Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Prepared for the City of Cupertino
Presented by:
Syserco Energy Solutions, Inc.
Date Submitted:
November 11, 2024
ATTACHMENT C
Table of Contents 1
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Section 1 – Project Financials ............................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 System Sizing ............................................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Annual Energy Savings ............................................................................................................................................. 3
1.3 Budget Impact / Financing Options .................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Portfolio Cash Flow Models ................................................................................................................................... 7 Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and Conceptual Designs ............................................. 15
2.1 Construction Methodology and Schedule .................................................................................................... 15
2.2 Project Portfolio Conceptual Designs ............................................................................................................. 18
2.3 Project Equipment Lists ........................................................................................................................................ 39 Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology Evaluation ............................................................................ 43
3.1 Technical Specifications ........................................................................................................................................ 43
3.2 New Technology Evaluation ................................................................................................................................ 47
3.3 Energy Storage Evaluation ................................................................................................................................... 49
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Executive Summary 2
Executive Summary
The City of Cupertino has been working to evaluate the benefits of adding solar photovoltaic energy systems to a number of locations. The goal of this potential project is to assist in offsetting ongoing electrical utility costs at these locations to provide long term value to the city and its residents.
To develop the recommended project, our experienced energy engineers, project managers, and project developers performed a detailed energy and operational audit of the City’s facilities to determine the full potential for savings. This proposal is a culmination of our audit findings, recommended systems, infrastructure enhancements, and overall cost reductions.
We would like to thank the members of the City’s staff and facilities team who worked closely with the Syserco Energy Solutions team throughout this process. Without their assistance, this report would not have been possible.
The project development process involved numerous site visits, interaction with City administration and facilities staff, and a detailed analysis of existing equipment and systems and current utility consumption.
Studies of energy usage, operating conditions, and interviews with the City’s facility team have been valuable sources of information, contributing greatly to this effort. We have taken into consideration the input provided by staff when compiling the proposed project.
The recommended project will design, furnish, and install new solar PV roof mount and carport / shade structure systems at various City sites. These new systems will offset significant electrical energy usage relative to the grid-purchased electrical energy. The recommended system sizes are summarized in the table below:
Recommended Project Summary
Site Name
Nominal
Array Size
(kW DC)
Nominal
System Size
(kW AC)
Mounting Type
Blackberry Farm 73.08 60 Carport
Community Hall 49.30 50 Rooftop
Library 422.82 403 Carport / Rooftop
Quinlan Community Center / Senior Center 311.46 273 Carport / Rooftop Sports Center 214.02 172 Carport
Total 1,070.68 958
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 3
Section 1 – Project Financials
1.1 System Sizing
The systems in the project were sized based on multiple factors to align with the city’s goals for the project. The first factor considered was available space – in concert with city staff, ideal areas on each site were identified that would not impact the usage of each site or require the removal of undue quantities of trees. With the usable locations identified on each site, energy consumption was evaluated to determine the maximum amount of energy generation that would be economically beneficial for the site. The systems were then sized within these two constraints to offset as much energy usage as possible at each location within the physical areas identified for use. Options for each site were presented to city staff for evaluation and comment, with preferred layouts selected by the city for each location.
1.2 Annual Energy Savings
Annual Energy Savings for the project were modeled utilizing the industry-standard software application Energy Toolbase based on data from site-specific models that were developed in Helioscope, another industry-standard software application. This model projects the energy savings provided by the array based on the estimated energy production within each time interval, to ensure that the impacts of time - of-use (TOU) rate schedules and non-bypassable charges are accurately accounted for. The first-year energy savings depicted in the table below assume a roughly 18-month duration between the issuance of this report and system completion and incorporate an estimated annual utility escalation rate of 5% during this time period. While first-year savings are presented in the table below, it is important to note that annual energy savings are estimated to change over time. Utility rates are anticipated to continue to rise over time, and throughout the project’s life cycle the modules are expected to degrade annually . For the purposes of the estimated payback period listed below, the annual utility escalation is estimated to be 5%, and the annual PV module degradation rate is assumed to be 0.5%. Additionally, the city has submitted interconnection applications under the NEM2 tariff, which is far more lucrative than the current NEM3 tariff – this allows the systems to be locked into this NEM2 tariff for 20 years from project permission to operate, after which time they will be transitioned to the NEM3 rate tariff. Syserco Energy Solutions assisted the city in accomplishing this by applying for utility interconnection of these systems prior to the April 15th, 2023 NEM2 application deadline. It is important to note that to capture this 20-year NEM2 eligibility, these projects must be completed by April 15 th, 2026.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 4
1.3 Budget Impact / Financing Options
Site Name Nominal Array
Size (kW DC)
System Price1
Estimated
Direct Pay
ITC1
Net Price1
First Year
Energy
Savings1,2
Estimated
Payback Period
(Years)
Blackberry Farm 73.08 $1,056,000 $382,400 $673,600 $38,253 14.08 Community Hall 49.30 $377,000 $150,800 $226,200 $29,441 7.15 Library 422.82 $4,103,000 $1,521,200 $2,581,800 $189,074 11.33 Quinlan Community Center /
Senior Center
311.46 $2,493,000 $867,200 $1,625,800 $154,217 9.21
Sports Center 214.02 $1,965,000 $726,000 $1,239,000 $93,047 11.11 Total 1,070.68 $9,994,000 $3,647,600 $6,346,400 $504,032 10.66 1Note: All costs and savings figures presented are estimates. 2Projected first year energy savings shown in table are indicative of the avoided electric utility costs the site will experience, which will manifest in the form of lowered utility bills on each site.
Financing Options
Solar PV systems can be financed in multiple ways to alleviate construction cash flow challenges. The main financial vehicles available for the project are a cash purchase, tax-exempt lease purchase (TELP), or a power purchase agreement (PPA). A cash purchase model is the simplest funding strategy for the project.
This methodology would utilize direct funding from the city to procure the project, which would have several benefits for the city. The city would be able to monetize the direct pay credit from th e federal government (available via the Inflation Reduction Act), essentially providing a significant rebate for the project. When meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements, this direct pay credit amounts to 30% of the total PV project cost. For public entities receiving direct pay credits, there is a penalty for not meeting domestic content thresholds on the project, which can reduce this 30% credit by 15% for projects beginning in 2025 (i.e. reducing the 30% credit to 25.5%.) In addition to avoiding this credit reduction, utilizing domestic content on the project provides a 10-percentage point increase on the baseline direct pay credit, which would increase the realized benefit to the city from 25.5% of PV project costs to 40% of PV project costs when meeting domestic content requirements.
To meet the domestic content requirements, all iron and steel used in the project must have all manufacturing processes taking place in the United States, and (for projects beginning in 2025,) 45% of the total costs of all manufactured products (including components) in the facility must be mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States.
As a result of this, the project has been conceptually designed to utilize equipment which meets the domestic content requirement. Additionally, the city would directly receive all of the benefits provided by the system, including Renewable Energy Credits (RECs), which are the “green attributes” of the energy generated by the array which can be separately sold. Additionally, there would be no financing fees or interest costs associated with this method, which would maximize the total return on investment o f the city’s procurement of the PV system. The downsides of this procurement method are minimal. Under this method, the city would need to operate and maintain the system, or alternatively hire a company to perform these services on behalf of the city which would require an ongoing (though small) cost to the city. The city would also need to have enough available capital to directly fund the project.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 5
A TELP funding model utilizes a tax-exempt lease for acquiring the capital necessary for construction and paying this lease back over time. Typically, these agreements run for 15-to-20-year terms. This financing format provides the city multiple benefits – direct capital funding from the city is not required for this financing method, and the model can be structured to ensure that the lease payments are funded by the cost savings from the PV arrays. Additionally, the city can negotiate a fixed interest rate on the borrowed funds and have a predictable payment schedule over time to repay the lease. Under this financing structure, the city is also able to monetize the direct pay credit from the federal government. There are multiple drawbacks to this financing mechanism, however. When utilizing a tax-exempt financing method under the Inflation Reduction Act, the direct pay credits are reduced by 15% relative to a cash purchase option (i.e. the 40% credit described above is reduced to 34%.) In addition, the city would own the arrays and would therefore receive all of the benefits of the system (including RECs) directly , but would need to operate and maintain the systems or hire a company to perform these services to keep the arrays functioning optimally over time which would require an ongoing cost to the city. Additionally, the interest associated with this financed procurement method would reduce the total return on investment of the project relative to a cash-purchase option.
A power purchase agreement (PPA) is an alternative financing option which utilizes a third party to provide the capital necessary for construction of the project. The third party retains ownership of the arrays and the city then pays the third party a negotiated value for the energy produced by the array s as measured by an electrical meter on site. Term length for this financing option can range significantly, though this is typically on the order of 20 to 30 years. PPA agreements typically encompass two independent variables which determine the base energy price in the agreement, which are term length and escalation rate (the year-over-year increase in the base energy price.) These variables can be adjusted to meet the needs of the city – increasing the term length and escalation rates typically results in a lower base (first-year) PPA rate, increasing savings realized in the early years of the project life cycle. There are several benefits to this financing format – the city would not require any capital to construct the arrays, would not accrue interest during the construction period, and would not incur any direct debt. The city would not own the arrays during the PPA term (though PPAs would typically include an option for the city to procure the array at the end of the term of the agreement), and therefore would not need to orchestrate operations and maintenance activities for the PV systems. Because payments under a power purchase agreement are based around a value per kilowatt-hour of energy delivered to the project site, typical issues impacting energy production would reduce the amount owed by the city to the PPA provider, insulating the city from risk of the systems encountering operational issues; this also keeps the PPA provider’s interests aligned with the city’s, as the PPA provider is incentivized to maintain the arrays in peak condition to ensure the maximum amount of energy is delivered to the site. This financing method also has downsides; the array being owned by a third party means that the city would not be able to monetize the direct pay credit from the federal government for the project. Additionally, payments from the city to the PPA provider can fluctuate due to weather conditions, etc., and are likely less predictable than payments under a TELP financing model.
These financial vehicles can also be combined to provide additional options for the city. For instance, available capital can be utilized to fund a project, with any shortfall being covered by a TELP or PPA.
Combining available capital with a financing option has the benefit of expanding the ability of the city to City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 6
procure the systems, while significantly reducing the interest paid on a potential lease, or the base price for energy, the annual escalator, or the term negotiated under a PPA.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 7
1.4 Portfolio Cash Flow Models
Each of the project locations was modeled to depict the estimated cash flow provided by each of the various financing strategies described in the previous section of this report. In addition, the portfolio as a whole was modeled similarly to show the revenue potential of the entire project throughout its life cycle.
All project financing models anticipate 20-year financing terms to align with the NEM2 project lock-in duration. The impact of changing to the NEM3 tariff after 20 years is included in the follo wing cash flow models and summary tables.
