Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Proposal for a Council Regulation concerning the notification to the Commission 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}
Date: 2009-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU action, data processing, energy distribution, energy policy, exchange of information, industrial infrastructure, investment, investment project, report

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN 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 Commission 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 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
1. 

SECTION  1  -  PROCEDURAL  ISSUES  AND  CONSULTATION  OF  INTERESTED 
PARTIES 

•  Identification  

Lead DG: DG TREN 

Associated DGs: DG ECFIN, DG ENV, DG ENTR, DG RTD, DG JRC 

Agenda planning/WP reference: 2009/TREN/019 

•  Organisation and timing 

Work on this impact assessment started in January 2009 with the analysis of the problem 
and  of  policy  options  as  well  as  with  a  discussion  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 Council Regulation  (EC) No736/96 on their area of 
competence. The Steering Group met 3 times over the period from January to April 2009. 

On 7 May 2009, the Impact assessment Board received 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  caused  by  a  lack  of  availability  of  data  and  a 
further clarification of policy options and of their impacts. 

The  revised  Impact  assessment  report  takes  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 clarified that the fundamentals of the energy 
landscape have changed and that investment into EU energy infrastructure has become 
a sensitive issue for the future EU energy position. Data will help establish a clearer 
view on potential problems in the future. 

–  Policy  options:  policy  options  have  been  further  clarified  and  assessed  in  terms  of 

proportionality. 

–  Analysis  of  impacts:  the  analysis  of  impacts  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  assessment  has  been  preceded  by  consultations, 
presentations  of  the  objectives  of  the  Commission  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 

2 

   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 Member States to get data on current 
and  future  power  generation  capacity  needs  and  on  expected  evolutions  of 
these capacities. The questionnaire was pre-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,  interested  parties  –  Member  States, 
representatives  of  industry,  transmission  network  operators  and  regulators  – 
were directly consulted on the basis of a targeted consultation. 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 interested in a possible revision: Member States, 
energy  regulators,  industry,  transmission  networks  operators2.  These  entities  represent 
the  whole  energy  chain/system  (Industry,  transmission/storage  systems  operators  and 
regulators)  and  cover  the  EU  energy  mix  (Conventional  energy  and  Renewable  energy 
sources)  and  are  involved  in  technological  development.  Umbrella  associations  have 
been targeted by preference as they can provide 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 investment 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  specific  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 administrative 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  meetings  held  in  Brussels:  Joint 
session of the Oil Supply Group and the Security of Supply Working group of the Fossil 
Fuels Forum (2 March 2009); Energy economists' meeting (31 March 2009). 

–  Meetings with experts 

1 

2 

Adopted on 13 November 2008 – COM (2008) 781 final 
For the list of consulted entities, see Annex 1. 

EN 

3 

   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 whether/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 investment plan for gas 
organised by the ENTSO for gas. It has participated as an observer to several meetings 
organised  by  one  Member  State’s  authorities  on  an  indicative  planning  for  future 
investments for electricity and gas (France). 

2. 

SECTION 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  energy  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.  supply/demand  balance).  Investments  are  also 
required to foster the transition to a low carbon energy future (implementation of the new 
Energy  Policy  for  Europe  with  the  20/20/20  targets  to  mitigate  the  effects  of  climate 
change),  to  ensure  greater  energy  security  in  case  of  a  crisis  as  well  as  the  effective 
functioning  of  the  internal  market.  All  types  of  infrastructures  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  and  new  EU  policy  objectives  require  an 
acceleration of investment into 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  and  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. Experience has shown that only a limited share of 
investment  projects  announced  by  firms  are  eventually  carried  out5  and 
that 
consequently,  a  monitoring  of  investment  projects  at  regular  intervals  is  considered 
important  (and  is  indeed  undertaken  by  a  number  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  projects.  This  has  been 

3 

4 

5 

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 change 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 electricity networks in the coming 5 years 
are needed according to a report issued by UCTE 
World Energy Outlook 2008  
According  to  studies  carried  out  in  US,  only  12%  of  announced  projects  for  coal  fired  power  plants  in  2002  had  been  eventually  carried  out  on  time  in  2007. 

Projects  are  often  delayed  and  even  cancelled  as  a  result  of  uncertainties  affecting  the  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 

4 

   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 energy system. In this context, data reporting 
(i.e. notification of information) and monitoring (i.e. analysis) of investment 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  Union9  and  the 
European  Parliament10  recalled  the  importance  of  promoting  investments  and 
improving  transparency  as  well  as  of  intensifying  the  works  on  supply  and  generation 
adequacy outlooks and network development plans. 

•  What is the issue or problem 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 result, this situation could cause a regulatory 
failure.  

Without appropriate data, the Commission is not in a position to: 

- 

- 

- 

analyze  the  likely  evolution  of  EU  energy  infrastructure,  detect  any 
potential gaps and anticipate future energy supply; 

evaluate EU energy policy and support 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  infrastructure  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 out that due to a situation of overcapacities in the past, no evidence of 
policy failure due to lack of data can be produced. However, fundamentals of the energy 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

EN 

Joint statement by the G8 Energy Ministers, the European Commissioner and the Energy Ministers of Algeria, Australia, Brazil, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, 

Korea, Libya, Mexico, Nigeria, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Turkey, available at the following address http://g8.italia2009.it 

IEA,  The impact  of the  financial and economic  crisis on global energy investment –  IEA background paper for the G8 energy ministers’ meeting – 24-25 May 

2009, available at the following address http://g8.italia2009.it 

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://www2.eurelectric.org. 

Energy Council Conclusions (6692/09) 
EP resolution on the 2nd Strategic Energy Review, 2/00/2009, (2008/2239(INI)). 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                   
landscape have radically changed and made of investment into EU energy infrastructure 
a  sensitive  issue:  capacity  is  stretched,  often  ageing  and  sometimes  inadequate;  private 
economic operators have been given a much more prominent role for investment and new 
EU  policy  objectives  for  energy  have  been  set.  This  new  situation  and  the  risks  to  be 
coped with call for well-calibrated policies. Appropriate data on investment projects will 
therefore help to establish a clearer view on potential problems in the future. 

Under  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No736/96  on  notifying  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  principle  communicated  by  Member  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  energy  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 Regulation). The “quality” of data transmitted may 
also be arguable in some cases. 

b)  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  736/96  imperfectly  covers  the  current  and  new  energy 
infrastructure  needed  for  security  of  energy  supply  and  the  transition  to  a  low  carbon 
energy  system.  The  evolution  of  the  energy  sector  since  1996  has  rendered  the  system 
devised by the Regulation increasingly ill-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)  coexist  within  the  European  Union. 
However they are not covered by the current Regulation. 

The  notion  of  "Community  interest"  in  the  existing  regulation  relates  to 
the  cross-border  nature  and/or  size  of  an  installation.  In  today's  internal 
market  context,  this  rationale  is  no  longer  appropriate.  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  are  covered  by  the  current 
Regulation whilst it is of interest to get a view of the transmission system as a 
whole,  irrespective  of  the  length  of  lines  (as  suggested  under  the  current 
Regulation).  Moreover, 
lines  may  also  affect  cross-border 
interconnections. 

‘internal’ 

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 

6 

   EN 

 
 
 
to have. For storage of gas, the connection 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 information required under the current Regulation). 

