Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ev Tariffs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee releases A4624 after extended testimony on demand-charge relief and BPU role
Summary
A4624 would require utilities to file tariffs for fast-charging commercial customers and create alternatives to demand charges; the committee released the measure after substantial testimony from utilities, industry and advocates about rate design and regulatory authority.
Assembly Bill 4624 (as amended) would require electric public utilities to submit new tariffs for commercial customers that operate fast EV chargers and would regulate non-volumetric fees charged to operators of fast-charging equipment. Sponsor remarks framed demand charges as a major financial barrier to private investment in DC fast chargers (DCFCs), noting that a single charging session can trigger a demand charge and sharply raise operating costs for station operators.
Testimony reflected a clear split among stakeholders. Rhea Davis, director of government affairs at Electrify America, testified in support and presented data showing demand charges can account for a large share of DCFC operating costs; Electrify America cited 26 stations and 128 chargers in New Jersey and argued demand-charge relief would make stations financially viable. Eric DeGesserro (New Jersey Motor Truck Association) and other business witnesses said demand charges are a significant hurdle for truck electrification as well and urged workable rate designs.
Opponents and concerned stakeholders — including Environmental Defense Fund, Chemistry Council, New Jersey Utilities Association, the Rate Counsel and NJBIA as read into the record — urged caution. Doug O'Malley (Environment New Jersey) and others said the bill risks short-circuiting ongoing Board of Public Utilities (BPU) processes and could limit data collection essential to durable rate design. Witnesses also raised equity questions about shifting costs across customer classes and the technical complexity of capacity and distribution charges.
After extended testimony and exchanges, the committee moved to release A4624 as amended. Committee members signaled an interest in continuing to refine statutory language to balance investment incentives, data collection, and the BPU’s regulatory role.
