Merger benefits increased significantly from '11 to '12 to '13. As I said, Gary's going to speak more to that, but this is the pretax earnings impact associated with those and you'll see that, that's in excess of $1 billion.

We're also targeting O&M reductions beyond the synergies of between $75 million and $175 million in 2012 and 2013. We expect asset sales in the range of $800 million to $900 million per year, and we expect to reduce debt by $1.5 billion to $2.2 billion over this time period.

...we continue to look for opportunities to reduce O&M. I just want to give you one, very quick example, of what we're doing on the O&M side.

We closed the transaction February 28 of last year. There are roughly 75 major applications that have to get integrated between the 2 companies. For some of the operating savings to occur, those systems have to be integrated. I'm pleased to say that our IT folks are basically going to integrate all of those applications in record time, and they'll make their cut-over shortly. They've had 5 test runs, so you'll see that some of the synergy has been accelerated and some of the synergies too, become, as we integrate our systems. And we're quite pleased with where we are. We'll continue to look for incremental costs. It's kind of our nature. But we're not going to do anything simply for a short-term benefit that puts the company at a longer-term risk. That's just not something we are going to do. Everything we are doing is to place FirstEnergy in the best possible forward position.

U.S. power company FirstEnergy Corp said Monday there were no evacuations at or around the Perry nuclear power plant in Ohio after the company shut the plant to fix a coolant leak that was contained within the plant, company spokeswoman Jennifer Young told Reuters.

In a report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) the company said it shut the reactor due to a small reactor coolant leak on a recirculation flow control valve vent line.

Young said the event caused no harm to plant workers or the public and radiation did not leak out of the plant.

...the companies "choked/came back in/ and said it's a deal ... only ask is completion of NEPA by Oct '12."

Meyers said the companies have been aware of the issues and will assist the PSC.

“It’s just an exercise that we need to go through, and hopefully, when we come to the end of the investigation and the recommendations and everything else, we can be stronger for it and have a good outcome for our customers,” Meyers said.

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. FirstEnergy recently acquired control of Mon Power and PE. Monongahela Power Company, et al., Case No. 10-0713-E-PC (Commission Order, December 16, 2010).
2. Certain FirstEnergy customers in West Virginia have received high bills which may be attributable to estimated OT average bills that may not have reasonably reflected historical usage and require further review.

1. Following the acquisition of Mon Power and PE in 2010, what changes, if any, to meter reading and customer billing has FirstEnergy implemented?
2. What data does FirstEnergy use to derive estimated or average bills?
3. To what extent has FirstEnergy reviewed or analyzed each current method of calculating estimated or averaged monthly bills of West Virginia customers after the acquisition of Mon Power and PE?
4. What was the effect of the severe storms in 2012 on how FirstEnergy calculated bills or its meter reading practices?
5. What is the total number of complaints received by First Energy from West Virginia customers about meter reading, estimated bills or average billing. Please provide a breakdown by complaint category.
6. What percentage of FirstEnergy customers in West Virginia had actual company employee meter readings (i) from one to five times per consecutive twelve month period, (ii) six times per consecutive twelve month period, (iii) more than six times per consecutive twelve month period over the last twenty-four consecutive months?
7. Did FirstEnergy maintain and incorporate historical billing data that pre-dated the merger into its calculation of estimated bills or average payment plans?
8. Describe in detail the manpower and equipment currently used to provide meter reading to Mon Power and PE customers and provide the same information for that activity prior to the FirstEnergy acquisition.
9. Describe in detail the manpower and equipment currently used to provide billing and customer service to Mon Power and PE customers and provide the same information for that activity prior to the FirstEnergy acquisition and after the FirstEnergy acquisition.
10. Describe the meter reading scheduling for Mon Power and PE, and describe the alternatives and options that are available to Mon Power and PE to reschedule or otherwise handle unexpected interruptions to normal meter reading schedules such as weather related incidents, unscheduled employee leave, transportation equipment failures or other such disruptive incidents.
11. Does FirstEnergy collect metrics regarding its customer service call center or other customer service contacts with ratepayers for any purpose including internal evaluations, planning and budgeting, or external reporting to other regulatory agencies? Provide a twenty-four month summary of each available customer service metric for all customers and separately for West Virginia customers along with a brief description of each metric.
12. What assistance does FirstEnergy provide to customers that receive large actual bills following a period of estimated bills?

The purpose of this general investigation is not to address individual customer bills directly. We recognize that considering the high level of formal and informal filings by individual customers to date, there may be a tendency for individuals to want to address their grievances in this proceeding. Each customer is entitled to specific evaluation of the particulars of individual billing and payment issues and such evaluation is best accomplished through the formal and informal review processes available for individual complaints. Customer-specific, formal and informal matters will continue to be resolved individually. This proceeding will focus on the practices, policies and procedures in place at Mon Power and PE and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses at a structural level.

We feel that the current billing problems are an unanticipated consequence of the company’s efforts to reduce expenses that can only be corrected by making sure that the company is being adequately funded to read meters with the frequency stipulated by the tariff.  This deficiency can only be remedied through a new base rate case. We also request that amounts necessary to read meters as required that were not spent by the company over the past two years be refunded to ratepayers, and that the Commission impose any and all fines, penalties and reprimands available under its authority consistent with its findings, among other relief measures.