- 

As a result of the New EU Energy Policy (in particular with its renewable 
targets),  a major  shift on EU energy systems  and  infrastructure  based  on 
conventional  fossil  fuel  supply  is  required  and  the  scope  of  the  current 
Regulation  does  not  cover  relevant  issues  such  as  electricity  generation 
powered  by  renewable  energy  sources,  carbon  transport  and  storage  or 
bio-fuel plants. 

Table  1  gives  an  overview  of  the  current  scope  of  Council  Regulation  (EC) 
n°736/96  with  regard  to  investment  projects  currently  covered  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  notification  requires  to  indicate  the  type  of  raw 
materials used. This information is considered no longer necessary (contrary to the type 
of  energy  source  used).  However,  the  notification  does  not  request  any  information  on 
new equipment to capture carbon on power plants or refineries. 

The  exercise  carried  out  in  May  2008  with  national  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  capacities  should  be  complemented  by  the  load 
factor for power generation to get a better idea on the power to be generated. 

Table 2 gives an overview of the current information requirement of Council Regulation 
(EC) No736/96 and additional ones deemed necessary or requirements to be amended. 

EN 

7 

   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 

1.1. Petroleum refineries 

None 

- Oil pipelines 

1. OIL 

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. 

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 

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 

- 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 

Storage 

- Underground storage 

- Storage installations 

EN 

8 

   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, 

- Overhead transmission 
lines, if they have been 
designed for a voltage of 345 
150 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, 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
4. BIOFUELS  

5. CO2 

Refineries 

Transport and storage 

Table 2 – Information requirements on investment projects  
currently covered by Council Regulation (EC) n°736/96 and suggested 
amendments/additions 

Information requested 
under Council Regulation 
(EC) n°736/96 

Amendments 

Additions 

Investment projects (new) 

Where applicable 

- Precise purpose and nature 
of such investments 

- Precise purpose and nature 
of such investments 

- Planned capacity or power 

- Planned capacity or power 

- Probable date of 
commissioning 

- Probable date of 
commissioning 

- Type of raw materials 
used 

- Type of raw materials 
used 

- 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  

Volume of capacities in 
commission planned or 
under construction  

Volume of installed 
capacities at the beginning 
of the reporting year  

- Member States may add 
any comments they may 
have 

Obstacles and delays to 
investment projects 

Decommissioning projects 

None 

None 

- Character and capacity or 
power of the installations 
concerned; 

- Probable date when the 
installations will be 
withdrawn from service 

EN 

10 

   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 projects 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  infrastructure  development  is  heterogeneous.  It 
does not provide sufficiently consistent information for a cross - sectoral 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 covered 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 notified 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 notified at a very advanced stage (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). 

Experience also shows that other sources of information such as industry associations at 
EU level or data provided by commercial suppliers 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 and power capacities per fuel. 

11 

See Table in Annex 3 

EN 

11 

   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 

12 

   EN 

 
Table 3 
Overview of the possible data sources 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) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (specific) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X 

X (specific) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (specific) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (specific) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

Pipelines 

Storage 

Gas 

Transport 
pipelines 

LNG 

Storage 

Electricity 

Conventional + 
nuclear power 
plants 

Electricity 
generation from 
Renewable energy 
source 

Transport 

X (partial) 

X (specific) 

X 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

X (partial) 

Biofuels 
production plants 

CO2  

Pipelines 

Storage 

EN 

X (specific) 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  What are the underlying drivers of the problem? 

- As for the non-application of Council Regulation (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 place 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  designed  in  the  early  1970’s  when  the  Council 
adopted Regulation (EEC) No 1056/72. It has been amended in the light of experience, 
firstly, in 1976 and, secondly, in 1996. However, the major features of the system set up 
in 1972 were maintained. 

The following problems have been identified: 

•  This reporting has led to synthesis reports12 and results have not been analysed in the 
context  of  demand  forecasts.  It  was  therefore  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  Regulation  (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  prevailed  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  information  that  can  hardly  be 
aggregated for analytical purposes. 

12 

The 1997 report – last report - shows the limited interest of this approach.  

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                   
- As for data from commercial information providers and for data collected by industry 
associations, data remains most of the time incomplete. 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
•  Who is affected, in what ways, and to what extent? 

Two categories of entities can be identified as affected by the absence of an EU reporting 
and monitoring tool for energy infrastructure 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 constitutes an important tool for relevant policy-
making.  Without  such  a  reliable  picture  on  future  investment  projects  (for  example 
those that have received planning consent from the authorities), the Commission (and 
the  EU)  is  not  fully  equipped  to  anticipate  problems  like  capacity  gaps  and  to 
contribute to solving them within the limits of its own competences and powers: the 
Commission  cannot  promote  measures  to  reduce  risks  of  underinvestment  or 
inadequacy of investments. 

–  Investors/economic  operators,  who  decide  on  and  implement  investment  projects, 
need  transparency  and  visibility  on  the  investment  situation  for  their  business 
operations.  The  absence  of  an  EU  wide,  regular  overview  of  the  likely  evolution  of 
energy infrastructure may negatively affect the investment environment, in particular 
for smaller companies and new markets entrants. 

•  How should the problem evolve, all things being equal? Should the EU act? 

Given the need for data for monitoring the evolution of energy infrastructure in the EU it 
is  necessary  to  act  and  improve  the  data  situation  enabling  a  consistent  cross  –  sector 
monitoring  (i.e.  analysis)  which  can  be  made  public  and  which  thus  will  increase 
transparency. 

3. 

SECTION 3 - OBJECTIVES 

The general objectives of the revision of Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 are to build 
an effective and efficient reporting and monitoring 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  stakeholders  and  to  improve  policy-making  and 
evaluation  of  EU policies on a medium to long term basis. This translates into specific 
and operational objectives as shown in the table below: 

General objectives 

Specific objectives 

Operational objectives 

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; 

1. Update the scope of the 
reporting ; 

EN 

16 

   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 investment 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. 

SECTION 4 - POLICY OPTIONS 

Four policy options have been considered. 

Option  0  –  Status  quo  -  Monitoring  of  the  evolution  of  energy  infrastructure 
without specific reporting 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
Under  option  0,  data  and  information  on  investment  projects  into  EU  energy 
infrastructure  would  be  either  provided  through  existing  reporting  mechanisms  (at  EU 
and/or  national  levels)  and/or  purchased  by  the  Commission  from  commercial  data 
providers. 

Member  States  have  developed  monitoring  systems  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  required  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-year investment plan for gas and electricity 
to  be  elaborated  by  Transmission  System  Operators  at  European  level.  Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No  736/96  is  still  one  instrument  for  data  collection  useful  for  the  oil 
sector.  The  Commission  has  also  been  working  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  information  for  its  analyses.  The  results  of 
such analysis would be used to have discussions with stakeholders and to determine for 
example whether risks of underinvestment or of inadequate investment or infrastructure 
gaps are likely to occur. 

Option 1 – Repeal of Council Regulation No736/96 

Compared to the status quo, this option consists in repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 
736/96  given  the  poor  implementation  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  monitoring  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  projects.  Both  data  supplied  by  commercial 
providers  and  data  forwarded  on  the  basis  of  other  EU  piece  of  legislation  would  in 
principle be available. 

