Just got word that CL&P (now Eversource) filed their rate case last month and they're proposing mandatory demand charges for all residential customers. They're calling it a 'grid modernization charge' but it's basically $12/kW for anything over 3kW. Has anyone else in CT seen the details on this? I'm working three accounts that could see $200+ monthly increases if this goes through. The tariff filing is dense but Schedule R-1 has all the details.
CL&P Rate Case 23-05-01 - Anyone tracking the residential demand charges?
Vince, I haven't seen the CT filing but Georgia Power tried something similar in 2019. We fought it hard and got them to phase it in over 3 years instead of immediate implementation. The key argument was impact on low-income customers. You might want to look at the intervention deadlines - usually 30-45 days from filing date.
I'm dealing with something similar here in PA with PPL. They filed for residential demand charges back in February. What's interesting is they're basing it on the highest 15-minute interval during peak hours only (2-7 PM). Much more reasonable than an all-day demand charge. Are you seeing peak-only or 24/7 demand measurement in the CL&P proposal?
Sylvia, it's 24/7 measurement with a 15-minute window, but they're only charging for demand above 3kW. So a typical home pulling 8kW would pay demand charges on 5kW. The real problem is they're not grandfathering existing net metering customers. Solar households could get hit twice - lower credits AND demand charges.
This is becoming a nationwide trend. We're seeing it everywhere as utilities try to recover infrastructure costs. The solar issue is the real kicker - utilities want to eliminate net metering advantages while adding demand charges. Document everything you can about customer impact. The PSC will want real-world examples showing bill increases. Has anyone calculated the average residential load factor in CT? That'll help predict actual demand charge impacts.
Randy's right about the trend. Duke Energy in Ohio proposed similar charges last year but backed off after public hearings. The Cincinnati area saw huge pushback. Vince, you might want to coordinate with consumer advocacy groups. In our case, the Office of Consumers' Counsel was very effective at highlighting the regressive nature of flat demand charges.
Good point about consumer groups. I've already reached out to Connecticut Consumer Counsel. They're planning to intervene but need data on actual customer impacts. I'm putting together a analysis of 50 residential accounts to show the range of bill increases. Preliminary numbers show 15-40% increases for typical households.
That's solid data, Vince. Here in Michigan, DTE backed down from residential demand charges after similar analysis showed disproportionate impacts on elderly and fixed-income customers. Make sure to highlight seasonal variations too - winter heating loads could create massive demand spikes that customers can't control.