1957 UPGRADED ELECTRICAL SERVICE - InspectionNews

CHARLIE VAN FLEET · #1 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 08:00 PM

Hey all

hope business is keeping food on the table--fore the first time i am alittle slow---maybe four inspection a week.

but here is a 1957 home i did today,and have to go back on sat for full inspection. but over head service seems suspect,and main box,was upgraded,and i have called city to see if permit and inspection completed. they haven't called back yet.

70 amp service,and main service wires seem suspect to me and how about that splice or tap {wire nuts}

i tried to take clear picture of that service entry wire to main-but it is blurry,,will retake sat,,,would you call that romex

thanks
charlie
doies that main wire with ground wire cut back seem right,i have never seen this before,,
any help here

Chris Kynard · #2 (**permalink**) 10-08-2008, 08:57 PM

Why did they stop the mast under the soffit? What kind of anchoring do the cables have? Looks like a crappy amateur installation from the pics.

Michael Thomas · #3 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 04:43 AM

"electrically heated gutters"

Jerry Peck · #4 (**permalink**) 10-09-2008, 10:05 AM

Charlie,

That overhead electrical service tie-in to roof mounted insulators is not only not allowed (not allowed by code), it is not safe either.

When the electrician upgraded the service equipment the service mast and overhead service should also have been replaced and not only made safe, but made code compliant too.

No need to retake any photos, that service needs to be replaced.

Stupid idiot electrician (wait, no electrician would do that

) cut the friggin' ground wire off at the sheath, sheesh!

However, that is the least of the problems.

My guess is that the service equipment was originally inside the house, and now this panel, as installed, becomes "service equipment".

Here are a few things wrong in that service equipment:

- neutral conductor multiple tapped at the neutral terminal bus bar

- the panel inside to which that mess in the bottom is running to is now no longer "service equipment", it is now "not service equipment". That means that the neutrals and grounds are no longer allowed to be tied together at that interior panel, or between that interior panel and the service equipment

- what were 'service entrance conductors' (that mess at the bottom) are now 'feeder conductors' and with feeder conductors, the neutral conductor is required to be isolated from ground and insulated - the original 'service entrance cable' does not have an insulated neutral, thus, that feeder now needs to be replaced with a wiring method which includes both a grounding conductor and an insulated neutral conductor

- by the looks of it, there was a grounding conductor terminal bar on the left, and it and the cross over bar have been removed, leaving the neutral terminal bar being held in place only with plastic snap in prongs - the label most likely shows a grounding bar on the left and a cross over bar between the grounding terminal bar and the neutral terminal bar, which would need to be left in place as it helps hold the two terminal bars in place

- it looks like the concentric knock-out in the lower right side is pulling out and needs to be repaired, along with an insulating bushing

Two pluses I see in your photo:

1) They could actually read and 'Top" is on top.

2) The enclosure was mounted with the proper mounting feet. This leaves the required 1/4" air space between the back of the enclosure and the brick wall.

Ken Amelin · #5 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 07:12 AM

Jerry,

Why is that panel not considered service equipment?
It looks like it is the main point of entry and is connected to a main breaker.

Is it because main service wire should have an uninsulated neutral/ground wire? Is that a code issue?

Thanks

Joe Klampfer · #6 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 08:18 AM

In addidtion to all of Jerry's comments... Is that home a rancher ?? Just wondering what the ground clearance is to all the overhead cables. Also, is there a main breaker upstream from that panel or do the mains just come in onto the loadcentre's main lugs ?

Jerry Peck · #7 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Amelin

Jerry,

Why is that panel not considered service equipment?
It looks like it is the main point of entry and is connected to a main breaker.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

My guess is that the service equipment was originally inside the house, and now this panel, as installed, becomes "service equipment".

Ken,

If by "that panel" you mean the one in the photo, it is service equipment, see my quote above.

The problem - ONE OF the problems - is that the interior panel 'was' service equipment at one time, and was fed by the service entrance conductors. Since the addition of "that panel" on the exterior, the interior panel is no longer the service equipment, thus it is fed by feeder conductors, not service entrance conductors, and feeder conductors, like branch circuit conductors, must have the neutral insulated and must have a separate ground path (either metal conduit or a grounding conductor).

