AUTOCAM Chevrolet

I am responding to your letter with Complaint ID number [redacted] regarding the complaint of [redacted] .As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”)Columbia's business practices are governed by its “Rates and Rules for Furnishing Gas Service” (the “Tariff”), as approved by the CommissionMoreover, the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulations, as well as statutes that the Commission administers.In researching complaint [redacted] , Columbia’s records indicate that this customer has been enrolled in the Zipcheck (Direct E-Bill) process since September 24, 2012.On May 15, 2017, Mr [redacted] called the Columbia Gas Customer Care Center and spoke with a customer service representative regarding a perceived error in the due date on his online bill statement from Direct E-BillDuring that conversation, his concern was that his email statement shows that the stated due date is approximately two weeks following the withdrawal date on his bill statement.It should be noted that the PUC has already considered and rejected the issues raised by Mr [redacted] in the context of a Formal Complaint proceeding at the CommissionIn Cavanaugh vColumbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc(Docket NoC-00982033), the Commission concluded that that Columbia did not violate either its tariff or the Commission’s regulations by collecting Zipcheck payments approximately ten (10) days after the bills were mailed instead of the twenty (20)-day period set forth in its tariffFurthermore, in dismissing the Cavanaugh complaint, the Commission stated “we hasten to add that the Zipcheck program is voluntary and is offered as a convenience to the customerThe Complainant has the option at any time to discontinue participation in the Zipcheck program.”While the PUC dismissed the Cavanaugh complaint, the Commission did direct Columbia to amend its Zipcheck promotional and enrollment materials in collaboration with the PUC’s Bureau of Consumer ServicesI am enclosing a sample of the revised brochure that was the result of that collaborative effortAs you will see, enrollees in Zipcheck/Direct e-Bill are adequately advised about the timing of billing and payment, and they specifically acknowledge that “payments will be deducted from my account approximately days after the bill is mailed, which is earlier than the 20-day ‘due date’ used for payments that are mailed to the company or delivered to an authorized payment agent” when they enroll.If Mr [redacted] would like to cancel his Zipcheck/Direct e-Bill enrollment, he can contact the Company at ###-###-#### and request to be removed or visit our website’s Direct Link at https://www.columbiagaspa.com/billing-payment-options/paperless-billing and initiate the removal.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Sarah B [redacted] at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Sarah B [redacted]

I am responding to your letter dated July 27, regarding the complaint of [redacted] .As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”) Columbia's business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulations, including those that are related to the processing of energy grants and customer payments.On February 4, 2014, Columbia posted a $Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (“LIHEAP”) cash grant payment to the account of [redacted] at the address of [redacted] ***, based on an erroneous electronic file submitted by the Department of Human Services (DHS), formerly the Department of Public Welfare (DPW) with [redacted] ’s account number.On February 11, 2014, Columbia issued [redacted] a bill in the amount of $98.90, which included the usage of thermsA line item titled “Energy Assistance Grant - $100” appeared on the bill, which thus reflected a credit account balance in the amount of $and no payment dueSubsequently, in June of 2015, Columbia discovered that the account number provided by DHS for the LIHEAP cash grant that was applied on February 4, was incorrectAs a consequence, the $LIHEAP grant was inadvertently credited to [redacted] ’s account even though he was not eligible to receive that grant.To correct that error, on June 8, 2015, Columbia debited [redacted] ’s account in the amount of $100, and his next bill on June 12, 2015, included a line item titled “Energy Assistance Grant +$100.”Columbia is legally prohibited from providing LIHEAP grants to those who are not income-eligible to receive such assistanceTherefore, Columbia cannot lawfully permit the erroneous $credit to remain on [redacted] ’s accountMoreover, by law, Columbia must charge rates that have been approved by the PUCThe Company cannot charge preferential rates that are not authorized by the CommissionTherefore, it would be unlawful for the Company to forego collection of the $that has now been charged to [redacted] to correct the prior errorWhat Ms [redacted] may be viewing as the Company’s intransigence or unreasonableness is really Columbia’s adherence to legal standards with which it must comply.Columbia does recognize that the error was not the fault of the customer and that this customer is an excellent-paying customer [redacted] ’s account was delayed for twobilling cycles, allowing the customer time to contact the office and make amicable arrangements to pay the $debited on the accountColumbia offered arrangements to the customer to pay the balance of the billing over several months, which would include the current bill charges plus an additional $payment each month until the outstanding balance has been paid.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B***

