Entry Capacity transfers in the
constrained period
Transmission Workstream
5th October 2006
Entry Capacity transfers in the constrained
period

Based on allowing transfer of capacity between interacting
ASEPs



Transfers take place within zones on a 1:1 basis
Capacity transfer allows ASEP capability to transfer
Monthly Capacity made available through a new auction



Subject to a Nodal maxima
Industry concerns

Doesn’t go far enough


AMTSEC
Sterilisation of Entry Capacity
Agreed to further explore the possibility of transfers across
zones
Transfers between zones

How can this be achieved

Earlier workstream presentations suggested this could be done
through;

Commercial exchange rates


Physical exchange rates


Buyer covers the incremental cost of transferring capacity
Exchange rate factors in likelihood of constraints
Is it possible to allow transfers between Zones that are
adjacent and have ‘some’ physical interaction
ASEPs with no physical interaction
 ASEPs with limited/variable physical interaction
 ASEPs with a strong physical interaction

Physical exchange rates

Transfers between ASEPs with no physical
interaction
 Does
not allow transfer of physical capability
 Any transfer would be using existing headroom (if any)
near recipient ASEP or creates incremental risk at
recipient ASEP.
 Therefore no exchange rate available
Physical exchange rates

Transfers between ASEPs with limited/varying
physical interaction
 Physical
interaction only comes into play when capacity
transfer reduces flows at the Donor ASEP

Physical interaction limited by configuration of Network


Multi junction
Compressors
 Therefore
possible for ASEPs in close proximity to have
no / minimal transfer of capability as a result of a request
to transfer capacity.
Capacity Exchange rate
Capacity available to
transfer to Recipient
ASEP
Capacity Exchange rate
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Capacity reduced at Donor ASEP
Physical exchange rates

Certain ASEPs have a 1:1 exchange rate
 Share
common areas of pipeline and/or junctions
 Highly interactive

If 1 unit of flow decreases at one ASEP then 1 unit of additional
flow would be allowed at interacting ASEP
 Basis
of grouping ASEPs into zones
Zonal definition

Zonal Definition
 ASEPS
placed within the same zone if;
Share common areas of pipeline and multi junctions
 Highly interactive

If 1 unit of flow decreases at one ASEP then 1 unit of additional
flow would be allowed at interacting ASEP

NTS Schematic – Easington Area
Teesside
Bishop
Auckland
Barrow
Hornsea
Garton
Carnforth
Asselby
Easington
Scunthorpe
Warrington
Theddlethorpe
Hatton
Bacton
Alrewas
Burton Point
Peterborough
Wisbech
Multiple Transfer requests

Provision of certainty to Users of applicable
exchange rates
 Prior
to participation in an auction to enable transfer of
unsold capacity;
Uncertainty around demand for capacity in forthcoming auction
 Uncertainty around whether Users would secure the capacity to
enable the transfer to take place.

 Exchange
rate may change after the auction.
Multiple requests
Baseline
Transfer request 10
Units
Transfer request 10
Units
Transfer request 10
Units
Capacity Exchange rate 2:1
Capability
Multiple requests
Baseline
Transfer request 10
Units
Transfer request 10
Units
Capacity Exchange rate 4:1
Capability
Multiple requests
Baseline
Transfer request 10
Units
Capability
Capacity Exchange rate 0
Alternative proposals

Unsold Capacity
 Provide
wide range of exchange rates
 ‘Lock in’ Users to transfer request

Sold Capacity
 First
come first served
Way forward

Modification Proposal to go to October Mod Panel?
 Does
Proposal meet the relevant objectives?
 Is the Proposal sufficiently developed?
 Is it worthwhile proceeding with Proposal?