Committee Summary for House Science, Technology and Energy (02/18/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB692 00:05:46.240 - 8:04:47 AM	Public Hearing	relative to utility companies adopting advanced meters.	McGhee, Kat(D)[CT]2024
HB755 01:11:35.080 - 9:10:36 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the state's electric utility market.	McGhee, Kat(D)[CT]2024
HB761 02:28:08.920 - 10:27:09 AM	Public Hearing	relative to customer energy storage.	Cormen, Thomas(D)[CT]2024
HB723 04:11:56.439 - 12:10:57 PM	Executive Session	repealing the multi-use energy data platform.	Berezhny, Lex(R)[A+]2024
HB690 04:26:55.159 - 12:25:56 PM	Executive Session	directing the department of energy to investigate the state's withdrawal from ISO-New England and other strategy decisions that impact ratepayers in relation to New England's environmental policy.	Summers, James(R)[B+]2024
HB681 04:42:24.798 - 12:41:25 PM	Executive Session	establishing a statewide online energy data platform.	McGhee, Kat(D)[CT]2024
HB674 04:46:24.280 - 12:45:25 PM	Executive Session	relative to non-wire alternatives, time-of-use tariffs, and multi-year rate settings.	Caplan, Tony(D)[F]2024
HCR2 04:49:49.080 - 12:48:50 PM	Executive Session	declaring the development of advanced nuclear energy technology to be in the best interest of the state of New Hampshire and the United States.	Ammon, Keith(R)[A+]2024
HB759 05:02:42.920 - 1:01:43 PM	Public Hearing	relative to community energy generators.	Cormen, Thomas(D)[CT]2024
HB760 05:50:15.080 - 1:49:16 PM	Public Hearing	relative to utility default service.	Cormen, Thomas(D)[CT]2024

HB692: Representative Cat McGee, Hillsboro 35, Hollis, New Hampshire Support00:05:46.240 - 8:04:47 AM; Representative McGee introduced House Bill 692, emphasizing the importance of upgrading utility technology to support competitive energy markets. She explained that the bill requires electric distribution utilities that have not yet implemented advanced meter functionality to develop a plan for making such metering available on an opt-in basis by November 2026. The goal is to avoid a large-scale, costly meter replacement while still moving towards advanced metering capabilities that can support competitive energy suppliers. McGee noted that some utilities, like Eversource, are replacing meters incrementally and suggested that these could be replaced with advanced meters to speed up the transition. She addressed concerns about costs, stating that customers opting into advanced meters would cover any additional costs, ensuring no cost shift to other ratepayers. McGee also engaged in a Q&A session, discussing the integration of advanced metering into utility planning and the potential for time-of-day rates with advanced metering.
HB692: Matt Young, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only00:27:03.720 - 8:26:04 AM; Matt Young from the New Hampshire Department of Energy was called to testify next, but the transcript ends before his testimony begins. No further information is available on his testimony.
HB692: Matt Young, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only00:27:11.960 - 8:26:12 AM; Matt Young, an attorney with the New Hampshire Department of Energy, expressed a neutral stance on HB692 but highlighted several concerns. He noted that implementing Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) could be very expensive and challenging from a data gathering and billing system perspective. He also expressed concerns about cost shifting, suggesting that the bill's language might allow for costs to be shifted to customers who do not opt into the AMI system. Lastly, he raised a structural concern about the bill's intent, suggesting that the Department of Energy should be responsible for implementing policy implications rather than the Public Utilities Commission (PUC).
HB692: Chris Clifton Belo, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support00:35:13.320 - 8:34:14 AM; Chris Clifton Belo from the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire supported HB692, emphasizing the benefits of AMI and time-based rates. He referenced the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and subsequent PUC investigations, highlighting the potential for cost-effective incremental implementation of AMI using cloud-based services. Belo argued that this approach could avoid stranded costs associated with deploying legacy meters that would need to be replaced in the future. He also mentioned the potential for time-varying rates and their benefits for managing peak loads and providing value to customers.
HB692: Michael Lata, Eversource Energy Oppose00:53:52.119 - 8:52:53 AM; Michael Lata from Eversource Energy opposed HB692, stating concerns over the oversimplification of AMI networks and the high costs associated with their implementation. He detailed the components of an AMI system, including meters, communication networks, and billing systems, and noted that Eversource's current systems are not equipped to handle AMI functionality. Lata mentioned a feasibility study that showed significant costs and benefits variability. He emphasized the need for a strategic rollout to minimize costs and highlighted the risk of stranded costs with premature deployment. He also noted that Eversource already offers time-of-use rates, suggesting that the benefits of AMI are already partially available to customers.
HB692: Michael Lata, Eversource Energy Information Only00:53:52.119 - 8:52:53 AM; Michael Lata, representing Eversource Energy, concluded his testimony discussing the feasibility of replacing the entire network, including the billing system. He mentioned that partial replacement of the metering and billing system is not feasible due to the complexity and age of the current systems. He explained that Eversource operates two billing systems, one for large and one for smaller customers, which cannot be partially replaced. In response to a question about AMI meters functioning like traditional meters, he indicated that he would need to check if such functionality could be programmed into AMI meters.
