[36 Pa.B. 4414]
[Saturday, August 5, 2006]
[Continued from previous Web Page] COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Field Visit Fees
EAPA, Columbia, NFG, PPL Electric, and PPL Gas clarify that information regarding Field Visit Fees, Collection Data Variables #45 through 48, applies only to PGW and thus, any information gathered will be very limited.
CLS/PULP offers that Collection Data Variables #26 through #42 and #45 through #48 should be broken out by Income Level.
RESOLUTION--Field Visit Fees
We agree with EAPA, Columbia, NFG, PPL Electric, and PPL Gas that information regarding Field Visit Fees, Collection Data Variables #45 through #48, applies only to PGW and thus, any information gathered will be very limited. We do not believe that the provision of this data by PGW is necessary for compliance with § 1415 and we will exclude these variables from the Interim Guidelines.
XI. Universal Service Program Costs
49. The total dollar amount of actual LIURP spending for the year just completed
50. The total dollar amount of CAP administrative costs for the year just completed
51. The total dollar amount of CAP credits for the year just completed
52. The total dollar amount of CAP pre-program arrearage forgiveness for the year just completed
53. The total dollar amount of CARES program costs for the year just completed
54. The total dollar amount of Hardship Fund administrative costs assessed to ratepayers for the year just completed
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Universal Service Program Costs
PPL Electric states that the company can provide the Universal Service program data in Collection Data Variables #49 through 54 for up to four years. Duquesne contends that Universal Service data is extraneous for the collection of meaningful and appropriate data to support the Chapter's data requirements. Columbia argues that the Universal Service program data is duplicative and should be excluded herein. PPL Gas indicates that it can provide the CAP and Hardship Fund Data, does not have a LIURP program, and would not be able to report data related to CARES program expenditures.
RESOLUTION--Universal Service Program Costs
Data regarding the Universal Service Program Costs is already provided to the Commission through the Universal Service reporting requirements and is not burdensome for the major electric and major natural gas distribution companies already required to report this data under the applicable regulations. In response to Columbia's argument that the reporting of such data is duplicative and should be excluded herein, we point out that we will not require separate reporting herein. However, we will list these variables within the Interim Guidelines because we want to make it clear that it is our intent to include a summary of the utilities' Universal Service program expenditures in our Biennial Report to the General Assembly and the Governor.
Section 2--Generic Reporting Issues
There are four subcategories within the generic reporting issues: the number of years of data to be included in the initial Biennial Report, the frequency of utility reporting to the Commission, the utility reporting due dates, and the applicability of the reporting requirements to the utilities.
Number of Years of Data to be Included in the Initial Biennial Report
In the Tentative Order, the Commission pointed out that it previously recognized the importance of the gathering of multi-year data for trend analysis as part of the Reliability Performance Benchmarks and Standards. In the applicable reporting requirements at § 57.195, the performance benchmark for each reliability metric represents the statistical average of the EDC's annual, system-wide, reliability performance index values for the five-year period from 1994-1998. The benchmark serves as an objective level of performance that each EDC should strive to achieve and maintain, and is a reference point for comparison of future reliability performance. In similar fashion, the Commission proposed that the large utilities report on the five years leading up to Chapter 14, 2000 through 2004. The Commission stated that, in lieu of benchmarking, it proposed to establish a pre-Chapter 14 trend line that would be long enough to provide a meaningful view of the trend lines leading up to Chapter 14.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Number of Years of Data to be Included in the Initial Biennial Report
Columbia and EAPA recommends that the required number of years for the requested and available historical data be reduced from six years to three years (2004 through 2006). The current Commission rules at § 56.202 necessitate the compilation and storage of four years of data. Columbia and EAPA submit that some data may not be available because it was not tracked. Furthermore, the Commission must realize that most utilities may not be able to extract the data for all of the 54 proposed data variables.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas request that the number of years of historical data be reduced from six years to four years. Under Commission regulations, at 52 Pa. Code § 56.202, Record Maintenance, utilities are required to maintain for a minimum of four years written or recorded disputes and complaints. Thus, it is unlikely that utilities will have some of the collection data variables, particularly some of the proposed new collection data variables. Further, PPL Electric suggests that the Commission should match the reporting frequency and period, i.e., monthly or annually, to existing reports. Duquesne reports that some data is available for two years while other data is available for four years in its information systems. Meanwhile, the company maintains that it has never collected some of the data and it is not attainable regardless of what costs or time/labor is involved.
FirstEnergy requests that the Commission reconsider the request of historical data from 2000 through 2005 in lieu of the substantial burden it would place on the company to construct the requested historical reports. Aqua suggests that the data go back to 2004 and reflect year-end data. Columbia can provide existing data going back six years while the company can not recreate data that was never collected.
In its Reply Comments, the OCA suggests that limiting the data collection period to 2004 will not allow for sufficient information for the analysis. The OCA explains that the utilities argued to the General Assembly that the problem of uncollectibles, in particular, has been growing over time and the price of natural gas has increased substantially over the last several years. Limiting data collection to only the year before Chapter 14 became effective may not properly capture any trends, or allow for any trend analysis. Thus, the OCA supports the collection of multi-year data so that all trends can be properly analyzed. As reported in its Reply Comments, the OCA recognizes that it may be difficult and costly for some utilities to obtain all of the requested information in the format or detail sought for the historic periods. Rather than eliminate the data variable for the historic period, the OCA suggests that each utility work with the Commission to determine the best available historic information for use in the report.
RESOLUTION--Number of Years of Data to be Included in the Initial Report
We agree with PPL Electric and PPL Gas that under Commission regulations, at 52 Pa. Code § 56.202, Record Maintenance, utilities are required to maintain for a minimum of four years written or recorded disputes and complaints. Thus, we establish that the historical reporting period for the residential collections data in our initial Biennial Report will be from 2002 through 2005, and we will specify this timeframe in the Ordering Paragraphs of this Final Order.
