StopPATH WV
  • News
  • StopPATH WV Blog
  • FAQ
  • Events
  • Fundraisers
  • Make a Donation
  • Landowner Resources
  • About PATH
  • Get Involved
  • Commercials
  • Links
  • About Us
  • Contact

FirstEnergy Charging Admission for Voters to Talk to Legislators

11/21/2013

0 Comments

 
Well, isn't this cozy?

FirstEnergy is "sponsoring" a 2014 Legislative Outlook luncheon, and charging the people $15 a head to come talk to their elected officials.

Sort of lets you know who's in charge, doesn't it?  FirstEnergy pulls the strings and the legislators line up like trick ponies at the circus... a circus that you must pay to attend.
0 Comments

FirstEnergy Fails to Address Substance

11/21/2013

2 Comments

 
In the wake of the FirstEnergy General Investigation of billing, meter reading and customer service practices of Potomac Edison and Mon Power, the WV PSC ordered the company "to address the substance of the complaints voiced at the hearings." 

Yesterday, FirstEnergy filed its "address."  Gotta wonder, does the PSC ever smack the regulated with a ruler and reject a homework assignment as incomplete?

FirstEnergy only "addressed the substance" of its own selective hearing of the public comments, not the actual comments.  FirstEnergy only "addresses" what it wants to address, picking and choosing only the complaints that fit into its story line, and ignoring the rest.  Go ahead, read the "report."  Were your issues addressed?  If not, please feel free to let the WV PSC know.

Don't let your time and effort at the public comment hearing be swept under the rug and dismissed by FirstEnergy!  And, while you're at it, why not drop an email to Senator Herb Snyder and let him know how you've been tossed under the bus by the PSC and FirstEnergy.  Be nice to Herb, he's on our side!
2 Comments

Potomac Edison Says All Its Estimated Bills are Wrong, But That's Okay!

11/20/2013

4 Comments

 
I got my Potomac Edison bill yesterday.  I found out I'm not "special" because my bill was estimated.  But that's not the half of it.  My bill was overestimated by hundreds of kwh... again!  So I had to make a phone call to ask for a correct re-billing... again.

My Happy Town guide was overjoyed to do the grunt work of recalculating my bill and doing whatever it is he does to instigate a re-billing.  Aside from that, he was completely useless to provide any insight or assistance into the root problem that causes me to have to call and ask for a re-bill every other month, other than the suggestion that I read my own meter every other month and call it in before the estimated bill is calculated.

No. Just no.

He did admit that all Potomac Edison's estimated bills are wrong because it is based on last year's data that may be inaccurate.  But he thinks that's okay because it will all even out the next time Potomac Edison comes to read my meter and issues me a correct bill.

But I did ask how much they were paying him that it doesn't matter in his own household if his utility bills fluctuate hundreds of dollars every month.  Silence.  Does he realize that seniors and people just barely hanging on month-to-month are on budgets and can't afford these monthly fluctuations caused by the fact that Potomac Edison hasn't been doing its job?  More silence.

And then he had the audacity to ask if there was anything else he could do to "help" me.

Nope, this bi-monthly comedy routine makes me almost as giddy as a wagon full of puppies.  :-)
4 Comments

PATH Failure Goes International

11/19/2013

2 Comments

 
Patience and I met two very delightful new friends today.  Hyosil Kim, a reporter for Korean newspaper The Hankyoreh, and her translator Brian Kim, spent the day with us touring Jefferson County and learning about PATH's spectacular, flaming failure to get its transmission project sited and permitted.

PATH's failure is interesting to the people of South Korea because they are engaged in their own furious battle with transmission developer Kepco over a 765kV line intended to export nuclear power out of the country.

The concept of social justice is being debated in Korea, just as it is here.  Why should any person have to sacrifice their home and well-being to serve the energy or environmental needs of others?

We took a fond trip down memory lane with many of our fellow PATH opponents during our tour of PATH's proposed route, recalling funny and touching moments during our successful David v. Goliath struggle to take control of our own energy future.

You'll be happy to know that the story of The Coalition for Reliable Power is just as funny when translated into Korean!


The message Hyosil will take back to Korea is encouragement for the people to persevere and refuse to give up!

We'll be posting a link to Hyosil's story here when it's written...
2 Comments

WV PSC Schedules Evidentiary Hearing on Potomac Edison/Mon Power Billing & Meter Reading Case

11/18/2013

2 Comments

 
The WV PSC issued an Order today setting an evidentiary hearing for December 17 - 19 on its General Investigation into meter reading, billing and customer service practices.

