The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) recently extended the Fuel Cost Recovery Surcharge for household goods carriers for an additional year, until April 18, 2013, to enable carriers to continue to recover increased diesel fuel costs.

Utility customers who challenge billing practices under the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL) must bring their challenge first to the Public Utility Commission (PUC), but may pursue their claim in civil court under the UTPCPL if the PUC concludes that the utility violated its tariff, the Commonwealth Court has ruled.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission held a workshop on Wednesday, January 4, 2012, to present a summary of Pennsylvania’s new Gas and Hazardous Liquids Pipelines Act (“Act 127”) and to solicit comments and suggestions from industry members and other interested parties about details of the implementation of the Act’s provisions.  The PUC indicated that it will schedule another meeting between its staff and industry representatives in early-mid February to obtain further comments and input as it finalizes its plans for the implementation of the Act.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) granted Laser Northeast Gathering Co.’s (“Laser”) petition to withdrawal its application to become a public utility.

By a 3-2 vote adopting  a motion by PUC Vice Chairman John F. Coleman Jr., the PUC approved Laser’s petition to withdraw its application and denied the request of certain parties to rescind its prior Orders in the case. PUC Commissioner Pamela A. Witmer and Commissioner James H. Cawley dissented not as to granting withdrawal but as to the issue of whether the prior Orders should be rescinded.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission recently proposed revisions to the policy statement, at 52 Pa. Code §41.11, that defines the scope of the exemption, from Commission regulation, for the provision of transportation service to injured or ill persons for medical treatment.

The proposed revisions, which were published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin and issued for public comment on June 11, 2011, are intended to eliminate confusion about the application of the policy to non-emergency transportation of injured or ill persons.

On July 28th, 2011, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission entered an Order intended to provide guidance to the PUC Staff and interested stakeholders regarding issues to be addressed in Phase II of the PUC’s Investigation into the competitiveness of Pennsylvania’s retail electric market.  The Phase II process will involve a series of technical conferences to be chaired by the PUC’s Office of Competitive Market Oversight (OCMO) as well as additional en banc hearings.

The PUC recently issued a Tentative Order seeking comment on a number of issues involved in the implementation of the deployment of smart meter technology throughout the Commonwealth and the data transactions required to support that implementation. Smart Meter Procurement and Installation, Docket No. M-2009-2092655 (Tentative Order entered June 30, 2011).

In January 2009, PPL Electric Utilities Corp. (“PPL”) sought Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) approval to construct a 500kV Pennsylvania-New Jersey transmission line, part of which, subject to the issuance of appropriate permits, will run through the National Park system in Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains.  The project involves modernization of an existing 230kV transmission line and the exercise of eminent domain over five parcels of land.  A PUC Administrative Law Judge issued a recommended decision granting PPL’s application on the condition that PPL not begin construction on the 230kV line prior to obtaining all approvals necessary for construction.  The PUC's final opinion and order adopted the ALJ’s recommended decision but also required that PPL inform the PUC whether it intended to defer its construction schedule and refrain from constructing a certain portion of the 230kV line until obtaining a National Park Service permit.  On reconsideration, the PUC clarified that PPL could begin construction on any other part of either line that was not subject to the National Park Service permit because to hold otherwise “would result in a significant, unacceptable delay in light of the demonstrated need for the line.”

The PA PUC’s recent public hearing to explore the future of the competitive electricity markets in Pennsylvania was no less than a resounding success according to Chairman Robert Powelson of the Commission.

On June 4, 2011, the PUC reduced its majority motion to a written order and has remanded the case to an Administrative Law Judge for a ruling on whether the service and terms of the partial settlement are in the public interest.  The Order essentially follows Commissioner Wayne E. Gardner’s Motion, which was joined by Chairman Robert F. Powelson and Vice-Chairman John F. Coleman, Jr. at the May 19, 2011 public meeting.  It accepted the position of Laser and other parties, such as the PUC’s Office of Trial Staff, that the service proposed by Laser will be public utility service because it will be open to any member of the public requiring service to the extent of capacity.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission approved a Final Rulemaking Order at its December 2, 2010 Public Meeting that, upon implementation, will significantly streamline and simplify the record keeping and filing requirements associated with requests for rate increases by small intrastate passenger carriers.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission has received comments and reply comments from various parties on its April 1, 2011 Tentative Order regarding changes to electric distribution companies’ (“EDCs”) energy efficiency and conservation plans (“EE&C Plan”) under Act 129.  See 66 Pa.C.S. § 2806.1.

In a 4 to 1 vote, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission “officially launch[ed] the investigation of the competitiveness of the retail electric market with the goal of making recommendations for improvements to ensure a properly functioning and workably competitive retail electric market.”

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission unexpectedly voted to delay implementation of the electricity shopping Customer Education Program for Metropolitan Edison Company and Pennsylvania Electric Company. The Commission was addressing an audit of the plans, which cost about $900,000 each, when it suspended implementation pending further comment from participants.  The Commission appears to be concerned that, due to lack of electric generation supplier participation in those territories, customer education about competitive alternatives may be premature.

It’s official - Pennsylvania has passed the 1 million customer mark in electricity shopping.  According to the latest weekly update on the Pa. Power Switch website (www.PaPowerSwitch.com), the total number of customers switching to an electric generation supplier as of March 23, 2011, was 1,001,062.

The PUC has ruled unanimously that opt-out municipal aggregation programs violate the Commission’s regulations regarding the standards for changing a customer’s electricity generation supplier.

Rejecting a claim by Pennsylvania's  Small Business Advocate  that the PUC must treat every competitive effect of a merger "good, bad, or indifferent" as a negative to be weighed against demonstrated "affirmative public benefits," Commonwealth Court affirmed the PUC's approval of a merger that indirectly transferred control of Embarq Pennsylvania (an ILEC) and Embarq Communications (an interexchange toll reseller) to CenturyTel. Lloyd v. Pa. Pub. Utility Comm'n, __A. 3d __2011) (496 CD 2010, filed March 1, 2011) (Brobson, J.).