We love our County Commission here in Jefferson County :-)  We miss seeing them as frequently as we used to, now that the PATH project is rolling around in some obscure corner somewhere emitting a gurgling death rattle.  This morning, Patience Wait and I decided to go to the Commission meeting to say hello.  Imagine our surprise to find that two representatives of FirstEnergy were on the agenda to give a presentation as the first order of business!  Wow, serendipity! 

Just as the meeting was getting underway, the FirstEnergy rep. showed up and sat right in front of us, like a moth to a flame.  She proceeded to play with all the papers in her notebook, including her propaganda from now defunct PATH front group, West Virginians for Reliable Power.

During public comment, Patience spoke about the new state-wide citizens' action group, Coalition for Reliable Power, the Coaliton's goals, and invited the Commissioners to Real Solutions to Rising Electric Rates, a public forum to be held in Martinsburg next Tuesday at 6:45 p.m.  The forum will address FirstEnergy's proposed energy efficiency program in West Virginia, which was a stipulation in their merger settlement with the PSC.  FirstEnergy has proposed a very weak program that will have little effect and little benefit for the vast majority of the ratepayers, however it will be funded by increases to residential electric rates.  The Commissioners were invited to come and find out how to take action at the PSC to make FirstEnergy do better.  You're invited, too!

I spoke next and gave the Commissioners a brief update on the status (or not!) of the PATH project, demand & congestion, PJM and FERC issues and other related topics.

Afterward, we decided to hang around and see what FirstEnergy had to say for themselves.  Charlie Friddle, who was supposed to introduce FE's "new" PR person for the Eastern Panhandle had been called away in the middle of the night, according to Charlene, and wasn't able to attend.  (Hmm... did a politician run out of pocket change somewhere?)  So, Charlene Gilliam introduced herself.

Bless her little heart, she kept doggedly to the script she was handed when FirstEnergy loaded her batteries, hit the "on" switch and set her in motion on this mission.  She began by showing the Commissioners a copy of that vacuous "Hello my name is..." ad and asked them not to be confused by the name Potomac Edison.  Although, Charlene seemed a bit confused herself, getting the date of FirstEnergy's takeover of Allegheny Power wrong.  Not that a few days matter, after all, it took FirstEnergy six months to get around to introducing their "family" to the County Commission.  She told the Commission about Potomac Edison's West Virginia headquarters in Fairmont and pretended it was a great FirstEnergy benefit, when the facility is actually headquarters for Mon Power and financed by the ratepayers through the TrAIL transmission line's FERC formula rate.  She showed the Commissioners a map of FirstEnergy's Diverse Generating Sources.  10,371 MW of "supercritical coal"; 4,633 MW of "subcritical coal"; 3,991 MW of nuclear; 2,783 MW of gas/oil; and 2,207 MW of "renewables," which consist entirely of hydro and exist in Jefferson and Berkeley Counties.  When asked about that other "renewables" icon on the map that is sitting on the WV/PA border, Charlene didn't know what it was.  She made the statement, "Generation percentages will change dramatically in the next 5 years!"  When Commissioner Morgan asked her to elaborate on how they would change, Charlene didn't seem to understand the question.  After it was repeated/rephrased several times, Charlene said she didn't know and would have to check and get back to the Commission.  (okay, stop that snickering, it's not polite!!!)  She was also asked a question about scrubbed vs. un-scrubbed coal generation by Commissioner Pellish, and a question by Commissioner Manuel about the effect of Marcellus on FE's generation portfolio.  She didn't know the answers to these questions either, all right?  In fact, she "wasn't privileged to the information" on Marcellus.

Charlene wanted the Commission to know that she was making the rounds to all the local government and that FE was bringing back their "Economic Development" department.  Charlene wanted the Commission to know that she is there to be a direct line of communication for elected officials whenever they needed her.  I just hope they don't need her to answer any hard questions, all right?

Charlene took off out of the Commission meeting room like her shoes were on fire as soon as she was excused.  I hope she was just beginning her search for answers with appropriate alacrity and not just trying to escape from more questions.  Patience and I hung around and mingled with the Commissioners during their next break, and we answered all the questions that Charlene could not.

FAIL!

... industry influence suspected.  Film at 11.

Okay, enough with the silly headlines.  This isn't a satire or parody website (okay, well most of the time anyhow, I'm just in a mood tonight).  Expecting laws to adapt to the behavior of the utility industry, instead of expecting the industry to adapt to the rules created to regulate it isn't a joke.  Suppose instead of of a transmission grid we were talking about drug manufacturers.  Would we expect the regulations that keep that industry in line to adapt to the whims of whatever the huge pharmaceutical corporations wanted to do to increase profits?  Of course not.  But for some reason, the utility industry wants us all to jump on the bandwagon calling for less regulatory scrutiny so they can construct a huge, expensive, dangerously centralized "national grid" at the electric consumer's expense.

In this interview with former FERC Chairman Joseph Kelliher, now working for NextEra Energy Resources, Kelliher talks about ways to work around the federal court rulings that threw a wet blanket on plans for a huge transmission build out.  NextEra bills themselves as the "Largest generator of wind and solar power in North America."  And what does a generator of midwest wind need?  New transmission lines.  Hmm... cancel that call to Sherlock Holmes, we're not going to need him on this case after all.

There have been three major federal court decisions in the past couple of years that threw a monkey wrench into the system the utility industry had "put in place" courtesy of their bought and paid for legislators.  First, the 4th Circuit said that FERC's backstop siting authority could not be invoked in the instance a state denied a transmission line application.  Next, the 7th Circuit said consumers could not be forced to pay for transmission lines from which they receive no benefits and remanded cost allocation to FERC.  FERC responded with its recent Order No. 1000.  Finally, the 9th Circuit vacated the Department of Energy's "National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors" which gave FERC their backstop siting authority to override state decisions, claim eminent domain powers, and site transmission lines.

Kelliher claims that the 4th Circuit's decision was in error and that "it's not the last word" on FERC's backstop siting power.

He also thinks that, in response to the 9th Circuit decision, DOE should re-implement NIETCs by allowing utilities to create smaller corridors  "on request" for each project they propose.

He claims the EPAct of 2005 was flawed because it bifurcated authority between FERC and DOE.  He thinks all authority should have been given to FERC, similar to their sole authority for siting gas lines.  But, no matter, says Kelliher, there are ways to bend the existing laws to suit the industry's purposes, so all is not lost.  Even if the industry push for federal control of transmission line siting doesn't happen soon enough, the industry can still manipulate existing law to usurp state authority and run a transmission line right through your living room, whether you like it or not.

Check out this crazy PowerPoint presentation by the Western Governors' Association.  "Searching for a Unified Theory of Transmission and Renewable Energy Development in the West" is apparently governor code for "The Corporations That Stuff our Pockets with Cash Need to Make More $Money$ by Building New Transmission to Transport Renewables From Coast to Coast!"  Take a look at Page 12, "Existing Paradigm for Renewables."  This is the paradigm that makes the most sense, both from a physics and an economic standpoint.  Page 13, "Changing the Paradigm" calls for large centralized generation areas in unpopulated areas connected to the rest of the country through a big network of huge transmission lines.  It's a coast-to-coast blackout in the making and it's going to cost hundreds of billions of dollars -- paid for by you!

When are we going to stop letting corporate money elect the legislators who are supposed to be representing the people? 

Let's do a little math here -- don't worry, it's really got more to do with simple logic than algebra.  New transmission grid to serve "renewables" = additional cost to electric consumers of $220B.  The talking heads tell us that this new grid will make electricity "cheaper."  FERC says their new policy will ensure that people who do not benefit will not pay for it.  Who's going to pay for this grid?  Certainly not less people than are paying for transmission lines now, or it wouldn't be "cheaper."  More people will be paying for this transmission grid.  FERC's definition of "benefit" is going to be so broad that everyone is going to "benefit" and end up paying a lot more for their electricity in order to finance new transmission.

Now, imagine if renewables were developed on a smaller scale and localized to load and didn't require ANY new transmission lines?  Cost for this version of meeting public policy goals = $0.  Benefit to you?  Priceless!

Apparently the utility industry has been sitting around twiddling their thumbs all summer and now they don't have time to file requests for rehearing on Order No. 1000 and comment on transmission incentives all in the same week!

Therefore, FERC has extended the deadline again until September 12.

But that also gives you extra time to get your comments in, so get busy!

That's what a reporter from The State Journal set out to determine last week.  Not surprisingly, the brown-nosers at industry-funded law firm Jackson Kelly said they love the PSC the most. 

The rest of the people in the article, including The Coalition for Reliable Power's Bill Howley and West Virginia Highlands Conservancy's Frank Young, told the truth.

Read the article.

