1. Call to order.

2. Comments by Chairman and task force members.

3. Staff review of previous meetings; overview of issues before task force.

4. Presentations on consumer protection, environmental protection and energy efficiency.

• Virginia State Corporation Commission. Richard Williams, Director, Economics & Finance.

• Association of Energy Conservation Professionals (AECP). Billy Weitzenfield, President.

• Southern Environmental Law Center. Trip Pollard, Staff Attorney.

• Virginia Council Against Poverty. Judy Mason, Executive Director.

• Virginia Farm Bureau. Mandi Smith, Legislative Specialist.

• The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). Mary Madge, Member, AARP Virginia State Legislative Committee.

• Energy Consultants, Inc. Jack Greenhalgh, Vice President [written remarks].

• Ogden Energy Group. Paula C. Soos, Director, Government Relations.

• International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, System Council U-1. Brad Wike, Legislative Director.

• Other interested parties.

6. Confirm next meeting's date and agenda.

7. Adjourn.

The Consumer, Environment & Education Task Force has met twice-first on August 18, and then most recently on September 17. This task force has many issues before it including: utility services for low-income households, consumer education, consumer protection, environmental issues, and energy efficiency. The task force will meet next on October 6 at 10 a.m. in House Room 4 of the Capitol. The topics under consideration will be (i) consumer protection (ii) environment, and (iii) energy efficiency.

Public Benefits Programs.

At our first meeting on August 18, we listened carefully to consumer group representatives tell us about the need to make electricity accessible and affordable to low-income households after restructuring. We learned that Virginia currently has no mandated public benefits programs for low-income customers, under current law. Utility-coordinated, voluntary programs like EnergyShare and Neighbor-to-Neighbor, however, provide some emergency relief to low-income households having difficulty paying their electricity bills.

The VCCC, AARP, and others believe that Virginia should-in a restructured environment-adopt a public benefits surcharge payable by all electricity customers as a means of furnishing (i) rate subsidies, (ii) energy efficiency assistance (such as weatherization), and (iii) crisis assistance to low-income households. Eligibility would be means-tested, and the level of assistance linked to household energy burden.

Not everyone agreed with this recommendation. AEP-Virginia, for example, suggested that public benefits surcharges may be unnecessary since incumbent utilities continuing to operate distribution networks should be able to maintain voluntary programs such as AEP's Neighbor-to Neighbor and Virginia Power's EnergyShare. Virginia Power suggested that any public benefits charge program be narrowly directed at defined low-income groups such as Virginia's SSI recipients.

Consumer Education.

At the task force's most recent meeting on September 17, we talked about consumer education and customer aggregation. How should consumers be prepared for retail competition? The answer from stakeholders and other interested parties is consumer education programs that precede and follow the advent of electric utility restructuring. The task force heard several presentations concerning the form the education should take, the source of regulatory oversight, and proposed funding mechanisms for such programs.

The VCCC, the Office of the Attorney General's Division of Consumer Counsel and others noted that consumer education programs must (i) prepare consumers for the change, and (ii) equip consumers to shop for electricity as a commodity. These public education program must utilize all mediums, keeping in mind that a "one size fits all" approach won't work for everyone. In that vein, the Virginia Council Against Poverty suggested that Virginia's low-income and other vulnerable groups should be targeted for focused outreach coordinated by Virginia's Department of Social Services, the Department for the Aging and similar state agencies with whom these groups currently have relationships.

In terms of funding consumer education programs, consumer groups such as the VCCC, the Virginia Council Against Poverty, and other recommended nonbypassable wires charges as the principal funding mechanism. Another suggestion: requiring electric supply market participants, e.g., incumbent utilities and other energy supplier, to fund these programs.

Customer Aggregation.

Customer aggregation is viewed by many as the principal means by which residential and small business electricity customers will benefit from restructuring. The electric cooperatives, for example, told the task force about new cooperatives being formed across the country in response to electric utility restructuring-including one formed in the heart of New York city.

Representatives of the Virginia Municipal League and the Virginia Association of Counties asked the task force to consider endorsing a proposal for locality aggregation in which localities would aggregate their residents through an "opt out" plan. Such plans are also referred to as "community choice" plans. These plans are actually being tried out in Massachusetts which approved them as part of its restructuring legislation. A selectman from the town of Falmouth, Massachusetts described for the task force how Falmouth is currently aggregating its residents' electrical load, and that at least fifty other Massachusetts communities are putting together such plans.

Under community choice, a locality's residents would be included in the locality's electricity customer aggregation unless residents and businesses individually choose to opt out in favor of shopping for their own generation supplier. The Virginia Citizens Consumer Council also expressed support for the community choice plan.

Not everyone thinks community choice plans are good public policy. Virginia Power, for example, said that such a proposal, if adopted in a Virginia restructuring plan, could prevent electricity suppliers from bringing competition to locality markets. Localities would effectively be contracting for most, if not all, of their residents' electrical load.

Meeting scheduled for October 6.

The task force will meet again on October 6 to review consumer protection, environmental concerns and energy efficiency issues. We encourage all stakeholders and interested parties to participate in this important meeting. Here are a few of the issues we hope everyone consider in preparing their comments.

Consumer protection.

• Should electric service providers and aggregators be required to disclose standard information in their marketing materials, and in their proposals and contracts for service? If so, what basic information should be provided?

• Should any kinds of marketing practices by electric service providers or aggregators be specifically prohibited? If so, what practices should be barred?

• Should Virginia restructuring legislation establish limits on the size of utility service deposits that may be required by electric service providers and aggregators? If so, what limits should be established?

• What kinds of standard information should electric bills contain after restructuring? If so, what information should each bill be required to provide?

• Should Virginians be given any statutory rights to cancel utility service contracts with electric service providers or aggregators within a specified number of days following acceptance? If so, what special rights of recission or cancellation should be provided in statute?

• Should Virginians be given any statutory protection against unauthorized switching of electric service providers, or "slamming?" If so, what anti-slamming protections should be adopted?

• Should Virginians be given any statutory protection against any electric service provider or aggregator telemarketing practices? If so, what?

• Should consumers be furnished assistance by any state regulatory agencies in resolving complaints against electric service providers or aggregators? If so, which agencies should be involved, and what should their responsibilities include?

Environmental Protection.

• Should Virginia restructuring legislation in any way promote or encourage the use of renewable energy in the generation of electricity? If so, how?

• Should Virginia restructuring legislation in any way address air quality, directly or indirectly? If so, in what way?

• Should Virginia restructuring legislation require electric service providers or aggregators to disclose generation fuels? If so, how should this requirement be implemented and administered?

Energy Efficiency.

• Should Virginia restructuring legislation in any way promote or encourage energy conservation or energy efficiency, e.g., encouraging installation of energy efficient equipment or energy efficiency monitoring equipment? If so, what incentives should the legislation include?

• Should Virginia restructuring legislation establish a public benefits charge for the purpose of encouraging research and development in the areas of energy conservation and efficiency? If so, how should it be assessed and administered?