COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Governance of the Energy Union, amending Directive 94/22/EC, Directive 98/70/EC, Directive 2009/31/EC, Regulation (EC) No 663/2009, Regulation (EC) No 715/2009, Directive 2009/73/EC, Council Directive 2009/119/EC, Directive 2010/31/EU, Directive 2012/27/EU, Directive 2013/30/EU and Council Directive (EU) 2015/652 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 525/2013
Date: 2016-11-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Energy, European Commission
Subjects: adaptation to climate change, energy cooperation, energy diversification, energy efficiency, energy research, greenhouse gas, reduction of gas emissions, renewable energy, single market

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 30.11.2016  SWD(2016) 394 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the Governance of the Energy Union,  amending Directive 94/22/EC, Directive 98/70/EC, Directive 2009/31/EC, Regulation (EC) No 663/2009, Regulation (EC) No 715/2009, Directive 2009/73/EC, Council Directive 2009/119/EC, Directive 2010/31/EU, Directive 2012/27/EU, Directive 2013/30/EU and Council Directive (EU) 2015/652 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 {COM(2016) 759 final} {SWD(2016) 395 final}  
 
 
Table of Contents 

Glossary .................................................................................................................................. 5 

1. 

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 6 

2.  Problem Description ...................................................................................................... 11 

2.1. 

2.2. 

Context of the problem ....................................................................................... 11 

Nature and extent of the problem ....................................................................... 12 

Inconformity of existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations 
2.2.1. 
with the principles of Better Regulation ........................................................................... 12 

2.2.2. 
Inadequacy of the current policy framework between Member States and 
the Commission to achieve the Energy Union objectives and implement the Paris 
Agreement ......................................................................................................................... 14 

3.  Subsidiarity and the varying situation of Member States ............................................. 15 

3.1. 

3.2. 

3.3. 

Legal basis .......................................................................................................... 15 

Necessity of EU action ....................................................................................... 15 

EU added-value .................................................................................................. 16 

4.  Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 17 

4.1. 

4.2. 

General objectives .............................................................................................. 17 

Specific objectives .............................................................................................. 17 

5.  Policy options ................................................................................................................ 18 

5.1. 

5.2. 
(S) 

5.3. 

Baseline scenario ................................................................................................ 18 

Options for streamlining of planning, reporting and monitoring obligations 
19 

Options for elements of the Governance process ............................................... 23 

5.3.1.  Periodicity of National Plans (NP) .................................................................... 23 

5.3.2.  Periodicity of Progress Reports (PR) ................................................................. 24 

5.3.3.  Periodicity of Commission monitoring of collective progress made (M) .......... 24 

5.3.4. 
recommendations or decisions (IP).................................................................................. 24 

Iterative process with Member States including country-specific 

5.3.5.  Consultations of Member States on National Plans (C) .................................... 27 

6.  Assessment of the impacts of the various policy options .............................................. 29 

6.1. 

Impacts of the Baseline Scenario ....................................................................... 32 

6.2. 
Impacts of options for streamlining of planning, reporting and monitoring 
obligations (S) .................................................................................................................. 35 

6.3. 

Impacts of options for elements of the Governance process .............................. 40 

6.3.1.  Periodicity of National Plans (NP) .................................................................... 40 

6.3.2.  Periodicity of Progress Reports (PR) ................................................................. 42 

2 

 
 
 
6.3.3.  Periodicity of Commission monitoring of collective progress made (M) .......... 43 

6.3.4. 
recommendations or decisions (IP).................................................................................. 44 

Iterative process with Member States including country-specific 

6.3.5.  Consultations of Member States on National Plans (C) .................................... 47 

7.  Comparison of the options ............................................................................................ 48 

7.1. 
monitoring obligations ..................................................................................................... 49 

Comparing approaches to streamlining of planning, reporting and 

7.2. 

Comparing and combining options for elements of the Governance process .... 51 

7.2.1.  Comparing options for the periodicity of National Plans .................................. 51 

7.2.2.  Comparing options for the periodicity of Progress Reports .............................. 53 

7.2.3.  Comparing options for the periodicity of Commission monitoring of 
collective progress made .................................................................................................. 55 

7.2.4.  Comparing options for an iterative process with Member States including 
country-specific recommendations or decisions .............................................................. 56 

7.2.5.  Comparing options for consultations of Member States on National Plans ...... 59 

7.2.6.  Overview of preferred policy options ................................................................. 61 

8.  Monitoring and evaluation ............................................................................................ 63 

Annexes ................................................................................................................................ 67 

Annex 1: procedural info ...................................................................................................... 67 

9.  Procedure ....................................................................................................................... 67 

9.1. 

9.2. 

9.3. 

9.4. 

Identification ...................................................................................................... 67 

Organisation and timing ..................................................................................... 67 

Consultation and expertise ................................................................................. 68 

External expertise ............................................................................................... 71 

Annex 2: Stakeholder consultation ...................................................................................... 72 

Annex 3: Who is affected and how ...................................................................................... 72 

Annex 4: Analytical models ................................................................................................. 72 

Annex 5: Outcome of the evaluation .................................................................................... 72 

Annex 6: Overview of classification of obligations in the energy acquis (Fitness Check) .. 73 

Annex 7: Overview of classification of obligations in the MMR ........................................ 87 

Annex 8: Background on planning, reporting and monitoring obligations .......................... 99 

Annex 9: Policy options on streamlining planning, reporting and monitoring obligations: 
Annual costs for Member States and one-time implementation costs ............................... 101 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
List of Tables  

Table 1: Total cumulative costs for Member States in the period 2021-2030 in million EUR 36 

Table 2: Comparison of policy options for streamlining ......................................................... 50 

Table 3: Periodicity of National Plans – Overview of impacts with regard to objectives ....... 52 

Table 4: Periodicity of National Plans – Comparison of policy options ................................. 53 

Table 5: Periodicity of national Progress Reports – Overview of impacts with regard to 
objectives .................................................................................................................................. 54 

Table 6: Periodicity of national Progress Reports – Comparison of policy options ............... 55 

Table 7: Periodicity of Commission monitoring – Overview of impacts with regard to 
objectives .................................................................................................................................. 55 

Table 8: Periodicity of Commission monitoring – Comparison of policy options ................... 56 

Table 9: Process for an iterative process with Member States including country-specific 
recommendations or decisions – Overview of impacts with regard to objectives ................... 58 

Table 10: Iterative process with Member States including country-specific recommendations 
or decisions – Comparison of policy options ........................................................................... 59 

Table 11: Consultations – Overview of impacts with regard to objectives ............................. 60 

Table 12: Consultations – Comparison of policy options ........................................................ 61 

Table 13: Overview of preferred options ................................................................................. 63 

Table 14: Annual costs for Member States in million EUR ................................................... 102 

Table 15: One-time implementation costs for Member States and the Commission in million 
EUR ........................................................................................................................................ 103 

List of Figures  

Figure 1: Overview of planning, reporting and monitoring in the governance system ........... 27 

Figure 2: Flow-chart of the governance process ..................................................................... 28 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
GLOSSARY  

ACER 

EEA  

ENTSO-E 

ENTSO-G 

ESD 

ETS 

GHG 

IEA 

JRC 

Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators 

European Environment Agency 

European Network of Transmission System Operators 

European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas 

Effort Sharing Decision 

Emissions Trading System 

Greenhouse gas 

International Energy Agency 

Joint Research Centre 

LULUCF 

land use, land-use change and forestry 

MMR 

OECD 

PCI 

REFIT 

TSO 

Monitoring Mechanism Regulation 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 

Project of Common Interest 

Regulatory Fitness Check 

Transmission System Operator 

UNFCCC 

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 

The objectives of the Energy Union Framework Strategy1, adopted in February 2015, can only 
be  achieved  through  a  combination  of  EU  and  national  policies  and  measures  which  are 
implemented in a coherent way and in line with the overarching EU energy and climate policy 
goals  of  ensuring  energy  security,  sustainability  and  competitiveness.  This  approach  is 
reflected by the five interrelated dimensions of the Energy Union Framework Strategy. 

After  the  endorsement  of  the  European  Parliament,  the  October  2014  European  Council 
agreed  to  reduce  domestically  greenhouse  gas  (GHG)  emissions  by  at  least  40%,  to  be 
delivered collectively by the EU by 2030 in the most cost-effective manner possible. It asked 
for setting corresponding national reduction targets for the non-ETS sectors and for the land 
use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector to be included into the 2030 greenhouse 
gas  mitigation  framework.  At  the  same  time  the  European  Council  agreed  on  a  target  of  at 
least 27% for the share of renewable energy consumed in the EU in 2030, binding at EU level, 
to be fulfilled through Member States contributions guided by the need to deliver collectively 
the  EU  target.  It  also  set  an  indicative  target  at  the  EU  level  of  at  least  27%  for  improving 
energy efficiency in 2030 compared to projections of future energy consumption, which will 
be reviewed by 2020, having in mind an EU level of 30%. The European Council also called 
for all Member States to achieve interconnection of at least 10% of their installed electricity 
production capacity by 2020 and asked the Commission  to report regularly to the European 
Council  with  the  objective  of  arriving  at  a  15%  target  by  2030,  as  proposed  by  the 
Commission. 

All these targets are interrelated. Renewable energy and energy efficiency play a key role in 
the transition towards a more competitive, secure and sustainable energy system and will also 
help  to  achieve  the  GHG  emission  reduction  target.  The  GHG  emission  reduction  target 
should equally encourage a greater share of renewable energy as well as energy savings in the 
EU.    Renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  are  vital  in  ensuring  energy  security  and 
competitiveness together with the further integration of the internal energy market, which in 
turn  provide  the  basis  for  implementing  the  2030  targets  in  a  cost-effective  manner.  The 
Energy Union governance system that essentially builds on Member States’ integrated energy 
and  climate  policies  has  a  key  role  to  play  in  achieving  the  interrelated  Energy  Union 
objectives and the EU 2030 energy and climate targets. 

By the end of 2016, the Commission aims to propose the main legislative and non-legislative 
initiatives  to  implement  the  Energy  Union  Strategy  across  its  five  mutually-reinforcing  and 
closely interrelated dimensions. This goes beyond the energy and climate field in the narrow 
sense by addressing also other policies  which support and enable the implementation  of the 
Energy  Union,  including  inter  alia  investments,  transport,  regional,  competition,  research, 
innovation and other policies. 

The  purpose  of  these  initiatives  is  to  propose  precise  and  ambitious  measures  at  EU  level 
while  providing  flexibility  to  Member  States  to  implement  the  common  objectives  and  EU 

1 COM(2015) 80 

6 

 
 
                                                 
legislation in a way that reflects national preferences and circumstances. At the same time, it 
is  important  to  ensure  that  such  flexibility  is  applied  in  a  way  that  contributes  to  cost-
effectiveness, is compatible with further market integration and increased competition, gives 
predictability  and  certainty  for  investment,  and  ensures  the  attainment  of  the  Energy  Union 
objectives.  

The  transition  towards  a  more  secure  and  sustainable  energy  system  will  require  major 
investments  in  generation,  networks  and  energy  efficiency,  estimated  at  some  €200  billion 
annually in the next decade.2 Coherent and reliable national policies complementing relevant 
EU legislation are crucial for ensuring investor certainty and transparency for consumers and 
citizens.  This  holds  true  notably  with  regard  to  the  achievement  of  the  EU  2030  targets  for 
climate  and  energy,  which  include  EU  level  targets  for  renewable  energy  and  energy 
efficiency and therefore require collective efforts by Member States for their achievement.  

For  these  reasons,  the  October  2014  European  Council  also  agreed  that  a  reliable  and 
transparent  governance  system  without  any  unnecessary  administrative  burden  will  be 
developed.  It  further  specified  that  such  governance  system  will  build  on  existing  building 
blocks  and  that  separate  planning  and  reporting  strands  will  be  streamlined  and  brought 
together.  In  November  2015,  the  Energy  Council  provided  detailed  conclusions  on  the 
governance system of the Energy Union3 and called on the Commission to present, inter alia, 
proposals  for  streamlining  existing  planning  and  reporting  obligations  in  order  to  reduce 
administrative burden and ensure coherence, simplification and consistency as well as prepare 
templates for Integrated National Energy and Climate Plans and respective progress reports. 

In  November  2015,  the  Commission  presented  the  Guidance  to  Member  States  on  National 
Energy and Climate Plans in the context of the State of the Energy Union 2015. This guidance 
proposed key elements of the Integrated National Energy and Climate Plans and main steps 
for  a  gradual  process  from  2015  until  the  finalisation  of  these  plans  by  2018,  including  the 
main tasks for both the Member States and the Commission.4 

In  December  2015,  the  European  Parliament  adopted  an  own  initiative  report  "Towards  a 
European Energy Union"5 calling for the governance framework for the Energy Union to be 
ambitious,  reliable,  transparent,  democratic  and  fully  inclusive  of  the  European  Parliament 
and to ensure that the 2030 climate and energy targets are achieved. The report also asked the 
Commission  to  present  swiftly  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  a  legislative 
proposal taking into account the relevant Council conclusions and the Parliament’s views. 

Moreover, an effective implementation of the objectives of the Energy Union across its five 
dimensions  needs  robust  reporting  of  progress  made  at  national  level  and  subsequent 
monitoring at EU level to evaluate progress made6, steer further policy action, and to enable a 

2 COM(2015) 80 
3 Council of the European Union reference 14459/15 
4 COM(2015) 572 
5 European Parliament reference (2015/2113(INI)) 
6  See  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  "Monitoring  progress  towards  the  Energy  Union  objectives  - 
Concept 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
key 
content/EN/TXT/?qid=1449767808781&uri=CELEX:52015SC0243  

indicators": 

analysis 

first 

and 

of 

7 

 
 
                                                 
structured dialogue between the EU and Member States as well as between the Commission 
and other EU institutions. The European Environment Agency (EEA) plays a prominent role 
in  supporting  the  Commission  in  its  current  tasks  relating  to  monitoring,  reporting  and 
verification. The EEA's as well as other relevant agencies' role could be enhanced in order to 
serve the purposes of the governance of the Energy Union. 

A transparent monitoring system is also important to ensure affordability and energy security 
for  European  consumers,  safeguard  the competiveness  of  European industries,  and establish 
coherence with the Commission's agenda for jobs, growth and investment. 

Scope of the initiative 

For  the  above  goals  to  materialise,  the  Energy  Union  governance  initiative  as  well  as  this 
Impact Assessment will therefore be based on two main pillars:  

  Streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations:  Integrated  National 
Energy  and  Climate  Plans  (hereinafter:  "National  Plans"),  subsequent  Integrated 
National  Energy  and  Climate  Plans  Progress  Reports  (hereinafter:  "Progress 
Reports), as well as integrated Commission monitoring at EU level; 

  A  political  governance  process  between  the  Commission  and  Member  States  on  the 
establishment  and  implementation  of  National  Plans  in  order  ensure  the  collective 
achievement of the objectives of the Energy Union. 

The two main pillars are strongly connected and interrelated via the envisaged National Plans, 
Progress Reports and Commission monitoring.7 

Streamlining of existing energy and climate planning, reporting and monitoring obligations is 
a key aim of the Governance initiative, reflecting Better Regulation principles and objectives. 
The streamlining pillar builds on a REFIT exercise that evaluated existing planning, reporting 
and monitoring obligations in the energy acquis as well as their interlinkages with the climate 
acquis (hereinafter "Fitness Check")8, carried out during the first half of 2016.  

Defining  the  political  process  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  is  of  equal 
importance in view of the need for a collective achievement of the Energy Union objectives, 
including the 2030 targets for climate and energy. The governance process pillar represents a 
new cooperation mechanism between Member States and the Commission aimed at ensuring 
the achievement of the Energy Union objectives.  

An  overview  of  the  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  of  the  energy  acquis  is 
provided  in  Annex  6,  as  are  the  requirements  of  the  Monitoring  Mechanism  Regulation 

7 In order to achieve the streamlining of existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations in the energy 
and climate acquis and to set up a Governance process between the Commission and Member States including 
Commission or Council recommendations, this Impact Assessment explores policy options encompassing a new 
legislative act and revisions of existing legal acts. Such initiatives require an Impact Assessment according to the 
Better Regulation principles. 
8 [Include reference to Fitness Check SWD once available.] 

8 

 
 
 
                                                 
(MMR)  in  Annex  7.  Further  background  on  the  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations is provided in Annex 8.   

Context of the Governance initiative  

The European Council has called in October 2014 and March 2015 for the establishment of a 
Governance  system  for  the  2030  Climate  and  Energy  Framework  and  the  Energy  Union.  A 
strong  Governance  system  will  be  decisive  notably  for  the  delivery  of  the  Union's  2030 
targets on renewables and energy efficiency. In the same vein, the European Parliament called 
for  an  ambitious  Energy  Union  Governance  framework  to  ensure  that  the  2030  climate  and 
energy  targets  are  achieved.  There  is  therefore  substantial  political  support  for  the  initiative 
and its implementation.  However, close engagement with  the Council, European Parliament 
and stakeholders is instrumental in order to further enhance political buy-in and support.  

The  Governance  initiative  builds  on  already  existing  building  blocks  and  the  lessons  learnt 
from these, including from the European Semester:  

  The Commission's Guidance to Member States on National Energy and Climate Plans 
of November 2015 sets out the main elements of the Governance system. It does this 
in a non-binding format that aims at a pragmatic approach to governance ensuring also 
an early start of the Governance process with Member States.  

  Ongoing  discussions  with  Member  States  in  the  Technical  Working  Group  on 
National  Plans  since  2015  and  in  the  Council  formations  have  supported  the 
emergence  of  a  common  view  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  on  the 
way forward regarding the design of the Governance of the Energy Union.  

  National  Plans  to  be  developed  by Member  States  should  ensure  the  involvement  of 
stakeholders and contribute to public awareness. This will stimulate the public debate 
in  the  Member  States  on  the  five  dimensions  of  the  Energy  Union,  taking  into 
consideration the relevant inter-linkages. 

  To  support  administrative  capacity  building,  the  Commission  is  considering  options 
for  technical  assistance  to  Member  States  for  the  development  of  National  Plans 
before 2020.Also in the period from 2020 to 2030, technical support will continue to 
play and important role. 

  With regard to the administrative set-up in the Member States, it is worth mentioning 
that  under  the  MMR  Member  States  are  operating  national  inventory  systems  to 
estimate  emissions  and  removals  and  national  systems  for  reporting  on  policies  and 
measures  and  projections  of  greenhouse  gas  emissions  and  removals.  These  systems 
include  the  relevant  institutional,  legal  and  procedural  arrangements  established  for 
evaluating policy and making projections.  

Links with other policy areas and the European Semester  

9 

 
 
 
 
Links  of  this  initiative  to  competitiveness  and  private  sector  innovation  capabilities  mainly 
relate to energy prices and costs for EU industries, investor certainty until the year 2030, and 
Member States' support for research and development. While the first issue is monitored by a 
biennial  report  from  the  Commission  on  energy  prices  and  costs  in  Europe,  the  latter  two 
issues are aimed to  be addressed by the future National Plans. Currently, very few Member 
States  have  integrated  National  Plans  for  energy  and  climate  and  very  few  cover  a  time 
horizon  of  2030  or  beyond.  National  Plans  for  2030  would  therefore  significantly  enhance 
investor certainty and also provide a framework for Member States' support for research and 
development in the context of the Energy Union.  

The  Governance  of  the  Energy  Union  should  build  on  the  European  Semester  and  be 
complementary  to  it,  such  that  the  European  Semester  addresses  macroeconomic  and 
structural reform issues, whereas the Governance process would address energy and climate 
specific policy issues. Nevertheless, energy and climate issues could be addressed as part of 
the European Semester, if they have macroeconomic or structural reform relevance. 

Interlinkages with other upcoming Energy Union initiatives 

This  Impact  Assessment  was  closely  coordinated  with  other  Energy  Union  related  impact 
assessments carried out in 20169.  

Concerning  the  market  design  initiative,  interlinkages  mainly  concern  the  streamlining  of 
reporting and monitoring obligations relating to the internal energy market. In particular, the 
Energy  Union  Governance  initiative  aims  at  streamlining  relevant  reporting  obligations  by 
Member  States  and  the  Commission  presently  enshrined  in  the  Third  Package,  thereby 
contributing to ensure policy coherence and reduce administrative burden.  

Concerning the initiatives on the revision of the Renewable Energy Directive and the Energy 
Efficiency  Directive  as  well  as  the  Energy  Performance  of  Building  Directive,  the 
Governance  initiative  aims  at  streamlining  planning  (in  terms  of  their  integration  into 
National Plans), reporting and monitoring obligations relating to renewable energy and energy 
efficiency.  Furthermore,  the  governance  process  includes  the  assessment  of  National  Plans 
and  the  monitoring  of  their  implementation  in  view  of  the  collective  achievement  of  the 
renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  targets  for  2030.  In  case  of  insufficient  collective 
action,  necessary  measures  have  to  be  taken.  This  could  include  the  Commission  proposing 
additional  measures  at  EU-level  or  requesting  Member  States  to  take  further  actions  to  fill 
potential  gaps  to  these  targets.  The  process  on  how  to  detect  and  also  prevent  such  gaps 
should  be  set  out  as  part  of  the  iterative  process  in  the  Governance  initiative.  The  potential 
measures to be taken would also be anticipated in the Governance initiative, but would be set 
out  in  detail  in  the revised  sectorial  legislation. Therefore,  the  corresponding  policy  options 
are assessed in more detail in the impact assessments for the revisions of these Directives. 

9 [Insert references once available.] 

10 

 
 
 
                                                 
Examples of the streamlining of the Commission's monitoring obligations include the Energy 
Efficiency  Progress  Report  and  the  Renewable  Energy  Progress  Report.  The  latter  is 
published by the Commission every two years and provides an overview of renewable energy 
policy  developments  in  EU  countries  based  on  national  reports  about  progress  towards  the 
EU's  2020  renewable  energy  goals.  The  Governance  initiative  aims  to  incorporate  this 
Commission  report  into  an  integrated  monitoring  instrument  that  would  cover  the  five 
dimensions  of  the  Energy  Union  and  thereby  assess  the  inter-linkages  of  renewable  energy 
developments  with  other  policy areas  such  as  energy efficiency or  greenhouse gas emission 
reductions. 

2.  PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 

2.1.  Context of the problem 

The Energy Union Framework Strategy, and in particular the 2030 energy and climate targets, 
is based on the collective achievement of its objectives by the Member States. In order for the 
EU to be able to annually report to the European Parliament and the  Council on the state of 
the Energy Union, an appropriate planning, reporting and monitoring framework needs to be 
in place, going beyond 2020.  

Member  States  currently  do  not  have  in  place  longer  term  planning  frameworks.  In  their 
planning, Member States often do not look beyond their borders which can lead to conflicting 
energy policies with their neighbours and the non-achievement of EU-level targets as this has 
not  been  taken  into  account  in  the  planning.  As  regards  reporting,  the  existing  reporting 
obligations can be found in almost every piece of EU legislation. These reporting obligations 
are  often  not  coordinated  as  they  have  been  adopted  at  different  points  in  time,  sometimes 
originating  from  (past)  international  obligations,  and  often  also  as  part  of  a  political 
compromise  in  the  ordinary  legislative  procedure.  This  can  lead  to  higher  costs  for  the 
Member  States  or  other  reporting  entities.  This  applies  similarly  to  the  Commission 
monitoring  obligations.  The  varying  periodicity  across  existing  obligations  that  are  suitable 
for  integration  into  National  Plans  and  Progress  Reports  is  inconsistent  with  a  governance 
process  that  aims  to  align  the  periodicity  of  integrated  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations.  In  addition,  many  of  the  current  obligations  will  end  in  2020  as  part  of  the 
existing energy and climate framework. 

However, the system in place is not sufficiently conducive to allow for a better coordination 
of these activities. Member States have to collectively deliver on the Energy Union objectives 
across  the 5 dimensions,  which requires  a closer cooperation among the Member  States  but 
also  with  the  Commission.  The  2030  Energy  and  Climate  Framework  also  necessitates  that 
Member States pledge ambitiously towards the achievement of the related targets and in view 
of the achievement of the European Union's domestic long-term objective to cut emissions by 

11 

 
 
 
at  least  80%  by  205010  and  the  long-term  goal  set  by  the  Paris  Agreement11.  The  European 
Semester process, which is in place and could in theory provide such a framework, is targeted 
on  fiscal  and  structural  report  policies  of  the  Member  States  as  well  as  at  issues  of 
macroeconomic relevance.  

2.2.  Nature and extent of the problem 

2.2.1.  Inconformity of existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations with the 

principles of Better Regulation 

While  appropriate  requirements  for  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  in  the  energy  and 
climate  fields  should  be  ensured  at  the  EU  level,  these  should  at  the  same  time  be 
proportionate and should not create an unnecessary administrative burden on Member States, 
the  Commission  and  stakeholders  (business  and  citizens).  Such  unwarranted  administrative 
costs  originate,  inter  alia,  from  redundancy,  incoherence,  differing  periodicity  and  lack  of 
coordination among the different obligations.   

Most of the current planning, reporting and monitoring obligations provide benefits in terms 
of  useful  information  on  a  specific  policy  area  and  support  the  implementation  of  specific 
policy  objectives  set  out  in  sectorial  legislation.12  The  obligations  enable  the  preparation  of 
policy  strategies,  the  provision  of  information  on  policies  and  measures,  provide  investor 
certainty,  enable  assessing  progress  to  targets  and  establish  feedback  mechanisms  between 
Member States and the Commission. They aim to provide the Commission with the data and 
information  needed  to  assess  whether  specific  EU  legislation  has  been  implemented  and 
whether it produced its intended effects. The current reporting obligations on the Commission 
ensure  that  the  Commission  informs  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  general 
public  about  the  results  achieved  by  EU  legislation.  Furthermore,  the  obligations  enable 
Member States and the Commission to share knowledge and learn about best practices. Some 
obligations stem from the EU's and its Member States' international treaty obligations.  

