CPOPE
12-26-2011, 10:17 AM
11:00 PM, Dec. 23, 2011 |
Ben Jones
and Jeff Starck
MADISON -- Faulty meters, data-entry mistakes and other problems created an unpleasant surprise last year for thousands of Wisconsin electricity customers.
The 94 electric utilities operating in the state imposed $6.3 million in back charges on nearly 7,700 Wisconsin customers, a Gannett Wisconsin Media analysis of state records found. Conversely, the utilities refunded $5.2 million in overcharges to about 2,800 customers.
The charges are perfectly legal. And in some cases, they are used to collect for stolen service.
In the industry, the charges are called "billing corrections." But Brian Carriere of Star Prairie in northwestern Wisconsin calls them something different.
"We had kind of a nightmare," said Carriere, who was hit with a nearly $1,000 back charge in 2009 from Northern States Power Co.
The utility told Carriere it had underestimated his bills during an eight-month span when the utility was unable to access his home's meter.
State law allows utilities to back bill for up to two years of errors, even those caused by the utilities. Refunds can cover up to six years of mistakes. Utility officials, including those at Northern States Power, contend that the law requires them to make the corrections.
They say back-billing situations are unfortunate but sometimes unavoidable, and the state's system for making adjustments works.
"It's not perfect, but the electric meters aren't perfect, either," said Scott Meske, associate director for Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin, an association representing 82 municipal-owned utilities.
"Is there a way to ensure 100 percent accuracy 100 percent of the time? Even Aaron Rodgers is inaccurate once in a while," Meske said.
But state Sen. Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, who introduced legislation this year to end back billing, said Gannett Wisconsin Media's findings demonstrate that problems happen too often.
"It means that they don't have a very efficient, test-worthy system," Ellis said. "If they have got that many over- and undercharges, that seems to me to be a lot. In this era of technology, they ought to be able to come up with a process to identify how much they are selling to the customer. And they ought to be able to do that without 11,000 mistakes."
While the largest utilities all issued charges and refunds during 2010, many smaller utilities did not. Twenty-seven of them reported they had no billing adjustments, records show.
Wisconsin Public Service Corp., central Wisconsin's largest electric utility, with about 500,000 customers, issued $652,528 in refunds to 363 customers and back-billed 884 customers for a total of $541,797.
In 2011, WPSC has seen a significant reduction in both the number of customers who received refunds or were back-billed and the amount refunded or billed. About 250 customers have received a total of approximately $381,000 in refunds through the first 11 months of the year, and about 1,500 customers were back-billed a total of approximately $340,000, WPSC spokesman Kerry Spees said.
Two technology changes in the past year have led to the reductions, Spees said. WPSC now is using an automated meter reading system that notifies the company if no power is used at a home or business for 10 days, instead of 30 days under the previous system. Natural gas gauges also are now inspected annually for potential problems, Spees said.
"We have rules we have to follow, and that's unfortunate in some cases for customers and fortunate for others," Spees said of refunds and back-bills.
We Energies, the state's largest utility, was responsible for the most back charges and refunds. Back charges totaling $3.5 million were imposed on 5,466 customers, and refunds also totaling $3.5 million were issued to 982 customers. Faulty meters were to blame for $1.7 million back charged to 489 customers, and $2.8 million in refunds paid to 807 customers.
Brian Manthey, a spokesman for We Energies, said billing corrections affected less than 1 percent of his utility's 2.2 million customers last year. "It's a very, very low percentage -- and it's pretty typical for what we've seen in any given year," he said.
Manthey said the utility works to prevent problems that require billing corrections.
Computer programs flag trouble early; workers train to properly install meters; and inspection processes continue to improve.
But Manthey said meters are mechanical devices that are in constant use outdoors in a punishing climate.
"Despite that, we do get a high percentage of meters that do register accurately the amount of energy that has been used," he said. "While, yes, it's likely that there are going to be some cases of (back billing), we try to keep it as minimal as possible."
When back charges are issued, We Energies works closely with customers to set up payment plans, Manthey said.
Ellis' proposed legislation would prevent utilities from back billing individual customers or passing those costs to other customers.
"(The money) is going to come from the shareholders," Ellis said. "And we want the shareholders to insist that their management teams have proper equipment."
Ellis' proposal failed to get the support of a legislative committee last month, but he plans to push for a floor vote next year.
