Committee Summary for Senate Energy and Natural Resources (01/27/2026)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB597 00:02:14.000 - 8:01:00 AM	Public Hearing	relative to utility rate increases to inflation-adjusted thresholds and performance incentive metrics for utilities.	Perkins Kwoka, Rebecca(D)[F]2025
SB591 SB 02660 00:11:11.760 - 8:09:57 AM	Public Hearing	allowing utility companies to own or build generation facilities.	Avard, Kevin(R)[B]2025
SB591 2024-0260s 00:24:20.400 - 8:23:06 AM	Public Hearing	allowing utility companies to own or build generation facilities.	Avard, Kevin(R)[B]2025
SB537 02:09:27.920 - 10:08:13 AM	Public Hearing	repealing the authorization for the public utilities commission to approve alternative forms of regulation.	Avard, Kevin(R)[B]2025
SB518 02:31:12.160 - 10:29:58 AM	Public Hearing	relative to asset condition projects.	Avard, Kevin(R)[B]2025
SB597 02:45:13.439 - 10:43:59 AM	Public Hearing	relative to utility rate increases to inflation-adjusted thresholds and performance incentive metrics for utilities.	Perkins Kwoka, Rebecca(D)[F]2025
Unclear 02:58:26.160 - 10:57:12 AM	General Working Session	Unclear

SB597: Senator Kevin Avart Information Only00:02:14.000 - 8:01:00 AM; Senator Avart introduces SB 597FN on behalf of the prime sponsor, Senator Perkins Quoka. He describes the bill as relating to utility rate increase to inflation adjusted thresholds and performance incentive metrics for utilities. He then closes his testimony and requests a recess until the prime sponsor arrives.
SB591 SB 02660: Senator Kevin Avart Information Only00:11:11.760 - 8:09:57 AM; Senator Avart, the prime sponsor, introduced SB 591 FN, which aims to allow utility companies to own and build generation facilities in New Hampshire, currently prohibited. He explained the bill's genesis stems from discussions on energy costs and the need for more generation, referencing experiences from conferences in DC and Louisiana. He noted that deregulation has not lowered energy costs as hoped, and restricting utilities has not benefited rates. He introduced amendment SB 02660, which repeals and reenacts RSA 374-F:3 to permit utilities to own and operate pre-1996 facilities for reliability and transition purposes. Under the amendment, electric distribution utilities may, with PUC approval, own and build facilities in NH up to 400 MW total capacity, apportioned by market share as determined by the PUC. Approval requires a finding that it serves the public interest and benefits ratepayers and taxpayers. The PUC may authorize long-term power agreements up to 20 years, with compliance to environmental requirements. Importantly, utilities are prohibited from earning a rate of return on capital expenditures under this chapter to ensure a level playing field, allowing them to enter the generation market at their own risk without guaranteed returns.
SB591 SB 02660: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:18:45.120 - 8:17:31 AM; The speaker engages in a brief exchange about the share of lead served in New Hampshire, clarifying that lead is banned and not served. They note that the technical details are beyond their expertise and suggest someone behind them could provide more information. The discussion touches on the complexities of energy, mentioning moving parts, electrons, and confirming that energy involves electrons.
SB591 SB 02660: Alec Omera, Director of External Affairs at Unitil Information Only00:19:39.919 - 8:18:25 AM; Alec Omera from Unitil states that they have no formal position on SB 591 due to no current projects and recent review of the amendment. He highlights Unitil's interest in exploring generation opportunities that benefit customers, referencing the Kingston solar array built under RSA 374G. He questions if the new language conflicts with existing projects and raises concerns about the rate of return provision's impact on business opportunities and risk. Overall, Unitil is open to generation concepts that make sense for business and customers. During Q&A with Senator Waters, he notes the Kingston project's cost benefits but defers on national solar costs, acknowledging renewable growth in New England.
