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

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

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

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

West Virginia Public Service Commission Skulduggery:  Time for Citizens to Act!

7/1/2013

4 Comments

 
On May 20, Governor Tomblin quietly reappointed Michael Albert as Chairman of the Public Service Commission.  The appointment was not announced publicly, in fact, State Journal reporter Pam Kasey had to go on a hunt for this information.  Kasey also found out that the Governor has done nothing about filling the expired term of PSC Commissioner McKinney, two years after his seat expired.

Yesterday, The Journal's Rachel Molenda reported that FirstEnergy (under the guise of its employees and political action committee) has become Governor Tomblin's biggest campaign contributor.  It sure looks like FirstEnergy has bought itself a seat on the Public Service Commission.  And according to The Journal, it only cost $94,000.  It only took $94,000 in campaign contributions for your Governor to throw you under the bus by "fixing" a supposedly independent commission with a corporate insider.

Chairman Albert "previously served as a Manager and Member in the Business Law Department of Jackson Kelly, PLLC, in Charleston, West Virginia, focusing on public utilities and business and commercial transactions."  In this capacity, Albert represented Allegheny Energy (now FirstEnergy) in all their cases before the PSC.  Chairman Albert is FirstEnergy's boy.

Commissioner McKinney is AEP's boy. 

One of these two has to go.  The Public Service Commission is not fulfilling its mission.
We will work tirelessly to assure:
1. Impartial and efficient resolution of all jurisdictional issues;
2. Public safety through inspections of motor carriers, railroads, and natural gas pipelines;
3. An increase in business investment, job creation/retention and the state’s overall competitiveness;
4. An improvement in the standard of living and quality of life for the people of West Virginia;
5. That consumers receive the best value in utility service from financially viable and technically competent companies; and,
6. That utilities receive an opportunity to earn a fair return on their investment in regulated services.
Chairman Albert's bias toward FirstEnergy is readily apparent.

Chairman Albert is not interested in helping West Virginians.
PSC Chairman Michael Albert’s recent remarks before a West Virginia legislative Joint Standing Committee on Judiciary epitomize the stagnant and captive nature of our current PSC leadership. Albert told the committee that the days of cheap utilities are over and that the only remedies for consumers who cannot afford higher utility costs are conservation or budget and consumer assistance programs. Instead of investigating creative solutions, which the PSC is empowered by law to do, Mr. Albert throws in the towel and goes along with the claims of West Virginia’s Ohio-based electric companies.
Governor Tomblin is empowered to appoint the members of the Public Service Commission "with the advice and consent of the Senate."
§24-1-3. Commission continued; membership; chairman; compensation;  quorum.
 
 (b) The Public Service Commission shall consist of three members who shall be appointed by the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate. The commissioners shall be citizens and residents of this state and at least one of them shall be duly licensed to practice law in West Virginia, with not less than ten years' actual work experience in the legal profession as a member of a state bar.
Governor Tomblin has appointed Chairman Albert.  Albert has not yet been confirmed by the Senate. 

The Governor makes hundreds of appointments every year.  The appointments are gathered up periodically and forwarded to the Senate for confirmation.  The next set is expected to come before the Senate for confirmation in January 2014.  The Senate has a Confirmations Committee to deal with this function.  The Senate can confirm the Governor's appointment, or the Senate can reject the appointment, in which case the Governor must appoint someone else.

It has become crystal clear, both to the citizens of West Virginia and their elected representatives, that change is desperately needed at the Public Service Commission.  We simply cannot afford another 6 years of uninspired, bought and paid for, corporate-influenced leadership.  Let your senator know that you want change!
4 Comments

FirstEnergy's Game of Truth or Consequences

6/19/2013

5 Comments

 
On February 25, 2011, Allegheny Energy was merged into and swallowed up by Ohio-based, investor owned utility, FirstEnergy.  As a result, the "Allegheny Power" dba company name West Virginia and Maryland customers had gotten used to ceased to exist.  FirstEnergy reverted the operating companies to their historical legal names.  Maryland and West Virginia's eastern panhandle became known as "Potomac Edison," which is a name old-timers may remember from the 1980s.  It's still the same company.  Nothing much has changed, except for the company's top management and profit goals.

