text: OJ L158, 14.6.2019, p. 22. 2 OJ L280, 28.10.2017, p.1. Page 1 of 11

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: Decision Ref. 609-4/609-18-64. 4 Fluxys Deutschland GmbH, Gasunie Deutschland Transport Services GmbH and Ontras Gastransport GmbH are minority fractional owners of the EUGAL pipeline.

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: “(a) a proposal to enable permanent physical capacity to transport gas in both directions for permanent bi-directional capacity concerning the reverse direction (‘physical reverse

text: flow capacity’); or

text: (b) a request for an exemption from the obligation to enable bi-directional capacity.”

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: “(a) accept the proposal for bi-directional capacity. Such decision shall contain a cost benefit analysis, a timeline for implementation and the arrangements for its subsequent use and be accompanied by the coordinated decision on the cross-border cost allocation referred to in point 4 and prepared by the regulatory authorities concerned;

text: (b) grant or prolong a temporary exemption for a maximum period of four years, if the cost-benefit analysis included in the decision shows that the reverse flow capacity would not enhance the security of gas supply of any relevant Member State or if the investment costs would significantly outweigh the prospective benefits for the security of gas supply;

text: (c) require the transmission system operators to amend and resubmit their proposal or

text: exemption request within a maximum period of four months.”

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: Regulation (EU) No 347/2013

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2013 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure and repealing Decision No

text: and amending Regulations

text: (EC) No 713/2009

text: (EC) No 714/2009

text: and

text: (EC) No 715/2009

text: , OJ L 115, 25.4.2013, p. 39. 6 It does not meet the requirements of the gas CBA methodology pursuant to

text: Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 347/2013

text: currently in force, which are in ENTSOG’s CBA methodology 2.0, cf. https://www.entsog.eu/sites/default/files/2019- 03/1.%20ADAPTED_2nd%20CBA%20Methodology_Main%20document_EC%20APPROVED.pdf 7 Only a physical flow to Germany was recorded for a short time in June 2021, which was caused by technical measures (an inter-TSO swap). 8 https://www.entsog.eu/sites/default/files/2023-11/2023_DAR_CZ-DE.pdf

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: Figure 1: Illustrative map of the considered region and main IPs

text: According to information provided by the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Czech Republic, the EUGAL pipeline is already connected to the Hora Svaté Kateřiny IP between the Czech Republic and Germany, which provides bi-directional capacity. Physically, the distance between the Brandov IP and the Hora Svaté Kateřiny IP is only 9 km, and the two IPs are interconnected with two large diameter, high pressure pipelines (DN 900 and DN 1000). All available capacity at the Deutschneudorf-EUGAL IP, the Brandov IP, and the Hora Svaté Kateřiny IP are offered as the sum of their capacity at the VIP Brandov-GASPOOL- EUGAL. 10 Based on ENTSOG Capacity Map, edition of October 2019: https://www.entsog.eu/maps# 11 See further section 5.1.7.

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: As the extra capacity does not bring security of supply benefits in other Member States.

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: Figure 2: Technical physical capacities (GWh/d) between Germany and Czech Republic. Source: ENTSOG’s datasets for System Capacity Map for 2024.

text: Table 1: Infrastructure standard indicator levels (N-1) as published in latest available PAPs

text: CZ DE Date of most recent PAP 2023/07 2019/06/21 Largest infrastructure Lanžhot Mallnow N-1_100% 227% N-1_30% 444% 199% Note: Table based on most recent PAPs.

text: And ~ 26 GWh/d/h according to ENTSOG’s System Capacity Map of 2024. 14 st As of 1 October 2023, the firm technical capacity listed on ENTSOG Transparency Platform for the Mallnow IP, direction from Poland (GAZ-SYSTEM) to Germany (Gascade) is in fact equal to 0.

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: Opinion No 06/2024

text: The views of a Commission official are purely his or her own and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.

text: Opinion No 06/2024

identifier: ACER Opinion No 06/2024

publisher: Europeiska unionens byrå för samarbete mellan energitillsynsmyndigheter

sprak: en

title: ACER Opinion 06-2024 on the reverse flow at the Deutschneudorf EUGAL interconnection point

serie: yttranden

text: PUBLIC

type: stycke

text: OPINION No 06/2024 OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS of 24 October 2024 on the elements of the coordinated decision on the application for determination of permanent physical bi-directional capacities at the crossborder interconnection point "Deutschneudorf EUGAL" between Germany and the Czech Republic

type: rubrik

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 9(4)

text: thereof, Having regard to

text: Regulation (EU) 2017/1938

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2017 concerning measures to safeguard the security of gas supply and repealing

text: Regulation (EU) No 994/2010

text: (‘the SoS Regulation’), and, in particular,

text: Article 5(4)

text: and (5) and point 8 of Annex III thereof, Having regard to the consultation with the national regulatory and the competent authorities concerned, Whereas:

text: 1. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURE

text: (1) On 24 July 2024, ACER received from Bundesnetzagentur für Elektrizität, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen (‘Bundesnetzagentur’) Decision Ref 4.12.01.03/3#1 titled “Reverse flow Germany/Czech Republic, application for

text: determination of permanent physical bi-directional capacities at the cross-border interconnection point "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov"” (‘the Decision’).

text: (2) On 5 February 2020, Bundesnetzagentur granted in accordance with the SoS Regulation an exemption from the obligation to permanently provide physical bi-directional capacity on the German side of the cross-border interconnection point "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov". This exemption was valid for four years and expired on 5 February 2024.

text: (3) On 2 February 2024, GASCADE Gastransport GmbH (‘GASCADE’), representing and having been granted a power of attorney by the three remaining shareholders of the EUGAL pipeline for the procedure pursuant to Article 5 (5) of the SoS Regulation, submitted to Bundesnetzagentur a proposal for the application for determination of permanent physical bi-directional capacities at the cross-border interconnection point "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov". The proposal is based on GASCADE’s assessment of the capacity situation at the border between the Czech Republic and Germany, focussing on the direction of flow from the Czech Republic to Germany.

text: (4) Before submitting its proposal, GASCADE conducted a public consultation from 15 January 2024 until 29 January 2024 with all potentially affected transmission system operators. Specifically, GASCADE sent emails to all affected parties and announced on its website its intention to submit a corresponding proposal to Bundesnetzagentur to determine the existence of permanent physical bidirectional capacities for the "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov" cross-border interconnection point. GASCADE did not receive any comments during this period.

text: (5) On 14 February 2024, Bundesnetzagentur in accordance with Annex III of the SoS Regulation consulted GASCADE’s proposal with the European Commission, ACER, the Czech Ministry of Industry and Trade (‘MIT’) and other competent authorities with a request for comments within four months. Bundesnetzagentur received no comments by the end of this period.

text: (6) Subsequently, Bundesnetzagentur and the Czech MIT agreed on the statement for the coordinated decision required by the SoS Regulation. The Czech’s position on the necessity of coordinated decision-making remains unchanged since several years ago. In MIT’s opinion, the virtual interconnection point (‘VIP’) Brandov has and continues to have bi-directional capacity, which prevents them from issuing a decision on their own.

text: Summary of GASCADE’s proposal and Bundesnetzagentur’s decision

text: (7) GASCADE’s proposal concludes that, based on market demand, there is no additional demand for permanent physical reverse flow capacities from the Czech Republic to Germany due to the lack of utilisation of capacities in the past and the lack of future demand of capacity. No significant gas flows from the Czech Republic to Germany have been recorded; only a physical flow to Germany was recorded for a short time in June 2021, which was caused by technical measures (an inter-TSO swap). The lack of future demand of capacity is deduced based on the lack of future capacity bookings at the Brandov VIP from the Czech Republic to Germany and the lack of demand for additional capacity during any of the three past cycles (in 2019, 2021 and 2023) of incremental capacity to be created in accordance with Chapter V of

text: Regulation (EU) 2017/459

text: establishing a Network Code on Capacity Allocation Mechanisms (‘NC CAM’).

text: (8) In addition, GASCADE notes that neither the German Gas Network Development Plan (‘NDP’) of 2022 nor the European Gas Ten-Year Network Development Plan (‘TYNDP’) of 2022 contain any indications of a steady gas supply from the Czech Republic to Germany. Moreover, the Russian gas import volumes have ceased since the exemption was granted in 2019 due to the efforts to phase out Russian gas imports after the start of Russian’s aggression against Ukraine. As a result, the predominant gas supply import pattern in the region has changed from a supply from the East to a supply from the North and West, where LNG imports have taken a large share of the reduced Russian gas imports. Against this background, the German NDP assumes that a transport capacity of around at least 30 GW of natural gas would be required from Germany to the Czech Republic until 2029. However, a potential increase of gas flows in the opposite direction is not envisaged.

