Looking for, the stupid thing that can allow me to remove the Eaton 200A breaker on a TEG2

[holeydonut]

I don't even want to try and explain why*... but it'll help me out if I can find the part with the green arrow on it.

If I understand things correctly (which is probably not the case since I suck), if I had that part I could remove the 200A whack-job Eaton breaker from my TEG2. So the utility energy will go straight into the TEG2. PS, I have a 200A breaker upstream of the TEG2.

* For the peeps who really want to know... the reason why is that a certain inspector may walk up to a certain TEG 2 on my house. And when interpreting 2017 NEC 705.12.B.2.3.C... this inspector will add up all the PV Gen + ESS breakers then add 200A as well from the funky Eaton breaker. This will clearly exceed 200A and cause sad-face

 

[jjrandorin]

Man, it really seems like they are out to get you. I have no idea what that part is, or any feedback on it, etc, but hope you can find what you are looking for so it gets them off your back.

I had to change the thread title from "wtb" to "looking for" because we only allow "wtb" in the marketplace subforums, but your post isnt really that kind of post, so I changed it to "looking for".

 

[holeydonut]

Man, it really seems like they are out to get you. I have no idea what that part is, or any feedback on it, etc, but hope you can find what you are looking for so it gets them off your back.

I had to change the thread title from "wtb" to "looking for" because we only allow "wtb" in the marketplace subforums, but your post isnt really that kind of post, so I changed it to "looking for".

Yeah, I had a guy at my house and they said they wouldn't support using the 2017 NEC 705.12.B.2.3.C interpretation that Vines and WWhitney brought up since I had the 200A Eaton thingie in my Tesla Gateway 2. So they would apply the 2017 NEC 705.12.B.2.3.B language and de-rate my utility breaker to protect the TEG2's internal busbar.

Barf.

 

[RandyS]

In looking at the Tesla video "Installing the Backup Gateway 2", halfway down this page:

Powerwall Installation Resources for Installers | Tesla Support

Learn about the installation process for Powerwall and the different components of a Powerwall system, including Backup Gateway 2 and Backup Switch.

www.tesla.com

at 43 seconds in, it looks like the part you are asking about is called Service Inlet Terminal Lugs and is the "Default" that the Gateway comes with or ships with, and the Eaton CSR circuit breaker is installed afterwards as an option. So does that mean the Tesla Energy folks remove this part you want and install the breaker? I tried to help by searching for this part name all over the place and came up empty-handed.

Maybe it is possible that the Tesla Energy folks might have one or two of these parts in their vans from previous jobs and you can get one that way? Otherwise I'm not seeing it anywhere...

 

[holeydonut]

In looking at the Tesla video "Installing the Backup Gateway 2", halfway down this page:

Powerwall Installation Resources for Installers | Tesla Support

Learn about the installation process for Powerwall and the different components of a Powerwall system, including Backup Gateway 2 and Backup Switch.

www.tesla.com

at 43 seconds in, it looks like the part you are asking about is called Service Inlet Terminal Lugs and is the "Default" that the Gateway comes with or ships with, and the Eaton CSR circuit breaker is installed afterwards as an option. So does that mean the Tesla Energy folks remove this part you want and install the breaker? I tried to help by searching for this part name all over the place and came up empty-handed.

Maybe it is possible that the Tesla Energy folks might have one or two of these parts in their vans from previous jobs and you can get one that way? Otherwise I'm not seeing it anywhere...

Yep, the Tesla Gateway 2 comes standard with the part I'm looking for. Sunrun actually did my install and (to my chagrin) swapped out this "Inlet Terminal Lugs" part with the 200A Eaton thing. You can see in the image I posted the instructions show the arrows removing the lug part and adding in the Eaton breaker if the Tesla Gateway 2 is used as service equipment.

My Tesla Gateway 2 is not used as service equipment. This 200A breaker never should have been added. But I didn't think to scavenge that part they threw away when they installed the Eaton thing. But now I have people telling me they won't allow me to proceed with my PV expansion (even for County approval) unless I remove that 200A Eaton breaker.

 

[jjrandorin]

Perhaps PM @Vines and see if they have one laying around where he works?

 

[holeydonut]

Perhaps PM @Vines and see if they have one laying around where he works?

