|
Search |
Stand Energy Corporation Seeks to Add Columbia Gas, NiSource Corporate Services to Complaint Over IGS Use of Columbia Retail Energy Name
September 22, 2011
Email This Story
Stand Energy Corporation has sought to amend a complaint originally filed against Interstate Gas Supply, regarding the use of its trade name Columbia Retail Energy, naming Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc. and NiSource Corporate Services as additional parties to the complaint (10-2395-GA-CSS).
As previously reported (10/25), Stand Energy, the Ohio Consumers' Counsel, and other parties had filed the complaint alleging that the use of the Columbia Retail Energy name by IGS represented marketing, solicitation, and sales acts or practices which are "unfair, misleading, deceptive, or unconscionable."
PUCO has previously dismissed objections to the trade name in terms of IGS's certification, stating that the use of the name will not adversely affect the retail natural gas supplier's fitness or ability to provide the services for which it is certified. That decision did not affect parties' pending complaint.
The originally filed complaint sought to terminate the use of the Columbia Retail Energy trade name by IGS, and other related relief.
Stand Energy sought to add Columbia Gas of Ohio to the complaint by alleging that, "by remaining silent when NiSource Corporate Services, Inc. agreed to license the use of the name and logo Columbia Retail Energy to IGS ... Columbia Gas of Ohio, Inc. violated both the spirit and the letter of its own tariff containing the Standards of Conduct."
Specifically, Stand Energy said that the Standards of Conduct prohibit Columbia Gas of Ohio from giving any retail natural gas supplier preference in, "matters, rates, information, or charges relating to transportation service including, but not limited to, scheduling, balancing, metering, storage, standby service or curtailment policy."
"The license to use the name and logo Columbia Retail Energy was not offered to any other Retail Natural Gas Supplier in Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland or Kentucky. The license was sold to IGS without being offered to competitors in any of the five Columbia Distribution Territories," Stand said.
Sustaining this specific point of the complaint does not appear likely given that Columbia Gas of Ohio is not the entity licensing the name, and thus the Standards of Conduct are not implicated.
This is not to say, in aggregate, that the complaint over the trade name does not have merit (nor does the following imply that it does), but it is likely any decision on the name will rest on a PUCO policy decision, and judgment on whether the use of the name is "deceptive," as opposed to arguments regarding undue preference, since NiSource Corporate Services is not subject to the tariff.
Under the most recent procedural schedule in the case, testimony is due September 27, with a hearing scheduled for October 4.
Email This Story
Be Seen By Energy Professionals in Retail and Wholesale Marketing
Run Ads with Energy Choice Matters
Call Paul Ring
954-
|
Search |
