Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation...

12
Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel: 0300 068 6996 Email: [email protected] Consultation reference: URN 12D/024 6th Floor Dean Bradley House 52 Horseferry Road London SW1P 2AF T +44 (0)20 7706 5100 F +44 (0)20 7706 5101 [email protected] www.energynetworks.org Registered Office as above 1 June 2012 Dear Sir/Madam, Energy Networks Association Response to the DECC Smart Metering Implementation Programme Consultations Data Access and Privacy Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your consultation on the proposals for Data Access and Privacy. As you are aware Energy Networks Association (ENA) is the industry body representing the UK’s electricity and gas transmission and distribution networks operators. The following comments are provided by ENA on behalf of its member companies in response to the DECC consultation on Smart Metering Implementation Programme published on 5 April 2012. A number of ENA member companies have responded individually to the consultation. The comments in the appendix accompanying this letter are submitted in support of the individual submissions provided by our member companies. If you require further information or you wish to discuss any of the content of this reply please contact Paul Smith on: 0207 706 5156 or email: [email protected] Yours faithfully David Smith Chief Executive Energy Networks Association 6th Floor, Dean Bradley House 52 Horseferry Road London SW1P 2AF PA: Mavis Neagle Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7706 5106 Fax:+ 44 (0) 20 7706 5101 Email: [email protected]

Transcript of Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation...

Page 1: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel: 0300 068 6996 Email: [email protected] Consultation reference: URN 12D/024

6th Floor Dean Bradley House 52 Horseferry Road London SW1P 2AF

T +44 (0)20 7706 5100 F +44 (0)20 7706 5101

[email protected] www.energynetworks.org

Registered Office as above 1 June 2012 Dear Sir/Madam, Energy Networks Association Response to the DECC Smart Metering Implementation Programme Consultations – Data Access and Privacy Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your consultation on the proposals for Data Access and Privacy.

As you are aware Energy Networks Association (ENA) is the industry body representing the

UK’s electricity and gas transmission and distribution networks operators. The following

comments are provided by ENA on behalf of its member companies in response to the DECC

consultation on Smart Metering Implementation Programme published on 5 April 2012.

A number of ENA member companies have responded individually to the consultation. The

comments in the appendix accompanying this letter are submitted in support of the individual

submissions provided by our member companies.

If you require further information or you wish to discuss any of the content of this reply please

contact Paul Smith on: 0207 706 5156 or email: [email protected]

Yours faithfully

David Smith

Chief Executive

Energy Networks Association 6th Floor, Dean Bradley House 52 Horseferry Road London SW1P 2AF PA: Mavis Neagle

Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7706 5106

Fax:+ 44 (0) 20 7706 5101

Email: [email protected]

Page 2: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

APPENDIX Energy Networks Association Response to: DECC Smart Meter Implementation Programme Consultation: Data Access and Privacy (Reference URN 12D/024)

1. Do you have any comments on the arrangements for consumer access to data through the in-home display, Home Area Network or supplier? Do you foresee any problems with any of these mechanisms? If so, how could any problems be overcome?

We believe that the proposed approach is appropriate as it is important that consumers are able

to obtain both direct and indirect feedback. A concern regarding access to smart meter data via

the HAN by means of a ‘secure’ connection of a consumer device is that it might be possible for

such a connection to be used inappropriately to ‘hack’ the smart metering system. It will be

important therefore that the means of ‘secure’ connection meets the reasonable expectations of

the SMIP Security Technical Expert Group.

2. Is there a need for any additional arrangements to enable consumers easily to access their own energy consumption data directly from their supplier, free of charge and in a common format?

It is important that consumers are able to extract detailed information in a format that enables

straightforward interpretation and can therefore obtain competitive quotations from alternative

suppliers. This should include half-hourly consumption data on request (for example, in order to

enable a consumer to obtain comparative quotations for time-of-use tariffs or to enable a third

party to assess the consumer’s suitability to provide, and be remunerated for, demand side

response services).

3. Do you have any comments on the overall balance and workability of the proposals for supplier access to data?

The proposals strike a reasonable balance between preserving data privacy for consumers whilst

providing suppliers/third parties with the necessary visibility of data to enable products to be

designed which might benefit certain consumers while also benefitting the overall efficiency of

the relevant energy chain (in particular electricity generation, transmissions and distribution).

