All tariffs and charges in the FPS are governed by 3 key principles:

  • Set by a competitive process where appropriate and otherwise economically justified
  • 反映提供服务的性质
  • Representative of a fair balance between risk taken and return earned

The Components of the Tariff

关税已经建立了从4关键部件that fully reflect the cost of developing and operating the Forties System:

  • 历史资本投资
  • Future Operating Costs
  • Future Capital Costs
  • 未来退役费用


The magnitude of the Historic Capital Investment component has been evaluated following Office of Fair Trading guidance that states 'it is justifiable to seek recompense for a historic investment (through tariff) where it can be shown that the investor has not yet recovered a reasonable return on that investment.' Investment in FPS can be categorised into three individual investment phases (as shown in the diagram below). To fairly evaluate the return of the system each investment decision has been evaluated independently.

FPS throughput (mbd) diagram-min.png


The second £1bn investment phase in the early 1990's was made to expand the capacity of FPS in order to win additional 3rd party business. This investment was over and above that required to provide continued service to existing customers and did not have the security of guaranteed future volumes or revenue.

The profitability of the £1bn investment has been accessed by comparing the cost of capital of the project at the time of inception with the actual return achieved from business subsequently won (post '93).

A third tranche of investment was made in the mid 2010's to comply with environmental legislation to ensure future system longevity. Further investment is anticipated for the first half of the 2020's to enable FPS to continue to provide services out to 2040 and beyond.

The analysis has shown that the return associated with the £1bn investment (including an equivalent notional return from INEOS equity business) has yet to meet the cost of capital. A return on the £400m investment is built into the standard tariff which is payable by new customers from 2014 onwards. In both cases the revenue required to meet the cost of capital has been assumed to be shared equally amongst all past and/or expected future barrels, as appropriate.

The ability to meet the cost of capital over the full life of the system may be inhibited by the ability to manage future risks such as:

  • Safety & Integrity
  • Environmental Legislation
  • Rising Costs
  • Reducing Throughputs
  • Decommissioning


Future Operating and Capital Costs

INEOS will invest significant sums in FPS to maintain availability and integrity. The future operating and capital cost components have been estimated to evaluate the future cost of operating the system up to 2040 and then have been averaged across all forecast barrels.

Decommissioning Costs


In the event that additional treatment is required (e.g. if fluids do not meet standard specification) the transportation tariff shall be amended accordingly to reflect the cost of providing such additional services.

INEOS' Operating Cost Option

The standard form FPS Transportation and Processing Agreement (TPA) contains an option for INEOS to switch customers from a tariff-based charge to a cost-share based charge.

INEOS appreciates that FPS customers would like to understand if and when INEOS is likely to exercise this option. The predominant factors which will influence INEOS' decision for onset of cost-share in FPS are long term system throughput, each entrant's utilisation of the FPS facilities and their current tariff. Clearly this will be dynamic, involving variables out-with INEOS direct control or influence. Nevertheless, we will be open and honest in our discussions with customers as to a range of potential dates for the onset of cost-share.