Skip to content
Bills from the 2023–24 session

Senate Bill 651

Use of environmental trust bonds to finance the costs of retiring electric generating facilities; integrated resource and reliability planning by electric utilities and cooperatives; closure of large electric generating facilities; and granting rule-making authority. (FE)

Stopped in committee

It never got a ⁠, so it never came up for a vote. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Nov 9, 2023

  2. Committee, stopped here

    Stopped here. No public hearing was held.

  3. Senate vote, not reached

  4. Assembly vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Apr 15, 2024: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

It never got a hearing in the Senate Committee on Utilities and Technology. See every bill that never got a hearing this session.

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

Embed this on your site

Paste this code into your page. The card shows the latest record each time it loads. Preview the card

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

This bill authorizes the use of environmental trust financing for the costs of retiring an electric generating facility, requires integrated resource and reliability planning by electric utilities and cooperatives, eliminates the requirement that the Public Service Commission prepare a biennial strategic energy assessment, and provides a process by which PSC determines whether a proposed closure of a large electric generating facility will affect electric reliability.

Environmental trust financing Under current law, an energy utility is allowed to apply to PSC for an order allowing the utility to finance or recover the costs of the following activities by issuing bonds: 1) the construction, installation, or otherwise putting into place of environmental control equipment in connection with a plant that, before March 30, 2004, has been used to provide service to customers; and 2) the retiring of any existing plant, facility, or other property to reduce, control, or eliminate environmental pollution in accordance with federal or state law. Current law defines these activities as “environmental control activities.” If approved by PSC, the bonds, which are referred to as “environmental trust bonds,” are secured by revenues arising from charges paid by an energy utility's customers for the utility to recover the cost of the activities, as well as the cost of financing the bonds.

Read the full summary

This bill adds the retiring of any existing electric generating facility as an environmental control activity, the costs of which, including the unrecovered value, may be financed or recovered by an environmental trust bond. In addition, with respect to this new environmental control activity, the bill adds to the costs that may be financed or recovered the portion of an energy utility's rate that is attributable to the rate of return for the facility authorized under PSC's order in a rate-making proceeding and that is forgone as a result of the retirement. Under current law, the costs that may be financed or recovered include capital cost incurred or expected to be incurred in undertaking an environmental control activity and, with respect to retiring a plant, facility, or other property, the unrecovered value of property that is retired.

Under this bill, PSC may order an energy utility to use environmental trust bonds to finance an expenditure. Under current law, PSC may not order an energy utility to use environmental trust bonds to finance an expenditure unless the energy utility has applied to PSC to do so, and PSC may not refuse to allow an energy utility to recover costs for environmental control activities in an alternate manner because of the potential availability of environmental trust financing.

Integrated resource and reliability planning This bill requires electric utilities and cooperative associations to submit biennial integrated resource and reliability plans to PSC that include certain information about their plans to construct the following: 1) large electric generating facilities with a capacity of 100 megawatts or more; 2) small electric generating facilities with a capacity of at least 12 but less than 100 megawatts; and 3) high-voltage transmission lines that are longer than one mile and operate at 100 kilovolts or more. As part of an integrated resource and reliability plan, an electric utility must identify alternatives to the proposed electric generating facilities, including alternative locations, fuel types, and methods of generation, and must explain the reasons for selecting the types of electric generating facilities proposed.

An electric utility must also identify alternative routes for any high-voltage transmission lines proposed and indicate their effects on the environment and how the utility will avoid or minimize potential adverse effects. An electric utility's detailed projection for electricity demand and assessment of whether it has sufficient capacity to make electricity available to consumers at a reasonable price must also be included in the plan, as well as a description of existing and planned programs and policies for discouraging inefficient and excessive electricity use. After holding a hearing on a utility's plan, PSC may approve the plan if PSC finds that the plan will provide a reasonably adequate supply of electricity to meet the needs of the public and that the plan satisfies certain other criteria.

Strategic energy assessment In addition, the bill eliminates the requirement that PSC prepare a biennial strategic energy assessment. Under current law, the strategic energy assessment evaluates the adequacy and reliability of the state's current and future energy supply and includes information on the following: 1) planned large electric generating facilities and high-voltage transmission lines; 2) plans for assuring an adequate ability to transfer electricity into the state; 3) the projected demand for electricity;

4) activities discouraging inefficient and excessive electricity use; 5) the extent to which effective competition contributes to a reliable, low-cost, and environmentally sound source of electricity; and 6) whether sufficient electricity is available at a reasonable price. Current law requires PSC to hold a hearing on a draft of the strategic energy assessment and prepare a final strategic energy assessment based on received comments.

Closure of large electric generating facilities The bill requires electric utilities and cooperative associations to notify PSC at least 180 days prior to closing any large electric generating facility with a capacity of 100 megawatts or more, and requires PSC, after public comment and hearing, to issue a determination as to whether the proposed closure will have an effect on electric reliability. The bill requires PSC to make its determination by considering the utility or cooperative's most recent integrated resources and reliability plan and information collected from the electric utility or cooperative and from the public, as well as any other information PSC deems relevant. Under the bill, PSC must notify the electric utility or cooperative of its determination no less than 45 days prior to the planned closure.

Who's behind it

2 senators are its ⁠. All 2 are Republicans.

12 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 14 names

Authors (2)

Signed on in support (12)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

What happened

  1. Apr 15, 2024

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Jan 29, 2024

    1 more senator signed on in support.

  3. Dec 1, 2023

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  4. Nov 9, 2023

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Utilities and Technology.

  5. Nov 9, 2023

    Introduced in the Senate.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Nov 9, 2023 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Cowles and Stroebel; cosponsored by Representatives Gustafson, Neylon, Tittl, Andraca, Dittrich, Krug, Murphy, O'Connor, Rettinger, Rozar and Spiros

  2. Nov 9, 2023 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Utilities and Technology

  3. Dec 1, 2023 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Jan 29, 2024 · Senate

    Senator Larson added as a coauthor

  5. Apr 15, 2024 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Public hearing

A meeting where anyone can speak to a committee about a bill, or send written comments.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate