Good afternoon, I'd like to call the House Special Committee on Energy to order.
Today is February 10th, it is 134, and members present.
We have representative Edgman, representative Camp,
representative Costello, Representative Ruffridge, co-chair Mears,
and myself, Co-Chair Holland, so thank you all for being here.
I'd like to remind members and staff that we're allowing members to use electronic devices
during the committee meetings, but please silence your cell phones as a reminder.
Staff and members of the audience may not approach the table if you need to pass a note
to committee members.
Please get the attention of my committee aide, Tim Truer, who's up here in the corner.
We're going to let him sit today, and he will take care of it.
Okay, got missed by some folks, you'll have to go back and see the recording.
Before we get started, I'd like to thank our recording secretary, Andrew Magneson, and
Kyla Tubo from the Juno-LIO for the technical support in the room.
Thank you both for being here.
We have two bills on our agenda today.
First, we'll be hearing House Bill 257, portable solar energy generation devices.
This is sponsored by Representative Eishein,
and this is the bill's first hearing.
Next, we'll be hearing a brief reintroduction of House Bill 164, Net Meetering Program
and Fund, by the request of the governor, followed by testimony, invited by myself.
Co-Chair Hollandis is the bill's second hearing, following its introduction to the committee
on April 8, 2025.
If you want to go back, you'll find that recording available on the Committee Basis website.
So proceeding, we'll first take up House Bill 257,
portable solar energy generation devices sponsored by Representative Eyshide.
Representative Esheide, would you and your staff please approach the bench,
introduce yourselves to the record and begin your overview for the committee.
We'll take a brief at ease while we get the presentation ready.
Back on the record for the House
Special Energy Committee, and we're beginning the presentation of House Bill 257
Representative Aishide
Thank you, mr. Chair
Mr. Co-chair, thank you members of the committee for hearing my bill House bill
257 for The record my name is representative Ted Ayeside. I represent House District 22
Northeast Anchorage sometimes called North Modou
So, it's honored to be here, and I'd like my staff or to introduce himself this time.
Good afternoon for the record, Aaron Callahan, staff for Representative Eischett.
Again, Rep Eishide for
the Record, members of the committee, thank you for hearing this legislation today.
House Bill 257 seeks to help Alaskans develop greater energy independence and
help offset monthly utility bills.
By delineating a class of plug-in solar generation devices
that utility companies cannot interfere with the purchase and operation of.
The bill ensures that to maintain this protection,
safety standards are upheld and that the devices require
certification through a national testing laboratory.
Some contacts.
Alaskan energy costs our per capita the highest in the nation.
So we obviously know that we all need energy to live our best lives.
Heat, light, our cooling devices, refrigerators,
our things that support our other electronic devices that
we use.
I've knocked a lot of doors in House District 22,
Folks say, you know, I'm concerned about energy cost,
whether it's natural gas or their electric utility.
So it is something that I hear quite consistently
and it it one of the motivations for this bill.
Plug-in solar devices provide some possible relief.
They are small devices, 1200 watts or less,
and they're designed to offset
these electrical costs of electricity.
They do support the idea of energy independence, something every Alaskan I think values.
Installation is as simple as removing the unit from a box,
putting the solar unit where it can collect some sun,
and plug it into a standard outlet.
they are relatively cheap compared to a large solar arrays we see on some homes and
They have a return
Uninvestment that depending on prices of electricity in the market can be a rapid enough that might be satisfactory
In developing this bill, we've heard a couple concerns.
So I just want to bring those up front before we talk about some resolutions to those concerns,
some folks have been concerned about the safety of essentially this device that's.
collecting solar energy converted into electrical energy,
and there being a shock.
So that has been one concern.
And the second concern is, you know, in Alaska,
we have some large grids, we also have small grids.
And there's some concerns about smallgrids.
Perhaps the use of these devices
could interfere with their stability.
Some solutions.
On the safety aspect, these devices are designed so that when there is no current sensed in the device, they don't pass electricity by.
So there shouldn't be any kind of shock danger.
And also on the small grid issue, we've heard some fears about that.
We haven't been shown any numbers.
We're happy to discuss those fears.
any kind of community, when there are concerns, we believe that the local entities, the government
entities and the utility can talk and work those issues out. So in summary,
we know that energy in Alaska is expensive and in general, it's expensive to live here.
This house bill gives a way for people to reduce their energy costs while being safe and very
does not have any costly incentive programs. It's a low risk, common sense solution,
and it does create that very Alaskan value of independence,
meeting in part your energy needs from the sun, from your own home. They are designed to be
portable, which means not only can you move them around, if you change your home, you can bring
And I'll turn it over now to Aaron for questions.
Or excuse me, the sexual and then questions after that.
Mr. Callahan, if you'd put yourself on the record
and proceed, please.
I'm good at reading the screen, obviously.
For the Record, Aaron Callaghan,
sexual analysis for House Bill 257, plug in solely.
34-LS1203, backslash A.
an act relating to the regulation of residential solar energy generation and portable solar
energy
generation devices. Section 1 amends AS 42.05 to add a new section 42 .05 .23. Portable solar
portable solar devices with an output of not more than 1,200 watts
certified by a nationally recognized testing laboratory,
and meeting the standards of the National Electric Code are exempt from utility interconnection.
Electric utility utilities may not require customers using these devices
to obtain permission, pay fees, or install additional controls or equipment.
Electric utilities are not liable for any damage or injury caused by the use of these devices.
Portable solar generation devices are defined as a movable photovoltaic device
designed to be connected to a building's electrical system
through a standard 120-volt outlet and used primarily to offset part of a customer's electricity consumption.
Thank you, and I'd like to just note that representative Johnson has joined us at this point
Are you finished any or any closing comments before we go to questions?
I think this go-to the questions maybe some closing comment after that, but we are ready for questions
Representative Costello, thank you. Thank very much for bringing this bill forward. I really appreciate it I see
In an article, it says 60 million Americans are using plug-in solar, but could you talk
about your experience or knowledge of, you know, how this is being dealt with in other
states and what, the reception has been, and just sort of give us a background in that
area?
