OVERVIEW
The Consumers’ Utility Counsel Division (“CUC”) of the Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs (“OCA”) represents Georgia’s residential and smallest commercial ratepayers in utility proceedings before the Georgia Public Service Commission (“PSC” or “Commission”). CUC acts on behalf of these ratepayers in a wide variety of electric, natural gas, and telecommunications matters, including matters involving utility rates and services and the rules of service applicable to ratepayers.
During the calendar year 2005, CUC appeared and participated in a variety of cases involving electric, gas and telecommunications matters of great importance to the ratepayers it represents. The major cases in which CUC participated are listed below. These include base rate and fuel increase cases filed by Savannah Electric and Power Company (“Savannah Electric”), a fuel increase case filed by Georgia Power Company (“Georgia Power”) and base rate increase cases filed by both Atlanta Gas Light Company (“AGL”) and Atmos Energy Corp. (“Atmos”).
ELECTRICITY UTILITY CASES
Case status as of December 31, 2005
Savannah Electric and Power Company 2004-2005 Base Rate Case: GPSC Docket No. 19758-U; CUC File No. 04006:
On November 30, 2004, Savannah Electric filed a rate case seeking a $23,200,000 base rate increase, and requesting that a disproportionate percentage of the increase be allocated to residential consumers. CUC was an active participant in the case, and strongly opposed portions of the requested increase and the disproportionate allocation of increases. The case was heard during the spring of 2005. After the hearing, a Stipulation was reached under which Savannah Electric received a $9,571,000 rate increase which was allocated equally by class.
Savannah Electric and Power Company 2005 Application to Increase Fuel Cost Recovery (FCR) Allowance: GPSC Docket No. 21229-U; CUC File No. 05054:
In its 2005 fuel filing, Savannah Electric requested, inter alia, that residential fuel rates be increased by approximately 24.5%. CUC was an active participant in cross examination during the hearings that were held in connection with the requested increase, and also was involved in subsequent settlement negotiations. Ultimately, a stipulation was reached and was approved by the Commission. Under the Stipulation, residential rates increased approximately 13.5%, and a $6 low-income senior citizen discount was implemented.
Georgia Power Company 2005 Application to Increase Fuel Cost Recovery: GPSC Docket No. 19142-U; CUC File No. 05003:
In February, 2005 Georgia Power filed an application to increase its fuel cost recovery (“FCR”) rates. In the application, the Company was seeking to recover an increase that would add approximately $7.92 per month to the bill of a residential consumer who used 1000 kilowatt hours per month. The CUC took pre-hearing depositions and conducted cross examination in connection with the prudence of the fuel expenditures and the impact of an increase on ratepayers. The Commission decided the matter on May 17, 2005, approving an increase that added approximately $6.39 per month to the average residential consumer’s bill.
Petition of the City of Savannah & Montenay Savannah Limited Partnership, LLC; Waiver of Green Power Energy Criteria: GPSC Docket No. 20611-U; CUC File No. 05023:
Petitioners filed for a wavier of the Commission’s “green power” criteria on April 26, 2005. Hearings were held on August 25, 2005. Staff, the intervening parties, and CUC recommended that the wavier be denied. The Petitioners filed a voluntary dismissal without prejudice on November 18, 2005.
Petition for Equitable Recovery of Municipal Franchise Fees: GPSC Docket No. 21112-U; CUC File No. 05062:
On September 6, 2005, the Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) to receive public comment on the method used by Georgia Power Company to recover municipal franchise fees. CUC filed comments asserting that Georgia Power should not recover municipal franchise fee operating expenses from customers who are not residents of the municipality levying such fees, but should, instead, recover the operating expenses from the residents who are beneficiaries of such fees. An oral argument will be scheduled in this docket late January 2006.
Notice of Inquiry: Review of Procedures Regarding Applications by Electric Utilities to Increase/Decrease Fuel Cost Recovery: GPSC Docket No. 20932-U; CUC File No. 05060:
On July 6, 2005, the Commission issued an NOI seeking public comments regarding the manner in which it and other parties could most effectively and efficiently gather and examine information provided by electric utilities during proceedings to set new FCR rates. Comments were filed by CUC and interested parties on September 19, 2005. All parties are now working to agree on a rule that will establish minimum filing requirements. CUC is actively involved in the process.
