1527 Biennial report to the General Assembly and Governor pursuant to section 1415; doc. no. M-00041802F0003
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION Biennial Report to the General Assembly and Governor Pursuant to Section 1415; Doc. No. M-00041802F0003 [36 Pa.B. 4414]
[Saturday, August 5, 2006]Public Meeting
held July 20, 2006Commissioners Present: Wendell F. Holland, Chairperson; James H. Cawley, Vice Chairperson; Bill Shane; Kim Pizzingrilli; Terrance J. Fitzpatrick
Final Order By The Commission:
On March 22, 2006, the Commission entered a Tentative Order seeking comments to its initial proposal for the content of the Biennial Report to the General Assembly and the Governor pursuant to Section 1415. The Tentative Order was published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin on April 8, 2006. Comments were sought by May 8, 2006, and Reply Comments were sought by May 23, 2006.
The primary purpose of the Final Order is to establish the data collection methods and data elements that the Commission will require on an interim basis from the utilities for the purpose of evaluating the effect of the implementation of Chapter 14 on residential collections as required by 66 Pa.C.S. § 1415. Second, this Order will set forth our proposals for the content of the Commission's Biennial Report as also required by § 1415.
BACKGROUND On November 30, 2004, Governor Edward G. Rendell signed into law SB 677, now known as Act 201. This Act went into effect on December 14, 2004. The Act amended Title 66 by adding Chapter 14 (66 Pa.C.S. §§ 1401--1418) (Responsible Utility Customer Protection). The legislation is applicable to electric distribution companies, water distribution companies and larger natural gas distribution companies (those having annual operating income in excess of $6 million).
Chapter 14 of Title 66 imposes requirements on the Commission at § 1415 pertaining to reporting to the General Assembly and the Governor every two years. The first report is due no later than December 14, 2006 and the final report is due in December, 2014. The reports are to review the implementation of the provisions of Chapter 14 and include, but are not limited to:
1. The degree to which the Chapter's requirements have been successfully implemented.
2. The effect upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collection of the affected public utilities.
3. The level of access to utility services by residential customers including low-income customers.
4. The effect upon the level of consumer complaints and mediations filed with and adjudicated by the Commission. (Mediations are currently known as payment arrangement requests under § 1415.)
Chapter 14 directs public utilities affected by the Chapter to provide data, as required by this Commission, to complete the reports. The Commission's report may also contain recommendations to the Governor and the General Assembly about legislative or other changes which the Commission deems appropriate.
The provisions of Chapter 14 generally apply to electric, water, and natural gas distribution utilities under § 1403. Chapter 14 includes the Philadelphia Gas Works, a city natural gas distribution operation, within the category of natural gas distribution utilities. The category specifically excludes natural gas distribution utilities with operation revenues of less than $6 million per year except where the public utility voluntarily petitions the Commission to be included or where the public utility seeks to provide natural gas supply services to retail gas customers outside its service territory. Natural gas distribution utilities that are not connected to an interstate gas pipeline are similarly excluded from the provisions of Chapter 14 under § 1403.
On March 22, 2006 the Commission entered a Tentative Order at this Docket for the purpose of evaluating the impact of implementing Chapter 14. In the Tentative Order, the Commission proposed to require larger utilities to provide more information than smaller utilities in recognition of resource restriction that smaller utilities are more likely to face. Specifically, 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. We 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, National Fuel Gas Distribution Corporation, 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.
The Commission proposed that the smaller utilities covered by Chapter 14 are required to report only a limited 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 asked all of the smaller companies to review the full list of collection data variables and provide comments on their ability to provide the data on a variable by variable basis.
REPORT CHAPTERS 1. Degree to Which the Requirements of Chapter 14 Have Been Successfully Implemented
The first area that the Commission is to report to the General Assembly and the Governor is the degree to which the Chapter's requirements have been successfully implemented. The Commission's initial proposal was that we provide a summary of the implementation of the Chapter 14 proceedings by both the Commission and the utilities. We also proposed to report on the deficiencies and violations of the utilities in the implementation of the Act. Finally, we proposed to survey Protection From Abuse agencies to determine the impact of Chapter 14 on that customer segment.
2. Residential Collections
The second area that the Commission is to report to the General Assembly and the Governor is the effect the Chapter has on cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and residential collections of the affected utilities. The Commission sought comments on five collection data issues associated with the utility collection reporting requirements including the content of the list of collection data variables to be included under the reporting requirements, the frequency of utility reporting under the reporting requirements, the periodicity1 of the reporting on a variable by variable basis, the accounting protocol on a variable by variable basis, the due dates for the utility reporting under the reporting requirements, and the number of years of collection data to be included in the first Biennial Report.
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 indicated that it receives limited information that pertains to termination from utilities through the annual Cold Weather Survey (CWS) pursuant to our regulations at 52 Pa. Code § 56.100. The Commission sought comments about the effectiveness of the CWS to assist in measuring access to utility service. We opined that there may be several potential measures of access to utility service that are not currently reported to, or gathered by, the Commission that may be relevant. We sought comments on whether the Chapter 14 evaluation should consider implementing these new measures.
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 stated that it can readily provide data including the number of consumer complaints, the number of payment arrangement requests, the number of non-CAP (Customer Assistance Program) 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 for payment terms and the number of customers who made a payment agreement with the Commission that were under a Protection From Abuse Order (PFA). We sought comments about these and other ways to measure the effect on the level of consumer complaints and payment arrangement requests filed and adjudicated with the Commission.
Written comments were filed by the following interested parties: Energy Association of Pennsylvania (EAPA); Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA); a joint filing from Community Legal Services, Inc. and Pennsylvania Utility Law Project (CLS/PULP); Duquesne Light Company (Duquesne); a joint filing from the three FirstEnergy Companies including Metropolitan Edison Company, Pennsylvania Electric Company, and Penn Power Company (FirstEnergy); PECO Energy Company (PECO), PPL Electric Utilities Corporation (PPL Electric); Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. (Columbia); Dominion Peoples (Dominion); Equitable Gas Company (Equitable); National Fuel Gas Distribution Corporation (NFG); Philadelphia Gas Works (PGW); PPL Gas Utilities Corporation (PPL Gas); and Aqua Pennsylvania, Inc. (Aqua). Reply Comments were filed by the following interested parties: EAPA; OCA; a joint filing from CLS/PULP; PECO, PPL Electric; and PGW.
