1. ESB Networks AIP Programme
Update to IGG
10th August 2006

2. ESB Networks AIP Programme :
Agenda
1. Recap on where we are
2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July
3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

3. ESB Networks AIP Programme :
Agenda
1. Recap on where we are
2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July
3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

4. ESB Networks AIP Programme: Recap on where we are : Timelines
3,6 or 9 month delay to the go-live date of the SEM
The Regulatory Authorities announced that there will be a delay to the go-live date of the
SEM from 1st July to 1st November 2007
Formal confirmation of impact on SIMDRACS workstream is awaited, working assumption
today is that unless hear otherwise, is that ESB Networks have to be ready for
Market Testing in April

5. 22nd June - IGG discussion on Appendix 8 – Key Issues
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Recap on where we are : Review of Interaction with IGG/TAG
18th May - Introduction
1st June Draft ver 0.1 ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued to IGG
7th June Special IGG
21st June Draft ver 0.2 ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued to IGG
22nd June IGG discussion on Appendix 8 – Key Issues
- TAG discussion on Key Issues
29th June Responses from Market Participants
4th July SIMDRACS Co-Ordinator clarifications/decisions
7th July Draft ver 0.3 [Appendix 8] ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued
13th July Special IGG

6. ESB Networks AIP Programme : Recap on where we are : Review of Interaction with IGG/TAG contd
Before the Special IGG of 7th June 2006, a first draft discussion document entitled ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’ issued from ESB Networks AIP programme. This set out the impacts for the Irish Retail Market that had at that time been identified by ESB Networks as a result of the AIP, in so far as the requirements were known.
Before the IGG of the 22nd June 2006, all key design issues were included in Appendix 8 in the second draft of the discussion document. At the IGG on the 22nd June there was a walk through of each of the issues in that document.
Before the IGG of the 13th July , updated Appendix 8 issued on 7th July , ver 0.3, containing
Feedback from Market Participants, SIMDRACS Co-Ordinator, New requirements
received from Regulatory Authority, and review of Design Issues by ESB Networks
Following the IGG of the 13th July, four Market participants responded to specific queries
raised at that IGG.
ESB Networks AIP Programme has formally written to CER/SIMDRACS to get agreement to
proceed with the detailed design based on what has been discussed with the IGG

7. ESB Networks AIP Programme :
Agenda
1. Recap on where we are
2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July
3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

8. The responses are documented in the following slides
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July
Background
At the Special IGG on 13th July there was a review of all Issues in ver 0.3 of Appendix 8 of ‘Impact of AIP on ROI Retail Market’. It was agreed that the following items would be considered further by Market Participants and responses forwarded by Friday July 21st:
Responses
Four Market Participants responded
The responses are documented in the following slides
[Original text of the queries is in Blue]

9. 1 Market Participant does want Estimated data at D+1
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd
If Indicative Aggregation goes ahead, then [Issues 25 & 26]
Is Estimated QH Data needed at D+1 by Suppliers, Participant Generators and TSO
Responses
3 Market Participants do not want Estimated data at D+1
1 Market Participant does want Estimated data at D+1
If Yes, then
Is versioning of 341 messages needed
and is the indicative flag needed
Only 1 Market Participant responded, and does not want the indicative flag
If No , then
Is versioning of 341 messages needed anyhow
Note that it is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that if Indicative Aggregation goes ahead, that estimates generated at D+1 for indicative would only be sent at D+4 where no actual read had been obtained, unless there is a clear need to send the estimates at D+1. This would also mean that the Indicative Flag would not be progressed.
We will separately consider the versioning issue based on responses.
2 Market Participants do want versioning of 341 messages to be implemented
1 Market Participant sees versioning as a potential future need for themselves, but not now
The forth respondent offered no view as to whether they wanted versioning or not

10. be sent at D+4 where no actual read had been obtained.
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd
Question 1, contd
Business Rationale for Indicative Aggregation is still under review with CER
Current Proposals
It is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that if Indicative
Aggregation goes ahead, that estimates generated at D+1 for indicative would only
be sent at D+4 where no actual read had been obtained.
This means that the Indicative Flag would not be progressed.
Provisional Proposal is to proceed with Versioning of 341 messages ,
subject to other changes being approved to 341 message, and impact assessment on
Project Timelines and funding approval

