Committee Summary for House Science, Technology and Energy (04/14/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
Unclear 00:03:29.760 - 8:04:05 AM	General Working Session	Unclear
HB710 00:06:40.400 - 8:07:16 AM	Executive Session	(New Title) enabling electric utilities to own, operate, and offer advanced nuclear resources, and relative to purchased power agreements for electric distribution utilities and limitations on community customer generators.	Vose, Michael(R)[A-]2025
SB65 1594H 02:06:07.199 - 10:06:43 AM	Executive Session	relative to stormwater management for solar arrays.	Pearl, Howard (R)[B]2025
SB230 02:10:37.920 - 10:11:13 AM	Executive Session	(New Title) relative to electric utility restructuring and investment in distributed energy resources.	Watters, David(D)[D-]2025
SB232 02:12:34.840 - 10:13:10 AM	Executive Session	clarifying certain net metering terms and conditions.	McConkey, Mark(R)[B]2025
SB233 2024-1592H 02:17:04.519 - 10:17:40 AM	Executive Session	(New Title) relative to the grid modernization advisory group.	Watters, David(D)[D-]2025
SB108 2025-1585H 02:22:34.160 - 10:23:10 AM	Executive Session	relative to the department of energy.	Pearl, Howard (R)[B]2025
SB232 2025-162H 04:10:32.199 - 12:11:08 PM	Executive Session	clarifying certain net metering terms and conditions.	McConkey, Mark(R)[B]2025
SB106 04:18:25.359 - 12:19:01 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the participation of customer generators in net energy metering.	Lang, Timothy(R)[B-]2025
SB228 1581 06:30:38.558 - 2:31:14 PM	Public Hearing	relative to the limitations on community customer generators.	Watters, David(D)[D-]2025

Unclear: Committee Chair Information Only00:03:29.760 - 8:04:05 AM; The Committee Chair opened the session, welcomed everyone, and announced the agenda for the day which included a work session on several Senate Bills related to energy. They also introduced a new member of the committee, Representative Sabor Dwanier from Rockadam district 30 Cbrook, replacing Representative Tom Plogeé.
Unclear: Representative Sabor Dwanier Information Only00:04:55.199 - 8:05:31 AM; Representative Sabor Dwanier introduced himself to the committee, sharing his background as a graduate of Clarkson University in environmental engineering, his service in the US Air Force, and his experience with aircraft maintenance and deployment to Kuwait in support of Operation Inherent Resolve.
Unclear: Committee Chair Information Only00:05:59.039 - 8:06:35 AM; The Committee Chair thanked Representative Dwanier for his service and welcomed him to the committee, then proceeded to outline the agenda for the work session, which included discussing Senate Bills 65, 230, 232, 233, and 108, all related to energy policies and regulations.
Unclear: Representative McGee Information Only00:06:40.400 - 8:07:16 AM; Representative McGee introduced an amendment to Senate Bill 65, which is related to storm water management for solar arrays. The amendment, numbered 1594H, was co-sponsored by the chair and included an additional sentence requested by the New Hampshire Lakes Association and other members to exclude projects in shoreland areas from permit requirements.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only00:06:40.400 - 8:07:16 AM; Representative McGee concludes their previous statement regarding the amendment to HB710, discussing the changes to the original language concerning terrain alteration.
HB710: Representative Harrington Information Only00:08:22.280 - 8:08:58 AM; Representative Harrington seeks clarification on the amendment to HB710, specifically regarding solar panel placement and the alteration of terrain permit review process.
HB710: Chair Information Only00:09:32.000 - 8:10:08 AM; The chair summarizes the amendment's intent to require projects to undergo the standard alteration of terrain permit review process instead of the permit notification process.
HB710: Chair Information Only00:10:41.560 - 8:11:17 AM; The chair moves the discussion to Senate Bill 230FN, explaining that sections one and two are deemed unnecessary and suggesting an ITL motion for the bill.
HB710: Representative Corman Information Only00:12:05.040 - 8:12:41 AM; Representative Corman agrees with the chair's assessment on Senate Bill 230FN, supporting the ITL motion.
HB710: Representative Harrington Information Only00:12:05.040 - 8:12:41 AM; Representative Harrington mentions a conference call with the Nuclear Energy Institute and expresses concerns about risks to ratepayers from advanced nuclear resources, supporting the ITL motion for Senate Bill 230FN.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only00:13:13.839 - 8:13:49 AM; Representative McGee supports the ITL motion for Senate Bill 230FN, stating the bill is redundant and accomplishes nothing.
HB710: Chair Information Only00:14:01.120 - 8:14:37 AM; The chair introduces Senate Bill 232, discussing the public hearing's focus on section one, which aims to protect hydro electricity generators under net metering.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only00:14:47.440 - 8:15:23 AM; Representative McGee explains the economic model of small hydro under net metering, addressing concerns about double dipping and supporting the current system.
HB710: Representative Corman Information Only00:15:59.680 - 8:16:35 AM; Representative Corman expresses concern about section one of Senate Bill 232, suggesting it needs clarification to ensure it's an either-or situation for hydro generators.
