Common use of INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Clause in Contracts

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY. A number of executive and legislative efforts were launched starting in 2018 to advance EV adoption and development of EV infrastructure statewide. The Legislature enacted and the Governor signed into law SB 575, an act relative to electric vehicle charging stations, and SB 517, creating the Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Infrastructure Commission (“EV Commission”). Among other things, SB 575 required the Commission to determine whether demand charges would be appropriate to apply to electric vehicle charging stations. In August of 2020, in investigatory Docket No. IR 20-004, the Commission issued Order No. 26,394, in which the Commission stated: “[W]e understand that demand charges may limit the economic viability of low utilization rate, high demand draw [Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (“EVSE”)], but also acknowledge their role in limiting cost shifts between classes and customers . . . [and] we expect that utilities will consider demand charge alternatives in any high demand draw rate design proposals they may develop.” (Order 26,394 at 9). As part of the mandate of SB 517, the EV Commission was to make recommendations on: development of zero emission vehicle technology and infrastructure, including installation of electric vehicle charging stations; the development of electric vehicle charging stations, including high-speed charging stations, in state and federal highway corridors and at public transportation hubs and parking garages, and; changes needed to state laws, rules, and practices, including building codes and public utilities commission rules, to further the development of zero emission vehicle technology and infrastructure.1 By October 2020, the EV Commission had issued its final report and among its recommendations was authorizing public utilities to deploy EVSE make- ready programs.2 The EV Commission specifically found that utility make-ready programs are particularly well-suited for enabling the advancement of EVSE deployment, and recommended the adoption of such programs.3 The Legislature expressed similar support for the important role utilities can play in EV infrastructure implementation when it passed SB 131 in July 2021, signed by the Governor on August 10, 2021. 2 Id. at 6. 3 Id. at 7-8. With SB 131, the General Court found: I. Availability of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) is critical to facilitating the development of the overall electric vehicle (EV) market in the region and will support our tourism-based economy. Adequate EVSE in New Hampshire, and in particular direct current fast chargers (DCFC) along major travel corridors in the state, is necessary to enable travel within and through the state, promote tourism, generate jobs, and support consumers, businesses, and automobile dealers and manufacturers. The state should commit to the development of zero emission vehicles (XXX) technology and infrastructure, including the state, private and rental residence, business, and municipal installation of EVSE. II. Electric utility investments in grid infrastructure to support the installation of EVSE lowers the barriers to such installation. Electric distribution companies (EDC) are uniquely positioned to enable strategic electrification as part of larger investments in grid modernization capabilities, specifically investments in electric vehicle charging infrastructure. EDC owned or funded behind the meter enabling infrastructure, also known as “make-ready” infrastructure, can accelerate charging infrastructure deployment, and it has the potential to put downward pressure on rates by spreading fixed costs over a greater volume of electric sales. Executive branch efforts included the issuance on September 7, 2018 of the State of New Hampshire Beneficiary Environmental Mitigation Plan, in which Governor Xxxxxx designated the Governor’s Office of Strategic Initiatives (now part of the DOE) to serve as lead agency and to work with the DES to develop plans to deploy the VW Trust Mitigation Fund.4 The Mitigation Plan includes this mission statement: “To best serve the state’s economic and social well-being New Hampshire will focus on those projects that will result in broad public benefits, serve the state’s economically challenged communities and make the state a welcoming environment for all ages, abilities and backgrounds to live, work, and play.”5 Included in those projects was “[s]upport[ing] the use of zero emission and near-zero emission vehicles by investing in electric vehicle charging infrastructure at strategic locations throughout the state and encouraging the replacement of diesel vehicles and equipment with lower emission alternatives, including those 4 DES was subsequently made the lead agency by the Governor in August 2021 to manage the VW Mitigation Trust. 5 State of New Hampshire Beneficiary Environmental Mitigation Plan September 7, 2018, page 4, available at: xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xx.xxx/sites/g/files/xxxxxx000/files/documents/beneficiary-mitigation-plan.pdf.