Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Review Group 0221- Action 012 27 November 2008.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Review Group 0221- Action 012 27 November 2008."— Presentation transcript:

1 Review Group Action 012 27 November 2008

2 RG0221 – 012 Option C & Interim Arrangements.
Option C: Security is needed for any capacity currently allocated to the User. Advantages & Disadvantages were identified as: Advantages: Would affect the balance of risk between Users and community in the community’s favour Treats all Users the same Crystallises and quantifies current socialised risk Disadvantages Sudden increase in industry wide requirement to provide security may require delayed implementation for Security Instrument Providers to provide instruments required and for National Grid to assess them. Some Users may not be able to comply with new arrangements and may face increased risk of failure or sanctions. There is an assumption that for future QSEC Auctions all security arrangements will be in place within 28 days of Capacity Allocation.

3 RG0221 – 012 Options for Interim Arrangements
Following Approval of Modification Proposal by the Authority the new security arrangements are put in place to take effect before the next QSEC Auction, i.e. to be effective for September 2009 or March 2010 auctions (Mod 230). What needs to be done to overcome disadvantages described on previous slide? Could Users get security in place in, say, 6-9 months? If security required in this period would an EBCC type arrangement (limited duration) be effective to try and mediate risks to Users/Community and could it be created / implemented in the same timescale, i.e. 6-9 months? Who would sit on this committee, what would its remit be e.g. sanctions, and would there be an appeal route? Following Approval of the Modification Proposal by the Authority the new security arrangements are put in place to take effect after the next QSEC Auctions, i.e. 2010, 2011, 2012….. What would the appropriate lead time be that would balance the risk on Users of having to put arrangements in place and that of giving such a long lead time that the current risks to the Community are not dealt with? Should introduction of the new arrangements be phased to cover capacity released in previous auctions? (Example schedule on next slide)

4 RG0221 – 012 Options for Interim Arrangements (2)
QSEC Auction Timings Capacity Release Period Arrangements Introduced Date of Introduction January 2003 Oct 2004 – Sep 2017 Phase 1 What is appropriate timing? September 2003 Apr 2005 – Mar 2020 February 2004 September 2004 Apr 2006 – Mar 2021 Phase 2 Sept – Dec 04 (MH Only) November 2005 Apr 2007 – Mar 2022 September 2006 Apr 2008 – Mar 2023 Phase 3 September 2007 Apr 2009 – Mar 2024 September 2008 Apr 2010 – Mar 2025


Download ppt "Review Group 0221- Action 012 27 November 2008."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google