diy solar

diy solar

Failed Inspection - need some advice and guidance for NEC 690 infractions.

pvgirl said:
That section was changed in 2020 NEC and now the whole circuit has to be in metal.

(D) Direct-Current Circuits on or in Buildings
Where inside buildings, PV system dc circuits that exceed 30 volts or 8 amperes shall be contained in metal raceways, in Type MC metal-clad cable that complies with 250.118(10), or in metal enclosures.
Click to expand...

Ugh.. this is the first time I've noticed the part about 8 amperes. I thought I was good just being below 30vdc. :cry:
 
pvgirl said:
That section was changed in 2020 NEC and now the whole circuit has to be in metal.

(D) Direct-Current Circuits on or in Buildings
Where inside buildings, PV system dc circuits that exceed 30 volts or 8 amperes shall be contained in metal raceways, in Type MC metal-clad cable that complies with 250.118(10), or in metal enclosures.
Click to expand...
Yes, 2018 NEC if it applies goes by first disconnect. For 2023 NEC, (G) was changed to covering over 1000V.

Colorado adopted 2020 NEC.

Other option is mount IMO disconnect outside and it complies with the lockout. 690.15(C) and (D).

Depending on string voltage (over 250V), it might be difficult or extremely costly to find a disconnect with a metal enclosure. Best option might be exterior mount like this video.
 
cj5orion said:
Just a comment...
Correct,it is not the inspectors to inform you of the proper corrections,BUT...when inspecting a "one-time" homeowner diy...c'mon man,get this DONE ! Jeez,share a lil bit,get it corrected,and I'll see you...never again !
Click to expand...

Golden Rule: No good deed goes unpunished.

The inspector shouldn't be criticized for doing what his employer requires and as I have posted twice, The OP should be thanking the Karma gods UL9540 hasn't been brought up.
 
Zwy said:
Depending on string voltage (over 250V), it might be difficult or extremely costly to find a disconnect with a metal enclosure.
Click to expand...

www.ebay.com

Square D HU361RB Heavy Duty Safety Switch Non-Fusible 3R 30A 600V - New Open Box | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Square D HU361RB Heavy Duty Safety Switch Non-Fusible 3R 30A 600V - New Open Box at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!
www.ebay.com

30A, 600V AC/DC, outdoor. This one is $200
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zwy
Only rated for AC, not DC.

It is a "Safety Switch", not "Heavy Duty Safety Switch" which seems to be the 600V AC/DC ones from Square D.
Although listing title says same "HU361RB", I don't see that marked on the item itself.

Edit: AC only is regarding "Or $20 for a used one ( Schneider HU361RB )"
 
Last edited:
Hedges said:
Only rated for AC, not DC.

It is a "Safety Switch", not "Heavy Duty Safety Switch" which seems to be the 600V AC/DC ones from Square D.
Although listing title says same "HU361RB", I don't see that marked on the item itself.
Click to expand...

You're talking about the used one.. I was all confused. I was looking at the listing for the new one..

The new one seems to be ok for DC from what I can tell?
 
Solar Guppy said:
Golden Rule: No good deed goes unpunished.

The inspector shouldn't be criticized for doing what his employer requires and as I have posted twice, The OP should be thanking the Karma gods UL9540 hasn't been brought up.
Click to expand...
Yep. As a counterpoint to the folks that think the inspector should be educating… think about the extra costs that entails for the building department.

In my town they already try to manage costs by allocating 15-30 min per inspection (on site and on the phone). It’s not practical or fair to explain how to fix everything.

Or if we decide they should do that, the city needs to spend more on inspectors.

Any time spent on education are better spent on scalable things like writing better documentation on the website for all residents / contractors working in the city to use.
 
meager said:
My batteries are UL1973, UL9540A
Click to expand...
It needs to be an approved UL9540 pair of inverter and battery combination. The battery positioning and protection within the structure is also prescribed in NEC or international residential code as adopted by your state (I think the latter). So that might be another rude awakening if inspector finds deviation from those rules.

Unfortunately it is possible that your AHJ only did a cursory plan check.

UL9540A is not the same as UL9540 and gives you no points for that.

UL1973 is a strict subset of UL9540 and code says you need UL9540
 
Out of all the many regulations I've seen since looking into solar stuff.. the UL9540 pairing requirements are my most disliked ones. They feel like the largest overstepping of bounds. It just reeks of regulatory capture.
 
cs1234 said:
Out of all the many regulations I've seen since looking into solar stuff.. the UL9540 pairing requirements are my most disliked ones that feel like the largest overstepping of bounds. It just reeks of regulatory capture.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. My hope is that a Chinese invasion of UL9540 products will race the market to the bottom… eventually
 
cs1234 said:
Out of all the many regulations I've seen since looking into solar stuff.. the UL9540 pairing requirements are my most disliked ones. They feel like the largest overstepping of bounds. It just reeks of regulatory capture.
Click to expand...
This all came about due to the use of L-ion technology ( not to be confused with LiFep04 ). L-ion has crashed planes, destroyed cars and homes and frankly shouldn't even be allowed for ESS ( IMHO ) ever.

The regulation were a direct answer to L-ion safety and has not been updated to define the various Lithium based options such as LiFep04 which shares almost nothing in common with the earlier chemistries from a safety perspective.

Good luck getting the Fireman that write the US electric code to understand the difference of LiFep04 is just as safe as Lead-Acid or AGM
 
Solar Guppy said:
This all came about due to the use of L-ion technology ( not to be confused with LiFep04 ). L-ion has crashed planes, destroyed cars and homes and frankly shouldn't even be allowed for ESS ( IMHO ) ever.

The regulation were a direct answer to L-ion safety and has not been updated to define the various Lithium based options such as LiFep04 which shares almost nothing in common with the earlier chemistries from a safety perspective.

Good luck getting the Fireman that write the US electric code to understand the difference of LiFep04 is just as safe as Lead-Acid or AGM
Click to expand...
The really weird part about the UL9540 rules is that in some states recycled EV batteries have an exemption if placed sufficient distance from the house. With no listing / testing requirements like requiring the cells to remain inside the (presumably well designed) module housing.

You could probably qualify with the letter of that exemption using some dog poop leaking cells from a Tesla wrecker.
 
zanydroid said:
The really weird part about the UL9540 rules is that in some states recycled EV batteries have an exemption if placed sufficient distance from the house. With no listing / testing requirements like requiring the cells to remain inside the (presumably well designed) module housing.

You could probably qualify with the letter of that exemption using some dog poop leaking cells from a Tesla wrecker.
Click to expand...

Maybe once more EV's start hitting the market as salvage vehicles, you can buy them up, park em in your driveway/front yard/back yard, whatever.. and tether them up and meet code. :geek:
 
Oh there’s a new for 2023 IRC or California Residential Code provision specifically targeting modifying EVs to backfeed a house. Needs to be done in a way that complies with carmaker instructions.

Checkmate.

That said I read that GM is targeting 2026 or something for V2H across all models…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
NEC 690.31 Wiring Methods (Contradiction?)
Replies
1
Views
399
pvgirl
pvgirl
I
The Chargeverter, the NEC and "listing" - (Seeking code guidance)
Replies
5
Views
342
wpns
W
A
EG4 LifePower4 no UL Label - Failed Inspection
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
6K
Matt_West
M
1
Anyone Pass inspection with home built EVE 280AH batteries and JK200ABMS on shelf next to Sol-Ark inverter?
Replies
8
Views
397
G00SE
G00SE
R
Tax Credit: Inspection required? Claimed once?
2
Replies
25
Views
784
JoeHam
J
Back
Top