Real issues,
real answers.

Rep opens a deal in Enerflo, clicks into design / Aurora, and hits an error — either cannot open design mode, cannot build a design, or can build in Aurora but cannot sync back to Enerflo. Rep insists they are using the correct login.

• Browser autofill is silently logging them into an old Ambia-era Aurora account rather than the new SunPower account. (Per DKD 2025-12-09: "ive had 4 sales reps say that and all 4 weren't. Autofill logins can be a bitch.")
• Rep was never sent the new Aurora invite email (or it went to the wrong address).
• Email handle mismatch between Enerflo and Aurora — e.g. Enerflo uses `first.last@sunpower.com` while Aurora expects `first.last+ambia@sunpower.com` or `first.last+sp@sunpower.com`.

1. Have the rep fully log OUT of Aurora in a new browser window and manually type the correct email — do not rely on autofill.
2. Confirm which email their Aurora account is under (often the `+ambia@sunpower.com` or `+sp@sunpower.com` variant, not the plain `@sunpower.com`).
3. If no Aurora invite was ever received, re-send the invite to the correct email.
4. If login is correct but Enerflo still errors on sync, check for an active Aurora outage first (see 2025-12 outage note — Aurora confirmed an outage affecting some territories).
5. If still broken, escalate with the deal link + rep's email + screenshot of the error.

• `brain/design-tools/aurora-design-not-syncing-to-enerflo.md`
• `brain/account-access/sungage-email-plus-sp-mismatch.md`

Rep tries to run a cash deal using Paykeeper inside Enerflo and gets an error, either on financing selection ("getting this error when I use paykeeper") or when trying to send for signature. Reps describe Paykeeper "not working through enerflo" on multiple dates.

• Paykeeper is incompletely wired into Enerflo. Per CKF 2026-01-07: "Paykeeper does not work through enerflo. The only thing we can do in enerflo is build a prop."
• Sometimes triggered by a missing homeowner email (CCE 2025-12-04 initially suspected — but rep confirmed email was correct and error persisted).
• Cases with cash + IL SREC path: selecting cash with Paykeeper errors, switching to loan clears the error (ATP 2026-01-16).

1. Double-check the homeowner email field is populated and valid.
2. If Paykeeper still errors, submit the project and ask the support line to create the cash contract manually (per CCE 2025-12-04: "skip it for now. Submit the project and ask the support line to help create it manually").
3. For IL SREC cash deals: try marking the proposal as loan temporarily to clear the SREC calc, then coordinate manual Paykeeper contract.
4. Do NOT tell the rep Paykeeper is fully functional — it is known to be partial. Set expectations.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/enerflo-pricing/battery-only-deal-not-supported.md`
• `brain/policy-process/il-shines-srec-enerflo-pending.md`

Rep (especially a new / 1099 rep) clicks an Enzy lead, Enerflo populates, then shows "you don't have authorization." Some reps also never received the initial Enerflo or Enzy invite email at all.

• Rep's Enerflo user wasn't activated or permissions weren't assigned during onboarding.
• Invite email went to wrong address (old Ambia vs new SunPower) or was spam-filtered.
• Team-lead permissions didn't carry over after the +ambia email change — manager perms in Aurora specifically needed re-granting (per CKF 2026-01-22 request for Aurora manager perms for Richard, Aaron, Benji, Mitchell).

1. Confirm the rep's Enerflo account actually exists — search by their email. If not, onboarding needs to send a new invite.
2. If the account exists, verify their role / permissions include deal creation and the team/installer assignment.
3. Resend onboarding invites as needed (Enerflo and Enzy are separate invites).
4. For managers: if team-lead perms were lost after the +ambia migration, request a re-grant.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/account-access/aurora-login-wrong-email-after-ambia-switch.md`
• `brain/integrations/enzy-push-to-enerflo-failing.md`

Rep tries to run financing (Sungage, Palmetto, or LightReach) from Enerflo and gets one of: "invalid credentials", a verification-loop asking to re-verify the account, or projects simply not pulling up in the financing partner's portal.

• The rep's Enerflo email does not match the email the financing partner has on file. Observed pattern: Enerflo is on `first.last@sunpower.com` while the partner account is under `first.last+sp@sunpower.com` (or the old `+ambia` variant).
• The rep's browser is logged into the partner portal directly with an old Ambia-era account, so new Enerflo hand-offs route them into the wrong session.

1. Ask the rep which email their partner portal account was created under (check Sungage / Palmetto / LightReach onboarding emails).
2. Have them fully log out of the partner portal in their browser (e.g. https://partners.sungage.com/) before retrying from Enerflo.
3. If emails mismatch, update the partner-side email to match Enerflo (or vice versa). Per observed 2026-04-15 resolution: telling the rep to log in with the `+sp@sunpower.com` variant fixed it. Per 2026-04-21 Palmetto example, the fix was to issue a new Palmetto invite with the matching email.
4. For new reps with no prior projects, simply re-issuing the partner invite to the correct matching email is the cleanest fix.
5. Do NOT change the Enerflo email on an established rep without confirming downstream impact.
6. Escalate.

