Regulatory Matters	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2014
Regulatory Matters	NOTE 6 – REGULATORY MATTERS UNITIL’S REGULATORY MATTERS ARE DESCRIBED IN NOTE 8 TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN ITEM 8 OF PART II OF UNITIL CORPORATION’S FORM 10-K FOR DECEMBER 31, 2013 AS FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ON JANUARY 29, 2014. Regulatory Matters Northern Utilities – Base Rates – Maine – On December 27, 2013, the Maine Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) approved a settlement agreement providing for a $3.8 million permanent increase in annual revenue for Northern Utilities’ Maine division, effective January 1, 2014. The settlement agreement also provided that the Company shall be allowed to implement a Targeted Infrastructure Replacement Adjustment (TIRA) rate mechanism to adjust base distribution rates annually to recover the revenue requirements associated with targeted investments in gas distribution system infrastructure replacement and upgrade projects. The TIRA has an initial term of four years, and covers targeted capital expenditures in 2013 through 2016. The settlement agreement also provides for Earning Sharing where Northern would be allowed to retain all earnings up to a return of 10%. Earnings in excess of 10% and up to and including 11% will be shared equally, between ratepayers and the Company. Earnings in excess of 11% shall be returned to ratepayers. The settlement agreement continues and revises the service quality plan (SQP) that Northern Utilities has been operating under since 2004 and established in Docket No. 2002-140. The revised SQP consists of seven metrics with an appurtenant administrative penalty for failure to meet any of the seven metrics. The settlement agreement further provides that Northern Utilities will be subject to a maximum annual penalty of $500,000 if it fails to meet any of the baseline performance targets under the revised SQP. On February 28, 2014 Northern Utilities filed its first annual TIRA for rates effective May 1, 2014, seeking an annual increase in base distribution revenue of $1.3 million. This filing is pending final approval of the MPUC. TIRA filings in future periods are projected to result in annual increases in revenue of approximately $1.0 million each year. Northern Utilities – Base Rates – New Hampshire – On April 21, 2014, the NHPUC approved a settlement agreement providing for an increase of $4.6 million in distribution base revenue and a return on equity of 9.5% for Northern Utilities’ New Hampshire division. In addition, the settlement agreement provides for additional step adjustments in 2014 and 2015 to recover the revenue requirements associated with investments in gas mains extensions and infrastructure replacement projects. The 2014 step adjustment provides for an annual increase in revenue of $1.4 million, effective May 1, 2014. The 2015 step adjustment is for a projected annual increase in revenue of approximately $1.4 million, effective May 1, 2015. The settlement agreement also provides for Earning Sharing where Northern Utilities would be allowed to retain all earnings up to a return of 10%. Earnings in excess of 10% and up to and including 11% will be shared equally, between ratepayers and the Company. Earnings in excess of 11% shall be returned to ratepayers. The settlement agreement provides that the Company’s next filing of a distribution base rate case is to be based on an historic test year of no earlier than twelve months ending December 31, 2016. The newly-approved rates will be reconciled to the effective date temporary rates were established, July 1, 2013. Unitil Energy – Base Rates – On April 26, 2011, the NHPUC approved a rate settlement that extends through May 1, 2016 and provides for a long-term rate plan and earnings sharing mechanism, with a series of step adjustments to increase revenue in future years to support Unitil Energy’s continued capital improvements to its distribution system. On March 3, 2014 Unitil Energy filed its third step increase of $1.5 million in annual revenue for effect on May 1, 2014, subject to final approval of the NHPUC. Granite State – Base Rates – Granite State has in place a FERC approved rate settlement agreement under which it is permitted each June to file for a rate adjustment to recover the revenue requirements associated with specified capital investments in gas transmission projects. Granite State received approval from the FERC for its latest annual rate adjustment, in the amount of $0.4 million, with rates effective August 1, 2013. The next rate adjustment is scheduled to be filed in the second quarter of this year for a projected $0.6 million for rates effective August 1, 2014. Fitchburg – Electric Base Rates Filed – In July 2013, Fitchburg filed a rate case with the MDPU requesting approval to increase its electric distribution rates. The Company requested an increase of $6.7 million in electric base revenue or 11.5% over test year operating revenue. Included in the amount of this annual increase is approximately $2.1 million for the recovery over a three year period of extraordinary storm costs incurred by the Company related to three severe storms, Tropical Storm Irene, the October 2011 snowstorm and Superstorm Sandy. The filing includes a proposed modified revenue decoupling mechanism to adjust base electric distribution revenue annually by means of either i) a capital cost tracker mechanism, or ii) a multi-year rate plan featuring a revenue cap inflation-based index. The filing also includes a proposal to establish a major storm reserve fund to address the costs of future major storms through a reconciling storm recovery adjustment factor beginning January 1, 2015. Hearings were held over a three week period during January 2014, and the matter has been fully briefed. A final rate order is expected in the second quarter of 2014. Major Storms – Fitchburg and Unitil Energy Superstorm Sandy – On October 29-30, 2012, a severe storm struck the eastern seaboard of the United States, causing extensive damage to electric facilities and loss of service to significant