Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Say No To Anti-Competitive Transmission Legislation
Next Post: RETAIL: Strengthening Communities Across Illinois
Posted in:
* Daily Herald…
An Illinois Commerce Commission panel recommended Monday that the regulatory agency approve a rate hike for Nicor Gas, but not as steep as the one the utility is seeking.
The ICC’s administrative law judges’ published opinion suggests shaving $109.8 million from Nicor’s proposed $314.2 million rate hike, setting it at about $204.4 million, according to the Citizens Utility Board.
The ICC is set to make a final determination in November. If approved, Nicor’s rate hike would increase average gas bills by about 9%, or more than $7 a month, and push the utility’s total increases to more than $1 billion in less than a decade, according to CUB.
Nicor spokeswoman Jennifer Golz said the utility is reviewing the administrative law judges’ proposal.
Click here for the 380-page proposed order.
* Tribune…
As part of the recommended reduction in the rate increase, the administrative law judges authorized a lower 9.93% return on equity, which would still generate profits of $471 million for the utility, according to the proposed order.
Residential gas bills include both supply and distribution charges. Nicor’s proposed $314 million rate increase would raise the cost of delivering the gas, which accounts for about half the bill.
For typical Chicago-area residential customers, the proposed $314 million increase would add about $7.70 per month to delivery charges, raising the total bill by nearly 9.3%, Golz said. […]
Nicor saw its gas supply prices peak this year at 58 cents per therm in April, up 71% over the same month last year. In October, Nicor charged customers 39 cents per therm, still up nearly 40% year-over-year, according to published ICC data.
* Some react from the Sun-Times…
Leaders at the nonprofit Citizens Utility Board said “there is more fat to trim” for the five-member Commerce Commission, which has the final say on how much utilities can charge customers.
“This proposed order is a promising step toward holding Nicor accountable, but we hope regulators will see that there’s plenty more room to do justice for consumers by eliminating wasteful spending and a bloated profit rate for shareholders,” CUB executive director Sarah Moskowitz said in a statement. “Now more than ever, consumers are counting on state regulators to alleviate the burden of relentlessly escalating utility costs, because no one should have to choose between keeping the heat on in the winter and putting food on the table.” […]
Illinois PIRG Director Abe Scarr said regulators “can do more to limit the impact of Nicor’s fifth rate hike since 2017.”
Curt Stokes, director of the Environmental Defense Fund, said “we will ask the Commission in its final order to require utilities to pursue the most affordable, climate-smart options before repeating old, costly investments that drive rates higher than customers can afford.”
Thoughts?
posted by Isabel Miller
Wednesday, Oct 8, 25 @ 10:19 am
Previous Post: Say No To Anti-Competitive Transmission Legislation
Next Post: RETAIL: Strengthening Communities Across Illinois
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“shareholder management” is literally the worst legal decision to ever happen in this country, every crappy thing that has come after, including this administration, is because companies now are legally only bound to “number go up” for shareholders
Comment by Suburban Mom Wednesday, Oct 8, 25 @ 11:21 am
(Okay, no, Dred Scott was pretty bad, so SECOND-worst legal decision.)
Comment by Suburban Mom Wednesday, Oct 8, 25 @ 11:22 am
Well there is also Plessy vs Ferguson and the Japanese Internment
Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Oct 8, 25 @ 11:35 am
My thoughts are that I have exactly four things in my house that use natural gas. The next time I go to replace those items, I will likely be getting electric replacements. Just getting rid of the gas line fees will save me a lot of money every year even before the cost of the actual methane.
Comment by Benniefly2 Wednesday, Oct 8, 25 @ 12:05 pm