Committee Summary for House Science, Technology and Energy (02/02/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB1745 00:06:20.240 - 8:05:06 AM	Public Hearing	relative to the allocation of public utility costs to ratepayers.	Thomas, Wendy(D)[CT]2025
HB1775 00:35:36.640 - 8:34:22 AM	Public Hearing	relative to utility ownership of natural gas and nuclear power generation facilities.	Bernardy, JD(R)[B+]2025
HB1723 02:45:57.439 - 10:44:43 AM	General Working Session	requiring utilities and electric grid operators to assess and report the vulnerability of high-voltage transformers to geomagnetic and electromagnetic disturbances, and to recommend mitigation measures to protect the state electric infrastructure.	Mattson, Rita(R)[B+]2025
HB1777 04:02:36.880 - 12:01:22 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the enhanced 911 system fund.	Hakken-Phillips, Mary(D)[F]2025
HB1748 05:02:52.718 - 1:01:38 PM	Public Hearing	establishing the New Hampshire energy efficiency and resource development authority.	Sweeney, Joe(R)[A]2025
HB1742 06:53:26.958 - 2:52:12 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the protection of customer-generators from inadvertent enrollment in third-party electricity supply programs.	Vose, Michael(R)[A-]2025

HB1745: Representative Wendy Thomas (Merrimack) Support00:06:20.240 - 8:05:06 AM; Representative Thomas introduced HB1745FN, explaining it prohibits public utilities from passing certain costs to ratepayers, including rate case litigation expenses (attorney fees, expert witnesses, consultants), trade association dues, membership fees, and promotional activities like marketing and advertising. She argued this protects ratepayers from funding expenses that do not directly benefit them, promotes transparency and accountability, and ensures bills reflect only necessary service-related costs. She highlighted the bill's brevity and provided an example from the fiscal note: Eversource's recent rate case cost $2 million, with New Hampshire ratepayers potentially saving $20,000. During questioning, she clarified that chambers of commerce sponsorships should be funded by utilities' own money, not ratepayers, and defended that these costs may be unnecessary or imprudent, despite PUC approvals.
HB1745: Michael Licato (Eversource Energy) Oppose00:12:30.959 - 8:11:16 AM; Michael Licato opposed HB1745FN, arguing it would prohibit recovery of prudently incurred expenses, constituting an unconstitutional taking per the 1944 Supreme Court case Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas. He noted utilities must participate in PUC proceedings like rate changes, energy efficiency reviews, net metering, and investigations into rate structures, requiring legal and expert involvement. These costs undergo rigorous PUC review under 1900 rules, with challenges possible, and are not a 'blank check.' He mentioned Eversource's performance-based ratemaking with a 4-year stayout to reduce rate cases, but costs can escalate due to non-settling parties, as in their recent 12-day litigated hearing. Passing the bill could encourage strategic delays to bankrupt utilities financially, leading to more litigation. He confirmed lobbying costs are not recoverable and emphasized benefits from chamber participation for economic development and customer engagement. On bill composition, delivery charges (about 30% of bills) are 50% expenses (including disputed costs) and 50% capital, with returns only on equity portion up to 9.5%.
HB1745: Alec Omera (Unitil) Oppose00:31:46.640 - 8:30:32 AM; Alec Omera opposed HB1745FN, corroborating Eversource's points on the prudence of these costs under established precedent. He emphasized that rate cases are not solely for shareholder benefit but document services, programs (e.g., time-of-use rates), and capital projects for PUC approval to ensure system safety and reliability. Rate filings involve collaboration, with recent Unitil cases settled. He defended chamber involvement as supporting local businesses, which benefits all customers by maintaining economic health and stabilizing rates, as commercial entities form a substantial rate base. He asserted all aspects of rate filings, including return on equity, are necessary for capital raising and system maintenance.
