Once the consolidated permit is filed, municipalities must decide whether to approve within 12 months. Permits are constructively approved if municipalities fail to meet this 12-month deadline.
In November 2024, Governor Maura Healy signed An act promoting a clean energy grid, advancing equity and protecting ratepayers (“2024 Climate Act”). Seeking to expand clean energy infrastructure by streamlining the approval process, the statute required the Department of Energy Resources (DOER) to create an optional streamlined local permitting process for small clean energy facilities.
In response, DOER published its draft regulations on September 15, 2025, titled “Small Clean Energy Infrastructure Facility Siting and Permitting”. The regulations are now final, promulgated in the Massachusetts Register on February 27, 2026.
Local municipalities may offer the consolidated permit pathway application by July 1, 2026, and must offer it by October 1, 2026. The stated intent of this expedited process is to reduce typical delays for SCEIFs while protecting public health, safety, and the environment.
To accompany the program, and to guide applicants and municipalities, DOER issued a set of draft guidelines on January 21, 2026. The guidelines discuss pre-filing notices; consolidation of reviews; public participation; meeting public health, safety, and environmental standards; commonly expected conditions; minimization and mitigation measures, and constructive approvals.
These draft guidelines help create predictability for the expedited permitting process by clarifying which factors ought to be assessed and how to properly do so.
The comment period was to close March 13. We await whether the draft rules, which seem quite complete, are promulgated as proposed. Email them to
The guidelines are excerpted and summarized below. Of particular importance for our legal readers and land use experts are Pre-Filing requirements for Stakeholder and Community Engagement and the Measures to Avoid, Minimize, and Mitigate adverse impacts.
Guideline on Pre-Filing Stakeholder Engagement
This guideline discusses how to effectively engage with stakeholders leading up to and at the Pre-filing Information Session. Throughout each of these steps, Applicants should consider seeking guidance from the Local Government in their decisions, particularly around community engagement.
Applicants must complete Pre-Filing requirements at least 60 days prior to submitting an application. Even after this period is complete, Applicants should continue stakeholder engagement through the remainder of the application process.
2.1 Stakeholder Engagement: The Applicant must solicit feedback from stakeholders familiar with the community, identify areas of concern (zoning, social, cultural, historical, or environmental), and discuss the need for Community Engagement Plans.
2.2 Language Access: For SCEIFs proposed in areas with a low English proficiency population, the Applicant should consider translation of materials.
2.3 Pre-filing Municipal Meeting: Before holding a Pre-Filing Information Session, the Applicant must schedule a meeting with municipal officials. The Applicant should discuss project details at the meeting to ensure that it has all the information and permits required prior to submission of the application.
2.4 Methods to Inform Stakeholders about the Proposed SCEIF and Pre-filing Information Session: The Applicant must engage and inform stakeholders of the proposed SCEIF prior to the Pre-filing Information Session. Engagement tools should include a variety of traditional and digital media. The Applicant must also provide notice to the community of the Pre-filing Information Session through two or more multimedia outlet advertisements.
2.5 Pre-filing Information Session: In determining the location and structure of the Pre-Filing Information Session, the Applicant should consider how to best encourage the participation of relevant stakeholders. This includes selecting a convenient time and date for the meeting; avoiding conflict with planned community events; locating the meeting in the municipality where the SCEIF is to be sited; conducting the meeting in a hybrid format, wherever possible; consulting the Commonwealth’s Tips for Hosting Accessible Events and Meetings Guidebook; and generally following best practices to maximize public engagement.
2.5.1: Session Structure: Pre-filing Information Sessions should be structured to allow the Applicant to give a detailed overview of the project with sufficient time for questions. The Applicant is responsible for managing the meeting in a way that facilitates public participation and understanding and for collecting stakeholder feedback. The Applicant should consider holding additional sessions and is encouraged to attend other community, neighborhood, or municipal board meetings regarding the proposed project. DOER, upon request, can assist Applicants in planning Pre-filing Information Sessions.
2.6 Pre-filing Engagement Completion Checklist: The Applicant will complete a checklist to affirm it has completed the pre-filing requirements. Documentation of these requirements must be attached to the checklist.
2.6.1 Pre-filing Engagement Completion Checklist: The Local Government Representative will evaluate the Applicant’s checklist to ensure all requirements have been met and documented and that the Applicant has sufficiently engaged in outreach and responded to stakeholder concerns.
Click here to download the Full Draft Guideline >>
Guideline on Public Health, Safety, Environmental, and Other Standards
Baseline Standards, as the name implies, “do not constitute an exhaustive list of all relevant health, safety, environmental, or other standards that are or could be applicable to an SCIEF.” Rather, Baseline Standards “reflect the key provisions” that DOER is highlighting.
All SCEIFs are required to comply with a specified set of Baseline Standards, ranging from regulation of asbestos to pollinator-friendly practices. Certain types of facilities are also subject to Additional Standards (e.g., heightened fire safety requirements for Small Energy Storage Facilities).