HB710: Representative Harrington Information Only00:16:45.600 - 8:17:21 AM; Representative Harrington agrees with Representative Corman and criticizes the lower part of the bill starting at line 22 for being ineffective in terms of net metering grandfathering.
HB710: Chair Information Only00:17:41.919 - 8:18:17 AM; The chair delays further discussion on Representative Harrington's point to focus on Representative Corman's suggestion for clarifying language in Senate Bill 232.
HB710: Heidi Kroll, Granite State Hydrop Power Association Information Only00:18:50.080 - 8:19:26 AM; Heidi Kroll explains that there are checks and balances in place to prevent double dipping under net metering and agrees to check the rules further.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only00:19:53.760 - 8:20:29 AM; Representative McGee inquires about any federal prohibition on participating in the wholesale market while net metering, to which Heidi Kroll responds that there is no conflict with federal law.
HB710: Representative Swanson Information Only00:22:18.520 - 8:22:54 AM; Representative Swanson presents options for amending section two of Senate Bill 232, suggesting either removal or rewording to prevent retroactive changes to net metering tariffs.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only00:23:51.400 - 8:24:27 AM; Representative McGee discusses the necessity of the proposed bill's language to ensure stability in the energy market, particularly for those operating on slim margins. She highlights the importance of maintaining the current net metering tariffs through 2040 to avoid retroactive changes that could disrupt existing businesses. She also addresses the potential for expansion of facilities, suggesting that such cases would be handled by the Public Utilities Commission under existing rules.
HB710: Representative Kaplan Support00:26:16.640 - 8:26:52 AM; Representative Kaplan supports the amendment suggested by Representative McGee, stating that the original bill's language was confusing. He agrees that no retroactive changes should affect stakeholders, and he clarifies that new laws would supersede the current legislation if necessary, addressing concerns about potential conflicts with future statutes.
HB710: Representative Matson Information Only00:29:16.559 - 8:29:52 AM; Representative Matson inquires about the status of expansions to existing facilities under the proposed bill, questioning whether additions would be grandfathered into the existing rules or fall under new regulations. This raises a discussion about not tying the hands of regulators with too specific language.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only00:30:30.480 - 8:31:06 AM; Representative Bernardi discusses potential conflicts that could arise if the Public Utilities Commission faces opposing laws, suggesting that such issues might need to be resolved in court. He expresses a preference for less regulatory language in the bill, indicating that complex issues might require legislative solutions in the long term.
HB710: Representative Harrington Oppose00:31:51.440 - 8:32:27 AM; Representative Harrington opposes the proposed language that would restrict the Public Utilities Commission's ability to make changes to net metering tariffs in the future. He argues that the energy market is dynamic and that flexibility should be maintained to allow for necessary adjustments without legislative delays. He also expresses concern about setting a precedent for guaranteed subsidies.
HB710: Representative Mickey Support00:33:28.640 - 8:34:04 AM; Representative Mickey supports the bill, emphasizing the need for stability in the energy market, particularly for hydroelectric facilities. He argues that the agreed-upon net metering rates until 2040 should be protected from retroactive changes to ensure businesses can operate without fear of sudden economic disruption. He stresses the importance of legislative clarity to protect clean energy contributors in New Hampshire.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only00:41:05.200 - 8:41:41 AM; Representative Bernardi expressed that there is no indication from the PUC or DOE of wanting to disrupt the energy sector. He believes the 2040 timeline set by the PUC is credible and sufficient, and sees no need to respond to what he considers irrational fears about the future of energy policy.
HB710: Representative Croll Information Only00:42:43.200 - 8:43:19 AM; Representative Croll discussed potential language drafted by Michael Lacata for section one of the bill. The language specifies that renewable energy generators participating in ISO New England electricity markets must transfer ownership of energy, capacity, and ancillary services to the electric distribution utility to be eligible for net metering tariffs. This is still under review by lawyers.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only00:43:57.200 - 8:44:33 AM; Representative McGee raised concerns about the proposed language's applicability to all generators or just those participating in the ISO New England market. He noted that some generators, like certain solar installations, do not list with ISO and thus would not be affected by the proposed change. He emphasized the need for legal review to ensure clarity.
HB710: Representative Harrington Oppose00:49:57.839 - 8:50:33 AM; Representative Harrington opposed the idea of codifying a PUC decision into law, arguing it sets a dangerous precedent and could lead to future legislative changes or court challenges. He sees it as a step in the wrong direction for energy policy.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only00:52:01.559 - 8:52:37 AM; Representative Bernardi discussed Senate Bill 233, which proposes an energy reliability and large-scale storage tax force. He mentioned that due to a directive from the Speaker to avoid creating new commissions, an amendment was suggested to integrate the task force's responsibilities into the existing grid modernization advisory group.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Support00:54:08.119 - 8:54:44 AM; Representative Bernardi supported the amendment to Senate Bill 233, suggesting that the grid modernization advisory group should take on the task force's responsibilities without creating a new entity. He noted the group's existing reporting obligations and the need to trust their ability to manage their workload.
