CSEPs Reconciliation “Read Window” proposal. 2 Background  I&C CSEPs (supply point AQ >73,200) are subject to reconciliation  IGTs are obliged to provide.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Third Energy Package for Change of Supplier 2009/73/EC.
Advertisements

1 Project Smart Metering Portfolio Foundation & DCC Day 1 Updates April 2013.
1 Project Smart Metering Portfolio Foundation Updates June 2013.
Project Nexus Workgroup 9 th September Background During detailed design a number of areas have been identified that require clarification with.
Project Nexus Workgroup Unique Sites 4 th November 2014.
CSEPs Update Chris Warner. 2 Background  Review Group 0157  Incremental Improvements (eg: UNC Modifications 0167, 0180V, 0200)  Ofgem CSEP Group 
AQ Amendment: Relevant UNC obligations and additional Validations Applied 27 May 2010.
PN UNC AMR Topic Workgroup Meeting 19 – Meter Reading.
UNC Mod 392/ IGT Mod 040 Proposal to amend Annex A of the CSEP NExA table, by replacing the current version of the AQ table August 2011.
UNC G7.3.7 Invoicing Read Estimation Proposal Requirement for Read Estimation & Proposed Methodology Dean Johnson Distribution Workstream – 25 th August.
Nexus Workgroup CSEP Transition Topic June
Place your chosen image here. The four corners must just cover the arrow tips. For covers, the three pictures should be the same size and in a straight.
CSEPs NDM Reconciliation. Assuming opening read of zero.
PN UNC Workgroup iGT Services 7 th February 2012.
1 Industry Shipperless &Unregistered Working Group Wednesday 7th July 10.00am at xoserve.
1 v1 iGT CSEP Billing Solution ScottishPower Proposals April 08.
Entry Capacity Trading Transmission Work Stream, 5 April 2007.
PN UNC Workgroup Read Validation 4 th October 2011.
PN UNC 4 th September 2012 Reconciliation Issues (Action: NEX06/02)
COR3316: Implementation of UNC Modification 0451AV UK Link Committee – May 2014.
Impacts of Mod 244 Steve Nunnington xoserve. Background  96.5% of transportation charges based on capacity.  These are dependent on historical throughput.
1 User Pays Non-Code Services – Contract Change Process Summary A Contract Change Proposal (CCP) is submitted. The Contract Change Register (CCR) is updated.
1 UNC Review Group 175 – Encouraging Participation in the Elective Daily Metered Regime 26 th June 2008.
13 th July 2009 Meeting of Theft of Gas Review Group (UNC245)
ADD PRESENTATION TITLE HERE (GO TO: VIEW / MASTER / SLIDE MASTER TO AMEND) ADD PRESENTER’S NAME HERE / ADD DATE HERE © Copyright EDF Energy. All rights.
Connected System Exit Points Options for strategic regime change Chris Warner.
PN UNC Workgroup Invoicing 10 th January Objectives of the Workgroups To determine business principles for future Invoicing processes –Consider/review.
23 February 2011 IGTRP0030 Potential impacts on Parties of changes to NExA Table.
IGT and Shipper Workgroup meeting 28 th February 2011.
DCA timeline and ROM Overview 12 October Smart Metering Indicative Timeline Evaluation Service (EVS) 2528 received / Rough Order of Magnitude.
User Pays User Committee 12th November 2013
Supply Point Register 7th December 2011
CSEP NExA Update Marie Clark ScottishPower 28th September 2006.
Must Read Process Guide For Shippers
Change Management Committee – June 2019 Update
PN UNC Workgroup iGT Services
Modification th July 2008.
R&N Timeline Release 2 Release 3 Feb-19 June-19
Project Nexus Workgroup
Change Management Committee – June 2019 Update
Connected System Exit Points Administration Options
New project process – timescales
Project Nexus Workgroup
DSC Change Budget 17th October 2018
CSEPs Reconciliation Proposals
UNC Mod Retrospective Invoice Limitation © 24 November 2009 EDF Energy plc. All rights Reserved.
UNC Mod 392/ IGT Mod 040 Proposal to amend Annex A of the CSEP NExA table, by replacing the current version of the AQ table August 2011.
Connected System Exit Points Administration Options
UNC Modification Proposal 0362
Project Nexus Workgroup
PN UNC Workgroup iGT Services
June 2019 Release Scope DSC Change Management Committee
Transporter Initiated SPA Confirmations on behalf of User Potential Impact Discussion with UK Link Committee.
AUG Query Responses 21st November 2013.
Current situation The submission of AQ Appeals and AQ Amendments using two alternative dates and reads that provide a more realistic indication of the.
Connected System Exit Points - Update
Project Nexus Workgroup
Deferral of Retrospective Updates Functionality
Lessons Learnt UKLC - November 2015
PN UNC Workgroup iGT Services
CSEPs SPA Rejections November 2007 update
Project Nexus Workgroup
CSEPs SPA Rejections December 2007 update
Meter Read Rejections ..
Meter Reads.
Project Nexus Workgroup
COR3007: UNC MOD 450B – Monthly revision of erroneous SSP AQs outside the User AQ Review Period Implementation UK Link Committee – May 2014.
CSEPs SPA Rejections January – August 2007
UK Link Timeline June-19 Sept-19 (EUC) Nov-19
Enabling Large Scale Utilisation of Class 3
Presentation transcript:

CSEPs Reconciliation “Read Window” proposal

2 Background  I&C CSEPs (supply point AQ >73,200) are subject to reconciliation  IGTs are obliged to provide reconciliation data to xoserve within 30 days of receiving a read  IGT data should include start and end read dates, and actual volume  xoserve will use the actual volume to create a reconciliation  As the rec is for an LMN, the dates need to match xoserve’s LMN dates  IGTs have highlighted the fact that read dates do not always match LMN dates held by xoserve  This results in rejections and unprocessed reconciliation

3 When will there be a mismatch?  There will be a mismatch wherever the dates for the reconciliation do not fall entirely within the LMN dates held by xoserve  The issue is assumed to occur at installation and transfer of ownership

4 Why is there is a mismatch?  Weekly submissions lead to small delays  IGTs may set up supply points retrospectively  xoserve cannot backdate the start of an LMN  xoserve LMN start date will at the earliest be date of receipt + 8 business days  xoserve process site onto Gemini system at D+8 – per NExA Annex A  Rejections will lead to further delays to the LMN start date  Start date delayed while rejections investigated and reprocessed

5 Proposed solutions  In an ideal world, LMN start dates would match IGT supply point start dates  To move towards this:  Understand and address operational issues to reduce, if not remove, mismatches  If the industry accepts that dates will never match exactly, and to address historic mismatches:  Agree a “read window” to be applied to rec periods

6 Address operational issues  Understand IGT SPA processes  Are shippers required to give 15 days’ notice for transfers of ownership; 8 with a withdrawal?  IGT UNC section Part C 12.7 contains these timescales  IGTs can specify a required start date within the D01 file  If enough notice was given to account for Gemini processing (and the record was accepted), this could enable the start dates to match exactly  Industry work to reduce rejections  Reducing rejections will reduce delays to start times

7 Agree a read window to be applied to rec periods  DN UNC (Section M 3.8.3) allows for a transfer read to take place within a read window around the transfer date – between D-5 and D+5.  xoserve would suggest a similar read window could be applied to CSEPs reconciliation  The window would be extended to account for the 8 day period given to xoserve to make updates  This would give a read window of D-13 to D+13  (All days are working days)

8 Suggested process  Rec file received from IGT containing start date D  xoserve system holds start date D+10 for LMN  xoserve system accepts rec period as start date is within the read window  xoserve system applies the provided volume to the LMN dates, ie from start date D+10 (to match LMN date and deemed period)  If the actual volume period fell outside of the 27-day window, the file would be rejected back to the IGT to discuss with the shipper

9 Larger mismatches  Proposed window accounts for small mismatches caused by process timescales  It is feasible to have mismatches of months  The decision to apply the volume for period A against deemed period B, where significantly different, cannot sit with xoserve  xoserve could potentially “override” the read window but this would need to be upon instruction from the IGT  Such mismatches would need to be rejected back to IGTs for discussion with the shipper

10 Rejections out of the read window IGT reviews with shipper Suggestion 2: IGT resubmits with existing data, asking xoserve to “override” read window Suggestion 1: IGT amends dates and resubmits IGT submits rec using new dates Shipper agrees to apply volume against xoserve LMN dates? Reads available for xoserve LMN dates? IGT receives rejection from xoserve