As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”)Columbia's business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulationsMoreover, Columbia must comply with U.SDepartment of Transportation (“DOT”) safety regulations.In researching the complaint, Columbia’s records indicate that on July 5, 2011, the Company turned gas service off at [redacted] in Charleroi, PA at the meter valve for non-payment under previous customer’s nameDuring a Cold Weather Survey on November 12, 2011, the company determined that the property was vacant.Commission safety regulations require that dormant services be physically disconnected where there the prospect of future use is unlikelyAccordingly, the Company generated an order on July 29, to remove the inactive meter and abandon the service line, which was scheduled for August 2, The Company removed the inactive meter from the property on August 2, 2015.On October 25, 2016, Renita [redacted] called the Company to obtain information on new serviceSince the premises had been physically disconnected in 2015, Mr [redacted] ’s inquiry was referred to the Company’s New Business Team, which handles requests for gas service at locations where service is not currently being providedThe New Business Team took an order to drop off a meter setting (“meter set”) to the property, with instructions to have a new service line installed by a properly certified plumber, in accordance with DOT gas safety regulationsOn October 27, 2016, the Company dropped off the meter set (comprised of prefabricated piping, a meter bar, and connections to hang a meter) at [redacted] in Charleroi.The Company received a call on November 16, from a gentleman named EdwinBarrett about the next step to start service at [redacted] He was transferred to theNew Business team and was advised that contact would be made with the customer who wouldbe billedThe Company’s New Business team called Ms [redacted] on December 5, 2016, and lefta voice message to call the Company when she was ready to have the meter set.On December 6, 2016, Ms [redacted] contacted the Company’s New Business team,stating she already had a meterThe New Business team scheduled an order to set the meteron December 8, 2015, since the Company’s system showed there was no meter at the address.Ms [redacted] called the Company’s Customer Care Center on December 7, 2016, and wasadvised that December 8, 2016, was the scheduled date to have the meter setMs [redacted] advised that she was not able to be presentColumbia advised Ms [redacted] that she did not needto be present and that service could be initiated as long as there was a DOT OperatorQualification Card at the premises for to demonstrate that her contractor was properly qualified.At 12:PM on December 8, 2016, workers from the Company went to [redacted] to set the meter, but they were unable to complete the order because there was noDOT Operator Qualification Card on siteA notification card was left for Ms [redacted] , withinstructions about rescheduling the setting of her meter.On Friday, December 9, 2016, the Company received an email from Ms [redacted] stating”I WAS VERBALLY ASSURED THAT THE METER WOULD BE INSTALLED ON 12-8-ANDWOULD NOT HAVE TO BE AT THE HOUSENOW 12-9, I GET A VM FROM COLUMBIA GASTHAT THEY ARE NOT INSTALLING METER DUE TO NO PAPERWORK AT THE HOUSEICALLED SERVICE TIMES TO THE NEW BUS DEPT AND REQUESTED TO SPEAK TO ASUPRMY PIPES R GOING TO FREEZE AND I CANNOT BRING MY YR OLD MOTHERHOME FROM THE HOSPITLAL FROM SUFFERING FROM A STROKE BECAUSE I HAVE NOHEAT YETCOLUMBIA IS IGNORING MY CALLS AND NOT DOING THEIR JOB, INADDITION, I DO NOT WANT COLUMBIA FOR MY GAS CARRIER.” The Company respondedwith an email to Ms [redacted] assuring her that her email was forwarded to a supervisor, and arequest was placed to have a supervisor call herThe New Business Team also emailed Ms[redacted] that day reiterating the need for a DOT Operator Qualification Card to be on site whenthe Company is there to set the meter.On Monday, December 12, 2016, a New Business team supervisor sent an email to thelocal field operations leader to drop off a blank DOT Operator Qualification Card at the property,so that Ms [redacted] ’s plumber could provide the necessary information to establish his DOToperator qualificationThe supervisor also left a message for Ms [redacted] explaining that themeter cannot be set at the property without the card being filled outMs [redacted] called theCompany’s New Business team and spoke with the supervisorThe supervisor scheduled anorder to have the meter set that dayThe Company’s technician went to [redacted] toset the meter, but there was not a DOT Operator Qualification Card, so the meter was not set.The Company’s New Business team attempted to contact Ms [redacted] on January 11,and left a voice mail to explain again the requirement of having a DOT OperatorQualification Card at the property and asked her to call the Company to reschedule an order toset the meterThe New Business team member left a phone number and extension to reach theteam member.Regarding Ms [redacted] ’s interest in having a different natural gas carrier, I have included a list of alternative natural gas suppliers,which can also be accessed at www.columbiagaspa.com/natural-gas-service/choice-program/approved-suppliersThe Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission also has information at www.pagasswitch.com.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B [redacted] at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Russell B***

