Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/28) */
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] complaint regarding her recent disconnection of electrical service.
We sincerely regret to hear of Ms. [redacted] medical condition and apologize for any poor service she...
experienced. Her concerns have been forwarded to the appropriate areas for their review and action.
Regarding the status of her account, while Ms. [redacted] believed her account to be current, her recent payments of $79.68 made on March 25 and $83.14 made on April 8 only covered part of her past due balance from February 2014. Ms. [redacted] still owed $191.66 for the remaining February charges plus March charges, including late fees (see table below). The disconnection notice reflected this amount due on or before May 2, 2014.
(A pdf copy of our response showing the table will be sent separately.)
Subsequently, her payment for April 2014 charges also became past due. We appreciate Ms. [redacted] payment of $315.15 ($270.06 past due + $20 service establishment charge plus $25 same day reconnection fee) for restoration of service. However, because the company reconnected service the following day, a credit of $25.00 was later posted to her account.
Based on Ms. [redacted] account history with Hawaiian Electric and because her service had been disconnected due to non-payment, her request for reimbursement of $150 for food spoilage is not approved.
We thank you for this opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] concern.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2014/06/03) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Hawaiian Electric Company is obligated to maintain and provide electricity to all consumers. Being the only electric company on this island we as consumers have no choice. Hawaiian Electric Company should take care of customers and be more considerate. Complaints like should not happen.
Hawaiian Electric Company main concern is to restore or fix electric power no matter where on this island and no matter that the circumstances maybe. In Black and White I as a consumer is obligated to make that payment for electricity. Hawaiian Electric Company is obligated to restore power for consumers which never happened.
Hawaiian Electric Company failed to fulfill their obligations on Monday, May 12 2014. When my payment was made in the of $315.15 to restore power. With no considerations and the lack of customer services Hawaiian Electric Company left me without electricity for 23 hours. As a result of the company's actions it caused me great losses and damages to my health.
Hawaiian Electric Company had more then enough time to turn that switch back on and restore electricity at my resident when my bill was paid in full. The company did not make and effort to restore power.
Hawaiian Electric Company is fully responsible for my losses. As I had requested in my complaint on Hawaiian Electric Company I want to be reimbursed for my losses in the amount of $150.00 and connection fee of $45.00 which was quoted by the customer service rep.
Hawaiian Electric Company is solely responsible for damages to my health condition that I am still suffering from Stress, Anxiety and Insomnia which occurred during my horrible experience. My health has gotten worst due to this ordeal.
Hawaiian Electric Company could have avoided my stress full encounter if they did their job, listen to customers concerns and needs, make a priority to restore electric and provide the service that is expected from me or any consumer. I stead I was completely ignored, brushed off and treated so unkindly.
Explanation on my bill in the amount of $191.00 does not give Hawaiian Electric Company the right to tamper with my payments. If a payment is made for specific bill it should be applied to that bill. I was not informed or notified that payments are posted else where. I have requested for a detailed report on my bill in the pass and got no response again lack of customer service. I had to file a complaint to get any result and be provide with a detailed report.
Regardless of any payments history it does not ALLOW or VALIDATE Hawaiian Electric Company Brutal! and Cruel! actions toward me and deny electricity for 23 hours.
Hawaiian Electric Company can you honestly tell me and the rest of the consumers to be tormented and left in the dark without electricity for 23 hours is acceptable and this is Customer Service.
Hawaiian Electric Company has no excuse to put me through this stress full experience just to do a simple job of turning that switch back on and restore electricity.
Company with horrific customers service and sneaky business practices with a complete lack of transparency. If there were another electric company in the state I would happily switch. Beware of misrepresented credit scores, outrageous deposits, unfriendly and rude customer service, long wait times, and no customer communication regarding accounts management.
Thank you for the opportunity to address Ms. [redacted] concerns regarding her recent electric bill. As noted, Mrs. [redacted] was particularly concerned since we had just executed a Net Energy Metering agreement for her PV system and a higher bill was especially surprising given the...
circumstances.
Since her initial contact with us, we have checked a number of possible reasons for her high bill. However, after tests of her meter and several visits to her home were conducted as additional follow ups, it appears that the high bill is due to higher usage, possibly due to air conditioning or other household uses. Our investigation and contacts with Mrs. [redacted] are summarized as follows:
On June 2, 2014, we executed a Net Energy Metering (NEM) contract for Ms. [redacted] PV system. Subsequently, Ms. [redacted] noticed an increase from $110 to $690 on her bill covering the period from July 5, 2014 through Aug. 5, 2014.
