Latest news with #I&M
Associated Press
11-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
I&M Files Proposal to Acquire Diverse Generation to Meet Future Energy Need
FORT WAYNE, Ind., April 11, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Indiana Michigan Power (I&M), an American Electric Power (Nasdaq: AEP) company, has made a filing with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) requesting approval of a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) to acquire the Oregon Clean Energy Center, an existing 870 megawatt (MW) natural gas plant located in Oregon, Ohio. I&M's filing explains the need to acquire the facility, details about the plant, and future operating plans, if approved. Through the CPCN process the IURC will ensure that the proposed plant acquisition is in the public interest and is just and reasonable. The proposal to acquire the Oregon Clean Energy Center and its 870 MW of natural gas-fueled electric generation is one component of I&M's Future Ready plan, which details the resources needed to provide I&M customers reliable and affordable energy today and into the future. 'I&M has established the need for additional electric generation, and we believe the Oregon Clean Energy Center is an important opportunity to further diversify our current generation portfolio and position I&M for future growth,' said Steve Baker, I&M president and chief operating officer. 'It is our responsibility to ensure that our current and future customers have reliable and affordable power.' I&M is currently navigating an unprecedented time in its history. As the company looks ahead, power demand is expected to more than double the Indiana peak from approximately 2,800 MW in 2024 to more than 7,000 MW in the 2030 timeframe. The rapid growth in energy demand provides an opportunity for I&M to reshape the way it serves current customers and those the company will serve decades into the future. The Oregon facility, if approved, will provide a stable source of power to meet the 24 hours per day x 7 days per week operational requirements of our existing customers and the new customers coming on to the I&M system. I&M's current generation portfolio incorporates a diverse mix of resources, including solar, wind, nuclear, coal and hydroelectric units. The company's vision for the future is to implement an 'all of the above' approach to providing a reliable, resilient, and stable electric power system that customers can access affordably. Additional benefits to this approach are that it supports economic development, stable energy costs, and access to new technologies. I&M anticipates a decision from the IURC on the filing in early 2026. The company will submit additional filings to the IURC throughout 2025 to request approval for additional resources that are consistent with the Future Ready Plan. For more information on I&M's Future Ready Plan, visit our website. Indiana Michigan Power (I&M) is headquartered in Fort Wayne, and its approximately 2,000 employees serve more than 600,000 customers. More than 85% of its energy delivered in 2023 was emission-free. I&M has at its availability various sources of generation including 2,278 MW of nuclear generation in Michigan, 450 MW of purchased wind generation from Indiana, more than 22 MW of hydro generation in both states and approximately 35 MW of large-scale solar generation in both states. The company's generation portfolio also includes 1,497 MW of coal fueled generation. About American Electric Power (AEP) Our team at American Electric Power is committed to improving our customers' lives with reliable, affordable power. We are investing $54 billion from 2025 through 2029 to enhance service for customers and support the growing energy needs of our communities. Our nearly 16,000 employees operate and maintain the nation's largest electric transmission system with 40,000 line miles, along with more than 225,000 miles of distribution lines to deliver energy to 5.6 million customers in 11 states. AEP also is one of the nation's largest electricity producers with approximately 29,000 megawatts of diverse generating capacity. We are focused on safety and operational excellence, creating value for our stakeholders and bringing opportunity to our service territory through economic development and community engagement. Our family of companies includes AEP Ohio, AEP Texas, Appalachian Power (in Virginia, West Virginia and Tennessee), Indiana Michigan Power, Kentucky Power, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, and Southwestern Electric Power Company (in Arkansas, Louisiana, east Texas and the Texas Panhandle). AEP also owns AEP Energy, which provides innovative competitive energy solutions nationwide. AEP is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. For more information, visit News releases and other information about I&M are available at View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Indiana Michigan Power
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Indiana utilities want ratepayers to fork out for small nuclear reactors
Indiana legislators are considering multiple bills to promote small modular nuclear reactors, including a controversial provision that would let utilities charge ratepayers for projects that may never be built. Such allowances, referred to as 'cost trackers,' are widely used by utilities to recover early-stage project costs as well as variable or unexpected expenses between rate cases, such as fuel costs or grid repairs. But critics argue that with a technology as untested and expensive as SMRs, utilities could charge customers hundreds of millions of dollars for a reactor before they even file concrete plans to deploy one. At a state House committee hearing last week, supporters of SB 424 argued that Indiana needs nuclear to meet voracious power demand from planned data centers and to reduce emissions. Opponents of the bill argued that regardless of one's opinion on nuclear power, the cost recovery provision unfairly saddles ratepayers with expenses for a nascent and untested technology. 'This bill has absolutely, absolutely nothing to do with one's feelings about nuclear power and where energy is going,' Kerwin Olson, executive director of the Citizens Action Coalition, the state's primary consumer watchdog organization, said during the hearing. 'This has everything to do with who we believe should assume the risk of something that is so risky.' Aerospace manufacturer Rolls-Royce, with a major plant in Indianapolis, is among the companies developing SMRs, but they are still considered years away from deployment. A federally funded SMR project in Idaho was canceled in late 2023, as the company NuScale Power said the cost of building the reactors had soared to over $9 billion. Indiana Michigan Power (I&M) President and Chief Operating Officer Steve Baker said the utility hopes to locate an SMR on the site of a coal plant in Rockport, Indiana, that is scheduled to close by 2028. 