Insurance & Commerce- House

The bill This American. You would introduce yourself Sir please limiter testament to five minutes thank you Mr. My name is Sean McMurray and today I represent Arkansas electric energy consumers. Which is an incorporated trade association of large industrial and agricultural companies throughout the state. Before that I worked in the consumer utilities division of the Arkansas attorney general's office. For twenty five years. Representing the interests of all Arkansas utility consumers. And based on my long experience. In the industry I can tell you that in my view this is a bit at this bill it's bad for business and bad for consumers. Decades ago this country. In this country governments establish electric monopolies in what is called the regulatory bargain. That is the utility is granted a monopoly by the state. To be the only provider of electricity. In its designated service territory and is given a guaranteed opportunity to earn a return on its investment. Right now for all utilities in Arkansas it's north nine percent. In return the utility is obligated to provide service at reasonable rates. And the terms and conditions of its service are regulated by the public service commission. And this regulated monopoly has worked well for decades. To build the electric grid infrastructure. But now it's a New World the new technology. And. There is an opportunity to modify this model with competition in some areas. And make no mistake but this bill. Would stifle competition. And kill jobs. The bill stated purpose is to avoid cost shifting. And yes. There has been a proceeding the public service commission to look at cost shifting. And there is opportunity and current law to address that problem. But this bill. More than two thirds of the bill does not address cost ship. In fact most of the bill is an attempt to try to reduce the size and scope of businesses and hospitals and other institutions trying to invest in. The solar and solar for the future. The result of this bill will be. To give the monopoly utilities a monopoly. On large so investment in Arkansas. Killing all costs and the potential competitors. And in fact the bill actually causes cost shifting. Because instead of protecting ratepayers from high rates this bill will increase the bills for every. Customer in the state. By increasing their fuel chart. Mr Bethel of entity. Mentioned that well this won't change it and brought up an example of a solo way in which the. The entity was given permission by the commission to include that cost of that store rate in its fuel charge but that's the point they had to go before the commission. In order to put it in their fuel charge and the commission had to make that judgment that was in the public interest to do so this bill would not give the commission. An opportunity to make that judgment. So please support the people of Arkansas and vote against this bill. Thank you for testimony there's a committee to any questions for the witness. Sam Nunn thank you for testimony thank you. Speaking for the bill rob so as. Please introduce yourself for your within the committee testimony and tried one to five minutes please certainly I'm my name is rob OS on the president CEO of Carol electric. We serve primarily in Carroll Benton Newton and Washington counties but we serve in parts of eleven counties the purpose my testimony today is to. Not share your opinion with you there's been enough opinion today what I'd like to do share some facts. Fite number one. as Mr McMurray just indicated there is a docket and when Mr Bethel gave you the cost shift numbers this morning those required quoted from the docket that's open at the commission so that was done on a pretty short time line we got that right before thanksgiving and just had days to initially respond we were thankful for an extension there. Fact number two the California public service commission on December fifteenth entered into the order on net metering. Marita few quotes for you the P. C. review the current net energy metering tariff referred to as net metering two point OO. And found that the current Taylor if negatively impacts non participating ratepayers disproportionately harms low income rate payers and is not cost effective the successor tariff net metering three point oh replaces retail rate compensation for export exported energy with the board the cost values these changes will improve the reliability of electricity in California I'm not here to tell you that netmetering has had a substantial impact on reliability but that's from California. I will take any more time with that. Fact number three also in December we talked about education this morning one of our esteemed law students at the university of Arkansas wrote a paper in the law journal the winter addition it's called. The green squeeze net metering this negative Exter I'm not going to try to read all that but I do want to read you the quote from the introduction. In practice net metering works like a reverse Robin Hood who file disguised as a green energy folk hero squeezes wealth Allen the poor and gives it to the rich as a windfall reward for the punitive good deed of buying solar panels. My next factor has to do with the publication that Carol what trick. will be releasing our third issue of a publication called on the record. The genesis of this publication is. In two thousand and twenty one for the first time we had institute rolling blackouts and we we were on the block to cut our consumers off because there was not enough power generation on the bulk power system you would think so energy would would be helpful in that situation. Like say this will be the third year we've done this electric serves about a hundred and fourteen thousand members in the counties I mentioned. And the publication is a four page highly technical utility geek publication about what's going on on the power grid. And out of a hundred and fourteen thousand accounts which represents about ninety thousand members we had over eleven thousand people respond to the survey. Which is a really good response rate when you're stuffing four pages in put in front of someone these are the goals that ten thousand of our members supported protect dispatchable power generation. In the unfair subsidies to non dispatchable forms of energy solar and wind are not dispatchable on the bulk power system it's a must take resource and you have to take all of it there's times that renewables ours so concentrated on the grid that there's negative pricing for use on our tax dollars to be on the grid. The third goal is to have consumer focused markets that places a continuous value on reliability. I don't want to conflate the bulk issues with net metering. But if our members could possibly understand what is before you today I feel confident that their request to end unfair subsidies to non dispatchable forms of power generation I think they would have the same answer to that. One last thing. I shared this with the legislative legislator on the twenty first of December. The next night I got a text message from my engineer because somebody somebody's team sent us a message that said the RTO is going to shut off the power. If you guys don't move somewhat around I went to the greatest so I apologize for what we're trying hold everyone to the five minutes so I have to be consistent with that members that are there any questions by the records of Lundstrum you're recognized for a question. Mr bell as could you go back and talk about that load issue so when the sun's out and it's generating electricity and is generating a heavy load of electricity it's moving on to the power grid correct yes at a larger rate yes the the seller's peak productive action is at the middle of the day when we have a sunny day if we have ice or snow they don't produce well if we have clouds I don't produce well they actually are a small user of electricity at night. Because the inverters that convert direct current to alternating current have to be powered through the night so what I described under December twenty second. we actually shut off a remote facility save them a little bit of money and it kept us from having to. Someone else to shut off power okay just elect provide power twenty four seven we have a statutory obligation to provide power every moment of every day. Thank you. Thank you absent road you're recognized for a question yes thank you Mr chairman. Well as thank you for your testimony today I keep hearing cost shifting and I've had some good answers must okay I have some questions could you speak directly to the cost to that your organization and what what the negative cost shifting looks like. Yes and to be fair when we submitted the numbers in the docket someone from our team and our right consultant did that what they've been for me is they could have come up with more that was about a seven hundred thousand dollar. subsidy based on the difference between the retail one to one that's described in the California docket and what we could have bought power from body for and so that difference is about seven hundred thousand dollars a year that with respectfully I would disagree a little bit with Mr McMurray we don't get a nine percent rate of return or not for profit organization last year we had a operating loss of one point six million dollars. We're going to have to have a rate increase this year and at that rate increase will already be more. Then another seven hundred thousand dollars. That's due to net metering because we are growing net metering at a compound growth rate of about fifty percent so that's why it's running by the subsidies are escalating so quickly and why this issue is so important that addresses your question. yes Sir thank you very much. Any further questions by the committee. Saying that thank you for test us are thank you. Jordan tensely is next on the agenda speak against the bill Mr tens or just come up introduce yourself and proceed with the testimony place. Thank you chairman Maddox my name is Jordan Tinsley I'm actually the