text: OJ L, 2024/1789, 15.7.2024 2 The review addresses natural gas and hydrogen network planning at the transmission level including selected observations regarding storage and regasification terminals. 3 In addition, Cyprus, Denmark, Romania did not submit responses to the questionnaire underlying the survey. The Swedish NRA did not submit responses arguing that there is currently no gas or hydrogen NDP, as it is not required by national law.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Link to latest list of projects included in the TYNDP 2024, published on 18 June 2024 by ENTSOG: https://www.entsog.eu/tyndp#entsog-ten-year-network-development-plan-2024 (Annex A) 5 Cyprus, Luxembourg and Malta have a derogation under

text: Article 9 of Directive 2009/73/EC

text: regarding the establishment of transmission system operators. Furthermore, Sweden and Finland are not required by national law to carry out a gas NDP. Finland, Luxembourg (TSO develops gas NDP based on national law) and Malta provided answers to the questionnaire, where applicable. 6 In the case of Spain, competences regarding network planning correspond to the Ministry. The Spanish NRA, CNMC, has no competences in the network planning process, e.g., in updating the NDP. 7 Law n. 214/2023 (Annual Market and Competition Law), which entered into force on 31 December 2023. 8 The Spanish NRA (CNMC) reports a four-year cycle but points out that the last gas NDP was approved in 2008, and it has not been updated yet.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: OJ L, 2024/1788, 15.7.2024. 10 BE, GR, PT and Spain include LNG terminals; BE, BG, ES, HU, PT and SK include underground gas storages

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: The gas NDP of Estonia does not include network development projects, considering a major gas demand reduction. 12 Decommissioning projects also include projects for repurposing reasons. 13 Due to confidentiality claims by project promoters, the CAPEX for 144 out of 326 (44%) projects is not included. 14 Project’s cost information is publicly not available in the gas NDP of Austria for some projects and for all projects in the NDPs of Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland due to confidentiality concerns of project promoters.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Based on ACER Opinion 09/2020 and ACER Opinion No 05/2021, there was little shift to a more integrated electricity and gas planning. 16 Annex II provides detailed information on the role of different infrastructure operators and the exchange of information with the gas TSO.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2022%3A230%3AFIN&qid=1653033742483 18 DE, ES, FI, FR, IE, IT, LT. 19 By the end of 2022, France had 514 biomethane production sites connected to the natural gas network. In Spain, there are two cases and Finland had four examples. 20 Only four NRAs report the inclusion of biomethane projects in the gas NDP. These projects include network adaptations to allow direct biomethane injection at transmission level, direct connection points for biomethane injection at transmission level and reverse flow capacity from the distribution to the transmission network. 21 DE, FR, HU and PL

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Enabling hydrogen blending requires network adaptations, especially in gas quality measurement systems. Metering equipment requires upgrades or chromatograph replacement to be able to measure hydrogen concentrations. Gas turbines, compressor stations, CNG tanks and some types of storage can only accept low hydrogen concentration (< 5%) and may also need retrofitting. 23

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: on the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, recital (74). This Regulation is part of the hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package. 24 Ibid,

text: Article 21

text: . 25 See ACER Opinion No 8/2022, pp.10-11 and Annexes.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Compared to 2022, the H2 concentration limit at gas transmission level increased in Austria from 4% to 10%. 27 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0301 28 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_23_4754 29 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2022%3A230%3AFIN&qid=1653033742483 30 However, several sources suggest a total EU hydrogen consumption in 2030 that lies below the objectives presented in the Hydrogen Strategy and the REPowerEU. 31

text: Directive (EU) 2024/1788

text: and

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: Regulation (EU) 2022/869

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: The “hydrogen core network” is the starting point of hydrogen transmission network in Germany. Gas TSOs jointly draft a planned hydrogen core network to the NRA, according to the Energy Industry Act. The core network aims at connecting key areas of hydrogen production, consumption, storage and import and consists of repurposed natural gas infrastructure and newly built pipelines. At the preparation of this Opinion, the draft is at public consultation stage and pending of approval by the German NRA. 34

text: Directive (EU) 2024/1788

text: Article 55

text: foresees a “single network development plan per Member State for natural gas and one single network development plan per Member State for hydrogen, or one joint plan for natural gas and hydrogen per Member State”. 35 AT, BE, CZ, DE, FR, LT, LV, PT. 36 These projects have different levels of advancement in the gas NDPs, e.g. planning status, implementation status.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: HNS owns and operates a hydrogen pipeline (Dow-Yara: https://www.hynetwork.nl/en/abouthynetwork/hydrogen-pipeline-dow-yara). Construction work has started on a first part of the national hydrogen network (https://www.hynetwork.nl/en/news/now-we-can-really-start-building-in-rotterdam) 38 Information about the first H2 transmission project: https://gasgrid.fi/en/2023/02/15/finlands-first-hydrogentransmission-project-moves-forward-demonstration-project-will-create-conditions-for-hydrogen-infrastructuredevelopment-in-finland/ 39 In view of the hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package, the procedure for certification and designation will likely be “renewed”. 40 In Croatia, Ireland, Portugal, Slovak Republic and Spain, the gas TSO (or subsidiaries of the gas TSO) takes the role of “acting” HTNO. 41 In Spain, Royal Decree – Law 8/2023 requires the provisional HNO to prepare a non-binding proposal for tenyear hydrogen backbone infrastructure plan that had to be turned into the Ministry for the Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge in April 2024. Enagás Infrastructuras de Hidrógeno, S.L.U. has been appointed as provisional HNO. A resolution of the Secretary of State of Energy has recently been published in the Spanish Official Journal publishing the Council of Ministers Agreement of 30 July 2024 empowering Enagás Infrastructuras de Hidrógeno, S.L.U. for the provisional exercise of the functions of development of European Projects of Common Interest of hydrogen networks.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: AT, BE, DE, ES, HU, IT, LU, NL, and planned in LT, LV. These market consultations were carried out by ministries and/or TSOs/Market Area Manager. 43 Link to latest list of projects included in the TYNDP 2024, published on 18 June 2024 by ENTSOG: https://www.entsog.eu/tyndp#entsog-ten-year-network-development-plan-2024 (Annex A)

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Project Type TYNDP TYNDP projects Share of NDP projects Included in latest gas NDP inclusion

text: Biomethane 5 3 60% Gas transmission pipeline 72 66 92% Hydrogen 202 67 33% LNG 12 8 67% UGS 11 10 91% Other 24 12 50%

text: Total 326 166 51%

text: For comparison, see ACER Opinion No 14/2019 on ENTSOG’s draft TYNDP 2018, ACER Opinion No 02/2021 on ENTSOG’s draft TYNDP 2020, and ACER Opinion No 08/2022 on ENTSOG’s draft TYNDP 2022 https://www.acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Opinions/Opinions/ACER%20Opinion% 2014-2019%20on%20the%20ENTSOG%20draft%20TYNDP%202018.pdf https://acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Opinions/Opinions/ACER%20Opinion%2002- 2021%20on%20the%20ENTSOG%20draft%20Ten-Year%20Network%20Development%20Plan%202020.pdf https://www.acer.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Publications/Opinions/ACER_Opinion_08-2022.pdf 45

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: Article 32

text: requires the TYNDP to “build on national investment plans”.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Croatia, Germany, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Italy, Hungary and Latvia

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: Oversight is seen as limited when NRAs provide non-binding scrutiny (e.g. opinion) on draft plans without hard powers to approve or issue binding amendment requests on draft plans.

text: Opinion No 07/2024

text: See

text: Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: . 49 Ibid.

identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2024

title: ACER Opinion 07-2024 on the consistency of gas and hydrogen national Network Development Plans with the EU Ten-Year Network Development Plan

text: PUBLIC

text: OPINION No 07/2024 OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS of 29 October 2024 on the review of gas and hydrogen national Network Development Plans to assess their consistency with the EU Ten-Year Network Development Plan

text: THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS,

text: Having regard to

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending Regulations

text: (EU) No 1227/2011

text: (EU) 2017/1938

text: (EU) 2019/942

text: and

text: (EU) 2022/869

text: and Decision

text: (EU) 2017/684

text: and repealing

text: Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: (recast/2005) , and, in particular,

text: Article 26(9)

text: and

text: Article 60(2)

text: thereof, Having regard to the outcome of the consultation with ACER’s Gas Working Group,

text: Whereas:

text: 1. INTRODUCTION

text: (1) The Opinion reviews the most recent editions of the European Union (EU) gas and hydrogen national development plans (NDPs) in view of ACER’s task to assess their consistency with the EU-wide Ten-Year Network Development Plans for gas and hydrogen (EU TYNDP), pursuant to

text: Article 26(9)

text: and

text: Article 60(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: . (2) The consistency of methodological aspects between NDPs and the EU TYNDP was assessed through a survey among national regulatory authorities (NRAs) from 6 June until 5 July 2024, to which 23 NRAs submitted a response . The projects’ consistency, i.e. the inclusion of EU TYNDP projects in most recent gas NDPs, is assessed based

text: on information publicly available from the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG) . (3) This Opinion focusses on: a. methodologies for gas network planning as well as the integration of decarbonised and low carbon gases (hydrogen and biomethane) in the gas networks; b. developments in hydrogen network planning as well as a review of the development of existing hydrogen infrastructure. (4) The Opinion summarises the main findings and includes recommendations aimed at improving consistency between national and European gas and hydrogen network planning. Detailed information supporting the findings is included in the Annexes.

