Maryland clarifies green pricing requirements. The Maryland PSC issued a clarifying order on March 4, in its proceeding on implementation of the green product pricing requirements of the market-wrecking SB1. The order states the MDPSC: (1) interprets SB1 to encourage procurement of verifiable RECs within PJM markets; (2) restates and further clarifies that all retail electric suppliers are directed to retire all RECs comprising an approved green product into a PJM tracking system accessible by the MDPSC; (3) removes the language, “The remaining [Y]% of RECs are [the specific product being marketed],” from the required marketing disclosure language; and (4) directs suppliers to participate and provide evidence in the next annual price-setting proceeding if they wish to make the case for green pricing higher than the established baseline.
Massachusetts plots new approach to restricting residential market. A proposal by Massachusetts DPU Staff presented at an in-person meeting on March 6 would make drastic changes to the residential electricity market in the state. Staff’s presentation claims “the future of the competitive market remains uncertain and contentious” in Massachusetts, with legislative action apparently stymied at the same time that the Attorney-General is making significant claims about alleged economic loss to supplier residential customers. Staff said further that reforms which “nibble around the edges” of the retail market issues in the state are not sufficient, and what is needed is a “market reset” (PRQ Note: a concerning phrase harking back to the 2019 reset order in New York). Staff proposes: (1) elimination of door-to-door and telemarketing sales channels; (2) elimination of direct mail and “table top marketing” channels even with the acknowledgement that these channels can be customer-friendly; (3) the requirement that all residential sales occur only through the state’s MAEnergySwitch shopping website; (4) elimination of automatic renewals and instead customers be required to re-enroll through Energy Switch at the end of each contract term (or returned to Basic Service if no action is taken); (5) customers on a variable price be required to re-enroll monthly through Energy Switch. Customers that did not re-enroll, or enroll with another supplier, would be returned to Basic Service; and (6) the requirement that to be listed on Energy Switch as a renewable energy product, the voluntary renewable energy content of the product must be composed entirely of MA RPS Class 1 RECs.
Connecticut to propose language for low-income customer contracts. PURA in Connecticut issued notice on February 27, directing the Office of Education, Outreach, and Enforcement to work with the Office of Consumer Counsel and others to develop proposed changes to supplier contract language and to file such language by April 28. The proposed changes relate to a new state law which has restored the ability of low-income customers to shop for their electricity supplier, provided the contract offers guaranteed savings over the price-to-compare.
Michigan PSC releases 2024 Annual Report. The press release for the report emphasizes MIPSC’s foci of expanding public engagement and boosting electric reliability. The latter includes the activities of the Financial Incentives and Disincentives workgroup, tracked at Policy Plugin, and notes that DTE and Consumers both reported reductions in time to restore power and total outage minutes in 2024. In addition, the report includes information on the year’s rate cases, pilots, and a number of other activities.
Proposed legislation in New York would put new obligations on suppliers. The New York budget bills (Assembly Bill A3008 and Senate Bill S3008) includes a number of policy-related measures as well as fiscal ones. in this case, Part WW of the bills amend the state’s Abandoned Property Law to define ESCOs (the name for retail natural gas and electricity suppliers in New York) and include them in the list of qualifying types of “utility services” that are subject to the law’s provisions. Effectively, it would require ESCOs to remit unclaimed customer deposits and refunds to the Abandoned Property Fund administered by the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC). The legislation is currently under consideration in both houses of the legislature.
Net metering and distributed generation under significant attack in Maine. There was an overflow of residents in attendance at a recent Energy, Utilities, and Technology Committee public hearing to discuss LD32, LD257, LD450, and LD515, many of whom argued that solar customers are being subsidized by non-solar customers and that current policies are hurting Maine businesses. The bills under consideration significantly curtail net metering and distributed generation policies in the state, with the first three entirely eliminating MEPUC’s authority to promulgate net energy billing rules.
Maine regulators offer recommendations on accelerated switching. The Maine PUC delivered a report to the state legislature’s Energy, Utilities, and Telecommunications Committee on February 3 on three-day accelerated switching. The MEPUC recommended that requests to drop competitive electricity provider (CEP) service for standard offer service should “occur within three business days, regardless of whether the drop occurs on-cycle or off-cycle within a billing period, and that any fee to implement an off-cycle drop be eliminated.” The report noted NRG was “the only commenter in support of more rapid switching” in general, with other parties raising concerns that: (1) “Volatility in the supply market could lead to gaming of the system;” (2)“increased uncertainty about customer load would tend to increase suppliers’ bids to provide both standard offer service and competitive service;” (3) implementation costs would “far outweigh any potential benefits;” and (4) there is no need, “since at least 90% of residential customers take standard offer service and a change in provider is more often… from CEP service back to a standard offer service and not switching between CEPs.”
In Brief: PURA in Connecticut issued a final decision on February 19, which directs the electric utilities to update the distributed energy resource (DER) interconnection application and review process to include new procedures to review DER interconnection applications in batches…the New Jersey BPU warned in a February 12 press release that following the conclusion of the electric utilities’ annual joint procurement for Basic Generation Service it was clear customer default service costs could increase by as much as 20% beginning this coming summer…Maryland’s Office of People’s Counsel is continuing its drumbeat against natural gas, warning on February 13 that “Maryland’s gas utilities’ massive spending on gas infrastructure continues to accelerate, and—without a change in course—customers face significant additional increases in gas delivery rates in the coming years” according to a new report released by the consumer advocate. The report claims the state’s “three largest gas utilities will spend more than $18 billion on gas infrastructure through 2043, driving up gas bills for Maryland households even higher than today’s levels.”
In Other News: The Baltimore Banner covered customer anger over a proposed distribution rate increase by utility BGE in Maryland…the CT Insider earlier this month looked at the ongoing dispute between Connecticut electric utilities and regulator PURA over the policy decision-making process in state, which has now culminated in a lawsuit against PURA by the utilities…
Leave a Reply