Our POCO requires metallic conduit for a service entrance to the meter. It does not allow a two way feed (as you would have on a overhead meter pole) in the same conduit, so many customers have the service coming into the meter in metallic tubing and the exiting wire going back up the pole in a seperate PVC conduit. We are having an argument on if PVC conduit is permissible for this purpose. If there is applicable code, please list the sections. Thanks.

Sch 80?
This will come down to the old "physical damage" judgement call.

I don't think the size was discussed but I'm assuming everyone was thinking Schedule 80. Does the "judgement" remark mean it is not specifically prohibited, but left to the discretion of the installer?

The installer in conjunction with the AHJ policy.
"Subject to physical damage" and what makes that "severe physical damage" is like pornography.
Nobody can define it but every AHJ thinks he knows it when he sees it. Few can actually agree what it is.

I ususally use sch 40 PVC for all my services. Unless there is a walkway or driveway in that side of the building then sch 80 it is.

Out here in Cali, the AHJ usually backs up the requirements set forth by the POCO. Period. Here, it's sch. 80 for anything that is exposed, and sch. 40 for the underground. The POCO lays out the specifics for the diameter of the pipe (min. 2", most apps are 3") radius of the sweeps, allowable total deflection of the bends (180 deg for SDGE, unless approved for an extra 45 or two), placement and manufaturer/model of the hand holes, and pretty much everything else. They even do their own independent trench inspections, on top of the AHJs.

So, to give you an answer you may not like, if the POCO says it's so, then it is usually so, and no amount of debate is likely to put a dent in that.

Results may vary by location...

I was just doing a little research for my golf bathroom service deal and it turns out FPL provides your conduit as part of the service charge. You pay them the labor charge to do the work.
Then you can do the work yourself, If that meets their satisfaction they refund your labor money, minus what it cost them to bring your job up to their standard.
I found that whole process strange.

http://www.fpl.com/doingbusiness/builder/b1_index.shtml

See, this is why it pays to read before you type. I was about to write that if Schedule 40 is acceptable for service conductors under the NEC, it should be OK for a feeder even if your local POCO regs call for metallic conduit. Then I looked and the 2002 NEC says Schedule 80. Turns out that is a change in the 2002 Code.

I didn't know, because the last time I worked anyplace that allowed PVC for a service riser was in 1997. Then again, I've never been red-tagged for a Schedule 40 lateral rising above-grade, which to my knowledge remains entirely legal in my neck of the woods.

PVC is used often here in BC but we never see schedule 80 except in water piping. Mech protection may be required.