ADEPT Engineering Committee Street Lighting Group

Transcription

1 Page 1 of 8 -Present: Dave Johnson DJ Transport for London Dave Franks DF Westminster C.C (LoLEG) Stuart Bulmer SB Secretary - (Home Counties North Group) Sue Kinsella SK Kent County Council (SE Region - incoming) Joe Cochrane JC Roads Services Northern Ireland Wilf Newall WN Durham County Council Martin Dunwell MD Lancashire County Council (NW Region) Stan Hall SH Lincolnshire CC (East Midlands Region) M Harwood MH Dudley MBC (West Midlands Region) Item Apologies / Absence was noted from: Angus Broadhurst (AB) Lindsay McGregor (LM) Glyn Williams K Tovee (KT) Mike Cunningham Simon Langley Ken Pitt Fife Council Dundee & Perth and Kinross Cornwall County Council Essex County Council Warwickshire County Council Highway Agency Action DS was unable to attend so DJ undertook the role of chairman DJ welcomed Dave Franks (DF) who was representing LoLEG who was replacing Dan Robinson who had moved to the private sector Minutes of meeting 20 th February 2013 It was agreed that most outstanding actions were covered on the agenda. (3.2) The information regarding figures from GW showing the benefits of keeping lighting on were still outstanding GW.

2 Page 2 of Energy Efficiency and Related issues Invest to Save Business Plan Model DJ told the meeting that he was currently tidying up the draft document (PLG). He further informed the committee that he had recently had a meeting with the Green Investment Bank, the European Investment Bank, Local Partnerships and DECC. He noted that DECC was intending to produce a Tool Kit which would include Business Case guidance. This Business Case guidance would be basically the same as the one proposed for the PLG but would be backed by the Government Department and would be loaded on to or HMEP websites. It was intended that there would be a meeting on the 19 th June. The work to date would be offered to DECC so there would be just one version of the truth DJ undertook to send the information out to members DJ 3.2 (BP5) Update on NMO review of the 500w Rule The committee was informed that the NMO had produced revised guidance which removes the 500W limit and requires predictability. DF felt that there was no enforcement and noted that UKPN had merely raised the limit to 2Kw. WN presented the case in Sunderland where the figure being quoted was 498w DJ suggested that the course of action would be to show the DNO the guidance document then send an official complaint. If this did not produce a solution then the matter should be taken up with the NMO DF informed the group that he had seen a paper which showed that at 3Kw there was a reasonable argument to use a meter. He undertook to send the paper to members. DF DJ suggested that there was a need for a meeting of the ECSG

3 Page 3 of ICP Framework Agreement arrangements. DJ told members that Dan Robinson was due to give a presentation on the ICP Framework arrangements The Midland Framework was due out in the coming months Changes to CRC SB noted information from James Everly of PDA. It noted that Phase 2 of CRC commenced on 1 st April Further information is listed below All unmetered supplies (excluding estate lighting) are now included in the reporting of emissions. I suggest it is worth all local authorities checking if their authority still qualifies for the scheme, particularly in England. This is due to schools being removed from the scope of the scheme (England only), around a 1/3 of London Boroughs have dropped out, along with numerous authorities around the country. In addition check that no unmetered supplies were submitted as part of the annual emission reports for the reporting years 1 st April st March 2013 and 1 st April st March The emission factor used for turning kwh into tco 2 is likely to change slightly for Phase 2, currently it is kwh x x 0.541, the new emission factor (Phase 1 was 0.541) won t be published until summer (so anytime over next few months). Don t believe it is likely to be a huge difference but worth making sure calculations are correct and up to date 4 REGIONAL / NATIONAL MEETINGS 4.1 Regional Meetings 1. SB noted his concern over the fact that certain areas were not being represented. DJ agreed to update the regional representation map. SB undertook to seek out and complete the LG committee spreadsheet. DJ/SB 2. There then followed a discussion on the fact that there were a number of other groups discussing similar topics to ADEPT. 3. LoLEG DF told the meeting that LoLEG was currently reviewing its terms of reference. He added that WCC was challenging the suppliers of CMS. He undertook to send the information out to members 4. North East WN told the group that DCC had embarked on a six year LED business plan. The NE minutes were provided for attaching to

4 Page 4 of 8 these minutes. WN then told members that Harvard were looking for a 25 year SLA he commented that this was unacceptable. DF volunteered to send WN the feedback of his negotiations with CMS providers. DF East Midlands SH asked for clarification of the regional boundaries. DJ noted that these will be sent to members SH then told the meeting that issues were generally the same as for the rest of the committee. He cited a problem with the reading of meters Another issue raised by the region was that of Feed in Tariffs which were seen as unfair to other electricity users. South East SK informed the group that Mike Adams of Southampton had retired. She also noted that, whilst there were four regulars attendees at regional meetings, it was difficult to get others to attend these meetings. SK also raised the fact that there was concern that UMSUG/ Elexon were not keeping up with demand. Northern Ireland JC informed the committee that the CRC scheme was likely to produce a 1million bill. He also raised the problem of transfers of S38 schemes. This arises from the fact that the developer uses a TT supply but on transfer to the authority a PME system is required. It was noted that electricity systems in Northern Ireland differed significantly from England where PME is required before handover. West Midlands MH told the group that there were some problems with LED retrofits that didn t have photometry information. He added that a.connections contract was imminent and that there had been some problems with relationships with IDNO s. He concluded by telling the group that the West Midlands region was currently undertaking a review of its activities North West MD informed the group that there were a number of authorities currently considering LED conversion. He added that Bolton had its CMS running but there were some issues to be ironed out. MD also raised the fact that auto meter reading costs will be added to electricity bills. Consequently if the authority doesn t have any meters then it should not be required to pay for this. DJ undertook to raise this at UKLB DJ