son of ed Tinsley you address the committee earlier today very proud of my data thank you didn't excellent job I am a regulatory attorney I have been practicing for about a dozen years I represent Arkansas electric energy consumers just like Mr McMurray we are colleagues our members include some of the largest job creators in the State of Arkansas acme brick Arkansas lime Clearwater paper commercial metals company delek packed of evergreen good I'll steal Lang says corporation Martin operating partnership producers rice mill resolute forest products Reynolds manufacturing riceland foods and Weyerhaeuser. Our organization opposes this bill vehemently this bill does not address the problem that it purports to solve. I mean it does to some extent but it goes far beyond that. The cost shifting that has been much discussed and maligned. Is not happening with large customers like the ones I represent and and this is kind of a a fundamental issue and it's an issue that I feel has been obfuscated. Large customers are bill old on various BC's one of which is demand their demand the charges are calculated based on their contribution to the utilities peak. One of our regulatory consultants calculated the amount of fixed costs that are recovered through large customers demanded charges and it's approximately ninety percent. The volume metric rate for L. G. S. customers on the interfaces term is less than half a penny. You are not covering the fixed costs caused by those customers with less than half a penny. And the bottom line is that. Seventy five eighty percent of this bill disrupts the ability of a large customers to install these facilities when they are not the ones contributing to the purported cost shift. And so you have to ask yourself why are the only witnesses for this bill utility executives. Have you heard from anybody that's for this bill that is not a representative of a utility. Ask yourself that question. Everybody else that's against the bill is everybody else. There's nobody that's for this bill that is not the utility executive. That speaks volumes volumes. This bill is not just about solar power net metering customers include anybody producing renewable energy. I heard representative Ladyman talk about wind power that would be disrupted by this bill we have customers that produce wood by products in their operations that's called bio mass if they wanted to burn that to generate steam power that would be disrupted by this bill. This is not a bill that's just about solar power guys it's about a lot more than that. The utilities are not telling you about the benefits of net metering facilities customer owned generation defers the need for the utilities to invest large amounts of capital in production facilities I'm talking about natural gas fired power plants and talking about large huge cost outlays for rate payers the estimates to build a natural gas fired power plant is like a billion dollars that's money that would have to be funded by ratepayers if they don't need to build that because we have more customer owned generation that helps ratepayers they don't want you to look at that side of the balance sheet and in fact the bill expressly says that the commission cannot look at the benefits they can't look at deferred capacity investments you've heard about interruptible customers interruptible customers deserve every bit of the discount they are getting. They do not because. Costs at the utility's peak so they shouldn't have to pay for peaking power plants almost fifty percent of the utilities production assets don't run most of the time they only run when the utility is peaking by definition an interruptible customer is not taking service windows power plants are running so they shouldn't have to pay for. Mr doesn't thank you for testimony or time is expired are you willing to take questions from the committee I would love to take questions from the committee president Alan you're recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman with low income advocates oppose this bill in my opinion low income advocates that are well informed on this issue would hate this bill. So I guess. One thing here testify. Low income advocates why are they not here testifying because they are not well informed on the issue unfortunately Sir and I don't know the the cause of that but I can tell you that everyone that has said that this bill is going to increase the cost of goods and services in Arkansas as a hundred percent correct the people that are taking advantage of the current law to to invest and to innovate and to install the systems they are passing through those savings they manufacture goods you know this is trickle down economics rate would may enjoy the savings they can price their goods lower and then they can compete right that's just basic economics this bill is going to destroy their ability to obtain those savings and therefore this bill is going to tank their ability to pass those savings through to their end users I'm talking about toilet paper I'm talking about milk cartons I'm talking about metal products you know screws nuts bolts I'm talking about all kinds of things we'll if they can save money on electricity they can price those commodities lower all of these things are what we call energy intensive trade exposed industries they don't just have to compete with surrounding states they have to compete with foreign countries and our other national multinational corporations thank you Mr tens I think you back to the question I'm going to keep moving represent Lundstrum did you have a question. Yes if you offered alternative language that might be a compromise to the bill's sponsors to help this process ma'am we have been actively working four days to talk to the bill's sponsors in an effort to create a bill that is streamlined that is targeted at the real problem which is the smaller rate classes that do not have demand rates we are very open to addressing. The issue of one to one compensation for those and and we have tried ma'am that's the answer the question we have tracking of that specific language just a yes or no yes ma'am we drafted some yesterday I don't know if that's gone to the bill's sponsors my understanding is it has but I have not actually been privy to those conversations although I would love to be. Thank you Ladyman recognized for a question thank you Mr chairman. So you're talking to us about helping small providers but yet you said you represent large corporations and you're talking about companies that have high demands and demand charges none of that is relevant to small users. So I mean how does that affect how does that help the the mom and pops in the. Someone talk about the eighty four year old don't don't have solar panels thanks to a person who does this help and papers neighbors solar panels representative help them representative Ladyman I respectfully disagree with the premise of your question what I described about different capacity investment helps every rate payer hi doesn't matter how elderly they are it doesn't matter what their income level is if they are a repair on the system and the utility is not building a two billion dollar gas fired power plant because we have enough customer owned generation to define that that is going to result in ratepayer savings substantial ratepayer savings that is why they will be harmed by the bill this bill will increase utility rates across the board follows. So you said you were an attorney is that right yes Sir I am how do you know what it cost to build a gas fired power plants your every couple of years inter G. as required to put together something called an integrated resource portfolio and I. R. P. it is called those documents are publicly filed I think they just filed one this fall the report on the cost of installing new capacity in those documents I follow those documents very closely what size power plant are you gonna build cost two billion dollars with the opportunity to be in middle Sir no individual customer is going to build that power plant that is what a utility might have to build because we anticipate substantial coal plant retirements and we anticipate potential load additions but if there is enough customer owned generation that's installed over the next few years we might avoid the need to make that investment that's and that's a power plant will I receive a fully disagree with your values that you're putting out here because I don't believe you understand what it takes to build power plant. I mean that's fair Sir I'm not in construction but I'm basing that on the utilities numbers and it's I. R. P.. Thank you for your testimony in or answer to a question does anyone have any questions on the committee okay saying none thank you Mr tensely. Next on the agenda is tad Bohannon. To speak against the bill. This one's already on. Hello good afternoon my name is Ted bill Hammond and I am the CEO of Central Arkansas Water. we provide water to about one in every six Arkansans we serve about a half million people you have some great testimony appear today so I'm gonna just focus on a couple things and one is we all know that there's in this bill there's a looming deadline of December thirty first two thousand twenty three. C. A. W. was looking at solar power very early when we were in comparison to the bill and so just to give you an idea and when we talk about different things and it's going to go to the five mile thing to of will primarily serve Pulaski County we serve swing county will come if you the surrounding counties so we wanted and all of our major facilities or in Pulaski County so we want to locate a four point eight megawatt facility in Klasky County. We could not find a location that interview would agree to earlier you had somebody testify that if you wanted to put this capital on solar power you couldn't do it okay so we would identify persons were sole or could call an interview would say sorry there is not significant load there you cannot go there so we ended up actually putting our facility and cap it we