Case Background
On June 13,
2019, Ms. Juana Del Rosario filed an informal complaint with the Florida Public
Service Commission (Commission) against Florida Power & Light Company (FPL
or Utility). In her informal complaint, Ms. Del Rosario
alleged that she was improperly backbilled for up to 48 months of usage, for a
total of $2,351.23. Although FPL had found that her meter had been tampered
with, Ms. Del Rosario alleged that she did not tamper with the meter.
By letter dated
December 17, 2019, staff advised Ms. Del Rosario that her informal complaint
had been reviewed by the Commission’s Process Review Team, in accordance with
Rule 25-22.032, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and it appeared that FPL
had not violated any applicable statutes, rules, company tariffs, or Commission
orders. Staff advised Ms. Del Rosario that if she disagreed with staff’s
complaint conclusion, she could file a petition for initiation of formal
proceedings for relief against FPL.
Ms. Del Rosario
filed a formal complaint against FPL on January 17, 2020, pursuant to Rule
25-22.036, F.A.C. In her complaint Ms. Del Rosario stated that she did not
tamper with her meter. However, on May 16, 2019, FPL found that Ms. Del
Rosario’s smart meter was missing the outer and inner seals, which were an
indication that someone other than utility staff accessed the meter enclosure
and internal meter workings. On June 12, 2019, FPL provided notice to Ms. Del Rosario
that her service would be disconnected due to meter tampering. FPL restored Ms.
Del Rosario’s service pending the resolution of her complaint.
On March 20,
2020, staff sent a letter to Ms. Del Rosario requesting any additional
information or documentation that might assist the Commission in addressing her
complaint. Staff did not receive a response from Ms. Del Rosario.
Ms. Del Rosario
requests for the Commission to find that FPL incorrectly backbilled her account
and to require FPL to give Ms. Del Rosario a credit adjustment of $2,351.23. This
recommendation addresses the appropriate disposition of Ms. Del Rosario’s
complaint against FPL. The Commission has jurisdiction over this matter
pursuant to Section 366.04, Florida Statutes (F.S.).
Discussion
of Issues
Issue 1:
What is the appropriate disposition of Ms. Del
Rosario’s formal complaint?
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Ms. Del Rosario’s formal
complaint be denied. Ms. Del Rosario’s account was properly backbilled in
accordance with Florida statutes and rules and FPL’s tariffs. FPL did not
violate any applicable statute, rule, company tariff, or order of the
Commission in the processing of Ms. Del Rosario’s account. (Lherisson)
Staff Analysis:
Pursuant to Rule 25-22.036(2), F.A.C., a complaint
is appropriate when a person complains of an act or omission by a person subject
to Commission jurisdiction that affects the complainant’s substantial interests
and that is in violation of a statute enforced by the Commission, or of any
Commission rule or order. Ms. Del Rosario’s petition fails to show that FPL’s
backbilling of her account violates a statute, rule, or order as required by Rule
25-22.036(2), F.A.C. Therefore, the Commission should deny Ms. Del Rosario’s
petition for relief.
On April 18, 2003, Ms. Del Rosario established an account
for electric service with FPL at her residence. In 2004, FPL identified a
switched meter condition at Ms. Del Rosario’s apartment building due to a meter
can labeling mistake in part by the builders, the builders’ electricians, and
FPL when the meter was initially installed. The meters of the apartment
building were mislabeled by the builders, the builders’ electricians, and FPL
at the time the meters were installed causing every residence in the apartment
building to be improperly billed. In 2004, FPL corrected the mixed meter
condition associated with Ms. Del Rosario’s residence.
On September 14, 2010, FPL installed smart meter ACD0735
at Ms. Del Rosario’s residence. On February 25, 2019, FPL reviewed the
communication from smart meter ACD0735 and found a drop in consumption occurred
on May 22, 2014. On May
5, 2019, FPL visited Ms. Del Rosario’s residence and found that the outer
enclosure seal of smart meter ACD0735 was missing. FPL removed smart meter
ACD0735 and installed new smart meter ACD1338 with a locking device and an
outer seal on the meter enclosure. FPL sent smart meter ACD0735 to its meter
testing center. An inspection of meter
ACD0735, on May 16, 2019, revealed that the meter’s inner seal was missing; the
meter had been internally tampered with by manipulating the current transformer
(CT) wires (one of the two CT wires had been cut); and the meter test results
showed Full Load (FL) at 49.91%, Light Load (LL) at 49.97%, and Weighted
Average (WA) at 49.95%. FPL reported that the meter’s missing outer and inner
seals were an indication that someone other than utility staff accessed the
meter enclosure and internal meter workings for the purpose of meter tampering.
On June 3, 2019, FPL assessed Ms. Del Rosario’s account a
total bill of $209.96. The bill included a $13 reconnection charge; the unpaid
balance of the March billing statement of $36.13; the unpaid balance of the
April billing statement of $57.59 and a $5 late payment charge; and the unpaid
balance of the May billing statement of $93.24 and a $5 late payment charge. On
June 4, 2019, FPL received a payment of $99, yielding a total bill of $110.96.
