Green Mountain Power backs S202 but urges UL safety standards, smart‑meter rule and AG oversight

Green Mountain Power on March 20 told the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure committee it supports S202, the bill addressing portable plug‑in solar devices, but urged lawmakers to keep strict safety and billing clarifications in the measure and to coordinate consumer‑protection oversight with the attorney general.

Candace Morgan of Green Mountain Power said the utility supports the bill as passed by the Senate and highlighted three priorities: safety certification, billing clarity for customers with existing net‑metering systems, and avoiding creation of a new compensation or rate structure that would shift costs to other customers. "We are supportive of the bill as passed the Senate," Morgan said, adding that a UL listing requirement helps ensure devices "are safe and operating under... the requirements" for consumer and worker safety.

Morgan said the Senate amendment that bars customers with existing net‑metering systems from also using a portable solar device reduces customer confusion about what is producing energy and how reductions show up on bills. "If a customer chooses to have one of these devices and plugs into their house and it's generating, it'll essentially just show up on their bill like reduced consumption," Morgan said, noting there is not a separate line item that identifies device generation.

On compensation, Morgan pointed to bill language clarifying that portable devices are ineligible for net metering and that excess generation exported to the grid would not be compensated. "A portable solar energy generation device shall not be eligible for net metering. Excess generation set back into the grid by one of these devices shall not be compensated," she said, supporting the Senate wording that changes "excess generation" language to "generation exported to the grid."

The utility also urged a smart‑meter requirement. Morgan said most customers in GMP territory have AMI smart meters but estimated "anywhere between 7 to 10,000 depending on the year" have opted out; older or non‑smart meters can misrecord behind‑the‑meter generation. She warned that some multi‑unit and master‑metered buildings complicate how portable device performance would be reflected on a monthly bill.

Committee members questioned how older analog or non‑smart meters would record device generation and whether rental units or master‑metered buildings would be disproportionately affected. Morgan responded that outcomes depend on meter type and building metering arrangements and offered to follow up with more specific deployment details.

Morgan also raised consumer‑protection concerns. Because device generation appears only as reduced consumption, customers cannot easily track device performance over time. "It feels more like an attorney general consumer protection conversation," she said, suggesting the committee invite the attorney general to clarify whether marketing and consumer complaint handling should fall to that office. Committee members agreed to invite the attorney general to next week's testimony.

GMP representatives discussed worker safety and a UL standard referenced in the hearing (UL 3700 was cited in the transcript). Committee members expressed concern that a device plug could remain energized briefly during disconnection; Morgan said utilities apply grounding and isolation procedures for line workers and would rely on device UL certification and electrician/fire‑safety guidance for home‑side safety.

The committee debated and ultimately moved away from a utility notification or registry requirement for portable devices. GMP and some members argued the devices behave like consumer appliances and owners may move them between locations, while others said a registry might help worker safety and uptake tracking but warned compliance could be low and skew data.

On liability, GMP explained that typical utility practice is that liability stops at the meter and said the company was consulting counterparts and legal counsel about whether additional statutory language is needed; GMP cautioned against adding language that would muddy established boundaries.

Lawmakers said they will take another round of testimony next week, including testimony from the attorney general's office, and if foundational testimony is complete they may mark up S202 by the end of the week.

The hearing produced no formal vote; the committee scheduled follow‑up testimony and further consideration next week.