ENERGY DEMAND IN SOUTHWEST CONNECTICUT IS GROWING RAPIDLY. This 54-town region is the state economy's engine. It is served by a transmission grid that dates back to the late 1940s. Today the system strains under capacity limitations and increasing congestion. Something needed to be done to narrow the ever-widening gap between supply and demand.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ranked southwest Connecticut as one of the nation's top energy reliability risks — with the potential to have widespread, prolonged power outages. Connecticut Light & Power Co. (CL&P; Hartford, Connecticut, U.S.) and United Illuminating (UI; New Haven, Connecticut) customers depend on energy to power virtually every aspect of their lives. They expect electricity to be there. They expect CL&P and UI to make this possible.

Additionally, Connecticut consumers are seeing their electric bills rise due in part to multimillion-dollar federal penalties for a congested transmission system serving the southwest region of the state. The existing situation threatens reliability, increases costs, and is one of critical and immediate need.

Between 1996 and 2001, peak demand jumped beyond all expectations by about 28%, far greater than was forecasted. In recent years, we have come perilously close to blackouts. Twice during August 2001 we came within several hundred megawatts of turning off electricity to a large area of customers in southwest Connecticut to maintain grid stability.

We no longer have a safety net. The margin between lights on and off is razor thin.

ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM

CL&P introduced the Bethel-Norwalk transmission project in the summer of 2001 using a traditional New England format: the town meeting. The project extends Connecticut's 345-kV transmission backbone into the southwest region of the state. The upgrade runs through four rural/suburban towns with a citizenry that is highly engaged in local issues and sensitive to change.

The project team hosted many informational meetings in town halls, gymnasiums and school auditoriums throughout the summer. Team members arrived about an hour before the scheduled start time to set up displays and discuss the proposal with early arrivals.

The formal meetings opened with a PowerPoint presentation moderated by a CL&P executive followed by questions from the audience. These meetings routinely lasted more than three hours. On more than one occasion, this format provided a stage for capacity crowds in overheated auditoriums to angrily vent their opposition to the project. State regulators approved Bethel-Norwalk 24 months later, with some of the requests voiced during these meetings incorporated into their final decision. There had to be a better way.

MIDDLETOWN-NORWALK TRANSMISSION PROJECT

In 2003, CL&P and UI introduced the Middletown-Norwalk transmission project to further extend the reliability benefits and operational efficiencies of 345-kV transmission into the southwest region of the state. The project, which came to be known as MN, extends the 345-kV transmission backbone from Middletown to Norwalk, with 69 miles (111 km) in total length containing 45 miles (72 km) of overhead lines and 24 miles (39 km) of continuous underground lines.

The communications lessons learned from the Bethel-Norwalk project drove the creation of a unique campaign for MN, where we took project presentations off the stage and replaced them with information stations that we placed in the audience for an open house experience.

The primary objective of the MN communication plan was to reach out to a public that was initially opposed to the transmission project and emphasize that this was the most technically feasible, environmentally sound and cost-effective solution available to address the region's rising energy needs. CL&P and UI also wanted to be perceived as a credible source of information and a cooperative community partner that welcomed residents to be an active part of the regulatory review process.

A team of CL&P and UI employees was formed to create a program. With expertise in communications, marketing, governmental and regulatory relations, as well as electric transmission engineering, the team worked to bring the information to the public in a face-to-face manner.

The main focus of the MN public communication was to host open houses in the communities that were along the project route, in an effort to bring the plan details directly to the people. In this way, the public could not only obtain information but also have a strong voice in the process. All responses were noted from comment surveys filled out by attendees.

Our research showed that no utility company had ever taken the open house approach to an electric transmission project.

THE OPEN HOUSE FORMAT

Giving this open house effort a distinctive look was important, so a specific logo and colors were integrated into all open house booths, along with information kits and letterhead. The open houses featured 10 booths staffed by subject experts from each of the companies. These topics were covered at the stations:

• Route locator
• Needs
• Meeting the needs
• Electricity: then and now
• Options
• Overhead transmission technology
• Under street technology
• Environment
• Electric and magnetic fields
• Property values.

TAKING THE SHOW ON THE ROAD

Before taking the MN open house on the road, about 50 staffers from both utilities were formally trained in two sessions on interpersonal skills, public speaking and breaking down data for the average resident.

A moving crew was assigned to support and truck the 18-stop open house road trip through towns and cities along the MN transmission project route.

Each of the booths was self-contained with special lighting, flat-screen video displays, scale models, cable samples and laptop computers. The moving crew typically took about an hour to set up the booths for the company staff to take their stations.

The MN communication team was keenly aware of the concerned, sometimes skeptical, attitude of the audiences, which included residents, business leaders and local officials in 24 Connecticut municipalities; regulatory agencies and state officials, primarily the Connecticut Siting Council, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, ISO-New England and FERC; and the Connecticut media, mainly from the southwest part of the state.

The companies also reached out to regulatory agencies and members of the Connecticut Siting Council focusing on the project's technical feasibility, environmental soundness and cost-effectiveness. However, lawmakers were under intense pressure from residents and local officials to pass legislation that would force the entire line underground.

CHALLENGES FACED BY THE MEDIA

The media approached this story with apprehension because of the highly technical nature of the subject, the overwhelming amount of data contained in our 12-volume application and the heated rhetoric critics used to define their positions.

Reporters also faced the difficult task of balancing the positions of the companies and critics with few third-party sources to rely on for a neutral perspective.

