 so that we can contribute in towards that net zero and the network activities defined in open networks underpins all of that from an electricity network perspective. So that is a clear link back for us and we'll continue to communicate how we're contributing towards that net zero target. If you move on to the next slide please, Sana. Thank you. One of the new things that we've published this year with our work plan is the flexibility roadmap. And this is a tool to link our development work back to the flexibility commitments and next steps that we published previously around flexibility. So we had a high level flexibility commitment from the CEOs of the network organizations that we broke down into six next steps for making emergency flexibility, emerging flexibility markets work in practice. And what we've done in this flexibility roadmap is we've shown how those six next steps map through into the work we're doing and we've provided a cross-reference for that. And why we think this is useful is we're not just looking at the 2021 work plan here, we're also looking beyond that. And it gives us some traceability back to those flexibility commitments to show what we're doing. As part of it, we've also included a set of stakeholder issues that we've consolidated from our consultation responses from you all, from key issues that have been raised through our stakeholder engagement activities to again show you that traceability that what we're doing is contributing towards resolving your issues. So it's, thankfully a use representation and providing the traceability back to the sources of our work. So if you move on to the next slide, please Salam. Just last slide for me. As Farina said, we launched the consultation on January the 18th. The closing date is the first. And we've asked for any comments in any format to make it as easy as possible for you all to respond back to our consultation. If you only have a couple of hours to look at it and provide us with half a dozen bullets, we'd rather have that than no response at all. Obviously we welcome any detailed responses from anyone. So there are some links in the slide deck. Hopefully we'll see in the consultation document, the work plan and the flexibility roadmap. So all of the detail for this can be found on our website. And again, we'll share that in our wrap up slide. So that's just a short intro from Farina and myself. And then the bulk of the content is from the work stream leads. And I will hand over to Steve Atkins to cover work stream three from here. If you can move on to those slides Salam. Thank you. That's great. Good morning. I'm Steve Atkins. I'm a DSO transition manager at Scottish and Southern electricity networks for those who don't know me. And I lead on work stream three DSO transition. And this work stream has been in place right from the start of open networks and had responsibility for the DSO roadmap, if you like, how we were going to move towards to DSO. And it started really way back in terms of DSO, this kind of rather nebulous entity that was kind of announced in five years ago in the smart systems and flexibility plan from Ofgem and Bayes, a joint paper, to a situation now where we have got a great deal of clarity about the DSO functions that Ofgem expects DNOs to perform in ED2. And so the journey so far reflects that. So at the start, in 2017, we spent some time looking at DSO definition and functions and what exactly a DSO was. We looked at some of the commercial principles that were affected by that because obviously flexibility was going to be a key part of that and how we treated flexibility in DSO services. But right at the outset and something that's remained in place right the way through is this principle of neutral market facilitation and making sure that as DNOs as networks that we facilitate this market in a neutral manner and that's been the biding theme right through the thread of this work stream. So then in 2018, we started to flash around DSO in more detail. We used a smart grid architecture model to look at some of the different worlds that might transpire with DSO and the roles and attributes of players in the industry and how that might be impacted. Who would have responsibilities for DSO functions and model all of that with consultation? And then in 2019, we used Boringa to do an independent assessment of those pathways and those responsibilities and it settles on the most cost effective approach being a short term approach of stronger coordination between DNOs and ESO that allowed for future changes to roles and responsibilities in the future as we developed our understanding of the market to develop the most effective model and that's what we've been operating now and that's pretty much reflected in some of the baseline expectations from off-gem in ED2. So then over the last couple of years, we focused on what are the activities that we need to implement as networks in order to transition to this environment where DNOs are performing some of the DSO functions that they're facilitating the markets operating in a whole system manner. So if we just move to the next slide. So this gives you a flavor of that and what we're trying to do is set out a clear plan that gives visibility of these actions as well as those key decisions that are gonna be needed to progress the development and implementation of a least regrets pathway to DNOs performing these DSO functions. So we've got a number of, got a couple of key products within this work stream. Firstly, the DSO implementation plan that some of you may well have already viewed looking at all of the functions and mapping the activities that sit under those functions so that you can see when those are planned to be implemented or where they're already operational in some cases and you're able to drill down to see the detail in all of the work streams and not just work streams, some of the innovation projects as well that support this move to DNOs performing DSO functions. At the same time, we're aware that as we transition to that, there's also the potential for conflicts of interests or unintended consequences. So a key part of that work stream as well is to monitor those as they're flagged by stakeholders or internally by networks to make sure we're aware of those conflicts of interests and make sure that we're planning mitigation in order to ensure they don't come to pass. And some of those responsibilities will sit with DNOs and ESO. Some of those responsibilities may sit with off-gem or bays and some may sit with stakeholders themselves but it's around capturing those and ensuring this work to mitigate those. In addition to those two areas, the work stream also takes responsibility for horizon scanning as well. So making sure that we're aware of some of the kind of key policy decisions that arise and making sure as open networks that we're in a place that we can accommodate those and we've got plans to implement them or react to them. And that might be papers that come out from off-gem or bays and it could be industry innovations as well. If we take to the final slide, Tana. So just to give you some of the key milestones for this year, we published the first distribution system operation implementation plan last year. We're in our first iteration of that at the moment. So we're revisiting that plan to update it, to reflect the work that's going to be carried out in 2021, reflect some of the ED2 work that's ongoing as well. We've made some accessibility improvements based on stakeholder feedback because it was part of the plan where it was a bit clunky so we've improved that and we've enabled data extraction as well for those of you that want to download some of those areas so you can look at them in more detail. Towards the end of this year, third quarter, September, October, we're also going to do