gas regional initiative – north west region pierre-marie cussaguet (cre) dr. stefanie neveling...
TRANSCRIPT
Gas Regional Initiative – North West Region
Pierre-Marie Cussaguet (CRE)Dr. Stefanie Neveling (BNetzA)
Bonn Workshops8 and 9 Feb. 2007
Workshop: Interconnections & Primary Capacity Market
2 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Agenda
10:00 – 10:15 Opening Address
10:15 – 10:45 Presentation of preliminary general findings
10:45 – 11:15 Comments from network operators andstakeholders
11:15 – 11:45 Coffee Break
11:45 – 12:15 Presentation of the situation at selected interconnection points
12:15 – 13:00 Comments from network operators and stakeholders, proposal & discussion on the way
forward and workshop results for closing session
13:00 Lunch
3 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Content
I. Introduction & general / procedural matters
II. Preliminary findings on general issues
III. Situation at selected interconnection points
IV. Way foward / next steps
4 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction & general / procedural matters
II. Preliminary findings on general issues
III. Situation at selected interconnection points
IV. Way forward / next steps
Content
5 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction
Development
• Questionnaire / action report for discussion in IG / SG meetings; approved by the RCC on 21st Nov 2006
involved key operators E.ON Gastransport, BEB and GRTgaz (at a later stage)
• Questionnaire sent on 6th Nov. for answers on 6th Dec. E.ON Gastransport & Fluxys answered late (mid-january) Gassco (N) did not answer Bocholtz & Ellund: questionnaire not sent to all concerned
TSOs
• Therefore only 23 IPs were analysed and assessment of answers by CRE & BNetzA delayed
Answering to questionnaires has to be improved
6 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction
Specific difficulties
• Very large number of confidential data Reason: 3-minus-rule?
• Partially imprecise / unclear / missing answers & data
7 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction
The following targets have been agreed and have been covered in the questionnaire:
• Target 1: Capacity products and services offered at interconnections should be compatible so that trade and competition is not distorted - Questionnaire Part 4
• Target 2: Allocation rules of capacity and booking rules/procedures at cross-border points should be coordinated by adjacent TSOs so that trade and competition is not distorted - Questionnaire Part 5 & Part 6
8 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction
• Target 3: Congestion management procedures need to be coordinated so that trade and competition is not distorted – incl. investments issues - Questionnaire Part 7
• Target 4: Nomination, re-nomination and matching procedures should be harmonized or at least made compatible at each cross-border point - Questionnaire Part 8
9 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
38 interconnection points (IP)
14 TSOs involved
I. Introduction
10 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction
Goals for the workshop
• Summary of the findings
1.) general 2.) specific findings for selected IPs
details to be found in the report
• Comments by the TSOs and stakeholders to identify relevant issues and priority setting
• Selection of IPs of high importance to be dealt with primarily
• Development of a working schedule
11 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction & general (organizational) matters
II. Preliminary general findings
III. Situation at selected interconnection points
IV. Way foward / next steps
Content
12 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
II. Preliminary general findings
1. Data confidentiality
2. Capacity Products & Services offered
3. Capacity Booking Procedures
4. Physical Congestion & Capacity Allocation Mechanisms (CAM)
4.1. Utilization rates 2005
4.2. CAM for existing capacity
5. Investments in new cross-border capacities / CAM
6. Contractual Congestion & Congestion Management Procedures (CMP)
6.1. Status of booked capacity for 2007
6.2. Application of CMPs
6. Nomination, Re-Nomination & Matching
13 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Confidentiality on Capacities (2005)
• 1 IP:
only confidential
• 17 IPs (74% of all IPs):
rate of confidential data
between 0% and 100%
• Only 5 IPs (22 % of all IPs):
all data requested have been
provided
1. Data confidentiality
14 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Confidentiality on Utilization Rates (2005)
• 16 IPs (70% of all IPs): rate of confidential data between 0% and 100%
• 3 IPs: only confidential
• 4 IPs (17% of all IPs): all data requested have been provided
1. Data confidentiality
15 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Confidentiality on Rates of Subscription (2007)
• 15 IPs (65% of all IPs): rate of confidential data between 0% and 100%
• 2 IPs: only confidential data
• 6 IPs (26% of all IPs): all data requested have been provided
1. Data confidentiality
16 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
2. Capacity Products
Questions on: type of capacity products offered
• Entry / Exit capacities
• Firm / Interruptible capacities
• Daily / monthly / yearly / multi-yearly capacities
General findings:
• At 14 out of 25 Interconnection Points (IPs) all involved TSOs offer
all listed products for the main direction of flow
• At 6 IPs there are mismatches (different products at each side)
• At 5 IPs problems exist
Importance of combined capacity products?
