Energy Choice
                            

Matters

Archive

Daily Email

Events

 

 

 

About/Contact

Search

Texas Staff Propose Questions Regarding REP Sharing of Customer Information

December 13, 2013

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-13 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Karen Abbott • kabbott@energychoicematters.com

Staff of the Public Utility Commission of Texas has proposed a series of questions for stakeholder comment in a project (42030) evaluating the sharing of customer information with third parties for customer approved services, "to gather information to assist staff in evaluating the Commission's rules regarding the sharing of customer information by Retail Electric Providers (REPs) and determining the need for a formal rulemaking project."

Staff recommends that the Commission request that interested parties file comments to the following questions:

1. Regarding the sharing of customer specific information by a REP with an affiliate or a third-party entity for service(s) which are customer approved and used for the purpose of providing electric service to the customer:

         a) Should the commission amend its rules to require REPs to more clearly disclose to the customer that their personal information will be shared with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and what verbiage should be amended to clearly advise the customer of the disclosure? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         b) Should the commission's rules be amended to clarify the verifiable authorization that REPs are required to obtain from a customer, written or otherwise, prior to sharing information with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         c) Should the commission amend its rules to allow a REP to refuse service to a customer based on the customer's failure to authorize sharing of customer information with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
NEW! -- Retail Energy Business Analyst -- DFW
NEW! -- Commercial Energy Advisor -- DFW or Houston
NEW! -- Energy Advisor -- PA, NY, Various
Chief Financial Officer -- Retail Supplier
Director of Sales/Marketing -- Retail Supplier
Director of Supplier Accounts -- DFW or Houston
Power Settlements Analyst -- Retail Provider

2. Regarding the sharing of customer information by a REP with an affiliate or a third-party entity for service(s) which are customer approved but not used for the purpose of providing electric service to the customer:

         a) Should the commission amend its rules to allow a REP to release proprietary customer information to an affiliate or a third-party entity without obtaining the customer's verifiable authorization? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         b) Should the commission amend its rules to create additional requirements regarding the sharing of customer specific information with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         c) Should the commission amend its rules to require REPs to more clearly disclose to the customer that their personal information will be shared with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and what verbiage should be amended to clearly advise the customer of the disclosure? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         d) Should the commission's rules be amended to clarify the verifiable authorization that REPs are required to obtain from a customer, written or otherwise, prior to sharing information with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         e) Should the commission amend its rules to allow a REP to refuse service to a customer based on the customer's failure to authorize sharing of customer information with an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         f) Should the commission amend its rules to require a REP to provide the customer an opportunity to opt-out of the release of their information if the information is used for a purpose other than marketing products or services on behalf of an affiliate or a third-party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         g) Should the commission amend its rules to allow a REP to share customer specific information with an affiliate or a third-party entity only if the customer agrees to opt-in prior to sharing their information? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended and how? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

3. Regarding the sharing of customer information by a REP with an affiliate or a third-party entity for services used for both the purpose of providing electricity and services not used for the purpose of providing electric service to the customer:

         a) Should the commission amend its rules to include the requirement for a REP to obtain the customer's or applicant's verifiable authorization prior to releasing customer information to an affiliate or third party entity? If so, what rules, including subsection(s) should be amended? If not, please explain why the rules should not be amended.

         b) Should the definition for "customer information" under P.U.C. SUBST. R. 25.5 and 25.472(c) be amended to include conditions and/or prohibitions regarding the use of customer information? If so, how should the definition be amended? If not, please explain why the definition should not be amended.

Separately, in Project 42029, Staff filed a draft proposal for publication concerning the sharing of customer's AMI data with third parties.

Specifically, with language tracking recent amendments to PURA, Staff suggests a new rule providing that a transmission and distribution utility shall not sell, share, or disclose information generated, provided, or otherwise collected from an advanced metering system or meter information network, including information used to calculate charges for service, historical load data, and any other customer information; except:

(1) With an affiliated corporation or other third-party entity, if the information is to be used only for the purpose of providing electric utility service to the customer; or

(2) With an affiliated corporation or other third-party entity for other customer-approved services.

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
NEW! -- Retail Energy Business Analyst -- DFW
NEW! -- Commercial Energy Advisor -- DFW or Houston
NEW! -- Energy Advisor -- PA, NY, Various
Chief Financial Officer -- Retail Supplier
Director of Sales/Marketing -- Retail Supplier
Director of Supplier Accounts -- DFW or Houston
Power Settlements Analyst -- Retail Provider

Search for more retail energy careers:
RetailEnergyJobs.com


Email This Story

HOME

Copyright 2010-13 Energy Choice Matters.  If you wish to share this story, please email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication prohibited.

 

Archive

Daily Email

Events

 

 

 

About/Contact

Search