Proposed Priority Procedure for Grid Connections in Finland — Significant Changes for Data Centers and BESS

Authors: Alisa Ainonen, Minna Juhola, Anniina Kunnaton Read time: 6 min

The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment is proposing a new priority procedure for grid connections under the Electricity Market Act. The draft government proposal is open for consultation from 18 September to 9 October 2026.

The priority procedure aims to secure the efficient use of grid capacity in situations of scarcity and encourage large electricity consumption sites and storage facilities to locate in areas without capacity constraints. Growth in electricity consumption and its geographical divergence from production have led to capacity shortages, particularly in southern Finland. The problem is not unique to Finland: several EU Member States have moved, or are moving, away from the traditional first-come, first-served model towards various prioritisation solutions, in line with a Commission recommendation.

The Proposal in Brief

• The priority procedure would apply to connecting electricity consumption sites and storage facilities to the main transmission network, the high-voltage distribution network, and the distribution network.
  • It would not apply to electricity production.
  • The procedure would cover new connections and increases in capacity under existing ones.
• Projects would be classified into four priority groups based on the connection’s intake capacity and main purpose and ranked further in order of priority within each group.
• Applications would be processed on a first-come, first-served basis in Group 1 and twice a year in Groups 2 through 4.
• Data centers would face lower capacity thresholds than other consumption sites, placing them in a weaker position than other consumption facilities.
• Standalone BESS facilities, except the very smallest, would fall into the weakest priority group.
• Consumption sites, including data centers, could improve their position through a flexibility and/or production commitment.

Although the proposed framework represents a major change to the capacity allocation principles in Finland, it would not change network operators’ duty to connect. However, network operators would in future also need to take the priority order into account when developing their networks to connect consumption sites and storage facilities. The proposed order of priority would thus also affect the order in which grid reinforcements are implemented in the parts of the grid where capacity is scarce.

Priority Groups and Order of Priority

* A latter criterion is applied only if applications are tied under the preceding criterion. The development stage of the project would also be considered.

Application Processing

Network operators would need to offer capacity in the order of the priority groups and within each group in order of priority. Applications in a lower group would not be offered capacity until applications in all of the higher groups have been processed. Before offering capacity to Groups 2 through 4, the operator would also need to reserve capacity for the anticipated development of Group 1 connections.

Group 1 projects would be processed on a first-come, first-served basis without any order of priority among the group, even when capacity is insufficient. Applications in Groups 2 through 4 would be processed in group-specific rounds twice a year to allow comparison. Compared to the rolling handling currently applied, the start of processing for these groups could therefore be delayed by up to around six months.

If capacity in Groups 2 through 4 is insufficient for all applications within the same group, it would be offered in order of priority until no longer sufficient for the next application(s). The remaining capacity would then be divided equally among all remaining applications in the same group (covering both tied applications and those ranked lower in the group’s internal ranking).

Network operators would need to assign every connection application to a priority group, regardless of whether there is any capacity scarcity. In practice, this means that the processing of connection agreements could slow down even in areas with sufficient capacity.

Flexibility Commitment and Production Commitment — Possibilities to Improve Priority

Under a flexibility commitment, an applicant would undertake to offer flexible production capacity on an organised marketplace, either as electricity production or as demand-side flexibility at the electricity consumption site. The capacity would need to produce electricity without interruption, be offered continuously, and have an output of at least 10% of the consumption site’s peak output. The commitment could be met with any form of production, but the requirement of uninterrupted production would in practice rule out weather-dependent forms. The production capacity would need to be in the same bidding area as the consumption site. The applicant would not need to own the production capacity but would need to be able to control its offering on the marketplace for the duration of the commitment.

Under a production commitment, an applicant would undertake that at least 50% of the consumption site’s estimated annual electricity consumption is covered by electricity produced at a power plant commissioned no more than 36 months before the consumption site and located in the same area for the purposes of main grid transmission constraints. This could be met either through own production or power purchase agreements. The main grid operator would determine and publish the criteria and areas to be regarded as the same area for the purposes of main grid transmission constraints. The information would be updated no later than six months before the start of each connection application handling round, and the area division published at the start of the allocation round pertaining to a connection request would apply to that connection.

A flexibility commitment would have two distinct effects for consumption sites and data centers:

• A commitment covering at least 10% would improve the application’s position within its priority group.
• A commitment covering at least 80% would move it from Group 3 to Group 2.

A production commitment would only improve the application’s position within its priority group, not between groups.

The applicant would need to comply with the flexibility and/or production commitment for the entire period the connection is used. A material breach not remedied within a reasonable time would entitle the network operator to terminate the grid connection agreement. A new application would then be placed in Group 4 for five years, regardless of which group’s conditions it would otherwise meet. The purpose is to prevent commitments from being used to obtain capacity by circumventing the priority order.

Entry into Force

The amended law is intended to enter into force on 1 January 2027 and would also apply to applications submitted before that date where no grid connection agreement or binding conditional agreement has been concluded. After entry into force, applications in Groups 2 through 4 would need to be processed in group-specific rounds for the first time by 31 December 2027. In the initial phase in 2027, processing would therefore likely involve a delay of more than six months.

Our Energy Team and Data Center Team are happy to discuss the proposed procedure and any related issues.