PG&E 2027 General Rate Case

A general rate case is where a utility's spending plans become customers' rates. PG&E's test-year 2027 GRC arrives with California industrial electricity rates already among the highest in the country — and with the state trying to retain manufacturing investment.

What we filed

The opening testimony of Sam Harper and John Holler (February 2026) took the following positions:

• The Commission should recognize the seriousness of current electric rate unaffordability, evaluate PG&E's revenue requirement on a basis that accounts for accounting and procedural adjustments, and approve spending only if it results in declining electric rates across the entire 2027–2030 GRC period under all reasonable load-growth scenarios.
• The Commission should evaluate PG&E's risk management programs using risk-neutral cost-benefit ratios as the primary analytical reference, and require PG&E to justify any program tranche with a ratio below 1 through explicit findings of safety necessity, legal obligation, or clearly articulated non-quantifiable benefits.
• The testimony also assessed the sequencing and prioritization of load-growth investments and the reasonableness of PG&E's use of two-way balancing and memorandum accounts.

In June 2026, CLECA joined EPUC and the Indicated Shippers in a joint response opposing PG&E's motion for interim rate recovery.

Why it matters

For an energy-intensive manufacturer, electricity is a raw material: when California rates rise faster than competitors' rates in Texas or overseas, the arithmetic of where to locate the next production line shifts accordingly. Affordability arguments in a GRC are about whether the state's industrial base can continue to justify investment.

This summary is drawn from documents on the public record and is provided for general information. It is not legal advice, and it does not disclose any confidential client matter.