[Read "Peeling The EDI Onion:  Part 1"]

Transport

The Internet has enabled anyone to throw up an FTP or HTTP website to move information.  But most of these types of solutions require people touching the data, driving up the cost of the solution.  In its origins in the 1970’s, EDI introduced mechanisms such as the Value-Added-Networks [VAN] and inner/outer envelopes that enabled parties to automate the transport of their transactions.  Computers could now reliably send transactions to other computers without people being involved.

The Internet in the 1990’s took EDI practices into new domains.  The first step was to replace the middle-men VAN’s.  Solutions like the North American Energy Standards Board’s [NAESB] (formerly Gas Industry Standards Board’s [GISB]) Internet Transport, and the Internet Engineering Task Force’s [IETF] AS2 provide transport of transactions across the Internet that assure privacy, authentication, integrity, and Non-repudiation in sending transactions.

The second step still in progress is the adoption of ‘Service-oriented architectures’ [SOA], including use of WSDL and SOAP.  SOA enables real-time exchange of information, speeding up the batch-oriented world of EDI.  You no longer need to wait a day to find out the disposition of your transaction.  Wholesale and smart-meter energy marketplace demands make real-time exchange of information critical.

Best practices

One of the most common statements we hear is ‘the cost of EDI is too high’.  The reason costs of EDI are high is classic ‘pay me now or pay me later’:  you pay higher EDI upfront costs by fully automating a process, eliminating people touching transactions and eliminating errors (which cause people to touch transactions).  Making computers speak to other computers can be expensive; the downstream savings is usually worth it.

The transactions of an energy marketplace translate into real money.  The enrollment transaction turns on a meter for an energy retailer.  The usage transaction converts into actual dollars that a customer will pay.  These transactions are extremely valuable to a retailer, and are tracked that way.  Like inventory at a warehouse, they need to be able to pull a transaction, to remove a transaction, and to view the lifecycle of each transaction.

One best practice that EDI people live by is the transaction ID.  Each EDI transaction has a unique number attached to it, enabling a company to track this information as it comes in to or leaves their organization, and the downstream actions taken on that transaction (e.g. ‘was that usage billed’).  Many non-EDI markets do not include this convention, making it difficult for energy retailers to track and maintain ‘usage’ and other inventories.

Another best practice learned from EDI world is the ‘acknowledgement’, the ‘997’ in X12 EDI world.  Non-repudiation concepts include the receiver not being able to claim they did not receive it, the proverbial ‘return receipt’ in snail mail worlds.  People with low-budget hosted FTP or HTTP sites don’t normally provide receipts/acknowledgements, opening the door to claims that trading partners never received the transactions.

These practices often mean the difference between a computer taking action or a person taking action.  They represent true cost-saving measures in an organization.

Conclusion

The real costs of ‘EDI’, no matter X12 EDI or XML EDI, is not that you have to pay someone who knows what ‘REF*12’ means.  The real cost is that you need to pay attention to the gory details that enable you to eliminate errors and people touching transactions.  There is no magic bullet or magic WSDL or magic FTP site or magic HTTP site to do this.

Fortunately if you are an energy retailer, there is ESG.

Provider of Last Resort (POLR) is the function a utility usually serves in markets that have opened energy supply to competition, serving customers who do not choose a competitive supplier.  What will the POLR of the future look like? (more…)

Starting 2/1/2010, Texas meters are moving to the head of the class.  Smart Meter Texas, a website/webservice collaborative of the big four TX TDSPs (AEP, Centerpoint, Oncor, TNMP), goes live that Monday providing energy consumers, REP’s, and other parties access to both data and features that raise the bar in smart grid world.  Where other states and markets are dipping their toes into these future capabilities, Texas is diving head first.

(more…)

ConEd hosted a ESCO meeting to announce some initiatives rolling out shortly.

Mandatory Hourly Pricing [MHP]

• MHP for accounts 1000kw – 1499kw total peak demand (not just one meter) begins Nov 2009, meters installed by Apr 2009 (300 customers)

• MHP for accounts 500kw – 999kw begins May 2011, meters installed by Apr 2010 (1400 customers)

PowerMove Expansion

• Allows Customer to choose supplier when they enroll, getting 7% savings immediately

• Expect Jun 2010 implementation pending PSC approval

Automated EDI Testing

• New automated testing process will reduce testing timeline to 10 days
• Web-based testing interface for trading partners; see progress; interact; email updates when files posted, etc.