It should be noted that while every position espoused by each of the parties, whether in Comments or in Reply Comments, may not be expressly detailed herein, each submittal was duly considered in the preparation of this Order and Annex A. Any position not expressly adopted herein is rejected without prejudice to future consideration as the parties request or the Commission deems appropriate. The summary of the parties Comments and Reply Comments is presented below and is divided into the four main areas or Biennial Report chapters as set forth in Chapter 14. Any general comments we received will precede the four report chapters. The four main chapters are further broken out into sections to allow for a more-detailed presentation and summary of the issues.
DISCUSSION Summary of Comments and Reply Comments Regarding the Biennial Report to the General Assembly and Governor Pursuant to Section 1415
The summary of comments and reply comments is presented below and is divided into the four main areas or Biennial Report chapters as set forth in Chapter 14 and listed above. The four main chapters are further broken out into sections to allow for a more-detailed presentation and summary of the issues. General comments precede each of the four chapters.
Biennial Report Chapters Chapter 1--Degree to Which the Requirements of Chapter 14 Have Been Successfully Implemented
The first area that the Commission is to report to the General Assembly and the Governor is the degree to which the Chapter's requirements have been successfully implemented. In the Tentative Order, the Commission proposed to provide a summary of the implementation of the Chapter 14 proceedings by both the Commission and the utilities. Next, we proposed to report on the deficiencies and violations of the utilities in the implementation of the Act. Finally, we proposed to survey Protection From Abuse agencies to determine the impact of Chapter 14 on that customer segment.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS TO Chapter 1--Degree to Which the Requirements of Chapter 14 Have Been Successfully Implemented
Summary of the Implementation of Chapter 14
PECO contends that the Commission can meaningfully report ''the degree to which the Chapter's requirements have been successfully implemented'' by reporting the status of implementation orders and other efforts, and by reporting certain data like terminations and reconnections into the categories of non-low income and low income. PECO agrees that a summary statement of the work accomplished to date on the implementation of Chapter 14, as well as the tasks that remain to fully implement Act 201, will be useful to include as a basis for the initial report.
EAPA argues that the Commission's handling of the reporting requirement on measuring the degree to which the Chapter's requirements have been successfully implemented is problematic because without a Chapter 56 rulemaking, the Commission has not completed the implementation of the Act.
Reporting on Deficiencies and Violations
PECO further contends in both its Comments and Reply Comments that the utilities and the Commission are still in the process of implementing Chapter 14 so it is too early to assess the deficiencies and violations. PPL supports PECO's contentions in its comments.
PPL Electric comments that the Commission entered a Second Implementation Order on September 10, 2005, but did not require utilities to submit another Implementation Plan. As a result, there may be a slight knowledge gap regarding the implementation of Chapter 14 provisions presented in the Second Implementation Order. PPL Electric suggests that the Commission may want to confirm that utilities have addressed any new implementation provisions presented in the Second Order.
EAPA opines that there is no legislative mandate to chronicle deficiencies and violations by the public utilities in implementing Chapter 14. Given the fact that the Commission has not set forth a rulemaking to replace the old Chapter 56 regulations, the industry can hardly be held accountable to a standard yet to be established. Duquesne, PPL Electric, and PPL Gas encourage the Commission to begin a formal rulemaking proceeding to reconcile Chapter 56 and Chapter 14 regulations. PPL Electric and PPL Gas also indicate that, as a result, utilities do not have clear direction on all the implementation requirements.
Protection From Abuse Survey
PECO requests that any survey of Protection From Abuse (PFA) agencies include the utilities as part of an open forum in which the utilities also have the opportunity to present their approach to the determination of the impact of Chapter 14 on this customer segment. PPL Electric and PPL Gas support a survey of PFA agencies and recommends that the Commission survey utilities as well to identify how many customers have contacted utilities regarding PFA Orders.
With respect to a survey of PFA agencies, EAPA suggests that rather than survey unidentified agencies, request that the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence provide information and guidance and along with the initiation of a Chapter 56 rulemaking, that will ensure the protections afforded by the Legislature are in place.
Columbia contends that Chapter 14 does not apply to victims under a PFA order. While some companies have been applying Chapter 56-type protections to these customers on a voluntary basis, regulations concerning Protection From Abuse orders should be promulgated so as to give customers and utilities guidance in dealing with Protection From Abuse orders.
RESOLUTION FOR CHAPTER 1--Degree to Which the Requirements of the Chapter Have Been Successfully Implemented
We agree with PECO that the Commission can adequately prepare a summary of the implementation of Chapter 14 proceedings for the Biennial Report and we will do so. We disagree with EAPA and the utilities that argued against reporting on deficiencies and violations of Chapter 14. We agree with PECO that the compliance data will be limited for inclusion in the initial Biennial Report. Nevertheless, we intend to include a summary of the compliance data that is available. We believe it is essential that this Commission provides such feedback to the General Assembly and the Governor and we will include such documentation in the Biennial Report. As for a survey of PFA agencies, we agree with EAPA that the utilities should provide additional guidance to the identified agencies. In this respect, we ask that the utilities provide an annual notification to such agencies and that the notice makes all pertinent information available to the identified agencies and PFA victims. We ask that the annual PFA notification be standardized and that the content of the PFA notice be developed during the collaborative process that will be completed by September 30, 2006.
Chapter 2--Residential Collections
The second area that the Commission is to report to the General Assembly and the Governor is the effect the Chapter has on cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and residential collections of the affected utilities. In the Tentative Order, the Commission sought comments on five specific collection data issues associated with the utility collection reporting requirements including: (1) the content of the list of collection data variables to be included under the reporting requirements, (2) the frequency of utility reporting under the reporting requirements, (3) the periodicity of the reporting on a variable by variable basis, (4) the accounting protocol on a variable by variable basis, and (5) the due dates for the utility reporting under the reporting requirements.
In addition, collections-related comments were received about the following: the number of years of past data to include in the initial Biennial Report; the manner in which the Commission will formalize the collection data requirement; the availability of the collection data to the public at large; and the need for a collaborative process to resolve data definitional issues through the development of a Data Dictionary.
The following summary of the collections chapter is segmented into six primary sections that address all of the collections issues mentioned above. The six consolidated primary sections are as follows: (1) the establishment of the list of collection data variables; (2) the reporting procedural issues such as the number of years of historical data to be included in the initial Biennial Report, the frequency of utility reporting to the Commission, and the reporting due dates for the initial and subsequent reporting to the Commission; (3) the establishment of a collaborative process to develop the Data Dictionary, clarify data definitions, the periodicity of the data variables, the accounting protocols for the data variables, and the data transfer methodology for both the historical data and future data; (4) the formalization of the collection data variables in the Chapter 56 rulemaking; (5) the process for making the collections data available to the public; and (6) suggestions for legislative changes.
