Project Nexus Workgroup

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PN UNC Workgroup (Settlement topic) Allocations Overview 4 th December 2012.
Advertisements

Application of User Pays Principles to Existing Service Lines 22nd November 2006.
Individual Meter Point Reconciliation. What? Calculation of actual energy used at meter point level for all supply points Allow sites to be accurately.
1 Project Nexus Market Differentiation Topic Workgroup 14 th & 15 th July 2009.
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.
CSEP Transportation Charges 11 th August Background Action NEX0604 from 18 th June PN UNC requested Xoserve to provide a presentation on how Supply.
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.
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
IGT Single Service Provision Requirements Update – 27 th March 2013.
UNC Review Group 0178 National Grid Distribution “Reclassification of SSP to Domestic only” Review Group Meeting – 22 February 2008 Chris Warner.
CSEPs Reconciliation “Read Window” proposal. 2 Background  I&C CSEPs (supply point AQ >73,200) are subject to reconciliation  IGTs are obliged to provide.
CSEPs NDM Reconciliation. Assuming opening read of zero.
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.
Allocation of Unidentified Gas Statement 2013/14 6 th February 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.
1 Mod Review Group 126 Mar 2007 slides 126 Review Group – Restriction of Invoice Billing Period  The review proposal is primarily concerned with restricting.
PN UNC Workgroup Read Validation 4 th October 2011.
Allocation of Unidentified Gas Statement – Interim Report findings 17 th September 2012.
PN UNC 4 th September 2012 Reconciliation Issues (Action: NEX06/02)
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.
UNC Modification Proposal 0380 Periodic Annual Quantity Calculation Calculation of Daily Supply Point Capacity Alan Raper – DNCMF 26 th September 2011.
Connected System Exit Points Options for strategic regime change Chris Warner.
Project Nexus UNC Workstream Consolidation of High-Level Principles Fiona Cottam 19 May 2010.
IGT and Shipper Workgroup meeting 28 th February 2011.
User Pays User Committee 12th November 2013
Supply Point Register 7th December 2011
UNC Modification Proposal 0202 National Grid Distribution
Modifications iGT 039 and GT 0440 re iGT Agency Services background
Options for Mod 640 Replacement
PN UNC Workgroup Invoicing 4th October 2011.
Weekly Progress Update 3rd Aug 2018
Extraordinary DSC ChMC
iGT Agency Services Background
Modification th July 2008.
Large Supply Point Reconciliation which spans Pre & Post Go Live
Weekly Progress Update 13 July 2018
Connected System Exit Points Administration Options
CSEPs Reconciliation Proposals
Weekly Progress Update 15 June 2018
Project Nexus Workgroup
Connected System Exit Points Administration Options
UNC Modification Proposal 0362
Weekly Progress Update 11 May 2018
Project Nexus Workgroup
Actions for Mod209 Workgroup
Connected System Exit Points - Update
Modification Proposal 115 – ‘Correct Apportionment of NDM Error’
Nexus Workgroup Mod 0473 Presentation
CSEPs SPA Rejections November 2007 update
Project Nexus Workgroup
MOD 640 INVOICING VALIDATION RULES
Modification 421 – Updates and Benefits Case
Project Nexus Workgroup
Project Nexus Workgroup
CSEPs SPA Rejections December 2007 update
Modification Proposal 136
Actions Updates Action 0282/006 – Exclude from AQ process
Modification 440 Project Nexus iGT Single Service Provision
Unidentified Gas (UIG)
PN UNC Workgroup (AQ topic)
Extraordinary DSC ChMC
CSEPs SPA Rejections January – August 2007
Presentation transcript:

Project Nexus Workgroup Reconciliation Meeting 6 Options for CSEP Reconciliation 24/04/2019

Background Reconciliation Business Requirements Document states “aspiration for new reconciliation rules to apply to NDM CSEPs” Preferred Shipper option is for a single Supply Point Register to hold CSEP meter point data and facilitate Meter Point Rec Need to develop “Contingency Requirements” for SSP/LSP CSEP meter point rec, in case single SP Register is not achieved

