Blumenthal Demands Federal Action to Lower Electricity Costs

[Hartford, CT] - U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal today introduced The Affordable Electricity Rates Act of 2026 a bill to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to consider affordability when setting transmission rates.

Transmission rates comprise 15 percent of your electricity bill and Blumenthal's legislation would prohibit any rate increases or charges that would increase overall electricity prices by over 5 percent.

"FERC has been anemic in its oversight of electricity costs. Connecticut consumers pay too much for electricity and federal authorities have done too little to protect them from rising costs by utility companies. I'm proud to introduce the Affordable Electricity Rates Act of 2026 to compel FERC to consider affordability when setting transmission rates and prohibit costly rate increases that burden consumers," Blumenthal said.

Blumenthal's bill amends Section 210 of the Federal Power Act to require FERC to consider whether a rate or charge is likely to result in retail electricity prices that are unaffordable for consumers and then prohibiting any rate or charge that is unaffordable by considering it as not "just and reasonable" which is FERC's current standard. The legislation also has a presumption of unaffordability for any transmission rate that would increase overall electricity prices by over 5%.

In addition to the legislation, Blumenthal today wrote to FERC demanding strong oversight of asset condition projects. These projects are initiated at the discretion of the transmission company, such as Eversource, and they received a presumption from FERC that they are necessary. In many cases, organizations like Eversource repair their infrastructure or replace full transmission lines when it isn't needed and consumers are left footing the bill.

Transmission owners are investing heavily in these types of projects. In fact, spending on asset condition projects represents 73 percent of the annual amount that transmission owners spend on all capital projects in New England.

Energy costs in Connecticut are already extraordinarily high, and Connecticut consumers pay for a portion of the costs of all transmission projects throughout the ISO-New England region. The number of these transmission projects have skyrocketed, in large part because the return on investment percentages for the utility companies are higher than for other projects.

In a letter to FERC Blumenthal cites Eversource's X-178 transmission project in New Hampshire as a perfect example of why FERC oversight is needed. While only 10% of the transmission lines need to be repairs, Eversource is replacing 580 poles and 49 miles of transmission lines to the tune of $360 million. Connecticut's share of that is expected to be $79.9 million.

"For too long, transmission owners have exploited weak oversight to make unnecessary and expensive upgrades. Since 2018, transmission organizations in New England have spent twice the amount of money on asset condition projects as they have on new reliability projects - to the tune of $4.1 billion. The costs of these projects - which are initiated at the sole discretion of a transmission organization - are passed onto ratepayers across the entire ISO-NE region, with Connecticut residents paying 25% of all costs for projects that affect the regional grid, even for projects located in another state, like the X-178 transmission project," Blumenthal wrote.

Blumenthal's bill text can be viewed here. A copy of his letter to FERC is available below.

The Honorable Laura V. Swett

Chairman

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE

Washington, D.C. 20426

Docket No. EL26-66-000

Dear Chairman Swett,

I write to provide comments on the above-mentioned docket and call again on FERC to increase oversight of the planning process for asset condition projects. I have repeatedly called for the Commission to provide greater scrutiny of such projects to ensure proposed upgrades are truly necessary and that the costs are reasonable. Eversource's actions in this case provide the perfect illustration of why such scrutiny is needed.

As petitioners allege, Eversource mischaracterized its X-178 transmission project, thereby subjecting it to a lesser level of scrutiny than it should have received while receiving a higher rate of return on these expenditures than those provided for costs of other capital projects and operating expenses. While regional transmission projects impacting reliability are reviewed by ISO-NE, asset condition projects initiated by transmission organizations to replace old or damaged infrastructure receive little to no meaningful review or oversight. This gives transmission owners an incentive to classify projects as asset condition projects, even in cases where the infrastructure being repaired has not exceeded its useful life or the transmission organization chooses to replace an entire line when only portions of it are damaged.

For too long, transmission owners have exploited weak oversight to make unnecessary and expensive upgrades. Since 2018, transmission organizations in New England have spent twice the amount of money on asset condition projects as they have on new reliability projects - to the tune of $4.1 billion. The costs of these projects - which are initiated at the sole discretion of a transmission organization - are passed onto ratepayers across the entire ISO-NE region, with Connecticut residents paying 25% of all costs for projects that affect the regional grid, even for projects located in another state, like the X-178 transmission project.

As I said in my August 8, 2025 letter, and again in a letter on April 8, 2026, FERC must provide greater oversight over asset condition projects, including at a minimum, the establishment of an independent review mechanism. As long as these types of projects receive a presumption that they are prudent during FERC's review, transmission organizations will continue to take advantage of the system by misclassifying projects. As a result, ratepayers in Connecticut are forced to pay for these unnecessary upgrades, further exacerbating already sky-high electric bills.

I urge the Commission to act in the best interests of consumers and establish a mechanism for greater oversight of asset condition projects.

-30-

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Tweet

1. Energy & the Environment