ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Violation?
by renosteinke - 01/27/23 09:52 PM
Does NEC 551.71 (F) apply to dwellings?
by BigB - 01/20/23 10:46 AM
Power submeter connections
by HotLine1 - 01/19/23 09:09 AM
AFDD's coming to the UK
by Texas_Ranger - 01/17/23 07:22 PM
New in the Gallery:
Burger King crown sillyness
Burger King crown sillyness
by wa2ise, December 11
240/208 to a house
240/208 to a house
by wa2ise, October 9
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 141 guests, and 13 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,672
Likes: 2
Admin Offline OP
Administrator
Member
<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?"

Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
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(resqcapt19)
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 84
C
Member
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)

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 84
C
Member
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)

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,081
Likes: 3
Member
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, [Linked Image]

Bill


Bill
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,081
Likes: 3
Member
<img border="0" src=&q...t;400" height="273">

Click on Photo for a closer look

Taken from 1990 NEC Handbook


How's this?

[Linked Image]


Bill


Bill
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,148
R
Member
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)


Don(resqcapt19)
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 84
C
Member
Bill,

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

cinkerf (Frank)

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 84
C
Member
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)

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,081
Likes: 3
Member
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 [Linked Image]

Bill


Bill
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

Tools for Electricians
Tools for Electricians
 

* * * * * * *
2023 National Electrical Code (NEC)
2023 NEC Now Available!
 
* * * * * * *

2020 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2020 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
dougwells
dougwells
kamloops BC Canada
Posts: 1,158
Joined: May 2003
Top Posters(30 Days)
BigB 9
triple 3
Popular Topics(Views)
302,553 Are you busy
231,906 Re: Forum
216,541 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5