In D.97-12-090, the Commission approved the UNIS in concept, and authorized the formation of the UNISWG. The UNISWG was formed to address the design and implementation issues concerning such a system, and was directed to address the following five issues:
"1. What needs to be done in order to secure the cooperation of the UDCs, the ESPs, other entitities providing metering services, the SCs [scheduling coordinators], and the ISO [Independent System Operator], in designing and implementing a UNI numbering system.
"2. Should the UDCs, in cooperation with the ISO and with the input of other market participants, develop the database of all SDPs?
"3. Should a single entity be responsible for maintaining and updating the UNI numbering system, or should each UDC maintain and update a UNI subsystem within its own service territory?
"4. What type of control systems need to be instituted, and by whom, in order to use the UNI system for informational purposes and to detect distribution losses?
"5. How should the expenses associated with the design, maintenance and upkeep of the UNI system be treated?" (D.97-12-090, p. 10.)
The Energy Division held a workshop on January 29, 1998 to discuss the above issues and to develop a plan for filing the Workshop Report. The workshop participants developed proposed answers to the questions and selected a drafting team to prepare the report and to incorporate comments from the participants. Two subsequent meetings were held on February 19, 1998 and March 9, 1998 to revise the draft report. The Workshop Report was then finalized at a meeting held on March 17, 1998, and submitted to the Commission on March 25, 1998.
The Workshop Report describes the UNIS as "a system for assigning a unique, permanent, non-intelligent identification number (the UNI number) to each service delivery point (SDP) on each electric utility distribution system."5 The Workshop Report defines the SDP as "the point where regulated pricing of retail delivery services ends and the domain of competitive end-user products and services begins." (Workshop Report, pp. 4, 16.) The Workshop Report
recommends that the SDP record consist of three attributes: the UNI number, the UDC who serves the SDP, and a description of the physical location of the SDP. The Workshop Report states that the SDP record could be expanded in the future to include other kinds of relevant information.
The Workshop Report contains the responses of the UNISWG to the five questions posed by the Commission and are summarized below.6 The appendices to the Workshop Report provide additional information about the UNIS and how it could be implemented. Since the appendices were not discussed much at the UNISWG meeting, they do not represent any consensus among the workshop participants.
In response to the first question, the UNISWG states that in order to secure the cooperation of other parties, further effort is needed to identify and evaluate the benefits of the UNIS, and to determine the implementation requirements of each of the various parties. In addition, the proposals need to contain sufficient detail to allow realistic cost estimates to be developed.
These further efforts include additional research, discussion, thinking, education of the parties, and linkages with other working groups, as well as regulatory intervention by the Commission, the Independent System Operator (ISO) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
In response to the second question, the Workshop Report states that assuming the Commission decides that the benefits of the UNIS justify its implementation, the workshop participants agree that the UDCs should develop the SDP database. Input on the design of the UNIS should also be solicited from other parties since the design effort should be a collaborative process. The Workshop Report also recognizes that the UDCs have different constraints and existing systems which affect their ability to implement such a system in the near term.
Regarding the third question, the Workshop Report states that the UDCs should be responsible for assigning the UNI numbers and creating the SDP records. The workshop participants disagree as to whether a single, third party entity should be responsible for maintaining the SDP database and managing access to it. The participants recommend that further discussion with all relevant parties take place to define the responsibilities that should be assigned.
In response to the fourth question, the Workshop Report notes that three categories of control systems need to be established. The first system is one to ensure the proper functioning and integrity of the UNIS. The second system is to protect the confidentiality of potentially sensitive information. The third system is to ensure that the UNIS accomplishes its intended purposes.
On the fifth question, the workshop participants agree in concept that some costs should be recovered by the UDCs in accordance with authorized expense criteria, and other costs should be recovered from direct access participants through the ESPs. The allocation of the costs to these two groups should depend on the statement of work that is to be developed for the UNIS and who is identified as being responsible for the design and implementation activities.
Section 1.2 of the Workshop Report recommends that a process and schedule be adopted whereby the UNISWG develops specific UNIS proposals for the Commission, together with the costs of implementing such proposals. The Workshop Report proposes that such a report be filed within four months of the submission of the Workshop Report.
5 The assignment of the SDP occurs only in the database. There is no physical labeling of each SDP.
6 More detailed explanations of each response can be found in the Workshop Report.
