11.6 Developing Standards for Meters and Communication Systems
As the competitive retail energy market emerges, the number of players with a vested interest in access to usage measurement information will increase exponentially compared to current levels. To mitigate the complexity resulting from competition, the adoption of a set of standards to govern metering and communications systems is highly desirable. All stakeholders can agree, conceptually, that standards adoption will facilitate the implementation of direct access and consumer choice. Regrettably, consensus regarding the actual standards to be adopted has not emerged. This subsection attempts to clarify the discussion of standards for metering and communications systems and provide a recommendation for proceeding with standards adoption.
The need for adoption of standards can be broken into two major categories: 1) Standards required for Performance of Work , consisting of operations, maintenance and installation (as defined in Section 11.5.1.3), and 2) Standards required to ensure access to required usage measurements by all authorized stakeholders, consisting of hardware and software.
For the purposes of discussion, the term "Standards" is used in a generic sense and includes standards, specifications, rules, policies and procedures, and other requirements.
11.6.1 Standards for Performance of Work
While the accountability for recommendations regarding who should perform the activities of operations, maintenance and installation are the purview of the ratesetting working group and the Commission itself, this section attempts to describe the types of performance standards that will continue to assure consumers of reliable, accurate and safe connection to utility distribution systems. Alternative pros and cons for who should perform these activities were presented in Section 11.5.1.3.
11.6.1.1 Standards for Operation of Metering and Communication Systems
In the case of operations, performance standards, not product specifications, are needed to insure efficacy, efficiency, reliability, compatibility and safety of the operation. The stakeholders will need to define these performance standards. Section 11.6.3.1 will discuss a process for accomplishing this task.
Standards for meter reading accuracy and timeliness, and transfers of meter data to other parties are just a few of the performance standards that must be included in the metering standards for operations.
11.6.1.2 Standards for Maintenance and Installation of Metering and Communications Systems
Should the Commission elect, maintenance and installation of revenue meters could be done by pre-qualified firms including: meter installation firms, electrical contractors, power suppliers (retailers), third party metering firms and the UDC. Firms will need to be pre-qualified based on their technical skills, training, and ability to safely and reliably install metering equipment according to set standards.
Third parties that install meters must be subject to metering installation standards, which should be based on current UDC standards and applicable governmental codes, ordinances, and rules pertaining to metering equipment, including safety and reliability requirements. All metering installers must accept responsibility and liability for any work performed.
While meters have typically required low levels of maintenance, the useful life of a solid-state meter is expected to be shorter than that of conventional electromechanical meters, but is currently unknown. Appropriate quality standards will be required for meter maintenance and repair. Questionable meters could be tested at any time, although testing costs could eventually be passed on to the party which questioning the accuracy. If found out-of-tolerance, meter testing and repair or replacement costs would likely accrue to the owner.
11.6.1.3 Customer Installation of Metering
Much has been made of the supposed similarities between a meter and a phone. Some have gone so far as to speculate that one day, a consumer will be able to walk into their local discount store, purchase their meter of choice , take it home and plug it in. While this alternative is unavailable today, it is conceivable that such a scenario could occur in future. This subsection attempts to describe the barriers which market forces must overcome in order to enable this alternative without taking a position on whether or not this market will develop.
11.6.1.3.1 The "Universal Plug"
To create a retail market in meters similar to the one that telecommunications devices now enjoy, a universal 'plug' similar to the standard two and three prong plug attached to electrical appliances would need to be developed for meters. This would allow the consumer to plug-in their meter just like a new lamp.
Technological changes to the meter and socket would need to occur in order to create the equivalent of a "phone jack" for electricity meters. First, the meter/socket connection must become "one-size-fits-all". Second, a meter socket with a "dead-front" would have to be developed.
11.6.1.3.1.1 Current Barriers to the Development of a Universal Plug
Barrier 1: Meters and meter sockets are already standardized.
Meter vendors, meter cabinet, and meter switchboard manufacturers presently design their meters and sockets using ANSI C12.10, the accepted industry standard. This standard addresses the internal connections for watt-hour meters. There are approximately 25 forms for socket-base electric meters (as well as their counter parts for A-base and switchboard mounted meters).
The various standard forms correspond to the various standard electric service configurations designed to meet customer specific power requirements. These service configurations are based on specific customer loads and power equipment requirements which vary in many different capacities (5 to 4000 amperes), voltage levels (120 to 230,000 volts), transformer connections (star or delta), base configurations (socket, A-base, or switchboard), phases (single or polyphase), and even the number of service wires (2-3-4).
