VermontProposal would define power facilities and fund their cleanup
The vetoed proposal would set rules for counting renewable power facilities and create a fee-supported fund to clean up abandoned facilities if it became law.
What it does
The proposal would set rules for counting renewable power facilities as one plant or separate plants, with different treatment for some net-metering and separately connected projects.
The proposal would create a fund for cleaning up abandoned or nonoperating power and storage facilities, paid for by facility-related surety fees.
State officials would report on solar development’s land impacts and recommend ways to use already disturbed sites; the utility commission would explain its cleanup-fee formula.
Argument forA cleanup fund could help remove abandoned facilities when owners cannot be found or will not complete the work.
Argument againstFacility-specific surety fees could raise the cost of building or operating power and storage projects, although the proposal caps the fee formula.
More detail
The proposal would define when renewable electricity facilities count as one plant or as separate plants. The rules would cover renewable facilities using wind, water, solar, biomass, or other electricity-generating technology, including facilities on the same or neighboring parcels. Facilities using the same technology on the same or neighboring parcels would generally count as one plant. Certain individual net-metering, shared-owner net-metering, and separately connected facilities would count as separate plants if they meet the listed billing, customer, location, and capacity conditions. The text says these definitions would apply only to applications filed on or after July 1, 2026.
The proposal would let the Public Utility Commission collect facility-specific surety fees and use a special fund for cleanup and site restoration. The fund would cover electric generation and energy storage facilities with a certificate of public good, including abandoned, nonoperational, or disclaimed facilities. The Commission could use the fund to investigate ownership, pay cleanup and restoration costs, hire experts, or take other needed remedial action when the responsible certificate holder cannot or will not act. The Commission could return part of a facility holder’s fees after satisfactory cleanup and Commission approval. The fee formula could not exceed the average cumulative market-based cost of obtaining and maintaining the facility’s cleanup financial instruments. The fund provisions would take effect under the proposal on July 1, 2026; unused balances and interest would remain in the fund.
The proposal would require state officials to study solar projects and report on cleanup-fee calculations. The solar report would cover projects of at least 1 megawatt built during the previous two years and would examine farmland, forests, and important natural areas. The Public Service Commissioner would consult with state agriculture, utility, and natural-resources officials. The report would recommend ways to place solar projects on already disturbed land, such as rooftops and parking lots, and possible financial support for those sites. The Public Utility Commission would report the formula used for decommissioning surety fees. The solar report would be due January 15, 2027, and the fee-formula report would be due February 15, 2027.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed 1st Chamber
- Passed 2nd Chamber
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- May 29House message: Governor Phil Scott vetoed bill on June 17, 2026Latest
- May 29Vetoed by Governor Phil Scott on June 17, 2026Major
- May 29Delivered to Governor on June 12, 2026To Governor
- May 29House message: House adopted Conference Committee report
- May 28Committee of Conference report adopted (House bill)Major
- May 28Rules suspended and taken up for immediate consideration, pending entry on Notice Calendar, as moved by Rep. McCoy of Poultney
- May 28Senate Message: Report of Committee of Conference adopted
- May 28Rules suspended & messaged to House forthwith, on motion of Senator Baruth
- May 28Committee of Conference report adopted
- May 28Committee of Conference report submitted by Senator Watson for Committee, text
- May 28Rules suspended & taken up for immediate consideration, on motion of Senator Baruth
- May 28Senate Message: Committee of Conference members appointed
- May 28Committee of Conference appointed: Senators Watson, Hardy, and Beck
