Previous PageTable Of Contents

D.97-10-087, OPINION REGARDING DIRECT ACCESS IMPLEMENTATION PLANS AND RELATED TARIFFS

1. Enron's motion to file its comments on the Workshop Report one day out of time should be granted.
2. This decision does not specifically adopt the DAIP because the revisions to the proposed direct access tariffs would alter the wording of the DAIP as well.
3. The Commission should analyze each of the proposed tariffs, and decide which of the tariff provisions should be adopted, rather than revising the wording of the DAIP.
4. Some existing system constraints limit the ability of the UDCs to comply with all of the direct access rules.
5. Due to these constraints, the UDCs should be allowed to use differing tariffs on a limited basis.
6. Any customer who returns to default UDC service during the transition period will be returned to the customer's previous rate schedule at the frozen rate level.
7. The imposition of an interim fee for discretionary services ("competitive services"), and the booking of non-discretionary services ("non-competitive services") to a memorandum account is not unlawful.
8. The rate freeze provision of AB 1890 does not prevent the recovery of costs to accommodate the implementation of direct access.
9. The issue of whether non-discretionary services should be permitted to be recovered under PU Code Section 376 will be deferred until the Commission examines the costs of providing those kinds of services.
10. The UDCs should be permitted to charge for discretionary services on an interim basis, and to book the interim fees and incremental costs to a one-way memorandum account.
11. Permitting the UDCs to collect interim fees for discretionary services should not be construed as a decision on the merits of the October 1, 1997 filings of SDG&E and Edison, nor as approval of the fees charged by the UDCs for discretionary services.
12. The proposal to book the incremental costs of the non-discretionary services to a memorandum account, and then seek to recover the amount from the customer in the future presents a retroactive billing issue.
13. The UDCs should be permitted to book the incremental costs of non-discretionary services to a memorandum account pending a Commission decision regarding the appropriateness of such costs and possible recovery under PU Code Section 376.
14. If the non-discretionary fees are approved, the Commission should consider waiving the DASR switching charge in certain situations.
15. The fees for discretionary services that are contained in the rate schedules in Table 1 are approved for use on an interim basis.
16. The rate elements for non-discretionary services that are reflected in the rate schedules shown in Table 1 will be examined in a future proceeding.
17. Although the Preferred Policy Decision stated that direct access customers must sign an agreement to pay their share of the transition costs, PU Code Section 370 should control.
18. Since the Commission imposed fee pursuant to PU Code Sections 401, 404, and 431 is to be collected from the utility's subscribers and customers, the UDC should bill the ESPs for this fee.
19. The Commission should not be the body to decide whether the UDC or an ESP should be shielded from liability.
20. The Commission should adopt the compliance testing tariff wording on an interim basis.
21. The standards for compliance testing shall be reasonable, completed in a timely manner, and shall not be used by the UDCs in an anti-competitive fashion to restrict the entry of any competitors.
22. Processing the DASRs shall be by electronic means, although each UDC shall have the discretion to decide whether the ESPs can submit their DASRs in some other format as well.
23. The DASR forms of PG&E and Edison, as shown in the October 1, 1997 filings, are approved for use on an interim basis.
24. Due to the existing statutory protections, additional cancellation rights for residential and small commercial customers are not needed.
25. The ESP shall ensure that the requests of small business and residential customers to cancel service in accordance with PU Code Section 395 are honored.
26. Failure to honor a cancellation under PU Code Section 395 could be considered an unauthorized transfer of the customer.
27. Allowing a larger customer the right to cancel a DASR would defeat the purpose of having the ESP and the customer enter into a contract for direct access.
28. Before a DASR can be submitted by an ESP on behalf of a residential or small commercial customer, the independent verification pursuant to PU Code Section 366.5 has to occur.
29. If an interval meter cannot record in 15-minute intervals, hourly data with reporting in a 15-minute interval format will be permitted.
30. The tariff provisions in Sections H and M of Appendix A that relate to issues addressed in the metering and data communications standards workshop will be adopted on an interim basis.
31. The inability to offer bill-ready billing is a constraint.
32. PG&E shall be permitted to deviate from the bill-ready tariff provision, from the payment and collection terms under consolidated UDC billing, and from the late or partial payment provisions in Section P.(1) of Appendix A.
33. A DASR request to transfer a service account back to bundled UDC service because of non-payment should not be given a priority if there is a DASR processing backlog.
34. The Commission has reviewed and considered the differences between the proposed direct access tariffs, and should adopt the tariff provisions shown in Appendix A.
35. The Commission should not adopt the language of Section 1.3 of the service agreements that have been proposed by the UDCs because such a clause could cause the entire electric restructuring endeavor to come to a halt if subsequent events diminish the UDCs' ability to recover certain costs.
36. It is against the public's interest to adopt Section 1.3 as proposed by the UDCs in their service agreements.
37. The Commission's assertion of initial jurisdiction is proper because the subject matter of these disputes concern the direct access tariffs and other related tariff provisions.
38. When an administrative remedy is provided for by statute, relief must be sought from the administrative body.
39. In order to reduce the number of ESP and UDC disputes, the Commission should impose a meet-and-confer obligation as part of the ESP service agreement.
40. The Commission lacks jurisdiction over the operations of the ESP.
41. PG&E shall be permitted to deviate from the method in which billing data can be transferred.
42. The Commission should adopt the UDCs' position on who can conduct the audits, and the Alliance's proposal for the interest rate to be applied.
43. The Commission has reviewed and considered the differences between the proposed service agreements, and should adopt the service agreement shown in Appendix B.
44. Should there be a delay in excess of 30 days to process a DASR, any interested party may file a motion to appoint a third-party auditor to examine a UDC's system capabilities.
45. A review of AB 1890 and other pertinent code sections does not indicate any legislative intent to exempt BART from the applicable direct access rules.
46. The Legislature knew of the existence of PU Code Section 701.8 when AB 1890 was enacted.
47. Unless this decision provides otherwise, the direct access tariffs shown in Appendix A should be adopted by PG&E, SDG&E, and Edison.
48. The proposed change to the calculation of net revenue in Rule 15 should be deferred to R.92-03-050.
49. The issue of whether the small electric utilities should have to pay for a share of the public purpose programs is more properly addressed by way of a petition for modification of D.97-02-014.
50. The Commission should approve on an interim basis the tariffs, rate schedules, and service agreements that were attached to the respective DAIP filings of PacifiCorp, Sierra Pacific, and SCWC.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The Energy Division shall file the "Direct Access Pro Forma Tariffs And Service Agreements Workshop Report" (Workshop Report) with the Docket Office. The Docket Office is directed to file the Workshop Report as of the date the Energy Division submits it for filing.
2. Enron's September 17, 1997 motion for leave to file its comments to the Workshop Report one day out of time is granted. The Docket Office is directed to file the comments that were attached to Enron's motion as of September 17, 1997.
3. Appendix A and Appendix B are approved as the primary direct access tariff and electric service provider (ESP) service agreement, respectively, and shall be effective immediately. Unless permission to deviate from a tariff provision in Appendix A or from a specific provision in Appendix B has been granted in this decision, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) and Southern California Edison Company (Edison) shall adopt Appendix A and Appendix B for their direct access service offerings.

