March 12, 2003

 

 

Honorable Christopher Hall, Senate Chair

Honorable Lawrence Bliss, House Chair

Joint Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy

100 State House Station

Augusta, ME  04333

 

Re:       LD 669, An Act to Strengthen the Energy Resources Council

 

Dear Senator Hall and Representative Bliss:

 

            The Commission will testify neither for nor against LD 669, An Act to Strengthen the Energy Resources Council.  We will be present at the work session to work with the Committee as it considers this bill.

 

LD 669 would expand the uses of the Conservation Program Fund established in subsection 5 of 35-A M.R.S.A. 3211-A (the Conservation Act).  Under the Act, these funds are collected from electricity ratepayers and are used “solely for conservation programs.”  LD 669 would expand the use of these funds to planning activity that affects all energy sources and that addresses issues that are broader than those addressed by the Conservation Act.  We note that the link between those who fund the Conservation Fund (electricity ratepayers) and those who are affected by it would be less direct if the bill is enacted.  However, decisions on how best to use consumers’ resources are within the purview of the Legislature, and we will not express an opinion on the best use of this fund.

 

We are aware that, in recent years, Maine (through the Department of Economic and Community Development) has received a federal grant from the Department of Energy that has been used to provide funding for State Planning Office activity and for energy planning.  This grant (and others) might supplement the Conservation Fund as a source of funding for statewide, multi-fuel energy planning.

 

            In the short period since its inception, the Commission has found the Energy Resources Council to be an effective way to share information and to coordinate parallel activities.  For example, through the Council, a variety of State agencies identified potentially duplicative electric efficiency initiatives directed at public school construction and unified those initiatives.  As the Council matures, coordination is likely to improve further, resulting in statewide consistency and leveraging of activities.  To the extent that the statewide planning process authorized by LD 669 focuses on implementation – i.e., identifying related activities and improving coordination – there is reason to believe that the Council can produce tangible benefits. 

 

To the extent that the statewide planning process focuses on policy planning, the Committee may wish to clearly establish the issues to be addressed and the expected use that will be made of any resulting plan.  This should help the Council achieve useable results and possibly avoid creating unrealistic public expectations. 

 

            In summary, we neither support nor oppose LD 669, but we recommend focusing its goals and considering additional sources of funding.  If you have any questions, please call me.

 

 

                                                                        Sincerely,

 

 

                                                                        Marjorie R. McLaughlin

                                                                        Legislative Liaison