HB1775: JD Bernardi, Representative, Rockingham 36 (Hampton Falls, Kensington, South Hampton, Newton, Plaistow) Support00:35:36.640 - 8:34:22 AM; JD Bernardi, the prime sponsor, introduced House Bill 1775, noting a typo in paragraph three, Roman I, where the word 'to' is missing after 'eligible'. He explained that New Hampshire's projected energy needs exceed supply for the next decade, as the state currently produces more power than it uses but production and transmission are lagging. To support potential new data centers and larger loads, base load nuclear and peaking gas power are needed. During a recent storm, the power mix included 35% oil, which he argued should be minimized and substituted with natural gas to reduce pollution. In the deregulated market, only the legislature can mandate investments in new power resources, as the PUC or Department of Energy lack authority. The bill is enabling legislation allowing utilities to invest up to 10% of their peak power distribution in nuclear and gas, similar to the prior allowance for 7% in solar, as Unitil did in Kingston. He noted that since 2015, rates have risen higher in deregulated states compared to integrated ones, suggesting a 10% investment move is modest.
HB1775: Representative JD Bernardi, Rockingham 36 Support00:42:02.800 - 8:40:48 AM; Representative Bernardi continues his testimony in support of HB1775, emphasizing that the bill is enabling legislation allowing the state to encourage utilities to invest up to 10% in natural gas and nuclear power projects, with 90% from private sources. He argues it prepares New Hampshire for reliable, affordable power in the 2030s. He addresses questions on reactive power from gas peaking units, cost comparisons in restructured vs. vertically integrated markets, the Vogle nuclear project as a management failure rather than indicative of future costs, standardization of nuclear designs to reduce expenses, risk sharing with ratepayers limited to 10%, and the need to push for new power amid pipeline constraints and oil dependency during storms. He clarifies the bill piggybacks on existing 7% solar investment allowances and enables traditional baseload and peaking sources without mandating firm gas transportation.
HB1775: Matt Young, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only01:07:52.880 - 9:06:38 AM; Matt Young from the Department of Energy states the department is neutral on HB1775. He flags ambiguous language on page 1, line 19 regarding utility investments in resources 'located on or interconnected to' the local distribution system and offers to work on clarifications. He notes the bill moves toward reregulation in a restructured market, potentially with consequences, and mentions the ongoing HB 690 investigation into ISO New England participation and alternative regulatory structures for affordable, reliable power, which may include recommendations on generation promotion.
HB1775: Clifton Below, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Oppose01:15:05.520 - 9:13:51 AM; Clifton Below opposes HB1775, arguing it undermines 30 years of restructuring by allowing significant utility ownership of generation, contrary to RSA 374-G's focus on small-scale (<5 MW) distributed resources to minimize costs. He provides historical data showing New Hampshire's rates improved from highest in the nation in 1994 to competitive today (9th in residential kWh cost), crediting deregulation and competition. Handouts compare competitive vs. monopoly states, showing lower price increases and higher generation output in competitive markets post-2008. He warns of risks like cost recovery ambiguity (distribution vs. default service rates), potential stranded costs socialized to all ratepayers, market distortion favoring utilities over private investment, and discouraging competition, urging inexpedient to legislate or interim study to avoid repeating past policy mistakes like PSNH's overextension.
HB1775: David Krier, Constellation Oppose01:37:08.800 - 9:35:54 AM; David Krier, manager of state government affairs at Constellation, the largest independent power producer in the US, opposes HB1775. He argues that allowing utilities to own up to 10% of generation undermines the principles of market restructuring in New Hampshire, which has benefited from competitive markets compared to monopoly states. This would impose high costs on ratepayers for limited megawatt hours, as utilities face the same regulatory hurdles as independents without speeding up construction. He notes that even limited ownership risks distorting competitive markets, similar to concerns with prior solar ownership allowances. During Q&A, he discusses PPAs' potential market impacts, affirms New Hampshire's energy export status, and explains economic barriers to nuclear and natural gas development due to fleeting incentives and moderate demand growth.
HB1775: Molly Connors, New England Power Generators Association Oppose01:45:34.320 - 9:44:20 AM; Molly Connors from NEPGA opposes HB1775, applauding its intent to attract new generation but arguing it would exacerbate challenges by undermining competitive wholesale markets that have driven nearly 10,000 MW of new generation in 14 years. Utilities, experts in transmission, would shift risks from shareholders to ratepayers without accelerating construction or reducing costs, as they face the same permitting and supply chain issues. She highlights New England's modest demand growth, contrasting it with other regions, and warns that utility ownership signals private investors to avoid the region, competing unfairly as a monopoly. The bill presumes natural gas or nuclear as solutions, but markets should decide technologies. She references historical utility misinvestments like coal plants that became uneconomic. In Q&A, she emphasizes understanding demand before acting, notes flat peak demands, and discusses policy stability, gas supply issues, queue limitations, and dual-fuel trends amid recent reliability challenges.
