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

FirstEnergy Cutting Employee Benefits and Operating Costs - Tony the Trickster Will Still Rake In $23M Compensation in 2013

8/6/2013

0 Comments

 
FirstEnergy got their quarterly grilling this afternoon, after releasing second quarter financial results that were less than impressive.

FirstEnergy's net profits were a minus 39 cents per share. 

FirstEnergy has been slashing operating costs, such as the cost of reading customer meters in West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania, but now even that's not enough.  Won't it be interesting to see Potomac Edison try to pull its corporate keister out of the fire while cutting spending on meter services even further?  Maybe they ought to leave one of those open positions available... the one titled "Regulatory Magician."

In order to make up for his own poor management, useless figurehead Tony the Trickster has decided to cut employee benefits like health insurance and pensions, in addition to laying off hundreds of employees.  I didn't hear him making any personal sacrifices though.  Our pal Tony will still rake in $23M in compensation in 2013, to include company-paid financial planning and tax preparation services; personal use of the corporate jet; annual compensation and performance awards.  So while you're struggling to make ends meet or pay your badly estimated electric bill, just remember that the Alexander household feels your pain (in a vague, annoying sort of way kind of like the pain you might feel when getting a fish pedicure).

Despite earlier regulatory puffery where FirstEnergy threatened to back out of the Harrison plant sale unless it got everything it wanted at full price, apparently the company is now involved in settlement talks.

"Briefs and reply briefs were filed by the parties in July and with the conclusion of the regulatory proceeding, the commission may issue an order at any time. We are however, currently in active settlement discussions with all parties in this case, and we are very hopeful that we can reach an resolution through this process."

Going back on your word so soon, FirstEnergy?  I was really looking forward to watching you struggle with that "great asset" after your proposal was denied by the WV PSC.  A settlement would just ruin my fun.  :-( 

More later...


0 Comments

PATH Open Meeting 2013 - Still Making Crap Up!

8/6/2013

0 Comments

 
Last week, PATH held its "Open Meeting" to discuss its 2012 transmission revenue requirement true up and answer questions from interested parties.  Well, at least that's what the meeting notice said...

However, PATH couldn't (or wouldn't) answer questions, instead PATH made crap up.  Randy's never going to learn, is he?

Emboldened by a question from one participant about the cost of legal counsel to defend the formal challenges, Randy answered a question about how PATH-Allegheny could have possibly had 5.1 full-time employees on an abandoned project in 2012 by telling everyone that "most" of that time was spent answering information requests about its formula rate filings.

Let's see, Randy, 5.1 full-time employees at 2080 hours each equals 10,608 hours spent answering 270 individual questions, "most" of which PATH refused to answer because they were alleged to be harassing, oppressive, annoying and burdensome.  That equals 39.28 hours per question, including those where a refusal to answer was merely copied and pasted into PATH's response.  That's nearly a work week.  It took PATH one full work week to answer each question?

Right.

Stop making crap up when you're talking to accountants, okay?

And when given the opportunity to answer questions informally over the phone during the Open Meeting and save all those work hours in 2013?  PATH refused and asked interested parties to submit written information requests.
0 Comments

Where Would FirstEnergy Get Its News If It Wasn't For This Blog?

8/6/2013

3 Comments

 
FirstEnergy subsidiary "Potomac Edison" submitted its most recent discovery responses in the General Investigation case before the WV PSC yesterday.  In its response to one of the Consumer Advocate's questions, "Potomac Edison" cites an "article" from this blog.
On April 18, 2013, the Jefferson County NAACP held a public meeting regarding several issues which included customer complaints related to this case. This article was forwarded internally and the attached invitation received.

Of course, the invitation received was the infamous invitation to the Citizens' Public Hearing from George Rutherford that The Friddler lied about to the Jefferson County Commission, telling them that the invitation did not mention the Harrison plant transfer.

I'm so glad this blog could be of service to FirstEnergy, bringing them news that they "forward internally."