text: 2. MAIN FINDINGS FOR GAS NETWORK PLANNING

text: 2.1. Status of most recent gas NDPs

text: (5) According to the information provided to ACER, all gas NDPs required by national 5 6 law are up to date, with two notable exceptions, Spain and Croatia. Regular updates of gas NDPs every two years or less would enhance the consistency and robustness between national and EU-wide network planning. A list with links to the most recent gas NDPs is presented in Annex I.

text: 2.2. Frequency and consolidation of gas NDPs

text: (6) Since the most recent consistency assessment of NDPs and EU TYNDP carried out by ACER in 2022, some changes in governance and regulatory processes have been observed. In Italy, the adaptation of a new legislation introduced several changes to the gas NDP process. These changes will apply to the upcoming NDP in 2025 and include a change in the frequency from annual to biennial and the adaptation from currently separate gas NDPs (one per TSO) to a single consolidated gas NDP at transmission level, prepared by the main gas TSO. (7) In 11 Member States (MS), the biennial publication frequency is consistent between NDPs and EU TYNDP. In nine MS, the publication frequency is annual. Spain is an exception with a four-year cycle .

text: (8) In all MS except France, a single gas NDP at transmission level is prepared. In France, both gas TSOs, GRTgaz and Téréga, draft a separate NDP. In MS with multiple gas TSOs, a consolidated gas NDP by the respective TSOs is prepared. (9) ACER supports the move towards a biennial frequency of NDPs in accordance with

text: Article 55 of Directive (EU) 2024/1788

text: on common rules for the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen. A biennial frequence strikes a balance between keeping the NDPs up to date and aligning NDPs with the EU TYNDP frequency, thus contributing to higher consistency. At the same time, a biennial frequency allows sufficient time for a proper consultation on the draft NDP and minimises delays. (10) ACER also welcomes that some NDPs of MS where more than one network operator exists have evolved towards a consolidated transmission NDP, also including Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) and Underground Gas Storage (UGS) projects. A consolidated NDP adds value by presenting joint analyses of investment needs and reflecting such needs into a single document.

text: 2.3. NRA’s oversight over the draft gas NDPs

text: (11) The role of NRAs to scrutinize network development plans varies across MS. In eleven MS, the respective NRA is formally empowered to approve or reject the draft proposal of the gas TSO(s) and to make or request changes to it. In nine MS, the respective NRA does not have approval power, and the NRA role varies. A more detailed description on the scrutiny of NDPs by the respective NRAs is provided in Annex II. (12) ACER reaffirms its view that strengthening the NRAs’ oversight and regulatory powers over NDPs could improve the consistency and efficiency of network planning at both national and EU-wide levels.

text: 2.4. Project inclusion in gas NDPs: type of projects

text: (13) Meeting market demand for capacity and meeting predefined policy scenarios are the main drivers for network development. Out of 20 reporting NRAs, seven NRAs report that network development is both market- and scenario-driven, while further seven NRAs report a mainly market-driven and four NRAs report a mainly scenario-driven network development. (14) In terms of the asset types included in the gas NDP, no changes have been observed since 2022. In addition to transmission assets, which are included in the NDPs of all Member States, seven MS also include LNG terminals and/or UGS projects in their gas NDPs. The NDPs of all MS except Estonia contain network development projects

text: (20 MS) . Furthermore, replacement projects (11 MS) and decommissioning projects (8 MS) are covered in the respective gas NDPs. (15) ACER encourages Member States to allow for the inclusion of decommissioning and repurposing projects in gas NDPs in accordance with

text: Article 55 of Directive (EU) 2024/1788

text: . These projects will be needed to have gas networks ready for energy transition in view of the expected decline of gas demand in the mid- and long-term.

text: 2.5. Project information and transparency of costs

text: (16) The projects collected in the EU TYNDP include project information, among other, on the commissioning year, the project maturity, the schedule and implementation status, associated costs for a limited number of projects and information on NDP inclusion, where applicable. (17) At national level, 18 reporting NRAs indicate that gas NDPs include project information on: • commissioning date (18 MS); • implementation status (15 MS); • increase of cross-border capacity (15 MS); • publicly available project cost data (13 MS); • required financing sources (9 MS).

text: (18) Similarly to the EU-TYNDP, project cost information is not publicly available in the NDPs of several MS due to alleged confidentiality concerns of the project promoters. (19) ACER reiterates its recommendation that fundamental project information (such as information on commissioning date, project status, increase of transport capacity, where relevant) should be published in the NDPs. Both TYNDP and all NDPs should include investment cost information, at least in an aggregated manner, as costs are essential information for evaluating investment proposals.

text: 2.6. Methodological approach to gas network development planning

text: (20) At EU level, the network development planning is carried out by ENTSOG and follows three main steps: building of scenarios, identifying infrastructure needs and assessing projects to determine each project’s potential benefit compared to its costs. At national level, MS define their own process for how scenarios are developed, whether and how the needs assessment is carried out and how potential solutions to those needs are assessed before projects are included in the NDP. Inconsistencies in

text: the methodologies may affect robustness and reliability of the network planning, which may lead to inaccurate insights on which policy decisions might be based.

text: 2.6.1 Scenarios and cross-border coordination

text: (21) Scenario development is typically the first step of network planning, where the future evolution of gas demand and supply, along possibly other energy vectors such as electricity and hydrogen, is assessed. The EU TYNDP scenarios are jointly developed by ENTSO-E, ENTSOG, and in the future also by the European Network of Network Operators for Hydrogen (ENNOH). The EU TYNDP for 2022 considers three scenarios: one scenario based on national policies and strategies and two top-down scenarios covering different time horizons up to 2050. (22) At national level, the number of scenarios/visions used for the elaboration of the respective gas NDP(s) ranges between one scenario (7 MS) and four (1 MS, France). The time horizon of these scenarios spans around 10 years in the NDPs of all MS, except for Italy, which extends to the year 2040. (23) The alignment of scenarios with policy targets varies significantly between MS. Most of the responding NRAs (12 out of 19) report an alignment of NDPs scenarios with different national and/or EU-wide plans, of which 10 NRAs report and alignment with the latest NECPs, seven NRAs report an alignment with Fit for 55 scenarios for achieving climate neutrality and five NRAs report an alignment with the REPowerEU plan (diversification of supplies, etc.) The remaining seven NRAs report an alignment only with other relevant scenarios at national level or were not able to assess any alignment of scenarios. (24) ACER stresses the importance that NDPs and the EU TYNDP should be based on compatible scenarios aligned with decarbonisation targets of national and European Energy Climate plans. (25) The number of scenarios jointly developed for gas and electricity increased to six MS , namely Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. A total of nine NRAs report that infrastructure operators other than gas transmission operators are considered in the scenario development process, such as gas and electricity distributor system operators (DSOs), LNG and storage system operators, as well as adjacent gas TSOs. (26) ACER welcomes the slight progress in the development of joint gas and electricity scenarios and the increased engagement with the distribution level, which are instrumental to create robust and consistent planning scenarios for efficient network planning. ACER finds that proper consultation and coordination between operators during the preparation of NDP scenarios contributes to improve the consistency of network planning.

text: 2.6.2 Stakeholders’ consultation

text: (27) Stakeholder consultations are essential for devising network plans serving the needs of network users and other stakeholders, both at national and EU level. (28) ENTSOG carries out a public consultation during the elaboration of the draft EU TYNDP, thus offering a platform for the engagement of market players and other stakeholders. However, the level of engagement of stakeholders’ during the EU TYNDP development process has decreased over time. (29) At the national level, 15 out of 21 responding NRAs report that public consultations are held in the scenario building process (run either by TSO or the NRA). In Belgium, Hungary, Luxembourg and Portugal, consultations only target specific stakeholders, such as Ministries, NRAs and other market players. In Czech Republic, there is no formal consultation carried out, but the scenarios are developed under the supervision of the market operator with assistance of relevant stakeholders. (30) ACER welcomes NRAs’ and TSOs’ efforts to appropriately involve stakeholders in the NDP process and considers it important to improve the NDPs’ quality and public acceptance.

text: 2.6.3 Infrastructure Needs Identification

text: (31) In most MS (11 out of 20), infrastructure needs are identified and quantified either as part of the NDP or as a stand-alone activity and report. In the gas NDPs of Greece, Ireland, Italy, and Latvia, there are some activities on infrastructure needs, but without the use of formal concept and metrics. (32) Infrastructure needs are mostly determined as a combination of different approaches, such as security of supply assessments (diversification of gas supply), system and market studies, economic tests (capacity auction, market consultation, demand shippers). Only the gas NDP of Slovakia includes the outcome of decarbonisation assessments (e.g., network investments for additional biomethane volumes) in its process of needs identification. (33) 15 NRAs noted that the respective gas NDP uses network modelling via hydraulic simulations (carried out for assessments of the ability of the network to cover stress/high demand situations) and 13 MS use market studies including projections of gas market fundamental data (supplies, demand, peak demand capacity and prices). However, sector-integrated modelling, at least covering the electricity and the gas sectors, are much less frequently used: only three NRAs report the use of such integrated modelling in the gas NDPs. (34) Target cross-border capacities are identified and quantified by the TSO(s) of most of the responding MS (12 MS). Half of these identified target cross-border capacities (6 MS) are aligned with the most recent NDPs of the neighbouring Member State(s) or adjacent countries. (35) ACER deems that the coordination of cross-border capacities and other projects with significant cross-border impact presents room for improvement and should be better coordinated across neighbouring NDPs. Effective coordination requires up-to-date

text: NDPs and regular discussions between neighbouring TSOs and NRAs on cross-border issues.

