daily · Clean Energy

Solar for All grantees seek damages from EPA after courts vacate program termination

Utility Dive reported Oct. 1, 2026 that two federal judges vacated the EPA's termination of the $7 billion Solar for All program and that grantees are suing for damages. EPA says it is considering an appeal. Trade-press report; court orders not read.

By Greener Numbers Editorial Team · Published October 4, 2026 · Updated 10/4/2026

Utility Dive reported on October 1, 2026 that Solar for All is expected to begin flowing to grantees again after two federal judges vacated the Environmental Protection Agency's 2025 termination of the $7 billion program, and that several grantees are suing the EPA for damages on top of the awarded funds. This brief relies on that trade-press report, not on the court orders themselves.

Utility Dive says a Sept. 18, 2026 ruling by the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island found the EPA illegally terminated the program, and that about a week later a federal judge in the District of Columbia reached a similar conclusion. Judge Mary McElroy wrote that Congress's clear intent was that EPA continue to administer the already obligated grants. An EPA spokesperson said the agency is reviewing the decision and considering options for appeal.

Solar for All was announced in April 2024 to award $7 billion to 60 grantees to deliver residential solar to over 900,000 households, with a focus on low-income and disadvantaged communities. The EPA froze the program in February 2025 and sent termination notices in August 2025. Congress preserved the obligated funding in the July 2025 budget law, Utility Dive reports.

Grantees seeking damages include Inclusive Prosperity Capital, which received a $249.3 million award in 2024, a coalition led by the Maryland Clean Energy Center, the Center for Rural Affairs, Growth Opportunity Partners and the Clean Energy Fund of Texas. In the Maryland case, plaintiffs argued in a May 7 filing that they suffered damages at least equal to the difference between the sum promised and the sum received, plus costs incurred. The head of Inclusive Prosperity Capital said her group had to cut staff and is not sure when funding will flow, because the agency has not engaged with it. Appeals or damages rulings could still change the outcome.

Official source: Utility Dive ↗