‌ powered by electric and other alternative fuels.”6 The DES has implemented such a project via the Volkswagen Mitigation Trust by issuing a Direct Current Fast Charging (“DCFC”) Request for Proposals (“RFP”). The purpose of the RFP is to address the need for EV charging infrastructure to enable EV travel to and within New Hampshire and to encourage EV adoption. In response, the DES received 30 applications.7 In October of 2020, Eversource reached a comprehensive settlement agreement with ten settling parties in its distribution rate case, Docket No. DE 19-057. The Commission approved the rate case settlement agreement in Order No. 26,433 (December 17, 2020). Section 16.4 of the rate case settlement agreement committed the Company to collaborating with interested parties to that docket as well as other stakeholders to develop both an EV make-ready infrastructure program and a proposal for an “alternative to demand charges for electric vehicle charging rates” so that both could support the development of EV infrastructure. (Docket No. DE 19-057 Settlement Agreement at page 32, docket tab 125). The rate case settlement agreement also required the Company to develop the DCA for EV rates unless “the Commission determines otherwise in the adjudicative proceeding announced in Order No. 26,394 (August 18, 2020) in Docket No. IR 20- 004.” Id. The Commission conducted such a proceeding in Docket No. DE 20-170, in which the Commission ultimately ordered the implementation of both residential and commercial EV time of use (“TOU”) rates by all New Hampshire utilities. See Order No. 26,604 (April 7, 2022). But at no time did the Commission determine that Eversource should abandon its proposed DCA for EV charging station customers, and in fact the DCA addresses a different set of customer needs than do the TOU rates.

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY. A number of executive and legislative efforts were launched starting in 2018 to advance EV adoption and development of EV infrastructure statewide. The Legislature enacted and the Governor signed into law On August 11, 2018, SB 575-FN, an act relative to a xxxx establishing requirements for, and restrictions on, electric vehicle charging stations, and went into effect. SB 517, creating the Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Infrastructure Commission (“EV Commission”). Among other things, SB 575 575-FN required the Commission to determine whether demand charges would certain rate designs should be appropriate to apply to implemented for electric vehicle charging stations, specifically requiring the Commission to determine whether to implement electric vehicle time of day rates for residential and commercial customers.1 The Commission issued an 1 See, RSA 236:133, V. (Stating “The public utilities commission shall… [c]onsider and determine whether it is appropriate to implement electric vehicle time of day rates for residential and commercial customers. In August The standards for determination of such implementation shall include consideration whether such implementation would encourage energy conservation, optimal and efficient use of facilities and resources by an electric company, and equitable rates for electric consumers.”) Order of Notice on January 16, 2020, opening Docket No. IR 20-004 to investigate issues related to the legislature’s directive. After several comment opportunities and a Commission Staff Recommendation (“Staff Recommendation”),2 the Commission held a hearing on matters identified by SB 575-FN on July 14, 2020. On August 18, 2020, the Commission issued Order No. 26,394 in investigatory Docket No. IR 20-004. In that Order, the Commission determined that time of use rates would be appropriate for separately-metered electric vehicle charging and required that a new proceeding be opened to consider utility-specific rate proposals for separately metered electric vehicle time of use (EV TOU) rates.3 The Commission also directed Staff and the parties to that new proceeding to further develop the alternative metering feasibility assessment concept discussed within the Staff Recommendation and determine a timeline for such an assessment with the input of the parties.4 On October 16, 2020, the Commission issued an Order No. 26,394, in which the Commission stated: “[W]e understand that demand charges may limit the economic viability of low utilization rate, high demand draw [Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (“EVSE”)], but also acknowledge their role in limiting cost shifts between classes and customers . . . [and] we expect that utilities will consider demand charge alternatives in any high demand draw rate design proposals they may develop.” (Order 26,394 at 9). As part of the mandate of SB 517, the EV Commission was to make recommendations on: development of zero emission vehicle technology and infrastructure, including installation of electric vehicle charging stations; the development of electric vehicle charging stations, including high-speed charging stations, in state