Ms. [redacted] contacted us regarding the increase in her bill. As a result, we began an investigation to ensure the bill charges were thoroughly checked.
A field service investigator was sent to her home twice, once on Aug. 12, 2014 and again on Aug. 20, 2014, to conduct meter check reads. Those readings showed usage of 14.3 kilowatt-hours (kWh) and 32.3 kWh per day, respectively. During our visit, we also conducted evaluations on the water meter but didn't find evidence of a hot water leak, which sometimes causes high bills. During his visit, the field service investigator did note two large air-conditioning units that may be contributing to the high bill.
A meter test was also conducted on Sept. 5, 2014, which showed no issues with the meter. As a result, we sent a letter to Ms. [redacted] informing her of the results of our investigation
On Sept. 16, 2014, Ms. [redacted] contacted our Customer Assistance Center regarding the results of the Sept. 5th meter test. Our customer assistance representative forwarded Ms. [redacted] concerns to the Customer Assistance Center supervisors, NEM supervisor, and NEM representatives for additional follow-up. At that time, we also suspended collections on Ms. [redacted] account through Oct. 31, 2014 to allow for resolution of our investigation.
On Sept. 18, 2014, a NEM representative contacted Ms. [redacted] to review the meter test results with her. Ms. [redacted] indicated that she was still not satisfied with the results of our explanation. On Sept. 24, 2014, a field service investigator and a NEM supervisor met with Ms. [redacted] and her solar contractor at her home to review her bill and the results of the readings we gathered. We explained to both Ms. [redacted] and the solar contactor that her billing is correct according to the results of both readings. The field service investigator discussed the two central air conditioning units--a 5.3 kilowatt (kW) unit serving upstairs and a 6.9 kW unit serving downstairs. We noted that if these units are running continuously the usage reflected on her bill from July 7, 2014 to Aug. 5, 2014 is probable.
We have noticed that recent usage has gone down, so we are hopeful that discussions about possible causes of higher usage were helpful.
Based on the visit, the information gathered, and the satisfactory results of the meter test and check reads, we do not believe that a credit or adjustment to Ms. [redacted] bill is appropriate. However, we would like to ensure that Mrs. [redacted] can reach out to someone who is familiar with her account in the future if she has additional concerns. Please let her know that she may contact [redacted], Customer Field Service Supervisor, at [redacted] with any questions.
We thank you again for the opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] concerns.
11/17/2014 – Hawaiian Electric Response to Customer Complaint
[redacted] ([redacted])
We appreciate the opportunity to respond again to Ms. [redacted]’s concerns regarding her recent electric bill.
Since our last response on October 2, 2014, Ms. [redacted] has been in contact with Customer Field Service Supervisor, Wilfred [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] had brought up information she researched online about the manufacturer of the Net Energy Meter installed at her home. Per Ms. [redacted]’s research, an article posted on Reuters.com dated May 2, 2011 stated that [redacted] [redacted] Company recalled 1,600 smart meters manufactured by the same company as her smart meter because “of a defect that causes the miscalculation of customer energy bills” and that these faulty meters “were occasionally running fast, and overcharging customers.” While this article reports on the manufacturer’s smart meters, a different type of meter – a Net Energy Meter - by the same manufacturer is installed at the [redacted] household. According to Hawaiian Electric’s meter shop, the manufacturer has not had any recalls for the meter model installed in the [redacted] home, nor have there been any reports of problems in other installed meters of the same make and model.
We have spoken with Ms. [redacted] about testing her specific meter with her present. In addition, the meter will be replaced with a newly tested meter. In addition, we will research the other meters that arrived on the same pallet as Ms. [redacted]’s to see if the others are showing unaccounted for spikes in readings. Furthermore, Ms. [redacted] will be given a list of meter numbers to select from for purposes of reviewing their performance to ensure consistent performance of this make/model of meter.
As of today, an appointment for Hawaiian Electric to meet Ms. [redacted] has been scheduled for Monday, November 17 between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. To prevent disconnection from non-payment, a dunning lock has been placed on Ms. [redacted]’s account while the investigation is underway.
