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

Maryland

ANet Metering BInterconnection
  • 2007
  • 2008
  • 2009
  • 2010
  • 2011
  • 2012
  • 2013
  • 2014
  • 2015
  • 2016
  • 2017
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • A
  • 2007
  • 2008
  • 2009
  • 2010
  • 2011
  • 2012
  • 2013
  • 2014
  • 2015
  • 2016
  • 2017
  • D
  • B
  • B
  • B
  • B
  • A
  • B
  • B
  • B
  • B
  • B

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Fuel Cells, CHP/Cogeneration, Anaerobic Digestion

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential, Nonprofit, Schools, Local Government, State Government, Fed. Government, Agricultural, Institutional

Applicable Utilities

All utilities

System Capacity Limit

2 MW generally, (30 kW for micro-CHP)

Aggregate Capacity Limit

1,500 MW

Net Excess Generation

Credited to customer's next bill at retail rate; reconciled annually at the wholesale energy rate

REC Ownership

Customer owns RECs

Meter Aggregation

Allowed

recommendations

  • Remove system size limitations to allow customers to meet all on-site energy needs Allow for meter aggregation Credit Net Excess Generation at the retail rate and provide the option of indefinite rollover

notes

Maryland is considered to have had a consistently stellar net metering policy, maintaining an A grade since 2007 and occupying the 5th spot in the 2013 rankings. Compared to the model rules, it loses only a small number of points, most significantly losing two (2) points for limiting system size to 2 MW, and losing 1.5 points for not allowing indefinite rollover of credits for net excess generation. While the state also receives a minor deduction (-0.5 points) for placing an aggregate statewide cap of 1,500 MW on net metered systems (roughly 9_10% of statewide peak demand), it should be noted that the formulation of the cap as a capacity-based measure is unique, transparent, and refreshingly easy to understand compared to those that exist in other states, while also being large enough to accommodate continued growth in distributed generation for years to come.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Fuel Cells, CHP/Cogeneration, Anaerobic Digestion

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential, Nonprofit, Schools, Local Government, State Government, Fed. Government, Agricultural, Institutional

Applicable Utilities

All utilities

System Capacity Limit

2 MW generally, (30 kW for micro-CHP)

Aggregate Capacity Limit

1,500 MW

Net Excess Generation

Credited to customer's next bill at retail rate; reconciled annually at the wholesale energy rate

REC Ownership

Customer owns RECs

Meter Aggregation

Allowed

recommendations

  • Remove system size limitations to allow customers to meet all on-site energy needs Allow for meter aggregation Credit Net Excess Generation at the retail rate and provide the option of indefinite rollover

notes

Maryland is considered to have had a consistently stellar net metering policy, maintaining an A grade since 2007 and occupying the 5th spot in the 2013 rankings. Compared to the model rules, it loses only a small number of points, most significantly losing two (2) points for limiting system size to 2 MW, and losing 1.5 points for not allowing indefinite rollover of credits for net excess generation. While the state also receives a minor deduction (-0.5 points) for placing an aggregate statewide cap of 1,500 MW on net metered systems (roughly 9_10% of statewide peak demand), it should be noted that the formulation of the cap as a capacity-based measure is unique, transparent, and refreshingly easy to understand compared to those that exist in other states, while also being large enough to accommodate continued growth in distributed generation for years to come.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Solar Thermal Electric, Photovoltaics, Landfill Gas, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, CHP/Cogeneration, All Distributed Generation , Anaerobic Digestion, Tidal Energy, Wave Energy, Ocean Thermal, Other Distributed Generation Technologies

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential, Nonprofit, Schools, Local Government, State Government, Fed. Government, Agricultural, Institutional

Applicable Utilities

All utilities

System Capacity Limit

10 MW

Standard Agreement

N/A

Insurance Requirements

N/A

External Disconnect Switch

N/A

Net Metering Required

N/A

recommendations

  • Remove requirements for redundant external disconnect switch

notes

Maryland is considered to have had a consistently stellar net metering policy, maintaining an A grade since 2007 and occupying the 5th spot in the 2013 rankings. Compared to the model rules, it loses only a small number of points, most significantly losing two (2) points for limiting system size to 2 MW, and losing 1.5 points for not allowing indefinite rollover of credits for net excess generation. While the state also receives a minor deduction (-0.5 points) for placing an aggregate statewide cap of 1,500 MW on net metered systems (roughly 9_10% of statewide peak demand), it should be noted that the formulation of the cap as a capacity-based measure is unique, transparent, and refreshingly easy to understand compared to those that exist in other states, while also being large enough to accommodate continued growth in distributed generation for years to come.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Solar Thermal Electric, Photovoltaics, Landfill Gas, Wind, Biomass, Geothermal Electric, Fuel Cells, CHP/Cogeneration, All Distributed Generation , Anaerobic Digestion, Tidal Energy, Wave Energy, Ocean Thermal, Other Distributed Generation Technologies

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential, Nonprofit, Schools, Local Government, State Government, Fed. Government, Agricultural, Institutional

Applicable Utilities

All utilities

System Capacity Limit

10 MW

Bonus

N/A

recommendations

  • Remove requirements for redundant external disconnect switch

notes

Maryland is considered to have had a consistently stellar net metering policy, maintaining an A grade since 2007 and occupying the 5th spot in the 2013 rankings. Compared to the model rules, it loses only a small number of points, most significantly losing two (2) points for limiting system size to 2 MW, and losing 1.5 points for not allowing indefinite rollover of credits for net excess generation. While the state also receives a minor deduction (-0.5 points) for placing an aggregate statewide cap of 1,500 MW on net metered systems (roughly 9_10% of statewide peak demand), it should be noted that the formulation of the cap as a capacity-based measure is unique, transparent, and refreshingly easy to understand compared to those that exist in other states, while also being large enough to accommodate continued growth in distributed generation for years to come.