Texas PUC Staff Supports Requiring REPs To Mail Notice Of Pass-Through A/S Charge Petition To Customers

Staff Also Proposes REPs Be Required To Post Notice On Their Social Media, Websites

January 19, 2024

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

Staff of the Texas PUC support requiring retail electric providers, who would avail themselves of the ability to pass-through to fixed-price customers new ERCOT Contingency Reserve Service (ECRS) costs, to mail notice, of a PUC petition to allow for such a pass-through, to any customers which would be affected by the grant of the petition

As previously reported, ARM and TEAM are seeking at the PUC the designation of ECRS as an, "ancillary service product as incurring charges beyond the REP’s control for a customer’s existing contract".

Such a designation would allow REPs to apply a one-time price adjustment to a fixed rate contract that was executed before the implementation of this new ancillary service

As previously reported, an ALJ had suggested that REPs be required to mail to potentially affected customers notice of the petition before the PUC, but sought comment from parties before establishing the notice procedures

Staff agreed that REPs who would seek to implement the charge -- including those not part of TEAM or ARM -- should be required to mail notice of the petition at the PUC to customers to whom the REP would apply the charge

PUC Staff said, "because each individual REP can identify its affected customers, since they will be the same customers the REP would bill the ECRS recovery costs if the petition is successful, it would not be burdensome for each REP seeking to pass through ECRS charges to send the approved notice via U.S. mail as directed by 16 TAC § 22.51(a)(2). Accordingly, Commission Staff recommends that each REP seeking to pass through ECRS charges publish the approved notice of the filing to each affected customer by mail, as well as through all their normal methods of customer communications for contractual and billing issues such as email and any other communications platforms."

Staff said that, "any REP that is not a member of the REP Coalition but would like to avail itself of the potential relief sought by the petitioners should similarly be required to self-identify," whether the REP would utilize the pass-through. Staff said that such REPs should also be subject to any notice requirements adopted in the proceeding

As previously reported, the ALJ suggested that the most analogous notice appropriate for the petition would be those used in utility rate proceedings. Such utility notice procedures include a requirement for notice to be published in various newspapers

Rather than requiring REPs to post notice in newspapers, Staff alternatively proposed that any REP that would seek to implement the pass-through, if approved, be required to publish notice of the petition on the REP's social media channels and its website (even for REPs not party to the petition proceeding, to the extent such REPs would avail themselves of any authority granted under the petition)

OPUC generally favored a mailed notice requirement as well. OPUC also addressed the merits of the REPs' petition itself (not just notice) and said that the petition for pass-through authority impermissibly seeks to re-litigate the "fixed means fixed" rule

TEAM and ARM opposed a mailed notice requirement, contrasting the competitive retail market with utilities who have captive customer

TEAM and ARM said, "(1) the [utility mailing] notice requirements in 16 TAC § 22.51(a)(1) and (2) do not apply to REPs; (2) this proceeding cannot be analogous to an electric utility rate increase because REPs do not have a captive customer base and the Commission lacks jurisdiction over a REP’s competitive prices; (3) this proceeding will not determine any rate adjustment for any individual customer; (4) this proceeding seeks a legal determination of general applicability as a corollary to the Commission’s rulemaking in Project No. 51830 that will apply to all REPs; and (5) individual REPs that are members of TEAM and ARM are not parties to this proceeding and should not be required to give notice by publication and mail as required by 16 TAC § 22.51(a)(1) and (2)."

Project 55959

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Customer Care Specialist I & II- remote/hybrid -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Pricing Analyst - Retail Power
• NEW! -- Electricity Pricing Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• Business Development Manager -- Retail Supplier
• Call Center Manager -- 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.