January 16, [redacted] The Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania Holiday Drive, StePittsburgh, PA Re: Revdex.com ID No [redacted] Dear Ms [redacted] : I am responding to your letter dated December 21, regarding Revdex.com Complaint ID No [redacted] Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”)Columbia's business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulationsPivotal Home Solutions is a company that sells warranty service plans for in-house gas lines, water lines, and sewage lines The ESP Service Plan, mentioned in the consumer’s complaint, is one of those plansColumbia is not affiliated with Pivotal Home SolutionsColumbia’s only involvement in this matter is that it provides billing services for Pivotal Home Solutions as a convenience to Columbia customers who purchase warranty service plans from Pivotal Home SolutionsColumbia has no specific knowledge of warranty plans or the individual services provided by Pivotal Home Solutions On November 19, 2015, the customer contacted Columbia questioning the Optional Service Charge of $ Columbia’s customer service representative advised her that the Optional Service Charge is the warranty service plan the customer purchased from the third-party company, Pivotal Home Solutions The customer service representative further advised that Columbia is not affiliated with Pivotal Home Solutions and that Columbia simply provides billing services for the third-party as a convenience to Columbia customers who purchase the warranty plans The customer requested more specific information on her service plan and asked if she could be billed separately Columbia referred the customer to Pivotal Home Solutions for an explanation of the charge and to discuss separate billing Upon receipt of the Revdex.com Complaint ID No[redacted] , Columbia contacted Pivotal Home Solutions Pivotal Home Solutions informed Columbia that on December 21, 2017, the warranty service plan was canceled by the customerThe customer’s bill will no longer reflect an Optional Service Charge of $Because Columbia is not affiliated with Pivotal Home Solutions, Columbia requests that this complaint be closedShould the customer have additional questions or concerns regarding warranty programs or Pivotal Home Solutions, the customer service number for Pivotal Home Solutions is [redacted] and the hours of service are hours a day, days a weekShould you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Sarah B [redacted] at [redacted] Very truly yours, Sarah [redacted] B [redacted] Director of Communications Columbia Gas of PA

Dear Mr***:On behalf of Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”), I am responding to your letter with ID number [redacted] regarding the complaint of [redacted] ***.On April 2, 2015, Columbia installed a new service line at the property of S [redacted] ***, [redacted] in [redacted] , and changed the location of an outside gas meter as part of the completion of a project to upgrade natural gas main lines in that areaDirt that had been moved to access the underground pipes was replaced by a contractor working for ColumbiaThe lawn area was filled in level to the existing grade and reseeded where the pipeline work had occurred.Ms [redacted] called Columbia on August 11, 2015, and requested additional repair work on her sidewalk and further restoration of her lawnColumbia’s restoration contractor met with Ms [redacted] at the property on August and determined that the issues regarding the condition of her sidewalk and her lawn were not physically located within Columbia’s service line replacement and meter relocation work area in April Consequently, Columbia’s contractor explained to Ms [redacted] that the Company could not perform the additional work that she was requestingMs [redacted] pointed out cracked concrete that preexisted Columbia’s work on the property and that had been previously patched as a result of frost damageThat patch work had been performed by someone other than Columbia or a Columbia contractorThe contractor further explained to Ms [redacted] that we could not raise the grade of dirt along the entire length of her sidewalk as requested, since it was not disturbed by Columbia’s work.Since the sidewalk and lawn conditions with which Ms [redacted] has taken issue were not caused by Columbia nor by a Columbia contractor, the Company is under no legal obligation to provide the redress that she seeks.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B [redacted] at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Russell B***