HB1775: Michael Lacata, Eversource Support02:05:34.480 - 10:04:20 AM; Michael Lacata from Eversource supports HB1775 as enabling legislation, not a mandate, providing a tool to address grid and capacity constraints highlighted by recent cold snaps relying on finite oil generators and constrained natural gas. The bill limits investments to 10% of distribution load (about 11 million MWh statewide), with facilities interconnected to local systems capped at 5 MW each, allowing multiple small projects like Unitil's Kingston solar. Eversource has no current plans but sees value amid ISO projections of 1.8% annual load growth and doubled winter peaks by 2045, driven by electrification. They previously explored but paused solar due to federal uncertainties. In Q&A, he clarifies minimal market disruption from small-scale ownership under RSA 374G, supports innovation via markets, notes PUC oversight for public interest, and addresses energy efficiency spending differences with neighbors. He affirms support stems from future capacity needs, not profit motives, with risks regulated by PUC.
HB1775: Alec Ora, Unitil Information Only02:29:27.040 - 10:28:13 AM; Alec Ora from Unitil states no formal position on HB1775, lacking current projects, but views it as enabling like RSA 374G used for their 4.9 MW Kingston solar array online this year. For Unitil, 10% cap equates to 30 MW or 5-6 such projects. They prioritize customer cost benefits and preserving opportunities for similar facilities, potentially including fuel-neutral options like fuel cells, leveraging their gas infrastructure. In Q&A, he notes higher O&M costs for gas/nuclear vs. solar, defers capacity needs to ISO, and confirms energy efficiency programs face regulatory scrutiny in all states, balanced against local priorities.
HB1775: Nick Kraoff, Conservation Law Foundation Oppose02:36:27.600 - 10:35:13 AM; Nick Kraoff from CLF opposes HB1775, sharing goals for affordability but arguing it departs from restructuring laws promoting competition, where utilities divested generation except narrow 6% DER exceptions under RSA 374G (5 MW cap). The 10% allowance risks ratepayer burdens from cost overruns, especially for advanced nuclear, which has proven expensive. He questions the interconnection limit's intent, noting it could allow up to 200 MW for Eversource without explicit caps. CLF favors private sector for nuclear to avoid rate base risks. In Q&A, he affirms CLF's interest in affordable clean energy, deems 9-12% lower neighbor consumption significant per cost-benefit analyses showing $2-3 benefits per dollar spent on efficiency, subject to scrutiny.
HB1775: Subcommittee Discussion on HB1723 Information Only02:44:12.479 - 10:42:58 AM; The hearing closes on HB1775, transitioning to a brief subcommittee work session on HB1723 before lunch, focusing on grid resilience to GIC and GNC. Key members discuss offering state leadership, reviewing the bill's requirements for utilities to inventory equipment (transformers 100 kV+) and estimate hardening costs. Eversource objects to the narrow definition covering distribution and transmission; debate ensues on adjusting to 200 kV or alternatives to better target vulnerabilities without overreach. Session to resume post-lunch.
HB1723: Unidentified Speaker Information Only02:45:57.439 - 10:44:43 AM; Discusses potential fixes to bill language, such as specifying transmission transformers without indicating voltage. Raises objection to the proposed 85 volts per kilometer electric field standard from IEC6100-2-9, questioning if it's appropriate compared to the current NERC standard of 12 volts per kilometer, suggesting a middle ground like 20 or 50.
HB1723: Representative Gorman Information Only02:47:51.840 - 10:46:37 AM; Acknowledges the need for an appropriate number between 12 and 85 volts per kilometer but notes the subcommittee lacks expertise. Proposes relying on outside help, mentioning constituent John Simmonelli, former Eversource and ISO New England engineer, to assist despite his current residence in North Carolina.
HB1723: Representative Matson Information Only02:48:59.840 - 10:47:45 AM; Shares responses from an expert witness addressing Eversource objections. Explains the bill's intent to use the existing NERC TPL7 model with the international 85 V/km standard for E3 to assess GIC from solar storms and nuclear HEMP. Notes that higher field strength directly correlates with GIC magnitude. Suggests amending the bill to replace magnetic field reference with 85 V/km electric field using the IEC standard, emphasizing that lower values like 2 or 20 V/km are insufficient for protection.