'That site checks all the boxes,' he said, noting that the utility has applied for a $50 million federal grant in partnership with the Tennessee Valley Authority that would be used for permitting and pre-construction costs of an SMR. 'If you think about where the utility industry is headed, you think about customers' desires for sustainable power, you think about the resource adequacy needs that we have on the grid, all roads point you toward nuclear.' Cost trackers allow utilities to recoup dollars as they are being spent rather than wait for the lengthy processes where commissions review and approve rates every few years. At the hearing, Baker said I&M needs this real-time cost recovery throughout the planning process instead of after SMR construction is actually approved or underway. Without this provision, he said, the utility would have to rely on bonds and pass the interest payments on to ratepayers. A 2024 report by the Edison Electric Institute, a utility trade group, said cost trackers have been used or permitted in 38 states, including Indiana. The Edison report notes, 'Cost trackers have been used for many years to recover large volatile costs like those for generation fuels. In recent years, they have also been used to compensate companies for rapidly rising costs such as those related to capital expenditures.' The practice has faced opposition in other states when relied on for constructing large, expensive power plants, but advocates say that such cost recovery for an SMR is especially problematic given the massive and potentially ballooning costs. Duke Energy — which serves Indiana — pushed for a law allowing cost trackers in North Carolina in 2021, while a citizen watchdog group argued the measure could cause massive rate increases. At the March 11 hearing in Indiana, Rep. Matt Pierce — a Democrat who voted against the bill — expressed concern that if the utility spent $100 million investigating the technology and decided not to go forward, the ratepayer would bear the whole burden of the failed project while utility shareholders bore none. 'Is it a problem where a corporation can go do something, and there's no downside if they're making bad decisions?' he asked. Pierce also asked Baker if the utility would object to an amendment saying that funds would be returned to ratepayers if an SMR project was ultimately not pursued. Baker said the utility would not support such an amendment. The chair of the House utilities committee, Republican Rep. Edmond Soliday, said that utilities should be able to keep costs recovered during the planning process even if an SMR is never built, noting the possibility that 'the antinuclear community will kill all these projects.' Baker and Soliday argued that the bill contains safeguards for ratepayers, including that the utility cannot earn a rate of return on the SMR planning costs if the project is canceled, unless certain conditions are met. For example, a utility could still turn a profit if it is needed 'to avoid harm to the public utility and its customers' or if the decision to scrap a planned SMR 'was prudently made for good cause.' Olson railed against these conditions, saying he couldn't see how a utility would be harmed by foregoing profit for an SMR that was never built. 'It's one thing to have a tracker for construction costs when an actual project is planned,' Olson told Canary Media. 'But it's another to basically give utilities a cost tracker to even think about SMRs. That could be hundreds of millions or billions of dollars for something that may never ever happen.' He added that since the recent push for SMRs is driven by energy demand from planned data centers, 'not only are the utilities getting this, they're getting it at the behest of these big tech billionaires.' Under the Indiana bill heard March 11 and a larger bill (HB 1007) with identical language about cost recovery, a utility must file with the state Utility Regulatory Commission to confirm an estimate of expected costs to be recovered. But the utility can recoup costs beyond that if the commission decides the overruns are 'reasonable, necessary, and prudent in supporting the construction, purchase, or lease' of SMRs. 'Reasonable and prudent are my least favorite words in the English dictionary, written by lawyers for lawyers,' said Olson. Indiana Conservation Voters' community and government affairs manager, Delaney Barber Kwon, said during the hearing that her organization also opposes the bill. 'Rate recovery up front without a guarantee of project completion puts Hoosiers at serious risk,' she said, adding that other opportunities like grants, tax credits, and public-private partnerships are already available to utilities that want to develop SMRs. The cost tracker bill (SB 424) passed the Indiana Senate 34–14 on Feb. 3 and passed the House committee on utilities, energy, and telecommunications with a 10–3 vote at the recent hearing. HB 1007 — aimed at incentivizing data center development and including the same cost recovery provisions as SB 424 — would also create a tax credit for SMR development. That bill passed the House on Feb. 13 and is now in a Senate committee. A separate bill (SB 423) would allow two SMR pilot projects in the state and similarly allow utilities to recover costs for those projects before they are actually approved. That bill passed the Senate on Feb. 3 and is now in the same House committee that recently passed the cost tracker bill. Yet another bill before the House utilities committee prevents local government entities from blocking construction of new generation at the sites of closed power plants or mines (dubbed 'energy production zones'); however, it excludes wind and solar. That means local governments could not prevent an SMR or natural gas plant on these sites but could block wind or solar. At the March 11 hearing, Indiana Secretary of Energy and Natural Resources Suzanne Jaworowski said SMRs are needed to power data centers, industries moving back to the U.S., and 'electrification of our culture,' including the increase in electric vehicles. 'This is proven technology that the U.S. created, the Department of Energy is developing, that is being deployed other places around the world,' she said. 'Russia has a floating reactor. China has SMRs.' China launched the world's first SMR in late 2023; a floating nuclear power plant in the Russian Arctic went online in 2020. 'This is a great time to be able to start developing the infrastructure to support SMRs,' Jaworowski said.
