Thoughts on Solar by Run on Sun's Founder & CEO, Jim Jenal

I am in the San Diego area. SDGE is the utility. When AB920 came into play, I was under the impression that we would have the choice of either getting compensation in either cash or credit for the overgeneration OR choose to keep the KWH for future use. I never received any letter last Jan. giving any options. I called SDGE the month before the true up asking if I could opt to keep my overgeneration KWH. I was told to wait until the actual true up date. The true up came Oct 6, 2011 and SDGE takes my 3800 KWH and gives me a .037 credit of $144. I called SDGE and informed them I want to opt to keep my KWH. SDGE is telling me they have never heard of such a thing, there is no law giving me that option, and this is my only option. SDGE tells me I need to show them this law in black and white. If anybody has any supporting evidence to the law showing SDGE must give its solar generators the option of choosing between keeping their KWH OR receiving compensation, it would be greatly appreciated. Has anyone else under SDGE experienced the same thing? We need to get together.
Greg S., San Diego

Hi Greg -

I agree with you that the law, AB 920, was intended to allow you the two options that you described. In fact, the language of the statute is pretty clear on that point. Here is a link to it:
http://runonsun.com/pdf/ab_920_bill_20090921_enrolled.pdf
The relevant section is on page 11 of the pdf file and is highlighted.
Moreover, when I was originally writing about this, I asked someone in Huffman's office about the interpretation of the statute and he concurred with my understanding and told me that the option to carry forward the surplus as kWh was "particularly important to some of the agricultural net metering customers because their supply/demand varies so much from year to year. We have a lot of wineries in our district and they felt that they would probably benefit more from rolling over the electrical credits than a cash refund."
I suspect it will take a lawsuit to determine which understanding of the law carries the day - certainly wouldn't be the first time someone has had to sue to have a law enforced as intended!

Hi Jim,
I got my notice from PG&E today, 1/19/12, though the thing is dated 1/4/12. It's a lovely letter from Felecia Lokey, Sr Director, Customer Engagement, and it tells me that my house used more energy than my PV system produced, so I will NOT get a Net Surplus Compensation credit. However, as of Dec 1, my 2011 Net Energy Metering Electric Statement showed that I had Total Energy equal to +216 (no units), and Energy Charges/Credits equal to $-238.48. My true up is Dec 31, so I am missing a month here. This is confusing, but I'm sure PG&E has a great reason for not wanting to compensate me. I plan to get them on the phone tomorrow. I can scan the notice and send it to you if you're interested. -R

Hi Ryan -

I would love to see the notices and please comment again if/when you get an explanation from PG&E. In my experience, the three IOUs have done their best (done their worst?) to make this process as obscure as possible and to fundamentally subvert the intent of the law.

However, they don't always win - as SDG&E just got smacked by the PUC (story to follow later today).

Jim