Just two short months after the merger, Mark Clark, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President, had this to say about the "benefits" of the merger to the company's shareholders during a May 3, 2011, earnings call with investment analysts:
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.
Let's translate this out of "1% speak" and make it understandable.  The benefits of the merger were expected to provide shareholders with earnings in excess of $1B in the first 3 years after the merger.  The company was also looking to reduce its "O&M" between $75M and $175M.  O&M is the acronym for operations and maintenance expense.  Operations and maintenance expense is the company's cost of operating and maintaining their systems.  In the case of a regulated electric company, like Potomac Edison, this means expenses for things like maintaining their distribution lines, operating their customer service center, sending you monthly bills, and reading your electric meter in accordance with their legal obligations as a regulated utility in the state of West Virginia.  A regulated utility is permitted to recover its cost of service, plus a reasonable return on its investment, from its customers.  A utility's cost of service includes O&M expense. 

Now let's take a look at how this amount is recovered from you and why a reduction in the amount spent would be a benefit to shareholders and increase their earned dividend.  A utility recovers its fixed costs through its base rate.  Fixed costs are the costs that remain the same year after year, such as the company's investment in a power station like Harrison.  O&M is a fixed cost.  The amount Potomac Edison is collecting from all of you for O&M was set in its last rate base case in 2007.  A base rate case also sets the company's rate of return, the amount of interest it is permitted to collect from you on its fixed costs.  Potomac Edison's rate of return in West Virginia is 10.5%.  A company is not required to file base rate cases on a regular basis.  A company will do so when it can financially benefit from doing so.  The rate set in 2007 will continue to be collected until the company takes the initiative to file a new base rate case.  A new base rate case will trigger a new battle over the current 10.5% return, most likely setting it lower.

The utility is collecting a fixed amount from you to be used to operate and maintain its system.  If it doesn't spend all it collects in one month, it can set it aside to spend later.  Conversely, some months it must spend more than it collects.  It's supposed to roughly equal out eventually, however, there is no true up mechanism that ensures that the company actually spends every penny on actual O&M expenses.  If a company ends up with a positive O&M balance at the end of the quarter, it adds that amount to its profit (dividend).  Therefore, whatever Potomac Edison can save on operating and maintaining its system is a direct profit.

So, FirstEnergy's first order of business after the merger was to cut O&M to produce more profit from the combined business.  During a subsequent earnings call on February 29, 2012, Mark Clark had this to say:
...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.
Right, Mark.  Don't do anything crazy like reorganize and cut your meter reading positions because something like that could have unforeseen consequences that squander Potomac Edison's community goodwill and put the company at a longer-term risk.  After all, an unhappy customer base could do something unexpected, like turn out in record numbers to oppose a proposed generation transfer that was planned as part of the company's strategy to "...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."  Remember, you must always place FirstEnergy in the best possible forward position!

Fast forward another year.  The company's penny-pinching has reduced/reorganized its meter reading staff to less than half of its former level.  The company is still collecting the same amount of O&M, but now they're spending half the amount!  The extra gets added to the dividend to show the shareholders a profit.  Shareholders are the only ones who truly matter.  Its not about responsibly providing a needed service in a monopoly construct.  Because the company has reduced its staff by more than half, meters are only getting read less than half as often as they should.  This means that the company is relying on more estimates to calculate monthly bills.  Perhaps the company thinks that it can train its customers to read their own meters and call it in to the company, allowing for more accuracy while also maintaining the meter reading staff cuts.  But that's not what happens... oh, no.  Some customers simply refuse to do the job they are paying the company to do, and the inaccurate usage estimates continue to pile up.  You all know what happens when you add too many inaccurate numbers to an equation -- the answer becomes hopelessly skewed.  And that's exactly what has happened to customers' bills.  Depending on the number of actual v. estimated readings currently in the queue of averaged billings, bills can swing wildly from month to month, resulting in some customers receiving outrageous bills for thousands of dollars that they simply cannot pay.  Potomac Edison's customer service staff simply doesn't care.  Pay up or be cut off.  And then the service shut-offs begin...

And the community took action.


The WV PSC opened an investigation into the company's business practices on June 7.  The West Virginia legislature announced its own parallel, independent investigation of the company on June 13.

All of this stemmed from the cost of a very small staff of meter readers?  How much did they save?  How much does a meter reader cost?  Recently, Potomac Edison placed a help wanted ad on Craig's List for temporary meter readers.  Yes, Craig's List!  Always my first choice when job hunting...anyhow... I guess they're even too cheap to advertise in more mainstream venues, or perhaps they don't really intend to actually hire anyone.  They certainly don't intend to hire anyone to solve the problem long term, after the regulators quit breathing down their neck.  The fewer people who see the ad, the fewer applicants Potomac Edison has to blow off.  Potomac Edison is offering a starting wage of $12.31 per hour for a meter reader in Frederick, Maryland.  That's about $24K per year.  Frederick's average per capita income is $36K per year.  Compare the meter reader's salary with the recently approved annual compensation of FirstEnergy CEO Tony Alexander of $23M for 2013.