This  is  confirmed  by  the  Fitness  Check,  in  which  the  majority  of  current  obligations  were 
found to be effective and to make a positive contribution towards achieving their objectives. 
The relevance of current obligations is generally considered good (if EU-added value is not 
considered), with only a relatively small number of obligations found to be irrelevant or not 
providing  information  that  is  actually  used.  Most  of  the  information  collected  or  produced 
through current obligations would not be available from other sources and gives to Member 
States and the Commission the possibility to measure progress at EU and national level and 
benefit from best practice examples.  

10 In line with scientific findings of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the EU's climate 
objective is to reduce GHG emissions by 80-95% in 2050 compared to 1990, in the context of necessary 
reductions by developed countries as a group. 
11 The Paris Agreement includes a long-term goal to keep the global temperature increase well below 2°C above 
pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to keep it to below 1.5°C. 
12 This was confirmed by the Public Consultation, in which the majority of respondents recognize the importance 
of existing planning and reporting obligations (see also section 9.3). 

12 

 
 
 
                                                 
Nevertheless,  the  Fitness  Check  showed  that  the  current  system  of  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring obligations shows several shortcomings: 

Lack  of  suitability  for  2030  targets  and  Energy  Union  objectives:  Parts  of  the  existing 
planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  serve  to  implement  and  monitor  progress 
towards the 2020 energy and climate targets, which were set for each Member State. In the 
climate  field,  targets  for  2030  will continue to  be  set  for  each  Member  State.  However,  the 
2030  targets  for  renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  are  set  at  EU  level  as  part  of  the 
2030  Framework  for  Climate  and  Energy  and  the  Energy  Union.  Therefore,  some  existing 
planning, reporting and monitoring obligations in the energy field are no longer fully suitable 
for implementing and monitoring progress towards the 2030 targets. Furthermore, the current 
obligations linked to existing sectorial policy objectives are not fully relevant to the revised 
and new objectives of the broader Energy Union Strategy and its five dimensions and thus not 
able  to  effectively  support  the  implementation  and  monitoring  of  progress  towards  these 
objectives (e.g. for research, innovation and competitiveness).  

Lack of policy coherence among obligations in the energy field:  The various sector-specific 
legal acts existing in the energy acquis do not adequately address the relevant interactions and 
interdependencies  among  different  policy  areas  of  the  Energy  Union  in  the  respective 
planning, reporting and monitoring obligations. This is on the one hand due to the adoption of 
the legal acts independently from each other at different points in time, and on the other due 
to  the  sector-specific  focus  of  the  obligations.  Policy  coherence  of  the  different  obligations 
cannot  fully  be  ensured  through  a  sectorial  approach.  This  means  that  all  aspects  of  the 
Energy  Union Strategy are currently not  adequately  covered or  not  subject to  any planning, 
reporting and monitoring obligations at EU level. Concerning periodicity, some existing legal 
acts  currently  provide  for  regular  review  of  the  planning  requirements,  while  others  do  not. 
Concerning stringency, some existing obligations are mandatory in terms of submission and 
format, while others are not. This is confirmed by the Fitness Check, which found potential 
for improving the planning, reporting and monitoring obligations with regards to coherence in 
particular.  

fields:  The 

the  energy  and  climate 

Lack  of  consistency  between 
interactions, 
interdependencies and overlaps in planning, reporting and monitoring obligations between the 
energy  and  climate  fields,  as  well  as  their  heterogeneity,  deserve  particular  attention.  As 
illustrated by the Fitness Check, under the energy acquis and the MMR Member States report 
information  with  differing  deadlines  and  periodicity,  partly  overlapping  in  substance  (e.g. 
reports on policies and measures which contribute to decrease emissions under the MMR with 
reporting  on  policies  and  measures  under  the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive,  Energy 
Performance of Buildings Directive and Renewable Energy Directive). Furthermore, there are 
inconsistencies  in  the  reports  themselves  (e.g.  parameters  related  to  renewable  energy  and 
energy efficiency used in national greenhouse gas emission projections are not consistent with 
parameters presented in energy reporting).  

Unnecessary  administrative  costs  and  inefficient  energy  regulation:  As  illustrated  by  the 
Fitness Check, a non-negligible share of the current obligations in the energy field is not cost-
effective and thus leads to a disproportionately high, unnecessary administrative burden. The 

13 

 
 
coexistence  of  a  number  of  sector-specific  legal  acts  has  resulted  in  too  extensive, 
heterogeneous and partly overlapping obligations both in timing and on substance. 

2.2.2.  Inadequacy of the current policy framework between Member States and the 
Commission to achieve the Energy Union objectives and implement the Paris 
Agreement 

Inadequacy of current policy framework to attain the EU 2030 energy targets: By setting the 
2030  targets  for  renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  at  the  EU  level,  the  process  of 
attaining  these  targets  provides  more  flexibility  to  Member  States  in  deciding  on  national 
objectives, policies and measures. At the same time, Member States need to plan their policies 
and  measures  in  the  energy  and  climate  fields  in  full  coherence  with  the  delivery  of  the 
Energy  Union  objectives  across  its  five  dimensions  and  need  to  enhance  coordination  and 
cooperation  with  other  Member  States.  In  the  absence  of  nationally  binding  energy  targets 
until 2030, the Commission also needs to assess whether Member States are collectively on 
track  to  achieve  the  EU  level  targets  and  to  intervene  in  the  case  of  insufficient  progress 
made.  

The  current  policy  framework  does  not  address  these  requirements,  in  particular  due  to  the 
absence of a formalised process of coordinating energy policies across the EU in view of the 
Energy  Union  objectives,  in  particular  the  lack  of  policy  recommendations  from  the 
Commission  to  Member  States  specific  to  energy  and  climate  policies  and  the  absence  of  a 
formalised  process  for  Member  States'  consultations  on  national  planning  activities  with  a 
comprehensive regional scope along the five dimensions of the Energy Union 

Lack of synchronisation of planning and reporting obligations with the Paris Agreement: The 
Paris Climate Agreement sets out a 5-year review cycle, which includes review processes to 
ensure the achievement of its goals. Starting from 202313, every five years a global stocktake 
will  take  place,  based  on  latest  science  and  implementation  progress,  which  is  relevant  for 
considering  progressively  more  ambitious  action  by  all  Parties.  All  parties  to  the  Paris 
Agreement  are  also  invited  to  communicate  by  2020  their  mid-century,  long-term  low 
greenhouse gas emission development strategies. To make sure that the EU is ready to fully 
participate  in  the  review  processes  under  the  Paris  Agreement,  planning  and  reporting 
obligations by Member States for the Energy Union should as far as possible be synchronised 
with the 5-year review cycle of the Paris Agreement. 

13  A  first  'facilitative  dialogue'  will  be  held  in  2018  to  take  stock  of  the  collective  ambition,  progress  in 
implementing commitments and to inform the preparation of further contributions. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
3.  SUBSIDIARITY AND THE VARYING SITUATION OF MEMBER STATES 

3.1.  Legal basis 

The  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union  (TFEU)  provides  the  EU  with  an 
explicit competence in the energy field through its Article 194. This article states that the EU 
policy in the area of energy shall aim to ensure the functioning of the internal market, ensure 
security  of  supply,  promote  energy  efficiency  and  the  development  of  new  and  renewable 
forms  of  energy,  and  promote  the  interconnection  of  energy  networks.  Articles  191  to  193 
TFEU specify EU competences in the area of climate change. The EURATOM Treaty is a lex 
specialis in relation to the TFEU, which applies to the nuclear energy sector.  

This proposal pursues a legitimate objective within the scope of Article 191(1) TFEU, namely 
combating climate change, as well as the above mentioned energy policy objectives of Article 
194 TFEU. The ordinary legislative procedure applies generally for the adoption of measures 
based  in  Article  192  (1)  TFEU  and  in  Article  194(2)  of  the  TFEU.  Nevertheless,  each 
Member  State  maintains  its  right  to  determine  the  conditions  for  exploiting  its  energy 
resources, its choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy 
supply  (Article  194(2)  TFEU).  The  general  division  of  responsibilities  between  the  EU  and 
Member States will not be affected by this proposal compared to the current situation. 

for 

the  Commission 

Impact  Assessment  also  assesses  options 

to  provide 
This 
recommendations  to  Member  States.  Articles  192  and  194  provide  the  legal  basis  for  the 
Commission to adopt a legislative initiative which foresees the adoption of recommendations. 
As  to  the  recommendations  themselves,  the  legal  basis  for  the  recommendations  is  Articles 
192 and 194 TFEU. According to Article 288 TFEU, to exercise the Union's competence, the 
institutions  can  adopt  regulations,  directives,  decisions,  recommendations  and  opinions. 
Recommendations have no binding force, but allow the Commission to make its views known 
and  suggest  a  line  of  action  without  imposing  any  legal  obligation  on  those  to  whom  it  is 
addressed.  In  case  a  legislative  proposal  is  pursued,  the  possibility  for  the  Commission  to 
provide  recommendations  and  the  process  governing  these  recommendations  will  be  laid 
down  in  the  proposal.  Once  entered  into  force,  this  will  provide  the  framework  for  the 
recommendations as well as for the follow up process.  

3.2.  Necessity of EU action 

the  background  of 

the  October  2014  European  Council  conclusions, 

the 
Against 
Commission's  2015  Energy  Union  Framework  Strategy  and  the  Commission's  first  State  of 
the  Energy  Union  2015  the  legislative  initiative  on  Energy  Union  Governance  aims  at 
streamlining  existing  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  and  defining  the 
the  Commission,  while  ensuring 
governance  process  between  Member  States  and 
synchronisation  with  the  reporting  cycle  from  the  Paris  Agreement.  In  line  with  the 
subsidiarity  principle,  any  proposal  explored  in  the  context  of  this  initiative  will  have  to 
respect Member States' competences. There is necessity for EU action in the following areas:   

15 

 
 
 
First, having in mind that several elements of the Energy Union Strategy relate to objectives 
set at the EU level, action at EU level is needed to ensure the attainment of these objectives as 
well as coherence of energy and climate policies within the EU and across its Member States, 
while  preserving  flexibility  for  Member  States.  Moreover,  the  majority  of  the  energy 
challenges facing the Union cannot be met through uncoordinated national action. The same 
holds true for climate change, which by its nature is a trans-boundary problem and cannot be 
solved  by  national  or  local  action  alone.  Therefore,  coordination  of  climate  action  at  both 
European  and  global  level  is  necessary.  Consequently,  EU  action  is  justified  to  monitor  the 
progress  of  implementation  of  energy  and  climate  policies  across  the  EU  in  line  with  the 
Energy Union objectives as well as the functioning of the internal energy market. 

Second,  because  of  the  cross-border  relevance  of  each  dimension  of  the  Energy  Union,  EU 
action is needed to further promote enhanced cooperation among Member States. None of the 
Energy  Union  dimensions  could  be  effectively  implemented  in  the  absence  of  an  EU 
governance  process  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  ensuring  a  more  regional 
approach to energy and climate policy. It is also necessary to create the enabling framework 
to  ensure  that  the  EU  is  ready  to  participate  fully  in  the  review  processes  under  the  Paris 
Agreement, ensuring maximum synchronisation and synergies. 

Third,  EU  action  is  justified  for  the  initiative's  objective  of  streamlining  existing  planning, 
reporting and monitoring obligations, as existing EU legislation in the energy acquis as well 
as  the  Monitoring  Mechanism  Regulation  can  only  be  amended  by  means  of  legislative 
proposals in order to reduce the administrative burden for Member States and the Commission 
and  enhance  the  coherence  of  planning  and  reporting  as  well  as  to  ensure  comparability  of 
National Plans and Progress Reports. 

3.3.  EU added-value 

On  the  basis  of  the  previous  Section  there  are clear  benefits  from  EU-level  action over  and 
above  what  could  be  achieved  by  the  Member  States  acting  alone.  The  establishment  of  a 
solid Energy Union governance system will help to ensure that the EU and its Member States 
collectively  achieve  the  agreed  objectives  of  the  Energy  Union  and  find  coordinated  and 
common  solutions  to  common  challenges  in  an  effective  and  affordable  manner.  This  is 
imperative  in  view  of  the  considerable  investment  needs  in  the  energy  sector  over  the  next 
decades.  Addressing  all  dimensions  of  the  Energy  Union,  including  transport,  regional 
policies, competition aspects, digital issues, innovation and others, in its governance system 
will also have a strong added value.   

Furthermore,  a  streamlined  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  framework  together  with 
functional governance process between the Member States and the Commission is expected to 
create  administrative  and  broader  economic,  social  and  environmental  benefits  for  the 
Member States and the stakeholders. 

Member  States  will  benefit  from  a  streamlined  and  simplified  planning  and  reporting 
framework for their  energy and climate policies. More efficient and coherent administrative 
procedures  both  within  national  authorities  and  between  the  Member  States  will  enable  a 

16 

 
 
 
more  efficient  development  and implementation  of  energy  and  climate policies.  The  private 
sector  will  benefit  from  more  transparent  national  regulatory  frameworks  as  basis  for 
investment decisions in the energy and climate fields and citizens from better information on 
the implementation of the Energy Union and its associated policies. 

4.  OBJECTIVES  

In  line  with  the  agreement  by  the  October  2014  European  Council  on  a  reliable  and 
transparent governance system without any unnecessary administrative burden, which helps to 
ensure  that  the  EU  meets  its  energy  policy  goals  and  streamlines  and  integrates  separate 
planning and reporting strands, the objectives of the initiative are presented below. 14 

4.1.  General objectives 

The general objectives of the initiative are the following: 

  To  ensure  a  coordinated  and  coherent  implementation  of  the  Energy  Union  Strategy 
across  its  five  dimensions  as  well  as  the  collective  achievement  of  the  Energy  Union 
objectives through a combination of EU and national measures;  

  To  set  up  a  functional  (dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent)  governance  process  between 

the Commission and Member States; 

  To  minimise  administrative  burden  and  achieve  a  simplification  and  integration  of 
planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  for  Member  States  and  the  Commission, 
while maintaining benefits of such obligations including their quality of information and 
transparency; 

  To ensure the compliance of the EU with its international climate obligations, especially 

those deriving from the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. 

4.2.  Specific objectives 

The specific objectives of the initiative are the following: 

  To provide for a timely implementation and monitoring of the Energy Union objectives; 

  To  streamline  existing  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  of  Member 
States  and  of  the  Commission  in  line  with  the  Better  Regulation  principles  of 
effectiveness, efficiency, EU added value, relevance and coherence; 

14 In consistency with the published Roadmap "Energy Union Governance – Planning, Reporting and Monitoring 
obligations". 
http://ec.europa.eu/smart-
regulation/roadmaps/docs/2016_ener_029_energy_union_governance_planning_and_reporting_en.pdf   

Reference: 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  To  specify  the  governance  process  in  terms  of  the  content  and  adequate  periodicity  of 
National  Plans,  Progress  Reports  and  the  monitoring  by  the  Commission  as  well  as  the 
related iterative process between the Member States and the Commission and the relevant 
framework for regional coordination.  

5.  POLICY OPTIONS 

5.1.  Baseline scenario 

The starting point for defining options is to define a baseline as "no policy change" scenario. 
A  baseline  serves  according  to  the  Better  Regulation  Guidelines  to  assess  all  relevant 
advantages and disadvantages of the retained policy options against it in a meaningful way. 

The  baseline  scenario  is  defined  as  to  represent  the  current  legislative  framework  for 
planning, reporting and monitoring in the EU energy and climate acquis as well as the current 
governance process between the Commission and Member States.  

A  strictly  legal  interpretation  of  the  "no  policy  change"  scenario  with  regard  to  planning, 
reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  in  place  in  the  current  EU  energy  and  climate  acquis 
would  imply  that  some  of  these  obligations  expire  (notably  relating  to  the  2020  energy 
targets), while others continue post 2020 (most of the obligations contained in the Monitoring 
Mechanism Regulation).  

Such  a  scenario  would,  however,  be  inconsistent  with  the  policy  context  of  this  Impact 
Assessment:  the  new  energy  and  climate  policy  targets  for  the  period  from  2021  to  2030 
included  in  the  Energy  Union  strategy,  which  build  on  the  respective  2020  targets  and  are 
linked to continued EU energy and climate policies post 2020. These policies require for their 
implementation  the  continuation  of  the  corresponding  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations  beyond  2020.  By  neglecting  the  existing  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations  that  would  be  needed  to  implement  these  policy  objectives,  such  a  baseline 
scenario  would  not  represent  a  suitable  reference  for  the  comparison  of  policy  options  for 
streamlining the existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations post 2020. 

Against this background, this Impact Assessment adopts a political interpretation of the "no 
policy  change"  scenario  by  assuming  an  unchanged  continuation  of  existing  planning, 
reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  in  the  energy  and  climate  field  post  2020,  without  the 
introduction of any new obligations, when assessing alternative options for streamlining.15  

Consistently,  the  baseline  scenario  does  not  assume  the  availability  of  any  formalised 
governance  process  between  the  Commission  and  Member  States  –  including  an  iterative 
process on ambition or implementation of National Plans leading to specific recommendations 
from  the  Commission  on  national  energy  and  climate  policy  planning  across  the  Union,  or 

15 The existing obligations also include the current framework for Commission infringements in order to ensure 
the full implementation of the respective Directives by Member States. 

18 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Member  States'  consultations  on  national  policy  planning.  However,  it  has  to  take  into 
account  the  pragmatic  approach  which  was  established  in  2015  and  will  continue  until  the 
current legislative proposal is in force. This includes a voluntary process mirroring elements 
of  the  European  Semester,  including  bilateral  discussions  with  Member  States  based  on 
specific  country  factsheets  or  the  annual  Semester  country  reports,  the  provision  of  policy 
conclusions or recommendations in the State of the Energy Union as an existing monitoring 
tool (together with the key indicators report for the five dimensions of the Energy Union), the 
cooperation  with  Member  States  through  the  Technical  Expert  Group  as  well  as  the 
involvement  of  all  Commission  services  and  agencies  in  the  provision  of  information.  The 
Guidance  to  Member  States  on  National  Energy  and  Climate  Plans16  provides  further 
information on these elements. As regards planning, reporting and monitoring obligations for 
the governance process, the existing obligations in sectorial legislation are part of the baseline 
scenario. 

5.2.  Options for streamlining of planning, reporting and monitoring 

obligations (S) 

In principle, streamlining of the existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations in the 
EU energy and climate acquis post 2020 could be pursued by different levels of stringency, 
from  a  better  alignment  of  the  existing  separate  obligations  (e.g.  in  terms  of  periodicity)  to 
their full alignment (e.g. also in terms of content) and integration in one aggregate obligation.  

For each of the existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations in the energy acquis 
and the MMR, the Fitness Check assessed whether the obligation is suitable for: 

 

  being  integrated  in  National  Plans,  Progress  Reports  and  integrated  Commission 
monitoring (and at the same time being amended in or repealed from current sectorial 
legislation); or  
remaining  a  separate  obligation  in  sectorial  legislation,  which  will  however  be 
reflected  in  the  National  Plans,  Progress  Reports  and  integrated  Commission 
monitoring; or  
remaining  an  entirely  separate  obligation  in  sectorial  legislation  (with  possible 
amendments) without reflection in the National Plans and/or Progress Reports; or  
remaining a separate obligation from National Plans, Progress Reports and integrated 
Commission  monitoring  but,  given  its  relation  to  obligations  to  be  integrated  in 
National  Plans,  Progress  Reports  and  integrated  Commission  monitoring,  linked  to 
those obligations and to follow the legal destination of those obligations17; or 

 

 

  being fully repealed from current sectorial legislation and thus removed from the EU 

energy and climate acquis. 

16  Presented  as  Annex  2  to  the  Commission's  State  of  the  Energy  Union  in  November  2015,  COM(2015)572 
final. 
17  For  example,  because  the  obligation  supports  the  collection  of  data  for  the  National  Plans  or  because  it 
improves the accuracy of such data. This category is only relevant for some obligations of the current MMR. 

19 

 
 
 
                                                 
All obligations under the Fitness Check were classified accordingly (see Annexes 6 and 7 for 
an  overview  of  obligations  and  their  classification).  The  incorporation  of  the  relevant 
obligations in National Plans and Progress Reports would be supported by means of templates 
for these plans and reports that cover the five dimensions of the Energy Union.  

Building on these conclusions of the Fitness Check, the following sub-sections present policy 
options  on  both  non-legislative  and  legislative  approaches  to  streamline  existing  planning, 
reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  with  the  aim  of  achieving  the  above  classification  of 
obligations.  

A. Streamlining obligations by soft guidance  

(1) Soft comprehensive guidance to Member States on planning, reporting and monitoring 

(S1) 

Member  States  would  be  invited  to  streamline  and  improve  their  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring  obligations  on  the  basis  of  comprehensive  non-binding  Commission  guidance, 
which  would  complement  the  already  existing  Guidance  to  Member  States  on  National 
Energy  and  Climate  Plans  (which  focussed  on  policy  planning)  by  guidance  related  to 
reporting  and  monitoring.  Any  streamlining  of  existing  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations would be undertaken by Member States and the Commission on a voluntary basis. 

The soft Commission guidance to Member States would mean an unchanged continuation of 
existing  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  without  the  introduction  of  new 
obligations.  

Templates  for  the  content  of  National  Plans  and  respective  Progress  Reports  would  be 
provided by soft guidance.  

B. Streamlining obligations by several legislative acts 

(2) Regulating planning, reporting and monitoring obligations in the energy and climate 

field through sector-specific EU energy and climate legislation (S2) 

The  current  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  for  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  in  the  energy  acquis  identified  in  the  Fitness  Check  as  being  relevant  to  the 
implementation of the Energy Union would be streamlined through  revisions of the existing 
sectorial  legislation.18  The  relevant  provisions  would  remain  in  the  existing  sectorial 
legislation but they would be amended in order to be brought in line with the Energy Union 
objectives by being integrated, revised or fully repealed. The MMR would also be amended 
separately  to  replace  the  articles  needing  to  be  either  repealed,  revised  in  order  to  ensure 
consistency with the Paris Agreement or integrated with the energy parts.19  

Templates  for  the  content  of  National  Plans  and  respective  Progress  Reports  would  be 
provided by soft Commission guidance. 

18 See Annex 6 for an overview of obligations and their classification. 
19 See Annex 7 for an overview of obligations and their classification. 

20 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
(3) Regulating planning, reporting, monitoring and compliance obligations in the energy 
and  climate  field  through  two  separate  legislative  acts  for  the  energy  and  climate 
fields (S3) 

The  current  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  for  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  identified  in  the  Fitness  Check  as  being  relevant  to  the  implementation  of  the 
Energy  Union  would  be  streamlined  through  two  separate  legislative  acts:  a  new  act  on 
governance for the energy field  that replaces the relevant  parts  of existing legislation in  the 
energy acquis20 and a separately amended MMR for the climate field that replaces the Articles 
needing  to  be  repealed,  revise  the  articles  in  order  to  ensure  consistency  with  the  Paris 
Agreement or to be integrated and streamlined with the energy parts. 21  

Templates  for  the  content  of  National  Plans  and  respective  Progress  Reports  would  be 
provided by soft Commission guidance. 

C. Streamlining obligations by a single legislative act 

(4) Regulating planning, reporting, monitoring and compliance obligations in the energy 
and climate field by a single legislative act on Energy Union governance that replaces 
the relevant parts of existing legislation (S4)  

A  single  legislative  act  on  Energy  Union  governance  would  be  adopted  that  replaces  the 
relevant  existing  obligations  in  the  energy  and  climate  acquis,  while  a  "light"  MMR  would 
remain in force. 

All  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  for  Member  States  and  the  Commission 
that are relevant to the Energy Union implementation and have been identified in the Fitness 
Check as suitable for being integrated will become part of one new single legislative act. The 
single act will also repeal all obligations that have been identified as being suitable for being 
fully repealed, and amend other obligations as identified in the Fitness Check for the energy 
acquis  and  in  the  MMR.22  However,  those  provisions  that  relate  primarily  to  the  UNFCCC 
and do not have a direct link with the National Plans would remain in the MMR.23  

Templates  for  the  content  of  National  Plans  and  respective  Progress  Reports  would  be 
provided as part of the single legislative act. 

20 See Annex 6 for an overview of obligations and their classification. 
21 See Annex 7 for an overview of obligations and their classification. 
22 See Annex 6 for an overview of obligations and their classification. 
23  Climate  obligations  that  would  remain  in  the  MMR  in  this  option  are:  Article  4  MMR  (Low  Carbon 
Development  Strategies),  Article  11  MMR  (Retirements  of  units  under  the  Kyoto  Protocol),  Article  15  MMR 
(National  adaptation  actions),  Article  16  MMR  (Financial  and  technology  support  provided  to  developing 
countries),  Article  18  MMR  (Reporting  of  national  communications  and  biennial  reports),  Article  22  MMR 
(True up period reports), Article 21 MMR (Reporting on Progress). 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(5) Regulating planning, reporting, monitoring and compliance obligations in the energy 

and climate field by a single legislative act on Energy Union governance (S5) 

A  single  legislative  act  on  Energy  Union  governance  would  be  adopted  that  replaces  the 
relevant parts of existing legislation in the energy acquis and fully replaces the MMR. 

