XML 27 R17.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.5.0.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Note 9 — Commitments and Contingencies Environmental Matters UGI Utilities From the late 1800s through the mid-1900s, UGI Utilities and its current and former subsidiaries owned and operated a number of manufactured gas plants (“MGPs”) prior to the general availability of natural gas. Some constituents of coal tars and other residues of the manufactured gas process are today considered hazardous substances under the Superfund Law and may be present on the sites of former MGPs. Between 1882 and 1953, UGI Utilities owned the stock of subsidiary gas companies in Pennsylvania and elsewhere and also operated the businesses of some gas companies under agreement. By the early 1950s, UGI Utilities divested all of its utility operations other than certain Pennsylvania operations, including those which now constitute UGI Gas and Electric Utility. UGI Utilities has also acquired two subsidiaries (CPG and PNG) which have similar histories of owning, and in some cases operating, MGPs in Pennsylvania. UGI Utilities and its subsidiaries have entered into agreements with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) to address the remediation of former MGPs in Pennsylvania. CPG is party to a Consent Order and Agreement (“CPG-COA”) with the DEP requiring CPG to perform a specified level of activities associated with environmental investigation and remediation work at certain properties in Pennsylvania on which MGP related facilities were operated (“CPG MGP Properties”) and to plug a minimum number of non-producing natural gas wells per year. In addition, PNG is a party to a Multi-Site Remediation Consent Order and Agreement (“PNG-COA”) with the DEP. The PNG-COA requires PNG to perform annually a specified level of activities associated with environmental investigation and remediation work at certain properties on which MGP-related facilities were operated (“PNG MGP Properties”). Under these agreements, required environmental expenditures relating to the CPG MGP Properties and the PNG MGP Properties are capped at $1.8 and $1.1, respectively, in any calendar year. The CPG-COA is scheduled to terminate at the end of 2018. The PNG-COA terminates in 2019 but may be terminated by either party effective at the end of any two-year period beginning with the original effective date in March 2004. At June 30, 2016 and 2015, our estimated accrued liabilities for environmental investigation and remediation costs related to the CPG-COA and the PNG-COA totaled $12.2 and $9.6, respectively. CPG and PNG have recorded associated regulatory assets for these costs because recovery of these costs from customers is probable (see Note 6). In May 2016, UGI Gas executed a Consent Order and Agreement (“UGI Gas-COA”) with the DEP with an effective date of October 1, 2016. The UGI Gas-COA will terminate in September 2031 if not extended by the parties. The UGI Gas-COA requires UGI Gas to perform a specified level of activities associated with environmental investigation and remediation work at certain properties in Pennsylvania on which MGP related facilities were operated (“UGI Gas MGP Properties”). Under this agreement, required environmental expenditures related to the UGI Gas MGP Properties are capped at $2.5 in any calendar year. At June 30, 2016, our estimated accrued liabilities for environmental investigation and remediation costs related to the UGI Gas-COA totaled $43.8. UGI Gas has recorded associated regulatory assets for these costs because recovery of these costs from customers is probable (see Note 6). We do not expect the costs for investigation and remediation of hazardous substances at Pennsylvania MGP sites to be material to UGI Utilities’ results of operations because (1) UGI Gas is currently permitted to include in rates, through future base rate proceedings, a five-year average of such prudently incurred remediation costs, and (2) CPG and PNG receive ratemaking recognition of environmental investigation and remediation costs associated with their environmental sites. This ratemaking recognition balances the accumulated difference between historical costs and rate recoveries with an estimate of future costs associated with the sites. UGI Gas has proposed a similar environmental cost tracking mechanism that will address the costs incurred under the UGI Gas-COA. From time to time, UGI Utilities is notified of sites outside Pennsylvania on which private parties allege MGPs were formerly owned or operated by UGI Utilities or owned or operated by its former subsidiaries. Such parties generally investigate the extent of environmental contamination or perform environmental remediation. Management believes that under applicable law UGI Utilities should not be liable in those instances in which a former subsidiary owned or operated an MGP. There could be, however, significant future costs of an uncertain amount associated with environmental damage caused by MGPs outside Pennsylvania that UGI Utilities directly operated, or that were owned or operated by former subsidiaries of UGI Utilities if a court were to conclude that (1) the subsidiary’s separate corporate form should be disregarded, or (2) UGI Utilities should be considered to have been an operator because of its conduct with respect to its subsidiary’s MGP. At June 30, 2016, neither the undiscounted nor the accrued liability for environmental investigation and cleanup costs for UGI Gas MGP sites outside of Pennsylvania was material. Other Matters Purported Class Action Lawsuits. Between May and October of 2014, more than 35 purported class action lawsuits were filed in multiple jurisdictions against the Partnership/UGI Corporation and a competitor by certain of their direct and indirect customers. The class action lawsuits allege, among other things, that the Partnership and its competitor colluded, beginning in 2008, to reduce the fill level of portable propane cylinders from 17 pounds to 15 pounds and combined to persuade their common customer, Walmart Stores, Inc., to accept that fill reduction, resulting in increased cylinder costs to retailers and end-user customers in violation of federal and certain state antitrust laws. The claims seek treble damages, injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees and costs on behalf of the putative classes. On October 16, 2014, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred all of these purported class action cases to the Western Division of the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. In July 2015, the Court dismissed all claims brought by direct customers and all claims other than those for injunctive relief brought by indirect customers. The direct customers filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which is still pending. The indirect customers filed an amended complaint claiming injunctive relief and state law claims under Wisconsin, Maine and Vermont law. In January 2016, the District Court dismissed the remaining injunctive relief claims for the indirect purchasers. As a result, the only claims remaining with respect to indirect purchasers involve alleged violations of Wisconsin, Maine and Vermont state antitrust laws. On July 21, 2016, several new indirect purchaser plaintiffs filed an antitrust class action lawsuit against the Partnership in the Western District of Missouri. This lawsuit repeats the allegations and claims from the existing indirect purchaser complaints, includes several of the same plaintiffs and was filed by the same group of lawyers. We are unable to reasonably estimate the impact, if any, arising from such litigation. We believe we have strong defenses to the claims and intend to vigorously defend against them. In addition to the matters described above, there are other pending claims and legal actions arising in the normal course of our businesses. Although we cannot predict the final results of these pending claims and legal actions, we believe, after consultation with counsel, that the final outcome of these matters will not have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=51674963&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration