To Amend The Law Concerning Energy; And To Regulate Nonexport Facilities.
Summary
SB615 would create a new legal category for “nonexport facilities,” defined as electricity-producing facilities that serve a customer’s own load within a utility’s service territory and do not intentionally send power back to the grid. The bill directs the Arkansas Public Service Commission to adopt rules by December 31, 2025, after notice and public comment, covering safety, reliability, acceptable operating standards, export-limitation methods, and an expedited review process for approval and interconnection.
The bill also amends existing utility billing law to prohibit electric utilities from charging discriminatory rates to customers who own or operate a nonexport facility compared with other similarly served customers. In addition, it amends the state’s net-metering definition so that a nonexport facility is expressly excluded from the definition of a “net-metering facility” under the Arkansas Cost-Shifting Prevention Act of 2023. In practical terms, the measure separates behind-the-meter, non-exporting generation from net-metering regulation and places it under a distinct regulatory framework.
Impact
SB615 would affect Arkansas utility regulation by creating a new statutory framework for nonexport generation systems and requiring PSC rulemaking on technical standards and interconnection procedures. It would also limit utility rate discrimination against customers using these systems and clarify that they are not treated as net-metering facilities under existing cost-shifting law. The bill would therefore impact electric utilities, distributed generation customers, solar and storage system owners, and PSC regulatory practice.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill faced significant opposition on the floor. It failed in third reading votes on April 8 and April 9, with 12 yeas to 17 nays and then 12 yeas to 20 nays. No committee transcript is available, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the repeated negative votes indicate the measure did not command broad support at that stage.
Contention
The main points of contention likely centered on how nonexport facilities should be regulated and whether they should be treated separately from net-metering resources. Supporters appear to favor a clear pathway for customer-owned generation that does not export to the grid, including expedited interconnection and protection from discriminatory rates. Opponents may have been concerned about utility cost recovery, grid safety, administrative burdens on the PSC, or the broader policy implications of carving these facilities out of the net-metering framework and the state’s cost-shifting rules.