Community Solar: Removing Barriers to Market Expansion Joseph F. Wiedman Keyes & Fox, LLP 1

Overview of Today’s Presentation Basics of Current Policy Why Community Solar? What does Community Solar look like? CS Resources & Contact Information Appendix - Overview of State Programs 2

Net Metering 3

Meter Aggregation 4 Customer’s best sites for PV Customer’s energy load

Why Community Solar? ≠

~ HH in DC ~60% of the housing in DC is mult-tenant ~ 60% of the HH are renters If 5% subscribe to 3kW of community solar per year: ~22 MW of community solar per year!!

Simplified Model of Community Solar

8 Community Solar Programs kWh blocks of NEM credits: SMUD – Solar Shares – CA Tucson Electric Power – Bright Tucson Community Power – AZ Net Metering Credits based on Production: United Power – Sol Partners Cooperative Solar Farm – CO City of Ellensburg – Ellensburg Comm. Renewable Park – WA FKEC – Simple Solar – FL St. George – SunSmart - UT City of Ashland – Solar Pioneers II – OR Holy Cross Energy – Gleenwood Springs, CO Seattle City Light – WA Colorado – Xcel and Black Hills service territories Delaware – statewide

9 Holy Cross Community Solar Program System SIZE: 120% of the participant’s 12-mo historical usage OWNERSHIP: Participants own; Clean Energy Collective manages the system PARTICIPATION: Customers in Holy Cross’s service territory Total Program Size: 3.5 MW BENEFITS: CEC is paid for the value of generated electricity to Holy Cross under a PPA Participants are paid for the power on their utility bills Residential – about 30% higher than current retail rates

10 TEP “Bright Tucson” Community Solar Program System SIZE: 100% of participant aggregate average consumption OWNERSHIP: 1.6 MW utility-owned array at UATechPark PARTICIPATION: TEP’s customers BENEFITS: Participants purchase 150 kWh/month “blocks” Price of kWh is fixed for term of participation

Decision Points Ownership and competition Valuation of VNEM credits – retail rate? Gen only? Mix? Distribution of benefits – NEM credit/check? Aggregate Net Metering Interconnection Participation by low-income/ag customers Program segmentation Metering Securities issues – state and federal Transfer of subscriptions Billing issues

Community Solar Resources IREC Model Program Rules: A Guide to Community Solar: VoteSolar: State policies and maps at Assistance to commissions and other stakeholders in developing community renewables programs – please contact Thank You!

13 Policy Approach StatesOverall System Size Valuation of kWhNumber of Participants Group Billing VTUp to 250kWRetail rate (minus program charges) unlimited Virtual Net Metering CA, MA, ME, RI, CO, DE Same as NEM program CO – 2 MW CA – same as NEM MA(n), DE* – retail rate minus distribution charges MA(g) - same as NEM ME – same as NEM RI – same as NEM CO – aggregate retail rate CA, CO, DE – unlimited MA(n) – up to 10 MA(g), DE – unlimited ME – up to 10 RI – up to 10; cities, towns, schools, farms and the Narragansett Bay Commission Community Ownership ME, WAME – up to 10 MW WA – up to 75 kW ME – Systems receive either (i) 150% REC credit, or (ii) long-term power sale contract with utility WA – retail rate plus production credit ME – unlimited WA – unlimited MA(n) – neighborhood NEM MA(g) – general NEM * - participants on same distribution circuit as facility receive full retail rate credit

14 StatesRequired Ownership Interest Geographic ScopeAdmin VTSame as NEMService territory of an electric utility Customer rep allocates benefits CA, MA, ME, RI, CO, DE CA – Same as NEM MA – Same as NEM ME – Same as NEM RI – Same as NEM CO* – Same as NEM DE – Same as NEM CA – on low-income, multitenant property ME, MA, RI, CO, DE – service territory of an electric utility Same as NEM (utility allocates credits on to participants’ electric bills) ME, WAME – requires minimum 51% ownership by in-state interests WA –incentive program for locally jointly-owned systems providing retail power ME/WA – service territory of an electric utility Investors admin. payment and incentives * CO also has a community-based system rule that requires local ownership but it is not well defined in statute.