The deadline for filing your comments on FERC's Notice of Inquiry - Promoting Transmission Investment Through Pricing Reform is fast approaching on August 25.

StopPATH WV, Inc. filed comments yesterday.  Now the only thing left for me to do is to encourage you to do the same.  We all know that incentives are what has driven the PATH project and are what motivates them to continue to hang on by their fingertips.  This is your opportunity to have your say!

If you need help writing or filing your comments, check out our FERC Transmission NOI category, or just ask.  If you don't have time or inclination to file extensive comments (yes, I realize I'm a nerdy bean-counter), you can always file shorter comments and/or simply document your support of other comments on the docket (however, this doesn't mean copying them and re-submitting them form letter-style).

Remember the SCC Public Hearing in Virginia back in February?  Nearly every person who got up and spoke during the sessions I attended remarked that PATH was motivated solely by that 14.3% ROE.  Now it's time to quit complaining and take action!

There's only two weeks left!

Has it really been a whole year since I wrote this?  Three years ago, the PATH Companies arrogantly thought they were going to run a power line through the backyards of a bunch of unsuspecting, ignorant hillbillies in West Virginia, have a few laughs, and make a quick pile of cash. Life is full of little surprises, isn't it?

Year four of my own personal little PATH odyssey begins now, and I'm not bored at all.  While my motivation remains the same it has also expanded greatly over the past year.  Although we have scored a bunch of huge victories since last August, it's so not over yet.  The things I have learned could fill a book, no make that several books... that resemble John Grisham novels.  It's a terrifying realization to pick up one of his novels and realize how much the fictional villains resemble real people you can name.  Today's corporate "person" is abysmally corrupt and lacks any sense of the moral code the rest of us live by.  It's all about money and power and control.  And it's right there in front of you, no matter which way you turn your head.

I used to think I'd get my old life back when PATH finally gave up for good.  That's not going to happen.  Once you notice something, it's impossible to un-notice it.  I may end up being a boil on the corporate posterior FOREVER.  The only variable now is... which corporate posterior will I attach myself to?

Tom Johnson, NJ Spotlight's Energy & Environment reporter, quotes analyst Paul Patterson of Glen Rock Associates in this recent article. 

He also captures a great quote from PSEG's recent earnings call.

"Our assessment is that it's difficult in the current market to find projects that meet our threshold for adequate returns," Caroline Dorsa, the company’s chief financial officer told analysts on a conference call. "Some of the returns that we see some of these solar projects clearing are not the kind of returns that we think make senses for shareholders on a risk-adjusted basis."

The utility business is no longer about providing a needed service at just and reasonable rates to benefit consumers.  The main objective has become to provide "adequate returns" to company shareholders.

That's what is behind FERC Order No. 1000, the push for federal control of project siting and current transmission incentives.  FERC is tasked with ensuring that electric rates are just and reasonable, however they have been utterly captured by the industry they are supposed to regulate.

This costs you money every month when you pay your electric bill.  It also expects a sacrifice on the part of those unfortunate individuals who become ground zero for new transmission projects.  And it's being done simply to increase corporate shareholder returns.

Tell FERC what you think.

This just in...  PATH's Memorandum in Support of the Potomac Edison Company's Petition for Judicial Review of the December 20, 2010 Findings and Decision of the Board of Appeals for Frederick County.  Before reading though, click here to set the proper tone and mood for your perusal because it's a sad, sad story.  I just couldn't hold back the tears... of laughter!

It's another PATHetic pity party starring poor, persecuted PATH, and winds up with a rather long-winded legal argument citing a bunch of precedent.  I'm not going to get into that aspect of it.  I'm not a lawyer and I refuse to waste my time looking up all those cases.  The Maryland opposition groups have lawyers for just that purpose.  You should consider slipping them a donation to help with their legal costs.  Visit CAKES or Sugarloaf Conservancy to show your support!

Regarding the pity party though, I simply can't resist having some fun at PATH's expense.  Here are a few quotes starring MISINFORMATION that I know you'll enjoy:

• The Substation is permitted as a special exception in an A zoning district and is part of a larger project to be constructed in Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia that will ultimately improve the reliability of the electric transmission grid in Maryland and the mid-Atlantic region.

Nowhere in this document does PATH mention that the substation, as well as the entire PATH project, is now a moot point because PJM has determined that it is not needed.  They also fail to mention that they have withdrawn their application to construct the project and the substation in the State of Maryland.  PATH will NOT "improve the reliability of the electric transmission grid."  PATH has provided misinformation to the Circuit Court for Frederick County.

