Coronavirus: BSC checks relaxed to reduce burden on code signatories

The Performance Assurance Board for the Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC) has decided to relax its compliance checks to reduce the burden on signatories during the Coronavirus pandemic.

The code administrator Elexon has also addressed concerns over the accuracy of the customer profiles used to estimate electricity demand, saying it is still assessing the impact of the lockdown on behaviour but does not believe any changes should be made at the moment.

The board decided yesterday (26 March) to suspend the Error and Failure Resolution process and place existing resolution plans on hold unless the supplier concerned wishes to continue being tracked. The escalation process for missed milestones will likewise be suspended.

It also decided to suspend the charges that suppliers can incur for failing to meet set performance levels in an effort to ease pressure on their cash flows.

The charges for December 2019 will be collected as normal, with invoices being issued within the next several days. The charges for January and February will similarly be calculated in the usual way but will not be payable until a later date that is still to be determined.

Elexon said it will additionally seek to coordinate a blanket “force majeure” application on behalf of all suppliers to set the charges to zero from March until there are further announcements from government.

The BSC audit for 2019/20 is nearly finished and will be completed remotely, but the final report may be delayed so businesses can prioritise critical work. Elexon, the PAB and the auditor will consider the current difficulties and restrictions when setting the scope for the 2020/21 audit.

In an update to signatories sent shortly before the board’s meeting on Thursday, Elexon chief executive Mark Bygraves said the code administrator had received “a number of queries around estimation and profiling”.

“We are currently assessing and analysing impacts of the current status on both of these processes and assessing whether there are any BSC parameters we can amend or change to help you,” he wrote.

“Our current view is that it would not be appropriate to recommend any changes to the load profiles. There will be some misallocation of non-half-hourly volume, but the energy settled for non-half-hourly customers will be correct once meters are read.

“Further, suppliers will have used the profiles for their forecasting models and changes could have an adverse impact on their energy imbalances. However, we are monitoring the data as it becomes available and will report on any findings.

“We will continue to review this stance and will come back to you with guidance when we have proposals.”

Meanwhile, the manager of the Smart Meter Installation Code of Practice, Electralink, has told Utility Week it is working with suppliers to identify sections that may need to be amended to allow for social distancing.

“It’s areas such as publishing the survey from people asking whether they’ve had energy efficiency advice,” said director of governance services Stefan Leedham.

“It’s the wrong thing to do at the moment to stay in peoples’ houses and give them energy efficiency advice once they’ve had a smart meter installed.”

He said Electralink is also working with suppliers to identify areas where the code does not need to change as it allows sufficient flexibility in how it is applied, but they instead need to agree to new arrangements.

“One of those areas that we’re looking at, particularly at the moment, is the Theft Risk Assessment Service. We’re organising virtual meetings with suppliers to get a common agreed approach to what thefts they’re going to investigate.”

“Most times when people are bypassing gas and electricity meters that is not a safe installation,” he explained, adding that this threat to safety needs to be balancing against the need to limit social contact as much as possible.

Electralink has suggested that suppliers only look into cases in which there has clearly been a theft that poses an immediate danger to life, and leave to one side those in which there is only a suspicion of theft.

Leedham said it is working to clarify this distinction and create guidance so that “hopefully everybody will take the same approach and there’s no perverse incentives to keep on doing what is essentially the wrong thing.”

Earlier this week, the government issued fresh guidelines for businesses concerning work carried out in peoples’ homes. It said this could continue if the worker is showing no signs of illness, but not if there is anyone in the property being isolated unless it is to “remedy a direct risk to the safety of the household.”

Energy UK also confirmed that its members have agreed to halt all non-essential smart meter installations. Industry sources have criticised the government for its lack of clarity on the issue.

Echoing recent comments from Gemserv, Leedham said the “silver lining” of the crisis is the success of its transition to remote working. When Electralink closed its offices and announced it would no longer be conducting physical meetings “all our customers were really supportive of that”.

He said remote working has benefits outside of a crisis – “you can save on your time, your travel and your carbon and also your costs” – and that he believes the practice will stick once this one has passed.

“In the past, there has always been a desire to have face-to-face meetings,” he remarked. “There are certain meeting that we would agree you do need occur face-to-face. But actually, those should be the exception rather than the rule.”

He said there are some issues that could be addressed without holding any meeting at all, instead using collaboration software to allow people to contribute at a time that suits them: “What we have seen is that as we have gone into social distancing, there’s a greater strain on peoples’ ability to work standard nine to five office hours, especially those with children.”

The BSC panel recently approved an amendment to the code allowing modification work to be conducted remotely – something which it explicitly prohibits, except in the case of urgent proposals. The panel also brought forward the implementation date from June to April as a result of the coronavirus.