[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6226713,"mediaKeyId","3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426","parentId",3503953,"title","Eversource late change on grounding transformer risks delay, $3 million tax credit for Rockingham County solar project","audioSeconds",1619,"startMs",58030,"endMs",1677559,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426&start=58&end=1677","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426/thumbnail_58030.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6226713/Rockingham-County/New-Hampshire/Eversource-late-change-on-grounding-transformer-risks-delay-3-million-tax-credit-for-Rockingham-County-solar-project","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6226713-de01a4a126e3265dbbc4c3ddc8d0aee7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450869&Signature=LH-Eb05YQ9fdulm~rAP27ASAQ6c2BK8THb~-cz0V0HHoJQvk3f2dj~3X5wg3VSQ3~jeDubkI9uf46duHa5HHYHR1zVGbOpzbgwOxFvn2P2EmYt14csZ-6O1EZ1U6Y5muyjQO-ShsMV1O6d~Eg15DgnI6wlAy4UfL2VMM7hLAaZ5DuyNBSqcVaHd7QiCQBxH1NW8Phkn-gms7V2iKvGT4ItyrcjJho2jmqnR6mg81PtVHHgONnZwaJdRjqtnfAbmdIJ9Hk~waxqTOM3DN22VBXpq7QaimsR0kXqNVlbScnOcCA2EwAHidva8J1hz-8JqHb0WAZmgnYQMlwzJ-lXawTA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Rockingham County NH","date","2025-05-25T08:50:55.28Z","article","Revision Energy told the Rockingham County Board of Commissioners on May 22 that Eversource has unexpectedly reversed earlier interconnection findings and now requires a grounding transformer for the county’s new solar array — a change Revision said could add “low 6 figures” in rework costs and delay energizing the system by six to 12 months.

The change threatens the county’s ability to claim an elective federal income‑tax payment tied to the Inflation Reduction Act, Revision said, because the county must place the project in service before the fiscal‑year end to register for the credit. \"We're probably talking low 6 figures for the rework and this transformer grounding matter,\" Revision Energy Chief Operating Officer James Hasselbeck told the commissioners. \"We have an airtight documentation trail wherever sources told us we do not need this piece of equipment.\"

The nut of the problem: Revision said the county and contractor completed mechanical work and testing and had an executed interconnection agreement with Eversource that did not require a grounding transformer. Revision described multiple earlier studies and a signed interconnection agreement and said Eversource’s contractor (identified in the discussion as Burns & McDonnell) then recommended adding a grounding transformer shortly before a witness test. Revision said Eversource’s prior written position — that \"This project does not require a grounding transformer\" — appears in the interconnection studies and agreement.

Why it matters: Revision said missing the county’s fiscal deadline would jeopardize an estimated $3,000,000 in federal elective credits tied to the project’s placed‑in‑service date. Revision also said the equipment must be custom manufactured, so lead times are long. \"Best case, 6 months, likely 9 to 12,\" Revision’s project manager explained when commissioners pressed on timing. Revision added the transformer is an additional protection scheme and that the array already includes multiple redundant protections.

Discussion and follow‑up: Commissioners and Revision discussed escalation and legal options. Revision said it had escalated the issue within Eversource — to a distributed‑generation manager, a vice president of government affairs and others — and had asked for a legal or technical explanation but had not received one. Revision asked the county, as the legal interconnection counterparty, to take the lead on next steps. Commissioner Kate Coyle said the board would \"probably talk in non public session about a course of action\" and follow up with Revision in short order.

What was not decided: The board did not vote on any formal action during the public meeting. Commissioners directed staff to review written correspondence from Eversource and Revision and to consider next steps in nonpublic session. Revision declined to speculate on Eversource’s internal analysis and said it had no change on its own equipment, only the utility’s new requirement.

Context and technical points: Revision described interconnection as a multi‑stage process in which utilities study detailed technical submissions and may require additional equipment to protect the grid. Revision said grounding transformers are required in roughly 10 percent of projects it builds in New England; they provide extra protection in certain fault conditions but are not active during normal operation. Revision emphasized it had completed mechanical commissioning and testing of inverters, switchboards and transformers and was awaiting Eversource’s witness test and permission to operate.

