|
|
|
|
|
1,100 Accounts Wrongly Enrolled Onto New York Municipal Aggregation Service
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
About 1,100 customer accounts were wrongly enrolled on an opt-out basis by a municipal aggregation in New York, the New York PSC reported in formally issuing an order to undertake a "complete evaluation" of community choice aggregation (CCA)
The 1,100 customer accounts were wrongly enrolled in the Sustainable Westchester CCA.
Sustainable Westchester blamed ConEd's data for the "mis-enrollments", alleging that ConEd's data had miscoded addresses and had included inaccurate municipal affiliation indications in the account records
The affected 1,100 customers were located in municipalities that do not operate a CCA, and thus their enrollment into the Westchester Power CCA was not authorized
The billing issue arising from the alleged inaccurate dataset also affected another 400 customers, but those customers resided in another community participating in SW's Westchester Power CCA, and thus still would have been enrolled under a correct dataset.
However, for some of these 400 customers, due to the incorrect municipality listed on their account, the customers may have been charged Gross Receipts Tax when such customers should not have been charged GRT
The PSC reported one instance in which a customer was wrongly enrolled onto a CCA, due to this geographic dataset issue, in which the customer was subject to CCA service for 11 months, despite "numerous" complaints from the customer to the CCA and the CCA's ESCO. The customer's complaints were "dismissed repeatedly" by the CCA Administrator and ESCO, the PSC said.
Only after the customer filed a complaint with the Dept. of Public Service was the erroneous nature of enrollment confirmed.
During the period that the customer was wrongly served by the CCA, the customer paid $1,300 more than the applicable utility supply cost over the 11-month timeframe
The PSC rebuked this CCA's "faulty customer service", and said that CCA enrollment and billing errors result in higher costs to customers, contrary to the purpose of the state's CCA policy
In a report to the PUC concerning the issue, Sustainable Westchester had said as follows:
"The accounts in question were enrolled in the CCA program according to municipal designations included in utility data provided
by Con Edison to the CCA supplier, Constellation. By way of background, earlier this year we were apprised by DPS of several
households within the Town of Cortlandt on the Village of Croton border that were mis-enrolled in Westchester Power due to
inaccurate municipal affiliation indications in the account records. In consultation with DPS, Sustainable Westchester took up
discussions about the initially identified mis-enrollments within the Town of Cortland with the supplier (Constellation), who
separately had been working on a resolution after being informed of this issue through a different channel. Those
mis-enrollments were subsequently resolved. After addressing the initial issue, and in further consultation with DPS,
Sustainable Westchester engaged the utility (Con Edison), whose data had caused the mis-enrollment in a broader discussion
about municipal coding. Constellation also participated in these discussions. The first of these meetings was held in May 2024.
During that meeting, Sustainable Westchester encouraged Con Edison to initiate a project to identify and correct miscoded
accounts in their Westchester account data. Sustainable Westchester noted that there likely would also be instances of
accounts that should have been enrolled in the CCA but were improperly coded to non-participating municipalities, and that
neither Sustainable Westchester nor Constellation had access to a complete set of records. Con Edison indicated that they
were engaging their GIS department to conduct tests. Sustainable Westchester initiated another joint meeting in June during
which methodology was discussed, and we again urged Con Edison to initiate a study of this data element across all
Westchester Con Edison accounts. Although Con Edison had indicated that it intended to undertake its own analysis,
Sustainable Westchester separately analyzed our active customer data set internally and in parallel to ensure that its existing
data set is accurate. To this end, Sustainable Westchester secured base maps and ARCGIS software and trained a staff
member to operate it. Through this process, we identified miscoded addresses within the dataset available to Sustainable
Westchester, indicating customers that were enrolled in the CCA program but should not have been due to errors in the Con
Edison data. As noted above, although we are confident that our assessment captures customers mis-enrolled in the CCA
Program, our assessment would not have identified customers that were incorrectly excluded from the CCA, as Sustainable
Westchester does not have access to the full suite of data maintained by Con Edison.