We thank you for this opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted]’s concerns.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond again to Ms. [redacted] original concern of electrical service disconnection. We understand the cost of making a late payment, the cost of a security deposit, a reconnection fee and additional fees assessed can seem very high. The Company offers a number of ways for customers to pay their monthly bill on time such as Automatic Bill Payment (ABP), MyCheckFree –an online bill payment service, or paying by phone using their debit card, credit card or electronic check. Our customers may also walk into any [redacted] office conveniently located invarious neighborhood places such as [redacted] Ms. [redacted] August statement for billing period of July 8 to August 5, 2014 reflecting the amount of $185.53 was due upon receipt of bill. No payment for this period was received in August 2014. Ms. [redacted] September statement for billing period of August 6 to September 4, 2014 included the August balance due and current charges of $192.69. No payment for the period was received in September 2014. On September 6, 2014, the Company sent a disconnection notice to Ms. [redacted] reminding her of her outstanding balance for her August statement of $185.53. The letter states that non-payment may result in disconnection of service. The Company also placed a courtesy reminder call to Ms. [redacted] on September 16, 2014. Company records show there were no calls received from Ms. [redacted] of plans to make a payment of any kind from here in Hawai‘i locally or from out of state. At the time of disconnection, on September 25, 2014, Ms. [redacted] account was one month overdue for her August payment. In reviewing Ms. [redacted] account history, the Company had sent her a number of disconnection notices and hadplaced courtesy reminder calls since January of 2014 for consistent late payments.
We regret to hear Ms. [redacted] disagreed with our Company policy requesting a security deposit and a reconnection fee in order to reconnect service and re-establish credit. We would like to extend the invitation for Ms. [redacted] to contact our Customer Assistance Center for more information on enrolling in one of our many bill payment options with hopes of maintaining a better payment history. We thank youfor this opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] concern
We appreciate this opportunity to respond to Dr. [redacted] complaint regarding the delay in the approval of her photovoltaic (PV) system.
We recognize it is frustrating to have to wait for a determination.
As stated on our website 1, the Locational Value Map...
(LVM) is "designed to show customers and solar contractors an estimate of the level of distributed generation 2 (DG) penetration on distribution circuits as a percentage of both minimum and peak circuit loads at a given point in time." 3 Further, note that we update the LVM every week night. For this reason, a percentage shown one day may change by the next.
We provide the LVM as a tool to give Net Energy Metering (NEM) applicants a general idea of the distributed generation saturation levels on their circuit before applying. Unfortunately, we cannot guarantee that the percentages will not change as we add more customers in the period between when they first check the LVM and when their NEM application is input.
Pursuant to our Tariff Rules, approved by the Public Utilities Commission, we process all NEM applications in the order received, and space on a circuit is determined on a first-come first-served basis. During the twelve business days between when we received Dr. [redacted] application (June 18, 2014) and when we finished our completeness review (July 3, 2014), all NEM applicants who applied prior to her and were connected to the same circuit caused the circuit saturation percentage to grow.
Dr. [redacted] application was submitted for technical review on July 3, 2014, and a determination was made regarding the status of her system on July 25. The Public Utilities Commission Tariff Rule 18, Appendix III allows the following timeframes for processing a NEM application:
15 business days for completeness review.
15 business days for initial technical review.
20 business days for supplemental review.
120 days for an interconnection requirements study
Dr. [redacted] application fell within the time allotted for supplemental review. This supplemental review determined that, given the high distributed generation saturation on the circuit to which her property connects, and the potential safety and reliability risks to the electrical grid that this situation creates, approval of her application must await the completion of an interconnection requirements study and the implementation of any safety upgrades, if needed. At this time, many NEM applicants are in a similar situation.
We are currently in the process of working with the solar industry and solar equipment manufacturers on possible technical solutions to address these issues.
Again, we know how frustrating it is for customers to wait for a determination. We are working to address this situation in the least expensive, fairest and fastest way possible for all of our customers, while ensuring continued safe and reliable service. We hope to be able to provide updated information on possible solutions soon.
Note to Revdex.com: Footnotes are not appearing in our response above, therefore, a hard copy will be attached once this is submitted.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/05/28) */
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] complaint regarding her recent disconnection of electrical service.