HB692: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:02:55.200 - 9:01:56 AM; An unnamed speaker posed a question to Michael Lata regarding the possibility of partial replacement of the metering and billing system with a cloud-based system. Lata clarified that it is not possible due to the necessity of a comprehensive system for customer functionality.
HB692: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:04:26.039 - 9:03:27 AM; Another unnamed speaker asked about the routine replacement of meters and whether AMI meters could function under the existing billing system. Lata responded that the current systems could not handle the volume of data from AMI meters and would need to check if AMI meters could be programmed to function like AMR meters.
HB692: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:05:14.640 - 9:04:15 AM; An unnamed speaker inquired about Eversource's support for AMI meters in other states. Lata explained that they are deploying AMI meters in Massachusetts and have filed a plan in Connecticut, which has not yet been approved. He noted that each state has its own billing system, but the long-term goal is to have a single system across all three states.
HB692: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:05:59.720 - 9:05:00 AM; An unnamed speaker asked about the timeline for implementing AMI meters and back office system conversions. Lata clarified that the different time frames refer to the start of back office system conversion and the actual deployment of meters. He also addressed whether Eversource is currently implementing AMI meters, stating they are in the planning and exploration phase but not actively implementing.
HB692: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:07:46.640 - 9:06:47 AM; An unnamed speaker asked about the differences in billing systems between New Hampshire and other states where Eversource operates. Lata explained that each state has its own legacy system due to historical reasons, but there is a move towards standardized third-party platforms.
HB692: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:08:52.198 - 9:07:53 AM; An unnamed speaker discussed their recent installation of a new meter and questioned the potential for learning by doing with AMI meters. Lata acknowledged the value of learning by doing but noted the real challenges and limitations. He mentioned that Eversource can benefit from the experiences of their sister utilities in Massachusetts.
HB755: Kat McGee, Hillsboro 35, Hollis Support01:11:35.080 - 9:10:36 AM; Representative Kat McGee introduced HB755, emphasizing the importance of enabling competition in the energy market to drive costs down. She highlighted New Hampshire's history of deregulating the utility monopoly in 1996 to foster a competitive market. McGee explained that the bill aims to address issues like the lack of accurate price signals for net metered energy and the need for a Level Playing Field. She noted that the bill's provisions are aligned with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order 2222, which requires grid modernization. McGee stressed that the investments needed for modern energy markets are essential for innovation and cost reduction, though she acknowledged the high costs involved. She responded to questions about cost-benefit analysis by stating that the bill does not provide one directly but aims to enable competition, which historically drives costs down.
HB755: Matt Young, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only01:27:28.560 - 9:26:29 AM; Matt Young from the New Hampshire Department of Energy provided neutral testimony on HB755. He highlighted that many of the bill's provisions are being considered in ongoing Public Utilities Commission (PUC) dockets, which have involved significant time and cost. Young urged the committee to review the extensive information from these dockets before proceeding. He also pointed out the thoroughness of PUC proceedings, which involve answers under penalty of perjury, ensuring a high level of scrutiny. Young noted that not all parties from the PUC dockets were present at the hearing and expressed concerns about potential cost shifting if the bill were to pass. He concluded by mentioning other legislative efforts related to restructuring and encouraged the committee to consider these broader discussions.
HB755: Harrington Information Only01:30:26.480 - 9:29:27 AM; Harrington asked a question about the ISO tariffs and their effect starting November 1st, 2026, and whether any changes in current law are required to comply with FERC Order 2222 as implemented by ISO rules. The response from the Department of Energy indicated that they are not aware of any changes in current law necessary for compliance.
HB755: Schneller Information Only01:31:18.800 - 9:30:19 AM; Schneller asked Matt Young about concerns related to cost shifting in the context of the legislation. Young explained that the bill deals with the ability of suppliers to offer net metering programs and raised questions about whether the costs should be borne by default service customers who are not part of these programs.
HB755: Kaplan Information Only01:32:15.600 - 9:31:16 AM; Kaplan inquired about the cost shifting implications of the bill and the potential benefits of incentivizing distributed generation resources. Matt Young mentioned ongoing discussions in dockets but was unable to provide specific cost-benefit analysis details during the hearing, promising to follow up after the session.
HB755: Alec Oma, Unitil Oppose01:34:09.320 - 9:33:10 AM; Alec Oma from Unitil opposed the bill, stating that various departments within Unitil had issues with different aspects of the legislation. He highlighted concerns about the costs associated with integration, questioning the premise of ultimate savings for participants, and emphasized that many of these issues are already under review at the Public Utilities Commission. Oma also acknowledged the existing cost shifting with net metering and expressed concern about potential new avenues for similar discussions.
HB755: Dena Dennis, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support01:43:05.199 - 9:42:06 AM; Dena Dennis from the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire supported HB755, stating that it would enable true market competition for innovative services by leveraging local distributed energy. She explained that the bill aims to encourage cost-effective development of distributed energy, which would lower energy costs, increase customer choice and local control, and strengthen grid reliability. Dennis criticized the current limitations on utilities' software systems and business processes that hinder market competition and advocated for the reforms in HB755 to enable a competitive retail market.
