EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 16.7.2009 
SEC(2009) 971 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
Accompanying document to the 
Proposal for a 
 
COUNCIL REGULATION 
 
concerning the notification to the Commiss ion of investment projects into energy 
infrastructure within the European Community  
and repealing Regulation (EC) No 736/96 
  
IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
{COM(2009) 361} 
{SEC(2009) 972} 
 
EN 2   EN 1. S ECTION 1 - PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED 
PARTIES  
• Identification  
Lead DG: DG TREN 
Associated DGs: DG ECFIN, DG E NV, DG ENTR, DG RTD, DG JRC 
Agenda planning/WP reference: 2009/TREN/019 
• Organisation and timing 
Work on this impact assessment started in Ja nuary 2009 with the analysis of the problem 
and of policy options as well as with a di scussion on the approach for consultation of 
interested parties. Members of  the Steering Group were also invited to contribute to the 
analysis of the impact of a revised C ouncil Regulation (EC) No736/96 on their area of 
competence. The Steering Group met 3 times ove r the period from January to April 2009. 
On 7 May 2009, the Impact assessment Board rece ived a preliminary draft of this Impact 
Assessment Report. The Board met on 27 May 2009 to review the draft and adopted a 
first opinion on 29 May 2009 and a second one on 16 June 2009. The IAB requested a 
strengthened analysis of the problems cause d by a lack of availability of data and a 
further clarification of policy options and of their impacts. 
The revised Impact assessment report take s full account of the Impact Assessment 
Board’s opinion throughout, namely on the following points: 
– Problem definition: while no policy failure resulting from a lack of data can be 
produced for the past, it has been further cl arified that the fundamentals of the energy 
landscape have changed and that investment into EU energy infrastructure has become 
a sensitive issue for the futu re EU energy position. Data w ill help establish a clearer 
view on potential problems in the future. 
– Policy options: policy options have been furt her clarified and asse ssed in terms of 
proportionality. 
– Analysis of impacts: the analysis of im pacts has been improved to assess how each 
option will contribute to the policy objectives to be met. 
• Consultation and expertise 
The preparation of this impact assessm ent has been preceded by consultations, 
presentations of the objectives of the Commi ssion in order to gather as many reactions 
and information as possible. 
– Consultation  of interested parties (i.e. those concerned by reporting obligations) took 
place at two different moments in time: 
 
EN 3   EN – In May 2008, in the context of  the preparation of the 2nd Strategic Energy 
Review of the European Union1, a questionnaire based on Council 
Regulation (EC) No736/96 was sent to Me mber States to ge t data on current 
and future power generati on capacity needs and on e xpected evolutions of 
these capacities. The questionnaire was pr e-filled with data from commercial 
information providers and Member States were asked to verify this information. The possible revision of the respective Regulation was 
mentioned. This first consultation may be  considered as a test case for the 
impact assessment study. 
– From February to March 2009, inte rested parties – Member States, 
representatives of industr y, transmission network opera tors and regulators – 
were directly consulted on the basis of a targeted c onsultation. To this effect, 
a questionnaire was prepared and sent to  these parties with a view to learning 
more about what is expected from EU institutions in the area of investment monitoring and the scope, design and impact of a reporting mechanism. A 
final consultation took place during a technical workshop with Member 
States and stakeholders on 14 May 2009.  
The consultation targeted stakeholders intere sted in a possible revision: Member States, 
energy regulators, industry, tr ansmission networks operators
2. These entities represent 
the whole energy chain/system (Industry, tr ansmission/storage systems operators and 
regulators) and cover the EU energy mix (C onventional energy and Renewable energy 
sources) and are involved in technological development. Um brella associations have 
been targeted by preference as they can provi de a European view and speak for a whole 
sector/branch. As most of the companies or operators are members of national or 
European sector – specific associations, this targeted consultation has covered the bulk of 
the sector. 
For most of the respondents, whether Member  States or industry representatives, an 
appropriate monitoring of invest ment projects into infrastructure in the energy sector is 
seen as relevant. It is regularly considered as essential for increasing transparency, for 
policy-making and for lending support to specif ic projects. A monitoring instrument at 
EU level is supported on the condition that it remains a transparency tool, provides an 
added-value and does not represent a high admi nistrative burden. For a summary of the 
contributions received, see Annex 2. 
– Presentations  
Two presentations on the possible revision of Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 were 
given to experts of the energy  sector during regular meeti ngs held in Brussels: Joint 
session of the Oil Supply Group and the Secur ity of Supply Working group of the Fossil 
Fuels Forum (2 March 2009); Energy economists' meeting (31 March 2009). 
– Meetings with experts  
                                                   
1 Adopted on 13 November 2008 – COM (2008) 781 final 
2 For the list of consulted entities, see Annex 1. 
 
EN 4   EN DG TREN has met with representatives of the European Network of Transmission 
System Operators (ENTSO) for Electricity and the ENTSO for Gas in charge of the preparation of the ten-year investment plan for electricity and for gas foreseen by the 
third internal market package to examine wh ether/how their exercise and a monitoring at 
EU level could dovetail. Views have also been exchanged with  commercial data 
providers. DG TREN also attended a workshop on the ten-year inve stment plan for gas 
organised by the ENTSO for gas. It has partic ipated as an observer to several meetings 
organised by one Member State’s authorit ies on an indicative planning for future 
investments for electricity and gas (France). 
2. S
ECTION 2 - PROBLEM DEFINITION  
• What is the general / policy context? 
Currently, there is concern that EU energy infrastructure could no longer be up to the 
task of providing secure ener gy supply in the foreseeable future. As mentioned in the 
Second Strategic Energy Review adopted  by the Commission in 2008, significant 
investment3 in energy infrastructure is required to replace old infrastructure and to 
respond to future energy demand (i.e. suppl y/demand balance). Investments are also 
required to foster the transition to a low car bon energy future (implementation of the new 
Energy Policy for Europe with the 20/20/20 ta rgets to mitigate the effects of climate 
change), to ensure greater ener gy security in case of a crisis as well as the effective 
functioning of the internal mark et. All types of infrastructu res in all energy sectors are 
concerned. This view is shared by the International Energy Agency4. The EU has to face 
a new series of risks and in particular economic risks mainly covering imbalances between demand and supply which could stem from delays in investment in energy 
projects. Today’s energy challenges a nd new EU policy objectives require an 
acceleration of investment in to energy infrastructure. 
So far the required investments have been  made in general: recent events have 
demonstrated that investments in additional gas storage for example had nevertheless been insufficient in many Member States a nd that some crucial inter-connectors were 
still missing within the EU . However, there is a high degree of uncertainty  related to 
the realisation of investment projects. Expe rience has shown that only a limited share of 
investment projects announced by firms are eventually carried out
5 and that 
consequently, a monitoring of investment pr ojects at regular intervals is considered 
important (and is indeed undertaken by a numb er of countries within and outside the 
EU). In addition, the current credit crunch and economic crisis  coupled with volatility of 
energy prices is seen as a major difficulty  for investment proj ects. This has been 
                                                   
3 Under the New Energy Policy scenario developed in the context of the Second Strategic Energy Review adopted in November 2008, the capacity expansion (i.e. 
replacement of old and addition of new capacities) needed for power generation alone to meet the future demand and climate chan ge targets will amount to 360-390 
GW over 2005-2020 which corresponds to a need for € 400 to 440 billions  of investment. € 17 billions of investment in electrici ty networks in the coming 5 years 
are needed according to a report issued by UCTE 
4 World Energy Outlook 2008  
5 According to studies carried out in US, only 12% of announced pr ojects for coal fired power plants in 2002 had been eventually  carried out on time in 2007. 
Projects are often delayed and even cancelle d as a result of uncertainties affecting th e investment environment. Investors may be confronted with regulatory 
uncertainties or local resistance to new projects. They may also  face bottlenecks in the industry, lack of a skilled workforce.   
 
EN 5   EN confirmed by G8 energy ministers6, by the Internal Energy Agency7 and even by 
Industry8.  
The EU can contribute to shaping a favourable investment climate that fosters investment 
projects needed to secure  Europe's low carbon energy future. In addition, public 
authorities play a role in shaping medium to long term developments on the demand and 
supply side and on the evolution of the EU ener gy system. In this c ontext, data reporting 
(i.e. notification of information) and monitori ng (i.e. analysis) of i nvestment projects and 
the evolution of the EU energy system are necessary. 
EU institutions have called for action. The European Council  Action Plan 2007-09 on 
Energy Policy for Europe has invited the Commission and the Member States to identify additional investment required to satisfy EU  strategic needs in relation to gas and 
electricity supply and demand. In the wake  of the second Strategic Energy Review 
adopted by the Commission, both the Council of the European Union
9 and the 
European Parliament10 recalled the importance of promoting investments and 
improving transparency as well as of inte nsifying the works on supply and generation 
adequacy outlooks and network development plans. 
• What is the issue or proble m that may require action? 
The problem that requires action is the lack  of consistent data and information on 
investment projects (in their different phases), the future development of the EU energy 
system and the related shortcomings. As a resu lt, this situation could cause a regulatory 
failure.  
Without appropriate data, the Comm ission is not in a position to: 
- analyze the likely evolution of EU  energy infrastructure, detect any 
potential gaps and anticipa te future energy supply; 
- evaluate EU energy policy and supp ort policy-making by official data; 
- promote transparency on the likely  evolution of the EU energy system. 
A lack of data could lead to inappropriate or even complete absence of political initiative 
at times when investment into the energy infr astructure is crucial considering its long 
lead times, the complexity of some energy infrastructure investments and the long life time of such installations.  
It has to be pointed ou t that due to a situation of overcap acities in the past, no evidence of 
policy failure due to lack of data can be produced. However, fundamentals of the energy 
                                                   
6 Joint statement by the G8 Energy Ministers, the European Commissioner and the Energy Ministers of Algeria, Australia, Brazil, C hina, Egypt, India, Indonesia, 
Korea, Libya, Mexico, Nigeria, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Turkey, available at the following address http://g8.ita lia2009.it  
7 IEA, The impact of the financial and econo mic crisis on global energy investment – IEA background paper for the G8 energy minis ters’ meeting – 24-25 May 
2009, available at the followin g address http://g8.italia2009.it 
8 See the joint conference organised by Eurelectric and Eurogas, “Can Europe finance clean and secure energy in the future?”, 26 May 2009, summaries of the 
debates are available at the following  address http://www 2.eurelectric.org. 
9 Energy Council Conclusions (6692/09) 
10 EP resolution on the 2nd Strategic Energy Review, 2/00/2009, (2008/2239(INI)). 
 
