Consumer advocates, EOE and AG defend prior cuts and urge caution on depreciation and ROE restoration

Consumer advocates and enforcement offices urged the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority on May 4 to preserve key elements of the earlier decisions and to be skeptical of company requests to restore revenue elements.

Andrew Minikowski of the Office of Consumer Counsel told commissioners the remand is procedural and that allowing significant new materials would risk piecing together a ‘‘Franken‑rate case’’ from different time periods. OC defended the authority’s earlier depreciation approach (advocated by expert witness Mr. Dunle) as consistent with prior Connecticut precedent and argued that the five‑basis‑point ROE reduction tied to underutilized plant was a permissible discretionary incentive. OC also recommended retaining the DIM cap, continuing oversight of customer‑service metrics, and denying recovery of legal appeal costs from ratepayers.

Tom Lopez of the Office of Education Outreach and Enforcement and Caroline McCormack for the Attorney General both highlighted customer‑service evidence in the record and said the record supported targeted remedies to protect consumers, including continued monitoring and corrective orders. OC told the panel that if the commission wants to allow any company re‑submission it should do so only after clearly striking or excising the newly filed, unvetted attachments so the administrative record is transparent.