[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6157110,"mediaKeyId","5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e","parentId",5466448,"title","Proposed Aquarian sale would shift oversight and set new board structure for regional authority","audioSeconds",15471,"startMs",529000,"endMs",16000000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e&start=529&end=16000","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e/thumbnail_529000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6157110/Connecticut/Proposed-Aquarian-sale-would-shift-oversight-and-set-new-board-structure-for-regional-authority","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6157110-3237eed8f716f944663210e0480e5ca0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770834915&Signature=TabfrU~HnpyeIqtovqo7xCgsYdo4Sfy4PQjlNOx2SyCSJXrEDXNhASvwFHK~oVjb1tzctgPPIiw~6rIj1YvByW-yWUplAgh8RwMX~8ZIdq3IcKehEADoXJ0RHljadFn9DQGBjeGXvbJFeV6QED0qjIRaEWp-Fxt2wJ8UbRIQ~UycoV3mWDQmfHZWZH~HmCGUVNBx8urpwJhUL88sTtvZuqjfOP-jU8T27cbCy5TqqanRd2~7onpOel8-rJj~Fw1YsGEmiqCHZtjldHpvB7ZesZQguFtkQyjD3qAiX1OAW0Z3HYK7GJFO0OpJRc~x-oc5tmQ9oHJtlG2CmNRMAHlKlg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","PURA","date","2025-07-24T13:49:52Z","article","Interim leaders of the South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority (RWA) and Aquarion told PURA on Aug. 19 that the sale structure approved by state legislation would move regulation of the acquired Aquarion Connecticut operations out of PURA and into a new authority model, with an 11‑member authority board governing the combined utility.

The change matters because the authority model gives local representative policy boards and the authority board primary roles in capital approvals and rate filings instead of PURA. Witnesses said the new board will have 11 members: six appointed by RWA’s representative policy board and five appointed by the AWA representative policy board. The RWA-appointed majority on the authority board drew repeated questioning from intervenors about potential conflicts when a single board approves budgets and officer compensation that the authority will charge to separate ratepayer groups.

Petitioners’ witnesses described how decision authority is divided: the authority board will approve operating and capital budgets, but representative policy boards (RPBs) vote on major items such as large projects and rate filings. Rochelle Kowalski, RWA chief financial officer, testified that capital projects above thresholds and the rate‑setting steps still require representative policy board involvement and public hearings. Witnesses said the authority board would review officer compensation and larger management decisions and that day‑to‑day operations remain the responsibility of management.

The hearing record also covered the role and budget of the Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) that represents customer interests inside the authority structure. Witnesses said the OCA will serve both RWA and the new AWA post‑transaction. The OCA’s budget is approved through the authority process; witnesses said the budget may grow if the office takes on the additional workload of representing a larger customer base after a transfer. Petitioners told the panel the OCA participates in finance and consumer‑affairs committee meetings and can hire consultants when needed.

Intervenors pushed petitioners on checks and balances: how authority board members will reconcile duties to both entities, how officer compensation and benefit decisions will be allocated across two ratepayer bases, and what procedural safeguards exist for perceived conflicts. Petitioners responded that board members have fiduciary duties to the organization on which they vote and that any questionable conduct could be addressed by removal under the authority’s rules. Petitioners said they expect regular consultation between the authority board, the RPBs and the OCA and that major decisions will be publicly noticed and subject to the authority’s required hearings.

Looking ahead, petitioners said the model preserves multiple procedural protections (public notice, RPB votes, public hearings and an OCA review) while allowing the authority to issue tax‑exempt debt and share operational practices between the two utilities. Intervenors said those features may change the balance of oversight and asked PURA to weigh the public‑interest consequences of moving review and final approvals out of PURA and into the authority structure.

The hearing record on governance is extensive; petitioners provided statutory citations and interrogatory responses describing the appointment process, committee review steps, and budgetary flow. The parties agreed that PURA retains the authority to approve or deny the change of control; if PURA approves the transaction the statute and the authority’s internal rules will define the post‑closing review process.