Site Name Nominal Array
Size (kW DC)
Estimated
Year 1 Net
Savings1
(Cash)
Estimated
Year 1 Net
Savings1
(TELP)
Estimated
Year 1 Net
Savings1
(PPA)
Estimated
Lifecycle
Net Savings
(Cash)
Estimated
Lifecycle
Net Savings
(TELP)
Estimated
Lifecycle
Net Savings
(PPA)
Blackberry Farm 73.08 $36,129 -$8,043 -$13,841 $810,224 $231,451 $275,870 Community Hall 49.30 $27,912 $18,887 $11,245 $1,034,175 $806,620 $862,561 Library 422.82 $178,508 $34,139 -$12,967 $7,797,315 $5,452,794 $5,767,273 Quinlan Community
Center / Senior Center
311.46 $146,135 $70,776 $24,761 $5,304,691 $3,798,254 $4,016,931 Sports Center 214.02 $87,697 $19,681 -$4,097 $2,962,378 $1,834,598 $1,987,284 Total 1,070.68 $476,381 $135,440 $5,101 $17,908,783 $12,123,717 $12,909,919 1Net savings depicted in the above table take into account all estimated elements of the project, incorporating utility bill savings, operations and maintenance costs, interest costs, and PPA payments (as applicable to each of the individual financing mechanisms.)
Utilizing a cash purchase model to procure the system provides the highest return on investment for solar PV projects, as there are no PPA payments, financing costs, or accrued interest that need to be paid over time for the system. While this method does require significant capital to be available to procure the system outright, it maximizes the value derived from the system by the purchaser.
When capital is not available or opportunity costs are too significant to justify the short-term expenditure, financing projects via a TELP or PPA (in most cases) provides an excellent opportunity to be able to procure the system while realizing immediate positive cash flow on the project. The downside of these options is that the various financing related payments reduce the life cycle savings of the project significantly, as they are covered by the savings the systems generate.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 8
Full Portfolio Cash Flow Model
Portfolio Financial Summary
Financing Mechanism Up Front
Costs
Payback Period
/ Break Even
Point
Estimated
Lifecycle Net
Savings
Cash Purchase $9,994,000 10.66 Years $17,908,783
TELP $0 N/A $12,123,717
PPA $0 N/A $12,909,919
The project portfolio provides an excellent opportunity to bundle all of the locations together to leverage any of the available financing methods and take advantage of the benefits that are most attractive to the city. In a cash purchase setting, the systems are anticipated to pay for themselves in 10.66 years and provide a net lifecycle savings to the city roughly $5 million greater than a financed option. However, both financed options are estimated to be able to provide the city a positive cash flow from the first year of operation, without requiring available capital to purchase the arrays. The modeled cash flow for all three options is shown in the graph below:
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 9
Blackberry Farm Cash Flow Model
Blackberry Farm Financial Summary
Financing Mechanism Up Front
Costs
Payback Period
/ Break Even
Point
Estimated
Lifecycle Net
Savings
Cash Purchase $1,056,000 14.08 Years $810,224
TELP $0 N/A $231,451
PPA $0 N/A $275,870
As a standalone project, the Blackberry Farm location is not ideal for leveraging a financed option to procure the system, as the anticipated costs for financing over a 20-year agreement term exceed the projected savings at this location. However, In a cash purchase setting the system is anticipated to pay for itself in 14.08 years, and provide lifecycle savings of more than $800,000. The modeled cash flow for all three options is shown in the graph below:
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 10
Community Hall Cash Flow Model
Community Hall Financial Summary
Financing Mechanism Up Front
Costs
Payback Period
/ Break Even
Point
Estimated
Lifecycle Net
Savings
Cash Purchase $377,000 7.15 Years $1,034,175
TELP $0 N/A $806,620
PPA $0 N/A $862,561
The Community Hall project location provides an excellent opportunity to leverage any of the available financing methods to take advantage of the benefits that are most attractive to the city. In a cash purchase setting, the system is anticipated to pay for itself in 7.15 years and provide a net lifecycle savings to the city roughly $170,000 greater than a financed option. However, both financed options are estimated to be able to provide the city a positive cash flow from the first year of operation without requiring available capital to purchase the arrays. The modeled cash flow for all three options is shown in the graph below:
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 11
Library Cash Flow Model
Library Financial Summary
Financing Mechanism Up Front
Costs
Payback Period
/ Break Even
Point
Estimated
Lifecycle Net
Savings
Cash Purchase $4,103,000 11.33 Years $7,797,315
TELP $0 N/A $5,452,794
PPA $0 N/A $5,767,273
The Library project location provides an opportunity to utilize any of the available financing methods to take advantage of the benefits that are most attractive to the city. In a cash purchase setting, the system is anticipated to pay for itself in 11.33 years and provide a net lifecycle savings to the city roughly $2 million greater than a financed option. However, both financed options are estimated to be able to provide the city a roughly neutral cash flow from the first year of operation, without requiring available capital to purchase the arrays. While the estimated PPA inputs utilized in this model anticipate a slightly negative cash flow in the first year of the project, the term length and PPA escalation rate can be fine tuned to provide a positive cash flow from the outset (though this will likely reduce the corresponding life cycle savings.) The modeled cash flow for all three options is shown in the graph below:
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 12
Quinlan Community Center / Senior Center Cash Flow Model Quinlan Community Center / Senior Center Financial Summary Financing Mechanism Up Front
Costs
Payback Period
/ Break Even
Point
Estimated
Lifecycle Net
Savings
Cash Purchase $2,493,000 9.21 Years $5,304,691
TELP $0 N/A $3,798,254
PPA $0 N/A $4,016,931
The Quinlan Community Center project location provides an excellent opportunity to leverage any of the available financing methods to take advantage of the benefits that are most attractive to the city. In a cash purchase setting, the system is anticipated to pay for itself in 9.21 years and provide a net lifecycle savings to the city roughly $1.3 million greater than a financed option. However, both financed options are estimated to be able to provide the city a positive cash flow from the first year of operation, without requiring available capital to purchase the arrays. The modeled cash flow for all three options is shown in the graph below:
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 13
Sports Center Cash Flow Model
Sports Center Financial Summary
Financing Mechanism Up Front
Costs
Payback Period
/ Break Even
Point
Estimated
Lifecycle Net
Savings
Cash Purchase $1,965,000 11.11 Years $2,962,378
TELP $0 N/A $1,834,598
PPA $0 N/A $1,987,284
The Sports Center project location provides an opportunity to utilize any of the available financing methods to take advantage of the benefits that are most attractive to the city. In a cash purchase setting, the system is anticipated to pay for itself in 11.11 years and provide a net lifecycle savings to the city roughly $1 million greater than a financed option. However, both financed options are estimated to be able to provide the city a roughly neutral cash flow from the first year of operation without requiring available capital to purchase the arrays. While the estimated PPA inputs utilized in this model anticipate a slightly negative cash flow in the first year of the project, the term length and PPA escalation rate can be fine tuned to provide a positive cash flow from the outset (though this will likely reduce the corresponding life cycle savings.) The modeled cash flow for all three options is shown in the graph below:
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 1 – Project Financials 14
NEM 2 and NEM 3 Comparison
As a part of this project, interconnection applications were submitted to the utility prior to the April 15, 2023 deadline for the closing of NEM2 to new applications for the 5 locations covered in this report. The relative value of the NEM2 projects is significantly greater than if these projects were to be completed under the currently-existing utility tariff structure of NEM3, which will require the systems to be completed by April 15th, 2026. The savings projections under NEM3 were modeled in an analogous manner to the NEM2 savings projections, utilizing an Energy Toolbase model based on a Helioscope array design for each project location, to ensure that the impacts of TOU rate schedules and values for energy exported to the utility grid were accounted for. The same assumptions for utility cost escalation rates (5%) and PV module degradation (0.5%) were utilized in both models. The projected net life cycle savings of the projects are shown under both NEM2 and NEM3 scenarios for comparison in the table bel ow:
Site Name
Nominal
Array Size
(kW DC)
Estimated Year
1 Net Savings
(Cash, NEM2)
Estimated Year
1 Net Savings
(Cash, NEM3)
Estimated Lifecycle
Net Savings (Cash,
NEM2)
Estimated Lifecycle
Net Savings (Cash,
NEM3)
Energy
Offset
Percentage
Blackberry Farm 73.08 $36,129 $15,183 $810,224 $156,047 97.01% Community Hall 49.30 $27,912 $16,699 $1,034,175 $683,968 67.38% Library 422.82 $178,508 $158,573 $7,797,315 $7,174,859 62.89% Quinlan Community
Center / Senior Center
311.46 $146,135 $80,666 $5,304,691 $3,260,036 87.54%
Sports Center 214.02 $87,697 $46,947 $2,962,378 $1,689,711 96.54% Total 1,070.68 $476,381 $318,068 $17,908,783 $12,964,621 76.76%
The impact of the NEM3 tariff relative to the NEM2 tariff for each of the project locations varies significantly. On average, NEM3 drastically reduces the credit earned for exporting energy from the project locations to the utility grid, though it has no impact on energy that is produced and consumed concurrently on site. As a result of this, locations that utilize most of their energy during the day (particularly in the summer months) are not as heavily impacted by the NEM3 tariff as sites whose energy usage is not aligned with available sunlight. For a given site, as the fraction of energy usage offset by the PV system rises, the impact of NEM3 will generally also increase. For this portfolio, the impact of NEM3 on the proposed systems varies significantly, ranging from an 11.17% reduction in first year savings at the Library to a 57.98% reduction in first year savings at the Blackberry Farm location. Across the entire portfolio, NEM3 would reduce first year energy savings by 33.23% when compared with the same project under NEM2. The lifecycle net savings discrepancy across the portfolio (27.61%) is slightly lower than the first-year savings discrepancy, as the NEM 2 projects will be transitioned to NEM3 after 20 years, at which point the annual savings of both scenarios will equalize.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 15
Section 2 – Construction Methodology ,
Equipment, and Conceptual Designs
2.1 Construction Methodology and Schedule
Design-Build Construction Methodology Benefits
Syserco Energy Solutions recommends a design-build methodology for execution of this project, which is common in the solar industry. There are a significant number of benefits to this delivery method, which are particularly valuable in a time-constrained environment. Given the need to complete these projects by the April 15th, 2026 deadline to maintain NEM2 status for the arrays, timing will be critical for the success of the project. The benefits of a design-build methodology are summarized below:
Complete Accountability – With the design-build delivery method, a single entity, the design-builder, is the point of accountability across the entire project. The Design-Builder is always working toward the owner’s project goals with intent. The entire process, from design to final walkthrough, requires the Design-Builder to take full responsibility for all aspects of the project. Details and “Scope Gaps” cannot be overlooked without accountability.