SB591 2024-0260s: Molly Connors, New England Power Generators Association (NEPGA) Oppose00:24:20.400 - 8:23:06 AM; Molly Connors testifies in opposition to SB 591, appreciating the goal of attracting new generation but expressing concerns about utilities entering the volatile power generation market. She notes that New Hampshire utilities have not owned significant generation for years due to the high-risk nature of the industry, and that private developers are the experts who have built nearly 10,000 MW in the last 15 years. Allowing utilities to own generation would undermine wholesale markets that have driven investments, without speeding construction or lowering costs, and instead shift risks and overruns to consumers. She highlights that recent rate increases are driven by transmission and distribution costs, not generation, and provides an example of stranded costs from a utility-owned coal plant versus private losses. During Q&A, she discusses alternatives like subsidiaries or power purchase agreements, the inherent advantages of incumbent utilities, and emphasizes focusing on non-generation costs to lower rates.
SB591 2024-0260s: J Monahan, representing Constellation Oppose00:47:50.480 - 8:46:36 AM; J Monahan presents testimony on behalf of David Greer from Constellation, noting it was written for the original bill but applies similarly to the amendment. He highlights concerns about inviting a monopoly utility into a competitive market, creating an uneven playing field. He points out that utilities can already form unregulated affiliates for generation, citing examples like Eversource's LLC with Hydro Quebec for Northern Pass. Constellation worries that allowing utilities to shift risks to ratepayers could deter other investors and send a negative market signal. Despite this, Constellation supports working with the state to add generation, mentioning their recent acquisition of Calpine, which owns a major facility in Londonderry, and offers to contribute to discussions.
SB591 2024-0260s: Clifton Below, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Information Only00:53:56.000 - 8:52:42 AM; Clifton Below, chair of the regulatory legislative affairs committee for the Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire (CPNH), provides historical context on New Hampshire's electric industry restructuring in the 1990s to address rising rates. He presents data from the Retail Energy Supply Association showing that competitive states like New Hampshire have seen lower price increases and more generation growth compared to monopoly states, using Vermont as a contrast. Below argues against repealing restructuring principles that prevent cost-shifting between customer classes. He advocates for enabling small-scale generation under 5 MW, including solar, storage, and micro-nuclear, through direct off-take agreements for community power aggregators. He explains how this could reduce transmission needs, shave peaks, and lower overall costs by better utilizing existing capacity and providing dynamic pricing signals. In response to questions, he clarifies that self-generation by large users could prevent grid expansions and cost increases for residential ratepayers by spreading fixed costs more efficiently.
SB591 2024-0260s: Donald Greece, Consumer Advocate Oppose01:09:48.159 - 9:08:34 AM; Donald Greece, the state's Consumer Advocate representing residential utility customers, opposes the bill, drawing parallels to Captain Ahab's pursuit in Moby Dick to critique high utility returns on equity (ROE). He argues for revising 'guaranteed rate of return' to 'opportunity not guaranteed to earn a reasonable rate of return,' tied to risk per constitutional standards, criticizing 9.5% ROEs as excessive for low-risk monopolies. He agrees with prior witnesses on maintaining restructuring's risk transfer to investors and notes generation costs are not driving rate increases—transmission and distribution are, due to unscrutinized investments. Greece expresses frustration over lack of consultation in legislative efforts to address rates and supports the amendment's prohibition on ROE for these investments to avoid subsidizing utilities. He emphasizes needing more generation but through competitive means, not utilities, and calls for policies on demand response, storage, and regional ties like with Quebec to enhance reliability without rate hikes. In discussion, he agrees on the need for generation near load to reduce transmission costs.
SB591 2024-0260s: Unidentified Speaker Information Only01:27:46.000 - 9:26:32 AM; The speaker discusses the potential for more even distribution of electricity use based on actual capacity, suggesting that all usage patterns would become similar. They affirm that price signals could encourage consumers to use electricity when it is cheaper to produce, thereby reducing the need to build and utilize additional assets during peak times when production is more expensive.