Demand Side Management Working Group: GPSC Docket Nos. 17687-U and 17688-U; CUC File No. 04007:
Throughout 2005 the demand side management (DSM) Working Group met, as directed by the Commission, to evaluate DSM measures. CUC has been an active participant in these discussions. The Group drafted a report which was adopted on May 24, 2005. The next Working Group meeting will occur in January 2006.
NATURAL GAS CASES
Atlanta Gas Light Company’s 2004-2005 Rate Case: GPSC Docket No. 18638-U; CUC File No. 04037:
Pursuant to the Commission’s Order in Docket No. 14311-U, AGL was under a three year Performance Based Rate Plan that began in May, 2002 and ended in April, 2005. In October of 2004, the Commission initiated Docket No. 18638-U to consider whether the Plan should be discontinued, extended or otherwise modified. AGL filed a general rate case with the Commission in October, 2004 and hearings on the Company’s direct testimony were held in January, 2005. Commission Staff, CUC, and other parties presented their testimony at hearings in February.
In its testimony, CUC recommended that the Commission deny the Company‘s $25.633 million base rate increase. CUC proposed adjustments or recommendations in cost allocation methodology, revenue allocation, G-II customer charges, the Energy Conservation Program and an increase in the low-income senior citizen discount from $10.50 to $14.00, which was subsequently adopted by the Commission.
Following a hearing, argument and briefs from all parties, the Commission rendered a decision in April, 2005. The Commission decision will save natural customers $46 million over the next three years. A majority of the Commission approved a freeze in the current base charges that residential customers pay each month to AGL. CUC supported the Commission’s April 29th Order.
Subsequently, AGL filed a Motion to “immediately stay” the Commission’s April Order. Upon Reconsideration, the Commission reversed its earlier decision and allowed the Company to keep excess profits that both Staff and CUC determined that under its existing rate base, the Company was actually over-earning approximately $22 million per year. Although the new decision freezes AGL rates for five years instead of three years, the Commission set no enforceable ceiling on the profits the Company can earn for the next five years. The new Order also gave the Company an additional five years to complete its pipeline replacement work, which means consumers will be paying the cost for a longer period of time. CUC positions taken in the case were better represented in the April 29, 2005 Order than the Revised Order that took effect in May 2005.
Atmos Energy 2005 Rate Case: GPSC Docket No. 20298-U; CUC File No. 05015:
On May 20, 2005 Atmos filed a base rate case. Hearings were held on September 6-7, October 11-12, and November 4, 2005. The Commission rendered its decision on November 21, 2005. The Commission approved a minimal rate increase, under which the average residential consumer’s bill will increase $0.32 per month.
Atmos filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Commission’s Order. While the Motion was pending, Atmos and Commission staff agreed to a stipulation under which Atmos would receive a rate increase that was significantly higher than the increase set by the Commission. CUC argued against the stipulation as it would have significantly increased the amount residential consumers would pay each month. On December 20, 2005 the stipulation was rejected by the Commission.
Atmos Energy Corporation’s 2005-2006 Energy Supply Plan: GPSC Docket No. 20528-U; CUC File No. 05042:
On July 18, 2005 Atmos filed with the Commission its 2005-2006 Gas Supply Plan. Georgia law requires Atmos to file a gas supply plan and gas cost adjustment factor for the ensuing recovery year. This is the Company’s twelfth’s such filing.
Hearings were during August 2005 and CUC submitted a Letter Brief on August 29, 2005. A Final Order was issued by the Commission on August 31, 2005.
IN RE: Notice of Inquiry on Multiple Natural Gas Systems Within a Single Certificated Area: GPSC Docket No. 21205-U; CUC File No. 05064:
The Commission issued this NOI to receive comments from parties regarding under what circumstances, if any, duplicative natural gas distribution systems should operate within the same certificated area. The Commission’s goal was to receive information that will assist in the development of a proposed rule regarding factors that should be considered if multiple natural gas systems are permitted to operate within a single certificated area. Eighteen sets of comments were filed (including comments from CUC, from AGL, the Municipal Gas Authority of Georgia and a number of Georgia municipalities.) The matter is still pending and no proposed rule has yet been issued.
GPSC Rulemaking to Amend USF Rule 515-7-5-.07(2): “Application For Disbursements From a Universal Service Fund: Electing Distribution Company: GPSC Docket No. 15326-U; CUC File No. 04075:
The Commission issued an NOI on December 3, 2004 to solicit comments from interested parties regarding what types of Universal Service Fund (“USF”) applications should be deemed as within the “public interest”. CUC argued that any request for line extension disbursements should be weighed against the other statutorily designated purposes eligible for USF, i.e., assisting low-income residential consumers in times of emergency as determined by the Commission, and consumers of the regulated provider of natural gas in accordance with O.C.G.A.46-4-166. CUC provided the Commission with factors for a “public interest” standard. CUC’s continued review of and involvement in USF applications pending before the Commission played a key role in bringing the need for a definition of “public interest” to a head.
