The PUC issued a preliminary version of its Report on the energy choice ballot initiative. The PUC had been requested to prepare an "objective" analysis of the ballot initiative to help inform the work of the Governor's Committee on Energy Choice (CEC). The issues that were referred to the PUC by the CEC were: 1) timeline for implementation, 2) programs/statutes that need to be revised and how, 3) wholesale market structure, and 4) retail market structure. PUC Chairman Reynolds independently decided that a review of those four issues would entail a review of the potential costs and benefits of energy choice as well.

The Report made a series of unsubstantiated "key findings," including potential rate increases, projected implementation costs, projected stranded costs, and anticipated job losses. It concluded by stating,

"The Energy Choice Initiative will cause Nevada to abolish its control over a key component of electric rates, and change the way Nevada has generated, bought, and sold electricity for over 100 years. No state has ever done it this way before, and it likely create "winners and losers."

If history and experience are any type of guide, commercial and industrial customers, will fare far better, at least initially, than the average Nevada residential family through this proposed change. Large commercial customers who currently cannot depart bundled electricity service pursuant to NRS Chapter 704B may financially benefit the most, as they cannot currently access a competitive open marketplace that may offer benefits to high-volume electricity users. Monthly bills are reasonably likely to increase in the short term. Immediate Nevada-specific benefits to single-family residential customers, and low-income customers, remain "elusive" and difficult to quantify."

At yesterday's meeting of a CEC workgroup, a member representing Sands Casino gave a blistering critique of the Report and the PUC. Others, including former FERC Chairman Jon Wellinghoff criticized the lack of evidence underlying the report's findings.

The preliminary Report is not yet final. It is expected to be taken up at the Commission's April 30th agenda meeting. This would allow the Report to be considered at the final meeting of the CEC scheduled for May 9th. The full text of the Report is available on the NEM Website.

The Commission adopted an Order on implementation of Act 40 of 2017, which included a provision requiring that solar renewable energy credits (SRECs) must come from within the state of Pennsylvania. The law was intended to address the problem created by previously allowing SRECs to be purchased from out-of-state, but not allowing SRECs to be sold outside of the state.

The Commission unanimously adopted a Joint Motion of Chairman Brown and Vice Chairman Place to form the basis of a Commission Order. As noted in the Motion the "question here is whether or not this statute is intended to 'grandfather' out-of-state facilities certified before October 30, 2017, to generate Tier I Solar credits." A Commission press release stated that "today’s motion still enables some out-of-state facilities - specifically facilities already certified as AEPS Tier 1 Solar Photovoltaic and having contracts with a Pennsylvania utility, supplier, load serving entity, electric or municipal cooperative for the sale of solar credits – to maintain certification until those contracts expire. Additionally, any out-of-state Tier 1 solar credit generated before Oct. 30, 2017, retains its Tier 1 solar attribute for the banking life span enumerated in the AEPS." The full text of the Order will be posted on the NEM Website when made available electronically.