Photo of P.E.A.C.H. Apartments in Chapel Hill. (Photo: EMPOWERment Inc.)
The N.C. Utilities Commission has ruled in favor of Duke Energy Carolinas in its dispute with EMPOWERment Inc., over the nonprofit developer’s use of a single master meter to power 10 new low-income apartments in Chapel Hill.
The apartments are for tenants earning at or below 30% of Area Median Income (AMI). EMPOWERment Inc., decided to use one meter for the entire apartment complex to accommodate the rooftop solar panels installed to reduce tenants’ energy costs.
But a majority of commission members said the state’s Master Meter Statute is “clear and unambiguous” in stating that it is “unlawful for a new residential building to be served by a master meter for electric service.
“In addition to generally prohibiting master meters for the provision of electric service, the plain language of the Master Meter Statute creates a secondary requirement that the electric service and meter are in the name of the occupant and that the occupant is billed directly for service,” the commission majority wrote in an order dated Sept. 29, 2025.
Sen. Floyd McKissick (Photo: NC General Assembly)Commissioner Floyd McKissick was the lone dissenter. McKissick argued that EMPOWERment’s plan to use a rooftop solar system should allow it to qualify for an exemption under a provision in state law that allows central meters. The rooftop solar system would have provided central heat, air conditioning and hot water, which he contends, would accomplish “greater energy conservation” than separate meters, he wrote in the dissent.
McKissick noted that EMPOWERment Inc., did not file a formal application for such an exemption.
“Potential tenants should not be ousted from their homes and penalized for EMPOWERment’s reliance on the title of an enacted law or due [to] the EMPOWERment’s lack of knowledge of how the application process works, especially since the proposed rooftop solar installation could potentially meet the requirements of the Central Meter Provision,” McKissick wrote in his dissent.
McKissick is referring to an amendment to the law that led EMPOWERment to believe that it could use a single meter if the landlord and tenants agreed to do so. Tenants would pay electric bills in the monthly rent.
“I would have ordered DEC [Duke Energy Carolinas] to continue to provide temporary electric service to the PEACH Apartments, and I would have allowed EMPOWERment sufficient time to submit a full and complete application for the Commission’s respectful consideration,” McKissick wrote. “A formal application would have provided the specificity and details needed by the Commission to evaluate the rooftop solar project and if it was approved, it would have qualified EMPOWERment for a meritorious statutory exemption that would have permitted master metering.”
Tenants were expected to begin moving in last May, but that date was put on hold pending the outcome of this dispute.
NC Newsline could not immediately reach EMPOWERment’s executive director Delores Bailey for comment. Bailey said in June that it would cost $86,000 to rewire the units so that each has a meter. She noted the Utilities Commission’s decision on her Facebook page.
“Get ready for the fundraiser!” Bailey said. “We gotta raise $125K.”
Hence then, the article about n c utilities commission rules against chapel hill developer in single meter dispute was published today ( ) and is available on NC news line ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( N.C. Utilities Commission rules against Chapel Hill developer in single-meter dispute )
Also on site :
- Wharton’s great contrarian says AI adoption isn’t an easy way to cut headcount: ‘The key thing … is just how much work is involved in doing it’
- Ex-husband charged in deaths of Monique and Spencer Tepe
- A Red State’s High Court Gave Sam Alito the Dobbs Rejoinder He Deserves