numbers of customers of several utilities. Fitchburg and Unitil Energy incurred approximately $1.1 million and $2.7 million, respectively, in costs for the repair and replacement of electric distribution systems damaged during the storm, including $0.3 million and $0.4 million related to capital construction for Fitchburg and Unitil Energy, respectively. The amount and timing of the cost recovery of these storm restoration expenditures for Fitchburg will be determined in its rate case. The cost recovery for Unitil Energy has been approved as discussed below. The Company does not believe these storm restoration expenditures and the timing of cost recovery will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations. Fitchburg – Storm Cost Deferral – On May 1, 2012 the MDPU approved Fitchburg’s request to defer $4.3 million of 2011 storm costs associated with Tropical Storm Irene and the October 2011 snowstorm, and Fitchburg is seeking recovery of these costs in the electric rate case it filed in July 2013. Unitil Energy – 2012 Storm Costs – On April 25, 2013, the NHPUC approved the recovery of $2.3 million of costs to repair damage to Unitil Energy’s electrical system resulting from Superstorm Sandy over a five-year period, with carrying charges at the Company’s long-term cost of debt, net of deferred taxes, or 4.52%, applied to the uncollected balance through the recovery period. Fitchburg – Electric Operations – On November 15, 2013, Fitchburg submitted its annual reconciliation of costs and revenues for transition and transmission under its restructuring plan. The filing also includes the reconciliation of costs and revenues for a number of other surcharges and cost factors which are subject to review and approval by the MDPU. Many of the surcharges and cost factors were redesigned based on cost-based rate design in compliance with a MDPU order in its Investigation into Cost-Based Rate Design for Reconciliation Factors, which resulted from the “Act Relative to Competitively Priced Electricity in the Commonwealth”, signed into law by the Governor of Massachusetts on August 3, 2012. All of the rates were approved effective January 1, 2014 for billing purposes, subject to reconciliation, pending investigation by the MDPU. Fitchburg – Service Quality – On March 1, 2014, Fitchburg submitted its 2013 Service Quality Reports for both its gas and electric divisions. Fitchburg reported that it met or exceeded its benchmarks for service quality performance in all metrics for its gas division. The electric division met or exceeded all metric benchmarks except for two measures relating to the performance of certain individual distribution circuits as compared to the performance of the system as a whole. As a result of penalty offsets earned in six metrics where company performance exceeded the benchmark measure, however, no penalties are due. On December 11, 2012, the MDPU opened an investigation into the service quality provided by the gas and electric distribution companies in Massachusetts and the Service Quality guidelines currently in effect. The MDPU investigation will review existing and potential new reliability, safety, and customer satisfaction metrics; potential penalties for downed wire response; potential clean energy metrics; penalty provisions, including penalty offsets for superior performance in other metrics for poor performance on a different metric; and review of historic data for use in establishing service quality benchmarks. Fitchburg has been an active participant in this docket. Fitchburg – Other – On February 5, 2013, there was a natural gas explosion in the city of Fitchburg, Massachusetts in an area served by Fitchburg’s gas division resulting in property damage to a number of commercial and residential properties. The MDPU, pursuant to its authority under state and federal law, has commenced an investigation of the incident, with which Fitchburg is cooperating. The Company does not believe this incident or investigation will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations. On February 11, 2009, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) issued its decision in the Attorney General’s (AG) appeal of the MDPU orders relating to Fitchburg’s recovery of bad debt expense. The SJC agreed with the AG that the MDPU was required to hold hearings regarding changes in Fitchburg’s tariff and rates, and on that basis vacated the MDPU orders. The SJC, however, declined to rule on an appropriate remedy, and remanded the cases back to the MDPU for consideration of that issue. In the Company’s August 1, 2011 rate decision, the MDPU held that the approval of dollar for dollar collection of supply-related bad debt in the Company’s rate cases in 2006 (gas) and 2007 (electric) satisfied the requirement for a hearing ordered by the SJC. The MDPU opened a docket to address the amounts collected by Fitchburg between the time the MDPU first approved dollar for dollar collection of the Company’s bad debt, and the rate decisions in 2006 and 2007. Briefs were filed in June 2013. This matter remains pending before the MDPU. On July 2, 2008, the Governor of Massachusetts signed into law “The Green Communities Act” (the GC Act), an energy policy statute designed to substantially increase energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy resources in Massachusetts. The GC Act provides for utilities to recover in rates the incremental costs associated with its various mandated programs. Several regulatory proceedings have been initiated to implement various provisions of the GC Act, including provisions for each distribution company to file enhanced three-year energy efficiency investment plans, plans to establish smart grid pilot programs, proposals to purchase long-term contracts for renewable energy, special tariffs to allow the net metering of customer-owned renewable generation, and terms and conditions for purchasing supplier receivables. Fitchburg’s first two three-year energy efficiency investment plans, plans to establish smart grid pilot programs, and net metering tariffs have been approved by the MDPU. Fitchburg’s proposal for a long