Interstate Gas Supply, Inc., Pets. v. PUC

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMarch 5, 2024
Docket292 MAL 2023 (Granted)
StatusPublished

This text of Interstate Gas Supply, Inc., Pets. v. PUC (Interstate Gas Supply, Inc., Pets. v. PUC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Interstate Gas Supply, Inc., Pets. v. PUC, (Pa. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

INTERSTATE GAS SUPPLY, INC. D/B/A : No. 292 MAL 2023 IGS ENERGY, NRG ENERGY, INC. AND : SHIPLEY CHOICE LLC D/B/A SHIPLEY : ENERGY, : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Petitioners : Commonwealth Court : : v. : : : PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION, : : Respondent :

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 5th day of March, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioners, is:

Contrary to the plain language and intent of . . . Section 1502 [of the Public Utility Code], 66 Pa. C.S. § 1502—which prohibits a public utility from granting any advantage to any person or corporation, or subjecting any person or corporation to a disadvantage—and Section 2804(6) [of the Competition Act], 66 Pa. C.S. § 2804(6)—which requires monopoly [e]lectric [d]istribution [c]ompanies like [Metropolitan Edison Company, Pennsylvania Electric Company, Pennsylvania Power Company, and West Penn Power Company] (“EDCs”) to provide distribution service to [e]lectric [g]eneration [s]uppliers (“EGSs”) like [P]etitioners on “rates, terms of access and conditions that are comparable to the utility’s own use of its system”— did the Commonwealth Court err as a matter of law by upholding the [Public Utility Commission’s (PUC)] interpretation of those sections to allow [the EDCs] to include charges for its own “side” products and services on its utility bills but exclude charges for the same or similar products offered by [P]etitioners, where the PUC long ago held billing to be a part of public utility distribution service? Petitioners’ Application for Leave to File Reply in Support of Petition for Allowance

of Appeal is DENIED.

[292 MAL 2023] - 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

§ 1502
Pennsylvania § 1502
§ 2804
Pennsylvania § 2804(6)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Interstate Gas Supply, Inc., Pets. v. PUC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interstate-gas-supply-inc-pets-v-puc-pa-2024.