• Implementation Jan 2010

Miscellaneous

• 600k accounts switched (3.1M total)
• 60 ESCO’s, 15 electric only, 28 gas only, 15 E&G

Attached below is FE’s summary of FE’s UCBRR solution.

Summary:  FirstEnergy-UCBRR-Summary-20090917

Links:

• Website, Rate Form for Met-Ed/Penelec:  http://www.firstenergycorp.com/supplierservices/files/Supplier_Registration/Ratedesignform%20rev%206%2021%2007.xls
• Website, Rate form for Penn Power:  http://www.firstenergycorp.com/supplierservices/files/Rates_and_EDI/suprates.pdf

The PA PUC ordered both PPL and PECO to prepare a report for how they would do Rate-Ready in their marketplaces.  PPL is leading a collaborative of LDC’s, suppliers and service providers through the requirements needed to make this happen.  Combined with POR, these markets in PA should be busy!  Notes:

• PA markets Duquesne, PennElec, MetEd, Allegheny Power and Penn Power all provide Rate Ready already.
• Most expect the new RR solution to look alot like the existing RR solutions already in place in PA
• PPL and PECO started with Bill-Ready in 1999
• To join the fray, contact Bruce Bolbat at PPL.
• A report is due to the PA PUC by 11/9/09.
• ESG is helping to coordinate Suppliers in this effort.  If interested, contact ESG at 800-773-3298.

NYC local taxes changed on 8/1 to 4½%.   Notes:

• Mayor’s proposal to charge the sales tax on ESCo charges and raise $83 million dollars was passed by the City Council in June
• New taxes for NYC go to the state legislature as well, known as a ‘home rule’.

KED

• In KED, ESCo’s have to calculate a 4 1/2% tax on charges and submit them for bill presentation as a separate line item.
• In KED POR program, KED purchases this tax along with the rest of charges.
• In KED POR, ESCo’s remit full tax amount to proper taxing authority.

ConEd

• In ConEd, the new tax is for both gas and electric.
• As in the past, Con Ed will buy the new NYC local taxes receivables as part of POR
• In ConEd, ESCO’s need to send in an 814 Change file to change the tax rate (use AMT*9M)
• As in the past, the ESCO is responsible for reporting and paying taxes to appropriate tax agency.

Miscellaneous

• If the meter is read on or after August 1, 2009, and the number of days from August 1, 2009, to the date of the meter reading is more than half the total number of days covered by the bill, report sales of these services at the new residential rate of 4½% or the nonresidential rate of 8 7/8%.  If the meter is read on or after August 1, 2009, and the number of days from August 1, 2009, to the date of the meter reading is more than half the total number of days covered by the bill, any sales of the services of transporting, transmitting, distributing, or delivering gas or electricity, even if made by someone other than the vendor of the gas or electricity, must be reported at the new rate of 4½%.

Related Resources

PSC Notice: http://www.tax.state.ny.us/pdf/notices/n09_12.pdf

ERCOT resi and small commercial customers will have new switching rules starting 8/16/09 for most territories (TDU’s have until 12/1 to complete changes).  Notes:

• On ’standard’ switch (formerly ‘on-cycle’), a customer’s first-available switch date FASD will be set 3 business days after switch received at ERCOT.  No special fees, no ‘waive notification’ option,
• If the normal read date is -3 or +3 days after FASD, that read will be used.  If outside that 7 day window, then a physical read will be made on one of the 4 days after the FASD (TDSP’s have until 12/1/09 to implement).
• The standard switch will be made 4 days after ERCOT receives the switch.
• On ’self-selected’ switch (formerly ‘off-cycle’), a customer is switched on the date selected by the REP, and TDSP fees apply.
• The rescission postcard to customers is replaced by a notification postcard (no option to rescind).
• TDSP’s must have a certain percentage of actual reads (reducing estimated reads) by 12/1/2009.

UPDATES:  above includes updates noted by Mike at TES Energy Services

The full order is here:  http://www.puc.state.tx.us/rules/subrules/electric/25.214/36536adt.pdf

Also see:  http://www.puc.state.tx.us/rules/subrules/electric/25.475/25.475.pdf

Retail energy gets one of its best tests to date when PA rate caps expire in 2010 and 2011. (more…)