A programme reviewed on a schedule
The net metering programme is updated biennially. In the 2026 cycle each utility filed a calculation of its blended residential rate on March 1, 2026, the Department provided its worksheets on April 1, 2026, and utilities were directed to file tariffs by June 15, 2026 for effect on August 1, 2026.
That is a predictable, public process rather than an arbitrary one, which is a genuine advantage over states where terms change with less notice.
What the process has produced, however, is a steady reduction in the value of the adjustors for net metering customers over successive updates.
The blended residential rate has moved the other way in the 2026 cycle, with the Department recommending an increase of $0.0231 per kWh, so the two components have not moved together.
What a projection should say about it
Ask whether your terms are fixed for a period once you enrol, or whether subsequent biennial updates would apply to you. That single answer determines how much the review cycle matters to your project.
Get that answer from the utility or the Commission rather than from a sales conversation, because it is the difference between a fixed input and a moving one.
Ask what the projection assumed about compensation across its term. A model holding today figures flat for twenty-five years is assuming roughly twelve biennial reviews leave things where they are.
Ask for the projection with compensation reduced, by a quarter and by half, so you can see how much of the case depends on terms that are reviewed on a schedule.
The part that does not depend on the review
Electricity you consume at the moment it is generated reduces what you buy from the utility, and that value comes from the retail rate rather than from the net metering compensation formula.
So a design weighted toward self-consumption is less exposed to the biennial review than one weighted toward export, even in a state where export compensation is comparatively generous.
That is not an argument for the aggressive daytime-load sizing that Georgia or Indiana require. Vermont compensation is strong enough that annual sizing remains reasonable.
It is an argument for asking what proportion of the projected savings comes from avoided purchases rather than from net metering compensation, so you know where the exposure sits.
What belongs in a Vermont projection
The 30 percent federal Residential Clean Energy Credit under Section 25D expired for property placed in service after December 31, 2025, so a cash or loan purchase in Rutland receives no federal tax credit.
Section 48E survives at 30 percent for third-party owners under leases and power purchase agreements, so ask what a provider claims and what reaches you in the rate.
What exists is compensation under Rule 5.100 built from a blended residential rate and two adjustors, reviewed biennially.
Ask whether your terms are fixed on enrolment, ask what the projection assumed about future reviews, and ask to see it with compensation reduced.