Does this comply?

Great pictures. In the first one, I wonder if the POCO thinks the meter reader has easy access to the meter.

In the second one torpedo level comes to mind.

Roger

Like Roger said, great pictures!

Are they going to raise the grade all along the side of the house, or is that it?

Maybe they should leave the scaffold there for the meter reader.

Or put a railing up ...

Bill

Thats the finished product Bill.

The retaining wall is constrcucted on the property line. One of the many challenges faced when you build on the mountain.

I red-tagged the job and cited working clearance. The gaurd rail is an option, but I really don't want that panel right there.

Question: How does the NEC address the surface of the required working clearance? Is it silent? Can you stand on jagged boulders? Hmm....

Ryan,

I don't know any code section that requires solid footing in front of equipment. I thought about making a proposal on that for the 2005 NEC, but didn't get around to it. It should be common sense I think.

If there was such a rule it could also affect Panelboards and equipment installed in stairways.

Bill,

Ryan I don't se working clearance as an issue here. As Bill said there is nothing about working surface. I don't think you could fail this. The poco may have the authority to disallow this (maybe won't energize?) if it does not conform to their specs.

Ryan,

Is there nothing in the Building Code about guarding from falls, etc? If I put in a small fish pond on my front lawn that is 12" deep I'd have to put a fence around either it or the whole yard with a self-latching gate.

Maybe the POCO would have something to say if you point out the possible danger to their employees.

Bill

How does the local building code treat the edge of the yard at the top of the retaining wall? Are you allowed to roll a car, un-impeded, over the edge and into the neighbor's yard?

What about 6'7" maximum to the OCPD.

And isn't the idea of 3' working clearance that you can step back 3' from the equipment?

Unless you feel like taking a fall you can not step back 3' here.

Ryan, Along the lines of Bill's and Al's post.

I can't tell for sure but it appears as though there is a crevice between the two levels.

If a person (especialy a child) were to fall could they be trapped?

I agree with Bob that the three foot clearance should be a flat surface.

whether specifically written into the code or not, our local inspectors require a flat unobstructed surface for this area.


Roger

Here are a couple that are a little bit of a stretch.


Could we consider the retaining wall a "architectural appurtenance"?


A real stretch but what do you have to do to gain entrance to the working space, walk along the top of the wall?

Guard rails are required anytime you can fall more than 30". I can get the gaurd rail, no problem, but is that the cure-all?

So: You are the electrician changing out the main breaker, or you are the POCO investigating a broken meter seal. There is a gaurdrail (probably conductive) to stop you from falling the 12' of this wall, but what about the balancing act required to do your job...gaurdrail or not?

I don't think this panel belongs here. I take great pride in enforcing the minimum code, as written. This is a tough one for me though.

I'm going to get the POCO involved to see what they say and see if we can't get this thing moved. But what if weren't service equipment, what if it were just a panelboard?

I think this is a very serious issue, and I also think that the NEC is silent on it. Should it be?

Great discussion so far, as I was hoping. Keep it up, I think there is much to discuss here.

Ryan,

How about a Reinforced Concrete pad in front of the Meter and a guard rail to the left and in back of the working space(L-shaped railing)

BTW, our local utility has requirements that exceed the NEC's Minimum working space requirements. Maybe your POCO has similar requirements?

Bill

I would suggest that the evaluation be made based on the 'readily accessible' criteria. Basically determine if the box and associated hardware is one of those items which is required to be readily accessible, and then determine if the surrounding conditions provide the necessary access.

As far as I know, a meter is not required to be readily accessible by the NEC, but may be required to be readily accessible by the power company. On the other hand, the power company may be using some remote meter reading system, and not particularly care where the meter is located...in the greater Boston area I've noticed a number of meters sitting high up on utility poles, supplying things like cable or telephone equipment boxes.

Junction boxes in general are not required to be readily accessible, but they cannot be buried.

Things like breakers and disconnects however do have to be readily accessible in most circumstances.

If the enclosure contains the main breaker or disconnect, then IMHO you should require a flat platform or pad with safety rail sufficient to make the enclosure readily accessible. If, on the other hand this box simply contains the meter, then I don't believe that the electric code would provide a basis for requiring changes.

I do not believe that accessibility for repairs is sufficient basis for requiring better access. It might be that an electrician working on this box would have to set a ladder from the base of the retaining wall rather than being able to stand at grade level, but electricians working on ladders is not extraordinary or inappropriate.

A question along these lines: if code requires readily accessible disconnection means in any given circuit, can you additionally have inaccessible disconnection means? Or does code require that if you add a disconnect it must be readily accessible? If, for example, there is a breaker in the enclosure being discussed _and_ a main breaker in the panel inside the house, then would the breaker inside the house count as the readily accessible disconnect, and the breaker in the enclosure count as some sort of supplementary disconnect?

-Jon

Ryan,

Just curious, any resolution on this situation?

What did the POCO say?

Bill

Nothing yet, Bill. I haven't been there for a few weeks. They will be calling for a stucco inspection shortly, and when they do I plan on talking with them about it. I will let you/all konw what comes of it.

Hey Ryan, any update on this yet?

Nothing yet, Gene.

I'm the type of person that doesn't babysit a guy. I wrote on about 4 inspection reports that I wasn't going to buy this, and I haven't heard back from them. I guess they want to wait until the final. (by the way, one of my final inspection items is having a meter installed). I'll keep in touch on this.

Does the fire department require access to the meter or disco in an emergency? Maybe that angle will work here...
/mike

The fire codes don't usually cover access to the meter, but the power company sure does. They will refuse to connect power to installations where the meter is not accessible. Codes are debatable and can be appealed through channels, but POCO regulations are etched in stone!

A three foot by three foot pad has been poured and a gaurdrail will be installed.

I'll post some pictures when I do the final inspection.


It's a good feeling when you know that you may have made an electrician safer when he/she is forced to perhaps be in this panel energized.

Gee, until I started reading, I thought that this was about the scaffolding, which I don't think complies.

Boy the sky in Utah is as beautiful as ever.
Great pictures

[This message has been edited by electure (edited 02-15-2004).]

Does this look any safer?




Edited to resize picture

[This message has been edited by Ryan_J (edited 03-06-2004).]

Ryan,

That last picture looks like they should have one of those coin-operated Binoculars there for the tourists!

This looks like the best solution to what was a bad idea. Is that UG service in conduit all the way? I'd hope there's not a buried cable under what looks like a pile of rocks.

Bill

Hi Bill. I'll have to send you some of hte views we have in our city...they are nothing short of breathtaking as get up the mountains.

To answer your question, yes, all of the installations here have conduit for the service lateral.

Ryan,

Just curious, was this a satisfactory solution for everyone, or was it a hard sell to the contractor/homeowner?

Bill

Hi Bill. Beleive it or not, it was rather easy. The general contractor understood and agreed with my concerns, so he put it in.

I'm not sure what the buyer thought of it.

Ryan that came out great, when you said guard rail I had something ugly in mind, that is quite nice.

I think standing there with a cold one would be kind of nice.

Bob

The meter reader is going to feel quite pampered

Ryan — Is that a slightly cantilevered concrete pad below the ironwork?

{Re: First new pic https://www.electrical-contractor.net/BCodes/Cliffhanger_fixed.JPG}




[This message has been edited by Bjarney (edited 03-08-2004).]

Yeah,it is slightly cantileeverd. I think there is enough rebar in it to keep it from going anywhere though.

[Thanks, Ryan. Just trying to cover all bases for future coin-operated telescope mounting.]

Thanks for the follow-up pictures Ryan. I couldn't wait to see how it was going to look.