EN 6   EN landscape have radically changed and made of investment into EU energy infrastructure 
a sensitive issue: capacity is stretched, of ten ageing and sometime s inadequate; private 
economic operators have been given a much mo re prominent role for investment and new 
EU policy objectives for energy have been se t. This new situation and the risks to be 
coped with call for well-calibrated policies. Ap propriate data on invest ment projects will 
therefore help to establish a clearer view on potential problems in the future. 
Under Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 on no tifying the Commission of investment 
projects of interest to the Community in the petroleum, natural gas and electricity sector, 
the Commission shall be notified once a year of major investment projects, 
decommissioning decisions, or major decisions affecting investment projects (such as 
cancellation of projects) in the petroleum, natural gas and electricity sectors. These 
projects concern pipelines for gas, refineries, LNG terminals, power plants and electricity 
transmission lines. Information is in prin ciple communicated by Me mber States on the 
basis of notifications from industry. 
However, Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 is no longer enforced consistently; 
imperfectly covers the current and new ener gy infrastructure and does not collect all 
appropriate information. 
a) Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 is no longer enforced consistently. In 2009, the 
Commission has received 4 notifications from  Member States (some notifications only 
concern some sector covered by the Regulati on). The “quality” of data transmitted may 
also be arguable in some cases. 
b) Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 imperf ectly covers the curre nt and new energy 
infrastructure needed for security of en ergy supply and the tran sition to a low carbon 
energy system. The evolution of the energy sector since 1996 has rendered the system 
devised by the Regulation increasingly il l-adapted and no longer fit for use: 
- The recent enlargements of the EU have brought new challenges to be 
dealt with: Oil pipelines have become  an issue since two oil pipeline 
systems (Eastern and Western) co exist within the European Union. 
However they are not covere d by the current Regulation. 
- The notion of "Community interest" in the existing regulation relates to 
the cross-border nature a nd/or size of an installa tion. In today's internal 
market context, this rati onale is no longer appropr iate. Rather, it is of 
interest to collect information on installations (investment projects) which will have an impact on the functioning of the overall system: 
 Concerning gas networks only trans-frontier ones ar e covered by the current 
Regulation whilst it is of interest to get a view of the transmission system as a whole, irrespective of th e length of lines (as suggested under the current 
Regulation). Moreover, ‘internal’ lin es may also affect cross-border 
interconnections. 
 Thresholds are often too high to get a precise view of the development of the 
whole system. Due to the shift towards a more decentralised power generation, 
centralised generation units tend to have a more limited capacity than they used 
 
EN 7   EN to have. For storage of gas, the connecti on of storage installations be they above 
or under ground connected to the transport is more important than capacity as 
such (which is the type of informati on required under the current Regulation). 
- As a result of the New EU Energy Polic y (in particular with its renewable 
targets), a major shift on EU energy sy stems and infrastructure based on 
conventional fossil fuel supply is re quired and the scope of the current 
Regulation does not cover relevant issu es such as electricity generation 
powered by renewable energy sources, carbon transport and storage or 
bio-fuel plants. 
 Table 1 gives an overview of the cu rrent scope of Council Regulation (EC) 
n°736/96 with regard to investment proj ects currently cove red and necessary 
amendment and/or additional information requirements. 
c) Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 does not collect information on investment 
projects  of interest for energy security and climate change mitigation. With regard to 
new investment projects, the current notific ation requires to indi cate the type of raw 
materials used. This information is consider ed no longer necessary (contrary to the type 
of energy source used). However, the notif ication does not request any information on 
new equipment to capture carbon on power plants or refineries. 
The exercise carried out in May 2008 with na tional ministries for energy revealed that 
some categories need to be updated to be of  interest. For instance, the current emphasis 
on installed nominal power generation capaci ties should be complemented by the load 
factor for power generation to get a bette r idea on the power to be generated. 
Table 2 gives an overview of the current information require ment of Council Regulation 
(EC) No736/96 and additional ones deemed n ecessary or requirements to be amended. 
 
EN 8   EN Table 1 - Scope of investment projects  
covered by Council Regulation (EC) No736/ 96 and required amendments/additions 
Investment projects 
under Council 
Regulation (EC) 
No736/96 Amendments Additions 
1. OIL 
1.1. Petroleum refineries 
Distillation plants with a 
capacity of not less than 1 Mio tonnes a year; 
Extension of distilling 
capacity beyond 1 Mio tonnes a year; 
Reforming/cracking plants 
with a minimum capacity of 500 tonnes a day; 
Desulphurization plants 
for residual fuel oil/gas oil/feedstock/other petroleum products. None - Oil pipelines 
Crude oil pipelines 
/Petroleum product pipelines 
Pipelines which constitute 
essential links in national or international interconnecting networks and pipelines and projects of common interest identified in the guidelines established under Article 155 of the EC Treaty. 
- Oil storage 
Storage installations for 
crude oil and petroleum products 
2. GAS 
2.1. Transport 
- Trans-frontier Pipelines 
and projects of common interest identified in the guidelines established under Article 129c of the EC Treaty. 
- Terminals for the 
importation of liquefied 
natural gas  
-
 Trans -frontier  Pipelines and 
projects of common interest identified in the guidelines established under Article 155 of the EC Treaty.  
- Gas, including natural gas 
and biogas, pipelines other than upstream pipeline and other than the part of pipelines primarily used in the context of local distribution; 
 
2.2. Distribution 
- Underground storage Storage 
- Storage installations  
 
EN 9   EN installation with a capacity 
not less than 150 Mio m³.  connected to the transport 
pipelines (underground and above ground). 
3. ELECTRICITY 
3.1 Generation 
- Thermal (conventional + 
Nuclear >200 MW ) 
- Hydro (> 50 MW)  
- Thermal power stations 
(generators with a unit capacity of 200
 100 MW or 
more), 
- Hydro-electric power 
stations (power stations having a capacity of 50
 30 
MW or more), 
 - Wind power farms (with a 
capacity of 20 MW or more for offshore farms or with a capacity of 10 MW or more for onshore farms); 
- Concentrated solar 
thermal, geothermal and photovoltaic installations (generators with a unit capacity of 10 MW or more); 
- Biomass/waste power 
generation installations (generators with a unit capacity of 10 MW or more); 
- Power stations with 
cogeneration of electricity and useful heat (units with an electrical capacity of 10 or more). 
3.2. Transport 
- Overhead transmission 
lines, if they have been designed for a voltage of 345 kV or more, 
- Underground and 
submarine transmission cables, if they have been designed for a voltage of 100 kV or more; 
- Projects of common 
interest identified in the guidelines established under Article 129c of the EC Treaty,  
- Overhead transmission 
lines, if they have been designed for a voltage of 345
 
150 kV or more, –  
 
EN 10   EN 4. BIOFUELS  
  Refineries 
5. CO2 
  Transport and storage 
Table 2 – Information requiremen ts on investment projects  
currently covered by Council Regu lation (EC) n°736/96 and suggested 
amendments/additions 
Information requested 
under Council Regulation 
(EC) n°736/96 Amendments Additions 
Investment projects (new) 
- Precise purpose and nature 
of such investments 
- Planned capacity or power - Probable date of 
commissioning 
- Type of raw materials 
used  
-
 Precise purpose and nature 
of such investments  
- Planned capacity or power - Probable date of 
commissioning 
-
 Type of raw materials 
used Where applicable 
- Location, type, name and 
main characteristics of installations  
- Type of energy sources 
used 
- Technologies of interest 
for energy security (e.g. 
reverse flows for gas pipelines) 
- Carbon capture equipment 
or retrofitting mechanisms.  
- Volume of capacities in commission or under construction  
- Member States may add 
any comments they may have Volume of capacities in 
commission  planned or 
under construction  Volume of installed 
capacities at the beginning of the reporting year  
Obstacles and delays to 
investment projects 
Decommissioning projects 
- Character and capacity or 
power of the installations concerned; 
- Probable date when the 
installations will be 
withdrawn from service None None 
 
EN 11   EN Volume of capacities which 
are scheduled to be taken out of commission within 3 years None None 
- To get the relevant data and information on investment projects into the energy 
infrastructure, the Commission could rely on other data sources : 
a) EU legislation : in some specific acts, Member States are required to 
report on and/or monitor aspects connected with investments projects, 
including decommissioning (see Annex 3).  
b) Commercial sources : some data providers can supply data and 
information on investments project s planned or under construction. 
c) Industry sources : in some cases, industry associations collect on a 
voluntary basis data and information on investment projects or on the 
evolution of capacities. This data is sometimes publicly available. 
Table 3 gives on overview of the possible data source for investment projects  (and not 
only on existing infrastructure). 
It is to be noted, however, that the EU regulatory framework imposing notification 
obligations for investment projects or infras tructure development is heterogeneous. It 
does not provide sufficiently consistent inform ation for a cross - se ctoral monitoring and 
reporting conditions differ significantly (e.g. type of data / information, frequency, 
conditions for use of the data)11. On top of that, projects for oil or CO2 pipelines or bio-
fuel refineries are not co vered by EU legislation. 
For example, Council Regulation (Euratom ) No2587/1999 imposes notification for all 
investments above certain monetary thresholds  in the civil nuclear sector. Industry (and 
not Member States concerned by the investment projects) notifies directly to the 
Commission. In this case, investment is notifie d once for all (one off notification) and is 
not subject to regular monitoring. In other words,  the evolution of the infrastructure is not 
regularly checked upon. Also, investment is notif ied at a very advanced stage (not later 
than three months before the first contracts are concluded w ith the suppliers or, if the 
work is to be carried out by the undertaking with its own resources, three months before 
the work begins). 
Experience also shows that ot her sources of information such  as industry a ssociations at 
EU level or data provided by commercial supplie rs do not provide complete/fully reliable 
data as illustrated by the following examples: 
– Commercial data purchased by DG TREN did not provide complete data for 
installed power capacities a nd power capacities per fuel. 
                                                   
11 See Table in Annex 3 
 
EN 12   EN – An industry association was not able to  provide data on withdrawal capacities 
of gas storage infrastructure. 
– An industry association was not able to  reconcile its figures on the installed 
capacities for refineries with data from commercial information providers.
 
