Case Number: 07-0242


11 results
  • October 1, 2008

  • September 5, 2008

    I am against any rate increases. Nicor only reads every other month. The gas prices have gone up to high.
    Brad Koerner
  • July 8, 2008

    500% increase Customer Charge !
    here’s a little tale ……… I have a small business only use gas for heat 6 months a year- Business customer charge is now $64.50 month and of course there is tax on that. my bill dated 7/17/08 - I used 1 therm my bill? $77.57. I didn’t even use a therm it’s an estimate. Last year we paid 165 in customer charges this year will be $865.
    This will cost our business 775 a year plus tax on that= $65 Also, I used to turn off my gas for the season, pay a fee to turn back on in fall, NOW, there is a large fee to turn back on and if a customer turns their gas on/off in a 12 month period they still pay the monthly fee.

    Alyse Kelly
  • April 9, 2008

  • March 31, 2008

    I want to express my exasperation with the recent rate increase of Peoples Gas, specifically the increase of the customer charge for small users. The dollar amount of my increase is small relative to others, I have small residential service - non-heating, but still my bill will increase over 50% of what I averaged for the prior year. Are other service classifications seeing this type of increase?
    I don’t believe this to be justified or evenhanded.

    Cary Kerber
  • March 21, 2008

    I do not like the higher rate on the People's gas bill which was approved. cannot afford it.
    ramona shableau
  • February 19, 2008

    I'm having a terrible time paying the bill. I'm still trying to pay the bill from last year and can't qualify for liheap. The bill now is $1005.68 waiting to be paid by 3/3 which I can't pay by 3/3. It is just ridiculous and if I don't get arrangments then I will be cut off. I am diabetic and a 74 year old senior and it is a struggle.
    Dorothy Turner
  • February 11, 2008

    Headlines in today's paper state 2 gas companies are proposing rates based on "expected" usage and not on actual usage of gas. These companies are not even the company that services us, but once one is granted a windfall, the others will follow. To even consider such an unfair proposal would be highly unfair. It is astounding to me that any company would try such a tactic!Our gas bills should be based on the amount of gas actually used. Otherwise, where is the incentive to cut usage? And why should a customer be charged these outrageous fees for more of a product than the consumer is using?I do hope this greedy grasp for more revenue will be soundly turned down by the commission! [Just think of the record profits the oil companies made last year!! Part of the greedy gouging of the American public by big business for commodities we cannot do without!]
    margaret roberts
  • February 5, 2008

    To Whom it May Concern at the Illinois Commerce Commission:

    Regarding the proposed rate increase and billing change (decoupling) for Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company I must voice my disapproval. Though I am a customer of Nicor, your ruling on this docket will certainly effect me at some point given Nicor's stated position (that they are watching today's vote and would eventually change their billing to match Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company's).

    Please reject this proposal as you initially did in November. The people should not pay for services they are not using, nor should they subsidize other customers that use more services than they do.

    Thank you for your time,

    Chris Peterson

    Chris Peterson
  • February 5, 2008

    The idea of decoupling natural gas costs is complete insanity. I keep my bills low by using a minimum of natural gas and also do so as president of the condo board for the building I own a unit in. With this decoupling procedure, I will be forced to pay more and pay it year round. So in the summer there will be high gas bills and high electric bills. To me this sounds like the socializing of the cost of natural gas. Wasteful and/or large users of natural gas will be subsidized by people like myself who do not use much natural gas. This will only lead to more natural gas consumption as people who have to pay for it anyway will decide there is no point in conserving, which will lead to further demand, which will lead to more price increases in a vicious cycle.

    Even if this decoupling were fair regarding how much gas was used, why should I be *FORCED* by the government to loan a utility money in the summer? This interest free loan is great for them, it does natural gas customers no good at all. The idea of 'stable' bills is idiotic as well. It's not my fault some people can't budget unless the bill is the same every month. Nor is it my responsibility to make the utility's budgeting easier. I can budget out natural gas usage for a large condo building as well as my own property understanding that costs will be greater in the winter, I think the utility's accountants and executives should be able to handle it on their end.

    There has to be incentive to conserve and that incentive is not paying for the natural gas we don't use and not forcing us to give Nicor and people's energy an interest free loan.


    Brent Peterson
  • February 5, 2008

    Today's headline in the Chicago Tribune suggests that a proposal is being considered for the equalization of natural gas payments. Clearly this proposal eliminates any incentive to conserve, and increases the hazards of further global warming. The proposal is completely headed in the wrong direction. My wife and I are most surprised that the proposal has gotten so far. Please try to rectify the situation.Ronald L. Weber and Nancy L. Fagin
    Ronald Weber