I'm guessing the inspector is right, but I can't convince myself yet...
Here are the installation details:
A home has a creek at the back edge of the property. The irrigation system uses a 240 volt pump, cord and plug connected. The receptacle for the pump is installed on a pedestal approximately 20 feet from the creek bank, up a steep grade, well away from any flood plane (electrical datum plane). The pump is set near the receptacle, plugged in, and plastic piping is run to the creek, and up to the house to feed the sprinklers.
Inspector says it requires GFCI protection, and he pointed me towards the "Natural and Artificial Bodies of Water."
682.33(B) maybe? Or maybe a different article requires it, and he was mistaken by pointing me to 682?
I have no problem changing the breaker, but would be happy to hear some opinions/clarification for future jobs with similar setups.
What if the receptacle would be mounted on the house, with an irrigation pump plugged into it? I don't see any distances in the article...
Thanks guys, this is my first post, been reading these forever though, and really enjoy the devil's advocate rebuttals and all the back and forth.
Welcome to the Forum.....or maybe Condolences in some cases but I digress...
The application of Section 682.33 is a shot at principles used in the Utility Industry and close to what we see in Article 680. However, the application and intent of Section 682.33 and quite frankly all of Article 682 is being looked at and re-examined for the 2020 Cycle. In fact, CMP has begun he process of forming task groups to revamp Article 682, which means it will clearly not look the same in the next cycle...yet I digress.
"Part (B) covers where the planes are not required, specifically, at the equipment supplied and disconnected by the items specified in Part (A). However, all circuits rated 120 V through 250 V, single phase, equal to or less than 60 A, must have GFCI protection. Note that this is a circuit requirement, so point of use GFCI devices, such as GFCI receptacles, will not comply with this requirement."
Now that quote is from the 2011 Handbook (no not the NFPA Handbook, the other one) by Fred Hartwell and Associates.
The most important aspect of part (A) is this statement :"(A)
Areas Requiring Equipotential Planes. Equipotential planes shall be installed adjacent to all
outdoor service equipment or disconnecting means that control equipment
in or on water, that have a metallic enclosure and controls accessible to personnel, and that are likely to become energized."
So in Part (A), it sounds like your equipment is not "in or on water". So it appears an EP is not required in your case. Then you move on to Part (B) which has this important statement within it's paragraph: "All circuits rated not more than 60 amperes at 120 through 250 volts, single phase, shall have GFCI protection."
The question to the current CMP Panel is Intent. If no EP is required and the electrical equipment is not in or on the water, Part (B) still tends to direct you to protect the "circuit" with GFCI protection (nope, GFCI Receptacle will not due based on this language). I am sure we can pull the roots of this from Section 680.21(C) in some form or fashion and probably a little smidgen of Section 555.33's last paragraph sprinkled on top (feeling Festive..sorry). However, I did not ask the fellow members because the consensus in the room was that whom ever (previous panel members) crafted Article 682 did so without real diligence, which this new panel will clearly take care of during the 2020 cycle. Hey better late than never...right.
Here is the exact language constructed for the ROP (17-154) :
"6xx.33 Equipotential Planes and Bonding of Equipotential Planes.
For the purposes of this section, equipotential planes are to mitigate step and touch voltages at electrical equipment.
(A) Areas Requiring Equipotential Planes. Equipotential planes shall be installed adjacent to all outdoor service equipment or
disconnecting means that control equipment in or on the water which have a metallic enclosure and controls accessible to personnel and
likely to become energized. The equipotential plane shall encompass the area around the equipment a minimum of 900 mm (36 in.)
where a person stands and can come in contact with the equipment.
(B) Areas Not Requiring Equipotential Planes. Equipotential planes shall not be required for the controlled equipment supplied by
the service equipment or disconnecting means. All circuits providing electric power to the controlled equipment that is accessible to
personnel shall have GFCI protection.
(C) Bonding. Equipotential planes shall be bonded to the electrical grounding system. The bonding conductor shall be copper,
insulated, covered or bare, and not smaller than 8 AWG. The means of bonding to wire mesh or conductive elements shall be by pressure
connectors or clamps of brass, copper, copper alloy, or an equally substantial approved means."
I believe the intent is to provide that GFCI (not GFI as in your subject line) for the equipment and circuit itself along with those who may come in contact with likely to be energized parts (you can define that one). The step potential methodology again is derived from IEEE and is common in the utility industry as well (they clearly call it Step Potential, where as we do not directly denote it as such but resemble the meaning). We have EP's in Article 680 and we have come to understand their intent. When it was bought over into the new Article 682 is we not defined as clearly
but we know what they are trying to do. Anyway the Article has been untouched since it's inception in the 2005 NEC....again it will be re-examined hard for the 2020 cycle as a direct initiative by our CMP Chairman so "EXPERTS" in this area of study, we await your public inputs when the 2020 NEC process starts.
