Future of Gas Proceedings: A National Overview and Lessons Learned

Future of Gas proceedings are becoming an increasingly common tool for state public utility commissions to examine avenues for gas distribution system evolution given new market realities and state policy goals. These proceedings are often the first step in evaluating business-as-usual gas system investments, and offer opportunities for advocates, utilities, local governments, and the public to provide direct input on policies that will shape the future energy system in their state.

Across the country, 10 states and the District of Columbia have active Future of Gas proceedings, each varying in scope and scale. While many proceedings have been opened following the passage of economy-wide decarbonization laws, states are also grappling with rising spending on natural gas distribution systems. In 2024 alone, utilities spent $28.5 billion on these systems nationwide.

As more states consider opening Future of Gas proceedings, there are opportunities to learn from the states with ongoing or completed proceedings. Some states have followed their Future of Gas proceedings with litigated dockets to implement the findings from these investigatory dockets. The following summary offers a snapshot view of where current Future of Gas proceedings are currently, lessons learned, and how states can continue progress following a Future of Gas proceeding.

California 

California opened its Future of Gas docket in January 2020 with the purpose to, “Establish Policies, Processes, and Rules to Ensure Safe and Reliable Gas Systems in California and perform Long-Term Gas System Planning.” In 2024, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) filed a whitepaper co-authored with the California Energy Commission and California Air Resources Board, discussing joint agency roles in gas transition planning activities and framing key issues in California’s gas transition. In 2024, that docket was closed but subsequently re-opened under Docket No. R.24-019-012.

Following passage of SB24- 1221, California has shifted the near-term focus of the proceeding to neighborhood-scale decarbonization pilots. In May 2026, the CPUC issued a proposed decision establishing the application process for the pilots, which will take place in three rounds. The first round of applications for pilot programs will be due in December 2026, and the CPUC is currently accepting comments about their initial order. As initial pilot design wraps up, the docket will return to its previously scoped topics, including guidance on managing the gas transition and stranded asset risk through long-term, iterative gas plans, facilitating customer access to electrification, assessing various gas asset depreciation methods, and more outlined in the joint agency whitepaper. 

Illinois  

The Illinois Future of Gas proceeding is one of the most active in the country. The Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) opened it in March 2024, with the central goal of determining how to decarbonize the state’s natural gas distribution system. ICC Staff have issue two timeline extensions for the proceeding, and it officially set to conclude with an ICC report at the end of 2026. While the process has existed on a longer timeline than originally intended, the proceeding’s record has demonstrated Illinois’ need to implement meaningful policy reforms for the gas system.

The proceeding has occurred in two phases, with phase one including workshops and public comment periods designed to explore the issues outlined in the initiating order. Phase two was divided into three parts, with phase 2A focusing on further discussing issues such as the role of energy efficiency in decarbonization, residential and industrial electrification strategies, geothermal energy, renewable natural gas (RNG), and alternative technologies. Phase 2B involved two working groups — the decarbonization pathways working group, and the pilots working group. The ICC opened a separate docket out of Phase 2B to determine the ICC’s authority to implement building decarbonization pilot proposals. Stakeholders in the decarbonization pathways working group identified the need for a full pathways study conducted by a third-party expert, and ICC Staff is currently commissioning that study in parallel with the proceeding’s final phase, Phase 2C, primarily focused on regulatory and legislative policy recommendations for the ICC to consider in its final Future of Gas report.

At this stage in Phase 2C, ICC is collecting feedback on the decarbonization pathways modeling results, which are expected to be published in Fall 2026. Intervenors also submitted comments on all regulatory and legislative policy recommendations submitted at the start of Phase 2C. Future of Gas workshops will continue throughout the Summer and Fall of 2026 to further clarify and adjust policy proposals after the decarbonization pathways report is published.

