Comité Energy, Utilities & Telecommunications de la Cámara de Representantes, 5 de marzo de 2026

Transcripción

93 turnos. Seleccione un tiempo para reproducir ese momento del video.

1. 0:01:59

   I guess I should be on the mic, huh?

2. 0:02:03

   Okay, we've called this meeting to order. Uh,

3. 0:02:09

   Chairman Dickey, I didn't ask you, but d- would you mind, uh, saying a prayer for us in our proceedings today?

4. 0:02:16

   Be happy to.

5. 0:02:17

   Okay.

6. 0:02:17

   Let us pray. Our Father, we thank you for this day. Thank you for bringing us here to do the b- business of this, uh, state. Would just be with each and every member here, and, uh, just give us the wisdom and the, and the insight to do what's best for the people of Georgia. Just lead and guide us in all that we do. In Christ's name, I pray. Amen.

7. 0:02:37

   Amen. Thank you, Chairman. Um, we have before us House Bill 1381. Uh, Whip Park is g- here. I just saw him. If you'd like to come up and present your bill.

8. 0:02:48

   Yes,

9. 0:02:56

   sir. Thank, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10. 0:03:04

    Can you hear me now? Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. Um, I'm here to present, uh, House Bill 1381, uh, LC56-0586. Uh, the bill is relatively short and straightforward. I'll walk y'all through it, uh, quickly. Um, uh, I really want to just highlight, uh, what GETS is, grid enhancing technologies, 'cause I think it's an important issue, uh, that is, that should benefit every single Georgian.

11. 0:03:36

    Um, the bill is bipartisan, uh, which I think reflects the bipartisan desire for us as an assembly to ensure that we are moving in the right direction with respect to especially our energy grid, uh, given that the demand for energy has increased, and certainly for us, uh, during these uncertain moments, to have as resilient of an energy grid, uh, as possible as well. And of course, uh, you know, happy to answer any questions, given all the questions that I always ask in, in the Rules Committee and, and wherever. So feel free to ask me as many questions as y- y'all would like.

12. 0:04:09

    So, uh, first, uh, with respect to Section 1, there are some definitions. The two new ones, uh, added in this bill is advanced rec- recon- re- conductoring, and, uh, from lines 31 to 34, grid enhancing technologies, where I'd just like to spend a little bit of time there. Grid enhancing technologies, or GETS, is hardware or software that increases the capacity, efficiency, reliability of existing transmission lines, including dynamic li- line ratings, advanced power flow control, and topology optimization.

13. 0:04:43

    Uh, with respect to Section 2, this is essentially, uh, based on the definition of GETS, how we are trying to incorporate GETS, uh, going forward. So beginning this year, if this bill were to pass, but certainly just appreciate the opportunity, uh, for this committee to consider and start learning about this important technology. But starting this year, uh, it would require, um, a grid modernization assessment to identify all areas, uh, in which GETS could otherwise be implemented and benefited.

14. 0:05:21

    Um, subsection 2, lines 75 to 79, uh, for each proposed construction of a new transmission line, uh, again, this bill simply requires an assessment, uh, of are we using grid, uh, a- are we moving in a direction that modernizes our grid? Uh, with respect to Section 3, uh, this, there's a mandate here. Um, I'm more than happy to take out Section 3 if this bill were to move forward, so don't worry about Section 3. Uh, for me, you know, I, I've learned certainly, given my time down here, that it's always, uh, you catch more flies with honey.

15. 0:05:56

    Um, I want to ensure that especially Georgia Power and others have incentives to ensure that they are implementing these beneficial technologies in the best interest of Georgia. So for all capital expenditures for any grid enhancing technologies or advanced rec- reconductoring, uh, this bill would allow those utilities to save or retain 25% of savings from the deployment of GETS with 75% of any additional savings to be passed through to rate payers, in which we're not only incentivizing utility companies to move forward with the best technology that ensures for greater efficiency and resilience of our grid, but we're also being intentional with trying to ensure affordability of energy prices for all Georgians.