I am responding to your letter with ID number *** regarding the complaint of *** ***.As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a regulated natural gas distribution utility that follows strict State and Federal safety regulations.In researching
the complaint, Columbia’s records indicate that on May 5, 2013, gas service at *** *** *** in Washington, Pennsylvania was disconnected, and gas was shut off at the meter.On January 4, 2016, the Company removed the inactive gas meter at *** *** *** due to no usage since May 2013, which exceeded monthsOn January 21, 2016, the Company abandoned the service line at the street in compliance with Code of Federal Regulations Title 49, (Abandonment or deactivation of facilities) and Pennsylvania Code Chapter (Abandonment of inactive service lines)Once such abandonment occurs, re-establishing service is not simply a matter of reconnecting service to the abandoned lineFederal and State safety regulations, as well as prudent and safe business practices, require the installation of a new service lineIt should be noted that, under Pennsylvania law, customers in Washington County own the service line from Columbia’s point of delivery (usually the valve near Columbia’s main line) to the building, and they are responsible for the installation and maintenance of that service line.On April 18, 2016, *** *** called the Company to apply for new gas service at *** *** ***Columbia advised Ms*** that there was no gas service at the address and that gas line had been disconnected at the streetThe Company advised Ms*** to have the property owner contact Columbia’s New Business Department to complete application for service by calling ###-###-####To date, neither *** nor *** *** have contacted the New Business Department to complete that application.Columbia stands ready to provide service to *** *** *** once a proper application for service has been madeAs noted above, the customer will be responsiblefor the installation and maintenance of the service line between Columbia’s point ofdelivery and the buildingThe installation must be performed by a plumber who hasDepartment of Transportation credentials to do such work.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contactRussell B*** at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Russell B***

I am responding to your letter with ID number *** regarding the complaint of *** ***.As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission”)Columbia's
business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulationsMoreover, the Company must abide by Title of Pennsylvania’s Consolidated Statutes, commonly referred to as the “Public Utility Code.”Section of the Public Utility Code, which was enacted in 1984, provides that maintenance of a service line shall be the responsibility of the owner of the service lineSection further prohibits a utility from acquiring ownership of service lines if the utility’s tariff provided for customers to own those lines as of the effective date of Section Since before 1984, under Columbia’s Commission-approved tariff, customers in Western Pennsylvania own the customer service line from the meter to the point of delivery (curb valve)Consequently, under Section 1510, those customers are responsible for the maintenance and repair of their service lines, and it would be unlawful for Columbia to provide the relief that the Complainant seeksFurthermore, in recognition that natural gas can result in damage to life and property if not used correctly, the tariff provides gas companies with the right to shut off gas for repairsThese rules are explained in our tariff, which may be found on our website at www.columbiagaspa.com/about-us/tariff-information.Columbia follows strict State and Federal safety regulations in its role as a regulated natural gas distribution companyConsistent with those mandated regulations, Columbia, or one of its contractors, conducts leak surveys on customer-owned service linesThese surveys are required once every three yearsColumbia’s records indicate that on August 12, 2015, Columbia’s leak inspector conducted a leakage survey on Mr***’s property at Pennsylvania Avenue West in Warren, PennsylvaniaWhile conducting this inspection, Columbia discovered leakage on Mr***’s customer owned service line and immediately shut off gas service until repairs could be made by a qualified plumber.In instances where leaks of this severity are found, natural gas utilities are required to stop the flow of gas immediately to keep the customer and the community safeA door hanger was left at Mr***’s residence informing him of the situation and the next steps he needed to take in order to restore his gas service.On August 26, 2015, Columbia completed a visit to Mr***’s property to see if repairs had been madeThe service line had not been repaired and Columbia issued a final bill for $16.75, representing a flat charge that is not based on usageOn September 16, a payment of $was posted to the account, which now has a zero balance.It should be noted that Mr*** filed an informal complaint about this matter with the Commission on September 23, 2015, which has been closedThe Commission instructed Mr*** that he is responsible for the maintenance of his service line and that he would need a qualified plumber to make repairs before gas service can be restoredThe Commission also instructed Mr*** that the $customer service charge was approved by the Commission in the Company’s tariff.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B*** at ###-###-####.Very

I am responding to your letter dated July 27, 2015 regarding the complaint of [redacted].As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”)....

