S.2.9. Projects of Common Interest

D.2.9. Projects of Common Interest

Go back

ACER has published two Opinions on the electricity and gas draft list of PCIs

Monday, September 30, 2019


ACER has published two Opinions on the electricity and gas draft list of Projects of Common Interest, and a decision on the period for reaching an agreement on the Proposal for the Methodology for the Coordination and the Cost Sharing of Redispatching and Countertrading.

In its documents, ACER assesses the consistent application of criteria, cost-benefit analysis methodology and cross-border relevance of projects across regions, according to the EU Regulation on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure (Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 – TEN-E). The Opinions on electricity and gas draft PCI list also include the view of National Regulatory Authorities on specific candidate projects and provide further recommendations for future PCI selection processes.

In the Opinion No 18/2019 on the draft regional lists of proposed electricity PCIs, ACER was not able to confirm the consistent application of the criteria of TEN-E Regulation and of the cost-benefit analysis to all the candidate projects. ACER underlines that “the regional groups (RGs) should work on improving the transparency of the process and the methodologies used in the ongoing and future PCI selection processes taking into account ACER’s recommendations included in this Opinion”.

In the Opinion No 19/2019 on the draft regional lists of proposed gas PCIs 2019, ACER notes the considerable improvements demonstrated in the preparation of the draft EU PCI list in terms of the procedure and the involvement of stakeholders, methodologies and methods for ranking used. However, ACER noted a number of shortcomings that will include many issues, as a lack of ability to monetise all benefits, to consider the long-term merits of some projects, a lack of full transparency of needs and project assessment methodologies; a non-replicability of the results of the application of the methodologies; a risk of a discretionary setting of thresholds which projects must meet in order to be selected for the draft PCI list; and finally the risk to not apply the assessment methodology in the same manner to all PCI candidates. Considering these issues, ACER strongly recommends taking immediate further steps leading to the remedy of the identified shortcomings, in particular in view of the fact that the duration of the project life cycle from inception to decommissioning typically exceeds decades.