HB710: Vice Chair Thomas Support00:55:29.520 - 8:56:05 AM; Vice Chair Thomas supported the amendment to integrate the task force's responsibilities into the grid modernization advisory group, highlighting the avoidance of forming new committees and aligning with the bill's original intent.
HB710: Representative McGee Support00:56:34.400 - 8:57:10 AM; Representative McGee agreed with the amendment, noting the suitability of the grid modernization advisory group for handling grid reliability and storage issues. He mentioned discussions with a supporter of the original task force who also approved the amendment.
HB710: Representative Harrington Information Only00:57:32.000 - 8:58:08 AM; Representative Harrington suggested considering regional implications in the amendment, advocating for cooperation with other New England states and ISO New England. He also proposed adding legislative members to the advisory group to ensure a balanced approach to recommendations.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only00:59:20.480 - 8:59:56 AM; Representative Bernardi responded to concerns about regional cooperation, stating that existing legislation already directs the Department of Energy to advocate for New Hampshire's policies regionally. He noted that the DOE's involvement in the grid modernization advisory group should address these concerns.
HB710: Vice Chair Thomas Information Only01:00:23.920 - 9:00:59 AM; Vice Chair Thomas highlighted the difficulty in staffing new committees as mentioned by the Speaker, suggesting that adding more members to the advisory group might defeat the purpose of avoiding new commissions.
HB710: Representative Corbin Information Only01:01:31.760 - 9:02:07 AM; Representative Corbin expressed support for the amendment to integrate tasks into the grid modernization advisory group but raised concerns about the group's meeting frequency and ability to report timely, as suggested by the original Senate amendment.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only01:02:45.559 - 9:03:21 AM; Representative Bernardi discussed Senate Bill 108, mentioning an amendment to remove section two as recommended by the Department of Energy. He noted that the section to be removed deals with outdated net metering statutes.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only01:04:36.400 - 9:05:12 AM; Representative Bernardi suggested removing section two of the bill to make it uncontroversial, as it was deemed obsolete and most public hearing testimonies supported the remaining changes to clarify existing statutes. He sought feedback on this proposal.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:06:02.160 - 9:06:38 AM; Representative McGee expressed surprise at the proposal to remove section two, considering the language in it as clarifying and more straightforward compared to the existing, convoluted text. He questioned the reasons for wanting to remove this language.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:06:58.079 - 9:07:34 AM; Representative McGee further discussed the language in section two, emphasizing its consistency with Senate Bill 232 and its purpose in clarifying rate structures under certain circumstances. He expressed confusion about the Public Utilities Commission's (PUC) objection to this language.
HB710: Meg Stone, Department of Energy Information Only01:07:59.520 - 9:08:35 AM; Meg Stone from the Department of Energy explained that the language in section two was initially intended as clarifying but was removed following objections from the PUC. She suggested working with the PUC to find a solution for future sessions.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:08:56.000 - 9:09:32 AM; Representative McGee argued that the language in section two, particularly the part about tariffs, does not usurp the PUC's authority but rather clarifies the roles between the Department of Energy and the PUC as previously established. He questioned the PUC's objection, stating that it does not transfer any authority to the Department of Energy.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:09:56.719 - 9:10:32 AM; Continuing the discussion, Representative McGee emphasized that the language specifying rules adopted by the department does not imply a lack of public scrutiny or undue influence, as the roles and responsibilities were already clarified in previous legislation. He maintained that the sentence in question does not offend the PUC's jurisdiction.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:11:20.640 - 9:11:56 AM; Representative McGee reiterated that the language in question only specifies the adoption of rules by the department, which is consistent with prior legislative decisions and does not imply any transfer of authority or lack of transparency. He acknowledged the PUC's concerns but argued that the legislation does not support those concerns.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:12:26.120 - 9:13:02 AM; Representative McGee clarified that the language about rules adopted by the department aligns with previous legislative decisions about the roles between the Department of Energy and the PUC. He emphasized that the language does not transfer any authority or diminish public scrutiny, contrary to the PUC's concerns.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:13:36.239 - 9:14:12 AM; Representative McGee defended the language in the bill, asserting that it clearly states the rules will be adopted by the department, consistent with previous legislative decisions, and does not suggest any jurisdictional shift or lack of public scrutiny. He argued against the PUC's objection, stating it does not align with the actual content of the bill.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:14:47.360 - 9:15:23 AM; Representative McGee continued to argue that the language in the bill about the department adopting rules does not imply a transfer of authority or lack of transparency. He noted that the concerns raised by the PUC were not supported by the actual content of the legislation.
HB710: Representative McGee Information Only01:15:34.159 - 9:16:10 AM; Representative McGee concluded his argument by stating that the language in the bill, specifically regarding the department's role in adopting rules, is consistent with previous legislative decisions and does not undermine the PUC's authority or public scrutiny. He maintained that the PUC's concerns were not justified by the bill's content.
