bonding new meter base on top of old meter base . . .

[brantmacga]

i have a service upgrade to do where the current meter base and mast are installed behind the exterior brick; the cover is flush with the brick. we're upgrading a 100A to a 200A and the poco is allowing us to use the current mast and mount a new meter combo panel on top of the old can, which will now be just a raceway.

question on bonding; my plan is to take a grounding conductor through the old can up the mast and out the weather head, bonding it to the mast w/ a strap.

any problems with this install?

 

[Charlie Bob]

i have a service upgrade to do where the current meter base and mast are installed behind the exterior brick; the cover is flush with the brick. we're upgrading a 100A to a 200A and the poco is allowing us to use the current mast and mount a new meter combo panel on top of the old can, which will now be just a raceway.

question on bonding; my plan is to take a grounding conductor through the old can up the mast and out the weather head, bonding it to the mast w/ a strap.

any problems with this install?

Behind exterior brick wall.Never seen such a thing, it'll be cool maybe if you can post some pics later.

 

[Volta]

i have a service upgrade to do where the current meter base and mast are installed behind the exterior brick; the cover is flush with the brick. we're upgrading a 100A to a 200A and the poco is allowing us to use the current mast and mount a new meter combo panel on top of the old can, which will now be just a raceway.

question on bonding; my plan is to take a grounding conductor through the old can up the mast and out the weather head, bonding it to the mast w/ a strap.

any problems with this install?

It was designed for a meter, and to have the 3R cover in place. If it was listed, it may not also have a listing as a pull box 110.3(B).

If the riser is behind the brick, hard to say it meets 230.70(A)(1). I doubt it could be considered encased in brick. 230.6(2).

I assume that the old base has a threaded hub, so once you bond the mast the old base is bonded. 250.92.

The old base is now a pull box rather than a meter socket enclosure. You will not have access to the wiring in the box. May or may not comply with 314.28(A)(2).
As a pull box, it needs a cover that is compatible 314.28(C).

Section 314.29 requires wiring in boxes to be accesible. If you sealed around the new socket enclosure to keep the water out, 110.14, that finish would be damaged to gain access. Art 100.

 

[kwired]

My first thought as Volta has adressed is how are you going to access the old meter enclosure?

At the very least if you must use it put a junction box over it with a full cut out in the back and nipple into the new meter from it.

May require other things to be done also but check with inspector and POCO first to see if they will even allow it.

 

[LarryFine]

Why not simply bond the original can to the incoming neutral as it passes through?

This is one I'd definitely run past both the POCO and inspector before doing anything.

 

[brantmacga]

Why not simply bond the original can to the incoming neutral as it passes through?

This is one I'd definitely run past both the POCO and inspector before doing anything.

i was avoiding putting a lug inside the old can because it would be inaccessible. having it on the exterior of the mast makes it possible to visually confirm the bond.

as for poco and inspector; poco recommended it, inspector approved it.


i know there's a few violations here, but its one of those instances where i know we can make it safe and there will be a seal between the two keeping the elements out.

long story short is i'm doing all i can to save this customer as much money as possible. they haven't asked for it and haven't given any sob stories, but i know their situation. there's not much wiggle room to cut labor costs so every little bit helps.


having meter cans and masts recessed into the brick was a common practice here in the '70's. its long been disallowed but several of these installations remain. i've never known this poco to allow them to remain in use when doing any type of service upgrade, but i'm thinking the engineer i called out knew this particular situation as well.

 

[kwired]

Although I still don't like this install instead of running your grounding conductor back up the mast why not tap off of the grounded service conductor at the top of mast to bond the mast. It is service equipment and is allowed.

If the weatherhead were a junction box and your pipe clamp were a grounding bushing you would have the same thing.

What type of roof does this mast pass through. If ashpalt shingle or other easy to work with material why not put new mast up on exterior of brick and fill the hole left by old mast. If you are capable of properly placing a roof flashing in shingles covering the old hole is not that hard.

I have removed service masts when changing from a drop to a lateral.
At the very least all you need is some galvanized sheet metal to slide under shingles and cover the hole remember to cut a piece for each row of shingle involved. Bottom rows need to be overlapped by top rows to keep water from entering structure.

As far as saving customer money if you need to upgrade from 100 to 200 amps apparently customer has enough money to buy something necessary to increase the load on the service a little extra to do it right should not be a big deal.

 

[Buck Parrish]

Here we're not allowed to have unfused service conductors in the house. (behind the brick)
Except for back to back panel to meter maximum five feet.
As for the poco here, they would allow all kinds of stuff that is not code compliant.

 

[mcclary's electrical]

What size is the mast? Did they use a 2" for the original sevice?

 

[brantmacga]

As far as saving customer money if you need to upgrade from 100 to 200 amps apparently customer has enough money to buy something necessary to increase the load on the service a little extra to do it right should not be a big deal.

customer is having to do it out of necessity. i'm not going into the details, only to say that it has to be done.



and yes the original is 2" RMC.

i hadn't thought about just using the grounded conductor; suppose i could get a tap lug and install just outside the weather head.


i'm not interested in debating the code legalities of the install, only the bonding of the old mast and can.

 

[Buck Parrish]

customer is having to do it out of necessity. i'm not going into the details, only to say that it has to be done.



and yes the original is 2" RMC.

i hadn't thought about just using the grounded conductor; suppose i could get a tap lug and install just outside the weather head.


i'm not interested in debating the code legalities of the install, only the bonding of the old mast and can.

I have to bid against this type of install all the time
Hey but if it works for you, then so be it.

 

[kwired]

customer is having to do it out of necessity. i'm not going into the details, only to say that it has to be done.



and yes the original is 2" RMC.

i hadn't thought about just using the grounded conductor; suppose i could get a tap lug and install just outside the weather head.


i'm not interested in debating the code legalities of the install, only the bonding of the old mast and can.

why not a 2 inch rigid pipe ground clamp?