5 Page 5 of Minutes of the last meeting can be found on the ADEPT website The link to the ADEPT website is Road Liaison Group (RLG) Members were reminded that the minutes of RLG meetings are available to view on the UKRLG web site. The Link to the ULRLG web site is Lighting Board Members were reminded that the minutes of the UKLB were available to view on the UKRLG web site listed above 4.5 CMS as a meter- DJ reported on the meeting held in London at which the NMO, Elexon ILP, ADEPT, HA, and HEA were present. The purpose of the meeting was to look at options for using CMS as a true meter. The meeting identified a number of regulations with disparate ownership that could cause problems. It was generally agreed that in the short term there was little likelihood in getting all of these regulations changed. One possibility was to use CMS to account for energy consumption within the unmetered supply system. Possibly by pointing to new incremental charge codes, possibly by recording a % against a single CMS code. This would mean that the CMS would do all of the work in establishing the correct power used by each unit on a half hourly basis and provide this information to the Meter Administrator. It was generally thought that this may be a workable system. Consequently the HA are looking to set up a system on a private network to compare the actual power drawn from the grid with that which is recorded on the CMS. 4.6 BSI SB informed the meeting that he had received an update from Nigel Parry who is a member of the BSI panel. Nigel s update is noted below The BSI committee is due to meet this summer (although I haven t seen a meeting note come out yet) and one thing on the agenda is the maintenance factor for LEDs, not sure what else will be on the agenda.

6 Page 6 of HMEP (Asset Management Group) SB informed the committee that he had eventually found a contact dealing with HMEP. He also noted that he had looked at the Specification and was extremely disappointed at some of the reasoning behind this document He mentioned that it had not been thought necessary to write a Series 1400 as lantern choice is usually left to the contractor another concern was that in the one series that had been written (Series 1300) it had been decided to omit any reference to bracket arms on the incorrect assumption that they are no longer used. SB undertook to make contact with HMEP to put the views of the ADEPT committee forward. SB 5 BUSINESS PLAN and ACTIVITIES (for discussion) Business Plan 5.1 BP1 Guidance on the provision of illuminated festive decorations. SB reported that the document had been proof read and that some work on a drawing had caused further delay. PM note PLG06 is now with the printer. The ADEPT executive summary will be listed on the ILP website possibly with a link to the ADEPT website BP4 Update on Complementary Guidance to 1 st Edition of Well Lit Highways This is a standing item - members were advised to send any comments. The document is on the ULRLG website. BP6 Update on the Traffic Signs Policy Review- DJ told members that the new TSRGD was in draft and that TfL will be putting a response together. He commented that the issue of illumination of traffic signs had not moved significantly and added that some responses were being sent in by others such as Westminster etc. ILP Events SB informed the committee that the Surveyor conference was taking place on the 24 th of June and that in September the ILP Summit was to be held at Solihull on the 24 th and 25 th, but prior to that the LANTERNS project would be updated at an event in London on the preceding day (23 rd ) IET CoP for the application of LED lighting systems SB tabled a report from Nigel Monaghan who is a member of the ILP Tech Com. And sits on the IET panel for this CoP. The report is noted below. The Code of Practice was published in April and is available to purchase. ILP

7 members get a discounted rate, not sure about other organisations receiving reduced prices but the IET website will confirm. No updates to report since publication. The IET low energy street lighting working group is in the early stages of defining the requirements and there is little to report at the moment. I'll keep you updated on any developments. Page 7 of Street Lighting Transfer from Developer to Road Authority The item was discussed under Regional Reports (Northern Ireland). 6.0 BP3 Development of condition indicators (including recommendations for National indicators) LM was unable to attend the meeting. DF was of the strong opinion that there would be benefit in having National Indicators particularly concentrating on outcomes. DJ commented that SCOTS had already carried out significant work on indicators MH added that APSE had its own set of indicators but these required a fee before they could be obtained. As LoTAMB were running a set of BV indicators DJ asked DF to lead on this considering his involvement with LoTAMB. DF 7.0 AOB Due to time limitations the following items were not discussed and held over to a future meeting BP8 - Key documents for the ADEPT Website BP10 Development of a standard Asset Valuation framework for street lighting BP11- Working relationships with DEFRA BP13 - Collaborative lighting procurement options TD34 & MCHW S Langley asked for a volunteer to carry out formal discussion on the revised documents. Specification for LEDs It was noted that some LEDs carry a 25 year guarantee when tested at 25deg. C. If the LED is run at a temperature of less

8 Page 8 of 8 than 25 Degrees C then the guarantee should be for longer than 25 years MH raised the fact that he was having problems accessing the ADEPT website DJ and SB undertook to test the site to see if it was causing problems on a major scale. DJ/SB 8.0 Dates and Locations of Next Meetings Thursday 18 th September Blackfriars & Euston Room 9 th Floor Palestra Future Dates (For Information Only) UK Lighting Board Tuesday 24 th June Tuesday 14 th October ILP Technical Board Monday 1 st September 2014