Maine advances legislation restoring net metering

The Maine state legislature has voted to advance a bill that would amend the state's statute governing the net metering of small distributed renewable energy projects. If enacted into law, the amendment would reverse regulatory changes imposed in 2017 that reduced the value of net energy billing to participating customers.

Maine has allowed customers with distributed renewable energy generation to use the power they produce to offset their electricity bill since the 1980s. In 2017, the Maine Public Utilities Commission amended its rules governing net energy billing to reduce the amount of power that a customer could net against its electric utility bill. The Commission did this by inventing a concept called "gross metering," which allowed electric utilities to collect charges even for power generated and consumed on-site in real time, while requiring participating customers to install a second meter.

The "gross metering" concept was controversial for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it deterred customer adoption of solar power and other distributed renewables (by adding costs while cutting compensation), and the fact that for the first time ever it allowed utilities to collect charges from customers for power produced and consumed entirely on the customer's premises even where that power never went on utility grid facilities.  The Commission later exempted most medium and large customers from this policy after finding that the cost of installing an extra meter wasn't justified, but left the gross metering requirements in its Rule Chapter 313 governing net energy billing. In response, in 2019 various state legislators proposed bills that would alter or restore the net energy billing paradigm.

One of these bills has now received favorable votes in both the state House and Senate. LD 91, An Act to Eliminate Gross Metering, was originally sponsored by Representative Seth Berry. It clarifies the statutory definition of net energy billing, which currently defines the concept as "a billing and metering practice under which a customer is billed on the basis of net energy over the billing period taking into account accumulated unused kilowatt-hour credits from the previous billing period." As amended by LD 91, the definition would specifically define "net energy" as the "difference between the kilowatt-hours delivered by a transmission and distribution utility to the customer over a billing period and the kilowatt-hours delivered by the customer to the transmission and distribution utility over the billing period." This clarification removes the Public Utilities Commission's ability to define "net energy" in any other way. LD 91 also directs the Commission to amend its rules "to be substantively equivalent to the rules in effect on January 1, 2017" (that is, before the Commission's 2017 regulatory amendment.)

LD 91 faces additional votes in the state legislature, before it would move to the desk of Governor Janet Mills for her signature. The legislature is also expected to consider other bills affecting net energy billing or expanding incentives for solar development, later this session.

Will Maine change its net metering law?

Several pieces of proposed Maine legislation could affect the state's version of net metering. Here's a quick look at Maine's net energy billing policy, how it could change, and what that might mean for consumers.

Maine's electricity rules allow consumers with certain distributed generation facilities (like solar panels) to elect "net energy billing." Like other forms of net metering, the basic concept is that consumers can use their on-site generation to offset their purchases of electricity from the grid, both in real time, and by banking credits for power exported to the grid during periods of time when on-site generation exceeds the consumer's load.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission first adopted a net energy billing rule in the 1980s, allowing customers to net imports and exports within any month or other billing period, in recognition that consumers should not be required to install an extra meter to measure exports from small renewable power facilities and other distributed generation. In 1998, the Commission revised its rule to allow annualized netting as a means of encouraging the use of small-scale renewable technologies designed primarily to serve the customer’s own needs.

In 2017, the Commission revised its rule to reduce the benefits of net metering for future projects, both by reducing the credit for nettable energy, and by shifting the state to a "gross metering" paradigm. Under gross metering, which has been called "one of the strangest and most regressive policies for valuing residential solar in the United States," utilities collect charges even for power generated and consumed on-site in real time. While the Commission later granted an exemption from its gross metering policy for most medium and large customers after finding that the cost of installing an extra meter (estimated at over $3,000 per installation) wasn't justified, the revised rule remains on the books for now.

But further possible changes to net energy billing figure among the numerous energy issues implicated by the list of legislation proposed for the Maine State Legislature's 2019 session. Several bills that have been printed so far suggest that the Legislature will consider various bills that would eliminate gross metering (like LD 91, An Act to Eliminate Gross Metering and LD 143, An Act To Protect Electric Ratepayers from Gross Output Metering Costs), or would replace net energy billing with a market-based mechanism (like LD 41, An Act To Replace Net Energy Billing with a Market-based Mechanism), among other measures. Other bill titles suggest possible changes to the state's policy on shared ownership net metering, which allows multiple customers to offset their load with generation from a community solar project or other off-site facility.

The Legislature's Joint Standing Committee on Energy, Utilities and Technology will schedule public hearings on these bills. The Committee has scheduled public hearings on LD 41 and LD 91 for 1:00 p.m. on January 29, 2019.

Energy issues in Maine's 2019 legislative requests

With the 129th Maine Legislature convened for its first regular session, the Office of the Revisor of Statutes has released a list of the titles of proposed legislation timely submitted by legislators. While the text of most of these legislative requests has not yet been publicly released, the preliminary list of working titles of over 2,000 precloture legislator bills suggests the scope of issues that will come before the Maine State Legislature in 2019. On energy matters, themes emerging from this list include reforms to Maine's renewable portfolio standard; efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; incentives for microgrids, renewable energy and electric vehicles; and changes to energy efficiency standards for most newly constructed buildings.

Based on the working titles and legislative committee assignments, a number of bills will propose changes to Maine's renewable portfolio standard or other laws regarding renewable energy. Among others, these bills could include:

• LR 26, An Act To Update Maine's Renewable Energy Policy (Spkr. Gideon of Freeport)
• LR 82, An Act To Update the State's Renewable Energy Goals (Rep. Berry of Bowdoinham)
• LR 119, Resolve, To Establish a Working Group To Develop a Stand-alone Renewable Energy Certificate Program for the Biomass Industry (Sen. Carpenter of Aroostook)
• LR 403, An Act To Diversify Maine's Energy Portfolio with Renewable Energy (Rep. Hubbell of Bar Harbor)
• LR 845, An Act To Encourage the Use of Renewable Energy (Sen. Lawrence of York)
• LR 872, An Act To Extend to December 31, 2020 the Deadline for Community-based Renewable Energy Projects To Become Operational (Rep. Higgins of Dover-Foxcroft)
• LR 1034, An Act To Establish a Green New Deal for Maine (Rep. Maxmin of Nobleboro)
• LR 1123, An Act To Repeal the 100 Megawatt Limit on Power Generation (Rep. Hanley of Pittston)
• LR 1405, An Act To Clarify the Definition of "Renewable Capacity Resource" (Rep. Babine of Scarborough)
• LR 1431, An Act To Study Transmission Solutions To Enable Renewable Energy Investment in the State (Rep. Berry of Bowdoinham)
• LR 1470, An Act To Modernize Maine's Renewable Portfolio Standard (Sen. Lawrence of York)
• LR 1558, An Act To Increase Maine-based Energy Sources (Pres. Jackson of Aroostook)
• LR 1616, An Act To Reform Maine's Renewable Portfolio Standard (Sen. Vitelli of Sagadahoc)
• LR 1803, An Act To Benefit Maine Consumers, Businesses and Communities through Expanded Renewable Energy (Sen. Dow of Lincoln)

