I've been tracking Georgia Power's fuel adjustment clause recoveries for three major commercial clients in Atlanta. Their FAC rate jumped 2.1 cents/kWh this quarter but I'm seeing some questionable items in their fuel cost filings. They're including transmission congestion costs that should be separate line items. Has anyone else noticed this pattern? The PSC approval documents don't seem to address these allocations properly. My clients are looking at an extra $45K annually just from this one issue.
Georgia Power FAC recovery - they're getting greedy
Rachel, I've seen similar issues with TVA's fuel cost recovery mechanisms here in Tennessee. The transmission congestion piece is tricky - sometimes it's legitimate fuel-related costs, other times it's grid management that shouldn't flow through the FAC. Did you check if Georgia Power is using the same methodology they filed in their last rate case? That's usually where the devil is in the details.
Down here in Charlotte we deal with Duke Energy's fuel riders constantly. Terry's right about checking the rate case methodology. Duke got dinged by the NCUC in 2011 for including non-fuel costs in their clause. The key is looking at FERC account classifications - true fuel costs vs. purchased power vs. transmission charges. Georgia Power might be blending categories that should be kept separate.
We've had success challenging similar charges with CPS Energy here in San Antonio. The trick is getting the detailed fuel procurement records and cross-referencing with their FERC Form 1 filings. If the transmission congestion costs aren't properly documented as fuel-related, you can usually get them excluded. File a formal complaint with the PSC - they take fuel clause abuse seriously when you have solid documentation.
Angela makes a great point about the FERC Form 1 cross-reference. I pulled their 2011 filing and there's definitely some cost shifting happening. The congestion charges are showing up in both transmission expense and fuel expense categories. Going to recommend my clients file individual complaints - this could be worth six figures for some of the larger accounts.
Also in Atlanta market - can you share which rate schedules you're seeing this on? I've got several Schedule PL customers that might be affected. The timing is suspicious too, right after their Plant Vogtle cost recovery rider got approved. They might be trying to recover some of those costs through the back door via the FAC.
Here in Ohio, AEP tried a similar game with their fuel recovery rider back in 2010. The PUCO shut it down hard - $12 million disallowance plus interest. Document everything, file complaints, and don't let them slide. These utilities count on customers not paying attention to the details.
Derek H - it's affecting Schedules PL, PLM, and PLS primarily. The larger demand customers are getting hit hardest. Jim's absolutely right about documentation - I'm building a forensic audit trail going back 18 months. Will keep everyone posted on the PSC complaint results.