Pretty much. Zero mention of bonding or anything like that. The manual is mostly just a wiring diagram and specs of all the components. Most of the text in it is your basic "warning" fluff saying a qualified person should install this ....blah blah blah.
Failed Inspection - need some advice and guidance for NEC 690 infractions.
- Thread starter meager
- Start date
I've since emailed my inspector and his peer the same pics I have posted here. I don't really expect much of an answer on the bonding, but I thought I'd try my luck anyways. Basically, I've laid out this discussion at a high level and asked them where they think the G/N bond should be. We shall see what happens.
Hedges
I See Electromagnetic Fields!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 21,199
That's the fancy thing with a lug for wire, that might only be required if conduit is EGC.
I thought just more toothed nuts.
I thought the same thing, but I want to be safe and use the additional contraption with a ground lug just in case. I figure if I throw enough money at the problem, it will eventually go away.
timselectric
If I can do it, you can do it.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 19,269
If you are referring to the locknut that includes a lug. They are used in the same places as a grounding bushing.
If the metal conduit doesn't meet proper grounding requirements in any other way.
timselectric
If I can do it, you can do it.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 19,269
Sometimes grounding and bonding can get fuzzy, depending on how the inspector interprets the situation.
Technically, the N/G bond is to be at or before the first means of disconnect. Which would be done by the inverter, or in the PDP box.
But I wouldn't have a problem with it at the loads panel. And setting the EG4's to not do it.
The inspector is probably expecting to see it this way.
But, you never know.
Technically, the N/G bond is to be at or before the first means of disconnect. Which would be done by the inverter, or in the PDP box.
But I wouldn't have a problem with it at the loads panel. And setting the EG4's to not do it.
The inspector is probably expecting to see it this way.
But, you never know.
Stationary ≠ On-Grid. It just means not for mobile applications.
B-Mod
Solar Enthusiast
Ok, so treat this as a generation source, as in same as a transformer. Electrical code lets you bond in trans or the first disconnect. In your solar inverter combo the breaker is the first disconnect, the panel after it is a sub panel, the same as if your house has a disconnect outside, that is the main disconnect, bonding is done there, but if no disconnect, then the panel with a main is now the main disconnect as it has a main breaker in it. Your panel does not have a main breaker in it, so it cannot be your first disconnect.
So unless the eg4 does something inside, which I kinda doubt, I am pretty confident I am correct.
@B-Mod This is unbelievable news!!! I got an email back from the inspector this morning it is included below. I "think" I'm good to go for an inspection and will certainly share my success and/or failure in the thread when complete. The advice I've received in this forum has been priceless and I really hope it positively impacts other DIY'ers along their own journey.
My email to the inspector:
The last time I spoke to (Name of inspector) on the phone, he wanted some pictures. Since that conversation, I have completely gutted all wiring inside the power shed and installed a PDP Load Center built specifically for these inverters. This product wasn't available until a couple weeks ago, so I was waiting to send my pics until after I had it all wired up. I've posted my pics in an electrical forum in order to get feedback (free pre-inspection advice) from other electricians to give me the best shot of success for when I get a second state inspection. The only point of contention at this moment is where I create the G/N bond. Some say the bond should be in the PDP load center since it now has the AC disconnect. Others think the bond should remain in the AC load center and should not be considered a sub-panel. I don't feel right making a G/N jumper cable in the PDP Load Center because the documentation doesn't have any mention of it and it doesn't just doesn't "feel" safe to do so.
Anyways, here are my pictures. Everything on the DC side and AC side are completely contained in 1-1/2 in metal conduit from point of entry. I just purchased some grounding bushings with lugs that I will use to bond the nipple between the PDP panel and the AC panel, but other than that I "feel" I've met all the requirements. Thoughts on where the G/N boding should occur? Also, in the first image I have two ground conductors using the same lug, but the green conductor will be moved to its own lug when I visit the property later today.
Response from Inspector:
"If you would have to "create" or "fabricate" the bond in the PDP, then I'd say it'd be best to keep the bond in your first AC panel. No problem with that in my opinion. Otherwise you should be good to request your inspection online when ready."
Adam De Lay
Solar Wizard
That's great to hear! Please do keep us in the loop!
One thing I can't see in your pictures is the ground connection from the panel to ground rod. Looks like plastic (?) flex into the side of an LB. I'd clean that up and make sure it complies with local code and standards. Where I was it was typically required to run the ground conductor in metal conduit or armored cable. Also to loop the ground conductor through a ground bushing at the panel before landing in a lug.
