The timing of meter readings by interstate pipelines and readings of customers’ meters which can create small mismatches in UFG data between years, and 2) The distribution main pressures, which can increase or decrease the amount of gas that is held in the Company’s mains, causing changes in LUFG because the gas has been measured at the pipeline but not yet measured at distribution meters. (Columbia St. No. 2R, pp. 4-5). Columbia opined the most likely cause for the increase could be tied to Columbia Transmission’s efforts to change out its meters to reduce high LUFG on its system. (Columbia St. No. 2R, p. 5). As Columbia Transmission replaced slow reading meters with more accurate meters, it registered more gas flowing through the city-gate meters. Columbia argued that much of the difference was not due to increased LUFG on its distribution system, but instead was due to understated measurement of gas deliveries into Columbia’s system in prior years. (Columbia St. No. 2R, p. 5). In the Joint Settlement, the parties recognize OCA’s request for further information was satisfied, and specifically accept that the Retainage Rate effective January 1, 2017 will be set at 1.1%, and that Columbia’s LUFG for the twelve months ended August 31, 2015 complies with the Commission’s regulations at 52 Pa.Code § 59.111(c)(1). The Joint Settlement also contains Columbia’s commitment to continue its efforts to reduce LUFG. (Settlement ¶ 36). With the filing of the Joint Settlement, OCA agrees the Company explained why its retainage rate increased between 2014 and 2015, and avers its concerns have been satisfied. Since no party objects to the proposed retainage rate, OCA avers the settlement provision (Settlement ¶ 36) is in the public interest for Columbia’s proposed PGC rate to be approved as filed. C. Gas Exchanges with Affiliates
Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. has not withheld from the market or caused to be withheld from the market during the relevant time period any gas supplies which should have been used as part of a least cost fuel procurement policy in compliance with Section 1318(a)(4) of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S.A. § 1318(a)(4). Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. has fully and vigorously attempted to obtain less costly gas supplies on both short-term and long-term bases from nonaffiliated interests during the relevant time period in compliance with Section 1318(b)(1) of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S.A. § 1318(b)(1). Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc.’s contracts for the purchase of gas from any affiliated interest during the relevant time period are consistent with a least cost fuel procurement policy in compliance with Section 1318(b)(2) of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S.A. § 1318(b)(2). Neither Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. nor any affiliated interest during the relevant time period has withheld from the market any gas supplies, which should have been used as part of a least cost fuel procurement policy in compliance with Section 1318(b)(3) of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S.A. § 1318(b)(3). The Joint Petition for Settlement of the Rate Investigation pursuant to 66 Pa.C.S.A. § 1307(f), that Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., the Commission’s Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement, the Office of Consumer Advocate and the Office of Small Business Advocate have executed and submitted at this docket, is in the public interest. VI. ORDER THEREFORE,