APS has been charging a punitive and discriminatory fee against residential rooftop solar customers for almost a year and AriSEIA has been fighting it every step of the way. Today we joined with the Solar Energy Industries Association and two individual ratepayers in filing for an appeal with the Arizona Court of Appeals.

AriSEIA filed for reconsideration/rehearing today on the APS grid access charge and "legacy adjustment." These are two charges that uniquely punish solar customers for using less power from APS. The fee is currently ~$2.50 a month per customer, but APS has said it should be $88 a month per customer and the ACC has ordered them to increase it in their next rate case, which they plan to file this year. Applying for rehearing is a necessary step towards appealing to the Arizona Court of Appeals, which we plan to do on January 30th.

Salt River Project
1500 N  Mill Avenue
Tempe, AZ 85281
RE: Salt River Project (SRP) Status Change Enforcement of Master Meter
 
Dear Board of Directors and Staff,
 
It recently came to our attention that SRP proceeded with a rule change that reduced or eliminated a multi-family development’s ability to meter their facility at a centralized location. This change has significant impacts on our industry and our collaboration efforts with property developers using the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) who proceeded over the last 18 months with development plans incorporating solar projects to an almost ubiquitous degree to claim the 20% Qualifying Low-Income Residential Building or Benefit Project tax credit. These developments have executed contracts, ordered electrical gear, and proceeded on the basis that their ability to elect the metering infrastructure design of their own accord would be unhindered. The essence of the solar bonus from the LIHTC program is to ensure that solar benefits are passed through to Low-Income Residents to reduce costs, and we urge SRP staff to adjust the rule change allowing for both centralized and distributed metering arrangements subject to a developer’s preference.
 
It is also important to point out that in SRP territory, the lack of Virtual Net Metering, a program which allows multi-family developments across the country to apply solar benefits virtually from a single (most cost effective) interconnection point, is not an option and therefore the only sensible route for these properties to access solar is through a pre-meditated strategy to centralize their electrical infrastructure in a manner that allows for a solar project to be implemented.
 
We recognize that our request may relate to other circumstances for Limited/Moderate Income (LMI) residents who wish to access SRP’s existing bill assistance programs, and we understand the importance of SRP’s plight to continue providing value to these residents in every form possible; however, the millions of dollars that have been invested by numerous LMI residential developers (Ulysses Development Group, Weis-Dominium, DEVCO to name a few in the area with active solar interests) under the auspice of their ability to centralize metering for a cost-effective solar project should be considered.
 
We understand the argument that low-income residents will lose access to individual plans for low income residents, but also want to point out that individually metered solar projects have the same restriction, i.e., once solar is put on an apartment complex, the ability to access low income rate plans is eliminated.
 
This change will result in projects costing 10% - 20% more due to the multiple interconnections, and the challenge to manage the property will be increased. The benefits of allowing master metering with solar are that the developer can install a solar system, share the savings with the tenant, and have a much easier time administering the site than with numerous interconnections.
 
SRP is expecting massive new load growth. We would encourage SRP to work with developers and solar companies to create development friendly policies that encourage more generation on the grid. Solar and solar+storage can be a great asset to “beating the peak.” Putting restrictions on the most straightforward way to achieve those goals is a detriment to the projects and the residents.
 
Further, such significant changes should undergo a stakeholder process before being implemented. This is the first we have heard about this change and the impending change or its justifications was never discussed with AriSEIA.
 
We recommend changing the Electric Service Specifications in 9.I.F to:
 
F. A Master Meter Service is available for new commercial and multi-level residential projects where SRP’s billing meters cannot be located on the ground floor or one level below the ground floor, provided this is not the lowest level of the Building. Also, master metering is allowed when a developer is intending to install a solar system and it would be infeasible to install it on every meter of the building.
 
