BSC Change Register

Modifications - 08 May 2020

Details Progression
Title Proposer Date Raised Active / Closed Problem/Issue Solution Current Status Urgent Self Gov Implementation date

Revisions to the nature of the Supplier Hub principle are required to take account of the fact that P332 seeks to make Agents signatories to the BSC and make all of their activities directly accountable to the Performance Assurance Board As per ELEXON's communication concerning the impact of COVID-19 the timeline for P332 has been
Suppliers do not always have a contractual relationship with the Agents they are supposed to be (PAB) and ELEXON. pushed back 3 months. The Assessment Consultation is now due to be issued in August.  ELEXON are
managing. planning to host the 7th workgroup during May 2020 to review the draft legal text and side-letter. 

Revisions to the Supplier Hub Principle
The seventh Workgroup meeting was held on 6 February 2020. The workgroup reviewed case studies
provided by members and concluded that the issues identified are common to CPA and non-CPA sites,
however, the amount of time and effort needed to resolve these issues for CPA sites is often higher
than for non-CPA sites. The Workgroup decided not to conduct any further analysis or evidence
gathering at this stage. The Proposer confirmed their preferred solution would be a side-letter as part
of the Qualification process, requiring Agents to agree to treat all appointments the same regardless of
Smartest Energy 28 Jan 16 Active contract status, such that they meet all relevant BSC requirements. This will bring DCs back in to No No 30 Dec 99
scope and refer directly to CPAs.

The sixth Workgroup meeting was held on 27 November 2019. The majority of the Workgroup believes
P332 should continue (not be put on hold any further). Workgroup Members agreed to provide case
studies for instances where CPAs have been the cause of, or a significant contributing factor, in issues
resulting in BSC underperformance. It is hoped that this evidence can be used to do more targeted
evidence gathering. A revised P332 progression plan is being developed and will be presented to the
Panel on 16 January 2020 for approval.

On 10 October 2019, the Panel approved a three-month extension to allow for a further P332
Workgroup meeting, following Ofgem’s response (see documents below) to the Panel’s letter (see
The Proposer identified a defect in the current arrangements for notifying ABSVD from the TC to P354 seeks to allow the Transmission Company to provide Applicable Balancing Services Volume Data (ABSVD) for non-BM Balancing Services P354 was raised on 11 Jan 17. The IWA was presented to the Panel at its meeting on 9 Feb 17. The
documents below).
ELEXON. BSC Parties are not obliged to specify a BM Unit for the provision of Balancing Services providers to BSC Central Systems for allocation to the appropriate Supplier account to correct their Energy Imbalance position. Panel agreed to progress P354 to six months Assessment Procedure. The Central System Impact
and, if they do, they can opt out of receiving ABSVD by notifying the TC. Where the Balancing Assessment (IA) was issued in June. The outcome was discussed at the third P354 Workgroup
At its September 2019 meeting, the Panel sought Ofgem’s latest view on P332. The Panel paused P332
Services provider is not a BSC Party, it will not be able to specify a BM Unit as currently it is unable meeting which was held on Friday 23 Jun 7. The Panel approved a three months' extension to the
in September 2017, as the baseline against which it was being assessed was likely to significantly
to register BM Units, so no ABSVD can be notified against BM Units. Assessment Procedure with the Assessment Report due in November 2017. The fourth P354
change. This was primarily as a result of Ofgem’s Significant Code Review (SCR) on market-wide Half
Workgroup meeting was held by teleconference on 20 July to discuss the potential changes to the
Hourly Settlement, but also Ofgem’s review of the Supplier Agent functions and future supply market
ABSVD Methodology. The Workgroup agreed by majority that the P354 Assessment Procedure
arrangements.
Consultation should be issued at the same time as the C16 informal consultation in October 2017. This
option allows the Industry and BSC Panel to have a view on what National Grid intends to implement
On 12 September 2019, the Panel sought Ofgem’s views as to whether P332 is in line with Ofgem’s
and should not cause any significant delay to the P354 progression. At its meeting on 13 Aug 17, the
current strategic direction. The Panel also sought to understand whether P332 is or will be within the
BSC Panel approved a three month extension to the Assessment Procedure with the Assessment Report
scope of any of Ofgem’s programmes of work. Ofgem responded on 9 October 2019. Ofgem confirmed
due in Feb 18. The first C16 ABSVD Workgroup meeting was held on 8 Sep 17 and the second C16
P332 is not within scope of any of its programmes of work and believed it could be addressed under
ABSVD meeting was held on 25 Sep 17. The third C16/ABSVD meeting was held on 13 Oct 17 and was
the current arrangements.
joint with the P354 Workgroup. A separate P354 Workgroup meeting was then held on 18 Oct 17. The
sixth Workgroup meeting was held on 10 Nov 17. P354 was issued for Assessment Consultation on 16
Use of ABSVD for non-BM Balancing Services at The Proposer believes that whilst the market has moved on over the last two years, the P332 issue has
ENGIE 11 Jan 17 Closed Nov 17, with responses due by 15 Dec 17. The seventh Workgroup meeting was held on 9 Jan 18. The No No 30 Dec 99
the metered (MPAN) level not yet been addressed under the BSC or any of the wider Ofgem initiatives. He is minded to reduce
P354 Workgroup agreed to amend the proposed solution and as such a second Assessment Procedure
the scope only to Meter Operator Agents, as this is where the majority of issues arise and where the
Consultation is required. This was issued on 15 Jan 18 for 10 WDs, with responses due 29 Jan 18. An
greatest number of direct contracts between customers and Agents (MOAs) exist. He is proposing that
eighth Workgroup meeting was held on 1 Feb 18. The Assessment Report was presented to the BSC
MOAs become signatories to the Code and directly liable for performance with the option of charges to
Panel on 8 Feb 18. The BSC Panel agreed with the Workgroup's majority view that the P354 Alternative
incentivise performance or penalise underperformance.
Modification is better than the P354 Proposed Modification. The P354 Report Phase Consultation was
issued on 9 Feb 18 for 10 WDs with responses due by 23 Feb 18. The P354 Draft Modification Report
Given the scope of the original P332 issue against the new baseline of the Target Operating Model
was presented to the Panel at its meeting on 8 March 2018. The Panel unanimously agreed that the
(TOM) for Market-wide Half Hourly Settlement, the scope of P332 is likely to change. The issue of CPAs
P354respect
with Proposed Modificationperformance
to Settlement would betterisfacilitate
likely to Applicable
be confinedBSC Objectives
to the Advanced (a),Market
(b), (c), (d) and under
Segment (e)
compared to the current baseline and the P354 Alternative Modification, and should therefore be
the TOM. This will comprise today’s Half Hourly market plus any Non Half Hourly settled Meters with
approved. The P354 Final Modification Report was submitted to the Authority for decision on 9 March
Advanced capable metering already connected.
2018. On 18 June 2018. the Authority approved the P354 Proposed Modification for implementation on
1 April 2020 as a standalone BSC Systems Release.
An interim report on P332 was presented to the Panel on 13 Jul 17 (in accordance with F 2.6.10).
Given the likely assessment duration and effort, the Panel sought Ofgem’s views to whether the
findings of this report are consistent with their provisional thinking and strategic direction. The Panel
considered Ofgem’ response at its meeting on 14 September 17. The Panel directed the P332
P305 proposed a new methodology for pricing reserve into the calculation of the imbalance price This Modification Proposal aims to address the lack of harmonised treatment between STOR and Fast Reserve and therefore extend the Workgroup
P371 to pause
was raised its Power
by UK work whilst theon
Reserve Significant Code Review
11 September (SCR)
2018. The on Written
Initial market-wide Half Hourly
Assessment was
exclusively for Settlement Periods in BM and Non-BM STOR. The aim was to capture the value that application of the Reserve Scarcity Price (RSP) calculation methodology to Fast Reserve. This will guarantee fair and harmonised treatment of Settlementto
presented is the
on-going
Panel as
on this could change
13 September the baseline against which P332 is developed and
2018.
that capacity is providing to the system at times of margin tightness. both products and will capture the value provided by Fast Reserve to the system. assessed.
The first Workgroup was held on 24 October 2018.
At the time the new methodology was limited to STOR because STOR was considered “the main ELEXON and NGESO will perform analysis before the next Workgroup.
source of reserve”, now the GB balancing system has undergone a range of changes, whereby This decision
Second WG was washeld
in-line
13 with
Marchthe views of the majority of the P332 Workgroup members from its 5th
2019
Reserve products have been rationalised and harmonised. There is a lack of harmonised treatment meeting.will
ELEXON An prepare
update was provided
Business to the Panel
requirements andonIAs
10with
May a2018.
view The Panel at
to issuing agreed
start to
of continue
April to
between STOR and Fast Reserve andit is necessary to extend the application of the Reserve Scarcity ‘pause’Workgroup
Third P332 untilwas
December
held on2018, pending
5 June where Ofgem’s policy decision
the Workgroup chose toon Suppliersolution
progress Agent functions
option 1. and
Price (RSP) calculation methodology to Fast Reserve. the further
APC development
was issued of the
17 June with Target Operating
responses due 5 July Models as part of the SCR.
We believe that there is no reason for a different treatment of the two Reserve products and Fast Final Workgroup was be held 16 July.
Inclusion of non-BM Fast Reserve actions into the Reserve should have been captured already within P305. At its meeting on 8 August the Panel submitted P371 to the report phase. The report Phase
UKPR 11 Sep 18 Active No No 30 Dec 99
Imbalance Price calculation Consultation was issued 13 August with responses due 27 August.
The Panel considered the Draft Mod Report at its meeting on 12 September, where it recommended
P371 be approved
The Final Modification Report was submitted to the Authority for decision on 19 September.
The Authority approved P371 for implementation on 25 June 2020 on 16 December 2019,

Modification to follow up the work done under Issue 70 'Settlement of Secondary BM Units using This Modification aims allow data from existing Operational Metering (if installed), located behind the meter, to be used for Settlement purposes The Seventh Workgroup took place virtually on 19 March 2020. the Workgroup agreed the solution and
metering at the asset' and if not, what additional metering and of which standard will need to installed. reviewed progress with legal text. There will need to be another short meeting to agree legal text
before proceeding to consultation.
The Meter at the Boundary Point would still form an SVA Metering System, and metering data collected from it would still be used in Settlement
of the Supplier BM Unit; but it would play no direct role in Settlement of the Secondary BM Unit. Settlement of the Secondary BM Unit would be The planned consultation has been put back to July 2020 as part of our response to Covid-19. We are
Settlement of Secondary BM Units using metering based on a Meter close to the controllable asset. This Meter would therefore be “Settlement Metering” rather than “non-Settlement Metering”, using this time to go through legal text and the consultation again as well as looking at how we can
Flexitricity 10 Dec 18 Active No No 24 Apr 20
at the asset and would form a new type of Metering System recognised under the BSC (not an SVA Metering System). accelerate some aspects of the change

Utilising a baselining methodology as an
Enel Trade S.P.A.
alternative to Physical Notifications
Enabling consumers to buy and sell electricity
GridBeyond
from/to multiple providers through Meter Splitting
Modification to follow up the work done under Issue 71 'Introduction of a baselining methodology as The Virtual Lead Party of the Secondary BM Unit can decide to input a PN for the Secondary BMU or allow the PN to be determined via a
an alternative to Physical Notifications'
11 Dec 18 Active
P379 aims to address a significant barrier to competition in the market rules whereby multiple
Suppliers are unable to compete for behind-the-meter energy volumes, measured via the same
boundary Metering System. Whilst the existing SVA Shared Metering Arrangements do facilitate
splitting of boundary Metered volumes between different Suppliers, these arrangements are
restrictive, for example they require agreements in advance between the Suppliers. The Proposer
03 Jan 19 Active
believes that the existing arrangements don’t adequately facilitate the development of local energy
markets and supply innovation, and effectively mean there is a monopoly of one Party, the ‘default’
or ‘Primary’ Supplier, over a consumer’s energy volumes behind a Settlement Meter at any given
time, restricting competition and innovation.
IWA was presented to Panel on 13 December 2018. Panel requested that we try to align WGs with
baseline methodology. This will be achieved by setting a flag in the System as part of the QME calculation. P375.
First WG in conjunction with 375 on 25 Jan 19.
Second WG was held in conjunction with P375 on 18 March 19
Third Workgroup to discuss baseline characteristics held on 3 June 2019.
The fourth WG meeting was held 14 August to consider draft BRs
ELEXON is developing the Business Requirements and requesting data for analysis to support
discussions ahead of the next meeting. A Request for Information was be issued to industry on 23
September with responses due 11 October to support ELEXON's analysis No No 30 Dec 99
The fifth Workgroup meeting was held 10 December where the Workgroup considered a detailed
walkthrough of the draft Business Requirements and provided comments. The Workgroup also looked
at ELEXON's analysis into baselines.
ELEXON is undertaking Impact Assessments with its service providers to help the Workgroup assess
potential solutions. Following this the sixth Workgroup will consider impacts and draft legal text. This is
likely to be in June 2020.
As per ELEXON’s communication concerning the impact of COVID-19 , we now expect to issue the
Assessment Procedure Consultation in July 2020.
This Modification will enable consumers to be supplied by multiple Suppliers through Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) Settlement Meters at The Panel approved an eight month extension to allow ELEXON to conduct a cost benefit analysis
the Boundary Point. P379 will allow multiple Suppliers to compete for the supply or export of electricity through a single Meter without needing (CBA) for P379. ELEXON will provide an update to the Panel on 14 May 2020, including the scope of
to establish an agreement between all of the Suppliers involved for every instance. the CBA. ELEXON are engaging with Ofgem about the CBA and are planning to hold a workshop with
interested parties to help inform the CBA. As per ELEXON’s communication concerning the impact of
COVID-19 the timeline for P379 has been pushed back 3 months. While we are presenting the scope of
No No 11 Feb 20
the CBA on 14 May 2020 we don’t intend on issuing the CBA to industry at the moment.

Enhanced reporting of demand data to the NETSO
to facilitate CUSC Modifications CMP280 and
CMP281
BSC Mod to follow the agreed solution for CMP280/CMP281 CUSC Modifications, that seek to exclude
storage providers from having to pay BSUOS and TNUOS on their imports. Ofgem suggested that
these charges on imports to storage sites were a barrier. Current CUSC Mods only cover CVA
registered storage. Innogy have developed an alternative to also cover SVA registered storage.
Engie 06 Mar 19 Active
A BSC Mod is proposed as the BSC already facilitates the provision of metered data for Network Charging purposes. In addition, a Mod is The P383 Initial Written Assessment was presented to the BSC Panel on 14 March 2019, who agreed
required to ensure clear, consistent rules for identifying and aggregating metered volumes for Metering Systems that ought to be excluded from that it should be progressed to the Assessment Procedure. P383 was raised on 6 March 2019.
the calculation of BSUOS/TNUOS. The proposal is similar to an approach used to identify Energy Intensive Industry in the calculation of EMR
and RO charges. The Supplier/Generator/Storage provider identifies sites/metering systems that it considers should be exempt; these are
validated; the Metering Systems are shared with SVAA and/or Data Aggregators; and then metered volumes for these metering systems are The first P383 Workgroup was held on 29 April 2019. The Workgroup have identified a solution,
collected and aggregated by Data Aggregators (alongside normal aggregation for Settlement) and reported to SVAA and/or NG to enable these agreed on the Applicable BSC objectives, and agreed that it should not be progressed as Self-
volumes to be excluded from the calculation of BSUOS and TNUOS charges. Governance. No No 11 Apr 19

A teleconferance call was held on 11 June to discuss the results from the ELEXON Service Provider
Impact Assessment and to hold an intial vote. A third Workgroup meeting was held on the 29 July, the
purpose of this meeting was to discuss the final solution and hold a final vote.

The P383 Assessment Report was presented to the BSC Panel on 8 August 2019 who agreed to submit
P344 and P354 were developed in isolation but have a number of interactions that need to be Additional clarification is needed in defined term to account for both P344 and P354. the Modification to the Report Phase.
Progression
aligned in order for both ABSVD and TERRE volumes to be settled correctly. The current legal texts Additional logic clause need to be added to Section S to account for both P344 and P354 volumes. The Self-Governance appeal window closed  on Friday 30 August 2019. No appeals were received, and
contain contradictory defined terms and incompatible processes (e.g. the MSID Pair Half Hourly Potential further clarification added to Section S in Regards to SVA Metering System Balancing Services Register. In addition, a number of The P383was
so P388 Report Phase consultation
implemented on 1 April was
2020issued to industry
(as part of ad-hoconBSC
13 Systems
August 2019 with in
Release) responses duewith
accordance by
Delivered Volumes allocation process). .The current P344 legal text can be interpreted in divergent clarifications are needed to the P344 legal text to remove the possibility of divergent interpretations and ensure there are no barriers to Party 27 August
the Panel’s2019.
determination. 
ways which may lead to unintentional Party non-compliance with the intended obligations set by the compliance with the new obligations. It is proposed that this addressed along with the alignment of the P344 and P354 solutions.
P344 workgroup. It is proposed that this is addressed along with the alignment of the P344 and Following an initial scoping exercise (conducted mid Nov 18)) the following areas have been identified that need to be addressed: P383 Draft
The Draft Modification
Modification ReportReport was presented
was presented to the
to Panel BSC Panel
for decision onon 12 September
8 August 2019,
2019. The the BSC
Panel
P354 solutions Panel unanimously
unanimously approvedapproved all recommendations.
the P388 Draft Modification Report under Self-Governance. 
• Conflicting definitions of shared defined items to be amended to align
• The process for allocating MSID Pair Delivered Volumes to composite MSIDs needs to be updated to account for both VLP and NG inputs P383 Final
The Report PhaseModification Report
Consultation wasonissued
closed to 2019.
30 July the Authority on 20 September
Two respondents 2019 with
raised concerns theP388
that BSC
Aligning the P344 & P354 Solutions NETSO 03 Jul 19 Closed • Aligning and simplifying the parallel (P344 & P354) processes surrounding the SVA Metering System Balancing Services Register that holds Panel's
does notreccomendation to approve.
take into account balancingInactions
order that
beingP383, CMP280
provided and CMP281
for regional can be implemented
DNO services, for 1
such as voltage No Yes 25 Sep 19
both SBMU and ABSVD Data April 2021 in consideration of National Grid ESOs system development timescales, Ofgem must make a
support.
• Resolving typos / incorrect references contained in both texts decision on this P383 by 28 February 2020.
The P388 Initial Written Assessment was presented to the BSC Panel on 11 July 2019.

P388 was raised by NETSO on 3 July 2019.