Thank you for the question through the chair to Rep. Costello, Rep Eischeid here.
this kind of legislation that's the state of Utah, there's over 10 other states that are
currently going through that legislative process. I just read this morning that the State of Vermont
Senate unanimously passed it out of their body, the Senate. The 60 million number that you gave
of Americans using plug-in solar, that is new to me, I haven't heard that before but I'll see if
My staffer, Aaron, would like to add any context to what I just said.
Mr. Callahan, anything you wanted to have to that?
Through the chair, Representative Costello, just to back up what Representative
I had said, Utah as an early adopter has so far seen really good results.
We don't have a lot of data yet, but through talking with.
Utah representative Ward who proposed the bill there
They've seen a lot of adoption of this technology
Right, thank you representative comp
Yes, I thank
you
And yeah, just to represent Costello there probably is that many Americans using solar power and some um question about the wiring
so
supplemental
generator power to a house, you have a special automated transfer switch so that
power goes off, your generator comes on. Power goes
off. Your generator goes
off so you don't get any back feeding in the grid. I'm not familiar with these
units, they sound great. Is that all internal or do you need an
electrician to come to your house and wire up a separate power transfer
switch like you would with a generator or is this all an internal mechanism?
Throw through through the chair to represent cop rep eyeshide here. So it is in the device.
So, it's basically three parts. You have the photovoltaic panel. Then on the back of it,
you have an inverter and that converts the DC current from the solar to AC. And then the third
component is it goes through a cord and you plug into the standard 120 volt outlet.
to your question, there's a sensor in the inverter that when it senses that there is no power
in an outlet that's plugged in into your home circuit, it turns off. So if you have a power
outage, a common question is, oh this is great, this will help during a Power outage. Actually,
it doesn't work during the power outage for the safety aspect. I hope that answers your
Thank you. If I can follow up on that I'm curious whether or not there is
underwriters laboratory standard that's available now and I am a little curious
also about knowing that this has been used significantly in Europe. The language
right now I think notes using a nationally recognized
testing laboratory and I'm wondering if that's anticipated that that would
recognize CE and European standards or whether products would have to come
through the U.S. standards laboratory. And finally just to tag on to that, I've
heard that potentially some of the standards anticipated might require a
receptacle to plug in that you wouldn't be able to
plug into just any old outlet that there's a fairly
significant upgrade.
So a little bit about the status of the UL standard
alternatives to that and what's happening with the
plug issue.
Yeah.
Thank you, Chair, Co-Chair, Holland, Rep.
Eyeshide here.
I answered the first part of that, and give the outlet
part to my staffer.
So it does say that the device has to
be certified by a certifying agency, and it is the UL, you know, Underwriters Laboratory,
and their UL3700 is a standard that's in draft that they're working on.
United States is a little behind the curve on this. It's been a big deal in Europe as you note it
But as a standard that they are working on there's also a national electric code and that is updated every three years
The last update was 2023. So this is something that's coming down to pipeline
and there is a draft, as I said, UL standard on this,
but again, it is in draft form,
and I'll let Mr. Callahan answer the outlet part,
I think that you've asked.
For the record, Aaron Callaghan,
thank you for the question,
Coach, you're Holland.
These devices that would be sold and used
be designed to plug in through a standard and are currently designed
to plugin through standard 120 110 volt access and as to your question
of recognizing European standards
that would not because of the differences between European
and American electrical systems that it would
not work very well.
Great thank you representative cop you have a question.
Representative Ishaider, you're able staff there, whichever one.
What would it look like if a homeowner decided they wanted three or four of these, and how would that affect this with respect to utilities and the grid and all that?
You are not generating more than 1,200 watts with this unit for a single domicile
For a single domisile. Okay. Yes. Is that what the bill says?
The bill does set the limit at 1200 1200 watts per domi-siler just for the unit
Currently for The Unit, okay
You have a follow-up to that?
Mr. Chair, so I guess just my thought is
I could see possibly the utilities would be have some interest in
per home versus the entire home. Otherwise, that whole rate payer infrastructure kind of goes up
for everybody else to carry the load. But if it was per domicile, then that changes the question
Yeah, it may I mr. Chair through the chair to represent a cop that is something that you know on our
Third or fourth reading of the bill we noticed was lacking and I think there could be some
clarifying language in there, so I
Know what you say and and
I have a similar concern
Thanks for that, I'd like to follow up on that because I think it would be interesting to clarify this issue.
I have some recollection that while the Utah bill.
perhaps is a prodomacile.
I think I've heard that in Europe
they may have multiple units hanging across a balcony,
so it'd be interesting to understand that.
But looking at that question from a slightly different angle,
do you have any thoughts on the threshold for a utility size
where this maybe shouldn't be allowed as a direct allowance
and maybe there needs to be some options for smaller?
I'm thinking particularly rural utilities that may not have a lot of capacity that
may need an opt-in option.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, for that question.
On the size of utilities, we're happy to have that conversation.
Talking to the sponsor of the Utah bill,
Mr Ward, Utah is a mountain state.
We would think there are some similarities to Alaska in some ways, but he did tell us that they just have three
Utilities in the whole state of Alaska
Excuse me a Utah. Yes, so
That's that's something that we could talk further about, you know
the the thing that is important to me is you
know folks have fears and then but you sometimes their fears are
fears based on rational things and irrational things. So I'm not saying there's irrational fears
but you know we haven't run across that issue in any other any parts of our research, but
you understand Alaska is different. And then I did if I may just go back to that number of panels.
One has to be very careful because for instance this says a 1200 watt per unit,
to 600 watt panels and feed it into an inverter.
Hence, the number of 1,200 watts total.
So one has to be careful,
the numbers of panels does not necessarily mean
each one is 1.200.
That's an excellent point, thank you.
Representative Mears.
Thank you through the Chair to Representative Aishide.
