Committee Summary for Senate Energy and Natural Resources (02/18/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB229 00:04:44.759 - 8:03:41 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the sale of uninspected bison, red deer, and elk meat.	Pearl, Howard (R)[C+]2024
SB229 00:19:08.520 - 8:18:05 AM	Executive Session	relative to the sale of uninspected bison, red deer, and elk meat.	Pearl, Howard (R)[C+]2024
SB233 00:20:46.440 - 8:19:43 AM	Public Hearing	establishing an energy reliability and large-scale storage task force.	Watters, David(D)[CT]2024
SB234 00:43:48.400 - 8:42:45 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the electric assistance program.	Watters, David(D)[CT]2024
SB226 01:02:01.480 - 9:00:58 AM	Public Hearing	suspending applications for new landfills and establishing a committee to study the feasibility of incinerating solid waste.	Rochefort, David(R)
SB227 02:00:26.199 - 9:59:23 AM	Public Hearing	relative to site setbacks for landfills.	Rochefort, David(R)

SB229: Senator Kevin AAR, District 12 Support00:04:44.759 - 8:03:41 AM; Senator Kevin AAR introduced SB229, emphasizing that the bill allows the sale of uninspected bison, red deer, and elk meat and removes the prospective repeal of provisions governing such sales. He mentioned his role as a co-sponsor and expressed confidence in additional testimonies supporting the bill.
SB229: Nick Veis, River Vale Farm, Erol Support00:05:53.039 - 8:04:50 AM; Nick Veis, owner of River Vale Farm in Erol, New Hampshire, testified in support of SB229. He shared his 30-year experience in farming, particularly with bison for 28 years and elk for the last 10 years. Veis explained how these animals are environmentally friendly and self-sustaining, and detailed his farm's practices of selling meat directly from the farm, to restaurants, and now wishing to expand to retail stores. He emphasized the organic and hormone-free nature of his products and the increasing demand for them.
SB229: Rob Johnson, New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation Support00:10:30.440 - 8:09:27 AM; Rob Johnson, representing the New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation, supported SB229. He clarified that at restaurants, the menu indicates if the meat is uninspected, ensuring consumer awareness. He discussed the safety concerns regarding handling uninspected meat, suggesting that state officials could provide more precise information. Johnson highlighted the benefits of the bill for farmers, including reduced stress on animals by harvesting them in their home environment and the economic advantages of direct farm-to-table sales.
SB229: Unnamed Speaker from Carroll County Information Only00:14:32.240 - 8:13:29 AM; An unnamed speaker from Carroll County provided information on the challenges farmers face due to the lack of FDA-certified processing facilities. This situation increases costs and logistical difficulties for farmers, supporting the need for legislation like SB229 to ease these burdens.
SB229: Michelle Roberge, Bureau Chief for Public Health Protection, Division of Public Health Services Information Only00:15:59.480 - 8:14:56 AM; Michelle Roberge introduced herself and passed the floor to Erica Davis, indicating their roles within the Department of Health and Human Services. No specific testimony on the bill was provided by her.
SB229: Erica Davis, Administrator for the Food Protection Section, Department of Health and Human Services Information Only00:16:45.720 - 8:15:42 AM; Erica Davis responded to a question about the safety of handling game meat. She explained that New Hampshire has adopted the 2017 Federal food code, which includes parameters for the safe handling of all products, particularly meat products. She detailed the standards from product intake to cooking, and emphasized the specific parameters within the food code for game meat such as red deer, elk, and bison, which include safe cooking instructions and handling of raw product to prevent cross-contamination.
SB229: Unnamed Speaker, Prime Sponsor of SB229 Support00:18:20.480 - 8:17:17 AM; The prime sponsor apologized for being late due to an unplanned meeting. They expressed strong support for SB229, believing it would help address issues with meat processing in New Hampshire. The sponsor hoped the committee would view the bill favorably and move it forward.