Frequency of Reporting
In the Tentative Order, the Commission opined that it may be appropriate for the frequency of reporting to vary on a variable by variable basis, depending on the nature of the data and the use of the data. In the Tentative Order, the Commission proposed that many of the collection variables be reported to us on a monthly basis. In this way, the Commission offered that it would have as much current collection data as possible at any given time. In addition, the Commission suggested that some variables, such as the Universal Service Program costs, be reported on an annual basis. Meanwhile, the Commission suggested biannual reporting for collections measures such as write-offs.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Frequency of Reporting
Columbia submits that there is little reason to require the utilities to report more frequently than one time per year. In those instances where data may be provided on a monthly frequency without excessive programming costs, Columbia does not object to the provision of data on a monthly basis. Columbia suggests that to the extent possible, every data variable should be reported on an end-of-calendar-month snapshot basis.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas suggest that the Commission should match the reporting frequency and period to existing reports.
RESOLUTION--Frequency of Reporting
We agree with Columbia that the frequency of reporting by the utilities to the Commission should be done one time per year, i.e., annual reporting to the Commission, and we will reflect such in our Interim Guidelines.
Utility Reporting Due Dates
In the Tentative Order, the Commission suggested that separate reporting for each year 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 is due on or before June 1, 2006. Subsequent reporting would then address data from 2006 and beyond. We then set forth various due dates for variables depending on how frequently we would require reporting for them.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Utility Reporting Due Dates
EAPA states that the submission of extensive data by June 1, 2006 prior to the presentation of a Data Dictionary is not feasible. The Commission cannot act prior to June 1, 2006, and, therefore, cannot be expected to comply by June 1, 2006. New data can be supplied going forward to supplement the existing reporting requirements to meet the needs of the Biennial Report due in 2008. Columbia, PECO and NFG state that the June 1 deadline for data submission is likely to occur before the Commission can issue a Final Order.
PECO anticipates that companies will need sufficient time to plan, program and test the required computer changes needed to produce new data and the company believes that the new data variables may not be available until the next Biennial Report filed on December 14, 2008. PECO explains that the effort to define new data points should be done in parallel with and after development of the 2006 Biennial Report with final regulations on that matter issued only after the parties and the Commission are able to utilize the information gained during the development of the 2006 Report. In its Reply Comments, PECO says that the June 2006 proposed reporting dates precede the Commission's final action in this docket and the issuance of a Data Dictionary.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas recommend that the proposed reporting deadline be changed from June 1, 2006 and June 25, 2006, to September 1, 2006.
RESOLUTION--Utility Reporting Due Dates
We realize that this Final Order will be entered after our initial reporting deadline of June 1, 2006. We accept the suggestions of PPL Electric and PPL Gas that we extend the initial reporting deadline to September 1, 2006. For subsequent reporting, we will establish the annual reporting due date as April 1 of each year. Data will then be provided for the prior year. This annual due date matches the due date of Universal Service reporting requirements. Thus, reporting for the year 2006 is due no later than April 1, 2007. The annual reporting will continue through April 1, 2014, which will cover the year 2013. We will reflect our decisions regarding the utility reporting due dates in our Interim Guidelines.
Applicability of Collections Reporting Requirements
In the Tentative Order, the Commission proposed that larger utilities provide more information than smaller utilities in recognition of resource restriction that smaller utilities are likely to face. We proposed that larger utilities be required to fully comply with the data reporting requirements while smaller utilities are required to report only a limited number of collection data variables. The Commission proposed that larger utilities, subject to full reporting to the Commission pursuant to § 1415, are electric, gas and water distribution utilities with annual operating revenues greater than or equal to $200 million. The electric distribution utilities that would be subject to the Chapter 14 evaluation reporting requirements using this criterion are Allegheny Power Company, Duquesne Light Company, Metropolitan Edison Company, PECO Energy Company, Pennsylvania Electric Company, Penn Power Company and PPL Electric Utilities. The natural gas distribution utilities that would be subject to the Chapter 14 evaluation reporting requirements as proposed are Columbia Gas Company, Dominion Peoples, Equitable Gas Company, Natural Fuel Gas Distribution, PECO Energy Company, PG Energy Company, Philadelphia Gas Works and UGI Utilities. The water distribution utilities that would be subject to the Chapter 14 evaluation reporting requirements are Aqua Pennsylvania, Inc. and Pennsylvania American Water Company.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Applicability of Collections Reporting Requirements
No comments were filed regarding the applicability of collections reporting requirements.
RESOLUTION--Applicability of Collections Reporting Requirements
We did not receive any comments on this matter. Hearing no objections to the proposal for applicable utilities set forth in the Tentative Order, we recommend that the large utilities listed above be required to fully comply with the collection data reporting requirements. As proposed in our Tentative Order, data submission from smaller utilities covered by Chapter 14 is limited to a smaller number of residential collection data variables. This abbreviated list of collection variables includes the number of residential customers, annual residential billings, annual gross residential write-offs, the number of terminations and the number of reconnections. However, we ask all of the smaller companies to voluntarily submit their set of more limited required data from the established historical period from 2002 through and including 2005. We will reflect our decisions regarding the applicability of collections reporting requirements in our Interim Guidelines.
Section 3--Collaborative Process
In the third primary residential collections issue, the initiation of a collaborative process, there are five subsections presented below: request for a collaborative process for the development of a Data Dictionary, definitions of terms, the periodicity of collections data variables, the accounting protocols for collections data variables, and data transfer. In the Tentative Order, the Commission determined to file the Data Dictionary and a report on utility variances from the Data Dictionary at this Docket upon completion of the Data Dictionary. The comments and reply comments for the five subsections for the collaborative process appear immediately below. The Resolution for Section 3, Collaborative Process, is consolidated and it appears after the final subsection regarding data transfer.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS--Section 3--Collaborative Process
Collaborative Process for the Development of a Data Dictionary
EAPA offers to work with the Commission in a collaborative process to develop the collections Data Dictionary. Duquesne also pledges its support to work with the Commission to help it gather the information it needs for its reporting purposes through a collaborative process.
PPL Electric believes there is insufficient time to establish a Commission-led working group to develop the Data Dictionary before the first report is due. In the alternative, PPL Electric recommends that the Commission issue a draft copy of the Data Dictionary with its Final Oder and provide a brief comment period for interested parties to provide feedback regarding the contents of the Data Dictionary. PPL Electric believes that having too many variances and exceptions makes it difficult to compare results, understand implications and draw meaningful conclusions.