Quality of the design – Allows for Owner input and accounts for all project-related costs Improved Continuity - In the traditional “Design-Bid-Build” project delivery, once the design team completes their work, they hand off the project to a general contractor, who may have a different perspective on the project than the design team. Unless all elements of the project are fully and minutely detailed, there may be discrepancies between the design intent and the fully executed project. With design-build projects, a seamless line exists between each phase of the construction process , aligning all parts of the project team towards a common design and implementation intent.
Single Project Leader, Single POC – A Design-Build Project Manager is part of everything from planning to the final stages. They’re in charge of keeping things on time, planned, and on budget.
Field Expertise & Early Collaboration – Expertise for all areas of project development and construction are involved from start to finish. Design engineers work with construction-focused minds to ensure what is being designed can actually be built in the field, without additional surprises and cost increases.
Risk Mitigation - Much of the risk involved in a project using the design-build method falls away from the owner to the design-build contractor. As a result, owners are often better protected against unexpected costs resulting from design errors or construction delays.
Single Contract – A single design-build contract eliminates (sometimes challenging) contract negotiations between engineering firms, construction firms, and commissioning firms. Instead of multiple contracts, the design-builder will have one singular agreement with the owner. As a result, the owner retains control, while an environment of collaboration produces exceptional results without regular construction hangups.
Streamlined Communication - Communication is critical to keeping projects on budget and on time.
Design-build cuts out inefficiencies by putting everyone on the same team. When designers, contractors, City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 16
and other workers are on the same team, getting information from one person to another is seamless and fast. Instead of needing to coordinate multiple entities that may operate on different schedules, the design-build team can react quickly to any issues that may arise during the project.
Financial Savings - It’s easy to assume that one of the benefits of design-bid-build is a lower budget, because projects often go to the lowest bidder. While a lower budget might be alluring, the inefficiencies and disconnects inherent in the traditional approach can create financial burdens. Keeping projects on budget is difficult and made even more complex by a lack of communication and accountability.
Time Savings - When teams work in step with each other, rather than solely sequentially, it means you can save time and budget time more effectively. Many project owners have an experience of waiting weeks (or even months) after the design phase to break ground and start construction. Using a design- build approach means you aren’t waiting on another company to start on the next stage.
Equipment Changes – The solar industry moves very quickly, and solar modules in particular are constantly subject to shifting availability as new module models and wattages come onto the market (and older modules stop being produced). Performing a detailed DC electrical design based on specific modules well in advance of the project's procurement and construction phases presents significant risk of alterations being needed. Alterations under a design-bid-build model impose an appreciable risk of delay, as the project engineer would need to be reengaged to review and update the DC electrical design to accommodate module changes.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 17
Design-Build Estimated Project Schedule
The major milestones of the estimated schedule required to implement a design-build procurement of the project portfolio by the April 15th, 2026 NEM2 deadline is summarized in the table below:
Event Target Date
Contract Issued January 14th, 2025
Project Engineering / Detailed Design Phase January 15th, 2025 – April 1st, 2025 Permitting April 1st, 2025 – May 1st, 2025
Procurement of Major Materials March 1st, 2025 – September 1st, 2025 Construction Schedule September 1st, 2025 – April 1st, 2026
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 18
2.2 Project Portfolio Conceptual Designs
Conceptual designs for each of the projects are shown on the following pages. For each project location, a Helioscope conceptual system design and a single line diagram have been provided, depicting the system layout, electrical components, and anticipated electrical configuration. These conceptual designs are indicative of the design intent for each of the projects, though alternative system designs (equipment manufacturers and models, inverter voltages, etc.) could be utilized to provide similar value to the city.
Maintaining the existing trees on site is a priority for this project, though several trees will need to be removed from the library and sports center site locations where conflicting with the array locations and where necessary to ensure appropriate solar access for the new solar arrays. Where possible, tree trimming is recommended in place of tree removal at the library and sports center sites. Tree trimming is additionally recommended at the Quinlan Community Center and Blackberry farm sites, though no trees will be removed from these locations as part of this project – the trees conflicting with the array located in the picnic area of the Quinlan Community Center are assumed to be removed or replanted as part of the Memorial Park revitalization project. The number of trees that will need to be removed and are recommended to be trimmed at each site is summarized in the table below:
Site Name Trees to be
Trimmed
Trees to be
Removed
Blackberry Farm 1 0
Community Hall 0 0
Library 0 31
Quinlan Community Center / Senior Center 9 0
Sports Center 2 5
Total 12 36
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 19
Blackberry Farm Conceptual Design
Blackberry Farm Carport Cupertino - Blackberry Farm, 21975 San Fernando Ave , Cupertino, CA 95014
Design Blackberry Farm Carport
DC Nameplate
73.1 kW
AC Nameplate 60.0 kW (1.22 DC/AC)
Last Modi ed Taylor Bohlen (Today at 10:26 PM)
Design
Project Location
Component Name Count
Inverters S6-GC60K-US (Solis) 1 (60.0 kW)
Strings 10 AWG (Copper) 8 (712.9 ft)
Optimizers TS4-A-O (Tigo Energy) 126 (88.2 kW)
Module Heliene Inc, 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial (580W) 126 (73.1 kW) Components
Description Racking Orientation Tilt Azimuth
Intrarow
Spacing
Frame
Size
Frames Modules Power
Field Segment 1
(copy 1)
Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
7° 241.43607° 1.6 ft 3x42 1 126
73.1 kW
Field Segments
Description Combiner Poles String Size Stringing Strategy Wiring Zone - 4-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zones
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 1 / 2 November 05, 2024
Detailed Layout2
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 2 / 2 November 05, 2024
Carport PV Array
(126 Modules)
Point of Interconnection
Transformer75 kVAUtility Side: 120/240 3Ph VACPV Side: 480 VAC Main SwitchgearTo Utility Grid800 A 120/240 3Ph VAC, 800 A 200 AAC Disconnect240 VAC (Nominal), 200 A (Min.)Cutler-Hammer DH324NRK Utility MeterMeter #1010282247DAS SystemCOMCOMCOMTo Inverter #1 Solis S6-GC60K-US60 kW, 79.4 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #173.08 kWstcPV Modules(126) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial68.8968 kWptc CTTo Module Temp SensorTo Irradiance Sensor
(126) TIGO TS4-A-O Optimizers
Project Location:
Project Details:
Cupertino - Blackberry Farm RecreationContractor:
Revision History:
Engineering Approval:
21975 San Fernando AveCupertino, CA 95014AHJ: Cupertino, City of
73.08 kWstc, 60 kWAC67.86 kW CEC-ACUtility: PG&E
Rev #DateDescription13/3/2023Original
215 Fourier AvenueFremont, CA, 94539Suite 140
28/28/2024Equipment
39/4/2024Equipment411/6/2024Equipment
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 23
Community Hall Conceptual Design
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 1 / 2 October 10, 2024
Co mmunity H all Ro o fto p C u p er t in o - C iv ic C en t er , 1 0 3 0 0 TOR R E AVE D es i g n C o mmuni t y H a l l Ro o f t o p
D C N am ep l at e 4 9 . 3 k W
AC N am ep l at e 5 0 . 0 k W ( 0 . 9 9 D C / A C )
L as t Mo d i ed T a y l o r B o hl e n ( 0 9 / 2 4 / 2 0 2 4 ) De s i g n
Proj e c t L oc a t i on
C om pon e n t N a m e C ou n t
I nv e r t e r s S 6 - G C 5 0 K- U S ( S o l i s ) 1 ( 5 0 . 0 k W) S t r i ngs 1 0 A WG ( C o ppe r ) 5 ( 3 7 2 . 1 f t ) M o dul e H e l i e ne I nc , 1 5 6 H C - 5 8 0 M 1 0 S L B i f a c i a l ( 5 8 0 W) 8 5 ( 4 9 . 3 k W) C omp on e n t s
D e s c r i pt i on R a c k i n g O r i e n t a t i on T i l t A z i m u t h In t r a r ow
S pa c i n g
Fr a m e
S i z e
Fr a m e s Modu l e s Pow e r
F i e l d S e gme nt
6 F l us h
M o unt
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
1 5 ° 9 0 ° 0 . 0 f t 1 x 1 3 4 3 4
1 9 . 7
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt
7 F l us h
M o unt
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
1 5 ° 2 7 0 ° 0 . 0 f t 1 x 1 4 0 4 0
2 3 . 2
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt
8 F l us h
M o unt
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
1 5 ° 1 8 0 . 0 2 4 2 5 ° 0 . 0 f t 1 x 1 1 1 1 1
6 . 3 8
k W
F i e l d S e g me n t s
D e s c r i pt i on C om bi n e r Pol e s S t r i n g S i z e S t r i n g i n g S t r a t e g y Wi r i ng Z o ne - - A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 2 - - A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 3 - 4 - 1 7 A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 4 - - A l o ng Ra c k i ng
W i ri n g Z on e s
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 2 / 2 October 10, 2024
De t a i l e d L a y ou t
Point of Interconnection
Rooftop PV Array
(85 Modules)
Solis S6-GC50K-US50 kW, 66.2 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #149.3 kWstcPV Modules(85) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial46.478 kWptc Transformer75 kVAUtility Side: 120/208 VACPV Side: 480 VAC Main SwitchgearTo Utility Grid1200 A 120/208 VAC, 1200 A 200 A AC Disconnect208 VAC (Nominal), 200 A (Min.)Cutler-Hammer DH324NRK Utility MeterMeter #1009538478
DAS SystemCOMCOMCOMTo Inverter #1CTTo Irradiance SensorTo Module Temp Sensor (43) TIGO TS4-A-2F Optimizers
Project Location:
Project Details:
City of Cupertino - Community HallContractor:
Revision History:
Engineering Approval:
10350 Torre AvenueCupertino, CA 95014AHJ: Cupertino, City of
49.3 kWstc, 50 kWAC45.78 kW CEC-ACUtility: PG&E
Rev #DateDescription13/3/2023Original
215 Fourier AvenueFremont, CA, 94539Suite 140
28/9/2024DAS
38/28/2024Equipment49/4/2024Equipment510/10/2024System Size 610/16/2024Project Name711/6/2024Equipment
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 27
Library Conceptual Design
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 1 / 2 October 10, 2024
Library / Civic Center C u p er t in o - C iv ic C en t er , 1 0 3 0 0 TOR R E AVE D es i g n L i br a r y / C i v i c C e nt e r
D C N am ep l at e 4 2 2 . 8 k W
AC N am ep l at e 4 0 3 . 0 k W ( 1 . 0 5 D C / A C ) L as t Mo d i ed T a y l o r B o hl e n ( 0 9 / 2 4 / 2 0 2 4 ) De s i g n
Proj e c t L oc a t i on
C om pon e n t N a m e C ou n t
I nv e r t e r s S 5 - G C 7 5 K- U S ( S o l i s ) 2 ( 1 5 0 . 0 k W) I nv e r t e r s S 6 - G C 3 3 K- U S ( S o l i s ) 1 ( 3 3 . 0 k W) I nv e r t e r s S 6 - G C 6 0 K- U S ( S o l i s ) 2 ( 1 2 0 . 0 k W) I nv e r t e r s S 5 - G C 1 0 0 K- U S ( S o l i s ) 1 ( 1 0 0 . 0 k W) S t r i ngs 1 0 A WG ( C o ppe r ) 4 9 ( 5 , 0 3 0 . 3 f t ) M o dul e H e l i e ne I nc , 1 5 6 H C - 5 8 0 M 1 0 S L B i f a c i a l ( 5 8 0 W) 7 2 9 ( 4 2 2 . 8 k W) C omp on e n t s
D e s c r i pt i on R a c k i n g O r i e n t a t i on T i l t A z i m u t h In t r a r ow
S pa c i n g
Fr a m e
S i z e
Fr a m e s Modu l e s Pow e r
F i e l d S e gme nt 5 C a r po r t
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
7 ° 1 8 0 ° 1 . 6 f t 3 x 4 9 1 1 4 7
8 5 . 3
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt 4
F l us h
M o unt
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
1 5 ° 2 7 0 ° 0 . 0 f t 1 x 1 1 4 3 1 4 3
8 2 . 9
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt 3 F i x e d T i l t
L a nds c a pe
( H o r i zo nt a l )
M o dul e :
1 0 °
M o dul e :
1 8 0 °
1 . 6 f t 1 x 1 3 4 3 4
1 9 . 7
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt 5
( c o py )
C a r po r t
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
7 ° 1 8 0 ° 1 . 6 f t 3 x 2 1 1 6 3
3 6 . 5
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt 5
( c o py 1 )
C a r po r t
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
7 ° 2 7 0 ° 1 . 6 f t 3 x 4 7 1 1 4 1
8 1 . 8
k W
F i e l d S e gme nt 5
( c o py 2 )
C a r po r t
P o r t r a i t
( V e r t i c a l )
7 ° 2 7 0 ° 1 . 6 f t 3 x 6 7 1 2 0 1
1 1 6 . 6
k W
F i e l d S e g me n t s
D e s c r i pt i on C om bi n e r Pol e s S t r i n g S i z e S t r i n g i n g S t r a t e g y Wi r i ng Z o ne - 5 - 1 7 A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 2 - 4 - 1 7 A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 3 - 5 - 1 7 A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 4 - 5 - 1 7 A l o ng Ra c k i ng
Wi r i ng Z o ne 5 - 4 - 1 7 A l o ng Ra c k i ng
W i ri n g Z on e s
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 2 / 2 October 10, 2024
De t a i l e d L a y ou t
Carport #1 PV Array
(201 Modules)
Carport #2 PV Array
(141 Modules)
Carport #2 PV Array
(147 Modules)
Carport #2 PV Array
(63 Modules)
Interconnection Point
Rooftop PV Arrays
(177 Modules)
Transformer500 kVAUtility Side: 120/208 VACPV Side: 480 VAC Main SwitchgearTo Utility Grid2500 A 120/208 VAC, 2500 A 2000 AAC Disconnect208 VAC (Nominal), 2000 A (Min.)
