[RE-wrenches] NEC 230.46 spliced and tapped conductors

Wed Feb 1 16:18:03 PST 2023

The requirements for power distribution blocks (PDB) to be marked “*suitable
for use on the line side*…” when installed connected in that manner in
wireways (Art. 376) and pull/junction boxes (Art. 314) have been in the
NEC® for quite a few cycles.

It looks like the additions to 230.46 in the 2020 NEC® (PDBs and
splices/pressure connectors connected to service conductors must be marked
“suitable for use…”) coincided with this explicit requirement being removed
from 314 (though it remains in 376); this makes sense - if you’re using a
PDB on the line side, well you’re connecting to some type of service
conductors, so why not cover it in Art. 230 (maybe it’ll also be removed
from 376 in 2026).

UL 1953 allows for PDBs (UL product code QPQS) to be listed for connection
on the line side, load side, or both, with those that can connect on the
line side having the marking mentioned above. Note that many have an SCCR
of 10 kA unless combined with the manufacturer-specified fuse type and size
(or smaller), and have minimum enclosure sizes that must be followed as
well. I have had a difficult time finding PDBs that are marked for use on
the line side while just using the internet (and have been too lazy to pick
up the phone thus far...plus it doesn't help that all PDBs have a line and
load side of the device regardless of whether or not they are being
connected on the line or load side of the service!).

Of course many folks are not going to want to use PDBs due to re-routing
conductors to them (if even possible) and having to shut down the utility
supply to install them. Enter pressure connectors, and the seemingly
industry-fave insulation-piercing style; unfortunately I'm not aware of any
that are available *yet* with the proper listing and markings as required
by 230.46.

A colleague that works for a large electrical product manufacturer passed
this along:

*“No test existed for qualifying single polarity connectors suitable for
line side use when this was added to the 2020 code with the January 1, 2023
date for enforcement.  A strategy and test procedure needed to be developed
and adopted by the UL CSDS working group.  Not a speedy process.  Long
story short, after developing a strategy, public comment period and voting
the standard wasn’t published until August of last year.  On average the
testing requirements take about 90 days.  To further complicate matters, I
was recently told that UL is still developing the submittal process.   I
know that there are a lot of companies currently testing products but until
the UL submittal process catches up, no one will be official.  The UL
product code is ZMWW; as companies become qualified they should show up in
the ZMWW search.  As of today, no one is listed.  This leaves power
distribution blocks as the lone connector product rated for line side use.
I know that Bussmann has some PDBs rated for line side use."So this begs
the question of whether or not NEC® 90.4(D) can be invoked (new products
not yet available at the time the Code is adopted...); PDBs already exist,
so no dice there, and it is likely that since they exist, an argument using
90.4(D) in regards to pressure connectors/splices will fall on deaf ears
because, well, use PDBs."*

Ugh.

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

On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 4:26 PM Jason Szumlanski via RE-wrenches <
re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org> wrote:

> As someone who does 75%+ supply-side interconnections, this kind of
> terrifies me. We have another year of NEC 2017 here, so I have time to
> prepare, but I'm watching this closely.
>
> Meter disconnects/reconnects here are difficult due to the lack of good
> utility company cooperation and the requirement for an inspection prior to
> reconnection, which leaves homeowners without power for many hours at
> times. Otherwise, I would just pop in a 200A main disconnect between the
> meter and main distribution panel and do a feeder tap for the inverter
> output between the new service disconnect and the existing distribution
> equipment. Unfortunately, that usually means bringing grounding electrodes
> and conductors up to current standards, but that's how we would be forced
> to comply if this splice/tap rule comes into effect here and there are no
> suitable products available.
>
> Side note: 200A 2-pole fusible disconnects are all but impossible to get
> here. Even 200A main breaker enclosures are very hard to find. Hurricane
> Ian didn't help that with thousands of people who had their service
> equipment under water... It has been a challenge.
>
>
> Jason Szumlanski
> Principal Solar Designer | Florida Solar Design Group
> NABCEP Certified Solar Professional (PVIP)
> Florida State Certified Solar Contractor CVC56956
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 7:56 PM August Goers via RE-wrenches <
> re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Wrenches -
>>
>> Occasionally we will do supply side connection for our PV systems. As of
>> 1/1/2023 in CA, we follow the 2020 NEC 705.11 Supply-Side Source
>> Connections section. Recently, an inspector asked us to comply with the
>> following:
>>
>> 230.46 Spliced and Tapped Conductors
>> Service-entrance conductors shall be permitted to be spliced or tapped in
>> accordance with 110.14, 300.5(E), 300.13, and 300.15. Power distribution
>> blocks, pressure connectors, and devices for splices and taps shall be
>> listed. Power distribution blocks installed on service conductors shall be
>> marked "suitable for use on the line side of the service equipment" or
>> equivalent.
>> Effective January 1, 2023, pressure connectors and devices for splices
>> and taps installed on service conductors shall be marked "suitable for use
>> on the line side of the service equipment" or equivalent.
>>
>>
>>
>> When we reached out to one supplier of insulation piercing connectors
>> (ILSCO), they responded: "We are still in testing, I just checked and from
>> what I see there are no products listed for this new requirement yet by any
>> manufacturer."
>>
>> Has anyone bumped into this before and/or have any proposed solutions?
>>
>> Best, August
>> Luminalt
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> Pay optional member dues here: http://re-wrenches.org
>
> 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
>
> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the
> other:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20230201/9bc75d92/attachment.htm>