and federal highway corridors and at public transportation hubs and parking garages, and; changes needed to state laws, rules, and practices, including building codes and public utilities commission rules, to further the development of zero emission vehicle technology and infrastructure.1 By October 2020, the EV Commission had issued its final report and among its recommendations was authorizing public utilities to deploy EVSE make- ready programs.2 The EV Commission specifically found that utility make-ready programs are particularly well-suited for enabling the advancement of EVSE deployment, and recommended the adoption of such programs.3 The Legislature expressed similar support for the important role utilities can play in EV infrastructure implementation when it passed SB 131 in July 2021, signed by the Governor on August 10, 2021. 2 Id. at 6. 3 Id. at 7-8. With SB 131, the General Court found: I. Availability of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) is critical to facilitating the development of the overall electric vehicle (EV) market in the region and will support our tourism-based economy. Adequate EVSE in New Hampshire, and in particular direct current fast chargers (DCFC) along major travel corridors in the state, is necessary to enable travel within and through the state, promote tourism, generate jobs, and support consumers, businesses, and automobile dealers and manufacturers. The state should commit to the development of zero emission vehicles (XXX) technology and infrastructure, including the state, private and rental residence, business, and municipal installation of EVSE. II. Electric utility investments in grid infrastructure to support the installation of EVSE lowers the barriers to such installation. Electric distribution companies (EDC) are uniquely positioned to enable strategic electrification as part of larger investments in grid modernization capabilities, specifically investments in electric vehicle charging infrastructure. EDC owned or funded behind the meter enabling infrastructure, also known as “make-ready” infrastructure, can accelerate charging infrastructure deployment, and it has the potential to put downward pressure on rates by spreading fixed costs over a greater volume of electric sales. Executive branch efforts included the issuance on September 7, 2018 of the State of New Hampshire Beneficiary Environmental Mitigation Plan, in which Governor Xxxxxx designated the Governor’s Office of Strategic Initiatives (now part of the DOE) to serve as lead agency and to work with the DES to develop plans to deploy the VW Trust Mitigation Fund.4 The Mitigation Plan includes this mission statement: “To best serve the state’s economic and social well-being New Hampshire will focus on those projects that will result in broad public benefits, serve the state’s economically challenged communities and make the state a welcoming environment for all ages, abilities and backgrounds to live, work, and play.”5 Included in those projects was “[s]upport[ing] the use of zero emission and near-zero emission vehicles by investing in electric vehicle charging infrastructure at strategic locations throughout the state and encouraging the replacement of diesel vehicles and equipment with lower emission alternatives, including those 4 DES was subsequently made the lead agency by the Governor in August 2021 to manage the VW Mitigation Trust. 5 State of New Hampshire Beneficiary Environmental Mitigation Plan September 7, 2018, page 4, available at: xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xx.xxx/sites/g/files/xxxxxx000/files/documents/beneficiary-mitigation-plan.pdf.‌ powered by electric and other alternative fuels.”6 The DES has implemented such a project via the Volkswagen Mitigation Trust by issuing a Direct Current Fast Charging (“DCFC”) Request for Proposals (“RFP”). The purpose of the RFP is to address the need for EV charging infrastructure to enable EV travel to and within New Hampshire and to encourage EV adoption. In response, the DES received 30 applications.7 In October of 2020, Eversource reached a comprehensive settlement agreement with ten settling parties in its distribution rate case, Docket No. DE 19-057. The Commission approved the rate case settlement agreement in Order No. 26,433 (December 17, 2020). Section 16.4 of the rate case settlement agreement committed the Company to collaborating with interested parties to that docket as well as other stakeholders to develop both an EV make-ready infrastructure program and a proposal for an “alternative to demand charges for electric vehicle charging rates” so that both could support the development of EV infrastructure. (Docket No. DE 19-057 Settlement Agreement at page 32, docket tab 125). The rate case settlement agreement also required the Company to develop the DCA for EV rates unless “the Commission determines otherwise in the adjudicative proceeding announced in Order No. 26,394 (August 18, 2020) in Docket No. IR 20- 004.” Id. The Commission conducted such a proceeding in Notice opening Docket No. DE 20-170170 to facilitate development and subsequent review