Duquesne contends that it is difficult to compile data variables without the use of a Data Dictionary and reporting instructions while some of the information requested in this proceeding is already provided to the PUC in other reports. For information not already provided, Duquesne believes that an evaluation and determination should be done to decide what information is truly needed by the PUC to prepare the report and how it can be assembled in the most cost-efficient manner.
FirstEnergy supports the Commission's initiative to establish a Data Collection Dictionary. According to FirstEnergy, without uniform definitions, it is very difficult to compare data submitted by participating utilities.
NFG is concerned that the definitions of data elements set forth in the proposed Data Dictionary could later be modified during the rulemaking process for amending Chapter 56 as superseded by Chapter 14. NFG comments that the Commission should strongly consider commencing the rulemaking process wherein the proposed data elements and reporting procedures can be properly defined and established so that utilities are not required to make programming changes without adequate guidance.
In its Reply Comments, PECO contends that a more extensive, collaborative approach to defining additional data reporting requirements for subsequent biennial reports is more likely to result in a set of requirements that are both attainable by utilities and useful to the Commission in preparing its report to the Governor and General Assembly. PECO believes the sheer magnitude of additional data requested by CLS/PULP reinforces the need for a collaborative approach.
Definitions of Terms
General Comments about Definitions of Terms
EAPA states that the Commission's definitions appearing in Appendix A--Section II, Definitions, need to be crafted in the context of developing a Data Dictionary as part of a collaborative process during a rulemaking proceeding.
PGW comments that the proposed definitions used in the Appendix are confusing and inconsistent with Chapter 14. For example, PGW believes that the term ''Active Residential Account'' does not appear in Chapter 14.
Specific Comments about Definitions
EAPA points out that Section 1403 sets forth a definition of CAP. EAPA contends that the definition of ''inactive residential account'' is contrary to industry practice, which does not require the account to be written off to be inactive if the service has been terminated or discontinued. Columbia submits that the definition is not comprehensive.
PGW contends that the definition for Reconnection for Customer Payment is faulty and will not match up with utility practice under Chapter 14. According to PGW, the PUC certainly could not have intended to limit its definition to individuals whose service has been terminated but whose final bill is not yet ''due and payable.'' Moreover, the definition of ''Payment Agreement'' also only applies to a ''Customer'' and therefore cannot be extended to someone who has been terminated and who is no longer a ''Customer'' (i.e., has already received the final bill, which has come due). PGW argues that these definitional issues merely add to the confusion and difficulties that covered utilities will face if they are forced to comply with the Commission's Tentative Order.
Columbia remarks that the definition is not comprehensive and would paint an erroneous picture of how many customers are reconnected. Columbia also questions whether definitions for CAP, CARES and LIURP are necessary here given that they are defined elsewhere. Instead, Columbia proposes that a reference to existing definitions would be a more appropriate way to proceed.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas suggest adding and defining the following terms to the Definitions in Appendix A: payment agreement, termination of service, arrears, current billings, security deposit, and LIHEAP.
Periodicity of the Reporting Requirements on Collection Data Variables
Columbia sees no need for any period other than a month or a year for the periodicity of data. Columbia does not see value in semi-annual reporting. Aqua suggests that the data go back to 2004 and reflect year-end data.
In its Reply Comments, the OCA opines that limiting the data to only annual data, rather than showing the month by month break down, and limiting the time period for the collection of historic data, will not allow the Commission to properly evaluate the impact of Chapter 14. Particularly in light of the winter termination procedures and protections, the OCA believes that data provided on a monthly basis will allow the Commission to evaluate the impact of this significant change.
Accounting Protocols on a Variable by Variable Basis
Columbia suggests that to the extent possible, every data variable should be reported on an end-of-calendar-month snapshot basis. Existing reports should be used for the 2006 Report and the Commission should initiate a Data Dictionary regulation proceeding to address the definitional and accounting protocol issues in the long term.
Data Transfer from Companies to the Commission
In the Tentative Order, the Commission offered to share its available historical collections data with the utilities in an effort to validate and verify past data and to facilitate the submission of previously reported data by the utilities to the Commission. Columbia offers that, if necessary, the utilities could likely reproduce some of the data from existing reports in a spreadsheet format so the PUC staff could more easily combine data between the utilities to show a composite for the entire Commonwealth.
RESOLUTION--Section 3--Collaborative Process
As indicated above, the comments and reply comments for the collaborative process included the following five sub-categories: the collaborative process for the development of a Data Dictionary, definitions of terms, the periodicity of the reporting requirements on collection data variables, the accounting protocols on a variable by variable basis, and the data transfer from companies to the Commission. Except for the data transfer issues, each of the other four sub-categories is related and shares a common resolution.
The Commission will develop a Data Dictionary for the required collections data variables in a collaborative process. In this manner, we will clarify the definitions of each data variable, establish the periodicity of the reporting for each data variable, and establish the accounting protocols for each data variable. Further, we will require that membership in the Collaborative Process Working Group be limited to one representative each from the electric industry, natural gas industry, water industry, and consumer representative (from either OCA or CLS/PULP). The Bureau of Consumer Services will represent the Commission. We ask the Working Group to complete the Data Dictionary by September 30, 2006, and the Data Dictionary will provide guidance for utility data beginning with the 2007 data set. In addition, the Data Dictionary will clarify the definitions for the historical data variables covering the historical data period 2002 through 2006.
With respect to the Data Transfer issue, the Bureau of Consumer Services will provide the major electric and natural gas distribution companies with its files containing the collections data for the historical period 2002 through 2005. The Commission will provide the data files in an electronic format to EAPA for distribution to its member companies. The Commission will provide the data by August 1, 2006, and we ask that the data validation process be completed by the utilities no later than September 1, 2006.