text: (9) Bundesnetzagentur has followed GASCADE’s proposal and has approved the existence of sufficient permanent physical bi-directional capacities at the "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov" cross-border interconnection point. In view of GASCADE, Bundesnetzagentur and the Czech MIT, there is no need to pursue an exemption any longer, given that it is technically feasible to flow of gas in both directions in the event of a supply crisis scenario.

text: 2. SCOPE OF THE OPINION

text: (10) ACER shall deliver an opinion on the elements of the Decision taking into account the requirements of the SoS Regulation.

text: (11) Annex III (2) provides that to enable or enhance bi-directional capacity on an interconnection or to obtain or prolong an exemption from that obligation the gas transmission system operators shall submit to their competent authorities:

text: (12) Further, Annex III (5) provides that the coordinated decision of competent authorities shall:

text: (13) Although it is uncertain whether the proposal and the decision directly pertain to any of the aforementioned cases, as they interpret the current existence of permanent physical bi-directional capacity, in this Opinion ACER has assessed the decision against the criteria specified in

text: Article 5

text: and Annex III SoS Regulation, including any possible objection received pursuant to point 7 of Annex III of the SoS Regulation.

text: 3. OBSERVATIONS RECEIVED BY THE AGENCY

text: (14) By 24 September 2024, i.e. within 2 months of the receipt of the coordinated Decision, the Competent Authorities did not submit objections to ACER related to the coordinated Decision.

text: 4. ASSESMENT OF THE PROCEDURE

text: (15) ACER finds GASCADE’s proposal and Bundesnetzagentur’s decision have followed the consultation and process defined in Annex III to the SoS Regulation, as summarised above.

text: 5. ASSESMENT OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE DECISION

text: (16) GASCADE’s request includes a succinct argumentation dealing with the elements set out in Article 5(5) of the SoS Regulation, which are also described in the Decision.

text: (17) Bundesnetzagentur’s decision has followed GASCADE’s proposal. Bundesnetzagentur includes in the Decision background and main steps of the procedure, and the legal basis of the request leading to the Decision.

text: (18) ACER’s considerations on:

text: b. the understanding about the existence of permanent physical capacity from Germany to the Czech Republic (5.2)

text: are presented below.

text: 5.1.1. CBA prepared on the basis of the methodology pursuant to

text: Article 11 of Regulation (EU) No 347/2013

text: (19) ACER considers that there is no sufficient evidence that the CBA included in the request follows sufficiently the CBA methodology pursuant to

text: . The CBA submitted by GASCADE is a summary of five pages covering the elements set out in Article 5(5) of the SoS Regulation.

text: 5.1.2. Assessment of market demand

text: (20) Based on GASCADE’s proposal, Bundesnetzagentur notes that no significant gas flows from the Czech Republic to Germany have been registered since the exemption authorisation was granted in 2020 . In the future, no capacity has been booked at the Brandov VIP from the Czech Republic to Germany and no demand for additional capacity has been submitted in the last three cycles in 2019, 2021 and 2023 of incremental capacity.

text: (21) ACER notes that the demand assessment for the incremental capacity process started in 2023 for the border between the Czech Republic and the German market area Trading Hub Europe showed that no non-binding demand indications were received. However, as stated in the demand assessment report, although the 2023 assessment did not identify the need to start an incremental capacity project, this “does not preclude making

text: conclusions from a follow-up demand assessment exercise” (which market demand analysis will start in 2025).

text: (22) ACER also notes that the virtual interconnection point (‘VIP’) Brandov-GASPOOL- EUGAL is versatile , as it allows redirecting flows in multiple ways to destinations in many Central and Eastern European countries (cf. Figure 1).

text: (23) Based on the foregoing, ACER concurs with GASCADE and Bundesnetzagentur on the lack of market demand for additional transportation capacity from the Czech Republic to Germany. The Decision correctly concluded that sufficient unused entry capacity exists from the Czech Republic to Germany, both physically (flows) and commercially (capacity).

text: 5.1.3. Projections for demand and supply

text: (24) ACER concurs with the Decision that neither the current market situation nor the German Gas Network Development Plan (‘NDP’) of 2022 nor the European Gas Ten-Year Network Development Plan (‘TYNDP’) of 2022 contain any indications of a steady gas

text: supply from the Czech Republic to Germany in the future. At the same time, gas supply patterns in the region have shifted since the start of Russian’s aggression to Ukraine, the stop of supplies via Nord Stream and the European goal to replace Russian gas supplies. This has meant that the previous gas supply flows from the East have been replaced by additional LNG volumes from the North and West. As a result, the German NDP has not identified a need to increase transmission capacities from Czech Republique to Germany. ACER supports Bundesnetzagentur’s view that this consideration also applies specifically to the Deutschneudorf-EUGAL (DE-CZ) IP.

text: 5.1.4. Possible economic impact on existing infrastructure

text: (25) The Decision argues that as there are no indications of market demand for additional capacities and therefore no cost-recovery of investments by bookings, the financial burden of increasing capacity would fall only on German gas network users . ACER agrees with Bundesnetzagentur’s assessment.

text: 5.1.5. Results of the feasibility study

text: (26) Bundesnetzagentur’s assessment notes GASCADE’s view that a feasibility study is not necessary as the already existing capacity from Czech Republique to Germany is already available and sufficient.

text: (27) ACER is of the opinion that the lack of capacity demand should not relieve transmission system operators from the obligation to prepare and present the results of a feasibility study for additional capacities as a part of a submission, as this obligation constitutes a requirement pursuant to

text: Article 5(5)

text: SoS Regulation.

text: (28) ACER furthermore notes that a feasibility study should include techno-economic elements that provide essential information about the basic design parameters of the main facilities, associated cost estimates, and the possible implementation schedule of additional reverse flow capacities. This applies even when the study concludes it is not economically viable, i.e. that the costs of the project outweigh the benefits.

text: 5.1.6. Costs of implementing bi-directional capacity

text: (29) GASCADE and Bundesnetzagentur conclude that currently there is sufficient permanent physical bi-directional capacity, and that creating more bi-directional capacities would not bring any additional benefits and would instead place an additional burden on network users.

text: 5.1.7. Benefits for the security of gas supply

text: (30) GASCADE does not see any benefits to the security of gas supply from creating additional physical bi-directional capacities at the cross-border interconnection point "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov." This is particularly true considering that the affected interconnection point is part of the VIP Brandov on the German-Czech border, which already offers both technical and bookable capacity from the Czech Republic to Germany. Moreover, this capacity can be increased in critical situations, provided that the pressure in the grid on the German side does not exceed 44 bar. Additionally, the Waidhaus VIP offers further technical entry capacities from the Czech Republic to Germany, with a stated capacity level of 21 GWh/d/h at this VIP .

text: (31) ACER assessed the N-1 indicator level as available in the most recent published national Preventive Action Plans (‘PAPs’) of Czech Republic (as of 2023) and Germany (as of 2019). ACER notes that in both Member States, the N-1 indicator exceeds the minimum required by the SoS Regulation (100%). As the assessment in Germany is from 2019, competent authorities could consider the results of more updated calculations for N-1 indicators once they will become available.

text: (32) GASCADE notes in its Proposal that with the change of gas flows patterns and the cessation of gas flows through Mallnow , the currently largest import infrastructure is Dornum. In the event of a failure at this infrastructure, the cross-border interconnection

text: in the VIP Brandov area have the technical capacity to compensate for a large part of the lost gas supply.

text: (33) In light of this, ACER considers that the Decision is well-supported by sufficient evidence, concluding that further entry capacity from the Czech Republic to Germany is unnecessary to ensure a sufficient level of security of gas supply. Both the proposal and the Decision conclude there is no identifiable benefit to security of supply from additional permanent capacity from the Czech Republic to the German market area. ACER understands and shares this conclusion noting the results are based on an assessment of 2019 in Germany. In Germany, the capacity-based security of supply indicators provided by SoS Regulation, namely the N-1 indicator and the existence of sufficient technical physical reverse flow capacities, exceed the minimum requirements of the SoS Regulation.

text: ACER considerations concerning the understanding that the need for an exemption has ceased due to the existence of permanent physical bi-directional capacity at VIP Brandov

text: (34) On 5 February 2020, Bundesnetzagentur granted GASCADE an exemption from the obligation to have permanent physical bi-directional capacities in the flow direction from the Czech Republic to Germany.

text: (35) GASCADE’s proposal of 2024, endorsed by Bundesnetzagentur’s Decision, argues the existence of sufficient permanent physical bi-directional capacity within the meaning of the SoS Regulation at the interconnection point Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov from the Czech Republic to Germany. According to GASCADE, consequently there is no need to continue the exemption as gas can already be transported from the Czech Republic to Germany as part of solidarity measures at the interconnection point Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov.

