IREG met on 10th April 2019 and discussed the following MRA Issue Forms (MIFs) and Electricity Central Online Enquiry Service (ECOES) changes.
MIF219 – Full review of the Working Practice Product Set (WPPS)
IREG received an update of the progress of the review. IREG noted the further analysis carried out on the remaining Working Practices and agreed to continue the review. It noted that there were still Working Practices (WPs) that could be removed from the WPPS due to redundancy or included within the Data Transfer Catalogue. As such, it agreed the two (2) drafted Change Proposals (CPs) as they were now either redundant could progress to MDB.
MIF281 – Crossed Meters
An updated draft MAP was presented to IREG reflecting the considerations agreed at the previous meeting. IREG noted the changes made and confirmed that the procedure was almost ready pending updates to the diagrams within the procedure along with review of the escalation process. The group noted that if the solution for managing the process was to be ECOES then the prompts could be automated like the current Additional MPAN request procedure. The initial prompts could be built in to notify the users set up to manage the process. If the step doesn’t progress within the timeframes, then further prompts could be given and potentially notified to the Contract Manager. Similarly, reports could be created for user categories and Contract Managers to give a view of all the Crossed Meter issues being managed and where in the process they are so action can be taken accordingly. IREG noted that it would be important to ensure that the Meter Operator community is aware of the developments to manage the process although many do have access to ECOES anyway to manage the meter updates and failures albeit some of that process will be changing from this June 2019. IREG agreed that the next steps would be for the MAP drafting to be finalised and discuss with the ECOES TSP regarding how the process could work, what changes may be required for the ECOES URS and consider them all at the next meeting.
MIF278 – Gap with HH Change of Meter Operator
IREG noted that the original raiser of the issue had been unable to attend the meeting to discuss the responses to the RFI in respect of aligning the D0268 and D0303 Data Flows and make the Meter Manufacturer Make and Type Mandatory within the Data Flows. A Supplier member noted that it did appear to be a problem that could be taken forward if the volumeterics could be understood, specially highlighting one Meter Operator response which advised that their systems would expect those fields to be completed. IREG highlighted that there may be impacts on Settlements and the audits carried out if a Party was having to wait for the metering information to be sent but the information had not been completed initially. IREG agreed to ascertain the volumeterics involved to understand whether there is a case for raising a change proposal to the D0268 and D0303 Data Flows.
IREG further discussed that a separate MIF may be required in order to review where previous Changes Proposals had been raised in respect of the D0268 Data Flow and how to progress them.
MIF284 – Potential Improvements to MRA Agreed Procedure 21 (Disconnections)
IREG were advised that the MIF could now be closed as a new Change Proposal had been raised for MAP21 and was going to April 2019 MDB for the agreement of the Impact Assessment.
MIF285 – Review of the valid set of codes under J1253 and use of the J0024 to better describe a change of energisation status rejection
IREG were advised that the Proposer and their alternates were unable to attend the April or May 2019 meetings and wished for them to be discussed at the June 2019 meeting.
MIF287 – Definitions within the D0350 Data Flow
The Proposer highlighted the issues that they were seeing as an MPAS provider, noting that the D0350 enables DCC to notify MPAS that DCC is providing communications services to a metering point. The use of the valid set in the DCC Service Flag has become unclear and there are discrepancies between Party’s understandings of the interpretation of what each flag represents and when they should be sent. Changes had been made to the Smart Energy Code removing W, as a code but not from the DCC definitions. DCC have advised that codes “S” or “W” would not be used as they cannot suspend an MPAN as only a device can be suspended and (W) Withdrawn related to opting out but is not possible now. The Proposer further highlighted there have been further issues where a customer has selected to be enrolled with a SMETS2 meter, but that consent has been withdrawn and has been converted to a “dumb meter” but the device remains “Active” as there is no way of amending the code. The Proposer advised that they currently hold circa 3k MPANs which are “Active” but unable to access the meter and a similar volume where the MPANs have been de-commissioned but the meters on site are still “Active”. IREG discussed that it in order to assess what needs to happen with the D0350 Data Flow it would be useful to understand what Status’s the DCC hold in their systems and how changes in the status are triggered and then have a starting point to understand what the gaps are and whether only a change is needed to the D0350 or changes under the MRA and SEC were required.
MIF288 – Industry Contacts Database
The Proposer highlighted that the issues with the Industry Contact Database was that it requires changes to a contact point to be carried out on all entries for that person. A simpler process to allow a single update to contact details that is then replicated automatically would be beneficial. As a Contract Manager they had multiple entries to update and tag as the relevant contact people and roles, having to update the same data on multiple entries was wasteful. Thus, having no way of updating and populating whenever they are assigned to an escalation level and to deal with changes that would minimise time to update which should improve data quality and therefore resolution. IREG agreed that making the way in which information could be updated easier may also assist in ensuring Contract Managers or their alternates updated the data. IREG highlighted that along with being able to carry out bulk updates, it would be useful also to investigate whether a user could be set up and then assign all their roles. Similarly, whether alternates can be assigned to update the users and roles. Similarly, whether Parties could be notified where updates to the information had been carried out. IREG recommended an Impact Assessment should be carried out to see what was possible.
MIF289 – HH Related MPANs
IREG were advised that the MIF had been raised following discussions at FSEG and MDB in respect of recent developments to support Stage 0 of the Faster Switching Programme for Related MPANs. IREG noted that a new MAP had been developed but this only included Non-Half Hourly Meter Points. MDB questioned whether this should be extended to cover Half Hourly metering as there were a volume of customers who switch Supplier and were required to be kept together. IREG noted that the definition within the MRA for Related Meters only included Non-Half Hourly and therefore whether a new definition was required for Half Hourly Related meters. IREG discussed that within the Faster Switching programme MPAS will be required to know which MPAN is the Primary and which would be Secondary so the Non-Half Hourly Meter Points are currently being cleaned to identify which is Primary or not, in readiness for the June 2019 go live, when the updates to MPAS will be required. The current Stage 0 did not include Half Hourly Meter Points but IREG highlighted that there was a clear need to keep HH MPANs registered together for several reasons such as where there is a very large site with multiple feeders and MPANs. IREG noted that these Customers/MPANs may be switching more frequently in the future but also there could be single site DUOS billing where the invoicing would have a Primary MPAN and subsequent associated ones. IREG agreed that further investigations should be made with the Distribution companies and Suppliers to identify the scale and examples of HH Related meters and sites to enable further discussion on the matter. A number of IREG members highlighted that as this issue is on how the MPANS are tagged and enable them to be registered and kept together through the registration process then considerations can be made through which expert group this issue is progressed.
MIF291 – Refining the list of valid codes for the J1699 (Priority Services Category) Data Item
IREG received a verbal update from the previous Safe Guarding Customer Working Group (SGCWG) highlighting that the discussions had now moved on to what specific changes to DTC Data Flows or the J1699 (Priority Service Category) Data Item codes. These changes would need to be in place for February 2020 ahead of the go live date Data Item Valid Set only. IREG noted that although discussions had taken place on making changes to the D0225 Data Flow to accommodate Water Companies being included as a sender or receiver, this has not been agreed by the SGCWG as the Data Flows can be sent out-with this requirement via the Data Transfer Network. IREG reviewed the draft Change Proposal and update to Annex D for the J1699 Data Item, noting that there were proposed amendments to codes 19,20,23,27and 3 new codes 35, 36 and 37. IREG suggested that for code 10, where this was being proposed to be “Not Used” from its current wording, it may be better worded as “Do Not Use” since there may be some updates in flight at the time of the change using the old wording and a need to keep the code for a period. Keeping the code in the Valid Set meant that it could still be selected so stating “Do Not Use” may make it clearer until a further change could be made to remove the code completely. IREG agreed that the Change Proposal and Appendix could be progressed to the April 2019 MDB.
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 08th May 2019.