PUC says clean-heat rules stalled; fuel-dealer registry and data requirements left in limbo

The Public Utility Commission told the Natural Resources & Energy committee that rules required by Act 18 for the state's proposed clean heat standard are not moving forward, and that several implementation duties remain in a pause while the Legislature decides next steps.

PUC Chair Ed McNamara said the agency received funding in fiscal 2024 to stand up three positions tied to implementation but that funding was only for that year. "FY24 provided three positions for the PUC, two permanent, one limited service," McNamara said. The PUC carried two of the positions into FY25, he said, but for FY26 the proposal before the Legislature assumes at least one vacancy because the funding was not included in the next budget.

Why it matters: Act 18 imposed continuing obligations beyond rulemaking, including registering field fuel dealers, appointing a default delivery agent and maintaining advisory groups. McNamara told the committee there is currently no active rulemaking path and that some duties, notably a requirement to approve a budget and plan for a default delivery agent, still carry a statutory or scheduling deadline. "There is a deadline September first of this year to approve a budget and plan for the default delivery agent," he said.

McNamara described problems the PUC encountered during the first year of registration required by the law. The PUC received many incomplete registrations and found that the statute's definition of an "obligated party" could sweep in importers as well as in-state sellers, complicating enforcement and obligation calculations. "We did the first year of registration. We got a lot of incomplete data," McNamara said, noting that tax-department reporting covers fuel sold within Vermont but does not identify imported fuel or identify all registrants.

That data gap drew sharply different responses from witnesses. Matt Coda, who said he owns Meadow Hill and represents several trade associations in the fuel and heating sectors, urged the committee to rely on existing tax and industry data instead of a PUC-run registry. "If you go to meadowhillmedia.com and you click on the fuel index, you will see all of the gallons sold every month," Coda said. He argued the PUC's registration net captures many retail sellers whose inclusion is impractical and burdensome, saying, "If you sell a 16 ounce canister of propane ... you are in fact an individual, a fuel dealer, required to register . It's absurd."

Environmental and planning advocates told the committee that higher-resolution retail data still matters for regional energy planning and equity-focused programs. Joanna Miller, who leads energy and climate work at the Vermont Natural Resources Council, said policymakers and local governments need more granular information to design programs and to help households that cannot afford fuel switching. "If we don't move forward with a clean heat standard, the problem that that policy was trying to solve still remains and still needs to be solved," Miller said.

On process, McNamara said the PUC sent a letter to the Legislature and draft legislation that would recognize the current pause and relieve the commission of registration, advisory group and default-delivery-agent duties until lawmakers take further action. "The letter ... essentially says that PUC no longer has to do any of the registration or advisory groups or the DPA," he said, describing the approach as a way to avoid collecting and maintaining data and processes that the commission cannot exercise effectively while the statutory policy is in flux.

What stayed unresolved at the hearing: whether the state should focus obligations on in-state retail sales (which the tax department records) rather than importers; whether the PUC can or should use tax data as a verification source given confidentiality rules; and whether additional funding and staff authority would be necessary to build an import-tracking capability. McNamara told the committee the import piece is particularly hard to regulate because of interstate commerce limits and the lack of an independent data source on imports.

Committee members indicated follow-up: McNamara said he would testify in Senate appropriations on the FY26 budget and the tax department was expected to appear before the committee the next day to clarify what data it could share and in what form.

No formal vote or rulemaking occurred during the hearing; PUC staff described implementation difficulties, industry witnesses urged reliance on tax and commercial data, and advocates urged preserving or creating a public, granular retail dataset for planning and equity work.

Ending: The committee left the PUC's duties and the fuel-dealer data question open pending additional testimony from the tax department and further legislative decisions about whether to pause or change Act 18 implementation.