INDEPENDENT POWER 2001 SALES

1
Massachusetts DTE DG Interconnection
Collaborative Collaborative Results Restructu
ring Roundtable March 28, 2003
2
What Is An Interconnect (Nomenclature)?

• The interface between Distributed Generation (DG)
  equipment, (the Facility) and the grid (the area
  Electrical Power System or EPS)

Point of Common Coupling (PCC)
EPS
Radial
Customer Site
(interconnecting facility)
Network
Load 3
Load 2
Load 1
DG
(generating facility)
3
Collaborative Effort Has Resulted in the Creation
of Four Processes

• Simplest process
• Minimal or no costs expected
• Shortest time
• Still reasonably simple
• Strict limits
• Modest fees, longer time interval
• Standardized process
• Screens / Supplemental Review technical approach
• Moderate fees , longer time interval
• Standardized process
• Similar to current process
• Essentially based on actual costs
• Potentially long time interval

• Simplified - Radial
• Simplified Network
• Expedited Radial
• Standard Radial or Network

4
Simplified Radial Process

• One sheet application and approval
• Only three technical screens
• Radial distribution systems only
• Limited to 10kW or less
• Inverter-based, UL1741 listed
• Minimal or no costs expected
• 15 business days max

5
Simplified Network Process

• One sheet application and approval
• Additional technical limits
• Spot network only
• Tighter capacity limit
• 100 or 300 fee
• 40 to 100 days max

Area or Grid Network
Spot Network
6
ExpeditedRadial Process
Is Facility Certified?
Supplemental Review
No
Yes
Pass Starting V Drop?

• Standardized application
• Five additional technical screens
• If passed, only a review of possible EPS
• modifications remains
• If not passed, Supplemental Review
• determines if application can remain in
• Expedited or go to Standard process
• Fee range from 300 to 3,750,
• possible EPS upgrades
• 40 or 60 days max

No
Yes
Pass Fault Contrib?
No
Yes
Pass Config. Screen?
No
Yes
Pass Trans. Stability?
No
(If required)
Yes
Company makes EPS Modifications
Suppl. Review Determine Req.?
Company Sends Written Authorization
EPS Modification Check
Optional Witness Test
Yes
Customer Installs Facility
No
To Standard Process
7
Basis For Screens

• Circuit size versus DG size
• DG contribution to fault
• Short circuit interrupting capability limit
• Three-wire and four-wire circuit criteria
• Nameplate limits

• Circuit impact
• Fault handling, fuse desensitizing nuisance
  trip
• Short circuit handling
• Proper connection
• Single phase imbalance

8
Standard Review Process

• Standardized application
• Initial review
• Initial review
• Impact study if required
• Facility study if required
• Fee range from 300 to actual
• costs (no limit)
• 125 or 150 days max

(If required)
Company makes EPS Modifications
initial review
Facilities Study if required
Company Sends Written Authorization
optional scoping meeting
Impact Study if required
Optional Witness Test
Customer Installs Facility
9
Process InReport
Customer submits complete application and
application fee
1. Is the Point of Common Coupling on a Radial
Distribution System?
No
Go to Figure 2
Customer opts for Standard Process
Yes
2. Is the aggregate generating Facility capacity
on the circuit less than 7.5 of circuit annual
peak load?
Perform Supplemental Review
InitiateStandard Process initial review
No
Yes
3. Does the facility use a Qualified Inverter
with a power rating of 10 kW or less?
No
Yes
Does the facility pass all the following
screens? 4. Is the Facility certified? 5. Is the
Starting Voltage Drop Screen met? 6. Is the Fault
Current Contribution Screen met? 7. Is the
Service Configuration Screen met? 8. Is the
Transient Stability Screen met?
No
Does Supplemental Review determine requirements?
Yes
No
Yes
System Modification Check
Company provides cost estimate and schedule for
Interconnection Study(ies)
Customer accepts
Company performs Impact and Facility (if
required) Study
Facility Processed forSimplified
InterconnectionUnder DG Tariff
Facility Processed forExpedited
InterconnectionUnder DG Tariff
Facility Processed forStandard
InterconnectionUnder DG Tariff
10
Simplified Process For Networks
Is the Point of Common Coupling on a spot network?
Initiate Standard process
No
Yes
Does the facility use a Qualified Inverter?
(UL1741)
No
Yes
Is the Facility 10kW or less?
No
Yes
Is the aggregate generating Facility capacity
less than 1/15 of Customers minimum load?
No
Yes
System Modification Check
Yes
Facility Processed for Simplified Interconnection
Under DG Tariff
11
Minimum Technical Requirements Set By

• IEEE P1547 Draft Standard for Distributed
  Resources Interconnected with Electric Power
  Systems.
• Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Standard UL 1741,
  November 1, 2002 Inverters, Converters and
  Charge Controllers for Use in Independent Power
  Systems
• IEEE 929-2000, IEEE Recommended Practice for
  Utility Interface of Photovoltaic (PV) Systems.