the second iteration which will increase the granularity and give company level data as well for more transparency. So you can see DNO by DNO where they're progressing to performing these DSO functions. And as well as that, what we want to do in December is have an independent audit as well to review and challenge activity to make sure that that plan's robust. So it will actually, and we'll publish the findings of that independent audit, but it will be there to review and challenge activity to make sure things are progressing and that the plan isn't aspirational but a good reflection of the progress that DNOs are making. And at the same time as that, we'll carry on maintaining, publishing the conflicts of interest and unintended consequences and update that as some of those things are rectified. Okay, thank you. I'm going to hand over to, I think we're extreme four now. Great, thanks, Steve. Good morning, everyone. My name's Mark Herring. I am the lead of the CodeChange function that's National Good to Electricity System Operator. And I'm also the chair of work stream four here in Open Networks. So work stream four is the whole system work through. And the first thing to say is that the work stream is focused on unlocking consumer benefit through optimizing network investments and operations across gas and electricity networks. So different to other work streams in Open Networks we're taking a step back and increasing the scope of the lens we're applying and looking across both fuels and seeing where we can unlock benefits for consumers by doing that. There's also something to note around the scope and saying like Farina said earlier, the focus is on taking a learning by doing approach. So we're really focused on honing and delivering tangible change to the processes that exist today and finding where there's potential for unlocking benefits through taking that whole system approach. Now work stream four has a dual governance structure. So we report into Open Networks on the electricity side but we also get a lot of benefit through also taking into the ENA gas goes green program and getting a lot of benefit from joining those two fuels and those two perspectives together at a governance level as well. And before I go into the detail of the products it's worth noting that this is a younger work stream than the others in Open Networks. So we're coming into our third year now for work stream four and we're looking to actually deliver some tangible new processes into the day to day operations of network companies and their stakeholders this year. So it's really exciting I think. So we've got three products and I'll set three to them on the next slide but each one I'll go through the focus of what the product is for this year, touch on the timeline and then also draw out any particular areas where we think there might be a particular value for engaging with stakeholders such as yourselves because we're really keen to get as many different perspectives feeding into the work that we're doing as possible. So starting I can see we've changed slides. So on products one at the top here products one the whole system CBA. So this is looking for efficiencies to unlock consumer benefit for network companies when they're making their planning and investment decisions using the processes they do today. It's considering impacts across the whole energy system and to do that we've developed a new CBA methodology. This methodology is looking to be included in the coordinated adjustment mechanism as part of the 302 price control period and it's also expected to be used for network innovation allowance, innovation projects, any of those where they expect there might be whole system benefits. We were also very open to other applications of this new methodology. It's fair to say that last year there's a lot of time and effort and some really, really impressive engagement from all corners on making sure that this methodology captured everything it needed to. So this year, as you can see on the slide, we're focusing on incorporating and feeding this methodology, making it dovetail with the CAM consultation in preparation for the 1st of April kickoff for that. And then the other focus is on really testing it. So getting some really good examples and case studies, finding them out there and running them through this CBA methodology and finding how we can improve it because it is a new tool. And so as you can see on the slide, from April onwards, we're looking to really test that and build in the stakeholder feedback that we get from those case studies and later in the year refine it further and embed it with appropriate governance. So I think the big ask on product one is for people please get in touch, raise your hand if you have any useful case studies that you'd love to feed through the CBA and give it a test drive really. If we move on to product three, so this is coordinated gathering of regional data. This is focused on the data that's gathered by network companies from local authorities and elsewhere that they use to inform their long-term investment planning. So you can think future energy scenarios, DFESs, long-term development statements, those sorts of processes. And product three is focused on ensuring the quality and the consistency of this data across regions, across time and across gas and electricity network companies to make sure that we're all getting the same quality and consistency of data into those processes so that when we do the analysis on a whole system basis, we're getting the best outcomes and outputs we can from that analysis. So in 2021, we've got two parallel work streams and those are progressing what we're looking at in 2020. You can think of them as sort of a short-term or immediate approach looking at how the network companies can coordinate amongst themselves and increase and ensure the quality and consistency of that data. And then a parallel work stream working closely in partnership with local authorities to understand and work with them to understand how they might sort of adopt a common and consistent methodology and how we can embed that in the longer term. But we're quite conscious that as that group of stakeholders grows and increases, the speed of change necessarily isn't as fast as the first one, which is why we're taking that parallel approach. And I think the big ask from stakeholders on this one is how we can best utilizes some really engaged regional stakeholders that we've got in local authorities. And last level product four, so investment planning. This is working closely with local authorities on their long-term development plans and finding optimal energy investment decisions across both fuels. And so this is focusing this year on getting really robust feedback and testing with local authorities. What the best model for developing and embedding an optionaring service for local authorities provided by energy networks could be. And as you can see on the slide, we're looking for a go-no-go decision around May or so, where we will have completed that full engagement with local authorities and looking to implement and embed that process. So the big ask from stakeholders on product four is any advice or any experience you've had and how we best pursue that engagement. So we've got a fair amount of expertise in the product team, which is great, but it's always great to get more perspectives in on that. So that's the whirlwind tour of workstream four for today. I'm going to stop there and hand over to the next presenter. Thank you very much. Sorry, Mark, just before you head off, we do realize you have to go to another meeting, but there is one question here that might be most relevant to you. So the question is from Paul Jarman and it's some question says, if off-chem do require further separation of ESO from national grid ET