Meter reader:          $12.31/hr.
Tony Alexander:    $11,454.18/hr.

I think we've found the place where cuts can be made to place FirstEnergy in the best possible forward position.  More meter readers, less Tony Alexander.

But will the company turn a corner and put sincere effort into righting its wrongs?  Or will it continue to make excuses for its failure, and continue to lie to regulators and the community?  What's it going to be, FirstEnergy, truth or consequences?

Image courtesy of meme-master Joe Solomon.  Share it on Facebook and show your solidarity with other Potomac Edison/Mon Power/West Penn Power customers who are being victimized by this giant Ohio-based energy conglomerate!
5 Comments

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!

6/18/2013

3 Comments

 
Put on your hip waders, Potomac Edison customers, the fertilizer is getting mighty deep!

Today, Potomac Edison's Director of Public Relations, Charlie Friddle, told a concerned customer that "...they had provided sufficient information that they were involved in an ongoing investigation and could not participate" in the Citizens' Public Hearing in Charles Town on May 22.

LIAR, LIAR, Pants on Fire!
But, wait a tick... the investigation was not announced by the PSC until May 31.  How was Potomac Edison "involved in an ongoing investigation" on May 22?

According to Cagey Charlie, the company "was investigating billing practices themselves" on May 22, so technically, Charlie believes his statement was correct.

Not even close.  Potomac Edison just plain old blew you all off.  The company's scientific estimate of how many citizens with genuine problems would show up, and who would show up to listen to these irate customers, was about as accurate and their monthly electric usage estimates. 

Why not just admit that you severely screwed up, Potomac Edison?  We'd be a little more forgiving of a company that admitted its mistakes and put forth an honest effort to right its wrongs.  Instead, Potomac Edison just keeps piling up the lies and flimsy excuses.  Nobody's buying it, and this dishonest company is only digging its hole deeper and deeper.

Potomac Edison's excuse for not attending the Citizens' Public Hearing prior to May 22 was:

"We appreciate the invitation to participate in the public hearing scheduled for May 22, regarding billing practices and future generation, but respectfully decline.  Should you have individual questions regarding your service, please feel free to contact me or our customer contact center at 1-800-686-0011."

Do you see anything in there about conducting an internal investigation, Charlie?  Yeah, me neither.

Liar, liar, pants on fire!  Next time we invite you to an event, you're going to show up, right?  We'll be sure to invite you personally, Charlie.
3 Comments

WV Legislature To Begin Second Investigation of Potomac Edison

6/13/2013

0 Comments

 
The West Virginia Legislature is not satisfied that the state's Public Service Commission will get the job done with its general investigation of FirstEnergy subsidiaries Potomac Edison and Mon Power, and has announced its own independent, parallel investigation of electric utility billing practices in the state.  The Joint Standing Committee on Government Organization's investigation will give the hairy eyeball to all electric utilities in the state.  So, other companies, like Appalachian Power, can give a great, big "thank you" to their compatriots at FirstEnergy who made all this possible.

Read breaking news by Pam Kasey in The State Journal.
0 Comments

Arrogant Potomac Edison Calls WV PSC Investigation Perfunctory

6/12/2013

2 Comments

 
It's true, you can't fix stupid.

FirstEnergy subsidiaries Potomac Edison and Mon Power are trying to remedy the public relations disaster they find themselves in, and shore up the companies' dishonest and negligent image, with even more dismissive arrogance.  FirstEnergy just doesn't get it and continues to kick itself in the rear end.

The company has deployed public relations simpleton Todd Meyers on a radio tour where he delivers lawyer-approved statements such as:

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.
What is Todd insinuating here by downplaying the authority of the WV PSC to investigate and fix unjust and unreasonable rates as "just an exercise?"  Is Todd trying to inform the public that the PSC is nothing but the company's stooge and that the investigation is mere political window dressing with a predetermined outcome?

"Our customers" will not be mollified by a token review and slap on the wrist.  "Our customers" want results, and a heaping helping of tasty schadenfreude.

How would y-o-u like to see Potomac Edison punished for all the misery it has caused?  What, if anything, can Potomac Edison do to make it up to you?
2 Comments

FirstEnergy Subsidiary Potomac Edison's Billing Excuses Don't Make Sense

6/3/2013

0 Comments

 
In an interview with State Journal's Pam Kasey on Saturday about Potomac Edison's failure to read meters, FirstEnergy spokesman Todd Meyers told the reporter:
The problems stem from a series of issues connected with several large storms and with FirstEnergy's acquisition of the utilities' former parent, Allegheny Energy in early 2011, according to company spokesman Todd Meyers.

