PAB Meeting 135 Douglas Alexander 26 April 2012

Apologies Douglas Alexander 26 April 2012

135/04 CP Progression – CP1368 Melinda Anderson 26 April 2012

3 Background This 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

4 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 CPC 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

5 Impacts and costs Market ParticipantCost/ImpactImplementation time needed ELEXON (Implementation) £ man days DC/DAs£0 / minimal impact0 calendar days LDSO, DNOCosts ranged from no costs to administrative costs <£1000 / No adverse impacts 0 – 180 calendar days Supplier£0 / no impact calendar days

6 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

135/05 Risk Evaluation Methodology 2013/2014 – Post Industry Consultation Melinda Anderson 26 April 2012

8 PAB endorsed the 2013/2014 issue of the Risk Evaluation Methodology (REM) for industry consultation on 23 January The consultation was issued on 24 February 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

9 Consultation responses QuestionParticipant Response Question 1Do you agree with the proposed methodology?100% agreed with the proposed methodology Question 2For each area where you disagree, please provide an alternative methodology. N/A Question 3Do you agree with the current Settlement Risks Threshold? One respondent did not agree with the current Settlement Risks Threshold Question 4Please provide any additional comments you may have on the content of the REM No further comments were provided

10 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

12 Smart Metering: Consultations & Updates DCC Licence DCC Licence Application Regulations Privacy & Data Access Consumer Engagement Strategy Smart Energy Code 1 Jun 15 May 1 Jun Updated Impact Assessments ____ EC notification of SMETS v1.0 PLUS: DECC response to 2011 consultations on Licence Conditions and Installation CoP

13 Consultation Stats TopicPagesQuestions DECC Update12- Consumer Engagement9136 Privacy/ Data Access9630 DCC Licence Application Regulations SEC14563 DECC Response to SMICoP56- DECC Response to DCC Consultation/ SMETS144- Updated Impact Assessments (Domestic/ Non Domestic) 176-

14 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

15 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

16 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 Networks Options 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

17 Consumer Engagement Strategy & Tools Build support & address concerns Ensure vulnerable/low income get benefits Help consumers make energy savings Indirect Feedback Direct/ Real Time Feedback Motivational Campaigns Advice & Guidance Central Delivery Body?

18 TermsCh4: 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: IndependenceCh7: Financial & Ring- Fencing Schedules DCC Draft Licence (copious detail as per other licences…) Qualification Proposal Best & Final Offer Preferred Applicant 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

23 Annually Objectives Fit for purpose Meeting the needs of our customers PAB 135/07 Background 1

24 What did we do? What was in scope? What was out of scope? How did we do it? PAB 135/07 Background 2

25 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

26 PAB 135/07 Recommendations The PAB is invited to: COMMENT on the proposed changes; and ENDORSE the proposed changes.

135/08 Trading Disputes Technical Assurance Checks – non confidential session Elizabeth Montgomerie 26 April 2012

28 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

29 Suppliers Inconsistent approach HH vs. NHH Exception management Communication One Supplier – EFR PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 1

30 Data Collectors Reliance on Suppliers Commercial problems Feedback PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 2

31 Licenced Distribution System Operators Losses incentives Inconsistent approach Cost vs. Benefits TAA should do more TAMEG response PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 3

32 PAB135/08 Summary of Key findings 4 Industry Concerns Dummy Meter Exchanges Trading Dispute Process Awareness Communication Favourable changes

33 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