1. In their P365: ‘Enabling ELEXON to tender for the REC’ decision letter Ofgem commented that the P390 seeks to introduce a framework into the BSC that allows the ELEXON Board to determine whether ELEXON can undertake additional P390 was raised by E.ON on 12 August 2019. The BSC Panel considered the Initial Written Assessment
Modification could have been wider in scope (a comment also made by a respondent to the FMR activities provided certain conditions are met. at its meeting on 12 September 2019, where it will agree how to progress this Modification. 12/9 The
consultation), enabling ELEXON to tender for any suitable opportunity that arises, rather than being BSC Panel considered the Initial Written Assessment at its meeting on 12 September 2019, where it
specific to the REC and suggested that this is something that should be further considered All of the conditions introduced in previous Modifications to ELEXON’s vires, P330 ‘Allowing ELEXON to tender for the Uniform Network Code agreed to progress P390 into the Assessment Phase. 20/10 the first meeting of the Workgroup has
Gas Performance Assurance Framework Administrator (PAFA) role’ and P365 ‘Enabling ELEXON to tender for the Retail Energy Code (REC)’ are been scheduled for 18 November 2019. Following the first Workgroup, ELEXON are ascertaining
included, plus some additional conditions to safeguard the interests of BSC Parties. availability for the 2nd Workgroup and strating to draft Buisness Requirements and Legal Text. 5/12
The second P390 Workgroup meeting will be held on 18 December 2019. ELEXON are requesting a two
Allowing extensions to ELEXON’s business and month extension to the P390 Assessment Procedure to return with the Assessment Report at the March
E.ON 12 Aug 19 Active No No 05 Dec 19
activities, subject to additional conditions
2020 meeting of the Panel. 20/12 The second Workgroup for P390 took place on 18 December 2020
where the remaining areas of the solution were agreed. ELEXON will draft the remaining business
requirements and legal text before circulating them to the Workgroup for review, before an additional
meeting in late January 2020.The third meeting of the P390 group took place on 23 Jan 2020 where
the Workgroup reviewed the Legal Text and considered outcomes of engagement with Ofgem
regarding their interpretation of the Transmission Licence.Standard Conditions.The Workgroup have
now developed the P390 solution to a point where it can be consulted on in mid-February with the aim
National Grid ESO are looking to delegate their responsibilities regarding the EBGL amendment Update the relevant BSC processes to capture the specific powers and obligations delegated to the BSCCo or the BSC Panel (as relevant) from to hold
P392 a 4th
was Workgroup
raised in early-to-mid
by National Grid ESO onMarch 20202019.
2 October to consider responses
The P392 and provide
Initial Written final views
Assessment wason
process as detailed under Articles 4, 5, 6 and 10. This relates to the power to amend the EBGL NGESO, and clearly set out the change process that shall apply to any BSC Modification proposal seeking to amend any of the EBGL Article 18 the P390 solution.
presented to the BSC10/02 P390
Panel on for Assessment
10 October Procedure
2019, the PanelConsultation,
agreed with holding a 4th Workgroup
all recommendations andin
Article 18 terms and conditions related to balancing, as approved by the Authority. As such, we will terms and conditions. early-to-mid
agreed Marchshould
that P392 2020 be
to consider
progressedresponses and providePhase.
to the Assessment final views on the P390 solution. 25/03 The
need to amend to BSC to enable the most efficient discharge of these responsibilites for the benefit final Workgroup took place on 25 March 2020 where responses to the consultation were considered.
of industry and internal processes. We are seeking to incorporate the EBGL amendment process THe Panel
The P390 Workgroup
progressed unanimously recommend
P392 to the Report Phase that
at itsP390 better
meeting onfacilitates the objectives
9 April 2020 and made no
with an initial
within our existing Change process to avoid the need for two separate submissions to the Authority amendments
unanimous to the solution. for
recommendation P390 was issued
approval. The for Report Phase
consultation Consulation
closed on 29 Aprilon2020
15 April, withresponses
and the responses
for every Modification that impacts BSC provisions constituting Article 18 terms and conditions. due be
will by presented
29 April. along with the Modification Report to the BSC Panel at its meeting on 14 May 2020.
Aligning the BSC Change process with EBGL
ELEXON 02 Oct 19 Active No No 26 Sep 19
requirements

Final Consumption Levies (FCLs)
The BSC requires BSCCo (or its appointed BSC Agents) to provide the EMR Settlement Services
Provider (SSP) with “EMR Settlement Data” required to calculate CFD and CM charges for Licensed
Supplier. This data takes the form of a BM Unit Gross Demand Report, identifying the gross Import
for each Supplier in each Settlement Period.
Currently this report attributes to Suppliers electricity they have provided to Licensed Generation
businesses, which falls outside the definition of ‘supply’ in the Electricity Act 1989. The Department
for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and Ofgem made clear in their joint Smart
Centrica 07 Nov 19 Active Systems and Flexibility Plan (published in July 2017) that the Supplier Obligation is not payable in
relation to such imports. This issue with the BSC data provided to the EMR SSP leads to over-
charging of CFD and CM levies for Suppliers whose customers are Licensed Generators operating
Generation or Storage Facilities.
This Modification would replace the interim solution with an enduring solution (capable of correctly calculating chargeable supply volumes for all
sites) requires:
• BSC processes for registering (and collecting data from) Asset Metering Systems located ‘behind the Settlement Meter’, independently of the
Supplier’s Boundary Point metering. This element of the required solution will be very similar to processes already being developed by the
Workgroup looking at BSC Modification P375 (‘Settlement of Secondary BM Units using metering behind the site Boundary Point’); and
• New calculation processes for the Supplier Volume Allocation Agent (SVAA) to apportion the Imports measured at the Boundary Points into
those which constitute ‘supply’ for purposes of the Electricity Act 1989 (and are therefore chargeable); and those that do not.
P395 was raised by Centrica 7 November 2019. The Panel considered the IWA on 14 November 2019
and agreed to advance the Modification to the Assessment Procedure. ELEXON are ascertaining
availability for the first Workgroup. 5/12 Due to internal constraints, progression of this Modification is
on hold until mid-January 2020. 10/01 the first P395 Workgroup has been confirmed for 19 February
2020. 20/2 The first meeting of the P395 Workgroup was held on 19 February 2020, with the
Workgroup and Proposer agreeing with ELEXON’s interpretation of ToR A) ‘Which imports should be
chargeable?’ The Workgroup noted that answering the P395 problem satisfactorily will involve
consideration of scalability, practicality and cost to ensure that the solution is truly enduring, consistent No No 20 Sep 19
with regulations and scalable to domestic level. As per ELEXON’s communication concerning the impact
of COVID-19 the timeline for P395 has been pushed back. The Assessment Consultation is now due to
be issued August 2020.

Under the EU Third Package (Article 2 of Regulation 714/2009) Interconnector flows should be This Modification Proposal seeks to exclude Interconnector Balancing Mechanism (BM) Units from the Main Funding Share and SVA (Production) Modification P396 was raised by Nord Pool AS on 10 December 2019. The Panel considered P396 Initial
treated as part of the Transmission System and not as Production or Consumption. The current BSC Funding Share BSC Charges, in order to better facilitate the EU Third Package. This Modification was previoulsy raised under P361 on 31 Written Assessment on 12 December 2019. The Panel agreed to send P396 straight to the Report
charging arrangements are not aligned with the EU Third Package. October 2017.On 22 October 2019 Ofgem confirmed that P361 has ‘timed out’. Ofgem was not in a position to make a determination on P361 Phase Consultation. The P396 Draft Modification Report was presented at the January 2020 BSC Panel
by 1 November 2018. The P361 Proposer Nord Pool Spot AS has re-raised P361 as a new Modification. If approved the Modification will be meeting with a majority of the Panel voting to reject P396. On 6 March 2020, the Authority approved
For the purposes of calculating Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) Charges, Interconnector effective in the 2020/21 financial year. the P396 Modification Proposal for implementation on 5 November 2020.
Balancing Mechanism (BM) Units in Great Britain, are currently treated as either a Production BM
Unit (generation) or a Consumption BM Unit (demand). The BSC Charges derived from Credited
Revised treatment of BSC Charges for Lead Parties
Nord Pool Spot AS 10 Dec 19 Active Energy Volumes are paid for by all BSC Parties having Production and Consumption BMUs with non- No No 05 Nov 20
of Interconnector BM Units
zero Metered Volumes, including Interconnector Users.

Assessing the costs and benefits of adjusting
Parties' Imbalances following a demand
disconnection
Following a Demand Control Event (DCE) on 9 August 2019, the BSC Panel raised concerns that the
perceived benefits of making adjustements to Parties' Imbalance Volumes (~£45k ABS) following
this DCE may not outweigh the costs of operating the BSC processes. On 14 November 2019, the
BSC Panel instructed ELEXON to present it with a Modification Proposal at its December 2019
meeting. The proposal should introduce a threshold mechanism for determining when not to make
adjustments to Parties' Imbalance Volumes following a Demand Control Event. The proposal should
be capable of being submitted straight into the Report Phase. ELEXON had already planned to raise
BSC Panel 12 Dec 19 Active an Issue to consider this issue.
The proposed solution is to introduce a criterion/criteria into the BSC that will be used by ELEXON to recommend to Panel whether adjustments
to Imbalance Volumes should be made following a DCE. The Panel may then decide whether or not to proceed with making adjustments to
Imbalance Volumes.Seeing as this proposal is intended as an urgent solution in case there are further DCEs this winter and because we had
intended to run an Issue Group to thoroughly explore the purpose and operation of the DCE processes, we are inclined to recommend that this
solution has a sunset clause so that it ceases to have effect on 30 April 2020 (i.e. after the Winter and Winter shoulder period)
P397 was raised by the BSC Panel at its meeting on 12 December 2019. The Modification was
submitted for a 10WD industry consultation on 16 December 2019 and the responses were presented
at the January 2020 Panel meeting. After due consideration, Ofgem decided to Send Back the P397
Final Modification Report with a request for further evidence to be gathered. ELEXON then presented
the P397 Send Back Process to the Panel at its meeting on 12 March 2020, where it explained it
expects to present the amended FMR to the Panel at its meeting on 9 July 2020 after gathering the
necessary information via Issue 89.
No No 29 Jan 20

Increasing Access to BSC data
The energy data taskforce (EDTF) made a series of recommendations around open data, and
identified the BSC as an early adopter of their recommendations. In welcoming the EDTF report
Mark Bygraves is quoted in an ELEXON press release, and on the ELEXON website, as saying
"ELEXON will help initiate the implementation of the report's recommendations by seeking where
necessary, to facilitate a change to the Balancing and Settlement Code this year to further embed
the principle of open data within the BSC". Ofgem have subsequently contacted ELEXON to ask
what actions we are taking to implement the recommendations of the EDTF report.
ELEXON 12 Dec 19 Active
Make changes to the BSC and CSDs that demonstrates ELEXON's commitment to open data. The First Workgroup meeting took place on 16 January 2020 at ELEXON’s offices. The Workgroup
It should be noted that inclusion of some text confirming ELEXON's commitment to open data will not of itself have any impact on any system established the principles for how the BSC should facilitate
or party. Impact will come through the change in culture towards open data that will be supported by the explicit expression of a commitment The second Workgroup will be on 30 March 2020 and agred the edn-to end solution.
to open data within the BSC suite of documents. There will be a third WG meeting in early May to sign-off the Legal text and solution
It may well be possible to include the commitment to open data within another Mod or Change; if not then inclusion of a paragraph on open
data in section 1.6 of BSCP01 would be an obvious solution.
No No 24 Apr 20

Making the identity of Balancing Service providers
Calon energy
visible in the Balancing Services Adjustment Data
Increased transparency of trades bringing non BM trades in line with BM trades and preventing any
potential distortion or competitive advantage. Currently bilateral trades conducted through Schedule
7A of the GTMA and other routes such as interconnector trading with counterparties are reported
through the Trade Reporting page on the NGESO website and form part of the Balancing Services
Adjustment Data (BSAD).  They comprise a unique sequential number, volume, cost and a flag.  potential solution that could significantly reduce lead times and costs of implementation. The
However this leaves the counterparty anonymous and gives an information advantage to
counterparties that trade with National Grid under these arrangements.
24 Dec 19 Active
NGESO undertakes a number of Balancing Actions outisde the BM using Bilateral contracts. These trades are recorded in the BSAD file. This
data lacks transparency over the provider,location and balancing service. This asymetry of data gives the provider of that service market
information which the rest of the market do not have. Providing this on the BSAD file gives transparency over what services are required by the two potential solutions were sent for impact assessment. These were assessed at the second
NETSO thus aiding any future investment and competition from Balancing Service Providers
This Modification was raised on Tuesday 24 December 2019 and the Initial Written Assessment was
presented to the Panel on 16 January 2020. The first Workgroup was held on 27 January 2020 where
Workgroup meeting, held on 27 March 2020. At this meeting National Grid ESO (NGESO) identified a
Workgroup unanimously agreed that NGESO should impact assess this solution before moving forward.
NGESO agreed and committed to providing a timeline for its completion to allow P399 progression
planning to go ahead.
No #N/A 27 Apr 20
Unfortunately, due to the ongoing Covid-19 situation, NGESO are unable to provide an update at this
time as the relevant resources’ priorities have shifted. This page will be updated when the timescales
moving forward are clear. In the meantime if you have any questions please contact
bsc.change@elexon.co.uk.

Currently, paragraph 4.4.7 of BSC Section B explicitly prevents the Panel from conducting Amend BSC Section B4.4 in order to allow the BSC Panel to make decisions on Modifications Business via tele/video conference. A clear P400 was implemented on 8 April 2020
Modification Business by tele/video conference except in the case of Urgent Modification Proposals. expectation should be set that wherever practicable BSC Panel Members will still be expected to physically attend Panel meetings.
This is overly restrictive and could, in the event that a quorum of Panel Members or their Alternates
cannot physically attend a Panel meeting, could delay or halt the progression of BSC Change.

Panel Gov: Tele/Videoconferencing for

BSC Panel 13 Feb 20 Closed No #N/A 13 Feb 20
Modifications business

Existing provisions are ambiguous on BSC Panel Alternates contribution to a quorum. Likewise in Amend Section B to clarify that: P401 was implemented in 8 April 2020.
respect of the contribution of BSC Panel Members or Alternates attending by teleconference or - A quorum is based on the number of individuals present; and
similar means to a quorum. - Alternates may only stand in for a single Panel Member, thereby only casting one vote in the case that they are a Panel Alternate and only
casting two votes in the case that the appointed Alternate is also a Panel Member.
Existing provisions have the potential to unduly concentrate power in an individual and undermine
the rules relating to quorum and robust decision-making.
Panel Gov: Clarification of Panel Alternates
BSC Panel 13 Feb 20 Closed This ambiguity presents potential risks to the robustness of BSC Panel Governance. No #N/A 13 Feb 20
Governance Arrangements

TCR SCR - implementing Ofgem's policy decision National Grid ESO
In accordance with the BSC, ELEXON currently aggregates and sends metered data to DNOs and
NETSO to support the calculation of network charges (DUOS, TNUOS and BSUOS). The Targeted
Charging Review (TCR) Significant Code Review will make changes to the way DNOs and NETSO
calculate the residual element of DUOS and TNUOS charges - i.e. by replacing the current volumetric
approach with either a fixed (e.g. £/meter/day) or capacity (e.g. £/MVA/day) based charge.Our
October 2019 response to Ofgem's consultation on refined TCR proposals is here:
https://www.elexon.co.uk/documents/industry-consultations/2019-industry-consultations/elexons-
02 Mar 20 Active response-to-ofgems-consultation-on-refined-residual-charging-banding-in-the-targeted-charging-
review/
To support Ofgem's Option 1 (Fixed Charge), NETSO will need details of Imports by GSP Group and by Customer Group/Type (i.e. HV and LV
CDCM Tariff Types (i.e. which are made up of a collection of LLFCs), EHV connected and Transmission connected). NETSO will also require
details of the numbers of MSIDs by GSP Group, (Supplier) BM Unit and Customer Group/Type.
To support Ofgem's Option 2 (Capacity Charge), NETSO will need details of the numbers of MSIDs by GSP Group, (Supplier) BM Unit and
Capacity type/value.
Assuming Option 1 and 2 are based on annual forecasts of consumption and/or MSIDs, with no mid-year corrections/reconciliation, it is possible
that NETSO could get the information they require directly from DNOs as part of DNOs' 'Wk24 forecasts'.
We are working with Ofgem, NETSO and DNOs to explore how BSC processes and systems can continue to support the provision of data
necessary to calculate fixed or capacity based residual network charges.
National Grid raised P402 on 5 March 2020. The Initial Written Assessment was presented to the BSC
Panel at its 12 March 2020 meeting. 25/3 An initial briefing for P402 between ELEXON and CGI will
take place on 26 March. The first Workgroup meeting took place on 31 March 2020. Following an
update that Ofgem has pushed implementation of TCR change to 2022, the group wish to consider
alternative options at its next meeting and extend the Assessment Procedure for P402.The second
Workgroup took place on 6 May 2020, where the Workgroup agreed to an amended solution, for which
ELEXON will finalise Business Requirements and develop Legal Text.
No #N/A 02 Mar 20

BSC Arrangements in the event that the TERRE
National Grid ESO
Market is suspended by National Grid ESO
Gridcode modification GC0097 introduced the notion of TERRE market is suspension (BC4.9) that is In order to provide clarity to Market Participants, in the event that the TERRE market is suspended, this Modification proposes to amend the National Grid raised P403 ‘BSC TERRE Market Suspension Arrangements’ on 10 March 2020. The BSC
not reflected in BSC arrangemnets. This makes GB non compliant with 'EU COMMISSION BSC to: Panel considered the IWA at its meeting on 12 March 2020, where it agreec to progress P403 as a
REGULATION 2017/2196 establishing a network code on electricity emergency and restoration' 1. Define the rules for TERRE-related data in the event of system outages; Self-Gov Mod. P403 was issued for a 10 working day Report Phase Consultation with responses due by
(NCER) 2. Suspend TERRE-related Settlement processes in a TERRE market suspension scenario; and Tuesday 31 March.The P403 Draft Modification Report was presented to the BSC Panel on 9 April
3. Suspend TERRE-related Settlement processes in a contingency scenario. 2020 where the Panel approved. P403 was subject to a 15 Working Day Self-Governance Appeals
Window which ended on 1 May 2020. No ppeals were received from BSC Parties so P403 will be
implemented on the 28 May, as a standalone BSC Release
12 Mar 20 Active No Yes 28 May 20

The Panel agreed the scope of a review of Qualification and Re-Qualification. Our recommendation
to remove the Self-Assessment Document (SAD) from the BSCP will introduce flexibility to the
Qualification and Re-Qualification processes and improve assurance by allowing us to update it easily
when new risks or changes occur.
The opportunity to amend the SAD and align it with new settlement risks affects both industry and ELEXON.It will improve the application
process for Parties entering the Market whilst ensuring ELEXON has greater flexibility to update the SAD more regularly which will help provide
greater assurance against risks.This change will impact: New entrants, BSC Helpdesk, Operational Support, Guidance Publications, BSC Training
BSC Party Performance Assurance.
P404 was raised by the BSC Panel at its meeting on 12 March 2020.
The Report Phase Consultation was issued 17 March 2020 with responses invited by 31 March 2020.
at its meeting on 9 April the Panel approved P404 as a Self Governance Modificatuib for implementation
on 25 June 2020 as part of the June 2020 BSC Release. The Self GOvernance appeal window closed on
1 May 2020; no appeals were received.

