Pa. PUC Directs Utility To Conduct Cost-Benefit Study Of Full Implementation Of EDI
July 10, 2018 Email This Story Copyright 2010-17 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • email@example.com
The following story is brought free of charge to readers byEC Infosystems, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The Pennsylvania PUC recently directed that Pike County Light & Power conduct a cost-benefit study regarding the prudence of full implementation of EDI
In a June order on reconsideration regarding various management and operations audit recommendations at Pike, the PUC addressed the issue of EDI implementation at the utility
The PUC said that, "We find Pike’s argument compelling that given its small company size, the unique configuration of its facilities, and the potential cost to its customers, the prudence of Pike fully implementing EDI capabilities should be considered before any express mandate is made. Therefore, in addition to requiring the filing of monthly updates regarding its EDI capabilities, we shall also direct Pike to file with OCMO a cost-benefit study regarding the prudence of full implementation of EDI versus the implementation of other options by its proposed date of September 1, 2018. If, at that time, Pike can provide supporting data indicating that an option other than full EDI implementation is more prudent for its customers, it may submit a further request for waiver of certain of our Regulations at 52 Pa. Code §§ 57.171-57.180, which concern the standards for changing a customer’s EGS."
Separately, Pike in its recent new default service proceeding has sought a waiver of the Pa. Code § § 57.173 and 57.174 of the Commission's accelerated switching regulations
Pike had previously been granted a waiver of the provisions.
According to the PUC's order in the audit docket, Pike noted that it currently has a manual switching process in place which permits for customer switching within a three-business day period
As summarized by the PUC in the audit order, concerning EDI issues, "Pike emphasizes that it fully supports shopping in its service territory and that it wants to ensure that its customers have the full capability to choose an Electronic Generation Supplier (EGS). However, Pike considers it more prudent to implement other less expensive options to provide EGS’s operating in its service territory with the necessary information for customer switching in lieu of fully implementing EDI. For example, Pike notes that it currently has a manual switching process in place which permits for customer switching within a three-business day period. Therefore, Pike submits that it is currently exploring the costs of benefits of fully implementing EDI versus implementing alternative options. Pike asserts that as a small company with only approximately 4,700 electric customers, full EDI implementation could have a significant impact. Namely, Pike estimates that full EDI implementation will cost $400,000 and that averaging this cost per its customer base could result in a monthly cost of $7.09 per customer. Additionally, Pike argues that full implementation will result in ongoing annual costs of approximately $40,000. Thus, Pike argues that given the unique size and configuration of its facilities, a summary determination that full EDI implementation is to occur should not happen, at present, and that no determination should be made until Pike finishes a cost-benefit analysis of its various options."