of utility-specific EV TOU rate 2 Docket No. DE 20-004. April 3, in which 2020 Staff Recommendation. Available at: xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xx.xxx/Regulatory/Docketbk/2020/20-004/LETTERS-MEMOS-TARIFFS/20-004_2020-04- 03_STAFF_RECOMMENDATION.PDF 3 Order No. 26,394 at 18. (August 18, 2020)(Stating “Staff recommended the Commission ultimately ordered open a new proceeding and direct each electric utility to file within 120 days, consistent with the implementation guidance above: (1) an EV TOU rate proposal for separately-metered residential and small commercial customer applications; (2) an EV TOU rate proposal for separately-metered high demand draw commercial customer applications that may incorporate direct current fast charging or clustered level two chargers... Based on our review of both the record in this investigation, we find electric vehicle time of use rates are an appropriate rate design for residential and commercial EV customers, and we believe a separate proceeding to adjudicate the merits of various proposals from each utility is warranted… We also see value in the distinction Staff has drawn regarding residential and small commercial customers and high demand draw applications that may incorporate direct current fast charging or clustered level two chargers.) 4 Id. at 13-14. (Stating “We are persuaded that further investigation of issues related to advanced metering functionality associated with EVSE embedded meters is warranted. We note that Eversource appears to have experience with third party metering approaches in other jurisdictions. Eversource Supplemental Comments at 4-5. We also find Unitil’s Supplemental Comments to be a helpful initial assessment of some of the barriers associated with third party metering technology. We are further encouraged by actions in neighboring jurisdictions that appear to target EVSE as an opportunity to build an initial framework for integration of advanced metering IR 20-004 functionality. While we decline at this time to require the utilities to file feasibility assessments related to alternative metering, we direct Staff to further develop this concept, with the input of use (“TOUthe parties, in the initial stage of any adjudicative proceeding that may follow this investigation, and determine an appropriate timeline for such an assessment with the input of the parties.”) rates by all New Hampshire utilities. See proposals for consistency with the directives of Order No. 26,604 26,394, and scheduling a prehearing conference for November 9, 2020. On November 13, 2020, the Commission approved a preliminary procedural schedule for this proceeding allowing for comments, reply comments, and technical session discussions regarding to-be-filed EV TOU rates and alternative metering feasibility assessments. On February 3, 2021, the Commission approved an amended procedural schedule requiring that the EV TOU and alternative metering feasibility assessment filings on April 30, 2021. On April 29, 2021, the Commission approved an amended procedural schedule extending the EV TOU and alternative metering feasibility assessment filings deadline to June 15, 2021. On June 15, 0000, Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, and Public Service Company of New Hampshire d/b/a Eversource Energy (April 7“Eversource”) filed testimony in this proceeding. Eversource filed supplemental testimony on June 23, 2021. Also on June 15, 2021, the Commission directed the parties to this proceeding to develop and propose a procedural schedule designed to resolve the outstanding matters in this proceeding at least 30 days prior to February 16, 2022), the date hearings are scheduled to conclude in Docket No. But at no time did DE 21-030.5 On August 4, 2021, the Commission determine that approved an amended procedural schedule and issued a Supplemental Order of Notice. On August 11, 2021, Eversource should abandon Energy requested transfer of its proposed DCA for EV charging station customersmake-ready and demand charge alternative proposals from DE 21-078 into the instant proceeding. On September 9, 2021, the Commission denied the Eversource request. On October 13, 2021, the Department of Energy, City of Lebanon, and ChargePoint, Inc. (“ChargePoint”) filed testimony; Clean Energy New Hampshire (“CENH”) and Conservation 5 This Commission directive was issued pursuant to Order No. 26,486 (June 9, 2021) in fact Docket No. DE 21-030, which denied a motion to remove Unitil’s Electric Vehicle Time of Use rate proposals from Docket No. DE 21-030. Law Foundation (“CLF”) filed Joint Testimony on that same day. On December 10, 2021, Unitil, Eversource, and Liberty filed rebuttal testimony. During the DCA addresses a different set period between November 16, 2021, and January 12, 2022, the parties engaged in Settlement Discussions. Based upon these discussions, the Settling Parties agreed to the terms of customer needs than do this Settlement Agreement, subject to Commission approval. The Settling Parties recommend and request that the TOU ratesCommission approve this Settlement Agreement without modification.