EN 13   EN Table 3 
Overview of the possible data so urces on investment projects 
Investment 
projects (new + 
decommissioning) Council 
Regulation 
736/96 EU legislation 
other than 
Council 
Regulation 
736/96 Industry 
sources Data 
providers 
(commercial 
sources) 
Oil      
Refineries X (partial)  X (partial) X (partial) 
Pipelines   X (partial) X (partial) 
Storage    X (partial) 
Gas     
Transport 
pipelines X (partial) X (specific) X (partial) X (partial) 
LNG X X (specific) X (partial) X (partial) 
Storage X (partial) X (specifi c) X (partial) X (partial) 
Electricity     
Conventional + 
nuclear power plants X (partial) X (partial) X (partial) X (partial) 
Electricity 
generation from Renewable energy source X (partial) X (specific) X (partial) X (partial) 
Transport X (partial) X (specific) X X (partial) 
Biofuels 
production plants   X (partial) X (partial) 
CO2      
Pipelines     
Storage  X (specific)   
 
EN 14   EN • What are the underlying drivers of the problem? 
- As for the non-application of Council Regul ation (EC) No736/96 and the resulting lack 
of information, there are two main drivers of  the problem: the design of the system 
(structural reasons) and the situation which prevailed after the adoption of the Regulation (historical/cyclical reasons) in 1996. 
(1) Structural reasons 
a) Design of the system 
Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 puts in plac e a reporting mechanism which consists 
in a series of notifications and ends by a report to the Council drafted by the 
Commission. The system was mainly designe d in the early 1970’s when the Council 
adopted Regulation (EEC) No 1056/72. It has b een amended in the light of experience, 
firstly, in 1976 and, secondly, in  1996. However, the major feat ures of the system set up 
in 1972 were maintained. 
The following problems have been identified: 
• This reporting has led to synthesis reports
12 and results have not b een analysed in the 
context of demand forecasts. It was th erefore difficult to identify possible 
infrastructure/capacity gaps. No conclusions were drawn. 
• Stakeholders who provide information were  not informed of any outcome as the 
compiled information remains restricted. The whole system has been limited to a 
reporting mechanism without operational consequences. 
(2) Historical/cyclical reasons: Overcapacities and low prices 
The system put in place by Council Regulatio n (EC) No736/96 was initially designed 
and adopted at a time of high oil prices (first  oil price shock). It was thus considered 
pertinent. Over time, with lower prices, overcapacities and national markets dominated 
by a limited number of national operators prev ailed and the issue of investments into 
energy infrastructures was considered less sensitive. 
- As for the availability of alternative data  sources, the following reasons may be given: 
EU specific legislation is designed for a specific purpose. For example, details on 
investment projects for gas infrastructure may be communicated to the Commission if an 
exemption is requested under the Third Party exemption regime. However, data is not 
collected systematically nor can it be used  for other purposes than the Third Party 
exemption. On the other hand, some pieces of legislation lay down very general 
obligations such as “investment intentions, for the next five years or more calendar years, 
of transmission system operators” or as “the  envisaged additional capacity being planned 
or under construction” which leads to heterogeneous in formation that can hardly be 
aggregated for analytical purposes. 
                                                   
12 The 1997 report – last report - shows th e limited interest of  this approach.  
 
EN 15   EN - As for data from commercial information providers and for data collected by industry 
associations, data remains most of the time incomplete. 
 
EN 16   EN • Who is affected, in what ways, and to what extent? 
Two categories of entities can be identified as  affected by the absenc e of an EU reporting 
and monitoring tool for energy infr astructure investment projects: 
– EU institutions and Member States  are co-responsible for energy security and for the 
implementation and evaluation of EU Energy Policy. In this context, an appropriate 
reporting and monitoring at EU level constitu tes an important tool for relevant policy-
making. Without such a reliabl e picture on future investme nt projects (for example 
those that have received planning consent from the authorities), the Commission (and 
the EU) is not fully equippe d to anticipate problems li ke capacity gaps and to 
contribute to solving them within the limits  of its own competen ces and powers: the 
Commission cannot promote measures to  reduce risks of underinvestment or 
inadequacy of investments. 
– Investors/economic operators , who decide on and implem ent investment projects, 
need transparency and visibility on the investment situation for their business 
operations. The absence of an EU wide, re gular overview of the likely evolution of 
energy infrastructure may negatively affect th e investment environment, in particular 
for smaller companies and new markets entrants. 
• How should the problem evolve, all thin gs being equal? Should the EU act? 
Given the need for data for monitoring the evol ution of energy infrastructure in the EU it 
is necessary to act and improve the data si tuation enabling a consistent cross – sector 
monitoring (i.e. analysis) which can be ma de public and which thus will increase 
transparency. 
3. S ECTION 3 - OBJECTIVES  
The general objectives of the revision of Council Regulati on (EC) No736/96 are to build 
an effective and efficient reporting and monitori ng tool, i.e. to collect  appropriate data on 
investment into EU energy infrastructure, to set up a mechanism for sharing the resulting 
analysis with Member States and stakeh olders and to improve policy-making and 
evaluation of EU policies on a me dium to long term basis. This  translates into specific 
and operational objectives as shown in the table below: 
General objectives Specific obj ectives Operational objectives 
 
     
   1. Update the scope of the 
reporting ; 1. Collect information 
taking into account the standard categories used by operators to avoid overlap: 
* cover additional 
infrastructure (existing or new) such as oil pipelines, storage capacities, Carbon transport and storage; 
 
EN 17   EN  
1. Collect as from 2010 
appropriate data on future investment into EU energy infrastructure while minimizing costs related to data collection; 
2. Develop and share 
analysis with stakeholders on short term basis; 
3. Improve policy-making 
and evaluation of EC policies on a medium to long term basis. 2. Ensure consistent and 
proportionate reporting obligations; 
3. Allow for a cross - sector 
monitoring/analyses of investment in EU energy infrastructures with a view to:  
- enhancing EU institutions' 
capacity to anticipate problems and propose solutions and 
- promoting transparency on 
future investment and on the evolution of the EU energy system 
4. Develop of a common 
understanding of potential 
infrastructure gaps and associated risks. * cover new categories of 
data related to existing capacities (gas storage withdrawal capacities) or equipment (reverse flows); 
 
2. Limit confidentiality 
requirements hampering the publication of aggregated data except for commercially sensitive data; 
3. Limit reporting 
obligations for Member States and Industry if equivalent data is already provided (in case of 
relevant sector specific 
monitoring at EU level / With appropriate thresholds and a reporting obligation every two years). 
4. Define an appropriate 
way of collecting, processing and protecting data. 
 . 
An appropriate reporting and monitoring of i nvestment in the energy sector at EU level 
can (only indirectly though) contribute to the objectives of the Lisbon strategy to 
strengthen growth and competitiveness. An efficient and up-to-date reporting framework, keeping reporting obligations proportionate and consistent with other EU obligations 
contributes to the drive towards “better regulation”. 
4. S
ECTION 4 - POLICY OPTIONS  
Four policy options have been considered. 
Option 0 – Status quo - Monitoring of  the evolution of energy infrastructure 
without specific reporting 
 
EN 18   EN Under option 0, data and information on investment projects into EU energy 
infrastructure would be either provided th rough existing reporting mechanisms (at EU 
and/or national levels) and/ or purchased by the Commission from commercial data 
providers. 
Member States have developed monitoring sy stems of the energy sector and in some 
cases they are already submitting to the Commission information on infrastructure 
development as a result of EU obligations. For gas and electricity, Member States or 
competent national authorities are require d to monitor and report to the Commission13. 
These mechanisms will be complemented with  the entry into application of the third 
internal market package which requires a ten-y ear investment plan for gas and electricity 
to be elaborated by Transmission System  Operators at European level. Council 
Regulation (EC) No 736/96 is st ill one instrument for data collection useful for the oil 
sector. The Commission has also been worki ng with several energy data providers for 
some time now. Their data are contained in EMOS – the Energy Markets Observatory 
System - which is a database  of dedicated databases. 
The Commission could use these data and info rmation for its analyses. The results of 
such analysis would be used to have discu ssions with stakeholders  and to determine for 
example whether risks of underinve stment or of inadequate i nvestment or infrastructure 
gaps are likely to occur. 
Option 1 – Repeal of Council Regulation No736/96 
Compared to the status quo, this option consis ts in repealing Counc il Regulation (EC) No 
736/96 given the poor implementa tion of this Regulation and its growing inability to 
capture the new EU energy system. Assuming  that in the longer run markets would 
balance supply and demand, regulatory mon itoring could be replaced by studies that 
could be conducted on a case by case basis if specific policy decisions would require an 
analysis of energy related investment pr ojects. Both data supplied by commercial 
providers and data forwarded on the basis of  other EU piece of le gislation would in 
principle be available. 
Option 2 – Monitoring of the evolut ion of energy infrastructure with a 
complementary reporting 
Under option 2, the envisaged monitoring is supported by a speci fic reporting. Council 
Regulation (EC) No736/96 is revised (for the sa ke of clarity this Regulation is repealed 
and a new regulation is drafted)  and a reporting obligation for all data and information on 
investment projects deemed necessary for monitoring purpose is maintained. 
The scope of the Regulation is enlarged to encompass sectors of importance for the new 
EU energy system (e.g. oil pipelines and storag e, renewable energy source for electricity, 
bio-fuel refineries, CO2 transport and storage infrastructure). In order to minimize costs 
for Member States and companies, the revise d system would maintain the possibility for 
Member States to exempt companies from notifying information and take into account existing reporting or monitoring obligations prov ided that equivalent information is made 
available. For the remaining data needs, Member States are still under an obligation to 
                                                   
13 For the whole picture of reporting obligations relating to i nvestment/infrastructure imposed by  EU legislation, see Annex 3. 
 
EN 19   EN notify. The content of notific ation is clarified and updated to take into account new 
needs. 
Given the time horizon of investment projects in the energy sector, reporting would apply 
every two years (instead of  every year under the current text). Time horizon for 
investment would be set at 5 years furthe r easing the administrative burden and aligning 
this obligation with other re levant frameworks, as genera lly suggested by respondents to 
the consultation. Thresholds are generally lo wered for existing items and are set for new 
ones to take into account the latest developments of the energy system14 while for the 
sake of proportionality mini mum thresholds below which information will not be 
required are set. Such thresholds  will give the possibility to get a picture of the situation 
without imposing un-proportionate administrativ e burden on companies. In order to align 
this text with other texts dealing with data  collection, appropriate collection and storage 
IT instruments are to be set up and data protection for individu als is provided. To 
improve quality of data and the acceptability  and quality of the works relying on such 
data, a general obligation of the type of th e obligation imposed on Member States in the 
context of statistics is spel led out. Appropriate ‘valida tion’ by Member States (e.g. 
opportunity to give feedback) is required fo r information and data concerning projects on 
their own territory collected by ENTSOs. 
On the basis of data collected, the Commissi on and in particular it s Market Observatory 
for Energy prepares regular analyses of the future development of the EU energy system 
in a cross sector perspectiv e with a view to identifying potential gaps and potential 
problems as well as bringing transparency to market participants. The results of this 
analysis would be discussed w ith stakeholders and made pub lic. Confidentiality of data 
would be limited to commercially sensitive data which is the ge nerally accepted rule. 
As a result of these modifications, a gl obal and integrated framework combining 
reporting and monitoring and streamlined inform ation flows, with validation of data by 
Member States in principle, is set up. The system is balanced with two coordinated 
pillars (reporting and monitoring). Compared  to the status quo option, this approach 
would imply the following main ch anges in the curre nt Regulation: 
Proposed change of content Proposed change with regard to 
Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 
Adjustment of the scope of reporting (incorporation of new infrastructure – e.g. 
oil pipelines and storage, Renewable 
energy source for electricity, bio-fuel refineries, CO2 transport and storage ) 
revision of certain thresholds ( e.g. 
capacity for hydro-el ectric power station ) Modification of Articles 1(1) and of the 
Annex 
Possibility for Member States to be exempted from notification provided that equivalent information is provided Modification of Article 1(1) 
                                                   