An evidentiary hearing will allow interested parties to intervene, file testimony and cross examine witnesses.  At the end of the process, the PSC will order remedies, if it determines that any are necessary.

The Commission has set a deadline of November 27 for petitions to intervene in the case.

In addition, FirstEnergy filed its response to the PSC Staff's recommendations.

FirstEnergy is now admitting that maybe we're right.  It's the legal equivalent of being "a little pregnant," I suppose.
...the Companies identified accounts in the Potomac Edison and Mon Power territories that we deemed necessary for reading on a monthly basis through at least January 2014 in order to help address the situation. If the Companies are unable to obtain an actual    reading for those accounts during that period, the billing department is reviewing the history to manually determine an estimate.    If a manual estimate cannot be calculated or other problems are discovered, the account is escalated to a Meter Reading supervisor.
How do you suppose these accounts were "identified?"  In its monthly statistical filing, FirstEnergy states that there are only "several thousand" problem accounts (out of more than 500,000).  I guess that must mean I've heard from every one of those customers over the past year and a half because I'm sure they didn't leave out any of the people who've told me their billing horror story.
After last month's review of accounts with multiple estimates during last year's storms and winter heating season,  we have identified several thousand customer accounts for special handling. This is a proactive attempt to mitigate compounding issues from a year ago. These accounts will be downloaded for reading on a monthly basis starting November through January 2014.    These accounts also have a hold placed OR billing to first allow for an internal review if an actual read cannot be obtained.    The review includes a billing representative's analysis of last year's estimation through the winter heating period to manually determine an estimate.    If a manual estimate cannot be calculated or other problems are discovered the account is escalated to the Meter Reading supervisor for further handling.
So, are you "special?"  FirstEnergy still hasn't gotten it right.  We are ALL "special."

How much money is this company going to waste on uninspired, half-assed "fixes" and denial of the problem?  Will they end up spending MORE than it would have cost to just do it right in the first place?
2 Comments

Potomac Edison & Mon Power Billing Tutorial

11/12/2013

2 Comments

 
Do the people at FirstEnergy ever have an original idea?  Or do they run their company based mostly on ideas they find on my blogs?  If that's the case, I suggest that FirstEnergy self report its transgressions to every jurisdictional regulatory agency and try to make amends for all the funny accounting and other dishonest ways it has made money off the backs of struggling electric consumers.

I didn't go out looking to take issue with FirstEnergy's billing scam.  In fact, I tried to ignore it, or find someone else who wanted to lead the charge, for nearly a year before I just gave up and added it to an already rather full plate of power company shenanigans.  I don't call or email people asking them to take issue with what FirstEnergy does to its customers.  But when people contact me about how FirstEnergy has hurt them, I will listen and try to help them to the best of my ability.  FirstEnergy ought to try it... an honest effort to help people.

So, tonight a friend messages me to tell me he got a "billing tutorial" in his electric bill.  This isn't a surprise.  I've been waiting for it ever since we announced community meetings with an electric billing tutorial presentation.  I knew that would drive my FirstEnergy friends crazy.  Kind of like locking them in a round room and telling them there's a penny in the corner.  But, really, I expected them to cobble something together before the PSC public comment hearings.  Don't you think FirstEnergy's billing tutorial should have been an appropriate part of the company's presentation at the hearings?  Customers might have found it useful, at least more useful than that sorry litany of excuses they got instead.

Because I expected FirstEnergy to be a little copy cat, I purposefully did not put our tutorial online until after the public comment hearings.  No matter, FirstEnergy managed to download it as soon as it was available and combine it with other advice we had for their customers to pretend it was all their idea.  What a bunch of posers!