Limiting the number of electric service configurations available to the customer may require some customers to install additional transformers or change their power appliances or equipment. This may increase customer inventory, maintenance, and operating expenses.
Barrier 2: New Designs Are Required
By definition, a universal standard plug fits all meters and services (or at least a significant number of meters and services). To accommodate the variety of electric service configurations in use with a "one-size-fits-all" plug, the plug must be over-built. Any "one-size-fits-all" plug will result in many redundant jaws, sockets, and mounting configurations which, at least in the short term, would increase their present costs.
Meter panels must be completely redesigned so that it is sufficiently safe for the "lay person" to access them. Current and voltage levels present at the meter/service connection are life threatening. Designs for a "dead-front" (energized parts are not accessible) do not currently exist.
Barrier 3: Manufacturing costs increase
Adoption will require major additions to present meter design standards and manufacturing processes. For example, the dead-front designs will increase the spacing requirements between the meter and socket jaws, which means that the socket/meter combination would no longer fit into the standard cabinet..
Manufacturing processes would have to be added, not only to manufacture the new meters, but also for the switchboards and switch cabinets. They will not necessarily replace the existing manufacturing processes, which would still be required to fulfill the needs of the existing base of meters, switchboards, and switch cabinets.
Inventory requirements will increase if two sets of each "universal form" will be required, one for the existing meter population, and one for the new standard.
Barrier 4: Unknown Market
If such a plug existed, it would initially be more attractive to consumers who are constructing new installations and could accommodate the new designs into their plans. It is not clear that retrofitting a universal meter/plug to existing services will be attractive to consumers due to many practical considerations such as meter and socket replacements, space requirements within existing cabinets, time for shutdowns during the conversion, and increased expense. As in telecommunications, the market will drive adoption of this type of innovation.
11.6.2 Hardware and Software Standards for Metering and Communications Systems
The overall long-term goals for metering and communications systems should be to encourage flexibility and market-based innovation resulting in the availability of improved services for the electric customer. Ideally, each component in the overall system should be standards based. Each component should have standard interfaces to promote multiple solutions by hardware and service providers. Just as there is choice among brand and model of electric meters, so should there be choice of communications method and provider, a data processor and other components and suppliers.
Where an industry standard already exists, common sense suggests that the industry standard should be adopted. In the absence of an industry standard, the arguments surrounding standards adoption coalesce into two fundamental alternatives, each associated with different categories of risk. Subsection 11.6.2.1 addresses metering and communications systems components where standards already exist and recommends their adoption. Subsection 11.6.2.2 addresses components where no industry standard prevails and describes the alternative strategies for resolution.
11.6.2.1 Components with Existing Industry Standards
Innovation at the component level will take place at different rates. Advances in communications capabilities will occur at different times in different locations. Hardware and software development will occur at different rates as well. Use of industry standards will allow developments to be incorporated on an ongoing basis. To "freeze" technology would be imprudent. It is better to enable the market to promote innovations on an on-going basis.
11.6.2.1.1 Standards Already Exist for Metering and Metering Devices
Meter installations include Potential Transformers (PTís), Current Transformers (CTís), metering cabinets, test switching systems and ancillary equipment.
Standards requirements help ensure that the correct meter and metering device combinations are used, in order to ensure accurate, reliable and safe metering that provides the necessary data. Standards for metering devices are defined primarily in ANSI C.12, which is a collection of accepted industry standards for electricity metering. These standards have been developed over many years, and incorporate the experience and expertise of many manufacturers, utilities, and other stakeholders. Meter standards are accepted and used for manufacturing by meter suppliers and for meter specifications by electric utilities.
Utility metering specifications typically supplement the ANSI standards with utility- specific operational requirements and optional functions, which are driven by accepted methods for connecting to their particular distribution system as well as all governmental codes, ordinances, and rules that pertain to metering equipment, including safety and reliability requirements. A typical utility specification will include calibration and testing requirements, a listing of which meter types are acceptable, nameplate information and numbering required, as well as other requirements.
Adoption of the existing utility standards, including utility metering specifications will help advance the implementation of customer choice by eliminating the delays associated with development of new metering standards.
Appendix 11.6-A lists the components where metering standards exist. Appendix 11.6-B lists the relevant ANSI standards. Section 11.6.3 will discuss an approach for adoption, communication and monitoring of standards compliance.