All  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  for  Member  States  and  the  Commission 
that are relevant to the Energy Union implementation and have been identified in the Fitness 
Check as suitable for being integrated will become part of one new single legislative act. The 
single act will also repeal all obligations that have been identified as being suitable for being 
fully repealed, including the MMR in its entirety, and amend other obligations as identified in 
the Fitness Check for the energy acquis.24  

Templates  for  the  content  of  National  Plans  and  respective  Progress  Reports  would  be 
provided as part of the single legislative act. 

(6) Regulating planning, reporting, monitoring and compliance obligations in the energy 
and  climate  field  by  a  single  legislative  act  that  amends  or  replaces  existing 
legislation for all actors and stakeholders (S6) 

A single legislative act would be adopted that integrates, repeals or amends existing planning, 
reporting and monitoring obligations for all actors and stakeholders (not only Member States 
and the Commission).  

In the energy field, this would imply that also obligations for the following other actors and 
stakeholders  would  be  regulated  in  the  single  act:  obligations  performed  by  the  Agency  for 
the  Cooperation  of  Energy  Regulators  (ACER,  two  obligations),  the  European  Network  of 
Transmission  System  Operators  for  Electricity  (ENTSO-E,  one  obligation),  the  European 
Network  of  Transmission  System  Operators  for  Gas  (ENTSO-G,  one  obligation)  and  the 
national  Transmission  System  Operators  (TSOs,  four  obligations).  In  addition,  further 
obligations that were outside the scope of the Fitness Check would be included in the single 
act,  such  as  planning  and  reporting  obligations  for  project  promoters  set  out  in  Article  5(1) 
and  5(4)  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  347/2013  on  guidelines  for  trans-European  energy 
infrastructure  (the  TEN-E  Regulation)  as  well  as  obligations  for  energy  market  participants 
set out in Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011 on wholesale energy market integrity 
and transparency (the Wholesale Energy Markets Regulation). As to the climate acquis, in this 
option  the  MMR  is  entirely  included  in  the  single  legislative  act  and  repealed  from  the 
existing climate acquis.  

Templates  for  the  content  of  National  Plans  and  respective  Progress  Reports  would  be 
provided as part of the single legislative act. 

24 See Annex 6 for an overview of obligations and their classification. 

22 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
5.3.  Options for elements of the Governance process  

This section presents policy options for the Governance process between Member States and 
the Commission as well as between Member States. 

5.3.1.  Periodicity of National Plans (NP) 

(1) No update of National Plans in the period from 2021 to 2030 (NP1) 

After submission of the final National Plans by Member States to the Commission by 2018, 
no update of National Plans by Member States is foreseen in the period from 2021 to 2030, so 
that final National Plans would remain valid until 2030.  

(2) One update of National Plans in the period from 2021 to 2030 (NP2) 

After submission of the final National Plans by Member States to the Commission by 2018, 
Member States would be required to update the plans once, e.g. in 2023. The update would 
cover objectives, policies and measures and projections of the plans.  

(3) Biennial updates of National Plans (NP3)  

After submission of the final National Plans by Member States to the Commission by 2018, 
Member  States  would  be  required  to  biennially  update  the  plans.  The  updates  would  cover 
objectives, policies and measures and projections of the plans.  

(4) Biennial updates of National Plans limited to policies and measures and projections 

(NP4) 

After submission of the final National Plans by Member States to the Commission by 2018, 
Member States would be required to biennially update the plans. However, the updates would 
be limited to policies and measures and projections of the plans. 

(5) Updates  of  National  Plans  every  five  years,  and  at  Member  States'  discretion  with 

regard to policies and measures and projections (NP5)  

After submission of the final National Plans by Member States to the Commission by 2018, 
Member States would be required to update the plans every five years, i.e in 2023 and 2028, 
but  going  beyond  that  date  in  view  of  the  2050  horizon.  National  plans  should  also  be 
informed by long-term strategies, e.g. the existing 2050 road maps or mid-century strategies. 

If, in addition, Member States wish to update the National Plans with regard to their policies 
and  measures  and  projections  more  frequently  than  the  required  updates  every  5  years  
Member States would be required to report to the Commission the updated plan.  

Note that for all of the options above, the timing and content of the updates of National Plans 
would have to be consistent with the timing and content of Progress Reports.  

23 

 
 
 
 
5.3.2.  Periodicity of Progress Reports (PR) 

(1) Annual Progress Reports (PR1) 

Member  States  would  submit  annual  Progress  Reports  on  the  implementation  of  National 
Plans,  including  on  updates  of  policies  and  measures  and  updated  projections.  The  first 
Progress Reports would be submitted in the early 2020s. 

(2) Biennial Progress Reports (PR2) 

Member  States  would  submit  biennial  Progress  Reports  on  the  implementation  of  National 
Plans,  including  on  updates  of  policies  and  measures  and  updated  projections.  The  first 
Progress Reports would be submitted in the early 2020s. 

(3) Biennial  comprehensive  Progress  Reports  and  limited  Progress  Reports  every  other 

two years (PR3) 

Member  States  would  submit  annual  Progress  Reports,  of  which  every  two  years  a 
comprehensive  report  on  the  implementation  of  National  Plans,  including  on  updates  of 
policies  and  measures  and  updated  projections,  and  every  other  two  years  a  limited  report 
containing  the  information  required  on  an  annual  basis  (for  example  GHG  inventories  and 
approximated inventories). The limited report could also contain updates of other information 
in  case  of  substantial  changes  occurring  as  compared  to  the  information  submitted  in  the 
comprehensive  report.  The  first  comprehensive  Progress  Reports  would  be  submitted  in  the 
early 2020s. 

5.3.3.  Periodicity of Commission monitoring of collective progress made (M) 

(1) Annual monitoring reports (M1) 

Annual integrated monitoring report by the Commission on EU-wide progress made towards 
the Energy Union objectives based on Member States Progress Reports and key energy and 
climate indicators as well as country-specific assessments.  

(2) Biennial monitoring reports (M2) 

Biennial integrated monitoring report by the Commission on EU-wide progress made towards 
the Energy Union objectives based on Member States Progress Reports and key energy and 
climate indicators as well as country-specific assessments.  

5.3.4.  Iterative process with Member States including country-specific 

recommendations or decisions (IP) 

The  achievement  of  the  Energy  Union  objectives  and  in  particular  of  the  2030  Energy  and 
Climate  Framework  assumes  an  iterative  process  between  the  Member  States  and  the 
Commission.  This  process  should  include  country-specific  recommendations  as  part  of  the 
State  of  the  Energy  Union.  Such  recommendations  would  be  based  on,  inter  alia,  Member 
States' National Plans, their Progress Reports, and the assessment of key energy and climate 
indicators to monitor progress towards meeting the Energy Union objectives.  They may also 

24 

 
 
 
 
concern  more  general  or  short-term  energy  and  climate  policy  developments  than  those 
covered  by  National  Plans  or  Progress  Reports  and  could  draw  on  complementary  country 
analyses  inter  alia  under  the  European  Semester.  The  geographical  scope  of  the  overall 
Governance process as well as of the possibility to provide recommendations has to be further 
considered  as  regards  non-EU  countries,  which  are  however  participating  e.g.  in  the 
achievement  of  the  climate  targets  or  which  are  closely  linked,  e.g.  through  the  Energy 
Community Treaty. 

This  process  would  enable  the  Commission  to  evaluate  whether  the  National  Plans  are 
ambitious enough to allow for the collective achievement of the Energy Union objectives, and 
in particular the 2030 targets, and to detect at an early stage whether the implementation of 
the National Plans is delivering on these objectives.  

Should this not be the case, the Commission should propose additional measures at EU-level 
or request from Member States further measures in order to fill potential gaps to these targets 
and thereby ensure the achievement of these Energy Union objectives, in particular the 2030 
targets  for  renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  (thereby  addressing  the  "What  if" 
question").  

the  policy  options  presented  below,  Member  States  would  be  asked 

In 
take 
recommendations or decisions into account (either as part of updates of National Plans or as 
part of their Progress Reports) and to report to the Commission on the consideration of these 
recommendations or decisions.  

to 

The options below on the iterative process on the one hand, and on the nature of subsequent 
country-specific recommendations or decisions on the other, are complementary. 

(1) Iterative  process  on  ambition  of  draft  National  Plans  including  country-specific 

recommendations (IP1) 

Should  the  Commission's  assessment  of  Member  States'  draft  National  Plans  show 
insufficient ambition of National Plans, the Commission issues recommendations for potential 
revisions of the draft National Plans (see options IP5 to IP8). These recommendations concern 
the  entire  National  Plans,  including  their  national  objectives  (ambition),  in  view  of 
collectively  achieving  the  Energy  Union  objectives  and  in  particular  the  2030  targets  for 
renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency.  Taking 
the  Commission 
recommendations, Member States revise their draft National Plans before their finalisation. 

into  account 

(2)  Iterative  process  on  the  implementation  of  the  National  Plans  including  country-

specific recommendations (IP2) 

Following  the  submission  of  final  National  Plans  and  based  on  an  assessment  of  Member 
States'  national  Progress  Reports,  in  case  of  insufficient  delivery  of  the  National  Plans,  the 
Commission  issues  recommendations  for  potential  revisions  of  final  National  Plans  (see 
options IP5 to IP8). These recommendations refer to the policies and measures of the National 
Plans in view of fully implementing (delivering) their national objectives. Taking into account 
these  Commission  recommendations,  Member  States  revise  policies  and  measures  of  their 
plans in the implementation phase. 

25 

 
 
 
(3) Iterative  process  on  ambition  and  implementation  of  the  National  Plans  including 

country-specific recommendations (IP3) 

The iterative process would take place based on the ambition of the draft National Plans and 
the implementation of the National Plans (combination of the 2 previous options). Taking into 
account the Commission recommendations on the ambition of draft National Plans, Member 
States  revise  their  National  Plans in  the  drafting  phase  before  their  finalisation.  Taking  into 
account  the  Commission  recommendations  on  the  implementation  of  the  National  Plans, 
Member States revise National Plans in the implementation phase. 

(4) Iterative  process  on  ambition  and  implementation  of  the  National  Plans  including 

country-specific recommendations and measures (IP4) 

This option applies if, despite of the iterative process of the Commission on the ambition of 
draft  National  Plans  and  the  implementation  of  final  National  Plans  (option  IP3),  aggregate 
national  objectives  presented  by  Member  States'  in  final  National  Plans  persist  to  be 
insufficient to  achieve  the  Energy Union  objectives  or  if Member  States  collectively  do  not 
sufficiently  deliver  on  their  national  objectives  for  renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency 
(and  in particular for the case of binding targets at EU level). In this case the Commission 
could  propose  additional  measures  at  EU-level  or  request  from  Member  States  further 
national  measures  in  order  to  fill  potential  gaps  to  these  targets  and  thereby  ensure  the 
achievement  of  these  Energy  Union  objectives.  The  process  on  how  to  detect  and  prevent 
such  gaps  should  be  set  out  as  part  of  the  iterative  process  in  the  Governance  initiative. 
Potential measures to be taken would be anticipated in the Governance initiative but would be 
set out in detail in the revised sectorial legislation. For this reason, the corresponding policy 
options  are  assessed  in  more  detail  in  the  impact  assessments  for  the  revisions  of  these 
Directives. 

(5) Commission recommendations not set in legislation (IP5) 

The  Commission  provides  recommendations  specifically  to  energy  and  climate  policy  to 
Member States on their draft National Plans and the implementation of the National Plans as 
part of the State of the Energy Union, when appropriate, and without a process specified in a 
legal act.  

(6) Commission recommendations set in legislation (IP6) 

The Commission provides recommendations to Member States on their draft National Plans 
and the implementation of the National Plans on the basis of a process specified in a legal act.  

(7) Council recommendations set in legislation (IP7) 

The Commission proposes recommendations to Member States to be adopted by the Council 
on draft National Plans and the implementation of the National Plans on the basis of a process 
specified in a legal act.  

(8) Binding Commission Decisions (IP8) 

The  Commission  issues  legally  binding  decisions  addressed  to  the  Member  States  on  their 
draft National Plans and the implementation of the National Plans on the basis of a process 
specified in a legal act.  

26 

 
 
Figure 1: Overview of planning, reporting and monitoring in the governance system 

5.3.5.  Consultations of Member States on National Plans (C) 

Consultations with neighbouring and other relevant Member States on National Plans refer to 
an exchange of a Member State's plan with other Member States, publication of the draft plan 
as  part  of  the  consultation,  comments  by  other  Member  States  on  the  plan  as  well  as 
consideration of such comments in the finalisation of the plan and subsequent revisions of the 
final plan. The options below address in particular the consultation process.  

To  establish  coherent  National  Plans  across  Member  States,  draft  National  Plans  would 
outline the initial objectives for the plans, the envisaged policies and measures to reach these 
objectives, and assess the anticipated impacts of these policies and measures on neighbouring 
and  other  relevant  Member  States.  Subsequently,  neighbouring  and  other  relevant  Member 
States  would  jointly  assess  options  on  where  and  how  a  coordinated  approach  would  best 
contribute  towards  achieving  the  Energy  Union  objectives  in  the  implementation  of  their 
National  Plans.  Against  this  background,  regional  cooperation  can  lead  to  enhanced  energy 
market integration, strengthened security of supply, and a more cost-effective implementation 
of the Energy Union.  

The consultations on National Plans can be undertaken within existing structures for regional 
cooperation or new regional structures to be created for such consultations or a new EU-wide 
coordination structure to be created for such consultations as part of the Governance initiative 
(or  a  combination  of  these  structures).  These  alternative  structures  concern  the  institutional 
design of regional cooperation and are not further explored in this Impact Assessment. 

27 

                                                                                          Commission  Recommendations  on National Plans Commission  Assessment of  National Plans  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(1) Voluntary consultations on draft and final National Plans (C1) 

Member States undertake voluntary consultations with neighbouring and other Member States 
on  objectives,  policies  and  measures  presented  in  the  draft  National  Plans  as  well  as  the 
implementation  of  the  National  Plans,  inter  alia  based  on  the  Commission's  Guidance  to 
Member States on National Energy and Climate Plans as well as the forthcoming Commission 
Guidance on regional cooperation.  

(2) Mandatory  consultations  on  draft  National  Plans  only  with  regard  to  policies  and 

measures (C2) 

Member  States  undertake  legally  mandatory  consultations  with  neighbouring  and  other 
Member States only on policies and measures presented in draft National Plans.  

(3) Mandatory consultations on draft National Plans (C3)  

Member  States  undertake  legally  mandatory  consultations  with  neighbouring  and  other 
Member States on objectives, policies and measures presented in draft National Plans.  

(4) Mandatory consultations on draft and final National Plans (C4)  

Member  States  undertake  legally  mandatory  consultations  with  neighbouring  and  other 
Member States on objectives, policies and measures presented in draft National Plans as well 
as the implementation of the National Plans.  

Following  the  presentation  of  policy  options  in  section  5.3,  the  figure  below  illustrates  the 
main elements of the governance process. 

Figure 2: Flow-chart of the governance process 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6.  ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACTS OF THE VARIOUS POLICY OPTIONS 

In  this  section,  the  impacts  of  the  policy  options  set  out  in  section  5  will  be  assessed  with 
regard to the extent to which the policy options meet the specific objectives defined in section 
4. In principle, all options are assessed with respect to three categories of impacts: economic, 
social and environmental impacts. However, as different options can trigger different changes 
and have different kind of impacts the specific assessment of policy options will be consistent 
with the nature of the proposed policy options. 

Streamlining of obligations 

The  impacts  of  policy  options  on  alternative  approaches  to  streamlining  are  based  on  two 
studies supporting this Impact Assessment: the Trinomics study and the Amec Foster Wheeler 
study (see section 9.4 for references). The methodology of the Trinomics study and the Amec 
Foster  Wheeler  study  for  assessing  the  policy  options  followed  the  Standard  Cost  Model 
defined by the Better Regulation toolbox. The underlying data on each indicator was derived 
from  a  comprehensive  stakeholder  survey  as  well  as  interviews  with  national  and  EU-level 
stakeholders. 

The  analysis  of  each  policy  option  examined  several  categories  of  direct  impacts  based  on 
quantitative  indicators  (such  as  costs  of  implementation,  administrative  and  reporting  costs, 
service outsourcing costs, and ICT/equipment costs for existing electronic reporting systems) 
and  qualitative  indicators  (such  as  efficiency  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  system, 
information  quality,  simplicity  and  coherence  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
procedures, and specific costs and benefits for companies). Furthermore, indirect impacts on 
policy  processes  were  examined  by  qualitative  indicators  (such  as  transparency  of  national 
and EU policies, quality of statistics, and quality of national energy and climate policy) to the 
extent possible, as were indirect impacts on the Energy Union objectives.  

The main cost categories assessed are annual costs from planning, reporting and monitoring 
obligations  and  one-time  implementation  costs  from  legislative  changes  as  well  as  their 
transposition  and  implementation.  In  particular,  annual  costs  originate  from  administrative 
and  reporting  costs,  ICT/equipment  costs  and  service  outsourcing  costs.  One-time 
implementation  costs  for  the  Commission  relate  to  the  legislative  changes  (revision  or 
renewal  of legislation, provision of templates, introduction of a new legislative act) that are 
needed  to  implement  each  option  as  well  as  the  preparation  of  guidance.  One-time 
implementation  costs  for  Member  States  originate  in  particular  from  transposition  and 
implementation  of  legislation  and  the  adoption  of  National  Plans.  Further  one-time 
implementation costs include ICT/ equipment costs as well as service outsourcing costs.  

Against this background, the following impacts are assessed: 

Economic  impacts:  For  policy  options  on  alternative  non-legislative  and  legislative 
approaches  to  streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations,  the  most 
relevant  economic  impacts  are  impacts  in  terms  of  the  associated  administrative  costs  (in 
terms of ongoing costs from obligations and implementation costs) and benefits (in terms of 

29 

 
 
 
simplification of obligations, a more coordinated and coherent implementation of the Energy 
Union strategy and compliance with international climate obligations) for Member States and 
the Commission relating to these options. Based on the mapping of obligations in the Fitness 
Check,  the  administrative  costs  and  benefits  of  the  policy  options  to  be  assessed  will  show 
variations depending on the corresponding prospects of arriving at such streamlining as well 
as the legislative processes involved. Furthermore, due to the focus on planning, reporting and 
monitoring obligations for Member States and the Commission, the initiative will not affect 
the  nature  of  information  obligations  placed  on  industry  in  general  and  SMEs  in  particular, 
and  will  not  impose  direct  or  indirect  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  requirements  on 
business  in  general  and  SMEs  in  particular.  Likewise,  significant  direct  impacts  on  the 
competitiveness of traditional industrial sectors are not expected. However, positive impacts 
on  industry  in  general  and  SMEs  in  particular  are  expected  in  terms  of  enhanced  investor 
certainty by means of streamlined obligations.  

Social  impacts  are  relevant  in  terms  of  better  informing  citizens  about  the  Energy  Union 
implementation  by  means  of  streamlined  and  thus  more  transparent  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring obligations for Member States and the Commission.  

Environmental impacts: The Fitness Check identified a lack of coherence between planning, 
reporting and evaluation obligations in the energy field with the climate field. Correcting such 
incoherencies will increase the EU's performance regarding climate change, improve quality 
and  completeness  of  data  and  compliance  with  international  commitments  under  the 
UNFCCC and Paris Agreement which are intrinsically linked with the EU system. 

Governance process 

For  policy  options  on  the  governance  process  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission 
the assessment of impacts will primarily relate to the general implications of these options for 
a  functional  (dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent)  governance  system  that  will  be  essential  to 
implement the objectives of the Energy Union. Besides, there are more specific impacts that 
will be assessed in a qualitative manner: 

Economic  impacts  are  relevant  with  regard  to  general  economic  impacts  of  a  functional 
governance process; the associated administrative costs and benefits for Member States  and 
the Commission; and impacts on SMEs and industry in terms of investor certainty by means 
of a transparent governance process. 25 

Social  impacts  are  relevant  in  terms  of  better  informing  citizens  in  the  Energy  Union 
implementation as well as in terms of jobs and growth by means of a functional governance 
process. 

Environmental  impacts  are  relevant  in  terms  of  increasing  the  EU's  performance  regarding 
climate change as well as compliance with international commitments.  

25 Due to the aim of the initiative to establish a governance process between Member States and the Commission, 
significant direct impacts on competitiveness of traditional industrial sectors are not expected. 

30 

 
 
 
                                                 
In line with the procedural nature of policy options on the governance process, the assessment 
is  undertaken  in  relation  to  and  structured  along  the  objectives  that  are  relevant  to  all 
categories  of  options:  achieving  a  dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent  governance  process; 
facilitating a timely implementation and monitoring of Energy Union objectives; minimising 
administrative burden; and enabling the EU to comply with international climate obligations. 

In  the  following  sub-sections,  impacts  will  be  quantified  and  monetised  as  far  as  possible 
(notably  for  policy  options  on  alternative  non-legislative  and  legislative  approaches  to 
streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations).  For  those  policy  options 
where  quantification  is  not  possible  due  to  the  procedural  nature  of  options  (notably  for 
options  on  the  governance  process)  the  impacts  of  policy  options  will  be  assessed 
qualitatively in  comparison  to  the baseline scenario.  Results of the public consultation have 
also been used in the assessment. 

As a conclusion of the assessment of impacts, the extent that the policy options contribute to 
meeting the relevant objectives presented in section 4 will be identified. 

Broader benefits of the Energy Union Governance 

Not all aspects  of the Energy Union Strategy are currently adequately covered or subject to 
planning, reporting and monitoring obligations at EU level. This is due to the broad nature of 
the Energy Union Strategy and its five dimensions. As regards some elements of the Energy 
Union  Strategy,  for  example  research,  innovation  and  competitiveness,  existing  legislation 
does  not  provide  for  any  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  and  these 
components are therefore insufficiently covered to effectively support the implementation and 
monitoring of progress towards the Energy Union objectives,.  

Besides  the  streamlining  and  simplification  of  existing  planning  and  reporting  obligations 
(which is expected to  generate cost savings), the initiative also aims  at the establishment of 
planning and reporting obligations on some of these issues as part of the integrated National 
Plans  and  the  integrated  progress  reports.  This  will  make  the  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring  framework  fit  for  the  post-2020  period,  covering  the  Energy  Union's  five 
dimensions.  Such  additional  planning  obligations  might  limit  the  cost  savings  from 
streamlining,  but  will  at  the  same  time  generate  substantial  benefits  of  integrated  policy 
planning and ensuring investor certainty until the year 2030. National Plans are instrumental 
for  the  implementation  of  the  Energy  Union.  The  same  holds  true  for  the  new  integrated 
monitoring  system  by  the  Commission,  which  will  be  key  to  assess  the  Union's  progress 
towards the implementation of the Energy Union.  

Greater  coherence  between  various  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  will 
enhance  transparency.  Consistency  between  the  energy  and  climate  fields  is  expected  to  be 
improved. This will bring benefits as Member States will not report information that is partly 
overlapping  in  substance  or  containing  inconsistencies.  For  example,  under  the  MMR 
Member  States  currently  report  on  policies  and  measures  which  contribute  to  decreasing 
emissions,  which  overlap  with  reporting  on  policies  and  measures  under  the  Energy 
Efficiency  Directive,  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive  and  Renewable  Energy 

31 

 
 
 
Directive.  Through  the  submission  of  an  integrated  Progress  Report  covering  all  five 
dimensions,  the  information  currently  reported  under  several  different  channels  would  be 
streamlined  and  only  submitted  once,  thus  contributing  to  cutting  administrative  costs  in 
Member States. Another example is that parameters related to renewable energy and energy 
efficiency  used  in  national  greenhouse  gas  emission  projections  are  not  consistent  with 
parameters  reported  in  the  energy  sector.  Improved  consistency  will  lead  to  better  data 
quality, transparency, and an integrated approach to energy and climate policy planning.  

Improved  data  availability  is  expected  to  bring  wider  benefits  as  Member  States  and 
stakeholders will have access to the data and information. A better picture will be available of 
policy developments in the Member States. Furthermore, research institutions will be able to 
use  the  data  and  information  for  their  research.  Experience  in  the  climate  field  where  for 
instance data on greenhouse gas emissions and removals is available to all has shown that this 
information can be a valuable source. 

The  broader  perspective  should  also  be  kept  in  mind.  The  transition  towards  a  more  secure 
and  sustainable  energy  system  is  estimated  to  require  some  EUR  200  billion  annual 
investments  in  the  next  decade.  Therefore,  general  environmental,  economic  and  social 
benefits  from  the  implementation  of  the  Energy  Union  can  be  expected  from  a  more 
streamlined  energy  and  climate  acquis  and  in  particular  from  a  functional,  reliable  and 
transparent Governance process that supports the achievement of the Energy Union objectives 
including the 2030 climate and energy targets. The Energy Union Governance will allow for 
the  necessary  certainty  and  predictability  to  facilitate  such  investments  as  part  of  the 
implementation of the Energy Union and make them more efficient.  

In summary, the initiative is expected to generate substantial new benefits. These include an 
integrated  approach  to  energy  and  climate  policy  planning,  the  reduction  of  policy  overlaps 
and interactions, improved transparency and availability of information, improvements in the 
quality of information, enhanced predictability and investor certainty until the year 2030. Put 
together, this is expected to lead to a substantially more cost-effective planning and reporting 
system.  

6.1. 

Impacts of the Baseline Scenario 

The  baseline  scenario  will  serve  as  a  reference  for  the  assessment  of  the  impacts  of  the 
proposed policy options in both areas of this Impact Assessment. 

