Mr. Chidester believes PJ+M is in bed with FirstEnergy. If they breed, the child would probably behave a lot like this one:
He's exactly right!
StopPATH WV |
|
They're not fooling Len Chidester of Montrose, West Virginia. He's heard some nasty rumors about the shoddy way FirstEnergy treats its linemen, neglects maintenance of equipment, and fails to read electric meters. Apparently this is all being done under the mandate of some company named PJ+M. Mr. Chidester believes PJ+M is in bed with FirstEnergy. If they breed, the child would probably behave a lot like this one: Post by Noni Moore. Mr. Chidester concludes that FirstEnergy bought Mon Power and Potomac Edison. FirstEnergy is bleeding these companies for every nickel they can squeeze by their phoney meter reading process, doing minimal repairs, and who knows what other practices. And he advises that a very major investigation be launched into exactly what the power companies, FirstEnergy, Mon Power, Potomac Edison and the company PJ+M have been and are continuing to do.
He's exactly right!
0 Comments
The union busters at FirstEnergy are at it again. The Herald-Mail reports that local union members have rejected FirstEnergy's contract offer. The local union represents workers from Frederick and Washington counties in Maryland, the Waynesboro area in Pennsylvania, and West Virginia's eastern panhandle. The company and the union have been negotiating for a new contract since March 2013. Federal mediators have been involved during the past several months. Union rep. Robert Whalen said that by rejecting the contract offer, union members have authorized a strike, if necessary. But never fear, Potomac Edison customers... useless PR flack Toad Meyers has promised to keep your lights on by magic! ...the utility has plans to continue providing electrical power to its 382,000 customers in Potomac Edison’s Maryland and West Virginia territory “no matter what happens,” company spokesman Todd Meyers said. It must be magic, because I don't think Toad could cut it in lineman school. I'm still waiting for him to come read my electric meter and he hasn't shown yet! I wonder if they'll let him use a company truck for that, or will he have to use his own vehicle? In case your lights go out, don't bother with the emergency number, call Toad: (724) 838-6650.
I'm going to stock up on candles and gas for the generator. I have no faith in Toad's promises. Mountain Party candidate for the 66th District seat in the WV House of Delegates, Danny Lutz, had great success with a petition against Potomac Edison's recent request for a 17.2% rate increase when he circulated it at the Jefferson County Fair a couple weeks ago.
Danny presented a sweet 500 signatures of protest to the PSC last week! Miss your chance to sign the petition at the fair? Danny's got you covered! He's made copies of the petition available for you to sign at several supportive local businesses. Visit these establishments and ask to sign the Potomac Edison rate increase petition: Roger's Tire and Auto Martinsburg Orr's Farm Market Martinsburg D&D Meats Inwood Mountain View Diner Charles Town Hampshire's Body Shop Kearneysville Cantuta Cafe Charles Town Needful Things Charles Town Weber's Store Shannondale And be sure to attend the Public Service Commission hearings on the rate increase in Shepherdstown on October 6 to watch Danny present his handiwork to the Commissioners. If you'd like a blank copy of the petition to circulate at your business, with your friends, neighbors, or family, just ask. Unless you're that other guy who works for the utility... he can't have my petition... or my vote. Marcelino Cuadra is in big trouble. He's been sentenced to seven years’ probation after he pleaded guilty to charges of corrupt organizations, theft of services and conspiracy to commit theft of services in connection with electric meter tampering incidents in Pennsylvania. He also has to complete 60 hours of community service and re-pay nearly $350K to electric utility PECO.
Cuadra was convicted of tampering with numerous business and residential electric meters to "fix" them so monthly usage would be reduced. He says the electric customers paid him for the "fix." Compare Cuadra's plight to West Virginia's recent meter scandal, where FirstEnergy subsidiaries Mon Power and Potomac Edison were found by the Public Service Commission to have failed to read customer electric meters bi-monthly as required. This resulted in consecutive estimated bills where monthly usage would be reduced, only to show up on an actual read bill months later that amounted to thousands of dollars. What was FirstEnergy's sentence? A $7.5M yearly rate increase to pay for monthly meter readings. I think it must have all been in the technique employed to commit the act, since both seem to be the result of corrupt organizations and conspiracy. But, don't call Marcelino, there are safer ways to save energy. Potomac Edison/Mon Power Monthly Meter Reading Will Cost YOU an additional $7.5M Every Year6/13/2014 FirstEnergy's Potomac Edison and Mon Power subsidiaries finally got around to filing their testimony in the rate increase case last week. As instructed by the WV PSC, the company has added the additional cost of rectifying its own failure to the increase it is seeking.
