Legal Bulletins
Community Solar in Maryland: 3 Key Takeaways from PSC Order No. 92399
The Maryland Public Service Commission just issued Order No. 92399 in Administrative Docket PC 73, resolving three issues for community solar developers. Here's what you need to know:
SOID & Interconnection Application Timing
Since the Commission's One Big Beautiful Bill Order (Order No. 91984), developers have been able to submit interconnection (IX) applications before filing a Subscriber Organization (SO) application. With this new order, the Commission is requiring that an SO application be submitted before or at the same time as an IX application. This is still a major improvement over the old regime, where the SO approval bottleneck could delay IX applications for months.
No Financial Deposits Required
The Commission accepted the NEM Working Group's recommendation that no financial deposits or penalties be imposed for concurrent SO and IX applications. This removes a potential barrier to entry and keeps development costs manageable.
No Retroactive Cure Period for Site Control
This was the most contested issue. The Commission approved prospective-only application of the new site control requirements adopted in RM 94, which require developers to demonstrate proof of site control to the utility at the time an interconnection application is submitted. Projects already in the interconnection queue will not be required to retroactively demonstrate site control or risk losing their queue position. Citing United Insurance Co. of America v. Maryland Insurance Administration, the Commission reaffirmed Maryland's longstanding presumption against retroactive regulation.
For more information or questions, contact David W. Beugelmans.
David W. Beugelmans
410-576-4104 • dbeugelmans@gfrlaw.com