HB1148, the “SMARTER Act,” would amend the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) to create a new federal ratemaking standard focused on smart grid investments. The bill repeals an existing PURPA provision and replaces it with a rule stating that electric utilities may not recover from ratepayers any capital, operating, or other costs associated with deploying a smart grid system. In effect, it would direct utilities and state regulators to treat smart grid deployment costs as non-recoverable from customer rates.
The bill also requires state regulatory authorities and nonregulated utilities to consider this new standard within one year of enactment and to complete their consideration within two years. It includes provisions addressing prior state action, pending proceedings, and comparable standards, so that states that have already implemented or considered similar rules may be exempt from the new federal consideration requirements. The bill is structured as an amendment to PURPA’s state consideration framework, which is the mechanism Congress uses to prompt state-level review of certain utility ratemaking standards.
Impact
If enacted, HB1148 would alter PURPA by adding a new federal standard prohibiting rate recovery for smart grid investments and by changing the timeline and procedural obligations for state utility regulators. It would affect electric utilities, state public utility commissions, nonregulated utilities, and ratepayers by potentially shifting smart grid deployment costs away from customer bills and into utility finances or other funding sources. The bill would also modify existing statutory references in PURPA sections governing state consideration, failure to comply, prior state actions, and pending proceedings.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes, the available context suggests the measure is presented as a consumer-protection and ratepayer-cost restraint bill rather than a broadly negotiated utility policy update. The title and operative language indicate a strong policy preference against allowing utilities to pass smart grid costs on to customers. Because there are no transcripts or votes provided, there is no documented committee sentiment to report beyond the bill’s clear framing as a restrictive ratemaking measure.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely whether smart grid deployment costs should be recoverable from ratepayers. Supporters would likely argue the bill protects customers from paying for utility technology investments, while opponents would likely contend that prohibiting cost recovery could discourage modernization, grid reliability improvements, and advanced metering or automation projects. Another likely issue is federal-state authority: the bill would impose a federal standard that requires state regulators to consider and potentially adopt a prohibition on recovery, which may be viewed as limiting state discretion in utility ratemaking.
Relating to rules regarding the provision by a health professional of a telemedicine medical service, teledentistry dental service, or telehealth service.