4. Preliminary Scoping Memo

As required by Rule 7.1(d) of our Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules), this order includes a preliminary scoping memo as set forth below. Unless a further Scoping Memo is deemed appropriate by the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) or the assigned Commissioner, the Preliminary Scope will be addressed in the first decision in this proceeding. As previously stated, the focus of this proceeding is to reduce the number of gas and electric utility service disconnections due to nonpayment by improving customer notification and education, including ways to help customers avoid disconnections while working with the utilities to pay arrearages and keep current on bills.

In addition to the practices we are implementing with the issuance of this Rulemaking, we also ask parties to consider the following issues as part of the scope of the proceeding and inform the Commission of your comments on whether to adopt any of the following practices:

· Best practices for contacting customers who are delinquent in their bill payments, including methods such as bill inserts, special colored-bills, individualized messages on a bill, separate mailings, dropped-off notices, telephone calls [including whether live-voice or recorded messages], e-mails, text-messaging, third-party notification, etc.;

· Language options and how a utility would know what language would be appropriate for a particular household;

· Outreach and education about customer assistance programs, energy efficiency programs, bill management options, balanced payment plans, etc.;

· How customers are "targeted" for outreach and education information, and whether the customer should be required to initiate the first contact;

· Whether CSRs should have "scripts" or be left to their own discretion in how they communicate with each individual customer;

· How should the utilities tailor their automated call and written notices concerning disconnection so that customers who use telephone relay services and sight-impaired customers are receiving the notices;

· Should a utility charge a customer for a remote connection or disconnection;

· Whether the reporting requirements included in this rulemaking are sufficient or should they be eliminated or expanded;

· Whether the Commission should set a benchmark for the number of disconnections experienced and what such a benchmark should be;

· If the utilities are not to collect post-service initiation deposits, are there other ways for the utilities to reduce future revenue losses from uncollectibles, such as financial institution guarantees;

· How does a utility distinguish between a payment extension and a payment installment plan and how is the difference communicated to the customer;

· If a customer requests a monthly billing date that is different from the date assigned by the utility, does the utility accommodate this request, and if so, how is the customer notified;

· How can the utilities strive to maintain the direct communication and personal contact that customers associate with in-person disconnection visits, when the utilities return to remote disconnections;

· How can all utilities incorporate best practices, such as those employed by SDG&E and SoCalGas, to work with community-based-organizations (CBO) and faith-based organizations to educated customers on the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) and other assistance programs; and

· Should the utilities utilize more data-sharing programs along the lines used by SDG&E to partner with school districts and use the program data as a screen to enroll additional families in the CARE program, while protecting privacy issues.