UTILITY-COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Amends the Public Utilities Act. Provides that, prior to approving or directing any decarbonization pathway, pilot program, infrastructure investment, or regulatory mandate related to the natural gas distribution system, the Commission shall conduct a comprehensive, independent cost-benefit analysis that evaluates: (i) life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions reductions; (ii) cumulative energy system costs, including any stranded asset risks estimated at no less than $80,000,000,000 by 2050 under high-electrification scenarios; (iii) ratepayer bill impacts for all customer classes, with a focus on low-income and non-migrating customers; (iv) system reliability and safety under State standards; (v) equity impacts, including cost shifts to vulnerable populations; (vi) workforce and job impacts; and (vii) the extent to which competitive market mechanisms, such as private investment, third-party financing, and supplier competition, can achieve equivalent or superior outcomes at lower costs. Provides that the Commission shall not approve a decarbonization pathway, pilot program, infrastructure investment, or regulatory mandate unless the pathway, program, investment, or mandate demonstrates net benefits under the cost-benefit analysis without prioritizing an approach where regulated solutions increase costs without proportional benefits. Provides that the Commission shall use transparent, market-based data from sources such as PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM), Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO), and Chicago Citygate and coordinate with applicable biennial long-term gas infrastructure plans.