Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senators hear competing views on HB 504 to update New Hampshire energy policy
Summary
House Bill 504 would put a more prescriptive energy-policy statement into statute, emphasizing an "all-of-the-above" approach and priorities such as affordability, reliability, diversity and security.
House Bill 504 would expand and make more prescriptive the state's statutory energy policy, emphasizing an "all-of-the-above" technology approach and language prioritizing affordability, reliability, diversity and security.
Representative Doug Thomas, introducing the bill on behalf of Representative Michael Vos, said the change would provide clearer goals for the Department of Energy and the Public Utilities Commission. Thomas read written testimony stating the bill would "promote an all-of-the-above technology solutions approach with emphasis on affordability, reliability, diversity, and security" and said the North American Electric Reliability Corporation had warned of increasing grid reliability risks.
The bill prompted sustained testimony from multiple stakeholders. Josh Elliott, director of the Division of Policy and Programs at the New Hampshire Department of Energy, said the department was neutral and identified two areas where the statute matters most: the state energy strategy update and regional transmission cost allocation through ISO New England. Elliott noted that regional transmission projects can create multi‑million dollar costs allocated across New England and said statutes give the state a legal framework to guard ratepayers from costs driven by other states' policy procurements.
Ray Burke, an attorney with New Hampshire Legal Assistance, testified in opposition on grounds the bill's wording could harm the state's low-income energy-efficiency program. Burke emphasized statutory language in RSA 374-F that "no less than 20% of the funds collected through the system benefits charge should be used on the low income energy efficiency program," and asked that the sponsor and committee work with stakeholders to avoid creating unintended obstacles to energy-efficiency programs for vulnerable households.
Other witnesses included Meredith Hatfield of The Nature Conservancy, Conservation Law Foundation's senior attorney (testimony urging rejection due to shifts away from fuel diversity), and Sam Evans Brown of Clean Energy New Hampshire (concerns about market language and the role of programs like New Hampshire Saves). Testimony covered public-health language, whether "secure" energy should be defined (cybersecurity was suggested during questioning), and how the bill's market-oriented phrasing might interact with federal subsidies and existing ratepayer protections.
Ending
The committee closed the hearing after a slate of testimony and follow-up questions. Multiple senators asked the sponsor to work with stakeholders on clarifying language about energy efficiency, low-income protections, and how renewable and dispatchable resources are treated before any executive action.