4. Do you agree with the proposed approach to defining supplier regulated duties, and that suppliers should be able to access monthly (or less granular) energy consumption data for these purposes without customer consent? Would the proposed approach restrict suppliers from undertaking any essential activity, or present any other problems?

We believe that allowing suppliers access to monthly (or less granular data) without consumer

consent is reasonable. However, such non-granular data will be of little benefit to suppliers in

terms of being able to design potentially more innovative products including, for example, time-

of-use based products.

5. Do you agree with the proposal to enable suppliers to access daily (or less granular) energy consumption data, and use this for any purpose except marketing, provided that the customer is made aware of this and given the opportunity to opt out? What would be the implications for consumers and competition of this approach?

Page 3: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

Our members generally agree with the proposal to enable Suppliers to access daily (or less

granular) energy consumption data, and use this for any purpose except marketing. Competition

and innovation are paramount to the Smart Energy regime and Suppliers will be using data to

innovate and to demonstrate to Customers the benefits available to them through running a

Smart Meter.

If Suppliers used daily energy consumption data to develop products and services, they would

not be able to market those products and services to their Customers unless those Customers

had agreed in any event and therefore new start up companies will not be unfairly prejudiced

from entering the marketplace.

It is not anticipated that this level of data would cause any breach of privacy, but would allow for

significant benefits in the improvements of services for Customers. The opt-out provision is a

reasonable safeguard for consumers who may have a concern that through visibility of day-to-

day variations in their consumption data (for example weekdays and weekends or weather-

related variations) suppliers might have too great an insight into lifestyle profiles.

6. Do you agree with the proposal to require suppliers to obtain explicit (opt-in) consent from the customer in order to access half-hourly energy consumption data?

An opt-in requirement in respect of half-hourly consumption data should allay any legitimate

concerns that consumers might unwittingly provide consent by failing to opt-out. Should a

consumer wish to take advantage of a product offering such as a time-of use tariff or a product

based on responsive demand, then the consumer would presumably understand the need (or

need to be educated of the need) to opt-in to providing access to more granular data in order for

the supplier or other third party to firstly assess the benefits for the consumer of such a product

and, subsequently, to enable the consumer to be charged (or rewarded) according to

consumption (or response) over designated time periods.

7. Do you agree with the proposal to require suppliers to obtain explicit (opt-in) consent from the customer in order to use energy consumption data for marketing purposes? Do you agree with the proposed definition of marketing, and in particular, that free advice should be excluded from the proposed definition?

An opt-in requirement in respect of marketing material is a desirable safeguard against

consumers unintentionally failing to opt-out. While marketing material (as opposed to sales

initiatives or customer propositions) should not expose consumers to risk, excessive exposure

might lead to bad publicity for the smart metering programme. On the other hand, it is possible

that by failing to opt-in consumers will exclude themselves from potentially valuable information

as to how they might reduce their energy bills.

Realisation of the IA benefits might depend on consumers being made aware of potential energy

and/or energy price saving opportunities. We would therefore advocate consideration being

given in future to relaxing the opt-in requirement (in respect of pure marketing material) in

favour of an opt-out approach. An appropriate time for such a review might (depending on

experience gained) be at either the completion of the Foundation Stage, a mid-point during mass

rollout, or on completion of the initial smart meter rollout in 2019.

Page 4: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

8. Do you agree with the Government’s proposed exceptions to the basic framework for supplier access to data – to accommodate theft detection and prevention, accurate billing, customer queries and trials? Are there any other important uses of energy consumption data that need to be covered in exceptions to the basic framework?

The cited exceptions to the basic framework are reasonable though it might be necessary to

define what would constitute ‘reasonable suspicion that theft is being committed’ and, in the

event that the reasonable suspicion proved unwarranted, the process by which the data would

be securely destroyed and the consumer advised of the daily consumption data that had been

accessed. Regarding trials, some of our members disagree with the provision that all trials

should be approved by DECC or OFGEM. This will result in a time consuming and bureaucratic

process and will stifle innovation. Potential participants to a trial will be given sufficient advice

and information about the purpose of the trial and the use of the data and if a Customer is

uncomfortable with the trial, they will simply not participate.

