Regulators consider OGE’s latest CWIP request

construction work in progress CWIP

CWIP Dispute Leaves OG&E Request Under Advisement at OCC

Another fight over Construction Work in Progress (CWIP) unfolded this week before the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) as Oklahoma Gas and Electric (OG&E) pressed regulators for approval to begin recovering construction costs from customers while new power projects are still under development.

After hearing arguments from all sides, commissioners opted to take the matter under advisement, leaving OG&E’s CWIP request unresolved.

OG&E Seeks CWIP for Horseshoe Lake Expansion

OG&E is seeking CWIP approval tied to new natural gas-fired generation capacity at its Horseshoe Lake power plant in eastern Oklahoma County, specifically Units 13 and 14. CWIP would allow the utility to begin charging ratepayers for construction costs before the projects are completed and placed into service.

The request drew firm opposition from the Oklahoma Industrial Energy Consumers (OIEC) and Oklahoma AARP, which jointly filed a motion urging the Commission to dismiss the case.

The Public Utilities Division (PUD) of the Corporation Commission also opposed OG&E’s request.

Opponents Argue CWIP Already Rejected

Appearing before the Commission, Thomas Schroedter, representing Oklahoma Industrial Energy Consumers, argued that the CWIP issue for Horseshoe Lake had already been decided by regulators.

“OIEC and AARP request that you dismiss this case as an unnecessary duplication of proceedings,” Schroedter said. “The issue of CWIP recovery for Horseshoe Lake Units 13 and 14 has already been decided by you, and you determined that CWIP should not be allowed, and you authorized AFUDC treatment.”

AFUDC, or Allowance for Funds Used During Construction, allows utilities to recover financing costs after a project is completed rather than during construction.

Schroedter warned that approving CWIP now would result in double recovery.

“If you allow OG&E to recover construction work in progress in this particular case, then you’re allowing both CWIP and AFUDC. That’s double recovery, which ratepayers should not pay.”

Commission Staff Raises “Leapfrogging” Concerns

The Public Utilities Division echoed concerns that OG&E was attempting to bypass regulatory safeguards, arguing the utility was trying to “leapfrog” requirements previously established by the Commission.

OG&E initially sought approval for expanded generation projects in May 2025, then refiled its request after the Legislature approved Senate Bill 998 (SB998), which became law in late August.

SB998 Reshapes CWIP Law — With Limits

SB998 allows CWIP recovery, but only for projects involving natural gas generation. The law passed without the signature of Gov. Kevin Stitt, despite strong opposition from Corporation Commissioners at the time.

In November 2025, commissioners approved preapproval of costs for several energy projects, including:

• A five-year capacity purchase agreement with Tenaska’s Kiamichi Energy Plant
• A 20-year agreement for power from Black Kettle Energy Storage in Oklahoma City
• Two new gas-fired combustion turbines at Horseshoe Lake costing $506.4 million

However, the Commission specifically rejected CWIP recovery for those projects.

OG&E Argues Statute Requires CWIP Approval

Defending OG&E, attorney Trevor Pemberton — a former Court of Civil Appeals judge and one-time general counsel to Gov. Kevin Stitt — argued that the utility is simply following the law as written.

“We’re not asking for retroactive treatment, not asking for special treatment,” Pemberton told commissioners. “We’re asking that the law as it’s written be applied.”

Pemberton said SB998 contains no language prohibiting CWIP approval for OG&E’s project.

“As I read it — and I think it’s the only proper reading — CWIP must be permitted,” he said. “We’ve done it as contemplated by the statute.”

He also rejected claims of double recovery.

“This doesn’t conflict with prior relief. We’re not asking you to do something you can’t do now.”

Decision Pending

After hearing testimony from all parties, commissioners declined to rule immediately, placing the CWIP request under advisement. No timeline was announced for a final decision.

📍 MORE ENERGY NEWS