term contract for renewable energy was approved by the MDPU, and the facility has been constructed and is now operating. Fitchburg’s costs associated with the contract are recovered through a MDPU approved tariff. Terms and conditions for purchasing supplier receivables are under review in a separately designated docket. On August 3, 2012, the Governor of Massachusetts signed into law “An Act Relative to Competitively Priced Electricity in the Commonwealth,” which both increases electric distribution companies’ obligations to purchase renewable energy resources and the availability of net metering. The Act also includes changes to the MDPU’s ratemaking procedures and authority for reviewing mergers and acquisitions for electric and gas distribution companies. With these changes, electric distribution companies are required to file rate schedules every five years, and gas distribution companies every ten years. The MDPU also opened a proceeding, as mandated by the Act, to establish a cost-based rate design for costs that are currently recovered from distribution customers through a reconciling factor. On December 17, 2013, the MDPU issued an order establishing the new rate design allocation methodologies. The Act also requires electric distribution companies to participate in joint solicitations and enter into additional long-term renewable contracts for 4% of distribution company load. A Request For Proposal for a long-term renewable energy contract, jointly prepared by Fitchburg and the other utility companies in consultation with the Massachusetts Attorney General and the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources and approved by the MDPU, was issued in the Spring of 2013. After analysis and contract negotiations, contracts for six projects were awarded and submitted for MDPU approval. Three of the contracts were terminated during the approval process, and the MDPU approved the remaining three contracts. Fitchburg’s costs associated with these contracts will be recovered through a MDPU approved tariff. On December 23, 2013 the MDPU issued two orders related to Grid Modernization. The MDPU opened an investigation on its own motion into Modernization of the Electric Grid and, in a separate but related order, opened an investigation into Electric Vehicles and Electric Vehicle Charging. The stated objective of the Grid Modernization proceeding is to ensure that the electric distribution companies “adopt grid modernization policies and practices” and all related objectives. It sets forth a straw proposal which would require each electric distribution company to submit a ten-year strategic grid modernization plan (GMP) within six months of a final Order. As part of the GMP each company must also include a comprehensive advanced metering plan (CAMP), and each company is required to achieve advanced metering functionality. The filing of a GMP will be a recurring obligation and must be updated as part of subsequent base distribution rate cases, which by statute must occur no less often than every five years. A cost recovery mechanism is proposed only for investments in advanced metering. The MDPU also proposes to address in separate, upcoming proceedings (1) time varying rates, (2) cybersecurity, privacy, and access to meter data, and (3) electric vehicles (EVs). In the Electric Vehicle Order, the MDPU seeks to establish policies and regulations that will help facilitate and accommodate the widespread adoption of EVs. Among other objectives, the proceeding looks to evaluate (1) EV charging and its impact on the electric distribution system, (2) electric distribution company involvement in EV charging, (3) residential metering practices and rates for EVs, and (4) consumer protection issues. These matters remain pending. Legal Proceedings The Company is involved in legal and administrative proceedings and claims of various types, which arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company believes, based upon information furnished by counsel and others, that the ultimate resolution of these claims will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position. In early 2009, a putative class action complaint was filed against Unitil Corporation’s (the “Company”) Massachusetts based utility, Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company (Fitchburg), in Massachusetts’ Worcester Superior Court (the “Court”), (captioned Bellerman et al v. Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company). The Complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages, including the cost of temporary housing and alternative fuel sources, emotional and physical pain and suffering and property damages allegedly incurred by customers in connection with the loss of electric service during the ice storm in Fitchburg’s service territory in December, 2008. The Complaint, as amended, includes M.G.L. ch. 93A claims for purported unfair and deceptive trade practices related to the December 2008 ice storm. On September 4, 2009, the Court issued its order on the Company’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, granting it in part and denying it in part. Following several years of discovery, the plaintiffs in the complaint filed a motion with the Court to certify the case as a class action. On January 7, 2013, the Court issued its decision denying plaintiffs’ motion to certify the case as a class action. As a result of this decision, the lawsuit would now proceed with only the twelve named plaintiffs seeking damages; however, the plaintiffs have appealed this decision to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (the “SJC”). The SJC accepted the matter for review, briefs have been submitted and oral arguments have been held. The decision of the SJC is pending. The Town of Lunenburg has also filed a separate action in Massachusetts Worcester County Superior Court arising out of the December 2008 ice storm. The parties to this action have agreed to put this matter on hold pending the decision of the SJC in Bellermann. The Company continues to believe these suits are without merit and will continue to defend itself vigorously.

