OCPD for service condutors

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rich Elec.

Senior Member
Location
Pennsylvania
I have not seen this installation first hand, it was explained to me by another electrician.

A new 400 amp service was installed at a residential property.
A utility pole is set over 50' (I don't recall actuall distance) from the house. The meter is mounted to the pole. Service conductors are run underground for a distance greater than 50'. The service conductors enter into the house into the back of a 400 amp panel.

The electrical inspector claimed a violation.

A diconnect needed to be installed on the utility pole to protect the service conductors.
The inspector said that the article was in the "International Residential Electrical Code."
Can anyone on this forum verify such a document or such a code?
 
KB is on the right track. As it's been explained before, a meter does not transition service conductors into feeders; it's more like a lump in the cable. As long as the service enters a disconnect outside or immediately inside (not under, but inside) the premises, it's compliant.
 
I hope those are not USE cables because I don't believe they can enter the building at all (art. 338.10(A)) .
 
Dennis Alwon said:
I hope those are not USE cables because I don't believe they can enter the building at all (art. 338.10(A)) .
Click to expand...

Keep reading. From 338.10(B)(4)(b):

Type USE shall be permitted to be terminated in enclosures at an indoor location where Type USE cable emerges from the ground. The length of the cable extending indoors to the first termination box shall not exceed 1.8 m (6 ft). Where Type USE cable emerges from the ground at terminations, it shall be protected in accordance with 300.5(D).
Click to expand...
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Larry--- Are you reading the 2002 NEC--- I don't see that in 2005. Nowhere in art 338.10 do I see your quote.
Click to expand...

It's not in the 02 or 99 either.

Roger
 
It is in the 2002.

I believe I remember someone saying USE (or URD) is also marked as a conductor type that can be used inside the building, and I think (without looking) the proposal that changed this in the 2005 explained it. But I'm late for work and can't substantiate any of this. :D
 
Dennis Alwon said:
Larry--- Are you reading the 2002 NEC--- I don't see that in 2005. Nowhere in art 338.10 do I see your quote.
Click to expand...
It is indeed from the 2002, and has the "new text" line in the margin. Here's the entire paragraph:

Type USE cable shall be installed outside in accordance with the provisions of Article 340. Type USE shall be permitted to be terminated in enclosures at an indoor location where Type USE cable emerges from the ground. The length of the cable extending indoors to the first termination box shall not exceed 1.8 m (6 ft). Where Type USE cable emerges from the ground at terminations, it shall be protected in accordance with 300.5(D). Multiconductor service-entrance cable shall be permitted to be installed as messenger-supported wiring in accordance with Articles 225 and 396.
Click to expand...
 
LarryFine said:
It is indeed from the 2002, and has the "new text" line in the margin. Here's the entire paragraph:
Click to expand...

Hmmmm. I guess we have different printings then, my 2002 says;

338.JPG



Roger
 
George and Larry, your books are indeed wrong, it was corrected with an errata.






"Type USE cable shall be installed outside in accordance with the provisions of Article 340. Where Type USE cable emerges from the ground at terminations, it shall be protected in accordance with 300.5(D). Multiconductor service-entrance cable shall be permitted to be installed as messenger-supported wiring in accordance with Articles 225 and 396."​


Roger​




 
roger said:
George and Larry, your books are indeed wrong, it was corrected with an errata.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up roger. I was wondering why there was no line in the column for that article.
 
LarryFine said:
KB is on the right track. As it's been explained before, a meter does not transition service conductors into feeders; it's more like a lump in the cable. As long as the service enters a disconnect outside or immediately inside (not under, but inside) the premises, it's compliant.
Click to expand...

That's great Larry.
Thank you.
I didn't think that it was a violation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top