Next steps: Revision agreed to share its correspondence with Eversource that indicates earlier approvals; the board asked staff to circulate that email thread to commissioners. Commissioners said they would discuss potential legal or administrative responses with counsel in a nonpublic session before returning to Revision with a plan.

Ending: Revision urged a quick resolution so the county can place the system in service and claim the federal credit; the board indicated it would consider short‑term measures and legal options and stay in close contact with Revision Energy.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Commissioners Meeting 05/22/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Revision Energy told the Rockingham County Board of Commissioners on May 22 that Eversource has unexpectedly reversed earlier interconnection findings and now requires a grounding transformer for the county’s new solar array, a change Revision said could add “low 6 figures” in rework costs and delay energizing the system by six to 12 months.","taxTitle","Rockingham County, New Hampshire","taxId",54226,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6226706,"Rockingham County commissioners move to end meal vouchers, curb catering as invoices rise",302,2430369,2732485,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426&start=2430&end=2732","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426/thumbnail_2430369.jpg","/articles/6226706/Rockingham-County/New-Hampshire/Rockingham-County-commissioners-move-to-end-meal-vouchers-curb-catering-as-invoices-rise","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6226706-43e3579617fa03a32f5190d0f421d903/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450869&Signature=G5lCFsZC6G9YuZtcIV60b5r2XQQgcb-RJyoSHdEVd43LWdyCuiBsk88sa9~p8y2F6TZaRZTeVARG2hW7pfGfBT~bES7mcX7TUMPItK34e-n-tHtghwiBBR6wNVqSpLQEt3ui6by10l0dzmuYPCHZS6RjYpb5jIPQUEJG~mhKUZblpH75itV-ierZp2XAJ6oIg9mD~VoJqaGoDrq1raxSa2CdDlue3T-NOr05Gt71eLirJGAdwyYaoP4gUULrqMddNWICeeG104CoYPUppqed7VZmvauEdInQDF-FqaOk9lW3rO-pc1GgYZgf~im7Y1MQz9NdZLGXWQwvVx4Sg-kIow__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rockingham County Board of Commissioners on May 22 directed departments to stop issuing meal vouchers and to reduce catering and similar discretionary food expenses after staff reported rising invoices and a one‑time emergency food purchase needed to meet regulatory stock requirements at county facilities.

Commissioners said recent invoices from the county’s food service contractor, now operating under Whitson after a contract transition, showed higher charges than previously visible under Glendale’s billing practices. County staff told the board they had identified more than two dozen billing questions and were meeting with Whitson to reconcile charges. \"We are getting rid of all the vouchers that we have. We're not gonna give out any budget. We're asking everybody to destroy the vouchers,\" a commissioner said during the meeting.

Staff explained two main factors behind higher near‑term costs: (1) the transition to new billing and staffing practices at the contracted vendor, which has caused higher line‑item labor and travel charges for temporary staff, and (2) one large, necessary purchase to meet regulatory emergency‑food stock requirements for the nursing home and corrections facilities. The purchase was described as necessary to satisfy regulators’ minimum emergency food stores in case of delivery interruptions; staff said that the buy was not elective but required for compliance.

Commissioners also discussed internal cost‑saving changes, including bringing more meeting day trips onto a county van and buying catering locally for some internal events. Finance staff and department heads said they were auditing invoices and would follow up with the vendor on 24 specific questions. The board said further budget planning should begin now for fiscal year 2027 to avoid last‑minute tax increases, and asked departments to identify revenue or efficiency options.

Decisions and follow‑up: The board’s immediate decisions were operational: cancel meal vouchers, stop discretionary catering where possible and require department heads to limit costs; staff will meet with Whitson to reconcile invoices and provide a list of outstanding questions. Commissioners said they would review fourth‑quarter numbers before proposing deeper budget changes and would use pilot purchasing options (including an Amazon Business program the county is exploring) to reduce supply costs going forward.

