Committee hears debate over transmission study, stakeholders ask for clearer scope and ratepayer protections

Senator Boner told the Senate Corporations Committee the purpose of Senate File 102 is to give the Legislature a formal role in a transmission and market‑integration study the Wyoming Energy Authority is already funding and planning. The bill sets two phases: a phase‑one transmission and load‑growth assessment and a phase‑two look at integrating Wyoming transmission into broader day‑ahead markets or a regional transmission organization (RTO). Sponsor‑spoken deadlines were noted in testimony as "phase one of November 1st 27" and "phase two September 1st 2028." No new appropriation was included in the bill.

Why it matters: Wyoming is a major power‑producing state; proposed data centers and other large loads could change local and regional demand patterns. Whether and how Wyoming utilities participate in regional markets could affect wholesale prices, reliability, and who ultimately pays for new transmission.

Utility and cooperative witnesses broadly supported a rigorous transmission analysis but urged narrower, more actionable language. Bill Mertz, CEO of Members First Power Cooperative, said he supports a transmission study but warned that phase two’s language risks presupposing RTO membership. He urged the committee to require defined load‑growth parameters (for example, explicit megawatt ranges and geographic assumptions), a formal stakeholder engagement process that includes co‑ops and rural utilities, and explicit cost allocation or rate‑payer protections before recommending integration steps that could shift costs to retail customers.

Rob Ker, executive director of the Wyoming Energy Authority, and John Jens, the authority’s director of energy market development, told the committee the agency had already planned studies and intended to involve the Public Service Commission, the Office of Consumer Advocate, utilities and co‑ops. Ker said the authority has in‑house budget resources to complete the work and referenced a separate coal‑market study that will inform price and generation‑mix context.

Committee members pressed how the study would treat generation (dispatchable sources) versus transmission upgrades. Sponsor Boner and authority staff said phase one is designed to identify transmission pinch points and capacity gaps under low/moderate/high load scenarios; phase two would evaluate regional market options and the economic impacts associated with various integration choices. Several members suggested adding an explicit rate‑payer impact analysis and clearer definitions for the three growth scenarios.

Stakeholders proposed concrete changes the committee said it would explore in a short working period. Tyler Lindholm of Americans for Prosperity asked that the study explicitly exclude consideration of right‑of‑first‑refusal or incumbent preferential ownership mechanisms for new transmission. Utilities including Black Hills Energy and PRECorp representatives urged that any study include clear cost allocation guidance and cooperative input so recommendations are actionable rather than academic.

What’s next: The committee set the bill aside to Wednesday to allow the sponsor and staff to convene a brief stakeholder working group and to consider language that would define load scenarios, add rate‑payer analysis and describe a structured stakeholder engagement process. The Energy Authority and major utilities signaled willingness to participate.

Sources: Committee testimony from Senator Boner; Rob Ker and John Jens, Wyoming Energy Authority; Bill Mertz, Members First Power Cooperative; David Bush, Black Hills Energy; written and oral amendments proposed by interests including Americans for Prosperity.

Ending note: The committee did not take a final vote on SF102; it will return after the sponsor and stakeholders present clarified, narrower language.