On the agenda: Lyons meeting — Data Center (Jun 3)

DRAFT AGENDA TOWN OF LYONS
UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING BOARD (UEB)
HYBRID MEETING
LYONS TOWN HALL, 432 5TH AVENUE, LYONS, COLORADO
June 3, 2026, 4:30 - 5:30 pm

Optional Zoom Meeting - Please contact [email protected] or
[email protected] for Zoom meeting link.

PAGE DOWN - Note that detailed content, if available, such as draft minutes and
presentations are provided in subsequent pages or through links directly below each
agenda item.
I.

Roll Call

II.

Approve Agenda and Minutes from Past Meetings
a. Approve Agenda
b. Approve May 6, 2026 Minutes
c. Approve May 11, 2026 Minutes

III. Audience Business
IV. Staff Report
a. Staff – Aaron Caplan
b. Liaison – Jen Wingard
c. UEB Chair – Jimm Vosburgh
d. Member Updates
V.

Business
a. Drought Water Supply Policy Review
b. WWTP Upgrade Design Options Discussion
c. LMC Changes Related to SB 26-1007 Meter Collar/Plug in Solar
Discussion

VI. Summary of Action Items
VII. Next Meeting and Requested Agenda Items
a. June 15, 2026

VIII. Adjournment

Persons needing accommodations or special assistance should contact the Town
at [email protected] as soon as possible, but no later than 72 hours before
the scheduled meeting

DRAFT MINUTES
TOWN OF LYONS
UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING BOARD (UEB)
LYONS TOWN HALL
HYBRID MEETING
May 6, 2026, 4:30 - 6:00 pm
Roll Call: Jimm Vosburgh (chair), Chris Meline, Gina Hardin, Jason Gaines, Gina Hardin, Jim Kerr
Staff: Aaron Caplan
Audience: Michael Karavas
Approve Agenda and Minutes from Past Meetings
•

Agenda approved unanimously (6-0).

•

Minutes approved with changes unanimously (6-0)

Audience Business
•

None.

Reports
•

Miscellaneous
Jen Wingard is new BOT liaison
Jim K will be absent from the next meeting as he will be at MEAN board meeting. Aaron
will also be out of town. Therefore, it was agreed that the next meeting, which will focus
on the WWTP Contractor’s Tech Memo, would be rescheduled for 4:30 on Monday, May
11. We will go to the site following the meeting.
Chris Meline expressed concern that the contractor has only submitted the Technical
Memorandum for 1 of the de-watering processes. The memo is 2 months late, and Chris
had expected it to cover 30% of job, including the different technological options.

o Staff: Aaron Caplan
o Pole went down last night. It was repaired today.
o Aaron presented for a grant to DOLA that he hopes will pay 50% of the
stormwater repair costs. Should hear whether Lyons is approved for the grant in
about 2 weeks. It would be August 1 before work could start.

o Aaron presented water workshop to BOT. Those who watched it believed it to be
a great overview and a decision was made to e-mail the link and share with the
group .
o TOU- We will require DT (delivered) 1 ,2 or 3 onto standard meters plus RT
(received) 1, 2 and 3 on net meters. However, we can only have 5 fields on bill.
So, while he would prefer to have all 3 lines for delivered and 3 lines for received,
he could, if necessary, put water on the top tier, the next 3 tiers for delivered,
and combine all 3 RTs on the fifth tier. Dolores is supposed to be working on
adding tiers to the bill, but Aaron is not sure she will be successful. He is targeting
June to add these to the bill. However, he reminded the UEB that until an
ordinance is passed to change the rates, they will initially be the same current
rate for all periods.
o Fixed Cost Recovery Rate- any new solar that comes online in a town. The peak
demand rate goes back to MEAN. This is the Fixed Rate Recovery
o Liaison – Jen Wingard: Not present
o UEB Chair – Jimm Vosburgh: Nothing
o Member Updates: Nothing
Business
•

MEAN REC Discussion – The UEB discussed the status of renewable energy
certificates (RECs) tracking with their green energy provider. MEAN offered to sign
an attestation document confirming they track RECs, though they don't provide
detailed individual records. While the state of Colorado will require retirement of all
green energy RECs in a few years, the UEB debated whether to spend money to
transfer and retire the current RECs now. The group expressed concerns about the
provider's lack of detailed tracking and accounting, though they don't suspect
malicious intent. The discussion concluded with consideration of future ordinance
changes to require Lyons rooftop solar systems not sell their RECs in order to
receive the green energy rate. Gina pointed out that MEAN had agreed to provide
such documentation in 2024 but had failed to do so. She explained that, according
to her interpretation of EIA and EPA regulations, retirement is a necessary
component of REC tracking. She does not understand why MEAN seems unable to
provide better documentation.
The discussion also covered challenges with current green energy projects, including
economic feasibility issues due to high interest rates and transmission costs, leading
to some projects being postponed or discontinued. UEB concluded that the town is
satisfied with their current 100% green energy status and are not interested in
pursuing additional efforts to track RECs beyond what the state requires.

•

Proposed MEAN Renewable Distributed Generation Policy Changes: Sec 1 & 2:
Half of our cost, the Fixed Cost Recovery Charge (FCRC) is based on peak.
Currently our peak rate is based upon the average peak use for 36 weeks plus
distributed generation (DG), which in Lyons, is limited to PV solar. MEAN
measures the solar by production meter readings or, in the case of installations
with no production meter, MEAN uses the nameplate of the installation. The
latter results in an exaggerated calculation of our peak use, hence, of the cost.
Jim has written a proposal to present to MEAN, to change how the measure for
the solar without production meters is calculated. He believes that this may
result in the possibility of the peak use being during the day.
HB26-107 (Portable Scale Solar) initially prohibited utilities from requiring
production meters, however the version that passed dropped that prohibition.
Lyons has 2 legacy systems with no meters – MEAN isn’t charging for legacy
systems.
Sec. 3: Decouple the member utility’s monthly peak calculation from the DG
production for the purposes of calculating the FCRC allocation. Rather than
determining the peak hour based on the member utilities’ monthly peak demand
plus DG production, base the peak hour only on peak demand. Then add DG
production during the monthly peak hour for the purposes of FCRC calculation
and allocation.
The current calculation corrupts the financial incentives associated with using
batteries. It incentivizes a member utility to add battery saved power back to the
grid when it is not needed to reduce MEAN load. It also incentivizes the town to
use their battery power during the middle of day instead of during peak use (in
evening).
Won’t affect MEAN’s revenue just how their revenue is allocated between
customers.
MEAN has a battery test case.
No one objected so Jim will bring it up with MEAN before and during May
meeting.

•

Town Water Policy Update – Discussion was focused on reviewing a water letter
from Longmont and discussing the town's water management plan. UEB
explained that the town needs to provide Longmont with 300-350 acre-feet of
water rights annually, with the current average daily demand being
approximately 281,000 gallons. The discussion covered various water rights,
including Colorado Big Thompson (CBT) shares and Lake McIntosh Reservoir
Company water, with CBT being considered the gold standard due to its wider
Front Range usage. UEB clarified that while drought levels were discussed, the
town does not currently expect to implement drought-level restrictions as CBT
came in at 80% of quota, above the 70% threshold

Summary of Action Items
Aaron will continue to push TOU along
Jimm V will ensure that attachments are posted with meeting minutes. Distribute
WWTP pdf documents and a link to Aaron’s recorded Water Workshop Presentation
Jim K will reach out to MEAN regarding his proposed changes to peak demand
calculations
Next Meeting and Requested Agenda Items
May 11, 2026
Adjournment

DRAFT MINUTES
TOWN OF LYONS
UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING BOARD (UEB)
May 11, 2026, 4:30 - 6:00 pm
HYBRID MEETING

ROLL CALL
Chris Cope, Jason Gaines, Gina Harden, Jim Kerr, Chris Meline, Jimm Vosburgh (chair)
Staff: Aaron Caplan
BOT: Mark Browning
Audience: Michael Karavas

APPROVE AGENDA AND MINUTES FROM PAST MEETINGS
• Approved Agenda and Minutes from Past Meetings
− Agenda approved unanimously (6-0).

− Minutes from May 6 tabled until next regular meeting

AUDIENCE BUSINESS
•

None.