HB755: Wendy Thomas Information Only01:50:40.320 - 9:49:41 AM; Wendy Thomas asked about the VD report's findings regarding cost shifting related to the initiative. The response indicated that the report concluded the value of distributed energy resources generally aligns with their current level of compensation but did not specifically address cost shifting.
HB755: Unknown Information Only01:59:33.119 - 9:58:34 AM; The speaker, whose name was not provided, asked a question about whether the bill moves towards net metering for community power and third-party suppliers. They were informed that the bill would indeed open up net metering to these groups, potentially reducing cost shifting by allowing competitive suppliers and community power aggregations to contract with these resources, thereby not requiring utility compensation.
HB755: Representative Kaplan Information Only02:00:33.040 - 9:59:34 AM; Representative Kaplan questioned the intent of the bill, suggesting it aims to use market forces to liberate benefits currently held internally by utilities, encouraging growth in distributed generation resources. The response confirmed the intent to use market signals to drive more optimal use of resources and investments, without putting ratepayers at risk.
HB755: Bill Babber of Dover Support02:02:09.280 - 10:01:10 AM; Bill Babber from Dover expressed support for the bill, drawing from his expertise in IT systems. He argued for simplifying power delivery systems through competition, criticizing the utilities' use of outdated technology. He suggested that shareholders should bear the cost of modernizing systems rather than ratepayers, and endorsed the bill for opening up information flow between customers and producers.
HB755: Unknown Information Only02:07:38.440 - 10:06:39 AM; The speaker, whose name was not provided, asked about the cost and responsibility of upgrading billing systems to accommodate the changes proposed by the bill. It was noted that while some utilities have moved to third-party systems, the responsibility for modernizing technology should fall on shareholders to maintain competitiveness.
HB755: Representative Corman Information Only02:10:18.040 - 10:09:19 AM; Representative Corman, with a background in computer science, asked about the elements of billing systems that might incur significant costs. The response highlighted the need for agile and robust systems, suggesting that major vendors like SAP can adapt to state needs more efficiently than in-house systems, and that shareholders should bear the cost of making systems suitable for modern needs.
HB755: Jeremy Clark of New Hampshire Electric Cooperative Oppose02:13:01.119 - 10:12:02 AM; Jeremy Clark from the New Hampshire Electric Cooperative testified in opposition to the bill, citing concerns about the high costs of implementing upgrades to metering, load settlement, billing, and customer service systems. He also mentioned a failed attempt at a transactive energy rate due to billing system issues and low member interest. Clark expressed concerns about cost shifting and the complexity of the proposed system, which he felt was difficult for members to understand.
HB755: Unknown Information Only02:16:23.639 - 10:15:24 AM; The speaker, whose name was not provided, asked about the uptake of time-of-use rates at the Cooperative. Clark explained that while traditional time-of-use rates are available, the hourly pricing of the transactive energy rate was too complex for members to understand, leading to low uptake.
HB755: Michael Lata of Eversource Oppose02:19:30.359 - 10:18:31 AM; Michael Lata from Eversource testified in opposition to the bill, arguing that it would radically change load settlement with ISO New England, increasing costs for all customers to benefit one unregulated entity. He emphasized that current processes accurately account for load reductions and savings are shared among all customers. Lata expressed concerns about the bill creating a new class of 'load reducers' and requiring significant investments in new metering and accounting systems, potentially leading to inaccurate load settlement and cost shifting among customer groups.
HB761: Tom Corman, Grafton 15 (Ward three of Lebanon) Support02:28:08.920 - 10:27:09 AM; Tom Corman introduced HB761, focusing on the importance of energy storage. He explained how storage can time-shift energy generation, using his personal example of solar panels and battery storage at home. He highlighted the inability to net meter from batteries currently and how this bill aims to allow such a practice. Corman also discussed the evolving technology of batteries, mentioning lithium-ion, iron-air, and solid-state batteries, and their potential impact on energy storage and net metering. He emphasized that the bill seeks to enable the Department of Energy to adopt rules and the Public Utilities Commission to approve tariffs for net metering from batteries.
HB761: Representative Harrington Information Only02:32:01.880 - 10:31:02 AM; Representative Harrington asked Tom Corman about the physics of electricity from the grid's perspective, questioning whether it matters if the electricity comes directly from solar panels or is stored in batteries first. Corman responded by explaining the benefit of storing energy and releasing it when needed by the grid, rather than just the physical transmission of electricity.
HB761: Representative Rolds Information Only02:33:40.279 - 10:32:41 AM; Representative Rolds inquired about the technological risk for battery owners under HB761, noting that the bill is technology neutral. Corman confirmed that battery owners would bear the risk of their technology choices and reiterated the potential increase in battery use as technology advances, particularly with solid-state batteries.
HB761: Representative Migy Information Only02:36:14.439 - 10:35:15 AM; Representative Migy asked if the bill aims to establish a statutory segment on storage, to which Corman clarified that the bill seeks to enable net metering for storage, which is currently not allowed.