text: (36) ACER finds it is open to interpretation whether the term "permanent physical capacity" within the meaning of the SoS Regulation must refer to commercially available capacity or if it is sufficient for security of supply if there are technical possibilities to organise the gas flow bi-directionally. Bundesnetzagentur and GASCADE refer to Recital 28 and

text: Article 9(1)

text: (j) of the SoS Regulation which suggest that the benefits of permanent physical bi-directional capacity for security of supply should be considered from a broader perspective. This perspective emphasises solidarity and enhanced cooperation, noting that bi-directional capacities must be available above all in an (imminent) crisis and be included in the preventive action plans.

text: (37) During this procedure, ACER has requested Bundesnetzagentur to clarify whether any investments and operational changes occurred between July 2020 and July 2024 to conclude that currently there are permanent physical bi-directional capacities at the crossborder interconnection point "Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov. ACER also asked for information on the evolution of physical reverse flow capacities and marketable

text: capacities at the IP Brandov during this period, to determine whether the situation has changed compared to 2020. Bundesnetzagentur confirmed that there have been no changes to the grid since 2020 and what has changed is their view on how to apply legislation, based on an alleged position of certain Commission’s staff .

text: (38) Therefore, it is evident that the current conclusion of existence of sufficient amount of physical permanent reverse flow capabilities at the IP Brandov in the direction from Czech to Germany, which was granted an exemption in 2020, responds primarily to a different reading of the term “permanent physical reverse flow capacities”, rather than to additional investments or changes in the offered reverse flow capacities.

text: (39) In view of the above, the Commission may consider if the mere possibility to allow physical reverse flows at the IP Brandov from the Czech Republic to Germany in the event of the gas supply crises is aligned with the gas SoS Regulation. In this sense, ACER finds questionable whether a reverse flow capacity which is only achievable during emergencies (such as a gas supply crisis), could be considered permanent, meaning it would last indefinitely or for a very long time. An adequate reading of the provisions for this case is important, as it may create a precedent when assessing other proposals for enabling or enhancing bi-directional capacities and proposals for granting or prolonging limited exemptions from this obligation for other interconnection points under the gas SoS Regulation. In this respect, ACER underlines the importance of having a consistent understanding of the gas SoS Regulation which preserves adequate levels of security of gas supply,

text: HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION:

text: 1. In terms or procedure, the Decision generally follows the process, and the requirements of assessment established under

text: Article 5

text: and Annex III of the SoS Regulation related to proposals to enable permanent bi-directional capacity and request for exemptions from the obligation to enable permanent physical bi-directional capacity, but for the lack of the following two elements:

text: a. a feasibility study, which should provide essential information about the design, the cost estimates, and the implementation schedule of the project. The study is important for providing information needed to carry out the CBA required by

text: Article 5(5)

text: SoS Regulation.

text: 2. In terms of substantive elements, particularly concerning security of supply matters, the Decision correctly concludes that the infrastructure standard indicators of the SoS Regulation are at adequate levels in both Germany and the Czech Republic. While aggreging on this conclusion, ACER notes that in Germany the N-1 indicator is from 2019. Competent authorities should consider the results of more updated calculations for N-1 indicators once they will become available.

text: 3. Concerning the proposal and decision understanding that the need for an exemption from the obligation to enable bi-directional capacity has ceased due to the existence of permanent physical bi-directional capacity at VIP Brandov,

text: a. ACER notes that while in 2020, GASCADE received an exemption from maintaining permanent bi-directional gas flow capacities between the Czech Republic and Germany, the 2024 decision by Bundesnetzagentur concluded that sufficient capacity already exists to transport gas from the Czech Republic to Germany at the Deutschneudorf EUGAL Brandov interconnection point. However, during this period there have been no additional investments or changes in the offered reverse flow capacities.

text: b. The European Commission may consider whether GASCADE and Bundesnetzagentur revised understanding of the concept permanent physical bidirectional capacity is aligned with the gas SoS Regulation, in view that it could set a precedent affecting future decisions on security of gas supply.

text: Without prejudice of the understanding of the concept of "permanent physical reverse flow capacities”, ACER recommends that GASCADE and Bundesnetzagentur assess every two years the outcome of future incremental capacity process and the security of supply situation to determine whether there is any potential market demand or security of supply need that would justify further increases of the reverse flow capacities at this IP.

text: This Opinion is submitted to the Commission for consequential actions deemed necessary, all competent authorities concerned, and the national regulatory authorities referred to in points 3 and 6 of Annex III SoS Regulation.

text: Done at Ljubljana, on 24 October 2024.

text: - SIGNED –

text: Fоr the Agency The Director

text: C. ZINGLERSEN

type: vagledning

utgivare: acer


text: Opinion No 06/2025

text: ENTSOG Summer Supply Outlook 2025 with Winter 2025/26 Overview EC Press Release 2025: EU to fully end its dependency on Russian energy 3 ACER Analysis of the European LNG market developments, 2025 Monitoring Report

text: Opinion No 06/2025

text: Figure 1: Outlook’s scenarios: yellow – reference, red – pessimistic , green – optimistic Demand: Reference LNG: Reference (5-year max) TurkStream Demand: 5-year average LNG: Low (5-year max -20%) Demand: 5-year average -15% no TurkStream LNG: High (max intake capacity)

text: Spatial coverage: EU-27, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Switzerland, Moldova, North Macedonia, Serbia, United Kingdom and part of Ukraine 5 Scenario naming – Pessimistic and Optimistic – is ACER’s interpretation and does not come from the Outlook

text: Opinion No 06/2025

text: Reference 5-year average 5-year average -15%

text: bcm/year 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

text: ACER concluded similarly as both – meeting the summer 2025 consumption needs and refilling storages to 90% – will only be feasible if pipeline supplies remain at a high level and the LNG imports increase by around 20% above the 2024 levels. See more in ACER Key developments in European gas wholesale markets (winter 2024- 2025).

text: Opinion No 06/2025

text: Figure 3: Historical demand and Reference scenario: EU-27 only

text: Reference 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017

text: bcm/year 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

text: ACER Key developments in European electricity and gas markets, 2025 Monitoring Report

text: Opinion No 06/2025

text: Figure 4: LNG supply potential scenarios

text: Reference: 5-year max Low: 5-year max -20% High: max intake capacity

text: GWh/day 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

text: GIE Aggregated LNG System Inventory: https://alsi.gie.eu/capacity-forecast

text: Opinion No 06/2025

text: E.g. exploring demand-side response by analysing historical demand-price relationships 10 European Energy Exchange https://www.eex.com/en/market-data/market-data-hub/natural-gas/futures 11 The Gas Storage Regulation sets a collective storage target that must be met by the start of the heating season. Additional analysis could qualitatively point to the comparative challenge to meet those targets under a select likely summer-winter spread scenarios. 12 Council of the EU press release 2025 – Gas storage rules: Council agrees its negotiating mandate

text: Opinion No 06/2025

identifier: ACER Opinion No 06/2025

title: ACER Opinion 06-2025 on ENTSOG's Summer Supply Outlook 2025

text: PUBLIC

text: OPINION No 06/2025 OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS of 4 July 2025 on ENTSOG’s Summer Supply Outlook 2025

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 Regulation (‘ACER’), and, in particular,

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) thereof, 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, and, in particular, Articles

text: and

text: thereof, Having regard to the outcome of the consultation with the ACER’s Gas Working Group, Having regard to the favourable opinion of the Board of Regulators of 26 June 2025, delivered pursuant to

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

text: , Whereas:

text: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

text: (1) ACER welcomes the timely publication of the Summer Supply Outlook 2025 (the Outlook) by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG). The Outlook evaluates the possible development in gas supply and the ability of the European gas system infrastructure to meet demand and handle storage injections during this summer and the coming winter. The expected gas demand and supply projections are modelled under a reference scenario, which is complemented with various gas system stress sensitivities, i.e. a cold winter and disruptions in Russian gas supply. The Outlook concludes that the current European gas infrastructure is adequate for reaching the storage filling targets and for supplying gas demand one year ahead.

text: Phasing out Russian gas imports

text: (2) ENTSOG examines the EU dependency on Russian gas supply. In all Outlook’s scenarios gas imports via the TurkStream pipeline are minimised. Additionally, two Russian gas supply disruption sensitivity scenarios are modelled: (i) TurkStream disruption and (ii) reduction of the liquified natural gas (LNG) supply (20% down from the historical supply). The latter impedes reaching the 90% gas storage filling before the winter season. (3) The recent Communication of the European Commission proposes a coordinated and gradual phase-out of Russian gas imports by prohibiting new gas supply contracts and stopping existing spot contracts by the end of 2025, as well as stopping all remaining gas imports by the end of 2027. In the future outlooks, ACER encourages ENTSOG to include a stepwise phase-out of Russian gas supply, while focussing on LNG imports dynamics, considering the globally expanding market , and securing additional supply to phase out from Russian gas.

