Eversource Opposed Law on Minimum Staffing, Storm Responses; Legislature Opted for Study Last Year

Eversource Energy transmits and delivers electricity to 1.25 million customers in 149 of Connecticut’s 169 municipalities, company officials told state legislators in March, just weeks before the state shut down due to the rapidly increasing coronavirus.

This week, well over half of those customers - approximately 800,000 - lost electric service in a fast-moving, high-wind storm that was underestimated by the company, according to state officials.  The result – more than 500,000 customers still without power days later and restoration now expected to proceed well into next week – has raised the ire of customers, local and state officials.  Gov. Lamont called for an investigation of the company’s preparedness, which the utilities regulatory agency, the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA), has now begun. 

A year ago, when the legislature held a public hearing on a proposal concerning “utility response times for restoration of electric service and utility minimum staffing levels,” Eversource Energy Vice President of Electric System operations Michael Hayhurst testified against the proposal, telling legislators that “Having sufficient in-house workers to perform day-to-day work – and supplementing them with contractors to repair storm damage – is a tried and true model” used by Eversource as well as  utilities throughout the nation.

Hayhurst explained that his own responsibilities included “overseeing the day-to-day operation of our Connecticut electric system operations, as well as leading our planning for, and response to, storms that impact Connecticut customers.  During storms, I serve as the on-site day-shift Incident Commander – stationed in our Berlin, CT Incident Command Center – leading our efforts to restore power.”

He went on to explain that the PURA already had the necessary authority to regulate “these two important issues.”  It is that agency which has launched the investigation this week, in the midst of the company’s much-criticized response to the widespread outages.

PURA, Hayhurst pointed out, already possessed authority to “establish performance standards for minimum staffing level targets for each utility company and typical restoration time targets for each utility company for larger storms in which ten percent or more of customers are out of power for more than 48 hours.” 

He noted that PURA had set (1) the typical number of employee and contractor personnel needed; (2) the typical time period within which a global statewide restoration projection should be issued; and (3) the typical number of days needed to restore power” for various intensities of storm,  utilizing a matrix to provide direction.   That matrix included five storm levels, each requiring different staffing levels.

Among the immediate concerns this week is that the storm level the company was apparently anticipating (and presumably preparing for) missed the mark – leading to more severe damage imposed by the rapid, stronger storm, and the resulting lengthy response time needed to repair customer service interruptions.  The investigation will likely include a review of how the company came to the conclusion it did regarding the storm’s anticipated intensity and its capacity to do serious damage to the state’s electric infrastructure, despite efforts to “harden” it in recent years.

In the aftermath of an October 2017 windstorm across Connecticut and much of the Northeast, Eversource reported that 311,000 Connecticut customers were impacted,and 85% had power restored within 48 hours. Then as now, strong winds brought trees and tree limbs down onto power lines, resulting in broken poles and downed wires throughout the state.  Hayhurst said at that time that “We have requested hundreds of additional line and tree crews to assist. It will take time to assess and repair damage caused by this storm, and our crews will continue to work as quickly as is safely possible to restore power to our customers.” The company reported that “through our mutual aid network, more than 200 additional utility crews from as far as Florida,Ohio, Alabama,and Tennessee” were brought in to assist Eversource crews.

In his testimony in February 2019, Hayhurst also raised concerns about too-rigid requirements that could prove costly to ratepayers: 

“Eversource encourages the legislature to avoid passing any law that requires fixed, mandatory in-house staffing levels because we have to balance the equally important goals of (1) ensuring reliable electric service and reasonable restoration times following storm events, and (2) maintaining reasonable electric rates for consumers and businesses. It would be too costly for customers if we had year-round in-house staffing levels based on the level of work needed to respond to catastrophic storms.”

Eversource understands the vital importance of these two issues, he told legislators, before concluding that the proposed legislation was “unnecessary.”

The legislature opted not to approve the initial proposal, voting instead to establish a study.  That study, to be conducted by PURA, was to examine both issues, and provide findings to the legislature by January 1 of this year.