IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> OUTRAGE: NIPSCO rates to jump nearly 17%
diggler
post Sep 21 2010, 03:42 PM
Post #1


Really Comfortable
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,177
Joined: 19-November 09
Member No.: 969




NIPSCO rates could jump 16.8 percent, more than expected

September 21, 2010

BY GITTE LAASBY,

The typical NIPSCO customer's electricity bill could be going up 16.8 percent -- not 10 percent as state regulators indicated last month, a company representative said Monday.

Outraged consumer groups call the hike "discriminatory."

The Northern Indiana Public Service Co. filed paperwork last week to clarify how customers will be impacted by the electric rate increase that state regulators approved at the end of August.

In an explanation to the Post-Tribune on Monday, NIPSCO spokesman Nick Meyer said if regulators approve the company's new numbers, a typical residential customer who uses 730 kilowatt hours per month would see their bill go up $13.39 per month, from $79.57 to $92.96. That's a 16.8 percent increase.

Grant Smith, executive director for the Citizens' Action Coalition of Indiana, called the number "ridiculous" and "outrageous" given that the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission told NIPSCO to reduce its overall revenue.

"We're still trying to unravel how you reduce overall revenue by $49 million and then you have an increase on residential customers. Somebody's benefitting from that," he said. "It sounds like they're discriminating against residential customers in favor of manufacturers."

Business customers will only see a 4 percent hike, Meyer said.

"It costs more to serve residential customers than to serve industrial customers," he said.

"The rates that are existing today, they're 20 years old. Those rates were designed and based on cost of service that was out of whack, meaning commercial and industrial customers were spending more for their share of cost than residential customers were."

NIPSCO's estimate is higher than IURC's because the commission's number is an average across all customers, i.e. it assumes everyone uses about the same amount.

By contrast, NIPSCO's number takes into account that in reality, customers' electricity use is distributed closer to a bell curve.

The 16.8 percent is what a typical residential user in the middle of the bell curve would experience, Meyer explained.

IURC didn't approve a dollar amount increase on customers' bills, only percentage increases for each customer group.

IURC spokeswoman Danielle McGrath said the commission has 10 business days to review whether NIPSCO's numbers are in accordance with what the commission approved.

Shaw Friedman, an attorney with Friedman & Associates, who has represented LaPorte and Hammond, called the increase "excessive."

Based on NIPSCO's low customer satisfaction rate, the utility deserves less of a return on equity than the IURC approved, he said. Friedman said he has talked to governmental entities he previously represented about filing an appeal.

"Of the 26 contested issues, there were probably four to five that offered really solid areas for appeal," he said.

Groups that intervened in the rate case can appeal until Friday.

The Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor originally argued that NIPSCO didn't deserve a revenue increase at all, but has not yet decided whether to appeal.

"Any time the commission issues an order in a case, the formal parties have 30 days to appeal if they choose to do so. We're still within that 30-day window," said OUCC spokesman Anthony Swinger. "No decision yet."

A rate increase typically takes effect within 30-60 days of IURC approval, Meyer said.

Smith said he's not sure if CAC will appeal, but he would support an appeal.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Southsider2k12
post Nov 21 2010, 10:17 AM
Post #2


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,413
Joined: 8-December 06
From: Michigan City, IN
Member No.: 2



http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/1...e8650348442.txt

QUOTE
Proposed NIPSCO rate hike might replace previous one

By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Saturday, November 20, 2010 5:11 PM CST
MICHIGAN CITY — NIPSCO has proposed an electricity rate hike that, if approved by a state regulator, would replace a previously approved rate hike that has not yet taken effect.

Residential customers would see their monthly electric bills increase $5.94 on average if the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission approves the electric rate case NIPSCO filed Friday. That is a 7.9 percent increase from 2010 bills, according to a NIPSCO press release.

NIPSCO spokesman Nick Meyer said the larger rate hike the state approved in August could still come into effect, an outcome the utility hopes to avert.

“We do anticipate that rates from the first case could be implemented within the first quarter of 2011,” he said, adding, “which is why we’re asking for consideration of an accelerated review process for the second case.”

*
Commercial and industrial customers also will see an increase by about 8 percent per month depending on various factors compared with 2010 bills, according to the release.

Meyer said NIPSCO’s proposal is a boon for residential customers.

“We heard our customers loud and clear, and we believe this provides a better solution by reducing the increase to residential bills by cutting it in half.”

