Expecting a few changes

[Isetech]

Its good to see open discussions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJDegJMH2VA&ab_channel=AREP

[Isetech]

Someone mentioned the "chaos" in the industry...that pretty much sums it up.

[Isetech]

What I took from that video...its gonna take a long time to fix anything.

Just smile

[Derlyn]

Thank you for sharing that Isetech.

It's good to see that these discussions with relevant stakeholders has began.

As was mentioned, this is only the beginning and any process has to start somewhere.

I was dissappointed that this meeting was only brought to our attention now, seeing that it was held in October last year.

It is interesting to note that even amongst the leaders in industry and regulators, there are opposing interpretations and views regarding the present regulations and guidelines.

Another takeaway is that the process of changing or editing the regulations doesn't happen quickly. It takes a long time.

I'm glad I'm not the only person who sometimes has difficulty with interpretations of the rules and regulations and also glad that someone took the initiative to call such a meeting in order to start the process of elininating any discrepencies and misunderstandings that there are.

[Dave A]

Interesting hearing the full content of the meeting. It really exposed the difficulties in negotiating with government for regulatory control improvement.

A few of the bigger takeaways for me-

1. The (lack of) regulatory status of Annexure M of SANS 10142-1 and the need for an update to the Electrical Installation Regulations to deal with "new needs already identified by industry" was clearly exposed. The significance of the difference between DC and single phase needs to be dealt with at a regulatory level. There is also a paradigm gap around supply (or multiple supplies) that needs to be addressed.

2. It seems clear that PV Installation Work needs to be carried out under the general control of a Registered Person and where done for someone else, by a registered Electrical Contractor. How is that being enforced?

3. The AIA's are finding very few PV installations that are compliant to standards - in fact the vast majority have been deemed sufficiently unsafe that they have switched off/disconnected the installation.

I must commend Carel Ballack for his leadership in convening the meeting, and think he did an excellent job in facilitating what was at times a potentially difficult engagement between parties. Well done Carel!!

[GCE]

I have a different take on that meeting and Carel's involvement, to you Dave .

The meeting was setup to obtain a narrative and directed in that direction
There was a meeting between Carel and Pieter beforehand where after Carel coordinated this meeting and was well aware where he wanted it to go.
Permission was granted for the meeting to be recorded but no permission was sought nor suggested that it would be posted on a public forum.

The fact that Annex M is been ignored in totality is absurd, as any legal document when disputed is referred back to informal notes of the committee's intention when drafting that piece of legislation which in my opinion is Annex M .

There has been embarrassment around the green card and PV training centers making promises and commitments to people enrolling to become " qualified solar installers" that needed to be rescued by the people running training centers , hence the need to ignore Annex M

Anthony put up various arguments against single phase license holders being allowed to operate with DC which where basically ignored.

With regards to AIA's and there findings - At the moment there appears to be only Leon that is vocal on the PV market and I believe ( but not sure) he is employed by Heroldt's in assisting with correct installation advice.
Leon is adamant that the neutral earth bridge on an inverter should be permanent and his words to me where " why would you risk your license using a relay for the bridge"
When I put forward sans10142-1 clause 6.1.6 he never answered and the discussion went quite
I am not sure if the AIA's get together and have a discussion and come to a united decision - I have been given the impression previously that it does not happen.
Now that I know where the confusion around earth neutral is happening I have directed enquiries and requested that it is resolved ASAP and a united answer given to stop confusion.

There are technical committees within DOEL and SANS that deal with regulations and the EIR and I am not sure why Carel has decided that he needs to coordinate another " type of committee " to deal with the same issues.

[Isetech]

Safe locations to install lithium batteries is another issue which requires urgent attention.

Installing a lithium battery lower than 1.2 m in a garage just seems crazy. If one of the dangers of a lithium batteries is impact. Just imagine if you bump a lithium battery with a motor vehicle by mistake. Maybe people are just making a big fuss about the dangers of these batteries for nothing.

[Dave A]

The meeting was setup to obtain a narrative and directed in that direction

Quite possibly. But that agenda didn't last very long

There was a meeting between Carel and Pieter beforehand where after Carel coordinated this meeting and was well aware where he wanted it to go.

Quite clearly Anthony and Leon had spent some time engaging in preparation too... And the two of them were certainly well prepared.

The fact that Annex M is been ignored in totality is absurd, as any legal document when disputed is referred back to informal notes of the committee's intention when drafting that piece of legislation which in my opinion is Annex M .

It still needs to be promulgated into law if DoEL is going to be able to successfully prosecute - the point was well made by Pieter. The solution is to update the EIR to reflect the intent of Annexure M. The EIR is long overdue for an update anyway.

There has been embarrassment around the green card and PV training centers making promises and commitments to people enrolling to become " qualified solar installers" that needed to be rescued by the people running training centers , hence the need to ignore Annex M

Yes, I picked up on that theme as well. It did quieten down during the course of the meeting when it became clear which way the wind was blowing. The SAPVIA input on their review of the greencard system was also telling.

Anthony put up various arguments against single phase license holders being allowed to operate with DC which where basically ignored.

Oh, I think Anthony made his points very well and won the argument hands down. I wouldn't read too much into Jake's read that there wasn't a regulatory problem that needed fixing; he was late to the meeting and Carel gently reminded him that he may have missed something important on that issue. And regulators are loathe to make commitments. But get a clear, well motivated proposal with multi-party support together and ...

Well, it will at least be harder for Jake to stonewall the issue.

With regards to AIA's and there findings - At the moment there appears to be only Leon that is vocal on the PV market and I believe ( but not sure) he is employed by Heroldt's in assisting with correct installation advice.
Leon is adamant that the neutral earth bridge on an inverter should be permanent and his words to me where " why would you risk your license using a relay for the bridge"
When I put forward sans10142-1 clause 6.1.6 he never answered and the discussion went quite
I am not sure if the AIA's get together and have a discussion and come to a united decision - I have been given the impression previously that it does not happen.
Now that I know where the confusion around earth neutral is happening I have directed enquiries and requested that it is resolved ASAP and a united answer given to stop confusion.

There are technical committees within DOEL and SANS that deal with regulations and the EIR and I am not sure why Carel has decided that he needs to coordinate another " type of committee " to deal with the same issues.

Probably because there are big problems that need to be solved now and so little signs of progress out of those committees. I believe Carel is genuinely interested in getting things right and hat off to him, for both the initiative and the fact that he got so many vested parties into the same meeting.

[Derlyn]

The fact that Annex M is been ignored in totality is absurd, as any legal document when disputed is referred back to informal notes of the committee's intention when drafting that piece of legislation which in my opinion is Annex M .

I agree.

The question must be asked if there are any other annextures in SANS 10142-1 that don't mean a thing to the training centres or is Annex M for some strange reason the only one ?