14 See also section 2 – What is th e problem that requires action ? 
 
EN 20   EN (reference to existing EU reporting 
mechanisms and to monitoring under the 
Third internal market  package provisions 
– ENTSO for Gas and for Electricity ) 
Revision of the frequency of the reporting 
(every two years ) and of the date for 
notification ( 31 July of the reporting year ) Modification of Article 1 (1) and (2) 
Clarification of the definitions used in the 
context of this draft Regulation Add new Article  
Clarification of the content of the 
notification ( deletion of outdated aspects 
– e.g. raw material used – and extension 
of its scope to cover new equipments on infrastructure – e.g. carbon capture 
equipment ) Modification of Article 2 
Incorporation of ne w requirements to 
ensure quality of data and information transmitted to the Commission and of new requirements concerning data processing (IT tools and protec tion of individuals ) Add new article 
Clarification of the scope for 
implementing measures ( technical 
aspects/definition ) Modification of Articles 2(2) and 5 
Incorporation of the analysis dimension 
(e.g. mention of regular analysis in a 
cross sector persp ective – experts; 
mention of the context of the objectives of 
the analysis )  Add new Article 
Enhance transparency of data / 
information and of the results of analysis (possibility to publish data collected 
except for commercially sensitive data 
and information / discussion of the results of analyses with stakeholders / publication 
of the analysis and transmission to EU institutions ) Modification of Articles 3 and 4 
Option 3 – Monitoring of the evolution of  energy infrastructure with new and fully-
fledged reporting requirements 
Under option 3, the envisaged monitoring is also supported by a specific reporting. As 
under option 2, a global and integrated fram ework combining reporting and monitoring 
and streamlined information flows, with validation of data by Member States in 
 
EN 21   EN principle, would be set up. The system would be balanced with tw o coordinated pillars 
(reporting and monitoring). Council  Regulation (EC) No736/96 is revised (for the sake of 
clarity this regulation is repealed and a new regulation is drafted). As for option 2, the 
revision of Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 c onsists in particular in adjusting the 
scope of the Regulation, clarifying and comp lementing the existing provisions, revising 
the frequency or reporting and setting up a monitoring system. 
However, the difference with option 2 is that option 3 sets  a fully-fledged integrated 
reporting and monitoring system . In practice, Member States  are obliged to notify and 
validate all requested information to the Commission, irrespective of other existing 
notification mechanisms or monitoring mechan isms developed at EU level (ENTSO for 
gas and ENTSO for electricity). No exemp tions from reporting obligations would be 
granted to Member States. I ndustry would be required to su pply Member States with the 
relevant information unless where the Memb er State decides to use other means of 
supplying the Commission. 
Compared to the status quo option, this approach would imply the following main 
changes in the current Regulation: 
Proposed change of content Proposed change with regard to 
Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 
Adjustment of the scope of reporting 
(incorporation of new infrastructure – e.g. 
oil pipelines and storage, Renewable 
energy source for electricity, bio-fuel 
refineries, CO2 transport and storage ) 
revision of certain thresholds ( e.g. 
capacity for hydro-el ectric power station ) Modification of Articles 1(1) and of the 
Annex 
Revision of the frequency of the reporting (every two years ) and of the date for 
notification ( 31 July of the reporting year ) Modification of Article 1 (1) and (2) 
Clarification of the definitions used in the 
context of this draft Regulation Add new Article  
Clarification of the content of the 
notification ( deletion of outdated aspects 
– e.g. raw material used – and extension 
of its scope to cover new equipments on 
infrastructure – e.g. carbon capture equipment ) Modification of Article 2 
Incorporation of ne w requirements to 
ensure quality of data and information transmitted to the Commission and of new requirements concerning data processing (IT tools and protec tion of individuals ) Add new article 
 
EN 22   EN Clarification of the scope for 
implementing measures ( technical 
aspects/definition ) Modification of Articles 2(2) and 5 
Incorporation of the analysis dimension 
(e.g. mention of regular analysis in a 
cross sector persp ective – experts; 
mention of the context of the objectives of 
the analysis )  Add new Article 
Enhance transparency of data / 
information and of the results of analysis (possibility to publish data collected 
except for commercially sensitive data 
and information / discussion of the results of analyses with stakeholders / publication of the analysis and transmission to EU 
institutions ) Modification of Articles 3 and 4 
5. S ECTION 5 - ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS  
The revision of Council Regulation No 736/96,  whatever policy option is considered, 
will per se  not have any significant economic impact s (nor will it he lp create jobs, 
develop innovation or have an impact on envi ronment). The analysis of impacts of such 
mechanism aims at clarifying the impact on av ailability of relevant data and on an 
appropriate development of monitoring (analysi s), and on the impact on SMEs as well. It 
is considered that collecting “historical” data , like in the case of statistics, does not differ 
from collecting forward looking data such as for investment projects. 
5.1. Benefits  
- On data availability  and quality of data 
An improved and strengthened reporting sy stem will increase data availability 
and the quality of data and information notified to the Commission. Regular studies commissioned by the Commission coul d also increase da ta availability. 
- On problems deriving from lack of data availability 
(a) On analysis of and transparency on the evolution of the EU 
energy system 
An improved and clear framework for analysis will improve the monitoring of 
investment projects at EU level. A re porting and/or analysis every two years 
would be sufficient given the type of investment at stake. 
In a short term perspective, an improved monitoring will not provide 
transparency and information with a leve l of detail required to take a decision 
for individual investment projects which are generally capital intensive. In a 
 
EN 23   EN medium to long term perspective, the elab oration of an EU consistent approach 
and overview, based on accurate and appropr iate information is generally valued 
by investors, in particular if  it reveals obstacles to i nvestment projects such as 
undue authorisation procedures or lack of credit. However, it is to be noted that 
decisions will ultimately be taken by economic operators on the basis of market analyses and signals, of th eir own strategies and of the economic viability of a 
project. This EU overview contributes  nevertheless to level playing field 
information which is more difficult to obtain for smaller companies and new markets entrants than for established players. 
(b) On evaluation of EU energy polic ies, identification of problems 
and on policy-making 
With data provided on a regular basis and analysis, the Commission will be 
better informed and will have a greater possi bility to address, within its field of 
competence, identified problems. The Co mmission could in particular promote 
best practices, e.g. regarding the au thorisation procedures of energy 
infrastructure projects. 
In addition, policy–making at EU le vel could benefit from better data 
availability and from a better knowledge of  the problems and of their causes. It 
could be based on more reliable facts, fi gures and analysis whenever a decision 
or initiative will be needed. Policy-making at Member States level may also benefit from an improved EU monitori ng, complementing national approaches 
and developing regional dimensions. 
The impact of such monitoring will th erefore increase in the medium to long 
term. All these aspects are however difficult to quantify. 
The likelihood for these potential impacts to happen depends on the option selected. 
– Policy option 0, as a baseline case, will in th e longer-term have a negative 
impact on EU energy policy and comme rcial entities, since important 
information on investments will not be made available in a systematic and 
coherent way. Since it relies on repo rting / monitoring exercises developed 
for sector specific purposes, a cohe rent and comprehensive approach 
would be unlikely and it is likely that the added value for policy makers and private investors remains small. Th is could also lead to un-informed 
EU policy decision, both in terms of undertakings misinformed actions or 
not being able to act due to lack  of information. No meaningful 
monitoring can be developed on th is basis, given that the data  
requirements are not adapted to the cu rrent needs of the policy makers and 
investors and that quality of the data  is not ensured. The EU added value 
would therefore be limited.  
– Policy option 1 (repeal of the current Regulation) will not overcome the 
limitations related to the availability of consistent data. Some data and information will only be made availabl e in the context of  studies or of 
existing specific legislation. The ri sks of methodological inconsistencies 
are considerable and the appropriatene ss/accuracy of data used in the 
 
EN 24   EN context of these studies is not guara nteed. Contractors would have to get 
the data, most likely from Member St ates, industry or commercial sources. 
Verification of data used by contractor s would be necessary to make sure 
that the envisaged analysis relies on  robust data and brings added value. 
Member States and / or industry woul d have to be consulted to comment 
on figures used for the analysis. Ad ministrative burden on Member States, 
on Industry or on the Commission woul d not be necessarily reduced.  
– Policy options 2 and 3 may prove more relevant. These options consist 
in a monitoring based on information and data which are meant to be adapted to the needs. On a medium  to long-term basis, these policy 
options are likely to provide real ad ded-value and a useful framework for 
discussion between public authorities a nd stakeholders in the analysis of 
future trends and investment projects and encountered investment barriers. 
 The strength of  policy options 2 and 3 consists in a global and integrated 
reporting and monitoring system with  a wide variety of information 
sources and with a greater implicati on of industry and Member States at 
all stage of the process (from collection to analysis). This greater 
involvement could improve compliance with reporting obligations and 
quality of data. A global and consistent  view at EU level can be built up. 
 However, both options would create some new administrative burden for 
companies and administrations to fu lfil new reporting requirements, which 
are kept to a minimum and proporti onate to the potential benefits. 
The following table summarizes the situation as follows: 
Short – term  
potential impact Medium to long term  
potential impact   Policy option 
Likelihood Magnitude 
PO 0,1  negative negative 
PO 2 positive  high 
PO 3  
negative 
positive positive positive high 
5.2. Administrative burden / costs 
The Commission was able to determine an approximate number of concerned operators 
on the basis of data provided by commercial data providers15, and the frequency of 
reporting. However, consulted parties have not provided the Commission with data or 
information on time required and categories of  staff involved in the reporting process 
under the Council Regulation No736/96 and its possible revision. For the Commission, 2 
Staff members working 6 months per monitori ng exercise (preparation, aggregation of 
data, conclusions…) would be needed.  
                                                   
15 See Annex 4 
 
EN 25   EN The following parameters have therefore been  selected to make a calculation of the 
administrative costs: 
Companies = € 44.66 (average of 
gross earning per hour from the 10 Member States with the highest amount for category 2 staff following EU standard costs model) Gross earning per hour  
Member States = use of the 
individual amount for category 2 staff following EU standard costs model 
Gross earning per year Commission = € 122 000 (standard 
average annual costs for one official, as recommended by DG BUDG) 
Companies to MS = 8 hours (Commission’s estimate) 
MS to EU =  
40 hours – current regulation 
(Commission’s estimate) 
48 hours – revised regulation 
(Commission’s estimate) Time required per notification action  
Commission =  
6 months – 1 staff = current 
regulation 
6 months - two staff = revised 
regulation  
Experts  € 5000 max per expert  
No expert – current regulation 10 experts – revised regulation 
The results of the calculation per notification exercise under the current scope of Council 
Regulation (EC) No 736/96 and under a revi sed Regulation in case of full reporting 
without any exemptions (option 3) are the following: 
 