Utility MeterMeter #1009484301DAS SystemCOMCOMCOMCOMTo Inverter #1To Inverter #6 AC Combiner Panel #1480 VAC (Nominal), 800 A (Min.)
150 ASolis S5-GC100K-US100 kW, 120.3 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #1Carport #1 PV Modules(201) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial CTTo Module Temp SensorTo Irradiance Sensor
125 ASolis S5-GC75K-US75 kW, 90.2 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #3
125 ASolis S5-GC75K-US75 kW, 90.2 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #2
100 A Solis S5-GC60K-US60 kW, 79.4 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #5
100 A Solis S5-GC60K-US60 kW, 79.4 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #6
60 A Solis S5-GC33K-US33 kW, 43.7 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #4
Carport #3 PV Modules(147) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial Caprort #2 PV Modules(141) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial Rooftop PV Modules(177) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial Carport #4 PV Modules(63) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial AC Combiner Panel #2480 VAC (Nominal), 300 A (Min.)
AC Combiner Panel #3480 VAC (Nominal), 200 A (Min.)
300 A
175 A
(90) TIGO TS4-A-2F Optimizers
Project Location:
Project Details:
City of Cupertino - LibraryContractor:
Revision History:
Engineering Approval:
10800 Torre AvenueCupertino, CA 95014AHJ: Cupertino, City of 422.82 kWstc, 403 kWAC392.04 kW CEC-ACUtility: PG&E
Rev #DateDescription13/3/2023Original
215 Fourier AvenueFremont, CA, 94539Suite 140
28/29/2024Equipment39/4/2024Equipment410/10/2024System Size 511/6/2024Equipment
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 31
Quinlan Community Center
Conceptual Design
Quinlan Community Center Cupertino - Quinlan + Senior + Sports Centers, 1018 5 N STELLING RD cupertino
Design Quinlan Community Center
DC Nameplate
311.5 kW
AC Nameplate 273.0 kW (1.14 DC/AC)
Last Modi ed Taylor Bohlen (Today at 5:25 PM)
Design
Project Location
Component Name Count
Inverters S5-GC90K-US (Solis) 1 (90.0 kW)
Inverters S6-GC33K-US (Solis) 1 (33.0 kW)
Inverters S6-GC50K-US (Solis) 1 (50.0 kW)
Inverters S5-GC100K-US (Solis) 1 (100.0 kW)
Strings 10 AWG (Copper) 35 (3,558.6 ft)
Module Heliene Inc, 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial (580W) 537 (311.5 kW) Components
Description Racking Orientation Tilt Azimuth
Intrarow
Spacing
Frame
Size
Frames Modules Power
Field Segment 1 Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
7° 180° 1.6 ft 3x66 1 198
114.8
kW
Field Segment 5
Flush
Mount
Landscape
(Horizontal)
20° 225.25685° 0.0 ft 1x1 34 34
19.7 kW
Field Segment 7
Flush
Mount
Landscape
(Horizontal)
20° 270.25943° 0.0 ft 1x1 11 11
6.38 kW
Field Segment 8
Flush
Mount
Portrait
(Vertical)
20° 134.57349° 0.0 ft 1x1 14 14
8.12 kW
Field Segment
12 Flush
Mount
Portrait
(Vertical)
20° 135° 0.0 ft 1x1 19 19
11.0 kW
Field Segment
36 Flush
Mount
Portrait
(Vertical)
20° 180° 0.0 ft 1x1 5 5
2.90 kW
Field Segment
34 Flush
Mount
Portrait
(Vertical)
20° 270° 0.0 ft 1x1 7 7
4.06 kW
Field Segment 1
(copy)
Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
7° 180° 1.6 ft 3x19 1 57
33.1 kW
Field Segment 1
(copy 1)
Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
5° 90° 1.6 ft 6x32 1 192
111.4
kW
Field Segments
Description Combiner Poles String Size Stringing Strategy Wiring Zone - 5-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zone 2 - 4-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zone 3 - 4-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zone 4 - 5-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zones
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 1 / 2 November 01, 2024
Detailed Layout
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 2 / 2 November 01, 2024
Interconnection Point
Carport Array #1
(198 Modules)
Carport Array #2
(192 Modules)
Carport Array #3
(57 Modules)
Rooftop PV Arrays
(90 Modules)
Main SwitchgearTo Utility Grid800 A 277/480 VAC, 800 A
450 AAC Disconnect480 VAC (Nominal), 600 A (Min.)Cutler-Hammer DH366NRK Utility MeterMeter #1009512069DAS SystemCOMCOMCOMCOMTo Inverter #1To Inverter #4 AC Combiner Panel #1480 VAC (Nominal), 450 A (Min.)
60 A Solis S6-GC33K-US33 kW, 43.7 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #3Carport #3 PV Modules(57) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 150 ASolis S5-GC90K-US90 kW, 108.3 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #2Carport #2 PV Modules(192) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 150 ASolis S5-GC100K-US100 kW, 120.3 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #1Carport #1 PV Modules(198) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 90 A Solis S6-GC50K-US50 kW, 66.2 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #4 Rooftop PV Modules(90) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial CTTo Module Temp SensorTo Irradiance Sensor
AC Combiner Panel #2480 VAC (Nominal), 300 A (Min.)300 A (47) TIGO TS4-A-2F Optimizers
Project Location:
Project Details:
City of Cupertino - Quinlan Community CenterContractor:
Revision History:
Engineering Approval:
10185 N Stelling RdCupertino, CA 95014AHJ: Cupertino, City of 311.46 kWstc, 273 kWAC288.61 kW CEC-ACUtility: PG&E
Rev #DateDescription13/3/2023Original
215 Fourier AvenueFremont, CA, 94539Suite 140
28/28/2024Equipment
39/4/2024Equipment
411/6/2024Equipment
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 35
Sports Center Conceptual Design
Sports Center Carports Cupertino - Quinlan + Senior + Sports Centers, 1018 5 N STELLING RD cupertino
Design Sports Center Carports
DC Nameplate
214.0 kW
AC Nameplate 172.0 kW (1.24 DC/AC)
Last Modi ed Taylor Bohlen (09/24/2024)
Design
Project Location
Component Name Count
Inverters S5-GC75K-US (Solis) 1 (75.0 kW)
Inverters S6-GC25K-US (Solis) 1 (25.0 kW)
Inverters S6-GC36K-US (Solis) 2 (72.0 kW)
Strings 10 AWG (Copper) 26 (1,628.9 ft)
Module Heliene Inc, 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial (580W) 369 (214.0 kW) Components
Description Racking Orientation Tilt Azimuth
Intrarow
Spacing
Frame
Size
Frames Modules Power
Field Segment 2
(copy)
Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
7° 270° 1.6 ft 6x27 1 162
94.0 kW
Field Segment 1
(copy)
Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
7° 180° 1.6 ft 3x17 1 51
29.6 kW
Field Segment 1
(copy 1)
Carport
Portrait
(Vertical)
7° 180° 1.6 ft 3x52 1 156
90.5 kW
Field Segments
Description Combiner Poles String Size Stringing Strategy Wiring Zone 2 - 5-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zone 3 - 4-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zone - 4-17 Along Racking
Wiring Zones
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 1 / 2 November 01, 2024
Detailed Layout
Design Overview produced by Taylor Bohlen
© 2024 Aurora Solar 2 / 2 November 01, 2024
Interconnection Point
Carport Array #1
(162 Modules)
Carport Array #3
(156 Modules)
Carport Array #2
(51 Modules)
480 VAC (Nominal), 400 A (Min.)
125 A Solis S5-GC75K-US75 kW, 90.2 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #1Carport #1 PV Modules(162) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL BifacialAC Combiner Panel Main SwitchgearTo Utility Grid400 A 277/480 VAC, 400 A
300 AAC Disconnect480 VAC (Nominal), 400 A (Min.)Cutler-Hammer DH365FGK Utility MeterMeter #1010260937DAS SystemCOMCOMCOMTo Inverter #1To Inverter #5 60 A Solis S6-GC36K-US36 kW, 47.6 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #3
60 A Solis S6-GC36K-US36 kW, 47.6 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #4
50 A Solis S6-GC25K-US25 kW, 33.1 A, 480 VAC
COMTo DAS
Inverter #2
Carport #3 PV Modules(156) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial Carport #2 PV Modules(51) Heliene 156HC-580 M10 SL BifacialCTCOMTo Module Temp SensorTo Irradiance Sensor Project Location:
Project Details:
City of Cupertino - Sports CenterContractor:
Revision History:
Engineering Approval:
21111 Stevens Creek BlvdCupertino, CA 95014AHJ: Cupertino, City of 214.02 kWstc, 197 kWAC198.57 kW CEC-ACUtility: PG&E
Rev #DateDescription13/2/2023Original
215 Fourier AvenueFremont, CA, 94539Suite 140
28/9/2024System Size
38/28/2024Equipment49/4/2024Equipment
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 39
2.3 Project Equipment Lists
The following is a description of the major materials utilized in the conceptual design for each of the project locations. Note that this equipment is listed to depict the conceptual design intent, and alternative equipment manufacturers and models may be utilized to meet the minimum requirements detailed in this report.