16. 0:06:41

    Um, the last thing I'll say is, you know, with respect to GETS, uh, we don't have anything currently on the books, but this is an area in which Georgia Power has led the way. Uh, my understanding is that in 2023, Georgia Power became the first utility in the world to deploy advanced power flow control technology, which is one of the core, uh, GETS that this bill addresses. I had a brief conversation with Georgia Power. Uh, certainly open to continuing to work with them to perfect the language in this bill.

17. 0:07:11

    Uh, but that is the proposal, and, uh, certainly happy to answer any questions committee members may have, to the best of my ability.

18. 0:07:19

    Thank you, Whip Park. I think you have a question, if you'd take it. Oh, uh, I'm not sure who's... Representative Flournoy, there you are. Okay.

19. 0:07:30

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, uh, Whip, for this bill. So, uh, I have a quick question. You mentioned that Georgia Power is already, uh, doing similar, uh, things. Is this bill just to make sure that it's uniform as far as all utilities, or, um, is there another rationale?

20. 0:07:49

    You know, I, to a certain extent, you know, I think you could view it as codifying certain practices. Um, I think one additional incentive would be, again, the ability for, uh, Georgia Power to retain some of the savings as they move forward. Again, with- we're- in a manner in which we're also ensuring that any cost savings are being passed, uh, to, to, uh, residents as well. And so it- it's that additional incentive component that my hope would be that there would be an acceleration of the adoption of grid-enhancing technologies around the state.

21. 0:08:22

    The, the proposed bill that, uh, is drafted and is before you is modeled after provisions in, uh, the State of Indiana, as well as Minnesota.

22. 0:08:30

    Okay. Thank you.

23. 0:08:33

    Uh, Representative Ward, did you have a question?

24. 0:08:38

    He just answered my question. Thank you.

25. 0:08:41

    Any other questions from the, uh, for the author of the bill? Do we have a... Anybody signed up to speak?

26. 0:08:49

    I don't believe we have.

27. 0:08:49

    Is anybody from the public online? We do have. Okay. Uh, we will, uh, give you an opportunity to come back and speak and take any questions at that time. W- I think at least there is one speaker would like to present on this.

28. 0:09:02

    Yes, sir.

29. 0:09:03

    Thank you. Uh, Georgia Power.

30. 0:09:10

    If you would tell us who you are and who y- who you represent. I think, I think you represent Georgia Power, but if you'll tell us for the record anyway.

31. 0:09:16

    That- that's correct. Good assumption, Mr. Chairman. Um, so yes, Stephanie Gossman with Georgia Power, and I appreciate your time to speak on this bill, and Whip Park, um, for the opportunity to discuss the other day. So I am the general manager of planning and policy at Georgia Power, where I am responsible for a team that helps plan the grid of the future, as well as supports the policies that enable those plans. Georgia Power is proud to contribute to Georgia's continued successful growth through providing clean, safe, reliable, and affordable electricity for more than 2.8 million customers that we are privileged to serve statewide.

32. 0:09:54

    Critical to our ability to meet these commitments is our vertically integrated, state-regulated energy market structure that is enabling Georgia and Georgia Power to lead the nation in providing customers with reliable power and rate stability. Within our market structure, there are existing regulatory requirements that hold Georgia Power accountable for planning, building, and operating the transmission portion of the grid. Georgia Power does not support House Bill 1381 because it would result in bad outcomes for customers.

33. 0:10:27

    Specifically, it contains requirements that unnecessarily duplicate existing regulatory requirements that Georgia Power is already obligated to follow. This unnecessary duplication and additional bureaucratic overlay could threaten Georgia Power's ability to deliver reliable, affordable power because of the additional cost and inefficiencies this bill would impose. Transmission planning requires flexibility and speed, along with the capability to evaluate all appropriate solutions to meet grid needs.

34. 0:10:59

    Imposing potentially irrelevant evaluation criteria and additional certification processes would hamper Georgia Power's agility in the planning and execution of transmission solutions. Now, regarding Georgia's energy market structure, multiple components of this bill are based on the term transmission congestion. This is defined in a regional transmission organization, or RTO, energy market structure that references the inability of a transmission grid to move power efficiently and meet customer demand.