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Indiana proposal to boost nuclear development, recover costs from customers clears committee
Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, leads an energy committee on Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (Leslie Bonilla Muñiz/Indiana Capital Chronicle) Indiana legislation boosting early forays into nuclear power earned utility company support on Tuesday, but passionate opposition from ratepayer groups. It advanced from committee on a bipartisan 10-3 vote. With demand on the rise, Hoosier political and energy leaders are increasingly eyeing emerging technology — small modular nuclear reactors, or SMRs — as a possible solution. The United States hosts no operational SMRs. Across the globe, only China and Russia have functional ones. Some want Indiana to lead, but nuclear development is pricey. Sen. Eric Koch, R-Bedford, told the House's energy committee that he hopes to 'incentivize earlier deployment by removing what I understand to be the single-biggest barrier.' His Senate Bill 424 would offer public utilities bringing SMRs to Indiana a path to recover pre-construction costs — including anticipated spending — from their customers before they obtain certificates of public convenience and necessity from the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. Included are expenditures for design; engineering; environmental analyses and permitting; federal approvals, licensing and permitting; equipment purchases and more. Once the IURC gives a utility permission to start spending, the company would be able to request approval of a rate schedule to pass those costs on to customers. Regulators would have to approve if they find the costs reasonable in amount, consistent with their best spending estimate, and necessary to support SMR development. A utility could recover 80% of approved costs under the resulting rate schedule within three years at most. It would defer the remaining 20% for recovery as part of its next general rate case. Indiana Michigan Power — one of the state's 'big five' investor-owned, regulated monopolies — featured heavily in discussion. Two of the state's largest incoming data centers, for Amazon Web Services and Google, will be in I&M territory. President and CEO Steve Baker said tax incentives and other economic development efforts are drawing more big customers and big loads into Indiana. 'Our customers are concerned about our ability to supply these loads and do that in a sustainable sort of way,' Baker told the committee. I&M is 'considering' an SMR at its coal-fueled Rockport power plant, he said, which is set to shutter in 2028 by federal consent decree. A state-funded Purdue University report last year found the plant is among eight Indiana coal plant sites well-suited to SMR development. Several representatives from Spencer County, which hosts the plant, said the legislation would ensure a major property tax contributor, charitable giver and employer stays in their community. That prompted Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, to remark later, 'I can understand why, from the perspective of the locals, they would certainly want to have that project built, particularly if the cost of the project is borne by people outside of their area.' Ratepayer advocates maintained opposition. 'Say no, no, to subsidizing financially healthy, investor-owned utilities (and) tech behemoths who have deep, deep pockets,' Citizens Action Coalition Executive Director Kerwin Olson said. Olson expected I&M to begin its cost recovery asks once the bill becomes law — although an SMR wouldn't come online at Rockport until at least 2036, in the utility's estimate. 'If they make a filing in 2025 or 2026, whatever they file for, this bill says they have to recover that by 2029 — for a project that may never, ever happen,' Olson said. '… Where are the provisions that require the utilities to refund customers their money?' Koch previously said his proposal contains 'important consumer protections.' Under Senate Bill 424, costs exceeding the IURC's best estimate wouldn't get passed to ratepayers unless regulators deem the spending 'reasonable, necessary, and prudent' in supporting reactor development. Expenditures for canceled or abandoned projects wouldn't be recoverable without the same 'reasonable, necessary, and prudent' finding. Even so, a utility wouldn't earn returns in such cases unless regulators also find the decision was 'prudently made for good cause,' that profit is 'appropriate … to avoid harm' to the utility and its customers; and that costs will be offset or reimbursed through other, listed means. Olson and others weren't convinced. 