We sincerely regret to hear of Ms. [redacted] medical condition and apologize for any poor service she...
experienced. Her concerns have been forwarded to the appropriate areas for their review and action.
Regarding the status of her account, while Ms. [redacted] believed her account to be current, her recent payments of $79.68 made on March 25 and $83.14 made on April 8 only covered part of her past due balance from February 2014. Ms. [redacted] still owed $191.66 for the remaining February charges plus March charges, including late fees (see table below). The disconnection notice reflected this amount due on or before May 2, 2014.
(A pdf copy of our response showing the table will be sent separately.)
Subsequently, her payment for April 2014 charges also became past due. We appreciate Ms. [redacted] payment of $315.15 ($270.06 past due + $20 service establishment charge plus $25 same day reconnection fee) for restoration of service. However, because the company reconnected service the following day, a credit of $25.00 was later posted to her account.
Based on Ms. [redacted] account history with Hawaiian Electric and because her service had been disconnected due to non-payment, her request for reimbursement of $150 for food spoilage is not approved.
We thank you for this opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] concern.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 8, 2014/06/03) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Hawaiian Electric Company is obligated to maintain and provide electricity to all consumers. Being the only electric company on this island we as consumers have no choice. Hawaiian Electric Company should take care of customers and be more considerate. Complaints like should not happen.
Hawaiian Electric Company main concern is to restore or fix electric power no matter where on this island and no matter that the circumstances maybe. In Black and White I as a consumer is obligated to make that payment for electricity. Hawaiian Electric Company is obligated to restore power for consumers which never happened.
Hawaiian Electric Company failed to fulfill their obligations on Monday, May 12 2014. When my payment was made in the of $315.15 to restore power. With no considerations and the lack of customer services Hawaiian Electric Company left me without electricity for 23 hours. As a result of the company's actions it caused me great losses and damages to my health.
Hawaiian Electric Company had more then enough time to turn that switch back on and restore electricity at my resident when my bill was paid in full. The company did not make and effort to restore power.
Hawaiian Electric Company is fully responsible for my losses. As I had requested in my complaint on Hawaiian Electric Company I want to be reimbursed for my losses in the amount of $150.00 and connection fee of $45.00 which was quoted by the customer service rep.
Hawaiian Electric Company is solely responsible for damages to my health condition that I am still suffering from Stress, Anxiety and Insomnia which occurred during my horrible experience. My health has gotten worst due to this ordeal.
Hawaiian Electric Company could have avoided my stress full encounter if they did their job, listen to customers concerns and needs, make a priority to restore electric and provide the service that is expected from me or any consumer. I stead I was completely ignored, brushed off and treated so unkindly.
Explanation on my bill in the amount of $191.00 does not give Hawaiian Electric Company the right to tamper with my payments. If a payment is made for specific bill it should be applied to that bill. I was not informed or notified that payments are posted else where. I have requested for a detailed report on my bill in the pass and got no response again lack of customer service. I had to file a complaint to get any result and be provide with a detailed report.
Regardless of any payments history it does not ALLOW or VALIDATE Hawaiian Electric Company Brutal! and Cruel! actions toward me and deny electricity for 23 hours.
Hawaiian Electric Company can you honestly tell me and the rest of the consumers to be tormented and left in the dark without electricity for 23 hours is acceptable and this is Customer Service.
Hawaiian Electric Company has no excuse to put me through this stress full experience just to do a simple job of turning that switch back on and restore electricity.
Company with horrific customers service and sneaky business practices with a complete lack of transparency. If there were another electric company in the state I would happily switch. Beware of misrepresented credit scores, outrageous deposits, unfriendly and rude customer service, long wait times, and no customer communication regarding accounts management.
Thank you for the opportunity to address Ms. [redacted] concerns regarding her recent electric bill. As noted, Mrs. [redacted] was particularly concerned since we had just executed a Net Energy Metering agreement for her PV system and a higher bill was especially surprising given the...
circumstances.
Since her initial contact with us, we have checked a number of possible reasons for her high bill. However, after tests of her meter and several visits to her home were conducted as additional follow ups, it appears that the high bill is due to higher usage, possibly due to air conditioning or other household uses. Our investigation and contacts with Mrs. [redacted] are summarized as follows:
On June 2, 2014, we executed a Net Energy Metering (NEM) contract for Ms. [redacted] PV system. Subsequently, Ms. [redacted] noticed an increase from $110 to $690 on her bill covering the period from July 5, 2014 through Aug. 5, 2014.
