Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hb13 Grid Modernization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to require forward-looking distribution planning and 'beneficial electrification' draws broad stakeholder input; committee to continue work
Summary
House Bill 13 would require utilities to produce transparent distribution-system plans and propose 'beneficial electrification' programs subject to Public Regulation Commission review. The committee heard extensive stakeholder testimony and agreed to continue work in the interim rather than voting this session.
Representative Hockman v. Hill introduced House Bill 13, which sponsors described as a package to modernize electric distribution planning, improve transparency, and require utilities to propose beneficial-electrification plans subject to Public Regulation Commission (PRC) review.
"HB 13 ensures New Mexico's utility customers receive reliable and affordable electric service when they need it," the sponsor said in opening remarks, framing the bill as forward-looking grid planning to accommodate electrification and growth. Sponsors said the bill coordinates distribution planning with other state policy goals and directs PRC oversight over proposed plans.
A wide set of stakeholders testified. Utilities and industry groups—including Xcel Energy and Renewable Energy Industry Association of New Mexico—expressed conditional support for transparent distribution planning and the bill’s economic-development goals. Local governments and clean-energy organizations urged passage to prepare infrastructure for electric vehicle charging, new housing and industry. Labor and workforce advocates emphasized job and training opportunities from grid modernization.
Several energy-sector witnesses urged refinements or more time in the interim to work on definitions and regulatory detail. Gas and oil-sector witnesses and a major gas distribution company said they supported modernization but had concerns about mandates on beneficial electrification and the need to clarify customer-class cost allocation.
Representative Hockman v. Hill described a set of amendments negotiated with the PRC that would give the commission more time and flexibility to review plans and explicitly preserve PRC authority to require revisions and to protect ratepayers. The committee did not take a final vote and sponsors and members signaled intent to continue stakeholder work during the interim.
Committee members and witnesses emphasized the bill’s potential economic-development benefits but also urged continued drafting to address implementation, timeline, and rate-making protections.