Ending: County officials said they will keep monitoring vendor invoices and return to the board with reconciliations and proposed budget options for FY2027.","Commissioners directed departments to stop issuing meal vouchers and to reduce catering after staff reported higher invoices under a new vendor billing cycle and necessary one‑time emergency food purchases for facilities.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6226710,"Rockingham commissioners ask Harvey Construction for receipts after missing backup on progress payments",507,6152400,6660125,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426&start=6152&end=6660","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3503953-d16db85a9dacf1f33a3ab623e12c8426/thumbnail_6152400.jpg","/articles/6226710/Rockingham-County/New-Hampshire/Rockingham-commissioners-ask-Harvey-Construction-for-receipts-after-missing-backup-on-progress-payments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6226710-8901f557b0978f7f3c19c48c571f92a6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450869&Signature=EsoLMdpNr37IRj1tBBiadNljUym~A0E-aa9hB7dbGiQ9SdlOrxvNZMIn46rJV9h6~YSur5Bs~zDmtVcoOgwdQlEkWxvuxNFWm7YxYqbLokw6jdgXkSfmgO081Vb5wEbGOo3p02AbHB3rnqMzOWfk0qalKWfLPztBoQPA0MAShB-73o9EHPpK6T4Y4b2NJ3cUVaeT7liwZGKT2MePs0PuxbIa5p8E3AvKNDJqu60GJnzGjAy~4o50ez4QQcPbAsyvzCf3Ob-7ym24TsgiSi3iXGqGJYFbZL~ci-5MY~JgcT6if0RPmcqjz5Gyxtsw-mU7TQvvV3ozOwCTkd4GT2qeRg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rockingham County Board of Commissioners voted on May 22 to send a letter to Harvey Construction requesting receipts and backup for outside purchases submitted with its monthly payment applications, citing missing supporting documentation under the contract’s reporting provisions.

A commissioner moved that the county request all receipts \"in accordance with section 11.1.4 of our agreement,\" referencing the contract clause that requires supporting documentation for applications for payment. During discussion the mover said the request aimed to clarify what small‑tool purchases and other general‑condition costs the contractor had acquired — items the county expects to become county property at project completion.

The county’s change request followed repeated staff questions about missing backup in prior payment applications. Meeting discussion referenced prior months where tens of thousands of dollars in billed items lacked supporting receipts; one commissioner said there had been months with roughly $48,000 of expense without receipts. Staff said the missing items commonly appeared under general conditions and included small supplies purchased from local suppliers.

The motion passed in public session with a single recorded dissent (\"Commissioner Rodriguez: I vote no\"). The board did not withhold payment at the meeting; the motion directs the chair to send the written request for supporting receipts to Harvey Construction and to require that future applications include the required documentation.

Discussion vs. decision: Commissioners repeatedly emphasized they support completing the project and acknowledged Harvey’s overall work, but said they need the requested documentation to satisfy the county’s contract, to verify reimbursements and to account for project‑owned tools and materials. The board did not take further enforcement steps at the meeting; staff said they would review any receipts received and raise additional follow‑up if discrepancies remain.

Clarifying details: The contract clause cited by the board is \"section 11.1.4\" (as referenced repeatedly during the motion discussion). Commissioners said the missing receipts tended to appear in the general‑conditions line items and cited examples such as purchases at local suppliers and winter‑condition materials. The precise cumulative value of undocumented items varied in comments but was described as tens of thousands of dollars for prior months.

Next steps: The board directed the chair to send the request to Harvey Construction, and staff will review any subsequent receipts. Commissioners indicated they expect regular compliance with contract documentation requirements going forward.

Ending: The board framed the request as a routine contract‑administration step rather than a change in their support for the overall construction program; it will revisit the matter if receipts are not provided or if further discrepancies are found.","The board voted to request that Harvey Construction provide receipts for outside purchases tied to monthly payment applications, citing missing invoice backup and concerns over tools and materials that should become county property.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Eversource late change on grounding transformer risks delay, $3 million tax credit for Rockingham County solar project

Rockingham County commissioners move to end meal vouchers, curb catering as invoices rise

Rockingham commissioners ask Harvey Construction for receipts after missing backup on progress payments