Go to The Daily Review mobile
Utility shutoffs need tougher PUC scrutiny
Font size: [A] [A] [A]
e-mail this
share thisA settlement by which PPL Electric Utilities will pay about $500,000, for violating state rules in shutting off the power of a woman who later died in a fire, is fine as far as it goes.
Neither the PUC nor the state Legislature should let the matter rest there, however. Rather, they should use the case as a catalyst to study the entire regulatory regimen regarding utility shut-offs, with an eye toward not just safety, but fairness to consumers.
PPL admitted no wrongdoing as part of the settlement. But a PUC investigation leading to that settlement found that the company had violated the Public Utility Code and commission regulations regarding termination notices, payment arrangements, medical certification, restoration of service and dispute rights.
After her service was terminated in 2008, Cynthia Glassman of Manheim Twp., Lancaster County, paid the balance by check. But a PPL staffer had failed to advise her of a late fee and the company did not restore service. A technician placed a lock on a faulty meter base that prevented its repair, and did not advise the customer. Perhaps worst of all, a company representative ignored Ms. Glassman's assertion that she suffered from a medical condition which, by state regulation, would have required the restoration of her service.
PPL agreed to a $50,000 fine and to pay $400,000 into Operation HELP, its own program to help low-income customers pay their bills. PPL will get back that money through payments from the fund, making the payment a scant deterrent.
Since the incident, PPL has upgraded customer-service training and revised its own protocols for service terminations. The company said those terminations are down by about 30 percent this year.
The PUC and the Legislature should use the Glassman case to examine the heavy hand that utilities are allowed to bring against consumers, even when those utilities comply with the rules. They are allowed not simply to collect overdue bills, but to add draconian penalties and to delay the restoration of service for as long as five days after payment, for example.
PPL does not serve Bradford County, but utility shutoffs here have raised concerns in the past.
PUC enforcement after rules are violated by utilities is appropriate. But the objective should be to make sure those rules are fair in the first place.
Be the first to comment on this article!