NEC 230.70, SER Cable, and the POCO

[phaset]

Selfish request in this one, it is for the new (to us) house we just purchased.

Service enters the house through a wirehead on the north gable. What appears to be type SER (or maybe SE) transitions the entire width of the attic behind the knee wall (40' or so) It then exits the other gable, transitions down the outside wall of the house, through the POCO meter (no obvious overcurrent or service disconnect identification here), and then runs back under the house through the crawl space about 2/3rd the length of the house again before transitioning up an interior wall to the panel. The panel has a mains OCPD in the form of a breaker at this point.

In my reading NEC 230, and especially 230.70, this whole arrangement would appear to violate the spirit of the code, but not necessarily the letter, depending on what the City of Atlanta AHJ considers an appropriate distance to a service disconnect inside of a building. There is probably 75' of unfused conductor between the pole drop and the input lugs of the house's panel, and probably 65' of that is within the building envelope :happysad:

Today I called the POCO and the CSR relayed my questions on to the engineering department. I'm hoping to confirm my suspicions before engaging with their engineering department. Also, what should I expect from the POCO in terms of rectifying this? I'd rather not have to go running off to the AHJ to force the POCO to change something. Is the POCO going to say that the existing configuration is not their responsibility?

Appreciate any insights,

 

[augie47]

POCOs responsibility normally stops at the service point which in all probability in your case would be where the drop connects to the conductors entering your house.
I can not imagine any AHJ accepting that long a run of unprotected conductors.

 

[infinity]

I know of no jurisdiction that would allow this much SE cable within a building. I would start with the following violation followed by the lack of an OCPD where they enter the building.

VI. Service Equipment ? Disconnecting Means
230.70 General. Means shall be provided to disconnect all
conductors in a building or other structure from the service-
entrance conductors.
(A) Location. The service disconnecting means shall be
installed in accordance with 230.70(A)(1), (A)(2), and
(A)(3).
(1) Readily Accessible Location. The service disconnect-
ing means shall be installed at a readily accessible location
either outside of a building or structure or inside nearest the
point of entrance of the service conductors.

230.91 Location. The service overcurrent device shall be
an integral part of the service disconnecting means or shall
be located immediately adjacent thereto.

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Years ago I have seen this done but it is not compliant. I bet the power company does not own that wire so they are out of it once it attaches to the house if they even get that far

 

[kwired]

Forget NEC, I wouldn't want that much unprotected conductor inside the building period. Something damages that cable and develops a fault between conductors - nothing stopping the fault current until the fault burns itself out or the primary overcurrent device on POCO transformer opens the supply, and you don't have any clue in most instances what it will take to open that.

 

[PetrosA]

I'd want that changed post haste...

 

[mjf]

I would not notify POCO, they may disconnect you on the spot. I would contact an electrical contractor licensed to work in Atlanta and have the entire service redone as soon as humanly possible.

 

[Iron_Ben]

I wonder if this is the way it was done locally 40 or so years ago and your POCO has tens of thousands of similar installations. I would have consulted with a local electrician first to see if this is a fluke, or a common arrangement. As far as predicting the POCO's response, it is likely to depend largely on who shows up to check it out and what kind of a day he is having. Worst case they could say something along the lines of you have ten days to make it right or we shut you off. Good luck, I hope it's not too costly to rework your service.

 

[kwired]

POCO's around here will not do anything unless maybe they see something that is an immediate danger, and it generally has to be pretty bad before they would do anything. If you want to know if it is safe or code compliant they will tell you to either call a licensed electrician or the applicable electrical inspection authority.

Licensed electrician can tell you anything from it must be changed to - it must have been compliant at the time it was installed.

Local inspection authority - likely tells you it must be changed and likely gives you a deadline as to when it must be done, or he can order utility to disconnect you.

 

[phaset]

Selfish request in this one, it is for the new (to us) house we just purchased.

Service enters the house through a wirehead on the north gable. What appears to be type SER (or maybe SE) transitions the entire width of the attic behind the knee wall (40' or so) It then exits the other gable, transitions down the outside wall of the house, through the POCO meter (no obvious overcurrent or service disconnect identification here), and then runs back under the house through the crawl space about 2/3rd the length of the house again before transitioning up an interior wall to the panel. The panel has a mains OCPD in the form of a breaker at this point.

Hey all,

Talked to an electrician acquaintance (I'm an engineer). He confirmed that this is common around here, and the POCO largely ignores it. Doesn't change the concerns, of course, so having him quote to redo the service.

Thanks for insights

 

[MasterTheNEC]

Hey all,

Talked to an electrician acquaintance (I'm an engineer). He confirmed that this is common around here, and the POCO largely ignores it. Doesn't change the concerns, of course, so having him quote to redo the service.

Thanks for insights

interesting.....seems to me that it is less about the POCO allowing it versus the AHJ unclear how to apply the NEC...:angel:

 

[kwired]

interesting.....seems to me that it is less about the POCO allowing it versus the AHJ unclear how to apply the NEC...:angel:

Such an install around here wouldn't surprise me at all if it is older then about 25 years - there was no inspection requirements before then - NEC technically still applied but with nobody enforcing it you get those kind of things.

 

[phaset]

Such an install around here wouldn't surprise me at all if it is older then about 25 years - there was no inspection requirements before then - NEC technically still applied but with nobody enforcing it you get those kind of things.

It must be exactly this. House was built in 1950 and still has a number of circuits without EGC. POCO asked me to move the location of the meter can when we get it redone, which was going to happen anyways.