We have a manufacturing client in Orlando who moved to a new facility in March. Duke Energy installed new service with what they claimed was 400:1 CT ratio on Schedule GS-2. Bills have been astronomical - $18,000/month vs expected $8,000. I went out and read the CT nameplate myself and it clearly shows 200:1, but their billing shows 400:1 multiplier. When I called Duke they said their records show 400:1 and they won't test without a $850 fee. Has anyone dealt with Duke on this type of issue? Mike D.
CT Ratio Wrong on New Install - Duke Energy Refusing Test
Mike D., this is a classic new install CT ratio error. Document everything with photos of the CT nameplate showing 200:1. File a formal complaint with the Florida PSC citing incorrect metering equipment installation. Duke is required to verify meter accuracy when challenged by the customer. The $850 test fee should be waived if the error is on their end, which it clearly is based on your nameplate reading. I've seen this exact scenario dozens of times - utility installers grab wrong CT ratios and billing department never double-checks against actual equipment. Keep pushing and escalate to their metering supervisor. Randy D.
Had similar issue with JEA here in Jacksonville last year. Customer was being billed at 600:1 when actual CTs were 300:1. Took three months of back and forth but we got it resolved and they issued credit for the overcharges going back to installation date. Key was getting photos of the nameplate and having an independent electrician verify the installation. Robert F.
Mike D., check if your client has demand charges too. If the CT multiplier is wrong for energy, it's definitely wrong for demand. That could be doubling the billing error. Also request copies of the original work order and installation records. Sometimes you'll find they ordered 400:1 but installer used what was on the truck. Document the delta between expected usage based on equipment loads vs actual billed usage. Marcus W.
This happened to us with Oncor in Dallas. New restaurant build, CTs installed at 200:1 but billed at 800:1. Customer got a $23K bill for first month when expected was around $4K. Oncor initially refused to test but when we filed PSC complaint they came out within a week. Turned out to be wrong multiplier programmed into their AMI head-end system. Got full credit back to service start date. Nancy P.
Check the meter itself too. Sometimes the CT ratio is correct but the meter multiplier is programmed wrong. Georgia Power did this to one of our clients - 400:1 CTs installed correctly but meter was programmed for 200:1 multiplier, so we were getting undercharged. They caught it in a routine audit and hit us with a big back-bill. Greg W.
Update - filed PSC complaint on Friday and Duke called Monday morning. Metering tech came out Tuesday and confirmed CTs are 200:1 but their billing system had 400:1. They're correcting it and issuing credit for 5 months of overcharges, about $51,000 total. Thanks for the advice everyone, PSC complaint was definitely the right move. Mike D.
Great outcome Mike D.! This is exactly why we need to verify CT ratios on every new install. I always take photos of nameplates during final inspections now. Had National Grid in Rhode Island try to bill a client at 1200:1 when CTs were actually 600:1. Caught it before first bill thankfully. Laura H.
Mike D., make sure you get documentation that the correction goes back to service start date. Georgia Power tried to limit our credit to just 12 months on a similar case even though the error went back 18 months. Had to fight for the full adjustment. Also verify they update both energy and demand multipliers if applicable. Kevin T.
This thread should be required reading for anyone doing new service audits. I've seen CT ratio errors on about 15% of new commercial installs in North Carolina. Duke, Progress Energy, even the coops make these mistakes regularly. Always verify actual equipment against billing parameters within first 90 days. Marcus.