Section 4--Link between the Chapter 56 Rulemaking and the Collections Reporting Requirements
In the Tentative Order, the Commission proposed that the collections reporting requirements be instituted through Interim Guidelines since there is little time between the current date and the due date of the Biennial Report. These guidelines, once finalized, would be intended to remain in place pending a decision on a formal rulemaking to promulgate regulations. The Commission received a number of comments on this topic.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS--Section 4--Link between the Chapter 56 Rulemaking and the Collections Reporting Requirements
PECO contends that it is not appropriate to implement new data reporting measures on a voluntary basis in the interim period between filing of the Comments and Reply Comments and final Commission resolution of these matters. Duquesne goes further and suggests that a rulemaking should be considered at some point to delineate what will be required on an ongoing basis.
EAPA comments that the Commission should revisit Chapter 56 by amending the existing regulations. The Chapter 14 legislation outlines likely conflicts with Chapter 56, specifically 25 provisions of Chapter 56. EAPA believes that until that process is undertaken and completed, the Commission has not set forth the rules that the utilities must follow. Columbia argues that the Chapter 56 rulemaking should commence and conclude before the collection data requirements are developed for the Biennial Report.
Columbia recommends that the Commission should initiate Data Dictionary regulations proceeding to address the definitional and accounting protocol issues in the long term following the Chapter 56 rulemaking.
In its Reply Comments, EAPA urges the Commission to begin the process of a rulemaking so as to fulfill its statutory duty to reduce receivables and assist timely paying customers, rather than seeking sweeping changes via a policy statement. The OCA replies that EAP's call for a rulemaking regarding Chapter 56 is misplaced in this docket. The Commission's Tentative Order addresses only the data collection requirements in this proceeding. Moreover, the OCA contends that any suggestion that the Commission was discussing any other possible rulemaking is simply without merit. The Commission sought public comment on these Interim Guidelines and there is no indication that a formal rulemaking is needed for the Commission to fully consider these comments. The OCA agrees that once the Commission has some experience with these Reports, it may wish to formalize all of the reporting requirements through a rulemaking process. However, the OCA believes that such a process is not necessary or practical for the Commission to collect information for this initial Report.
RESOLUTION--Section 4--Link between the Chapter 56 Rulemaking and the Collections Reporting Requirements
We agree with the OCA and the Commission will soon initiate a rulemaking revising Chapter 56. Until the Chapter 56 rulemaking is complete, we will establish Interim Guidelines in this Order for the collections data reporting requirements effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. These Interim Guidelines will remain in place until the Chapter 56 rulemaking is completed. In the Chapter 56 rulemaking, we will revise § 56.231 to incorporate these Interim Guidelines.
Chapter 14 was clear with respect to the Commission's implementation of this legislation. Section 6 of Act 201 requires the Commission to amend Chapter 56 to comply with Chapter 14 and promulgate other regulations to administer Chapter 14 ''but promulgation of any such regulation shall not act to delay the implementation or effectiveness of this Chapter.'' In order for us to comply with time requirement of § 1415, it will be necessary to adopt Interim Guidelines set forth herein.
Section 5--Making Collections Data Available to the Public
Although the Commission did not raise the issue of making the collections data available to the public, we received comments asking us to make the data available on our website.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS--Section 5--Making Collections Data Available to the Public
CLS/PULP strongly suggests that all current and future data or information collected be made available to the public concurrently with the submission to the Commission through electronic methods from the Commission's website. In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric agrees with the principle of making information readily available to the public but recognizes the difficulty in providing the data concurrently to the Commission and the public. PPL recommends that the Commission establish a reasonable timeframe, such as 30 days, in which it would have the data available on its website.
CLS/PULP suggests that if material changes are made to utility data previously reported to the Commission, the Commission should inform the public not only of the nature of the changes, but should provide a detailed explanation why the data was modified. In its Reply Comments, PPL opposes this proposal because it lacks clarity and definition and it is overly burdensome for both the Commission and the utilities.
PECO states that some financial data may need to be provided to the Commission on a date prior to being released to the financial community or public at large. In this instance, PECO states that a rulemaking should address the proper handling of such data, including the details for utilities requesting to submit information under a confidential or proprietary cover.
RESOLUTION--Section 5--Making Collections Data Available to the Public
We agree with CLS/PULP that the collections data should be made available to the public and we will place the initial historical data submission covering the period 2002 through 2005 on our website by December 14, 2006. Thereafter, we will place subsequent annual data submissions on our website by August 31 of each year.
Section 6--Proposed Legislative Changes
According to § 1415, the Commission may also recommend in the Biennial Report any legislative or other changes which it deems appropriate to the Governor and General Assembly. The Commission received one comment in this regard while the Commission has one announcement to make regarding future Biennial Report submission due dates.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS--Section 6--Proposed Legislative Changes
In its Reply Comments, CLS/PULP points out that § 1415 states that the Commission may propose any legislative or other changes which it deems appropriate to the Governor and the General Assembly. The Comments filed by EAPA and the utilities judge Chapter 14 to be a success. On the other hand, CLS/PULP submits that such a review will demonstrate that Chapter 14's unaffordable payment agreements, prohibitive deposits, and limitations on PUC intervention, combined with accelerated termination processes with inadequate safeguards for low-income and medically vulnerable customers, have endangered and continue to endanger the welfare, health and safety of Pennsylvanians. CLS/PULP believes that the Act should either be repealed or amended.
RESOLUTION--Section 6--Proposed Legislative Changes
The decision to repeal or amend Chapter 14 is solely up to the legislature. Through the issuance of the Biennial Report, the Commission will keep the legislature abreast of the implementation of the Chapter.
At this time, the Commission has one suggestion for a change to future Biennial Reports. The Commission hereby serves public notice that it intends to revise the due date for the second Biennial Report (and subsequent Biennial Reports) by moving it earlier, from December 14, 2008 to August 31, 2008. By moving the due date up by three and a half months, the data contained in the Commission's Biennial Report will be timelier. Thus, the second Biennial Report will include data for the calendar years 2006 and 2007 and when the Commission issues the report by the end of August 2008, the data will be current enough to be timelier. Also, in this way the final Biennial Report due on August 31, 2014 will be submitted prior to the sunset of Chapter 14 on December 14, 2014, and will be available for the legislature in its decision-making on whether to allow Chapter 14 to sunset, to modify it, or to continue it without change. Following the 2008 Report, subsequent Biennial Reports will then be due to the General Assembly and Governor by August 31 of 2010, 2012, and 2014.