Other bill titles suggest possible proposed changes to other aspects of Maine's renewable policy, such as Maine's version of net metering or rules governing community solar projects:

• LR 15, An Act To Eliminate Gross Metering (Rep. Berry of Bowdoinham)
• LR 299, An Act To Replace Net Energy Billing with a Market-based Mechanism (Rep. O'Connor of Berwick)
• LR 404, An Act To Protect Ratepayers from Gross-metering Costs (Rep. Hubbell of Bar Harbor)
• LR 535, An Act To Eliminate the Cap on Solar Energy Generation Farms (Sen. Miramant of Knox)
• LR 536, An Act To Require Transmission and Distribution Utilities To Purchase Electricity from Renewable Resources at Certain Prices (Sen. Miramant of Knox) 
• LR 1259, An Act To Eliminate Restrictions on Community Solar Projects (Rep. Higgins of Dover-Foxcroft)
• LR 1621, An Act To Expand Community-based Solar Energy in Maine (Sen. Sanborn of Cumberland)

Several more bill titles appear designed to expand opportunities for microgrids or other local private sales of electricity:

• LR 18, An Act To Allow Microgrids That Are in the Public Interest (Rep. Devin of Newcastle)
• LR 213, An Act To Authorize Businesses Located Adjacent to Electric Power Generators To Obtain Power Directly (Rep. Campbell of Orrington)
• LR 1464, An Act To Allow the Direct Sale of Electricity (Sen. Woodsome of York)

Beyond a direct focus on renewable energy, several bill titles address Maine's participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative or efforts to reduce fossil fuel use:

• LR 254, An Act To Develop a State Energy Plan To Provide a Pathway to a Fossil-free Energy Portfolio (Rep. Devin of Newcastle)
• LR 1493, An Act To Ensure the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Trust Fund Continues To Promote Energy Efficiency and Benefit Maine Ratepayers (Rep. Wadsworth of Hiram)

At least three bill titles call for increased incentives for electric vehicles:

• LR 862, An Act To Provide Purchase Rebates for Battery Electric Vehicles and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (Rep. Ingwersen of Arundel)
• LR 1380, An Act To Encourage Municipalities, State Agencies, Colleges and Universities To Adopt Electric Vehicles (Rep. Ingwersen of Arundel)
• LR 1687, An Act To Create an Electric Vehicle Tax Credit (Sen. Chenette of York) 

At least five bill titles address the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code:

• LR 561, An Act To Amend the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (Rep. Kessler of South Portland)
• LR 537, An Act To Strengthen the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (Rep. Caiazzo of Scarborough)
• LR 619, An Act Regarding the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (Rep. Ingwersen of Arundel)
• LR 866, An Act To Amend the Laws Governing the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (Rep. Rykerson of Kittery)
• LR 1743, An Act Regarding the Application and Administration of the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (Rep. Fecteau of Biddeford) 

Experience suggests that most of these legislative requests will result in printed bills, and will be given public hearings before legislative committees before votes by the House and Senate.

Montana to study customer-generator costs, benefits

Montana utility regulators are preparing to study the costs and benefits of distributed solar energy projects and other customer-generators.  The results could reshape the way net-metered customers are charged for electric service, including the creation of a separate service classification and rates for customer-generators.

Earlier this year, the Montana legislature enacted House Bill 219, a law requiring utility NorthWestern Corp. to "conduct a study of the costs and benefits of customer-generators," for submission to the state Public Service Commission to inform future ratemaking.  The law allowed the Commission to establish "minimum information requirements" for inclusion in the study.

On June 16, 2017, the Commission posted a Notice of Opportunity to Comment on potential benefit and cost elements and study questions.  That notice identified categories of potential benefits including avoided energy costs, avoided capacity costs, avoided transmission and distribution capacity costs, avoided system losses, avoided renewable portfolio standard compliance costs, avoided environmental compliance costs, market price suppression effects, avoided risk, avoided grid support services costs, avoided outages costs, and non-energy benefits.  It also identified categories of potential costs, including reduced revenue, administrative costs, interconnection, integration, and cost shifts in production, transmission, and distribution.

The Commission's notice also posed a series of questions relevant to cost-benefit studies, including:

• What, if any, assumptions regarding the adoption rate of solar or other net metering technologies should the Commission specify?
• What, if any, time frame for calculating benefits and costs should the Commission specify (e.g., 10 years, 20 years, etc.)?
• What, if any, assumptions regarding utility rates should the Commission specify (e.g., rate of increase, changes in rate design (time-of-use, other))?
• What, if any, methodology for cost-effectiveness tests should the Commission specify (e.g., standard practice manual or the Cost Benefit Framework developed by the Electric Power Research Institute)?
• What cost-effectiveness perspective(s) should the Commission require be evaluated (e.g., societal, utility/program administrator, ratepayer, participant)?
• Should the Commission specify the generating resource avoided by net-metered systems?  If so, what generating unit should be used?
• Should the Commission specify a particular locational attribute that counts as either a benefit or cost adder/subtractor?
• What, if any, other compensation approaches in addition to net metering should be assessed in the study NorthWestern is required to conduct?

The Commission invited interested persons to submit written comments addressing the potential benefit and cost elements and study questions identified above no later than July 7, 2017.  It also directed the utility to provide information on the scale and scope of data it has collected, or intends to collect, regarding variations in the usage profiles of customer-generators compared to other customers in the same rate class.

MA net metering, Single Parcel and Subdivision rules

Massachusetts utility regulators have opened an inquiry to review the current standards and procedures by which distributed generation projects seek exceptions to the net metering rules and regulations that generally require each facility to be sited on a single parcel of land.  The case could lead to changes in the Department of Public Utilities' Single Parcel Rule and Subdivision Rule.

On March 15, 2017, the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities issued an order opening an inquiry relating to the application of its net metering rules, which it docketed as DPU 17-22.  As described in that order, under Massachusetts statutes and regulations, "net metering allows customers to generate credits for excess electricity that net metering facilities generate."  The rules include limitations on the size of a generation facility eligible for net metering -- below 60 kW generally, or up to 2 MW for renewable projects (or 10 MW for certain public facilities).

