CPUC NEM 3.0 discussion

[BGbreeder]

In the FYI category, it appears NEM3.0 is in a bill being considered in the legislature.

We just learned PG&E’s Solar Tax was snuck into a bill that state lawmakers will vote on tomorrow (Wed 8/31). We have less than 48 hours to stop this Solar Tax and need you to make your voice heard today. Details below. Please do the following three actions today: 1) Send a message to your state Assemblymember and Senator right away to stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax 2) Call both your state Assemblymember and Senator to increase the impact of your message. Here's a way to look up their number and a suggested calling message. 3) Forward this message. If you are on social media, please share this alert on platforms such as Nextdoor, Facebook or Twitter. Solar Tax details ​ Tomorrow (Wed 8/31), state lawmakers will vote on a proposal - SB 846 - to keep PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant open for another ten years. To pay for it, ratepayers will be charged a new fee based on “gross” energy consumption. This includes the solar energy that powers your home during the day or charges your battery. (Section 9(l) of the bill) Taxing the sun makes no sense​ This is not about the merits of nuclear power or keeping Diablo Canyon open. This is about the idiocy of taxing people even when they don't buy energy from the utility, when they in fact are reducing their burden on the grid and helping to make the grid more reliable. The bill would tax all solar users, current and future, when their solar panels (or batteries) power things like:​ A fridge, air conditioner, wheelchair, or dialysis machine in a home An irrigation pump on a farm A science lab in a school A heart monitor in a hospital To be clear, solar users with a battery will not be spared, not even during Public Safety Power Shutoffs. This is the same Solar Tax also proposed by the CPUC, and could balloon to $600 per year or more if we don't stop it now​ This sneaky Solar Tax in the California State Legislature is different but related to the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rooftop solar proposal. If the Legislature passes this Diablo Canyon Solar Tax, nothing will stop the CPUC from levying the 11 other types of Solar Taxes suggested by the CPUC in Maythat will add up to $300 to $600 per year for the average solar user. It's hard to keep it all straight, and that's the utilities' plan. Let's show the utilities and their lackeys that the public is on to them, no matter when and where they propose their nonsense. The Solar Tax is illegal​ Solar Taxes have been struck down many times in other states. That's because it is discriminatory. People reduce their electricity consumption in many ways, such as energy efficiency and conservation. Yet, no one is proposing a tax on people who hang-dry their clothing rather than run the electric dryer! It's another profit grab by PG&E, cooked up behind closed doors, and revealed at the 11th hour so no one has time to respond While Governor Newsom has been public about his intention to keep Diablo Canyon open for quite some time, the actual bill language was only made public this past Sunday evening, and the legislative session ends tomorrow night at midnight. That means we have less than 48 hours to stop this Solar Tax. This is a classic move by PG&E and their allies, who are most effective in the shadows and backrooms of Sacramento. They know the Solar Tax is wildly unpopular with voters, so they need secrecy and the element of surprise to make the Solar Tax happen. Please send a message to your state Assemblymember and Senator right away to stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Thank you for all you do! -- Dave Rosenfeld, Executive Director P.S. Please keep it up. Remember that the Solar Tax prompted protests by thousands of people in nine cities around the state this summer. Let's channel that energy into emails and calls to the Legislature today! Solar Rights Alliance 302 Washington St # 150-5062 San Diego, CA 92103 United States unsubscribe Please consider a donation to Solar Rights Alliance.

 

[DealMasterMike]

In the FYI category, it appears NEM3.0 is in a bill being considered in the legislature.

