Page 11 - Damage Prevention Journal 2017 Issue 1
P. 11

pt'DVI~IOlW of the law that are left unentnreed, t1ll(\Wlng them

to he settled in court as necessary However, the coalition did

address the larger issues, the Ones that ereated significant

portions ut the daiiiages we were ~'L\'ing.

Since this‘ ievismii was the second to the law, and mice we I I
had learned to work together on the first, this prnce~'s did go  T
easier the second time. Still, it took over .1 year of discihsioii W E D D T H  : l ‘
betore ll’lL‘   dratted, r lot ot support   ..,l.|E!!!L|l.E§§
legi~‘ltit|\'e Cl’\£|l‘flplUh~ and a lot ut eleventh heiir phone calls

"’ "°‘ ‘l‘° ‘ml '"°“”“'° ”““°d Cnniplete ping-earn management and turnkey Sulullnns.

Haw mniiy are DH tiie eeiiiiiiittee niid haw iimg riiii it take for IFS what We an m “E WEIESS Sm“ Em mmis mm

the euiiiiiiittee ta he nypaiiiteriz

tn U5 [lui l.-in-uly nt I:nmpan|Es prl:IVlElE5:

There are 17 members of the committee tmni different

industry grtiups. Appeiiitnieiit Of the full greiip took over 12 - Telecnni, Elem-lc & E35 Cnnstruchun

l‘n()n(l)~‘ [tom the date of eiiartiiient anei roughly [our n1(\nll’\s . W,,E1E55 ”m,m.k g_ 1-WE, [jm-Eh-“than

attei the committee became initially artiye. _ Fmifismnal SEMEES & SM Dmlupmam

lb rinte, what riii yak thiiik were/are the iiiasr riiffieiiitl . 1] A5 snluufln Damn lg Imamamn

imyaytmit steps the mmmittee tank’ _ Undergmund “mm Lmaung

The rtinnniittee is still developing its "pace" as it attenipb to ,

achieve .i rhythm in its- diseussiens and in its eieeisiniis Also, Wm“ ‘l‘”“ '"”“k ‘’’“h “Si ""3" l*“"“’ V"“ "9 “Ed

obtaining the pruper eieeunientutitiii trtini the cenipiaiiiant the nuht lleulllai nu matter What thfi lub-

and the Respondent has been difficult

I . . .

YUIlYpVDXY/117115 rainpIt1iiifdV1'U£vi,righf.7 We V: (in! 11:15. A‘

Yes, Ei)|'nplt1lht~‘ are nied through the Public UKIlIliL‘N i

Commis'si<ui of Ohio.

What is the caiiiinitteis rule in the evifarcciiievif pyacess’

The UTC decides whether ti viciliitioii sit the law occurred and ‘

as'sesses whether a monetary nne, a n<in—monetar_v penalty or

.i Em1\blnaU0h at the (W0 be l~'sued tor the non—cornplli1nCL‘

The PUCO is tasked with communicating this decision and

Insuring that any required d0CumL‘ntt1ll()n is submitted, fines

are collected and the results are reported back to the UTC.

whii pniiiiries rhe iiiuestigiirinnz ,

The ln\'L‘sllg£|tI(|n is rniiiiueteei hy PUCO staff .is- .i "desk

audit." The ctinipluinuiit and the Respundeiit are to suhniit '-

.i statement rit their pusitirin along with any (lucunientatlon — _ -
they teel is relevant. while the parties are welerinie to r —« .
attend the meetirig~ (whieh are public, at course), there Is no ,.
Pt’DVl~I(\h tur testimony during the tncetlng anei dL‘(l~‘l()n~‘ are

hased solely upon the evidence submitted thrriiigh the desk

audit.

How iiinny alleged Tlialritmns iiriiie beeii reyavted since the

yragrflin was established?

So tar, tor the year ztiis, we are iii receipt Of roughly 3540

cases. A tew that eiid ntit rniitririii tn a legitimate Coniplaint &

according to the law were C(\ml'nunl(I\tL‘d, but not referred, to

W‘ "T5 COMMUNICATIONS

whritizre yiiiirtheuyhts nllaut llYllr1t11pyL‘flr5 ta he (1,011! , _ _ .

iiiimlier afvwpurfed alleged viuIaliuvi5.7 Ht“ ’“ W‘ =“ *1

Cull ‘ llg[ll71VT5:Vlr‘lE4C

i think there are several reasons: _I.£ 3 I W,

1. Although the entnreenient prtwhitins passed in December ’

2014 and became eftective in March 2015 they did not become

"active" until Iaiiuiiry 2015. The level of awtirenees that

was raised during that rine year ediieatiun peririd saw large

CONTINUED on PAGE 13
niii- Eiilisiiiiai-y '5?‘
Partners   «LWIII F,5'!!E!.. <> 

   9   10   11   12   13