Specific resolution(s) will be included at the end of each of the primary sections (2) through (6).
For section (1), the establishment of the list of collection data variables, the discussion includes numerous subsections, the last of which is the specific list of collection data variables that is carried over from the Tentative Order. A general resolution of the generic issues and comments appears on page 23, immediately preceding the subsection containing the specific list of the collection data variables. Most importantly, a resolution is provided at the end of each of the 11 primary data categories within section (1). (See next paragraph for the list of the 11 primary data categories).
Section 1--Establishment of the List of Collection Data Variables
In the Tentative Order, the Commission proposed a list of potential collection data variables for inclusion in these reporting requirements. These variables were listed in Appendix A of the Tentative Order. Overall, this initial list was designed to allow for a more complete collection analysis than current collection reporting has produced. We received extensive comments on these proposed collections data variables in addition to a number of new proposed variables. The initial list of collection variables had been compiled into 11 primary data categories including the number of customers, collection operating expenses, billings and payments, write-offs, arrearages, terminations and reconnections, security deposits, reconnection fees, late payment fees, field visit fees and Universal Service program costs.
The summarization of the comments regarding the establishment of the list of collection data variables is broken out into the following subsections: general comments; comments that offer support for the requirement of collections data; comments that suggest new or additional reporting requirements would be burdensome; comments that offer support for the use of existing collection data reporting requirements; a list of proposed new collection data variables; and specific comments regarding the 54 collection data variables proposed by the Commission in its Tentative Order.
In order to facilitate the discussion of the specific collection data variables that the Commission proposed in its Tentative Order, the collection data variables are repeated in this Order in the same manner, including the variable number, and in the same sequence that they appeared in the Tentative Order.
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES TO CHAPTER 2--Residential Collections--Section 1--Establishment of the List of Collection Data Variables
General Comments to Section 1
PECO believes that a key element to assessing the success on the implementation of Chapter 14 will be to develop a universally understood definition of ''successful implementation.'' This can be done by mapping each data to a specific measure of success.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas suggest an iterative process through which the Commission would establish its baseline data variables for the December 2006 Report, and then carefully consider other data variables that would add further value and insight to future reports. PPL Electric and PPL Gas ask that opportunities to reduce and/or consolidate the number of proposed collection data variables should be identified. Finally, PPL Electric recommends that the Commission take steps to reduce the number of variances from the Data Dictionary by selecting data variables that all utilities can provide.
Support for Collection Data Variables
The OCA states that the new collection data requirements reflect some of the necessary additional data needed to respond to the statutory directives concerning these Biennial Reports. The OCA has identified additional data points for the Commission to collect to analyze the impact of Chapter 14.
With the exception of the Security Deposit variables, Collection Data Variables #26 through #28 from the Tentative Order, FirstEnergy anticipates it will be able to provide within a reasonable timeframe the information for all proposed variables going forward.
Burdensome Reporting Requirements or Duplicative Reporting of Data
EAPA concludes that many of the 54 data elements sought by the Commission are duplicative of data already provided, not possible to collect, not necessary for consideration in reporting to the General Assembly as outlined in the statute, and create an unnecessary burden on the utilities.
EAPA argues that once the reporting requirements are set, depending upon the company, it could take from six months to a year to adjust programming to be in compliance provided there is no other change sought. EAPA also contends that various mergers may prohibit investment in data initiatives at this time by the companies affected by the mergers. Moreover, EAPA contends that additional programming costs will be paid for by ratepayers, will not reduce uncollectibles, and cannot facilitate the statutory purpose of cost containment for consumers under § 1402.
PGW argues that much of the information requested in the data requests are already being reported and it would be costly and confusing to require the same reporting here. Further, it is important to keep in mind that each data submission imposed on a utility not only requires the utility to incur administrative costs, but also creates another imposition on the time and attention of the utility's management, time that would otherwise be devoted to seeking to utilize the tools provided by Act 201 to improve collections and reduce uncollectibles. EAPA supports PGW in its Reply Comments by offering that the Commission is arguably prevented from imposing any new requirements upon PGW that will in any way worsen its financial ability to function.
PGW states that the Commission's order requests data that far exceeds that which it is authorized to request under Section 1415. The Commission's Appendix A demands raw data that would permit it to analyze every possible permutation of a utility's operations and interactions with its customers, without focusing on the individual items specified in the Section. The Commission is demanding information that goes well beyond anything that the legislature has directed or contemplated, and would appear clearly in excess of this statutory authority. In its Reply Comments, CLS/PULP argues that the Commission should reject these baseless claims. In order to assess utility performance in areas of cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collections, and the level of access of residential customers, including low income customers, to utility service, the Commission has correctly recognized that it needs a wider range of data than is currently available. CLS/PULP further elaborates that EAPA and company comments are replete with complaints that systems limitations, time constraints, alleged burdens on company resources and allegedly premature or redundant data requests should excuse imposition of any new reporting requirements at this time.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas urge the Commission to obtain timely and insightful data, but should avoid overly burdensome data collection requests. NFG contends that although a few new data elements may be warranted, asking utilities to capture and report on 33 new data elements by the end of the year is neither necessary nor practical. Aqua reports that total compliance with the collections data would be a significant burden to the company and the requirement to report historical data would sometimes be impossible.
In its Reply Comments, PECO indicates that there are significant difficulties to completing the necessary programming changes to capture and collect new data elements. PECO further agrees that the Commission needs data to fulfill its reporting requirements in such a way to avoid redundancy and unnecessary reporting as well as not to create an undue burden on utilities.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric points out that if the proposed collection data variables suggested by the OCA and PULP/CLS are required, the total data set would increase from the Commission's initial proposal of 54 data variables to 109 data variables. It would be very unlikely that utilities could effectively and timely respond to 109 different data variables, with many proposed variables to be segmented by various Income Levels. PPL concludes that attempting to provide data for 109 variables is both unnecessary and overly burdensome. The company submits that the Commission can reduce the number of proposed data variables without adversely affecting the quality and integrity of the Biennial Report.
Use of Existing or Current Reporting Requirements
Duquesne, EAPA, PECO, PPL Electric and PPL Gas believe that much of the collections data necessary to prepare the initial report required by the General Assembly has already been provided to the Commission. EAPA further contends that there is already sufficient data to measure any historical trends. PPL Electric encourages the Commission to evaluate current utility reporting and identify critical knowledge gaps and request new data only for those knowledge gaps.
