California Utilities Launch Legal Battle Against NEM Ruling

By SI Staff, Solar Industry Magazine

Three of the largest investor-owned utilities in California – Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) – have submitted a legal challenge opposing the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) Jan. 28 decision to continue net metering.

On March 7, PG&E filed a rehearing application for the net energy metering proceeding, referred to as NEM 2.0, asking the CPUC to vacate its decision. According to the California Solar Energy Industries Association (CALSEIA), this would effectively prevent customers from installing solar after the current rules expire if the CPUC’s legal division agrees to further review. The other two utilities, the group adds, are calling for major changes that would make solar inaccessible to a majority of customers.

According to Bernadette Del Chiaro, executive director of CALSEIA, “The utilities are continuing their legal maneuvers because it is disruptive to the solar industry. Rather than working in partnership with solar companies and striving to reduce costs for customers, utilities would prefer to be obstructionists and muck up the market.”

CALSEIA asserts that the proceeding to consider net metering changes has already lasted 22 months and has extended one month past the state legislature’s deadline. After deliberation, the CPUC decided to reject the utilities’ proposals to replace net metering with what CALSEIA says are complicated schemes.

However, a spokesperson for PG&E says, “With their final decision, we are extremely disappointed that the CPUC did not take the opportunity to meet the important goals set out in Assembly Bill 327 and make the smart energy reforms that are needed to ensure a sustainable market for solar in California.”

“PG&E advocates that the CPUC re-evaluate their decision in order to address the cost incurred by non-solar customers and determine the appropriate subsidy for solar customers,” the spokesperson adds.

Brad Heavner, policy director for CALSEIA, refutes this argument, claiming that the utilities’ actions will unfairly deprive their customers of solar opportunities.

“The utilities continue to use false analysis to claim that net metering is a massive subsidy,” says Heavner. “Rather than accepting the commission’s decision and allowing their customers to go solar under fair rules, the utilities are fighting to keep opportunities away from their customers.”

Although the CPUC ruling rejected the utilities’ proposals, CALSEIA notes the decision does make significant changes to net metering, requiring customers to pay both an upfront and an ongoing monthly fee and to be subject to time-varying rates.

The CPUC says it will continue re-evaluating the rules but intends to make changes gradually so that customers will still have the opportunity to install solar and the industry will have time to continue lowering prices.

The new net metering rules will not affect current solar customers or those who install solar before the utilities meet their caps – April for SDG&E, October for PG&E and early 2017 for SCE – on the current rules. If the CPUC does not grant the applications for rehearing, the new rules should be in place in time to enable a seamless transition.

Source: http://solarindustrymag.com/california-utilities-challenge-state-decision-to-protect-net-metering

Utilities look to reverse net metering decision

SDG&E wants “modifications”

By Rob Nikolewski, The San Diego Tribune

San Diego Gas and Electric and two other major California utilities Monday filed applications urging the California Public Utilities Commission to hold a rehearing to vacate or make "modifications" to its decision keeping retail rate net metering in place until 2019.

"We feel it's in the best interest of our customers to re-look at this issue and consumer advocates actually agree, as they have taken similar action," said SDG&E representative Amber Albrecht.

In January, in a tense 3-2 vote, the CPUC sided with solar backers over utilities that insist they are not trying to blunt the growth of solar power in California.

Instead, utilities say the net metering system that pays rooftop solar customers for the excess electricity their systems send back to the grid is unfair to consumers who don't have solar energy systems.

Solar companies and their customers say the power their systems generate helps lower strain on the electrical grid and reduces the need to buy power during times of high demand.

"Sadly, the investor-owned utilities refuse to accept the policy objectives of California and prefer to cling on to their antiquated fossil fuel business models rather than allow our state to move towards energy independence,” Daniel Sullivan, founder and president of Sullivan Solar Power, said in a statement. 

The net metering framework prompted supporters to deliver 130,000 petitions to the CPUC ahead of its Jan. 28 meeting and the commission — in a ruling that ran more than 150 pages — agreed to keep tying credits to retail rates, rather than near wholesale rates that other states use.

The commission did, however, pass rules requiring new solar customers pay a one-time interconnection fee that is estimated to cost $75 to $150.

Other fees will go into effect for new users but don't apply to customers with systems already in place.

The CPUC said it will continue to re-evaluate the rules but the decision was widely viewed as a big win for solar, as other states such as Nevada have rolled back some solar incentives.

SDG&E filed its application for rehearing jointly with Southern California Edison, calling on the CPUC to make changes to its decision.

"What we've asked in our application is some modifications that help to limit the increases on our customers' electric bills," Albrecht said.

Pacific Gas and Electric also filed paperwork Monday, the deadline for applications for a rehearing, looking to get the commission to vacate its ruling.

They were joined by The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group, whose calls for a "value of distributed energy" tariff were rebuffed by the commission, and the Coalition of California Utility Employees.

SDG&E estimates customers without solar could pay an extra $300 on their utility bills by 2025.

"What we're really looking at is who's really paying this additional money to maintain the grid, to build out the two-way infrastructure needed to support rooftop solar," Albrecht said.

But solar companies dispute those figures.

"The utilities continue to use false analysis to claim net metering is a huge subsidy," said Brad Heavner, policy director at California Solar Energy Industries Association. "Rather than accepting the commission's decision and allowing their customers to go solar under fair rules, the utilities are fighting to keep opportunities away from their customers."

The CPUC has 120 days to respond to the requests for a rehearing.