11.6.2.1.2 Standards Already Exist for Meter Forms
The various standard forms correspond to the various standard electric service configurations designed to meet customer specific power requirements. These service configurations are based on specific customer loads and power equipment requirements which vary in many different capacities (5 to 4000 amperes), voltage levels (120 to 230,000 volts), transformer connections (star or delta), base configurations (socket, A-base, or switchboard), phases (single or poly-phase), and even the number of service wires (2-3-4).
Form requirements for meters help ensure that the correct meter and socket combinations are used, in order to ensure accurate and safe metering installations. Form standards are accepted and used for manufacturing by meter suppliers and used for meter specifications by electric utilities, although not all utilities accept all standard forms (utilities generally accept a limited number of the available forms based on the characteristics of their distribution systems).
11.6.2.1.3 Standards Already Exist for Meter Protocol Translation
Solid-State (Electronic) Meters and Interval Data Recorders (IDRs) store the information they collect on computer chip sets designed by each meter manufacturer. Due to the fiercely competitive nature of the metering market, these chip sets are programmed with proprietary protocols (sets of instructions) that are unique to each manufacturer. Meter manufacturers continually seek lower cost, higher function chip sets to differentiate their products in the marketplace. Most solid-state meters can be programmed to collect similar sets of information, but without access to the meter's protocol, the information cannot be "decoded" so that it can be read by mainframe or personal computers.
In response to market requirements for translation of multiple protocols, a product emerged which provides "universal" meter protocol decoding. This product not only supports protocol translation of the meters developed by multiple manufacturers, it also supports translation of virtually every protocol used in the last decade. This allows utilities to take advantage of new products developed by the meter manufacturers (which take advantage of the increased capabilities and lower costs of the latest computer chip sets), while allowing "older", but still functional, equipment to continue to be used and useful.
Further, MV-90 translation formats the data so it can be accepted by the utility billing and customer service system computers. In the direct access environment, this feature will facilitate access to usage measurement by multiple participants.
For many years, the metering business has been a highly competitive, unregulated, market-driven enterprise. Were there market forces driving for protocol standardization, it would already have occurred. In fact, lowest cost per highest function is the major market driver. Unless the Commission intends to require the replacement of every solid-state meter currently installed (most commonly at the installations of large consumers of energy), the only feasible recommendation is to continue with the existing practice of every major utility in the country, that of using MV-90 for protocol translation.
Appendix 11.6-C describes the MV-90 Translator in greater detail.
11.6.2.1.4 Industry Standards Already Exist for Network Communication Protocols
(Data Transportation for Storage Pending Retrieval)
While still a moderately recent development, the TCP/IP protocol has emerged as the accepted industry standard for network communications between computers. This standard should be adopted for network communications beginning at the top the Tier 1 link (where computer-computer communications actually begin) and continuing up through successively higher tiers to the main center for data collection and transfer. Communications across the network should not be limited to a unidirectional data flow. The customer's future needs for how their usage data is or could be used must be incorporated into plans. Data must be accessible to the customer. Communications must be two-way so that energy management systems, analysis products and other innovations are available. An open architecture that allows for a variety of solutions is the best way for this to happen. (Note: Two-way communications does not require or assume that all meters can receive and send messages, only that the network can send and receive messages to/from multiple devices for multiple purposes (some of which may be meters)).
11.6.2.1.5 Industry Standards Already Exist for Database Access Language
(Accessing Data for Processing by Multiple Parties)
Regardless of the actual database selected for use by the provider of usage measurement data, the database must be SQL-compliant. SQL (Structured Query Language) is the industry standard for relational database access language.
11.6.2.2 Alternatives for Components without Industry Standards
Selection of a technology standard in the absence of a prevailing industry standard is a double-edged sword. If the standard selected emerges as the industry standard, you "win". It will be embraced by the market place and value-added retailers will rapidly develop innovative products based on it. If the standard selected does not prevail in the market, typically, you "lose". Over time, the number of products compatible with your standard diminishes and obsolescence results.
To guard against the "wounds" this double-edged sword can potentially inflict, many advocate the adoption of an "open" standard. Open standards are certainly preferable where they exist, but it is important to note that standards become "open" as the result of market forces. Typically, the supplier of a product with a proprietary standard decides that they would rather have, for example, a 10% share of a $10 billion market than a 50% share of a $1 billion market. By publishing their standard (thereby opening it to others), they create a domino effect which results in at least two positive outcomes: 1) value-added retailers can invest in new product development based on the standard and 2) consumers feel both less at risk for obsolescence and less chained to a single supplier. Both outcomes increase the revenue potential of the overall market.