The hearing was continued; petitioners and intervenors were ordered to file supplemental materials requested during cross‑examination, including documentation about the authority board rules, OCA budget history and staffing, and templates the authority will use for public notices and capital project applications.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Docket No. 25-04-03 - Evidentiary Hearing - Aquarion Change of Control","oneSentenceSummary","Interim leaders of the South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority (RWA) and Aquarion told PURA on Aug. 19 that the sale structure approved by state legislation would move regulation of the acquired Aquarion Connecticut operations out of PURA and into a new authority model, with an 11‑member authority board governing the combined utility.","taxTitle","Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, Departments and Agencies, Organizations, Executive, Connecticut","taxId",15761,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6157096,"Centennial Forest, land protections and policing raised as environmental and municipal concerns",10614,3261000,13875000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e&start=3261&end=13875","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e/thumbnail_3261000.jpg","/articles/6157096/Connecticut/Centennial-Forest-land-protections-and-policing-raised-as-environmental-and-municipal-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6157096-672b5118f910a916676967d7387068ef/orig.mp4?Expires=1770834915&Signature=iiWddGuqQI9VZBDyzplL2f7zFBClC8VA3TDAMasGt9UvuyihPxw6-szTlbsByaiOeYocZarmWUgyZl3mSqcC2Un-0XBFXQ-8L8feU0s~Po11~4~WBoLkfbZB-zTlKqYyIPziWfmyVNaCVZ-dynyWXdpb0Im1HQqAUYhZxEGr36oT-wgQHcATJHIkt~etw1T9un3XhfOAXbbUmWKp-q6ahnfKyJvgY8f6nd70M3ZqsvV1ed2~q3Vv1G8fhVaqV9pkaZ0iiRvXKlqmo0qaJ4IBNWU0tul3H7EyRIao0Myh7EHJDDh2XQtsrjVd4OfUBtdTEVOqMqYJkZztQOPCejzAbw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) questioned petitioners about Centennial Forest and earlier land transactions originating with the BHC sale. DEEP cited docket O11116 (the earlier PURA approval) and a Natural Resources Management Agreement that created long‑term protections for the conveyed acreage; petitioners told the panel they will honor the terms of that 2002 arrangement and described how proceeds from any permissible disposals must be used under their bond resolutions and enabling legislation.

DEEP asked whether the authority and Aquarion plan to employ private or dedicated police officers for watershed enforcement after the transaction. Petitioners said Aquarion historically employed part‑time police officers and contracted seasonal policing details with municipalities for summer recreational sites, and that RWA maintains a permanent police force that patrols watershed lands across multiple towns. DEEP requested a range of exhibits: (1) annual average cost of law enforcement for Aquarion (2020–2023) as a dollar amount and as a percentage of billed sales, and (2) the comparable figures for RWA. DEEP also requested Aquarion job descriptions for contracted police detail members, seasonal patrol workers, watershed rangers and any historical Aquarion police job descriptions; petitioners agreed to produce the materials as late‑file exhibits.

Petitioners said RWA generally sells class‑3 land only after a defined process and typically transfers property to land trusts; proceeds from class‑3 dispositions are deposited into dedicated construction or watershed protection funds under bond resolutions. Petitioners said the enabling legislation grants towns a right of first refusal and that the representative policy board and towns participate in disposition decisions.

DEEP pressed petitioners on whether police officers assigned to watershed lands have statewide authority under Conn. Gen. Stat. §29‑19a and whether contracted summer policing details were certified under that statute; petitioners said they would check and provide written clarification as a read‑in or late‑file exhibit.