9. Do you agree with the proposal to require suppliers to explain clearly to customers what energy consumption data will be accessed, for which purposes, and the choices that customers have about this, and to provide annual reminders to their customers about this?

The requirement to remind consumers on an annual basis as to the energy consumption data

that is being accessed (and the purpose thereof) is reasonable in principle. There might be

questions as to how such annual reminders would be managed in respect of consumers who

change supplier (a pragmatic approach might be for the incoming supplier to issue such a

reminder at the time of transfer or on issuing the first energy bill).

10. Do you agree with the proposed approach to the way in which suppliers should facilitate opt-out and opt-in choice mechanisms?

The proposal not to require explicit opt-in to be registered in writing is welcome. Such a

requirement would surely be regarded as a burden by many consumers and potentially limit the

number of consumers who would otherwise willingly opt-in. In that regard, a requirement that

the consumer would first receive information ‘in writing’ (which we presume is intended to

mean a written communication addressed to the consumer) might seem overly prescriptive. For

example, if clear information is provided via an internet webpage which explicitly invites the

consumer to read the information before (say) ticking a tick-box, then that would seem to satisfy

the underlying principle of opt-in while making the exercise convenient for consumers.

11. Do you agree with the proposed use of licence conditions to implement requirements relating to supplier access to data? Would any of the detailed arrangements, or any additional measures, be more effectively set out elsewhere, for example in an industry code, a standalone code of practice or guidance?

While we believe that the proposed approach is workable, the consultation rightly notes the

potential for a licence condition approach to offer less flexibility to accommodate potential

improvements than (say) an industry code approach (backed up by the licence-backed SEC).

12. Do you agree that the licence conditions as drafted would effectively implement the proposed policy approach to supplier access to data? Do any specific areas of the draft licence conditions need amendment or clarification?

Page 5: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

Notwithstanding our answer to Q11, the licence conditions as drafted appear to be appropriate

to ensure effective implementation of the policy approach to supplier access to data.

13. Is there a need for any consequential changes to existing licence conditions or codes to ensure that the proposed requirements on suppliers work as intended?

We do not perceive any need for consequential changes to licence conditions or codes.

14. Do you have any comments on the proposed approach to timing of implementation of proposals relating to supplier access to data?

We agree that the changes should be implemented as soon as is reasonably practicable and that

the proposed licence changes should be introduced in late 2012 by which time we would

anticipate SMETS1 (or possibly SMETS2) compliant meters becoming available and hence at a

time when suppliers might be seeking to ramp-up numbers of smart meters installed during the

Foundation-Stage.

15. Do you agree with the proposal to allow network operators to access half-hourly energy consumption data, without customer consent, for the purposes of developing and maintaining efficient, co-ordinated and economical systems for the distribution of electricity and gas, if they have had plans for aggregation approved? To what extent would this approach address potential consumer concerns about privacy in relation to network operator access to data? Network operators have made a very strong case for access to half-hourly consumption data in order to perform their statutory and regulatory duties in respect of developing and maintaining efficient, co-ordinated and economical systems for the distribution of electricity. In gas, half hourly data would be of limited value relative to 6 minute information. For gas networks we require the approval to be for 6 minute data. Gas networks model demand on the basis of 6 minute intervals and half hourly data is not sufficient for this purpose. The design for gas meters is for them to be able to record, when requested, four hours of 6 minute readings. We expand on this further in the text below. In respect of electricity, it is the envisaged future changes in daily consumption patterns (and hence daily demand shape) as a consequence of government’s proposals for decarbonisation of electricity production, and electrification of heat and transport, in support of The Carbon Plan that make free access to such data necessary. In the case of electricity, such half-hourly data would be used purely to derive load profiles for distribution networks (particularly low voltage distribution networks which have minimal levels of monitoring) in order to determine whether such networks were continuing to operate within (or approaching) design limits. The general approach would be to aggregate individual half-hourly readings at the network level; that is to say existing MPAN-to-network connectivity models would be used to determine which individual half-hourly consumption data sets should be aggregated in order to derive half-hourly network demand profiles. Aggregation would ensure not only anonymity of individual consumer half-hourly profiles but also eliminate the possibility of tracing of individual MPAN half-hourly profiles. While aggregated data will be appropriate in many situations, we are concerned proposed

arrangements focus too heavily on this and the potential value in some situations may be

diminished if aggregation is always required. We envisage there will be situations where in order

to deliver full network benefits and smarter networks data will be required at individual premise

or site level. We believe the focus should instead be on:

(i) intended use to ensure use is legitimate and within a network’s permitted activities;

Page 6: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

(ii) to ensure it will deliver real or potential network benefit; and (iii) data protection and privacy arrangements to ensure customer data and identity is

protected.

