Pa. PUC Orders Higher Fine On Retail Supplier Versus Amount Agreed Under Settlement With Staff

The Pennsylvania PUC voted to issue an order modifying a settlement agreement between Vista Energy Marketing, L.P. and the PUC's Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement (I&E) which had been entered into to resolve allegations that a vendor's agent conducted door-to-door sales on behalf of Vista prior to a background check being completed.

The settlement had been exclusively first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com in January. As previously reported, Vista agreed to pay a civil penalty of $37,500 under the settlement

For full details concerning allegations addressed by the settlement, see our prior story here

The PUC today adopted a motion from PUC Chair Gladys M. Brown to increase the amount of the civil penalty to $52,700, which Brown said, "represents a per violation fine amount of $425 applied to each of the 124 violations and a total increase in the fine of $15,200, or 40%."

Vista and I&E have 45 days from the issuance of an order to elect to withdraw from the settlement given this modification

Concerning the higher fine, Brown wrote in a statement that, "I am not convinced the settled upon civil penalty of$37,500 is in the public interest. The Commission has some latitude in the process by which it may calculate a civil penalty in accordance with our long-standing Rose standards."

"In the instant proceeding, the Company committed, at a minimum, 124 violations of Commission regulations by permitting 124 sub-contractors to offer EGS marketing services without having first completed background checks. Under the existing civil penalty this equates to a fine of $302.42 per violation," Brown wrote

"I submit that, pursuant to the Commission's policy statement for the evaluation of settled violation proceedings, this amount per violation is not in the public interest. It is apparent from the record that these violations are of a serious nature. While it is not prudent to speculate, it is reasonably logical to conclude that temporarily authorizing personnel to market door-to-door without fully completing criminal background reviews may result in serious consequences and irreparable public harm," Brown wrote

"[I]t is imperative to establish a penalty which will deter future violations from this Company, and, send a proper signal to the Commonwealth's marketplace on the severity of violations of this nature. The regulations in this instance are clear, permitting any person to conduct door-to-door marketing or sales activities without having obtained and reviewed a background check is a violation. It is unfortunate, but necessary to ensure that this fact is made abundantly clear to Vista as well as other EGSs and natural gas suppliers," Brown wrote

M-2018-2624484