Via Electronic Filing and First Class Mail. October 26, 2018

Transcription

1 BRIAN E. CALABRESE 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT Main (860) Fax (860) Direct (860) Also admitted in West Virginia Via Electronic Filing and First Class Mail October 26, 2018 Jeffrey R. Gaudiosi, Esq. Executive Secretary Public Utilities Regulatory Authority 10 Franklin Square New Britain, CT Re Docket No Review of Feasibility, Costs, and Benefits of Placing Certain Customers on Standard Service Pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat o(m) Dear Mr. Gaudiosi Enclosed please find Retail Energy Supply Association s Objections to the OCC s First Set of Interrogatories in connection with the above-referenced docket. I certify that a copy hereof has been sent to all participants of record as reflected on the Authority s service list as of this date. A copy has also been filed with the Authority as an electronic web filing and is complete. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or require additional information. Thank you. Sincerely, Brian E. Calabrese Enclosures Copy to Service List

2 STATE OF CONNECTICUT PUBLIC UTILITIES REGULATORY AUTHORITY REVIEW OF FEASIBILITY, COSTS, AND BENEFITS OF PLACING CERTAIN CUSTOMERS ON STANDARD SERVICE PURSUANT TO CONN. GEN. STAT O(M) DOCKET NO OCTOBER 26, 2018 RETAIL ENERGY SUPPLY ASSOCIATION S OBJECTIONS TO THE OCC S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES The Retail Energy Supply Association ( RESA ) 1 hereby objects to the Office of Consumer Counsel s (the OCC s ) First Set of Interrogatories. Specifically, for the reasons discussed more fully below, RESA objects to Interrogatories OCC-3; OCC-4; OCC-5; OCC-6; OCC-7; OCC-8; OCC-12; OCC-13; OCC-15; OCC-16; OCC-17; OCC-19; OCC-20(a)-(c), and (j); OCC-21; OCC-23(a); OCC-24(a); and OCC-25 (the Objectionable Interrogatories ). BACKGROUND Connecticut General Statutes o permits the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority ( Authority ) to initiate a docket to review the feasibility, costs and benefits of placing on Standard Service all customers of all electric suppliers (1) who are hardship cases, (2) having moneys due and owing deducted from such customer bills by the electric distribution company, (3) receiving other financial assistance from an electric distribution company, or (4) who are otherwise protected by law from shutoff of electricity services. 2 Hardship case includes (i) a customer receiving local, state or federal public assistance; (ii) a customer whose sole source of 1 The comments expressed in this filing represent the position of the Retail Energy Supply Association (RESA) as an organization but may not represent the views of any particular member of the Association. Founded in 1990, RESA is a broad and diverse group of twenty retail energy suppliers dedicated to promoting efficient, sustainable and customer-oriented competitive retail energy markets. RESA members operate throughout the United States delivering value-added electricity and natural gas service at retail to residential, commercial and industrial energy customers. More information on RESA can be found at 2 Conn. Gen. Stat o(m).

3 financial support is Social Security, Veterans' Administration or unemployment compensation benefits; (iii) a customer who is head of the household and is unemployed, and the household income is less than three hundred per cent of the poverty level determined by the federal government; (iv) a customer who is seriously ill or who has a household member who is seriously ill; (v) a customer whose income falls below one hundred twenty-five per cent of the poverty level determined by the federal government; and (vi) a customer whose circumstances threaten a deprivation of food and the necessities of life for himself or dependent children if payment of a delinquent bill is required. 3 On June 4, 2018, the Authority initiated the instant proceeding to conduct this review. 4 On October 5, 2018, the OCC issued its First Set of Interrogatories to The United Illuminating Company ( UI ) and The Connecticut Light and Power Company d/b/a Eversource Energy ( Eversource ) (collectively, the electric distribution companies or EDCs ). 5 These interrogatories request, among other things, various information about customers served by licensed suppliers, including RESA members. On October 15, 2018, the EDCs filed a joint motion requesting an extension of time until November 9, 2018 to file responses to the OCC s First Set of Interrogatories. 6 The Authority granted the motion. 7 On October 19, 2018, UI filed responses to Interrogatories OCC-16, OCC- 18, OCC-22, and OCC RESA hereby objects to the Objectionable Interrogatories. 3 Conn. Gen. Stat c(b)(3). 4 Notice of Proceeding (Jul. 11, 2018). 5 Office of Consumer Counsel s First Set of Interrogatories (Oct. 5, 2018). 6 Joint Motion of The Connecticut Light and Power d/b/a Eversource Energy and The United Iluminating Company (Motion No. 3) (Oct. 15, 2018). 7 Motion No. 3 Ruling (Oct. 19, 2018). 8 UI Responses to Interrogatories OCC-16, OCC-18, OCC-22, and OCC-25 (Oct. 19, 2018). -2-