HB761: Matt Young, Department of Energy Information Only02:37:10.880 - 10:36:11 AM; Matt Young from the Department of Energy stated a neutral stance on HB761 but raised structural concerns, particularly about the department's jurisdiction over net metering as mentioned in the bill. He suggested working with Representative Corman to address these issues and mentioned ongoing rule development. He also noted potential changes needed in the net metering law and the existence of an energy storage task force bill in the Senate, suggesting that some discussions might occur there.
HB761: Representative Harrington Information Only02:38:50.399 - 10:37:51 AM; Representative Harrington asked Matt Young if the Department of Energy had any issues with the principle of allowing energy storage to participate in net metering. Young mentioned some concerns about the source, compensation, and storage of energy but indicated that these could be addressed in a task force or through the rules process.
HB761: David Hemway, Webster Information Only02:39:58.479 - 10:38:59 AM; David Hemway introduced himself and mentioned that he provided written testimony earlier, which included charts and was not going to read through it during the hearing.
HB761: David Hemway, Webster Support02:40:19.800 - 10:39:20 AM; David Hemway, from Webster, New Hampshire, and chair of the select board, testified in favor of HB761. He highlighted his background as an engineer with personal experience in solar and battery storage. Hemway explained the importance of storage for grid resiliency, optimization, efficiency, load reduction, and rate stability. He discussed peak demand response programs and how they work with storage, emphasizing the financial benefits of such systems. He also mentioned the 'duck curve' issue, suggesting that the bill could help manage this by incentivizing the use of storage during off-peak times to flatten demand curves, ultimately benefiting all ratepayers by reducing peak costs and supporting baseload generation.
HB761: Dena Dennis, Community Power Coalition Support02:44:33.359 - 10:43:34 AM; Dena Dennis, representing the Community Power Coalition, supported HB761 for its clarification of roles between the Department of Energy and the Public Utilities Commission, particularly concerning energy storage. She noted that the bill aligns with recent legislative actions and national best practices for interconnection of energy resources. Dennis highlighted the potential of the bill to streamline regulatory processes, increase transparency, and enable innovation by capturing the benefits of storage. She also mentioned the study from the Department of Energy that found increased value from combining storage with distributed generation.
HB761: Sam Evans Brown, Clean Energy New Hampshire Support02:48:26.720 - 10:47:27 AM; Sam Evans Brown from Clean Energy New Hampshire expressed support for HB761, describing it as a step towards establishing a market structure for energy storage. He noted that despite past legislative efforts, progress on developing price signals for customer-sited storage has been slow. Brown referenced an ongoing investigation by the Department of Energy and mentioned the Liberty Utilities battery storage pilot as a successful example. He stressed the importance of storage in managing grid infrastructure costs and providing rate relief, urging the committee to consider the bill as a means to establish such programs.
HB723: Representative Bney Information Only04:11:56.439 - 12:10:57 PM; Representative Bney moved for HB723 to be judged as ought to pass. He briefly discussed the benefits of the bill, noting that the primary beneficiaries of the proposed data platform would be the Department of Energy and potentially the federal government. He pointed out that the federal government had previously declined to fund the project, and questioned the clarity and extent of benefits to individual customers and utilities.
HB723: Representative Fog Information Only04:11:56.439 - 12:10:57 PM; Representative Fog seconded the motion to pass HB723. No additional comments were provided by this speaker.
HB723: Representative McGee Oppose04:13:38.279 - 12:12:39 PM; Representative McGee opposed the motion to pass HB723, arguing that the bill would hinder access to important aggregated energy data needed for various Public Utilities Commission cases. He emphasized the project's long-term development and the potential for significant benefits, such as improved energy planning and cost savings. McGee was concerned that passing the bill would eliminate the possibility of securing necessary data, thus limiting the ability to make informed decisions about the project's benefits.
HB723: Representative Corman Oppose04:16:43.439 - 12:15:44 PM; Representative Corman opposed the motion to pass HB723, stating a desire for a cost-benefit analysis before making a decision. He noted that the cost of the project was still unknown as the RFP had just been released, and suggested retaining the bill until costs were clearer. Corman also expressed the view that the platform's full potential and benefits would be better understood once implemented, drawing a comparison to his experience with new technology in the past.
HB723: Representative Reels Oppose04:18:32.239 - 12:17:33 PM; Representative Reels expressed opposition to the motion to kill the bill, arguing that it is premature to end the development of the data platform. They highlighted the five and a half years of effort that went into the project, which began with legislative action and continued through the Public Utilities Commission and volunteer efforts from various stakeholders. They stressed that the project is nearing the stage of issuing an RFP, which would provide concrete cost data and enable a proper cost-benefit analysis. Reels also mentioned the concept of 'market transformation' from a previous energy policy bill, suggesting that the data platform could facilitate this transformation and help achieve state energy goals. They concluded by supporting retaining the bill until more information is available later in the year.
HB723: Representative Bernardi Oppose04:21:39.119 - 12:20:40 PM; Representative Bernardi initially considered supporting the retention of the bill as suggested by Representative Corman. However, upon learning about the existence of similar programs in other states and commercial entities, they argued that it is unnecessary to spend money on the proposed data platform when alternative, cost-effective solutions are available. They believe that these alternatives could provide the necessary resources without the need for additional state expenditure.
