Darryl,

I Apologize. Perhaps I should have tried to be more helpful.

--- You wrote:
>Actually that is where it came from.  The inspector
>wants no more than 6 motions of the hand to turnoff
>all sources of of power to the Solar related
>equipment.  And wants all of these six motions grouped
>together.

"6 motions of the hand", I believe, is at least pre-1996 NEC "code speak". I
only have copies of the '96, '99, and 2003 editions of the NEC. The language of
the 2003 edition of the NEC Handbook, in Article230.71, page 142,
reads, "The service disconnecting means ... shall consist of not more than six
switches or sets of circuit breakers, or a combination of not more than six
switches and circuit breakers, mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of
separate enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be no more than six
sets of disconnects per service grouped in any one location." 

Your inspector is probably considering the solar electric system to be a
"Parallel power production system"  
(( Article 230-2(A)(5)  )) and therefore it is an "additional service",
permitted to have it's own six disconnects. 

Article 100, Definitions, does not define "group". Websters says, among others,
"an assemblage of objects                                                                                              
             regarded as a unit.  

>what I am after is this gets kind of complex, and was
>wondering what others thought of to handle the problem
>or if I am the  only one whos inspector has brought it
>up.

Everyones's inspector should have brought it up. It is a very specific
requirement. The intent is to allow someone to quickly and conveniently shut off
all incoming sources of power to the building, particularly in an emergency. The
code allows some flexibility by not requiring only one, single main disconnect.

>My inspector wants it and I was wondering if other
>faced it and had addressed this in some neat way.  I
>think my inspector is open to some flexability, I have
>a meeting this Friday.---

How you address it, besides good workmanship, would depend on what specific
equipment you are using.
For instance, in some Sunny Boy installations, a single, three pole Square D
safety switch can apparently be used to simultaneously disconnect three
ungrounded conductors. 

In my previous post I meant to  suggest" brainstorming" with your electrical
inspector to cooperatively develope a solution acceptable to all parties. That's
not to suggest you have him do your job, designing the system. 

Regardless of what the NEC reads, it gives final authority to your electrical
inspector. That's quite a bit of power, and responsibility. There is absolutely
nothing to be gained by getting in a pissing contest with your inspector. A very
small perecentage of inspectors thrive on it. They always win. It's good to be
on good terms with your inspector. 

>I am also going to propose the paralleling of 250 amp
>breakers, I have done in the past, many years ago, and
>the code changes, does anyone know?  I do not want to
>propose if there is something wrong.
--- end of quote ---

Not sure what you mean by this.

Dick Ratico
Solarwind Electric

- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches@topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://www.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/

List rules & etiquette: http://www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquete.htm

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/index.html

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch@homepower.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: michael.welch@homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9.bWljaGFl
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe@topica.com

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------



