1. Implementation Network Codes: status update
Working Group Belgian Grid
27/04/2018

2. Status public consultation and submission
FGC proposal
Gen. Req.
ABCD proposal
Full scope
info session
Submission
T&C BRP/BSP
CuRe NC Workshop
12/3/2018
29/3/2018
17/5/2018
18/6/2018
2018
mrt
apr
mei
jun
2018
Public consultation FGC
15/3 - 16/4
Public consultation GR
15/3 - 23/4
Public consultation T&C BRP/BSP
15/3 - 15/5
# Responses received public consultation FGC and GR :
Next steps: 26
April 17
May
FGC
general
WG Belgian Grid: discussion feedback public consultation
Submission proposals Federal Grid Code, General Requirements and thresholds ABCD 7 10
Proposal
Public consultation
Submission
Federal Grid Code
FRA + NED
FRA + NED (report FR/NL)
General Requirements
ENG
FRA + NED (report ENG)
T&C BRP
T&C BSP
RfG
DCC
HVDC 9 3 2 4
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

3. Feedback received public consultation: general remarks
Translation / References / Style / coherency FGC-GR / coherency between chapters
French and Dutch version equal importance, alignement with regional/other grid codes and contracts needed
Definitions and terms used throughout the text
Some definitions are missing, some conflicting with E-Law, some (too) complex
Some terms are not consistently used throughout the text, resulting in interpretation issues
Balance to be found between rights and obligations grid operator – grid user
Questions/doubts about reasoning for certain track changes, missing (quantitative) justification
Willing to have a feedback on each comment on the public consultation
Aim for realistic implementation planning (iCAROS, T&C, IT-tools,…)
Uncertainty issues
Investment uncertainty: frontier between ‘new’ and ‘existing’,
Approval derogations, market based mechanisms and possible remunerations (in content T&Cs)
Submission of own GR proposals, while Elia proposal is still subject to change
Appreciation of efforts made by Elia in the preparation of this proposal and in the > 2-years preparation track with stakeholders
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

4. Comments public consultation oriented to competent authorities
Investment uncertainty due to unkown frontier/requirements for new vs existing units
What is applicable for units that are installed as of 17 May 2018
More information about this ‘investment vacuum’ on the next slide
Determine vision with regards to derogations
What type of derogations will / will not be accepted?
Missing derogation: “type C” requirements for units < 75 MW, connected ≥ 110 kV
What derogation period will be granted?
Questions about transparency of the process, post - 17 May
Stakeholders want to be kept on formally/informally consulted after 17 May
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

5. Legal uncertainty ‘New vs. Existing’
Investment uncertainty
Full RfG in application
RfG EiF + 3y
27/4/19
Entry into force RfG
17/5/16
RfG EiF + 2y
17/5/18
Decision GR?
17/11/18
Old
New
Investment vacuum
Art. 4.2 RfG:
“For the purposes of this Regulation, a power-generating module shall be considered existing if:
(a) it is already connected to the network on the date of entry into force of this Regulation; or
(b) the power-generating facility owner has concluded a final and binding contract for the purchase of the main generating plant by two years after the entry into force of the Regulation.
Art. 7.4 RfG
The relevant system operator or TSO shall submit a proposal for requirements of general application, or the methodology used to calculate or establish them, for approval by the competent entity within two years of entry into force of this Regulation.
On 17 May 2018, several investments considered as “new”’ while no decision by competent authorities on the applicable requirements  Investment vacuum
Mitigation possibility in Art. 4.2: postponing the date for a GU to become “new” with 1 year (as France and UK already did)
A Member State may provide that in specified circumstances the regulatory authority may determine whether the power-generating module is to be considered an existing power-generating module or a new power-generating module.
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

6. Extract of comments received public consultation
Title I. – Generalities
Definitions and terms used throughout the text
Some definitions are missing, some conflicting with E-Law, some (too) complex (copy definitions, except deviating definitions)
Some terms are not consistently used throughout the text, resulting in interpretation issues (elekticiteitsproductie- eenheid)
More specifically, comments related to (non-exhaustive):
‘zone de réglage’
‘Definitions/scoping storage
gestionnaire de réseau / gestionnaire du réseau de transport,
Interconnexion (publieke netten – niet publieke netten)
Installation (point de) raccordement, installation (d’un utilisateur du réseau de transport)
CDS: réseau fermé de distribution / réseau fermé industriel,
Check insertion tractienet spoor
Need of more definitions (market players, achterliggende netgebruiker…)
Questions related to ‘new’ vs. ‘existing’
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

7. Key elements received public consultation Title III. - Connection
Feedback received public consultation
Position Elia
General scope of Title III : connection on transmission grid but not only
Competency based on RTSO for the whole control zone => to clarify with a general article just after the Title (to develop current art 38 § 1 al 2) + new title
Storage
full “out of scope” from FGC for emergency storage (Art 99)
Quid regime for existing ?
How to apply types ABCD without derogations possibilities whereas reference to CNC rules ?
OK : definition & exemption from FGC in Generalities
No specific rules for existing storage
OK : Application by reference + BE rules foreseen
Process-driven generators: update of FGC requirements and fine-tuning definition
Noodgenerators : full “out of scope” from FGC (also for existing)
To review the text based on the proposals (see comments Febeliec, BASF, Cogen…) => SEE NEXT SLIDE
Noodgenerators: OK + definition art 3.2 RfG
Several comments / questions on technical requirements for existing grid users
To adapt after internal anaysis
Substantial modernization : use vague concept of ‘charge’ ; check with op 28/02/2018 een uitgebreide analyse alsook tekstvoorstellen heeft doorgestuurd aan Elia; Not aligned with approach proposed in WGBG in 11/2017 ; To detail more the partial compliance in art 162 § 4; what criteria for storage ? To add a global timing ?
Proposal in FGC aligned with decision taken in WGBG:
For demand : ad-hoc analysis in the modernization study (already in 164 § 5 but not clear enough)
Suppress criteria “charge” in §§ 3-4
Information on partial conformity : list to come (164 § 2)
Some specific concepts like “charge”, “installation”, “industrial site”… to be defined ; To suppress/ keep wording “unite réglante” ?
OK (link with Title Generalities)
Connection procedure EON/ION/LON/FON :
How to improve the information flow between RSOs when such a procedure at RSO level ?
What/how to lighten it if not full new connection procedure but new installation of Tractienet Spoor or CDS ?
In practice, conformity if the one of ’achterligende installaties’ => to clarify
OK, possibility to clarify text
Clarify connection procedure is Elia as RSO
Connection procedure will be applied on a very pragmatic mode (sohrt study if possible/formal letter only, similar to now, light for Type A,B,C)

8. Requirements RTSO - RSOIC
hvdc
Zone de réglage = RTSO ~
D.F.
CDS
Transmission
grid
Local transmission grid
Distribution ~ ~
TSO = RSO
70 kV
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

9. Title III. - Connection : Process-driven generators
Revision of text 74 § 4 – Based on consultation proposals
Base: Article 6.3 RfG
§ 1: islanding in case of critical industry process
Installations of a TSO connected-grid user and of a CDS-TSO connected
Criteria of Critical industrial process (no more criteria % of production capacity)
§ 2: stability for the local network
Concertation with relevant RSO but final decision taken by RTSO (based on Relevant TSO competence - frequency)
Exceptional local circumstances
CREG has to be informed of the specific requirements (competency for connection)
§ 3: small WKK with specific requirements
Installations of TSO connected-grid user
NOT for CDS-TSO connected grid user => right to develop its own rules as RSO (Title IX – Art 367)
Whereas n°28 RfG refers to RfG derogation process (Art 60 …)
No freedom to create alternative derogation process without regulatory approval
Possibility to develop light derogation process by the NRA’s
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

10. Extract of comments received public consultation
Title IV. – Access / Title V. – Balancing / Title VI. – Grid Operations
Power put at disposal: definition seems to limit the maximum offtake of a grid user to this Power while tariffs clearly foresee situations where PPD is exceeded
Procedures for adding a new AP in an access contract
Balancing publications
Grid losses
Specific offshore modalities:
means Elia will impose
compensation in case that restart of production after a storm is delayed by Elia
Dimensioning of reserved balancing capacity and specific procedures (< SOGL)
results of volume determination should always be proposed to CREG and published
MVAR & black start:
Market based process seems excluded
Icaros:
Coordinability of units not taken into account
Freedom of dispatch
General comment for title VI and more specifically chapter E&R
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

11. Extract of comments received public consultation – Title VII Metering TiTitle Metreing VII. – Metering Title VII. – Metering
Feedback received during public consultation
Elia's position
Terminology/Definition
Difference ‘Mesure/meting’ vs. ‘Comptage/telling’. "Données d’accès"/"données de mesure"/"données de comptage"
Scope of definition ‘comptage/telling’
Ok, we zijn aan het werken aan de definities.
Scope of application
Submetering
Competence TSO vs. CDSO to be clarified
Deze voorstel van FTR geeft geen monopolie aan de TNB inzake submeter.
Artikel 287 duidt de lokalisatie aan van meetuitrustingen die worden geïnstalleerd. Alinea 4° betreft meetuitrustingen stroomafwaarts van het aansluitingspunt dat ondersteunende dienst leveren. Artikel 292 over eigendom betreft enkel in artikel 287, 1°, 2° en 3° bedoelde meetuitrustingen. Hierdoor zijn submeters niet de exclusieve eigendom van de TNB maar kunnen ze de eigendom van de netgebruiker zijn.
Voorstel om tellingen op CDS in een apart § is aanvaard. Het is de verantwoordelijkheid van de CDS om te informeren over de plaats van de meetuitrustingen dewelke in het toepasselijke contract voor ondersteunende diensten worden opgenomen.
Transitory requirements
Opmerking Elia: al beperkend "nadeel kunnen berokkenen"
Voorstel: toevoegen "motivatie"
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

12. Extract of comments received public consultation
Title VIII. – DSO aspects
Sourcing MVAR to be discussed
MVAR: TSO to justify requirement in common analysis
Definition of (transmission) grid user, in relation to the DSO
WG Belgian Grid - 27 April 2018

13. Key elements received public consultation IX : CDS aspects
Modernisation: requirements for new CDS created over-night, no technical impact
Art 74 § 1er : explicit reference to Art 4 CNC => Need to adapt the connection contract (and thus technical significant changes) for being qualified as new
Is it enough ? Possibility to complete/clarify the concept of “new” on this respect
Relations TSO – CDSO:
What content of the connection contract of the CDSO <> requirements of the generation unit within a CDS ?
Need of clarification of CDS and of industrial site ?
Art : organization of the links between CDSO & TSO regarding CDS-grid users
Possibility to complete/clarify the text on info exchanges
Possibility to complete/clarify the text on industrial site <> CDS concepts
Links with respective competences TSO / RSO / CDSO / federal – regional levels
Quid set of rules for internal working of the CDS (regional competency) ?
Balancing / BRP / market aspects is of federal competency
Notion of access point within the CDS / access to market : introduction of a complementary notion
Plenary UG - Implementation NC: status