Removing the Self-Assessment Document from

the BSCP and instead making it a Category 3 BSC Panel 12 Mar 20 Active No #N/A 12 Mar 20
configurable item

The BSC currently excludes certain notices to be sent by email, such as Accession Agreement. This Modification will allow notices that the BSC currently requires to be sent by post or fax to be sent by email. Due to the COVID-19 The BSC Panel raised P405, in accordance with BSC Section F paragraph 2.1.1(d)(vi), at its meeting on
Moreover, the BSC (Section H9.2.1) specifies which forms of notices are permissible. These are post, pandemic, it is not currently practical to use post or fax. More generally, it is now accepted and more efficient to send notices via email. 9 April 2020.The Panel considered the Initial Written Assessment at its meeting on 9 April 2020, where
fax and email. This is too specific and does not allow for new forms of communication and it progressed directly to the Report Phase.P405 has been issued for Report Phase Consultation with
development of technology without the need for a Modification. This is not efficient as it requires responses due by Wednesday 29 April 2020.
both time and effort from industry and ELEXON to engage in the progression of Modifications, which
is unnecessary, were the BSC to be less restrictive. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, left
unchanged, Parties and ELEXON may be non-compliant with the BSC, and were any non-compliance
Allow notices via electronic means where currently
BSC Panel 09 Apr 20 Active challenged, there is a risk that any notices not sent in accordance with the BSC could be considered No Yes 5 WDs after approval
prohibited
defective notices.

With the UK Government and Ofgem advice being that companies are to prioritise the safety of Set SP08a, SP08b, SP08c and SP04 Serials to £0 for all Suppliers from the March 2020 PARMS reporting period, until further notice. 06/05/2020 - Authority approved Modification 05/05/2020
customers and staff, it is clear that Suppliers will not be able to meet BSC obligations around Meter Supplier Charges are to be reinstated by the BSC Panel after a period of suspension following any changes to Government guidelines and 23/04/2020 (NAF) - Ad-hoc Panel (301A) recommends the Authority approve P406
installations and Meter reads, and will therefore incur considerable charges through no fault of their restrictions which would allow for normal Settlement operations activities to resume. 16/04/2020 (NAF) - 5WD Report Phase Consultation issued 14 April 2020.
own.

Temporary disapplication of Supplier Charge

BSC Panel 10 Apr 20 Active Yes No 11 May 20
Serials SP08 and SP04 due to COVID-19
 Manually Activated Reserves Initiative (MARI) is the project name to deliver manaul Frequency
Restoration Reserves (mFRR) as requried by Art 21 of the EBGLs.
There are 19 TSOs participating (inc. NGESO) and seven observers.
mFRR will be managed by a central european platform and will involve bids for 15 minute blocks
(standard) as well as minute-by-minute activations as required
This will be a new Standard Balancing Product for NGESO and as such, the BSC will nee to me modified so that it's use can be accounted for in
Settlement in the same way that other products are accounted for. DA has developped the BSC solution but are still awaiting input from
NGESO to tweak/amedn as requried

Project MARI NGESO 12-Mar-20 Active No No 23 Jun 22

NGESO raised P408 on 5 May 2020. P408 will run alongside a similar Modification Proposal (GC0130)
for the Grid Code which was put out to Code Administrator Consultation on 21 April 2020.

NGESO were originally going to close down TOGA and get all participants to send in data into REMIT instead. However REMIT is only needed
for large generators. Therefore the solution has changed so that large generators just submit info into REMIT and small/medium continue
Simplifying the Output Usable Data Process as a Industry have questioned the need to send in duplicate information into NGESO's TOGA system and
consequence of GC0130 NGESO 5-May-20 Active REMIT. using TOGA. NGESO get their requirements from Large generators by taking data from REMIT. No systems changes required but will involve No Yes 25 Feb 21
some changes to section Q as they are changing some of the reporting requirements for TOGA and we have to piblish any data which they
request off generators

Removal of Unused BSC Provisions
The problem of redundant BSC sections negatively affects the efficiency of the code. Removing
these sections simplifies the code and prevents redundant processes having to be factored in to the
Foundation Programme design. The solution involves deletion of sections of the BSC which are no
longer used and serve no practical purpose.Over the lifetime of the BSC, there have been a number
of provisions introduced that have since become redundant. These include provisions that were
never called upon by Parties, fully developed and therefore left unused, and transitional
arrangements that have now expired.
ELEXON 10 Oct 19 Closed
P394 was implemented on 27 February 2020.
At its meeting on 12 December 2019, the BSC Panel unanimously agreed that Modification P394 should
be approved.
The Report Phase Consultation was issued over the period 14 October to 22 November 2019.
Removing unused provisions in the code will increase the efficiency of the code, reduce regulatory burden and contribute to preparations for
the Foundation Programme.P394 seeks to remove text from the BSC which relates to provisions that have been identified as unused or
The BSC Panel Raised Modification P394 at its meeting on 10 October 2019. No Yes 27 Feb 20
expired. The provisions are Dual Notifications; Joint BM Units; Party and NETA Funding; BSC Section I ‘Transitional Arrangements for the
Implementation of BETTA’; Pool Supplement; Manual Credit Qualification; and BSCP534 ‘PARMS Techniques’

Disapplication of SP01 Supplier Charges
Expansion of the scope of the Technical Assurance
of Metering (TAM) technique to include desktop
audits
There are six PARMS Serials (Supplier performance standards) which attract a Supplier Charge for Supplier Charge SP01 will be set to 0 following the implementaiton of this Modification P393 was implemented on 27 February 2020. BAckground: On 2 January 2020, the Authority approved
underperformance. P393 for implementation on 27 February 2020 as part of the February 2020 BSC Release. Prior, the
SP01 is applied where PARMS submissions are incomplete. Supplier Charges are supposed to be a BSC Panel raised P393 at its meeting on 10 October 2019 (on recommendation of the Performance
genuine pre-estimate of loss, and the loss here would be from the uncertainty around performance Assurance Board (PAB)), and P393 was submitted for Report Phase Consultation over the period 14
monitoring and the risk management actions taken by the PAB in response to underperformance of October - 30 October 2019 inclusive. At its meeting on 14 November 2019, the BSC Panel unanimously
any parties. recommended to the Authority that P393 be approved.
However, the proportion of SP01 charges has been increasing now making up over 90% of all
ELEXON 10 Oct 19 Closed Supplier Charges, and within a year could equal £10m a month at the current trajectory - not No No 24 Sep 19
reflecting the risk. Additionally the charges continue accruing for each working day that the files are
missing for - there is no cut off date and it can be complex to submit files for dates long past.
The charges are capped, so liabilities are limited. However, for many smaller Suppliers the SP01
charges are higher than their cap, so the actual performance Serials (SP04 and SP08) are lost in the
noise. The charges are redistributed. The situation we see is that nearly all larger Suppliers end up
being net beneficiaries as their Supplier Charges for underperformance are more than offset by their
share of the redistributed amounts - mostly made up of SP01.
In summary,
The SP01
wording of the charges have
scope for ceasedand
Balancing to be an incentive
Settlement Codeor (BSC)
a genuine liquidated
Section damage
L 'Metering' that7
Clause The proposed solution is to provide an alternative desktop audit method to the TAM process. This would allow Metering Registrants the P391 was implemented on 27 February 2020. Background: P391 was raised by the BSC Panel on 12
compensates
Technical parties of
Assurance forMetering
others' underperformance.
Systems (TAMS) is focused around onsite inspections where flexibility of either selecting an in-person audit or having their metering data audited electronically. This alternative process would be beneficial September 2019 who agreed that P391 meets the Self-Governance criteria and should be progressed
Metering Equipment is installed. Such inspections are resource intensive to centrally deliver and for to both the TAA and the Registrants themselves, achieving both time and cost-efficiency. This would greatly decrease the percentage of no straight to the Report Phase. All consultation respondents agreed with the proposal and its
participants to support. This involves travel costs, inspection duration and the on-demand availability access to Registrant sites as TAA audits would no longer be entirely dependent on the Registrant or the required presence of a MOA or LDSO. implementation approach. The Panel approved P391 as a Self Governance Modification.
of a Meter Operating Agent (MOA) and Licensed Distribution System Operator (LDSO) if required. Electronic records of the Metering Systems would also be readily made available, allowing for non-compliance notices to be sent and for issues
There is an additional impact where the Technical Assurance Agent (TAA) have been unable to of non-compliance to be rectified at a much quicker rate. This would also aid the TAA in writing their BSC Panel Annual Report and individual
access, for any reason, the required Metering System sites, causing high costs which the Metering annual customer reports in instances where Registrants have more than 25 TAA inspections during the annual audit period.
ELEXON 13 Sep 19 Closed Registrants are obligated to absorb. No Yes 20 May 19

Resolution of Capacity Market and Balancing
Green Frog Power
Mechanism registration conflicts
There is a conflict between the rules in the Balance and Settlement Code (BSC) and the Capacity
Market (CM) rules regarding how Balancing Mechanism (BM) Units are registered. Removing this
conflict from the BSC will clarify the arrangements and ensure BSC Parties remain compliant with
both the BSC and CM rules.
01 Aug 19 Closed
Delete BSC Section K 3.1.8(b)
P389 was implemented on 7 November 2019. Background: P389 was raised on 1 August 2019 with a
recommendation to go straight to Report Phase. The Initial Written Assessment was presented to the
Panel on 8 August 2019. The Panel agreed that P389 should proceed to the Report Phase and initially
recommended that P389 be approved.The Report Phase Consultation was issued on 9 August until
Friday 23 August 2019. There were no respondents to the consultation. No Yes 07 Nov 19
The Panel approved P389 as a Self-governance Modification on 12 September 2019.

BSC Section H 3.1 covers Events of Default relating to seven scenarios, once triggered the BSC Panel Modification of the BSC to ensure that Events of Default are simple, relevant and timely. P385 was raised by Centrica on 3 April 2019.
is able to apply the Consequences of Default, often referred to as ‘Panel resolutions’. We believe that Payment Default
the current rules do not ensure appropriate protection against failing BSC Parties. The rules delay Introduce a new Event of Default in BSC Section H to aim to reduce timescales for Payment Default to trigger an Event of Default. The new ELEXON presented the Initial Written Assessment to the BSC Panel at its meeting on 11 April 2019,
action being taken by the BSC Panel in Events of Default relating to Payment Default and Credit Event of Default could trigger in the event that a BSC Party uses Credit Cover to pay Trading Charges on three occasions within a 30 calendar who recommended that the Modification proceed to the Assessment Procedure.
Default. The rules should be reviewed to ensure that BSC Panel can minimise the impact of a day rolling period. Alternative options could reduce the number of occasions or consider consecutive Payment Defaults, e.g. two consecutive
Defaulting Party in a timely manner. Payment Defaults. The first meeting of the P385 Workgroup was held on 17 June 2019 at ELEXON’s offices.
Reviewing BSC rules in regard to actions being Credit Default
taken by the BSC Panel in Events of Default British Gas 03 Apr 19 Closed • The timescales should be reduced and simplified to 10 consecutive working days for Level 1 Credit Default to trigger an Event of Default.
The second meeting of the P385 Workgroup took place on 15 July 2019 where the solution was No Yes 05 Dec 19
relating to Payment Default and Credit Default • The timescales should be reduced and simplified to five consecutive working days for Level 2 Credit Default to trigger an Event of Default.
finalised and remaning Terms of Reference considered. P385 has been issued for Assessment
• The arrangements surrounding recurrent events of Credit Default; Level 1 or Level 2 should be simplified. In the event that a Party clears the
Procedure Consultation , with industry invited to respond to by 5pm on Wednesday 21 August 2019.
Credit Default there should be no cooling off period. The number of occurrences should be reduced to three occasions in six months. The Workgroup will review the responses and provide their final views at the third P385 Workgroup on
30 September, before submitting the Assessment Report to the Panel on 10 October 2019. The
Assessment Procedure Consultation closed on 21 August 2019. There were 3 responses from Suppliers,
all of whom are supportive of the proposal and its recommendation as a Self-Governance Modification.
At the final Workgroup meeting on 30 September 2019, Members confirmed that the Assessment
ELEXON has been delegated responsibility for EB GL Article 12 by the Department for Business, This Modification will ensure the Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) remains compliant with obligations relating to the European Electricity Procedure
On Consultation
the 11 April response
2019, ELEXON had put an
presented no update
new arguments forward
on the revised andsolution
P384 had notto altered their as
the Panel, initial
Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS); to publish data as required by the EB GL Article 12.3(a)-(e) views against
Balancing Guideline (EB GL) and the European Transparency Regulation (ETR) assigned to Balancing and Settlement Code Company (BSCCo) by requested on 14theMarch
Applicable
2019.BSC
TheObjectives.P385 was issued
presentation provided foronReport
clarity Phaselead
the costs, Consultation
times and on 14 of
impacts
and sending such data to EMFIP to fulfil Article 12.5. EB GL Article 12.5 mandates that 2 years after the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). October
P384, the2019,
risks with
P384responses
may havedue by 30delivery,
on P344 October and2019.
theThe RPC received
interactions with 4National
responses,
Gridthe
ESO.Panel
Thewill
the EB GL has come into force that Article 12.3 data should be published on the ENTSO-E platform consider
Panel madethese
its as part of the
unanimous Draft Mod
decision Reportapprove
to initially on 14 November
P384. The2019.
PanelThe
alsoPanel
agreedconsidered
for P384 the Draft
to proceed
EMFIP. Modification Report on 14 November 2019 and determined that P385 ‘Improving the
directly to Report Phase. P384 was issued for a 10 Working Day consultation on the 15 April 2019 with efficacy and
The publication of European Electricity Balancing and so a BSC change is required to remain compliant. ELEXON will be non-compliant with the efficiency of the Section H Default provisions’ is a Self-Governance Modification Proposal;
responses due on the 30 April 2019. The Draft Modification Report was presented to the Panel on the and approved
NETSO 06 Mar 19 Closed P385 No Yes 11 Jun 19
Guideline (EB GL) balancing data by BMRS responsibility assigned by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS); to 9 Mayfor implementation
2019. on 27 February
The Panel unanimously 2020.the
approved 05/12 theunder
P384  Self Gov Appeal WindowP384
Self-Governance. for P385 closed on
was subject to a4
publish data as required by the EB GL Article 12.3(a)-(e) and sending such data to EMFIP to fulfil December
15 Working2019Day with nowindow,
appeal appeals recieved,
which closed therefore the Mod
on Thursday 30will
May be2019,
implemented
there werein the
no Feb 2020
appeals
Article 12.5. release. P384 was implemented on the 18 December 2019 (as part of ad-hoc BSC Systems Release) in
received.
accordance with the Panel’s determination.
.EBGL Article 12 (5) mandates that two years after coming into force TSO shall submit Article 12
reporting to Transparency Platform and duplicate ETR related articles (ETR article 17) will be phased
out.the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal, some parts of the BSC will need updating to
In The BSC will be amended to reflect where EU regulations will not be retained in EU law and where those changes will make the BSC ambiguous P382 was rejected by the BSC Panel on 13 February 2012.
reflect retention of EU law into UK law or confusing. Similarly, where appropriate, references to EU legislation will be amended to include the SI that has amended them (i.e. not all P382 was a self-Governance Modification -the appeal window will close on 4 March 2020
articles have been retained into UK law).

Amendments to the BSC to reflect the United

Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union NETSO 04 Mar 19 Closed No Yes 04 Mar 20
without a deal
Aligning the BSC with the EB GL change process Changes to the Balancing Terms and Conditions as defined in Article 18 of the EBGL may require There are a number of possible interpretations of the EBGL Articles, and ultimately Ofgem will decide. However, ELEXON have put forward three P374 was approved by the Authority on 14 November 2019 for implementation on 21 November 2019.
and derogation approach changes to the BSC Modification procedures in order to comply with Article 10 of the EBGL. approaches for consideration: The P374 Final Modification report is with the Authority for final decision. The P374 Draft Modification
Report was presented to the BSC Panel at its meeting on 12 September 2019, where it unanimously
1. Run BSC and EB GL change processes successively recommended that the P374 alternative Modification be approved and the Proposed Modification
2. Run EB GL change process in parallel with BSC modification process rejected.
3. Existing BSC processes are deemed to meet the EB GL process
SSE 05 Nov 18 Closed No No 21 Nov 19

Revised treatment of BSC Charges for Lead Parties
of Interconnector BM Units
Panel Gov: Remove Quarterly Reports
Under the EU Third Package (Article 2 of Regulation 714/2009) Interconnector flows should be This Modification Proposal seeks to exclude Interconnector Balancing Mechanism (BM) Units from the Main Funding Share and SVA (Production) P361 was submitted to Ofgem with an Implementation Date of 28 February 2019. However, the cut-off
treated as part of the Transmission System and not as Production or Consumption. The current BSC Funding Share BSC Charges, in order to better facilitate the EU Third Package. date for being able to develop and deliver P361 lapsed. ELEXON analysis suggests that P361 has timed
charging arrangements are not aligned with the EU Third Package. out, as it can no longer be delivered for the original Implementation Date. The Authority is considering
whether P361 has timed out.
For the purposes of calculating Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) Charges, Interconnector
Europe 31 Oct 17 Closed No No 30 Dec 99
Balancing Mechanism (BM) Units in Great Britain, are currently treated as either a Production BM P361, raised by Nord Pool Spot AS on 31 October 2017, proposes to remove Interconnector BM Unit
Unit (generation) or a Consumption BM Unit (demand). The BSC Charges derived from Credited volumes from the Funding Share calculations. This means that, should P361 be approved, those Parties
Energy Volumes are paid for by all BSC Parties having Production and Consumption BMUs with non- with Interconnector BM Units will pay less, whilst those without will pay more. If approved, P361 will
zero Metered Volumes, including Interconnector Users. now only apply from 1 April 2019 and will not re-calculate and re-bill the 2018/2019 financial year (1
April 2018 to 31 March 2019).
Panel governance review is proposing that the existing requirement in C3.9.1 to produce Quarterly Propose to amend the Code to remove the need for the Quarterly Report As the Self-Governance appeal window closed on Wednesday 3 April 2019 and no appeals were
Reports is unnecessary, overlaps other reports and is not needed. received, P381 is now awaiting Implimentation and will be implmented on the 27 June 2019. The
Panel unanimously approved the P381 Draft Modification Report under Self-Governance. As the
Panel Approved the P381 Draft Modification Report under Self- Governance, P381 will be subject to a
15 Working Day appeal window, which will close on Wednesday 3 April 2019. If an appeal is received,
Panel+K91 14-Feb-19 Closed the implementation of P381 will be suspended and the appeal tabled at the next available Panel No Yes 27 Jun 19
meeting, on the 11 April 2019. However, if no appeal is received, the Panel will be advised and P381
will be implemented on 27 June 2019 as part of the June 2019 scheduled BSC Release.

