Powerwall 2: SGIP/Incentives

[Kren]

Well, my SGIP developer application was just kicked back:



I think they made some mistakes, here. The question they want me to answer yes to reads in full:



I would only have one project, at most, so of course the answer is no! And why do I have to know who will be performing the other development tasks at this stage?

Furthermore, this "substantial amount of the development activities" requirement does not apply to "individual homeowners applying for SGIP incentives for systems located on their own property" (according to the handbook).

Seems to me they are not following their own rules.

Other members on this forum have had success by marking 9 out of the 13 activities. You should mark all those activities you "could" do. Some folks have written in detail in earlier posts which activities they were able to mark off. Unfortunately, SGIP is not interpreting the rules according to the handbook it would seem.
If you mention Tesla at this point in the application process, they will most likely take your rebate out of Tesla's developer's cap, Tesla will be very very angry with you for doing this. They have threatened other's that they won't do the install. I would write SGIP and explain to them that you don't know the installer/developer yet because you are still "developing" your project.

 

[markb1]

Other members on this forum have had success by marking 9 out of the 13 activities. You should mark all those activities you "could" do. Some folks have written in detail in earlier posts which activities they were able to mark off. Unfortunately, SGIP is not interpreting the rules according to the handbook it would seem.
If you mention Tesla at this point in the application process, they will most likely take your rebate out of Tesla's developer's cap, Tesla will be very very angry with you for doing this. They have threatened other's that they won't do the install. I would write SGIP and explain to them that you don't know the installer/developer yet because you are still "developing" your project.

When I asked my Tesla rep about submitting my own application, I was only told that it was not recommended. It seems to me that if SGIP can take it out of Tesla’s cap now, they can take it out later in the process, too. I certainly don’t want that to happen.

I’m planning to go to the SGIP quarterly workshop on Friday. Not sure if it’s the right place to argue my case, but I certainly intend to point out that my developer application was improperly denied. And I will try to determine whether it’s really feasible to act as my own developer.

Anyway, this plan is not my first choice. My Tesla rep seems optimistic that I can get three powerwalls and qualify for the large storage rebate, which would be the best outcome, by far.

 

[Kren]

When I asked my Tesla rep about submitting my own application, I was only told that it was not recommended. It seems to me that if SGIP can take it out of Tesla’s cap now, they can take it out later in the process, too. I certainly don’t want that to happen.

I’m planning to go to the SGIP quarterly workshop on Friday. Not sure if it’s the right place to argue my case, but I certainly intend to point out that my developer application was improperly denied. And I will try to determine whether it’s really feasible to act as my own developer.

Anyway, this plan is not my first choice. My Tesla rep seems optimistic that I can get three powerwalls and qualify for the large storage rebate, which would be the best outcome, by far.

SGIP can, depending on how you fill out your Developer's ID application, determine that Tesla is the developer for your project. But if they determine you are the developer for your project, then you receive a Developer's ID. The handbook states there cannot be two developers. But the problem is you can go through this process and get towards the end and then SGIP can interpret and/or change the handbook rules to determine you were never the developer in the first place.
The problem seems to me is that Tesla and PG&E have a strong voice with the SGIP and the handbook is being interpreted according to their wishes. We as homeowners don't have a strong, united voice. I think one or two people make a complaint or suggestion here and there. It might work out for those one or two people who escalate their complaints but it doesn't change the way they handle overall homeowner applications. The problem is becoming worse as we see Tesla's cap closed for all steps and competitor installers who still have not reached their cap, are price gouging. This is a frustrating predicament when you can see that there are still funds available for step 2. You would otherwise qualify for those incentive funds but because of current developer's cap rules and price gouging, you won't receive your incentive.
Please voice your concerns at the workshop. But I think the SGIP needs to see that this is a bigger problem for Solar battery customers than they assume. Some reps at SGIP have suggested filling out a Program Modification document to get your complaint heard. But this seems very time consuming and difficult. I thought about starting an online petition drive with the only purpose being to show the California Public Utilities Commission and SGIP how many people this problem affects. But truthfully I am almost finished with my rebate application process and lack the time and motivation to do this.
Lucky for you though that you can do a large scale install. That should solve your problem. Keep us updated.

