<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.5726" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY text=#000000 bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hello Kurt,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks for looking at this problem.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The project manager works for a licensed PV
contracting company that has been trying for several months to get this PV
system approved. First, they were blocked by the Los Angeles Building
& Planning's interpretation of the LA Fire Marshall's set-back
guidelines (not regulations). Now LADWP's interconnection department is
holding up the project. If the system had been installed last year as planned,
this new rule would not have applied. There is no requirement like this in
nearby Southern California Edison (SCE) territory.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>(Pulling the meter is not acceptable to most fire
departments, but that's a separate subject.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My question is <FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>Do any other electric utilities require an additional disconnect switch
on a PV system with a line-side tap?<BR><BR>Joel Davidson
</FONT><BR></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=info@es-ee.com href="mailto:info@es-ee.com">Kurt Albershardt</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
href="mailto:re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org">RE-wrenches</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, February 21, 2009 12:08
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [RE-wrenches] 2 PV utility
interconnect disconnects?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>On 2/21/09 10:24 AM, Joel Davidson wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:5E2F4F347CE14A2585CD6A749BBC0B06@JOEL
type="cite">January 1, 2009 LADWP added another interconnection requirement.
See page 8-11 at <A class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="http://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/cms/ladwp004344.pdf">http://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/cms/ladwp004344.pdf</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I
found what I think is the relevant section on p. 36 of the PDF (called out as
p. 1-32 at the top of the page.)<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:5E2F4F347CE14A2585CD6A749BBC0B06@JOEL type="cite">This
is how a PV commercial project manager described this new
requirement:</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I'm curious if this was an LADWP project manager,
or someone managing projects for customers?<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:5E2F4F347CE14A2585CD6A749BBC0B06@JOEL type="cite">When
a customer, any customer, generates electrical power with the intention of
supplying that power to the electrical grid, the connection to the grid has
to be made below, or on the load-side, of one main switch for the
property.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>They define<BR><BR><I>generators using a
closed-transition (“make-before-break”) type transfer switch or a multi-
<BR>breaker transfer scheme, or an electrical inverter that can be configured
to operate in a utility <BR>interactive mode constitute a potential back feed
source into the Department’s electric system and are <BR>classified as
interactive generators.<BR></I><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:5E2F4F347CE14A2585CD6A749BBC0B06@JOEL type="cite">the
policy seems to be that the total electricity supplied to any building or
property must be disconnected from the grid by one main
switch.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The wording appears to be:<BR><I><BR> All
interconnected generating systems shall be connected on the load side of the
customer’s meter switch (main service disconnect device). <BR></I><BR>I'm
wondering about the origins of this requirement. How would they handle
critical power systems (data centers, hospitals, etc. which are often fed by
multiple services entering by different routes?) How would they handle a
premises with multiple service voltages?<BR><BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:5E2F4F347CE14A2585CD6A749BBC0B06@JOEL type="cite">This
policy is in place for emergency situations, to where fire fighters or
persons on the scene during an emergency would be able to completely shut
down building power with one switch. </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The phrase "pull the
meter" comes to mind here...<BR><BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:5E2F4F347CE14A2585CD6A749BBC0B06@JOEL type="cite">This
describes a scenario whereby the grid is disconnected from the building
circuits, but the solar PV is still connected to the building circuits.
Therefore, there is a basic flaw in this requirement; this scenario is only
possible at nighttime- during the daytime, the solar PV system is energized
and may still feed to the building electrical circuits, unless the main PV
disconnect switch is opened.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Has this "project manager"
ever heard of anti-islanding? This fantasy scenario almost makes sense
for a battery-backed PV system, but then the presence or absence of sunshine
would not matter. What about emergency backup gensets and UPS or
flywheel systems? They are protected from backfeeding by a transfer
switch, so exempted, but UL 1741 does not qualify as
such?<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>List sponsored by
Home Power magazine<BR><BR>List Address:
RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org<BR><BR>Options &
settings:<BR>http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR><BR>List-Archive:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org<BR><BR>List
rules & etiquette:<BR>www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm<BR><BR>Check out
participant
bios:<BR>www.members.re-wrenches.org<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>