(CNS): Residents who have legally purchased and installed solar and battery systems from licensed local providers are being told by CUC that their systems are non-compliant and they could face fines and disconnection if they are using equipment not approved and inspected by the power firm. OfReg has said it is looking into the correspondence circulated by CUC to customers who have installed solar panels, as it has concerns about “inappropriate hurdles to homeowner participation in solar”.
Meanwhile, CUC has said that any solar equipment connected to its grid must be inspected and approved by the company for safety reasons.
However, homeowners using domestic solar panels and the local companies providing them say the equipment has been approved by the Department of Planning’s Building and Control Unit. They are asking why CUC would disrupt the domestic market after the NCFC government has made a policy commitment to accelerate the transition to solar and encourage domestic green energy.
Consequently, they have started a petition calling on government to intervene and “stop any enforcement action, threat of disconnection, fines, or other punitive measures by CUC against homeowners with existing solar and/or battery installations”.
The petitioners are accusing CUC of trying to curtail and control all domestic solar. “We are calling on OfReg and the Cayman Islands Government to immediately halt this enforcement campaign, protect existing installations, and put residents, not a monopoly utility, back in charge of their own roofs,” the petition, which went live on Sunday, says.
“On 19 May 2026, Caribbean Utilities Company issued a public statement promoting renewable energy and encouraging Cayman residents to ‘go green’ to lower their bills. Four hours later, on the same day, CUC sent every solar installation company in Cayman a letter restricting what their customers are permitted to do with their own solar and battery systems. The very next day, the government’s one-year progress update again highlighted solar as a key strategy for reducing the cost of living for Cayman families. These messages cannot both be true,” the petition states.
The petitioners said the campaign is not anti-CUC, which has a legitimate, important role in operating Cayman’s grid. “But that role does not extend to threatening private homeowners who chose to invest in their own clean energy future on their own property,” they said.
After CNS asked OfReg about the situation, the regulator issued a press release on Monday evening saying that it is aware of the issues being raised. OfReg said it is already gathering information to properly assess the situation, including concerns relating to customer communications, approval processes, installer requirements, and the distinction between regulatory obligations and utility operating procedures.
OfReg wrote to CUC last week pointing out that any references in letters to customers relating to legal obligations, offences, enforcement outcomes, reporting requirements or deadlines must be properly framed within the applicable legislation, approved programmes, licence conditions, codes and regulatory frameworks. “CUC should not be implying that it independently determines regulatory compliance obligations or enforcement outcomes,” the regulator added.
OfReg said it did not object to the “objective of improving visibility of distributed generation and encouraging compliance with applicable safety and regulatory requirements”. However, it is reviewing the information available and has requested that CUC engage with the regulator on any follow-up actions, compliance programmes, enforcement matters or further communications arising from this issue.
OfReg said it would “continue to assess the matter and consider the appropriate next steps, including whether additional regulatory guidance or clarification to the market is required, to help ensure a clear, consistent and legally sound approach that does not create inappropriate hurdles to homeowner participation in solar and renewable energy solutions”.
In response to the petitioners’ concerns about the letters and their potential impact on solar users, CUC told CNS that it was all about safety. “CUC supports the adoption of rooftop solar panels and battery systems by customers. For properties that are connected to CUC’s grid, any additional generation should be reviewed by CUC, which includes solar panels.”
The inspection ensures the safety of the installation and awareness for CUC, a spokesperson for the company said, adding that the power company had found “multiple installations where solar panels and batteries were not configured as the installer or owner expected/designed them to be”.
The spokesperson said that this is dangerous for CUC staff and contractors because technical teams may begin work on equipment they believe to be deenergized, only to discover that it is not. Inspections ensure compliance with programmes that have been approved by the regulator to ensure the configuration does not lead to subsidisation of costs by other customers.  