It wasn't too long ago, however, when FirstEnergy's PATH companies were complaining about this blog to the WV PSC:
Unfortunately, articles and comments attached to them on this website needlessly address named individuals associated with Applicants in respect of their attire, physical attributes, intelligence, integrity, and “personality.”
(read the highlighted portions of this motion, but I warn you, don't be drinking anything, and shut your office door so your co-workers don't hear you howling with laughter when you do).
Maybe I should start charging them admission?
3 Comments

Potomac Edison's Charm Offensive is Out of Whack

7/27/2013

0 Comments

 
In the wake of the WV PSC's refusal to dismiss its investigation of billing practices, FirstEnergy subsidiaries Potomac Edison and Mon Power have now mounted what's known as a charm offensive.  A charm offensive is a public relations campaign designed to build trust and mollify a perturbed public in order to repair a company's image.  In FirstEnergy's case, the company is  trying desperately to sweep away the mess its former Allegheny Energy subsidiaries have made of billing and meter reading in the wake of their merger with FirstEnergy in 2011.

Unfortunately, FirstEnergy's charm offensive is being carried out by a squinty-eyed, loquacious fabulist who is not well-liked, either by the public or the media.  Our friend Todd is carrying too much flaming baggage from the PATH project, and other dubious claims he has spun for the public in recent memory.  Nobody believes a thing Todd says anymore.  Looks like FirstEnergy is going to have to find a more charming spokesperson.

Here's what Todd told WV Metro News the other day:

"Customers started complaining to the PSC several months ago after meter readers with both companies fell behind following Superstorm Sandy. Meyers said they were helping with the power restoration efforts. Bills were estimated for some customers for consecutive months and the estimates were based on the previous mild winter. When the actual readings took place, customers received very expensive bills."

Customers have been complaining for a lot longer than "several months," although Potomac Edison has only acknowledged some of the complaints in recent months, after the PSC opened an investigation in response to public outrage and legislative anger.  The company's problems started following the "superstorm" of the 2011 Allegheny/FirstEnergy merger, and the ensuing spending cuts and stunning incompetence that brought bi-monthly meter reading to a screeching halt.  The PSC has called foul on Todd's excuse that meters were not read because personnel were "helping with power restoration efforts," or that estimates were made based on any logical process at all and were not, instead, made up out of whole cloth.

Todd insists that Potomac Edison should be granted more time to actually do the job that you're paying them to do every month, and that you should overlook continued erroneous billing and skipped meter readings while they "work through the issues individual customers have with double billing and estimated meter readings."

I don't think so, Todd.  Potomac Edison has had months already to clean up its act, and years to have gotten it right in the first place.  The public is done being patient.  The public has become quite bloodthirsty and a sacrifice must be made to appease them.  How about we start with Todd and his "out of whack" charm offensive?
0 Comments

How FirstEnergy is Systematically Dismantling the Former Allegheny Energy

7/21/2013

5 Comments

 
Interesting article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.  It seems like the locals are a bit miffed at the way Ohio-based FirstEnergy has been slowly cannibalizing former Pittsburgh energy star Allegheny Energy.

That echoes an anonymous sentiment I saw in an online forum yesterday, where it was said that FirstEnergy is wrecking what used to be a good company.  It's all about the stockholder dividends anymore.  FirstEnergy doesn't give a damn about its customers, or the communities where it does business.

FirstEnergy made all sorts of glittering promises to regulators and communities in order to get its merger approved, and has been systematically violating its promises ever since.

FirstEnergy just doesn't care if you don't like it, little customers.  The company has a monopoly in this state, step in line and take what you are served.
But, FirstEnergy's monopoly state franchise isn't irrevocable.  Look what's happening in another town that got fed up with a different out-of-state utility conglomerate...
5 Comments

WV PSC Refuses to Dismiss Potomac Edison Investigation and Orders Monthly Monitoring, Public Comment Hearings -- Punitive Fines a Future Possibility

7/19/2013

0 Comments

 
The WV PSC issued an Order today refusing to dismiss the Potomac Edison/Mon Power general investigation of billing and meter reading practices as requested by the companies.

The PSC was unconvinced by the companies' claim that the matter has been resolved and should be dismissed.  The Commission believes the data Staff and FirstEnergy filed indicate the need for further investigation and do not justify dismissing this matter as resolved and therefore FirstEnergy's request to dismiss is denied.

The Commission made the following FINDINGS OF FACT:

1. The Commission opened a general investigation into the meter reading, billing and customer service practices of FirstEnergy. June 7, 2013 Commission Order.
2. FirstEnergy reported that 5.3 percent of its customers received two consecutive estimated bills and a further 2.2 percent received three consecutive estimated bills in the May 2013 billing cycle. July 1, 2013 FirstEnergy Filing at 8.
3.  Approximately 44 percent of FirstEnergy customers in West Virginia were unable to resolve a billing problem in their first customer service call in 2013. Id. at 12.
4. Staff reported that it has received an increasing number of informal complaints regarding FirstEnergy billing practices. July 15, 2013 Staff Reply.


