Implementation of EASEE-gas’ rules Or …Working towards a functioning European gas network

1. Implementation of EASEE-gas’ rules Or …Working towards a functioning European gas network European Association for the Streamlining of Energy Exchange Maribor October 9, 2007

2. European Commission Member States Regulators Industry European Association for the Streamlining of Energy Exchange- gas • Created in March 2002 with the support of the European Gas Regulatory Forum (‘Madrid Forum’) • Mission: “To develop and promote common practices to simplify and streamline business processes between the stakeholders that will lead to an efficient and effective European Gas Market” • Registered office in Paris, France

3. Organisation Basic principles • Open, independent and fully transparent • Structured and balanced voting • Represents the entire gas chain, open to all stakeholders • Provides a working platform for the gas industry • Voluntary guidelines unless adopted by a governmental agency

4. Producers Producers Producers Producers LNG Terminal LNG Terminal LNG Terminal LNG Terminal and Storage and Storage and Storage and Storage Operator and Operator and Operator and Operator and Service Service Service Service Provider Provider Provider Provider (LTSOSP) (LTSOSP) (LTSOSP) (LTSOSP) End Users End Users End Users End Users EASEE-gas Segments Ownership of gas Physical flow of gas Associate Associate Associate Associate Members Members Members Members Traders & Traders & Traders & Traders & Shippers Shippers Shippers Shippers Transporters Transporters Suppliers Suppliers Suppliers Suppliers Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Network Network Network Network Retail Retail Retail Retail Operators Operators Operators Operators Suppliers Suppliers Suppliers Suppliers

5. Gas market rules & network access at EU level Commission’s Scope: 10 generic areas Impacting: • Security and reliability rules All • Grid connection and access rules, Most • Data exchange rules, All • Interoperability rules, All • Operational procedures in cases of emergencies, Many • Capacity allocation / congestion management rules, Some • Rules for trading, Some • Transparency rules, All • Balancing rules including • rules on nominations procedures, Many • rules for imbalance charges Some • rules for operational balancing between TSO’s systems TSOs • Rules for harmonised transport tariff structuresMost

6. Gas market rules & network access at EU level Market rules design Impact on segments Network access Data exchange rules Interoperability rules Congestion management Capacity trading Commodity trading Transparency Balancing rules Cap. incr. planning, tariff meth. Master trading agreements Other bi-lateral agreements Producers Traders TSOs Service DSOs Suppliers End Users Shippers Providers

7. Gas market rules & network access at EU level Network operation & physical design Impact on segments Security-reliability Maintenance System losses Quality commingling (op.) Residual balancing Inter TSO compensation Inter TSO grid operation Ten-year statement Tariff method. (existg infrastr) Op. emergency procedures Producers Traders TSOs Service DSOs Suppliers End Users Shippers Providers

8. All Market Participants TSOs only Gas market design & market operation at EU level Market Design Market Operation Time Network Operating Rules Market Rules

9. Development and implementation of codes, standards, and procedures across the EU 27 Developing rules & standards impacting all stakeholders Market Design Implementation and optimal management of EU grid supporting Market Operation • Open, transparent • Binding agreements • Involvement of all stakeholders TSO TSO TSO TSO Consultation Role Producers TSO´s End Users TSO TSO TSO TSO Suppliers DSO´s Retail suppliers TSO TSO TSO TSO Shippers & Traders Service Providers ... TSO TSO TSO TSO Optimal Management EASEE-gas GTE+ Guidance/ Regulations Enforcement ERGEG + Develop CBP’s Advice Commission

10. CBP Implementation Survey 2007

11. 2003 Harmonisation of Units Implementation deadline 2005 2003 Nomination & Matching Implementation deadline 2005 2004 Edig@s No implementation deadline 2005 Gas Quality Harmonisation Implementation deadlines 2006 and 2010 2005 Interconnection Agreement Implementation deadline 2007 2005 Constraints Handling Implementation deadline 2006 Approved CBPs included in survey

12. Common Data Communications Network Message transmission protocol Company’s Identifier encoding Connection point identifier encoding Harmonisation of the allocation information exchange Edig@s revision and version rules Secondary trading of capacity 2007 CBPs Approved Sep 2007 Out for consultation – expected to be approved Nov 2007 Under development

13. Survey carried out in Aug/Sep 2007 Additional responses from Finland, Sweden and Switzerland Fewer responses from some other countries Responses cover 18 markets/ systems

14. All respondents indicated that all markets/systems in the survey are using bar to measure pressure CBP1 Harmonisation of Units Pressure: bar CBP element implemented

15. Most markets appear to use Coordinated Universal Time UK & IRL require Network Code changes SWI indicates systems and financial issues AUT indicates legislative and regulatory changes required ESP and ITA have not stated barriers CBP2 Nomination & Matching ProcessUse of Coordinated Universal Time CBP element implemented CBP element not implemented CBP element not implemented due to regulatory/legislative issues

