Rallying Support to Lift Caps on Net Metering in Massachusetts

The Challenge

A previous post, Massachusetts Net Metering and Solar Policy Status and Next Steps , addressed the Net Metering and Solar Task Force report and outlined some considerations for reforms going forward. Front and center right now is the issue of statutory net metering caps,* which limit the amount of solar that can be credited for generating electricity.

These caps have been reached in National Grid’s service territory, which is preventing municipal, community-shared, and low-income solar projects from moving forward in 171 cities and towns across the Commonwealth. Policymakers in the Baker Administration and Legislature have made it clear that the caps, although arbitrary, cannot be lifted until there is a long-term framework in place that resolves any problems with the current system. At a hearing before the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy on June 2, Acadia Center and many other stakeholders encouraged legislators to move forward on this issue.

The Proposal

The majority position represented in the Net Metering and Solar Task Force report outlined a sensible, high-level approach but many more details are necessary for concrete implementation. Since the release of the Task Force report on April 30th, Acadia Center has engaged extensively with a range of colleagues to determine the best way to move forward. Prior to the June 2nd hearing, the product of those discussions was released —the “Next Generation Solar Policy Framework for Massachusetts .”

This framework, now endorsed by 52 organizations–spanning sustainable energy and environmental advocates, labor, solar developers, business groups and community groups–presents a detailed and sensible approach for reforms to the current system that will allow MA to lift the caps soon and eventually eliminate them. The key aspects of the proposal are:

•  Lift caps on solar development;
• Preserve key aspects of Massachusetts’ net metering and virtual net metering programs;
• Phase in a new system of distribution credits and a new “energy system benefit credit” for solar generators based on analysis of the long-run net costs and benefits of solar generation to the electric grid. These changes should be phased in based on availability of appropriate and cost-effective metering and billing mechanisms, and the right of individuals to produce clean electricity for their own consumption must be respected. The credits for generation and transmission would remain the same as current policy.
• Establish a new “adjustable block” compensation mechanism that promotes more cost-effective solar development, provides more certainty for developers, and allows Massachusetts to pursue ambitious clean energy goals;
• Avoid increased fixed charges and minimum bills, which penalize low-income customers and undermine efficiency incentives; and,
• Appropriately grandfather existing projects under the policies under which they were built.

 

What are the Next Steps?

At the June 2nd hearing, there was a widespread show of support among stakeholders and legislators testifying for lifting the net metering caps. Many of the bills currently up for discussion would lift the net metering caps and promote solar, but do not contain many of the essential elements necessary for long-term reforms. Acadia Center and our allies are working to build support so that the Committee will soon take up and pass a comprehensive bill that encompasses the ideas presented in the Next Generation Solar Policy Framework for Massachusetts. Moving these measures forward is an important piece of the effort to advance a low-carbon, consumer-friendly energy future.

The framework is available here and those interested in more information or signing on can contact mlebel@acadiacenter.org.

 

* Net metering allows customers to generate their own electricity (through, for example, a rooftop solar PV system) in order to offset their electricity usage. Net metering can lower a customer’s electricity bill by reducing the amount of electricity that the customer buys from the distribution company (the utility). Net metering allows customers to receive credits for any electricity that they generate but do not use. Each distribution company in MA has a cap, and after it is hit, no more customers can use net metering. Small systems, primarily those under 10 kW of capacity, are exempt from the caps. For more info see: http://www.mass.gov/eea/grants-and-tech-assistance/guidance-technical-assistance/agencies-and-divisions/dpu/net-metering-faqs.html#6 

New Analysis: $10 Fixed Electric Charge Cap to Lower Most CT Monthly Bills for Eversource Energy’s Residential Customers

At Connecticut’s General Assembly these days, a debate is raging about consumers’ control over their electric use and costs. On one side, the utilities defend ever higher “fixed charges” on electric bills; on the other, consumers and their advocacy allies push to lower and cap those charges at $10. A fixed charge is a monthly flat minimum charge on a customer’s electricity account that should be an accurate calculation of the minimum, short-term fixed cost of connecting a customer to the grid. High fixed charges hurt consumers by increasing the amount that must be paid regardless of energy use. These fixed charges interfere with benefits from energy efficiency measures and diminish consumer control over energy generation, consumption, and costs.

