A European Commission proposal to improve security of gas supplies following last year's price dispute between Russia and Ukraine has inspired 614 amendments from members of the European Parliament.
The Parliament has spent six month improving the Commission's proposal for a regulation on measures to safeguard security of gas supply, its rapporteur Alejo Vidal-Quadras (European People's Party; Spain) told journalists on Tuesday (16 March).
The Spanish centre-right MEP said he was not surprised by the high number of amendments, because the proposal was of "high political sensitivity" despite its technical nature.
The draft regulation is largely seen as non-controversial and is expected to pass a committee vote later today (18 March).
Indeed, the text does not deal with big infrastructure projects such as the planned Nabucco pipeline or with ambitions for a more streamlined European energy policy under the Lisbon Treaty. Its main objective is to improve coordination in case of supply disruptions, with the European Commission playing a leading role (see 'Background').
Vidal-Quadras said the numerous amendments had been re-grouped into 18 proposals in order to simplify the vote, adding that he expected the outcome to produce a better text than the initial proposal.
In particular, the Spanish MEP highlighted an agreement to install capabilities for reversing flows at gas pipeline 'interconnectors' (the so-called 'N-1 standard'), which would be put in place at key nodes in the network. The standard is intended to prevent infrastructure failure in a given country from disrupting others by allowing flows to be reversed where needed.
Countries would also be obliged to maintain sufficient storage capacity to ensure normal supply even in the coldest winters. An early-warning system at EU level would also be activated automatically as soon as 20% or more of the normal supplies are lost.
Vidal-Quadras also welcomed the new definition of households as "protected customers".
Asked by EurActiv if households in Eastern Europe would also be protected, as the majority of accommodation in those countries relies on district heating, the Spanish MEP gave assurances that this had been taken into account.
He also admitted that for some countries, such as Bulgaria and Slovakia, the N-1 standard could not apply, as they were too dependent on a single gas supply source.
No 'public suicide'
Answering a question about the cost of the technical improvements stemming from the new regulation, Vidal-Quadras said he realised the figure would be "in the billions".
Asked which EU member states were reluctant to share their gas reserves in times of crisis, Vidal-Quadras declined to answer, saying he would not like to "commit suicide in public".
A French expert recently cited Italy in such a context, explaining that a decree issued by the Italian government stipulated that any gas operator on its territory must divert all its imports to supplying the country at times of need.
Gazprom controversy
The rapporteur was also urged to clarify whether the reversal of gas flow obligations would also apply to pipelines operated by Russian gas monopoly Gazprom.
"Yes, any operator on EU soil should comply," Vidal-Quadras replied.
However, this opinion appeared to be challenged by shadow rapporteur Konrad Szymański MEP (European Conservatives and Reformists; Poland), who stressed that some countries had signed contracts with Gazprom containing clauses that explicitly prohibit re-exporting. He added that he was personally against such clauses and that they should be made illegal under EU law.
Szymański also blasted the standard for declaring an emergency at EU level, which has been set at a 20% loss of normal supplies. If this standard had been in place during the January 2009 crisis, no emergency would have been declared, he claimed, advocating a 10% threshold instead.