Connecticut is moving forward with plans to further update the state’s electric grid through Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). On Wednesday, the Public Utilities Regulatory Agency (PURA) voted unanimously to adopt a new framework for rolling out these updates.

AMI attempts to control the cost of electricity for consumers through a “smart” system, essentially using artificial intelligence software to monitor how much energy a home is using, communicate faster with the utility, and monitor outages, among other usages. According to a report September 2016 report from the U.S. Department of Energy, the system could also allow utilities to implement time-based pricing, raising or lowering rates based on peak usage to encourage customers to scale back at peak times. 

For Connecticut, the exact ways AMI would be utilized is unclear, in part because the state does not currently have these systems deployed to all customers. PURA, for its part, has emphasized the possibility of a benefit to consumers through rate reductions, more accurate metering, and a better ability to troubleshoot issues within the grid itself.

But until Wednesday, the agency hadn’t established a means of implementing a system statewide and among the various electricity providers. The framework, says PURA’s commissioners, is a major step toward their goals to modernize the grid and deliver on their equity goals.

“This is a very important document for us. It’s extensive, it’s broad, it’s wide-ranging, and it’s an important part of the Authority’s work,” said PURA Commissioner Michael Caron. “There are other areas where we can further pursue some of the issues that Eversource, for instance, put forward before this final decision, and I will continue to make sure that we work together to make this AMI project work because so much depends on its ultimate success. We need to get it right.”

“To me, it’s another historic day for PURA. We’ve been trying to get AMI for such a long time and it’s here, the roadmap is set,” added Vice Chairman John W. Betkoski III. “We need collaboration and communication with the stakeholders, with the companies, with the ratepayers. We don’t want to surprise anybody. We want everyone to know what’s coming, but I think this is an excellent document moving forward for the ratepayers of Connecticut.”

In its attempts to create this framework, PURA put out a request for proposals and comment and received responses from three major stakeholders: United Illuminating, Eversource Energy, and Utilidata. UI and Eversource represent the two largest power companies in the state. Utilidata, though, isn’t a power company at all, but a technology company that specializes in smart grid technology, adding their services overtop of existing infrastructure.

Many of Utilitdata’s suggestions were used in creating the framework. Most notably, the framework creates a requirement that there be separate proposals for each segment of the rollout, so technology, software, and other services could, theoretically, be provided by a variety of vendors.

According to PURA’s decision, this would allow for the lowest possible costs to consumers and taxpayers, since each part of the rollout would have a bid process.

Some argue, though, that separating each of the segments out could benefit Utilidata since they provide only a portion of the infrastructure. A source close to the regulatory process tells Inside Investigator they are concerned that PURA’s decision could lead to a push by Utilidata for less up-to-date meters which would require the company’s accessories. Rather than UI or Eversource installing newer meters with built-in technology, the source, who prefers to remain unnamed, states that Utilidata could potentially undercut the bidding process for products in which they specialize.

PURA, for its part, disputes those concerns, arguing that the proceeding was completely transparent and intended to benefit ratepayers.

“In adopting suggestions or recommendations from participants, the Authority considered the testimony, written comments, and documentation submitted by stakeholders,” said Joe Cooper, a spokesperson for PURA. “To the extent any concerns or objections were raised with respect to Utilidata’s suggestions, the Authority considered and weighed that information when making its determinations. As a result of this robust, public process, there is no reason to believe that the decision favors a specific stakeholder.”

Regardless of who wins the various bids, the AMI transition is expected to cost its stakeholders a lot of money. Eversource, for one, has only included AMI on half of its meters and would need to invest a further $4 million to convert the rest. UI, on the other hand, has converted about 80% of its customers. All of these investments, however, are outlined by PURA to be outweighed by their potential monetary benefits.

As of this writing, the state itself has not committed any public funding to the AMI upgrades.

“Ultimately, the investment in AMI will be recovered from ratepayers,” clarified Cooper. “Therefore, the Authority established this framework to encourage prudent and efficient investments. Importantly though, the decision does obligate the EDCs to report to the Authority on efforts to seek federal funding from the U.S. DOE to offset the costs of this investment.”

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.