text: Gas demand

text: (4) The reference gas demand in the Outlook, as estimated by Transmission System Operators (TSOs), is about 10% higher than the historical demand outturn in the last three years. ACER recommends reviewing the TSOs’ demand estimates by comparing them with the historical demand development, political and economic trends, and third-party projections.

text: Market drivers

text: (5) ACER further invites exploring the gas price effect on gas supply and storage filling, as it may change the regular supply pattern. Such assessment would indicate market driven gas off-take and feed-in patterns offering additional insights into the use of the gas infrastructure.

text: 1. INTRODUCTION

text: (6) On 10 April 2025, the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG) published its Summer Supply Outlook 2025 (the Outlook) with Winter 2025/26 Overview pursuant to

text: Article 26(3)

text: (g) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: . (7) Pursuant to

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: , ACER may provide an Opinion to ENTSOG on, inter alia, relevant documents referred to in

text: Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: , as submitted by ENTSOG to ACER pursuant to

text: Article 27(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: 2. SUMMARY OF THE ENTSOG’S SUMMER SUPPLY OUTLOOK

text: (8) ENTSOG’s Outlook presents EU-wide simulations of the European gas infrastructure readiness in the coming year (summer 2025 and winter 2025/26) to cope with various gas demand and supply scenarios. (9) In total, eighteen (18) scenarios were modelled in the Outlook. Figure 1 shows the possible combinations of three gas demand scenarios, TurkStream supply disruption scenario and three liquified natural gas (LNG) supply scenarios. The Reference scenario combines the yellow blocks in Figure 1. Any other combination of blocks constitutes sensitivity scenarios that test the readiness of gas infrastructure and gas storage filling with respect to the targets.

text: (10) The Reference gas demand is estimated by the transmission system operators (TSOs). The “5-year average” and “5-year average -15%” scenarios model, respectively, higher and lower gas demand relative to the Reference. (11) ENTSOG applies supply stress scenarios to assess the EU’s dependence on Russian piped gas via TurkStream and on LNG imports. Russian piped gas supply is minimised and fully disrupted, while the availability of the LNG supply potential for Europe is modelled under a Reference, Low and High supply scenarios. The Reference LNG supply is based on historical data.

text: (12) ENTSOG’s main findings and conclusions are: a. A low gas storage level at the beginning of this summer season (34%) requires early storage filling and high LNG imports to facilitate reaching the 90% gas storage level before the start of the winter season. b. Gas infrastructure is adequate for reaching the storage filling targets and for supplying the gas demand through the summer and winter seasons. c. All sensitivity scenarios with Low LNG supply do not allow for reaching the storage filling target before the start of the winter season. Additionally, higher demand scenarios lead to lower storage levels.

text: 3. ENTSOG’S APPROACH AND ACER’S ASSESSMENT

text: (13) ACER welcomes ENTSOG’s timely Outlook delivery and the continuous modelling updates that capture recent changes in infrastructure (mostly the new LNG terminals and cross-border capacities) and expand spatial coverage with the EU gas transit via Ukraine. (14) The following sections present ACER’s review of ENTSOG’s modelling assumptions – on demand, supply and storage – complemented with recommendations for future outlooks.

text: Demand

text: (15) The three gas demand scenarios modelled in the Outlook are shown in Figure 2: (i) reference demand based on the TSOs estimate, (ii) 5-year average (from 2017 to 2021/22), and (iii) 5-year average (from 2017 to 2021/22) reduced by 15%. Figure 2: Demand scenarios: EU-27 and other modelled countries

text: (16) The Reference scenario demand value is about 10% higher than the actual demand outturn in the last three years following the 2021 crisis (see Figure 3). Such reference value could be more appropriate as a cold winter sensitivity scenario. ACER notes that TSOs` assumptions behind the Reference demand estimates are not provided in the Outlook.

text: (17) The 5-year average represents the highest demand among the three demand scenarios, as it is based on the high gas demand period of 2017 - 2021/22. This approach does not account for the energy efficiency measures applied since 2021. Gas demand in 2023 and 2024 dropped 15-20% below the pre-crisis (2021) levels possibly reflecting an industrial shift and improved energy use efficiency according to recent findings from the ACER 2025 Monitoring Report of electricity and gas markets . The 5-year average demand scenario seems extreme, but it could be useful for testing the gas infrastructure. (18) The “5-year average -15%” demand scenario, which is based on the

text: Council Regulation (EU) 2022/1369

text: on coordinated demand-reduction measures for gas, is close to the historical outturn in the last two years. In this Regulation, the voluntary 15% gas demand reduction target applied for summer 2023 & winter 2023/24 compared with the average annual demand from 2017 to 2021/22.

text: (19) ACER recommends reviewing the TSOs’ demand estimates by comparing them with the historical demand development, political and economic trends, and third-party projections.

text: Supply

text: (20) The maximum supply potential is based on the historical availability of the last 5 years. This potential is estimated per source and per season as the maximum of the 30-day rolling average supply. (21) Russian gas pipeline supply through TurkStream is minimised. The TurkStream connects Russia with Turkey and then onwards to Bulgaria. This supply is used as the last resort, i.e. when other supplies are exhausted. (22) Three LNG supply scenarios are modelled in the Outlook as shown in Figure 4: Reference, Low and High. The Reference LNG supply potential is based on historical data.

text: (23) The Low LNG supply potential is 20% lower than the Reference potential. This is due to the exclusion of the Russian LNG supply from Yamal. The High LNG potential is limited only by the LNG regasification capacity in Europe. Although the High LNG scenario exceeds the potential volume of contracted LNG supply , it is a good initiative by ENTSOG for the purpose of exploring maximum LNG supply needs required to meet gas demand under various sensitivity scenarios. (24) The Union’s domestic production is expected to decline following the historical trend. (25) ACER encourages adjusting the maximum LNG supply potential in the Reference LNG 3,8 supply scenario including the booked LNG capacities as the best forecast. (26) ACER also encourages to reflect the stepwise phase-out of Russian gas supplies in a sensitivity scenario.

text: Storage

text: (27) Gas storage levels at the beginning of the modelling horizon on 1 April 2025 were at 34% (35 bcm). It is about 20 percentage points lower than in the previous two years. This requires higher gas supply during the summer season to reach the storage target level of 90% (93 bcm) by 1 November 2025 (

text: Regulation (EU) 2017/1938

text: ). Gas storage filling is supported via a mechanism of minimum intermediary targets (

text: Regulation (EU) 2023/2633

text: ), which enables market flexibility for Member States to fulfil the filling target at their own pace. (28) ACER appreciates that, in the recent Outlooks, ENTSOG enhanced the gas storage assumptions by (i) modelling the country-specific strategic storage reserves and (ii) modelling the LNG tanks at regasification terminals for additional short-term storage flexibility.

text: Market drivers

text: (29) ENTSOG recognises the importance of demand side response in reducing pressure on LNG imports and meeting the gas storage filling targets. However, ENTSOG does not model price sensitivity of gas demand, rather it estimates the required demand side response capacity to keep gas storage levels above the minimum (11%) under various demand-supply sensitivity scenarios.

text: (30) The LNG supply potential is a fixed modelling input set under the Reference, Low and High scenarios. In the Outlook, the LNG supply does not react to changes in gas demand. Yet, higher demand may eventually attract cargos at higher prices . (31) While gas prices are currently not factored into modelling, the current summer-winter price spreads signal possible challenges for the market-based storage filling.

text: (32) ACER recommends further exploring modelling price-sensitive gas demand (demand side response). Considering price dynamics may reveal flow patterns that are relevant to test infrastructure adequacy. (33) ACER welcomes the Low LNG supply potential scenario and invites ENTSOG to provide the underlying assumptions behind it. (34) ACER recommends considering the future gas wholesale prices (e.g. EEX futures ) and the expected summer-winter price spreads. Negative or close to zero summer-winter spreads discourage market-based gas storage injections during the summer season.

text: 4. CONCLUSIONS

text: (35) ACER acknowledges ENTSOG’s gradual improvements in the modelling assumptions that underlie the seasonal outlooks and the more structural modelling updates. ACER welcomes the fact that in addition to the central Reference scenario, ENTSOG methodically examines gas infrastructure readiness and storage filling through various gas system stress sensitivities. The Outlook concludes that the European gas infrastructure is adequate for delivering gas supply to meet demand in the coming year. (36) ACER encourages ENTSOG to consider more closely the recent trends in both – gas and electricity – sectors, especially the globally growing LNG market , energy efficiency and electrification, policy developments related to more flexible storage targets , as well as progress towards the Russian gas supply phase-out proposed in the roadmap by the European Commission . (37) ACER further invites exploring the gas price effect on gas supply and storage filling in the Reference scenario, also accounting for the intermediary minimum filling targets. Different summer-winter price spreads compared with the previous years may change the regular supply pattern resulting in unique gas flows and gas infrastructure loading.

text: (38) ACER recommends reviewing the methodology that underlies the Outlooks, considering the experience gathered so far and ACER’s recommendations in its opinions, including the cross-sectoral considerations with the electricity sector, where gas demand is decreasing. Gas consumption in electricity production fell for the second straight year in 2024, continuing a sharp decline since 2022 as renewables expanded their share . (39) ACER encourages ENTSOG to consider streamlining its gas scenario outlooks, possibly by reducing their number and focusing on the most policy-relevant ones to provide more actionable recommendations. HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION: 1. ACER finds that ENTSOG’s Summer Supply Outlook 2025 is broadly consistent with the objectives listed in 4(3)(b) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: and

text: Regulation (EU) No 2024/1789

text: . 2. ACER encourages ENTSOG addressing the recommendations from sections 3.1 Demand, 3.2 Supply, 3.4 Market drivers and 4 CONCLUSIONS in the upcoming outlooks. This Opinion is addressed to ENTSOG.

text: Done at Ljubljana, on 4 July 2025

text: - SIGNED -

text: For the Agency The Director C. ZINGLERSEN


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: 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.

