Million Solar Roofs bill dies at finish line
SB1 background | Controversial amendments | More info
SB1 killed in Assembly
Senate Bill 1, the Millions Solar Roofs Initiative, SB1 was killed on the Assembly floor of the State Legislature on Thursday, Sept. 8, 2005, ending a three-year effort by numerous solar energy industry, consumer, and environmental groups to establish a comprehensive, long-term solar program in California.
The bill succumbed to partisan politics brought about by several controversial amendments championed primarily by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) as the bill made its way through Senate and Assembly committee hearings during this legislative session. These amendments concerned the type of contractor license required for solar installations to qualify for MSRI rebate funds and a requirement to pay prevailing wages for "non-residential" MSRI projects. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger had indicated he would veto SB1 if the bill came to him with the prevailing wage amendment.
Recent press about SB1:
|
About SB1
Originally co-authored by Senators Kevin Murray (D-Los Angeles) and John Campbell (R-Orange County), SB1 championed the proliferation of solar installations on California homes and businesses. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger initially supported this legislation toward realizing his campaign promise to promote solar energy. SB1 would have bolstered the state's solar rebate funding and net metering policy.
SB1's main elements included:
- Requiring the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to establish a new, 10-year fund to provide rebates for 3,000 MW of solar photovoltaic systems on a million new and existing homes and businesses. The rebate would have declined each year until 2016, driving down prices while ensuring a self-sufficient solar market in 10 years. Funding for this new rebate was to come from an existing, $200 million renewable energy fund generated by surcharges on customer utility bills, with low-income utility ratepayers exempted from these surcharges.
- Requiring all builders of new single-family housing developments with 50 or more homes to offer solar power systems as an option to home buyers beginning in 2010, rather than requiring a set number of new homes be built with solar. Industry research has indicated that about 10% of California home buyers would choose this option. Currently about 1% of newly built homes incorporate solar power.
- Raising the net metering cap from 0.5% of peak load to 2%, with another raise to 5% after review by the PUC. Net metering is the mechanism for determining how utility customers receive credit for excess electricity generated by their grid-connected solar systems. This provision in SB! would have raised the current limit to that credit.
The bill left the program details of the new rebate fund to be worked out by the PUC. The new rebate program fund would have supplanted existing solar rebate programs, including the California Energy Commission's Emerging Renewables Program (ERP) (rebates for solar projects up to 30 kilowatts) and the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) (rebates for 30-100 kilowatt solar projects). As of March 5, 2005, PG&E stopped accepting reservations for SGIP projects due to overwhelming demand and insufficient rebate funds.
Controversial amendments
Two key amendments to SB1 that caused it's demise were added by labor interests late in the game, eroding the bill's bipartisan support. One of SB1's original authors, Sen. Campbell, asked to have his name removed from the bill (see his message about this).
- Prevailing wage: Building and labor groups argued that because the SB1 rebate would be paid for through a public goods surcharge, the program represented an unprecedented level of public subsidy for private construction, thus raising the prevailing wage issue.
- Contractor licensing: The Internal Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the electrician's union, asserted that only licensed electrical contractors (C-10s) are qualified to install solar systems because of their in-depth knowledge of the National Electrical Code. However, nothing in the C-10 electrical contractor licensing requirements specifically covers solar photovoltaic knowledge or skills. The solar industry has worked closely with the Contractor State Licensing Board (CSLB) in recent years to revise C-46 licensing requirements to focus extensively on solar PV installation work.
The solar industry fought to get this amendment changed to ensure that contractors with general, C-10, or C-46 licenses could continue to install solar systems, as permitted under current law. This Preventing general and C-46 contractors from performing work they are qualified and already authorized by the Contractors State Licensing Board to do would have restricted competition, reducing the pool of qualified solar installers in the state, and limiting consumer choice.
Legislative advocates for solar organizations and businesses worked extremely hard to find bi-partisan compromises on the prevailing wage and contractor licensing issues to assuage labor and contractor groups' concerns while ensuring that SB1 did not have unintended negative consequences for the solar PV industry.
More on SB1:
Other solar legislation: SB1017
Another solar bill, and SB1017, authored by Sen. Campbell, would extend the state's existing solar energy tax credit for 10 more years through 2016, which would otherwise expire after this year. For every dollar spend on a solar installation above any rebated amount, homeowners would receive a 7.5% tax credit.
Governor's summary of 2005 solar legislation »
California Solar Energy Industry Association's list of important solar-related legislation to watch for 2005/2006 »
More about 2004 solar legislation »
More about existing solar rebate and incentives »
Learn about CCEnergy's advocacy work »
|
