Calif. Draft Would Deny Retail Suppliers' Petition for Rulemaking on Nonbypassable Charges

A proposed California PUC decision would deny a petition from retail suppliers and other direct access advocates to institute a rulemaking regarding nonbypassable charges and related mechanisms, including exit fees

The draft states that "most" of the issues presented by petitioners have recently been addressed by the PUC or are being addressed in pending proceedings.

"To the extent that any issues raised in the petition may require additional review, they can be addressed in proceedings such as the Long Term Procurement Planning proceeding and General Rate Cases," the draft states.

The draft would find unpersuasive direct access parties' argument that current cost allocation and nonbypassable mechanisms are unfair, and would also find unpersuasive direct access parties' argument that SB 790 requires a re-evaluation of these mechanisms at this time.

"SB 790 does not explicitly require that the Commission review existing cost allocation and fee mechanisms, nor does it find that existing mechanisms violate the requirement that cost allocation and fees remain 'fair and equitable to all customers.' As a result, we find that SB 790 does not require a reevaluation of existing rates at this time," the draft states

"[T]he Petitioners have presented no evidence that existing cost allocation and fee mechanisms allow cost shifting or violate the provisions of SB 790 or other state laws. In fact, the Commission has found in past decisions that existing fee mechanisms divide costs appropriately between bundled customers and the customers of other LSEs," the draft states

Petition 12-12-010