Latest news with #IUC
Business Wire
22-05-2025
- Business
- Business Wire
Iowa American Water Granted New Rates by Iowa Utilities Commission
DAVENPORT, Iowa--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Iowa Utilities Commission (IUC) issued an order on May 21 approving new water and wastewater rates for Iowa American Water. The company's rate request was filed on May 1, 2024, and was primarily driven by over $157 million in infrastructure investment in treatment and distribution system upgrades since its last rate filing. 'We are committed to making appropriate investments to continue to provide safe, clean, reliable and affordable services,' said Brad Nielsen, President, Iowa American Water. 'Our effective capital planning and consistent focus on efficiently operating our systems keep our water and wastewater services compliant with state and federal regulations for the benefit of the customers and communities we serve in Iowa.' Next, Iowa American Water will prepare and file rates that reflect the IUC's Order. After review of the filing, an effective date for the new rates will be established by the IUC. Interim rates became effective on May 11, 2024. Iowa American Water offers customer payment installment plans and budget billing options on the MyWater customer portal at More information on these programs can be found on the company's website, under Customer Service & Billing, Customer Assistance programs. Customers will receive information about the new rates on their Iowa American Water bill. Information will also be available on the company's website here under Customer Service Billing, Your Water and Wastewater Rates. Additional information can also be found on the Iowa Utilities Commission's website at About American Water American Water (NYSE: AWK) is the largest regulated water and wastewater utility company in the United States. With a history dating back to 1886, We Keep Life Flowing® by providing safe, clean, reliable and affordable drinking water and wastewater services to more than 14 million people with regulated operations in 14 states and on 18 military installations. American Water's 6,700 talented professionals leverage their significant expertise and the company's national size and scale to achieve excellent outcomes for the benefit of customers, employees, investors and other stakeholders. For more information, visit and join American Water on LinkedIn, Facebook, X and Instagram. About Iowa American Water Iowa American Water, a subsidiary of American Water is the largest regulated water utility in the state, providing safe, clean, reliable and affordable water services to approximately 227,000 people. For more information, visit and follow Iowa American Water on Facebook and X. AWK-IR
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Prysmian SpA (PRYMF) Q1 2025 Earnings Call Highlights: Strong Start with Robust EBITDA and ESG ...
Release Date: May 08, 2025 For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. Prysmian SpA (PRYMF) reported a strong start to 2025 with an EBITDA of 527 million, significantly ahead of last year. The company achieved an impressive organic growth of 5%, driven by transmission and supported by stability in Power Grid and growth in digital solutions. Free cash flow stood at 1 billion for the last 12 months, indicating strong cash generation. Prysmian SpA (PRYMF) is on track to achieve its ESG target of a 38% reduction by 2025, with a current reduction of 37%. The company confirmed its net zero target by 2035 and reported a significant improvement in the recycled content of copper, up by 300 basis points from last year. The company faced declining organic growth in the US due to tough comparisons from last year and bad weather impacts. There is a wait-and-see situation in the US market due to current tariff dynamics, affecting the IUC business. The industrial construction segment showed flat organic growth, with a 35 million shortfall compared to the previous year. Prysmian SpA (PRYMF) experienced a temporary negative effect on net income due to the negative value of metal derivatives. The company anticipates potential headwinds from forex exchange rates, which could impact future guidance. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 3 Warning Sign with PRYMF. Q: Can you provide some color on the performance of the Power Grid segment, particularly in medium voltage versus HVAC, and any differences between the US and Europe? A: The organic growth in Power Grid was slightly negative due to a strong demand in the previous year. Medium voltage demand remains strong, prompting significant investment in the US. The "wait and see" situation was due to bad weather affecting installations. In Europe, demand varies, with strong demand in North Europe and the UK, but weaker in France. (Unidentified_1) Q: What is the impact of moving to margin in constant metal prices, and how does it affect your targets for transmission and grid margins? A: The impact on transmission is minimal as it involves less metal. We maintain our target of 18-20% for transmission, with a slight increase for constant metal prices. For the INC space, the differential is higher, with a couple of points added for standard metal prices. (Unidentified_1) Q: Have you seen any increased traction from distributors in the US electrification market after the Eco deal? A: Yes, we