Local business wins; the Office of Governmental Accountability wins appeal against Department of Labor
18 JUNE 2014 | By: Realgy, LLC
One year ago in May 2013, the Office of Governmental Accountability (OGA) issued their finding which required the Connecticut Department of Labor (DOL) to provide certain documents related to their ongoing investigation as requested by Realgy. The DOL appealed that decision and the appellate court upheld OGA’s decision. The result; DOL cannot claim an exemption to releasing the information.
Realgy, LLC, a West Hartford business for 13 years, filed a Freedom of Information Request (FOIA), which is handled under the Office of Governmental Accountability in Connecticut. Michael Vrtis, President of Realgy explained “We filed a freedom of information request to hold DOL to the same standard as they have held us and seek to have information released that will show what we believe to be an abuse of power by DOL during this investigation.”
DOL filed their appeal against releasing this information as it would harm their ability to investigate Realgy stating “…that every investigation initiated is criminal in nature.” In addition, DOL cited that Realgy’s “…request for documents merely is an effort to hinder the DOL’s pending investigation and to harass the wage agent assigned to the investigation.”
However, the appellate court upheld the OGA’s finding that found that DOL had spent 4 years on the investigation, had not communicated with Realgy in over a year, and that DOL failed to prove that there is any consideration of legal action against Realgy.
Vrtis stated, “We feel grateful to OGA for wading through DOL’s defense and appeal of this investigation.” Vrtis continued, “with this appeal resolved, the original OGA’s finding are upheld and DOL will be held to the same standard as every business in Connecticut. I look forward to receiving the information and making it public.”
Realgy was only a 3rd party to this appeal as it was DOL who appealed OGA’s ruling. In essence;
The FOIC (Freedom of Information Commission) initially ruled Realgy and the public did have that right and DOL should turn over the documents. DOL sued the FOIC ruling they didn’t. The Superior Court decided they did.
This decision is important as it means the DOL has to be held accountable as is every business in Connecticut and turn over the documents they collect in the course of their business. They cannot claim that an open investigation gives them protection against such requests. DOL has no time constraints on an investigation, therefore, and has been able to shield collected information for years.
Vrtis explained “the FOIA request has been the only means available to Realgy to have DOL be held accountable for the ongoing investigation.” All FOIA requests involve a company requesting information from a governmental agency. The Office of Government Accountability houses the FOIC; additional information is at http://www.ct.gov/foi. The FOIA process required Realgy to request specific information from DOL through the FOIC. The FOIC rules on Realgy’s request for information and the resulting decision requires DOL to release the requested information.
“For over four years the DOL has investigated Realgy for violations of labor laws which can be a criminal matter. Four years for investigating one complaint from one employee who was only with Realgy for one year. Such an open investigation can be intimidating and as such, no other governmental or politician will address it until the conclusion of the investigation,” stated Vrtis.
Vrtis continued, “The Office of Government Accountability and, in particular, the Freedom of Information Commission are valuable entities. Without having to hire an attorney, Realgy can be heard by an impartial panel that has the power to order DOL to produce the records and be held accountable for their investigation. I am impressed by the hard work of this impartial panel to balance the power of governmental agencies against the need for business to protect themselves from abuse of that power.”
Contact:
Realgy, LLC
Michael Vrtis
675 Oakwood Avenue
West Hartford, CT
860-233-2270
www.realgyenergyservices.com
Michigan Gas Costs—set to increase dramatically
With Consumers Energy approval for their “extraordinary rate cost recovery” the other Michigan utilities have quickly followed. Consumers’ June cost is $5.597, compared to Realgy’s price at $5.240 or a savings of $0.357/MCF. Consumers Energy has been approved to charge this cost until April 2015.
Recent filing to the MPSC discloses the following:
DTE/MichCon:
The current price in June is $4.24/MCF. In their U-17332 filings it looks like they are requesting an increase to $5.32 effective August 1.
MGU:
The current price in June is $4.71/MCF. In their U-17331 filings it looks like they are requesting and have been approved for an increase to $5.278 effective the first cycle following the date of the order, June 6.
SEMCO:
The current price in June is $4.62/MCF. In their U-17333 filings it looks like they are requesting an increase to $5.7525 effective July 1.