HB1723: Eversource Representative Information Only02:51:32.479 - 10:50:18 AM; Expresses willingness to be constructive. Reiterates concerns from testimony: clarifying the modeling standard, scope (transmission vs. distribution), data sharing, jurisdictional issues under FERC, and cost allocation since New Hampshire lacks authority over transmission planning. Notes prior NERC modeling was for transmission only, distribution would require new work.
HB1723: Representative Bernardi Information Only02:53:55.600 - 10:52:41 AM; Asks if utilities would have a problem if FERC adopted the 85 V/km standard instead of NERC's 12 V/km.
HB1723: Eversource Representative Information Only02:55:14.160 - 10:54:00 AM; States no problem; utilities would model and comply with a higher NERC standard as directed, with costs covered through FERC-approved transmission rates.
HB1723: Chair Thomas Information Only02:56:05.200 - 10:54:51 AM; Seeks clarification on payment if FERC directs the modeling. Emphasizes the subcommittee's intent is not to solve nationally but to take substantive state action at little or no cost to ratepayers, putting New Hampshire 'on the scoreboard.' Defers to Representative Matson for agreement.
HB1723: Representative Matson Information Only02:57:55.359 - 10:56:41 AM; Agrees on getting recognition started at the state level to prompt national action.
HB1723: Chair Thomas Information Only02:57:10.319 - 10:55:56 AM; Considers changing the bill to a resolution but emphasizes substantive action. Asks if utilities could use existing models for a cost projection to harden New Hampshire's transmission grid without huge expense.
HB1723: Eversource Representative Information Only02:57:55.359 - 10:56:41 AM; Offers to consult technical experts for an estimate on applying a different level to the existing NERC model without significant cost.
HB1723: Unidentified Representative Information Only02:59:22.160 - 10:58:08 AM; The speaker emphasizes that the bill's purpose is a survey to identify vulnerable transformers, not to fix them, and questions whether utilities already have this information via NERC models. They suggest applying a more realistic vulnerability threshold, like 85 volts per kilometer, and seek cost estimates for reassessment.
HB1723: Representative McGee Information Only03:00:35.120 - 10:59:21 AM; Representative McGee appreciates the discussion, highlights jurisdictional and security concerns with releasing vulnerability reports, and supports quantifying solutions without detailed public disclosures. He notes sharing sensitive information with federal agencies and suggests a non-confidential executive summary.
HB1723: Unidentified Committee Member Information Only03:01:35.760 - 11:00:21 AM; The member inquires about the number of distribution line transformers at risk and asks Eversource to provide a topline estimate using the bill's definition.
HB1723: Eversource Representative Information Only03:02:45.439 - 11:01:31 AM; The representative agrees to check and provide the number of impacted distribution transformers, referencing a prior mention in an earlier hearing.
HB1723: Committee Chair Information Only03:02:45.439 - 11:01:31 AM; The chair announces a lunch break at around 1:00 PM and indicates they may continue the work session or move on based on lunch discussions.
HB1777: Representative Mary Hecken Phillips, Hanover and Lyme Support04:02:36.880 - 12:01:22 PM; Representative Phillips introduces HB1777FN, explaining it addresses the improper use of the enhanced 911 fund for state radio communications, which violates RSA 106-H and has contributed to the fund's insolvency projected for FY2026. She details the history, including a recent 25-cent surcharge increase, and notes approximately $10 million diverted over five years. The bill tightens fund usage to direct 911 operations, adds enforcement, auditing, and oversight per federal recommendations. She argues for consumer protection, public safety, and legislative accountability, dismissing exaggerated fiscal notes estimating $7 million impact as overly conservative. She suggests the real impact is about $1-2 million annually for radio communications and urges OTP or vacation to another committee.
HB1777: Vice Chair Thomas Information Only04:20:10.720 - 12:18:56 PM; Vice Chair Thomas asks if surcharge taxes from burner phones sold at big box stores like Walmart are included in the E911 fund.
HB1777: Representative Phillips (response) Information Only04:20:10.720 - 12:18:56 PM; Phillips is unsure about burner phone surcharges, suggesting it might not apply due to lack of ongoing service agreements.
HB1777: Vice Chair Thomas (follow-up) Information Only04:21:17.920 - 12:20:03 PM; Thomas recalls a prior bill to collect surcharges from store-bought phones and asks about their fund allocation.
