Plug-in (balcony) solar becomes legal in Utah but power company has concerns with devices currently available

[gringopapo]

Utah house bill 340, passed in March 25, 2025, created a new category for plug-in solar systems that exempt the consumer from interconnection agreements while establishing basic safety requirements and liability protection for utilities.

The bill allows for "Portable Solar Generation Devices" which have a maximum output of 1200 watts and connect to a standard 120 volt outlet. The bill says that these units must "meet the standards of the most recent version of the NEC" and "is certified by UL".

Here's a historical thread about this bill when first passed and before devices became available:

Thread 'Plug-in solar finaly comes to the US. (Currently legal in Utah)'

Feb 6, 2025

In Utah, plug-in solar has been legal since May 7, 2025.

https://le.utah.gov/~2025/bills/static/HB0340.html,

• Banjohn
• Replies: 342
• Forum: DIY Solar General Discussion

• 
• 

I live in Utah and have been generating power for a few months now with this device: https://www.ecoflow.com/us/stream-microinverter

My house's idle consumption is around 100w and I've connected about 1100 watts to the device. My roof angles are not good, but I'm generating much more during peak hours than I'm consuming.

For that reason, the power company contacted me noticing I'm feeding power into the grid. I stated that I am generating power per House Bill 340. The power company has stated these concerns regarding my parallel power generation:

The inverter/PCS must be IEEE 1547-2018 compliant and be UL 1741 SB certified. Must also meet NEC 2020 requirements.

So now I'm stuck between a broadly written utah law and specific policies of the power company.

So here are my questions:

It appears that the manufacturers of plug-in solar devices have interpreted this law to mean that as long as their device shuts off when the grid shuts off then they have complied. This is called anti-islanding. However, UL 1741 SB gets into the weeds of things like "ride through" and very specific parameters that must be followed. So is taking a basic approach of just shutting the device off when the grid goes down sufficient for a low power system, or are all the extras of SB revision necessary?

I also appears that IEEE 1547 gives very specific parameters for how distributed energy resources (inverters) behave on the grid. The Utah law doesn't reference IEEE standards so I don't know if it even applies but it appears to be the same question as above. For low power parallel generation, do the requirements of IEEE 1547 matter?

I get that something being "necessary" and "mattering" are subject to the eye of the beholder. I also kind of wonder how much research actually went in to this law before they passed it.

Ultimately, both the power company and myself are subject to the law. I think this will be a messy process and probably will end up having the law amended to clarify its intent or just rescinded to make the power company happy.

Alternatively, maybe this law was well researched and its basic intent is to allow low power parallel generation explicitly without the power company's desires to regulate it, except to ensure safety of the linemen.

I'm just an ignorant consumer who can google. I know there are a lot of people on this forum with real experience and knowledge. So what say ye?

 

[Hedges]

When there were only a few GT PV inverters, disconnecting for out of spec parameters was good enough.
With many, having all that generation drop off for 5 minutes (UL 1741) could destabilize the grid.
So UL 1741-SA and now -SB has ride-through and optional frequency-watts and volts-watts. Also Volts-VAR.

For now, not much balcony solar. Eventually maybe everyone will have one.
Your equipment needs to be compliant to rules at the time installed. Question is what rules the law requires now.

 

[teal95]

Does it have to meet the latest NEC or the one currently required by the state? Does the appropriate NEC requirements reference IEEE? I'm guessing the utility is going to throw everything at you, whether it's legally required or not, trying to stop you.

 

[SkyBlue]

Utah house bill 340, passed in March 25, 2025, created a new category for plug-in solar systems that exempt the consumer from interconnection agreements while establishing basic safety requirements and liability protection for utilities.

The bill allows for "Portable Solar Generation Devices" which have a maximum output of 1200 watts and connect to a standard 120 volt outlet. The bill says that these units must "meet the standards of the most recent version of the NEC" and "is certified by UL".