The telephone industry's RJ11 jack is a good example of how this phenomenon occurs. Prior to the advent of the industry standard RJ11 telephone jack (a universal connector to a telephone line) only a hard-wired voice telephone was available to the average residential customer on a standard voice grade telephone line. The RJ11 has allowed a variety of products ranging from voice telephone to fax machines to personal computers to be connected to the telephone network. These devices are now manufactured by hundreds of companies and offer features that were only dreamed of 30 years ago.
11.6.2.2.1 Meter Data Collection and the Meter Communications Interface
The alternatives for setting standards where no industry standards prevail center around the desire for "open" standards and are specifically focused on one component of the communications network where an open standard does not currently exist: the Tier 1 link between the meter communications module and the first point of data collection in the communications network.
11.6.2.2.1.1 Alternative 1: An Open Standard is Required for Meter Data Collection and the Meter Communications Interface
An open standard is necessary for all meter vendors to be able to interface with a variety of meter data collection and meter data communications systems.
In more specific terms, the data link between individual customers' (interval) meters and the point of data collection or point of communications interface, such as a pole-top receiver, must be governed by the use of an open standard so that any meter vendor who so chooses can employ it without the threat of patent infringement or other legal barriers.
A number of the meter data collection and meter communications suppliers would like to impose on the market the use of closed, proprietary standards for data transfer interface between the meter and the local data collection or communications point. These closed, proprietary standards or protocols are typically used in the lowest tier of the network, the link between the meter and the pole-top receiver of meter data.
By adhering to proprietary standards and failing to move toward a common, open architecture, many of the current metering system vendors are stalling the implementation of widespread use of interval meters. With adherence to closed, proprietary standards for interface between the meter and the data collection or communications point, there is greater risk of choosing the wrong horse (technology) and being saddled with it for a long time. Consequently, California will be delayed in gaining the competitive and social advantages of widespread access to competitive power markets. Moreover, the dispersion of benefits from direct access will be limited to large customers, to the detriment of small and intermediate sized customers. Without open standards, the potential is great to be saddled with a single system for metering and data collection. This would allow for the development of monopolies in metering and all the attendant problems of monopoly behavior, such as the intentional slowing of new technology adoption.
Pros: Selecting an open standard for the Tier 1 link has the following advantages:
1) Suppliers will be able to develop interchangeable products at lower risk
2) Consumers are less likely to select a technology that will become obsolete
3) A greater number of consumers are more likely to receive benefits from direct access
4) Competition for metering and communications is more likely
5) New product innovation is more likely
Cons: Selecting an open standard for the Tier 1 link has the following disadvantages:
1) There is no open standard to select. This makes it somewhat difficult to accrue any of the potential advantages
2) Selection or designation of an existing proprietary standard for use in California will arbitrarily result in significant short-term advantage for the supplier whose standard is selected, to the detriment of other market players
3) Selection or designation of an existing open standard which is not currently used by any supplier will cause years of delay in gaining the competitive and social advantages of widespread access to competitive power markets as all suppliers of these products retool and redevelop their operations and product lines
4) There is no guarantee that the suppliers will elect to develop products under your selected standard to begin with
5) Technology obsolescence will occur whether there is an open standard or not
11.6.2.2.1.2 Alternative 2: Allow the Existing Competitive Marketplace to Determine When and What the Open Standard for Meter Data Collection and the Meter Communications Interface Should Be
Competitive businesses take business risks, that is part of what competition means. It is counter-intuitive (and potentially impossible) to attempt to regulate an already competitive market (in meters and communications) in order to reduce the risk to an emerging market in retail energy and generation services. ESPs who want to do business will manage to do so quite well without the interference of regulation, as they have continually made clear during this proceeding.
Every major meter manufacturer currently performs factory-installation (at very low cost) for the meter communications modules of every major meter communications network supplier, permitting competition in the meter communications business to develop. Retrofit of meters (to swap meter modules, for example) also occurs in today's environment, also at low cost. Meter suppliers already interface with a wide variety of communications modules, meeting all relevant standards for quality, safety and reliability per ANSI C.12, all without benefit of an "open" standard.
In addition, many value-added retailers have Memorandum's of Understanding with each communications network supplier to develop connections for advanced communications which interact at the top of the Tier 1 collection point (the pole-top collector, for example) which typically does communicate with everything but the meter under an open standard like TCP/IP.
