News Stories
Sponsored by Earth Etch. Regulatory insight and compliance solutions for today’s energy markets.
ALJ Issues Initial Decision Dismissing Columbia Gas’ Attempt to “Re-institute Any On-Bill Billing Program and to Seek Relief from the Commission Regarding the Proposed Affiliated Interest Agreement”
A Secretarial Letter informing parties that on March 19th, an initial ALJ decision has been issued by the Office of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in the Columbia Gas’ rate case. The secretarial letter informs parties that “[[i]f you do not agree with any part of this decision, you may send written comments (called Exceptions) to the Commission . . . within twenty (20) days of the date of this letter.”
The ALJ finds that “to re-institute any on-bill billing program and to seek relief from the Commission regarding the proposed affiliated interest agreement, Columbia is required to file a petition pursuant to Section 5.41 or other appropriate pleading.”
“It is unreasonable to conclude that the Commission’s orders in the 2018 Rate Case permit or invite a subsequent compliance filing, nearly seven years later, and that would disrupt a long-resolved proceeding. The June 30, 2025 Letter, which contains scant details about the mechanics of a newly proposed on-bill billing program is not a “compliance filing” and will be stricken from Docket No. R-2018-2647577.”
As background, on June 30, 2025, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. filed a letter with the Commission under Columbia’s 2018 Rate Case, at Docket No. R-2018-2647577, to serve as notice of its plan to implement the practice of on-bill billing for Columbia customers.
On that same day Columbia also filed a letter seeking approval for an Affiliated Interest Agreement (AIA) under Section 2102 of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S. § 2102. The June 30, 2025 AIA Letter stated that, under an agreement between NDC and Pivotal, Pivotal will offer warranty service plans, products, and services to Columbia’s customers and that NiSource Dev. Co. will grant a non-exclusive right and license for service marks to be used to market Pivotal’s products, and the agreement would permit NDC to receive a revenue share percentage for the purchase of Pivotal’s products by Columbia’s customers. The AIA further indicated that NCSC, on behalf of Columbia, will provide billing services offered by Pivotal to Columbia 8 customers in exchange for Pivotal’s payment of certain fees, including annual and monthly service fees.
On August 5, 2025, the OCA filed a Protest and Public Statement at Docket Nos. R-2018-2647577 and G-2025-3056022 and on October 20, 2025, the RESA filed a Petition to Intervene.
Excerpts from the ALJ’s Decision:
“Given the novel issues raised in Columbia’s newly proposed on-bill billing program, Columbia must file a formal request with the Commission to implement the new program. This must be done through either a Petition or an Application under the unique circumstances presented in this proceeding. Columbia’s filing does not meet the criteria pursuant to Sections 5.11, 5.12 and 5.41 of the Commission’s regulations.”
“We agree with OCA and CAUSE-PA that the Letter filing at Docket No. G2025-3056022 is improper because it does not conform to the Commission’s regulations. To re-institute any on-bill billing program and to seek relief from the Commission regarding the proposed affiliated interest agreement, Columbia is required to file a petition pursuant to Section 5.41 or other appropriate pleading. Columbia could have simply addressed these matters in a proper pleading before the Commission, instead of filing facially inadequate letters at Docket Nos. G-2025-3056022 and R-2018-2647577.”
“Here, based upon the insufficient and vague unverified initial filing by the Company at Docket No. G-2025-3056022, the specific claims and basis for the claims being advanced by Columbia, as well as the factual and legal basis to support such claims, are unclear. Accordingly, the parties are unable to prepare a defense to the claims advanced by the Company and the filing by the Company provides no notice to the public or Columbia’s customers. As such, a hearing in this matter is not appropriate and is not in the public interest. Therefore, the merits of the filings will not be addressed in this decision.”
“In conclusion, the Motion for Judgment On The Pleadings filed by OCA and CAUSE-PA will be treated as a Motion to Dismiss the June 30, 2025 Base Rate Letter filed at Docket No. R-2018-2647577 and the June 30, 2025 AIA Letter filed at Docket No. G-2025-3056022. The Motion to Dismiss is granted, without prejudice.”
The ALJ’s initial decision may be appealed to the Commission prior to becoming a final decision.