• `brain/account-access/aurora-login-wrong-email-after-ambia-switch.md`

Rep builds a design with a 5p battery and sees the battery line priced at roughly $11,000 instead of the ~$5,600 they expect. Usually happens on a small system (e.g. 14 panels + 5p).

• The battery is flagged as "backup" configuration in Enerflo when the rep intended "self-consumption" / "grid-tied". Backup 5p pricing is significantly higher. Per CCE 2025-11-14: switching configuration from backup to self-consumption corrected pricing.
• Per DKD 2026-01-26: 5p is NOT allowed to be a backup config and Enerflo may still mark it as backup if the wrong battery question is answered; 5p is only valid as grid-tied / self-consumption.
• A related case (2026-01-06): 5p grid-tied still showed ~$11k instead of $5,600 — was also traced to the backup flag / battery questions not being filled in correctly.

1. Open the deal proposal and verify battery configuration is set to self-consumption (not backup) if the customer only wants grid-tied.
2. Check the Additional Requirements section in the left menu: ensure "Does this include a battery?" is set to Yes and the battery-config question is set correctly (defaults to No and backup).
3. If the rep already finalized, unfinalize the proposal, correct the config, and refinalize.
4. Confirm pricing updates — should drop to ~$5,600 for a single 5p self-consumption.
5. If pricing is still wrong after correction, escalate.

• `brain/enerflo-pricing/battery-questions-missing-no-pricing.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/battery-count-cap-at-2.md`

Rep adds a battery to the Aurora design, syncs to Enerflo, opens proposal — but the battery shows no price (or proposal shows no adders for the battery at all).

• The rep did not fill out the battery questions inside the Additional Requirements section in the Enerflo left menu. Per CCE 2026-01-07: "Does this include a battery?" defaults to No, so without manually switching to Yes the proposal omits battery pricing.
• Rep went straight from design sync to proposal generation, skipping Additional Requirements entirely.

1. In the Enerflo deal, click Additional Requirements in the left menu.
2. Set "Does this include a battery?" to Yes.
3. Complete the associated battery configuration questions below it (backup vs self-consumption, etc).
4. Regenerate the proposal — pricing should populate.
5. NOTE (per CCE 2026-01-07): a proposal-generation alert is being implemented that will block proposal if battery questions are missing and route the rep back to the section. If you're reading this after that ships, the error may now be self-explanatory.

• `brain/enerflo-pricing/battery-pricing-backup-vs-self-consumption.md`
• `brain/enerflo-pricing/battery-only-deal-not-supported.md`

Rep tries to price a battery-only project in Enerflo and gets an error (e.g. at `/customer/edit/<id>`), or tries to add a battery to an existing design and Enerflo will not allow it. Reps also report not being able to generate battery-only HICs / contracts from Enerflo.

• Enerflo does not currently support the full battery-only workflow (pricing, proposal, HIC generation). Per CCE 2025-11-20: "Battery only projects do not have the capability to be run through enerflo right now. We are working on some ways this can be done soon."
• Battery-only HIC / contract generation has at times been paused pending legal review (reported early Dec 2025).
• There is also a documented cap on number of batteries in a design — one rep hit it trying to build 3x 5p (15 kW) and got a "capped at 2 batteries" error (date: ).

1. For now, do NOT try to run battery-only through Enerflo.
2. Use the SolarGraf + Albatross process for battery-only sales (per CCE 2025-11-20).
3. For battery-only HICs specifically, route through the Props team — but confirm first that HIC generation is currently unpaused (legal review has blocked it in the past).
4. If the rep needs a battery-only HIC and Props says it is paused, escalate.
5. Track status of Enerflo battery-only support; once live, migrate back.

Rep builds an Aurora design using a 430 panel (Q.TRON 430, Jinko 430, or SEG 430) and Enerflo blocks the GoodLeap TPO. The error message commonly says the panel is "not an option" or not approved for the market. Hits across CA, CO, VA, IN, MN.

• Enerflo's approved-panel list for GoodLeap did not yet include all 430 SKUs on the dates the rep tried. The "Modules by Market" sheet and the Enerflo catalog can drift. Per DKD 2025-11-25: "that was just updated, any errors are ones we need to fix to match the Mods by market sheet."
• Aurora library may contain a duplicate Q.TRON 430 module not tied to Enerflo (see `qtron-430-duplicate-in-aurora.md`).
• A market-level module selection is missing: MN should use SEG 440 (per CCE 2025-12-19 / ATP 2025-11-14), so picking a 430 in MN errors.

1. Cross-check the panel selected against the current "Modules by Market" sheet for the deal's state.
2. If the selected panel is not the default for that market, swap to the default (e.g. MN → SEG 440, CA/others → Q.TRON 430 BLK M-G2+ specifically).
3. If the correct panel IS on the sheet but Enerflo still errors, ping DKD/CCE — the Enerflo catalog may not yet reflect the update.
4. For Q.TRON 430, ensure the Aurora design uses `Q.TRON BLK M-G2+ 430`, not a duplicate.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/panels-equipment/qtron-430-duplicate-in-aurora.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/tpo-approved-panels-by-state.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/mn-seg440-panel-required.md`

Rep picks REC 470 in CA and Enerflo blocks LightReach TPO. Or picks Q.CELL 410 for cash/loan and Enerflo errors. Reps are confused which panel is valid for which financing.

