IEEE Electrification Magazine - March 2014 - 11

Minnesota Standards Policy
interconnection requirements in the
state of minnesota were issued on 28
september 2004 (docket No. e-999/
ci-01-1023). A subset of those regulations governs small, grid-tied dg. The
ieee's consideration of ieee 1547a
amendment and more likely changes
to come to existing ieee 1547 standards-plus Ferc's proposed revisions to its sgiP and sgiA-should
lead minnesota to review its own
existing interconnection standards
and tariffs. This should be an ongoing
process for years to come, given the
speed of change in standards, best
practices, and technology in this
space. if minnesota continues to see
value in microgrid adoption, it needs
to institute a regular standards review
process and swiftly adopt new,
approved standards. on the utility
side, some of minnesota's utilities
have staff that serve on the ieee standards committee and, thus, are well
aware of pending changes in these
areas. other utilities have dedicated
distribution technology teams
charged with reviewing standards and
best practices, which will have to
monitor and adapt to related changes.
one immediate change minnesota
needs to make in its own regulations is
to change its restrictive definition for
dg capacity. The state's interconnection requirements set thresholds and
size limits on dg and microgrids, with
thresholds at 40 and 100 kW and a system capacity at 10 mW, half the size of
Ferc's 20-mW limit for small generator treatment. That's lower than most
other states, several of which have no
limits at all. The current rules force
larger microgrid proposals to forge
unique agreements with a utility at
greater cost and uncertainty.

Next Steps
should the state of minnesota decide
that encouraging microgrid development aligns well with its policies
regarding energy assurance as a pillar

of economic stability and growth, it
has regulatory and legislative paths to
achieve its aims. currently, its interconnection standards and tariffs are
outdated. They do not accommodate
grid-integrated microgrids with a combination of generation, storage, and
load-management functionality, and
they set outmoded thresholds and limits for size. An ongoing review and
revision of the state's interconnection
policies will help it keep pace with
evolving standards. As technology
changes often outpace ieee balloting
and Ferc rule-making processes, minnesota can look to other states whose
standards and practices better reflect
prevalent industry norms as a guide.
of course, interconnection standards and tariffs are but one set of concerns and opportunities for action in
minnesota and elsewhere. minnesota's
microgrid road map includes many
steps best taken simultaneously. one
important step, among others, is to
establish a working microgrid with
stakeholders that include the state, a
local utility, and a microgrid developer;
make it a pilot project not a demonstration project-the technology has
been demonstrated; use the microgrid
and its interconnection to satisfy utility safety concerns and create a business case that demonstrates value to
the utility as well as its shareholders
and customers; and make sure that
interconnection policy, standards, and
practices are kept current to enable the
technology's potential.
We may be climbing that slippery
"slope of enlightenment," but the
"plateau of productivity" beckons
from the horizon, clearly visible.
many, including myself, believe that
we can get there from here.

analysisgroup.com/uploadedFiles/
Publishing/Articles/centolella_ge_
Whitepaper_electricity_regulation.pdf
K. Fox, s. stanfield, L. varnado, T.
culley, m. sheehan, and m. coddington, "Updating small generator interconnection procedures for new market
conditions," NreL Technical report,
NreL/TP-5500-56790, National renewable energy Laboratory, dec. 2012.
m. A. Hyams, A. Awai, T. Bourgeois, K.
cataldo, s. A. Hammer, T. Kelly, s.
Kraham, J. mitchell, L. Nurani, W.
Pentland, L. Perfetto, and J. van
Nostrand, "microgrids: An assessment
of the value, opportunities, and barriers
to deployment in New York state," Final
report, prepared for the New York state
energy research and development
Authority (NYserdA), rep. 10-35, sept.
2010.
m. T. Burr, m. J. Zimmer, B. meloy,
J. Bertrand, W. Levesque, g. Warner, and
J. d. mcdonald. (2013). minnesota microgrids: Barriers, opportunities and
pathways toward energy assurance,
minnesota department of commerce.
[online]. Available: http://mn.gov/
commerce/energy/images/mNmicrogrid-WP-FiNAL-amended.pdf
(2013). model interconnection procedures, interstate renewable energy
council. [online]. Available: http://
w w w. i re c u s a . o rg / w p - c o n t e n t /
uploads/2013-irec-interconnectionmodel-Procedures.pdf
P. sheaffer. (2011, sept.). interconnection of distributed generation to
utility systems: recommendations for
technical requirements, procedures
and agreements, and emerging issues,
regulatory Assistance Project (rAP).
[online]. Available: www.raponline.
org/document/download/id/4572

Biography
For Further Reading

John D. McDonald (johndougmcd@

d. malkin and P. centolella. (2013).
results-based regulation: A modern
approach to modernizing the grid. ge
digital energy/Analysis group.
[online]. Available: http://www.

gmail.com) is the chair of the Board of
the smart grid interoperability Panel
(sgiP) 2.0, inc., and the smart grid
consumer collaborative (sgcc). He is
a Fellow of the ieee.

IEEE Electrific ation Magazine / MARCH 2 0 1 4

http://www.analysisgroup.com/uploadedFiles/ http://www.mn.gov/ http://http:// http://www.irecusa.org/wp-content/ http://www.raponline http://www

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Electrification Magazine - March 2014