With the support of PGW, EAPA submits that the following four data elements will adequately measure the effect which Chapter 14 has had on cash working capital or cash flow: (1) uncollectible levels, and collections including total residential billing and total arrears at year end (§ 56.231 and Annual Financial Reports); (2) payment arrangements in terms of dollar amount and number of arrangements (BCS Payment Plan and Annual Financial Reports); (3) gross residential write-offs at year end (BCS Annual Bill Survey and Annual Financial Report); and (4) Deposits.
EAPA urges the Commission to rely upon existing reports to collect data, to eliminate the re-collection of historical data or the collection of new data points other than in the area of deposits, to recognize that data cannot be assembled prior to the June 1, 2006 date stated in the Tentative Order, and to start the process of a formal Chapter 56 rulemaking and the creation of a Data Dictionary.
EAPA states that prudency and cost containment necessitate interim data collection that maximizes use of existing reports as opposed to establishing interim guidelines requiring new system and computer programming for information prior to the development of a Data Dictionary.
EAPA's arguments against imposing additional reporting requirements includes the high current volume of pending formal actions before the Commission including, but not limited to, issues such as the five merger requests and the implementation of the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards. EAPA opines that FERC and Commission annual reports, together with other PUC reports, provide sufficient requisite data for both current and historical information.
In its Reply Comments, EAPA believes that the Commission has sufficient data to respond to the 2006 Legislative request. However, if the Commission wants more data, EAPA would respectfully urge that such data be collected on an ongoing basis starting with the beginning of 2007 and that this additional data be used for the 2008 report. While EAPA believes that no new data is necessary, if the Commission concludes otherwise, EAPA would ask for an expedited decision so that systems can be upgraded to meet the Commission's timetable to the Legislature.
Columbia, NFG, PECO, PPL Electric and PPL Gas believe that the Commission should base the 2006 Report on data that is already collected and reported by public utilities. PECO further supports this position in its Reply Comments. NFG further proposes that the Commission should not request new data until the General Assembly and Governor provide feedback to the Commission regarding the first Biennial Report, including what specific and more-detailed information on aspects of Chapter 14 they desire. Columbia is concerned that data variables are identified prior to the creation of a Data Dictionary. Each of the variables has multiple valid interpretations, and without a dictionary to clarify what is being requested by each variable, the Commission will be collecting inconsistent data that cannot be combined to present a comprehensive and meaningful picture of the impact of Chapter 14 on Pennsylvania's utilities and their responsible customers. Thus, the only solution is to rely on existing reports. Columbia further recommends using existing reports to satisfy the Commission's reporting obligation and then revising them as part of the Data Dictionary and regulation promulgation process that will be done pursuant to Chapter 14.
PPL Electric opines that the Commission should not abandon its efforts to collect historical data, but instead, suggests that the PUC be judicious in identifying data variables by which it can obtain complete information for specific periods of time from all of the utilities.
PGW writes that it has no ability to provide any of the required historic data prior to 2004, the point at which it became fully regulated by the PUC. Moreover, the company doesn't have the resources or the funds, accounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars in new expenditures, to engage in the process of extracting from its customer billing records many of the thirty-three different new data points that the PUC is requesting. PGW opines that the company has already supplied the necessary data on which a useable pre-Act 201 trend line can be constructed. PGW further contends that the best way for the Commission to fulfill its evaluation and reporting responsibilities under the Act is to focus on and compile existing data that are absolutely necessary to satisfy the Commission's legislative mandate.
If the Commission believes that adequate data elements exist for evaluation purposes within existing data reported by other industries under Section 56.231, than Aqua would argue that no additional reporting burden should be requested.
Aqua offers a limited number of Collection Data Variables including the following: annual utility customer billings, annual gross write-offs, arrears at year-end, payment arrangements at year-end, and payment arrangement dollars at year-end.
In its Reply Comments, in reference to the utilities' calls for reliance solely on existing data provided in other reports to the Commission to assess the impact of Chapter 14 or for limiting the data variables and the historic data collection period, the OCA contends that these limitations are inappropriate given the breadth of the changes implemented pursuant to Chapter 14. The limitation of the collection data to only existing information from current reporting requirements in place before the enactment of Chapter 14 will not capture all of the impacts of Chapter 14. The list of data variables provided by the Commission provides a reasonable foundation for these data collection efforts. As modified and supplemented by its recommendation's in it Comments, the OCA believes that the data and information will allow the Commission to provide a more complete and thorough report on the impact of Chapter 14 on consumers, the utilities, and the public.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric opines that the Commission is able to assess the impacts of Chapter 14 through a variety of existing reports and activities including the 52 Pa. Code § 56.231 monthly reports, monthly payment agreement reports, consumer complaints received, Universal Service and Energy Conservation Reporting Requirements, annual Cold Weather Surveys, and informal investigations of utilities' policies and practices.
Comments Regarding the Specific Proposed Collection Data Variables
General Comments
PPL Electric provided comments on each of the proposed 54 Collection Data Variables and supports the provision of four years of data for historical analysis and the four year limit is supported by PPL Gas. Also, PPL Electric offers guidance for the defining of the Collection Data Variables in the Data Dictionary.
PPL Electric suggests that each data variable should be reviewed to determine the ability of the utility to obtain the data, the amount of historical information that may be available, whether the variable can be consolidated with existing variables and the value of the variable in evaluating the impact of Chapter 14. In its Reply Comments, PECO supports PPL's suggestions.
Columbia asks that data Collection Data Variables currently reported elsewhere be removed from Chapter 14 reporting requirements. Also, Columbia recommends that definitions for all of the Collection Data Variables be addressed in the Data Dictionary.
Suggestions for Modifications to Proposed Collection Data Variables or New Collection Data Variables
In order to assess the impact of allowing winter termination for customers with household income above 250% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), the OCA suggests that the Commission collects information for customers with incomes above 250% of the FPL including the number of accounts that have made no payments in the winter months to determine if there has been a decline, the payments-to-bill index for the winter months, the number of customers and the amount of ''bills behind,'' and the current bill coverage ratio during the winter months.
The OCA opines that winter termination poses numerous risks for customers, even those with higher incomes. In order to determine if allowing winter termination of customers with incomes over 250% of the FPL has had an impact on the health and safety of these customers or the public, the Commission should also collect the following information: the number of households terminated in the winter, the number of households that had occupants over 65 years old, children under 12 years of age, or occupants who were disabled; the number of households issued a winter termination notice, or terminated in the winter, the number that submitted a medical certification; the length of time the homes were without utility service; the options used by households after service has been disconnected; and the source of payment funds to get reconnected.
