Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Utah PSC hears testimony on Enbridge Gas Utah phase 1 settlement calling for $62 million increase

6442085 · October 23, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Parties told the Utah Public Service Commission that a black‑box settlement would set Enbridge Gas Utah’s 2026 distribution non‑gas revenue requirement at $604 million (a $62 million increase); the division, Office of Consumer Services and other intervenors said the result is reasonable, while the commission cautioned about black‑box terms.

SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Public Service Commission on Oct. 15 heard sworn testimony supporting a phase 1 settlement in the general rate case filed by Enbridge Gas Utah that would set the utility’s Utah distribution non‑gas revenue requirement at $604,000,000 — a $62,000,000 increase compared with current revenues.

The settlement stipulation, described at the hearing as a “black box” agreement, specifies the total revenue requirement and several limited terms but does not itemize the company’s individual accounting adjustments or a specific allowed return on equity. “This means that while the total revenue requirement is agreed upon, the stipulation does not specify individual adjustments or cost components,” said Austin Summers, director of regulatory and pricing for Enbridge Gas Utah, as he summarized the settlement on the record.

The stipulating parties asked the commission to admit prefiled phase 1 testimony and the settlement exhibit into the record; the commission admitted the testimony and exhibits without objection. Division of Public Utilities witness Eric Orton, the Office of Consumer Services witness Allison Anderson, and intervenor witnesses including Justin Bieber (for the Utah Association of Energy Users) each testified that, based on their analyses, the stipulated $604 million revenue requirement is a just and reasonable result.

Why it matters: the settlement would resolve phase 1 issues now and leave phase 2 matters — including cost allocation, rate design and other tariff changes — for later litigation. The settlement also includes two procedural and substantive items the parties highlighted: modified depreciation rates proposed by the Office of Consumer Services’…

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to keep reading

Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.

  • Unlimited articles
  • AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
  • Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
  • Follow topics and more locations
  • 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
30-day money-back on paid plans