Witnesses tell Utah PSC telemetry fees and telemetry policy deter customers from switching to transportation service
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
ANGC and intervenor witnesses told the PSC that upfront telemetry costs and how Enbridge treats metering/telemetry create a barrier to customers switching from sales service to transportation service; they recommended rate-basing or other remedies to avoid disincentives.
At a Public Service Commission hearing on Enbridge Gas Utah's rate case (Docket 25-057-06), witnesses highlighted telemetry and metering practices as material barriers for large customers considering a move to transportation service.
Bruce Richard Oliver, testifying for the American Natural Gas Council, said the company's practice of charging an upfront telemetry cost is a disincentive. Oliver told the commission, "The upfront cost of $7,600 is a very large percentage, if not more than their total annual distribution cost," and asked why telemetry costs "can't be rate based as you do for other metering costs." He called the upfront charge "an explicit deterrent for use of transportation services that is inappropriate and should not be allowed." Oliver said telemetry equipment is often reusable and that the company has not provided engineering evidence to justify treating the equipment as non-reusable when a customer switches service.
Matthew Paul Smith (Federal Executive Agencies) similarly questioned the company's rationale for treating large-diameter feeder and IHP (intermediate high-pressure) mains costs and the associated telemetry practice in a way that places upfront burdens on customers. Both witnesses urged the commission to require clearer documentation and to consider rate-based treatment or other mitigation to avoid discouraging efficient customer choices.
Commissioners and counsel discussed alternatives and asked parties to provide clearer, printed exhibits and supporting analytics to demonstrate cost causation. No final action on telemetry charging rules was taken at the hearing; the testimony and exhibits were admitted into the record for the commission to consider in its upcoming order.