NEC 230.24(A) Service Conductor Clearance From "Roof"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cavie said:
The handbook has a couple of paragraphs on this issue. Please do no reply with " The hand book is not a legal document" . I'm tired of hearing that. All the inspectors I know go to it regularly for clarification.
Click to expand...

Cavie,

I have a handbook also, and it has a 90.2(B)(5) in it ?
 
Actually I agree with Bob about the part where we cannot install a swimming pool under service drops that are low enough to become a violation if the pool was installed. Poco here is mandated to follow NESC rules by the authority of the state legislature. NESC is more stringent about height of service drops. NESC wants service drops 10 ft over roofs and 18? over swimming pools. Good enough for me........ Now, about that window installation company that also sells portable swimming pools and puts them right under service drops....... and gets away with it cause they never have been caught yet. :mad:
 
Here is how I feel about the POCO/NEC debate that is raging around the country.
1. I am aware there has been a committee formed to discuss this. The committee is POCO and NEC type people.I hear that they are not near agreement on a lot of issues to their supply to properties and who is to regulate what.

With that said, I am myself somewhat confused. I do not have direct contact or accessibility to all the information, so I can only surmise some of what I think is actually going on. I do know that two entities are fighting for the same slice of pie and someone is eventually going to win.

My confusion lies in the fact that I thought Article 90 laid out this debate fairly well.
Yet both sides seem to disagree and for now it may not be as simple as we would all like it to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top