built a four point eight megawatt facility up in Cabot injured she said okay there sufficient load there so we generate solar power up there and we take it in all of our we take power at all over facilities in Pulaski County what county and and where we have other operations doing County okay so. First of all the bill is going to restrict you to five miles. As a twenty four twenty twenty five twenty forty deadline of grandfather our facility is more than five miles so it becomes obsolete in twenty forty under this bill. A five million dollar investment for the benefit of water ratepayers becomes obsolete in twenty forty because of this bill. We can't have it it's more than five five miles from any of our facilities under this bill. It dice. Okay. The other thing is time one that we talked about so we sent the Cabot facility to energy for a preliminary site review on January third twenty twenty. They got back to us fairly quickly and said okay we need to do a first level feasibility study sentence of thousand dollars. We seven thousand dollars. July seven months later they came back and said it needs additional study now we need twenty five thousand dollars for that study so we put Senator on the twenty five thousand dollars we took a chance and we ran the PSC proceeding at the same time and we went ahead and filed our PSC proceeding while they were doing their study. Okay. The PSC took. Almost a year to approve the project so anybody the streaming about a project right now unless they're already sitting in front of the PSC. We'll never make it. The time lines that we've seen historically. Okay. Feasibility study remember that feasibility study that I told you we started on July first twenty twenty and sent them twenty five thousand dollars to do it. They completed it on August tenth of twenty twenty one. Thirteen months thirteen months later. Okay. When we got to interconnect six hundred and forty two thousand three hundred and ninety five dollars. To connect before point megawatt facility to enter G. system. Okay. Now there's a little bit of conversation about sharing costume will have you CFW has about a five million dollar investment in that facility we say about ninety thousand dollars a year and that's just that's a savings for our ratepayers okay and we hope to save that way beyond twenty years but we're gonna get shut down if the bill passes in twenty forty. Assuming injures you committee that same investment of five million dollars. Right now we've heard the figure of operative nine percent starting point seven five. But it's four hundred and eighty seven thousand dollars. That the ratepayers of inter G. have to pay interest you for making that commitment. To build that facility. Solar power in the restrictions. Thank you Tess Mercer thank you. Any questions by the committee for the witness. Sam Nunn thank you Sir. Frank Kelly's next with the signed up to speak against the bill. Please remember to limit five minutes and I would also say state if things of art instead of maybe not to reiterate them as we are we're gonna try to move this along a little bit better okay thank you I'm Frank Kelly chairman of the Arkansas renewable energy association Commission the first net metering facility on interviews network in two thousand and three. I commission the first major aggregated facility on interviews network in two thousand and fourteen and I Commission the first major aggregated solar farm on introduce network in two thousand and fifteen. I've been in these halls since two thousand and one when a reader was passed without a single no vote. the public service commission directed by ACT eight twenty seven of two thousand fifteen to hold discussions to determine if one one crediting was a fair plan electric cooperatives and the energy of participate in those discussions and it the time ran out and there was no consensus on any cost shifting going on. so makes electricity when it's needed the most Seoul lowers peak purchases by the utility had a cost savings which is much greater than the current retail rate. In other markets this lowered peak demand requirements lowers demand by a big demand requirements by over seventy five percent. One one was going to remain in effect until New River new rates for changes were approved by the PSC. But instead the coops and municipality well the electric monopolies here file this bill they were they didn't get what they wanted at what used to be called the utility permission commission now it's the public utility commission representing all public citizens not just ratepayers. Solar developers as a central Arkansas Water express pays all the expenses to connect the raid to the grid they are also responsible for any upkeep maintenance and insurance any equipment referred required in front of the meter that the solar developer pays for becomes the property of the utility in in central Arkansas waters case that six hundred and forty two thousand dollars of equipment that they paid for it enter G. now owns. Emissions from fossil fuels are causing harm to your constituents the regulated electric utility monopoly operating in Arkansas has had decades to install solar and move away from fossil fuel generation that made minuscule efforts to change the increased health costs insurance rate increases are not reflected in our monthly utility bills in two thousand and nine two thousand eleven two thousand thirteen in two thousand and fifteen the same utilities make sure that proposed legislation promoting generation partners among their customers never made it out of a single committee meeting. When coal plants are decommissioned and dismantled the funds that utility companies have allocated for the remediation process to turn a toxic wasteland into a brown field or seriously an adequate history shows that all taxpayers pay for these extra calls all the operators are able to walk away from a significant amount of cost it doesn't matter how you create electricity it's always cheaper to save energy in the first place as a representative Allen was asking earlier. There is no money that changes hands with net metering were only trading kilowatt hours the utilities have demonstrated through their comments and actions that they do not want their customers making their own electricity. Seventy percent seventy to an all new plants fifty percent of the invited energy into the BTU all right gas or coal as a fuel source. Seventy to fifty percent of that embodied energy that fuels orders because ride up the smokestack. And that's where the problem exist the missions that's why solar is the answer to all of our problems there are no emissions when you're making the electricity thank that's it thank you Sir thank you thanks guys thank you for voting against this bill it would be a new low at this bank thank you Sir your time is this body yes. No question no question all right thank you. Bilborough next on the list to speak against the bill. Thank you my name's bill Berlin the city manager for the city of hot springs and we heard a lot of testimony in here today and for me I just want to share our experience that we've had in hot springs You know back in two thousand nineteen when the seller access act passed we were extremely excited we're a we're a city that believes in green initiatives we embarked at that time we started looking at sewer we want to become totally self reliant on renewable energy at the time we would have been the first city in the in the state to be able to claim that would have been the six city in the nation to be able to claim that it was very important to us and we embark on this journey. As we were looking at this I had to visits from inter G. that wanted me to purchase that's over from them in a plant they were going to build close to start guard. We didn't want to do that we wanted to say that not only are we we didn't really want to buy credit somewhere else we wanted to build our own plants and offset our energy usage we have a water and wastewater utility the last thing I want to be as a is an electric utility we just want to be able to build plants to offset our current usage. To do that I would have to build a an array at one of my plans and be able to have a credit to offset the usage at another plant. The five miles is going to be an issue for that. And we've when we've gone through the process we've got a little over eight megawatts that were approved we need twelve point five. there's no way we'll get there by the by the end of this year. This is been a issue from the beginning. whenever I decided that I wasn't going to take that power actually had somebody in that in that company go to my board in in question my ethics it was something unethical happening forgot about that so I started writing some notes today. But when you go back to it this thing is been slow play this was in two thousand nineteen here we are almost four years later and I've got one megawatt of of of DC power that said being generated right now we're about I think to start the process to build another seven but we're kind of scared to do that too we see what happens with this bill I'm told that were grandfathered but I don't know that we are. You know in him when you think about everything that we've gone through as I mention it was slow playing we were presenting in trying to get connections just about anywhere we could and it takes thirty plus days to find out whether you can do that and if you know what one you've got to go to another and finally we found a couple spots we could do. then we ran into the PSC filings. Same as C. A. W. it took over a year to get those back. That's one of the reasons we have been able to build what we wanted to build at this point we did the one megawatt because it didn't take P. eight piece PSC approval. But when you look at that you're never post pandemic you can't get half the supplies we need to do that even those are building these hundred megawatt plants running into that same issue. They're not they're not penalized for time they don't have to have there's bill by the end of