Legislative session hailed as success despite challenges for energy sector
Utah lawmakers made protecting existing electricity ratepayers one of their top priorities this past session — especially for rural consumers; they moved to keep the Intermountain Power Plant open and they tackled the use of AI for existing apps and app developers.
Additionally, they put in guardrails for above ground storage tanks for petroleum products and they assessed a 5 cent tax per barrel of oil to help local communities pay for road repairs associated with industrial activity.
At a Tuesday webinar hosted by the Utah Petroleum Association, multiple representatives from energy, mining and retail associations detailed some of the bigger impacts that came from a record-breaking session that saw 959 bills introduced.
Rikki Hrenko-Browning, association president, said there were 159 bills those industries tracked, with some coming down to passage in the final minutes of the session.
'Overall, it was a successful session,' she said, although there was a lot of wrangling, negotiations and last-minute angst.
Lawmakers moved to amplify energy transmission and put in safeguards for rural electric cooperatives, said Nathan Johnson, executive director of the Utah Rural Electric Cooperatives.
'I think we walked away as unscathed as was possible. I think the issues that we saw and just the underlying kind of political issues were the House and Senate were not fully aligned on how they wanted to deal with the issues of data centers, and so that created some obstacles and challenges for us,' Johnson said.
Those safeguards were contained in SB132, which deals with large load electricity consumers — those of 100 megawatts or greater — to operate within rules and cost allocations to be developed by the Utah Public Service Commission.
Johnson said a key aspect of the measure deals with data centers that want to access existing electric utility providers and the transmission infrastructure without necessarily paying for those costs.
Another win for industry came from HB378 which establishes a predictable funding source for Endangered Species Act mitigation, which will be the species protection account after the bill takes effect.
'We obviously don't need to preach to the choir here and tell folks how problematic an Endangered Species listing can be for extractive industries. And so the work of this fund is very, very important, and it's something that, you know, we've had a lot of success over the years as a state,' said Brian Somers, president of the Utah Mining Association.
The fund has been inherently troublesome because of its variability, Somers added.
'Over the years, the funding has really gone up and down from year to year based on the budget situation. And where most of these projects are very long term and they're getting multiple year projects, it's difficult,' he said. 'It was difficult for us on the advisory committee to really figure out how to allocate funds when one year we would have a couple of million dollars and maybe if it was a good budget year, we'd get a couple million extra dollars.'
Changes in the bill rope in transmission lines for wind and solar generation, which was contentious for those industries that will face an assessment based on per mile of line of those systems that generate 340,000 volts or more.
HB201 changes how the Public Service Commission evaluates integrated resource planning by PacifiCorp, while SB159 moves the state to be more protective of handling nonhazardous waste by requiring synthetic liners at disposal facilities.
'Those waste disposal facilities are going to be regulated under (the state division) of waste management and radiation control,' said Hrenko-Browning.
'This sets out some requirements to ensure that there are synthetic liners or liners with equivalency in terms of transmission of fluids to ensure that we've got cradle to grave protection for those oil and gas wastes that go into these kinds of landfills,' she said. 'It's done in a way that it's structured over time, so we're not asking folks to immediately close their facilities if they don't meet some of those liner requirements.'
Two big bills were attention grabbers this last session — HB70 and HB249.
The latter will establish a nuclear energy consortium as Utah eyes advanced nuclear technologies such as small modular reactors to provide carbon free baseload power. Utah has been one of many states across the country that see nuclear energy as a long-term answer to embrace new energy demands.
Participants pointed out the framework solidified in the bill is in tandem with Utah Gov. Spencer Cox's 'Operation Gigawatt' that seeks to double the state's energy production in the next decade.
In the interim, Hrenko-Browning said natural gas will have a large part to play because new coal-fired power plants simply aren't being built anymore.
HB70 preserves the state's ability to protect the assets of Intermountain Power Agency's power plant in Delta, and its attendant infrastructure, so it could produce that energy for Utah for the grid.
The Utah Retail Merchants Association closely tracked SB226, which kept the group's president reaching for antacid pills.
'This bill took several years off my life,' said Dave Davis, president and chief legal officer for the retail association.
The bill imposes certain requirements on app developers which Davis said could deter implementation of those services.
'I think technology is something that is going to touch us all and we need to make sure we keep a very innovative environment here that isn't stifled by government regulation,' he said.
In the end, lawmakers agreed to a delayed implementation date for 2027, which Davis said gives the group another chance at the Legislature in 2026 to work out any bugs.
'If there are problems with the system, then we still have another legislative session that we can come back and hopefully tweak or fix or address any of those concerns that come up,' when it comes to liability if a transaction isn't made clear to consumer that they are using AI, he said.
Lawmakers, in a nod to the importance of critical minerals, also passed SJR11, which recognizes the importance of developing a national strategy when it comes to supply chains of these minerals. They also passed a measure to tackle problems associated with the large infrastructure tax credit for mining operations and mineral extraction via SB234.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
3 hours ago
- CNBC
CCTV Script 06/06/25
The war of words between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, which seemed to escalate almost hourly, has already cost real money in the capital markets. Overnight, Musk's personal net worth reportedly fell by approximately $34 billion. By aligning the timing of their social media exchanges with Tesla's stock movements, a clear pattern emerges: as the feud grew more intense, with language becoming increasingly blunt and emotional, Tesla's share price continued to slide. Many analysts believe that Tesla's stock is likely to remain volatile. To assess its future trajectory, we can start with the trigger of this conflict: a recently passed House spending bill. One provision would eliminate tax credits for electric vehicles—directly impacting Tesla. JPMorgan analysts estimate that the new legislation could cut Tesla's annual profits by around $1.2 billion. However, some market observers note that both Musk and others in the industry had long anticipated that the Trump administration would eventually scrap EV subsidies. This expectation has been priced in—it was only a matter of timing. But of even greater consequence is the second layer of impact: the broader regulatory posture of the White House toward Musk, particularly in the autonomous driving space. Timing is critical. Next week, Tesla is expected to debut its long-awaited Robotaxi service in Austin, Texas. Progress in self-driving technology has been a key reason many investors remain bullish on Tesla. But the breakdown in Musk's relationship with Trump could undermine those expectations. "there's a view that the battle here going on between musk and Trump, that this is going to continue to sort of, you know, increase, and with that, ultimately does is that autonomous and the regulatory vision does Trump now, now not start to play nice in the sandbox with musk.""Elon Musk, as brilliant as he can be, can also be mercurial and impetuous. CUT TO from a trading perspective, I think the stock could easily trade down into the 250s 260s until you get some support." Beyond the personal feud, the spotlight is also shifting to the broader relationship between Silicon Valley—the U.S. tech hub—and Washington, D.C.—the political center. As Musk and Trump move from allies to adversaries, their split is drawing attention to the evolving dynamic between big tech and federal power. Analysts told CNBC that during Trump's first term, major tech firms often found themselves in the administration's crosshairs. Companies like Meta, Google, and to some extent Apple were all named in antitrust inquiries. Now, the rift between Musk and Trump may open new doors for tech leaders who have had tense relations with Musk. For instance, Jeff Bezos—who also leads a space company—has in recent months made efforts to court Trump more closely, reportedly taking cues from Musk's political playbook. This shift may also present an opportunity for Sam Altman, CEO of AI startup OpenAI. "If you're a startup that's trying to make big names or big headlines with investments for the US, that's probably a good place to be." Still, some analysts caution that this overnight drama may not deserve too much attention. A defining feature of the Trump-era policymaking process has always been its volatility—things can shift dramatically within just a few hours. What ultimately matters is returning to the fundamentals and taking a long-term view of where the industry—and the economy—are heading.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Johnson: Deploying Marines to Los Angeles protests would not be ‘heavy-handed'
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Sunday that deploying the Marine Corps to Los Angeles to suppress protests, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has suggested, would not be 'heavy-handed.' 'Secretary Hegseth said that active-duty Marines there at Camp Pendleton, there by San Diego, are on high alert and could be mobilized. Could we really see active-duty Marines on the streets of Los Angeles?' ABC News's Jonathan Karl asked on 'This Week.' 'You know, one of our core principles is maintaining peace through strength. We do that on foreign affairs and domestic affairs as well. I don't think that's heavy-handed,' Johnson responded. Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard members to the Los Angeles area on Saturday amid protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the action was due to 'violent mobs' attacking federal agents 'carrying out basic deportation operations.' 'The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE,' Hegseth said in a post on the social platform X on Sunday morning. Deploying active-duty forces against Americans on U.S. soil would be an extraordinary move and would require bypassing laws that prevent the military from being used for domestic law enforcement purposes. There's also little precedent for deploying the National Guard to states that have not requested the help. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Sunday went after Trump over the deployment of the National Guard to the Los Angeles area, saying the president 'thinks he has a right to do anything.' 'He does not believe in the Constitution; he does not believe in the rule of law,' Sanders told CNN's Dana Bash on 'State of the Union.' 'My understanding is that the governor of California, the mayor of the city of Los Angeles, did not request the National Guard, but he thinks he has a right to do anything he wants,' he added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ex-Illinois Speaker Mike Madigan's attorneys ask for no prison time for bribery conviction
The Brief Lawyers for ex-Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan are asking that he not be sent to prison for his bribery conviction. Federal prosecutors recommended a prison sentence of more than 12 years and a $15 million fine. Earlier this year, a jury found Madigan guilty on 10 of 23 counts, including bribery and wire fraud. CHICAGO - Attorneys for former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan are asking that he not be given a prison sentence after he was convicted of bribery and conspiracy earlier this year. What we know Federal prosecutors have already called for sentencing Madigan to more than 12 years in prison, which his lawyers called "draconian," in a new court filing. Madigan's attorneys argued it would essentially be a life sentence for the 83-year-old. Instead, they're asking that Madigan be sentenced to five years' probation, including one year of home detention, community service, and a "reasonable" fine. Prosecutors said they're also seeking a $15 million fine from Madigan. "Madigan was in a special position of trust and responsibility to the public. Yet he deprived all residents of Illinois of honest government and eroded the public's trust," prosecutors wrote in their memo." Earlier this year, a jury found Madigan guilty on 10 of 23 counts, including bribery and wire fraud. The former speaker, arguably the most powerful politician in Illinois at one point, was accused of using his role leading the state House and heading the state Democratic Party to enrich himself and his allies by securing jobs, contracts, and other financial benefits. What's next Madigan's sentencing is scheduled for this Friday.