11. few days to clarify responses, and will update Market Participants in
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd
Is the Supplier Unit ID required in the 341 message
[New item arising at the Special IGG ]
Responses
1 Market Participant clearly wants the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message
1 Market Participant may want the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message
1 Market Participant does not need the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message
1 Market Participant does not need nor want the Supplier Unit ID in the 341 message
Note
ESB Networks will be contacting certain Market Participants over the next
few days to clarify responses, and will update Market Participants in
Draft ver 0.4 at end of August

12. messages would contain kWhs
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd
3 Are MWhs needed in the 5x1,5x4,5x5 and 5x8 messages [Issue 17]
Responses
4 Market Participants are in favour of kWhs in these market messages
Note that it is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that these
messages would contain kWhs

13. messages need to contain a minus sign
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July, contd
4 Signing [Issue 9]
Does the aggregated consumption in each of the 96 intervals in the 5x1 and 5x5
messages need to contain a minus sign
Does the generator data in each of the 96 intervals in the 5x4 and 5x8 messages
need to contain a plus sign
Responses
3 Market Participants do not need signing in these messages
1 Market Participant is in favour of signing for these messages
Note that it is proposed to proceed with the original proposals that these
messages would not contain any signs

14. ESB Networks AIP Programme :
Agenda
1. Recap on where we are
2. Review of responses received to questions from Special IGG on 13th July
3. Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG

15. ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd.
With agreement of the CER, for the core design, ESB Networks will proceed based
on the working assumptions
outstanding items will be reviewed with the IGG as and when the information is
available
Provisional Plan: NB there are dependencies on status of items from 18th August meeting
31st August Draft ver 0.4 updated - see following slides
7th September - Special IGG to discuss any new issues and proposals and looking for
agreement to proceed to MCR
14th September - Issue of MCRs
21st September - IGG to approve MCRs
all subsequent changes will be progressed through formal MCR change control process

16. For Discussion on 18th August by SIMDRACS Board:
ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG
Next Steps
For Discussion on 18th August by SIMDRACS Board:
Updated Draft Regulatory Requirements document from SIMDRACS - at ver 0.55
since
this includes a potential new requirement for a Microgeneration solution
Updated Baselined Requirements documents from SEMIT - at ver 1.2 since
to be clarified with SMO on 18th August
Potential change required to design to have Generation, Price Affecting Demand and
Non-Price Affecting Demand sent to SMO separately instead of in one single message.
Requirements for Price Affecting Demand in Associated Supplier Units
Outcome of 18th August meetings including any changes to be included in draft ver 0.4

17. ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd.
31st August Draft ver 0.4 to issue to include:
Body of text to be updated with outcomes from Issues
Updated description of new SEM Entities and terms eg Participant Demand Customers,
Trading Sites and Trading Site Supplier Units, Generator Units, Price-affecting Demand,
Supplier Units, Associated Supplier Units
Registration Process for Non-Participant Generators
to include nomination and agreement of Supplier of the Supplier Unit against which the
Non-Participant Generator export data will be netted
Registration interfaces [manual] between Retail Market and SMO for SEM Participants
and impact on Retail Market Registration processes to include
rejection of registration request for a site into a Trading Site Supplier Unit,
new rejection reason & code
Interaction between Retail Market and SEM for registration into or out of a
Trading Site Supplier Unit

18. ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd.
31st August Draft ver 0.4 to issue to include, contd:
Any firm requirements or working assumptions from SIMDRACS/CER for De-Minimus Generation
Any specific requirements of AIP to accommodate SOLR
Impact of the outcome of ESB Networks /EirGrig Metering Responsibilities discussions, including
Transmission connected Import-Only Demand
SEM requirement for Price Affecting Demand and Generation on a Calendar Day basis
and on a D+3 basis for Initial Aggregation [Indicative is D+1]
Note that all Generators that are dispatchable or controllable could affect price
and could either be Distribution or Transmission connected
and potentially either Participant or Non-Participant Generators
Participant Demand Customers could also affect price
Interface between MRSO and EIRGRID [TSO] for the receipt of data that is agreed to be
polled/validated/substituted/estimated by TSO
Note that these discussions have yet to be concluded

19. ESB Networks AIP Programme : Next steps and Plans for progressing the Design with the IGG, contd.
Recap:
Provisional Plan: NB there are dependencies on status of items from 18th August meeting
31st August Draft ver 0.4 updated
7th September - Special IGG to discuss any new issues and proposals and looking for
agreement to proceed to MCR
14th September - Issue of MCRs
21st September - IGG to approve MCRs
all subsequent changes will be progressed through formal MCR change control process

20. ESB Networks AIP Programme :
Thank You