The panel granted DEEP’s requests for detailed law‑enforcement cost and personnel exhibits and for copies of related job descriptions and policy documents.","Connecticut state agencies and petitioners discussed an earlier 2002 land conveyance (about 18,316 acres) that formed Centennial Forest, the statutory protections attached to land sales, and the history of company‑contracted law enforcement and watershed patrols; DEEP pressed for records about Aquarion policing costs and job descriptions.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6157101,"Treatment timeline and settlement money: petitioners outline PFAS projects, say settlements unclear and likely multi‑year",675,6968000,7643000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e&start=6968&end=7643","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e/thumbnail_6968000.jpg","/articles/6157101/Connecticut/Treatment-timeline-and-settlement-money-petitioners-outline-PFAS-projects-say-settlements-unclear-and-likely-multiyear","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6157101-5dce137edce85f8997389409a5b2b4fe/orig.mp4?Expires=1770834915&Signature=P69ntw97TmC2Y2HFlF3oh1DjZLrfiLPDApP~hP89ruSzIin4IspsK-w6wJSSiaJp~WEQ1ljQZuynNvJTPKgow7p3Xj-BQIC4BdGGnc0LR4zipbTIrz1JpDt-1HYXLp-0k6WE9Q1iotWE8wavImukmA~J60Cn75rD8w0oBy8Bb8MV0F4xto10DA4rgVmAibH8uvGUUxqiarYQBAeIQ4CRJMDg7cCDsm3qHLhivXBATKcbeCEcaxk3-a4jezpM1uZOXiRW2fhnxiGQgYFxvt0hCaMUMB3iUfQY-7ooBfJ5cIJq6sxiWcsdfxiy55YIqzRfGPXxVruPFjr1YrM9KlWwCg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Petitioners told PURA they have a multi‑site PFAS response underway and provided a project list for treatment, interconnections and other remedial actions. Company witnesses said two larger wellfields—Mount Carmel and South Cheshire—are the highest‑priority Connecticut projects and will be funded through a mix of internal funds, low‑cost Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) loans (with some forgiveness where eligible), and debt financing.

Petitioners provided a project list and cost estimates on the record. One attachment presented by petitioners lists a set of treatment projects the company considers necessary to comply with a 4 parts per trillion standard; petitioners estimated a subset of those projects at roughly $149.5 million (company figure for a defined list of systems) and said additional projects are in planning. Petitioners said some projects are already complete and some are in planning or design; project timing varies by system and by whether the utility will apply for DWSRF funding (which extends schedules because applications, approval, and bidding take additional months).

Company witnesses described field pilots and a pending patent application for a powdered activated carbon treatment they say can lower remediation cost at selected wellfields; petitioners said the pilot results are promising and that they plan to file patents and then evaluate broader deployment. Petitioners also described existing and planned work to identify customer‑side lead service lines and to use machine learning and meter replacement work to improve inventories.

On settlement funds, Aquarion witnesses said the company has received partial payments from nationwide PFAS class‑action programs and expects further distributions stretched over multiple years; petitioners said the administrator of those settlements is allocating payments to specific sources and that the timing and amounts to be received remain in flux. Petitioners said they have received some initial funds and that allocations are tied to source‑by‑source claims filed with settlement administrators. Witnesses said settlement proceeds will be applied to remediation projects for the sources for which they were received; they also said there are no general statutory restrictions preventing the use of settlement proceeds for remediation of the affected systems, and they will apply settlement proceeds to reduce project costs where the funds match affected sources.

The Department of Public Health, Office of Consumer Counsel, and intervenors pressed the petitioners for documentation: petitioners agreed to file additional exhibit detail on project types, timelines and the modeling behind estimated project costs and to provide breakdowns of settlement payments received and the expected timing of remaining distributions. Petitioners said that in some cases, DWSRF loan forgiveness is available and that, where it is granted, that reduces the amount that must be financed through debt and thus reduces rate impacts for customers.