HB710: Robin Information Only01:16:49.800 - 9:17:25 AM; Robin, from the office, discussed the preparation of two amendments with the Office of Legislative Services (OLS). One amendment would remove section two but amend section one with new language, and the other would include both the amendment to section one and a new section two with the proposed language.
HB710: Representative Bernardi Information Only01:18:12.880 - 9:18:48 AM; Representative Bernardi inquired whether specific order numbers need to be cited in the law for alternative tariffs or if a general reference to alternative tariffs from a specific year would suffice. He noted that other parts of the law have cited specific orders.
HB710: Representative Swanson Information Only01:19:36.240 - 9:20:12 AM; Representative Swanson sought clarification on whether the Senate was aware of the PUC's objection to section two of SB 108 FN before passing it to the House. It was clarified that the PUC registered its objection during the Senate's public hearing, but the Department of Energy's recommendation to remove section two came later.
HB710: Representative Swanson Information Only01:18:57.960 - 9:19:33 AM; Representative Swanson was finishing speaking at 01:19:36.240, concluding the discussion on HB710.
SB65 1594H: Representative McGee Support02:06:07.199 - 10:06:43 AM; Representative McGee proposed and explained amendment 1594H to Senate Bill 65, stating it clarifies procedures for protected shoreland areas. The amendment was unanimously adopted by the committee.
SB65 1594H: Committee Vote02:07:00.639 - 10:07:36 AM; The committee voted unanimously to adopt amendment 1594H to Senate Bill 65, followed by a unanimous vote to pass the bill as amended (OTPA). The bill is to be placed on the consent calendar.
SB230: Vice Chair Thomas Support02:10:37.920 - 10:11:13 AM; Vice Chair Thomas moved and seconded a motion of ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate) for Senate Bill 230, citing that the bill is no longer needed due to changes made in House Bill 710.
SB230: Committee Vote02:11:24.400 - 10:12:00 AM; The committee voted unanimously to adopt the motion of ITL for Senate Bill 230, which will be placed on the consent calendar.
SB232: Chair Bose Information Only02:12:34.840 - 10:13:10 AM; Chair Bose explained that an amendment to Senate Bill 232 needs correction and will be revisited after lunch. The session was recessed until 1:00 PM.
SB232: Representative Corman Information Only02:14:03.119 - 10:14:39 AM; Representative Corman inquired about the amendment's application to net metering, which was confirmed by Chair Bose.
SB233 2024-1592H: Representative Bernardi Information Only02:17:04.519 - 10:17:40 AM; Representative Bernardi moved to pass Senate Bill 233 with amendment 2024-1592H. The amendment integrates the work of the task force related to SB233 into the grid modernization advisory group, thereby eliminating the need for a new organization and broadening the scope of the existing group to handle the tasks.
SB233 2024-1592H: Meg Stone, Department of Energy Information Only02:17:55.840 - 10:18:31 AM; Meg Stone provided information about the meeting frequency of the grid modernization advisory group. In 2024, the group met six times: twice in March, twice in June, once in August, and once in September. The report was due on November 1st and was submitted on time. There is no scheduled meeting for 2025 yet.
SB233 2024-1592H: Committee Members Vote02:20:35.359 - 10:21:11 AM; The committee voted unanimously (18-0) to adopt amendment 2024-1592H to Senate Bill 233. Subsequently, the committee voted unanimously (18-0) to pass Senate Bill 233 as amended. The bill was placed on consent without objection, and Representative Bernardi was tasked with writing the committee report, due by 4:00 PM on Tuesday.
SB108 2025-1585H: Committee Members Information Only02:22:34.160 - 10:23:10 AM; The committee discussed and adopted amendment 2025-1585H to Senate Bill 108. The amendment deletes section two of the bill and renumbers the subsequent sections. This change was recommended by the Department of Energy to avoid controversy over section two, which was opposed by the Public Utilities Commission.
SB108 2025-1585H: Committee Members Vote02:25:03.920 - 10:25:39 AM; The committee voted unanimously (18-0) to adopt amendment 2025-1585H. Following this, the committee also voted unanimously (18-0) to pass Senate Bill 108 as amended. The bill was placed on consent without objection, and the committee report was to be completed by 4:00 PM on Tuesday.
SB232 2025-162H: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:10:32.199 - 12:11:08 PM; The speaker moved to discuss Senate Bill 232 and proposed the motion to pass the bill as amended with amendment number 162H. The amendment modifies the bill by adding a requirement for renewable energy generators in ISO NE electricity markets to transfer market revenues to the interconnected electric distribution utility. The amendment also proposes deleting section two of the bill and renumbering the sections.
SB232 2025-162H: Representative Corman Information Only04:12:31.840 - 12:13:07 PM; Representative Corman expressed support for the amendment's section one changes but had reservations about deleting section two. He suggested replacing the language of section two with an amendment discussed earlier in the morning instead of deleting it, indicating he would accept the amendment as is if necessary.
SB232 2025-162H: Representative McGee Information Only04:13:45.120 - 12:14:21 PM; Representative McGee sought clarification on the sequential adoption of amendments, specifically how adopting amendment 1600H after 162H would affect the deletion of section two. He was informed that adopting 1600H after 162H would mean 1600H would be an addition to 162H.