EN 26   EN Maximum 
costs16 Under the Current 
Regulation Under a Revised 
Regulation ( lower 
thresholds17 and 
expanded scope18 + 
analysis and discussion ) Impact of the revision 
For 
companies   € 160 000 € 350 000 + € 190 000 
For 
Member States € 30 000 € 40 000 + € 10 000 
For the 
Commission  € 61 000 € 172 000 + € 111 000 
Total € 251 000 € 562 000 € 311 000 
These costs are however unlikely to be actua lly borne by companies and Member States 
to meet the requirements of a revised Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 as they are the 
maximum costs. 
It is highly likely that a lot of data will be collected in the context of sector – specific 
monitoring at national level, irrespective of  an EU obligation. Fo llowing the adoption of 
the third internal market package, a lot of data  will also be collected by industry itself in 
the context of investment programming for ga s and electricity grid. Administrative costs 
and burden are expected to resu lt mainly from other information obligations laid down by 
other legal instruments. Theref ore, the estimated cost is considered to represent the 
maximum administrative burden. 
As a conclusion, the actual administrative costs induced by a revised Council Regulation 
(EC) No 736/96 are likely to remain modest a nd even negligible. It also appears that the 
cost of such a reporting for companies and Memb er States is more or less equivalent to 
purchasing data from commercial data provi ders and commissioning studies. Purchasing 
data and commissioning studies therefore cannot be considered as a cheaper option, also 
considering that data from commercial provid ers is sometimes flawed or incomplete. As 
for the Commission, the cost incurred for this involved analysis of da ta is comparable to 
the expenses which could be incurred for external consultants. 
5.3. SMEs Test 
In the energy landscape, dominated by bi g energy companies, small and medium 
enterprises (SMEs) are mainly active in the sector of renewable energy sources (RES) 
which is relatively recent19. In Spain for example, enterprise s fully involved in this sector 
                                                   
16 Rounded figures 
17 Except for power generation from RES, the impact of lower thresholds on the number of operators is limited.  
18 New aspects: oil pipelines, storage capacities, RES… 
19 Within the RES sector, SMEs are rather upstream i nnovator players than generators/ or downstream producers. 
 
EN 27   EN are either medium-sized or small and one out of three enterprises ha s been created after 
2000. However, no comprehensive figures on SMEs in the RES sector at EU level which could be concerned by the revi sed Regulation are available
20. 
To measure the impact on SMEs, this test can be carried out in the form of a cost/benefit 
analysis. 
(1) The burden  of Council Regulation (EC) No 736/ 96 for SMEs is expected to be 
limited for the following reasons: 
(a) Firstly, given that Member States ha ve to comply with specific targets 
related to RES, a thorough monitoring of  investment in these capacities is 
highly likely to take place at national level, irrespective of the obligations 
stemming from Council Regulation (EC)  No 736/96. The EU targets on 
climate change translate into nationa l targets. As mentioned above, no 
additional burden for companies is expected to result from a revised Council Regulation (EC) n°736/96. 
(b) Secondly, in line with the objective of this proposal  to get the information 
at minimum costs, it is not consider ed that under Council Regulation (EC) 
No 736/96 Member States will have to  contact directly companies to get 
the relevant information. Member States will still enjoy flex ibility to select 
the way data should be collected. Th e one stop shop principle, according 
to which companies will be required to communicate the same information only once, will be promoted by the Commission. Alternative ways of 
obtaining data from the RES sector are surveys based on representative 
samples. 
(c) Thirdly, the impact will be further reduced with a less frequent reporting 
obligation and the definition of thresholds below which notification of investment projects is not required. A reporting every two years – instead 
of an annual one as under the current text – is envisaged. Thresholds for 
RES are defined to ensure that the most relevant capacity developments, 
which are the focus of the Regulation, are covered. As evidenced in Annex 4, the number of operators concerned by a notification obligation could be 
reduced by about 20% with a thre shold set at 10 MW for RES. 
(2) SMEs may also benefit from such a monitoring tool for investment projects in the 
energy sector and its conclusions. Analyses  on the overall situation at EU level 
and data collected will be made public ly available, which will provide an 
additional source of information for SMEs  and their investment projects. Given 
their limited resources/cap acities, SMEs are generally  less equipped than big 
companies to collect information. 
As a conclusion, Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 is not expected to put SMEs at a 
disadvantage compared to big companies. Th e administrative burden resulting from this 
Regulation, if any, will be limited and will, at  least partly, be outweighed by the potential 
                                                   
20 Data often concerns the whole sector, fr om construction to generation, for example. This exceeds by far the scope of the curre nt and possible future Regulation 
which targets investments in new generation capacities 
 
EN 28   EN benefits. In a medium to long te rm perspective, it is likely that the nu mber of SMEs in 
the RES sector will decrease as a result of the possible consolidation/consolidation trends of this sector. This could take place w ith the possible evolution of support schemes 
which have been put in place to st imulate the development of RES. 
6. S
ECTION 6 – COMPARING THE OPTIONS  
The comparison of the policy options is based on qualitative terms and on the assessment 
of administrative burden. The following tabl e gives a summary of the advantages and 
disadvantages of each option for a reporting and monitoring tool. 
Policy option Advantages Disadvantages 
PO 0 
(Do nothing 
situation) - Use of existing data sources 
- Confidentiality generally 
limited to commercially sensitive information (Except for Council Regulation 736/96) 
 - No consistent reporting 
(difference of deadline, frequency, format, type of information…) and reporting without updated categories of data. Lack of consistent nomenclature. 
- Still lack of important data to 
discuss all challenges (e.g. bio-diesels plants; oil pipelines and storage, RES in particular). Useful / necessary data not necessarily collected; 
- Quality of data might be 
insufficient due to collection method and compliance problems. 
- For Council Regulation 
736/96, confidentiality of forwarded data ( subject to 
publication of general 
information or of summaries not containing details concerning 
individual undertakings ) 
- Problems with comparability 
and relevance of data collected ; 
- Compliance problems under 
specific instruments; 
- Additional administrative 
burden for MS and the Commission to process data 
 
EN 29   EN from various sources.  
- No analysis possible against 
demand and supply scenarios. 
PO 1 
(Repeal of Council 
Regulation (EC) No736/96) - Simplification of the 
regulatory framework for reporting obligations. 
- Limitation of the compliance 
problem by Member States and industry. 
 - Repeal of the only instrument 
providing for a certain cross-sector view at EU level; 
- Repeal of the only source of 
information for certain EU energy infrastructure (e.g. oil refineries); 
- Still lack of important data to 
discuss all challenges (e.g. bio-diesels plants; oil pipelines and storage in particular); 
- No consistent reporting 
(difference of deadline, frequency, format, type of information…) and reporting without updated categories of data. Lack of consistent nomenclature. 
- Quality of data might be 
insufficient due to collection method and compliance problems. 
- Problems with comparability 
and relevance of data collected; 
- Compliance problems under 
specific instruments; 
- Additional administrative 
burden for MS and the Commission to process data from various sources;  
- No analysis possible against 
demand and supply scenarios. 
PO 2 
(monitoring with 
specific complementary - Availability of required data 
and proportionality of data; 
- Acceptability of data used 
(commercial, MS and industry - Possible incompleteness of 
data due to uncertain compliance with reporting obligations 
 
EN 30   EN reporting) data) and broad overview; 
- Integrated framework 
combining reporting and monitoring; 
- Confidentiality limited to 
commercially sensitive information; 
- Reduction of duplication with 
other EU reporting and monitoring exercises; 
- Improved framework for data 
processing - Possible limitations of the 
quality of data depending on collection methods 
- Additional administrative 
burden to collect data 
- Additional co-ordination effort 
by the Commission for collecting and processing the data 
 
PO 3 
(monitoring with a 
new and fully-fledged reporting) - Collection of data specifically 
required and diversified sources of information (commercial, MS, industry) 
- Possible greater acceptability 
of data used (commercial, MS and industry data) 
- Integrated framework 
combining reporting and monitoring  
- Confidentiality limited to 
commercially sensitive information - Possible incompleteness of 
data due to uncertain compliance with reporting obligations 
- Possible limitations of the 
quality of data depending on collection methods 
- High administrative burden to 
collect data (Duplication with existing data/reporting mechanisms) 
- Additional co-ordination effort 
by the Commission for collecting and processing the data 
On the basis of this list of advantages and disadvantages, it is possible to evaluate the 
various options to determine th e best option. In this case th e best option s hould allow for 
a good reporting and monitoring process givi ng a global and cross-sector view of 
investment trends to the Commission and ultimately to Member States and economic 
operators (effectiveness), with minimum ne gative impacts (efficiency). With this 
mechanism which should be as simple as possi ble, they should be in a better position to 
perform their respective tasks and to cont ribute to achieving EU policy objectives 
(energy security, mitigation of climate cha nge, better regulation, transparency, level 
playing - field…) which should make th e burden / costs it im plies acceptable 
(coherence). 
In the following, the evaluation of the differe nt policy options is based on a qualitative 
grading, on a scale from (-) to (++). 
 
EN 31   EN A (++) grade is granted when the policy op tion provides a signifi cant contribution to 
meeting the objectives. 
A (+) grade is granted when the policy optio n provides a satisfactory contribution to 
meeting the objectives. 
A (-) grade is granted when the policy object ives are not achieved or negative impacts 
can be expected . 
 Effectiveness 
(reaching the 
target) Efficiency 
(reaching the 
target at 
minimum costs) Coherence 
 
PO 0 (Status quo)  - - - 
PO 1 (Repealing Council 
Regulation No736/96)  - - - 
PO 2 (monitoring with 
specific complementary reporting)  ++ + + 
PO 3 (monitoring with a 
new and fully-fledged reporting)  ++ - + 
From the above analysis, it can be concluded that option 2 presents  the most favourable 
outcome of the options consider ed and best reaches the objectiv es set for the revision of 
Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96: 
– It provides an integrated and updated fr amework combining reporting and monitoring 
at EU level which should allow for a globa l and cross – sector view of investment 
trends. 
– It will improve quality and acceptability of data and allow for comparison of data. 
– It allows EU to establish a dialogue with Member States  and industry in a monitoring 
context (which would not be  the case with option 1). Th is can improve sense of 
ownership of the process and impr ove quality of data notification. 
– It will give the possibility to publish data and to limit confidentiality to commercially 
sensitive information. 
– It takes into account the existing reporting and monitoring sector specific mechanisms 
at EU level which are of possible interest . It would avoid duplicating existing work 
and simplify the administrative environment and therefore limits the administrative burden imposed on Industry and Member Stat es (which would not be the case with 
option 3). 
 
