The Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority slammed Connecticut Light & Power in a draft decision analyzing the utility company’s response to two storms.
PURA, calling CL&P “deficient and inadequate,” said on Tuesday that these findings will be taken into consideration when it rules on the next rate request from CL&P and on any request for recovery of costs it incurred as a result of the storms. Northeast Utilities is the parent company of CL&P, and one of two electricity utilities in the state.
“Last year’s storms were a nightmare for Connecticut residents, and the response from Northeast Utilities was unacceptable. Today, PURA is echoing the earlier findings of the Two Storm Panel, the Witt report, and hundreds of thousands of Connecticut residents who experienced extended power outages after each storm,” Malloy said.
CL&P can challenge PURA’s draft decision before the agency finalizes the report on Aug. 1. A spokesman for the utility, however, said CL&P is unsure if it will do so.
"We are in the process of reviewing all 117 pages of the document and will decide if we will file written exceptions or participate in oral arguments in front of the commissioners before they issue their final decision on August 1," Mitch Gross, a CL&P spokesman, told the Connecticut Mirror.
The draft decision also ordered CL&P to develop a plan to establish a “heightened state of readiness” in preparation for future storms. The reports also asks the company to take steps to address issues such as tree trimming, communications and securing mutual assistance.
“This draft is a positive step toward ensuring better quality of service and fair compensation for residents, ratepayers and municipalities,” said Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen in a statement.
The PURA draft decision did not specify potential sanctions for other public service companies, including United illuminating (UI), the state’s second largest electric distribution company. PURA did, however, reserve the right to take UI’s storm performance into consideration when reviewing any future request by that company for recovery of 2011storm-related costs.
The full report 123-page report is attached to this article.
The debate is...do you mitigate the future risk by forcing CL&P to staff and equip for a 5 or 6 standard deviation event like last year’s storm and PAY for it through jacked up utility rates....OR...do you live with the risk of NOT staffing and equipping for such a low probability event and save the costs that will be passed through to the customer as MUCH higher utility rates??? There are no free lunches.
We were the last neighborhood with power during the big storm and last summer. Over 9 days each time!!! Fix the wiring completely, CL&P, and stop band aided the situation.
1, aggressively trim the trees around power lines, regardless of the impact on property value. Trees cause outages, not the power lines themselves. 2, start burrying power lines, at least for new developments. But of course that's 10 times more expensive so be prepared for higher contruction costs and utility rates.
My little generator kept the water flowing and the A/C and appliances running during the two 1-week outages last year. Not expensive either, it cost me something like $800 back in 1999.
I'm with you. I'm also on a well and was 8 days without power 10/2011 AND could not leave the neighborhood for 6. Additionally, it was the SAME tree/lines from Irene. Yep, they did a great job there. And to address the " prepare" statements...how does the average citizen prepare, or even anticipate, an outage such as those? You can buy water, batteries, shelf stable foods, etc., but what after that? A generator? To have a generator properly/safely in stalled costs between $5,000 and $10,000. I know because I looked into it after Irene. It's not in my budget after being unemployed 17 months.
So we're talking $1500+ for a backup power supply option, that also requires gasoline, maintenance AND man power to start it up when the power goes out as it's an off-line system. This is a reasonable backup solution for the entire population?
I completely agree with your assessment of NU and their regulator. My point is that you are supremely naive to believe that CL&P will make ANY investment in growing their staff and/or equipment without asking for a rate increase first. Their bottom line trumps your desire for instant restoration of power. Especially in the case of such low probability events as Newtown experienced last fall. AND if you demand a greater level of service you’ll probably get it, along with a rise in what is already one of the highest utility rates in the country. Do you really want to risk that?
Whatever happened to the idea of neighbor helping neighbor? I mean, come on! If you have a pine tree and half of YOUR tree is in the road blocking the street, it's not up to the "city" or CL&P to clear that tree -- it's YOUR responsibility! So why can't a couple of homeowners with chain saws and manual saws agree to get together the next time a storm comes through and help clear out their neighbors' driveways and streets? My guess is that as soon as others see you out there starting to work, they'll also come over and begin to lend a hand. Why does everybody think that they're "owed" something by the corporations and the government?
Unfortunately most suburbanites with chainsaws are a threat to themselves and others...
I was going to say the same thing. Particularly if the downed limbs are anywise near power lines.