17 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
2. Capacity Products
Questions on: Capacity Situation 2005
• Maximum Technical capacity
• Firm / Interruptible capacity
General findings:
• Technical (= firm) capacity at IPs where data has been provided
does not match between adjacent TSOs
• Mostly only interruptible capacities available (esp. reverse flow)
Importance of matching of technical capacities?
• Entry / Exit capacity
• Contracted / Available capacity
18 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
3. Booking procedures
Questions on:
• Booking Periods
• Separate booking / coordination of Booking Procedure
General findings:
• At only 2 cross-border points the timeframe for booking matches for
daily firm (Entry or Exit) capacity.
• The shorter the duration for booking is, the less the timeframe for
booking procedure is the same.
• For any given duration, the timeframe matches more frequently for
interruptible capacity than for firm capacity
• Booking at adjacent TSOs always separately and not coordinated
Importance of matching of booking procedures?
19 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Physical congestion & CAM
4.1 Maximum Utilisation Rates 2005
Missing data needs to be delivered to CRE / BNetzA
20 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Physical congestion & CAM
4.2 CAM for existing capacity
Questions on:• Type of CAM applied (FCFS, Open Subscription)• Coordination of CAM between adjacent TSOs
General findings:• CAM applied or legally required for does not match at 3 IPs
• FCFS is always applied, except for Fluxys (although legally required – TSO’s answer)
• FCFS is legally required in D, NL, B, UK (TSOs answers)• Open Subscription is only applied in F, UK and legally required in
UK (TSO’s answer)• At all IPs no coordination of CAM between adjacent TSOs
21 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Physical congestion & CAM
Questions on: Auctions• Auctions undertaken for existing capacity
General findings:• Only National Grid (UK) untertakes long & medium term auctions
annually, GdFD one auction in 2005, daily short term auctions done by National Grid (UK) and GRTgaz (F) (since 11/06)
• In Belgium auctions are forbidden by law (TSO’s answer)• Auctions are not coordinated between adjacent TSOs
22 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Physical congestion & CAM
Questions on: Day ahead capacities auctions (DACA)
• Auctioning of day-ahead capacity implemented / feasible
General findings:
• Only GRTgaz has implemented day ahead auctions at 3 IPs
• Feasibility study: Wingas, EGT
• 3 TSOs: feasible
• 4 TSOs not feasible: due to implementation constraints (IT-System), conflicting implementation periods
FCFS most frequently used CAM Rarely other mechanisms Better coordiniation necessary? FCFS: no? Auctions: yes? Improvement of CAMs?
23 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
5. Investments / new capacities
Questions on: • Type of CAM applied for new capacities (Auction, Open Season) • Coordination of CAM for new cross-border capacities• Auctions
General findings:• CAM not legally required at 87% of all IPs • Where increases are planned, capacities are mostly already allocated• Open Season applied by BEB (D), GTS (NL), Interconnector (UK),
GRTgaz (F) • No auctions applied for new capacity• No coordination concerning CAMs for new capacities
Capacity allocation has to be non-discriminatory
24 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Directionof flow
0%
<10
%
Overall Indication for the
IPs considered
Availability
6. Contractual congestion & CMP
Availability of firm capacity in 2005:
25 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
6. Contractual congestion & CMP
Rates of subscription in 2007:
Directionof flow
0%
<10
%
Availability
insufficient firm capacity available
Overall Indication for the
IPs considered
26 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
6. Contractual congestion & CMP
Questions on: • applied CMPs (firm/interruptible UIOLI, sec. Market)• UIOLI details, coordination
General findings:• Booking level at which CMPs are applied: different (e.g. 90%, any
level, at each refusal)• firm UIOLI often implemented but practically rarely applied• Zero-nomination on day before delivery leads to «Lose it» at only
35% of IPs• Only 35% of TSOs have seized an amount of capacity by application
of UIOLI but offered it to the market only on interruptible basis
Is coordination necessary? Should capacity be offered as firm capacity?
