Lawmakers hear proposal to direct state DOE to study leaving ISO New England; consumer advocate and DOE weigh costs and governance

House Bill 690, which would direct the New Hampshire Department of Energy to investigate the costs, benefits and feasibility of withdrawing from ISO New England or otherwise changing the state's participation in regional market structures, drew a full hearing in front of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Testimony ranged from categorical opposition—citing Texas’s 2021 winter failures—to support for a study of ISO governance and cost allocation.

Representative Dr. James Summers (prime sponsor) told the committee the bill would create an investigatory docket to quantify generation, transmission and market costs and to evaluate whether New Hampshire is bearing costs from other states’ policies. "It looks at the different costs and benefits of being a member of ISO New England," Summers said, adding the Department of Energy had signaled it was neutral and willing to investigate if directed.

Several witnesses recommended study but warned about cost and scope. Mark Brown of the Consumer Energy Alliance said conversations about regional market design and cost allocation are ongoing nationwide and that an independent inquiry could be useful. Donald Kreece, the state's consumer advocate, testified in strong support of HB 690, saying the inquiry should examine governance and whether ISO New England serves ratepayers’ interests; Kreece named large transmission and generation companies as stakeholders with outsized influence and urged transparency.

Opponents including Wendy Thomas warned the study is a first step toward a costly and risky withdrawal from ISO New England and cited Texas’s ERCOT experience in 2021 as a cautionary example. Thomas told the committee that the bill’s title and scope suggested withdrawal, and she questioned the fiscal note, saying $200,000 would be insufficient to buy the necessary legal and engineering expertise.

Chris Helms, deputy commissioner of the Department of Energy, told the committee the department is neutral but capable of conducting the investigation if the legislature directs it. Helms said the department expected to procure specialized consultants if required and noted the region is facing roughly $10 billion in transmission investments over the next 7–10 years; New Hampshire would be assigned roughly 10% of those costs under current allocation methods. He and other witnesses discussed how the study’s upfront cost (the fiscal note indicates a consultant cost estimated at about $200,000) might produce information that yields longer‑term savings for ratepayers.

Committee members probed drafting questions, suggested clarifications (including whether to cite RSA 3:65‑37 for the department's investigatory authority) and discussed whether the bill’s questions should be narrowed to avoid a sprawling, expensive engagement. The transcript records no committee vote on HB 690 during the hearing.