​ We just learned PG&E’s Solar Tax was snuck into a bill that state lawmakers will vote on tomorrow (Wed 8/31). We have less than 48 hours to stop this Solar Tax and need you to make your voice heard today. Details below. Please do the following three actions today: 1) Send a message to your state Assemblymember and Senator right away to stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax 2) Call both your state Assemblymember and Senator to increase the impact of your message. Here's a way to look up their number and a suggested calling message. 3) Forward this message. If you are on social media, please share this alert on platforms such as Nextdoor, Facebook or Twitter. Solar Tax details ​ Tomorrow (Wed 8/31), state lawmakers will vote on a proposal - SB 846 - to keep PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant open for another ten years. To pay for it, ratepayers will be charged a new fee based on “gross” energy consumption. This includes the solar energy that powers your home during the day or charges your battery. (Section 9(l) of the bill) Taxing the sun makes no sense​ This is not about the merits of nuclear power or keeping Diablo Canyon open. This is about the idiocy of taxing people even when they don't buy energy from the utility, when they in fact are reducing their burden on the grid and helping to make the grid more reliable. The bill would tax all solar users, current and future, when their solar panels (or batteries) power things like:​ A fridge, air conditioner, wheelchair, or dialysis machine in a home An irrigation pump on a farm A science lab in a school A heart monitor in a hospital To be clear, solar users with a battery will not be spared, not even during Public Safety Power Shutoffs. This is the same Solar Tax also proposed by the CPUC, and could balloon to $600 per year or more if we don't stop it now​ This sneaky Solar Tax in the California State Legislature is different but related to the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rooftop solar proposal. If the Legislature passes this Diablo Canyon Solar Tax, nothing will stop the CPUC from levying the 11 other types of Solar Taxes suggested by the CPUC in Maythat will add up to $300 to $600 per year for the average solar user. It's hard to keep it all straight, and that's the utilities' plan. Let's show the utilities and their lackeys that the public is on to them, no matter when and where they propose their nonsense. The Solar Tax is illegal​ Solar Taxes have been struck down many times in other states. That's because it is discriminatory. People reduce their electricity consumption in many ways, such as energy efficiency and conservation. Yet, no one is proposing a tax on people who hang-dry their clothing rather than run the electric dryer! It's another profit grab by PG&E, cooked up behind closed doors, and revealed at the 11th hour so no one has time to respond While Governor Newsom has been public about his intention to keep Diablo Canyon open for quite some time, the actual bill language was only made public this past Sunday evening, and the legislative session ends tomorrow night at midnight. That means we have less than 48 hours to stop this Solar Tax. This is a classic move by PG&E and their allies, who are most effective in the shadows and backrooms of Sacramento. They know the Solar Tax is wildly unpopular with voters, so they need secrecy and the element of surprise to make the Solar Tax happen. Please send a message to your state Assemblymember and Senator right away to stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Thank you for all you do! -- Dave Rosenfeld, Executive Director P.S. Please keep it up. Remember that the Solar Tax prompted protests by thousands of people in nine cities around the state this summer. Let's channel that energy into emails and calls to the Legislature today! Solar Rights Alliance 302 Washington St # 150-5062 San Diego, CA 92103 United States unsubscribe Please consider a donation to Solar Rights Alliance.

Seriously, WTF is up with our lawmakers in CA and the CPUC. They keep trying to screw over the people of CA and there seems to be no end.

 

[RKCRLR]

In the FYI category, it appears NEM3.0 is in a bill being considered in the legislature.