SB232 2025-162H: Representative Corman Information Only04:14:53.359 - 12:15:29 PM; Representative Corman inquired about the possibility of adopting multiple amendments in committee, referencing past practices. He expressed concern over the conflict between the two amendments, specifically the deletion of section two in one amendment and its modification in the other.
SB232 2025-162H: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:15:47.680 - 12:16:23 PM; The speaker confirmed the committee's ability to adopt multiple amendments as long as they do not conflict, based on advice from the committee researcher. However, the clerk later informed that all amendments must be merged into one, leading to a decision to recess the session until the following week to prepare a combined amendment.
SB106: Senator Tim Lang, District 2 (Lakes Region) Support04:18:25.359 - 12:19:01 PM; Senator Lang introduced Senate Bill 106, which aims to increase the cap for renewable installations on industrial and commercial facilities from 1 megawatt to 5 megawatts and extend the net metering program to these installations. He emphasized the bill's role in making New Hampshire more competitive for attracting manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., highlighting the state's high energy costs as a barrier to economic growth. He noted that the bill supports self-generation, allowing businesses to control their energy costs and contribute to local economic development.
SB106: Michael Skelton, Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire Support04:22:35.760 - 12:23:11 PM; Michael Skelton, representing the Business and Industry Association, supported Senate Bill 106, emphasizing its importance in addressing New Hampshire's high energy costs, which he described as an economic disadvantage. He highlighted the bill's support for self-generation as a step forward in mitigating these costs for large energy users. Skelton also addressed concerns about cost shifting, stating that the bill's limited expansion of net metering mitigates this risk. He stressed the need for an all-encompassing approach to energy policy and cited successful examples from other states like Texas.
SB106: Michael Skelton, Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire Support04:22:35.760 - 12:23:11 PM; Michael Skelton emphasized the importance of continuing discussions on SB106 to move it forward, highlighting the need for a policy framework to make economic sense for businesses to invest in solar installations up to 5 megawatts. He argued that other states are implementing similar policies to enhance economic competitiveness, suggesting New Hampshire should follow suit to support businesses in mitigating high energy costs.
SB106: Representative Bernardi Information Only04:28:43.840 - 12:29:19 PM; Representative Bernardi inquired about what prevents businesses from currently building 5 megawatt solar installations. Michael Skelton responded that without the right policy framework, it may not make economic sense for businesses to invest in solar, as they are not primarily in the electricity generation business but need strategies to address rising energy costs to remain competitive.
SB106: Representative Summerus Information Only04:30:22.080 - 12:30:58 PM; Representative Summerus questioned the benefits of on-grid solar versus off-grid power solutions, mentioning a recent house bill that supports off-grid implementations. He referenced Texas's approach to off-grid power for AI companies. Michael Skelton responded that these strategies are not mutually exclusive and advocated for pursuing all forms of energy capacity to enhance energy abundance in New Hampshire.
SB106: Representative Harrington Oppose04:32:27.920 - 12:33:03 PM; Representative Harrington expressed concerns about the reliability of solar power and the potential impact of intermittent generation on the grid, citing the North American Reliability Corporation's warnings. He argued that overbuilding intermittent resources could lead to increased costs and decreased reliability. Michael Skelton countered that he does not see how adding local solar generation would increase reliability risks and mentioned the over-reliance on natural gas as a significant issue in the region.
SB106: Unnamed Speaker Information Only04:38:44.480 - 12:39:20 PM; An unnamed speaker, possibly Michael Skelton, mentioned an upcoming energy symposium where reliability issues would be discussed, including a presentation by a representative from ISO New England. He emphasized that over-reliance on natural gas due to insufficient pipeline capacity is a root cause of reliability concerns in the region, rather than the addition of solar capacity.
SB106: Representative Bernardi Information Only04:39:48.718 - 12:40:24 PM; Representative Bernardi commented on the region's reliance on liquefied natural gas due to pipeline expansion bans in neighboring states, which has increased costs and affected energy reliability.
SB106: Mr. Skelton Information Only04:40:34.080 - 12:41:10 PM; Mr. Skelton discusses the challenges of energy supply in New Hampshire, highlighting the overreliance on natural gas and the limitations due to foreign supply. He mentions the importance of local, in-state resources and supports the expansion of gas pipeline capacity. He also addresses questions about the bill's requirement for industrial users to consume at least 33% of their generated energy, stating it's not a problem as businesses with large energy needs are likely to use most of what they generate. He emphasizes the need for multiple strategies to address energy costs and the frustration among businesses due to the lack of policy solutions.
SB106: Representative Corman Information Only04:41:44.320 - 12:42:20 PM; Representative Corman questions Mr. Skelton about the bill's requirement for industrial users to consume at least 33% of their generated energy, to which Mr. Skelton responds that it is not a problem and aligns with the intent of the bill.