HB723: Representative Swanson Oppose04:22:29.720 - 12:21:30 PM; Representative Swanson expressed skepticism about the availability of the alternative solutions mentioned by others. They agreed with many points made by their colleagues but chose not to repeat them. Swanson argued that there is no compelling reason to abandon the capability of the data platform at this time, especially as they are still seeking data. They voted against the motion to pass the bill.
HB723: Representative McGee Oppose04:23:00.880 - 12:22:01 PM; Representative McGee, involved from the inception of the project, argued for the importance of the Statewide Energy Data Platform. They noted other states like Texas and New York are working on similar initiatives, but emphasized that New Hampshire's system is uniquely designed to access all state energy data. McGee highlighted the complexity of energy management and the necessity of data visibility for analysis and planning. They referenced potential savings outlined by Dunky and stressed the project's good management to date. McGee requested the committee to vote down the motion to pass the bill, suggesting instead to retain it to further evaluate the project's benefits.
HB690: Representative Summers Support04:26:55.159 - 12:25:56 PM; Representative Summers moved to pass House Bill 690, directing the Department of Energy to investigate New Hampshire's potential withdrawal from ISO New England and other strategic decisions affecting ratepayers in relation to New England's environmental policy.
HB690: Representative Matson Support04:26:55.159 - 12:25:56 PM; Representative Matson seconded the motion to pass House Bill 690.
HB690: Bill Sponsor Support04:27:15.119 - 12:26:16 PM; The bill sponsor explained that the purpose of HB690 is to allow the Department of Energy to conduct an investigation into the pros and cons of potentially leaving ISO New England. The Consumer Advocate supported the bill and provided a map illustrating the complexity of the ISO New England platform. The Department of Defense (DoD) was neutral but willing to investigate. Public generators opposed the bill, citing that similar investigations had already been conducted in Connecticut and Maine.
HB690: Unknown Speaker Support04:28:00.520 - 12:27:01 PM; The speaker elaborated on the investigations conducted by Maine and Connecticut regarding ISO New England. Maine found issues with the status quo, including rising energy prices and over-reliance on natural gas, but concluded that leaving would be more costly. Connecticut identified barriers to clean energy development and is still investigating the benefits of ISO New England participation. The speaker argued that New Hampshire should conduct its own investigation due to its unique data and situation.
HB690: Representative Harrington Support04:30:23.560 - 12:29:24 PM; Representative Harrington discussed the influence of Massachusetts and Connecticut on ISO New England policies, particularly their push towards zero emissions. He highlighted potential impacts such as the need for extensive renewable energy infrastructure and the high cost of maintaining dispatchable resources that would run infrequently. He suggested exploring alternatives like forming a new ISO with Maine or Vermont.
HB690: Representative Wendy Oppose04:33:12.400 - 12:32:13 PM; Representative Wendy criticized the bill for being poorly written with no specified end date or recipient for the report. She questioned the $200,000 cost estimate and argued that merging with another state to form a new ISO would increase customer rates. She also dismissed the Department of Energy's neutral stance on the bill as irrelevant.
HB690: Representative Kaplan Oppose04:34:49.438 - 12:33:50 PM; Representative Kaplan argued that the bill is unnecessary because similar investigations have already been conducted by Maine and Connecticut, which concluded that leaving ISO New England was not beneficial. He questioned the value of repeating these studies and pointed out that the Department of Energy had indicated that the study would not lead to a recommendation to leave ISO New England.
HB690: Vice Chair Thomas Support04:36:31.799 - 12:35:32 PM; Vice Chair Thomas expressed support for the bill, arguing that it could provide a definitive answer to recurring questions about ISO New England, potentially reducing the frequency of similar bills in the future. He viewed the investigation as a way to settle the debate once and for all.
HB690: Representative McGee Oppose04:37:04.561 - 12:36:05 PM; Representative McGee expressed skepticism about the bill, questioning the cost and feasibility of leaving the regional grid. He argued that the bill represents a 'wild goose chase' and suggested focusing on solving existing problems within the current grid system instead of exploring potentially costly alternatives.
HB690: Chairman Information Only04:38:26.320 - 12:37:27 PM; The Chairman discussed missing a field trip to ISO's control room but having seen Eversource's control room, suggesting ISO's would be similar. He expressed concerns about the cost and feasibility of building a state-wide control system, questioning who would pay for it. He acknowledged the bill's intent to study not just leaving ISO New England but also understanding the impact of other New England states on New Hampshire's energy policy.
HB690: Representative Harrington Support04:40:00.040 - 12:39:01 PM; Representative Harrington supported the bill, emphasizing the importance of understanding how ISO New England's policy changes, particularly the phasing out of natural gas, would affect New Hampshire. He pointed out the relevance of studying the impact of potential offshore windmill projects and the need to consider what happens if New Hampshire stays in ISO under new policies.
HB681: Representative Bney Oppose04:42:24.798 - 12:41:25 PM; Representative Bney moved to judge HB681 as inexpedient to legislate, citing concerns from the Department of Energy regarding cost controls moving from the Public Utilities to the platform governing council. He also mentioned that another bill, 723, had already been passed, reducing the urgency of HB681.
