[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6574400,"mediaKeyId","3080028-9799e7bd66ee4419dd581babd2590fa3","parentId",3080028,"title","Committee debates repeal of statewide energy data platform law as RFPs near issuance; vote to re‑refer recorded","audioSeconds",4818,"startMs",1581000,"endMs",6399000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3080028-9799e7bd66ee4419dd581babd2590fa3&start=1581&end=6399","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3080028-9799e7bd66ee4419dd581babd2590fa3/thumbnail_1581000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6574400/New-Hampshire/Committee-debates-repeal-of-statewide-energy-data-platform-law-as-RFPs-near-issuance-vote-to-rerefer-recorded","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6574400-c7c5447f1e95767a2b953c8dbcc9b206/orig.mp4?Expires=1771140790&Signature=J0DIYXVtN2VF96gJkk81roelRjYh~x0s0Zej45ZHGNZNJxEp1zoza4xnaBS6-iCRRESUor4QxODYaSk~qzo6Rgk~3iNsDjdTGQk4hsbhSYI4MWG2tkZE6tf~46eSb7-W~cHCaqtgMdssfDeMXtzb8gnLq1Pahft~tsFOKzMB-wWNCk24DyhpggG2TzourjyUX3YdfWBWkLLCL1wx6avGGlEJZQlK-rVuWCooI52sHYu4iLAhJ-S8X9wvlvnxrMoJWU1EluTG4BRMlraAvWBpALP4X85cumuyX9uZwirueCWFUgSkX8oGPOBkkW3w5JiCUZw6NO9FlZwxGJc0Fnr~lg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","New Hampshire Legislature","date","2025-04-22T14:53:44.727Z","article","CONCORD, N.H. — The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee heard extended testimony July 23 on House Bill 723, which would repeal the statute (RSA 378:50–54) authorizing a statewide multi‑use energy data platform. Committee members questioned whether to kill the law now or wait for two imminent requests for proposals (RFPs) and a cost‑benefit analysis that proponents say will quantify costs and benefits.

Representative Lex Baresni, R‑Grafton (District 11) introduced HB 723, telling the panel the project has been in statute for six years and that previous federal grant applications were rejected. Baresni said he believes the platform is “not economically viable” as currently conceived and argued that utilities or private software companies should lead such projects rather than placing the requirement in statute. He cited a federal grant rejection letter that concluded custom data solutions are often business as usual, that the project’s impact description “may be unrealistic,” and that the application did not justify economic viability.

Several witnesses who helped design the platform urged caution about repealing the law before RFPs are issued. Representative Kat McGee, who said she managed early subcommittee efforts after the law passed in 2019, described a multi‑year PUC docket (DE‑19‑197) that produced “user stories” and a governance council involving utilities, stakeholders and the Department of Energy. McGee said the governance council has approved RFP language and that Unitil and other utilities had been prepared to issue the RFPs and supply a cost‑benefit analysis to quantify both capital and operating costs and potential savings.

Donald Kreece, the state’s consumer advocate, testified in opposition to repeal. Kreece said the platform advances “customer freedom” by enabling customers to authorize third‑party access to usage data and that the only remaining question is whether benefits justify costs; he argued the RFPs would provide that answer and that repeal at this moment could stop the project before bids and costs are known.

Clean Energy New Hampshire’s legislative director Nick Paul and other supporters described potential market benefits: the platform provides a “secure, standardized way for customers to share their energy usage data with contractors, competitive suppliers, property managers, or efficiency programs.” A draft cost‑benefit analysis cited by Paul estimated $27 million in net benefits in the first five years and up to $94 million over ten years; Paul described savings from streamlined data exchange, increased participation in efficiency programs and reduced administrative costs for landlords and contractors.

Dan Phelan, regional policy director at the New Hampshire Department of Energy, testified the department is neutral on HB 723 but confirmed the agency and utilities have committed substantial staff time to the project and that prior federal grant efforts involved consultant costs (cited as $150,000). Phelan said it is unclear who will opt in to the platform, how quickly utilities can supply interval data (many customers currently supply only monthly totals), and how benefits will flow through to ratepayers.

Unitil’s Alec O’Meara said the company has acted as a facilitator within the governance council and reiterated that an RFP, if issued, would likely produce cost and timeline certainty; Unitil estimated approximately 14 weeks after an RFP is issued to obtain responses and a cost‑benefit analysis.

Committee discussion focused on whether to allow the RFP process to proceed. Supporters of repeal argued the legislature should “cut losses” on a six‑year effort that has not produced a built platform and that the statute creates perpetual obligations without clear ownership. Opponents said the statute does not force the state to build or operate the platform and that repeal would effectively halt a project that has almost completed governance work and an RFP package reviewed at the Public Utilities Commission.

Procedural action: the committee voted to re‑refer HB 723 to executive session to allow the RFP process and PUC activity to proceed; committee discussion indicated members expected the re‑referral would push further work and allow time for RFP responses and a cost‑benefit report before final disposition. The motion was moved and seconded and passed on a voice vote (committee recorded “aye”; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the transcript).