SB106: Representative Kaplan Support04:42:46.400 - 12:43:22 PM; Representative Kaplan supports the bill, viewing it as an attempt to solve the problem of attracting and retaining businesses in New Hampshire. He suggests expanding the net metering program and increasing the cap for industrial generators to 5 megawatts. He also mentions the potential of technology and battery storage to address reliability concerns and asks about the current state of industrial generators and how they handle excess energy.
SB106: Representative McGee Support04:45:09.840 - 12:45:45 PM; Representative McGee appreciates Mr. Skelton's testimony, emphasizing the broader benefits of building out energy infrastructure in New Hampshire. He highlights how it can lower demand, reduce costs, and decrease contributions to transmission costs. He sees the efforts of industry as a need for relief and an investment opportunity that the state should welcome, as it reduces dependence on out-of-state fuels.
SB106: Representative Schneller Oppose04:48:58.958 - 12:49:34 PM; Representative Schneller expresses concern over the bill, viewing it as a subsidy for certain businesses, which could lead to picking winners and losers. He worries about the broader impact on ratepayers and other businesses that do not receive similar benefits. Mr. Skelton responds by clarifying that he does not view the policy as a subsidy but as an incentive for economic growth, similar to other state programs, and emphasizes the broader economic benefits of supporting the manufacturing sector.
SB106: Representative Bernardi Oppose04:51:45.120 - 12:52:21 PM; Representative Bernardi expressed opposition to the bill, citing the example of Maine where the implementation of a similar policy led to a $210 million increase in ratepayer costs over two years. He argued that the proposed policy is a subsidy that would raise costs for everyone due to the need for double building to ensure power reliability when solar power is not available.
SB106: Representative Schneller Information Only04:51:45.120 - 12:52:21 PM; Representative Schneller concluded his testimony by discussing the difference between subsidies and policy incentives, suggesting that the outcome of the policy would be beneficial for economic competitiveness in New Hampshire.
SB106: Russ Greenlaw, Associated Grocers of New England, Penacook, NH Support04:54:18.040 - 12:54:54 PM; Russ Greenlaw, representing Associated Grocers of New England in Penacook, NH, supported the bill. He explained that their business, which is considering expansion, struggles with high energy costs. He detailed their current energy consumption and the need for more power generation, arguing that the bill would help them invest in solar without seeking subsidies. Greenlaw emphasized their commitment to New Hampshire and their desire to contribute to solving energy generation issues in the state.
SB106: Hannah Campbell, The Balsams, Colebrook, NH Support05:06:45.920 - 1:07:21 PM; Hannah Campbell from The Balsams in Colebrook, NH, expressed support for SB106. She highlighted the potential for the bill to make it financially viable for The Balsams to invest in solar power, aligning with their goal of self-sufficiency and supporting the North Country's economic development.
SB106: Kyle King, Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast, Bedford, NH Support05:09:36.600 - 1:10:12 PM; Kyle King from Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast in Bedford, NH, supported the bill. He noted that the company's ambitious climate goals include reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and they are exploring on-site solar options. The current 1-megawatt cap limits their ability to meet these goals, and the bill would allow them to expand up to 5 megawatts, aiding job creation and affordable power.
SB106: Jessica Keeler, Ski New Hampshire, Conway, NH Support05:14:25.920 - 1:15:01 PM; Jessica Keeler from Ski New Hampshire in Conway, NH, supported the bill, focusing on the high energy costs and the need for more energy options. She explained that ski areas, which cannot relocate, would benefit from increased energy supply options, especially solar, to manage costs and support sustainability goals. She also addressed the financial viability of solar investments through net metering credits.
SB106: Amy Charbonneau, Continental Paving, Londonderry, NH Support05:25:36.080 - 1:26:12 PM; Amy Charbonneau from Continental Paving in Londonderry, NH, supported the bill. She detailed the company's energy usage and the need to offset costs to remain competitive. She argued that the bill would help them utilize net metering across their multiple locations, reducing costs and improving their ability to bid on contracts. Charbonneau emphasized their commitment to New Hampshire and the lack of subsidies they've received, viewing the bill as a means to support their business and employees.
SB106: Unnamed Speaker, New Hampshire businesses Information Only05:35:28.798 - 1:36:04 PM; The speaker discussed the economic benefits of New Hampshire businesses participating in infrastructure projects, such as the highway construction which saved the state an estimated $1.2 billion due to competitive low-cost bidding, costing only $800 million instead. They also mentioned their readiness to invest in net metering up to a megawatt at their facility but noted that a one-megawatt installation would not be cost-effective, requiring a five-megawatt installation to offset the costs of the project.
SB106: Unnamed Speaker, New Hampshire businesses Information Only05:36:28.798 - 1:37:04 PM; The speaker continued to discuss the financial considerations of investing in solar energy, explaining that a one-megawatt net metering system would not be viable for their business due to high upfront costs and the need to scale up to five megawatts to achieve a return on investment within five to ten years. They emphasized their goal is to reduce electricity costs rather than becoming energy producers.
