The Great Britain electricity connections queue after Connections Reform, with the Gate 2 outcomes of April 2026

Where connections reform stands in May 2026

The Gate 2 detailed results published by NESO in April 2026 are the first end-to-end picture of what the reformed queue looks like.¹³ Across generation and storage, 283 gigawatts have been progressed to firm offers; across demand connections, 99 gigawatts. The portfolio is sorted into two phases. Phase 1 covers the projects that NESO and Ofgem judge are needed and capable of energising by 2030 to meet the Clean Power 2030 target. Phase 2 covers projects that are needed but on a 2035 horizon. Offer-issuance windows run from March 2026 through to November 2026, in sequenced tranches by technology and connection voltage. The next application window opens in the second half of 2026; the precise dates are still being finalised through the open-governance process under the CUSC and DCUSA modification panels.

Behind those headline numbers sits a regime that did not exist eighteen months ago. The Ofgem Connections Reform decision of April 2025 approved the package that retired the legacy first come, first served model.⁷ NESO then published three methodologies in close succession. The Connections Network Design Methodology (CNDM, 30 April 2025) defines how the network is designed against a firm pipeline rather than against a speculative backlog. The Gate 2 Criteria Methodology (G2CM) sets the eight tests a project has to meet to receive a firm Gate 2 position. The Gate 2 to Whole Queue process spells out how legacy projects without Gate 2 status are handled, including the orderly withdrawal of offers that no longer fit the strategic network plan. The reform sits on top of the duty to offer terms in section 16 of the Electricity Act 1989, and the queue-management duty that NESO inherited from the former ESO under Part 5 of the Energy Act 2023.¹¹

What changed in practice. A project that lodged a CUSC application in 2022 used to receive an indicative connection date based on its position in the contracted-queue order, often a year in the late 2030s. A project lodging in May 2026 lands in a structured assessment against the eight criteria, with a firm Phase 1 date if it qualifies and a firm Phase 2 date if it is needed on the longer horizon. Projects that lodged before the reform and did not progress through the Gate 2 to Whole Queue assessment have been moved to a withdrawal track, freeing the entry capacity their offers had locked up against the network model. The Centralised Strategic Network Plan methodology approved by Ofgem in April 2026 then drives the network build-out that those Phase 1 and Phase 2 connections need, on a three-year cycle that replaces the older Network Options Assessment.¹² The Capacity Market T-4 auction in February 2026 cleared 40.1 gigawatts for delivery 2029/30 against a 39.4 gigawatt target, which gives the connections queue a parallel revenue anchor for the projects that need it.⁸ The LTDS Stage 2 publication on 29 May 2026, under the Ofgem derogation letter of 13 May 2026, is the network model the queue is now being designed against; the visibility of the constraints under voltage rise and thermal headroom is the most current it has ever been.¹

The reform chain from April 2025 to April 2026

The reform package is a chain of instruments, not a single document. The chain starts with the Ofgem Connections Reform decision letter of April 2025, which approved the policy direction and authorised NESO to publish the methodologies that operationalise it.⁷ The decision sits under the Electricity Act 1989 section 6 licence regime (transmission, distribution, generation, supply) and the queue-management duty transferred to NESO under Part 5 of the Energy Act 2023.¹¹ The decision did not amend the section 16 duty to offer terms; what it changed is the rules NESO follows in framing the offer.

The Connections Network Design Methodology (30 April 2025)

The CNDM is the spatial and engineering document of the reform package. It defines how NESO designs the network against a firm pipeline rather than against the whole contracted queue. It introduces zonal capacity envelopes aligned to the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP) methodology of May 2025 and to the Centralised Strategic Network Plan, the methodology for which was approved by Ofgem in April 2026.¹² A project lodging an application after 30 April 2025 is placed against the CNDM zonal map and the resulting capacity envelope, not against the older first come, first served order. Section 18 of the CNDM names the eight criteria a project has to meet to qualify for Gate 2 status; those criteria are set out in detail in the dedicated Gate 2 Criteria Methodology and are reproduced in the section below.

The Gate 2 Criteria Methodology (G2CM)

The G2CM is the procedural document. It defines the assessment process NESO follows when sorting an application against the eight criteria, the evidence the applicant has to provide for each criterion, and the score weighting and pass thresholds. The G2CM also sets the cadence of application windows and the firm-offer issuance windows that follow. The first issuance window under the reformed regime opened in March 2026 and runs through to November 2026, with batches sequenced by technology and connection voltage. The G2CM is the document a developer working on a new application reads first; it tells them what evidence the team needs to assemble and on what schedule.

The Gate 2 to Whole Queue process

The Gate 2 to Whole Queue process handles the legacy. By Q4 2024 the contracted transmission queue had reached approximately 722 gigawatts. The Gate 2 to Whole Queue process applies the same eight criteria to projects that lodged applications before April 2025, identifying which legacy projects qualify for Phase 1 or Phase 2 Gate 2 status and which are retired through an orderly withdrawal of the offer. The retired projects free up the entry capacity their offers had locked up, which is the mechanism that brought the post-reform queue down from 722 gigawatts to a structured 283 gigawatts generation and storage plus 99 gigawatts demand.¹³ The licence condition that holds NESO and the DNOs to publishing the network model the reform is being run against is SLC 25 of the Electricity Distribution Licence and the parallel transmission licence condition; SLC 25.2 sets the cycle at intervals of not more than seven years, and the LTDS Stage 2 publication of 29 May 2026 is the most recent step in that cycle.¹⁰

The chain reads forwards as policy then methodology then results. A developer who walks the chain backwards from the Gate 2 detailed results gets a precise picture of what the reformed regime is asking them to evidence, and on what schedule.

The queue before and after TM04+

Setting the before and after side by side makes the reform easier to read. The headline numbers are stark, but the more important contrast is in the mechanics. Before TM04+, the queue ordered applicants by the date their CUSC-compliant or DCUSA-compliant application landed. A 2 megawatt rooftop solar project sat ahead of a 2 gigawatt offshore wind farm with full development consent if the rooftop application arrived first. The position carried a firm date, and a developer could trade the position by selling the project company. The connection date the position implied was often more than a decade in the future even for small, ready, well-sited projects, because the position depended on the speculative pipeline ahead of it that had no obligation to build.

After TM04+, the position depends on the readiness of the project against the eight Gate 2 criteria and on its fit with the zonal capacity envelope under the CNDM. A 2 megawatt rooftop solar project at a site that matches the local demand pattern lands in the same phase as a 2 gigawatt offshore wind farm of comparable readiness; an unready 2 gigawatt project is moved to the legacy track and asked to come back when the readiness gap is closed. The trade is no longer a position date but a place in the network design. NESO does the design against the SSEP and CSNP, and the firm offer follows from the design rather than from the order of the queue.

The before column is what a developer or a planner in 2023 had to work with. The after column is what they have to work with now, six weeks after the Gate 2 detailed results. The change is not cosmetic; it is the move from an administrative queue to a designed pipeline.

The eight Gate 2 criteria from section 18 of the CNDM

Section 18 of the CNDM is the heart of the reform for a developer reading the methodology for the first time. It names the eight criteria a project has to meet to qualify for Gate 2 status, the evidence the assessment looks for in each criterion, and how the criteria are weighted. The criteria are intentionally broad rather than narrow: they cover land rights, planning consent, technology readiness, financial commitment, system need, locational fit, deliverability, and an interoperability and data-quality test. A project that scores strongly across all eight lands in Phase 1 with a 2030 target; a project that scores strongly on system need and locational fit but is earlier in its land or consent journey lands in Phase 2 with a 2035 target; a project that scores weakly is asked to come back when the evidence is in place.

The eight criteria are checked together. NESO assesses each criterion against the evidence the applicant supplies and produces a composite ranking. Phase 1 status is reserved for the projects that score strongly across all eight; Phase 2 status is for projects that score strongly on system need and locational fit and have a credible plan to close any other gap by a later milestone date. A project denied at Gate 2 is not denied a connection: it is asked to address the gap and to come back in the next application window in H2 2026 or a subsequent window.

The criteria interlock with the other workstreams in a way that matters for a developer planning evidence. Criterion 5 (system need) ties to the SSEP and to Clean Power 2030. Criterion 6 (locational fit) ties to the CNDM zonal map and to the LTDS Stage 2 model published 29 May 2026.¹ Criterion 7 (deliverability) ties to the Capacity Market timetable for projects that need a CM contract to underwrite their finance; the T-4 2029/30 results of February 2026 are the relevant anchor for Phase 1 projects.⁸ Criterion 8 (data quality) ties to the LTDS data exchange under GC0139 and to the BSI CIM Engagement Hub. A team that prepares evidence for one criterion without thinking about the others tends to discover gaps late in the assessment; a team that maps the criteria onto its existing project documents at the start finds them straightforward to satisfy.

A queue walk from initial enquiry to energisation

The diagram above sketches the seven stages a project moves through. Each stage is set out in more depth below, noting what the developer needs to do, who owns the next step, and how the timescale compares with what the same stage looked like under the legacy regime.

Stage 1: initial enquiry and CUSC or DCUSA application

The first move is the developer's. For a transmission-connected project at 132 kilovolts and above (and in Scotland, for projects at 132 kilovolts), the application drops into the CUSC track and is addressed to NESO. For a distribution-connected project at 132 kilovolts or below in England and Wales, the application drops into the DCUSA track and is addressed to the host DNO. The application carries a data pack covering the proposed site, the connection voltage and capacity requested, the technology and the export profile, and the initial timeline. Under TM04+, the application is also expected to carry early evidence against the eight criteria; a developer who waits for the formal assessment to ask for the evidence loses the cycle.

Stage 2: TM04+ filter (months 0 to 2)

The TM04+ filter is the first NESO step. It checks the application against a baseline of data quality (criterion 8) and project readiness (a composite of criteria 1, 2, and 4). The filter is intentionally light: it weeds out applications that are not credible at the lodgement stage, freeing the more detailed assessment to focus on projects that are. Projects that drop out at the filter are not refused a connection; they are advised which criterion they fell short on and invited to lodge again when the gap is closed.

Stage 3: CNDM zonal placement (months 2 to 4)

The CNDM zonal placement is the geographic step. NESO maps the project onto the CNDM zonal capacity envelope to identify whether the proposed site sits in a zone with remaining headroom under the SSEP and CSNP, whether it co-ordinates with the other Gate 2 projects already in flight, and whether it needs to be matched to network reinforcement planned in the next CSNP cycle. The placement step is where a developer often discovers that a marginal-fit site can be made strong by a small adjustment: moving the substation by a kilometre into a zone with more headroom, or co-locating with storage to absorb the voltage rise.

Stage 4: the eight criteria assessment (months 4 to 6)

The G2CM assessment is the substantive step. NESO scores the project against each of the eight criteria using the evidence supplied. The output is a composite ranking and a Phase recommendation (Phase 1 for 2030 delivery, Phase 2 for 2035, or a referral back with named evidence gaps). The assessment is documented end to end; a developer receives the rationale for the Phase recommendation and the criterion-by-criterion scoring, which gives a clear basis for either accepting the offer or, if needed, lodging a revised application in a later window with the named gaps closed.

Stage 5: firm-offer issuance (months 6 to 8)

The firm offer issues within the current cycle's offer window, which for the April 2026 outcomes runs March 2026 to November 2026 in sequenced tranches by technology and connection voltage. The offer is a Bilateral Connection Agreement under CUSC for transmission or the equivalent under DCUSA for distribution. It names the connection point, the connection voltage, the Transmission Entry Capacity (or equivalent distribution capacity), the energisation date, the Schedule 11 milestone schedule, and the charging arrangements. The applicant has a two-month acceptance window from offer issue; an offer that is not accepted within the window lapses and the project returns to the next application window.

Stage 6: construction (2 to 4 years for most generation and storage)

Construction proceeds under Schedule 11 of the BCA. The applicant reports against milestone dates at fixed intervals (typically 6, 12, and 24 months from acceptance). The milestone tests are designed to catch a project that is slipping while there is still time to recover; missing two consecutive milestones triggers a cure-or-terminate notice with a 28-day cure period. A project that cures returns to the milestone schedule; a project that does not is terminated and its TEC is returned to the model, where it becomes available to other Phase 1 or Phase 2 projects in the next assessment window.

