This one still keeps me up at night sometimes. Large steel fabrication plant in Pittsburgh, Duquesne Light customer for over 30 years. Client called me in because their bills had jumped about 40% over the past year with no major operational changes. I spent two weeks analyzing their usage patterns, demand profiles, power factor, everything looked normal. Then I started digging into the rate schedule history and found the problem - Duquesne had quietly moved them from an old grandfathered industrial rate to a standard large general service rate. The difference was costing them $73K annually. Here's the kicker: the rate change was completely legitimate and properly noticed according to tariff rules. I had focused so much on finding billing errors that I missed the bigger picture. Sometimes the real money is in rate optimization, not error correction. Client ended up saving the $73K by switching to a different rate schedule that better matched their load profile.
The $73K mistake that taught me about rate schedule changes
Walt, that's a great lesson and honestly one that a lot of auditors miss. We get so focused on finding mathematical errors that we forget to evaluate whether the client is even on the optimal rate schedule. MLGW has about 8 different commercial rate options, and I'd say 60% of my clients could save money just by switching rates. The utilities aren't going to proactively suggest better rates - that's our job as auditors to analyze and recommend.
Avista up here in Spokane has some really complex rate structures, especially for industrial customers. I've learned to do a rate comparison analysis for every client as part of my standard audit process. Takes maybe 4 hours of extra work, but I've found rate optimization opportunities worth $50K+ on multiple occasions. Sometimes the biggest "error" is just being on the wrong rate schedule.
PSE here in Washington has been really aggressive about moving customers off older rate schedules. Had a manufacturing client who got moved from a legacy time-of-use rate to a standard general service rate that cost them about $35K annually. The notice was buried in their bill insert and they never paid attention to it. Now I always review rate schedule changes as part of my audit process - utilities are required to notice changes, but they don't have to make it obvious.
TEP down in Arizona has some grandfathered rates from the 1990s that are way better than current offerings. Had a client who got automatically moved to a new rate when they added a small expansion. The new rate cost them an extra $28K per year. We were able to get them back on the old rate by arguing the expansion didn't materially change their load profile. The key was understanding the tariff language about what triggers mandatory rate changes.
National Grid here in Rhode Island has gotten much better about rate transparency, but older accounts can still have legacy issues. What I do now is create a rate schedule timeline for every client - when they started service, every rate change, every tariff modification. It helps identify opportunities and also explains why bills might have changed over time. Clients appreciate understanding their billing history.
Duke Energy here in Charlotte has been consolidating rate schedules and forcing customers onto "simplified" rates that aren't always cheaper. I've found several cases where clients could save significant money by requesting to stay on or move to older, more complex rate structures. The utilities prefer the simple rates because they're easier to administer, but they're not always in the customer's best interest.
Evergy out here in Kansas has some really good time-of-use rates for the right type of customer. Had a grain elevator that was paying peak rates during their busiest season, costing them about $45K annually. Moved them to a seasonal rate structure that matched their operational pattern and cut their demand charges in half. The lesson is understanding not just the client's usage, but when they use power and how that aligns with available rate options.
OG&E here in Oklahoma has some hidden gems in their rate schedules if you know where to look. Found a manufacturing client who qualified for an economic development rate that saved them $62K annually. The rate had been available for years, but nobody at the utility ever mentioned it. Sometimes you have to dig through every available tariff to find the best fit.
Alabama Power has some complex rate structures, but they also have some really good programs for the right customers. The key thing I learned from Walt's example is to always look at the big picture. Yes, find the billing errors, but also make sure the client is optimized from a rate perspective. That's where the real money often is.
MLGW keeps things pretty straightforward here in Memphis, but even we have some optional rate structures that can save money for the right customer. Walt's story reminds me why I always include rate optimization in my audit proposals. It's not just about finding errors - it's about making sure the client is getting the best possible deal from their utility.
Ohio Edison up in Youngstown has been pushing customers toward "simplified" billing that eliminates some of the more favorable rate options. Had a client who was automatically moved to a standard rate that cost them an extra $30K annually. We fought it and got them back on their original rate by arguing the change wasn't properly noticed. Sometimes you have to advocate aggressively for your clients.
FirstEnergy here in Cleveland has some legacy industrial rates that are fantastic if you can qualify. The trick is understanding the qualification requirements and helping clients structure their operations to take advantage. Walt's right that rate optimization is often more valuable than error correction. We should be consultants, not just bill auditors.
SWEPCO down here in Louisiana has some really competitive industrial rates, but you have to ask for them specifically. They won't volunteer the information. Walt's experience shows why we need to be proactive advocates for our clients. The utilities have teams of people working to maximize revenue - our clients need someone working just as hard to minimize their costs. Great thread Walt, really valuable lesson for all of us.