The OCA points out that Chapter 14 also significantly changed the rules regarding payment plans and additional data may be needed to determine the impact of these changes. The data includes the average value of arrears subject to payment plans, the percent contribution of arrears subject to payment plans to total arrears, the number of payment plans that are successfully completed by income category and the average length of a payment plan.
The OCA recommends that the Commission collect information from the utilities on changes in collection practices so that the results can be properly analyzed, including information regarding changes in prices or rates that affect total bills. In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric disagrees arguing that the Commission's role is to address and balance the needs of consumers and utilities by ensuring that jurisdictional utilities adhere to both the spirit and intent of Commission regulations, orders and policy statements. Overseeing and managing day-to-day operations is the responsibility of the utilities.
The OCA suggests that the Commission should seek data regarding the number of applicants that were required to pay the arrears or unpaid balance for another customer to establish service, the total dollar amount of previously unpaid charges that were collected from an applicant on behalf of another customer of record, and the total number of applicants that were denied service due to non-payment by a customer of record other than the applicant.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas recommend adding two variables; namely, the total number of customers receiving LIHEAP cash and crisis grants and the corresponding dollar amounts of the grants. Both PPL companies contend that these new data elements are warranted because LIHEAP plays an important role in supporting utilities' low income programs.
The OCA requests that the Commission collect some of the required data variables by income level such as terminations. The OCA opines that Chapter 14 treats payment agreements differently for customers with different incomes. Consequently, the OCA recommends that items #3-10, 17-34, and 36-44 from Appendix A in the Tentative Order be provided into three Income Levels: 150% of FPL and below, 150% to 250% of FPL, and over 250% of FPL.
CLS/PULP submits that Chapter 14 requires that the Commission's Biennial Report must assess the impact of Chapter 14 upon each of the four Income Levels as defined in the Act. The legislature recognized that Chapter 14 provisions had the potential to jeopardize the ability of low and lower income households to maintain utility service. For this reason, the collection data variables intended to address access issues should be broken down according to the Income Levels set forth in the Act. In some cases, data must also be broken out according to whether the customers are participants in a CAP.
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. EAPA believes that the cost of collections is already excessive without additional report requirements and the cost involved with additional reporting would exacerbate an already excessive and untenable collections situation.
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, and additional requests would be burdensome and would cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars, and would tie up management and IT personnel for months, thereby making it almost impossible for PGW to conduct regular business. Consequently, PGW respectfully urges the Commission to reject these requests.
In its Reply Comments, the OCA argues that the Commission's Report does not have to be limited to the four categories under § 1415(1), but instead the Commission has the discretion to propose any other analyses and information it feels would be valuable to the users of the report and to suggest any legislative or other changes to Chapter 14 that it deems necessary.
GENERAL RESOLUTION FOR CHAPTER 2--Residential Collections--Section 1--Establishment of the List of Collection Data Variables
EAPA and various utilities suggested that the Commission use existing data wherever possible while cautioning that additional data requests would be potentially burdensome. The OCA and CLS/PULP offered support for the list of Collection Data Variables proposed in the Tentative Order, suggested a number of modifications to those variables, and presented proposals for new variables. We agree with EAPA and the utilities that we should use existing data whenever possible. Further, we are concerned that the imposition of new collection data variables could be burdensome, and it is with this concern in mind that we have agreed to pare down the proposed list of collection data variables. However, we agree with the OCA and PULP/CLS that reconnection data should be broken out into the four Income Levels implemented by the Commission under Chapter 14. Finally, we feel that several new collection data variables are essential for allowing the Commission to meet its legislative charge of reporting on the effect of Chapter 14 upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collection of the affected public utilities.
Specific Comments about the Collection Data Variables Proposed in the Tentative Order
GENERAL COMMENT APPLICABLE TO THIS ENTIRE SUBSECTION
With the support of PGW, EAPA submits that four data elements will adequately measure the effect which Chapter 14 has had on cash working capital or cash flow: uncollectible levels and collections including total residential billing and total arrears at year end (§ 56.231 and Annual Financial Reports), payment arrangements in terms of dollar amount and number of arrangements (BCS Payment Plan and Annual Financial Reports), gross residential write-offs at year end (BCS Annual Bill Survey and Annual Financial Report) and Deposits.
I. Number of Customers
1. The total number of residential customers
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Number of Customers
PPL Electric and PPL Gas support Collection Data Variable #1, the Number of Residential Customers, and the company can provide four years of historical data. Columbia points out definitional issues with this variable and concludes that the data element needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
RESOLUTION--Number of Customers
We will include this variable in the Interim Guidelines and resolve definitional issues expressed by Columbia in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process.
II. Collection Operating Expenses
2. The total dollar amount of annual collection operating expenses
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Collection Operating Expenses
For Variable #2, Annual Collection Operating Expenses, PPL Electric recommends using the same definition as in the Universal Service reporting requirements and, along with Columbia and PPL Gas, further proposes that the data be submitted annually and not semi-annually. Columbia and PPL Gas point out definitional issues with this variable and conclude that the data element needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
RESOLUTION--Collection Operating Expenses
We agree with PPL Electric and we will use the same definition from the Universal Service reporting requirements. We also agree with the three utilities that ask for annual reporting rather than semi-annual reporting for this variable, which is also consistent with Universal Service reporting. We will include this variable in the Interim Guidelines and resolve definitional issues expressed by the utilities in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process.
III. Billings and Payments
3. The total dollar amount of annual residential billings
4. The total dollar amount in customer payments including all payments made on behalf of the customer
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Billing and Payments
For Variable #3, Annual Residential Billings, Columbia and PPL Gas point out definitional issues with this variable and conclude that the data element needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia, further proposes that this data be submitted annually and not semi-annually.
For Variable #4, Customer Payments, Columbia, PPL Electric, and PPL Gas point out definitional issues with this variable and conclude that the data element needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
RESOLUTION--Billing and Payments
We will include Residential Billings in the Interim Guidelines and resolve definitional issues expressed by the utilities in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process.
We agree with EAPA and we will exclude Customer Payments from the Interim Guidelines because we believe that it is not a primary measure of collections performance that supports our legislative charge of reporting on the effect of Chapter 14 upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collection of the affected public utilities.
