Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Electricity Market Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to permit off-grid electricity providers draws mixed reactions; utilities seek limits on interconnection and safety
Summary
House Bill 672 would create a statutory category for off-grid electricity suppliers that sell power to customers not connected to the transmission/distribution grid; utilities urged amendments to prohibit interconnection for backup and to require adherence to safety/roadway standards.
Senators heard testimony on House Bill 672, a bill the sponsor said would enable ‘‘off-grid electricity providers’’ to build generation facilities that supply electricity to customers not connected to the regulated transmission and distribution system. Sponsors and proponents framed the change as an innovation and economic-development tool to attract large, high-demand businesses such as data centers, and said the facilities would not impose costs on ratepayers.
Representative Doug Thomas (introducing the bill on behalf of the House sponsor) said HB 672 passed the House with bipartisan support and would exempt such off-grid suppliers from public-utility regulation because they would not be a public utility if they were not connected to the grid. The bill’s proponents described potential benefits including faster project timelines and an innovation test bed for new generation technologies such as small modular reactors.
Eversource testified as neutral-to-opposed and offered amendment language aimed at clarifying that off-grid providers must not interconnect to a regulated utility’s transmission or distribution system either for primary or backup supply. Griffin Roberge (Eversource) said the amendment would also bar off-grid providers from constructing in or crossing state, federal or local roadways and would require that any future interconnection pay its full interconnection costs so other ratepayers are not subsidizing upgrades.
Proponents argued off-grid suppliers could reduce reliability risk for the grid by removing large customers from ratepayer obligations and could help attract major employers. Glenn Lyons, founder of Advocates for Consumer Regulated Electricity, testified in support and said off-grid suppliers would allow consumers to “pay for what they want” and enable rapid innovation.
Department of Energy staff told senators the bill, as drafted, appeared to exempt off-grid providers from safety regulations in Title 34 and from consumer-protection provisions; the Department said it would review the Eversource amendment language. The Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) staff said projects that meet utility-scale thresholds would still require SEC review and a certificate of site and facility under RSA 162-H, and that public safety topics normally are addressed in that process.
The Consumer Advocate indicated support for the bill’s concept but suggested the committee consider Eversource’s clarifying language. The hearing included technical questions about emergency response and who would be contacted if an off-grid facility failed or left energized lines on roads after weather events; Eversource urged provisions to ensure first-responder clarity.
No committee decision on HB 672 was recorded in the transcript; witnesses and senators discussed potential amendments for safety, roadway siting and interconnection-cost allocation.