If the rate increase is approved and applied to bills, it will be NIPSCO’s first increase in base electricity rates in more than 20 years, Meyer said. Other electric costs, however, have changed since then.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
diggler
post Nov 23 2010, 06:38 PM
Post #3


Really Comfortable
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,177
Joined: 19-November 09
Member No.: 969



Now that I could probably live with. cool.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Southsider2k12
post Jan 16 2011, 09:26 AM
Post #4


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,413
Joined: 8-December 06
From: Michigan City, IN
Member No.: 2



This is what we need more of locally. Great investigative work here.

http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/art...310f582141.html

QUOTE
A day after Indiana's top utility regulator approved an order authorizing NIPSCO to hike electric rates, a director of the utility's parent company sent a thankful e-mail inviting him to take in thoroughbred farms and the races in Kentucky Bluegrass country.

In the next two weeks, the invitation was firmed up with offers of a stretch limo, a racetrack suite and dinner at an exclusive Lexington restaurant for then-Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission Chairman David Lott Hardy and his wife.

In one of the final e-mails, NiSource Inc. director Dennis Foster told Hardy: "I will arrange for a driver so we can all have fun. We have dinner reservations at Jonathon's at 6:45 Thursday (they are busy during races but promised a quiet table). ... And of course races Friday afternoon."

Hardy responded, "Regret the delay but - yes, party on."

Consumer groups already have been outraged by the clubby relationships Hardy cultivated with executives at Duke Energy. Those relationships first were reported by the Indianapolis Star in October when it published e-mails between Hardy and then-Duke Indiana President Michael Reed, a former IURC executive director.

But the newly discovered e-mails point to Hardy weaving an even wider web of relationships within the industry. NIPSCO is one of the largest utilities in the state, with 457,000 electric and 712,000 natural gas customers. Its parent, NiSource Inc., has 3.8 million energy customers stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to New England.

In the e-mails, Hardy also suggests inviting Duke Indiana President Reed to attend the outing and Foster obliges.

"This is all about (Hardy) trying to live the lifestyle of a CEO when he's actually the chief regulator," said Kerwin Olson, utility campaign organizer for the Citizens Action Coalition. "How can you be independent when you are in constant communication and wined and dined by those you regulate?"

NiSource Inc. officials say the arrangements being made between Foster and Hardy were entirely appropriate under its code of business conduct.

"Any time Mr. Foster hosted a visit by Mr. Reed and Mr. Hardy to Lexington, they always paid their own expenses," said NiSource spokesman Karl Brack. That information is based on NiSource's own review of the events, Brack said.

NiSource's code of business conduct warns that "entertainment that might be usual and customary in the private sector may be improper or even illegal when dealing with government employees."

Longtime friends

Reed and Foster are good friends from their days working at communications provider GTE, and Hardy came to know Foster through Reed, Brack said. Reed worked at the IURC under Hardy as executive director from September 2006 to February 2009.

Foster, 70, has been a NiSource board member since 1999 and is chairman of its audit committee. He is also the principal owner of Foster Thoroughbred Investments, which specializes in breeding, racing and training thoroughbred horses.

Foster received $185,212 for his service on the NiSource board in 2009, according to the company's 2010 proxy statement. At the end of 2009 he owned 92,777 shares of NiSource stock. He retired as vice chairman of Alltell Corp. in 2000.

Brack acknowledged Foster has had "infrequent and sporadic contact" with Hardy over the years, including dinner at Foster's home and an outing at the legendary Keeneland thoroughbred track in Lexington, Ky., about a year ago.

Reed did not respond to a call to his home for comment. Phone messages left for Hardy were not returned.

The last e-mails in the exchange include Reed suggesting an invite be extended to West Virginia Public Service Commissioner Jon McKinney. In a subsequent e-mail, Reed writes that Hardy has spoken to the commissioner and that he will be joining them for the horse farm tour and the races.

In response to a Times inquiry, the West Virginia Public Service Commission said in an e-mailed response that Commissioner McKinney initially understood he and his wife would be getting together with Hardy and his wife for dinner and at Keeneland. When McKinney learned that utility industry officials would be present he turned down the invitation.

The fallout

Brack said Hardy, Reed, Foster and their wives never got together for their planned outings Oct. 28 and 29. By that time, Hardy had been fired as IURC chairman and Reed's actions were being investigated by Duke Energy.

Hardy was sacked Oct. 5 by Gov. Mitch Daniels because he allowed IURC General Counsel Scott Storms to preside over cases involving Duke Energy while also interviewing for a job with the utility company. Storms went to work for Duke as a staff attorney in September, but he and Reed were fired in early November following Duke's own investigation of the matter.