 

[SoundDaTrumpet]

SGIP can, depending on how you fill out your Developer's ID application, determine that Tesla is the developer for your project. But if they determine you are the developer for your project, then you receive a Developer's ID. The handbook states there cannot be two developers. But the problem is you can go through this process and get towards the end and then SGIP can interpret and/or change the handbook rules to determine you were never the developer in the first place.
The problem seems to me is that Tesla and PG&E have a strong voice with the SGIP and the handbook is being interpreted according to their wishes. We as homeowners don't have a strong, united voice. I think one or two people make a complaint or suggestion here and there. It might work out for those one or two people who escalate their complaints but it doesn't change the way they handle overall homeowner applications. The problem is becoming worse as we see Tesla's cap closed for all steps and competitor installers who still have not reached their cap, are price gouging. This is a frustrating predicament when you can see that there are still funds available for step 2. You would otherwise qualify for those incentive funds but because of current developer's cap rules and price gouging, you won't receive your incentive.
Please voice your concerns at the workshop. But I think the SGIP needs to see that this is a bigger problem for Solar battery customers than they assume. Some reps at SGIP have suggested filling out a Program Modification document to get your complaint heard. But this seems very time consuming and difficult. I thought about starting an online petition drive with the only purpose being to show the California Public Utilities Commission and SGIP how many people this problem affects. But truthfully I am almost finished with my rebate application process and lack the time and motivation to do this.
Lucky for you though that you can do a large scale install. That should solve your problem. Keep us updated.

In the case with my reservation, PG&E has taken steps to verbally quiz both the homeowner and capped developers to ensure there is no overlap in activities, and followed up with a declaration in writing. I have taken a different approach by agreeing to activities I "have done" and "surely will do" instead of activities I "could" do. I a took minimalist participation approach and thankfully received a green light from PG&E. If I deviate, then it's grounds for suspension.

I recommend accepting Tesla offer to do the three (3) Powerwall install for you. You will have a more delightful experience vs. what Kren and I have experienced in the small residential category.

 

[markb1]

Lucky for you though that you can do a large scale install. That should solve your problem. Keep us updated.

Just this morning, Tesla got back to me with the proposal for three powerwalls for $21,083, which is what one local installer wanted for two powerwalls! I think the only question now is, will the 10 kW NEM rule will apply to three 5 kW powerwalls. My plain English interpretation says no, @wwhitney says yes. I'm not sure if Tesla finally getting back to me with a proposal means they've researched this issue.

 

[markb1]

In the case with my reservation, PG&E has taken steps to verbally quiz both the homeowner and capped developers to ensure there is no overlap in activities, and followed up with a declaration in writing. I have taken a different approach by agreeing to activities I "have done" and "surely will do" instead of activities I "could" do. I a took minimalist participation approach and thankfully received a green light from PG&E. If I deviate, then it's grounds for suspension.

I recommend accepting Tesla offer to do the three (3) Powerwall install for you. You will have a more delightful experience vs. what Kren and I have experienced in the small residential category.

Yeah, the deeper I get into this SGIP stuff, the more I'm dreading it! Fortunately, the 3-powerwall install will be the best deal, anyway, if it works.

 

[markb1]

Just got back from the morning sessions of the SGIP workshop. The administrators seem to feel they are responsible for enforcing CPUC's intent over CPUC's rules as written in the SGIP Handbook. To be fair, the resolution that added the homeowner language to the developer definition also clearly states that homeowners should be subject to the substantial activities requirement, even though the developer definition in the same resolution says the opposite.

The other take away is that CPUC does not define what constitutes substantial activities, so that's up to the administrators to interpret. Seems like a crappy way to run a program, but that's what they say.

I also noticed that the slide this morning with the developer definition added a grammatically incorrect comma, which changes the meaning.

SGIP Handbook:

A Developer is, if not individual homeowners applying for SGIP incentives for systems located on their own property, the corporate entity registered and in good standing with the Secretary of State of California that handles a substantial amount of the project’s development activities.

Workshop slide:

A Developer is, if not individual homeowners applying for SGIP incentives for systems located on their own property, the corporate entity registered and in good standing with the Secretary of State of California, that handles a substantial amount of the project’s development activities.

The extra comma is after "Secretary of State of California". The comma makes it substantially more ambiguous.

 

[Frankman60]

Did Tesla guarantee a specific SGIP step rebate for this “large” installation? I believe in our area Step 2 is still available for 3 PWs or more but I am not sure about whether Tesla already has a queue of installations that will use up the rest of Step 2.

Yeah, the deeper I get into this SGIP stuff, the more I'm dreading it! Fortunately, the 3-powerwall install will be the best deal, anyway, if it works.

 

[markb1]

Did Tesla guarantee a specific SGIP step rebate for this “large” installation? I believe in our area Step 2 is still available for 3 PWs or more but I am not sure about whether Tesla already has a queue of installations that will use up the rest of Step 2.

No guarantee, except that I can cancel if I don’t get the SGIP reservation confirmation. But the way I understand it, as long as Tesla hasn’t reached it’s developer cap, the contract is signed, and the step is still open, Tesla can submit the reservation request right away. So they shouldn’t have a queue.

 

[Frankman60]

Did Tesla say how long it would be before they can do the installation? The Powerwall supply seems to still be tight and I was wondering how long Tesla is estimating to install.

No guarantee, except that I can cancel if I don’t get the SGIP reservation confirmation. But the way I understand it, as long as Tesla hasn’t reached it’s developer cap, the contract is signed, and the step is still open, Tesla can submit the reservation request right away. So they shouldn’t have a queue.

