House Energy committee reviews S.213 to let customers opt out of advanced meters and authorize cybersecurity guidance

Sen. Ruth Hardy, sponsor and reporter of S.213, told the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure committee on April 8 that the bill responds to a constituent who objected to a water "smart meter" and to a small utility’s plan to charge an opt-out fee. "I introduced the bill because a constituent of mine reached out because he did not want to have a . . . smart meter," Hardy said, arguing the legislation seeks to balance individual preferences with utilities’ need to recover costs.

The bill revises statutory language to use "advanced metering technology" and extends opt-out and cost-recovery rules to both water and electric companies. Hardy said the intent is to allow a customer to decline an automated meter while permitting systems to recoup the reasonable costs of manual reads so that other customers do not face higher rates. "It's a small thing that we can do to make sure that electric and water bills are not higher than they need to be and also give people the option of saying no if they want," she told the committee.

Committee members pressed staff and the sponsor on two related lines of policy in the draft. First, members sought clarification on health and privacy concerns that prompt some customers to opt out. Hardy and staff cited a Department of Health review referenced during past testimony that committee members said found minimal or no health impacts from radio-frequency emissions used by meters; members nonetheless acknowledged that some residents raise privacy and cyber concerns.

Second, the bill adds a cybersecurity provision intended for system-level protections. Under the draft, the Secretary of Natural Resources could ask the Cyber Security Advisory Council to develop nonbinding guidance for public water systems on generally accepted cybersecurity practices — including measures relevant to metering and customer-data handling — and the council could also publish guidance as part of its annual work. Members noted that the Agency of Digital Services (ADS) has authority to provide guidance, and Hardy described the bill’s language as a "belt-and-suspenders" measure to ensure the Agency of Natural Resources has a clear tool if it sees system vulnerabilities.

Technical testimony and past written submissions identified a range of metering technologies and operational differences: some systems use low-power radio that transmits to local collectors (allowing drive-by or fixed-collector reads), while others rely on optical readers or external devices that can be removed to allow manual reads. The bill would preserve a customer's right to opt out and, in specified cases, to have an installed meter removed without charge; it also contemplates a fee where a utility must perform additional, recurring in-person reads, subject to the draft’s cost-recovery rules.

Witnesses previously listed on the committee’s record include utility representatives, Agency of Natural Resources staff, ADS representatives, the Rural Water Association (Liz Royer), and local water-system operators. Committee staff agreed to pull written testimony and to compile oral testimony notes; members planned to resume consideration the next day, when the committee expected additional witnesses on related items.

The committee did not take a final vote on S.213 during this session; members directed staff to gather and summarize testimony and to continue the bill discussion at the next meeting.