The Fiscal Committee on Nov. 21 questioned the Office of the Consumer Advocate’s selection of a Michigan-based consulting firm to assist in upcoming Public Utilities Commission rate cases. Donald Kreece, the consumer advocate, explained the office issued an RFP last spring with two broad categories of work: return-on-equity (ROE) analysis and detailed review of operating-cost spreadsheets. After the PUC’s decision in a recent Eversource case, the office eliminated ROE work from the scope and focused on the operational spreadsheet review, Kreece said.

“The firm that we chose out in Michigan is a firm that we’ve worked with before, and we know that they do both a really good and thorough job of that, and they’re also really efficient,” Kreece said, adding the firm’s price was competitive. He told the committee there are ‘‘simply no consulting firms in New Hampshire that do this kind of work” and that most technical experts are on the staffs of state energy agencies or the PUC.

Representative Leishman raised concerns about the RFP process, asking whether firms eliminated because they proposed only ROE work were told so they could revise offerings; Kreece said he informed them of the decision and did not invite revised proposals. Committee members also asked whether the contract work would affect customer rates; Kreece said the office’s role is to limit rate increases to those necessary and favorable to customers and that rate pressures are real given inflation and other factors.

The committee approved the contract item by voice vote, with Representative Leishman recorded as voting in the negative.