With the highest residential fixed charges in New England for any major electric utility, Connecticut’s Eversource Energy and United Illuminating continue to increase already high fixed charges and to oppose legislative attempts to lower or cap these charges. In response to inaccurate information distributed by Eversource lobbyists at the Capitol, Acadia Center completed an analysis which shows that significantly more than half of Eversource residential customer monthly bills would decrease if the General Assembly enacts a $10 fixed charge cap, as proposed in a pending Senate bill.

In a May 12th email, an Eversource lobbyist claimed that, “more than half of our customers would see an increase in their overall bill if the fixed charge is lowered,” and that, “a $10 fixed charge is actually more regressive than a $19.25 fixed charge.” However, using information provided by Eversource in its 2014 rate case before the Public Utility Regulatory Authority (PURA), Acadia Center found that:

• All residential customers using less electricity than the average in a given month would pay less if the fixed charge decreases from $19.25, the existing amount, to $10, the maximum allowed under the proposed cap;
• 61% of monthly bills in Eversource’s primary residential rate class fall below the actual average of 730 kilowatt hours per month; and,
• Increasing the residential fixed charge to $25.50 per month—the amount sought by Eversource in its rate case—would increase monthly bills for all customers that use less electricity than the average.

 

The analysis showed that an overwhelming majority of Eversource’s approximately 1 million residential customers would pay higher bills and would see a decreased incentive to use energy efficiently under the utility’s high fixed charge approach. This analysis rebutted claims by Eversource lobbyists that consumers do not stand to benefit from lower fixed monthly charges.

Acadia Center released its analysis of Eversource’s claims against the fixed charge cap on May 18th. The issue continues to be debated in Connecticut’s General Assembly with a vote hopefully soon to be scheduled in the Senate on Senate Bill 570.

 

Learn more about fixed charge caps from Acadia Center’s Senior Attorney and Connecticut Office Director Bill Dornbos by watching this panel discussion video: CT Mirror/AARP Google Hangout: Fixed-Rate Cap on Electric Rates

 

Principles to Strengthen the RGGI Program

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)—a market-based program developed to reduce CO2 emissions from the power sector—has been a success through its first six years of operation. Since the program began in 2009, the nine participating states have seen electricity prices fall while harmful emissions from the power sector have been reduced. Revenue from emission allowance auctions has been reinvested in programs that help consumers make energy efficiency improvements in their homes and save on energy costs. RGGI’s success shows the ability of market-based approaches to deliver cost-effective emissions reductions, and demonstrates how states can work together to develop sound energy policies.

Ahead of the upcoming 2016 RGGI Program Review process, Acadia Center and 31 other environmental groups and clean energy businesses have produced a set of joint principles to strengthen the program and enable the RGGI states to comply with U.S. EPA’s Clean Power Plan which requires reductions in power plant carbon emissions nation-wide (30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030). The following reforms to RGGI are needed to meet these requirements and improve the program going forward.

1) Extend the RGGI Cap

The RGGI cap currently extends to 2020, while EPA’s Clean Power Plan requires that states demonstrate how they will meet emissions targets in 2030. By extending the RGGI cap to 2030, the RGGI states will be consistent with EPA’s targets and will provide market certainty to encourage clean energy investments.

2) Correct the Emissions Cap Decline Trajectory

The way the RGGI cap declines must be corrected to ensure achievement of deeper long-term emissions reductions. The current cap declines by 2.5% annually based on a percentage of the prior year’s cap. Instead, the cap should decline by 2.5% of the 2014 base year, and continue to decrease by that same fixed quantity of allowances each year. By 2050, the percentage-based reduction would allow four times more emissions than the fixed quantity approach and could prevent states from meeting their 2050 GHG reduction targets.

3) Revise or Remove the Cost Containment Reserve

In order to reduce price volatility, the RGGI states established a Cost Containment Reserve (CCR) that creates additional allowances when price thresholds are reached. The release of additional allowances could push RGGI emissions above EPA’s proposed 2030 emissions targets and prevent the RGGI states from achieving compliance with the Clean Power Plan. The CCR should be modified to ensure achievement of emissions reductions by drawing allowances from under the cap, rather than minting new allowances.

With the changes above, the RGGI states will demonstrate a commitment to driving emissions reductions while creating a model of compliance with the federal Clean Power Plan for other states to emulate.