35. 0:11:31

    Thankfully, unlike other areas of the country that are seeking, that are seeing skyrocketing energy prices, partly due to this congestion, and threats to resource adequacy, this is not what we experience in Georgia. In fact, because of our market structure, Georgia's transmission grid is proactively planned to ensure there's enough energy capacity to meet the needs of all customers. In other words, we plan the transmission grid to avoid congestion because we can make decisions from the generator to the end-use customer and everything in between and meet all customers' needs, big and small, urban or rural.

36. 0:12:12

    Planning the transmission grid is one component of Georgia Power's robust planning process, which can be more fully represented in the existing integrated resource planning, or IRP, process. As required by statute in the IRP that's filed every three years, Georgia Power represents a 20-year plan that details how Georgia Power will meet the state's energy needs and support continued economic growth. There are many components in this IRP, such as forecasted demand, generation plans, customer programs, a transmission plan, and others.

37. 0:12:44

    And in Georgia, it's important to note that the transmission plan is developed in collaboration with all participants of the integrated transmission system, or ITS. That ensures that the plan can meet the needs of all Georgians, regardless of their electric service provider. In Georgia Power's 2025 IRP filing, the transmission plan produced by all ITS participants included over 1,000 miles of new transmission lines, among other transmission projects, and nearly half of the transmission lines projects included innovative solutions such as GETs, or grid enhancing technologies, and specifically advanced conductors, which is a type of grid enhancing technology that Whip Park mentioned that's in this bill.

38. 0:13:28

    Further, the 2025 IRP order already requires Georgia Power to consider the evaluation of GETs in transmission planning processes, so there's no need to impose similar requirements or additional approval processes through legislation. In short, Georgia Power is steps ahead of what this bill accomplishes because our market structure holds us accountable for making the right energy choices for our customers. Serving customers and supporting a growing Georgia are key principles of Georgia Power's integrated resource planning process.

39. 0:14:00

    And Georgia Power is committed to maintaining reliability and affordability for all customers. To do so, we support and contribute to a strong transmission plan that serves the needs of our growing state. And our ability to provide a robust transmission plan is based on the beneficial, vertically integrated, state regulated market structure and already includes new technology such as gets where it is beneficial for customers. We're open to continuing conversations as Whit Park mentioned, and, um, with other legislators, and I'm happy to take any questions if you have them.

40. 0:14:33

    I think you have a question. Uh, Chair Lady Camp, did you have a question?

41. 0:14:36

    I do. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here today. Um, I had a question. You said early on in your, um, speech, um, about overlay, how would overlay of existing regulations increase prices by codifying?

42. 0:14:52

    So the overlay, you're talking about the additional bureaucratic overlay that I mentioned?

43. 0:14:56

    Well, you said, um, overlaying, uh, things that you're already doing, existing regulations. How would... If it was codified, how would that increase your prices?

44. 0:15:05

    Sure. So that refers to the additional inefficiencies in terms of adding a step in the process, as well as, I think it's important to note, as much as Georgia Power is already deploying gets, and, and it's not just advanced reconductoring that's mentioned in here, there are all types, as you mentioned, Whit Park, but it is... I think it's important to note, gets are not always the cheapest solution. So it's, that's why I say at the end, we deploy them where it makes sense for our customers, where it's beneficial. So again, those are the cost reference in particular is these are potentially not either the right solution from a technology standpoint or the most cost effective solution depending on the situation, and the additional steps in the process of, and this is section three that is still in there currently that I'm specifically referencing, where having to come back each time adds that additional step which slows things down, creates inefficiencies, and could increase cost as a result.

45. 0:16:01

    Okay. Mr. Chairman, can I ask one more question, please?

46. 0:16:03

    Yes, absolutely.

47. 0:16:03

    All right. Thank you. Thank you for that explanation. So rather than going to the Public Service Commission, you'd have to go through the legislation to change it if there was a change to be had.

48. 0:16:14

    So I'm not a lawyer, but I, I don't know what the exact process is that's referenced by section three currently, but possibly. I'll, I'll leave that to Whit Park. I don't know if there's a specific process that was considered in that, but certainly it's additional- ... is the way that I understand it.

49. 0:16:32

    Okay. Thank you so much.

50. 0:16:34

    Any other questions? Uh, Representative Ward.

