Public Service Department briefs Natural Resources & Energy on Vermont electricity system, rates, and forecasts

TK Gore, director of regulated utility planning at the Vermont Public Service Department, told the Natural Resources & Energy committee that his presentation was intended as background, not a policy proposal. “For the record, I'm TK Gore, the director of regulated utility planning at the Public Service Department,” Gore said at the start of his briefing.

Gore said the department represents “Vermonters” and the public interest on energy, telecom, water and wastewater issues and that its work is guided by state energy policy (cited in the briefing as 30 V.S.A. § 202a) and a six‑year comprehensive energy plan, last completed in 2022. He described two central themes from the plan — equity and grid evolution — and said public polling showed Vermonters prioritize affordability, reliability and emissions when considering how the state gets electricity.

Gore walked committee members through three core components of the electric system: generation sources, transmission and distribution. He explained Vermont’s system remains largely vertically integrated — utilities in Vermont own some combination of generation, transmission and distribution — and contrasted that with parts of New England that moved to retail choice. He identified Green Mountain Power (GMP) as the largest utility in Vermont and explained VELCO (the Vermont Electric Power Company) owns the high‑voltage transmission system that connects in‑state utilities to the New England grid.

On oversight, Gore said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) governs wholesale sales and interstate transmission under the Federal Power Act, ISO New England operates the regional grid and the Vermont Public Utility Commission regulates distribution utility rates, siting and service quality. He described the Department of Public Service’s role as an advocate for ratepayers and noted the department sometimes participates in regional proceedings through the New England States Committee on Electricity (NESCO).

Turning to rates, Gore said roughly two‑thirds of a typical retail bill come from power supply and transmission; distribution operations and maintenance and financing make up the remainder. He described Vermont’s ability to enter into longer contracts or ownership arrangements as a hedge that has, in his view, reduced volatility for ratepayers compared with some neighboring states during price shocks.

Gore flagged two major near‑term cost pressures: expected increases in wholesale energy prices and rising regional transmission costs. He said transmission costs are rising in part because of asset condition work (aging lines and poles) and “rightsizing” to meet future load and potential new generation. He said the department is advocating regionally for transmission cost containment.

On demand, Gore showed historical flatness in retail energy use — which he credited in part to energy efficiency programs that have reduced load by an estimated 15% — but said future demand is projected to increase under many scenarios due to heat pump and electric vehicle adoption. He stressed that many demand forecasts assume no load management; the department and utilities already use managed rates and other load‑management tools, and Gore said those programs affect how much new infrastructure may be required.

Gore described the state’s 2023 physical power deliveries as about 91% carbon‑free on a generation basis, but explained that accounting for renewable energy certificates (RECs) and how utilities buy, sell or retire RECs changes the reported mix of attributes. He said utilities still have entitlements to nuclear generation through existing contracts that extend into the 2030s and that the state’s renewable requirements will change how utilities show compliance.

Committee members asked technical and policy questions throughout the briefing — for example, whether the Public Service Department has more granular survey data on what “affordability” means to different Vermonters (Gore said the polling term was not defined and pointed to Energy Efficiency program data for fuel‑burden measurements), and whether burying distribution lines will ultimately reduce storm‑related costs (Gore said the benefits depend on location and implementation and that a benefit‑cost analysis is pending). Gore closed by offering a follow‑up session to cover program history and more detail on renewables and load management.

Ending: Gore said he hoped to return for a “part 2” presentation with deeper detail on renewable deployment history, energy efficiency programs and load management tools. The committee did not take any formal action in the transcripted portion of this briefing.