The six handle rule only applies to AC connection(s).
See 230.71. you are allowed up to 6 for EACH set of service entrance conductors allowed per 230.40.What are the circumstances, if any, that allow a PV system supply side disconnect to be your 7th service disconnect, when there are 6 existing disconnects already?
This document shows such an example, with a 7th disconnect for the PV system:
It's not the 7th disconnect, it's the 1st PV disconnect and there can be five more. This is a common misconception and it sends people to the code saying, show me where the 7th disconnect is allowed.
And also there is the "there shall not be more than six disconnects per service grouped in any one location" wording in 230.71. the way I read that, that applies even if you have more than six per one of the 230.40 exceptions
Looks like that went away in the 2020 NEC? Unless I've missed where it moved to.
interesting.
That is true, but I see it ignored all the time. It's not unusual for me to find an MLO SWBD with six service disconnect CBs and a PV CB. I think the nuance might be lost on most.
230.72?
230.72(B), in both 2017 and 2020, says "The one or more additional service disconnecting means for fire pumps, emergency systems, legally required standby, or optional standby services permitted by 230.2 shall be installed remote from the one to six service disconnecting means for normal service . . ." Which doesn't cover PV disconnecting means.
Ah, they were looking for the "grouped in one location" limitation and yes, that seems to be gone in later versions of the code.
That is interesting. So does that mean I can't have more than 36 disconnects in one location?
Apparently that's so.
Perhaps under the 2017 NEC, but that is moot or soon to be moot. The language is in not in the 2020 NEC.
Sure, all true. 36 is an absolute max assuming you can properly invoke 230.40 exceptions for all beyond the first six.
