PUC tells committee net‑metering rate fix should be goal‑driven, not a single statutory price change
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
PUC told the committee H.716’s approach of legislating a single net‑metering price risks higher net‑metering rates and cost‑shifts to non‑participants; the PUC recommended a legislative goal (for example, increased rooftop solar by 2030) and stakeholder rulemaking to set pricing to meet that goal.
Greg Taylor of the Vermont Public Utility Commission told the committee that H.716 — which would change how net‑metering customers are compensated — is not supported by the PUC in its current form because it reaches into an existing PUC process and prescribes a single pricing variable.
"We we don't support this this bill," Taylor said, explaining the PUC believes the bill would likely increase net‑metering rates and shift costs to non‑net‑metering customers, and that the change would conflict with statutory goals for least‑cost planning and greenhouse‑gas reduction.
Taylor recommended the legislature instead set a clear policy goal (the PUC used an example: 30% more rooftop net‑metering by 2030) and direct the PUC to convene stakeholders and set prices and rules through a least‑cost planning process. Committee members asked about how batteries and behind‑the‑meter storage affect metering and whether meter definitions should be revisited; PUC staff agreed storage is changing the landscape and suggested a technical conference or broad rulemaking to evaluate incentives, rates and potential positive adjusters for encouraging storage.
Members also relayed constituent concerns about the current adjuster (described in testimony as roughly a "negative 4¢" on exported energy) and asked PUC staff to explain historical timing of rate changes. The PUC said it will participate in further stakeholder conversations and provide drafting and rulemaking guidance if the committee chooses a goal‑based approach.
No formal vote was taken on H.716 at this meeting; the committee appears likely to pursue further stakeholder engagement before any statutory pricing change.