The Commission was unconvinced by FirstEnergy's desperate posturing attempting to show that everything is hunky dory, and tells the company who's boss:

"The Commission also takes this opportunity to emphasize that the purpose of this proceeding is to ensure that FirstEnergy takes the steps necessary to provide reliable service and accurate billing. The Commission will not prematurely rush this matter or
close the proceeding until FirstEnergy demonstrates that its billing accurately reflects customer usage on a consistent basis and has implemented responsive service practices.
"

The Commission intends to stop FirstEnergy's reign of terror, therefore FirstEnergy must now be monitored like a wayward teenager:

"In this case, the Commission believes that it should immediately begin collecting data to allow it to monitor certain aspects of FirstEnergy customer service. This data will assist the Commission and the parties in this proceeding by generating a statistical benchmark for determining improvement or decline in service quality and providing empirical data that demonstrates whether the problems have been resolved as contended by FirstEnergy."

Beginning August 15, 2013, and continuing for one year, the required monthly submissions should include the following information:

1. Current customer contact center metrics collected by FirstEnergy.
2. The number and percentage of customers with two or more consecutive estimated bills rendered.
3. The current number of budgeted meter reader positions and the current number of meter readers employed.
4. The current status of the project to re-number meters and adjust meter routes.
5. The steps taken to adjust or improve the current enhanced estimation algorithm.
6. The number and percentage of meter rereads.
7. The number of complaints handled by the customer contact center with a breakdown by complaint type.
8. The number and percentage of customer complaints resolved on the first call to the FirstEnergy call center.
9. The number of customers placed on a deferred payment plan and note the percentage of those with two or more consecutive estimated bills
.

The Commission also ordered:

"Further, Staff must review the reports FirstEnergy will file and promptly submit an analysis of the new data after three and six months of those filings. The Commission, however, expects Staff to continue to investigate this matter beyond the analysis prescribed by this Order and recommend further steps as needed.

The Commission will monitor the monthly filings and expects FirstEnergy to demonstrate improvement consistent with its representations in the July 1, 2013 filing that the underlying problems are resolved. The Commission will determine the need for further action after approximately six months of statistical filings and will issue a subsequent Order that may either call this matter for an evidentiary hearing or prescribe an appropriate alternative. The Commission will also hold public comment hearings in the FirstEnergy service areas after it receives and reviews the first two monthly reports."


The Commission reasserts its authority and hopefully strikes a little fear in FirstEnergy's flippant little corporate heart by reciting possible future outcomes:

"The Commission cannot at this time conclusively determine what future action might be necessary if
current trends continue, possible future interventions may include (i) requiring more costly monthly meter reading instead of bimonthly readings, (ii) fixing minimum meter reading staff levels and practices, (iii) creating financial rate penalties tied to statistical performance or (iv) requiring FirstEnergy to retain a consultant to revise its integration process."


The Commission has even issued a press release.


It's time to stop playing around now, FirstEnergy, quit denying there is a problem, and get down to the serious business of making amends with your customers.
0 Comments

Barbie Isn't Happy

7/17/2013

0 Comments

 
"FirstEnergy Moves Up In Market Cap Rank, Passing Mattel" says the headline.

Barbie isn't happy.  She wants to punish FirstEnergy.

Maybe she's the anonymous person who made this suggestion in today's Martinsburg Journal:
From Jefferson County:

Potomac Edison/FirstEnergy has a public image to restore. In fairness to the customers, the ones who recieved overwhelming bills of a 120-day usage for one month's billing period should be shown restitution. That would be the first step to restoring their reputation and consumer confidence in their customers.
Lesson for today:  Don't mess with 54-year old fashion dolls.  They're mean.
0 Comments

WV PSC Smells a Potomac Edison Rat

7/16/2013

1 Comment

 
The staff of the West Virginia Public Service Commission filed their comments and initial staff memorandum yesterday regarding the general investigation of Potomac Edison's and Mon Power's billing and meter reading practices.  You may read the memo here.

