[RE-wrenches] (no subject)

Rebekah Hren rebekah.hren at gmail.com
Mon Apr 28 14:38:39 PDT 2014


*Fuses for PV dc circuits do not have to be readily accessible:*

690.9(D) Photovoltaic Source Circuit and Output

Listed PV overcurrent devices shall be required to provide overcurrent
protection
in PV source and output circuits. The overcurrent devices shall be
accessible but shall not be required to be readily accessible.

The language allowing j-boxes under modules has been in the NEC for many
cycles:

690.34 Access to Boxes. Junction, pull, and outlet boxes located behind
modules or panels shall be so installed that the wiring contained in them
can be rendered accessible directly or by displacement of a module(s) or
panel(s) secured by removable fasteners and connected by a flexible wiring
system.

A dc combiner is now defined in the 2014 Code as a device/equipment and
thus outlet might have it covered. I think there is an argument to be made
that a box containing overcurrent protection can be positioned under a
module. However I don't think it's a great idea and wouldn't want to
maintain a system with fuses on a roof under the array, but this seems like
a grey area in the Code and getting the AHJ interpretation would be
advisable.

Rebekah Hren








On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Michael Morningstar <
mjmorningstar at gmail.com> wrote:

> Readily accessible is now defined in the 2014 NEC. Installing OCPD’s
> underneath a module is a major faux paux, and I can’t imagine any AHJ
> thinking otherwise. Having to remove a module in order to reset a breaker,
> what a drag.
>
> "Capable of being reached quickly for operation, renewal or inspection
> without requiring those concerned to use a tool, to climb over, remove
> obstacle or other.”
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2014, at 10:29 AM, William Miller <william at millersolar.com>
> wrote:
>
> You call it a solar panel, I call it a glass j-box cover plate.
>
> William
>
> Miller Solar
>
> On Apr 28, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Jason Szumlanski <jason at fafcosolar.com>
> wrote:
>
> If that is the interpretation,
> I don't see how the breakers are "readily accessible" in a SolaDeck
> mounted anywhere, regardless of whether it is under a module. It
> requires removal of four screws (using a tool) to access the breakers
> inside the enclosure. It's all up to the AHJ. It has not been an issue
> locally here. I can see how other jurisdictions may not
> concur.
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change email address & 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change email address & 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20140428/2771caa0/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the RE-wrenches mailing list