I attended the Dec. 15th meeting to stand in opposition to the rezoning NIPSCO is requesting. Like many others in the room, I went in believing this was a local zoning issue — something our town officials and residents still had meaningful authority over.
What I learned that night made it clear that assumption was wrong.
During the meeting, it was stated that NIPSCO wants to build a massive megawatt power generation facility to supply electricity to the rapidly growing number of data centers already operating — and being proposed — across Northwest Indiana. And yes, they also want to put data centers right here.
What stunned both council members and residents was learning that construction on a peaker plant had already begun on NIPSCO property. No local vote. No warning. No public discussion. From the reactions in the room, it was obvious that many of the local council members were completely in the dark.
That was the first time many of us heard the term IURC — a term introduced not by a regulator, but by a NIPSCO employee, who matter-of-factly explained that they didn’t need local permission. The reason given was simple:
The IURC says it’s not required.
If you’re like me, your immediate reaction was probably:
What does that even mean?
Who decided this?
And how can something this large move forward without the county — or the people who live here — having any real say?
The Two Things You Have to Understand: IURC and Act 425
If you oppose what is happening with NIPSCO in your backyard, you need to understand two things: the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) and Act 425. Together, they explain exactly how local control was overridden.
The IURC is the state authority that regulates public utilities like NIPSCO. When a project falls under IURC jurisdiction, local zoning boards and county councils do not get final say — and in some cases, they get no say at all.
In plain terms: when the IURC is involved, local government can be reduced to spectators.
As if that weren’t enough, the Indiana Legislature passed Act 425, which makes things even clearer — and harsher — for local communities. This law explicitly allows certain electric generation projects to move forward without any local zoning or land-use approval, as long as they meet state-defined criteria.
This wasn’t an accidental loophole.
It was a deliberate decision to shift power away from local communities and toward the state.
So when residents show up believing rezoning is the battlefield, they’re already too late. The battlefield was moved to Indianapolis — quietly — without most people ever knowing it happened.
I didn’t know.
Most people didn’t know.
That’s why opposition feels like it hit a brick wall.
Because legally, it did.
So Who Controls What — And Who Doesn’t?
Here’s the distinction that matters.
What the IURC Controls
The IURC has authority over:
- Utility-owned power generation facilities
- Whether those facilities are deemed “necessary”
- Whether they can proceed without county approval
- Large power contracts and generation planning
That authority is why NIPSCO was able to begin building a peaker plant without getting permission from the county.
What the County Still Controls
Local government still has authority over:
- Private developments, such as data centers
- Zoning and land-use decisions
- Roads, water access, and local infrastructure
This distinction is critical.
A power plant is a utility project regulated at the state level.
A data center is a private development that still requires local approval.
That is why the peaker plant moved forward — while the data center rezoning is still being debated.
The Bigger Plan: The Mega-Megawatt Power Plant
Beyond the peaker plant already under construction, NIPSCO has filed plans for a much larger natural-gas-fired power generation facility, potentially ranging from 2,300 to 3,000 megawatts. This plant would be designed to serve extremely large electricity users, such as hyperscale data centers.
To do this, NIPSCO created a separate affiliate — NIPSCO Generation LLC — which allows the company to structure these projects and contracts differently from traditional utility generation.
While this larger project must still go through the IURC, opposition to the data center does not automatically stop the power plant itself. These are legally separate projects.
Residents could successfully block the data center and still end up living next to a massive industrial power plant approved at the state level.
🔋 What Has Been Publicly Proposed So Far
NIPSCO’s affiliate NIPSCO Generation LLC (GenCo) — sometimes called “GenCo” — has filed plans to build up to about 3 GW (3,000 megawatts) of gas-fired generation, mostly to serve large data center loads such as those from Amazon.
Megaproject
This includes roughly two 1.3 GW gas plants plus battery storage designed to supply these large customers.
Megaproject
So the ~3 GW figure is the main public threshold being discussed right now, not just the earlier ~2,300 MW amount.
Megaproject
📈 Future Demand Could Require Even More
NIPSCO’s own planning documents show that projected load from new large users could grow far beyond 3 GW by 2035, depending on how many data centers and other large facilities actually materialize:
Some NIPSCO forecasts project more than 8,000 MW (8 GW) of new load from large economic development projects — including data centers — by 2035 if all build out as proposed.
Battery Storage Safety Concerns
In addition to generation facilities, another technology often mentioned at public meetings is large‑scale battery energy storage systems (BESS). These systems store electricity using large banks of lithium‑ion batteries, similar to what is used in phones and electric cars — but on a much larger industrial scale. While battery storage can help stabilize the grid, it also carries known safety risks that have been observed at multiple sites and documented by safety researchers and emergency responders. Large lithium‑ion batteries can experience a condition called thermal runaway, where overheating of one cell triggers a rapid, uncontrollable reaction that can lead to fire or explosion and release toxic gases such as hydrogen fluoride and carbon monoxide. Such fires are extremely difficult to extinguish and have required evacuations at large facilities, including a 2025 incident at a major battery storage plant in California where residents had to be evacuated due to toxic smoke and risk to public health. These risks — fire propagation, toxic gas release, explosion potential, and challenges for firefighters — are why many communities, regulators, and fire departments urge careful planning, strong safety standards, and robust emergency response capabilities before approving large battery storage installations near homes. The Union of Concerned Scientists+2Environmental Protection Agency+2
Why Stopping the Data Center Isn’t the End of the Story
Even if the data center never gets built here, the power generation facility does not become harmless.
A plant of this size brings long-term consequences regardless of where the electricity ultimately goes.
