|
|
|
|
|
New York Utilities Report Higher Costs To Be Assigned To ESCOs To Implement Side-by-Side Billing Comparison; Provide Additional Implementation Details
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
NYSEG and RGE have reported in an updated filing at the New York PSC higher costs to be charged to ESCOs to implement shadow billing information, to be included in utility bills, and other aspects of General Business Law sections 349-d(9) and (10)
As previously reported by ECM, the new law requires that: (1) the "billing party" provide residential and small commercial customers with billing statements which include a side-by-side comparison of prices charged by ESCOs versus the "price" the customer would have paid had the customer been on default service, and (2) ESCOs provide an annual statement to the customer comparing the ESCO’s prices with the utility’s over the prior 12-month period.
Statute provides that ESCOs shall be responsible for any costs incurred to implement the comparisons. As first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com, the utilities seek to recover from ESCOs "all" costs to comply with GBL §§ 349-d(9) and (10)
See full background here
As first reported by ECM, NYSEG and RGE each proposed a per-customer charge to ESCOs of $10.83 per customer to recover implementation costs
NYSEG and RGE have now filed updates to such per-customer charge to ESCOs
NYSEG now approximates the per-customer charge to ESCOs as $14.14 per NYSEG residential or small non-residential ESCO account
RGE now approximates the per-customer charge to ESCOs as $12.63 per comparable RG&E account.
NYSEG and RGE cited the need for additional vendor resources, required for implementation, as causing the higher charges to ESCOs
The NYSEG and RGE estimated cost per customer is based on ESCO account counts as of June 17, 2026
"The associated costs are subject to change based on unexpected complexities encountered during development, resourcing constraints, priorities of other regulated mandates, and any further changes the Commission may require in implementing these new requirements," NYSEG and RGE said
NYSEG and RGE also provided additional implementation details
For the side by side bill comparisons on UCB, the comparison will include a comparison of billed utility delivery and ESCO supply amounts, inclusive of taxes, to billed utility delivery and hypothetical supply amounts, inclusive of taxes, had the customer taken commodity service from the utility. The amounts exclude all utility miscellaneous charges and adjustments, such as late payment charges, cancelled charges, etc.
NYSEG and RGE's comparisons will look like the chart below:
At NYSEG/RGE, for dual billed customers and for the ESCO’s 12-month comparison statements required pursuant to GBL § 349-D(10), NYSEG and RG&E will provide billed delivery amounts and hypothetical supply amounts to ESCOs to support ESCO comparisons for residential and small commercial customers. ESCOs can request consumption history for up to 500 Point-of-Delivery Identifiers per request, via NYSEG’s and RG&E’s Secured Services website portal. For each ESCO request, a flat file is posted to the ESCO’s secure web login page. The file provides up to 24 months of the most recent data by bill period. NYSEG and RG&E will append four new fields at the end of the flat file for residential and small commercial bill periods for customers receiving commodity service from an ESCO. The additional fields will be available for NYSEG and RG&E bill periods ending after the date system modifications are implemented. The four new fields are defined as follows: (1) billed delivery amounts without tax; (2) billed delivery tax amounts; (3) hypothetical utility supply amount without tax; and (4) hypothetical utility supply tax amounts.
Central Hudson also provided further details on implementation, with no change to Central Hudson's prior cost estimate of $1.09 per ESCO customer, to be charged to ESCOs
For customers receiving service under dual billing, Central Hudson will support the billing comparison requirement utilizing an existing standardized data file known as the 503B pricing history. This file will include: 1) a line item for the combined total of utility supply and delivery charges; and 2) a separate line item that contains utility supply charges.
The standardized data file 503B pricing history, which gives ESCOs access to up to 24 months of detailed billing and pricing data, will also be used by Central Hudson to provide data to ESCOs to provide the 12-month price comparison information
The joint New York utilities said that Con Edison, Orange and Rockland, National Grid, and National Fuel Gas Distribution will be filing their
updated implementation plans separately, which were not available as of publication time
The joint New York utilities, collectively, also opposed retail suppliers' call for a rulemaking or other PSC process to establish certain parameters to govern the side by side bill comparisons, prior to authorizing utility cost recovery from ESCOs
Most notably, the utilities opposed a request from the Retail Energy Supply Association who had proposed that customers covered by the PSC's "Aggregation Rule" not be provided the cost comparison, and not be included in an ESCO's account total used to divide the cost allocation. The Aggregation Rule treats a customer's accounts on a small customer service classification as non-mass-market accounts if the customer, across the customer's accounts, meets certain size thresholds on an aggregate basis (such as over 750 dekatherms or MCFs per year)
The joint utilities said that the side by side comparisons statute does not include aggregation in defining customer sizes, and expressly applies to a small non-residential customer, as that term
is defined in section sixty-six-w of the public service law
"Not aggregating would also allow more customers to see the on-bill
comparison and receive the other benefits of the Legislation, and lead to less customer
confusion," the join utilities said
The joint utilities noted that excluding customers defined as non-mass-market due to aggregation would lead to a higher per-customer cost by reducing the number of customers used to determine an ESCO's cost allocation.
NYSEG and RGE specifically will implement a new automated process to identify small commercial gas customers on an annual basis. NYSEG and RG&E’s gas service classifications are not sufficient to delineate commercial customers using 750 dekatherms or less on an annual basis, NYSEG and RGE said
Notably, NYSEG and RGE said, "NYSEG and RG&E bill customers at the account-service level and, accordingly, will apply the 750-dekatherm threshold at the individual account-service level".
NYSEG and RGE said, "This approach is more inclusive than applying the threshold based on aggregated consumption across multiple accounts associated with a single customer. As a result, it ensures that, at a minimum, bill comparisons are provided to all residential and eligible small non-residential customers as required by GBL 349-D(9)."
The joint utilities generally said that various issues raised by ESCOs concerning the new law are broader in scope than the cost recovery authority sought by the utilities. See full details of such issues raised by ESCOs here
"[B]roader disputes
concerning rate design, renewal notices, and other policy matters fall outside the scope
of this proceeding," the utilities said
The joint utilities opposed any delay in cost recovery, calling the new law "self-effective," and further stated that, "the legislature has not granted
the Commission the authority to delay the effective date".
Utilities did agree that costs assigned to an ESCO should be tied only to an ESCO’s residential and small non-residential
customers, as defined by the legislation, and not the supplier's entire customer base
The utilities agreed that costs should not be imposed on ESCOs that do not serve customers covered by the statute
The utilities' request to recover the specific implementation costs remains pending before the PSC
Cases 98-M-1343, 15-M-0127, et al.
ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2026 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 23, 2026
Email This Story
Copyright 2026 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW -- Enrollment & Rate Management Director - Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Strategic Sales Channels Manager - Retail Supplier
• NEW -- Controller - Retail Provider
• NEW -- Manager, Product I - VXRetail (Retail Energy)
• Refreshed 5/27/26 -- Manager, ISO Coordination (electricity), Retail Supplier
|
|
|
|
|