- May 28House message: House refused to concur in Senate proposal of amendment & requested Conference Committee; House Conference Committee members appointedMinor
- May 27Rules suspended and bill messaged forthwith to the Senate as moved by Rep. McCoy of Poultney
- May 27Speaker appointed Reps. James of Manchester, Sibilia of Dover, and Kleppner of Burlington as members of the Committee of Conference on the part of the House
- May 27Senate proposal of amendment not concurred in and Committee of Conference requested upon motion of Rep. Kleppner of BurlingtonMinor
- May 27Which was disagreed to on a division; division results Yes, 42; No, 65
- May 27Pending the question, Shall the House concur in the Senate proposal of amendment with further proposal of amendment thereto, as offered by Rep. Burtt of Cabot?, division demanded by Rep. Burtt of CabotMinor
- May 27Rep. Burtt of Cabot moved to concur in the Senate proposal of amendment with a further amendment theretoMinor
- May 27Rules suspended and taken up for immediate consideration, pending entry on Notice Calendar, as moved by Rep. McCoy of Poultney
- May 27Senate Message: Passed in concurrence with proposal of amendmentMinor
- May 27Rules suspended & messaged to House forthwith, on motion of Senator Baruth
- May 27Read 3rd time & passed in concurrence with proposal of amendmentPassed 2nd Chamber
- May 27New Business/Third ReadingMinor
- May 263rd reading ordered
- May 26Proposal of amendment by Committee on Natural Resources and Energy, as amended, agreed toMinor
- May 26Proposal of amendment not agreed toMinor
- May 26Proposal of amendment by Senator(s) Heffernan; textMinor
- May 26Proposal of amendment by Senator(s) Watson agreed toMinor
- May 26Motion to substitue amendment agreed to
- May 26Senator(s) Watson motion to substitute proposal of amendment; textMinor
- May 26Proposal of amendment by Senator(s) Ingalls; textMinor
- May 26Reported favorably by Senator Watson for Committee on AppropriationsMinor
- May 26Read 2nd time, reported favorably with proposal of amendment by Senator Watson for Committee on Natural Resources and EnergyMinor
- May 26Proposal of amendment to be offered by Senator(s) IngallsMinor
- May 26Favorable report by Committee on AppropriationsMinor
- May 26Favorable report with proposal of amendment by Committee on Natural Resources and EnergyMinor
- May 26Unfinished Business/Second ReadingMinor
- May 22Proposal of amendment to be offered by Senator(s) IngallsMinor
- May 22Favorable report by Committee on AppropriationsMinor
- May 22Favorable report with proposal of amendment by Committee on Natural Resources and EnergyMinor
- May 22Unfinished Business/Second ReadingMinor
- May 21Proposal of amendment to be offered by Senator(s) IngallsMinor
- May 21Favorable report by Committee on AppropriationsMinor
- May 21Favorable report with proposal of amendment by Committee on Natural Resources and EnergyMinor
- May 21New Business/Second ReadingMinor
- May 20Favorable report by Committee on AppropriationsMinor
- May 20Favorable report with proposal of amendment by Committee on Natural Resources and EnergyMinor
- May 20Second ReadingMinor
- May 20Entered on Notice Calendar
- May 15Referred to Committee on Appropriations per Senate Rule 31
- May 15Favorable report with proposal of amendment by Committee on Natural Resources and EnergyMinor
- May 15Second ReadingMinor
- May 15Entered on Notice Calendar
- Apr 30Committee on Finance relieved; bill committed to Committee on Natural Resources and Energy on motion of Senator Cummings
- Feb 20Read 1st time & referred to Committee on FinanceMinor
- Feb 19Read third time and passedPassed 1st Chamber
- Feb 19Action Calendar: Third ReadingMinor
- Feb 18Which was agreed to on a Roll Call Passed -- Needed 69 of 138 to Pass -- Yeas = 108, Nays = 30
- Vote recorded Which was agreed to on a Roll Call Passed -- Needed 69 of 138 to Pass -- Yeas = 108, Nays = 30. Result: pass.Lower
- Feb 18Third Reading orderedMinor
- Feb 18Rep. Houghton of Essex Junction demanded yeas and nays
- Feb 18Report of Committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure agreed to
- Feb 18Rep. Kleppner of Burlington reported for the Committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure
- Feb 18Read second timeMinor
- Feb 18Action Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
- Feb 17Notice Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
- Jan 16Read first time and referred to the Committee on Energy and Digital InfrastructureIntroduced
Environment & EnergyPublic SafetyGovernment & Ethics