Columbia's business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulations, including those that are related to the processing of energy grants and customer payments.On February 4, 2014, Columbia posted a $100 Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (“LIHEAP”) cash grant payment to the account of [redacted] at the address of [redacted], based on an erroneous electronic file submitted by the Department of Human Services (DHS), formerly the Department of Public Welfare (DPW) with [redacted]’s account number.On February 11, 2014, Columbia issued [redacted] a bill in the amount of $98.90, which included the usage of 87 therms. A line item titled “Energy Assistance Grant - $100” appeared on the bill, which thus reflected a credit account balance in the amount of $1.10 and no payment due. Subsequently, in June of 2015, Columbia discovered that the account number provided by DHS for the LIHEAP cash grant that was applied on February 4, 2014 was incorrect. As a consequence, the $100 LIHEAP grant was inadvertently credited to [redacted]’s account even though he was not eligible to receive that grant.To correct that error, on June 8, 2015, Columbia debited [redacted]’s account in the amount of $100, and his next bill on June 12, 2015, included a line item titled “Energy Assistance Grant +$100.”Columbia is legally prohibited from providing LIHEAP grants to those who are not income-eligible to receive such assistance. Therefore, Columbia cannot lawfully permit the erroneous $100 credit to remain on [redacted]’s account. Moreover, by law, Columbia must charge rates that have been approved by the PUC. The Company cannot charge preferential rates that are not authorized by the Commission. Therefore, it would be unlawful for the Company to forego collection of the $100 that has now been charged to [redacted] to correct the prior error. What Ms. [redacted] may be viewing as the Company’s intransigence or unreasonableness is really Columbia’s adherence to legal standards with which it must comply.Columbia does recognize that the error was not the fault of the customer and that this customer is an excellent-paying customer. [redacted]’s account was delayed for twobilling cycles, allowing the customer time to contact the office and make amicable arrangements to pay the $100 debited on the account. Columbia offered arrangements to the customer to pay the balance of the billing over several months, which would include the current bill charges plus an additional $20 payment each month until the outstanding balance has been paid.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B[redacted].

As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”). Columbia's business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all...

Commission rules and regulations. Moreover, Columbia must comply with U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”) safety regulations.In researching the complaint, Columbia’s records indicate that on July 5, 2011, the Company turned gas service off at [redacted] in Charleroi, PA at the meter valve for non-payment under previous customer’s name. During a Cold Weather Survey on November 12, 2011, the company determined that the property was vacant.Commission safety regulations require that dormant services be physically disconnected where there the prospect of future use is unlikely. Accordingly, the Company generated an order on July 29, 2015 to remove the inactive meter and abandon the service line, which was scheduled for August 2, 2015. The Company removed the inactive meter from the property on August 2, 2015.On October 25, 2016, Renita [redacted] called the Company to obtain information on new service. Since the premises had been physically disconnected in 2015, Mr. [redacted]’s inquiry was referred to the Company’s New Business Team, which handles requests for gas service at locations where service is not currently being provided. The New Business Team took an order to drop off a meter setting (“meter set”) to the property, with instructions to have a new service line installed by a properly certified plumber, in accordance with DOT gas safety regulations. On October 27, 2016, the Company dropped off the meter set (comprised of prefabricated piping, a meter bar, and connections to hang a meter) at [redacted] in Charleroi.The Company received a call on November 16, 2016 from a gentleman named EdwinBarrett about the next step to start service at [redacted]. He was transferred to theNew Business team and was advised that contact would be made with the customer who wouldbe billed. The Company’s New Business team called Ms. [redacted] on December 5, 2016, and lefta voice message to call the Company when she was ready to have the meter set.On December 6, 2016, Ms. [redacted] contacted the Company’s New Business team,stating she already had a meter. The New Business team scheduled an order to set the meteron December 8, 2015, since the Company’s system showed there was no meter at the address.Ms. [redacted] called the Company’s Customer Care Center on December 7, 2016, and wasadvised that December 8, 2016, was the scheduled date to have the meter set. Ms. [redacted]advised that she was not able to be present. Columbia advised Ms. [redacted] that she did not needto be present and that service could be initiated as long as there was a DOT OperatorQualification Card at the premises for to demonstrate that her contractor was properly qualified.At 12:04 PM on December 8, 2016, workers from the Company went to [redacted]
[redacted] to set the meter, but they were unable to complete the order because there was noDOT Operator Qualification Card on site. A notification card was left for Ms. [redacted], withinstructions about rescheduling the setting of her meter.On Friday, December 9, 2016, the Company received an email from Ms. [redacted] stating”I WAS VERBALLY ASSURED THAT THE METER WOULD BE INSTALLED ON 12-8-16 ANDWOULD NOT HAVE TO BE AT THE HOUSE. NOW 12-9, I GET A VM FROM COLUMBIA GASTHAT THEY ARE NOT INSTALLING METER DUE TO NO PAPERWORK AT THE HOUSE. ICALLED SERVICE TIMES TO THE NEW BUS DEPT AND REQUESTED TO SPEAK TO ASUPR. MY PIPES R GOING TO FREEZE AND I CANNOT BRING MY 81 YR OLD MOTHERHOME FROM THE HOSPITLAL FROM SUFFERING FROM A STROKE BECAUSE I HAVE NOHEAT YET. COLUMBIA IS IGNORING MY CALLS AND NOT DOING THEIR JOB, INADDITION, I DO NOT WANT COLUMBIA FOR MY GAS CARRIER.” The Company respondedwith an email to Ms. [redacted] assuring her that her email was forwarded to a supervisor, and arequest was placed to have a supervisor call her. The New Business Team also emailed Ms.[redacted] that day reiterating the need for a DOT Operator Qualification Card to be on site whenthe Company is there to set the meter.On Monday, December 12, 2016, a New Business team supervisor sent an email to thelocal field operations leader to drop off a blank DOT Operator Qualification Card at the property,so that Ms. [redacted]’s plumber could provide the necessary information to establish his DOToperator qualification. The supervisor also left a message for Ms. [redacted] explaining that themeter cannot be set at the property without the card being filled out. Ms. [redacted] called theCompany’s New Business team and spoke with the supervisor. The supervisor scheduled anorder to have the meter set that day. The Company’s technician went to [redacted] toset the meter, but there was not a DOT Operator Qualification Card, so the meter was not set.The Company’s New Business team attempted to contact Ms. [redacted] on January 11,2017 and left a voice mail to explain again the requirement of having a DOT OperatorQualification Card at the property and asked her to call the Company to reschedule an order toset the meter. The New Business team member left a phone number and extension to reach theteam member.Regarding Ms. [redacted]’s interest in having a different natural gas carrier, I have included a list of alternative natural gas suppliers,which can also be accessed at www.columbiagaspa.com/natural-gas-service/choice-program/approved-suppliers. The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission also has information at www.pagasswitch.com.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B[redacted] at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Russell B[redacted]