Bills are based on alternate months of actual meter readings and estimates, Meyers said.

During storm response — including, since the acquisition, Hurricane Irene in August 2011, the derecho in June 2012 and superstorm Sandy in October 2012, as well as smaller storms — meter readers may be called off their routes to watch lines that have been reported down until line crews arrive. They return to reading meters on schedule, so the readings that are missed during those periods aren't made up and result in three estimates in a row — which can result in large true-up bills when those meters are read in the fourth month.

In addition, as FirstEnergy began transitioning from Allegheny's system in which meter readers conducted meter maintenance and other functions as well to its own system in which they only read meters, some staff in the Potomac Edison service area switched to other positions, creating a temporary staffing shortage in mid-2012, Meyers said.

And another phase of transition in early 2013 called "renumbering," in which routes were adjusted, also resulted in a one-time long billing cycle, he said — which, again, created problems primarily in the eastern panhandle.
Meyers wants you to believe that the company's failure to read meters was a result of "Act of God" weather events, and therefore the company should be blameless.

I'm not buying it.

Meyers suggests that weather has caused more downed lines since the Allegheny Energy/FirstEnergy merger and suggests that the company's failure to read meters is caused by meter readers being reassigned to babysit downed wires. 

My pile of bills from the last five years doesn't lie.  Weather is what it is.  Extreme weather that takes down power lines comes and goes.  Extreme weather never caused numerous successive estimates on my bill before the merger.  In fact, it looks like the Allegheny Energy meter reader showed up faithfully through all kinds of weather to read my meter, even when he had to wade through deep snow to do it.  My meter was read every other month like clockwork until the fall of 2011.  Regular meter readings stopped abruptly in October of 2011, and what had been fairly uniform monthly bills began to get wackier and wackier as time went on, climbing up or down without rhyme or reason by as much as $100.  But I'm one of the lucky ones.  Some Potomac Edison customers had their bills jump by thousands of dollars in one month's time.

As well, during two of the storms Todd mentions in his excuse for the company's failure, one of Potomac Edison's distribution lines came down in my neighborhood and NOBODY showed up to babysit it until repairs could be made, even though it was lying in a busy street.  The local fire department placed traffic cones around it to keep vehicles from driving over it, but no meter reader showed up to direct traffic.  At one point, we were fortunate enough to catch a FirstEnergy employee at the site while driving by.  He explained that he was there simply to evaluate the problem and would not be staying.  He also informed us that it would be days before the line would be repaired and power restored.  Where was my meter reader during all this?

Oh, that's right... he had been "reassigned" and not replaced.  That's most likely because the new boss at FirstEnergy had ordered that the former Allegheny companies' yearly loss on meter reading functions be remedied.  And, since the companies did not want to file new rate cases to increase the amount recovered for this function, they simply cut the amount being spent on it to align with the amount being recovered.  Seems fair, right?  There's only one little problem... cutting services meant that meters would be read with less frequency, and the frequency of meter reading is set out in the companies' state jurisdictional tariffs.  In order to cut services, the company had to willfully violate its tariff.  And next thing you know, the "storm excuse" was born.

Everything still might have turned out okay, except that the company didn't think their action through.  Numerous estimates skewed the companies' estimation algorithm.  If you add enough false data to any computer program, it's going to start producing false results.  Garbage in, garbage out! 

In addition, something went horribly wrong with the companies' transition from Allegheny Energy's computerized billing system to FirstEnergy's computerized billing system.  Anyone who has worked with computers knows what a joke this is.  A huge transition like this should have been carefully planned and tested and both systems should have been run in parallel for a period of time so that a backup existed in case of major error.  Instead, FirstEnergy wants us to believe there were no backups and that they have not managed to work the bugs out of their system for over a year.  This isn't an "Act of God," it's sheer incompetence.  And then the elaborate "transition" excuses were born.

The more elaborate the excuse, the greater the chance that it's simply not true.
FirstEnergy needs some new lies and new excuses.  The old ones just don't make sense.
0 Comments

State Journal Scoop on Potomac Edison Investigation

6/1/2013

0 Comments

 
Read Pam Kasey's article about the PSC's investigation of Potomac Edison.

Methinks Todd doth protest too much!  :-)
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

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    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
    Valley Link Transmission
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.