This is very common in the older sections of town. I've been told by some electricians and hi's alike that it's no big deal and some electricians and hi's alike that it is and should be called out. I can't find the codes referencing that either is correct other than it's supposed to be 3' above roof line. Can someone give me some specific reference on which is correct? Until yesterday, I never had the opportunity to actually inspect one of these homes, but now that I do, I want to make sure I'm right. Thanks!

Attached Images

001-0503.jpg (33.8 KB, 66 views)

__________________
I'd rather be catching a big ole Redfish!

Should be ok IF the bottom of the drip loop is 10' above the ground.

I could post the code, it's in the NEC, but it's somewhat complex.

As Richard said, it's 10 feet to the bottom of the drip loop in that instance.

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )

Thanks guys, that's what I was looking for. This one was about 13' so it's good to go.

__________________
I'd rather be catching a big ole Redfish!

If the service head is above the roof there is a 8' (18" in certain cases) minimum clearance to the roof, but that is only if the service head is above the roof. In the case in the photograph there is a requirement that the service head be above the point of attachment of the service conductors (which seems to be the case in the photograph) There is an exception to the above-the-point-of -attachment rule if it is (a) impractical to do so and (b) if the point of attachment is within 24" of the service head.

As Jerry pointed out, you still need the 10' clearance to ground.

- BOB

"If the service head is above the roof there is a 8' (18" in certain cases) minimum clearance to the roof,"

In some cases, it may be 3 feet above the roof.

" but that is only if the service head is above the roof."

Huh? You mean only if the mast penetrates through the roof, right?

"In the case in the photograph there is a requirement that the service head be above the point of attachment of the service conductors (which seems to be the case in the photograph)"

There is?

"There is an exception to the above-the-point-of -attachment rule if it is (a) impractical to do so and (b) if the point of attachment is within 24" of the service head."

Please show me so I can learn about it.

As I said, "but it's somewhat complex". Now you are beginning to see why I said that.

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )

Exceptions to the 10' mentioned could exist. We can't see the ground in your shot. If the driveway is under that drip loop, it should be 12'. If there's a pool, the distance to the service connection is 22.5' in any direction.

Re the rest of the discussion: the local utility does't always follow the NEC. But I have interpreted the clearance rules as follows.

mast must be within four feet of the edge of the roof
min 8' IF the roof has a slope < 4:12
min 3' if slope is >/= 4:12
service min 3' from any attachment to the house or opening in the envelope from which one could touch the service.

Understand that the section is complex and this is my dumbed down version. If I am in error, I have a feeling someone will let me know.

__________________
The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
- Paul Fix

Here are some drawings I made years ago.

These are from building openings and above ground.

Attached Images

	balcony_clearance.jpg (44.2 KB, 24 views)
	windows_doors_clearance1.jpg (36.2 KB, 12 views)
	ground_clearance_1.jpg (37.8 KB, 15 views)
	ground_clearance_2.jpg (33.3 KB, 8 views)
	ground_clearance_3.jpg (30.4 KB, 11 views)

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )

Here are some for clearances from the roof.

Attached Images

	roof_clearance_1a.jpg (15.0 KB, 12 views)
	roof_clearance_2.jpg (26.5 KB, 9 views)
	roof_clearance_3.jpg (21.7 KB, 8 views)
	roof_clearance_4.jpg (33.7 KB, 9 views)
	roof_clearance_5.jpg (26.9 KB, 8 views)

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )

Yes.

NEC 230.54 Overhead Service Locations.

(C) Service Heads and Goosenecks Above Service-Drop Attachment. Service heads and goosenecks in service-enterance cables shall be located above the point of attachment of the service-drop conductors to the building or other structure.

Exception. Where it is impracticable to locate the service head or gooseneck above the point of attachment, the service head or gooseneck location shall be permitted not farther than 600 mm (24 in) from the point of attachment.

- BOB

Bob,

From the NEC (copy and paste to eliminate typos - bold and underlining are mine)
- 230.54 Overhead Service Locations.
- - (B) Service Cable Equipped with Raintight Service Head or Gooseneck. Service cables shall be equipped with a raintight service head.
Exception: Type SE cable shall be permitted to be formed in a gooseneck and taped with a self-sealing weather-resistant thermoplastic.
- - (C) Service Heads and Goosenecks Above Service-Drop Attachment. Service heads and goosenecks in service-entrance cables shall be located above the point of attachment of the service-drop conductors to the building or other structure.
- - - Exception: Where it is impracticable to locate the service head or gooseneck above the point of attachment, the service head or gooseneck location shall be permitted not farther than 600 mm (24 in.) from the point of attachment.

That is not "service entrance cable", that is a raceway riser with a weather head and "service entrance conductors".

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )

Agreed, it is not a "service entrance cable".

What you call a weather head is a raintight service head.

NEC 230.54 Overhead Service Locations.

(A) Raintight Service Head. Service raceways shall be equipped with a raintight service head.

Exception: Type SE cable shall be permitted to be formed into a gooseneck and taped with a self-sealing weather-resistant thermoplastic.


Consider: "Service heads and goosenecks in service-enterance cables"

This is:
Service heads
and
goosenecks in service-enterance cables

not

Service heads in service-enterance cables
and
goosenecks in service-enterance cables

that is, this applies to all service heads, service-enterance cable need not be present.

So, I believe, 240.54(C) applies to the photograph.

Note that (A) requires a service head where there is a service raceway, (B) requires either a service head or a gooseneck in the cable where there is a service cable. So (C) applies to (A) and (B), and, I think, to all overhead drops.

- BOB

You've got me to re-thinking that.

Not convinced you are correct, but you are making a good argument.

I could be wrong (again) and I have been wrong before, but I'm not convinced on this yet.

I've got to read the Handbook a bit more to say either way.

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )

Thanks Jerry for the drawings. I've printed them and will place them in my reference binder. Thanks to all for the discussion and comments.

__________________
I'd rather be catching a big ole Redfish!