Chapter 3--Level of Access to Utility Service
The third area that the Commission is to report to the General Assembly and the Governor is the impact that Chapter 14 has had on the level of access to utility services by residential customers, including impacts on low income customers. In the Tentative Order, the Commission suggested that this may be the most challenging of the four areas of evaluation required by Chapter 14 because historically there has been minimal systematic data collected to address this topic.
The Commission pointed out that it receives limited information that pertains to termination from utilities through the annual Cold Weather Survey pursuant to our regulations at 52 Pa. Code § 56.100. The CWS data gathering is conducted by the electric and natural gas distribution companies once a year during the fall months. The utilities survey residential properties where heat-related service was terminated during the calendar year and not reconnected. Survey results are reported to the Commission and categorized according to whether household is known to be low income, known to be non-low income or income status unknown. The CWS reports to the Commission do not provide any indication as to how long the household has been without utility service. A further limitation of the CWS is that if you were terminated in a prior year, you will not be in the pool of customers to be surveyed in the current year.
In the Tentative Order, the Commission sought comments about whether there are any other potential measures of access to utility service that are not currently reported to, or gathered by, the Commission that may be relevant. We also sought comments on whether the Chapter 14 evaluation should consider implementing these new measures.
This major Biennial Report section regarding the level of access to utility service produced comments in three sections as follows: customer surveys, requests for new data, and targeted audits. The Commission's resolution appears after the last section in this chapter.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS--Chapter 3--Level of Access to Utility Service
Surveys
While the OCA supports the Commission's collections reporting requirements, the OCA submits that the Commission's evaluation of Chapter 14 performance must include a component directed toward assessing the impact of Chapter 14 from a customer's perspective through a customer-focused inquiry. The OCA contends that the Commission should develop one or more means to obtain information on the impact of Chapter 14 on affected customers, including a survey of low income customers similar to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA) survey, along with the adjunct Home Energy Insecurity Scale, so that the Biennial Report provides a complete picture of the impact of the provisions of Chapter 14 on customers including health and safety impacts. CLS/PULP supports using the NEADA survey template. In its Reply Comments, EAPA contends that since the NEADA survey is limited to energy assistance recipients, it can not be used to demonstrate the effect of Chapter 14 on all residential customers. In its Reply Comments, the OCA writes that since complete data may not be available from utilities for the first Biennial Report, this warrants even more the need for a customer survey of the impact of Chapter 14. In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric believes that the OCA may be overstating the impact of Chapter 14 on utility-customer interactions and provides data showing that 63% of its call center transactions did not involve collections. In addition, PPL adds that 75% of its field orders involve issues unrelated to the provisions of Chapter 14. PPL opines that another survey, including either the NEADA survey or the Home Energy Insecurity Scale survey, is not needed since the PUC already receives substantial feedback from consumers through a variety of sources, including § 54.154 for electric utilities and § 62.34 for major natural gas utilities.
CLS/PULP strongly recommends that the Commission utilize an independent survey of low and lower income households with income below 250% of FPL to obtain information concerning the specific and general impact on these households of the implementation of Chapter 14.
In its Reply Comments, EAPA opines that, if the Commission should find merit in the use of a new survey, EAPA urges the Commission to replace existing questions in the Quality of Service Customer Surveys rather than adding questions. The development of new policy would necessitate a regulatory change which cannot be addressed through the issuance of an Order aimed at establishing an Interim Policy.
In its Reply Comments, PGW argues that the additional requests for new data from the OCA and CLS/PULP are outside the scope of the PUC's reporting requirements, outside the purview of Section 1415, and arguably beyond the Commission's jurisdiction entirely. PGW adds that while the survey data may be an appropriate subject for the Department of Welfare, it is outside of the PUC's statutory charge.
In its Reply Comments, PECO submits that there may be other effective ways to obtain information from a customer's perspective. Specifically, PECO suggests amending the customer transaction survey that is conducted each year pursuant to the applicable Commission regulations. PECO also suggests that customer advocacy groups may be able to collect data and report to the Commission.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric writes that if the Commission agrees that a NEADA-type survey of residential customers is needed, then the Commission should have a third-party evaluator conduct the first survey for the 2008 Biennial Report on Chapter 14. PPL provides reasons for the delay in a survey including the fact that it will take time to agree on a third-party evaluator and for a survey instrument to be developed.
New Data
The OCA identified data items that the Commission may wish to add including the total number of applicants, and applicants by income level, that apply for utility service and are denied service, the time between disconnection of service for non-payment and reconnection of service broken down by time ranges (e.g., less than 1 day; 2-7 days; more than 7 days), the number of accounts disconnected for non-payment resulting in a write-off before service was reconnected, in total and by income level, the total dollar amount of bills written-off after a service disconnection, in total and by income level. The OCA also suggests that the Commission consider adding variables solely for those customers with incomes above 250% of the FPL including additional data from utilities regarding the winter moratorium, second payment plans, the use of payment funds, and the so-called ''household rule.'' In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric offers that utilities already provide the Commission with sufficient data regarding overdue receivables, terminations, reconnections, etc. As for post-termination customer data, PPL contends that such data is impractical. Finally, PPL argues that data related to the use of payment funds, i.e., customer funds, family or friends, or church organizations, is clearly untenable. Additional data regarding second payment agreements is burdensome and existing payment agreement data is adequate. As for the ''household rule,'' PPL states that Act 201 does not require utilities to obtain the names of adult occupants, or to implement all of the Act's provisions. Thus, there may be limited meaningful data to report and analyze.
The OCA states that in seeking to better evaluate the necessary link between utility credit and collection outcomes and utility credit and collection activities newly permitted under Chapter 14, the Commission should inventory the changes in utility credit and collection behavior attributable to Chapter 14. Thus, the Commission should require the utilities to provide a list of credit and collection activities, policies and procedures newly adopted and/or implemented since the enactment of Chapter 14.