HB1777: Representative Phillips (response) Information Only04:21:17.920 - 12:20:03 PM; Phillips is not familiar with subcategories of revenue inflows and apologizes for not knowing.
HB1777: Representative Gorman Information Only04:21:17.920 - 12:20:03 PM; Representative Gorman asks if current RSA 106-H:9 permits fund transfers and why a new bill is needed.
HB1777: Representative Phillips (response) Information Only04:22:30.880 - 12:21:16 PM; Phillips explains the current RSAs do not permit such transfers, and the bill codifies prohibition to prevent future issues, especially given past insolvency.
HB1777: Representative Thomas Information Only04:23:26.800 - 12:22:12 PM; Thomas asks how far back repayment of misappropriated funds would go and about guardrails on civil actions by complainants.
HB1777: Representative Phillips (response) Information Only04:23:26.800 - 12:22:12 PM; Phillips clarifies repayment is forward-moving, not retroactive. For civil actions, normal class action rules apply as a last resort after safe harbor and AG discretion, per federal recommendations to ensure enforcement.
HB1777: Representative Harrington Information Only04:25:31.920 - 12:24:17 PM; Harrington seeks clarification on the $7 million vs. $1 million fiscal discrepancy and whether the bill reflects reality over the department's estimates. He also asks if citizen enforcement is forward-looking and if disciplinary actions were taken.
HB1777: Representative Phillips (response) Information Only04:25:31.920 - 12:24:17 PM; Phillips explains the $2 million average from department's budget analysis for radio communications contrasts with the conservative $7 million fiscal note. She confirms forward-looking enforcement and suggests asking the department about discipline.
HB1777: Representative McGee Information Only04:27:32.080 - 12:26:18 PM; McGee questions if the 25-cent increase was necessary given diversions and if the bill addresses potential fee reduction.
HB1777: Representative Phillips (response) Information Only04:28:27.199 - 12:27:13 PM; Phillips notes the increase predates budget deliberations and posits the bill could enable fee reevaluation by the commission, potentially reducing it.
HB1777: Mark Doyle, Director, Division of Emergency Services and Communications, Department of Safety Oppose04:30:23.199 - 12:29:09 PM; Doyle opposes HB1777FN, arguing it disrupts the statutorily authorized funding for the statewide radio communications network, integral to the 911 system per federal regulations (47 CFR 9.23) and codified in RSA 21-P:48A via HB2. He warns of fiscal risks, funding unpredictability from general fund shifts, potential system degradation, increased local costs, and politicization. The radio system provides redundancies for 911, supports 90 jurisdictions, and has been funded by 911 surcharges since 2012 with legislative approval. He urges inexpedient to legislate to maintain stability and public safety.
HB1777: Vice Chair Thomas Information Only04:37:02.160 - 12:35:48 PM; Thomas asks if point-of-sale surcharges from track phones contribute to the 911 fund and estimates the amount.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:37:02.160 - 12:35:48 PM; Doyle confirms they do contribute and offers to provide the amount.
HB1777: Vice Chair Thomas (follow-up) Information Only04:37:02.160 - 12:35:48 PM; Thomas asks if eliminating state vehicle inspections affects the 911 fund.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:37:02.160 - 12:35:48 PM; Doyle states it will not affect the fund.
HB1777: Representative Nutter Information Only04:38:03.920 - 12:36:49 PM; Nutter compliments the thorough testimony and requests a copy.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:38:03.920 - 12:36:49 PM; Doyle agrees to provide written testimony via email or copies.
HB1777: Representative Swanson Information Only04:38:03.920 - 12:36:49 PM; Swanson asks if the Department of Safety is the only state agency with a critical infrastructure role requiring state funding.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:39:11.760 - 12:37:57 PM; Doyle seeks clarification and states he lacks the answer.
HB1777: Representative Harrington Information Only04:39:11.760 - 12:37:57 PM; Harrington questions the department's interpretation of 'statewide emergency notification system' in RSA 106-H:9 to include radio systems beyond direct 911.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:40:13.760 - 12:38:59 PM; Doyle affirms it is integrated into the radio network, which has multiple functions including emergency alerts, and is allowable under FCC rules codified in state law.