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY. A number of executive and legislative efforts were launched starting in 2018 to advance EV adoption and development of EV infrastructure statewide. The Legislature enacted and the Governor signed into law On August 11, 2018, SB 575-FN, an act relative to a bill establishing requirements for, and restrictions on, electric vehicle charging stations, and went into effect. SB 517, creating the Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Infrastructure Commission (“EV Commission”). Among other things, SB 575 575-FN required the Commission to determine whether demand charges would certain rate designs should be appropriate to apply to implemented for electric vehicle charging stations, specifically requiring the Commission to determine whether to implement electric vehicle time of day rates for residential and commercial customers.1 The Commission issued an 1 See, RSA 236:133, V. (Stating “The public utilities commission shall… [c]onsider and determine whether it is appropriate to implement electric vehicle time of day rates for residential and commercial customers. In August The standards for determination of such implementation shall include consideration whether such implementation would encourage energy conservation, optimal and efficient use of facilities and resources by an electric company, and equitable rates for electric consumers.”) Order of Notice on January 16, 2020, opening Docket No. IR 20-004 to investigate issues related to the legislature’s directive. After several comment opportunities and a Commission Staff Recommendation (“Staff Recommendation”),2 the Commission held a hearing on matters identified by SB 575-FN on July 14, 2020. On August 18, 2020, the Commission issued Order No. 26,394 in investigatory Docket No. IR 20-004. In that Order, the Commission determined that time of use rates would be appropriate for separately-metered electric vehicle charging and required that a new proceeding be opened to consider utility-specific rate proposals for separately metered electric vehicle time of use (EV TOU) rates.3 The Commission also directed Staff and the parties to that new proceeding to further develop the alternative metering feasibility assessment concept discussed within the Staff Recommendation and determine a timeline for such an assessment with the input of the parties.4 On October 16, 2020, the Commission issued an Order No. 26,394, in which the Commission stated: “[W]e understand that demand charges may limit the economic viability of low utilization rate, high demand draw [Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (“EVSE”)], but also acknowledge their role in limiting cost shifts between classes and customers . . . [and] we expect that utilities will consider demand charge alternatives in any high demand draw rate design proposals they may develop.” (Order 26,394 at 9). As part of the mandate of SB 517, the EV Commission was to make recommendations on: development of zero emission vehicle technology and infrastructure, including installation of electric vehicle charging stations; the development of electric vehicle charging stations, including high-speed charging stations, in state and federal highway corridors and at public transportation hubs and parking garages, and; changes needed to state laws, rules, and practices, including building codes and public utilities commission rules, to further the development of zero emission vehicle technology and infrastructure.1 By October 2020, the EV Commission had issued its final report and among its recommendations was authorizing public utilities to deploy EVSE make- ready programs.2 The EV Commission specifically found that utility make-ready programs are particularly well-suited for enabling the advancement of EVSE deployment, and recommended the adoption of such programs.3 The Legislature expressed similar support for the important role utilities can play in EV infrastructure implementation when it passed SB 131 in July 2021, signed by the Governor on August 10, 2021. 2 Id. at 6. 