So, how did FirstEnergy do with their tutorial?  Do you know what your electric rate is and how it is calculated to arrive at the amount you must pay?  No, it's just more confusing crap that does nothing to create customer understanding.
From Meters to the Mailroom
A lot of effort goes into creating your monthly bill, and our goal is to make it as accurate and easy to understand as possible.  From meter reading to the mailroom, everything needs to operate effectively to deliver your bill.
The process begins with our meter readers who attempt to read your meter every other month. On the months that your meter is not read, your bill is estimated, which typically is based on daily usage from the same period during the prior year. Any difference between your estimated usage and actual usage is automatically adjusted the next time your meter is read.
After the reading is obtained, it is entered into our computer system, which compares your reading with previous readings. If it is outside of the expected usage, the reading is flagged for closer examination by our Customer Accounting associates. Inaccurate estimated readings either are adjusted, or we obtain another reading. Finally, the bill is calculated and sent to you.
We provide electricity to millions of customers and strive to deliver accurate bills every month. However, if you feel you’ve received a bill that is not accurate, you can read your meter and compare that reading with the one on your bill. For more information, visit www.firstenergycorp.com/aboutyourbill, or call our customer contact center – Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
FirstEnergy's goal is to make your bill accurate and understandable?  In that case, they get a big FAIL.  If they had been meeting their goal, there would have been no need for my billing tutorial.  FirstEnergy "attempts" to read your meter every other month.  In that case, should we all "attempt" to pay them every month?  Your estimated bill is based on your usage from the same period last year, when the company failed to read your meter.  This means that your usage from last year is inaccurate.  You know what happens when you estimate based on inaccurate data?  The estimate is inaccurate, of course!  If FirstEnergy is flagging bills "outside of the expected usage" and the expected usage is inaccurate, then that means they will only flag a bill that is accurate?  This does not prevent an inaccurate bill from being sent to you.  FirstEnergy calculates your bill -- in some mysterious way that you don't understand and can't replicate at home.  You have no idea how your bill is calculated and FirstEnergy isn't going to tell you in their billing tutorial.  You're just supposed to trust that their "calculation" is correct?

But, if your bill is not accurate, you should do what I've been advising you to do with every estimated bill you've received for the last several months -- go read your own meter and compare it to the amount billed.  FirstEnergy's tutorial stops here.  What are people supposed to do after they read their meter and compare it to their inaccurate bill, FirstEnergy?  Just go ahead and pay it?  The rest of my advice tells the customer to call FirstEnergy and ask for an accurate re-billing when they discover a discrepancy.

FirstEnergy's meter reading tutorial is even worse.  Not only is it bogged down with unneeded, tedious detail, it provides senseless instruction that a meter must be read from right to left.  Why?  Won't the numbers be the same if read from left to right?  It's not like a math problem where numbers are carried over from one dial to the next.  It's a number. Instead of encouraging customers to read their meters, FirstEnergy's explanation only confuses them further.

Some days it's harder than normal to resist the urge to post completely bogus information on my blog just to see it blow up in FirstEnergy's face when they attempt to use it.  Instead, I amuse myself thinking about a gigantic corporation making decisions based on my blog. Idiots.
2 Comments

FirstEnergy & American Electric Power Transmission "Reliability" Ratepayer Shakedown

11/12/2013

4 Comments

 
Building transmission (whether it's needed or not) has been a utility profit center for years.  But now investor owned utilities are really shaking the transmission money tree to make up for the fact that the rest of their business is failing.

And like all good utility money-making schemes, West Virginia's out-of-state utility tedious twins go head-to-head to see which one can make the most money doing it fastest and "bestest."

Last week, FirstEnergy's Tony the Trickster made some big deal about a new transmission money making scheme approved by FirstEnergy's Board of Bamboozlers.  This $2.8B "transmission spend" was given cover by being dubbed the "Transmission Reliability Excellence Plan 2014-2017," like it's all about reliability and not about "target[ing] annual transmission Net Income growth of 20+%."  At what point do the reliability needs of customers intersect with FirstEnergy's need to make money?  Wow, serendipity!  FirstEnergy's system is going to be as "unreliable" as needed to grow income 20+%.  The more "unreliable" FirstEnergy's system is, the more money FirstEnergy makes!
The "near term" plan consists mainly of rebuilds and upgrades to FirstEnergy's ATSI and TrAILCo systems.  FirstEnergy will concentrate on its 69 & 138kV systems in order to avoid regulatory or community opposition hurdles that could slow down the "investment."  FirstEnergy also reasons that an improved system will cut down on future maintenance costs, and that will help keep O&M in check.

But, wait a tick, how much of this "need" for re-building has been caused by FirstEnergy's long-term failure to maintain its system, and therefore should properly fall under the category of ordinary maintenance expense that the company has already been reimbursed for?  If it were this easy, utilities could simply refuse to perform any maintenance on their transmission systems, and then wrap all the ordinary course repairs into some fancy package called a "Transmission Reliability Excellence Plan" and get reimbursed for it separately (and at higher rates) when a need to grow income arises.  This isn't "reliability," it's a ratepayer shakedown.  If FirstEnergy gets away with it, the company plans to increase their "reliability" to the tune of $12B "over time."

