ECN Forum Forums Photo Discussion Forums Violation Photo Forum Is this a violation?

Thanks for the pic, 67.

Here's a 2005 NEC Change

courtesy: www.nfpa.org

Does this allow the installation as shown in the first picture?

Joe,
The example shown looks like an application for a household sump pump in a basement or an application where the control panel or junction box is mounted to a wall. The original installation would have met the County requirements had the junction box been located directly over the cable enterance into the wetwell. Again they were primarily concerned with the physical damage, and from what I recall there was something in Article 400 in the '05 NEC that the County Inspector got them on regarding that. In the County we do have a couple of applications on wetwells where the junction box is mounted directly over sleeves entering the wetwell. There is 12-18" clearance (air gap) to meet class I div. I standards, and the strain relief bushings going into the junction box are corrosion resistant. The most common application we use has conduits entering through the side of the wetwell (2 for pump cords,1 for float switches, 1 for a transducer). The conduits are sealed with an O/Z Gedney style compression fitting where they enter the junction box. Most of our control panels are mounted away from the wetwell or in a building on site. Thanks for the graphic and additional info.

[This message has been edited by 67watts (edited 06-19-2005).]

what's the difference between "Cable wiring requiring protection" and "sleeve for protection"