We believe further work is required to examine how half-hourly energy consumption data can be

effectively aggregated to provide meaningful information and we will be looking to commission

an assessment in due course to examine how this could be achieved.

Half hourly consumption data would be combined with other non-privacy sensitive data such as

half-hourly reactive energy and circuit voltage profiles (i.e. the voltage profile along a given LV

circuit) in order to provide network operators with the network management information

required to efficiently and economically manage such networks. This is particularly important as

network loadings begin to increase due to electric vehicles and electric heating (in particular heat

pumps) begin to displace conventional forms of transport and space and water heating, and as

network voltage variations begin to increase due to the combined impacts of additional network

loading and micro-generation.

However, the focus should not be on half hourly data only. In gas, half hourly data would be of

limited value relative to 6 minute information. For instance, daily data would allow us to

monitor demand more closely and manage flows and pressures accordingly. 6 minute data

would help us build up a more accurate picture of localised gas use, consumer behaviour

patterns, peak demand and diversity of load and plan and manage the network more efficiently.

However, 6 minute data may only be required for specific locations at specific times, rather than

the entire population at all times. As such arrangements should also allow the network to

sample data based on location e.g. postcode as required. It is therefore very surprising that

while the technical specification for SMETS1 includes 6 minute data, there is no mention of this

in the consultation document on data access. Our gas members believe it should be clearly

included in the scope.

In respect of electric vehicle charging and heat pump installations in domestic premises, there

would be benefits in a procedure which enabled electricity network operators to be notified of

such installations (a broadly equivalent procedure already exists in respect of micro-generation

installations). While this might be regarded as ‘private’ data the requirement would not

necessarily extend to monitoring individual consumption data; it would generally be sufficient

for network operators to know that such installations were planned (or had been completed) so

that they could pay more attention to monitoring aggregated demand and voltage profiles on

the circuits affected in order to ensure continued operation within design limits.

It follows from the above that any missing data sets (of which there might be many if consumers

were permitted to opt-out) would compromise the effectiveness of this approach. The result

would be that network operators would have to invest in network monitoring systems which

would result in additional costs ultimately borne by consumers. Even with all this effort we may

still not be able to obtain the level of granularity of data that would deliver useful information to

network operators in the form of aggregation of consumption, real/reactive energy data and

smart meter-derived voltage measurements.

Page 7: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

16. If network operators’ plans for aggregation have not yet been submitted or approved, do you agree that the proposed framework for supplier access to data should also apply to network operators? Would any alternative approach be more effective?

Arrangements need to recognise the activities, obligations, regulatory frameworks and hence

privacy concerns for networks are very different to those for suppliers, as are data requirements.

Data requirements between electricity and gas can also vary e.g. half hourly data is of limited

additional value to a gas network operator but is of significant value to an electricity network

operator. Data access arrangements should be geared towards the user’s role, its needs, the

regulatory framework, the protection this provides and specific risks or concerns. As such we

believe it is appropriate for parties to have different access arrangements.

While the proposed mechanism provides network operators access to data until such time as

plans are submitted and approved, we are concerned they are very onerous for suppliers and

networks and likely to be impractical. Networks will be completely reliant on suppliers for

procuring access rights and data in a timely and accurate manner. Arrangements also raise

additional issues associated with data privacy and protection where the supplier has access to

data that would not otherwise be available to it or other suppliers. This adds another layer of

complexity in relation to the network / supplier / customer relationship and processes and

procedures to manage arrangements. As customers will have the ability to opt-in and out we are

also concerned the value of information collected could be diminished where an incomplete

picture of network use and dynamics is provided.