CLS/PULP argues that the Commission's Biennial Report must also assess the impact of Chapter 14 in low income customers' ability to enroll and maintain participation in CAP. The legislature expressly required that the Report assess how implementation of the new law affected access to utility service. To be consistent with the Act, the Report must address the impact on access not merely in a general way, but rather on each of the Chapter 14 defined Income Levels. In its Reply Comments, EAPA contends that Chapter 14 has no impact on the ability of low income customers to receive the benefit of CAP and access to CAP is not an issue under Chapter 14. Thus, EAPA concludes that the CLS/PULP contention that CAP customers are impacted by Chapter 14 is without merit.
CLS/PULP requests that CWS data should be broken out by Income Level, be further expanded to include the length of time that the household has been without service, and include terminated accounts in the survey year as well as in the year prior to the survey year. Finally, CLS/PULP submits that a final CWS update should be added March 31.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric's perspective is that these suggestions are unnecessary, overly burdensome and costly. In its Reply Comments, EAPA writes that the Cold Weather Survey should not be expanded and cannot be altered via a policy statement.
CLS/PULP supports a requirement for a Collection Data Variable concerning the number of applicants denied service. However, CLS/PULP believes that a distinction should be made between new applications for service, and applications for service in which the applicant has an outstanding balance and the number of applications and denials should be broken out by Income Level. They submit that the data concerning denials should also have a time component as the companies should be required to report on the number of applicants granted within three days, fifteen days and thirty days, with this data broken out by Income Level.
PECO claims that other data demonstrates the level of access that low income customers have to utility service, including the fact that PECO does not require a security deposit from confirmed low income customers. PECO states that it has increased enrollment of low income customers into CAP. PECO explains that additional benefit is realized by reducing the payment level for low income customers as enrollment in CAP reduces the potential for low income customers to incur additional arrearage, thereby reducing the risk of termination for low income customers.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas recommend that the Commission focuses on two areas, the Cold Weather Survey and the quality of service statistics because these are two good indicators of customers' level of access to utility service. PPL Electric and PPL Gas track the number of service denial letters issued, but the companies do not track this data by income level. The PPL companies recommend that the PUC wait and address this issue for the 2008 Biennial Report.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas further recommend that the Commission eliminate the number of payment arrangement requests (PARs) as a measure of access to utility service. PARs are more indicative of a utility's collection activities rather than access to utility service.
In its Reply Comments, EAPA argues that much of the information which OCA and CLD/PULP wish to collect for the Biennial Report would not demonstrate the effect of Chapter 14 on access to utility service. Rather, an examination of the information traditionally collected by the Commission regarding collection and Universal Service Programs, will demonstrate whether access has been affected. EAPA further contends that the Comments of OCA and CLS/PULP focus solely on access to service by low-income customers and this narrow focus does not recognize the increase in reconnections due to expanded medical certification supported by Chapter 14, the increase in the number of CAP participants, or the fact that timely payments has led to greater levels of access.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric submits that several of the recommendations for new data variables offered by the OCA and CLS/PULP, such as providing data by Income Levels and conducting extensive surveys, clearly exceed the reporting requirements intended by the General Assembly in § 1415 of Act 201. PPL elaborates that the company only has Income Level data for 15% of its customers, and some of that data is arguably outdated.
Targeted Audits
CLS/PULP strongly recommends that the Commission initiate targeted audits as a data collection component. Targeted audits provide the appropriate mechanism to obtain and analyze the policies utilized by various companies and the impact that these policies have had on obtaining and retaining access to utility services. For example, the audit will permit the Commission to assess the impact of newly enacted Chapter 14 concepts, such as utility determinations of ''creditworthiness,'' and to examine areas of importance such as the success or lack of success of utility efforts to screen out low-income households from winter terminations. The Commission should attach as an Appendix to its Biennial Report the results of any audit of Chapter 14 compliance which it conducted in the period covered by the Report. At a minimum, targeted sampling audits should be conducted regarding the following: the extent to which utility companies have issued inappropriate termination notices and effected terminations to protected individuals during December 1 through March 31; the extent to which utility companies have issued inappropriate termination notices; the extent to which Chapter 14 reconnection and security deposit requirements, including credit scoring assessment of being ''uncreditworthy,'' act as barriers to the low and lower income to obtain and maintain service, as well as barriers to service reconnection; the extent to which utilities failed to provide termination protection or reconnection of services when it knew or had reason to know of the existence of a medical condition warranting a medical certificate; the extent to which the Commission determination to issue one payment agreement has increased access to the Commission, reduced the level of service terminations and fostered reconnections; and the extent to which the enactment of Chapter 14 has facilitated water service terminations and inhibited water service reconnections.
In its Reply Comments, PGW writes that the request for the Commission to conduct targeted surveys appears to be a thinly veiled version of a random compliance investigation, which is not authorized by Chapter 14 and is not conducted by the PUC in any other context.
In its Reply Comments, CLS/PULP contend that the necessity of surveys and audits to secure a balanced view of the impact of Chapter 14 implementation on residential customers is further dramatized in the utilities comments which summarily advance a series of proposed Report conclusions to show alleged financial benefits of Chapter 14, but fail to discuss the impacts on customers in maintaining access to service. Therefore, CLS/PULP argues that for every utility assertion of a Chapter 14 financial effect, the Commission has a responsibility to submit a finding and conclusion regarding the resulting effect on residential customer access to service.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric does not see the need for targeted audits because this suggestion is unnecessary. PPL explains that the Commission already has the authority to conduct investigations of utilities' practices in regard to the provisions of the Public Utility Code and its regulations and the Commission has access to sufficient sources of data to determine if a utility's collection practices warrant further investigation. PPL opines that historically the Commission has been diligent and effective in its efforts to protect the interests of residential customers.
RESOLUTION--Chapter 3--Level of Access to Utility Service
In reference to the Cold Weather Survey, in the past the Commission has asked utilities with more than 100 off accounts to resurvey those accounts and to provide an update to the Commission's Bureau of Consumer Services on February 1. Utilities have voluntarily complied with this request. CLS/Pulp argues that we need a resurvey added for March 31. We agree that CWS updates are needed. However, we believe that two updates, each one month from the preceding survey would be sufficient. Thus, we recommend that the utilities provide CWS updates to BCS on January 15 and February 15. We will formalize the dates of the CWS updates in the Chapter 56 revisions at § 56.100.
