PG&E Advanced Metering Assessment

for Residential Electric Customers

September 2, 2010
Structure Overview
Deep subject matter expertise with proven delivery methodologies
to address energy & utility companies’ transformation needs

Smart Grid
Distribution SCADA and
Operations Energy
and Management
Automation

Market Trading and

Solutions Risk
Disclaimers
• Reasonable efforts performed to complete engagement
• No assurances that all issues were identified, or that
future issues may not develop after assessment
completion
• Impartial and independent evaluation
• Findings developed independently from CPUC and PG&E
• Results not shared with PG&E in advance
Assessment Scope
Independently evaluate and address 3 questions regarding PG&E’s
Smart Meter system’s ability to accurately measure, collect, calculate,
and bill electric customer usage:

1. Does PG&E’s SmartMeterTM system measure and bill electric

usage accurately, both now and since PG&E’s Smart Meter
deployment began?
2. What factors contributed to Smart Meter high bill complaints?
3. How does PG&E’s SmartMeterTM Program’s past and current
operational and deployment practices compare against the
framework of industry best practices?
1. Does PG&E’s SmartMeterTM system measure and bill
electric usage accurately, both now and since PG&E’s
Smart Meter deployment began?
PRESENT SINCE DEPLOYMENT
• Smart Meters are • No systemic issues were
accurately recording found beyond exceptions
electric usage already reported by PG&E

• Systems are correctly • Limited exceptions were

processing data & billing identified but were not
usage prevalent in deployed
meters
 2. What factors contributed to high bill complaints?

Customer Usage Rates Customer Service Process Issues

•Smart meter • Rate increases • Smart Meter •Extended manual

deployment amplified weather education / reading of Smart
coincident with impact on usage skepticism Meters
heat wave
• Incorrectly • PG&E complaint
•Other load •Billing quality
applied rates resolution did not
increase provide Customer control
coincident with • Manual CARE
with relevant •Installation
smart meter renewal available data
requirements challenges
installation
• CPUC complaint
•Electromechanical resolution
meter degradation
 3. How does PG&E’s SmartMeterTM program’s past and
current operational and deployment practices compare
against the framework of industry best practices?
Historical Current
10 Gaps in Best Practices
8

6 • Communication backbone
4
installation timing
2 • Manual meter read
0 transition
Installation

troubleshooting
Meter equipment

Meter deployment

MDM interfaces

Data validation

Account billing
standards
Manufacturing

• Billing quality control

Complaint
quality

safety

• Complaint
troubleshooting
Assessment Focus Areas
Laboratory Meter Testing
Field Meter Testing
End-to-end Systems Testing
High Bill Complaint Evaluation
Best Practices for Smart Meters
Security Assessment
• 156 meters
• 6 meters - environmental tests
• 611 Smart Meters
• 147 electromechanical meters
• 5 laboratory-controlled meters
• 4 field complaint customers
• Monitored over 1 month bill cycle
• 1,378 complaints analyzed
• 97,000 records – historical usage
• 20 customer interviews
• 8 practice areas, 152 audit items
• 3 peer industry experts consensus
• Requirements per AMI-SEC “best
practices” standard
 METER Test Results
Laboratory

• 100% Smart • 100% passed

End to End System

• 100% passed

Field
accuracy test Meters passed meter accuracy,
accuracy testing communications,
• 156 factory
shipped meters • 611 Field tested estimation
tested routines, billing
• 6 environmental • 95.92% systems
tested Electromechanical
• 5 laboratory-
passed accuracy simulated event
testing Smart Meters
• 4 field Smart Meter
• 147 field tested customers
• 6 failed
 OTHER Results

• 1,378 Smart • In place or being • Cyber security

High Bill Complaints

Best Practices

Security Assessment
Meter historical implemented with framework was
complaints limited exceptions developed
• Usage correlation • Meter manufacturing meeting Smart
between 2006 and 2009 quality control Grid industry
weather • Meter installation
• Cancel/re-bill impact standards requirements
• Meter equipment safety • Document review
• 20 Customer • Meter deployment • Security
interviews (biased • Meter Data • Executive interviews
Management interfaces
sample)
• Validating, Editing and
• Unsatisfied with PG&E Estimating and Editing
customer service and for monthly and interval
complaint resolution data
process • Account billing
• High bill complaint
troubleshooting
Conclusion
AMI system deployed by PG&E appeared:
• Consistent with industry standards

• Accurate from meter data flow to billing

• Weak focus on customer service

• Some PG&E practices found to be partially non-

compliant relative to industry best practices
 THANK YOU

STACEY WOOD
THE STRUCTURE GROUP
Inquiries@thestructuregroup.com