Here's a historical thread about this bill when first passed and before devices became available:

Thread 'Plug-in solar finaly comes to the US. (Currently legal in Utah)'

Feb 6, 2025

In Utah, plug-in solar has been legal since May 7, 2025.

https://le.utah.gov/~2025/bills/static/HB0340.html,

• Banjohn
• Replies: 342
• Forum: DIY Solar General Discussion

• 
• 

I live in Utah and have been generating power for a few months now with this device: https://www.ecoflow.com/us/stream-microinverter

My house's idle consumption is around 100w and I've connected about 1100 watts to the device. My roof angles are not good, but I'm generating much more during peak hours than I'm consuming.

For that reason, the power company contacted me noticing I'm feeding power into the grid. I stated that I am generating power per House Bill 340. The power company has stated these concerns regarding my parallel power generation:

The inverter/PCS must be IEEE 1547-2018 compliant and be UL 1741 SB certified. Must also meet NEC 2020 requirements.

So now I'm stuck between a broadly written utah law and specific policies of the power company.

So here are my questions:

It appears that the manufacturers of plug-in solar devices have interpreted this law to mean that as long as their device shuts off when the grid shuts off then they have complied. This is called anti-islanding. However, UL 1741 SB gets into the weeds of things like "ride through" and very specific parameters that must be followed. So is taking a basic approach of just shutting the device off when the grid goes down sufficient for a low power system, or are all the extras of SB revision necessary?

I also appears that IEEE 1547 gives very specific parameters for how distributed energy resources (inverters) behave on the grid. The Utah law doesn't reference IEEE standards so I don't know if it even applies but it appears to be the same question as above. For low power parallel generation, do the requirements of IEEE 1547 matter?

I get that something being "necessary" and "mattering" are subject to the eye of the beholder. I also kind of wonder how much research actually went in to this law before they passed it.

Ultimately, both the power company and myself are subject to the law. I think this will be a messy process and probably will end up having the law amended to clarify its intent or just rescinded to make the power company happy.

Alternatively, maybe this law was well researched and its basic intent is to allow low power parallel generation explicitly without the power company's desires to regulate it, except to ensure safety of the linemen.

I'm just an ignorant consumer who can google. I know there are a lot of people on this forum with real experience and knowledge. So what say ye?

I read your posts on this issue in the previous thread. Your power company is taking an interesting position. They're saying that the legislature didn't consult with them when it passed HB 340, so they are going to ignore the law and continue to enforce their own interconnection requirements, which now are inconsistent with the law.

As you point out, HB 340 requires the plug in devices to be certified by the UL or an equivalent recognized national testing laboratory. The law also requires these devices to comply with the most recent version of the National Electrical Code, which I think is the 2023 version (NOT the 2020 version that your POCO uses). The law doesn't mention IEEE 1547-2018 compliance (unless that's part of the NEC). So if your EcoFlow is certified and complies with the 2023 NEC I'd go ahead and plug it in. It meets the requirements of the law. If the power company man visits I'd give him the text of HB 340 and tell him that if the POCO doesn't like the law, they should take the State of Utah to court. I'd also post on r/solar and a few other places to connect with other people in the same boat as you, and let the POCO know you all are discussing filing a class action lawsuit if they continue their harassment. Finally, I'd contact my representatives in the Utah legislature and let them know what's going on. They probably can get the POCO to back off.

Edit: I re-read your post and the material in your link to the EcoWorthy plug in device. According to EcoWorthy, the device is UL certified as required by HB 340 and your POCO, and is IEEE 1541 (not 1547?) compliant, as required by the POCO. Both the law and the POCO also require the device to conform to the NEC, though they refer to different versions of the NEC. So if the device does conform to the NEC and if EcoWorthy's claims of IEEE compliance and UL certification are correct, it sounds like you already meet all the POCO's rules, except for the interconnection agreement. And HB 340 specifically disallows your POCO's interconnection agreement requirement. So there shouldn't be any problem. Or am I missing something?

 

[ricardocello]

IEEE 1547-2018 is the published standard for interconnection devices.
UL 1741, SA, and SB are the independent test lab results showing that a device conforms.

Smart PV inverter overview: IEEE 1547-2018 and UL 1741 explained

What is IEEE 1547-2018? IEEE 1547 refers to “Standard 1547” as developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) to safely and functionally integrate distributed energy resources (DERs)... View Article

solarbuildermag.com

 

[Madco]

At the end of the day, the POCO will cite language in your service agreement indicating it can disconnect your service if it deems anything associated with your downstream equipment is unsafe. That language will reference IEEE 1547 at least and probably some more. I expect you will have an uphill battle.

