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

Oklahoma

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

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Solar Thermal Electric, Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Hydroelectric, Geothermal Electric, Municipal Solid Waste, CHP/Cogeneration, Small Hydroelectric

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential, General Public/Consumer

Applicable Utilities

Investor-owned utilities, regulated electric co-ops

System Capacity Limit

100 kW or 25,000 kWh/year (whichever is less)

Aggregate Capacity Limit

No limit specified

Net Excess Generation

Credited to customer's next bill or granted to utility monthly (varies by utility)

REC Ownership

Not addressed

Meter Aggregation

Not addressed

recommendations

  • Remove system size limitations to allow customers to meet all on-site energy needs Require all utilities to rollover NEG month-to-month at the retail rate Specify that RECs belong to the customer

notes

Oklahomas net metering policy could be improved in many ways, most significantly by raising the system capacity cap (limited to facilities with total generation of 25,000 kWh or less annually) and requiring utilities to compensate customers net excess generation, which is currently forfeited to the utility without compensation on a monthly basis. Unfortunately, rather than making efforts to improve its policy, during 2014 the state enacted legislation raising the possibility that additional fees and charges could be imposed on its already beleaguered net metering customers. While the 2014 legislation does not require additional charges and it remains to be seen whether any new charges will be imposed, the state receives a further point deduction (-3) in the 2014 grading as a result of this new provision, reducing its score too.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

Solar Thermal Electric, Photovoltaics, Wind, Biomass, Hydroelectric, Geothermal Electric, Municipal Solid Waste, CHP/Cogeneration, Small Hydroelectric

Applicable Sectors

Commercial, Industrial, Residential, General Public/Consumer

Applicable Utilities

Investor-owned utilities, regulated electric co-ops

System Capacity Limit

100 kW or 25,000 kWh/year (whichever is less)

Aggregate Capacity Limit

No limit specified

Net Excess Generation

Credited to customer's next bill or granted to utility monthly (varies by utility)

REC Ownership

Not addressed

Meter Aggregation

Not addressed

recommendations

  • Remove system size limitations to allow customers to meet all on-site energy needs Require all utilities to rollover NEG month-to-month at the retail rate Specify that RECs belong to the customer

notes

Oklahomas net metering policy could be improved in many ways, most significantly by raising the system capacity cap (limited to facilities with total generation of 25,000 kWh or less annually) and requiring utilities to compensate customers net excess generation, which is currently forfeited to the utility without compensation on a monthly basis. Unfortunately, rather than making efforts to improve its policy, during 2014 the state enacted legislation raising the possibility that additional fees and charges could be imposed on its already beleaguered net metering customers. While the 2014 legislation does not require additional charges and it remains to be seen whether any new charges will be imposed, the state receives a further point deduction (-3) in the 2014 grading as a result of this new provision, reducing its score too.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

N/A

Applicable Sectors

N/A

Applicable Utilities

N/A

System Capacity Limit

N/A

Standard Agreement

N/A

Insurance Requirements

N/A

External Disconnect Switch

N/A

Net Metering Required

N/A

recommendations

  • The state should adopt IRECs model interconnection procedures

notes

Oklahomas net metering policy could be improved in many ways, most significantly by raising the system capacity cap (limited to facilities with total generation of 25,000 kWh or less annually) and requiring utilities to compensate customers net excess generation, which is currently forfeited to the utility without compensation on a monthly basis. Unfortunately, rather than making efforts to improve its policy, during 2014 the state enacted legislation raising the possibility that additional fees and charges could be imposed on its already beleaguered net metering customers. While the 2014 legislation does not require additional charges and it remains to be seen whether any new charges will be imposed, the state receives a further point deduction (-3) in the 2014 grading as a result of this new provision, reducing its score too.

Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies

N/A

Applicable Sectors

N/A

Applicable Utilities

N/A

System Capacity Limit

N/A

Bonus

N/A

recommendations

  • The state should adopt IRECs model interconnection procedures

notes

Oklahomas net metering policy could be improved in many ways, most significantly by raising the system capacity cap (limited to facilities with total generation of 25,000 kWh or less annually) and requiring utilities to compensate customers net excess generation, which is currently forfeited to the utility without compensation on a monthly basis. Unfortunately, rather than making efforts to improve its policy, during 2014 the state enacted legislation raising the possibility that additional fees and charges could be imposed on its already beleaguered net metering customers. While the 2014 legislation does not require additional charges and it remains to be seen whether any new charges will be imposed, the state receives a further point deduction (-3) in the 2014 grading as a result of this new provision, reducing its score too.