As part of the state’s last gas utility rate cases concluded in 2025, the ICC ordered a separate study to be conducted on gas line extension allowance (LEA) policies in the state. The study was released in Spring 2026 and found that current policies create a significant cross subsidization between customers for the cost of extending new service. Gas LEA issues are expected to be further discussed in the remainder of the Future of Gas proceeding and remain a contested issue in the ongoing rate cases for the state’s major gas investor-owned utilities. The ICC also initiated a separate workshop process for Peoples Gas to evaluate Non-Pipeline Alternatives (NPA) options for the utility’s Chicago territory. NPAs are, traditionally, central topics to Future of Gas proceedings. Follow ups for that workshop, including an NPA evaluation and screening framework, are currently up for discussion in the Future of Gas docket. While more substantial gas planning reforms are needed following Illinois’ Future of Gas proceeding, LEAs and NPAs are two near-term topics the ICC can address to reduce gas system costs.

Maine 

The Maine Future of Gas proceeding was initiated in 2025 with the goal of assessing whether current gas investments align with Maine’s greenhouse gas emission goals. Initial comments submitted on the proceeding demonstrate a divide between the utilities and consumer advocacy and environmental groups. Utilities advocate for RNG as the solution to decrease carbon emissions, while consumer advocacy and environmental groups argue that this is insufficient and costly for consumers, and that non-pipeline alternatives should be considered instead. The Public Utility Commission is currently evaluating comments and is expected to issue a report in summer 2026.

Maryland 

Maryland’s Future of Gas proceeding originated in 2023 with a petition from the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel (OPC). The OPC proposed a two-track proceeding, with a “transition track” focused on initiating a rulemaking on utility gas transition plans, and a “priority track” addressing immediate actions utilities should take to protect consumers from rising gas bills. These actions included removing gas subsidies in the form of LEAs, removing incentives for gas appliances in the state’s energy efficiency program, reforming gas utility marketing practices, and re-evaluating the state’s accelerated pipeline replacement program.

In June 2025, the PSC responded to one of OPC’s near-term priority by issuing an order in an adjacent docket asking PSC Staff to draft rules to eliminate gas line extension allowances. While the PSC was set to finalize the draft LEA regulations in 2026, but the decision is currently stalled while Staff conducts additional analysis to determine the economic impacts of eliminating gas LEAs. As part of the Maryland regulatory process, economic impact analysis is already standard practice. An additional agency, the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive, and Legislative Review must review draft regulations from a holistic lens before sending them back to the Commission to finalize. As noted by OPC analysis, Maryland regulators have the opportunity to save consumers of the two largest gas utilities over $952 million over the next decade by eliminating gas LEAs. In addition, as shown by recent RMI analysis conducted on states that have fully eliminated gas LEAs, there is no clear relationship between eliminating gas LEAs and extraneous economic impacts (such as housing prices and construction costs). As the Maryland PSC continues its Future of Gas proceeding, eliminating gas LEAs are a measured first step for reducing costs on the gas system.

In August 2025, the PSC issued an order to launch formal procedures to investigate the long-term planning practices of Maryland gas utilities. In that docket, intervenors are currently debating next steps for gas planning, non-pipeline alternatives, rate design, and other related issues as part of aligning gas system investments with the state’s climate and affordability goals. Consumer advocates continue to highlight in the proceeding that electrification can save consumer costs, particularly as gas delivery costs rise to over 60% of Maryland gas bills. A report to the Commission from the proceeding’s Special Master is expected at the end of 2026.

Massachusetts  

Massachusetts was the first state to open a Future of Gas proceeding in 2020 with a focus on achieving the state’s 2050 carbon neutrality goal. As part of the proceeding, the gas local distribution companies (LDCs) retained an independent consultant to conduct a decarbonization pathways study. The pathways study assumptions were informed and managed by the LDCs, and advocates involved in the docket raised concerns around the pathway analysis’s RNG assumptions and underestimated electrification potential. Following the study, in 2023, the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) issued a landmark order in the proceeding requiring gas utilities to prove that they considered non-pipeline alternatives prior to traditional gas system investments to recoup the costs of capital investments. As demonstrated by Massachusetts, states undergoing Future of Gas proceedings should ensure pathways study analysis is managed by their Commission, rather than utilities, and that stakeholders have the opportunity to provide input throughout the study.