HB1777: Representative Harrington (follow-up) Information Only04:41:12.718 - 12:39:58 PM; Harrington seeks confirmation that the radio system is funded entirely from 911 despite multi-use, rather than split funding.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:41:12.718 - 12:39:58 PM; Doyle explains full funding since 2012 per FCC allowances for infrastructure, codified in RSA 21-P:48A, as it supports E911 continuum; distinguishes from subscriber radios.
HB1777: Representative Thomas Information Only04:43:55.520 - 12:42:41 PM; Thomas asks if the bill's independence for audits and reports in the 911 commission is already practiced.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:44:54.480 - 12:43:40 PM; Doyle confirms quarterly transparent reporting to the E911 commission and internal audits by the division of administration.
HB1777: Representative Swanson (follow-up) Information Only04:44:54.480 - 12:43:40 PM; Swanson seeks clarification on whether the bill focuses on appropriate uses for state communications infrastructure and if other infrastructures receive E911 funds.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:45:51.280 - 12:44:37 PM; Doyle confirms focus on communications infrastructure; E911 funds go only to Department of Safety uses, no other external infrastructures.
HB1777: Unidentified Representative Information Only04:47:04.638 - 12:45:50 PM; The representative asks about the realism of 911 fund insolvency and potential remedies.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:47:04.638 - 12:45:50 PM; Doyle explains no increase since 2016 led to depletion of carry-forward balance; recent 25-cent increase provides 10-year stability, ensuring 50% operating expense reserve for emergencies.
HB1777: Unidentified Representative (follow-up) Information Only04:50:02.560 - 12:48:48 PM; The representative asks to explain discrepancies between fiscal note and budget analysis on E911 fund.
HB1777: Amy Newberry, Director of Administration, Department of Safety Information Only04:50:02.560 - 12:48:48 PM; Newberry explains fiscal note covers all shared costs beyond direct PSAP, leading to higher estimates; fund is stable post-increase.
HB1777: Unidentified Representative (further follow-up) Information Only04:51:23.280 - 12:50:09 PM; The representative asks what the discrepancy means for the fund's health.
HB1777: Amy Newberry (response) Information Only04:51:23.280 - 12:50:09 PM; Newberry states the fund is in a good place with biannual planning for costs and reserves; discrepancies highlight potential obligations, but current management ensures compliance and efficiency in the interconnected emergency system.
HB1777: Representative Harrington Information Only04:53:55.520 - 12:52:41 PM; Harrington questions terminology differences between 'state radio communication system' in RSA 21-P:48A and 'statewide emergency notification system' in 106-H:9, asking if they are the same.
HB1777: Mark Doyle (response) Information Only04:54:52.798 - 12:53:38 PM; Doyle explains 21-P:48A includes the 106-H:9 component; original 106-H:9 language predates 2012 radio funding, suggesting synchronization for clarity.
HB1748: Representative Joe Sweeney (Prime Sponsor, NH House) Support05:02:52.718 - 1:01:38 PM; Representative Sweeney introduced HB1748FN, proposing the creation of the New Hampshire Energy Efficiency and Resource Development Authority, nicknamed 'White Mountain Power.' He emphasized New Hampshire's need for long-term energy competitiveness amid high and volatile energy costs due to reliance on imported natural gas and regional grid issues. The bill aims to attract advanced nuclear generation for carbon-free energy, protect ratepayers with stable prices, and integrate energy efficiency with generation planning. The authority would coordinate workforce development, financing, and economic benefits like jobs, without micromanaging markets. Sweeney addressed questions on funding from system benefits charge and RGGI funds, structure similar to the Business Finance Authority, compatibility of efficiency and nuclear goals, loan guarantees, oversight exemptions, and data privacy, expressing openness to amendments.
HB1748: Josh Elliot (Director, NH Department of Energy, Division of Policy and Programs) Support05:31:56.878 - 1:30:42 PM; Elliot supported the bill's philosophical underpinnings, particularly shifting energy efficiency programs from utilities to a quasi-state agency to eliminate inherent tensions where utilities reduce demand for their product while earning incentives that benefit shareholders. He noted the New Hampshire Saves program's success but highlighted $5 million annual performance incentives going to utilities. For the nuclear financing aspect, he questioned setting up a loan guarantee entity like the Business Finance Authority. He acknowledged bill details need refinement, such as statutory references, staffing expertise conflicts, and exemptions from rules like RSA 91-A, but endorsed evaluating the concept per the state energy strategy. He addressed fiscal notes, comparisons to other states, employee benefits, and workforce training, suggesting no need to reinvent existing programs.
