Donald Kreece, the state's consumer advocate, explained the office's decision to hire an out-of-state consulting firm for work on utility rate cases after Representative Leishman questioned the RFP process.

Kreece said the RFP separated two broad categories of services, including return-on-equity (ROE) analysis and detailed examination of operating-cost datasets. After the PUC's recent handling of an ROE matter, Kreece said his office decided not to pursue ROE work for the forthcoming cases and therefore eliminated respondents who proposed only ROE services.

"There simply are no consulting firms in New Hampshire that do this kind of work," Kreece said, explaining that the selected Michigan firm had done thorough, efficient work for the office before and offered a competitive price. He added that much of the work will be done remotely but that the contract allows the consultant to fly to Concord to testify at a PUC hearing if necessary.

Representative Leishman pressed whether firms eliminated for scope reasons were told they could re-propose under the changed focus; Kreece said he informed respondents of his office's decision and did not invite new proposals. Committee members also raised whether the contract would increase rates; Kreece said the consumer advocate's role is to limit authorized rate increases and that rates tend to rise with inflation, but he declined to promise rate decreases.

The committee approved item 25272; the record shows Representative Leishman voted in the negative.

Next steps: the consumer-advocate office will proceed under the contracted scope and can call the consultant to appear in person at hearings if needed.