"Constellation is currently cross checking the data to confirm the above evaluation. Once this is confirmed, Sustainable
Westchester and Constellation will work together to immediately disenroll all accounts that should not be in the program. Such
accounts also will not be enrolled in the CCA program in the future. Con Edison will also be provided with our analysis of the
errors in Con Edison’s data, and we will urge Con Edison to correct its data going forward.
"In addition, we will urge Con Edison to put their Westchester accounts through GIS analysis and correct the municipal codes on
all records found to be miscoded. Because this data is maintained by Con Edison in the first instance, this is the best way to
prevent future errors (including non-CCA ESCO accounts, to which the CCA and CCA Supplier do not have access)."
The PSC's new review of municipal aggregation is prompted, in part, because CCAs have not been producing savings for retail generation service, the PSC said
For those CCAs offering a 100% compliant renewable product, which is not subject to a price cap, the PSC reported that "nearly all" CCA programs, as documented in a 2023 report, had a rate which exceeded the applicable utility's 12-month trailing average rate for default service
The PSC's prior authorization for CCAs to rely on opt-out enrollments was premised on the expectation that CCAs would provide lower rates to customers
However, the PSC observed that CCA participants, "are often no longer receiving the cost savings they once received and are paying a much higher premium for a REC-compliant product when compared to previous CCA contracts, as well as recent utility default rates."
Exacerbating the PSC's concerns with CCAs are the "the frequency and magnitude" of errors in CCA customer enrollments and billing
In addition to the wrongful enrollments noted above, about 235,000 CCA customers experienced a "billing issue" during the period between January 2023 and October 2024, the PSC said
While the reported information did not indicate if the 235,000 total reflected the same customers experiencing multiple instances of a CCA billing problem, the PSC reported that, as of the end of 2023, there were just under 253,000 CCA customers statewide
In opening the new review of municipal aggregation, the PSC also cited the dearth of any value-added products made available to customers by CCA programs, on an opt-in basis
The PSC's new evaluation of municipal aggregation shall consider recommendations to "discontinue the program", as well as reviewing potential improvements or alternative paths towards achieving the CCA program's stated goals
The evaluation of municipal aggregation shall address, among other things:
• An in-depth analysis of the CCA program's costs and benefits
• The failure of CCAs to engender additional opt-in offerings to customers, such as community solar, distributed resources, or other value-added energy-related services.
• The accuracy and integrity of data exchanged among CCAs and other parties; addressing current data sharing practices among CCAs and ESCOs which are alleged to violate CCA rules; and related issues
• The terms of agreements between municipalities and CCA administrators, and supply agreements between CCAs and ESCOs, including any restrictive terms harming competition or customer choice
The PSC said that it has learned of a "customary" practice among CCAs to share customer data from a prior CCA ESCO to the CCA's new ESCO, which the PSC said violates the CCA program rules
Under this alleged customary practice, the PSC said that the customer data is provided from the old CCA ESCO, to the CCA Administrator, with the CCA Administrator then sending it to the new ESCO
Notably, this sharing includes customer identification numbers, for purposes of customer enrollment, the PSC said
"If this is in fact true, this practice is in direct violation of CCA Program Rules 42, 48, and 54," the PSC warned
The PSC explained that CCAs are to obtain from the utility, not the ESCO, the customer contact information for sending opt-out notices
With regard to detailed customer information used for enrollment, that information is to be provided by the utility to the ESCO, the PSC said
The PSC affirmed that utilities are prohibited from providing CCA Administrators with customer utility account numbers as part of the info provided to CCAs to send opt-out letters
A CCA ESCO, in possession of the customer account numbers from the utility, shall not provide such account numbers to the CCA Administrator without proof of, "explicit customer consent that the individual account holder has agreed to have their account number shared with the CCA Administrator by the ESCO and for what purposes," the PSC said
The PSC declined to allow the utility to provide to ESCOs customer account numbers prior to the completion of the opt-out period
The PSC also found "very concerning" provisions of CCA consultant agreements or ESCO supply agreements which may restrict a municipality's rights or customer choice
The PSC was concerned with the potential that CCA agreements may prohibit a municipality, or retail customers, from installing distributed energy resources or undertaking energy efficiency or load reduction measures
DPS Staff had proposed a Municipality Bill of Rights that, among other things, would have informed communities that municipalities do not need to name a specific CCA Administrator in their local legislation adopting a CCA, and that municipalities have the right to reject an energy supply contract for any reason (the PSC adopted these and other provisions from Staff's bill of rights, though by incorporating them into the municipal CCA filing package)
Citing opposition from certain CCA parties to the bill of rights, the PSC said that such objections, "seem to indicate that there may be contracts that prohibit a municipality from signing with other CCA Administrators and that they cannot decline to enter an ESA [energy service agreement] if it meets the initially agreed upon terms."
"CCA programs are not limited to contracting with only one ESCO, and municipalities are encouraged to consider whether agreements with more than one ESCO offering different products or benefits, or with DERs and energy efficiency providers in addition to one or more ESCOs, could support their development of a holistic community energy initiative," the PSC said
"The Commission finds that restricting the ability for a municipality to use another Administrator or third party directly limits the Commission’s intended vision of CCA," the PSC said
"CCA contracts are not allowed to include terms that would restrict the installation or use of DERs or energy efficiency products by the municipality or CCA customers, and doing so violates CCA Program Rules and is a disservice to New Yorkers," the PSC affirmed
The PSC's evaluation of municipal aggregation shall include a review of energy service agreements (supply agreements) in light of the above concerns
In the same order, the PSC also implemented new and revised outreach and education requirements for CCAs
The PSC expanded the required outreach and education period to 90 days, from the current 60 days, for existing CCAs which aren't currently supplying customers
For existing CCAs which aren't currently supplying customers, the PSC bifurcated the 90-day education period, ordering that 60 days of outreach and education are required prior to a community signing an energy supply contract. Another 30 days of outreach is required after the signing of a supply contract, but this post-award outreach period may run concurrently with the 30-day opt-out period
Additionally, if no outreach events are held during any 60-day period during this minimum 90-day outreach period, the CCA will need to restart the entire 90-day period and all obligations thereunder
For a CCA with a "renewal" of a supply contract, 60 days of outreach and education are required, but all such education would be after the execution of the renewal contract. 30 days' outreach will be required prior to the opt-out period, with another 30 days running concurrent with the 30-day opt-out period
For new CCAs, 120 days of outreach and education are required, with 60 days required prior to the execution of a supply contract, and 60 days required after execution of a supply contract, with 30 days of the post-contract education occurring before the opt-out period begins, with the final 30 days of outreach permitted to run concurrently with the 30-day opt-out period
With the extension of the outreach and education period, the PSC clarified how the CCA price will be measured against the applicable price caps for mass market service
For a fixed rate, the CCA rate must not be 5% higher than the 12-month utility trailing average rate. The PSC held that the specific 12-month utility trailing average rate used for comparison will be the 12-month utility trailing average rate that existed at the time that the CCA's supply agreement was signed
Though CCAs have not typically relied on variable rates, the PSC also reiterated that any CCA variable rate must provide guaranteed savings versus the utility, in the same manner as applicable to ESCO mass market service outside of CCAs
For CCA plans that offer a compliant renewable product, the PSC said that the ESCO requirement to disclose the premium for the renewable product shall be satisfied with the comparison of the CCA product’s rate to the utility posted 12-month trailing average, and the disclosure that the customer would be paying a premium for the renewable product offering.
