The Tribune`s Dec. 29 editorial asks: ”Will the Edison rate case ever end?” The hopeful answer is ”yes”-when the Illinois Commerce Commission and Commonwealth Edison finally follow the law, rather than continually attempt to circumvent and ignore it.
The Illinois Supreme Court has unanimously reversed the last three Edison rate increases because the ICC has constantly violated the consumer protections in the public utility laws. The Illinois Appellate Court has reversed two Edison rate orders in recent years, again because the ICC
”arbitrarily” failed to follow the law.
Unfortunately, the Tribune`s editorial blames the judicial messengers and consumer victims for the ICC-Edison rate shenanigans. They are blamed for utility rate-making ”poisoned by politics,” ”mired in procedural technicalities,” ”punishing the utility for past mistakes” and harmful to
”the region`s future growth and well-being.” This rhetoric does not conform with reality.
The Supreme Court has unanimously reversed all three multimillion rate increases awarded by the ICC to Edison since 1985. The decisions have been written by both Republican and Democratic justices. Each finds that the ICC violated the Illinois Public Utilities Act and rejects Edison`s attempts to whitewash these illegalities. The real politics is the cozy ICC-Edison relationship typified by Edison`s hiring of two former ICC chairmen who both approved large rate increases.
The law protects consumers against higher rates for utilities`
unreasonable construction cost overruns and expensive, unneeded nuclear power plants. These are not mere ”procedural technicalities,” but the very substance of fair and reasoned rate-making.
The true technicalities are Edison`s arguments that consumers should keep paying large rate increases, even after they have been invalidated by the court, while the appeals and remand process drags on. For example, consumers have yet to see a dime of Edison`s promised refund of an illegal $495 million rate increase which took effect in October 1985, was reversed in June 1987, and remained in force through 1991.
Edison has among the highest residential electricity rates in the country. These rates are attributable to the expensive nuclear power plants constructed over the last decade. The costs for the Braidwood nuclear plant alone soared to over $5 billion, amid lengthy construction delays. The cost overruns are compounded by Edison`s large amount of excess capacity.
Three fundamental principles of public utility law are that consumers cannot be charged for unneeded power plants, for ”unreasonable” cost overruns and for ”imprudent” plant construction. The Tribune views the fair application of these legal principles as ”punishing the utility” by making Edison pay for its own mistakes. What`s the alternative? Punish consumers by making them pay for Edison`s mistakes?
Edison has long argued that consumers should pay for the costs of excess plants and cost overruns. Consumer and governmental representatives have instead supported a fair allocation of the costs of Edison`s construction and planning mistakes (unneeded plants are not ”used and useful”) and have opposed Edison`s attempts to pass on construction costs unless they are demonstrated to be ”reasonable” and ”prudent.” That is not just the law;
it is fairness.
