Comments Filed in PUC’s Net Energy Billing Proceeding

Parties filed comments regarding the Maine PUC proceeding to consider amendments to its net energy billing (NEB) rule (Ch. 313).  In this matter the Commission is considering a number of amendments implementing bills signed into law in 2026 – LD1730, LD1936, LD1966, LD839, and LD1777 – as well as possible revisions raised in the previous Ch. 313 rulemaking.

(1) ReVision and Maine Renewable Energy Association and Solar Energy Industries Association (MREA-SEIA) recommended clarifying the “Shared Financial Interest Provision” to allow “that a simple form affidavit would satisfy” the “requirement to notify the utility of any arrangements wholly owned by the customer”;

(2) regarding the proposed §3(E)(1), which identifies prohibited new agreements, ReVision and MREA-SEIA recommended clarifying: (i) “that a ‘single customer’ may have multiple accounts under different names”; and (ii) “a project may be built to serve planned or future load,” rather than strictly required to size facilities to offset the customer’s current load;

(3) regarding the proposed §3(E)(2), which specifies when amendments to NEB agreements constitute new agreements: (i) MREA-SEIA and ReVision recommended “that the rule refer to a change in the agreement’s delivery period rather than a change in the agreement’s term,” with ReVision also recommending “a narrow exception for extended utility-driven outages that affect a project’s delivery period”; (ii) MREA-SEIA and ReVision recommended “revising the provision requiring a new agreement for a change in location to a different property” to specify a “noncontiguous property”; (iii) MREA-SEIA recommend allowing “a project sponsor or individual customer to make a one-time election to change the method of credit application either pre- or post-commercial operation,” not merely pre-commercial operation, but that “a change from kilowatt-hour credit application to tariff rate credit application only be allowed if the project met the December 31, 2023 sunset”; and (iv) ReVision recommended “allowing at least a one-time post-operation change between cascading credits and percentage allocation,” given “the significant lifespan of an NEB agreement and the possibility that customer needs may change”; and

(4) MREA-SEIA said that, though it believes MEPUC “and DOER have required disclosures in place that plainly and comprehensively inform customers,” the “NEB Disclosure Form (kWh credit)” could be better aligned with statutory intent “to help customers better comprehend net savings” by: (i) amending “General Description of Terms of Subscription” report estimated annual, rather than monthly, value; and (ii) providing “greater emphasis in the form that production (and subsequently, the fee) may vary month-to-month.”

Transcript of October 21^st public hearing made available here.