Shoreline Awash

With Debate Over Fees

By Kendra Bobowick

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s disputes will finally find a voice before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that has agreed to hold a public hearing regarding a Shoreline Management Plan (SMP). “We’ll be ready, willing, and able to oppose the plan,” the attorney general stressed. “I am opposed…particularly to the fees.”

The commission had declined previous requests, but has plans for a hearing in September on a date to be determined. Mr Blumenthal will state his opinions. “Clearly the fees are unfair and unjust,” he said. Congressman Chris Murphy has also become involved. According to a recent release from his office, “On the eve of Mr Murphy’s intention to offer an amendment to an energy bill to require [FERC] to hold local public meetings before any land use decision, Mr Murphy received a call from the federal agency — FERC will reverse its previous position and grant a public meeting…”

Riling Mr Blumenthal is the financial burden awaiting residents with property along Lakes Candlewood and Lillinonah specifically as FirstLight Hydro Generating Company prepares to enforce the SMP as part of its license to operate facilities along the Housatonic River.

“The [fees] are too high and it’s unfair to property owners who are only a few of the total people who use and enjoy the lake,” Mr Blumenthal said.

The previous hydropower company owner, which did not enforce fees, was Northeast Utilities subsidiary Northeast Generation Services. When FirstLight purchased the company, it assumed the licensing agreements that had been going through a renewal process. After roughly a year of drafts, a final submission, and reviews, the federal commission approved the license and shoreline plan in early July. Opposition had already begun.

On July 28, 2006, Mr Blumenthal had issued statements lashing out at first at Northeast Generation Services, which still own the hydroelectric plants and was going through a draft phase of the plan. He made accusations including, “Northeast Generation Services continues to bury its head in the mud. I am deeply disappointed by the final Shoreline Management Plan that Northeast submitted to [FERC]…that ignored residents’ real and relevant concerns — shared by me…” The commission received complaints that were in writing, however, which were submitted with the SMP. Verbal statements were also gathered.

Lake Lillinonah Authority Chairman Bryan Piepho said that during public hearings held by FirstLight, “They recorded comments,” and collected written statements and the comments accompanied the license renewal application sent into FERC.

Mr Piepho voiced his suspicions recently. “Did FERC ever take them into consideration?” he asked.

Yes. Commission spokesperson Celeste Miller said, “Everything submitted as a comment is part of what we look at.” Further addressing doubts, she said, “Any concerns are part of the record; that’s standard operating procedure and the purpose for public input.”

Both the attorney general and Mr Piepho noted that FERC had not granted its own public hearing after FirstLight filed its renewal application. In fact, FERC had replied to Mr Blumenthal on June 7, roughly one month before approving the license application. Why did FERC decline requests for a hearing? Ms Miller referred to a letter addressed to Mr Blumenthal.

The letter began, “With regard to your request that the commission reconsider its decision not to hold a public meeting in the area affected by the SMP thirteen stakeholder meetings were held since 2005 to gather input from the public. The licensee then postponed filing the SMP for seven months at the public’s request to allow time for additional public comment. The SMP summarizes the public’s concerns and contains copies of over 100 respondent letters and e-mails. The SMP also contains the licensee’s responses to these concerns. Further, the commission issued a public notice of the filing of the SMP to solicit additional comments.”

The order approving the SMP refers to the lengthy and documented comments included in the plan. Remarks from area elected officials include, “Proposed fees are overly burdensome. A rational basis for the fees in the form of a budget should be presented in conjunction with the fee proposal,” and “Unfair Burden — Lakefront property owners appear to be the target of an unfair burden. How will fees be collected from lake marinas used in implementing the Plan? What costs of the SMP is the project owner prepared to bear on its own?”

(The complete Appendix H of the SMP as filed is available at essexpartnership.com/documents.asp.)

Facing more specific complaints regarding the SMP, Ms Miller explained in an e-mail, “Currently, we have rehearing requests of our decision on the [SMP] pending before the commission. These concerns are under review and the commission will address them in time. So, at this point I can’t comment further on specific concerns due to the pending rehearing request.”

She also anticipates a September hearing. FERC is planning “a public meeting to provide interested parties the opportunity to raise any concerns, issues or questions they have…commission staff will be in attendance and will make sure all comments are considered…”

Officials and residents look forward to answers.

Regarding the fees, Mr Piepho said, “No one is happy with it.” He questions why the federal commission would approve the licensing with the fees. “There was not support from the public.”

The point also nags at Mr Blumenthal. “Assuming fees are justified, I am far from persuaded they are necessary.” He believes the company needs to account for the fees. “How will the money be spent and why is it necessary?” he asked.

Northeast Generation Services had not enforced the fees. Mr Blumenthal said, “In part, they avoided imposing the fees because they knew we would oppose it. I hope to send the same message…if Northeast is fine without fees, why not the new company?”

Despite his opposition, the attorney general explained that he has no control over a federal agency. He said, “We can appeal. They made a decision and all we can do is petition and argue and hope they are listening.” He then noted that his office has successfully sued the federal commission on other issues in the past.

The SMP outlines a fee structure that calls for a one-time registration fee of $500 for existing structures (which can be waived under the right circumstances) and licensing fees of between $300 and $1,000 for docks, gazebos, decks, and other structures that are on the water company’s property. Unlike Lake Zoar where private property boundaries extend into the water, the hydropower company’s property along Lakes Lillinonah and Candlewood extend onto land several feet beyond the waterline.

The SMP is among the changes that lake residents will see since FirstLight Hydro Generating Company, which now operates the hydroelectric stations along the Housatonic encompassing Lakes Lillinonah, Zoar, and Candlewood, assumed the federal licensing and SMP from prior owner Northeast Generation Services. FERC approved the plan on July 3. The SMP fee structure asks for one-time licensing fees of between $300 and $1,000 for structures including docks, swim platforms, gazebos, for example.