ENTSOG TYNDP 2017 - Main Report

Listing of projects not in NDPs, with infrastructure gap addressed

According to Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No. 715/2009, the Community-wide network development plan shall build on national investment plans. This does not prevent, from a legal perspective, that projects are submitted to the TYNDP although they are not yet part of a national investment plan. Indeed, TYNDP is a non-binding exercise that allows an EU-wide perspective on projects. In TYNDP 2017, as part of the project data collection, project promoters have been requested to indicate if their projects were part of the national development plan (NDP). The way Project Promoters have answered may vary depending on the interpretation of the question. Projects in the validation phase of the respective NDPs led to either a positive or negative response to this request. For future data collections, ENTSOG should further clarify what is expected from project promoters in answering such request. In case of projects which are not part of the relevant NDPs, TSOs or project promoters have provided the reasoning behind the project is not part of a NDP. Information on infrastructure gaps addressed by the project was also part of the information collected from project promoters. Following ACER recommendation, and based on the project information as received from the project promoters in the TYNDP project data collection, ENTSOG has included a new Annex A3. Although this information was previously available in Annex A1, this provides a targeted overview of the TYNDP projects for which were reported as not included in NDPs, together with the reason for non-NDP inclusion as well as the infrastructure gaps addressed by these projects, as provided by the promoters. About 75% of the TYNDP projects are reported as listed in NDPs. It is worth mentioning that in the case of about 40% of the projects not part of the relevant NDP, the reasons for non-inclusion are outside the control of the Project Promoters (e. g. country is outside EU, Project Promoters are not TSOs, country does not have a NDP, etc). As part of its Opinion, ACER offered national regulatory authorities (NRAs) to provide comments on TYNDP projects that had significant differences  1) in the characteris- tics in comparison to the information available in their NRA (last NDP or other source). These comments are available as an annex to ACER Opinion  2) and provide valuable additional information on projects, as a supplement to the promoter information as provided as part of TYNDP Annex A. The comments from the NRAs in particular reflect recent project information, NRAs own views on project promoter information, and in some occasion identification of incorrect data in project submission. The comments regarding incorrect data have been incorporated in the final version of the TYNDP, within Annex A. Regarding recent project information, it is a standard feature of projects that they keep on evolving as time passes. In TYNDP, the information on projects has to be frozen at one point in time, to ensure that the development process is performed in a timely manner in line with the TYNDP publication timeline. NRA Comments on the TYNDP 2017 projects

 1) ACER Opinion specifies, page 26 footnote 52: NRAs were invited to indicate significant differences (not due to natural evolution of a project) in the characteristics (data fields) in comparison to the information available in their NRA (last NDP or other source). ENTSOG’s TYNDP 2017 data is as of 25 May 2016, when data collection process was closed for this TYNDP.  2) http://www.acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Opinions/Opinions/ACER%20Opinion%2006-2017.pdf

Ten-Year Network Development Plan 2017 Main Report | 29