Hendrix
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
I'm drawing a blank on code section that requires a disconnect in sight of the tank :weeping:
Septic tank pumps. Help
- Thread starter Hendrix
- Start date
- Status
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
I would say 430.102 is where to start, and which subsection applies depends on exactly what you have.
If the pump is a submersible pump inside the tank then the exception that mentions "where such a location of the disconnecting means for the motor is impracticable" probably applies to the motor disconnecting means, but if your motor controller is next to the tank you will still need a disconnect for the controller.
If the controller is a float switch, there is a pretty good chance this is a cord and plug connected unit and the cord and plug would qualify as the disconnecting means.
Hendrix
Senior Member
- Location
- New England
Thank you 
shortcircuit2
Senior Member
- Location
- South of Bawstin
I will put a breaker lock out kit in the panel on well pumps.
You may well (no pun intended) see something I don't, but I would not accept that based on 430.102. Can you direct me to the justification ?
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
I have a well with submersible pump that is in 4 inch casing @ about 150 feet deep.
May or may not be impracticable to place a disconnect within sight of this motor, but I'm pretty sure it would involve increased hazards to be able to get to a disconnect within sight of this motor for most people, unless you know someone that can fit into a 4 inch tube.
I have a well with submersible pump that is in 4 inch casing @ about 150 feet deep.
May or may not be impracticable to place a disconnect within sight of this motor, but I'm pretty sure it would involve increased hazards to be able to get to a disconnect within sight of this motor for most people, unless you know someone that can fit into a 4 inch tube.
No argument there, but most well pumps have a controller and, as best I decipher 430.102, a disconnect is needed for the controller.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
I your point now. Seems like 90%+ of the time the breaker is within sight of the controller for me, so a breaker lock still works if that is the case, but if the controller is not within sight of the breaker then yes you need a lockable disconnect at the controller.
shortcircuit2
Senior Member
- Location
- South of Bawstin
Sorry I didn't respond sooner.
So...in looking at 430.102(B)...I'm told to have a disconnect according to (B)(1) or (B)(2)...
The motor on wells is our area is hundreds of feet down in the ground out of sight of any disconnecting means for...
1. The motor (B)(1)
2. And the motor is also out of sight of the pressure switch (Controller) at the storage tank located in the basement of the dwelling (B)(2)
So I use a breaker lock kit to comply as allowed in the exception to (1) and (2)
shortcircuit2
Senior Member
- Location
- South of Bawstin
I have used breaker lock kits to comply with 422.31(B) also...
IMO, as far as 422.31 is considered, I have no problem, however, it might be worth noting that in the '11 Code the "over 1/8 HP" wording was removed leaving you with 422.33 (Art 430) as far as motors are concerned.
To me, a septic pump would not fall under "Appliances" and, unless your "pressure switch (Controller)" was in sight from the branch circuit disconnecting means, I personally would still require a disconnect at the controller per 430.102 (A)
shortcircuit2
Senior Member
- Location
- South of Bawstin
Maybe there is some confusion on my statements. The pump I was referring to was a well pump. In referring to 422 for appliances I was thinking of wall ovens and cooktops. I'm sorry for the confusion. I was trying to point out that a circuit breaker lock kit is an option in some situations.
I agree the controller disconnect is needed and I put a toggle switch at the well pump holding tank with the controller(pressure switch)
kbsparky
Senior Member
- Location
- Delmarva, USA
I have typically done this as well.
But now the question that comes to mind is this a violation, unless that toggle switch is a "lockable" type?
shortcircuit2
Senior Member
- Location
- South of Bawstin
Regarding the "Controller" disconnecting means...it would NOT be required to be lockable if within sight.
There are many configurations of Overcurrent Device-Controller-Motor location that dictate the requirements for the disconnect means for each.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
Correct, it doesn't need to be lockable regarding it being the "controller" disconnecting means. But if using the exception and it is also the motor disconnecting means then it must be lockable.
kbsparky
Senior Member
- Location
- Delmarva, USA
I was referring to a typical 2-pole toggle switch being used as a disconnecting means for a well pump. The switch disconnects power to the pressure switch (controller) which is adjacent to it and within sight.
The actual pump motor is buried inside of the well, 100 feet away, and 50 feet deep. No disconnect within sight there.
The actual pump motor is buried inside of the well, 100 feet away, and 50 feet deep. No disconnect within sight there.
kwired
Electron manager
- Location
- NE Nebraska
- Occupation
- EC
Nothing wrong with that setup, but there must be provisions for locking that switch as it is also the motor disconnect when using the exception in 430.102(B)(2).
- Status