6th Stakeholder Group Meeting

Stockholm - 26 November, 2009

Gas Regional Initiative – North West Region

Experience with coordinated open seasons

Dominique JammeCommission de Régulation de l’Energie

2SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

ERGEG Guidelines on open seasons

European level: Guidelines for Good Practice on Open Season Procedures (GGPOS) published in May 2007 Aim: ensure that OS are conducted in a non-discriminatory and

transparent manner and result in efficient outcomes Main features:

Structure of the OS: preparatory phase (publication of OS notice – non binding capacity requests) and binding phase (capacity allocation and contracts signature)

The sponsor shall offer long term and short term capacities Coordination with adjacent system operators / Coordination between

NRAs Need for transparency during the whole process

Need to provide sufficient visibility to the market from the beginning of the process

3SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

GRI NW project – OS Coordination

Aim of the project Propose practical solutions to facilitate the coordination of OS Provide advice to the GGPOS – Consultation to monitor compliance

launched in July 2009 - Revision of the GGPOS if needed in 2010 by ERGEG

Report on open seasons coordination approved by RCC in May 2009

Confidentiality clauses Hinder the necessary information exchange between TSOs Recommendation from regulators:

Need to exchange disaggregated data on an anonymous basis on the OS process between adjacent TSOs → alignment of capacity at both sides of the border

Positive response from TSOs to regulators’ recommendation

4SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

OS GRTgaz/FluxysPositive points and critical issues

Positive points A really coordinated open season

Consistent timeframes, coordinated contractual aspects and capacity allocation, consistency in the capacity allocation scheme, MoU

Coordination with GTS Open Season 2012 on the timetable

Critical issues 9 months delay due to discussions on transit tariffs in Belgium

Significant difference between the bids submitted in the 1st phase and the binding agreements signed in the 2nd phase → How to improve the reliability of the 1st phase?

Additional short term capacity on top of the requested capacity only provided on the French side (but the total amount of capacity (old + new) at each side of the border is equivalent)

Final Investment Decision to be taken at the end of 2009

5SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

OS France/Spain

• Coordination prior to the open season: Joint open subscription periods for allocating existing capacity in October 2008

• Close cooperation between 4 Spanish and French TSOs, 2 regulators, CRE and CNE, and governments over the past 2 years:

• Adaptation of the Spanish regulatory framework to allow for allocation at the borders other than through FCFS

• Fully harmonized products and allocation procedures• A common information memorandum • A joint allocation office operated by one TSO (Enagas)• A high degree of coordination regarding the works

Major contribution to the integration of Iberian, French and North-West European gas markets and to European security of supply

6SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

Lessons learned

Open seasons are functioning well when properly organized and coordinated

Open seasons are increasingly becoming the standard procedure for major investment projects - Useful instrument to develop the network and to efficiently identify market needs

Critical issues: Need to improve cooperation between adjacent TSOs Final Investment Decision based on the economic test

7SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

Thank you for your attention!

dominique.jamme@cre.fr www.cre.fr

8SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

Appendices

9SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

GRI NW Open seasonsSince 2007

GRTgaz/Fluxys April 2007- Dec. 2008•FID end 2009 (cap. available Dec. 2013)

E.ON GastransportJan. 2008 – May 2009•Phase 1: 102 customers (7.2 billion €)•Phase 2: unilateral commitments 44 customers (3 billion €)•FID: 400 million € (cap. available end 2012)

GTS 2012July 2007 - Nov. 2009 •Split up in 2 phases •FID taken for Bocholtz (cap. available Oct. 2012)•No FID for ‘s Gravenvoeren (OS GRTgaz-Fluxys) (cap. available Oct. 2013)

BBL OSMay 2007-March 2008Phase 1: 18 parties (forward flow capacity)March 2008: 4 bookings agreements signed

Energinet.dkFeb.09 – ongoing

GTS/Gasunie Integrated OS February 2009 – ongoing

10SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

Open seasons in France

Coordinated open season IP Blaregnies-Taisnières GRTgaz/Fluxys in 2007 (cap. Available in 2013)

Open season IP Obergaibach 2005 – GRTgaz (new available capacities in 2008 and 2009)

Two coordinated open seasons France-Spain 2009 Reinforcement of the

Western axis (Larrau) in 2013 Open season for the

development of the Eastern axis in 2015

LNG open season Montoir (in 2007)

LNG open season Fos Tonkin (ongoing)

11SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

OS GRTgaz/Fluxys

Launched in April 2007 Phase 1: 39 shippers in Belgium

and 37 shippers in France Beginning 2008: Postponement of

the process due to discussions on transit tariffs in Belgium between CREG and Fluxys

GRTgaz

GTS 2012 Open

Season

Nov. –Dec. 2008: binding phase – 14 binding agreements in Belgium (~ 316 GWh/day) and 17 in France (~ 592 GWh/day)

Capacities available in December 2013 (whereas according to initial planning, capacity was forecasted for end 2012)

12SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

OS France/Spain

The development of the interconnections between France and Spain is based on 2 fully coordinated OS

Successfully completed: OS for the Western axis to increase interconnection capacity up to 5.5 bcm/y in both directions from 2013

CentreFrance

Rhône

MidCat

North

SouthGuyenne

Larrau

Biriatou

CentreFrance

Rhône

MidCat

North

SouthGuyenne

Larrau

Biriatou

To be held in the 1st half of 2010: creation of a new Eastern axis could create interconnection capacity of 6 bcm/y in the direction France-Spain and 7,6 bcm/y in the other direction

13SG Meeting – Stockholm, 26 November 2009

Shippers’ viewERGEG Consultation (preliminary results)

Do you think that operators of adjacent systems should share the following information for a successful coordination?

(1) Aggregate requested amount of

capacity/point

(2) Amount of requested capacity/

point/ participant (anonymised)

(3) Commercially sensitive info such as the amount of

requested capacity / point / participant

(including identities)

Yes 20 18 8

No 0 1 11

Not Known 0 1 1

No answer* 1 1 1

Total users 21 21 21

* The shipper who did not answer to (1) and (2), answered YES to (3)

19 shippers (out of 21) support the exchange of disaggregated data on an anonymous basis