Impacts of the baseline for streamlining obligations 

For the area of streamlining obligations, impacts of the baseline scenario reflect implications 
of an unchanged continuation of existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations post 
2020. The following impacts are derived for the baseline scenario. 

Economic impacts for Member States and the Commission are expected as follows:  

32 

 
 
 
 
  Total  cumulative  costs  for  Member  States  in  the  period  2021-2030  of  222.7  million 
EUR.  This  includes  both  one-time  implementation  cost  and  annual  costs  (the  latter 
multiplied by 10, to cover the 10 years period).  

  One  time  implementation  costs  are  due  to  legislative  changes  ensuring  the 
continuation  of  existing  obligations  beyond  2020.  Implementation  costs  occur  in  the 
baseline  scenario  due  to  the  legislative  procedure  of  prolonging  the  respective  legal 
provisions that would otherwise expire in 2020. Implementation costs include costs for 
transposition  and  implementation  by  Member  States.  An  overview  of  one  time 
implementation  costs  in  the  baseline  scenario  is  presented  in  Annex  9.  The  relevant 
legislation that would be affected by prolongation due to expiry in 2020 includes: 

o  Directive 2009/28/EC (Renewable Energy Directive) 
o  Directive 2010/31/EU (Energy Performance of Buildings Directive) 
o  Directive 2012/27/EU (Energy Efficiency Directive) 
o  Directive 2013/30/EU (Safety of Offshore Oil and Gas Operations Directive) 
o  Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013 (Establishing the Connecting Europe Facility) 

  The total figure also includes annual administrative and reporting costs (for planning 
and  reporting  activities),  ICT/equipment  costs  (for  equipment  and  ICT  system 
installation,  maintenance  and  use)  and  service  outsourcing  costs  (for  outsourcing  of 
planning  and  reporting  services  to  external  consultants)  for  Member  States.  This 
represents  an  unchanged  administrative  burden  from  existing  planning  and  reporting 
obligations  (except  for  inflation  correction).26 An  overview  of  annual  costs  for 
Member States in the baseline scenario is presented in Annex 9. 

  No  administrative  benefits  in  terms  of  simplification  as  well  as  in  terms  of  a  more 
coordinated  and  coherent  implementation  of  Energy  Union  strategy  across  its  five 
dimensions from more streamlined and integrated planning, reporting and monitoring 
due to an unchanged continuation of existing obligations post 2020. 

  No impacts on SMEs and industry are expected due to unchanged specific costs and 
benefits for companies from an unchanged continuation of existing planning, reporting 
and monitoring obligations post 2020. 

  No  general  economic  impacts  are  expected  from  the  unchanged  continuation  of  the 
existing  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  relevant  for  the  achievement 
of the Energy Union objectives.  

No environmental impacts are expected in terms of achieving the Energy Union objectives 
due  to  unchanged  efficiency  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  system,  information 
quality,  simplicity  and  coherence  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  procedures.  The 
single  framework  approach  established  by  the  MMR  incorporates  planning  and  reporting 
requirements  from  EU  law  (ESD,  ETS  and  LULUCF)  and  international  origin  (UNFCCC, 
Paris  Agreement)  in  one  act,  thereby  helping  to  ensure  compliance  by  the  Union  with  its 

26  Cost  estimates  are based on  the  associated  cost of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring obligations  in  energy 
field presented in the Fitness Check. 

33 

 
 
                                                 
international climate obligations and to enable the EU to monitor consistency and progress of 
its international and EU obligations in an integrated way. 

No  social  impacts  are  expected  in  terms  of  informing  citizens  about  the  Energy  Union 
implementation  due  to  unchanged  information  quality  from  an  unchanged  continuation  of 
existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations post 2020. 

Impacts of the baseline for the governance process 

For  the  area  of  the  governance  process  impacts  of  the  baseline  scenario  correspond  to 
implications  of  the  absence  of  a  formalised  process  between  Member  States  and  the 
Commission. It however takes into account the pragmatic approach established in 2015.  

With regard to the periodicity of existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations  the 
baseline scenario is based on the existing obligations in the sectorial legislation, which either 
do  not  include  an  explicit  requirement  to  update  plans  or  foresee  different  periodicity.  The 
same  applies  for  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations,  where  the  majority  of  legislative 
provisions, however, provide for annual or biennial reporting and monitoring. Therefore, the 
Impact  Assessment  assumes  that  planning  obligations  for Member  States  are  either  updated 
every  three  years  or  can  be  updated  when  necessary  and  that  reporting  obligations  for 
Member  States  are  either  annual  or  biennial.  Such  varying  periodicity  across  existing 
obligations  that  are  suitable  for  integration  into  National  Plans  and  Progress  Reports  is 
inconsistent  with  a  governance  process  that  aims  to  align  the  periodicity  of  integrated 
planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations.  As  regards  the  monitoring  obligations,  the 
State  of  the  Energy  Union  is  intended  to  be  an  annual  report  assessing  progress  made  and 
steering the further policy debate. This is part of the baseline.  

The  pragmatic  approach  established  in  2015  provides  for  a  voluntary  process  mirroring 
elements  of  the  European  Semester.  In  2015,  bilateral  meetings  were  held  with  all  Member 
States  based  on  sector-specific  factsheets.  The  interaction  with  the  Member  States  provided 
the  basis  for  the  evaluation  of  progress  made  which  fed  into  the  2015  State  of  the  Energy 
Union. As this was the first edition, policy conclusions were made on European, regional and 
national  level,  but  not  yet  country-specific.  This  process  should  be  developed  further  in  a 
pragmatic  way  until  the  Energy  Union  governance  legislation  is  in  force.  This  includes 
bilateral  discussions  with  Member  States  based  on  specific  country  factsheets  or  –  in  the 
absence  of  such  factsheets  in  a  given  year  (like  in  2016)  –  the  annual  Semester  country 
reports. These bilateral discussions form the basis of developing, as of 2016, country-specific 
policy conclusions or recommendations.  

include 

the  baseline 

scenario  does  not 

However, 
country-specific 
recommendations  on  energy  and  climate  policies  across  the  Union.  These  are  aimed  to  be 
included into the Commission's integrated monitoring report and should be developed further 
over time to more detailed country-specific recommendations once the Governance system is 
in place and/or the draft National Plans are available to the Commission. This procedure does 
not  foresee  a  role  for  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  on  the  European  level. 
However, the specific recommendations on energy and climate policies included in the State 

formalised 

34 

 
 
 
of the Energy Union would feed into the European Semester process. They could also become 
a  Commission  recommendation  with  a  role  for  the  Council  in  the  context  of  the  European 
Semester  if  they  are  linked  to  fiscal  and  structural  policies  or  issues  of  macroeconomic 
relevance. Nevertheless, a lack of a formalised political process between the EU institutions 
and  Member  States,  including  on  the  finalisation  of  the  draft  plans  and  their  subsequent 
implementation,  is  expected  to  result  in  collective  national  efforts  that  are  insufficient  for 
achieving  the  Energy  Union  objectives,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  2030  targets  for 
renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency,  together  with  an  uncertain  implementation  of  the 
National Plans over time. 

For Member States' consultations on national policy planning, the baseline scenario provides 
for  no  formalised  consultations  on  National  Plans.  However,  the  baseline  scenario  includes 
the  cooperation  with  Member  States  through  the  existing  Technical  Working  Group  on 
National  Energy  and  Climate  Plans,  where  Member  States  are  already  encouraged  to 
exchange  information.  Existing  regional  initiatives  and  fora,  which  could  also  be  used  for 
consulting  the  draft  National  Plans,  are  also  part  of  the  baseline  scenario.    However,  such 
informal process might put at risk the achievement of the objectives of the Energy Union (in 
particular  the  2030  targets  for  renewable  energy  and  the  energy  efficiency)  due  to  the  non-
coordinated  approach  and  the  fact  that  the  process  is  based  on  voluntary  participation. 
Investor certainty for SMEs and industry or information for citizens would not be enhanced 
by the absence of a transparent governance process.  

The  impacts  of  policy  options  will  subsequently  be  assessed  qualitatively  in  comparison  to 
this baseline. 

6.2. 

Impacts of options for streamlining of planning, reporting and 
monitoring obligations (S) 

In  this  section,  the  impacts  of  policy  options  for  streamlining  obligations  will  be  assessed 
against the reference of the baseline scenario, which assumed an unchanged continuation of 
existing planning, reporting and monitoring obligations post 2020. 

For this area of policy options, in the Public Consultation supporting this Impact Assessment 
(see  section  9.3)  a  broad  consensus  emerged  among  respondents  on  the  need  to  better 
streamline,  align  and  integrate  existing  planning  and  reporting  obligations  to  avoid  gaps, 
duplications and inconsistencies. This view is notably also shared by all Member States that 
replied to the Public Consultation. Concerning the approach to streamlining, a vast majority of 
respondents  considered  a  single  legislative  act  as  the  preferred  option  for  streamlining  of 
planning and reporting obligations in the energy and climate field post 2020.27 

27 This approach was supported by 31% of respondents, and by 7 out of 15 Member States having replied to the 
consultation. An absolute majority of stakeholders (51%) saw several benefits deriving from the adoption of a 
new legislative act. The option of streamlining obligations by revisions of sectorial legislation received support 
from 21% of stakeholders but not a single Member State expressed explicit preference for this option. The option 
of non-binding Commission guidance received support from only 15% of stakeholders (which however included 

35 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
Total cumulative costs for Member States in the period 2021-2030 

Table 1 below presents the total cumulative costs for Member States in the period 2021-2030. 
The  figures include  both  one  time  implementation  cost  and  annual  administrative costs  (the 
latter multiplied by 10, to cover the 10 years of the period). One-time implementation costs 
for Member States originate in particular from transposition and implementation of legislation 
and  the  adoption  of  National  Plans.  Further  one-time  implementation  costs  include  ICT/ 
equipment costs as well as service outsourcing costs. Annual costs include administrative and 
reporting  costs,  annual  ICT/equipment  costs  and  annual  service  outsourcing  costs.  An 
overview  of  one-time  implementation  costs  and  annual  administrative  costs  for  Member 
States across policy scenarios is presented in Annex 9. 

Table 1: Total cumulative costs for Member States in the period 2021-2030 in million EUR 

Policy option 
Baseline 
Option S1 (soft guidance) 
Option S2 (sector-specific legislation) 
Option S3 (two legislative acts replacing relevant parts of energy acquis 
and MMR) 
Option S4 (single act replacing relevant parts of energy acquis and 
MMR) 
Option S5 (single act replacing relevant parts of energy acquis and fully 
replacing MMR) 
Option S6 (single act for all actors and stakeholders) 

Total cumulative costs 
222.7 
244.5 
330.1 
n.a. 

219.3 

219.3 

243.6 

n.a. = not available as this policy option was not evaluated by the external expertise; impacts for this 
option are therefore assessed qualitatively.  
NB:  As  regards  option  S4,  as  a  partial  MMR  remains,  some  of  the  complexity  related  to 
implementation  of  separate  acts  remains  which  may  increase  costs  and  decrease  the  savings  under 
this option. As regards option S5, due to cost savings of fully integrating the MMR, the total costs for 
Member States of this option are expected to be lower. 

As regards policy  options for streamlining of obligations, the studies supporting this Impact 
Assessment  (see  section  9.4  for  references)  assumed  an  unchanged  periodicity  of  planning, 
reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  in  relation  to  existing  legislation.  Actual  annual 
administrative cost savings from streamlining of these obligations are expected to be higher 
due  to  an  alignment  of  the  periodicity  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations 
which  will  reduce  administrative  costs  (see  also  sections  6.3  and  7.2  for  an  assessment  and 
comparison of options on the Governance process).  

Ongoing  administrative  and  reporting  costs  for  the  European  Commission  (all  obligations 
related monitoring costs) have not been monetised by the Trinomics study. However, as for 
Member  States  these  administrative  and  reporting  costs  are  expected to  be  lower  as  regards 

5  Member  States)  and was  considered by 61% of  overall  respondents  as  not sufficient  to  ensure  effective  and 
efficient streamlining and the creation of a stable legislative framework guaranteeing stability for investors. 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                         
annual  monitoring than  in  the  baseline  scenario for  all  options,  reflecting  cost  savings  from 
streamlined  obligations.  At  the  same  time,  the  integrated  Commission  monitoring  of  the 
National Plans and Progress Reports will also incur new administrative costs (mainly in terms 
of human resources and external technical support). In total, annual monitoring costs for the 
Commission are expected to decrease compared to the baseline for policy options S4 and S5. 

Administrative benefits 

Overall,  all  options  will  lead  to  higher  administrative  benefits  in  terms  of  simplification  of 
planning, reporting and monitoring – in particular between the energy and climate fields – and 
therefore  a  more  coordinated  and  coherent  implementation  of  the  Energy  Union  Strategy 
across  its  five  dimensions.  The  closer  an  option  gets  to  the  streamlining  into  a  single 
legislative act without creating unnecessary complexity, the higher the administrative benefits 
are. Therefore, the highest administrative benefits can be expected from option S5 followed 
by option S4, with the lowest benefits for option S1. 

The following additional considerations have to be taken into account when looking into the 
administrative benefits of some of the options: 

  As  regards  option  S1,  there  is  a  risk  that  the  benefits  might  not  be  achieved  as  the 

guidance is voluntary and may not be followed.  

  As regards option S2, the complex legislative process of revising the various sector-
specific acts and the risk of inconsistent interpretations leads to a corresponding risk 
that  the  streamlining  and  integration  would  not  be  fully  achieved  and  that  these 
benefits would not materialise. 

  As  regards  option  S3,  the  two  separate  legislative  process  of  introducing  a  new 
legislative act for the energy field and revising the MMR for the climate field and the 
risk of inconsistent interpretations leads to a corresponding risk that these benefits – in 
particular  from  the  integration  between  the  energy  and  climate  field  –  would  not  be 
fully achieved and would not materialise. 

  As  regards  option  S6,  this  option  risks  introducing  unnecessary  complexity  in  the 
overall reporting system given the large scope of stakeholders that would be covered. 
The level of integration and efficiency would be affected.  

Impacts on SMEs and industry 

The  streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  is  intended  only  for 
Member  States  and  the  Commission,  except  for  option  S6  which  also  foresees  the 
streamlining  of  obligations  of  other  actors  and  stakeholders  (ACER,  ENTSO-E,  ENTSO-G 
and TSOs). Therefore, the impact on industry and in particular on SMEs is – compared to the 
baseline scenario – positive but minor. Potential benefits for companies in terms of investor 
certainty could result from potentially more integrated energy and climate policies (especially 
by the use of templates by Member States). However, option S4 might have mixed impacts as 

37 

 
 
 
 
the discontinuation of a single framework related to planning, reporting and monitoring in the 
climate field might entail negative impacts in this regard.  

Integration between energy and climate policies 

The integrated planning, reporting and monitoring would lead to more integrated energy and 
climate  policies  and  improvements  of  quality  and  completeness  of  reported  data  because  of 
the introduction of harmonised templates for National Plans and Progress Reports. The most 
optimal integration and increased coherence would be achieved mainly by option S5 through 
a  single  legislative  act covering  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  for Member 
States and the Commission in the energy and climate field. However, the benefit is different 
based on the applied option: 

  As regards option S1, this benefit is considered as only potential as there is a risk that 

the voluntary guidance will not be followed. 

  As regards option S2, the complex legislative process of revising the various sector-
specific  acts  and  the  risk  of  inconsistent  interpretations  leads  to  the  risk  that  the 
streamlining and integration would not be fully achieved and that these benefits would 
not materialise. 

  As  regards  option  S3,  this  entails  a  risk  of  inconsistent  interpretations  of  provisions 
that should be read together. The fact that two acts would have to be adopted leads to a 
corresponding  risk  that  the  streamlining  –  in  particular  the  integration  between  the 
energy and climate field – will not be fully achieved and that these benefits would not 
materialise. 

  As  regards  option  S4,  obligations  that  are  part  of  the  plans  linking  the  international 
context  with  the  EU  would  be  lacking  in  the  single  legislative  act  (for  example  low 
carbon development strategies or reports on national adaptation actions with which the 
plans  should  be  coherent  and  consistent)  due  to  the  light  MMR  remaining.  On  the 
other hand, option S4 would result in a shorter legislative act by integrating only those 
planning, reporting and monitoring obligations from the energy and climate field that 
are most relevant for the Energy Union. 

  As  regards option  S5,  it  should  be mentioned  that  it  would  lead  to  higher  quality  of 
national energy and climate policy (as the new legislative act would be a strong push 
factor for this), much higher efficiency of the reporting system (as it  would lead to a 
more  integrated  vision  and  reduce  risks  of  overlaps,  duplications  and  redundancies), 
improved  information  quality  (due  to  improved  requirements  and  streamlined 
coherence across Member States), simpler and more coherent reporting procedures (as 
all  changes are  devoted  to  streamlining,  improving  comparability  and  congruence  of 
requirements)  It  would  ensure  the  highest  consistency  in  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring  between  EU  and  international  climate  policies  due  to  integration  of  all 
obligations from the MMR.  

  As  regards  option  S6,  due  to  the  creation  of  complexities  and  the  risk  of  time 
consuming  data  collection,  the  overall  reporting  system  may  become  less  efficient 

38 

 
 
 
which would also have negative impacts on the level of integration and the quality of 
the information. There are also risks related to the quality of statistics as it might be 
hard to provide comparable statistics for all obligations due to specific circumstances 
and data collection methodologies applicable. 

Ensuring the compliance by the Union with its international climate obligations 

All  options  contribute  to  ensuring  compliance  with  the  Union  and  Member  States' 
commitments  and  obligations  under  international  climate  change  agreements  to  a  different 
extent. They ensure easy access to climate data and consistency and credibility of information 
reported to the Commission and internationally. They (except for option S4) enable the EU to 
continue  its  approach  on  monitoring  progress  on  the  implementation  of  its  international 
commitments  in  a  single  integrated  monitoring  report  which  could  be  used  to  demonstrate 
internationally  what  climate  action  the  EU  is  taking  and  to  show  progress  towards  the 
commitments the EU has made internationally at UNFCCC Climate Conferences. 

Option S1, S2, S3 and S4 contribute in the same way as the baseline to this objective. Option 
S5,  due  to  the  single  legislative  act,  contributes  best  to  this  objective.  Option  S4  would 
contribute less to this objective due to the split of obligations from EU or international origin 
into two different legislative acts and subsequently two different monitoring procedures. 

Social impacts 

Option S1 has similar social impacts to the baseline since it is expected that the citizens would 
be  informed  about  the  Energy  Union  implementation  in  the  same  way.  Potential  social 
benefits could  result from higher information  quality due to the more integrated energy and 
climate  policies  introduces  by  the  voluntary  templates  for  National  Plans  and  Progress 
Reports. 

Positive  social  impacts  are  expected  from  options  S2,  S3  and  S5  in  terms  of  informing 
citizens  about  the  Energy  Union  implementation  due  to  higher  information  quality  from 
improvements  of  data  quality  and  completeness  as  a  result  from  more  coherent  planning, 
reporting and monitoring based on more streamlined and integrated obligations. 

Mixed  social  impacts  are  expected  from  option  S4  as  benefits  are  expected  due  to  better 
information of citizens about Energy Union implementation due to more transparent and more 
streamlined planning, reporting and monitoring obligations and to  better  quality of statistics 
and  of  the  information  reported.  However,  the  discontinuation  of  the  single  framework  for 
planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  in  the  climate  field  would  impact  negatively  on  the 
manner in which citizens would be informed about climate issues.  

Negative social impacts are expected from option S6 as citizens would be less informed given 
the overly complex system and because there would be also a risk that important details are 
missed because of the heavy amount of information to be covered.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
6.3. 

Impacts of options for elements of the Governance process  

In  this  section,  the  impacts  of  policy  options  for  the  Governance  process  will  be  assessed 
against the reference of the baseline scenario, which assumed the absence of any formalised 
governance process between the Commission and Member States.  

For this area of policy options, in the Public Consultation supporting this Impact Assessment 
(see  section  9.3)  five  Member  States  emphasised  the  necessity  to  find  the  right  balance 
between  the  principle  of  investment  certainty  and  the  possibility  to  adapt  national  plans  to 
changing  circumstances.  Furthermore,  there  was  a  widespread  consensus  that  the  new 
governance  system  should  facilitate  the  coordination  of  national  energy  policies  and  foster 
regional  cooperation.  There  was  also  wide  support  for  the  principle  that  Member  States' 
consultations  could  play  a  role  in  the  political  process  leading  to  the  definition  of  national 
plans. 

In the following, due to the procedural nature of policy options for the Governance process as 
well as the lack of quantitative data on impacts of these options, the assessment is pursued in 
a  qualitative  manner.  Instead,  more  emphasis  is  put  on  the  results  from  the  Public 
Consultation, where appropriate. 

6.3.1.  Periodicity of National Plans (NP) 

The Commission set out in its Guidance document in November 2015 that it expects the first 
National  Plans  to  be  submitted  by  2018  in  order  to  have  the  plans  available  in  good  time 
before  the  post-2020  framework  comes  into  force.  The  options  below  consider  different 
options for updating the National Plans. It should be added that the new Governance system 
for the Energy Union should be set up with a long-term time horizon, even if the main focus 
of  the  first  plans  will  be  the  period  from  2021  to  2030  in  line  with  the  2030  Energy  and 
Climate Framework.  

Dynamic, reliable and transparent governance process: The different options lead to different 
dynamics of the governance process. Whereas in the case of no update of National Plans in 
the period from 2021 to 2030 (option NP1) the plans would remain static until the end of the 
2030-period, the other options allow for a more dynamic process with different possibilities 
for updates, from one update (option NP2) to updates in regular intervals (biennial in options 
NP3  and  NP4,  every  five  years  in  option  NP5).  The  options  also  differ  on  the  contents  of 
National Plans for which updates are possible. Several options (options NP2, NP3 and NP5) 
provide for complete updates of the National Plans themselves, including their objectives and 
targets. Option NP4 only focusses on updates of the policies, measures and projections, with 
option NP5 leaving this opportunity to the Member States discretion in addition to the regular 
updating. Leaving the objectives of National Plans for at least the 2030-targets untouched or 
updated only once (as foreseen by options NP1, NP2, NP4) or twice (as foreseen by option 
NP5) over this period would contribute to more stable objectives for the period from 2021 and 
2030, thereby also providing for investor certainty for industry and SMEs and consequentially 
having beneficial impacts on jobs and growth. Therefore, the longer the interval between the 
updates  is,  the  more  stability it  provides.  However,  the  downside  of  such  periodicity  is  that 

40 

 
 
 
long  planning  intervals  allow  to  a  lesser  extent  for  the  possibility  to  adjust  the  targets 
upwards,  i.e.  to  make  them  more  ambitious,  and  to  update  policies  and  measures  and 
projections, which could prevent  their full implementation  or  at least lead to  outdated plans 
which  could  in  turn  lead  to  negative  impacts  on  jobs  and  growth.  This  could  be  partly 
alleviated by at least providing the option to update the policies, measures and projections on 
a more regular basis (as foreseen by options NP3, NP4 and NP5).  

Administrative  burden  and  economic  impacts:  The  costs  for  this  option  increase  by  the 
number  of  updates  of  the  National  Plans,  i.e.  the  more  often  the  plans  can  or  have  to  be 
updated  the  higher  the  costs  would  be.  Therefore,  option  NP1  would  have  the  lowest 
administrative  (planning)  costs  of  all  options,  including  the  baseline  scenario.  The  highest 
administrative  costs  would  apply  to  option  NP3  due  to  the  biennial  updates  of  the  National 
Plans. The costs for the other options lie between these two options. However, the lower the 
frequency of updates, the lower is also the monitoring benefit for the Commission from the 
National Plans, and vice versa.28 The lower the periodicity of updates of National Plans, the 
higher  is  the  risk  of  having  outdated  National  Plans  in  place,  which  would  lead  to 
misinformation  of  investors  and  the  citizens  as  well  as  lead  to  policies  and  measures  not 
reflecting long term needs and policy objectives. 

Timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Energy  Union  objectives:  More  frequent 
updates  of  the  National  Plans  or  at  least  of  their  policies,  measures  and  projections  would 
allow for the possibility to better react to changing circumstances in the implementation of the 
energy transition which is the basis for achieving the Energy Union. Except for option NP1, 
all  options  will  contribute  to  different  extents  to  the  achievement  of  these  objectives.  In 
addition, in order to properly provide European decision-makers but in particular citizens with 
up-to-date information, updates of the National Plans are needed, also to avoid outdated plans 
and risks to the full implementation of the Energy Union.  

Ensuring  compliance  by  the  Union  with  its  international  climate  obligations:  In  order  to 
comply with the Union's international obligations from the Paris Agreement, and in particular 
the  5-year  review  cycle  and  the  review  processes,  the  plans  should  allow  for  updates  when 
relevant.  The  planning  (and  reporting)  periodicity  of  the  Energy  Union  governance  system 
should  therefore  be  synchronised  with  these  cycles.  Following  the  facilitative  dialogue  in 
2018,  global  stocktaking  will  take  place  in  2023,  2028  and  every  five  years  thereafter. 
Therefore, the closer the National Planning cycle comes to these points in time (as foreseen 
by option NP5), the better the information can be taken into account in the global stocktakes. 
Option  NP5  would  lead  to  full  synchronisation.29  In  this  context  it  would  be  important  to 
allow  for  increasing  the  ambition  and  implementation  of  the  National  Plans  based  on 
developments in the energy system. If this is not the case, this could lead to potential losses in 

28 It should, however, be noted that the monitoring benefits for the Commission would to a large extent come 
also from the Progress Reports. 
29 Option NP5 entails updates of the National Plans in 2023 and 2028 which implies that the National Plans 
would be available as an input to the global stocktakes at both dates. Option NP1 leads to no synchronisation, 
options NP2, NP3 and NP$ to limited synchronisation, as the National Plans would only be available as an input 
into the global stocktake in 2023, not in 2028. 

