Law360 Canada ( September 28, 2026, 9:42 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellants from a decision of Alberta Utilities Commission (Commission) establishing parameters for 2024-2028 performance-based regulation plan. The appellants challenged the Commission’s approach to supplemental capital funding, having argued that the methodology denied them a reasonable opportunity to recover their prudently incurred capital costs and earn a fair return on equity contrary to ss. 121 and 122 of the Electric Utilities Act. They contended that the Commission erred by calculating Type 2 supplemental capital funding using only historical average capital additions rather than incorporating forecast capital expenditures, by adjusting the productivity X factor in the supplemental capital calculation, and by maintaining overly restrictive eligibility criteria for Type 1 capital funding. The appellant FortisAlberta further argued that the Commission failed to address its submissions that the productivity stretch factor should not apply to it because of the financial risks arising from its statutory obligation to provide service to rural electrification associations without full cost recovery. The Commission maintained that the performance-based regulation framework appropriately balanced incentives for efficiency, reduced regulatory burden and ensured utilities a reasonable opportunity to recover prudent costs while protecting consumers through just and reasonable rates....