Ending — Testimony reflected a split: sponsors and some members who favor repeal emphasized cost, uncertain customer opt‑in rates and six years without a built system; consumer advocates, utilities, clean‑energy groups and DOE described near‑term steps (RFP issuance, vendor bids and a cost‑benefit analysis) that they said should be allowed to complete before the law is repealed.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Energy and Natural Resources (04/22/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee debated July 23 whether to repeal RSA 378:50–54, the law creating a statewide energy data platform, as proponents criticized the project’s cost and feasibility while supporters urged waiting for RFP results and a cost‑benefit analysis.","taxTitle","Energy and Natural Resources, Senate , Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",29507,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6574405,"N.H. lawmakers hear bipartisan bill to tighten landfill leachate plans after Bethlehem overflow",1379,243000,1622000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3080028-9799e7bd66ee4419dd581babd2590fa3&start=243&end=1622","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3080028-9799e7bd66ee4419dd581babd2590fa3/thumbnail_243000.jpg","/articles/6574405/New-Hampshire/NH-lawmakers-hear-bipartisan-bill-to-tighten-landfill-leachate-plans-after-Bethlehem-overflow","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6574405-7ddb709e3093d2b58df3ae36f01c2ef9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771140790&Signature=jl~foW9Dye7xH0Z9DdD-pYnRLWJtcY1lemQJf5KiVQvQHpOMcd7Wnas-1GsIwWDRVupZdFtoBV6jSSV4x4N10OMuwWllUjIoxp2XsYyXTHFCfaSqhBbwnhJczbp9U--K90ATT7uvIOvl4lw9Gdeg2zQ~lf2d9ZXRAJCTwDThvkVT0~w6nn00MhmMU03yz-W~ooPWSnn-5Aoj73EqpcSPH8DJEXo57Y~zMTv0rCR5rMzgF6ZOvnXD9XsWJUVEUF8BYHdXGhRpcYdrC8U107cLJwxeeVadyFGLQqrAuio2DBR7sIuCjQ4xdukvprhW~hfx45JkEsEW53IpvcZeXJNJRQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CONCORD, N.H. — Lawmakers heard testimony July 23 on HB 566, a bipartisan bill that would require landfill permit applicants to file detailed leachate management plans and identify contractual arrangements for off‑site treatment and disposal with the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES).

Representative Nick Germana, R‑Cheshire (District 15), the prime sponsor, told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee the bill was developed with input from “Director Mike Wimsatt at DES” and from regulated industry representatives to avoid undue burdens on operations. Germana said the measure would “provide statutory support for DES’s current rules by requiring applicants for landfill permits to provide detailed leachate management plans,” including storage, on‑site treatment when applicable, transport estimates and contingency plans.

The bill was presented amid examples of recent leachate management failures. Tom Tower, vice president of North Country Alliance for Balanced Change and a Whitefield resident, cited reporting and DES correspondence about the Bethlehem facility, saying the site experienced “over 10 feet of leachate” where rules limit leachate depth to about 12 inches. Tower said from the second half of 2021 through the first half of 2023 the site pumped about 2,800,000 gallons of leachate per quarter and that figure rose to about 5,200,000 gallons in late 2023 into 2024. He also referenced a February 2021 incident he described as a 54,000‑gallon leachate overflow at the Bethlehem facility.

Mike Wimsatt, identified in committee testimony as director of the Waste Management Division at DES, said DES has referred conditions at Bethlehem to the Department of Justice for enforcement and confirmed the agency has observed problems at multiple facilities. “We have had a number of problems…seeing leachate both collecting in excess on the liner system above what's allowed under the rules, but also some leachate breakouts of facilities that make their way to stormwater systems,” Wimsatt said.

Wimsatt and other witnesses explained how landfill design intends to keep most precipitation away from the waste, but that extreme rainfall events and exposed working faces create leachate that must be collected, pumped and removed to wastewater treatment plants or other authorized facilities. Under current rules, DES requires facilities to have arrangements with at least two wastewater plants for acceptance of leachate; the department may request contracts during inspections but does not currently require those contracts to be submitted proactively with permit applications.

Representative Germana said HB 566’s central enforcement enhancement is a requirement that operators provide detailed information about contracts with at least two facilities that will treat and dispose of leachate. He told members DES asked for a technical timing change to the bill language so that some contract details would be required later in the permitting timeline rather than at initial application, acknowledging that applicants may not have all contracts finalized at first filing.

Senators on the committee asked whether the contract reporting requirement raised proprietary concerns. Germana said earlier drafts included broader contract provisions that were narrowed after discussions with DES and regulated industry representatives. “Those parts that were kind of concerning about what they should report or not report, have been removed,” he said, adding the current draft reflects collaboration.

Several senators asked DES whether the agency’s existing rules and enforcement authorities are sufficient. Wimsatt said DES can and does enforce violations and had referred the Bethlehem conditions for enforcement, but added that placing explicit leachate management language in statute would strengthen the agency’s regulatory posture because statutes reduce legal argument over rule interpretations.

The hearing closed without a committee vote on HB 566; committee members moved on to the next agenda item after questioning and additional brief public testimony supporting the bill.

Ending — The bill’s sponsors and DES framed HB 566 as a targeted statutory reinforcement of existing leachate rules: requiring more detailed, documented plans and named contractual arrangements for treatment and disposal to improve DES’s ability to prevent and respond to large‑scale leachate events.","Lawmakers reviewed HB 566, which would add statutory requirements that landfill permit applicants file detailed leachate management plans and named disposal contracts with the Department of Environmental Services after multiple facility failures, including a 54,000‑gallon overflow in Bethlehem.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee debates repeal of statewide energy data platform law as RFPs near issuance; vote to re‑refer recorded

N.H. lawmakers hear bipartisan bill to tighten landfill leachate plans after Bethlehem overflow