the year. The issue of of coming down from twenty megawatts to five. That would kill our whole project. We need twelve and a half. Again I just want to offset what we generate what we actually consent. I don't want to make additional power and put out on the grid I would be able to use that power that we generate one plant at another plant. This bill would decimate that plan and after the thirty first of December I don't think we'll see anymore so Arkansas other than the utility companies the big ones that are coming in trying to build their. So today you know I'm just asking you to vote no against this bill and if you can't vote no at least hold this bill long enough for us to can continue to look at the language we heard about an amendment this morning it was going to remove riders I haven't seen that yet but I'm glad to see that happen. We may find some level the Graham we need here to come to that kind of a compromise but we can't do it today we need to continue to work and see additional amendments to the language that we have so I ask you to either postpone a vote your vote no against this bill thank you. Thanks any questions from the committee. Thank you Mr yes. So are you saying you telling us that. Based on what you see in the language of the bill if you don't thank you organizations grandfathered in I think there's there's other there's things in the bill that we have questions of and and look there's a lot of technical things in this bill that that I've had had X. you know have explained to me I'm not as technically savvy when it comes to running electric A generation or or Somerfield I've got partners that are helping us understand that but to my knowledge this bill does not fully protect us and then when it takes only two twenty forty that really doesn't give us to pay back that we need as far as agreed fees. We don't know what those are nobody's been able to determine that even for the PSC but we were willing to take that risk that we may have some type of agreed fee if we had a net metering and we had enough time to pay that off we were looking at about a thirty year pay out. and again it's not to make money it's to offset what we're generating and I think I think when I look at that it was about a twenty eight year pay back but it did let us. Let us generate everything that we needed for our consumption of our city was renewable energy and we're willing to to make that one quick question when you did that first project you mentioned something about going to the P. a public service commission and it took you how many months before you get an answer that I think is over a year over year yes Sir okay we can do that one megawatt through the two thousand nineteen bill but anything over that had to go to PSE all right thank you thank you Mr. Any further questions from the committee. What about. Thank you Mr might be very brief do you know why the it took the PSE so long to respond I really don't I know that we had to go over through several meetings that have testimony there as well what year was this the this was. I believe it is the end of twenty okay but I have to go back and look but it's it's been a while okay thank you. Evans recommend share Mr Perot I think the committee the information maybe we heard from one the earlier testimony today. Complimenting the language that was in the bill of five megawatt. In that has been presented that that is kind of a a standard or an average for what a utility would need to operate. Why would why would Hot Springs need two and a half times that amount in order to meet the load request and in hot springs sure that's a that's a great question for Senate in the previous bill it was twenty megawatt so we and my understanding when you could really you can't really generate more sellers than what you're consumption is so we took I think it was three years of our electric consumptions and I'm everything from my water plants waste water plants or street lights are city buildings and we had about twelve and a half megawatts of consumption so that's what we wanted to build out we wanted to claim and be able to say that we were totally self reliant on renewable energy in the city of hot springs so that's that's what that is. So based upon the five in the bill you need twelve point five what would you be giving up what what could you not do that requires the additional seven and a half it would be about four and a half four have to five megawatts we would not be able to build out now. You know does that mean that streetlights doesn't mean it's a waste water plant as mean as water plant it's probably a little bit of both as we build these and being a water and waste water service provider when we when we have those kind of savings. at those plants were able to pass that on to our rate payers as well again we wouldn't be really generating a lot of savings we might only utility side but we have to pick it up on the general fund side the main thing was to have a a neutral amount of waste I mean about the amount of energy generated to offset our consumption and and that was our goal and we could do that under the the the down under the bill today just this past as we will not be able to do that thank thank you Mr. Thank you have say no further questions the route as well Sir. Douglas Hutchins next on the agenda to speak against the bill. So I would ask you to look again limited testament of five minutes if you can at it the president for paid if maybe we can come before that absolutely and Douglas Hutchings I did my PhD at the university of Arkansas in the microelectronics and photonics programs that have had the pleasure of contributing to the development of new technologies to drive down the cost of things like solar worked with facilities across the globe and supported projects in Arkansas but also in three different countries and all across the US. one I'm in a wonderful civic lesson here today so I appreciate that you know it. Not to repeat anything but just to touch on you the one of the first comments there is around this bill does not kill so we're in Arkansas right but the justification for that was look at all these massive projects in the my so cute I would say absolutely it doesn't kill utility scale solar in Arkansas right it kills it for member your neighbors and your constituents right you can do so as long as you're utility or you have millions of dollars to build a big facility another clarification part I think this important is there is no sale of electricity in Arkansas under one one that meeting I agree that a competitor should not have to pay you retail rates for your power. There is no sale this bill is what would create a sale between two users right what one one net metering allows you to do I would classified as an interest free loan from a net metering customer to the utility if you're a farmer in Arkansas with grain bins for instance right you're using the facility three months out of the year nine months out of the year you are providing an interest free loan of power to the utility who is the likely selling it at retail rates which I am told by others ten to fourteen cents right you fire that claimed an on in the fall you're probably getting credit at six to eight cents. Now that sounds like a very attractive deal from the utility perspective but we're hearing today that that is not fair to the utility and they want more so the question is how much more do we want to give them right what is fair to that former in that situation. And I'm obviously looking forward to your guises perspective and the other thing is just you know where is this bill is titled around cost shifting we've heard numerous times where is that **** should cost shift I believe the co sponsor to this bill is on record as saying that as of today it is negligible right that in Arkansas business article and I have not seen the date on this all the data I have seen filed with the public service commission includes calculations like M. yeah we are. Reducing our revenue and therefore we are going to include that in our Kashif calculations right so if you install a solar array and never put any energy onto the grid under their current calculations that the only public ones I've seen they say that is creating a cost shift I that is the same as you while you're here the capital you've got your lights down you've got your air conditioner off for home unfortunately you're burdening your neighbors right you're creating a cost shift because you're not using what they expected you to use that to me is not a valid argument and I think historically they have been unwilling to provide the data to the public service commission I would like nothing more than to have an open transparent dialogue based on the data if you could just lock them in here today and not let anyone leave until you had the data so that you could make the appropriate decision. That would be wonderful rate the light it just does not exist in a transparent fashion so that we can have a conversation today you've heard every single so we're customer here today state please charge me what I need to be charged. And that is up to the public service commission to work with the utilities to determine what that cost is right that conversation has not taken place. In a fair and transparent manner you I think at representative Lundstrum had mentioned why isn't this that the PSC while reading the room it seems like there's some folks who don't think the utilities got treated fairly at the PAC is historically we've got two new commissioners right why isn't that the venue for this to be handled. And I do and and it is a negligible cost like why but you you guys have way better things to be spending your time on personally been trying to decide what a fair rate for electricity is in Arkansas why have the public service commission right why don't we just make up numbers randomly and put him in law right I just don't think it makes good policy the last point I can make you the current law in Arkansas encourages you to work proactively with your utility in a perfect