​ We just learned PG&E’s Solar Tax was snuck into a bill that state lawmakers will vote on tomorrow (Wed 8/31). We have less than 48 hours to stop this Solar Tax and need you to make your voice heard today. Details below. Please do the following three actions today: 1) Send a message to your state Assemblymember and Senator right away to stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax 2) Call both your state Assemblymember and Senator to increase the impact of your message. Here's a way to look up their number and a suggested calling message. 3) Forward this message. If you are on social media, please share this alert on platforms such as Nextdoor, Facebook or Twitter. Solar Tax details ​ Tomorrow (Wed 8/31), state lawmakers will vote on a proposal - SB 846 - to keep PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant open for another ten years. To pay for it, ratepayers will be charged a new fee based on “gross” energy consumption. This includes the solar energy that powers your home during the day or charges your battery. (Section 9(l) of the bill) Taxing the sun makes no sense​ This is not about the merits of nuclear power or keeping Diablo Canyon open. This is about the idiocy of taxing people even when they don't buy energy from the utility, when they in fact are reducing their burden on the grid and helping to make the grid more reliable. The bill would tax all solar users, current and future, when their solar panels (or batteries) power things like:​ A fridge, air conditioner, wheelchair, or dialysis machine in a home An irrigation pump on a farm A science lab in a school A heart monitor in a hospital To be clear, solar users with a battery will not be spared, not even during Public Safety Power Shutoffs. This is the same Solar Tax also proposed by the CPUC, and could balloon to $600 per year or more if we don't stop it now​ This sneaky Solar Tax in the California State Legislature is different but related to the Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rooftop solar proposal. If the Legislature passes this Diablo Canyon Solar Tax, nothing will stop the CPUC from levying the 11 other types of Solar Taxes suggested by the CPUC in Maythat will add up to $300 to $600 per year for the average solar user. It's hard to keep it all straight, and that's the utilities' plan. Let's show the utilities and their lackeys that the public is on to them, no matter when and where they propose their nonsense. The Solar Tax is illegal​ Solar Taxes have been struck down many times in other states. That's because it is discriminatory. People reduce their electricity consumption in many ways, such as energy efficiency and conservation. Yet, no one is proposing a tax on people who hang-dry their clothing rather than run the electric dryer! It's another profit grab by PG&E, cooked up behind closed doors, and revealed at the 11th hour so no one has time to respond While Governor Newsom has been public about his intention to keep Diablo Canyon open for quite some time, the actual bill language was only made public this past Sunday evening, and the legislative session ends tomorrow night at midnight. That means we have less than 48 hours to stop this Solar Tax. This is a classic move by PG&E and their allies, who are most effective in the shadows and backrooms of Sacramento. They know the Solar Tax is wildly unpopular with voters, so they need secrecy and the element of surprise to make the Solar Tax happen. Please send a message to your state Assemblymember and Senator right away to stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Stop PG&E's Sneaky Solar Tax Thank you for all you do! -- Dave Rosenfeld, Executive Director P.S. Please keep it up. Remember that the Solar Tax prompted protests by thousands of people in nine cities around the state this summer. Let's channel that energy into emails and calls to the Legislature today! Solar Rights Alliance 302 Washington St # 150-5062 San Diego, CA 92103 United States unsubscribe Please consider a donation to Solar Rights Alliance.

I'm a little torn on this. I support keeping Diablo Canyon open. What I don't understand is why a fee is necessary to keep it open when we have been paying a fee for decommissioning. One one hand I don't think solar customer should have to pay NBCs to keep it open. But on the other hand nuclear power is a good way to supplement solar power when the sun isn't shining, at least in the near term.

And are they going to continue to charge a decommissioning fee while they are charging the fee to keep it open?

 

[power.saver]

And are they going to continue to charge a decommissioning fee while they are charging the fee to keep it open?

Yes.

(f) (1) Notwithstanding any approval of extended operations, the commission shall continue to authorize the operator to recover in rates all of the reasonable costs incurred to prepare for the retirement of Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2, including any reasonable additional costs associated with decommissioning planning resulting from the license renewal applications or license renewals. The reasonable costs incurred to prepare for the retirement of Diablo Canyon Power Plant Units 1 and 2 shall be recovered on a fully nonbypassable basis from customers of all load-serving entities subject to the commission’s jurisdiction in the operator’s service territory, as determined by the commission, except that the reasonable additional costs associated with decommissioning planning resulting from the license renewal applications or license renewals shall be recovered on a fully nonbypassable basis from customers of all load-serving entities subject to the commission’s jurisdiction in the state.

 

[Onetwothree]

Yes.

(f) (1) Notwithstanding any approval of extended operations, the commission shall continue to authorize the operator to recover in rates all of the reasonable costs incurred to prepare for the retirement of Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2, including any reasonable additional costs associated with decommissioning planning resulting from the license renewal applications or license renewals. The reasonable costs incurred to prepare for the retirement of Diablo Canyon Power Plant Units 1 and 2 shall be recovered on a fully nonbypassable basis from customers of all load-serving entities subject to the commission’s jurisdiction in the operator’s service territory, as determined by the commission, except that the reasonable additional costs associated with decommissioning planning resulting from the license renewal applications or license renewals shall be recovered on a fully nonbypassable basis from customers of all load-serving entities subject to the commission’s jurisdiction in the state.