REPORTS
• STAFF
▫

• BOT
▫

This is a special meeting just for reviewing the WWTF 30% design plans and
tour the facility. No reports since last meeting on May 6.

Nothing to report

• UEB CHAIR
▫

Nothing to report

• MEMBER BUSINESS
▫

None

BUSINESS
•

WWTF 30% Design Review

Dewatering Process Performance Issues
UEB discussed issues with the current dewatering process, which is only achieving 50% of the
expected water separation compared to the typical 90% performance. They noted that high-strength
waste concerns remain a challenge, though the permit limit for such waste has been increased from
750 to approximately 1,500 (mg/l). Aaron mentioned a previous review that suggested potentially
increasing the high-strength waste limit further, up to around 2,000-2,500, however this would be a
new and larger plant and cost $20 million.
Waste Management Plan Discussion
UEB discussed the current waste management plan, noting that an engineering company confirmed
the existing permit level is sufficient with adequate buffer for both volume and high-strength waste.
Aaron explained that while hitting 85% capacity typically requires designing for a new plant, the
current options should maintain appropriate buffer levels below this threshold. The discussion
focused on implementation requirements and longer-term operating costs, particularly regarding
dewatering processes, though town engineer Justin Doles was unable to attend the meeting.
Larger Centrifuge Operational Benefits
The team discussed the advantages of using larger centrifuges, particularly focusing on potential
labor and operational cost savings. They explored how a properly sized centrifuge could allow for
reduced operator presence, potentially requiring only three days of operation per week with longer
days, while maintaining similar processing levels. The discussion also covered storage capacity
concerns and confirmed that current sludge storage practices would be sufficient to support the
proposed schedule changes.
Centrifuge vs Press System Analysis
UEB discussed the potential labor savings and costs associated with implementing a new centrifuge
versus a press system. They highlighted concerns about the need for continuous human presence
during centrifuge operations and questioned whether the proposed system would still require
significant labor costs. Also emphasized was the high cost of hauling liquid sludge and that a new
centrifuge could help reduce these expenses. Also expressed was a need for more detailed

information from CONSOR on how the proposed system would affect operating expenses and labor
requirements. The 30% review included a scoring matrix which recommended the redundant
centrifuge solution. Some UEB members were surprised that this rated so high when screw and
press systems seemed to have lower labor and maintenance costs.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Options
The discussion focused on wastewater treatment plant construction and expansion options. Aaron
explained that while the plant needs to be expanded, there are constraints due to floodplain
requirements and the existing location on an “island” (during high water events). The team discussed
potential portable solutions and the challenges of handling increased volume, with Aaron noting that
expanding if our flows exceed 80% capacity then significant infrastructure changes, potentially
costing around $20 million would be required. The conversation also touched on previous
considerations for an eastern corridor expansion in 2013, though no specific location was identified
as viable.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Process Review
Aaron provided a detailed walkthrough of the wastewater treatment plant's process flow, explaining
how sewage enters through the influent wet well and is processed through various stages including
grit removal, bar screens, and SBR basins. The discussion covered the treatment process where
solids settle in basins and sludge is held in tanks before going to dewatering, while treated water
flows through disinfection and UV treatment before being released to the outfall. Chris Meline noted
some discrepancies between the schematics and the actual plant layout, particularly regarding
holding tanks and process flow details.
Dewatering Equipment Performance Issues
UEB discussed issues with the current dewatering equipment and centrifuge system, noting that only
40-50% of solids are being removed rather than the intended 95%. Aaron proposed either moving
the sampling point instead of re-piping the return system or investigating historical data from when
liquid sludge was being hauled off without using the centrifuge to compare BOD measurements.
UEB also suggested reviewing the 2013 design study outcomes to compare current
recommendations with those made 15 years ago when the centrifuge system was originally chosen.
Equipment Decision-Making Process Review
UEB discussed the decision-making process around equipment options in 2014, particularly focusing
on centrifuge and screw press/fan press alternatives. They noted that at the time, the plant was at
risk of failing, and Honeywell had already been contracted for energy savings recommendations.
UEB expressed particular interest in the volute screw press option, which scored closely to the
redundant centrifuge option and offered benefits like reduced labor and electricity usage, though the
redundant centrifuge remained compelling due to its built-in redundancy.

Modular Screw Press Technology Discussion
UEB discussed contact with another company regarding modular screw presses (their solution
ranked #3), learning that multiple units could be operated with one in reserve if needed. UEB raised
concerns about installation time estimates for different technologies, noting uncertainty about
whether these times included building construction. The discussion also covered cake percent
solids, with UEB questioning the difference between current performance and proposed
technologies, particularly regarding the efficiency of centrifuges versus screw presses.
Centrifuge System Efficiency Optimization
UEB discussed the efficiency of the current centrifuge system, which appears to be operating at
around 14-50% capacity based on different measurements. They explored the potential cost savings
from reducing haul frequency versus optimizing the dewatering process, noting that each overweight
haul could cost an additional $100-$150. Aaron clarified that the current sludge entering the
centrifuge has low solids content (around 1.5%), and the system should be removing approximately
90% of the solids rather than the current 50% efficiency.
SBR System Clarification Discussion
UEB discussed questions about the SBR (Sequential Batch Reactor) system, particularly regarding
confusion in the report about the digestion process at Lyons’ current WWTF. UEB identified a
contradiction where the report described a digestion process but then stated none exists, suggesting
they may be referring to a makeshift process rather than true digestion. The team plans to ask for
clarification on this point and will visit the facility to better understand the tank accessibility and
potential for deeper tanks. UEB noted they are not ready to make decisions yet and will compile
questions for further information.

•

Tour of Facility by all present at the meeting.

SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS
o

None

DECISIONS MADE
•

Agenda approved unanimously. (6-0)

NEXT MEETING AND REQUESTED AGENDA ITEMS
•

June 3 is the next meeting.

Water Shortage Action Plan
Standard Conservation Level
Lyons is in a semi-arid climate. Even when there is no water shortage or drought, we
should conserve water using Best Management Practices (BMPs). Wasting water is
prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person to permit the unnecessary use or waste of
water from the public water system.

Mild Water Shortage
This level will be enacted when there are concerns that the Town’s water supply might be
affected by drought conditions. Watering Restrictions shall include sprinkling and irrigation
only being lawfully permitted on the following days;
Single-family residential: Even-numbered addresses. Sunday and Thursday
Single-family residential: Odd-numbered addresses. Wednesday and Saturday
All others (including multifamily and commercial).!Tuesday and Friday

Moderate Water Shortage
This level will be enacted when the Town’s raw water rights might not be sufficient to provide
the Town’s 3-year average of purchased water in the following year. Watering Restrictions
shall include sprinkling and irrigation only being lawfully permitted on the following days;
Single-family residential: Even-numbered addresses. Sunday
Single-family residential: Odd-numbered addresses. Saturday
All others (including multifamily and commercial).!Tuesday

Severe Water Shortage –
Generally, a level that might only occur after multiple years of drought. This level will be
enacted when the Town’s raw water rights might not be sufficient to provide the Town’s 3year average of purchased water in the current year.
No watering allowed

For 2025, Longmont expects to continue to utilize native basin water rights, transmountain water rights, and local storage water rights.
Description of Indicators and Forecasting Methods:
•

Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Monthly Streamflow Forecast
Streamflow Forecast can be used to evaluate impacts upon Longmont's water rights
on an average and dry basis. Based upon the streamflow forecast, the projected
yield of direct flow and storage decrees will be used for calculation of raw water
availability during water shortage conditions. This effort will focus on the April 1 and
May 1 streamflow forecasts as an indicator of water shortage in the upcoming
irrigation season.

•

Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Monthly Snowpack Survey
The Snowpack Survey will be used in validating and/or adjusting the Streamflow
Forecasts. These surveys also provide real-time measurement of snowpack to assist
in reviewing projections in the time between monthly streamflow forecasts.

•

Saint Vrain Creek Basin Reservoir Storage Levels
Total reservoir storage in the Saint Vrain Basin varies with the availability of water
during the storage season (usually November through June). The total Saint Vrain
Creek storage levels will be used in conjunction with target storage levels in Ralph
Price Reservoir. When comparing storage levels in reservoirs with storage rights
senior to Ralph Price Reservoir, water supply availability can be projected for the
storage components of Longmont's water portfolio. An example of this information
for Ralph Price Reservoir is shown in Exhibit B.