Option  2  –  Monitoring  of  the  evolution  of  energy  infrastructure  with  a 
complementary reporting 

Under option 2, the  envisaged monitoring is supported by a specific reporting. Council 
Regulation (EC) No736/96 is revised (for the sake 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 storage, renewable energy source for electricity, 
bio-fuel refineries, CO2 transport and storage infrastructure). In order to minimize costs 
for Member States and companies, the revised system would maintain the possibility for 
Member  States  to  exempt  companies  from  notifying  information  and  take  into  account 
existing reporting or monitoring obligations provided 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 investment/infrastructure imposed by EU legislation, see Annex 3. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
                                                   
notify.  The  content  of  notification  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 further easing the administrative burden and aligning 
this obligation with other relevant frameworks, as generally suggested by respondents to 
the consultation. Thresholds are generally lowered 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  minimum  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 administrative 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  individuals  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 the obligation imposed on Member States in the 
context  of  statistics  is  spelled  out.  Appropriate  ‘validation’  by  Member  States  (e.g. 
opportunity to give feedback) is required for information and data concerning projects on 
their own territory collected by ENTSOs. 

On the basis of data collected, the Commission and in particular its Market Observatory 
for Energy prepares regular analyses of the future development of the EU energy system 
in  a  cross  sector  perspective  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 with stakeholders and made public. Confidentiality of data 
would be limited to commercially sensitive data which is the generally accepted rule. 

As  a  result  of  these  modifications,  a  global  and  integrated  framework  combining 
reporting and monitoring and streamlined information 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 changes in the current Regulation: 

Proposed change of content 

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 
(e.g. 
capacity for hydro-electric power station) 

thresholds 

Proposed  change  with  regard  to 
Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96 

Modification of Articles 1(1) and of the 
Annex 

Possibility  for  Member  States 
to  be 
exempted  from  notification  provided  that 
provided 
equivalent 

information 

is 

Modification of Article 1(1) 

14 

See also section 2 – What is the problem that requires action ? 

EN 

19 

   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  

the  content  of 

the 
Clarification  of 
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) 

Incorporation  of  new  requirements  to 
ensure  quality  of  data  and  information 
transmitted to the Commission and of new 
requirements  concerning  data  processing 
(IT tools and protection of individuals) 

Modification of Article 2 

Add new article 

of 

Clarification 
implementing 
aspects/definition) 

the 
measures 

scope 

for 
(technical 

Modification of Articles 2(2) and 5 

Incorporation  of  the  analysis  dimension 
(e.g.  mention  of  regular  analysis  in  a 
sector  perspective  –  experts; 
cross 
mention of the context of the objectives of 
the analysis)  

Add new Article 

Modification of Articles 3 and 4 

of 

data 

transparency 

Enhance 
/ 
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) 

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 framework combining reporting and monitoring 
and  streamlined  information  flows,  with  validation  of  data  by  Member  States  in 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
principle, would be set up. The system would be balanced with two 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  consists  in  particular  in  adjusting  the 
scope of the Regulation, clarifying and complementing 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 mechanisms developed at EU level (ENTSO for 
gas  and  ENTSO  for  electricity).  No  exemptions  from  reporting  obligations  would  be 
granted to Member States. Industry would be required to supply Member States with the 
relevant  information  unless  where  the  Member  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 

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) 
(e.g. 
revision  of  certain 
capacity for hydro-electric power station) 

thresholds 

Revision of the frequency of the reporting 
(every  two  years)  and  of  the  date  for 
notification (31 July of the reporting year) 

Proposed  change  with  regard  to 
Council Regulation (EC) No736/96 

Modification of Articles 1(1) and of the 
Annex 

Modification of Article 1 (1) and (2) 

Clarification of the definitions used in the 
context of this draft Regulation 

Add new Article  

the  content  of 

Clarification  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) 

Incorporation  of  new  requirements  to 
ensure  quality  of  data  and  information 
transmitted to the Commission and of new 
requirements  concerning  data  processing 
(IT tools and protection of individuals) 

Modification of Article 2 

Add new article 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
of 

Clarification 
implementing 
aspects/definition) 

the 
measures 

scope 

for 
(technical 

Modification of Articles 2(2) and 5 

Incorporation  of  the  analysis  dimension 
(e.g.  mention  of  regular  analysis  in  a 
cross 
sector  perspective  –  experts; 
mention of the context of the objectives of 
the analysis)  

Add new Article 

Modification of Articles 3 and 4 

of 

data 

transparency 

Enhance 
/ 
information  and  of  the  results  of  analysis 
to  publish  data  collected 
(possibility 
except  for  commercially  sensitive  data 
and information / discussion of the results 
of analyses with stakeholders / publication 
of  the  analysis  and  transmission  to  EU 
institutions) 

5. 

SECTION 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  impacts  (nor  will  it  help  create  jobs, 
develop innovation or have an impact on environment). The analysis of impacts of such 
mechanism  aims  at  clarifying  the  impact  on  availability  of  relevant  data  and  on  an 
appropriate development of monitoring (analysis), 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  system  will  increase  data  availability 
and  the  quality  of  data  and  information  notified  to  the  Commission.  Regular 
studies commissioned by the Commission could also increase data 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  reporting  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  level  of  detail  required  to  take  a  decision 
for  individual  investment  projects  which  are  generally  capital  intensive.  In  a 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
medium to long term perspective, the elaboration of an EU consistent approach 
and overview, based on accurate and appropriate information is generally valued 
by  investors,  in  particular  if  it  reveals  obstacles  to  investment  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 their 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  policies,  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 possibility to address, within its field of 
competence, identified problems. The Commission could in particular promote 
the  authorisation  procedures  of  energy 
best  practices,  e.g.  regarding 
infrastructure projects. 

In  addition,  policy–making  at  EU  level  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, figures and analysis whenever a decision 
or  initiative  will  be  needed.  Policy-making  at  Member  States  level  may  also 
benefit  from  an  improved  EU  monitoring,  complementing  national  approaches 
and developing regional dimensions. 

The  impact  of  such  monitoring  will  therefore  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 the longer-term have a negative 
impact  on  EU  energy  policy  and  commercial  entities,  since  important 
information on investments will not be made available in a systematic and 
coherent way. Since it relies on reporting / monitoring exercises developed 
for  sector  specific  purposes,  a  coherent  and  comprehensive  approach 
would be unlikely and it is likely that the added value for policy makers 
and  private  investors  remains  small.  This  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  this  basis,  given  that  the  data 
requirements are not adapted to the current 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  available  in  the  context  of  studies  or  of 
existing  specific  legislation.  The  risks  of  methodological  inconsistencies 
are  considerable  and  the  appropriateness/accuracy  of  data  used  in  the 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
context of these studies is not guaranteed. Contractors would have to get 
the data, most likely from Member States, industry or commercial sources. 
Verification of data used by contractors would be necessary to make sure 
that  the  envisaged  analysis  relies  on  robust  data  and  brings  added  value. 
Member States and / or industry would have to be consulted to comment 
on figures used for the analysis. Administrative burden on Member States, 
on Industry or on the Commission would 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 added-value and a useful framework for 
discussion  between  public  authorities  and  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  implication  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 fulfil new reporting requirements, which 
are kept to a minimum and proportionate to the potential benefits. 

The following table summarizes the situation as follows: 

Policy option 

Short – term  
potential impact 

Medium to long term  
potential impact  

PO 0,1  

PO 2 

PO 3 

negative 

positive 

positive 

5.2. 

Administrative burden / costs 

Likelihood 

Magnitude 

negative 

positive  

positive 

negative 

high 

high 

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  monitoring  exercise  (preparation,  aggregation  of 
data, conclusions…) would be needed.  