Also no splices in the ground conductor unless they are irreversible splices (i.e. caldweld or hydraulic crimp).
No more than one wire in a lug unless the lug is specifically rated and identified for it.
Also no splices in the ground conductor unless they are irreversible splices (i.e. caldweld or hydraulic crimp).
No more than one wire in a lug unless the lug is specifically rated and identified for it.
B-Mod
Solar Enthusiast
Your inspector is the boss. He can interpret the code how he wants and can wave things if he wants. He has the power, lol.
Yep, we are neighbors, kinda. @meager is about 14 miles away as the crow flies, about 25 road miles.
I have only had two interactions with this inspector and I'm pretty much neutral to slightly negative with him. His communication skills are not the best. As for some comments in this thread about "inspectors only inspect" - on the state DORA/electrical website there is a page where it says "PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO ASK YOUR LOCAL INSPECTOR QUESTIONS". It has been four days now since I asked a question via email with no response, but I'll press ahead. A neighbor out here finished a house back in April. Neighbor said that his electrical contractors were not enthused about the inspector.
We built our home out here 2014-2017 (long story). The electrical inspector at that time for this area was an old guy - easy to get along with. I did all the final electric in the home. When the guy came out to inspect, he found a couple things he didn't like, recommended a couple options for corrective action and then said to send him pics once I had corrected things. The important thing here is that he recommended a couple options. The final decision as to which path to take was mine.
When one moves from an area which has skilled contractors that want your business to an area where they work when they want to and the methods they employ are dated along with their skill sets - things get really difficult. For my solar project, I wanted to pay for advice/direction. I went through 3 solar companies - each one saying that they could consult - then crickets even after I tried to do follow ups. After the third attempt (and three weeks of lost time) I told myself that I have to figure this out myself with help hopefully from folks on this forum. Even getting concrete poured for the ballast blocks was a hassle. Went through 3 companies saying they would look at the project, but never showed. Finally on company 4, talked to the guy on Friday, he looked at the project on Monday and they poured on Thursday. Since I had done all the forming, bracing for the steel posts and setting rebar all they had to do was the pour (with a line pump). One of the guys on the crew said it was the easiest job they had ever done. Of course I sweetened them up with doughnuts.
It appears @meager has now successfully navigated a path with the inspector. I still have a long ways to go.
Trip.Diamond
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2021
- Messages
- 36
Any updates? Has the Inspector been back?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Inquiring minds want to know!
I did FINALLY pass my inspection this past Thursday (9/21). I took several iterations. As soon as I would tidy one thing up, the next thing would come up. I'd fix that and then the next...and the next. It was a painful never ending cycle that was likely to continue until I gave up...but I was determined to get past it and therefore I never did give up. The final draw was when the inspector was laser focused on one specific battery terminal connector in the power distribution panel. He was convinced that the terminal was not rated to hold fine stranded wire. He wanted me to swap it out with a UL 486 A/B listed single barrel terminal lug or terminate the cable end with a UL 486 A/B listed battery lug and tie that into a "listed" stud. Yes, the NEC has a rule that requires fine stranded cables (above Class B or C) to be terminated using listed lugs. NEC 110.3(A) and (B). I understand the spirit of this NEC rule, especially if your cable will be subjected to movement. I see how it could become less secure over time a cause a potential problem. My cable is absolutely not subject to movement, plus the fact that I am using the equipment as it was intended from the manufacturer without any modifications. I spent hours going back and forth with the company I purchased this equipment from in order to get documentation...any documentation...that would satisfy this inspector. Nothing worked!Any updates? Has the Inspector been back?
Inquiring minds want to know!
At this stage of the battle, my boiling point was reached and I couldn't take any more BS. I finally contacted the inspectors superior and let him know what the hell was going on. I pleaded my case (via phone and email) with him. Essentially, what the inspector wanted was for me to modify the original equipment and put a "listed" cable terminator in its place. That was a red flag for the supervisor and he said absolutely not to do that. Never modify original UL listed equipment (breaker/terminator) if it is being used for its intended purpose from the manufacturer. It "appears" there was a "miscommunication" and the inspector thought I was building this stuff from scratch and just adding pieces and parts as I saw fit. That is absolutely NOT the case and I've not modified a single item in this setup. Miraculously, about an hour or so after my conversation with the supervisor, my inspection was approved and I can finally move on to the next project.
