Relative to least cost integrated resource plans of utilities; municipal hosts for purposes of limited electrical energy producers; the cost of compliance with disclosure of electric renewable portfolio standards; repealing the energy efficiency and sustainable energy board; and procedures for energy facility siting by the site evaluation committee.
The bill's passage is expected to streamline processes related to energy production and utility management in the state. By eliminating the requirement for utility plans to be evaluated by the commission, the bill may reduce the administrative burden on utilities. However, this change also raises concerns regarding transparency and oversight, as these plans often provide important insights into energy planning and sustainability efforts. Moreover, the repeal of the energy efficiency and sustainable energy board and the transfer of responsibilities to the department of energy suggest a significant shift in how the state manages energy efficiency initiatives.
House Bill 281 is a legislative proposal that impacts various aspects of energy regulation in New Hampshire. The bill primarily focuses on removing certain requirements imposed on electric and natural gas utilities, particularly concerning the submission of least cost integrated resource plans. Under this legislation, the obligation for utilities to provide these plans to the public utilities commission, which would assess and keep these plans on file, has been repealed. Additionally, the act modifies the definition of municipal hosts for limited electrical energy producers, allowing greater flexibility for customer generators.
Critics of HB 281 argue that removing the requirement for utilities to submit integrated resource plans could lead to a lack of accountability in energy management. The absence of oversight from the public utilities commission may result in utilities pursuing less sustainable practices or insufficiently addressing public concerns regarding energy efficiency. Additionally, the legislation's move to consolidate energy regulation under the department of energy is seen by some as a potential dilution of local control and community input in energy matters. The debates surrounding the bill highlighted these concerns, indicating a divide between those advocating for deregulation and efficiency versus those emphasizing the need for robust oversight.