1. European Transparency Requirements – Draft Mod Transmission Workstream 4 th September 2008

2. European Transparency Drivers  Transparency seen as key to liberalization of European gas market  Drivers:  Compliance with existing EC Regulation 1775/2005  3 rd Package of amendments to current Regulation/Directives on gas market liberalization  GRI NW (Gas Regional Initiative North West)

3. GRI NW Transparency Project  European Regulator’s Group for Electricity and Gas (ERGEG), of which Ofgem is member, established Gas Regional Initiative in April 2006  Develop regional solutions as stepping stone to European internal gas market  GRI NW Transparency project (Ofgem lead regulator)  Aim: improve publication of capacity and flow data  Transparency project plans developed by TSOs  Demonstrate commitment to respond to market requirements  Agreed information provision extends beyond requirements of EC Regulation 1775/2005  Anticipates 3 rd package amendments  Participation in GRI is voluntary, but TSOs are expected to deliver agreed outputs

4. UK Requirements  UK regime largely compliant and frequently exceeds requirements  Only 2 gaps identified concerning exit capacity and day ahead nominations  Compliance requires  provision of day ahead nominations at points of connections between TSOs and LNG terminals  publication of “technical, contracted and available” exit capacity at interconnectors  TSOs to publish agreed data set by end of 2008  If data not published then TSOs must identify reasons for delay (e.g. IT related, or legal) and provide implementation plans

5. UK Way Forward – Exit Capacity  Exit Capacity - (technical, contracted and available)  Await clarity re Exit Reform (November 2008)  Relevant point consultation (EC Regulation 1775/2005, Article 6.4) can also proceed at this point

6. UK Way Forward – Day Ahead Nominations  Requirements involve connections with other TSOs and importation points for “non-indigenous gas”  Original focus was on key entry points  Some concerns raised by stakeholders re this level of disaggregation  ASEP information considered more relevant to UK regime  Aligns nomination data with how entry capacity is sold  Publish at all major ASEPs to avoid discrimination issues  Bacton, Barrow, Easington, Garton, Hornsea, St Fergus, Teesside, Theddlethorpe, Isle of Grain & Milford Haven  Raise Mod for Publication of Day Ahead Nominations  Publish aggregate nomination at major ASEPs at 18:00 D-1  Information provided as part of MIPI Phase 2 N.B. Publication of nomination data is voluntary at present

7. Future Requirements  Current GRI NW Transparency Project now being described by ERGEG as “Phase I”  Network user groups (e.g. EFET, IFIEC) to provide paper re priorities for “Phase II”  Paper expected September/October 2008  TSOs to respond by next GRI NW Stakeholder conference in November 2008  3 rd Package  New information requirements such as “ex-ante and ex- post supply and demand information, based on nominations, forecasts and realised flows….”