«1st meeting of the ACER Stakeholders Advisory Group Tuesday 15th March from 10:30 to 17:00 ENTSO-E Offices, Avenue de Cortenbergh 100, Brussels 1000 ...»
1st meeting of the ACER Stakeholders Advisory Group
Tuesday 15th March from 10:30 to 17:00
ENTSO-E Offices, Avenue de Cortenbergh 100, Brussels 1000
Christophe Gence-Creux ACER
Alberto Pototschnig ACER Director
Alain Marien ACER
Francesco Cariello ACER
Charles Sabrina Mlynek ACER Pamela Taylor ACER Tahir Kapetanovic ACER Mathieu Fransen ACER Robert Maaskant ACER) Vivi Mathiesen ACER Jean-Pierre Becret CEFIC Peter Botschek CEFlC Hakan Feuk EFET William Webster EFET Christian Dobelke ENTSO-E Clotilde Levillain ENTSO-E Frank Vandenberghe ENTSO-E Ritva Hirvonen ENTSO-E Cecilia Hellner ENTSO-E Andrew Claxton EuroPEX Juan Perez EuroPEX Marcel Caillau Eurelectric Anne-Malorie Geron Eurelectric Hans Gruenfeld IFIEC 1/9 Ref: E11-AESAG-01-02 Participants Peter Claes IFIEC Matti Supponen European Commission Natalie McCoy CEER Secretariat 1 Opening The meeting opened at 10h40 Christophe Gence-Creux (ACER) in the Chair.
1.1 Approval of the agenda The Agenda was approved in the form shown in these minutes.
1.2 Approval of the minutes The 9th AHAG minutes were approved with changes.
Review of agreed action points1 Action Description Who When Due Status The capacity calculation project team is planning a final report on 7 March A-110126-01 its work (zones, reliability margin, CC project DONE transparency, etc.) for the January AHAG meeting The Commission consultants working on a study on long-term To be transmission rights
2 New ToR for AESAG The ACER Director introduced the purpose of AESAG (ACER Electricity Stakeholder Advisory Group), to serve as an informal vehicle to support the implementation of the network codes and the integration of the energy market. AESAG will operate in parallel to the formal process of the framework guidelines and network codes and will serve to discuss and monitor and agree how to proceed with implementation. This parallel approach should facilitate the ongoing work while the „rules‟ are being developed.
AESAG should develop a roadmap to take forward the implementation and completion of the internal market by 2014. The ambition is to present this roadmap to the Florence Forum.
ENTSO-E welcomes the thinking of putting a focus on the real implementation projects and to make progress while the rules are being approved. From ENTSO-E‟s perspective they wish to recognise the starting points – two parallel tracks of rule-making and implementation projects.
ENTSO-E must consider whether it can deliver the tasks through AESAG, given its obligations to develop the network codes in good time. This will depend on the scope/depth of the roadmap.
ENTSO-E would see itself providing advice on this roadmap. There are areas where many things could be discussed through AESAG, while other issues may be more difficult. ENTSO-E underlined it is very positive about the future of AESAG but has some concerns on how to deliver.
CEFIC welcomes the continuing involvement of stakeholders in the process. CEFIC underlined that two issues were not studied in AHAG and should be analysed by AESAG: the “Long-Term Market” model and integration and the optimisation of market zones. ERGEG confirms these should be discussed in 2011-2012.
EuroPEX supports ACER‟s pragmatic approach on several counts: we cannot afford to wait to make progress until the rules are in place and also practical experience will facilitate the drafting of the codes themselves. Regarding open issues on design issues, we should note these issues while continuing to make progress where possible (and while recognising that there may be changes in the future).
Eurelectric welcomes the continuation of the stakeholders‟ process and expressed its full support to the proposed terms of reference and the broadening of the tasks of the stakeholders‟ platform.
In Eurelectric‟s view, the emphasis should be on making progress with market integration and implementation.
