House Energy Committee weighs H.716 to freeze net‑metering adjuster; members split on scope

Representative Brett Morrow, sponsor of H.716, told the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee on Feb. 18 that the short bill would ‘‘freeze in a negative rate adjuster of 4 negative 4¢ and … eliminate it on behind the meter consumption fee.’’ The committee spent the morning examining whether that near‑term fix is the right approach amid larger changes in federal incentives and utility compensation policies.

The bill was framed by Morrow as an interim measure to respond to the loss of a federal tax credit that he said threatens local solar jobs and installation firms. ‘‘California lost 19,000 jobs in the first year after that went into effect,’’ he said, citing testimony presented to the committee as a cautionary example of rapid policy change’s economic impact.

Why it matters: net‑metering rules determine how customers are credited for rooftop generation and how costs are allocated across utility customers. Opponents at the table emphasized that setting compensation levels is normally a PUC responsibility and warned that a legislative price freeze risks unintended consequences, including distorted incentives for storage and grid investments.

Committee debate and alternatives Representative Sebelia told colleagues she is ‘‘a hard no’’ on returning rate setting to the legislature, arguing the PUC exists to set rates and the committee should instead pursue alternative incentives for clean energy such as refundable tax credits and town energy programs. Other members voiced a mix of support for not charging customers for self‑consumed rooftop generation and concern that a blunt freeze (the -4¢ adjuster) could lock utilities into an inflexible obligation.

Several members urged the committee to narrow H.716. Commonly voiced alternatives included: - Remove the proposed freeze on the statewide negative adjuster and instead preserve an exemption for energy consumed entirely behind the meter; - Add drafting to address battery backup and virtual power‑plant coordination so behind‑the‑meter storage isn’t double‑billed; - Ask the PUC to undertake a compensation study or provide more explicit guidance on time‑of‑generation and blended compensation rather than a fixed adjuster.

PUC staff present, including TJ Poore of the Department of Public Service, cautioned that jurisdictional and legal questions remain and that regulatory rulemaking and data (the PUC’s upcoming review) would affect future adjusters and siting decisions.

What the committee decided: rather than vote on H.716 as introduced, members asked the sponsor for an amended draft that would remove the adjuster freeze and focus on behind‑the‑meter and battery/back‑up language, and to seek more testimony (including from utilities, PUC staff and battery program managers) before taking a final vote. No formal motion or recorded vote was taken during the session.

Next steps: the sponsor said he will provide updated bill language for committee review that narrows H.716 to the behind‑the‑meter and storage elements, and the committee will schedule additional testimony so members can assess technical effects and the possible need for PUC directives or studies.

Ending: the committee concluded the net‑metering discussion and moved on to other agenda items; members will review an amended draft before any floor action.