Fellow auditors, I need some perspective on this nightmare with Arizona Public Service. Discovered a huge error on a retail client - they've been getting charged Schedule E-32 Large General Service rates when they should be on E-20 Medium General Service. The difference is about $127,000 over 4 years. APS is saying they'll only go back 24 months per their tariff. Anyone dealt with APS on statute issues?
APS limitation horror story - need advice
Evelyn, that's a tough one. Arizona utilities can be pretty rigid on their limitation periods. Have you checked if the customer ever formally requested a rate review or questioned their classification? Sometimes that can extend the recovery period if you can show the utility had notice of a potential issue.
I'm dealing with Duke Energy on a similar classification issue here in North Carolina. $127K is serious money - you might want to file a formal complaint with the Arizona Corporation Commission. Sometimes the threat of regulatory involvement makes utilities more flexible on their internal policies.
Had a case with TVA territory in Tennessee where the customer's usage profile clearly showed they qualified for a different rate 3+ years back. We argued the utility had constructive notice because the demand and usage patterns were obviously misclassified. Got them to go back 3.5 years instead of their normal 2-year limit. Worth a shot with APS.
Thanks everyone. Roy, I like that constructive notice argument. This customer's demand never exceeded 300kW in 4 years but they were getting charged the >300kW rate. That should have triggered an automatic review on APS's end. Going to compile usage data and make that case. Steve, might have to go the Corporation Commission route if they don't budge.
Evelyn, document everything and create a timeline showing when APS reasonably should have caught the error. In Arkansas with Entergy, we've had success showing utility negligence in rate application. The fact they never reviewed the account despite clear usage patterns under the threshold could work in your favor.
That's a significant overcharge. In Louisiana, our PSC has ruled that utilities can't benefit from their own errors when it comes to statute limitations. If APS had proper billing controls, they would have caught this misclassification years ago. Use their own tariff language about rate reviews against them.
Oklahoma utilities sometimes have language in their tariffs about "continuing violations" for ongoing rate errors. Check APS Schedule E-20 and E-32 - there might be provisions about rate applicability that could help your argument. Each monthly bill could be considered a separate violation rather than one continuous error.
Evelyn, I've dealt with several APS cases over the years. They can be stubborn but they respect well-documented arguments. Focus on their tariff obligations and billing accuracy requirements. If this customer never exceeded 300kW demand, there's no justification for E-32 classification. The continuing violation angle Susan mentioned is solid - each bill is a separate overcharge incident.
Randy, appreciate the insight. I'm preparing a comprehensive response using the continuing violation argument and documented proof that they should have caught this error through routine account reviews. Will also cite their own tariff language about rate applicability. If that doesn't work, Corporation Commission here I come.
Good strategy. Make sure to reference APS General Terms and Conditions section on billing adjustments. They have language about correcting errors "when discovered" that might help your case. Also check if your client ever received any rate analysis or energy audit from APS - that could show they knew the usage profile. Keep us posted on how it turns out.