The California Supreme Court just ruled in favor of a lawsuit challenging the legality of NEM 3.0, the landmark policy which slashed electric generation credits for solar customers by an average 75%. The court sided with plaintiffs including the Environmental Working Group (featured in this video), ordering the lower courts to revisit the rollback, which initially took effect on new solar installations commissioned after April 2023.
Bernadette Del Chiaro, Vice President of the Environmental Working Group, told Unplugged California in her featured interview that the Supreme Court heard the case based on the contention that the lower courts deferred, in error, to the CPUC for guidance. Rather, the courts are now charged with revisiting on the merits of NEM policy based on the facts surrounding the case, including independent cost impact research.
Among the studies the CPUC used to justify NEM 3.0 reduced compensation for solar customers was the “cost shift”, which claims solar customers unfairly burden low income non solar eligible customers with higher costs. Keynote studies, dating back to 2021 titled by then-UC Berkeley Haas Business Chair Severin Borenstein, were used extensively in the initial CPUC NEM 3.0 decision. Watchdog groups have accused Borenstein and UC Berkeley with conflict of interest, as recipient of thousands of grants from state investor owned utilities in the period surrounding the studies.