• Policy per PID 2026-02-03: "In CA use the REC470, we were told to turn off REC450 in CA" — REC 470 is the cash/loan default in CA.
• For TPO (LightReach, GoodLeap), Q.CELL is the required panel because LR needs DC panels (per PID 2026-01-26).
• There was an active internal debate (per CCE 2026-02-05) about whether REC 470 could be allowed on LR (Devon, Eric, Conner were deciding) — as of mid-Feb 2026 the answer was "use domestic content / Q.CELL for LR, REC 470 for cash/loan only".
• Per CCE 2026-02-05: if a rep hit a module error with 470 + LightReach, switching to domestic content (Q.CELL) cleared it.

1. Ask the rep: what financing is the customer going with?
2. - Cash or loan → REC 470 (domestic content path).
3. - LightReach TPO → Q.CELL 410 (or whatever the current DC/DOM panel is).
4. - GoodLeap TPO → check AVL; IQ8X inverter is NOT on GoodLeap DOM AVL so if paired with 470s it may still error.
5. If the rep started the design on the wrong panel, have them swap in Aurora, re-sync to Enerflo, and regenerate the proposal.
6. Do NOT tell reps they can show both panels interchangeably — panel selection is financing-scoped.
7. Escalate if the current panel-by-financing policy has changed.

• `brain/panels-equipment/tpo-approved-panels-by-state.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/qcell-405-vs-410-ca.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/goodleap-430-panel-errors-multi-market.md`

Rep tries to design a 15 kW backup solution as 3x 5p batteries and Enerflo errors with a message that the deal is capped at 2 batteries. Rep frustration: "we need to compete with Tesla 13 on pricing".

• This is an operational product-catalog constraint, not a system bug. Per DKD 2025-11-18: "this is an operational constraint, not a system failure. We don't sell 15ps."
• Enerflo is enforcing the current supported battery SKU list (10c, 20c, single/double 5p) and rejecting a 3-battery design.

1. Confirm with the rep what kWh of backup they actually need.
2. If 10 kW or 20 kW is acceptable, pivot to a 10c or 20c configuration instead of stacking 5p's.
3. Do NOT design 3x 5p in Aurora and attempt to sync — Enerflo will reject.
4. If the customer genuinely needs a 15p-class solution, this requires Steve / product approval (per 2025-11-18 thread, Steve was later said to green-light a 15p option but it had not been added at time of incident).
5. Escalate to Steve / product.

• `brain/enerflo-pricing/battery-only-deal-not-supported.md`
• `brain/enerflo-pricing/battery-pricing-backup-vs-self-consumption.md`

Rep opens a FL or SC deal in Enerflo and sees no panel options at all on the equipment-check or design stage. Error message varies but reps cannot build any proposal. Affected reps over multiple days with customer callbacks rescheduled 4x in one case.

• Supply chain did not yet activate equipment in Enerflo for FL / SC, even though zip-code approvals existed. Per CCE 2026-02-16: "I'm not seeing any equipment available in SC. I'll reach out to supply chain." Per CCE 2026-02-17: "Qcells have been activated in SC and FL" — the fix was explicit supply-chain activation.
• The Supply Chain modules-by-market sheet was missing FL equipment entirely at the time (per CCE 2026-02-13: "Supply chain's sheet doesn't have equipment").

1. If a rep reports no panels showing in a state, first check whether the state is newly-activated for sales (zip approval doesn't equal equipment activation).
2. Ping CCE / supply chain to confirm Q.CELL (or market-appropriate panels) are enabled for that state in Enerflo.
3. Do NOT tell the rep the state is broken — tell them panels are pending activation and to reschedule. Supply chain can enable within hours if pushed.
4. Once activated, have the rep re-open the deal — the catalog update is immediate, no design rebuild needed.
5. Escalate to supply chain.

• `brain/panels-equipment/tpo-approved-panels-by-state.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/mn-seg440-panel-required.md`

Rep building an MN design picks JA 440 (or Jinko 430) and Enerflo errors "panel not available in this market" when generating the proposal.

• The MN panel SKU was changed: per CCE 2025-12-19 the correct MN panel is SEG 440, not JA 440. Per ATP 2025-11-14 the change was from Jinko 430 → SEG 440. Aurora library and Enerflo catalog updates can lag.
• A separate later thread (2026-01-07) had REC 450 errors in MN which were fixed by CCE after a catalog tweak.

1. Confirm the deal is MN (check the address — mismatched state vs Enerflo rep location is a real cause of confusion).
2. Use SEG 440 as the default MN panel for cash / loan.
3. For TPO specifically, validate against the current "Modules by Market" sheet — GoodLeap / LightReach AVL may dictate a different SKU.
4. If the Enerflo catalog still rejects SEG 440 after the rep swaps, escalate for catalog fix.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/panels-equipment/goodleap-430-panel-errors-multi-market.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/tpo-approved-panels-by-state.md`

Rep in CA builds a GoodLeap design in Aurora and only sees the Q.CELL 410 module — but the Modules-by-Market sheet says CA should use Q.CELL 405. Conversely, another rep tries the 405 and Enerflo tells them to use the 410.

