Submersible well motor for a man made water feature

[TPO]

I have an inspector that is insisting that I install a disconnect along side a man hole that contains a submersible single phase 3-wire well motor. This is a closed system, water is pumped to an upper pond that flows down a stream to a lower pond that has a pipe into the manhole. The pump is installed in a casing inside the manhole.
I contend that it is covered by 430.102 (B) exception (a)
He contends that it is covered by 682.14 (B).
I say this doesn't apply because 682.1 which states it does not apply if covered by other articles in this Code (paraphrased).
Any thoughts.
Thanks

 

[iwire]

I have an inspector that is insisting that I install a disconnect along side a man hole that contains a submersible single phase 3-wire well motor. This is a closed system, water is pumped to an upper pond that flows down a stream to a lower pond that has a pipe into the manhole. The pump is installed in a casing inside the manhole.
I contend that it is covered by 430.102 (B) exception (a)

The following are my opinions and others may see it differently.

As far as 430.102(B) Exception (a) what part of that do you feel applies?

(a) Where such a location of the disconnecting means
for the motor is impracticable or introduces additional or
increased hazards to persons or property

If you are thinking impracticable keep in mind that impracticable basically means it cannot be installed in that location it is not possible. For example if the inspector was insisting that the disconnect be located in sight of an underground motor.

If you are thinking additional or increased hazards to persons or property I just do not see it.

He contends that it is covered by 682.14 (B).
I say this doesn't apply because 682.1 which states it does not apply if covered by other articles in this Code

What year NEC are you on, I do not see those words in either 2011 or 2014 682.1.

But regardless this applies from 90.3

Chapters 5, 6, and 7 apply
to special occupancies, special equipment, or other special
conditions. These latter chapters supplement or modify the
general rules. Chapters 1 through 4 apply except as amended
by Chapters 5, 6, and 7 for the particular conditions.

In my opinion 682.14(B) is the section that you must comply with.

682.14(B) Location. The disconnecting means shall be readily
accessible on land, located not more than 750 mm (30 in.)
from the receptacle it controls, and shall be located in the
supply circuit ahead of the receptacle. The disconnecting
means shall be located within sight of but not closer than
1.5 m (5 ft) from the shoreline and shall be elevated not
less than 300 mm (12 in.) above the datum plane.

 

[charlie b]

Bob, what do you think about the informational note that follows 430.102(B) exception (a)? It explicitly names a submersible motor as an example of where the phrase "increased or additional hazards" applies.

To the OP: you have not told us where the controller for this motor is located. The exception requires that controller to have a disconnecting means that is lockable. Is that possible for your installation?

 

[iwire]

Bob, what do you think about the informational note that follows 430.102(B) exception (a)? It explicitly names a submersible motor as an example of where the phrase "increased or additional hazards" applies.

Here is what I think about it.

1. I do not see an increased hazard with a disconnect just because the pump is submerged.
3. I feel it is up to the inspector to make the call if the exception applies or not and it seems they have decided.
5. FPNs are not code, just opinion.
7. 430.102 has been modified by 682 and is irrelevant to this installation.

Informational Note No. 1: Some examples of increased or
additional hazards include, but are not limited to, motors
rated in excess of 100 hp, multimotor equipment, submersible
motors, motors associated with adjustable speed drives,
and motors located in hazardous (classified) locations.

 

[dmxtothemax]

Here is what I think about it.

1. I do not see an increased hazard with a disconnect just because the pump is submerged.
2. I feel it is up to the inspector to make the call if the exception applies or not and it seems they have decided.
3. FPNs are not code, just opinion.
4. 430.102 has been modified by 682 and is irrelevant to this installation.

Have you discussed these concerns with the inspector ?

 

[junkhound]

There is no reason to NOT install a disconnect. Esp. if inspector requests one.

Next time anyone (even OP) has to service the pump they will be cussing the original installer who did not install a disconnect !

My own stuff that may need 'emergency' service anytime in the future all have disconnects (ef just for convienience) and places even where I can see the CB from the unit.

 

[TPO]

Thanks everyone

to answer a couple of the questions raised
motor controller is mounted on the exterior of a house, but not within site of the man hole
I based my code quotes on the 2014
My concern is if you turn this motor off it will not restart by turning this disconnect back on. (originally I was concerned that it would damage the motor, well contractor informed me he was sure it just would not start)

We did install the disconnect as requested by the ADJ

Just a note.. He told us to lock the disconnect if we wanted. So why have one?

 

[texie]

Thanks everyone

to answer a couple of the questions raised
motor controller is mounted on the exterior of a house, but not within site of the man hole
I based my code quotes on the 2014
My concern is if you turn this motor off it will not restart by turning this disconnect back on. (originally I was concerned that it would damage the motor, well contractor informed me he was sure it just would not start)

We did install the disconnect as requested by the ADJ

Just a note.. He told us to lock the disconnect if we wanted. So why have one?

I'm guessing from your comment about restarting and the controller being ahead of the requested disconnect that this must be a cap. start pump with common, run and start lead. If so, did you use a 3 pole disconnect?
Is this in Teton County? Butch or Mike?

 

[TPO]

I'm guessing from your comment about restarting and the controller being ahead of the requested disconnect that this must be a cap. start pump with common, run and start lead. If so, did you use a 3 pole disconnect?
Is this in Teton County? Butch or Mike?

Yes we used a 3 pole disconnect
Butch
I was just looking for other opinions

 

[iwire]

Have you discussed these concerns with the inspector ?

Perhaps you should read the thread again.