In an unprecedented move, North Carolina Utilities Commission Chair Brawley issued an order on April 23, 2026 to pause Duke Energy’s current solicitation for solar and battery storage to serve new and existing customers in North and South Carolina. Solar and storage resources were found by the NCUC to be an essential part of the low-cost and most reliable portfolio of resources to serve customer needs when the Commission approved Duke’s plan in November 2024. Chair Brawley was on the Commission and voted to approve Duke’s plans for solar and storage at that time.
The amount of solar and storage that Duke proposed to procure this year, before Chair Brawley paused the solicitation, was already less than was found to be most economic during the 2024 Carbon Plan proceeding. So even though Duke’s proposed procurement encompassed a more modest amount of resources, given the load growth and affordability challenges facing Duke and its customers right now, Chair Brawley went further and ordered Duke to halt the procurement process entirely. Chair Brawley’s order purports to leave an opportunity for Duke to propose a new amount after the NCUC issues its final decision in the ongoing 2026 Carbon Plan proceeding, but that order will come too late for any meaningful procurement to occur this year. That delay will make it harder for Duke to meet load growth and lead to higher bills for Duke’s customers.
By the Order’s logic, Duke should procure more solar, not less
Chair Brawley’s Order claims that the 2026 solar procurement targets should be based on a Commission-approved Carbon Plan IRP, and not on the one filed by Duke but not yet ruled upon by the Commission. Following that logic, Duke should be procuring more solar this year, not less. The Commission approved a Carbon Plan IRP that included the procurement of 3,460 MW of solar in 2025 and 2026. Duke issued a Request for Proposals for 1,700 MW of solar last year. That leaves 1,760 MW remaining in the Commission-approved Carbon Plan IRP to be procured in 2026, which is more than the 770 MW Duke had proposed to procure this year.
So how did we get here?
Prior to 2023, all Commissioners on the NCUC were appointed by the North Carolina Governor, as is the practice in many, if not most, states across the country. In 2023 and 2024, the GOP-controlled legislature adjusted that process to curb the Democratic Governor’s power. First, in 2023, the NCUC was reduced from seven to five members, and the Governor’s appointments were reduced to three, with the remaining two appointments being made by the leader of each house of the General Assembly. In December of 2024, immediately following the Governor’s election in which a Democrat was overwhelmingly elected, the General Assembly reduced the Governor’s appointments further, to two, and gave one appointment to the elected State Treasurer, which is currently Brad Briner, a Republican.
In 2023, then-Speaker of the House Tim Moore (R-111), representing parts of Cleveland and Rutherford Counties, appointed his former colleague William Brawley to a six-year term on the NCUC.
What are we doing about it?
SACE and other organizations have taken swift action. Chair Brawley’s attempt to pause Duke’s solar and storage process has far-reaching implications. Because of the order of transmission studies to integrate resources onto Duke’s grid, the pause in this process could have a snowball effect and delay other resources Duke plans to get onto its grid to serve customers.
Duke, like other utilities in the Southeast, is projecting load growth from data centers, new manufacturing, and population growth. The cancellation or delay of this year’s solar procurement risks leaving a hole in the resources available to meet existing and new electricity demand. Plugging this hole retroactively will be expensive and could delay interconnections of new loads. If Duke is forced to use gas instead of solar and storage, that leads to higher bills. The cost of gas power plants has increased astronomically in recent years, with no sign of relief. The war in Iran highlights the risk of volatile fossil fuel prices driving up electric bills to captured customers since 100% of electricity fuel costs are passed directly onto bills.
To complicate matters further, Duke’s solar and storage solicitation was not only for resources in North Carolina but for resources in South Carolina as well. And the uncertainty that this order inserts into Duke’s future procurements could make the states less attractive to solar and storage developers, reducing competition and driving up costs in future procurements.
Following SACE’s and others’ filings for reconsideration, the NCUC requested intervenors in the case to file comments by Friday, May 22. Notably, neither Duke nor the Public Staff submitted comments. Industry groups were split, with the industrial customer group CIGFUR II & III opposing the petitions for reconsideration and NCSEA supporting the petitions for reconsideration.
The next step in the process will be up to the NCUC. A Commission that thinks of itself as a reasonable and steady regulator of electric utilities in the state would be wise to rescind this order and, if it has questions about the solar and storage resources, bring those up in dockets already in front of the Commission.
We will continue to participate in the process and report out on the actions taken by the NCUC, as they are consequential for all electricity customers across the Carolinas.