SB106: Sam Evans Brown, Clean Energy New Hampshire Support05:39:27.200 - 1:40:03 PM; Sam Evans Brown testified in support of the bill, emphasizing that the New Hampshire net metering tariff is not a subsidy but rather compensation that recognizes the value of distributed energy resources. He highlighted a study that found these resources are undercompensated, arguing that the bill would not lead to cost shifting as seen in Maine. He also discussed the reliability benefits of behind-the-meter solar, stating it helps during winter cold snaps by reducing the use of oil, and cost benefits by reducing reliance on fossil fuels. He responded to questions about the capacity markets and the potential increase in capacity costs, suggesting that savings in energy markets could offset these costs. Additionally, he addressed concerns about renewable penetration in New England and the potential for increased net metering capacity, explaining the current regulatory framework and the economic benefits of distributed generation.
SB106: Chris Peterson, Merrimack County Support05:56:00.920 - 1:56:36 PM; Chris Peterson from Merrimack County supports SB106, emphasizing the benefits of net metering for county governments. He discussed the ongoing project of building a 3.38-megawatt solar array on county property, which began in 2021 when the net metering cap was increased to 5 megawatts. The project was downsized to fit the budget, and he provided financial details, noting the impact of the PUC's decision to stop the net metering program in 2040. Peterson highlighted the project's aim to save taxpayers money, given the county's consistent electricity usage across facilities like the corrections facility, nursing home, and assisted living facility. He also mentioned the project's potential to stabilize the grid in the North Boscawen area.
SB106: Charles Nickerson, New Hampshire Association of Counties Support06:01:39.360 - 2:02:15 PM; Charles Nickerson from the New Hampshire Association of Counties supports SB106, focusing on the importance of a guaranteed 20-year net metering period. He noted that Rockingham County is close to launching its solar array and stressed the uncertainty caused by the current net metering expiration in 2040. Nickerson explained that a shorter return period could deter municipalities and counties from pursuing solar projects. He highlighted the potential financial loss for Rockingham County if net metering ends in 2040 and emphasized that any savings are directly used to lower taxes for county residents.
SB106: Josh Elliot, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:04:43.840 - 2:05:19 PM; Josh Elliot from the New Hampshire Department of Energy provided a neutral stance on SB106, discussing technical, policy, and administrative aspects. He pointed out inconsistencies in the bill's language regarding the definition of institutional entities and issues with the eligibility and consumption requirements for net metering. Elliot also discussed the policy implications of cost shifting and the grandfathering issue, noting that the bill would undo a PUC decision. He highlighted the need for careful consideration of the bill's impact on all ratepayers and mentioned the administrative burden of reviewing group host applications. Elliot concluded by suggesting that any costs should be attributed only to commercial and industrial customers if the bill moves forward.
SB106: Josh Elliot, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:04:43.840 - 2:05:19 PM; Josh Elliot concluded his testimony by discussing the implications of energy consumption and net metering policies. He highlighted that if the goal is to reduce a business's energy consumption without using it as a supplemental revenue stream, the energy usage offset should be close to 100%. He also clarified questions about sections of the bill related to RSA 362A, specifically addressing the definitions and sections within the statute.
SB106: Representative Corman Information Only06:19:50.320 - 2:20:26 PM; Representative Corman raised concerns about the sections of the bill and their references to RSA 362A. He questioned the existence of facilities mentioned in section 4 of the bill and their relation to the definitions in section 362A:9, suggesting that the section's wording might be problematic.
SB106: Representative Kaplan Information Only06:22:18.240 - 2:22:54 PM; Representative Kaplan continued the discussion on the bill, focusing on the Department of Energy's stance on net metering. He questioned the data used by the department to support increasing the percentage of usage to 100%, referencing the VDRS report which suggested cost shifting in the opposite direction.
SB106: Josh Elliot, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:23:12.798 - 2:23:48 PM; Josh Elliot responded to Representative Kaplan's questions by clarifying the findings of the VDRS report. He explained that while there might be undercompensation in transmission and distribution, there was overcompensation in energy costs, leading to a slight cost shift to non-participating members. He further discussed the rationale behind suggesting 100% usage offset, emphasizing that it aligns with the goal of offsetting energy costs rather than selling electricity back to the grid.
SB106: Representative Swanson Information Only06:25:54.160 - 2:26:30 PM; Representative Swanson questioned the fairness of setting the usage offset at 100% without considering the initial investment costs made by entities to establish their systems. He sought clarification on whether the department's position meant that these entities should not recover their investments.
SB106: Josh Elliot, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:27:00.400 - 2:27:36 PM; Josh Elliot clarified that setting the usage offset at 100% does not mean entities cannot recover their investments. He explained that if entities consume 100% of what they produce behind the meter, they effectively pay zero for electricity, allowing them to recover their investment over the lifetime of the system.
SB106: Representative Corman Information Only06:28:04.240 - 2:28:40 PM; Representative Corman questioned the need for hiring a full-time utility analyst as mentioned in the fiscal note, given the workload associated with the bill's implementation. He sought to understand whether such extensive staffing was necessary for the anticipated number of filings.