So it's been a couple weeks since I looked at the bill,
but from my recollection,
Balcony these solar systems could be approved by utilities as they are. So it's changing. It's
believing an administrative burden
Potentially with utilities rather than allowing them wholesale
Yeah
To co-chair mirrors if I understand your your question
In talking to the various utilities one of them my utility in anchorage
We had talked about, and again, the context is we want this to be a low barrier entry.
Hence, really, that's the reason for this bill, but we had
talked something heard from another utility like they would like to maybe have them,
these devices registered with the utility. So they knew. And my local utility,
through my staffers that they don't want to do that.
They don' t want that burden.
So I don t know if I understood the context of your question
and if i didn't, please restate it and no, or follow us in.
Follow up.
So what I'm getting at is with utilities permission,
residents can do this now.
I'm not sure how to answer that.
I think right now the goal of this bill
is to create a glide path for people that want to do this,
that they won't run into interference from the utility.
And that's why you are seeing this in so many states
is people have an interest in allowing folks to this.
So I don't know if my staffer wants to add to that
because they may not be understanding the question.
Mr. Callahan for the record co-chair mirrors. Oh, sorry for
the records Aaron Kellahan. Co- chair mirrors right now anybody
can really do anything. So there's it's not defined.
So somebody could go put whatever type of system they want.
And the utilities could say you can't connect that to our grid
or you're going to have to pay for that
to be connected to the grid at this time.
Great any follow-up no
what I'd like to do is
Take a second we invited
Mr. May
To this hearing primarily to speak to the next bill, but he's involved with solar projects
And I understand that he may have some information related to this discussion. We've just had so mr. may if you're
Online and could put yourself on the record and address any of the discussion we just have
on the uh this bill hello um for the record this has been made the owner of Alaska Solar
to the chair thank you for bringing me in what i am seeing so far from the commercial side is that
there are inverter companies that are that have these um the main backbone of this
technology available, that's AP systems. And I was just checking they are not UL-listed yet,
but they have many certs in the European side because of the european experience and they're
being ahead of game. So the technology is available. They've shipped some of their early production
They are very simple, just as the representative
of the group presented in the bill.
Instead, they plug into an outlet.
They're rated for the 1200,
two of them would give you 1200 watts
and kind of make that criteria.
I think the commercial market is coming quickly,
but the UL listed would be probably
a gateway for last year.
Great, thank you.
Are there any other questions from the committee today on this bill?
Okay, seeing none then.
Thank you, Representative Ayeshaide, Mr. Callahan.
With that, we will be setting a side House Bill 257.
And we'll take just a brief add ease while we prepare for
presenting the next bill 164.
This is the House Special Committee on Energy.
We're back on the record at two o'clock.
And we're beginning our discussion on House Bill 164,
net metering program and fund requested by the governor.
Again, as we introduced beginning of the meeting,
this was introduced last session.
And since we have two new members of our committee,
since this bill was heard, we've asked.
Mr. Thayer, Executive Director of the Energy Authority, to join us.
I understand, though, due to the flight delays that Director Thayers has been delayed and
speaking in his stead as AEA Board Member, Mr Conner, Ericsson.
But we may see Directorthayer here momentarily, so we'll kind of go with the flow on that.
But Mr Erickson, I believe you're online if you could introduce yourself for the record
and begin your presentation.
Absolutely. This is kind of some director of planning with the energy authority.
Can everyone hear me through the audio? Is that good?
It's okay so far. Let's see how the volume goes.
It was breaking up a little bit for me, but I have the presentation ready.
Go ahead and proceed for now.
Okay. All right. Thank you very much.
Yes. Just please inform me if the Audio drops off.
So I'll just start here.
With the presentation, so as you can see here, there's a presentation on that.
I'll go 1.64.
The short title is Net Metering Program and then Fund.
That's the spelling on the first page.
If you could please proceed to the next page there on this slide.
Thank you.
The second page here is just an overview of AEA's programs and services.
Many of you there are familiar with the Lask Energy Authority and what we do.
We're the state's energy policy body.
We also own a variety of electrical transmission and generation assets largely concentrated
in the rail belt.
We administer the power cost equalization program in conjunction with those rates set
by the regulatory commission of Alaska.
We, also, administer an overseas, so rural energy programs, rural-energy efficiency programs
and is well-conducted energy planning and are now housing for administrative purposes,
the new Rail Belt Transmission Organization as created under House Bill 307 in 2024.
Next slide, please.
So, HD164 established the principal act behind this bill that establishes a new net
to incentivize behind the meter generation additions for customers of utilities that
are governed by EROs and as well as are regulated by the regulatory commission, which in this
case under current statute applies to the rail belt utilities.
Those are four utilities operating along what we term the railroad that goes from Homer
north to Fairbanks.
serving the Fairbanks area, and it seeks to provide for the payment as a current, as
under current metering, you know, those that generate and are participating in a utilities
net metronic program are compensated at what is deemed to be the small power, small facility
power purchase rate, excuse me, that's kind of a mouthful, but that that provided in
and is derived through the cost to produce the marginal kilowatt
out of electricity, and right now, that on average is about $0.09,
but this bill would provide for that power to be compensated at rate,
which would be equivalent to that they receive under the utility.
It also gives flexibility.
to the utilities to devise either seasonal or time of use rates for that compensation
of power provided from a consumer generator under a net mutering program.
It also allows for those credits received under the access with electricity that would
be provided to provide for an annual accounting so that those credit can be stored to offset
and went solar energy of the less prevalent and less power to produce, such as in the
winter time, versus the summer time.
The bill also seeks to address potential revenue losses as exhibited currently under those net
metering programs, the idea that there's a cross-subsidization between those that have
currently and the cost to be reimbursed would be subject to determination by the regulatory
commission and those funds would determine that their discretion and AEA would administer
the fund for repayment for costs sought by utilities in implementing and to recover
So you can see here, Section 1 of the bill,
the men's law statute 42-05-391A,
which this effectively allows for the utility to devise rates
that would be exceptional for use
in this new net metering program
that will not contravene the requirements stipulated
that the rates must, you cannot discriminate in rates.
It must be published in the tariff.