Regardless of a community's size, all municipalities will need to conduct 5 public meetings under their required outreach -- 2 meetings before signing the supply contract, 2 meetings after signing (independent of anything required for the opt-out period), and 1 meeting during the opt-out period (For those CCAs whose post-award outreach periods run concurrent with the opt-out period, it appears that the required public meetings are separate despite the periods running concurrently. In other words, a CCA whose opt-out period overlaps the post-award outreach period would be required to hold 3 public meetings, not 2)
Public meetings must have an in-person component (a hybrid with a virtual component is allowed, but the meeting may not be entirely virtual), and public meetings must allow for live Q&A. A recording of all meetings must be placed on the CCA's website
The PSC also required separate information sessions (which may be wholly virtual) as well as supplemental outreach measures (including but not limited to TV, radio, newspaper ads, municipal service bill inserts, mailings, emails, social media, etc)
For communities with more than 10,000 residents, 6 information sessions, and 24 supplemental outreach methods (12 physical, 12 electronic), must be undertaken, over the course of the outreach period (with specific requirements set for the number required during each stage of the period)
For communities with less than 10,000 residents, 3 information sessions, and 12 supplemental outreach methods (6 physical, 6 electronic), must be undertaken, over the course of the outreach period (with specific requirements set for the number required during each stage of the period)
The PSC declined to require that CCA outreach materials include example bill impacts under CCA service versus default service
The PSC acknowledged that such an example comparison would require the utilities to post their supply rates for each month in advance. As utilities rely on spot purchases for a portion of default service, advance monthly posting of utility supply rates is not required by the PSC (on the state's power to choose site, some utilities use the prior month price)
In the absence of any PSC order to require monthly posting of utility supply rates, the PSC did not require CCAs to provide example bills under the CCA rate versus the utility rate
The PSC did direct that its new evaluation of municipal aggregation shall study whether requiring utility posting of monthly supply rates is feasible and cost effective
All opt-out notices shall include the most recent 12-month utility trailing average price, the PSC said
This requirement includes opt-out letters for newly eligible customers during the middle of a CCA term
NRG had opposed requiring opt-out letters for newly eligible customers to include the latest 12-month price comparison, citing costs to maintain updated information each month
In terms of performing outreach, the PSC will allow a party other than the CCA Administrator, acting as the CCA Administrator's representative, to conduct outreach and education events, "if and only if that company/consultant identifies themselves to customers and in any relevant materials as the CCA Administrator."
However, the PSC's order includes ambiguous language stating that, "In the event a CCA Administrator includes outreach and education in the Municipality Filing that indicates it was performed by a company/consultant other than the municipality’s CCA Administrator, it will not be counted towards the CCA Administrator’s required outreach and education actions."
If outreach by a third party, even as a representative for the CCA Administrator and identified as the CCA Administrator, does not count towards the minimum required outreach, it is unclear why the PSC would see the need to state that the PSC will allow such activity (granted, the PSC encourages outreach above the minimum levels required, but, if additional outreach by a CCA Administrator's representative will never count towards the minimum, it is unclear why the PSC felt the need to "allow" such activity since such authorization seems unnecessary as such activity, which isn't being undertaken to comply with a PSC rule, would fall under the municipality's plenary power to communicate (via its agent) with its citizens)
It is unclear if the PSC's language quoted above was meant to provide something akin to: In the event a CCA Administrator includes outreach and education in the Municipality Filing that indicates it was performed by a company/consultant other than the municipality’s CCA Administrator in which such outreach was not identified to customers as being conducted by the CCA Administrator, it will not be counted towards the CCA Administrator’s required outreach and education actions. [underlined text represents ECM's thoughts on intent; to be clear, this is not a quote from the PSC's order].
CCA Administrators will be required to send notices to customers when a CCA program term ends (i.e. not a continuation with a new or renewed contract), in which case the customers are dropped to default service
The PSC clarified that ESCOs serving CCA customers are not required to mail CCA customers' sales contracts or an ESCO Bill of Rights, "as the ESCO customer is the municipality, not its constituents."
Case 14-M-0224
ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT 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
NY PSC Says Alleged "Customary" Data Sharing Of Customer Account Numbers Among ESCOs, CCAs Violates Rules
PSC Concerned CCA Contractual Provisions Restricting DERs, Energy Efficiency
November 19, 2024
Email This Story
Copyright 2024 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Director of Policy and Research, Retail Energy
• NEW! -- Director, Load Forecasting
-- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Wholesale Markets Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Origination Analyst
-- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Settlements Analyst
-- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Billing Supervisor
|
|
|
|
|