SB229: Unnamed Committee Member Support00:19:08.520 - 8:18:05 AM; The committee member discussed the safety concerns around chronic wasting disease in red deer and elk, and the lack of slaughtering services in the North Country. They felt confident in the safety measures in place and believed the bill could help farmers by providing necessary services, expressing support for moving the bill forward with an ought to pass (OTP) recommendation.
SB233: Senator David Waters, District 4 Support00:20:46.440 - 8:19:43 AM; Senator Waters introduced SB233, highlighting the challenges facing the energy market such as reliability shortages and growing electricity demand. He emphasized the potential of long-duration storage technologies to address these issues and reduce dependency on fossil fuels. He discussed the need for a task force to study these technologies and their integration into the electricity supply management, proposing a new chapter in the RSA with specific definitions and a repeal of some existing sections. He also mentioned the funding from the renewable energy fund for consultants and the urgency of the task force's work.
SB233: Senator Perl Information Only00:26:14.399 - 8:25:11 AM; Senator Perl asked for clarification on the repeal date of the task force, which was confirmed to be December 1st, 2025. The discussion also touched on the definitional changes and the new chapter in the RSA.
SB233: Megan Stone, Legislative Liaison, Department of Energy Information Only00:27:18.159 - 8:26:15 AM; Megan Stone stated that the Department of Energy is neutral on SB233. She raised a concern about the time frame for hiring a consultant, noting it could take up to 6 months and might impact the consultant's ability to contribute effectively to the task force's duties. She was open to questions and suggested extending the task force's timeline if necessary.
SB233: James Andrews, CEO, Granite Shore Power Support00:30:08.080 - 8:29:05 AM; James Andrews testified in support of SB233, explaining the region's high energy costs, ineffective market designs, and the shift from summer to winter peak loads due to electrification. He discussed the dependency on natural gas and oil during winter, the decline in generating capacity, and the need for quick start dispatchable and storage resources to sustain a reliable power market. He urged New Hampshire to proactively identify solutions before an energy crisis occurs.
SB233: Unnamed Speaker, representing multiple energy clients Support00:33:28.279 - 8:32:25 AM; The speaker supported SB233 and discussed the urgency of addressing reliability in the energy sector. They highlighted the need for a task force rather than a traditional study commission and mentioned working with Senator Waters and Forum Energy on the legislation. They suggested changes to the task force's duties to evaluate the use of indexing storage credits instead of pilot programs and discussed the potential cost savings for consumers with storage technology.
SB234: Senator David Waters, District 4 Support00:43:48.400 - 8:42:45 AM; Senator Waters introduced SB234, noting its similarity to Senator Avard's SB236. He explained that both bills aim to move the responsibilities of the electric assistance program to the Department of Energy and address the funding level of the program. He proposed increasing the expenditure from 1.5 cents to 2 cents per kilowatt-hour due to insufficient funds to cover the number of people needing assistance. He mentioned the potential threat to federal funding and suggested using Senator Avard's bill as a vehicle for further discussion and amendments.
SB234: Megan Stone, Department of Energy Information Only00:47:13.040 - 8:46:10 AM; Megan Stone from the Department of Energy testified that the department is neutral on Senate Bill 234. She explained that the current electric assistance program, administered by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), could naturally transition to the Department of Energy (DOE) due to the DOE's existing administration of other assistance programs such as fuel and weatherization assistance since its creation in 2021. She mentioned a related Senate Bill 236, expressing the department's preference for that method of moving the program. Stone also discussed the System Benefits Charge (SBC) and noted that the bill proposes to increase the low-income portion of the SBC from 1.5 to 2.0 mills, although the department is comfortable with the current level. She raised concerns about changing the program year start date from October 1st to November 1st, which would create a budgetary gap. Lastly, she addressed the bill's codification of the Electric Assistance Advisory Council, suggesting that flexibility in making adjustments through hearings rather than the legislative process would be beneficial.
