PICASSO Electricity Balancing Stakeholder Group aFRR Platform Implementation Project Electricity Balancing Stakeholder Group 5th March 2018

TOP 1. Involved TSOs

1. Involved TSOs Current Members and Observes of PICASSO MEMBERS Country TSO Austria APG Belgium Elia Czech Republic ČEPS Denmark Energinet Finland FINGRID France RTE Germany TenneT GmbH TransetBW 50HERTZ AMPRION Norway STATNETT Netherlands TenneT BV Slovenia ELES Spain REE Sweden SVENSKA KRAFTNÄT OBSERVERS Country TSO Bulgaria ESO Croatia HOPS Greece ADMIE Poland PSE Portugal REN Romania TRANSELECTRICA Slovakia SEPS Switzerland SWISSGRID | PICASSO |

TOP 2. aFRR and mFRR Implementation Framework Submission Timeline

Stakeholder Workshops 2. aFRR and mFRR Implementation Framework Submission Timeline Overview Implementation Framework Drafting Finalization on the Implementation Framework IF Provision to NRAs TSOs TSOs TSOs Public Consultation – 2 Months Stakeholders Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Stakeholder Workshops Stakeholder Workshop | PICASSO |

TOP 2. Consultation Summary

Consultation Feedback General Statistics I Countries of Presence: There were released consultation questionnaire including 67 questions, across 58 stakeholders from 13 countries. The market roles of stakeholders were identified by themselves to 6 categories. Majority of stakeholders is presented in Germany and Austria, and major role is the generation. Countries of Origin: | PICASSO |

Consultation Feedback General Statistics II There were identified 2 size categories by aFRR capacity available: medium (5-50 MW) large (over 50 MW) 10 stakeholders did not provide an answer Countries of Origin | PICASSO |

Minimum Bid Size & Bid Granularity Consultation Feedback Standard Product Full Activation Time Most stakeholders are currently active in countries with a 5 min FAT and expressed their preference to keep this FAT. Impact on capacity procurement costs is pointed out by BSPs active in countries with a FAT currently larger than 5 minutes. Minimum Bid Size & Bid Granularity The majority of stakeholders are in favor of a 1 MW minimum bid size and bid granularity. Bid Validity Period Stakeholders preference of bid validity period varies greatly from 15 min to 4 hours.

Balancing Energy Pricing Period Consultation Feedback Processes Bidding, BEGCT & BEGOT The input from stakeholders varies greatly. Main considerations are: possibility to re-use flexibility, protection of ID market, technical and operational feasibility, closeness to real-time. Many stakeholders answered that they would need >15 min to re-offer released bids. In regards of BEGOT, most stakeholders expressed for preference of BEGOT between 24 and 48 hours. Pricing & Settlement In general, concept of XB-MP in combination with proportional cost sharing is acceptable for stakeholders. More information should be provided on settlement input (price and volume) Balancing Energy Pricing Period Stakeholders generally preferred a quarter-hour BEPP, mainly due to the increased simplicity and transparency. Concerns with the quarter hour BEPP are mostly the risk for high imbalance prices. Volume Determination Stakeholders have expressed their preference for the volume determination to be harmonized or to be made consistent

TSO-TSO Exchange and FRCE adjustment Consultation Feedback TSO-TSO Exchange, CM and CBA TSO-TSO Exchange and FRCE adjustment Stakeholder generally agreed with the proposed solution, with no big issues raised. More information was requested and should be communicated in the proposal for settlement for intended exchange in regards to FRCE adjustment. Congestion Management There is a general agreement among stakeholders to use the remaining cross-zonal capacities after intraday for exchange of balancing energy, with a clarification that limiting the ATC as proposed by the PICASSO project should only be done to reflect the actual ATC on the zonal border and not to solve internal congestions. Internal congestions should be handled by marking bids as unavailable. Cost Benefit Analysis Stakeholders are highly interested in the assumptions, calculations and results, which they asked to be published and discussed with market parties. However, stakeholders believe that no decision should be taken based solely on the results of the CBA since the assumptions may largely affect the results.

Transparency & Information Publishing Consultation Feedback Transparency, Intermediate Versions and Other Topics. Transparency & Information Publishing Stakeholder do not foresee any particular issues with transparency & publishing of information. There exists a preference for publication as fast as possible before the 30 min deadline as well as harmonization at ENTSOE level. Intermediate Version Stakeholders generally support the idea of intermediate versions and acknowledge the advantages. Stakeholders requested more precise descriptions of possible intermediate versions, and emphasize that they must have a true direction towards the end goal of the final platform.