Alexis Bechtel
Director, PA PUC, Bureau of Consumer Services
Kathy O’Brien
Customer Assistance & Complaints Division Chief
CACD Chief, Call Center Operations and Informal Consumer Complaints
Pennsylvania Public Utility
Commission
Bureau of Consumer Services
September 16, 2015
2
2014 was an anomalous year.

BCS began 2014 with a caseload of 4,200 cases –
unprecedentedly LOW.
o February – the Perfect Storm : polar vortex, variable rates,
consumers unaccustomed to shopping and managing their
commodity rates
o By mid-July the caseload had grown to over 20,000 open cases
(where the normal range would have been about 8,000).


Last year BCS took in approximately 14,000 more cases
than normal (70,000 is normal, in 2014 we took in
84,000).
Last year BCS answered 56,000 more calls than we
normally handle (approx. 180,000 is normal, in 2014 we
answered close to 236,000 calls).
3


BCS has been working on closing that gap, but –
We Need your Help!
Warm Transfer and the related RSI and CURE programs are a way that the companies can help close this
gap and gain/retain customer satisfaction.
o Verizon’s Warm Transfer program: A pilot started in 2009, recently made permanent by Order of the
Commission. As cases are taken in by PUC staff, complainants are offered the option to be
transferred to a select team of Company representatives who are prepared to handle and expedite
the resolution of PUC calls.

2009-2015 only service related case-types

Approximately 98% satisfaction rate
o RSI = Resolution & Settlement Initiative. Launched in late August of 2014, the RSI is a voluntary
program where in the past year companies have voluntarily reached out to contact and resolve over
1,000 of their PUC Informal Consumer Complaints (closed their PUC cases).
o The CURE program (Customer/Utility Resolution Effort) is a pilot program with two gas and electric
utilities (PECO and UGI). Launched in May, 2015, It is similar to the RSI but is not entirely voluntary in
that there are 12 select case types where the complainants must be contacted and results provided
to the BCS to report back to the Commission.

Participating in these programs is a WIN:WIN for all parties involved. It’s quick resolution – less
paperwork for the Company & Commission - and it puts the company back in the good graces of its
customers. You’re helping to fix the problem.
4




Completely voluntary
Approximately 17-20 Electric, Gas, and Water
companies participating
Over 1,000 cases closed between August 2014 to
present
While BCS is not collecting data on attempts,
o Companies are reporting an approximate 12% closure
rate for the select <CURE> case types
o Columbia Gas has been running a similar program for
years very successfully in PA, VA, & MD (not tracked by
the PUC/BCS)
5
How does it work?

When the company receives PUC case information through the Data Exchange
feed
o Company compliance staff reviews and selects cases where they feel they
can satisfy or resolve the issue
o The company contacts the complainant via email or phone
o If resolved, email confirmation of a resolution is sent by both parties to
BCS – OR
o The company representative and complainant can call BCS and leave a
message (together) indicating satisfaction and giving the BCS permission
to close the case
o These messages and/or emails serve as a “certificates of satisfaction” and
allow BCS to close these cases (with a follow-up to the complainant, if
necessary)
o 14 – 21 Day Turnaround
6
Participation in the Pilot: PECO & the UGI Companies
Why are we doing this now?


The Commission was interested in expediting the expansion
of Verizon’s successful Warm Transfer program to aid in
returning caseload to a manageable level.
BCS felt the CURE to be a less technically challenging
alternative and felt it gave the companies more control and
flexibility in handling what are already primarily disgruntled
customers.
7
Differences in the program (vs. RSI):

Formal review and reporting to the Commission at 6-month intervals

Not voluntary for pre-selected case-types
What are the case types? We avoided straight payment related cases and
stuck to cases related to:
1. Storm, weather, outages, and safety related
2. Service related issues (variety)
3. Inability to reach the company for any reason
4. Billing disputes, rate complaints, confusion about bills, competition
related billing explanations, and CAP/customer assistance plan billing
explanations
5. Security deposits (existing customers and/or applicants)
6. Payment Arrangement Requests combined with a dispute
8