Because the rules include project size limits, how you define the "facility" can affect its eligibility for net metering.  In one case, the Department established a "Single Parcel Rule", defining an eligible net metering facility as “the energy generating equipment associated with a single parcel of land, interconnected with the electric distribution system at a single point, behind a single meter." In 2016, the Department received 13 petitions seeking an exception to the Single Parcel Rule, an increase over three petitions in 2015 and one petition in 2014.

The Department also recognized if it was adopting parcel boundaries as a factor for defining a net metering facility, it should also set a date after which it would presume that the further subdivision of parcels was to game the net metering rule.  In its Subdivision Rule, the Department required that any customer who seeks to establish a net metering facility on a parcel of land that was subdivided after January 1, 2010, file a petition demonstrating that the subdivision was not for the purpose of creating multiple parcels specifically to support multiple net metering facilities.

But in a move that could lead to changes to these regulations, in its March 15 order opening inquiry, the Department identified a series of questions on which it seeks written comment.

Questions posed by the Department relate to the aggregation of capacity, blanket exemptions and case-by-case exemptions, the treatment of multiple facilities on one parcel, the treatment of a single facility on multiple parcels,  possible methods of streamlining submission and review of petitions for exceptions from the net metering rules and regulations, process requirements for petitions for exemptions, and challenges in allocating credits to multiple accounts and related solutions.

The Department has requested initial written comments no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 10, 2017.  It has also scheduled a technical conference for May 3, 2017.

Maine net energy billing rules, 2017 revision

On January 31, 2017, the Maine Public Utilities Commission adopted revisions to its rule chapter 313, governing net energy billing.  Net metering, or net energy billing, is the metering and billing mechanism that Maine and most other states have adopted to promote the development of solar photovoltaic and other distributed renewable energy facilities.  While the Commission first adopted a net energy billing rule in the early 1980s, its 2017 revisions to that rule reduce the benefits of net metering for future projects.  Here's a look at Maine's revised net energy billing rules.

The Commission described its actions in a written order dated March 1, and published its final rule on the same date.   Most notably, the Commission reduced the amount of future generation facility output that can be netted against its transmission and distribution utility bill -- by first introducing, then reducing, a concept called "nettable energy."  Nettable energy is now the entire amount of energy generated by the facility, including the amount consumed by a customer “behind-the-meter”.  This shift -- from netting on a net basis, to netting on a gross basis -- is a significant change in state policy that is unfavorable for behind-the-meter generation.

As before, a net energy billing customer with solar or other eligible generation may offset all of its energy supply bill with its nettable energy.  But the Commission's new rule phases out the former 100% crediting of net energy for transmission and distribution charges.  Depending on the year into which a project is placed in service, the new rule reduces the portion of the "nettable output" -- what counts for netting -- by 10% in each of the next 10 years, reaching 0% T&D crediting for customers that become net energy billing customers after calendar year 2026.  The result is a gradual reduction of the incentive to net energy bill.  (Note that once a customer becomes a net energy billing customer, its rate treatment will generally last for 15 years.  Likewise, existing net energy billing customers may continue to net bill under the previous rule's approach for a 15-year period, after which they could continue to net for supply but not for T&D.)

The Commission also added a section covering renewable energy credit (REC) aggregation.  Section 4 of Chapter 313 provides that new customers in 2018 and after may elect to have the RECs or environmental attributes of project power be aggregated by their local investor-owned utility for sale into the regional market, with the proceeds returned to participating customers.  The Commission described its decision to include a REC aggregation program as "an effort to obtain on an optional basis a value stream that is not currently being monetized."  If small renewable projects would qualify for RECs, but are either not doing so or are not selling the RECs, REC aggregation options may allow some projects to connect with the market.  On the other hand, by selling the RECs, the project owner or power consumer cannot claim to have consumed green electricity, so there are tradeoffs.

The Commission did not change some other aspects of the rule, such as maximum project size (660 kW) or its limit on the number of accounts or meters permissible under a single net energy billing arrangement (10).  It noted, "Fundamental changes to NEB in Maine and promotional programs for larger renewable and community solar projects are the purview of the Legislature as a matter of State energy policy."

Based on a list of legislative requests, the state legislature will consider at least 12 bills relating to solar energy in its 2017 session.

On March 10, the Commission published a Frequently Asked Questions document covering the Chapter 313 net metering rules.  The FAQ provides answers to 10 questions, ranging from why the Commission changed the rule, to providing specific examples of how much nettable energy a customer would be able to claim depending on the year in which its project was placed in service.

Maine considers community solar rules

As Maine utility regulators consider changes to the state’s net metering rule for solar panels and other customer-owned generation, revisions proposed by the Public Utilities Commission could change how consumers can participate in community and shared ownership solar projects.

For years, the Maine Public Utilities Commission’s rules have allowed “net energy billing,” a metering and billing mechanism that promotes the development and operation of smaller renewable generation facilities. Net metering is responsible for nearly all customer-owned solar power projects developed in Maine to date, including a handful of shared ownership or community solar farms. But as utility Central Maine Power Company reported that its customers' net metering reached 1% of peak load last year, the Commission launched a process to consider revisions to its net energy billing rules.

On September 14, 2016, the Commission released a Notice of Rulemaking along with proposed amendments to its rule. As proposed by the Commission, the amended rule would expand net energy billing in Maine in several ways. It would increases the size cap for an eligible facility by 50%, from 660 kilowatts to one megawatt. It would also recognize four different types of net energy billing arrangements that would be allowed: individual customer; customer leases; shared ownership; and community NEB.

Under the shared ownership model, each participating customer must have a shared ownership interest in the eligible facility under which the customers have joint responsibility for the costs of the shared ownership facility and have rights to the output of the shared ownership facility in proportion to their cost responsibilities. Under shared ownership net energy billing, the transmission and distribution utility would allocate the nettable energy of the shared ownership facility to customers in proportion to each customer’s ownership interest in the eligible facility.

The proposed rule would also explicitly allow for “community” net energy billing, a model that the Commission recognized as “increasing as a means to promote smaller solar installations.” The proposal suggests that community projects would have similarities to shared ownership projects, with additional registration and consumer protection provisions, but potentially with different ownership requirements.

The case over the rule change’s adoption remains pending for now. While some elements of the proposal would expand net metering opportunities, the proposal would also ratchet down the amount of energy that new projects could net against their T&D bill, from 100% in 2016 to 0% for new NEB customers after 2025. Elements of the Commission’s proposal remain controversial. Nevertheless the Commission’s proposal suggests a potential direction for future community solar projects in Maine.