Full Portfolio Equipment List
Cupertino Portfolio Equipment List
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
Modules Heliene Inc 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 1846
Rapid Shutdown / Optimizers TIGO TS4-A-2F 180
Rapid Shutdown / Optimizers TIGO TS4-A-O 126
Inverters Solis S5-GC100K-US 2
Inverters Solis S5-GC90K-US 1
Inverters Solis S5-GC75K-US 3
Inverters Solis S6-GC60K-US 3
Inverters Solis S6-GC50K-US 2
Inverters Solis S6-GC36K-US 2
Inverters Solis S6-GC33K-US 2
Inverters Solis S6-GC25K-US 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 800A 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 450A 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 400A 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 300A 2
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 200A 1
Transformers TBD 500 kVA, 480:120/208 VAC 1
Transformers TBD 75 kVA, 480:120/208 VAC 1
Transformers TBD 75 kVA, 480:120/240 VAC, 3-Ph, 4-W 1
Disconnects TBD 240 VAC, 200 A, Fused 1
Disconnects TBD 240 VAC, 200 A, Unfused 1
Disconnects TBD 240 VAC, 2000 A, Fused 1
Disconnects TBD 600 VAC, 600A, Fused 1
Disconnects TBD 600 VAC, 400A, Fused 1
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 40
Full Portfolio Equipment List (Continued)
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
DAS AlsoEnergy PLCS400 3
DAS AlsoEnergy PLCS600 1
DAS AlsoEnergy
Custom: (System must include a module
temperature sensor, irradiance sensor, and CTs
with a 2000:5 CT ratio) 1
EV Chargers TBD 32A/Level 2 18
Blackberry Farm Equipment List
Blackberry Farm Equipment List
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
Modules Heliene Inc 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 126
Rapid Shutdown / Optimizers TIGO TS4-A-O 126
Inverters Solis S6-GC60K-US 1
Transformers TBD 75 kVA, 480:120/240 VAC, 3-Ph, 4-W 1
Disconnects TBD 240 VAC, 200 A, Fused 1
DAS AlsoEnergy PLCS400 1
EV Chargers TBD 32A/Level 2 2
Community Hall Equipment List
Community Hall Equipment List
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
Modules Heliene Inc 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 85
Rapid Shutdown / Optimizers TIGO TS4-A-2F 43
Inverters Solis S6-GC50K-US 1
Transformers TBD 75 kVA, 480:120/208 VAC 1
Disconnects TBD 240 VAC, 200 A, Unfused 1
DAS AlsoEnergy PLCS400 1
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 41
Library Equipment List
Library Equipment List
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
Modules Heliene Inc 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 729
Rapid Shutdown / Optimizers TIGO TS4-A-2F 90
Inverters Solis S5-GC100K-US 1
Inverters Solis S5-GC75K-US 2
Inverters Solis S6-GC60K-US 2
Inverters Solis S6-GC33K-US 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 800A 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 300A 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 200A 1
Transformers TBD 500 kVA, 480:120/208 VAC 1
Disconnects TBD 240 VAC, 2000 A, Fused 1
DAS AlsoEnergy
Custom: (System must include a module
temperature sensor, irradiance sensor, and CTs with
a 2000:5 CT ratio) 1
EV Chargers TBD 32A/Level 2 8
Quinlan Community Center Equipment List
Quinlan Community Center Equipment List
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
Modules Heliene Inc 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 537
Rapid Shutdown / Optimizers TIGO TS4-A-2F 47
Inverters Solis S5-GC100K-US 1
Inverters Solis S5-GC90K-US 1
Inverters Solis S6-GC50K-US 1
Inverters Solis S6-GC33K-US 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 450A 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 300A 1
Disconnects TBD 600 VAC, 600A, Fused 1
DAS AlsoEnergy PLCS600 1
EV Chargers TBD 32A/Level 2 4
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 2 – Construction Methodology, Equipment, and
Conceptual Designs 42
Sports Center Equipment List
Sports Center Equipment List
Item Manufacturer Model # / Size Quantity
Modules Heliene Inc 156HC-580 M10 SL Bifacial 369
Inverters Solis S5-GC75K-US 1
Inverters Solis S6-GC36K-US 2
Inverters Solis S6-GC25K-US 1
Panelboards TBD 480 VAC, 400A 1
Disconnects TBD 600 VAC, 400A, Fused 1
DAS AlsoEnergy PLCS400 1
EV Chargers TBD 32A/Level 2 4
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 43
Section 3 – Project Specifications and
Technology Evaluation
3.1 Technical Specifications
General
● All power generation and transmission equipment must be UL listed for its designed use. ● Construction must comply with current adopted State Building Code, as amended by the City of Cupertino, which encompasses:
o Most recently adopted California Building Code (CBC)
o Most recently adopted California Electric Code (CEC)
o Most recently adopted California Green Building Code
o Most recently adopted California Energy Code
o All other relevant local, state, and national codes
● There must be a minimum 1-year warranty for all materials and workmanship. ● All labor utilized on the project must meet prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements in the Inflation Reduction Act required to receive the full direct pay credit.
Balance of System Equipment
● Each proposed PV system shall include, at a minimum, one Visible Blade AC disconnect for safety and maintenance concerns. System must comply with all Utility interconnection requirements.
● Rooftop PV systems must include rapid shutdown, as required by code. ● String combiner boxes (if applicable) must include properly sized fusing, and all metal equipment and components must be bonded and grounded as required by the CEC.
● All system wiring and conduit must comply with applicable local code and CEC stipulations.
● Wall penetrations must be sealed in compliance with CEC and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) regulations.
● All wiring materials and methods must adhere to industry-standard best practices. o The conductors in the circuit between the AC disconnect switch and point of interconnection must be copper (CU).
o All conductors shall be provided in conduit appropriate for the conditions in which they are to be located, except conductors between PV modules.
o Wiring insulation types shall be appropriate for the conditions in which they are located.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 44
● Material requirements:
o Project must meet domestic content threshold for bonus ITC credit under the Inflation Reduction Act.
o Fasteners and hardware throughout the systems shall be stainless steel or material of equivalent corrosion resistance. o Racking components and all structural members shall be anodized aluminum, hot-dipped galvanized steel, or material of equivalent corrosion resistance based on appropriate
environmental conditions.
o Unprotected steel not to be used in any components.
o All structural steel and iron must be 100% domestically produced.
o Manufactured components must contain 45% (minimum)
domestic content across each project location. This domestic content percentage must be 50% (minimum) if the project begins in 2026.
o Modules utilized in the project must have a minimum of a 10- year material warranty and 25-year power output guarantee. o Power output guarantee must include a maximum of 2% first- year degradation and 0.5% annual degradation.
o Modules utilized in the project must be from a tier 1 module manufacturer.
o Inverters utilized in the project mush have a minimum of a 10- year warranty.
Interconnection
● System interconnection must comply with CEC and Utility regulations and must be approved by the local Utility and the Authority Having Jurisdictions (AHJs).
● Interconnection points will be at facility main switchgear locations, per Single Line Diagrams
● Emergency back-up generation may exist on-site and must be factored into proposed PV system electrical plans.
● All placards required by the AHJ, the Utility, and/or State Solar Initiative program must be provided and installed according to SES and CEC guidelines.
Monitoring and Reporting Systems
● Monitoring shall include revenue-grade metering of PV system production, a pyranometer, and a module temperature sensor. ● Monitoring system shall include an online portal with a graphical user interface for the city to be able to remotely access site production and weather data.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 45
● Respondent will be responsible for providing all required monitoring communications and power wiring and conduit.
System Design and Permitting
● Construction plan set shall include (at a minimum):
o Site overview
o Detailed array layout with stringing configuration
o Mounting and racking details
o Details of electrical transmission showing conduit routing and location of electrical enclosures, conduit support details, and enclosure mounting details
o Electrical single-line diagram
o Electrical three-line diagram
o Monitoring plan
● All proposed system designs and construction techniques must be approved by the AHJ ● Wire loss in DC circuits to be < 1.5%.
● Wire loss in AC circuits to be < 3%.
● Minimum 30-year design life for structural members.
● Carports must have a minimum height of 10’.
● Where carport footprints encroach onto existing fire lanes, a minimum structure height of 13’-6” must be maintained.
EV Charging Requirements
● Carport projects located in parking lots must have EV chargers and EV-ready spaces installed in accordance with CALGreen Requirements, as amended by the Cupertino Municipal Code. ● EV charging stations must be fed by a dedicated subpanel, with individual dedicated breakers for each charger.
Construction
● All electrical enclosures and equipment shall be installed to be readily accessible to qualified personnel only.
● All visible conduits and electrical equipment shall be painted or aesthetically dressed to match existing structures.
● Location of existing underground utilities must be marked by USA/Dig Alert or equivalent private service prior to any underground work.
Contractor to utilize Ground Penetrating Radar to locate any private utilities prior to drilling, boring, or trenching.
Commissioning
● Systems shall be commissioned in accordance with industry best City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 46
practices, and include (at a minimum):
o Insulation resistance testing
o I-V Curve testing
o 7-day performance (capacity) testing
● Commissioning shall be completed at the conclusion of the construction phase of the project.
