OPEN · WORKINGNOTES-nantlle-gbe-eoi-pack.md

The Nantlle GBE EoI pack — submission-ready, entity undecided

Published live (2026-07-04). The owner said yes to submitting a Great British Energy Expression of Interest for Nantlle, per NOTES-nantlle-dossier.md. This document is the submission pack: the live process as fetched today, every field's content drafted from the dossier, and the one decision this desk cannot make on the owner's behalf. Process honesty, same tagging as the dossier: [verified] = fetched live 2026-07-04, source named; [dossier] = carried from NOTES-nantlle-dossier.md's own tags without re-checking; [desk] = drafted here, unchecked in the world. This document does not submit anything. A government form asserting an organisational identity is an act only a human with standing to make that assertion can take — that is the entity question below, and it is left open on purpose.

1. The live process, checked today

Form: gbe.gov.uk/express-your-interest (linked from gbe.gov.uk/express-interest) [verified — fetched 2026-07-04].

Who may submit. The form's own framing: "Local and community energy organisations and developers." No individual-applicant category is named, but the form does not gate on organisational status either — it asks for a person's name, an organisation name (which can be answered "N/A" or with an informal descriptor), and separately asks "If you're enquiring on behalf of a specific place or community, what is the postcode?" — a place-based enquiry is a recognised path distinct from an organisation's own submission [verified]. It is non-committing: "Sending an EOI won't commit you to anything and it isn't a formal funding application — it's simply a first step." [verified].

The date problem, printed rather than smoothed. The form's own text states the window as "Throughout the first half of 2026, we're running an Expression of Interest (EOI) process as part of our early market engagement" [verified — fetched 2026-07-04]. Today is 4 July 2026 — into the second half. The form itself, fetched today, still renders live with no closed-notice and no visible end-date enforcement; nothing on the page states what happens when the window nominally ends, or whether it rolls over [verified — absence, not a claim]. This is the same class of failure the dossier's own opening objection warned about: a stale-window claim, caught or not caught depending on who checks and when. Action, not assumption: re-open the form URL immediately before filing and confirm it still accepts submissions. If it has been closed, the fallback is the Local Power Plan's Autumn 2026 GBE Capital Toolkit launch, and direct contact with GBE in the meantime [dossier].

Required fields — full list, fetched live (grouped as the form groups them):

No deadline within the window beyond the date problem above; no fee; single form per submission.

2. The entity question — the owner's decision, not this desk's

The form wants one named person answering as one organisation. Three legitimate shapes exist; this pack drafts content usable under any of them, but only the owner can pick, because only the owner can assert (or decline to assert) standing on Ynni Lleu's or Yr Orsaf's behalf.

A. The owner, personally, as an interested party. Organisation name: "N/A" or a plain descriptor ("independent researcher / Nantlle valley"); organisation type: Other; enquiring on behalf of a specific place: yes, Penygroes/Talysarn postcode. Filed today, needs no one else's permission, costs nothing. Weakest fit to the form's project-detail fields, because the owner cannot assert Ynni Lleu's board-held facts (commissioning date, export arrangement, CAPEX) as their own organisation's answers — the honest move is to answer Part 3 at the level this desk actually knows (the dossier's [verified]/[desk] facts, tagged as such) and use the free-text fields to say plainly that this is third-party desk research surfacing a live project, and to flag that GBE should expect a submission from Ynni Lleu CBC directly.

B. Drafted for Ynni Lleu CBC to submit under its own name. Organisation type: Community benefit society. Strongest fit — Ynni Lleu is the actual holder of the actual project (311kW solar + 307kWh battery, £384k grant, commissioning in flight) and the only entity that can truthfully answer the CAPEX, commercial-operation-date, and grid-connection fields. Requires the owner to hand this pack to Ynni Lleu's board for review and adoption — which is the same conversation the dossier's off-desk item 1 already calls for (the three-questions ask). This is very possibly the same phone call doing both jobs at once.

C. Drafted for Yr Orsaf (or the GwyrddNi/DEG regional programme) to submit as the coordinating civic body. Organisation type: Community benefit society (Yr Orsaf is one) or Other (if filed as GwyrddNi/DEG). Best fit for the development-grant ask specifically — the roof census across Yr Orsaf's and Antur Nantlle's estates, the club-offer pricing work, Cwm Du's remaining pre-consent work — because that ask belongs to the valley's coordinating body, not to Ynni Lleu's generation project. Weaker fit for the generation-project fields (Yr Orsaf isn't the generator). Requires Siôn's (the GwyrddNi facilitator's) sign-off, the same contact named in the dossier's off-desk item 3.