• Supply chain changes mid-cycle: CA was flipped between 405 and 410 depending on which campaign / financing partner was active. Per CCE 2026-01-07: "Jerry and supply chain have been making changes to equipment. I've asked Jerry to update the models by market sheet so we know what to sell."
• The Aurora library vs Enerflo catalog vs Modules-by-Market sheet can all be out of sync during the swap.
• Per PID 2026-01-06: "Use the 410 qcell module" for the specific CA GoodLeap deal that day.

1. Check the most recent version of the Modules-by-Market sheet for CA (timestamp matters — it changes).
2. If the sheet and Aurora disagree, default to what Aurora + Enerflo will BOTH accept — usually that's the 410 for GoodLeap CA as of 2026-01.
3. If the rep really needs a 405 (for a specific AVL or pricing), ping PID for a catalog check before retrying.
4. Do not coach reps to pick a panel that doesn't appear in their Aurora library — it will just fail again.
5. Escalate to Jerry / supply chain to align the sheet and catalog.

• `brain/panels-equipment/tpo-approved-panels-by-state.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/goodleap-430-panel-errors-multi-market.md`

Rep builds a design in Aurora using the Q.TRON 430 panel and Enerflo errors on proposal creation (most often on GoodLeap TPO, across multiple markets). Symptom persists even after the approved-panel fix is rolled out in Enerflo.

• There are two Q.TRON-branded 430 modules enabled in the Aurora library, and only one of them is correctly tied to Enerflo. If a rep picks the un-tied one, Enerflo cannot match the equipment.
• Per CCE 2025-11-24: "for some reason in aurora we have two Qtron panels turned on. The one you are using in your aurora design is not correctly tied to Enerflo. Try using the other one. (Q.TRON BLK M-G2+ 430)"

1. In the Aurora design, verify the panel selected is specifically `Q.TRON BLK M-G2+ 430` (not a similarly-named duplicate).
2. If the wrong module is selected, swap it for the correct one and re-sync the design to Enerflo.
3. If the correct module is already selected and proposal still errors, confirm this is not actually a utility/AVL issue (see `lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`).
4. Escalate.

• `brain/design-tools/aurora-design-not-syncing-to-enerflo.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/tpo-approved-panels-by-state.md`

Rep picks a panel that works for a cash/loan deal in one state and gets "panel not available in this market" or similar when trying to run TPO. Recurring examples: VA with JA 440 (failed for LightReach), FL with certain panels, CA Q.CELL 405 vs 410 ambiguity.

• The approved-panel list is a 3-way intersection: Enerflo catalog × state modules-by-market × financing partner's AVL (LightReach, GoodLeap, Palmetto). Any one of the three can block.
• LightReach requires DC-optimized panels (e.g. Q.CELL) per PID 2026-01-26: "with LR you need to use DC panels. So qcell".
• GoodLeap domestic-content AVL excludes certain inverters (IQ8X not on domestic AVL per CCE 2026-01-07) and certain panels (e.g. REC 450 was not on GoodLeap dom AVL early-Jan 2026).
• Supply chain / Jerry and team have been making changes to the equipment catalog and the "Modules by Market" sheet lags.

1. Always start from the current "Modules by Market" sheet (Jerry / Supply Chain owns it). Reference link commonly shared: `blueravensolar.sharepoint.com/.../SupplyChainProductDashboard/.../Doc2.aspx` (the specific URL has a long token; pull a fresh link from the sales-support channel).
2. Once you know the state's default panel, cross-check the financing partner's AVL:
3. - LightReach → DC panels, typically Q.CELL 410/430.
4. - GoodLeap → check their domestic content AVL if claiming DOM content; IQ8X not approved as of 2026-01-07.
5. - Palmetto / cash / loan → broader but still market-gated.
6. If the rep insists a panel works in one state, do not assume it works in another.
7. Escalate to Jerry / supply chain if the rep reports a panel that SHOULD work per the sheet but Enerflo rejects.
8. Escalate.

• `brain/panels-equipment/goodleap-430-panel-errors-multi-market.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/mn-seg440-panel-required.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/qtron-430-duplicate-in-aurora.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/qcell-405-vs-410-ca.md`

Rep finalized a proposal but realized afterwards that the UB was missing, the wrong equipment was selected, or credit was run on the wrong APR tier. Rep can't edit; tries to unfinalize and refinalize but hits errors ("that one has already been finalized").

• Enerflo locks certain deal fields once the proposal is finalized + credit is run, even after an unfinalize.
• Per DKD 2026-01-29: Enerflo support can normally unlock it in less than 2 minutes if requested through the support chat.
• Duplicating the proposal does not always re-enable APR changes (per MJM 2026-01-30 concert example).