 

[Frankman60]

Did they say when SDG&E Step 4 for residential small installations would open up for applications?

Just got back from the morning sessions of the SGIP workshop. The administrators seem to feel they are responsible for enforcing CPUC's intent over CPUC's rules as written in the SGIP Handbook. To be fair, the resolution that added the homeowner language to the developer definition also clearly states that homeowners should be subject to the substantial activities requirement, even though the developer definition in the same resolution says the opposite.

The other take away is that CPUC does not define what constitutes substantial activities, so that's up to the administrators to interpret. Seems like a crappy way to run a program, but that's what they say.

I also noticed that the slide this morning with the developer definition added a grammatically incorrect comma, which changes the meaning.

SGIP Handbook:



Workshop slide:



The extra comma is after "Secretary of State of California". The comma makes it substantially more ambiguous.

 

[markb1]

Did Tesla say how long it would be before they can do the installation? The Powerwall supply seems to still be tight and I was wondering how long Tesla is estimating to install.

When I was initially considering two, Tesla said summer. They haven't provided an updated estimate for three.

Did they say when SDG&E Step 4 for residential small installations would open up for applications?

Per the announcement on the SGIP website (link), it opens on 2/26. The statewide developer cap for step 4 will be set on 2/19. Who knows, maybe the developer caps will be raised.

 

[Frankman60]

Thanks. I’m wondering if the installation delay is because of a tight supply of Powerwalls or a limited amount of Tesla installers? If it is a tight supply of Powerwalls, does Tesla provide production estimates by quarter like it does for Tesla vehicles? Do the Powerwalls and Model 3s compete for battery cells?

When I was initially considering two, Tesla said summer. They haven't provided an updated estimate for three.



Per the announcement on the SGIP website (link), it opens on 2/26. The statewide developer cap for step 4 will be set on 2/19. Who knows, maybe the developer caps will be raised.

 

[qphan79]

Hi everyone. I put down a deposit for the Tesla Powerwall last month and I’ve been trying to catch up on this discussion about the SGIP rebate. I don’t quite seem to understand why there’s so much uncertainty in terms of qualifying for it. If I am a Southern California resident in SCE region, what are my chances of getting the SGIP by the time I get it installed (3-6 months is what I was told)? Thanks!

 

[NuShrike]

Hi everyone. I put down a deposit for the Tesla Powerwall last month and I’ve been trying to catch up on this discussion about the SGIP rebate. I don’t quite seem to understand why there’s so much uncertainty in terms of qualifying for it. If I am a Southern California resident in SCE region, what are my chances of getting the SGIP by the time I get it installed (3-6 months is what I was told)? Thanks!

Generally ZERO if you're applying via Tesla with 2 or less PowerWalls.

 

[markb1]

Generally ZERO if you're applying via Tesla with 2 or less PowerWalls.

The developer caps haven’t even been set yet for steps 4 and 5. Tesla has been telling people they’re too late to get the incentive, but I think that’s just an estimate based on the number of customers Tesla has waiting for the incentive and the expected developer caps. It’s possible the rules could change, too, and maybe the developer caps could even go away. Who knows? Perhaps not likely, but we’ll see.

The step 4 small residential cap is scheduled to be set on 2/19.

 

[NuShrike]

The developer caps haven’t even been set yet for steps 4 and 5. Tesla has been telling people they’re too late to get the incentive, but I think that’s just an estimate based on the number of customers Tesla has waiting for the incentive and the expected developer caps. It’s possible the rules could change, too, and maybe the developer caps could even go away. Who knows? Perhaps not likely, but we’ll see.

The step 4 small residential cap is scheduled to be set on 2/19.

I agree, but I think it's better advice to find another installer, at this point, especially in SCE area and still getting into Step 2 than waiting for something to shake out of Tesla.

 

[qphan79]

I see...that’s a bummer. I’ve also seen mention of a preferred installer but didn’t this installers name listed. Could anyone reccomend an installer who I could still get onto Step 2? Thank you!

 

[Kren]

I see...that’s a bummer. I’ve also seen mention of a preferred installer but didn’t this installers name listed. Could anyone reccomend an installer who I could still get onto Step 2? Thank you!

Depending on where you live, some people from this forum have said Infinity Solar is charging about $1000 over Tesla's estimate which is pretty decent compared to some other installers out there who are charging minimum $4000 over. But they only service Southern California.

 

[Frankman60]

FWIW, I called Infinity Solar for an estimate and the salesperson told me that they service the San Diego area. But I found them to be flakey because after sending them my information and photos of my electrical panel and inverters they were unresponsive. They had my phone number and email address and did not follow up with me at all. And, at the time Infinity Solar was not on the list of approved SGIP installers. Later someone posted here that they are on the list, but not as Infinity Solar. That was enough for me to delete them from my list of potential contractors.