In December, Duke President and Chief Operating Officer James Turner announced he would resign after the Indianapolis Star published e-mails in which he had planned a day boating on Lake Michigan with Hardy.

The Indiana inspector general began an investigation when Daniels fired Hardy, and later the Federal Bureau of Investigation began its own investigation.

The e-mails between Foster, Hardy and Reed were sent during a critical phase in the NIPSCO rate case, which was watched closely by Wall Street because it was considered crucial to NiSource's future.

At one point in the e-mails, Hardy inquires about purchasing a ticket "at the door" for him and his wife. Foster later tells him he has suite tickets.

The backlash

The city of Hammond and the LaPorte County Board of Commissioners have been formal parties to the NIPSCO proceedings since the utility filed its rate hike request two years ago. LaPorte lawyer Shaw Friedman has represented both governments in the rate case hearings before the IURC.

"NiSource's CEO, Bob Skaggs, needs to take appropriate steps and ask for Dennis Foster's resignation," Friedman said. "Ian Rolland (NiSource board chair) and Bob Skaggs have to talk to Foster and say we don't condone this cozy, club-like, good old boys atmosphere."

Friedman said the fact NiSource knew about the e-mails may explain why NIPSCO is so anxious to slash its 16.8 percent residential rate increase by more than half by replacing the first rate case with a request for a 7.9 percent increase filed in November.

When filing the second case on Nov. 19, NIPSCO CEO Jimmy Staton said the move was in reaction to customer comments and was designed to better reflect current economic conditions.

Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. responded to the e-mails, saying it is no wonder the IURC always seems to side with utilities in rate cases.

"We'll never get a fair shake because we are not lobbying the IURC like the millionaires are," McDermott said.

The Citizens Action Coalition obtained some of the e-mails between Hardy and Foster through public records requests of the IURC. The Times has obtained others by making public records requests of the agency since early October. NiSource Inc. also obtained the same records, Brack said.

Olson, of the Citizens Action Coalition, said the discussion of the NIPSCO rate case in the e-mails between Hardy and Foster would clearly qualify as outside communications on a pending rate case. Under IURC regulations those would have to be reported and made part of the rate case record.

Brack said Foster has confirmed that he had no substantive discussions with Hardy concerning the NIPSCO rate case and that Foster "was simply expressing his personal views concerning the commission's decision."

Copyright 2011 nwi.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
NDReporter
post Jan 16 2011, 03:09 PM
Post #5


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 137
Joined: 24-August 09
Member No.: 945



QUOTE(southsiderMMX @ Jan 16 2011, 09:26 AM) *

This is what we need more of locally. Great investigative work here.

http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/art...310f582141.html


I agree...now where is the money to pay for reporters to do it here? I'm glad at least one region newspaper regularly has enough people to spare to do bigger investigations. I'm a little jealous.


Signature Bar
Necessary disclaimer: The views expressed in this post are mine and do not necessarily reflect the views of Paxton Media Group.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Southsider2k12
post Apr 15 2011, 07:17 AM
Post #6


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,413
Joined: 8-December 06
From: Michigan City, IN
Member No.: 2



http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2011/0...1d640829766.txt

QUOTE
NIPSCO spokesman defends hike

By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Thursday, April 14, 2011 2:56 PM CDT
MICHIGAN CITY — NIPSCO continues to seek a hike in electricity rates, something that some area consumers and advocates objected to at a recent forum in Hammond.

The hike, which would represent NIPSCO’s first electric rate spike in more than 20 years, would increase the average residential customer’s bill by about $5.94 per month, NIPSCO spokesman Nick Meyer said.

That’s a roughly 7.9 percent hike.

Meyer said investments such as a more than $300 million acquisition of a power station in the Terre Haute area and other costs have made the hike necessary.

“Other components of this request include costs associated with system upgrades, ongoing maintenance and other costs associated with customer growth during the last 20 years,” Meyer said.

The company is not seeking the rate hike in part, he continued, because its CEO got paid about 30 percent more in 2010 as compared to the previous year, according to news reports.

“This rate request is not about executive salary,” Meyer said. “Again, it has primarily to do with our investment in the Sugar Creek facility, other system upgrades and ongoing maintenance cost over the last 20 years for a very large capital intensive infrastructure.”

