Mid-City, CA · August – December 2022 · LADWP / LADBS

In Mid-City, the utility rewrote our own number.

An interconnection request goes in with a rating on it. Three months later the approval came back with a different one, and the difference had to be re-signed by hand.

Written by the Cali Energy project team · California contractor license 1032379 · Updated September 2026

An interconnection request carries a system rating, and the utility checks it against the equipment on the plan set rather than taking it on trust. On this Mid-City project the filed AC rating did not match what the engineering review calculated, so the utility marked the figure it would accept and required the interconnection agreement to be filled in and signed again with that number on it. A corrected PDF was refused. Cali Energy carried both work requests on this Mid-City house in Los Angeles through to permission to operate at the utility's figure of 5.41 kW AC-CEC.

At a glance

Filed as

15.5 kW AC-CEC

Approved as

5.41 kW AC-CEC

Storage in the application

3.84 kW AC-CEC

Storage in the approval

None

Engineering review

Requested twice

Work requests

Two open on one address

Utility / AHJ

LADWP / LADBS

The story

The project started in the middle of August as a house that wanted solar and a battery, plus a service panel that was going to have to be replaced to take either. None of that is unusual. What happened to the paperwork afterwards is the part nobody sees.

An interconnection request is filed with a number on it: the AC rating of the system, calculated to the California Energy Commission method. That number is not decoration. It decides which review track the application goes down, whether the service can carry the export, and what the agreement the owner signs actually commits to.

At the end of September the utility acknowledged the request and, in the same morning, asked for a supplemental engineering review. That is the standard response when a battery is in the application: energy storage goes to its own review group, with its own engineer and its own queue.

A week later the review came back. The single-line diagram did not comply with the utility's electric service requirements, and the notice said exactly that and nothing else — no line, no clause, no indication of which part was wrong. A revised diagram was requested. A week after that, the same notice arrived a second time.

This is the first thing worth understanding about engineering review. It is not a correction notice from a building department, which lists what to fix. It is a compliance check, and a failed one tells you that the drawing is wrong without telling you where. The only route forward is to call the engineer whose name is at the bottom of the notice and ask.

While that ran, a second work request was open on the same address. A service panel replacement and a solar interconnection are separate requests at this utility, handled by different groups, and the second one produced its own correspondence with its own engineer.

And that engineer is where the number changed. The design group sent the sheet back with the areas to verify highlighted, and one instruction: use the marked power output rate for AC-CEC. The utility had calculated the rating itself, from the equipment on the plan set, and it did not agree with the rating on the filing.

The obvious move is to correct the figure on the agreement and send it back. That was refused, in one sentence and without ceremony: changing the numbers in Adobe or any other software is not acceptable, and the interconnection agreement has to be filled in and signed from scratch. It is worth being precise about why that is not bureaucratic fussiness. The agreement is the document the owner signs, and a signature has to sit under the number it applies to. A figure typed over the top of a signed page is a signature under a different number.

The two numbers are worth stating plainly. The request went in at 15.5 kW AC-CEC. The approval came back at 5.41 kW AC-CEC — not a rounding difference but almost a factor of three, on the same equipment and the same roof.

So the agreement was redone with the utility's figure on it. The site evaluation was completed at the start of November, the agreement notice went out a day later, the payment cleared at the end of the month, and the installation was approved on the thirtieth — carrying the corrected rating, not the filed one. Permission to operate followed on the eighth of December.

The storage is the part of this that did not survive. It appears in the application in October at 3.84 kW AC-CEC and it is not in the approval.

Two questions worth asking before an interconnection request is filed on your house. What AC rating is going on the application, and how was it worked out — from the modules, from the inverters, or from the CEC listing for the exact equipment on the plan set. And if the utility comes back with a different figure, who re-signs the agreement, and how long does that take. Neither question is exotic. Both of them decide whether a project closes in December or in the spring.

Cali Energy carried both work requests on this Mid-City house through to permission to operate, including the engineering review, the corrected rating and the agreement that had to be signed twice.

How it ran

A hundred and fifteen days from first contact to permission to operate, and the longest single stretch was the engineering review.

What we did

• Filed the interconnection request and the service panel work request in parallel.
• Took the AC-CEC figure the utility's design group marked rather than arguing it.
• Re-executed the interconnection agreement from a blank form when the PDF edit was refused.
• Revised the single-line diagram twice against a notice that gave no reason.
• Carried both work requests through to permission to operate.

System specifications

Is your project like this one?

• Your interconnection request has come back with a different system size on it.
• You have been told your single-line diagram does not comply and not told why.
• There are two work requests open on your address and you are not sure why.
• A battery was in your quote and is no longer in your application.
• You are being asked to sign an interconnection agreement for a second time.

Cali Energy in Mid-City

Frequently asked questions

Why would the utility change the size on my application?

Because it calculates the AC rating itself, from the equipment on the plan set and the CEC listing for that equipment, rather than accepting the figure on the form. If the two disagree, the utility's figure is the one the approval carries. It is worth knowing which method produced the number on your application before it is filed, because a correction late in the process means the agreement is signed again.

Can a signed interconnection agreement be corrected in a PDF editor?

No. On this project that was tried and refused in a sentence: the agreement has to be filled in and signed from scratch. The reasoning is sound — a signature has to sit under the number it applies to, and a figure typed over a signed page is a signature under a different number.

What does it mean when a single-line diagram is returned as non-compliant?

That the drawing does not meet the utility's electric service requirements. The notice usually says only that, without identifying the clause or the part of the drawing at fault, because it is a compliance check rather than a correction list. The practical route forward is to contact the reviewing engineer named on the notice and ask directly.

Does adding a battery slow an interconnection down?

It adds a review. Energy storage goes to its own engineering group with its own queue, on top of the standard interconnection review, and that group can return the single-line diagram independently. On a project that already carries two work requests, storage is the component that comes off first when the calendar starts to matter.

Does Cali Energy install solar in Mid-City, Los Angeles?

Yes. Mid-City is one of the Los Angeles neighborhoods we work in regularly, permitted through LADBS and interconnected through LADWP. This project is a fair example of what that involves on pre-war housing: a service panel replacement alongside the array, two work requests running in parallel, and an engineering review that changed the number the project was approved at.

What this would look like on your roof

Related

• The correction came after the inspection was booked Westchester, Los Angeles · solar and storage · two permits, two plan checks Solar
• Somebody had crossed out the amperage Hollywood Hills, Los Angeles · service relocated · asked before ordering Solar
• Everything was approved. The agreement was missing Granada Hills, CA · 10.09 kW · the signed contract nobody mentions Solar
• A wrong number on the application. It could not be changed North Hollywood, CA · solar inside a whole-house renovation Solar
• The city permit was not the permission that mattered Mid-City, Los Angeles · two jurisdictions · nine weeks on a finished array Solar

This timeline reflects this property and this permitting path. Updated September 2026.