text: 2.6.4 Cost-benefit and SoS evaluation

text: (36) The gas NDPs of seven MS use a cost-benefit analysis for evaluating the net benefits of gas infrastructure investments. Six NRAs report the use of other analyses used to evaluate investments. (37) Only the Italian and Lithuanian NRA confirm that the NDP contains an economic evaluation of the value of cost of disruptions of gas supply due to potential gas supply interruptions. (38) ACER notes that the evaluation of the value of the cost of disruptions of gas supply in NDPs is very challenging, but this assessment remains relevant in view of existing risks of gas supply route disruption.

text: 2.7. Readiness of gas transmission networks for injection of hydrogen and biomethane

text: 2.7.1 Biomethane injection in gas transmission networks

text: (39) Biomethane, as a sustainable alternative to fossil gas, plays a significant role in achieving the EU’s energy transition objectives. The REPowerEU plan calls for increasing biomethane production to 35 bcm by 2030 . This represents a significant increase from current production levels, which will have to be integrated into the gas network. (40) Compared to 2022, some progress can be observed regarding biomethane developments. NRAs from seven MS report that biomethane is currently physically injected into the gas transmission system . In seven MS, there are investments/ adaptations foreseen to allow or increase direct injection of biomethane into the gas transmission system. (41) ACER notes an upward trend in the inclusion of biomethane developments/projects in the gas NDPs, increasing from 11 MS in 2020 and 12 MS in 2022 to 15 MS in 2024 . In comparison to 2022, Latvia has now included biomethane projects, while Austria, Poland and Slovakia incorporate biomethane primarily for scenario building assumptions. (42) In four MS , there are obligations for gas network operators to prioritise direct biomethane injections into the gas transmission system. Almost half of the responding NRAs (10 MS) report that gas transmission network operators must provide a connection point for direct biomethane injection upon request by a network user.

text: (43) ACER recommends that all gas NDPs include infrastructure investments for biomethane injections to support its integration into the EU's gas transmission network. At the same time, further cooperation between transmission system operators (TSOs), distribution system operators (DSOs), and biomethane producers is essential to ensure that gas network planning aligns with biomethane production growth. Priority access and connection for biomethane injections to the gas transmission network, along with incentives for biomethane production, are instrumental to facilitate the achievement of biomethane targets.

text: 2.7.2 Blending of hydrogen in gas transmission networks

text: Role in EU regulation (44) Unlike biomethane, which can be easily integrated into the gas grid, hydrogen blending poses both technical and economic challenges . The EU gas and hydrogen Regulation recognises that blending hydrogen into the natural gas system should be a last-resort option, as it is less efficient than using hydrogen in its pure form and reduces its economic value . Blending also impacts the operation of gas infrastructure, natural gas end-user applications, and the interoperability of crossborder systems. (45) According to EU Regulation, MS retain the right to decide whether to allow hydrogen blending in their national gas systems and to what degree such blending will be allowed. However, in order to prevent market segmentation, a Union-wide disputesettlement mechanism was introduced for cases in which there are disagreements on gas quality, including up to 2% hydrogen blending at cross-border interconnection points . This mechanism is designed to avoid restrictions to cross-border flows due to gas quality differences at interconnection points between Member States.

text: National developments

text: (46) While several NRAs reported in the past that their respective MS plans to increase hydrogen acceptance into the natural gas network , few changes have been observed. Notably, in 2021, the Latvian gas TSO established a hydrogen steering group in cooperation with the neighbouring operators (Estonia, Finland and Estonia). In 2023, these operators completed the first part of a jointly implemented research and development project on the possibilities of hydrogen injection into the gas transmission system of Estonia, Finland, Latvia and Lithuania. The study concluded that, theoretically, with relatively small investments in the transmission system, it is possible to transport natural gas with a hydrogen admixture ratio of 2% – 5%.

text: (47) In total, five MS (Austria, Germany, Italy, Latvia and Spain) have allowed hydrogen injection into the gas transmission network, the same countries as in 2022 with the addition of Latvia. (48) Similarly, the maximum hydrogen concentration accepted by TSOs in the natural gas network remains almost unchanged. The hydrogen concentration limit at gas transmission level ranges from 0.1% in Latvia to 10% in Austria and Germany.

text: 3. MAIN FINDINGS FOR HYDROGEN NETWORK PLANNING

text: (49) The European Union has set policy ambitions as regards hydrogen in the EU 27 28 29 Hydrogen Strategy , Fit for 55 Package and the updated REPowerEU plan . These aim for an aspirational demand target of 20 million tons of green hydrogen by 2030, with ten million tons expected to be produced in the EU and ten million tons imported from outside the EU . Achieving this large-scale hydrogen demand would require a dedicated European hydrogen pipeline network, including both new dedicated hydrogen pipelines as well as repurposing existing natural gas pipelines to transport pure hydrogen. (50) Given the uncertainties in future hydrogen demand, supply and need of transportation services, the future topology and scale of efficient hydrogen networks remain largely uncertain. The hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package and the revised TEN- E Regulation provide the overarching EU legal and regulatory framework for developing a hydrogen market and infrastructure on a European scale, which will need to be developed and implemented in the years to come.

text: 3.1. National hydrogen strategies and framework for network planning

text: (51) Hydrogen strategies are comprehensive plans developed by governments to promote the production, distribution, and use of hydrogen as a clean energy source. The strategies shape the direction for future policy frameworks and guide network planning developments. While at European level the EU has adopted a hydrogen strategy in 2020, followed by the revision of the TEN-E Regulation in 2022 and the newly adopted hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package in 2024, MS are at different stages of developing their national hydrogen strategies and legal framework for hydrogen network planning. (52) NRAs report that all MS except Estonia and Malta either already have an existent hydrogen strategy (15 MS) or plan to have one in the near future (6 MS). This is

text: consistent with 2022, with the addition Lithuania and Slovenia, which are now planning a hydrogen strategy. (53) NRAs from six MS -Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Malta, Poland and Portugalreport the existence of a national legal framework for hydrogen transmission regulation. In these six MS, the NRAs report to have some competence over hydrogen infrastructure. In Czech Republic, Malta, Poland and Portugal, hydrogen is defined by national law as a part of natural gas, so NRAs have indirectly some competence over the hydrogen sector. In Belgium, the NRA -CREG- recently gained competences for hydrogen transmission following the 2023 Belgian Hydrogen Law. CREG’s current competences consist of advisory powers over the hydrogen NDP, with the Ministry for Energy having the competence to approve the NDP. In Germany, the NRA has competence in the approval of the so-called “hydrogen core network” . Furthermore, operators of hydrogen networks can voluntarily declare to the NRA that their hydrogen network should be subject to regulation. (54) Hydrogen network planning framework may either be integrated with gas NDPs or handed separately for gas and hydrogen sectors . NRAs report that currently eight MS have included hydrogen in the most recent gas NDPs (i.e. integrated gas and hydrogen NDPs). In most MS (15), there is no framework for H2 network planning in legislation. However, in 13 MS, the gas network operators are promoting plans and/or studies for H2 network planning. (55) The integrated gas and H2 NDPs, as implemented by eight MS, cover different type of hydrogen network development . Projects for repurposing existing gas pipelines to dedicated 100% hydrogen pipelines are covered in the NDPs of Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Portugal, while new dedicated hydrogen pipeline projects are included in the NDPs of Austria, Belgium, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania and Portugal.

text: 3.2. Existing and future hydrogen infrastructure

text: (56) Hydrogen infrastructure is still in its early stages of development. The overall number of MS with an existing hydrogen pipeline system did not change since 2022. However, several NRAs report on concrete plans to establish and/or expand hydrogen infrastructure in their respective MS. (57) Belgium, France, Germany and the Netherlands report the existence of 100% hydrogen dedicated pipeline networks for industrial purposes, i.e., networks which

text: connect several industrial sites. In Belgium, there is a highly developed pipeline network of more than 600 km with cross-border connections with the Netherlands and France that serves industrial purposes (e.g., oil refineries) and is operated by the H2 production companies (e.g., Air Liquide). In the Netherlands, hydrogen pipelines exist and are owned and operated by private commercial companies. Hynetwork Services BV (a 100% subsidiary of Gasunie) will develop and operate the national hydrogen network. (58) Additionally, 12 MS plan to develop hydrogen pipeline networks in the future. For example, in Finland, there are concrete plans of a first national hydrogen transmission project by the gas TSO Gasgrid . Italy’s 2022 gas NDP includes a proposal for a hydrogen pipeline network expanding 2800 km from north to south, combining newly built infrastructure and repurposed gas pipelines. In Luxembourg, the gas TSO signed an MoU with the Belgian HTNO Fluxys hydrogen and the French gas TSO, GRTgaz, to foster cooperation in H2 infrastructure.

