Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Portfolio Standard topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House work session examines changes to renewable portfolio standard that sponsor says will cut rates by about $5.7 million
Summary
Representative Vos, sponsor of House Bill 219, told the House Finance Committee that the bill would change New Hampshire’s renewable portfolio standard by removing Class 2 renewable energy certificates, lowering the Class 1 thermal obligation from 2.2% to 1.7%, and aligning alternative compliance payments with other New England states.
Representative Vos, sponsor of House Bill 219, told the House Finance Committee that the bill would change New Hampshire’s renewable portfolio standard (RPS) by removing Class 2 renewable energy certificates (RECs), reducing the utility obligation to procure Class 1 thermal RECs from 2.2% to 1.7%, and adjusting alternative compliance payments (ACPs) for Classes 1, 3 and 4 to be comparable to other New England states. "The result of these changes will save ratepayers an estimated $5,700,000 per year," Vos said, adding the reductions primarily come from fewer ACPs when utilities cannot buy the required Class 1 thermal RECs.
Why it matters: the RPS cost is passed through to customers in rates, making changes to REC obligations a direct rate-driver. Vos said Class 2 is "saturated"—utilities hold a surplus of certificates and do not purchase Class 2 RECs—so eliminating the category would not reduce revenue available to renewable projects but would reduce payments to some generators who currently receive Class 2 REC prices.
Committee members pressed Vos on budget and policy effects. Representative McGuire noted an amended fiscal note on the table indicating a $1.2 million reduction in general‑fund revenue, and asked how that number related to the $5.7 million estimate of ratepayer savings. Vos replied that $5.7 million is the estimated annual reduction in charges passed to ratepayers; how much of that would show up as reduced transfers to the general fund depends on budgetary choices and prior sweeps of the renewable energy fund.
Other members raised policy concerns. Several representatives argued the state should protect programs that encourage investment in local renewable generation to reduce exposure to natural‑gas price volatility. Vos said the bill was crafted to "save ratepayers money without impacting the renewable portfolio standards," and noted that an earlier, broader proposal to phase out the RPS over five years was rejected in favor of targeted changes.
Clean Energy New Hampshire’s executive director, Sam Evans Brown, urged caution. "The RPS is one of the few policies we have in New Hampshire to encourage local generation," Evans Brown said. He noted studies showing RPS-driven renewable generation can suppress wholesale prices and argued the committee should wait for an ongoing Department of Energy study before changing REC targets or ACPs.
Committee outcome: the chair opened and closed the work session on HB 219 without a recorded committee vote; the bill remains retained for further consideration.
Ending: Committee members and witnesses asked for more detailed fiscal and market analysis. Several members suggested waiting for the Department of Energy’s recommended reforms before final action, while the sponsor maintained the bill would reduce customer costs without materially reducing program effectiveness.
