MEPs call for faster permitting of energy grids and cost allocation based on benefits to countries

Priority cross-border energy projects should be permitted more quickly and assessed on the basis of joint planning of EU needs, according to the position adopted in Brussels by the European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE). MEPs support a 12-month standard deadline for the legal permitting stage, following acceptance of the complete application, and call for alternatives that enable more efficient use of existing grids to be examined.

In brief, ITRE calls for joint investment planning coordinated by the Commission and subject to stricter scrutiny by ACER. Scenarios should test grid needs under different conditions, while alternatives to physical expansion should be analysed as a priority. The legal permitting stage would have a standard deadline of 12 months from acceptance of the complete application. The procedure may include a preparatory stage and extensions, while tacit approval retains exceptions for environmental decisions and national legal systems. Countries receiving at least 10% of a project’s estimated benefits would participate in cost allocation. Authorities should also assess the risk that recovering investments through tariffs could create affordability problems. The report passed by 56 votes in favour, ten against and nine abstentions. The negotiating mandate was approved separately, but the opening of talks with the Council depends on confirmation in plenary; lower bills remain an objective, with no guaranteed outcome.

The review of the rules on trans-European energy infrastructure, known as TEN-E, aims to reduce bottlenecks that limit energy exchanges between countries. ITRE calls for investments to be assessed also on the basis of their contribution to market integration, price stability and the system’s ability to meet demand. Lower prices for households and businesses remain an objective of the reform; the vote does not establish a reduction in bills or a timetable for it.

To determine where investments are needed, the European Commission would lead the development of a common strategic scenario. This would include a perspective up to 2050, an alternative scenario taking into account the actual progress of national policies, and analyses testing outcomes under different conditions of demand, production or technological development. Operators would provide the necessary data, while the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) would verify the information and play a stronger role in overseeing assessments of infrastructure needs.

Rapporteur Tsvetelina Penkova, a Bulgarian MEP from the S&D group, explained the criterion being pursued in a statement published by Parliament: “Europe needs the right infrastructure in the right places, based on sound data and a clear assessment of the real needs of our citizens and our economy.” She argues that the new rules should also help reduce differences in electricity prices between countries and regions.

Planning should prioritise examining alternatives to grid expansion. These include technologies that increase the usable capacity of existing infrastructure, energy storage and demand response, meaning the adjustment of consumption according to system or market signals. Project assessments should explain how these options were taken into account, so that the construction of new lines can be compared with other ways of resolving bottlenecks.

For priority projects included on the Union list, ITRE proposes reducing the standard deadline for the legal permitting procedure from 18 to 12 months. The calculation begins after acceptance of the complete application, and a preparatory stage may precede this procedure. The text allows extensions under the stipulated conditions and retains avenues of appeal; tacit approval would not apply to environmental decisions or in countries whose legal system does not recognise this mechanism.

Cost allocation should take into account the countries benefiting from a project, including when the infrastructure is built elsewhere. If at least 10% of the estimated benefits are concentrated in a country, that country and its regulatory authority should participate in the cross-border cost-allocation process. This threshold establishes participation in the process without automatically requiring payment of 10% of the investment; the allocation would reflect, where applicable, the distribution of net benefits.

Investment costs may be included in network tariffs, and national regulatory authorities should assess any affordability problems resulting from this inclusion. The compromise explicitly mentions the risk of higher tariffs. The reform therefore also concerns how the infrastructure needed for energy exchanges is financed; it does not establish that every investment will immediately make energy cheaper for consumers.

The list of priorities would also cover equipment for protecting critical grid elements, monitoring, control and digitalisation, as well as climate-adaptation projects. Infrastructure assessment would take into account resilience to physical and cyber incidents, alongside the capacity to transport and integrate energy.

The proposal is part of the European grids package presented by the Commission in December 2025. This also includes a separate legislative initiative to accelerate permitting procedures; the ITRE vote concerns the revision of TEN-E.

The report was adopted by 56 votes in favour, ten against and nine abstentions. Separately, the negotiating mandate with the Council received 61 votes in favour, six against and eight abstentions. According to Parliament, the opening of negotiations depends on confirmation of the decision at a future plenary session; the regulation has not been finally adopted.