690 or 705 sections that need changes for the 2020 NEC cycle?

[jaggedben]

I think that's an odd opinion, because "multiple inverters" in 2014 changed to "multiple PV systems" in 2017.

I won't presume it would never matter. But it never has mattered to me in my professional work because, thankfully, no AHJs have wanted to argue such a nitpicky point.

And I'd also say 2 supply side breakers or fused switches aren't allowed.

I'd strongly disagree based on 230.40 Exception 5 referring to 'each or several systems covered by ... 230.82(6)'. 705.12(A) refers back to 230.82(6). There is just a limit of six based on 230.71. That is, if no one is disputing that they are service entrance conductors. :roll: At any rate, there is nothing in the code that explicitly states that supply side connections are limited to one.

 

[ggunn]

I think that's an odd opinion, because "multiple inverters" in 2014 changed to "multiple PV systems" in 2017.

You are, of course, free to think anything you want of my opinion, but mine is based upon working in the industry for nearly ten years and designing hundreds of residential and commercial PV systems. What is the basis for yours?

The change you point out is, in my opinion, a clarification of language rather than a change in the regulations.

 

[PVfarmer]

no AHJs have wanted to argue such a nitpicky point.

I'd strongly disagree based on 230.40 Exception 5 referring to 'each or several systems covered by ... 230.82(6)'.
705.12(A) refers back to 230.82(6). There is just a limit of six based on 230.71.
That is, if no one is disputing that they are service entrance conductors. :roll:

You are, of course, free to think anything

What is the basis for yours?

a clarification of language rather than a change in the regulations.

Guys.
You appear to be telling me I am wrong because of how your own AHJs and/or POCOs interpret things and thereby how things are done where you are.
They aren't interpreted/done the same way here, the 2 of you don't have the same requirements, and the situations in all other areas are also mostly completely different.

The exception #5 is referring to Service Entrance Conductors SUPPLYING "each or several systems". (There's a problem right there- how many is several?)

There are NO SECs contained within a PV system and you yourself insist that services DO NOT supply PV systems.
The blue things in 230.40(5) are supplied by POCO *or* things in (6), the blue things in (6) PRODUCE power (mostly).

705.12(A) says AN- AN means *1*. If it meant more than 1 it would be plural and say "Electric power production SOURCES", not source.
I am trying to look at at the literal meaning of the language, and not involve my personal opinion or that of my AHJ or anyone else's AHJ.
It should be universally understood, that is the whole point of this thread!

And yes, I'm "disputing that they're SECs", simply because they can't be if they do not exist...

----
230.40 Number of Service-Entrance Conductor Sets.
Each service drop, set of overhead service conductors, set
of underground service conductors, or service lateral shall
supply only one set of service-entrance conductors.

Exception No.5: One set of service-entrance conductors
connected to the supply side of the normal service disconnecting
means shall be permitted to supply each or several
systems covered by 230.82(5) or 230.82(6).

(5) Taps used only to supply load management devices,
circuits for standby power systems, fire pump equipment,
and fire and sprinkler alarms, if provided with
service equipment and installed in accordance with requirements
for service-entrance conductors.
(6) Solar photovoltaic systems, fuel cell systems, or interconnected
electric power production sources.

705.12 Point of Connection. The output of an interconnected
electric power source shall be connected as specified
in 70S.I2(A), (B), (C), or (D).
(A) Supply Side. An electric power production source shall
be permitted to be connected to the supply side of the service
disconnecting means as permitted in 230.82(6). The sum of
the ratings of all overcun'ent devices connected to power production
sources shall not exceed the rating of the service.

Informational Note: Where service equipment is located
outside the building walls, there may be no service entrance
conductors or they may be entirely outside the
building.

Definitions:
Service-Entrance Conductors, Overhead System. The
service conductors between the terminals of the service
equipment and a point usually outside the building, clear of
building walls, where joined by tap or splice to the service
drop or overhead service conductors.

 

[SolarPro]

You might benefit from working with a Professional Engineer who has experience designing PV power systems. When Code-Making Panels make revisions, it is usually in response to some sort of common, widespread problem that needs addressing. As far as I can tell, the Code interpretations you are struggling with are not problems elsewhere or are not problems in more mature markets. If you are working in a jurisdiction that is not used to seeing PV power systems, there is a lot of education that needs to happen. A veteran PE could help with that. It seems like you can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[PVfarmer]

1- You might benefit from working with a Professional Engineer who has experience designing PV power systems.