41 

 
 
                                                 
terms of achieving environmental benefits as well as to putting at risk the achievement of the 
Energy Union objectives and in particular the 2030 targets. 

The frequency of updates to ensure a reliable governance system, the timely implementation 
of  the  Energy  Union  and  in  particular  the  2030  targets  as  well  as  the  compliance  with  our 
international  climate  commitments  has  to  be  balanced  with  the  need  for  having  a  stable 
regulatory  framework  leading  to  investor  certainty  and  for  not  increasing  the  administrative 
burden on the Member States and the Commission.  

6.3.2.  Periodicity of Progress Reports (PR) 

These  options  imply  different  points  in  time  and  contents  of  national  Progress  Reports  that 
Member States prepare on the implementation of their National Plans. These Progress Reports 
form the basis for the subsequent Commission monitoring.   

  Dynamic, reliable and transparent governance process: While annual Progress Reports 
(PR1)  would  provide  for  a  more  dynamic  reporting  process  between  Member  States 
and the Commission than the baseline, the frequency of reporting would be lower in 
the case of biennial Progress Reports (PR2) and similar for the intermediate option of 
biennial  comprehensive  Progress  Reports  and  limited  Progress  Reports  every  other 
two years (PR3). Reporting on progress made in implementing the National Plans is 
important as it enables the Member States and the Commission to be informed on the 
progress  in  achieving  the  objectives  of  the  Energy  Union.  Thus,  the  objective  of 
ensuring a dynamic, reliable and transparent governance process is most served by an 
annual reporting rhythm, which is covered by options PR1 and PR3.  

  Administrative  burden  and  economic  impacts:  Option  PR1  would  imply  only 
moderately  higher  costs  as  compared  to  the  baseline  scenario  as  parts  of  the 
information  required  for  the  compilation  of  National  Plans is  already  reported  on  an 
annual basis under the current legislation. PR2 would lead to certain savings due to the 
fact that the information that is currently required annually would be submitted only 
every  other  year,  although  Member  States  would  still  need  to  compile  information 
annually  for  purposes  of  other  EU  legislation  or  for  international  purposes.  Option 
PR3 would entail similar administrative burden on Member Stats. On the benefit side, 
all  options  would  lead  to  compiled  information  that  currently  is  required  under 
different pieces of legislation, thus eliminating the overlaps and inconsistencies. While 
PR1  would  also  lead  to  higher  general  economic  benefits  and  to  higher  investor 
certainty for SMEs and industry and higher prospects for creating jobs and growth by 
means of a  more functional governance process, PR2 would lower investor certainty 
due  to  a  lower  frequency  of  reporting  and  thus  transparency  on  policy  progress  and 
PR3 would leave the baseline situation unchanged. 

  Timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Energy  Union  objectives:  By  closely 
tracking  their  own  progress,  Member  States  and  the  Commission  have  in  place  an 
early  warning  system  that  informs  them  of  possible  underachievement  of  the  2030 
targets  and  enables  them  to  take  additional  actions  to  get  back  on  track.  Annual 

42 

 
 
 
reporting  on  GHG  inventories  is  one  of  the  key  obligations  under  the  UNFCCC. 
Annual  Progress  Reports  from  Member  States  (as  foreseen  by  option  PR1)  also 
support  the  Commission's  work  of  compiling  this  information  into  the  integrated 
monitoring  report.  Biennial  Progress  Reports  (option  PR2)  would  be  suboptimal  at 
least  in  the  context  of  energy  efficiency  and  decarbonisation.  In  contrast,  a  biennial 
reporting cycle under the Energy Union would fail to integrate the tracking of progress 
with the targets under the decarbonisation component which would need to continue 
on  a  separate  annual  track.  Option  PR3  would  enable  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  to  track  progress  with  the  objectives  of  the  Energy  Union  in  a  flexible 
manner.  It  would  allow  for  the  information  that  changes  less  frequently  to  be 
submitted  on  a  biennial  basis  while  still  ensuring  that  the  information  necessary  for 
tracking  progress  annually is available. While option PR1 would enable citizens and 
industry to be informed in a timely and accurate manner of the state of the climate and 
of the business environment, option PR2 would lead to a lower level of information on 
the  Energy  Union  implementation  and  option  PR3  would  maintain  the  information 
level  of  the  baseline.  This  option  would  lead  to  a  higher  level  of  information  for 
citizens on the Energy Union implementation.  

  Ensure the compliance by the Union with its international climate obligations: In order 
for  the  EU  as  a  Party  to  the  UNFCCC  to  comply  with  its  international  obligations, 
timely, accurate, consistent and complete GHG inventories need to be reported by the 
Member States to the Commission every year by 15th of January (as foreseen in option 
PR1).  This  deadline  is  important  because  it  enables  the  work  of  the  Commission  of 
aggregating the data submitted by the Member States and producing the Union GHG 
inventory  in  time  for  the  submission  deadline  under  the  UNFCCC  (15th  of  April). 
Without this information submitted annually (option PR2), the EU would not be able 
to  comply  with  its  international  obligations.  Also  option  PR3  would  ensure  that  the 
information  required  for  the  compliance  of  the  EU  with  its  international  obligations 
under  the  UNFCCC  is  submitted  by  the  Member  States  to  the  Commission  at  the 
optimum frequency and in time to ensure compliance of the EU. 

6.3.3.  Periodicity of Commission monitoring of collective progress made (M) 

These  options  imply  different  frequencies  of  the  regular  Commission  monitoring  report  on 
EU-wide progress made towards the Energy Union objectives that is based on Member States' 
Progress Reports and the Commission's key indicators report. 

  Dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent  governance  process:  Only  an  annual  monitoring 
report  by  the  Commission  (option  M1)  would  lead  to  a  more  dynamic  monitoring 
process between Member States and the Commission than the baseline. Likewise, only 
for  option  M1  there  would  be  a  higher  level  of  information  for  the  European 
Parliament  and  the  Council  on  the  Energy  Union  implementation  and  more  frequent 
possibilities for a political debate with these institutions.  

43 

 
 
 
  Administrative  burden  and  economic  impacts:  Compared  to  the  baseline,  option  M1 
would  entail  higher  administrative  costs  due  to  the  increase  in  frequency  of  the 
compilation  of  some  information  that  is  currently  done  on  a  less  frequent  basis  in 
sectorial progress reporting. In contrast, option M2 would lower administrative burden 
compared  to  the  baseline  due  to  the  lower  frequency  of  monitoring,  but  would  also 
generate  lower  administrative  (monitoring)  benefits  as  regards  the  decarbonisation 
dimension  due  to  the  lower  frequency  of  data  reporting  on  greenhouse  gas  emission 
reductions.  Option  M1  would  also  lead  to  higher  investor  certainty  for  SMEs  and 
industry due to an annual monitoring report by the Commission on EU-wide progress 
made  towards  the  Energy  Union  objectives  as  well  as  the  regulatory  environment. 
Higher prospects for creating jobs by a more dynamic monitoring process and growth 
would better be ensured by option M1. 

  Timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Energy  Union  objectives:  Annual 
tracking of progress (option M1) towards the 2030 targets for greenhouse gas emission 
reductions  is  paramount  in  order  to  ensure  that  Member  States  are  in  line  with  their 
annual  obligations  under  the  Effort  Sharing  Regulation.  A  less  frequent  monitoring 
report  (option  M2)  would,  however,  be  sufficient  in  order  to  assess  Member  States' 
progress for the other Energy Union dimensions. At the same time, annual compilation 
by the Commission of a monitoring report (option M1) would enable the Commission 
to  detect  cases  of  possible  underachievement  at  an  early  stage.  Higher  level  of 
information for citizens on the Energy Union implementation due to a more dynamic 
monitoring process would be ensured by option M1.  

  Ensure the compliance by the Union with its international climate obligations: Annual 
compilation of a monitoring report (option M1) would enable the EU to demonstrate 
internationally,  at  the  annual  UNFCCC  Climate  Conferences,  what  action  the  EU  is 
taking in the climate and energy field and to show progress towards its international 
commitments.  A  biennial  report  from  the  Commission  (option  M2)  would  not  be 
adequate to achieve this objective.  

In  the  Public  Consultation,  stakeholders  underlined  the  importance  of  the  Commission 
pursuing  subsequent  monitoring  and  assessment  of  progress  made  by  Member  States.  The 
Commission's role was seen as "very relevant" by 61% of overall stakeholders, including 42% 
of public authorities, 63% of private companies and industry associations and 93% of NGOs. 

6.3.4.  Iterative process with Member States including country-specific recommendations 

or decisions (IP) 

The  first  set  of  options  implies  an  iterative  process  between  Member  States  and  the 
Commission  that  would  include  recommendations  or  decisions  (see  below),  which  Member 
States would take into account by a revision of their National Plans. The iterative process can 
be complemented by additional measures in order to fill potential gaps to the EU-level 2030 
targets. 

44 

 
 
 
  Dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent  governance  process:  An  iterative  process  only  on 
draft National Plans (option IP1) or final National Plans (option IP2) can contribute to 
a  more  reliable  governance  process  either  on  the  ambition  or  the  implementation  of 
National Plans.  In  contrast, an iterative process that covers both  the drafting and the 
finalisation phase of policy  planning (option IP3)  can  address both  the ambition and 
delivery  of  National  Plans  and  thus  contribute  more  comprehensively  to  a  sufficient 
level  of  collective  contributions  by  Member  States  to  the  EU-level  2030  targets  for 
renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency  as  part  of  their  National  Plans  and  a  full 
implementation of these plans. Complementing the comprehensive iterative process of 
option  IP3,  EU-level  measures  or  a  request  by  the  Commission  for  further  national 
measures by Member States (option IP4) can fill potential gaps to the EU-level 2030 
targets  and  thereby  ensure  the  most  reliable  governance  process  as  a  basis  for  the 
achievement of these Energy Union objectives. 

  Administrative burden and economic impacts: Option IP1 and IP2 would each entail 
higher  administrative  (planning)  costs  for  Member  States  than  the  baseline  due  to 
potential  revisions  of  draft  or  final  National  Plans  and  higher  administrative 
(monitoring) costs for the Commission due to an assessment of and recommendations 
on draft National Plans or Progress Reports. Option IP3 would entail higher costs than 
IP1 and IP2 in this regard due to its coverage of the drafting and the finalisation phase 
of policy planning. The highest administrative costs result from option IP4 due to the 
additional  efforts  needed  for  the  design  and  implementation  of  measures  at  EU  or 
Member  States'  level.  At  the  same  time,  options  IP1  to  IP3  generate  higher 
(monitoring) benefits for the Commission due to an assessment of draft National Plans 
(IP1),  Progress  Reports  (IP2),  or  both  (IP3  yielding  the  highest  benefits).  Investor 
certainty  for  SMEs  and  industry  is  enhanced  by  options  IP1  to  IP3  compared  to  the 
baseline  due  to  a  dedicated  process  ensuring  the  collective  ambition  (IP1),  delivery 
(IP2) or both (IP3) of the Energy Union objectives and in particular the 2030 targets 
for  renewable  energy  and  energy  efficiency.  Investor  certainty  is  enhanced  most  by 
option IP4 due to the highest prospects for achieving these 2030 targets. All options 
would increase the prospects for creating jobs and growth by different degrees due to 
their contribution to a more reliable governance process as set out above. 

  Timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  Energy  Union  objectives:  Options  IP1  to 
IP3  provide  higher  possibilities  of  either  increasing  the  ambition  (IP1)  or  delivery 
(IP2) of National Plans or both (IP3) leading to potential gains in terms of achieving 
environmental benefits. These  expected benefits are highest in option IP4 due to  the 
highest prospects for achieving these 2030 targets by complementing EU or national 
measures.  Likewise,  options  IP1  to  IP3  ensure  a  higher  level  of  information  for 
citizens on the Energy Union implementation due to Commission assessment of draft 
National  Plans  (IP1),  Progress  Reports  (IP2)  or  both  (IP3)  and  recommendations  on 
National Plans.  

  Ensure  the  compliance  by  the  Union  with  its  international  climate  obligations:  In 
particular the iterative process entailing higher possibilities of increasing the ambition 

45 

 
 
and improving the delivery of National Plans (IP3), if necessary complemented by EU 
or  national  measures  (IP4),  is  expected  to  lead  to  more  ambitious  and  solid  plans 
which may help the Union to ensure compliance with its international obligations. 

In the Public Consultation, respondents confirmed that the Commission should play a crucial 
role  in  the  Governance  process  notably  by  reviewing  National  Plans  prepared  by  Member 
States  and  engage  in  an  iterative  dialogue  that  should  be  conducive  to  higher  level  of 
collective  ambition  of  National  Plans.30  In  addition,  respondents  emphasised  that  the 
Commission should be able to introduce EU-level measures supporting Member States in the 
attainment of the objectives of the Energy.31  

As part of the iterative process above, country-specific recommendations or decisions would 
be  issued  on  Member  States'  National  Plans.  The  options  below  concern  the  nature  of  such 
recommendations or decisions, which Member States take into account by a revision of their 
National Plans. 

  Dynamic, 

and 

reliable 

transparent  governance  process:  Country-specific 
recommendations  on  National  Plans  that  are  specific  to  national  energy  and  climate 
policy planning across the Union result in a more reliable governance process between 
Member  States  and  the  Commission  that  contributes  to  achieving  the  Energy  Union 
objectives. This holds true in particular for a process on recommendations or decisions 
set  in  legislation  (options  IP6  to  IP8),  while  the  effects  would  remain  uncertain 
without a process set in legislation (option IP5).  

  Administrative  burden  and  economic  impacts:  Options  IP6  and  IP7  would  entail 
higher  administrative  (planning)  costs  for  the  Commission  Member  States  than  the 
baseline  due  to  a  process  set  in  legislation  for  recommendations  that  are  specific  to 
national energy and climate policy planning across the Union. A process involving the 
Council  (option  S6)  would  entail  an  even  higher  administrative  burden  and  could 
create  potential  overlaps  with  the  European  Semester.  For  option  IP5  these  costs 
would remain uncertain, depending on the extent of recommendations. 

  Timely implementation and monitoring of Energy Union objectives: If the process for 
recommendations is not set in legislation (option IP5) it would be left to the discretion 
of  the  Commission  whether  to  issue  these.  In  addition,  the  lack  of  a  process  set  in 
legislation adopted by both Council and Parliament could reduce their legitimacy and 
effectiveness (i.e. the extent to which Member States take the recommendations into 
account).  In  contrast,  binding  Commission  decisions  (option  IP8)  would  provide  the 
highest  prospects  for  their  implementation.  Option  IP6  would  ensure  systematic 
recommendations  from  the  Commission  to  Member  States  based  on  a  procedure 
agreed in co-decision by Council and Parliament, which would enjoy high legitimacy 

30 The Commission's role in this context was perceived as "very relevant" by 54% of all stakeholders, including 
27% of public authorities, 58% of private companies and industry associations and 93% of NGOs. 
31 The Commission's role in this context was perceived as "very relevant" by 52% of all stakeholders, including 
37% of public authorities, 48% of private companies and industry associations and 93% of NGOs. 

46 

 
 
 
                                                 
and  would  ensure  effectiveness.  For  Council  recommendations  set  in  legislation 
(option IP7) these prospects are similar to those of option IP6, with the difference that 
it would ensure Member States' support for the recommendations from the outset, and 
thereby further increase the prospects for their implementation. Flexibility for Member 
States  with  respect  to  their  national  planning  processes  would  be  ensured  in  options 
IP5 to IP7, while option IP8 would substantially limit such flexibility.32  

  Ensure  the  compliance  by  the  Union  with  its  international  climate  obligations:  In 
particular  for  a  process  on  recommendations  or  decisions  set  in  legislation  (options 
IP6 to IP8), the assessment of and recommendations on draft National Plans and their 
subsequent implementation may lead to more ambitious and robust plans which may 
help the Union to ensure compliance with its international obligations. 

In  this  area,  a  majority  of  respondents  of  the  Public  Consultation  confirmed  that  the 
Commission  should  play  an  important  role  by  issuing  policy  recommendations  on  National 
Plans.33 

6.3.5.  Consultations of Member States on National Plans (C) 

Consultations  with  neighbouring  and  other  Member  States  on  National  Plans  can  be 
undertaken either on parts of the plans or on entire plans, both in the drafting phase or in the 
implementation phase, and could result in revisions of National Plans.  

  Dynamic, reliable and transparent governance process: The presented options lead to a 
different extent  to a  more reliable governance process among Member States: While 
voluntary  consultations  on  National  Plans  (option  C1)  this  contribution  remains 
uncertain, mandatory consultations on draft National Plans only with regard to policies 
and measures (option C2) contribute to more reliable and regionally coordinated final 
National  Plans.  In  case  mandatory  consultations  also  cover  the  objectives  of  draft 
National  Plans  (option  C3),  they  would  further  contribute  to  generating  ambitious 
collective national efforts for achieving the Energy Union objectives. If draft and final 
National  Plans  are  consulted  among  Member  States  mandatory  (option  C4),  also  the 
implementation  of  National  Plans  as  well  as  regional  cooperation  thereon  would  be 
enhanced. 

  Administrative  burden  and  economic  impacts:  Consultations  would  entail  higher 
administrative  (planning)  costs  for  Member  States  than  the  baseline  due  to  potential 
revisions  of  draft  and  final  National  Plans  based  on  consultations  and  due  to  the 
consultation  process,  combined  with  higher  benefits  for  Member  States  in  terms  of 
higher  transparency  of  other  Member  States'  National  Plans.  These  would  be  lowest 

32 As option IP8 could raise concerns with regard to the Member States' rights in the energy and climate fields 
under the TFEU due to its binding nature, this policy option is expected to lack political feasibility and is not 
further assessed in this Impact Assessment. 
33 The Commission's role in this context was perceived as "very relevant" by 45% of all stakeholders, including 
32% of public authorities, 40% of private companies and industry associations and 93% of NGOs. 

47 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
for  voluntary  consultations  (option  C1)  and  highest  for  mandatory  consultations  on 
draft and final National Plans (option C4). At the same time, option C4 would ensure 
the  highest  investor  certainty  for  SMEs  and  industry  due  to  more  reliable  National 
Plans  that  were  consulted  with  other  Member  States  also  with  regard  to  their 
objectives as well as in their implementation phase.  

  Timely implementation  and  monitoring  of Energy  Union objectives:  By contributing 
to  a  different  extent  to  a  reliable  governance  process  (see  above),  each  option  on 
consultations  enhances  the  prospects  for  achieving  the  Energy  Union  objectives  to  a 
different extent (highest prospects for option C4, lowest for option C1). At the same 
time,  the  larger  the  scope  of  consultations,  the  higher  the  possibilities  for  Member 
States to increase ambition (in options C1, C3 and C4) and also improving the delivery 
of  National  Plans  (in  options  C1  and  C4),  which  leads  to  enhanced  environmental 
benefits.  Likewise,  the  level  of  information  for  citizens  on  the  Energy  Union 
implementation  due  to  potential  revisions  of  draft  and  final  National  Plans  based  on 
consultations is most increased by option C4. 

  Ensure the compliance by the Union with its international climate obligations: While 
the targets set in the Effort Sharing Regulation implement the EU commitment under 
the Paris Agreement and constitute the GHG emission reduction objectives under the 
Energy  Union,  in  particular  mandatory  consultations  (options  C2  to  C4)  entailing 
higher possibilities of increasing the ambition (C3) and improving the delivery (C4) of 
National Plans may lead to more ambitious and solid plans which may help the Union 
to ensure compliance with its international obligations in a cost-efficient manner. In. 
option  C2  mandatory  consultations  could  lead  to  more  coordinated  policies  and 
measures  in  between  Member  States,  consequently  achieving  the  international 
commitments in a more cost efficient way. 

In  the  Public  Consultation,  61%  of  all  stakeholders  agreed  that  strengthening  regional 
integration  and  cooperation  in  the  Energy  Union  domains  is  an  "important"  or  "very 
important" objective. In particular, there was a widespread consensus on the importance that 
Member States' consultations have in the political process leading to the definition of National 
Plans.34  

7.  COMPARISON OF THE OPTIONS 

On the basis of the assessment of the impacts of the individual policy options in section 6, this 
section  provides  a  comparison  of  the  options  and  a  summary  analysis  covering  the  key 
elements of the assessment through trade-offs between the options in terms of effectiveness, 
efficiency and coherence, where relevant through the combination of options. The comparison 

34 In particular, 58% of all stakeholders consider consultations of other Member States in the preparation of the 
plans as "important" or "very important" In the same vein, 42% of all respondents agree that National Plans 
should adequately illustrate how the principles of regional integration and cooperation were taken into account in 
the preparation of National Plans. 

48 

 
 
 
                                                 
presents  a  multi-criteria  analysis  for  the  identified  policy  options  based  on  quantitative 
information  where  possible,  in  particular  the  related  administrative  costs  of  the  options  on 
approaches to streamlining, and qualitative analysis for other impacts as well as for options on 
the  governance  process.  The  following  criteria  have  been  used  for  the  comparison  of  the 
options: a) effectiveness of the option in achieving the objectives, b) efficiency of the option 
in  achieving  the  objectives  (benefits  versus  costs)  and  c)  coherence  of  the  option  with  the 
overarching  objectives,  strategies  and  priorities  of  EU  policies,  in  particular  the  Energy 
Union.  

7.1.  Comparing approaches to streamlining of planning, reporting and 

monitoring obligations 

In  this  section  the  policy  options  on  streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations are compared. The comparison is undertaken in relation to the relevant objectives 
of  minimising  administrative  costs;  achieving  a  simplification  of  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring obligations; ensuring a coordinated and coherent implementation of Energy Union 
strategy  across  its  five  dimensions;  and  enabling  the  EU  to  comply  with  its  international 
climate obligations deriving from the Paris Agreement. 

Effectiveness  in  achieving  the  objectives:  All  policy  options  with  a  legislative  approach  to 
streamlining (options S2 to S6) would contribute to achieving the objective of a simplification 
of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  and  to  ensure  a  coordinated  and  coherent 
implementation of the Energy Union strategy. The reason is that only a legislative approach is 
capable  of  amending  or  repealing  the  corresponding  existing  legislation.  The  options 
involving a single legislative act (S4 to S6) will result in a more integrated planning, reporting 
and monitoring system across the five dimensions of the Energy Union, reducing the risk of 
overlaps,  duplications  and  redundancies,  and  thus  be  more  effective  than  the  options 
involving  several  legislative  acts  (options  S2  and  S3).  However,  option  S4  (single  act 
replacing  relevant  parts  of  energy  acquis  and  MMR)  will  lead  to  a  lower  integration  of 
obligations within the climate field and thus introduces risks of overlaps and duplications in 
this area. The effectiveness of policy option S3 (two legislative acts replacing relevant parts of 
energy  acquis  and  MMR)  is  expected  to  be  in  between  S2  and  S4,  as  two  legislative  acts 
represent  a  more  ambitious  approach  to  streamlining  than  revised  sector-specific  legislation 
but  a  less  ambitious  approach  than  a  new  single  legislative  act.  Policy  option  S1  (soft 
guidance)  is  not  expected  to  be  effective  in  achieving  these  objectives  due  to  its  voluntary 
nature.  

Efficiency  in  achieving  the  objectives:  Option  S2  (sector-specific  legislation)  is  the  most 
costly  option  due  to  comprehensive  revisions  that  are  necessary  in  different  pieces  of 
legislation following different processes as well as coordination needed between them. It also 
implies a high risk of not achieving an effective streamlining. Options S4 (single act replacing 
relevant  parts  of  energy  acquis  and  MMR)  and  S5  (single  act  replacing  relevant  parts  of 
energy acquis and fully replacing MMR) are the least costly options in terms of annual costs, 
while  generating  higher  administrative  benefits  in  terms  of  simplification  of  planning, 

49 

 
 
 
 
reporting and monitoring. At the same time, options S4 and S5 generate only slightly higher 
implementation  costs  than  those  of  the  least  ambitious  option  S1,  but  would  result  in  much 
higher administrative benefits in terms of simplification and a more coordinated and coherent 
implementation of the Energy Union strategy. The cost difference between option S6 (single 
act  for  all  actors  and  stakeholders)  and  S4  as  well  as  S5  is  due  to  additional  administrative 
burden imposed by the legislative procedure for integrating all obligations under a single act, 
including the revision and transposition of a higher number of pieces of legislation and a more 
complex single legislative act in option S6.  

Coherence with overarching Energy Union objectives: Policy option S1 (soft guidance) is not 
expected  to  improve  coherence  significantly,  since  the  obligations  in  the  legislation  will 
remain unchanged. All other options (S2 to S6)  represent legislative approaches that will to 
different extents  streamline and improve coherence  within the energy field and between  the 
energy and climate  field. However, considerable uncertainties for the extent of streamlining 
are attached to options S2 (sector-specific legislation) and S3 (two legislative acts replacing 
relevant  parts  of  energy  acquis  and  MMR)  as,  especially  in  option  S2,  many  legislative 
processes  would  need  to  be  followed  and  they  may  not  lead  to  the  same  result.  These  two 
options present also risks of inconsistences in interpretation and implementation as these acts 
that should be read together. The options involving a single legislative act (S4 to S6) have the 
highest  potential  in  ensuring  a  greater  extent  of  streamlining  and  integration  as  well  as 
coherence with  the overarching strategy of the Energy  Union.  However, option S4 entails a 
risk  of  inconsistencies  in  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  between  EU  and  international 
climate  policies  due  to  the  split  obligations  of  the  MMR,  which  would  be  eliminated  by 
option S5. In contrast, option S6 would entail the risk of creating complexities in the overall 
planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  system,  which  could  affect  the  level  of  integration  and 
coherence of obligations. 

