The exception to 430.102(B) was revised for the 2002 Code.
I read it as requiring a disco by the controller and the motor.
Not to hijack your thread, it's a similar concern.......
The disconnecting means shall open all ungrounded supply conductors and shall be designed so that no pole can be operated independently. The disconnecting means shall be permitted in the same enclosure with the controller.
FPN:See 430.113 for equipment receiving energy from more than one source.
The Code requires that a switch, circuit breaker, or other device serve as a disconnecting means for both the controller and the motor, thereby providing safety during maintenance and inspection shutdown periods. The disconnecting means also disconnects the controller; therefore, it cannot be a part of the controller. However, separate disconnects and controllers may be mounted on the same panel or be contained in the same enclosure, such as combination fused-switch, magnetic-starter units.
Depending on the size of the motor and other conditions, the type of disconnecting means required may be a motor circuit switch, a circuit breaker, a general-use switch, an isolating switch, an attachment plug and receptacle, or a branch-circuit short-circuit and ground-fault protective device, as specified in 430.109.
If a motor is stalled or under heavy overload and the motor controller fails to properly open the circuit, the disconnecting means, which must be rated to interrupt locked-rotor current, can be used to open the circuit. For motors larger than 100 hp ac or 40 hp dc, the disconnecting means is, in accordance with 430.109(E), permitted to be a general-use or an isolating switch where plainly marked “Do not operate under load.”
wellll...an E-stop will do that right???