I am responding to your letter with Complaint ID number [redacted] regarding the complaint of [redacted].As you know, Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission”...

or “PUC”). Columbia's business practices are governed by its “Rates and Rules for Furnishing Gas Service” (the “Tariff”), as approved by the Commission. Moreover, the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulations, as well as statutes that the Commission administers.In researching complaint [redacted], Columbia’s records indicate that this customer has been enrolled in the Zipcheck (Direct E-Bill) process since September 24, 2012.On May 15, 2017, Mr. [redacted] called the Columbia Gas Customer Care Center and spoke with a customer service representative regarding a perceived error in the due date on his online bill statement from Direct E-Bill. During that conversation, his concern was that his email statement shows that the stated due date is approximately two weeks following the withdrawal date on his bill statement.It should be noted that the PUC has already considered and rejected the issues raised by Mr. [redacted] in the context of a Formal Complaint proceeding at the Commission. In Cavanaugh v. Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc. (Docket No. C-00982033), the Commission concluded that that Columbia did not violate either its tariff or the Commission’s regulations by collecting Zipcheck payments approximately ten (10) days after the bills were mailed instead of the twenty (20)-day period set forth in its tariff. Furthermore, in dismissing the Cavanaugh complaint, the Commission stated “we hasten to add that the Zipcheck program is voluntary and is offered as a convenience to the customer. The Complainant has the option at any time to discontinue participation in the Zipcheck program.”While the PUC dismissed the Cavanaugh complaint, the Commission did direct Columbia to amend its Zipcheck promotional and enrollment materials in collaboration with the PUC’s Bureau of Consumer Services. I am enclosing a sample of the revised brochure that was the result of that collaborative effort. As you will see, enrollees in Zipcheck/Direct e-Bill are adequately advised about the timing of billing and payment, and they specifically acknowledge that “payments will be deducted from my account approximately 10 days after the bill is mailed, which is earlier than the 20-day ‘due date’ used for payments that are mailed to the company or delivered to an authorized payment agent” when they enroll.If Mr. [redacted] would like to cancel his Zipcheck/Direct e-Bill enrollment, he can contact the Company at ###-###-#### and request to be removed or visit our website’s Direct Link at https://www.columbiagaspa.com/billing-payment-options/paperless-billing and initiate the removal.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Sarah B[redacted] at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Sarah B[redacted]

