Utility regulators on the Illinois Commerce Fee will quickly ship a closing choice of their year-long investigation of the Peoples Fuel pipe substitute program, what Peoples Fuel calls the Security Modernization Program.
This system calls for reform: After 15 years and billions of {dollars} spent, it’s behind schedule, over-budget, and failing to successfully tackle the pressing security dangers posed by ageing, leak-prone iron pipes operating underneath Chicago’s streets. As clients, our payments have increased with out getting sufficient of the vital security enhancements we’ve been paying for.
Within the investigation, Peoples Fuel has proposed primarily the identical strategy to this system that the ICC rejected when it launched this investigation in November 2023. This can be a sample. The final time the ICC required new program plans in 2015, Peoples Fuel additionally served up a repackaged status quo. On this investigation and in 2023, when Peoples Fuel requested a record-breaking fee hike, Peoples Fuel refused to meaningfully take into account different approaches, regardless of ICC directives to take action.
This highlights a problem. Regulators may give utilities guidelines and route, however they will’t — and shouldn’t — handle them. That’s the job of utility managers. So what’s a regulator to do with a deeply troubled program and utility managers that repeatedly refuse to meaningfully take into account different approaches? How can the ICC set Peoples Fuel up for fulfillment, contemplating a number of previous makes an attempt have failed?
Within the investigation’s just lately held oral argument, ICC Chair Doug Scott requested Peoples Fuel two essential questions that time to 1 potential strategy. To paraphrase his questions:
- Regulators have reviewed and accredited variations of this system a number of instances over the previous decade, however issues persist. Why is that this time going to be totally different? and
- Why ought to regulators deal with pipe substitute investments as a particular program within the first place? Why not deal with it like different vital investments utilities make on daily basis?
Some context helps to point out why these easy questions are essential.
Sufficient of the established order
Peoples Fuel has been emphatic that the ICC approve a program plan, ideally its established order proposal, and in so doing, give the utility “regulatory readability.” That’s, Peoples Fuel is demanding assurance that, if it follows a plan accredited by regulators, that these regulators will in flip approve massive will increase to charges and to Peoples Fuel income when the utility asks.
Illinois has tried this strategy, by means of the “QIP” legislation from 2013-2023, which primarily assured that sure gasoline utility infrastructure spending and related income could be accredited. The legislation led on to an explosion of gasoline utility over-investment, record-breaking fee hikes, and file utility income.
QIP was signed into legislation by then-Gov. Pat Quinn, who has a well-earned status as a utility watchdog, not lapdog. As I perceive it, he and his advisors thought that throwing cash at Peoples Fuel was what it could take for the utility to lastly tackle security dangers posed by its ageing, leaky iron pipes.
Sadly, the other occurred. As a substitute of extra speedy pipe substitute or using cost-effective alternate options to substitute, Peoples Fuel spent billions of {dollars} on increasing and overhauling its complete system. The “regulatory readability” supplied by QIP super-charged incentives to utility managers to spend wastefully quite than spend successfully.
It’s time for the other strategy. It’s time to cease rewarding repeated failure with file income. As a substitute, the ICC ought to make clear that it’s going to not approve Peoples Fuel fee hikes and sustained file income except it may well exhibit transparently that its spending cost-effectively addresses the precise security dangers related to ageing leak-prone iron pipes. This could embrace the consideration of non-replacement alternate options, resembling superior leak detection and restore applied sciences or focused pipe retirement paired with vitality effectivity and constructing electrification.
This reform alone gained’t repair all the issues with Peoples Fuel’ pipe substitute program, however placing a worth on failure ought to assist focus the thoughts of utility administration and, hopefully, lastly ship what Chicago deserves: a program that prices much less, makes us safer, and facilitates the transition to cleaner vitality.
Abraham Scarr is director of Illinois PIRG and the PIRG Power and Utilities Program Director.
The views and opinions expressed by contributors are their very own and don’t essentially mirror these of the Chicago Solar-Instances or any of its associates.
The Solar-Instances welcomes letters to the editor and op-eds. See our guidelines.
Get Opinions content material delivered to your inbox.
