# Service Violation



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

I believe this is a violation of 230.6.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Yes, those unfused service conductors do travel quite a ways indoors. I'm also worried about working space for the meter cans. 

That fake chimney looks like it might have been added after the service was installed. Do you have any other information about how this ended up happening this way?


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

Nope, I just parked the truck next to this building on my way to lunch a few months back. As I recall, there were no violation issues with the meter cans because there was some landscaping/ railroad ties that kept the meters at least 3' from the sidewalk. I tend to agree with you that the chimney framing was added after the service was installed wich tells me the framing was done without a permit. How else could the NEC violation be explained? The builing is a restaurant on the first floor, and a few apartments up above.


----------



## sguinn (Nov 19, 2007)

Magnettica said:


> I believe this is a violation of 230.6.


 I think it violates the laws of physics, is that some kind of MC Escher house? But seriously, I've never seen SE going into a house and then coming back out, cooky.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

sguinn said:


> .... I've never seen SE going into a house and then coming back out, cooky.


Looks like conduit to me....


----------



## sguinn (Nov 19, 2007)

Celtic said:


> Looks like conduit to me....


 
Celtic, good eye. Mine were all wobbly from trying to figure out what dimension the house was existing in!:laughing:


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

Kinda lookes like the old Bates place. How much for a room?


----------



## littlesparky (Dec 21, 2007)

I seen the same thing near Lavalette on rt34 an thought Wow just wow


----------

