Panel advances controversial private‑use electrical networks bill after hours of testimony and amendments
Loading...
Summary
SB 490 (private‑use electrical networks) was advanced as amended after a long hearing that included retooled amendment language, LPSC opposition stressing constitutional and resource‑adequacy concerns, utility and consumer warnings about cost shifting, and supporters who said private investment is needed to attract large projects.
Senate Bill 490 — which would create a statutory pathway for "private‑use electrical networks" (private grids for large customers, including on‑site generation, storage and private wires) and fast‑track a determination that such networks are non‑jurisdictional — cleared the Senate Commerce Committee as amended after a lengthy, sometimes heated hearing.
Senator Henskins presented a PowerPoint explaining the proposal and introduced amendment set 2123 to address several concerns: an objective test for "primarily dedicated" service (50% of annual energy output or nameplate capacity to an identified large load under a five‑year contract), binding declarations of non‑jurisdiction (30‑day clock with deemed approval if the LPSC fails to act on a complete filing), standardized tariff and interconnection timelines (180 days) and confidentiality protections for sensitive commercial data. Henskins and supporters framed the bill as a tool to accelerate billions in private investment and secure jobs for Louisiana.
Industrial associations and local officials (including Randy Young of the Louisiana Energy Users Group and parish officials courting data‑center projects) urged the committee to keep optionality for private investment, arguing private projects should bear their own risk rather than shift costs to ratepayers.
The Louisiana Public Service Commission — represented by Executive Secretary Brandon Fry speaking for all five commissioners — strongly opposed the bill as written. Fry argued the constitution creates the PSC’s authority to define and regulate public utilities and warned that the 30‑day and 180‑day timelines would undercut the commission’s rule‑making and rate‑making processes. He cited potential for large interconnection‑study costs, difficulties of expedited true‑cost studies for each utility, and risks of stranded assets and cost shifting to residential customers.
Utilities (Entergy, SWEPCO, CLECO) and consumer groups (AARP) echoed the PSC’s concerns about resource adequacy, reliability and protecting small customers from rate‑shifts. Supporters said the bill contains safeguards and that private generation can reduce strain and bring jobs. After amendment adoption and extended exchanges, the committee voted to move SB 490 forward "as amended," leaving open further negotiation in the legislature and signaling the measure will be a major policy fight on the floor.
