Comments must be received by 4:30pm on the close date.
This Discussion channel is currently closed.
Topic: How should the Commission proceed in re-examining and updating the Minnesota Standards for Interconnection of Distributed Generation established in its September 28, 2004 Order in Docket No. E-999/CI-01-1023, including scope, priorities, schedule, and process? Before responding please carefully review: • The May 12, 2016 Motion to Reopen and Amend the State Interconnection Standards and Memorandum in Support of Motion by the Energy Law and Policy Center (ELPC), Fresh Energy (FE), and the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC). This filing includes recommendations to adopt procedures based on the FERC’s Small Generation Interconnection Procedures with modifications to incorporate some additional best practices, including a public queue, technical screens, fast track screens, simplified process for small inverter-based systems, streamlined application process, and dispute resolution process. It also proposes a revised Minnesota Interconnection Agreement. • The May 19, 2016 Proposed Modifications to Distributed Generation Interconnection Procedure and Technical Requirements by Dakota Electric Association (DEA), pages 11 through 21 and Attachments 1, 2, and Agreements1. This filing includes proposed changes to interconnection requirements and processes, including an expedited process, updated engineering screens, adding a queue to the process, adding a pre-application data request, clarifying pre-certified, and modified generation system design. It also includes updated required interconnection documentation, updated process steps, additional new short form application for small inverter based systems, the addition of a Minnesota Uniform Contract, updated Interconnection Agreement Template, and updated Technical Standards Document.
Topic: Should the Commission consider modifying and updating each of the areas recommended by ELPC/FE/IREC and by DEA? Are there additional subject areas that should be considered by the Commission?
Topic: In the subject areas for which you are recommending updates, identify which you think are likely to be susceptible to agreement among stakeholders, which are likely to moderately controversial, and which are likely to involve a high degree of controversy.
Topic: In the subject areas for which you are recommending updates, identify which ones are the higher priorities, and suggest a process, sequence and general timeline for Commission action, taking into account whether any of the decisions depend upon one another and the degree of controversy likely.