HB 4076 — Relating to energy; and prescribing an effective date.
Last action — Chapter 46, (2026 Laws): Effective date June 5, 2026.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed House
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 02, 2026. Enacted.
Signed by Governor Tina Kotek (Democratic) on March 31, 2026.
Odds of enactment
High chanceBased on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.
Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.
A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.
Prognosis
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
2 sponsors
1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (2 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 5 recorded votes so far.
Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.
Summary
Requires the Energy Facility Siting Council to find that reasons justify why the state policy in applicable statewide planning goals should not apply to a proposed energy facility if the council finds that the proposed energy facility will deliver electricity to the electric grid using an existing energy facility's surplus interconnection and does not require associated transmission lines more than two miles from the existing energy facility. Defines "surplus interconnection." <b>Allows a local government to justify a reason for an exception to a statewide land use planning goal relating to agricultural lands for the development of a renewable energy facility if an exception is required under rules of the Land Conservation and Development Commission, the county adopts certain findings and the proposed facility will deliver electricity to the electric grid using an existing energy facility's unused interconnection capacity and does not require associated transmission lines more than two miles from the existing energy facility. Takes effect on the 91st day following adjournment sine die.</b>
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
236 added · 127 removedPlain-language change summary
The latest version of HB 4076 includes several amendments aimed at clarifying how energy facilities can comply with statewide planning goals. Specifically, it allows the Energy Facility Siting Council to justify exceptions to these goals under certain conditions, such as when a proposed facility utilizes an existing energy facility's surplus connection and does not require new transmission lines beyond two miles. This change is significant because it streamlines the approval process for energy projects, potentially making it easier to expand renewable energy infrastructure while still adhering to local regulations.
83rd OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2026 Regular Session A-EngrossedEnrolled House Bill 4076 Ordered by the House February 16 Including House Amendments dated February 16 Sponsored by Representative LIVELYLIVELY; (Presession filed.) SUMMARY The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to consideration by the Legislative Assembly.
ItSenator isMANNING anJR editor’s(Presession brieffiled.) statementCHAPTER of................................................. the essential features of the measure.
TheAN statementACT includesRelating ato measureenergy; digest written in compliance with applicable readability standards.
Digest:amending ORS 215.446 and 469.504;
Specifiesand aprescribing reason why EFSC may take an exceptioneffective todate. goal compliance.
(Flesch Readability Score:
60.7).
[Digest:
Makes ODOE do a study on energy and submit a report on its findings.
(Flesch Read- ability Score:
65.7).] [Requires the State Department of Energy to study energy.
Directs the department to submit findings to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to energy not later than Sep- tember 15, 2027.] [Sunsets on January 2, 2028.] Requires the Energy Facility Siting Council to find that reasons justify why the state policy in applicable statewide planning goals should not apply to a proposed energy facility if the council finds that the proposed energy facility will deliver electricity to the electric grid using an existing energy facility’s surplus interconnection and does not require associ- ated transmission lines more than two miles from the existing energy facility.
Defines “sur- plus interconnection.” A BILL FOR AN ACT Relating to energy;
amending ORS 469.504.
or (C) For a facility that the council elects to evaluate against the statewide planning goals pur- suant to subsection (5) of this section, that the proposed facility complies with the applicable state-statewide NOTE:planning goals or that an exception to any applicable statewide planning goal is justified under subsection (2) of this section.
Matter in boldfaced type in an amended section is new;
matter [italic and bracketed] is existing law to be omitted.
New sections are in boldfaced type.
LC 253 A-Eng.
HB 4076 wide planning goals or that an exception to any applicable statewide planning goal is justified under subsection (2) of this section.
Enrolled House Bill 4076 (HB 4076-B) Page 1 [(A)] (i) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goal should not apply;
If the special advisory group recommends applicable substantive criteria for an energy facility described in ORS 469.300 or a related or supporting fa- [2]cility A-Eng.that does not pass through more than one local government jurisdiction or more than three zones in any one jurisdiction, the council shall apply the criteria recommended by the special advi- sory group.
HB 4076 cility that does not pass through more than one local government jurisdiction or more than three zones in any one jurisdiction, the council shall apply the criteria recommended by the special advi- sory group.
Enrolled House Bill 4076 (HB 4076-B) Page 2 (8) Notwithstanding ORS 34.020 or 197.825 or any other provision of law, the affected local government’s land use approval of a proposed facility under subsection (1)(a) of this section and the special advisory group’s recommendation of applicable substantive criteria under subsection (5) of this section shall be subject to judicial review only as provided in ORS 469.403.
[3]SECTION 2.
ORS 215.446 is amended to read:
215.446.
(1) As used in this section:
(a) “Average electric generating capacity” has the meaning given that term in ORS 469.300.
(b) “Energy generation area” has the meaning given that term in ORS 469.300.
(c) “Renewable energy facility” means:
(A) A solar photovoltaic power generation facility using:
(i) More than 100 acres but not more than 240 acres located on high-value farmland as defined in ORS 195.300;
(ii) More than 100 acres but not more than 2,560 acres located on land that is predominantly cultivated or that, if not cultivated, is predominantly composed of soils that are in capability classes I to IV, as specified by the National Cooperative Soil Survey operated by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture;
or (iii) More than 320 acres but not more than 3,840 acres located on any other land.
(B) An electric power generating plant with an average electric generating capacity of at least megawatts but less than 50 megawatts if the power is produced from geothermal energy at a single plant or within a single energy generation area.
(C) An electric power generating plant with an average electric generating capacity of at least megawatts but less than 100 megawatts if the power is produced from wind energy at a single energy facility or within a single energy generation area.
(2) An application for a land use permit to establish a renewable energy facility must be made under ORS 215.416.
An applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the county that the renewable energy facility meets the standards under subsection (3) of this section.
(3) In order to issue a permit, the county shall require that the applicant:
Show all 99 changed lines (59 more)
(a)(A) Consult with the State Department of Fish and Wildlife, prior to submitting a final ap- plication to the county, regarding fish and wildlife habitat impacts and any mitigation plan that is necessary;
(B) Conduct a habitat assessment of the proposed development site;
(C) Develop a mitigation plan to address significant fish and wildlife habitat impacts consistent with the administrative rules adopted by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission for the purposes of implementing ORS 496.012;
and (D) Follow administrative rules adopted by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission and rules adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission to implement the Oregon Sage- Grouse Action Plan and Executive Order 15-18.
(b) Demonstrate that the construction and operation of the renewable energy facility, taking into account mitigation, will not result in significant adverse impacts to historic, cultural and archaeological resources that are:
(A) Listed on the National Register of Historic Places under the National Historic Preservation Act (P.L.
89-665, 54 U.S.C.
300101 et seq.);
(B) Inventoried in a local comprehensive plan;
or (C) Evaluated as a significant or important archaeological object or archaeological site, as those terms are defined in ORS 358.905.
Enrolled House Bill 4076 (HB 4076-B) Page 3 (c) Demonstrate that the site for a renewable energy facility, taking into account mitigation, can be restored adequately to a useful, nonhazardous condition following permanent cessation of con- struction or operation of the facility and that the applicant has a reasonable likelihood of obtaining financial assurances in a form and amount satisfactory to the county to secure restoration of the site to a useful, nonhazardous condition.
(d) Meet the general and specific standards for a renewable energy facility adopted by the En- ergy Facility Siting Council under ORS 469.470 (2) and 469.501 that the county determines are ap- plicable.
(e) Provide the financial assurances described in paragraph (c) of this subsection in the form and at the time specified by the county.
