The Aluminium Federation (ALFED) has submitted its formal response to the government’s British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme (BICS) consultation, following engagement with members. 

The formal response was agreed after ALFED facilitated an industry roundtable in which to discuss the scheme. Among other concerns and recommendations, ALFED believes there are a number of blind spots and omissions in the draft scheme – including capturing the full spectrum of energy-intensive aluminium activities.

They said: “During the roundtable, members shared detailed insights into gaps within the Government’s proposed eligibility framework and highlighted several areas where the draft scheme does not yet capture the full spectrum of energy-intensive aluminium activities. Contributors from across the sector, including recyclers, service-based manufacturers, melters, fabricators and specialist processors, emphasised that BICS must be broadened if it is to deliver equitable and effective support.

A recurring theme throughout the discussion was that the current SIC/HS code lists omit several essential, electricity-intensive activities that sit between primary production and final product manufacturing. These include polishing, anodising, coating, cutting, bending, forging, casting and other mid-stream processes. Members also underlined the critical role of scrap processors and secondary preparation activities, both of which contribute directly to the UK’s ambitions for circularity but appear inadequately represented in the codes proposed to date.”

ALFED also raised concerns around the business-level electricity intensity test and time constraints for implementation.  

“Many members noted that methodologies similar to those used in the EII scheme produce distorted outcomes for metals producers, particularly where raw material costs dominate expenditure or where mixed-fuel sites rely heavily on gas because grid capacity for electrification is limited.

“Businesses consistently reported that the proposed April 2027 implementation date is far too late and urged ALFED to push for earlier support or backdating. Members also expressed concerns about the administrative burden on both businesses and DBT if thousands of applications must be processed within a short timeframe.” 

ALFED has taken these issues forward into its own consultation response and will continue engaging with DBT as the scheme is refined. They also urge individuals to submit their own responses in order to create a cohesive and consistent message to the government.