Stage 7: energisation (Phase 1 by 2030, Phase 2 by 2035)

Energisation is the final step. At transmission, the project completes its compliance under Grid Code CC.6 and Engineering Connection Conditions ECC.6, presents its compliance documents to NESO, and receives a Final Operational Notification.³ At distribution, the equivalent compliance is under Distribution Code DPC4 and the ENA Engineering Recommendations (G98 for micro-generation, G99 for everything above 16 amperes per phase).⁴ The project then enters operation under its TEC; the TEC is the formal capacity right it holds against the network model, and it is published in the Transmission Entry Capacity Register that NESO maintains and updates weekly.

Worked example: a 100 megawatt battery through the queue

To make the assessment concrete, this section walks a hypothetical 100 megawatt, two-hour battery energy storage project from initial enquiry to energisation. The site is in the East Midlands, near a 132 kilovolt substation with documented historic capacity to absorb storage exports during low-demand periods. The applicant is a developer with a portfolio of three other batteries operational in the Midlands. The example is not a real project; the figures are illustrative and the supplier names are anonymised, but the steps and the timescales match what a comparable project would face under the reformed regime in the H2 2026 application window.

The same walk applied to a less ready project would produce a different outcome. A project that scored strongly on system need and locational fit but had only a letter of intent on the land (criterion 1 below threshold) and a heads of terms on the cell supply contract (criterion 3 below threshold) would not pass Gate 2 at first lodgement; it would be advised to lodge again in the next window with the option agreement signed and the cell contract upgraded to a binding commercial term sheet. The point of the reformed regime is that the gap is named, the cycle to address it is short, and the position when the project does qualify is firm.

How the queue connects to voltage, network, and markets

The connections queue is one of three interlocking workstreams a developer or a planner has to read together. The other two are the voltage and headroom constraint the project has to live inside, and the market revenue stack that pays for the project once it is built. Each is held in a separate note so the mechanics on one do not crowd out the mechanics on another; the cross-links below name where each interaction sits.

Connections to voltage: the rise constraint that decides whether an offer can be firm

Criterion 6 of the eight Gate 2 criteria (locational fit) is the criterion where the voltage notes do their work. A connection that proposes to export at a substation where the local voltage profile is already close to the upper edge of the G99 operational envelope cannot be firmed without one of three remedies: reduce the connection size, accept a flexibility contract that curtails during high-rise hours, or wait for the reinforcement that brings new headroom.^{5 6} The voltage notes set out the per-unit maths and the worked voltage-drop example that lets a developer estimate the rise their project would impose; the queue walk above is where that estimate becomes a Phase 1 versus Phase 2 versus referral-back decision. The two reads are designed to sit together when a project sits on the cusp.

Connections to network: the geographic picture the queue is being designed against

The CNDM zonal placement at stage 3 of the queue walk uses the network map the CSNP and the LTDS Stage 2 publication describe. The network notes set out the asset register, the regional layout, and the planned reinforcements that are coming through the CSNP cycle. A developer who reads the network notes first gets a sense of where the headroom is and where it is closing; a developer who skips the network reading and lodges blind to the geography tends to discover at stage 3 that a marginal-fit site can be made strong by a small adjustment. The two reads are designed to be done in sequence: network first for the geography, connections second for the queue mechanics.

Connections to markets: the revenue stack that underwrites the construction phase

A project that receives a firm Phase 1 offer at stage 5 of the queue walk then has to finance the construction phase at stage 6. The revenue stack the project relies on is set out in the markets notes: the Capacity Market T-4 auction for capacity, the wholesale market for energy, and the Balancing Mechanism for ancillary services. The T-4 2029/30 auction in February 2026 cleared 40.1 gigawatts at £27.10 per kilowatt against a 39.4 gigawatt target, which gives Phase 1 projects a parallel revenue anchor when their connection offers come into the cycle.⁸ The flexibility off-ramp in the queue diagram above is also a markets-side mechanism: a project that accepts curtailment terms in exchange for an earlier energisation date receives a flexibility payment that compensates for the lost output, priced through the local DNO's flexibility tender or through the NESO ancillary services. The three reads together describe the full picture of a project from initial enquiry through firm offer to operating revenue.