•

Trans-Mountain Water Supply Availability
Colorado-Big Thompson Project (C-BT) Quota Declaration and Longmont carry-over
of C-BT allocation from the previous year will be utilized in establishing transmountain water supply availability for 2025 and projections for later years. This
trans-mountain water availability includes C-BT quota declarations, Upper Baldwin
Ditch Replacement water, Carry-over C-BT water, Exchanged C-BT water, and Windy
Gap water supplies. As of April 15, 2025, Longmont had a total trans-basin water
supply yield of 15,585 AF.

•

Raw Water Availability for City of Longmont
Raw water availability will be updated and revised by the Division staff to estimate
Water Treatment Plant demands and projected raw water availability for Longmont.
A graph of raw water availability for prior years and the projected water availability
for this year is attached as Exhibit A. Projected demand in this graph is based upon a
Sustainable Conservation Level water shortage implementation assumption.

PAGE 4 OF 16

II.

•

City of Longmont Treated Water Demands Greater than Normal
As water shortage conditions occur, water use often increases and raw water
availability decreases. Treated water demand projections will be adjusted in
accordance with this expected increase. Actual use as the water shortage
progresses will be included in the evaluation of projected water demands.

•

City of Longmont Water Supply Projections for Multi-Year Water Shortage
Projections
As an additional tool in evaluating the current year water shortage implementation
level, Division staff will complete a multiple year water supply evaluation. The
current and next water year of that projection will be used to determine the water
shortage implementation level for the City.

Description of Water Shortage Supply Implementation Levels

Division staff is responsible for monitoring water shortage indicators and forecasting raw water
availability. The following guidelines will assist Division staff and Water Board in advising City
Council to determine the appropriate course of action to undertake in varying degrees of water
shortage intensity. These will serve as a guideline only, with the experience and year by year
specific details also guiding the City's actions in any given water shortage scenario. The City
Manager, with the advisement of Division staff, will have the power to declare a specific
implementation level in the case of an emergency. Division staff will compare raw water supply
with projected demand and monitor the storage levels in Ralph Price Reservoir and the Saint
Vrain Creek Basin. If the combination of supply and available storage exceed projected demand
by more than 135%, the City's water supply will not be considered in a water shortage scenario.
The City will continue to take water conservation actions at all times, especially during years of
below average streamflow. Percent of water savings goal referred to hereafter shall be with
respect to last year’s actual demand.
Sustainable Conservation Level:
At this level, the City will continue to implement Best Management Practices to conserve the
water resources of the City.
Target Water Savings Goal: Sustainable demand management at all times to ensure
reasonable water conservation methods are followed utilizing best management practices
and that the overall goal of a 10% water savings as outlined in the Raw Water Master Plan is
realized.
This level will include a projection of the following indicators:
• Storage volumes in Ralph Price Reservoir greater than target levels for the Mild
Water Shortage Implementation in Exhibit B; and
• Raw water supply availability projections for the current and next water year at a
level greater than 135% of projected water demand.

PAGE 5 OF 16

Mild Water Shortage Implementation Targets:
At this level, conditions will mildly impact the City’s supply vs. demand.
Target Water Savings Goal: Sufficient demand management, up to 10%, to ensure demand
does not exceed raw water availability.
This level will include a projection of the following indicators:
• Storage volumes in Ralph Price Reservoir lower than target levels in Exhibit B.
• Raw water supply availability at a level of 120% - 135% of projected water demand.
Moderate Water Shortage Implementation Targets:
At this level, conditions will moderately impact the City’s supply vs. demand.
Target Water Savings Goal: 10% to 25%
This level will include a projection of the following indicators:
• Storage volumes in Ralph Price Reservoir lower than target levels in Exhibit B.
• Raw water supply availability at a level of 105% - 120% of projected water demand.
Severe Water Shortage Implementation Levels:
At this level, conditions will severely impact the City's supply vs. demand.
Target Water Savings Goal: To be determined at time of Severe water shortage, goal
dependent upon water shortage severity and water savings needs.
This level will include a projection of the following indicators:
• Storage volumes in Ralph Price Reservoir lower than target levels in Exhibit B.
• Raw water supply availability at a level less than 105% of projected water demand.

PAGE 6 OF 16

WWTF Upgrades - Cost Summary

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)
Item No. Item Description
1
Lift Station Wet Well Expansion
2
Influent Flow Splitter Improvements
3
Aeration Improvements
4
WAS Pump Modifications
5
UV Disinfection Replacement
6
Non-Potable Water Improvements
7
Dewatering Improvements
8
Odor Control Improvements
9
Centrate/Pressate Discharge Relocation

Project Total Item
Cost
$
665,275
$
172,575
$
880,750
$
96,850
$
426,400
$
355,063
$
1,699,815
$
1,040,000
$
140,000
TOTAL $

5,476,728

Cost Notes
Cost based on Alternate A - Expand Ex. Wet Well

Replace with smaller pumps and minimal other improvements
Cost based on Alternate C - Exterior below grade vault
Cost based on Alternate B - Fan Press
Cost from Master Plan
Cost from Master Plan

WWTF Upgrades - Lift Station Wet Well Expansion - Alternative A

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Demo Existing Concrete
Concrete Modifications including Sloped Bottom
New Concrete Deck Supports
Wet Well Coating
Modify and New Removable Covers
Modify Pump Suction Piping
Modify and Reroute Piping
Electrical Modifications
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Bypass Pumping During Construction
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
20
1

Units
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
Days
LS

Unit Cost
$ 66,750.00
$ 60,000.00
$ 100,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 40,000.00
$ 40,000.00
$ 25,000.00
$ 40,000.00
$ 25,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$
3,000.00
$ 20,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
66,750
$
60,000
$
100,000
$
20,000
$
40,000
$
40,000
$
25,000
$
40,000
$
25,000
$
15,000
$
60,000
$
20,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

511,750
153,525
665,275

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 2 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - Basin Influent Flow Splitter Improvements

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Excavation and Backfill
Demo at Existing Flow Split Structure
New Concrete Structure
Modify Existing Concrete
New Adjustable Gates
Modify Piping
Bypass Pumping During Construction
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
1
15
1
2
1
10
1

Units
LS
LS
LS
CY
LS
EA
LS
Days
LS

Unit Cost
$ 12,750.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$
2,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$
3,000.00
$
5,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
12,750
$
10,000
$
10,000
$
30,000
$
5,000
$
20,000
$
10,000
$
30,000
$
5,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

132,750
39,825
172,575

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 3 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - Aeration Improvements

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Blower and Air Piping Demo
Equipment Pad Modifications
New Blowers w/ VFDs
Blower Suction Pipe Modifications
Blower Discharge Pipe Modifications
MCC Modifications
Conduit and Wire Modifications
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1

Units
LS
LS
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS

Unit Cost
$ 82,500.00
$ 20,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 130,000.00
$ 100,000.00
$ 80,000.00
$ 40,000.00
$ 30,000.00
$ 30,000.00
$ 25,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
82,500
$
20,000
$
10,000
$
260,000
$
100,000
$
80,000
$
40,000
$
30,000
$
30,000
$
25,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

677,500
203,250
880,750

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 4 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - WAS Pumps

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Demo Existing WAS Pumps
New WAS Pumps
WAS Pump Discharge Pipe Modifications
WAS/RAS Piping Improvements
Conduit and Wire Modifications
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Construction Impacts - Basin Balancing and Temporary Pumping
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1

Units
LS
EA
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS

Unit Cost
$
7,500.00
$
1,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$
2,500.00
$
5,000.00
$
5,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$
5,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
7,500
$
2,000
$
30,000
$
5,000
$
5,000
$
5,000
$
5,000
$
10,000
$
5,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

74,500
22,350
96,850

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 5 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - UV Improvements

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
UV Channel Concrete Modifications
Demo Existing UV Equipment
New UV System
UV Maintenance Improvements
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Construction Impacts - Temporary Disinfection
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1

Units
LS
LS
LS
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS

Unit Cost
$ 33,000.00
$ 30,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 100,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 20,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
33,000
$
30,000
$
10,000
$
200,000
$
10,000
$
10,000
$
15,000
$
20,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