world by want to solar facility I can put it in the place that adds the most value to the grid right if we start putting arbitrary limitations around five mile radius is or any other barriers to adoption I just forces people to put it in suboptimal locations why wouldn't the utility work review to maximize the value thank you Tess Mercer thank you questions committee saying none. Thank you thank you. Gary moody is next on the agenda speak against the bill. He stepped outside. One Waltrip is next in the queue if you would like to come to the table under dishes up and remember that you have five minutes and trying to be repetitive if you can't yes I. Thank you Mr chair members of the committee my name farm Waltrip I'm the executive director for the advanced energy association. I'll in the name of trying not to be repetitive I'll just try to bring a different kind of perspective to the table the short of it is I think that this bill has nothing to do with developers seller developers at all it really has to do with the the city's as we see today the city's the county's the farmers the small businesses the churches that will be hindered as a result of this bill prior to my work at a EA I worked with agriculturally related clients and so I got to advocate on behalf of farmers all across the state I grew up on a on a a rice and so we've environment East Arkansas and during that time I saw a lot of our farmers where adopting renewable energy on their farms and I thought what is what is the deal with this you know that was even before it really that the economic benefits of this technology had been as widely accepted as they are now in a knowledge and I saw that farmers you know agriculture's the state's biggest industry farmers are the backbone of our state and I saw that they were able to take an input cost that as we all know is is highly variable and also increasing and they were able to lock that in at a certain rate which is very rare for them for you know a period of twenty years and I saw that it was able to save the money it provided another choice for them and we actually ultimately implemented that on my family farm and home as well so I came to work for this industry because it enabled some of that conservative principles that you know I have come to believe in as a as an adult let free market and competition I think we all know that more competition is is better for consumers and ultimately our cans and I think you know the. Which is exactly what this bill does the comment was made that this bill doesn't kill solar and that's true it doesn't it doesn't kill it for the monopolies they still get to build it and they will it only kills it for Parkinson's you know I would just point out that Republican governor Disentis vetoed a similar bill that was last agreed yes that then this bill and just to kind of put it in perspective when I first bought my electric vehicle I no longer pay gas tax because I don't purchase gas I'm not forced to make that transaction anymore similar someone who produces solar power of their own I now pay a flat fee once a year of two hundred dollars and I'm happy to pay what I need to pay to drive on the roads I want to pay my fair share of that and there's a way and so our customers I would say want to do the same and there's a way for them to do that and this bill is not it and so I would just conclude my comments there Sir. Thank you for testimony any questions by the committee. Thank them thank you. Next on the agenda Steve Mallett speak against the bill. Five minutes plays yes Sir you can go shorter that that will not be a problem I guarantee you a respect for everybody's time but a lot of uh topics brought up a lot of the information provided I'm just going to try to add a couple things I'm I'm an end user I'm Steve MALOCH on the general manager for water wastewater utility in Russellville we manage it is a non profit for the city so we're just right now we we have an open application with the PSC based on projected savings that we're going to get we I have already reduced the water and sewer rates for this year little ahead of the game because we're still actually at the PSC waiting for approval so rather than have egg on my face we went ahead and left the rate reduction in place but that was a direct passing along the savings from this project it was we were expected to have online by the end of last year and again we're still waiting for approval but we went ahead and honored our commitment to the city and in our customers the lower the rate in the hopes that this will will take place it's my understanding that that we will not be affected by this grandfathered but obviously we're all a little leery I'm I'm like bill I'm not really sure exactly what all that means for those of us are kind of in the hopper waiting for something how long term if we want to do something different want to add to that I'm not sure we could the interview we've done a lot of partnerships with energy over the last few years we the energy efficiency programs that they have in place energy smart programs energy solutions city smart been involved in pretty much any and all of those and it makes a lot of sense I don't really understand why at first they would incentivize people and pay them money to use less energy but it makes perfect sense because I'm utility a planner and I understand rates and understand cost and it's because they knew that if they if they could lower the demand they wouldn't have to buy more expensive power during peak times and wouldn't have to build additional facilities as as time goes on we're in a situation now where I'm needing to. Build a hundred hundred fifty million dollar reservoir for growth for a little bit increasing demand and growth but unfortunately the only people that I can tax with paying for that or my existing customers I wish I could bill future customers they're going to benefit from that but I can't I have to build all my existing customers and I think that's kind of the same reason that inter G. I can't speak for the other utility companies I don't know what shape they're in but I know they were doing that so they would not have to spend that money and they could make the power that they have the capacity that had go farther so they wouldn't have to pay for those things and put those burdens on existing ratepayers which I and my family is everybody that works for city court for all energy customers and we're not changing that and we're gonna continue to be a partner with energy through this program that I thought they were supportive of for the same reasons that they were supportive of all the other programs that make sense for the same exact reasons so I'm not really sure I'm sure there's more people in a room I'm sure they can tell tells why I think obviously the big reason is because we're a nonprofit corporation in their for profit corporation I don't begrudge them that because that's what they are but I have to look out for my customers just like they do but we're in a situation where we have the ability to do some things on our own to have a direct impact on our customers and and your constituents throughout the Arkansas I'm just one of many public entities is here today in the same situation municipalities you folks have done a great I'm I'm gonna be honest you folks about a great job over the last few years supporting us with the grant money they are per money for for infrastructure this is another great example of of ways that you're helping us be able to control costs and get further into some of the things we need to do but I've I think overturning this reversing this would have a detrimental impact on the on the on the the ground that we've gained over the last few years and all the help that you've given us to do what we need to do so I would hope that you know we can find a way to work through this and and allow us to continue to move forward with the things. We need to do to help our constituents we did just as a side note we did agree with energy again a long term partner of ours to sign up for their sepal be program because they built solar facilities and they had a program where they would pass those savings along to us at a reduced rate so with that that's fine as you read it whether it's cheaper through them or we do it as long as it's better on a ratepayers were fine so we signed up for that and and got to be honest as my CFO of have you really seen any difference and the answer is no we have you know what can give you the calendar impending that but I mean obviously we were expecting to see a pretty good reduction and and being part of this plan and it really hasn't happened so obviously we would be looking down the road to move those accounts all of our smaller thirty three small pump station accounts over to another of greater facility but obviously this would prevent problem and likely to prevent us from being able to do that so um you know we're trying to pardon we're trying to do what's best for our group and we're just asking that you folks support us like you'll have done in the past and you know I think has a lot of people said it kind of comes down to cost avoidance and when I look at having to build new plants and if I could get water from some of my customers to help offset our our demand in our peak would save me from building another lake that's manner from heaven I'd love to have it but sorry I went five minutes I didn't know your fun here thank you recess when the questions Committee saying none thank you Sir thank you been noble. Next on the agenda speak against the bill. Okay we're gonna move forward. Brett Stevenson. Okay. Help for it I'm sorry. I should have known that I apologize. Just introduce yourself Sir and proceed with the testimony yes Sir. Thank you Mr chairman members of the committee I find myself in a very similar position in our was here four years ago. I represent Arkansas for to paper counseling coke industries today. In four years ago when this bill is passed Mr halter contest to it and so can chairman Thomas is that we