EFET welcomes AESAG and broadly supports the terms of reference. They recognise the challenge of achieving the target model by 2014 but see the importance of having this group to help monitor progress of the different ongoing projects.
IFIEC expressed its support for this initiative. They enquired if there is still room to discuss the target model itself or whether this is now the final and accepted model. Should this be raised within the Florence Forum?
The ACER Director thanked everyone for their views and underlined that AESAG does not intend to duplicate work or to create an additional burden. Given the 2014 deadline, the aim should be to have as much in place as possible with visible progress underway in all areas. Regarding the target model, there are indeed some aspects which are not fully defined which may require further discussion. AESAG should not reduce in any way the role or importance of ENTSO-E‟s engagement with stakeholders in the process to develop network codes.
There is also a regional dimension to the work. ACER itself will not have a formal working group on 3/9 Ref: E11-AESAG-01-02 the Regional Initiatives but is evaluating how to ensure the regional dimension in its activities.
An AESAG roadmap should address the work which is needed in any case – as part of the process to achieve the 2014 deadline and adopt the relevant network codes.
CEFIC enquired whether a „scorecard‟ from consumers would be useful – which explained the needs and priorities of various elements.
The ACER Director would welcome support on how to approach and priorities the implementation but cautioned against re-opening the discussions on the concept, which are contained in the framework guidelines.
The members discussed the scope and wording of the draft Terms of Reference (ToR) for AESAG.
ENTSO-E indicated that in the very short term, the issues of balancing and long-term transmission rights need further development and would not be ready for the May Florence Forum. They would propose rather to provide a first indication of a way forward on these issues, rather than a definitive roadmap for implementation, given the early stages of discussion on long-term rights in particular.
Regulators underlined that coordination of long-term transmission rights is addressed in the 2nd Package. A roadmap is not intended to present solved solutions, but rather a path for finding a solution (i.e. the process and steps for progress). In some areas, concrete progress and steps are possible, while in others it is still for consultation/development.
For the next meeting in May, ENTSO-E (and EuroPEX, where relevant) should prepare a
draft roadmap on implementation of 5 areas:
single European price market coupling (ENTSO-E, in close collaboration with EuroPEX), Facilitation of cross-border intraday trade through the implementation of a European Intraday Capacity Management Module allowing multiple accesses (ENTSO-E) and of a European Shared Order Book (EuroPEX), Implementation of a single European platform for the allocation and nomination of long-term transmission rights (ENTSO-E), Implementation of a flow-based allocation method in highly meshed networks (ENTSO-E), Implementation of pilot projects for the integration of balancing markets (ENTSO-E).
The other stakeholders are warmly invited to provide their ideas on the 5 topics, to ensure that all the issues are addressed through AESAG.
Regarding balancing, ACER agrees that further discussions are needed before a detailed roadmap can be elaborated. A detailed roadmap on this will be delivered later (not at the May Florence Forum).
Following the Florence Forum, AESAG can work on its second step: following up the implementation of the roadmaps and discussions with the Commission‟s consultants on long-term transmission rights.
Eurelectric underlined the importance of receiving the working documents as soon as possible in advance of meetings, in order to facilitate discussions.
The AESAG members approved the Terms of Reference for AESAG.
3.1 Update on the PCR project (EuroPEX) EuroPEX provided an update on the PCR, which is led by 6 power exchanges.
There are three main streams of work:
- development of common algorithm;
- decentralised parallel operations;
Regarding the algorithm, the chosen starting point will embed an optimization solver.
The PCR also includes four options for participation of new partners in PCR:
- run the matching algorithm and enter the master-slave procedure;
- run the matching algorithm but not the master role rotation;
maintain own trading system, providing anonymous bids to other exchanges but don‟t run the matching algorithm;
- reach an agreement with a PCR participating exchange and use an existing trading system while keeping its independence as an exchange.
EuroPEX explained its master-slave rotational responsibility concept. It is based on the general principle that all PCR power exchanges run in parallel the matching algorithm, with each being responsible for their own results. A rotating master role takes care of two basic functions: giving the green light to exchanges to publish their results and in emergencies situations be the central contact point.