EN 32   EN – Policy options 1 and 3 are unlikely to allow for a global and consistent overview of 
investment trends at EU level at a mini mum cost. In this context, there is no 
improvement to expect compared to th e baseline case (do nothing situation). 
7. S ECTION 7 – MONITORING AND EVALUATION  
The Commission will continuously monitor the impact/interest of the changed legislation 
and of the reporting and monitoring mechanis m. More specifically, the Commission will 
observe the following issues: 
– Number of MS complying w ith the reporting obligation 
– Quality, completeness, appropr iateness of data collected 
– Participation of stakeholders and of intere sted entities in the monitoring mechanism 
(interest in analytical reports,  participation in meetings…) 
– Number of references made to the monito ring exercise carried out by the Commission 
and use of its results by EU institu tions and other interested parties 
Experience shows that the effects of a cha nge in a regulatory framework take three to 
five years to materia lize. Therefore the Commission proposes  to review the application of 
the revised Regulation five year s after its entry into force. 
 
EN 33   EN Annex 1 
Entities consulted by the Commission  
(on top of Member States) 
Name Representative of Members 
EUROPIA  - European 
Petroleum Industry Association Oil refining and marketing 
industry in Europe 17 international and 
national companies 
OGP Europe  - 
International Association of Oil & Gas producers (OGP) Private and state-owned oil 
& gas companies, oil & gas associations and major upstream service companies. OGP members produce more than half the world’s oil and about one third of its gas.  - 49 upstream companies 
- 14 national and other 
associations 
- 3 associate members 
EUROGAS  Companies, national 
federations and associations 
involved in the supply, 
trading and distribution of natural gas and related activities such as storage and liquefied natural gas. 46 members from 26 
countries out of which 
33 natural gas companies, 
12 federations of natural gas companies, and 1 international organisation 
GIE – Gas Infrastructure 
Europe Gas transmission 
companies, storage system operators and LNG terminal operators in Europe. 63 member companies from 
27 countries 
(GTE transmission – 34 
Members in 27 Countries 
GSE storage – 33 members 
in 17 countries 
GLE (LNG) – 16 members 
in 11 countries) 
 
EN 34   EN ENTSO-E  / European 
Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity Transmission system 
operators running the high voltage interc onnected grid 
in Europe  42 members 
EURELECTRIC – Union 
of the Electric Industry Sector association 
representing the electricity industry 34 European full members 
and 9 European affiliate members 
EURACOAL  - The 
European Association for Coal and Lignite Umbrella organisation of 
the European coal industry - The association’s activities are directed at the entire coal chain beginning with coal prospection, access to reserves, extraction, marketing and transport right through to its utilisation at power stations, in the steel industry as well as in other energy-intensive industries.  28 Members from 18 
countries amongst which national producers and importers associations, companies and research institutes  
EREC  - European 
Renewable Energy Council  Umbrella organisation of 
the European renewable energy industry, trade and research associations active in the sectors of bioenergy, geothermal, ocean, small hydropower, solar electricity, solar thermal and wind energy. 12 members and 1 associate 
member (non profit organisations and federations) 
EUREC Agency  - 
European Renewable Energy Research Centres Agency  European Economic 
Interest Grouping in 1991 to strengthen and rationalise the European research, demonstration and 
development efforts in all 
renewable energy technologies. 43 prominent research 
groups from all over Europe 
ERGEG  - European 
Regulators' Group for Electricity and Gas". ERGEG is a body of 
independent national energy regulatory authorities, which was set up by the European Commission as an Advisory Group to the Commission on energy 27 Members (national 
regulators) 
 
EN 35   EN issues. 
 
EN 36   EN Annex 2  
Summary of contributions to the target ed consultation of Member States and 
representatives of Industry and energy regulators (+ questionnaire) 
1. I NTRODUCTION  
The Commission received 34 contributi ons (out of which 21 from Member 
States). One member of an umbrella association sent its views to the Commission. The consultation was very welcome. Some c ontributions in 
particular for more technical aspects were presented as first views due to the fact that some developments of interest fo r the issue under discu ssion have still to 
take place. This is the case for the monitoring to be carried out by the future ENTSO – Electricity and Gas. 
2. G
ENERAL REMARKS (QUESTIONS 1 AND 2) 
a) In the area of investment, it is widely acknowledged that EU should : 
a) Bring transparency on investment, im prove the market design and set up a 
stable and attractive regulato ry framework for investment. 
b) Provide analysis on energy tre nds and forecasts at EU level 
c) Make sure that regulating framewor ks allow for necessary investment to 
be made. For some respondents, EU should focus on support to new 
investments politically, fi nancially and technically. 
b) For most of the respondents, an appropr iate monitoring of investment projects 
into infrastructure in the energy sector is seen as relevant and is regularly 
considered as essential for transparency, po licy-making and support to 
specific projects. 
a) Impact on investment: transparency and data-sharing  which could 
result from this monitoring could help market participants identify opportunities for investment if: 
- it could result in an early ove rview of planned investments, 
- it provides, statistical overview of  data, dedicated analyses of the 
actual situation – sector by sector - and of the trends on medium to 
long term perspective at EU and regional level, 
- it provides clarity on where it is im portant to make investment and 
on cross-border dimensions. 
 According to various submissions, such a monitoring could potentially influence 
the direction of investment, cont ribute to optimizing investment 
 
EN 37   EN process/decisions and help identify necessa ry investment for EU energy security 
and the relevant time frame. 
b) Impact on policy-making . Monitoring investment is considered crucial 
for policy – making and for evaluation of policies:  
- Data on the level or timing of investment are necessary for EU 
informed decisions on what action can most usefully be taken. 
- A monitoring could stimulate a st rategic thinking on infrastructure 
and on priorities for investment projects. 
- It could help bring more consis tency between the future demands 
and the EU policy objectives. 
 For respondents, improved timeliness and quality of data on investment would 
contribute to better understa nding the EU energy positio n, in particular with 
relation to infrastructure which could be  considered of strategic importance for 
energy security. 
c) Impact on specific projects . For some respondents, a better monitoring at 
EU level could be of help for specific projects , which are not progressing 
as planned or which need co-funding to  be properly implemented or where 
the market has not delivered. 
- It could provide a useful tool  for pressuring/stimulating on-time 
implementation, for a better cr oss-border cooperation and 
coordination of local planning. 
- It could encourage participation of  joint infrastructure projects and 
foster support mechanisms for R& D technologies, investment and 
associated infrastructure (e.g. CCS…). 
c) The nature, reliability and relevance  of such an EU monitoring at EU level as 
well the administrative burden  it may represent are however discussed. 
a) Nature of the instrument . For some Member States and Industry 
associations, this monitoring should not: 
- Be turned into a centrally-planned economy instrument: Investment 
into energy infrastructure has to remain market-driven/economically-feasible. 
- Be used to promote investment (or even decide on investment) in a 
way which affects negatively the functioning of the market. 
 For one industry representative, the confidential nature of the plans and 
strategies in relati on to their antitrust, stock and labour related sensitivities has 
to be reckoned with. 
 
EN 38   EN b) Reliability . For some Member States and Industry representatives, public 
conclusions based on results of such a monitoring could be questionable since: 
- Such tool only captures information from the supply side and it may 
be inherent in this system that it would overestimate the planned investment. 
- Investment/divestment strategies carry a high level of uncertainty. 
c) Relevance : While the direct impact of monitoring on investment is bound 
to be modest, it is felt by some res pondents that this instrument will not 
bring any added – value at all or that a revision of this Regulation is not 
necessary: 
- Information on investment projects may be already publicly 
available and investment decision s require detailed information 
which cannot be provided by a monitoring tool. 
- Given the existence of national monitoring resulting from EU 
legislation and the latest legislative development
21, an EU 
monitoring under Council Regulation N°736/96 would be irrelevant. 
- The TEN-E Regulation and the future Infrastructure instrument 
could suit more the needs of a monitoring on investment on infrastructure. 
 Replies however make a distinction between the various energy sectors 
potentially concerned – elect ricity and gas on the one hand – and oil on the other 
hand where monitoring woul d be more necessary.  
 One European association (ENTSO-E) underlines that a well designed 
monitoring system could strengthen information flows and data-sharing. 
d) Administrative burden
22. For some Member States and Industry 
associations, such a monitoring could be a burden both for Member States 
and companies and could even be an obstacle to investment. However, in 
some cases it is considered that the impact would be low. Reporting 
through only one system should be ensured. 
d) Some replies underline that the re vision of Council Regulation N°736/96 should 
be preceded by a prior analysis  of the faults of the current system and by 
charting the future needs of the sector. The need for an ex post analysis  
ensuring that reporting data will eventually  support the political process is also 
mentioned once. 
                                                   
21 Under the 3rd internal market package, the new European associ ations of transmission system ope rators (ENTSO - Electricity and  Gas) will be required to prepare 
and update a 10-year investment statement fo r gas and electricity at EU level and pub lish annual summer and winter generation a dequacy outlook. The new 
Directive on Renewable energy sources will also provide relevant information. 
22 Respondents did not submit specific eviden ce on the costs/burden potentially induced by reporting obligations stemming from th e current legislation. Depending on 
the exact scope of the obligations, administrative cost s could be considered as low for some respondents. 
 
EN 39   EN 3. C OMMENTS ON MONITORING (QUESTIONS 3 TO 5) 
a) As a rule , both horizontal and sector-specific  monitoring are seen as relevant: 
a) A global / horizontal approach is needed: sectors are interrelated and 
interdependent and each impact s on the overall energy security. 
b) Sector-specific monitoring should nevertheless be, for several Member 
States, the starting point of  any global analysis and it is necessary to adjust 
the monitoring to the specific ities of individual sectors. 
 5 respondents prefer a sector – specific  monitoring which appears to them more 
practical for processing and analysing data. 
 Some Member States refer to altern ative or complementary options: regional 
dimension or cross-border network de velopment plans or other structural 
developments of importance for energy security. 
 One Member State reminds that the specifi cities of some (small) Member States 
should be taken into account.  
 One Member State suggests that the m onitoring could focus on specific themes. 
Depending on the challenges or threats to  EU energy situation, analyses or 
reports could be elaborated. 
b) In addition to what could be expect ed for investment and policy-making (see 
under point 2), this monitoring could: 
a) Provide an overview of achievement s and of the needs and functioning of 
the market. 
b) Lead to a list of projec ts of significant interest for energy security or to a 
data base on European energy infras tructure. Member States could follow 
up by assessing alternatives ways of  meeting demand through efficiency 
measures, alternative ways of supplying energy. 
c) For most of the respond ents, all actors should be involved in the monitoring: 
a) It would help this mechanism to be perceived as a help rather than an 
administrative obligation. 
b) Discussion of final reports and conc lusions could be a way of increasing 
value added and a sense of ownership to the process. 
 Member States are considered by so me respondents best placed to assess 
contributions and to deal with various aspects of the monitoring. 
 Industry’s involvement is critical for th e vast majority of respondents. For one 
industry representative, the role of Member States is crucial to ensure that the link with Industry is strong. 
 
EN 40   EN  As for civil society, many consulted par ties do not provide clear views on this 
issue. While it is generally acknowledged that civil society ca n contribute to a 
smooth dissemination of information available and should have the possibility to discuss issues to a certain extent, 3 Me mber States clearly reject the possible 
involvement of civil society. For these Member States, this monitoring should 
not be turned into a second E nvironmental Impact Assessment. 
 For one Member State, neither industry nor civil society should be part of the 
monitoring. 
 The role of the Commission as a facil itator and for analysis is recalled. The 
Commission is urged by some Member St ates to establish strong links with 
actors. It is regularly put forward th at ENTSO and ACER (future Agency for 
regulators) should have a cruc ial role to play in monito ring and in coordinating 
projects. For the representa tive of energy regulators , the monitoring should be 
assigned to ACER. 
4. C
OMMENTS ON REPORTING (QUESTIONS 6 TO 9) 
 Consulted parties are strongly in favour of a simple and pragmatic approach. 
Reporting obligations should not be dupli cated but should be  harmonised with 
those of ENTSO or those of the TEN-E regulation. 
a) Scope of reporting . Respondents are generally in  favour of an expansion 
although a few consulted parties are not supporting it. 
 Example of possible extensions: 
a) Infrastructure for supply of petrol eum or CHP/district  cooling/heating 
infrastructure, as they serve multiple goals, for some respondents. 
b) New technologies (smart meters, carbon capture and storage…): their 
incorporation is widely  supported, although in some  cases on th e condition 
that it is relevant to the analysis  of policy objectives or that no other 
reporting systems on these specific aspects exist. 
c) Non financial decisions (e.g. divestment…): they should be encompassed 
for the vast majority of respondents. In  one case, it is cons idered that these 
decisions are purely private matte rs and should not be reported. 
d) Obstacles to projects: reporting is seen as a positive development or as a 
possibility by several Member Stat es. For a few respondents, this 
information is not relevant for the monitoring or is a private matter. Incorporation is also conditioned upon th e existence of EC specific powers 
to resolve the issues. 
e) Partners or amount of investmen t: incorporation is accepted by several 
respondents as a contribution to transparency. However, for a few respondents, such reporting could act as deterrent to stakeholders to 
provide information or would not be relevant or would be commercially 
 
EN 41   EN sensitive. A facultative notification is suggested  by various consulted 
parties. 
b) Definition of projects of European interest . The following main aspects are 
mentioned: 
a) Cross–border dimension, impact of an  infrastructure on more than one 
Member State, as a rule. 
b) Contribution to EU policy objectives  (Security of supply, diversification 
of supply, internal market…), for se veral Member States. The definition 
laid down in the TEN-E guidelines is  referred to by a few respondents. 
c) Possible thresholds  in order to determine the scope of reporting. Submissions 
are limited to general ideas : these thresholds depend on the sector, they should 
be balanced and not too small but the thrust should not be lost.  
 For one respondent, these thresholds s hould also reflect the importance of a 
project compared to the scale of the sector in a Member States. 
 For renewable energy sources, and wind in  particular, the Commission is urged 
by one sector association to ensure that  all energy projects, big and small, are 
accounted for in order to re flect the reality of today. 
d) Categories on the status of investment projects . For some, categories should 
be adapted according to the nature of the investment. However, “planned” or 
“committed”, “under construction” and “e xpected” date of commissioning” are 
generally considered as basic categories. 
 One respondent suggests four categories:  preparatory phase (planned projects or 
undergoing feasibility study) / before the final investment decision / under 
construction / in operation. 
 For the moment of notification, the planni ng consent could be used as a starting 
point for several respondents, subject to a clear definition of what “planning 
consent” is. This would avoid confidentia lity problems. Other contributions also 
mention the moment a project is formally  presented to national authorities and 
not necessarily the licensing stage or the project approval, as a possible starting 
point. 
e) On time horizon (projects for which work is scheduled to start within…) for 
notification: replies are equa lly divided into three categor ies: 3 years, five years 
and no target date. It is generally underlined that the relevant time horizon 
depends on the infrastructure concerned. 
f) On frequency of the reporting. An oblig ation every two years (instead of an 
annual one) is sli ghtly preferred: 
a) Projects concerned are big an d such a frequency would reduce 
administrative burden. 
 
EN 42   EN b) It would also be consistent with  the monitoring carried out by ENTSO for 
gas and electricity. 
 However, rapid changes of the situation on the ground could justify a more 
frequent reporting, at leas t an annual one. For one respondent, a more frequent 
reporting could be accepted for projects with an accelerated implementation if 
participants agree. One respondent sugge sts that the reporting should take place 
every third year, which could compen sate an increased level reporting. 
g) For respondents, industry should repor t to Member States, subject to one 
suggestion, according to which EU multinat ionals operating in several Member 
States could notify dire ctly to the Commission. 
h) Confidentiality of reported data should  be limited as much as possible for the 
vast majority of respondents, subject to  commercially sensitive data or to an 
aggregation of data. 
In one reply, confidentiality should be the rule and for a few respondents, this 
issue should left to Member States or  subject to separa te agreement with 
industry. 
**** 
Questionnaire  
A – General questions 
1. What do you expect from EU ins titutions in the investment area? 
2. How could a monitoring system help i nvestment decisions and implementation? 
B - Questions relating to monitoring 
3. What type of monitoring would be releva nt for industry/invest ors: a horizontal / 
global or sector-specific monitoring? 
4. What should be the results and follow-up of such a monitoring, from an industry 
point of view? 
5. Would it be necessary to involve industry, Member Stat es, civil society in the 
monitoring? How should they be involved? 
C - Questions relating to reporting 
6. What information should be reported / colle cted to be of interest for industry/ 
investors? 
a) Should sectors other th an oil, gas, electricity (CCGT, hydro, solar, wind, 
etc) be covered? 
b) In your area, what infrastructures should be monitored? 
 
EN 43   EN c) What would be a project of Europ ean interest from your perspective? 
What thresholds for infrastructures should be set? 
d) Should new technologies or equipments (CCS, switching systems, reverse 
flows installations…etc) be covered? 
e) Should information on partners in th e projects / amounts of the investment 
projects be notified? 
f) Should concrete obstacles to pr ojects implementation be reported? 
g) Should non-financial decisions with an  impact on infrastructure (e.g. life-
time extension, decommission ing…etc) be encompassed? 
h) For investment monitoring, what are the most relevant categories: 
- Planned projects, under construction, date of 
(de)commissioning…etc? Should the planning consent be the stage 
when notification should start? 
- What is the relevant time horizon: Projects on which work is 
scheduled to start within three years / five years? 
- Should nominal capacities be complemented? 
7. How frequently should information be reported, once a year, every two years? 
8. Should industry be involved in the reporting? What alte rnative could be 
envisaged? What administra tive costs or burden would imply a reporting of the 
type laid down by the current regulation? 
9. Should forwarded information be treated as confidential? To what extent could 
information be disclosed? 
 
EN 44   EN Annex 3 – Overview of the notification obligations resulting fr om EU legislation in relation  to investment/infrastructure 
Which infrastructure/ 
investment? Which obligation? Who notifies? When? How?  Confidentiality? Action by Commission 
 I - Existing legislation 
A- GAS  
A1. Directive No  2003/55 of the European Parliament and of the Council co mmon rules for the internal market in natural gas 
 Article 4 
“Natural gas 
facilities” For information  - 
Reasons for refusal to grant authorisation 
for construction
 or 
operation of natural gas facilities  Member States or 
delegated entities  
 NA  Article 31 – Annual 
Report to the European Parliament and Council , 
including examination of 
issues relating to the system capacity levels…physical capacity for exchanges and development of storage 
- Article 5 
Capacity - 
“Envisaged additional capacity being planned or under construction” For SoS purposes  - 
Monitoring by MS and reporting to the Commission 
 
For control of access   Annual  
 National 
Annual report outlining the findings - to be forwarded to the Commission   
 
EN 45   EN - Notification of 
exemption decision to access rules 
 
- Article 22 
a) Major new gas 
infrastructures – i.e. interconnectors between MS, LNG and storage facilities 
 b) Existing 
infrastructure with significant increased capacity and modifications to such infrastructure which enable the development of new sources of gas supply Exemption possible in 
particular if the level of risks attached to the investment is such that the investment would not take place unless an exemption was granted  Without delay 
after adoption of the decision Decision with 
all relevant information including share of the total capacity of the infrastructure for which exemption is granted; contribution of the infrastructure to the diversification of gas supply Confidentialit
y of commercially sensitive information  
A2. Council Directive 2004/67 concerning measures to  safeguard security of natural gas supplies 
- Levels of storage  In the report pursuant 
to Article 5 of MS    Monitoring on the basis 
of the reports referred to 
 
EN 46   EN Directive 2003/55 in Article 5 
 Withdrawal capacity of 
gas storage 
 - level of interconnection 
of national gas systems of MS 
A3. Decision No  1364/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying  down guidelines for trans- European energy networks 
- Article 2 
- High pressure gas 
pipelines 
- Underground 
storage facilities connected to High pressure gas pipelines 
- reception, storage 
and regasification facilities for LNG and also LNG carriers - Article 8 
* For each projects of 
European interest, regular exchange of relevant information; 
*MS to communicate 
reasons for (significant or prospective) delay for a project of European interest 
 MS Upon request    
 
EN 47   EN  - Article  9  
Every two years, 
Commission in close 
collaboration with the 
committee  
(comitology) to present a report on the progress of projects of European interest
23, 24      
B - ELECTRICITY  
B1. Directive No 2003/54 of the European Parliament and of the Council common rules for the int ernal market in electricity 
 
- Article 4  
Capacity - 
“Envisaged additional capacity being planned or under construction” For SoS purposes  - 
Monitoring by MS and reporting to the Commission Member States or 
delegated entities Every two 
year  National 
Annual report outlining the findings - to be forwarded to the  Article 28 1(c) – 
Monitoring and reporting of the implementation of the Directive – Annual report covering at least an examination of issues relating to system capacity levels… 
                                                   
23 *projects of European interest = on the axis  of priority projects and which are of cr oss-border nature or have a significant i mpact on cross-border transmission capacity. 
24 (Info -envisaged passage of the project through the planning approval phase; timetable for the feasibility and design phase; c onstruction of the project; entry into serv ice of the project) - No info on capacity 
 
EN 48   EN Commission
B2. Directive 2005/89 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning measures to safeguar d security of electricity su pply and 
infrastructure investment 
- Article 7 
*cross-border 
interconnection capacity 
*taking into account 
existing and planned transmission lines (internal lines that materially affect the provision of cross-border interconnection) For SoS purpose  - 
In the report pursuant 
to Article 4 of Directive 2003/54 
- investment 
intentions  for the 
next five or more calendar year, of TSOs and those of any other party of which they are aware, as regards the provision of cross-border interconnection capacities; 
- investments
 related 
to the building of internal lines that materially affect the provision of cross-border MS or competent 
authorities in close cooperation with TSOs 
 - TSO and any 
other party required to provide MS with information Every two 
year  National 
Annual report outlining the findings - to be forwarded to the CommissionNon-disclosure of 
confidential information Article 7(5) – On the 
basis of information received from competent authorities, Commission to report to MS, competent authorities, ERGEG, on the investments planned and their contribution to SoS 
 