1. First try: in the deal, unfinalize the current proposal and open it for edits. For small changes this works.
2. If Enerflo refuses to let you refinalize after edits, open the Enerflo support chat and ask them to unlock the deal — include the deal URL.
3. For APR-change scenarios (rep ran credit at one APR and got approved at a different one), you may need to void the existing credit app and run a new one at the correct APR rather than edit.
4. Do NOT create a brand-new deal as a workaround unless absolutely necessary — you lose Enzy linkage.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/integrations/enerflo-sf-project-submission-stuck.md`

Rep completes financing + contracts. Palmetto / LightReach portal shows NTP or fully signed, but Enerflo still shows the deal as needing steps, so the project does not transfer to Salesforce. Site Survey team reports they cannot find the deal in Salesforce.

• The rep ran contracting / credit through the partner portal directly (e.g. Palmetto) instead of through Enerflo, so Enerflo never registered the completion.
• Enerflo-LightReach sync was intermittently broken on 2026-01-28. Per PID 2026-01-28: "enerflo is having issues with LR today."
• The "Submit to Project" button was pressed before all required fields were populated; Enerflo returned without fully pushing.
• The deal was flagged as finalized but the UB wasn't yet uploaded, blocking SF push.

1. Verify the deal's status in Enerflo: which stage is showing incomplete?
2. If contracting was done outside Enerflo (portal direct), coordinate with DKD/PID to manually sync status — per DKD 2026-01-30: "I can sync it back to enerflo when it finishes."
3. Ensure the UB is uploaded before finalizing — a finalized-before-UB deal may require Enerflo support to unlock (per DKD 2026-01-29: "enerflo support can normally unlock it in less than 2 minutes if requested").
4. Sign any remaining docs in the contracting stage, then re-click Project Submission.
5. If SF still doesn't receive it, escalate to PID for a manual SF create.
6. Escalate.

• `brain/account-access/enerflo-paykeeper-cash-blocked.md`
• `brain/integrations/enerflo-deal-finalized-unlock.md`

Rep books an appointment in Enzy but: - Clicking "Open in Enerflo" restarts the whole design process from title check. - New closers assigned later cannot see the prior Aurora design. - Some Enzy appointments never create a corresponding Enerflo deal at all, forcing reps to manually create. - Errors on deal creation from Enzy (address-related, on 2025-11-25 it was resolved by CCE fixing address).

• The Enzy → Enerflo push integration is owned by Sunder (Yan, Kerstin, Devon per CCE 2025-12-18). Internal Virtual Sales support cannot directly fix Enzy-side bugs.
• Permission / authorization gating: some 1099 / new reps don't have Enerflo authorization yet, and when Enzy tries to push a lead it errors (RLG 2025-12-10 on Garrett Mendelsohn).
• Address validation inside Enerflo on new-deal creation sometimes blocks until Alec Potter / admin clears it.

1. First check: is the rep fully onboarded and authorized in Enerflo? If not, fix that first.
2. Ask the rep to send BOTH the Enzy link and the expected Enerflo deal URL. Send to CCE or PID.
3. For Enzy-side bugs (push not firing, upload errors, search issues), message Yan or Kerstin directly — CCE 2026-01-15: "I unfortunately don't have access to help with that. Kerstin and Yan will be the ones to contact for Enzy issues."
4. Workaround: manually create the deal in Enerflo from the Enzy customer details so the rep isn't blocked. Coordinate so it doesn't create a duplicate.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/account-access/rep-not-authorized-in-enerflo.md`
• `brain/integrations/enzy-pdf-upload-rejected.md`

Rep tries to upload a utility bill PDF to an Enzy lead and gets an error. Previously worked fine; started failing around mid-Jan 2026. Reps complain they now have to upload 3-4 screenshots instead of one PDF.

• PDF upload support appears to have been silently removed from Enzy. Per CCE 2026-01-13: "Yeah it looks like PDF is no longer supported."
• Cause of the change is unconfirmed — CCE was going to ping Yan to check if there were recent changes.

1. Have the rep convert the PDF to PNG or JPG before upload.
2. If the rep can't do conversion, they can upload page screenshots (worse UX but unblocks them).
3. Flag the deal internally so the support team knows the bill is in multiple files.
4. Escalate to Yan at Sunder for reinstatement of PDF support.
5. If this is a permanent change, communicate it team-wide so reps stop wasting time retrying PDFs.

• `brain/integrations/enzy-push-to-enerflo-failing.md`

Rep runs LightReach credit app but contract / NTP never reaches Enerflo. Multiple lookups in LightReach show the customer only in one specific brand's portal (e.g. SunPower instance, not the Ambia one that Enerflo expects).

• There are (at least) three LightReach portal instances in play: Ambia, SunPower, Complete Solar. Each has its own licensing / utility AVL.
• If the credit app was initiated under the wrong instance (e.g. IL deals run under SunPower LR, which doesn't have the correct IL licensing), Enerflo cannot find the app and the customer has to redo credit under the correct portal.
• Per CCE 2026-02-12: when trying to find a customer, CCE observed the deal was in the SunPower instance of LightReach, not the expected one.

