ECN Forum
Posted By: mbarnwatt Osha vs NEC - 10/16/05 02:49 AM
In Denver, we have recently run into an interesting problem with our local utility. Of course, the NEC requires
'230.24 Clearances
Service-drop conductors shall not be readily accessible and shall comply with 230.24(A) through (D) for services not over 600 volts, nominal.
(A) Above Roofs Conductors shall have a vertical clearance of not less than 2.5 m (8 ft) above the roof surface. The vertical clearance above the roof level shall be maintained for a distance of not less than 900 mm (3 ft) in all directions from the edge of the roof.'
Our utility provider, Xcel, has told us they can not hook-up these services because OSHA has prohibitted them from connecting to anything more than 5' above a "walkable roof" and a ladder on a roof is unacceptable. Needless to say, we have had to install several 9' masts with a point of attachment at 8.5' due to 230.24(A), have the AHJ inspect them, then lower the mast knob to 5', have the utility attach the service drop, then (third trip) push the mast knob back up to the required 8.5'. ????
Are there any others out there with similar problems and, if so, what have been your solutions, and if not, any comments?
Posted By: Bill Addiss Re: Osha vs NEC - 10/16/05 03:14 AM
mbarnwatt,

Welcome to ECN,
I never had to do it, but our local utility allows a "Drop Swing" Service where the point of attachment is inaccessible (by their rules).

Maybe something along these lines would be acceptable. Look at Drawing D9 (page 11) in the following file:
http://www.lipower.org/pdfs/commercial/redbook/Chapter11.pdf

Bill
Posted By: Trumpy Re: Osha vs NEC - 10/28/05 01:56 AM
mbarnwatt,

Welcome to ECN, mate!. [Linked Image]

This is a rather interesting topic.
Let's bump it back up to the top.
© ECN Electrical Forums