27 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
7. Nomination & Matching
Questions on:• Application of Easee-gas CBP concerning nomination, re-
nomination and matching
General findings:• Easee-gas nomination, re-nomination and matching procedures
applied at 75% of IPs • At the remaining IPs at least one TSO does not apply the
procedures
Should Easee-gas CBP always be applied?
28 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Summary
• Few data have been provided. Missing data to be delivered to CRE / BNetzA
• Offer of capacity products not everywhere coordinated• Booking procedures are not coordinated• Allocation mechanism for existing capacities mostly FCFS• Day ahead capacity auctions rarely implemented• Capacities seized by application of UIOLI are offered on interruptible
basis• Auctions for allocation of new capacities are an exception
29 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Discussion
What are the key priorities?
• Importance of matching of products and booking procedures?
• Improvement of CAMs?• Insufficient firm capacity available?• Should CMPs be improved?• Investment in new cross-border capacities necessary?
30 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction & general (organizational) matters
II. Preliminary general findings on main issues
III. Situation at selected interconnection points
IV. Way foward / next steps
Content
31 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
III. Situation at selected IPs
Key findings for 6 selected interconnection points
1. Taisnières (F – B)2. Obergailbach (F – D)3. Oude Statenzijl (NL – D)4. Eynatten (B – D)5. Bacton (UK – UK)6. (Zevenaar) (NL – D)
Selection criteria:
• Trying to represent the whole region (as many different TSOs as possible)
• Importance / dimension regarding technical capacity
• Avoid IPs with missing data / answers from adjacents TSOs (e.g. Gassco, Eni, Dangas)
Importance in the shippers‘ view?
32 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Map: GTE
1. Obergailbach / Medelsheim
33 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
What does not match / problems:
• Allocation of new capacities not coordinated• in 2005, investments in new cross-border capacities on both sides were not
coordinated
• Data on monthly capacities:• provided by GRTgaz & EGT, provided for only Q4 2005 by GDFDT
• only GRTgaz & GDFDT publish historical capacities on their website
• Data on rates of subscription:• GRTgaz publishes (monthly) booked capacities (2007) on its website
• EGT and GDFDT publish nothing on their website
• Utilization rates:• EGT provided monthly data on utilization rates (2005). GRTgaz and GDFDT
have provided it for only Q4 2005.
• In 2006, GRTgaz published daily flows, but EGT and GDFDT published only monthly maximum/minimum utilization rates
1. Obergailbach / Medelsheim
34 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Main issues to be solved:
• Harmonization of published data on capacities and flows• What information on capacities and gas flow are needed? / What information
should be published by TSOs on their website?
• Are maximum/minimum flows sufficient and useful signals for shippers? / Should daily flows be published instead of maximum and utilization rates?
• Inter-TSO coordination• How can CAM for new capacities be coordinated?
Possible solutions / Priority goals / Way forward?
1. Obergailbach / Medelsheim
35 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Map: GTE
2. Taisnières/Blaregnies/Quévy
36 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
In 2005 the level of booked capacity washigher than that of firm capacity at Quévy(exit from Finpipe)
What does not match:The levels of booked capacities do not match
for 2007
However, the utilization rate was lowerthan the level of firm capacity
2. Taisnières/Blaregnies/Quévy
37 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Main issues to be solved
• Inter-TSO coordination• How can CMP and CAM be coordinated?
• Harmonization of published data on capacities and flows• What information on capacities and gas flow are needed? / What information
should be published by TSOs on their website?
• Are maximum/minimum flows sufficient and useful signals for shippers? / Should daily flows be published instead of maximum/utilization rates?
Possible solution
/ Priority goals
/ Way forward?
2. Taisnières/Blaregnies/Quévy
38 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Map: GTE
3. Oude Statenzijl (13E)
39 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
What does not match: Data on capacity, rates of subscription and utilization rates provided and published by
BEB
GTS: data confidential
CAM for new capacities are different: OSWPR for GTS vs OSWR for BEB
CAM for existing capacities:
FCFS applied but not coordinated
ST and LT UIOLI for existing/new
capacities not coordinated
At the German border side:4% < utiliz. rate (Oct.-Dec. 2005) = 67%rates of subscription for 2007 = 100%
3. Oude Statenzijl (13E)
40 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Main issues to be solved:
• Harmonization of published data on capacities and flows• What information on capacities and gas flow are needed? / What information
should be published by TSOs on their website?