have geared up our commercial organization to sell a full range of products, not just Anchor Wire products. Our service level has been impeccable, with 24-hour delivery for most products, which has been well-received by customers. (Unidentified_1) Q: Can you elaborate on the potential pipeline of new transmission projects and the impact of new US tariffs on your business? A: We have visibility of projects through 2028, with a strong pipeline for 2025. The US tariffs have led to a shift in customer behavior, with more demand for local production. We haven't seen increased competition from Asian players in Europe. (Unidentified_1) Q: How is the demand evolving for data centers, and have you observed any changes in trends? A: Demand for data centers remains strong, particularly in the US, where we are gaining market share. In Europe, the market is stable, and we are working to strengthen our position by collaborating with contractors. (Unidentified_1) For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Former IUC members and business groups say governor's energy bill would cost ratepayers
Wind turbines along west-bound Interstate 80 on March 29, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) A slew of business organizations, as well as AARP and several former members of the Iowa Utilities Commission, are opposing an energy bill proposed by the governor, because they say it would negatively affect Iowa ratepayers. In addition to granting existing utilities the right of first refusal to new transmission projects, House File 834 and Senate File 585 expand the projects that can pursue ratemaking principles and set rules for utility resource planning. Opponents argue these elements of the bills would give big utilities a 'carte-blanche' to add more capital investments in the state regardless of impact to ratepaying Iowans. Utility companies MidAmerican Energy and Alliant Energy are in favor of the bill and disagreed with the assertions that it would not benefit ratepayers. 'The policies in the bill allow us to deliver on our promise to provide safe, reliable and affordable energy when our customers need it,' a spokesperson for MidAmerican said in a statement. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Five former members of the Iowa Utilities Commission, or the Iowa Utilities Board as it was formerly titled, penned a letter to lawmakers and urged them to pause the current legislation. The letter said the bill has potential to 'shift the risk/benefit ratemaking balance away from ratepayers and towards investors.' In the early 2000s, Iowa authorized ratemaking principles to account for the added risk of investments into alternative energy sources, like wind and solar, which were new at the time. These principles, according to the letter from former IUC members, 'freed' regulators from traditional ratemaking principles and granted them 'premium' returns on equity at levels that ranged between 1% to 2% above the national average. The bill would expand the projects eligible for these ratemaking principles with the intent of attracting energy storage and nuclear electric power generation facilities in the state. 'With these changes, Iowa ratepayers could be paying some of the highest (return on equities) in the country for another round of very large utility investments,' the letter read. Legislation sets regulations for anaerobic digesters on livestock operations in Iowa The former IUC members cited a report completed by an outside firm in 2023, per requests of the Iowa Legislature, to review Iowa utility ratemaking laws and procedures. The study found that rate-regulated utilities can receive advanced ratemaking approval with 'relative ease' and that the IUC had limited ability to 'determine whether an asset would truly benefit the electric system and the ratepayers that pay for it.' It also said precedent around advanced ratemaking 'facilitates infrastructure build-up without thorough assessment by the IU(C)' The former IUC members said they 'commend legislators for taking ratemaking reform seriously' but they recommend 'pausing the current legislation' or amending the bill, to better address the issue in a way that 'protects ratepayers.' Geoff Greenwood, media relations manager for MidAmerican, said the letter 'ignores' that the returns can 'only be approved if they are found to be in the public's interest.' 'MidAmerican's track record over the past two decades proves that the policies in the bill allow us to deliver on our promise to provide safe, reliable and affordable energy when our customers need it,' Greenwood said in a statement. He said returns on equity are approved 'after a robust process' in the IUC with input from the Office of the Consumer Advocate and customers. Greenwoods said the returns are 'not 'premium'' because they 'reflect the cost and risk of long-term investments' as they are applied to the 30- to 40-year lifespan of a facility. Latest figures from MidAmerican point to average utility rates in Iowa that are 44% below the national average. 'The use of 'non-traditional' advance ratemaking principles is exactly what has made Iowa exceptional and resulted in some of the lowest electricity rates in the country,' Greenwood said. He said MidAmerican additionally uses a method of revenue sharing that allows the company to use revenue, beyond a certain level of return, to 'pay off company generating facilities so that customers won't bear those costs in the future.' 