Texas PUC Staff Files Recommendation On AARP Texas Petition To Require Lower Initial Payment, Longer Time Period For REP Deferred Payment Plans

Staff of the Texas PUC have recommended that the PUC deny a petition from AARP Texas for an emergency rule to lower the initial payment amount required under a deferred payment plan with a retail electric provider, and to extend the time over which the customer must pay the deferred balance

As first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com, AARP Texas had specifically proposed that, for deferred payment plans entered into between June 24, 2021 and August 17, 2021, the PUC should require an initial payment of no greater than 33% of the amount due, and that the deferred amount should be paid by the customer in equal installments over at least 9 billing cycles unless the customer agrees to fewer installments.

In a recommendation filed today, PUC Staff said, "Commission Staff recommends that the Commission deny the petition for rulemaking. The effective date of any rule adopted by the Commission at this time would fall after August 17, 2021, which is the end of the time period over which AARP Texas proposed the temporary rule change apply. This would eliminate the effect that any rule would have, as customers will have already entered into agreements with their REPs governing the terms of the relevant DPPs."

"Furthermore, the Commission could not have adopted this as an emergency rule, as requested by AARP Texas. Under Texas Government Code § 2001.034, a state agency may adopt an emergency rule if either it finds that 'an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare' or 'a requirement of state or federal law' requires it. There is no applicable state or federal law that would require such a rule amendment, and the Commission's current rule governing DPPs already provides customers with a level of protection by limiting the initial down payment to 50% of the amount owed and the remainder spread out over at least five billing cycles. Especially in light of this existing level of protection, Commission Staff does not believe that the imminent peril standard required for an emergency rulemaking is met in this case," Staff said

Project 52305