1 Project Nexus Market Differentiation Topic Workgroup 14 th & 15 th July 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PN UNC Workgroup (AQ topic)
Advertisements

PN UNC Workgroup (Settlement topic) Allocations Overview 4 th December 2012.
PN UNC Workgroup (AQ topic) Meeting 3, 18 th July 2011.
Application of User Pays Principles to Existing Service Lines 22nd November 2006.
Proposal to Change the UNC AQ ‘Backstop Date’ to accommodate the 2010 Seasonal Normal Review DESC – 2nd October 2009 NOTE: Instances where TBC is stated.
Gas Consumer Forum Project Nexus xoserve update 27th July 2009
Implementation of Non Effective Days Nexus Workgroup – March
21 May 2015 GAZ DE FRANCE ESS Mod 115 An alternative view Phil Broom Gaz de France ESS.
Project Nexus Workgroup 9 th September Background During detailed design a number of areas have been identified that require clarification with.
CSEPs Update Chris Warner. 2 Background  Review Group 0157  Incremental Improvements (eg: UNC Modifications 0167, 0180V, 0200)  Ofgem CSEP Group 
1 Project Nexus Requirements Definition Phase Steve Nunnington.
AQ Overview.  Annual Quantity (AQ) is a value held for each meter point that reflects the expectation as to the volume of gas that a meter point will.
PN UNC Workgroup Supply Point Register 25 th October 2011.
“Introduction of a New Shipper Obligation in Relation to the Procurement of Gas Below the Gas Safety Monitors” Transmission Workstream 4 th Jan 2007 Chris.
UNC G7.3.7 Invoicing Read Estimation Proposal Requirement for Read Estimation & Proposed Methodology Dean Johnson Distribution Workstream – 25 th August.
Project Nexus Workgroup Read Validation following Transfer of Ownership 13 th October
Nexus Workgroup CSEP Transition Topic June
UNC Review Group 0178 National Grid Distribution “Reclassification of SSP to Domestic only” Review Group Meeting – 22 February 2008 Chris Warner.
SSP/LSP and Market Sector Code Simon Trivella – December 12 th 2007 Review Group 178 – Reclassification of SSP to Domestic Only.
PN UNC Workgroup iGT Services 7 th February 2012.
Mod 270 Potential Options Rob Hill 15/02/2009. Six potential options following discussion at last months Development Workgroup OptionNameDescription 1Elective.
Distribution Network Interruption - Initialisation 28 September 2010.
11 User Pays User Committee 11th January Agenda  Minutes & Actions from previous meeting  Agency Charging Statement Update  Change Management.
Project Nexus Workgroup – Invoicing 11 th August 2014.
1 Project Nexus Approach to modelling costs and benefits Cesar Coelho Ofgem Project Nexus UNC Workgroup 15 May 2012.
Billing Operations Forum 24 July 2007 RbD Overview Billing Operations Forum 24 July 2007 RbD Overview Fiona Cottam.
1 v1 iGT CSEP Billing Solution ScottishPower Proposals April 08.
Customer Charge On behalf of all DNs 25 October 2010.
11 User Pays User Committee 16th February Agenda  Minutes & Actions from previous meeting  Agency Charging Statement Update  Change Management.
Draft Modification Proposal: Population and Maintenance of Market Sector Code within Sites & Meters Simon Trivella –25 th February 2010 Distribution Workstream.
PN UNC Workgroup Read Validation 4 th October 2011.
1 Review Group 264 Rules & Options Analysis for BSSOQ Methodology Changes Post MOD th September 2009.
ScottishPower, Energy Retail MOD 282 – Introduction of a process to manage Long Term Vacant Sites May 2010 Elaine Carr ScottishPower.
ALLOCATION OF RbD ACROSS RELEVANT PERIOD DNOs’ comments on previous Workstream discussion ALLOCATION OF RbD ACROSS RELEVANT PERIOD DNOs’ comments on previous.
Development Workgroup 0282 Action 018 – impact on RbD 13 September 2010.
Version PNUNC AQ Principles Workgroup Mod 0209 – Rolling AQ Presenter: Steve Nunnington 23 rd March 2010.
PN UNC Workgroup Invoicing 24 th October Objectives of the Workgroups To determine detailed business requirements Consider/review comments made.
Replacement of Any Read – Initial views. 2 Assumptions  Can’t re-open NDM Allocation or Energy Balancing after D+5  Can’t go back to a read before prevailing.
Datalogger / DMV Modification Proposals - Summary Simon Trivella – 26 th August 2010 Distribution Workstream - Elexon U P D A T E.
Impacts of Mod 244 Steve Nunnington xoserve. Background  96.5% of transportation charges based on capacity.  These are dependent on historical throughput.
PN UNC Workgroup Settlement Issues 1 st November 2011.
1 UNC Review Group 175 – Encouraging Participation in the Elective Daily Metered Regime 26 th June 2008.
UNC Modification Proposal 0380 Periodic Annual Quantity Calculation Calculation of Daily Supply Point Capacity Alan Raper – DNCMF 26 th September 2011.
Customer Treatment in project Nexus Presentation on behalf of GDF Suez By Gareth Evans.
PN UNC Workgroup Invoicing 10 th January Objectives of the Workgroups To determine business principles for future Invoicing processes –Consider/review.
Project Nexus UNC Workstream Consolidation of High-Level Principles Fiona Cottam 19 May 2010.
Supply Point Register 7th December 2011
Supply Point Register 21st November 2011
Supply Point Register 10th January 2012
UNC Modification Proposal 0202 National Grid Distribution
Options for Mod 640 Replacement
SSP/LSP and Market Sector Code
Review Group 178 SSP as Domestic only.
Modification th July 2008.
Rolling AQ Review Group 177.
Project Nexus Workgroup
Modification Proposal 115 – ‘Correct Apportionment of NDM Error’
Actions for Mod209 Workgroup
Current situation The submission of AQ Appeals and AQ Amendments using two alternative dates and reads that provide a more realistic indication of the.
Market Differentiation Workgroup Market Sector Flag Analysis
UK Link Replacement Programme additional supporting UNC modifications
Modification Proposal 115 – ‘Correct Apportionment of NDM Error’
Project Nexus Workgroup
Modification 421 – Updates and Benefits Case
GT Response to Action AMR014 Project Nexus AMR Workgroup 20th July | Energy Networks Association.
DN Interruption Phase II
Reconciliation Volume Impacts 25 January 2008
Modification Proposal 136
REVIEW GROUP 178 – AN ALTERNATE SOLUTION
PN UNC Workgroup (AQ topic)
Presentation transcript:

1 Project Nexus Market Differentiation Topic Workgroup 14 th & 15 th July 2009

2 Market Differentiation Issues  Two issues identified during the consultation:  1. Changing definitions & market split to ‘Usage’ rather than ‘AQ’  2. Distinct processes for different sectors of the market  Charging regime for market sectors

3 Changing Definitions & Market Sector Split

4 2. Market Definitions  Consultation comments for this area included:  Presently a contention between the Utilities Act definition of business and domestic customers and dated industry I&C/Domestic thresholds  A separation of I&C processes from Domestic, i.e. Market Sector based on “usage” as defined in the Supply Licences rather than by any other means  The UNC works on the distinction between SSP and LSP, based on AQ. This is inconsistent with the Gas Licence. Project Nexus gives the opportunity to align definitions as currently it can result in differing applications & management of customers.  Areas we have looked at for this workgroup:  Existing definitions  Processes  Issues  Stats

5 Existing Definitions  Annual Quantity (used by UNC & Gas Act)  Small Supply Points (SSP) – AQ <73,200 Kwh  Large Supply Points (LSP) – AQ >73,200 Kwh  Usage (used by Shipper & Supplier Licences & Utilities Act)  Domestic – Gas is taken wholly or mainly for domestic purposes  Non-Domestic – Gas taken wholly or mainly for non-domestic purposes