The full documents are available at: www.dleg.state.mi.us/mpsc/orders/filings
Realgy Energy Services is significantly less than the utility service. Additional information is available at; www.realgyenergyservices/michigan
PJM Backs Duke’s $9.8M ‘Stranded Gas’ Claim
And now the lawsuits over winter’s Polar Vortex 2014 begin. Much like this winter (coldest in 22 years), this is a unique circumstance and would be record-setting.
The players:
PJM—the regional authority that calls on power generators to meet expected and actual electric (power) demand (PJM could represent any utility that was affected).
Duke—owns generation plants (this could be any energy marketer serving customers).
Duke Lee Energy Facility (Source: Bill Spindler, SouthPoleStation.com)
FERC—the federal government overseeing wholesale interstate markets (this of as the referee).
Like all power suppliers when the utility (in this case PJM) called for more power to meet the record demand for electricity (natural gas) the generators had to respond. Duke went out and bought natural gas to generate the electricity but didn’t get paid enough from the electricity (or reselling the natural gas) to cover its cost (plus profit). Therefore, it wants to recover the cost from PJM (think all of us).
Duke is not unique. Every utility did this to every supplier during this winter. Whether it was gas or electric, it worked the same. The utility called for more and the marketers had to respond.
The idea that we (Realgy) could go back to one of the utilities that requested more gas/electricity such as NICOR, Citizens, COMED, Consumers, etc. and say that you asked us to bring more but we didn’t get paid enough so please make up the difference—well it’s laughable. However, Duke thinks it’s not!
Realgy Energy Services is an energy marketer of natural gas and electricity in Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. We provide direct service without a utility mark-up behind 12 utilities. To learn how much we can save you and the benefits of Customer Choice please see www.realgyenergyservices.com.
Read the whole ROT Insider article, “PJM Backs Duke’s $9.8M ‘Stranded Gas’ Claim”
Illinois continues to use legislation to pursue energy policy
Illinois has current legislation on renewal energy that sets aside a percentage of supply; that is, a percentage each year of the total energy used in Illinois must come from renewable (wind or solar) generation sources. However, the spirit of this program relies on the utilities passing through the costs of acquiring the renewable energy to their customers. Customer Choice, municipal aggregation, and the IPA itself changed how the utility acquires power for their customers (which is dwindling due to choice and municipalization). Therefore the current renewable legislation’s intent has been blunted.
This effort seems to be another bite of the same apple. Renewable energy should be supported by open and competitive process and we are heartened to see that this legislation will be overseen by the ICC. Past legislative efforts have bypassed the ICC’s oversight and expertise in favor of the utilities (real-time metering) or municipalization (allowing towns to aggregate energy purchases).
Realgy owns 120 kw of solar energy in Illinois and invests annually in the creation of new renewable solar projects.
Read the whole Crain’s Chicago Business article, “Here comes the sun: Rooftop solar panels get jump-start in Illinois”.
Chicago homeowners could get ZAPPED
Electric prices need not be confusing. The primary reason we have regulated utilities is for efficiency, no duplicate wires or pipes. Offering electric choice does not change this. Electric prices have always been controlled by rather confusing processes called tariffs (akin to IRS taxes) because it was, and is a regulated monopoly. THE REGULATORS are in charge of the process; utilities must prove they spent money according to the tariff so they can get it repaid. Customer choice does not change this relationship between regulators and the utility; it just adds a new player—the retail energy supplier.
Having energy choice need not confuse customers. The regulators need to continue balancing customer choice against their desire to have a regulated market without innovation or price volatility.
Realgy believes in open competition and easily understood explanations of energy offers. Realgy offers energy prices that show a savings compared to the utility, offers fixed pricing during seasons, and offers to beat or match any competitor’s offer.
Check out our current prices that will show you our price as compared to the utility for every market we serve.
Read the whole Chicago Business article, “Emanuel’s power pact could zap Chicago homeowners”.
“Bait And Switch” Leads to Prison Sentence
Manufacturing companies once practiced this technique of promising one product while delivering something cheaper. In this day and age, this kind of activity is a crime in any business.
