THE SQUEAKY WHEEL, THE IRRITATING PEBBLE - OR What I learned from Challenging Bangor Hydro at the Maine Public Utility Commission

It requires Patience, Persistence and a big chunk of a “P.O-ed” attitude to challenge Bangor Hydro Electric Company (BHE). The same can be said when dealing with the Maine Public Utilities Company (MPUC).

This past Friday, May 20th, Case # 2010-377 was decided by the MPUC Board of Commissioners. Finally I was going to see and be in the presence of “the players” – or so I thought. The MPUC announcement, stating the meeting would begin at 9am at the Commission’s office in Hallowell, advised the parties need not attend and no testimony would be heard. Still, I expected the major players, who have argued and written endlessly for five and one-half months, would want to be there to hear the positions and decisions of the three Commissioners. I was wrong.

Newly-appointed Chairman Thomas Welsh attended via telephone; his coughing at the end of his statements verified the state of his immediate health. However, Commissioners David Littel and Vendean Vafiades were seated at the massive conference table, as were three members of what appeared to be MPUC staff. Two men sat in the area designated for observers. Two other women, who appeared to have official responsibilities, were seated at either the conference table or a table to the side. There was no indication of attendance by BHE, the Hearing Examiner, the Office of Public Advocate (OPA), or others who have participated lo these many months.

Because of weather and my tradition of getting lost the first time traveling to a new location, I didn’t arrive until 9:20am – just in time to hear Commissioner Vafiades reference Intervenor Gagnon (!). Glad I got there when I did. Since Commissioner Littel had already issued his primary positions, I have no idea if he, too, might have mentioned my initial letter (petition), Brief or Response to the Hearing Examiner’s Report. However, I was certainly gratified to hear Commissioner Vafiades affirm the position I have taken all along regarding the junk mail appearance of BHE’s mailed “notification.”

It was also rewarding to hear Chairman Welsh state his concern that some of the debts BHE is identifying as Stranded Costs (which BHE believes ratepayers should pay off through increasing rates) may not legally qualify as Stranded Costs. His position was that some debts may have occurred because of the restructuring BHE went through following its sale to Emera Corporation. He did not appear to feel subsequent debts following the sale qualified as Stranded Costs, a position Intervener Helen Patterson has been arguing during this case and others involving BHE and Central Maine Power, which also went through restructuring after selling out to Iberdrola USA. Therefore it was rewarding to hear Chairman Welsh indicate he wants the MPUC to explore and review that issue at a future unspecified time.

A major issue all along has been BHE’s position that “the remaining life of Bangor Hydro’s stranded costs is ...at least twenty (years)” and that a “conservative” rate of 8.5% should be attached to BHE’s Return of Equity (ROE) based on BHE’s calculations and methodology. The MPUC’s Hearing Examiner (and staff) had developed calculations and methodology which supported only a 7.04% ROE.

Each Commissioner weighed in with Littel leaning toward a 7.5% rate. Both Vafiades and Welsh leaned toward a 7.35% ROE and 7.35% was the final decision. During a conversation with Commissioner Vafiades following the meeting I learned the 7.35% rate will be applicable to the next three years (meaning ratepayers should not be faced with an increasing rate each of the three years of this “contract.”). Because of this rate being fixed for three years, the Stranded Cost recovery period will probably be extended to nine years instead of the six to seven projected in the Examiner’s Report. Overall, nine years is better than twenty and 7.35% is better than 8.5%.

It was also rewarding to hear Commissioner Vafiades tell me that she had read all of my submissions as well as the attachments.

There were many lessons this ratepayer/taxpayer/voter learned over this past five-month journey.

1. One individual can (and should) speak up when events that seem so automatic are wrong on their face. The notification form mailed by BHE, or their designee, back in December – or whenever, who knows when there is no mailing date stamped on the address portion on written on the enclosed message, carried no identification of the sender. From all appearances it was junk mail. If the intent was (should be) to provide proper advance notification to ratepayers and allow (encourage) individuals to petition in support or opposition, recipients need to recognize the mailing as something to open and read.

2. Petitioning the MPUC must follow strict protocol – written letters must be mailed or faxed to the MPUC Administrative Director with copies to the utility (in this case, BHE). Moreover, these "petitions" must be submitted by a specified date, even if the BHE notification doesn’t provide the date in its notification. Therefore, individuals must act swiftly upon receiving any notification.

3. The petitions must challenge specific actions with specific reason(s). In my petition it was (primarily) the lack of BHE identification as the sender and (the consequent) appearance of junk mail. Other specifics that could be used are: Maine is the 9th poorest state in the nation with electricity costs the 12th highest, the negative impact on a significant portion of ratepayers living on fixed incomes and the consequential impact of higher heating costs, etc. Just stating BHE rates are already too high or “I can’t afford BHE’s charges as it is,” won’t gain the ratepayer admission to the “Intervener Classification” which is the objective. Unless one obtains the status of a bona fide (admitted) Intervener one is fluff in the wind.

4. While the Maine OPA is charged with the responsibility of arguing on behalf of the public, the ratepayers, it doesn’t. You have to take on the responsibility and the work to argue for yourself, your issue(s), and your involvement. That means writing and faxing whatever documents you want to become a part of the case record. Emails don’t become a part of the record and disappear into the nether world, even though a lot of communication goes on via emails. No one will tell you this outright, but it is.

5. The case process goes on and on and there will be times when you want to chuck the whole thing. There will be times when you will feel even the MPUC staff want you to go away. They can be very dismissive and disregarding. It shouldn’t be that way, but it is. Individuals acting alone simply do not carry the weight of a massive corporation, especially when that corporation is armed with lots of attorneys and has paid staff to do the letter or document research and writing.
HOWEVER, none of those people is going to come forward and pay your bills, advocate for what you believe is right – or against what you believe is wrong.

It isn’t easy, however if you don’t speak up big corporations and government will do all the speaking and they will not be speaking for your interests. The battleground for your freedom to stand up and speak may have been won on foreign lands but you have to fight here at home to hold on to it.

One way to find fellow Interveners, once you have filed your petition – with your email address included, is to read all of the names of the people who will be receiving email communications from the MPUC. That is how Intervener Patterson and I connected and the result was more effective for each of us.

The PUBLIC must take the initiative, must speak up, must take an active role in controlling runaway energy costs here in Maine. Case 2010-377 provided this writer with the opportunity of being a student in MPUC 101. It will not be the last class in which I will enroll. Here is hoping I see a larger enrollment the next time.