On that note, is there a device made to physically prevent additional breakers
from being installed in the meter main? And also the two SP meter main breakers
would have a combined ampacity limit.
Kirk Herander / [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Owner|Principal, VT Solar, LLC
Celebrating our 29th Anniversary 1991-2020
www.vermont.solar
[https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.vermontsolarnow.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9f0330d75a244870112408d685311841%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636842843233477645&sdata=0NjyuKeQbEK6245SNnk8X4XnP9Q%2B%2BqtvcALkdDghvk4%3D&reserved=0]
dba Vermont Solar Engineering
802.863.1202
On 11/8/2020 2:02:20 PM, Jason Szumlanski <[email protected]>
wrote:
Here is the corrected drawing for the record.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 12:51 PM Jason Szumlanski
<[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]>
wrote:
Correction... The PV OCPD would need to be 80A or less or the total loads would
need to be 100A or less. It's the sum of the OCPD, not loads plus rated PV
current.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2020, 12:46 PM Jason Szumlanski
<[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]>
wrote:
It's a 200A bus.
300A "on" the bus doesn't matter. The total of all load and supply devices does
not exceed the bus rating. This is 705.12(D)(2)(3)(c) in 2014/2017.
In no way can the total ampacity on the 200A bus exceed 200A as long as
additional loads are not added, hence the required warning label. Where would
300A of current ever flow?
On Sun, Nov 8, 2020, 12:30 PM Jay <[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]> wrote:
Hi Jason
My question is if it’s 200a in from the main breaker and 100a from PV its 300
amps on the buss correct?
How is that ok with the 125% rule?
Or is this covered by some other rule as it’s a feed through lug load center?
Jay
On Nov 8, 2020, at 9:46 AM, Jason Szumlanski <[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]> wrote:
Maybe this is a better example (attached). I don't see how this would be a
problem under NEC 2014, 2017, or 2020. No portion of the main bus, feeder
conductors, or subpanel could possibly be subjected to overcurrent without an
OCPD stopping it.
My point is that here we are, 3 code cycles in since feeder taps were
addressed, and there is still no clarification of intent. AHJs are still
struggling with this.
I'm not sure where residential meter/mains with feed through lugs are popular.
I know they are in Florida and I have heard Hawaii. I'm curious what your
jurisdictions think of this if you have this scenario. Most of the time the
subpanel is main lug only, but adding a main circuit breaker is usually an easy
and cost-effective fix to make this interconnection type work.
Jason Szumlanski
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 5:15 PM Jason Szumlanski
<[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]>
wrote:
For further discussion, I don't see how my original scenario is any different
from this attached scenario, which I think everyone would agree is allowed. All
conductors and busbars are subject to the same potential loads and fault
currents.
(Image attached).
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 5:01 PM Jason Szumlanski
<[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]>
wrote:
Of course the feeder conductors and bus bar could be subjected to a fault. But
we're not talking about faults here. Fault protection is the job of the PV OCPD
And primary supply OCPD to protect the downstream busbar and feeders. If that
wasn't the case, you would need a new OCPD on BOTH the load and line side of a
solar connection as a feeder tap, not just the load side.
If your interpretation is correct regarding the location of the OCPD, that
sounds like a sub-feed breaker is the only way to comply, and I haven't seen
such an animal for a typical residential load center. You can get these for NQ
panelboards and similar panelboards from other manufacturers of course. It
doesn't say as close as practicable or anything like that. It says that a
busbar connection is allowed when there are feeder CONDUCTORS connected to feed
through LUGS. What does "overcurrent device .. at the supply end" mean? I
emphasize "at." It's unclear how you would implement this other than a sub-feed
breaker I suppose, but that's not what it says. It refers to feeder conductors
on lugs on busbars, not feeder conductors on load-side terminals of an
overcurrent device.
My point is that 705.12 should have been wrapped up neatly in a bow, but the
lack of clarity, still, is astonishing. Why add a section about feed-through
lugs if it's going to be so vague?
Jason
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 3:37 PM Brian Mehalic <[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]> wrote:
Hey Jason,
Here's the 2020 text:
6) Connections shall be permitted on busbars of panelboards that supply lugs
connected to feed-through conductors. The feed-through conductors shall be
sized in accordance with 705.12(B)(1). Where an overcurrent device is installed
at the supply end of the feed-through conductors, the busbar in the supplying
panelboard shall be permitted to be sized in accordance with 705.12(B)(3)(1)
through 705.12(B)(3)(3).
