Prohibits public utilities, serving greater 100,000 customers from recovering through rates any direct or indirect cost associated with, amongst other costs, advertising, marketing, communications.
H5818 amends Rhode Island’s public utilities law to restrict what costs large utilities may recover from ratepayers through base rates and related charges. The bill applies to public utilities serving more than 100,000 customers and bars recovery of a broad set of expenses, including advertising and marketing intended to influence public opinion, trade association dues, charitable contributions, lobbying, political spending, litigation aimed at changing laws or regulations, investor relations, certain travel and entertainment expenses, and costs tied to unregulated affiliate products or services. It also prohibits recovery of costs associated with a utility’s participation in certain rate and infrastructure/safety proceedings initiated on or after July 1, 2025.
The bill also preserves and updates existing provisions governing utility base rates, demand-side management, renewable energy funding, and related oversight. It keeps the framework for electric and gas efficiency charges, renewable energy program funding, and reporting requirements, while allowing the Public Utilities Commission to adopt rules to implement the new restrictions. In practical terms, the measure would shift these specified corporate, political, and advocacy expenses away from ratepayers and onto utility shareholders for covered utilities, while leaving the commission authority to approve or disallow other costs as provided by law.
H5818 would amend chapter 39-2 of the General Laws, specifically the section governing utility base rates and adding a new section on prohibited recoverable expenses. It would affect electric, gas, pipeline, and water utilities with more than 100,000 customers by limiting what they may include in rates, and it would give the Public Utilities Commission rulemaking authority to implement the new requirements. The bill would not eliminate existing demand-side management or renewable energy funding mechanisms, but it would narrow the universe of expenses that can be passed through to customers and could materially affect utility rate cases and cost recovery practices for large regulated utilities.
Based on the bill caption and text, the measure appears to be framed as a consumer-protection and ratepayer-relief proposal, with an emphasis on preventing utilities from charging customers for corporate advocacy, political, and non-core business expenses. There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided material, so no formal opposition or support is documented here. The overall direction of the bill suggests a reform-minded approach that would likely appeal to ratepayer advocates and critics of utility spending, while drawing scrutiny from utilities and industry groups affected by the restrictions.
The main point of contention is likely the scope of expenses barred from recovery, especially the prohibition on advertising, public education, lobbying, political activity, charitable giving, trade association dues, investor relations, and litigation related to changing laws or regulations. Utilities may argue that some of these costs are legitimate business expenses or that the restrictions are too broad, while supporters are likely to contend that ratepayers should not subsidize corporate advocacy or shareholder-oriented spending. Another likely issue is the ban on recovering costs for participation in certain proceedings, which could be viewed as limiting utilities’ ability to defend their positions in regulatory cases.