Energy Networks Association (ENA) on behalf of both electricity and gas network operators has

previously commissioned (and shared with DECC) a Privacy Impact Assessment which provides a

generic approach to ensuring security and privacy of sensitive consumer data. This will be used

to develop more detailed plans for aggregation and secure disposal of half-hourly consumption

data, including options for such aggregation to be undertaken by parties undertaking DCC

related services (such as the data gateway provider) rather than network operators. It is the

intention of ENA and its members to present such plans for approval but we are keen that the

focus should be on data access arrangements being geared towards the user’s role, its needs, the

regulatory framework, the protection this provides and specific risks or concerns.

17. Do you agree with the proposed approach to implementation of requirements relating to network operator access to data? What would be the practical implications of the proposed approach to implementation, and how could any problems be overcome?

Access to data via Suppliers when plans for data aggregation have not been approved will be

difficult to manage given the many different Suppliers that could potentially be required to

access data on behalf of network operators even for relatively small enquiries. It is likely that

such an approach will significantly increase the cost of data, lead to delays and may result in few

Customers agreeing to their data being used.

We also note that while it is proposed that “suppliers should be responsible for procuring the

right to access such data” it is not clear what the framework would be or what obligations or

incentives would exist to ensure suppliers do this in an efficient and timely manner. We believe

a robust yet proportionate industry framework is required. This is something that could be

addressed through CERG OI via Service Level Agreements and Codes of Practice.

Page 8: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

It is important to also recognise that as we move towards smarter networks, network operators

may wish to, or need to, develop direct relationships with consumers in order to meet future

network challenges, particularly in electricity where Demand Side Response is seen as a key tool

in the framework for delivery smarter grids. This is something that has been recognised at

European level e.g. in the recent ENTSOe consultation on the Demand Connection Code where it

is envisaged demand could provide essential network services and supports as the volume of

renewable generation increases. It is also being discussed with DECC and Ofgem under the

Smart Grid Forum and associated working groups. Arrangements should not preclude such

relationships and services developing where they are the most efficient and effective solution.

18. Do you agree that the licence conditions as drafted (including the proposed amendment to supply licence condition 22) would effectively implement the proposed policy approach to network operator access to data? Do any specific areas of the draft licence conditions need amendment or clarification?

From a networks perspective, some of our members are concerned as to why the Licence

Conditions apply to domestic supply only. In their view this leaves a significant gap from a

network perspective as we will not have a complete picture e.g. for non-domestic customers or

any other premises that are not connected to the DCC. This could significantly undermine

network benefits.

Paragraph 1

There may be a need to define a Domestic Premise and Smart Metering System. We would

expect the same conditions to apply to meters installed in the Non-Domestic sector where the

data was available via the DCC.

The term ‘quantity of electricity’ could be interpreted to include real and reactive electricity

consumed. It would be helpful to clarify that the data set being considered is limited to real

power imported into a premises.

Paragraph 4

This should refer to relevant defined terms in the gas and electricity transportation licences e.g.

“transportation business”, “Distribution Business” and “permitted purpose” as currently used.

Paragraph 7

A network operator’s obligations and responsibilities in relation to theft are in transportation or

conveyance i.e. upstream of the Emergency Control Valve (ECV) in gas and cut-off in electricity.

As such this paragraph should be in relation to a suspected occurrence of theft or abstraction

upstream of these points, not at the relevant premises as currently specified.

Paragraph 9

9 (a) (i) should apply in respect of one or more periods of less than one day.

9(b) clarification is required in terms of what is intended by “explicit consent”.

Paragraph 10

In order to deliver full network benefits and maximise use of metering system functionality as

currently specified in SMETS1, this should provide for data for a period of less than one month

Page 9: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

i.e. daily, half hourly or 6 minute to be provided automatically where plans have been submitted

and approved.

It was not our understanding that this mechanism would provide automatic access on a trial

basis only. To deliver network benefits, particularly associated with economic and efficient

development and operation of the network and the development of smarter networks we

envisage plans would be submitted for data access on a long term or enduring basis, not just a

trial basis.

Further clarification should also be provided in terms of the approval process and enduring

governance arrangements.

We do not agree as suggested under paragraph 10 (c) that after having plans approved the

licensee should be required to give the customer advance notice or that the customer should be

able to opt out of providing data. If a robust case for access and use has been presented to the

Secretary of State or Authority and approved the obligation to then advise the customer and

allow the customer to object undermines the process and potential network benefits. This is

also inconsistent with the description set out in the consultation document.

