Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Committee hears bill asking the PUC to study tariffs for large‑use electric customers, including data centers
Loading...
Summary
Representative Kat McGee introduced HB 17‑22 to ask the Public Utilities Commission to open an investigatory docket and develop tariff options for "large use" electric facilities (20 MW+). The Department of Energy and utility witnesses said the bill should be reframed as an investigatory docket and cautioned about jurisdictional and technical issues, while environmental groups urged broader planning and consumer protections.
Representative Kat McGee told the committee HB 17‑22 would direct the Public Utilities Commission to open a docket and develop a regulatory framework for a new customer classification: "large use" electric facilities that peak at 20 megawatts or more and typically include data centers and similar high‑intensity electricity users. The bill seeks to clarify how costs for interconnection, transmission and any required capital investments would be allocated so retail ratepayers are not exposed to cost‑shifting.
"The idea behind the bill is to look at it from a ratepayer perspective and try and protect their interests," McGee said, pointing to a proposed implementation timeline and PUC reporting requirements. She said the bill would allow the PUC to examine practices from other states and set a deadline for an agreed framework by Jan. 1, 2028.
Josh Elliott of the Department of Energy said the department is neutral but recommended restructuring the bill explicitly to direct an investigatory docket rather than require the PUC to pre‑set rates or tariffs. He cautioned about the NAICS‑code‑based definition (self‑assigned by companies) and warned that lines in the draft mixing environmental siting and tariff terms could cross into other agencies' jurisdiction.
Michael Licata of Eversource confirmed utilities do have large‑customer rate schedules and interconnection processes and that interconnection upgrades are typically charged to the entity seeking connection; he cautioned that transmission rates are set by FERC and siting/community impacts fall to environmental regulators, and suggested the bill be framed narrowly to ask the PUC to study tariff design and cost allocation.
Catherine Corkery of the Sierra Club urged caution, pointing to Virginia's experience with clustered data‑center growth and studies showing potential upward pressure on residential bills when utilities must expand capacity or transmission to meet demand.
What happens next: Testimony made clear the committee will likely refine HB 17‑22 to frame it as an investigatory docket for the PUC and to clarify definitions, jurisdictional boundaries, and the scope of protected customer classes. No committee vote occurred on Feb. 9; stakeholders recommended the PUC engage utilities, ISO‑NE and environmental regulators as part of any docket.