I know others have mentioned previously in this post that the inspectors job is to inspect...nothing more...nothing less. I absolutely feel like a ton of this heartache could have been avoided if the inspector would have answered just a couple of extremely simple questions that I had. But instead, he just threw NEC codes my way. I never had any tough questions honestly. I don't at all expect the inspector to be my teacher and hold my hand during this process, but for F&@# sake, answer some basic questions and let us move on.
In addition to @LBen having issues with this individual, I now know of others in my county experiencing the same pain. My home inspector told me a story just yesterday about all the troubles he is having putting his system in. Together, we were able to make a common connection...and guess what that is? I really don't think this county, or possibly just this individual, are too fond of DIY'ers. This stuff is not rocket science. At its core, it is actually quite simple if you follow some basic safety rules.
Anyways, this final approval came just in the nick of time. They will be tying my house panel into it next week. I think if I hadn't raised my voice, my home would be delayed and I'd still be in a vicious cycle.
Here is a pic of the lug (circled in yellow) that was holding up my inspection. This is when I blew my lid
Here are some other pics of the finished product. I'm very please with it.
Yes, your battery cables must be contained using an "approved" wiring method. It can be plastic or metal, but it must be done.
I did FINALLY pass my inspection this past Thursday (9/21). I took several iterations. As soon as I would tidy one thing up, the next thing would come up. I'd fix that and then the next...and the next. It was a painful never ending cycle that was likely to continue until I gave up...but I was determined to get past it and therefore I never did give up. The final draw was when the inspector was laser focused on one specific battery terminal connector in the power distribution panel. He was convinced that the terminal was not rated to hold fine stranded wire. He wanted me to swap it out with a UL 486 A/B listed single barrel terminal lug or terminate the cable end with a UL 486 A/B listed battery lug and tie that into a "listed" stud. Yes, the NEC has a rule that requires fine stranded cables (above Class B or C) to be terminated using listed lugs. NEC 110.3(A) and (B). I understand the spirit of this NEC rule, especially if your cable will be subjected to movement. I see how it could become less secure over time a cause a potential problem. My cable is absolutely not subject to movement, plus the fact that I am using the equipment as it was intended from the manufacturer without any modifications. I spent hours going back and forth with the company I purchased this equipment from in order to get documentation...any documentation...that would satisfy this inspector. Nothing worked!
At this stage of the battle, my boiling point was reached and I couldn't take any more BS. I finally contacted the inspectors superior and let him know what the hell was going on. I pleaded my case (via phone and email) with him. Essentially, what the inspector wanted was for me to modify the original equipment and put a "listed" cable terminator in its place. That was a red flag for the supervisor and he said absolutely not to do that. Never modify original UL listed equipment (breaker/terminator) if it is being used for its intended purpose from the manufacturer. It "appears" there was a "miscommunication" and the inspector thought I was building this stuff from scratch and just adding pieces and parts as I saw fit. That is absolutely NOT the case and I've not modified a single item in this setup. Miraculously, about an hour or so after my conversation with the supervisor, my inspection was approved and I can finally move on to the next project.
I know others have mentioned previously in this post that the inspectors job is to inspect...nothing more...nothing less. I absolutely feel like a ton of this heartache could have been avoided if the inspector would have answered just a couple of extremely simple questions that I had. But instead, he just threw NEC codes my way. I never had any tough questions honestly. I don't at all expect the inspector to be my teacher and hold my hand during this process, but for F&@# sake, answer some basic questions and let us move on.
In addition to @LBen having issues with this individual, I now know of others in my county experiencing the same pain. My home inspector told me a story just yesterday about all the troubles he is having putting his system in. Together, we were able to make a common connection...and guess what that is? I really don't think this county, or possibly just this individual, are too fond of DIY'ers. This stuff is not rocket science. At its core, it is actually quite simple if you follow some basic safety rules.
Anyways, this final approval came just in the nick of time. They will be tying my house panel into it next week. I think if I hadn't raised my voice, my home would be delayed and I'd still be in a vicious cycle.
Here is a pic of the lug (circled in yellow) that was holding up my inspection. This is when I blew my lid
View attachment 168968
Here are some other pics of the finished product. I'm very please with it.
View attachment 168969
View attachment 168971
Yes, your battery cables must be contained using an "approved" wiring method. It can be plastic or metal, but it must be done.
