Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Illinois charger installation incentive

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
In Illinois, can one qualify for the incentive (as I read it, 1/2 the cost) with a simple 14-50 outlet? Or does there need to be an EVSE installed? It would be in a private indoor parking garage, so no possibility that the 14-50 would be 'misused' for an RV. Unfortunately, depending on routing, I figure there would need to be a 300'-400' conduit run to the main panel. So the installation cost could be a bit pricey, and any incentive would help a lot.
 
Just put in a Clipper Creek HCS-60, 48A, 240V Charging for $899. It takes the same #6 wire as a 14-50, provides 48 Amps to those intelligent MS buyers that got the dual charger option, and you have an EVSE for checking off those boxes!
But then you have to deal with the J1772 adapter each time.
You should ask the agency that runs the incentive program. Explain that's what your car uses for charging. With all the Model S in Illinois they've probably encountered this before. For what it's worth, Austin has a similar incentive and installing a 14-50 outlet qualifies.
 
But then you have to deal with the J1772 adapter each time.
You should ask the agency that runs the incentive program. Explain that's what your car uses for charging. With all the Model S in Illinois they've probably encountered this before. For what it's worth, Austin has a similar incentive and installing a 14-50 outlet qualifies.

The J adapter is equal or less hassle than the UMC...
 
Dual chargers won't be needed. If Teslas 2015 map is accurate, there will be a supercharger site very close by. (Less than 10 miles.)

I guess this answers my question: http://www.illinois.gov/dceo/whyillinois/KeyIndustries/Energy/Pages/ev.aspx

It says there must be a J1772 at the end.
It says the program is currently closed, will reopen in fall 2014, and guidelines are subject to revision for fall 2014. Looks like the Illinois owners need to educate the agency that some EVs use a 14-50 or HPWC, if not in time for this cycle then for the next cycle of grants.
 
I guess the next question is if one could install a 14-50 socket, then buy a cheapo EVSE to plug into it? Or does the EVSE need to be hardwired?

The page says "Stations must be Level 2 (208-240V AC) or hardwired Level 1 (120V AC) models with SAE J1772 cord connectors." The word "hardwired" is for Level 1. So maybe one could get away with installing a 14-50 and plug-in EVSE. Has any Illinois owner done this?
 
I guess the next question is if one could install a 14-50 socket, then buy a cheapo EVSE to plug into it? Or does the EVSE need to be hardwired?

The page says "Stations must be Level 2 (208-240V AC) or hardwired Level 1 (120V AC) models with SAE J1772 cord connectors." The word "hardwired" is for Level 1. So maybe one could get away with installing a 14-50 and plug-in EVSE. Has any Illinois owner done this?
Clearly only the level 1 needs to be hardwired (they're not going to pay for wiring a 120V outlet), but reading this again it's not clear that the level 2 needs to have J1772 cord connector. You could interpret that sentence as either:
A. level 2 charging station
B. Hardwired level 1 charging with J1772 connector

Either way it's likely the rule was written with good intentions prior to anyone knowing about how Model S get charged. It they don't count 14-50 it should just take some education to get it changed for the next grant cycle. A 14-50 counted for the federal tax credit for alternative fuel vehicle refueling property.
 
Looking through http://www.illinois.gov/dceo/whyill...ergy/Documents/Fall2013EVIRebateAppFinal3.doc, from last years program, it is clear that they want a J1772 with both Levels 1 and 2. However Section 3.2.6 only mandates hard-wiring on a Level 1 EVSE.

With the State picking up half the tab, I suppose something like the HCS-60 that Cottonwood suggested above is not that much more than a NEMA 14-50 + lower cost EVSE.
 
Looking through http://www.illinois.gov/dceo/whyill...ergy/Documents/Fall2013EVIRebateAppFinal3.doc, from last years program, it is clear that they want a J1772 with both Levels 1 and 2. However Section 3.2.6 only mandates hard-wiring on a Level 1 EVSE.

With the State picking up half the tab, I suppose something like the HCS-60 that Cottonwood suggested above is not that much more than a NEMA 14-50 + lower cost EVSE.
Or you could just use the 14-50 and put the EVSE up for sale. Like when Tesla bundled dual chargers with HPWC last year and some who just wanted the dual chargers for travel sold their unused HPWC.
 
I have had some email exchanges with the folks at the State of Illinois who administer the program. They really do insist on a J1772 capability in order to qualify for the rebate. However hardwiring is only a requirement at 115v. They confirmed that it would be ok to install a 14-50, then have a EVSE mounted next to it that could be plugged in.

Another little detail they pointed out is that the installation "must be performed by an electrician who has completed the Illinois Commerce Commission's (ICC) Certification for the Installation, Maintenance or Repair of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations." At the time of this posting, there are only 36 such installers in the state - listed at: http://www.icc.illinois.gov/utility/Certified.aspx?type=25. They said it is a 5-9 week process to get a new contractor through the certification process. (And of course the one we would be using is not currently listed...)
 
Another little detail they pointed out is that the installation "must be performed by an electrician who has completed the Illinois Commerce Commission's (ICC) Certification for the Installation, Maintenance or Repair of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations." At the time of this posting, there are only 36 such installers in the state - listed at: http://www.icc.illinois.gov/utility/Certified.aspx?type=25. They said it is a 5-9 week process to get a new contractor through the certification process. (And of course the one we would be using is not currently listed...)
Another blatant example of regulations being for the benefit of those who are regulated. As if the public needs to be protected from a licensed electrician who wouldn't be able to install one safely without going through a separate "certification process". I wonder what the genesis of this regulation was and who paid whom. Follow the money (especially in Illinois).