If this passes we need solar customers to take action. I'm planning to file a lawsuit to allow me to defect from the grid entirely, and in the meantime, I suggest we all band together and shut of our solar breakers during this heatwave. I haven't run the numbers but I'd have to imagine that even reducing mid-day solar generation by 25% during a heat wave will send a very clear message. Clearly the emails and phone calls aren't getting it done.

 

[getakey]

" This includes the solar energy that powers your home during the day or charges your battery. (Section 9(l) of the bill)"

How would they know how much solar powers your home? That said, in my case, they did install a separate meter.

 

[Redhill_qik]

are they going to continue to charge a decommissioning fee while they are charging the fee to keep it open?

The current Nuclear Decommissioning fee is actually a very small credit.

 

[power.saver]

" This includes the solar energy that powers your home during the day or charges your battery. (Section 9(l) of the bill)"

How would they know how much solar powers your home? That said, in my case, they did install a separate meter.

If you have a NGOM then they would know how much you produce. For the rest of us without one, it could only be estimated based on array size.

 

[Redhill_qik]

If you have a NGOM then they would know how much you produce. For the rest of us without one, it could only be estimated based on array size.

Estimates should be based on number of panels, panel vendor & model, roof pitch/tilt, azimuth/direction, invertor vendor & model and latitude/longitude location. All of these are on the PTO documents and are currently used to calculate the "ESTIMATED PV GENERATION" number on the black bill.

Bureaucrats that don't actually know that is information is already in the system and being used are the ones that dumb calculation down to "AC rating" which is the max output from the invertor. This penalizes people with a low DC/AC ratio like myself. My AC rating is 7.68kW, but the best that I ever get is 6.2kW as most of my panels are pointing northwest and northeast as I have very little south facing roof.

 

[stopcrazypp]

If you have a NGOM then they would know how much you produce. For the rest of us without one, it could only be estimated based on array size.

So basically another kW based tax that is disguised in another matter.

 

[yblaser]

This is section 9(I) from the bill:

Any costs the commission authorizes the operator to recover in rates under this section shall be recovered on a fully nonbypassable basis from customers of all load-serving entities subject to the commissions’s jurisdiction, as determined by the commission, except as otherwise provided in this section. The recovery of these nonbypassable costs by the load-serving entities shall be based on each customer’s gross consumption of electricity regardless of a customer’s net metering status or purchase of electric energy and service from an electric service provider, community choice aggregator, or other third-party source of electric energy or electricity service.

I'm not a lawyer (and I only read this paragraph) but it seems to me that this is just defining what we typically call a NBC but it really depends on what they mean by "gross consumption." I would interpret this as gross consumption from the load-serving entity and not behind the meter gross consumption.

 

[Merrill]

It is sad that we have this out of control monopoly that does what ever it wants. The CPUC should be the watch dog for these companies that provide power for California but they are in bed with them and Newsom just let’s them do this.

 

[RKCRLR]

This is section 9(I) from the bill:

Any costs the commission authorizes the operator to recover in rates under this section shall be recovered on a fully nonbypassable basis from customers of all load-serving entities subject to the commissions’s jurisdiction, as determined by the commission, except as otherwise provided in this section. The recovery of these nonbypassable costs by the load-serving entities shall be based on each customer’s gross consumption of electricity regardless of a customer’s net metering status or purchase of electric energy and service from an electric service provider, community choice aggregator, or other third-party source of electric energy or electricity service.

I'm not a lawyer (and I only read this paragraph) but it seems to me that this is just defining what we typically call a NBC but it really depends on what they mean by "gross consumption." I would interpret this as gross consumption from the load-serving entity and not behind the meter gross consumption.

I initially interpreted it as similar to our current NBCs. But the Solar Rights Alliance as a gross consumption tax so I went with their interpretation and contacted my representatives to vote no. If it is a typical NBC I might not be opposed to it.

It would be nice to know whether or not this a total gross consumption tax on solar that is self consumed behind the meter.

