Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Portfolio Standard topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would phase out REC eligibility over 20 years; DOE says statutory clarity needed
Summary
HB 17‑21 FN would bar new systems from enrolling after a six‑month window and cap REC eligibility at 20 years; DOE said the bill would effectively sunset the RPS over two decades and asked the Legislature to provide clearer statutory direction for program wind‑down and REF‑funded positions.
Concord, N.H. — Representative Michael Harrington presented HB 17‑21 FN, a bill that would close REC eligibility to new systems after a six‑month enrollment window, limit REC minting to 20 years for eligible systems, and require the Department of Energy to reduce alternative compliance payment (ACP) requirements annually as eligible systems decline.
DOE policy staff told the committee the department is neutral but noted the measure would administratively sunset much of the RPS over roughly 20 years and that implementing the transition would be an administrative lift: DOE identified about 8,200 registered REC facilities (mostly class‑2 solar) and said it would need to calculate and track expiration dates and navigate programmatic changes for staff and grant programs funded by the Renewable Energy Fund.
Stakeholders from biomass, hydropower, timber, community power and clean‑energy advocacy groups warned that the bill would jeopardize small hydro and biomass that rely on New Hampshire REC revenue and that the bill departs from DOE’s recommendation for periodic program reviews and careful transition planning. Witnesses recommended alternatives, including targeted program design changes or a phased review process rather than an automatic cap and closure.
Committee members asked for clarification on statutory authority for DOE to reduce ACPs and sought more precise drafting language if a phase‑out is pursued. DOE and others urged legislative direction on how to wind down grant programs and staff funded by the REF if ACP revenue declines.
No final committee vote was recorded at the hearing; members heard extensive testimony and requested further clarification on statutory references and fiscal impacts.
