Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates annual fee and reporting rules for data centers in SB 6,171
Summary
Lawmakers and stakeholders debated whether to impose a per‑kWh annual fee on large energy users (data centers) and how tariffs, reporting and diesel generator limits should be structured; an amendment removing the fee was debated and the committee ultimately advanced the bill with substitutes.
Senate Bill 6,171, described to the committee in staff briefing, would require utilities to make available a tariff or policy for emerging large energy‑use facilities (referred to in testimony as "data centers"), require data‑center owners to publish sustainability reports, and impose an annual per‑kilowatt‑hour fee in the underlying text. Committee staff outlined two proposed substitutes (B and C) and an amendment C1 offered in committee to remove the 0.005 USD per‑kWh fee and the associated emerging large energy use facility account and distributions.
A business representative speaking in committee (identified in the transcript only as Speaker 6) urged members to adopt the fee removal, arguing the amendment would improve competitiveness and help Washington attract jobs and investment. "This striking amendment allows us to get the annual fees out of theirs and give them opportunity...to have a level playing field and competitive nature with other states," the representative said.
Committee members opposed to removing the fee argued it serves to protect ratepayers, including low‑income customers, from cost shifts tied to new large loads. The chair (identified in the transcript by speaker tag) said the fee aims "to try and compensate some of those that are most low income." Senator Short, who represents a district with significant existing large loads, said his region already balances hosting large facilities while protecting ratepayers and indicated he would vote no on the fee removal.
The committee debated other provisions in the substitutes, including required tariff elements, exit‑fee calculations, curtailment rules, diesel‑generator use restrictions and reporting obligations to the Department of Ecology (including water and air permits). An amendment (C1) that would remove the 0.005 USD/kWh fee was offered and debated by multiple speakers; voice votes in the executive session recorded both "ayes" and "nays," and, after subsequent motions, the proposed substitute was advanced with a due‑pass recommendation and the bill was sent to Ways & Means per the transcript.
What remains unresolved: the transcript records competing policy priorities—industry competitiveness versus explicit ratepayer protections—but does not contain a roll‑call vote tally that would reveal how individual senators voted. Staff and sponsors indicated continued stakeholder work on tariff language and reporting standards before final floor consideration.
Next steps: The bill was sent to Ways & Means with a due‑pass recommendation; sponsors said they will continue to refine tariff elements, reporting requirements and any fee language in follow‑up work.