Vermont adopts Renewable Energy Standard

This summer Vermont energy regulators issued an order implementing a Renewable Energy Standard.  This standard, or RES, requires Vermont electric utilities to procure an increasing share of electricity from renewable sources. 

Under a 2015 law called Act 56 (formerly called bill H.40), the Vermont Legislature directed the Public Service Board to issue an order implementing the RES to take effect on January 1, 2017.  Act 56 set certain rules for the RES, but left other issues to the Board.  Following working group meetings, workshops, and opportunities for written comment, the Board adopted the RES by order dated June 28, 2016.

The RES sets targets for utility procurement of renewable energy, starting at 55% of the electricity sold to customers from renewable sources in 2017, increasing gradually to 75% in 2032.   Of these amounts, at least 1% must come from new, distributed renewable generators, such as net-metering systems, rising to l0% by 2032.

The RES also establishes a category of "energy transformation projects," to encourage utility investment in projects that directly reduce customers' fossil-fuel consumption.  Energy transformation projects might include measures like weatherization, biomass heating, cold-climate heat pumps, demand management, or clean vehicle technologies.  To satisfy this requirement, utilities must demonstrate fossil-fuel savings equivalent to 2% of their annual retail sales (increasing to 12% by 2032) or procure an equal amount of additional renewable generation.  The Board has described the energy transformation project program as the first of its kind in the U.S.

Most states have adopted binding renewable portfolio standards for electricity supply.  Before the enactment of Act 56 and the Board's adoption of the RES, Vermont had renewable goals under its Sustainably Priced Energy Enterprise Development or SPEED program, but no mandatory renewable portfolio standard.

Under the act, the Vermont Public Service Board order adopting the RES will take effect on January 1, 2017.

Massachusetts develops next solar incentive

The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) is designing a new solar incentive program to encourage the continued development of solar renewable energy generating sources by residential, commercial, governmental and industrial electricity customers, based on a state law enacted this spring. The so-called "next solar initiative" program could affect the pace of solar photovoltaic project development in Massachusetts, as policymakers seek a smooth transition from the current SREC II program as it reaches full capacity.

On April 11, 2016, Governor Charlie Baker signed into law An Act Relative to Solar Energy, also known as Chapter 75 of the Acts of 2016.  The law preserved and expanded net metering, preserving the value of that policy for projects developed by residential, small commercial, municipal and government customers.

As described by the Baker administration, the law also allows DOER and the Department of Public Utilities to "gradually transition the solar industry to a more self-sustaining model." In particular, section 11 of the act directed DOER to "develop a statewide solar incentive program to encourage the continued development of solar renewable energy generating sources by residential, commercial, governmental and industrial electricity customers throughout the commonwealth."

The law prescribed twelve requisite characteristics of the solar incentive program, but left the creation of rules and regulations to DOER.  Some criteria are process-oriented, such as that the program "promotes the orderly transition to a stable and self-sustaining solar market at a reasonable cost to ratepayers," or considers underlying system costs, environmental benefits, energy demand reduction and other avoided costs provided by solar renewable energy generating facilities.

Other criteria define structural requirements for the program, such as that it "relies on market-based mechanisms or price signals as much as possible to set incentive levels," "differentiates incentive levels to support diverse installation types and sizes that provide unique benefits," and "features a known or easily estimated budget to achieve program goals through use of a declining adjustable block incentive, a competitive procurement model, tariff or other declining incentive framework."  The law also requires the program to promote investor confidence through long-term incentive revenue certainty and market stability.

After the solar bill's enactment, DOER held two public listening sessions, and solicited comments on the development of the "next solar incentive" through June 30, 2016.  Many commenters expressed support for a continuation of the SREC framework, such as "SREC III."  Other comments focused on locational issues, such as proposing policies to deter the development of projects located on farmland or other undeveloped "greenfield" sites.

DOER is expected to release a first draft of its next solar incentive program this summer.

NH net metering under review

New Hampshire utility regulators have paused their review of a utility’s proposed changes to rates for customers with solar and other distributed energy resources, pending a more holistic review of the state’s net metering policy. Interest now focuses on Docket DE 16-576, in which the Commission may develop new alternative net metering tariffs or other regulatory mechanisms applicable to customer-sited generation.

Under New Hampshire law, the net energy metering section of the Limited Electrical Energy Producers Act, each electric distribution utility must make standard tariffs providing for net energy metering available to eligible customer-generators in accordance Public Utilities Commission regulation.

On April 29, 2016, distribution company Unitil Energy Systems, Inc. (Unitil) filed a petition to the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission seeking authority to, among other things, implement new permanent delivery rates for distribution service, beginning June 1, 2016. Among Unitil’s proposed changes was a new tariff schedule for Domestic Distributed Energy Resources, called Schedule DDER, applicable to certain residential customers with renewable distributed generation systems installed behind the retail meter. If adopted, it would change how Unitil’s customers may net meter solar panels and other eligible distributed generation.

Changes to net metering policy can be controversial.  Consumers and solar advocates typically support net metering as a key incentive for solar project development, even if it might undercompensate consumers relative to the value of solar.  But some utilities oppose net metering, arguing that it hurts their revenues or shifts costs to customers without solar panels.  Debate over the issue led the New Hampshire legislature to enact a net metering bill, House Bill 1116, earlier this year. Signed by Governor Hassan on May 2, 2016, House Bill 1116 amended several provisions of RSA 362-A:9.

Among the new statutory language is new paragraph XVI, requiring the Commission, within a ten month period, to initiate and conclude a proceeding to develop new alternative net metering tariffs, which may include other regulatory mechanisms and tariffs, taking into consideration a number of specified factors deemed relevant to such development. By Order of Notice issued on May 19, 2016, the Commission opened Docket DE 16-576 to conduct this holistic review of net metering.  That case remains ongoing.

Given the overlap between the holistic net metering case and Unitil’s proposed Schedule DDER, on June 9, the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission issued an order suspending the investigation of, and staying any litigation regarding, Unitil’s proposed tariff schedule. In its June 9 order suspending the investigation, the Commission concluded that “it it would be inconsistent with the intent of HB 1116 and would represent an inefficient allocation of limited Staff, stakeholder, and Unitil ratepayer resources to address rate design proposals directly affecting net-metered customer-generators in this proceeding as well as in Docket DE 16-576.”

