1. PN UNC Workgroup Supply Point Register 25th October 2011

2. Objectives of the Workgroups • Determine detailed business requirements • Consider/review comments made during the Project Nexus consultation • Review existing Modifications relevant to the topic area • Workgroup deliverables; • Process maps • Business Requirements Document. Document to provide sufficient definition around business rules to: • Enable the proposed requirements to be incorporated in xoserve’s investment decisions, and • Support the raising of any UNC Modification Proposals • Monitor & align with latest SMIP position • Focus will be on requirements for Project Nexus delivery

3. Approach & Workplan • Agree scope • And areas for consideration • Consider requirements from other Workgroups; • Settlement • AQ • Reconciliation • Invoicing • PN UNC • Consider any relevant live Modifications • Mod 0357: Enhanced Supply Point Admin. Process • Mod 0353: Population & Maintenance of the Market Sector Code • Agree future requirements • Develop process maps and detailed business rules

4. Project Nexus Consultation Responses

5. Project Nexus Consultation Responses cont.

6. AMR & Settlement Workgroup; Check Read information Requirement for the GT to notify the Shipper the date the Check Read was due [1] month after the Check Read due date. In order to do this the relevant data items to monitor the Check Read requirement will need to be recorded by the GT. Supply Point Enquiry (Mod 0357) Provision of consumption data to the Shipper BRD already developed, review required Reconciliation, Invoicing & AQ Workgroups; Nothing identified as yet PN UNC Single Meter Point Supply Points Market Differentiation Requirements raised in other Workgroups

7. Proposed Approach for Today’s meeting • Discuss and agree issues & requirements for each area identified as a business issue • Some could possibly be closed as no longer an issue • May highlight new issues

8. Scope? • Identified areas from IRR & Workgroups for discussion; • Updating Address data • Asset data – identify when a check read is required • Unique Sites • CSEP’s • Prime & Subs • LPG Sites • Market Differentiation • Consumption data • Single Meter Point Supply Points

9. 1. Address Data • Requirement to improve address data. • Current principles: • UIP submits MPRN creation • Shipper / Network submits address update • Xoserve validate against PAF (Post Office Address Format) • If valid, MPRN created/address updated • Invalid: request rejected • Possible issue with plot addresses • although validation performed there is still a risk of duplicates, plot address remaining & MPRN set up in incorrect LDZ • Any requirements/improvements to current process? • Any principles/initiatives discussed by SMIP

10. 2. Asset Data • Requirement to record AMR related data for monitoring a Check Read for certain sites • Also need to show if the equipment submits ‘derived’ or actual reads. • Held on the Register against the MPR? • Is this the only additional asset related data item that needs to be held? • Raised at a number of meetings the quality of asset data held on UKLink • Opportunity to address under Project Nexus? • Improvements to RGMA flows/validations?

11. 3. Unique Sites • Approx 100 sites (inc. NTS sites & Interconnectors) • Currently processed off line due to complex arrangements which UKLink system is unable to manage (mainly billing issue) • Desire for Unique Sites processes to be systematised • Issues • Shared Supply Meter Points (SSMP’s) require submission of a form signed by all registered/proposing Shippers • DM CSEPs • Some SPA timescales are different to ‘normal’ sites

12. 4. CSEPs • Assuming that the current arrangements apply, • Receipt of aggregated data • Receipt of specific data at MPR level to carry out Reconciliation for LSPs (difficult to validate) • Receipt of MPR & related site data items for the SCOGES service • Are there any improvements we can make to the current service?

13. 5. Prime & Subs • Approx P&S numbers: • 1,500 Prime meters, 2,960 Subs • Issues relating to P&S sites (from Xoserve perspective) relate to billing; • Energy from Sub meters must be deducted from the Prime meter (reconciliation) • AQ of the prime meter should reflect consumption from that meter only, not consumption of all Sub meters • Requirements from AQ Workgroup state • Reads will continue to be obtained within a 5 day window • All P&S meters must be processed within the same ‘Product’ (except if DM mandatory) • Any other issues?

14. 6. Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) Sites • Approx 2,000 sites across 2 networks • All details of LPG sites are held on a separate database • Desire for these sites to be included in the scope of Project Nexus • LPG MPRs recorded on the Supply Point Register would; • Deliver benefits from managing all Meter Points on one central system • Ensure duplicate sites are not set up • Utilise existing data flows for the receipt & processing of site & asset data including receipt of reads (this may be dependent on whether Smart meters are fitted) • Would mean that LPG sites would need to be excluded from some processes (e.g. allocation)

15. 7. Market Differentiation • Agreed to ‘park’ until later in the requirements definition phase of Project Nexus • Within the Settlement processes; the market will be differentiated by ‘Product’ • Is there still a requirement within each Settlement process to differentiate via a market sector flag ? • If so is there still a desire to increase the sectors (e.g. SME, Hospitals, holiday homes) • What will the MSF provide? • What defines MSF – usage or contract or licence definition? • SSP & LSP will continue to exist for SPA processes & charging

16. 8. Provision of Consumption Data • BRD produced August 2010 • Document details the process for a Shipper to request & receive consumption data for I&C sites • Market Sector Flag used to validate, Shipper obtains relevant permission from the consumer • Data provided via Supply Point Enquiry process • Consumption data issued to a Proposing Shipper for the requested period, potentially daily consumption for a 12 month period • Purpose: to provide additional information to a potential Proposing Shipper about a Supply Point to enable efficient & accurate quoting • A Proposing Shipper will be as equally well informed as the Incumbent Shipper • Requirement put on hold until data access principles were set by SMIP • SMIP principle: understanding appears to be that access to consumption data will only be provided to the Supplier for the period of their ownership

17. 9. Single Meter Point Supply Points • Requirement from GTs to limit 1 Meter Point to a Supply Point • Removes complexities & simplifies Transportation processes • More reflective of physical arrangements • Consistent treatment for all sites • Cost reflective charging • over 99% of all Meter Points will have their transportation charges reduced • Aligns with Smart metering arrangements • Although • May misalign with supply contracts • Facility to link meter points?? • Increase in transportation charges for some sites • Approx 0.27% (15.6% of LSP market) • Comments re: ICoSS letter