Enstar requests ADR for tariff increase

Enstar Natural Gas Co. has petitioned the Regulatory Commission of Alaska for alternative dispute resolution procedures for its new tariff, filed June 1 (see story in July 10 issue of Petroleum News).

The commission has suspended the rate increase and ordered a hearing into the proposed rate change, which would be applied in two stages, increasing the typical residential gas bill by 4.6 percent per year. In a July 18 order RCA allowed the new rate to be applied on an interim basis, with a requirement for refunds if it is found to be too high.

In its Aug. 12 petition for alternative dispute resolution, Enstar noted that the commission “has a long-standing policy of encouraging settlements and avoiding litigation where possible.”

The company said a settlement would conserve resources for the regulated utilities who are parties to the proceeding and for the Attorney General’s Regulatory Affairs and Public Advocacy section. Enstar noted its recent rate filings and the general familiarity of intervenors with underlying issues, and said it believes “the present docket is an excellent candidate for alternative dispute resolution.”

There is also guidance, Enstar said, in the commission’s recent order for ADR in the Kenai Beluga Pipeline rate case (see story in Aug. 14 issue), in which the commission ordered ADR at the outset of the case, prior to formal discovery or before responsive testimony by intervenors.

“The KBPL rate case, like the present docket, addresses the rate filing of an investor-owned regulated entity that arose from a recent settlement. Furthermore, the KBPL rate filing, as here, involves complex ratemaking issues and multiple intervening parties with sometimes competing interests.”

Enstar said it did oppose early-state ADR in the KBPL rate case, but based on the commission’s order in that matter, believes the same policies and conclusions identified in the KBPL case are applicable to its rate case.

The company also said there would be considerable savings with ADR for its ratepayers because of “the significant direct and allocated cost associated with a fully litigated proceeding.”

Enstar also requested appointment of a settlement judge.

- KRISTEN NELSON