Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Kathleen James]: Right. Welcome back, everybody. House Energy and Digital Infrastructure. We are here for not quite a walk through. We we give every sponsor bill sponsor, the opportunity to come in and pitch their bill to our committee and just walk us through why they're introducing it and what key highlights are, and then we get ledge counsel back in if we need a detailed. So Okay. We need a detailed walk through. Just quickly since we just came back on live, I'm rep Kathleen James from Manchester.

[R. Scott Campbell]: Scott Campbell from St. Johnsbury.

[Richard Bailey]: Richard Bailey, Lamoille too. Chris Westin. Michael Southworth, Caledonia too. Christopher Howland, Ravam Kleppner. Dara Torre, Washington 2.

[Bram Kleppner]: Bram Kleppner, Chittenden 13, Burlington.

[Kathleen James]: Great. And quickly, in the room.

[Michael Southworth]: Hi. Dana Lee, passenger room. Yeah. Great. Danielle Isaac, the analyst. Peter Sterling, Rev.

[Kathleen James]: Great. Isabelle from moderator of Calvert. Super. Alright. Let's roll because I don't wanna we do have a part stop at 04:20 max, so I don't wanna cut you guys off.

[Laura Sibilia]: That's great. Well, first, Laura Sibilia, Dover. Nice to And meet you, Scott, to see you back. Oh, appreciate it.

[Kathleen James]: Scott Campbell. Anyway,

[Laura Sibilia]: never mind. Sorry. So, for the record, Patty McCoy, I represent Rutland One, Sibilia Transportation Committee. Thank you very much for having me in today and Mike Southworth. Southworth, he and I are the sponsors of this bill.

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: It's a bill that is put forth really by the administration. So, I would suggest that you have the Public Service Department members in. Eric Johnson, I'm sure you're familiar with him, well as Brittany Laraby. They are the two that will be most familiar with this bill. And feel free to reach out to them at any time. The bill is H-six zero one, which is a public service energy, renewable energy, clean energy, nuclear energy, and nuclear storage bill. So it's going to embrace all of those things. It proposes to ensure affordable, reliable, clean energy for Vermonters. The Governor is requesting common sense reforms to the renewable energy standard. Accelerated review of the impacts to ratepayers of the renewable energy standard requirement. And removing needless statutory barriers to considering nuclear energy generation. This bill eliminates unnecessary renewable energy credit purchases that mask clean nuclear power that is currently in Vermont's energy portfolio. This approach will generate millions in ratepayer savings and increase transparency regarding cost impacts of existing energy sources while maintaining the same level of greenhouse gas reductions. So just very quickly, the bill proposes to remove some requirements of the renewable energy by the 2032 standard. And it deals with removing some nuclear statutory barriers as well that are current in statutes. And I am going to turn it over to representative Southworth.

[Michael Southworth]: So I just I took a few notes after going through the bill. Just to reiterate the renewable energy standard as it was now is wanting to be changed to the clean energy standard. It does not change anything within state generation at all. I just want to say that right up front that in state generation stays the same. What this does change is it allows nuclear energy to count toward our energy savings. Nuclear energy is greenhouse gas neutral. This will allow us to use it. It's already in our portfolio. There's 18% to 20% of the energy purchased now from the utilities, which is based from nuclear production. Vermont already has the assets to advance nuclear energy. Siting is present. The infrastructure is present, regulatory structure is better to advocate for the risk versus renewable because it's already in place. All of this is there. It just makes more sense to look at the nuclear piece because it has changed over the years. Technology has changed. The facilities have changed. It makes more sense for us to start looking at that rather than relying on coal generated electricity, gas generated electricity, which we're purchasing from out of state and in town. Projected savings of approximately $20,000,000 fall by 2035 with the state being able to do this, changing the res to this clean energy standard.

[R. Scott Campbell]: She you mind taking questions along the way? Sure.

[Michael Southworth]: I'm not gonna guarantee I have all the answers,

[R. Scott Campbell]: but I will do my best. Is so that savings would would come from Being able to count the

[Michael Southworth]: nuclear portfolio energy now as greenhouse gas emissions, because it's greenhouse gas and nickel. The expense comes from

[R. Scott Campbell]: the having having to to purchase regs, minimum credits, to offset the purchase of the nuclear. Is that a credit? Yes. So this just released the utilities after that requirement. The energy they're already purchasing from nukes, from nuclear facilities, that they now have to buy RECs to make the dealables in order to standard. That's okay. That's that's what's that's what changes here. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Rose Sibilia? I'll

[Michael Southworth]: answer that. Thank you.