The DPU now requires all the state’s local distribution companies (LDCs) to submit climate compliance plans (CCPs) every five years. The first of these plans are currently being litigated with an order expected toward the end of 2026. The primary issues up for consideration in the CCPs are LEAs and gas utilities’ obligation to serve. Advocates in the CCPs have argued continuing to subsidize gas expansion through LEAs will expose remaining ratepayers to rising gas system costs. In the CCP orders, the DPU will make a determination on eliminating gas LEAs and what the obligation to serve may look like if feasible alternatives to gas service are available. Other issues the DPU will examine in the CCPs include requirements for utilities to examine NPAs before beginning a pipeline project, integrated gas and electric planning, performance metrics, and decommissioning practices. 

Minnesota  

The passage of the Natural Gas Innovation Act in 2021 directed the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to open a proceeding into the future of gas. The initial phases of the proceeding primarily addressed modeling gas demand and creating more transparent planning procedures. The Future of Gas proceeding was briefly paused to focus on the state’s gas integrated resource plans (IRPs).

Following CenterPoint and Xcel Energy’s IRP proceedings, the Commission refocused attention to the Future of Gas docket with an updated scope. Current informational hearing topics include winter reliability, RNG, hydrogen and other alternative fuels, hybrid heating rate design, and updates from the Thermal Energy Network (TEN) Work Group. The Commission also initiated review of the state’s gas LEAs, and in June 2026, the Commission reduced CenterPoint’s footage allowance slightly while leaving Xcel’s unchanged.

Nevada (inactive) 

The Nevada Future of Gas docket was opened in 2020 and was initially outlined as a 3-stage process. The first stage took inventory of current natural gas usage in Nevada, outlined the options for decarbonization, and noted how these options would impact low-income customers. The second stage evaluated the impacts of decarbonization on the electric system, considering grid stability, generation needs, and supply chain issues. The third stage assessed the costs and planning needs of a transition to consumers, utilities, and the government. The proceeding progressed through all three stages, with comments submitted by clean energy groups, consumer advocates, utilities, and government agencies. The docket was closed in 2022 without a final order, as an administration with different energy priorities took office before the PUCN could act on the learnings of the proceeding. However, the legislature did pass a bill creating a gas Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process following the Future of Gas proceeding. The subsequent gas IRP rules require gas utilities to evaluate the lowest reasonable cost plans and conduct a comparative evaluation of gas-delivery resources. Gas utilities in the state filed inaugural plans in 2025.

New Jersey (inactive) 

New Jersey’s Future of Gas proceeding was initiated via Executive Order 317, which required gas utilities to develop plans to reduce gas utility emissions 50% by 2030 relative to a 2006 baseline. The Board of Public Utilities was also directed to develop recommendations for how the natural gas industry can best meet emission reduction goals, considering cost and support for well-paying jobs. After a technical conference, this proceeding became largely inactive. In December 2024, a group of stakeholders submitted a letter to the Board concerning the lack of progress in the docket. The BPU has yet to respond.

New York 

The New York Future of Gas proceeding began in 2020 to align gas system investments with the state’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). Beyond long-term gas planning, other issues explored in this docket include NPAs, locational electricity constraint analyses, rate design, and more. Utilities also conducted studies on various scenarios for depreciating assets given changing gas demand. As a result of the docket, the Public Service Commission (PSC) initiated a gas planning proceeding to establish requirements for long-term gas planning. Several intervenors noted the decreasing future usage protections for natural gas and pushed for NPAs to be explored as a more cost-effective alternative. In 2022, the PSC issued an order requiring gas utilities to file long-term plans that include NPAs and scenario analyses. Separate dockets have since been opened to evaluate gas utility long-term plans every three years. The major gas utilities submitted their long-term planning reports through May and June of 2026, and major issues up for discussion include designing more accurate demand forecasting and expanding NPA deployment.

Rhode Island (inactive) 

The Rhode Island Future of Gas proceeding began in 2022 to revisit the state’s investments in natural gas. The primary goals of this proceeding included understanding how the public utilities commission can influence emissions targets, a review of gas utility spending and investments, and studying emissions patterns in the state. While this docket is currently inactive, testimony in RI Energy’s gas rate case argues the state should reform its LEA policy.

