pointed out that this was a matter that was litigated in 2006 base rate case. PGW’s Additionally, the ALJs noted that proposed DSM cost recovery mechanism is the PGW’s same as has it has been in prior years. Therefore, the ALJs ruled that USC is the PGW’s appropriate cost recovery mechanism for its LIURP program. R.D. at 29. The ALJs also acknowledged the positions of the OCA and I&E that because proposed LIME Program may benefit more than just its low income PGW’s customers, the costs of this program should not be recovered through USC. The PGW’s ALJs noted that as a result of these concerns, I&E and PGW entered into a Joint Stipulation related to the LIME program. The ALJs opined that although I&E and PGW both point out that this agreement runs contrary to our the USECP 2014-2016 Order, Joint Stipulation sufficiently addresses the concerns of the Parties regarding PGW’s LIME program. Accordingly, the ALJs recommended that PGW be permitted to continue to use its DSM cost recovery mechanism as currently structured with the modification presented in the Joint Stipulation of PGW and I&E. R.D. at 29-30. 3. Disposition No Party filed Exceptions regarding the recommendation on this ALJs’ issue. Finding the to be reasonable, we adopt it without further ALJs’ recommendation comment. D. Proposed Conservation Adjustment Mechanism PGW’s In addition to using its ECRS and USC surcharge mechanisms to recover the costs associated with its current DSM programs, in its Phase II DSM Plan, PGW proposed to include two new cost elements in its calculations of these surcharges: a CAM, discussed below, and a proposed Performance Incentive Mechanism, discussed in Section E, PGW submitted that its proposed CAM and Performance Incentive infra.
pointed out that this was a matter that was litigated in PGW’s 2006 base rate case. Additionally, the ALJs noted that PGW’s proposed DSM cost recovery mechanism is the same as has it has been in prior years. Therefore, the ALJs ruled that PGW’s USC is the appropriate cost recovery mechanism for its LIURP program. R.D. at 29. The ALJs also acknowledged the positions of the OCA and I&E that because PGW’s proposed LIME Program may benefit more than just its low income customers, the costs of this program should not be recovered through PGW’s USC. The ALJs noted that as a result of these concerns, I&E and PGW entered into a Joint Stipulation related to the LIME program. The ALJs opined that although I&E and PGW both point out that this agreement runs contrary to our USECP 2014-2016 Order, the Joint Stipulation sufficiently addresses the concerns of the Parties regarding PGW’s LIME program. Accordingly, the ALJs recommended that PGW be permitted to continue to use its DSM cost recovery mechanism as currently structured with the modification presented in the Joint Stipulation of PGW and I&E. R.D. at 29-30. 3. Disposition No Party filed Exceptions regarding the ALJs’ recommendation on this issue. Finding the ALJs’ recommendation to be reasonable, we adopt it without further comment. D. PGW’s Proposed Conservation Adjustment Mechanism In addition to using its ECRS and USC surcharge mechanisms to recover the costs associated with its current DSM programs, in its Phase II DSM Plan, PGW proposed to include two new cost elements in its calculations of these surcharges: a CAM, discussed below, and a proposed Performance Incentive Mechanism, discussed in Section E, infra. PGW submitted that its proposed CAM and Performance Incentive
1464440.docx