Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes SB115 after lengthy debate on utility incentives and consumer protections
Summary
Senate Bill 115, revising public utilities regulation to focus on competition and public interest and allowing incentive rate mechanisms, passed the House after intense floor debate over consumer protections and how excess earnings would be shared; several amendment attempts to remove earnings sharing or specify public‑purpose uses failed.
The Utah House approved Senate Bill 115 on third reading after extensive debate over a new framework for the Public Service Commission to consider competition, new services and incentive‑based rate mechanisms.
Sponsor Representative Moody opened by stressing the bill "is not a deregulation bill," but rather compresses existing regulatory factors into two primary tests (competition and public interest) and allows the commission to adopt incentive plans that could share savings between ratepayers and shareholders. "The key thing to this bill is the public service commission continues to have control now," he said.
Floor debate was energetic and divided. Representative Bush urged removing the earnings‑sharing language, warning the incentive could encourage companies to keep rates high to increase the amount to be shared: "I can't see the incentive to keep the rates down," Bush said. Supporters, including Representative Okey and Representative Valentine, argued incentive programs in 18 other states have motivated utilities to invest and reduce costs, and that the commission would retain adjudicative oversight.
Several amendments were offered on the floor: one would have deleted the incentive/earnings‑sharing section; another proposed directing the utility share into specified public purposes. Those amendments were rejected in committee/roll calls, after motions for previous question and divisions. Proponents emphasized public hearings, commission oversight and the potential to deliver better service and lower long‑run rates.
After the debate the House passed SB115, 54‑15. The bill was signed by the speaker in the House and will proceed to the Senate. Supporters called for follow‑up work by the Public Service Commission and consumer advocates to specify the commission's intended formulas and safeguards.
What happens next: SB115 goes to the Senate for action; the Public Service Commission will need to develop procedures, rules and evidence‑based formulas to implement incentive plans if the bill is enacted.
