The Utility Transparency and Accountability Act was one of the dozens of bills the Maryland House of Delegates passed March 17, sending it to the Senate as part of the legislature’s “crossover day,” which begins a three-week countdown to the close of the 2025 session on April 7. 

Otherwise known as HB 121, the bill would require the state’s electric utilities to file a yearly report on all their votes at PJM, or any other RTO, including votes taken at “any committee, user group, task force or other part of the regional transmission organization in which votes are taken.”  

Votes are to be reported whether or not they are final votes or made by a person with decision-making authority, the bill says. HB 121 passed the House 128 to 8, while the Senate version, SB 37, passed with a unanimous vote, 45-0, on Feb. 27. 

With energy a top priority for the Assembly’s Democratic leadership, the bills that crossed over, and the amendments needed for passage, were significant. 

For example, SB 116, which crossed over March 14, originally called for the state’s Department of the Environment and Energy Administration to work with the University of Maryland School of Business to produce a report analyzing the environmental, economic and energy impacts of data center development in the state. 

But to gain Republican support — and a 46-0 vote — the language requiring the report to look at the energy impacts of data centers was stripped out of the bill, as was the requirement that the MEA work on the analysis. 

The House version, HB 270, crossed over on Feb. 17 on a 125-8 vote, with no amendments, which means final passage could depend on either the House accepting the Senate amendment or the Senate backtracking.  

Amendments could take the teeth out of another bill, SB 149, and its House version, HB 128, a Democratic-sponsored proposal to create a Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Program that would require fossil fuel producers doing business in the state to pay fees that would be used to mitigate the impacts of climate change in Maryland.  

A flurry of amendments on March 14 essentially rewrote the Senate version, which now would only require the state’s comptroller and Environment and Commerce departments “to conduct a study to assess the total cost of greenhouse gas emissions in the state.” The same amendments were adopted in the House, and both bills passed on March 17. 

Hoping to Cross Over

Not all state legislatures have crossover days, but among those that do, failure to pass one house by the specified date typically means a bill is essentially dead for the session. In Maryland, however, bills that do not cross over can still move forward with a special vote in the rules committee of either house. 

Leaders in both houses appear to be relying on that strategy for the passage of three major energy bills, often referred to as “the leadership package.” The bills cover a range of issues critical for the state to meet its growing energy demand while ensuring affordability and reliability and cutting dependence on imported power, primarily from PJM. (See Ahead of Crossover Day, Energy Bills Stalled in Md. General Assembly.) 

• • The Energy Resource Adequacy and Planning Act (SB 909) would require the Maryland Public Service Commission to establish an Integrated Resource Planning Office, which would conduct a 25-year comprehensive energy forecast aimed at meeting state clean energy and emission reduction goals. 

• • The Renewable Energy Certainty Act (SB 931) would set rigorous standards for solar and storage projects seeking a certificate of public necessity and convenience from the PSC, to ensure careful siting and community engagement. The bill also would prohibit city or county governments from passing zoning or other laws blocking solar and storage projects. 

• • The Next Generation Energy Act (SB 937) would promote the development of nuclear energy, and the extension of the licenses of existing reactors, as a matter of state policy, while also encouraging regional collaboration between states to share costs on the development of new reactors. The bill also calls for the procurement of 3,100 MW of “dispatchable energy generation capacity” and a temporary expedited permitting process for these projects.  

None of the bills crossed over on March 17, but energy advocates and lawmakers like Del. Lorig Charkoudian (D) have said negotiations over possible amendments are ongoing. Speaking with NetZero Insider on March 13, Charkoudian said, “I think what you’re going to see, when they kind of come out or start going through the process in committee, is just a lot of amendments to add, to improve, take the best ideas and move them on.” 

She is sponsoring another bill, the Abundant, Affordable Clean Energy (AACE) Act (HB 398, SB 316) which calls for major new procurements of energy storage and solar in the state, as well as better transmission planning for offshore wind and license extensions for existing nuclear plants. Charkoudian said she is working on proposing some of the bill’s provisions as amendments to SB 937. 

Distribution and Transmission Planning

Katie Mettle, policy principal for Maryland at Advanced Energy United, is promoting another non-crossover, SB 908 and HB 1225, which would require the state’s utilities to submit detailed distribution system plans to the PSC every three years. The bill calls for these plans to include demand-side management options such as virtual power plants, as well as non-wires solutions for improving reliability.  

Mettle remains “cautiously optimistic” it could still move forward. “We love it because it has the potential to save rate payers a lot of money on their electricity delivery costs over time,” she said. “Just building out infrastructure in the most cost-effective way possible … will also lower demand on the grid and really make the grid a lot more reliable.” 

Other bills crossing over included: 

• • HB 155, which would allow the state’s Community Development Administration to provide loans for energy efficiency and clean energy upgrades for multifamily, low- and moderate-income buildings. The loans could be 0% interest, with deferred repayment plans lasting 15 to 40 years. The Senate version, SB 247, is still in committee. 

• • HB 49, which provides exclusions to the state’s building performance standards in special cases, such as not counting emissions related to the production of steam used for sterilizing medical instruments or from backup generation at a health care facility. The bill also gives building owners the option of paying a compliance fee if they cannot meet the state’s performance standards. 

• • HB 829, another Charkoudian bill, which would require transmission developers seeking approval for a new line to provide the PSC with evidence they had considered alternatives, such as grid-enhancing technologies or distribution system upgrades that would defer the need for a new line. The bill does not have a Senate version.