Requires customer consent to material changes to third-party energy supply contracts.
Summary
Assembly Bill 4913 would require express consent from a residential customer before any “material change” can be made to a third-party energy supply contract for electric generation service or gas supply service. The bill defines a material change broadly to include changes to the contract’s terms or duration, including price changes and changes between fixed and variable pricing. Consent could be given verbally, electronically, or in writing, but the supplier would have to keep that consent in a verifiable format.
The bill applies only to third-party energy supply contracts entered into or renewed after the bill’s effective date. It also directs the Board of Public Utilities to adopt implementing rules and regulations under the Administrative Procedure Act. In practical terms, the measure is aimed at residential customers who buy energy supply from electric power suppliers or gas suppliers rather than directly under standard utility service arrangements.
Impact
The bill would add a new consumer-protection requirement to Title 48 governing third-party energy supply contracts in New Jersey. It would limit suppliers’ ability to unilaterally modify contract terms for residential customers and would require documentation of customer authorization for any qualifying change. The Board of Public Utilities would be responsible for writing rules to administer and enforce the new consent standard, affecting electric power suppliers, gas suppliers, and residential consumers who enter into or renew these contracts after the effective date.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded opposition, so there is no direct evidence of debate or division around the bill. Based on the text alone, the measure appears consumer-protective and likely intended to address concerns about surprise contract changes in the retail energy market. The absence of voting history or hearing testimony means the overall legislative sentiment cannot be measured beyond the bill’s protective framing.
Contention
The main policy issue is whether suppliers should be allowed to make changes to contract terms without obtaining fresh customer approval, especially for price and pricing-structure changes. Consumer advocates would likely support the bill because it increases transparency and customer control, while third-party energy suppliers may view it as adding compliance burdens and reducing flexibility in contract administration. Another possible point of contention is the breadth of the term “material change,” which could capture a wide range of modifications and create disputes over what requires renewed consent.