SB234: Steve Tower, New Hampshire Legal Assistance, Manchester Support00:49:50.440 - 8:48:47 AM; Steve Tower, representing New Hampshire Legal Assistance and managing the Manchester office, expressed support for Senate Bill 234. He highlighted his experience with the Electric Assistance Program (EP) Advisory Board and stressed the importance of moving the EP administration from the Public Utilities Commission to the Department of Energy, which already handles similar programs. Tower appreciated the bill's provisions to continue the EP Advisory Board, renamed as the EP Advisory Council, under DOE, noting its effectiveness and consensus-driven decision-making process. He discussed the bill's proposal to increase the SBC cap to 2.0 mills, explaining that this could provide necessary flexibility for the program in case of future energy cost spikes or increased participation. He also clarified that the increase is not a requirement but a ceiling, and he compared the bill to another related bill, Senate Bill 236, stating no opposition to either's administrative aspects.
SB234: Senator Ros Information Only00:56:14.280 - 8:55:11 AM; Senator Ros confirmed the understanding that the increase in the SBC to two mills mentioned in the bill is not a requirement but a ceiling, as per the language in the bill.
SB226: Jonah Orion Wheeler, Senator, representing Peterborough and Sharon, Hillsborough's 33rd District Support01:02:01.480 - 9:00:58 AM; Senator Jonah Orion Wheeler, representing Peterborough and Sharon, introduced Senate Bill 226, which he co-sponsored. The bill aims to suspend applications for new landfills in New Hampshire and establish a committee to study the feasibility of solid waste incineration. Wheeler expressed personal reservations about the cleanliness of incineration but acknowledged its potential to address landfill issues. He emphasized the importance of protecting the environment in the North country from new landfills and viewed the bill as a step towards exploring alternative waste management solutions like incineration.
SB226: David Roser, Senator, representing Senate District 1 Support01:04:46.680 - 9:03:43 AM; Senator David Roser supports Senate Bill 226, emphasizing the need for a moratorium on new landfill permits until 2031 due to evolving issues with trash and landfills. He highlights the importance of taking time to address changing rules and regulations, particularly commending the efforts of the Department of Environmental Services (DES) while noting ongoing concerns. Roser also mentions the recent statement by the governor advocating for a pause on landfill permits due to community concerns. He discusses the potential of land incineration as an alternative to landfills, suggesting a study committee to assess its viability. Roser argues that the state has sufficient landfill capacity for the next six years, allowing time for a thoughtful approach to waste management without immediate urgency.
SB226: Jared Sullivan, State Representative, representing Bethlehem and Franconia, Grafton 2 Support01:09:30.319 - 9:08:27 AM; Representative Jared Sullivan supports the moratorium proposed in SB226, arguing that current regulations for landfill siting are outdated. He believes the bill will provide necessary time to update regulations and explore alternative waste management solutions like incineration or expanded recycling. Sullivan criticizes the fiscal note accompanying the bill, arguing it misleadingly suggests increased costs to state and municipal governments due to the moratorium. He explains that even without the bill, landfill closures like the one in Bethlehem would still lead to increased costs due to capacity shortages. Sullivan emphasizes the importance of modernizing regulations to ensure environmentally safe landfill siting and operations.
SB226: N Grace, representing the Business and Industry Association (BIA) Oppose01:18:47.679 - 9:17:44 AM; N Grace from the Business and Industry Association opposes the moratorium aspect of SB226, arguing it would hinder business development in the state. Grace notes that recent landfill rules were updated by DES in December 2024, suggesting that the state is not working with outdated regulations. The concern raised is that the moratorium would delay new landfill capacity development, potentially leading to economic issues due to reduced competition and increased waste disposal costs. Grace points out the risk of increased transportation costs if waste must be sent out of state, which could impact businesses and residents financially.