NOTE 6 – REGULATORY MATTERS

UNITIL’S REGULATORY MATTERS ARE DESCRIBED IN NOTE 8 TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN ITEM 8 OF PART II OF UNITIL CORPORATION’S FORM 10-K FOR DECEMBER 31, 2013 AS FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ON JANUARY 29, 2014.

Regulatory Matters

Northern Utilities – Base Rates – Maine – On December 27, 2013, the Maine Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) approved a settlement agreement providing for a $3.8 million permanent increase in annual revenue for Northern Utilities’ Maine division, effective January 1, 2014. The settlement agreement also provided that the Company shall be allowed to implement a Targeted Infrastructure Replacement Adjustment (TIRA) rate mechanism to adjust base distribution rates annually to recover the revenue requirements associated with targeted investments in gas distribution system infrastructure replacement and upgrade projects. The TIRA has an initial term of four years, and covers targeted capital expenditures in 2013 through 2016. The settlement agreement also provides for Earning Sharing where Northern would be allowed to retain all earnings up to a return of 10%. Earnings in excess of 10% and up to and including 11% will be shared equally, between ratepayers and the Company. Earnings in excess of 11% shall be returned to ratepayers. The settlement agreement continues and revises the service quality plan (SQP) that Northern Utilities has been operating under since 2004 and established in Docket No. 2002-140. The revised SQP consists of seven metrics with an appurtenant administrative penalty for failure to meet any of the seven metrics. The settlement agreement further provides that Northern Utilities will be subject to a maximum annual penalty of $500,000 if it fails to meet any of the baseline performance targets under the revised SQP. On February 28, 2014 Northern Utilities filed its first annual TIRA for rates effective May 1, 2014, seeking an annual increase in base distribution revenue of $1.3 million. This filing is pending final approval of the MPUC. TIRA filings in future periods are projected to result in annual increases in revenue of approximately $1.0 million each year.

