icaros Task Force Meeting report

Transcription

1 1 icaros Task Frce Meeting reprt MEETING Date 22/03/2018 Organiser REPORT Authr Sfie Van den waeyenberg Functin System Services Prduct Manager (Market Develpment Department) Date reprt 16/05/2018 Status Draft Final versin 1. AGENDA Cnsultatin feedback & design status Federal Grid Cde prpsal icaros related articles Planning fr Transitin twards SO GL cmpliance in 2019 Varia: KORRR submissin t NRA ENTSO-E cnsultatin n the All TSOs prpsals fr the relevance f assets fr utage crdinatin Next steps All agenda items were supprted by presentatins prepared by. These slides serve as backgrund fr these minutes and can be fund n the ELIA website under Redesign/Agenda

2 2 PARTICIPANTS Aertsens Walter Devillet Marie Dewispelaere Bram Feneuil Brieuc Gabriels Senne Hebb Bb (President) Lerux Amandine Lery Niclas Maenhudt Marijn Olischläger Axel Pirard Nicky Rbbelein J Russeaux Sébastien Van Bssuyt Michaël Van Bruwaene Mattijs Van den waeyenberg Sfie (Secretary) Van Melkebeek Wuter Verelst Martine (icaros prgram manager) Verhelst Clara Infrabel Resa Edf Luminus Lampiris Cgen vlaanderen EDORA CREG Lampiris Resa Tecte FOD Febeliec EDF Luminus Engie CREG 2. REPORT ELIA presents a summary f the feedback received f the stakehlders in the public cnsultatin f the design ntes as well as ELIA s respnse fr the mst critical issues. It is imprtant t nte that the cnsulted design cncerned the crdinatin f assets cnnected t the ELIA-grid and t ELIA-cnnected CDS. The design fr DSO-cnnected assets is under discussin within a Synergrid wrking grup. The results will be discussed with Febeliec (where relevant in applicatin t CDS) and with the ther stakehlders in due time. ELIA is als under discussin with CREG n the expected impact f the design prpsal t allw Intraday schedule updates until neutralizatin time regardless f cngestin risks ( freedm f Intraday redispatch ). This reprt prvides an verview f the questins discussed during the meeting with respect t the icaros design. Subjects ften relate t elements included (r nt) in the Federal Grid Cde: fr cmments n the Federal Grid Cde that transcend the icaros design ELIA refers the stakehlders t the nging cnsultatin. Cnsultatin feedback & design status - Febeliec asks abut the definitin f crss-brder relevant assets and states nt t have a view n the impact, in terms f peratinal requirements r in terms f federal grid cde.

3 3 ELIA refers t an nging cnsultatin n the subject at ENTSO-e level (see als varia sectin f the presentatin). The definitin f crss-brder relevant assets is frmalized via a Eurpean-level methdlgy t be apprved by the NRA; thereby it des nt require a translatin in the Federal Grid Cde. Specifically in the framewrk f icaros the distinctin between crss-brder relevant assets and ther assets is nly relevant fr utage planning (impacting the timings that are t be respected fr data exchange). - One f the main remarks f prducers in the cnsultatin was with respect t the (lack f) level playing field between prductin and demand. ELIA clarifies hw the level playing field is aimed fr, nnetheless taking int cnsideratin the different characteristics f the asset types. In respnse t the cnsultatin feedback ELIA prpses t add a scheduling bligatin fr demand delivery pints that ffer flexibility fr redispatching purpses. EDF again asks during the task frce why demand delivery pints ffering flexibility fr balancing are nt bliged t participate t redispatching. ELIA refers t the different bidding mdalities (e.g., individual versus prtfli bids; delta versus schedule activatins; nly balancing under Transfer f Energy framewrk;...). Febeliec remarks that mandatry bidding wuld be regarded as curtailment. EDF asks why a level playing field cannt be achieved by exempting nn-crdinable PGM type B. ELIA clarifies that the System Operatins Guideline there makes the distinctin between PGM and demand: the requirements are applicable t all PGM (regardless f size r crdinability level) and PGM cannt by the TSO be exempted frm peratinal infrmatin exchanges such as utage planning r DA/ID scheduling while (TSOcnnected) demand facilities can. ELIA has searched and prpsed an alternative fr PGM B t minimize the wrk lad despite the bligatin: the chice between MW and ON/OFF schedules. This chice is nt lgic t prpse fr demand facilities as the schedule will rarely/never be OFF. Febeliec ntes that crdinability is nt defined in the prpsal f the new Federal Grid Cde. ELIA cnfirms: crdinability will be defined in the terms and cnditins. EDF remarks that demand can gain mre prfits frm redispatching. ELIA explains that althugh n cst frmula can be created fr demand, the prvider shuld explain the cst cmpnents f the bids and the price shuld be cst reflective. With respect t the new scheduling bligatin fr demand (nly in case f flexibility ffered fr redispatching), Febeliec states that the bligatin can nly be applicable during the quarter-hurs that flexibility is being ffered. ELIA respnds that the design still has t be finetuned and this is indeed ne f the questins t analyse further. - EDF asks abut the use f the flexibility that is ffered fr natinal redispatching purpses, fr crss-brder redispatching. ELIA clarifies that the same flexibility is used fr natinal and fr crss-brder redispatching: there are n separate pls f flexibility that are used. The cncrete mdalities (e.g. settlement) can hwever be different. Crss-brder redispatching is discussed n a Eurpean level in the framewrk f CACM implementatin. - One f the remarks f Febeliec in the cnsultatin cncerned the applicability n CDS (whether r nt treated similar t TSO-cnnected demand facilities). ELIA clarifies that the utage planning bligatin will nt be applicable t CDS but nly t TSO-cnnected demand. ELIA als emphasizes that icaros discusses the bligatins n asset level. There

