|
|
|
|
|
Utility Not Filing Exceptions To ALJs' Decision In Affiliate Docket Which Would Deny Utility's Sought Relief To Allow Billing, By Utility's Selected Provider, Of Non-Commodity Charges On Utility Bills
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. filed with the Pennsylvania PUC a statement that Columbia, "is not filing Exceptions to the
Initial Decision issued on March 19, 2026 in the above-captioned matter," with such captioned matter being solely listed as Docket No. G-2025-3056022
However, as of publication time, no filing from Columbia was online indicating whether Columbia would file exceptions in a related case, R-2018-2647577.
Both proceedings relate to the billing, by Columbia on Columbia Pennsylvania utility bills, of non-commodity services, including Columbia's previously stated intent to allow Pivotal Home Solutions, LLC to bill, on Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania customers’ utility bills, charges for Pivotal’s warranty service plans and products & services
Docket G-2025-3056022 is the docket addressing Columbia's application for an affiliated interest "arrangement" between Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. ("Columbia" or "the Company") and its affiliate NiSource Development Company, Inc. ("NDC") as a necessary step to allow the billing of the Pivotal charges on the Columbia bill (Pivotal is not an affiliate of Columbia). See full background here
Docket R-2018-2647577 is the broader docket addressing the billing of non-commodity products and services on Columbia's utility bill generally, including Columbia's compliance with a 2018 PUC order which had found that Columbia's offering of such on-bill billing of non-commodity services to only utility-selected third parties was discriminatory, requiring Columbia to either open the on-bill functionality to all third parties, or to cease such on-bill billing service altogether
As previously reported, Columbia in 2018 initially chose to comply with the non-discrimination provision by ceasing the offering of on-bill billing to any third party. However, Columbia last year stated that Columbia would comply instead by offering the on-bill billing service to all third parties (subject to conditions), thus paving the way for Columbia to bill for the Pivotal services
As first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com last month, an initial decision from two Pa. PUC ALJs would dismiss, without prejudice, Columbia's application for the affiliated interest arrangement (AIA), while also closing the separate R-2018-2647577 docket, as the ALJs found that Columbia could not, almost 7 years after the close of the relevant rate case proceeding, change its compliance mechanism through a mere informational filing.
The ALJs in an initial decision concluded that, "To re-institute any on-bill billing program and to seek relief from the Commission regarding the proposed affiliated interest agreement, Columbia is required to file a petition pursuant to Section 5.41 or other appropriate pleading."
The ALJs would strike from the record Columbia's filing in 2025 to change its compliance method to be an approach allowing all third parties to bill non-commodity charges on Columbia's bills. The ALJs would also dismiss Columbia's application for the affiliated interest arrangement which had been presented as a step necessary to facilitate the inclusion of the Pivotal charges on the Columbia utility bill
The initial decision was issued in both cases: G-2025-3056022 and R-2018-2647577 (both captioned)
As noted above, Columbia said that Columbia is not filing exceptions to the initial decision in the matter captioned as G-2025-3056022 (the AIA docket). Columbia's filing notably did not include in its caption R-2018-2647577. Certain other filings from Columbia in the proceedings were captioned as both G-2025-3056022 and R-2018-2647577
Columbia has taken the position that no Commission action was sought in R-2018-2647577, and its captioning of its statement of no exceptions could potentially reflect such, but, as noted above, the initial decision was captioned as for both proceedings, and Columbia previously captioned various filings concerning the matters with both case numbers G-2025-3056022 and R-2018-2647577
Although a single initial decision was issued covering both cases, and though Columbia stated that it is not filing exceptions to such initial decision in G-2025-3056022, it is unclear, as of publication time, if Columbia has any exceptions to the initial decision under R-2018-2647577
Exceptions were due on or about April 8 (20 days from a March 19 notice). However, the online posting of filings may lag their filing with the PUC; letters concerning non-exceptions were filed by Columbia (G-2025-3056022) and RESA on April 8, but were only posted to the PUC's online docket site on April 10
As of publication time, no exceptions to the ALJs' initial decision have been publicly posted online (other parties to the case include OCA and CAUSE-PA, with the initial decision generally granting their sought relief)
To the extent there are no exceptions filed to the initial decision, the initial decision would become final
ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
April 10, 2026
Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW -- Channel Partner Manager -- Retail Energy
• NEW -- Manager of Sales, Commercial -- Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Commercial Sales Support Specialist -- Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Channel Partner Manager - TX -- Retail Supplier
• NEW / Refreshed 2/24/26 -- Manager, ISO Coordination (electricity), Retail Supplier
|
|
|
|
|