In the absence of an open industry technology standard, performance standards, not specific product specifications, are needed to insure efficacy, efficiency, reliability, and safety. The users of metering and communications systems are expert in what they need and should articulate it; the manufacturers are the experts in how to build it and should be permitted to do so.
The market for networks to perform these activities is still relatively young and no clear standard has emerged at the lowest tier. The most appropriate action for the Commission to adopt is to allow this market to continue to develop naturally and allow the industry standard to emerge as the result of competitive forces.
Pros: Permitting the market to determine the standard for the Tier 1 link has the following advantages:
1) California (overall) will have less risk of "picking the wrong horse"
2) Multiple suppliers and technologies continue to have the opportunity to compete for market share
3) Market forces will ultimately result in lower cost/higher function and more consumers will benefit from the retail electricity market
5) New product innovation is not constrained by the lack of a Tier 1 standard
6) Variety and choice of meter is not constrained by the lack of a Tier 1 standard
7) Selection of Energy Services Provider is not constrained by the lack of a Tier 1 standard
8) Direct Access by 1/1/98 is not constrained by the lack of a Tier 1 standard
Cons: Permitting the market to determine the standard for the Tier 1 link has the following disadvantages:
1) Some technology obsolescence will eventually result
2) Market players interested in deploying systems will undertake additional risk until the standard emerges
3) New product innovation may proceed more slowly in the short-term
11.6.3 A Process to Adopt Additional Necessary Standards
This section provides a process and schedule for the development of required standards for electric metering and communications that all electric energy service providers will be required to comply with. Meter data recording and collection requirements will be as specified in Section 11.3 of this report.
Metering and communications systems standards are needed to ensure that requirements are met in the following areas:
1) Compatibility of equipment and systems provided by different entities
2) Integrity of metering and communications - the system works as desired
3) Development of Licensing/Certification requirements
4) Enforcement of adopted standards
5) Security of meter data
Unauthorized Access
Theft Prevention/Deterrence of Tampering
6) Timeliness of meter data delivery/access
Selection of alternatives and development of requirements must be addressed for the following categories:
Hardware and Software
1) Meter communications protocols
2) Meter reading systems
3) System integration
4) Data storage
5) Data access
6) Data transfers
Adoption of standards and development of procedures for implementing them may be required for the following categories:
Performance of Work:
1) Metering equipment operations
2) Metering equipment installation
3) Metering equipment maintenance
4) Metering equipment testing - procedures and frequency
5) Licensing of metering installers
6) Coordination with local electrical inspection authorities
7) Meter vendor certification
11.6.3.1 Proposed Process
The CPUC should elect to adopt existing standards, select an alternative where standards do not exist and sponsor an Electric Metering and Communications Standards Working Group to develop the remaining requirements. The Working Group should be specifically directed to reach decisions, not make recommendations, on minimum requirements. The Working Group should include representatives from:
1) The investor owned utilities identified in the CPUC Restructuring decision (PG&E, SCE and SDG&E)
2) CPUC representatives - DRA/CACD/Safety Branch
3) Metering, service entrance equipment, and communications suppliers
4) Energy services companies (including retailers, aggregators, etc.)
5) Consumer representatives
6) Other interested parties
11.6.3.2 Proposed Schedule
The Working Group should start work immediately on those items which are not dependent on the results of the Ratesetting Working Group. The target date for those standards should be December 31, 1996. Additional work will be scheduled following a decision on Ratesetting and dependent on standards deemed necessary for the 1/1/98 implementation of Direct Access.
11.6.3.3 Adherence to Standards Over Time
Once standards are in place, they will need to maintained, communicated and updated as technology and accepted industry practice changes. Ongoing certification and compliance monitoring will also be required.
11.6.3.3.1 Certification
Utilities will continue to certify and approve new technology (meters for example) for compliance with applicable standards. They should continue to perform this activity post-restructuring and communicate the approved list to the appropriate parties.
Utilities should also have control over the qualification and certification of companies and/or individuals permitted to access equipment (like metering) which is part of the utility distribution system.
