Energy Choice
                            

Matters

Texas Staff: New Enrollment Process Envisioned by REP "Relatively Unknown," Necessitates Hearing

June 15, 2015

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-15 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com

Staff of the Public Utility Commission of Texas said that a hearing regarding IGS Energy's sought good cause exception to the enrollment requirements in P.U.C. SUBST. R. 25.474(f)(2) and (3), to enable a new enrollment method developed by IGS Energy, is necessary because IGS's, "proposed process and the protection from misuse and fraud it offers are still relatively unknown."

As previously reported, IGS Energy (Accent Energy) is seeking a good cause exception to the rule to allow customers solicited door-to-door the option of choosing a retail electric product via a hand-held electronic device without requiring the customer to participate in a recorded third-party verification voice telephone call. IGS Energy has said that the current Texas rules governing door-to-door sales can be read to require that, even where an enrolling customer has electronically interfaced with IGS through its new iPad technology, the customer cannot have that choice effectuated without participating in a recorded third-party verification phone call. Under IGS Energy's iPad-based door-to-door sales and enrollment process, the customer would verify their consent to the terms and conditions via their electronic signature that is captured as a digital image.

More specifics of IGS Energy's proposed sale process are described in our prior story (click here), but in brief the hand-held electronic device also verifies via an electronic signature that the customer consents and acknowledges the specific statements set forth in the requirements of P.U.C. Subst. R. 25.474. After verifying the customer's consent and desire to choose the selected product, the terms of service, EFL, and Your Rights as a Customer document are e-mailed to the customer

Texas Staff has requested a hearing on the matter, which IGS opposed as unnecessary, arguing that there are no factual disputes in the case, and the matter may be appropriately addressed by the Commission.

Staff responded that, "Even if the facts regarding the specific details of IGS Energy's procedures and use of technology are not disputed, it is necessary that the ALJ make findings of fact and conclusions of law determining whether these procedures effectively protect the customer. Thus, the overarching issue of whether the customers are adequately protected remains at issue in this proceeding and must be determined by an ALJ."

While IGS offered decisions in other states accepting its new enrollment procedures, Staff noted that, "the Pennsylvania and Ohio decisions merely reflect the policies of other commissions with limited explanation of why or why not the policy was adopted." Staff further noted that, unlike Texas, the relevant Pennsylvania Code, 52 Pa. Code §§ 111.7-111.9 does not require telephonic verification of any solicitation, therefore, a good cause exception and accompanying analysis was not required.

"While it is important to utilize new technology to the benefit of the consumers of the State of Texas, this proposed process and the protection from misuse and fraud it offers are still relatively unknown. Staff believes this proceeding requires the presiding officer to consider a robust record in order to ensure that the customer protections in 16 TAC § 25.474 (f)(2) and (3) are preserved. SOAH is the appropriate forum for the determination of whether IGS Energy's enrollment procedures are sufficient safeguards to warrant a good cause exception from the telephonic verification process," Staff said.

"Staff believes this application is not appropriate for informal disposition because the presiding officer must weigh the evidence in the record to determine whether the procedures used by IGS Energy in door-to-door solicitation provide sufficient safeguards for customers to negate the need for third-party telephonic verification as required in 16 TAC § 25.474 (f)(2) and (3)," Staff said.

Docket 44518

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Senior Business Analyst -- Retail Provider -- Houston
• NEW! -- Billing Manager -- Retail Supplier -- Houston
• NEW! -- Business Development Analyst -- Retail Provider -- Houston
• NEW! -- Business Development Manager - Retail Energy
• Business Development Coordinator -- Retail Supplier
• Senior Analyst, Power Supply -- Retail Supplier
• Retail Energy Analyst -- Retail Supplier -- Houston