Sincerely,
/s/ Autumn T. Johnson
Executive Director
AriSEIA 
(520) 240-4757
[email protected]

​City of Buckeye
Planning & Zoning
530 E. Monroe Ave.
Buckeye, AZ 85326
 
RE: City of Buckeye Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Ordinance (3.2 Use-Specific Standards, (D) Battery Energy Storage System (BESS))
 
Dear Mr. Wingard and Ms. Woods and Planning and Zoning Staff,
 
The Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (AriSEIA) is the State’s solar, storage, and electrification trade association. We are active on energy policy issues at every level of government in Arizona. We have previously engaged on the City of Eloy, City of Surprise, Mohave County, City of Chino Valley, and Yavapai County solar or BESS ordinances. We only became aware of this pending ordinance draft recently and apologize that our comments were not provided to you earlier in your process. We very much hope to continue to be engaged with the City as this process progresses. Our primary comments for the purposes of this letter pertain to the setback from residences and the lack of a waiver provision. We recommend that the City reduce the BESS 1,320’ setback from residential property requirement to 150’. We also recommended adding a waiver provision to the ordinance.
 
Setbacks
The American Planning Association found the national setback average for BESS-specific setbacks used distances of 50-150 feet from property lines.[1] The BESS 1,320’ setback requirement is significantly above BESS setback standards in other jurisdictions and will restrict clean energy development in the City of Buckeye.[2] We recommend 150’ based on the Phoenix Regional Standard Operating Procedures Battery Energy Storage Systems policy.[3] The American Clean Power Association (ACP) provides a helpful FAQ that covers questions about battery safety and air emissions.[4] ACP also has a Claims v. Facts one-pager on battery safety, included here as Attachment A. “It should also be noted that the average emissions rates of equivalent masses of plastics exceed those of batteries.”[5] Additionally, sampling was done by the Environmental Health Division and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after the Moss Landing incident and “no threat to human health or the surrounding environment” was found.[6] All electricity generation and energy storage creates some amount of risk. However, battery incidents represent only 2% of battery installations.[7] Setbacks for batteries should not be more onerous than setbacks for other energy storage devices, such as those that contain fossil fuels.
 
In (D)(3)(a) we recommend the setback measure from the dwelling unit or residence and not the residential property line.
 
Waiver Provision
The current ordinance draft covers the primary land use matrix for all zoning districts in Buckeye. The ordinance should include a waiver provision in the event a project proposal conflicts with some component of the permitted ordinance uses but is otherwise an ideal site. The City of Eloy Solar and BESS Ordinance includes such a provision.[8] We recommend adding language such as that included in 21-3-1.39(B) of Eloy’s ordinance.
 
Other
We appreciate the applicability of the plan excluding existing BESS general maintenance and repair in (D)(2). We would recommend considering National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 855 for minimums on mitigating risks associated with BESS.[9]
 
Thank you for your time and consideration and we look forward to continuing to engage with the
City on this ordinance as the stakeholder process progresses.
 
Respectfully,
Autumn Johnson
Executive Director
AriSEIA 
(520) 240-4757
[email protected]

[1] American Planning Association, Zoning Practice, P.10 (Mar. 2024), available here https://planning-org-uploaded-
media.s3.amazonaws.com/publication/download_pdf/Zoning-Practice-2024-03.pdf

[2] We have included our Maricopa County economic impact study as Attachment B and our water analysis as
Attachment C.

[3] City of Phoenix, Battery Energy Storage Systems, April 2023, available here https://www.phoenix.gov/firesite/Documents/205.20A%20Battery%20Energy%20Storage%20Systems.pdf.

[4] American Clean Power Association, Energy Storage: Safety FAQ, available here https://cleanpower.org/wp-
content/uploads/gateway/2023/07/ACP-ES-Product-4-BESS-Safety-FAQs-230724.pdf.

[5] Consolidated Edison and NYSERDA, Considerations for ESS Fire Safety, Feb. 9, 2017, at iii, available here
https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/-/media/Project/Nyserda/files/Publications/Research/Energy-Storage/20170118-ConEd-
NYSERDA-Battery-Testing-Report.pdf.

[6] County of Monterey, Air Quality Testing Information and Process During Moss Landing Fire Incident, Sept. 30,
2022, available here https://www.countyofmonterey.gov/Home/Components/News/News/9345/1336.

[7] California Public Utility Commission, Energy Storage Procurement Study: Safety Best Practices, 2023, available
here https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/energy-division/documents/energy-storage/2023-05-
31_lumen_energy-storage-procurement-study-report-attf.pdf.

[8] Eloy Ordinance, 21-3-1.39, available here https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/eloyaz/latest/eloy_az/0-0-0-9381.

[9] NFPA, Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems, 2023, available here https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/nfpa-855-standard-development/855.