FirstEnergy reasons:  The majority of these projects located in the ATSI region will target 69kV lines, which are outside of the RTEP approval process, and that construction would occur on land where most rights- of-way are already secured.  But, assets assigned to TrAILCo must receive PJM RTEP approval and operate at 100kV and above, therefore these will be secondary to the low-hanging fruit in ATSI.

You'll be happy to know that public-money-sucker Burns & McDonnell has been hired to manage the engineering, procurement, construction and completion of the capital portfolio created for the plan and has established an office in Akron, OH
.  It's full steam ahead to spend as much of your money as fast as possible, little ratepayer!

FirstEnergy plans to put all its "transmission spend" eggs into its FERC jurisdictional formula rate baskets -- ATSI with a return of 12.4%, and TrAILCo, with a return of 11.7% for non-TrAIL projects and 12.7% for rebuilds and upgrades to the two-year old TrAIL line.

Is this really about "energizing the future by improving the health, capacity, and reliability of the transmission system for existing and new customer loads," or is it more about "energizing the future by improving the health, capacity, and reliability of the FirstEnergy balance sheet for existing and new shareholders"?

Meanwhile, not to be outdone, AEP has also announced its own plan to spend around $5B on the "reliability" of its transmission systems over the next 3 years.
AEP CEO Nick Akins said the company’s infrastructure investments will be aimed at improving the reliability of electric service to customers. He said the company expects to invest nearly $5 billion in its AEP Transmission Holding Co. unit through 2016, adding the holding company’s contribution to earnings will nearly double in 2014 alone.
However, AEP isn't afraid to invest in joint ventures and big, new projects outside its footprint. 

Both companies have also submitted numerous bids on the first two PJM transmission project bidding windows.


Which transmission investment business plan will be the winner?  And how much is this going to cost us before regulators catch on to the "reliability" scam and challenge it?  And what if someone goes after the companies' FERC ROEs?  The fun is only just beginning...

Maybe we should distract their attention by challenging these two companies to see which one of them gets into the solar business first?  How much money is there to be made putting solar on every residential roof and then charging the customers "rent" for the investment?  Or will they continue pumping the transmission "reliability" well until it runs dry before taking any positive action to make themselves relevant in a brave, new, distributed generation world? 
4 Comments

WV PSC Staff Agrees With Consumers on Potomac Edison/Mon Power Problems

11/8/2013

0 Comments

 
The WV PSC staff filed a memo in the FirstEnergy General Investigation of customer service, billing and meter reading practices case yesterday.

The staff agrees with recommendations of many of the consumers who came before the Commission last month.

The staff requests the Companies provide the number of consecutively estimated readings for residential and non-residential customers separately.

As pointed out repeatedly by Jefferson County consumer Kery Fries, the companies have been skewing these statistics by including monthly read commercial customers in the numbers, but excluding annual read residential customers. 

And speaking of those "annual read" customers, staff believes that FirstEnergy's policy of requiring meter readers to use their personal vehicles is causing too many customers to be designated as "annual read" customers.
According to the MP and PE response dated October 14,2013 to Commission Question No. 3 both MP and PE currently employ more than the number of budgeted meter readers.    Based on an informal meeting on October 10, 20 13 between Staff and MP and PE some of the above budgeted meter readers are “floaters” or “rovers” used to address both planned and unplanned meter reader absences. During the October 1Oth meeting it was confirmed that since April 2012
full time and contract meter readers are required to use personal vehicles which, according to the utilities are subject to monthly inspections.    While not necessarily an unreasonable practice Staff has concerns that requiring meter readers to use personal vehicles may bias the utilities’ determination of which customers are annual read customers using stated criteria of remote access and or safety where for example “Safety is defined as anything that may pose a hazard to the meter reader or his/her vehicle.” (FirstEnergy Supplemental Response dated 8/30/13, Emphasis Added.)
In other words, if your non-union meter reader drives a lowrider hooptie you may be designated an "annual read" customer, whereas if your meter reader was driving a company-owned 4WD pick up designed for higher clearance and better traction, you might receive readings more often. 
The staff also takes exception to the company's refusal to provide data on the number of complaints it has received from customers.
Mr. Fletcher notes the Companies have not provided answers to question 7 from the Commission: “The number of complaints handled by the customer contact center with a breakdown by complaint type.” The Companies have responded that the tracking of complaints is not done through a customer contact. The only information supplied in answer to this request is a regurgitation of the formal and informal complaints filed before the Commission. Mr. Fletcher states Electric Rule 2.1.a requires utilities to maintain the records required by the Electric Rules and Electric Rule 5.5 requires the utilities to keep detailed records of adjustments t o customer accounts and detailed records of high bill complaints. It appears to Mr. Fletcher the Companies have not been in compliance with these sections of the Electric Rules.
Well, sweet!  If Potomac Edison has to count every call that resulted in an adjustment to the customer's bill, I'm probably good for 5 or 6 myself.  If done Potomac Edison's way, my "complaints" probably wouldn't register.  Remember, Potomac Edison doesn't have a "complaint department" according to one of the customers who spoke in Shepherdstown.