'This customer-first mechanism incentivizes MidAmerican to better manage its operations and, when that happens, customers benefit,' Greenwood said in the statement. The bill would also remove the requirement that projects are a baseload electric power generating facility, or one that essentially operates at all times, and lowers the generating capacity of the facility from at least 300 megawatts to 40 megawatts. Bob Rafferty, with Iowa Businesses for Clean Energy which is one of the groups opposed to the bill, said these changes would allow companies to seek higher ratemaking principles on projects like gas peaker plants. Per MidAmerican documents, a newly proposed $600 million peaker plant project would work when demand is high, and is expected to operate less than 10% of the year. A fact sheet on the plants say they are a 'key addition' to the company's 'all-of-the-above generation strategy' to meet the expected increased demand of the next 20 years. But Rafferty said utility companies have an incentive to build more capital assets, like generating stations and transmission lines, because they can profit from them. He said it's 'important' to make sure the system doesn't allow a company to determine how many capital assets they need to build, as he alleges the bill would do. Opponents are also worried about a line in the bill that says utilities should submit resource plans to the IUC that 'reflect the circumstances and management judgment of an electric utility.' Rafferty said this means an investor-owned utility would have to create its resource plans in line with what would benefit its shareholders, rather than ratepayers. Iowa is currently one of a handful of states that does not require an integrated resource plan, defined by Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance as an examination of energy supply, demand and potential risks to meeting demand at a reasonable cost. Gov. Kim Reynolds' energy plan for the state, on which the bill is based, notes the need for integrated resource planning, or IRP, to comprehensively look at what energy sources will be needed for further growth in the state. Current law requires utilities to submit energy efficiency plans every five years, with five- or 20-year energy needs forecasts. Rafferty said when a utility proposes an investment be considered for ratemaking principles, the utilities commission doesn't get the 'big picture' of the project's impact on the state without an IRP. 'What the IRP should do is require it to be in the ratepayers' best interest, and the Iowa Utility Commission needs to be empowered to make sure that that is, in fact, the case,' he said. ROE Letter 4-24-25 Former members of the Iowa Utilities Commission, Richard Lozier, Jr., Geri Huser, Sheila Tipton, Darrell Hanson and John Norris wrote a letter to legislators opposing the bill. Under the bill, the Iowa Utilities Commission may make recommendations to the utilities on the resource plan, and the company must 'make a good faith effort' to inform and include suggestions from the commissioners, consumer advocate and stakeholders. 'The legislation, as it's currently constructed … would give the utilities a carte blanche to make any investment that they want and to earn a premium return on equity,' Rafferty said. Rafferty as part of Iowa Businesses for Clean Energy, has banded with lobbyists from Iowa Business Energy Coalition, AARP, Iowa Economic Alliance, National Federation of Independent Business, Iowa Retail Federation and LSPower in opposition of the bill and to suggest lawmakers either 'fix it or forget it.' An amendment suggested by the bill opponents would make it so that facilities outlined in resource plans are 'in customers' best interests.' The proposed amendment would also allow the IUC to approve, reject or modify a resource plan and would greatly expand the ability of stakeholders to participate and weigh in on the plans. The bill, as is, stipulates a resource plan should 'consider all reasonable resources' and should include 'adequate, cost-effective, and reliable energy service considering costs, fuel diversity, and probable future demand for energy.' Rafferty said legislators need to think of utility rates like they think about taxes for Iowans. 'Their vote will determine whether taxes go up, or taxes don't go up,' he said. A spokesperson from Alliant Energy said the bill will 'strengthen and help grow Iowa communities to meet the state's future energy needs.' 'We commend Governor Reynolds for leading on energy policy that promotes an all-the-above energy strategy, enhances customer transparency and participation for generation planning and is focused on driving economic development in this state,' the spokesperson said in an email. Greenwood with MidAmerican said the bill is important in updating Iowa's policies that 'have been effective for customers for decades' and will keep the state from 'falling behind other states.' 'Simply put, Iowa's energy policy – as it is currently as well as the bill's proposed updates – works for Iowans,' Greenwood said. Lawmakers noted during House hearings in early February the bill would have some amendments before it would be ready for floor debate. As legislators close out the 110th day of session, the bill remains stuck in a Senate appropriations committee and a House subcommittee. House Speaker Pat Grassley said Thursday to reporters that the caucus is focusing on the budget before 'taking up significant pieces of policy.' When asked specifically about ROFR and the energy bill as a whole, the Republican leader said 'it's still pretty divided' among representatives. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Pipeline bill survives funnel with major amendment from senators