Massachusetts Net Metering and Solar Policy Status and Next Steps

Solar arrays are springing up over Massachusetts fields, former parking lots, and rooftops; they contribute to an increased percentage of the state’s renewable power supply. They are also evidence of solar’s growing role in boosting the state’s clean energy economy. In recent years, there has been a national debate about the best way to develop distributed solar generation (e.g. rooftop and community-located solar) and how to set rates of payment and compensation for the energy that it generates. In Massachusetts, the General Court decided last year to create the Net Metering and Solar Task Force to discuss solar policy and make recommendations. (Net metering is a method used by utilities to credit customers for the power they provide back to the grid from renewable generation, for example, rooftop solar.) The Task Force included lawmakers, energy and industry representatives, consumer advocates and others. The Task Force Report was released on April 30th.

Task Force Report Recommendations
The Report includes recommendations and supporting information such as policy research and cost-benefit analyses. The first part of the recommendations is a list of consensus general principles regarding the goals of solar and net metering policies, and how to proceed. Most Task Force members also endorsed conducting a Value of Solar study with input from the public and all interested stakeholders. The Study would determine the value and impact of solar in Massachusetts by evaluating total benefits in two broad categories: a) power system benefits, including avoided system costs and b) societal benefits. (See Acadia Center’s Value of Solar study for MA.)

The rest of the Report, however, reflects Task Force differences of opinion, particularly between solar groups and the electric utilities. There is disagreement about how–over the short- and long-term– to reform net metering and lift the net metering caps that currently restrict solar development. Determining the right approach will impact consumers, utilities and the solar industry.

Challenges To Address and Next Steps
While the Report makes sensible overall suggestions for reforming Massachusetts solar policy for the long run, there are a few holes. First, the recommendations appear to allow the utilities to suggest rate reforms before a comprehensive and public Value of Solar study is done. Acadia Center firmly believes the Value of Solar study should be completed before any rate reforms are initiated. Second, the Report fails to develop a concrete proposal that ties solar policy to existing energy and climate policies, which is needed in order to support progress toward the state’s energy and climate goals and create a fair, affordable energy system. In coming months, Acadia Center looks forward to participating in the process of crafting policy solutions that advance these efforts.

Sharing Visions for a Clean Energy Future

It’s spring and Acadia Center staff is on the move participating in policy events, talking to community members, and providing information to diverse stakeholder groups about how to build a clean energy future that will lower energy costs and emissions and empower consumers. Many of the presentations feature Acadia Center’s EnergyVision and UtilityVision. Here are some recaps and previews:

April 30/New England Local Energy Network
Bill Dornbos (Connecticut Office Director & Senior Attorney) presented Acadia Center’s EnergyVision and focused on policy considerations for accelerating community energy work in the region. The webinar explored full electrification of transportation and buildings as a path to reaching aggressive greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets, ways to build a modern power grid by empowering the energy consumer as called for in UtilityVision, and the importance of local energy as a grid resource. The presentation also highlighted local energy projects around the region and Acadia Center’s recent work on the value of solar PV.

May 1/Massachusetts Transportation Summit, Worcester, MA
Staff attorney, Mark LeBel, spoke on the panel entitled “Full State Ahead: 12 Leaders Share Their Vision for Transportation” at the Massachusetts Transportation Summit hosted by Transportation for Massachusetts in Worcester. He presented on EnergyVision, which charts a pathway to 80% greenhouse gas emissions reductions by 2050. In particular, Mark described the critical role of electric vehicles powered by renewables in transforming transportation and building a clean energy system.

May 6/The Financial Benefits of Sustainability – an Evening of Humor and Insight, Sustainable Wellesley, MA
As part of a panel of financial and sustainability experts, Amy Boyd, Senior Attorney, presented to a group organized by Sustainable Wellesley on the economic benefits of energy efficiency and a clean energy system. Amy shared her knowledge of Massachusetts’ statewide energy efficiency programs, which are nationally recognized for their performance and benefits delivered to consumers and businesses. As part of this educational roundtable, Amy demonstrated the value of energy efficiency as a sustainable business practice and as a key component of the vision for a clean energy future (EnergyVision) and for the framework of a consumer-friendly energy system (UtilityVision).

And Coming Up:

May 14/ Leadership South Coast Panel Discussion on Sustainable Energy Solutions, Fall River, MA
Abigail Anthony, Director, Grid Modernization and Rhode Island Director, will talk about the potential for consumer-friendly, clean distributed energy resources to replace the need for expensive, capital-intensive energy infrastructure, and the benefits of geographically targeted energy efficiency in the South Coast region of Massachusetts. Other panelists will include State Representative Haddad (5th Bristol District) and Pauline Rodrigues from the Somerset Citizen’s Transition Committee.

