Marina service disconnects

[Paulie15]

Hello, I am currently working with a local marina to bring up to state mandated regulations, and article 555. Their current service consists of 35' utility pole with 2 side arm disconnects mounted below transformer supplied by the corps. of engineers. The disconnects are mounted so high because of flood plane, and operated with a cable and pulley system from ground level (one cable opens, one cable closes). Each disconnect is feeding a type W cable that extends down and out to dock distribution panels. Is this an acceptable installation? The corps. will not allow them to build a crows nest or platform with a ladder. To top it off I need to find a way to achieve a minimum of 100mA gfi protection for these cables. Any help?

 

[GoldDigger]

Hello, I am currently working with a local marina to bring up to state mandated regulations, and article 555. Their current service consists of 35' utility pole with 2 side arm disconnects mounted below transformer supplied by the corps. of engineers. The disconnects are mounted so high because of flood plane, and operated with a cable and pulley system from ground level (one cable opens, one cable closes). Each disconnect is feeding a type W cable that extends down and out to dock distribution panels. Is this an acceptable installation? The corps. will not allow them to build a crows nest or platform with a ladder. To top it off I need to find a way to achieve a minimum of 100mA gfi protection for these cables. Any help?

Do you need to GF protect the cable themselves or just the circuits that they feed?

That is, do you have to protect the cables at the pole, as high as possible above the base of the pole but not necessarily at the level of the disconnects? Or can you put the GF protection at the input of each distribution panel or at the shore end of each dock?

Worst case, if the GF devices also need to be above the flood electric datum plane, can you put in your own pole and run the wires down the C.E. pole and up your pole to your enclosure with the GF devices.
I cannot see the NEC allowing any GF device to be mounted high on the existing pole with no way of accessing it for testing or reset.

 

[fmtjfw]

The NEC (2011), NFPA 303, and HB3020 combine to require 100mA (or less) protection on the OCPD(s) that feed the marina (555.3). Where is your main OCPD(s)? If they are fused switches you need to add an CB equipped with GF protection or a contactor held closed by a GF device. You can use 30mA devices, for instance.

Note that the 100mA does NOT apply to 15/20A-120V standard receptaces on the dock or outdoors or ... which must be protected by 6mA GFCIs.

I have a requested change into NEC2017 to require all power circuits present on a dock to be protected by GF prior to going to the dock, but who knows how that will turn out.

If I were you I would work with an inspector the Fire Marshal has certified as having been trained on inspecting marinas (that is, one who attended the presentations my buddies and I put on at Stonewall Resort).

You need to meet all three document requirements (and only master and journeyman electricians can do the work. No apprentices, bid accordingly).

/s/ Jim Williams

 

[Paulie15]

All branch circuits on the docks themselves are gf protected individually with breakers. I am trying to achieve protection on Type W cables feeding these branch panels. Cable is submersed on the bottom of the lake with strain relief attached to dock and enough slack in cable to allow for water level fluctuation. service disconnects are at the top of the pole above datum plane and the cable system to control them works very well. Thoughts were to replace with ground fault breaker in enclosure with an external handle to control in the same fashion. I plan on speaking with Corps. to about a platform.

 

[JRW 70]

Navigable Waters

Navigable Waters

The Army Corps. of Engineers has
jurisdiction over the areas that are
up to the "high water mark" I'm
sorry I can't think of the technical
term, but where this pole is and the
original terms of service there may be
multiple AJH's, but the A. C. of Engineers
can and will, if they decide to, supercede
local and state jurisdictions. I know this
from personal experience.

Research who has the right to dictate the
standards on this project.

Good luck

JR

 

[fmtjfw]

The Army Corps. of Engineers has
jurisdiction over the areas that are
up to the "high water mark" I'm
sorry I can't think of the technical
term, but where this pole is and the
original terms of service there may be
multiple AJH's, but the A. C. of Engineers
can and will, if they decide to, supercede
local and state jurisdictions. I know this
from personal experience.

Research who has the right to dictate the
standards on this project.

Good luck

JR

Actually the jurisdiction of state fire marshals to supercede federal authority is well known. They have the power, for instance, to close a public event, say the appearance of the POTUS, until the location has its hazard(s) cured. The WV Fire Marshals are granted specific authority to enforce WV HB3020 which calls out NEC2011 and NFPA 303. [HB3020 requires all marinas in WV to pass inspection under its requirements and NEC and 303 or they will be shut down. They can avoid HB3020 by disconnecting all electrical service to the docks. A marina may have to meet Corps of Engineers requirements as well.]

 

[hhsting]

I am also working on marina project. I was wondering where and from who can I get information about datum plan such as highest high tide and highest water level at particular site? Army crops of engineers, coast guard or some other place? Does anyone have any experience regarding the matter?

Sent from my SM-G935U using Tapatalk