Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contract Negotiation Petition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PURA denies ALCO petition, finds insufficient evidence UI failed to negotiate in good faith
Summary
The authority denied ALCO Finance Limited's petition alleging United Illuminating Company failed to negotiate in good faith under Connecticut's PURPA-related statute, concluding the record did not show a violation after an evidentiary hearing and oral argument.
The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority on March 26 denied a petition from ALCO Finance Limited asking the authority to find that United Illuminating Company failed to negotiate in good faith over a contract to purchase energy and capacity under Connecticut General Statute "16 dash 2 43 a."
Authority staff attorney Patrick Fryer summarized the record: ALCO filed its petition Aug. 20, 2024 and an evidentiary hearing was held Dec. 9, 2024; the authority issued a proposed final decision on Feb. 26, 2025 and heard oral argument on March 18, 2025. Fryer said the record indicates UI actively engaged in negotiations within Connecticut's existing PURPA regulatory framework and that ALCO's dissatisfaction with the regulatory structure or UI's offered terms did not amount to a failure to negotiate in good faith.
The authority concluded the evidence did not support a finding that UI violated general statute section "16 dash 2 43 a subsection d," and denied the petition and requested relief. Staff recommended adoption of the decision and the commissioners voted to adopt it.
The decision leaves in place the current PURPA-related negotiation framework; ALCO's requested remedies were denied for lack of record support.