May 14/ People’s Power & Light Annual Meeting, Providence, RI
Abigail Anthony will provide Acadia Center’s perspective on major energy legislation currently under consideration in Rhode Island, including the creation of the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank and the renewal of the state’s Least Cost Procurement policy for energy efficiency. Abigail will also provide recommendations for issues that advocates and stakeholders should prepare to advance in next year’s legislative session in Rhode Island.

June 9/New England Conference of Public Utility Commissioners (NECPUC) Annual Meeting, Newport, RI
Abigail Anthony will participate in a panel on the Integrated Grid with a representative from Eversource at this year’s annual meeting of utility regulators. These two panelists will provide unique perspectives on the grid of the future, including the role and functionality of the distribution utility. Abigail will discuss the utility business model and regulatory model reforms recommended in UtilityVision. Eversource will be in the midst of developing its 10-Year Grid Modernization Plan for Massachusetts.

$1.5 Billion in Energy Costs Avoided by Energy Efficiency/New Study of Winter 2014

With several tough New England winters behind us, the cost of energy remains a top concern for consumers. A recent study by Acadia Center shows that energy efficiency may be one of the best solutions for keeping those costs under control. Without electric efficiency programs, energy costs would have been $1.5 billion higher in winter 2014 alone. *

The analysis shows the value of electric efficiency–especially during the winter periods when we need the greatest relief from high prices. Lower demand as a result of energy efficiency measures reduces the prices that consumers pay for power, and provides significant relief during peak demand periods when prices are highest. In the report, Acadia Center estimated what electricity demand, wholesale prices, and consumer costs would have been in the winter of 2014 and found that, without electric efficiency programs:

• Demand would have been 14% higher
• The price of wholesale electricity would have been 24% higher
• Overall costs for electricity would have been $1.5 billion higher

This winter 2014 energy cost relief complements savings that electric efficiency programs deliver over the entire year. It reinforces the logic of investing in electric efficiency as the “first fuel” in order to meet the region’s energy needs and reduce the risk of fuel price volatility. Saving electricity though efficiency measures such as LED lighting, building weatherization and incentives for efficient appliances costs about four cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), which is about a quarter of the regional average wholesale price of 16 cents per kWh during the winter of 2014. Indeed, since 2000, electric efficiency programs have reduced electricity demand in New England by almost 2.2 gigawatts, equivalent to the combined capacity of the coal-fired Brayton Point and nuclear-powered Pilgrim power plants.

New England states are now considering long-term investments in gas pipelines and electric transmission lines to add to the region’s energy supply. The report data—showing that energy efficiency is a prime method to cost-effectively reduce energy demand—can influence how states shape their energy plans. Given the findings of the report, the policy of implementing all cost-effective efficiency should be a prerequisite to any proposals that could result in ratepayers bearing the risk of new infrastructure investments.

As states work to meet the region’s energy needs while controlling costs, policy makers should prioritize energy efficiency investments. In particular, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont should continue to push the envelope in their efforts to procure all cost-effective efficiency, and other New England states should ramp up their efficiency program savings levels to invest in all energy savings that are cost-effective.

The report is available here.

*In this analysis, “winter 2014” is defined as January-March 2014 and the effects of electric efficiency are estimated by comparing actual demand and prices during that period.

What Is the Value of Solar Power in Massachusetts? A New Report

A new study released this week by Acadia Center quantifies the grid and societal benefits of solar photovoltaic systems (solar PV) in Massachusetts. Establishing the value of distributed resources like rooftop solar is increasingly important as states explore ways to meet energy needs and deploy clean energy resources.

Acadia Center assessed the value of six hypothetical solar PV system configurations to better understand the overall value that solar PV provides to the grid. The assessment determined that the value of solar to the grid—and ratepayers connected to the grid—ranges from 22-28 cents/kWh, with additional societal values of 6.7 cents/kWh. This value derives from solar PV’s unique ability to produce clean energy and, among other benefits, avoid generation and related emissions from conventional power plants.  The overall grid value of solar is the sum total of these different benefits.