on the basis of conflict of interest, will ESO still be able to participate in the ENA? I would have to defer to some colleagues on that one. Sorry, that's probably a bit outside the scope of workstream four, but it's definitely a good question, but I can't say I'm close to the answer, apologies. Thanks for that, Mark. Thanks very much, and thanks everybody. Okay, and we have workstream one A next. Over to you, Sotiris. Thanks, Valina. Thanks, Mark. So I am Sotiris from UK Power Networks. I head off this Margaret's team at UKPN and I've also been leading the flexibility workstream. So the flexibility workstreamization mentioned has nine products and a significant volume of work this year. The work that I'm going to present reflects either off-chem base or stakeholder feedback, and we had to significantly reframe and add work and add products to reflect the stakeholder feedback. So it is important that you give us your feedback. It is important that you give us your questions. So please throw questions of the chat as we go along and please give us your feedback because the whole open networks process is based on stakeholder feedback. And when we get the feedback, we essentially fit it into our work in terms of addressing the issues that are coming back either directly into the project or directly through off-chem and base. Key themes for this year's flexibility services workstream is transparency, standardized processes on flexibility procurement across transmission distribution. We are looking to enable new markets and platforms and a number of the products working on processes that hopefully standardize and allow those markets and platforms to flourish. And then finally, we got a lot of feedback on last year's bid-year consultation on flexible connections, flexible connection contracts and the concern that flexible connections might inhibit or prevent or affect the growth of flexibility markets. So we have three products that are looking to clarify some of those issues and also set out options of how we take those forward. Sana, can we go to the next slide? I'm gonna do a quick run-through of the products over the next 10 minutes or so. And please do also refer to the PID, there's more detail or as I said, five questions in the chat. So the first product is the Common Evaluation Methodology on this list of high priority products and it's not that the other three products are a lower priority, but there's so much work that we have to kind of set out which ones are the more important ones. So Common Evaluation Methodology, as of April 21, all distribution companies are gonna be using a common tool that we developed last year with Baring and we consulted on to evaluate the flexibility and they determine the value of flexibility that they are using the flexibility procurement. Now that tool has been developed and is live. Two things are happening this year as part of the product. One, we're putting the tool under open governance. So we are gonna be setting up in the first quarter of this year a user group that is not gonna be just DNA companies, it's gonna be the wider industry to govern the tool and get input from the market in terms of what are the next steps. So that's one thing. The second thing is to look at two areas where we got feedback last year that are areas for further work, one is optionality and the other is carbon. How can we take into account a carbon intensity into the valuation of the cost-benefit analysis? So this is the scope of work for the common evaluation methodology. The second product is around the common contract for flexibility services. Now, all distribution companies work together over the last 18 months or so to develop a set of common terms and conditions that apply when distribution companies contract for flexibility with flexibility service providers. The focus of this year is how we take that contract into a more aligned set of terms and conditions with some of the ESO contracts. So the focus of the work we're doing currently a piece of work around which products we're gonna take forward, which contracts we're gonna take forward and how we're gonna go into this evolving if you like development of commonality but really the main deliverable is in August we are planning to consult on the version one point of the contract that is gonna have that alignment between some of the ESO products and the DSO to flexible service providers existing contract that we developed here. The third product, which is principles to review legacy active net management contracts. This is a new one and it's in response to the feedback we got last year. So this is all about looking at the existing flexible connections contracts in place, understanding the various provisions of how you exit, how you might be offered and an alternative solution, developing some consistency, but also looking at kind of options of how we can improve in this area. The fourth one is non-DSO services. Non-DSO services this year is gonna look at a couple of things. The first is gonna be some work that often has to look at as part of the kind of wider significant code review. It's not work that has been taken through the main code review. It's work around a trading of capacity of network capacity. And really there we are trying to work up and we're doing a set of market simulations and then trials and trying to understand whether the trading of capacity can work and what would be the principles behind it. Apportioning cartelment risk is the second of the active net management of flexible connections products and it's gonna develop a set of options around how the risk of cartelment might be more equitably spread across connections and users and the distribution companies under the current charging arrangements the cartelment risk sits with the connect team. We are gonna look at what other options might exist. I mean, as you appreciate, we cannot determine the option but we are doing this development work, look at the options and then put them back out to the market in terms of consulting but most importantly going back to optimum base who at the end of the day are the decision makers on this. And then the final product on this list is cartelment information. And then again, we had feedback from market participants that the cartelment information was provided can't be improved, it might not be consistent. It's something we looked three years ago or so but we wanna go back and look again and make sure that this time we also build consistency around how the flexible connections information is provided in line with also the flexibility procurement and flexibility markets work that the DNOs are currently doing. So these are the high priority products. Sanna, we can move to the next slide. And then the lower priority products is the procurement process we've developed a standardized DNO procurement timeline in terms to flexibility that tend to say year and how they're gonna run. So we've done all this work but this year we're gonna look more of how we can build more consistency between the DNO processes and the ESO. Privacy rules for service conflicts. It's a product that is starting in June and is gonna look at essentially setting out rules and principles of how we're gonna resolve conflicts when we operate the system given now that there's a number of other flexible connections contracts or flexibility contracts that the DNOs have and of course the national products that the ESO is procuring. So how we're gonna resolve those building on previous work we've done. And then finally last but not definitely not least is the baselining work. Baselining is it is a challenging topic. We've done the previous year work in terms of developing common options for a methodology. This year we're gonna be building a tool that can help us evaluate kind of and calculate baselining in a