 

[ricardocello]

At the end of the day, the POCO will cite language in your service agreement indicating it can disconnect your service if it deems anything associated with your downstream equipment is unsafe. That language will reference IEEE 1547 at least and probably some more. I expect you will have an uphill battle.

Which is all the more reason to get the state involved to assist you, rather than going it alone.

 

[fuzzmunky415]

At first blush, the Stream Ultra (unit with batteries) appears to comply:

EcoFlow STREAM Series Plug-and-Play Home Solar System | EcoFlow US

Experience the power of EcoFlow STREAM Series Plug-and-Play Home Solar System. With AI-powered solar energy, lower electric bills and transform your home into a smarter space

www.ecoflow.com

But I'm having difficulty finding docs on this device...beyond the sales blurb on that page.

 

[SnickeringBear]

Is anyone else realizing that Ecoflow's website is all about advertising glitz and very little about the nuts n bolts of their products? I'd love to read the technical details of their products so an informed decision could be made whether or not to purchase their products. The EcoFlow Ocean is getting a lot of advertising currently. It maxes out at 80 kWh of "ecoflow only" batteries in 10 kWh per battery units. It can support up to 40 kWh of solar panels across 2 inverters which I am inferring means 20 kWh per inverter. But is that on 2 MPPT's or 3? Also, there is nothing on their site about meeting NEC battery requirements which are currently 40 kWh/house and 40 kWh/separate battery building.

 

[1ufvlsi6x]

The power companies can go to hell. In this country they started offering good packages for selling them back excess energy, and once they realized that may lead to them having lower profits in total (in case the entire country went solar) they started charging €15,000 euros to install for you a mediocre ~system that barely has 1/3rd of the capacity of a DIY project costing less than half lol..

 

[Q-Dog]

Is anyone else realizing that Ecoflow's website is all about advertising glitz and very little about the nuts n bolts of their products? I'd love to read the technical details of their products so an informed decision could be made whether or not to purchase their products. The EcoFlow Ocean is getting a lot of advertising currently. It maxes out at 80 kWh of "ecoflow only" batteries in 10 kWh per battery units. It can support up to 40 kWh of solar panels across 2 inverters which I am inferring means 20 kWh per inverter. But is that on 2 MPPT's or 3? Also, there is nothing on their site about meeting NEC battery requirements which are currently 40 kWh/house and 40 kWh/separate battery building.

Ecoflow is a marketing company trying to sell to folks that don't know anything about how electricity, or solar panels, or batteries work.

 

[gringopapo]

Edit: I re-read your post and the material in your link to the EcoWorthy plug in device. According to EcoWorthy, the device is UL certified as required by HB 340 and your POCO, and is IEEE 1541 (not 1547?) compliant, as required by the POCO. Both the law and the POCO also require the device to conform to the NEC, though they refer to different versions of the NEC. So if the device does conform to the NEC and if EcoWorthy's claims of IEEE compliance and UL certification are correct, it sounds like you already meet all the POCO's rules, except for the interconnection agreement. And HB 340 specifically disallows your POCO's interconnection agreement requirement. So there shouldn't be any problem. Or am I missing something?

Hi SkyBlue, couple of thoughts: On EcoFlow's (not EcoWorthy) website I think the IEEE1541 reference is a typo. I think they meant IEEE1547. Unfortunately, it's not uncommon for companies like EcoFlow to make dumb mistakes either in translation or sometimes because they don't have technical knowledge of the US law/specs. It doesn't give me a lot of confidence in EcoFlow's product, but that's what I get for being an early adopter, I suppose.

Ultimately, however, I think it simply boils down to the intent of HB 340. If it's specifically meant to be a carve out exception for low power grid connected solar, then the UL1741 grid disconnect safety requirements are sufficient (along with standard best practices of NEC compliance).

It also makes sense to me that the power company doesn't immediately need to worry about UL1741 SB and IEEE1547 compliance that I believe has to do more with grid reliability and performance, since there are so few of these low power, portable grid connected units in use. However, it also makes sense to me that at some point in the future the POCO will and should care about these units and their affect on the grid's reliability and performance.

