1 / 7

SHQ Review Process Update

SHQ Review Process Update. Erika Melén – Network Code Manager 10 th December 2013. MOD390 – SHQ Review Current Process. UNC Modification 390 was implemented in 2012

meryl
Download Presentation

SHQ Review Process Update

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. SHQ Review Process Update Erika Melén – Network Code Manager10th December 2013

  2. MOD390 – SHQ ReviewCurrent Process • UNC Modification 390 was implemented in 2012 • This introduced to code a process whereby DNOs provide reports to shippers by the end of April each year of sites where the SHQ/SPOR (maximum instantaneous rate in kWh/hour) appears significantly under- or overstated compared against actual usage. • An obligation was placed on shippers to review the amended SHQ/SPOR amounts with customers and respond to the DNOs within 3 months to say whether or not they agreed to the amended values • During the 2013 review 12 Shippers contacted for revisions to 146 sites - Out of the 12 Shippers only 7 responded – much improved from 2012 but still shows non-compliance from 5 shippers

  3. Current SHQ Review Process SPOR report sent from GDN by end of April Shipper speaks to customer to establish if suggested values are suitable Shipper responds to GDN by end of July with either agreement to values or not (current breaches to this stage) If agreement then Shipper re-nominates site by end of August / Oct-Jan if SOQ reduction required (current breaches to this stage)

  4. Option 1 SPOR report sent from GDN by end of April Shipper speaks to customer to establish if suggested values are suitable Shipper responds to GDN by end of July with either agreement to values or not If agreement then Shipper re-nominates site by end of August / Oct-Jan if SOQ reduction required GDN re-nomination of site on behalf of shipper in cases of no response / no re-nomination – notification and charge to shipper for work required If no response from shipper If no re-nomination by shipper

  5. Option 2 SPOR report sent from GDN by end of April Shipper responds to GDN by end of July with either agreement to values or not If agreement then Shipper re-nominates site by end of August / Oct-Jan if SOQ reduction required Shipper speaks to customer to establish if suggested values are suitable If no re-nomination by shipper GDN re-nomination of site on behalf of shipper in cases of no response / no re-nomination – notification and charge to shipper for work required If no response from shipper - GDN contacts customer directly re SHQ change Customer agrees to suggested SHQ? YES – GDN informs shipper. 2 week objection period then re-nom NO – No further action

  6. Option 3 SPOR report sent from GDN by end of April If agreement then Shipper re-nominates site by end of August / Oct-Jan if SOQ reduction required Shipper responds to GDN by end of July with either agreement to values or not Shipper speaks to customer to establish if suggested values are suitable 1st April Y+1 SPOR report run to show usage since end August Y-1 Where during Y-1 SPOR review a new higher SHQ value was suggested but the shipper either didn’t respond or re-nominate and the customer has used over the value. A penalty charge will be issued to the Shipper (similar to a SHQ Ratchet)

  7. Thank you! Any preferred option for a modification?

More Related