15 

See Annex 4 

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
                                                   
The  following  parameters  have  therefore  been  selected  to  make  a  calculation  of  the 
administrative costs: 

Gross earning per hour  

Gross earning per year 

Companies  =  €  44.66  (average  of 
gross  earning  per  hour  from  the  10 
Member  States  with  the  highest 
amount 
staff 
following EU standard costs model) 

category  2 

for 

the 
Member  States  =  use  of 
individual  amount  for  category  2 
staff  following  EU  standard  costs 
model 

Commission =  € 122 000  (standard 
average  annual  costs 
for  one 
official,  as  recommended  by  DG 
BUDG) 

Time 
required 
notification action  

per 

Companies 
(Commission’s estimate) 

to  MS  =  8  hours 

MS to EU =  

40  hours  –  current 
(Commission’s estimate) 

regulation 

revised 
48  hours  – 
(Commission’s estimate) 

regulation 

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  revised  Regulation  in  case  of  full  reporting 
without any exemptions (option 3) are the following: 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
Maximum 
costs16 

Under the Current 
Regulation 

Impact of the revision 

Under a Revised 
Regulation (lower 
thresholds17 and 
expanded scope18 + 
analysis and discussion ) 

For 
companies  

For 
Member 
States 

For the 
Commission  

 € 160 000 

€ 350 000 

+ € 190 000 

€ 30 000 

€ 40 000 

+ € 10 000 

€ 61 000 

€ 172 000 

+ € 111 000 

Total 

€ 251 000 

€ 562 000 

€ 311 000 

These costs are however unlikely to be actually 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. Following 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 gas and electricity grid. Administrative costs 
and burden are expected to result mainly from other information obligations laid down by 
other  legal  instruments.  Therefore,  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 and even negligible. It also appears that the 
cost of such a reporting for companies and Member States is more or less equivalent to 
purchasing data from commercial data providers and commissioning studies. Purchasing 
data and commissioning studies therefore cannot be considered as a cheaper option, also 
considering that data from commercial providers is sometimes flawed or incomplete. As 
for the Commission, the cost incurred for this involved analysis of data is comparable to 
the expenses which could be incurred for external consultants. 

5.3. 

SMEs Test 

In  the  energy  landscape,  dominated  by  big  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, enterprises fully involved in this sector 

16 

17 

18 

19 

Rounded figures 
Except for power generation from RES, the impact of lower thresholds on the number of operators is limited.  
New aspects: oil pipelines, storage capacities, RES… 
Within the RES sector, SMEs are rather upstream innovator players than generators/ or downstream producers. 

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
                                                   
are either medium-sized or small and one out of three enterprises has been created after 
2000. However, no comprehensive figures on SMEs in the RES sector at EU level which 
could be concerned by the revised Regulation are available20. 

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) 

(b) 

(c) 

Firstly,  given  that  Member  States  have  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  national  targets.  As  mentioned  above,  no 
additional  burden  for  companies  is  expected  to  result  from  a  revised 
Council Regulation (EC) n°736/96. 

Secondly, in line with the objective of this proposal to get the information 
at minimum costs, it is not considered 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 flexibility to select 
the way data should be collected. The 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. 

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 threshold 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  publicly  available,  which  will  provide  an 
additional  source  of  information  for  SMEs  and  their  investment  projects.  Given 
their  limited  resources/capacities,  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. The 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, from construction to generation, for example. This exceeds by far the scope of the current and possible future Regulation 
which targets investments in new generation capacities 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
                                                   
benefits. In a medium to long term perspective, it is likely that the number of SMEs in 
the RES sector will decrease as a result of the possible consolidation/consolidation trends 
of  this  sector.  This  could  take  place  with  the  possible  evolution  of  support  schemes 
which have been put in place to stimulate the development of RES. 

6. 

SECTION 6 – COMPARING THE OPTIONS 

The comparison of the policy options is based on qualitative terms and on the assessment 
of  administrative  burden.  The  following  table  gives  a  summary  of  the  advantages  and 
disadvantages of each option for a reporting and monitoring tool. 

Policy option 

Advantages 

Disadvantages 

PO 0 

- Use of existing data sources 

(Do nothing 
situation) 

- 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 

28 

   EN 

 
 
from various sources. 

- No analysis possible against 
demand and supply scenarios. 

- Simplification of the 
regulatory framework for 
reporting obligations. 

- Repeal of the only instrument 
providing for a certain cross-
sector view at EU level; 

- Limitation of the compliance 
problem by Member States and 
industry. 

PO 1 

(Repeal of Council 
Regulation (EC) 
No736/96) 

- 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. 

- Possible incompleteness of 
data due to uncertain 
compliance with reporting 
obligations 

PO 2 

(monitoring with 
specific 
complementary 

- Availability of required data 
and proportionality of data; 

- Acceptability of data used 
(commercial, MS and industry 

EN 

29 

   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 incompleteness of 
data due to uncertain 
compliance with reporting 
obligations 

- Possible greater acceptability 
of data used (commercial, MS 
and industry data) 

- Possible limitations of the 
quality of data depending on 
collection methods 

- Integrated framework 
combining reporting and 
monitoring  

- Confidentiality limited to 
commercially sensitive 
information 

- 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 the best option. In this case the best option should allow for 
a  good  reporting  and  monitoring  process  giving  a  global  and  cross-sector  view  of 
investment  trends  to  the  Commission  and  ultimately  to  Member  States  and  economic 
operators  (effectiveness),  with  minimum  negative  impacts  (efficiency).  With  this 
mechanism which should be as simple as possible, they should be in a better position to 
perform  their  respective  tasks  and  to  contribute  to  achieving  EU  policy  objectives 
(energy  security,  mitigation  of  climate  change,  better  regulation,  transparency,  level 
playing  -  field…)  which  should  make  the  burden  /  costs  it  implies  acceptable 
(coherence). 

In the following, the evaluation of the different policy options is based on a qualitative 
grading, on a scale from (-) to (++). 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
A  (++)  grade  is  granted  when  the  policy  option  provides  a  significant  contribution  to 
meeting the objectives. 

A  (+)  grade  is  granted  when  the  policy  option  provides  a  satisfactory  contribution  to 
meeting the objectives. 

A (-) grade is granted when the policy objectives are not achieved or negative impacts 
can be expected. 

Effectiveness 

Efficiency 

Coherence 

(reaching the 
target) 

(reaching the 
target at 
minimum costs) 

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 considered and best reaches the objectives set for the revision of 
Council Regulation (EC) No 736/96: 

–  It provides an integrated and updated framework combining reporting and monitoring 
at  EU  level  which  should  allow  for  a  global  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).  This  can  improve  sense  of 
ownership of the process and improve 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  States  (which  would  not  be  the  case  with 
option 3). 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
 
 
–  Policy options 1 and 3 are unlikely to allow for a global and consistent overview of 
investment  trends  at  EU  level  at  a  minimum  cost.  In  this  context,  there  is  no 
improvement to expect compared to the baseline case (do nothing situation). 

7. 