● A commissioning report shall be prepared (encompassing all testing performed, including the above required testing at minimum.) For review and acceptance by the city before final completion of the project.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 47
3.2 New Technology Evaluation
New technology options were evaluated as a part of this project, though no emerging technologies were selected to be leveraged. One such technology that was investigated was building integrated, transparent coatings for windows which generate solar energy; unfortunately, the sites which have been selected for this project are not particularly well suited to this technology, as there are a limited number of windows at these locations with ideal orientations and good solar access. Additionally, as this is an emerging technology in the marketplace, there are risks inherent in being an early adopter. For a solar PV project, which has an expected lifespan of 30 years, utilizing proven, bankable technologies to ensure that long term value is captured from the systems in a predictable fashion is critical to ensure the ongoing viability of the investment.
Each site was evaluated as a fit for this technology, though none were selected for the reasons specified below:
Blackberry Farm:
-No large glass building facades
-Suboptimal facing of windows in existing structures for solar production -Large number of separate structures would require significant underground work to connect the system in a single location
-Significant shade cast on buildings prevents optimal energy production
Community Hall:
-No large glass building facades
-Significant shading from Library building would reduce solar production
Library:
-No large glass building facades
-Significant shading from nearby trees would significantly impact energy production -Not enough available real estate on building facades to meet production needs
Quinlan Community Center:
-Significant shading from nearby trees would significantly impact energy production -Not enough available real estate on building facades to meet production needs City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 48
Sports Center:
-No large glass building facades
-Significant shading from nearby trees would significantly impact energy production -Not enough available real estate on building facades to meet production needs
Thin-film solar modules were an alternative technology that was also considered for the project. The benefits associated with these modules are that they are lower cost and lighter weight. While they do provide excellent benefits, this module type tends to be less efficient and less durable than traditional solar modules. With lower efficiency than traditional modules, more space is required to provide the same electrical output when utilizing the thin-film module option. Due to the desire to maintain as many trees as possible in the project, the additional real estate necessary to utilize this type of module on the project would have likely come at the expense of additional trees needing to be removed. Furthermore, maximizing the system’s durability is a priority on the project to ensure that the system encounters as few issues as possible during its projected 30-year life cycle.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 49
3.3 Energy Storage Evaluation
All five project locations were evaluated to determine the feasibility and efficacy of installing a battery to provide site resilience and financial benefits for the city. Batteries can typically provide revenue in two main ways. The first is by capturing low-cost energy at off-peak times and utilizing this energy to offset higher-cost electrical usage during peak times (energy arbitrage.) The second is by discharging energy during high-usage time periods on site to offset electrical demand charges (demand reduction.) Under NEM2, the ability to generate cost savings through energy arbitrage is limited, as the re is little cost differential between on-peak and off-peak energy. Under NEM3, a battery can capture excess energy which would be exported to the utility grid for minimal value, and instead consume this energy on site during high-cost periods. As the average differential between NEM3 exported energy and retail energy prices is significantly larger than the difference in retail price between time periods, there is a vastly expanded opportunity for the energy storage system to provide cost savings when compared with NEM2 through energy arbitrage. As the systems approach the end of the 20-year NEM2 lock-in period, it is recommended that the addition of a battery to these projects should be reevaluated.
Energy storage systems can also be utilized to mitigate electrical demand charges at a project location.
Demand charges are levied based on the maximum amount of electrical energy used within any 15 - minute period throughout the billing cycle (typically a month.) The batteries can discharge energy during these high-usage intervals, reducing the energy consumed in these windows to reduce the associated demand charge. This benefit tends to complement solar PV systems, as the ability to target these high usage periods is much greater with a controllable resource as opposed to one dependent on available sunlight and weather conditions.
PV systems under NEM2 are particularly effective at offsetting energy charges, as excess energy produced during any time period is credited to the customer at close to the retail rate of electricity, with the difference in credited and retail value being equal to the non-bypassable charges associated with consumed energy. This credited value can be used to offset the electrical energy charges accrued during times of the day where the system is not producing energy (i.e. at night.) A solar PV system is much less effective in offsetting demand charges when compared with energy charges. Because demand charges are based on the highest-usage 15-minute interval within a billing period, which does not always occur in-line with solar production, the system will not necessarily offset these charges. Even if the peak site usage coincides with solar production, a new, lower peak will be recorded. The only ways to completely mitigate demand charges are to not import any energy from the utility, or to reduce the demand to a level at which the site becomes eligible for a utility rate schedule which does not include demand charges.
As the solar PV system in each location will be on NEM2, the additional financial benefit of a battery is limited; however, there are two project locations (Quinlan Community Center and Sports Center,) where a battery can be utilized to mitigate the site’s electrical demand to the point at which these sites will become eligible for the B1 and B6 rate schedules, which do not include demand charges. For these rate schedules, the marginal electrical costs are rolled into the energy portion of the bill which ca n be directly offset by the PV system, allowing for much greater avoided costs from the system compared with a standalone PV project on a rate schedule which includes demand charges.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 50
For the remaining sites, the project locations are either already on or are eligible for energy -only rate schedules (Blackberry Farm and Civic Center,) or have a level of electrical demand that can’t be mitigated to the point where the location is eligible for an energy-only rate schedule (Library.) The current estimated benefit of cost avoidance utilizing batteries at these three locations is not sufficient to offset the estimated costs of installing, maintaining, and operating these energy storage systems, and therefore is not recommended at these locations.
The sites were also evaluated to determine how much energy storage would be needed to support backup power for each location for a period of 1 and 2 days (in concert with the planned PV system at each site.) The estimated battery size required for each of these outcomes is shown in the table below:
City of Cupertino Battery Evaluation Summary
Project Location Rate Change* 1 Day Backup 2 Days Backup Blackberry Farm N/A 200 kWh 350 kWh
Civic Center N/A 300 kWh 575 kWh
Library N/A 2,000 kWh 3,850 kWh
Sports Center 225 kWh 650 kWh 1,150 kWh
Quinlan Community Center 200 kWh 500 kWh 800 kWh
*The addition of EV chargers for each of these projects may impact each site’s electrical demand. The power available for use at each charger will need to be managed by a load-management system (in concert with the energy storage system) to ensure car charging doesn’t adversely impact the ability of the battery to provide the demand reduction necessary to facilitate a rate change.
This is a high-level evaluation of what would be needed to support full site backup for the listed durations; there is also flexibility to design a microgrid system to support only critical electrical loads, which would have a significant impact on the backup duration that could be provided from a battery of a similar size. In order to design an ideal microgrid for each location, a detailed review of project goals and requirements would need to be undertaken.
Of note, in order to accommodate full-facility backup operation of each of these project locations, significant infrastructure upgrades will be necessary – while there are multiple options available to facilitate this full-facility backup, significant reconfigurations and/or upgrades to the electrical capacity of the sites’ switchgears would be necessary. These infrastructure upgrades can likely be mitigated if a smaller scale, critical-load backup was desired in place of full-facility backup.
Infrastructure upgrades at the Sports Center and Quinlan Community Center would not be required to utilize the needed size of energy storage system to provide the electrical demand reduction necessary for a change in rate schedule. Upgrades would not be necessary at these locations for demand reduction functionality, as the systems would not need to function during a power outage. As a result, the resources could be connected on the utility’s side of the main breaker, allowing the systems to avoid si ze restrictions in the CEC associated with connections on the customer’s side of the main breaker. Please note that this analysis is based on the customer’s infrastructure – upgrades to utility infrastructure (transformer, service conductors, etc.) may still be required for these options.
City of Cupertino
Programming, Cost, and Funding Report
Section 3 – Project Specifications and Technology
Evaluation 51
Appendix A – Equipment Cut Sheets
156HC M10 SL Bifacial Module
156 Half-Cut Monocrystalline 565W – 585W
Bifacial Technology Enabling Additional Energy
Harvest from Rear Side
Half-Cut Design with Split Junction Box Technology
2% First Year Degradation & 0.5% Annual Power Degradation 21%
Utilizes the latest M10 size super high efficiency
Monocrystalline PERC cells. Half cut design
further reduces cell to module (CTM) losses.
Hail Resistance
Framed Glass-backsheet construction is ideal
for Hail resistance upto 55mm.
Anti-Reflective
Premium solar glass with anti reflective coating
delivers more energy throughout the day
High Reliability
Proven resistance to PID and reliable in high
temperature and humidity environments.
No Compromise Guarantee
15 Year Product Warranty
25 Year Linear Performance Guarantee
World-class Quality
• Heliene’s fully automated manufacturing
facilities with state-of-the-art robotics
and computer aided inspection systems
ensure the highest level of product
quality and consistency
• All manufacturing locations are
compliant with international quality
standards and are ISO 9001 certified
• Heliene modules have received
Top Performer rankings in several
categories from PV Evolution Labs (PV
EL) independent quality evaluations
Bankable Reputation
• Established in 2010, Heliene is recognized
as highly bankable Tier 1 manufacturer of
solar modules and has been approved for
use by the U.S. Department of Defense,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and from
numerous top tier utility scale project debt
providers
• By investing heavily in research and
development, Heliene has been able to stay
on the cutting edge of advances in module
technology and manufacturing efficiency
Local Sales, Service, and Support
• With sales offices across the U.S.
and Canada, Heliene prides itself on
unsurpassed customer support for
our clients. Heliene has become the
brand of choice for many of the leading
residential installers, developers and
Independent Power Producers due
to our innovative technology, product
customization capability and just in
time last-mile logistics support
• Local sales and customer support
means answered phone calls and
immediate answers to your technical
and logistics questions. We understand
your project schedules often change
with little warning and endeavor to
work with you to solve your project
management challenges
156HC M10 SL Bifacial Module
Manufactured Using International Quality
System Standards: ISO9001
www.heliene.com
156HC M10 SL Bifacial Module
Dimensions for 156HC M10 SL Bifacial Series Modules
I-V Curves for 156HC M10 SL Bifacial Series Modules
The specifications and key features contained in this datasheet may deviate slightly from our actual products due to the ongoing innovation and product enhancements. Heliene Inc. reserves the right to make necessary adjustment to the information described herein at any time without prior notice. PV modules should be handled and installed only by qualified people. Please carefully read safety and installation instructions available for download from Heliene website before using Heliene PV modules. For warranty details, please refer to Product Warranty Document, also available for download from Heliene website.
