Bills have been introduced in both the Senate and House to increase the electric choice cap. SB1035 and HB5503 have been referred to the Committees on Energy and Technology in each respective chamber. The bills would increase the electric choice cap in the following manner:

"(i)Within 30 days of the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subdivision, the Commission shall, for the remainder of that calendar year, set the electric choice cap to be the greatest of the following:
(A) 10%.
(B) A percentage equal to the percentage of weather-adjusted retail sales for the preceding calendar year allotted to customers taking service from an alternative electric supplier on the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subdivision plus the percentage of weather-adjusted retail sales for the preceding calendar year represented by additional customers requesting service from an alternative electric supplier on the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subdivision but who have not received an allotment under this subsection. The Commission shall ensure that any customer requesting service from an alternative electric supplier on or before the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subdivision is allowed to purchase electricity from an alternative electric supplier.
(C) The highest percentage, determined on a calendar-year basis for years 2000 through 2012, of weather-adjusted retail sales for the preceding calendar year representing customers who took service from an alternative electric supplier. The Commission shall ensure that any customer requesting service from an alternative electric supplier on or before the effective date of the amendatory act that added this subdivision is allowed to purchase electricity from an alternative electric supplier.
(ii) For each of the 3 calendar years following the calendar year in which the amendatory act that added this subdivision takes effect, the Commission shall, at the beginning of each calendar year, increase the electric choice cap for a utility subject to this subdivision from its then current percentage by 6%."

The bill additionally provides that if the cap has been met and the customers that cannot be served exceeds 2% of the utility's weather-adjusted retail sales for the previous calendar year, then the Commission shall open a proceeding to examine increasing the choice cap. The full texts of SB1035 and HB3305 are available on the NEM Website.

As required under its applicable electric rate Order, ConEd has filed electric rates for the rate year commencing April 1, 2012. Included in its filing is a revised Statement of Merchant Function Charge. The revised MFC reflects revised credit and collection and supply-related components of the MFC, including the increase in PPWC costs and the annual change in the transition adjustment, effective April 1, 2012, and the monthly change in the uncollectible bill expense associated with the Market Supply Charge.

The MFC is to be revised as follows:

SC 1 and SC 7 - 0.5770
SC 2 - 0.5657
SCs 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, and 13 - 0.2082

The full text of ConEd's Filing is available on the NEM Website.

The Commission is reviewing the existing electric Competitive Safeguard provisions of the Code which became effective in July 2000. In 2010, the Commission started the proceeding by issuing an ANOPR to consider appropriate changes to the Competitive Safeguard regulations in view of the current state of market development and changes that had taken place in the decade since the regulations were first put in place. NEM and other stakeholders submitted comments in response. Subsequently, in 2011, the Commission identified additional issue areas for consideration in the Competitive Safeguards and adopted its Proposed Rulemaking Order upon which comments are now being sought.

In NEM's comments, we recommended that:
1) The utilities provision of information about the Commission’s PAPowerSwitch website and a list of suppliers supports the goal of educating consumers and is consistent with the policies endorsed in the Commission’s on-going retail markets investigation.

2) The prevention of cross-subsidization between utilities and affiliated entities is central to ensuring competitive neutrality among market participants and should be expressly prohibited in the Competitive Safeguard regulations.

3) If a utility name is used by an entity, affiliated or non-affiliated, the entity must make proper disclosures with respect to its relationship with the utility, i.e., the focus of the regulations should be on proper disclosure regardless of the entity’s affiliation.

The full text of NEM's Comments is available on the NEM Website.

NEM filed in support of the Petition filed by certain competitive gas suppliers asking the Commission to issue an Order clarifying that the natural gas utilities have the ongoing obligation to provide and update complete customer lists to competitive natural gas suppliers at no charge. NEM noted that the provision of customer lists provide a myriad of benefits that promote the proper functioning of the retail gas market, particularly with respect to promoting an efficient customer enrollment process and the reduction of supplier acquisition costs. The net result is to enhance suppliers ability to communicate with and serve consumers on a more cost-effective basis. NEM argued the provision of gas customer lists is required under Commission regulation and Order. In addition, NEM noted that the Commission required that the electric utilities provide eligible customer lists as "fundamentally necessary to ensure a properly functioning competitive retail market in Pennsylvania." The full text of NEM's Filing is available on the NEM Website.

Columbia Gas responded to the Petition arguing that the utilities obligation to provide customer lists expired January 1, 2004, under Commission Order. Alternatively, Columbia argued that, "if the Commission believes that uniform rules for updating and release of customer lists should be considered, the proper procedure is to open a new docket, and to solicit input as to uniform rules." The full text of Columbia's Filing is available on the NEM Website.

Similarly, NFG argued in its filing that, "because the Commission has not adopted an Order or regulation that modified the time limitation for providing customer lists to NGSs established by the April 13, 2000 Tenative Order and the May 11, 2000 Final Order, the January 1, 2004 end date was never eliminated or extended and therefore National has not violated those Orders by discontinuing its provision of updated customer lists to NGSs after January 1, 2004. Any NGDC that continues to provide updated customer lists to NGSs is doing so on a voluntary basis." The full text of NFG's Filing is available on the NEM Website.