328,000
98,400
426,400

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 6 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - Non-Potable Water Improvements - Alternate A

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Concrete Modifications
New 350 Gallon Tanks
Upsized Hydropneumatic Tank
New Transfer Pumps
Modify Pump Suction Piping
Modify and Reroute Discharge Piping
Electrical Modifications
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Bypass Pumping Effluent During Construction
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
5
1

Units
LS
LS
EA
LS
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
Days
LS

Unit Cost
$ 17,625.00
$
5,000.00
$
7,500.00
$ 15,000.00
$
5,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$
2,500.00
$ 10,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
17,625
$
5,000
$
15,000
$
15,000
$
10,000
$
5,000
$
15,000
$
15,000
$
15,000
$
12,500
$
10,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

135,125
40,538
175,663

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 7 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - Non-Potable Water Improvements - Alternate B

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Concrete Slab
Heated and Insulated 2,000 Gallon Storage Tank
Upsized Hydropneumatic Tank
New NPW Pumps
Tank Fill Pumps
Tank Fill Piping
Pump Discharge Piping
Electrical Modifications
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Bypass Pumping Effluent During Construction
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
5
1

Units
LS
LS
LS
LS
EA
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
Days
LS

Unit Cost
$ 34,125.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 60,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$
5,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 30,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$
2,500.00
$ 20,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
34,125
$
15,000
$
60,000
$
15,000
$
20,000
$
10,000
$
10,000
$
20,000
$
30,000
$
15,000
$
12,500
$
20,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

261,625
78,488
340,113

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 8 of 9

WWTF Upgrades - Non-Potable Water Improvements - Alternate C

Preliminary Design

Town of Lyons, CO

4/30/2026

Class IV Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Cost (EEOPCC)

Item No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Item Description
General Conditions - Mobilization, Demobilization, Permitting, Etc.
Excavation and Backfill
8x8x8 Concrete Vault with Hatch
Upsized Hydropneumatic Tank
New NPW Pumps
Tank Fill Piping
Pump Discharge Piping
Electrical Modifications
Instrumentation and Controls Modifications
Bypass Pumping Effluent During Construction
Startup and Testing

Quantity
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
5
1

Units
LS
LS
LS
LS
EA
LS
LS
LS
LS
Days
LS

Unit Cost
$ 35,625.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 80,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 20,000.00
$ 30,000.00
$ 15,000.00
$
2,500.00
$ 15,000.00

Project Total Item
Cost
$
35,625
$
20,000
$
80,000
$
15,000
$
20,000
$
10,000
$
20,000
$
30,000
$
15,000
$
12,500
$
15,000

SUBTOTAL $
30% $
TOTAL $

Contingency

273,125
81,938
355,063

Notes
The accepted industry standard deviation for a Class IV EEOPCC is -30% to +50%.
Consor’s construction cost estimate (“estimate”) is in dollars valued as of the date of this estimate. This estimate is an opinion of probable cost based on
information available at the time of its development. Final costs will depend on:
•actual field condi ons,
•actual material and labor costs,
•market condi ons for construc on,
•regulatory factors,
•final project scope,
•method of implementa on,
•schedule, and
•other variables.
This estimate is based on our perception, which is based on experience and research, yet nevertheless, an assessment, of current conditions at the project location.
This estimate reflects our professional opinion of current costs and is subject to change as the project design evolves. Consor has no control over, nor can it forecast
variances in the cost of labor, materials, equipment; nor services provided by others, contractor's means, and methods of executing the work, or of determining
prices, of the impact of competitive bidding or market conditions, practices, or bidding strategies. Consor neither warrants nor guarantees that proposals, bids, or
actual construction costs will reflect the costs presented, which are for illustrative purposes only.

Page 9 of 9

CAMU 2026 Legislation Notes A full list of legislation CAMU worked on follows.
highlights from the May meeting.

These are some of Aaron's

One item not found in the list of proposed bills is the reintroduction of a bill to
move 100% net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 up to 2040. This was proposed
in 2025 but did not move forward. There was an expectation it would eb brought
forward again in 2026 but was not.
Note SB26-182 updated the current clean energy plan by allowing municipal utilities
having challenges meeting the plan an extra 2 years extending the first deadline of
2030 out to 2032. This was a bill brought forward by CAMU that appears to have
helped legislators understand there are truly reliability concerns moving forward
with the clean energy plan to quickly. Legislators appeared to agree this was a more
realistic path forward.
HB26-1007 is one bill that will require some updates to our municipal code. This is
the bill that allows meter collars and plug in solar. CAMU played a large part in
getting a number of modifications to this bill, including the removal of a ban on
production meters.
HB26-1272 proposes worker protections in extreme temperatures. Lyons will need to
review if it needs to make any changes to its employee policy. We should have some
language on working in extreme temperatures. This brought up a discussion on
utility and public works staff being considered first responders.
Another bill proposed in 2025 that did not come back in 26 but may be reintroduced
next year deals with making a planned power outage an emergency requiring emergency
alert notification possibly in the top 5 languages of the jurisdiction. This could
be very burdensome depending on the language of any final law put in place.
There was also discussion on some Public Utilities Commission dockets including how
to deal with Ford’s Electric Vehicle Charging Systems with Home Backup Power
Features and Disabled Home Power Management Features and whether they are subject to
interconnection rules.

Legislative Victories – High Impact Legislation
Key Bill

Concerns / Activity

HB26-1030
Data Center &
Utility
Modernization

The bill created a statewide data center development and incentive program and
required utility consultation and reporting. CAMU sought clarifying language to protect
municipal utilities from reporting to the PUC. The bill was killed in committee due to
opposition from environmental stakeholders.
The bill created the Colorado Electric Grid Resiliency Task Force to study grid resilience
and required transmission-owning entities to participate in the task force assessment
and provide requested data. CAMU opposed the bill due to significant security and
operational concerns and advocated for reliance on the applicable NERC regulations on
geomagnetic disturbances. CAMU actively lobbied against the bill and helped
successfully kill it in committee.
The bill defined a "consumer-regulated electric utility" as an electric generation and
supply system constructed for the purpose of servicing non-residential load and
exempted such utility from any regulatory structure. CAMU opposed the bill as an
attempt to island large loads within existing utility service territories. CAMU successfully
lobbied against the bill, and it died in committee.
The bill enables municipally owned utilities facing challenges meeting the state’s clean
energy goals to file an updated Clean Energy Plan by the end of the year that achieves an
80% greenhouse gas emissions reduction by no later than December 31, 2032, while
requiring annual reporting on our progress toward achieving an 80% GHG emissions
reduction and committing these utilities to explore emission reductions beyond
80%, without impacting electric reliability.
The bill defines and creates requirements for portable-scale solar generation devices and
requires municipal utilities to allow for customer ownership and use of meter collar
adapters. As introduced, the bill posed significant safety and operational concerns for
municipal utilities. CAMU was successful in significantly amending the legislation.
The bill implements the 23 recommendations of the Department of Regulatory Agencies
in its 2025 Sunset Review of the Public Utilities Commission. CAMU was successful in
achieving numerous amendments, including removing the requirement for municipal
utilities to comply with the state’s renewable energy standards (RES), eliminating the
requirement for municipal utilities to submit their RES to the PUC, and removing a
provision that requires municipal utilities to submit their Clean Energy Plans to the PUC.
The bill created strict environmental requirements for large-load data centers and set
conditions for municipal utilities’ ability to interconnect large-load customers. CAMU
worked with proponents to draft amendments to resolve our concerns regarding
unconstitutional restrictions on our ability to serve our customers and to determine our
utility rates. The bill was killed by the sponsor due to mounting opposition and failure to
reach a compromise proposal.
The bill required entities to make all emissions records required by state or federal law to
be publicly available on the entity’s website and allowed the Air Pollution Control
Division to assess severe civil penalties for failing to comply with the bill. CAMU worked
with a broad coalition to oppose this legislation as burdensome and duplicative,
successfully killing it in committee.
The bill requires the Air Quality Control Commission to adopt a rule establishing limits on
the emission of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxides from an electric generating unit that
is owned or operated beyond 2030. As part of negotiations on SB26-002, this bill was
amended to delay compliance until 2034. CAMU moved from oppose to monitor.
CAMU successfully amended the legislation to remove sections of the bill that
increased risk for municipal gas systems by potentially eliminating existing customers
from the load of a municipal utility and increasing costs for the remaining customer base,
as well as attaining amendment language to authorize emission reductions
associated with a thermal energy network to be counted in a municipal utility’s Clean
Heat Plan.
The bill would have clarified how a ballot measure establishing a constitutional right to
natural gas would impact state and local government regulatory authority. CAMU
worked diligently with the Governor, the Attorney General, and the Speaker of the House