SB591 2024-0260s: Josh Elliot, Department of Energy Information Only01:29:40.080 - 9:28:26 AM; Josh Elliot provides neutral testimony on the bill, emphasizing the need for continued conversation on energy affordability and system issues. He notes no silver bullet exists for fixing the energy system and suggests options like a study commission or department investigation. He highlights diverse perspectives from stakeholders and promotes energy efficiency programs like New Hampshire Saves as a quick way to reduce costs. He discusses amendments addressing facility limits and caps.
SB591 2024-0260s: Michael Lica, Eversource Energy Information Only01:36:07.440 - 9:34:53 AM; Michael Lica represents Eversource, appreciating the bill's intent to address supply challenges amid high wholesale prices and cold weather reliance on expensive oil. He clarifies that supply volatility significantly impacts costs, countering claims that only transmission and distribution drive increases. Eversource has no plans to enter generation but sees the bill as enabling optional utility involvement with PUC review. He explains rate of return is a ceiling, not guaranteed, set through rigorous processes, and discusses complications in generation development like permitting and policy changes.
SB591 2024-0260s: Nick Krakoff, Conservation Law Foundation Oppose01:49:43.679 - 9:48:29 AM; Nick Krakoff opposes the bill, arguing it departs from restructuring laws aimed at competitive markets for cost reduction. Allowing up to 400 MW utility ownership risks ratepayer costs from overruns, especially for expensive advanced nuclear. He recommends long-term energy procurements as a safer alternative to achieve similar goals without utility ownership risks, and suggests increasing limits in RSA 374G for smaller distributed resources. He advocates for demand response, efficiency, and time-of-use rates over large generation.
SB591 2024-0260s: Jonathan Han, representing people of New Hampshire and Northstar Capital Support01:55:17.119 - 9:54:03 AM; Jonathan Han supports the bill, focusing on energy cost volatility and the need for more generation, particularly small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs). He argues New Hampshire relies too much on out-of-state sources and that nuclear provides predictable costs and high ROI for taxpayers, powering 15% of residential usage with one 300 MW reactor. He urges state-federal collaboration for multi-MW projects to reduce volatility and create jobs, emphasizing private incentives and current federal pro-nuclear support.
SB537: Senator Aar (prime sponsor) Information Only02:09:27.920 - 10:08:13 AM; Senator Aar introduces the bill to repeal PUC authorization for alternative regulation forms, noting it was requested by the executive branch.
SB537: Josh Elliot, Department of Energy Support02:10:16.960 - 10:09:02 AM; Josh Elliot supports repealing the specific alternative regulation statute for clarity, ensuring performance-based mechanisms undergo prudent, used, and useful reviews under RSA 378:28. It does not prohibit alternatives within cost-of-service frameworks and aims to prevent unscrutinized returns.
SB537: Dena Dennis, Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire Information Only02:17:14.319 - 10:16:00 AM; Dena Dennis is neutral, cautioning against removing tools from the PUC's toolbox that could improve utility regulation if alternative/incentive mechanisms prove beneficial.
SB537: Donald Crease, Consumer Advocate Oppose02:18:15.920 - 10:17:01 AM; Donald Crease opposes repeal, urging fixes to address issues like unscrutinized returns in recent cases rather than eliminating the statute. He distinguishes between problematic 'free money' alternatives and beneficial performance incentives that reward good behavior without violating prudence standards. Confirms no impact on New Hampshire Saves funding.
SB537: Sam Evans Brown, Clean Energy New Hampshire Oppose02:21:15.760 - 10:20:01 AM; Sam Evans Brown opposes the bill, arguing alternative regulation is key to affordability by changing the regulatory paradigm. Acknowledges complexity in implementation but advises against discarding it due to initial misfires.
