For those who received Mike Holts October code questions and answers. Question #8 regarding a utility co. employee wiring metal light poles with out a equipment grounding conductor,and depending on a ground rod to provide a fault return path. Mikes agreed that the utility co. was not required to do the work by NEC standard.
But also explained how dangerous the installation was.
I am a wiring inspector in the State of Massachusetts. I came across the same situation at a subdivision of 35 homes with 12 light poles in the town where I work. To make matters worse these poles do not have any overload or short circuit protection. The circuits are tied directly to the secondary of the transformers by way of the utility hand holes. Also the neutral conductor is not insulated at the pole connection
I complained to a utility official who told me that they are exempt from local inspection.
I did some research of the MGL and found MGL 166-32 that reads in part "Such inspector shall supervise every wire over or under streets or buildings in such a city,town or district and every wire within or supplied from buildings and structures subject to the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty-three and the state building code"I interpret that to mean that I as the AHJ has jurisdiction over that installation at least in the state of Massachusetts. I am now in the process of getting an interpretation from town council.
This may be a way to finally get the utility co to stop killing people by there ungrounded light poles. I will post the results as they happen it may be useful for Massachusetts electricians.
Any comments or suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
I believe that a egc. should be run all the way back to xo of the transformer and not only back to the hand hole in the event that the neutral should become open from the hand hole to the transformer creating a parallel neutral from the pole to the hand hole, should the egc be run only back to the hand hole.
But also explained how dangerous the installation was.
I am a wiring inspector in the State of Massachusetts. I came across the same situation at a subdivision of 35 homes with 12 light poles in the town where I work. To make matters worse these poles do not have any overload or short circuit protection. The circuits are tied directly to the secondary of the transformers by way of the utility hand holes. Also the neutral conductor is not insulated at the pole connection
I complained to a utility official who told me that they are exempt from local inspection.
I did some research of the MGL and found MGL 166-32 that reads in part "Such inspector shall supervise every wire over or under streets or buildings in such a city,town or district and every wire within or supplied from buildings and structures subject to the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty-three and the state building code"I interpret that to mean that I as the AHJ has jurisdiction over that installation at least in the state of Massachusetts. I am now in the process of getting an interpretation from town council.
This may be a way to finally get the utility co to stop killing people by there ungrounded light poles. I will post the results as they happen it may be useful for Massachusetts electricians.
Any comments or suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
I believe that a egc. should be run all the way back to xo of the transformer and not only back to the hand hole in the event that the neutral should become open from the hand hole to the transformer creating a parallel neutral from the pole to the hand hole, should the egc be run only back to the hand hole.