Council hears confusion over HB 1036’s thresholds for solar siting and decommissioning rules

A council member told the Howard County Council that passage of HB 1036 has coincided with roughly 15 new projects in the county and that local officials remain unclear about regulatory lines between state and local authority.

"Ever since HB 1036 passed, we have 15 new projects going on in Howard County," the councilmember said, adding that counties are unsure which processes remain under local control and which are subject to the Maryland Public Service Commission’s authority. At issue is the statute’s capacity thresholds: above a stated megawatt threshold projects can be treated like industrial‑scale energy facilities and fall under state siting rules; below it, counties typically have more ability to impose local conditions.

Michael Sanderson and MC Keeganair urged lawmakers to consider a cleanup bill to clarify definitions, decommissioning protocols, and the treatment of adjacent or multiple under‑threshold projects owned by the same entity. Sanderson said the original statute has left a "demilitarized zone" of unclear authority and that counties want more clarity on back‑end issues such as soil testing and decommissioning to protect agricultural land.

Why it matters: Councilmembers said that without clear thresholds and decommissioning rules, counties face administrative confusion and potential loss of meaningful public input on siting decisions. They requested MACo support for legislative fixes.

Outcome: MACo said it would be at the table on any cleanup efforts and would share related draft language and resources with county staff and councilmembers. No vote or formal county direction was taken at the meeting.