"It's the right thing to do," he said.
Ben Jones
and Jeff Starck
MADISON -- Faulty meters, data-entry mistakes and other problems created an unpleasant surprise last year for thousands of Wisconsin electricity customers.
The 94 electric utilities operating in the state imposed $6.3 million in back charges on nearly 7,700 Wisconsin customers, a Gannett Wisconsin Media analysis of state records found. Conversely, the utilities refunded $5.2 million in overcharges to about 2,800 customers.
The charges are perfectly legal. And in some cases, they are used to collect for stolen service.
In the industry, the charges are called "billing corrections." But Brian Carriere of Star Prairie in northwestern Wisconsin calls them something different.
"We had kind of a nightmare," said Carriere, who was hit with a nearly $1,000 back charge in 2009 from Northern States Power Co.
The utility told Carriere it had underestimated his bills during an eight-month span when the utility was unable to access his home's meter.
State law allows utilities to back bill for up to two years of errors, even those caused by the utilities. Refunds can cover up to six years of mistakes. Utility officials, including those at Northern States Power, contend that the law requires them to make the corrections.
They say back-billing situations are unfortunate but sometimes unavoidable, and the state's system for making adjustments works.
"It's not perfect, but the electric meters aren't perfect, either," said Scott Meske, associate director for Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin, an association representing 82 municipal-owned utilities.
"Is there a way to ensure 100 percent accuracy 100 percent of the time? Even Aaron Rodgers is inaccurate once in a while," Meske said.
But state Sen. Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, who introduced legislation this year to end back billing, said Gannett Wisconsin Media's findings demonstrate that problems happen too often.
"It means that they don't have a very efficient, test-worthy system," Ellis said. "If they have got that many over- and undercharges, that seems to me to be a lot. In this era of technology, they ought to be able to come up with a process to identify how much they are selling to the customer. And they ought to be able to do that without 11,000 mistakes."
While the largest utilities all issued charges and refunds during 2010, many smaller utilities did not. Twenty-seven of them reported they had no billing adjustments, records show.
Wisconsin Public Service Corp., central Wisconsin's largest electric utility, with about 500,000 customers, issued $652,528 in refunds to 363 customers and back-billed 884 customers for a total of $541,797.
In 2011, WPSC has seen a significant reduction in both the number of customers who received refunds or were back-billed and the amount refunded or billed. About 250 customers have received a total of approximately $381,000 in refunds through the first 11 months of the year, and about 1,500 customers were back-billed a total of approximately $340,000, WPSC spokesman Kerry Spees said.
Two technology changes in the past year have led to the reductions, Spees said. WPSC now is using an automated meter reading system that notifies the company if no power is used at a home or business for 10 days, instead of 30 days under the previous system. Natural gas gauges also are now inspected annually for potential problems, Spees said.
"We have rules we have to follow, and that's unfortunate in some cases for customers and fortunate for others," Spees said of refunds and back-bills.
We Energies, the state's largest utility, was responsible for the most back charges and refunds. Back charges totaling $3.5 million were imposed on 5,466 customers, and refunds also totaling $3.5 million were issued to 982 customers. Faulty meters were to blame for $1.7 million back charged to 489 customers, and $2.8 million in refunds paid to 807 customers.
Brian Manthey, a spokesman for We Energies, said billing corrections affected less than 1 percent of his utility's 2.2 million customers last year. "It's a very, very low percentage -- and it's pretty typical for what we've seen in any given year," he said.
Manthey said the utility works to prevent problems that require billing corrections.
Computer programs flag trouble early; workers train to properly install meters; and inspection processes continue to improve.
But Manthey said meters are mechanical devices that are in constant use outdoors in a punishing climate.
"Despite that, we do get a high percentage of meters that do register accurately the amount of energy that has been used," he said. "While, yes, it's likely that there are going to be some cases of (back billing), we try to keep it as minimal as possible."
When back charges are issued, We Energies works closely with customers to set up payment plans, Manthey said.
Ellis' proposed legislation would prevent utilities from back billing individual customers or passing those costs to other customers.
"(The money) is going to come from the shareholders," Ellis said. "And we want the shareholders to insist that their management teams have proper equipment."
Ellis' proposal failed to get the support of a legislative committee last month, but he plans to push for a floor vote next year.
"It's the right thing to do," he said.