New OFGEM FIT policy released yesterday

[resybaby]

Agree with the other guys George, officialdom gone power crazy with zero authorisation. They wont persue anything in reality as its not worth their time/money, and id certainly not apply for retrospective planning - doing so would kind of accept their knee jerk reaction as having a basis, when in fact they dont according to this

https://www.planningaid.co.uk/hc/en-us/ ... lar-panels

Alternatively tell them they are put there simply for 'storage'. Your allowed to store your own personal items at your property, regardless. Its how some farmers etc get away with causing a visual blight on the countryside dumping random piles of junk (sorry, personal items) all over their land.

Bloke up the road from me bunged a shipping container on his boundary line with the street to use as storage whilst renovating (too high for permitted approval), had to get planning for it as all the neighbours comlained about the visual effect. Planning permission granted for use whilst works ongoing only. After they had formslly finished the work on site a neighbour complained was still there in breach of permission. Council came out and did nothing to enforce their own permissions.

[shirehorse99]

Hey Resybaby, I was speaking to a well respected local installer earlier regarding the new ofcom directive as mentioned in first post - he reads it that any panel change would change the FIT contract and would be lost - so I don’t know now ? Anyone else got any thoughts on this?

[AGT]

I think you can change equipment as long as you inform them if you have fit payment so if you had a 2kW array and changed it to 4kW when you submitted generation inf. you would only receive 50%.

[jonc_uk]

I have 3 panels on the vetical wall of my garage . I also have 3 panels (low down) on the side of the house.
Recently the extremeley overgrown hedge on our road has been cut back hard (much needed -was getiing very narrow and high) .
Have had a visit from planning control -very pleasent lady as someone has complained about them.
Letter today -planning permission required as not permitted development (on a roof no issue) -have 21 days to reply .

I think the real issue is that you have a high fence against a highway.

A hedge is ok, but a six foot fence against a highway would require planning.

That is.. unless it is not on the boundary. If it is inside the boundary, then it would be a garden structure. If this structure is in front of the building line, ie. in front of your house, then it is not covered by permitted development and would still require planning permission.

[shirehorse99]

I agree with you AGT, but he definitely said that I shouldn't replace them , I told him that I didn't think that was the case - but he does it everyday and I do it once every 10 years so what do I know - I thought I could replace what I had with less panels as long as I didn't go above my fit contract of 3.43kw. I could do this with 8 panels instead of 14

[shirehorse99]

the other six could be used to charge my batteries as long as I set max grid export to 3.43, well that was my understanding

[resybaby]

Shire, my recent installer told me the opposite.
From my read of the new legislation, it seems to focus on either an increase or decrease in the capacity of the system.
I forget the word they used now of the top of my head in the document.
It does not mention the missing component of when there is NO increase or decrease in capacity.
Surely that will just then become a maintenance issue, and therefore acceptable, as previously was the case?

I would suggest careful selection of the sppropriate panels to ensue the declared FIt capacity is the exact same as the original system, and then it would be perfectly ok to replace panels on a 'maintenance' basis, as old panels are not availible. But new ones are in many output permiatations nowadays (helpfully).

Its my view that having lost the court case to row back on the original FIT terms some while ago, the government/Ofgem are trying to reduce future increasing liabilities by trying to get a handle on the 'maintenance' issue, as panel efficencies and tech improve. They have missed the 'capacity has remained the same' test IMV by not covering it, and its perfectly reasonable (which is the test in law) to expect to be able to maintain something over a 25 year period.

If looking for certainty, you could always write to your FIT payer and Ofgem, attach the relevent document, and seek their responses?

[AE-NMidlands]

seeing as the front page intro of the document linked in post 1 says

This guidance is relevant for both MCS-FIT and ROO-FIT accredited installations. It provides an overview of the FIT scheme, detailing the scheme guidelines, and explains the steps generators should take when modifying an accredited FIT installation.

I don't see how any firm worth dealing with can insist no changes are allowed!
Section 3 is specifically about modifications and says

Feed-in Tariffs (FIT) | Feed-in Tariffs: Guidance for FIT Generators

3.4. You may repair or replace all or some generating equipment without affecting
the compliance of an accredited installation, provided that the installation
continues to meet the scheme rules. These include that the:
• maximum capacity of 5MW (or 2kW for micro-CHP) is not exceeded
• accredited installation continues to generate electricity from the same
eligible technology
• accredited installation is not decommissioned or relocated

and goes on

Extending an installation
3.10. An “extension” to an accredited FIT installation is a modification which increases
its TIC from the same eligible low-carbon technology. This can include adding
generating equipment or replacing generating equipment.
3.11. Installations may be extended through repowering, or the removal of de-rating
mechanisms. Where an accredited FIT installation is extended through either of
these methods, the below rules on extensions would also apply.
• Repowering can be defined as the process of replacing older generating
equipment with newer equipment which either has a greater capacity or
more efficiency, which results in a net increase of power generated

I am sure this same discussion has already taken place...

[shirehorse99]

So in layman’s terms for a thicko like me I can change my panels as long as they only add up to the 3.43kw that I have. Any additional capacity I would have to have to use to directly charge my AC coupled batteries and not be abled to used for export for SEG even if I give up the deemed export part of fit

[resybaby]

So in layman’s terms for a thicko like me I can change my panels as long as they only add up to the 3.43kw that I have. Any additional capacity I would have to have to use to directly charge my AC coupled batteries and not be abled to used for export for SEG even if I give up the deemed export part of fit

Shire,
Reading back through the document, and your plans (as well as mine) the first thing to note is:-

3.7. Generators MUST contact the FIT licensee if you extend or reduce the Total Installed Capacity TLC of the installation.

Clearly this is to stop people replacing old panels with better/bigger ones to exceed the already accredited installations contracted PV capacity. i.e. bung extra/bigger panels on a system to take it from, say 4kw to 5kw. And quite rightly so.

Both of us are being careful to keep the TIC EXACTLY the same by a clever choice of replacement panel outputs.
We are merely replacing an old 4kw PV panel system (your case 3.43) with a similar, but more efficent 4kw (3.43) Pv panel system.
Hence, we are neither 'reducing nor extending' our installations.

So i understand that this term 3.7 negates our need to even contact the FIT licensee of the changes in the first place. As Our systems will be of an identical PV size to now, not reduced nor extended.

Im not going to be contacting my FIT licensee to advise them directly because of this specific term. Its quite clear to me what it says.

3.10 further states an 'extension to a FIT acredited installation is a modification which increases its TIC"

This clearly confirms that in order to be considered an 'extension' then the system needs to be modified with more/bigger panels which results in a bigger TIC i.e. 5kw in place of 4kw, for example.

Your proposal and mine do not increase the TIC, so we are not 'extending.

3.11 states that "Installations MAY be extended through repowering.

Repowering they define as "the process of replac8ng older generating equipment with newer equipment that either has a greater capacity or more efficency". They are simply acknowledging that tech has moved on and are moving with the times

This in effect gives express permission to replace older euipqment with better newer stuff, which is all we are both doing.

Cant help with the SEG Exporting query, i dont export nor have a SEG, but i did take sage advice from folk on here to ensure that my FIT system was kept entirely separate from my later installation and hence that runs through a second inverter/battery.

In short if you replace 3.43 old PV with 3.43 new Pv on your FIT system i wouldnt even bother to advise them, as above, but if you exceed/reduce that 3.43 then you will need to. In any such case i think all your FIT licensee would then do is apportion your payments pro rata, but best avoid the hassle imv.