Key points:
The implementation of the AS/NZS 4777.2:2020[1] standard for grid-connected low voltage inverters is being undermined by systemic failures in Australia’s regulatory frameworks for new energy technologies.
This is a whole of system failure, rather than an issue stemming from the shortcomings of any specific organisation.
The problems centre on insufficient legal duties of industry participants and regulators and, as a consequence, ineffective planning and coordination, compliance and assurance activity.
Australia lacks an adequate national framework to hold manufacturers and installers accountable for preventing and rectifying non-compliance of grid-connected low voltage inverters.
The problems resulting from an inadequate national framework are currently being managed at a regulatory participant level. Without tackling the underlying regulatory frameworks, the systemic causes of these problems will endure.
The application of best practice regulatory principles[2] could address these problems and lay the foundation for a market transition that more fully recognises the values, interests and rights of end consumers.
The lessons we are learning from inverter standards governance can inform our future approaches to issues of consumer protection, technology interoperability and data governance.
Introduction
Prevention of grid-instability is essential for the successful roll out of AEMO’s plan for a 5-fold increase in distributed solar in Australia by 2050. With over 370,000 low voltage rooftop solar systems installed in Australia last financial year under the SRES, it is essential that systems that are being installed now are equipped with an inverter that has grid-protective functions.
Implementation of the new Australian standard AS/NZ 4777.2:2020 for grid-connected inverters has been challenging for industry, government and consumers.
These challenges help frame the key policy questions that should be answered as government and industry plan for an effective, nationally-consistent approach to DER deployment and integration.
What does the Standard do?
In 2019, AEMO initiated a review of the previous inverter standard to address grid security concerns. This resulted in the development AS/NZ 4777.2:2020. This piece from the Clean Energy Council (CEC) summarises how the Standard works to support grid stability.
Key changes from the previous standard:
Previously, the Volt-Watt[3] and Volt-Var[4] set points needed to be set by the installer during commissioning.[5] These set points are now built into the firmware of a compliant inverter. The installer only needs to set the relevant ‘regional setting’, and a compliant inverter will do the rest.
Undervoltage ride through capability is now built into the firmware. This prevents inverters from switching off and disconnecting in response to low voltage events.
Key challenges
AS/NZS 4777.2.2020 (the Standard) was mandated by each jurisdictional electrical safety regulator, and commenced on 18 December 2021 as a requirement for grid-connected inverters[6] and was included in the National Energy Rules.[7] Despite, a 12-month implementation period that followed publication of the Standard, effective implementation has been hampered by[8]:
The absence of a regulatory authority to take responsibility for determining and managing a critical path for effective coordination, and implementation of the Standard
Difficulties faced by manufacturers and importers obtaining certification from accredited test laboratories, exacerbated by the global COVID 19 pandemic
The absence of a regulatory mechanism to ensure that test laboratories have complied with the testing procedures provided in the Standard
The variable skills and expertise of system installers – the highly individualistic (often sole traders) installer cohort is struggling to deal with the increasing layers of complexity and customer support obligations
Inconsistent approaches by manufacturers to OEM firmware upgrades and bug fixes
Variable compliance with other standards, called up within the Standard
An ineffective compliance framework, with multiple bodies holding legal duties to respond to allegations of non-compliance. This results in a lack of dedicated resources and the effective coordination of investigation and enforcement activities
Misunderstanding among some regulatory bodies about how the specific technical requirements, as documented in the Standard, operate to support grid security.
Work in progress
The CER is in the process of implementing the recommendations of an Integrity Review of the Rooftop Solar PV Sector, in two phases described here and here.
The implementation of the recommendations introduces new regulatory powers and responsibilities governing the SRES[9], including powers and duties to:
Discipline installers, retailers and manufacturers not complying with regulatory requirements
Set requirements for installer accreditation
List compliant inverters and solar panels.
This work is proceeding in close cooperation with industry and will progress the matters outlined above. However, the impact of this work will be impeded by higher-level, systemic, regulatory policy issues. Note also that the SRES is due to end in 2030 and covers most, but not all solar PV installations, and does not regulate battery storage installation or products.