consistent way across the DNO flexibility work. So onto the last slide, the timeline and you can have a closer look at this. It's gonna be a busy year. We've tried to stagger some of the work but I think in reality there's gonna be most of these products are in development throughout the year. The couple of things to flag is that we are gonna have a mid-year consultation as we did last year. So instead of consulting, we're gonna consult the specific products as needed but we will do a package of all the progress we've done on the first half of the year, consulting in July and get the feedback in September to inform next steps. So that's the one thing to flag and then the other is public consultation on the work on the contracts in September. And as always with a flexibility work stream, we really value feedback on an ongoing basis. We do have the advisory panel but if there's anything else that you think we should be looking at or should know about, of course, I just want the consultation but also don't just reach out to us and we can be getting feedback on this work as we go. And also if you wanna contribute in some of the work again, that's something that we are open to. So I think that's all I wanted to say but Ina, you are good to go on to the Q&A. Thank you. Thank you, Satiris. So we'll now open up for Q&A. We've got three questions already but I'll ask the other people to share their comments in the chat. So the first question that we had was from Helen. It's about our conflicts of interest work. So Helen's question is whether or not this conflicts of interest register can be accessed by anyone and whether the data in it can be logged by anyone or is it only for stakeholders or only for networks to log? Steve, I might ask you to answer that one. Yeah, the conflicts of interest. There's a link to it on the ENA's open network site. So if you go into the open networks page and scroll down, each of the work streams has its own slot with a little plus mark by the side of it. If you open up that plus mark for distribution system operation transition, there's a link within the text there to the conflicts of interest and unintended consequences. The, in terms of populating that, so that's an Excel spreadsheet that you can download but in terms of populating that, I'll put in questions to that. Most of them come through the advisory group that we have which is this body of stakeholders that inputs to our work. But there's no restrictions on anybody flagging conflicts of interest and we work with them within the group with off-gem and beige to validate them and add them to the log. Thanks for that, Steve. So we'd be happy to share a link to where we've got the register published and I think just to reiterate what Steve said, we are very much open to stakeholder feedback on that. So anyone can provide us feedback on that and we'd be happy to take that forward. So you can send feedback to us on opennetworks at energynetworks.org. The next question that we have is about how people can have more detailed discussions on different work streams or more specific product. So I think so similar to the previous answer. So if you can drop us an email on opennetworks.energynetworks.org, we can take any questions and then kind of put you in touch with the relevant people from there. We've got a few more questions coming in. So we've got a question from Alessandra. So in addition to the user group mentioned for Workstream 1A Product 1, which is the common evaluation methodology, what other engagement fora can we expect for this year? So I think Satira's, this question is on the common evaluation model. So maybe you can answer that one. Yeah, I think there's also, I don't know Jason, you wanna, or Farina, you wanna say a bit more on the wider engagement program. I think on the common evaluation framework, we're gonna set up the user group really to drive forward the input on the common evaluation methodology. And as I said, we have a set consultation in mid-year in terms of consulting on the progress that we've done. And we also have a set consultation in September on the common contract. And we are also gonna be getting feedback as we go in progress as part of the advisory group as well, which happens almost, I think, on a monthly basis or a six-week basis. And I think just to build on that, so the user group will have stakeholder representatives, so it wouldn't only just be a networks group, it will be open for participation from the industry. If we, just to add onto that, if we look a bit more widely, we are looking at whether there are other opportunities for focus groups or ways to engage stakeholders or for some of our products. And you'll see that in the detail in the PID. And I think, Alessandra and everybody, if you review through the PID and you think there are particular products that we would benefit from yours or wider stakeholder input through focus groups or additional work on top of the advisory group, we'd really welcome that as detailed feedback. So if there are particular elements of what Ceteris has presented, particularly maybe on flexibility, where you think we would benefit from focus groups or more targeted stakeholder engagement, we'd welcome that as part of your feedback on the PID. Because we are looking at, would it be beneficial to have focus groups and additional input outside the advisory group? But we are very dependent on the advisory group as a source of input and development input into our work. Jason, just to add to this, and you might have covered on your opening intro, but one of the other pieces of work that is being done is looking at enduring governance arrangement for some products. We recognize that we've developed some products, such as the common evaluation tool, such as the common contract, such as the baseline verification tool, such as some of the work on investment planning that needs wider industry input in order to be governed in a transparent manner. So there is a piece of work, there is a product that is looking at the options on that over the first part of the year. Yeah, and we've started looking at that and looking at our options. We're in sort of options analysis phase for that as well. So again, if there are particular models you think work well for this type of open governance, we'd appreciate any feedback for that. So in the program management section of the PID at the beginning, it's not part of the work streams, it's something we're doing as the central program. There is that open governance project as Turris has highlighted. And we'd welcome anything on what works well and what doesn't work well with other open governance arrangements at the moment. So we can learn from that. We're looking at our options and what exists at the moment. Okay, the next question we have is from Kate and it's regarding our website. So the question is whether there are any plans to update the website so people can kind of see the broad range of deliverables that we have. So we have had that feedback through a number of forums and within the next couple of weeks we will be making some changes to our website. So we will have a page where we will have all of our deliverables from open networks. It will be like basically like a library where you can search through all the work that we've done over the years. There are no further questions at this point. Just a reminder to everyone, we will be sharing the slides and the recording from today. It's good to see some positive feedback on our plans for the website. All right, so we'll now move on to workstream 1B. Hand over to you, Ian. Good morning, my name's Ian Povey. I'm the distribution system operator, technology and data manager for electricity Northwest. I'm also the lead for workstream 1B which is looking at whole system electricity system planning and transmission and