FERC Eases Small Residential Solar QF Filing Burden for Sunrun

May 7, 2019

Reading Time : 3 min

By: Shawn Whites (Paralegal)

Background

FERC’s regulations exempt “[a]ny facility with a net power production capacity of 1 MW or less” from filing a Form 556 to self-certify QF status or an application for certification as a QF.1 To determine a small power production facility’s net power production capacity, FERC aggregates the capacity of any commonly-owned facilities that (i) use the same energy resource (e.g., solar insolation) and (ii) are located at the same site, i.e., “located within one mile of the facility for which [QF status] is sought,” as measured by the distance between the electric generating equipment of the facilities.2 Because developers often pursue multiple projects within the same general vicinity, two or more facilities with common ownership that, standing alone, would not exceed 1 MW in net power production capacity could be deemed to exceed the 1 MW threshold if located within one mile of each other, thereby triggering the requirement to make a filing with FERC to obtain QF status.

In September 2018, Sunrun petitioned FERC to waive its QF filing requirements for separately‑interconnected residential solar photovoltaic systems that are both (i) owned and maintained by Sunrun but provide homeowners with an “option to purchase” (as opposed to the homeowner buying and owning the system outright); and (ii) individually 20 kW or less but when aggregated may exceed 1 MW within one-mile.  Sunrun also requested waiver “of the requirement in Item 8a of Form No. 556 to include in a certification filing for clusters of rooftop PV systems above 20 kW information regarding the facilities covered by the first requested waiver (i.e., 20 kW or less facilities), even if the facilities of 20 kW or less are within one mile of the cluster exceeding 20 kW that is being certified.”3

Sunrun explained that while it does not currently make FERC-jurisdictional wholesale sales, several factors warrant clarification from FERC on the applicability of its QF regulations to Sunrun’s portfolio.  Such factors include (i) Sunrun’s intention to pursue emerging opportunities “for aggregated [DERs] to participate in organized wholesale electric markets,” through which it would make FERC-jurisdictional sales; (ii) the growing concentration of Sunrun’s “third-party owned systems,” which in certain parts of the country may exceed 1 MW by virtue of being located within one mile of each other; and (iii) “increasing inquiries from lenders and investors regarding QF status and the regulatory exemptions it affords.”4

FERC’s Waiver Order

FERC granted both waiver requests, reasoning that “[i]ndividual homeowners’ decisions to use Sunrun’s third-party financing option . . . should not result in the need for Sunrun to continuously monitor the concentration of these individual residential facilities and then file numerous certifications and re-certifications for QF systems of 20 kW or less, which would otherwise be far too small individually to cross the 1 MW threshold for filing but for this third-party financing arrangement.”5 FERC noted, however, that “if any new requirements are placed on [wholesale DER] aggregations” resulting from FERC’s ongoing DER rulemaking proceeding, such “requirements would apply to Sunrun’s aggregated resources irrespective of the outcome of this proceeding.”6

While certain language in the Waiver Order might be interpreted to mean that the waivers FERC granted to Sunrun are generally applicable, other language makes clear that FERC granted the requested waivers only to Sunrun and only for the specific types of facilities addressed in Sunrun’s petition.  Accordingly, similarly situated developers should not rely on the Waiver Order to refrain from filing Form 556s for similar projects or to omit information from Section 8a of Form 556.  Rather, similarly situated parties that would benefit from the waivers that FERC granted to Sunrun should request—and now have reasoning to support—similar waivers from FERC for their facilities.

 


1 18 C.F.R. § 292.203(d)(1) (2019).

2 Id. §§ 292.204(a)(1)-(2).

3 Sunrun, Inc., 167 FERC ¶ 61,059, at P 23 (2019) (“Waiver Order”).

4 Sunrun, Inc. Petition for Declaratory Order at 8, FERC Docket No. EL18-205-000 (filed Sept. 24, 2018).

5 Waiver Order at P 25.

6 Id. at P 30.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

February 10, 2026

The global energy sector enters 2026 amid major policy shifts, geopolitical tension and evolving market dynamics. The Trump administration’s reversal of Biden-era climate initiatives and renewed emphasis on domestic production have reshaped the policy landscape, offering a more favorable regulatory environment even as conflicts abroad, oil price volatility and shifting trade policies tempered deal activity through 2025.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 22, 2026

On January 16, 2026, the National Energy Dominance Council (NDEC) and governors from each of the 13 states in PJM issued a Statement of Principles urging PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) to hold an emergency backstop auction and take other measures to support the entry of new capacity to preserve the reliability of the PJM region. The Statement of Principles calls on PJM to expeditiously file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) tariff revisions that would overhaul aspects of PJM’s market rules to address rising electricity prices and growing reliability risks in the PJM region. The Statement of Principles comes at a time of growing concern that PJM will not have sufficient capacity in the coming years to meet demand due to the retirement of existing generation resources, the glacial pace of new entry and projected increased demand associated with data center development.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

December 21, 2025

On December 19, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued its much-anticipated order on show cause proceeding concerning the co-location of generation and load within the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) market.[1] In the order, the Commission finds that PJM’s tariff is unjust and unreasonable because it does not provide sufficient clarity on the rates, terms, and conditions of service applicable to generators serving Co-Located Load and does not include transmission services appropriate for customers that are willing and able to limit their use of the transmission system in certain conditions. 

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

November 25, 2025

We are pleased to share the program materials and a recording of Akin’s recently presented webinar, “Navigating the Evolving Landscape of Corporate PPAs.”

...

Read More

© 2026 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.