CUSC – Positives 
         Administered in an      Working Groups chaired by Panel Members or 
           independent &           National Grid 
          objective fashion      Governance arrangement have evolved as issues 
                                   arose
                                      i.e. CAP160 - Working group process now aligned to the 
                                       BSC
         Rigorous and high       Large scale analytical support from National Grid
           quality analysis 
                                 Established Standing Groups that debate key wider 
          Promote inclusive        issues.  BSSG, GSG and Transmission Access 
           accessible and        Active engagement of Panel Members during the 
              effective            Amendment Process 
            consultation         Joint working groups with the Grid Code
                                 Cost effective administration 
           Cost effective 
       CUSC – Negatives
                Sufficiently           Difficulty in progressing fundamental change 
                flexible to               especially when there is an overlap with matters of 
            circumstances                 public – i.e. CAP148 
                                       Tight ‘standard’ timeframe for complex Amendments
                Delivers a             All details are within the codes, no procedures 
               proportionate           All Amendments approved by Ofgem – no self 
            regulatory burden             governance 
                                       Different governance terminology  to other Electricity 
               Governed by                codes
              transparent &            Potential for a significant number of alternatives (now 
            easily understood             reduced with the introduction of CAP160)
                 rules and 
                procedures             RPI – X acts as a dis-incentive for expenditure on 
                                          assessment and implementation 
   Ideas for the future  
     Establish Workstreams in Electricity 
       For BSC, CUSC, BSAD and Grid Code issues 
     Formal joint mechanisms for cross code and licence issues 
       i.e. BSC modifications and BSAD developed and consulted in a 
       joint report
       Current examples in CUSC and Grid Code include:
          Gas Insulated Switchgear
          Compliance 
          Frequency response
   Ideas for the future  
    Greater use of Issue/ Standing Groups to address issues / develop 
     ideas from industry 
       Such groups could aid Amendment development and support 
       smaller participants 
    Common code terminology for governance – All codes
    Quarterly education seminars – All relevant codes together
    Code user guides and Amendment guidance/FAQ’s in a common 
     format 
    Plain English for reports and codes (where appropriate to do so without 
     affecting the legal status of the code) e.g. Crystal marks 
       Grid Code – Positives 
                Sufficiently          Flexible governance arrangements – i.e. able to 
                flexible to 
            circumstances                change legal text once an Amendment is with Ofgem
                                      Developments by consensus 
          Administered in an 
             independent &            Representative panels who actively contribute 
           objective fashion 
            Promote inclusive         Joint working groups with other codes  
             accessible and 
                effective 
              consultation            For Grid Code National Grid required to respond to 
               Delivers a                each consultation response to address points raised 
              proportionate
           regulatory burden          Cost effective administration 
             Cost effective