PUC Approves Utility's New Bill Format For Consolidated Bills, Rejects Shadow Billing Of Default Service

December 19, 2019

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-19 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com

The following story is brought free of charge to readers by EC Infosystems, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com

The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio has approved a new bill format filed by Duke Energy Ohio, including for utility consolidated bills

As previously reported, Duke Energy Ohio originally filed to modify the Price to Compare language on electricity bills under the format changes. However, in an amended proposal, Duke withdrew any changes to the PTC language, and Duke said that it would continue to use the PTC statement it currently utilizes on customer bills.

Currently, the PTC is only required by rule to appear for electricity service, but, as exclusively first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com yesterday, a draft Ohio rule would require the natural gas PTC to be listed for natural gas bills as well

Duke's amendment rendered concerns about the PTC language raised by IGS Energy, "moot," PUCO said in approving Duke's new bill format

The Ohio Consumers Counsel had proposed that the PTC information be moved to the front of the bill for customers receiving the "detailed" bill option. Currently, the PTC info appears next to a "billing details" section listing a line item of charges on page 3 of the detailed bill.

PUCO rejected OCC's proposal regarding the placement of the PTC statement

"[T]he Commission believes, and as Duke points out, it is logical to keep the PTC statement next to relevant content on the bill to ensure it is not overlooked," PUCO said

In response to another OCC concern, PUCO noted that, "Duke has also agreed to remove the reference to disconnection for failure to pay competitive charges."

OCC also sought to require that a comparison of shadow-billed default service costs and a customer's competitive retail supply rate be included on Duke's utility consolidated bills.

PUCO rejected OCC's proposal.

PUCO noted that, for natural gas, "With respect to OCC’s concerns about GCR pricing and shadow billing information being displayed on the bills of shopping customers, OCC itself recognizes that billing system changes are required before such information can be provided on a bill. OCC’s recommendations on these issues are premature at this point."

Case 19-1593-GE-UNC

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Channel Relations Manger -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Customer Service Representative -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Renewables and Energy Trader -- Retail Supplier
• Channel Partner Sales Manager -- Retail Supplier