text: 3.3. Regulatory developments for hydrogen network planning

text: (59) The hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package and the revised TEN-E Regulation provide the overarching legal and regulatory framework for the development of a hydrogen market and network at European level. According to EU Regulations, the European Network of Network Operators for Hydrogen (ENNOH) shall consist of certified Hydrogen Transmission Network Operators (HTNOs). Among other tasks, ENNOH shall develop a non-binding TYNDP for the hydrogen sector. (60) According to NRAs’ input, Belgium is the only MS with an officially certified and designated HTNO -Fluxys hydrogen SA/NV- designated in April 2024 to manage hydrogen transmission (not storage or terminals). In several other MS , gas TSOs are currently “acting” as operators of future hydrogen networks and are expected to be officially appointed as HTNO and certified once the revised Gas Directive is transposed in the Member States providing the legal basis. For example, in Spain , Enagás Infrastructuras de Hidrógeno, S.L.U. has provisionally been designated as

text: HTNO, while in the Netherlands, Hynetwork Services BV is tasked to develop and operate its national hydrogen network. (61) As the hydrogen market is still in its nascent stage, and future hydrogen demand and supply remain uncertain, consulting potential network users is crucial for understanding future hydrogen infrastructure needs. According to NRAs, market consultations that collect the interest of hydrogen network users have been carried out in eight MS . During these market consultations, NRAs often played no role or, as in Germany and Austria, have an observing role. None of the NRAs have reported plans to organise open seasons (with a binding commitment phase). (62) ACER notes that the absence of a national legal framework for hydrogen infrastructure planning prevents some regulatory authorities from assessing hydrogen infrastructure plans. It is anticipated that MS will enact legislation to establish a framework for hydrogen network planning until summer 2026, possibly allocating on NRAs oversight responsibilities over hydrogen network plans. It is crucial that both European and national hydrogen network plans address the interests of market players in developing hydrogen transportation capacities, as this is a key driver of hydrogen infrastructure projects. Given the early stages and uncertainties associated with hydrogen market development, it is essential to synchronize and coordinate the development of hydrogen markets and infrastructure as much as possible. Furthermore, coordination and alignment of assumptions between hydrogen, natural gas as well as electricity scenarios and network development processes, both at national as well as at European level, is needed to overcome issues such as spatial competition and to ensure security of supply and sector integration.

text: 4. CONSISTENCY OF PROJECTS IN GAS AND HYDROGEN NDPS AND THE DRAFT EU TYNDP 2024

text: 4.1. Consistency of project inclusion in plans

text: (63) To ensure a comprehensive monitoring of network planning, it is important that there is consistency of projects included in different network development plans. A lack of consistency renders an unclear picture of network development, which may raise uncertainty for decision-makers about network development. (64) ACER notes that 166 out of the 326 (51%) projects included in the draft EU TYNDP 2024 are listed in most recent NDPs , like the share of project consistency observed for the EU TYNDP 2022 (49%) and for the EU TYNDP 2020 (55%). However, the

text: level of project consistency still lags considerably behind the levels observed for the EU TYNDP 2018 (75%) .

text: Table 1: Number of NDP projects included in the EU TYNDP 2024, per project type

text: (65) There is a significant difference in the level of project consistency between the different project types included in the EU TYNDP 2024, as shown in Table 1. Gas transmission pipeline projects have the highest consistency with 92% of projects that are included in the latest gas NDP(s). Hydrogen projects, which have nearly tripled in number compared to 2022, are included in only 33% of cases in the latest gas NDP(s).

text: (66) Furthermore, the consistency of draft TYNDP 2024 projects included in the respective NDPs differs significantly between MS. A detailed overview of the consistency per sector and per country is shown in Annex IV.

text: (67) Despite the minimal improvement and the overall relatively low level of consistency of project inclusion in the EU-wide and national development plans, the inclusion rate of hydrogen TYNDP projects in the NDP(s) rose significantly from 17% in the EU TYNDP 2022 to 33% in the EU TYNDP 2024.

text: (68) The data suggests that as national plans for hydrogen infrastructure will develop, a better alignment between EU-level plans and national plans can be anticipated over time. ACER recommends that project promoters consult with national authorities on hydrogen projects before applying to the TYNDP process to increase the consistency of European and national network planning .

text: 4.2. Cross-check of draft TYNDP 2024 and gas NDP information

text: (69) ACER and NRAs cross-checked the input data (project attributes) of the draft TYNDP 2024 project candidates as submitted by the project promoters. The NRAs reviewed these candidates early in the TYNDP 2024 development process. The NRAs’ views and comments on the projects were communicated to ENTSOG, primarily to enhance the quality of the input data for TYNDP 2024 and to allow NRAs to express their general comments and concerns on the draft projects at an early stage. (70) Out of 14 responding NRAs, 8 NRAs had either general and/or project-specific comments and remarks on the draft TYNDP 2024 projects . Projects for which comments were received as well as general comments are listed in Annex IV. (71) ACER calls on project promoters to ensure that coherent and reliable project information is provided in NDPs, in the EU TYNDP, and during the project implementation monitoring. ACER asks ENTSOG and promoters to thoroughly consider and accept the remarks from NRAs on draft TYNDP projects, which are mostly intended to increase the consistency of national and European network planning.

text: 5. CONCLUSION

text: (72) ACER has carried out a comprehensive review of gas and hydrogen network planning, primarily based on the information provided by national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and project information provided by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG). (73) ACER’s review finds: a. some improvements in the methodological consistency of NDPs with the EU- TYNDP, notably, a shift of gas NDP developments towards a biennial frequency, a shift of operators’ plans towards a consolidated, single gas NDP and an increase of jointly developed scenario processes, especially between gas and electricity. b. different practices regarding the methodologies applied for gas and hydrogen network planning. This includes the number and use of scenarios, the approach to identify infrastructure needs and the time alignment between network development plans at national level and EU level. c. a significant increase in the consistency of hydrogen projects included in the draft TYNDP and most recent NDPs from 17% in the 2022 edition to 34% in the 2024 edition of the EU TYNDP plan. Despite this improvement, the overall project consistency remains much lower for hydrogen projects compared to natural gas transmission pipeline projects (92%). This discrepancy is mainly explained by the inclusion of a large number of hydrogen projects in the EU

text: TYNDP that are not always included in national hydrogen network plans and to the fact that hydrogen network plans are still to be developed in some MS. (74) ACER observes that the recently adopted hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package, which contains new provisions for integrating renewable and low-carbon gases into the existing gas system also aims at better aligning gas NDPs with the EU- TYNDP. Key alignments include a biennial frequency of gas NDPs, consolidation of operators’ plans into one single gas NDP per MS and joint development of scenarios for electricity, gas and hydrogen. ACER notes that MS may opt for a joint plan for gas and hydrogen or separate plans. (75) ACER recognizes the progress made in developing legal and regulatory frameworks for hydrogen in selected Member States (e.g. Belgium, Germany). However, it also identifies a need for further implementation of the hydrogen and decarbonised gas market package provisions related to network planning in numerous Member States,

text: HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION:

text: 1. ACER has reviewed most recent gas and hydrogen national network development plans (NDPs) across Europe to assess their consistency with the draft European-wide ten-year network development plan (EU TYNDP) of 2024.

text: 2. ACER issues several recommendations aimed at improving the consistency between gas NDPs and the EU TYNDP in light of achieving more comprehensive and robust information on network planning on which policy decisions may be based.

text: The NDPs should: a. Ensure meaningful consultations with relevant stakeholders. National and neighbouring operators should coordinate and exchange information on key areas such as scenarios, identifying infrastructure gaps, and cross-border projects. b. Be as time aligned as possible with the EU-TYNDP development process to contribute to better consistency and coordination in planning between the European and national level. c. Be subject to strengthened NRAs’ regulatory oversight in those MS where, so far, this oversight has been limited. d. Include relevant project information such as cost data and, for projects included in the EU TYNDP, cross-references between the gas NDP investment item (project) and the EU TYNDP codes. e. Include, where relevant, a framework for the phase-out, decommissioning and repurposing of natural gas projects to hydrogen projects.

text: f. Be based on compatible scenarios aligned with the decarbonisation targets and, where relevant, on the goals to phase out the remaining dependency on Russian gas. The EU TYNDP should: a. Include information on project costs and, where possible, on monetised benefits, in line with the practice observed in the electricity TYNDP. b. Improve the planning process to avoid the recurrent delays in the development and release of TYNDPs. c. Build on national network development plans . For projects not included in most recent NDPs addressing cross-border capacity needs, project promoters should consult and seek validation from national authorities on projects before applying to the TYNDP process. For projects included in most recent NDPs addressing cross-border capacity needs, ENTSOG should seek validation from national authorities and explain any exclusion of such projects from the TYNDP. d. Include infrastructure to be decommissioned. e. Align the expected market supply and demand developments of renewable hydrogen and biomethane with a prudent assessment of the need for future transportation services.

text: Done at Ljubljana, on 29 October 2024.

text: - SIGNED –

text: Fоr the Agency The Director

text: C. ZINGLERSEN

text: Enclosures, data Annexes: I - LINKS TO LATEST GAS NDPS II - GAS NETWORK PLANNING: SUMMARISED FINDINGS III - HYDROGEN NETWORK PLANNING: SUMMARISED FINDINGS IV – PROJECT CONSISTENCY OF DRAFT EU-TYNDP WITH NDPS

type: vagledning

utgivare: acer


text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending Regulations

text: (EU) No 1227/2011

text: (EU) 2017/1938

text: (EU) 2019/942

text: and

text: (EU) 2022/869

text: and Decision

text: (EU) 2017/684

text: and repealing

text: Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: (recast) Official Journal L, 2024/1789, 15.7.2024.

text: Directive (EU) 2024/1788

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on common rules for the internal markets for renewable gas, natural gas and hydrogen, amending

text: Directive (EU) 2023/1791

text: and repealing Directive

text: (recast). Official Journal L, 2024/1788, 15.7.2024.