The OCPD on the supply end of the feed-through conductors would be in the form
of a sub-feed breaker at the point of supply to those conductors,
re-establishing overcurrent protection of the conductors (likely at the same
ampacity as the main breaker in the supplying panel. The feed-through
conductors are basically an extension of the busbar in the supplying panel;
they can either be protected by the main, or in the presence of multiple
sources of power in the supplying panel (such as a backfed PV system breaker)
they can be protected based on (B)(3)(1) - "the 125% rule" - or they can be
protected by a new overcurrent device at their point of supply, in which case
current on them is limited based on that OCPD size; in this latter scenario the
busbar in the supplying panel is allowed to be sized based on one of (B)(3)(1)
- (3) because it is protected downstream at its end.
The theory is pretty much the same as 705.12(B)(1) for feeders - when not
connecting at the end of the feeder, use the "125% rule" or re-establish
overcurrent protection for that portion of the feeder subject to multiple power
sources.
In your drawing the 200 A feeder conductors, as well as the busbar below the PV
system breaker, could be subject to > 200 A in the event of a fault somewhere
along those conductors.
Brian Mehalic
NABCEP Certified Solar PV Installation Professional™ R031508-59
National Electrical Code® CMP-4 Member
(520) 204-6639
Solar Energy International
http://www.solarenergy.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/6eb0c6c8006878ded7b952fd907cf2296d8a8c23?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.solarenergy.org&userId=1613865&signature=b90b1c342f944fc6]
SEI Professional Services
http://www.seisolarpros.com
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/0c7a06ede90529e40edf3310fc409ef25d314f50?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seisolarpros.com&userId=1613865&signature=90f78f85b5245d83]
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 10:18 AM Jason Szumlanski
<[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]>
wrote:
Does anyone else think they botched the wording in this section? It's still not
clear, and we have a ton of meter/main combos with feed-through lugs around
here.
Where is it written, "where an overcurrent device is installed at the supply
end of the feed-through conductors," (emphasis added) are they referring to the
solar backfed breaker on the busbar or another breaker somewhere along the
feeder circuit? It goes on to state that the loads on the supplying busbar can
comply with any method in 705.12(B)(3), which prescribes an OCPD at the load
end of the feeder in 705.12(B)(3)(3), so they can't be talking about that. I
have to assume it is the solar backfed breaker they are referencing.
See my interpretation of one scenario in the attached image.
We're a long way off from the 2020 code implementation here, but it can help
sway plans examiners looking to clarify the intent of the 2014/2017 code cycles.
Jason Szumlanski
<Feed Through Lug Interconnection Option (2).pdf>
_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
List Address: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/a508814a91f7fad4c91cb6fc97922e45ccd78e16?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.re-wrenches.org%2Foptions.cgi%2Fre-wrenches-re-wrenches.org&userId=1613865&signature=42daadc1cf7c9084]
There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/1f9850889dc692a09d33ffb9c74141df66c2f619?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Fre-wrenches%40lists.re-wrenches.org%2F&userId=1613865&signature=d673e951847c87eb]
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/43f4b3a8fe61bd04fcc0da80189644cd4469af0e?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.re-wrenches.org%2Fpipermail%2Fre-wrenches-re-wrenches.org&userId=1613865&signature=4aba6be7c097c677]
List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/8b9d34a3cd498671f1ffd693900413a452386135?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.re-wrenches.org%2Fetiquette.htm&userId=1613865&signature=c808e1d55c0af1a3]
Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/04218d8e6a1baae12f88b2d657e2f45e9f798c4e?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.members.re-wrenches.org&userId=1613865&signature=545fb4d0ff21ff33]
_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
List Address: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/6b09aeef26f6788fb5d2ea22112bb686347b7fbf?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.re-wrenches.org%2Foptions.cgi%2Fre-wrenches-re-wrenches.org&userId=1613865&signature=198f8532a8201f02]
There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/d2a5dfee8cf90cc9d6d0507dc021f7df79d9a729?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Fre-wrenches%40lists.re-wrenches.org%2F&userId=1613865&signature=4b66bc2ee38a9e73]
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/bff29ac89287feeed11cf19c6690147803c2d9c3?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.re-wrenches.org%2Fpipermail%2Fre-wrenches-re-wrenches.org&userId=1613865&signature=fc732945abf29f4e]
List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/9c70dbeffa47721f81c73a2a13b61737dfc9ebff?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.re-wrenches.org%2Fetiquette.htm&userId=1613865&signature=c045bc78f52658c4]
Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
[https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/f342a09c740b61f880b6ca21f6456c58b1e65a97?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.members.re-wrenches.org&userId=1613865&signature=fb4c9c552fd1b7a9]
_______________________________________________ List sponsored by Redwood
Alliance List Address: [email protected] Change listserver
email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org There are
two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules &
etiquette: http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out or update
participant bios: http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
List Address: [email protected]
Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
