It is a terrible shame that this was allowed to remain!

Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Picture was sent to me recently:


http://www.joetedesco.com/servicemess.jpg


--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm

Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Joe,


I agree the service entrance looks like a mess, but you say it passed the local AHJ. I can't tell you how many times over the past many years I have written up something on a new home, and the builder simply says "too bad, it passed the county inspection". Unless I can find a defect I don't know how I would write that up as a home inspector.

What is the hazard here and the potential for a problem to arise from the installation?


Originally Posted By: gbeaumont
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



hi to all,


Joe, surely those cables should be enclosed either in a conduit or raceway, no ??

Regards

Gerry


--
Gerry Beaumont
NACHI Education Committee
e-mail : education@nachi.org
NACHI phone 484-429-5466

Inspection Depot Education
gbeaumont@inspectiondepot.com

"Education is a journey, not a destination"

Originally Posted By: Bob Badger
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



It does not matter what we think of this mess, it matters what the AHJ thinks. icon_sad.gif


It does look like the AHJ forgot about 230.50(B) cables other than service cables shall not be installed within 3.0 m (10 ft) of grade level or where exposed to physical damage.

Even though this is SE cable they are feeder cables not service entrance cables, the breaker is at the meter.

And 334.30 SE cable will be supported withing 12" of every cabinet, box, or fitting.

And 110.26(A)(1) Depth of working space.

How could an HI address this?

I do not think they can, the AHJ and the power company are good with it so an HI saying there is a problem is fighting an uphill battle don't you think?

JMO, Bob


--
Bob (AKA iwire)
ECN Discussion Forums
Mike Holt Code Forum

Originally Posted By: Mike Parks
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



It is sad but other than requiring the entrance cables to be secured, their is no code violation.


I would have made them put one more post on the leftside. And I would have had made them have all the cables secured.

In this application it would be a pain---but that is not my problem.

Mike P.


Originally Posted By: Randy Flockton
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



while were on the code wagon… 230-71(a)



“Prices subject to change with customers additude”

Originally Posted By: jpeck
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



No code violation?


To start with, those appear to be intended for installation in an electrical equipment room, and do not appear to be rain tight enclosures.


--
Jerry Peck
South Florida

Originally Posted By: jfarsetta
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Jerry,


cant tell without a closer look, but these look like the same stuff we see installed outside all the time at condo complexes up north.

But, you could be right


--
Joe Farsetta

Illigitimi Non Carborundum
"Dont let the bastards grind you down..."

Originally Posted By: Scott Wilson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



The gear appears to be 2 Cutler-Hammer type 1MM Meter Stacks.


They are listed as raintight, as are the meter-main on the left and the disconnect on the right.


Is that SE cable for sure?? It looks like it could be regular NM cable, in which case it would not be for outdoor use at all.


Originally Posted By: jtedesco
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Scott Wilson wrote:
The gear appears to be 2 Cutler-Hammer type 1MM Meter Stacks.
They are listed as raintight, as are the meter-main on the left and the disconnect on the right.

Is that SE cable for sure?? It looks like it could be regular NM cable, in which case it would not be for outdoor use at all.


Scott:

Thanks for identifying the equipment. No that was not "rope," it was my understanding that the feeders were Type SER, the "R" indicates that the cable is round, and included an insulated grounded (neutral) conductor.

If Type SE was installed, the single phase feeders would present a problem, because there would be two insulated conductors for the hot "ungrounded" legs, and the other would be a bare conductor, only to be used for the EGC.

I am surprised that no one has even mentioned the window. Wasn't that window put there for a reason, like ventilation or maybe an exit from the basement?

Gerry:

I would say "YES" to your question. This image was only a reminder that we often find that even the local electrical inspection is worthless and this is an example of one that went wrong!


--
Joe Tedesco, NEC Consultant

www.nachi.org/tedescobook.htm