H.B. 413 Surplus Interconnection Service Amendments

What this bill does

The bill would require affected electric utilities to study surplus interconnection service, which means using existing grid connections for additional power, in their integrated resource plans and in the action plan. It would also let utilities ask non-utility owned facilities for information about it, direct the Public Service Commission to encourage including it in those plans, and allow utilities to recover approved costs for it.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 6 yes, 0 no, 6 absentHouse Public Utilities and Energy Committee: vote, which it did not pass · Feb 12, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 12, 2026 House Public Utilities and Energy Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (25 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)44:51

     And we'll move on to our next agenda item, which is HB four 13 surplus interconnection Service Amendments. Uh, Representative Watkins time is yours.

  2. Rep. Christine F. Watkins45:03

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Mr. Chair and committee, this is the surplus interconnection Service Amendments. Um, we're talking about something that's really new here, and I'm gonna describe it to you. Uh, what it does is it requires, uh, an affected electrical utility to analyze surplus interconnection service opportunities in integrated service resource plan filings. And it allows, uh, the electrical utility to solicit information from non-utility owned facilities regarding surplus interconnection service. And it requires an affected, uh, electrical utility to consider surplus interconnection service in the action plan. And it requires the commission to encourage inclusion of surplus interconnection service in integrated resource plans. And it allows them to, that they may recover approved cost surplus for those interconnection plans. Now, that's a lot of words that you may not know what they mean. So I have someone here with me that if you'll give you, if you'll give them a quick and quick, um, breakdown, breakdown of what this does.

  3. Josh Brown, The Pew Charitable Trusts46:26

     Hello, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak. Josh Brown, uh, representing Piute Charitable Trust. This bill, um, as the representative has said, uh, it's a new idea. It's, it's something that utilities do. What we're looking at is, is you have, essentially, you've got cars on a highway, you wanna get that car filled up with electrons, right? The, the highway's full. And this is an opportunity to look at best utilizing power lines, making sure that if we have, uh, processed, accumulated, this is what is part of the, uh, dispatch transmission capability for a generation system. Sometimes these generation systems aren't utilizing their full transmission allocation. This is essentially a path to look at how do we best fill those lines? Um, it prevents costs from going up. You don't need to put in as many new transmission lines because you're actually utilizing the ones that they have. That being said, there's a lot of, uh, dynamics on how much of those transmission lines you have full, how much of them you have somewhat idle in case things need to be shifted or moved throughout the system. So this, this is an a done idea that is being used, but to optimize it, look at it differently, is something that probably needs a bit more study than this bill. So the, the conversation we've had with the utility is, let's spend the summer, let's work with people, let's try to work with the utility and come up with a path that best utilizes this opportunity without creating undue consequences and actually create a new process that can help utilize transmission lines to their most effective utilization. That was a lot of words, and we've already spoke with Representative Jack. Uh, he's willing to help work with us on this summer. I'm speaking for him, he's not here, so he could tell me that I'm wrong. But, um, we've had this discussion. The utilities here, we've, we've, we've discussed this and it's best to hold it at this current time. Thank you.

  4. Committee chair (presiding)48:26

     Thank you. Does that conclude your presentation? Yes, it does. Alright, I'm gonna bring it to our committee, uh, representative Albright.

  5. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht48:37

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, is this something that, uh, uh, Rocky Mountain, for example, has not put in their IRPs in the past?

  6. Rep. Christine F. Watkins48:51

     I have, uh, Mr. Cox here behind me who could speak better to it. Um, I would say that they look at this, I can't speak to directly how much it is or is not in their IRP, but again, this is a process they do. And you might know representative better than I.

  7. Jon Cox, Utah Public Affairs49:05

     Yeah, I'll just respond very quickly. Mr. Chair and Representative Albrecht, uh, this is absolutely something that is looked at, uh, to, to the bill sponsor's point and to, uh, Mr. Brown's point. Um, there certainly is more that can be done. So the utility of today, uh, is different than a utility of 20 or 30 years ago. So think of, uh, all those electrons flowing on a transmission line. It's not always constant. You have intermittent resources. Um, obviously you have redundancies purposely built into your system, and so you are looking for ways to maximize existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure. So that absolutely does occur today in the IRP, uh, but to the, the bill sponsor's point, uh, the utility is certainly very open, uh, to continuing this discussion and seeing if there's ways to maximize that even more

  8. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht49:50

     Follow up. Yes. So most transmission lines that have been built have, um, transmission rights that certain groups own, uh, within that, that transmission line. Um, they may or may not be willing to share those based on their ownership rights, uh, transmission rights that they, they have in a transmission line. How, how are you proposing to make this work with that question hanging out there? Is that a question from you or the bill sponsor?

