Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ev Charging Evip topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hearing record updated to include settlement revising Rocky Mountain Power's EV charging program
Summary
At a Utah Public Service Commission hearing, parties entered a settlement stipulation and admitted prefiled testimony for the 3‑year review of Rocky Mountain Power’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program (EVIP). Witnesses from the Division of Public Utilities, Office of Consumer Services and Western Resource Advocates urged the commission to approve the stipulation, which redirects incentives and changes certain program elements.
Get email alerts on the Ev Charging Evip topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Utah Public Service Commission hearing record was updated on Nov. 6, 2025, to include a settlement stipulation and multiple parties’ prefiled testimony in the three‑year review of Rocky Mountain Power’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program (EVIP).
Robert Davis, a utility technical consultant for the Division of Public Utilities, told the hearing the division ‘‘supports the party’s stipulation as just and reasonable in result and in the public interest’’ after summarizing the division’s review of the program’s operations since 2022.
Sean Grant, director of customer solutions at Rocky Mountain Power, read a prepared statement describing the settlement’s changes. ‘‘The electric vehicle infrastructure program launched in 2021 as a 10‑year $50,000,000 program to expand electric vehicle charging infrastructure across Utah,’’ Grant said. He summarized key elements of the 2025 stipulation: an allocation of roughly $4,800,000 for company‑owned chargers, $1,000,000 for education and outreach, $3,400,000 for nonresidential incentives under Schedule 120, discontinuation of incentives for residential chargers and discontinuation of make‑ready investments, and miscellaneous changes affecting Schedule 60 and a decrease to the Schedule 198 surcharge effective Jan. 1, 2026. Grant also said the stipulation retains annual reporting and a final review scheduled for June 30, 2029.
Alex Ware, a utility analyst with the Office of Consumer Services, said the stipulation ‘‘is the product of good faith negotiations’’ and recommended commission approval. Ware highlighted the office’s priorities: realigning remaining make‑ready funds to support company‑owned chargers to focus on revenue generation, retaining some funding for cost‑effective multi‑unit incentives, and continuing consumer education to encourage enrollment in time‑of‑use rates for off‑peak charging.
Deborah Kapiloff, a clean energy policy adviser for Western Resource Advocates, told the commission WRA supports the stipulation and specifically the continuation of Schedule 120 incentives for multifamily and commercial charging and measures that encourage off‑peak charging and managed charging participation.
The parties moved to admit a long list of prefiled testimony and exhibits into evidence; the presiding officer admitted those materials and also admitted the settlement stipulation and associated RNP workpapers filed with the stipulation. Counsel described the stipulation as incorporating lessons learned over the first three years of the EVIP and aligning program changes with legislative intent under House Bill 396 (codified at Utah Code § 54‑4‑41), which authorized the program.
The hearing record shows the stipulation and supporting testimony were entered into evidence and that witnesses from the Division of Public Utilities, the Office of Consumer Services and Western Resource Advocates urged the commission to approve the settlement. The transcript does not record a final commission order or final vote on the stipulation during this hearing; the presiding officer adjourned the proceeding after admitting the documents into the record.
Next steps described on the record include continued annual reporting by the company, midyear stakeholder updates and a final review slated for June 30, 2029. The commission’s formal action to adopt or reject the settlement was not included in the hearing transcript.