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/460 of 16 March 2017

text: establishing a network code on harmonised transmission tariff structures for gas. Official Journal L 72, 17.3.2017. Page 3 of 12

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: (EU) No 1227/2011

text: (EU) 2017/1938

text: (EU) 2019/942

text: and

text: (EU) 2022/869

text: and Decision

text: (EU) 2017/684

text: and repealing

text: Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: (recast). Official Journal 2024/1789, 15.7.2024. ‘Until 5 February 2026, regulatory authorities may submit a request to the Commission for a derogation from the application of the network codes and guidelines referred to in paragraph 1 at entry points from and exit points to third countries pursuant to paragraph 2, point (d). The request for a derogation shall be submitted simultaneously to the Commission and to ACER. Within three months of the date of receipt of the request for a derogation ACER shall provide a reasoned opinion to the Commission. The Commission shall adopt a decision on the request for a derogation, taking into account ACER’s reasoned opinion and after assessing whether the regulatory authority has: (a) demonstrated that a network code or guideline, or specific element of those acts, cannot be effectively implemented at entry points from and exit points to third countries; in the case of interconnection points with third countries which have the obligation to adapt to the Union energy acquis, including this Regulation, pursuant to an agreement concluded between the Union and those third countries, but where application or implementation has not been completed, the request for a derogation shall specify which provisions of this Regulation have not been effectively applied or implemented in the third country concerned or which technical rules or lack of technical rules in the third country impede the application of the specific provisions of the relevant network code or guideline; (b) explained which measures were taken to alleviate the obstacles to the application of the specific provisions of the relevant network code or guideline; (c) demonstrated that the derogation is not detrimental to the proper functioning of the internal market for natural gas, or to the security of supply of the Union or of a Member State. The derogation shall be limited to the specific provisions that cannot be effectively implemented and shall be granted for a limited period of time.’

text: Regulation (EU) 2026/261

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 January 2026 on phasing out Russian natural gas imports and preparing the phase-out of Russian oil imports, improving monitoring of potential energy dependencies and amending

text: Regulation (EU) 2017/1938

text: . Official Journal L, 2026/261, 2.2.2026.

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/459 of 16 March 2017

text: establishing a network code on capacity allocation mechanisms in gas transmission systems and repealing

text: Regulation (EU) No 984/2013

text: . C/2017/1660. Official Journal L 72, 17.3.2017. The standard products established in the CAM NC are yearly, quarterly, monthly, daily, and within-day products.

text: Commission Regulation (EU) No 312/2014 of 26 March 2014

text: establishing a Network Code on Gas Balancing of Transmission Networks. Official Journal L 91, 27.3.2014.

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/703 of 30 April 2015

text: establishing a network code on interoperability and data exchange rules. Official Journal L 113, 1.5.2015. 10

text: Lithuania, as an EU Member State, cannot implement provisions whose application depends on the simultaneous implementation by a third country which is outside its control, as these provisions are not binding upon the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus.

identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2026

publisher: Europeiska unionens byrå för samarbete mellan energitillsynsmyndigheter

sprak: en

title: ACER Opinion 07-2026 on the derogation request submitted by the Lithuanian National Energy Regulatory Council (NERC) from the application of the network codes and guidelines

serie: yttranden

text: No 07/2026

type: rubrik

text: OPINION

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: , at the entry points from and the exit points to Belarus and Russia

text: 30 April 2026

text: A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6

type: stycke

text: Executive summary

text: Pursuant to

text: Article 70(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: (‘Gas Regulation’), ACER is required to provide the European Commission with a reasoned opinion within three months of the date of receipt of a request for a derogation, submitted by a national regulatory authority (‘NRA’) in line with the aforementioned provision, from the implementation of network codes or guidelines, referred to in Article 70(1) of the Gas Regulation, or specific elements of them. On 5 February 2026, the Lithuanian National Energy Regulatory Council (‘NERC’) submitted to the European Commission and to ACER a derogation request asking for a derogation from the application of all the network codes and guidelines with reference to the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of the Republic of Belarus and to the Šakiai exit point to the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation, for an indefinite period of time. A bilateral agreement between the Lithuanian transmission system operator, i.e. Amber Grid, and PAO Gazprom is valid until 31 December 2030, it was concluded following the expiry of the previous agreement in December 2025. This agreement regulates the transportation service offered by Amber Grid between the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus and the Šakiai exit point to deliver gas to the Kaliningrad region. Such network points are used exclusively for the supply of gas to the Kaliningrad region and, therefore, operate in a unidirectional manner.

text: Conclusion

text: ACER notes that Directive 2024/1788 (‘Gas Directive’) and the Gas Regulation aim at creating a fully operational Union internal market for natural gas. In the case under consideration, the gas flowing from the Russian Federation to Kaliningrad is not destined to the internal market itself, as it is transported through the infrastructure in Lithuania via the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point.

text: Given the abovementioned exceptional situation in Lithuania, and given that the Kotlovka entry and Šakiai exit points are not standalone elements of an integrated infrastructure such as the Lithuanian natural gas network, specific regulatory arrangements are required for these points. In these specific circumstances, and for as long as the bilateral agreement remains in force and unless new conditions arise, the application of a set of minimum provisions of the network codes is considered sufficient to safeguard the integrity of the Union internal gas market, ensure equal treatment of network users, and

text: A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6

text: avoid cross‑subsidisation. ACER refers to the provisions identified in paragraph (35) of section 4.2 of this Opinion. ACER is of the opinion that NERC has already implemented most of these provisions, including the key requirement that the

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/460

text: (‘TAR NC’) provisions applicable at the other points of the Lithuanian network also apply at these points.

text: A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6

text: 1. Background

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: (‘Gas Regulation’) extends the application of network codes and guidelines, referred to in Article 70(2) of the Gas Regulation (‘network codes and guidelines’), to the entry points from and exit points to third countries, namely countries that are not members of the European Union. The principle embedded in the Regulation at issue is the enhancement of the internal gas market by supporting cross-border trade and efficient operations also at the borders with third countries. Applying network codes and guidelines at these border points helps to avoid market fragmentation and ensures the seamless functioning of the internal market, in particular by guaranteeing consistent rules, non-discriminatory access and efficient cross-border trading conditions, even at the borders of the Union.

text: Article 70(2)

text: (d) of the Gas Regulation lays down that EU network codes and guidelines, adopted in accordance with paragraph 1 of the same provision, shall apply to all points within the Union and to entry points from and exit points to third countries from 5 August 2026.

text: 3 Furthermore,

text: Article 70(3)

text: thereof states that until 5 February 2026 national regulatory authorities (‘NRAs’) may submit a request to the European Commission and ACER for a derogation from the application of the network codes and guidelines at entry points from and exit points to third countries pursuant to

text: Article 70(2)

text: (d).

text: 4 ACER shall provide a reasoned opinion to the European Commission within three months of the date of receipt of the request for a derogation. In its reasoned opinion ACER provides an assessment on the request submitted by the NRA. The European Commission shall adopt a decision on the request for a derogation, taking into account ACER’s reasoned opinion and after assessing the existence of the conditions listed in

text: Article 70(3)

text: (a), (b) and (c).

text: 5 Notably, whether the NRA has demonstrated that provisions of a network code or guideline cannot be effectively implemented at an entry point from or exit point to a third country; has taken measures to alleviate obstacles to such implementation; and has shown that the derogation is not detrimental to the internal gas market or to the security of supply of the Union or of a Member State. The derogation shall be limited to specific provisions that cannot be effectively implemented and shall be granted by the European Commission for a limited period of time. A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6

text: 6 Furthermore, Recital 95 of the Gas Regulation acknowledges that specific circumstances, including the existence of long-term contractual arrangements or legal difficulties in establishing dispute resolution procedures with transmission system operators or natural gas suppliers established in third countries, may prevent the effective application of network codes in the short term. A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6

text: 2. Procedure

text: 8 On 5 February 2026, ACER received from the National Energy Regulatory Council (‘NERC’) in written form via electronic post a request for a derogation from the application of network codes and guidelines pursuant to Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation.

text: 9 Upon the submission of the derogation request, and after an in-depth analysis thereof, ACER has interacted with NERC to further clarify elements included in the Derogation request. ACER has thus taken due account of the additional information provided by the NRA in its assessment.

text: 10 On 1 April 2026, ACER shared the draft version of the reasoned opinion with NERC for a factual check and to verify the completeness of the information provided.

text: 11 On 30 April 2026, ACER adopted this reasoned opinion and sent it to the European Commission in accordance with Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation following the prescribed timeline.

text: 3. Summary of Derogation Request

text: 12 NERC’s derogation request concerns the application of all network codes and guidelines at the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus and the Šakiai exit point to the Russian Federation’s region of Kaliningrad neighbouring Lithuania and Poland, for an unlimited time and without conditions.

