This story will be updated.
Gov. Mike Braun on Monday directed Indiana‘s utility watchdog to seek a formal investigation into NIPSCO.
The request cites the company’s tree-trimming and vegetation management, maintenance of right-aways and use of ratepayer funds after historic Northwest Indiana power outages.
An estimated 10,000 Indiana residents still remained without power early Monday, nearly two weeks after severe storms tore through the region. Gary was among the hardest hit cities. The utility reports it has restored 364,824 customers since Aug. 11 when storms and violent winds hit the region that day.
NIPSCO expects power to be restored in Munster and Lake Station by the end of Monday, and in Gary and Portage by the end of Tuesday.
Braun’s office said the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor will file a complaint and petition the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission to examine whether NIPSCO adequately maintained vegetation and right-aways, and whether funding regulators approved for reliability improvements was spent as promised.
“NIPSCO is a monopoly utility that Hoosiers pay every month with the expectation that it will use its considerable resources to maintain its system, prepare for severe weather and restore service as quickly as possible when disaster strikes. NIPSCO has failed to keep its end of the bargain," Braun said in a statement.
Gary Mayor Eddie Melton has pushed NIPSCO for more transparency throughout the outages.
“I had to demand that NIPSCO provide more accurate restoration times specifically for Gary because the information that was shared was omitting Gary,” Melton told WFYI in an interview Thursday.
U.S. Rep. André Carson tied the outages to years of rising bills in a social media post Monday.
“Their electricity bills have been going up for the last two years — while their utility company rakes in huge profits,” Carson said.
What can IURC do?
It’s not clear how or when the investigation will take shape. The Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission has authority under state code to conduct formal or informal investigations in response to complaints filed with the commission.
Former IURC Commissioner Dave Ober said the outcome will depend on how the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor files the complaint and petition. If they file a complaint under that specific statute, the commission could open up a docket, solicit evidence and hold hearings. The commission also has its own authority to open an investigation — in that case the OUCC would receive automatic status as an intervening party in that case.
“Until the OUCC files something and the commission reacts to that, we really wouldn’t know how the proceeding would take place,” Ober said.
While the OUCC can’t conduct its own investigations, it often intervenes in rate and tracker cases before the IURC. Ober said the office could file its complaint and petition in one of those pre-existing cases, and that vegetation management and right-of-way maintenance “usually get handled” through a utility’s base rate case.
“I think it’s a difference without a distinction. It is probably the same outcome. It’s just the means of initiating the investigation or the review are different: whether it’s the OUCC doing it or it’s the commission doing it on its own, it’s probably the same outcome,” he said.
Some investigations, like the commission’s investigative inquiry earlier this year into energy affordability and bill transparency, are informal and do not have set timelines. Ober said the commission can’t issue binding orders on regulated utilities in informal inquiries.
