SB619Introduced in the Senate
Electric utilities; certificate of operation for high-load facilities.
Introduced by Kannan Srinivasan, District 32
What does this bill do?
Plain-English breakdown
Writing a plain-English summary of this bill… this can take a few seconds the first time.
Official description
Electric utilities; certificate of operation for high-load facilities. Prohibits any person from operating a high-load facility, defined in the bill as a facility whose electricity demand exceeds 90 megawatts that was not operating before January 1, 2027, without first having obtained a certificate of operation from the State Corporation Commission. The bill includes factors for the Commission to consider in reviewing a petition to operate a high-load facility. The bill establishes a presumption that a high-load facility shall be considered to have met certain requirements if the high-load facility has secured sufficient contracts for energy storage resources or zero-carbon electric generating resources or that the high-load facility has a plan to implement sufficient demand reduction measures. The bill also requires the Commission to consider certain factors in a review of a petition for a certificate to operate a high-load facility, including whether there is sufficient energy, capacity, and grid infrastructure to support the operation of the high-load facility and whether the operation of the high-load facility would create an unreasonable cross-subsidy across customers served by the incumbent electric utility.
Where it stands
Left in Labor and Commerce
March 10, 2026
How did lawmakers vote?
House of Delegates votes
1 recorded vote · each counted separately
Senate votes
4 recorded votes · each counted separately
House of DelegatesStage: Subcommittee recommends laying on the table (9-Y 0-N) · March 3, 2026
9
Yes
0
No
0
Absent or Not Voting
9 delegates recorded in this House of Delegates vote. Colors show vote categories only, not whether a vote was good or bad.
What do people think?
Citizen Voice
How would you vote on this bill?
An unofficial public opinion poll. It does not affect the bill or the official vote.
One response per device. Location is self-reported and not verified. Results are informal and not a scientific survey.
See how each delegate voted
| Delegate | District | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Richard Sullivan | 6 | Yes |
| Irene Shin | 8 | Yes |
| Tony Wilt | 34 | Yes |
| Terry Kilgore | 45 | Yes |
| Wren Williams | 47 | Yes |
| May Nivar | 57 | Yes |
| Nadarius Clark | 84 | Yes |
| Bonita Anthony | 92 | Yes |
| Michael Feggans | 97 | Yes |
Bill history
Prefiled and ordered printed; Offered 01-14-2026 26103512D
Referred to Committee on Commerce and Labor
Fiscal Impact Statement from State Corporation Commission (SB619)
Fiscal Impact Statement from State Corporation Commission (SB619)
Senate committee offered
Reported from Commerce and Labor with amendments and rereferred to Finance and Appropriations (9-Y 6-N)
Reported from Finance and Appropriations (11-Y 4-N)
Rules suspended
Constitutional reading dispensed Block Vote (on 1st reading) (40-Y 0-N 0-A)
Passed by for the day Block Vote (Voice Vote)
Read second time
Commerce and Labor Amendments agreed to
Engrossed by Senate as amended (Voice Vote)
Read third time and passed Senate (23-Y 16-N 0-A)
Placed on Calendar
Read first time
Referred to Committee on Labor and Commerce
Fiscal Impact Statement from State Corporation Commission (SB619)
Assigned HCL sub: Subcommittee #3
House subcommittee offered
Subcommittee recommends laying on the table (9-Y 0-N)
Left in Labor and Commerce
Verify the information
Our commitment to neutrality
We provide factual information only. We never tell you which politicians or bills to support, and we do not rank, score, or endorse anyone.