(f) For a renewable energy facility that is a solar photovoltaic power generation facility using the number of acres described in subsection (4) of this section, provide a decommissioning plan to accomplish the restoration of the site to a useful, nonhazardous condition as described in paragraph (c) of this subsection.
A decommissioning plan provided under this paragraph must include bonding or other security as the financial assurances described in paragraph (c) of this subsection.
(g) For a renewable energy facility that is an electric power generating plant with an average electric generating capacity of at least 50 megawatts but less than 100 megawatts that produces the power from wind energy at a single energy facility or within a single energy generation area, pro- vide a decommissioning plan to accomplish the restoration of the site to a useful, nonhazardous condition as described in paragraph (c) of this subsection.
A decommissioning plan provided under this paragraph must include bonding or other security as the financial assurances described in par- agraph (c) of this subsection.
(4) The requirements in subsection (3)(f) of this section apply to a solar photovoltaic power generation facility using:
(a) More than 160 acres but not more than 240 acres located on high-value farmland as defined in ORS 195.300;
(b) More than 1,280 acres but not more than 2,560 acres located on land that is predominantly cultivated or that, if not cultivated, is predominantly composed of soils that are in capability classes I to IV, as specified by the National Cooperative Soil Survey operated by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture;
or (c) More than 1,920 acres but not more than 3,840 acres located on any other land.
(5) Upon receipt of a reasonable cost estimate from the state agency or tribe, the applicant and county may jointly enter into a cost reimbursement agreement administered by the county with:
(a) The State Department of Fish and Wildlife to receive comments under subsection (3)(a) of this section.
(b) The State Historic Preservation Officer or any affected federally recognized Indian tribe to receive comments under subsection (3)(b) of this section.
(c) The State Department of Energy to receive comments under subsection (3)(c) and (d) of this section as well as comments regarding other matters as the county may require.
(6) A county that receives an application for a permit under this section shall, upon receipt of the application, provide notice to persons listed in subsection (7) of this section.
The notice must include, at a minimum:
(a) A description of the proposed renewable energy facility;
(b) A description of the lots or parcels subject to the permit application;
(c) The dates, times and locations where public comments or public testimony on the permit application can be submitted;
and (d) The contact information for the governing body of the county and the applicant.
(7) The notice required under subsection (6) of this section must be delivered to:
(a) The State Department of Fish and Wildlife;
(b) The State Department of Energy;
(c) The State Historic Preservation Officer;
(d) The Oregon Department of Aviation;
Enrolled House Bill 4076 (HB 4076-B) Page 4 (e) The United States Department of Defense;
and (f) Federally recognized Indian tribes that may be affected by the application.
(8) If an exception is required under rules of the Land Conservation and Development Commission to allow the development of a renewable energy facility, a local government may justify a reason for an exception to a statewide land use planning goal relating to agricultural lands under ORS 197.732 (2)(c)(A), if:
(a) The facility will deliver electricity to the electric grid utilizing the capacity of an ex- isting energy facility’s point of interconnection that is under the existing energy facility’s interconnection agreement and is not being utilized and the electricity to be delivered does not exceed the original interconnection capacity of the existing energy facility;
(b) The facility does not require associated transmission lines more than two miles from the site boundaries of the existing energy facility;
and (c) The county adopts findings addressing:
(A) The availability of nonresource lands suitable for the proposed use;
(B) The availability and use of existing infrastructure, access and rights of way;
(C) Public health and safety;
(D) Compatibility with surrounding agricultural and rural uses;
(E) A mitigation plan to address potential impacts to surrounding land uses, farm prac- tices and water resulting from the construction or operation of the facility;
and (F) Compliance with local, state or federal requirements.
SECTION 3.
This 2026 Act takes effect on the 91st day after the date on which the 2026 regular session of the Eighty-third Legislative Assembly adjourns sine die.
Passed by House February 20, 2026 Received by Governor:
Repassed by House March 4, 2026 ........................M.,........................................................., 2026 Approved:
..................................................................................
