[RE-wrenches] NEC 705.12 Point of Connection - 120% rule for center-fed panelboards

Fri Mar 4 09:38:50 PST 2016

I support Bill's assertion here and his work on the code making committee.

Certain AHJ's in California are obsessing about center-fed residential
panels.  (County of Santa Barbara, for example)  The result is unnecessary
meter-main panel upgrades.  These upgrades drive the cost of solar
installations up significantly ($2000-$4000.)  This added cost acts as
barrier-to-entry into the solar market.

The problem with all of this is that *center-fed residential panels are not
a safety problem to begin with.  *

Thus, we get:  A) increased cost, B)  fewer solar installations and C) no
improvement in overall safety.

Put simply, *this is a lose-lose situation that needs to be addressed now*,
because adoption of the 2017 code is a long way away for most of us.

Best regards,

Abe
-----------------------------
John Abraham Powell
CEO
Solforce
W. 805/695-0015
C. 805/895-2355
E. abe at solforce.com
www.solforce.com
CA License. 806685

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 12:40 PM, <billbrooks7 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Chris,
>
>
>
> While John’s article may seem like a logical interpretation of the 2014
> NEC, if you lived in the western half of the United States where these
> panels are common, you would have a very different view of his choice of
> articles.
>
>
>
> His article sites a technicality that is not a safety concern in the
> least. Of all the things that AHJs have to worry about with PV, this has to
> be at the very bottom of the list—and yet this is the only thing that many
> AHJs look at because someone wrote an article about it. We set the record
> straight in the 2017 NEC, but that does not fix the fact that literally
> 1,000s of these perfectly fine panels have been removed due to the focus of
> this magazine article.
>
>
>
> Your opinion of this interpretation would be very different if you had
> lost a PV system sale because someone was unwilling to incur the extra cost
> of a panel change out when you knew it was totally unnecessary.
>
>
>
> I have all the respect in the world for what you are doing in the
> northeast. I’m just helping with some “perspective” from the left coast.
>
>
>
> I’m off my high horse,
>
>
>
> Bill.
>
>
>
> *From:* RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Christopher Warfel
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 03, 2016 6:42 AM
> *To:* re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> *Subject:* Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 705.12 Point of Connection - 120% rule
> for center-fed panelboards
>
>
>
> This is a link to John Wiles article on NEC2014 for this topic. To my
> knowledge, no one has adopted NEC2017, so it would seem that this article
> is appropriate for the most recent NEC published. As noted AHJs can allow
> exceptions, and it is great that new language is now approved for NEC2017,
> but that wasn't the case when John Wiles published his article.
>
>
> http://iaeimagazine.org/magazine/2014/07/10/center-fed-load-centers-and-panelboards/
>
> There is also pdf version here.
>
>
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjl8OmH26TLAhWI7D4KHcbJAHQQFggjMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdept-wp.nmsu.edu%2Fswtdi%2Ffiles%2F2015%2F11%2Fiaei_jul-aug_2014.pdf&usg=AFQjCNERV2M21V1nvLlvLVSLZUMoj36J_A&sig2=g145SdF1HzNuHc0P6NXshw&bvm=bv.115339255,d.cWw&cad=rja
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> On 3/2/2016 2:24 PM, billbrooks7 at sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Here is the new language that has been approved for the 2017 NEC (more
> authoritative than JW).
>
>
>
> 705.12(B)(3)(d)
>
>
>
> (d) A connection at either end, but not both ends, of a center-fed
> panelboard in dwellings shall be permitted where the sum of 125 percent of
> the power source(s) output circuit current and the rating of the
> overcurrent device protecting the busbar does not exceed 120 percent of the
> current rating of the busbar.
>
>
>
> This clarifies that it was never the intent of the NEC to limit the 120%
> rule to the opposite end of the busbar for dwellings (it was allowed from
> 2005 back to 1987). I was able to convince the panel that centerfed panels
> did not need the opposite end stipulation. Several large jurisdictions in
> California or considering making an official policy accepting the language
> of the 2017 NEC on this item. Please share this with your own jurisdiction.
>
>
>
> Bill.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org
> <re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org>] *On Behalf Of *Glenn Burt
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 02, 2016 10:54 AM
> *To:* RE-wrenches <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
> <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [RE-wrenches] NEC 705.12 Point of Connection - 120% rule
> for center-fed panelboards
>
>
>
> I believe that John Wiles has stated this in a couple of places in print,
> therefore you may have a tough time justifying a way around the rule to an
> AHJ.
>
> Supply side connections are very popular in this situation.
> ------------------------------
>
> *From: *August Goers <august at luminalt.com>
> *Sent: *‎3/‎2/‎2016 11:32
> *To: *RE-wrenches <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
> *Subject: *[RE-wrenches] NEC 705.12 Point of Connection - 120% rule for
> center-fed panelboards
>
> All –
>
>
>
> We are seeing more AHJs not allowing us to use the NEC 7015.12(D)(2)(3)(b)
> 120% rule on center-fed panelboards. For example, if we have a 100 A
> meter/main combo with a center fed 100 A breaker we cannot apply the 120%
> rule at all and need to do a panel swap. What are other wrenches doing in
> this case?
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> August
>
> Luminalt
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
>
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
>
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
> List-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html
>
>
>
> List rules & etiquette:
>
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
>
>
> Check out or update participant bios:
>
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Christopher Warfel, President
>
> ENTECH Engineering, Inc.
>
> PO Box 871, Block Island, RI 02807
>
> 401-466-8978
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out or update 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/20160304/91e3ce1a/attachment-0003.html>