|
|
|
|
|
New York Utilities Oppose Billing Of Non-Commodity Energy-Related Value-Added Product Costs Through Utility Bill, POR, In Response To ESCO Petition
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The Joint New York Utilities said that a proposed energy-related value-added product or service (ERVAS), for which NOCO Electric, LLC and NOCO Natural Gas, LLC have sought New York PSC approval, should not be billed under utility consolidated billing, and should not be included in POR
As previously reported, NOCO Electric, LLC and NOCO Natural Gas, LLC (together, NOCO) sought from the New York PSC a declaratory ruling finding that NOCO’s smart monitoring product (the SMT Product) qualifies as an energy-related value-added product or service (ERVAS) which is not subject to the mass market price caps, or alternatively granting NOCO a limited waiver to offer the SMT Product
See background on the petition and product here
The Joint Utilities do not take a position on whether NOCO’s SMT Product qualifies as an energy-related value-added product or service under the PSC's Second Retail Market Reset Order, or whether the Commission should grant NOCO a waiver of that order.
"But, even if the Commission sees merit in the SMT Product, the Joint Utilities respectfully urge the Commission to deny the petition to the extent it proposes to permit NOCO to include charges for this product on consolidated bills issued by utilities," the Joint Utilities said
Regardless of how the Commission rules on NOCO’s petition, "the Joint Utilities recommend that only commodity-related charges continue to appear on utility bills."
"The Joint Utilities recommend that charges for energy service companies’ ('ESCOs') non-commodity products should not be part of the utility bills but should instead be billed for separately by ESCOs, as allowed under existing Business Service Agreements ('BSAs') and the Commission’s Uniform Business Practices ('UBPs')," the Joint Utilities said
The Joint Utilities said, under their current Billing Service Agreements (BSAs), consolidated bills may have ESCOs’ supply charges but not charges for other products, such as non-commodity products.
"Therefore, allowing ESCOs to include non-commodity products in a utility bill, such as by allowing NOCO to bundle the charges for non-commodity products with its energy supply charges, would violate billing services agreements between utilities and ESCOs," the Joint Utilities said
"ESCOs can avoid these concerns by billing separately for any non-commodity goods or services, like the SMT Product," the Joint Utilities said
The Joint Utilities summarized, "First, utility bills are designed to clearly communicate supply and delivery charges to customers. Introducing non-commodity ESCO charges into the utility bill poses risks to customer transparency, utility operations, and the customer experience. Second, including non-commodity ESCO products on consolidated utility bills does not align with the existing UBPs. It also violates existing BSAs between ESCOs and distribution utilities, including provisions governing the Purchase of Receivables ('POR'). Third, requiring utilities to bill for non-commodity products would require clarification of rules related to partial payments, priority of payments, and termination under the Home Energy Fair Practice Act ('HEFPA'). Such a requirement would also compel utilities to adopt new billing practices, assume additional administrative burdens, manage increased collections risks, and address potential customer confusion regarding their bills."
The Joint Utilities are Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation (“Central Hudson”), Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (“Con Edison”), National Fuel Gas Distribution Corporation, New York State Electric & Gas Corporation (“NYSEG”), Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National Grid, KeySpan Gas East Corporation d/b/a National Grid, and The Brooklyn Union Gas Company d/b/a National Grid NY (“National Grid”), Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (“O&R”), and Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (“RG&E”)
Case 15-M-0127
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
September 26, 2025
Email This Story
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
|
|
|
|
|