Recent changes to the Replacement Reserve Implementation Framework (RRIF), specifically the NGESO is proposing to modify the wording of BSC Section Q ‘Balancing Mechanism Activities’ to state ‘40 minutes before the start of each P381 was raised
Following Reportby the BSC
Phase Panel on 14
Consultation February
which ended2019
on 4 who
Marchagreed
2019,that
the P381
Draft meets the Self-
Modification Report
Transmission System Operator (TSO) energy bid submission gate closure time for Replacement Replacement Reserve Auction Period (RRAP)’ in place of ‘15 minutes following Gate Closure for each RRAP’ to ensure NGESO’s continued Governance
was presented criteria andfor
to Panel should be progressed
decision straight
on 14 March 2019.to Report
The PanelPhase. The Panel
unanimously also recommended
approved Modification
Reserves (RR), mean that National Grid Electricity System Operator (NGESO) will not be able to be compliance with the BSC and the RRIF. the
P380draft legal
under text and a proposed
Self-Governance. Implementationappeal
The Self-Governance Date ofwindow
27 Juneclosed
2019 asonpart of the June
Wednesday 20192019
3 April BSC
compliant with the Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) obligations introduced under P344. Release.
and The Report
no appeals werePhase Consultation was issued on 19 February 2019 with responses due on 4
received.
March 2019. The Draft Modification Report was presented to Panel for decision on 14 March 2019.
Revision to Replace Reserve Bid Data submission National Grid 6-Feb-19 Closed The Initial Written Assessment (IWA) was presented to the BSC Panel at its meeting on 14 February No Yes 27 Jun 19
deadline requirements
2019. The BSC Panel recommended that the Modification should be progressed direct to Report
Phase, and that it met the Self-Governance criteria. The Panel also recommended the draft legal text
and a proposed Implementation Date of 27 June 2019 as part of the scheduled June 2019 BSC
Release. P380 was raised on 6 February 2019.
BEIS has requested that the parties obliged under the CM continue to discharge their obligations This Modification would introduce a new interim BSC charge on Suppliers to be known as the CM Supplier Interim Charge. The charge will The Authority rejected P378 on 20 February 2019. The decision letter can be found in the documents
during the CM standstill period. As this is the BEIS minded to position, it is therefore prudent that form a simple fund, without provisions for credit cover or the mutualisation of any shortfall. Any failure to make a payment will be treated as section below. Ofgem concluded that it does not have the power to approve P378, as to do so would
Suppliers also continue to collect CM payments from customers. However, the Electricity being in default of the BSC, and carries the same BSC sanctions. be unlawful. This was on the basis that Parliament has established a specific and bespoke statutory
Settlement Company (ESC), pending the outcome of the BEIS consultation noted above, was regime for regulating the Capacity Market and approving P378 under Ofgem’s general statutory
instructed to stop collecting the CM payments from Suppliers by the Secretary of State. As such duties as set out in Electricity Act 1989 would contravene this and therefore be unlawful.
Suppliers currently appear to have no robust legal basis for taking money from customers, to help
them plan for any future liabilities if back payments are authorised. The Authority approved urgency for P378 on 8 January 2019 and approved the timetable as proposed
While the market has supported the continuation of the CM, and urged the Government to find a by the Panel.
pragmatic way forward, this industry is now ‘missing’ one month (December 2018)
What is the Capacity Market? At its urgent meeting on 4 February 2019, the BSC Panel recommended to the Authority that P378 be
The Capacity Market is designed to ensure sufficient reliable capacity is available by providing approved. The Final Modification Report was submitted to the Authority on 5 February 2019.
payments to encourage investment in new capacity or for existing capacity to remain open.
Monthly payments for the provision of capacity are made to Capacity Providers in line with their The Modification Consultation was issued on 16 January 2019 with responses due by 5pm on Tuesday
Capacity Agreements. Monthly payments are received from suppliers based on forecast demands, 29 January 2019.
which is reconciled once actual data is available. This payment is in relation to the Supplier Charge
Levy. The Initial Written Assessment (IWA) for P378 was presented to the Panel on 21 December 2018. The
VPI Immingham Panel recommended that P378 be treated as an Urgent Modification Proposal. An Ofgem response on
Introduction of a CM Supplier Interim Charge LLP
20-Dec-19 Closed urgency was requested and granted on 8 January 2019. The approved urgent procedure, detailed in Yes No _
the IWA, contains a minimum 10 Working Day consultation. The Panel additionally recommended that
they be allowed to put forward an Alternative solution in response to the consultation, if it is believed
to be better than the Proposed.
P378 was raised by VPI Immingham on 20 December 2018.

BSC Section T 1.5.3(b)(iii) defines ‘short term’ in relation to Market Index Data as a time period in The ‘short term’ definition in BSC Section T 1.5.3(b)(iii) should have its reference to Gate Closure removed and changed to refer to the P377 was raised by the BSC Panel on 13 December who agreed to progress P377 straight to Report
reference to Gate Closure. Following BSC Modification P342 implemented in November 2017, the Submission Deadline. (Requiring a Modification) Phase. P377 was sent out for a ten day consultation starting 17 December and was then presented
deadline for contracts for delivery in a Settlement Period has moved from Gate Closure to the The Market Index Definition Statement should also have its references to Gate Closure removed and changed to refer to the Submission again to Panel on 10 January for a recommendation. The BSC Panel unanimously agreed a
Submission Deadline. P342 did not change the Market Index Definition Statement (MIDS) to reflect Deadline. (Requiring a Change Proposal). recommendation that P377 should be approved. P377 was sent to the Authority on 16 January 2019
Amending Gate Closure references in Market this. The 2018 MIDS Review is proposing to amend references of Gate Closure to the Submission for a decision. On the 14 March 2019 the Authority approved P377, and will now be implemented on 18 April 2019 - 5 weeks after Ofgem
BSC Panel 13-Dec-18 Closed Deadline to include trades taken in the hour prior to a Settlement Period in Market Index Data. This the 18 April- five weeks from this date. No No
Index Data approval
change to the MIDS will need BSC Panel approval in November and approval from the Authority.

Simplifying BMRS changes
The BMRS (Balancing Mechanism Reporting Service) has, over time, evolved into a ‘one stop shop’   It is ELEXON’s view that much of the detail contained in BSC Section V ‘Reporting’ could be moved into subsidiary documents (the Reporting P372 was raised by the BSC Panel on 13 September 2018. The Initial Written Assessment was
for the publication of electricity market information for the industry. Much of the scope of the Catalogue or Interface Definition and Design Documents (IDDs)). This approach that was taken in the implementation of P329 ‘Changes to presented to the Panel on 13 September 2018 and the Panel agreed to progress the
BMRS is set out in BSC Section V: ‘Reporting’ with some of the lower level detail (the data items REMIT inside information reporting’ in the June 2017 BSC System Release, where detail from BSC Section Q: ‘Balancing Mechanism Activities’
included in each of the reports set out in Annex V-1) captured in the Reporting Catalogue or was transferred to the Reporting Catalogue or the IDDs. Modification to the Assessment Procedure.
Interface Definition and Design Documents (IDDs), documents that are subject to the change
control arrangements set out in BSCP 40 – ‘Change Management’. 3.2 Over the last six to nine The first industry Workgroup was held on 15 November 2018 where a solution was agreed.
months we have observed increasing public criticism of the timescales for the publication of data
on the BMRS arising from the requirement (in most cases) to follow the BSC Modification The second industry Workgroup was held on 18 December 2018 to gather Workgroup initial
Procedures.
views on the proposal before issuing the Assessment Consultation. ELEXON issued the
Assessment Procedure Consultation for a 15 Working Day window on 27 February 2019. The
BSC Panel 13 Sep 18 Closed responses have been published online. The third meeting of the P372 Workgroup took place No Yes 27 Jun 19
on 27 March 2019 and the Assessment Report will be presented to the BSC Panel on 11 April
2019. Following the presentation of the AR, was issued for 10 working day RPC, which ended
on 01 May 2019, prior to presentation of DMR at the May Panel meeting. At the May BSC
Panel meeting the modification was approved under self-Governane. The Self Governance
appeal window will expire at 5pm on 30 May 2019. The Modification was implemented in the
27 June 2019 BSC Release

The list of organisations that may raise BSC Modifications is prescribed in BSC Section F: This Modification proposes to move the designation process (as provided for in F2.1.1(c)) from the Authority to the BSC Panel; and for the P370 was Implemented on the 3 April 2019,as a standalone BSC release. On the 27 March 2019, the
‘Modification Procedures’. As well as the BSC Parties that may raise Modifications, Section F2.1.1 (c) Authority to become the body to which appeals may be made. Authority approved the P370 Alternative Modification Proposal. P370 will be Implemented on the 3 April
states that a Modification Proposal may be made by “such other bodies representative of interested 2019 ( five Working Days after approval).The P370 Final Modification Report was submitted to the
third parties as may be designated in writing for this purpose by the Authority from time to time”. Authority for decision on 20 February 2019. The BSC Panel made its unanimous final recommendation
The Authority’s consent process was recently tested (the first time since the BSC was introduced in to approve the Alternative Modification on 14 February 2019. The Report Phase Consultation was
P370 'Allow the Panel to designate non-BSC 2001) and proved to be time consuming, adding additional weeks to the front-end of the issued on 7 January 2019 with responses due on the 25 January 2019. The P370 Assessment Report
BSC Panel 13 Jul 18 Closed No No 29 Mar 19
Parties to raise Modifications' Modification Procedure. Furthermore, Authority consent timescales were unknown as were the was presented to the Panel on 13 December 2018. The Panel’s initial majority view was that the P370
criteria used to make its determination. Alternative Modification be approved.

Legal separation of the Electricity System Operator
National Grid
(ESO) within the National Grid Group
National Grid is establishing a new legal entity ‘National Grid Electricity System Operator - NGESO’,
which will be the holder of the new Electricity System Operator (ESO) licence provisions. The TO
licence provisions will remain with the exiting legal entity ‘Nation Grid Electricity Transmission plc -
NGET’. The BSC and Change Susbsidary Documents require amendments to accurately reflect the
arrangement.
05 Jul 18 Closed
This Modification proposes to:
 Amend all references that refer to ESO functions to become ‘Transmission Company’ where possible (exceptions outlined below); and
 Amend the definition of ‘Transmission Company’ to refer to ESO obligations only.
The proposed definition of Transmission Company includes the acronyms and words: ‘NGESO’, ‘National Grid Company’ and ‘NGC’. All
references to ‘NGET’, the ‘National Grid Electricity Transmission Limited’, ‘National Grid’ and ‘System Operator have been updated to become
‘Transmission Company’ where possible (exceptions outlined below). This will ensure all terminology is accurate and aligns with NGESO’s future
functions, as well as avoiding possible confusion over future responsibilities. A definition for NGET is not required to be added to the Code due
to all references within the BSC relating to NGESO functions only.
National Grid agreed to raise the Modification on 5 July 2018. The Initial Written Assessment was
presented to the Panel on 12 July 2018. Some Panel members felt that although the terminology used
achieved legal separation in line with National Grid's requested approach, a clearer term could be used
to do so. The Panel approved P369 to progress directly to Report Phase Consultation as a non-Self-
Governance Modification. However, an additional RPC question was inlcuded to establish what term the
No No 29 Mar 19
industry would prefer to represent NGESO is in the BSC. The Report Phase Consultation was issued on
the 16 July with responses due by 31 July 2018. The Draft Modification Report was presented to the
Panel on 9 August 2018. P369 was approved by The Authority on 24 September 2018, and will be
implemented on 29 March 2019.

Removal of obsolete SBR and DSBR arrangements
Corrections and clarifications to the P344 'Project
National Grid
TERRE' legal text'
Allowing email communications for the BSC Panel
Elections process
The Balancing Settlement Code (BSC) currently requires ELEXON to ensure imbalance prices
calculated for Settlement Periods reflect the value of Supplemental Balancing Reserve (SBR) and
Demand Side Balancing Reserve (DSBR) actions where they are taken.
BSC Panel 10 May 18 Closed In March 2017, Ofgem decided to remove SBR and DSBR cost recovery arrangements for 2017/18
from the National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) Licence. This is because SBR and DSBR were
introduced as short-term balancing measures before the implementation of the Capacity Market
(CM). As a result of the government’s decision to bring forward the delivery of the Capacity Market
to 2017/18, SBR and DSBR arrangements no longer apply and have been removed from NGET’s
A number of manifest errors and opportunities to add clarity have been idemntified within the
Licence.
P344 legal text. This modification wil ensure that the legal text accuratley reflects the P344
workgroup agreed solutiona s detailed in the P344 Business Requirements.
Ofgem confirmed to ELEXON that the Transmission Company no longer has SBR and DSBR services
available to them and as such, requested that these provisions be removed from the BSC.
7-May-19 Closed
The current Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) Panel Elections process is in need of
improvement. In regards to BSC Section H ‘General’ Paragraph 9.2.5, ELEXON is required to issue
nomination and voting letters via post or fax which is a very time-consuming process and wastes a Other forms of communication may be permissible as determined by the Panel from time to time.
BSC Panel 9-May-19 Closed large amount of paper. Parties are required to submit nominations and votes via post or fax which
is out of date with modern technology.
This Modification proposes to remove all SBR and DSBR requirements, definitions, and references from the BSC and subsidiary documents.
Clarifications will be made to the P344 legal text to ensures clarity and alignmenmt with the Workgroup intentions
The proposed solution is to amend BSC Section H ‘General’ Paragraph 9.2.5 to allow BSC Panel Election notices, nomination / voting papers
etc. to be sent and received via email by both ELEXON and voting Trading Parties during the BSC Panel Elections period.
The Panel agreed, at its meeting on 10 May 2018, to raise the P367 in accordance with Section
F2.1.1(d)(iv) and agreed for the Modification to proceed directly to the Report Phase.
The Report Phase Consultation was issued on 15 May 2018 and closed on 30 May 2018.
The Draft Modification Report was presented to the BSC Panel on 14 June 2018. The Panel determined
P367 as a Self-Governance Modification and unanimously approved the modification for implementation No Yes 27 Jun 19
on 27 June 2019. In accordance with Section F6.4, Parties had until 5 July 2018 to appeal the Panel's
determination. No appeals were notified by this time and so the Panel's decision is final. The
Modification is due to be implemented on 27 June 2019.
P386 was raised by National Grid 7 May 2019, with the Initial Written Assessment presented to Panel
on 9 May 2019. The BSC Panel agreed that P386 should progress directly to the Report Phase. P386
was issued for Report Phase Consultation on 13 May 2019, with responses due back 5pm Monday 3
June 2019. The Draft Mod Report was presented to the Panel on 13 June, who approved the
modification under self governance. The self governance window will expire on 4 July.
No Yes 07 Nov 19
The BSC Panel considered the Draft Modification Report at it meeting on 13 June 2019 and approved
the P387 Solution under Self-Governance. P387 was issued for a 15 Working Day appeal window,
which closed on Thursday 4 July 2019. As no appeals were received, P387 will be implemented on 7
November 2019, as part of the November 2019 BSC Release. No Yes 07 Nov 19
 Key: Progression Stages

Committee

CPC

BSC Change Register Awaiting Decision

Change Proposals - 08 May 2020 Awaiting Implementation

Implementation

Details Progression Decision

Title Proposer Date Raised Active/ Closed Problem/Issue Solution Current Status CPC No. Committee Implementation date Committee Decision
 Issue Title Proposer Date Raised

Could ELEXON (under BSCCo) administrate a

Issue 90 Market Maker (MM)? Infinis Energy 05 May 20

Ensuring Demand Control Event (DCE) procedures

Issue 89 remain fit for purpose
ELEXON 23-Mar-20

Clarification of BSC Arrangements relating to

Issue 88 Complex Sites
ELEXON 18-Mar-20
Issue 87 Offshore Wind Park Bus Bar VT Metering Siemens 23 Feb 20

Review of processes potentially impacted by

Issue 86 Ofgem’s Faster Switching Programme
ELEXON 9-Oct-19

Removal of obligation to visit de-energised sites

Issue 85 once every 12 months from BSCP504
TMA 27-Aug-19

Ensuring that the Buy Price Adjuster reflects all

Issue 83 additional balancing costs incurred by NGESO
Sembcorp 1-Jul-19

determine the benefits associated with Run-

Issue 81 up/Run-down rates and Last Time to Cancel NETSO 12-Jun-19
Synchronisation (LTCS) publication on BMRS

Issue 69 Performance Assurance Framework Review ELEXON 30-Mar-17

Measurement and monitoring of Settlement

Issue 78 performance
Opus Energy 29-Mar-19

Cost-recovery options for the ongoing provision SSE Electricity Ltd

Issue 84 of the Radio Teleswitching Arrangements
10-Jul-19
 Expand the BSC Panel’s ability to raise
Issue 82 Modification Proposals
ELEXON #N/A

Increase in minimum data storage memory

Issue 80 requirements within the Half Hourly Metering AMO #N/A
CoPs

Issue 73 Faults Defect 12-Oct-18

Reviewing the suitability of Specified Charges.

