1 / 16

xoserve Services Workgroup

xoserve Services Workgroup. xoserve Funding Arrangements - Model Comparison. ü. X. X. ü. Models Compared. User Choice Model. Users approach xoserve to request services xoserve quote and charge on normal commercial basis Scope for negotiation Users can take-it or leave-it

kgrubb
Download Presentation

xoserve Services Workgroup

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. xoserve Services Workgroup

  2. xoserve Funding Arrangements - Model Comparison ü X X ü

  3. Models Compared

  4. User Choice Model • Users approach xoserve to request services • xoserve quote and charge on normal commercial basis • Scope for negotiation • Users can take-it or leave-it • No visibility of service, charges or costs • Outside price controls • Adjust allowed revenue every five years

  5. Strength Flexible No constraints to meeting User requirements Commercial Benefits from standard commercial incentives Weakness Governance No visibility of costs, charges or services offered Discriminatory Not available to all User Choice Assessment

  6. User Choice Refinements • xoserve publish pricing principles • Audit of performance • Internal and external, plus periodic Ofgem audit • User Group/Board Oversight

  7. User Choice Services • Used by some Users only • One off, individual services • Varied service level • Commercially driven • Users perceive an advantage

  8. User Choice Service Lines • Provide Query Management • User Admission & Termination • Must Reads • Provision of Services in Relation to Obligations under GT licence • Provision of user reports and information

  9. Incentive Scheme Model • Services set out in UNC • Users pay depending on usage • Inside price controls • Allowed revenue flexes with usage • Potentially complex • Charging structure • Targets • Sharing factors

  10. Strength Incentives aligned xoserve benefit by meeting User demands Flexible Automatic revenue adjuster Governance Transparent Weakness Incentives may be perverse Focus on what is measured Complex Operating costs increased Creates windfall gain or loss Match between cost and revenue change imperfect Incentive Scheme Assessment

  11. Incentive Scheme Services • Available to all Users • Defined in UNC • Volume driven • Those who use most pay most

  12. Incentive Scheme Service Lines • Provide Query Management • User Admission & Termination • Must Reads • Provision of Services in Relation to Obligations under GT licence • Provision of user reports and information

  13. Incentive Scheme Example - AMR • Introduce charge per meter read received • More reads means more revenue • xoserve choose how to provide service • Capex and/or opex funded by additional revenue

  14. Price Control Options • Meter read income excluded • Allowed Revenue = Target – Assumed Excluded Revenue • Incentive Scheme • Target Revenue set by Ofgem • Variations shared e.g. 50:50 • Caps and collars set by Ofgem

  15. Incentive Scheme Issues • Incentive not to submit reads • User liabilities to offset? • Charge by category • DM v NDM, monthly v annual read, AMR? • Charge variations within price control period • Level, structure, new charges • Administrative costs • More charge items to monitor and invoice

  16. What Might Users Pay for? • Meter Reads Submitted? • Queries Submitted? • Supply Point Transfers? • Invoices Issued? • Information Requests? • Admission/Termination? • UNC Modification Proposals Raised/Implemented?

More Related