Iowans opposed to carbon dioxide pipelines hand out buttons that read "No CO2 pipelines" at the Iowa State Capitol Mar. 18. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) Iowa senators amended and advanced on Wednesday a House bill aimed at protecting private property rights from eminent domain. House representatives passed the proposed legislation last week which combines a series of bills aimed at reforming the Iowa Utilities Commission and preventing the Summit Carbon Solutions' pipeline from using eminent domain in the state. Sen. Mike Bousselot, R-Ankeney, said the Senate subcommittee meeting on the issue was 'long awaited.' Bousselot said his goal 'has always been' to pass legislation that protected 'all landowners' and not just those affected by certain projects, which he alleged House legislation over the past several years has done. 'House File 639, before us today focuses only on creating additional property rights for land impacted by potential hazardous liquid pipelines … but does not take into account all types of pipelines, transmission lines or power generation,' Bousselot said. Bousselot proposed an amendment that would remove certain parts of the House bill and add language to 'avoid' eminent domain by allowing a project to find voluntary easements outside of the original project corridor. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Bousselot said this would apply to 'any project seeking eminent domain approval before the IUC, including pipelines, transmission lines and power generation.' His amendment would also require the Iowa Utilities Commission to make, within one year, a decision on any project that is seeking eminent domain rights. 'By saying that decision needs to be made within one year, there's plenty of time for fact finding, but it also means, like the court cases that are going on today, those court cases get to court faster,' Bousselot said. As passed from the floor, House File 639 would have: Increased the insurance requirements for a hazardous liquid pipeline to cover any damages to property and reimburse landowners for increases in their property insurance premiums due to the pipeline. Changed the definition of a common carrier, to require a hazardous liquid carrier to establish with 'clear and convincing evidence' that it will transport a commodity. Required an Iowa Utilities Commissioner to be present at all proceedings. Allowed any interested party, including lawmakers, to intervene in IUC proceedings. Restricted the IUC's ability to sanction intervenors Limited the length of a hazardous liquid pipeline permit to one 25-year term. Bousselot's proposed amendment would strike the common carrier definition, permit limits, intervenor requirements and would adjust the insurance requirements. The amendment would add a requirement for the 'lifetime' repair and replacement costs for drainage tile, crop loss and soil degradation. Under the proposed amendment landowners would also be able to request, and be granted, a new land representative. The amendment retains the requirement that a commissioner from the IUC be present at informational meetings and hearings, and the section on insurance requirements that hold operators responsible for damages caused by the projects. Some of the landowners said the contents of Bousselot's amendment were 'a surprise' and they questioned how the landowners outside of the corridor, or the area around a proposed eminent domain project, would be notified. Jake Highfill, on behalf of the American Petroleum Institute said the organization was in favor of the corridor change and that it was 'common practice' for members of the institute in other states. Jake Ketzner, a lobbyist for Summit Carbon Solutions, urged lawmakers to vote against 'any piece of legislation that changes the rules in the middle of a project.' Ketzner said the company has been suggesting the corridor change Bousselot proposed and appreciated the amendment, noting it would give the project a route forward in counties where it currently has 90-95% of easements secured. 'If we have the ability to move off someone's ground that does not want the project, currently, the only way to deal with that is restarting,' Ketzner said. 'So we think what you're suggesting makes a lot of sense.' Sen. Matt Blake, D-Urbandale, said he signed off on the bill in subcommittee because it was the 'last train out of the station' on the private property rights issue, but he urged his colleagues to vote against the amendment, which he called a 'tremendous change to the system.' Sen. Tony Bisignano, a Democrat from Des Moines, said he opposed the amendment because of its rushed nature, and because he felt it was not 'solving property rights.' 'We haven't had a time to talk with people, to step back and really look at it,' Bisignano said of the amendment. 'These people deserve the debate on eminent domain and property rights. This is a consolation.' He voted in favor of the amendment to 'keep it alive' for floor debate, which he has pushed for earlier in the session via a failed amendment to chamber rules. The committee voted to adopt the amendment. 'This amendment builds on the work that was found in House File 639, retaining some, adding a lot, but ultimately is a major, major addition to strengthening and protecting private property rights in Iowa,' Bousselot said. The bill advanced to the Senate floor via a voice vote in favor. Bousselot said he intends to file an additional amendment on the floor dealing with communications. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa House votes to ban eminent domain for CO2 pipelines
