Please insert at least 3 characters

FAQs on transaction reporting – Question II.3.1.33

I have a few questions related to REMIT reporting I am hoping you can help with.

  1. Is the aggregate delivery point or the sub terminal delivery point required? For example, for Beach contracts at Bacton, would we report the main Bacton terminal, or Bacton SEAL, which is the sub terminal?
  2. In table 1 – fields 38 (notional amount) and 41 (total notional contract quantity) – since we can report non-standard executions after invoicing, do these fields refer to the value of the invoice for that month, rather than the full agreement (which is not a defined amount) which may stretch over a year?

Answer:

Based on the information provided in the first question above, it is our understanding that the delivery point should be reported according to the terminal indicated in the contract. For example, if the contract indicates the sub-terminal, then both parties should use that EIC code.

OR

If the delivery point is at a terminal (e.g. for Beach contracts at Bacton), then the EIC code for the aggregate main terminal can be reported.

With regard to question 2, please see Annex II to the TRUM. (To be finalised)

Last update: 26/04/2017   RSS_Icon Subscribe to this Page’s RSS