Ms. [redacted] contacted us regarding the increase in her bill. As a result, we began an investigation to ensure the bill charges were thoroughly checked.
A field service investigator was sent to her home twice, once on Aug. 12, 2014 and again on Aug. 20, 2014, to conduct meter check reads. Those readings showed usage of 14.3 kilowatt-hours (kWh) and 32.3 kWh per day, respectively. During our visit, we also conducted evaluations on the water meter but didn't find evidence of a hot water leak, which sometimes causes high bills. During his visit, the field service investigator did note two large air-conditioning units that may be contributing to the high bill.
A meter test was also conducted on Sept. 5, 2014, which showed no issues with the meter. As a result, we sent a letter to Ms. [redacted] informing her of the results of our investigation
On Sept. 16, 2014, Ms. [redacted] contacted our Customer Assistance Center regarding the results of the Sept. 5th meter test. Our customer assistance representative forwarded Ms. [redacted] concerns to the Customer Assistance Center supervisors, NEM supervisor, and NEM representatives for additional follow-up. At that time, we also suspended collections on Ms. [redacted] account through Oct. 31, 2014 to allow for resolution of our investigation.
On Sept. 18, 2014, a NEM representative contacted Ms. [redacted] to review the meter test results with her. Ms. [redacted] indicated that she was still not satisfied with the results of our explanation. On Sept. 24, 2014, a field service investigator and a NEM supervisor met with Ms. [redacted] and her solar contractor at her home to review her bill and the results of the readings we gathered. We explained to both Ms. [redacted] and the solar contactor that her billing is correct according to the results of both readings. The field service investigator discussed the two central air conditioning units--a 5.3 kilowatt (kW) unit serving upstairs and a 6.9 kW unit serving downstairs. We noted that if these units are running continuously the usage reflected on her bill from July 7, 2014 to Aug. 5, 2014 is probable.
We have noticed that recent usage has gone down, so we are hopeful that discussions about possible causes of higher usage were helpful.
Based on the visit, the information gathered, and the satisfactory results of the meter test and check reads, we do not believe that a credit or adjustment to Ms. [redacted] bill is appropriate. However, we would like to ensure that Mrs. [redacted] can reach out to someone who is familiar with her account in the future if she has additional concerns. Please let her know that she may contact [redacted], Customer Field Service Supervisor, at [redacted] with any questions.
We thank you again for the opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] concerns.
11/17/2014 – Hawaiian Electric Response to Customer Complaint
[redacted] ([redacted])
We appreciate the opportunity to respond again to Ms. [redacted]’s concerns regarding her recent electric bill.
Since our last response on October 2, 2014, Ms. [redacted] has been in contact with Customer Field Service Supervisor, Wilfred [redacted]. Ms. [redacted] had brought up information she researched online about the manufacturer of the Net Energy Meter installed at her home. Per Ms. [redacted]’s research, an article posted on Reuters.com dated May 2, 2011 stated that [redacted] [redacted] Company recalled 1,600 smart meters manufactured by the same company as her smart meter because “of a defect that causes the miscalculation of customer energy bills” and that these faulty meters “were occasionally running fast, and overcharging customers.” While this article reports on the manufacturer’s smart meters, a different type of meter – a Net Energy Meter - by the same manufacturer is installed at the [redacted] household. According to Hawaiian Electric’s meter shop, the manufacturer has not had any recalls for the meter model installed in the [redacted] home, nor have there been any reports of problems in other installed meters of the same make and model.
We have spoken with Ms. [redacted] about testing her specific meter with her present. In addition, the meter will be replaced with a newly tested meter. In addition, we will research the other meters that arrived on the same pallet as Ms. [redacted]’s to see if the others are showing unaccounted for spikes in readings. Furthermore, Ms. [redacted] will be given a list of meter numbers to select from for purposes of reviewing their performance to ensure consistent performance of this make/model of meter.
As of today, an appointment for Hawaiian Electric to meet Ms. [redacted] has been scheduled for Monday, November 17 between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. To prevent disconnection from non-payment, a dunning lock has been placed on Ms. [redacted]’s account while the investigation is underway.