HB1748: Matt Mayberry (CEO, New Hampshire Homebuilders Association) Oppose05:56:06.240 - 1:54:52 PM; Mayberry opposed the bill as written, arguing it would decimate the effective New Hampshire Saves program, which assisted 140,000 families in 2024 with energy-saving measures. He supported an all-of-the-above energy approach and nuclear development but urged removing efficiency components to focus solely on a nuclear resources authority. He criticized creating bureaucracy, suggested repurposing PUC staff, and highlighted the program's role in weatherization and community support, warning of overload for a new agency handling 140,000 applications from day one.
HB1748: Chase Poyer (President, Resilient Buildings Group, Contoocook, NH) Oppose06:02:56.798 - 2:01:42 PM; Poyer, operating in New Hampshire Saves programs, praised utilities' excellent administration of efficiency initiatives across income levels and sectors. He saw no problems with the current system and opposed introducing more government involvement, stating he likes things as they are and hopes for no changes. He noted no experienced tension in utilities' goals and would not oppose a bill focused only on nuclear.
HB1748: Alec Omera and Cindy Carroll (Director of External Affairs and VP of Customer Energy Solutions, Unitil) Oppose06:07:35.040 - 2:06:21 PM; Omera and Carroll opposed the bill, asserting no evidence of issues with utility-administered energy efficiency programs, which they've managed for 25 years as core to customer solutions. They refuted claims of tension, noting performance incentives and rate mechanisms ensure accountability. They highlighted the Granite State test's role in transparency and cost-effectiveness, warned of disruptions to demand response and data privacy, and emphasized partnerships with state agencies. They supported competitive procurement for low-income programs via CAP agencies and noted other states' failed state-run models.
HB1748: Nick Rickoff (Conservation Law Foundation) Oppose06:22:56.638 - 2:21:42 PM; Rickoff opposed HB1748 due to insufficient oversight and transparency in approving three-year energy efficiency plans, as the authority's board would decide without PUC review or adjudicative process, unlike current law or models in Maine and Vermont. He acknowledged merit in some ideas but cited the bill's complexity and flaws, recommending a study commission with stakeholders like DOE, PUC, consumer advocate, legislators, former E-Z board members, and businesses to explore nuclear and other generation, rather than advancing the bill as is.
HB1748: Carolyn O'Connor and Eric Stanley (Director of External Affairs and Manager of Energy Efficiency, Liberty Utilities) Oppose06:28:53.920 - 2:27:39 PM; O'Connor and Stanley opposed the bill, stating no evidence a separate agency would deliver programs more cost-effectively. They highlighted cross-subsidization risks, lack of performance accountability, and utilities becoming mere tax collectors without control. They noted serving 60,000 customers in 2025, high trust in utilities per ESO research, and historical delivery since the 1980s. They affirmed the Granite State test's importance and existing legal alignments, expressing concerns over potential conflicts.
HB1748: Michael Licata and Mark Lamemenager (Eversource Energy) Oppose06:33:58.718 - 2:32:44 PM; Licata and Lamemenager opposed energy efficiency portions, calling a shift to an untried quasi-state entity disruptive, costlier, and job-losing. They noted utilities' $2+ benefit-cost ratio, statewide participation, 24 awards, and risks of state accounts diverting funds. Lamemenager emphasized protections like QA/QC, audits, and reporting, higher admin costs in non-utility models elsewhere, and current coverage of all proposed responsibilities except local constraints. They questioned direct funding increases yielding better results without program redesign.
HB1748: Dena Dennis (Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire) Information Only06:43:14.000 - 2:42:00 PM; Dennis stated neutrality, praising the bill's goals of affordability and economic security but noting complex policy questions. She recommended a study committee or commission for stakeholder engagement on accountability, transparency, interactions with PUC/DOE/community power (RSA 53-E), taxpayer/ratepayer risk protections, and preserving competitive markets over government concentration. She advocated private investment for nuclear risks and policy focus on open access and oversight, offering collaboration via amendments or study.