In the Commission’s words, it initiated Docket DE 16-576 based on the legislative mandate “to conduct a proceeding involving all regulated electric distribution utilities to develop new alternative net metering tariffs, which may include other regulatory mechanisms.” Noting that Schedule DDER is effectively a net metering tariff, the Commission found that separately reviewing, evaluating, and litigating Schedule DDER in both the Unitil docket and Docket DE 16-576 would impose additional burdens on the limited resources of Staff and its consultant, as well as on those of other parties and stakeholders, and “could result in conflicting schedules, redundant discovery, and potentially inconsistent results in the separate proceedings.”

The Commission noted that under the HB 1116 amendments to the net metering law, “net metering will continue indefinitely and without limit, unless and until otherwise determined by the Commission in the proceeding we have opened as Docket DE 16-576… In effect, customer -generators will continue to participate in net metering under RSA 362-A:9 even in excess of the 100 megawatt “cap,” but those above this statutory limit ultimately will be subject to the new alternative net metering tariffs approved by the Commission in Docket DE 16-576.”

Accordingly, the Commission placed the suspension and stay of the Unitil case in effect until the completion of Docket DE 16-576.  The net metering review in that case remains pending, with a schedule set through the coming winter.

Maine opens net metering inquiry

The Maine Public Utilities Commission has issued a Notice of Inquiry to obtain feedback on whether its net energy billing rules should be modified, or other action taken to affect Maine's net metering policy.

Rooftop solar panels on a Maine business.

Under Chapter 313 of the Commission's rules, Maine electricity customers may net the output of qualified solar panels or other distributed generation resources against their utility loads.  To date, this rate treatment, known as "net energy billing," has been a major incentive for the development of solar photovoltaic and other customer-sited renewable energy projects in Maine.  Most other U.S. jurisdictions have adopted similar net metering programs.

But the Maine regulations provide for a review by the Commission of its rules once a utility gives notice that net metered capacity reaches 1% of peak demand.  Maine transmission and distribution utility Central Maine Power Company gave that notice earlier this year.

At a deliberative session held on June 14, the Commission unanimously decided to initiate an inquiry into the matter.  The Commission's 4-page Notice of Inquiry seeks comment and information on a list of specific issues related to the net metering rules.  Issues identified in that notice include possible changes to the value of net metering credits or the kinds of customer generating facilities may be net metered, grandfathering of existing systems, the adoption of consumer protection standards, and an alternative contracting structure:

1. In what respects (if at all) should Chapter 313 be revised, and what objective is each such revision intended to achieve?

2. In what respects (if at all) should there be revisions to the retail rate components that are netted such that less than the full retail rate (T&D and supply) would be netted, and what objectives are such revisions intended to achieve?

3. Should the Commission consider changes in the current kWh (660kW) threshold for qualified projects? What is the rationale for such a change?

4. If there are revisions to NEB, should existing NEB customers be “grandfathered” with respect to any future changes that affect NEB? Please provide the rationale for your answer, and, if yes, for how long should customers be grandfathered?

5. How can an NEB program be designed to track changes in the costs of distributed generation facilities?

6. Should issues of revenue loss and rate impacts be addressed through T&D utility rate design? How should rate design be approached--through cost of service, avoided cost, or a value of solar approach? Please discuss any equity issues that might arise from these approaches.

7. With respect to the structural app roach discussed in the Commission’s Report to the Legislature Regarding Market-Based Solar Policy Design Stakeholder Process Pursuant to Resolves 2015, ch. 37 (Jan. 30, 2016) (which was the basic structural approach that was considered by the Legislature last session through LD 1649) in which the output from solar facilities would be purchased and re-sold into the wholesale market, please comment on the statutory authority under which the Commission could implement such an approach. In the event the Commission has the statutory authority, should the Commission pursue such an approach and, if so, how should the purchase price be established for the various distributed generation resources that participate in NEB?

8. Should solar PV be treated differently than other NEB eligible resources with regard to any changes that might be adopted to the program?

9. How should any changes to NEB arising from CMP’s January 14, 2016 letter request for review apply to Emera Maine and the consumer-owned utilities?

10. Does the Commission have statutory authority to regulate or oversee lease arrangements or other custom er agreements that involve NEB? If so, should the Commission consider additional consumer protection standards with respect to distributed generation lease programs or other customer arrangements (i.e., sales of community solar project shares)?

11. Please comment on any other issues related to NEB?

The Commission requested comments on these issues by July 22, 2016.  Public comment and information will help inform the Commission's review of its Chapter 313 rules.

Maine to consider net metering rules

The Maine Public Utilities Commission is set to consider opening an inquiry into the state's net energy billing rules, which allow electric utility customers to offset their load with distributed generation.

Under Maine's form of net metering, customers with qualifying distributed electric generation may net the power they produce against their consumption of power from the grid.  The Maine Public Utilities Commission adopted rules governing this "net energy billing" or net metering arrangement, which is a key incentive for customer-scale solar photovoltaic projects in Maine.

But those rules, found in Chapter 313 of the Commission's regulations, provide for an agency review of net metering as more customers go solar or participate in other net-metered distributed generation.  Earlier this year, Maine transmission and distribution utility Central Maine Power Company notified the Commission that the cumulative capacity of net metered generating facilities in its service territory had exceeded 1 percent of annual peak demand.  By rule, this notification will trigger a review by the Commission "to determine whether net energy billing ... should continue or be modified."

The Commission has now placed consideration of a Notice of Inquiry related to this item on its agenda for deliberations on June 14, 2016.

Massachusetts solar legislation signed

Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker has signed a bill passed by the state legislature to expand the Massachusetts solar industry and establish a long-term framework for sustainable solar development.

The bill, An Act Relative to Solar Energy, preserves and expands net metering.  Net metering -- a customer's right to offset its solar power production against its consumption of electricity from the grid -- has been an important incentive for solar projects in Massachusetts, leading to the development of over 1,000 megawatts of solar capacity currently installed in Massachusetts.  Previous law set caps on how much solar capacity each utility was required to let its customers net meter against their load.  But at least one utility has reached its cap, cutting off future projects' access to net metering in that territory, and the other utilities are close behind.

In response to interest in preserving net metering, the bill signed into law on April 11 increases the state's solar net metering caps, which limit how much net metered capacity may be installed in each utility's service territory.  It raises the cap on publicly owned projects from 5% of utilities’ peak load to 8%, and lifts the cap on private net metered projects from 4% of utilities’ peak load to 7%.   