January 16, 2018 [redacted] The Revdex.com of Western Pennsylvania 400 Holiday Drive, Ste. 220 Pittsburgh, PA 15220 Re:        Revdex.com ID No. [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]: I am responding to your letter dated December 21, 2017...

regarding Revdex.com Complaint ID No. [redacted]. Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”) is a natural gas distribution utility that is regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“Commission” or “PUC”). Columbia's business practices are governed by the Commission and the Company must follow all Commission rules and regulations. Pivotal Home Solutions is a company that sells warranty service plans for in-house gas lines, water lines, and sewage lines.  The ESP Service Plan, mentioned in the consumer’s complaint, is one of those plans. Columbia is not affiliated with Pivotal Home Solutions. Columbia’s only involvement in this matter is that it provides billing services for Pivotal Home Solutions as a convenience to Columbia customers who purchase warranty service plans from Pivotal Home Solutions. Columbia has no specific knowledge of warranty plans or the individual services provided by Pivotal Home Solutions.   On November 19, 2015, the customer contacted Columbia questioning the Optional Service Charge of $9.90.  Columbia’s customer service representative advised her that the Optional Service Charge is the warranty service plan the customer purchased from the third-party company, Pivotal Home Solutions.  The customer service representative further advised that Columbia is not affiliated with Pivotal Home Solutions and that Columbia simply provides billing services for the third-party as a convenience to Columbia customers who purchase the warranty plans.  The customer requested more specific information on her service plan and asked if she could be billed separately.  Columbia referred the customer to Pivotal Home Solutions for an explanation of the charge and to discuss separate billing.     Upon receipt of the Revdex.com Complaint ID No.[redacted], Columbia contacted Pivotal Home Solutions.  Pivotal Home Solutions informed Columbia that on December 21, 2017, the warranty service plan was canceled by the customer. The customer’s bill will no longer reflect an Optional Service Charge of $9.90. Because Columbia is not affiliated with Pivotal Home Solutions, Columbia requests that this complaint be closed. Should the customer have additional questions or concerns regarding warranty programs or Pivotal Home Solutions, the customer service number for Pivotal Home Solutions is [redacted] and the hours of service are 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Sarah B[redacted] at [redacted].                                                 Very truly yours, Sarah ** B[redacted] Director of Communications Columbia Gas of PA

Dear Mr. [redacted]:On behalf of Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania, Inc., (“Columbia” or “the Company”), I am responding to your letter with ID number [redacted] regarding the complaint of [redacted].On April 2, 2015, Columbia installed a new service line at the property of S[redacted], [redacted] in...

[redacted], and changed the location of an outside gas meter as part of the completion of a project to upgrade natural gas main lines in that area. Dirt that had been moved to access the underground pipes was replaced by a contractor working for Columbia. The lawn area was filled in level to the existing grade and reseeded where the pipeline work had occurred.Ms. [redacted] called Columbia on August 11, 2015, and requested additional repair work on her sidewalk and further restoration of her lawn. Columbia’s restoration contractor met with Ms. [redacted] at the property on August 14 and determined that the issues regarding the condition of her sidewalk and her lawn were not physically located within Columbia’s service line replacement and meter relocation work area in April 2015. Consequently, Columbia’s contractor explained to Ms. [redacted] that the Company could not perform the additional work that she was requesting. Ms. [redacted] pointed out cracked concrete that preexisted Columbia’s work on the property and that had been previously patched as a result of frost damage. That patch work had been performed by someone other than Columbia or a Columbia contractor. The contractor further explained to Ms. [redacted] that we could not raise the grade of dirt along the entire length of her sidewalk as requested, since it was not disturbed by Columbia’s work.Since the sidewalk and lawn conditions with which Ms. [redacted] has taken issue were not caused by Columbia nor by a Columbia contractor, the Company is under no legal obligation to provide the redress that she seeks.Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact Russell B[redacted] at ###-###-####.Very truly yours,Russell B[redacted]