Repost: Interconnection insurance requirements [RE-wrenches]

[Allan Sindelar]

Reposting; I only received one comment offlist. I could sure use some help
before Thursday's next workshop.
Allan

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Allan Sindelar" <allan at positiveenergysolar.com>
To: "New wrenches posting" <RE-wrenches at topica.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:50 AM
Subject: Interconnection insurance requirements [RE-wrenches]


>
> Wrenches,
> As I have indicated in recent posts, I'm involved in workshops to revise
our
> Public Regulatory Commission's interconnection standards. There are many
> issues, but today's request is about requiring liability insurance. A
> section of the "straw man" document that is serving as the basis for
> discussion will require liability insurance for all interconnected
systems.
> The existing under-10kW regulation ("Rule 571" referenced below)
recommends
> but doesn't require it, and I want to make sure this remains.
>
> Here is the new text, followed [in brackets] by my own draft comments on
> this particular section. I need supporting information for my argument
that
> insurance shouldn't be required on small systems. I also need to know that
> my comments about homeowner's policies are accurate. Any help from
Wrenches
> in other jurisdictions is much appreciated.
>
> 11.9     Insurance
> All Generating facilities shall obtain liability insurance to cover risks,
> liabilities, and consequences that may arise as a result of
interconnection
> with a utility system.  A utility may require qualifying Generating
> facilities larger than 50 kW to obtain general liability insurance not to
> exceed $1,000,000 before the qualifying Generating facility is
> interconnected with the public utility.  In extraordinary cases and for
good
> cause shown the Commission may require a Generating facility to obtain a
> greater amount of general liability insurance. [Note: Historically with
> residential and small commercial systems, this is covered under general
> liability provisions in homeowner's policies, and these have generally bee
n
> determined in other jurisdictions to be sufficient. It must not be
required
> on small residential systems, as the insurance industry has not caught up
> with the rapid growth of residential PV; as such any specific rider could
> add prohibitively to the cost of the system. Note also that existing Rule
> 571 states that "All customers are urged to obtain adequate liability
> insurance to cover risks, liabilities, and consequences which may arise as
a
> result of interconnection with a utility system." This has served
adequately
> to date and should not be changed.]
>
>
>
> Thanks as usual for any assistance.
>
> Allan
>
> Positive Energy


- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read

List rules & how to change your email address: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9.bWljaGFl
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit:
http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER
--^----------------------------------------------------------------