IV. Write-Offs
5. The total dollar amount of gross residential write-offs
6. The total dollar amount of residential recoveries
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Write-Offs
Columbia points out definitional issues with Variable #5, Gross Residential Write-Offs, and concludes that the data element needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia, further proposes that this data be submitted annually and not semi-annually.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas suggest that Net Write-Offs be reported in lieu of Gross Write-Offs and Recoveries. Columbia points out definitional issues with the gross write-offs variable and concludes that this data element needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia, further proposes that write-offs data be submitted annually and not semi-annually.
RESOLUTION--Write-Offs
We believe that Gross Residential Write-Offs is an essential collections data variable that will allow us to satisfy our legislative charge of reporting on the effect of Chapter 14 upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collection of the affected public utilities. We will include Gross Write-Offs in the Interim Guidelines and resolve definitional issues expressed by the utilities in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process. We agree with Columbia and we will require annual reporting. However, we do not believe that the Amount of Recoveries is essential to our legislative charge and we will not require this variable in the Interim Guidelines.
V. Arrearages
7. The total number of active residential accounts in arrears and not on a payment agreement
8. The total dollar amount in arrears for active residential accounts in arrears and not on a payment agreement
9. The total number of active residential accounts in arrears and on a payment agreement
10. The total dollar amount in arrears for active residential accounts in arrears and on a payment agreement
11. The total number of active residential accounts in arrears and in CAP
12. The total dollar amount in arrears for active residential accounts in arrears and in CAP
13. The total number of active CAP recipients who have pre-program arrearages that have not yet been fully written-off
14. The total dollar amount in arrears for active CAP recipients who have pre-program arrearages that have not yet been fully written-off
15. The total number of active residential accounts that have current billings not yet due
16. The total dollar amount for active residential accounts that have current billings not yet due
17. The total number of inactive residential accounts in arrears
18. The total dollar amount in arrears for inactive residential accounts in arrears
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Arrearages
In regards to Collection Data Variables #7 through #8, CLS/PULP state that Chapter 14 recognizes two kinds of payment agreements, i.e., agreements under § 1405 for customers whose service is on, and agreements under § 1407, which establish the terms for reconnection of service. Because the standards are different between § 1405 and § 1407, each of these variables, 7 through 10, should be reported accordingly in two parts. Further, these data variables should be broken down out according to Income Levels.
In Collection Data Variables #7 through #12, Columbia points out definitional issues with each variable and concludes that the data elements need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
In Collection Data Variables #11 through #14, CLS/PULP opines that it is important for the Commission to require clear distinctions between pre-program arrearages, and arrears accumulated by CAP participants while they were in a CAP program. Meanwhile, NFG says that it is unclear how these data elements on active CAP accounts is necessary or relevant to the Commission's biennial report on the effectiveness of Chapter 14, given the limited references to CAP in Chapter 14.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas comment that providing Variables #11 and #12, The Total Number and Dollars of Active Residential Accounts in Arrears and in CAP, will be difficult and require some computer programming, but could provide the data on a going-forward basis. In addition, the PPL companies ask for definitional clarifications.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas contend that while Variables #13 and #14, regarding pre-program arrearages for CAP recipients, could be provided with difficulty on a going-forward basis. The companies further opine that they are not convinced that these two variables would help to explain or to provide insights regarding the effects of Chapter 14. Columbia points out definitional issues with each variable and concludes that the data elements need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia, further proposes that this data be submitted annually and not semi-annually.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas believe that data regarding Collection Data Variables #15 and #16, Residential Accounts not yet Due, may not reveal any key insights or trends regarding the impact of Chapter 14 and request that the Commission consider deleting these variables. Columbia and NFG argue that this data is simply not useful or relevant to Chapter 14.
PPL Electric states that the company can provide Collection Data Variables #17 and #18, referring to Inactive Residential Accounts in Arrears, on a going-forward basis. NFG points out that since companies write off bad debt at different times, the data will be inconsistent and make it difficult to compare one company to another. Columbia also notes definitional issues with each variable and concludes that the data elements need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
RESOLUTION--Arrearages
In agreement with EAPA, we will include data currently provided through the § 56.231 reporting and the monthly Payment Agreement reporting, Variables #7 through #10. We agree with the utilities that argued that Variables #11 through #16 may be difficult to obtain and did not significantly add to our legislative charge of reporting on the effect of Chapter 14 upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collection of the affected public utilities. Most importantly, we recognize that each of these categories comprises a small part of the Cash Working Capital data set, but we do not believe the added expense and burden is worth the minimal impact these data variables have on measuring the impact of Chapter 14 on collections. Despite the concerns of several of the utilities, we will include Variables #17 and #18, related to arrearages associated with accounts that have been terminated or discontinued, the arrearage has yet to be written off, and the final bill for these accounts is also past due. These former customers are no longer active accounts, i.e., in receipt of the utility service, but have not yet been written off. As companies have increased collection activity including an increase in the number of terminations since the passage of Chapter 14, we believe that this particular category of arrearage among the Cash Working Capital set of arrearages is significant. We will resolve definitional issues expressed by the utilities in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process. We view the provision of this data as required on a going-forward basis while we view the submission of historical data as optional.
VI. Terminations and Reconnections
Terminations
19. The total number of terminations for non-payment of arrearages as defined at § 1406(a)(1) or § 1406(a)(2)
20. The total number of terminations for non-payment of security deposits as defined at § 1406(a)(3)
21. The total number of terminations for non-payment of both an arrearage and a security deposit as defined at either § 1406(a)(1) or § 1406(a)(2) and § 1406(a)(3)
22. The total number of terminations for other reasons including failure to permit access, unauthorized use of service, fraud, meter tampering, and safety as defined at § 1406(a)(4), § 1406(c)(1)(i), § 1406(c)(1)(ii), § 1406(c)(1) (iii), and § 1406(c)(1)(iv)
Reconnections
23. The total number of reconnections for customer payment
24. The total number of reconnections for medical certification
25. The total number of reconnections for reasons other than customer payment or medical certification
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Terminations and Reconnections
CLS/PULP recommends that Variable #19, Terminations for Non-Payment, be divided into three parts and also broken out by income level. The three categories included non-CAP customers not on a payment agreement, non-CAP customers who failed to comply with a payment agreement, and CAP customers who failed to comply with the terms of their CAP plan. Columbia suggests that this data variable be defined in the Data Dictionary as presently reported on the § 56.231 reports.
