[RE-wrenches] Nec 225

[William Miller]

Dick:

Just to follow up, below is the reply I received from the inspector when I 
asked for clarification.  I had asked for clarification because I admit 
ignorance to this section and I wanted to formulate a good response on the 
first attempt:

There must be a main disconnect for panel C in the pump house. A main
circuit breaker in panel C would satisfy this requirement. If the panel
does not have a main circuit breaker (MLO) a maximum of six branch circuits
are allowed per NEC 225.33.

I prefer to approach these requirements with generic solutions.  The 
broader a solution, the more likely it will apply to other projects.  Also, 
a generic solution can box you in to a certain design.  I did not know the 
number of circuit breakers and did not want to drive out to the job to find 
out.  Instead I put this note on the plans:

4. Panel C shall have 6 or fewer circuit breakers or implement Documented 
Safe Switching Procedures per 225.32 Exception 1.

This proved to be acceptable and a permit was issued a few days ago.  I 
have since found out that there are 5 existing breakers.  One is in the off 
position and may be a spare.  We will be installing two inverters, bringing 
the number of breakers to 7.  If I can remove one breaker, I achieve 
compliance that way. If I can not remove a breaker, I write up a procedure, 
post it and I'm good.

Thanks for your input.

William Miller



At 06:33 PM 12/11/2009, you wrote:
>William,
>
>No, I mean what is your problem with complying with the request, "Show the
>number of existing circuits and/or the
>disconnecting means for panel C". Why not just do that?
>
>Dick
>
>
>
>--- You wrote:
>Dick:
>
>I too am mystifed.  I sent a request for clarification but have not
>heard back.  It may be some kind of power trip as we have been at odds
>over many issues.  I will report back.
>
>William Miller
>Millersolar.com
>
>On Dec 11, 2009, at 6:05 PM, Richard.L.Ratico at VALLEY.NET (Richard L
>Ratico) wrote:
>
> > William,
> >
> > No direct specific experience with this, but, respectfully, what is
> > the problem?
> > The code sections seem clear and not unreasonable nor arduous.
> >
> > Dick Ratico
> > Solarwind Electric
> >
> >
> > --- You wrote:
> > Friends:
> >
> >
> > I just received a plan correction for a grid-tie permit application
> > wherein
> > the inspector is questioning compliance with section 225.  Below is
> > the
> > text of the correction notice:
> >
> > The existing panel C in the pump house must comply with NEC 225.31. 225.32
> > & 225.33. Show the number of existing circuits and/or the
> > disconnecting
> > means for panel C.
> >
> > Has anyone ever had experience with this section being applied to a
> > grid-tie system?  The inverters will be inside a pump house remote
> > from the
> > main residence.
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > William Miller
> >
>--- end of quote ---
>_______________________________________________
>List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
>List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
>Options & settings:
>http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
>List-Archive: 
>http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
>List rules & etiquette:
>www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
>Check out participant bios:
>www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 9.0.716 / Virus Database: 270.14.103/2558 - Release Date: 
>12/11/09 02:06:00

Please note new e-mail address and domain:

William Miller
Miller Solar
Voice :805-438-5600
email: william at millersolar.com
http://millersolar.com
License No. C-10-773985
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20091218/461f1ac6/attachment-0004.html>