distribution data exchange. I think you can see the main focus there on the slide. It's about enhancing the way that T&D work in the industry, improving data exchange, but also that's still with a view to improving the efficient design across the whole of the electricity network. And what is vital to that is stakeholder input. And therefore we're looking at improving visibility of what's on our network now and providing a much more enhanced data provision for stakeholders so that they can see going forward what opportunities there may be for them. So if we move on to the next slide please, Senator. There are actually eight products in workstream 1B. You'll see on the slide there five listed. There are a further three in addition to those five, which this year are more of a watching brief. I'll update you on those at the end of this brief whistle stop tour. But I'll focus from the time being on these five products. The first one is product two, which is the future energy scenarios and central scenario. This builds on work from the previous two years and open networks where we've developed building blocks for distribution phase and in the phase. So there is a common way of building up what these scenarios are. And so there are four basic scenarios and you build them up with the building blocks. And they may vary the actual quantity that is involved in those building blocks by DNO with what stakeholders can see across all DNOs and national grid and consistency in how our forecasts are put together. But what is important is that the forecast give you a range of different views on the world going forward. But we obviously need to have something that we can use for planning the network and identifying areas where we need to enhance either by reinforcement or by contracting with flexibility so to enhance our network to make sure that we can provide the efficient network that we're all used to. So what this product is looking at this year is developing a central scenario, which will be then used commonly across different reporting in terms of the long-term development statement and network development plan, which I'll talk about in a moment in terms of data exchange between DNOs and national grid. So that's the focus of this product in the year going forward. Product five, network development process. DNOs have recently had a change to their license where they're being required to publish network development plans from the year 2022 onwards. This product did start work last year and it's building on the work that's only happened in terms of how we identify capacity shortfalls on the network and then signposting those. So what's gonna happen this year is we're going to develop a capacity report that will publish around about June of this year. And that will be a precursor to a form of capacity report and then how we need to develop the network in future years. So we'll publish the report and then we'll develop a form of statement for the network development plan, which will come in 2022. The next three products are all new products to open networks. And so if I pick the first one up, the operational visibility. Osgem, I've given a clear steer that they want to see enhanced monitoring and be on the network. So this product is looking to define needs cases for that monitoring and then develop a framework, a CBA framework, which will then justify the expenditure for that. So that's product six. Product seven is, again, it's looking at operational data and we're talking about things like network configuration. We're talking about outage planning of data, constraint of data, both in the near term, I want to say near term history and near term future requirements of that. So that will be looking at developing the information for that and the supporting data that we will need to be sharing. The final one really is a scoping activity, looking at technology business management. This is more of an IT focus than the other products that we're looking at this year. TVM is a framework which really gives visibility and understanding of the relationship between primary business processes and the level of IT investment. So we're looking at this to say, what's happening in the industry at the moment and can we adopt the TVM methodology as a way of getting consistency across all the NOs? As I say, it's really a scoping exercise before we really understand what future work we can do on this. So moving on to my final slide, so picking up on P2 and P5, you can see there is actually a link between P2, the activities of P2 and P5 because the central scenario for that's been developed from the P2 will feed into the work of P5 in terms of being able to use that central scenario to then develop a capacity signposting report and the basis for the network development plans that we'll need to publish from 2020 onwards. You can see in there and you can take your leisure there and you can see the work and the timescales for P6, 7, and 8 and point out that going back to P2 and P5 that we'll be seeking stakeholder engagement and feedback on those two to ensure that the reports that we're generating will be of use to our stakeholders in a more holistic fashion. P1, on the box right at the very bottom and what I mentioned earlier, there are three other products which are now more of a monitoring process. P1 last year looked at the investment planning and relied very heavily on the work of the, not the reason one, sorry, there with me, on the, sorry, on the Pathfinder projects that National Grid are developing. So once we've got further learning from them, we're hoping that then we'll be able to finalise an engineering recommendation that we will be publishing on the ENA website which will give guidance on how we intend to go about whole system planning. P3 again relied on the regional development programme work that was going on in a number of the network companies and again, we'll be keeping a watching brief on that and then reporting back as is necessary. And finally, P4, P4 developed in previous years proposals for enhanced data exchange, primarily between National Grid and DNOs but also between interconnected DNOs and DNOs and IDNOs that has precipitated a grid code and a distribution code modification proposals which are ungrowing. So P4 this year will be keeping a watching brief on those two code modifications. I think that is a whistle-stop tour of what we're doing on Workstream 1B this year. So I'll now hand over to the next speaker. Yeah, thanks Ian. It's Jim Cardwell here. I'm head of policy development at Northern Power Grid where I lead our flexibility work and I'm joining you here today to talk about, I also lead Workstream 2 under Open Networks. So I'm just gonna share some thoughts to you on what we're doing on Workstream 2. I mean, the key point about Workstream 2 is that we are focused on two of the four primary objectives for Open Networks that you see in the consultation document accompanying the project initiation document that we're consulting on. And so the two areas really are, we're seeking to provide opportunities for flexible resources to connect faster and also we're seeking to open up data to identify the best locations to invest and indeed to help to grow flexibility markets. So that's where we're sort of focusing our attention and in common with all the other Workstreams we're really looking, although we're centered in customer information and connections, we are centered on standardization and convergence of practice. So you'll see bits of that come out and what I'm gonna share with you today. I think the key thing about 2021 just to set the scene for you just to talk about the sort of phase we're in, it's a really great time because we are now into implementation of a lot of detailed thinking and detailed working that we did through 2020. So a number of colleagues