Orders

Decision Information

Decision Content

IN THE MATTER OF

the Utilities Commission Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, Chapter 473

 

and

 

An Application by FortisBC Energy Inc. (FEI), FortisBC Energy Inc. – Fort Nelson Service Area (FE FTN),

FortisBC Energy (Whistler) Inc. (FEW) and FortisBC Energy (Vancouver Island) Inc. (FEVI)

(collectively the FortisBC Energy Utilities or FEU)

for a Variance to Commission Order G-2-11

 

 

BEFORE:               L.F. Kelsey, Commissioner

                                D. Morton, Commissioner                                            August 4, 2011

                                N.E. MacMurchy, Commissioner

 

O  R  D  E  R

 

WHEREAS:

 

A.      By Order G-2-11, the British Columbia Utilities Commission (Commission) approved the Terasen Gas Inc. (TGI), Terasen Gas Inc. – Fort Nelson Service Area (TG FTN), Terasen Gas (Whistler) Inc. (TGW) and Terasen Gas (Vancouver Island) Inc. (TGVI) (collectively the Terasen Utilities, the predecessor to FortisBC Energy Utilities) application to revise the administration and the invoicing of the Basic Charge from a monthly basis to a daily basis, effective January 1, 2012;

 

B.      On March 28, 2011, FEU filed an application with the Commission pursuant to section 99 of the Utilities Commission Act (Act) for a variance to Directive No. 1 of Order G-2-11.  FEU seek an order to revise the invoicing of the Basic Charge from a monthly basis to a daily basis, for all billing and invoicing purposes on or after January 1, 2012 (Application);

 

C.      The Application states that variance sought is necessary because once the daily mechanism is implemented effective January 1, 2012, the ability to bill using the monthly charge mechanism will no longer exist;

 

D.      The Commission issued Information Request (IR) No. 1 on April 21, 2011 and FEU responded on May 2, 2011;

 

E.       In response to a supplemental IR, regarding the correction of errors that could result in an annual bill impact of greater than $5.00, FEU states that likelihood of a billing adjustment is low.  FEU is also of the view that the daily charge mechanism methodology should be the default method, and only under extreme cases should the old monthly methodology be applied and at FEU’s discretion;

 

 

 

F.       The Commission has reviewed the Application and finds that approval is warranted.

 

 

NOW THEREFORE pursuant to section 99 of the Act, the Commission orders as follows:

 

1.       The Commission approves the variance to Directive No. 1 of Order G-2-11 to read:

The FortisBC Energy Utilities proposal in the Amended Application to revise the administration and the invoicing of the Basic Charge from a monthly basis to a daily basis, for all billing and invoicing purposes on or after January 1, 2012 is approved.

 

2.       If FEU receives a complaint directly from a customer regarding an error correction (for periods prior to January 1, 2012) where FEU has reversed the original charge using the monthly Basic Charge mechanism, and re-billed the customer using the daily Basic charge mechanism and the total Basic Charge amount increases by $5.00 or more, FEU will correct the error using the monthly Basic Charge mechanism.

 

3.       The Commission will accept, subject to timely filing, the revised Tariff page(s) for Commission endorsement.

 

 

DATED at the City of Vancouver, in the Province of British Columbia, this         4th          day of August 2011.

 

                                                                                                                                BY ORDER

 

                                                                                                                             Original signed by:

 

                                                                                                                                D. Morton

                                                                                                                                Commissioner

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.