Monthly meter reading will increase customer rates an additional $7.5 million annually, or 1.35% for residential customers(1.57% for non-residential). This increase will be added to the already proposed 13.95% base rate increase, and additional estimated increase for coal plant retrofits of another 2%. Total rate increase proposed by FirstEnergy for its West Virginia residential customers? 17.2% According to Testimony of Raymond E. Valdes filed last week, FirstEnergy's 2013 cost of meter reading was just over $5M per year. Dividing that number by the number of actual meter reads performed resulted in an average cost of $1.99 per meter read. But FirstEnergy can't simply double the costs because its number of meter reads compared to estimates is not equal, even when the annual read customers are removed from the equation. When numbers are actually put on paper, it turns out that FirstEnergy was not actually reading meters every other month, or half the time, as required. FirstEnergy was reading meters much less than the required every other month. Maybe the WV PSC should have asked for these numbers during the general investigation and simplified everything? Actual Meter Readings in 2013: 2,238,832 Estimated Readings in 2013: 2,894,376 If the company had been reading meters every other month as it was supposed to, then these two numbers would be equal. This is the plainest picture you're going to get of FirstEnergy's failure. So, anyhow, Valdes used the $1.99 reading cost to calculate a total incremental cost to switch to monthly meter reading of $6.4M. But, wait, the company needs to add an additional $1,074,173 in "transition costs" to rectify its own meter reading mistake. FirstEnergy describes these costs as: "estimated additional costs the Companies will incur related to the conversion to monthly meter reading." The company proposed to recover this extra million over a 3-year period, so that it can earn interest on it (at your expense, of course). This brings your additional cost to read meters monthly up to: $7,519,213 And that is a clearest picture you will get of how your Public Service Commission has failed to protect your interests during its perfunctory "investigation" of FirstEnergy's customer abuse. The PSC clearly found FirstEnergy to be at fault in the investigation. But, instead of punishing the company for its failure, the PSC has punished the customers who were injured by the failure. As my friend Kery says... when is the failure to perform under a contract ever the fault of the party who was injured? FirstEnergy failed to perform. They should be liable to the parties injured by their action. End of story. Except, this is West Virginia, where our PSC behaves like a poodle on a leash held by Ohio energy conglomerates. Look up "regulatory capture." The PSC could have made some token attempt at fairness in its general investigation order. It could have ordered FirstEnergy to absorb the first year's incremental additional cost ($7.5M). It could have ordered FirstEnergy to absorb the $1M transition costs, instead of putting them on the backs of struggling ratepayers for three years. But it didn't. FirstEnergy was rewarded for its failure. Rewarded for injuring YOU, the customer. So, what can you do? Tell the PSC what you think! You can submit an online comment here. Select "high profile" case number 14-0702-E-42T from the drop down list on the comment form. As we move forward with this rate increase case, there will also be opportunities to voice your concerns in person during various public comment hearings around the state. Stay tuned... Good news, FirstEnergy customers! If you're one of the thousands of customers whose electric meter is only read every other month (or longer interval), there is now a quick and easy solution to your problem! Simply pick up your phone and call the customer service number on your bill and "inquire" about it. Then do it again the next day. (Like those instructions on your shampoo bottle -- lather, rinse, repeat). According to the voice message I now have recorded on my answering machine from FirstEnergy escalation specialist (or other fun job title) "Kim" (employee number 30111): Any time there is a bill inquiry on the account more than one occasion we do send out to verify a check reading..." Kim was explaining why I received a "special" actual reading after my May bill was estimated.
