Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New to Forum. a little confused

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by KRenn View Post
    Did you install the system yourself or did have a 3rd party install it?
    I did all the work. The inspector did not have any issues with the workmanship. I was an electrician (well ... apprentice) quite a few years back and worked in semiconductor industry maintenance for over a decade.

    Does who did the work make any difference?

    Here is the inspector entry in the permit:
    "2008 NEC 110 .3 -(B) Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling. Inverter is not labeled."

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by danleaf View Post
      Here is a picture of the sticker:

      [ATTACH=CONFIG]2906[/ATTACH]

      The certificate in the manual says it was tested to UL 1741.
      But was nottested by UL or an authorized agent. Your inspector will only accept UL. It is not abnormal, to the contrary most jurisdiction only recognizes UL. You can argue all you want, will not change anything. Until you meet your local jurisdiction requirements you will not pass inspection.

      There is a way around it, to hire a lawyer and file a formal complaint to first go to Arbitration. If that fails then to court. It will be a lot less expensive and time consuming to just comply and get a different. Then request a second inspection. The inspector is correct, and you did not meet the requirements.
      MSEE, PE

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Sunking View Post
        But was not tested by UL or an authorized agent. Your inspector will only accept UL.
        Sunking, I am just trying to understand. Who needs to authorize the testing agent? TUV is part of the NRTL. Does UL needs to authorize the agent? Who gave UL the monopoly?

        Like I said before, the inspector did suggest as a solution getting a third party engineering firm from the accredited WA state list to confirm that the inverter complies with the UL standard. My argument with him is that TUV is in the list of company that he suggested to do the testing, so no additional testing is required.

        Comment


        • #34
          Don Quixote had a thing about windmills as I remember.
          [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by danleaf View Post
            I did all the work. The inspector did not have any issues with the workmanship. I was an electrician (well ... apprentice) quite a few years back and worked in semiconductor industry maintenance for over a decade.

            Does who did the work make any difference?

            Here is the inspector entry in the permit:
            "2008 NEC 110 .3 -(B) Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling. Inverter is not labeled."

            It does when there are conflicts with the inspector. If you're a DIY, they tend to give you a lot less latitude and heap a lot more crap on you overall. In fairness everyone should be treated equally, but generally as a single individual, you don't have the same clout as a bigger installer may have.

            Comment


            • #36
              I guess I was lucky

              The inspector accepted the TUV mark. He said he could not see the mark the first, time. I believe him, since I have about 8" side clearance and if you stick your head in there your eyes are only a few inches from the label.

              Now the utility questions the TUV mark and they said they have to do some research about TUV. Will see if my luck continues.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by KRenn View Post
                It does when there are conflicts with the inspector. If you're a DIY, they tend to give you a lot less latitude and heap a lot more crap on you overall. In fairness everyone should be treated equally, but generally as a single individual, you don't have the same clout as a bigger installer may have.
                When I first met my inspector I was warned by the contractor that he was really smart but was very nit picky. It was true, while he was here inspecting the contractors new circuit he noted that the bound between the neutral/ground bar and the service panel was never hooked up 4 decades ago. Anyway, after having him come out and inspect my DIY work a handful of times (new service, heat pump, first phase of solar, second phase of solar, etc) we became friendly. Based on my experience I think once he realized that there was no him vs me mentality, that the installation was not butchered, that I at least had some clue how to do things right, and probably most importantly that I wasn't there to cut corners, there was no conflict and I got treated just like everyone else. I missed a few really minor things but there was nothing major.

                One thing I realized recently is that you aren't allowed to relabel #6 or smaller wire as a ground. In both my solar install and my service panel I did this. Next time I see him I'll have to find out if he missed that I did this or if he just thought it was not a concern. I don't think anyone is going to confuse a black #6 wire running around outside of conduit as anything other than a ground.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by danleaf View Post
                  The inspector accepted the TUV mark. He said he could not see the mark the first, time. I believe him, since I have about 8" side clearance and if you stick your head in there your eyes are only a few inches from the label.

                  Now the utility questions the TUV mark and they said they have to do some research about TUV. Will see if my luck continues.
                  That's great news. I was surprised how many people immediately assumed that the inspector did not accept the TUV certification when I don't think you said that. As your later post said it was just that he did not SEE any certification.

                  So everyone that assumed the inspector was just rejecting TUV do you have experience with AHJs that are literally requiring ONLY UL certificated equipment? This just seems completely silly. I have to hope the NEC's definition of listed was meant so that a AHJ could define listed wider than just listed by the NRTLs, allowing them to be more restrictive IMO doesn't promote anything that NEC is trying to achieve. Fragmenting which products can be installed down to the local jurisdiction just because of a label doesn't help anyone except for the UL.

                  The utilities response seems completely legit, if you asked me if TUV was accepted I'd say the same thing since I have no idea who TUV os but once I realized they are as legitimate as any other NRTL then this should not cause any issues.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X