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: This may cause a delayed implementation of EU rules from the Energy Community contracting parties, as additional legislative steps are necessary to transpose the 'Acquis Communautaire’.

text: Regulation (EU) No 984/2013

text: Serbia implemented the Gas Regulation 2017/459 in 2022. 8 Decision of AERS on the Exemption of the New Interconnector for Natural Gas No 40/2018-D-03/62 dated 5 March 2019.

text: For 20 years, starting from October 2021.

identifier: ACER Opinion No 06/2026

title: ACER Opinion 06-2026 on the derogation request submitted by the Hungarian Energy and Public Utility Regulatory Authority (MEKH) from the application of the network codes and guidelines

text: No 06/2026

text: OPINION

text: Regulation (EU) 2024/1789

text: , at the entry points from and the exit points to Serbia

text: 28 April 2026

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

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 Hungarian Energy and Public Utility Regulatory Authority (‘MEKH’) submitted to the European Commission and ACER two derogation requests concerning the two interconnection points connecting Hungary and Serbia. As a Contracting Party to the Energy Community Treaty, Serbia is required to align its national legislation with, and implement, relevant parts of the EU energy acquis, as transposed into the Energy Community acquis. The Hungarian NRA has requested a derogation from the application of

text: Article 19 of Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/459

text: (‘CAM NC’), specifically with regard to the bundling of standard capacity products at the Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point. In addition, MEKH has requested a derogation from the application of CAM NC

text: Article 9

text: Article 11

text: , and

text: Article 19

text: , specifically from the obligation to offer standard yearly capacity products at the annual auctions and from the bundling of standard capacity products at the Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point.

text: Conclusions

text: Regarding the derogation request for Kiskundorozsma-1, and taking into account justifications provided by the Hungarian NRA, ACER is of the opinion that, in the present case, a derogation from CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: , specifically with regard to the bundling of standard capacity products, should be granted, as the requirements listed in Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation are fulfilled. Regarding the derogation request for Kiskundorozsma-2, and taking into account justifications provided by the Hungarian NRA, ACER is of the opinion that, in the present case, a derogation from CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: , specifically with regard to the bundling of standard capacity products, should be granted, as the requirements listed in Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation are fulfilled. Notably, ACER is of the opinion that, considering the specified timeline, a derogation from the bundling of the yearly capacity product is not necessary. ACER further considers that the requirements under CAM NC

text: Article 9

text: and

text: Article 11

text: A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 6 / 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 network codes and guidelines, adopted in accordance with paragraph 1 of the same provision, shall apply to all interconnection 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 6 / 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 6 / 2 0 2 6

text: 2. Procedure

text: 8 On 5 February 2026, ACER received from the Hungarian Energy and Public Utility Regulatory Authority (‘MEKH’), in written form via electronic post, two requests 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 requested additional information to the involved NRA to further clarify elements of its derogation requests. ACER has taken due account of the additional information provided by the Hungarian NRA in its assessment complementing its argumentation.

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

text: 11 On 28 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 MEKH submitted two derogation requests for the interconnection points connecting Hungary and Serbia: Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point and Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point. The national regulatory authority of Serbia is the Energy Agency of the Republic of Serbia (‘AERS’). As a Contracting Party to the Energy Community Treaty, Serbia is required to align its national legislation with, and implement relevant parts of, the EU energy acquis, as transposed into the Energy Community acquis.

text: 13 The Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point is operated on the Serbian side by Transportgas Srbija LLC Novi Sad (‘Transportgas’), while the Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point is operated on the Serbian side by Gastrans d.o.o. Novi Sad (‘Gastrans’). On the Hungarian side, both interconnection points are operated by FGSZ Natural Gas Transmission Ltd (‘FGSZ’).

text: 3.1. Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point

text: 14 In its derogation request, MEKH explains that it has contacted AERS, the Serbian regulator, and Transportgas, the Serbian transmission system operator (‘TSO’). Following these exchanges the parties have established the need for a derogation with respect to certain legal provisions that could not be effectively implemented at the Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point by 5 August 2026.

text: 15 In particular, the Hungarian NRA has requested a derogation from the application of Article 19 of the

text: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/459

text: (‘CAM NC’), specifically with regard to the bundling of standard capacity products at the referred interconnection point.

text: 16 The derogation timeline has been considered, following the auction calendar, to ensure that capacity products are available as bundled by 1 October 2027: • Quarterly products: until 1 August 2027 (Q1–Q4 gas year auctions); A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 6 / 2 0 2 6 • Monthly products: until 19 September 2027 (October monthly auction); • Daily products: until 29 September 2027 (day-ahead auction); and • Within-day products: until 30 September 2027 (within-day auction).

text: 17 The effective implementation of the CAM NC provision referred above is impeded, within the meaning of

text: Article 70(3)

text: (a) of the Gas Regulation, at the Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point by 5 August of 2026 for the following reasons, as described by the Hungarian regulator: • Firstly, CAM NC has only been recently implemented by Transportgas, and further steps are necessary for its full application. • Secondly, the set-up of a joint capacity booking platform is still on going, and substantial developments to Transportgas’s internal IT systems are considered necessary to allow its full implementation. • Lastly, the contractual framework for standard capacity products at the Serbian side will be implemented in two phases: yearly, monthly and daily standard product will be offered as unbundled for gas year 2026/27, while the offering of quarterly and within-day standard product together with the bundling of all products is expected to be completed for Gas year 2027/28.

text: 18 The derogation timeline indicated is considered by MEKH as necessary to allow sufficient time for the completion of technical developments and setting up the contractual framework for standard capacity products, on the Serbian side, as well as for coordinating the cross-border implementation for the bundling of capacity and to ensure full compliance with the CAM NC provisions.

text: 19 No technical constraints or implementation impediments have been highlighted by MEKH, which currently applies the CAM NC provisions to the broadest extent possible on the Hungarian side of the interconnection point and awaits developments on the Serbian side to enable the full implementation of capacity bundling.

text: 20 MEKH considers it has fulfilled its obligations in addressing the obstacles to the application of network codes and guidelines by coordinating with its third-country counterparty to facilitate the identification of technical constraints and consequently support the future implementation of the network codes and guidelines.

text: 21 Considering that Kiskundorozsma-1 is a unidirectional interconnection point from Hungary to Serbia, MEKH considers that a time limited derogation does not pose risks to the EU internal market or to security of supply, due to primarily serving Serbian domestic consumption and having limited or no effect on the internal EU market.

text: 3.2. Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point

text: 22 In its derogation request, MEKH explains it has contacted AERS and the Serbian TSO Gastrans. Following these exchanges, the parties have established the need for a derogation with respect to certain legal provisions that could not be effectively implemented at the Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point by 5 August 2026.

text: 23 The Serbian legal framework provides a wide exemption to the Serbian TSO Gastrans in accordance with the national Exemption Act , issued by AERS in 2019. Notably, 90% of technical A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 6 / 2 0 2 6 capacity of the interconnection point on the Serbian side is exempted and allocated under long term contracts , while the remaining 10% is offered as short-term products (quarterly, monthly, daily, within day) subject to the provisions of the CAM NC. Capacity products are currently offered as unbundled products on the Regional Booking Platform (‘RBP’).

text: 24 Consequently, MEKH has requested a derogation from the application of CAM NC

text: Article 9

text: Article 11

text: , and

text: Article 19

text: , specifically from the obligation to offer standard yearly capacity products at the annual auctions and the obligation to offer them as bundled products, until 30 September 2027.

