Popowsky v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

OPINION BY

Judge SIMPSON.

The Office of Consumer Advocate challenges two aspects of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission’s (PUC) order approving a general rate increase for Pennsylvania-American Water Company (Utility) under the Public Utility Code.1 Specifically, the Consumer Advocate questions the legality of the retroactive recovery of increased security costs for a closed period following September 11, 2001, and it questions the process of determining the Utility’s cost of common equity.

Consumer Advocate filed a formal challenge to Utility’s proposed Supplement No. 141 to Tariff…