........................M.,........................................................., 2026 Timothy G.
Sekerak, Chief Clerk of House ..................................................................................
............................................................................Tina Kotek, Governor Julie Fahey, Speaker of House Filed in Office of Secretary of State:
Passed by Senate March 3, 2026 ........................M.,........................................................., 2026 ..................................................................................
Rob Wagner, President of Senate ..................................................................................
Tobias Read, Secretary of State Enrolled House Bill 4076 (HB 4076-B) Page 5
Show all 99 changed rows (59 more)
View plain text versions (6)
- Enrolled View text Current pdf
- Engrossed A-Engrossed pdf
- Engrossed B-Engrossed pdf
- Amended Senate Amendments to A-Engrossed pdf
- Introduced House Amendments to Introduced pdf
- Introduced View text pdf
Amendments
2 amendmentsClick Show changes on an amendment above to see how it modifies the bill.
Action History
-
Chapter 46, (2026 Laws): Effective date June 5, 2026.
-
Governor signed.
-
President signed.
-
Speaker signed.
-
Potential conflict(s) of interest declared by Scharf.
-
House concurred in Senate amendments and repassed bill.
-
Third reading. Carried by Smith DB. Passed.
-
Second reading.
-
Recommendation: Do pass with amendments to the A-Eng. bill. (Printed B-Eng.)
-
Public Hearing and Work Session held.
-
Referred to Energy and Environment.
-
First reading. Referred to President's desk.
-
Third reading. Carried by Gamba. Passed.
-
Rules suspended. Carried over to February 20, 2026 Calendar.
-
Rules suspended. Carried over to February 19, 2026 Calendar.
-
Second reading.
-
Recommendation: Do pass with amendments and be printed A-Engrossed.
-
Public Hearing and Work Session held.
-
Referred to Climate, Energy, and Environment.
-
First reading. Referred to Speaker's desk.
Sponsors
- James Manning Jr. · Cosponsor
- John Lively · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 88 not signed on · 14 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- John Lively Democrat
Co-sponsors (1)
- James Manning Jr. Democrat
Not signed on (88)
88 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 88 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 32 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Republican | 7 | 13 | 0 | 3 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 41 | 13 | 0 | 6 |
| % of votes cast | 68% | 22% | 0% | 10% |
How each member voted (60)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lamar Wise | — | Yea |
| Matt Bunch | — | Yea |
| Andrea Valderrama | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Annessa Hartman | Democrat | Not Voting |
| April Dobson | Democrat | Yea |
| Ben Bowman | Democrat | Yea |
| Dacia Grayber | Democrat | Yea |
| Daniel Nguyen | Democrat | Yea |
| David Gomberg | Democrat | Yea |
| Emerson Levy | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Farrah Chaichi | Democrat | Yea |
| Hai Pham | Democrat | Yea |
| Jason Kropf | Democrat | Yea |
| John Lively | Democrat | Yea |
| Jules Walters | Democrat | Yea |
| Julie Fahey | Democrat | Yea |
| Ken Helm | Democrat | Yea |
| Lesly Muñoz | Democrat | Yea |
| Lisa Fragala | Democrat | Yea |
| Mari Watanabe | Democrat | Yea |
| Mark Gamba | Democrat | Yea |
| Nancy Nathanson | Democrat | Yea |
| Nathan Sosa | Democrat | Yea |
| Pam Marsh | Democrat | Yea |
| Paul Evans | Democrat | Yea |
| Ricki Ruiz | Democrat | Yea |
| Rob Nosse | Democrat | Yea |
| Sarah McDonald | Democrat | Yea |
| Shannon Isadore | Democrat | Yea |
| Sue Rieke Smith | Democrat | Yea |
