Working on a billing dispute for a hospital client here in Cincinnati where Duke Energy's AMI meters are recording usage every 15 minutes. The utility is using this granular data to identify what they call 'anomalous usage patterns' and applying additional charges under their Schedule MGS tariff. My question is - how granular is too granular for billing purposes? The old mechanical meters gave us monthly totals, period. Now they want to bill based on 15-minute intervals and claiming usage 'spikes' that warrant penalty rates. This feels like moving the goalposts after the game started.
AMI meter reading intervals - how often is too often for billing disputes?
Cecilia, I've been dealing with similar issues with Tennessee Valley Authority down here in Alabama. Their new AMI system captures 5-minute interval data and they're using it for 'load profile analysis' that wasn't possible with mechanical meters. The problem is they're retroactively applying these interval-based charges to accounts that were originally set up under monthly billing cycles. Had one manufacturing client hit with $18,000 in 'demand ratchet penalties' based on 3 fifteen-minute spikes over six months. Fighting it with the Alabama PSC now.
This is a huge issue that doesn't get enough attention. Here in Pennsylvania, PPL is doing the same thing with their smart meters - using 15-minute interval data to retroactively identify 'billing anomalies' that would never have been caught with mechanical meters. They claim it's for 'improved accuracy' but it feels like a revenue grab. The key legal question is whether the tariff language supports this level of granular billing analysis. Most tariffs were written in the mechanical meter era and don't explicitly authorize interval-based penalty charges.
You guys are spot on about the tariff language issue. Had a similar case with Entergy Louisiana where they tried to use AMI interval data to prove a restaurant was 'power stealing' during off-peak hours. Problem was their Schedule LGS tariff had no language about interval monitoring - it was written for monthly mechanical meter reads. Won the case by arguing that customers can't be held to billing standards that didn't exist when their service agreements were signed. Got a $12,000 refund plus interest.
Juan's point about service agreement terms is crucial. I'm seeing Duke Energy in Ohio pull the same tricks Cecilia mentioned. They're using AMI data to identify 'unusual load patterns' and then demanding site inspections to look for unauthorized equipment or wiring modifications. It's like they're using the smart meters as surveillance tools rather than billing instruments. The 15-minute intervals give them way too much insight into customer operations. Sometimes I miss the simplicity of those old spinning disk meters!