A Massachusetts Senate committee held a hearing on policies to accelerate solar deployment across the Commonwealth, with witnesses urging faster permitting, revised incentive rules and changes to interconnection practices so projects can qualify for expiring federal tax credits.

The Department of Energy Resources commissioner, Elizabeth Mahoney, told the committee that Massachusetts has expanded solar from roughly 3 megawatts in 2008 to 3.5 gigawatts by the end of last year and that the state’s SMART (Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target) program will be a central tool to keep building. "Solar is already the fastest, cheapest way to add electricity to our grid," Mahoney said, urging use of SMART 3’s “evergreen” approach and annual rate-setting to respond to market changes.

Why it matters: Federal rules that affect the investment tax credit (ITC) create urgency to bring projects into construction windows that preserve federal benefits, witnesses said. The hearing focused on concrete steps — automated permitting, remote inspections, flexible interconnection and targeted state incentives — that advocates and vendors say can cut the “soft costs” that now make rooftop and community solar significantly more expensive in the U.S. than in other countries.

Key facts and testimony

- Commissioner Elizabeth Mahoney (Department of Energy Resources) described SMART 3 as an "evergreen incentive program" with a base compensation rate plus adders for specific project types, said DOER is accepting applications for up to 900 megawatts, and said the program now includes protections to exclude development on some high‑value lands and a dynamic upfront mitigation fee. Mahoney also said that behind‑the‑meter solar helped New England during a June heat wave and that the administration expects solar to deliver large annual savings; she told the panel, "We believe that with the addition of this new program, solar will actually deliver $300,000,000 in energy savings a year."

- Multiple industry and nonprofit witnesses urged automated permitting and remote inspections as immediate cost reductions. Bronte Payne, senior policy manager at Sunrun, recommended removing a proposed requirement that all net‑metering facilities enroll in SMART and called for statewide standardized permitting and interconnection reforms. Hannah Birnbaum of Permit Power and Matthew McAllister of the SolarAPP+ Foundation described automated permit platforms that can issue instant approvals and said jurisdictions that adopt such platforms typically shave weeks off permitting timelines; Permit Power estimated smart permitting could reduce a typical install cost by about $5,500.

- Interconnection issues were raised repeatedly. Testimony cited utility service‑territory ‘‘SIP’’ (system improvement plan) areas where upgrades are concentrated and said flexible interconnection and revised deposit structures (for example, permitting bonds rather than large upfront cash deposits) could unlock projects and reduce the need for immediate cash outlays. Bronte Payne noted that an interconnection reform proposal before the Department of Public Utilities would align thresholds, require a common system modification fee, and consider changes to how upgrade costs are allocated.

- Equity and community solar: Kate Daniel of the Coalition for Community Solar Access stressed community solar’s role in reaching households that cannot put panels on their roofs and recommended several actions including a 10‑gigawatt solar target by 2035 (in draft bills S.2269/H.3520 cited at the hearing), interconnection reforms and a retail storage incentive. Several witnesses also urged targeted state tax incentives for low‑income households and affordable housing, including proposals to increase the state residential credit and make some credits refundable for qualifying low‑income installations.

- Caps and policy frictions: Witnesses re‑raised two caps in current law: a 10 megawatt municipal cap and regional caps tied to utility territories, both of which speakers said can constrain municipal and regional projects. Haskell Whirlin and others asked that government entities be treated comparably to other actors and urged removing municipal‑level barriers to installations on public buildings and schools.

- Legal and programmatic status: DOER and industry witnesses noted several regulatory and legislative threads moving in parallel: DOER’s SMART 3 regulations and draft 2026 rates, DPU dockets on interconnection and net‑crediting (net billing), and pending legislation referenced by witnesses (the governor’s energy affordability bill, H.4144, and consumer protection language proposed in H.450). Commissioner Mahoney also said Massachusetts joined a legal challenge related to a cancelled federal program ("Solar for All") and that the state filed a declaration in that litigation.

Discussion, not decisions

No formal votes or final orders were recorded at the hearing. The session collected testimony and clarifying questions from senators and committee members; witnesses offered program details and recommended statutory and regulatory changes. Committee members suggested legislative approaches such as phased effective dates to allow implementation while lifting caps and asked for follow‑up materials, model legislative language, and data to evaluate cost and budget impacts.

Ending

Witnesses agreed that there is no single fix: the hearing emphasized a package approach—streamlined permitting, remote inspections, flexible interconnection, tailored incentives and targeted measures for low‑income and municipal projects—together could meaningfully increase solar deployment in Massachusetts. Committee staff asked witnesses to provide slide decks, model language and follow‑up analyses for the committee’s consideration.