3 Id. at 7-8. With SB 131, the General Court found: I. Availability of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) is critical to facilitating the development of the overall electric vehicle (EV) market in the region and will support our tourism-based economy. Adequate EVSE in New Hampshire, and in particular direct current fast chargers (DCFC) along major travel corridors in the state, is necessary to enable travel within and through the state, promote tourism, generate jobs, and support consumers, businesses, and automobile dealers and manufacturers. The state should commit to the development of zero emission vehicles (XXX) technology and infrastructure, including the state, private and rental residence, business, and municipal installation of EVSE. II. Electric utility investments in grid infrastructure to support the installation of EVSE lowers the barriers to such installation. Electric distribution companies (EDC) are uniquely positioned to enable strategic electrification as part of larger investments in grid modernization capabilities, specifically investments in electric vehicle charging infrastructure. EDC owned or funded behind the meter enabling infrastructure, also known as “make-ready” infrastructure, can accelerate charging infrastructure deployment, and it has the potential to put downward pressure on rates by spreading fixed costs over a greater volume of electric sales. Executive branch efforts included the issuance on September 7, 2018 of the State of New Hampshire Beneficiary Environmental Mitigation Plan, in which Governor Xxxxxx designated the Governor’s Office of Strategic Initiatives (now part of the DOE) to serve as lead agency and to work with the DES to develop plans to deploy the VW Trust Mitigation Fund.4 The Mitigation Plan includes this mission statement: “To best serve the state’s economic and social well-being New Hampshire will focus on those projects that will result in broad public benefits, serve the state’s economically challenged communities and make the state a welcoming environment for all ages, abilities and backgrounds to live, work, and play.”5 Included in those projects was “[s]upport[ing] the use of zero emission and near-zero emission vehicles by investing in electric vehicle charging infrastructure at strategic locations throughout the state and encouraging the replacement of diesel vehicles and equipment with lower emission alternatives, including those 4 DES was subsequently made the lead agency by the Governor in August 2021 to manage the VW Mitigation Trust. 5 State of New Hampshire Beneficiary Environmental Mitigation Plan September 7, 2018, page 4, available at: xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xx.xxx/sites/g/files/xxxxxx000/files/documents/beneficiary-mitigation-plan.pdf.‌ powered by electric and other alternative fuels.”6 The DES has implemented such a project via the Volkswagen Mitigation Trust by issuing a Direct Current Fast Charging (“DCFC”) Request for Proposals (“RFP”). The purpose of the RFP is to address the need for EV charging infrastructure to enable EV travel to and within New Hampshire and to encourage EV adoption. In response, the DES received 30 applications.7 In October of 2020, Eversource reached a comprehensive settlement agreement with ten settling parties in its distribution rate case, Docket No. DE 19-057. The Commission approved the rate case settlement agreement in Order No. 26,433 (December 17, 2020). Section 16.4 of the rate case settlement agreement committed the Company to collaborating with interested parties to that docket as well as other stakeholders to develop both an EV make-ready infrastructure program and a proposal for an “alternative to demand charges for electric vehicle charging rates” so that both could support the development of EV infrastructure. (Docket No. DE 19-057 Settlement Agreement at page 32, docket tab 125). The rate case settlement agreement also required the Company to develop the DCA for EV rates unless “the Commission determines otherwise in the adjudicative proceeding announced in Order No. 26,394 (August 18, 2020) in Docket No. IR 20- 004.” Id. The Commission conducted such a proceeding in Notice opening Docket No. DE 20-170170 to facilitate development and subsequent review of utility-specific EV TOU rate 2 Docket No. DE 20-004. April 3, in which 2020 Staff Recommendation. Available at: xxxxx://xxx.xxx.xx.xxx/Regulatory/Docketbk/2020/20-004/LETTERS-MEMOS-TARIFFS/20-004_2020-04- 03_STAFF_RECOMMENDATION.PDF 3 Order No. 26,394 at 18. (August 18, 2020)(Stating “Staff recommended the Commission ultimately ordered open a new proceeding and direct each electric utility to file within 120 days, consistent with the implementation guidance above: (1) an EV TOU rate proposal for separately-metered residential and small commercial customer applications; (2) an EV TOU rate proposal for separately-metered high demand draw commercial customer applications that may incorporate direct current fast charging or clustered level two chargers... Based on our review of both the record in this investigation, we find electric vehicle time of use rates are an appropriate rate design for residential and commercial EV customers, and we believe a separate proceeding to adjudicate the merits of various proposals from each utility is warranted… We also see value in the distinction Staff has drawn regarding residential and small commercial customers and high demand draw applications that may incorporate direct current fast charging or clustered level two chargers.) 