PUC Rules for Fair Market Competition

Consumers and Fair Market Competition Win Precedent-Setting Policy Victory

On May 20, the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission (PUC) issued a precedent-setting decision upholding the principles of fair market competition and rejecting proposals that would have unfairly shifted energy supply costs. The ruling, issued in a Unitil Energy Services docket, marks a significant victory for consumers, municipalities, and the competitive energy market. Community Power Coalition of New Hampshire (CPCNH) applauds the Commission’s decision.

In 2024, the PUC directed utilities to explore moving utility energy supply costs into non-bypassable stranded cost charges. Had these proposals been implemented, they would have undermined fair competition by embedding utility energy costs into fixed charges that non-participating customers would be forced to pay — regardless of their supplier choice.

Communities, businesses, and residents across New Hampshire spoke out at the legislature, in local media, and before the Commission. This decision demonstrates the power of our collective voices, and that we have been heard in our stand to protect competitive markets in New Hampshire.

The ruling sets precedent for similar proposals under review, including those in an ongoing Eversource proceeding.

Local Solar and Hydro Generators Benefit from Fair Market Ruling

The ruling also protects compensation for local renewable generators. Under New Hampshire’s net metering policy, small and mid-sized solar, hydro, and other renewable generators are compensated at the utility’s energy supply rate. Had the cost shifting been approved, it would have artificially suppressed those rates, reducing the value of local clean energy without justification.

Creating a Vibrant Local Power Market

Looking ahead, New Hampshire has an opportunity to unlock more value from local energy resources by modernizing key systems that support market operations.

Recent regulatory proceedings have highlighted challenges in utility-administered systems — such as load settlement, metering, and data management — that the energy market relies on. These systems, managed by utilities like Eversource, are flawed and fail to recognize or reward customer-driven energy investments.

The regulatory proceedings have exposed how outdated market systems can misrepresent customer electricity use and penalize competitive suppliers. In one case, Eversource claimed a $6.5 million loss due to customers switching to competitive supply. Testimony later revealed that the real cause was anomalies in the utility’s load settlement system — the process used to estimate and report customer energy use to ISO New England.

Other limitations in these systems make it harder for suppliers like CPCNH to source power locally, such as crediting solar generation from net-metered customers instead of relying solely on wholesale purchases. These issues highlight the need for system updates that reflect real customer behavior and support accurate market operations.

What is Load Settlement – and Why Does it Matter?

Load settlement is the process used to match customers’ electricity use with the power purchased by suppliers in the wholesale market. For customers without interval meters, utilities use "class average load shapes" to estimate hourly usage based on customer type (e.g., residential or commercial). ISO New England uses this data to allocate costs to suppliers.

However, this averaging fails to reflect how customers actually use — or generate — electricity. Some have solar panels, batteries, or electric vehicles that can provide value and shift their usage to lower-cost times. These actions reduce overall demand, but the current system often doesn’t recognize those savings. As a result, a customer might be using less power — or even supplying it — while being reported as a consumer. This misalignment leads to overcharges in the wholesale market and undervalues the local energy market.

Solar inverters, batteries, EV chargers already collect accurate data that is ready to be used. With smarter systems — and the right updates to policy and regulatory frameworks — we can ensure customers are credited fairly, and the market functions more efficiently.

Conclusion

Consumers, cities and towns, and the competitive energy market have won a critical defensive victory. The PUC’s decision preserves fair competition and prevents cost shifts that would have distorted energy prices.

Looking ahead, we welcome the opportunity to work collaboratively — with regulators, utilities, communities, and industry — to modernize energy systems and continue building a smarter, more responsive electric market for New Hampshire.