1. Check which LightReach portal the credit app was initiated in (Ambia, SunPower, or Complete).
2. Cross-check the state's licensing — IL for example is under Ambia, not SunPower. CA can be any of the three depending on installer assignment.
3. If the credit app was run in the wrong instance, have the customer redo the credit app from the correct portal (yes, this is painful — warn them).
4. For ongoing prevention: align the Enerflo deal's installer assignment with the correct LightReach portal BEFORE running credit.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/integrations/lightreach-enerflo-sync-stuck.md`
• `brain/account-access/sungage-email-plus-sp-mismatch.md`

Customer completes everything in LightReach / Palmetto portal (identity, contract signed, NTP approved), but Enerflo still shows the financing stage as needing steps — so Project Submission fails and the deal does not push to Salesforce. Repeated occurrence across multiple days.

• Enerflo ↔ LightReach API integration has been flaky. Per DKD 2026-02-04: "Enerflo let me know that it's an API issue with lightreach" — the issue has resolved and recurred multiple times.
• Manual fix per CCE 2026-02-11: clicking back to the Financing page and hitting "sync" in Enerflo forces it to re-pull status from LightReach.
• Credit app was run in the SunPower LightReach portal instead of the Ambia one (licensing mismatch), so Enerflo doesn't recognize it (per PID 2026-02-05: "the above credit application was done in the sunpower LR portal where it doesn't have the correct licensing").

1. In the Enerflo deal, navigate to the Financing page and click "Sync" — this fetches current LightReach state.
2. If the customer is NTP in Palmetto/LR but Enerflo doesn't show it, ask PID / CCE to manually sync or resend contract.
3. Verify which LightReach instance the credit app was run in (Ambia vs SunPower vs Complete). If wrong instance, the customer will have to redo the credit app under the correct one.
4. After sync, complete any remaining contracting steps inside Enerflo, then Project Submission.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/integrations/enerflo-sf-project-submission-stuck.md`
• `brain/account-access/sungage-email-plus-sp-mismatch.md`
• `brain/integrations/lightreach-multiple-instances-ambia-sp.md`

Rep finishes a design in Aurora and tries to sync it to Enerflo. Any of: sync fails with an error, offset does not carry over, or the equipment list shows blank in Enerflo. Sometimes rep also sees "self design only" with no option to request a design from the design team.

• No consumption profile was set on the design before it was opened in Aurora. Multiple resolved threads (DKD) show the fix was simply adding a consumption profile or correcting one with 0 monthly consumption.
• Rep is logged into the wrong Aurora account (see `brain/account-access/aurora-login-wrong-email-after-ambia-switch.md`).
• Active Aurora outage affecting some territories (Aurora confirmed at least one such outage during this period).
• Wrong panel module selected in Aurora so Enerflo can't match equipment (see `brain/panels-equipment/qtron-430-duplicate-in-aurora.md`).

1. Open the deal in Enerflo and confirm a consumption profile exists with non-zero monthly usage. If not, create / fix it first, then re-open the design in Aurora.
2. Have the rep click "Sync" in the Aurora design pane and watch for specific errors.
3. If error persists, verify the rep is logged into the correct Aurora account (manually type email, ignore autofill).
4. Check if there is an active Aurora outage before escalating as a one-off.
5. Confirm the selected panel module is the Enerflo-linked variant (see related).
6. If none of the above resolves it, escalate with the deal link and Aurora design URL.

• `brain/account-access/aurora-login-wrong-email-after-ambia-switch.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/qtron-430-duplicate-in-aurora.md`
• `brain/utility-data/utility-missing-from-enerflo-dropdown.md`

Rep tries to run a GoodLeap PPA in CA with PG&E utility and no battery — Enerflo marks GoodLeap as unavailable. As soon as the rep adds a battery the option becomes available again.

• GoodLeap's PPA AVL for PG&E currently requires battery storage on the design. Per BJC / DKD 2026-01-08: adding a battery worked, removing it flipped the product to unavailable.
• This appears to be a GoodLeap underwriting rule, not an Enerflo bug.

1. If the customer wants GoodLeap PPA with PG&E, include a battery in the design from the start.
2. If the customer is battery-averse, pitch them on the self-consumption benefits or pivot to LightReach / loan instead.
3. Do NOT tell the rep the option is broken — this is expected AVL behavior.
4. Confirm the AVL rule has not changed before applying to other CA utilities (it may be PG&E-specific).
5. Escalate if the rule appears to have changed without notice.

• `brain/financing/goodleap-tpo-ca-failures.md`
• `brain/utility-data/lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`

Rep tries to run GoodLeap TPO (or PPA) on a CA deal and gets either "not available due to state restrictions" in Enerflo or no pricing options at all in Aurora. Broader rep report (2025-12-12): "TPO projects don't really work in enerflo right now (goodleap never works) and lightreach almost never gives a price that is at target."

• Licensing / contractor setup mismatch between Ambia and SunPower installers in CA. Per CCE 2025-12-17: "You cant choose sunpower as the installer in IL. It has to go through the Ambia flow" — the same installer-selection gating applies in CA for TPO.
• A stale / un-refreshed Enerflo session: multiple times a simple refresh cleared the GoodLeap error (e.g. CKF 2025-11-18: "Nevermind we refreshed and its working").
• Utility-specific GoodLeap AVL restriction (e.g. PG&E sometimes requires a battery for GoodLeap PPA — see 2026-01-08 thread where removing the battery caused "unavailable").
• Panel/inverter not on GoodLeap AVL (e.g. IQ8X not on GoodLeap domestic AVL per CCE 2026-01-07).

