(The Center Square) – The state Utilities and Transportation Commission last year approved a rate increase requested by Puget Sound Energy, with the stipulation that costs associated with the state Climate Commitment Act not be included in billing statements.
SB 5826 would require utilities do the opposite and list costs due to the CCA on statements. As part of its ruling, the UTC mandated that CCA rebates be included.
The decision to prohibit CCA cost inclusion came after AGO Assistant Attorney General Nina Suetake, acting as public counsel, wrote to the UTC arguing that such a policy “requires more discussion in upcoming workshops.” Another reason was that she felt line items would be too confusing for ratepayers to understand.
Speaking at a Jan. 24 public hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology, bill sponsor Rep. Drew MacEwen, R-Shelton, challenged that argument, saying “come on, it’s the 21st Century. We can figure these things out. I think it’s important that consumers have an understanding of what’s happening.”
Public testimony at the hearing was mostly positive. Natasha Jackson with the Northwest Gas Association told committee members that “at its core we believe SB 5826 is a transparency bill. The public should know the cost they’re paying for programs like the Climate Commitment Act.”
Association of Washington Business Director of Government Affairs for Energy Peter Godlewski told the committee that “it makes it difficult for customers to know how to adjust their behaviors” if they don’t know what’s driving the energy increases.
Also testifying in support was Puget Sound Energy. Lobbyist Matt Miller told the committee that “we believe in price transparency. We think both the cost and the benefits of the CCA should be put on our bills for our customers to see.”
The public testimony generated an exchange between bill supporters and several committee members. Sen. Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, a former AGO legislative director, reiterated the arguments made in Suetake’s letter regarding line item complications.
However, Washington Policy Center Environmental Director Todd Myers noted that the letter didn’t dispute the cost amount associated with the CCA, adding that if line item complication is an issue the rebates should not have been included.
Trudeau replied that “I think those are two separate questions. I believe a part of the complication is that we don’t have full picture.”
Sen. Joe Nguyễn, D-White Center, argued that if people favor more transparency with utility prices they should also support price transparency for oil companies, which have claimed their prices have increased significantly due to the CCA.
Myers responded that price transparency in a regulated monopoly is separate. “If you don’t provide price transparency in a competitive market, you are punished.”
The bill is not scheduled for any further committee action.