I'm not really on board with the staff's analysis and recommendation regarding customer-supplied meter readings, though.  Staff seems to be under the impression that multiple bills are generated when a customer calls in a meter reading after receiving an incorrectly estimated bill.  While the customer will receive a new bill (and is informed of that during the phone call), the multiple bills customers have been complaining about are randomly generated at company initiative.  When FirstEnergy makes an internal adjustment to a customer's account without the customer's knowledge, a bill is generated.  These bills are being mailed to the customer, instead of being culled from the outgoing bill stream.  In-house adjustments should appear as line items on a customer's regular monthly bill, not as separate "restatements" of previously billed amounts mailed to the customer.

Also, the staff doesn't seem to see the problem with customers continuing to do the meter reader's job and call in their readings.  With very few exceptions, customers don't want to read their own meters when they are paying the company to do so.  Some do simply because they cannot afford to pay an incorrect bill, but this shouldn't be a requirement.

Staff recommends that pre-billing customer reads be done within a window of time, instead of on a certain day, and that post-billing customer reads only be accepted for a difference greater than 10%.

Staff also agrees with us that FirstEnergy has not fixed the problems with its estimation routine, but fails to recommend any corrective action.
Staff remains concerned about the prospects for an increase in MP and PE complaints during the forthcoming winter heating  season.    The October 14thmonthly report states no changes have been made to the estimation routine “this month” pending completion of EPRI’s review. Staff notes that some changes have been made to the estimation routines based on the FirstEnergy response dated August 2,2013 to Staffs Second Data Request Question No. 3.    Staffs review of numerous billing and usage histories associated with complaints received by the Commission show the majority of such  histories for individual complainants contain numerous months from the summer of 20 12 through the summer of 20 13 with “bad” data.    “Bad” in that several consecutive low estimated monthly usages are followed by a month with significantly large “true up’’ actual usage.    The large “true up” actual then tends to bias upwards the subsequent estimates.    These trends were illustrated by Attachment 3 to Staffs July 15thInitial Memorandum and Staff has subsequently observed the repetition of those trends many times. Consequently, regardless of how theoretically sound the estimation routines are or might be improved to be, Staff is concerned that “bad” data generated in 2012-2013 will produce unreliable future estimate usages for the same customers.
And?  Is there a page missing here?  Let's get this fixed, before the winter heating season really gets underway and the service shutoffs begin.  They're still happening.
0 Comments

FirstEnergy Gets Spanked by FERC for Recovering Merger Costs in its Transmission Revenue Requirements

11/6/2013

2 Comments

 
This has been a long time in coming, but FirstEnergy was ordered on Friday to "submit a detailed plan for implementing audit staff’s recommendations and correcting journal entries reflecting an approximate $1.2 million refund to affected customers from its transmission-only subsidiaries with formula rate recovery mechanisms, including Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Company, Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline, LLC, and American Transmission System, Incorporated."

The first time this problem reared its ugly head was during the July 2011 PATH Open Meeting to review its 2010 actual transmission revenue requirement.  At this phone "meeting" I notified PATH that I had found expenses of the Allegheny Energy/FirstEnergy merger in its PATH rates.

In September, FirstEnergy subsidiaries PATH and TrAILCo made entries to their quarterly FERC financial filings to effect a credit for amounts wrongly charged to ratepayers in violation of the company's "hold harmless" guarantee to the Commission that it would not charge merger expenses to ratepayers except under certain circumstances.  Over a million dollars was credited, but because PATH and TrAILCo made the correction in the normal course of business, it did not credit ratepayers for interest on the amounts wrongly recovered.

