Get the facts:

CNG/SCG rate case
Draft Decisions

Fact Check:

All is not what it seems in the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority’s (PURA) Draft Decisions in the Connecticut Natural Gas (CNG) and Southern Connecticut Gas (SCG) rate cases.

PURA claim #1: The Draft Decisions set an allowed Return on Equity (ROE) of 9.2% and provide us with payment to cover the costs of infrastructure projects we completed through April 30, 2024.

True

PURA does set our allowed ROE at 9.2% and includes payment for the costs of certain investments we have made. However, an ROE of this level represents the bottom of the barrel nationally, and PURA’s approval of investments remains insufficient.

PURA claim #2: The Draft Decision also provides sufficient revenue to cover other costs that CNG and SCG have so that it is actually possible that we can reach the authorized ROE, or even come close.

False

PURA makes so many errors and cuts to our allowed revenue that we will not have any chance of covering our costs, or even showing our lenders and investors that there is enough money to run the business – never mind to pay them back. Under the proposed rates, CNG cannot earn more than about 4% and SCG cannot earn more than around 2.5% – less than most banks’ high-yield savings accounts.cient.

PURA claim #3: The Draft Decisions are based upon evidence and the law.

False

PURA erroneously includes a combined $8 million for a tax break for investments that they cut, meaning they are requiring us to provide customers the benefits of a fictitious tax credit for projects they do not approve. In the real world, that’s called a hoax.

PURA claim #4: The Draft Decisions adequately reflect CNG and SCG’s costs of doing business.

False

PURA ignores CNG and SCG’s cost of debt increases, even as their own regulatory approach has driven these costs up.

PURA also makes numerous math errors, totaling approximately $15 million, including double-counting several deductions – all of which eat into the company’s financial health.

CNG and SCG’s have no ability to account for inflation. Since 2020, equipment costs have gone up 50%, but PURA forces CNG and SCG to pretend inflation does not exist.

PURA claim #5: The Draft Decisions support safe and secure natural gas service in Connecticut.

False

CNG and SCG’s funding for key infrastructure programs is wiped out. CNG and SCG’s funding for cybersecurity has been eliminated, prohibiting us from improving our systems to best protect customer data and our physical infrastructure, which is vulnerable to attack. PURA also eliminates funding for a mobile command center to help CNG and SCG respond to gas emergencies quickly and safely.

The Takeaway:

PURA has lost its way. It indiscriminately uses precedent in some situations and develops new rules in others, all apparently with one predetermined outcome in mind: lower rates at any cost, regardless of the impact to reliability, safety, and long-term cost increases when lenders jack up their rates.


Tell Governor Lamont, Attorney General Tong, and Consumer Counsel Coleman: PURA must change the CNG SCG Draft Decisions before they are finalized on November 18. Failure to do so will compromise CNG and SCG’s ability to provide safe, reliable, and resilient service to the 391,000 customers we serve.