View attachment 168970
And one more thing. When in doubt, just ground it. I grounded the crap out of my system. I have so much grounding wire going through this thing that I actually think I saw a smile on the inspectors face. Of course, all of this grounding wasn't necessary, but I knew he'd be focused on it, so I just went nuts
Luckily, I also remembered to properly ground all of the outlets and switches because he randomly pulled two of them apart to check. I usually don't use metal enclosures, but I did this time.scoharri
New Member
Very happy to hear the good news. Congratulations!!!! Nice work Sir!!I did FINALLY pass my inspection this past Thursday (9/21). I took several iterations. As soon as I would tidy one thing up, the next thing would come up. I'd fix that and then the next...and the next. It was a painful never ending cycle that was likely to continue until I gave up...but I was determined to get past it and therefore I never did give up. The final draw was when the inspector was laser focused on one specific battery terminal connector in the power distribution panel. He was convinced that the terminal was not rated to hold fine stranded wire. He wanted me to swap it out with a UL 486 A/B listed single barrel terminal lug or terminate the cable end with a UL 486 A/B listed battery lug and tie that into a "listed" stud. Yes, the NEC has a rule that requires fine stranded cables (above Class B or C) to be terminated using listed lugs. NEC 110.3(A) and (B). I understand the spirit of this NEC rule, especially if your cable will be subjected to movement. I see how it could become less secure over time a cause a potential problem. My cable is absolutely not subject to movement, plus the fact that I am using the equipment as it was intended from the manufacturer without any modifications. I spent hours going back and forth with the company I purchased this equipment from in order to get documentation...any documentation...that would satisfy this inspector. Nothing worked!
At this stage of the battle, my boiling point was reached and I couldn't take any more BS. I finally contacted the inspectors superior and let him know what the hell was going on. I pleaded my case (via phone and email) with him. Essentially, what the inspector wanted was for me to modify the original equipment and put a "listed" cable terminator in its place. That was a red flag for the supervisor and he said absolutely not to do that. Never modify original UL listed equipment (breaker/terminator) if it is being used for its intended purpose from the manufacturer. It "appears" there was a "miscommunication" and the inspector thought I was building this stuff from scratch and just adding pieces and parts as I saw fit. That is absolutely NOT the case and I've not modified a single item in this setup. Miraculously, about an hour or so after my conversation with the supervisor, my inspection was approved and I can finally move on to the next project.
I know others have mentioned previously in this post that the inspectors job is to inspect...nothing more...nothing less. I absolutely feel like a ton of this heartache could have been avoided if the inspector would have answered just a couple of extremely simple questions that I had. But instead, he just threw NEC codes my way. I never had any tough questions honestly. I don't at all expect the inspector to be my teacher and hold my hand during this process, but for F&@# sake, answer some basic questions and let us move on.
In addition to @LBen having issues with this individual, I now know of others in my county experiencing the same pain. My home inspector told me a story just yesterday about all the troubles he is having putting his system in. Together, we were able to make a common connection...and guess what that is? I really don't think this county, or possibly just this individual, are too fond of DIY'ers. This stuff is not rocket science. At its core, it is actually quite simple if you follow some basic safety rules.
Anyways, this final approval came just in the nick of time. They will be tying my house panel into it next week. I think if I hadn't raised my voice, my home would be delayed and I'd still be in a vicious cycle.
Here is a pic of the lug (circled in yellow) that was holding up my inspection. This is when I blew my lid
View attachment 168968
Here are some other pics of the finished product. I'm very please with it.
View attachment 168969
View attachment 168971
Yes, your battery cables must be contained using an "approved" wiring method. It can be plastic or metal, but it must be done.
View attachment 168970
Hedges
I See Electromagnetic Fields!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 21,199
I can sure see why the inspector thought that lug was something DIY.
A multiple pole breaker with multiple tap busbar stuck in it and adapted to large cable.
It is DIY by the company which got it through UL listing. If the breaker itself is actually UL listed. Or is it listed somewhere else in the world, and the assembly containing it was UL listed?
What amperage, voltage, AIC rating is it?
A single Midnight/Carling 175A or 250A breaker would do the job an fit battery cable in the lug.
Midnight also sells multiple pole breakers with ganging connector. They seem a bit goofy.
A multiple pole breaker with multiple tap busbar stuck in it and adapted to large cable.
It is DIY by the company which got it through UL listing. If the breaker itself is actually UL listed. Or is it listed somewhere else in the world, and the assembly containing it was UL listed?
What amperage, voltage, AIC rating is it?
A single Midnight/Carling 175A or 250A breaker would do the job an fit battery cable in the lug.
Midnight also sells multiple pole breakers with ganging connector. They seem a bit goofy.
Similar threads