SECTION 7 – MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The Commission will continuously monitor the impact/interest of the changed legislation 
and of the reporting and monitoring mechanism. More specifically, the Commission will 
observe the following issues: 

–  Number of MS complying with the reporting obligation 

–  Quality, completeness, appropriateness of data collected 

–  Participation  of  stakeholders  and  of  interested  entities  in  the  monitoring  mechanism 

(interest in analytical reports, participation in meetings…) 

–  Number of references made to the monitoring exercise carried out by the Commission 

and use of its results by EU institutions and other interested parties 

Experience  shows  that  the  effects  of  a  change  in  a  regulatory  framework  take  three  to 
five years to materialize. Therefore the Commission proposes to review the application of 
the revised Regulation five years after its entry into force. 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
Annex 1 

Entities consulted by the Commission  
(on top of Member States) 

Name 

Representative of 

Members 

EUROPIA - European 
Petroleum Industry 
Association 

OGP Europe - 
International Association of 
Oil & Gas producers (OGP) 

EUROGAS 

GIE – Gas Infrastructure 
Europe 

Oil refining and marketing 
industry in Europe 

17 international and 
national companies 

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.  

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. 

Gas transmission 
companies, storage system 
operators and LNG terminal 
operators in Europe. 

- 49 upstream companies 

- 14 national and other 
associations 

- 3 associate members 

46 members from 26 
countries out of which 

33 natural gas companies, 
12 federations of natural 
gas companies, and 1 
international organisation 

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 

33 

   EN 

 
ENTSO-E 
European 
/ 
Network  of  Transmission 
System 
for 
Electricity 

Operators 

Transmission 
system 
operators  running  the  high 
voltage  interconnected  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 

- 

European 
- 
EREC 
Renewable Energy Council  

Agency 

EUREC 
- 
Renewable 
European 
Energy  Research  Centres 
Agency  

- 

ERGEG 
Regulators'  Group 
Electricity and Gas". 

European 
for 

Umbrella  organisation  of 
the European coal industry - 
The  association’s  activities 
are  directed  at  the  entire 
coal  chain  beginning  with 
coal  prospection,  access  to 
extraction, 
reserves, 
transport 
marketing 
right 
its 
to 
utilisation at power stations, 
in the steel industry as well 
as in other energy-intensive 
industries.  

and 
through 

Umbrella  organisation  of 
the European 
renewable 
energy  industry,  trade  and 
research  associations  active 
in  the  sectors  of  bioenergy, 
geothermal,  ocean,  small 
solar 
hydropower, 
thermal 
solar 
electricity, 
and wind energy. 

European 
Economic 
Interest  Grouping  in  1991 
to strengthen and rationalise 
research, 
the  European 
and 
demonstration 
development  efforts  in  all 
renewable 
energy 
technologies. 

ERGEG 
is  a  body  of 
independent national energy 
regulatory 
authorities, 
which  was  set  up  by  the 
European  Commission  as 
an  Advisory  Group  to  the 
energy 
Commission 

on 

28  Members 
from  18 
countries  amongst  which 
national 
and 
associations, 
importers 
companies  and 
research 
institutes  

producers 

12 members and 1 associate 
profit 
member 
organisations 
and 
federations) 

(non 

prominent 

from 

43 
groups 
Europe 

research 
over 

all 

27  Members 
regulators) 

(national 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
issues. 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
Annex 2 

Summary of contributions to the targeted consultation of Member States and 
representatives of Industry and energy regulators (+ questionnaire) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

2. 

a) 

b) 

The  Commission  received  34  contributions  (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  contributions  in 
particular for more technical aspects were presented as first views due to the fact 
that  some  developments  of  interest  for  the  issue  under  discussion  have  still  to 
take  place.  This  is  the  case  for  the  monitoring  to  be  carried  out  by  the  future 
ENTSO – Electricity and Gas. 

GENERAL REMARKS (QUESTIONS 1 AND 2) 

In the area of investment, it is widely acknowledged that EU should: 

a) 

Bring transparency on investment, improve the market design and set up a 
stable and attractive regulatory framework for investment. 

b) 

Provide analysis on energy trends and forecasts at EU level 

c)  Make  sure  that  regulating  frameworks  allow  for  necessary  investment  to 
be  made.  For  some  respondents,  EU  should  focus  on  support  to  new 
investments politically, financially and technically. 

For  most  of  the  respondents,  an  appropriate  monitoring  of  investment  projects 
into  infrastructure  in  the  energy  sector  is  seen  as  relevant  and  is  regularly 
considered  as  essential  for  transparency,  policy-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 overview 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 important to make investment and 
on cross-border dimensions. 

According to various submissions, such a monitoring could potentially influence 
investment 
the  direction  of 

to  optimizing 

investment, 

contribute 

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
 
process/decisions and help identify necessary 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  strategic  thinking  on  infrastructure 
and on priorities for investment projects. 

It  could  help  bring  more  consistency  between  the  future  demands 
and the EU policy objectives. 

For respondents, improved timeliness and quality of data on investment would 
contribute  to  better  understanding  the  EU  energy  position,  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  cross-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 
remain  market-
driven/economically-feasible. 

infrastructure 

energy 

has 

to 

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 relation to their antitrust, stock and labour related sensitivities has 
to be reckoned with. 

EN 

37 

   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  respondents  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  decisions  require  detailed  information 
which cannot be provided by a monitoring tool. 

Given  the  existence  of  national  monitoring  resulting  from  EU 
legislative  development21,  an  EU 
legislation  and 
monitoring under Council Regulation N°736/96 would be irrelevant. 

latest 

the 

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 – electricity and gas on the one hand – and oil on the other 
hand where monitoring would be more necessary.  

One  European  association  (ENTSO-E)  underlines  that  a  well  designed 
monitoring system could strengthen information flows and data-sharing. 

d)  Administrative  burden22.  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. 

Some replies underline that the revision 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. 

Under the 3rd internal market package, the new European associations of transmission system operators (ENTSO - Electricity and Gas) will be required to prepare 

and  update  a  10-year  investment  statement  for  gas  and  electricity  at  EU  level  and  publish  annual  summer  and  winter  generation  adequacy  outlook.  The  new 
Directive on Renewable energy sources will also provide relevant information. 
Respondents did not submit specific evidence on the costs/burden potentially induced by reporting obligations stemming from the current legislation. Depending on 
the exact scope of the obligations, administrative costs could be considered as low for some respondents. 

d) 

21 

22 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                   
3. 

a) 

COMMENTS ON MONITORING (QUESTIONS 3 TO 5) 

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 impacts 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 specificities 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  alternative  or  complementary  options:  regional 
dimension  or  cross-border  network  development  plans  or  other  structural 
developments of importance for energy security. 

One Member State reminds that the specificities of some (small) Member States 
should be taken into account.  

One Member State suggests that the monitoring 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  expected  for  investment  and  policy-making  (see 
under point 2), this monitoring could: 

a) 

b) 

Provide an overview of achievements and of the needs and functioning of 
the market. 

Lead to a list of projects of significant interest for energy security or to a 
data base on European energy infrastructure. 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 respondents, 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 conclusions could be a way of increasing 

value added and a sense of ownership to the process. 

Member  States  are  considered  by  some  respondents  best  placed  to  assess 
contributions and to deal with various aspects of the monitoring. 

Industry’s involvement is critical for the 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 

39 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
As for civil society, many consulted parties do not provide clear views on this 
issue.  While it  is generally acknowledged that civil society can contribute to  a 
smooth dissemination of information available and should have the possibility to 
discuss  issues  to  a  certain  extent,  3  Member  States  clearly  reject  the  possible 
involvement  of  civil  society.  For  these  Member  States,  this  monitoring  should 
not be turned into a second Environmental Impact Assessment. 

