Nevada Pre-Pay Experience NASUCA 2015 Barry Gold AARP Nevada

Nevada Pre-Pay Experience Originally part of rate case filing Pushed to investigatory docket Issues related to costs, CBOR, eligibility, viability, more Investigatory docket ruling - move forward with Tariff Filing Discussed numbers, costs, CBOR equivalent/better Initial Tariff Filing – 11/3/2015

Issues / problems raised by AARP NV Voluntary vs low income alternative Impact to low income – additional costs, lose other services Changes to CBOR – need legislative approval, not “better” No customer input – not requested by ratepayers Shut off numbers in other states – health impacts Subsidized by other ratepayers

Voluntary program Impacts to low income No deposit vs $250 $2 month additional charge – plus any credit card fees/interest Lose other services – internet/phone first affecting notifications Customer agreement – sign or no service

Changes to CBOR NAC states agreements can not be less PUC staff ruled this is as good or better Changes to Transmittal of info to customers, Content of Bills, Equalized billing, Deferred payment of delinquent, Termination of service notification Notification – “REQUIRE” internet access, verify 1x year People using others /phone if not have Changes need to have approval by Legislative Commission Agree to this or no service if cannot pay deposit

Health Impacts Although keep temperature shut-off protections can still turn off at 104 degrees Non eligibility for health is self declaratory Age discrimination – cannot sign up if 62 or older self declaratory Status changes are up to customer my husband coming from hospital with oxygen Hide or – or NO service

Other Issues / Wins Shut off numbers from other states Costs shared by other ratepayers No consumer input – not requested by customers CA – “cannot waive CBOR” Wins – Cannot use pay day loan sites Slowed process – required separate hearings Entire tariff process