Service Entrance Penetration Panel Offset

R

Rock86

Senior Member
Location
new york
Occupation
Electrical Engineer / Electrician
Service install. Trying to keep it simple. Below are three mock ups. If you penetrate a wall and do not terminate the conduit directly into the panel (right image) is an LB acceptable (left & middle)? The LB would allow access to the unprotected service entrance conductors. For the sake of argument, lets say the conduit length is no longer than 24". Assume panels are mounted 6'-0" to the top.
1738774077033.png
 
And watch the wire fill on the LB. Some will not take 4-0 4-0 2-0 al, but it’s rare you will need 2-0 neutral.
 
Some utilities do not permit conduit bodies between the load side of their meter and the service disconnect, but the code does not care.
 
Okay. well I had a disagreement with someone because they said it was a code violation because it did not terminate on the MCB at the nearest point, and the unprotected conductors are accessible. I didn't feel like I was wrong, but I couldn't point to a particular code which would allow it.

What about if you enter a pull box to make the sweep of parallel conductors instead of conduit bodies. both have accessible covers, does it make a difference?
 
Rock86 said:
Okay. well I had a disagreement with someone because they said it was a code violation because it did not terminate on the MCB at the nearest point, and the unprotected conductors are accessible. I didn't feel like I was wrong, but I couldn't point to a particular code which would allow it.

What about if you enter a pull box to make the sweep of parallel conductors instead of conduit bodies. both have accessible covers, does it make a difference?
Click to expand...
The "nearest the point of entrance" language is very subjective. Only the AHJ for where the installation is being made knows what those words mean.
Our local code has an amendment that says not more than 10' of service conductor once you enter the building and they must be in IMC or RMC.

The code would permit a pull box, but subject to what the "nearest the point of entrance" means in your area. Utilities that would not permit a conduit body would not permit a pull box.
 
Rock86 said:
Okay. well I had a disagreement with someone because they said it was a code violation because it did not terminate on the MCB at the nearest point, and the unprotected conductors are accessible.
Click to expand...
As Don stated no one knows what "nearest" means except for the person inspecting this. Personally if installed to the scale of your first two sketches both methods are acceptable.
 
So what about access to the unprotected conductors? That seems to be the bigger argument against either a conduit body or pull box.
 
wwhitney said:
How is an LB any more access than the service panel or the meter enclosure already provide?

Cheers, Wayne
Click to expand...
I can't explain it either. I think he is using the argument that because it is within the building that it cannot be accessible and must terminate on the OCPD at the nearest point of entry. Neither of us could state a code to determine who was right.
 
Rock86 said:
So what about access to the unprotected conductors? That seems to be the bigger argument against either a conduit body or pull box.
Click to expand...
If the conductors are after the meter no one really cares. Ahead of the meter the POCO may be worried about theft of services. Ahead of the meter the POCO might want tamper resistant screws installed after the conductors are pulled in.
 
For the LBs and Pull boxes:

Utility off and on orders +meter section safety revolve around locks and ties. It usually only applies from the service entrance to the meter container. Some utilities extend it to the main.

Meter reader can see if the service entrance has been tampered with.

It comes back to people tapping wire, stealing power, adding load without notification, and neighbor disputes. Someone comes by, taps the conductors and steals power from their neighbor. The main doesn't turn them off when the bill doesn't get paid. So then you have to send a crew out to disconnect at the pole. It is easier for a meter tech to remove the meter socket (if less than 400A) and tie it back up or lock out the main breaker and leave a note. Can't lock out a main if someone tapped ahead of it.

I think it is work procedure and convivence rules that persisted though time in the utility handbooks.
 
If you come in the side (center figure) watch your gutter space. If you come in opposite the breaker you could have a deflection problem (312.6) and, even you you don't, the large conductors can make breaker terminal access a bear.
 
hbiss said:
It comes from Con Ed. They will allow up to 5 feet of unprotected service entrance conductors inside the building after the meter to the panel. That can even be SE. If that is not possible you can get special approval for more.

-Hal
Click to expand...
I'm curious as to why ConEd would have a say in what happens after the service point?
 
infinity said:
I'm curious as to why ConEd would have a say in what happens after the service point?
Click to expand...
Many utilities have rules that they enforce beyond the service point. For example ours requires two ground rods at the meter location with a 6 AWG GEC to the meter. That applies even in cases where the NEC would not require those rods. If those rods are not there, the power does not get connected.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Many utilities have rules that they enforce beyond the service point. For example ours requires two ground rods at the meter location with a 6 AWG GEC to the meter. That applies even in cases where the NEC would not require those rods. If those rods are not there, the power does not get connected.
Click to expand...
That I get because the rods affect the system itself but what does the POCO have to do with the amount of SEC's that enter into a structure if they're past the service point which is clearly an NEC issue? Around here the POCO almost never even enters the building for a single family dwelling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top