Key policy questions that need to be addressed
The AEMC is currently undertaking a review of DER technical standards to: identify existing activities in relation to DER technical standards; clarify the NEM’s needs from new DER technical standards; and report on progress on adopting and implementing DER technical standards across the NEM. In doing so it is important it considers all the relevant dimensions of this issue:
Enabling and supporting consumers
What are the gaps in the current consumer support framework? Are the roles and responsibilities of existing industry and consumer bodies sufficient to provide effective support to consumers throughout the lifecycle of a system?
Enabling and supporting manufacturers
How can the governance of technical standards be streamlined and improved to support technological development, get the balance right between prescriptive versus performance-based standards, and ensure effective national implementation?
Ensuring effective installation and use of products
How can the training and accreditation of installers and system retailers be improved to ensure the safe and compliant installation of products?
Compliance and enforcement framework
What are the necessary roles and responsibilities that need to be developed to create an effective national compliance framework?
Compliance roles and issues over the inverter life cycle
Figure 1 outlines the roles of different parties in the lifecycle of inverter certification, selection, commissioning, and post-commissioning rectification of non-compliance. The Notes on Figure 1 provide a summary of the key risks in ensuring effective compliance with the Standard, including the known efforts of relevant parties to address the issues.
Figure 1 – Compliance roles over the inverter life cycle
Notes on Figure 1
1. Responsibility for accreditation of test laboratories is unclear and not secured by sufficiently precise legal duties. Better oversight of the accreditation of test laboratories is required to ensure that the implementation of standards is coordinated with the laboratory accreditation processes.
2. Further, the process for validation of test laboratory results against testing requirements within the Standard is not transparent and is not the subject of any specific legal duties.
3. The process and governance of validation of a compliance certificate is unclear, and not secured by any legal duty to undertake assurance audits.
The three issues above can potentially be addressed within the SRES, with the CER establishing standards and providing more direct oversight and control of product certification processes. Although limited to the SRES, improvement of test-laboratory accreditation and product approval processes will benefit the entire industry.
4. As a voluntary process, national reliance on CEC listing processes is limited to situations where a legal mandate to use a CEC-listed product is in place. Currently, CEC listing is mandated under the SRES, and by most DNSPs. This is not complete national coverage.
5. Compliant inverters are required by jurisdictional safety regulations, the SRES program, CEC installer accreditation requirements, and DNSPs via the NER. This raises barriers to enforcement due to varied legal instruments, duplicated responsibilities and lack of coordination of compliance activity. This is currently being addressed by industry and the CER, but these efforts will be hampered if the involvement of jurisdictional regulators and DNSPs in operational compliance cases is not fully explored.
System designers can be a range of individuals, including the retailer, or any other person. This can create a consumer issue where a customer purchases a system, under a contract that includes non-compliant equipment, and surprise costs are then incurred during installation to ensure compliance. Although the CEC accredits designers, many designers are employees of solar retailer businesses, and are currently not subject to relevant legal duties to comply with legislation.
Compliant system installation relies on the performance of the CEC accreditation process and continuing professional development. Accreditation standards are not secured by mandatory service standards. This is being addressed by the CER, under the implementation of the SRES reforms that are currently in train.
6. The installer’s commissioning checklist is a requirement of safety installation standards and has evolved as a creature of the standards development process. While often useful in a compliance case, the prescribed form has not been formulated to satisfy evidential standards. This is indicative of a systemic issue in technical standards development. The process needs to be improved to ensure that the purpose and development of testing and verification documentation is aligned with compliance processes, within the regulatory framework.
7. Jurisdiction-level inspections are primarily focussed on safety and are inconsistent. Jurisdictional electrical safety regulators focus on a safety threshold that arises from civil negligence principles. This means that a system can be declared safe, if it can be switched off. Frequently, when a system is disabled by a jurisdictional regulator, it is due to an obvious safety hazard which can leave compliance-related issues unaddressed. This limits the reliance that can be placed on this inspection point to support standards compliance processes.