PURSUES: The panel ordered petitioners to provide more detailed cost‑and‑timeline exhibits for the listed PFAS projects and a reconciliation of two different project cost spreadsheets that appeared in the record.","At the Aug. 19 hearing petitioners described planned PFAS treatment projects across the systems (Mount Carmel, South Cheshire and a set of smaller projects), requested DWSRF and other low‑cost financing, and said settlement proceeds have started but are being paid over multiple years and generally tied to specific sources; petitioners agreed to l",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6157106,"Applicants say $2.6 billion Connecticut purchase financed with long debt; forecasting multi‑year rate increases",4513,1421000,5934000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e&start=1421&end=5934","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5466448-b281c4c9842c1c7586d5842786c4600e/thumbnail_1421000.jpg","/articles/6157106/Connecticut/Applicants-say-26-billion-Connecticut-purchase-financed-with-long-debt-forecasting-multiyear-rate-increases","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6157106-84af5cab543200d72a7fc10f8da7a145/orig.mp4?Expires=1770834916&Signature=hWosacUcNFhSpEcFJPMWMBOl5ZDcqo5OvwML9JZ5HY71Q~lHKMLjtwNzVsT3D~HDZWqnfs3tooM7nSiLw3iez6yX4Z2XXJzavon3AUa2UM7fG0krwSTWDheWxmRl7cZ6D34xHgNLYsDlvkOAYBdjTT7KCiwbdrssIe4E6ld2qeLHO~KvW9Y1P6eRhK6x-B-epeYy3Z-K5lGi9bzcUPS~Pd~WURCfvlQZ0O3lFq3Ve61Jnsqqkfrx0LYnB~ONd8dP-9d6VG4CFNDLpVCZb3RmzICQO92TgjOzrMKttiyv3UA2nBqZRsrNHuBkE377X9ntA~r~pCDFYIa8sPYBoMWNmA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Petitioners told the hearing panel they modeled the Connecticut portion of the sale with approximately $2.6 billion in sources and uses (acquisition price plus acquisition‑related financing and initial capital needs), and that the acquisition financing schedule includes a final principal maturity in the fortieth year while the average life of senior acquisition debt in the model is roughly 16.8 years.

RWA and Aquarion witnesses walked the panel through an OCC attachment (OCC 42, attachment 1) in which petitioners’ financial advisor modeled first‑year increases after acquisition: the spreadsheet the company submitted shows an initial projected increase of about 8.35% in 2027 followed by a 6.85% increase in 2028 (each increase cumulative), and a series of annual increases in the 6–9% band for the early years of the 10‑to‑15‑year financing window. Petitioners characterized the model as conservative and said it does not include some potential improvements such as refinancing assumptions or additional grants. Petitioners also said acquisition debt is expected to be a mix of tax‑exempt debt (the primary source) with a small taxable private placement for working capital; petitioners identified a $100 million private placement as part of their sources.

Company witnesses described a projected first‑rate case revenue requirement gap that Aquarion estimated at about $64 million under current ownership (Aquarion’s pre‑filed model) but that the authority model would lower. Petitioners’ advisor also produced an illustrative net‑benefit calculation (petitioners’ filings call it roughly $365 million over the modeled period) driven largely by a lower cost of capital for a tax‑exempt authority compared with Aquarion’s current investor‑owned cost of capital.

Intervenors pressed petitioners on the assumptions underlying the spreadsheets. OCC staff and counsel asked for debt amortization schedules and the detailed underlying models for the OCC 42 and OCC 44 exhibits; petitioners agreed to provide amortization tables and asked that some commercially sensitive attachments be handled as late‑file exhibits. Petitioners testified they built principal and interest payments into the projections and that principal payments begin in fiscal 2027 under the model. Petitioners also said the acquisition debt’s senior portion shows an average life of about 17 years in the current plan; the final maturity of some subordinate pieces stretches out to year 40.

The panel repeatedly asked petitioners to provide more granular supporting material. The evidentiary record shows multiple requests from intervenors for the lenders’ and advisors’ spreadsheets, the sources/uses that produce the $2.6 billion figure, and line‑by‑line amortization details; petitioners marked several items as late‑file exhibits to be produced to the record.

The parties agreed that the final cost and rate impacts will depend on financing terms, any PURA conditions on approval, and whether petitioners successfully secure low‑cost tax‑exempt financing and grants such as DWSRF programs.","Petitioners told PURA at an Aug. 19 evidentiary hearing they expect roughly $2.6 billion in sources/uses to fund the Connecticut acquisition and related capital, that acquisition debt has a final maturity in year 40 but shorter average lives, and that their planning spreadsheets project multi‑percent annual rate increases starting in 2027.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Proposed Aquarian sale would shift oversight and set new board structure for regional authority

Centennial Forest, land protections and policing raised as environmental and municipal concerns

Treatment timeline and settlement money: petitioners outline PFAS projects, say settlements unclear and likely multi‑year

Applicants say $2.6 billion Connecticut purchase financed with long debt; forecasting multi‑year rate increases