CUC said properties that are completely off-grid with no active CUC account do not need to be inspected. CNS has been told that at least one customer who is completely off the grid did receive a letter about inspection and approval, but CUC stated that if that was the case, it indicates they have an active CUC account and are not off-grid. 
“Some of these installations are bypassing the approved programmes, but the benefit of the grid as a backup service is still being received and not being paid for,” the company stated. “When these customers’ systems are taken offline for maintenance or due to failure, the grid has to be at a sufficient level to provide the needed amount of electricity.”
CUC claimed that the costs associated with maintaining and supporting grid services are not being properly accounted for, creating an imbalance that shifts costs onto other customers who may not have the means to install solar systems themselves. “CUC does not seek to restrict or control the growth of solar energy. Rather, our role is to ensure that customer-owned systems are safe for employees and operate within approved regulatory programmes,” the spokesperson told CNS.
CNS has also contacted the sustainability ministry, which is responsible for the National Energy Policy, and we are awaiting a response.
See the petition here.
See the letters sent by CUC to local installers and customers below:
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
OfReg have a challenge as more people get more creative power plans for their homes & buildings that fall outside the expected designs the regulatory system was designed for. Like having to prove that your off-grid solar is actually off-grid, in a system that was clearly built on the assumption that solar would always be grid-tied (or so small as to not mater, like a solar powered pump not a solar powered car).
The next issue is going to be larger scale battery ‘generators’ – especially useful if anyone suggests variable peak rate electricity costs – and their ability to ‘move’ electricity across time and space.
Hate to have to be the one to say it but it’s CUC’s grid that supplies 99.9% of population and they must be allowed to protect it.
That said, they should have 0 input if someone wants to come off the grid entirely.
Bury the power lines.
As soon as I can afford it, I will be adding panels and battery backup and using that for my day to day electricity consumption. Just to stick to it these thieves.
we’d be a lot further ahead if cuc didn’t tell me what I could had couldn’t do with solar panels
Follow the money!
CUC is so full of it, it’s getting ridiculous.
Are there safety concerns with solar, yes. What are they? The concerns are that linemen working on downed and theoretically de-energized power lines could be electrocuted by power that’s in the lines from someone’s solar array. A very real concern.
And guess what…all over the world they have this concern. Guess what else…solar arrays have been designed for decades to deal with it.
They either have anti-islanding inverters, which sense the grid is down and kill the power from the array. Or they have active disconnects which sense the grid is down and separate the solar from the grid.
This is addressed in building code and manufactured equipment literally allllll over the world.
For those who don’t know: BCU in Cayman is incredibly diligent. If one single thing is wrong then the inspector will not pass the installation. If these installations are passed, it means that the homeowner’s system has all the code required anti-islanding stuff to keep linemen safe.
BTW, CUC is the one who worked with BCU to determine what type of safety features needed to be incorporated.
CUC needs to get it’s comms straight. There is a guy with a 100% off grid parkin structure which he uses to charge his EV. It is not connected to the grid at all. His house is connected to the grid, the solar is not. He got the letter to disconnect his system.
CUC DOES NOT WANT HOMEOWNERS TO OWN THEIR OWN POWER. Loud for the kids in the back.
Don’t worry…Sacha will be on CMR to lie to us all tomorrow morning.
All sounds good IF things are connected correctly.
Also does BCU have a single electrical engineer to determine the correct requirements for themselves?
ofreg….the wrong answer to a question no one asked.
Given their action on the candw.ky shutdown (at least temporarily) I’ll give OfReg their flowers and benefit of the doubt here that they may be useful in injecting some sanity into the immediate problem.
CUC desperately trying to keep its monopoly..
Power bills are out of control !
Everyone needs solar at this point !
This is more of the same: CUC throwing up roadblocks to prevent people from saving money unless CUC can profit from them. Sounds a lot like being harassed by gangsters, doesn’t it? OfReg, won’t you PLEASE put an end to this tyranny?
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment *
Name
Email
Website


Δ
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Cayman News Service

source