This desk's reading, not a decision: the dossier's own ask already called for both Ynni Lleu and Yr Orsaf to file (dossier §"The ask", point 1) — so B and C are not really alternatives to each other, they are two separate filings with two separate owners-of-the-content. A is the only option that substitutes for B and C rather than complementing them, and it is the only one the owner can execute alone, today, without anyone else's authorisation. If the owner wants something filed now, in the current window, without waiting on a board conversation, A is the only route open to that constraint — with the honest caveat printed inside it.

3. Field-by-field content, drafted

Content below is written to be copy-paste-usable, then edited down to whichever entity (A/B/C) actually files. Where the dossier does not have a hard number, the field is marked TBC with the off-desk item that would supply it, rather than invented.

General information

Enquiry interest

Project basics (if filing under B, for Ynni Lleu's own live scheme; leave largely blank/TBC under A or C)

Land status: TBC — likely Lease/freehold secured or Option agreed given the scheme is mid-installation on the industrial-estate roof, but this desk has not seen the agreement; off-desk item 1.

Location: Penygroes industrial estate, Gwynedd; local authority Cyngor Gwynedd.

Grid: connection arrangement — TBC, the single most load-bearing unknown in the whole pack: the dossier's off-desk item 1 asks directly "is there a metered export MPAN at all, or is the scheme wholly behind-the-meter?" and off-desk item 2 notes that even at >60% self-consumption, at most roughly 120 MWh/yr could be exportable [dossier, desk arithmetic] — enough to matter for a club, not enough to be sure of. Answer Behind-the-meter, with export only if item 1 confirms an MPAN exists; otherwise Not yet determined, honestly.

Existing support: Yes. £384,000, Ynni Cymru 2024–25 capital grant round, with DEG and Cyd Ynni support [verified — dossier's own Companies House / gov.wales sourcing]. If Cwm Du is included: £20,000 of existing hydro-scheme profits allocated to date [dossier].

Community ownership and local benefit: Community ownership (Ynni Lleu is a CBC — community interest company limited by guarantee); Community benefit fund (~£25,000/yr estimated reinvestment income) [dossier]; Local energy supply (tenants Adra, Tŷ Gwyrddfai, Travis Perkins, Pero already served on-site) [dossier]. Ownership share %: not applicable in the equity sense (CBC structure, not a share offer) — say so rather than leaving it implying an unasked question.

Route to market: Onsite self-consumption (targeting >60% of tenants' load) [dossier]; flag under barriers that the export route for any surplus is the open question.

Barriers and support required:

Timelines / decision dates: the Tŷ Gwyrddfai 250–500kW rooftop-solar discussion is already live between Cyd Ynni and Adra [dossier — Community Energy England, Sept 2024] — flag this as the nearest thing to a decision date, and as the natural partnership-grant candidate (community + housing-association + plausibly Cyngor Gwynedd, matching the Local Power Plan's partnership category near-verbatim per the dossier).

Attachment: attach NOTES-nantlle-dossier.md itself (as a PDF export) or a short covering summary of it — the form allows one document, 40MB max, and the dossier is the single most information-dense thing this pack can offer.

Anything else: "This submission is built from a desk-researched valley dossier (published 2026-07-04), which is itself explicit about what is verified, what is corpus knowledge, and what is unchecked inference. We would rather flag that honestly than round it up." — matching the house discipline the dossier already commits to, and giving GBE's reader the same tagging this desk uses internally.

Data sharing with Local Net Zero Hub: decline — Nantlle is in Wales, the Net Zero Hub network is England-only [verified — Community Energy England, GBE Community Fund page], and consenting would misroute the enquiry.

4. What this pack does not resolve

Sources

Fetched 2026-07-04: GBE — express interest · GBE — express your interest (the form) · gov.uk — Local Power Plan · Community Energy England — GBE Community Fund. All other project facts carried from NOTES-nantlle-dossier.md, sourced there.

A submission pack, not a proposition; not on the spine. Prepared at the owner's instruction after a yes decision on NOTES-nantlle-dossier.md. Submits nothing itself — the entity question in §2 is the one thing left for the owner to pick at filing time.