capacity methodology statements transmission workstream 5 th july 2007
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Capacity Methodology Statements Transmission Workstream 5 th July 2007](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081822/5697bfd11a28abf838cab353/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Capacity Methodology Statements
Transmission Workstream
5th July 2007
![Page 2: Capacity Methodology Statements Transmission Workstream 5 th July 2007](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081822/5697bfd11a28abf838cab353/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Capacity Methodology Statements
Constrained Period Unconstrained
EntryEntry Capacity Transfer and Trade Methodology
Statement
Entry Capacity Substitution Methodology Statement
Incremental Entry Capacity Release Methodology
Statement
Exit
Exit Capacity Baseline
Revision Methodology Statement
Exit Capacity Release Methodology Statement
(Interim & Enduring)
![Page 3: Capacity Methodology Statements Transmission Workstream 5 th July 2007](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081822/5697bfd11a28abf838cab353/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Methodology Statement – Timetable
StatementConsultation
startConsultation
endComment
Capacity Transfer and Trade 2nd May 30th May Under review
Incremental Entry Capacity Release 16th May 5th June With Ofgem
Entry Capacity Substitution 18th May 15th June See later slides
Exit Capacity Release
(Interim)16th May 13th June With Ofgem
Exit Capacity Release
(Enduring)TBC
Linked to implementation of mod 116A
Exit Capacity Baseline
RevisionTBC
Applies to Enduring Exit regime
![Page 4: Capacity Methodology Statements Transmission Workstream 5 th July 2007](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081822/5697bfd11a28abf838cab353/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Consultation on the proposed Entry Capacity Substitution Methodology Statement
Key concerns expressed: Loss of capacity at the donor ASEP
Makes new projects expecting to use “spare” capacity less viable. Impact on Security of Supply.
Storage contracts are generally of short duration. User unable to signal long term requirements to prevent capacity being substituted away.
May lead to inefficient investment decision as Users bid to protect capacity normally obtained short-term.
Loss of Total Capacity Generally a limit on exchange rates preferred.
Most respondent unable to specify a precise rate, but 1:1 and 1.5:1 suggested.
![Page 5: Capacity Methodology Statements Transmission Workstream 5 th July 2007](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081822/5697bfd11a28abf838cab353/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Consultation on the proposed Entry Capacity Substitution Methodology Statement
Key concerns expressed: Scope of Substitutions.
Capacity substitutions limited to within zone to reserve capacity for within zone transfers and trades.
Substitutions should be applied to incremental requests irrespective of whether the NPV test is passed.
Adverse impact on short-term markets. Concern that proposals may have an adverse
impact of availability of NTS exit capacity, particularly flexibility capacity.
![Page 6: Capacity Methodology Statements Transmission Workstream 5 th July 2007](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081822/5697bfd11a28abf838cab353/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Consultation on the proposed Entry Capacity Substitution Methodology Statement
Key concerns expressed: Comments on Detail of Proposed Process
Use of lowest revenue driver to identify recipient ASEP Should the process aim to avoid “material” or
“incremental” risk? Exchanges should be assessed against “peak” flow
analysis. Definition of zones – storage ASEPs should be separate
from non-storage.