And so that just allows the needed flexibility
Section 2 establishes a program under the new statute AS-4205-395.
This also ensures that consumer generators that have their systems installed before the
first of July of last year continue to receive compensation for energy under prevailing terms
of the time where they can elect to be compensated also at the
new rate that would be devised by the utilities under this bill.
It also provides for protections, limiting participation should these facilities find
that the system reliability or unjust rates may arise owing to net metering installations,
that also be subject to RC approval, again, and establishes a net-metering reimbursement
fund for our utility to recover revenue losses subject
to the RCA's discretion in terms of what those losses are, how those
It requires the RCA established regulations for determining what the law is and then provides
for definitions as needed for this bill being consumer, consumer generator, electric reliability
organization.
Also, presently known as a rail belt reliability council is being the only one that presently
operates within the state and that loads serving entity both directly and by reference.
Next slide, please.
establishes the fund which the Alaska Energy Authority would administer under this bill
and would be would make payments for those costs requested by the utilities for
those drugs and offices as defined under RCA regulation and also sets forth the
second being gifts to press contributions from resources and federal money and the third being
interest earned on the fund balance. Again, that requires that ADA would administer and service
to fiduciary to fund and it would authorize ADA to make payments subject to those
regulations set forth by the RCA and that Section 4 establishes an effective date
This bill is in direct support in alignment with the governor's priorities as said forth
and recommended in the Alaska security energy task force, which is multi stakeholder task
force as created by the Governor, the final report published in December 2023.
It aligns with priority strategy B2, entitled last policy recommendations, which seeks
to enhance Alaska's departmental and regulatory policies to spur and sustain renewable energy
and transition development to cut energy costs and advance economic prosperity for Alaska.
And under to achieve that priority, there's sub-action B 2.2 recommending to strengthen
Alaska s net-vittering energy for any more terrorism regulations for the Alaska S diverse
And so this bill is the exam and directs the board of this item.
Thank you.
Great, thank you for your presentation.
Are there questions from the committee?
Yeah, let's begin the representative reference.
I caught your-
Go ahead, go ahead.
I will defer to my superior representative cop.
Thank you for that presentation through the chair.
The fund, the Net Metering Reimbursement Fund,
I can see that was established to help offset
the certain revenue drop that utilities will see,
but it appears that there's,
it's kind of an unknown what that drop will be,
and it is really unknown
what the ability of a remedy would be to,
appears to be the budget process and any gifts bequests contributions from other sources and
then it looks like AEA has the authority under statute to provide a recoverable cost to utility
for their lost revenue. It seems a little iffy reading that that there would ever be a recovery
I'm happy to take that question offline and respond to you offline on that item
There was discussions that he had with some of the utilities regarding this this amount
But as you stated the amount of which would be subject to, you know, the the discretion appetite of a legislature
Great
Thank you, and if I can follow up on
But bring in with your response later would be what the effect would
be if the fund wasn't capitalized.
Is that keep net metering from beginning or does it just change the scope of which utility
might want to develop the net meter?
But we can follow up with you.
arrived here, so it was available. If we have any questions for him, we've just finished the
presentation by Mr. Erickson. I also want to note that we
have representatives from the RCA online, if there are any
questions related to the RCAA that anyone would like to ask on this.
Representative Mears.
Thank you through the co-chair. I see we've got I think three folks from the RCA
available online and I wanted to ask a question about the seasonal error time
of use rate. So on the bill that is page two line eight allowing for seasonal
I think that's fantastic and I
Don't know my
Utility rates well enough to know if that is allowable
For utilities for regular customer use at this point
Mr. Erickson or is that a question for
One of the staff from RCA, would you like to respond to that, please?
Yeah, through the chair, Representative Mears, right now I do believe we have some utility tariffs that do have a kind of use rate.
We could look into that further, but we had some that haven't had pilot programs doing so,
but not all utilities have those right.
Ms. Vogler, that was just responding.
I'm sorry, co-chair, yes, it is Julie Voglers.
Great, thank you.
With a follow-up?
Through the chair, Thank you, Ms Voglar.
I don't need a following up on that.
I appreciate your recollection is sufficient for me right now
that that's an option for utilities
to look at having that for customers.
Great.
Thank You.
Representative Ruffridge.
Thank, you chair.
I have a lot of questions on this section so I think the first one is just
generally speaking I mean we have net metering and regulation currently I guess
broadly speaking what's what is the need for the statute and how is it
different than what in regulation right now. Mr. Erickson do you want to take
to place that to the chair.
Yeah, I mean effectively what it does is it puts it within, and statute currently exists
within regulation, it also provides for the ability for utilities to be more flexible
in the rate that they offer currently in regulation there to rate at which excess electricity
met mutering a program participant is compensated at what is determined to be the small facility
power purchase rate and that at times can create some conflict between the value for both the
consumer generator and the utility. So this would provide for a more favorable landscape or
And also provides more flexibility with the establishment of that annual account because
currently that credit is applied only in the subsequent billing month and so then you could
more equally distribute that credits over time as clearly the production of solar energy
will drop off during the darker winter months and will ramp up during summertime.
Thank you, Chair Holland.
So there's a lot of words in there that I'd like to flesh out a little bit.
When you say flexibility, I'm not entirely certain what you mean by that.
In my experience, that means you could adjust it, you can make it go away.
This does not seem flexible.
When I read the bill, it seems like it's directing it in a very specific way.
is that rate higher or lower than what it is now on generally mr.
irksha yeah through the chair that that's a difficult question to answer I mean I
think it depends on how the rates devised and clearly the rate would be
subject to RC approval because they are economically regulated entities
And so any rate that they would be wished to provide under this legislation would have
to be approved by the regulatory commission and the cost justified, you know, as would
be appropriate and determined by a commission.
compensation at a rate that's more equally advantageous to both the consumer
generator and utility because clearly at times and currently at present most of
the energy that is generated is sold back to the utility during the summer time
when the loads are lower. So when now this creates an opportunity where the
energy can be created stored and then sent to utility
during times at which the generation is more valuable to a particular utility
at that higher rate, um, the rate I can't speak to what the
rate would be. That would, that would
be the discretion of both the utility and and
subject to the approval of the commission.
