Gas Transmission and Capacity Pricing Workshop – Topics for Discussion 11 April 2013

Reminder of main themes of submissions on PEA’s preliminary advice Gas Industry Co2 PEA failed to set-out a ‘vision’ for the future Dissatisfaction with the problem definition including a suggestion by Market Reform (Larry Ruff) that the fundamental problem is the point-to-point capacity definition and that a ‘Market Carriage’ type regime may be preferable Support for greater transparency PEA did not consider all the options in particular, the option of extending the MPOC regime to Vector pipelines should have been considered

Options to be analysed in July 2013 paper Gas Industry Co3 Capacity follows end user o as set out in GIC’s November 2010 Retail Competition and Transmission Capacity: Statement of Proposal Capacity auctioning when commercial capacity is scarce o ‘straw man’ developed to specify auctioning method etc Convergence o further convergence of Maui and Vector access arrangements towards what some submitters refer to as a ‘common carriage option’ or a ‘Maui style arrangement’ Integration of transmission and gas markets o Victoria style ‘market carriage’ arrangement Others?

What could ‘Convergence’ include? Gas Industry Co4 Common administrative arrangements, eg: o Dispute resolution arrangements o Code change arrangements o Technical standards (eg metering) Common transportation concepts, eg: o Extending OBA arrangements to all receipt and delivery points o Equating AQ and term capacity o A common nominations regime across both pipeline systems o Common curtailment arrangements on both pipelines Common IT system, ie: o Orderly transition from OATIS to a less customised system

Questions for participants Gas Industry Co6 1.Are there any other options the PEA should consider? 2.Is the rough-cut assessment of the options against the problem definition reasonable? 3.Do people have any feedback about the convergence option?

Possible Work Programme Gas Industry Co7