| Susan McLain | Democrat | Yea |
| Tawna Sanchez | Democrat | Yea |
| Thuy Tran | Democrat | Yea |
| Tom Andersen | Democrat | Yea |
| Travis Nelson | Democrat | Yea |
| Willy Chotzen | Democrat | Yea |
| Zach Hudson | Democrat | Yea |
| Alek Skarlatos | Republican | Nay |
| Anna Scharf | Republican | Nay |
| Bobby Levy | Republican | Not Voting |
| Boomer Wright | Republican | Yea |
| Court Boice | Republican | Yea |
| Cyrus Javadi | Republican | Yea |
| Darcey Edwards | Republican | Yea |
| Darin Harbick | Republican | Nay |
| Dwayne Yunker | Republican | Nay |
| E. Werner Reschke | Republican | Nay |
| Ed Diehl | Republican | Nay |
| Emily McIntire | Republican | Nay |
| Gregory Smith | Republican | Yea |
| Jami Cate | Republican | Nay |
| Jeffrey Helfrich | Republican | Nay |
| Kevin Mannix | Republican | Yea |
| Kim Wallan | Republican | Nay |
| Lucetta Elmer | Republican | Not Voting |
| Mark Owens | Republican | Yea |
| Rick Lewis | Republican | Nay |
| Shelly Boshart Davis | Republican | Not Voting |
| Vikki Breese-Iverson | Republican | Nay |
| Virgle Osborne | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 10 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 28 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 93% | 0% | 0% | 7% |
How each member voted (30)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anthony Broadman | Democrat | Yea |
| Chris Gorsek | Democrat | Yea |
| Courtney Neron Misslin | Democrat | Yea |
| Deb Patterson | Democrat | Yea |
| Floyd Prozanski | Democrat | Yea |
| James Manning Jr. | Democrat | Yea |
| Janeen Sollman | Democrat | Yea |
| Jeff Golden | Democrat | Yea |
| Kate Lieber | Democrat | Yea |
| Kathleen Taylor | Democrat | Yea |
| Kayse Jama | Democrat | Yea |
| Khanh Pham | Democrat | Yea |
| Lew Frederick | Democrat | Yea |
| Lisa Reynolds | Democrat | Yea |
| Mark Meek | Democrat | Yea |
| Rob Wagner | Democrat | Yea |
| Sara Gelser Blouin | Democrat | Yea |
| Wlnsvey Campos | Democrat | Yea |
| Bruce Starr | Republican | Yea |
| Cedric Hayden | Republican | Yea |
| Christine Drazan | Republican | Not Voting |
| David Brock Smith | Republican | Yea |
| Diane Linthicum | Republican | Not Voting |
| Dick Anderson | Republican | Yea |
| Fred Girod | Republican | Yea |
| Kim Thatcher | Republican | Yea |
| Mike McLane | Republican | Yea |
| Noah Robinson | Republican | Yea |
| Suzanne Weber | Republican | Yea |
| Todd Nash | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 80% | 0% | 0% | 20% |
How each member voted (5)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Janeen Sollman | Democrat | Yea |
| Jeff Golden | Democrat | Yea |
| Khanh Pham | Democrat | Yea |
| David Brock Smith | Republican | Not Voting |
| Noah Robinson | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 29 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Republican | 5 | 5 | 0 | 13 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 36 | 5 | 0 | 19 |
| % of votes cast | 60% | 8% | 0% | 32% |
How each member voted (60)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lamar Wise | — | Yea |
| Matt Bunch | — | Yea |
| Andrea Valderrama | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Annessa Hartman | Democrat | Not Voting |
| April Dobson | Democrat | Yea |
| Ben Bowman | Democrat | Yea |
| Dacia Grayber | Democrat | Yea |
| Daniel Nguyen | Democrat | Yea |
| David Gomberg | Democrat | Yea |
| Emerson Levy | Democrat | Yea |
| Farrah Chaichi | Democrat | Yea |
| Hai Pham | Democrat | Yea |
| Jason Kropf | Democrat | Yea |
| John Lively | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Jules Walters | Democrat | Yea |
| Julie Fahey | Democrat | Yea |
| Ken Helm | Democrat | Yea |
| Lesly Muñoz | Democrat | Yea |
| Lisa Fragala | Democrat | Yea |