4 4 are als data exchanges (e.g. n utage planning f grid elements) between system peratrs and there CDSO (as DSO) have t crdinate with ELIA. Infrabel remarks that this is nt frmalized anywhere (nt in cnnectin cntract). - Cncerning the future framewrk f rles and respnsibilities, EDF asks abut the cnsequences in case ne f the appinted entities des nt take n its respnsibility. ELIA respnds that the BRP can include a clause regarding this risk in its cntract with the grid user. EDF remarks that cntractual adjustments require a transitin perid f at least 2 years. ELIA explains that the implementatin trajectry will be discussed with the stakehlders in a next prject phase. The gal is that the implementatin trajectry will allw fr sufficient time t translate the required rules in relevant cntracts between the different entities and the grid user. Federal Grid Cde prpsal icaros related articles - As the vltage level f the cnnectin is relevant fr PGM < 75MW t be classified as PGM type D r nt, Infrabel ask whether the vltage level is determined based n the cnnectin t the ELIA grid r t the CDSO grid. - Febeliec and Infrabel asks abut the applicability n strage and cmment that the prpsed new federal grid cde des nt clearly and crrectly exempt emergency batteries frm the peratinal requirements discussed in the icaros design ntes (r any ther requirements if relevant). As there is n Eurpean cnnectin cde fr strage, there is n pssibility fr dergatins (as is the case fr PGM). ELIA advises Febeliec and Infrabel t nte this dwn in their feedback n the cnsultatin f the federal grid cde. - The prpsed new Federal Grid Cde refers nly t transmissin cnnected assets (see article 256 2). ELIA explains that the requirements n ELIA s lcal grids are utside the authrity f the Federal Grid Cde; similar adaptatins and guideline implementatins will have t be translated t reginal grid cdes as well. Planning fr Transitin twards SO GL cmpliance in 2019 TF members state that TSO s in neighbring cuntries are nt making as much effrts t be cmpliant t the System Operatins Guideline by March They ask what the cnsequences wuld be in case f nn-cmpliance. ELIA explains that any nn-cmpliance cmplaints wuld be addressed firstly t the Member State. Varia: KORRR submissin t NRA ENTSO-E cnsultatin n the All TSOs prpsals fr the relevance f assets fr utage crdinatin Next steps Nw that the fundamental elements f the design are clear and stable, the next meeting (n date yet) will fcus n the preparatin twards implementatin ( peratinal

5 5 wrkshp ). T prperly start n the implementatin trajectry, hwever, a view n the psitin f the regulatrs and n the design applicable t DSO-cnnected assets is desired. Feedback n the finetuning f the design r discussins n the design fr DSO-cnnected assets with Synergrid may be reprted either via the Wrking Grup Balancing r via a new Task Frce icaros meeting. / 3. DATE FOR NEXT MEETING