Vines probably designs his systems well, and never uses the TEG2 as service equipment

 

[wwhitney]

Yeah, I had a guy at my house and they said they wouldn't support using the 2017 NEC 705.12.B.2.3.C interpretation that Vines and WWhitney brought up since I had the 200A Eaton thingie in my Tesla Gateway 2. So they would apply the 2017 NEC 705.12.B.2.3.B language and de-rate my utility breaker to protect the TEG2's internal busbar.

Here you go, try this on your inspector or their boss:

The 2017 NEC definition of "panelboard" is "A single panel . . . including buses and automatic overcurrent devices . . ." Note the plural. A box with a bus and a single overcurrent device is not a panelboard. Therefore 705.12(B)(2)(3) does not apply, as it refers to "busbars in panelboards." All you have is a (redundant) disconnect switch/OCPD.

Now this argument is slightly complicated because the Gateway 2 does include the provision for mounting an internal panelboard. But that is a separate panelboard, and when it is absent, the Gateway 2 is not itself a panelboard, even when it incorporates the main breaker. So with the panelboard installed, only the panelboard's busses need protection under 705.12(B)(2)(3), not the other busses in the Gateway 2.

Also, you could try the practical argument of "it can never be the case that adding a second redundant equally sized breaker reduces safety or reduces protection of any downstream components. So if the install is compliant without the breaker, adding the breaker can't make it non-compliant." As in any code provisions or interpretations that reach that conclusion are non-sensical and should be discarded. [Note the first part of that quote isn't strictly true, because of issues of coordination between breakers, and series AIC ratings of breakers, but those don't apply residentially.]

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Vines]

Yep, the Tesla Gateway 2 comes standard with the part I'm looking for. Sunrun actually did my install and (to my chagrin) swapped out this "Inlet Terminal Lugs" part with the 200A Eaton thing. You can see in the image I posted the instructions show the arrows removing the lug part and adding in the Eaton breaker if the Tesla Gateway 2 is used as service equipment.

My Tesla Gateway 2 is not used as service equipment. This 200A breaker never should have been added. But I didn't think to scavenge that part they threw away when they installed the Eaton thing. But now I have people telling me they won't allow me to proceed with my PV expansion (even for County approval) unless I remove that 200A Eaton breaker.

I will ask if someone has one of those sitting in a truck or toolbag somewhere. I am sure an east coast installer has a 5 gallon bucket of these somewhere, because areas over there mostly have separate meter/mains.

I can probably count on 2 hands the number of systems I have designed with a main breaker required in the TEG, so probably not too many have been removed.

 

[Patrick66]

Also, you could try the practical argument of "it can never be the case that adding a second redundant equally sized breaker reduces safety or reduces protection of any downstream components. So if the install is compliant without the breaker, adding the breaker can't make it non-compliant." As in any code provisions or interpretations that reach that conclusion are non-sensical and should be discarded.

Isn't there a specific code section that states that-- exempting series equally-rated (or inversely rated) breakers? I might be thinking of a California OSHPD thing though.

The main argument though should be that it isn't a panelboard.

 

[holeydonut]

Here you go, try this on your inspector or their boss:

The 2017 NEC definition of "panelboard" is "A single panel . . . including buses and automatic overcurrent devices . . ." Note the plural. A box with a bus and a single overcurrent device is not a panelboard. Therefore 705.12(B)(2)(3) does not apply, as it refers to "busbars in panelboards." All you have is a (redundant) disconnect switch/OCPD.

Now this argument is slightly complicated because the Gateway 2 does include the provision for mounting an internal panelboard. But that is a separate panelboard, and when it is absent, the Gateway 2 is not itself a panelboard, even when it incorporates the main breaker. So with the panelboard installed, only the panelboard's busses need protection under 705.12(B)(2)(3), not the other busses in the Gateway 2.

Also, you could try the practical argument of "it can never be the case that adding a second redundant equally sized breaker reduces safety or reduces protection of any downstream components. So if the install is compliant without the breaker, adding the breaker can't make it non-compliant." As in any code provisions or interpretations that reach that conclusion are non-sensical and should be discarded. [Note the first part of that quote isn't strictly true, because of issues of coordination between breakers, and series AIC ratings of breakers, but those don't apply residentially.]

Cheers, Wayne

He looked at the TEG2 and said if I use whatever this "internal panelboard" is... then he's going to add up the breakers he sees. And that's clearly over 200A once you throw in the Eaton 200A. He said he was aware of 705.12(B)(2)(3) and disagreed that the 200A Eaton whack-job breaker was exempt. He acknowledged the breaker was redundant, but he said I'd have to remove that 200A if I wanted to use 705.12(B)(2)(3).

