Colorado Public Utilities Commission Denies Black Hills' Gas Reserve Plan

LR
Lewis Roca

Contributor

Lewis Roca logo
Lewis Roca serves clients around the world in complex litigation, intellectual property, business transactions, labor and employment, regulatory counseling, and government relations.  With legal excellence and exceptional client service, we pride ourselves on our ability to win for our clients while serving their highest goals and needs.   
In dismissing the application 3-0, the PUC expressed concerns about ratepayer protection, and stated that the plan posed "serious risks to ratepayers."
United States Energy and Natural Resources

This week, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) granted a motion to dismiss an application by Black Hills/Colorado Electric Utility Company to acquire natural gas reserves as a hedge against future gas prices. The application, which was filed in late 2015, sought approval of long-term investments in natural gas reserves that would be recoverable though rates charged to utility customers. The program, Black Hills argued, was designed to reduce its customers exposure to volatile natural gas prices though a long-term physical hedge. The utility has filed similar plans in other states where it provides electricity or gas service.

In dismissing the application 3-0, the PUC expressed concerns about ratepayer protection, and stated that the plan posed "serious risks to ratepayers." In a statement, the PUC further explained that "granting this particular gas hedging program without adequate information to determine sufficient ratepayer protections was not in the public interest." Even though the application was dismissed, the utility will nevertheless have a chance to reapply with a different and more detailed plan.(April 27) PUC dismisses Black Hills gas reserve plan

Even if Black Hills does not file a new application, similar issues will remain before the PUC during 2016. Public Service Company of Colorado (Xcel Energy) currently has an application for a similar plan pending before the PUC. That plan, which has not been subject to a similar motion to dismiss, is set for hearing later in 2016.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More