<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.hoenzb
{mso-style-name:hoenzb;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Jason,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>In your email below you state:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>“</span>You DO need to observe the 120% rule for the combining subpanel, regardless of whether there are loads present, at least in jurisdictions where I have worked. I've heard that some inspectors will allow you to ignore it if it is labeled as a PV combiner with "add no loads" notation.<span style='color:#1F497D'>”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>NEC 705.12 (D) states that the distribution equipment (in this case the combiner panel, fed by multiple inverters and a utility source) must be “capable of supplying multiple branch circuits or feeders or both” for (D)(1) through (7) to apply. If you fully populated a combiner panel with inverter breakers, leaving no slots for load breakers, it is not capable of supplying branch circuits or feeders, and IMO the 120% rule does not apply to the combiner buss or the conductors back to its point of utility interconnect. I have argued this point as well as label combiners “load circuits prohibited” (with or without available slots) and received AHJ approval.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>You could also just lock shut a combiner that had spare slots as a deterrent to adding load breakers.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Kirk Herander<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>VT Solar, LLC<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>dba Vermont Solar Engineering<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>NABCEP<sup>TM </sup>Certified installer Charter Member<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>NYSERDA-eligible Installer<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>VT RE Incentive Program Partner<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>802.863.1202</span><span style='font-size:18.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> re-wrenches-bounces@lists.re-wrenches.org [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces@lists.re-wrenches.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Jason Szumlanski<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 26, 2012 8:28 AM<br><b>To:</b> RE-wrenches<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [RE-wrenches] Enphase grid tie question<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I'll email you off-list a 1-line diagram from a system with 164 microinverters broken down into 8 strings in a 208V system. This particular system used two subpanels to accumulate PV, but that was only because we had to backfeed two existing subpanels due to the size of existing 480/208V transformers. You will have to look at the utility service and all existing equipment.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Regarding the breakers in the subpanel, you will only need a maximum of a 20A breaker for each string. The max inverters per string is 25 and the calculation for OCPD is:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>215W / 208V x 25 inverters / 1.732 x 1.25 = 18.65A<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>“</span>You DO need to observe the 120% rule for the combining subpanel, regardless of whether there are loads present, at least in jurisdictions where I have worked. I've heard that some inspectors will allow you to ignore it if it is labeled as a PV combiner with "add no loads" notation.<span style='color:#1F497D'>”</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Use a MLO panel with a fusible disconnect between the subpanel and the interconnection point. If you use a 225A panel, you can feed it with 270A. With eight 20A backfed PV circuits, you would need to protect the line side of the panel with a 100A fusible disconnect. That probably isn't going to work. You may be best off from a cost perspective using two 225A subpanels and two 60A fusible disconnects. Anything larger than a 60A 3P disconnect and the price skyrockets. It all depends on your circuit calculations and the existing equipment. Of course, you would need two spaces for your interconnection point.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Jason Szumlanski<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Fafco Solar<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>