worked very hard through 2020, worked with you as stakeholders to develop some common practices. And we're now firmly got our implementation head on. So we've got three products in the, with the, where we're now in fully in implementation mode and we've got two new products which are then talking about that and what can we do next and where can we take this forward? So I guess that's how I'd frame the year. So we're three plus two as we work through these things here. So the first three products are about implementation for the development and then the bottom two are new products which are bringing forward implement further development to take us forward from here. So I, just to move on to the next slide please, Sana. Thank you very much. So let's just talk through these products in some detail then. And so on product one, the embedded capacity register we are really into putting more information out there to support flexibility markets. That's and support connections to take part in flexibility. That's our main aim here in the embedded capacity register. This went live last year and I guess our attention in the coming year and what we're doing now is about continually improvement of that. And so we're increasing the data fields both in their scope or consistency of approach in terms of how we're doing that. But we're also looking to expand more into the transmission area. So there's getting transmission constraints in there and also thinking about ESO services. And also we're looking into the future. We're costing proposals for going down low in the system because at the moment it's above a megawatt. So we're saying how can we get to less than a megawatt and also thinking about how we can potentially move to a more centralized solution, recognizing that this is a particularly fast moving environment in terms of the development of availability of data out there. And this will link through to the work also we're doing in the energy networks associations with the data working group where we're looking at electricity system data which is predominantly what we're talking about here as well as I guess thinking about gas system data as well through that other forum as well as all the extra work going on in the industry at the moment thinking about how we move forward the open data agenda. Then moving forward to the second product on connections queue management. This is another case where we developed a process guide user guide last year explaining how we're going to be on a standard basis across transmission and distribution develop milestones and revised processes that ensure clear and fair management of connection queues where there's a shortage of capacity. And enabling those projects to proceed and use that available capacity supposed to get the most out of the system we've got and keep costs down as a result of that. So we're heading towards an implementation date in July of this year based on that user guide that was put out last year and there'll be more information coming out on that in the next month or so on how we're doing that. And the second half of the year we're also looking about how we can look at flexibility resources and look at the approaches and the opportunities to move them up any connection queue if they can help resolve and solve issues that can then free up capacity for both themselves and for others. So that's the other piece we're doing there. Moving on to product three, interactivities. This is about application interactivity. So this is about where we're issuing connection offers for areas where there's two or more connectees seeking to have connection offers but those connection offers are related to each other because it depends on what the other people do in terms of responding to those connection offers. So again, we've got standardized processes in a user guide that's now out there and these were implemented in all transmission distribution companies by the end of last year. So we're really keen as individual companies and as the ENA to get feedback on those processes as they start to work their way through if you're involved in application interactivity and you see how those are working. It'd be good to get feedback on that. And then secondly, I suppose in 2021 and this year, the other thing we're really looking forward to moving to addressing is once there's an industry change going through, which is flagged on the slide, which is CMP 328. This is looking at where you have a transmission connection request that has the potential to impact on the distribution system. And we need to make sure that we take account of that when that COSMOD has gone through the system and we understand what the implications of that are that could require changes to some of the processes we're doing to allow us to move into that area as well. So that's the key bit of development work for this but big focus on implementation. So moving forward briefly into the last two products here which are the new ones and what we're doing there, we've got product four which is looking at DNO connection offers and really taking a review of those to say are the terms that are being offered in those connection offers keeping pace with developments? So a good example of this is where we've now got flexibility services living alongside flexible connections and is it clear in the connection offers that we're offering there where the rights and obligations of all the different parties are or have we got some legacy terms and conditions if you like that need to be refreshed to keep pace or revised to keep pace with the way that the system is being developed and the flexibility is coming on and that's particularly I guess in larger generators connected to the distribution system or offers being put out there. So there's a bit of work there to look at that and this one I mean that both of these product four and product five on this list have both been issued in response to stakeholder feedback. So this is about stakeholders saying we've got these issues, can you look at them please? So this is the first one and the second one again very much in light of that on the user commitment is this is now transmission. So the first one product four is distribution with the distribution focus product five is transmission and we're looking there at of course the user commitment serves an important process it's a financial commitment to progress with a job but we've had feedback that there is there are certain customer projects where that's providing a disproportionate barrier to connection and we're keen to explore that to understand that and have that discussion to look into that issue a bit more and then see what we do about that so analyze the issue I suppose in some more detail but Sarnak have the next slide please just to look at the time scales for this and hopefully you'll see the sort of flavor but thank you that we've got here. So product one if you think of that as the sort of four rows there but think of it as two halves I suppose the first two are those improvements that we're looking to bring forward that are described for transmission constraints and also ESO balancing services we're looking to see how we can enrich this information source as a way to enable that and then the bottom two blue rows that you see here are then the more thinking about what are the opportunities here to do more and be quite significant changes so what would it require to go below a megawatt what would be the best way to proceed with that and then also at the moment that's still implementing it on I guess common format but individual DNO registers and the last one is saying well what about a centralized register echoing I said a lot of the developments I talked about in the industry whether it's electrolyte that's taken for the prototype in 2020 or EXO serve thinking about