SB226: Mike Whimet, Director of the Waste Management Division, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Information Only01:37:37.560 - 9:36:34 AM; Mike Whimet from the Department of Environmental Services provides informational testimony on SB226 without taking a position. He highlights potential unintended consequences of the bill, such as the automatic approval of applications under RSA 541-A:29-a if not acted upon within specified timelines. Whimet suggests amendments to avoid these issues, such as explicitly denying applications or excluding the RSA from the bill's scope. He also discusses the potential delay in developing needed landfill capacity post-moratorium due to the time required for application processing and facility construction. Whimet clarifies that the bill would apply to all types of landfills, including those not accepting municipal solid waste, and would also affect municipally owned landfills.
SB226: Henry Vu, Waste Management Information Only01:52:33.239 - 9:51:30 AM; Henry Vu from Waste Management clarified that SB226, as written, would not interfere with the expected filing in 2028 for the Rochester landfill expansion. He explained that the expansion would not be affected by Section 2 of the bill because it pertains to the expansion of an existing landfill. Vu discussed the capacity of the Rochester landfill, which is the largest in New Hampshire and accepts most of the state's waste. He noted that the landfill has a permitted capacity until 2034, managed by a depletion schedule to ensure state capacity until that date. Vu also mentioned that effective management might extend the landfill's life to 2036. He stated that an application for expansion would likely be filed in 2027 or 2028 due to the time required for permit approval and construction. Vu emphasized the importance of Section 2 of the bill, which is critical for the existing landfill's continued operation and its good relationship with the Rochester community. He also provided statistics on out-of-state waste, correcting previous figures to show that in 2024, it was 55% and in 2023, it was 53%. Waste Management is not opposed to SB226.
SB226: Michael Wright, Littleton, New Hampshire Support01:57:27.639 - 9:56:24 AM; Michael Wright from Littleton, New Hampshire, expressed support for SB226. He argued that New Hampshire does not need additional landfill capacity, citing existing capacity up to 2036 and potential expansion that could add another 20 years. Wright noted that New Hampshire generates about 1.1 million metric tons of waste annually, while Rochester has capacity for 1.4 million metric tons, and there is additional capacity in other locations. He emphasized that waste management strategies are expected to reduce disposable trash by 25%, suggesting that New Hampshire has sufficient capacity for the next 30 to 40 years. Wright raised concerns about the environmental impact of landfills, particularly leachate, which he stated could be a significant issue if a new landfill were to be built. He supported the bill's proposed five-year pause to explore technologies for managing leachate and other waste-related issues.
SB227: David Roser, Senator from Senate District 1, Coos and Grafton Counties Information Only02:00:26.199 - 9:59:23 AM; Senator David Roser introduced SB227, which is based on a previously vetoed House Bill 1454. He explained that the bill aims to provide more specific guidelines for the Department of Environmental Services regarding landfill setbacks and leachate flow. Roser noted that recent rule changes increased the landfill setback from 200 feet to 500 feet, but argued that SB227 would offer more precise parameters for measuring the distance and time over which leachate might travel in the event of a leak. He emphasized the importance of considering the geology and soil type when siting landfills, citing an example from Vermont where a landfill operator acknowledged the risks of building on sand. Roser also highlighted a drafting error in the bill related to hydraulic conductivity but stressed that the bill's focus is on understanding leachate flow in case of leaks. He welcomed questions and noted that experts would follow to discuss hydrogeology in more detail.
SB227: Dees Information Only02:06:43.920 - 10:05:40 AM; Dees provided a detailed analysis of Senate Bill 227 without taking a position on it. They highlighted several concerns and observations regarding the bill's content. They noted that section two of the bill establishes a five-year setback distance from surface waters, which they compared to their recently passed rules that set a default setback of 500 feet and a performance-based setback. They expressed concerns about the clarity of the bill's language regarding maximum seepage velocity determination, suggesting it might be based on a single location measurement, which could exclude many potential sites. They also questioned the exemption of expansions of existing facilities from the bill's siting criteria, arguing that such exemptions could subject residents to less protective conditions. Additionally, they discussed the ambiguity surrounding the term 'fully permitted' and suggested removing the word 'fully' to clarify the bill's intent. They also recommended deleting references to perennial water bodies traversing a landfill footprint, as they believed it was unnecessary under current rules. Finally, they criticized the requirement for a 24-hour employee on site, advocating for electronic monitoring systems as a more effective alternative.