For  one  Member  State,  neither  industry  nor  civil  society  should  be  part  of  the 
monitoring. 

The  role  of  the  Commission  as  a  facilitator  and  for  analysis  is  recalled.  The 
Commission  is  urged  by  some  Member  States  to  establish  strong  links  with 
actors.  It  is  regularly  put  forward  that  ENTSO  and  ACER  (future  Agency  for 
regulators) should have a crucial role to play in monitoring and in coordinating 
projects.  For  the  representative  of  energy  regulators,  the  monitoring  should  be 
assigned to ACER. 

4. 

COMMENTS ON REPORTING (QUESTIONS 6 TO 9) 

Consulted  parties  are  strongly  in  favour  of  a  simple  and  pragmatic  approach. 
Reporting  obligations  should  not  be  duplicated  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  petroleum  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 the 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 considered that these 
decisions are purely private matters and should not be reported. 

d)  Obstacles to projects: reporting is seen as a positive development or as a 
possibility  by  several  Member  States.  For  a  few  respondents,  this 
information  is  not  relevant  for  the  monitoring  or  is  a  private  matter. 
Incorporation is also conditioned upon the existence of EC specific powers 
to resolve the issues. 

e) 

Partners  or  amount  of  investment:  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 

40 

   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  several  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  should  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 reflect 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 “expected” 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 planning consent could be used as a starting 
point  for  several  respondents,  subject  to  a  clear  definition  of  what  “planning 
consent” is. This would avoid confidentiality 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. 

On  time  horizon  (projects  for  which  work  is  scheduled  to  start  within…)  for 
notification: replies are equally divided into three categories: 3 years, five years 
and  no  target  date.  It  is  generally  underlined  that  the  relevant  time  horizon 
depends on the infrastructure concerned. 

On  frequency  of  the  reporting.  An  obligation  every  two  years  (instead  of  an 
annual one) is slightly preferred: 

a) 

Projects  concerned  are  big  and  such  a  frequency  would  reduce 
administrative burden. 

e) 

f) 

EN 

41 

   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 least an annual one. For one respondent, a more frequent 
reporting  could  be  accepted  for  projects  with  an  accelerated  implementation  if 
participants agree. One respondent suggests that the reporting should take place 
every third year, which could compensate an increased level reporting. 

For  respondents,  industry  should  report  to  Member  States,  subject  to  one 
suggestion, according to which EU multinationals operating in several Member 
States could notify directly to the Commission. 

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  separate  agreement  with 
industry. 

g) 

h) 

**** 

Questionnaire 

A – General questions 

1. 

2. 

What do you expect from EU institutions in the investment area? 

How could a monitoring system help investment decisions and implementation? 

B - Questions relating to monitoring 

3. 

4. 

5. 

What type of monitoring would be relevant for industry/investors: a horizontal / 
global or sector-specific monitoring? 

What should be the results and follow-up of such a monitoring, from an industry 
point of view? 

Would  it  be  necessary  to  involve  industry,  Member  States,  civil  society  in  the 
monitoring? How should they be involved? 

C - Questions relating to reporting 

6. 

What  information  should  be  reported  /  collected  to  be  of  interest  for  industry/ 
investors? 

a) 

Should sectors other than oil, gas, electricity (CCGT, hydro, solar, wind, 
etc) be covered? 

b) 

In your area, what infrastructures should be monitored? 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
 
c)  What  would  be  a  project  of  European  interest  from  your  perspective? 

What thresholds for infrastructures should be set? 

d) 

e) 

f) 

g) 

Should new technologies or equipments (CCS, switching systems, reverse 
flows installations…etc) be covered? 

Should information on partners in the projects / amounts of the investment 
projects be notified? 

Should concrete obstacles to projects implementation be reported? 

Should non-financial decisions with an impact on infrastructure (e.g. life-
time extension, decommissioning…etc) be encompassed? 

h) 

For investment monitoring, what are the most relevant categories: 

- 

projects, 

of 
Planned 
(de)commissioning…etc?  Should  the  planning  consent  be  the  stage 
when notification should start? 

construction, 

under 

date 

-  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. 

8. 

9. 

How frequently should information be reported, once a year, every two years? 

Should  industry  be  involved  in  the  reporting?  What  alternative  could  be 
envisaged? What administrative costs or burden would imply a reporting of the 
type laid down by the current regulation? 

Should forwarded information be treated as confidential? To what extent could 
information be disclosed? 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
Annex 3 – Overview of the notification obligations resulting from EU legislation in relation to investment/infrastructure 

Which infrastructure/ 

Which obligation? 

Who notifies? 

When? 

How?  

Confidentiality? 

Action by Commission 

investment? 

A1. Directive No 2003/55 of the European Parliament and of the Council common rules for the internal market in natural gas 

 I - Existing legislation 

A- GAS 

 Article 4 

“Natural 
facilities” 

- Article 5 

Member  States  or 
delegated entities 

NA 

gas 

information 

For 
- 
Reasons for refusal to 
authorisation 
grant 
for  construction  or 
operation  of  natural 
gas facilities 

Article  31  –  Annual 
Report  to  the  European 
Parliament  and  Council  , 
including  examination  of 
to 
issues 
the 
relating 
system 
capacity 
levels…physical  capacity 
for 
and 
exchanges 
development of storage 

- 

Capacity 
“Envisaged 
additional 
being 
under construction” 

planned 

capacity 
or 

For  SoS  purposes  - 
Monitoring  by  MS 
and  reporting  to  the 
Commission 

For  control  of  access 

Annual  

National 
report 
Annual 
outlining 
the 
findings  -  to  be 
forwarded 
to 
the Commission 

EN 

44 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
of 
-  Notification 
exemption decision to 
access rules 

- Article 22 

a)  Major  new  gas 
infrastructures  –  i.e. 
interconnectors 
between  MS,  LNG 
and storage facilities 

Exemption possible in 
particular  if  the  level 
of  risks  attached  to 
the investment is such 
that 
investment 
would  not  take  place 
unless  an  exemption 
was granted 

the 

b) 
Existing 
infrastructure  with 
increased 
significant 
capacity 
and 
modifications  to  such 
infrastructure  which 
the 
enable 
development  of  new 
sources of gas supply 

Without  delay 
after  adoption 
of 
the 
decision 

Confidentialit
of 
y 
commercially 
sensitive 
information 

Decision  with 
relevant 
all 
information 
including  share 
of 
total 
the 
capacity  of  the 
infrastructure 
for 
exemption 
granted; 
contribution  of 
the 
infrastructure  to 
the 
diversification 
of gas supply 

which 
is 

A2. Council Directive 2004/67 concerning measures to safeguard security of natural gas supplies 

- Levels of storage  

In the report pursuant 
of 
to  Article 

5 

MS 

Monitoring  on  the  basis 
of  the  reports  referred  to 

EN 

45 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Directive 2003/55 

in Article 5 

A3. Decision No 1364/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down guidelines for trans- European energy networks 

- Article 2 

- Article 8 

MS 

Upon request 

Withdrawal  capacity  of 
gas storage 

- level of interconnection 
of  national  gas  systems 
of MS 

-  High  pressure  gas 
pipelines 

Underground 
- 
facilities 
storage 
to  High 
connected 
pressure gas pipelines 

-  reception,  storage 
regasification 
and 
for  LNG 
facilities 
and 
LNG 
carriers 

also 

* For each projects of 
European 
interest, 
regular  exchange  of 
relevant information; 