994 Customers Eligible

209 Successfully CUREd (21%)

235 Unsuccessful (various reasons) (23%)

524 Not Attempted (53%)

Individual Success Rate
o PECO
20%
o UGI
12%
(through August 31, 2015)
9
10





Thank you to everyone who is participating in
these programs.
We are pleased at the number of companies that
have joined the RSI (voluntary program).
We need more of you to reach out to your
customers and fix what you can.
Our goal is for companies to resolve 25% of their
PUC Consumer Complaints (excluding PARs)
Every closure is a success story for all parties to
the case
(WIN : WIN : WIN)
11
Alexis Bechtel
Director, PA PUC, Bureau of Consumer Services
abechtel@pa.gov
Kathy O’Brien
CACD Chief, Call Center Operations and Informal Consumer Complaints
katobrien@pa.gov
Matt Hrivnak – CACD Chief, Competition and Informal Consumer Complaints
mhrivnak@pa.gov
Dan Romage – Manager - Training, Innovations, Quality, and Systems
dromage@pa.gov
Sasha Oberheim – CURE / RSI / WT Project Leader
soberheim@pa.gov
717-783-1661
12
13
PECO
Customer Utility
Resolution Effort
(CURE)
Benefits of CURE process
 Satisfied customer
 Quick closing /decision from BCS
 More efficient
•
•
•
•
No written report with two year chronology.
No billing statements
No review process prior to sending report
No request for revisions
 Not considered for Justified and/or Infraction
determination
 Win/Win for Customer and Utility
15
Cases Opened May 1, 2015 – September 1, 2015
SUCCESSFUL
Cases
Opened
1074
CURE
Status
Pending # CURE
275
207
UNSUCCESSFUL CURE
Not
CURE
Attempted Customer
Failed
Case
by
Not
Customer Contact Opened
% CURE Company Satisfied Refused Attempts in Error
19.7%
373
105
3
87
24
16
CURE – Customer & Utility Resolution Effort
Cases Opened
CURE Status Pending
Successful CURE
% Successful CURE
Unsuccessful CURE - Not Attempted by Company
Unsuccessful CURE - Customer Not Satisfied
Unsuccessful CURE - Customer Refused
Unsuccessful CURE - Failed Contact Attempts
CURE Case Opened in Error
Unsuccessful CURE - Not Attempted by Company
ON - PAR WITH DISPUTE (#63)
APPLICANT/DEPOSITS - SERVICE IS ON (# 28)
CAP DISPUTE (#67)
BILLING DISPUTES (# 18)
SECURITY DEPOSIT - EXISTING CUSTOMER (# 72)
SCHED DELAYS, PERSONNEL, DAMAGES (# 58)
SERVICE (CO. FACILITIES) (# 48)
EXPERIENCING A STORM/OUTAGE (# 02)
ACCESS / DIFFICULTY CONTACTING CO (#17)
833
187
146
18%
317
87
3
73
20
317
106
70
53
46
17
9
8
5
3
17
23%
Successful
of those
completed
146/646
High likelihood
that 87% of
those not
attempted are
credit related
UGI CURE
Chris Ann Rossi
Manager, Customer Services
Rose Williams
Supervisor, Regulatory Compliance
Ann Blaskiewicz
Customer Care Analyst and CURE Lead
18
Background
• Prior to pilot, UGI was not largely involved
with RSI
• Started CURE pilot at UGI Gas
• Ramped up to include 3 of the 4 UGI
companies on same CIS and Web Exchange
• Invested in 1 full time FTE to support project
• Initially contacted via call, added email
19
19
UGI Statistics
20
20
Current Status
21
21
What’s Next
•
•
•
•
Continue to Analyze Improvement Areas
Monitor Progress
Discuss Key Findings
Offer Suggestions for Improvements
22
22
Questions?
23
23