SB106: Josh Elliot, New Hampshire Department of Energy Information Only06:28:59.920 - 2:29:35 PM; Josh Elliot responded to Representative Corman's question by detailing the expected workload increase due to the bill. He explained that the number of entities eligible could be significant, potentially up to 55% of the state's load, justifying the need for a full-time position to handle the anticipated filings and follow-up work.
SB228 1581: Senator David Waters, District 4 Support06:30:38.558 - 2:31:14 PM; Senator David Waters introduced Senate Bill 228, focusing on an amendment that modifies the bill's sections. He proposed removing section one and concentrating on sections two and three. The bill aims to adjust the size of community customer generator projects, proposing a pilot program allowing projects up to 500 kilowatts and expanding the total megawatt capacity. The senator discussed the rationale behind these changes, emphasizing the need for a pilot program to assess the appropriate tariff rate for projects between 100 kilowatts and 500 kilowatts. He also mentioned the expansion of the definition of municipal hosts to include educational institutions and public housing authorities.
SB228 1581: Andrea Picket, Portsmouth Housing Authority Support06:38:52.400 - 2:39:28 PM; Andrea Picket from the Portsmouth Housing Authority testified in support of Senate Bill 228. She highlighted the importance of the bill in enabling housing authorities to pursue energy-efficient solutions, particularly through increasing the net metering cap from 100 kilowatts to 500 kilowatts. This change would allow organizations like hers to plan energy systems that match their operational needs, thereby reducing long-term operating costs and maximizing the impact of their resources. Picket also emphasized the significance of the bill's enhancements to the electric assistance program, which would benefit more low and moderate-income households by providing more stable utility costs. Additionally, she appreciated the amendment clarifying that public housing authorities are included in the definition of municipal host, ensuring they can pursue appropriately scaled energy projects.
SB228 1581: Chris Schlier, Elm Grove Companies Support06:48:57.040 - 2:49:33 PM; Chris Schlier, representing Elm Grove Companies, spoke in support of Senate Bill 228. He explained that Elm Grove is involved in multifamily housing development across New Hampshire, including in Concord, Hooksett, Lee, Londonderry, Manchester, Newmarket, Rochester, and Salem. Schlier stressed the importance of the bill in providing stable, low-cost energy to low-income residents, particularly through the expansion of opportunities for public housing authorities. He discussed the financial challenges in the housing sector due to rising interest rates and inflation, and how the bill would help manage costs and pass savings onto residents. Schlier also supported the bill's provision for a pilot program allowing projects under 500 kilowatts to access net metering values as small customer generators.
SB228 1581: Sam Evans Brown, Clean Energy New Hampshire Support06:52:37.478 - 2:53:13 PM; Sam Evans Brown from Clean Energy New Hampshire testified in support of Senate Bill 228. He emphasized the bill's role in ensuring that low-income residents in multifamily housing could benefit from community-scale distributed generation. Brown also mentioned a letter from Rob Dapice of New Hampshire Housing, which supports the bill and highlights how a $23 million federal grant under the Solar For All program could benefit more residents if the bill passes, due to larger economies of scale from community generators.
SB228 1581: Lindseay Burggoyne, Revision Energy Support06:54:53.478 - 2:55:29 PM; Lindseay Burggoyne, Director of Policy and Government Affairs for Revision Energy, supports SB228 and its amendment. She highlights that the bill makes reasonable incremental changes to New Hampshire's net metering policy, fostering self-generation. She notes the bill's provisions to increase access to net metering for low to moderate income residents, public entities, and small customer generators. Burggoyne apologizes for her testimony's misalignment with the amendment sections but emphasizes the importance of the new pilot program for projects between 100 and 500 kilowatts. She argues that current net metering rates undervalue larger projects and suggests aligning with the Department of Energy's value of distributed resources report to fairly compensate these projects, thus reducing energy burdens for Granite Staters.
SB228 1581: Brendan Flity, DuPont Group Support07:00:33.520 - 3:01:09 PM; Brendan Flity from the DuPont Group presented four letters of support for SB228 from National Granite Flooring in Hudson, Greater NSHA YMCA, Promoscentric in Newmarket, and Stonyfield Organic in Londonderry. He apologized for the volume of letters but entered them into the record, stating he was not prepared to answer questions on behalf of those companies but provided contact information in the letters.
SB228 1581: Josh Elliot, Department of Energy Information Only07:01:38.280 - 3:02:14 PM; Josh Elliot, Director of the Division of Policy and Programs at the Department of Energy, provided information regarding SB228, focusing on amendment 1581s. He noted that the sponsor dropped section one of the bill dealing with billing language and focused on sections two and three, which propose a pilot program. Elliot expressed concerns about the pilot's scope and duration, noting that it might be exhausted quickly. He also mentioned the lack of clear guidance on the program's implementation and the broad eligibility criteria. Elliot discussed the implications of increasing the megawatt cap for community solar projects and the complexities surrounding the eligibility of public housing authorities and other entities under the current statute. He concluded by stating the department's neutral stance on the bill.

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