things in gas or the media projects looking at modernizing energy data lots of thinking going on there and we need to bring that in to see what could that how could that revolutionize I suppose the embedded capacity register and bring that forward on P2 in the orange on the connections Q management you can see their big focus and implementation and then also and then in the second sort of proportion of the year two thirds of the year really say thinking about that flexibility promotion and how that could affect that on application interactivity that's the I guess we should really put a big yellow bar in right in the middle bit there because that's the bit we're not developing new products we're just getting on with it and that's as I said that's where it would be great to get some sake or the feedback on how that's going as you start to experience those processes with all the definition that was applied to them last year but then you can see there the mod that comes through from the cusk that can cause us then to review those findings and see what that means for us and you see the two new ones so they're the more think pieces about looking into either the DNO contract offers connection offers or the transmission level the user commitment and an understanding what that's doing for certain jobs and how we move on forward on that so I think that was it for me I think that gets us to the end of our work streams and Farina I think back to you Thanks Jamie So I'll hand over to Emily Jones who is a comms lead so Emily is going to talk to us about the 2020 year and review and stakeholder engagement for this year Great, thank you Farina Hi everyone, as Farina said I'm Emily and I'm the comms lead for open networks and I'm just going to take you through the work stream five overview so are we on the right slide Sana just to check Perfect Great, so within the work plan we have a range of objectives using different mechanics and different channels to raise stakeholder awareness something that will be really important for this year is making the connection to the project and net zero much more explicit and in its fifth year looking back at progress that's been made and what's to come and you'll see on the slide as well that we've got some key focuses that will be proactively looking to talk about then the work stream will continue with its holistic approach in seeking a wide range of opportunities to generate interest in the project this will include political influencer engagement media stories and developing materials to support product activity we're also looking at doing some more profile raising of individuals working on the project both for ENA and members as well Next slide please Sana So as you'll be aware we launched our work plan in mid January this was published alongside our interview review which gives a really comprehensive overview of the achievements from last year we received some good trade coverage which included an interview that our new head of open networks Trina conducted with utility week which you're welcome to take a look at and we've got a number of pieces of activity coming up this quarter including a domestic flexibility event next Wednesday which you can sign up to on the ENA events page and a community energy forum in March then our first product activity and progress newsletter of the year will also be in March and you can contact the email address on the how to respond slide at the back end of this presentation if you'd like to be added to our distribution list for this or to be notified of any upcoming webinars and that's it from me, short but sweet Thanks Emily so we're now into the Q&A session so we've had a few questions in the chat so we've had a couple of questions on work stream too so I think maybe I'll ask Jim to answer them for us so the first one is on the ECRs and regarding the accuracy of data so are there any plans for us to tackle the accuracy of data in the ECRs? Yeah, thanks Frina, thanks for signaling out the question that's good and thank you to Gregory for asking the question I think that the whole issue of as we move into open data and just getting more data out there accuracy is a really important issue for us to address and understand I think it will be good to understand a bit more about not necessarily in this forum but harking back to one of the earlier questions actually more generally about what we're going through here please contact us and signal the bits that you're particularly most concerned about if there's a specific but I think it's something that will continue to be under our focus as we move forward with that I think the key issue with accuracy of data is where we is to be clear on where we consider it if there are bits where we're putting out data that we believe there is inaccuracy then we need to be stating that and we need to be seeking to address it where we can as well so I think it's kind of ever present there but I think it's a case of not only sort of continually improvement to improve its accuracy but also be really clear on what that accuracy is and I think one of the sort of principles is that we're not looking to hold things back as long as it's above a certain threshold if you like we're looking to in terms of its quality we're looking to make sure we get it out there but yeah, so I think that would be the key points Farina please flag up if there's a specific field but if it's a general point yes, we're not blind to that objective of making sure that we're either clear about the accuracy or improving it as we go Can I just add to that as well Jim whilst we were online and I saw Gregory's question I went into every single DNO webpage for the ECRs and there was either a feedback form or a feedback email address in every single ECR webpage So the opportunity is there to raise any inaccuracies in the data against the individual ECRs and we really encourage stakeholders where you find inaccuracies in the data please do let the DNOs know because you're a key source of identifying those inaccuracies for us so please do use the contact details and the forms that are on the ECR web pages for each of the individual DNOs as well Okay so the next question is on queue management the milestones on the user guide are not realistic for large renewable projects can you consult and use stakeholder data to form those as they have not changed since the subsidy regime when projects were significantly smaller? Yeah thanks Farina, I think that's one I think that's Gregory again isn't it so thank you for the question I think I'll certainly go back and reflect on that with the team as well I guess the key point on this is as I said we're into implementation mode but that doesn't mean that we're not into monitoring how they go or thinking about as we start to implement later on this year and start to identify if there's any corrections needed or any change of approach needed as a result of the changing world around us because that's kind of implicit or sorry explicit in your question the world doesn't stop turning I guess the key point is that we've consulted very widely on these and in some depth and we got a lot of stakeholder support for the general consensus was that these milestones provided that good balance I suppose of proportionality meeting objectives, fairness delivering on the ambition of making sure that we'll have projects that can proceed to proceed and projects that can't proceed can move out of the way so that we can get projects that proceed going so I guess I'm keen to reflect on it offline of this call I suppose and just take that feedback on the chin if you like but I guess at the moment I had unless there's a significant flaw that this question identifies I can't see at the moment I think our plan at the moment is to go implement with that which we consulted on during 2020 in