Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Service

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Service

    Inspecter is saying my solar system is a service,and I have to bond it like a service. This is a residental install,grid tied transformerless inverter,no supply side tap. solar backfeed breaker to utility disconnect ,to solar edge transformerless inverter,to roof.basic install, I showed him the definition of a service,It did not help, I'm gonna see him tomorrow for final inspection,how do I convince this guy that it is not a service thanks

    #2
    Try 690.14(A), the disconnecting means shall not be required to be suitable as service equipment.

    If he is asking you to bond the neutral and ground together at the solar AC disconnect then 250.6, Objectionable Current. Tell him you absolutely won't do it, he is asking you to do something dangerous and you refuse to risk the safety of your customer just to make a dime. Tell your customer the same thing.

    Comment


      #3
      thank you I will

      Comment


        #4
        Actually that bonding requirement seems to be a pretty common thing for inspectors to require based on other threads here *if* the PV disconnect is line side.
        And as such it is harder to see where the resulting neutral current is objectionable or even worse unsafe.
        One argument that I have seen is that when the disconnect is open the neutral to the PV will not be bonded. The fact that the GTI will not be sourcing power when disconnected from the grid pretty well shoots that down though.
        If one set of service conductors feeds multiple service disconnects on different buildings you would not object to bonding at each, right?

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Shawn pavich View Post
          thank you I will
          I would advise putting it a bit more diplomatically if you expect to do more business in his jurisdiction. He is mistaken, though; nothing on the load side of a service can be another service.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by GoldDigger View Post
            Actually that bonding requirement seems to be a pretty common thing for inspectors to require based on other threads here *if* the PV disconnect is line side.
            Definitely, if the OP hadn't said that it wasn't supply side then this would be a different thread.

            And as such it is harder to see where the resulting neutral current is objectionable or even worse unsafe.
            Let's say you have an inverter installed 5ft from a subpanel that has a 200ft feed from the service panel. A misguided AHJ requires you to have an AC disconnect at the inverter and bond the neutral to ground there. Now you have roughly half the neutral current for the whole subpanel running on the EGC back to the service. That's a textbook case of objectionable current, and certainly not as safe as it should be.

            The OP's situation might not be so bad, but it's the principle.

            One argument that I have seen is that when the disconnect is open the neutral to the PV will not be bonded.
            ?? PV disconnects don't normally open neutrals.

            If one set of service conductors feeds multiple service disconnects on different buildings you would not object to bonding at each, right?
            No, but then at least I have more stringent bonding requirements.

            Comment

            Working...
            X