text: 13 NERC’s derogation request is based on the geopolitical situation in the region since 2022. Specifically, under Lithuanian law, only suppliers not posing a threat to the national security of Lithuania are provided access rights to the Lithuanian national gas infrastructure. NERC further states that the Lithuanian law does not prohibit the transit of gas of Russian origin from the Republic of Belarus to the Kaliningrad region, as this service would not violate the national security interests of Lithuania.

text: 14 NERC further highlights the alignment of the provisions included in paragraph (13) above with the provisions of

text: Regulation (EU) 2026/216

text: , which establishes a gradual phase-out of the import of gas of Russian origin in the Union by 2027.

text: 15 NERC informs that a bilateral agreement between the Lithuanian transmission system operator (‘TSO’), i.e. Amber Grid, and PAO Gazprom is in place and valid until 31 December 2030 as it was concluded following the expiry of the previous agreement in December 2025. This bilateral agreement regulates the transportation service offered by Amber Grid between the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point to deliver gas to the Kaliningrad region. NERC specifies that such points are used exclusively for the supply of gas transit to the Kaliningrad region and, therefore, operate in a unidirectional manner. Pursuant to national legislation, no other network users are allowed to access or use these points.

text: 16 According to NERC, if the provisions of Article 70(2) of the Gas Regulation were applied at such points, they would potentially make it mandatory for the TSO to ensure an allocation of transportation capacity at the Kotlovka entry point from Belarus for all the market participants, potentially allowing Russian gas to enter the Republic of Lithuania and, therefore, the Union gas internal market.

text: 17 In its derogation request, NERC further highlights that the regulatory and market framework in the Russian Federation and in Belarus differs significantly from the EU framework, including the A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6 absence of an entry-exit system, limited transparency and cooperation, and the lack of an independent regulatory authority aligned with EU rules.

text: 4. ACER’s assessment

text: 4.1. Application of network codes and guidelines at the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus and the Šakiai exit point to the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation

text: 18 NERC's derogation request pertains to all network codes and guidelines.

text: 19 In this Section, ACER analyses the current framework on capacity allocation, balancing, congestion management, interoperability, and tariffs applying at the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus and the Šakiai exit point to the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation. Capacity allocation

text: 20 Based on the information provided by NERC, transportation capacity products are based on the provisions of the standard products established in

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/459

text: (‘CAM NC’), namely yearly, quarterly, monthly, and daily products and are offered as both firm and interruptible products. However, due to the application of standards in the Russian Federation and in the Republic of Belarus differing from the EU regulatory framework, NERC informs that full alignment with the requirements of CAM NC is not possible under the bilateral agreement. Balancing

text: 21 ACER understands that most provisions of

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 312/2014

text: (‘BAL NC’) apply at the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus and the Šakiai exit point to the Kaliningrad region.

text: 22 To ensure that the same volumes injected into the Lithuanian network at the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus are withdrawn at the Šakiai exit point to the Kaliningrad region, two restrictions apply. First, the entry nominations and physical flows at the Kotlovka entry point must always be equal to exit nominations and physical flows at the Šakiai exit point. Second, in the event of discrepancies between the gas nominated and the gas physically injected or withdrawn, the gas volume allocated at Šakiai is the same as the volume registered by the metering station, whereas the gas volume allocated at Kotlovka results from the difference between the gas allocated at Šakiai exit point and the gas allocated at Kiemenai interconnection point with Latvia. Congestion management

text: 23 Based on the information provided by NERC, none of the provisions established in Annex I, paragraph 2.2. of the Gas Regulation, i.e. regarding congestion management procedures in the event of contractual congestion, apply. ACER notes that is unlikely that measures to manage contractual congestions would be needed under the current specific circumstances. A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6 Interoperability

text: Articles 16 of Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/703

text: (‘INT NC’) establish that TSOs shall publish on their website for each point, with a frequency of at least once per hour during the gas day, the Wobbe-index and the gross calorific value for gas directly entering their networks. At the the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point such information is not published. No metering station is installed in the Lithuanian gas network to measure such data at the Kotlovka point. Tariffs

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/460

text: (‘TAR NC’) is implemented at both the Kotlovka entry point and at the Šakiai exit point. Under the current regulatory period, i.e. until December 2028, NERC applies a postage stamp tariff methodology for the whole Lithuanian system. While the application of TAR NC Chapter III, which regulates the calculation of reserve prices for non-yearly standard capacity products, multipliers for non-yearly products, seasonal factors, and discounts for interruptible products, was not mandatory in the case of points with third countries before 5 August 2026, NERC calculated the tariffs for non-yearly and interruptible products following the same methodology established for the other entry and exit points, and applies multipliers and seasonal factors for these points in the same way as they apply for the rest of the system.

text: 4.2. ACER considerations

text: 26 ACER acknowledges the existence of an exceptional situation in Lithuania, in which the TSO is required to enforce the prohibition to supply gas to Lithuania from countries that, according to the National Security Strategy, pose a threat to the national security and safeguarding of national security interests of the Republic and that gas originating from the Russian Federation reaches the Kaliningrad region by entering the Kotlovka point from the Republic of Belarus and exiting the Šakiai point to the Kaliningrad region within the framework of the bilateral agreement signed between Amber Grid and PAO Gazprom.

text: 27 This bilateral agreement is valid until 31 December 2030, as it was concluded following the expiry of the previous agreement in December 2025.

text: 28 NERC derogation request is submitted for an unlimited time and without conditions.

text: 29 ACER acknowledges the role and the need for NERC to guarantee that the gas system is kept safe and secure.

text: 30 ACER notes that the Gas Directive and the Gas Regulation aim at creating a fully operational Union internal market for natural gas. In the case under consideration, the gas flowing from the Republic of Belarus to Kaliningrad is not destined to the internal market itself, as it is transported through the infrastructure in Lithuania via the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point. However, such two points are not standalone elements of an integrated infrastructure such as the Lithuanian natural gas network. In fact, the infrastructure elements connecting Kotlovka entry point with the Šakiai exit point are not physically separated from the rest of the Lithuanian network and are not exclusively serving the purposes of transporting gas from the Republic of Belarus to Kaliningrad, i.e. there is no dedicated pipeline connecting them.

text: 31 In the case under consideration, common infrastructure elements are used to provide both transmission services for transporting gas through the system between third countries and services for transporting gas to end-users within the Union, making it difficult to establish a clear A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6 separation at asset level. Lacking such a clear separation of assets and costs, any exclusion of network costs would have to rely on assumptions and modelling, The modelling may not reduce the risk of cross-subsidisation and decreased cost-reflectivity, both ultimately affecting the internal market for natural gas. This would pose a risk of cross-subsidisation and decreased costreflectivity, due to the non-application of the TAR NC provisions.

text: 32 ACER notes that NERC has implemented TAR NC provisions at such points in the same way as they are implemented at the other points of the Lithuanian network. This ensures the fulfilment of the objective of cost-reflectiveness and the avoidance of cross-subsidisation among network users of the Union internal gas market.

text: 33 In this regard, ACER notes the importance of ensuring that the duration of the products allocated at these points is the same as the duration of the standard products of CAM NC, in order to support the maximisation of the use of the gas network and to ensure equal treatment of network users through the application of the provisions on network tariffs, multipliers, and seasonal factors established in the TAR NC. NERC has confirmed that this provision is implemented at the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point.

text: 34 Furthermore, CAM NC

text: Article 32

text: establishes that interruptible capacity products should be offered only if firm capacity products of the same duration are unavailable and only prior to the offering of the subsequent product of shorter duration; the offer of interruptible capacity shall not be detrimental to the amount of firm capacity on offer; TSOs shall not set aside capacity that can be offered as firm capacity in order to offer it as interruptible capacity. Interruptible capacity is generally priced at a discount compared to firm capacity, as established in the TAR NC, and PAO Gazprom is the only entity allowed to book capacity. Therefore, ACER notes the importance of the implementation of CAM NC

text: Article 32

text: provisions. NERC has confirmed that these provisions are implemented at the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point.

text: 35 ACER acknowledges that the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point are operational solely due to the bilateral agreement between Amber Grid and PAO Gazprom and that the gas flowing at these points is not destined to the Union gas market. Therefore, ACER is of the opinion that, until the validity of the bilateral agreement, and unless new conditions appear, there are minimum provisions to be implemented by NERC at the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point, aimed at reflecting the specific circumstances in place at such points, in order to fulfil the objectives of non-discrimination among network users, cost-reflectivity, cost-predictability, avoidance of cross-subsidisation across network users, and equal treatment in the Union internal market for natural gas, which include: • The offer of capacity product with the same duration as the duration of the standard capacity products of CAM NC

text: Article 9

text: , following the provisions on interruptible capacity established in CAM NC Chapter VI, specifically those established in CAM NC

text: Article 32

text: . NERC has confirmed that these provisions are implemented at the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point. • The implementation of all the provisions of the TAR NC that apply at all the other points of the Amber Grid network and the alignment of the bilateral agreement of Amber Grid – PAO Gazprom with the TAR NC provisions. In these specific circumstances, the full implementation of the TAR NC will guarantee harmonised transmission tariff structures, a reasonable level of cost reflectivity and predictability, and non-discrimination among network users. NERC has fully implemented these provisions. • The implementation of all provisions of the BAL NC at the Kotlovka entry point and at the Šakiai exit point that apply at the other points to the maximum extent possible considering the additional provisions correctly established by NERC to ensure that the gas of Russian origin does not enter the Lithuanian market, listed in section 4.1. above, and any provision guaranteeing the full separation of the imbalance volumes at these points from the imbalance volumes, imbalance charges, and neutrality fees applying to the other network users. NERC has confirmed that these provisions are implemented at Kotlovka and Šakiai. A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6 • The implementation of INT NC

text: Articles 16

text: to ensure transparency for all network users and the well-functioning of the EU internal energy market.