CLS/PULP suggest additional data be collected for CAP customers who are terminated including, the total dollar amount in arrears for terminated CAP accounts, the total number of terminated CAP customers who get reconnected for reasons other than a medical certification, the total number of CAP customers who were granted stays of termination based on a medical certification, the total number of CAP customers who get reconnected based on the provision of a medical certification, and the total number of CAP customers who received utility granted extensions or stays resulting in cure of a CAP default.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas comment that they can provide Variable #19, Terminations for Non-Payment of Arrearages, for a period of four years.
For Collection Data Variable #20, Termination for Non-payment of a Security Deposit as defined at § 1406(a)(1) or § 1406(a)(2), CLS/PULP contends that this variable should be broken out into Income Levels. PPL Electric cannot distinguish between non-payment of arrearages and non-payment of a security deposit and, since the company rarely terminates for only non-payment of a security deposit, the company recommends that the Commission delete this data variable. Columbia recommends deleting this variable because it is not meaningful for purposes of Chapter 14 reporting. PPL Gas reports that this data is not available without additional computer programming.
CLS/PULP requests that Variable #21, Terminations for Non-payment of both an Arrearage and a Security Deposit be divided into two parts and by Income Level. The first part is the number of terminations for non-payment of both an arrearage not subject to a payment agreement and a security deposit and the second part is the number of terminations for non-payment of a payment agreement and a security deposit. PPL cannot distinguish between non-payment of arrearages and non-payment of a security deposit and, since the company rarely terminates for only non-payment of a security deposit, the company recommends that the Commission delete this data variable.
CLS/PULP recommends that Variable #22, terminations for reasons other than for non-payment of arrearages or security deposits, should be divided into three parts: (1) terminations for failure to permit access as defined at § 1406(a)(4); (2) terminations for unauthorized use based on § 1406(c)(1)(i), § 1406(c)(1)(iii), or § 1406(c)(1)(iv); and (3) terminations based on fraud or material misrepresentation of the customer's identity for the purpose of obtaining service. As a complement to Data Variable #22, the Commission should also include a variable which provides the number of complaints filed with the Commission in which Section 1406(c)(1)(ii) was an issue, the number of complaints granted, and the number of complaints denied. Columbia points out definitional issues with each variable and concludes that the data elements need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
PPL Electric reports that the company can provide Collection Data Variables #22-25 and has up to four years of historical data. PPL Gas reports that the company can provide Collection Data Variables #22-24 and has up to four years of historical data.
CLS/PULP suggests that Collection Data Variable #23, Number of Reconnections for Customer Payment, should be divided into three variables and broken out by Income Level. The new variables include the total number of non-CAP reconnections for full payment of the outstanding balance, the number of non-CAP reconnections based on amortization of the outstanding balance, and the total number of CAP reconnections. Columbia points out definitional issues with this variable and concludes that it needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
CLS/PULP recommends that Collection Data Variable #24, Number of Reconnections for Medical Certification, be divided into two variables and broken out by Income Level. The new variables include the total number of stays of termination and the total number of reconnections based on the provision of medical certification.
Columbia recommends that Collection Variable #25, Reconnections for Reasons other than Customer Payment of Medical Certification, be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia further offers that the Data Dictionary should contain consistent definitions for this data variable and data variable #22, Terminations for Other Reasons (excludes termination for any type of non-payment). PPL Gas reports that it can begin to capture this data on a forward basis beginning January 1, 2006.
In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric recommends that the Commission should consider collecting household income data for reconnection of service data variables #23 through #25 because reconnection is an event where the utility is likely to be able to update household income with the customer.
RESOLUTION--Termination and Reconnections
Overall, the comments support the provision of termination and reconnection data. We initially proposed four categories for the reporting of termination data. We share the concerns of PPL Electric over distinguishing between the two non-payment categories, non-payment of an arrearage and non-payment of a security deposit. Thus, we propose to consolidate variables #19 through #21 into a single variable that simply captures terminations for non-payment, without the distinction. We also propose to include Variable #22, which includes terminations for any reason other than for non-payment. As for reconnections, we agree with CLS/PULP and PPL Electric that we should require the additional sorting into the four Income Levels2 . Income Level data is widely available from customers at the time the customer/applicant meets the terms for restoration of service with the utility. We will resolve definitional issues expressed by the utilities for both termination and reconnection data variables in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process.
VII. Security Deposits
26. The total number of applicants that are billed a security deposit for new service
27. The total dollar amount of security deposits billed to applicants for new service
28. The total dollar amount of security deposits paid by applicants for new service
29. The total number of customers that are billed a security deposit for current/existing service while service is still on
30. The total dollar amount of security deposits billed to customers for current/existing service while service is still on
31. The total dollar amount of security deposits paid by customers for current/existing service while service is still on
32. The total number of applicants or customers that are billed a security deposit as a condition of reconnection
33. The total dollar amount of security deposits billed to applicants or customers as a condition of reconnection
34. The total dollar amount of security deposits paid by applicants or customers as a condition of reconnection
35. The total dollar amount of security deposits on-hand
36. The total number of customers that had dollars in previously collected security deposits applied to unpaid account balances
37. The total dollar amount in previously collected security deposits applied to unpaid account balances
38. The total dollar amount in security deposit interest paid to customers
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Security Deposits
In the Security Deposit variables #26 though #28, Columbia points out definitional issues with these variables and concludes that they need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia further opines that Collection Data Variables #26 through #31, #34 and #35 be dropped because the data will not provide insight into the success of Chapter 14. Columbia contends that the Security Deposit related Variables #32 and #33 provide meaningful information that will enable a relevant analysis of the impact of Chapter 14 across all companies. Columbia also points out definitional issues with Variables #36 and #37 and concluding again that they need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary.
EAPA agrees that more data is needed to understand the use of customer deposits, Collection Data Variables #26 through #38, in reducing uncollectible levels going forward. EAPA and PGW suggest an abbreviated list including the total amount of customer deposits, total amount of customer deposits with interest used to offset bad debt, and total amount of interest paid on customer deposits. Some deposit provisions in Chapter 56 were superseded by Chapter 14 and, as a result, there is no intrinsic value to historical data on security deposits. The industry agrees that it would be helpful to undertake the cost of collecting data on customer deposits going forward. NFG states offers that since the rules regarding security deposits were changed by Chapter 14, some additional reporting on security deposits may be warranted.
CLS/PULP offers that Collection Data Variables #26 through #42 and #45 through 48 should be broken out by Income Level. In its Reply Comments, PPL Electric states that it can not provide this data by Income Level and the company does not charge security deposits for customers with household incomes below 250% of the FPL.