set here at by at this table. And warned you that when you put that rate. In the statute you'd be back. Represent what from Best Buy are you here. Okay having this committee miss legislature assume the authority. The public service commission to address these very technical and complex issues. Is not the best environment for that for customers. In the customers I represent yes are large users Mr Hensley indicate Mister Ladyman how this affects the small mom and pop. Is we have employees electric bills. Conductor bills go up there shall we do to go up the salary to to go up to our contractors to goes up. We're on competitive. That's just economics that's just student simple math okay. Just below the thing is that Historically there was a move under the deregulation rules a few years ago that we built a bunch of independent power producing natural gas turbines. Anybody know where they are today the ones are still operating. Man and the energy portfolio because they were I would bomb a cheap because the rules changed and allowed to make money so he had to sell at a fire sale. That's a fact. All these time dress to become familiar with demand charges aborted cost interruptible. That's what the public service commission is therefore but them do their job. There's one positive in this bill Mr Speaker phone from coke industries perspective. LMP pricing is a good step in the right direction. Everything local marginalize price is the fair market price in the market I can tell you what that was on Monday because I look at my shows dashboard it was twenty one to twenty two dollars per I think kill water make what whatever it is so as the two cent price but because you're in an environment this week what is very little demand for much energy with the moderate temperatures that's the price. Okay so Peter G. in the solar customers can figure out what the yea and nay is on the pricing in the public service commission but when you take away opportunities for folks like I represent to be a beating consider. Investing in a solar array in the future restricted to five miles those types of things your put an artificial restrictions on the market place. And money cannot flow Courtney's flow provide services in this state. Also let you know that you're not thinking about it. The final generation of power in this state. Mr Cole correct we've had that environmental debate correct they're going to be to make commission do two thousand twenty eight two thousand thirty two largest coal producing generators in the state. As of this moment energy has no real plan to replace farm generation except for solar and based on documents they present the public service commission there so array emit electrons twenty three percent of the time. What you guys want to the seventy seven percent okay. But best boulder cold hard facts in restricting the market here today by passing this bill is not in the best interest of consumers in our Kansas at large I ask you to vote no on this bill appreciate your attention thank you thanks any questions committee. Privilege to witness. I wish I had asked this event the last few folks that have spoken because I felt like they were offering some good points Mr Stevenson have you offered some language to the sponsors yes the helpful yes. Thank you lord. That probably would be helpful at this point but I will tell bills one more. Care to share that sure in the early part with the local Martin was prosecuting twelve month average we suggest to go to our the technology is there yet another call into the spreadsheet thing make that so the money flows much quicker and you understand what real time value of the commodity is okay thank you. Johnson you're recognized for a question I don't get to take a place on our site I just wanted to stand so you offered a one word amendment does that mean with that amendment you be supported the bill I didn't say that in a lot better okay that's about as far as I was allowed to. Comment on represent Johnson and I'm just trying to make sure I understand the decide what your issues are. Thank representative Johnson say no to any other questions committee. Thank you very much Mr chairman members committee thank you. William ball. So to speak against the bill. I know the drill. It's been about twenty years since I've been up here within the substance my name is William ball for lack of a better term a sewer engineer. I first got involved in the public service commission dockets in nineteen ninety three and I came up to the legislature in nineteen ninety nine when the the utility deregulation was on the table. And that was a long arduous docket very confrontational. And I think as soon as it passed the legislators realized we had done something wrong we haven't quite gotten it right so the next section I came here was in two thousand and two thousand one. And I brought with me a bill that I had offered the Arkansas renewable energy development act. How about that. And I have been here a couple times for amendments that improve that act. This bill that's on the table uses the language of cost shifting. If you look at it look at all of the lines stricken through that are are existing law our renewable energy development act. I took my website down about four years ago. I don't do residential solar I really don't do many in house projects these days instead I do feasibility and design for national corporations that you would recognize. About three four years ago tractor supply came to me and said bill we'd like you to analyze our distribution centers we've got a double. I did and they said well this is interesting we're gonna build a new center and Ohio designed as a system so I designed a system that is just now being commissioned in Ohio because it was we're some of the dirty or energy existed. And this is a corporation that has made a real commitment to clean energy. I told him a couple years ago as I was doing these evaluations I says you know Arkansas has got a great net metering law. Okay. Are your eighteen months ago bill we're gonna build a new center in Arkansas. I'm all male. We're doing it because of our commitment to clean energy. And the net metering law that you have in place is attractive to us to help us do that. And by the way that's four hundred and fifty new jobs full time jobs high paying jobs with good benefits. Benefits have not been discussed much during this. I have to disagree with some that think that this bill won't kill solar I believe it will. Before the twenty nineteen ACT four sixty four that gave us third party. We had a chance to bring Mars candy to the Little Rock Port Authority. But they bowed out because we couldn't all from renewable energy like we can today and they went to Kansas instead. This is about economic development this is about clean energy. It's about system benefits where we have twenty three percent capacity factor of of reducing peak this is much more than about lost revenues for utilities. If we want to deal with cost shift let's let the commission's order docket number twenty two oh six one U. proceed I am a party to that docket I have file remarks I'm proud to say that into G. actually supported some of my ideas because we're focusing on cost shifting. This is not the place to deal with this and this bill will hurt all Arkansans I guarantee. Thank you. Thank you Sir any questions by the committee. Okay Senate thank you just one. Her next on the agenda to speak against the bill. It also Mr under warranty moving. Tom van. Good afternoon I will keep this well under five minutes somebody missed I've been I'm a co founder of a small solar company of residential solar company based out of bed in Arkansas named in lighting solar I'd like to bring your attention first to the original bill Page nine line twenty four although the date has been amended on this if you will read through it says schedules out but will to net metering customers to ensure that all existing and prospective net metering customers pay all applicable writers and surcharges so even though that date has been moved at twelve thirty one that word existing customers are still kind of scary to me could go against the grandfather. my next question is the PSC has had an open door with entity if they could prove unfair cost shifting. The PSC would approve a standard grid connection my question is why is that not been done. and then finally this bill introduces a very aggressive change to go to from retail to wholesale is drastic and will one hundred percent kill my small business I ask that we find a compromise between the two that allows small solar companies residential solar companies to continue to operate while the utility company can offset some of this cost shifting thank you guys. Thank you Sir would you be willing to take a question first represent road you're recognized. Could you just give me a little more detail you said this would absolutely kill your business could you tell me just specifically battery how that would happen please yes so with the whole cell by back being roughly three to five percent versus the retail rate being upwards of ten to fifteen cents solar will not will no longer be feasible to middle income families because I will not be able to give them a savings right now I'm able to average my savings at about fifty dollars a month cheaper for my solar system than their average electricity bill when I can no longer send that power back at close to retail rate those savings are mitigated so so are now cost more than the utility company with that being said I get no deals I install number as the sole or in Arkansas I can't can to keep my doors open. That makes sense. Yeah as I said earlier some folks some slow but I'm worth waiting on hi I need you to maybe go through just one more time. Not not so much your business but for the customer So hypothetically I'm your customer and you've installed solar for me okay and I'm generating power. The power generating I'm not paying for I'm using it correct you're using what you can't at the house yeah and then you were sending the access