HB1742: Representative Michael Bose, Rockingham District 5, Epping Information Only06:53:26.958 - 2:52:12 PM; Representative Bose introduced HB1742, explaining it restores lost net metering credits to customer generators inadvertently enrolled in community aggregation programs. He noted this is rare but has caused significant losses, like $100,000 for a hydro facility over three months. The bill allows restoration of credits for up to six months and applies retroactively. He described how opt-in programs sometimes enroll net metering customers despite exclusions, and the bill has bipartisan support.
HB1742: Josh Elliott, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:59:42.160 - 2:58:28 PM; The Department of Energy is neutral on HB1742 but supports addressing inadvertent enrollments as a consumer protection measure. Elliott noted informal complaints have arisen, though none formal. He suggested clarifying language in Roman numeral 3 to apply to both NEM 1.0 and 2.0 tariffs, ensuring billing adjustments make customers whole based on their prior tariff. He also recommended assigning costs to the responsible party and changing 'may' to 'shall' for PUC rules. He discussed current mediation processes for complaints, emphasizing the bill provides clear timelines unlike general complaint procedures.
HB1742: Dena Dennis, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support07:09:01.920 - 3:07:47 PM; CPCNH supports HB1742 for protecting net-metered customers from inadvertent enrollments due to utility data errors. Dennis explained PUC rules require accurate data to exclude such customers, but failures have led to lost credits. The bill ensures prompt restoration and reimbursement up to six months. She noted CPCNH excludes most net-metered customers due to lack of granular export data and market obligations. She agreed to work on amendments for tariff clarity and highlighted broader net metering issues, urging passage to safeguard consumers and align with RSA 53-E.
HB1742: Jackson Kaspari, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Support07:15:21.360 - 3:14:07 PM; Kaspari, responding to questions, described CPCNH's collaborative efforts with utilities on inadvertent enrollments. Early on, CPCNH reimbursed affected customers despite believing utility data errors were at fault. Now, they email and drop net-metered customers post-enrollment to prevent harm. He confirmed the bill's timelines (10 and 5 business days) are realistic based on changeover experiences.
HB1742: Michael Lacata, Eversource Energy Support07:19:27.520 - 3:18:13 PM; Eversource supports HB1742 for clarifying utility responsibilities in inadvertent enrollments, which occurred twice in their territory. Lacata noted system limitations prevent full data export, requiring manual input, and sought a waiver for rules. He suggested extending investigation to 20 business days, applying changes at the next billing cycle, and limiting restoration to three months. He opposed assigning costs to responsible parties to avoid litigation, preferring socialization among customers via stranded cost recovery, as exports benefit the system overall.
HB1742: Howard Plant, Freedom Energy Logistics Support07:33:47.520 - 3:32:33 PM; Freedom Energy Logistics strongly supports HB1742, noting utilities' tracking of customer generators is imperfect. Inadvertent enrollments cause loss of export payments, as third-party suppliers lack practical compensation methods. For CCA programs, they advise opt-in for net-metered customers and warn of opt-out notices. Plant highlighted significant past impacts on generators and affirmed the bill's value in resolving unresolved issues.
HB1742: Patrick Walsh, Turncycle Solutions Oppose06:49:05.040 - 2:47:51 PM; Patrick Walsh, operations manager at Turncycle Solutions, a NH-based energy efficiency contractor, opposed HB1748FN. He emphasized the current program's stability, which supports hiring, training, and scheduling for low-income weatherization. The bill introduces uncertainty that could delay projects, disrupt schedules, reduce hours, lay off workers, and cause customer confusion and higher bills. He urged careful changes to maintain energy savings, jobs, and predictability.

Vose, Michael(Chairman)(R)[A-]2025	Bernardy, JD(Clerk)(R)[B+]2025	Thomas, Douglas(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2025
Notter, Jeanine(R)[A-]2025	Schneller, John(R)[B+]2025	Harrington, Michael(R)[A]2025
McGhee, Kat(D)[CT]2025	Ploszaj, Tom(R)[A-]2025	Mattson, Rita(R)[B+]2025
Raynolds, Ned(D)[D-]2025	Thomas, Wendy(D)[CT]2025	Parshall, Lucius(D)[F]2025
Caplan, Tony(D)[D-]2025	Summers, James(R)[B]2025	Cormen, Thomas(D)[F]2025
Swanson, Dale(D)[D-]2025	Larochelle, John(D)[F]2025	Sabourin dit Choinière, Matt(R)[A-]2025