The staff gets really, really close to determining the probable cause of the most recent problem. 
Of particular note is that on about April 1, 2012 MP and PE changed over from the prior Allegheny Power billing system to the billing system of FirstEnergy. 
Within the eleven months prior to the initiation of the general investigation, customers of the Companies filed  approximately 750 Requests for Assistance (RFAs) related to billing practices in addition to nearly seventy formal complaints.
Staff noted a significant increase in RFAs concerning the Companies' billings beginning in January 2013, particularly RFAs directly related to estimated bills.
Ut-oh, FirstEnergy!  Maybe the company should tell the PSC what happened now, before the staff figures it out for itself?  Maybe the staff needs just a little help?  The longer this goes on, the harder it's going to be for FirstEnergy to admit to the real problem and create a story for why it's being covered up. 

The PSC isn't convinced that all the problems are "in the rearview mirror."
A major Staff concern is the future impact on MP and PE customers affected by recent problems whether storm related, related to meter reading staffing problems, or route renumbering projects that have been unreasonably billed. Since both estimation methods generally rely on historical usage data, how is MP, in the customer example of Attachment 3, going to produce reasonable usage estimates for that customer in the forthcoming "winter heating season" given the obviously bad usage data that has been generated? How for all other similarly affected MP and PE customers?

Staff is very concerned that the unreasonable billings sent to  customers who previously received bills based on unreasonable estimates will be  self-perpetuating. As both the estimation methods generally rely on historical usage data, it seems likely that MP and PE will produce unreasonable usage estimates in the future because they are relying on historical bad usage data the utilities based on bad estimates. Staff does not currently agree that the Companies' recently implemented initiatives, set forth on Page 14 of its report, are sufficient to resolve this proceeding without further investigation.
The staff isn't buying FirstEnergy's storm-related excuses for not reading customer meters:
The Companies report that it reassigned meter readers to assist in storm restoration after Super Storm Sandy caused damage on October 30, 2012, which would account for MP averaging 27% of customers receiving consecutive estimated bills in November 2012 and PE averaging 23%. In December 2012, PE
continued to average 23% of customers receiving consecutive estimated bills and MP
averaged 31%.  While Super Storm Sandy went through West Virginia on October 30, 2012 FirstEnergy's responses and responses to individual complaints indicate that meter readers were reassigned to assist in storm restoration which presumably accounts for the November 2012 27% for MP and 23% for PE, but fails to explain why December 2012 was even greater for MP at 31% and the same for PE at 23%.
Technical Staff believes the trends shown on Attachments 1 and 2 are indicative of problems with the Companies' billing practices and cannot be attributed solely to the Summer 2012 Derecho and Super Storm Sandy.  The foregoing table and Attachments 1 and 2 indicate that MP and PE have current billing problems that are not likely to  disappear because the causes of those problems occurred in the past such as from the Derecho and Hurricane Sandy.
The PSC staff wasn't convinced by FirstEnergy's billing fish story, so the investigation will continue.
After reviewing the Companies' report and their responses to discovery requests, Staff believes it requires additional information in order formulate final recommendations in this general investigation proceeding. Staff is  seeking this information through a separately filed second set of discovery requests. Staff will continue to review this matter and submit final recommendations in accordance with a procedural schedule to be established by the Commission.
Don't miss your opportunity to help the PSC staff out by submitting your own comments!
1 Comment

Friddle me this...

7/11/2013

4 Comments

 
Clueless arrogance.
4 Comments

And The Survey Says...

7/11/2013

3 Comments

 
A recent article in Greentech Media says that 76% of consumers don't trust their utility.  
Two years ago, Greentech Media asked if utilities could rebuild trust with customers. According to a recent study by Accenture, it appears that it hasn't happened yet.

Less than one-fourth of consumers trust their utility, 9 percent below last year and the lowest figure since Accenture began the annual survey four years ago. Globally, customer satisfaction also dropped 12 percentage points to 47 percent in the past year alone.
But, but, but... Potomac Edison and Mon Power insisted to the WV PSC that 73% of their customers rate their satisfaction with the company a 9 or 10 out of 10.  How do you suppose a company that is under general investigation in two different states due to hundreds of complaints about their meter reading and billing practices is getting such stellar marks in customer satisfaction?

Denial. 