Electrical Data (STC)
Peak Rated Power* Pmpp (W) 585 580 575 570 565
Maximum Power Voltage Vmpp (V) 45.85 45.64 45.44 45.23 45.02 Maximum Power Current Impp (A) 12.77 12.70 12.64 12.58 12.52 Open Circuit Voltage* Voc (V) 54.41 54.13 53.86 53.59 53.32 Short Circuit Current** Isc (A) 13.50 13.48 13.46 13.44 13.42 Module Efficiency Eff (%) 20.9 20.8 20.6 20.4 20.2
Maximum Series Fuse Rating MF (A) 30 30 30 30 30
Power Sorting Range [- 0/+3%]
Bifaciality Factor*** 70 ± 5%
Mechanical Data
Solar Cells 156 Half Cut, M10, 182mm, PERC Cells
Module Construction Framed Glass–Backsheet
Dimensions (L x W x D) 2464 x 1134 x 35 mm (97.01 x 44.65 x 1.38 inch) Weight 31 kg (68.34 lbs)
Frame Double Webbed 15-Micron Anodized Aluminum Alloy
Glass 3.2mm Low-Iron Content, High-Transmission, PV Solar Glass with Anti Reflective Coating
Junction Box IP-68 rated with 3 bypass diodes
Output Cables 4mm2 (12AWG), 0.3-meter Symmetrical Cables Optional: 1.2-meter Symmetrical Cables upon request
Connectors Multi-Contact/ Stäubli MC4
HSPE_156HC_M10_SL_Bifacial_Rev.02.pdf
Temperature Ratings
Nominal Module Operating
Temperature (NMOT) +45°C (±2°C)
Temperature Coefficient of Pmax -0.34%/°C
Temperature Coefficient of Voc -0.25%/°C
Temperature Coefficient of Isc 0.05%/°C
Certifications
UL Certification UL61215, UL61730
Maximum Ratings
Operational Temperature -40°C to +85°C
Max System Voltage 1500V
Mech. Load Test (Front) 113 psf / 5400 Pa
Mech. Load Test (Back) 50 psf / 2400 Pa
Fire Type Type 1
Electrical Data (NMOT)
Maximum Power Pmpp (W) 436 432 429 425 421
Maximum Power Voltage Vmpp (V) 43.56 43.36 43.17 42.97 42.77 Maximum Power Current Impp (A) 10.01 9.97 9.93 9.89 9.85 Open Circuit Voltage Voc (V) 51.68 51.43 51.17 50.91 50.66 Short Circuit Current Isc (A) 10.91 10.89 10.88 10.86 10.84 NMOT - Nominal Module Operating Temperature:
Irradiance at 800W/m2, Ambient Temperature 20ºC, Wind speed 1m/s June 5th, 2024
546W
436W
328W
217W
106W
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
CURRENT [A]
VOLTAGE [V]
HELIENE INC. 156HC -585 M10 SL BIFACIAL
Incident Irrad. = 1000W/m2
Incident Irrad. = 800W/m2
Incident Irrad. = 600W/m2
Incident Irrad. = 400W/m2
Incident Irrad. = 200W/m2
At NMOT
Incident Irrad. = 1000W/m2
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
CURRENT [A]
VOLTAGE [V]
HELIENE INC. 156HC -585 M10 SL BIFACIAL
Cells temp = 10°C, Pmpp=614W
Cells temp = 25°C, Pmpp=585W
Cells temp = 40°C, Pmpp=556W
Cells temp = 55°C, Pmpp=526W
Cells temp = 70°C, Pmpp=494W
6 5 4 3 2 1
6 5 4 3 2 1
A
B
C
D
DESCRIPTIONREV. DATE
DOCUMENT TITLE:
DRAWN BY
REVIEWED BY
DATE
THIRD ANGLE
PROJECTION
TOLERANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED:
COPYRIGHT HELIENE:
THIS DOCUMENT AND DATA DISCLOSED HEREIN OR HEREWITH IS PROPRIETARY AND MAY
NOT BE REPRODUCED, USED OR DISCLOSED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM HELIENE.
C
X ± 1
X.X ± 0.1
LINEAR: ANGULAR: X ± 1
X.X ± 0.1
UNIT:
MILIMETER(MM)
NAME
APPROVED BY
PART NUMBER: SHEETS:
Xinyan Bai
DRAWN
REVIEWER
APPROVER
Parth Bhatt
1/1
Krishna Bharatia 2022-10-19
2022-10-19
2022-10-19
156HC M10 SPEC SHEET
00 Initial Release 2022-05-07
35 x 2
4 - Ø7 x 10
Mounting Hole
8 - Ø9 x 14
Mounting Hole
4 - Ø4
Grounding Hole
1134
400
800
1400
4 x Drainage Holes
5 x 5
8 x Drainage Holes
8 x 3
20 x 2
2464
35 1085 x 6
35 35
35 20
A - A (1:10) B - B (1:10)
A A
BB
532
832
1032
Warranty
15 Year Product Warranty
25 Year Linear Power Guarantee
Packaging Configuration
Modules per Pallet 40’ Container: 31 pieces
Modules per 40’ Container: 620 pieces
Modules per Pallet 53’ Trailer: 28 pieces
Modules per 53’ trailer: 588 pieces
STC - Standard Test Conditions: Irradiation 1000 W/m2 - Air mass AM 1.5 - Cell temperature 25 ºC, *Pmpp Production Tolerance ± 3%, *Voc Production Tolerance ± 3%, **Isc Production Tolerance ± 4% ***Bifaciality Factor= Pmpprear/Pmppfront where Pmpprear and Pmppfront are tested at STC [email protected]
S5-GC(75-100)K-US
Solis Three Phase Grid-Tied Inverters
Models:
S5-GC75K-US / S5-GC80K-US
S5-GC90K-US / S5-GC100K-US
Efficient
Smart
Safe
• 8/9/10 MPPTs, max. efficiency 98.8%
(CEC efficiency 98.3%)
• > 1.5 DC/AC ratio
• String current up to 16A for higher
capacity modules
• Intelligent string monitoring, smart I-V curve scan
• Remote firmware upgrade with simple operation(1)
• Type 4X, C5 Anti-Corrosion Level
• UL 1741 SA and SB
• External signal control function
• Integrated nighttime PID recovery for optimal module performance • AFCI protection, proactively reduces fire risk
• High quality components from globally recognized suppliers Economic
• DC side supports "Y" connector
360º View
Ordering: S5-GC(75-100)K-US
• APST (APS MLRSD Transmitter)
• RSS (Tigo MLRSD Transmitter)
• NEPT (NEP MLRSD Transmitter)
(1) Requires the user to use Solis monitoring
www.solisinverters.com
DATASHEET S5-GC(75-100)K-US
Models 75K 80K 90K 100K
Ordering guidelines: Determine the basic model and add your desired features from above.
Ex: S5-GC75K-US-APST (Inverter with APS transmitter)
Input DC
Max. input voltage 1000 V
Rated voltage 600 V
Start-up voltage 195 V
MPPT voltage range 180-1000 V
Max. input current 8*32 A 9*32 A 10*32 A
Max. short circuit current 8*50 A 9*50 A 10*50 A
MPPT number/Max. input strings number 8/16 9/18 10/20
Output AC
Rated output power 75 kW 80 kW 90 kW 100 kW
Max. apparent output power 75 kVA 80 kVA 90 kVA 100 kVA Max. output power 75 kW 80 kW 90 kW 100 kW
Rated grid voltage 3Ф/PE, 480 V
Rated grid frequency 60 Hz
Max. output current 90.2 A 96.2 A 108.3 A 120.3 A
Power Factor >0.99 (0.8 leading - 0.8 lagging)
THDi <3%
Efficiency
Max. efficiency 98.7% 98.8%
CEC efficiency 98.3% 98.2%
Protection
DC reverse-polarity protection Yes
Surge protection DC Type II / AC Type II
Ground fault monitoring Yes
Anti-islanding protection Yes
Strings monitoring Yes
I/V Curve scanning Yes
Rapid shutdown Yes
Integrated AFCI (DC arc-fault circuit protection) Yes
Integrated PID recovery Yes
AC switch Yes
General Data
Dimensions (W*H*D) 41.9*22.3*13.6 in (1065*567*344.5 mm) Weight 187 lbs (85 kgs)
Topology Transformerless
Self-consumption (night) <2 W
Relative humidity 0-100%
Operating ambient temperature range -22°F to 140°F (-30°C to +60°C ) Storage environment -40°F to 176°F (-40°C to 80°C)
Ingress protection TYPE 4X
Cooling concept Intelligent redundant fan-cooling
Max. operation altitude 13,120 ft (4000 m)
Compliance UL1741SB, UL1741SA, IEEE 1547-2018, UL1699B, UL1998, FCC Part15 ClassB, California Rule 21, Heco Rule 14H, NEC 690.12-2020, CAN/CSA C22.2107.1-1
Features
DC connection MC4 connector
AC connection OT Terminal (max. 350 MCM)
Display LCD
Communication RS485, Ethernet, Optional: Wi-Fi, Cellular
23.6.3 S6-GC(25-60)K-US
Solis Three Phase Grid-Tied Inverters
Models:
S6-GC25K-US / S6-GC33K-US
S6-GC36K-US / S6-GC40K-US
S6-GC50K-US / S6-GC60K-US
Ordering: S6-GC(25-60)K-US
• APST (APS MLRSD Transmitter)
• RSS (Tigo MLRSD Transmitter)
• NEPT (NEP MLRSD Transmitter)
英语
NEW
NEW
Efficient
Smart
Safe
Economic
• Max. efficiency 98.8% (CEC efficiency 98.5%)
• String current up to 20A
• 3/4 MPPT design, supports multiple orientation
system design
• Night time PID recovery function, increases
overall system yield (optional)
• Wide voltage range and low startup voltage
• Equipped with external power control interface,
supporting zero output power control
• Intelligent string monitoring, smart I-V curve scan
• Supports RS485, Ethernet, WiFi, Cellular
• Scan to register on SolisCloud, supports remote
upgrade and control
• Type 4X, C5 Anti-Corrosion Level
• AFCI protection, proactively reduces fire risk
• Intelligent redundant fan-cooling
• Integrated module level rapid shutdown
transmitter
• High quality components from globally
recognized suppliers
• Integrated DC and AC disconnects
• > 1.5 DC/AC ratio
• Supports high power modules for lower
installation costs
• Separable AC wiring box
www.solisinverters.com
Input DC
Max. input voltage 1000 V
Rated voltage 720 V
Start-up voltage 180 V
MPPT voltage range 180-1000 V
Max. input current 3*40 A 4*40 A
Max. short circuit current 3*63 A 4*63 A
MPPT number/Max. input strings number 3/6 4/8
Output AC
Rated output power 25 kW 33 kW 36 kW 40 kW 50 kW 60 kW
Max. apparent output power 27.5 kVA 36.3 kVA 39.6 kVA 44 kVA 55 kVA 66 kVA Max. output power 27.5 kW 36.3 kW 39.6 kW 44 kW 55 kW 66 kW Rated grid voltage 3Ф/PE, 480 V
Rated grid frequency 60 Hz
Max. output current 33.1 A 43.7 A 47.6 A 52.9 A 66.2 A 79.4 A Power factor >0.99 (0.8 leading - 0.8 lagging)
THDi <3%
Efficiency
Max. efficiency 98.8%
CEC efficiency 98.5%
Protection
DC reverse-polarity protection Yes
Short circuit protection Yes
Output over current protection Yes
Surge protection DC Type II / AC Type II
Grid monitoring Yes
Anti-islanding protection Yes
Temperature protection Yes
Strings monitoring Yes
I/V Curve scanning Yes
Integrated AFCI (DC arc-fault circuit protection) Yes
Integrated PID recovery Optional
Integrated DC switch Yes
Integrated AC switch Yes
General Data
Dimensions (W*H*D) 30.9*21.6*12.6 in (784*549*320 mm)
Weight 96.3 lbs (43.7 kgs) 105.4 lbs (47.8 kgs) 108.7 lbs (49.3 kgs) 110.5 lbs (50.1 kgs) Topology Transformerless
Self-consumption (night) <1 W
Relative humidity 0-100%
Operating ambient temperature range -13°F to 140°F (-25°C to 60°C) Ingress protection TYPE 4X
Cooling concept Natural convection
Max. operation altitude 13,120 ft (4000 m)
Compliance UL1741SB, UL1741SA, IEEE 1547-2018, UL1699B, UL1998, FCC Part15 ClassB, California Rule 21, Heco Rule 14H, NEC 690.12-2020, CAN/CSA C22.2107.1-1
Features
DC connection MC4 connector
AC connection OT terminal (4 AWG to 3/0 AWG)
Display LCD
Communication Modbus RTU (Sunspec compliant), RS485, Optional: Cellular, Wi-Fi DATASHEET S6-GC(25-60)K-US
Models 25K 33K 36K 40K 50K 60K
30上市
[email protected] ©AlsoEnergy, Inc / 5400 Airport Bvd. Ste. 100 Boulder, CO 80301 USA / 866.303.5668 Standardized PLCS 600 includes:
• DataLogger with LCD touchscreen display
• Revenue grade energy meter compatible with all
5A CTs (sold separately)
• Two optional weather station choices may add data
for irradiance, back-of-module panel temperature,
ambient temperature, and wind speed
• 5-port Ethernet switch
• NEMA4 weatherproof enclosure
• Optional 4G cell modem (requires a cellular plan)
AlsoEnergy’s vertically-integrated, edge-to-cloud platform includes a convenient standardized hardware monitoring solution for small to mid-sized commercial PV systems. The PLCS 600 combines our standard commercial datalogger with a revenue grade meter, a weatherproof NEMA 4 enclosure, and other supporting hardware. Customers may choose to add weather sensors and/or a cellular modem. The PLCS 600 is recommended for 3-phase systems with up to 20 external inverters. Performance data is uploaded to PowerTrack, AlsoEnergy’s flagship cloud-based application for monitoring, managing, and optimizing energy and financial performance of clean energy assets.