Current CSEPs Reconciliation Arrangements Larger Supply Points Each LSP = 1 Logical Meter Number (LMN) iGT holds meter assets and reads iGT sends start and end dates and actual volumes GT agent calculates Rec volume, Rec energy and Rec charges Opposite entry passed to RbD Smaller Supply Points 1 LMN per Shipper/CSEP project combination CSEP SSP AQ included in RbD – ranks equally with direct connects for RbD charging

Options for Future CSEP SSP Rec No Meter Point Rec for SSP on CSEPs – attract share of Reconciliation Neutrality A B Reconciliation on AQ, for every AQ change Aggregated Rec by SSP LMN – iGT Reads all meters in a CSEP on same day and submits total actual volume C D Meter installed at every offtake – Reconciliation between GT and iGT E Each SSP = 1 LMN – iGT submits dates and actual volumes F Single Supply Point Register allows full Meter Point Rec

Option A No Meter Point Rec for SSP on CSEPs – attract share of Reconciliation Neutrality only (in proportion to original allocation) Pros Simple solution No change to SPA arrangements No extra burden on iGT Cons No account taken of changes in gas usage No correction for erroneous AQs

Option B Reconciliation on AQ, for every AQ change. Following an AQ change, iGT advises Xoserve of old and new AQ, applicable start dates and applicable Shippers. Difference in AQ billed as a change to allocation, split between applicable Shippers. Separate process to LMN AQ updates. Pros Simple solution Not dependent on change to SPA arrangements Takes account of changes in usage and Shipper transfers Cons No check against LMN AQ updates Extra burden on iGT Relies on timely and accurate AQ reviews by iGT

Option C Aggregated Rec by SSP LMN – iGT Reads all meters in a CSEP on same day and submits total actual volume Pros Not dependent on change to SPA arrangements Takes account of changes in usage and Shipper transfers Cons Increased burden on iGTs Unfeasible to read all meters one day? Reconciliations not visible at MPR level

Option D Meter installed at every offtake – Reconciliation between GT and iGT? iGT to perform individual meter point reconciliations? Pros No change to SPA arrangements Clarity of large GT throughput Cons Large scale engineering project Does not help attribute energy to individual meter points Increased burden on iGTs

Option E Each SSP = 1 LMN – iGT submits dates and actual volumes – increase in data held in Gemini or other system Pros Takes account of changes in usage and Shipper transfers Visibility of meter point transactions Cons Increased burden on iGTs Meter asset data still held across diverse systems Large increase in data processing for 1m+ MPRs

Option F Single Supply Point Register for all direct and CSEP MPRs - allows full Meter Point Rec Pros Takes account of changes in usage and Shipper transfers Visibility of meter point transactions Cons Significant change to iGT processes Funding and governance not resolved

Option A - Illustration No Meter Point Rec for SSP on CSEPs – but attract share of Reconciliation Neutrality Initial Allocation – not to scale Prod 1&2 Prod 4 Prod 3 NDM CSEP SSPs

Option A - Illustration After Reconciliation CSEP SSPs share in changes to Unidentified Energy via Reconciliation Neutrality No other changes to CSEP SSP Allocation Prod 1&2 Prod 4 Prod 3 NDM CSEP SSPs Not to scale

Option B - Illustration Option B – Reconciliation on each change of AQ Assume Quarterly Rolling AQ for illustration only iGT sends updated Shipper AQ totals to Xoserve for use in daily allocation Separate notification to Xoserve of before- and after-AQs for SSPs Also highlight any Shipper changes in the period

Option B - Illustration Xoserve performs “AQ change Reconciliation” Similar to End of Year Threshold Crosser Reconciliation Reconcile for difference in allocation between old and new AQ Take account of Shipper changes Opposite energy amount feeds into Reconciliation Neutrality Prod 1&2 Prod 4 Prod 3 NDM CSEP SSPs Reconciliation based on AQ movements Not to scale