Legislation - Plug-In Sites

Tesla Implements Maryland-Only Changes to Supercharger Congestion Fees

August 17, 2026August 17, 2026 Lanny

Supercharger Congestion fees in Maryland

Change Comes After New Weights and Measures Rules Take Effect

In an earlier post, I examined whether Tesla’s congestion fee structure complied with new Maryland legislation signed by the Governor on April 28, 2026.

The legislation, which took effect July 1, 2026, added method-of-sale rules for EVSE to Maryland’s Weights and Measures statute.

The statute says that electricity sold at charging stations shall be measured and sold in units of kilowatt-hours and that during a charging session, a customer may be charged only for the kilowatt-hours of electricity dispensed during the charging session.

It also says that in addition to the price charged for the sale of electricity, the EVSE operator may charge a fee for services related to the retail sale of electricity as a vehicle fuel. That fee may be a fixed fee or assessed based on length of time, and may be applied only at the conclusion of a charging session and shall be itemized on the customer’s receipt.

According to Tesla’s website, congestion fees apply when a Supercharger site is busy and a vehicle’s charge level is above 80% or charging is complete. Unlike traditional idling fees, which begin once charging stops, Tesla’s congestion fees have applied while the vehicle is still drawing power. Accruing time-based fees of any kind before the charging stops did not appear to comply with the new law.

I anticipated that one of three things would occur after the law took effect: Tesla would restructure the congestion fee at Maryland Supercharger locations to trigger only after the session ends, Tesla would stop assessing congestion fees at Maryland sites altogether, or Tesla would wait to see whether Maryland Weights and Measures treated it as an enforceable violation.

There is now evidence of a change to Tesla’s congestion fees that appears to apply only to Maryland, suggesting a direct response to the new law.

Maryland Department of Agriculture – EVSE Fee Regulation Comments

July 27, 2026July 30, 2026 Lanny

MDA EVSE registration sticker in Laurel, MD

Below is the complete set of public comments released by the Maryland Department of Agriculture in response to a Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) request I filed on July 2, 2026. The request asked for all comments submitted on the proposed EVSE Weights and Measures fee regulation changes.

The agency’s response contained 53 files. It included two copies of the Fair Charge Alliance comments but did not include a file with my own comments. Those comments are linked after the list for reference.

UPDATE: 2026/07/28 MDA was asked about missing files including mine and one other comment by name. They sent two more files, mine and that other commenter’s which have now been added in the list below.

You can browse, search, and download the individual documents in the viewer below.

Comments of Lanny Hartmann not included in the [original] MPIA response are in this PDF file.

The $150 Charger Fee Nobody Knew Was Coming

June 29, 2026June 30, 2026 Lanny

Clear Spring Maryland Farm EVSE, Level 2 charger

Maryland officials committed to a formal public hearing. They never held one. Here is how it all went wrong.

Today — June 29, 2026 — is the final day to submit written comments on the Maryland Department of Agriculture’s proposal to lower the annual registration fee for EV chargers after backlash when it was set at $150. In reality, it’s a done deal. Commercial chargers in Maryland need to be registered and paid up by July 1st. MDA was successful in getting an emergency regulation through that temporarily sets the new fee while the timeline for the regular amendment plays out.

I composed a letter of comment, knowing full well that it is a quixotic exercise. I’ve been involved with EV policy as a citizen advocate for more than a decade. I’ve seen how the sausage gets made and it’s often not pretty. It’s a process, nonetheless and I’ve generally felt like I was a genuine participant, even when the outcome was disappointing. But this time is different. I still can’t fully pinpoint it. Maybe it’s watching a commitment made to stakeholders simply vanish that gnaws at me. Or maybe it’s that I trusted a process that, in reality, isn’t there for us.

The following is my full letter of comment.

$900,000 in Clean Energy Funds Committed to EVSE Inspection Program

May 5, 2026May 5, 2026 Lanny

Public Information Act Request Reveals Weights and Measures Funding Agreement

A signed Memorandum of Understanding obtained through a Public Information Act request reveals that the Maryland Energy Administration has committed up to $900,000 from the Maryland Strategic Energy Investment Fund to cover the startup costs of the Maryland Department of Agriculture’s EVSE Weights and Measures inspection, testing, and reporting program. Based on the MOU’s terms, an upfront disbursement of $511,876 for equipment and supplies may already have been transferred to MDA.

That money comes from you.

Is Tesla’s 80% Congestion Fee Now Illegal in Maryland?

April 29, 2026April 29, 2026 Lanny

Congested Tesla Supercharger in Maryland

Maryland Governor Wes Moore signed companion bills SB649 and HB969 into law yesterday. The legislation, which becomes effective on July 1, 2026, is supposed to establish a uniform method of sale for electricity at public charging stations. Contained within the language of the bills is a provision that appears to directly conflict with how Tesla assesses congestion fees at busy Supercharger locations.

How Supercharger Congestion Fee Works

According to Tesla, congestion fees apply when a Supercharger site is busy and a vehicle’s battery reaches 80% state of charge. At that point, the driver is notified and a congestion fee, typically $0.50 per minute, begins accruing. If the driver unplugs within five minutes, the fee is waived.

Unlike idling fees, which usually begin once charging stops, Tesla’s congestion fees kick in while the vehicle is still drawing power. The idea is to encourage drivers to vacate the charging space when charging speed has dropped significantly, which happens at around 80%.

Maryland Ratepayers to Subsidize EV Charger Fees Under Emergency Regulations

April 24, 2026April 24, 2026 Lanny

Fees could take effect under emergency authority before public comments are due.

