I've got three commercial clients here in Lake Charles getting hit with a new line item from Entergy Louisiana called "Regulatory Cost Recovery Adjustment" starting in September 2024. The charges range from $285 to $1,840 per month depending on account size. When I called Entergy, they said it's to recover costs from recent LPSC proceedings, but they won't specify which proceedings or provide the calculation methodology. Has anyone else seen these charges? I'm concerned they're double-billing for costs already included in base rates.
Entergy Louisiana mysterious "regulatory adjustment" charges
Estelle, we're seeing similar charges here in Arkansas with Entergy Arkansas, but they're calling it "Regulatory Asset Recovery." Started around the same time as yours. The Arkansas PSC approved a rider for storm damage costs, but these charges seem way higher than what was authorized. I think Entergy might be using the same rider name for different cost categories across states.
This is classic Entergy behavior. They love creating vague "adjustment" charges that customers can't easily verify. Here in New York we don't deal with Entergy much, but I've heard from colleagues that they're notorious for these mystery line items. The key is demanding specific LPSC docket numbers and approved tariff language. If they can't provide both, the charge is probably improper.
Tom's advice is spot-on. I filed formal data requests with both Entergy and the LPSC asking for the docket numbers and tariff provisions authorizing these charges. Entergy's response was basically "we'll get back to you" and it's been three weeks. The LPSC hasn't responded at all. Meanwhile, the charges keep showing up on bills. This is exactly why customers lose faith in utility regulation.
Estelle, I'm dealing with a similar issue here in Corpus Christi with AEP Texas. They added something called "Transmission Cost Recovery Factor" that wasn't in any published tariff. After four months of back-and-forth, turns out it was a billing system error affecting about 200 commercial accounts. Sometimes these "regulatory adjustments" are just coding mistakes. Might be worth checking if all commercial customers are getting the same treatment.
Lena, that's a great point. I requested billing data for similar commercial accounts and found some interesting patterns. Accounts on Rate Schedule LGS-1 are getting charged $0.0028/kWh, but LGS-2 accounts are getting $0.0041/kWh for the same "regulatory adjustment." When I asked why, they said different rate classes have different cost allocations, but that doesn't match any LPSC-approved methodology I can find.
The varying rates across schedules is suspicious. In Texas, CenterPoint tried something similar where they allocated storm costs differently by customer class without clear justification. The PUC made them recalculate and issue refunds. You should definitely file a formal complaint with the LPSC - they take cost allocation issues seriously, especially when utilities can't explain their methodology.
Angela's right about filing with the commission. But also consider contacting the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry - they have lawyers who specialize in utility issues and might be interested in a pattern of improper charges. If multiple customers are affected, they sometimes coordinate group complaints that get more attention than individual filings.
Good suggestion Tom. I reached out to LABI and they're definitely interested. Turns out they've gotten complaints from at least a dozen other businesses about similar Entergy charges. They're considering filing a formal intervention in whatever docket these charges are supposed to be based on - assuming we can figure out which docket that is. The plot thickens.
Estelle, any update on the LABI intervention? We're putting together a similar effort here in Arkansas with the State Chamber. Entergy seems to be testing these mystery charges across their entire service territory. If we coordinate our challenges across states, it might get more attention from their corporate headquarters.
Kenneth, LABI filed their intervention last week in LPSC Docket No. U-36892. Turns out the charges are supposedly based on a 2023 rate case settlement that authorized recovery of "regulatory proceeding costs." But the settlement language is so vague it could justify almost any charge. We're arguing that Entergy is exceeding the scope of what was actually approved. Will keep everyone posted as this develops.
Estelle, I've been following this thread with interest. Here in Memphis we deal with MLGW so we don't see Entergy charges directly, but I've worked on similar "regulatory cost recovery" disputes in other states. The key argument is usually that utilities can't recover the same costs twice - once through base rates and again through riders. Make sure LABI's lawyers are checking whether any of these costs were already included in Entergy's last depreciation study or rate base calculation.
Randy, excellent point about double recovery. I forwarded your suggestion to the LABI attorneys and they're now requesting Entergy's work papers from the 2023 rate case to see what regulatory costs were already included in the revenue requirement. This could be the smoking gun we need to prove the charges are improper. Thanks for the insight!
Happy to help Estelle. These cases are all about the paper trail - utilities count on customers not having the resources to dig through rate case documents. But when you start asking for work papers and cost studies, they often realize their charges won't hold up to scrutiny. Keep pushing for documentation and don't accept vague explanations. The LPSC staff should be your ally in getting answers.