1. Refresh the Enerflo tab and retry — many GoodLeap errors clear this way.
2. Confirm the installer routing is correct for the state (Ambia flow for IL and some CA paths; SunPower for others).
3. Verify the panel/inverter combo is on GoodLeap's AVL — if uncertain, swap to a known-good combo (e.g. Q.TRON 430 + IQ8M).
4. If the utility requires a battery for GoodLeap TPO/PPA (e.g. some PG&E configs), add a battery before running.
5. If error persists, pivot to LightReach or loan/cash as a backstop so the appointment doesn't die.
6. Escalate.

• `brain/utility-data/lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`
• `brain/panels-equipment/qtron-430-duplicate-in-aurora.md`
• `brain/financing/goodleap-pge-no-battery-fails.md`

Rep in TX tries to show TPO pricing via LightReach (or GoodLeap) and no pricing appears regardless of panel selection. Customer is often on CPS Energy or a similar municipal utility.

• LightReach's TX approved-utility list is narrow. Per PLD 2026-01-16: LR in TX approves Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP, and a few other small municipal services — CPS Energy is NOT approved.
• GoodLeap was not enabled in TX at the time of incident (per DKD 2026-01-16).
• Enerflo's generic "lending options available" indicator does not reflect LR's per-utility AVL.

1. Ask the rep which utility the customer is actually on (pull from the UB).
2. Cross-check against LightReach's current TX AVL (Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP, + small munis per 2026-01-16).
3. If the utility is not approved, tell the rep to pivot to cash/loan — do not chase a LR TPO for that customer.
4. If the utility IS approved but still no pricing appears, retry after refresh and then file an Enerflo ticket.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/utility-data/lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`
• `brain/financing/goodleap-tpo-ca-failures.md`

Rep tries to run a PPA in MI with Lansing Power & Light. Aurora lets them build the design; Enerflo errors at financing. Rep question: "does that power company not allow PPA?"

• Lansing Power & Light is not on Palmetto's active-utilities list for PPA. Per DKD 2025-11-26 (linking Palmetto's active-utilities help article): the utility is not approved.
• Enerflo's financing green/yellow/orange indicator was supposed to auto-filter to approved options only, but this one slipped through. Per DKD 2025-11-26: "that's why this one is odd. I'm sending it over to Enerflo to make sure that's marked correctly."

1. Confirm the customer's utility from the UB.
2. Cross-check against Palmetto's active-utilities list (help.palmetto.finance/en/articles/8500574-active-utilities) before committing the rep to a PPA pitch.
3. If the utility is not approved, pivot to cash/loan/LightReach.
4. File an Enerflo ticket if the financing indicator shows the option as available when Palmetto says otherwise — the green indicator is supposed to gate this.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/utility-data/lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`
• `brain/financing/goodleap-tpo-ca-failures.md`

Rep in IL tries to run LightReach TPO for a customer on a utility other than ComEd or Ameren and gets an error at the proposal stage even though Enerflo's generic indicator showed LR as available.

• LightReach's IL active-utility list is limited to ComEd and Ameren. Per PID 2026-02-13: "LightReach only supports ComEd or Ameren" in IL.
• Enerflo's financing indicator doesn't per-utility gate LR the way it should.

1. Confirm the customer's utility from the UB BEFORE pitching LR TPO.
2. If the utility is not ComEd or Ameren, pivot to cash / loan (Concert, etc.) or send the deal back to marketing.
3. If the customer has ComEd or Ameren and LR still errors, verify the LR credit app is being run under the Ambia IL portal (not SunPower or Complete — they lack IL licensing).
4. Escalate.

• `brain/utility-data/lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`
• `brain/integrations/lightreach-multiple-instances-ambia-sp.md`
• `brain/policy-process/il-contractor-license-required.md`

Utility shows as a valid (green) option in the Enerflo consumption / financing flow, but when the rep tries to create a LightReach proposal they get an error. Examples observed: Seattle City Light (WA), Fayetteville Public Works Commission (NC), various CA utilities, and an Illinois example where LightReach simply "won't work".

• Enerflo does not validate the utility against the LightReach API until the proposal-creation step, so the "green light" in earlier stages is misleading.
• LightReach's approved-utility list is state-specific and narrower than Enerflo's dropdown. E.g. in NC, LightReach only allows Duke Energy Progress or Duke Energy Carolinas.
• In some states (notably CA) the LightReach AVL is so narrow that certain utilities additionally require a battery attached.