On June 7, 2019, FPL reviewed Ms. Del Rosario’s account
and determined that a drop in consumption occurred on May 22, 2014, and an
increase in consumption occurred after the new meter was installed on May 5, 2019.
FPL backbilled Ms. Del Rosario for 48 months of under-recorded usage based on
the results of the meter test.
FPL billed Ms. Del Rosario for the 50.05% kilowatt hour (kWh) difference that
did not register on the meter due to the unauthorized condition.
Ms. Del Rosario’s cumulative bill for the period May 21,
2015 through April 22, 2019 was $2,066.99. FPL canceled that bill and rebilled
the account $3,658.43, a difference of $1,591.44. Pursuant to Section 8.3 of
its tariff, FPL also billed Ms. Del Rosario a tampering penalty of $200.00 and
investigative charges of $540.66, bringing the total backbilled amount to
$2,332.10.
On June 12, 2019, FPL went to Ms. Del Rosario’s residence
to disconnect her service due to meter tampering. FPL provided a notice
explaining the disconnection of service and the payment required to obtain
restoration of service. That same day FPL spoke with Ms. Del Rosario and explained
the meter condition, and the payment required to have her service restored. Ms.
Del Rosario argued that her service was disconnected because FPL mixed up her
meter with another unrelated customer’s meter similar to the switch that
occurred in 2004. According to FPL, if a mixed meter condition existed, another
unrelated customer’s service would have been interrupted that day. FPL asserted
that Ms. Del Rosario’s electric service would have remained operational if the
mixed meter condition had continued to exist. Additionally, FPL reported that
because the mixed meter condition was corrected in 2004, the meter backbilling
Ms. Del Rosario received in 2019 was in no way related to the previous meter
condition.
FPL advised Ms. Del
Rosario that as the account holder, she is held responsible for the backbill
for unmetered consumption since she benefitted from the unauthorized condition.
Additionally, FPL offered to reconnect the service with a payment of 50% of the
backbill and a payment arrangement for the remaining balance, which Ms. Del
Rosario declined.
On June 26, 2019, due to no payment received, FPL closed
Ms. Del Rosario’s account, effective June 12, 2019. FPL sent Ms. Del Rosario a
final bill for $2,425.09, including the final bill charges of $73.86 for
service used from May 21, 2019 to June 12, 2019, a $97.96 past due balance, a
$13.00 reconnection charge, the backbill charges of $2,332.10, a $90.00 deposit
refund, and a $1.83 deposit interest credit.
On July 2, 2019, FPL cancelled the bill charges of $73.86
consumed from May 21, 2019 to June 12, 2019, bringing the remaining balance to
$2,351.23. That same day, FPL contacted Ms. Del Rosario and advised that, as a
courtesy, her account would be reopened and the service would be reconnected,
pending the resolution of her complaint with the Commission. Ms. Del Rosario accepted
the offer to reconnect the service pending the Commission’s review of her complaint.
The account was reopened, and a request to reconnect service at the residence
was issued. The service was reconnected and a $13 reconnection charge was
issued, which yielded a new balance of $2,364.23. FPL told Ms. Del Rosario that
the backbill charges of $2,332.10 would be protected
from collection action pending the resolution and closure of her complaint
filed with the Commission; however, she would need to remain current on her
bills because the unauthorized condition (tampered meter) was corrected.
On August 6, 2019, Commission staff discussed with FPL
whether the Utility would be willing to modify the payment arrangements for the
disputed balance. FPL stated that if Ms. Del Rosario could make an initial
payment of $300, then the remaining unpaid balance of $2,032.10 could be paid
in 48 payments, including the applicable late payment charges. Commission staff relayed FPL’s offer of
payment arrangement to Ms. Del Rosario, which she rejected.
Based on staff’s review of the billing and payment
documentation provided by FPL, it appears that Ms. Del Rosario has a poor
payment history. She has made several late payments and partial payments. As a
result of her late payments, her service has been interrupted previously. Upon
review of information provided to staff and discussions with both the Utility
and Ms. Del Rosario, there is no evidence that FPL backbilled Ms. Del Rosario
incorrectly. Meter tests performed by FPL on smart meter ACD0735 revealed a
registration below the allowable tolerances due to the tampered CT wires. Ms.
Del Rosario was backbilled for 48 months based on the data collected by FPL,
which indicated that consumption dropped on May 22, 2014, one of the two CT
wires in smart meter ACD0735 had been cut, and consumption increased after the
new meter was installed on May 5, 2019. Ms. Del Rosario was backbilled the
50.05% kWh difference that did not register on the meter due to the meter
tampering. Thus, staff recommends that the Commission deny Ms. Del Rosario’s complaint
as it does not demonstrate that FPL’s backbilling of her account violates any
statutes, rules, or orders, or that FPL’s backbilling of 48 months is
unreasonable.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Recommendation:
If no person whose substantial interests are
affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the
issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a
consummating order. (Lherisson)
Staff Analysis:
If no person whose substantial interests are
affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the
issuance of the order, this docket should be closed upon the issuance of a
consummating order.
