Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would create streamlined CPCN path for 2–5 MW community solar projects, proponents say
Summary
HB 827 would establish a distributed-generation (DG) CPCN process tailored to 2–5 megawatt community solar projects, with stakeholder-developed siting and design standards meant to speed permitting while adding upfront, objective requirements.
House Bill 827 would create a separate Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) pathway for community solar projects sized between 2 and 5 megawatts, allowing the Power Plant Research Program (PPRP) and the Public Service Commission (PSC) to set standardized siting and design requirements aimed at faster project review.
Sponsor remarks and industry witnesses described the permanent community solar program adopted in 2023 as successful and said a substantial increase in applications has created a backlog. Advocates and industry groups told the committee the current CPCN process is designed for large power plants and imposes time-consuming, evidentiary procedures on small community solar projects; HB 827 would create a right-sized DG CPCN with objective standards developed through a stakeholder process led by PPRP.
Witnesses said the proposed process would require PPRP to convene stakeholders to develop standards for setbacks, stormwater, erosion control, landscape screening and public safety, aligned with the state's renewable energy goals. Proponents indicated the standards are expected to be more stringent but would be published in advance, giving developers the option of meeting them for a faster review or proceeding through the regular CPCN process. Industry witnesses said a DG CPCN could reduce administrative burden for regulators and reduce project variability.
Committee members asked technical questions about project footprint (witnesses estimated roughly 5–8 acres per megawatt) and whether public hearings would still be required; proponents said hearings would continue. Panelists noted amendments had been circulated to address fiscal impacts and to allow PSC and PPRP cost recovery so the fiscal note could be offset. No final action was taken during the hearing.
