Electrical service question

Attached are a couple of pictures of service wiring. What would you write in the report?

Needs proper clearance for obvious reasons. Have client consult with electrical service provider and/or electrician about corrective options.

Mast over 5’ needs guy wire.Proper clearence over roof is 3’. I recommend taking interNACHI course on electrical. It gives me reason behind my opinion. It has helped me and its free with membership.

Article 230 covers specifics of overhead service drops. You might note that it may damage the roof or the actual conductors themselves besides the Article 230 clearance issues.

There is no 5’ mast rule in the NEC. This maybe covered by the utility company or a local code however.

Robert I was referring to NACHI’s electrical education program. I do need to go to the NEC and learn . I have seen the Power Company come out and put a sleeve over the line and let it rub on the roof.?

It’s great that NACHI has you guys looking at the service masts. 5’ may be accepted as a general inspection parameter but it’s not in the NEC that’s why I posted the actual code wording. Who knows what “shall be of adequate strength” really means. The utilities (POCO’s) seem to have their own interpretation since many of them have defined support requirments. I’m unsure if the POCO would provide rub protection on those service drop conductors. Many POCO’s have requirements that say the installation must comply with the NEC. That would bring us back to the Article 230 clearances which this installation fails to meet.

All of this might be outside of the scope of the NEC in the first place. Article 90.2 tells us that service drop conductors are outside of the scope of the NEC.

General notes that may help.

Without exception, no parts of swimming pools, wading pools, hot tubs, etc. shall be placed under existing service-drop conductors or any other open overhead wiring. Nor shall such wiring be installed above the following:

A. Swimming pool, wading pool, hot tubs, and the area extending 10 feet horizontally from the inside of the walls of the pool or tub.

B. Diving structures.

C. Observation stands, towers, or platforms.
Other Clearances

The minimum clearance for the service drop conductors to any building or other structure is:

A. 12 feet above finished grade, sidewalks, platforms, decks, or building projections, from which the conductors might be reached (areas subject to pedestrian traffic).

B. 12.5 feet over residential driveways.

C. 18 feet over roads, streets, and other areas subject to truck traffic.

D. Three feet from windows, doors, porches, fire escapes, or similar locations.

E. Where the voltage between conductors does not exceed 300V and the service drop conductors pass over the roof of an intervening building, clearance of three feet is required.

F. The service drop attachment shall not be higher than 25 feet above finished grade unless it is stipulated in the metering specifications.

G. The service drop conductors are not to pass over more than four feet of a building’s roof to reach the point of attachment.

H. The point of attachment (POA)shall be placed so the service conductors do not rub, or come in contact with the building, its eaves, or any intervening building or structure. Any intervening trees on the customer’s property, which may interfere with the service drop, are the customer’s responsibility to trim, or remove.

I. No part of service drop conductors, their drip loops, or their weather head shall come within 12" of communication cables or conductors.

Overhead Service Requirements

Funny thing is that I wrote that course and knowing what the NEC does say, I am pretty sure there is no mention of a 5ft minimum clearance, the 5ft issue is about guide wires on taller masts.

Here’s iNACHIs own image from the course



Thanks everyone! :slight_smile:

Regardless of being outside the scope of the National Electrical Code. The fact that unprotected conductors are in contact with the roof surface, and an abrasive roof surface at that would indeed warrant being included in your report. The fact is regardless of the compliance to codes, this is a safety concern that should be spoken about in order to remove the HI from any future liability.

I would not spit out references to the National Electrical Code as it is a service drop BUT just keep in mind that if this was a feeder from a seperate structure that the NEC would indeed play a role in it under Article 225.

All in all…I would write up, “improper clearance on unprotected service drop conductors which could cause a hazardous condition in the future if left uncorrected. Consider contacting your local power company for potential corrective solutions.”