51. 0:16:38

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you so much for being here. Um, just to help me understand-

52. 0:16:43

    Mm-hmm

53. 0:16:43

    ... can you give one example of where gets would not be a viable solution?

54. 0:16:49

    Sure. Well, viable could mean it's not the right technology solution, or it could be not the most cost effective. So I think, um, what's most appropriate, just going back to the previous question around cost, I sat on a meeting yesterday where a solution for a transmission project, a transmission lines project, was evaluated, should we deploy an advanced reconductor situation, or should we just rebuild an existing line? And they did go through a cost evaluation, and it was not actually a cost savings for that reconductoring solution because that reconductor is actually much more expensive, and they evaluate several other criteria.

55. 0:17:30

    But that's an example of, we, we sat through and we went through all the details of the cost and what the engineering solution of this one versus that one, right, gets advanced reconductoring versus a more traditional non-advanced conductor solution was, and it just wasn't the right one from a cost perspective especially.

56. 0:17:48

    Thank you.

57. 0:17:50

    Mm-hmm.

58. 0:17:50

    I don't see any other questions. Um, if you can be available, so my... W- we may have questions for you here in a bit.

59. 0:17:56

    Of course. Thank you.

60. 0:17:57

    Mm-hmm. Thank you. Uh,

61. 0:18:02

    I will say this, we have two more speakers, and I don't want to inhibit anybody's ability to speak in this public meeting, but there are other meetings this afternoon that we need to get to. I know I have to get one here in just a little bit. Uh, Mr. Teper.

62. 0:18:19

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. Um, Georgia, I represent Georgia Conservation Voters. We work on energy and environmental issues. Um, we, uh, have intervened in rate cases in the past. Um, we've been very involved in proposing to, um, the investor-owned utility in this state, uh, ways to make it more affordable for people to pay their electric bills. Uh, I wanna go on record that we support Representative Park's, um, bill very much so.

63. 0:18:52

    Uh, I just wanna remind everybody, and I'll sit down after this, that there was an election last November, uh, two seats on the Public Service Commission, and the people of Georgia overwhelmingly voted out the incumbents because the electric bills-

64. 0:19:09

    Mr. Teper

65. 0:19:09

    ... have gone up.

66. 0:19:10

    Mr. T- my friend, Mr. Teper.

67. 0:19:11

    Yes.

68. 0:19:12

    You can proceed, but, uh, don't bring politics and, uh, and campaigns or elections into this. Just speak to the bill, if you would.

69. 0:19:20

    Okay. I'll, I'll speak very much so. Um, if electric bills keep going up the way they are because the Georgia Power Company is not doing the appropriate planning and construction for the future, which is what the bill speaks very much to, then every one of the public policy makers who are involved in not making those wise decisions will no longer be public policy makers. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

70. 0:19:45

    Thank you.

71. 0:19:50

    We appreciate, the public speaking on these or an- anybody from industry or any related entity, but, u- You know, one thing I will not have is somebody threatening members of the committee or the, or the General Assembly. If they don't vote some way or another, they're gonna get voted out. That's just improper. It's inappropriate. Thank you. Uh, Bob Scherer.

72. 0:20:11

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. I'm Bob Scherer. I'm a lawyer at the Southern Environmental Law Center. Um, we're a nonprofit pro bono law firm, and I focus on energy policy and, uh, represent clients in things like integrated resource plans that this bill would s- apply to, and I support House Bill 1381. I think that it's very timely. The transmission system is undergoing a historic build-out right now. Uh, Ms. Gossman referred to it, that the current 10-year plan calls for 1,000 miles of new transmission lines, new rights of way.

73. 0:20:46

    For context, a couple years ago, the 10-year plan called for just 20 miles.

74. 0:20:52

    Those are expensive. Georgia Power has eminent domain power, and so we support planning for transmission that looks at modern solutions. Um, you heard reference to sort of like a multi-factor analysis that, that was done on s- on a certain project. Um, we support this bill bringing that kind of analysis to public scrutiny in an IRP. What happens now is we just get a list of the projects and not the rationale behind them. Uh, the 2025 IRP required Georgia Power to adopt a formal process to evaluate GETS as a potential solution for the major transmission projects, and we supported that.