Paragraph 11

From a network operator perspective, it is important to distinguish between the functions of a

network operator, the market in which they operate and the regulatory framework, relative to

that of a supplier. As such the focus of this paragraph should be on data security and protection

e.g. ensuring data is used for a permitted purpose. It is also important to recognise that in some

cases, to deliver network benefits data will be required on a location or site specific basis. While

this could allow the identity of the customer to be determined it should not create data security

or abuse issues. Providing data is adequately controlled and access protected, it should not be a

concern. This also needs to be considered in relation to wider network licence obligations

relating to business separation, ring fencing, protection of information and obligations to ensure

the licensee manages and operates its business so as not to restrict, prevent or distort

competition or provide any party with an unfair commercial advantage or preferential or

discriminatory arrangements. Timescales for the Secretary of State or the Authority to provide

consent (or rejection) should be specified.

We think that the definition of Gas Consumption Data could usefully be expanded, it currently

reads: “in respect of a relevant premises, the quantity of gas measured by the Gas Meter as

having been supplied to the relevant premises”. We suggest that this could usefully include a

reference to consumption for periods of less than one month and consumption for periods of

less than one day. The definition of Gas Consumption Data could then read: “in respect of a

relevant premises, the quantity of gas measured by the Gas Meter as having been supplied to

the relevant premises including data relating to periods of less than one month and less then one

day”.

19. Is there a need for any consequential changes to existing licence conditions or codes to ensure that the proposed requirements on network operators work as intended?

We are not aware of any further changes required to the licence as a direct result of these

proposals but we believe significant change will be required to industry codes and related

Page 10: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

documents to recognise and make full use of new metering systems and data. It is possible that

some further changes may be required to licences as a result of this work.

The reference to the provision to Metering Data in the electricity codes is the data required to

allow the Electricity Distributor to calculate and bill for Distribution Use of System (DUoS)

charges. We do not believe that these references need to change but it is essential that any

proposed changes in this area do not restrict Electricity Distributors calculating DUoS charges.

20. Do you agree that technical data (such as electricity quality and voltage readings) which does not show energy consumption data should be outside the scope of the Government’s data access and privacy framework?

The ENA Privacy Impact Assessment referred to under Q16 above sets out the rationale for

determining the sensitivity of technical data (such as electricity quality and voltage readings).

Such data provides no indication of individual consumer energy consumption patterns and

should not therefore give rise to legitimate concerns over data privacy (indeed quality and

voltage related measurements are essentially network technical data) and therefore should be

outside the scope of the government’s data access and privacy framework.

As set out above, we have concerns that where parties are not required to use the DCC this will

leave a significant gap in data available to the transporter and potentially reduce network

benefits.

21. Do you agree with the proposal to require third parties to take steps to verify that the request for third party services has come from the individual living in the premises in question?

We agree that it will be important to ensure that third parties take reasonable steps to verify

that requests for services emanate from the individual(s) living in the premises in question.

22. Do you agree that the Customer Identification Number (CIN) process would enable third parties

adequately to demonstrate verification of the individual consumer? Which of the two CIN models described is preferable? Would any alternative approach be more effective?

The CIN process would adequately confirm access to the property, but not necessarily the bill

payer. It is possible to conceive of a fraud mechanism whereby someone other than the bill

payer has access to the meter and is able to set up data access.

Furthermore, the process where the CIN is sent only to the property, and not to the third party,

is preferred because it provides a stronger control.

23. Do you agree with the proposal to require third parties wishing to access data via the DCC to self-certify that where it is required, customer consent has been properly obtained?

Where a third party has followed a strong CIN process, the approach suggested for self-

certification would seem adequate.

Any CIN process or equivalent measure would need to be adequately strong because the ability

to detect unauthorised access is very limited.

Page 11: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

24. Do you agree with the proposal to require third parties to provide annual reminders to customers from whom they are collecting data on an ongoing basis?

The proposal is consistent with that proposed for suppliers in respect of Q9 above and we

believe is therefore appropriate. However, there needs to be a clear communication with

Customers so that they understand that their data may well be available to third parties for up to

12 months before they are informed.

25. Do you agree with the proposed use of the Smart Energy Code to set out requirements relating to third party access to data?

