XML 34 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.21.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2021
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 former subsidiaries owned and operated a number of 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 gas and electric operations. Beginning in 2006 and 2008, UGI Utilities also owned and operated two acquired subsidiaries, with similar histories of owning, and in some cases operating, MGPs in Pennsylvania. Prior to October 1, 2020, UGI Utilities was subject to three COAs with the PADEP to address the remediation of specified former MGP sites in Pennsylvania and, in the case of one COA, the plugging of specified natural gas wells. Effective October 1, 2020, the COAs were consolidated into one agreement that supersedes the existing agreements, and which is scheduled to terminate at the end of 2031. In accordance with the consolidated COA, UGI Utilities is required to either obtain a certain number of points per calendar year based on defined eligible environmental investigatory and/or remedial activities at the MGPs, or make expenditures for such activities in an amount equal to an annual environmental minimum expenditure threshold. The annual minimum expenditure required under the consolidated COA is $5. The consolidated COA permits the transfer of the specified wells, with related costs counted towards the annual minimum expenditure. At June 30, 2021, September 30, 2020 and June 30, 2020, our aggregate estimated accrued liabilities for environmental investigation and remediation costs related to the current COA and the predecessor agreements totaled $49, $53 and $55, respectively. 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 UGI Utilities receives ratemaking recovery of actual environmental investigation and remediation costs associated with the sites covered by the COA. This ratemaking recognition reconciles the accumulated difference between historical costs and rate recoveries with an estimate of future costs associated with the sites. As such, UGI Utilities has recorded an associated regulatory asset for these costs because recovery of these costs from customers is probable (see Note 6). 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 a former subsidiary. 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 a former subsidiary 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. Neither the undiscounted nor the accrued liability for environmental investigation and cleanup costs for UGI Utilities’ MGP sites outside Pennsylvania was material for all periods presented. AmeriGas Propane AmeriGas OLP Saranac Lake. In 2008, the NYDEC notified AmeriGas OLP that the NYDEC had placed property purportedly owned by AmeriGas OLP in Saranac Lake, New York on the New York State Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites. A site characterization study performed by the NYDEC disclosed contamination related to a former MGP. AmeriGas OLP responded to the NYDEC in 2009 to dispute the contention it was a PRP as it did not operate the MGP and appeared to only own a portion of the site. In 2017, the NYDEC communicated to AmeriGas OLP that the NYDEC had previously issued three RODs related to remediation of the site totaling approximately $28 and requested additional information regarding AmeriGas OLP’s purported ownership. AmeriGas OLP renewed its challenge to designation as a PRP and identified potential defenses. The NYDEC subsequently identified a third party PRP with respect to the site. The NYDEC commenced implementation of the remediation plan in the spring of 2018. Based on our evaluation of the available information as of June 30, 2021, the Partnership has an undiscounted environmental remediation liability of $8 related to the site. Our share of the actual remediation costs could be significantly more or less than the accrued amount. Other Matters Purported Class Action Lawsuits. Between May and October of 2014, purported class action lawsuits were filed in multiple jurisdictions against the Partnership/UGI 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 Missouri District Court. As the result of rulings on a series of procedural filings, including petitions filed with the Eighth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court, both the federal and state law claims of the direct customer plaintiffs and the state law claims of the indirect customer plaintiffs were remanded to the Western Missouri District Court. The decision of the Western Missouri District Court to dismiss the federal antitrust claims of the indirect customer plaintiffs was upheld by the Eighth Circuit. On April 15, 2019, the Western Missouri District Court ruled that it has jurisdiction over the indirect purchasers’ state law claims and that the indirect customer plaintiffs have standing to pursue those claims. On August 21, 2019, the District Court partially granted the Company’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissed the claims of indirect customer plaintiffs from ten states and the District of Columbia. On October 2, 2019, the Partnership reached an agreement to resolve the claims of the direct purchaser class of plaintiffs; the agreement received final court approval on June 18, 2020. On September 18, 2020, the Partnership and counsel for the indirect purchaser plaintiffs filed a joint statement with the court that they had reached an agreement in principle to settle the claims of the remaining classes and plaintiffs; the settlement received final court approval on March 30, 2021. 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 statements. 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 statements.

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://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6491277&loc=d3e6429-115629 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=123406679&loc=d3e25336-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration