Presentation on theme: "UNC Review Group 0178 National Grid Distribution “Reclassification of SSP to Domestic only” Review Group Meeting – 22 February 2008 Chris Warner."— Presentation transcript:
UNC Review Group 0178 National Grid Distribution “Reclassification of SSP to Domestic only” Review Group Meeting – 22 February 2008 Chris Warner
Verification of Usage As now, the User is expected to confirm the gas usage. The Transporter will not be able to fully validate this assertion economically as this would require verification of the usage which would necessitate contact with each relevant end consumer. Alternatively Transporter may be able to provide a higher level of validation in the application of a “maximum AQ value” of domestic usage, For example a consumer with an AQ of =>500,000kWh would be unlikely to be using gas for domestic purposes. Inclusion of validation to reject such a configuration within the Supply Confirmation Processes?
Scope of Use The existing flag is not used in any settlement or other UNC process – merely recorded in the SPR. As we understand it, the suggestion is to apply RbD to domestic use SPs Including those with AQ >73,200kWh? Apply individual meter point reconciliation to all non- domestic use SPs Including those with AQ <73,200kWh Is this the sole application? Is the intention to maintain existing processes for Supply Point Registration? In 2004 BP raised Network Code Review Proposal 0700 which proposed the division of the Code into domestic and I&C sections. The Review concluded that there were insufficient drivers for change.
Aggregations Which flag is utilised where Supply Point usage is mixed? assume ‘defaults’ to I&C? In the SPR the flag is marked against confirmations (i.e. per Supply Point) within the S38 file Potential for the SP to move in and out of reconciliation via RbD dependent on a different Registered User’s view as to the gas usage. Current processes mean this is only likely once per year due to threshold crossers.
Practical Code Implications ‘domestic’ SPs with LSP AQs dealt with as if they are SSPs Should they be re-designated in UNC as SSP and vice versa? (assume not) Likely to require new defined terms e.g. SSP(i) and/or LSP(d)? If the change is purely in respect of treatment for settlement purposes (ie: RbD or no RbD) then this can perhaps be ring fenced from all other transactions under the UNC which are subject to the consumption based LSP/SSP split.
Current Domestic Flag Data quality issues with current flag If implemented as part of 2012 it may be preferable and more accountable/auditable to develop new status’ which could be used as part of the Nomination/Confirmation process (although this would need file format changes in SPA). A consistent approach across all transactions would appear preferable.
Consequential Implications If the SMP becomes individually reconcilable by reason of usage (non-domestic) then logically the LSP ‘rules’ on meter reading and AQ calculation should apply (and vice versa)? Would SSPs with I&C usage be eligible for elective DM service? Confirmation cancellation rules may need revisiting.
CSEPs Current processes do not provide the DNs with Supply Point level data at CSEPs Aggregate level data provided One Logical Meter Number (LMN) for all of a Users SSPs at a CSEP One LMN per LSP To facilitate within current systems, the iGT will have to request separate and distinct LMNs for each non-domestic SSP. Given that iGTs see no benefit to the current requirements, they are unlikely to favour the additional complexity.
Benefits Benefits for Transporter? The Transporter is able to validate current consumption based market sectorisation the level able to be applied under new proposal is lower Introduces a greater level of SPs requiring Individual Meter Point Reconciliation (up to 40% increase in current population) Under performance here may be additional uncertainty to RbD. Benefits for Users? domestic only non-domestic only SSP only LSP only mixed portfolio.