16. Most markets appear to use Lesser Rule for matching FIN only has single source, so no need for matching The GBR regime does not include matching and agents act for the shippers at interfaces. There are no requests from shippers to change existing arrangements IRL, NIR, IUK and POR use matching but not with Lesser Rule in all cases All would require Network Code and/or Interconnection Agreement changes CBP2 Nomination & Matching ProcessLesser Rule applies to matchingMessages to contain matching shipper CBP element implemented CBP element not implemented

17. Some markets are not complying with nomination deadlines FIN only has single source, so deadlines agreed bilaterally DEN and SWE working to implement CBP in near future Most others have quoted Interconnection Agreements and Network Code changes as barriers to implementation No specific barriers mentioned in ITA CBP2 Nomination & Matching ProcessDeadlines for initial nominations CBP element implemented CBP element in process of being implemented CBP element not implemented

18. Generally well adopted through central area of Europe FIN only has single source so communications agreed Some systems in GER use it and others do not All others indicate IT issues, internal resource and/or financial issues as barriers GBR & SWE also indicate Network Code changes are required No specific barriers mentioned in ITA or ESP CBP 3 Use of Edig@s CBP element implemented CBP element implemented in some systems CBP element not implemented CBP element not implemented due to regulatory/legislative issues

19. In most systems the CBP has been implemented, partly implemented or is in the process of being implemented FIN single source SWE old limits are close & need agreement with DEN BEL, DEN, NOR in process of implementing all limits GER some systems adopted ahead of new DVGW spec. NED implemented at some points but legacy problems slowing down others GBR & POR require legislative changes to technical specs IRL & NIR linked to GB spec. AUT requires changes to OVGW CBP4 Gas qualityHarmonisation of S, CO2, WDP, HCDP CBP element implemented CBP element implemented in some systems CBP element close to being implemented CBP element not implemented CBP element not implemented due to regulatory/legislative issues

20. Most systems are either making progress towards the 01/10/2010 deadline or are waiting for the results of the CEN study before implementing changes GB also has a Government review to conclude IRL & NIR are linked directly to the GB spec. Changes required to interconnection agreements in POR SWE gave no indication of progress CBP4 Gas qualityHarmonisation of Wobbe, RI, Oxygen CBP element implemented CBP element in process of being implemented CBP element not implemented CBP element not implemented due to regulatory/legislative issues

21. Quite good progress is being made particularly in markets with largest interconnection Non-implementation does not always mean an issue of interoperability (e.g. Finland, Sweden, Ireland) Some legislative and regulatory barriers to implementation in some countries (Units & Quality) National regulation needs to provide the proper framework/support to allow implementation Can take time to modify national network codes and needs support from all market participants Countries further east have issue of compliance … with single supplier Survey conclusions

22. Implementation of EASEE-Gas CBP in the SSE region relies on a number of factors to be effective • More feedback and active membership needed, along the whole natural gas value chain in SSE • Better feedback from EASEE-Gas members: • Czech Republic • Slovenia • Poland • Feedback from non-EASEE-Gas members: • Producers, shippers, TSOs, DSOs, suppliers/service providers • Especially in the South East Region • BOTH in ERGEG/EU member states • AND in neighbouring countries, e.g. countries of the Energy Community

23. Participation in EASEE-Gas CBPOn a voluntary basis • Green:Respondent already • Yellow:GRI REM SSE, non respondent • Light blue:EnC members • Dark blue:EnC observer countries • Involvement sought from GRI REM SSE and EnC countries • EASEE-Gas now to approach market participants in these countries

24. Benefits of participating in EASEE-Gas andFuture role of EASEE-GAS • EASEE-Gas: A broad platform for structured CBP development and implementation monitoring (?) • EASEE-Gas ideally suited to play the role of a multi-stakeholder platform involving all stakeholder within the natural gas value chain • EASEE-GAS hence as the ideal vehicle for consultation: Strengths of the EASEE-gas consultation process 3rd PackageInteraction needed Success of the development of codes and standardswill crucially rely on the involvement of all stakeholdersnot just transmission system operators

25. www.EASEE-gas.org EASEE-gas

26. A structured consultation process Prioritised in line with Annual Plan approved by the Board Work Group announced to members by Executive Committee (ExCom) Common Business Practice Request from stakeholder Each Segment has 2 votes irrespective of number of participants in attendance or by phone.Majority is over 50% Working Group develops Common Business Practice Balanced Voting Executive Committee approves CBP for release to all members Each ExCom Member votesMajority is over 50% Majority Voting Members comments received and Working Group modifies CBP accordingly Each ExCom Member votesMajority is over 50% AND max of 1 vote against in each segment Executive Committee approve CBP Balanced Voting 3 or more Full Members may appeal within 60 days General MeetingMajority is over 50% Full membership ratification CBP is approved

27. Gas Quality HarmonisationThe Approach Extensive industry consultation has taken place Technical advice received from Marcogaz

28. The Gas Quality Harmonisation Common Business Practice