“This company’s going to experience a thousand points of pain,” UWUA Local 102 President Bob Whalen said.

Whalen said, however, that after a 20-minute preliminary meeting, representatives only spent five minutes around the negotiating table on Monday. He said after reading the first item on the union’s list of contract change requests, the extension of health care benefits for retirees, FirstEnergy ended the discussion.

“They said, ‘No, the meeting is over.’ They did not listen to the rest of our proposals,” Whalen said.

During the Merger integration process, FirstEnergy and Allegheny will review existing procedures and policies to determine “best practices” and how to implement them, ensuring that customer benefits appropriately outweigh the associated costs and considering any related effects on customer service and customer satisfaction levels.

...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.

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.

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.)

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.

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.