• Are maximum/minimum flows sufficient and useful signals for shippers? / Should daily flows be published instead of maximum and utilization rates?
• Inter-TSO coordination• How can CMP and CAM for existing/new capacities be coordinated?
• Day-ahead capacity auctions• Should a market day-ahead capacity auction mechanism be implemented?
Possible solutions / Priority goals / Way forward?
3. Oude Statenzijl (13E)
41 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Map: GTE
4. Eynatten
42 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Eynatten
Eynatten Exit E.ON Gastransport
0
500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
3.500
4.000
4.500
Janu
ary
Febru
ary
Mar
chApr
ilM
ayJu
ne July
Augus
t
Septe
mbe
r
Octob
er
Novem
ber
Decem
ber
MW
h/h
Technical Exit Capacity Contracted Firm Exit Capacity
Maximum utilization rate Exit Capacity seized UIOLI capacity
Fluxys (B) RWE (D) / E.ON Gastransport (D) Fluxys (B) Wingas
43 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Eynatten
Key findings Fluxys EGT/RWE
Mismatches:
• EGT fully booked out: 2005 exit, 2007 both directions
• Fluxys entry and exit available 2005 and 2007
• Confidentiality RWE
• Fluxys does not offer interruptible products, except domestic entry
• Fluxys does not offer online booking for non-domestic transports
• Fluxys does not apply UIOLI for non-domestic transports (although legally required?)
• Only EGT seized capacities by application of UIOLI and offered it on interruptible basis
• RWE does not apply Easee-gas CBP
44 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
4. Eynatten
Further Problems:
• No auctions (in Belgium forbidden by law?)
• No Coordination: booking procedure, (short-term) CAM, UIOLI
Key findings Fluxys (B) Wingas
• Rate of subscription 2007 exit Wingas 99-100%
• No data on utilisation of Wingas exit and Fluxys entry
• Basically same problems as for Fluxys / RWE and EGT
Priority issues to be solved: non-combined capacity products? UIOLI?
45 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Map: GTE
5. Bacton
46 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
5. Bacton
Key findings Bacton (H-Gas): National Grid (UK) Interconnector (UK)
Problems & Mismatches:
• Firm Interconnector capacity sold out until 2018; long term contracts
only interruptible cap. available on an hourly basis, but NG (entry) offers daily capacity
• No data on contracted Interconnector capacity
• Interconnector seized no capacity by application of UIOLI, although there was no full utilisation
• No coordination of CAM, booking, UIOLI, auctions
47 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
5. Bacton
Interconnection Point 52B: BactonInterconnector >>> National Grid (UK)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2005
GW
h/h
Technical CapacityInterconnector - Exit
Maximum UtilisationRate (of techn. cap.)Interconnector Exit
Contracted FirmCap. NG - Entry
Technical capacityInterconnector -Entry
Maximum UtilisationRate (of techn. cap.)Interconnector -Entry
48 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
5. Bacton
Further problems:
• National Grid does not apply Easee-gas CBP• UIOLI products not fully compatible (regarding timing)
• NG raised a modification proposal to reform exit capacity regime• Now situation has changed (new import routes (BBL), LNG)?
Priority issues to be solved: non-combined capacity products? Improve coordination Offer firm long term UIOLI products? Interconnector: auctions?
49 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Map: GTE
6. Zevenaar
50 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
6. Zevenaar
Key findings Zevenaar (L-Gas):Gas Transport Services (NL) RWE (D) / E.ON Gastransport (D)
Matches: • All TSOs offer all capacity products• All TSOs apply all listed CMPs
Mismatches:
• RWE does not apply Easee-gas CBP
• UIOLI procedure not harmonised
• Zero-nomination on day before delivery leads to ‚lose it‘: only EGT and GTS
• Booking periods of daily firm capacity:
GTS 3 months, EGT 20 working days in advance (acceptable?)
