ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area Sad story raises a question

230.25 B says about service drops:

(B) Vertical Clearance
Service-drop conductors, where not in excess of 600 volts, nominal, shall have the following minimum clearance from final grade:
(1) 3.0 m (10 ft) - at the electrical service entrance to buildings, also at the lowest point of the drip loop of the building electrical entrance, and above areas or sidewalks accessible only to pedestrians, measured from final grade or other accessible surface only for service-drop cables supported on and cabled together with a grounded bare messenger where the voltage does not exceed 150 volts to ground
(2) 3.7 ill (12 ft) - over residential property and driveways, and those commercial areas not subject to truck traffic where the voltage does not exceed 300 volts to ground
(3) 4.5 ill (15 ft) - for those areas listed in the 3.7-m (12-ft) classification where the voltage exceeds 300 volts to ground
(4) 5.5 m (18 ft) - over public streets, alleys, roads, parking areas subject to truck traffic, driveways on other than residential property, and other land such as cultivated, grazing, forest, and orchard

Based on the above, and just viewing the video, it looks like it's compliant. I do agree that in our jurisdiction anyway the inspector would probably make them put it on a mast a little higher. Not sure how they would justify it other than the code is minimum and the inspector can make it more stringent if local conditions warrant. Such an order to install a mast could be appealed to the building permit appeals board, but the installer would probably just say ok and put it on a mast.

This is a tragedy, but it isn't the installer or the POCO's 'fault.'