HB26-1124
Electrical
Generation &
Distribution
Resiliency
HB26-1246
ConsumerRegulated Electric
Utilities
SB26-182
Updated Clean
Energy Plan
Municipally Owned
Utility
HB26-1007
Improve Customer
Use Distributed
Energy Resources
HB26-1326
Sunset Public
Utilities Commission

SB26-102
Large-Load Data
Centers
HB26-1121
Public Accessibility
of Emissions
Records
HB26-1226
Manage Emissions
from Electric
Generating Units
SB26 142
Development of
Thermal Energy
Resources
Bill Draft: Right to
Natural Gas

Position / Result
Monitor –
postponed
Indefinitely
Oppose –
Postponed
Indefinitely

Oppose –
Postponed
Indefinitely

Support – Passed,
Awaiting Governor
Action
Amend to Monitor
– Passed, Governor
Signed
Amend – Passed,
Awaiting Governor
Action

Amend –
Postponed
Indefinitely

Oppose –
Postponed
Indefinitely
Oppose to Monitor
– Passed, Awaiting
Governor Action
Amend to Monitor
– Passed, Awaiting
Governor Action

Never introduced

HB26-1211
Regulation of
Broadband Services
HB26-1272
Extreme
Temperatures
Worker Protections
SB26-148
Financing Utility OnBill Repayment
Program

to amend this bill draft to resolve our constitutional concerns regarding our right to
provide natural gas service to our community. Due to significant opposition, the bill was
not introduced.
The bill authorized the Public Utilities Commission to regulate broadband service in the
state and to adopt rules related to the quality, safety, and resiliency of broadband
services. CAMU successfully amended the legislation to carve-out municipal utilities. The
bill died in committee.
The bill requires the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (CDLE) to collect
data concerning temperature-related injury or illness or temperature-related
emergencies at worksites and develop a model temperature-related injury and illness
prevention plan. CAMU joined a coalition of stakeholders to oppose the legislation.
Although the bill passed, it was significantly amended to limit the scope of the
rulemaking and the requirements in the TRIIPP.
The bill would provide financing to pay for energy efficiency, electrification, and energy
upgrades that customers would pay back on their utility bill. CAMU worked with the
Energy Office prior to the bill’s introduction to add clarifying language that utility
participation in the program is voluntary.

Amend –
Postponed
Indefinitely
Oppose – Passed,
Awaiting Governor
Action
Monitor –
Postponed
Indefinitely

NEMA US 80016-2022

Meter Socket Adapters

NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
The information in this publication was considered technically sound by the consensus of persons engaged
in the development and approval of the document at the time it was developed. Consensus does not
necessarily mean that there is unanimous agreement among every person participating in the development
of this document.
The National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) standards and guideline publications, of which
the document contained herein is one, are developed through a voluntary consensus standards
development process. This process brings together volunteers and/or seeks out the views of persons who
have an interest in the topic covered by this publication. While NEMA administers the process and
establishes rules to promote fairness in the development of consensus, it does not write the document and
it does not independently test, evaluate, or verify the accuracy or completeness of any information or the
soundness of any judgments contained in its standards and guideline publications.
NEMA disclaims liability for any personal injury, property, or other damages of any nature whatsoever,
whether special, indirect, consequential, or compensatory, directly or indirectly resulting from the
publication, use of, application, or reliance on this document. NEMA disclaims and makes no guaranty or
warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein, and
disclaims and makes no warranty that the information in this document will fulfill any of your particular
purposes or needs. NEMA does not undertake to guarantee the performance of any individual manufacturer
or seller’s products or services by virtue of this standard or guide.
In publishing and making this document available, NEMA is not undertaking to render professional or other
services for or on behalf of any person or entity, nor is NEMA undertaking to perform any duty owed by any
person or entity to someone else. Anyone using this document should rely on his or her own independent
judgment or, as appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of
reasonable care in any given circumstances. Information and other standards on the topic covered by this
publication may be available from other sources, which the user may wish to consult for additional views or
information not covered by this publication.
NEMA has no power, nor does it undertake to police or enforce compliance with the contents of this
document. NEMA does not certify, test, or inspect products, designs, or installations for safety or health
purposes. Any certification or other statement of compliance with any health or safety-related information
in this document shall not be attributable to NEMA and is solely the responsibility of the certifier or maker
of the statement.

© 2022 National Electrical Manufacturers Association

NEMA US 80016-2022
Page 2

I.

Introduction

In light of industry trends such as the integration of distributed solar photovoltaic generation and the
installation of backup generators in disaster-prone areas, meter socket adapters are being more
commonly used within the service entrance of residential, commercial, and industrial buildings. The
purpose of this paper is to educate owners and installers of meter socket adapters on general use
applications for these products, as well as design and testing requirements.
II.

Definition of A Socket Adapter and Why/When Used

A meter socket adapter is an enclosed construction with blades and jaws intended for installation
between a meter socket and the utility meter. While utilities have installed these devices for decades,
adapter utilization has increased and grown steadily over the years. Today meter socket adapters may
contain additional bus bars, protective devices, metering, communications, and other associated
equipment and primarily serves as an S-base meter socket. Its physical electrical aspects are covered by
ANSI/NEMA C12.7 Requirements for Watthour Meter Sockets and C12.10 Electromechanical Watthour
Meters. The dimensions of the base of the adapter are provided with an appropriate envelope design, as
covered in Figures 2–10 of C12.10 for the intended application. Adherence to both Standards ensures
coordination between the meter, the socket, and the adapter. Additionally, performance criteria for meter
socket adapters are covered by UL 414 Supplement SA.
Meter socket adapters are utilized in many different applications, such as meter conversions, transfer of
meter position, distributed energy connections, surge protection, metering and communication, and other
associated functions. Not all of these applications and uses are certified by third-party organizations,
though some may be certified by utilities or product manufacturers. While final populated assemblies
could be covered under different certification standards, such as UL 414, UL 1008M, and UL 2735, the
base adapter product, consisting of enclosure, blades, and jaws, is covered by the UL 414 standard.
The typical meter socket adapter is a circular “collar” type device that is installed between the meter and
the meter socket. Meter socket adapters for special applications may have larger enclosures or
supplemental enclosures that are connected to the basic “collar.” Meter socket adapters may also have
provisions for the use of conduit to facilitate connections to other equipment not connected to line or load
terminals of the existing meter socket.
III.

Overview of Different Types/Applications

Meter Conversion/ Installation Upgrades
Meter socket adapters used for meter conversions and installation upgrades allow for the conversion of
legacy meter socket forms that are no longer supported by the serving utility. For example, today meter
socket adapters are commonly used to convert A-base sockets to S-base sockets.
Interbase Adapters
Meter socket adapters can also be used for conversion of the meter type or orientation. For example,
these meter socket adapters could be used to convert a ringless style meter socket to a ring style meter
socket assembly. Meter socket adapters can also conform to varying angles to change the meter
orientation, making the reading of the meter easier for the end-user.
Power Source Adapters
This type of meter socket adapter is used as a line side or load side tap to provide AC power (or DC
power with a converter) in various applications such as FTTH (fiber-to-the-home).

NEMA US 80016-2022
Page 3
Alternative Energy
Meter socket adapters may be provided with provisions for the interconnection of distributed energy
systems, such as interactive inverters, energy storage systems, or bi-directional types of electric vehicle
chargers. These provisions typically connect the distributed energy system to the load side of the meter,
but, in some cases, it may be desirable for this connection to be made on the line side of the meter.
Transfer Switches
Meter-mounted transfer switches typically use an adapter for connecting the transfer switch between the
meter mounting equipment and the electric utility meter, such that the transfer switch is on the line side of
the service disconnect. In this case, the adapter must meet the requirements in UL 414, and the entire
assembly is investigated using UL 1008M.
Surge Suppression
The 2020 edition of NFPA 70 (The National Electrical Code) requires single-point surge protection for
residential service.

