ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat Box
Recent Posts
HVDC Greece to Crete
by gfretwell - 08/06/20 02:28 AM
310.15 (B) 7 Feeders
by HotLine1 - 07/31/20 02:29 PM
What would be the ideal solution?
by Fleppin - 07/21/20 12:42 AM
NESC question
by gfretwell - 07/16/20 04:17 PM
Code Violation or just not good Practice?
by HotLine1 - 07/16/20 03:03 PM
New in the Gallery:
Facebook follies, bad wiring
FPE in Germany pt.2
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 14 guests, and 20 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Is this a violation? #105658 06/10/05 06:54 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,749
Joe Tedesco Offline OP
Member
Quote
I feel that there is a NEC Code violation present here, a contractor installing a sewage pump station for the County I work for installed the pump cords, float switch cables, and transducer wiring as shown in the photo. They say that it meets Class I, Div. I hazard standards and wiring practice. I feel that the application violates NEC Code, and presents a trip hazard, and potential hazard to our collection system operators since these cords can carry 480 volts when the pump(s) are running.

Is this a violation?
[Linked Image]

Is there a specific code that would reference this installation?

Thanks to ECN for any help they can offer?


Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant
2017 / 2014 NEC & Related Books and Study Guides
Re: Is this a violation? #105659 06/10/05 07:33 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 315
L
luckyshadow Offline
Member
What type of cords are they? What are they rated?

Re: Is this a violation? #105660 06/12/05 12:59 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5
6
67watts Offline
Junior Member
The yellow cords are rated at 600v, I don't have any information on the insulation type at this time. The three back cords are SJOW and go to the intrinsically safe float switches. The blue cord is rated for submergence and goes to a intrinsically safe pressure transducer (1-5 vDC). My biggest concern was physical damage and a trip hazard, and was trying to pin point a specific code governing this installation. Thanks for any help you can offer.

Re: Is this a violation? #105661 06/12/05 01:27 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,316
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Member
We're back to the old issue of needing to learn more than your trade.

The NEC certainly doesn't address the issues you raise.

OSHA guidelines are vague enough that I don't think there's a problem there either. The cords are not excessively long, nor do they cross into any marked (or obvious) walkway.

I'm not sure what you want the contractor to do, nor do I see another way to do this job.
If you're really worried that someone wil go out of their way to trip over these cords- with all that open area around them- or feel that the trained, certified professional technicians will not be smart enough to step around them, there are other issued as work here.

If it makes you feel better, cut a notch in a trash can and set it over them!

Re: Is this a violation? #105662 06/12/05 03:12 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5
6
67watts Offline
Junior Member
I've installed wastewater pumping stations for the last 15 years and have never seen a "Walt Disney" application like this one. Not only does it present an obvious trip hazard to the operators working around the wetwell, but is also subject to physical damage, and operator error. And after further review of the '05 NEC believe there are issues in 501.10(A)(2)& 501.140 & 504.30 that cover the installation.

Re: Is this a violation? #105663 06/12/05 09:27 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,316
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Member
Thank you, 67. Could you maybe get a pic of a similar install, correctly done? For example, do you dig down alongside the basin, and enter from the side?

Re: Is this a violation? #105664 06/14/05 06:44 PM
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 51
B
BElder Offline
Member
Are these listed & marked for sunlight resistance 2002 NEC 310.8 (D)

Re: Is this a violation? #105665 06/14/05 11:25 PM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,316
renosteinke Offline
Cat Servant
Member
I have seen similar cables in similar applications, and they were listed for just about anything, including sunlight as well as direct burial. SEOW? Maybe.

Re: Is this a violation? #105666 06/18/05 09:01 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5
6
67watts Offline
Junior Member
The yellow cables are marked 600v rated, have the size and number of conductors, and simply say "water resistant". The float switches are SJOW, water resistant, and do not have a UV rating. This application failed it's inspection on the articles I previously listed,and on grounding and bonding of the junction box. The contractor is in the process off redoing many of these and other issues at this site, and may incur penalties from the County in addition.

Re: Is this a violation? #105667 06/18/05 11:58 AM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5
6
67watts Offline
Junior Member
https://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/m67/wetwelljunctionbox.jpg

Here is an example of a wetwell mounted junction box. The conduits from the wetwell into the junction box are compression sealed to prevent H2S gases from entering. It is done all in stainless, except for the rigid conduit. The intrinsically safe circuits are mounted in a seperate junction box on the back side (barely visable in the picture. The wetwell lid opens toward the panel. All wiring is protected and out of the way of the collection system operators. This is just one of many correct ways of doing the installation.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Featured:

2020 National Electrical Code
2020 National Electrical
Code (NEC)

* * * * * * *

2017 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2017 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
Bill Addiss
Bill Addiss
NY, USA
Posts: 3,959
Joined: October 2000
Show All Member Profiles 
Top Posters(30 Days)
BigB 3
Popular Topics(Views)
268,631 Are you busy
202,969 Re: Forum
191,344 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3