• ...opponents, including nearby residents, environmental groups, and activists from  Maryland and out of state, offered subjective,
  emotional, and anecdotal arguments against the Substation and the motives of the Petitioner, and generally in support of a NIMBY position.  "NIMBY" refers to "Not In My Back Yard," a common position taken by certain opponents whereby the opponents do not necessarily protest the specific proposal but, rather, protest the location of the specific proposal as being too close to their own property.

PATH provides no proof that all arguments against its substation were subjective or any of those other things.  This is simply PATH's sweeping characterization of the citizens and provides MISINFORMATION.  (See, we're embarking upon a theme here, you'll see why.)  PATH is motivated by $$$ and they have not proven otherwise.  PATH even stoops to name-calling, something I can't remember the citizens ever stooping to during the hearings.  Congratulations, PATH, I'm sure your mommies are very proud of you!  Regarding PATH's definition of "NIMBY," is that their "expert" opinion or merely their subjective, emotional and anecdotal argument?  I'm thrilled that they have finally given definition to the NIMBY word they love so much in a legal document though.  I promise to make good use of that quote from here on out!

• When authorized by the Maryland Public Service Commission, Petitioner will construct, operate, and maintain PATH in Maryland.

When pigs fly, PATH!  PATH does not even have an application on file, much less any guarantee that if they file an application in the future that the PSC will authorize it.  Awfully presumptuous, aren't we, PATH?  More MISINFORMATION through omission of crucial fact.

• Petitioner is pursuing this judicial review because PATH cannot be built without the Substation.

PATH also cannot be built without an application to the PSC, the inclusion of the project in PJM's RTEP, and at least some semblance of "need" for the project, but don't let that stop you, PATH.  Enjoy your little MISINFORMATION fantasy!

• Petitioner agreed to proceed in good faith with the County's special exception process under a reservation of its rights to assert the pre-emption argument at any time.

Well, what's stopping you... go right ahead, PATH, and assert your "pre-emption argument."  What?  PATH's gun is loaded with blanks because there is no argument, pre-emptive or otherwise, because PATH does not have an application for its project before the MD PSC.  I guess that fact makes this statement MISINFORMATION.

• Prior to the first night of the special exception hearing, well-organized and extremely
  vocal opposition to, and misinformation about, PATH, including the Substation, spread in the
  news media, on the internet, and at political town hall meetings and debates. Also prior to the first night's testimony, the Board visited the Property and walked the Site. In the wake of
  resident outrage fueled by misinformation, and in light of at least one Board member's history of actively opposing projects (see the letter in the Record dated December 8, 2010 from Mr.
  Cannon to the Board), this visit appears to have been a premature death knell for Petitioner's application.

MISINFORMATION, you say?  Well, I disagree.  What fueled the opposition and outrage were THE FACTS that were revealed, not that sugar-coated bucket of MISINFORMATION you tried to spoon-feed to the public.  So, PATH, are you now admitting that we kicked your butt on the PR front?  I'm so happy that you finally agree with me that Charles Ryan Associates failed to perform.  I just knew we'd find common ground eventually!  "Premature death knell?"  It's positively EERIE that the Board's visit to your substation property foretold the eventual removal of the PATH project from PJM's RTEP because there is no need for PATH!  Do you also suppose that the Board called Miss Cleo for advice before their visit?  And all this time I thought Miss Cleo was just pulling my leg in order to swindle me...

• Mr. Reed also testified that the Substation will not have any material adverse impact on
  area roadways. (TR 16-17, Oct. 14, 2010). The Substation will be unmanned, and will require
  four to five regular maintenance visits each month.  Mr. Reed testified that these visits would not generate high volumes of either local or regional motor vehicle traffic along the existing roadway infrastructure.

Oh, that's right, Truescape's MISINFORMATION said the substation is going to float down from the sky and magically appear at the site thereby not generating any adverse impacts on roadways during construction.