CHARLIE VAN FLEET · #8 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 09:51 AM

GUYS
got a peek inside this house today, and there it was the original service equipment and it was of the federal pacific beast,,i'm interested in seeing the wiring inside that panel

charlie

Ken Amelin · #9 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 10:48 AM

Jerry,

You've got good eyes.

After going back and looking again at the pictures, I can see what looks like the top of the "service equipment" panel on the exterior. (I didn't see that at first glance)

I now understand your comments.

But this just begs me to ask more questions.
Let say there was no exterior panel and the interior panel was the service equipment.

1. Would service wire splices be allowed within the panel, prior to the main breaker?

2. If yes, is it OK to have the bare service neutral wire spliced to an insulated white wire?

Thanks

Jerry Peck · #10 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 11:45 AM

No & no.

Brandon Whitmore · #11 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Jerry Peck No & no. Today 09:48 AM Ken Amelin Jerry,

You've got good eyes.

After going back and looking again at the pictures, I can see what looks like the top of the "service equipment" panel on the exterior. (I didn't see that at first glance)

I now understand your comments.

But this just begs me to ask more questions.
Let say there was no exterior panel and the interior panel was the service equipment.

1. Would service wire splices be allowed within the panel, prior to the main breaker?

2. If yes, is it OK to have the bare service neutral wire spliced to an insulated white wire?

Thanks

Jerry, do you have a code reference for that, or other data to back it up that you could share. Reason I ask is I have seen service wires spliced in a panel a few times over the years and have been told it is OK...

Thanks

Jerry Peck · #12 (**permalink**) 10-10-2008, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandon Whitmore

Jerry, do you have a code reference for that, or other data to back it up that you could share. Reason I ask is I have seen service wires spliced in a panel a few times over the years and have been told it is OK...

(slaps forehead with hand - knuckle head you ... he says to himself)

"over the years and have been told it is OK"

Over the years it was not okay, and that is what I keep remembering, ... then the code changed from 'shall not be spliced' (with a few exceptions) to 'splices shall be ... '.

That's the part I keep forgetting - the old electrician in me says 'remember *shall not be spliced* ' and the inspector part keeps forgetting the code now allows service entrance conductors to be spliced, if properly done with proper splicing devices.

Me bad, again.

John Steinke · #13 (**permalink**) 10-15-2008, 10:34 AM

I see some issues here that have come up in several recent threads. So, I'll start at the very beginning ....

Service requirements are determined by the local utility, and not the NEC. Those requirements do change over time; when you replace the service, you need to comply with the latest requirements.

The use, by the PoCo, of separate overhead wires is quite dated; for that type of service drop, though, attaching each wire to a separate, securely mounted insulator is proper.
Likewise, ending the service mast below the eave was once the preferred way to do it. One of the reasons was that none of the mast was concealed by passing through the eave and roof; it's simply amazing what folks have done in order to steal power.
Some areas don't even have a mast; SE cable is used from roofline to panel.

Using wire nuts to make the existing wires reach the breaker is allowed.
Not connecting the ground wires is not allowed. I can't tell if there is a disconnect before the panel.

All that said, what I would expect to see for this service change is:
1) A ground rod;
2) A mast of 2" rigid, projecting above the roof about 30". (The mast doesn't HAVE to go through the roof; bending it is allowed);
3) The mast to be bot vertical and secured in place;
4) The PoCo wires to be 'triplex" (two insulated wires wound around a steel reinforced bare aluminum wire); and,
5) A ground buss.

What I suspect you have is a "service change" made without permit, by an unqualified person.

Matthew Barnicle · #14 (**permalink**) 10-15-2008, 12:01 PM

Without a doubt, call it out! Among everything else, could you imagine the homeowner cleaning the gutters and contacting those non-insulated links? Or, how about clogged gutters that have ice hanging, water pouring from them and contact the non-insulated links and energizing any nearby metal.