2- When Code-Making Panels make revisions, it is usually in response to some sort of common, widespread problem that needs addressing.

3- As far as I can tell, the Code interpretations you are struggling with

4- If you are working in a jurisdiction that is not used to seeing PV power systems, there is a lot of education that needs to happen.

1- I do and I am, more than one. Problem is, they aren't AHJs.

2- Well, how many supply side connections are allowed? If it is really 6 like JB is saying, how so? I don't get that at all, and I'm not the only person.

3- I'm struggling for responses to seemingly legit comments, such as "There are NO SECs contained within a PV system".
Perhaps I should have typed "within many or most supply side PV systems" but I thought it was obvious.

So say you have a meter on the outside of a house, and SECs running inside to the MDP panel breaker.
You install a supply side j-box on the outside of house between the meter and the service entrance (SE =the point where the SECs enter the structure.)
You also install a fused switch adjacent to the j-box that disconnects the PV system. (or the hybrid wind/PV system....)

Question is- what do you call the the 5 foot run of conductors between j-box and PV switch?

4- Don't even get me started!

Service-Entrance Conductors, Overhead System. The
service conductors between the terminals of the service
equipment and a point usually outside the building, clear of
building walls, where joined by tap or splice to the service
drop or overhead service conductors.

Service-Entrance Conductors, Underground System.
The service conductors between the terminals of the service
equipment and the point of connection to the service lateral
or underground service conductors.

Informational Note: Where service equipment is located
outside the building walls, there may be no serviceentrance
conductors or they may be entirely outside the
building.

 

[ggunn]

Guys.
You appear to be telling me I am wrong because of how your own AHJs and/or POCOs interpret things and thereby how things are done where you are.
They aren't interpreted/done the same way here, the 2 of you don't have the same requirements, and the situations in all other areas are also mostly completely different.

I am not telling you that you are wrong, per se; I am telling you that what you are saying makes no difference to me. You can take the position that the AHJ's I work with are all wrong, but it really doesn't matter. Take it up with them if you want and let me know how it turns out. I'll hang up and listen.

 

[ggunn]

I am not telling you that you are wrong, per se; I am telling you that what you are saying makes no difference to me. You can take the position that the AHJ's I work with are all wrong, but it really doesn't matter. Take it up with them if you want and let me know how it turns out. I'll hang up and listen.

BTW, the AHJ's I work with sometimes have policies based on their interpretation of the NEC with which I disagree, and sometimes I lock horns with them over these policies. Sometimes I even win, but I pick my battles carefully.

 

[PVfarmer]

I am telling you that what you are saying makes no difference to me.

You can take the position that the AHJ's I work with are all wrong, but it really doesn't matter

That's very nice. What if I told you that literally every PE I've talked to says "of course, you ground/bond at the supply side PV dicso"?

And I never said that. I'm saying when the code becomes clearer, there are logically then less AHJs making different "interpretations" which might affect you or me or the other dude, as well as other people reading this.

Again, I thought that was the whole point of this thread!

 

[ggunn]

That's very nice. What if I told you that literally every PE I've talked to says "of course, you ground/bond at the supply side PV dicso"?

As I keep telling you, it wouldn't make any difference to me. But are you telling me that or is this just another of your "what ifs", and if you are, how many PE's is that, exactly? Otherwise, what you say is merely innuendo. What if I told you that literally all the PE's I've talked to say "of course the sky is yellow and the sun is blue"?

Around here my fellow PE's are just as agnostic as I am on the issue.

 

[SolarPro]

1- I do and I am, more than one. Problem is, they aren't AHJs.

No, they are not. But most AHJs will defer to subject matter experts on topics outside their wheelhouse. If not, try to get the AHJ to clarify its policies in writing. At a minimum, put together a conference call to get everyone (you, the PE, the AHJ) on the same page.

The NEC 2020 revision process is starting now, but the release is a long way off. By the time that version drops, the words/scenarios you are trying to parse now probably won't even be relevant to your daily interactions with AHJs.

 

[sketchy]

Remove the required label that states "terminals on the line and load may be energized in the open position" for utility interactive inverters. No they won't.

 

[sketchy]

I should've specified on AC disconnects.