Acadia Center also evaluated the impact of orientation (i.e. west- or south-facing arrays with different tilts from the horizontal) on the value of solar PV, which is why six different system configurations were examined.  One key finding is that under traditional net metering, west-facing arrays—which maximize output during periods of peak demand like late afternoon—would receive approximately 20% less credit than a comparable south-facing system, despite the fact that they produce approximately the same overall value to the grid. The study finds that solar PV provides broader societal advantages (such as environmental benefits from avoided greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants) which should be considered when assessing costs and benefits and determining additional incentives for solar producers.

The implications and policy recommendations of the report include the following key points:

• Solar generation is a valuable local energy resource that provides significant benefits to all ratepayers, with a per-kWh value in excess of retail rates. Further, in the aggregate, net metering is a fair policy.
• Once sufficiently high levels of solar PV are installed, a “value of solar” tariff could correct discrepancies between the individual elements– for example, avoided energy or transmission and distribution costs – of the value of solar and of retail rates. In such a tariff, solar PV generation is credited at an administratively determined rate and the individual value components can be accounted for properly (e.g. distribution portion of benefits paid by distribution companies).
• Current policies can discourage the installation of west-facing systems.  For customers who cannot install south-facing solar, new policies that recognize the value of west-facing solar (maximizing output during peak demand periods) could be beneficial for both ratepayers and society.
• Societal benefits should be calculated when assessing the costs and benefits of solar PV and determining additional solar producer incentives.
• Locational values (the added value from solar that reduces grid congestion and avoids expensive upgrades to the distribution system) have not been considered in this study, but are important to maximize the savings in distribution costs that solar can bring to ratepayers. Appropriate incentives can ensure that solar PV, energy efficiency, and other customer-side resources are targeted to defer or avoid the need for new infrastructure spending.

 

The Value of Solar report has been released in time to provide information for the work of the Net Metering and Solar Task Force in Massachusetts, which will conclude its work at the end of April.

For more information:
Value of Solar  for MA and CT

Maine ‘s Public Utilities Commission Value of Solar analysis

Additional rate design recommendations in Acadia Center’s UtilityVision

Join us for Earth Day Webinar

What do you know about our energy system? Some don’t know much more beyond sending a check every month to keep their lights on. Others are working to engineer new technologies to generate energy or researching and advancing policies to promote a clean energy future.

There’s new info for all of these audiences at Acadia Center’s Earth Day Webinar, Utility Vision: Making the Energy System Work for Consumers and the Environment, which will discuss how the consumer can become an integral part of the energy system.

As it stands now the energy system is largely one-directional, with the power flowing to us from large fossil-fueled generators and our money flowing back. For decades that money has gone towards maintaining the infrastructure of those plants and the power lines that bring us that energy.

But, as consumers become more aware of how our energy use affects the environment, the supply of fossil fuels runs low, and worries about energy costs increase, consumers and leaders are increasingly looking to ways to re-envision the energy system. And now that cleaner technologies for demand-reducing efficiency and generating and distributing a renewable supply are becoming more accessible and affordable, a new energy system isn’t only necessary, it’s possible.

Acadia Center’s Utility Vision is a strategic plan to achieve a new system that meets our energy needs and supports a fair, healthy economy and environment. The webinar will outline the recommendations for policy changes that will create an energy system that will benefit and empower us all.

The webinar will take place at 1:00 pm on April 22nd , led by the director of Acadia Center’s Grid Modernization Initiative, Abigail Anthony. You can Register Here. Tuning in would be a great way to celebrate Earth Day!

Update

Thank you to everyone who attended the webinar! Abigail Anthony, Director of the Grid Modernization Initiative, took us through the development of Acadia Center’s vision for a clean energy future, from ClimateVision 2020 to EnergyVision to UtilityVision, which was published in February of this year. If you want to learn more about anything you heard or may have missed today there is more information on our website or you can email us, Happy Earth Day!

Envisioning Our Energy Future: Making It Work for Consumers and the Environment –A Strategy Retreat

On the heels of its release of UtilityVision, a framework for advancing a modern clean energy grid, Acadia Center took the next step to work through various challenges to implementation. On March 23 and 24, Acadia Center hosted Envisioning Our Energy Future: Making it Work for Consumers and the Environment—a strategy retreat at The Pocantico Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund* in Tarrytown, New York.  The objective was to move closer to resolving key questions regarding how the utility business model must change to achieve a clean energy future that is friendly to both consumer and the environment. The agenda was structured around two key questions:

1. What reforms are needed to maximize the utility transition to a clean, affordable distributed energy future?

2. Broad-based consumer support will be critical to achieving the reforms needed. What is needed to ensure that all consumers tangibly benefit from the future energy system?

