VI. Other Restitution
A. Reconnection Fees and Payments
The parties generally agree that certain customers whose service was shutoff for nonpayment within 75 to 150 days following the receipt of delayed or estimated bills covering service in excess of three months should receive a refund of reconnection fees and a credit of $100 (following delayed bills) or $50 (following estimated bills).26 The remaining difference concerns which customers should be eligible for these remedies.
With respect to delayed bills, PG&E proposes to limit refunds to residential customers whose service was shutoff within 75 to 150 days following receipt of a backbill bill in excess of the tariff time limits, and who PG&E identifies as not having been eligible for shutoff at the time of issuance of the illegal backbill. TURN recommends that the default assumption be that the receipt of the illegal backbill caused any shutoff that followed within 75 to 150 days, and that PG&E have the burden of showing on an individual basis which customers had been eligible for shutoff before receiving the illegal backbill. Try as we may, we cannot discern an actual difference between these recommendations. We adopt PG&E's approach as it is more straightforward in its description.
With respect to estimated bills, PG&E similarly proposes to limit refunds to residential customers whose service was shutoff within 75 to 150 days following receipt of an illegal backbill and who PG&E identifies as not having been eligible for shutoff at the time of issuance of the illegal backbill. PG&E proposes, as an additional limitation, that refunds be limited to situations where the amount of the illegal backbill exceeded the customer's average monthly bill over the time period between the accurate meter reads used to determine the backbill amount. PG&E suggests that, in situations where the estimates were extremely accurate and did not involve significant true-up bills, there is no basis to assume that the illegal backbill contributed to the service shutoff. We agree in theory with PG&E's suggestion. However, we cannot find on the basis of this record that backbill amounts up to and including a customer's average monthly bill are insignificant or that they could not have contributed to a service shutoff. In the absence of any reasonable standard for determining a dividing line between significant and insignificant backbill amounts for this purpose, we reject PG&E's proposed additional limitation.
CPSD recommends that PG&E pay interest on the refunded reconnection fees.27 We agree that interest payments on reconnection refunds are appropriate to compensate customers for the time value of money. We direct that refunds of reconnection fees include interest at the short-term commercial paper rate.28
In addition, consistent with our previous discussion regarding refunds of illegal backbill charges, unclaimed refunds of reconnection fees shall escheat to the State pursuant to C.C.P. § 1519.5.
B. Deposits Following Delayed or Estimated Bills
CPSD recommends that PG&E return deposits collected from those customers who were required to pay credit re-establishment deposits within 90 days of receipt of a delayed or estimated bill. PG&E states that CPSD's recommendation is moot. Only the most recent 12 months of a customer's credit history affect whether a customer is required to have a deposit with PG&E, and PG&E's policy has been not to issue delayed and estimated bills in excess of the tariff limits since January 2005 (estimated bills) or October 2004 (delayed bills). PG&E states that any customer deposits that it now holds should be unrelated to delayed or estimated bills in excess of the Rule 17.1 time limits.
In its reply brief and without citation to the record, CPSD asserts that PG&E informed staff that it still holds customer deposits required after the presentation of an illegal backbill. CPSD recommends that we direct PG&E to either return the deposits or provide evidence that it has done so. Because there is no record evidence that PG&E continues to hold deposits previously required after presentation of an illegal backbill, we do not adopt CPSD's recommendation.
C. Credit Scores
TURN recommends that the Commission order PG&E to "recall" any notification to credit agencies of unpaid closing bills associated with shutoffs following delayed or estimated bills in excess of tariff time limits. Although PG&E does not have control over the records maintained by credit agencies, it does not state an objection to providing them with the relevant information and requesting that they remove any reference to the nonpayment of the customer's closing bill from their records. We direct PG&E to do so.
D. Contribution to REACH Program
TURN recommends that the Commission encourage PG&E to contribute an additional $1 million to REACH (Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help),29 as an appropriate and meaningful gesture of PG&E's commitment to improved customer service going forward. While we certainly encourage PG&E to voluntarily to assist worthy causes in all communities in which it operates, the Commission declines to order particular charitable contributions to be made.
26 CPSD objects to arbitrarily limiting the refunds to $100 if the customer in fact paid more than $100. It appears that CPSD misunderstands PG&E's proposal, which is to refund the entire reconnection fee, and, in addition, pay a credit of either $100 or $50.
27 Although PG&E acknowledges this recommendation in its briefs, it does not state an objection to it.
28 TURN recommends this interest rate in its opening brief. No party disputes the appropriate rate.
29 REACH is a program for low-income customers who cannot pay their PG&E bill due to financial hardship, and is funded through donations from PG&E shareholders, employees and customers.