 

[yblaser]

I initially interpreted it as similar to our current NBCs. But the Solar Rights Alliance as a gross consumption tax so I went with their interpretation and contacted my representatives to vote no. If it is a typical NBC I might not be opposed to it.

It would be nice to know whether or not this a total gross consumption tax on solar that is self consumed behind the meter.

I guess the one thing of note is "regardless of a customer’s net metering status" which I would interpret as applying to those under NEM 1.0.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I guess the one thing of note is "regardless of a customer’s net metering status" which I would interpret as applying to those under NEM 1.0.

Yeah, but if it is only NBCs that is still not as bad as a true behind-the-meter tax, as that would either require a separate meter or some other sort of estimate.

 

[Redhill_qik]

I initially interpreted it as similar to our current NBCs. But the Solar Rights Alliance as a gross consumption tax so I went with their interpretation and contacted my representatives to vote no. If it is a typical NBC I might not be opposed to it.

It would be nice to know whether or not this a total gross consumption tax on solar that is self consumed behind the meter.

I found this on the CPUC site that is align with the Solar Rights Alliance interpretation:

Frequently Asked Questions

www.cpuc.ca.gov

II) Collecting Public Purpose Charges from Successor Tariff Customers

• Some parties have proposed that the tariff could bill customers for their full contribution to fund public purpose programs, such as low-income assistance, energy efficiency programs, and wildfire hardening costs, even after they switch to rooftop solar to cover some of their electricity needs. This proposal is referred to as “Non-bypassable Charges on Gross Consumption.”

There are a lot of other NEM 3.0 comments with "Gross Consumption" that appear to have the same definition, but I can't find any actual definition.

site:cpuc.ca.gov "gross consumption" - Google Search

 

[yblaser]

I found this on the CPUC site that is align with the Solar Rights Alliance interpretation:

Frequently Asked Questions

www.cpuc.ca.gov

There are a lot of other NEM 3.0 comments with "Gross Consumption" that appear to have the same definition, but I can't find any actual definition.

site:cpuc.ca.gov "gross consumption" - Google Search

Thanks. Yes looking through those documents Gross Consumption seems to be always defined as total energy consumed from the grid + self consumed energy. So indeed they are trying to pull a fast one here.

 

[Sky Blue]

Thanks. Yes looking through those documents Gross Consumption seems to be always defined as total energy consumed from the grid + self consumed energy. So indeed they are trying to pull a fast one here.

I really don't believe that the State of California has the legal authority to impose a tax on electricity that people produce themselves for their own use behind the meter. And worse, to require people to pay that tax to a for-profit corporation. I'll be happy to sign on to one of the lawsuits that will be filed if California tries this.

 

[RKCRLR]

I really don't believe that the State of California has the legal authority to impose a tax on electricity that people produce themselves for their own use behind the meter. And worse, to require people to pay that tax to a for-profit corporation. I'll be happy to sign on to one of the lawsuits that will be filed if California tries this.

Plus, what they are taxing us on has a disproportional benefit for non-solar customers vs solar customers. Basically, a tax because solar customers are not using sufficient production from Diablo Canyon.

 

[holeydonut]

yes it is. And certainly do not believe your installer when they tell you that it's "no problem" to add on whatever you want in the future. I particularly enjoyed the Sunpower panels not being compatible with the Sunpower battery part....

Yeah, I can't find an installer willing to touch my system. I just need someone to do the racking, add the panels, add Enphase IQ7+, run the Q-Cable, do a home run, terminate the home run in my Enphase Envoy with a 20A breaker... then upgrade my existing PV-Gen breaker from 35A to 60A to cover the extra energy that could come from solar.

But nobody will do this... they say it's too risky. The gauge wire connecting my Envoy and TEG2 is sufficient to support the extra generation too. And I completely own this solar+ESS system, so this isn't about ownership of the equipment.

"No Problem" actually means "Helluva Problem" Which is why PG&E was probably very proud of themselves by BLOCKING ME FROM ADDING THE PANELS IN THE FIRST PLALCE. Jerks.