The retreat brought together a small group of individuals who are leaders in thinking about the future of the electric power system. Attendees included representatives from utilities, clean energy businesses, academia and consulting, state energy officials, and consumer and sustainable energy voices from California, New England, and New York.
The discussions covered these three categories: a) the roles of planning and competitive markets to achieve a sustainable power grid; b) how to align utility financial incentives with public policy objectives; and c) ways to design revenue recovery to both empower consumers and provide utilities with the appropriate level of certainty. Some of the key questions discussed included the following:

• What is the utilities’ experience with using geographically-targeted energy efficiency and demand response to avoid transmission and distribution upgrades?
• What is the experience with performance incentive mechanisms, from the U.S. and United Kingdom?
• Can competitive markets deliver greater innovation and respond to consumer needs more quickly and with greater nimbleness than utilities?
• What are different ways utilities can earn the revenue required to support the advanced technological investments needed to create a market platform?
• Can the utility’s obligation-to-serve and net metering co-exist?
• Can we shift to widespread time-of-use distribution rates or demand charges while ensuring that consumers have the knowledge and tools to manage their electricity bills?

The group at The Pocantico Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund* came much closer to agreement than expected on key questions concerning the utility business model, the role of markets and regulation, strategic grid planning, and utility rate design and compensation for distributed generation. The next steps discussed include drafting and refining a straw proposal for grid reforms, providing lessons learned from utility pilot experiments, and possibly reconvening in the future. Acadia Center will be developing a proposal for facilitating these next steps.

*Please Note: As is the case with all materials resulting from meetings held at The Pocantico Center, the views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, its trustees, or its staff.

A Resolution to Keep Massachusetts a National Leader in Energy Savings

Massachusetts has an impressive record of investing in energy efficiency and saving home-owners and businesses money on energy bills.  Electricity and natural gas programs produced an estimated $3.14 billion in benefits in 2014 alone, and $11.4 in benefits since the programs began in 2010 (Press Release: MA Energy Efficiency Benefits Top National Bests for Savings ;  MA Energy Efficiency Benefits Factsheet). Now, work is underway on the state plans that can ensure that this leadership continues to provide even more benefits to ratepayers.

Under the Massachusetts Green Communities Act (GCA), the state gas and electric utilities (Program Administrators) are charged with creating plans to acquire all available energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost-effective, or less expensive than supply.  These plans are prepared in coordination with the state’s Energy Efficiency Advisory Council (Council) which is made up of fifteen representatives of stakeholder groups and includes residential customers, low-income customers, large commercial and industrial users, manufacturers, and non-profits, as well as state agencies. Acadia Center is the representative of the environmental community.

The Council recently issued a Resolution setting out its priorities and recommendations for the 2016-2018 state plans. It also reiterated that the emission reduction targets established by the Global Warming Solutions Act and the state’s Clean Energy and Climate Plan–which implements the Act—require a key role for energy efficiency and demand reduction programs. The Council has high expectations for the development of a third well balanced, cost-effective, robust, and innovative statewide electric and natural gas plan. The Council expects the forthcoming energy efficiency programs to accomplish the following:

• Achieve all cost effective energy efficiency and demand reduction in accordance with the GCA;
• Align with the greenhouse gas reduction targets of the Global Warming Solutions Act and Clean Energy and Climate Plan;
• Deliver consistent and equitable service to all segments of businesses and residents statewide;
• Prioritize lifetime savings and benefits;
• Produce electric demand savings in order to significantly mitigate peak demand costs to the electric sector;
• Achieve data transparency and enable robust planning and analysis through a comprehensive statewide database;
• Effectively communicate to ratepayers information about program and initiative effectiveness, and progress;
• Continue to improve the cost efficiency of program delivery.

Acadia Center—as a member of the Council—will be reviewing the draft Three-Year Plans when the Program Administrators submit them on April 30th.  After June stakeholder workshops, the Council and Program Administrators will coordinate on plan revisions. Plans will be filed with the Department of Public Utilities by October 31st and be finalized and under implementation starting January 2016.

The Massachusetts EEAC Resolution is available in final form here: http://ma-eeac.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/EEAC-Resolution-Priorities-for-2016-2018-Three-Year-Efficiency-Plans.pdf