Proposed bill would force utilities to assess transformer vulnerability to geomagnetic currents; industry warns of scope and cost

A bill that would require electric utilities to run GIC (geomagnetically induced current) vulnerability models to a higher realistic threat level drew both urgent national-security framing and practical industry pushback at a Jan. 14 committee hearing.

Lieutenant Colonel (ret.) Tommy Waller, who leads a coalition called Secure the Grid, told lawmakers HB1723 would force utilities to use a realistic threat input when running North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) vulnerability models rather than the lower scaling often plugged into industry compliance runs. "This is a fixable problem," Waller said of the potential to damage long-lead transformers; he urged the committee to require utilities to identify the longest-lead assets and recommend proven protective hardware.

Waller promoted a tested device (described in testimony as "solid ground" protection) that he said has been deployed at several U.S. substations and can block quasi-DC GIC that shortens transformer life or destroys equipment during extreme geomagnetic storms or a high-altitude EMP. He recommended that utilities model to a higher volts-per-kilometer threshold (85 volts/km was cited, consistent with recent international IEC discussion of severe E3/EMP threats) to prioritize protection of the longest-lead transformers.

Utilities told the committee they already model transmission-level GIC under a NERC standard and ISO-New England processes but warned HB1723 as drafted would change the study scope in a way that could be expensive and technically challenging. Eversource engineers noted NERC's study threshold typically targets 200 kV and above with grounded-Y windings; the bill's 100 kV/25 MVA threshold would push the effort into distribution infrastructure where DC components are not usually modeled and would require significant new data collection and engineering work. Unitil said many distribution-connected transformers are not in the NERC-grounded-Y category and questioned whether a 180-day reporting window is feasible.

Confidentiality and cost allocation

Committee members probed how sensitive infrastructure detail would be protected under the bill (the draft allows Critical Energy Infrastructure Information redaction). Waller and industry witnesses both emphasized careful handling of sensitive data. Utilities also said state-ordered retrofits that result from the reports would raise questions about cost-recovery jurisdiction (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission tariff and transmission-rate issues) and regional coordination since the grid crosses state lines.

Next steps

The committee heard technical and security arguments for raising threat assumptions and practical arguments against an overly broad or near-term mandate. Several witnesses and lawmakers suggested amending HB1723 to narrow the scope to transmission-level elements (consistent with NERC thresholds), clarify confidentiality and to include consultative timelines or cost-recovery mechanisms before the committee advances the measure.

Speakers attributed

- Tommy Waller, Secure the Grid coalition/Center for Security Policy (retired lieutenant colonel) - Alec Omera, Director of External Affairs, Unitil - Michael Lacata, Director of Government & Community Relations, Eversource - Brian Dicki, VP of Electric Operations, Eversource

Provenance: topicintro SEG 2460; topfinish SEG 3660