Overhead of reference, you follow up?
Sure. I so I don't understand some of
the things that we're talking about there.
So maybe a little bit more of a layman's
explanation will be super helpful to me.
Um,
So, if I install a electrical generating capacity at my home and I'm generating a whole bunch
of energy in the summer months, and that's the same time where nobody is using any energy,
you mentioned the word storage, who's storing that, I guess we don't have that level of
So are the utilities going to have to increase their battery
capacity?
How are we storing that energy?
Mr. Ericsson?
Yeah, through the chair, I guess I should clarify.
The torch that trusted out of clarifying was that in some
instances, there's going be storage at the consumer
premises, so that people are going
solar panels along with small battery devices, so that energy can be then conveyed to the
back to utility at times in which the energy would be told with the two-way meter.
But I should also premise the fact that the benefit is more, in this sense, to consumer
in a sense that the value of the energy in the summertime,
but instead of it being equal across all months,
it's gonna be paid to them at the rates
that would be equivalent to the
value, of which it is to be the time
that that energy is then would otherwise be used.
And so, for instance, sorry, to reiterate
During times at which the load is higher, but then the solar energy production from that
metering is down, any credits would be available that you're producing the summer time are
now available for you to offset due to those higher energy bills versus how it is now,
which is just the bills that it only applies to your subsequent billing month, there is
no account that's created, and so essentially you have whatever money that
And those net metering payments have to be applied to your next bill.
So during the months, in the summer months when your bill is lower,
it's only applied for those lower bills.
And so you're not spreading the cost savings out over time.
So this bill creates an opportunity for that cost saving to
be spread out overtime to the consumer generator.
It's up to you, Chair, I'll go all day if you let me.
Well, what it's going to suggest here for a second is I want to follow up on a part of
your question and perhaps ask Ms. Volcker from the RCA to also kind of touch on this
the RCA can do. And as I understand it, the RCAA currently can entertain special net meter
tariffs if the utilities can demonstrate a material cost impact on net-meter customers.
So how does that regulatory authority have interact with this bill? And do you have any
other thoughts or clarifications you might offer to the discussion we've just had between
Representative Ruffridge and mr. Erickson
Through the chair, this is Julie Vogler
So right now we have where the retail rates are established through a revenue requirement study
For and the customer charges for each of the utilities
And again, one of the utility would propose a time of use rate.
We have seen those in those revenue requirement studies also.
And then we have the avoided cost rate, which is that small firm purchase power rate and
that is updated quarterly in the cost of power adjustment filings made by the electric utilities
Not only provides the calculation, but establishes the type of definition that goes into the
calculation for the utility. So those are the two rates that are at play here.
Thank you, Ms. Vogler.
Mr. Thayer, if you would like to join us at the table, you're welcome to, and if have any comments on
The questions we've just been asking that might offer any clarity you'd like to share
would be happy to take that if you would like put yourself on the record and offer
any thoughts you have on what the discussion we're having.
Thank you Curtis there executive director alaskan energy authority. I do apologize for my delay
But I wasn't in charge of deicing out of Anchorage
but with that I
Just came in late into the conversation
And so I guess what I'd like to do is Connor is our in-house expert on this
So I would kind of defer to Connor and I don't want to trip him up in something that.I might misspeak
Fair enough well leave it at that
Did you have a follow-up reference in reference? Otherwise, we'll go to reference on the comp.
I did. Thank you, Chair Holland. So, when we're talking about, I guess, the regulation
currently versus what we see in House Bill in front of us,
I understood the regulations, and I can just read it to you directly, that the credits under the
program that exists now shall be used to reduce dollar amounts owed to the consumer in subsequent
They do not expire or otherwise revert to the electric utility.
I read that to mean they can use them not just in the month that they have now.
So if something is happening differently, I'd like to know why that's happening
differently and how the legislation in front of us creates something different.
address the current, I believe it's an avoided cost recovery under the
current regulations versus what this new bill would introduce in terms of time of
use rate compensation. You want to kind of outline how this bill is different
than the correct net meter regulations.
more time to to suffer what what specifically the differences in the in
the two between the current regulations and and what proposed. Okay. Thank you
for that. I'll just offer Representative Ruffridge and I suspect also Mr. May
who's going to come on in a few minutes with invited testimony. You can probably
flesh this out a look.
better, but the current net meter program is essentially only compensating net
meter customers at an avoided cost, a very low amount of what might have been
the fuel cost. And this bill will essentially give customers that are using
this full at time of use rate credit. So substantially more credit that has much
more value and the potential for being able to.
save a significant amount of money with larger systems
than is economically possible with the current fairly low amount money that is
credited for access electricity but we'll see if
Mr. May when he comes on a couple minutes can add that into his invited testimony
do you have additional follow-up question for now?
well i guess not not for anyone online i i
guess would be for you since it sounds like you're
Because I feel like I asked the question a minute ago about the difference between a
small facility purchase rate and what the other rate might be.
Just a general idea of whether that would be higher or lower and I did not get it.
You seem to be indicating that that amount is substantially higher.
Yeah, I don't have an answer for that I'm referring to the the
difference between the avoided cost recovery of the current net
meter and this legislation, but we'll have to see if we can get
somebody who knows more of detailed rates and that will
probably also depend upon which utility is impacted because this
is I think tied to utility that you're connected to also for
that number.
Yeah. Go ahead, Mr. Erickson. Did you want to chime in?
Yeah, excuse me, through the chair, I can speak to that.
My comment about not knowing whether it be high or low or with more respect to the term
time of use rates or seasonal rates, in the sense that I don't know, you know during
some of that seasonal use may actually be below what the current small facility power
purchase rate is at present, which is about the rail belt average right now is what,
and RCA copophilings, and then if in fact the utilities would elect to compensate the
consumer generator as would be allowed in a spill at the full retail rate, which they
presently pay to the utility for all to a lot of hours, the
utility would provide to them, you know, that could be anywhere that given the current
which anywhere between about 20 and 27 cents per kilowatt hour.