Iowans gathered at the Iowa State Capitol to rally against carbon dioxide pipeline projects March 18, 2025. (Photo by Cami Koons/Iowa Capital Dispatch) The Iowa House approved a bill Wednesday that would stop pipelines carrying liquified carbon dioxide from using eminent domain. Six other bills related to carbon sequestration pipelines, eminent domain and the Iowa Utilities Commission were combined into one bill, which also advanced. The bills were directed at an ongoing fight between landowners and the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline, which would stretch more than 1,000 miles in Iowa connecting to biofuel refineries and transporting the sequestered carbon dioxide to underground storage in North Dakota. House File 943 is similar to a law recently passed in South Dakota, another state crossed by the pipeline's proposed route. Summit recently asked South Dakota regulators to pause proceedings on its pipeline permit due to the new law. South Dakota governor signs eminent domain ban on carbon pipelines The Iowa bill would take effect in May and apply to any eminent domain filings made on or after that date. Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, R-Wilton, said businesses should 'expect the unexpected' if they plan to use eminent domain in Iowa. 'Expect that we're going to make changes when eminent domain is involved, and expect that we're going to make changes in favor of landowners,' Kaufmann said. Pipeline opponents advocated for the bill March 18 during a rally at the Capitol and again on Monday at a press conference with a group of Republican lawmakers opposed to the pipeline project. The bill passed 82-12. Iowa Renewable Fuels Association Executive Director Monte Shaw said in a press release the decision by the House was 'hardly surprising, but it is still disappointing.' 'IRFA members have been saying for three years that (carbon capture and sequestration) is the most important tool available to grow ethanol demand into new markets both here at home and around the world,' Shaw said in the statement. Shaw said he believes 'cooler heads will prevail in the Senate' and said the opposition to the project has been led by a 'small, though loud, minority.' 'IRFA calls on the Iowa Senate to stand with the majority of impacted landowners, farmers, ethanol producers, and Iowa's economic future to ensure the state has the tools it needs to meet the brewing economic disaster in the heartland,' Shaw said. House File 639 would increase the insurance requirements for liquid hazardous pipeline operators. The five amendments to the bill would also update the definition of a common carrier, require IUC commissioners to be present at all hearings, expand who is allowed to intervene in an IUC docket, limit the pipeline permits to one term not longer than 25 years and stop the IUC from imposing sanctions on intervenors. These were all bills that had already advanced from House committees, but Rep. Steven Holt combined into HF 639. Holt, R-Denison, said with all of the amendments, the bill should be called the 'no eminent domain for private gain' bill. The bill passed 85-10. A spokesperson for Summit said the company has signed easements with more than 1,320 Iowa landowners and has 'adjusted the route based on feedback from stakeholders and regulatory agencies.' 'Regulatory certainty is crucial for maintaining Iowa's competitive edge in business, fostering long-term opportunities for farmers, ethanol producers, and rural communities,' the spokesperson said in a statement. Some representatives voiced concern because of historic opposition in the Senate. Rep. Brian Meyer spoke in support of the bills but said he wondered if lawmakers were 'wasting our time here today.' 'We've done this now several years in a row, and the Senate has not acted,' Meyer, D-Des Moines, said. 'As far as I can tell, they have not even tried to negotiate … Do something. Do something about this important issue.' Rep. Charley Thomson, R-Charles City, said he appreciated the concerns about the Senate on the issue and said he believes the House will 'do the right thing without regard for what others may do.' Holt said the issue is not partisan and that in both the House and the Senate, the two parties disagree with one another on the issue. He disagreed with a claim that he and other lawmakers fighting for the issue are doing so performatively. 'We're doing it because it's the right thing to do,' Holt said. 'And regardless of whether the Senate is going to pass it or not, we're going to fight for it here because it's the right thing to do.' Iowa Capital Dispatch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@
