PAB Meeting 135

Douglas Alexander

26 April 2012

Apologies

Douglas Alexander

26 April 2012

135/04CP Progression –

CP1368

Melinda Anderson

26 April 2012

4

BackgroundThis CP was raised by ELEXON and proposes a number of changes to provide further clarification and/or resolve operational issues related to Unmetered Supplies (UMS) registered in the Supplier Meter Registration Service (SMRS).

What is the issue?New equipment and processes have come into the UMS arena and the relevant BSCPs need to be changed to accurately reflect this.

CP1368

5

These changes have been directed by the SVG to ensure that new equipment and processes are defined/carried out under the BSC.

CP1368 was issued for participant Impact Assessment via CPC00709. We received seven responses all of which agreed with the changes.

One respondent suggested some additional changes but has agreed to seek guidance from the UMSUG.

Solution and consultation

6

Impacts and costs

Market Participant Cost/Impact Implementation time needed

ELEXON (Implementation)

£360 1.5 man days

DC/DAs £0 / minimal impact 0 calendar days

LDSO, DNO Costs ranged from no costs to administrative costs <£1000 / No adverse impacts

0 – 180 calendar days

Supplier £0 / no impact 30 - 60 calendar days

7

The PAB is invited to:

• ENDORSE the proposed amendments to BSCP520;

• ENDORSE CP1368 for implementation on 29 November 2012, as part of the November 2012 Release.

Recommendations

135/05Risk Evaluation

Methodology 2013/2014 – Post Industry

ConsultationMelinda Anderson

26 April 2012

9

PAB endorsed the 2013/2014 issue of the Risk Evaluation Methodology (REM) for industry consultation on 23 January 2012.

The consultation was issued on 24 February 2012.

We received six responses from BSC Parties by 6 March 2012 which represented views from:• Suppliers (NHH & HH);• Party Agents (NHH & HH); and• Distributors.

REM Consultation

10

Consultation responses

Question Participant Response

Question 1 Do you agree with the proposed methodology? 100% agreed with the proposed methodology

Question 2 For each area where you disagree, please provide an alternative methodology.

N/A

Question 3 Do you agree with the current Settlement Risks Threshold?

One respondent did not agree with the current Settlement Risks Threshold

Question 4 Please provide any additional comments you may have on the content of the REM

No further comments were provided

11

The PAB is invited to:

• NOTE the responses received from industry consultation;

• APPROVE the Risk Evaluation Methodology; and

• AGREE that the Risk Evaluation Methodology is published on the ELEXON website.

Recommendations

SMART Update

Chris Rowell/David Jones

26 April 2012

13

Smart Metering: Consultations & Updates

DCC Licence

DCC Licence Application Regulations

Privacy & Data Access

Consumer Engagement Strategy

Smart Energy Code

1 Jun

15 Ma

y

1 Jun

1 Jun

1 Jun

Updated Impact

Assessments

____

EC notification of SMETS

v1.0

PLUS: DECC response to 2011 consultations on Licence Conditions and Installation CoP

14

Consultation Stats

Topic Pages Questions

DECC Update 12 -

Consumer Engagement 91 36

Privacy/ Data Access 96 30

DCC LicenceApplication Regulations

18220

18

SEC 145 63

DECC Response to SMICoP 56 -

DECC Response to DCC Consultation/ SMETS 144 -

Updated Impact Assessments (Domestic/ Non Domestic)

176 -

15

Decisions!

»Rollout to complete by 31 December 2019

»No exemptions for early (non compliant) meter installations

»Smart Metering Equipment Technical Specification (SMETS) V1.0

»No WAN Communications solution yet»Ongoing trials for Home Area Network

communications»SMETS V1.0 compliant meters will count to rollout

target!»Suppliers responsible for V1.0 equipment assurance

»Consumers»No Sales concluded during installation»Licence obligation for compliance with Installation

CoP

16

SEC Content

 Section Activity

Participation • Party types• Accession rules

Using DCC Services• Enrolment/Withdrawal of meters• DCC’s Comms Services• DCC Charges

Governance & Change

• SEC Relevant Objectives• SEC Panel• Code Administrator & Secretariat• Mods Process• Reporting

Assurance & Enforcement

• Compliance & Assurance• Liabilities• Disputes• Suspension & Expulsion

Other Matters• Intellectual Property Rights• Confidentiality• Transfer of DCC Licence• Force Majeure/Business Continuity

17

Privacy & Data Access Proposals

User Access

Consumer • Access via HAN• Access via Supplier

Suppliers• Monthly Data capture for all uses• Daily Data capture for all uses except marketing (with

opt-out)• > Daily or for marketing needs consumer opt-in

NetworksOptions• As per Supplier• HH access subject to networks developing plans for

approval that demonstrate protection of privacy

Third Parties • Data via consumer consent• Can be via DCC, subject to meeting SEC rules

Non Domestic premises • DECC will consider if any proposals are required

Settlement • No specific provisions for Settlement but will consider

how privacy framework could change if Settlement changes

18

Consumer Engagement Strategy & Tools

Build support & address concerns

Ensure vulnerable/lo

w income get benefits

Help consumers

make energy savings Indirect

Feedback

Direct/ Real Time Feedback

Motivational

Campaigns

Advice & Guidance

Central Delivery Body?

19

Terms Ch4: Start up & Development

Ch8: Provision of Regulatory Information

Ch1: Interpretation, Modification &

Payment

Ch5: General Arrangements for

Services

Ch9: Price Control

Ch2: Nature & Conduct of DCC

Ch6: Core Industry Documents

Ch10: Intervention & Continuity

Ch3: Independence Ch7: Financial & Ring- Fencing

Schedules

DCC

Draft Licence (copious detail as per other licences…)

Qualification Proposal

Best & Final Offer

Preferred Applican

t

Licence Application Regulations

135/01b Non-confidential Settlement Risk

Report

Tabled

26 April 2012

135/09 Risk Management Plan

Annual Review

Tabled

26 April 2012

Panel Update

26 April 2012

PAB135/07 Technical Assurance of

Metering Service Review

Elizabeth Montgomerie

26 April 2012

24

• Annually

• Objectives• Fit for purpose• Meeting the needs of our customers

PAB 135/07 Background 1

25

• What did we do?

• What was in scope?

• What was out of scope?

• How did we do it?

PAB 135/07 Background 2

26

• Proposing changes to BSCP27• Tidy up• Include Query process• Tighten up Targeted visits process

• Proposing changes to the technique• No major change• Add value

• Bring LDSOs into the process• Check CVA Aggregation Rules as a standard check• Collect information and feedback to Supplier

PAB 135/07 The Outcome

27

PAB 135/07 Recommendations

The PAB is invited to:

• COMMENT on the proposed changes; and

• ENDORSE the proposed changes.

135/08Trading Disputes Technical

Assurance Checks – non confidential session

Elizabeth Montgomerie

26 April 2012

29

• P258• Include DCs in the TD process• Rejected – Inefficient• TAPAP Check to investigate

• ROP• Checks performed (Oct 2011 to Feb 2012)

• DCs and Suppliers• Investigatory checks

• Questionnaires to LDSOs

PAB135/08 Background

30

• Suppliers

• Inconsistent approach

• HH vs. NHH Exception management

• Communication

• One Supplier – EFR

PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 1

31

• Data Collectors

• Reliance on Suppliers

• Commercial problems

• Feedback

PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 2

32

• Licenced Distribution System Operators

• Losses incentives

• Inconsistent approach

• Cost vs. Benefits

• TAA should do more• TAMEG response

PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 3

33

PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 4

• Industry Concerns

• Dummy Meter Exchanges

• Trading Dispute Process Awareness

• Communication

• Favourable changes

34

The PAB is invited to:

• ENDORSE the raising of a Change Proposal to update BSCP11 with a feedback loop;

• ENDORSE investigating a solution for the impact of Dummy Meter Exchanges on Settlement data; and

• COMMENT on the level of perceived risk of Settlement data shifting between RF and DF.

PAB135/08 Recommendations