Relative to the department of energy.
The bill's impact on state law is significant, particularly as it redefines how energy providers and public utility services are managed. One of the notable provisions includes the development of updated rules that would allow residential and small commercial customers greater freedom regarding how they communicate with competitive electric suppliers. This shift facilitates a more consumer-friendly approach, which is in line with contemporary expectations for flexible and personalized service. Moreover, the amendment concerning net energy metering aims to ensure that eligible customer-generators have access to standardized tariffs, which promotes fairness and equity in energy distribution.
Senate Bill 108 (SB108) aims to amend existing laws concerning the regulation of energy and public utilities in New Hampshire. The bill proposes to transfer certain regulatory and adjudicative responsibilities away from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to the Department of Energy (DOE). This includes protecting ratepayer communication preferences, prohibiting unauthorized telecommunications service provision, and refining procedures related to net energy metering and consumer complaints. The intention behind these changes is to streamline the regulatory framework governing energy and public service utilities in the state.
There are points of contention surrounding SB108, particularly regarding the balance of power between the DOE and the PUC. Opponents may argue that transferring responsibilities to the DOE could undermine the existing checks and balances provided by the PUC, which has traditionally acted as a regulatory safeguarding entity to ensure public interest. Furthermore, the bill's provisions on net energy metering may provoke discussions about how the capacity limits are defined and managed, and whether these measures adequately protect both small producers and conventional utilities.
According to the fiscal note associated with the bill, the proposed changes are assessed to have no additional fiscal impact on state, county, or local expenditures or revenues, signaling a straightforward modification rather than a financial burden on the governmental structure.