  9. Jon Cox, Utah Public Affairs50:29

     I can either one of you, I can answer. Want me to go? Yeah. This is not my bill, so I I don't know that I, I wanna be the one responding on behalf of the bill. Well, you're the answer it, John. Okay.

  10. Jon Cox, Utah Public Affairs50:40

      Yeah. So, so transmission rights, you are correct. Uh, those are private property rights they belong to, to someone. Uh, so the intention, as I understand this bill, is not to force an outcome with that property, but rather to seek paths to, to enhance its efficiency. So, so in this particular case, if this bill were to come and, and propose a takings of transmission rights of the utility or of another third party, uh, the utility would absolutely oppose that. Yeah. And I would add to that, that it's, it's, it's more of a, is there an opportunity? It's not a coercive, it, it's, it's lurking with opportunities that the utility says, Hey, we might have some opportunity looking with other third parties that say, Hey, we might have some opportunity. It, it is not a force that is a, let's find if there's opportunity.

  11. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht51:25

      So is your end, end game here to try to have more efficiency in the transmission grid and prevent future construction of infrastructure?

  12. Jon Cox, Utah Public Affairs51:39

      I would say that would be the best case scenario. That being said, that's pretty limited. I mean, you know, as well as, I mean, you've, you're very educated in this subject. There, there are redundancies, there are needs to keep lines somewhat idle, but where there's opportunities that might exist, let's look at those opportunities.

  13. Committee chair (presiding)51:58

      Is the bill sponsor willing to take this dinner?

  14. Rep. Christine F. Watkins52:01

      Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

  15. Committee chair (presiding)52:04

      Thank you. Seeing no other comments from members of the committee, we'll go to the public. Is there anybody from the public here that would like to speak to this Bill? Don't thanks. Come forward. State your name and who you represent.

  16. Dylan Munn, resident52:22

      Good morning. My name is Dylan Munn. Um, I represent myself. I work, um, in distribution, electric utilities, uh, work with electric co-ops in strategic planning and analytics. But I come here as a citizen who cares about good energy policy. Um, I do wanna speak in support of this bill. Um, at least its intention, um, because of its ability to anchor jobs, uh, around existing generation in our communities that are facing upcoming, uh, generation retirements. There are a few things that I think could improve the overall implementation at the Public Service Commission with few better words. Um, so it sounds like this summer there will be more work around that, but ultimately it's really around what, uh, or how is surplus capacity calculated? Is that from nameplate capacity? Is it operational forecasting and recent historical trends? Um, really, yeah. Overall, it's something that I think our rural communities really need. Going back to the efficiency of our transmission grid. Um, I think there are a lot of opportunities with existing generation in the state. Um, around 51 of our generation plants meet the criteria of 20 megawatts or more. Um, so it is something that I believe would be a very good bill.

  17. Committee chair (presiding)53:52

      Thank you. Thank you. Not seeing any more public comment. We're gonna bring it back to the committee for further action.

  18. Committee chair (presiding)54:01

      Representative Albrook.

  19. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht54:03

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, given the testimony and the, the response from the, the, uh, sponsor, I would motion to hold this bill and further study it during the interim.

  20. Committee chair (presiding)54:15

      All right. Because I believe that's what the sponsor wants to, I'm gonna go to the committee for discussion on that motion. All right. Not seeing any, we'll go to the sponsor for summation.

  21. Rep. Christine F. Watkins54:26

      Thank you. Uh, we knew we were kind of getting into new territory here, and, um, just to answer a question or statement that was said, there's no intention of stopping building transmissions lines. We're, we're probably gonna have to do that anyway. We just know how long it takes and the issues that are there. But, uh, in today's world, I guess in anything with energy, it's about efficiency and getting all that we can out of what we have. So I'm looking forward to working on this during the summer. Thank you.

  22. Committee chair (presiding)54:58

      Thank you. We'll go to the maker of the motion.

  23. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht55:01

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it's a, a great idea. Uh, it just needs to be fleshed out a little bit more during the interim and get some people involved that, uh, have more expertise than maybe some of us do. And, um, but transmission lines are costly, generations very costly. And the utility industry is, uh, the electric utility industry is changing fast. A lot of things are gonna happen in the next 10 years. So I, I think it's got some merits and this, let her study it some more.

  24. Committee chair (presiding)55:38

      Alright, thank you representative.

  25. Committee chair (presiding)55:41

      If the motion before us is to hold HB four 13 surplus interconnection service amendments. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule that motion passes unanimously.