Table 2: Comparison of policy options for streamlining 

Policy Option 
Baseline 
Option S1 (soft guidance) 
Option S2 (sector-specific legislation) 
Option S3 (two legislative acts replacing relevant 
parts of energy acquis and MMR) 
Option S4 (single act replacing relevant parts of 
energy acquis and MMR) 
Option S5 (single act replacing relevant parts of 
energy acquis and fully replacing MMR) 
Option S6 (single act for all actors and 
stakeholders) 

Effectiveness 
= 
L 
L/M 
M 

Efficiency 
= 
L 
L 
M 

Coherence 
= 
L 
L/M 
M 

H 

H 

H 

H 

H 

M 

L 

H 

M 

Ratings: no effect (=), low (L), medium (M), and high (H) effects 

50 

 
 
 
 
In  conclusion  of  the  comparison  of  policy  options,  a  single  act  replacing  relevant  parts  of 
energy acquis and fully replacing MMR (option S5) as the preferred option. Alternatively a 
single act replacing the relevant parts of the MMR (option S4) could be considered as coming 
close in terms of costs and benefits.  

7.2.  Comparing and combining options for elements of the Governance 

process 

The  following  sections  compare  the  policy  options  on  elements  of  the  governance  process 
between  Member  States  and  the  Commission.  Where  appropriate,  policy  options  are 
combined  in  order  to  take  into  account  relevant  synergies  between  the  options.  In  order  to 
ensure consistency with the assessment of options in section 6 across different categories, the 
comparison of options is undertaken in relation the following objectives that are relevant to all 
categories:  achieving  a  dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent  governance  process;  facilitating  a 
timely implementation and monitoring of Energy Union objectives; minimising administrative 
burden;  and  (where  appropriate)  enabling  the  EU  to  comply  with  international  climate 
obligations. 

7.2.1.  Comparing options for the periodicity of National Plans 

Effectiveness  in  achieving  the  objectives:  Options  which  entail  no  or  limited  updates  of  the 
plans  in  the  period  2021-2030  (options  NP1  and  NP2)  are  effective  in  minimising 
administrative burden, but are not effective in achieving the general objective of a dynamic, 
reliable  and  transparent  governance  process  and  the  specific  objective  of  a  timely 
implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Energy  Union  objectives.  The  options  which  entail 
more frequent updates (options NP3 and NP4) would better attain these objectives but at the 
same time would generate a comparably higher administrative burden or might only partially 
enable  the  EU  to  comply  with  its  international  climate  obligations.  The  option  of  updates 
every five years and at Member States' discretion with regard to policies and measures (option 
NP5) contributes to the specific objective of a timely implementation and monitoring of the 
Energy  Union  objectives  and  also  enables  the  EU  to  comply  with  its  international  climate 
obligations deriving from the Paris Agreement.  

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3: Periodicity of National Plans – Overview of impacts with regard to objectives 

Policy Option 

Dynamic, reliable 
and transparent 
governance process 

Baseline 
Option NP1 (no 
update) 
Option NP2 (one 
update) 
Option NP3 (biennial 
updates) 
Option NP4 (biennial 
updates of policies 
and measures and 
projections) 
Option NP5 (updates 
every five years and 
at Member States' 
discretion) 

= 
--- 

- 

+ 

+ 

= 

Timely 
implementatio
n and 
monitoring of 
Energy Union 
objectives 
= 
--- 

- 

+ 

+ 

+ 

Minimising 
administrative 
burden 

Enabling the EU 
to comply with 
international 
climate 
obligations  

= 
++ 

+ 

- 

= 

= 

= 
--- 

-- 

-- 

-- 

+++ 

Ratings: + is used to denote a positive impact, – to denote a negative impact, = signifies no 
impact, +/- low impact, ++/-- medium impact, +++/--- high impact. 

Efficiency  in  achieving  the  objectives:  While  the  policy  options  that  entail  no  or  a  single 
update of the plan (option NP1 and NP2) lead to comparably lower administrative (planning) 
costs  for  Member  States,  they  also  lead  to  less  administrative  (monitoring)  benefits  for  the 
Commission and do not contribute to establishing a more dynamic planning process. Despite 
the  fact  that  these  options  lead  to  comparably  higher  investor  certainty  through  more  stable 
objectives,  citizens  would  be  less  informed,  less  flexibility  would  be  granted  to  Member 
States in their planning processes, synchronisation with the Paris Agreement's 5-year review 
cycle  would  not  be  achieved  and  environmental  benefits  would  be  comparably  lower. 
Therefore, even though these options lead to the least administrative costs for Member States, 
they  are  not  the  most  efficient.  Of  the  policy  options  that  entail  more  frequent  updates 
(options NP3, NP4 and  NP5), policy option NP3 (biennial updates of the plans) leads to an 
increase in administrative costs compared to the baseline and is thus not efficient despite of its 
contribution to other objectives. The option of updates every five years and at Member States' 
discretion with regard to policies and measures (option NP5) best balances the contribution to 
the policy objectives with the objective of not increasing administrative burden. 

Coherence with overarching Energy Union objectives and the Paris Agreement: All options 
will improve coherence of policy planning for implementing the Energy Union compared to 
the baseline, as all options lead to an aligned periodicity of the planning obligations across its 

52 

 
 
 
 
five dimensions as part of National Plans. The policy option of updates every five years and at 
Member States' discretion (option NP5) is the policy option that best ensures coherence with 
objectives of the Paris Agreement. 

Table 4: Periodicity of National Plans – Comparison of policy options 

Policy Option 
Baseline 
Option NP1 (no update) 
Option NP2 (one update) 
Option NP3 (biennial updates plans) 
Option NP4 (biennial updates of policies and 
measures and projections) 
Option NP5 (updates every five years and at 
Member States' discretion) 

Effectiveness 
= 
L 
L 
M 
M 

Efficiency 
= 
L 
L 
L 
M 

Coherence 
= 
M 
M 
M 
M 

H 

M 

H 

Ratings: no effect (=), low (L), medium (M), and high (H) effects 

In  conclusion,  policy  option  NP5  on  updates  of  National  Plans  every  five  years  and  at 
Member States' discretion is proposed as the preferred option. 

7.2.2.  Comparing options for the periodicity of Progress Reports 

Effectiveness in achieving the objectives: While the policy option of annual Progress Reports 
(option  PR1)  is  the  most  effective  in  meeting  the  objectives  of  a  dynamic,  reliable  and 
transparent  governance  process,  timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  Energy  Union 
objectives  and  enabling  the  EU  to  comply  with  its  international  climate  obligations,  it  does 
entail  higher  administrative  costs  compared  to  the  baseline  scenario.  Policy  options  PR2 
(biennial Progress Reports) and PR 3 (biennial comprehensive Progress Reports and limited 
Progress Reports every other two years) would not increase administrative burden compared 
to  the  baseline.  However,  option  PR3  attains  the  objectives  of  a  dynamic,  reliable  and 
transparent  governance  process,  timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  Energy  Union 
objectives and enabling the EU to comply with its international climate obligations to a large 
extent, while option PR2 does not meet these objectives. 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5: Periodicity of national Progress Reports – Overview of impacts with regard to 
objectives 

Dynamic, reliable 
and transparent 
governance 
process 

Timely 
implementation 
and monitoring of 
Energy Union 
objectives 

Minimising 
administrative 
burden 

Enabling the EU to 
comply with 
international 
climate obligations  

+++ 

- 

++ 

+++ 

- 

++ 

-- 

+ 

= 

+++ 

--- 

+++ 

Policy Option 

Baseline 
PR1 (annual 
Progress Reports) 
PR2 (biennial 
Progress Reports) 
PR3 (biennial 
comprehensive 
Progress Reports 
and limited 
Progress Reports 
every other two 
years) 

Ratings: + is used to denote a positive impact, – to denote a negative impact, = signifies no 
impact, +/- low impact, ++/-- medium impact, +++/--- high impact. 

Efficiency in achieving the objectives: The policy option of annual Progress Reports (option 
PR1)  leads to the highest  benefits with regard to the objectives of  a  more dynamic, reliable 
and  transparent  governance  process,  a  timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  Energy 
Union  objectives,  and  enabling  the  EU  to  comply  with  its  international  climate  obligations, 
but is also the only option that leads to an increase in administrative burden compared to the 
baseline  and  is  thus  not  efficient.  The  policy  option  of  biennial  comprehensive  Progress 
Reports  and  limited  Progress  Reports  every  other  two  years  (option  PR3)  is  slightly  less 
effective in reaching the objectives than the policy option of annual Progress Reports (option 
PR1), but it manages to attain these objectives without an increase of administrative burden. 
In  comparison  to  option  PR3,  option  PR2  is  less  efficient  as  it  does  neither  contribute  to  a 
more  dynamic,  reliable  and  transparent  governance  process,  nor  to  a  timely  implementation 
and  monitoring  of  Energy  Union  objectives,  nor  does  it  enable  the  EU  to  comply  with  its 
international climate obligations. 

Coherence  with  overarching  Energy  Union  objectives  and  compliance  with  international 
obligations: With regard to coherence of the policy options on periodicity of Progress Reports 
with  the  overarching  strategy  of  the  Energy  Union  and  its  five  dimensions,  all  options  will 
improve  coherence  of  the  reporting  obligations  for  the  Energy  Union  implementation 
compared to the baseline, as all options lead to an aligned periodicity of progress reporting in 
its  five  dimensions  as  part  of  Progress  Reports.  Both  the  policy  option  of  annual  Progress 
Reports (option PR1) and the policy option of biennial comprehensive Progress Reports and 
limited Progress Reports every other two years (PR3) ensure coherence with the objectives of 
the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 6: Periodicity of national Progress Reports – Comparison of policy options 

Policy Option 
Baseline 
PR1 (annual Progress Reports) 
PR2 (biennial Progress Reports) 
PR3 (biennial comprehensive Progress Reports and 
limited Progress Reports every other two years) 

Effectiveness 
= 
H 
L 
H 

Efficiency 
= 
M 
L 
H 

Coherence 
= 
H 
M 
H 

Ratings: no effect (=), low (L), medium (M), and high (H) effects 

In  conclusion, biennial  comprehensive Progress Reports and limited Progress  Reports  every 
other two years (option PR3) are proposed as the preferred option. 

7.2.3.  Comparing options for the periodicity of Commission monitoring of collective 

progress made  

Effectiveness in achieving the objectives: The policy option of annual monitoring reports by 
the  Commission  (option  M1)  leads  to  a  higher  level  of  information  for  the  European 
Parliament,  the  Council  and  citizens  on  Energy  Union  implementation  and  more  frequent 
possibilities for a political debate than the policy option of biennial monitoring (option M2). 
Annual monitoring (option M1) also leads to higher investor certainty for SMEs and industry 
than  biennial  monitoring  (option  M2)  and  allows  the  Commission  better  to  detect  possible 
problems at an early stage and to propose possible solutions to ensure that Member States and 
the EU are on track to meet their objectives. Furthermore, annual monitoring (option M1) is in 
line  with  the  annual  periodicity  of  UNFCCC  Climate  Conferences  contrary  to  the  biennial 
monitoring reports (option M2).  

Table 7: Periodicity of Commission monitoring – Overview of impacts with regard to 
objectives 

Policy Option 

Dynamic, reliable 
and transparent 
governance 
process 

Baseline 
M1 (annual 
monitoring 
reports) 
M2 (biennial 
monitoring 
reports) 

= 
+++ 

-- 

Timely 
implementation 
and monitoring of 
Energy Union 
objectives 
= 
+++ 

-- 

Minimising 
administrative 
burden 

Enabling the EU to 
comply with 
international 
climate obligations  

= 
= 

++ 

= 
+++ 

-- 

Ratings: + is used to denote a positive impact, – to denote a negative impact, = signifies no 
impact, +/- low impact, ++/-- medium impact, +++/--- high impact. 

55 

 
 
 
  
 
Efficiency  in  achieving  the  objectives:  The  policy  option  of  annual  monitoring  (option  M1) 
entails higher administrative costs than the option of biennial monitoring (option M2) due to a 
higher  frequency  of  monitoring.  The  option  of  biennial  monitoring  (M2)  would  lower 
administrative burden and would be sufficient to reach the objectives in most Energy Union 
dimensions,  but  does  not  reach  the  objectives  envisaged  in  the  decarbonisation  dimension. 
This  is  because  annual  tracking  of  progress  towards  the  2030  target  for  greenhouse  gas 
emission reductions is paramount in order to ensure that Member States are in line with their 
annual  obligations  under  the  effort  sharing,  as  well  as  to  enable  the  EU  to  demonstrate 
internationally  what  action  the  EU  is  taking,  and  also  to  show  progress  towards  this 
international  commitment.  The  option  of  annual  monitoring  (M1)  is  contributing  to  all 
objectives, but is at the same time increasing administrative burden compared to the baseline.  

Coherence  with  overarching  Energy  Union  objectives  and  compliance  with  international 
obligations:  With  regard  to  coherence  of  the  policy  options  on  periodicity  of  Commission 
monitoring of collective progress made with the overarching strategy of the Energy Union and 
its  five  dimensions,  both  options  will  improve  coherence  of  monitoring  obligations  for  the 
Energy  Union  implementation  compared  to  the  baseline,  as  both  options  lead  to  aligned 
periodicity  of  monitoring  across  the  five  dimensions  as  part  of  an  integrated  Commission 
monitoring.  However,  only  the  policy  option  of  annual  monitoring  reports  (option  M1) 
ensures  coherence  with  the  EU  objectives  for  the  international  UNFCCC  process,  under 
which  the  EU  demonstrates  progress  in  achieving  its  international  obligations  at  the  annual 
UNFCCC Climate Conferences. 

Table 8: Periodicity of Commission monitoring – Comparison of policy options 

Policy Option 
Baseline 
M1 (annual monitoring) 
M2 (biennial monitoring) 

Effectiveness 
= 
H 
M 

Efficiency 
= 
M 
M 

Coherence 
= 
H 
M 

Ratings: no effect (=), low (L), medium (M), and high (H) effects 

In  conclusion  of  the  comparison  of  policy  options,  annual  Commission  monitoring  (option 
M1) is proposed as the preferred option. 

7.2.4.  Comparing options for an iterative process with Member States including country-

specific recommendations or decisions  

Effectiveness in achieving the objectives: All presented policy options lead to a more reliable 
governance  process  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  on  the  finalisation  of  the 
draft plans and their subsequent implementation, a higher level of information for citizens on 
the  Energy  Union  implementation  as  well  as  higher  investor  certainty  compared  to  the 
baseline.  To  this  end  all  options  would  also  contribute  to  the  specific  objective  of  a  timely 
implementation and monitoring of the Energy Union.  

56 

 
 
 
 
 
In the case of an iterative process between Member States and the Commission limited either 
to the ambition of draft National Plans (option IP1) or to the implementation of the National 
Plans (option IP2) the effectiveness in achieving the above mentioned objectives is limited as 
regards ensuring a sufficient level of collective contributions to the EU-level 2030 targets for 
renewable energy and energy efficiency. Thus, a more effective iterative process covers both 
the ambition and implementation of the National Plans (option IP3). The effectiveness of the 
iterative  process  can  be  maximised  if  it  is  complemented  through  EU-level  or  national 
measures  (option  IP4),  in  particular  to  ensure  the  achievement  of  EU-level  2030  targets  for 
renewable energy and energy efficiency. In the case of Commission recommendations not set 
in  legislation  option  (IP5),  the  benefits  mentioned  above  remain  uncertain,  implying  a  low 
effectiveness  in  this  regard.  In  contrast,  Commission  or  Council  recommendations  set  in 
legislation (options IP6 and IP7) both contribute to a more reliable governance process and a 
timely  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the  Energy  Union.  However,  not  involving  the 
Council in the process might lead to a lower buy-in  by the Member States  and the political 
decisions-makers to the Energy Union Governance process. 

None  of  the  presented  options  are  effective  in  achieving  the  objective  of  minimising 
administrative burden as the baseline scenario does not feature dedicated recommendations on 
National Plans. 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 9: Process for an iterative process with Member States including country-specific 
recommendations or decisions – Overview of impacts with regard to objectives 

Policy Option 

Baseline 

IP1 (Iterative process on 
ambition of draft plans) 

IP2 (Iterative process on 
implementation of plans) 

IP3 (Iterative process on 
ambition and implementation of 
plans) 
IP4 (Iterative process on 
ambition and implementation of 
plans with measures) 
IP5 (Commission 
recommendations not set in 
legislation) 
IP6 (Commission 
recommendations set in 
legislation) 
IP7 (Council recommendations 
set in legislation) 

Dynamic, 
reliable and 
transparent 
governance 
process 

= 

+ 

+ 

++ 

Timely 
implementation 
and monitoring 
of Energy 
Union 
objectives 
= 

+ 

+ 

++ 

+++ 

+++ 

=/+  

=/+ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

Minimising 
administrative 
burden 

= 

- 

- 

-- 

--- 

=/- 

- 

-- 

Enabling the 
EU to comply 
with 
international 
climate 
obligations 
= 

+ 

+ 

++ 

+++ 

=/+ 

++ 

++ 

Ratings: + is used to denote a positive impact, – to denote a negative impact, = signifies no 
impact, +/- low impact, ++/-- medium impact, +++/--- high impact. 

Efficiency  in  achieving  the  objectives:  All  presented  policy  options  involve  higher 
administrative  (planning  or  implementing)  costs  for  Member  States  due  to  the  iterative 
process,  combined  with  higher  monitoring  benefits  compared  to  the  baseline.  The 
administrative burden is lowest for the iterative process limited to either the ambition or the 
implementation  of  National  Plans  (options  IP1  and  IP2),  but  higher  for  a  comprehensive 
iterative  process  (option  IP3),  and  highest  if  such  a  process  is  complemented  by  EU  or 
national  measures  (option  IP4).  As  regards  the  country-specific  recommendations,  higher 
administrative (monitoring) costs will be incurred for the Commission, combined with higher 
monitoring  benefits  compared  to  the  baseline.  The  administrative  burden  is  lowest  for 
Commission  recommendations  not  set  in  legislation  (option  IP5),  with  lowest  effectiveness 
implying  medium  efficiency 
this  option.  Between  Commission  and  Council 
recommendations  set  in  legislation  (options  IP6  and  IP7),  option  IP6  is  more  efficient  as  it 
generates lower administrative burden for a comparable effectiveness. 

for 

58 

 
 
 
 
Coherence with overarching Energy Union objectives: All presented options would improve 
coherence due to a more reliable governance process between Member States compared to the 
baseline.  However,  option  IP4  would  best  ensure  coherence  with  the  overarching  Energy 
Union strategy and its objectives. As regards country-specific recommendations, all presented 
options  set  in  legislation  (options  IP6  and  IP7)  would  improve  coherence  due  to  a  more 
functional governance process between Member States and the Commission compared to the 
baseline together with enhanced Member States' flexibility.   

Table 10: Iterative process with Member States including country-specific recommendations 
or decisions – Comparison of policy options 

Policy Option 
Baseline 
IP1 (Iterative process on ambition of draft plans) 

Effectiveness 
= 
L 

Efficiency 
= 
M 

Coherence 
= 
L 

IP2 (Iterative process on implementation of plans) 

IP3 (Iterative process on ambition and 
implementation of plans) 

IP4 (Iterative process on ambition and 
implementation of plans with measures) 

IP5 (Commission recommendations not set in 
legislation) 

IP6 (Commission recommendations set in 
legislation) 

IP7 (Council recommendations set in legislation) 

L 

M 

H 

L 

M 

M 

Ratings: no effect (=), low (L), medium (M), and high (H) effects 

M 

M 

M 

M 

H 

L 

L 

M 

H 

L 

M 

M 

In  conclusion  of the comparison  of policy  options, a combination of an iterative process on 
ambition  and  implementation  of  the  National  Plans  complemented  through  EU  or  national 
measures (option IP4) with Commission recommendations set in legislation (option IP6), with 
a  role  for  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  still  to  be  defined,  are  proposed  as  the 
preferred option. 

7.2.5.  Comparing options for consultations of Member States on National Plans 

Effectiveness in achieving the objectives: All presented policy options lead to a more reliable 
governance  process  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  on  the  finalisation  of  the 
draft plans and their subsequent implementation, a higher level of information for citizens on 
the  Energy  Union  implementation  as  well  as  higher  investor  certainty  compared  to  the 
baseline.  To  this  end  all  options  would  also  contribute  to  the  specific  objective  of  a  timely 
implementation and monitoring of the Energy Union, including the identification of areas for 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
regional  cooperation  and  the  avoidance  of  energy  and  climate  policies  that  would  have 
unintended impacts on other Member States.  

In  the  case  of  voluntary  consultations  on  National  Plans  (option  C1)  these  benefits  remain 
uncertain, implying a low effectiveness in this regard. Mandatory consultations on draft plans, 
either only on policies and measures (option C2) or also on objectives (option C3) would be 
more effective than voluntary consultations, with option C3 being more effective than option 
C2 due to the inclusion of objectives of draft plans in the consultations, but would still only 
cover the drafting phase of the planning process. The effectiveness is highest for mandatory 
consultations  on  draft  and  final  plans  (option  C4),  as  in  this  case  also  the  implementation 
phase of the planning process would be consulted with other Member States, thereby ensuring 
regional cooperation among Member States in the implementation of National Plans. 

Table 11: Consultations – Overview of impacts with regard to objectives 

Policy Option 

Dynamic, 
reliable and 
transparent 
governance 
process 

Timely 
implementation 
and monitoring 
of Energy Union 
objectives 

Minimising 
administrative 
burden 

Enabling the EU 
to comply with 
international 
climate 
obligations 

Baseline 
C1 (Voluntary 
consultations) 
C2 (Mandatory 
consultations on policies 
and measures of draft 
plans) 
C3 (Mandatory 
consultations on draft 
plans) 
C4 (Mandatory 
consultations on draft and 
final plans) 

= 
=/+ 

+ 

= 
=/+ 

+ 

++ 

++ 

+++ 

+++ 

= 
=/- 

- 

- 

-- 

= 
=/+ 

= 

+ 

++ 

Ratings: + is used to denote a positive impact, – to denote a negative impact, = signifies no 
impact, +/- low impact, ++/-- medium impact, +++/--- high impact. 

Efficiency  in  achieving  the  objectives:  All  presented  policy  options  involve  higher 
administrative (planning) costs for Member States due to the consultation process, combined 
with  higher  benefits  for  the  Commission  in  terms  of  higher  transparency  of  other  Member 
States' National Plans compared to the baseline. Administrative burden is lowest for voluntary 
consultations  (option  C1)  and  highest  for  mandatory  consultations  on  draft  and  final  plans 
(option C4) – with lowest and highest effectiveness, respectively, implying medium efficiency 
for  both  options.  Due  to  their  higher  effectiveness  but  similar  administrative  burden, 
mandatory  consultations  on  comprehensive  draft  plans  (option  C3)  are  more  efficient  than 

60 

 
 
   
 
 
mandatory  consultations  only  on  policies  and  measures  of  draft  plans  (option  C2),  but 
similarly efficient as options C1 and C4. 

Coherence  with  overarching  Energy  Union  objectives  and  compliance  with  international 
obligations: With regard to coherence of the policy options with the overarching strategy of 
the Energy Union and its five dimensions, all presented options with mandatory consultations 
(options  C2  to  C4)  would  improve  coherence  due  to  a  more  reliable  governance  process 
between  Member  States  compared  to  the  baseline.  However,  option  C4  would  best  ensure 
coherence  with  the  overarching  Energy  Union  strategy,  as  consultations  would  cover  the 
entire  planning  process  and  thus  fully  ensure  regional  coordination  and  cooperation  among 
Member States in the implementation of National Plans. 

Table 12: Consultations – Comparison of policy options 

Policy Option 
Baseline 
C1 (Voluntary consultations) 
C2 (Mandatory consultations on policies and 
measures of draft plans) 

C3 (Mandatory consultations on draft plans) 
C4 (Mandatory consultations on draft and final 
plans) 

Effectiveness 
= 
L 
M 

Efficiency 
= 
M 
L 

Coherence 
= 
L 
M 

M 
H 

M 
M 

M 
H 

Ratings: no effect (=), low (L), medium (M), and high (H) effects 

In conclusion of the comparison of policy options, mandatory consultations on draft and final 
National Plans (option C4) are proposed as the preferred option. 

7.2.6.  Overview of preferred policy options 

As  a  summary  of  the  comparison  of  policy  options,  this  Impact  Assessment  proposes  a 
package  of  preferred  options  on  both  streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations  and  on  the  elements  of  the  governance  process  between  Member  States  and  the 
Commission. 

As regards streamlining of planning, reporting and monitoring obligations in the energy and 
climate field, the evaluation shows a preference for a single legislative act on Energy Union 
governance that replaces the relevant parts of the energy acquis and fully replaces the MMR.  
A  single  legislative  act  on  Energy  Union  governance  that  replaces  the  relevant  parts  of  the 
energy acquis and the relevant parts of the MMR comes close in terms of costs and benefits. 
This  single  legislative  act  would  also  specify  the  integration  and  reflection  of  the  relevant 
existing obligations in the energy acquis and the MMR into National Plans, Progress Reports 
and integrated Commission monitoring.  

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
While  streamlining  of  the  energy  acquis  and  the  MMR  is  a  key  aim  of  the  Governance 
initiative,  defining  the  political  process  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  is  of 
equal  importance  in  view  of  the  need  for  a  collective  achievement  of  the  Energy  Union 
objectives, including the 2030 targets for climate and energy.  