Except I haven't made any bill inquiries since January. So, be aware that there may be a 4 month delay in your own "special" meter reading. My May bill was estimated on May 15, as scheduled. Kim and her co-workers informed me that on May 16, a "must read" order for my account was issued from the company's billing office. This delayed my bill, waiting for the "must read" to occur. On May 27, 12 days AFTER the estimate was first calculated, FirstEnergy sent me an estimated bill anyhow. It was actually pretty accurate this month (yay!) The very next day, May 28, a meter reader made a special trip all the way out here just to "must read" my meter. The "must read" was not reflected on my bill, because the company had already sent me an estimated bill the day before. My June bill is scheduled to be an actual read, along with all the other customers in my neighborhood. What was the purpose of the May 28 read? Did FirstEnergy just need to waste some meter reader time coming all the way out here for nothing? As usual, FirstEnergy's right hand doesn't know what its left hand is doing. The effect of FirstEnergy's "must read" to make sure my bill was accurate this month served only to delay my bill by 12 days. It did not make it any more accurate. The company did some fine dancing and singing about what alignment of the moon and stars made its billing department roll out of bed one morning and decide to put a "must read" on my account. It finally settled on the excuse that my multiple billing inquiries last year and early this year needed to finally be acted upon. You da' man, FirstEnergy! Unless, maybe, that "must read" came from somewhere else in the company and was supposed to simply shut me up until the Commission issued its Order in the meter reading & billing case? Hmm... perhaps I should consult an att........ oh, *shhhhhhhh* Who else has made multiple inquiries about their bill in the past and recently received a "special" extra read in an estimated month? Anyone? The West Virginia Public Service Commission finally issued an Order in its General Investigation of FirstEnergy subsidiaries Potomac Edison and Mon Power today. The investigation was initiated a year ago at the urging of citizens' groups and legislators, and was to examine the billing, meter reading and customer service practices of Potomac Edison and Mon Power. However, instead of punishing the company for its transgressions, the PSC has decided to punish the customers! The PSC has ordered Potomac Edison and Mon Power to increase meter readings from bi-monthly to monthly no later than July 1, 2015. However, the company's customers will pay for the cost of increasing the frequency of meter reading. FirstEnergy has estimated that monthly reading would increase yearly costs by five million dollars ($5,000,000.00). The PSC has directed the company to recover the increased cost from you by amending its recent request for a 15% rate increase to add the additional costs for monthly meter reading. The PSC estimates that this will add another half a percent to the upcoming rate increase, to make the total rate increase more than 16%. Converting from bimonthly to monthly meter reading in the territory of both FirstEnergy operating companies in West Virginia will require a transition period that allows FirstEnergy time to procure additional equipment, hire and train new meter readers and make any necessary changes to its billing platform. Therefore, the Commission will require that FirstEnergy implement monthly meter reading as quickly as possible, and no later than July 1, 2015. The Commission will monitor the transition as part of the adjustment to its metrics discussed below. The Commission will be watching for continued improvement and consistent performance. The handling of current annual read customers will also be discussed in the relevant section below. FirstEnergy should file amendments to the tariffs of each West Virginia operating company that provide for monthly meter reading and billing for residential customers. Finally, FirstEnergy may request to amend its filings in the pending general rate proceeding and provide evidence of the reasonable increase in the estimated cost of service. Over the year long course of this investigation, customers made many constructive and useful suggestions on how FirstEnergy could improve. The Coalition for Reliable Power and the NAACP suggested that FirstEnergy (AT ITS OWN EXPENSE) be ordered to read meters every month for one full year in order to acquire accurate readings on which to base future estimated bills. The West Virginia Consumer Advocate Division recommended that FirstEnergy be ordered to read meters monthly for one year without addressing who would pay for it. The WV PSC staff recommended that FirstEnergy be ordered to read meters monthly only if other recommendations for improvement were not successful.