'I think 'reasonable' and 'prudent' are my least favorite words in the English dictionary; (they're) written by lawyers for lawyers,' Olson said. He noted that the legislation doesn't define those terms. His other concern: 'It's the 'shall' provisions. The bill is littered with, 'The utility shall recover,' (and) 'The commission shall approve.'' Delaney Barber Kwon, the community and government affairs manager for Indiana Conservation Voters, asked the committee to consider alternative ways to support SMR development, like tax credits, public-private partnerships and more. Joe Rompala, representing Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers Inc., similarly requested that lawmakers pursue other forms of cost recovery, like the partnership-heavy pilot program in Senate Bill 423. The trade organization includes more than 20 of the state's largest energy consumers, he said. Sam Carpenter, executive director of the Hoosier Environmental Council, noted that Virginia has capped SMR development cost recovery totals to just $125 million over five years and limited rider increases for the typical residential customer to $1.40 monthly. Disagreements abounded over the legislation's timing. Pierce, the Bloomington Democrat, said SMR is 'not quite proven' and that Indiana should wait for the technology to get better and cheaper. Advancing Koch's proposal now, he said, would make ratepayers into 'guinea pigs for this experiment called an SMR.' But I&M's Baker previously feared that if Indiana moves too slowly, it may struggle to compete for power-needy economic development projects. Baker said I&M wants to ensure that 'we're not too far in front, but we're not so far behind that we don't have the ability to act on this.' The legislation earned a full-throated endorsement from Energy and Natural Resources Secretary Suzanne Jaworowski, one of Gov. Mike Braun's cabinet appointees. She said this chance to 'deploy proven technology' aligns with Braun's agenda and 'all-of-the-above approach' to energy. 'This is (such) a unique moment in time that I don't want to see Indiana miss out on the opportunity to have federal support, private-public partnership support,' Jaworowski said. 'Not only do we have a demand signal from industry that they want this technology, … they're also willing to help pay for it so that it is not all on the backs of the ratepayers.' Identical language within another measure, House Bill 1007, has also crossed into the Senate. That's after the committee on Tuesday stripped out the only difference: a 2035 expiration date on the cost-recovery provisions. Chair Rep. Ed Soliday, R-Valparaiso, said he 'convinced' Koch to remove it because 'we don't know when these are going to come online.' The Indiana General Assembly meets often enough that it can enter a date later if needed, he said. The twinned language is necessary because lawmakers plan to push both across the finish line, Soliday told the Capital Chronicle, citing 'powers above my head.' The committee didn't take up detailed edits filed for a carbon dioxide storage and transmission measure — or accept testimony — before a vote. Author Sen. Sue Glick, R-LaGrange, has dubbed it a 'clean-up' effort for previous legislation. Lawmakers authorized a pilot project, led by Wabash Valley Resources, in 2019 and revisited it in 2023. In between, in 2022, they established regulations for carbon sequestration projects and exempted the pilot from those requirements. Glick's Senate Bill 457 seeks to build on those endeavors. Indiana Senate approves education measures, narrowly OKs carbon storage measure It would exempt pipeline companies from needing to get certificates of authority in certain cases. The legislation would also create a permit for exploratory wells and well conversions; add inspection provisions; charge new fines for legal violations; and tweak other fee amounts. It would direct fee and fine proceeds away from topic-specific funds toward the state's General Fund — changes made by Sen. Ryan Mishler, R-Mishawaka, who leads the powerful Senate Appropriation Committee. An exhaustive amendment filed ahead of the committee's meeting would've undone that, redirecting monies back to carbon sequestration trust and administrative funds and specifying that the funds exist to defray state spending to manage and monitor projects. It wasn't called. 'The chair will not be accepting any amendments,' Soliday said during the meeting. 'There will probably be an amendment as a trailer to another bill. The debate is who can create funds.' 'We are at the mercy of the Appropriations Committee, as you all know, and (the) Ways and Means (Committee),' Glick added later. 'So we'll live with whatever they decide we can do.' Senate Bill 457 will head there next for a finance-focused review, after committee members advanced it in an 11-2 vote featuring bipartisan support. Rep. Tim Wesco, R-Osceola, critiqued the concept but voted in favor. 'Carbon sequestration, in my view, is likely the most expensive boondoggle of this decade. It is wasteful and pointless — but, I feel, otherwise harmless,' Wesco said. 'Companies … want to spend money to do it, so, we'll let them.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