Although we agree with EAPA that the new data proposals of the parties would be burdensome and would not demonstrate the effect of Chapter 14 on access to utility service, we will include a review of the new data proposals for measuring the level of access to utility service into the Collaborative Process. Specifically, we will explore the possibilities of adding questions to the customer service transaction survey at §§ 54.151--54.156 and §§ 62.31--62.37.
Also, we point out that the Bureau of Consumer Services maintains extensive data on PUC-filed Payment Arrangement Requests and Consumer Complaints. The Commission will consider BCS' reporting capabilities in its reporting on informal complaints in the Biennial Report. Thus, some of the proposals for new data from the OCA and CLS/PULP may be available under Chapter 4, rather than in Chapter 3, in the Commission's Biennial Report.
In regards to the suggestion for targeted audits offered by CLS/PULP, we agree with PPL Electric's explanation that the Commission already has the authority to conduct investigations of utilities' practices pursuant to the provisions of the Public Utility Code and its regulations and the Commission has access to sufficient sources of data to determine if a utility's collection practices warrant further investigation. In addition, the Commission already has a process in place to address issues through its mandated management audit process. In the management audit process, issues are solicited by the Commission's Bureau of Audits from Commissioner offices, other Commission offices and bureaus, the OCA, the Office of Small Business Advocate, the utility, affected employee unions, and other parties as appropriate.
Chapter 4--Effect on the Level of Consumer Complaints and Payment Arrangement Requests Filed and Adjudicated with the Commission
The fourth area that the Commission is required to report to the General Assembly and the Governor is the effect of Chapter 14 on the level of consumer complaints and payment arrangement requests filed and adjudicated with the Commission. In the Tentative Order, the Commission reported that we can readily provide data including the number of consumer complaints, the number of payment arrangement requests, the number of non-CAP customers turned away from the Commission seeking a payment arrangement request, the number of CAP customers who were denied a payment arrangement by the Commission, the number of payment arrangement requests that the Commission took in but dismissed without a decision on payment terms, and the number of customers who made a payment agreement with the Commission that were under a Protection From Abuse Order. The Commission received both general and specific comments from the parties and they appear below.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS--Chapter 4--Effect on the Level of Consumer Complaints and Payment Arrangement Requests Filed and Adjudicated with the Commission
Given Chapter 14's limitation on Commission-ordered payment arrangements, the OCA submits that the number of payment arrangements requested and the number of payment arrangements denied should be included in the Commission's Biennial Report.
CLS/PULP recommends additional Collection Data Variables for payment agreements including requests by non-CAP customers for utility-established payment agreements and should be divided between utility-established payment agreements by customers whose service is on pursuant to § 1405, and requests by customers/applicants whose service is off pursuant to § 1407. CLS/PULP submits that this data should include the number of requests for utility-established payment agreements, the number of denials of such requests, and should be broken out according to Income Level. In their Reply Comments, EAPA and PPL Electric argue that the requirement to segment payment arrangement data into income categories would be not only costly, but impossible for most regulated utilities. PPL Electric adds that the Commission already has sufficient data and oversight regarding the implementation of CAP.
CLS/PULP recommends that we add a Collection Data Variable to capture the number of requests by non-CAP customers for Commission-established payment agreements divided between Commission-established payment agreements by customers whose service is on pursuant to § 1405, and requests by customers/applicants whose service is off pursuant to § 1407. CLS/PULP contends that this data should include the number of requests for Commission-established payment agreements, the number of denials of such requests, and should be broken out according to Income Level.
CLS/PULP recommends that we add a Collection Data Variable to capture the number of requests by CAP customers for utility-established payment agreements divided between utility-established payment agreements by customers whose service is on pursuant to § 1405, and requests by customers/applicants whose service is off pursuant to § 1407 requiring less than the outstanding CAP arrears (not including pre-CAP arrearages), plus reconnection fees. Moreover, CLS/PULP believes that utilities should also provide the numbers of payment agreements which were granted to CAP customers.
PECO agrees with the Tentative Order that the Commission already has the data sufficient to report on the level of consumer complaints and mediations filed with the Commission and that no changes are needed to comply with this portion of Section 1415.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas agree that the Commission can readily provide data regarding consumer complaints and PARs. Furthermore, the companies reason that it may be not a straightforward process to identify and separate out the effects of implementing Chapter 14 provisions versus actions taken independently by utilities to improve their compliance performance.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas are uncomfortable with the Commission's proposal to ''approximate'' the distribution of payment arrangement data and recommends that the Commission steers clear of estimates.
RESOLUTION--Chapter 4--Effect on the Level of Consumer Complaints and Payment Arrangement Requests Filed and Adjudicated with the Commission
We agree with EAPA and the utilities that the Commission already maintains sufficient data to measure the effect of Chapter 14 on the level of consumer complaints and payment arrangement requests filed and adjudicated with the Commission.
CONCLUSION The Commission's Final Order lays out a framework for meeting its obligation to issue a Biennial Report to the Governor and General Assembly reviewing the implementation of the provisions of Chapter 14 as directed at § 1415. The Commission proposes specific residential collection data reporting requirements that are aimed at measuring the impact of Chapter 14 on utility collections. The Commission believes that this can be accomplished through the initiation of Interim Guidelines for Collection Data Reporting Requirements. The reporting of comprehensive, accurate and uniform residential collection data will facilitate the use of residential collection data in future policy decisions regarding Chapter 14.
We are hereby proposing by this Final Order that Interim Guidelines for the Collection Data Variables be in effect pending the promulgation of regulations revising Chapter 56. These guidelines help certain utilities affected by Chapter 14 with the information needed to formulate the submission of data required for the Commission to complete its Biennial Report to the General Assembly and Governor; Therefore,
It Is Ordered That:
1. The Interim Guidelines for Residential Collection Data Reporting Requirements attached to this Final Order are hereby proposed to provide a framework for data reporting for the Commission to meet its obligation to issue its Biennial Report to the General Assembly and Governor reviewing the implementation of the provisions of Chapter 14 as directed at § 1415. These Interim Guidelines, once published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, are intended to remain in place until the revisions to the Chapter 56 regulations are promulgated.
