Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves electric power facilities bill with intent language aimed at preserving coal use at IPP
Summary
After extended debate over local coal, contracts and potential fuel shifting at the Intermountain Power Project, the Utah Senate passed SB 94 and added intent language asking IPP and Los Angeles to notify state leaders before fuel shifts, a move supporters said preserves jobs and gives leaders time to respond.
Senate Bill 94, addressing electric power facilities, drew one of the day's most substantive floor debates. Sponsors warned that failure to act could prompt the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power to pursue alternative suppliers by issuing an RFP, which could jeopardize the Intermountain Power Project (IPP) and related coal-industry jobs in Utah. Supporters described current coal contracts that extend to 2027 and said they had a letter from Los Angeles outlining a commitment to negotiate extensions if the bill passed.
Opponents and cautioning senators raised concerns about long-term environmental regulation, competitiveness, and consumer electricity prices. Senator Hinkins warned of potential electric-rate increases and fallout for manufacturing if utilities shift to higher-cost sources, while other senators stressed that any long-term fuel shifts are complicated and costly.
The Senate debated and then adopted specific intent language memorializing written and verbal commitments by IPP and Los Angeles, including a provision asking IPP to notify the governor, the Senate president and the speaker of the House at least 120 days in advance of any contract that would shift fuel sources away from coal. Supporters said the language would place the commitments on the legislative journal and allow state leaders time to assess economic and political implications.
On final tally, the Senate passed SB 94 with 23 yeas, 4 nays and 2 absent. Sponsors said the bill and the intent language are intended to preserve Utah's coal-mining-related jobs and give elected leaders advance notice of major fuel decisions at IPP.
Floor debate included substantive exchanges about the economics of coal versus conversion to natural gas, the magnitude of IPP debt and the feasibility and cost of converting generation facilities. The Senate spread the agreed intent language on the journal and proceeded with final passage.
