ECN Forum Forums Photo Discussion Forums Photos for General Discussion Service Drop or Service Entrance Conductors?

<img border="0" src=&q...uot;377" height="282">

Click on Photo for a closer look.


Submitted by Frank Cinker Pittsburgh, PA E-mail
CinkerF@cs.com

"A new 200 Amp Service did not pass electrical inspection. The
conductors were too close to window. McGRAW-HILL'S NEC
handbook indicate service drop conductors. NEC section 230.9 states
service conductors. Does this code section apply to service entrance
conductors or service drop conductors?"

Frank,
The code section uses the words "service conductors" so in my opinion it applies to both service drops and service entrance cables. Is that window designed to be open? If not there is no violation in the current code. I would like the 3' restriction to apply to all windows, not just those designed to be opened, but that's not what 230-9 says. Any overhead drops near windows interfere with the placement of fire service ladders in the event of a fire.
Don(resqcapt19)

Don,
The window is designed to be opened. NEC handbook (McGraw-Hill, 1999) seems to indicate both in words and photo that section 230.9 applies to service drop conductors. When in doubt I suppose the current NEC book should used instead of a NEC Handbook.

cinkerf (Frank)

I wanted to mention that this code violation will be corrected by extending the service raceway above the window along with the service drop conductors.

cinker (Frank)

Frank,

I would say that 230-9 is referring to both, in that it addresses the conductors without an overall covering, which would be the Conductors coming out of the Service head and the Triplex from the pole. Since they both (service drop and service conductors) extend to the point of splice, the drip loop would also have to be included.

In the 1990 NEC Handbook (sorry, I don't have a more recent one) It talks of including the drip loop in the clearance requirements. There is even a picture of the drip loops also being above the Window to meet the exception requirements.

If I can get my scanner working I will post a picture.

I hope this helps,

Bill

<img border="0" src=&q...t;400" height="273">

Click on Photo for a closer look

Taken from 1990 NEC Handbook


How's this?




Bill

Frank,
The handbook is not an official interpretation. It is only opinion and as such is no more valid than yours or mine.
Don(resqcapt19)

Bill,

Thanks for the clarification. It seems to make the most sense. Good job on scanning the drawing.

cinkerf (Frank)

Don,

You are correct concerning NEC Handbooks. However, they are a very useful. I usually purchase the McGrall-Hill and the NFPA code handbooks each new NEC edition. It's a little expensive but for me it's worth it.

Frank (cinkerf)

Thanks Frank,

Don,

I am aware that the Handbook is not an Official interpretation. While We are on that subject, though - does that make sense?

Do I dare ask why?
The Handbook I am referring to was published by the NFPA and says (from the jacket)

"All of the commentary material has been researched, written, and reviewed by experts in the field of electrical safety-NFPA staff and members of the National Electrical Code Committee."

Once again, I know what it says (somewhere) about not being an official interpretation, but why isn't it? It looks pretty official to me, and it is being touted as a "must have" for inspectors etc ...

Is there an explanation? Apparently they say it's researched and written by them (NFPA), and you "must" have it, but don't believe anything you read?

I'm confused

Bill