Is This in violation ?

[wrestless]

I know I dont have any pictures of the service but these are the facts. I have a meter base mounted on the exterior of a dwelling single family, I came out of the side of the meter base with a 2 " LB extends up 3 ft . This is just a sleeve for my SEU cable from where it breaks the plane of the ceiling under house to the bottom of my panel is 57 " . My inspector and his
posse in the county I live say ,that you have to count the number of inches inside the panel also to comply with the so called 5 ft rule. art 230.70 says nearest readily accessible location. Please note this house is built on columns. The inspector also says that if I come out of my meter base and run up the exterior of the house more than 5 ft I need a disconnect also this is totally nuts and not sure if I should go for the disconnect and SER cable or try to fight them on this. Any help with this one ?

 

[augie47]

You already quoted the applicable Article and, unfortunately, "nearest the point of entrance" is an AHJ call that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction (and often from job to job depending on conditions).
Unless you can show where similar installations have been accepted, I think to fight it would be futile.

 

[infinity]

You can run around the enitre house on the outside with the conductors not entering the house, in other words on the outside the length is unlimited. 230.70 limits the conductor length once you go into the structure.

 

[iwire]

I agree with Gus on the inside portion and I agree with Rob on the outside portion.

 

[infinity]

Since there is no 5' rule in the NEC so I'm assuming that this is a local interpretation. You could run for an unlimited length on the outside and then go directly into the back of the panel with your conduit body. You can't get much closer than that to the "inside nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors"

 

[wrestless]

You already quoted the applicable Article and, unfortunately, "nearest the point of entrance" is an AHJ call that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction (and often from job to job depending on conditions).
Unless you can show where similar installations have been accepted, I think to fight it would be futile.

I also wanted to add that the inspector said it is not him making the rules it is the Dept of Insurance. If I can get aletter from DOI that they ( The County Inspectors) are misinterpeting this they will let this fly. I had talked with the DOI and the chief inspector agrred with me unfortunatly he had a family emergency so I'll have to wait til Monday. Also the city inwhich I live have City electrical inspectors and I met with 4 of them and they also agreed
with me. I dont know maybe I just dont have it anymore this nonsense with AHJ is getting to played out. He also gave me a violation for having only 1 receptacle in a 20 foot hallway pretty cool right ? So I had to add one why is it that we the contractors always have to
bend over backwards and spend extra time and money to appease some inspector on a Power trip ?

 

[wrestless]

Since there is no 5' rule in the NEC so I'm assuming that this is a local interpretation. You could run for an unlimited length on the outside and then go directly into the back of the panel with your conduit body. You can't get much closer than that to the "inside nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors"

Sorry you must have misinterpeted what I said I told the inspector what if I just run up 8 ft on the exterior of the house with conduit and go straight into the back of the MB panel and he still insisted this would need a disconnect also over 5 Ft. Sorry man I truly think there should be a NEC standard knowledge for being an Inspector. I will always have a problem with its OK in some parts of whatever Country you live in and not in other parts.

 

[augie47]

Let us know how it goes with the Chief Inspector.

 

[wrestless]

Let us know how it goes with the Chief Inspector.

I will just hope I dont have to go for more money but whatever ? Thanks

 

[infinity]

Sorry you must have misinterpeted what I said I told the inspector what if I just run up 8 ft on the exterior of the house with conduit and go straight into the back of the MB panel and he still insisted this would need a disconnect also over 5 Ft. Sorry man I truly think there should be a NEC standard knowledge for being an Inspector. I will always have a problem with its OK in some parts of whatever Country you live in and not in other parts.

Nope I understood what you were saying. You can run 8' or 18' or 80' on the outside if you like. According to the NEC your 8' of outside conduit going into the back of the panel is code compliant.

 

[commonslob]

It's always been my understanding that the 5 ft rule (which is a rule of thumb that appears nowhere in the code book) doesn'y apply until you actually enter the house. Even if you go by his way, it sounds like he's busting you on inches anyway. Redoing a service isn't small potatoes,you should definately talk to the chief inspector on this one. While you're there maybe you could get some clarification on why you need another receptacle in that hallway too.

 

[ceb58]

Don't know what state you are in but the inspectors have told me that NC's DOI has ruled that they will allow twice the length of the panel after penetration. But that length is also what is in the panel. So a 200amp mb panel is around 42'' so they allow 84''. So about 48'' is the max.

 

[infinity]

Don't know what state you are in but the inspectors have told me that NC's DOI has ruled that they will allow twice the length of the panel after penetration. But that length is also what is in the panel. So a 200amp mb panel is around 42'' so they allow 84''. So about 48'' is the max.

What does the length of the panel have to do with the length of service entrance conductors into the structure?

 

[ceb58]

What does the length of the panel have to do with the length of service entrance conductors into the structure?

The only thing I can find from the inspectors is that is just a rule of thumb for conductor length. No one will or has stated you can run up to x number of feet.

 

[One-eyed Jack]

The only thing I can find from the inspectors is that is just a rule of thumb for conductor length. No one will or has stated you can run up to x number of feet.

