|
|
|
|
|
PSC Orders Utilities To Continue Work On Supplier Consolidated Billing Implementation
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
With new legislation only addressing the purchase of residential receivables, the Maryland PSC ordered the state's investor-owned utilities to continue work on implementing supplier consolidated billing
As first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, Potomac Electric Power Company, and Delmarva Power & Light Company in Maryland, which collectively referred to themselves as the "Exelon Utilities" in their filing (hereafter, "Exelon Utilities"), had submitted a "notification" to the PSC that, in light of language in SB1 prohibiting the purchase of residential receivables by an EDC, the Exelon Utilities intended to "pause" work on IT systems updates to implement Supplier Consolidated Billing (SCB)
The PSC, in an order issued today after hearing the issue at an administrative meeting in June, stated, "The Commission finds that the Exelon Utilities inappropriately styled their May 15, 2024 request as a 'Notification of Intent to Pause Work. (Emphasis added [by PSC]). The utilities had no authority to unilaterally cease compliance with COMAR 20.53.05.07, COMAR 20.59.05.09, and Order No. 89116 [relating to SCB], absent express approval from the Commission -- a point the Exelon Utilities appear to have conceded at the June 12, 2024 hearing."
The PSC generally noted that SB 1 prohibits, for retail choice suppliers, the sale of residential accounts receivable from a retail supplier to a utility, and the purchase of receivables by a utility from a retail supplier.
SB 1 does not prohibit non-residential POR in any form. The PSC noted that its existing rules for SCB do not distinguish between residential and non-residential service
"Given that the provisions of SB 1 will not impact the POR for non-residential customers, and that the utilities will still need to have IT system updates in place for SCB to serve non-residential customer classes by December 31, 2024, the Commission directs the utilities to continue work related to the implementation of SCB unless otherwise stated in future Commission determinations," the PSC said
The PSC ordered briefing on the impact that SB1 will have on SCB implementation
The PSC specifically sought comment on the following:
• the impacts that the POR provision in SB 1 will have on SCB implementation for both residential and non-residential customers
• the interest (or lack thereof) of retail electric and gas suppliers to participate in SCB following the passage of SB 1 as well as the participation of retail suppliers in the utilities’ IT system testing for SCB implementation
• the status of IT work that is being conducted by the utilities related to SCB implementation and the potential impacts, including cost, to both completed and future work if a pause on SCB implementation work is ordered by the Commission
• the current cost of SCB implementation and the impacts on the recovery of SCB implementation costs to different entities (including, without limitation, ratepayers and suppliers) if suppliers do not participate in SCB or a pause on SCB implementation work is instituted by the Commission
While SB 1 prohibits the purchase of residential receivables, retail suppliers have argued that, under the law, such provision applies only to generation receivables, not distribution receivables
SCB as implemented in Maryland includes the retail supplier’s purchase of utility delivery charges from the utility and the potential re-purchase by the utility of such delivery charges in the event of a customer nonpayment.
As such, retail suppliers have argued that SB1 does not prohibit the current design of SCB for residential customers
The PSC in its order did not specifically discuss this question concerning whether SB1's prohibition on the purchase of receivables applies to receivables related to delivery service. The PSC also did not address other substantive issues, as it requested briefing as noted above
The PSC in its discussion did state, "SB 1 prohibits the sale of accounts receivable from a residential electric or gas supplier to an electric or gas company and prohibits the purchase of accounts receivable by an electric or gas company from the electric or gas supplier," but in context, this general recitation by the PSC appeared more to establish the issue giving rise to the Exelon Utilities' sought pause, rather than the PSC making a finding with respect to the meaning of the statute's text providing for such receivables prohibition, and the PSC's language does not appear to indicate that the PSC made a finding that SB 1's provision applies to all receivables (not only generation receivables as argued by retail suppliers)
Regarding cost recovery, as previously reported, the PSC previously split cost recovery for SCB between SCB suppliers and distribution ratepayers, with SCB suppliers to be charged a $2 fee per supplier consolidated bill. If no suppliers use SCB, the costs allocated to SCB participants would ostensibly need to be recovered through other means
Case 9461
ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Copyright 2024 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
Orders Briefing On New Law's Impact On SCB
July 12, 2024
Email This Story
Copyright 2024 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
NEW Jobs on RetailEnergyJobs.com:
• NEW! -- Director, Load Forecasting
-- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Origination Analyst
-- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Wholesale Markets Analyst -- Retail Supplier
• NEW! -- Billing Supervisor
• NEW! -- Settlements Analyst
-- Retail Supplier
|
|
|
|