6 Processes that Use AQ  Currently 44 sub processes use the AQ  Main processes are:  Meter Point / Supply Point Creation  Supply Point Transfers  AQ Review  Reconciliation  Demand Estimation  Reporting  AQ used generally to classify the site or for validation purposes (e.g. system validates using AQ)

7 AQ vs Market Sector Flag Based on Portfolio Report dated 1 st June 2009 Market Sector Flag Total Supply Points I&CDomesticBlank Annual Quantity (AQ) LSP 326,540254, %46, %25,4157.8% 1.5%40.0%0.3%0.4% SSP 21,209,536381,1291.8%13,706, %7,122, % 98.5%60.0%99.7%99.6% Total SP's21,536,076635,6883.0%13,752, %7,147, %

8 Summary of Stats  46,500 ‘Domestic’ Supply Points in the LSP market (14% of total)  380,000 ‘I&C’ Supply Points in the SSP market (1.8% of total)  More ‘I&C’ in SSP market than the LSP market (280,400 I&C in LSP)  60% of I&C sites reside in the SSP market  Market Sector Flag is blank for 33% of sites

9 Issues  Conflicting definitions with UNC & Licences  Inconsistent reporting  Market Sector Flag (MSF) is incomplete for 33% of sites  Flag not used for any UNC processes therefore not challenged or verified  AQ is calculated based on data held in the Supply Point Register (consumption) & can be easily validated  How can MSF be validated? Governance? Potential for gaming?

10 Distinct Processes for Different Sectors of the Market

11 Distinct Processes  Consultation comments for this area included:  The relationship between value, cost & risk varies tremendously per supply point warranting segmented processes for these different customer classes  Ability to enable charging transportation & energy costs across different supplier portfolio  Differing requirements between domestic and I&C markets, opportunity to provide an increased domestic performance  Domestic & non-domestic supply points vary and so would benefit from having different processes to manage them. Existing anomalies would be improved by either separating them into two different areas or by removing the dividing line  Areas we have looked at for the workgroup:  Processes affected  Related issues

12 Distinct Processes  Currently 67 sub processes are treated differently if LSP or SSP, by MRF, NDM or DM and Unique Sites or by Firm/Interruptible  Main processes are:  Supply Point Transfers  AQ Review  Reconciliation  Reporting  Was the separation of markets introduced to simplify processes for SSP’s or purely due to volume?  Although charges on invoices may be separated costs & allocations are not aligned to markets

13 Supply Point Transfers  Nomination process not required for existing SSP  Supply Point Offer issued for LSP (or new SSP)  Different information required on the Nomination for DM than NDM  Ratchets & BSSOQ change could potentially void the Offer for DM sites  For NDM sites, the Offer is revised as a result of AQ review  Different information required on the Confirmation for DM than NDM  Confirmations may be Cancelled for SSP

14 AQ Review  Different timescales for DM & NDM  Principles of calculating the AQ is different for DM & NDM  DM calculated using daily reads over 12 month period  NDM calculated using reads of over a max period of 3 years  As a result of the AQ review, the value calculated for NDM sites will go live on the 1 st October  The Shipper is required to ‘Confirm’ the revised values for DM sites  Threshold crosses from NDM to DM or vice versa are processed differently.

15 Reconciliation & Invoicing  Meter Point Reconciliation for LSP  Filter Failure process for LSP  Reconciliation by Difference (RbD) for SSP  Charges for LSP’s are split based on AQ band the site falls into whereas SSP have flat rates  Different services available for LSP or DM, e.g. Interruptible transportation, IFA, Optional Tariff

16 Reporting  Reports are generally required to be split by AQ or Supply Type.  Ofgem reports are generally required by ‘Domestic’ & ‘I&C’

17 Issues  Not all processes are separate for different markets (SSP/LSP, NDM/DM)  Costs are not allocated to markets sectors  Mod 213 seeks to allocate costs  Not all transportation invoices are separated by markets