So we're talking in the magnitude of about 12 to 16 cents or so difference per
kil-att-hour.
More questions, Mr. Chair?
Yes. Thank you.
So you said and thank you for that.
That really helps sort of guide my thoughts and discussion on this.
You said if the utility elects to pay them at the rate that I don't see that term in this bill either.
Is, are you saying that there would be a choice that the utilities is given to either pay for one that a consumer generator that is new or.
You know, coming online after this Bill goes into effect that.
There will be choice of the.
Well, through the chair, as it reads in the bill, it's a state that the rate would be
equal to the excess energy generation multiplied by the rates per kilowatt over the applies
to consume or were not a consumer generator, which, in fact, could be the full retail
Opportunity to utilities for that rate to also be applied
As a seasonal rate or time of use rate
So it would it ultimately depend on one what methodology the utility would elect to submit to the the rate
To the they are safe for approval. I'm sorry, I can't I cannot speak to exactly what the rates would be
Thank you represent a reference
I mean
I'll wait till the end
Yeah. Yeah, thank you. Thank you for that. Any other questions right now for Mr. Erickson?
We do have Mr May, founder and owner of Alaska Solar, who's going to be
speaking next who might be able to fill in some holes and has been listening to this. So I'm
hoping that that will help address maybe some of the questions. But anything more for
Wonderful well, then thank you for the presentation mr. Erickson
I hope you can stick around if you're available in case there are any other follow-ups at the end
So next we're going to go back to Ben May. We had him on briefly with the earlier bill
But this is a primary one we had invited him to
come and present to us. He's the founder and owner of Alaska Solar.
He is online to give testimony on the bill at the request of myself. Mr.
Bay, please go ahead and introduce yourself to the record and begin your testimony.
Hello, I realize that he had more light.
Thank you, Chair. Thank You, Committee. I appreciate it very much being here today.
This is a subject here here from my heart and to my company and
to our customers as well and future customers.
For the record, I'm Ben May, founder and owner of Alaska Solar.
I have some brief remarks about the beginning of the company,
kind of saying the contact for where we're at now in 2025.
No employees for a couple years, eight systems the first year, 16 the next, and then solarized
took off and and people started to trust more and more in the third year with the 63 systems
and really took on. So neighborhoods were sponsoring and kind of vetting contractors and
So I really, I was riding a wave.
I wasn't lucky to start then.
The price of panels had dropped a lot to 2016
and continued to drop a bit back into that.
Prices of other things came online or came down as well.
So in 2025, we were up to 13 employees
at sometimes 20 at times when we had a large project,
110 installations.
But the installation has gotten much bigger.
You can go to the second slide.
Thank you.
So a residential big bigger,
I'll just kind of demonstrate this real quickly
as pictures on a few notes.
Presidential is 20 to 30 panels,
typically around 18, it's a high value.
We've done 800 of those. Each one is a safe ale, a contract,
a design, approval to proceed through a union and utility, and install
inspection. It's a monitoring setup, final commission to operate,
and then the joyful moment where you finally get to turn this switch on and start making
the power.
It is like a remodel. They are a pretty big project, each one of them.
So, yeah, we've been through a lot, you know, a
lot of customers. We have a
lot
of history with people with what
works and what doesn't. And, and you
know seeing what the customer is
set, I'll get to that.
The next, the middle slide is,
you
know commercial has started to come
online. A small commercial and the
larger commercial.
We've done once they're 80 to 140
panels.
Um, and that bigger, bigger couple of them for two gaps, some first for a system living facilities, except for them. Um. And then.
Excuse me, just last year, um, community solar for she got selected. That's right there at Anchorage, 90, 94th and old sewer roughly.
And, uh, it's 1560 panel.
individuals, customers from she got to bought shares in order to offset their
bill in a net metering kind of way. The old monthly net here. So, and going
forward, Alaska in the next couple of years will be full of larger projects.
Canada Chiefs Council has seven villages in about a year and a half of work for
CA is perceiving that we probably all know towards an 80 acre 14 megawatt project.
This has worked for hundreds of people.
Ticulin Tribe is planning a two megawatts project, Northwood Arti Burroughs has several
projects they'll do in the next couple of years. There's probably other ones that are not familiar
with the city and two gotcha looking to use smaller commercial ones. So why so much solar?
Why is it, is everybody doing it?
So it's economics.
People, especially with the hard end sayings,
you know, residential customers, they're not done news.
We have 800 customers that are to a person happy.
Nobody's asked us to take solar off the building or come to us and
said, I have the top.
They're making a steady tax-free savings, which is basically like income, and they're
making them a power. And yeah, it's a great business to be part of, because people are
very happy in the end. Mostly they are unhappy with us because we can't move fast enough.
Let's make sure we business. So, yeah. The size of the party got bigger.
Residential work, you know, business owner and employee perspective, I need the residential
work to fill in between these big projects that are coming.
I needed to keep them busy.
I had to get them employed.
And so if we do just large projects and say, yay, we'll be, those projects will probably
be done by people from out of state because I won't be able to maintain a crew.
Unless I have residential that is profitable enough for residential customers that they want to do it.
So in this small market, you really need to have both residential and the larger projects in order to keep company like mine going.
All right, let's go to the third slide and look at some of the numbers about this.
But the big thing that happened in solar was the price of the panels went down.
Germany demanded a lot of panels through their policy, China built up their manufacturing
facility.
The main magic that had happened at solar in the last 15 years is manufacturing, bit
by bit progressive progress towards doing it with less energy and less inputs until
it got to the point where a panel made now, well, we planted its energy in about nine
months.
So, and then it goes to $2,000, $3,500.
Okay, so 2006, a panel would cost $ 2, 000.
And 2016, when I started, it was about $320.
And then in 2025,
it's roughly around $155.
So what does that mean for the customer?
