Regulator Dismisses Retail Suppliers' Sought Declaratory Ruling On Regulator's Rate Cap Authority

September 27, 2023

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-23 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com

The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com

The Connecticut PURA declined to issue a declaratory ruling sought by the Retail Energy Advancement League (REAL), the NRG Retail Companies, and Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. concerning PURA's authority to impose rate caps on retail suppliers

In brief, the suppliers had sought a ruling that language in revised Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245o(m) -- which states that, "all customer contracts with electric suppliers, for rates effective on and after January 1, 2024, shall be at or below the standard service rate for the duration of the contracts," and that PURA, "may initiate a docket to order all customer contracts with electric suppliers, entered into on and after a determined date, to comply with appropriate limitations the authority deems necessary," -- applies only to hardship customers, and not all residential customers

PURA Staff have argued that PURA may cap supplier rates under another section of statute, but have cited revisions to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245o(m) as further supporting the use of default service rates as the standard to determine if customers are harmed by retail supplier service (and thus appropriate limits may be imposed). See our prior story here for more

PURA said that, "A declaratory ruling is not an appropriate mechanism for addressing the issue raised by Petitioners for two reasons."

"First, the Petition does not meet the prerequisites for a declaratory ruling. Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-176(a), the Authority may rule on the validity of a regulation or the applicability of statutes or regulations to 'specified circumstances.' Here, however, the Petitioners seek a general interpretation of Conn. Gen. Stat § 16-245o(m) without any actual specified circumstances. See Peruta v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 128 Conn. App. 777, 785-86 (2011) (finding an email was not a request for a declaratory ruling because it 'did not seek to have the department apply or examine a regulation or statute with respect to a specified set of circumstances.'); cf. Republican Party of Connecticut v. Merrill, 307 Conn. 470, 485 (2012) (finding a letter was a request for a declaratory ruling because it 'clearly raised an actual controversy regarding the application of [the statute] to the specific facts . . .'). Absent 'the application of a statutory provision . . . to a specific factual scenario,' the Authority has no basis on which to issue a declaratory ruling. Cannata v. Dep't of Env’t Prot., 239 Conn. 124, 140 (1996)," PURA said

"Second, the issue raised by Petitioners can be properly addressed in the pending proceeding in Docket No. 18-06-02RE02, Investigation of Appropriate Limitations on All Customer Contracts with Electric Suppliers Pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245o(m), which the Authority initiated to implement the very language of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245o(m) for which Petitioners seek an interpretation. Given the pendency of that proceeding, and that there has been no determination as to any contract limitations or to which customers they might apply, a declaratory ruling would be premature. See Financial Consulting, LLC v. Commissioner of Insurance, 315 Conn. 196, 216 (2014) (petition for declaratory ruling 'may not be used to bypass a party's obligation to exhaust its remedies in the context of a pending administrative proceeding'). In Docket No. 18-06-02RE02, the Authority continues to review written comments and interrogatory responses, and to receive evidence in the record. Further, the Authority anticipates a final report by October 18, 2023, from a working group tasked to consider a number of issues relevant to that docket," PURA said

As noted above, PURA anticipates a final report by October 18, 2023, from a working group tasked to consider a number of issues related to Docket No. 18-06-02RE02, which is examining any potential "appropriate limitations" with which all customer contracts with electric suppliers, entered into on and after a determined date, must comply. See more details on Docket No. 18-06-02RE02 here

As PURA declined to issue a declaratory ruling, PURA denied as moot a motion from suppliers to stay activities in Docket No. 18-06-02RE02 pending issuance of a declaratory ruling

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Pricing Analyst - Retail Power
• NEW! -- Electricity Pricing Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Business Development Manager -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Call Center Manager -- Retail Supplier
• Senior Billing Subject Matter - (Remote) -- Retail Supplier

HOME

Copyright 2010-23 Energy Choice Matters.  If you wish to share this story, please email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication prohibited.