Maine's Office of Public Advocate filed a response Friday to the Public Utility Commission's investigation into Central Maine Power's metering, billing and customer relations issues, requesting a broader investigation into the issue.
State public advocate Barry Hobbins said the OPA filed the response to "aggressively, on the part of the Maine ratepayers, express to the [PUC] the absolute necessity for their to be a full-fledged investigation of the whole process involving the metering, billing and customer service."
Hobbins said this response is two-fold: First, to strongly urge the PUC to open up an investigation immediately, and second, to request that there be public hearings if an investigation is indeed opened up.
"This audit was something that we had no input but, as the [OPA], we had no input," Hobbins said. "We had one conversation with [auditing company Liberty Consulting Group]."
The OPA has retained Portland-based consulting firm BerryDunn, per Hobbins, to essentially review and critique the audit — to audit the audit. He said the firm has already made initial reactions and points of view, which he believes point to critical aspects of the process's integrity and validity.
"It should've been done before, we were denied the opportunity – they denied my request for a full investigation," Hobbins said, "and so know we're stuck with a situation where we will end up with another six months – it could end up with nine months – of a full-fledged, I hope, investigation."
It's either that, Hobbins said, or there will be so many questions from ratepayers that go unanswered. He said the OPA has received hundreds of calls and that issues still remain.
According to comments filed by the OPA, the office and its consultant identified the following questions and issues while reviewing Liberty's PUC-commissioned audit report of CMP:
- Unclear how many customers were affected by anomalies in several CMP meters, which could have resulted in inaccurate billing
- No explanation for testing methodology or assumptions used for random sampling
- Unclear why 24 of 430 randomly selected sample billing accounts used in comparison test were not replaced when it was discovered they were not billed during test period
- No discussion as to why some "insignificant" variances in overall conclusion noted for reflecting billing errors weren't elaborated upon
- Unclear whether original 2,290 costumers with high bill complaints were ever investigated or if specific billing issues were determined or resolved
In addition, the OPA and BerryDunn listed the following concerns with CMP's "poor preparation" in the lead-up to its SmartCare system rollout go-live date:
- Reduction of data validation efforts, possibly indicating transfer of inaccurate data from old to new system
- Unclear if exceptions regarding parallel testing overlapping with code changes were presented to stakeholders before go-live
In a letter from June 11 addressed to PUC Administrative Director Harry Lanphear, the OPA requested three points:
- First, allowing the OPA access to auditors to understand how work is being conducted by Liberty, the audit group, and ability to propose questions
- Second, allowing participation in periodic review to help allay customer concerns about the cost of the audit
- Third, providing past communications with costumers regarding billing issues the OPA felt may be of help to Liberty during its audit
Lanphear said Friday he couldn't comment until the document was considered by the full commission, which was expected to happen Tuesday.
"I can say we have received their document and will give it full consideration and make a decision on Tuesday," Lanphear said.
Catharine Hartnett, CMP's manager of corporate communications, released the following statement regarding the OPA comments:
"Once the PUC determines whether and how the current summary investigation should proceed, assuming it opts to continue an investigation, we would support that it be conducted apart from the rate case as it would allow a more efficient way to receive information requests and process comments and responses."
Hobbins said he and the OPA do not want this particular audit issue to be involved in the ongoing rate increase case that has been asked and proposed for by CMP. He said they want it as a separate, standalone issue, not whitewashed into the rate case and somehow skewed.
"It's very important not to sidestep this issue. We need to confront it," Hobbins said. "If [CMP] had done this from the beginning instead of hiding the ball, we would not be in this situation. Unfortunately, I'm willing to work with them, but they have never really acknowledged they had issues."