Northern Utilities – Base Rates – New Hampshire – On April 21, 2014, the NHPUC approved a settlement agreement providing for an increase of $4.6 million in distribution base revenue and a return on equity of 9.5% for Northern Utilities’ New Hampshire division. In addition, the settlement agreement provides for additional step adjustments in 2014 and 2015 to recover the revenue requirements associated with investments in gas mains extensions and infrastructure replacement projects. The 2014 step adjustment provides for an annual increase in revenue of $1.4 million, effective May 1, 2014. The 2015 step adjustment is for a projected annual increase in revenue of approximately $1.4 million, effective May 1, 2015. The settlement agreement also provides for Earning Sharing where Northern Utilities would be allowed to retain all earnings up to a return of 10%. Earnings in excess of 10% and up to and including 11% will be shared equally, between ratepayers and the Company. Earnings in excess of 11% shall be returned to ratepayers. The settlement agreement provides that the Company’s next filing of a distribution base rate case is to be based on an historic test year of no earlier than twelve months ending December 31, 2016. The newly-approved rates will be reconciled to the effective date temporary rates were established, July 1, 2013.

Unitil Energy – Base Rates – On April 26, 2011, the NHPUC approved a rate settlement that extends through May 1, 2016 and provides for a long-term rate plan and earnings sharing mechanism, with a series of step adjustments to increase revenue in future years to support Unitil Energy’s continued capital improvements to its distribution system. On March 3, 2014 Unitil Energy filed its third step increase of $1.5 million in annual revenue for effect on May 1, 2014, subject to final approval of the NHPUC.

Granite State – Base Rates – Granite State has in place a FERC approved rate settlement agreement under which it is permitted each June to file for a rate adjustment to recover the revenue requirements associated with specified capital investments in gas transmission projects. Granite State received approval from the FERC for its latest annual rate adjustment, in the amount of $0.4 million, with rates effective August 1, 2013. The next rate adjustment is scheduled to be filed in the second quarter of this year for a projected $0.6 million for rates effective August 1, 2014.

Fitchburg – Electric Base Rates Filed – In July 2013, Fitchburg filed a rate case with the MDPU requesting approval to increase its electric distribution rates. The Company requested an increase of $6.7 million in electric base revenue or 11.5% over test year operating revenue. Included in the amount of this annual increase is approximately $2.1 million for the recovery over a three year period of extraordinary storm costs incurred by the Company related to three severe storms, Tropical Storm Irene, the October 2011 snowstorm and Superstorm Sandy. The filing includes a proposed modified revenue decoupling mechanism to adjust base electric distribution revenue annually by means of either i) a capital cost tracker mechanism, or ii) a multi-year rate plan featuring a revenue cap inflation-based index. The filing also includes a proposal to establish a major storm reserve fund to address the costs of future major storms through a reconciling storm recovery adjustment factor beginning January 1, 2015. Hearings were held over a three week period during January 2014, and the matter has been fully briefed. A final rate order is expected in the second quarter of 2014.

Major Storms – Fitchburg and Unitil Energy

Superstorm Sandy – On October 29-30, 2012, a severe storm struck the eastern seaboard of the United States, causing extensive damage to electric facilities and loss of service to significant numbers of customers of several utilities. Fitchburg and Unitil Energy incurred approximately $1.1 million and $2.7 million, respectively, in costs for the repair and replacement of electric distribution systems damaged during the storm, including $0.3 million and $0.4 million related to capital construction for Fitchburg and Unitil Energy, respectively. The amount and timing of the cost recovery of these storm restoration expenditures for Fitchburg will be determined in its rate case. The cost recovery for Unitil Energy has been approved as discussed below. The Company does not believe these storm restoration expenditures and the timing of cost recovery will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

Fitchburg – Storm Cost Deferral – On May 1, 2012 the MDPU approved Fitchburg’s request to defer $4.3 million of 2011 storm costs associated with Tropical Storm Irene and the October 2011 snowstorm, and Fitchburg is seeking recovery of these costs in the electric rate case it filed in July 2013.

Unitil Energy – 2012 Storm Costs – On April 25, 2013, the NHPUC approved the recovery of $2.3 million of costs to repair damage to Unitil Energy’s electrical system resulting from Superstorm Sandy over a five-year period, with carrying charges at the Company’s long-term cost of debt, net of deferred taxes, or 4.52%, applied to the uncollected balance through the recovery period.

