SB425 revises Maryland’s regulation of coal combustion by-products, including coal ash, by changing how the Department of the Environment sets and uses fees on generators. The bill establishes a minimum base fee of $2.30 per ton, expands the factors the Department must consider when setting fees, and directs the Department to use any excess fee revenue for beneficial reuse of coal combustion by-products and for mitigating human health and environmental harms at priority sites. It also limits fees on by-products shipped out of state to no more than 50% of the in-state disposal fee and continues to exempt beneficially used materials and certain coal mine reclamation uses from fees.
The bill creates a new Statewide Coal Combustion By-Products Coordinating Committee to share monitoring information and discuss ongoing or needed remedial actions at coal combustion by-product sites. The committee includes state environmental leadership, an environmental justice representative, a power plant research representative, and technical experts in coal by-products, public health, and water quality. It must meet at least twice a year beginning in 2026 and submit annual reports to legislative committees.
SB425 also requires the Department to update its fee regulations by December 1, 2025, and adopt regulations by October 1, 2026, to implement federal Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent guidelines and the federal legacy coal combustion residuals rule. In doing so, the Department is expressly authorized to strengthen state protections for human health and the environment, including site-specific actions and expanded chemical testing beyond federal minimums.
The bill’s impact is primarily on the Environment Article, especially § 9-283 and the addition of new § 9-291, and it gives the Department broader authority and clearer obligations in managing coal combustion by-products. It affects generators of coal combustion by-products, facilities that dispose of or beneficially reuse coal ash, and communities near legacy disposal or reuse sites. By tying fees more closely to disposal burdens and remediation needs, the bill is designed to support cleanup, monitoring, and reuse efforts.
The overall sentiment appears favorable, as reflected by strong passage in both chambers, though not unanimously. The vote totals suggest broad support for tighter oversight and environmental protection, but some opposition remained, likely reflecting concerns about regulatory burden, fee increases, or implementation costs. The main points of contention are the higher minimum fee, the expanded fee-setting criteria, and the Department’s authority to direct excess revenue toward remediation and enhanced testing rather than simply reducing future fees.
SB425 amends Maryland Environment Article § 9-283 and adds new § 9-291, expanding the Department of the Environment’s authority over coal combustion by-products. It establishes a minimum fee floor, broadens the factors used to calculate fees, directs excess fee revenue to reuse and remediation purposes, and creates a statewide coordinating committee with reporting duties. The bill also requires new and updated regulations to align state rules with federal coal ash and power plant wastewater standards while allowing Maryland to adopt stronger protections.
The bill appears to have had generally positive support, as shown by passage in both chambers with substantial majorities. The vote margins indicate that most legislators supported the environmental and public-health goals, while a meaningful minority opposed the measure. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record suggests broad but not unanimous agreement, likely with some concern about costs, fees, and regulatory expansion.
The main areas of contention are the fee structure and the use of fee revenue. Supporters likely viewed the higher minimum fee and expanded fee criteria as necessary to fund oversight, cleanup, and beneficial reuse, while opponents may have objected to increased costs for generators and the potential financial impact on utilities or other regulated entities. Another likely point of debate is the bill’s authorization for the Department to go beyond federal minimums, including expanded chemical testing and site-specific remedial actions, which could be seen as either necessary protection or overregulation depending on perspective.