Metering location change from LF to MSB — LF view
The process describes the interactions between the LF and MSB of the metering location in the case where the LF orders a change to technical equipment of the metering location without a change of MSB taking place at the same time. The MSB of the metering location checks whether a metering location change has to be carried out on the basis of the order issuance by the LF. The MSB of the metering location also checks without delay whether the desired change date named with the order issuance can be met for technical or operational reasons. Where necessary, it must promptly agree a date with the AN for this purpose. If it is foreseeable that the date cannot be met, it determines the next possible date on which the desired change can be made. Once the checks have been carried out, the MSB of the metering location replies to the LF within the deadline with an order confirmation or a rejection.
Process flow from the perspective of the LF
Process steps
Order issuance change
LF MSB (corresponds to MSB at the metering location object)Check identifiers
- 17011 — Order placement quotation change of technology · AS4
Flow
Message to MSB (corresponds to MSB at the metering location object) · AS4
Write endpoint
- Transaction updated — Update process data
POST /updateProcessData
Updates the existing transaction in the backend once the message has been created.
- Transaction updated — Update process data
Response
LF MSB (corresponds to MSB at the metering location object)Z33Check identifiers
Flow
Message from MSB (corresponds to MSB at the metering location object) · AS4
Response per decision tree
19005,19006→ E_0250 · MSB · Check order issuance for metering location change
APERAK checks
19005,19006→Z33— APERAK check: Is referenced message known ?
Write endpoint
- Transaction updated — Update process data
POST /updateProcessData
Updates the existing transaction in the backend with the data of the incoming message.
- Transaction updated — Update process data
Failure of the change
LF MSB (corresponds to MSB at the metering location object)Z10Z17Z18Z24Z25Z26Check identifiers
- 21025 — Status message · AS4
Flow
Message from MSB (corresponds to MSB at the metering location object) · AS4
Response per decision tree
21025→ E_0286 · MSB · Carry out metering location change
APERAK checks
21025→Z10— APERAK check: Is location known ?21025→Z1721025→Z1821025→Z2421025→Z2521025→Z26
Write endpoint
- Transaction updated — Update process data
POST /updateProcessData
Updates the existing transaction in the backend with the data of the incoming message.
- Transaction updated — Update process data
Decision trees of this process
| EBD | Name |
|---|---|
| E_0250 | Check order issuance for metering location change |
| E_0286 | Carry out metering location change |
Process information
Wording of the consolidated version, profile ch. 3.3.2.1, pp. 54–56.
Preconditions
- The LF can demand a change to the metering location from the MSB if and to the extent that it is entitled to do so on the basis of legal provisions or bilateral agreements with the MSB.
- Use cases start of supply and creation (GPKE part 2): if the device technology present at an allocation start does not allow the registration and LFN or LF wants to order the change of the device technology via the use case described here,
- the LFN or LF holds a valid power of attorney from the final consumer or EZ allowing it to order the change in their name and
- the power of attorney is available at the MSB of the metering location.
Results
- If the order issuance is confirmed by MSB of the metering location and the change at the metering location has been carried out successfully, MSB of the metering location sends the changed master data.
- The changes carried out in this use case may, among other things, result in a transmission of values being required. For this purpose the SD „Processing and transmission of values from the MSB of the metering location“ (WiM part 2) is carried out. The order issuance for the transmission of values results from the values of the corresponding master data item. No further order issuance is made towards MSB.
Error case
Result in the error case
If the MSB of the metering location was not able to carry out the change on time (e.g. because the measuring equipment was permanently unreachable), it notifies the LF that the change has failed.
Further requirements
Note: The process steps required when ordering a configuration (e.g. change of balancing procedure, provided that all metering locations of the market location are equipped with kME with RLM, metering time period definition of the NB by the LF (e.g. as a prerequisite for ordering the off-peak concession levy) or metering time period definition of the LF by the LF, provided that all metering locations of the market location are equipped with iMS) are not to be triggered via this process; they must be triggered via the use cases of the chapter „Order placement of a configuration“ (GPKE part 3). The creation of the device-related prerequisites for ordering a configuration via these GPKE use cases can, where applicable, be commissioned via the use cases described here for changing the metering location or as part of the device replacement.
First message
The party involved on this page is itself the sender of: „Order issuance for change“ to MSB (corresponds to MSB on the metering location object) (step 1).
Objective
The change to the metering location ordered by the LF has been carried out by the MSB of the metering location.
Other views of the process
The same process through the eyes of the other parties involved: the same steps, each read from their point of view.
- View MSB-MELO — MSB at the metering location object · market role MSB
Notes on this page
The steps are the possible messages of this process, not a sequence — the source lists neither conditions nor alternatives. The small box on the step names the own view on the left: with ← it receives, with → it sends. Collapsed steps run between other market partners. The numbers are those of the source; where one is missing, it is missing there.
The source does not yet name the event that triggers these steps.
Applies to: 1
The connector table lists no write call for these steps. Derived from the process flow: the own role was already involved in this process, so the transaction already exists.
For the check identifiers of these steps there is no test case in the test data set; the »Try it out« button of the write interface therefore offers no body.
Applies to: 1