We agree that the Smart Energy Code is the appropriate mechanism for non-licensed entities

(who would necessarily be signatories to the SEC) to obtain access to data via the DCC.

26. Do you have any comments on the proposed option of the SEC Panel arranging an independent audit function to check third party compliance with data access requirements? Would any alternative approach be more effective?

The SEC panel should arrange the audits and should not be required to provide notice to the

third party in question of the audit.

Customers should also have a direct ability to notify the panel of any complaints they have in

regard to non-consensual access to third party data.

Furthermore there should be a process to actively identify unauthorised third party access to

data, given the risk of up to 12 months of Customer data being accessed before the Customer

detects it.

27. Is there a need for any specific arrangements to enable non-domestic customers to allow third parties to access their data? Should such arrangements apply only to opted-in smart meters or more widely?

For non-domestic smart meters that are opted-in to the DCC we would advocate a similar

approach to that proposed for the domestic sector (subject to our relevant comments above).

For opted-out smart (or advanced) meters the general presumption would be that these

consumers would be larger than profile 3 or 4 consumers and/or part of a larger group. As such,

it might be unnecessary to provide an equivalent degree of protection to that for domestic

consumers or micro-businesses in respect of audits of third parties. However, we believe it is

reasonable for a consumer to require a supplier opting-out of DCC to make available information

to third parties when requested to do so.

28. What would be the advantages and disadvantages of applying the data access framework proposed for domestic customers equally to the non-domestic sector? Should this apply only to opted-in smart meters or more widely?

We believe that a more permissive framework is possible for larger non-domestic consumers but

that an equivalent framework to that applied to domestic consumers should apply to micro-

businesses (currently profile 3 or 4 consumers).

Page 12: Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of ... · Smart Metering Implementation Programme Department of Energy & Climate Change, 3 Whitehall Place, London, SW1A 2AW Tel:

It should be understood that the non-domestic sector will have very different consumption

behaviour, and so the need to model some activity differently will need to be considered.

Furthermore, the non-domestic sector may be a good opportunity for testing, trialling and

development.

29. Is there a need for any additional obligations to ensure that network operators can gain access to non-domestic customers’ energy consumption data and other data, even where meters are opted out of the DCC, or in the case of advanced meters? What would be the practical challenges in facilitating such access?

Meters serving the non-domestic sector have the potential to provide important data to enable

network operators (in particular electricity network operators) to perform their statutory and

regulatory duties in respect of developing and maintaining efficient, co-ordinated and

economical systems for the distribution of electricity (and gas). This is particularly important

given that such consumers will tend to have higher levels of (especially) weekday / daytime

consumption which might significantly impact load shape and contribute to the maximum

demand experienced by a given network. However, it is difficult to see how this can be managed

economically given the many different Suppliers that may be involved in providing such data.

Any obligations regarding provision of data to network operators where meters are opted out of

the DCC should consider the cost for the provision of data. If the arrangements are complex, the

cost of data excessive and access to data timescales are long it is likely that network operators

will be deterred from using such data.

As with domestic data, half-hourly consumption data would be aggregated in order to provide

the required network demand profiles.

For opted-out smart and advanced meters (the latter depending on the available functionality)

there might be opportunities for such data to be provided other than via suppliers providing

basic information. For example it might be feasible for the entity providing a DCC gateway

service to also provide data relating to opted-out smart meters which, again, would obviate the

need for electricity network operators to hold, even temporarily, half-hourly consumption data.

30. Is there a need for any form of information obligation on suppliers to ensure that non-domestic consumers are aware of the potential for particular choices to limit their ability to access their own data or share this with third parties?

Some of our members believe that it is will be important for non-domestic consumers to be

aware of whether their supplier has opted-in or opted-out of DCC in respect of their metered

electricity consumption and any limitations this might place on accessibility by third parties to

their data should they wish third parties to have such access. They believe there is potential for

new products to be offered to non-domestic consumers such as more dynamic time-of-use

tariffs and demand-side response options which might result in either lower energy bills or

rewards for provision of ancillary services.

However, other members believe that the service offered to non-domestic Customers should not

be governed and Suppliers must be able to develop relationships with non-domestic Customers

as they see fit. Any concerns surrounding smaller non-domestic Customers will be covered by

the Data Protection Act, particularly regarding sole traders for example.