For the Collection Data Variables #26 through #38 involving Security Deposits, PPL Electric and PPL Gas have limited historical data and opine that some of the security deposit data variables are necessary while others are not necessary. The PPL companies propose to reduce the list of Security Deposit variables down to six, including (1) the total number of applicants billed a security deposit, (2) the total dollar amount of security deposits billed for applicants, (3) the total number of customers billed a security deposit, (4) the total dollar amount of security deposits billed for customers, (5) the total number of security deposits held as of December 31, and (6) the total dollar amount of security deposits held as of December 31. The first four of the six variables can be submitted monthly while the last two variables can be submitted annually. FirstEnergy points out that the Security Deposit variables are the most challenging since the companies did not request a security deposit from applicants prior to Chapter 14.
For Variable #38, Security Deposit Interest Paid to Customers, Columbia suggests that this variable be combined with Variable #35. Columbia points out definitional issues with this variable and concludes that it needs to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia advocates annual reporting rather than semi-annual reporting.
RESOLUTION--Security Deposits
Generally, EAPA, Columbia, PPL Electric and PPL Gas offer support for gathering data regarding security deposits. The commentators expressed various definitional concerns and suggestions were made to either maintain, consolidate, revise or delete various individual variables. Overall, we support the approach suggested by PPL Electric. We agree with PPL Electric that variables #26 and #32 should be combined into a single variable and that the corresponding and related variables #27 and #33 should also be combined into a single variable. In this way, the utility does not need to distinguish beyond an initial determination that the person is an applicant. There were no specific objections or revisions proposed to variables #29 and #30, regarding data about security deposits from customers and we will include these two variables in our Interim Guidelines. Variables #28, #31 and #34 reflect the amount of the security deposit payments made by either applicants or customers. We will exclude these three variables along with variables #36 through #38 because we believe that each of these variables is not a primary measure of collections performance that supports our legislative charge of reporting on the effect of Chapter 14 upon the cash working capital or cash flow, uncollectible levels and collection of the affected public utilities. Finally, we agree with PPL Electric that Variable #35, regarding the amount of security deposits on hand, should be included and that we should also require the corresponding number of security deposits that are on-hand as of year-end. We will resolve definitional issues expressed by the utilities for the security deposit data variables in the development of the Data Dictionary in the Collaborative Process.
VIII. Reconnection Fees
39. The total number of customers that were billed a reconnection fee as a condition of reconnection
40. The total dollar amount of reconnection fees billed to customers as a condition of reconnection
41. The total number of customers who paid reconnection fees as a condition of reconnection
42. The total dollar amount of reconnection fees paid by customers as a condition of reconnection
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Reconnection Fees
For Variable #39 and #40, related to Reconnection Fees, Columbia points out definitional issues with these variables and concludes that they need to be better defined in the Data Dictionary. Columbia advocates annual reporting rather than semi-annual reporting.
PPL Electric and PPL Gas can provide Reconnection data in Variables #39 through #42 for a period of four years. Both PPL companies recommend monthly totals be submitted on an annual basis. Despite these specific comments, both PPL companies recommend eliminating these variables because they have limited value in explaining the impact of Chapter 14 on utilities' overdue receivables. NFG argues that it is not necessary to provide information regarding Reconnection data because the amounts and number of reconnection fees have little relevance to the implementation of Chapter 14.
In reference to the Reconnection Fee variables #41 and #42, Columbia requests that utilities should be permitted to certify that have no accounts meeting this reporting criteria instead of being expected to invest in the expensive programming changes necessary to produce a report consistently filled with zeros.
CLS/PULP offers that Collection Data Variables #26 through #42 and #45 through #48 should be broken out by Income Level.
EAPA states that variables seeking new information on Reconnection Fees and Late Payment Fees in Collection Data Variables #39 through #44 are not responsive to the issues outlined in § 1415 for the Biennial Report.
RESOLUTION--Reconnection Fees
We agree with EAPA and NFG that it is not necessary to provide information regarding Reconnection data because the amounts and number of reconnection fees have little relevance to the implementation of Chapter 14.
IX. Late Payment Fees
43. The total dollar amount in late payment fees billed to customers
44. The total dollar amount of late payment fees paid by customers
COMMENTS AND REPLY COMMENTS OF THE PARTIES--Late Payment Fees
CLS/PULP recommends that Collection Data Variable #43, Dollar Amount in Late Payment Fees, be divided into two variables and broken out by Income Level. The new variables include the total number of customers assessed a late payment fee and the total dollar amount of late payment fees billed. PPL Electric and PPL Gas can provide this data up to four years.
CLS/PULP recommends that Collection Data Variable #44, Dollar Amount of Late Payment Fees Paid by Customers, be divided into two variables and broken out by Income Level. The new variables include the total number of customers who paid a late payment changes and the total dollar amount of late payment charges paid. PPL Electric submits that it can not provide this data.
PPL Gas recommends adding the total number of customers to Collection Data Variables #43 and #44, regarding the amount of late payment fees billed and late payment fees paid.
NFG argues that data regarding Late Payment fees fails to show the effectiveness to which § 1409 has been implemented by the Commission. Columbia argues that this data is simply not useful or relevant to Chapter 14.
EAPA states that variables seeking new information on Reconnection Fees and Late Payment Fees in Collection Data Variables #39 through #44 are not responsive to the issues outlined in § 1415 for the Biennial Report.
RESOLUTION--Late Payment Fees
We agree with EAPA and Columbia that variables seeking new information on Late Payment Fees in Collection Data Variables #43 and #44 is not responsive to the issues outlined in Chapter 14 for the Commission's Biennial Report.
X. Field Visit Fees
45. The total number of customers billed a field visit fee
46. The total dollar amount of field visit fees billed to customers
47. The total number of customers that paid a field visit fee
48. The total dollar amount of field visit fees paid by customers
[Continued on next Web Page] _______
1 The quality, state, or fact of being regularly recurrent. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary 852 (1977)
2 Chapter 14 has various sections that refer to a customer's relationship to the Federal Poverty Level. For example, § 1405(b) describes the length of payment agreement a customer is eligible for based upon the customer's relationship to the poverty level. For administrative efficiency, the Bureau of Consumer Services has categorized these distinctions into four ''Income Levels'':
LEVEL ONE: household income less than 150436000f the Federal Poverty Level.
LEVEL TWO: household income at or above 150but not exceeding 2500f the Federal Poverty Level.
LEVEL THREE: household income at or above 251but not exceeding 30014100005000f the Federal Poverty Level.
LEVEL FOUR: household income at or exceeding 30114100000000f the Federal Poverty Level.
[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,
SecretaryAPPENDIX 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.]
