Committee approves OPA amendment requiring competitive electricity providers to provide PUC‑protected data for an OPA study of CEP rates and practices

The Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee voted to advance LD 860 with an Office of the Public Advocate‑sponsored amendment that substantially reworks the bill’s original drafting. Under the amendment the OPA is explicitly authorized to petition the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) for data and information from public utilities, standard offer providers and competitive electricity providers (CEPs) on a showing of good cause. Where information is confidential, the PUC may issue protective orders allowing the OPA to review the data without public disclosure.

The amended bill requires the OPA to produce a report (drafted in consultation with stakeholders) on the rates and business practices of standard offer and competitive electricity providers, taking account of value‑added services (for example, behind‑the‑meter measures), length of contract periods and other product differences. The amendment also mandates that OPA solicit recommendations from at least three CEPs and at least one SOP serving residential/small commercial customers; participating stakeholders are allowed to review methodology and draft reports and to have their comments appended to the final report. The draft preserves confidentiality protections by directing the OPA to seek information through PUC petitioning and protective‑order procedures.

The OPA and several CEP representatives worked together on the amended language. Heather Samoran (OPA) told the committee the approach is intended to ensure the OPA has access to the granular data necessary to compare apples to apples — for example, to separate green‑energy product offerings or bundled services from pure supply rate comparisons. Stephen Hudson, counsel for NRG (a large national CEP), said his company supported the revised process and the stakeholder review element, and emphasized that the stakeholder participation and confidentiality protections were essential for CEPs to share proprietary product data.

The committee voted unanimously to report the bill “ought to pass as amended.” Committee staff and the OPA told members they will use the PUC’s information‑gathering authority and protective‑order process to ensure confidential commercial data is shared only under binding safeguards.

Ending: The amended bill directs OPA to prepare a stakeholder‑informed report about SOP and CEP rates, contract terms and value‑added services; the PUC petition/protective order mechanism was identified as the proper channel for giving the OPA access to confidential provider data while protecting commercially sensitive information.