HB681: Representative McGee Information Only04:43:11.200 - 12:42:12 PM; Representative McGee explained that HB681 was initially about transitioning decision-making to a governance council rather than keeping an open public utilities case. However, he noted that since the project's advancement was no longer imminent, the need for the bill was less urgent.
HB674: Representative Harrington Oppose04:46:24.280 - 12:45:25 PM; Representative Harrington supported the motion to judge HB674 as inexpedient to legislate, arguing that the issue should be handled through the ongoing process at the Public Utilities Commission rather than through legislation, due to the complexity of the issue.
HB674: Representative Kaplan Support04:47:09.760 - 12:46:10 PM; Representative Kaplan opposed the motion to judge HB674 as inexpedient to legislate, advocating for the bill's retention. He believed it was the legislature's duty to set these matters in statute rather than relying on the Public Utilities Commission, and suggested revisiting the bill in September for potential amendments.
HCR2: Vice Chair Thomas Support04:49:49.080 - 12:48:50 PM; Vice Chair Thomas supported the motion to pass HCR2, arguing that it sends a strong message to potential investors about New Hampshire's interest in exploring new types of nuclear energy. He highlighted the economic and energy stability benefits of nuclear technology and the importance of encouraging education and training in this field.
HCR2: Representative Wendy Thomas Oppose04:51:29.200 - 12:50:30 PM; Representative Wendy Thomas opposed HCR2, citing recent layoffs in Washington affecting nuclear industry monitoring and suggesting that addressing federal management of nuclear devices should precede state-level actions.
HCR2: Vice Chair Thomas Support04:52:14.520 - 12:51:15 PM; Vice Chair Thomas responded to Representative Wendy Thomas's concerns by noting that the layoffs were being addressed with rehiring efforts. He reiterated the importance of the resolution in encouraging education and training for the nuclear field.
HCR2: Representative Schneller Support04:52:44.600 - 12:51:45 PM; Representative Schneller supported HCR2, citing a study from the Pioneer Institute which indicated that New Hampshire was attracting talent and capital, necessary for advancing nuclear efforts. He viewed the resolution as beneficial for positioning New Hampshire to capitalize on these resources.
HCR2: Unnamed Speaker Support04:53:41.480 - 12:52:42 PM; The speaker expressed a change in their stance on nuclear energy, influenced by technological advancements and the necessity for reliable zero-carbon base load power. They mentioned their late wife's strong opposition to nuclear energy and how they are now voting in favor of HCR2, recognizing the evolution in technology and the need for offshore wind and other technologies.
HCR2: Representative Lelle Support04:55:11.840 - 12:54:12 PM; Representative Lelle supported HCR2, citing global trends towards nuclear energy. They mentioned France's long-term reliance on nuclear power and Japan's decision to recommission a 50-year-old nuclear plant, suggesting that New Hampshire could safely follow suit.
HCR2: Representative Parshall Oppose04:55:57.638 - 12:54:58 PM; Representative Parshall opposed HCR2, citing the failure of a small modular reactor project in Utah and concerns over nuclear waste. They argued that focusing on nuclear energy would detract from investing in proven technologies like solar, wind, and hydro.
HCR2: Representative McGee Support04:57:26.520 - 12:56:27 PM; Representative McGee supported HCR2, acknowledging the global efforts to develop small modular reactors and the necessity of clean base load power for achieving net zero emissions. They viewed the bill as a harmless declarative statement in favor of advanced nuclear technology.
HCR2: Representative Harrington Information Only04:59:02.718 - 12:58:03 PM; Representative Harrington provided information on ongoing nuclear projects, including efforts to reopen Three Mile Island and other plants in the Midwest. They noted significant investments in nuclear energy and mentioned the high number of startups in the U.S. working on small modular reactors.
HB759: Tom Corman, representing Grafton 15, Lebanon Support05:02:42.920 - 1:01:43 PM; Representative Tom Corman introduced HB759, which was drafted by the Community Power Coalition. The bill aims to define and integrate community generators into the statute, allowing them to offset the load obligation of municipal or county aggregations. He shared his personal experience with solar panels and the desire to net meter with Lebanon Community Power, which this bill would facilitate.
HB759: Matt Young and Mark Tuscano, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only05:07:19.000 - 1:06:20 PM; Matt Young and Mark Tuscano from the New Hampshire Department of Energy expressed a neutral stance on HB759. They highlighted concerns about the lack of a lower limit in the definition of a community generator and the use of maximum rated export capacity instead of nameplate capacity. They are open to working with the legislature to refine these aspects of the bill.
HB759: Representative Harrington Information Only05:09:25.080 - 1:08:26 PM; Representative Harrington sought clarification on the practical changes HB759 would bring. Matt Young explained that the bill would allow individuals to participate as community generators, helping offset the load obligation of aggregations. They also discussed concerns about tracking and accounting, as well as interconnection requirements.
