Feb. 13—CHEYENNE — After Rocky Mountain Power proposed raising its rates by nearly 30% for Wyoming ratepayers last year, lawmakers proposed bills to control rates and ensure reliable power generation for Wyoming consumers.

Three separate Senate files made it through Monday’s introduction vote on the floor and were discussed by the Senate Corporations, Elections and Political Subdivisions Committee on Tuesday. Committee members advanced two of the three bills during their meeting, and discussion on the final one, Senate File 22, “Public service commission-utility reliability,” will continue Thursday.

SF 20, “Electricity rates for costs that do not benefit Wyoming,” was forwarded to the full Senate on a 5-0 committee vote. As written, the bill would put into statute the Wyoming Public Service Commission’s authority to cut out any utility costs that do not benefit Wyomingites.

Wyoming is a major generator and exporter of energy, and the construction of two major transmission lines by Rocky Mountain Power are underway that will deliver energy to western states.

PSC deputy chairman Chris Petrie told lawmakers this bill simply “memorialized” what the commission is already permitted to do. If anything, the bill helps clarify the commission’s authority in statute.

“This doesn’t really look like it’s changing anything drastically,” Petrie said.

The commission, he said, is neutral on the bill, as it does not enhance the organization’s power, nor does it take anything away. Lawmakers asked if there were any scenarios where having this power certified in Wyoming statute would give leverage to the commission’s overall authority to cut out-of-state utility costs.

Sen. Charles Scott, R-Casper, inquired about a scenario where a western state’s utility growth expands or the state retires a power source and looks to build a replacement facility here in Wyoming. He asked whether this bill would levy the commission’s power to address those situations.

Petrie said the costs of growth in utility usage in a western state are already allocated to that state. As for building a replacement power facility in Wyoming, Petrie said he believed the commission “would already have the capacity” to deal with the allocation of those costs.

“We don’t know today exactly what might happen,” Petrie said. “We have to deal with that when we encounter it. This, I think, would provide some guidance.”

Committee Chairman Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, said the discussion was “dancing around” the main issue on the table.

“The Legislature may disagree with the Public Service Commission about your allocation of assets under the (Multi-State Protocol),” Case said. “The largest company that serves the state of Wyoming has constructed two very large transmission lines that are not yet fully in a rate base. And the question, I think, as we go forward is who’s going to pay for those transmission lines?”

Because the lines are being built for Rocky Mountain Power, which has a scheduled rehearing on aspects of its general rate case, Petrie said he couldn’t comment on it Tuesday.

“Perhaps we just haven’t reached the point where the commission has found itself unable to deal with (these) allocations,” Petrie said, adding the bill simply confirmed the commission’s situation.

Anthony Ornelas with the Wyoming Office of Consumer Advocacy (OCA), said the primary issue is defining “costs” and “benefits,” especially with the large energy transmission project underway that the OCA had initially been against.

Rocky Mountain Power spokesperson Rick Kaysen said the utility company was neutral on the bill. Case asked Kaysen what the impact the transmission lines could have on electricity rates, and Kaysen said he couldn’t answer the question at the time.

Case said he was worried about interpretation of the bill’s language down the road, and whether it will generate lawsuits. Testimony from three different groups showed the bill wouldn’t change much, but there was pressure on the Legislature to do something.

However, Scott said he disagreed with the testimony, saying the bill does more than what officials said it would. Furthermore, the senator added it would add clarity to have this bill in statute.

A second bill, SF 21, “Public utilities-net power cost sharing ratio,” was forwarded by the committee on a vote of 4-1, with the “no” vote coming from Sen. Eric Barlow, R-Gillette. Petrie with the Public Service Commission explained the bill provides an incentive for utility companies to recover a percentage of electric supply costs, as long as they are cost-effective for the consumer.

An amendment was made to the bill by Scott, at Petrie’s suggestion, to insert language that said “within the complete or partial control of utilities.” The purpose of the language was to ensure utility companies kept that incentive to ensure low costs for procuring energy.

Barlow said he doubted whether this bill gets them any further toward from protecting consumers from cost that can be controlled by utility companies.

Case said there was obviously still some work to be done on the bill, which can be discussed through an amendment on the Senate floor.

Hannah Shields is the Wyoming Tribune Eagle’s state government reporter. She can be reached at 307-633-3167 or hshields@wyomingnews.com. You can follow her on X @happyfeet004.