I will ask if someone has one of those sitting in a truck or toolbag somewhere. I am sure an east coast installer has a 5 gallon bucket of these somewhere, because areas over there mostly have separate meter/mains.

I can probably count on 2 hands the number of systems I have designed with a main breaker required in the TEG, so probably not too many have been removed.

Yeah maybe I can just make my own thing using paperclips and duct tape? Super safe if you ask me. Fingers crossed someone finds it in the crevice of their van hah.

 

[Vines]

Isn't there a specific code section that states that-- exempting series equally-rated (or inversely rated) breakers? I might be thinking of a California OSHPD thing though.

The main argument though should be that it isn't a panelboard.

It's hard to make that argument when it has a panelboard in it, without very specific understanding and language. The inspector might never believe a homeowner over his own thinking.

Sometimes it's easier to just make what should be a simple hardware swap.

What are the chances of this inspector coming back for your inspection and still causing an issue?

Maybe just make the CAD plans without the main breaker in the TEG shown and roll the dice at the inspection? It's literally a redundant breaker and makes no difference to the power flow when fed from a 200A breaker upstream breaker.
.

 

[jjrandorin]

What are the chances of this inspector coming back for your inspection and still causing an issue?

I am guessing that it has something to do with @holeydonut wanting to do a PV expansion:

But now I have people telling me they won't allow me to proceed with my PV expansion (even for County approval) unless I remove that 200A Eaton breaker.

Although, given his last experience, I have no idea why he would want to go through that again (other than to get more solar so he can say $@$%@$%%@$ PGEEEEEE louder)

 

[Vines]

I am guessing that it has something to do with @holeydonut wanting to do a PV expansion:



Although, given his last experience, I have no idea why he would want to go through that again (other than to get more solar so he can say $@$%@$%%@$ PGEEEEEE louder)

Oh I saw that I just meant that there are probably multiple inspectors and it was such a silly misunderstanding that I doubt it would continue a year(s) afterward, to the next PV expansion.

 

[jjrandorin]

Oh I saw that I just meant that there are probably multiple inspectors and it was such a silly misunderstanding that I doubt it would continue a year(s) afterward, to the next PV expansion.

I dont know.... I am convinced at this point that @holeydonut is on "A list" somewhere within PGE, with a note to "enforce the heck out of this homeowner". Im not even joking about this any longer, because it certainly seems that way.

I think if he doesnt fix it and just hopes to get a different inspector in a year, that in a year from now they may get a different inspector who will still point to that and say "according to our previous notes......."

(note that I have said something similar many, many times... like "I see in our previous interactions that...." " According to the previous notes we......." " I see that it has previously been communicated to you that".... )

 

[holeydonut]

@Vines, thanks for looking into whether someone in the field has this part lying around!

In my case right now I'm really trying to get a PV expansion to charge my wife's Model 3. It makes me crying-sad-kitty to see how my NEM is going to be a net deficit and I'm on the hook to owe PG&E like a thousand bucks this cycle because they blocked me from getting the solar panels to begin with. Paying PG&E makes me .

Anyway, it's not an inspector that is asking for this removal of the 200A Eaton thing. It's actually the lone PV+ESS company I've found that is willing to do the PV expansion to my existing system. The owner did the site visit today, and said his buddy recently had an issue in Contra Costa County and the TEG2. Just like me, this other project used the TEG2 with its integrated panelboard as a generation panel.

But the inspector in CoCoCo said the TEG2 had a 200A busbar. So the inspector applied the NEC 705.12.B.2.3.B interpretation ... and said the home had to have the main service panel breaker de-rated from 200A down to 125A. That way you could add the PVGen+ESS breakers and the utility breaker and fit under the 120% of what the inspector thought was the busbar rating of the TEG2. (200A TEG2 busbar x 1.2 - 125A = 115A of PV+ESS).

He understood why I didn't want to de-rate my main service breaker since I was drawing from PG&E (with no ESS support) during off-peak times to charge EVs. So he was willing to try and use the sum of breakers NEC 705.12.B.2.3.C specific to the TEG2. And he said since my home was still 200A on the primary load center he felt everything was fine at 200A. But he said he believed this same inspector would want to include the 200A Eaton thingie in the sum of all breakers calc. He thought the inspector would just simply sit there and simply add up every breaker he saw on the TEG2. He wants me to figure out how to remove this 200A Eaton thingie or he won't proceed with my project. Unfortunately he doesn't think he can find any extra "service inlet terminal lugs" since he says that part is usually left in place on the installs he's seen.