Issue 77 ELEXON 29-Mar-19

Central Data Collection Agent (CDCA) to use

Internet Protocol (IP) address based
communications for Central Volume Allocation
Issue 75 (CVA) Metering Systems. SSE/RWE 28-Nov-18

Issue 74 Increased utilisation of non-BM STOR National Grid 25-Oct-18

Settlement of Secondary BM Units using metering

Issue 70 Flexitricity 15-Jun-18
at the asset

Erroneous Consumption Volumes following a

Change of Supplier Event
Issue 79 Utilita 15-Apr-19
 Ensuring Electricity Network Connections assets
Issue 72 installed by a Non-BSC Party are successfully SSE 11-Sep-18
Commissioned within BSC timescales

Introduction of a baselining methodology as an

Issue 71 ELEXON 15-Jun-18
alternative to Physical Notifications

Using the BSC to provide interim contingency

planning for the CM

VPI Immingham
Issue 76 S.P.A. 6-Dec-18

Under-estimation of Demand capacity and credit

Issue 68 ELEXON 28 Mar 17
cover Percentage

Appropriate Meter Timeswitch Code for Smart

Issue 67 SSE 19 Jan 17
Meters

Responsibility for repairs of Dual Function Meters

Issue 66 Ecotricity 19 Jan 17
with different Suppliers for Import and Export
Issue 65 LLF Value Threshold Limitations ELEXON 17 Jan 17

Defining default price when NIV equals zero and

Issue 64 when there is no priced action left after NIV ELEXON 21-Jul-16
tagging

Amending the BSC arrangements to allow ELEXON

to tender for the Uniform Network Code Gas ScottishPower
Issue 62 02 Nov 15
Performance Assurance Framework Administrator Energy Retail
(PAFA) role

Changes to Gate Closure for Energy Contract

Issue 61 EDF Energy 28 Oct 15
Volume Notifications

Interfaces between the European Balancing

Issue 60 Project TERRE and the current GB market National Grid 08 Jun 15
arrangements

Consideration of the PARMS and Supplier Charge

Issue 59 ELEXON 31 Oct 14
changes introduced by P272 and P300.
 Obligation to estimate missing or correct defective
UK Power
Issue 58 Reactive Energy measurements from CVA 02 Sep 14
Networks
metering systems

Should Half-Hourly Settlement be mandatory for

Issue 57 ELEXON 22 May 14
certain Unmetered Supplies customers?
Treatment of the new SBR and DSBR services in
Issue 56 National Grid 08 May 14
the imbalance price
Review of the approach to the calculation and
Issue 55 application of GSP Group Correction Scaling ELEXON 14 Feb 14
Weights

Discrepancies between the points of measurement

Issue 54 required in the BSC and the CoPs and the physical ELEXON 06 Feb 14
points of connection

Reforming the Change of Supplier meter read

Issue 53 EDF Energy 09 Dec 13
process for smart electricity meters

Billing for Data Transfer costs and the 'Total Cost

Issue 52 of Ownership' for using a replacement solution to BSC Panel 08 Aug 13
send DTS Flows

Issue 51 Multiple MOAs and Third Party Access ELEXON 02 Jul 13

Issue 50 Customer Appointed Agents Npower 26 Jun 13

Change of Measurement Class (CoMC) process for

Issue 49 ELEXON 24 Jun 13
Advanced Meters

Issue 48 SMETS & Codes of Practice (COPs) ELEXON 05 Jun 13

GB Implementation of the European Transparency

Issue 47 National Grid 26 Apr 13
Regulation

Issue 46 Non Half Hourly Interoperability ELEXON 04 Apr 13

Introduction of Change of Supply Agreed Read

Issue 45 British Gas 16 Jul 12
Principle to correct all errors in Settlements

Issue 44 Balancing Mechanism Pricing National Grid 20 Apr 12

Issue 43 On-site generation during planned outages E.ON 09 Sep 11

Black Start Generator – Defining a ‘Local

Issue 42 National Grid 04 May 11
Shutdown’

Issue 41 Improving the Speed and Accuracy of Data Flows E.ON 28 Apr 11

Review of ELEXON Governance and Funding

Issue 40 E.ON 29 Mar 11
Arrangements for New Business Opportunities
 Unrecorded Units identified by Revenue Protection
Issue 39 E.ON 24 Sep 10
Services

Potential Improvements to Credit Checking Rules

Issue 38 to Support High Levels of Embedded Generation in BSC Panel 08 Oct 09
North Scotland

Boundary Point Metering and BM Unit Issues in

Issue 37 BSC Panel 14 May 09
Section K.

Issue 36 Party Failure and Default BSC Panel 18 Nov 08

Issue 35 Timing of Gate Closure and Related Matters Utilita 08 Sep 08

Issue 34 Distribution Losses Scottish Power 29 Apr 08

Issue 33 Fuel Security Code guidance BSC Panel 14 Feb 08

Issue 32 Black Start National Grid 27 Nov 07

Provision of Annualised Advance and Estimated Electricity Network

Issue 31 27 Nov 07
Annual Consumption Data to LDSO Company

Issue 30 Cash Out Review Utilita 02 Nov 07

Issue 29 Profile Administrator (PrA) Model BSC Panel 23 Aug 07

Issue 28 Further Consideration on Section P BSC Panel 14 May 07

Issue 27 Funds Administration Scottish Power 23 Apr 07

Issue 26 Issues arising from ELEXON/ PAB interpretation Npower 17 Nov 07

Issue 25 Governance issues related to PAB determination Npower 17 Nov 06

Issue 24 Impact of BSC Reactive Power Charging Gaz de France 20 Jun 06

Apparent Tendency for EAC values to under-

Issue 23 Central Networks 07 Jun 06
estimate consumption
Issue 22 Indebtedness SmartestEnergy 18 Jan 06

Issue 21 Scope of Profile Administration BSC Panel 08 Dec 06

Issue 20 Fuel Security Code Gaz de France 26 Oct 05

Issue 19 PARMS the way forward Centrica 21 Sep 05

Issue 18 Sleeper bids Opus Energy 11 Aug 05

Issue 17 Review of Electricity Market information National Grid 04 May 05

Credit Default and the Default provisions in British Gas

Issue 16 20 Apr 05
Section H of the BSC Trading
Issue 15 Review of Trading Query Deadlines EDF Energy 19 Apr 05

Issue 14 Vacant sites and ‘Shut Down’ meters Powergen 4-Apr-05

Issue 13 Codes of Practice applicable to Metering Systems Gaz de France 22 Nov 04

Uskmouth Power
Issue 12 Timescales for Withdrawal from the BSC 21 Sep 04
Company Limited

Issue 11 Performance targets and Monitoring Centrica 02 Sep 04

Issue 10 Implementation Dates NGT 24 Aug 04

Issue 09 Review of aspects of the Modification Process Bizz Energy 21 Jul 04

Apparent Inconsistency between requirements for

Issue 08 rectifying NHH Meter reading history anomalies Npower 22 Jun 04
and the BSC

Potential anomaly in respect of Bid Offer British Gas

Issue 07 14 Apr 04
Acceptance (BOA) volume Trading

Appropriateness of the current Supplier Charging

Issue 06 Energywatch 06 Aug 03
Mechanism

Treatment of Parties going directly into level 2

Issue 05 Powergen 08 Aug 03
Credit Default
Issue 04 Periodic reviews of the BSC BSC Panel 22 Jul 03

Issue 03 Credit cover for Interconnector users EDF Trading 26 Feb 03

Credit Indebtedness Calculation during Holiday

Issue 02 Bizz Energy 06 Jan 03
periods

Credit cover provisions for the BSC signatories

Issue 01 Gaz de France 02 Jan 03
withdrawing from the Market
 Details
Open/ Closed

Active

Active

Active
Active

Active

Closed

Active

Active

Active

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
Closed

Closed

Closed

Closed
 BSC Change Register
Issues - 08 May 2020

Details
Description

Alongside publication of their commissioned report from NERA, Ofgem have published their decision to review market liqu
to do so comes after suspension of the Market Maker Obligation (MMO) due to too few remaining obligated parties. Early
Ofgem and NERA remaining uncertain about whether there is a liquidity “problem” requiring intervention. Ofgem intends
research over the coming six months to further determine the extent of the “issue”. Market participants remain concerned
“issue” and the increase in the bid-ask spread seen since the MMO was stopped is evidence of this. The proposer is of the
products mandated under the MMO were insufficiently broad to meet the needs of the emerging market players. Waiting
conclude there is a problem and then to take the time to determine and implement a possible solution is less optimal than
consideration of the solution in anticipation of their final decision. An issue group should review the case for Elexon, as BSC
a tendered MM on behalf of the market and, if Elexon could tender, what sort of MM parties would want to see. This prop
group to review the case for Elexon, as BSCco, administrating a tendered MM on behalf of the market and, if Elexon could
of MM parties would want to see.

This Issue seeks to examine efficacy of the Settlement Adjustment Processes (SAP) introduced by P305 ‘Electricity Significa
Developments’ in 2015. The intent of the SAP is to amend participants’ imbalance positions following a DCE.

The SAP were used for the first time following the DCE on 9 August 2019 and the majority of positions have been adjusted
However, difficulties were faced and this Issue will in part act as a lessons learned exercise for the SAP and seek potential i
efficiencies.

Additionally, questions were raised by the BSC Panel as to whether the costs of running the processes were commensurate
It
ofhas become
doing so. Asclear
such,that
the there
Panel are a number
raised of issues the
P397 ‘Assessing andcosts
ambiguities relating
and benefits of to the complex
adjusting siteImbalances
Parties’ arrangements, whicha th
following de
address.
disconnection’ as a means to introduce a materiality threshold wherein the processes are only performed where the estim
outweigh the expected costs.
ELEXON believes that, as a result of the current lack of clarity, different Suppliers and Supplier Agents are likely to be opera
interpretations of what is permitted under the complex site arrangements. This has the potential to create distortions in th
with certain customers potentially incentivised to take their supply from a Supplier with an interpretation of the rules that
situation.

As a result the Performance Assurance Board (PAB) asked ELEXON to raise a BSC Issue to discuss and provide a solution to
the Complex Sites process discussed by various industry bodies in recent times.
Tariff Metering of offshore wind parks are performed on an offshore substation, where space is limited. There are currently
how wind parks are metered:- At the transformer(s), which is(are) fed by the wind turbine strings (CoP 1)
- At the wind turbine strings individually (CoP 2)
Depending on who owns the turbine strings and when the wind park goes into operation, either a CoP 1 or CoP 2 design is
the string level currently requires a Voltage Transformer (VT) per string, which increases the weight and size and conseque
solution.Bus bar VTs in this scenario cannot be used due to the CoP 2 standard requesting that a Voltage Transformer is req
circuit of each measured string.

The Retail Energy Code (REC) and Central Switching Service (CSS) are key components of Ofgem’s Faster Switching Program
expected to go live on 1 April 2021. ELEXON is required to inform Ofgem how processes relating to Change of Supplier (Co
Agent (CoA) may be impacted.

There is an obligation on the NHHDC to visit de-energised sites annually (note 99 from BSCP404). Originally the obligation
sites where no remote communication was available. That was removed by CP1019 in 2005. The Obligation for regular sit
removed from the Supplier Licence obligations in 2016 by the Authority as other obligations, such as LC 21b.4 would prom
use a risk based approach to ensure that sites are visited regularly enough to avoid health and safety issues. This leaves th
exposed; unless they are instructed by the Supplier to visit de-energised annually, they are in breach of BSCP504.

The BPA does not accurately reflect the availbility fees paid to balancing servoce providers. This in turn distorts the imbala
calculation

In the NGESO CBA on P297,NGESO recieved feedback that there may be an opportunity to identify consumer benefits by e
with industry how the other data items originally in P297 might be assessed to support their development.

The current Performance Assurance Framework (PAF) provides for a flexible, integrated approach to the deployment of te
and the Performance Assurance Board (PAB) have become aware of opportunities to further enhance the application of th
envisaged in P207, to address the challenges of a changing industry. Smart Metering will have profound impacts on whole
the BSC, changing industry processes, providing unprecedented quantities and granularity of data, and presenting new ass
At its March 2017 meeting, the BSC Panel approved the scope and delivery approach of the PAF review, which has been di
following four work streams: Smart Metering; Risk Evaluation Methodology (REM) and other PAF procedures; Data Provisi
Performance Assurance Techniques.

There is a mismatch between the conditional Supply licence obligation (SLC 21B.4) to take All Reasonable Steps to obtain a
least once per year, and the absolute BSC obligation (Section S-1, clauses 2.1.1 and 2.1.2) to meet the minimum level of se
performance. The Supply Licence obligation recognises that it is not possible in all instances to acquire a meter read (typic
customer refusal or obstructiveness), whereas the BSC does not take account of this fact. The Issues Group should explore
appropriateness and practicalities of excluding meters from the settlement performance calculation, where All Reasonable
evidenced and consider if 97% is the appropriate minimum level of performance in light of P272 and the move to mandato
Settlement.

The current billing and cost recovery of teleswitch payments for Suppliers, opeated by the ENA, is not fit for use. There is n
arrangments, including a mutualisation process. Further, new suppliers entering the market are not obliged to pay. There i
for ELEXON to support Energy UK in resoling this common industry issue.
It is generally recognised within the industry that there are recurring problems with LDSO fault management and uncertain
resolution timescales. This results in unsatisfactory experiences for Customers, and potential risk of inaccurate data going
particular, there is ambiguity in the BSCPs and other BSC related documents around the responsibilities and processes for
management of faults and resolution timescales where there is a fault found on LDSO equipment by the MOA for a new co
with the potential introduction of CP1505 and ‘off site’ Stage 1 commissioning, this could increase the risk of a fault occurr
of installation at either new or existing connection, and therefore be subject to the same ambiguity over responsibility for
management and slow resolution of the fault.

Review of Specified Charges for Additional BM Units – Panel (282/10)

The majority of the Panel agreed that a full review of Section D charges should be carried out and that an Issue Group shou
Panel agreed that the Issue Group should focus on ELEXON’s costs only but to take into account Ofgem’s findings from its
recovery of residual charges, which are due by the end of 2019

The CDCA as a BSC Agent is not able to communicate with CVA Metering Systems using IP dialling methods, due to the con
it has with ELEXON, and hence utilises fixed telephone and 2G networks. Due to the decline in use of this ageing technolog
Meter Operators wish for the CDCA processes to be updated.

The Electricity System Operator (ESO) have contracted significant volumes of non-BM STOR, due to the low availability and
currently in the market. These low costs are primarily driven by current arrangements, whereby suppliers who are respons
metered unit delivering the service receive an imbalance benefit when that unit provides balancing services to the ESO. Th
this benefit, referred to as “spill”, is passed through from the supplier to the balancing services provider. This means the p
in lower service availability and utilisation prices. Ofgem have agreed that this situation is unsustainable and have directed
modification P354 and associated changes in the Applicable Balancing Services Volume Data methodology are implemente
April 2020. Until that time it is anticipated that non-BM STOR prices will remain depressed.
There are two broad areas of concern arising from this:
1. Service visibility: Reduced visibility of non-BM STOR actions compared to other actions taken in the market makes it har
parties to react to signals in relation to non-BM STOR utilisation.
2. Cash-out impacts: Low non-BM STOR prices mean they are often cheaper than some Bids the ESO have accepted, so the
During the (taken
arbitraged P344 Workgroup
out of the process,
imbalance ‘Behind the Meter’
price stack). Thisassets andan
can have energy
impactflows were
on the discussedprice.
imbalance with There
regardhave
to two points:
been time
accepted Offers in a short market are arbitraged, leaving no prices with which to generate the imbalance price. Therefore,
-price
The methodology
location of thereverts
meterstoused forthe
using Settlement i.e. atPrice.
Market Index the Asset level or at the Boundary point, and associated difficulties P
experience in providing accurate Final Physical Notifications (FPNs); and
- Ensuring payment for delivery corresponds to the service provided.
Issue 70 aims to look into whether data from Operational Metering can be used for Settlement purposes and if not, whethe
need to install additional metering at the asset for Settlement purposes. Further details can be found in the paper ‘Extendin
to allow Settlement of Secondary BM Units using metering at the asset’ below.
dentified issue when CoS Gain/Loss occurs between certain Suppliers who have smart Metering (SMETS1) already installed
identified an issue which is causing both Excessive & Negative advances being entered into Settlement. This is due to differ
being followed by Suppliers
Several issues have been identified in the Commissioning process where Measurement Transformers installed by a non-BSC
owned by the Licensed Distribution System Operator (LDSO). This results in the Meter Operator Agent (MOA) being require
full Commissioning testing, which may not be practical or possible in the case of high voltage (HV) and extra high voltage (E
The issues noted are:
• there is misalignment between the Commissioning of non-BSC Party owned measurement transformers process as outline
Practice 4 (CoP4) and certain industry operational processes. Where a measurement transformer is not commissioned by a
Commissioning is completed by a non-BSC Party (for example an Independent Connections Provider (ICP)), the MOA procur
Commissioning and Calibration records; either from the non-BSC Party or the LDSO on adoption. There is currently no BSC
procedure regarding this process and as such there are no clear requirements on the procurement of Commissioning and Ca
from non-BSC Parties;
• in the majority of cases, the MOA does not possess the correct level of safety authorisation to complete Commissioning on
connections. There does not appear to be an industry approach for MOAs being trained by LDSOs and subsequently holding
authorisation; and
• although it is the Registrant’s responsibility to authorise the Metering System energisation, in some cases new connections
to be energised before the meter has been installed.

Balancing Service providers that want to participate in the BM must indicate at what MW level they expect their BM Unit to b
Settlement Period. This is known in the Grid Code as a Physical Notification (PN). At Gate Closure this MW level is finalised a
Settlement where it is termed the BM Unit’s Final Physical Notification (FPN) and acts as a baseline for any future deviation
National Grid.

P344 Workgroup members have noted that the requirement to provide a Physical Notification (ahead of Gate Closure) may
customers and independent aggregators, where the asset they control (and whose output they can forecast accurately) may
connection with other Demand or Generation whose output is outside of their control. In this situation, the expertise for new
lies in calculating the cumulative change for the customer’s sites but not the cumulative change relative to total Demand for
sites. Issue 71 seeks to examine the possibility of PN for a site being created via an alternative baselining methodology
On 15 November 2018 the General Court of the Court of Justice of the European Union found in favour of Tempus Energy,
European Commission (EC), annulling the Commission’s State aid approval for the UK Capacity Market (CM). All CM cost re
and payments to capacity providers have been suspended with all credit cover available to be returned.
If the CM is reinstated, Suppliers will be required to back pay their CM payments, if this is collected as a lump sum it threat
some businesses

Demand Capacity (DC) is a parameter that is declared for each BSC Season in accordance with BSC Section K. It is declared
‘good faith and as accurately as it reasonably can’ for each Balancing Mechanism Unit (BMU).

