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@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@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@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 > >
_______________________________________________ List sponsored by Redwood Alliance Pay optional member dues here: http://re-wrenches.org List Address: RE-wrenches@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
