Just noticed Duke Energy Carolinas added a new "Grid Modernization Rider" to our client's bill starting March 2015. It's showing up as $4.67/month on a 150 kW demand account. The tariff amendment references Schedule GM-1 but I can't find the specifics on cost recovery methodology. Anyone else in the Carolinas seeing this pop up? Trying to figure out if this is legitimate infrastructure investment or just another way to boost revenue between rate cases.
Duke Energy's new infrastructure rider - anyone else seeing this?
Derek, I've seen similar riders from TVA in our territory but nothing that specific yet. Tennessee regulators have been pretty tight on infrastructure riders lately. What's the Commission approval date on that tariff? Duke usually files these things 6 months in advance.
We're seeing infrastructure riders everywhere here in Pennsylvania. PPL just got approval for their "Distribution System Improvement Charge" that's hitting our manufacturing clients hard. The trick is making sure they're actually spending the money on what they claim. Half these utilities use riders to fund regular maintenance they should be covering in base rates.
Sylvia's right about the maintenance issue. Here in Texas, Oncor's been creative with their "Advanced Metering Charge" - started as AMI deployment but now covers everything from pole replacements to transformer upgrades. Derek, check if Duke's rider has annual true-up provisions. That's usually where the overcharges happen.
Marcus hit the nail on the head. MLGW tried something similar in 2014 but the city council shut it down. The key question is whether Duke's getting a guaranteed return on these "investments" or if they're subject to prudency review. I'd request the Commission filing and look for the cost-benefit analysis.
Good catch Reggie. Found the NCUC filing - Docket E-7 Sub 1146. Duke's projecting $2.1 billion in grid investments over 5 years with quarterly adjustments. The rider caps at $8.50/month for residential but no cap on commercial accounts. Looks like they're front-loading cost recovery before the investments are even made.
That's the red flag right there Derek. Pre-funding infrastructure without completed projects is basically giving Duke an interest-free loan from ratepayers. I'd challenge any bills showing charges before actual in-service dates. We've had success getting refunds on similar overcharges from other utilities.
Agreed. File complaints on any accounts where the timeline doesn't match up. These utilities count on customers not paying attention to the details. Document everything and prepare for a long fight - Duke's legal team doesn't back down easily on revenue streams this big.