*MS  to  communicate 
for 
reasons 
(significant 
or 
prospective) delay for 
a project of European 
interest 

EN 

46 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
- Article 9  

Every 
years, 
two 
Commission  in  close 
collaboration with the 
committee 
(comitology) 
to 
present  a  report  on 
the 
of 
progress 
projects  of  European 
interest23, 24 

B1. Directive No 2003/54 of the European Parliament and of the Council common rules for the internal market in electricity 

B - ELECTRICITY 

- Article 4  

- 

Capacity 
“Envisaged 
additional 
being 
under construction” 

planned 

capacity 
or 

For  SoS  purposes  - 
Monitoring  by  MS 
and  reporting  to  the 
Commission 

Member  States  or 
delegated entities 

Every 
year  

two 

National 
Annual 
report 
outlining the 
findings  -  to 
be 
forwarded 
to 

the 

1(c) 

– 
28 
Article 
Monitoring and reporting 
of  the  implementation  of 
the  Directive  –  Annual 
report  covering  at  least 
an  examination  of  issues 
relating 
system 
to 
capacity levels… 

23 

24 

*projects of European interest = on the axis of priority projects and which are of cross-border nature or have a significant impact on cross-border transmission capacity. 
(Info -envisaged passage of the project through the planning approval phase; timetable for the feasibility and design phase; construction of the project; entry into service of the project) - No info on capacity 

EN 

47 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
B2. Directive 2005/89 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning measures to safeguard security of electricity supply and 
infrastructure investment 

Commission

- Article 7 

For SoS purpose - 

*cross-border 
interconnection 
capacity 

In the report pursuant 
to  Article 
of 
Directive 2003/54 

4 

MS  or  competent 
authorities 
in 
close  cooperation 
with TSOs 

Every 
year  

two 

*taking  into  account 
existing  and  planned 
lines 
transmission 
(internal 
that 
materially  affect  the 
provision  of  cross-
border 
interconnection) 

lines 

for 

year, 

investment 
- 
intentions 
the 
next  five  or  more 
calendar 
of 
TSOs  and  those  of 
any  other  party  of 
which they are aware, 
the 
regards 
as 
provision  of  cross-
border 
interconnection 
capacities; 

-  TSO  and  any 
party 
other 
required 
to 
provide  MS  with 
information 

Non-disclosure  of 
confidential 
information 

National 
Annual 
report 
outlining the 
findings  -  to 
be 
forwarded 
to 
the 
Commission

of 

Article  7(5)  –  On  the 
basis 
information 
received  from  competent 
authorities,  Commission 
to  MS, 
to 
authorities, 
competent 
the 
on 
ERGEG, 
investments  planned  and 
their contribution to SoS 

report 

-  investments  related 
the  building  of 
to 
that 
lines 
internal 
materially  affect  the 
provision  of  cross-
border 

EN 

48 

EN 

 
  
 
interconnection 

B3. Decision No 1364/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down guidelines for trans- European energy networks 

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) 

- Article 2 

- Article 8 

On MS 

Upon request 

Electricity networks:  

-  all  high  voltage 
lines, excluding those 
distribution 
of 
to 
,  and 
networks 
links 
submarine 
provided 
this 
infrastructure  is  used 
interregional  or 
for 
international 
transmission 
connection; 

or 

-  any  equipment  or 
installations  essential 
to 
the  system 
for 
operate 
properly 
(including  protection, 
monitoring 
and 
control systems)  

For  each  projects  of 
interest, 
European 
regular  exchange  of 
relevant information; 

- Article 8 

MS  to  communicate 
reasons 
for 
or 
(significant 
prospective) delay for 
a project of European 
interest 

- Article 9  

years, 
two 
Every 
Commission  in  close 
collaboration with the 
committee 
to 
(comitology) 
present  a  report  on 
the 
of 
progress 
projects  of  European 

EN 

49 

EN 

 
  
 
 
interest 

B4. Regulation No 1228/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on conditions for access to the network for cross-border 
exchanges in electricity 

Article 7 – 

New  interconnectors 
(exemption …level of 
risks  attached  to  the 
investment 
is  such 
investment 
that 
would  not  take  place 
unless  an  exemption 
is granted) 

the 

Article 10 -  

Networks 
/infrastructure 
general  

in 

Article  7  –  For 
exemption  purposes 
(congestion 
management…) 

Article 7 – MS or 
competent 
authorities 

Article  7 
Automatic 
notification 

- 

7 

Article 
- 
Confidentiality  of 
commercially 
sensitive 
information 

the 
Notification  of 
exemption 
decision 
and  of  all  relevant 
information  relevant 
to that decision 

Article 10 – For inter 
transmission 
compensation 

Information  on  costs 
(…)  Costs  of 
the 
networks and costs of 
hosting  cross-border 
flows 
on 
…investment  in  new 

based 

Article 10 – 

Upon request 

Article  10  –  MS 
competent 
or 
authorities  – 
in 
exceptional  case, 
undertaking 
the 
(as last option) 

Decision  on  amounts  to 
be paid for compensation 
purposes 

Guidelines  on  cross  -
border compensation  

Article 10 –  

Information 
collected 
to  be 
used  only  for  the 
specific  purposes 
of this Regulation 

Commission  shall 
not 
disclose 
information 
acquired  pursuant 

EN 

50 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
infrastructure 

to  this  Regulation 
if 
by 
covered 
professional 
secrecy. 

C.1 Directive 94/22 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions for granting and using authorizations for the 
prospection exploration and production of hydrocarbons 

C – Oil/Gas (Hydrocarbons) 

Article 9 

Information 
activities 
prospection, 
exploration 
production 
hydrocarbons  

on 
of 

and 
of 

Article  9  –  For  SoS 
reasons 

MS 

Annually 

Annual 
report 

information 

- 
geographical 
opened 
prospecting, 
exploration 
production 

on 
areas 
for 

and 

authorizations 

- 
granted 

entities 

- 
holding 
authorizations and the 
composition thereof 

D1. Council Regulation No 2857/1999 defining the investment projects to be communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 

D - Nuclear 

EN 

51 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
41 of the Euratom Treaty 

- Article 1 

as 

and 

New installations and 
of 
replacements  or 
conversion 
(transformation, 
modernisation) 
their 
decommissioning  as 
activities 
well 
across  the  entire  fuel 
cycle  in  a  series  of 
activities 
industrial 
when  such  projects 
are 
sufficiently 
extensive  (i.e  above 
thresholds 
certain 
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 
the 
Annex 
Regulation. 

to 

and 

Communication  shall 
be 
include 
limited  to  the  details 
required  (Article  43 
including: 
Euratom) 
investment; 
type  of 
amount; 
length  of 
time  to  be  required; 
prospects  as  regards 
supply  and  operation 
of 
installation 
the 
(Article 3). 

Voluntary 
of 
notifications 
projects 
investment 
for  decommissioning 
new 
and 
for 
installations 
for 
reactors  of 
nuclear 

in 

or 

Persons 
undertakings 
engaged 
industrial 
activities 
falling 
within  the  scope 
of  the  Regulation 
(Annex 
II 
Euratom Treaty). 