4. To the extent PG&E, SDG&E, or Edison has been allowed to deviate from the tariff requirements of Appendix A or from the provisions in Appendix B, PG&E, SDG&E, or Edison shall abide by the conditions set forth in the decision permitting such deviation, and shall adhere to any deadlines specified in this decision for terminating such deviations.
5. The tariffs, rate schedules, and service agreements that were attached to the respective direct access implementation plan filings of PacifiCorp, Sierra Pacific Power Company (Sierra Pacific), and Southern California Water Company (SCWC) are approved on an interim basis, and shall be effective immediately.

6. The six utilities are permitted to begin accepting DASRs starting on November 1, 1997, and they shall be required to begin accepting DASRs no later than November 9, 1997.
7. The six utilities named above are authorized to collect the interim fees for discretionary metering and billing services that are shown in their respective rate schedules, subject to refund in a Commission decision regarding the appropriateness of such fees.

8. The six utilities are authorized to book the incremental costs of providing non-discretionary services to a memorandum account pending a Commission decision regarding the appropriateness of such costs and possible recovery under Public Utilities Code Section 376.

9. Within 90 days from today, a decision or a ruling will issue which will state where the issues regarding the fees and charges for discretionary and non-discretionary services will be addressed.
1. All six of the above-named utilities shall inform all new customers who have contacted the utility to initiate the process of obtaining electric service of the following: the customer's ability to choose an electric provider, that a customer information packet explaining this choice is available to the customer, and that the Electric Education Call Center may be called if the customer has any questions regarding direct access.

11. The Energy Division shall convene a meeting within 90 days from today to solicit persons who are interested in serving on the Rule 22 Tariff Review Group. It is the Commission's intent to establish a new proceeding to address possible changes to the direct access rules and tariffs. Once that proceeding is opened:

This order is effective today.
Dated October 30, 1997, at San Francisco, California.

                P. GREGORY CONLON
                President
                JESSIE J. KNIGHT, JR.
                HENRY M. DUQUE
                JOSIAH L. NEEPER
                RICHARD A. BILAS
                Commissioners

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OPINION REGARDING DIRECT ACCESS IMPLEMENTATION PLANS AND RELATED TARIFFS 2

Findings of Fact 70
Conclusions of Law 75
ORDER 79
Appendix A
Appendix B

Previous PageTop Of Page

This Web page was produced using a Beta version of HTML Transit 3.0