Regarding governance arrangements, confidentiality and data sharing agreements have been signed, there has been agreement on co-ownership principles in terms of intellectual property rights of the algorithm, and discussions are in progress on power exchange cooperation.
The project focuses on those aspects which should be Europe-wide, while leaving flexibility for processes at lower levels.
3.2 Update on the NWE TSOs project (ENTSO-E) ENTSO-E provided an update on the activities of the NWE day-ahead project. An algorithm development approach has been drafted. The fundamentals of governance have been mapped as has the project structure and a roadmap. Discussions are ongoing on the PCR approach and its relationship to the NWE project. A draft document by the TSOs has been delivered to the NWE power exchanges. The TSOs are currently working on network constraints (in particular as regards losses).
Eurelectric enquired if the NWE project can be considered as a subset of the PCR project.
ENTSO underlined that the two projects have different scopes, PCR concentrating on the matching and its operation, NWE having to deal with the all-over project also dealing with e.g. shipping and nomination questions. Also, NWE is defining requirements in the light of the public service 5/9 Ref: E11-AESAG-01-02 character of such a project.
EuroPEX recognised the interdependence between the two projects. PCR provides the coordinated matching function, which must meet the function requirements in order to be accepted.
In order to meet the 2012 target, the projects will intensify and meetings will become more frequent. ENTSO-E assured AESAG that these two projects are converging and there is no risk of separate directions. In this sense, the roadmap on this issue for Florence Forum should be rather detailed and straightforward.
Eurelectric reiterated its doubts – expressed earlier on in the process- as to the degree of actual coordination between the NWE and PCR projects and repeated its call for a single and joint dayahead price coupling project with clear steps and timelines. Further clarity on the geographical is also needed.
4 Intraday market project
Short update on the 16th Feb meeting (EC) 4.1 ENTSO-E provided an update on the TSOs‟ proposals for an enduring solution for intraday. They note that the provisions on intraday in the framework guidelines on capacity allocation and congestion management go in the same direction.
The ENTSO-E‟s target model includes:
- Pooling of liquidity in a shared order book;
- Extendability to ensure European-wide deployment;
- ATC and flow-based compatibility;
- Continuous allocation;
- Single algorithm for automatic matching;
- Capacity pricing mechanism;
- Complex orders;
- Compatible with the cross border balancing target model.
The main hurdle is that power exchanges have not reached consensus on the model to provide
continuous trading with direct OTC access:
1. OTC access provided independently of the SOBF (similar to the FrenchGerman system);
2. OTC access provided by the same system as the SOBF, under suitable TSO/NRA governance.
The ENTSO-E model examines 2 models for trading, either exclusive or allowing OTC. The decision to permit OTC access should be taken by regulators.
The NWE TSOs project goes hand in hand with ENTSO-E‟s work. ENTSO-E is organising a TSO monitoring group to monitor NWE project and ensure compatibility/extendability to others.
Eurelectric notes that OTC access has now become an inherent feature of the interim cross-border 6/9 Ref: E11-AESAG-01-02 intra-day model and calls for a non discriminatory access based on objective and transparent criteria under the supervision of ACER.
This issue could be further examined during ACER‟s public consultation on the framework guideline on CACM.
EuroPEX presented its agreed principles for intraday (which were used at the Commission‟s 16 February meeting on intraday). EuroPEX is working on a shared order book function, although currently there are differing views on how to take this forward.
EFET underlined the need for clarity regarding the scope of the SOB and the CMM, before concrete decisions can be taken (for example in terms of governance of each).
Regulators reported on the NWE regulators‟ common position on how to implement the intraday target model in the region. They reference the intraday sections of the draft framework guideline.
The regulators‟ paper includes deadlines for delivery of the various elements and arrangements to implement the intraday project (covering general points, the capacity management module, shared order book function, capacity pricing and governance).