I have a home on the water that has a dock. They fed a 20 amp circuit to the dock for a gfci receptacle and a direct wired lift for a boat,from a disconnect mounted beside a service panel which so happened to be located outside. So basically we have a 20 amp gfi breaker feeding this dock. Would you make them install an equipotential plane around this disconnect? The disconnect breaker is about 30 feet from the dock and within sight. Also who would you accept to give the electrical datum plane required by this article?

Generally speaking my answer would be yes...but I would like to know where the disconnect is located. Is it mounted on the dwelling next to the service panel? Or out on the property?

Yes, it is a sub panel right next to the service on the house with a 20 amp gfi breaker feeding the dock. The breaker becomes the disconnect for the dock.

What about 682.3 and 555.1???

I think the intent under art. 682 would be if they put in a seperate service down by the water.I dont think they mean a service on a house.And residential isnt covered under art. 555.

I don't understand most of Article 682. It's a very mesy and poorly written Article...

I agree with hotsparks, not required.

When I read 682.33(A) "equipotential planes shall be installed
adjacent to all outdoor service equipment OR disconnecting means that control equipment in or on the water that have a metallic enclosure" yada yada I am not sure you you could even exempt a switch that controlled a koi pond if it was in a metal bell box.
(B) seems to contradict (A)
I agree with Bryan, this is not a well thought out article

I also am with Bryan. Mike and Hotsparks, where does it diffrientiate between service or disconnect at the house or down by the dock? I believe the intent of 682 was to cover fountains, aereators (sp), and pumps etc in bodies of water. The handbook says under summary this article was added to cover wiring and equipment in or adjacent to bodies of water not covered by other articles, which docks are (even though residential docks are exempt)This article needs a complete re write.(must be the same guys that wrote 680) LOL

I think the real questions are, where is the datum plane and how is the boat lift wired. I was assuming the wiring to the far side lift plate was "in" the water. That seems to be the norm here.
If there is nothing "in or on" the water then I agree, 682 does not apply.

I agree with Bryan 682 is poorly written. 682.33 As I read it, (A) & (B) contradict each other. It would in my opinion make since to require the equippotential plane at the davit controller if as stated the enclosure and controls are metallic.

I agree that the code section is poorley written, and as I said generally speaking I would have said yes....but in this case I was under the impression that electricman stated that it was just a new breaker installed in an existing sub-panel on the side of the dwelling. Under that circumstance I didn't feel that it was the intent of the code to require an equipotential plane be added for a new breaker installed into an existing panel.

Maybe I missunderstood what the installation is?

What do you all think?