The regulatory review process was alien to most journalists and was closely related to a legal proceeding. Covering these proceedings required more time than the average reporter has in a week to develop a story. The Connecticut Siting Council held 27 evidentiary hearings dedicated to MN, each lasting all day — far exceeding the several hours most reporters have to spend reporting and writing a story.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF OPEN HOUSES

The open houses provided more residents with direct face-to-face meetings with subject experts. Those residents, uncomfortable with asking specific questions in front of a packed auditorium, were more apt to voice their concerns in the open house format.

By changing the way we inform the public about a project, we were able to defuse the focus of the public debate from a loud minority to many residents with practical questions on a transmission project's impact on their community.

Media coverage of the MN open houses was focused on the individual's experience and whether the new format met their information needs. The open houses also provided photojournalists with a fertile opportunity to capture residents interacting with utility staff or technology to get answers to their questions.

Generally speaking, the result was significantly more positive than the coverage we received from a town meeting. Those attending the open houses were also invited to fill out an exit survey grading the experience and providing the MN team with valuable advice on how to improve the new forum. The town meeting served a smaller number of attendees. A three-hour meeting provided time to publicly respond to less than 20 questions. The open house offered an opportunity to reach many more people in less time.

To ensure the utilities were meeting the needs of the public, a special open house was held for members of the Connecticut Siting Council and their staff. They walked away satisfied that anyone with a question or comment on MN would be addressed in this new format.

COMMUNICATION EFFORTS

CL&P and UI took great care in developing the informational displays used in the open houses. The portable displays were professionally designed by CL&P and UI, advertising agency Cronin & Co. and DisplayCraft. The traveling displays were broken down into 13 informational stations, each of which focused on a particular issue surrounding the transmission project. Some of the information had to be customized for each town. The stations conveyed information through a combination of visual graphics panels, computer screens and printed handouts, providing attendees with subject-specific material. The stations were used in 21 locations, which included town halls, school cafeterias and gymnasiums along the proposed route.

In addition, open house information kits were distributed at the open houses, as well as to media and other interested parties. The kits contained basic information about the project.

Open house print advertising and posters were placed in local and weekly newspapers to announce the time, place and date of events. The announcements informed the public of the opportunity to learn more about the proposed MN project and to ask questions of experts and provide feedback. Open house calendar listings were distributed and follow up was conducted to secure listings in community/upcoming events sections in the local weekly and daily newspapers. Also, bill inserts highlighting the project were mailed to CL&P customers in towns along the MN project route. The insert provided information regarding the proposed enhancements to the system, the proposed route and technical details.

A transmission information phone line and website were established to support the open houses. A grassroots campaign to reach abutting property owners was developed, featuring face-to-face meetings with neighborhood groups. Focus group sessions were conducted to establish and understand the public's key concerns and issues. And, PowerPoint presentations were created for briefings with local officials and state legislators to explain the application process and how towns could participate. Right-of-way tours were conducted for the media to demonstrate exactly what was being proposed to the existing transmission pathway and to highlight the companies' environmental record. CL&P Speakers' Bureau was expanded and enhanced to address the project. A question-and-answer reference document was created for CL&P employees involved in external public speaking roles. Internal communications efforts were expanded within CL&P to keep employees informed and the “Notice of Application” was placed in appropriate publications.

THE OUTCOME

Close to 2000 residents and business owners attended the open houses. Both the public and opponents of the project supported and complimented our communications efforts. Further, the comment surveys that we collected after each open house, which were submitted with the application, illustrated that we addressed the key issues of our audiences in a clear, concise and easily accessible manner.

Additionally, due to the initial not-in-my-backyard opposition to the proposal, we had to overcome emotionally charged, negative comments and turn them around to create positive public opinion. By the conclusion of our communications initiatives, public opinion toward the project ranged from neutral to positive. Comments were far less emotional, negative or shrill compared to the earlier Bethel-Norwalk project.

As required by the state regulatory agency, the project information needed to reach the primary audience in a 60-day time span. We addressed this by having staff at CL&P dedicated to the project. And interestingly, it was accomplished for significantly less than the cost of an advertising campaign to sell the project.

---

Frank J. Poirot is a senior communications specialist for Connecticut Light & Power Co.'s Transmission Group, a post he has held for five years. Poirot joined Northeast Utilities, CL&P's parent company, in 1998 after 23 years in newspapering, where he served as a reporter, photographer and editor. He is a graduate of the University of Connecticut. PoiroFJ@NU.com

Mitch Gross is manager of communications for CL&P. Formerly manager of transmission communications, he was part of the team that oversaw the development and rollout of the MN Open House program. Gross joined Northeast Utilities in 2002. He has a background in public relations/marketing and broadcast journalism and is a graduate of Rider College. grossms@nu.com

TIMELINE

• February 2003 - Informal meetings were held with top elected officials in each of the 18 municipalities that would be affected by the Middletown-Norwalk (MN) project.
• May 2003 - The formal “Municipal Consultation” process began, including the delivery of an eight-volume project document to local leaders.
• Summer 2003 - Open houses were held throughout the summer months at 21 locations along the proposed project route.
• September 2003 - The project application was revised to 12 volumes based on input from the public.
• October 2003 - The project application was submitted to the Connecticut Siting Council.
• October 2003 to April 2005 - The Connecticut Siting Council held more than 35 public and evidentiary hearings for the project application.
• April 2005 - The Connecticut Siting Council unanimously approved the MN project.