Potential Impacts of Large-Scale Power Generation Include:
Air Emissions
Large natural gas plants emit nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and greenhouse gases, all of which are linked to respiratory and cardiovascular health concerns. It is already established fact that residents of this county have higher rates of lung cancer than other counties in Indiana.
Noise Pollution
Turbines, compressors, and cooling systems operate continuously. In rural areas, that noise travels far beyond the plant boundary.
Water Use
Combined-cycle power plants can consume millions of gallons of water per day, placing stress on aquifers and local water supplies.
Infrastructure Strain
Heavy truck traffic during construction and maintenance damages roads and increases demand on small, rural emergency services.
Safety Risks
High-pressure gas pipelines and industrial systems carry inherent risk. When failures occur, consequences can be severe.
Property Value Impacts
Living near large industrial power generation can negatively affect property values, with no compensation for homeowners.
Permanent Change
Once infrastructure of this scale is built, it opens the door to further industrial development and permanently alters the character of the area. Wheatfield residents already are dealing with the massive amount of solar fields that destroyed the area.
Will the Mega-Megawatt Power Plant Raise People’s Electric Bills?
🔹 What NIPSCO Is Saying
NIPSCO has said that the large mega-megawatt power plant will not raise rates for existing customers, because it is intended to serve large users (like data centers) through separate contracts.
That claim can be true — if the project is kept completely off the regular customer rate base.
🔹 When Rates Would Not Go Up
Electric bills should not increase if all of the following are true:
- The plant is owned by NIPSCO Generation LLC (GenCo) or a similar affiliate
- The cost of building and operating the plant is paid entirely by:
-
Data center customers
-
Special contracts approved by the IURC
-
- None of the construction, fuel, maintenance, or financing costs are passed on to regular residential customers
This is what NIPSCO is promising and what the IURC is supposed to enforce.
🔹 When Rates Could Go Up
Rates can increase if any of the following happen:
- Parts of the project are later moved into NIPSCO’s regulated utility rate base
- Infrastructure upgrades (transmission lines, substations, gas pipelines) are labeled as “system-wide benefits”
- The data center customer leaves, downsizes, or renegotiates contracts
- The IURC later approves cost recovery from general customers
- The plant is justified as needed for “grid reliability” beyond the data centers
These kinds of cost shifts have happened before — not just in Indiana, but nationwide.
🔹 The Risk People Should Understand
Even if initial approvals say “no rate impact,” that is not a permanent guarantee.
Utilities can — and do — come back later asking to:
- Reclassify costs
- Adjust rate structures
- Spread expenses across all customers
Once a plant is built, customers are stuck with the infrastructure, even if the original purpose changes.
🔹 The Honest Bottom Line
- NIPSCO says your electric bill will not go up
- That depends entirely on IURC enforcement and future decisions
- Residents do not control those decisions
- Once the plant exists, financial risk shifts away from the company and toward the public
So the real concern isn’t just this rate case —
it’s what happens five, ten, or twenty years down the road.
Why This Feels So Wrong
This is not about being anti-power or anti-progress.
It’s about the fact that local communities were stripped of meaningful control without being told.
The IURC and Act 425 didn’t just limit your voice.
They removed it from the process.
Decisions affecting health, property, and the environment are being made by people who will never live next to the consequences.
Once you understand that, the anger makes sense.
So What, If Anything, Can Wheatfield Residents Still Do?
At this point, the hardest truth to accept is this: the peaker plant already under construction is very likely a done deal. The IURC approved it, and under Indiana law and Act 425, local government does not have the authority to stop it.
The larger mega-megawatt power generation facility, however, is not fully built yet — and while it is moving through the IURC process, that does not mean residents are completely powerless.
It does mean the fight is no longer local.
If Wheatfield residents want to challenge or influence the larger power plant, it must happen where the legal authority actually exists: the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission.
That looks like:
-
Submitting public comments into the IURC record
-
Intervening formally in the IURC docket (often with legal help)
-
Forcing NIPSCO to answer questions about:
-
Air emissions
-
Noise levels
-
Water usage
-
Emergency response planning
-
Site necessity and alternatives
-
Cumulative health impacts
-
This process is slow, technical, and frustrating — but it is not meaningless. Even when projects are ultimately approved, conditions can be imposed, scope can be narrowed, and mitigation can be required.
The goal may shift from “stop it entirely” to “if you're coming you're not steamrolling us for free.”
One More Important Clarification:
Residents may hear NIPSCO refer to a different entity when discussing the larger plant. That company is NIPSCO Generation LLC, often shortened or referred to as “GenCo.”
This is a separate affiliate created by NIPSCO to build and own large-scale generation intended for massive customers like data centers. Structuring the project this way allows NIPSCO to:
- Keep the project off the traditional utility rate base
- Limit cost exposure to regular customers (or so they say)
- Change how regulatory oversight applies
This structure is legal — but it is also intentional. It makes projects harder for the public to track and easier to present as “separate” from other developments, even when they are functionally connected.
Understanding this distinction matters.
The Bottom Line for Wheatfield
This situation is not the result of apathy by all local officials or ignorance by residents. It is the result of state law deliberately removing local authority from the equation.
The rezoning fight over the data center still matters — because data centers are not utilities and do not receive the same exemptions. That remains one of the last areas where local voices still have leverage.
But residents should be clear-eyed:
Stopping the data center does not automatically stop the power plant.
That is why understanding the IURC and Act 425 matters so much.
This is not about being anti-energy.
It is not about being anti-jobs.
It is about a system that made decisions first — and informed the people last.
And once you see that clearly, the frustration isn’t irrational.
It’s justified.
