Got a new bakery client in Baton Rouge and found something concerning. The utility''s position is that the rate change was communicated, but the tariff language doesn''t support that. The meter nameplate shows 400:5 but the billing system has 100:5.
Member Community
Enter your email to read this discussion
You're reading the AAUBA Member Forum — where Certified Utility Bill Auditors share case studies, tariff strategies, and industry insights.
Free to read. Enter your email to continue.
No spam. We'll send you one welcome email about CUBA certification. Unsubscribe any time.
Tricky backbilling violation situation at CPS Energy
Be careful with Dominion Energy''s refund process — they sometimes try to limit the lookback period to 2 years.
Solid analysis. One thing I''d add is to verify the seasonal rates apply May-October against the original service application.
Nice find. I''ve started using interval data analysis software to cross-reference these calculations and it saves a ton of time.
Excellent discussion everyone. Earl S, your approach on this Pacific Gas & Electric case is solid. For newer members, this is a great example of why thorough tariff review is essential.