Click here to download the complete list of Baseline and Additional Standards draft guideline >>
Guideline on Common Conditions in Cases of Constructive Approval
Per 225 CMR 29.02, “Constructive Approval” occurs when a Consolidated Loan Permit is granted due to the failure of the Local Government to issue a decision on the permit within 12 months of receipt of a complete application. The Guideline adds an additional element for an SCEIF to achieve Constructive Approval: the project must meet a set of “common conditions.”
Common Conditions are management practices (e.g., adherence with the law, construction hours, snow removal, etc.) that the project must follow throughout the design, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning of an SCEIF. Common Conditions are separated into four categories/phases: Administrative/Legal, Construction, Operations & Maintenance, and Decommissioning. Common Conditions apply to all SCEIFs, with some types of SCEIFs subject to additional Common Conditions.
Click here to download the complete list of Common Conditions draft guideline >>
Guideline on Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures
This guideline discusses how to site and design an SCEIF to avoid, minimize, and if necessary, mitigate, environmental and land use impacts “to the greatest extent possible.” The guideline discusses (1) exemption of certain SCEIFs from these requirements, (2) creation of Criteria-specific Suitability Scores, and (3) technical guidance on the development of minimization and mitigation measures.
1. Exemptions
225 CMR 29.07(1) exempts the following SCEIFs from Site Suitability and the associated Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Requirements:
- A Small Clean Energy Infrastructure Facility with a Site Footprint of one acre or less;
- A Small Clean Transmission and Distribution Infrastructure Facility that is not sited in a newly established public right of way, as defined in the Site Suitability Guidance;
- A Solar Facility with a nameplate capacity, as measured in alternating current, of less than or equal to 25 kW; or
- A Behind-the-Meter Small Clean Energy Infrastructure Facility, as measured in alternating current, of less than or equal to 250 kW.
2. Criteria-Specific Suitability Scores
225 CMR 29.07 requires Applicants seeking a Consolidated Local Permit Application for an SCEIF to estimate Criteria-specific suitability scores for their project. The Applicant must develop scores for five categories: climate change resilience, carbon storage and sequestration, biodiversity, social and environmental burdens, and agricultural resources. Each of the scores should reflect the following:
- Less than or equal to 1.0: highly suitable, minimal impact
- Greater than 1.0 and less than or equal to 2.5: suitable, low impact
- Greater than 2.5 and less than or equal to 4.0: moderately suitable, moderate impacts
- Greater than 4.0: unsuitable, high impact
The greater the number, the more minimization and mitigation will be necessary for an Applicant’s Consolidated Local Permit Application to be approved. In turn, sites with a higher score are considered less suitable for development and should be avoided.
Criteria-specific Suitability Scores can be modified due to the development potential of the site. SCEIFs sited on Brownfields, Eligible Landfills, and Previously Developed Lands automatically receive a Criteria-specific Suitability Score of 0 for all categories except climate change resilience. Conversely, SCEIFs sites that overlap with a Protected Open Space automatically receive a 5 for each Criteria-specific Suitability score.
Criteria-specific Suitability Scores can also be modified to reflect any benefits the SCEIF would have to human health and wellbeing, livelihood, and/or environmental quality. Proposed SCEIFs can have 0.5 points subtracted from their Criteria-specific Suitability Score for social and environmental burdens, up to 5.0 points total, for the following benefits: environmental justice and equity, economic development and workplace creation, infrastructure and community support, and implementation of environmental and public health protections.
In response to these scores, the Applicant must develop and include proposed Mitigation and Minimization measures in the Consolidated Local Permit Application. Applicants must apply the “Mitigation Hierarchy” – an order of operations meant to prioritize actions with the greatest ability to stave negative environmental and land use impacts:
- Avoidance: where possible, the Applicant should prevent negative impacts
- Minimization: where negative impacts cannot be completely avoided, the Applicant should reduce them
- Mitigation: where minimization does not effectively address negative impacts, the Applicant should take actions to repair, rehabilitate, and restore the affected area
3. Qualifying Minimization and Mitigation Measures for Criteria-specific Suitability Scores
“Mitigation must have a rational nexus to the specific criterion on which the score was assessed. Qualifying Mitigation measures involving replacement of impacted resources (e.g., tree replacement, or habitat replacement) should adhere to a ‘no net loss’ goal and at least a two-to-one replacement ratio of impacted land area.” Proposed SCEIFs which are highly suitable and have minimal impact (score of 1.0 or less) may still be required to fulfill mitigation requirements. This section provides technical guidance on and examples of appropriate Mitigation and Minimization Measures for each of the Criteria-specific Suitability Scores.
Click to download DOER's technical guidance and example draft guideline >>
Abigail George is a legal intern at McGregor Law Group PC in her third year at Boston University School of Law.