One day after the Louisiana Legislature advanced Senate Bill 490 - which would create a statutory pathway for private-use electrical networks, meaning on-site generation, storage and transmission for large industrial and digital infrastructure customers - Public Service Commissioner JP Coussan issued a directive to the LPSC staff during the April meeting to open their own rulemaking docket evaluating private use electrical networks, noting that the LPSC is the “agency with the constitutional mandate to regulate electric public utilities.”
Organizations across Louisiana have come out on opposite sides of SB 490. The Consumer Energy Alliance, a utility-backed organization, said the bill would allow certain entities to generate and distribute their own power across “contiguous, adjacent, or commonly controlled” properties that are not regulated by the LPSC, which could create a patch-work of disconnected power that would add layers of complexity without offering price savings for consumers. That same day, the Pelican Institute released a statement urging lawmakers to support SB 490, saying it creates a market-driven path for large load energy users to meet their own power needs without distorting the existing regulatory framework or by shifting costs onto Louisianans.
“Discussion at the task force also included potential statutory changes to ensure that Louisiana has the electrical generation needed to attract new large loads to Louisiana and more recently, how microgrids can serve these large loads,” Coussan said. “Incidentally, Senate Bill 490 has now been introduced into this 2026 regular session, proposing private-use electrical networks to enable construction of generation to support large industrial and digital infrastructure projects.”
No opposition was voiced to the directive.
The LPSC’s April meeting also featured a directive aimed at overhauling transparency in intervenor funding disclosures, a move that may leave clean energy advocates in the state debating if this is truly about accountability in the regulatory process or if it's a move to keep people out of the process.
Chair Eric Skrmetta’s undocketed Exhibit 19 would mandate full disclosure of foreign and outside funding to intervenors in the last five years. It requires tracing ultimate funding sources, including pass-through intermediaries, and making disclosures public in the docket with narrowly tailored protections for truly proprietary information. Noncompliance could mean losing intervener status or other sanctions, with an effective date within 60 days of adoption.
Staff would model the rule on existing Louisiana transparency provisions but adapt it to the Commission’s process. The measure frames itself as a tool to protect the integrity of the regulatory process, ratepayers, and the public interest, not a barrier to participation.
Jackson Voss of the Alliance for Affordable Energy supported greater transparency while cautioning about constitutional issues around donor privacy and urging narrowly tailored rules plus constructive stakeholder input. The Alliance noted specifically Americans for Prosperity v Bonto, a case where the US Supreme Court in 2021 struck down a policy from the California attorney general’s office requiring charities to disclose the names and information about their major donors.
The directive passed with Commissioner Lewis voting no, and staff will draft a rule for the June meeting.
The Commission also began the process of tackling Entergy Louisiana’s request to accelerate an already accelerated process for building more generation and transmission around the Meta project in Richland Parish.
Entergy Louisiana’s March application in item U-37882 sought to speed the Lightning Directive's certification process for a major generation and transmission project to serve Meta’s Richland Parish load, asking the Commission to direct the Administrative Hearings Division to adopt a procedural schedule that would enable consideration at the November 2026 Business & Executive (B&E) Session and filed a Rule 57 motion on April 2 requesting a hearing examiner to prepare a complete evidentiary record without a Commission recommendation for a December 2026 B&E consideration within an roughly eight‑month window.
During the meeting, Commissioner Foster Campbell - who represents PSC District 5 where the Meta project is under construction - presented a Rule 57 motion to establish a procedural schedule in U-37882 that would place relief for the request on the December 2026 B&E, with the Administrative Hearings Division serving as a hearing examiner and compiling the evidentiary record for de novo consideration, without an initial recommendation. Alaina DiLaura of the Alliance for Affordable Energy spoke against the directive, asking the Commission to deny Entergy’s premature rush and to retain independent Administrative Law Judge review to ensure a robust analysis of the project’s public-interest impacts.
DiLaura argued that a 1,200-page application warrants substantial time for review and that the sheer scale of the proposed transformation, which would affect generation mix, grid planning, resource planning, and rate-making, requires independent scrutiny. The Alliance also questioned the interim nature of the request, stressing the need for transparency and due process to ensure that ratepayers’ interests are protected and that the record supports a prudent, objective decision.
This directive also passed with Commissioner Lewis voting no.
Not to be left out, the meeting’s agenda also included SWEPCO’s System Improvement Plan (SIP) authorization and related rate recovery, including a potential interim rate increase. The SIP is designed to pay for new projects designed to strengthen the grid against weather events and improve vegetation management; these new projects include hardening 629 line-miles and clearing 6,095 line-miles of rights-of-way. The plan would affect SWEPCO customers in 11 parishes, including: Bossier, Bienville, Caddo, DeSoto, Grant, Nachitoches, Red River, Sabine, Webster, Winn and Vernon.
The proposed recovery would be collected through SWEPCO’s Fuel Adjustment Clause from June 1, 2026, through the SIP docket. Staff noted there is no assumed overlap between the extended spend and SIP cost recovery and did not issue a formal interim-rate recommendation; any interim increase would be subject to refunds and bonding. If approved, SWEPCO would post a bond, file an updated tariff within 30 days, and refrain from charging the interim rate until staff approves both bond and tariff.
Commissioner Skrmetta asked whether the interim charge is a real increase or a continuation; SWEPCO clarified the interim rate would be $2.91 per MWh (per thousand kilowatt-hours) and would end when SIP is approved and SIP cost recovery begins.
Questions focused on avoiding double recovery between interim vegetation management and SIP costs, and on metrics for pre-SIP progress. SWEPCO said the incremental $18 million would cease after SIP approval, with reporting to confirm no overlap. Staff requested pre-approval effectiveness metrics; SWEPCO described circuit-level reliability indicators and noted a third party analyzed SIP costs with a benefit-cost ratio of at least 1 for inclusion. SWEPCO also said it would not pursue a separate vegetation-management pilot, focusing instead on the interim rate and the SIP docket.
This application passed with Commissioner Lewis voting no.
You can watch Louisiana PSC meetings here: https://www.youtube.com/@louisianapsc.
The next Louisiana PSC meeting will take place on May 13 at 9:00am at the Galvez Building (602 North 5th Street, Baton Rouge).
Southern Renewable Energy Association and Powering Louisiana write these stories because regulatory decisions shape everyday life, from affordability to reliability, and yet they’re still often a mystery to the average consumer. Our aim is to provide transparent recaps of these meetings and show how you can participate in public comment or hearings. Keep up with all things Louisiana by following Powering Louisiana on Facebook and sign up for email updates.
