Senate Bill 718, the Fair Procurement and Ownership Reform Act, would overhaul North Carolina’s renewable energy procurement framework by shifting electric utilities toward an all-source competitive procurement model. For large electric public utilities serving more than 150,000 customers, the bill requires recurring competitive solicitations for future energy needs and directs the Utilities Commission to evaluate bids using standardized, public criteria that weigh emissions reductions, cost, reliability, and deployment timelines. The bill explicitly broadens procurement beyond solar and storage to include wind, hydropower, geothermal, and other low-carbon resources, and it requires independent third-party oversight and public reporting to increase transparency.
The bill also makes major changes to ownership rules. It eliminates mandated utility ownership percentages in renewable projects, including the prior 55% utility ownership requirement for certain solar and storage projects, and generally bars utilities from holding equity stakes in procured renewable projects. At the same time, it preserves a path for utility self-developed projects if competitive bids fail to meet targets, subject to Commission review and cost caps. The bill further revises shared solar program capacity allocations among customer classes, sets bill-credit rules based on market value, and requires retirement of renewable energy attributes to avoid double counting.
In terms of state law impact, S718 would amend Chapter 62 of the General Statutes by creating a new Article 18 and changing how the Utilities Commission oversees procurement, cost recovery, and compliance. It authorizes recovery of prudently incurred costs for power purchase agreements and interconnection upgrades, imposes uniform capital cost caps, and allows penalties for utilities that fail to comply with procurement requirements or show bias in the process. The bill also sets implementation deadlines, requiring Commission rules within 12 months and the first all-source RFP within 18 months of enactment, with an effective date of October 1, 2025.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is pro-competition, pro-transparency, and focused on expanding renewable energy access while reducing what sponsors characterize as ownership mandates and market distortions. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented public debate in the supplied materials, but the structure of the bill suggests support for broader developer participation and more flexible procurement. The bill’s framing indicates an intent to modernize clean-energy procurement rather than to reduce renewable standards.
Likely points of contention include the elimination of utility ownership mandates, the prohibition on utility equity stakes in procured projects, and the reallocation of shared solar capacity among customer classes. Utilities may object to losing guaranteed ownership shares and to the new procurement constraints, while third-party developers may support the shift toward competitive, developer-driven projects. Customer advocates and policymakers could also debate whether the revised shared solar allocations and bill-credit methodology fairly balance residential, commercial, industrial, and government participants.
S718 would substantially revise North Carolina utility procurement law by creating a new all-source procurement regime in Chapter 62, replacing technology-specific and ownership-mandated renewable procurement requirements with competitive solicitations overseen by the Utilities Commission. It would affect electric public utilities serving more than 150,000 customers, renewable project developers, shared solar participants, and customers in different rate classes, while also changing Commission oversight, reporting, cost recovery, and enforcement authority.
The bill’s tone is generally supportive of renewable energy expansion, market competition, and transparency, with sponsors presenting it as a reform measure to broaden procurement options and remove ownership mandates. No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support beyond the bill’s text. Based on the provisions, the measure appears designed to appeal to proponents of competitive clean-energy procurement and to reduce structural advantages for utility-owned projects.
The main controversies are likely to center on the bill’s elimination of mandated utility ownership percentages, its prohibition on utility equity stakes in procured renewable projects, and its reallocation of shared solar capacity among customer classes. Utilities may resist the loss of ownership rights and the tighter procurement rules, while third-party developers may favor the more open competitive process. There may also be disagreement over whether the bill’s cost caps, penalty provisions, and customer allocation changes strike the right balance between affordability, reliability, and equitable access.