CUSC “Alternate” Proposal process

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Code Governance Review: WWU views on potential changes to UNC and the Modification Panel Simon Trivella – 30 th March 2010 Governance Workstream.
Advertisements

Nexus Workgroup Transition Approach Update 8 th January 2014.
Review of industry code governance 26 March 2010.
Code Governance Review Initial Proposals Industry Codes and Licensing Ofgem.
Code Governance Review UNC Modification Proposals Chris Shanley - National Grid NTS.
Proposer: insert Panel Date: insert 0XXX: Mod Title: insert title Guidance: These slides are meant to provide a brief overview for the UNC Panel, to introduce.
1 Project Nexus Market Differentiation Workplan Version 0.2 Draft.
Overview of Balancing & Settlement Code Change Process By Gareth Evans on Behalf of Gazprom Marketing & Trading –Retail.
Proposer: Hayley Burden Panel Date: 17th April : Mod Title: Imbalance Charge amendments required to align the UNC with the Network Code on Gas.
Code Administrators Working Group (CAWG) Meeting 3, 29th October 2008.
Emergency Cashout Prices and Emergency Curtailment Quantity (ECQ) Adjustment Ritchard Hewitt Gas Code Development Manager.
Code Governance Review UNC Modification Proposals Beverley Viney - National Grid NTS.
Code Administration Code of Practice Tim Davis KPIs Q
Industry Dialogue on xoserve Services 14 th September 2007.
Legal Text Production Options for Discussion. Legal Text Production 2 Issues with current approach Issues with the current approach to legal text production.
Development Modification Proposal: Introduction of an Inter-day Linepack Product Review Group August 2010 Transmission Workstream 07/10/2010.
CAP169 BSSG 12/03/09. 2 Today  Recap on developments to date  Discuss and agree Terms of Reference for the group  Begin to work through proposal, capturing:
Overview: Code Modification Process Summary. PROPONENT Step 1 - Proponent has a code change in mind MODIFICATION (Mod) Step 2 - Proponent enters the mod.
Distribution workstream 29th January 2009
Transmission Workstream February 2009
Proposer: Matthew Hatch Panel Date: 20/10/16
Capacity Conversion – 616s
DSC Change Governance Review Group
Distribution Workgroup 24/11/16
Grid Code What is the Standard Modification Process? Panel
PROCEDURAL BASICS FOR THE MEETINGS OF MALAYSIAN PARLIAMENT
Manifest Errors for Entry Capacity Overruns Workgroup 364
Grid Code Development Forum – 6 September 2017
Code Governance Review UNC Modification Proposals
Grid Code Review Panel 16th August 2017
Agenda 5.11 General Regulations
CAP104 Amendment to System to Generator Inter-trip Related Terms concurrently defined in the Grid Code and the CUSC. Emma Carr 25th August 2005.
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK SEPTEMBER 22, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING RESCIND RESOLUTION NO AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE RULES GOVERNING.
CAP190: Workgroup Report CUSC Modifications Panel, 26th August 2011
Authority decision on CAP086 –Implementation Dates
UNC Modification Proposal 0373
Transmission Workgroup – 1st December 2011
Proposer: BP Gas Marketing Ltd Panel Date: 17 April 2014
Proposer: National Grid NTS Panel Date: 17th April 2014
Electricity Governance Comparison
Mod CMC_03_18 Unique circumstances may arise whereby the Transmission System Operator or Distribution System Operator requires additional time to formulate.
Code Governance Review UNC Modification Proposals
CAP089/090/091 Working Group Report
Assignment Workshop 2 16th September 09, Solihull.
Project Nexus Workgroup
CSS Update for CoMC 19th September 2018
Exit Capacity Substitution and Revision
Code Administration Code of Practice
UNC 0XXX: Mod Title: insert title
The Necessary Criteria for a UNC Modification Proposal
Proposer: Malcolm Montgomery Panel Date: 20/10/16
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
Rebecca Hailes For 15 March 2018
Proposer: Colette Baldwin – E.ON Panel Date: 21st August 2014
Proposer: Penny Garner Panel Date: 19 April 2018
Joint Office Presentation for Modification 0678
Transmission Workgroup 6th March 2014
Workgroup Timetable Tim Davis.
Project Nexus Workgroup
Proposer: Transporter /
Process to be followed when processing Sec 75 Bills Presentation to Ad Hoc Committee on the Funding of Political Parties (NCOP) Date:
Modification 0448 – European Driven Change Process Flow Diagram
CUSC Amendment Panel Recommendation
Proposer: Debbie Brace Panel Date: 20th March 2014
Proposer: Colette Baldwin – E.ON Energy Solutions Ltd
Title slide [from Title Slide master]
Implementation Approach Distribution Workgroup – June 2014
Project Nexus Workgroup
Proposer: Steve Mulinganie, Gazprom Energy Panel Date: 20th June 2019
Proposer: Tracey Saunders, Northern Gas Networks
Presentation transcript:

CUSC “Alternate” Proposal process Ritchard Hewitt

UNC Alternative Modification Proposals (ASIS) Alternatives covered in Modification Rules section 6.4 and 7.2.3 Alternatives can be raised to Modification Proposals, Urgent Modifications and Development Modifications Alternative Modifications shall be raised within 5 Business Days – generally raised in the 5 days following a Modification being issued to consultation The alternative Modification and original Modification shall proceed through the Modification process together

Code Governance Review - Final Proposals SSC A11. Network Code and Uniform Network Code 10.b (i) the alternative is made during the workgroup stage of the consultation as described in the Code of Practice and as further specified in the uniform network code 10.b (ii) unless an extension of time has been approved by the Authority such workgroup stage will last for a maximum period (to be specified in the UNC*) from the date on which the original modification was proposed CoP Principle 7 – Code Administrators will facilitate alternative solutions to issues being developed to the same degree as an original solution Any User (other than the proposer) can raise an alternative Alternative proposals should be raised during the workgroup stage Each alternative will be assessed with the same rigour as the proposed solution * Maximum period specified in the UNC is 6 months

CUSC alternative process steps New proposal to the Panel If sent “Direct to Company Consultation” then no alternate proposals are allowed. If sent to “Development” in a Working Group then TOR are raised and development meetings arranged

Working Group steps Original Mod is “owned” by the proposer During development any one can raise a Working Group Alternative Amendment (WGAA) proposal which is then “owned” by the Working Group who develop the detail of all the proposals. Following development all the various mods are sent out to industry in a Working Group Consultation.

Working Group Consultation As part of this consultation process reps are received Reps can also request that the WG consider other issues / options. Note – no obligation on the WG to take on board the issues / options raised but…… WG may decide to raise a Working Group Consultation Alternative Request (WGCAR) proposal in response to the reps All mods are then subject to any further development by the WG

Working Group Report At end of development stage WG votes on what mods should be included in the report to the Panel – simple majority vote WG chair may overrule a “no vote” Report then sent to Panel with details of original proposal and any agreed alternates (WGAAs and WGARs)

Final consultation On receipt of WG report the Panel may either: Send back for further development Send out to Company Consultation If sent out to consultation then no further alternate mods can be raised If during consultation “new issues” are raised then Panel can send mod inc any alternates back to development.

Post 160 CUSC process