Senate committee backs bill to let very large power users build or contract for supply; utilities and consumer advocate urge guardrails

The Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee advanced Senate Bill 227, electricity supply amendments, which would create a statutory and regulatory framework allowing very large customers — defined in the bill as loads over 50 megawatts — to develop on-site or near-site generation or contract for power outside traditional utility delivery when the regulated utility cannot meet needs in a timely way.

The bill’s sponsor and outside counsel said the measure is intended to prevent long waits for power that prospective data centers and manufacturers currently face and to allow large users to build or contract for the resources they need. "If the utility cannot [serve those customers], then it shouldn't stand in the way," said Gary Dodge, who presented technical background on the bill to the committee.

Why it matters: supporters said the proposal would help attract large industrial and data center projects that require substantial, predictable power and speed to market; critics warned that without safeguards the costs of new grid additions could be shifted to existing ratepayers.

What supporters told the committee Dennis Bartlett, vice president of utility development at Tract Capital Management, told the committee the bill "provides flexibility and speed for large new customers," aligns with state energy policy and would protect existing customers by keeping incremental costs with the new users, he said.

Christine Michael of Eneo Energy said businesses want alternatives to long waits and red tape and warned that "we will see a mass exodus of business opportunity here in Utah" if options are not provided.

Land developer Chuck Ackerlow described a private study in which Rocky Mountain Power told a Tooele County site developer it could not serve a large parcel for seven years and returned an estimated cost of $1,860,600,000 to deliver needed power. Ackerlow said that experience illustrates why prospective developers want authority to build their own generation.

What opponents told the committee Tom Carter of Rocky Mountain Power said the company supports finding solutions but expressed concern the bill as drafted could allow incremental costs tied to very large loads to be borne by other customers. "We have to ensure that these incremental costs ... are assigned to the cost causer," Carter said, urging guardrails and planning steps so transmission or planning costs are not shifted to existing customers.

Michelle Beck, director of the Utah Office of Consumer Services, said her reading of the bill aligns with the utility’s: "I do not think that this bill protects other customers." Beck said the proposal makes a significant departure from past practice and urged more work to put appropriate guardrails in place given ongoing affordability concerns.

Committee action and next steps Senators discussed making the Public Service Commission’s roles and cost-assignment explicit in drafting. Sponsor Senator Cullimore said the bill is still "a work in progress" and that drafters considered ratepayer effects. The committee voted to recommend the bill favorably to the Senate floor; the motion passed unanimously (recorded as 5–0 in committee).

Votes at a glance from this meeting - Senate Bill 227 (electricity supply amendments): recommended favorably to the Senate floor, committee vote recorded as 5–0.

Ending: The sponsor said the bill will be refined with input from utilities, consumer advocates and the commission to address cost assignment and planning, and the committee moved the measure forward for further consideration.