• Petitioner also offered the expert testimony of a highly respected and well-credentialed
  real estate appraiser and consultant, Mr. Jay Goldman. Mr. Goldman was very familiar with the Property and the surrounding areas and testified he had driven through the communities, flown over them in a helicopter, studied land records and historical sales, and visited the County's land records office. (TR 438-39, Nov. 13, 2010). With this personal knowledge of the Property and proposed Substation, Mr. Goldman compared the Site to the Quarry Creek development in Charlestown, West Virginia. (TR 440-43, Nov. 13, 2010). Mr. Goldman stated that the Quarry
  Creek development is the most expensive in the area, with the value of most of the 60 to 65 houses exceeding $1 million, and three houses exceeding $5 million. Mr. Goldman testified
  that a large rock quarry and an electrical substation are located at the development's entrance. Moreover, the development is adjacent to the main line of CSX Railroad, (which transports high volumes of coal and chemicals), is intersected by power lines, and backs up to the Charleston landfill. Mr. Goldman also indicated that the development contains a water tower, a cemetery, and at least one gas well.  Mr. Goldman testified that despite these perceived negative influences, the property values for the homes in the  development remained quite high.

Jay Goldman was an embarrassment to the PATH project and the residents of West Virginia who were present.  He presented MISINFORMATION because he's from Charleston, West Virginia, which is at least 6 hours (and many worlds!) away from Frederick County, Maryland.  He turned the citizens of West Virginia into cartoon characters who jump at the chance to live near public housing and city dumps and pay a premium for an unobstructed view of AEP's John Amos coal-fired generating plant.  He also doesn't appear to know the geography of his state, unless the "error" of Charlestown vs. Charleston was made by PATH's counsel.  Apparently Geography wasn't someone's favorite subject.  Charles Town (notice it's two words) is located in Jefferson County in West Virginia's eastern panhandle.  It is an easy 30 minute (or less) drive from Frederick County and it is a place that many from Frederick have previously visited and with which they are familiar.  Charles Town doesn't have any homes overlooking the city dump that sell for more than a million dollars.  Charles Town residents oppose PATH and do not consider it a selling point.  Charleston (notice the different spelling, pronunciation and the fact that it's one word) is located in Kanawha County, WV, in the south central part of the state where out of state corporate interests have laid waste to the environment and where politicians' pockets are stuffed with "donations" from the same corporate interests.  Charles Town often finds itself at odds with Charleston because the populations are so completely opposite in thought and lifestyle.  Or was that whole Charlestown/Charleston thing just a miserably engineered attempt at legal chicanery?

• Of the countless protestants, including representatives of three groups, testifying in
  opposition to the Substation, not a single one was: a civil engineer who had conducted a wetland study; an environmental engineer who had conducted an environmental impact review; an historical expert who had conducted a historical impact analysis; an EMF specialist; or an epidemiologist who had examined  available health impact studies.

That's right, the "countless protestants" weren't paid to spin a specific rendition of "the facts" while PATH's "experts" performed poorly, and even resorted to perjury in some instances.  Being an "expert" does not mean they are incapable of spreading MISINFORMATION, only that they are being paid to do so.

• While the heated emotions and fears of the protestants were palpable and readily appreciated, the opposition's testimony was anecdotal and based on blogs, random  anti-substation websites, and highly  questionable "reports."

PATH provides no proof of this accusation, not even one example is given.  This statement is opinion, based on MISINFORMATION.  Amusingly, in West Virginia, one of PATH's motions to the PSC actually relied on a blog as a source to prove some point that only seemed to fully form in the minds of Randy Palmer and Phil Melick.  Quick, someone call the WAHHHHHmbulance!

• Petitioner refers to the opposition as "protestants" or "opponents" and not "residents" given that a number of those
  testifying in opposition to the Substation do not live in the neighborhood closest to the Property, much less Frederick County or even the State of Maryland (e.g., Patience Wait of West Virginia).

Hahahahah!  It really bothered PATH that much that we attended the Frederick hearings?  Guess what, out of state corporate PATH players?  We're actually WELCOME in Frederick, you're not.  Therefore, in future weak attempts to spread MISINFORMATION, remember that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Very entertaining, PATH!  Now quit spreading MISINFORMATION to the Circuit Court for Frederick County and go away.  It's over, you lost.

We've touched on this over at the Coalition for Reliable Power, but here's another, more recent article that spells out precisely why the need for PATH in its current form has completely evaporated.

Due to dropping demand and increasing demand response, the economic congestion that PATH pointed to as one of the needs for their transmission line has completely evaporated.  Prices in "eastern PJM" (the east coast load pockets) have levelized with prices in "western PJM" (home of all those coal-fired generating plants in West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio).

This means that, in 2014/15, the price of electricity won't be appreciably higher in the eastern parts of the region than in the western parts of the region.  When prices are levelized like this, there is no need to transport "cheap" electricity from western PJM to eastern PJM.  That transfer was "needed" in order to alleviate the transmission congestion "bottle neck," and that was the problem PATH was supposed to solve.  Now that congestion bottle neck no longer exists.  If there's no need to transport power across the region, there's simply no need for PATH.