SB537: Nick Craigoff, Conservation Law Foundation Oppose02:24:10.800 - 10:22:56 AM; Nick Craigoff opposes, noting alternative regulation like performance-based ratemaking can contain costs and prioritize affordability, as in other states. Cost-of-service can incentivize overinvestment; repeal eliminates a useful tool without addressing root causes of rate increases.
SB537: Michael Lacata, Eversource Oppose02:24:58.080 - 10:23:44 AM; Michael Lacata opposes, viewing repeal as prohibiting PUC approval of alternatives, a statute since 1994. It's enabling, not mandatory, and performance-based ratemaking aligns incentives with customer benefits like reliability. Multi-year plans could stabilize rates amid inflation; all spending still faces prudence review.
SB518: Senator Avard (prime sponsor) Information Only02:31:12.160 - 10:29:58 AM; Senator Avard introduces the bill from the executive branch, outlining definitions, certification, application modifications, agency roles in site evaluations, and expanding the SEC fund for monitoring costs.
SB518: Josh Elliot and Dan Failen, Department of Energy Support02:32:26.479 - 10:31:12 AM; Josh Elliot supports the bill to address transmission costs. Dan Failen explains it increases state oversight of asset condition projects (e.g., pole replacements) lacking federal review, protecting ratepayers from unnecessary $4.2B+ expenses since 2016. Sets SEC criteria for necessity, alternatives, and cost-effectiveness without delaying timelines.
SB518: Michael Carter (partial, consumer advocacy) Oppose02:50:10.319 - 10:48:56 AM; Michael Carter opposes, arguing it could delay necessary transmission upgrades, increasing costs as seen in other states (e.g., $68M in inland projects). Supported by business, labor, and safety coalitions concerned about wildfire risks and reliability impacts.
SB597: Senator Rebecca Perkins Kwoka (prime sponsor) Support02:45:13.439 - 10:43:59 AM; Senator Perkins Kwoka introduces the bill to stabilize rates and encourage grid modernization via performance-based ratemaking if rates exceed 4% inflation-adjusted thresholds. Addresses high NH costs (39% above national average), recent increases, and disincentives in traditional structures for efficiency. Amendment updates for PUC dockets and Eversource discussions.
SB597: Representative from Project Less Red Tape Support02:52:36.560 - 10:51:22 AM; The speaker from Project Less Red Tape advocates for the legislation to reduce regulatory burdens and facilitate infrastructure investment in New Hampshire. They argue that state intervention in processes like tariff filings and prudency proceedings consumes limited resources and causes delays compared to faster complaint filing options, such as the ongoing 206 complaint against Eversource. They note that it's not unprecedented for regulators to disallow cost recovery for projects, citing examples from Southwest Power Pool, PJM, and other jurisdictions. The speaker warns that without this bill, political blame and external events like wildfires could lead to project delays and increased costs, urging the committee to pass the legislation.
SB597: Joe Casey, International Representative for the IBEW for New England States, representing Local 104 the Lineman Local for New Hampshire Oppose02:57:14.160 - 10:56:00 AM; Joe Casey opposes SB 597 as it stands, emphasizing that adding another layer of bureaucracy through the SEC would delay projects and negatively impact the members of Local 104 and their families. He has no immediate ideas for amendments but is open to suggestions to improve the bill without going full-blown.
Unclear: Committee Chair Information Only02:58:26.160 - 10:57:12 AM; The committee decides to recess the hearing. They discuss scheduling future sessions for bills including SB 586, SB 593, SB 518, and SB 597, opting to move SB 597 to the 10th due to time constraints and its critical nature. They plan to limit session lengths, consider additional times like Thursdays, and assist with other bills.

Avard, Kevin(Chairman)(R)[B]2025	Pearl, Howard (V Chairman)(R)[B]2025	Watters, David(D)[D-]2025
Rosenwald, Cindy(D)[F]2025	McConkey, Mark(R)[B]2025