PSC Sets Process For Remanded Case Involving Allegations Against Retail Supplier, Affiliated Utility

July 10, 2024

Email This Story
Copyright 2024 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 Executive Secretary of the Maryland PSC has established a process for consideration of a complaint filed by the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel against Washington Gas Light Co. ("Washington Gas" or "WGL") and WGL Energy Services, Inc. ("WGL Energy") which was previously dismissed by the PSC, but which was remanded to the PSC by a court after an appeal by OPC

The PSC's Executive Secretary directed that discovery, which has been sought by OPC, begin immediately. OPC had alleged that WGL had stated that it would not respond to data requests until the PSC issued an order regarding discovery

The Executive Secretary further directed that the matter be delegated to the Public Utility Law Judge Division to conduct the proceedings

As previously reported, OPC's complaint contained several allegations concerning a bill message on WGL bills which marketed natural gas as a "clean energy". A specific bill reviewed by OPC indicated that the customer's supplier was WGL Energy

OPC's complaint had originally alleged that a representative from WGL in discussing the matter with OPC had described the bill as a "subscriber-consolidated bill" [sic]. This prompted OPC to allege potential affiliate violations

See our prior story for full details of the allegations in the original complaint

However, the PSC in its order dismissing OPC's complaint said that the description of the bill as a "subscriber-consolidated bill" resulted from a miscommunication between WGL's counsel and OPC.

The PSC determined that the bills at issue were utility consolidated bills, and that the marketing message about natural gas was authored by WGL (not WGL Energy). WGL has said that the message was placed on utility consolidated bills regardless of the customer's retail supplier.

As such, the PSC dismissed the complaint's allegations concerning alleged affiliate violations

See full details on the PSC's order dismissing the complaint here

However, OPC, arguing that WGL during the case provided three different explanations concerning the nature of the bills and bill message, argued that issues of material fact remained with respect to the party responsible for the messaging on the bills, and argued that the PSC erred in dismissing the complaint without developing an evidentiary record on the matter

Addressing OPC's appeal, the Appellate Court of Maryland agreed that there were still facts in dispute regarding the source of the marketing message, and ruled that the PSC abused its discretion in dismissing the claims relating to WGL Energy. The Appellate Court remanded the matter to the PSC

The OPC has stated in court filings that it would be willing to dismiss its claim against WGL Energy if OPC receives evidence that WGL Energy had no involvement in the marketing message, but, absent discovery, OPC said that it does not know the source of the marketing message

While WGL previously submitted an affidavit stating that it, "does not have, and has never had, a joint marketing agreement with WGL Energy Services, Inc.," OPC alleged that the lack of a joint marketing agreement does not preclude improper affiliate actions, as the companies still could have worked together

Of less relevance to the retail market, OPC's complaint also alleged that the marketing message was "deceptive" for its description of natural gas as "clean".

The PSC dismissed this count of the complaint, finding that a complaint about a bill message is not a proper forum for broader issues raised by natural gas and its role in greenhouse gas emissions, with the PSC also finding that the complaint failed to adequately demonstrate a violation of state law or regulation

However, the Appellate Court found that, under the relevant COMAR section, dismissal of a complaint is only permitted if the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

"The ground given by the Commission, that the complaint involved broad issues that might affect other natural gas companies, is not an authorized basis to dismiss a complaint," the Appellate Court said, in remanding the case to the PSC

Case 9673

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Origination Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Wholesale Markets Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Billing Supervisor
• NEW! -- Settlements Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• Energy Regulatory Specialist

HOME

Copyright 2024 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com