P-2011-2277868

The provided excerpts do not explicitly discuss specific financial or timeline risks in terms of quantified impacts. However, several procedural and process-related concerns can be inferred:

Financial Risks and Concerns:
- One of the open issues is the "dollar impact to ratepayers" associated with gas-on-gas competition and flex rates, indicating a concern with how these competitive tariffs might affect utility revenues and customer costs. The Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA) specifically requests data on the "dollar impact to ratepayers" as part of the ongoing review process 1.
- There is mention of the need for protective orders when disclosing sensitive information, implying concerns about the confidentiality of competitive pricing and its potential financial implications if disclosed improperly 2, 3.

Timeline Risks and Concerns:
- The dockets have been dormant for several years, with the process initially started in 2011 and only recently reassigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judge in 2025, suggesting significant delays and procedural stagnation 1, 1, 4.
- The inability of key parties (e.g., Peoples and Columbia) to reach a consensus on the four open issues since 2019 has delayed resolution, indicating a risk of further delays in reaching final decisions on these matters 3, 5.
- The parties agreed that gathering current data on gas-on-gas competition is a necessary first step, and a subsequent prehearing conference will only occur after this data is collected and analyzed, suggesting additional time will be needed before substantive progress can be made 2.

In summary, the main risks involve delays due to longstanding unresolved issues and the potential financial impact on ratepayers and utilities depending on how competitive tariffs are structured and applied.

The docket does not explicitly identify "areas of growth" in the sense of market expansion, new services, or increased customer base. Instead, it focuses on resolving four open regulatory and procedural issues regarding gas-on-gas competition among jurisdictional natural gas distribution companies (NGDCs) in Pennsylvania. These four issues are the closest analog to "areas of growth" in this context, as their resolution could influence how competition and rate structures evolve. The issues and related key considerations are:

1. The appropriate methodology to calculate the lowest applicable gas-on-gas flex tariff rates for customers participating in gas-on-gas competition.
- Key consideration: Establishing a fair and consistent method to determine competitive rates that reflect market dynamics and regulatory requirements.

2. The uniform tariff provisions to be utilized by jurisdictional NGDCs in implementing gas-on-gas flex rates.
- Key consideration: Ensuring that all NGDCs apply consistent tariff provisions so that competition is not distorted by differences in rate structures or terms.

3. The circumstances under which the extension of service to a potential gas-on-gas customer at full tariffed rates should be permitted.
- Key consideration: Defining when a customer should receive standard rates versus competitive (flex) rates, impacting revenue and competitive balance.

4. Whether a separate rate schedule should be established for gas-on-gas flex rate customers.
- Key consideration: Determining if customers engaged in competitive situations should have a distinct rate class, which could affect both pricing transparency and cross-subsidization concerns.

The resolution of these issues is seen as critical for the continued evolution and potential growth of gas-on-gas competition, as well as for the protection of ratepayers and competitive equity among NGDCs 1, 1.

Key events and submissions in the gas-on-gas competition proceeding include:

- December 8, 2011: Peoples Natural Gas, Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement (I&E), Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA), and Office of Small Business Advocate (OSBA) jointly filed a petition for a generic investigation or rulemaking regarding gas-on-gas competition (Docket No. P-2011-2277868) 1.

- March-August 2012: Multiple petitions to intervene filed by parties including Columbia, UGI, National Fuel, PSU, PECO, Equitable, and IECPA 2.

- June 24, 2014: Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Elizabeth Barnes issued a recommended decision addressing the phase-out of gas-on-gas competition and potential proposals for service territory division or modification of competition 2.

- May 4, 2017: The Commission entered an order permitting gas-on-gas competition under specific conditions and sought comments on flex rate tariffs 3.

- June 13, 2019: The Commission entered an order articulating four open issues on gas-on-gas competition 3.

- April 2, 2025: ALJ Katrina Dunderdale issued a prehearing conference order scheduling a prehearing conference for April 22, 2025, and set requirements for prehearing memoranda and service lists 4, 4.

