On Friday the Coalition for Community Solar Access, Renewable Energy Industries Association of New Mexico, and New Energy Economy jointly filed a Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification regarding the November 26th Final Order issued by the PRC. The motion addresses the following three critical concerns that arise as a result of the Final Order's capitulation to utility complaints:
1. Bill Credit Rate Mechanism and Exclusion of Customer Costs: The Commission’s Final Order violates the Community Solar Act (CSA) by altering the calculation of the Retail Rate used to determine the community solar bill credit, a change that threatens the potential benefits for subscribers and creates uncertainty for developers after responses to the Request for Proposal (RFP) were already submitted in 2022. We argue that the PRC should clarify that the Final Order locks in the methodology for calculating the community solar bill credit for the first 200MW of the program. Essentially, you can’t change the rules of the game after the RFP has already gone out and developers selected; after the first 200MW the PRC can provide notice about a possible rule change for the following phases.
2. Subsidization and Public Interest Determination: Our motion also challenges the Final Order's decision to strike the recommended findings regarding the definition of subsidization and the 3% subsidization cap. The Community Solar Act mandates that non-subscribers shall not subsidize costs attributable to subscribers unless the Commission determines such subsidization to be in the public interest, a subsidization capped at 3% of non-subscribers aggregate retail rates. The Hearing Examiner’s Recommended Decision stated “It is in the public interest for non-subscribers to subsidize costs attributable to subscribers," a well-reasoned conclusions based on substantial evidence provided by parties that subsidization up to the 3% cap serves the public interest by providing tangible community benefits and promoting equitable access to renewable energy, especially given the 30% carve out for low-income subscribers. Legislators allowed for the 3% cross-subsidization on purpose and in consideration of the benefits that Community Solar provides to all ratepayers. The PRC's decision to strike the Hearing Examiner's recommendation on this matter further muddies the waters for developers and must be reconsidered.
3. Clarification and Implementation of Administrative Costs: The motion raises concerns about the lack of clarity in the Final Order regarding the administrative cost rider, which allows investor-owned utilities to recover reasonable costs associated with the program. The CSA authorizes utilities to recover these costs through reasonable and nondiscriminatory fees (NMSA § 62-16B-7(B)(6)). The PRC's Final Order requires utilities to file detailed estimates of administrative costs but delays the rider's implementation until community solar facilities are operational, creating practical programs for administrators who have to clarify costs to potential subscribers before they sign up.
It is unconscionable that we still do not have a single operational Community Solar project in New Mexico. The legislature passed the Community Solar Act in 2020 and from that date the monopoly utilities in New Mexico have used every legal and regulatory opportunity to delay, delay, delay. In March 2024, when we won the case against all three electric monopoly investor-owned utilities, the New Mexico Supreme Court responded to their challenges to the Community Solar rules promulgated at the PRC (with their full participation) on the very same day as oral argument, issuing the following Order:
“WHEREAS, the parties have represented to the Court that the uncertainty created by this appeal has frustrated attempts to implement the Community Solar Program because of the possibility that the Community Solar Rule may be vacated and annulled; WHEREAS, the Court has reviewed the briefing and arguments of the parties and the record of the proceedings below and has determined that the Public Regulation Commission should be affirmed without further delay to the implementation of the Community Solar Program."
Absurdly we find ourselves once again demanding clarity, this time from the PRC. Without further consideration and clarity the PRC's Final Order will again hamper the implementation and deployment of community solar. The modifications we called for will create greater certainty surrounding the community solar program, facilitate a more positive customer experience, prioritize serving low-income families and ensure that these programs are financially viable and capable of delivering tangible benefits to participants, as the legislature intended and as the NM Supreme Court affirmed must be implemented without further delay!
Comments