He also said it is unrelated to a $600 million settlement NIPSCO reached with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which requires the utility to invest in pollution-fighting technology. The settlement resolved violations of the federal Clean Air Act.

The hike is still under consideration and still needs Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission approval. Meyer doesn’t expect electric bills to rise due to the hike until late this year or early next year.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
southyards
post Apr 15 2011, 04:09 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 188
Joined: 10-April 08
Member No.: 783



QUOTE(NDReporter @ Jan 16 2011, 03:09 PM) *

I agree...now where is the money to pay for reporters to do it here? I'm glad at least one region newspaper regularly has enough people to spare to do bigger investigations. I'm a little jealous.



DOUBLE OUTRAGE. . . . . .


Chesterton Tribune 4/11/11:

MERRILLVILLE, Ind. (AP) — The CEO of one of Indiana’s biggest power companies saw his salary grow 31 percent to $1.9 million in 2010.
Northern Indiana Public Service Co. CEO Jimmy Staton’s big salary boost came in a year in which he urged Indiana regulators to approve a rate hike for the utility’s customers to cover rising costs.
The Times of Munster reports that Staton’s salary grew in 2010 mainly because of incentive payouts tied to his work on NIPSCO’s rate cases before state regulators. Last year, NIPSCO won an order authorizing a nearly 17 percent increase in residential electric rates before later asking regulators for a smaller 7.9 percent increase.
Consumer advocates say the escalation of utility executive pay comes at a time when regulators and state government seem oblivious to consumers’ rights.


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Southsider2k12
post Jul 21 2011, 09:02 AM
Post #8


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,413
Joined: 8-December 06
From: Michigan City, IN
Member No.: 2



http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2011/0...20103466906.txt

QUOTE
NIPSCO limited to 4.5% electric hike

By Amanda Jacobson
Staff Writer
Published: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 5:09 PM CDT
NIPSCO’s proposed 8 percent residential rate increase last November arrived after 24 years of unchanged electric rates.

NIPSCO, however, will be limited to a 4.5 percent hike after a collaborative settlement between the utility, the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor, NIPSCO’s industrial clients and a coalition of northern Indiana municipalities.

The settlement was filed Monday with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission and requires its approval to take effect.

The agreement will limit the base rate increase to residential customers to 4.5 percent. If implemented, that could amount to an additional $3.33 per month for the average residential customer, according to a NIPSCO release.

Click here to find out more!
“This settlement balances the interests of our diverse customer base while providing a solid foundation from which NIPSCO can invest in northern Indiana’s energy infrastructure to help fuel job creation and economic growth,” NIPSCO CEO Jimmy Staton said in the release.

NIPSCO plans to use money from the proposed rate increase to provide NIPSCO-funded rebates for gas-to-electric furnace conversions and fund its new, $330 million purchase of a natural gas-fired electric plant in Sugar Creek, Ind.

The settlement also limits further action on NIPSCO’s August 2008 rate case, where a 16.8 percent residential rate increase was authorized, but never applied to customer bills.

Interruptible credits are included in the provisions of the agreement, which would provide incentives to NIPSCO’s largest industrial consumers to reduce or shift their energy use.

Attorney Shaw Friedman, counsel for the City of Hammond in the NIPSCO electric-rate case, said the city will not support the settlement because of the potential for interruptible credits to create unanticipated increases for residential customers.

“Mayor McDermott is pleased that Hammond’s efforts contributed to NIPSCO’s willingness to limit the residential base rate increase to 4.5 percent instead of the 17 percent previously ordered by the IURC,” Friedman said. “But Hammond is not able to sign onto the current settlement, which includes excessive ‘interruptible credits’ or subsidies for certain industrial customers that could mean residential electric bills actually go up about 8 percent. Also, Hammond remains concerned that some low energy-use residential customers may actually face double-digit increases under this settlement. That’s unacceptable to us.”

The Citizens Action Coalition and Jasper County also are not in support of the agreement, according to Friedman.

NIPSCO Communications Manager Nick Meyer said interruptible service programs essentially allow large industrial customers to shift a certain amount of their total electric usage to other customers to avoid purchasing additional electric resources, like generating stations, during periods of peak energy demand.

Meyer added the idea of interruptible service programs having the potential to skyrocket low-use customers’ billing rates into the double digits was “somewhat misleading” in terms of dollar impact.

