On July 7, the Indiana Utility Consumer Counselor filed a formal petition for rehearing against the IURC's approval of AES Indiana's $71 million rate increase — opening a 60-day decision clock that ends September 5. The petition targets specific cost line items the OUCC says ratepayers should not be absorbing, and it lands inside a vote-math problem and a $33 billion acquisition timeline that make this one of the more consequential Indiana regulatory dockets in recent years. Three additional developments — federal capacity price escalation, USMCA's annual review, and automotive reshoring acceleration — hit the same operations from different angles.

AES Indiana Rate Increase Rehearing: What's Being Challenged

The OUCC, joined by the Citizens Action Coalition, filed on the final day of the 20-day statutory window. The petition challenges roughly $3 million in rate-case legal expenses passed to ratepayers, cost recovery for over 100 vacant AES payroll positions, and a reduction to AES's 9.5% authorized return on equity. AES's new billing system generated more than 800 consumer complaints and over 6,800 written comments. CAC Program Director Ben Inskeep flagged that AES is already over-earning its allowed profit by $19 million in the current fuel adjustment clause proceeding — that figure is the IURC's strongest existing lever for cost reduction.

If your facility was party to the industrial settlement alongside Kroger, Walmart, and Rolls-Royce at $90 to $91 million, a successful rehearing could reopen that agreement. Your 2027 cost allocations may not hold. Get your energy counsel reviewing your exposure before September 5.

The vote math adds another layer. Commission Chair Anthony Swinger — appointed for his consumer-advocacy background after 25 years at the OUCC — will likely recuse again, removing the commissioner most favorable to ratepayers from the decision. Commissioner David Veleta, one of the three original yes votes, resigned effective August 31. His replacement could be seated before the September 5 deadline. Governor Braun's appointment to fill that seat may matter more than any legal argument filed. Also in frame: the GIP-BlackRock-EQT consortium won AES stockholder approval in a $33.4 billion take-private transaction on June 26. Any IURC order cutting AES Indiana's authorized return on equity compresses the utility's earnings profile at exactly the moment that consortium needs state and federal approval to close.

Two More Developments Indiana Manufacturers Are Walking Into

PJM cleared capacity at $329.17 per megawatt-day for 2026-2027 — compared to $28.92 two years prior. FERC issued orders on June 18 requiring regional grid operators to fast-track interconnection for AI data centers and large industrial load. Those wholesale cost increases flow to all industrial customers served by load-serving entities in PJM-covered territory — eastern and central Indiana — alongside hyperscalers. Whether large data center operators get carved into their own rate class or stay in the same tariff bucket as manufacturers is an active fight in Indiana right now. Assume nothing is settled. Model your capacity charge exposure before the next PJM auction. Over 60% of the new generation capacity data centers pledged for 2027 hasn't broken ground — the supply gap is real, and your facility sits in it.

On trade: USMCA was not extended at the July 1 deadline. Annual review is now active. Round 3 U.S.-Mexico negotiations are set for Mexico City the week of July 20, with a reported push to raise automotive regional value content from 75% to 82% — a threshold industry analysts say few current 2026 model year vehicles could meet without significant sourcing changes. Meanwhile, Toyota committed $3.6 billion to move Tacoma production from Mexico to San Antonio. Honda shifted Civic Hybrid production to Greensburg. Hyundai announced $26 billion in U.S. investment. GM absorbed $3.1 billion in tariff costs and is moving crossover production domestically. OEMs are locking in tier-one and tier-two suppliers now, not in 2028. The qualification window for Indiana suppliers is compressing.

Questions for Your Morning Huddle

Q: What should we do before the September 5 AES Indiana rehearing deadline?
A: If your facility is in AES's service territory and you were party to the industrial settlement, review your cost allocation exposure with energy counsel now. A successful rehearing could reopen the settlement and change your 2027 rate structure before you've had a chance to budget for it.

Q: How do PJM capacity prices at $329 per megawatt-day affect our facility?
A: Those wholesale capacity costs flow through to all industrial customers served by load-serving entities in PJM — your facility absorbs them alongside data centers. Model your capacity charge exposure now, before the next auction locks in your cost basis.

Q: What does the USMCA annual review mean for our bill of materials?
A: The reported push to raise regional value content requirements to 82% would force sourcing changes most current vehicle platforms can't meet without significant work. If the U.S. pursues separate bilateral deals with Canada and Mexico, you could face different origin rules by country within a single product. Map your cross-border component exposure before Round 3 concludes in late July.

For more on how Indiana utility rate cases affect your facility's cost structure, start with the TEG Energy Decision Blueprint.