to the utility company as somebody said there is no purchase there when you get to real quick okay so. Let's say I'm not sending any yet because I'm just using what I'm generating I'm not paying for I'm generating is that correct you're not buying the power from the utility because I'm using it your issue okay writing with yourself so at that moment I'm I'm. That I'm not paying for so I'm not I'm saving it because I'm not having a bite correct okay then what I generate in excess I would then be sending and would be paid being paid for the lower rate now if the if this were to pass okay so I'm still receiving a credit it's just not to the degree that the higher rate correct so but I would still be experiencing savings three cents versus the retail of eleven cents as a very large margin when you're looking at a thousand fifteen hundred two thousand kilowatt hours per month all right I'll try and get through this and then what you give me that but that's fine if you got a sorry brother I apologize today. I really good. If there are no more questions. Go ahead Mr Ferguson represented Ferguson. Thank you madam chair and just quick question the curiosity two thousand square foot house what would that cost me to do so palace on a two thousand square foot house realistically what would you say the average utility bill is between two hundred to two fifty yes so I would go in and I would Pitsch that ideally I try to do fifty dollars at least in day one savings so if your average electricity bill over the previous twelve months is two fifty then my target would be to have your solar payment at two hundred dollars what would it cost me to put those total panels on a two thousand square foot house. Realistically anywhere from twenty five to thirty five. Twenty five to thirty five thousand dollars correct okay and my payment plan would be put on the ten year peer fifteen year period with our company were partner with that national finance company we offer five ten fifteen twenty and twenty five your lower payment typically makes better sense on a twenty five year term twenty five year term and what interest rate I deal interest rate right now with the fed raising is at three five nine three five six months ago as a one four nine. Okay so it would take me about twenty to twenty five years to pay for it if you pay it to terms so there's no early termination you can pay it off at any time but I you would pay at the time correct typically we see our homeowners within five to ten years they will have given entity let's face it electricity rates are rising quickly and they're going to continue to rise within five to ten years the homeowner will have what have given interview the same amount of money is what it costs for their system now we're able to break that payment down significantly lower and pay it out over term but. Ten years with the utility company is the same Casal copy twenty five thousand dollars in ten to fifteen year period and my savings is. Your savings so solar typically cost about half of what you would spend with the utility company so I'll boards of over fifty thousand dollars try to save fifty. Okay all right. Thank you I would love I would love to explain this better later on if you'd like okay thank you. The representative Valentin question yes ma'am thank you madam chairman let's go back to something that my colleague to say it and. You all of finance from out of twenty five years I have five ten fifteen twenty and twenty five year option so have you finance the amount of twenty five years yes okay what is the longevity of the solar panels we see panel still operating at eighty plus percent efficiency that are over thirty five to forty years old the panel we sell has a twenty five year bumper to bumper no questions asked warranty it's also guaranteed to be over eighty three percent efficiency at the end of the twenty five years the system doesn't just break and fall off it is an electronic so it does degrade slightly but your system is going to be guaranteed to still be producing over eighty three percent of the power it did on day one on your twenty six. Representative Lundstrum to to have a question yes I think part of it's been answered you said the life is around twenty five years so the the warranty the guaranteed warranty like bumper to bumper is for twenty five years there are panels in other states and other areas that are popular of thirty five forty years old they're still producing efficiently I'm ready manufacture panels I have several different brands previously until LG pulled out of the solar game that's what we are using we use head what you sell panels typically the company and partner with the installs they manufactured and assembled their own freedom forever panel that's manufactured from site assembled within the US. Disassembled within the US. Okay mission is about the only panel I know of that is completely made in the US and we have a hard time getting a supply that in Arkansas okay thank you for the next. Anymore questions for Mr van. Thank you yes the next person on the list is Cooper weighed. Mr way okay. Please state your name and. You're with. Five minutes I'm Cooper Wade I'm currently finishing a PhD in energy engineering at the institute for energy studies in North Dakota while also working for a seal solar here locally I've also worked for other solar companies here in the state of Arkansas completing residential commercial industrial as well as utility projects today I'm testifying on the requirements to be able to achieve grandfather in which it states that you can either submit a standard interconnection agreement by December thirty first twenty twenty three or pay your facilities costs or the costs to improve infrastructure to accommodate the project essentially this is the most valuable item for a solar array it's the one thing that solar companies cannot control because they are not they don't have access to the the data that goes into evaluating what the equipment is and how the energy is behaving within that equipment where you're trying to connect to in order to get that data again it's highly variable in both the resulting cost of the improvements but also the time frame in order to achieve you know that cost and that's due to the size of the projects being in nature from homes to large industrials but also the method of your internet connection as well and so essentially this could take as little as two months or as much as nine months or more currently with that deadline of December thirty first frankly if you started significant size commercial and industrial solar project today it's basically already killed when it starts and so I believe this deadline should be extended Yeah they conclude my testimony. Thanks any questions of committee. Seeing them thank you for your representative Ferguson you're recognized. I'm invading flowers today. So you're saying and thank you Mr. So you're saying that. It would take. Nine months to work on a in agreement with energy company or yes Sir that is correct the this period before a solar company begins the actual construction of procurement process they need to make sure just to be responsible for their clients to make sure that the project is still feasible and that largest very bottom is going to be the interconnection costs or upgrades associated with your project and so if it It can take up to nine months or even more to be able to find out what that costs associated you're saying the grandfathered language is not clear enough that would I'm. It would you saying I'm saying that that time frame is not long enough that if today if today a large industrial wanted to do a solar array and started that process it's essentially the project is killed before it gets off the ground. Okay thank you. Thank you representative the rest looks have questions. Thank you Mr how long would be long enough. So that is something that I'm not able to provide however I believe that are that in collaboration with the industry as well as the public service commission would be able to come up with an appropriate deadline that accommodates all projects currently in development. If you don't know how long is long enough had a note that the current time line isn't long enough to do my past experience on multiple projects in this round in Arkansas for customers of various sizes it is not it is even been more than a year but also in that when that cost as an feasible it can cause you to have to reassess the project entirely and choose a new site a new interconnection method reevaluate the sizing in this you start the process all over again and so it's highly variable depending on the project. From start to completion was long as project you worked on. Longest project from the initiation of the preliminary with the utility to start this evaluation to the completion of it I would say the longest one hasn't even been finished yet and it's probably been Three years or more. From the start of construction to completion no Sir from the start of the interconnection process which is the beginning of the facility study. But from the start of completion construction completion construction to completion it would be a matter of months in the three to five months range okay thank you Sir. They represent gross any any further questions by the committee Senate they protest Mr. last witness from the public because someone we know represent Rick Beck. Expect some questions. Thank you Mr thank you Committee in Arkansas Georgia some some very reliable and and chief political power that's hats off to allow a lot of people that are here they're playing their options they will not decide right now but but thank you. They've done their job put public service commission's done their job hi so that's why I'm not down here then I'm down here because of one thing this is the cost shifting bill we were void cost shifting right we want to point that out because and I've talked to the last two weeks with public everybody on both sides of this that I possibly could and everyone of them said that alone cost if we want to get rid of kasha the existing legislation that's in place right now I believe personally that does cut it there's cost shifting what for want to retail right it's crazy that's crazy I've said that all along that's crazy hi but this bill has a problem. And that is. I think that if okay if you establish. The correct avoided cost if you get that right if you get that right. There can be no cost shifting. That's a fact if if we truly get the board cost figure right there can be no cost shifting because people are being paid the correct amount that they. With a cost shift so that's key to this thing and that is my objection to this bill I think that the the the bill takes a great step in the right direction in the way that they're trying to compute the cost shifting but I think that we should say this I think the public service okay I don't speak for the public service commission but I have talked to some people the public service commission and I want clear direction from the legislature not on this and other products I think what you say in this bill very clearly is that the public service commission is to say that is the set there in charge there is set thereof would cost that's what we pay those guys to their engineers or conflagration for they can they can truly come up with that I'm not asking them to to make laws that's what you guys do that's what that's what we're paid to do hi what I'm asking them to do is say let's utilize them I think you have eighty people down and do nothing more than questions numbers and you've heard the thing about you for both sides of this argument argue that what is a fair of what it costs will want why not get the public service commission to do that and I have told people that talked about said you know if you want me to support this bill the public service commission charge of the board costs and I'm okay with it so with that I will take any questions if there are any. Thank you representive out of any questions committee. There's a question representive Ken Ferguson you. Thank you Mr chair. Senate back here The New yeah a lot of expertise thank in this area we'll talk over a couple of sessions but now when you look at this bill Hey when you look at the grandfather that situation is it possible from an engineering perspective. You can. Get a project a major projects off the ground and eight months of five months. I I think there's some challenges there but I I'm not a software engineer I'm not I I don't know what that what that entails so I'm I'm I can't I can't make a good what challenges. I'm sorry what challenges I know you said these challenges well I don't know exactly what the I I don't feel comfort saying that you can do in a month so I will a lot of because I haven't done that project but but truly guys if you get the avoided cost right if we get that right there can be no because Shipp it's mathematically impossible. Thank you Mr a committee would you like to take another question yes Sir okay Russia wants to appear recognized. My concern is we're almost as to make a Solomon like decision here when it seems like is that maybe this needs to be directed to the chair is the public service commission here because it seems like this should have been done a long time ago or they in the room. You've got a separate question the I'm sorry go ahead if you have another question now I'll wait and hold that one okay the public service commission is here however that. Well it is with yes in effect do you have anything further back now our way and you have a question what you are you saying appointed cost avoidance or does that reversal on. Okay if you if you read the bill the talks about. Page. I thank. It calls for two in the definition section avoided cost it tells you how that's going to be calculated it's got a little from the near to the exact Callachan inform the starts out great I love the way that they look and they're actually using this new hardwood thing of my sound and the living in the the cost of the repair they use that in there yeah I'll tell you that that's that's what you should do in my opinion that's what you should do this because quite honestly all this demand cost and all this other stuff that you've heard all that's cooked into that price that's what the utilities are paying for that power at that moment so that is a great place to start I do not agree with some of the averaging what to talk about having things like that in here yeah I think a better person to be able to crunch through those numbers is a public service commission that's what we pay those guys do we pay a lot of money. Okay Mister representative Beck of. Do you do you know a number or you saying that we just need the experts to look at the to come up with the number that would resolve the issue of all those against an although for if we get that ride for the long run. Yes that that's that's exactly one component I don't have a number but I like I could sit here and talk for you guys for a long time to tell you exactly to so components I think would have to go into that it would be a very complicated number two but I think the public service commission is the place to do that okay we we've had alone number so to us are you talking about the recent eleven Senator you talking about. What what they're paying for it is of all it cost to get that number right what what what it costs to serve cat what what they're saying this bill is that okay we need a number this is truly what cost did we avoid by the army's kilowatt hours. When we took a kilowatt hour well costed we avoid yeah no words I'm gonna have to pay you for that so it shall I should pay you for the cost the lives a book that I and that's and that's it once I get that right there can be no caution thank you may cause pain for kilowatt hours what I'm thank thank thank you thank you representative board and any further questions Committee. Thank you. One of the ones that I thank representative Leding for bringing this up for that is TopBuild he's got a good job. Thank you for your time. Members of in contacted by represent a fight to is asked to address the committee representative if you would like to to come to the committee and bring whomever you would like the dress the committee the stage. This. Thank you Mr chair no Senate dismaying here I would like him to speak here for just a moment. I thank you members appreciate you taking the time today you what you've led to the it is a very I think successful negotiation between the sides at least most of the sites that are involved in this issue I would come to an agreement with the eighty eight I think and and they may say the same thing and the second on some changes to the bill in addition the amendment that you made earlier today the first is the grandfathering would be extended to nine thirty twenty four in the bill saw the language that you see this is twelve thirty one twenty three would move to nine thirty twenty four you increase the radius from about five miles two hundred miles in the bill and then if there was a project that was over five megawatts that there is a signed contract for two day so as of today twelve or a there were twenty second then they would also be grandfathered in for that larger project in addition to or if they have a filed a filing with the PSE and have one of those larger projects that would they would also be grandfathered in for that larger project that in addition to that and and and this is kind of a commitment but it's it's our understanding that the language or the law as it stands right now as part of a grant funding if there is a complaint that is filed with the PSC's we have utility that is slow moving or whatever it may be in there is a complaint filed with the PSC than that complaint would also trigger that grandfather again that the understanding is that's the way the current law is my my dedication to you is if it's not we find out otherwise it off on the bill you'll unfortunately see me again with that to to ensure that that is the case with that we can you're welcome recognized whoever else but in any awkward to the process of how you dont that men men and and move forward. Thank you senator thank you represent a fight I wouldn't mind hearing from the other side just frankly we have an affirmation of the agreement was going to put this on the record in helping other this again. If you would introduce yourself plus hi I'm heather Nelson I am board chair for Arkansas dance Energy association and representing and that capacity right now. This is a good. I apologize if you would just a firearm your understanding of their ramen that your association is in agreement with that thanks a lot thank you so as it is with that legal process in the legislative process we do want to see everything in writing but we do agree with the terms that have been outlined in the changes by Senator Dismang and so as as of this time we are dropping opposition. Thank you thank you senator this man and I don't want to mislead anyone in the room that is not mean everyone's going to be happy with this amendment there it did eighty P. C. has said that they haven't had time to review what part of the conversation and I'm not sure what their positions ultimately going to be but there may be other organizations out there that haven't agreed but that's we understand that we're talking about I think who've been the major player so far in the discussion. Thank you senator center this may represent fighters or anything else you would like to address with the committee at this time. Yes Mr I'd like pull this bill down and and have been amended I'll be back. Whatever you will call the meeting thank you that's certainly your your right uh men to pull this is amended members my plan is if we can get this amended I hate to do it but I want to move fast on this or what your calendars anticipate meeting tomorrow potentially after session for a for a pretty quick meeting is what I'd like to do if we can do that so we will make certain we can and and I'll get that to you but what your counters.