HB759: Sam Evans Brown with Clean Energy New Hampshire Support05:12:15.520 - 1:11:16 PM; Sam Evans Brown from Clean Energy New Hampshire expressed support for HB759, highlighting its potential to simplify the process for community-scale generation projects. He explained that the current system requires generators to engage in complex accounting to line up off-takers, whereas the proposed bill would allow these generators to be seen as a load offset for community power aggregation, benefiting all members of the aggregation. He noted the administrative burdens and costs associated with the current system and praised the bill as an elegant solution to increase access to distributed energy resources for all ratepayers, not just homeowners. He mentioned some potential issues with the language around peak capacity but overall encouraged the committee to consider the bill favorably.
HB759: Dena Dennis with the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support05:19:12.638 - 1:18:13 PM; Dena Dennis from the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire, accompanied by Clifton Below, supported HB759. She emphasized that the bill provides a market-based alternative to utility default service net metering, offering new options for customers and local generators up to 5 megawatts, potentially lowering costs for all ratepayers. She highlighted that the bill expands options to competitive suppliers and community power aggregations, which could benefit all consumers by reducing wholesale power and transmission costs. She also discussed changes in how net metered generation exports are settled, proposing a starting point for line loss adjustments due to delays in implementation by the commission.
HB759: Clifton Below with the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support05:21:31.000 - 1:20:32 PM; Clifton Below, also from the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire, supported HB759 and clarified that the bill's approach to load settlement is not unusual, citing examples from Texas and Maine. He discussed the importance of determining line loss adjustments, noting the lack of action on this issue for nearly five years. He explained the concept of maximum rated export capacity and its relevance to the bill, emphasizing that it's an update to accommodate modern inverter-based technologies. He distinguished the bill's approach from the municipal host model, noting that it avoids cost shifting and provides more options for projects in the 1 to 5 megawatt range. He cited the example of Lebanon's landfill gas to energy project to illustrate the benefits of the proposed legislation.
HB759: Kaplan Information Only05:34:30.080 - 1:33:31 PM; Kaplan raised a concern about the billing issue mentioned by the representative from Lebanon, questioning whether the billing for customer generators would be a problem. He was informed that billing is not an issue as competitive suppliers are capable of billing outside the utility system, though it would be ideal to use the utility system.
HB759: McGee Information Only05:35:19.958 - 1:34:20 PM; Representative McGee pointed out a typographical error in the bill's text, specifically on page two, line seven, where 'load servicing entity' should be 'load serving entity'. This correction was noted for potential amendment.
HB759: Jody Grimas, Granite State Hydro Power Association Information Only05:36:53.600 - 1:35:54 PM; Jody Grimas expressed concerns about a specific change in the bill on page one, line 14, where the phrase 'total Peak generating capacity' is replaced with new language. She highlighted that the existing phrase has been interpreted as nameplate capacity and works well, expressing worry about unintended consequences of the change.
HB759: Unnamed Speaker Information Only05:37:48.240 - 1:36:49 PM; An unnamed speaker further discussed the concern about changing the language from 'total Peak generating capacity' to new language, suggesting that the existing language is clear and well-understood. They suggested reverting to the original language to avoid unintended consequences.
HB759: Michael Lata, Eversource Oppose05:40:06.360 - 1:39:07 PM; Michael Lata from Eversource opposed HB759, expressing concerns about several concepts within the bill that have been discussed in earlier testimonies and are part of active adjudications. He specifically criticized the arbitrary reduction of line loss by half, the need for a line loss study, and the potential erosion of the Public Utilities Commission's role. He also noted that provisions allowing for the assignment of energy output to other load assets could violate federal jurisdiction.
HB759: McGee Information Only05:43:50.478 - 1:42:51 PM; Representative McGee questioned Michael Lata about the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regarding interstate versus intrastate energy transactions. Lata mentioned that this issue is part of ongoing legal discussions in the LEAPA docket.
HB759: Thomas Corman, Grafton 15, Lebanon Support05:45:45.160 - 1:44:46 PM; Representative Thomas Corman introduced House Bill 760, which aims to ensure that costs associated with utility default service are recovered only from default service customers and not from those on community power or other competitive suppliers. He explained the potential for increased volatility in utility costs due to market changes and the need for timely recovery of costs within a year.
HB759: Jim G Information Only05:50:09.798 - 1:49:10 PM; Jim G, a former chair of the committee, was introduced but his testimony was not captured in the provided transcript snippet.
HB760: Jim G from Atkinson, New Hampshire Support05:50:15.080 - 1:49:16 PM; Jim G, a former legislator and current member of multiple energy-related boards and commissions, supports HB760. He emphasizes his extensive experience in the energy sector, having served as a legislator from 2004 to 2012, chairing the relevant committee, and currently serving on the Residential Ratepayers Advisory Board, the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire (CPCNH), and the Atkinson Energy Commission. He argues that the bill aligns with his belief that electric rates can be reduced through efficient management and competition. He stresses the importance of asking how legislation impacts rates and criticizes cost-shifting and subsidies, advocating for free market competition as seen in the success of community power programs. He urges the committee to vote 'ought to pass' on the bill, emphasizing its potential to maintain lower electric rates and prevent ratepayers from bearing unnecessary costs.