At the same time, the bill changes the value of net metering credits for some new projects.  When a net metered customer's solar system produces more electricity than the customer uses, the customer receives credit for its excess production.  Historically, that credit was at the full retail rate -- meaning the customer is credited the same amount for a kilowatt-hour exported to the grid as the customer pays the utility to buy that kilowatt-hour from the grid.  The fact that net metered generation is credited at the full retail rate, as opposed to any lesser amount, has helped net metering drive solar project development.

But some utilities have expressed concerns that net metering imposes costs on other customers who don't have net metered distributed generation.  In an effort to balance cost containment against effective incentives for solar development, the Massachusetts legislation sets the new credit value for most solar projects (other than residential, small commercial, municipal and government-owned) at 60% of the full retail rate once the state hits its goal of 1,600 megawatts of solar capacity.

But to "facilitate continued solar growth within communities around the Commonwealth," the bill preserves retail rate credits for municipal and government-owned projects.  It also continues to exempt residential and small commercial projects from the net metering cap and any net metering credit reductions.

Looking forward, the bill also requires the Department of Energy Resources (DOER) to "develop a statewide solar incentive program to encourage the continued development of solar renewable energy generating sources by residential, commercial, governmental and industrial electricity customers."  The bill gives the Department guidance on the characteristics of that program, including that it must be one which: "promotes the orderly transition to a stable and self-sustaining solar market at a reasonable cost to ratepayers," considers underlying system costs, takes into account electricity revenues and incentives, relies on market-based mechanisms or price signals, minimizes costs and barriers, features a declining incentive framework, differentiates incentive levels, "ensures that the utility customer realizes the direct benefits of the solar incentive program," considers the value of distributed generation and encourages solar generation where it benefits the distribution system, shares program costs collectively among all ratepayers, and promotes investor confidence through long-term incentive revenue certainty and market stability.

With the bill signed into law, the Department of Energy Resources is expected to open a rulemaking proceeding and solicit public comment on the development of the new solar incentive program.

Massachusetts net metering expansion bills

As Massachusetts solar energy legislation seems stalled over debate on the value of solar renewable energy credits, 100 state legislators have written to the Massachusetts House of Representatives leadership calling for "a bill to raise net metering caps as expeditiously as possible."  Governor Baker, the state House and Senate have each agreed to expand net metering programs, but legislation has yet to be fully enacted due to a lack of agreement over the separate SREC issue.

Solar panels on a rooftop in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts solar energy policy is at an inflection point, as the state's two most significant solar photovoltaic offerings -- net metering and the Department of Energy Resources SREC II program -- reach prescribed limits.

Current law caps public sector net metering at 5% of a distribution company's historical peak load, and private sector net metering at 4%.  Last year, Governor Charlie Baker and legislators agreed to increase each of these caps by another 2% of load. The Baker administration described An Act relative to a long-term, sustainable solar industry as maintaining:

strong support for solar generation in the Commonwealth by raising the private and public net metering caps two percent each, to six and seven percent, respectively. The enhancement of cap space represents a 50% increase for public entities, and a 40% increase for private entities, in the allowable amount of solar energy available for net metering credits. This increase will provide immediate support for projects being developed in service territories where the caps have already been reached, and provides the Department of Public Utilities with the authority to raise the caps further, as needed in the future.

In the last legislative session, the Massachusetts House and Senate each passed a similar bill expanding net metering.  But because these bills differed on the reimbursement rate for solar renewable energy credits (SRECs), a conference committee must now try to find agreement between the versions if the concept is to advance. 

In an apparent attempt to prompt action from the conference committee, 100 state legislators signed a March 14, 2016, letter calling for a floor vote on a bill at the earliest opportunity.  The legislators described net metering credits as "compensation for the value provided by solar generation exported to the grid."  They articulated a pro-consumer net metering policy:

In our view, a strong net metering policy, at a minimum, calls for maintaining retail net metering credit value for preferred classes of projects, such as (1) community shared solar, (2) projects that serve low income housing and low-income ratepayers and (3) municipalities until an official, publicly scrutinized analysis of costs and benefits has been completed. In addition, we ask the Conference Committee to ensure grandfathering of existing systems. We also are in favor of the inclusion of new or expanded programs to achieve solar equity for low-income residents.

The legislators noted increased urgency given the filling up of the SREC II program.

The bills -- H.3854 and S.2058 -- are now before the Conference Committee.

Maine community solar farms

As the Maine legislature considers a bill to change the state's solar energy laws, opportunities for customers to participate in community solar farms are drawing interest.  As a result of this interest, some of the legal structures within which Maine community solar projects operate may change.

Community solar farms offer one model for connecting electricity consumers with solar power.  While there are various definitions of what qualifies a project as "community solar", most concepts feature a solar-electric system that provides power or financial benefit to, or is owned by, multiple community members.  This shared ownership, or shared benefit, is key to the community renewable energy model.

The Solar Energy Industries Association notes 25 states with at least one community solar project on-line, with 91 projects and 102 cumulative megawatts installed as of early 2016.  According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, interest in the community solar segment flows from "the recognition that the on-site solar market comprises only one part of the total market for solar energy."  Renters, those with shaded or otherwise unsuitable roofs, or anyone choosing not to install a residential system at home might prefer to invest in an off-site, shared ownership solar project.

State laws or regulations typically shape how customers can participate in community solar projects.  For example, Maine's current community solar model relies on the state's shared ownership net energy billing regulations. The Maine Public Utilities Commission rules governing "net energy billing" require investor-owned transmission and distribution utilities to offer net energy billing to any customer of a transmission and distribution utility that owns or has the legal rights to energy generated using an eligible facility.

The current Maine rules allow up to 10 customer accounts to be netted against a commonly-owned eligible generating facility located in the same utility service territory.  These accounts must belong to "shared ownership customers" -- customers that have an ownership interest (or legally enforceable rights and obligations) in the generating facility.  Participating customers must have joint responsibility for the costs of the shared ownership facility, as well as the rights to the benefits of the project's output in proportion to the cost responsibilities.  The local public utility will allocate the project's generation output among the participants, along with any banked credits, based on each customer's ownership interest in the project. 

Under these shared ownership net metering regulations, a solar project in South Paris developed in 2014 became Maine's first shared ownership community solar farm, and a project in Edgecomb became Maine's second operating community solar farm in 2015.  Other community solar projects are under development.