Meter socket adapters—equipped with surge protection—may fulfill that requirement by providing whole
house surge protection at the service entrance. The surge protection device(s) are investigated using UL
1449, and the adapter is investigated using UL 414.
Load Management
Meter socket adapters may also contain monitoring devices, communication devices (including cellular
communication), power quality interfaces, and recording devices for the purpose of load management
and other similar functions.
IV.

Scope of UL 414 / History

Main Body of Standard
The Standard for Safety UL 414, Meter Sockets (UL 414), has been utilized for certifications since the
1950s. The main body of UL 414 provides requirements for meter sockets associated with plug-in-type
watthour and similar utility meters, test switches, metering transformer cabinets, and interiors. The
standard limits the maximum ratings of the plug-in-type watthour and similar utility meters to 600 V AC
and 400 A. The metering transformers cabinets and interiors are limited to a maximum rating of 600 V AC
and 6000 A.
Supplement SA
The UL 414 Supplement SA provides additional construction, testing, and marking requirements utilized
for accessories intended for use with meter sockets, such as meter socket extenders and meter socket
adapters, or other similar equipment. This supplement has been updated over the past several years to
accommodate requirements with assemblies containing connections for utility-interactive alternative
energy sources. This supplement is used in conjunction with the main body requirements for the
certification of meter socket adapters. The standard limits the maximum ratings of the meters socket
extenders and adapters to 600 V AC and 400 A.

© 2022 National Electrical Manufacturers Association

NEMA US 80016 2022
Page 4

Proposed Supplement SB
A new Supplement SB has been submitted for inclusion into the UL 414 standard through the standard
technical panel (STP) process. It builds upon the legacy Supplement SA requirements and provides
additional guidance for construction and testing considerations for the systems and components
associated with the connection of distributed generation equipment, which is currently not properly
addressed in the Supplement SA. This supplement is limited in scope to meter socket extenders/adapters
with connections for utility-interactive alternative energy sources, distributed generation equipment, and
other similar equipment. As part of these updates, the requirements associated with distributed
generation in the Supplement SA portion of the UL 414 standard will be removed once added to the
Supplement SB.

VI.

General Construction / Testing Requirements for Meter Socket Adapters

The performance requirements in Supplement SA generally focus on three elements of the construction:
heating, the enclosure properties, and short-circuit current.
Heating Tests
The heating properties are addressed by the Heating Test in Section SA4. This heating test is conducted
in either of two methods depending on the intended application. Specifically, meter socket adapters may
be 1) tested for use with any manufacturer’s meter socket (i.e., “any meter socket”) at a specific rating; or
2) tested for use only with a specific manufacturer’s meter socket (e.g., catalog number). The basic test
method utilized is found in Section 14, Heating Test of the main body of UL 414. Further guidance is
contained in Section SA4, which provides that both heating test methods consist of three separate
devices assembled for the testing: a meter socket, the meter socket adapter, and the simulated meter.
One difference between the two test methods is that for the “any meter socket” testing method, the meter
socket and simulated meter are initially calibrated to provide a baseline correction factor (Tc) to allow
adjustment for the thermal differences between different meter socket constructions at the same
continuous current rating. The correction factor (Tc) is used to adjust the final measured temperatures
attained on the meter socket jaw used during the testing on the subsequent steps in Section 14.2 parts b)
and f) such that when the adapter is installed, it will not contribute any additional heating to the end
system. Products that are tested for use with any manufacturer's meter socket will have a marking that
states, "Rated ____ Continuous Amps When Used in a Meter Socket Rated ____ Continuous Amps," or
equivalent. The first blank specifies the test current of the meter socket adapter, and the second blank
specifies the continuous current rating of the meter socket.
Meter socket adapters intended for use with a specific meter socket would be tested in a method similar
to the method used when intended for use with any meter socket, except that the initial meter socket
calibration step is omitted. Meter socket adapters tested for use in a specific meter socket are marked to
indicate the manufacturer's name and model number of the meter socket with which they are intended to
be used.
It is possible that a meter socket adapter may be tested both for use with any meter socket and also for a
specific meter socket. In this case, it will contain both markings.
In addition to the above, meter socket adapters with provisions for connection of an alternative energy
source will be tested per paragraph 14.2(f) twice: first with the alternative energy source terminals
carrying 100 percent of the continuous ampere rating of the alternative energy circuit and balance of the
current through the utility source terminals; and the second test conducted with a total load of 100 percent
of the continuous current rating of the meter socket adapter, supplied through the utility source terminals.
Products will have a marking that states, “Rated ___ Continuous Amps for Combined Utility and
Distributed Generation When Used in a Meter Socket Rated ___ Continuous Amps” and “Rated ___ Vac,
© 2022 National Electrical Manufacturers Association

NEMA US 80016-2022
Page 5
____ Amps Maximum, ____ A Continuous Amps for Distributed Generation Input,” or equivalent. The
blanks are filled with the appropriate ratings based on the testing conducted.
Enclosure Tests
UL 414 Paragraph 4.1 requires compliance with the requirements of the Standard for Enclosures for
Electrical Equipment, Non-Environmental Considerations, UL 50, and the Standard for Enclosures for
Electrical Equipment, Environmental Considerations, UL 50E. In the case of non-metallic meter socket
adapters, the testing would generally consist of flammability – 5-inch (127 mm) flame tests, resistance to
impact (both normal and cold) tests, crushing resistance tests, mold stress relief distortion tests, and
ultraviolet light exposure testing. Some of these tests may be omitted based on the polymeric material's
small-scale property ratings if a recognized component plastic is used.
Short Circuit Tests
Meter socket adapters with a short-circuit current rating greater than 10,000 amperes are subjected to the
Short Circuit Current Test, Section 15, or the Short-Circuit Current Test with Specific Circuit Breaker,
Section 16, as appropriate. All meter socket adapters with provisions for connection of an alternative
energy source having overcurrent protection integral to the adapter are subjected to a short circuit
withstand test in accordance with SA5.2.2 – SA5.2.12 regardless of the short circuit rating. In all cases,
the testing setup and methods as described in Section SA5 are utilized.
A proposed Supplement SB uses the same basic construction and performance testing criteria as the
Supplement SA for meter socket adapters with provisions for the connection of an alternative energy
source. It also includes requirements associated with the following:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
VII.

ventilation,
overtemperature detection and protection,
overcurrent protection and disconnection means,
printed circuit board electrical spacings,
external connections to power circuits,
external connections for low energy communication and control circuits,
switching components installed in meter socket adapters,
metering circuits in meter socket adapters, and
communication circuits in meter socket adapters.
Special considerations

Security concerns/access by unauthorized persons
Meter socket adapters are required to have provisions for locking and sealing by the utility. Additionally,
covers for access to distributed energy connections are required in the Supplement SB to have provisions
for the application of a seal or lock by the serving utility to prevent unauthorized access.
Weight/moment arm
Supplement SA and the proposed supplement SB in UL 414 do not currently address the weight and
moment arm concerns related to adapter size or configuration. Those requirements are found in
ANSI/NEMA C12.7 Requirements for Watthour Meter Sockets.
Connections ahead of service disconnect
The disconnection means overcurrent protective devices, and surge protective devices installed in meter
socket adapters are required to be of a type suitable for use on the line side of the service. When external
circuits are intended to be connected directly to a meter socket adapter, the meter socket adapter shall be
provided with certified fittings for connection of a flexible liquid-tight conduit system. Terminations are
required to be located in an area that can be sealed or locked by the serving utility.
© 2022 National Electrical Manufacturers Association

NEMA US 80016 2022
Page 6
Connections ahead of utility meter
Meter socket adapters may have provisions for connection of external circuits to the line side of the meter
socket adapter when the adapter is provided with instructions and marked “This meter socket adapter has
provisions for connecting external circuits to the line side of the meter. Approval from the serving utility is
required before connection of these circuits.” Terminations are required to be located in an area that can
be sealed or locked by the serving utility.

VIII.

