County Hears NREL SAM Analysis; consultants seek more data before final solar recommendations

Stratford County commissioners on Monday met with staff from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to review an early techno‑economic simulation of a proposed county solar project and to discuss next steps. The lab said the analysis is a proof of concept run in NREL’s System Advisor Model (SAM) and that staff must provide additional technical and financial details before NREL can deliver final, actionable recommendations.

The discussion matters because NREL’s work, completed through an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) technical assistance voucher, will shape whether the county issues a request for proposals, pursues public ownership or structures a private‑sector deal that relies on tax equity. Commissioners repeatedly cited an approaching federal tax‑incentive deadline as a reason to move quickly.

Emily, a NREL project lead, told the commission, “NREL is completing a techno economic analysis to model the possible energy resilience intervention configurations with a strong focus on solar for Stratford County.” She said NREL and county staff have populated most model inputs from a March 2022 solar feasibility review but are using default SAM values for missing fields and need specific local answers on ownership, financing, incentives and electricity rates.

NREL modeler Ambari Shnag described the current work as an early test of the model: “The simulations... are far from the finished product. It is rather a straw man.” He said NREL has started by modeling one of four area options listed in the 2022 feasibility report and that the team will iterate the SAM inputs — including tilt/track settings, DC/AC ratio and degradation assumptions — after the county supplies missing data.

Commissioners asked about equipment life and degradation, financing options and whether to favor fixed or tracking arrays. NREL staff recommended the county confirm whether the project would be publicly owned or financed by a private developer, because ownership affects whether federal and state tax incentives and income‑tax considerations apply to the financial model.

County staff and commissioners identified several immediate follow‑ups. Commissioners asked staff to gather outstanding technical items identified by NREL, including panel tilt and tracking preferences, the county’s anticipated financing structure (loan vs. cash), expected loan term and interest rate, and the county’s electricity‑rate structure so the SAM financial model can be run against local rates. A commissioner said the county should try to supply those answers “within a week, a week or 10 days” so NREL can iterate the model quickly.

Several commissioners expressed frustration about past delays: one commissioner noted that “the federal government spends $77,000 with these people” and urged the county to accelerate the process so the project can take advantage of tax incentives that, the commission was told, may lapse next summer. Commissioners also proposed contacting Rockingham County’s project lead, Chuck Nickerson, to view a completed county project and to ask about financing, roof and canopy installations, and project management. The commission agreed to arrange a conference call among Diane (county administrator), Chuck Nickerson and commissioners to discuss lessons learned.

Beyond modeling and finance, some commissioners raised planning questions that NREL does not yet model, including land availability for large arrays, the potential to feed power into community programs (for example, to reduce electricity costs at municipal housing or community facilities) and decommissioning/end‑of‑life disposal for solar equipment. One commissioner urged that the analysis include “a hard look” at long‑term removal and disposal plans rather than leaving those costs to future budgets.

No formal votes or commitments to a particular procurement approach were taken at the meeting. Commissioners set a planning target to be able to make a direction decision by January and discussed whether the county should issue an RFP if the commission elects to use private developers that can monetize tax benefits. NREL staff said they have been using the PVWatts/commercial financial model in SAM for preliminary runs but can switch to other financial scenarios (public ownership, tax‑equity structures) as county input clarifies the intended structure.

Next steps recorded in the meeting: county staff will respond to the itemized NREL data requests and circulate answers; staff will contact Rockingham County and try to schedule a site visit and a conference call with Chuck Nickerson, Diane and commissioners; and NREL will continue iterative SAM modeling once those inputs are received. Commissioners emphasized urgency because of the upcoming change in federal incentives and because subsequent grant opportunities depend on having a concrete project plan and technical analysis in hand.

The meeting included references to the March 2022 solar feasibility review by Partner Engineering & Science, the EECBG technical assistance voucher, and NREL’s Annual Technology Baseline as sources used for default assumptions. Commissioners asked staff to return with the requested information and to place the Rockingham County briefing on a future agenda.

Ending: The commission moved on to other agenda items after setting the follow‑up tasks and agreeing to schedule the planned conference call and any necessary site visits.