My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.1. ERMUSR 07-06-2004
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2004
>
07-06-2004
>
6.1. ERMUSR 07-06-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2013 12:07:16 PM
Creation date
10/1/2013 12:07:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
7/6/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Elk River <br /> Municipal Utilities <br /> 13069 Orono Parkway phone: 763.441.2020 <br /> Elk River,MN 55330 Fax 763.441.8099 <br /> June 29, 2004 <br /> To: Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission <br /> Jerry Takle <br /> Jim Tralle <br /> John Dietz <br /> From: Bryan Adams <br /> Subject: Electric Meter Accuracy <br /> One of our customers in Otsego called, concerned about high electric usage. This <br /> specific facility has six meters. The owner sub meters for their information, some of their <br /> facilities and the sub meter totals are not close to our billing meters. Upon further <br /> investigation, three of the six accounts utilize form 3S meters with a single current <br /> transformer. The proper "CT" ratio is 1/2 of the calculated "CT" ratio. Unfortunately we <br /> were utilizing the calculated "CT" ratio which in effect is billing twice the actual usage. <br /> These services were installed over 20 years ago and to the best of our knowledge, the <br /> metering has not been changed since the initial installation. Based upon the last 12 <br /> month consumption history, we have been over billing this customer approximately <br /> $8300.00/year. <br /> The PUC (public utility commission) rules for metering errors, refunds or charges shall <br /> be computed for a period of no longer than one year. Under state law, if the error is a <br /> result of negligence or fraud, the termination is six years. The customer supposedly has <br /> records back seven years. Out of fairness, does this commission desire to exceed the <br /> statuary requirements? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.