|
|
|
|
|
Pa. PUC Won't Require Utility To Send Letters To Choice Customers About How To Compare Rates (Reversing ALJs' Proposal)
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The Pennsylvania PUC won't order Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania to send letters to low-income customers who are served by a competitive retail supplier at a price which exceeds the default service rate. The PUC also won't order Columbia to send targeted messages to choice customers about how to compare retail supplier rates
As previously reported, such a policy was proposed by CAUSE-PA [Coalition for Affordable Utility Services and Energy Efficiency in Pennsylvania] and the Office of the Consumer Advocate
OCA during the proceeding had provided a report which OCA said showed that, from January 2022 through March 2025, approximately 48,000 residential customers at Columbia paid $35,332,095 more than the price to compare. In only two months was there even a slight benefit from retail supplier prices, OCA had said
In a recommended decision, two ALJs would have found that requiring Columbia to send the letter concerning the customer's retail supply rate would be consistent with 66 Pa.C.S. § 1501 which requires the utility to provide safe, adequate and reasonably continuous service
The ALJs had recommended that the letter shall inform these customers of the availability of CAP [Customer Assistance Program] and other universal service programs, including the benefits of each program and how to enroll. Generally, CAP customers at Columbia are ineligible to take individual choice service from a retail supplier (and thus enrollment in CAP would require termination of choice service)
Additionally, ostensibly separate from the specific low-income customer letters, the ALJs had recommended that, "[a]t a minimum, the Commission should require Columbia to target educational messages to the choice customers to emphasize how to compare NGS [retail supplier] charges."
In the recommended decision, the ALJs had stated, "OCA and CAUSE-PA identified an issue and proposed a solution to address a concern that that affects a number of Columbia customers. OCA and CAUSE-PA further provided proposals to address and potentially resolve these issues for the benefit of Columbia customers."
However, in a final order in Columbia's rate case issued today, the PUC reversed the ALJs on this issue, and declined to order Columbia to send the letters to shopping customers concerning rate comparison education, or to send letters to low-income shopping customers who have rates above the default service price
The PUC said, "We agree with the ALJs that the record evidence suggests that some Columbia shopping customers, including low income shopping customers, may be paying rates that are higher than the Company’s PTC. However, the record evidence does not support a conclusion that Columbia’s current education and outreach to its shopping customers is not compliant with the Code, the Choice Act, the Company’s tariffs, or any Commission Regulation or Order. In our view, neither the OCA nor CAUSE-PA proved that Columbia is not fully compliant with its statutory and regulatory outreach and educational responsibilities regarding this matter. Furthermore, we do not find that Columbia’s obligation to provide safe, adequate, and reasonable service under Section 1501 of the Code, 66 Pa.C.S. § 1501, supports any requirement to provide the additional consumer education proposed by the OCA and CAUSE-PA at this time."
The PUC said that while a rate case was a proper venue to address customer service issues such as education, the PUC did not believe this specific question of targeted communications to certain choice customers is best resolved through the rate case, and instead suggested that a separate case would be a better forum, with the issue addressed on an industry-wide basis
The PUC further said, "[W]e will also refrain, in this Opinion and Order, from addressing the merits of the arguments offered by the Parties regarding the underlying intent of the Choice Act; if any improvement to Columbia’s current shopping education and any associated costs are necessary; whether such messaging could discourage customer choice; and whether additional education to low income customers would be discriminatory."
Access To Eligible Customer List
In the rate case order, the PUC ordered that Columbia shall revise its tariff language concerning the Eligible Customer List (ECL) to strike references to third parties
The PUC ordered that Columbia shall restrict the release of the Eligible Customer List (ECL) to Natural Gas Suppliers (NGS) that are licensed by the Commission to operate within Columbia’s service territory.
Columbia had argued that the ECLs could be provided to non-NGS third parties.
The PUC said, "[p]ermitting Columbia to provide the ECL information to third parties may expose customers to targeted marketing for products unrelated to gas service and may subject them to unwanted and unscrupulous marketing practices."
As previously reported, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. previously stated that it intends to enter into a Billing Agreement with Pivotal Home Solutions, LLC (Pivotal), which would allow for charges for Pivotal’s warranty service plans and products & services ("Covered Products") to be included on Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania customers’ utility bills. Additionally, such Pivotal service plans and products could use the "Columbia" brand name.
See background here
Issues concerning certain affiliate arrangements related to the Pivotal Billing Agreement, as well as "on-bill" billing issues, were not before the PUC in the rate case, and such issues remain pending in separate PUC proceedings
Bypassable Gas Procurement Charge
The PUC updated the bypassable Gas Procurement Charge (GPC) to be $0.00113 per therm at Columbia
Docket R-2025-3053499
ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Won't Require Letters To Low-Income Shopping Customers Who Have Rates Exceeding The Default Service Price
December 9, 2025
Email This Story
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW -- Account Executive (Commercial Retail Energy)
|
|
|
|
|