Current performance in DC submission is poor with only 34 out of 131 Supplier declaring GC/DC for the BSC Winter 2016/17
the quality of DC estimations could be improved as under-statement of the parameter has resulted in £5.9m of CEI error. R
process is challenging due to the current BSC Issue 68 will look into Demand Capacity (DC) declarations for each Balancing
(BMU), which are used, along with other parameters, to calculate the Credit Cover Percentage (CCP). The issue to be invest
SSE have identified that the Meter Timeswitch Codes available are not appropriate for Smart Meters, especially considering
requirement of Credit Cover and how to develop a solution to avoid inaccurate DC declarations which lead to this.ules which
compliant Smart Meter can be operated in credit or prepayment mode and change configuration. SSE are looking to raise th
assessing the issue that under-estimated DC is resulting in an understatement of the CEI and hence CCP we recommend th
that there can be an industry agreement on what the correct MTC is for a SMETS compliant meter that will be recognised by
consider the following areas:
DNO, DC and Settlements. We’re considering the option of introducing a limited number of MTCs for SMETS compliant Sma
a) Whether the under-estimation of DC by BSC Parties is causing an Issue with the accuracy of CEI and hence CCP.
new MTCs that could be used for SMETS1 or SMETS2 compliant Smart Meters. They should be supported across the country
b) Whether the GC/DC limits specified in BSC Section K are too high for DC values. The rule allows a persistent understatem
indicate that a meter can be operated in both credit and prepayment mode and they should indicate that the meter is progr
Energy Indebtedness calculation. Noting that this issue is offset by an administrative cost of frequent re-declaration and a b
also be identifiable through the MTC whether there are any associated MPANs (in order to identify sites with two meters / d
Credit Cover if DC is over-declared.
meters). Time Pattern Regime IDs should not be identifiable through the MTC as Smart Metering opens up a vast array of o
c) Whether the requirement for BSC Season declaration of GC/DC is necessary. If a continuous monitoring process is operat
Use tariffs of which there simply may not be enough free MTCs to cope with. In order to support the above, a new MTC Me
administrative
ThereMeter burden
is currently of BSC
an issue Season
present declaration
with Dual wouldMeters
Function be removed.
where a afault hasisoccurred on that meter, Smart
but there are Adiffer
MTC Type Description may need to be introduced that indicates meter a SMETS1/2 compliant Meter. new
d) The
Import requirements of the BSC for mid-BSC Season existing re-declaration
GC/DC are difficult to enforce. The obligationsforcurrently
Type IDand
andExport function Type
MTC Payment of that meter.Under
Description theindicates
which rules,
a Smartboth suppliers
Meter capableareofjointly
beingand severely
in either liable
credit the mete
or prepayment
faith’
faulty,and ‘belief’
with which supplier
the Import is ambiguous.
having190/04 Page
the right 1 of 10 the
to appoint 1.0 Meter Operating Agent (MOA) for the meter and the Export s
required.
e) The quality of downwards DC re-declaration is not controlled.
appoint the same MOA. A potential solution that we would appreciate In particular, where a during
being discussed Party isthe
in Issue
breachmeetings
of the limits
coverit mor
is ab
reduction. This can make the under-statement of CEI worse.
code, but the electricity retail market as a whole and would involve the following: -The Import Supplier being primarily resp
f)
of Zero
faultyDC submissions
meters where a Party
-A flow/process hasfor
existing a non-zero MeteredtoVolume
Export suppliers mayImport
notify the be considered
Supplier ofinaccurate
the fault but the BSC
-Explore theispossibilit
not spe
situation. Zero DC submissions are currently being used by Suppliers with thousands of Metering
supplier to contribute to the costs of the fault resolution, potentially via invoicing, splitting the costs 50:50. Systems registered. This a
statement of CEI.
An LDSO (NPG) submitted values for the annual 2017/18 audit which exceeded the threshold levels within central systems a
validation system. The proposed solutions are dependent on the result of the SVG paper. We will provide the SVG Committe
solutions. Change the systems to allow values (greater than 10 (>10)) to be loaded, validated and used within central syste
BSCP128 to include threshold limitations, which do not currently exist within the code and default the site to. ELEXONs pref
amend BSCP128 so we can stop future levels of this magnitude from being submitted. The first Issue Group took place on
The second Issue Group was held on 4 May 2017. The Issue 65 Final Report was tabled at the Panel meeting on 8 June 201

Currently, when Net Imbalance Volume (NIV) equals zero or when there is no priced action left in the stack to set the Replacement Pri
Price (MIP) is used. The MIP is defined by the Market Index Definition Statement (MIDS). The data is provided by two Market Index Da
namely APX and N2EX. Before 5 November 2015 and the implementation of P305 ‘Electricity Balancing Significant Code Review Develo
was used every Settlement Period as Reverse Price. This was to set either the System Sell Price (SSP) or System Buy Price (SBP) depend
length.
P305 introduced a single Imbalance Price system solely based on the actions taken by National Grid to balance the network, as well as
control actions. The MIP is therefore not used as much as it used to be and the Imbalance Price calculation has changed significantly.
When considering the matter, the Issue Group could contemplate the following options:
• Keep the MIP as the default price for the two scenarios (No change)
• Keep the MIP but recommend changes to the parameters of the MIDS to the ISG that reflect the change implemented by Modificatio
timebands, Products, ILT…)
Under the gas
• Use other Uniform
default optionsNetwork
such asCode (UNC) there
the Imbalance Priceare twoprevious
of the Modifications seeking
Settlement to introduce
Period, performance
set the price to zero, baseassurance arrang
the price on an a
gas marketPeriods
Settlement for the first time. The P330 proposers believes that should these changes be approved ELEXON should have the
•partake
Use an in
alternative index
any tender that is for
process available for free
the Performance Assurance operator. The BSC currently prohibits this. The Issue 62 Propo
ELEXON has significant experience and understanding of performance assurance techniques in the energy industry and has
and knowledge that would potentially meet the criteria for the appointment of the PAFA, should Ofgem approve MOD506. T
therefore like to explore the potential for the BSC arrangements to be changed to allow ELEXON to bid for the gas PAFA con

Issue 61 looked at allowing Energy Contract Volume Notifications (ECVNs) and Metered Volume Reallocation Notifications (M
submitted after Gate Closure, up to a new notification submission deadline. This would decouple the timings of these notific
required under the Grid Code (such as Physical Notifications), the deadline for which would remain unchanged. The Propose
allowing ECVNs and MVRNs to be submitted after Gate Closure would increase liquidity in the market.

Project Trans-European Replacement Reserves Exchange (TERRE) aims to harmonise the Transmission System Operator dis
Replacement Reserve across seven TSO areas from GB to Greece. It will do this by introducing common TERRE Products, w
to products such as BSC Bid-Offers or Short Term Operating Reserve (STOR) submissions. National Grid is expected to utilis
for energy balancing in GB from TERRE go-live, which is currently scheduled for summer 2017. As all current GB balancing p
the BSC calculations of imbalance prices and volumes, the Proposer considers that the relevant TERRE Products should do s
they start to be used as part of GB balancing. This will require changes to the GB market arrangements (BSC and/or Balanc
arrangements). The Issue 60 report was tabled at the Panel meeting on 12 May 16. The Panel noted that Issue 60 is now c
National Grid will raise a Modification in time for the June 2016 Panel meeting.

BSC Modifications P272 'Mandatory Half Hourly Settlement for Profile Classes 5-8' and P300 ‘Introduction of new Measurem
support Half Hourly DCUSA Tariff Changes (DCP179)’, which have been approved for implementation on 1 April 2016 and 5
respectively, introduce changes to the Performance Assurance Reporting and Monitoring System (PARMS) and Supplier Cha
P272 and P300 Workgroups developed these changes, they recognised that further development would potentially be neede
considered by appropriate experts. They therefore recommended that an Issue Group be convened to explore these should
Modifications be approved. Now that both Modifications have been approved, ELEXON is raising this Issue to explore the are
Issue Form to determine if any further changes are required.
Existing obligations for data provided from Central Volume Allocation (CVA) metering systems require only the estimation of
substitution of defective Active Energy measurements. The estimation of Reactive Energy measurements is excluded from t
Estimation and Substitution for CVA under BSCP03.

To enable Distributors to fully comply with their approved charging methodology obligations, it is proposed that Data Collect
Reactive Energy on a half hourly basis where no actual readings are available and should estimate accurate values of React
hourly basis where the actual readings are proven or strongly suspected to be in error.

A similar change was made in 2010 for Supplier Volume Allocation (SVA) metering systems under CP1303 ‘Requirement on
Collectors to Estimate Missing Reactive Power Demand Values’. This Issue will look at extending this solution to CVA meterin

As well as CVA metering systems embedded within Distribution Systems which are subject to Distribution Use of System (DU
Issue will also look at enhancing the accuracy of data available to National Grid as the Total System becomes more actively
levels. It will also consider the estimation and correction of Reactive Energy measurements at other CVA metering systems
out of Transmission and Distribution Systems more generally.

SVG is supportive of ELEXON raising an Issue to look at minimum requirements for HH UMS.
This Issue looks to consider how to reflect the new Supplementary Balancing Reserve (SBR) and Demand Side Balancing Re
services in the imbalance price.
A paper was taken to SVG in November and December about HH GSP Group Correction Factors. Issue 55 seeks to look at th
means of amending the Code in order for such HH GSP group Correction factors to occur. A resultant Modification would ne
in advance of April 2015 (i.e. implementation as part of the February 2015 Release).
There are currently discrepancies between where the Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) requires measurements of ener
purposes to be made and where the Codes of Practice (CoPs) require overall accuracy to be maintained (the Defined Meteri
This could result in many applications for Metering Dispensations where the actual points of connection do not coincide with
addition, the DMP for Interconnectors is very specific and not up to date.

The existing Non Half Hourly (NHH) Change of Supplier (CoS) process is complicated, relying on multiple information flows
new and old Suppliers and Supplier Agents. Due to the number of flows of data being sent the process is prone to error. Wh
are not sent or cannot be processed by the recipient, delays occur which can result in inaccurate data entering Settlement.
resolving these delays and process errors are borne by Suppliers, Supplier Agents and ultimately the consumer.

Ofgem’s CoS Project, a work stream within its ‘Promoting smarter energy markets’ work programme, has the objective of de
reliable and cost effective Change of Supplier (CoS) process that will facilitate competition and build consumer confidence”.
engaged with a range of stakeholders through its Change of Supplier Expert Group (CoSEG) and identified a number of refo
of the advent of the Data Communications Company (DCC) and smart meter rollout. Such reforms include reducing the relia
process on data transfers.

Ofgem has written an open letter to the Panel highlighting and welcoming a new Issue to look at these process reforms. Of
reforms should be progressed now through existing change processes. Issue 53 has been raised to look at these reforms.

Issue 53 Report was tabled at the 20 Mar 2014 Panel meeting, where it was noted that a Modification was required to take
forward.

Issue 52 seeks to consider two areas of the Data Transfer Service (DTS), relating to whether an alternative mechanism can
DTS Flows and how these costs are charged to BSC Parties.

Following SVG’s decision to reject CP1378 at its meeting on 2 July 2013, Issue 51 has been raised to continue the work star
Workgroup.
Before tackling the concerns over competition in metering, Issue 51 will look at addressing the robustness of the current en
the associated risks and the control framework that needs to be established.
This issue seeks to address concerns where a Customer appoints a Third Party Agent rather than using the Suppliers own a
The proposer believes customer appointed agents may give rise to issues around BSC obligations, requirements and perform
they have reduced control over what they do as the customer has chosen them. The issue is looking to address this through
qualification process and/or the BSC around changing Supplier obligations where a customer appointed agent is involved an
obligations on an agent if they have been chosen by a customer.

Electricity supply standard licence condition 12 requires that by 6 April 2014 Suppliers must not supply electricity at any Met
Profile Classes 5 to 8 other than through an Advanced Meter. From that date, the Change of Measurement Class (CoMC) pro
Hourly (NHH) to Half Hourly (HH) is likely to involve a NHH Meter which is already HH capable. Whilst the current BSCP pro
allowances for a CoMC with no change of Meter, they do not fully embrace the possibility that a CoMC can take place withou
site visit by the MOA. ELEXON has been asked to review the CoMC process by the Profiling and Settlement Review Group (P
the complexity (real or perceived) of the CoMC process does not act as a barrier to elective HH Settlement.

The BSC currently requires all Metering Equipment to comply with the Codes of Practice (CoP). However, smart Meters will o
with smart metering equipment technical specifications (SMETS) and will not need to additionally comply with the CoPs.

ELEXON has already carried out a gap analysis on the CoPs and SMETS, but the findings need further consideration. Theref
will be convened to consider what changes are necessary to the BSC, CoPs or other Code Subsidiary Documents.
The European Regulation on submission and publication of data in electricity markets, commonly known as the 'Transparen
requires primary data owners to submit information to the Transmission System Operator, or a third party acting as a data p
publication on a central information platform.

The aim of Issue 47 is to consider the implementation of the Transparency Regulation, assess what modifications are requir
and facilitate the effective progression of such modifications.
ELEXON has investigated issues around interoperability in the Non Half Hourly (NHH) market, considering what lessons can
Half Hourly (HH) market.

ELEXON believes that NHH processes could be strengthened, for example, by introducing protocol testing for advanced Met
Classes 5 to 8 or raising a change to clarify the rules for Outstation Protocol approvals where HH Metering Equipment is use
Systems.
The Proposer identifies issues arising from MAP CP 0135, which was approved by the MRA Development Board (MDB) in Jun
implementation date of February 2013. This change will introduce new principles into MRA Agreed Principle (MAP) 08 relatin
Supplier Agreed Reads. Under these new principles, the old Supplier will now have an obligation to use reasonable steps to
Settlement. The Proposer identifies that, where a dispute has arisen between Suppliers as to the correct number of dials tha
for calculating energy used for Settlement purposes, there are currently no mechanics that exist within the BSC to allow Sup
agents to correct Settlement data as required by these new principles.
The Proposer identifies issues with the rules for Bid-Offer Data Prices in the Balancing Mechanism that can result in inefficie
reduced flexibility to meet the challenges of future system operation. These issues are at their most significant for multi-sh
Gas Turbine (CCGT) Modules and Cascade Hydro Schemes, but also affect other generators.
During a planned outage a Distributor and customer can agree the provision of on-site generation. This Standing Issue high
implications for Settlement accuracy as well as for Suppliers.
The P231 Workgroup previously highlighted that an instruction to a single Black Start Station (e.g. during a localised shutdo
the suspension of normal BSC market operations. National Grid has raised this Standing Issue to facilitate further industry d
issue, and whether any changes are needed to the BSC and/or Grid Code.
You can find the Issue form as submitted by the Proposer, along with a further attachment containing additional information
website.
Performance Assurance Techniques look to detect non-compliance with the timeliness / quality of flows and ensure rectifica
compliances. However, it often proves difficult to audit and enforce the quality of the data flows. Whilst data flows sent acco
timescales may appear compliant, if these flows are inaccurate or incomplete it can result in long and costly delays whilst an
resolved. Issue 41 has been raised by E.ON UK to investigate how best to improve the quality of certain SVA data flows and
issues that poor quality of such data flows cause.

BSCCo is unable to pursue new business development opportunities as it is precluded from doing so under Section C 1.2.2 o
In October 2009 a party to the Distribution Connection and Use of System Agreement (DCUSA) raised DCUSA Change Propo
‘Revenue Protection/Unrecorded Units into Settlements’. The DCP 054 Working Group was set up to consider this Change P
continues to hold regular meetings. DCP 054 is in the ‘definition’ phase of progression.
The DCP 054 Working Group has recognised that obligations relating to how unrecorded units are estimated and submitted
could be included in the DCUSA. However, the requirements for the subsequent processing of these units fall within the sco
There is no single clear solution for processing unrecorded units in Settlement under the BSC. On behalf of the DCP 054 Wo
UK raised Standing Issue 39 ‘Processing Unrecorded Units identified by Revenue Protection Services’ to allow various option

There is a defect in the method used by BSC credit checking processes to estimate how much energy Suppliers have used.
becomes material if the amount of embedded generation in the GSP Group is nearly as large as the amount of demand. In S
North Scotland GSP Group came close to this for the first time.
The Issue relates to Section K of the BSC in which three areas of concern have been identified and highlighted by the ISG.
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) Modules: In most cases both generating units associated with CCGT Modules are coup
connecting to the Transmission System and metering is installed at the Boundary Point which facilitates the BMU requireme
generating units are of licensable size then additional metering is required for each generator even though the CCGT Modul
BMU in both cases.
Power Park Modules (PPMs): Under certain circumstances additional metering is specified which may exceed the BMU requi
particularly relevant for off shore wind farms where currently the BSC requires that all Boundary Points should have meterin
at the connection of each string of turbines). Lack of provision for the transfer of generators from one BMU into another by
through alternative routes to the Total System. This can be problematic if it becomes necessary for PPM operators to re-rou
outputs in the event of a cable or generator fault.
As a result of the recent defaults under the BSC and the resultant debts that all Parties are being exposed to, the BSC Pane
Issues Group considers the processes and timings for dealing with defaulting and failing Parties. The Panel is keen to under
believes there are any improvements that could reduce the potential debt.
Questions that should be considered include:
1) Does the Code allow the Panel default powers to be triggered sufficiently early?
2) Are there any additional actions that should be undertaken relating specifically to the various mechanisms for a Party 'exi
arrangements (e.g. actions specific to entering into administration, trade sale, etc.)?
3) Is it appropriate to treat ECVNS and MVRNS differently? (Currently Trade sale and SoLR will automatically clear MVRNs a
they are BMU based, however the Panel is required to agree to clear ECVNs).
4) Should we cash out volumes for failed Parties at a neutral price?
5) Any further lessons to be learnt from recent failures?
Based on the Issue 30 discussion, Utilita believes either advancement of Gate Closure or the deadline for submission of con
could have a beneficial impact for reducing imbalance risk. Panel observations invited.
Questions posed:
- Implications of shifting GC to 30 mins? Feasibility?
- Impacts on Balancing and imbalance, including on both central and participant systems; Trading through APX & Settlemen
and balancing efficiency
- Would 45 or 15 mins be better or worse?
- Can contract notification be shifted on its own and what are the implications?
- Impact on quality of reverse price and spread?
Scottish Power networks has raised a concern regarding the variability of losses on their networks (their two networks are g
separate). The Issue seeks to understand whether there are any Settlement anomalies contributing to the perceived discrep
broad analysis could be undertaken to investigate. More information on this issue can be found on the ELEXON website: Iss
Losses
Further to the publication of a revised Fuel Security Code the BSC Panel raised P221 ‘Amendments to the BSC to reflect the
Security Code (FSC)’. P221 simply ensures the BSC is consistent with the FSC and has been recommended for approval by t
the consultation for P221 the Panel received feedback that a standing Issue group should be formed to consider the FSC gu
published alongside the revised FSC) and the letter sent from BERR to Ofgem regarding queries raised in relation to the rev
Respondents suggested that clarification may be necessary (either formally within the BSC or in the form of guidance from
Ofgem) regarding:
a) Cost Recovery Processes; b) Interim Claims Processes; c) Communication of Fuel Security Period; d) Presentation of Claim
BSC Panel.
The BSC Panel therefore agreed to raise a new Issue to consider the FSC Guidance and BERR letter to ELEXON. The Fuel Se
guidance can be found on the BERR website:
http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/reliability/downstream/page30313.html
As a result of a recent Black Start exercise, a number of learning points and process improvements have been identified tha
ELEXON’s role and the successful suspension and recommencement of market arrangements as part of a Black Start. In pa
following areas were identified where work could be undertaken to ensure that any Black Start progressed smoothly from a
1. The arrangements for the formal declaration of the start of a Black Start under the BSC and calculation of the Imbalance
2. Appropriate arrangements, processes and timetables to successfully reinstate the market following a Black Start. Conside
given to developing criteria that the Panel can use to determine reinstatement of the market as well as the outline processe
to cover timescales, data and audit requirements, liaison with participants and National Grid, alignment with Grid Code arran
in’ to going live.
3. ELEXON’s business continuity requirements specifically related to its role during a Black Start. Suggest consideration is gi
We suggest that for all three areas above, consideration should be given by the Issue group as how best to establish arrang
the BSC processes during a Black Start and also to ensure that participants will understand how this should work with the o
timely progression of BSC processes during a Black Start, good co-ordination with other industry and government bodies an
Grid Code Black Start arrangements and how best to minimise industry uncertainty and queries to ELEXON during a Black S

Currently Annualised Advance and Estimated Annual Consumption Data is provided by Data Collectors to Suppliers and Non
Aggregators through use of the DTC data flow D0019. Modification Proposal P43 was raised by Western Power in January 2
these should be provided to LDSOs. This proposal was rejected. At the time one of the key reasons for rejection was the la
However, it appeared to be acknowledged that this was an issue that could be revisited at a future date if circumstances ch
circumstances have changed.
At the time of the proposal business separation was still being undertaken and business attention was focussed elsewhere.
are now operating as completely separate entities and no longer receive site specific consumption information in respect of
under the super customer mechanism. Therefore, it is appropriate to review the value that such information has to LDSOs.
entered the market. Typically, such distributors connect their networks to the distribution systems of the ex-PES LDSOs. E
IDNOs are exploring solutions that avoid the use of boundary metering to ascertain use of system. One potential solution in
providing aggregates of settlement data to the ex-PES LDSO for the purpose of billing DUoS. This would in essence replicat
mechanism for billing of DUoS to suppliers. By IDNOs providing the data to the LDSO no changes to the BSC systems and p
required. However one of the concerns raised by DNOs is that they need to understand maximum demands on IDNO conne
site basis for network planning and operation reasons. The solution proposed is for the DTC dataflow D0019 to be provided
collector to the relevant LDSO. For more information please refer to Standing Modification Group Issues page on the ELEXO

A new standing issue has been raised to investigate the broader concepts highlighted in the recent Cash Out Review. The Is
be asked to explore the following questions:
• Is dual cash-out pricing still appropriate versus single pricing?
• Are large spreads necessary to provide incentives to balance?
• Does a large spread in cashout prices generate unnecessary levels of RCRC to the detriment of smaller players?
• Is there merit in adoption of a single energy price (net of system and energy plus actions) supported by a small symmetric
• How can BSAD and cash-out be integrated and brought under single governance?
• Would the assessment of the merits of these issues be impacted by a reduction in Gate Closure from one hour?
• Is it possible or desirable to restrict the Balancing Mechanism to energy providers? Are there other mechanisms for provid
separation between energy and system balances?

There are a number of issues relating to data collection and recruitment with the existing PrA Model. The data collection iss
available space for new metering equipment, incomplete GSM signal coverage and liability issues. Additionally, there are iss
of diversity and regional coverage for potential PrA sample participants. In order to resolve these issues an alternative PrA M
required. A new model may require a modification of the BSC in order to make the requirements mandatory for Suppliers. A
Model has been put forward in order that the feasibility and desirability of an alternative PrA Model can be discussed.

The Panel raised Issue 28 on 10 May 2007 following concerns arising as a result of Modification Proposal P210. The Settlem
Modification Group (SSMG) and any additional experts should discuss whether Modification to the Code is required in the ar
Notification and other points arising from the post P210 process and from the Trading Disputes Committee (TDC).
The five issues initially identified are shown below. It is acknowledged that further issues may be uncovered by progression
• Dual Notification
• Process for replacing one notification Agent with another
• Handling of negative CALF by MVRN refusal / rejection process
• Handling of overwrite notifications by refusal / rejection process.
• Inability to correct Settlement arising from erroneous placement into Credit Default
The BSC review has identified a number of Issues relating to Funds Administration. We believe the Issues and potential solu
section 3 of the BSC Review should be submitted to the Settlement Standing Modification Group for industry discussion. The
ascertain if a Modification (or Modifications) should be raised to progress any potential solutions. The BSC Review for 2006/
funds administration aspects of the Code. This BSC review identified the following issues with the current funds arrangemen
• Small Value Transactions;
• Processing of Transactions;
• Current banking practice not reflected;
• VAT Reporting;
• BSC Party Standing Data;
• Recovery of Credit Cover; and
• Lodging Funds
More information can be found on the following Panel Papers BSC Review 2006/2007 Funds Administration Report and Fun
Conclusions and Recommendations

A question has been raised over the obligations of transferee and transferor Suppliers arising from a transfer of Supplier ID.
explore what obligations should be due to each Party arising from such an event and whether the Code is being applied cor
whether greater clarification is required within the Code for processes and obligations arising from these events.

A recent matter determined by the Performance Assurance Board (PAB) gives rise to the following issues, which Npower Lim
considered by a Standing Modification Group (probably the GSMG):
1) A determination under paragraph 4.1.1 of Annex S-1, involving interpretation of the Code, has the potential to change th
Code and thereby effectively circumvent the Modification Process, putting Parties in breach of the Code in respect of matter
reasonably believed they were compliant.
2) There does not appear to be a process for appeal of PAB decisions, except in respect of Certification/Accreditation (or po
Qualification), other than judicial review. The cost, effort and time required for the latter would appear to be disproportiona
most major issues.
3) For a decision where PAB has discretion, is it appropriate that PAB should hear any appeal on that decision (as opposed t
who should be the appeal body?
4) It does not seem appropriate that PAB should act as the appeal body in respect of a matter where a previous decision of
challenged on the grounds of being inconsistent with the Code (i.e. potentially ‘ultra vires’). In this case, who should be the
5) The BSC ‘issue’ process does not in itself provide an adequate mechanism to play the role of an appeal process, since it d
decision. Furthermore, it cannot be assumed that it will always be necessary to make a Modification to the Code in order to
it is an interpretation or compliance matter.
It may also be appropriate to draw these issues to the attention of the Modification Group considering Modification Proposal

As described in recent SVG papers (SVG62/08, SVG63/11 and SVG64/07), Section K of the BSC requires a licensed Supplier
Exempt Generator) to take responsibility for Reactive Power absorbed by Licence Exempt Generating Plant. This is leading
Distribution Use of System (DUoS) charging for sites such as wind farms, with the Supplier being charged for Reactive Powe
the view of the Parties concerned) would be better charged to the Licence Exempt Generator. As Reactive Energy is not se
it is not clear that there is any requirement for the BSC to be so prescriptive about who takes responsibility for Reactive Pow
has been raised to investigate options for making Section K less prescriptive.
The Non Half Hourly settlement process relies heavily on estimates of annual consumption (EACs), particularly at SF and ea
stages. This use of EACs is based on the assumption that they are a reasonable estimate of consumption. However, this as
to be flawed, because analysis (carried out by Distributors and ELEXON) suggests that EAC values are, on average, lower th
consumption. This discrepancy appears to be driven by the backward looking nature of EACs, and their failure to capture gr
over time. This has a number of implications for both trading parties and DSOs:
• Total NHH uncorrected energy tends to increase across settlement runs
• The degree of correction in the NHH market is larger than necessary
• Suppliers have a perverse incentive not to read meters / suppliers that read meters more frequently are effectively penalis
• DUoS bills (based on uncorrected consumption) are lower than they should be
• Error becomes fixed at RF whenever EACs have not been replaced by actual meter readings
In view of the above I believe the time is right to review of the EAC methodology with a view to improving the accuracy of c
estimates. As discussed this would best be done through a settlement issue and I therefore formally request that an issue
and pursued.
Smartest perceive that we have to put up credit way in excess of our real exposure. This occurs for two reasons1) as a cons
BMU units are net exporters, but the CEI part of the calculation only takes consideration of the DCs, not our GCs2) the II pa
does not adequately cater for large portfolio changes, as it is using estimates not actual data. This second point is nothing n
certainly the main reason behind the conclusion of the ISG Panel Paper 100/009 that the indebtedness calculation is least su
An option here is to raise a modification to investigate further and implement changes following on from this paper (so long
issue above is also addressed) We are of the view that manual submission of GCs and DCs is inefficient -- monies spent pol
arrangement could be spent on automating it in some way. We are also of the view that the excess credit of £250m industr
as a result of a fear of being named publicly and this issue should be addressed. I am mindful of the fact that there have be
tinker with the calculation in the past and that large ones have failed on the grounds of cost. However, credit is a rather top
moment and we suspect there is appetite for an even wider review of the credit arrangements. We wonder whether the thr
over which the calculation is made should be debated

Issue 21 seeks to initiate industry discussion of the following potential issues relating to the scope of the Profile Administrat
problems experienced by the Profile Administrator in recruiting customers into the load research sample; and (2) The reliab
logging equipment which is owned by ELEXON. Potential solutions to (1) would be either to transfer responsibility for the sa
Suppliers (which would require a modification to the BSC); or For ELEXON to pursue other ways of recruiting customers (wh
require a Modification Proposal). Potential solutions to (2) would be either: To use the same metering equipment for billing,
load research (which would place responsibility for the equipment on Suppliers and would require a modification to the BSC
replace the existing logging equipment with separate metering equipment to that used by Suppliers (which would not requir
Proposal). It is believed that a Modification in this area may improve the efficiency of the Balancing and Settlement arrange
therefore be raised by the Panel under section F2.1.1(d) of the Code.

The DTI have recently published the draft changes to the Fuel Security Code for industry consultation. A modification will b
amend the Balancing and Settlement Code to reflect the changes to the FSC, and it is likely that the timescales for progress
will be limited. It is proposed that a Standing Issue be raised to allow industry consideration of the changes required to the
that any potential issues with the drafting of the BSC changes are addressed prior to such a modification being raised. The
this Standing Issue to consider the merits of the changes to the FSC (views on the FSC changes can be provided to the DTI
the consultation on the draft FSC changes) and should be limited to consideration of the impact the changes with have on B
suggested that this Standing Issue be considered by the Pricing Standing Modification Group.

Further to the recent issue of the "PARMS - The Way Forward" consultation document on 15th September, we wish to form
to enable industry participants to meet, review and debate the available options to progress the PARMS implementation coll
that any solution implemented is robust. We firmly believe that with the escalating costs and the further delay to the catch
Charges, affected industry participants should agree the most appropriate course of action.
We would recommend that an initial meeting is convened with the focus of the Issue Group to include, but not be restricted
the current issues and materiality of the PARMS errors; and a review of the available options, including their associated dev
benefits.

During the discussions on P171-173 it was generally recognised that there were wider issues associated with so-called sleep
circumstances where balancing actions are taken outside of the normal operation of the market. Ofgem echoed these conce
P175 decision letters, referring to the potential to distort competition.
More light was shed on this matter at NGC’s interim operational forum on 3 August. In a presentation now posted on NGC’s
concluded that there were a substantial number of BMU bids at “abnormal prices”, and many of these were from non-nuclea
also shows the incidence of posting high sleeper bids is now greater in the light of decisions on P173 and P175. The conclu
NGC was that there is “fairly substantial industry risks” arising from these circumstances, which might be triggered by high
or transmission constraints. It is clear that the ability of generators to post bids up to the theoretical maximum of £99,999
with a view to identification of appropriate rectifying modification proposals. One option for such change might be impose a
participants (the issue applies in principle to all offers and bids) that offers and bids must be related to their reasonable cos

National Grid is currently developing proposals to improve information flows between Users and National Grid under the Gri
outlines the potential impact of the Grid Code proposals on the BSC and BMRS, and seeks to initiate discussion regarding th
of these proposals (and any other proposals relating to BMRS data publication that the Standing Group may wish to develop

Issue 16 was raised in order to consider whether the current Code provisions for dealing with persistent or recurring Level 1
provide industry participants with an appropriate level of protection. In particular, whether the existing provisions whereby a
Section H default following a defined period of either Level 1 or 2 Credit Default are sufficient.
Since the introduction of P107, we believe that Suppliers have been severely disadvantaged where an error with HH data be
outside of the settlement deadlines and where the party had no ability to highlight the error through normal validation proce
further exacerbated the issue, by preventing the supplier from correcting even 20 months of the error as only data within th
window of 14 months will be altered.
Issue 14 claims that there is an inaccuracy in Settlement since many vacant, but energised sites are settling on non zero es
consumption values due to the fact that Data Collectors are unable to access the sites and Suppliers are unable to obtain Cu
This leads to an over-accounting of uncorrected energy in Settlement

The Code requires Metering Equipment to comply with the relevant Code of Practice (CoP) current at the time of first registr
However, a number of Metering Systems have been installed for a time prior to registration and the CoP to which they were
lapsed. As a consequence, a number of Metering Systems are found unnecessarily non compliant during technical audits.

The current BSC withdrawal process requires companies to remain as BSC Parties until following the Final Reconciliation Run
the efficiency of this process, and to limit the costs and risks for all parties, Uskmouth Power Company Limited is considerin
Modification Proposal to enable Parties who have settled all of their trading debts as best they are able by the 2nd Reconcili
withdraw from the Code - leaving a cash deposit with BSCCo to cover their future liabilities. This would be a voluntary abilit
utilised by Parties who are non-physical traders or are responsible for CVA-registered meters. Issue 12 sets out a number o
potentially be covered by such a Modification Proposal, and seeks the views of the SSMG regarding these issues prior to dra

The current Settlement target of 97% became effective with the introduction of the 1998 Trading Arrangements to ensure t
Settlements. This target does not ensure that equability is delivered for two prime reasons, firstly, fluctuations between act
minimal and secondly, incorrect skew factors can be contained within the deemed actual performance. The current perform
Suppliers to achieve 97% is an inappropriate target and does not drive the appropriate incentives to improve data quality an
participants to ensure accurate data enters Settlements, instead, it diverts attention from the real issues.
To address this issue, we believe that potentially two steps need to be taken. Firstly to amend the target of 97% to perform
agreed tolerance of market average, therefore maintaining the deemed status quo of Settlement equability. Secondly, a lon
needs to be considered to identify more appropriate measures of equability. In addition, an appropriate supporting monitori
should be in place, to enable the market to monitor data quality and operational performance on an equitable and impartial
equitability of Settlements is actually achieved.

NGT would like to raise the whole issue of 'Implementation Dates' as a Standing Issue for consideration by the GSMG - spec
BSC is inconsistent with the Transmission Licence in that the current construction of Implementation Dates may lead to Aut
being 'timed out' if decision cut-off points are passed.
The Proposer argues that – although generally the Modification Process works well – Section F contains some shortcomings
inability to withdraw a Modification after it has been presented to the Panel, the inability to recall and amend legal text with
the requirement for ‘housekeeping’ changes to follow the full Modification Procedures.
The Proposer has raised Issue 9 to allow a standing group to undertake a review of the Section F Modification Procedures –
‘issues register’ presented by ELEXON to the BSC Panel as paper 75/014, and any efficiency lessons to be learned from othe
governance structures.
The Issue was first presented to the Supplier Volume Allocation Group on 1 June 2004 in paper SVG/40/006. The SVG pape
inconsistency between methods currently being used for deeming Meter readings and the provisions of the Balancing and S
Code), Annex S2. The issue was also raised by the BSC Auditor in the BSC Audit Report, statement of significant matters ‘D
calculated in incorrect circumstances’.
An anomaly may exist when a Party operates with or re-declares its MEL to a lower level than the submitted FPN. The re-su
MEL to this lower level will be a representation of the BMU performance meaning the FPN is not representative of the BMU’s
the System Operator was then to issue a BOA, it will be from the MEL all the while the MEL<FPN, and we would expect the
with that BOA be calculated from the appropriate level. However, we believe that the credited volume is based upon the no
and not the MEL, which now reflects the BMU’s running pattern.

The Performance Assurance Framework 'supplier charges' technique should incentivise suppliers to attain the levels of data
out in the Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC). The current means of calculating, capping and redistributing supplier char
most efficient or effective way of meeting this objective.
It would be useful to investigate the appropriateness of the current supplier charging mechanism as an incentive to improve
also to explore whether an alternative incentive mechanism could be proposed that could be simpler and more transparent.

There is an issue in respect of how Parties should be treated if their Credit Cover Percentage goes directly to a level at whic
Default should be called. It is unclear whether a Query Period exists in this circumstance and there is no provision for a Cu
for Level 1 Credit Default. This means that Parties are sometimes unable to raise additional Credit Cover to avoid being put
Default, if the potential event of default occurs on a non business day
BSC Section C3.8.1(a) currently obliges BSCCo to carry out periodic reviews of the Code and its implementation and of oper
Code in order to evaluate whether it continues to facilitate achievement of the Applicable BSC Objectives, and to do so in th
way. These reviews must take place at least once every 2 years and not more often than once every year. The GSMG is inv
whether there may be any merit in amending this provision, in order to assist ELEXON and the BSC Panel in considering wh
modification that would seek to increase efficiency in the implementation and administration of the Code.

