When the National Energy System Operator (NESO) announced a new pipeline of deliverable energy projects at the end of last year, it was the next step in a massive overhaul of the grid connection process. Matthew Ling, business development director at Leep Utilities, talks about the new reality for anyone involved in extra-high voltage projects.
The biggest change to grid connection in decades
NESO’s shift from a first‑come, first‑served model to a first‑ready and needed, first‑connected approach represents the most significant overhaul of the grid connection process in years.
The need for reform was clear: capacity hoggers with no genuine projects would secure a 100 MVA connection, then attempt to sell it on at inflated values. These companies would often lack the knowledge and expertise of more experienced partners, for example trying to sell export‑only connections as import connections. This was leaving legitimate developments, with planning permission, funding, and construction teams ready to mobilise, stuck waiting years for grid capacity.
Under NESO’s new gated approach, you can’t simply park an application and hope for the best. Gate 1 is a point where organisations are expected to deliver preliminary evidence of project viability. Gate 2 – the critical milestone for receiving a firm connection offer – has multiple pre-conditions, including planning consent and detailed design works. If you can’t demonstrate readiness at each stage, you don’t progress through the pipeline or get allocated an availability timeslot.
A positive change – but challenges remain
NESO’s reforms are fundamentally positive. They create a level playing field where serious projects rise to the top based on deliverability rather than application date. For developers with genuine, shovel‑ready schemes, it means conversations about grid connections are now with other credible market participants rather than operators hoping to cash in.
However, challenges do remain for developers. Demonstrating readiness for a Gate 2 offer isn’t straightforward, particularly for EHV projects where complexity escalates exponentially compared to standard connections. These developments require 132kV or higher connections, often involving primary substations, whether it’s to serve thousands of homes, major industrial facilities, battery energy storage systems (BESS) or power‑hungry data centres. These aren’t plug‑and‑play scenarios.
By the time a developer approaches Gate 2, they need answers to a myriad of questions that can take months to resolve: Where will the connection point be? What route will the cables take? How will we manage the engineering challenges of installing high‑voltage infrastructure in constrained environments? What plant and equipment specifications will satisfy both the future adoption requirements and the project’s operational needs?
Consider the infrastructure requirements alone. A data centre needing resilient power typically requires diverse supply routes: two separate cable feeds either from different directions or at a minimum on opposite sides of the road. When you’re bringing 132kV cables from potentially several miles away, these pathway challenges multiply. You’re negotiating easements across multiple landowners, navigating congested underground corridors filled with existing utilities, and working with independent connection providers to ensure adoptable standards throughout.
Then there’s the equipment itself. Not many organisations routinely work with 132/33kV transformers, it’s a significantly different way of working compared to the 33kV infrastructure many contractors handle. Projects need specific engineering teams who are experienced in the safety protocols, engineering, testing and commissioning procedures required for this scale of work before.
Early engagement is more important than ever
Finding the answer to connection questions when you’re already at Gate 1 and racing towards Gate 2 deadlines is too late. The projects that are going to succeed in this new regime are those where power infrastructure planning is defined up front, at master planning stage. Before architects have finalised building layouts, before site boundaries are fixed, before the project becomes constrained by decisions made without considering how electricity will actually be delivered. It’s about identifying where primary substations need to sit – and how this critical infrastructure can be accommodated within a space restricted site – as well as how cables will route through developments, and what the realistic programme looks like for energisation.
For data centres specifically, this early planning is even more crucial, with NESO and Ofgem having signalled that further reforms are coming. The sector is targeting 20% growth over the next five years, with data centre expansion zones being established across the country. But these applications will still need planning consent in place, detailed designs completed, and clear evidence of funding and delivery capability.
In this challenging, fast changing environment, organisations are increasingly turning to EHV-experienced IDNOs. It’s already well known that an IDNO is able to offer asset values that an incumbent cannot at the time of adoption. But IDNOs are also able to offer greater flexibility around many of the factors that are important for EHV projects, including plant specifications. DNOs have to work strictly to their approved equipment lists (G81 lists) which are essentially a catalogue of what they’ll accept on their networks. If your preferred transformer isn’t on the list, the incumbent DNO’s answer is simply no.
At Leep, we start with G81 as our baseline because it represents proven, adoptable equipment. But it’s not the end of the line for us. If your supply chain has equipment available that’s G81‑approved in one region but you’re building in another, we can potentially use it, rather than forcing you to wait months for DNO‑preferred alternatives. In a world where demonstrating delivery capability determines whether you secure your connection date, programme flexibility translates directly into commercial advantage.
The same applies to project delivery. IDNOs that aren’t tied to a single contracting arm, who can work with multiple contractors suited to different elements of the work, ensures that if one contractor encounters problems, it doesn’t derail the entire programme. For our clients, it means an additional layer of oversight ensuring every element meets adoptable standards, rather than hoping a single contractor gets everything right.
A bright future
Reform is making the GB connections process fairer and more efficient. For serious developers with genuine projects, that’s unambiguously good news. But developers must treat grid connections as the complex, critical infrastructure challenge they truly are, rather than an administrative box to tick somewhere down the line.
For businesses looking to deliver successful EHV projects, the message is clear: demonstrating readiness is now the price of entry. That means engaging with connection specialists early, understanding the Gate 1 and Gate 2 requirements thoroughly, and building delivery teams with proven EHV experience. The era of securing a connection as a speculative asset is over. The opportunity now belongs to those who can show up at Gate 2 with all of the necessary components, including a credible plan to energise on schedule.
For those of us working daily with data centres, battery storage facilities, manufacturing plants, and large‑scale master developments requiring primary substations, this isn’t abstract policy. It’s the new reality shaping every conversation we have with clients about delivery of their power infrastructure.
Link to the article in E&T magazine: https://eandt.theiet.org/2026/02/26/industry-insight-why-new-grid-connection-rules-favour-ready-build-energy-projects
Find out more about our EHV solutions: EHV – Leep Utilities – Network adoptions done right