Conclusion and Summary

When installed properly, meter socket adapters can be an important tool in measuring electric loads. We
encourage electric utility engineers to familiarize themselves with the various products and models for
different applications. For further information on meter socket adapters, please contact Jonathan Stewart
([email protected]) or visit UL.com to purchase the UL 414 Standard for Meter Sockets.
§

© 2022 National Electrical Manufacturers Association

Status of Wastewater Treatment Facility Upgrades Project as of 6/2/2026
Sludge Dewatering Systems











The 30% design has been submitted. While the submittal may not fully satisfy all
requirements identified in the Scope of Work for the 30% milestone, it appears
adequate for evaluating alternatives and continuing discussions with the project team.
The Esmil screw press and the Centrisys centrifuge currently appear to be the two most
cost-effective options.
A pilot test for the screw press is scheduled for June, along with potential site visits to
facilities currently utilizing screw press systems. These efforts should provide valuable
insight into whether the screw press is the preferred long-term solution.
Replacement of the centrifuge would likely be relatively straightforward at our facility.
However, additional due diligence is warranted if this alternative is pursued. The
primary concern is that the existing centrifuge should be performing significantly better
than its current operation indicates. Although it is undersized for permitted peak
loading conditions, it should still operate substantially more efficiently during the
majority of normal operating days.
During a recent call with Esmil, it was mentioned that they offer rental self-contained
units that could potentially be utilized during construction. Although not discussed
further during the meeting, the team may want to evaluate whether one of these selfcontained units could serve as a longer-term solution if building modifications become
extensive.
A dewatering system decision will ultimately need to be made, as several other design
elements are dependent upon that selection, including odor control and non-potable
water system improvements.

Blower Upgrades


This portion of the design appears relatively straightforward. At this time, the most
cost-effective approach appears to be installation of two larger blower units while
retaining one of the existing smaller units.

UV System Upgrades


This design also appears relatively straightforward and generally consists of minor to
moderate flow channel modifications along with upgraded UV equipment and
hardware.

Non-Potable Water


The 30% design included a 2,000-gallon external tank located on the north side of the
building, utilizing either a submersible pump or a buried vault configuration.





This design component may be significantly affected by the selected dewatering system,
particularly if building expansion is required and impacts the proposed non-potable
water storage location.
Following selection of the dewatering system, the team should revisit this item in more
detail. Based on recollection from prior discussions, the buried vault alternative may not
require heating and could eliminate one pumping step by allowing water to flow
directly through the system. While the vault alternative would likely have a higher
initial capital cost, it may provide long-term operational savings and simplify operations
by avoiding the need for tank fill controls and associated logic.

Flow Split Structure




The proposed weir gates with hand-crank adjustment handles would represent a
significant improvement over the existing system and appear to be a cost-effective
solution.
Additional input from Ramey is needed regarding this component.

Odor Control




Very little detail regarding odor control was presented in the 30% design. This
component is highly dependent on the other planned modifications throughout the
facility.
The current expectation is that the existing odor control system may remain in service,
with improvements focused primarily on troubleshooting and minor repairs.

Centrate Return Line




No specific improvements were presented in the 30% design for the centrate return
line. This work appears relatively straightforward and would likely be similar to the
approach previously presented by JVA during the rerating effort.
Another concept discussed was to avoid modifying the centrate return system
altogether and instead relocate the influent sampling location, since the sampling
configuration is what appears to be driving this need. The team should evaluate
whether this is a viable alternative.

Smaller WAS Pumps





This appears to be a relatively straightforward design modification involving
downsizing the pumps while retaining the existing wiring and VFD infrastructure.
The existing pumps appear to be oversized, making it difficult to properly control
wasting rates without adversely impacting mixed liquor concentrations within the
basins.
Additional confirmation from Ramey is needed to verify that the proposed pump sizing
achieves the desired operational flow range.

Wetwell Upgrades





The current design proposes utilizing abandoned space within the existing vault, which
appears to be a cost-effective method of increasing storage volume.
It is unclear whether the proposed modifications fully address all existing concerns. My
understanding is that the current issues involve emergency storage capacity, pump
short-cycling, and maintaining a more consistent/even flow to the treatment process.
While the additional volume likely helps address the first two concerns, there may still
be a need for a smaller pump to better manage consistent flow conditions, as the added
storage volume alone may not fully resolve that issue. Additional input from Ramey and
Consor is needed.
Expanding the wetwell footprint or constructing a new wetwell appears to have largely
been ruled out due to cost considerations.

N OR T H AM E RI C A

D AT A S H EE T

IQ Meter Collar
IQ Meter Collar is a meter socket adapter with an integrated microgrid
interconnection device (MID) and Energy Meter. It is installed on an ANSI
C12 Form 2S meter socket. IQ Meter Collar is rated for 200 A continuous
current. It can be installed either at the service entrance between an ANSI
C12 Form 2S utility meter and the meter socket or on the load side of the
utility service on a separate meter socket pan.

5034331

Key specifications

IQ Meter Collar

Model

MC-200-011-V01

1

Nominal grid supply

120/240 VAC, 180°, split-phase

Nominal frequency

60 Hz

Nominal power consumption

3.8 W

Overvoltage category

Category IV (service entrance-rated)

Integrated consumption
meter

±0.5% accurate

Maximum continuous current
rating

200 A

Maximum short-circuit
current withstand

22 kA

Maximum overcurrent
protection device
Weight
Meter and meter socket
interface

Easy to install
•
•
•

Robust and reliable
•
•

•

200 A
3.6 lb (1.63 kg)

Thermal management minimizes
use of internal fan
Integrated AC-DC power supply
closes MID to restore power to
the home when the utility grid is
available, even if battery energy is
exhausted
15-year product warranty
Smart grid-ready

•

ANSI Form 2S, 200 A, ringless, or ring type
•
•

•

1

Lightweight and simple to install
Lowers the cost of whole-home
backup
Remote commissioning saves
additional truck roll

Complies with advanced grid
support, voltage, and frequency
ride-through requirements
Supports remote firmware updates
to changing grid requirements
Configurable at commissioning
to comply with applicable grid
interconnection parameters
Meets CA Rule 21 (UL 1741-SA),
IEEE 1547:2018 (UL 1741‑SB), Puerto
Rico Electric Power Authority
(PREPA), and Hawaiian Electric
Industries (HEI) SRD V2.0 grid
profiles

Use the model number (not the ordering SKU) for interconnection application and permitting.

© 2026 Enphase Energy. All rights reserved. Enphase, the e and CC logos, IQ, and certain other marks listed at
https://enphase.com/trademark-usage-guidelines are trademarks of Enphase Energy, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. Data subject to change.

DSH-00468-6.0-EN-2026-04-01

Product details
Model: MC-200-011-V01

IQ Meter Collar
Meter socket adapter with integrated MID and current sensors for energy
consumption metering. Rated at 200 A, it installs on an ANSI C12 Form 2S meter
socket at service entrances or on standalone load-side meter sockets.

Ordering SKU

MC-200-011-V01-2

What's in the box
IQ Meter Collar

Meter collar adapter with microgrid interconnect device (MID)

Seal ring

Seal ring to prevent tampering or unauthorized removal of the utility watt-hour
meter

Plastic bag

Plastic bag for installers to hang the IQ Meter Collar next to the utility watt-hour
meter

Quick install guide (QIG)

IQ Meter Collar quick install guide

Accessories kit

One control connector; one junction box sub-assembly; one cable gland, 1/2" NPT
(national pipe taper thread)

Blank cover plate

One blank cover plate attached in front of the IQ Meter Collar

Electrical specifications
Nominal grid supply

120/240 VAC, 180°, split-phase

Nominal frequency

60 Hz

Nominal power consumption

3.8 W

Power consumption

2.5 W to 5.8 W

Overvoltage category

Category IV (service entrance-rated)

Integrated consumption meter

±0.5% accuracy

Maximum continuous current rating

200 A

Maximum short-circuit current withstand2

22 kA

Maximum overcurrent protection device

200 A

Mechanical specifications
Dimensions (L × W × D)
Weight
Meter and meter socket interface
Cooling

6.9 in × 8.1 in × 5.0 in (175 mm × 206 mm × 128 mm)
3.6 lb (1.63 kg)
ANSI Form 2S, 200 A, ringless, or ring type
Forced convection-cooled

Environmental specifications
Ambient temperature range

-40°F to 122°F (-40°C to 50°C)

Enclosure environmental rating

Indoor/Outdoor, NEMA type 3R

Maximum altitude

8,200 ft. (2,500 m)

Compliance
Safety
Emissions

UL 414, CSA C22.2 No.115:2025
CFR 47 Part 15B

System and grid compatibility
Grid
2

UL 1741 SA/SB (IEEE 1547:2018), multi-mode

The short-circuit current is limited by an external overcurrent protection device.
DSH-00468-6.0-EN-2026-04-01

System and grid compatibility
Power control system (PCS)

Current sensor for a power control system under UL 3141

Interfaces
Control connector

4-wire signaling with 24 VDC power supply between system components.

