Stakeholders urge committee to preserve 'Granite State Test'; bill would let PUC reopen cost-effectiveness review

A lengthy hearing on House Bill 221 drew public utilities, consumer advocates, housing authorities, contractors, and environmental groups to the Senate committee to debate whether the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) should have the option to convene an adjudicative proceeding in 2027 to revisit the cost-effectiveness test that determines how the state evaluates ratepayer-funded energy-efficiency programs.

Sponsor testimony described HB 221 as an option for the PUC, not a mandate. The sponsor said the bill would permit the PUC to open an adjudicative process to determine whether a different method should be used to compute the “system benefits charge” cost-effectiveness analysis in the future; the sponsor emphasized the bill does not require the PUC to act.

Many witnesses opposed the bill. Don Kreese, the state Consumer Advocate (RSA 363:28 cited in his testimony describing his role), said he was “emphatically opposed” and described HB 221 as “a full frontal assault on the ratepayer funded NH Saves programs.” Kreese argued the legislature intentionally codified the Granite State Test in statute through House Bill 549 (2022) and that the discount rate embedded in a cost-benefit test is fundamentally a policy decision for elected representatives.

Industry witnesses representing utilities (Eversource, Liberty, Unitil), program administrators and contractors said the Granite State Test provides stability for program delivery and for local businesses that implement efficiency projects. Eversource and other utilities noted the test was developed through a multi-stakeholder process and argued that reopening it would create uncertainty for contractors and customers.

Housing and social-service witnesses said NH Saves plays a critical role in preserving affordable housing and lowering energy burdens for low-income households. Josh Meehan, executive director of Keene Housing and chair of the New Hampshire Housing Authorities Corporation legislative committee, told senators NH Saves projects reduced operating costs across his portfolio and allowed authorities to reinvest in capital projects; several housing witnesses quantified savings and projects funded in the past decade.

Environmental and conservation groups opposed the bill. Nick Krakoff of the Conservation Law Foundation pointed to inconsistencies in PUC statements about whether it should or should not consider holistic or societal benefits; he urged the committee to ''ITL'' (inexpedient to legislate) HB 221.

Department of Energy staff testified the department was neutral; Josh Elliott, director of the Division of Policy and Programs, said the bill raises a fundamental choice for the Legislature: retain direct legislative control over the cost-effectiveness framework or delegate that authority to the PUC. The Department told the committee the Granite State Test had been codified under HB 549 and that the question before senators was whether the Legislature wanted to retain the policy decision.

Opponents highlighted recent regulatory history. Witnesses referenced a 2021 PUC order that proposed ending ratepayer-funded efficiency programs and House Bill 549 in 2022, which the Legislature enacted to preserve NH Saves and codify the Granite State Test. One witness also noted a recent Massachusetts budget change that reduced energy-efficiency funding, saying broader market dynamics can change assumptions used in earlier planning.

No committee vote on HB 221 was recorded in the transcript; the hearing record consists of sponsor remarks, a neutral Department presentation, and extensive opposition testimony from consumer advocates, utilities, contractors, housing authorities and conservation organizations.