Fitchburg – Electric Operations – On November 15, 2013, Fitchburg submitted its annual reconciliation of costs and revenues for transition and transmission under its restructuring plan. The filing also includes the reconciliation of costs and revenues for a number of other surcharges and cost factors which are subject to review and approval by the MDPU. Many of the surcharges and cost factors were redesigned based on cost-based rate design in compliance with a MDPU order in its Investigation into Cost-Based Rate Design for Reconciliation Factors, which resulted from the “Act Relative to Competitively Priced Electricity in the Commonwealth”, signed into law by the Governor of Massachusetts on August 3, 2012. All of the rates were approved effective January 1, 2014 for billing purposes, subject to reconciliation, pending investigation by the MDPU.

Fitchburg – Service Quality – On March 1, 2014, Fitchburg submitted its 2013 Service Quality Reports for both its gas and electric divisions. Fitchburg reported that it met or exceeded its benchmarks for service quality performance in all metrics for its gas division. The electric division met or exceeded all metric benchmarks except for two measures relating to the performance of certain individual distribution circuits as compared to the performance of the system as a whole. As a result of penalty offsets earned in six metrics where company performance exceeded the benchmark measure, however, no penalties are due.

On December 11, 2012, the MDPU opened an investigation into the service quality provided by the gas and electric distribution companies in Massachusetts and the Service Quality guidelines currently in effect. The MDPU investigation will review existing and potential new reliability, safety, and customer satisfaction metrics; potential penalties for downed wire response; potential clean energy metrics; penalty provisions, including penalty offsets for superior performance in other metrics for poor performance on a different metric; and review of historic data for use in establishing service quality benchmarks. Fitchburg has been an active participant in this docket.

Fitchburg – Other – On February 5, 2013, there was a natural gas explosion in the city of Fitchburg, Massachusetts in an area served by Fitchburg’s gas division resulting in property damage to a number of commercial and residential properties. The MDPU, pursuant to its authority under state and federal law, has commenced an investigation of the incident, with which Fitchburg is cooperating. The Company does not believe this incident or investigation will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

On February 11, 2009, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) issued its decision in the Attorney General’s (AG) appeal of the MDPU orders relating to Fitchburg’s recovery of bad debt expense. The SJC agreed with the AG that the MDPU was required to hold hearings regarding changes in Fitchburg’s tariff and rates, and on that basis vacated the MDPU orders. The SJC, however, declined to rule on an appropriate remedy, and remanded the cases back to the MDPU for consideration of that issue. In the Company’s August 1, 2011 rate decision, the MDPU held that the approval of dollar for dollar collection of supply-related bad debt in the Company’s rate cases in 2006 (gas) and 2007 (electric) satisfied the requirement for a hearing ordered by the SJC. The MDPU opened a docket to address the amounts collected by Fitchburg between the time the MDPU first approved dollar for dollar collection of the Company’s bad debt, and the rate decisions in 2006 and 2007. Briefs were filed in June 2013. This matter remains pending before the MDPU.

On July 2, 2008, the Governor of Massachusetts signed into law “The Green Communities Act” (the GC Act), an energy policy statute designed to substantially increase energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy resources in Massachusetts. The GC Act provides for utilities to recover in rates the incremental costs associated with its various mandated programs. Several regulatory proceedings have been initiated to implement various provisions of the GC Act, including provisions for each distribution company to file enhanced three-year energy efficiency investment plans, plans to establish smart grid pilot programs, proposals to purchase long-term contracts for renewable energy, special tariffs to allow the net metering of customer-owned renewable generation, and terms and conditions for purchasing supplier receivables. Fitchburg’s first two three-year energy efficiency investment plans, plans to establish smart grid pilot programs, and net metering tariffs have been approved by the MDPU. Fitchburg’s proposal for a long term contract for renewable energy was approved by the MDPU, and the facility has been constructed and is now operating. Fitchburg’s costs associated with the contract are recovered through a MDPU approved tariff. Terms and conditions for purchasing supplier receivables are under review in a separately designated docket.

