Section 10 of S.323 would expand PUC party status and add cradle-to-grave audits and a 5-acre agricultural threshold for energy projects

Legislative counsel walked the committee through Section 10 of S.323, which amends 30 VSA §248 — the statute that governs the Public Utility Commission's (PUC) authority to issue certificates of public good for energy generation facilities. "This is the section of law that gives the PUC the authority to issue permits for electric generation facilities," counsel said, and the draft would make the Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets a party to every permit proceeding rather than only participating in larger projects sited on prime soils.

The draft also adds soil-language referencing "primary, secondary, and local important agricultural soils" and maps from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Counsel noted that Act 250 and 10 VSA §6001 already reference primary and mapped soils, so the extra phrasing may be redundant but was added at a sponsor's request for clarity.

New requirements specific to solar: the bill would require a Vermont-licensed engineering firm approved by the Department of Environmental Conservation to perform a "full spectrum" audit for solar facilities that includes energy payback time and cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas accounting covering resource extraction, manufacturing, transportation, deployment and disposal of panels, concrete, transformers and batteries, and 25 years of lost agricultural production. Counsel also read a provision that would consider a project "undue and not in the public good" if the facility or related infrastructure precludes tilling, seeding, or harvesting on more than 5 acres of primary/statewide or local importance agricultural soils, reduces Vermont-based food security, or destructs forest ecosystems on more than 5 acres.

Industry and process concerns: Greg Faber (PDC) and a PUC representative told the committee that adding Agriculture as a party in every proceeding could create a substantial workload for that agency. On public hearings, the PUC described pre-evidentiary public hearings as non-evidentiary opportunities where "people come in, they vent," which the commission uses to identify issues to probe during evidentiary proceedings. Faber warned the committee that the engineering-audit requirement "looks pretty... it looks pretty..." he paused, then said it may be a heavy requirement, adding that "solar facilities that disturb more than 5 acres are pretty much prohibited," and that the change could frustrate utilities required to procure renewable energy and affect project costs.

Why it matters: the changes would alter PUC process, broaden mandatory participation by the Agency of Agriculture, and impose technical audit and acreage-based thresholds that could materially affect where and whether ground-mounted solar projects can be sited on important agricultural soils. Counsel and witnesses recommended that the committee solicit written or oral input from the Agency of Natural Resources, the Department of Environmental Conservation, the Agency of Agriculture, and utility companies to assess feasibility and costs.

Next steps: committee members agreed to seek additional agency testimony and to continue drafting. Counsel offered to research statutory definitions and practical implementation questions (for example, whether DEC maintains an approved list of engineers and how the PUC weighs competing criteria in a certificate-of-public-good determination).