This matter is still pending.
Commerce Energy, Inc. Application for a Natural Gas Marketer Certificate of Authority and A.C.N. Energy, Inc.’s Application for Expedited Authorization to Transfer its Customers: GPSC Docket Nos. 20504-U and 10086-U; CUC File No. 05021:
A.C.N. and Commerce Energy (“Applicants”) filed their respective applications on April 14, 2005. In response to Staff’s request, Commerce filed supplemental information to complete its application on May 6, 2005. The Applicants filed joint pre-filed testimony on June 6, 2005. A Hearing was held on June 16, 2005. CUC participated in the hearing by conducting cross-examination of witnesses.
Commerce was granted a natural gas marketer certificate of authority on an interim basis in the Commission’s Order of July 12, 2005. A.C.N.’s application to transfer customers to Commerce was also granted on an expedited basis. The Commission ordered that Staff-approved customer notification letters be sent to A.C.N’s customers thirty days in advance of the transfer date, in compliance with PSC rule.
Application of Gas South, LLC for a Natural Gas Marketer Certificate of Authority: GPSC Docket No. 21109-U; CUC File No. 05068:
Gas South, LLC filed an application for a natural gas marketer certificate of authority on October 7, 2005. Gas South is an affiliate of Cobb EMC that was formed from the Southern Company’s sale of Southern Company Gas to Cobb EMC. Under the terms of agreement between the companies Gas South will take over the accounts of existing Southern Company Gas customers and certain contracts under which Southern Company Gas currently provides billing and customer service.
CUC participated in a hearing on this matter during December 2005. A decision is scheduled for Administrative Session on January 3, 2006.
Application of Catalyst Energy, LLC for a Natural Gas Marketer Certificate of Authority: GPSC Docket No. 21626-U; CUC File No. 05067:
Catalyst Energy, LLC filed its Application for a Natural Gas Marketer in Georgia on October 7, 2005. A hearing is scheduled to be held at the Commission on January 10, 2006.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS CASES
2005 Joint House & Senate Emerging Communications Technologies Study Committee: Non-Docket; CUC File No. 05070:
During 2005, CUC was appointed to an Advisory Committee which will make a recommendation regarding proposed legislation to a Joint House and Senate Sub-committee. CUC’s participation on the Committee helped keep consumer-friendly provisions in the draft bill ('Act Encouraging Deployment of Competitive Emerging Communications Technologies of 2005). Two examples of provisions such provisions:
- “This Code section shall not be construed to affect State laws of general applicability to all businesses, including without limitation consumer protection laws and laws relating to restraint of trade”, and
- “Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Code section, nothing in this Code section shall be construed to restrict or expand any authority or jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission.”
City of LaGrange Petition to Amend Certificate of Authority to Provide Competitive Local Exchange Service: Docket No. 7127-U; CUC File No. 05013:
In its February 21, 2005 Petition, LaGrange requested an amendment in order to expressly authorize LaGrange to provide voice local exchange telecommunications services to all classes of customer, including residential customers. Since being granted its Interim Certificate of Authority on May 22, 1997, LaGrange had provided voice, video and data communications services (i.e., high-speed Internet and network access services) and Ethernet to schools, medical facilities, commercial businesses and governmental facilities located in Troup County and in the LaGrange city limits.
LaGrange filed its Petition because it desired to expand its local exchange service authority to include the offering of facilities-based services to residential customers, including Voice Over Internet Protocol (“VOIP”).
On April 18, 2005, the Commission issued its Order for Second Amendment to Interim Certificate of Authority L-003, such that LaGrange would be able to offer such services.
GENERIC CASES
Utilities Response to Hurricane Katrina: Non-Docket; CUC File No. 05071:
During September, 2005 CUC was contacted by a representative of AARP regarding what, if anything, Georgia utilities were doing to assist Katrina Evacuees who had relocated to Georgia. In response to this request, CUC contacted Commission Staff and each of the Georgia utilities to determine what actions were being taken by each. While a number of utilities already had initiatives underway, many did not. As a result of CUC’s actions, the majority of utility companies did implement programs to assist Katrina victims.