Connecticut 2011 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB05847

Introduced
1/24/11  
Introduced
1/24/11  
Refer
1/24/11  
Refer
2/24/11  
Refer
2/24/11  
Report Pass
3/22/11  
Report Pass
3/22/11  
Refer
3/31/11  
Refer
3/31/11  
Report Pass
4/6/11  

Caption

An Act Concerning Time Frames For Interconnection Projects.

Impact

The passage of HB 5847 will significantly amend existing statutes governing the relationship between private power producers and electric utility companies. By mandating timely responses to contract proposals, the bill seeks to prevent unnecessary delays that can hamper the deployment of renewable energy projects. This will promote a more proactive engagement from electric companies, enhancing the potential for private producers to engage in long-term energy contracts, which could be beneficial for overall energy supply and pricing stability in the state.

Summary

House Bill 5847 aims to establish clearer timelines for electric utility companies in their responses to contract proposals from private power producers seeking to sell energy and capacity. This legislation mainly seeks to address the delay in negotiations that can often occur, requiring electric companies to respond to contract proposals within a stipulated timeframe of ninety days. Such a requirement intends to create a more efficient and predictable process for independent energy producers, thereby encouraging competition and innovation in the energy market.

Sentiment

General sentiment regarding HB 5847 appears to be supportive among stakeholders involved in the private energy sector. Advocates view this bill as a necessary step towards fostering a more competitive market that will ultimately benefit consumers through improved energy options and pricing. However, there might be some apprehension from electric utility companies concerning the potential increase in administrative burdens and the impacts on their operational flexibility on contract negotiations.

Contention

While there is considerable support for HB 5847, notable points of contention could arise regarding the implications it may have on the existing operational protocols of electric utility companies. Electric companies may express concerns over the mandatory response timeline, emphasizing that some contract proposals, particularly complex ones, may require more than ninety days for thorough evaluation. This tension between maintaining a vibrant independent energy market and ensuring that electric utilities can operate effectively without undue pressure will likely require careful consideration as the bill advances through the legislative process.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB954

Dental services: third-party network access.

DC B25-0265

Contract No. GAGA-2022-C-0259 with SodexoMagic, LLC Approval and Payment Authorization Emergency Act of 2023

TX SB543

Relating to oversight of and requirements applicable to state contracts and other state financial and accounting issues; authorizing fees.

TX HB1426

Relating to certain requirements applicable to contracts entered into by, and the contract management process of, state agencies.

MS HB934

Healthcare Contracting Simplification Act; create.

NJ S3443

Requires State Contract Managers to monitor work conducted by subcontractors on State contracts.

NJ A4487

Requires State Contract Managers to monitor work conducted by subcontractors on State contracts.

CA SB681

Public employees’ retirement: contracting agencies: termination.