The critical number, really, for all of us,
is what about paying for that electricity?
the industry standard for looking at that as a levelized cost of energy. That's a 25-year
analysis, like I do this thing. What is my price per kilowatt for that 25 year problem?
So we're going to Alaska just for context. Why do we pay now? We're gonna Alaska
50 to 75 cents per kilometer. Rail belt, always checked it, and like everybody's escalated a bunch.
I didn't realize that we've gone up this much.
Fairbanks and Homer right up near 30 cents per kilowatt hour and Anchorage is at the bottom at 22, which is a lot more than it was.
But here you go.
And, um, man, there's electric is in the mood.
Also, for context, the community solely we just did ended up at 28 cents, per kill an hour.
Okay, so that's what customers are currently paying in various scenarios.
We can install in most of these places, especially on the rail belt at 15 to 19 cents per kilowatt
hour.
It was just you do.
And that is without the subsidies, without that investment tax that was done away within
July.
And at the end of 2025.
Bit of context, you know, we've got this picture in the background, China isn't stalling, not at an acre level or a kilowatt level, or megawatt-level, they're installing by the desert.
By, like, hundreds, thousands of acres.
Their energy is cheaper because India is doing the same.
Africa is starting.
So their energy will be cheaper.
that they were cheaper in most situations than we were.
Our every community has to figure out
what their energy and the next needs to be.
So last year, 90% of new capacity in the world
was solar and wind, the majority of that being solar.
90%, of the new energy.
What else do you?
All new demand in a world was met by solar in wind.
There's a little up and down between high hero and gas and coal and the other ones.
They kind of eat even down and they do demand, including the AI boom, or whatever.
One of the biggest reasons for that is the, the
other big reason is that it is deployable at a large scale, utility scale one to two
years.
We managed to do the community solar in about six months between signing contract and having
motion upon.
Solar is deployable on rooftops in one to two months.
Energy that's easily put on the grid.
And that is one of the big reasons,
besides price, that we would do this over and over right now.
Great, Mr. Chairman, last slide.
Yeah, before you go on to the next slide,
I think we have a question from Representative Costello.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate your presentation so far.
It's been very interesting.
My question has to do with the homeowner who's
Trying to achieve solar and and integrate it into their energy use
Do they have to buy or purchase?
smart energy software if you're talking about the solar panels and then
Storage which I have some questions about how that works, but you know
What who is keeping track is that the utility is at the home owner and what kind of additional?
preparation does a homeowner need to have and pay for in order to
have a system? That's right. We need the chair. Thank you for
that question. So the the essence of it is that the utility
either has or installs a bidirectional meter and it measures
energy coming in and going out and they keep track.
RCA regulation mandates that they do that, and they
do without cost to the customer.
The more nuanced answer is that we also
provide monitoring for our system.
So we know what the solar made before the house
consumed in it.
And it also gives us a great way to do trouble
appreciating if something's wrong with the system
or see your panel or inverter that's out.
Who's that?
Anything else?
the follow-up. Thank you. I have a question about about storage. It's my
understanding that that's a challenge right now and can you talk about what
storage capacity exists for you know for homeowners.
currently and what where the future is you know I'm sure there's a lot of
research going on at our national labs and we have you in terms of having
storage for use you for the military and different different you
know entities but can you tell me right now what is the what does the
landscape look like in term of storage capacity
small customer residential level, storage is available, but it is not necessary when
you do solar. Most of our system, 95%, are grid top-eyed, which means the inverters match
the grid, synchronize the same way as the balcony or the plug-in solar was described.
They know what the the grids doing, they match the hertz and the frequency, and they make sure
it's safe if they don't produce, if there's no power coming in, so they keep a safe alignment
So, that's grid tied and it is half of the expense of somebody going with a battery.
People now in Alaska currently are doing batteries, mostly for resilience and to make sure they
have power when they get out of it.
tariff rates from the utility.
So that is kind of a luxury product to put it back to me.
It's not necessary.
And if we did require batteries,
only the rich would be able to do so.
It would give you a return on investment of like two or three percent.
It'd be very,
Okay. Any follow up? Okay, thank you, Mr. Ray. Why don't you go ahead and proceed with your next slide.
Okay?
Okay so let's go to slide four.
So why handle that meter?
Okay right now residential solar is modestly attractive.
We've lost the investment tax credit. That was at 30%.
Metals have become more expensive, labor is more
expensive. Dr. COVID and panels have gone up with
tariffs. So the return on investment with a reasonably
installed system on a reasonable rate is maybe six
per percent, maybe seven percent. If you imagine what
$18,000 and I'll give you a 6% box study,
kind of a math for most people.
And so what we've done countless iterations of proposals
with people we do, the economics,
we know how it will affect that bill.
Our computers get hot when we're doing our proposals for people,
our own production and the ramifications
on the bill are calculated.
We increased, we turned our investment,
for people who have annual net metering.
Now you've taken it from a 6% to an 8% or maybe 9%,
and that's the way it's go up as we expect it may
with importing LNG now, or 10%.
If I offer somebody for their hard-earned money,
would you like to make 10% steady?
Pretty safe in those now.
I think most people say how early is that?
essence of the moment right now is that people will not be doing a residential solar without
some of what annual net metering does. And it also like another another real part when you're
going to get trenches and you trying to explain this to people monthly net meeting is a mess.
People cannot understand they don't understand it after they've had it installed they call me
This avoided cost rate, and when do I get it?
That is a wholesale retail,
we throw all these toward the ground.
If we can tell people,
the retail rate that you pay is
a retail you will get back and
you can save what you made in summer and use it in the winter.
This creates trust in
solar utilities government, it helps.
Well, understand what the heck they're getting and they don't feel like they are being duped.
I've seen it over and over. I'd say 20% of the people back out because we don t understand
something on the ear. So, we can create stress. And I would really like to say another important
component to this.
When we come to, you know, in Alaska we want to make our own power.
We want, to allow people to do what they can for themselves and bootstrap themselves up.
But just like in 2010, when the RCA tariff was built to create the first met metering tariff,
report was made, who are we to say that families can't make their own
power at their home and save some money?
