V. Consumer Protection

The utilities and the CCAs disagree about the extent to which AB 117 requires or permits the Commission to regulate consumer protections. The utilities interpret the statute broadly to require the Commission to promulgate a number of rules and to take action if the CCA fails to provide promised benefits to consumers, if rates are unexpectedly changed or where customers are defrauded. They propose CCA customers should be able to file complaints at the Commission and that CCAs be required to file annual reports. The utilities and ORA propose protections against "slamming" by CCAs, that is, the transfer of a customer to the CCA without authority.

CCAs object to the utilities' broad interpretation of the statute and argue that the Commission has no jurisdiction over consumer complaint procedures, and protections against slamming and fraud.

Discussion. Many of the issues we resolved our Phase 1 order and those we address in this order are surely "consumer protection" in every sense of the word. The CRS protects utility bundled customers from assuming the costs incurred on behalf of CCA customers. The rates we set for CCAs are intended to protect CCA customers and utility bundled customers from having to subsidize each other. The operational requirements we order in utility tariffs protect CCA and utility customers from compromises to the engineered electrical system and the reliability of electrical service. As the statute requires, we establish procedures for notifying customers of the CCA's program and their options for future electrical service.

On the other hand, we see a very limited role in other types of consumer protections for reasons we have already discussed with regard to the jurisdiction conferred by AB 117. Nothing in AB 117 suggests that we act as a forum to negotiate or rule on disputes between CCAs and their customers. Many local governments provide utility services and we have no evidence to suggest their consumer protections are lacking. Section 394 exempts public agencies from submitting to the Commission's consumer complaint procedures, presumably because they have their own. Section 366 explicitly exempts CCAs from procuring a "positive written declaration" by the customer, a requirement for private aggregators and direct access providers intended to prevent "slamming." Moreover, if we impose elaborate slamming protections on CCAs, we wonder why the utilities should not be subjected to the same procedures.

For these reasons, we do not intend to act as a forum for CCA customer complaints and we assume CCA customers will have the same recourse for their electricity services as they have for other utility services provided by local agencies.

We agree with the utilities that we require certain types of information from CCAs in our role to oversee the electric system generally and there is no question of our authority to require relevant information from CCAs. The CCAs do not object to filing annual reports with certain types of information and we will direct them to provide such reports, such as those they would provide to their own local oversight agencies or bodies.

Finally, the utilities have proposed that their tariffs serve as a resource for CCA customers by specifying all program rules, including those over which we may not have authority. We have stated our intent to use utility tariffs to govern the relationship between CCAs and serving utilities. However, utility tariffs are not the appropriate place to govern relationships between CCAs and their customers. In general, utility tariffs may not regulate the activities of CCAs in ways that are otherwise outside the scope of this Commission's authority, consistent with this order.