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: And I just wanna just for the record, I have a niece who is, you know, probably mid who graduated with a degree in engineering and went to work for the Braten Nuclear Power Plant. Actually has two patents for the Braten Nuclear Patent Plant. So she really knows nuclear energy. Anytime I meet with her over and over, she keeps telling me, Aunt Patty, it's the cleanest form of energy that we have. And she's a young person that I look to as our future, and she is all in nuclear, especially since we think of those huge reactors like Vernon. But they have now these small modular reactors that are being set up in different areas, they're not the same nuclear power that I grew up, you know, in those three mile island, and they're much smaller, much more efficient. And look at the maps of Europe. Just Google nuclear power Europe. You see hundreds of them dotted throughout Europe.

[Michael Southworth]: So what this has do?

[R. Scott Campbell]: This would apply not only to existing purchases but to but to future services. Right. So so what this does,

[Michael Southworth]: it opens up the door for Vermont to start actively looking to doing this in some fashion with other states. Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York are already in process and looking at doing this. Excellent. Small. They are already in process. Small. Just makes sense for Vermont to be able to do that. This is the time to do it. It's not gonna happen tomorrow. We're looking at seven to eight years out for it to actually come to fruition if that happens.

[R. Scott Campbell]: So Is it targeted really I'm sorry. Go ahead. Is this really targeted at at at developing new nuclear facilities using these small nuclear

[Michael Southworth]: There is a piece of it.

[R. Scott Campbell]: Yes. Yep. Yep. So it is both things. It's both the existing purchases and developing looking ahead to the picture.

[Kathleen James]: Did you yep. Representative Sibilia?

[Laura Sibilia]: Do we know how many states currently would allow small modular?

[R. Scott Campbell]: I don't know that off the top

[Michael Southworth]: of my head. I do know that, like, the state that I mentioned that had get past New York, they're actively looking at that.

[Kathleen James]: I had a couple questions. We already verified one question I had. So by opening up the res and expanding that definition to clean and renewable, which is, you know, a lot of the bill. Right?

[Michael Southworth]: I'm just

[Laura Sibilia]: looking at all those.

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: Like I said, that's a lot

[Kathleen James]: of the bill. So our utilities that are currently already that are currently purchasing nuclear power as part of their long term contract or whatever, that would count and they would no longer the savings come from wrecks they no longer have to purchase. Correct. So I got a question. This may be more, you know, ledge counsel, but on page 16. And if this isn't something you guys can answer, I'll just put a pin in it. But I was curious about the percentages, the total amount of total renewable energy required by this subsection. So it'll be 63% beginning in 2025, increasing to 60. I didn't know what that section is going up to 7575%. So Correct. Yeah. So that that was a question I had. I when I when I read that section Yeah. I thought, oh, I wonder if the intent of this section is to dial back the res, the entire res.

[Michael Southworth]: Currently we're

[Laura Sibilia]: at

[Michael Southworth]: 63% currently, but we're still going for a 100% renewable 01/01/2030.

[Kathleen James]: It looks like 75% that's proposed to me. Right. So the current rest takes us to a 100%. Are you proposing that that we knock that back to 75%?

[R. Scott Campbell]: You look

[Michael Southworth]: at the top of the page. Uh-huh. Reaching 100% on and after 01/01/2030.

[R. Scott Campbell]: See if I remember that correctly. Okay.

[Kathleen James]: So I I'll just need to understand how that matches with

[R. Scott Campbell]: And that probably

[Kathleen James]: paragraph below it. Yeah. That's not like a ledge counsel. Yep. And then one thing I also wanted to ask about was one of the things, rep McCoy, that you mentioned was that this and that was another question I had about the bill. It this would remove regulatory barriers to nuclear energy generation Correct. In Vermont? So what I hear is that this would make it easier to actually build and site a new nuclear reactor in Vermont. Well, currently I don't

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: think we are citing or permitting any nuclear power. Right. So, yes, This would open up. Representative Southworth said, Connecticut, New Hampshire Connecticut, Mass. Mass, and New York are already looking into this. So we're pretty much surrounded by it anyway. So this would open up the possibility for Vermont to actually look into sightings use of these small modular reactors. I'm not talking about another Vernon stuck somewhere, I'm talking about smaller reactors, modular.