We thank you for this opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted]’s concerns.
We appreciate the opportunity to respond again to Ms. [redacted] original concern of electrical service disconnection. We understand the cost of making a late payment, the cost of a security deposit, a reconnection fee and additional fees assessed can seem very high. The Company offers a number of ways for customers to pay their monthly bill on time such as Automatic Bill Payment (ABP), MyCheckFree –an online bill payment service, or paying by phone using their debit card, credit card or electronic check. Our customers may also walk into any [redacted] office conveniently located invarious neighborhood places such as [redacted] Ms. [redacted] August statement for billing period of July 8 to August 5, 2014 reflecting the amount of $185.53 was due upon receipt of bill. No payment for this period was received in August 2014. Ms. [redacted] September statement for billing period of August 6 to September 4, 2014 included the August balance due and current charges of $192.69. No payment for the period was received in September 2014. On September 6, 2014, the Company sent a disconnection notice to Ms. [redacted] reminding her of her outstanding balance for her August statement of $185.53. The letter states that non-payment may result in disconnection of service. The Company also placed a courtesy reminder call to Ms. [redacted] on September 16, 2014. Company records show there were no calls received from Ms. [redacted] of plans to make a payment of any kind from here in Hawai‘i locally or from out of state. At the time of disconnection, on September 25, 2014, Ms. [redacted] account was one month overdue for her August payment. In reviewing Ms. [redacted] account history, the Company had sent her a number of disconnection notices and hadplaced courtesy reminder calls since January of 2014 for consistent late payments.
We regret to hear Ms. [redacted] disagreed with our Company policy requesting a security deposit and a reconnection fee in order to reconnect service and re-establish credit. We would like to extend the invitation for Ms. [redacted] to contact our Customer Assistance Center for more information on enrolling in one of our many bill payment options with hopes of maintaining a better payment history. We thank youfor this opportunity to respond to Ms. [redacted] concern
We appreciate this opportunity to respond to Dr. [redacted] complaint regarding the delay in the approval of her photovoltaic (PV) system.
We recognize it is frustrating to have to wait for a determination.
As stated on our website 1, the Locational Value Map...
(LVM) is "designed to show customers and solar contractors an estimate of the level of distributed generation 2 (DG) penetration on distribution circuits as a percentage of both minimum and peak circuit loads at a given point in time." 3 Further, note that we update the LVM every week night. For this reason, a percentage shown one day may change by the next.
We provide the LVM as a tool to give Net Energy Metering (NEM) applicants a general idea of the distributed generation saturation levels on their circuit before applying. Unfortunately, we cannot guarantee that the percentages will not change as we add more customers in the period between when they first check the LVM and when their NEM application is input.
Pursuant to our Tariff Rules, approved by the Public Utilities Commission, we process all NEM applications in the order received, and space on a circuit is determined on a first-come first-served basis. During the twelve business days between when we received Dr. [redacted] application (June 18, 2014) and when we finished our completeness review (July 3, 2014), all NEM applicants who applied prior to her and were connected to the same circuit caused the circuit saturation percentage to grow.
Dr. [redacted] application was submitted for technical review on July 3, 2014, and a determination was made regarding the status of her system on July 25. The Public Utilities Commission Tariff Rule 18, Appendix III allows the following timeframes for processing a NEM application:
15 business days for completeness review.
15 business days for initial technical review.
20 business days for supplemental review.
120 days for an interconnection requirements study
Dr. [redacted] application fell within the time allotted for supplemental review. This supplemental review determined that, given the high distributed generation saturation on the circuit to which her property connects, and the potential safety and reliability risks to the electrical grid that this situation creates, approval of her application must await the completion of an interconnection requirements study and the implementation of any safety upgrades, if needed. At this time, many NEM applicants are in a similar situation.
We are currently in the process of working with the solar industry and solar equipment manufacturers on possible technical solutions to address these issues.
Again, we know how frustrating it is for customers to wait for a determination. We are working to address this situation in the least expensive, fairest and fastest way possible for all of our customers, while ensuring continued safe and reliable service. We hope to be able to provide updated information on possible solutions soon.
Note to Revdex.com: Footnotes are not appearing in our response above, therefore, a hard copy will be attached once this is submitted.