4 OBJECTION As discussed more fully below, RESA objects to the Objectionable Interrogatories because the information requested is not relevant or material to this proceeding. Accordingly, the Authority should issue a ruling directing the EDCs not to respond to the Objectionable Interrogatories, and, to the extent responses to those interrogatories have been filed, striking those responses from the record. LEGAL STANDARD The Authority has generally recognized that in order to be discoverable the information sought must be relevant or material to the proceeding. 9 Thus, if the information requested is not relevant or material, it is objectionable. 10 Relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is material to the determination of the proceeding more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. 11 Evidence is material when it is offered to prove a fact directly in issue or a fact probative of a matter in issue. 12 The Authority has generally adhered to the following standard [T]he department and other parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in a pending proceeding. Further, it is not grounds for objection that the information or documents sought through discovery will be inadmissible at 9 Cf. Conn. Agencies Regs (a) (authorizing the exclusion of irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious evidence in contested cases); Docket No RE07, Application of Liberty Power Holdings, LLC for an Electric Supplier License Review of Allegations of Consumer Protection Violations, Ruling, at 4 (Feb. 7, 2018) (identifying permissible grounds for objection in contested cases as relevance, materiality, and privilege). 10 Id. 11 Conn. Code Evid State v. Estrella, 277 Conn. 458, 484 n.17 (2006). -3-

5 the hearing if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 13 ARGUMENT The instant proceeding deals with a narrowly circumscribed subject matter; namely, the review of the feasibility, costs, and benefits of switching a certain statutorily specified group of customers to Standard Service. 14 This proceeding is not a general inquiry into the Connecticut retail electricity market or an inquiry into the operations of specific licensed electric suppliers. Thus, any information requested about customers other than those explicitly set forth in statute, requested about any subset of customers or about the customers of specific suppliers is not relevant or material to this proceeding. Accordingly, RESA s objections to the Objectionable Interrogatories should be sustained. I. INFORMATION ABOUT CUSTOMERS OTHER THAN THOSE EXPLICITLY SET FORTH IN STATUTE IS NOT RELEVANT OR MATERIAL Interrogatories OCC-3, OCC-5, OCC-7, OCC-12, OCC-15, OCC-16, OCC-19(a), OCC- 19(b), OCC-19(c), OCC-20(a), OCC-20(b), OCC-20(c), OCC-21, OCC-23(a), OCC-24(a), and OCC-25 inquire specifically about non-hardship customers 15 or matters generally applicable to 13 Office of Consumer Counsel v. Department of Public Utility Control, 44 Conn. Supp. 21, 27 (1994) (quoting August 20, 1992 Authority ruling setting forth Authority discovery procedures) (emphasis added). At the time of the decision, the Authority was known as the Department of Public Utility Control ( Department or DPUC ). The Authority has followed these discovery procedures in other proceedings as well. Docket No , Joint Application of Energy East Corporation and CTG Resources for Approval of a Change of Control, Motion No. 12 Ruling (Oct. 18, 1999); Docket No RE01, Application of Palmco Power CT, LLC for an Electric Supplier License Investigation into Marketing and Enrollment Practices, Motion No. 15 Ruling (Jan. 15, 2016), Motion No. 18 Ruling (Mar. 18, 2016). 14 Conn. Gen. Stat o(m); Notice of Proceeding, at See Interrogatory OCC-3 ( Regarding non-hardship customers. ); Interrogatory OCC-5 (same); Interrogatory OCC-7 (same); Interrogatory OCC-12 (requesting information about non-hardship accounts); Interrogatory OCC-15 ( please provide... for non-hardship accounts ) (emphasis in original); Interrogatory OCC-23(a) ( What is the average annual kwh usage associated with non-hardship customers for (i) Rate Class 1 and (ii) Rate Class 5? ); OCC-24(a) (same). -4-

