Regulator's Staff Seeks Decision Allocating Utility Bill System Upgrade Costs To Retail Suppliers; Would Assign Specific Share To Each Supplier

August 19, 2022

Email This Story
Copyright 2010-21 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 Office of Education, Outreach, and Enforcement (EOE) of the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority requested that PURA issue a draft decision to assign about $2.3 million in costs for utilities to update their billing systems to retail suppliers, with a proposed mechanism, and specific amounts, proposed for each supplier

The costs related to billing requirements under the Next Cycle Rate obligations for suppliers in Connecticut and system changes needed to list such information on EDC bills.

Additionally, EOE's draft decision would clarify PURA's prior findings with respect to reporting incidental residential accounts (IRAs)

"To ensure there is clarity in the Authority’s expectations of the EDCs reporting regarding IRAs, the Authority orders the EDCs to separately report IRAs in their monthly Docket No. 06-10-22. Specifically, the EDCs shall exclude IRAs from their residential reporting and separately report the IRAs for each licensed third-party electric supplier serving customers in their territory. The EDCs shall submit to EOE for review and approval the method by which they will display and report IRAs in future Docket No. 06- 10-22 compliance filings," EOE proposes

The EOE draft notes, "there are a variety of methods by which the Authority reasonably could allocate the Final Project Costs to Suppliers. The intent behind the changes required in Docket No. 14-07-19RE05 was to increase the accuracy and transparency of Supply Summary Information on each customer’s bill and to assure continued compliance with Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245d(a)(2). This intent integrates two components: a need to remedy the consistent errors made by Suppliers in their Supply Summary submissions prior to the RE05 Decision and a desire to create a system going forward that prevented future mistakes. This basis of the RE05 Decision suggests that the most equitable allocation of costs between Suppliers is to capture both intents and allocate the costs both prospectively and retrospectively."

EOE proposes that, to calculate the allocation between Suppliers, the Final Project Costs shall be divided into two portions.

The first portion would be a fixed fee assessed to all Suppliers who currently have a residential license (this does not include Suppliers who are licensed to serve business customers only). Suppliers who are licensed to only serve business customers and have IRAs are not considered licensed to serve residential customers and are excluded from the final allocation, EOE said. This fixed fee reflects the RE05 Decision’s intent to create a system that prevented Supply Summary errors in the future. All Suppliers who currently have a residential license have the statutorily-obliged opportunity to use the EDC billing system; therefore, it is reasonable to require all of these suppliers to pay a portion of the Final Project Costs since each of those suppliers benefit from the system changes ordered in Docket No. 14-07-19RE05 and implemented by the EDCs in the future, even if they are not currently serving residential customers, EOE proposes

EOE proposes that the second portion be allocated among Suppliers based upon the average customer counts for the three calendar years following the issuance of the RE05 Decision, specifically 2019, 2020, and 2021. "Using an average customer count to allocate half of the Final Project Costs balances the relative sizes of each Supplier and addresses concerns over use of the EDCs’ billing system," EOE said

EOE proposes that, "The Authority recognizes the customer count for Suppliers can vary greatly and therefore determined a larger sample size over multiple years is a better assessment for an allocation of costs. Furthermore, because the Final Project Costs is based on prospective and retrospective allocations, using a customer count with current customer counts is not retrospective, nor is it representative of potential prospective customer counts."

EOE's proposed allocation of the total nearly $2.3 million in costs to each individual supplier, under the mechanism described above, can be seen in the chart below

Atlantic Energy MA              $ 49,058.27
Champion Energy Services        $ 47,638.98
CleanChoice Energy              $ 47,634.38
Clearview Electric             $ 162,941.54
Constellation NewEnergy        $ 289,749.92
Direct Energy Services         $ 241,825.04
Eligo Energy                    $ 47,636.25
Energy Plus Holdings            $ 57,014.73
Think Energy (GDF Suez Retail)  $ 60,206.80
Green Mountain Energy           $ 47,634.38
Independence Energy Group,      $ 47,634.38
Major Energy                    $ 71,348.63
Mega Energy                      $ 3,357.50
National Gas & Electric         $ 47,901.97
NextEra Energy Services         $ 47,738.63
North American Power and Gas   $ 163,839.87
Reliant Energy Northeast        $ 70,895.04
Residents Energy                $ 48,403.15
Spark Energy                    $ 49,015.02
Starion Energy                 $ 107,724.36
Summer Energy Northeast         $ 47,634.38
Town Square Energy             $ 249,039.98
Verde Energy USA               $ 153,036.04
Wattifi, Inc                    $ 47,641.28
XOOM Energy                     $ 79,899.78

Docket No. 14-09-17RE07

ADVERTISEMENT
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Director, Regulatory Affairs, Retail Supplier
• Controller for C&I-only Retail Electricity Supplier
• Energy Advisor, PJM -- Retail Supplier
• Senior Retail Transportation Analyst (Gas Transport Services)
• Sales Business Development Manager – Residential Sales -- Retail Supplier

HOME

Copyright 2010-21 Energy Choice Matters.  If you wish to share this story, please email or post the website link; unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication prohibited.