Transmission Transparency Workshop

European Strategy and Environment

10 July 2008

2

NW Gas Regional Initiative

Regional Initiatives Started Spring 2006 Practical bottom up approach to reform Engage all stakeholders

North West Region Nine Members (+ Norway) Majority of European gas trade and consumption

Transparency One of three priority areas

1. Transparency 2. Capacity3. Investment

Objective: overcome barriers to gas trade between Member States on a non-discriminatory basis

3

Participating TSOs

Netherlands

United Kingdom

Germany Belgium

France Ireland

Sweden

Northern Ireland

Denmark

?

4

Context – original information shopping list

Gas Quality

Gas Balancing

Transmission Capacity

Gas Flows

Supply and Demand

Agreed as priority areas

Important issues for

future focus

To be delivered…

Gas Flows

Daily flow and interruptions

Daily prompt allocations

Daily aggregate day-ahead nominations

Historic gas flows

Transmission Capacity

Max technical capacity

Interruption probability

Daily commercial firm and interruptible capacity

focus on prioritised subset of information

5

Which interconnection points?

121 Interconnection Points

87 Public

34 Confidential (?)

Greater information transparency at “confidential” interconnection points?

EC Law: Less than three shippers; can request authorisation from NRAs not to publish information

3rd package amendment1 1

74

10 10

14

2

6

22

02

0

5

9

0 0

0

0

0

11

9

0

1

0

5

6

3

0

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

Num

ber o

f Inte

rcon

necti

on P

oint

s

publicly available confidential

IMPACT OF LESS THAN THREE SHIPPER RULE ON PROJECT

6

TSOs committed to milestones

7

Implementation schedule

Data Type% provided

in December 2007

% expected by May 2008

% expected by September

2008

% expected by December

2008 (C1) Max technical capacity

69 94 94 94

(C2) Interruption 31 50 81 88(C3) Daily commercial firm and interruptible capacity

56 75 88 94

(F1) Daily flow / aggregated Allocation

25 75 94 100

(F2) Daily prompt allocation information

81 88 88 94

(F3) Daily aggregate day-ahead nominations 13 31 63 75

(F4) Historic gas flow information database

44 63 100 100

Example: 25% of TSOs already provided aggregate daily flow and interruptions (F1), by December 2008 100% of TSOs should provide this info

8

Implementation progress: May 2008

MIXED PROGRESS: ON TRACK IN 3 BUT BEHIND SCHEDULE ON 4

9

Dec 2007 - planned im-plementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Max technical capacity (C1)

ALMOST ON TRACK: ONLY ONE TSO LEFT TO IMPLEMENT

Planned

Fluxys, BGE, Energinet.dk, Swedegas

Implemented

Fluxys, BGE, Energinet.dk

Delayed

Swedegas

10

Dec 2007 - planned im-plementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Probability of interruption (C2)

BEHIND SCHEDULE: 6 TSOs TO IMPLEMENT BY SEPTEMBER

Planned

Ontras, Energinet.dk, Swedegas

Implemented

E.ON

Delayed

Ontras, Energinet.dk Swedegas

11

Daily commercial firm and interruptible capacity (C3)

ROUGHLY ON TRACK: ONE TSO IMLPEMENTED EARLY ONE TSO FAILED

Dec 2007 - planned im-plementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Planned

Fluxys, BGE, Energinet.dk

Implemented

NG, BGE, Energinet.dk

Delayed

Fluxys

12

Daily flow/aggregated allocation (D+1) (F1)

BEHIND SCHEDULE: 4 TSOs TO IMPLEMENT BY SEPTEMBER; 3 BY DECEMBER

Dec 2007 - planned im-plementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Planned

E.ON, WINGAS, Ontras, Energinet.dk, BEB, DEP, Swedegas, GdF DT

Implemented

E.ON, BEB, DEP, GdF DT

Delayed

Fluxys, WINGAS, Ontras, Swedegas

13

Daily prompt allocation information (F2)

ON TRACK: ALL TSOs NOW REPORT TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION

Dec 2007 - planned im-plementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Svenska Kraftnät and E.ON now report that

they provide this information

14

Daily aggregate day ahead nominations (F3)

BEHIND SCHEDULE: 3 TSOs PROVIDE NO ANSWER ON IMPLEMENTATION

Dec 2007 - planned im-plementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Planned

WINGAS, Ontras, DEP

Implemented

E.ON

Delayed

WINGAS, Ontras, DEP

15

Historic gas flow database (F4)

ON TRACK: 5 TSOs STILL NEED TO IMPLEMENT THIS INFORMATION

Dec 2007 - planned implementation

June 2008 - monitored implementation

resulting change

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

in place May 2008 Sept 2008 Dec 2008 no answer

Num

ber

of

TS

Os

Planned

WINGAS, Ontras, BEB

Implemented

E.ON, DEP, WINGAS, BEB

Delayed

Ontras

16

TSOs that report new information release

TSOs that report full compliance already

17

Next Steps

Incorporate your feedback into the implementation report: feedback by 18 July

Publish the implementation report and press release: end of July 2008

Questionnaire for second progress report: October 2008

Publication of second progress report: November 2008

North-West Region Stakeholder Conference in London: 14 November

Deadline for implementation: 31 December 2008

Final project report/workshop: Early 2009

18

Key issues

Implementation accuracy1. At which interconnection points will the relevant data be

published?2. Are the definitions for each data type appropriate?3. Has there been any further progress since May?

User views4. Network user feedback on accessibility and usefulness of

the data5. Improvements to project management and reporting6. Any other key issues?

TSO feedback7. Reasons for delays in releasing new data8. Re-confirmation of implementation commitment

19

Risks to successful project?

How will we handle delays in project implementation? First implementation report and press release to be published

at the end of July Second and final implementation reports published in

November and early 2009 Updates at GRI Stakeholder(November 2008) and Madrid Fora

Escalation of concerns? National regulators to engage with TSOs Engage Programme Board in project implementation Timelines to be revised?

20

BIG THANK YOU TO ALL STAKEHOLDERS!

PROJECT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE WITHOUT POSITIVE AND ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF ALL

THOSE INVOLVED

WANT POSITIVE OUTCOME FOR EVERYBODY

21