12
IEEE Std P1547 Key Clauses

• Voltage regulation
• Integration with EPS grounding
• Synchronization
• Surge Withstand
• Response to EPS abnormal conditions
• Response to EPS faults
• EPS reclosing coordination
• Voltage detection and limits
• Frequency detection and limits

• Reconnection to EPS
• Limitation of Flicker
• Harmonics
• Unintentional islanding
• Design testing
• Commissioning testing

13
Additional Technical Requirements

• For Facilities qualified for Simplified Process
• Must be qualified to UL 1741
• Disconnect switch may be required
• For Facilities gt10kW
• Non-export functionality if not allowed to export
• Disconnect switch or comparable device
• Possible NPCC criteria
• For Facilities with rotating generators
• Interrupting Device (ID)
• Synchronizing Device (could be part of ID)
• Additional protection equipment requirements
• For large Facilities
• Transfer trip?
• High speed protection
• Communications channels
• Reactive capability

(Note Tariff also covers standby gensets that
momentary parallel)
14
Fee Schedules
Simplified Expedited Standard Simplified Spot Network
Application Fee (covers screens) 0 3/kW, minimum 300, maximum 2,500 3/kW, minimum 300, maximum 2,500 3kW 100, gt 3kW 300
Supplemental Review or Additional Review (if applicable) N/a Up to 10 engineering hours at 125/hr (1,250 maximum) N/a N/a
Standard Interconnection Initial Review N/a N/a Included in application fee (if applicable) N/a
Impact and Facility Study (if required) N/a N/a Actual cost N/a
Facility Upgrades N/a Actual cost Actual cost N/a
O and M N/a TBD TBD N/a
Witness Test 0 Actual cost, up to 300 travel time Actual cost 0
15
Maximum Time Lines
Simplified Expedited Standard Simplified Spot Network
Acknowledge Receipt of Application (3 days) (3 days) (3 days) (3 days)
Review Application for Completeness 10 days 10 days 10 days 10 days
Complete Review of All Screens 10 days 25 days N/a Site review 30/90 days
Complete Supplemental Review (if needed) N/a 20 days N/a N/a
Complete Standard Process Initial Review N/a N/a 20 days N/a
Send Follow-on Studies Cost/Agreement N/a N/a 5 days N/a
Complete Impact Study (if needed) N/a N/a 55 days N/a
Complete Facility Study (if needed) N/a N/a 30 days N/a
Send Executable Agreement Done 10 days 15 days Done
Total Maximum Days 15 days 40/60 days 125/150 days 40/100 days
Notice/ Witness Test lt1 day with 10 day notice or by mutual agreement 1-2 days with 10 day notice or by mutual agreement By mutual agreement 1 day with 10 day notice or by mutual agreement
16
Application Process

• Prior Notice
• One Point of Contact
• Application submittal
• Review
• Load flow and Voltage constraints
• Short Circuit and Protection review
• System Modification Review
• Agreement

17
Application Information

• General (Single) or Specific Form?
• Simplified process (Inverter)
• Applicant contact information
• Location of generator
• Proof of UL1741
• Others
• Application contact information
• Location of generator
• Machine technical data
• Proposed drawings

18
Massachusetts Company Contacts

• Boston Edison, Cambridge Electric, Com Electric
  (NStar Electric)
• Frank Gundal
• Tel [phone]
• Email frank_gundal_at_nstaronline.com
• Fitchburg Gas Electric (Unitil)
• John Bonazoli P.E.
• Tel [phone]
• e-mail bonazoli_at_unitil.com
• Massachusetts Electric Co. (National Grid)
• John J. Bzura, Ph.D., P.E., M.B.A.
• Tel [phone]
• e-mail john.bzura_at_us.ngrid.com
• Western Massachusetts Electric ( Northeast
  Utilities)
• Doug Clarke
• Tel [phone]
• Email clarkdp_at_nu.com

19
Why is DG Different?
20

21
How Does DG Affect Distribution Companies?

• Protection
• Generator Protection
• Coordination
• Reliability Effects
• Planning Procedures
• Peak Load Planning
• Firm Capacity

22
Interconnection Process Advantages

• Standard Process
• Easier planning for customer
• More Efficient with time
• Less time Consuming
• Consistent Fees
• Known Costs to customer
• Known Process for customer

23
Challenges for Distribution Company

• General Requirements
• Interpretations
• Analysis of compliance
• Testing Requirements
• New devices
• Time Lines
• Reports
• Interconnection agreement

24
Future Efforts

• Quarterly Collaborative Meetings
• Interconnection updates
• Numbers of projects and applications
• Annual Documentation sharing
• Detailed process information
• Process Adjustments as needed

25
Upcoming Tariff Document

• 1.0 Introduction
• 2.0 Responsibility of the Parties
• 3.0 Process Overview
• 4.0 Interconnection Req.
• 5.0 General Operating Req.
• 6.0 Metering, Monitoring, and Communication
• 7.0 Responsibility For Costs of Interconnecting a
  Facility
• 8.0 Dispute Resolution Process
• 9.0 Confidentiality Statement
• 10.0 Insurance Req.

• Exhibit A Interconnection Service Agreement
  template
• Exhibit B Third Party Owner Agreement
• Exhibit C Simplified Application
• Exhibit D Expedited/Standard Application
• Exhibit E Supplemental Review Agreement
• Exhibit F Impact Study Agreement
• Exhibit G Facility Study Agreement
• Exhibit H Qualifying Facilities

7 2 13 11 2 3 1 2 1 2
7 1 2 5 1 3 3 2
Discussed already, from Collab. report, or new
effort