An Act to Prohibit Net Energy Billing by Certain Customers
LD 359 would significantly narrow Maine’s net energy billing programs for both residential and commercial/institutional customers. The bill amends Title 35-A to prohibit participation where a customer has a shared financial interest in a distributed generation resource, such as through shared ownership, leases, or power purchase agreements, and instead requires that the resource be located on the same side of the meter as the customer, used primarily to serve that customer’s load, and have all associated net energy billing credits allocated to that customer’s retail account. It also preserves and updates a series of eligibility and timing rules for certain projects, including size limits, commercial operation deadlines, and limited good-cause exemptions for external delays.
The bill also revises the commercial and institutional net energy billing program, including tariff and credit rules, and maintains commission authority to adopt rules and enforce compliance. It includes consumer protection provisions for project sponsors, such as disclosure requirements, rescission rights, limits on information sharing, and compliance with unfair trade practices, credit, and telemarketing laws. Enforcement authority is expanded through the Public Utilities Commission and the Attorney General, with violations treated as violations of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.
In addition to the net energy billing changes, LD 359 makes conforming amendments to other statutes, including provisions related to expired net energy billing credits and property tax exemptions for solar energy equipment used entirely on-site. The bill also adjusts definitions and applicability rules for distributed generation resources, including capacity thresholds and grandfathering language for certain preexisting agreements and projects already far along in development.
The overall sentiment in the available record appears limited but the bill’s title and structure indicate a restrictive policy approach toward net energy billing arrangements that rely on shared project ownership or subscription models. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided material, there is no documented debate or formal vote history to show support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the likely policy effect is to favor behind-the-meter, customer-specific generation over shared or third-party financed net energy billing projects.
The main point of contention is likely to be the bill’s treatment of shared financial interest arrangements, which are commonly used in community solar and similar distributed generation projects. Supporters would likely view the bill as limiting complexity, preventing abuse, and aligning credits more closely with actual on-site use, while opponents would likely argue it would reduce access to solar participation, constrain financing options, and disrupt existing or planned renewable energy projects.
LD 359 would amend Maine’s net energy billing statutes in Title 35-A, especially sections 3209-A and 3209-B, to eliminate or sharply restrict shared-financial-interest participation models and require a much tighter relationship between the customer and the distributed generation resource. It would also revise related rules on project eligibility, credit allocation, consumer protections, enforcement, and grandfathering, while making conforming changes to other statutes, including provisions on expired credit remittances and solar property tax exemptions. The bill would affect residential customers, commercial and institutional customers, project sponsors, utilities, the Public Utilities Commission, and developers of distributed generation resources, particularly community solar and subscription-based projects.
The available record suggests a generally restrictive or skeptical posture toward net energy billing arrangements that rely on shared ownership or third-party subscription structures. The bill’s sponsor and cosponsors indicate support for limiting those arrangements, but no committee testimony or vote history is provided, so there is no documented public debate in the record. On the face of the bill, the policy direction is to tighten eligibility and reduce the use of shared-interest net energy billing.
The central contention is whether net energy billing should continue to allow multiple customers to share a financial interest in a distributed generation resource. Supporters of the bill are likely concerned about consumer protection, program integrity, and ensuring credits are tied to a customer’s own load and meter. Opponents are likely to argue that the bill would undermine community solar, third-party financing, and broader access to renewable energy, especially for customers who cannot host generation on-site. Additional friction points include the bill’s grandfathering rules, project deadlines, and the potential impact on already-developed or partially developed solar projects.