75. 0:21:33

    We think that's a step in the right direction and support this bill making that a permanent requirement. Thank you.

76. 0:21:38

    Thank you. I don't see any questions. I believe that's all the speakers on this. Um, Whip Park, would you like to have some closing words for us?

77. 0:21:51

    Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief. Um, you know, again, um, with respect to GETS, uh, you know, these technologies have the ability to unlock 20% to 50%, uh, greater capacity from transmission lines that we already have at a fraction of the cost of new construction. So we're not just talking efficiency, we're talking cost savings. Uh, second, with respect to unnecessary duplication, I, I mentioned and I, uh, made a pledge certainly that I will abide by, that Section 3 of this bill is gone.

78. 0:22:22

    This bill is requiring an assessment, an assessment that Georgia Power, uh, is saying that they are already doing, yet opposes, right? This is simply requiring an understanding of whether or not GETS would be appropriate to all utility providers in Georgia, not just Georgia Power. So part of this is to ensure standardization, that we're incentivizing the most efficient technologies for the benefit of Georgians. The last thing I'll say is, you know, I, I certainly respect and understand, uh, that Georgia Power is vertically integrated, but as Ms.

79. 0:22:56

    Gossman stated, we-- they are regulated by the state. They are regulated by us, duly elected by the people to act in their best interest. And so I certainly look forward to continuing to work with Georgia Power, but ultimately, the decision comes to us because the people, the people entrusted us to make the best decisions, uh, for Georgians as we continue to move forward. So with that, again, appreciate the opportunity for this bill to be heard, Mr. Chairman.

80. 0:23:22

    Thank you, Whip Park. Um, the chair would just say I don't, I don't necessarily disagree with what you're trying to do. I really don't. I, the, have read that code section several times over the last coup- last few years, and I think what the law currently requires, among some other things, is for the Georgia Power, they're the company that's, comes under the definition it's, that relates to this, to submit the IRP, and then it requires the PSC to approve an IRP, and, and what they do is they, if they don't like the first thing that comes, they go, and they, in their discussions, in their back and forth or whatever, then, uh, Georgia Power eventually brings an IRP that the PSC will, will approve.

81. 0:24:11

    That's how I see it. But I guess that, you know, Georgia Power can, in that IRP, they can, I mean, I think it's pretty well spelled out that they can present, uh, they can present in their IRP pretty much what they want to present, and the PSC then can require them, before they will approve it, to, uh, to do about anything in the IRP that the PSC sees that they need to do. That's how, that's kinda how I see it. Um, and I will say this, I think that the, the, the requirements for the IRP, Georgia Power, are not very stringent, really.

82. 0:24:49

    They're really not. Uh, they just have to come, and we know that they're not always right because just a couple years ago, they filed an IRP that they had to come back and do an amendment on just a, a year later, something like that, because they completely misjudged on the, uh, on the data centers, on the number of data centers coming in, and there's nobody. I've always thought that Southern Bell, where I retired from, probably did one of the best jobs of projecting growth and, uh, needs of anybody, but Georgia Power actually is better, and the fact that they misjudged on that, you know, has always raised some questions for me.

83. 0:25:23

    I, like I said, I don't-- I understand what you're trying to do. I think it can be done now with the PSC going back and requiring, you know, we need more information on this. Um, but with that, uh, I don't see any other questions, and, um, you know, my feel, my sense here is that, uh, it would be better to, uh, re- leave this as a hearing.

84. 0:25:48

    Of course.

85. 0:25:48

    Do you object to that? I mean, if I would-

86. 0:25:50

    No, sir. I don't.

87. 0:25:51

    Okay. Wanna leave it at a hearing. That way you can go ahead and have this bill, and you can, uh, you know, Georgia Power will, I'm sure will be glad to meet with you and see if you can work something out for next year.

88. 0:26:01

    Yes, sir. A- and certainly happy to talk to members of the PSC as well.

89. 0:26:04

    Okay.

90. 0:26:04

    Thank you, sir.

91. 0:26:05

    With that, we are adjourned.

92. 0:26:07

    Thank

93. 0:26:19

    you.