51 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
6. Zevenaar
Further mismatches & problems:
• GTS delivered no data on exit quantities, utilization & subscription rates, amount monthly seized by UIOLI
• RWE delivered confidential data
• No auctions implemented (day ahead auctioning would require
considerable IT adjustments (GTS))
• No Coordination of (short-term) CAM, booking procedure (separate),
UIOLI
General comments by TSOs:
• GTS: Primary market needs capacity (not more/different CAMs)
efforts needed to stimulate investment
• EGT: Reliable and secure services should be kept in mind when
discussing methods for firm capacity on the primary market
52 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Discussion
Classification by GTE Location interconnected TSOs1B, 1C Zeebrugge IZT Interconnector Fluxys
2B Zelzate Fluxys GTS 3 Hilvarenbeek GTS Fluxys 4 Obbicht GTS Fluxys 5 s'Gravenvoeren GTS Fluxys
6A, 6B Eynatten Fluxys Wingas 6C, 6D Eynatten Fluxys E.On Ruhrgas RWE
9A Quévy GRTgaz Fluxys 9B Blaregnies GRTgaz Fluxys 9C Taisnières GRTgaz Fluxys 10 Bocholtz GTS E.On Ruhrgas ENI
11A Zevenaar GTS E.On Ruhrgas 11B Zevenaar GTS RWE 12 Winterswijk GTS E.On Ruhrgas
13A Oude Statenzijl GTS Wingas 13B Oude Statenzijl GTS E.On Ruhrgas
13C, 13D Oude Statenzijl GTS BEB 13E Oude Statenzijl GTS BEB 13 F Oude Statenzijl GTS EWE
16A, 16B Ellund Energinet.dk E.On Ruhrgas BEB Dong17 Dragor Energinet.dk Nova Naturgas 28 Obergailbach E.On Ruhrgas GRTgaz GDFDT
52A, 52B Bacton National Grid Interconnector 53 Moffat National Grid Bord Gais
78A Zandvliet H Fluxys GTS 78B Zandvliet L Fluxys GTS
Important IPs to be dealt with primarily?
53 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
I. Introduction & general (organizational) matters
II. Preliminary general findings on main issues
III. Situation at selected interconnection points
IV. Way foward / next steps
Content
54 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
IV. Way forward / next steps
responsibility deadline deliverable
Comments by stakeholders on selection of IPs to be worked on primarily
CRE / BNetzA February 23 List of IPs
Comments by stakeholder on priorities for each of the selected points
CRE / BNetzA February 23 List of IPs and related priorities
Comments from stakeholders on the report CRE February 28 ReportDraft implementation plan containing issues to be solved at each selected IP
CRE / BNetzA March 1 Implementation plan
Final report CRE March 9(Workshops on the implementation plan) (April 16 / 17)(Approval on implementation plan) (RCC) (May 2)Implementation phase
Meetings by adjacents TSOs (NRAs and further stakeholders if necessary)
TSOs
Comments to:
55 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
General remarks
Prepare a common slide revealing the outcome of this workshop! (15min)
56 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Conclusions
• Way forward should focus on the details at specific interconnection points
• Assessment of the situation at specific IP requires an improved data basis (Solution: publishing of (aggregated) data, provide data to NRAs)
• Investment important issue where contractual (?) and physical congestions occur; efficient CMP for contractually congested IP.
• Better coordination of capacity products and booking procedures
• Inter-TSO and inter-NRA coordination
• Interconnection points: all the IP proposed in the slides plus Ellund, Zelzate; shippers are encouraged to give their priorities
• No objections on the time schedule proposed
57 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Way forward / actions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
responsibility deadline deliverable
Comments by stakeholders on selection of IPs to be worked on primarily
CRE / BNetzA February 23 List of IPs
Comments by stakeholder on priorities for each of the selected points
CRE / BNetzA February 23 List of IPs and related priorities
Comments from stakeholders on the report CRE February 28 ReportSubmit missing data to CRE / BNetzA (esp. utillisation rates)
TSOs / NRAs February 28 Data
Draft implementation plan containing issues to be solved at each selected IP
CRE / BNetzA March 1 Implementation plan
Final report March 9(Workshops on the implementation plan) CRE (April 16 / 17)(Approval on implementation plan (RCC) (May 2)Implementation phase
Meetings by adjacents TSOs (NRAs and further stakeholders if necessary)
TSOs
58 GRI – NWWorkshop in Bonn on Interconnections: Primary Market, 8 Feb. 2007
Eynatten Entry Fluxys
0
100.000
200.000
300.000
400.000
500.000
600.000
700.000
800.000
900.000m
N3 /h
Technical Entry CapacityContracted Firm Entry Capacity Maximum utilization rate Entry Capacityseized UIOLI capacity