The Public Utilities Regulatory Authority has finalized a decision allowing Eversource Energy to recover hundreds of millions of dollars in storm restoration costs while rejecting the utility’s attempt to charge customers nearly $400 million in retroactive financing costs.
In a final decision approved Wednesday, PURA found that Eversource prudently incurred about $861.5 million in restoration costs tied to 43 major storms between 2018 and 2023, including Tropical Storm Isaias, of which roughly $668 million in net costs is eligible for recovery through a future securitization proceeding.
Regulators again rejected the utility’s request to recover $396.7 million in carrying charges that accrued before the agency completed its prudence review.
Instead, PURA ruled that carrying charges may begin accruing only after the agency approved the costs, consistent with longstanding Connecticut regulatory policy.
The decision largely mirrors a proposed final decision released last month despite objections from Eversource and other parties.
Eversource spokesperson Jamie Ratliff said the company appreciated the “thoughtful and deliberate process” PURA used to reach the decision, and called the ruling an important step toward recovering costs the utility says it prudently incurred while restoring power after the storms.
Ratliff said customers expect a fast and effective response when severe weather hits and have little tolerance for outages, and that meeting those expectations requires storm preparation and response that carry substantial costs.
Authorization to securitize the storm costs will let the company pull hundreds of millions of dollars out of its recently filed rate review, Ratliff said, lowering the bill impact for customers. Ratliff described securitization as a complex and lengthy process, but one the company expects will produce significant savings.
Eversource originally sought to recover about $1.28 billion when it filed its application in December 2025. As carrying charges accumulated during the proceeding, the total request grew to about $1.38 billion.
Securitization allows utilities to finance extraordinary storm costs through low-interest bonds backed by a dedicated customer charge, reducing the monthly bill impact compared with traditional financing.
PURA said the amount ultimately authorized for securitization will be determined in a separate proceeding.
The Office of Consumer Counsel had argued that only about $689.5 million of the company’s storm costs should be approved, while Attorney General William Tong and other parties urged PURA to reject the request for retroactive carrying charges, arguing customers should not pay financing costs before regulators determine whether expenses were prudently incurred.
PURA also reaffirmed its finding that Eversource failed to justify several categories of requested costs, reducing the company’s recoverable storm expenses by roughly $100 million before applying additional credits and offsets.
Eversource has argued that the lengthy prudence review increased its financing costs and that denying carrying charges discourages utilities from making the investments necessary to respond quickly to major storms.
Ratliff did not directly address whether the company was disappointed by the denial of retroactive carrying charges, and did not say whether Eversource would seek reconsideration or appeal any portion of the decision. Ratliff said storm response is a process of continual improvement and that the company would apply what it learned from the outcome going forward.
The decision comes as Eversource pursues a separate distribution rate case seeking an increase in electric rates beginning next year. During that proceeding, the company has argued Connecticut’s regulatory framework has made it increasingly difficult to earn its authorized return on equity.