2. This Final Order, including Appendix A, be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
3. A copy of this order be served upon all jurisdictional electrical distribution utilities, natural gas distribution utilities, water distribution utilities covered by Chapter 14, the Office of Consumer Advocate, the Office of Small Business Advocate, and the Office of Trial Staff, posted on the Commission's web site, and shall be made available, upon request, to other interested parties.
4. The Bureau of Consumer Service is hereby ordered to submit its records of residential utility historical data from 2002 to 2005 regarding the number of customers, annual collection operating expenses, gross write-offs, the number of customers in debt, the corresponding dollars in debt, the number of terminations, the number of reconnections, and the Universal Service program costs to the major electric and natural gas utilities by August 1, 2006. The 2006 data will be limited to the same abbreviated data set as the historical data set from 2002 to 2005 and BCS is ordered to submit its records of 2006 data to the utilities by April 15, 2007.
5. The utilities complete the data validation for the historical data in collaboration with the Bureau of Consumer Services by September 1, 2006.
6. The Bureau of Consumer Services, with assistance from the Law Bureau, is hereby ordered to set up a Collaborative Process to develop the Data Dictionary for the Interim Guidelines for Collection Data Reporting Requirements with one representative each from the electric industry, natural gas industry, water industry, and consumer representative (from either OCA or CLS/PULP). The Collaborative Process shall also include the development of a standardized Protection From Abuse annual notification as well as consider adding questions to the customer service transaction survey at §§ 54.151--54.156 and §§ 62.31--62.37. The Collaborative process shall be completed by September 30, 2006.
7. That the Data Dictionary for the Interim Guidelines for Collection Data Reporting Requirements is completed by September 30, 2006, and that the Data Dictionary is to become effective beginning with 2007 utility data due to the Commission no later than April 1, 2008.
JAMES J. MCNULTY,
Secretary
APPENDIX A INTERIM GUIDELINES FOR RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION DATA REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ELECTRIC, NATURAL GAS, AND WATER DISTRIBUTION COMPANIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF § 1415(2)
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of these interim guidelines is to set forth the reporting requirements for residential collection data that will allow the Commission to measure the effect of Chapter 14 upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collections of the affected public utilities.
II. APPLICABILITY/REQUIRED COMPANIES
All electric, gas or water distribution companies that have filed their most current financial disclosure to the Commission showing annual operating revenues greater than or equal to $200,000,000 are required to fully report on all collection data variables listed in Section IV beginning with 2007 data due April 1, 2008. All large water companies meeting this revenue criteria are required to report only variables #1, #3, #5, and #11 through #15 in Section IV for 2006 data due April 1, 2007. Data from large water companies for the years 2002 through 2005 may be submitted voluntarily to the Commission by April 1, 2007. All small companies covered by Chapter 14 are required to report only variables #1, #3, #5, and #11 through #15 in Section IV beginning with 2006 data due April 1, 2007. Data from small companies for the years 2002 through 2005 may be submitted voluntarily to the Commission by April 1, 2007.
III. UTILITY REPORTING FREQUENCY AND DUE DATES
The frequency of utility reporting is annual and beginning with 2006 data, the due date for utility reporting is April 1 of the following year. The last year of required data is 2013 and it is due to the Commission by April 1, 2014.
IV. PROPOSED LIST OF COLLECTION DATA VARIABLES
The proposed list of collection data variables appears below. Collection data reporting shall be categorized as follows:
1. The total number of residential customers
2. The total dollar amount of annual collection operating expenses
3. The total dollar amount of annual residential billings
4. The total dollar amount of gross residential write-offs
5. The total number of active residential accounts in arrears and not on a payment agreement
6. The total dollar amount in arrears for active residential accounts in arrears and not on a payment agreement
7. The total number of active residential accounts in arrears and on a payment agreement
8. The total dollar amount in arrears for active residential accounts in arrears and on a payment agreement
9. The total number of inactive residential accounts in arrears
10. The total dollar amount in arrears for inactive residential accounts in arrears
11. The total number of terminations for non-payment as defined at § 1406(a)(1) or § 1406(a)(2) or § 1406(a)(3)
12. The total number of terminations for other reasons including failure to permit access, unauthorized use of service, fraud, meter tampering, and safety as de- fined at § 1406(a)(4), § 1406(c)(1)(i), § 1406(c)(1)(ii), § 1406(c)(1)(iii), and § 1406(c)(1)(iv)
13. The total number of reconnections for customer payment by Income Level
14. The total number of reconnections for medical certification by Income Level
15. The total number of reconnections for reasons other than customer payment or medical certification
16. The total number of applicants that are billed a security deposit
17. The total dollar amount of security deposits billed to applicants
18. The total number of customers that are billed a security deposit
19. The total dollar amount of security deposits billed to customers
20. The total number of security deposits on-hand
21. The total dollar amount of security deposits on-hand
22. The total dollar amount of actual LIURP spending for the prior year
23. The total dollar amount of CAP administrative costs for the prior year
24. The total dollar amount of CAP credits for the prior year
25. The total dollar amount of CAP pre-program arrearage forgiveness for the prior year
26. The total dollar amount of CARES program costs for the prior year
27. The total dollar amount of Hardship Fund administrative costs assessed to ratepayers for the prior year
V. COLLABORATIVE PROCESS, COLLECTION DATA DICTIONARY AND VARIANCES
Following the Commission's issuance of the Final Order for Interim Reporting Guidelines, the Commission will prepare a Data Dictionary that will contain a definition for each collection data variable along with all pertinent reporting instructions for each variable. Companies that can not meet the requirements must seek a variance from the Commission. Variances from the Data Dictionary by individual companies will be documented and a report on the variances will be issued as an appendix in the Commission's report to the Governor and the General Assembly. The Data Dictionary and report on variances will also be filed at this Docket.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 06-1527. Filed for public inspection August 4, 2006, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
