Nora Grace-Flood photo
A seemingly new fence — and new graffiti — at English Station.
A state utility regulator cited growing graffiti and revolving project management as reasons to doubt United Illuminating’s (UI) promise to fix up a long-abandoned and toxic power plant — and as reason to fine the company over $1 million annually until the regional power company follows through on the remediation.
UI, in turn, has shot back against that proposed financial penalty, denying claims of mismanagement, refusing accountability for any vandalism of the site, and accusing the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) of violating due process.
That’s the latest in an ongoing legalistic back and forth — embedded in a broader draft decision by PURA to reject a recent rate hike proposed by UI — regarding the fate of English Station, the historic and long-dormant power plant at 510 Grand Ave.
Click here to read PURA’s draft decision from July 21. Click here to read UI’s response to that draft decision from Aug. 7. Click here to read more about the broader rate hike request and UI-PURA dispute.
United Illuminating agreed to clean up that site through a 2016 partial consent order they signed after selling the property back in 2000. Before ridding themselves of the building, UI polluted the property with carcinogens, polychlorinated biphenyls, heavy metals and other contaminants produced over decades of burning coal and oil on scene. By signing that 2016 consent order with the state, UI committed $30 million to complete a partial remediation of the site (read more about what that entails here) by 2019.
Six years later, the job still incomplete, Attorney General William Tong called on PURA to intervene. In a July 21 draft decision on a rate hike put forward by UI, PURA heeded Tong’s lead and sought to impose a 20 basis point reduction to the company’s return on equity each year that they fail to fulfill compliance with the consent order. UI said in their responsive filing on Aug. 7 that that penalty would translate to a $1.63 million yearly fine.
“The Authority finds that the company has imprudently and inefficiently managed the English Station remediation, imprudently managed the state’s natural environment, and failed to comply with the conditions of the Merger Decision,” PURA’s statement reads, referencing a merger between UI and Avangrid of which the station’s remediation was a condition required by the authority.
While UI pointed to $18 million spent cracking down on asbestos and site security as proof of their intentions to finish the remediation, PURA pointed to graffiti along the property’s gates and high turnover of managers overseeing the project as alternate proof that the company “has taken a lackadaisical approach to ensuring site security” and shown “an apparent lack of ownership and accountability for this Merger Decision and PCO condition.”
UI, meanwhile, called those conclusions “erroneous,” countering that the company’s cycling of six project managers over seven years did not constitute evidence of “mismanagement” nor did graffiti on the walls suggest failed site security on their part, noting that there was no proof of “when this graffiti may have been created.”
Nora Grace-Flood photos
English Station, in May.
“The draft decision makes a hindsight conclusion based on no evidence of what would constitute reasonable actions and decisions by a utility related to such investigation and remediation,” UI’s response reads.
UI argued that the authority failed to state a “defined end date” for the proposed financial penalty, which they said “conflicts with legal requirements associated with the company’s remediation, violates notice provisions and right to a hearing.”
Lastly, UI stated that PURA was acting outside of its own authoritative bounds by fining UI for an issue that the company said did not impact the utility rates of clients. While the remediation was a condition of their Avangrid merger, UI wrote that that same “merger does not empower the authority to oversee or enforce compliance with the consent order.”
PURA, meanwhile, clarified their own authority in their original draft decision: “The Authority is broadly responsible for ensuring that the company is performing its public responsibilities with economy, efficiency, and care for public safety and energy security while also, in relevant part, reflecting prudent management of the natural environment.”
Read more here about how New Haven activists have bashed UI’s indifference to English Station, expressing concern about how the property is jeopardizing the health, wealth and wellbeing of the city’s residents and the plant’s immediate neighbors.
PURA is scheduled to hand down a final ruling on UI’s requested rate hike, and on this proposed English Station cleanup penalty, on Aug. 25.
Who's gonna make UI pay the fine??? What if they don't?
PURA is trying to make UI assume responsibility for this mess. But if UI had just kept the station and maintained it, perhaps the contamination might not be as bad right now.