Remember that crazy congestion costs motion filed by the MD-PSC staff attorney in February that caused the Maryland Chamber of Commerce to file a late petition to intervene right before PATH went belly up and floated downstream?  That specious argument is now completely nullified.

This information isn't new.  The auction mentioned in the article happened three months ago.  There is a new angle presented in the article, however, whereby the new EPA rules and the TrAIL transmission project coming online are also credited for the evaporation of "congestion."  The TrAIL line helped, but the argument was made during the its approval process that demand response and energy efficiency would be able to solve the "congestion" problem without building a new transmission line.  It looks like The Sierra Club and other TrAIL opponents have been proven correct, although saying "I told you so" is a hollow victory in the face of the environmental destruction Allegheny Energy wrought while constructing the line, the burden to landowners that resulted, and the billions of dollars the unneeded TrAIL line is going to cost all PJM ratepayers over the next 70 years, plus.

The EPA rules have had the effect of adding some of the true cost of coal onto electricity prices in western PJM.  Seven gigawatts of coal-fired generation was priced out of the market at the auction.  The article points out that this is a good thing for all of us who like to breathe clean air.  It's a win-win, according to EnergyPulse!

So why is PATH continuing to waste our money appealing the decision of the Frederick County, Maryland, Board of Zoning Appeals against a special exception to construct the Mt. Airy substation?  PATH is trying to preserve the three long-term processes they will need to make a comeback, one of which is the court fight over siting of the substation.

PATH is not coming back in the form we knew it on February 28, 2011.  Whether they will try to "greenwash" it as a project with different goals depends on how stupid they think the state regulatory commissions and the opposition are, and remains to be seen.  We're all still here and we're still on to you, PATH.  It's time to abandon your silly, little project and put your efforts toward doing something constructive for society.  Quit wasting both your own, and our, time and money.  PATH is history.

This article from Ohio caught my eye this morning and reminded me that, not only is the Ohio Consumers Council dissatisfied with FirstEnergy's Energy Efficiency program in that state, but FirstEnergy is proposing an even more useless farce in West Virginia.

What the FirstEnergy talking head doesn't tell the consumer is that they're paying for this program.  Sure, you can buy a CFL light bulb for 50 cents, or get a small rebate on a new appliance, but all FirstEnergy's costs for the program are recovered from ratepayers, including their marketing costs for the program.

As part of their merger settlement in West Virginia, FirstEnergy was required to offer energy efficiency and demand response programs in the state.  Because consumers like you saving electricity cuts into their profit margin, FirstEnergy has proposed an ineffectual, weak energy efficiency program that's going to cost more than its potential savings.  And because out-of-state energy companies view the WV PSC as their champion against the citizens of this state, FirstEnergy expects their proposal to sail through PSC approvals.  Read about the program at Energy Efficient West Virginia's website. 

You will be paying for this program in your "Potomac Edison" bill, but unless you're a commercial/industrial customer who wants to change out the lighting in your business, or a low-income customer who needs a few free lightbulbs or a faucet aerator, you will get absolutely nothing in return for the monthly fee you will be charged for this program.  Why isn't this meager program offered to everyone?  Is FirstEnergy afraid that your electric bill might go down, along with their revenue?

FirstEnergy customers need to take action with the WV PSC to make FirstEnergy's Energy Efficiency program better.  PATH opponents know all about getting involved at the PSC, and we need to share our knowledge with all our neighbors.  We're not going to be asking anyone to intervene this time, merely to participate in public comment.  You PATH opponents know how easy that is (compared to all we've been through over the past 3 years!)

Energy Efficient West Virginia and the Coalition for Reliable Power will be co-hosting a series of public meetings designed to solicit input from FirstEnergy customers around the state beginning this month.  The first meeting will be held at the Martinsburg-Berkeley County Public Library on Tuesday, August 23, beginning at 6:45 p.m.  Come join us and save some money on your "Potomac Edison" bill!  More information can be obtained from The Coalition for Reliable Power or Energy Efficient West Virginia.

Read more about the upcoming meetings, including our meeting agenda, format and attendees, by checking the blog at Coalition for Reliable Power regularly.  If you are tired of constantly rising electric bills, come and find out how and why rates go up and the simple steps you can take to make your electric provider work for you to save money for your business and reduce your residential costs for power.