Personally, I think the only thing missing from HB 340 is a requirement that the consumer register their device with the POCO. They need to know the volume of this additional parallel generation for future consideration.

 

[gringopapo]

Updates:
I wrote a response to the POCO stating that I believe I am acting in accordance with Utah law, referenced the Utah code that gives my responsibility and the burdens I'm exempt from, and even gave them a timeline to take action against me. I probably will put a smile on someone's face at the POCO for this little consumer trying to stand their ground but, for now, they just said "OK, I guess this matter is resolved". In reality, I'm sure I'll just be on next month's list of customers to harass about unathorized parallel generation... but hey, it's a start!

I'm in contact with the sponsor of HB 340. He seems to be on my side and agrees that my position is tenable. I encouraged him to stand his ground against the lobbyist and improve on the bill rather than cave to the POCO.

Finally, I asked EcoFlow for a certification of conformance for their Microstream Inverter. Surprisingly, they delivered. See attached. It's not just a document originating from EcoFlow but looks to be a legit certificate indicating conformance to UL1741 supplement SB and (I believe) the latest revision of IEEE 1547. I was impressed.

 

[fedexo]

Murray City Power sent a flier to give some clarification, which is appreciated. The bigger poco Rocky Mountain Power should do the same.

 

[pdp8]

Murray City Power sent a flier to give some clarification, which is appreciated. The bigger poco Rocky Mountain Power should do the same.

View attachment 327628

Private utilities have a very diffrent set of incentives than municipal power co-ops.

[ Yes they do call me Mr. Obvious? Why do you ask? ]

 

[Brucey]

Is anyone else realizing that Ecoflow's website is all about advertising glitz and very little about the nuts n bolts of their products? I'd love to read the technical details of their products so an informed decision could be made whether or not to purchase their products. The EcoFlow Ocean is getting a lot of advertising currently. It maxes out at 80 kWh of "ecoflow only" batteries in 10 kWh per battery units. It can support up to 40 kWh of solar panels across 2 inverters which I am inferring means 20 kWh per inverter. But is that on 2 MPPT's or 3? Also, there is nothing on their site about meeting NEC battery requirements which are currently 40 kWh/house and 40 kWh/separate battery building.

It has 40kW of solar input via eight trackers, each good for 5kW, not sure if thats over two units or a single.

https://enterprise-service-us-cdn.ecoflow.com/enterprise/documentation/1753865351953/Ocean%20Pro%20datasheet_View.pdf

 

[RostadKatt]

Just a heads up, my Utah POCO seem to charge me for the extra electricity this little "balcony" stream microinverter donate to their grid, obviously I'm not net metering.

 

[cs1234]

Just a heads up, my Utah POCO seem to charge me for the extra electricity this little "balcony" stream microinverter donate to their grid, obviously I'm not net metering.

That's why you need to hook your panels up to a battery through an mppt.. and then use a GTIL or a Hybrid AIO and just do zero export. Use the solar you capture to power your loads, don't export squat. The law is basically just allowing you to hook things up without getting reamed for spurious backfeed by the POCO.

Cheapest way to do it is probably this, in the link below. I've used one before without issues through careful monitoring of my 24/7 loads and not exceeding them on the output. In your situation, just set it to export nothing, or the lowest setting it allows. You still need a separate MPPT to charge the batteries though.

Amazon.com

 

[gringopapo]

Just a heads up, my Utah POCO seem to charge me for the extra electricity this little "balcony" stream microinverter donate to their grid, obviously I'm not net metering.

Need more details. How do you know they are charging you? How much?

The law says they can't. If they are I'd suggest contacting the representative who sponsored the bill. he's been responsive so far.

 

[RostadKatt]

Need more details. How do you know they are charging you? How much?

The law says they can't. If they are I'd suggest contacting the representative who sponsored the bill. he's been responsive so far.

I can view pretty detailed electricity usage from my POCO's website, and today I noticed that usage seem to have increased during sun hours ( after I installed this device ) , rather than decreased. I conducted some tests today to assess the situation and will know better tomorrow.

