Connecticut AG Criticizes Eversource’s Storm Cost Recovery Plan

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong wants to stop Eversource from collecting about $340 million in interest linked to nearly $1 billion in projected storm costs from 2018 to 2023. Tong says this demand is premature, unprecedented, and would stick ratepayers with the bill even though the costs and charging practices are still under PURA review.

Beyond that, the whole mess raises bigger questions about how Connecticut documents, processes, and approves storm-related charges. It’s not just about numbers—it’s about transparency and trust, too.

Find Your Ideal Getaway in Connecticut
Explore top-rated stays with no booking fees and instant confirmation. Your dream trip starts here!
Start Exploring Now

Overview of the petition and the stakes for ratepayers

Tong asked the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) to reject Eversource’s interest claim as the utility tries to recover these carrying charges. He says PURA’s own precedent doesn’t allow interest on storm costs until the costs are actually vetted and ruled prudent.

This isn’t just a technical squabble. It could hit families across Connecticut, whether you live in a big city or a small town.

What Tong is asking PURA to do

Tong wants PURA to block nearly $340 million in interest that Eversource says it should collect along with almost $1 billion in forecasted storm expenses from 2018–2023. He calls the filing premature and unprecedented because PURA has always required costs to be vetted before interest starts piling up.

He thinks the company rushed this after years of limited PURA scrutiny, leaving critical questions unanswered. Tong also raised concerns about how Eversource handled discovery and documentation, pointing out issues with contractor charges, the inclusion of improper storms, pre-staging costs, poor documentation, and mileage problems.

He noted Eversource filed 74 motions for extensions—over 1,000 days’ worth—to respond to discovery. Tong called these tactics obstructionist and not what you’d expect from a transparent regulatory process.

Key concerns and objections

Interest on storm costs shouldn’t be collected until an independent review finds those costs prudent.
Documentation and charges from outside contractors need more scrutiny to avoid double counting or misallocations.
Timing and process—Eversource’s delays and extensions make you wonder if there was a faster, clearer way, like answering interrogatories promptly or filing separately for earlier storms.
Alternative routes—Tong suggests a rate case or explicit PURA approval for carrying charges, not retroactive interest charges tied to disputed storm costs.
Ratepayer protections—the brief pushes for guarding Connecticut families from higher bills caused by the company’s timing, especially if carrying charges get approved before costs are fully vetted.

The Office of Consumer Counsel and other parties back these concerns, showing this isn’t just a legal fight—it’s got industry and public attention all over Connecticut. Tong argues the filing is a bid for “special treatment” and could leave ratepayers exposed if PURA doesn’t step in.

Who is assisting Tong and how the case could affect communities

Assistant Attorneys General Caroline McCormack and John Wright, plus Deputy Associate Attorney General Michael Wertheimer, are working on the case. Their involvement really highlights how complicated and high-stakes this fight is as PURA considers a decision that could set a new standard for storm-cost recovery.

Residents and officials from all corners of Connecticut—Hartford, New Haven, Stamford, Bridgeport, Waterbury, Norwalk, Danbury, Greenwich, and more—could see changes to their monthly bills depending on the outcome. The debate also matters for folks in Bristol, Milford, Middletown, East Hartford, and New Britain, since the regulatory framework will decide how widespread carrying charges get sorted and validated.

What’s next and the broader implications

PURA is now reviewing Tong’s arguments. Folks across Connecticut are watching to see if the authority sets a stricter standard for when carrying charges can build up and under what conditions interest gets recovered.

The result here could change how transparent Eversource needs to be. It’s also going to affect the regulatory process and the balance between utility investments in reliability and protections for ratepayers in communities from Waterford to Windham—and honestly, everywhere in between.

Connecticut towns—think Hartford, New London, Norwich—are going to feel these effects. How storm costs get recorded, scrutinized, and, in the end, paid by ratepayers is on the line.

The AG’s office says it’s staying focused on making sure there’s a fair and thorough review. They want to block unnecessary charges, but also let utilities invest in resilience when it actually makes sense.

Here is the source article for this story: CT Attorney General Bashes Utility’s Efforts To Recover Storm Costs

Discover Your Perfect Stay in Connecticut
Find available hotels and vacation homes instantly. No fees, best rates guaranteed!
Check Availability Now