CIECA SALVAGE

BUSINESS PLAN

 

Interested Parties and Pilot Companies

The following companies are currently represented on the CIECA Salvage Committee:

Insurance Companies

·        Allstate

·        California Casualty

·        Nationwide Insurance

·        State Farm Insurance

·        USAA

Software Providers

·        ADP

·        Car-Part.com

·        CCC Information Services

·        ComputerLogic

·        Mitchell International

·        Vemark LLC

Salvage Vendors or Service Providers

·        ADESA Impact

·        APU Solutions (formerly PlanetSalvage)

·        Insurance Auto Auctions

·        PartsLink

·        ProAuto Recyclers

·        SalvageDirect

 

Note:  Membership is open to any company that is a member of CIECA.

      Pilot companies:  To be determined.

 

Process Flow:  

The Salvage Committee has defined three distinct workflows for the salvage disposition process.  The workflows are included in Appendix A and represent the entire process, starting at the time the vehicle is declared a total loss through the sale or disposal of the totaled vehicle.  The workflows are:   

1.      Vendor-Facilitated Workflow:  This workflow depicts the “traditional” salvage disposition process where a Salvage Vendor is responsible for disposing of the salvaged vehicle, generally through an auction.   

2.      Direct Allocation Contract Workflow:  This workflow depicts a Salvage Provider assigning the totaled vehicle directly to a specific buyer, thus bypassing the Salvage Vendor and the vehicle auction process.  This workflow is used today primarily for the disposal of scrap vehicles. 

3.      Alliance Partner-Facilitated Workflow: This workflow involves a third party, usually a software provider, serving as an intermediary between the salvage provider and salvage vendor to facilitate the salvage disposition process. 

There is also a fourth workflow which is a hybrid of the Direct Allocation and Alliance Partner-Facilitated workflows.  It is not included in Appendix A. 

 

Deliverables

The XML message deliverables scheduled for inclusion in the first Salvage release are:

 

·        The Salvage Assignment, sent from the Salvage Provider to the Salvage Vendor. 

·        The Salvage Response, generally sent from the Salvage Vendor to the Salvage Provider which contains information such as the Stock Number, location, etc. associated with the vehicle.

·        The Salvage Update, sent from the Salvage Vendor to the Salvage provider which contains updated information about the status of the vehicle.

 

These new messages were originally defined in an Excel spreadsheet as “Salvage Spreadsheet 1.0” by the Salvage Committee and will be incorporated into CIECA’s BMS (Business Message Specification) standard.  Three deliverables have been identified:

 

·        The first deliverable will be the incorporation of Salvage Spreadsheet 1.0 into three XML messages from CIECA’s BMS, along with the associated XML schema and Codelists.   

·        The second deliverable will be updates to CIECA’s BMS, XML schema and Codelists to incorporate additional functionality and changes from Salvage 2.0 (TBD).  

·        The third deliverable will be the Salvage XML Implementation Guide.

·        Subsequent deliverables will be determined by the group at a later time.

 

Note:  The new XML Schema will be a product of the Architecture Committee and generated from the BMS changes approved by the Salvage Committee.

 

Benefits to Industry Segments

·        Processing efficiency:

o       Eliminates need to phone or fax assignments, stock numbers or updates between the Salvage Provider and Salvage Vendor.

o       Eliminates need to re-key Salvage Provider’s data into Salvage Vendor’s or Salvage Buyer’s own systems.

·        Reduced operating cost by automating manual tasks.

·        Improved accuracy, reporting and overall salvage management, depending on the degree of integration of the standards into other related systems.

 

Risk or Barrier Assessment:  

·        Full benefits not realized without integration of interested parties’ existing systems.

·        Participation by all industry segments is required to ensure full implementation.

·        Too long to define and complete the standards so that, upon completion, there will be proprietary formats in place that will be difficult to replace.

·        Implementation of the standards by key participants in their industry segment, as well as the industry as a whole.

·        Cost: system design/development, integration and potential transaction fees.

 

Resource Requirements

Money:

Rooms needed for face-to-face meetings will be needed in the event volunteers are not able to host meetings.  All support for web services (posting of meeting schedules, minutes, etc.), teleconference services and CIECA membership tools are included with CIECA membership.

 

CIECA Staff:  

CIECA staff time for project support are included with CIECA membership for approved projects.  Staff time will include project management assistance as well as technical assistance.

 

Volunteer Time:

Business volunteers will be needed to identify business requirements of the message contents.  Representation from multiple areas of the business segment will make the message development more complete and better serve the entire industry.  Business volunteers will also be needed for the development of the Implementation Guides.

 

Technical volunteers will be needed to complete the translation of business needs to the BMS representation of those business needs and work with the Architecture Committee in this integration.  Assistance will be made available from members of Architecture.

 

Estimated Project Duration

The first deliverable is expected to be completed by April 30, 2004, with the second deliverable by June 15, 2004.  The third deliverable, the Salvage Implementation Guide, is expected to be complete in the 3^rd Quarter, 2004.

 

Other Items for Standards Advisory Board (SAB) Review

Is this project included in the CIECA 2004 Strategic Plan?    

·        Yes

This is a new development project or a maintenance/enhancement project?

·        New

What will be the anticipated impact on other CIECA efforts or standards? 

·        The work with the Architecture Committee should be coordinated; there may be some overlap with the Parts & Material and Automated Procurement committees

·        Architecture resources will be needed to assist in understanding the BMS and completing the integration into the BMS.

·        This group will need technical support familiar with the BMS and XML schema.

To assist in supporting this committee these items can help identify areas of need.  Are members of the committee familiar with or do they have:

·        Business representation?  Yes

·        Technical representation?  Yes

·        Membership tools?  (on www.CIECA.com) Yes

·        XML development? Limited

·        CIECA’s BMS? Yes