text: 36 As regards the period after 2030, when the bilateral agreement expires, and unless new conditions appear, ACER is of the opinion that all the provisions of the network codes and guidelines, except for those requiring mutual implementation with the adjacent TSO , shall apply at the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point for the reasoned provided in section (4.1) and in this section (4.2).

text: 5. Conclusions

text: 37 NERC’s derogation request concerns the application of all network codes and guidelines at the Kotlovka entry point from the Republic of Belarus and the Šakiai exit point to the Russian Federation’s region of Kaliningrad, for an unlimited time and without conditions.

text: 38 ACER acknowledges the existence of an exceptional situation in Lithuania, in which the TSO is required to enforce the prohibition to supply gas to Lithuania from countries that, according to the National Security Strategy, pose a threat to the national security and safeguarding of national security interests of the Republic of Lithuania and to ensure that gas of Russian origin reaches exclusively the Kaliningrad region under the framework established by the abovementioned bilateral agreement.

text: 39 ACER notes that the Gas Directive and the Gas Regulation aim at creating a fully operational Union internal market for natural gas. In the case under consideration, the gas flowing from the Russian Federation to Kaliningrad is not destined to the internal market itself, as it is transported through the infrastructure in Lithuania via the Kotlovka entry point and the Šakiai exit point.

text: 40 The regulatory framework established by NERC correctly reflects the specific circumstances affecting such points.

text: 41 Given the above-mentioned exceptional situation in Lithuania and given that the Kotlovka entry and Šakiai exit points are not standalone elements of an integrated infrastructure such as the Lithuanian natural gas network, specific regulatory arrangements are required for these points. In these specific circumstances, and for as long as the bilateral agreement remains in force and unless new conditions arise, the application of a set of minimum provisions of the network codes is considered sufficient to safeguard the integrity of the Union internal gas market, ensure equal treatment of network users, and avoid cross‑subsidisation. ACER refers to the provisions identified in paragraph (35) of section 4.2 above.

text: 42 ACER is of the opinion that NERC has already implemented most of these provisions, including the key requirement that the TAR NC provisions applicable at the other points of the Lithuanian network also apply at these points. This Opinion is addressed to the European Commission. A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 7 / 2 0 2 6 Done at Ljubljana, on 30 April 2026. — SIGNED — V. ZULEGER, ACER Director ad interim


text: Please click on the icon to take a 5’ online survey and provide your feedback about this document

identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2012

title: ACER Opinion 08-2012 on ENTSO-E's Network Code for Requirements for Grid Connection Applicable to All Generators

text: Publishing date: 16/10/2012

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 16/10/2012

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2013

title: ACER Opinion 08-2013 on the ENTSOE Winter Outlook Report 2012-2013 and Summer Review 2012

text: Publishing date: 03/04/2013

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 03/04/2013

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2014

title: ACER Opinion 08-2014 on the National Ten-Year Electricity Network Development Plans

text: Publishing date: 09/04/2014 Document title: ACER Opinion 08-2014

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2015

title: ACER Opinion 08-2015 on the Annual Report 2014 of ENTSOG

text: Publishing date: 31/08/2015 Document title: ACER Opinion on the Annual Report 2014 of ENTSOG

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2016

title: ACER Opinion 08-2016 on TYNDP Implementation


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2017

title: ACER Opinion 08-2017 on Electricity Projects in National Development Plans and EU TYNDP 2016


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2018

title: ACER Opinion 08-2018 on the ENTSO-E Summer Outlook Report 2018 and Winter Review 2017-2018


identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2019

title: ACER Opinion 08-2019 on Amended Manual of Procedures for ENTSO-E Central Information Transparency Platform


text: OJ L 158/22, 14.6.2019, p. 1. 2 OJ L 211, 14.8.2009, p. 36. Page 1 of 7

text: Opinion No 08/2020

text: Opinion No 08/2020

text: Opinion No 08/2020

text: Cf. p. 26 of the draft AWP 2021 as submitted to ACER.

text: Opinion No 08/2020

text: Opinion No 08/2020

text: Research & Development, p. 37 of the version provided to ACER for its opinion. 5 Cf. https://www.entsog.eu/sites/default/files/2020- 08/ENTSOG%20Draft%20Annual%20Work%20Programme%202021_For%20Public%20Consultation_%20Hi gh%20resolution.pdf

text: Opinion No 08/2020 addresses regulatory, legal, finance and human resource aspects, should be visible in the AWP 2021 alongside the specific objectives, tasks and deliverables,

identifier: ACER Opinion No 08/2020

title: ACER Opinion 08-2020 on ENTSOG's Annual Work Programme 2021

text: PUBLIC

text: OPINION No 08/2020 OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS of 18 December 2020 on ENTSOG’s Draft Annual Work Programme for the Year 2021

text: THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS, Having regard to

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 establishing a European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER), and, in particular,

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) thereof, Having regard to

text: Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on conditions for access to the natural gas transmission networks and repealing

text: Regulation (EC) No 1775/2005

text: , and, in particular,

text: Articles 8(3)

text: (d), 8(5) and 9(2) thereof, Having regard to the outcome of the consultation with ACER’s Gas Working Group, Having regard to the favourable opinion of the Board of Regulators of 16 December 2020, delivered pursuant to

text: Article 22(5) of Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: , Whereas:

text: 1. INTRODUCTION

text: (1) The European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG) submitted on 18 September 2020 its draft Annual Work Programme 2021 (draft AWP 2021) to ACER for its opinion. (2) Pursuant to

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: and

text: Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: , the draft annual work programme has to be evaluated by ACER taking into account the objectives of non-discrimination, effective competition and the efficient functioning of the market.

text: 2. GENERAL FINDINGS

text: General Scope

text: (3) ENTSOG conducted a stakeholder consultation pursuant to

text: Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: from 5 August 2020 until 8 September 2020. ENTSOG received feedback from one stakeholder during the public consultation, and accordingly amended the consulted draft version of the AWP 2021. When drafting the AWP 2021, ENTSOG also considered feedback received on previous editions of its AWP. (4) ACER appreciates that ENTSOG sees two foci of planned activities in 2021. The first is to proactively undertake the tasks assigned to it by EU legislation, as already performed, while the second is to place much greater emphasis on tasks and activities in line with the upcoming objectives of EU’s Energy Union policy. The latter applies, in particular, to EU’s goal of decarbonising EU’s gas sector in an affordable and secure way. (5) Among the work areas already covered by ENTSOG earlier, ACER positively notes ENTSOG’s intention to continue to provide support to its Members and other interested parties on Network Codes and Guidelines implementation and monitoring, an area of work prioritised in 2020. ACER also notes the proper coverage in the draft AWP 2021 of other ongoing work areas and deliverables such as the Summer and Winter Supply Outlooks and reports, transparency platform, and rules for the coordination of network operations under normal and emergency conditions. (6) ACER is of the view that ENTSOG’s intention to include in future activities assessing the progress of the functionality of the European gas markets and looking at longer term horizons for European Scenarios should be encouraged. This is all the more so in the context of looking for synergies between already active work areas and tasks which derive from expected significant changes in the EU’s energy sector. ACER notes ENTSOG’s intention to strengthen the synergies between the gas and electricity sectors to facilitate energy flexibility, storage, international transportation capacity and security of supply. (7) ACER positively notes ENTSOG’s plan to participate in the discussions on the upcoming legislative proposals in preparation for the new energy and climate-related legislation as part of the European Green Deal. ACER finds reasonable ENTSOG’s identification of strategic topics in this context, particularly those required to facilitate gas grids playing a constructive role in the energy transition, including the repurposing, retrofitting and refurbishment of the gas grids for the transport of hydrogen. ACER notes ENTSOG’s plan to continue contributing to the development of secondary legislation following the European Energy System Integration and Hydrogen Strategy and the reopening of the TEN-E framework. (8) In all of the above work areas, ACER expects ENTSOG to regularly and proactively consider the views of the regulatory community, including the opinions and recommendations of ACER, whenever the work areas and activities touch on regulatory issues. ACER positively notes ENTSOG’s intention to continue its contribution to the Madrid Forum and the Copenhagen Energy Infrastructure Forum, as well as to further develop its relationship with ACER, ENTSOG’s members, and stakeholders.

text: Network Codes and Guidelines

text: (9) ACER appreciates ENTSOG’s plan to work with it in providing joint solutions to issues posted by stakeholders on the Gas Network Codes Functionality Platform and on further improving the Functionality Process, as well as to work in close cooperation with ACER, EC, Energy Community, and stakeholders on all matters relating to Network Code and Guidelines. (10) ACER notes that interoperability work in 2021 includes the development, support, and maintenance of Common Network Operation Tools (CNOTs) for data exchange. In this respect, ACER notes that the AWP 2021 could include clarifications on how ENTSOG plans to take into account considerations regarding various aspects of cybersecurity.

