You asked if there are differences between the scopes of practice for “solar electricity work” described in (1) the initial legislation, (2) implementing regulations, and (3) a letter you provided this office. The Office of Legislative Research is not authorized to give legal opinions and this report should not be construed as one.

SUMMARY

The definition of “solar electricity work” is used to set the scope of practice for limited solar electricity licenses. The definitions in the act creating the license and the implementing regulations differ only slightly. The letter you provided this office, which was written by Richard Hurlburt, would apparently expand the scope of practice by giving it a broader definition by authorizing the limited license holders to make (1) connections to load centers, service panels, battery banks, inverters, and (2) the final connection to the electrical grid.

The General Law Committee held a public hearing on what was, at the time, a bill requiring the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) to study the creation of a solar electricity license. DCP Commissioner Rodriguez, Representative Widlitz, and nine other speakers provided testimony. Commissioner Rodriguez spoke against a study bill because the department had already studied the issue. Representative Widlitz submitted written testimony that included a definition of solar electricity work that she stated was written in part by DCP's Richard Hurlburt. Everett Barber, a solar contractor, supported the bill and stated that he wrote the definition with Hurlburt.

The supporters generally testified about the need to establish standards in an emerging trade. But four provided testimony related to the definitions or the scope of practice. Barber stated that his definitions were consistent with industry procedure. Paul Popinchalk stated that a limited license would allow those who did not hold an unlimited electrical license to install solar electric systems. Chris Linda, an electrical contractor with an unlimited license, said that creating a limited license would expand the pool of people specifically trained to install photovoltaic modules and thereby encourage the growth of the industry. Dr. K. Raman, a professional engineer, stated that creating a limited license would enable more people to become qualified installers in less time than it takes to obtain an unlimited license. No one testified that the definition of solar electricity work written by Hurlburt and Barber should be expanded.

Representative Stone, chairman of the General Law Committee introduced the bill in the House. Representative Widlitz offered an amendment that replaced the study bill with the provisions of PA 05-211. She stated that the amendment would establish more complete definitions of solar work and would enable DCP to write more specific license requirements. The Senate passed the bill without debate.

SCOPE OF PRACTICE

State law requires workers in many building trades to hold state licenses. Some licenses authorize their holders to work in all aspects of a trade; these are called “unlimited licenses. ” Others are limited to just one part of a trade. The scope of practice authorized by these limited licenses is established in accordance with the definition of an area of a trade. The amount of training required to obtain a license is partially based on the scope of practice. An unlimited license has the broadest scope of practice, requires the most training, and has the longest training period. A limited license with a fairly broad scope of practice will likely require more training and a longer training period than one with a fairly narrow scope of practice.

The definition for solar electricity work was enacted in 2005 and is codified in statute.

AN ACT CONCERNING OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES FOR PERSONS ENGAGED IN SOLAR-RELATED WORK

The act requires the Electrical Work Board in the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) to recommend regulations establishing licenses for solar electricity work and requires the DCP commissioner to adopt them (PA 05-211, CGS § 20-340c).

The act defines “solar electricity work” as the installation, erection, repair, replacement, alteration, or maintenance of photovoltaic or wind generation equipment used to distribute or store ambient energy for heat, light, power, or other purposes to a point immediately inside a structure or next to an end use (CGS § 20-330).

IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

State regulations do not define “solar electricity work” but instead establish a scope of practice for solar electric contractors and journeypersons based on the act's definition (Conn. Agencies Reg. § 20-332-2). They allow license holders to “perform only work limited to solar electricity systems; which means the installation, erection, repair, replacement, alteration or maintenance of photovoltaic or wind generation systems, including storage and distribution of such energy for heat, light, power or other purposes to a point immediately inside a structure or adjacent to an end use. ”

There are two small differences between the act and the regulation. First, the act uses the term “photovoltaic or wind generation equipment used to distribute or store ambient energy” and the regulation instead uses the term “photovoltaic or wind generation systems, including storage and distribution of such energy. ” Although the terms are similar, the term in the regulation could be construed as being marginally broader. Second, the act uses the term “adjacent to an end use” and the regulation instead uses the term “next to an end use. ” Although the words are different, it is less likely that the phrases would be construed to have different meanings.

