An Act amending Title 66 (Public Utilities) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in restructuring of electric utility industry, further providing for energy efficiency and conservation program.
Summary
HB 543 amends Pennsylvania’s Public Utilities Code provisions governing electric utility energy efficiency and conservation programs. The bill requires the Public Utility Commission to act on an electric distribution company’s energy efficiency plan within 120 days of filing. If the commission disapproves a plan, it must explain the reasons in detail, and the utility then has 60 days to submit a revised plan, which the commission must review within another 60 days.
The bill also adds a new statutory definition of “mechanical insulation” and bars the commission from rejecting a plan solely because it includes mechanical insulation, so long as that insulation is shown to be cost-effective under a commission-approved total resource cost test. In practical terms, the measure is intended to make it easier for utilities to include mechanical insulation in energy efficiency portfolios and to speed up regulatory review of those plans.
Impact
HB 543 would amend Title 66 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, specifically section 2806.1 on energy efficiency and conservation programs in the restructuring of the electric utility industry. It would impose firm review deadlines on the Public Utility Commission, require more detailed explanations for plan disapprovals, and limit the commission’s ability to reject cost-effective mechanical insulation measures. The bill primarily affects electric distribution companies, the Public Utility Commission, and customers participating in utility energy efficiency programs, with potential downstream effects on utility program design, energy savings measures, and ratepayer-funded conservation investments.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have generally favorable support in the House, passing the Consumer Protection, Technology and Utilities Committee unanimously and later receiving overwhelming final passage in the House. That said, the floor votes show some procedural or amendment-related resistance, with two close 101-102 votes before final passage, suggesting there was at least some disagreement over the bill’s language or handling even though the underlying measure ultimately advanced by a wide margin. Overall, the voting history indicates broad bipartisan acceptance of the bill’s policy goals.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s restriction on the Public Utility Commission’s discretion to disapprove plans that include mechanical insulation. Supporters likely view this as a targeted way to ensure cost-effective efficiency measures are not excluded, while any critics may be concerned about limiting regulatory flexibility or mandating approval of a specific class of measures. The close amendment votes also suggest debate over the bill’s details, though the available record does not include transcript remarks identifying specific objections.
In restructuring of electric utility industry, further providing for definitions and for duties of electric distribution companies and providing for duties of public utilities.