EN 49   EN interconnection 
B3. Decision No 1364/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Co uncil laying down guidelines fo r trans- European energy netwo rks 
- Article 2 
Electricity networks:  - all high voltage 
lines, excluding those of distribution networks , and to submarine links provided this infrastructure is used for interregional or international transmission or connection; 
- any equipment or 
installations essential for the system to operate properly (including protection, monitoring and control systems)  - Article 8 
For each projects of 
European interest, regular exchange of relevant information; 
- Article 8 MS to communicate 
reasons for (significant or prospective) delay for a project of European interest 
- Article 9  Every two years, 
Commission in close 
collaboration with the 
committee  
(comitology) to present a report on the progress of projects of European On MS Upon request   Commission to draw up a 
report on the progress of projects of European interest (Article 9) and on the implementation of this Decision (Article 15) 
 
EN 50   EN interest 
B4. Regulation No  1228/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on  conditions for access to th e network for cross-border 
exchanges in electricity 
Article 7 – 
New interconnectors 
(exemption …level of risks attached to the investment is such that the investment would not take place unless an exemption is granted) 
 Article 7 – For 
exemption purposes (congestion management…) 
 Notification of the 
exemption decision and of all relevant information relevant to that decision Article 7 – MS or 
competent authorities 
    Article 7 - 
Automatic notification 
     Article 7 - 
Confidentiality of commercially sensitive information 
    
     
Article 10 -  Networks 
/infrastructure in general  
 Article 10 – For inter 
transmission compensation 
 Information on costs 
(…) Costs of the networks and costs of hosting cross-border flows based on …investment in new Article 10 – MS 
or competent authorities – in exceptional case, the undertaking (as last option) Article 10 – 
Upon request  Article 10 –  
Information 
collected to be used only for the specific purposes of this Regulation 
Commission shall 
not disclose information acquired pursuant Decision on amounts to 
be paid for compensation purposes 
 Guidelines on cross -
border compensation  
 
EN 51   EN infrastructure to this Regulation 
if covered by professional secrecy. 
C – Oil/Gas (Hydrocarbons) 
C.1 Directive 94/22 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorizations for t he 
prospection exploration and pr oduction of hydrocarbons 
Article 9 
Information on 
activities of prospection, exploration and production of hydrocarbons  
  Article 9 – For SoS 
reasons 
- information on 
geographical areas opened for prospecting, exploration and production 
- authorizations 
granted 
- entities holding 
authorizations and the composition thereof MS Annually Annual 
report   
D - Nuclear 
D1. Council Regulation No  2857/1999 defining the investment projec ts to be communicated to the Commi ssion in accordance with Article 
 
EN 52   EN 41 of the Euratom Treaty 
- Article 1 
New installations and 
of replacements or conversion (transformation, modernisation) and their decommissioning as 
well as activities 
across the entire fuel cycle in a series of industrial activities when such projects are sufficiently extensive (i.e above 
certain thresholds 
expressed in 
Millions Euros – e.g. 
above € 100 Mio for 
nuclear reactors of 
all types and for all 
purposes ) 
In particular nuclear 
rectors of all types and for all purposes Communication to 
the Commission of new investment projects fulfilling the criteria set up in the Annex to the Regulation. 
Communication shall 
include and be 
limited to the details required (Article 43 Euratom) including: type of investment; amount; length of time to be required; prospects as regards supply and operation of the installation (Article 3). 
Voluntary 
notifications of investment projects for decommissioning and for new installations for nuclear reactors of Persons or 
undertakings engaged in industrial activities falling within the scope of the Regulation (Annex II 
Euratom Treaty). For new 
installations - not later than three months before the first contracts are concluded with the 
suppliers or, if 
the work is to be carried out by the undertaking with its own resources, three months before the work begins (Art. 42 Euratom Treaty). Official 
notification to the Commission by the investor. For decommissi
oning – 
simple declaration which may be limited to essential characteristics (Article 1). 
For 
voluntary notification, simple declaration giving the essential characteristics (Article The Commission 
may with the consent of the Member States, persons and undertakings concerned public any investment 
projects 
communicated to it (Art. 44 Euratom Treaty) The Commission shall 
discuss with the persons or undertakings all aspects of investment projects which are related to the objectives of the Euratom Treaty. It shall communicate its view 
with the Member State 
concerned (Art.43 Euratom Treaty). 
 
EN 53   EN any type and for any 
purpose and projects concerning the replacement, transformation, modernisation or power increase of such installation when costs are below the cost thresholds set up in the Annex. 1) 
E – Critical infrastructures 
E1. Council Directive 2008/11/EC on the identification and designat ion of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need 
to improve their protection  (transposition 1/1/2011) 
Annex I  
- Infrastructures and 
facilities for generation and transmission of electricity 
- Oil production, 
refining, treatment and transmission pipelines - Article 4(4) 
Information of the 
Commission of the number of designated ECIs 
- Article 7(2) Report on the types 
of risks, threats and vulnerabilities encountered per ECI On MS - Article 4 – 
every year 
 - Article 7(2)- Every two 
years Report Yes Commission and MS to 
assess whether further measures are necessary 
 
EN 54   EN - Gas production, 
refining, treatment, storage and transmission by pipelines and LNG terminals sectors 
 
F – Energy statistics 
F1. Regulation n° 1099/2008 of the European Parlia ment and of the Council on energy statistics 
Annex B – 
- 2.2.6 – Gas storage 
capacities 
- 3.3.1. Electrical 
capacities  
- 5.2.5 – RES 
electricity generation capacities 
- 5.2.5 – Biofuels 
production capacities Transmission of data 
on installed capacities and energy consumption MS Annual 
notification  Possibility of 
confidentiality – a priori not applicable to these data Production and 
dissemination of data by 31 January of year n+2 following the reported period 
G. COGENERATION 
F.1 Directive 2004/8 of the European Parliament and of the Council on  the promotion of co-generation  based on a useful heat dem and and 
in the internal energy market 
 
EN 55   EN Article 10 – 
cogeneration capacities an fuels used for co-generation  Article 10 – 
Reporting obligation 
- statistics MS  Annual basis  No Article 11 – Progress 
report on the implementation of the Directive to the Council and EP ever 4 years 
G. CO2 infrastructure 
G1. Directive 2009/31/EC on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and am ending Directives 85/ 337, 96/61, 2000/60, 2001/80, 2 004/35, 
2006/12 
Article 2 -Geological Storage sites in the territory of Member States (not those undertaken for RTD with a total intended storage < 100Kt) Article 10 – review of 
draft storage permits + notification of the final Decision 
 Articles 10 and 
18 – MS or competent authorities 
  Articles 10 
and 18 –  
    Articles 10 and 18 - 
Opinion by the Commission 
  
 Article 18 – 
Transmission of a report (and all relevant information) + draft decision / final decision on transfer of responsibility in case of closure of a  
    
      
   
 
EN 56   EN storage site 
 
 Article 27 –  
Report on the 
implementation of the Directive + permanent register of all closed storage sites and surrounding storages complexes Article 27 - S Article 27 – 
Every three years   Article 27 - Report 
     
H. Renewables 
H1. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Par liament and of the Council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewables so urces 
(Possibly) 
development of infrastructure and generation in relation to RES For monitoring of the 
achievement of RES targets   
Article 22- 
National action plans  MS Every two 
years  No except if MS 
request it for certain information Article 23 – Reporting by 
the Commission to EP + Council 
 
EN 57   EN  
II - Future legislation 
 
A. European Recovery Action Plan 
(Proposal for a…) Regulation of the European  Parliament and of the Council establishi ng a programme to aid economic recovery by  
granting Community financial assistance to projects in the field of energy  
Article 1 – 
- Gas and electricity 
interconnections  25 
- offshore wind 
projects   
- CCS projects  Information on 
actions related  to 
projects listed in Annex may be obtained in the course of the calls for proposals 
Information on the 
evolution of actions 
related to projects 
once selected for EC financial assistance Promoters of 
projects In the course 
of the call for proposals and during the implementation and evaluation of selected projects  No obligation   
                                                   
25 all high-voltage lines, excluding those of  distribution networks, and submarine links , provided that this infrastructure is us ed for interregional or intern ational transmission or connec tion; high-pressure gas pipelines; underground storage facilities c onnected to the high-pressure gas pipelines; 
reception, storage and regasification facilitie s for liquefied natural gas (LNG); any e quipment or installa tions essential for the system in question to operate properly, incl uding protection, monitoring and control systems  
 
EN 58   EN Annex 4  – Number of operators 
Infrastructure in petroleum, gas , electricity, CO2, biofuels  
Number of operators by order of magnitude 
Sector26 Total number Number over current 
thresholds Potential number over 
possible revised 
thresholds/criteria 
1. Oil 
1.1. Petroleum refineries  
1.1.1 Crude input 
 1.1.2 Cat cracking  1.1.3 Hydro 
cracking 
 1.1.4 
Desulphurisation  
85 
 
50 
 
35 
 
?  
70 (> 1000 kt/y) 
 
45 (> 500 t/d) 
 
30 (> 500 t/d) 
  
75 (> 500 kt/d) 
65 (> 2000kt/d) 
45 ([> 500 and < 2000 
t/d]) 
45 (> 2000 t/d) 25 (> 1000 t/d) 
1.2. Oil pipelines 1.2.1 Condensate 1.2.2 Crude 1.2.3 Products  75 
10 65 15 - 
-  -  -  75 
 
1.4. Oil storage  -   
2. Gas 
2.1. Transport 
(TSO) 65 50  
 65  
 
2.2. LNG 15 15 15 
                                                   
26 Bold and italicised items are not  covered by the current Regulation. They have b een introduced in this table to have a picture  of the sector in case the current Regulation 
would be expanded to cover them. 
 
EN 59   EN 2.3. Storage 
2.3.1 Underground 2.3.2 Above ground  65 
55 15 50 (> 150 Millions m³) 
45 (> 150 Millions m³) 
5 (> 150 Millions m³) 50 (> 150 Millions m³) 
45 (> 150 Millions m³) 
5 (> 150 Millions m³) 
3. Electricity 
3.1 Production (All) 900 240 (>200M w) 550 (with application 
of specific thresholds: 
100 Mw for thermal, 
30 Mw hydro and 10 
for RES)  
3.1.1 Thermal 
(conventional + 
Nuclear) 620 200 (> 200 Mw) 360 (> 50 Mw) 
270 (>100 Mw) 
 
3.1.2 Hydro 90 70 (> 50 Mw) 80 (> 30 Mw)  
3.1.3. RES (All)  500 -   
400 (> 10 Mw) 
3.2. Transport 45 35 (International 
connections) 45 (all infrastructure)  
4. CO2 
4.1. Transport - -  
4.2. Storage - -  
5. Biofuels 
5.1. Production   - 90 
Source: Includes data supplied by Petroconsult ants S.A., Copyright (2009) Petroconsultants 
S.A.; various.