Concerning  the  periodicity  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring,  Member  States  would 
submit their final National Plans to the Commission in 2018 and would be requested to update 
these plans every five years thereafter. In addition, National Plans may be updated at Member 
States' discretion with regard to policies and measures and projections. Member States would 
report on the implementation of National Plans biennially in the period from 2021 to 2030 by 
means  of  comprehensive  Progress  Reports  and  report  every  other  two  years  by  means  of 
limited Progress Reports. The Commission would monitor collective progress made towards 
the  Energy  Union  objectives  by  annual  monitoring  reports  with  alternating  foci  on  the 
different  Energy  Union  dimensions  and  thereby  also  inform  the  European  Parliament,  the 
Council, stakeholders and the general public.  

As regards the iterative governance process between Member States and the Commission, this 
process  should  cover  both  the  ambition  and  delivery  of  National  Plans,  and  should  be 
complemented  by  EU  or  national  measures  in  case  of  insufficient  collective  action.  This 
process would be the basis for the Commission to issue recommendations on National Plans 
on the basis of Member States' Progress Reports in the context of State of the Energy Union 
based on a process set in legislation. The role of the Council and the European Parliament has 
to  be  further  defined.  Among  Member  States  mandatory  consultations  on  draft  and  final 
National  Plans  would  be  undertaken  in  order  to  ensure  coordination  of  national  planning 
processes.  

Table 13 presents an overview of all preferred options by category of policy options. 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 13: Overview of preferred options  

Category of options 

Preferred option 

Streamlining of planning, reporting and 
monitoring obligations Legislative and non-
legislative approaches to streamlining (S) 

Periodicity of National Plans (NP) 

Periodicity of Progress Reports (PR) 

Regulating planning, reporting, monitoring and 
compliance obligations in the energy and climate 
field by a single legislative act on Energy Union 
governance that replaces the relevant parts of the 
energy acquis and fully replaces the MMR (S5) 

or alternatively 

Regulating planning, reporting, monitoring and 
compliance obligations in the energy and climate 
field by a single legislative act on Energy Union 
governance that replaces the relevant parts of 
existing legislation (S4) 

Updates of National Plans every five years, and 
at Member States' discretion with regard to 
policies and measures and projections(NP5)  

Biennial comprehensive Progress Reports and 
limited Progress Reports every other two years 
(PR3) 

Periodicity of Commission monitoring of 
collective progress made (M) 

Annual monitoring reports (M1) 

Process for an iterative process with Member 
States including country-specific 
recommendations or decisions (IP) 

Iterative process on ambition and delivery of 
National Plans complemented by measures (IP4)  

Commission recommendations set in legislation, 
with a role for the Council and the European 
Parliament (IP6) 

Consultations of Member States on National 
Plans (C) 

Mandatory consultations on draft and final 
National Plans (C3)  

8.  MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  in  the  energy  and  climate  field  that 
formed  the  subject  of  this  Impact  Assessment  will  also  provide  the  tools  to  track  progress 
towards  implementing  the  Energy  Union  –  and  thus  the  effectiveness  of  the  initiative  on 
Energy  Union Governance. Together with the establishment of an iterative process between 
Member States and the Commission, they will establish a comprehensive governance system 
of the Energy Union. The Member States' Progress Reports will be central in this regard as 
they will provide the information needed to monitor the implementation of the National Plans 
and  the  Energy  Union  objectives.  Besides,  the  administrative  burden  related  to  planning, 
reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  needs  to  be  evaluated  in  the  course  of  the 
implementation of the Energy Union. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
The Member  States' Progress Reports  will be assessed  by the Commission,  assisted notably 
by  the  EEA.  In  its  annual  monitoring  reports,  the  Commission  will  monitor  the 
implementation and overall progress made at EU level towards the Energy Union objectives 
and inform the European Parliament and the Council as well as stakeholders and the general 
public.  While  such  tracking  of  progress  is  not  legally  binding  for  the  Member  States,  it 
provides  the  means  to  convey  early  warning  signals  in  case  Member  States  are  lagging 
behind, and also for naming and shaming.  

The process with recommendations by the Commission on specific climate and energy issues 
and/or  comments  from  neighbouring  Member  States  also  offers  possibilities  for  early 
warnings in case Member States are not on track or if the objectives do not seem accurate. 

In addition to the monitoring at EU level of the reports prepared by Member States under this 
initiative,  some  information  contained  in  the  reports  will  also  be  assessed  at  international 
level.  This  concerns  mainly  climate-related  information  which  is  provided  in  the  context  of 
the  UNFCCC  and  in  the  future  implementation  of  the  Paris  Agreement.  These  international 
assessments  are  conducted  by  external  experts  with  the  goal  to  identify  areas  for  further 
improvement of the reports and to assess compliance. 

In  addition  to  the  Member  States'  Progress  Reports,  indicators  are  also  paramount  for  a 
transparent  monitoring  system.  The  Commission's  monitoring  in  its  annual  reports  will 
therefore also build on the assessment of key indicators for the five dimensions of the Energy 
Union. In its 2015 State of the Energy Union35, the Commission showed progress made since 
the  Energy  Union  Framework  Strategy  was  adopted  to  bring  about  the  transition  to  a  low-
carbon, secure and competitive economy. In that Communication, the Commission proposed a 
methodology on key indicators as a first step towards measuring and monitoring the delivery 
of  the  Energy  Union36.  Under  this  initiative,  key  indicators  will  continue  to  be  used  to 
measure and monitor the delivery of the Energy Union. The selection of indicators can further 
evolve  in  the  future  to  take  account  of  better  indicators  being  made  available  due  to  the 
enhancement of energy statistical data collection or suggested to address the issues at hand. A 
dialogue between the Commission and the Member States is taking place at expert level37 in 
this regard.  

In  order  to  monitor  the  effectiveness  of  this  initiative  beyond  the  implementation  of  the 
Energy  Union  and  to  specifically  evaluate  the  administrative  burden  related  to  planning, 
reporting  and  monitoring  obligations  in  the  course  of  the  implementation  of  the  Energy 
Union, the following indicators (or criteria) are relevant: 

  Coherence and consistency of obligations both within the energy acquis as well as of 

obligations between the energy and climate acquis. 

  Relevance  of  obligations  in  the  energy  acquis  and  climate  acquis  with  regard  to 

evolving EU policy priorities. 

35 COM(2015)572. 
36 SWD(2015)243. 
37 In the Technical Working Group on National Energy and Climate Plans. 

64 

 
 
                                                 
  Cost-effectiveness  of  obligations  in  the  energy  and  climate  acquis  in  terms  of 

administrative and implementation costs as well as administrative benefits. 

  Number of non-compliance cases identified at EU level or internationally (UNFCCC/ 

Paris Agreement); 

  Number  of  reports  submitted  on  time  to  the  Commission  and/or  internationally 

(UNFCCC/ Paris Agreement); 

  Consistency  of  the  EU  level  reports  with  those  submitted  by  EU  Member  States  as 
evidenced  through  review  of  the  information  at  international  level  (UNFCCC/  Paris 
Agreement); 

  Consistency  of  the  information  in  the  plans  and  reports  as  evidenced  through  EU 
assessment  and  international  (UNFCCC/  Paris  Agreement)  reviews  compared  to  the 
existing situation; 

  Extent  to  which  Member  States  apply  a  common  methodology  compared  to  the 

existing situation; 

  Extent  of  completeness  of  Member  States  reports  when  compared  to  the  existing 

situation; 

  Availability of data and information in areas targeted by the initiative compared to the 

existing situation. 

The  results  of  both  the  EU  monitoring  and  international  assessment  will  also  be  used  to 
evaluate administrative burden and most effectively direct improvement efforts and capacity 
building  activities  at  EU  and  Member  States'  level.  The  Commission  has  been  organising 
regular meetings of the Technical Working Group on National Energy and Climate Plans in 
which technical discussions on National Plans take place.  In this Technical Working Group 
experts  covering  both  energy  and  climate  issues  participate.  Experiences  are  shared  and  a 
discussion around technical elements of the National Plans takes place, including on the role 
the Commission could play in supporting Member States.  

In  the  climate  field,  Working  Group  1  on  annual  inventories  and  Working  Group  2  on 
projections, policies and measures and implementation of the ESD under the Climate Change 
Committee have played a crucial role for bringing about improvements and capacity building. 
The networks held by the EEA have proven to provide significant opportunities for capacity 
building with and between the Member States, as has the continued dialogue on data quality. 
In the future, similar mechanisms will continue to play a crucial role in this regard and will 
continue to be the main instruments to exchange best practices and promote lessons learned 
among the EU and the Member States. The Commission is also looking into possibilities for 
capacity building support to Member States in the development of the National Plans.  

In  alignment  with  the  review  cycle  agreed  under  the  Paris  Agreement,  updates  of  National 
Plans  are  foreseen  at  least  in  2023  and  2028.  Comprehensive  Progress  Reports  by  Member 
States will be submitted biennially, including in 2023 and 2027), and limited Progress Reports 
every  other  two  years.  While  2023  will  be  too  early  to  draw  any  conclusions  on  the 
implementation  of  the  initiative  (as  Member  States'  Progress  Reports  would  be  submitted 

65 

 
 
 
from  the  early  2020s  onwards  only)  an  evaluation  of  the  implementation  of  the  initiative 
should be done by the mid-2020s.  

Furthermore, the Commission will  regularly review the conformity of the provisions of this 
initiative  with  future  decisions  relating  to  the  UNFCCC  and  Paris  Agreement.  The 
Commission  will  also  regularly  assess  whether  developments  within  the  framework  of  the 
UNFCCC  and  Paris  Agreement  give  rise  to  a  situation  where  requirements  in  this  initiative 
are no longer necessary or need adjusting for example because of inconsistencies. 

66 

 
 
ANNEXES  

ANNEX 1: PROCEDURAL INFO 

9.  PROCEDURE 

9.1. 

Identification  

Lead DGs: Energy (ENER). Climate Action (CLIMA), Secretariat General (SG) 

Agenda  planning  reference:  "Energy  Union  Governance  –  Planning,  Reporting  and 
Monitoring obligations" (ENER/2016/029) 

9.2.  Organisation and timing  

The preparations of the Impact Assessment on Energy Union Governance formally started in 
November  2015  with  the  Commission's  first  State  of  the  Energy  Union,  announcing  a 
proposal on streamlining of planning and reporting requirements related to climate and energy 
actions  for  Member  States  and  the  Commission  to  reduce  as  soon  as  possible  unnecessary 
administrative  burden  in  line  with  the  better  regulation  agenda  and  to  align  planning  and 
reporting  requirements  with  the  Energy  Union  Framework  Strategy.  However,  the  Impact 
Assessment builds on earlier calls for a Governance system, in particular by the October 2014 
European  Council,  as  well  as  earlier  concepts  on  the  Governance  system  such  as  those 
contained  in  the  2030  Framework  for  Climate  and  Energy  in  January  2014  and  the  Energy 
Union Framework Strategy in February 2015. 

An inter-service group on the Fitness Check steered the Public Consultation for the initiative 
(see  section  9.3)  as  well  as  the  external  expertise  supporting  this  Impact  Assessment  (see 
section 9.4) as of November 2015. An inter-service group on the Governance of the Energy 
Union was established in May 2016 in view of steering the work on the Impact Assessment. 
Participating  services  are  SG,  ENER,  CLIMA,  ENV,  SJ,  JUST,  JRC,  GROW,  ECFIN, 
REGIO,  AGRI,  BUDG,  RTD,  MOVE,  EPSC,  and  ESTAT.  Two  meetings  of  the  ISG  were 
held on 23 May and 15 July. The final draft of the Impact Assessment was submitted to the 
ISG on 11 July 2014. 

The draft Impact Assessment was submitted to the Regulatory  Scrutiny Board (RSB) on 28 
July and was discussed at the RSB hearing on 14 September 2016, following which the RSB 
issued a positive opinion on the Impact Assessment. As the RSB provided recommendations 
to further improve the draft, the Impact Assessment was amended as follows. 

The  scope  and  the  broader  context  of  the  Governance  initiative  were  better  explained, 
including links to other policy strands. The links to and synergies with other policy areas and 
the European Semester were  assessed in  more detail. Furthermore, inter-linkages  with other 
upcoming Energy Union initiatives such as the Market Design Initiative and the Renewable 
Energy  Directive  were  elaborated  on,  the  latter  including  the  question  of  EU  and  national 
measures. Finally, the broader benefits of the Energy Union Governance were assessed more 
explicitly and the legal basis for recommendations to Member States was clarified. 

67 

 
 
 
9.3.  Consultation and expertise 

A  public  consultation  was  launched  on  11  January  2016  to  collect  views  and  input  from 
stakeholders and citizens ahead of the forthcoming proposal on the Governance system of the 
Energy  Union.  The  consultation  period  lasted  over  12  weeks  and  closed  on  22  April  2016. 
The online survey received a total of 103 submissions. The functional email inbox received an 
additional  35  documents,  either  in  complement  to  or  in  lieu  of  online  submissions.  Most 
contributions were submitted by Industry Associations and private companies (46%), National 
Public  Authorities  (either  central  or  local  government)  (18%)  and  NGOs  (14%).  The 
Commission received contributions from national public authorities from 15 Member States: 
Belgium,  Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Estonia,  Finland,  Germany,  Hungary,  Latvia, 
Lithuania, Malta, The Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia and Sweden. Norway also replied to the 
consultation. 

The consultation focused on: i) how current planning and reporting obligations in the energy 
and  climate  field  could  be  better  streamlined  to  better  serve  the  objectives  of  the  Energy 
Union; ii) how to best proceed to develop integrated planning, reporting and monitoring tools 
and; iii) how to set up a Governance process conducive to the attainment of the objectives of 
the Energy Union. The responses to this public consultation fed into the Commission's Fitness  
Check of existing planning and reporting obligations in the Energy Acquis as well as into this 
Impact Assessment. 

While  the  full  synthesis  reports  can  be  found  as  Annex  2  of  this  Impact  Assessment,  a 
summary  of  the  main  views  related  to  the  policy  options  considered  in  the  context  of  this 
Impact Assessment can be found below. 

Responses on streamlining of planning, reporting and monitoring obligations 

While  the  vast  majority  of  respondents  recognize  the  importance  of  existing  planning  and 
reporting obligations, a broad consensus emerges on the need to better streamline, align and 
integrate  existing  planning  and  reporting  obligations  to  avoid  gaps,  duplications  and 
inconsistencies. This view is notably shared by all Member States having replied to the public 
consultation. 

Concerning the approach to streamlining, a vast majority of respondents consider that a single 
legislative  act  should  be  the  Commission  preferred  option  for  streamlining  planning  and 
reporting obligations in the energy and climate field post 2020. This option (corresponding to 
policy options S4 to S6 of this Impact Assessment) is supported by 31% of respondents and 
by  7  out  of  15  Member  States  having  replied  to  the  consultation.  An  absolute  majority  of 
stakeholders (51%)  see several benefits  deriving from the adoption of a new legislative act, 
notably  in  reducing  administrative  burden  and  ensuring  more  consistent  approach.  More 
particularly, according to stakeholders this option would i) increase the coherence of planning 
instruments ("improvement" or "considerable improvement' for 52% of overall respondents); 
ii) improve the monitoring phase ("improvement" or "considerable improvement' for 47% of 
overall respondents); facilitate the achievement of the Energy Union targets ("improvement" 
or  "considerable  improvement'  for  44  %  of  overall  respondents)  while  ensuring  iv)  the 

68 

 
 
 
effective implementation of the legislation ("improvement" or "considerable improvement' for 
43 % of overall respondents).  

The two other options on the approach to streamlining subject to consultation received minor 
support.  The  option  of  streamlining  obligations  by  sectorial  legislation  (corresponding  to 
policy option S2 of this Impact Assessment) received support form 21% of stakeholders but 
not  a  single  Member  State  expressed  explicit  preference  for  this  option.  The  non-binding 
guidance  option  (corresponding  to  policy  option  S1  of  this  Impact  Assessment)  received 
support  from  only  15%  of  stakeholders  but  including  5  Member  States.  The  non-binding 
guidance option is nonetheless considered by 61% of overall respondent as not sufficient to 
ensure effective and efficient streamlining and the creation of a stable legislative framework 
guaranteeing  stability  for  investors.  More  specifically,  according  to  stakeholders  this  option 
would:  i)  negatively  affect  the  possibility  to  properly  implement  EU  legislation  (37%  of 
stakeholders  anticipate  a  "significant  deterioration")  ii)  reduce  the  possibility  to  attain  EU 
energy and climate targets (37% of stakeholders anticipate a "significant deterioration") and 
iii)  reduce  the  possibility  to  adequately  monitor  progress  and  trends  (according  to  36%  this 
option  would  bring  a  "significant  deterioration").  As  a  consequence,  this  option  is  also 
considered  by  a  majority  of  respondents  as  entailing  direct  negative  impacts  on  investment 
certainty (here again, 38% of stakeholders anticipate a "significant deterioration"). 

On  the  structure  of  National  Plans,  respondents  are  generally  of  the  opinion  that  these 
National  Plans  should  reflect  the  five  dimensions  of  the  Energy  Union  and  should  be 
produced  on  the  basis  of  a  detailed  template.  This  view  is  notably  supported  by  6  Member 
States out of 15 having replied to the consultation.   

According  to  an  absolute  majority  of  stakeholders,  including  6  Member  States,  while 
reflecting the five dimensions of the Energy Union, National Plans should focus on the areas 
with  quantified  EU  targets.  According  to  stakeholders,  National  Plans  should  give  more 
prominence  to  the  areas  covered  by  the  2030  energy  and  climate  framework  and  notably 
greenhouse-gas emission reductions (element considered by 53% of the respondents as "very 
important"), energy efficiency (53% of the respondents consider it as "very important") and 
renewables ("very important" to the eyes of 50% of the stakeholders). According to 6 Member 
States  and  some  stakeholders,  the  new  plan  should  not  include  new  obligations  that  might 
bring new administrative burden or additional costs. 

An  absolute  majority  (52%)  of  stakeholders  that  replied  to  the  consultation,  including  3 
Member  States,  are  suggesting  to  maintain  a  high  level  of  detail  in  future  planning 
instruments in order not to lose important information. 4 Member States nonetheless openly 
express preference for short strategic planning documents with a high level of aggregation.  

Despite  the absence  of  dedicated  question,  about  one  third  of  stakeholders  (32%, of  overall 
replies,  including  3  Member  States)  advocate  for  the  inclusion  of  standardized  or  binding 
templates.  Those  respondents  equally  advise  on  the  necessity  of  standardised  reporting 
templates mirroring the structure of the new planning instruments.  

Concerning  the  achievement  of  the  2030  energy  targets,  38%  of  stakeholders,  including  6 
Member  States,  are  asking  for  the  introduction  of  benchmark,  trajectories  or  "corridors", 

69 

 
 
notably  for  renewables  and  energy  efficiency  in  order  to  track  each  single  Member  States’ 
progress against the overall EU targets. Several stakeholders (34 % of respondents, including 
2  Member  States)  also  voice  the  necessity,  for  the  new  planning  instruments,  to  factor  in  a 
long term vision until 2050.  

Responses on the governance process 

On  the  political  process  governing  the  finalisation  and  review  of  National  Plans,  several 
respondents  (41%  of  overall  replies)  advocate  for  a  transparent  and  participatory  planning 
process  to  create  investor  confidence  and  public  acceptance.  According  to  the  majority  of 
respondents,  national  administrations  as  well  as  national  stakeholders  and  national 
Parliaments will have a key role to play in the preparation of National Plans. From the replies 
received, a clear agreement emerges on the centrality of national administrations (considered 
"very  relevant"  for  70%  of  the  respondents),  as  well  as  the  involvement  of  national 
stakeholders  ("very  relevant"  for  55%  of  the  respondents)  and  of  the  national  Parliaments 
("very relevant" for 43% of the respondents). 

It is also held by a number of respondents that the Commission should play an important role 
to  i)  provide  templates  and  technical  support  to  Member  States  in  the  preparation  phase  of 
National  Plans;  ii)  to  assess  National  Plans  and  review  the  progress  made  (notably  via  the 
State  of  the  Energy  Union)  and  iii)  to  introduce  additional  measures  in  view  of  ensuring 
delivery of the EU-level objectives. The role of the Commission in this process is considered 
as "very relevant" for 47% of the overall respondents, and is also fully acknowledged by 12 
Member States. 

Concerning the revision of National Plans, 5 Member States are highlighting the necessity to 
find a right balance between on the one hand the principle of investment certainty and on the 
other  the  possibility  to  adapt  National  Plans  to  changing  circumstances.  It  is  also  widely 
recognised  that  obsolete  National  Plans  could  undermine  the  reliability  and  transparency  of 
future planning for investors and other stakeholders.  

Finally, there is widespread consensus that the new Governance system should facilitate the 
coordination of national energy policies and foster regional cooperation. 61% of stakeholders, 
including  5 Member States,  agree that strengthening regional integration and cooperation in 
the  Energy  Union  domains  is  an  "important"  or  "very  important"  objective.  There  is  also 
widespread belief in the principle that Member States' consultations could play a role in the 
political  process  leading  to  the  definition  of  the  National  Plans.  More  concretely,  58%  of 
stakeholders  consider  consultations  of  other  Member  States  in  the  preparation  of  National 
Plans  as  "important"  or  "very  important".  Stakeholders  finally  agree  that  the  Commission 
should  play  an  important  role  in  guiding  Member  States  and  setting  up  process  defining 
regional cooperation. 50% of stakeholders consider the definition of a Commission guidance 
on regional cooperation as "important" or "very important". 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
9.4.  External expertise 

Study commissioned by the European Commission, DG Energy ("Trinomics Study"):  

  Framework contract ENER/A4/516-2014 (Reference: ENER/A1/2015-643) 

  Title:  1)  Preparatory  study  for  the  Commission’s  Fitness  Check  Evaluation  of 
Planning  and  Reporting  Obligations  in  the  EU  Energy  acquis.  2)  Support  for  an 
Impact  Assessment  in  view  of  legislative  proposals  on  streamlining  of  Planning, 
Reporting and Monitoring for the Energy Union (Energy Union Governance) 

  Presented  by  a  consortium  led  by:  Trinomics  B.V.,  Westersingel  32A,  3014  GS, 
Rotterdam,  The  Netherlands  (with  participation  of  Technopolis  Group  and  Ludwig 
Bölkow Systemtechnik) 

  Timeframe of contract: 31 December 2015 until 30 June 2016. 

Study  commissioned  by  the  European  Commission,  DG  Climate  Action  ("Amec  Foster 
Wheeler Study"):  

  Framework contract CLIMA.A3/FRA/2011/0027  

  Title: Possible streamlining of climate and energy reporting requirements in areas with 

interlinkages  

  Presented by a consortium led by: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure 
UK Limited Booths Park, Chelford Road, Knutsford, Cheshire WA16 8QZ, England  
(in association with Öko-Institut and Bio by Deloitte) 

  Timeframe of contract: 31 December 2015 until 24 June 2016. 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 2: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 

Please see Annex IV of the Fitness Check for the detailed report on the Public Consultation. 

ANNEX 3: WHO IS AFFECTED AND HOW 

Member  States  will  be  affected  by  streamlining  of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring 
obligations  in  general  and  by  developing  and  implementing  National  Plans  in  particular  in 
terms of the associated administrative costs and benefits. Furthermore, Member States will be 
affected  by  the  governance  process  with  the  Commission  in  terms  of  recommendations  on 
National Plans and by the governance process among each other in terms of consultations on 
National  Plans.  The  proposed  initiative  primarily  addresses  Member  States  as  institutional 
actors and this mostly affects their national administrations. 

Local  and  regional  actors  will  also  be  affected  by  their  involvement  in  Member  States' 
imply  additional 
implementation  of  National  Plans.  This  might 
development  and 
administrative costs for coordination between governmental levels, but also entail additional 
benefits  by  ensuring  that  local  and  regional  authorities  as  well  as  the  general  public  are 
involved from the start in the development of national  energy and climate policies until  the 
year 2030. EU policy work to empower the local actors is important in this context. 

While  the  initiative  will  not  affect  the  nature  of  planning,  reporting  and  information 
requirements on industry in general and SMEs in particular, investor certainty for businesses 
is expected to improve by a reliable and transparent governance process for the period from 
2021  to  2030  as  well  as  by  means  of  streamlined  obligations  on  Member  States  and  the 
Commission. 

Citizens  will  be  affected  in  terms  of  better  information  about  the  Energy  Union 
implementation  by  means  of  streamlined  and  thus  more  transparent  planning,  reporting  and 
monitoring obligations for Member States and the Commission.  

ANNEX 4: ANALYTICAL MODELS 

No analytical models were used to support this Impact Assessment. 

ANNEX 5: OUTCOME OF THE EVALUATION 

Please see the Fitness Check for a detailed evaluation of the existing planning, reporting and 
monitoring  obligations  in  the  energy  acquis  as  well  as  their  interlinkages  with  the  climate 
acquis, supporting this Impact Assessment. 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 6: OVERVIEW OF CLASSIFICATION OF OBLIGATIONS IN THE ENERGY ACQUIS (FITNESS CHECK) 

Name of 
obligation 

Legal basis 

Art. 