FirstEnergy clutches its phony customer satisfaction statistics tightly and pretends nothing is wrong.  That's great -- a whole bunch of nice folks will keep their jobs for the time being.  But because none of them want to tell The Emperor that he's naked, they only facilitate the demise of the company and put their personal financial situation in jeopardy over the long term.  How badly run is FirstEnergy that its employees are terrified to make suggestions for improvement?  How long has it been since anyone at FirstEnergy's Fairmont call center went home at the end of the day feeling like they made a difference and helped someone?  Or, more likely, how often do they burn rubber out of there in order to get home to the liquor cabinet as quickly as possible?
The result is that people are increasingly looking past the utility for energy-related services. Home services providers, security companies and commercial retailers are all taking a piece of what could be new revenue streams for utilities. More than 70 percent of consumers surveyed by Accenture said they would consider a provider other than the utility for energy services if it were available.

“Utilities need to consider radically rethinking their customer satisfaction investments with a targeted approach to simplifying the consumer energy experience, addressing the concerns of dissatisfied consumers and closing the expectation gap,” said Greg Guthridge, managing director for Accenture Energy Consumer Services, in a statement. Increasingly, consumer engagement cannot just be a panel topic at smart grid conferences, but instead must become a core undertaking for utilities.
When asked recently, dozens of Jefferson and Berkeley County, West Virginia, residents overwhelmingly gave Potomac Edison a vote of non-confidence.

When asked how likely they would be to select a FirstEnergy company if given a choice, 19% said they would be somewhat unlikely, 31% said very unlikely, and an another 31% said "never in a million years."

This isn't shaping up as a bright future for FirstEnergy in West Virginia, as the utility industry remakes itself over the next decade.

It's been one screw up after another in Jefferson County, and since FirstEnergy couldn't be bothered to listen to its customers when given a chance, it has absolutely no concept of just how hated it is.  Overall, the utility's satisfaction rating has been hanging around 3.8.  Yes, that's on that same 10 point scale where FirstEnergy claimed it was receiving a 9 or 10 from 73% of its customers.  Maybe FirstEnergy is holding their statistics upside down, because it sure looks like they've got things backwards?

And if you think that's bad, FirstEnergy's "Customer Service" call center gets a rating even worse than that.  It's at an all-time high of 3.3 this morning.  It's been as low as 1.98 (also using the 10 point rating scale).

Just a few customer complaints about their call center experience:

"They state that the increase was do to square footage. When we read our meter they told us we were wrong. They refused to read our meter and continue to charge us based on estimated bills."

"Even the staff couldn't answer why my bill was so inconsistent. They have no idea how to average the use without the actual reading. It made it seem like something in my house was consuming electric at an alarming and dangerous rate."

"Horrible customer service, erratic bills (one month $170, the next month $500), not reading the meter every month instead relying on "estimating."


"As I noted above, they could not explain my bill and because I was unhappy with the inability of the customer service person, she hung up on me. I had to call back again and that person could not explain so I was given to a supervisor and while she was nicer, she could not explain it either. Unacceptable."

"Put on hold for so long I gave up."

"Got "stock" answers to questions about billing. Would not really answer questions."

"Long delays before a person answers."

"Very hard to get to the right person to answer my question. I was passed though 8 people in 1 hour to get to the person that I should have gotten in the first place, not someone in a different state who did not have a clue about what I was taking about."

"15min wait timed on hold. Don't return calls as promised. Wrong phone numbers on website."

"Would not help with payment. Resulted in loss of service."

"Rude, rude, rude."

"Promised calls back, never happened. Rude customer reps who cannot/will not answer specific questions about billing/meter reading. Ridiculous!"

"Placed on hold for over an hour, I finally gave up and hung up. My time is too valuable to sit on hold."

As long as FirstEnergy employees keep making excuses for their own laziness and failure, customer trust will continue to deteriorate.  As long as FirstEnergy keeps lying both to the WV PSC and the public, the situation will not improve.  You know what they say... trust, once broken, can never be fully repaired.
In the next few years, utilities will not only have to build out those platforms while also maintaining and upgrading an aging electrical grid, but also do it all while providing a level of customer service many have never had to provide before.

“Many utilities are at an inflection point at which they should redefine their role in consumers’ lives and refocus on building a base of trust,” said Guthridge. “The first step is making interactions simple, and in particular, getting the basics right the first time."
What do you think?  Take our Potomac Edison customer satisfaction survey.  There are only six questions.  You'll be finished in less than 2 minutes!  It's way past time to burst FirstEnergy's customer satisfaction fantasy bubble!
Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey , the world's leading questionnaire tool.
3 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.