This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target | |
|---|---|
| Name | Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target |
| Other names | SMART |
| Established | 2018 |
| Jurisdiction | Massachusetts |
| Program type | Incentive program |
| Administered by | Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources |
| Status | Active |
Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target
The Solar Massachusetts Renewable Target is a Commonwealth of Massachusetts renewable energy incentive program designed to accelerate deployment of distributed solar photovoltaic systems across the state. It builds on prior policies such as the Renewable Portfolio Standard (United States), Net metering, and the Massachusetts Clean Energy Standard while interacting with entities like the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, Eversource Energy (Massachusetts), National Grid (United States), and Unitil Corporation. The program aligns with broader initiatives including the Global Warming Solutions Act, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, and the Zero-emission vehicle mandate in pursuit of decarbonization and grid modernization.
SMART emerged following legislative and regulatory efforts tied to laws and decisions such as the An Act to Promote Energy Diversity (Massachusetts) and proceedings before the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities. Debates invoked stakeholders including Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, Massachusetts State Senate, Massachusetts House of Representatives, and advocacy groups such as Northeast Clean Energy Council, Acadia Center, Environmental Defense Fund, and Sierra Club (US). Predecessors and contemporaneous programs referenced during formulation included the Solar Carve-Out, Solar Renewable Energy Certificates, and state-level implementations in California Solar Initiative, New York NY-Sun, and New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. Legal and policy frameworks considered federal influences like the Investment Tax Credit, decisions by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and rulings related to interstate transmission and wholesale markets administered by ISO New England.
SMART was structured as a fixed-rate, declining-block incentive program with capacity blocks and locational adders to reflect distribution system needs addressed by utilities such as Eversource Energy (Massachusetts), National Grid (United States), and Unitil Corporation. Goals included reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Global Warming Solutions Act, expanding access to solar for municipalities like Boston, Massachusetts and towns across Middlesex County, Massachusetts and Plymouth County, Massachusetts, supporting workforce development partners such as Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, and catalyzing private investment from firms like Sunrun, Tesla, Inc., NextEra Energy Resources, and Borrego Solar Systems. The framework paralleled market designs in regions overseen by ISO New England, and coordinated with financial instruments including state tax incentives, municipal programs, and federal tax provisions like the Investment Tax Credit.
Eligible technologies included photovoltaic systems interconnected to distribution systems managed by Eversource Energy (Massachusetts), National Grid (United States), and Unitil Corporation, as well as community shared solar projects involving entities such as MassSolar, Cape Light Compact, and municipal aggregations like Cambridge, Massachusetts. Incentives were delivered through technology-specific compensation mechanisms similar in concept to Solar Renewable Energy Certificate schemes and net metering alternatives, with base compensation rates and adders for factors such as location, energy storage pairing, brownfield siting involving the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, and affordable housing partnerships with organizations like Habitat for Humanity. Program rules addressed interconnection standards coordinated with Northeast Utilities infrastructure and compliance protocols referencing Underwriters Laboratories standards for modules and inverters produced by manufacturers such as First Solar and LG Electronics.
Administration roles involved the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources issuing regulations, the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities overseeing tariff approvals, and distribution utilities managing enrollment and interconnection. Market participants included project developers like Borrego Solar Systems, Ameresco, SunPower Corporation, and community partners such as Solarize Mass campaigns and municipal entities including Somerville, Massachusetts and Worcester, Massachusetts. Implementation engaged labor organizations like International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and financing structures from institutions including MassDevelopment and community development financial institutions. The program interface with regional stakeholders included ISO New England for grid integration and Northeast Clean Energy Council for industry coordination.
SMART drove increases in distributed solar capacity across counties such as Suffolk County, Massachusetts and Essex County, Massachusetts, contributing to state climate targets under the Global Warming Solutions Act and complementing procurement actions by entities like Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and state universities such as University of Massachusetts Amherst. Economic outcomes engaged companies like Sunrun and NextEra Energy that developed projects, while job impacts intersected with workforce programs run by Massachusetts Clean Energy Center and training providers affiliated with Northeast College of Electrical Line Workers. The program influenced retail solar market dynamics and investor activity including municipal partnerships in Brookline, Massachusetts and utility-scale interactions affecting ISO New England operational planning.
Critiques originated from trade groups and advocates including Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and environmental organizations debating equity concerns raised by ACEEE and Union of Concerned Scientists. Controversies addressed issues of ratepayer impacts discussed before the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, the allocation of capacity across distribution circuits monitored by utilities like Eversource Energy (Massachusetts), and perceived barriers for low-income communities highlighted by Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance. Litigation and regulatory disputes referenced filings involving developers such as SunPower Corporation and consumer advocates like AARP (organization). Stakeholder negotiation mirrored experiences in other jurisdictions involving California Public Utilities Commission and New York State Public Service Commission.
Ongoing policy evolution considers coordination with state climate legislation including the Act Driving Clean Energy and Offshore Wind and potential modifications to align with regional market rules from ISO New England and federal developments at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Prospective changes may address equitable access models promoted by organizations like GridLab, expanded storage incentives involving companies such as Tesla, Inc., and integration pathways with offshore wind projects developed by firms like Ørsted (company) and Equinor. Future administrative actions will likely involve continued rulemaking by the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources and tariff reviews at the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities while engaging stakeholders including municipal governments, labor unions, and renewable industry groups.
Category:Massachusetts energy policy