TWEETS

Full retail credit with no subtractions. Customers protected from fees and additional charges. Rules actively encourage use of DG.

A

Generally good net metering policies with full retail credit, but there could be certain fees or costs that detract from full retail equivalent value. There may be some obstacles to net metering.

B

Adequate net metering rules, but there could be some significant fees or other obstacles that undercut the value or make the process of net metering more difficult.

C

Poor net metering policies with substantial charges or other hindrances. Many customers will forgo an opportunity to install DG because net metering rules subtract substantial economic value.

D

Net metering policies that deter customer-sited DG.

F

No Statewide Policy

N/A

alabama

F

alaska

C

arizona

F

arkansas

A

california

A

colorado

A

connecticut

A

delaware

A

Dist. of Columbia

A

florida

B

georgia

F

hawaii

F

idaho

C

illinois

A

indiana

B

iowa

B

kansas

C

kentucky

B

louisiana

C

maine

B

maryland

A

massachusetts

A

michigan

B

minnesota

B

mississippi

F

missouri

B

montana

C

nebraska

B

nevada

F

new hampshire

A

new jersey

A

new mexico

B

new york

A

north carolina

C

north dakota

D

ohio

A

oklahoma

F

oregon

A

pennsylvania

A

puerto rico

N/A

rhode island

A

south carolina

B

south dakota

F

tennessee

F

texas

F

utah

A

vermont

B

virginia

C

west virginia

A

wisconsin

D

wyoming

D

  • 2007
  • 2008
  • 2009
  • 2010
  • 2011
  • 2012
  • 2013
  • 2014
  • 2015
  • 2016
  • 2017

Arizona

FNet Metering FInterconnection
  • 2007
  • 2008
  • 2009
  • 2010
  • 2011
  • 2012
  • 2013
  • 2014
  • 2015
  • 2016
  • 2017
  • N/A
  • B
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • F
  • 2007
  • 2008
  • 2009
  • 2010
  • 2011
  • 2012
  • 2013
  • 2014
  • 2015
  • 2016
  • 2017
  • B
  • B
  • C
  • N/A
  • N/A
  • N/A
  • N/A
  • N/A
  • F
  • F
  • F

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

N/A

Applicable Sectors

N/A

Applicable Utilities

N/A

System Capacity Limit

N/A

Aggregate Capacity Limit

N/A

Net Excess Generation

N/A

REC Ownership

N/A

Meter Aggregation

N/A

recommendations

  • Adopt IREC's net metering rules

notes

In 2016, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) voted to replace net metering with "net billing", which credits new customer-generators at an avoided cost rate for energy exported to the grid. This does not meet the IREC definition of net metering. In November 2013 the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) authorized APS to establish a $0.70/kW surcharge on all residential DG customers that enter contracts for a system after December 31, 2013, and that do not enroll under a demand-based tariff rate. One thing that makes this decision all the more striking is that Arizonas net metering rules contain a safe harbor clause requires any additional charge be fully supported by a cost-of-service studies and cost/benefit analysis, and provides that the utility bears the burden of proof on any proposed charge. The Arizona decision, which was counter to ACC Staffs recommendation that the issue be addressed in a general rate case, raises questions over the efficacy and strength of safe harbor clauses, especially where they exist only in regulations rather than statutes. While Arizonas safe harbor language has not changed in years, the scoring has been updated to reflect the fact that, in practice, the protections it offers have proven to be less meaningful than they appear to be under the law.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

N/A

Applicable Sectors

N/A

Applicable Utilities

N/A

System Capacity Limit

N/A

Aggregate Capacity Limit

N/A

Net Excess Generation

N/A

REC Ownership

N/A

Meter Aggregation

N/A

recommendations

  • Adopt IREC's net metering rules

notes

In 2016, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) voted to replace net metering with "net billing", which credits new customer-generators at an avoided cost rate for energy exported to the grid. This does not meet the IREC definition of net metering. In November 2013 the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) authorized APS to establish a $0.70/kW surcharge on all residential DG customers that enter contracts for a system after December 31, 2013, and that do not enroll under a demand-based tariff rate. One thing that makes this decision all the more striking is that Arizonas net metering rules contain a safe harbor clause requires any additional charge be fully supported by a cost-of-service studies and cost/benefit analysis, and provides that the utility bears the burden of proof on any proposed charge. The Arizona decision, which was counter to ACC Staffs recommendation that the issue be addressed in a general rate case, raises questions over the efficacy and strength of safe harbor clauses, especially where they exist only in regulations rather than statutes. While Arizonas safe harbor language has not changed in years, the scoring has been updated to reflect the fact that, in practice, the protections it offers have proven to be less meaningful than they appear to be under the law.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Solar Thermal Electric, Photovoltaics, Landfill Gas, Wind, Biomass, Hydroelectric, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, CHP/Cogeneration, Microturbines, Other Distributed Generation Technologies

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential

Applicable Utilities

Investor-owned utilities, SRP

System Capacity Limit

Varies by utility

Standard Agreement

N/A

Insurance Requirements

N/A

External Disconnect Switch

N/A

Net Metering Required

N/A

recommendations

  • Make the regulatory requirements uniform, using IREC standard interconnection recommendations, for all utilities.

notes

In 2016, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) voted to replace net metering with "net billing", which credits new customer-generators at an avoided cost rate for energy exported to the grid. This does not meet the IREC definition of net metering. In November 2013 the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) authorized APS to establish a $0.70/kW surcharge on all residential DG customers that enter contracts for a system after December 31, 2013, and that do not enroll under a demand-based tariff rate. One thing that makes this decision all the more striking is that Arizonas net metering rules contain a safe harbor clause requires any additional charge be fully supported by a cost-of-service studies and cost/benefit analysis, and provides that the utility bears the burden of proof on any proposed charge. The Arizona decision, which was counter to ACC Staffs recommendation that the issue be addressed in a general rate case, raises questions over the efficacy and strength of safe harbor clauses, especially where they exist only in regulations rather than statutes. While Arizonas safe harbor language has not changed in years, the scoring has been updated to reflect the fact that, in practice, the protections it offers have proven to be less meaningful than they appear to be under the law.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Solar Thermal Electric, Photovoltaics, Landfill Gas, Wind, Biomass, Hydroelectric, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, CHP/Cogeneration, Microturbines, Other Distributed Generation Technologies

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential

Applicable Utilities

Investor-owned utilities, SRP

System Capacity Limit

Varies by utility

Bonus

N/A

recommendations

  • Make the regulatory requirements uniform, using IREC standard interconnection recommendations, for all utilities.

notes

In 2016, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) voted to replace net metering with "net billing", which credits new customer-generators at an avoided cost rate for energy exported to the grid. This does not meet the IREC definition of net metering. In November 2013 the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) authorized APS to establish a $0.70/kW surcharge on all residential DG customers that enter contracts for a system after December 31, 2013, and that do not enroll under a demand-based tariff rate. One thing that makes this decision all the more striking is that Arizonas net metering rules contain a safe harbor clause requires any additional charge be fully supported by a cost-of-service studies and cost/benefit analysis, and provides that the utility bears the burden of proof on any proposed charge. The Arizona decision, which was counter to ACC Staffs recommendation that the issue be addressed in a general rate case, raises questions over the efficacy and strength of safe harbor clauses, especially where they exist only in regulations rather than statutes. While Arizonas safe harbor language has not changed in years, the scoring has been updated to reflect the fact that, in practice, the protections it offers have proven to be less meaningful than they appear to be under the law.