Electric Shock, Gas Relief, and LPG Value Boost: PA Overhang Persists

Research evidence excerpt

Electric Shock, Gas Relief, and LPG Value Boost: PA Overhang Persists

ive that if Shapiro wanted to make UGI a broad affordability test case, the gas docket

Earnings of Jurisdictional Utilities.would have been the more important forum; instead, electric was the target, where bill optics,

Nonetheless, he submits theserequested ROE, and capital structure map explicitly to Shapiro’s April framework. We would not

comments to note that theoverread the absence of gas comments, but for now it suggests the sharper political focus remains

proposed revenue increase ofelectric affordability.

$17.283 million annually—an

New OSBA color in gas case less expansive than feared, though ROE remains the clearing issue 11.9 percent increase over

into July settlement window. OSBA’s June 10 admitted testimony does not appear to mount a the company’s current revenue

broad challenge to UGI’s class cost allocation framework, instead accepting the ACOSS as broadly requirement—is inconsistent with

consistent with Commission precedent and proposing only a de minimis revenue allocation change; principles that the Governor

modestly constructive given concern the gas case could become an all-fronts affordability fight. recently articulated as a fair

OSBA still uses affordability to frame cost of capital, explicitly highlighting a 9.0% ROE scenario barometer of whether utility

as a ~$57mn revenue requirement reduction vs UGI’s 10.75% request, while also opposing the 5- rate proposals would result in

year WNA extension in favor of a shorter 2-year review tied to customer bill impacts and utility risk excessive costs for customers. ”

reduction. With hearings concluded and briefs due June 23 / replies or joint settlement due July 6, both

sides appear to be preserving litigation leverage.