11.6.3.3.2 Monitoring
Methods and procedures for monitoring and enforcement of standards need to be defined and established, to ensure ongoing compliance by all parties. Those standards currently enforced by governmental agencies, such as local electrical inspectors and the Commission should continue to operate in that way. Remaining standards, especially those that are adopted from current UDC practice, should be enforced by the UDC, such as inspection, verification and testing of meter installations . Enforcement, particularly when an unsafe condition exists, should be at the discretion of the utility and will consist of requiring that an installation that is not in compliance be corrected, with service disconnection or refusal of service connection as the ultimate enforcement mechanism. This is the only way to ensure safe, reliable, accurate service for all in the event that non-utility workers are permitted access to the utility's distribution system.
Appendix 11.6-A
List of Existing Standards for Metering/Device Components
The metering standards define all electrical and mechanical parameters of electric meters and metering devices. For example, ANSI C12.10 includes specifications for the physical construction, wiring, environmental requirements, mounting, voltage, frequency, test currents, form designations, register and rotor construction, calibration adjustments, nameplates, sealing, and terminal connections for electromechanical watt-hour meters.
Standards exist for the following meters and metering devices and should continue in use:
Code for electricity metering
Mechanical demand registers
Thermal demand meters
Marking and arrangement of terminals for phase-shifting devices
Watt-hour meter sockets
Test blocks and cabinets for installation of self-contained A-base watt-hour meters
Test switches for transformer-rated meters
Electromechanical watt-hour meters
Instrument transformers - current and potential transformers
Electronic time-of -use registers for electricity meters
Magnetic tape pulse recorders for electricity meters
Solid-state demand registers for electromechanical watt-hour meters
Solid-state electricity meters
Cartridge-type solid-state pulse recorders for electricity metering
Protocol specification for ANSI type 2 optical port
Appendix 11.6-B
List of ANSI Standards for Metering
ANSI C12.1 - American National Standard Code For Electricity Metering
ANSI C12.4 - American National Standard For Mechanical Demand Registers
ANSI C12.5 - American National Standard For Thermal Demand Meters
ANSI C12.6 - American National Standard For Marking And Arrangement Of Terminals For Phase-Shifting Devices Used In Metering
ANSI C12.7 - American National Standard For Watt-hour Meter Sockets
ANSI C12.8 - American National Standard For Test Blocks And Cabinets For Installation Of Self-Contained A-Base Watt-hour Meters
ANSI C12.9 - American National Standard For Test Switches For Transformer-Rated Meters
ANSI C12.10 - American National Standard For Electromechanical Watt-hour Meters
ANSI C12.11 - American National Standard For Instrument Transformers For Revenue Metering, 10 kV BIL Through 350 kV BIL
ANSI C12.13 - American National Standard For Electronic Time-Of -Use Registers For Electricity Meters
ANSI C12.14 - American National Standard For Magnetic Tape Pulse Recorders For Electricity Meters
ANSI C12.15 - American National Standard For Solid-State Demand Registers For Electromechanical Watt-hour Meters
ANSI C12.16 - American National Standard For Solid-State Electricity Meters
ANSI C12.17 - American National Standard For Cartridge-Type Solid-State Pulse Recorders For Electricity Metering
ANSI C12.18 - American National Standard For Protocol Specification For ANSI Type 2 Optical Port
Appendix 11.6-C
Description of MV-90
MV 90 Translation System Description
The MV 90 translation system consists of computer hardware and software, as pictured on the attached diagram.
Functions & Capabilities of MV-90
- Converts meter output data to units used for billing or load research, i.e. kilowatt-hours, - Performs various checks on the data for errors and completeness
- Provides the capability to edit and correct the data
- Converts (translates) the meter data to a format which can be accepted by billing and customer information system computers
- Controls remote reading of Interval Data Recorders and solid-state meters when required
-Combines (aggregates) meter data from two or more accounts when needed
Hardware Components of MV-90
MV-90 includes a Server, which is the central control computer, typically a high end personal computer (PC), workstations, which are PCs connected to the server, connections between the server and workstations, a high speed communications link to the mainframe computer, which is used for billing and customer service applications, and modems, which are required for remote reading of IDR meters equipped with modems.
Software Components of MV-90
MV-90 includes proprietary metering communications protocols, which are programs required to read data from meters manufactured by different vendors (meter protocols are obtained from vendors by the MV-90 developer), data conversion programs, which convert meter data to units used for billing or load research, data checking and editing programs, billing data calculation programs, which can calculate consumption and peak demand values by various time periods, format conversion programs, to format the data so it can be accepted by the utility billing and customer service system computers, data transfer control programs, to control transfers from the MV-90 to the main computer and vice versa, and meter reading programs, to control remote meter reading via modems.