NOBODY RECOMMENDED THAT THE COMPANY BE ORDERED TO READ METERS MONTHLY, INDEFINITELY, AND AT THE CUSTOMERS' EXPENSE. But the PSC batted aside every constructive suggestion, in addition to your calls that the company be punished for its willful violation of its tariff. Instead, it rewarded FirstEnergy with another $5M rate increase! The bi-monthly meter reading system of the former Allegheny Power worked fine for many years. It was only AFTER Allegheny Power was acquired by Ohio utility holding company FirstEnergy that the problems started. The PSC admits that the transition to FirstEnergy business practices, in addition to poor decision making, caused the problems. The switch to monthly reading can therefore be easily tied to the ill-advised FirstEnergy merger. The PSC and FirstEnergy promised us that customers wouldn't have to pay higher rates as a result of the merger. Once again, the PSC has failed us. To add insult to injury, the PSC and FirstEnergy are in cahoots to spin this as a victory for the customers in the press. The PSC is crowing about how they have ordered FirstEnergy to read meters monthly, without mentioning who is going to pay for it. You are! They must really think you're stupid. Don't fall for it! West Virginia electric customers have now been punished for speaking out about the abuse heaped on them by Ohio-based FirstEnergy. It's going to cost us at least $5M. This is the clearest example of regulatory failure I've ever witnessed. Of course FirstEnergy had to have the last word in the WV Public Service Commission General Investigation into its billing, meter reading and customer service practices. FirstEnergy's latest attempt to pretend there's no problem was entitled "Status Report." ??? Is there some legal requirement for a "status report" in a general investigation that's waiting for an order that nobody but FirstEnergy knows about? Or maybe it's just cover for the PSC to also pretend that nothing's wrong so they can dismiss the investigation, after wasting everyone's time for the past year? FirstEnergy's "Status Report" is a rendition of all the super-de-dooper changes the company has made to the crappy way they treat you, the customer, ever since the PSC started giving them the hairy eyeball. Let's see if this makes people who receive gigantic bills they can't pay feel any better: Added messaging informing customer as to payment options when an actual bill is received (after multiple estimates) if the bill is > 25% than the customer's prior year bill informing customers of some payment options at receipt of the bill reducing dissatisfaction with catch-up bills. There, all better. FirstEnergy will give you some "options" to prevent that kick in the gut feeling you get when opening an electric bill hundreds or thousands of dollars more than you expected. You still have to pay the bill, but reading some canned message in tiny print should make you feel all warm and fuzzy and avert the panic attack. Right.
This list of FirstEnergy's "accomplishments" is crap. Most of it is old stuff they already "accomplished" that either didn't do anything, or screwed things up even further. Customers STILL received huge bills they couldn't pay this spring, just like last year. FirstEnergy's plans for future improvements include more tiny print "messaging" on your bill. Because, don't you know, the whole problem all along has been that you're just stupid, and FirstEnergy has done nothing wrong. FirstEnergy also promises to continue to screw around with its estimation algorithm. *NOOOOOOOOOOOO!* I have a couple of "improvements and evaluations" for FirstEnergy that might actually make a difference. They're really quite simple. 1. Apologize. 2. Accept responsibility for your actions. 3. Make amends to your customers. But I don't see that ever happening.... because the WV PSC probably wants to pretend there is no problem just as badly as FirstEnergy does. Once again, the customer gets tossed under the regulatory bus. Did any of these chuckleheads pause to consider the effect of an unsatisfactory conclusion to the general investigation on the FirstEnergy base rate case? The hoi polloi haven't had an opportunity to get over the billing & meter reading issues before they got hit with a gigantic rate increase. What do they see? They see FirstEnergy being rewarded for complete and utter failure. FirstEnergy better get comfy curled up in the fetal position. It's going to be a rough year. Another excuse-filled, poor performance, quarterly earnings call from FirstEnergy on Tuesday. How much longer can this company continue to flounder and still stay in business? The basic story goes like this: Despite a big profit from the cold weather in January & February, company mismanagement frittered it away. The Plain Dealer provides a good summary of FirstEnergy's disappointing performance. FirstEnergy lost two large power plants during January's arctic-like weather -- the 2,490-megawatt coal-burning Bruce Mansfield plant in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, and right next door, one of its 900-megawatt nuclear