Interconnector BM Units are less likely to act in accordance with their historical patterns than other kinds of BMUs due to vo
pricing differences between England & Wales and the neighbouring system(s) and, in the case of the Anglo-French Intercon
auctioning of interconnector capacity. This means that traditional CALF methodologies - which look at historical patterns – a
to an Interconnector Users current position.
Where a supplier is purely (or dominantly) non-domestic then its actual demand can drop significantly (down to 1/3) during
contractual position will follow this drop. During the period between the delivery day and the II run (which can be more tha
Christmas) the CALF calculation massively overstates the demand. This can rapidly tip such portfolios into credit shortfall at
banking services are not available.
Are there adequate provisions within the Code as currently drafted to ensure that signatories to the BSC, who elect to withd
market in an orderly manner, must maintain adequate credit cover provision and ensure full payment of all bills, including E
charges, for a relevant period after they officially exit?
 Progression
Status

Issue 90 was raised on 5 May 2020

Issue 89 was raised on 23 March 2020 and the first meeting was held on 22 April 2020.

Issue 88 was raised on 18 March 2020 and the first meeting 29 April 2020.
 Siemens Transmission and Distribution Limited raised Issue 87 on 3 March 2020. The first Issue 87 meeting

Issue 86 was raised on 9 October 2019. The first Issue Group meeting was held on 29 October (papers below), the second
folder below), and the third meeting was held on 30 January 2020 (see papers below). The fourth Isue Group will be held o

Issue 86 has been extended in scope and time to assist ELEXON in preparing documents to submit to Ofgem as part of the
Review – the revised Issue form is below.

The BSC Panel and Ofgem shared correspondence in January and February regarding Ofgem’s Switching Programme. Their
Issue 85 was raised by TMA on 27 August 2019. ELEXON will be holding the first Issue Group on 30 October 2019.The Issue
-Since
removing the Issue
the third obligation
Grouponmeeting,
NHHDCswe to have
visit de-energised sites, and
shared (on Ofgem’s option
behalf) C - latest
their Placingview
the on
obligation
how theonto
MRAthe
willSupplier.
be split – M
correct at the time of sharing on 7 February 2020.
The second Issue 85 meeting wsa on 10 December 2019, the Workgroup decided that they would like to place the obligati
Supplier. They programme
The Switching also descided that
has they
been putwould likedue
on hold to align this obligation
to Covid forwe
19 - as such, NonareHalf Hourly and
evaluating howHalf
bestHourly.
to proceed
The Issue 85 Issue Report was tabled at the February 2020 BSC Panel meeting, as such the Issue is now closed.
Issue 83 was raised by Sembcorp Utilities (UK) on 1 July 2019.
The first meeting was held 7 August.
A second meeting was held 11 October to further discuiss how the BPA can continue to be relfective.
NGESO took an action to investigate how changes to the BPA would impact the value of the Impbalance Price.
Issue 83 has been put on hold pending the outsome of the Imbalance Settlemen Harmonisation Proposal.
Issue 81 was raised by National Grid ESO on 12 June 2019. The First Issue 81 meeting was held on Monday 4 November 20
Tuesday 14 January 2020 at ELEXON's offices. We have conducted an analysis into the impacts of the current set of Run Up
summary, the analysis shows the total net value of imbalance charges paid by the industry during NGESO instructed start-u
is approximately less than 1% of imbalance charges.As a result, ELEXON and the Proposer recommend we progress no cha
of this view so we have issued draft Issue 81 report for your review by COP Friday 1 May. We are planning to table Issue 8
2020.
 Data Provision Workstream – is looking at current and alternative data sources, and includes some proofs of concept to te
team are reviewing existing data sources in detail and will be engaging with industry on known alternative sources for PAF
PAT Review Workstream- aims to catalogue the current Performance Assurance Techniques (PATs), identify limitations or
feedback and further discussion with technique owners), and integrate those improvements into a set of new PATs.

Next Event: there are no more planned meetings for Issue 81

Last Update : A workshop was held for the Data Reporting Worksteam on the 31 March 2020

There is a mismatch between the conditional Supply licence obligation (SLC 21B.4) to take All Reasonable Steps to obtain a
absolute BSC obligation (Section S-1, clauses 2.1.1 and 2.1.2) to meet the minimum level of settlement performance. The S
possible in all instances to acquire a meter read (typically due to customer refusal or obstructiveness), whereas the BSC do
Group should explore the appropriateness and practicalities of excluding meters from the settlement performance calcula
evidenced and consider if 97% is the appropriate minimum level of performance in light of P272 and the move to mandato

The current billing and cost recovery of teleswitch payments for Suppliers, opeated by the ENA, is not fit for use. There is n
mutualisation process. Further, new suppliers entering the market are not obliged to pay. There is an opportunity for ELEX
common industry issue.
Issue 82 was raised by ELEXON on 19 June 2019. The Issue 82 Workgroup meeting was held on 20 August 2019.
The meeting documents can be found here Issue 82 Meeting
The WG recommended that no Modification be raised to expand the BSC Panel’s ability to raise Modifications. The WG ho
out analysis on the BSC Panel’s powers currently. Clarifying what the Panel can or can’t do. The Legal feedback has been in
Issue 82 Workgroup members and the BSC Panel members.
BSC Panel update on Workgroup recommendation:
At its meeting on 10 October 2019, the BSC Panel noted that the conclusions of the Workgroup were broadly in line with t
The Issue 80 report
considerable was submitted
time. Where the Paneltodoes
the October
not raiseBSC Panel meeting.
a Modification The
it can beWG areby
raised seeking
a BSC aParty
Partyortoa raise twoParty
non-BSC CPs. throug
In the
ELEXON will raise the CPs on behalf of the Issue 80 WG.
The Panel Members agreed with the Issue Group view that although the BSC Panel is less likely to raise Modifications with
can respond to industry initiatives such as the Market Wide Half Hourly Settlement reform and to ELEXON reviews commis

43301

Issue 77 was raised by ELEXON on 29 March 2019. The first IG has been scheduled for 15 May 2019. Following
prepared for the June Panel meeting. The group are recommeding changes to rates of two Specified Charges bu
following June Panel meeting. The Issue Report was tabled at the 13 June BSC Panel meeting. ELEXON intend
meeting formally recommendinf the reduction to zero of 2 Specified Charges.

Issue 75, regarding the use of IP in the Central Volume Allocation (CVA) Market on 28 November 2018, was raised on 28 N
was held on 31 January 2019 with the aim of presenting its findings to the March BSC Panel. As a result of the discussions i
assessment to its service providers concerning the proposed amendments required to effect a resolution.The second mee
2019. The final report was presented to the BSC Panel at its meeting in June 2019 where it was noted with no further com

Raised on 26/10/2018.
First Issue group meeting held 26/11/2018
Second Workgroup held on 15 April 2019. Issue group requested information from grid on dispatch process.
Issue Report was noted by Panel on 9 May, and Issue closed

Issue 71 was raised by ELEXON on 15 June 2018.The first Issue group was held on 11 July 2018. The Issue Group defined
consideration, coming up with a range of initial proposals for a subsequent Modification, if raised, to address. The full discus
will be presented to the Panel at its meeting on 11 October 2018.

ELEXON was made aware of an Issue wherein two BSC Parties were unable to agree a Change of Supplier (CoS) opening or
Equipment Technical Specification 1 (SMETS1) meters due to disparate processes in the latter half of 2018. This Issue is cau
be entered into Settlement. The first Issue Group meeting was held on 20 May 2019 and the Issue Report was presented t
with no further comment.
Issue 72 was raised by SSE Ltd on 11 September 2018. The first Issue Group was held on Tuesday 16 October
the meeting available to download below. The second meeting was held on Thursday 24 January 2019. ELEXON
from the second meeting of the Issue 72 group before determining an appropriate time to hold the third meeting.
April 2 2019 where the group will consider a draft CP and agree next steps. 04/04 3rd meeting took place April 2
suggested amendments) CiCCoP Modification (to be raised by ELEXON) and presentation of BNO work to Ofge
outcomes and that the Issue could now be closed. The issue report will be tabled at the 9 May Panel meeting. 0
received no comments from the Panel. ELEXON are preparing to progress a CP to amend CoP4 based on the Is

The Issue Report for Issue 72 was tabled at the 9 May 2019 BSC Panel meeting. The Issue is now closed

Issue 70 was raised by Flexitricity on 15 June 2018. The first Issue group was held on 11 July 2018. The Issue Group defin
consideration, coming up with a range of initial proposals for a subsequent Modification, if raised, to address. The full discus
will be presented to the Panel at its meeting on 11 October 2018.

WG meeting was held on 17 December 2018. We expect an urgent Mod to be raised to take forward recpommen
P378 riased 20 December 2018 by VPI Immingham.
Issue Report will be presented to Panel in Feb 19

Closed 10 August 2017

Closed 13 April 2017

Closed 13 April 2017

 Closed 8 June 2017

Closed on 19/01/2017

Closed on 14/04/2016

Closed on 10/03/2016

Closed on 12/05/2016

Closed on 11/03/2014
Closed on 12/03/2014

Closed on 101/10/2014

Closed on 101/12/2014

Closed on 08/05/2014

Closed on 12/06/2014

Closed on 14/12/2013

Closed on 14/11/2013

Closed on 01/09/2014
Closed on 01/09/2014

Closed on 01/02/2014

Closed on 12/09/2013

Closed on 11/07/2013

Closed on 12/12/2013

Closed on 01/01/2013

Closed on 01/10/2012

Closed on 01/02/2012

Closed on 01/08/2011

Closed on 01/10/2011

Closed on 01/09/2011
Closed on 01/02/2011

Closed on 01/12/2009

Closed on 01/07/2009

Closed on 01/02/2009

Closed on Apr-09

Closed on Jun-08

Closed on 01/07/2008
Closed on 01/07/2008

Closed on Feb-08

Closed on Apr-08

Closed on 01/01/2008

Closed on 01/08/2007
Closed on 01/07/2007

Closed on

Closed on 01/06/2007

Closed on May-07

Closed on 01/10/2006
Closed on 01/08/2006

Closed on 01/03/2006

Closed on 01/10/2007

Nov 05

Nov-05

Sep 05

May 05
May 05

Jan 05

Oct 04

Dec 04

Oct 04

Oct 04

Aug 04

Jun 04

Nov 03

Aug 03
Withdrawn

Aug 03

Jul 03

Jul 03
 Proposed Progr

March April May

2nd- 16th- 23rd- 30- 1st - 6th - 13th- 20th- 27th 4th - 11th -
9th-13th 1st
6th 20th 27th 31st 3rd 10th 17th 24th -30th 8th 15th

Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment Assessment Assessment Assessment Assessment
 Proposed Progression

May June July

18th - 25th - 15th - 22nd - 13th -
1st - 5th 8th - 12th 29th- 30th 1st - 3rd 6th - 10th
22nd 29th 19th 26th 17th
July
20th -
27th -31st
24th
 June 2020 BSC Release - 25 J

Change
Title of Change
Number

Updates to BSCP520 to align with working practices and UMSUG

CP1522
recommendations

CP1523 BSCP 501 Amendments to clarify D0312 process

Inclusion of non-BM Fast Reserve actions into the Imbalance Price

P371
calculation

P392 Aligning the BSC Change process with EBGL requirements

P400 Panel Gov: Tele/Videoconferencing for Modifications business

P401 Panel Gov: Clarification of Panel Alternates Governance Arrangements

Removing the Self-Assessment Document from the BSCP and instead

P404
making it a Category 3 configurable item
 November 2020 BSC Release - 05 Nov

Change
Title of Change
Number

Clarifying responsibility for the Commissioning of measurement

CP1528
transformers that will be later adopted

Increase the minimum data storage capacity for Settlement Outstations

CP1527
and Mandate specific selectable DPs for CoPs 3, 5, and 10

Revised treatment of BSC Charges for Lead Parties of Interconnector BM

P396
Units

P398 Increasing Access to BSC data

June 2021 BSC Release - 29 J

Change
Title of Change
Number

AD Hoc BSC R

Change
Title of Change
Number
 Enhanced reporting of demand data to the NETSO to facilitate CUSC
Modifications CMP280 and CMP281
P383

BSC Arrangements in the event that the TERRE Market is suspended by

P403
National Grid ESO

P405 Allow notices via email where currently prohibited

TBC Release
Change
Title of Change
Number

P332 Revisions to the Supplier Hub Principle

Utilising a baselining methodology as an alternative to Physical

P376
Notifications

Enabling consumers to buy and sell electricity from/to multiple providers

P379
through Meter Splitting

P375 Settlement of Secondary BM Units using metering at the asset

Allowing extensions to ELEXON’s business and activities, subject to

P390
additional conditions

P395 Final Consumption Levies (FCLs)

P392 Aligning the BSC Change process with EBGL requirements

Making the identity of Balancing Service providers visible in the Balancing

P399
Services Adjustment Data

Assessing the costs and benefits of adjusting Parties' Imbalances

P397
following a demand disconnection
June 2020 BSC Release - 25 June 2020

BSC Central BSC

Current Status BSC Parties
Systems/Document Date Raised Systems/Documents
of Change Impacted
only impacts Impacted

Pending
Document 31 Oct 19 None - BSCP520 Suppliers
Implementation

Pending
Document 06 Nov 19 None - BSCP501 Suppliers
Implementation

Pending
Document 11 Sep 18 None - Section Q, Annex X-1 All trading Parties
Implementation

BSC Parties engaging

none - BSC Section F, BSC
Document 02 Oct 19 Report Phase with the BSC Mods
Section X-1
process

Document 13 Feb 20 Implemented N/A - Section B None

Document 13 Feb 20 Implemented N/A - Section B None

None - Section X-1, Suppliers, All Trading

Pending
Document 12 Mar 20 BSCP537 - Appendix 1,2 and Parties (except non-
Implementation
3 Physical Traders)
November 2020 BSC Release - 05 November 2020

BSC Central BSC

Current Status BSC Parties
Systems/Document Date Raised Systems/Documents
of Change Impacted
only impacts Impacted

Pending
Document 28-Jan-20 None - CoP4 None
Implementation

Generators, Licensed
Assessment none - Metering CoPs 1,2,3,5
Document 28-Jan-20 Distribution System
Procedure and 10, BSCP601
Operators, Suppliers
Generators
Interconnector
Administrators
Pending Interconnector Error
System 10-Dec-19 SAA, FSS - BSC Section D
Implementation Administrators
Interconnector User
Non Physical Traders
Suppliers

Assessment
Document 12-Dec-19 none - Setions: B; H; V; X-1 None
Procedure

June 2021 BSC Release - 29 June 2021

BSC Central BSC

Current Status BSC Parties
Systems/Document Date Raised Systems/Documents
of Change Impacted
only impacts Impacted

AD Hoc BSC Release

BSC Central
Systems/Document Current Status BSC Systems BSC Parties
only impacts Date Raised of Change -Documents Impacted Impacted
 SVAA - BSCP503, BSCP508,
SVAA Service Description,
SVAA User requirement
Pending Specification, SVA Data Suppliers, Transmission
System 06 Mar 19
Implementation Catalogue, Connection and Company
use of system code, BSC
Section S, Section S-2,
Section X-1, Section X-2

None - BSC Section Q

BSC Section G
Pending
Document 12 Mar 20 BSCP201 None
Implementation
SAA URS
SAA SD

None - Section H, BSCP11,

Document 09 Apr 20 Report Phase BSCP38,BSCP40, All BSC Parties
BSCP65,BSCP301

TBC Release Date

 BSC Central BSC
Current Status BSC Parties
Systems/Document Date Raised Systems/Documents
of Change Impacted
only impacts Impacted

Assessment
Document 28 Jan 16 None - Section H, J, Z Suppliers
Procedure

BMRS, ELEXON Portal,

SAA - Sectiions
PARMS, TAAMT,T,Estimated
X-1, X-2,
Assessment BSCP15
AnnualBSCP20, BSCP27,
Consumption
System 11 Dec 18 VLP
Procedure BSCP31, BSCP75, BSCP534,
(EAC)/Annualised Advance
BSCP535 SAA SD, SAA
(AA) - BSC Section URS
A,D,E,H,J,K, L, O, Q, S,T, U ,
Suppliers , Virtual Lead
V W, X, Z Code Subsidiary
Assessment Parties, Licensed
System 03 Jan 19 Documents
CDCA, CRA,BSCP11, BSCP27,
FAA, SAA, SVAA,
Procedure Distribution System
BSCP501,
TAAMT - BSCBSCP502,
Section K, Operators, Generators,
BSCP503,
Section Q, BSCP504,
Section T.
Assessment BSCP505, BSCP507,
BSCP70, BSCP503, BSCP508.
System 10 Dec 18 BSCP508, BSCP514, VLP
Procedure BSCP601, BSCP602, CDCA
BSCP516, BSCP533,
SD, CDCA URS, CRA URS,
FAABSCP534, BSCP535,
SD, FAA URS, SAA SD,
BSCP536,
SAA BSCP537,
URS
Document 12 Aug 19 Report Phase None - BSC Section C BSC Parties

Assessment SVAA (DCP & P&P); SAA -

System 07 Nov 19 Generators, Suppliers
Procedure Section Q

BSC Parties engaging

none - BSC Section F, BSC
Document 02 Oct 19 Report Phase with the BSC Mods
Section X-1
process
BMRS, SAA - Section Q
Section 6, SVAA User
Requirement Specification,
BMRA Service Description,
Assessment
System 24 Dec 19 SVAA Service Description, NETSO, ELEXON
Procedure
SAA User Requirement
Specification, BMRA User
Requirement Specification,
SAA-Service
None SectionDescription
R, Section S, LDSOs, HHDAs, HHDCs,
BSCP03, BSCP502, BSCP503, NHHDAs, NHHDCs,
Document 12 Dec 19 Report Phase
BSCP504, BSCP505, Trading Parties, NETSO,
BSCP508, BSCP515 ELEXON
Party Agents
Impacted

None

SMRA

None

None

None

None

None
 Party Agents
Impacted

None

None

None

None

Party Agents
Impacted

Party Agents Target Release

Impacted Date
 HHDAs, SVAA 1-Apr-21

None 28-May-20

All Party Agents 8-Jun-20

 Target
Party Agents
Implementation
Impacted
Date

HH Data Aggregators, HH
Data Collectors, Meter
Administrators, HH Meter NAR
Operator Agents, NHH
Meter Operator Agents,

HHDC, HHDA NAR

HHDC 03 Nov 22

HHDC, HHDA 24 Feb 22

5 WDs after Authority

None
decision

HHDCs, HHDAs 24 Feb 22

None 25 Jun 20

BMRS, SAA TBC

5 WDs after Authority

CDCA
decision