Throughout the fall of 2011, PATH counsel continued to argue with me in discovery about recovery of merger expenses, refusing to own up to the fact that other merger expenses had been recovered.  In October, PATH filed a motion to dismiss the first formal challenge, claiming that the involvement of Ali Haverty and myself in its annual update review was costly to ratepayers.  In response, I pointed FERC to the more than $1M savings ratepayers had realized due to my identification of merger costs wrongly included in PATH's revenue requirement that were subsequently reclassed on the company's Form No. 1 filings.

Shortly thereafter, FERC notified FirstEnergy that it was commencing an audit to determine if the company had complied with the Commission's order in the merger case. 

In December, TrAILCo filed a revision to its revenue requirements to correct merger costs "inadvertently" recovered.  It claimed this error had been noticed during an "internal staff review."  Right....

If you take time to read FERC's FirstEnergy merger order, you will see that parties to that case had argued that adequate safeguards did not exist at FERC to prevent FirstEnergy from ignoring the hold harmless stipulation and recovering merger costs.  FERC poo-poo'd this idea, insisting that their processes would be adequate to catch any wrongful recovery.

And then FirstEnergy went ahead and recovered the merger costs anyhow!  Did FERC's processes identify this wrongful recovery?  No, I did.  How embarrassing!

FirstEnergy made a whole bunch of promises it never intended to keep in order to get its merger with Allegheny Energy approved.  In addition to wrongly recovering merger costs in FERC jurisdictional rates, the company has saddled its West Virginia ratepayers with "acquisition adjustment" premiums flowing from its merger, as well as causing hardship to a whole bunch of distribution customers by cutting its meter reading services that resulted in huge erroneous bills and service shut offs.

FirstEnergy's past bad deeds seem to be catching up with them lately, and the group of people and entities enjoying the show keeps growing.
2 Comments

WVCAG Files Appeal of FirstEnergy's Harrison Plant Sale

11/6/2013

0 Comments

 
Counsel for the West Virginia Citizen Action Group filed an appeal of the West Virginia Public Service Commission's approval of a settlement in the Harrison case this morning.

The filing asks that the West Virginia Supreme Court  grant its Petition for Suspension of the October 7, 2013 Plurality and enter an order vacating the Commission’s decision in its entirety.

It's just too bad the pendulous nature of it prevented it from being filed yesterday morning, before FirstEnergy's timely earnings call, but I'm sure the financial analysts will have plenty of time to give it a look before the EEI conference next week.  Nobody's going to care much about Tony's transmission spend after all.

You can download a copy of the filing here.

0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    About the Author

    Keryn Newman blogs here at StopPATH WV about energy issues, transmission policy, misguided regulation, our greedy energy companies and their corporate spin.
    In 2008, AEP & Allegheny Energy's PATH joint venture used their transmission line routing etch-a-sketch to draw a 765kV line across the street from her house. Oooops! And the rest is history.

    About
    StopPATH Blog

    StopPATH Blog began as a forum for information and opinion about the PATH transmission project.  The PATH project was abandoned in 2012, however, this blog was not.

    StopPATH Blog continues to bring you energy policy news and opinion from a consumer's point of view.  If it's sometimes snarky and oftentimes irreverent, just remember that the truth isn't pretty.  People come here because they want the truth, instead of the usual dreadful lies this industry continues to tell itself.  If you keep reading, I'll keep writing.


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

    Got something to say?  Submit your own opinion for publication.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Categories

    All
    $$$$$$
    2023 PJM Transmission
    Aep Vs Firstenergy
    Arkansas
    Best Practices
    Best Practices
    Big Winds Big Lie
    Can Of Worms
    Carolinas
    Citizen Action
    Colorado
    Corporate Propaganda
    Data Centers
    Democracy Failures
    DOE Failure
    Emf
    Eminent Domain
    Events
    Ferc Action
    FERC Incentives Part Deux
    Ferc Transmission Noi
    Firstenergy Failure
    Good Ideas
    Illinois
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Land Agents
    Legislative Action
    Marketing To Mayberry
    MARL
    Missouri
    Mtstorm Doubs Rebuild
    Mtstormdoubs Rebuild
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    Newslinks
    NIETC
    Opinion
    Path Alternatives
    Path Failures
    Path Intimidation Attempts
    Pay To Play
    Potomac Edison Investigation
    Power Company Propaganda
    Psc Failure
    Rates
    Regulatory Capture
    Skelly Fail
    The Pjm Cartel
    Top Ten Clean Line Mistakes
    Transource
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.