reactors at its Beaver Valley power plant. This is all despite FirstEnergy's desperate attempts to restructure debt and raise cash over the past year through the sale of hydro assets, and the transfer of its unregulated Harrison power station to its WV regulated subsidiaries for a billion dollar payday. FirstEnergy still has little cash, and a mountain of looming debt. FirstEnergy's competitive retail business continues to drag it down, despite an effort to reposition all its eggs in the regulated basket. It wasn't too long ago that FirstEnergy was all giddy over beating AEP on all the consumer "shopping" going on in the state of Ohio. Tony the Trickster bragged through previous earnings calls over the number of customers signed up. Yup, that quantity over quality race to the finish was really helpful over the long term. When FirstEnergy goes under, Tony can tell his investors that at least he beat AEP. FirstEnergy now brags that it has filed a rate increase in West Virginia. The company requested an increase of approximately $96 million, or 9.3%, and an allowed ROE of 11%, an increase of .5% over current return. Never going to happen. FirstEnergy neglected to mention the looming General Investigation, or any other number of regulatory venues where it finds itself in hot water, and analysts were just too polite to bring up all that nastiness. FirstEnergy also brags about its new scheme to "invest" in its transmission system, after years of neglect while chasing big, new build projects. Just like every other shiny object in FirstEnergy history, management's concentration on transmission blinds it to reality. And Leila still hasn't learned to pronounce the word exacerbate. Higher prices exasperated the earnings impact of our power purchases. I don't know about you, but I'm thoroughly exasperated by these uneducated dolts. Their money-grubbing, desperate and questionable legal maneuvers, such as foisting polar vortex "fees" off onto fixed rate customers, are not cute or prudent over the long run. The schadenfreude continues to build as FirstEnergy continues to burn bridges with its customers, employees and regulators.
As part of last year's PSC settlement allowing FirstEnergy to "sell" the Harrison Power Station from its competitive generation subsidiary to its regulated West Virginia utilities, the company was required to file a new base rate case with the PSC this month. A company's base rate covers the utility's fixed costs and earns a return. FirstEnergy's current West Virginia return (profit) is 10.5%. Base rate cases are filed infrequently, usually at the initiative of the utility if it thinks it can increase earnings by doing so, or it may be ordered by a regulator as part of another deal. FirstEnergy has asked for a $96M rate increase. I haven't read the filing at the PSC yet, but I received several copies of this company-generated rubbish in my email today. The company doesn't mention its requested return percentage, so I will assume it's the same, or even higher. In addition to the more than a billion dollar cost of "buying" Harrison, the rate increase also includes: ...recovery of costs associated with storm repairs from the 2012 Derecho and Hurricane Sandy, along with operating costs at power stations, including new environmental control equipment. In addition, the rate request includes hiring 50 new company employees to help enhance service reliability. So, how much is this going to cost you? Currently, the monthly bill for a typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours is about $92.62. If the proposed rate increase, including the cost of the new tree trimming program, is granted, the monthly bill would be about $106.79. But, wait! FirstEnergy wants you to know about all the value you're going to be getting! Mon Power and Potomac Edison have not filed for an increase in base rates for nearly five years. The companies’ last major rate changes were a decrease in fuel-related rates of 5 percent on Jan. 1, 2013, and a rate reduction of 1.5 percent in October 2013 due to the Harrison acquisition. But, that's of little actual value when the company doesn't bother to read your electric meter for months on end and then sends you a gigantic bill for your accumulated usage once a year. Don't worry though... To help customers manage their bills, Mon Power and Potomac Edison offer an average payment plan, special payment plans, and access to energy assistance programs. Just hop on the ol' FirstEnergy debt treadmill and run for your life! Oh, and let's not forget... that extra $96M out of your pockets will now guarantee you better service! “The filing will help ensure continued safe and reliable electric generation for our customers,” said Holly Kauffman, president of FirstEnergy’s West Virginia Operations. “On the utility side of our operations, the new employees will include linemen, engineers, supervisors and other personnel to help make the service we provide our customers even better and meet anticipated business growth in our state.” Twit.
|
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
|