Manual override lever

Manually sets the MID relay state: pull to open, push to close.

Push button

Short press (7–10 seconds): Disables hardware control of the MID; press again to
re-enable.
Long press (>15 seconds): Performs a hard reset of the unit without changing the
relay state.
The relay LED and the control LED blink simultaneously for 6 seconds, indicating a
successful hard reset.

Light-emitting diodes (LED)

Indicates IQ Meter Collar status—normal, error, or MID state—based on relay and
control LED patterns. Refer to IQ Meter Collar quick installation guide for more
details.

Error

RELAY LED

CONTROL LED

STATE

RED

RED

MID closed

OFF

RED

MID open

OFF

OFF

No supply

OFF

Slow blinking (1 second ON, 3
seconds OFF)

MID open, grid present

Accessories
ACC-MC-200

One junction box assembly including two cable glands, one control connector, one
plastic bag, and one seal ring.
Compatible only with MC-200-011-V01.

ACC-MC-200-2

One junction box assembly including a liquid-tight conduit connector, one plastic
bag, and one seal ring.
Compatible only with MC-200-011-V01-2.

ACC-MC-200-3

One junction box assembly including a cable gland, one plastic bag, and one seal
ring.
Compatible only with MC-200-011-V01-2. Not compatible with liquid-tight
conduits.

JC-MC-200

Jumper cover suitable for up to 200 A meter socket.

MP-MC-200

200 A ringless meter socket.

CTRL-SC3-NA-01

Control cable, 500 ft. spool, 18/4 TC-ER.

Warranty
Limited warranty

15 years

Enphase equipment compatibility
IQ Gateway
Communications Kit
Microinverters

ENV2-IQ-AM1-240, and ENV-IQ-AM1-240
COMMS-KIT-02
IQ8, IQ7, and IQ6 Series Microinverters

3rd-generation Enphase Energy System

IQ Battery 5P (IQBATTERY‑5P‑1P‑NA), IQ Combiner 5/5C (X‑IQ‑AM1‑240‑5,
X‑IQ‑AM1‑5C), and IQ System Controller 3M (SC200D111CMC1US01)

4th-generation Enphase Energy System

IQ Battery 10C (IQBATTERY-10C-1P-NA), IQ Battery 10CS (IQBATTERY-10CS-1PNA), and IQ Combiner 6C (X-IQ-AM1-240-6C)
DSH-00468-6.0-EN-2026-04-01

Enphase equipment compatibility
Third-party inverters and legacy Enphase
microinverters

Supported with 4th-generation Enphase Energy System

DSH-00468-6.0-EN-2026-04-01

Components of the Enphase Energy System

3
4

IQ System Controller 3M

IQ Battery 5P

It connects the home to
grid power, IQ Battery 5P,
IQ Combiner 5/5C, and PV.
In the event of a grid failure,
it works seamlessly with the
IQ Meter Collar to transition the
system from grid power to backup
power.3

Fully integrated 5 kWh
AC battery system.
Includes six field-replaceable
IQ8D‑BAT Microinverters.3

IQ Combiner 6C

IQ Battery 10C/10CS

Consolidates PV, battery, and
EVSE interconnection into a single
enclosure. Provides 60 A load
control. Works seamlessly with
IQ Meter Collar to transition the
system from grid power to backup
power in the event of a grid
failure.4

Fully integrated 10 kWh AC
battery system with neutral
forming capability. Works with
IQ Combiner 6C.4

3rd-generation Enphase Energy System.
4th-generation Enphase Energy System.
DSH-00468-6.0-EN-2026-04-01

Revision history
Revision

Date

Description

DSH-00468-6.0

April 2026

Updated the "Compliance" section.

DSH-00468-5.0

October 2025

Added the new "Ordering SKUs".

DSH-00468-4.0

July 2025

Added the "Power consumption" parameter in the "Electrical specifications" section.

DSH-00468-3.0

June 2025

Updated "Electrical" and "Interfaces" sections.

DSH-00468-2.0

February 2025

Updated the cover page and specifications.

DSH-00468-1.0

September 2024

Preliminary release.

DSH-00468-6.0-EN-2026-04-01

SOLAR METER SOCKET
ADAPTER
The ConnectDER™ Solar Meter Socket
Adapter (MSA) is designed to rapidly
connect grid-ready solar PV assets to the
home. The adapter is UL-listed, NEC
compliant, and a low-cost alternative to
traditional installation methods.

SIMPLE PLUG & PLAY

INTERCONNECTION FOR RESIDENTIAL SOLAR PV
• Eliminates main panel upgrades (MPU), reduces costs, and standardizes safe, efficient
installations
• Tool-free junction box removal provides easier access to meter socket for inspection and
allows for safe removal by emergency personnel
• Reversible junction box with conduit entry from either side of the MSA
• Ability to interconnect Solar PV without entering the premises or accessing the main panel
• Compatible with most residential meter sockets, including lever and horn bypass
• Integrated overcurrent protection device for Solar PV (60A maximum)
• Suitable for use as service equipment

AVAILABLE NOW

INSIDE A CONNECTDER SOLAR MSA

www.connectder.com

CIRCUIT BREAKER

TERMINAL BLOCK

SOLAR METER SOCKET ADAPTER V5.1
MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS

UTILITY INTERACTIVE SOURCE RATINGS

ENCLOSURE RATING

NEMA 3R

MAXIMUM POWER

11.52 KW AC

ENCLOSURE TYPE

Injection molded polycarbonate, UL 94
V0 flame rating

MAXIMUM VOLTAGE

240V

COOLING

Natural convection

MAXIMUM CONTINUOUS PV CURRENT

48A

DIMENSIONS (H X W X D)

6.7 x 6.7 x 4.6in adapter only
8.1 x 6.7 x 4.6in with junction box

CONTINUOUS COMBINED CURRENT,
PV/GRID

180A

WEIGHT

3.6lb (1.6kg)

INVERTER WIRING TERMINATION

Terminal block

MOUNTING SYSTEM

Blade interface with 4-jaw

GRID TERMINATION METHOD

Blade interface with meter socket for
L1/L2, pigtail for neutral

ELECTRIC METER COMPATIBILITY

Type 2S

METER SOCKET COMPATIBILITY

Ringless and ring-type, lever and horn bypass meter sockets

DER INTERFACE POINT

Factory configured, load side of utility meter/supply side of main service disconnect

CONDUIT CONNECTION

Single 1” NPT fitting

TERMINAL CONNECTIONS

L1, L2, N, G; Up to 4 AWG wire

SAFETY INFORMATION

OVERCURRENT PROTECTION

APPLICABLE SAFETY STANDARDS

UL 414 – Meter Sockets

TYPE

Eaton Type BR 120/240V,
externally resettable

UL FILE NUMBER (STANDARDS)

E361188

OVERCURRENT RATINGS AVAILABLE

40A and 60A Standard

AMBIENT AIR OPERATING TEMPERATURE RANGE

-22°F to 158°F (-30°C to 70°C)

CURRENT INTERRUPTING RATING

10k AIC

AMBIENT AIR STORAGE TEMPERATURE RANGE

-40°F to 176°F (-40°C to 80°C)

“

“ConnectDER’s Solar Meter Socket Adapter is one of these
potential “game-changers” that has really caught my
attention...the main distribution panels in the home are
notoriously small, outdated, maxed out, recessed into the
wall, not listed for a supply-side interconnection or a
combination of the above – making interconnection costly
and complex. Utilizing the ConnectDER adapter however can
greatly simplify the process - bypassing the existing
distribution panel altogether and tying directly in at the
meter in both a code-compliant and utility-sanctioned
manner.”
- 15 Year Veteran Solar Installer