|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania PUC Withdraws Marketing Conditions from Supplier's License
March 16, 2012
Email This Story
Copyright 2010-
On rehearing, the Pennsylvania PUC has withdrawn certain marketing and solicitation conditions, including a $50 cap on early termination fees, which were originally imposed on a retail electric supplier when the PUC granted the supplier its license.
As was exclusively reported by Matters, the PUC placed the marketing and solicitation conditions on EnerPenn USA, LLC, d/b/a Y.E.P. and YEP Energy, when the PUC granted YEP Energy an electric supplier license in November.
Matters noted at the time that the conditions were unprecedented, as they stemmed almost entirely from the Pennsylvania PUC's concern arising from a settlement between Staff of the Public Utility Commission of Texas and Texpo Power, LP, an affiliate of YEP Energy, concerning Texpo's compliance with the PUCT substantive rules. While nearly all mass market REPs in ERCOT have been found in violation of various PUCT substantive rules under the market-wide compliance audits, YEP Energy had been the only supplier upon which the Pennsylvania PUC has placed the marketing and solicitation conditions as a result of any Texas violations found in a compliance audit, even as suppliers similarly situated to YEP Energy with respect to the compliance audit applied for, and received, unconditional Pennsylvania supplier licenses.
On rehearing, the PUC agreed that, "there is no need for the conditions that the November 2011 Order placed on EnerPenn's EGS license, nor is there a need for an eighteen-month probationary period." The PUC removed the conditions from the license.
The PUC noted that EnerPenn did not have an opportunity to respond to the Pennsylvania PUC's concerns regarding the PUCT's investigation prior to the issuance of the November 2011 Order which contained the license conditions. The Pennsylvania PUC noted that in its rehearing request, EnerPenn offered new and novel arguments, and described additional facts and circumstances that were not previously considered by the Commission.
Such responses from EnerPenn resolved the PUC's concerns regarding consumer protection. For example, EnerPenn provided Commission staff with the name and contact information for a single point of contact with the company, a description of the customer service quality control process, a copy of telephone enrollment scripts, and a new disclosure statement.
Email This StoryCopyright 2010-
|
|
|
|
|