HB760: Alex Spidel from the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission Oppose05:56:26.320 - 1:55:27 PM; Alex Spidel opposes HB760, highlighting that the issues addressed in the bill are currently under active adjudication at the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). He notes that the proposed changes to default service reconciliation are being considered in several open dockets, including proposals from Eversource and Unitil. Spidel argues that the PUC has not yet decided on the reasonableness of applying these charges to distribution consumers. He also expresses concern about the bill's proposal to repeal certain sections of RSA 374-F, which he believes are important for maintaining flexibility and protecting the interests of ratepayers. He advises the committee to allow the PUC to complete its process before legislative intervention.
HB760: Matt Young from the New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:17:24.840 - 2:16:25 PM; Matt Young remains neutral on HB760 but echoes the PUC's concerns about the bill's potential impact on ongoing adjudications. He emphasizes the importance of default service as a safety net and questions whether the PUC has a duty to protect it. Young warns of a potential 'default service death spiral,' where increasing costs could lead to mass migration away from default service, leaving remaining customers to bear higher costs. He clarifies that default service is not intended to be competitive but rather a pass-through service, and encourages the committee to consider the broader implications of the bill on all ratepayers.
HB760: Michael Lata from Eversource Energy Oppose06:21:23.400 - 2:20:24 PM; Michael Lata opposes HB760, arguing that it could interfere with an active adjudication at the PUC. He explains that utilities do not profit from default service and are directed by the PUC to procure it in a specific manner. Lata discusses the recent changes in procurement strategy, which include purchasing a portion of energy from the market to mitigate risk premiums. He contends that the bill could create an illegal construct by prohibiting the recovery of prudently incurred costs and criticizes the bill's arbitrary time limits on recovering overcollections. He suggests that the PUC should retain flexibility in managing these charges.
HB760: Matthew Fum from the Office of the Consumer Advocate Support06:30:55.080 - 2:29:56 PM; Matthew Fum supports HB760, arguing that it aligns with the principle that costs should be assigned to those who cause them. He criticizes the current system where residential customers might be burdened with costs from other customer classes, especially in light of the migration to community power. Fum addresses concerns raised by the PUC and DOE, suggesting that the bill does not eliminate necessary provisions but rather clarifies them. He argues against socializing costs and supports the bill's potential to protect competitive suppliers and prevent a default service death spiral.
HB760: David Greer from Constellation Energy Support06:37:19.920 - 2:36:20 PM; David Greer supports HB760, emphasizing the need to prevent under and over collections from being applied to non-bypassable charges, which unfairly affect competitive suppliers' customers. He suggests that the bill should go further by preventing default service from being procured on volatile wholesale markets. Greer argues that this would stabilize default service rates and prevent artificial price swings that could harm competitive markets. He recommends amendments to ensure default service minimizes customer risk and supports competitive markets.
HB760: Dena Dennis and Henry Heeren from Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support06:46:44.240 - 2:45:45 PM; Dena Dennis and Henry Heeren support HB760, arguing that it protects the competitive supply market by ensuring that community power and competitive supply customers are not forced to subsidize utility supply rates. They dispute claims that community power aggregation caused recent undercollections and criticize the forecasting methodologies used by utilities. They warn that artificially low utility supply rates could halt the growth of New Hampshire's competitive market and share the impact of recent rate increases on their ability to launch new programs. They urge the committee to pass the bill to uphold the goals of the restructuring act.
HB760: Howard Khed from Rye, New Hampshire Support06:52:05.798 - 2:51:06 PM; Howard Khed supports HB760, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a competitive market for electricity supply. He highlights the significant savings Rye has achieved through community power and expresses concern about utilities having an unfair advantage in sourcing supply. Khed argues against socializing overcollections and undercollections, likening it to tax returns. He stresses the need for competitive electricity rates to support New Hampshire's economic growth and increasing electrification demands, urging the committee to support the bill to preserve competitive electric suppliers.
HB760: Cliff Sammat from Exeter, New Hampshire, representing the Exeter Energy Committee Support06:56:03.920 - 2:55:04 PM; Cliff Sammat supports HB760, arguing that it clarifies the limited purpose of default service and prohibits cost-shifting. He emphasizes the risk introduced by recent changes in procurement directed by the PUC and asserts that such risks should be borne by those causing them. Sammat expresses concern about the potential for utilities to underestimate default service costs, leading to moral hazard. He highlights the benefits Exeter has seen from community power and warns against undermining its viability. He urges the committee to support the bill to protect competitive power initiatives.

Vose, Michael(Chairman)(R)[A]2024	Bernardy, JD(Clerk)(R)[A-]2024	Thomas, Douglas(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2024
Notter, Jeanine(R)[A]2024	Schneller, John(R)	Harrington, Michael(R)[A]2024
McGhee, Kat(D)[CT]2024	Ploszaj, Tom(R)[A-]2024	Mattson, Rita(R)
Raynolds, Ned(D)[CT]2024	Thomas, Wendy(D)[CT]2024	Parshall, Lucius(D)[CT]2024
Berezhny, Lex(R)[A+]2024	Caplan, Tony(D)[F]2024	Summers, James(R)[B+]2024
Cormen, Thomas(D)[CT]2024	Swanson, Dale(D)	Larochelle, John(D)