Staff recommends denying Harkins Lane Solar's colocation exemption; developers and PPRP urge coordinated response

Staff presented a detailed colocation review for Harkins Lane Solar 1 LLC's proposed 5 MW community solar project (case 9775), telling the commission the project's later-noted parcel change put it adjacent to MD Solar 6000 and several other proposed arrays. "In total, there is 16.25 megawatts of proposed co located solar in this subject area," staff said, and concluded the siting triggers the community-solar program's colocation provisions under the Public Utilities Article §7-306.2(d)(13).

Staff recommended the commission deny Harkins Lane's request for an exemption from the colocation provisions, confirm that Harkins must comply with a modified licensing condition requiring an MDA-approved agrivoltaics plan or participation in a joint colocation compliance plan, authorize adjacent projects to submit a joint compliance plan within 45 days, and show-cause Harkins Lane if it fails to participate. Harrison Sher (staff) said priority is determined by application order and that MD Solar 6000, having applied earlier and committing to agrivoltaics, would have priority absent a cooperative solution.

Representatives for Harkins Lane (Eric Wallace) disputed staff's recommendation and asked the commission to consider the project's late-stage maturity. Wallace told the commission the project had progressed through interconnection, received subscriber-organization certification and a CPCN-stage review, and that imposing an agrivoltaics requirement at this stage "would delay things significantly"—"our estimate is that it would be at least 6 months," he said. Wallace urged the commission to provide a fair path forward given the financing, construction and investor uncertainty caused by a late-stage compliance pivot.

PPRP (the Maryland Department of Natural Resources' Power Plant Research Program), represented by Zach Barthol, said PPRP broadly supported staff's recommendations and offered to help develop better public-facing queue information so stakeholders can identify potential colocation earlier in the process.

Commissioners pressed staff and the applicant on timing, the feasibility of obtaining MDA approval within staff's 45-day window, whether a road or right-of-way breaks adjacency, and the risk of setting precedent; several commissioners said they would take the matter under advisement for further deliberation rather than ruling immediately.