Wow! During a discussion at today's Open Meeting on docket 37569, a formal
customer complaint filed against Gexa by a customer protesting changes in
their variable rate, the Commissioners seem to be of the opinion that it is
their job to review and adjudicate contract disputes.
Folks, you'll want to closely monitor this one, it may be a game changer.
mail2web.com – Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider -
are now available on the PUCT website for REP use…
It would seem that PUCT staff is making progress on the initial audits started last Fall. At least one REP has received a follow-up letter dated January 20th asking for some additional information.
The PUCT is requiring all REPs to file REP amendments to demonstrate compliance with the new provisions of 25.107 that took effect on May 21, 2009. REPs have until May 21, 2010 to get those amendments approved or they risk operating without a valid certificate (meaning they could be subject to administrative penalties).
For REPs serving load prior to Jan. 1, 2009, the focus of the amendment filings are to specifically document compliance with the ongoing financial requirements (f)(1) and (f)(2) using the proof outlined in (f)(4) and the technical requirements outlined in (g), particularly (g)(1)(D) and (g)(1)(E) since these are “new.”
If you thought, like I did, that this proof would be part of your annual filing, due on March 5th, we’d be wrong.
This clarification (requiring REP amendments) was obtained from Janis Ervin this morning, who advised that PUCT Legal was requiring this approach.
Get your filings in order…
Just a brief recap…
Project 37291 – Meter Tampering:
Jan. 22 – Comments Due
Jan. 28 – Public Hearing, if requested
Feb. 1 – Reply comments due
Project 35533 – Prepay Rule
Jan. 12 – Comments Due
Jan. 19 – Reply comments due (although as of Jan.20th only OPC had filed replies.) Nothing prevents late filed replies given this is only a strawman proposal.
Project 36131 – Summer Protections
Draft rule for publication appears likely to be headed to the first Open Meeting in February
Apparently PUCT staff have issued another round of letters to 4-5 REPs advising them that they are being audited for compliance with the customer protection rules. This follows on the heels of the initial audits conducted last fall of 6 REPs.
I have it on good authority that not much has happened with the data provided by the first 6 REPs who were audited, likely due to PUCT staff turnover in the enforcement division.
Clearly, not waiting for those audits to finish, staff is making good on its promise to eventually audit all REPs.
The letter being sent REPs this go round appears to be very similar to that provided to the initial set of REPs last fall.