- April 21, 2025: Multiple parties including PSU, Peoples, Columbia, I&E, and others filed prehearing memoranda identifying issues, proposed witnesses, and procedural positions in advance of the prehearing conference 5, 6, 3, 1.

- April 22, 2025: Initial telephonic prehearing conference held before ALJ Dunderdale 5.

- May 20, 2025: The Presiding Officer ordered NGDCs in western Pennsylvania to submit by July 20, 2025, data on flex rate and gas-on-gas competition customers for 2021 and 2024, including volumes and revenues. A second prehearing conference is scheduled for August or September 2025 to review this data 2.

This timeline traces the major filings, procedural orders, and scheduled submissions relevant to this ongoing proceeding.

The main stakeholders in the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission's docket regarding "gas-on-gas" competition are:

- Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. (Columbia)
- Peoples Natural Gas Company, LLC (Peoples) and Peoples TWP, LLC
- National Fuel Gas Distribution Corporation (NFG)
- Pennsylvania State University (PSU)
- The Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement (BIE/I&E)
- The Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA)
- The Office of Small Business Advocate (OSBA)
- The Industrial Energy Consumers of Pennsylvania (IECPA, now withdrawn)
- Pennsylvania Independent Oil & Gas Association (PIOGA, now withdrawn)
- UGI Utilities, Inc. (UGI), PECO Energy Company, and others who have filed to intervene in the past

Positions on Proposals:
- The four open issues from the 2019 order remain the focus: (1) methodology for flex tariff rates, (2) uniform tariff provisions, (3) conditions for service extension at full rates, and (4) need for a separate rate schedule for flex rate customers 1, 2.
- The parties have not reached a consensus on these issues despite multiple meetings; no stakeholder has been explicitly recorded as for or against a specific proposal in the recent excerpts—rather, there is an agreement that more data is needed before positions can be finalized 3, 2, 2.
- Peoples and Columbia both notified the Commission in 2023 that they were unable to find a mutually acceptable resolution to the four open items 4, 4.
- The OCA recommends obtaining current data before proceeding, given significant changes in the industry landscape (e.g., mergers among NGDCs), and requests information on customer counts, volume, and dollar impact 2.
- IECPA and PIOGA have withdrawn their participation as of April 2025 5, 6.

In summary, the stakeholders are established parties in the Pennsylvania natural gas distribution sector and relevant public advocacy or consumer bodies. As of the latest information, they are in a fact-finding and discussion phase, with no clear or stated support or opposition for specific proposals among active parties. The withdrawal of IECPA and PIOGA reduces industry opposition voices. The OCA is advocating for data-driven decision-making before any position is taken.

The "gas-on-gas" competition docket before the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission addresses issues arising when multiple jurisdictional natural gas distribution companies (NGDCs) have overlapping service territories and compete by offering flexible (discounted) distribution rates to nonresidential customers. The practice, known as "gas-on-gas competition," involves NGDCs negotiating rates below their maximum approved tariffs to retain or attract customers, which also affects ratemaking and revenue allocation 1.

- The docket was initiated in 2011 (P-2011-2277868, I-2012-2320323) following a joint petition by Peoples Natural Gas Company, Peoples TWP LLC, the Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement (BIE), the Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA), and the Office of Small Business Advocate (OSBA).
- The Commission issued orders in 2017 and 2019 allowing gas-on-gas competition under certain conditions and identified four unresolved issues:
1. The methodology to calculate the lowest applicable flex tariff rates for eligible customers.
2. Uniform tariff provisions for implementing flex rates.
3. Circumstances for extending service at full tariffed rates to potential gas-on-gas customers.
4. Whether a separate rate schedule should exist for gas-on-gas flex rate customers 2, 2, 3.

Multiple parties, including Columbia Gas, Peoples, IECPA, OCA, and OSBA, participated in discussions but failed to reach consensus on these issues. As of 2025, the matter remains unresolved and was reassigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judge (OALJ) for further proceedings, with a focus on gathering current data on the prevalence and impact of gas-on-gas competition in Pennsylvania 3, 1.