Washington, D.C. 

DC’s Future of Gas proceeding was formally initiated in 2020 to review the climate business plan submitted by AltaGas. AltaGas was required to submit this plan as part of a 2017 settlement following a merger between AltaGas, WGL Holdings, and Washington Gas Light Company. This proceeding is designed in part to review the plans submitted by AltaGas, and to explore how the gas transition will impact the district’s climate goals. The scope of the proceeding subsequently expanded to include broader gas transition-related questions concerning all DC utilities, including LEAs, NPAs, and accurate forecasting models. Currently, intervenors are reviewing and commenting on PEPCO’s revised 15-year climate solutions plan and electrification impact study. In late 2026, an order from the Public Service Commission is expected to provide further guidance on structural reforms to the District’s gas planning framework.

The Path Forward: What States Can Learn from Future of Gas Proceedings 

Other states are considering Future of Gas proceedings, particularly given rising gas bills and a market shift toward electrification. One of those includes Michigan, where a recent proposed decision in the DTE gas rate case recommended opening a statewide Future of Gas proceeding. While gas utilities in Michigan currently file Natural Gas Delivery Plans, the nonbinding plans have delivered little evaluation of non-pipeline alternatives and the impacts of electrification on future gas demand. Evaluating future gas investments will be critical for Michigan, where Advanced Energy United analysis found the average monthly residential Consumers Energy gas bill could increase 49% by 2030 at the current pace of pipeline investment.

For states with an ongoing Future of Gas proceeding, or those looking to open one, Washington and Colorado are two examples to look to for meaningful gas transition policy reforms. Washington officially closed its initial investigatory gas proceeding with a final report to the legislature identifying the need for gas and electric utilities to coordinate on state climate goals. In 2023, the legislature passed the Large Combination Utilities Decarbonization Act requiring its dual-fuel utility, Puget Sound Energy (PSE), to merge separate gas and electric integrated resource plans (IRPs) into Integrated System Plans (ISPs). The ISPs are intended to evaluate a coordinated approach to the energy transition between the gas and electric systems and require a standard cost test for determining lowest reasonable cost of decarbonization. In 2025, the ISP rules were finalized, and PSE must file its first ISP in 2027. Washington also eliminated LEAs for Avista, Puget Sound Energy, and Cascade Natural Gas, in separate rate cases in 2025. While these decisions occurred outside of the Future of Gas docket, they demonstrate a mode of action on an issue that many states are exploring in their Future of Gas dockets. Implementing concrete reforms as recommended in Future of Gas proceedings is often where states fall behind on managing gas system spending. Washington serves as a key state example of implementing meaningful gas and electric planning reforms to achieve state climate and affordability goals.

Colorado has also been regarded as a leading state in managing the gas transition. Following the state’s Future of Gas proceeding and the passage of related legislation that would lower gas utility throughput over time via a Clean Heat Standard, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission initiated a rulemaking that included gas infrastructure plans (GIPs). This framework is now regarded as one of the strongest in the country and has resulted in the largest NPA in the country, the Mountain Energy NPA. They require analysis for many categories of utility investment. Simultaneously, the state eliminated its LEA policy. Next, the state will investigate integrated gas and electric planning per newly passed House Bill 1081 (2026) to align gas and electric demand forecasts and further avoid duplicative investments on the energy system. For states that are undergoing an active or stalled Future of Gas proceeding, Colorado’s package of future of gas related policies (including its clean heat standard, GIP, line extension allowance reforms, and integrated gas-electric planning investigation) is a model of meaningful policy reforms on the gas system.

As new states consider opening a Future of Gas proceeding, they must balance timeliness with measured analysis. Clear timelines, processes, and goals should be outlined at the outset. Following a Future of Gas proceeding, regulators and policymakers should ensure that Future of Gas proceedings are followed by concrete regulatory reforms, rather than functioning as purely exploratory. Every delay in acting on Future of Gas findings puts states further behind in managing billions of dollars invested in long-lived gas pipeline infrastructure.