6 all customers, not just hardship customers. 16 Non-hardship customers are not covered by Connecticut General Statutes section o(m) and, therefore, information about them is outside the scope of, and irrelevant to, the instant proceeding, and immaterial. Accordingly, the Authority should determine that the EDCs are not required to respond to any interrogatories not specifically tailored to hardship cases, and direct the EDCs not to respond to any interrogatories not so tailored. II. INFORMATION ABOUT SUBSETS OF CUSTOMERS IS NOT RELEVANT OR MATERIAL Interrogatories OCC-3(d), OCC-5, OCC-6, OCC-7, OCC-8, OCC-19(b), OCC-19(c), OCC-20(b), OCC-20(c), OCC-23(a), and OCC-24 request information by municipality, zip code, and/or rate class. 17 The instant proceeding does not deal with geographic distinctions between customers. Connecticut General Statues section o(m) empowers the Authority to initiate a docket respecting all customers defined under Connecticut General Statutes section o(m) as hardship cases, not customers from a particular municipality, zip code, or rate class. 18 Accordingly, responses to these interrogatories are irrelevant to the instant proceeding and immaterial. The Authority should determine that the EDCs are not required to respond to these interrogatories and direct the EDCs not to respond to these interrogatories. 16 See Interrogatory OCC-16 ( If and when suppliers charge customers a cancellation fee for terminating service, does the Company collect the cancellation fee on behalf of the suppliers? ); Interrogatory OCC-19(a) (inquiring about each supplier s total number of residential accounts served ); Interrogatory OCC-19(b) (inquiring about each supplier s total number of Residential 1 accounts); Interrogatory OCC-19(c) (inquiring about each supplier s total number of Residential 5 accounts); Interrogatory OCC-20(a) (inquiring about each EDC s total number of standard service residential accounts); Interrogatory OCC-20(b) (inquiring about each EDC s total number of Residential 1 accounts); Interrogatory OCC-20(c) (inquiring about each EDC s total number of Residential 5 accounts); Interrogatory OCC-21 (inquiring about the percent of all residential customers who change supplier each month); Interrogatory OCC-25 (seeking sample customer bills). 17 Interrogatories OCC-3(d), OCC-5, OCC-6, OCC-7, OCC-8, OCC-19(b), OCC-19(c), OCC-20(b), OCC-20(c), OCC-23(a), and OCC Conn. Gen. Stat o(m). -5-

7 Interrogatory OCC-20(j) requests information about customers flagged in EDC billing systems, but not mentioned elsewhere in Interrogatory OCC To the extent that any of these customers are not hardship cases, information about them is not relevant to the instant proceeding and should not be provided in response to the OCC s interrogatories. III. INFORMATION ABOUT THE CUSTOMERS OF SPECIFIC SUPPLIERS IS NOT RELEVANT OR MATERIAL Interrogatories OCC-3, OCC-4, OCC-5(a), OCC-6(a), OCC-12, OCC-13, OCC-16, OCC- 17, OCC-19, and OCC-21 request information to be provided on a supplier-by-supplier basis. 20 The instant proceeding is not directed at nor does it involve specific, individual suppliers. 21 Indeed, Connecticut General Statutes section o(m) does not authorize an inquiry into particular suppliers; it authorizes the Authority to initiate a proceeding to review whether to place a certain type of customers of all electric suppliers on Standard Service. 22 Accordingly, information specific to particular suppliers is not relevant or material to the instant proceeding and should not be provided in response to the OCC s interrogatories. The Authority should determine that the EDCs are not required to respond to these interrogatories and direct the EDCs not to respond to these interrogatories. By doing so, the Authority also will prevent sensitive supplier-specific information from being disclosed publicly. 19 Interrogatory OCC-20(j). 20 See Interrogatory OCC-3(a) (g) (requesting certain data for each competitive supplier licensed to market and sell electricity in the Company s service territory ); Interrogatory OCC-4 (requesting certain data, disaggregating by competitive suppliers ); Interrogatory OCC-5(a) (requesting the name of the supplier and total number of all nonhardship residential accounts billed for each unique combination of municipality, zip code, and rate class, the total kilowatt hours billed and the number of new residential accounts billed) (emphasis in original); Interrogatory OCC- 6(a) (requesting the name of the supplier and total number of all residential hardship accounts billed for each unique combination of municipality, zip code, and rate class, the total kilowatt hours billed and the number of new residential accounts billed) (emphasis in original); Interrogatory OCC-12 (requesting certain data separately by supplier ); Interrogatory OCC-13 (same); Interrogatory OCC-16 (same); Interrogatory OCC-17 (same); Interrogatory OCC-19 (same); Interrogatory OCC-21 (same). 21 See Notice of Proceeding (Jul. 11, 2018), at 1 (indicating that the Authority intends to explore the number of Conn. Gen. Stat o(m) customer served by a supplier ). 22 Conn. Gen. Stat o(m). -6-

8 CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Authority should issue a ruling directing the EDCs not to respond to the Objectionable Interrogatories, and, to the extent responses to these interrogatories have already been filed, striking those responses from the record. Respectfully Submitted, RETAIL ENERGY SUPPLY ASSOCIATION By Brian E. Calabrese Robinson & Cole LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT Phone (860) Fax (860) bcalabrese@rc.com -7-

9 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent to all participants of record on this 26th day of October Brian E. Calabrese