text: 25 In addition, MEKH has requested a derogation from the application of CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: , specifically for the bundling of short-term capacity products in accordance with a differentiated timeline, so as to ensure that these capacity products are available by 1 October 2027 as of the start of Gas year 2027/2028: • Quarterly products: until 1 August 2027 (Q1–Q4 gas year auctions), • Monthly products: until 19 September 2027 (October monthly auction), • Daily products: until 29 September 2027 (day-ahead auction), • Within-day products: until 30 September 2027 (within-day auction)

text: 26 In MEKH’s view, the effective implementation of CAM NC provisions referred above is impeded, within the meaning of

text: Article 70(3)

text: (a) of the Gas Regulation, at the Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point for the following reasons, as described by the Hungarian regulator: • Firstly, the Exemption Act affects the allocation of transmission capacity rights and constitutes an objective legal constraint, within the meaning of Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation, which impedes the effective application of the capacity bundling; • Secondly, Gastrans generally does not offer firm yearly capacity products, which impedes the effective application of the capacity bundling for yearly capacity products; • Lastly, Gastrans further indicated that the immediate application of bundled capacities is not feasible until certain technical adjustments are performed on its Electronic Data Platform.

text: 27 Another element that has been brought forward by Gastrans, as a limitation in relation to the offer of bundled capacities, is the risk of an unlevel playing field between network users from the Energy Community contracting parties and network users from the EU countries. These limitations consist of the need for Energy Community or non-EU traders to establish an EU company to obtain a license in the EU in order to acquire bundled capacity products and be able to trade gas, leading to additional costs and obstacles for these potential users.

text: 28 No technical constraints or implementation impediments have been highlighted by MEKH, which currently applies the CAM NC provisions to the maximum extent possible on the Hungarian side of the interconnection point and awaits developments on the Serbian side to enable the full implementation of capacity bundling.

text: 29 MEKH considers it has fulfilled its obligations in addressing the obstacles to the application of network codes and guidelines by coordinating with its third-country counterparty to facilitate the identification of technical constraints and consequently support the future implementation of the network codes and guidelines.

text: 30 MEKH considers that granting the requested derogation for the Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point does not pose risks to the internal gas market or to security of supply, as A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 6 / 2 0 2 6 the pipeline has operated effectively under the current regulatory framework to date. MEKH further states that approximately 90–95% of the available capacity is already contracted on both sides in the period under consideration.

text: 4. ACER assessment

text: 4.1. Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point

text: 31 ACER is of the opinion that CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: , mentioned in the derogation request, cannot be effectively applied at the Kiskundorozsma-1 interconnection point, until the Serbian TSO on the other side of the interconnection point, Transportgas, fully applies the CAM NC with all its technical requirements to bundle capacity products at the interconnection point.

text: 32 With reference to the measures adopted to alleviate the above-mentioned obstacles, ACER notes that MEKH has taken all possible steps to ensure the highest level of implementation on its side of the interconnection point. Specifically, ACER acknowledges that MEKH has engaged in discussions with both the Serbian NRA and the relevant TSO to address the identified technical constraints and to fully implement the network code provisions to the extent possible within its jurisdiction.

text: 33 Concerning market impact and the demonstration 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, ACER considers that, based on the information provided by the Hungarian NRA, no significant effects on market dynamics or security of supply risks are identified.

text: 4.2. Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection point

text: 34 ACER is of the opinion that CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: cannot be effectively applied at the Kiskundorozsma-2 interconnection until the Serbian TSO on the other side of the interconnection point, Gastrans, has fully applied the CAM NC with all its technical requirements to bundle capacity products at the interconnection point.

text: 35 Concerning the derogation request from the application of

text: Article 9

text: and

text: Article 11

text: , ACER is of the opinion that the requirements under CAM NC Article

text: and

text: are currently fulfilled by the Hungarian TSO to the extent possible. Until the bundling of the product is not possible this entails the possibility for the Hungarian TSO to offer standard yearly capacity product as unbundled on its side of the interconnection point.

text: 36 ACER remarks that, on the basis of the information it has collected, yearly capacity products are already offered on the Hungarian side of the interconnection point as unbundled in the RBP platform. No further obligation in reference to the aforementioned articles have been identified by ACER that would require a derogation to be requested by the Hungarian NRA.

text: 37 ACER highlights that the capacity auctions for bundled products will cover only 10% of the technical capacity at the interconnection point, as the rest is exempted on the Serbian side.

text: 38 ACER further remarks that, based on the information provided in the derogation request, it cannot be determined whether, after the expiry of the derogation period, Gastrans will commence offering yearly capacity products for the available capacity not subject to long-term contracts. ACER highlights that this condition is necessary to enable the offering of bundled capacity for all standard products at the interconnection point.

text: 39 ACER notes that the foreseen timeline for the offering of bundled yearly products, following the proposed derogation timeline of 30 September 2027, entails that the first auction for yearly products, after the expiry of the derogation, will take place in July 2028 for the Gas year A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 6 / 2 0 2 6 2028/2029 product. However, following further bilateral discussions, the Hungarian NRA confirmed to ACER that its intention is to have all capacity products offered as bundled at both interconnection points as of 1 October 2027. The derogation deadline for the yearly product was not specified with the same level of precision or rationale as for the other products. In particular, the timeline included in the derogation request, 30 September 2027, needs to be understood as the date after which the yearly product will be made available as bundled, rather than being linked to the timing of the annual yearly auction.

text: 40 ACER observes, in agreement with the Hungarian NRA, that following the logic underpinning the derogation request for the other products, a derogation is not required for the bundling of the yearly product until the intended offering date of 1 October 2027. This is because the first yearly auction for the Gas year 2027/2028 product will, in any event, take place in July 2027, after the 5 August deadline set out in Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation.

text: 41 In relation to the potential limitation on capacity trading of bundled capacity products arising from the different licensing regimes and to which extent this limitation hinders the possibility for EU and non-EU companies to acquire bundled products, ACER notes that, based on the information provided, it is not possible to fully assess the impact of this element. ACER therefore considers this element as noteworthy and it points out that further investigation is necessary from the national regulatory authority to adopt all measures that can mitigate the effects of licensing differences while ensuring seamless application of EU rules.

text: 42 With reference to the measures adopted to alleviate the above-mentioned obstacles, ACER notes that MEKH has taken all possible steps to ensure the highest level of implementation on its side of the interconnection point. Specifically, ACER acknowledges that MEKH has engaged in discussions with both the Serbian NRA and the relevant TSO to address the identified technical constraints and to fully implement the network code provisions to the extent possible within its jurisdiction.

text: 43 Concerning market impact and the demonstration 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, ACER considers that, based on the information provided by the Hungarian NRA, no significant effects on market dynamics or security of supply risks are identified.

text: 5. Conclusions

text: 44 With reference to the derogation request at Kiskundorozsma-1, and taking into account all the aforementioned reasons, ACER is of the opinion that in the case at issue a derogation from the application of CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: 45 In relation to the derogation request at Kiskundorozsma-2, and taking into account all the aforementioned reasons, ACER is of the opinion that in the case at issue a derogation from the application of CAM NC

text: Article 19

text: , specifically with regard to the bundling of standard capacity products, should be granted as the requirements listed in Article 70(3) of the Gas Regulation are fulfilled. Notably, ACER is of the opinion that, considering the specified timeline, a derogation from the bundling of the yearly capacity product is not necessary. ACER is of the opinion that the requirements under CAM NC

text: Article 9

text: and

text: Article 11

text: , specifically the obligation to offer standard yearly capacity products at the annual auctions, are currently fulfilled by MEKH on the Hungarian side of the interconnection point to the extent possible, therefore a derogation is not considered necessary. A C E R O P I N I O N N O 0 6 / 2 0 2 6 This Opinion is addressed to the European Commission. Done at Ljubljana, on 28 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 07/2012

title: ACER Opinion 07-2012 on the ENTSO-E Summer Outlook Report 2012 and Winter Review 2011-2012

text: Publishing date: 11/10/2012

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 11/10/2012

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2013

title: ACER Opinion 07-2013 on the Suitability of Long Run Average Incremental Costs for the Assessment of Inter-Transmission System Operator Compensation

text: Publishing date: 02/04/2013

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 02/04/2013

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2014

title: ACER Opinion 07-2014 on ENTSO-E Network Code on Electricity Balancing

text: Publishing date: 24/03/2014

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 24/03/2014

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2015

title: ACER Opinion 07-2015 on ENTSOG's Summer Supply Outlook 2015

text: Publishing date: 31/08/2015 Document title: ACER Opinion on ENTSOG's Summer Supply Outlook 2015

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2016

title: ACER Opinion 07-2016 on ENTSOG's Summer Supply Outlook 2016

text: Publishing date: 27/06/2016

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 27/06/2016

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2017

title: ACER Opinion 07-2017 on ENTSOS' Draft Consistent and Interlinked Electricity and Gas Market and Network Model

text: Publishing date: 03/04/2017

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback

text: Publishing date: 03/04/2017

text: Document title:

text: We appreciate your feedback


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2018

title: ACER Opinion 07-2018 on the ENTSOG Annual Report 2017


identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2019

title: ACER Opinion 07-2019 on ENTSO-E Winter Outlook Report 2018-19 and Summer Review 2018


text: OJ L 158, 14.6.2019, p. 22–53. 2 OJ L 158, 14.6.2019, p. 54–124. 3 OJ L 158, 14.6.2019, p. 1–21.