text: REMIT

text: (11) ACER is of the view that ENTSOG’s activities to be undertaken in support of REMIT topics are appropriate, being centred on reporting obligations, including TSO publications on their websites, ENTSOG Transparency Platform (TP), and data reporting to ACER REMIT Information System (ARIS).

text: Cybersecurity

text: (12) In view of the data implications under ENTSOG’s role in the Transparency Platform, interoperability and data exchange, REMIT reporting, and other tasks, as well as the potential network code for the cybersecurity sector, ACER invites ENTSOG to further clarify in its AWP 2021 how cybersecurity will be addressed and maintained at a high level.

text: Scenarios and Infrastructure

text: (13) ACER notes ENTSOG’s plan to work on scenarios and infrastructure on a year-rolling basis, with key activities (e.g. system assessments, cost-benefit analyses - CBA, TYNDP and PCI processes inputs) carrying over from 2020 into 2021 and then 2022. In this respect, ACER stresses its view that critically important methodologies, tools and outputs are in need of revisiting and improvement. This applies in particular to the implementation of a better approach to the sustainability dimension in the CBA methodology the interlinked electricity and gas model and the scenarios used in it, and the assumptions used in system–wide and project-level assessments. (14) In particular, ACER is of the view that the AWP 2021 could benefit from more precise detail on the way in which such improvements could be achieved in 2021, as well as the resource assessments accompanying such work. This is even more pressing given that the relevant methodologies, tools, and assumptions are used by ENTSOG in at least several work areas (e.g. infrastructure, security of supply, and themes of work overlapping with those in electricity). (15) ACER is of the view that, given that the output of ENTSOG’s work serves as input to other EU-level processes where decisions are taken, including on the sustainability and on other merits of investments, improvements as already recommended by ACER in the above areas cannot be delayed any more. In this respect, ACER calls on ENTSOG to

text: consult ACER and consider its views in work related to the TYNDP 2022 Practical Implementation Document, the joint ENTSOG / ENTSO-E TYNDP 2022 Scenario Report, and the adaptation of their Interlinked Model. ACER considers that the Practical Implementation Document should be a tool not only to include Energy Transition Projects in ENTSOG’s work, but also an instrument to reduce the number of traditional gas infrastructure projects candidates in the TYNDP to a level commensurate to the need of additional “classic” gas investments. ACER invites ENTSOG to update the methodologies and the tools used for the assessment of the merits of such “classic” projects in such a way as to enable the clear demonstration of the contribution of these projects to sustainability, or the lack thereof. (16) ACER expects ENTSOG to also take into account ACER’s Opinions and Recommendations, as well as the results of the informal bilateral discussions with ACER’s staff and the trilateral discussions involving the European Commission, in particular regarding the ability of methodologies and tools to properly assess the contribution of infrastructure to sustainability. (17) ENTSOG plans to finalise the TYNDP 2020 report in February 2021 . However, ACER notes that the submission of the draft TYNDP 2020 for ACER’s Opinion is not expected before the end of 2020, and that ACER needs reasonable time (up to 3 months) in order to issue its Opinion, which can thus be expected by March 2021. The TYNDP then only becomes final after ACER’s Opinion is taken into account by ENTSOG, by introducing adaptations to the draft TYNDP, if any. Iin view of these regulatory requirements and the associated time schedule, ACER calls on ENTSOG to adapt its AWP 2021 and to include work possibly resulting from ACER’s Opinion on draft TYNDP 2020 in the programme of activities. (18) ACER advises ENTSOG to explicitly include the “Support to Regional Groups on the PCI selection process” in the activities under the programme of activities in p. 26, as in previous AWPs.

text: Security of Supply

text: (19) ACER takes note of ENTSOG’s intention to continue delivering the relevant Summer and Winter Supply Outlooks and Reviews. ACER recalls its recommendation to focus these products to a greater extent on assessing supply patterns and their pertinent risks, rather than on the assessment of the gas infrastructure’s ability to handle supplies, assuming that they are available. (20) ACER appreciates ENTSOG’s plan to carry out activities deriving from Regulation 2017/1938, notably a Union-wide simulation of supply and infrastructure disruption scenarios representing a Union-wide risk assessment providing input to competent

text: authorities for the update of their risk assessments, preventive action plans and emergency plans. (21) ACER appreciates ENTSOG’s plan to undertake work on the facilitation of the existing Regional Coordination System for Gas (ReCo System for Gas) and support of the EC and the Gas Coordination Group (GCG) in the implementation of the revised Security of Supply Regulation. (22) ACER notes that the bulk of gas in the EU is imported from non-EU countries, and that a very large share of those imports originates or crosses third-countries to the EU. For these reasons, ACER supports ENTSOG’s plan to assist the Energy Community Secretariat and Contracting Parties in Network Code implementation workshops and queries. For the same reasons, ACER finds reasonable ENTSOG’s intention to strengthen the cooperation between EU TSOs and the TSOs of third countries that play an important role in EU gas supplies and contributes to the preparedness on matters necessary to provide security of supply in emergencies.

text: Energy Transition

text: (23) ACER shares ENTSOG’s assessment that the Energy System Integration and Hydrogen Strategies, published in July 2020, are of particular relevance and will provide guidance to which elements are important for TSOs to work on in order for gas grids to play a constructive and forward-looking role in the energy transition. For this reason, ACER appreciates ENTSOG’s plan to participate in and contribute to the realisation of European Green Deal. (24) ACER notes that ENTSOG provides a more detailed assessment -compared to previous AWPs of activities and the relevant resources needed to address the identified emerging strategic topics such as Energy System Integration, future role of the gas TSOs, guarantees of origin/certificates, TEN-E reopening, gas quality and hydrogen transport and handling, methane emissions and regional cooperation. ACER appreciates ENTSOG’s readiness to consider any applicable initiatives and proposals published by the EC, ACER or relevant stakeholders in these areas of work.

text: Other considerations

text: (25) The subsection on finance (p. 42) is actually almost devoid of essential information related to the financing of ENTSOG’s work in 2021. ACER is of the view that – for the sake of transparency - this section should include at least line-item budget as foreseen by ENTSOG for its activities in 2021, a comparison with the 2020 budget, and explanations on the upwards or downward evolution in comparison to previous year. ACER expects this basic information to be included in the AWP 2021, also given that it is relevant for ascertaining the extent to which ENTSOG is adequately equipped to perform its activities.

text: (26) ACER observes that the draft AWP 2021 includes under section 6 activities such as an online training for gas network codes, which may not be pertinent to this section, or conversely, the title of the section could be changed to correctly identify the content. (27) ACER notes the importance of thoroughly planning the rotation of seconded persons from TSOs at ENTSOG. Ensuring a smooth transition of knowledge and dossiers among ENTSOG’s staff, adequate resource allocation, and efficient hand-over processes are vital for ensuring the continuity of ENTSOG’s tasks and activities. (28) ACER finds insightful the annex to the AWP 2021 providing an overview of ENTSOG’s regulatory framework. However, ACER notes that a table is repeated 10 times (cf. p. 45 to p. 55 of the version submitted to ACER for its opinion), and also that this is not the case with the version published on ENTSOG’s web site . ACER invites ENTSOG to ensure proper technical editing of the final AWP 2021.

text: 3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

text: (29) ACER finds the content of the draft AWP 2021 appropriate. ACER welcomes the updated classification of the main tasks by work area and the clear setting of objectives, key deliverables and work schedules in each main area of activity, including the new focal area of Energy Transition. The draft AWP 2021 is consistent with ENTSOG’s tasks as described in

text: Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: . (30) However, possible improvements of the draft AWP 2021 could include the stronger highlighting of critically important work areas and deliverables. Adjustments may be needed, in particular in the area of scenarios and infrastructure, security of supply, and Energy Transition. (31) ACER notes that the draft AWP 2021 indicates key deliverables for 2021, but generally does not indicate whether there are specific risks of not achieving the various specific objectives, tasks and deliverables. ACER reiterates its recommendation that annual work programmes indicate which objectives, activities and deliverables may be exposed to significant risks that could hinder due performance, along with the risk factors that could lead to such an outcome and any planned specific risk mitigation measures. ACER invites ENTSOG to provide a synopsis of such assessments and planned measures in the AWP 2021 itself. ACER is of the view that ENTSOG’s internal evaluation of the risks that present challenges to meet its objectives, activities, and deliverables, which also

text: HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION:

text: 1. ENTSOG has published and submitted to ACER in a timely manner the draft Annual Work Programme for the year 2021, in compliance with the provisions of

text: Articles 8(3)

text: (d), 8(5) and 9(2) of

text: Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: . 2. ACER finds that the draft AWP 2021 meets the objectives of

text: Regulation (EC) No 713/2009

text: and

text: Regulation (EC) No 715/2009

text: , in terms of contributing to non-discrimination, effective competition and the efficient and secure functioning of the internal natural gas market. 3. ACER calls on ENTSOG to give utmost consideration to this Opinion and, where needed, adapt its AWP 2021. This Opinion is addressed to ENTSOG. Done at Ljubljana, on 18 December 2020.

text: - SIGNED -

text: Fоr the Agency The Director

text: C. ZINGLERSEN