 

[Vines]

@Vines, thanks for looking into whether someone in the field has this part lying around!

In my case right now I'm really trying to get a PV expansion to charge my wife's Model 3. It makes me crying-sad-kitty to see how my NEM is going to be a net deficit and I'm on the hook to owe PG&E like a thousand bucks this cycle because they blocked me from getting the solar panels to begin with. Paying PG&E makes me .

Anyway, it's not an inspector that is asking for this removal of the 200A Eaton thing. It's actually the lone PV+ESS company I've found that is willing to do the PV expansion to my existing system. The owner did the site visit today, and said his buddy recently had an issue in Contra Costa County and the TEG2. Just like me, this other project used the TEG2 with its integrated panelboard as a generation panel.

But the inspector in CoCoCo said the TEG2 had a 200A busbar. So the inspector applied the NEC 705.12.B.2.3.B interpretation ... and said the home had to have the main service panel breaker de-rated from 200A down to 125A. That way you could add the PVGen+ESS breakers and the utility breaker and fit under the 120% of what the inspector thought was the busbar rating of the TEG2. (200A TEG2 busbar x 1.2 - 125A = 115A of PV+ESS).

He understood why I didn't want to de-rate my main service breaker since I was drawing from PG&E (with no ESS support) during off-peak times to charge EVs. So he was willing to try and use the sum of breakers NEC 705.12.B.2.3.C. But he said he believed this same inspector would want to include the 200A Eaton thingie in the sum of all breakers calc. He thought the inspector would just simply sit there and simply add up every breaker he saw on the TEG2. He wants me to figure out how to remove this 200A Eaton thingie or he won't proceed with my project. Unfortunately he doesn't think he can find any extra "service inlet terminal lugs" since he says that part is usually left in place on the installs he's seen.

If nothing else you can just turn off your house one cool sunny day, leave it in backup mode and rush your main breaker over to my house and I will swap it for my lugs lol.

 

[Vines]

@Vines, thanks for looking into whether someone in the field has this part lying around!

In my case right now I'm really trying to get a PV expansion to charge my wife's Model 3. It makes me crying-sad-kitty to see how my NEM is going to be a net deficit and I'm on the hook to owe PG&E like a thousand bucks this cycle because they blocked me from getting the solar panels to begin with. Paying PG&E makes me .

Anyway, it's not an inspector that is asking for this removal of the 200A Eaton thing. It's actually the lone PV+ESS company I've found that is willing to do the PV expansion to my existing system. The owner did the site visit today, and said his buddy recently had an issue in Contra Costa County and the TEG2. Just like me, this other project used the TEG2 with its integrated panelboard as a generation panel.

But the inspector in CoCoCo said the TEG2 had a 200A busbar. So the inspector applied the NEC 705.12.B.2.3.B interpretation ... and said the home had to have the main service panel breaker de-rated from 200A down to 125A. That way you could add the PVGen+ESS breakers and the utility breaker and fit under the 120% of what the inspector thought was the busbar rating of the TEG2. (200A TEG2 busbar x 1.2 - 125A = 115A of PV+ESS).

He understood why I didn't want to de-rate my main service breaker since I was drawing from PG&E (with no ESS support) during off-peak times to charge EVs. So he was willing to try and use the sum of breakers NEC 705.12.B.2.3.C specific to the TEG2. And he said since my home was still 200A on the primary load center he felt everything was fine at 200A. But he said he believed this same inspector would want to include the 200A Eaton thingie in the sum of all breakers calc. He thought the inspector would just simply sit there and simply add up every breaker he saw on the TEG2. He wants me to figure out how to remove this 200A Eaton thingie or he won't proceed with my project. Unfortunately he doesn't think he can find any extra "service inlet terminal lugs" since he says that part is usually left in place on the installs he's seen.

I have what you need:

I'll send them to your address this weekend, unless you plan on coming to Santa Cruz any time soon.

 

[holeydonut]

I have what you need:
View attachment 858512
I'll send them to your address this weekend, unless you plan on coming to Santa Cruz any time soon.

Holy shitttt how did you find it? The Supercharger USB thing is also really cool hahaha.

Thank you so much Vines! Will send you a PM.

 

[Vines]

Holy shitttt how did you find it? The Supercharger USB thing is also really cool hahaha.

Thank you so much Vines! Will send you a PM.

I dug it out of the boneyard, we have a couple of gateways that are only good for parts.