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: ENTSO-E, “2020 Summer Outlook – Winter Review 2019-2020”, 15 June 2020. https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/Summer-Outlook-2020_Report.pdf. 5 ACER Decision No. 08/2020 of 6 March 2020 on the methodology for short-term and seasonal adequacy assessments. https://acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Individual%20decisions/ACER%20Decision% 2008-2020%20on%20the%20shortterm%20and%20seasonal%20adequacy%20assessments%20methodology_RPR8.pdf 6 ENTSO-E, “2020 Summer Outlook – Winter Review 2019-2020 – Country Comments”, 15 June 2020. https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/Summer-Outlook-2020_Country_comments.pdf 7 https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-contain.er/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/Supply_SOR%2020.xlsx. 8 https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/Transfer%20Capacities_SOR%2020.xlsx. 9 https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/PECD/PECD_2020_edition%202020_Offshore.xlsx.

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/PECD/PECD_2020_edition%202020_Onshore.xlsx. 11 https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/PECD/PECD_2020_edition%202020_PV.xlsx. 12 https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/Hydro.zip. 13 https://eepublicdownloads.blob.core.windows.net/public-cdn-container/clean-documents/sdcdocuments/seasonal/SOR2020/data/Demand_SOR%2020.xlsx. 14 ACER Decision on STSAA Methodology: Annex I. https://www.acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Annexes%20to%20the%20DECISION% 20OF%20THE%20AGENCY%20FOR%20THE%20C8/ACER%20Decision%2008- 2020%20on%20the%20RPR8%20-%20Annex%20I.pdf 15 See footnote 5

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: Opinion No 07/2020

text: Opinion No 07/2020 2. This Opinion is addressed to the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity. Done at Ljubljana, on 10 December 2020.

identifier: ACER Opinion No 07/2020

title: ACER Opinion 07-2020 on the ENTSO-E Summer Outlook and Winter Review 2019-2020 Report

text: PUBLIC

text: OPINION No 07/2020 OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR THE COOPERATION OF ENERGY REGULATORS of 10 December 2020 ON THE ENTSO-E SUMMER OUTLOOK 2020 AND WINTER REVIEW 2019-2020 REPORT

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 , and, in particular,

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) thereof, Having regard to

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/943

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the internal market for electricity and, in particular,

text: Articles 30(1)

text: (m) and 32(2) thereof, Having regard to

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/941

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on risk-preparedness in the electricity sector and repealing Directive

text: and, in particular,

text: Article 9(2)

text: thereof, Having regard to the favourable opinion of the Board of Regulators of 13 October 2020, delivered pursuant to

text: Article 22(5)

text: (a) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: , Whereas:

text: 1. INTRODUCTION

text: (1) On 15 June 2020, the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (‘ENTSO-E’) published its annual summer adequacy outlook report for 2020 (‘Summer Outlook 2020’) together with the review of the main events occurring during winter 2019-2020 (‘Winter Review 2019-2020’). On 17 September, ENTSO- E submitted the Summer Outlook 2020 to ACER for its opinion, according to

text: Articles

text: and

text: of Regulation (EU) 2019/943. The document submitted by ENTSO-E is entitled “2020 Summer Outlook – Winter Review 2019-2020” (the ‘Report’).

text: (2) Pursuant to

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: and

text: Article 30(1)

text: (m) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/943

text: , ACER may provide an opinion to ENTSO-E on their seasonal adequacy assessments, taking into account the objectives of nondiscrimination, effective competition and the efficient and secure functioning of the internal market for electricity. In view of these objectives, and to steer the implementation of the ACER Decision No. 08/2020 towards the desired outcomes, ACER considers it appropriate to issue this opinion on the submitted Report.

text: (3) The Report is accompanied by:

text: (a) a document including country-specific comments on the expected security of supply situation in their system during summer 2020 and country-specific analyses of events or specific operational conditions which occurred during winter 2019- 2020. The document is entitled “2020 Summer Outlook – Winter Review 2019- 2020 – Country Comments” (the ‘Country Comments Report’); (b) a spreadsheet file providing relevant input information with respect to supply data for Summer Outlook 2020; (c) a spreadsheet file providing the expected transfer capacities between study zones for Summer Outlook 2020;

text: (d) a spreadsheet file providing wind offshore generation time series from the ENTSO-E Pan-European Climate Database (‘PECD’) used for Summer Outlook 2020;

text: (e) a spreadsheet file providing wind onshore generation time series from the ENTSO- E Pan-European Climate Database (‘PECD’) used for Summer Outlook 2020;

text: (f) a spreadsheet file providing solar generation time series from the ENTSO-E Pan- European Climate Database (‘PECD’) used for Summer Outlook 2020;

text: (g) an archive file providing relevant input information with respect to hydroelectric power modelling used for Summer Outlook 2020; and (h) a spreadsheet file providing the expected electricity demand data used for Summer Outlook 2020.

text: 2. SUMMARY OF THE REPORT

text: (4) In the Summer Outlook 2020, ENTSO-E upgraded its methodology for assessing adequacy on the seasonal time horizon, as described in section “Seasonal Outlook Revolution” of the Report. In particular, the new methodology (Methodology for Short-term and Seasonal Adequacy Assessment, ‘STSAA Methodology’) has been developed by ENTSO-E and approved by ACER on 6 March 2020. The Summer Outlook 2020 summarizes the main elements of improvement of the methodological framework (e.g. from deterministic to probabilistic approach). ENTSO-E recognizes that the full implementation of the methodology will require further work in the coming years (e.g. to include flow-based modelling).

text: (5) The Summer Outlook 2020 covers the period from week 22 of 2020 (25 May 2020) to week 40 of 2020 (4 October 2020), and is based on data collected and processed pursuant to Article 7 of the STSAA Methodology.

text: (6) ENTSO-E clarifies that the relevant data collection for Summer Outlook 2020 has been performed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic: consequently, the impact on adequacy of measures applied in each country to limit the spread of the pandemic are not captured. On the other hand, ENTSO-E declares that, after a ‘stress test’ to assess maintenance reschedule under severe conditions was performed, transmission system

text: operators (‘TSOs’) confirmed that there is no significant adequacy risk during the period covered by the assessment.

text: (7) The Summer Outlook 2020 provides an overview of the status of the power system (section “Overview of the power system in Summer 2020” of the Report) in the period covered by the assessment in terms of:

text: (a) generation capacity mix. In particular, it is highlighted that Net Generating Capacities (‘NGC’) are sufficient to cover the highest expected demand in all study zones except Luxembourg. On the other hand, in case only thermal and hydro capacity are considered, the NGC may decrease in several study zones; (b) generation capacity evolution; (c) planned unavailability of thermal units; (d) demand overview; and (e) network overview.

text: (8) The information about the power system considered in the Summer Outlook 2020 encompasses all resources available to supply demand in a market-based approach and does not represent resources dedicated to ensuring operational security, transfer capacities, which are dedicated to cope with power flow variability and out-of-market measures, which are dedicated to cope with power supply shortages.

text: (9) The results of the Summer Outlook with respect to the adequacy situation (section ‘Adequacy situation’) are summarised below:

text: (a) Most adequacy concerns (in terms of risk to rely on non-market measures) are identified in the Mediterranean Sea islands; (b) Marginal and occasional risks are identified in Poland: ENTSO-E observes that such risks are associated with extreme scenarios (high unplanned outages combined with low renewable generation); (c) Structural risks are highlighted in Malta. The reasons behind this adequacy risk are investigated in the ‘Focus on Malta’ section: i. during the daytime of a typical workday in summer, demand in Malta lies in the approximate range of 300–500 MW depending on weather conditions. Meanwhile, market-based resources consist of 355 MW of thermal generation and 178 MW of solar generation, which is weather dependent. Therefore, during the daytime of a summer day, Malta depends on solar generation and imports; ii. in scenarios where the interconnection between Malta and Sicily (Italy) is not available in a typical working day in week 39 (Monday 21 September 2020 – Sunday 27 September 2020), the Loss of Load Probability (‘LOLP’) adequacy metric value would reach 29.9%. In scenarios where the interconnector between Malta and Sicily is available, LOLP would be lower than 5% in week 39; and

text: iii. taking into consideration the utilisation of “reserves” (non-market measures), the adequacy risk in Malta is deemed negligible and related to extreme scenarios with high unplanned outages combined with low renewable generation.