[Michael Southworth]: Yeah, the SMRs.

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: The SMRs, I've said it a couple of times. SMRs to be placed and permitted. The permitting process is not going to happen overnight. How long it takes to get an F250 in the state. It's probably gonna be like seven or eight years before we even consider or pass permitting for the SMRs. We have to start some of it. States are, so. Yeah, I'd be

[Kathleen James]: curious to know, and this is not for you guys, if, to explore this idea, I'd be curious to know what we have in place now. I don't know if you're on the, but anyway, I don't wanna put people on the spot. I don't know how it works now. I don't think we have what do you know?

[R. Scott Campbell]: Sorry. I

[Laura Sibilia]: don't wanna over state, but I know.

[Kathleen James]: Yeah. We'll get testimony. But okay. I just wanted to make sure I understood the intent.

[Michael Southworth]: It's it's limited scope, Bill. Yeah. If you look at what it does, and that's kind of the thing that I like about it. It doesn't go all over for changing everything. This is pretty limited scope. It's serious and it's looking ahead to the future for the mom and the rate payers.

[Kathleen James]: Sibilia? So do you know and this is not

[Laura Sibilia]: a trick question. I know this at some point, but I don't have it right here. How many of our utilities currently have nuclear contracts?

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: It's to restrain how many

[Laura Sibilia]: of our utilities currently have nuclear

[Michael Southworth]: contracts. I don't have it written down. I did see that.

[Laura Sibilia]: It's a couple at least.

[Michael Southworth]: Yeah. They're long term contracts.

[Patricia "Patty" McCoy]: Yeah. They're Green Mountain Power. Long used to, which rolled into Green Mountain. Green Mountain Power.

[Laura Sibilia]: And I I don't know how long those contracts are till. I think they're till, like, thirty Twenty thirty. '25. Yeah. Maybe. Somewhere around there. But, again, Vermont is kind of alone with

[Michael Southworth]: that because they always do everything with long term contracts, where other states are shorter term. So

[Laura Sibilia]: as someone who is not opposed to nuclear power and who is really interested in the overall energy transition and how we get here, you know, I think we have to I think we have to really be thoughtful in in thinking about a lot of things at the same time. So we've got these huge large loads

[R. Scott Campbell]: Yep.

[Laura Sibilia]: That are emerging with data centers and of, you know, Bitcoins, all of this that are competing right now for those existing nuclear contracts. You know? I mean, this marketplace is hugely dynamic. And as someone who is from the Windham County area and is on NCAP and has done extensive work on the, economic recovery from the closure of the power plant, I would just encourage us to be very thoughtful, slow, and careful as we are moving forward, in a direction that I also agree is important, very slow and thoughtful. Eyes are right open. Yes. I I think there's a lot to be improved from our last foray here, and I think a lot of resistance, at least in my neck of the woods, that will have to be addressed. So thanks for your

[Kathleen James]: And then oh, sorry.

[R. Scott Campbell]: Just Quick question. So when when we the utilities buy electricity from the spot market, the ISO New England mix is usually around 20. I just looked it up.

[Michael Southworth]: It's 22% right now. To 20%. Yeah.

[R. Scott Campbell]: So that would be included in this.

[Michael Southworth]: Correct. Which would equate to repair savings if we change the And

[Kathleen James]: just before we move on, there's some sections at the end of the bill. I'm on page starting on page 20. That seem to have to do with the storage of nuclear waste. What's allowed? What's what process there is for creating it it looks to me like it's proposing the storage of more or new nuclear waste at the Yankee site.

[Michael Southworth]: So that's going to be a better answer by the publishers. That that's one piece that I'm not really comfortable with even deciding into. Okay.

[Kathleen James]: Yeah. Because we get toward the end, and I'm seeing a lot of stuff about repealing and exempting and changing how we handle nuclear waste. So that makes me nervous. And then it looks like there's a bunch of stuff repealed around how we expand our natural gas facilities. So I don't know if that's pipelines or what. Is that a care question? Yeah. Okay.

[Michael Southworth]: I I could say more than likely it probably is pipelines, but I'm not a 100% sure on.

[Kathleen James]: Okay. So great. I it's four twenty. Patty or sorry. Representative McCoy, thank you so much for coming in early. Representative Southworth, thanks to the two of you for presenting.