Download
1 / 8
80 likes | 160 Views
ERGEG’s draft Guidelines on Art. 22. 28 responses (4 of them confidential) 17 suppliers/traders/integrated energy companies 3 TSOs 6 Associations 1 SSO 1 Regulator. Results from ERGEG’s public consultation. The majority of respondents agreed on the following points:
E N D
ERGEG’s draft Guidelines on Art. 22 • 28 responses (4 of them confidential) • 17 suppliers/traders/integrated energy companies • 3 TSOs • 6 Associations • 1 SSO • 1 Regulator
Results from ERGEG’s public consultation • The majority of respondents agreed on the following points: • The scope should include “identical” new technology • Exemption procedure has to be considered on a case-by-case basis • Open Seasons should not be mandatory and should not be used for allocating equity • There should be no ex-ante preference for LNG terminals • Consultations with neighbouring authorities should take place when dealing with infrastructure of cross-border relevance
Results from ERGEG’s public consultation- respondents’views • Partial exemptions are preferable over full exemptions, howevercase-by-case evaluation is needed • Incumbents should not be excluded from exemptions, but this should remain an exception. In such cases NRAs should give preference to partial exemption. • There is a need to establish ex-ante transparent, stable and consistent rules on the circumstances under which an exemption could be reviewed • “Diversification of suppliers”should be added to the list as another means to fortify Security of supply • The criterion of “Risk assessment” should not be dependent on project dimensions only • Exemption reviews should be subject to the condition that transparent, stable and predetermined rules are defined
Consensus achieved between ERGEG and the Commission • ERGEG welcomes the clearly structured paper which provides pragmatic guidance and a useful basis for the further harmonisation of Art. 22 practise among responsible authorities • ERGEG thanks the Commission for aligning its paper with the work produced by the ERGEG and the findings from the respective public consultation.
Consensus achieved between ERGEG and the Commission • Several aspects of the revised “Commission Draft Staff Working Document” draw on the results from the ERGEG consultation: • Proportionality may make partial exemption preferable over full exemption • Application of anti-hoarding procedures to the exempted part of the infrastructure • Taking into account specifics of LNG terminals not a priori, but on the basis of the case by case approach • Consultation with neighbouring authorities should not be limited to interconnectors, but be conducted when dealing with all infrastructure of cross-border relevance
ERGEG recommendations • Additional and new points in the Commission’s Draft Staff Working Document • Natural Monopoly vs. infrastructure competition (Box on p. 7)andRisk assessment where a regulated and a merchant infrastructure are planned in parallel(Box on p. 15) • Creating parallel infrastructure may in some cases be inefficient and costs to consumers must be considered. • Regulators and competition authorities need to ensure against any collusion or anti-competitive behaviour where competing infrastructure does exist. • Points from Madrid Forum 14 • ERGEG still sees a need for better guidance through a higher level of detail on preconditions and consequences of review clause
Further information is available at www.energy-regulators.eu Thank You !