DATA SHEET
Solution Features
• Up to 20 external inverters
• Modbus via RS-485 or TCP
connections to inverters
• Cellular or Ethernet connectivity
• Remote firmware updates
• Up to 1-minute data granularity
• Uploads at 5-minute intervals
• Suitable for demand meter, relay,
other non-PV use cases
• For systems with a single metering
point; direct metering or PT
secondary voltage up to 600VAC
• Satisfies reporting requirements for
most US electricity sector agencies
• All parts except weather sensors and
cell modem covered with standard
AlsoEnergy 5-year warranty
• Supported on PowerTrack only
engineering & project management
teams
PLCS-600-CM-PLUS + cell modem, + reference cell, BOM panel temperature, ambient temperature, wind speed
PLCS-600-CM-BASE + cell modem, + reference cell, BOM panel temperature
PLCS-600-CM-00 + cell modem, no environmental sensors
PLCS-600-00-PLUS no cell modem, + reference cell, BOM panel temperature, ambient temperature, wind speed
PLCS-600-00-BASE no cell modem, + reference cell, BOM panel temperature
PLCS-600-00-00 no cell modem, no environmental sensors
PLCS 600:
PowerLogger Commercial
Solution 600
[email protected] ©AlsoEnergy, Inc / 5400 Airport Bvd. Ste. 100 Boulder, CO 80301 USA / 866.303.5668
ASSEMBL Y
Enclosure dimensions 15.7" x 15.7" x 7.9" (400mm x 400mm x 200mm) Enclosure rating NEMA4
Operating temperature -13° to 158°F (-25° to 70°C), <95% relative humidity non-condensing
Power supply 120-277VAC
Communication ports Three available 10/100 Ethernet ports, two half-duplex rs485 ports
Regulatory UL listed 508A
DATALOGGER
Devices supported Up to 40 connected Modbus RTU enabled devices (20 per rs485 port) / Recommended limit 32
Storage Removable 2GB industrial rated micro SD card
Serial RS-485 with integrated 120 ohm termination resistor Primary protocols Modbus TCP , Modbus RTU, most proprietary inverter protocols
Touch screen Color, resistive touch screen 2" by 2.75"
Warranty Standard 5-year warranty
METER
Voltage inputs 90-600VAC
Accuracy Meter 0.2% (see CT datasheet for CT accuracy
information)
CTs Any CT with 5A secondary current ratio (sold
separately)
CT accuracy Refer to CT datasheet
Warranty Standard 5-year warranty
IRRADIANCE SENSOR
(included with Base and Plus weather station option)
Irradiance sensor type Monocrystalline Silicon reference cell with mounting bracket and 3m twisted pair shielded cable
Absolute accuracy ±5W/m2 ± 2.5% of reading
Dimensions 3.34” W x 6.10” H x 1.54” D
(85mm x 155mm x 39mm)
Warranty 1 year against defects in materials and workmanship
BACK OF MODULE PANEL TEMPERATURE SENSOR
(included with Base and Plus weather station option)
Form 3m cable with 3-pin connector compatible with paired reference cell - sensor cable cannot be extended
Sensor type PT1000 Class A
Mounting Self-adhesive for attaching to a solar module
Warranty 1 year against defects in materials and workmanship
WIND SPEED SENSOR
(included with Plus weather station option)
Form Cup star anemometer with 5m 2-pin connector
compatible with paired reference cell
Sensor type Reed relay
Mounting Mounting bracket for pole or surface mounting
included
Accuracy 0.5 m/s or 5% of reading
Sensor range 0.9 – 40m/s (2 – 90 mph)
Warranty 1 year against defects in materials and workmanship
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE SENSOR
(included with Plus weather station option)
Voltage inputs 90-600VAC
Accuracy Meter 0.2% (see CT datasheet for CT accuracy
information)
CTs Any CT with 5A secondary current ratio (sold
separately)
Warranty Standard 5-year warranty
IRRADIANCE SENSOR
(included with Base and Plus weather station option)
Form Pt1000 1/3 Class B with integrated modbus RTU
digitizer
Dimensions 3.34" W x 6.10" H x 1.54" D
(85mm x 155mm x 39mm)
Wiring Includes 3 meters of twisted-pair, shielded cable Warranty 1 year against defects in materials and workmanship
CELL MODEM
Cellular data 4G L TE
Warranty 1 year
Specifications: PLCS-600
DATA SHEET
[email protected] ©AlsoEnergy, Inc / 5400 Airport Bvd. Ste. 100 Boulder, CO 80301 USA / 866.303.5668 PLCS 400: Power Light
Commercial Solution 400
AlsoEnergy’s vertically-integrated, edge-to-cloud platform includes a cost-effective standardized hardware monitoring solution for light commercial PV systems. The PLCS 400 is designed for 3-phase systems with up to 16 external inverters. Performance data is uploaded to the PowerTrack or LocusNOC applications, which provide a suite of tools and analytics for asset managers. A successor for the Locus LGate 320, the PLCS 400 provides direct monitoring of inverters across all supported inverter technologies.
DATA SHEET
Product Qualifications
• PLCS 400 logs data during daylight hours only;
for demand metering applications the PL1000 is
recommended
• PLCS 400 has a fixed range of supported inverter models for clients using LocusNOC software. The full list of
supported inverters is https:/ /kb.alsoenergy.com/article. php?id=1418
Standardized PLCS 400
system includes:
• DataLogger with LCD touchscreen display
• Energy meter with 3 solid core CTs
(revenue grade accuracy)
• Weather station with irradiance
sensor, mounting bracket, and module
temperature sensor
• 5 port Ethernet switch
• NEMA4 weatherproof enclosure
• Optional 4G cell modem (requires a
cellular plan)
Solution Features
• Up to 16 external inverters
• Modbus via RS-485 or TCP
connections to inverters
• Cellular or Ethernet connectivity
• Remote firmware updates
• 5-minute data granularity
• Uploads at 2 hour intervals
• Satisfies most US agency
reporting requirements
• For systems up to 325kW
utilizing 480V inverters (140kW
@ 208V)
• All parts covered with standard
AlsoEnergy 5-year warranty
(excluding irradiance sensor
and cell modem)
[email protected] ©AlsoEnergy, Inc / 5400 Airport Bvd. Ste. 100 Boulder, CO 80301 USA / 866.303.5668
ASSEMBL Y
Enclosure dimensions 15.7" x 15.7" x 7.9" (400mm x 400mm x 200mm) Enclosure rating NEMA4
Operating temperature -13° to 158°F (-25° to 70°C), <95% relative humidity non-condensing Power supply 120-277VAC
Ports Three available 10/100 Ethernet ports
DATALOGGER
Devices supported Up to 16 inverters – only inverters supported as external devices Storage Removable 2GB industrial rated micro SD card
Serial RS-485 with integrated 120 ohm termination resistor Primary protocols Modbus TCP , Modbus RTU, most proprietary inverter protocols Touch screen Color, resistive touch screen 2" by 2.75"
Warranty Standard 5 year warranty
METER
Voltage inputs 90-600VAC
Accuracy Class 0.5S
CTs 3 solid core CTs with 1.25 inch opening; rated input up to 400 Amp CT accuracy ±0.5% revenue grade accuracy
Regulatory UL listed 508A
Warranty Standard 5 year warranty
CELL MODEM
Cellular data L TE Cat M1
Warranty 1 year
IRRADIANCE SENSOR
Pyranometer type Silicon cell with mounting bracket
Absolute accuracy ±5%
Dimensions 1.12" H x 0.93" D (28.32mm x 23.5mm)
Wiring Includes 5 meters of twisted-pair, shielded wire with Santoprene jacket Operating temperature -13° to 131°F (-25° to 55°C)
Warranty 1 year against defects in materials and workmanship
PANEL TEMPERATURE SENSOR
Form Thermal tab disk with 10 ft lead to an outdoor enclosure with a 4-20mA transmitter Sensor type Platinum RTD 1K
Mounting Self-adhesive ring for attaching to a solar module Operating temperature -40 to 185°F (-40 to 85°C)
Transmitter range Transmitter can be extended 1000 ft from enclosure with 18AWG cable Warranty Standard 5 year warranty
Specifications: PLCS-400 / PLCS-400-CM
DATA SHEET