The  Commission 
the 
may  with 
consent  of 
the 
Member  States, 
persons 
and 
undertakings 
concerned  public 
any 
investment 
projects 
communicated  to 
it 
44 
(Art. 
Euratom Treaty) 

The  Commission  shall 
discuss  with  the  persons 
all 
or 
undertakings 
aspects  of 
investment 
projects which are related 
to  the  objectives  of  the 
Euratom  Treaty.  It  shall 
communicate 
its  view 
with  the  Member  State 
(Art.43 
concerned 
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 
the 
before 
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 
characteristi
cs 
(Article 
1). 

– 

For 
voluntary 
notification, 
simple 
declaration 
giving 
essential 
characteristi
(Article 
cs 

the 

EN 

52 

EN 

 
  
1) 

any  type  and  for  any 
purpose  and  projects 
concerning 
the 
replacement, 
transformation, 
modernisation 
or 
power 
increase  of 
installation 
such 
when costs are below 
the cost thresholds set 
up in the Annex. 

E1. Council Directive 2008/11/EC on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need 
to improve their protection (transposition 1/1/2011) 

E – Critical infrastructures 

Annex I  

- Article 4(4) 

On MS 

-  Infrastructures  and 
for 
facilities 
and 
generation 
of 
transmission 
electricity 

-  Oil 
refining, 
and 
pipelines 

production, 
treatment 
transmission 

the 
Information  of 
Commission  of 
the 
number of designated 
ECIs 

- Article 7(2) 

Report  on  the  types 
of  risks,  threats  and 
vulnerabilities 
encountered  per  ECI 

EN 

-  Article  4  – 
every year 

Report 

Yes 

Commission  and  MS  to 
further 
assess  whether 
measures are necessary 

- Article 7(2)- 

Every 
years 

two 

53 

EN 

 
  
 
sectors 

-  Gas  production, 
treatment, 
refining, 
storage 
and 
by 
transmission 
pipelines  and  LNG 
terminals 

F – Energy statistics 

F1. Regulation n° 1099/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on energy statistics 

MS 

Transmission  of  data 
on installed capacities 
and 
energy 
consumption 

Annual 
notification 

Possibility 
of 
confidentiality – a 
not 
priori 
to 
applicable 
these data 

Production 
and 
dissemination  of  data  by 
31  January  of  year  n+2 
reported 
the 
following 
period 

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 

F.1 Directive 2004/8 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of co-generation based on a useful heat demand and 
in the internal energy market 

G. COGENERATION 

EN 

54 

EN 

 
  
 
 
10 

Article 
cogeneration 
capacities  an 
used 
generation  

for 

– 

fuels 
co-

Article 
Reporting obligation 

10 

– 

MS  

Annual basis 

No 

- statistics 

G. CO2 infrastructure 

on 

Article  11  –  Progress 
the 
report 
implementation  of 
the 
Directive  to  the  Council 
and EP ever 4 years 

G1. Directive 2009/31/EC on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Directives 85/337, 96/61, 2000/60, 2001/80, 2004/35, 
2006/12 

Article 10 – review of 
draft  storage  permits 
+  notification  of  the 
final Decision 

Articles  10  and 
18  –  MS  or 
competent 
authorities 

Articles 
and 18 –  

10 

Articles  10  and  18  - 
Opinion 
the 
Commission 

by 

Article  2  -Geological 
Storage  sites  in  the 
territory  of  Member 
those 
(not 
States 
undertaken  for  RTD 
with  a  total  intended 
storage < 100Kt) 

18 

(and 

Article 
– 
Transmission  of  a 
all 
report 
relevant  information) 
/ 
+  draft  decision 
on 
final 
transfer 
of 
responsibility  in  case 
a 
of 

decision 

closure 

of 

EN 

55 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
storage site 

Article 27 –  

Article 27 - S 

on 

Report 
the 
implementation of the 
Directive 
+ 
permanent  register  of 
all 
storage 
sites  and  surrounding 
storages complexes 

closed 

Article  27  – 
Every 
three 
years 

Article 27 - Report 

H1. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewables sources 

H. Renewables 

(Possibly) 
of 
development 
and 
infrastructure 
generation  in  relation 
to RES 

For monitoring of the 
achievement  of  RES 
targets  

MS 

Article 22- 

National action plans  

Every 
years 

two 

No  except  if  MS 
request 
for 
certain 
information 

it 

Article 23 – Reporting by 
the  Commission  to  EP  + 
Council 

EN 

56 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
II - Future legislation 

A. European Recovery Action Plan 

(Proposal  for  a…)  Regulation  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  establishing  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 

on 
Information 
to 
actions  related 
in 
projects 
listed 
be 
Annex  may 
obtained in the course 
of 
for 
proposals 

calls 

the 

Information  on  the 
evolution  of  actions 
related 
to  projects 
once  selected  for  EC 
financial assistance 

No obligation  

Promoters 
projects 

of 

In  the  course 
of  the  call  for 
proposals  and 
the 
during 
implementatio
n 
and 
evaluation  of 
selected 
projects 

25 

all high-voltage lines, excluding those of distribution networks, and submarine links, provided that this infrastructure is used for interregional or international transmission or connection; high-pressure gas pipelines; underground storage facilities connected to the high-pressure gas pipelines; 
reception, storage and regasification facilities for liquefied natural gas (LNG); any equipment or installations essential for the system in question to operate properly, including protection, monitoring and control systems  

EN 

57 

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. 
refineries  

Petroleum 

1.1.1 Crude input 

1.1.2 Cat cracking 

1.1.3 Hydro 
cracking 

1.1.4 
Desulphurisation 

1.2. Oil pipelines 

1.2.1 Condensate 

1.2.2 Crude 

1.2.3 Products 

1.4. Oil storage 

85 

50 

35 

? 

75 

10 

65 

15 

2.1. 
(TSO) 

Transport 

65 

2.2. LNG 

15 

70 (> 1000 kt/y) 

75 (> 500 kt/d) 

45 (> 500 t/d) 

30 (> 500 t/d) 

65 (> 2000kt/d) 

45 ([> 500 and < 2000 
t/d]) 

45 (> 2000 t/d) 

25 (> 1000 t/d) 

- 

-  

-  

-  

-  

50  

15 

2. Gas 

75 

65  

15 

26 

Bold and italicised items are not covered by the current Regulation. They have been introduced in this table to have a picture of the sector in case the current Regulation 
would be expanded to cover them. 

EN 

58 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                   
2.3. Storage 

2.3.1 Underground 

2.3.2 Above ground 

65 

55 

15 

50 (> 150 Millions m³) 

50 (> 150 Millions m³) 

45 (> 150 Millions m³) 

45 (> 150 Millions m³) 

5 (> 150 Millions m³) 

5 (> 150 Millions m³) 

3.1 Production (All) 

900 

240 (>200Mw) 

3. Electricity 

3.1.1 Thermal 

620 

200 (> 200 Mw) 

550 (with application 
of specific thresholds: 
100 Mw for thermal, 
30 Mw hydro and 10 
for RES)  

360 (> 50 Mw) 
270 (>100 Mw) 

(conventional + 
Nuclear) 

3.1.2 Hydro 

3.1.3. RES (All)  

3.2. Transport 

4.1. Transport 

4.2. Storage 

5.1. Production  

90 

500 

45 

- 

- 

70 (> 50 Mw) 

80 (> 30 Mw)  

-  

35 (International 
connections) 

4. CO2 

- 

- 

- 

5. Biofuels 

400 (> 10 Mw) 

45 (all infrastructure)  

90 

Source: Includes data supplied by Petroconsultants S.A., Copyright (2009) Petroconsultants 
S.A.; various. 

EN 

59 

   EN