SB227: Henry Veu, Waste Management Oppose02:24:54.479 - 10:23:51 AM; Henry Veu, representing Waste Management, expressed opposition to several sections of Senate Bill 227. He highlighted concerns about the bill's approach to determining maximum seepage velocity, suggesting that using an average rather than the highest rate measured would be more representative of site conditions. He also criticized the bill's focus on the undisturbed area underneath a landfill, arguing that engineered solutions could be more effective. He agreed with previous testimony regarding the confusing language on aquifers and the impracticality of requiring a 24/7 on-site employee, advocating for sensor technology which his company has already invested in.
SB227: Wayne Morrison, North Country Alliance for Balanced Change Support02:32:18.319 - 10:31:15 AM; Wayne Morrison, from North Country Alliance for Balanced Change, supported Senate Bill 227, emphasizing the need for a site-specific, science-based setback for landfills. He highlighted two significant spill incidents that occurred when no one was present, underscoring the importance of having personnel on site to monitor potential issues. He questioned the effectiveness of the current rules and advocated for stricter standards to ensure the protection of water bodies. Morrison argued that a science-based approach would provide a more reliable margin of safety and criticized arbitrary setback distances as wishful thinking.
SB227: Timothy Kinsky, BCM Environmental and Land Law Support02:39:57.960 - 10:38:54 AM; Timothy Kinsky, an attorney with BCM Environmental and Land Law, supported Senate Bill 227 on behalf of North Country Alliance for Balanced Change. He argued that the current Solid Waste rules do not meet the purpose of protecting human health and the environment as stated in RSA 149 M. He provided a comparison matrix showing that the current rules are less protective than previous versions and lag behind other New England states. Kinsky emphasized the need for stricter standards to prevent out-of-state waste concentration in New Hampshire and supported the bill as a step in the right direction.
SB227: N Grace, Business and Industry Association Oppose02:43:13.800 - 10:42:10 AM; N Grace from the Business and Industry Association opposed Senate Bill 227, echoing concerns raised by previous speakers. They noted that the bill appears stricter than previous legislation, particularly regarding the five-year setback from water bodies, which they believe would severely limit potential landfill sites in the state. Grace also discussed the complexities of contamination plumes and the influence of external factors, questioning the feasibility of the bill's requirements.
SB227: Michael Wright, Littleton Support02:46:58.080 - 10:45:55 AM; Michael Wright from Littleton supported Senate Bill 227. He provided statistics to illustrate that there are potentially 4,800 suitable sites in New Hampshire for a new landfill, representing a very small percentage of the state's land. He referenced historical data from the Bethlehem landfill siting to argue that calculations of future impacts should use the highest estimate of hydraulic conductivity rather than an average, as water flows towards more permeable sediments.
SB227: Tom Tower, Whitefield, North Country Alliance for Balanced Change Support02:49:06.120 - 10:48:03 AM; Tom Tower from Whitefield, New Hampshire, and vice president of the North Country Alliance for Balanced Change, spoke in support of Senate Bill 227. He provided historical context, mentioning that a similar bill, 1454, had previously received overwhelming support from both the House and Senate but was vetoed by the governor. Tower argued that SB227 is necessary to address arbitrary setbacks, specifically increasing from 200 to 500 feet, to prevent environmental contamination. He cited examples of leachate spills and emphasized the importance of preventing potential catastrophic environmental situations. Tower highlighted the state's natural beauty and quality of life, arguing that SB227 ensures that projects are well-envisioned and protect the environment and water bodies.

Avard, Kevin(Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Pearl, Howard (V Chairman)(R)[C+]2024	Watters, David(D)[CT]2024
Rosenwald, Cindy(D)[CT]2024	McConkey, Mark(R)