Vermont committee hears H.601 to count nuclear power toward clean-energy goals

House Energy and Digital Infrastructure committee members on Jan. 17 heard the sponsors of H.601 outline a proposal to revise Vermont's renewable energy standard (RES), allow nuclear power to count toward state clean-energy targets and remove statutory barriers the sponsors say now impede consideration of new nuclear options.

"The bill is H.601, which is a public service energy, renewable energy, clean energy, nuclear energy, and nuclear storage bill," sponsor Representative Patty McCoy said as she introduced the measure. McCoy said the proposal would eliminate some renewable energy credit purchases that, she argued, mask existing clean nuclear power in Vermont's portfolio and would increase transparency about ratepayer costs. "This approach will generate millions in ratepayer savings and increase transparency regarding cost impacts of existing energy sources while maintaining the same level of greenhouse gas reductions," she said.

Representative Suttler, presenting additional detail, said the bill would rename the RES to a "clean energy standard," allow nuclear generation to be counted as greenhouse-gas neutral energy and would not change in-state generation mandates. He said nuclear power already makes up about 18'20percent to 20'20percent of the electricity utilities procure and that, by counting those purchases toward the standard, the state could see savings. He told the committee the bill could yield roughly $20,000,000 in ratepayer savings by 2035.

Committee members asked technical and policy questions. One member noted complex percentage language in the bill and sought clarification about whether current statutory pathways to 100'20percent renewables would be altered; sponsors said those sections merit review with legislative counsel. Another asked whether H.601 would enable new siting or permitting of small modular reactors (SMRs) in Vermont. Sponsors said the measure opens the door to considering SMRs but cautioned permitting would be a lengthy process subject to existing state reviews (including Act 250) and estimated it would likely take seven to eight years before a project could be permitted and built, if it progressed that far.

Members also pressed on waste-storage language. "It looks to me like it's proposing the storage of more or new nuclear waste at the Yankee site?" one member asked. Sponsors deferred technical answers on waste storage to the Public Service Department and said they were not comfortable adopting new waste-storage policy without its testimony.

Committee members sought information about which utilities hold long-term nuclear contracts; presenters named Green Mountain Power as an example and said several Vermont utilities have long-term purchase arrangements that extend into the 2020s and 2030s. Presenters also noted that purchases from the ISO New England market currently include roughly 20'22percent nuclear content, which would factor into any accounting under a revised standard.

The committee did not take action on H.601 at the meeting. Sponsors recommended the committee consult staff from the Public Service Department and legislative counsel for technical briefings on the bill's detailed sections, including provisions affecting renewable energy percentage targets, nuclear storage and any changes to statutes governing gas-facility expansion. The chair thanked Representatives McCoy and Southworth for presenting and closed their time on the agenda.