8. DNSP inspections are governed by voluntary guidelines that are not mandated and have not been updated to implement the Standard. DNSP inspection activity is highly variable. Further, inspections can only verify that a compliant inverter model has been installed, check labelling requirements, that the firmware is up-to-date and that the correct jurisdictional settings have been applied. The current model limits the use of DNSP inspections as a tool to support compliance processes.
9. Although compliance with the Standard is mandated under the NER, as a legal requirement of the customer connection agreement, this does not translate into a positive legal duty to verify compliance, prior to connection to the grid. This problem is aggravated by the delay in updating the voluntary guidelines (see above) to include the DNSP verifying compliance with the Standard.
10. SRES inspections are well-governed under legislation and the inspection methodology is subject to an annual co-design process with industry and regulators. However, SRES inspections are conducted only on a small proportion of SRES installations. It is understood that the SRES inspection methodology is in the process of being updated to address compliance with the Standard.
There is wide variation in inspection methodologies and governance across jurisdictions and schemes. This creates evidential issues for compliance enforcement that create legal risks for regulatory bodies undertaking disciplinary action against regulated parties.
Where a customer becomes aware of a compliance issue, the burden of securing evidence of non-compliance rests with them. This is a significant barrier for customers in accessing rectification for a non-compliant system.
In some jurisdictions, there is no clear dispute resolution body to engage in resolving installation disputes. Consumer complaints that do not fall within the limited jurisdiction of the CEC or the CER (i.e. standards compliance issues), can go unanswered.
OEMs have a significant and currently untapped role to play supporting the collection of compliance-related information by regulators. For example, if data on critical grid security functions was made available to regulators, this could better support compliance assurance activity. This could be addressed under a more comprehensive compliance and enforcement framework.
11. The CEC installer accreditation scheme and the SRES regulations make the installer responsible for “sign off” that a system is compliant, and subject to potential disciplinary action in cases of non-compliance. The CEC’s compliance process requires an installer to rectify non-compliance. However, the process is disrupted where a retailer or other party undertakes rectification works, the installer ceases operating, or the customer refuses permission to have the system rectified.
As noted above, there are significant barriers for consumers seeking rectification, in the absence of acceptable evidence of non-compliance.
12. The CEC installer compliance program has established business processes to engage in system rectification processes and manage legal risks arising from disciplinary processes. The program is significantly limited by available resources and processed around 2095 installer compliance cases last financial year, resulting in 59 suspensions and 10 cancellations of accreditation. CEC compliance programs obtain limited funding, solely from accreditation application and renewal fees. The CEC exercises its functions within the legal environment of voluntary terms and conditions of accreditation. This carries with it some litigation risks.
Under the SRES reforms, the CER now has additional powers to exit installers, retailers and manufacturers from the SRES and will take on a direct regulatory role of setting the requirements for the installer accreditation and product-listing, which will significantly strengthen the legal duties and planning that must underpin compliance processes. As noted above, the SRES does not cover batteries.
It remains to be seen how the SRES reforms will impact product and installation compliance. In any case, nationally consistent compliance of all inverters cannot be achieved without a framework that extends beyond the SRES.
© enX Consulting (2022)
[1] Australia and New Zealand Standard for Grid connection of energy systems via inverters, approved by the Council of Standards Australia on 27 November 2020 and published on 18 December 2020 (the Standard) [2] For instance, see the high-level description, published here by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. [3] Settings that reduce the impact of increasing voltage from solar exports. [4] Settings to gradually reduce power export once specified voltage limits are reached. [5] Under AS/NZS 4777.2:2015. [6] For example, Electrical Safety Victoria. A full review of technical implementation has not been conducted. [7] See Rule 5.A.B.2 which calls up the Standard, as a requirement for connection agreements between Distribution Network Service Providers and customers. [8] A number of these challenges are referred to in: the AEMC Final Rule Determination of 17 March 2022, available here; and the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) Integrity Review of the Rooftop Solar PV Sector report available here. [9] Small Scale Renewable Energy Scheme.
Comentarios