As market participants will not be allowed to trade until they are registered, it may potentially represent a barrier to trade in the internal energy market.

Registration will not be a one-off event, but rather an ongoing requirement due to obligation to keep information provided up-to-date. From the practical point of view it is therefore necessary to establish within corporate structures of market participants arrangements ensuring that new requirements will be properly and timely discharged.

It should be noted that market participants are under obligation to register even if they are located outside the European Union.

 

Another issue of potential significance for the wider market is the commercial exploitation for data contained in the part of the register publicly revealed by ACER.

 

 

 

graph1

 

 

Somebody my ask why exactly 100 MW (and above) outage is treated as inside information under REMIT Regulation and what is the legal basis for such determination...

 

ccr core

 

1. Are there in any Member State any energy exchanges which do not qualify as regulated markets or MTF as defined by MiFID (for instance act under specific national legislation divergent from financial markets regulations)?

2. Do the energy exchanges referred to under point 1 trade in physically settled commodity (electricity) forwards?

3. Are transactions mentioned in points 1 and 2 captured by MiFID?

 

 

It seems that there is no agreement between European Supervisory Authorities and non-financial market participants as regards draft Technical Standards on risk mitigation techniques for OTC derivatives not cleared by a CCP under the Regulation on OTC derivatives, CCPs and Trade Repositories (the draft RTS).

 

 

There are grounds for applying certain regulatory guidance elaborated under financial instruments’ market abuse regime to wholesale energy products regulated by the REMIT Regulation. The best practice for the treatment of rumours seems to be good example.

 

These points might also be of relevance for emitters of greenhouse gases, considering interdependencies between electricity and carbon price curves and the future potential covering of emissions allowances by the financial instruments legislation.

 

 

An existing generating unit which is not compliant with a provision of the Network Code should apply for derogation within 12 months from the day the requirement, of which it is not compliant with, becomes applicable.

 

The network operator will have the right to refuse the operation of the generating unit, if the 12 months period terminates without an application for derogation.

 


What precisely should be published under new disclosure scheme for wholesale energy products?

ACER Agency in its Guidelines built its list consisting of three main items:
- any planned outage, limitation, expansion or dismantling of capacity of one generation unit that equals or exceeds 100 MW, including changes of such plans,
- any unplanned outage or failure of capacity that equals or exceeds 100 MW for one generation unit, consumption or transmission facility, including updates on such outages or failures,
- any other information that is likely to have a significant effect on the prices of one or more wholesale electricity product if made public;

the last one however is quite spacious.

But ERGEG’s catalogue released in December 2010 as regards electricity generators stipulated the positions for disclosure far more extensively and specifically.


Is the publication on market participant’s own website the sufficient discharge of the disclosure obligation on wholesale energy market?

 

The main body of the REMIT Regulation applies from 28 December 2011. So, practically, it is useful to precisely define what arrangements energy firms should have in place as of that date.

The newly published ACER guidelines on REMIT coincide with the release of the ‘CEER final advice on the regulatory oversight of energy exchanges, A CEER Conclusions Paper’. Perceived jointly, the considerations of the Union and the national energy regulators, lean towards the  reflection what we find at the end of the regulatory direction started by REMIT. The problem particularly concerns vertically integrated undertakings.

 

 

The thorough re-calibration of energy trading licensing regime is looming. Besides standard registration required by the REMIT Regulation, the wholesale energy market participants will have the option for choosing either Europe-wide passport for wholesale trading in electricity and gas or MiFID passport – depending on the projected extent of business activity.

 

Market participants remaining beyond the scope of MiFID, will have to, however, regularly and on an ongoing basis, monitor exemptions foreseen by this Directive (currently undergoing the revision under the so-called MiFID II and MiFIR procedures) and the character of contracts concluded on the market so that not to run the risk of a charges of providing financial services without proper authorisation.

 

Attachments:
Download this file (remit en s. 10-11.pdf)remit en s. 10-11.pdf[ ]46 kB
Download this file (remit en s. 6-7.pdf)remit en s. 6-7.pdf[ ]48 kB