| Mari Watanabe | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Mark Gamba | Democrat | Yea |
| Nancy Nathanson | Democrat | Yea |
| Nathan Sosa | Democrat | Yea |
| Pam Marsh | Democrat | Yea |
| Paul Evans | Democrat | Yea |
| Ricki Ruiz | Democrat | Yea |
| Rob Nosse | Democrat | Yea |
| Sarah McDonald | Democrat | Yea |
| Shannon Isadore | Democrat | Yea |
| Sue Rieke Smith | Democrat | Yea |
| Susan McLain | Democrat | Yea |
| Tawna Sanchez | Democrat | Yea |
| Thuy Tran | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Tom Andersen | Democrat | Yea |
| Travis Nelson | Democrat | Not Voting |
| Willy Chotzen | Democrat | Yea |
| Zach Hudson | Democrat | Yea |
| Alek Skarlatos | Republican | Not Voting |
| Anna Scharf | Republican | Not Voting |
| Bobby Levy | Republican | Not Voting |
| Boomer Wright | Republican | Not Voting |
| Court Boice | Republican | Not Voting |
| Cyrus Javadi | Republican | Yea |
| Darcey Edwards | Republican | Yea |
| Darin Harbick | Republican | Nay |
| Dwayne Yunker | Republican | Not Voting |
| E. Werner Reschke | Republican | Nay |
| Ed Diehl | Republican | Not Voting |
| Emily McIntire | Republican | Nay |
| Gregory Smith | Republican | Yea |
| Jami Cate | Republican | Nay |
| Jeffrey Helfrich | Republican | Not Voting |
| Kevin Mannix | Republican | Yea |
| Kim Wallan | Republican | Not Voting |
| Lucetta Elmer | Republican | Nay |
| Mark Owens | Republican | Yea |
| Rick Lewis | Republican | Not Voting |
| Shelly Boshart Davis | Republican | Not Voting |
| Vikki Breese-Iverson | Republican | Not Voting |
| Virgle Osborne | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 11 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 92% | 8% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (12)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Emerson Levy | Democrat | Yea |
| John Lively | Democrat | Yea |
| Ken Helm | Democrat | Yea |
| Mark Gamba | Democrat | Yea |
| Pam Marsh | Democrat | Yea |
| Sarah McDonald | Democrat | Yea |
| Tom Andersen | Democrat | Yea |
| Bobby Levy | Republican | Yea |
| Darcey Edwards | Republican | Yea |
| Jami Cate | Republican | Nay |
| Mark Owens | Republican | Yea |
| Virgle Osborne | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does HB 4076 do?
- Requires the Energy Facility Siting Council to find that reasons justify why the state policy in applicable statewide planning goals should not apply to a proposed energy facility if the council finds that the proposed energy facility will deliver electricity to the electric grid using an existing energy facility's surplus interconnection and does not require associated transmission lines more than two miles from the existing energy facility. Defines "surplus interconnection." <b>Allows a local government to justify a reason for an exception to a statewide land use planning goal relating to agricultural lands for the development of a renewable energy facility if an exception is required under rules of the Land Conservation and Development Commission, the county adopts certain findings and the proposed facility will deliver electricity to the electric grid using an existing energy facility's unused interconnection capacity and does not require associated transmission lines more than two miles from the existing energy facility. Takes effect on the 91st day following adjournment sine die.</b>
- Who sponsors HB 4076?
- HB 4076 is sponsored by James Manning Jr. (Democrat) and John Lively (Democrat).
- What is the current status of HB 4076?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 02, 2026. Enacted.
- Where can I track HB 4076?
- Track HB 4076 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB 4076
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HB 4076
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →