MA energy bill provision to solicit nuclear power may be tied to Vineyard Wind project

Massachusetts may gain a new weapon in its quest to meet clean energy mandates: the ability to buy nuclear power from a facility in New England and count it toward emissions reduction requirements.

Legislative negotiators filed a 139-page compromise bill (S 2967) Monday night after months of talks, and the sweeping new bill was set to emerge for a potentially complicated vote Wednesday, just two weeks before many lawmakers are up for reelection.

The final proposal would also push the state toward a stronger embrace of electric vehicles, make more families eligible for discounted utility rates, and eyes fusion as a possible renewable energy source.

The measure includes reforms to speed siting and permitting of clean energy infrastructure, an area where lawmakers, the Healey administration and industry representatives have called for change. It also reaches into a number of other areas long in the spotlight.

One high-profile provision would allow the Department of Energy Resources to coordinate with one or more New England state to solicit long-term clean energy generation, including from nuclear power.

Power from Connecticut plant exchanged for offshore wind

That change could be key to a deal Gov. Maura Healey has reportedly been discussing with Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, in which Massachusetts would buy power from the Millstone Nuclear Power Plant in Connecticut and Connecticut would buy into a second Vineyard Wind offshore energy project with Massachusetts.

Several sections of the bill focus on electric vehicles and building out the charging infrastructure needed to support a transition away from gasoline.

Bay Staters who own units in condominiums, homeowners associations, historic districts or neighborhood conservation districts would be allowed to install EV chargers, and the state would also update the specs for EV charger energy efficiency standards.

The bill calls on agencies including the state Department of Transportation to develop a forecast of EV charging demand in the next decade, and it requires electric distribution companies to develop their own EV charging infrastructure plans for the same timeframe.

During much of the debate about the underlying legislation, some lawmakers argued that the state needs to balance its transition toward clean energy sources with relief for ratepayers who might shoulder higher costs.

The compromise legislation would require utilities to offer discounted rates to some moderate-income households, similar to what they must already do with low-income households who earn 200 percent or less of the federal poverty limit. The bill itself does not outline eligibility thresholds for moderate-income households, and instead calls on the Department of Public Utilities to draft those criteria.

"This legislation is a win-win for Massachusetts," said Moira Cyphers, the American Clean Power Association's director for Atlantic offshore and eastern state affairs. "By streamlining the siting and permitting processes, this legislation would significantly benefit offshore wind power and energy storage, enabling faster deployment of crucial infrastructure. Allowing longer power contracts of up to 30 years, the legislation aims to create more stable investments and potentially lower electricity costs for consumers. Additionally, the focus on enhancing battery storage facilities will support the integration of renewable energy, paving the way for a more sustainable energy future."

The compromise bill needs to be approved in both branches to reach Healey's desk. Senate Democrats planned to bring it forward on Wednesday, but the measure might face obstacles en route to reaching the governor.

Control over siting for Vineyard Wind a concern

All 25 House Republicans and two Senate Republicans voted against the bills used to develop the compromise bill. House Republicans said after their vote they were concerned about losing local control in the siting process and unanswered questions surrounding a Vineyard Wind turbine blade that fell into the water.

The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance objected to the bill being released on Monday night and coming up for a vote on Wednesday, although the filing met the Legislature's fair notice requirements. The alliance said "it is unclear if lawmakers are expected to come in for a recorded roll call vote, if there will be a debate, or if the Speaker and Senate President will try to ram it through in an informal session."

"This isn't governing, this is abuse. The legislature's climate bill was very controversial and complex. It has serious policies that will impact a lot of residents and businesses. It will drive up costs for the ratepayers, and taxpayers," said MassFiscal spokesperson Paul Craney. "Some other organizations will praise this development as a good thing, but their interests are not with the taxpayers. They serve the interests of their ideologically driven members who are set to enrich themselves or advance their agenda."

Republicans wield additional power, should they decide to exercise it, over the bill's next steps now that the Legislature is set to meet only in informal sessions. During informals, a single objection can stall any action, unless Democrats get a quorum of members together.

"There is the possibility of delay, but we hope that nothing serious obstructs the Senate's movement. We filed the compromise legislation late last night in order to honor a Republican request that the document be available publicly before we take it up," lead Senate negotiator Michael Barrett told the News Service. "There's a transparency point there that deserves respect. So that's what we've done. It took us an enormous amount of work over the weekend to make that happen."

"My hope is we will hear some commentary on the merits of the bill from those who might disagree, but that you won't see obstruction for its own sake," he added. "The approval of the bill is virtually guaranteed at this point, so delay would only be for show. I hope that we can avoid that."

Democrats last year overcame Republican opposition on a spending bill during an informal session by getting a quorum of members to come to session. Usually, very few members from either party even attend informal sessions.

Legislative leaders have also signaled they're open to suspending rules and holding a formal session, where roll call votes could occur.

Senate President Karen Spilka did not say Tuesday if she intends to call enough Democrats in to the State House to constitute a quorum at Wednesday's session.

All four Democrats on the conference committee signed the final accord to signal their support, but neither Republican on the conference committee, House Minority Leader Brad Jones and Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, did the same.

Jones told the News Service he did not have enough time to read the bill.

"We were told we had until this morning based on two emails from Barrett's office last night, and then it was filed and reported by the clerk's office while I was in the process of reading through, so I hadn't made a final decision," Jones said.

A Jones aide later provided the News Service with printouts of emails that Barrett sent to conferees Monday evening, one at 7:14 p.m. with an initial draft of the accord and a second at 8:26 p.m. with a slightly updated version, asking for their signatures in support.

"Anytime tonight or first thing tomorrow (Tuesday) morning will work," Barrett wrote, according to the emails shared by Jones's office.

Negotiators then filed the bill without the Republican signatures at 9:01 p.m. Monday.

Barrett confirmed the veracity of the emails provided by Jones's aide, and said the timing was "fluid."

"There was always an argument for delaying additional time in order to pick up a signature, but that would have meant less time for every other member of the House and the Senate to review the contents," Barrett said. "Next week is the week before the most important presidential election of our adult lifetimes. A number of legislators are going to be campaigning in contested races for reelection. Others will be helping members of their party up and down the ticket. We really need to do this this week, and we did go back and forth. If we had withheld the bill in order to gather more signatures, it would have meant less time for other legislators to peruse the contents."

Sens. Ryan Fattman and Peter Durant, the two Senate Republicans who voted against the underlying bill, did not respond to News Service inquiries Tuesday.

[Sam Drysdale and Alison Kuznitz contributed reporting.]

This article originally appeared on Cape Cod Times: Electric vehicle charging stations, nuclear power in MA energy bill