4 Id. at 13-14. (Stating “We are persuaded that further investigation of issues related to advanced metering functionality associated with EVSE embedded meters is warranted. We note that Eversource appears to have experience with third party metering approaches in other jurisdictions. Eversource Supplemental Comments at 4-5. We also find Unitil’s Supplemental Comments to be a helpful initial assessment of some of the barriers associated with third party metering technology. We are further encouraged by actions in neighboring jurisdictions that appear to target EVSE as an opportunity to build an initial framework for integration of advanced metering IR 20-004 functionality. While we decline at this time to require the utilities to file feasibility assessments related to alternative metering, we direct Staff to further develop this concept, with the input of use (“TOUthe parties, in the initial stage of any adjudicative proceeding that may follow this investigation, and determine an appropriate timeline for such an assessment with the input of the parties.”) rates by all New Hampshire utilities. See proposals for consistency with the directives of Order No. 26,604 26,394, and scheduling a prehearing conference for November 9, 2020. On November 13, 2020, the Commission approved a preliminary procedural schedule for this proceeding allowing for comments, reply comments, and technical session discussions regarding to-be-filed EV TOU rates and alternative metering feasibility assessments. On February 3, 2021, the Commission approved an amended procedural schedule requiring that the EV TOU and alternative metering feasibility assessment filings on April 30, 2021. On April 29, 2021, the Commission approved an amended procedural schedule extending the EV TOU and alternative metering feasibility assessment filings deadline to June 15, 2021. On June 15, 0000, Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, and Public Service Company of New Hampshire d/b/a Eversource Energy (April 7“Eversource”) filed testimony in this proceeding. Eversource filed supplemental testimony on June 23, 2021. Also on June 15, 2021, the Commission directed the parties to this proceeding to develop and propose a procedural schedule designed to resolve the outstanding matters in this proceeding at least 30 days prior to February 16, 2022), the date hearings are scheduled to conclude in Docket No. But at no time did DE 21-030.5 On August 4, 2021, the Commission determine that approved an amended procedural schedule and issued a Supplemental Order of Notice. On August 11, 2021, Eversource should abandon Energy requested transfer of its proposed DCA for EV charging station customersmake-ready and demand charge alternative proposals from DE 21-078 into the instant proceeding. On September 9, 2021, the Commission denied the Eversource request. On October 13, 2021, the Department of Energy, City of Lebanon, and ChargePoint, Inc. (“ChargePoint”) filed testimony; Clean Energy New Hampshire (“CENH”) and Conservation 5 This Commission directive was issued pursuant to Order No. 26,486 (June 9, 2021) in fact Docket No. DE 21-030, which denied a motion to remove Unitil’s Electric Vehicle Time of Use rate proposals from Docket No. DE 21-030. Law Foundation (“CLF”) filed Joint Testimony on that same day. On December 10, 2021, Unitil, Eversource, and Liberty filed rebuttal testimony. During the DCA addresses a different set period between November 16, 2021, and January 12, 2022, the parties engaged in Settlement Discussions. Based upon these discussions, the Settling Parties agreed to the terms of customer needs than do this Settlement Agreement, subject to Commission approval. The Settling Parties recommend and request that the TOU ratesCommission approve this Settlement Agreement without modification.