A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 56-6.1, relating to Office of the Public Utility Ombudsman; established.
HB120, as substituted, designates the Consumer Services Section within the State Corporation Commission’s Division of Public Utility Regulation to serve as Virginia’s public utility ombudsman. The bill expands that section’s role beyond its existing consumer-assistance functions and directs it to receive, review, and attempt to resolve complaints from residential customers about public utilities, help customers understand their rights and responsibilities under utility agreements, and provide procedural and technical guidance to customers facing Commission investigations or enforcement actions.
The measure also requires the section to assist residential customers dealing with service cessation caused by a utility’s dissolution, maintain records on inquiries and outcomes, and help customers use available utility- or Commission-based procedures and remedies. The assistance must be provided only to the extent feasible and within the Commission’s legal authority and procedural rules, and other state agencies must cooperate upon request.
HB120 would add a new Code of Virginia section, § 56-6.1, establishing an Office of the Public Utility Ombudsman function within the State Corporation Commission’s Consumer Services Section. In practical terms, it would formalize and broaden the state’s consumer advocacy and complaint-resolution role for residential utility customers, while not creating a separate standalone agency. The bill affects the State Corporation Commission, public utilities, and residential customers seeking help with billing, service, disputes, or Commission processes.
The available record shows no recorded floor debate or votes, and the bill was left in the House Committee on Appropriations. Based on the text, the bill appears consumer-protection oriented and administratively focused, suggesting a generally favorable policy purpose of improving assistance for utility customers. However, the lack of committee transcript or vote data means there is no direct evidence of support or opposition beyond its committee disposition.
The main potential points of contention are likely administrative burden, scope, and resource needs. Because the bill assigns additional duties to an existing SCC section and requires cooperation from other state agencies, concerns could arise about staffing, funding, and whether the Commission has sufficient legal authority and capacity to provide the expanded assistance. Another possible issue is the bill’s limitation that services be provided only to the extent feasible, which may raise questions about how robust the ombudsman function would be in practice.