1 / 14

DN Interruption Reform

DN Interruption Reform. Distribution Workstream 23 rd July 2009. Agenda. Background to DN Interruption Reform Outcome of 2008 DN Interruption tender DN Analysis Proposed Approach Next Steps. Background to DN Interruption Reform. Implemented 1 April 2008

lavonn
Download Presentation

DN Interruption Reform

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DN Interruption Reform Distribution Workstream 23rd July 2009

  2. Agenda • Background to DN Interruption Reform • Outcome of 2008 DN Interruption tender • DN Analysis • Proposed Approach • Next Steps

  3. Background to DN Interruption Reform • Implemented 1 April 2008 • DNs tender for interruption rights three years ahead of use • DNs incentivised to procure appropriate level of interruption and investment in networks • Fewer interruptibles from 2011 onwards

  4. Outcome of 2008 DN Interruption Tender

  5. All DNs Prelude

  6. All DNs Post Mod 90

  7. Approach • Identify Firm Load Shedding Capability post Mod 90 • Establish a target based on the performance achieved in Exercise Prelude • NEC wants speed and confidence on DN deliverability • Load shed in 4 hours • LDZ specific • Resources available for Site visits where required • Shipper obligations remain to maintain site contact details

  8. Example – NGG Analysis Prelude

  9. Example – NGG Analysis post Interruption Reform

  10. Next Steps • DN Best Practice • Preparation • Data Validation [NG top 200 per LDZ] • Site Visits > 2 million therms [NG 212 across 5 LDZs] • NEC involved • Industry Engagement • GATG • Emergency Exercises (2009 and 2010) • Highlight Target Customers • Recycling Contact Information • Escalating Contact Information • Increased Number of Site Visits • Revised DN Safety Case submissions August 2009

  11. Summary • Current approach aims to improve the quality of contact information at the larger FSPs. • Contact Information will be issued to Users • Users will be expected to update the Supply Point Register where necessary • Quality of information to be assessed via [NEC] exercise

  12. Possible Future Changes • Concern that performance may remain low: • Option for consideration of incentives for the accuracy of User provided information • It is not our intention to propose such a regime at this time • Mod proposal 0728 – decision letter. Effectiveness of incentives on interruption contacts • “In contrast to firm load shedding, incentives exist in the UNC for shippers to ensure this data is correct, so that interruption occurs when required. UNC penalties apply for failure to interrupt and these are usually replicated in relevant supply contracts with customers. Such incentives appear to have worked successfully to date…for sites with firm supply contracts, statistics have shown widely varying levels of shipper/supplier performance. …collecting and maintaining ECI comes at a cost, and [Ofgem] takes the view that those shipper/suppliers with poor levels of performance should not obtain an advantage over others. Ofgem therefore considers that further thought should be given to introducing greater incentives in this area”

  13. Potential Scope of User Provided Contacts Scheme LDZ 2 LDZ 1 Largest LFSPs Band A - Mandatory DM – Transporter Site Visits / Phone Call A • Scheme aimed at testing quality of contacts provided by Users • Top 200 sites (Bands A and B) per LDZ will be validated by Transporter and are hence an inaccurate measure of User performance • Next largest 50 sites (Band C) per LDZ (650 across 13 LDZs) could be measured for the purposes of an incentive scheme A Band B - Remainder of top 200 per LDZ – Transporter phonecalls B B C C Band C - 201- 250th largest per LDZ – Subject to incentive scheme Smallest LFSPs 732,000kWh

  14. Potential Financial Scheme Operation: Principles • Transporters would be revenue neutral within the scheme • However, they would recover costs associated with administration of the scheme • Value of incentive charges would be inversely proportional to performance • High overall performance would result in comparatively low incentive charges • Low overall performance would result in comparatively high incentive charges • Scheme would require • ‘Income’ – notionally paid into scheme by Users (based on market share of Band C) • ‘Expenditure’ – scheme notionally repays funds to Users (based on individual performance within Band C) • Only the net value is actually invoiced • Income and expenditure levels would be determined by registered SOQ values • to reflect relative importance of larger loads in Firm Load Shedding • Process • Performance assessed via NEC Annual Exercise

More Related