According to NIPSCO’s press release about the settlement, the rate change would not affect natural gas-consumption charges for residential customers, and would take effect around the end of 2011 or the beginning of 2012, upon IURC approval.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ang
post Jul 21 2011, 11:01 AM
Post #9


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 5,171
Joined: 11-December 06
From: Indiana
Member No.: 10



As if we don't already pay too much for EVERYTHING!! When are they going to increase our wages? The bills get higher and higher while the pay scales stay the same.


Signature Bar
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind~Dr. Suess
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MSFOOTBALL
post Jul 23 2011, 09:37 PM
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 63
Joined: 26-May 11
Member No.: 1,114



QUOTE(southsiderMMX @ Apr 15 2011, 08:17 AM) *


I just received my bill and the electric was double what I normally pay. In reading my bill I discovered that they replaced my 5 year old dial meter with a digital one. They did this on a Saturday morning at 10:30am, now we all know NIPSCO gets paid double time on the weekends. We were not home when this was done, nor were we made aware they were doing this. They did two readings for the month and the total was 2500kwh--which is my normal amount for June-July. Then they claimed I used 4,998 kwh and this was what I was being charged for this month. The first person I spoke to was very rude and would not do anything for us yet obviously something was wrong. I waited an hour and spoke to someone who actually said there was not a note that made sense for why my meter was changed. The note placed was indicating that I had a digital already and those were on recall, which some were and mine needed to be replaced. Well mine was a dial and only 5 years old. There also was not a work order placed for the work to be done--also odd. She said obviously the numbers did not match up correctly and it looked like they were double. She placed a request form for them to review it for errors. Hopefully it gets fixed because I went from a $225.00 to a $600.00 bill. At this rate I can't afford NIPSCO and this isn't even my highest month yet, August is the worst. How can it be that people that live all over the state of Indiana have smaller utility bills than we do from NIPSCO?? Am I going to have to place a windmill in my back yard? I probably could because it is very windy year around at my house. What is even more upsetting is the digital doesn't give you a reading so the home owner can keep track of what is being used. I heard they read them through radio frequency out at the street. It just doesn't seem fair because we don't have a choice in public service companies and we are just suppose to trust what they tell us our bill is for the month.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
diggler
post Jul 24 2011, 04:16 AM
Post #11


Really Comfortable
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,177
Joined: 19-November 09
Member No.: 969



With personal horror stories like that, its yet another reason to go OFF-GRID:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wslB1TQ2nUE...player_embedded

_
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Southsider2k12
post Feb 2 2012, 02:36 PM
Post #12


Spends WAY too much time at CBTL
******

Group: Admin
Posts: 16,413
Joined: 8-December 06
From: Michigan City, IN
Member No.: 2



http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/ham..._medium=twitter

QUOTE
Hammond wants court to nix NIPSCO rate hike

By Keith Benman keith.benman@nwi.com, (219) 933-3326 | Posted: Wednesday, February 1, 2012 3:45 pm | (13) Comments

The city of Hammond is challenging state regulators' approval of NIPSCO's electric rate hike in court.

The city never signed onto last year's settlement, which the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission approved in late December, and remains opposed to its terms, Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. said.

"The general concept is NIPSCO is getting a large rate increase at a time when I'm laying off police and firemen," McDermott said.

The city contends the IURC order is affecting both city budgets and city residents, with some low-use customers seeing their bills go up more than the 4.5 percent NIPSCO has pegged as the bill increase for a typical customer.

Responding on Wednesday, NIPSCO spokesman Nick Meyer said the utility responded quickly to customer concerns after the IURC issued an order in August 2010 that would have allowed the utility to hike rates 16.8 percent. NIPSCO filed a second case requesting a rate increase less than half of that.

"And that increase was further reduced to the smaller increase in the settlement," Meyer said.

The 16.8 percent increase did not go into effect, and the IURC rescinded that order when it approved the 4.5 percent increase in December. That increase was part of a settlement reached with a number of municipalities and large industrial users earlier in the year.

The city of Hammond filed its appeal with the Indiana Court of Appeals in late January. Shaw Friedman, Hammond's lawyer in the case, points out testimony from the case showing that an extra 3.14 percent could be tacked onto residential customers' bills once a discount program for large industrial users is put into place this year.

NIPSCO in the past has said that second increase will be more like 1.7 percent and will only be that high if large industry takes full advantage of the discount.

NIPSCO has 457,000 electric and 786,000 natural gas customers in northern Indiana. It is a subsidiary of utility holding company NiSource Inc., of Merrillville.

Read more: http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/ham...l#ixzz1lG78VmSI
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 02:16 AM

Skin Designed By: neo at www.neonetweb.com