Committee reviews H.88 to prohibit utility disconnections during extreme heat

Maria Royal of the Legislative Council summarized H.88 for the committee on Feb. 12, describing a proposal to prohibit involuntary disconnections of residential electric, water and wastewater service during periods of extreme heat and to require reconnection procedures and reasonable repayment plans.

The bill’s core requirement would direct the Public Utilities Commission to adopt a rule prohibiting utilities under its jurisdiction from involuntarily disconnecting residential service for nonpayment if the forecasted high within 24 hours of the scheduled disconnection is at or above 92 degrees Fahrenheit, or if the National Weather Service has issued (or intends to issue) a heat-related alert. The bill would treat “residential service” to include tenants, residents of multi-unit buildings and mobile-home-park residents.

Reconnection and repayment plan provisions H.88 would require utilities to adopt procedures allowing a resident to reconnect during a period of extreme heat if the service had previously been disconnected for nonpayment. Utilities could require enrollment in a reasonable repayment plan before reconnection. The draft sets a ceiling for repayment under the model borrowed from Washington state: monthly payments under a plan shall not require more than 6% of a resident’s monthly income; residents may agree to a higher percentage, but would not be in default during the period so long as payments meet at least the 6% threshold. If assistance payments arrive after a plan is in place, the resident must be allowed to reformulate the plan.

Definitions, timing and jurisdiction Royal said the draft places similar protections into municipal statutes that govern publicly owned water and wastewater utilities, which are not under the PUC’s jurisdiction. The bill’s PUC rulemaking deadline the committee discussed was on or before June 1, 2026, and the sponsor noted an effective date of July 1 (year indicated in the draft language). The “period of extreme heat” definition drew sustained committee questions about how the 24‑hour forecast window would operate in practice and whether a longer period would be easier to administer.

Committee discussion Members compared the proposal to Vermont’s existing winter cold-weather shutoff restrictions, which are a month-based prohibition rather than a short-term temperature trigger. Committee members raised administration and enforcement questions, including how frequently forecasts change and how reconnection records would be inspected by the PUC or Department of Public Service on request. Witnesses and members discussed outreach to low-income customers and links to LIHEAP and weatherization programs to reduce heat‑related risks for households that do not use air conditioning out of cost concerns.

Next steps Representative McCann, the bill sponsor, provided data that one utility in Stowe reported six days last season with temperatures at or above 92 degrees; the committee will assess testimony and may schedule additional stakeholders including the Public Utilities Commission and utilities for further comment.