tap to a dedicated pool panel.

[xxj.electricxx]

Can we tie or tap in a photovotaic system to a dedicated swimming pool sub panel that is fed by a meter main?

 

[jaggedben]

I know more about PV systems than pools. As far as PV code is concerned, it's not a problem, but I can't say for the pool side of things.

 

[BillK-AZ]

Consult 2011 NEC Art 705.12(D)(3) if there is ground-fault protection for the pool panel.

 

[ggunn]

Can we tie or tap in a photovotaic system to a dedicated swimming pool sub panel that is fed by a meter main?

You can tie in through a backfed breaker in the sub panel if it will fit within the 20% rule, though I'm not sure what happens at the main when the breaker feeding the sub is turned into a backfed breaker. Tapping into the line feeding the sub panel may be problematic. Why would you want to do this rather than feeding the main directly?

 

[jaggedben]

You can tie in through a backfed breaker in the sub panel if it will fit within the 20% rule, though I'm not sure what happens at the main when the breaker feeding the sub is turned into a backfed breaker.

See 705.12(D). Both the sub and the main are subject to the 120% rule. For both the sub and the main, the breaker feeding the respective panel plus the PV breaker(s) cannot exceed 120% of the panel. I think the code is pretty clear on this.

If the original poster needs a lesson in interconnecting solar, that's kind of a different and much larger subject. I think the question is if involving a pool or its equipment is a code violation. I perused 680 and didn't notice anything that would seem to be a violation in and of itself, although Bill's point about GFI protection is apt. But I'm not very familiar with 680.

Why would you want to do this rather than feeding the main directly?

Probably because the pool sub is a lot closer to solar system.

 

[ggunn]

See 705.12(D). Both the sub and the main are subject to the 120% rule. For both the sub and the main, the breaker feeding the respective panel plus the PV breaker(s) cannot exceed 120% of the panel. I think the code is pretty clear on this.

What I was wondering about is this: Say it's a 200A service and the sub is a 100A panel fed by a 100A breaker in the main, and the OP wants to bring in solar on a 20A breaker. He has no problem at the sub; his 20A breaker conforms to the 20% rule, but what about at the main? The 100A breaker is now a backfed breaker. Even though he'll never feed it with more than 20A, the rule is about breaker size, not amps fed, isn't it? Has he busted the 20% rule at the main or is it still the 20A breaker in the sub that counts? I know that he'll never have a problem with overcurrent, but will the NEC allow it? I don't have my code book handy.

 

[BillK-AZ]

.....Has he busted the 20% rule at the main or is it still the 20A breaker in the sub that counts? I know that he'll never have a problem with overcurrent, but will the NEC allow it? ......

See 2011 NEC 705.12(D)(7)
"...In systems with panelboards connected in series, the rating of the first overcurrent device directly connected to the output of a utility-interactive inverter(s) shall be used in the calculations for all busbars and conductors."

 

[ggunn]

See 2011 NEC 705.12(D)(7)
"...In systems with panelboards connected in series, the rating of the first overcurrent device directly connected to the output of a utility-interactive inverter(s) shall be used in the calculations for all busbars and conductors."

As it should be. Thanks.