text: (10) The Winter Review 2019-2020 is described in section ‘Winter 2019/2020 Review’ of the Report: it describes the most important events that occurred during the winter of 2019/2020 and compares them with the study results reported in the previous Seasonal Outlook. The main elements of the Winter Review 2019-2020 are summarised below:

text: (a) The past winter (December 2019 to March 2020) was the warmest on record in Europe; (b) Some voltage regulation challenges were experienced throughout Europe towards the end of the Winter 2019/2020 season, in relation to the decreased demand due to the COVID-19 pandemic and during moments of high renewable generation. The effect was specifically prominent during bank holidays and in regions with important countermeasures in place to cope with the pandemic crisis; (c) On 23 December 2019, the Malta–Sicily Interconnector was damaged by a ship’s anchor causing a nationwide blackout for about three hours. The emergency gas turbines were dispatched to restore supply to consumers within a short time. The interconnector was back in operation on 13 March 2020; (d) Several winter storms were recorded in North-Western Europe. In Germany, they occasionally caused wind generation to peak. Wind generation curtailment was occasionally necessary to ensure security of system operations; (e) On January 2020, Hungary recorded more frequent and higher unplanned outages than usual. Furthermore, the demand increased compared to the winter of 2018/2019 despite the mild winter. A new demand record of 7105 MW was marked on 5 December 2019; and (f) Many unplanned outages of nuclear power plants were recorded in Sweden, either due to technical failures of power plant elements or technical failures of grid elements connecting them to the power system. Nevertheless, adequacy and security margins were sufficient to cope with the situation.

text: 3. ASSESSMENT OF THE SUMMER OUTLOOK 2020 AND WINTER REVIEW 2019-2020

text: Legal framework

text: (11) The Report was submitted for ACER’s opinion pursuant to

text: Articles 30

text: (l)(m) and 32(2) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/943

text: . According to these Articles, ENTSO-E shall adopt seasonal adequacy assessments and submit them to ACER for an opinion. Seasonal adequacy assessments include a winter adequacy assessment and a summer adequacy assessment, as specified in

text: Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) 2019/941

text: (12) In providing its opinion, ACER takes into account the objectives of nondiscrimination, effective competition and the efficient and secure functioning of the

text: General remark

text: Articles 30(1)

text: (m) and 32(2) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/943

text: do not explicitly refer to summer and winter reviews to be adopted by ENTSO-E and to be submitted to ACER for an opinion. However, such reviews are of utmost relevance for the preparation of future seasonal adequacy assessments and, equally, constitute a long-standing practice of ENTSO-E. Therefore, ACER deems it appropriate to consider in this Opinion not only the Summer Outlook 2020, but also the Winter Review 2019-2020.

text: (14) ENTSO-E published the Report on 15 June 2020, two weeks after the deadline set in

text: (1 June each year). ENTSO-E informed ACER in due time about the delay, motivated by the need to perform additional analyses on the European power system to properly assess the impact of the COVID- 19 pandemic on adequacy risks. ACER observes that

text: does not declare a publication after 1 June 2020 as invalid. ENTSO-E also submitted the Summer Outlook 2020 to ACER for its opinion.

text: (15) Therefore, ACER considers the submission of the Report as valid.

text: Assessment of specific issues of Summer Outlook 2020 and Winter Review 2019- 2020

text: (16) Although it is mentioned in several parts of the Summer Outlook 2020 (‘Introduction remark’, footnote in the “Executive summary” and ‘Overview of power system in Summer 2020’) that a ‘stress test’ to assess the recently announced maintenance reschedule under severe conditions’ (including heat wave and low RES generation)’ with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic has been performed and that ‘TSOs themselves do not expect that the pandemic will negatively impact adequacy during this summer’, the Summer Outlook 2020 does not include any evidence of this study or refer to additional documents. ACER observes that providing evidence and detailed explanation of such analysis would have increased transparency of the Summer Outlook 2020.

text: (17) Pursuant to Article 3(7) of the STSAA Methodology, seasonal adequacy assessments shall be based on any relevant metrics, including Loss of Load Expectation (‘LOLE’). The Summer Outlook 2020 does not include this metric: ACER observes that the calculation of LOLE (in a given modelled zone during a given time period) would allow to better characterize the level of security of supply in the analysed area (as a complement to LOLP).

text: (18) Pursuant to

text: Article 3(8)

text: (c) of the STSAA Methodology, seasonal adequacy assessment shall include a sensitivity analysis to assess possible measures to prevent or mitigate adequacy risks, in particular with respect to the use of non-market measures to mitigate an electricity crisis. The Summer Outlook 2020 does not include such sensitivities in a systematic way, with the exception of a dedicated analysis for

text: Malta as described in subparagraph (9)(c) above. ACER observes that, in line with the STSAA Methodology, the role of non-market measures shall be systematically evaluated to identify the role of such measures in preventing or mitigating adequacy risks.

text: (19) Pursuant to paragraph (14) of Annex I to STSAA Methodology, the convergence of the Monte Carlo method exploited in the probabilistic assessment of short-term and seasonal adequacy outlooks shall be assessed by the calculation of the coefficient of variation on the Expected Energy Not Serve (‘EENS’) adequacy metric: in particular, paragraph (16) of the aforementioned Annex I requires that the number of analysed Monte Carlo samples and the values of the coefficient of variation as a function of the number of analysed Monte Carlo samples shall be reported along with the results of adequacy assessments. However, the Summer Outlook 2020 does not provide such information. ACER observes that, in line with the STSAA Methodology, the robustness of the seasonal assessment results can only be ensured if the probabilistic assessment converges.

text: (20) The dedicated analysis for Malta in the Summer Outlook 2020, the role of non-market measures in mitigating adequacy risks is highlighted. However, no details are provided with respect to what type of reserves are expected to be deployed to mitigate adequacy risks. ACER observes that a proper characterisation of the resources modelled in seasonal assessments ensures a better understanding from relevant stakeholders.

text: (21) Pursuant to Article 9(1) of the STSAA Methodology, the seasonal assessment report shall be exhaustive and informative. While ACER recognizes that the Summer Outlook 2020 is the first seasonal adequacy assessment carried out by ENTSO-E by partially implementing the STSAA Methodology, ACER also observes that the level of description and explanation of the results is rather limited. ACER observes that an appropriate description and discussion of the results is of paramount importance to highlight possible adequacy risks and, eventually, potential mitigation measures, to relevant stakeholders.

text: (22) With respect to the import capacity with non-explicitly modelled systems, it is not clear from the Summer Outlook 2020 to what extent such capacities are included in the modelling exercise: in particular:

text: (a) Pursuant to paragraph (22) of Annex I to STSAA Methodology, “Supply shall be considered as all available generation units and storage units in the assessed system and expected available imports from non-explicitly modelled neighbouring countries”; and

text: (b) According to p. 13 of the Report, “import capacities with non-modelled systems (not coloured in figure [10] ) are not considered”. ACER observes that a proper and consistent characterisation of how imports/exports from/to non-explicitly modelled systems are accounted in seasonal assessments is of paramount importance to properly reflect adequacy risks at pan-European level.

text: (23) With respect to the data provided as annexes to the Report and detailed in subparagraphs (3)(b)-(3)(h) above, ACER praises the effort from ENTSO-E to ensure transparency of inputs for seasonal adequacy assessments. On the other hand: (c) ACER observes that this information does not follow standardised data formats (e.g. database management systems, comma-separated values files, etc.) that could facilitate systematic and automatic data processing from relevant stakeholders; and (d) ACER observes that ENTSO-E has not specified the data licensing or has stated clear data re-use rights. In this respect, ACER highlights that, on February 2019, a data policy on ENTSO-E Transparency Platform has been implemented .

text: 4. CONCLUSION

text: (24) ACER did not identify such elements in the Report that would suggest that the Summer Outlook 2020 and the Winter Review 2019-2020 have negative effects on non-discrimination, effective competition, and efficient and secure functioning of the electricity market. (25) In line with the assessment provided in Section 3.3 above and with the STSAA Methodology, ACER found that the informative value of future seasonal adequacy assessments and reviews can be further enhanced as follows: (a) The level of detail in the results should improve. In particular, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic should be properly analysed and communicated in the upcoming Winter Outlook 2020-2021; (b) All relevant adequacy metrics should be computed; (c) The impact of non-market measures shall be systematically evaluated; (d) Representation of non-explicitly modelled systems should be consistent and clearly described; (e) Data should be provided in a user-friendly manner; and (f) Data licensing should be specified,

text: HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION:

text: 1. ACER considers that the Summer Outlook 2020 and the Winter Review 2019-2020 are in line with the requirements of

text: Article 4(3)

text: (b) of

text: Regulation (EU) 2019/942

text: - SIGNED -

text: Fоr the Agency The Director

text: C. ZINGLERSEN