The Moore Administration announced yesterday that it plans to use Maryland’s Strategic Energy Investment Fund to cut in half the cost of registering electric vehicle chargers with the state’s Weights and Measures program. SEIF is funded by Maryland utilities, therefore ratepayers, and was created to support renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In recent years it has become a go-to source for plugging state budget gaps. Now MDA wants a piece of it too.

Secretary Kevin Atticks told about 65 stakeholders on a Zoom call yesterday morning that MDA will file emergency regulations today reducing the annual per-port EVSE registration fee from $150 to $75. The other $75 will come from SEIF through an agreement with the Maryland Energy Administration. A current MOU covers $900,000 for equipment, staffing, and training. A second agreement covering five more years of ongoing program costs is still being negotiated. The total public commitment was not disclosed.

The emergency regulations, if approved by AELR, would take effect May 15 and remain in place for up to 180 days. Atticks described the purpose as giving industry confidence to register at the $75 fee before the July 1 deadline. At the same time, a standard regulatory proposal with the same language will be filed. This standard proposed action will open for a 30-day public comment period on May 15.

Whatever public comments produce, the $75 fee will have been in place, invoices will have gone out, and the program will be running. At that point, changing course based on public input will have much more resistance. Comments that arrive after the fact carry less weight than comments that arrive before the decision is made. That is the whole point of a comment period, and it is what the emergency action skips.

The Waffle House Rule: What EV Charging Prices Should Look Like

April 7, 2026 Lanny

Roadtrip Lessons

If you want to learn the truth in the world, you’ve got to get out in it. We’ve just returned from a 4,200 mile EV roadtrip through the south eastern United States where we stopped at 130 charging stations.

There is no greater touchstone for ground truth in America than a visit to a Waffle House. FEMA uses the number of their restaurants that are able to remain open – “The Waffle House Index” – as an unofficial metric to assess disaster severity.

Gazing at the Waffle House menu for a late dinner while our car charged nearby, I noticed these words at the top, “prices include sales tax.” If Waffle House can do it, and gas stations do it, why can’t EV charging providers state their prices inclusive of all taxes? This inspired me to post a proposal for “the Waffle House Rule” on EV charging prices. Include the taxes in the advertised per kWh price.

The previous day, I had stopped at a fast charger that is owned and operated by Florida Power and Light. The Florida Public Service Commission had recently granted the utility a price increase from $0.32/kWh to $0.45/kWh at FPL owned fast chargers. When I charged at an FPL charger last week, my total bill for 10 kWh was not $4.50, but $5.80 after taxes and fees.

HB 969 Passes the House With the Loophole Intact

March 23, 2026March 24, 2026 Lanny

HB 969 Electric Vehicle Fuel Sold at Retail

House Bill 969, the Electric Vehicle Fuel Sold at Retail bill sponsored by Delegate Nick Allen, passed the Maryland House of Delegates today on third reading following amendments adopted last week in the Agriculture and Aquaculture Subcommittee. The bill now moves to the Senate, where the companion bill, SB 649, did not advance before crossover.

What the bill does

As amended, HB 969 requires owners of EV charging equipment to display contact information for a responsible local party, requires that electricity be sold in kilowatt-hour units, limits charges to kilowatt-hours actually dispensed during a session, allows ancillary fees applied at the conclusion of a session, and requires those fees to be itemized on the customer’s receipt.

Opposition that was not acknowledged

During floor debate ahead of the vote, Delegate Christopher Adams of the Eastern Shore asked the bill’s floor leader, Delegate Natalie Ziegler, whether there had been any opposition to the bill as amended. Delegate Ziegler replied that she was not aware of any.

HB 969 Amendments Do Not Close the $0.00/kWh Loophole

March 19, 2026March 19, 2026 Lanny

Maryland Weights and Measures Charging Station down via seal

I sent the following to members of the Maryland House of Delegates Environment and Transportation Committee regarding House Bill 969, Electric Vehicle Fuel Sold at Retail – Equipment Requirements, Units of Measure, Sales Price, and Fees

HB 969 – Continued Opposition Following Subcommittee Amendments

Chair Korman, Vice Chair Guyton, and Members of the Committee:

I previously submitted written testimony and testified at the February 27 hearing requesting an unfavorable report on House Bill 969. I write again briefly in light of the amendments adopted yesterday in the Agriculture And Aquaculture Subcommittee.

The amendment requiring itemized receipts is already addressed by NIST Handbook 44, Section UR.3.3, which requires a receipt at the completion of every transaction detailing the quantity of energy delivered, the unit price, and any additional separate charges such as parking fees, including their unit price and total cost. Handbook 44 is explicitly incorporated into Maryland law through Agriculture Article 11-207.1. To the extent other amendments also restate requirements already present in Handbook 44, the same redundancy concern from my original testimony applies. More broadly, codifying select provisions of the NIST Handbooks into Maryland statute creates a known risk: if NIST updates those handbooks, Maryland’s statute may fall out of step with the national standards it was intended to reflect. Advanced Energy United raised a related concern in their testimony, recommending that Maryland harmonize with national standards through the National Type Evaluation Program rather than creating Maryland-specific requirements.

Oxford, MD Commissioners Vote to Remove EV Chargers

March 7, 2026March 14, 2026 Lanny

High Operating Costs Including New State Registration Fee Cited

On February 10, 2026 the Commissioners of the Town of Oxford, Maryland voted unanimously to remove the town’s public EV charging stations. The decision came after discussion of ongoing expenses estimated at approximately $7,000 per year, primarily for electricity and maintenance.

The principal reasons were the inability to shift costs to users and a lack of resident support for taxpayer subsidies. A town survey found that only 7% of respondents supported the town covering most of the costs, while 59% were willing to absorb less than $1,000 annually, well below actual expenses.