I think this is the essence of this bill.
You can make this power, you get to save money off the door and that makes it, and this makes
that especially for the middle class folks. It makes that so it's viable and reasonable and
something they can put the heart and power into. So besides keeping gas in the ground, which might
be beneficial to everybody, I'd like to eat my home with gas. That's one of the best options right
Keep pumps really don't work very well might as 20. I've got one running. It was really struggling
well
We need gas we need it for heat
So keeping it the more people we have solar
Doing solar
The more we can keep gas in the ground and use it when we really need for what we're really near for
Of course if you've gotten people up on roofs and they're working
to install these are good local jobs,
skill made for their non-replaceable
and not something can replace with AI.
And I don't have much trouble hiring people.
These are jobs that young people actually want.
These're jobs to keep good people in our state.
A lot of people want to be part of this
for whatever reason.
They're psyched about solar
and people come to me and want work
and I get great people to deal with it. So it's really a win-win to be making our state
win our people and the saving money. Thank you.
Thank You Mr. May. We have a question from Representative Mears.
Thank you through the chair to Mr. May.
So I imagine it's a range,
but what is the general payback time that your customers,
your individual residential customers
are expecting on their systems?
And is that gonna go down when our electric rates go up?
Thank-you, through-the-chair.
Yes, it will go-down when rates come up.
Whenever rates goes up, so it becomes more valuable.
And that is when it's just like utilities, residential customers can lock in a current
amount.
Their levelized cost of electricity, their LCOE becomes 13 cents.
But they're going to pay for their electricity for 25 years.
And so, but if, yeah, and then if the rates go up to 30 or 35 cents as they may.
then the payoff is quicker.
At the, it's kind of a magic passover there at 10%
return on investment,
it is about a 10 year payout.
The product is a 25 that 30 year follow-up panels
are warranted both for performance
and for workmanship these days for 25 years.
Thanks, any follow up on that?
I'd like to followup on if I can.
The proposed bill includes a fund that would help compensate the utilities for
some revenue that's lost because of the structure of providing full time of use.
And I'm curious, assuming that we didn't have that fund available.
Um, how does that factor in if the utilities find that they have to adjust their rates
so that, they're not losing money with annual net meter customers or having to pass it on
to other customers?
Does that kind of get us back to where we are right now without net metering or is
there still an advantage of a net-metering system even if their rate, um, had to be adjusted
Avoid this revenue loss that the fund is anticipating and trying to compensate for
To the chair to the co-chair
Thank you. I am completely unconcerned about that amount of money
I think frosting
Subservation is very small the current amount
Solar in terms of how much it provides at a residential level is small
And I would absolutely welcome a calculation on this.
I think it's been thrown around with a lot of language
for many years, this cross-stepsization.
It's a bit of a boogie man.
And, I, think we really need to calculate it.
And. I. think this bill would provide for that.
And it would be good.
There are other states who have
created structures where this, your solar kilowatt hours,
that you push back into the grid,
your excess is worth 90% of what you pay when you buy power.
Those are still very economical
and good deals for people going solo.
Thanks. Yeah, you're only talking about the excess, so it's a really small amount of kilowatt
hours, and it really is significant compared to the grid. Great, thank you. Representative
Ruffridge. Thank you, Chair Holland. Chair, thanks for your testimony. A couple questions since
this is your realm of expertise and not mine. If I build a 25 kilo watt capacity system,
And it is July.
How many kilowatt hours on average am I generating?
Do the chair, wow, this is like a math problem
from high school or something.
So I can't tell you what's gonna happen in July,
but I Can tell that if you have a 25 katut new system,
most systems in Alaska will produce about 25,000 kilo
the 80% of that is going to be during the, the back six months of the year. So, um, it's going
to being, uh, yeah, if you put that much in your house, you're going have really good
overall production. Okay, so as, as I read the bill, and maybe, this question would be for
I don't think that this net metering restricts to a home.
It does restrict by kilowatt hours, kind of to the point.
You could put this on, I think, your business, correct me if I'm wrong, has installed panels on
businesses, is what you said. What is the size of, let's say,
Is that a 25 kilowatt or less business?
Let's say for a small business of some sort.
What size is that system?
How many panels is a twenty five kilo watt system.
Mr. May?
Thank you, Chair.
Thank You for the question.
Excellent question,
so many small businesses do the 25KW or Less
because that keeps them in the net metered zone
tear it. And so that is more profitable to be able to, at least do, but that need are enduring
the love. So that many, yeah, Fire Island data on pastry is an example of that. They have 252W.
And that's about in modern panels, that are around 70 panels. We're using a 441 panel.
And that, quite frankly, and disappointed is often a pittance compared to their overall
bill.
The original tariff with a 25 katini cap has made it so the commercial entities become
somewhat uninterested in soy because it takes care of 8% of their bill, it's like, ugh,
my bobble.
That cap really, to jump it up to 50 is a good step for many commercial entities,
a hundred kid everywhere. Actually, we've done it, so I hope you'll.
Any other short follow-up?
Thank you, Mr. May. Any others short- follow up? Otherwise,
we're going to wrap up for today.
Nothing short. Okay, perfect. Thank
you. All right, uh,
we are going need to
wrap it
up
for
today
Mr. May, thank you for joining us today and for your presentation.
And if you have any additional information you'd like to follow up with, we'd welcome that.
With that, will be setting House Bill 164 aside.
That's going to conclude our business for today.
On Thursday, we'll again have a delayed start time of 1.30 as we did today,
so just a note to anyone watching the calendars, 1-30 on Thursday.
And there we will be holding a second hearing for House Bill 252
and taking public testimony for house joint resolution 27 with a...
two minutes available per testifier, we'll also be entertaining amendments for House
Joint Resolution 27. We've received two already and we are going to update the amendment deadline
to tomorrow at 12 p.m. for any further submissions. If members would like any more information
on either of the amendments we've already received, please reach out to myself and my
committee aide Tim Truer and seeing no further business before the committee this meeting
at 258. Thank you, everyone.