the middle of this year and then as I said keep it under review as we go I think again just to add on to that Jim we've tried to be fair by identifying where there are issues that are out with the customers connecting customers control that can be taken into account as well so if there are genuine reasons and triggers outside your control that is part of the user guide as well and intended to reflect some of the things like planning processes that can be outside the control of the customers so whilst we had to move this on in order to reflect the stakeholder feedback we have reflected those elements of feedback where stakeholders have said really there are some circumstances that are totally out of our control that may impact the milestones and that is reflected as well. Okay, thanks Jason and Jim the next question and this is also regarding work stream too it's around the connection agreements how do you identify which connection agreements need to be reviewed? Also I'm not sure I understood whether the review is going to affect existing connections as well as new connection applications. Yeah, thanks Alessandra so let's take your first the second part of your question if you like first and that is that it knows is about thinking about the connection offers that we release in the future and what the terms and conditions of those should be so it's not a retrospective look so I think that's nice and clean covers off on that one and I think in terms of what it's about it's really about saying I guess that the query that was raised the specific query that was raised was talking about the rights and obligations around when generators can be disconnected and the wording of those and the conditions around that so there's some sort of catch all phrases in some of our connection offers that we raise that talk about the rights to disconnect generators and the point that's been raised as well that doesn't really take account of the fact that what sort of connection agreement is this if you like is this in the world where we're then triggering flexibility services and going out for flexibility and looking to contract the flexibility obviously in that sort of arrangement then one would expect to be paid if you like rather than a DNO disconnecting generators and curtailing generation and taking it for free effectively I suppose crudely so that's the kind of hope that gives you a bit more information about the sort of where we're going with this but I guess the idea is to flesh out the issue a bit more first which I think would add opportunity to amplify it and to explore some of the nature of what the issue is and how deep it goes if you like or how widespread or what kind of connection offers and then we can work with stakeholders to then see what the issue is and therefore what the solution needs to be. Thanks, Jim. The final question that we have is from Toni and it's about whether or not we're planning to outsource any opportunities as part of our work. So yes, we do plan to engage consultancy support to help the development of some of the products so where we do have that requirement we have set that out in the pit. There are a few products across a number of work streams and it is as it is noted in the pit. I think we've had a follow up question from Gregory. Can you hear me at all now? Yes, we can hear you. Apologies, yeah, I was drafting a wall of text. So what I would say to Jason and Jim is that I was part of the stakeholder engagement and it did not focus on the milestone structure it focused on the leniency and how projects move on if they become at risk or the NA believes they are at risk which I'm happy with the leniency bit. The honest appraisal of this here is that it is not realistic to ask a solar or wind or large battery scheme to submit into planning within two months from accepting a connection considering the current planning environment. So if you did receive specific feedback on this that people were saying that yeah, these milestones are realistic and we'll happily crack on with them. I'd very much like to see it even on anonymous space because I've spoken to a couple of trade bodies and colleagues from other organizations and none of them believe the current milestones are realistic. The only reason no one has raised it so far is because DNOs are lenient with how each one approaches them but considering your planning on rolling this out in July, this can be aligned in the sun moment and if it is aligned in the sun moment we might as well get it right. That's my point. Yeah, I'll come back on that screen if that's okay. Thanks, Gregory. Appreciate the clarification of that point and clearly we won't go any more detail on this call but that's made it a lot clearer. Thank you and we'll get in touch with you offline. So thank you very much. Okay, so we've got another question in from Tony. How does cybersecurity resilience threat analytics play into this platform? So I think by, I guess that's more general question for the project. Jason, did you want to maybe make a start on that? Yeah, I mean, we have a separate ENA group on cybersecurity which we and resilience and threat analytics, you know, it's all tied into that. There's also a strategic telecommunications group which looks at how we address more strategic telecoms infrastructure and issues in ENA. We've been continuing to inform them on the developments in open networks and the telecoms infrastructure and cybersecurity and some of those sort of both physical and non-functional requirements of communication are all built into what we're doing and there aren't any specific products allocated to that but you will see in the DSO implementation plan that Steve talked about earlier. There is a whole set of activities in a function associated with resilience and security sort of underpins that. So whilst we don't have specific products looking at cybersecurity resilience threat analytics it is an integral part of what we're doing and all of the network operators include that as part of the requirements in their development work. Yeah, I think Jason, I think that the last point just to say slightly different angle but I'm seeing this internally a lot of the added value from open networks is clarifying these requirements. So we can then take it on board and work it through our cybersecurity strategies and understand how a world with all the requirements we were setting out can be compliant with needs directors and other things. So a lot of the open networks work is gonna feature if you like in the cybersecurity strategies for now but certainly a lot of it is gonna come home on ED2 as well. Thanks, Ceteris, that's great. And then there was a consolidated piece of work done at Bayes for security implications of connecting EDR which we contributed into as well. So there was a more general piece done by Bayes of this as well as the specific company initiatives as well. Okay, thank you, Jason and Ceteris. There's a question on the domestic flexibility event that Emily mentioned. So we've shared a link to that. We would encourage everyone to register for that event. It's on the 10th of February. There are no further questions in the chat. Are there any other questions people would like to ask? If not, then we'll move on to the final slide which is just wrapping up the discussions. So just as a reminder for everyone, our consultation closes on 1st of March. You can send in your responses to opennetworks.energynetworks.org. So we've tried to keep this consultation fairly simple so people can submit responses in any form. We would welcome comments at any level of detail. We look forward to hearing your views. And if there are any further questions people have, you can send those across to us on open networks at energynetworks.org and we can get back to you. Thank you everyone for your time today.