This may act as a wake-up call, a “coming of age” issue for the energy industry. Previously there were few energy suppliers and most trusted their own employees to be transparent and honest. The proliferation of energy suppliers combined with the use of third parties to sell has the unfortunate effect of increasing the chances of such dishonesty and greed.
I am glad to see that it was dealt with in a severe manner because unscrupulous practices will continue if not caught and prosecuted.
Energy supply services are unique amongst most other businesses in that regulatory protection as well as consumer protection helps guard against abuses.
Read the full Retail Energy article, “SHOCK: Broker Agent’s Electricity Rate ‘Bait And Switch’ Leads to Prison Sentence”
New Ideas in Lighting Get Closer to Market
So for the last 100 years humans have had two types of light sources: natural daylight and incandescent light from the ubiquitous light bulb (there has been only one type).
Today we still have natural daylight and we still have the light bulb, but we now have choices about the light bulb!
The Finally Light Bulb Company Debuts First Ever Acandescent(TM) Light Bulb. Credit: Finally Light Bulb Company
Bowing to efficiency, the US Government (along with other governments) has banned the sale of the original incandescent light bulb technology.
In its place are technologies that provide light and do so much more efficiently but the light “quality” is a little different (we will all learn about the light spectrum). Some people are complaining about this change in “quality.” We will get over it in due course.
Replacing something so commonplace will, of course, be met with resistance; consider how energy choice was first received! But this innovation and the accompanying options will be exciting and beneficial.
This Times article highlights two new light bulbs! Think about that; after 100 years of only one kind of light bulb, we will now have some five different competing technologies all to do the same thing…only better.
Long live change.
Realgy Energy Service is bringing change; we recently opened up electric choice to MidAmerican Electric in Illinois. We are the first energy marketer authorized to serve this utility market.
Read the whole NY Times article “New Ideas in Lighting Get Closer to Market”
COMED parent company to pay $6,800,000,000 for East Coast utility
As the late Harry Caray, iconic baseball announcer, might say, “Holy Cow!”.
Now we see that Exelon, the corporate holding company which owns the local utilities of Baltimore Gas & Electric and COMED, seeks ownership of the utilities around Washington, D.C. and Philadelphia. This would more than double the customers they serve in COMED.
Utility acquisitions that are not in relatively close proximity to their current customers would appear to offer no benefits to either Exelon or Pepco customers.
This acquisition will be closely scrutinized and I am sure will it will be opposed by several groups.
Exelon previous proposed the acquisition of a large utility group in New Jersey from which they ultimately withdrew due to opposing parties.
I look forward to hearing the rationale of how each local utility (BG&E, COMED, Pepco, and Atlantic City Electric) justifies the way each utilities’ customers are better served by having a larger corporation in charge of it.
Read the whole Crain’s Chicago Business Article “$6.8 billion Pepco buy makes Exelon an East Coast force”
Michigan Cost Recovery is approved
Michigan Cost Recovery is approved; June billing is approved up to $5.8092 /Mcf
In a contested case, Consumers Energy Company (Consumers) has been approved to recover the costs associated with this winter’s extreme cold including the effect of the polar vortex.
Starting in June 2014, Consumers, will be allowed to recover their winter costs, which exceed $185,000,000.
The cost recovery was contested because Michigan utilities are, under normal conditions, required to submit their costs only once a year each December to cover their costs for the coming year. However, the winter costs accelerated sharply in January, February, and March 2014. Instead of sitting on these costs and paying interest, Consumers requested the Michigan Public Utility Commission (MPSC) to approve the recovery of these costs due to the extraordinary amount that would have to be carried for 12 months. Consumers, like all Michigan utilities, borrows money and repays it, thereby paying interest until the loan is repaid.
With this decision settled, it is expected that the other Michigan utilities will submit their winter costs and begin recovering them rather than waiting until next year and thereby increasing the cost to be recovered.
The Commission decision in whole is below;
As in banking, too big to fail means failure for utilities.
The largest public bankruptcy, the largest private equity buyout funny how those two usually don’t go together.
This is perhaps a tale of how “fracking” and perhaps how a viewpoint that natural gas would continue to increase above the rate of inflation; both were shortsighted.
Read the whole New York Times article, Big Texas Utility Files for Bankruptcy