Eversource Energy is asking Connecticut regulators to approve an electric delivery rate increase that would raise the average electric customer’s bill by roughly 11% beginning in July 2027.
The utility filed a letter of intent with the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority on Wednesday, formally launching its first Connecticut electric distribution rate review since 2017.
The typical residential customer using 700 kilowatt hours per month would see a steeper increase of about 13%, according to the filing.
Eversource said it needs $503 million in additional annual revenue to support ongoing maintenance, vegetation management, aging infrastructure upgrades and technology investments aimed at improving outage response.
The filing is only the opening step in what is expected to be a lengthy regulatory proceeding. A full rate application is expected on or about July 14, with a final PURA decision not expected until mid-2027 following a 350-day statutory investigation.
Consumer Counsel Claire Coleman, whose office represents ratepayer interests in utility proceedings, said the filing marks the beginning of what is likely to become one of Connecticut’s most consequential utility review cases in years. She said her office plans to scrutinize the company’s spending, proposed investments and requested customer impacts once a formal application is filed.
“… This case will provide the first real opportunity in years to thoroughly examine the company’s operations, spending decisions and priorities under a microscope,” Coleman said.
Steve Sullivan, Eversource’s outgoing president of Connecticut electric operations, framed the request as a response to nearly nine years without a distribution rate adjustment, during which inflation reshaped the cost of nearly everything the utility buys.
“We’ve been able to deliver top-tier reliability with middle-of-the-pack rates,” Sullivan said. “We’ve squeezed as much out of cost control as we can. We really need to come in now for a rate review.”
The company has invested about $3.3 billion in Connecticut electric infrastructure since 2017, roughly $600 million of which is not yet reflected in customer rates, he said. Those investments generate about $240 million in annual state and local tax revenue across the 157 Connecticut municipalities Eversource serves, according to the filing.
The 11% figure measures the increase against the total customer bill rather than the distribution portion alone, which would itself rise by about 35%, according to the filing. Actual impacts for residential, commercial and industrial customers could vary depending on how costs are allocated in the formal rate case.
The request does not include costs tied to restoring power after 43 major storms between 2018 and 2023, including Tropical Storm Isaias. Those costs — now totaling about $1.4 billion, including accrued carrying charges — are being reviewed in a separate contested PURA proceeding, with a draft decision due June 22 and a final decision scheduled for July 29.
Eversource is counting on a 2025 state law allowing storm-cost securitization to keep those expenses out of the delivery rate case. Under that approach, approved storm costs would be financed through long-term, state-backed bonds and repaid over roughly 20 years, rather than through a shorter conventional recovery period. The company estimates securitization would reduce the storm-cost portion of a residential bill to about $4 per month, compared with roughly $12 per month under traditional recovery.
If storm restoration costs were folded directly into base rates, the company’s annual revenue request would rise by an additional $278 million to about $781 million, pushing the overall bill impact to roughly 17% and the distribution-component change to about 54%, according to the filing.
That assumes regulators approve a significant share of Eversource’s storm-cost request. Consumer Counsel Claire Coleman has urged PURA to approve no more than $689.5 million of the utility’s storm-cost request and reject more than $300 million in carrying charges. Attorney General William Tong has called those carrying charges a “rushed cash grab.”
Asked whether an unfavorable ruling in the storm docket could alter the new rate filing, Sullivan said Eversource would likely seek to securitize whatever amount regulators ultimately approve, though an appeal would remain an option.
The utility also expects to seek a return on equity close to the 9.57% level recently set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for New England transmission owners. Sullivan said the final request will likely fall between 9.5% and 10.5%.
He said Connecticut Light & Power earned an actual return of about 6.5% last year, below its currently authorized range of roughly 9.25% to 9.75%, and argued that Eversource must remain competitive with utilities in other states when attracting capital.
Sullivan also acknowledged the roughly $500 million in Connecticut investment cuts Eversource announced in 2024 during its conflict with the previous PURA leadership. He said that pullback contributed to weaker reliability performance last year, while the current investment proposal is intended to reverse that trend.
The company said it has held growth in operations and maintenance expenses to about 16% since the last rate case, well below the roughly 30% rise in general inflation over the same period as measured by the Gross Domestic Product Price Index. Eversource estimates the savings for customers at $45 million a year.
Sullivan praised the current composition of PURA, which includes five commissioners with legislative, academic and energy-investment backgrounds, chaired by a former consumer advocate.
Connecticut’s overall high electric rates are driven more heavily by supply and public benefits costs than by distribution costs, Sullivan argued.
Coleman also emphasized that the rate case process will include opportunities for public participation through hearings and written comments submitted to regulators, encouraging consumers to stay engaged as the case unfolds.