For the past 30 years I have been asked by ec's to give them a length of wire. The NEC does NOT stipulate distance. The NCDOI in the past has stipulated one stud space horizontally from the outside. This was never cut and dried enough for the EC's. If you come out of meter enclosure and go to a point low enough to get under hse,cross that stud space of 16-20 inches and go up to the panel and terminate you will have approximatley 15 ft developed length. This developed length # made the ec's happy and changed absolutley nothing. As Augie said you are working from a local AHJ interpretation. He basically gave you a 5 ft number to work with when no such number exists. Either work within the number parameters set by the AHJ or go back to back.

 

[jwjrw]

http://www.charmeck.org/NR/rdonlyre...ft unfused commercial roughly 5ft residential

 

[commonslob]

The Engineering Division of the Department of Insurance states its position relative to 230-70(a) NEC? as follows:
"Service entrance conductors routed from their point of entrance into the structure, to their point of attachment to the service enclosure a distance horizontally not more than twice the nominal width of the service enclosure and vertically not more than the greater of 5 feet or twice the nominal height of the service enclosure shall be considered to be in compliance with the requirements of 230-70(a) of the current National Electrical Code. Service entrance conductors may be routed in the most direct route or at right angles. Service entrance conductors in excess of these specified limits will not be allowed unless specifically authorized by special permission from the electrical inspector having jurisdiction to accommodate adverse site conditions which would not reasonably allow installation within this criteria."

from what I'm reading there it doesn't say anything about counting the inches inside the panel, its says 5 ft from the point of entrance to point of attachment to the service Enclosure. To me that would be the connector on the bottom of the panel. If it said point of attachment to the service equipment I could see counting the wire inside the panel, but it clearly says enclosure. If the OP had 57" I don't see where he's in violation.
I still thnk its worth some clarification with the chief before he redoes a service

 

[jwjrw]

The Engineering Division of the Department of Insurance states its position relative to 230-70(a) NEC? as follows:
"Service entrance conductors routed from their point of entrance into the structure, to their point of attachment to the service enclosure a distance horizontally not more than twice the nominal width of the service enclosure and vertically not more than the greater of 5 feet or twice the nominal height of the service enclosure shall be considered to be in compliance with the requirements of 230-70(a) of the current National Electrical Code. Service entrance conductors may be routed in the most direct route or at right angles. Service entrance conductors in excess of these specified limits will not be allowed unless specifically authorized by special permission from the electrical inspector having jurisdiction to accommodate adverse site conditions which would not reasonably allow installation within this criteria."

from what I'm reading there it doesn't say anything about counting the inches inside the panel, its says 5 ft from the point of entrance to point of attachment to the service Enclosure. To me that would be the connector on the bottom of the panel. If it said point of attachment to the service equipment I could see counting the wire inside the panel, but it clearly says enclosure. If the OP had 57" I don't see where he's in violation.
I still thnk its worth some clarification with the chief before he redoes a service

That would be my take here in nc on it.

 

[ceb58]

The Engineering Division of the Department of Insurance states its position relative to 230-70(a) NEC? as follows:
"Service entrance conductors routed from their point of entrance into the structure, to their point of attachment to the service enclosure a distance horizontally not more than twice the nominal width of the service enclosure and vertically not more than the greater of 5 feet or twice the nominal height of the service enclosure shall be considered to be in compliance with the requirements of 230-70(a) of the current National Electrical Code. Service entrance conductors may be routed in the most direct route or at right angles. Service entrance conductors in excess of these specified limits will not be allowed unless specifically authorized by special permission from the electrical inspector having jurisdiction to accommodate adverse site conditions which would not reasonably allow installation within this criteria."

from what I'm reading there it doesn't say anything about counting the inches inside the panel, its says 5 ft from the point of entrance to point of attachment to the service Enclosure. To me that would be the connector on the bottom of the panel. If it said point of attachment to the service equipment I could see counting the wire inside the panel, but it clearly says enclosure. If the OP had 57" I don't see where he's in violation.
I still thnk its worth some clarification with the chief before he redoes a service

And that is what I have been told by inspectors. Just not in the detail you have posted. Thank You. I have never had a problem on a 400 amp back to back with crossing the first stud cavity under the first panel and hitting the second panel in the next stud cavity. I agree the OP doesn't seem to have a violation. And after several PM's I think and hope he will fight it. I just would like him to let us know the outcome.

 

[wrestless]

Is This a Violation

Is This a Violation

And that is what I have been told by inspectors. Just not in the detail you have posted. Thank You. I have never had a problem on a 400 amp back to back with crossing the first stud cavity under the first panel and hitting the second panel in the next stud cavity. I agree the OP doesn't seem to have a violation. And after several PM's I think and hope he will fight it. I just would like him to let us know the outcome.

OK here is the outcome I spoke directly to Ron Chilton from NC DOI and I also produced pictures of the service. He stated that although there are no wall under a pier built home it is still considered in the building envelope, I said OK i'll install the meter on the adjacent side of column which actually would be the exterior of the dwelling went up the outside 4 ft and then in with the same SEU. He said that was fine and so did the inspectors after I told them if they insist on a disconnect on the exterior then they have to take it up with the DOI. I am happy I just had to pull out the SEU and meter and remount took about 1 hour. I guess that would actually be the building envelope just thought it had to have enclosed walls but its done. Thanks very much guys Rich.