But when community solar projects rely on state laws, they may be affected by changes in law.  The Maine legislature is now considering a bill that would change Maine's solar energy law.  LD 1649 would largely replace a billing treatment called net metering with a series of long-term contracts and utility procurement orders.  It would establish a procurement target for large-scale community solar distributed generation resources of 45 megawatts by 2022.  Under this model, project sponsors would propose projects (up to 5 megawatts each) and could bid for long-term contracts to sell the project output to the local utility.  Project sponsors would recruit "subscribers" to take proportional interests in the resource, with each subscription sized to represent at least one kilowatt of the resource's generating capacity. Each subscriber would receive a bill credit based on his or her percentage interest in the project's production.

This model could enable more than 10 customer accounts to participate in a shared ownership solar project, which would address the limit on how many customers may participate in a community solar project under current regulations.  This could enable an expansion of shared-ownership solar, albeit under a model that relies on power sales to the local utility, instead of self-consumption or net metering.  But LD 1649 could also have an impact on those community solar projects already operating or under development, because it would effectively end net metering and offer only limited grandfathering of existing projects.

One alternative that could support community solar without impacting existing projects would be to expand the net metering paradigm, for example by allowing municipalities or groups of consumers to participate in larger projects that could offset more customer accounts.  For example, Massachusetts encourages municipal participation in solar projects by allowing governmental entities to net meter larger projects than individual customers.  Maine could adopt a similar model, expanding opportunities for municipally owned or shared ownership solar projects.

The Maine legislature's Joint Standing Committee on Energy, Utilities, and Technology held a public hearing on LD 1649 on March 16.  The committee is expected to give the bill further consideration this month.

NH net metering bills passed

The New Hampshire legislature is acting to expand that state's net metering programs.  Now the question is how much: a 50% expansion, or a doubling?

New Hampshire law requires electric distribution utilities to offer eligible customer-generators a standard tariff for net energy metering. Solar panels are the most commonly net metered type of generation, but other technologies are also used.  Net metering under these tariffs is available "on a first-come, first-served basis within each electric utility service area" until each utility hits its specific cap on net metered capacity.  Under existing law, each utility's cap is effectively its share of a statewide program cap of 50 megawatts.

On January 20, 2016, utility Eversource announced it had reached its cap, and that it would place new projects going forward on a wait list.  But New Hampshire is home to significant interest in expanding net metering.  In the same announcement, Eversource described its work with the state legislature "to enact an expansion to the net metering program."  As the utility said, "Such an expansion would alleviate much of the uncertainty being faced by customers and developers, and would provide time for stakeholders to investigate all of the various costs and benefits of distributed generation and to provide for a sustainable evolution of the net metering program."

Meanwhile, Eversource also indicated a request that state regulators "develop a more permanent solution to the challenge of fairly compensating developers of new distributed generation in a manner that does not shift costs to other customers."

In February, the New Hampshire Senate voted to increase the net metering cap from 50 megawatts to 75 megawatts.  That bill, S.B.333, also directed the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission to develop a net metering tariff for all generation above the 75 megawatt cap.

This month the New Hampshire House passed H.B.1116, a bill that would double the cap, to 100 megawatts.

Under New Hampshire legislative process, these two bills must be reconciled before a proposal can be sent to Governor Maggie Hassan.  But she has expressed strong support for reconciling the bills and expanding net metering:

Lifting the cap on net metering is essential to the continued success of New Hampshire’s solar industry, and I applaud the House for its bipartisan vote to pass this critical measure. The Senate has already supported this legislation, and I urge them to concur with the version passed by the House and send this bill to my desk as quickly as possible so that we can lift the cap on net metering.

The New Hampshire House and Senate now have the opportunity to reconcile the bills and present them to Governor Hassan for her signature.  Assuming this happens, New Hampshire will significantly expand its net metering program in the near term.

Maine solar legislation released

The Maine legislature has printed a bill whose enactment would reshape the state's solar energy laws.  The bill, An Act To Modernize Maine's Solar Power Policy and Encourage Economic Development, has been numbered as LD 1649.  It would replace a billing treatment called net metering with a series of long-term contracts and utility procurement orders.

Solar photovoltaic panels on the roof of Gallagher's Auto Parts, in Patten, Maine.

Under net metering or “net energy billing,” an electric utility invoices a customer with solar panels based on the difference between the customer's energy use and the solar project's output.  If the generator output exceeds monthly usage in any billing period, the customer earns kilowatt-hour credits that can be banked and netted against future usage.  The bipartisan non-governmental organization National Conference of State Legislatures has noted that "Net metering policies have facilitated the expansion of renewable energy through on-site generation, also known as distributed generation."

But a 2015 Maine legislative resolve directed the Public Utilities Commission to convene a stakeholder group to consider alternatives to net energy billing, largely in the hopes of helping more consumers connect with solar power.  As part of that case, the state's Office of Public Advocate proposed a structure where individual solar projects would enter into contracts to sell solar power to their local utility.  While stakeholders developed consensus around exploring the concept, there was not uniform agreement around whether it should immediately replace net metering, or whether the new concept should operate "side by side" with net metering for some test period.

The bill now printed as LD 1649 largely reflects the contract-based, solar standard buyer proposal.  It would direct the Public Utilities Commission to enter into twenty-year contracts for the procurement of 248 megawatts of solar energy between 2017 and 2022.  The bill allocates 60 megawatts (24%) to grid-scale solar distributed generation resources; 45 megawatts (19%) to large-scale community solar resources; 25 megawatts (10%) to commercial and industrial resources; and 118 (47%) megawatts to residential and small business resources.  This would represent a significant expansion of solar capacity in Maine compared to what has been developed to date.

Under LD 1649, customers could seek contracts to sell solar power to a standard buyer (the utility) at prices set by the Public Utilities Commission. The standard buyer's stated role is to purchase the output of these distributed generation resources, aggregate the portfolio of resources procured, and sell it into the relevant New England markets. 

Consumers with projects up to 250 kilowatts in capacity could have two options.  The first is to sell the project's entire output to the utility under a contract, and buy all the customer's electricity requirements back from the utility in a separate transaction.  This is sometimes described as a "buy-all, sell-all" structure.

The second option is to use onsite generation to first offset electric consumption, and sell any excess electricity.  This would allow hourly offsetting of onsite load, but would not allow customers to carry forward monthly credits for excess production that could be used to offset future load.  This differs from net metering under Maine's current regulations, which measure net energy use over an entire month billing period, and carry credits forward for up to 12 billing months.

This contracting structure would effectively replace net metering. No new customers could participate in net metering once the new rules take effect.  Those residential and small business customers who already net meter their loads against a distributed solar project would face a choice: either seek a long-term contract under the new program, or elect to net meter for 12 more years.    