On August 3, 2012, the Governor of Massachusetts signed into law “An Act Relative to Competitively Priced Electricity in the Commonwealth,” which both increases electric distribution companies’ obligations to purchase renewable energy resources and the availability of net metering. The Act also includes changes to the MDPU’s ratemaking procedures and authority for reviewing mergers and acquisitions for electric and gas distribution companies. With these changes, electric distribution companies are required to file rate schedules every five years, and gas distribution companies every ten years. The MDPU also opened a proceeding, as mandated by the Act, to establish a cost-based rate design for costs that are currently recovered from distribution customers through a reconciling factor. On December 17, 2013, the MDPU issued an order establishing the new rate design allocation methodologies. The Act also requires electric distribution companies to participate in joint solicitations and enter into additional long-term renewable contracts for 4% of distribution company load. A Request For Proposal for a long-term renewable energy contract, jointly prepared by Fitchburg and the other utility companies in consultation with the Massachusetts Attorney General and the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources and approved by the MDPU, was issued in the Spring of 2013. After analysis and contract negotiations, contracts for six projects were awarded and submitted for MDPU approval. Three of the contracts were terminated during the approval process, and the MDPU approved the remaining three contracts. Fitchburg’s costs associated with these contracts will be recovered through a MDPU approved tariff.

On December 23, 2013 the MDPU issued two orders related to Grid Modernization. The MDPU opened an investigation on its own motion into Modernization of the Electric Grid and, in a separate but related order, opened an investigation into Electric Vehicles and Electric Vehicle Charging. The stated objective of the Grid Modernization proceeding is to ensure that the electric distribution companies “adopt grid modernization policies and practices” and all related objectives. It sets forth a straw proposal which would require each electric distribution company to submit a ten-year strategic grid modernization plan (GMP) within six months of a final Order. As part of the GMP each company must also include a comprehensive advanced metering plan (CAMP), and each company is required to achieve advanced metering functionality. The filing of a GMP will be a recurring obligation and must be updated as part of subsequent base distribution rate cases, which by statute must occur no less often than every five years. A cost recovery mechanism is proposed only for investments in advanced metering. The MDPU also proposes to address in separate, upcoming proceedings (1) time varying rates, (2) cybersecurity, privacy, and access to meter data, and (3) electric vehicles (EVs). In the Electric Vehicle Order, the MDPU seeks to establish policies and regulations that will help facilitate and accommodate the widespread adoption of EVs. Among other objectives, the proceeding looks to evaluate (1) EV charging and its impact on the electric distribution system, (2) electric distribution company involvement in EV charging, (3) residential metering practices and rates for EVs, and (4) consumer protection issues. These matters remain pending.

Legal Proceedings

The Company is involved in legal and administrative proceedings and claims of various types, which arise in the ordinary course of business. The Company believes, based upon information furnished by counsel and others, that the ultimate resolution of these claims will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position.

In early 2009, a putative class action complaint was filed against Unitil Corporation’s (the “Company”) Massachusetts based utility, Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company (Fitchburg), in Massachusetts’ Worcester Superior Court (the “Court”), (captioned Bellerman et al v. Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light Company). The Complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages, including the cost of temporary housing and alternative fuel sources, emotional and physical pain and suffering and property damages allegedly incurred by customers in connection with the loss of electric service during the ice storm in Fitchburg’s service territory in December, 2008. The Complaint, as amended, includes M.G.L. ch. 93A claims for purported unfair and deceptive trade practices related to the December 2008 ice storm. On September 4, 2009, the Court issued its order on the Company’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, granting it in part and denying it in part. Following several years of discovery, the plaintiffs in the complaint filed a motion with the Court to certify the case as a class action. On January 7, 2013, the Court issued its decision denying plaintiffs’ motion to certify the case as a class action. As a result of this decision, the lawsuit would now proceed with only the twelve named plaintiffs seeking damages; however, the plaintiffs have appealed this decision to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (the “SJC”). The SJC accepted the matter for review, briefs have been submitted and oral arguments have been held. The decision of the SJC is pending. The Town of Lunenburg has also filed a separate action in Massachusetts Worcester County Superior Court arising out of the December 2008 ice storm. The parties to this action have agreed to put this matter on hold pending the decision of the SJC in Bellermann. The Company continues to believe these suits are without merit and will continue to defend itself vigorously.