New Hampshire electricity consumers may soon notice changes to their bills. A proposal by Unitil, one of the state’s major utility companies, to broaden the scope of reconciliation charges has been rejected by state regulators. The proposal would have extended these charges to all customers, regardless of their electricity supply source.

This decision marks a victory for consumer advocates, municipalities, and the competitive energy market. Had the plan been approved, it could have increased costs for customers who receive their electricity supply through community power programs or other competitive suppliers. These customers currently rely on utility companies for power delivery but obtain their electricity from local town or county programs.

The core issue revolves around reconciliation charges. Utility companies estimate electricity costs when setting rates, typically twice a year. Unexpected events, such as price fluctuations, necessitate adjustments—reconciliation charges—appearing on the bills of default service customers. This changes when customers opt for community power or choose a different energy supplier.

Recent shifts in New Hampshire’s energy landscape have amplified the importance of reconciliation charges. Firstly, the growing adoption of community power programs has reduced the number of customers using utilities’ default service. Currently, sixty-four municipalities and four counties participate in community power programs, alongside those using alternative contractors. Secondly, state regulators have mandated a change in how utilities purchase power, moving away from fixed-term contracts to shorter-term spot market purchases, introducing volatility and risk.

Unitil’s proposed solution – spreading reconciliation charges across all customers – was presented as equitable, arguing that the default service acts as a safety net for those who don’t seek alternative suppliers. The company also indicated that the rise of community power has financially impacted their default service. However, regulators disagreed, maintaining that these charges should remain with default service customers. The Public Utilities Commission acknowledged the issue is not fully resolved and may consider future adjustments to the reconciliation process.