The bill would also largely eliminate Maine's policy of virtual net metering, which has allowed customers to net meter load at one site against a solar project located elsewhere in the same utility's service territory.

As of late on March 9, LD 1649, An Act To Modernize Maine's Solar Power Policy and Encourage Economic Development, had not yet been referred to committee, nor a public hearing scheduled.

MA solar policy faces change

Massachusetts solar energy faces uncertainty, as the two state policies most supportive of solar photovoltaic project development -- a solar project's right to produce solar renewable energy certificates and a customer's right to net meter -- reach their end.  With the Massachusetts SREC II and net metering programs ending, new solar energy projects face diminished and uncertain financial incentives.

Massachusetts has made a strong commitment to solar energy.  The Commonwealth met its original goal of 250 megawatts of solar power installations four years early, then set a new goal was set of 1,600 MW by 2020. As of May 2015, over 841 megawatts of solar capacity had been installed in Massachusetts.

As the Solar Energy Industries Association has noted, "The Massachusetts market is driven by net metering, a renewable portfolio standard with a solar goal along with an accompanying SREC market."  The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center seemingly agrees, listing net metering and SRECs as two key "production-based incentives and benefits" for solar system owners.
The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources ran its Solar Carve-Out II, or SREC II, program from April 25, 2014 to February 5, 2016.  The DOER described the program as designed to support the market until 1,600 megawatts of photovoltaic capacity has been installed statewide.

But that limit has been reached, counting the 653.8 megawatts of PV capacity installed under the Department's SREC I program (which ran from 2010-2014), additional capacity installed under SREC II, and over 600 megawatts of additional projects having reservations filed for the remaining SREC II program capacity.  The practical effect is that new projects will not likely be able to participate in the SREC II program.  This removes a key incentive for Massachusetts solar development.

The other Massachusetts solar promotional program reaching its limit is the Commonwealth's net metering program.  Under net metering, customers of certain electric distribution companies who generate their own electricity may offset their electricity usage.  Effectively, the retail meter spins forward when the customer uses electricity from the utility grid, and it spins backward when the customer generates excess electricity.

Massachusetts law requires each distribution company to maintain net metering caps equal to 4% of the company’s highest historical peak load for private net metering customers, and another 5% for municipal or public entities.  Once an electric distribution company fills its net metering caps, it can no longer allow customers to take service under its net metering tariff.  National Grid has reached its cap in its service territory, with other service territories close to full.  If net metering is not available to Massachusetts customers, it will remove another incentive that has supported significant growth in the state's solar sector in recent years.

In 2015, several pieces of legislation were proposed to lift the net metering caps, but no bill respecting net metering passed both the House and Senate.  The House measure contained provisions including a shift from retail rate compensation for net metering to a wholesale rate for most systems after the 1,600 megawatt target is met, authority for utilities to impose a minimum bill charge on net metering customers after the target is reached, and increased opportunity for utility ownership of solar.  A 2014 effort to lift net metering caps and reform solar policy similarly died.

But with significant interest in solar, from citizens and communities to the Commonwealth, U.S., and even the United Nations following the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, how will Massachusetts react to the end of its SREC II and net metering programs?  Will a third effort to increase net metering work?  What will the Department of Energy Resources offer as a successor to the Solar Carve-out II SREC program?

E2Tech solar forum 2016

Today the Environmental and Energy Technology Council of Maine, better known as E2Tech, held its E2Tech forum on solar energy.

A panel of solar policy experts shared their perspectives on the issues facing Maine.  The panel included:

• Timothy Schneider, Maine Public Advocate
• Fortunat Mueller, ReVision Energy's co-founder
• Brian Conroy, Avangrid's Director of Network Projects & Initiatives
• Rep. Sara Gideon, Assistant Majority Leader in the Maine House of Representatives
• Chris Rauscher, Sunrun's Director of Public Policy

Panelists and audience members discussed some of the recent and ongoing solar energy policy discussions and outcomes in Maine, including a stakeholder process before the Maine Public Utilities Commission to explore an alternative policy complementary to net metering.  That process is expected to wrap up this winter with a report to the legislative committee with jurisdiction over energy matters.

The event also featured Preti Flaherty's launch of its First Light initiative.  Grounded in the Preti team’s experience helping consumers benefit from distributed or “behind the meter” generation, the firm has created a special focus on the commercialization of solar power by and for all consumers.  This strategic initiative will help qualified new entrants, as well as larger, existing companies, navigate legal and business challenges to harness the power of the sun. It will also help site owners participate in solar energy as project hosts, through site leasing and power purchase agreements or other arrangements.  Contact Todd Griset for more information about qualifying for the Preti First Light program.

Maine utility requests net metering review

Maine transmission and distribution company Central Maine Power Company has asked the Maine Public Utilities Commission to review whether the state's net metering program should continue or be modified.

Maine allows customers with qualifying distributed electric generation to net the power they produce against their consumption of power from the grid.  The Maine Public Utilities Commission adopted rules governing this "net energy billing" or net metering arrangement.  Most customer-scale solar photovoltaic projects in Maine rely on net energy billing, including those located in the service territory of utility Central Maine Power or CMP.

One provision of those rules, found in Section 3(J) of Chapter 313, provides for regulatory review of net metering once a utility reaches a threshold of installed net metering capacity:

A transmission and distribution utility shall notify the Commission if the cumulative capacity of generating facilities subject to the provisions of this Chapter reaches 1.0 percent of its peak demand. Upon notification, the Commission will review this Chapter to determine whether net energy billing pursuant to this Chapter should continue or be modified.

On January 14, 2016, CMP filed a letter with the Maine Commission requesting that the Commission undertake the review of net energy billing described in Section 3(J) of Chapter 313.  In support of that request, CMP notes:

As of the end of calendar year 2015, the cumulative capacity of the generating facilities for which CMP has net energy billing agreements under Chapter 313 is approximately 1.04% of CMP’s annual peak demand. The 1.04% is based upon the ratio of 16.261/1,565.300, where the numerator is the megawatts of nameplate capacity of contracted net energy billing facilities and the denominator represents the Company’s 2015 annual hourly peak demand.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission has docketed CMP's request as 2015-00008.  At the same time, the Commission is concluding a months-long legislatively mandated stakeholder process to consider alternatives to net energy billing, after which the Commission is scheduled to present a report to the state's legislative energy committee.

These two proceedings have different direct origins, but their effects could be similar.  CMP's letter under Chapter 313 says it was triggered by growth of enrolled net metering capacity, while the stakeholder process resulted from a direct legislative requirement.  Nevertheless both proceedings may affect the future of net metering in Maine.