1. Confirm the customer's utility against the current LightReach approved-utility list for that state before committing to a TPO path.
2. If the utility is not on LightReach's AVL, pivot the deal to a different financing product (cash / loan / GoodLeap / Sungage) — do not try to force the TPO.
3. For suspected API-validation bugs (utility SHOULD be approved but errors out), file an Enerflo ticket with the deal link and a screenshot of the error.
4. If a battery is required by LightReach for that utility, add one before retrying.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/utility-data/utility-missing-from-enerflo-dropdown.md`
• `brain/financing/goodleap-tpo-ca-failures.md`

Rep is on the consumption stage in Enerflo and the customer's actual utility (from their bill) is not available in the dropdown. Sometimes a wrong utility is shown in its place (e.g. rep sees "Cleveland Power" when the customer is on First Energy).

• Genability does not yet have that utility's rates loaded, so Enerflo has nothing to show in the dropdown.
• New / small / distribution-only utilities commonly aren't in Genability yet.
• Genability updates take roughly ~24 hours after a ticket is submitted (per 2025-11-20 thread).

1. Confirm the utility name and state from the customer's full utility bill (a full bill is required — Genability will not accept partial).
2. Submit an Enerflo ticket to get the utility added; include the customer's full UB.
3. If the customer is on the line and you cannot wait ~24 hours, the only documented workaround is: select a different utility with similar rates, enter the individual monthly usage from the UB, and create the consumption profile. The utility MUST be corrected before the project is submitted, and customer savings shown to the homeowner may be inaccurate in the meantime.
4. Do NOT apply this workaround to TPO deals — TPO selections cannot be manipulated after the fact.
5. If still blocked after ticket submission, escalate.

• `brain/utility-data/lightreach-approved-utility-mismatch.md`

Rep running a CA deal in Enerflo cannot finalize a proposal or send documents — license-related error. Different from IL in that CA requires the individual rep to have an HIS (Home Improvement Salesperson) registration number, not just the company license.

• CA law requires the individual salesperson to hold a current HIS number. Enerflo enforces this on CA deals.
• A rep joining mid-cycle may not have their HIS on file in Enerflo yet — pipeline deals will fail until it is added.

1. Ask the rep for their HIS number (they can look up their own via the CA CSLB website).
2. If the rep doesn't have one yet, they cannot close CA deals — route the deal to a rep who does, or hold until registration completes.
3. If the rep HAS an HIS but Enerflo still errors, check their profile in Enerflo V2 settings and make sure the HIS field is populated.
4. Per CCR 2026-03-01 thread, there is a CA HIS lookup tool reps can use for teammates on vacation ().
5. Escalate.

• `brain/policy-process/il-contractor-license-required.md`

Rep running an IL deal in Enerflo gets "rep does not have a license number for this state" when trying to run financing or generate a HIC. Often the rep can price the deal and run credit but hits the error at proposal / contract.

• Enerflo requires the contractor license number at the company level for IL — not an individual rep number. Per CKF 2026-01-19: "You only need a contractor license number not an individual number like the HIS."
• If the rep is on an Ambia-flagged deal, Enerflo expects the Ambia IL contractor number; on a SunPower-flagged deal, the SunPower one. Mismatch between the deal's installer assignment and the license registered causes the error.
• Per DKD 2026-01-19: "Illinois also has a sales license number requirement" — but per CKF the enforced one is the contractor number; sales license is tracked separately.

1. Verify the deal's installer assignment (Ambia vs SunPower) matches the available contractor license.
2. If the deal is Ambia flow, confirm the Ambia IL contractor number is on file — Derek may not have this handy (per DKD 2026-01-26: "i dont know what the license number is").
3. For SunPower IL deals, use the SunPower contractor license registered in Enerflo.
4. Do not confuse this with the CA HIS individual-rep license, which is a separate requirement only for CA.
5. If the license is correctly registered but error persists, escalate to PID (Philip Dangerfield) for Enerflo-side license-config fix.

• `brain/policy-process/il-shines-srec-enerflo-pending.md`
• `brain/policy-process/ca-his-number-required.md`

Rep working an IL deal cannot see SREC / power-company incentives in Enerflo, or the SREC section shows as red / errors. Customer-facing HIC and proposal need to show net system cost after SREC rebate — without it the rep cannot price the deal.

• The IL Shines SREC calculation is being built / fixed inside the Ambia Enerflo instance. Per PID 2026-01-13: "We are getting close" (they thought they were close 2026-01-13 and discovered the calc itself was wrong). IL Shines had NOT yet launched cleanly as of 2026-01-22.
• A separate one-time "Derek Downs rebate" left enabled briefly showed up on new deals (2026-01-22); Phil disabled it — this is NOT the SREC fix, just a stale rebate record.

1. Confirm the deal is actually in IL and uses a utility eligible for IL Shines.
2. Check whether IL Shines has shipped — if still pending (pre-2026-01-22), the workaround is to pause IL apps until it's live OR run the SREC calc manually and annotate the HIC.
3. If SREC section throws a red error even after it should be working, try switching financing between cash/Paykeeper and loan — sometimes the SREC path is only active under certain financing types.
4. If a one-time rebate shows up unexpectedly on a new deal, ping Phil / Derek — they can disable stale rebate records.
5. Escalate.

• `brain/account-access/enerflo-paykeeper-cash-blocked.md`
• `brain/policy-process/il-contractor-license-required.md`