LETTER

The letter was written by Richard Hurlburt, DCP's Director of Occupational and Professional Licensing Division, to a solar industry member. It defines “solar electricity work” by quoting the definition used in the public act and then adds the following sentence, “Connection to a load center, service panel, battery bank, inverter and final connection to the grid is also allowable to complete such installation. ”

The letter may be construed to authorize a broader scope of work. By stating that connections to load centers, service panels, battery banks, and inverters and final connections to the grid are also allowed, the letter apparently states that holders of a solar electric license may properly work beyond a point immediately inside a structure or adjacent to an end use.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Public Hearing

HB 6732 in its original form simply required the consumer protection commissioner to study the issue and report to the General Law Committee. Consumer Protection Commissioner Rodriquez stated that the department had already studied the issue and that there was no need for the bill. General Law Chairman Stone reported that the committee had received a letter from Representative Widlitz supporting the bill and proposing to amend the bill.

Her testimony (attached) includes the following proposed definition of solar electricity work. “Solar electricity means the installation, erection, repair, replacement, alteration or maintenance of photovoltaic or wind generation equipment, including the distribution and, if needed, storage of such energy for heat, light, power, or other purposes to a point immediately inside a structure or adjacent to an end use. ” The definition is closer to the definition in the regulation than to the one adopted in the public act. Widlitz states in her testimony that the definition was written by DCP's Richard Hurlburt and Everett Barber.

Everett Barber, a contractor who installs solar systems, testified in favor of the bill because (1) the demand for solar installations is increasing, (2) the industry is evolving, and (3) the statutory definitions of solar work need to be consistent with industry procedure. He submitted testimony and stated that he had written the definitions of solar work with DCP's Richard Hurlburt.

David Mandagen, a licensed professional engineer, also spoke in favor. He stated that proper licensure and regulatory requirements would allow progress and that inadequate licensure can yield poor installation. Joel Gordes, an independent energy consultant, stated that the bill would foster the growth of the solar industry and asked that it be written to allow home improvement contractors to build passive solar additions like sun rooms. Ian Hochstetter, a contractor who builds homes and makes home improvements, spoke in favor of both the bill and Gordes' suggested change.

Paul Popinchalk, a professional engineer, spoke in favor of the bill and added that the incentives being offered by the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund would increase the demand for photovoltaic systems and that the state should create a structure that would provide “consumers with a high degree of confidence in the expertise of the installing contractors. ” He stated that the “cost-effectiveness of solar electric installations will be improved by modifying current installation criteria to allow journeymen electricians to be responsible installers, and not limiting this work to master electricians. ” Like Popinchalk, William Stillinger also spoke about the Clean Energy Fund. He is general manager of a firm selected by the fund to install grid-connected solar electric power systems on residential homes. He described the bill as a necessary step to ensure that the state funds quality solar installations.

Chris Linda, an electrical contractor, supported the bill because creation of a limited license would increase the labor pool and said that “there has to be some demarcation in between where solar photovoltaic work ends, and the traditional work of electrical contractor begins. ”

Dr. K. Raman, a professional engineer, stated that the bill would expand the scope of the solar thermal license and address the lack of qualified solar electric installers by allowing specialized training for solar electric installers that would take less time than it takes to obtain an electrical contractor (E-1) license. Henry Link, a professional engineer, supported the bill because it would ensure that photovoltaic systems would be installed properly.

No one spoke against the bill.

Proceedings

Representative Stone introduced the bill on May 31, 2005. Representative Widlitz offered an amendment, supported by Stone, which became the bill and was subsequently enacted. She stated that it would establish more complete definitions of solar work and would enable DCP to “write more specific requirements for the limited license. ” Representative Greene supported the bill because it would establish a special license and training in a field that is becoming more complicated.

The Senate passed the bill on consent and without discussion.

DD: ts