Source: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/mar/08/utilities-net-metering-decision/

IID solar incentive cuts could slow east valley growth

By Anna Rumor, The Desert Sun

The Imperial Irrigation District has suspended subscriptions to one of its solar incentive programs, a move green energy proponents say will deter the growth of sustainable energy in east Coachella Valley

The Net Energy Metering Program measures the ebb and flow of power produced by a customer's solar panels during the day in comparison to the power they use when the sun is shining. The difference between the two is used to generate the customer's bill. At the end of the year, if a customer's accumulated power generation exceeds their consumption, IID will pay them 5.72 cents per kilowatt-hour their solar panels added to IID's electricity grid.

The program currently has 2,589 solar customers and paid out $63,406 in 2015, according to IID.

Because the program has reached the state-legislated metering capacity — 5 percent of the utility's peak demand — IID announced Wednesday it will no longer be approving new applicants. The utility met 82 percent of its capacity at the end of February, but said it will reach 100 percent once all current solar projects go on line.

That 5 percent calculation, however, isn't regulated for municipal utilities the same way it is for large electrical corporations such as Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric, which are required to use a standard equation statewide.

IID spokeswoman Marion Champion said only those customers who generate much more power than they use will really see a difference now that the program has been suspended, because most solar systems are built at an appropriate size. SCE, which has installed 163,777 net energy meters as of January, plans to meet its 5 percent cap in 2017. SDG&E has installed 81,319 meters and still has 15 percent of available wattage before it reaches the cap.

"The intent of today's action in no way is meant to stymie or deter people from going solar," Champion said. "We definitely don't want to slow down the solar industry."

Source: http://www.desertsun.com/story/tech/science/energy/2016/03/02/iid-solar-incentive-cuts-could-slow-east-valley-growth/81220690/

Solar advocates tell lawmakers inaction clouds future of sector

By John Laidler | Globe Correspondent

ACTON — A group of local solar power developers and advocates urged the state Monday to promptly extend programs that have nurtured solar power in Massachusetts, warning that continued uncertainty over the rules could stall the industry’s momentum.

At a forum in Acton, solar supporters sounded a note of urgency about the need for the state to expand net metering credits and solar renewable energy certificates, both of which are at or facing state caps.

“As an employer, nothing scares me more — I have 35 people that I may have to put out on the street,” said Mark Durrenberger, president of Hudson-based New England Clean Energy and one of about 50 people who turned out for the forum at the Acton Public Safety Center.

Democratic state Representatives Cory Atkins of Concord and Jennifer Benson of Lunenburg jointly organized the event to hear from residents about how the state should advance the future of solar energy. 

Debate over the future of the two programs has made solar energy a front burner subject on Beacon Hill.

Net metering allows residents and businesses to sell excess solar power to utilities at about the retail price. Much of the state has reached the cap on how much of that power utilities have to buy. The House and Senate passed bills lifting the cap but disagree on the details.

Utilities purchase solar renewable energy certificates from solar panel owners to meet minimum state requirements on how much of that power they must offer. The program is also nearing its cap and there is no defined plan on either extending it or establishing a new program.

The net metering cap in most cases applies only to projects over 10 kilowatts, according to the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. So it does not affect homeowners who have existing solar panels or want to install them — they remain eligible to sell their excess power to utilities at current net metering rates. Existing large-scale projects are also not affected, but the cap makes it difficult for new ones to be built.

Homeowners with projects that are already qualified for renewable energy certificates would similarly continue to receive income from utilities for the 10-year duration of the certificates even if that cap is reached, state energy officials said. For residents installing new panels, there are still certificates available. But once the cap is hit, no more will be given under the current program.

Residents could also be affected by other possible changes being discussed to the net metering program, including pricing adjustments and setting a minimum electric bill. 

Atkins and Benson said they were not satisfied with the House solar bill approved in November but voted for it in hopes of keeping the industry going while a more comprehensive bill was crafted. But with the incentives now in limbo, some in the audience said net metering needs to be addressed now so planned projects can proceed.

Durrenberger warned that until the net metering issue is resolved, the state Department of Energy Resources will not extend the solar renewable energy certificate program. And if the process were to drag on another month, “the solar industry will effectively collapse in Massachusetts.” 

Haskell Werlin, from Solar Design Associates of Harvard, urged lawmakers to ensure that the energy certificate program can continue as plans for its update are worked out.

“Once companies are spooked, you are going to create a lack of confidence in the marketplace,” he said. “It’s going to say Massachusetts is not solar-business friendly. . . . The industry right now is looking at New York, Vermont, and elsewhere to work because we can’t do work in our own state. It’s not right when we have 15,000 jobs.”

Mark Sandeen, a solar developer from Lexington, said he is working with a company whose efforts to build a rooftop solar project in Acton have been stalled by delays in securing an agreement to tie in to utilities and, more recently, by the energy certificate cap. “You can’t do business with this much uncertainty,’’ he said. “This is where we are for the solar industry; we don’t have certainty.’’ 

Others at the forum urged the two lawmakers to press for a state study examining the true costs of solar relative to fossil fuels. Benson said she and Atkins ran out of time trying to amend the House bill to provide for a study, and planned to push for it again when the next bill comes forward. 

“We are at the tipping point on changing the energy paradigm on energy,” Atkins said later, a reason she said a true independent study was vital. 

“The biggest issue is clarifying the market so that projects can move forward,” Benson said after the meeting. In addition to extending the two solar programs, she said that meant having the Department of Utilities require utilities to modernize their infrastructure to better accommodate solar.

Source: www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/west/2016/02/26/solar-advocates-press-for-state-action-incentives/tBkL8VaqKN2MDSY1XLhvBJ/story.html