MORGANTOWN – A net-metering dispute between Coalfield Development Corp. and Appalachian Power Co. – a dispute that parties involved say could affect future net-metering projects across the state – took a couple more steps forward this week.
Public Service Commission staff further spelled out their arguments in favor of denying Coalfield’s request to have its current setup considered net metering, and in favor of APCo paying Coalfield for the power the setup has generated.
In addition, Coalfield told the PSC that it is in talks with APCo about the situation and asked the PSC to put the case on hold pending developments.
Coalfield Development is a nonprofit incubator devoted to revitalizing coal communities through renewable energy workforce development projects. It installed 120 kilowatts worth of solar panels on its West Edge Factory warehouse roof and wants to begin net metering service with APCo, but APCo has refused.
The warehouse receives power from APCo via a meter on an alley-way wall connected to an APCo pole. The solar meter is a few feet away on the same wall and sends power into APCo’s system via a line going to the same pole.
PSC staff has agreed with APC’s contention that this setup is not net metering, which requires the input into the building and the output from the solar array to be on the same meter – in order to measure the net difference and apply credits for any excess power the panels send into the grid.
Staff also recommended that because Coalfield has been delivering power into APCo’s system since 2021 and has not been compensated because of the ongoing dispute, APCo should compensate Coalfield once Coalfield rearranges its system for genuine net metering.
In a Thursday filing – the same day Coalfield filed its request to put the case on hold – staff emphasized that the solar setup doesn’t send any power into the warehouse; except for a tiny amount used to run the array, it all goes into APCo’s system.
This crosses the line, staff said, from virtual net metering where multiple customers share power from a single array, to impermissible retail wheeling, where customer-generators use the utility’s electric grid to distribute power from one account to another over utility-owned infrastructure.
This has implications, staff said, for other proposed projects by Solar Holler, the state’s largest solar developer, that have similar dual-meter setups designed to save the customer money because meters aren’t always located where the panels need to go, leading to extra costs and reduced savings.
“Staff continues to stand by its position that the power generated by the solar array must be behind a legitimate load before qualifying for net metering,” staff said.
Staff also repeated its point that Solar Holler owns the array on the warehouse, so Coalfield doesn’t qualify as a customer-generator eligible for net metering.
On the matter of compensation for Coalfield, staff pointed out that APCo connected the array to the pole. “APCo is receiving free energy. … APCo should be required as a matter a fairness once the commission determines the parameters of what is allowable under statutes and its rules to compensate Coalfield for the energy it has received while this dispute has been pending.”
Email: dbeard@dominionpost.com