Some information suggest that certain meters can report export as usage; perhaps this is the current configuration of my meter ( landis gyr gridstream plx )

 

[nullinterface]

Is anyone else realizing that Ecoflow's website is all about advertising glitz and very little about the nuts n bolts of their products?

Yes. EcoFlow, Bluetti, Jackery, Pecron et al all have damn-near identical websites that grudgingly condescend to give basic specifications (beneath mountains of marketing puffery), and occasionally a product manual - which may or may not contain detailed technical information.

 

[gringopapo]

I can view pretty detailed electricity usage from my POCO's website, and today I noticed that usage seem to have increased during sun hours ( after I installed this device ) , rather than decreased. I conducted some tests today to assess the situation and will know better tomorrow.

Some information suggest that certain meters can report export as usage; perhaps this is the current configuration of my meter ( landis gyr gridstream plx )

Ah, yes, you probably need them to install this power meter:

Meter Upgrade

www.rockymountainpower.net

Its free. Plus it tells you your instantaneous usage. You have to double the number on the screen for some reason though.

 

[pss5272]

Need more details. How do you know they are charging you? How much?

The law says they can't. If they are I'd suggest contacting the representative who sponsored the bill. he's been responsive so far.

If you have a normal meter basically it's got an internal CT's that measures amperage. A smart net meter has two set's of these basically that read amperage in either direction. So if don't have a smart/net meter and you over produce and send some power back to the grid it will charge you for the power you sent back because as far as it knows you did use it.

To my knowledge these systems are set to meet the demand in your house. For example you have 1200w inverter, 800 W base load, and 2000W of solar panels. The system you have should throttle your load to 800W and not produce more than that. This throttling isn't instantaneous however and will push 400 W of energy back onto the grid when you drop loads quickly. Say your house needed 1800W for a minute due to your microwave running but your baseload is 800W as mentioned above, the equipment would ramp up to 1200W, then drop to 800W quickly but not instantly when the microwave was finished. This 400W would momentarily push back to the grid.

I've had an ongrid system now for 2 months and the first month before I put my system in off grid since I don't have an interconnection agreement yet I used 10 KWH according to the POCO due to this. This is a guess but I would assume the closer your base usage is to 1200W the more energy would be sent back to the grid as the swings would be more substantial.

 

[Hedges]

If you have a normal meter basically it's got an internal CT's that measures amperage. A smart net meter has two set's of these basically that read amperage in either direction. So if don't have a smart/net meter and you over produce and send some power back to the grid it will charge you for the power you sent back because as far as it knows you did use it.

To my knowledge these systems are set to meet the demand in your house. For example you have 1200w inverter, 800 W base load, and 2000W of solar panels. The system you have should throttle your load to 800W and not produce more than that. This throttling isn't instantaneous however and will push 400 W of energy back onto the grid when you drop loads quickly. Say your house needed 1800W for a minute due to your microwave running but your baseload is 800W as mentioned above, the equipment would ramp up to 1200W, then drop to 800W quickly but not instantly when the microwave was finished. This 400W would momentarily push back to the grid.

I've had an ongrid system now for 2 months and the first month before I put my system in off grid since I don't have an interconnection agreement yet I used 10 KWH according to the POCO due to this. This is a guess but I would assume the closer your base usage is to 1200W the more energy would be sent back to the grid as the swings would be more substantial.

You speak with authority, as does AI.

Can you reference a source for your assertion?

 

[pss5272]

You speak with authority, as does AI.

Can you reference a source for your assertion?

Here is my energy to the grid with a hybrid system with export turned off except for 2 days when I thought I could just send power back to the grid and receive no money from it. You can see small blips in august except for 8/4-8/5 when testing my system I exported and then looked at my meter KWH reading and realized it went up by the ~62 kwh I exported to the grid so I stopped exporting. Did a bit of research and that's was what was indicated on line. Made sense with my situation and the fact that the gridboss/flexboss come with CT clamps that have a directional arrow and that it is very clear in the instructions needs to be installed the proper direction. The September data shows the same thing with a different scale. And the grid import shows similar numbers.

So basically online research and personal experience showing it to be true as a generality. The technical root cause may be different from my ct statement and beyond my understanding but there's definitely power bleed back and forth when connected to the grid.