Description of obligation 

Type of 
obligation 

Frequency 

Entity targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
for obligation 

Destination of 
provision 

ACER Regulation 

Regulation (EC) 
713/2009 

11 

ACER Annual Report internal markets 
in electricity and natural gas (market 
monitoring report) 

Reporting 

Annual 

ACER 

Keep separate 

ACER Regulation 

Regulation (EC) 
713/2009 

13 (12) 

Annual ACER activity report 

Reporting 

Annual 

ACER 

Keep separate 

ACER Regulation 

Regulation (EC) 
713/2009 

34 

Evaluation report on ACER   

Monitoring 

Every 4 years 

EC 

Keep separate 

Connecting 
Europe Facility 
Regulation 

Regulation (EU) No 
1316/2013 

22 

Report on progress and investments 
made in projects of common interest 

Reporting 

Annual 

MS 

Repeal  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Crude Oil Imports 
Regulation 

Regulation 
2964/95/EC 

8 

COM to analyse information and 
communicate it to MS 

Monitoring 

Monthly 

EC 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

73 

 
 
  
Crude Oil Imports 
Regulation 

Regulation 
2964/95/EC 

2, 7 

Report at regular intervals on the 
conditions under which the oil imports 
or deliveries have taken place 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Electricity 
Directive  

Directive 
2009/72/EC 

4 

 Monitoring of security of supply by 
MS, with possibility to delegate to NRA 

Reporting 

Every 2 years, 
by 31 July 

MS 

Repeal  

Electricity 
Directive  

Directive 
2009/72/EC 

22 

Submit a national ten-year network 
development plan based on existing 
and forecast supply and demand, 
containing efficient measures in order 
to guarantee the adequacy of the 
system and the security of supply 

Planning 

Annual 

TSOs 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Electricity 
Directive  

Directive 
2009/72/EC 

37(1) ( e 
) 

National Regulatory Authority annual 
report 

Reporting 

Annual 

NRA 

Keep separate 

Electricity 
Directive  

Directive 
2009/72/EC 

47 

Overall progress report on internal 
market of electricity; should include 
MS measures for improving 
competition +/- recommendations   

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

Integrate 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

3 

Member State shall set an indicative 
national energy efficiency target 

Planning 

Every 3 years 

MS 

Integrate 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(2), 
Annex 
XIV Part 
2 

NEEAPs                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Planning 

Every 3 years 

MS 

Integrate 

Governance 
act  

74 

 
 
  
                                                                                                             
Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

4 

Long-term strategy for mobilising 
investment in the renovation of the 
national building stock 

Planning 

Every 3 years 

MS 

Integrate 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

7(9) 

one-off notification of planned 
alternative measures to energy 
efficiency obligation schemes  

Planning 

one-off 

MS 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

14(1) 

Comprehensive assessment of the 
potential of cogeneration and district 
heating and cooling 

Planning 

Every 5 years 

MS 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

Annex 
VIII 

Potential of cogeneration and district 
heating and cooling 

Planning 

Every 5 years 

MS 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(1), 
Annex 
XIV Part 
1 

Progress report 

Reporting 

Annual 

MS 

Integrate 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(3) 

Evaluation of annual reports and 
NEEAPs 

Monitoring 

Other 

EC 

Integrate 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(4) 

Monitor impact of implementing the 
EED on the ETS Directive, the RES 
Directive, the EPBD Directive, the 
Effort-sharing Decision and industry 
sectors (carbon leakage sectors) 

Monitoring 

Other 

EC 

Repeal  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

75 

 
 
  
Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(5) 

review of continued need for 
exemptions set out in Article 14(6) 

Monitoring 

Other 

EC 

Keep separate 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(6) 

Statistics on production from high and 
low efficiency cogeneration, 
capacities and fuels for cogeneration, 
and on district heating and cooling in 
relation to total heat and electricity 
production and capacities 

reporting 

Annually 

MS 

Keep separate 

Energy Efficiency 
Directive 

Directive 
2012/27/EU 

24(11) 

publication of reports referred to in 
Article 24(1) and (2) 

Monitoring 

As in para 1 and 
2 (annually and 
every three 
years 
respectively) 

EC 

Repeal  

Energy Labelling 
Directive 

Directive 
2010/30/EU 

3(3) 

Enforcement activities and level of 
compliance 

Reporting 

Every 4 years 

MS 

Repeal 

Energy Labelling 
Directive 

Directive 
2010/30/EU 

3(4) 

Synthetic report of MS 4 years 
reporting   

Monitoring 

Every 4 years 

EC 

Repeal 

Energy 
Performance of 
Buildings 
Directive 

Energy 
Performance of 
Buildings 
Directive 

Directive 
2010/31/EU 

5,2 

Report all input data and assumptions 
used for cost-optimal calculations and 
their results 

Reporting 

Every 5 years 

MS 

Integrate 

Directive 
2010/31/EU 

5(4) 

Report on the progress of the Member 
States in reaching cost-optimal levels 
of minimum energy performance 
requirements. 

Monitoring 

EC 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Governance 
act  

Sectorial 
legislation  

76 

 
 
  
  
  
  
Energy 
Performance of 
Buildings 
Directive 

Energy 
Performance of 
Buildings 
Directive 

Energy 
Performance of 
Buildings 

Energy 
Performance of 
Buildings 
Directive 

Directive 
2010/31/EU 

Directive 
2010/31/EU 

9.1 

9.5 

Planning requirement on minimum 
energy performance requirements 
(plans NZEB) 

Planning 

Every 5 years 

MS 

Integrate 

Report on progress of MS in increasing 
the number of nearly zero energy 
buildings 

Monitoring 

Every 3 years 

EC 

Integrate 

Directive 
2010/31/EU 

10.2 

List of existing measures and 
instruments, including financial 

Reporting  

Every 3 years 

MS 

Integrate 

Directive 
2010/31/EU 

10.3 

Examination (monitoring) of the 
effectiveness of the measures and 
instruments, including financial, listed 
by MS pursuant  to Art.10.2 

Monitoring 

Not specified 

EC 

Integrate 

Energy Statistics 
Regulation 

REGULATION (EC) 
No 1099/2008 

4.1(a) 

Transmit national statistics (annual) 

Reporting 

Annual 

MS 

Keep separate 

Energy Statistics 
Regulation 

REGULATION (EC) 
No 1099/2008 

4.1(b) 

Transmit national statistics (monthly) 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Energy Statistics 
Regulation 

REGULATION (EC) 
No 1099/2008 

4.1(c) 

Transmit national statistics (short-
term monthly) 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

77 

 
 
Energy Statistics 
Regulation 

REGULATION (EC) 
No 1099/2008 

5(5) 

Energy Statistics 
Regulation 

REGULATION (EC) 
No 1099/2008 

6,4 

The Commission (Eurostat) shall 
disseminate yearly energy statistics by 
31 January of the second year 
following the reported period. 

Every five years, Member States shall 
provide the Commission (Eurostat) 
with a report on the quality of the 
data transmitted as well as on any 
methodological changes that have 
been made. 

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

Keep separate 

Reporting 

Every 5 years 

MS 

Keep separate 

Euratom Supply 
Agency Statues 
Council Decision 

Council Decision 
2008/114/Euratom 

3 

Report on the activities of the Agency 
in the previous year and a work 
programme for the next year 

Reporting 

Annual 

ESA 

Keep separate 

Financial 
Assistance in the 
Field of Energy 
Regulation 

Regulation No 
663/2009, as 
amended by 
regulation 
1233/2010 

28 

Report on implementation of financial 
assistance to projects in the field of 
energy 

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

Repeal  

Gas Directive  

Directive 
2009/73/EC 

5 

Monitoring of security of gas supply by 
MS, with possibility to delegate to NRA  

Reporting 

Annual, by 31 
July 

MS 

Repeal  

Gas Directive  

Directive 
2009/73/EC 

22 

Submit a national ten-year network 
development plan based on existing 
and forecast supply and demand, 
containing efficient measures in order 
to guarantee the adequacy of the 
system and the security of supply 

Planning 

Annual 

TSOs 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Gas Directive  

Directive 
2009/73/EC 

 41(1) e 

 NRA annual report 

Reporting 

Annual 

NRA 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Sectorial 
legislation  

78 

 
 
  
  
Gas Directive  

Directive 
2009/73/EC 

52 

Hydrocarbons 
Directive  

Directive 
94/22/EC 

8(2) 

Overall progress report on internal 
market of gas; should include MS 
measures for improving competition 
+/- recommendations     

Report on the conditions for granting 
and using authorization for the 
prospection, exploration and 
production of hydrocarbons - on the 
situation of entities in third countries 
and on the state of any negotiations 
undertaken with those countries or in 
the framework of international 
organizations 

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

Integrate 

Monitoring 

Other 

EC 

Repeal  

Hydrocarbons 
Directive  

Directive 
94/22/EC 

9 

Annual report on prospecting, 
exploration and production 

Reporting 

Annual 

MS 

Repeal  

Infrastructure 
Regulation 

Regulation No 
256/2014 

3 and 5 

Reporting on investment projects in 
energy infrastructure within the 
European Union 

Reporting 

Every 2 years 

MS 

Repeal  

Infrastructure 
Regulation 

Regulation No 
256/2014 

10 

Cross-sector analysis of the structural 
evolution and perspectives of the 
Union’s energy system 

Monitoring 

Every 2 years 

EC 

Repeal  

Intergovernmental 
Agreements 
Decision 

Decision 
994/2012/EU 

Network Access 
for Cross-Border 
Electricity 
Exchanges 
Regulation 

Regulation 
714/2009 

8 

8 

Report on information exchange 
mechanism with regard to 
intergovernmental agreements (IGA) 
between Member States and third 
countries in the field of Energy 

Adopt a non-binding Community-wide 
ten-year network development plan, 
(Community-wide network 
development plan), including  the 
modelling of the integrated network, 
scenario development, a European 

Monitoring 

Every 3 years 

EC 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Planning 

Every two year 

ENTSO-E 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

79 

 
 
  
  
generation adequacy outlook and an 
assessment of the resilience of the 
system 

12(1) 

publish a regional investment plan 

Planning 

Every two year 

TSOs 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

24 

8 

Regulation implementation monitoring 
and reporting by COM, including 
preparation of the  report "Progress 
towards completing the Internal 
Energy Market" 

Adopt a non-binding Community-wide 
ten-year network development plan, 
(Community-wide network 
development plan), including  the 
modelling of the integrated network, 
scenario development, a European 
generation adequacy outlook and an 
assessment of the resilience of the 
system 

Monitoring 

EC 

Repeal  

Planning 

Every two year 

ENTSO-G 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

12(1) 

publish a regional investment plan 

Planning 

Every two year 

TSOs 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Network Access 
for Cross-Border 
Electricity 
Exchanges 
Regulation 

Network Access 
for Cross-Border 
Electricity 
Exchanges 
Regulation 

Regulation 
714/2009 

Regulation 
714/2009 

Network Access 
for Natural Gas 
Transmission 
Regulation  

Regulation 
715/2009 

Network Access 
for Natural Gas 
Transmission 
Regulation  

Regulation  
715/2009 

Network Access 
for Natural Gas 
Transmission 
Regulation  

Nuclear 
Decommissioning  
Assistance in 
Bulgaria and 
Slovakia 
Regulation and 
Nuclear 

Regulation 
715/2009 

29 

Regulation implementation monitoring 
and reporting by COM, including 
preparation of the  report "Progress 
towards completing the Internal 
Energy Market" 

Monitoring 

EC 

Repeal  

Council Regulation 
1368/2013 & 
Council Regulation 
1369/2013 

6(1) and 
6(2) 

Annual work programme 

Planning 

Annual 

EC 

Keep separate 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Sectorial 
legislation  

80 

 
 
  
  
  
  
Decommissioning  
Assistance in 
Lithuania 
Regulation 

Nuclear 
Decommissioning  
Assistance in 
Bulgaria and 
Slovakia 
Regulation and 
Nuclear 
Decommissioning  
Assistance in 
Lithuania 
Regulation 

Nuclear Safety 
Directive  

Nuclear Safety 
Directive  

Nuclear Safety 
Directive  

Nuclear Safety 
Directive  

Council Regulation 
1368/2013 & 
Council Regulation 
1369/2013 

Council Directive 
2009/71/Euratom, 
as amended by 
Council Directive 
2014/87/Euratom 

Council Directive 
2009/71/Euratom, 
as amended by 
Council Directive 
2014/87/Euratom 

Council Directive 
2009/71/Euratom, 
as amended by 
Council Directive 
2014/87/Euratom 

Council Directive 
2009/71/Euratom, 
as amended by 
Council Directive 
2014/87/Euratom 

6(2) 

Progress report 

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

8e(1) 

Self-assessment and international 
peer review 

Reporting 

8e(2&3) 

Topical peer review 

Reporting 

Ad hoc but at 
least every 10 
years 

Ad hoc but at 
least every 6 
years 

MS 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

MS 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

9(1) 

Report on progress made with the 
implementation of this Directive 

Reporting 

Every 6 years 

MS 

Keep separate 

9(2) 

Report on progress made with the 
implementation of this Directive 

Monitoring 

Every 6 years 

EC 

Keep separate  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

81 

 
 
Offshore Safety 
Directive 

Directive 
2013/30/EU 

25(1), 
Annex 
IX point 
3 

Annual report on oil and gas 
installations and their safety 

Reporting 

Annual (starting 
end of 2017) 

MS 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Offshore Safety 
Directive 

Directive 
2013/30/EU 

25(3) 

Annual report based on the 
information reported by MS to the EC 

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

 Integrate 

Oil Stocks 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/119/EC 

6(2) 

Annual summary copy of the stock 
register 

Reporting 

Annual 

MS 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Oil Stocks 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/119/EC 

9(4) and 
9(5) 

 Annual summary copy of the stock 
register 

Reporting 

Annual (9(5)) 

MS 

Keep separate 
(9(4)) and reflect 
(9(5)) 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Oil Stocks 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/119/EC 

12 

Monthly statistical summaries of 
emergency stocks 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Oil Stocks 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/119/EC 

13 

Monthly statistical summaries of 
specific stocks 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Oil Stocks 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/119/EC 

14 

Monthly statistical summaries of 
commercial stocks 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

82 

 
 
Petrol Products 
Consumer Prices 
and Crude Oil 
Supply Costs 
Council Decision  

Petrol Products 
Consumer Prices 
and Crude Oil 
Supply Costs 
Council Decision  

Petrol Products 
Consumer Prices 
and Crude Oil 
Supply Costs 
Council Decision  

Petrol Products 
Consumer Prices 
and Crude Oil 
Supply Costs 
Council Decision  

Council Decision 
1999/280 (and its 
implementing acts 
provided in 
Commission 
Implementing 
Regulation (EU) No 
1348/2014) 
Council Decision 
1999/280 (and its 
implementing acts 
provided in 
Commission 
Implementing 
Regulation (EU) No 
1348/2014) 
Council Decision 
1999/280 (and its 
implementing acts 
provided in 
Commission 
Implementing 
Regulation (EU) No 
1348/2014) 
Council Decision 
1999/280 (and its 
implementing acts 
provided in 
Commission 
Implementing 
Regulation (EU) No 
1348/2014) 

3.1 

3.2 

4 

4 

MS shall communicate to the COM: 
a) crude oil supply cost cif,  
b) the  consumer  prices  of  
petroleum  products  net  of duties 
and taxes and inclusive of all taxes in 
force 

MS shall communicate to the COM: 
Consumer prices of petroleum 
products 
net of duties and taxes in force  

COM to publish crude oil supply cost 
cif (and the consumer prices of 
petroleum products net of duties and 
taxes and inclusive of duties and taxes 
charged) 

Reporting 

Monthly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Reporting 

Weekly 

MS 

Keep separate 

Monitoring 

Monthly 

EC 

Keep separate 

COM to publish consumer prices of 
petroleum products net of duties and 
taxes charged (weekly Oil Bulletin) 

Monitoring 

Weekly 

EC 

Keep separate 

PINC 

Euratom treaty 

40 

EC to publish periodically illustrative 
programmes indication in particular 
nuclear energy production targets and 
all types of investment required for 
their attainment 

Monitoring 

Irregular 

EC  

Integrate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

83 

 
 
Radioactive Waste 
Council Directive 

Council Directive 
2011/70/Euratom 

14(1) 

Report on the measures it has taken 
to implement the obligations of the 
Convention 

Reporting 

Every 3 years 

MS 

Keep separate 

Radioactive Waste 
Council Directive 

Council Directive 
2011/70/Euratom 

14(2) 

Report on progress (implementation) + 
summary report to EP, C and EESC + 
inventory of radioactive waste and 
spent fuel and future prospects 

Monitoring 

Every 3 years 

EC 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Radioactive Waste 
Council Directive 

Council Directive 
2011/70/Euratom 

14(3) 

Self-assessments and international 
peer reviews 

Reporting 

ad hoc, but at 
least every 10 
years 

MS 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Renewable Energy 
Directive 

Renewable Energy 
Directive 

Renewable Energy 
Directive 

Renewable Energy 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/28/EC as 
amended by 
Directive (EU) 
2015/1513 

Directive 
2009/28/EC as 
amended by 
Directive (EU) 
2015/1513 

Directive 
2009/28/EC as 
amended by 
Directive (EU) 
2015/1513 

Directive 
2009/28/EC as 
amended by 
Directive (EU) 
2015/1513 

4 + 
Annex 
VI 

National Renewable Energy Action 
Plan (NREAP) 

Planning 

once 

MS 

Integrate 

22 

MS Progress Report on NREAPs 

Reporting 

Every 2 years 

MS 

Integrate  

17(7) + 
23(3) 

Progress report 

Monitoring  

Every 2 years 

EC 

Integrate 

19(5) 

Report on typical and default values 
of biofuels and bioliquids emissions  

Monitoring 

Every 2 years 

EC 

Keep separate  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Governance 
act  

Sectorial 
legislation  

84 

 
 
Renewable Energy 
Directive 

Directive 
2009/28/EC as 
amended by 
Directive (EU) 
2015/1513 

24 

Making relevant information public on 
the transparency platform 

Monitoring 

Irregular 

EC 

Integrate  

Security of 
Electricity Supply 
Directive 

Directive 
2005/89/EC 

7 (1-4) 

Report on overall adequacy of the 
electricity system to supply current 
and projected demands for electricity 

Reporting 

Every 2 years 

MS 

Repeal  

Security of 
Electricity Supply 
Directive 

Directive 
2005/89/EC 

7 (5) 

Report on investments planned and 
their contribution to the objectives  

Monitoring 

EC 

Repeal 

Security of Gas 
Supply Regulation 

Regulation 
994/2010 

4 and 5 

Preventive Action Plans and 
Emergency Plans 

Planning 

every 2 years 

MS 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Security of Gas 
Supply Regulation 

Regulation 
994/2010 

9 

Risk assessment 

Planning 

Every 2 years 

MS 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Security of Gas 
Supply Regulation 

Regulation 
994/2010 

14 

Report on the security of gas supply to 
be included in annual reporting in 
Directive 2009/73/EC 

Monitoring 

Every 2 years 

EC 

Keep separate 
and reflect 

Shipments of 
Radioactive Waste 
Council Directive 

Council Directive 
2006/117/Euratom 

16(1c) 

Inform the Commission and the 
Advisory Committee on a yearly basis 
on shipments of radioactive waste and 
spent fuel to third countries that, in 
the opinion of the competent 
authorities of the MS of origin, meet 
the exports requirements 

Reporting 

Ad hoc 

MS 

Keep separate 

Governance 
act  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Governance 
act and 
sectorial 
legislation 

Sectorial 
legislation  

85 

 
 
  
  
Shipments of 
Radioactive Waste 
Council Directive 

Council Directive 
2006/117/Euratom 

20(1) 

Report on implementation of the 
directive 

Reporting 

Every 3 years 

MS 

Keep separate 

Shipments of 
Radioactive Waste 
Council Directive 

Council Directive 
2006/117/Euratom 

20(2) 

Summary report on the 
implementation of the Directive with 
particular attention for art. 4 

Monitoring 

Every 3 years 

EC 

Keep separate 

TEN-E Directive 

Regulation (EU) No 
347/2013 

5(5) 

Consolidated Report: Evaluation of 
progress achieved, recommendations, 
evaluation of consistent 
implementation of the Union-wide 
consistent implementation of the 
Union-wide network development 
plans with regard to the energy 
infrastructure priority corridors and 
areas 

Reporting 

Annual 

ACER 

Keep separate 

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Sectorial 
legislation  

Transparency of 
Gas and 
Electricity Prices 
Directive  

Transparency of 
Gas and 
Electricity Prices 
Directive  

Directive 
2008/92/EC 

1,  
Annex I 

Annex I: Gas prices reports 

Reporting 

Other 

MS 

Repeal 

Directive 
2008/92/EC 

1,  
Annex II 

Annex II: Electricity prices report                         

Reporting 

Other 

MS 

Repeal 

Transparency of 
Gas and 
Electricity Prices 
Directive  

Directive 
2008/92/EC 

8 

Report on the transparency of gas and 
electricity prices charged to industrial 
end-users 

Monitoring 

Annual 

EC 

Repeal 

* Legend for the column "Recommendation for Obligation": Integrate means the obligation is integrated in National Plans, Progress Reports and integrated 
Commission monitoring; Keep separate means the obligation remains an entirely separate obligation in sectorial legislation (with possible amendments); or 
Keep separate and reflect means the obligation remains a separate obligation in sectorial legislation, which will however be reflected in the National Plans, 
Progress Reports and integrated Commission monitoring; Repeal means the obligation is fully repealed from current sectorial legislation and thus removed 
from the EU energy and climate acquis. 

86 

 
 
  
  
  
 
ANNEX 7: OVERVIEW OF CLASSIFICATION OF OBLIGATIONS IN THE MMR  

Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

4 

updates 
every 2 
years 

Obligation to 
prepare a LCDS, 
to report on the 
status of 
implementation 
and to make it 
available to the 
public 

Planning / 
Reporting 

MS and EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

The  Article  is  relevant  for  planning  in  the  climate 
field with a long term perspective. While the national 
plans  are  focussed  on  the  Energy  Union's  objectives 
for  2030,  the  LCDS  cover  a  longer  time  frame. 
Consistency  of  the  national  plans  should  be  ensured 
with  the 
low-carbon  development  strategies  or 
similar  future  strategic  planning  obligations  of  the 
EU,  e.g.  mid-century  strategies  under  the  Paris 
Agreement.  However  given  the  different  time 
perspective and objectives of the two documents,  it 
is not possible to be fully streamlined. The Article is 
suitable  to  be  integrated  in  the  new  legislative 
initiative on governance. There are linkages to plans, 
targets and measures reported in NEEAPs and NREAPS 
under energy legislation. The Article is to be revised 
to reflect the new text in the Paris Agreement.  

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

5 

updates 
every 2 
years 

Requirements 
for Member 
States' national 
inventory 
systems  

Other/rep
orting 

MS 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

The  obligations  regarding  national  inventory  systems 
are  part  of  the  'environment'  of  the  integrated 
national energy and climate plans as they support the 
implementation of the EU objectives by enabling the 
collection  of  data  at  Member  State  level  in  an 
integrated  way.  There  are 
linkages  to  energy 
legislation related to responsibilities for the reporting 
of energy data and information in particular to access 
to  data  reported  under  the  Energy  Statistics 
Regulation. The Article is also important for ensuring 
compliance with international obligations. The Article 
includes 
Statistics 
Regulation.  Closely  linked  with  Article  7  MMR  and  to 
follow  that  Article.    This  article  would  need  to  be 
integrated 
initiative  on 
governance 

in  the  new 

the  Energy 

references 

legislative 

to 

87 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

6 

N/A 

Union inventory 
system 

Other/rep
orting 

EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

As the Article establishes the Union inventory system, 
it is linked to the Union inventory of GHG emissions, 
which  includes  the  data  on  the  EU's  GHG  emissions 
and  shows  where  the  EU  -  overall-  stands.  Though  it 
does  not  contain  a  planning  or  reporting  obligation 
for  Member  States,  and  therefore  cannot  be 
integrated  in  Member  States'  plans  or  progress 
reports,  the  Article  is  important  as  it  supports  the 
implementation  of  EU  objectives  as  it  ensures  the 
transparency,  accuracy,  consistency, 
timeliness, 
national 
comparability 
inventories  and  the  Union  inventory.  In  this  way,  it 
contributes  to  enabling  the  assessment  of  progress 
towards 
international  climate  action 
commitments,  which  are  linked  to  the  EU's  domestic 
targets to reduce GHG emissions and is therefore also 
important  for  the  Energy  Union.  The  Article  is  also 
important for ensuring compliance with international 
obligations.  Closely  linked  to  Article  7  MMR  and  to 
follow  that  Article.  Consequently,  this  article  would 
need to be integrated in the new legislative initiative 
on governance 

completeness 

the  EU's 

and 

of 

88 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

7 

annual 

Reporting 
obligations on 
Member States' 
greenhouse gas 
inventories and 
obligation for 
the Commission 
to compile the 
Union 
greenhouse gas 
inventory 

Reporting 

MS and EC 

Integrate (in 
National Plans 
and Progress 
Reports) 

Integrate in 
governance act 

The  Article  is  important  for  providing  data  to  assess 
compliance  with  the  ESD  targets  and  for  ensuring 
compliance with international obligations. It is linked 
to  integrated  national  energy  and  climate  plans  and 
reporting on progress on the delivery of the plans and 
suitable  to  be  integrated  in  the  legislative  initiative 
on  governance.    It  supports  the  implementation  of 
the EU objectives as it enables the collection of data 
at  Member  State  level  in  an  integrated  way.  There 
are  linkages  with  Energy  Statistics  Regulation  and 
data  reported  under  that  Regulation  to  Eurostat  and 
inconsistencies between inventory data and the data 
reported  under  the  Energy  Statistics  Regulation  that 
derive  from  differences  in  definitions  applied  and 
timelines  for  reporting  and  updating  data.  Also 
linkages  with  indicators  used  in  the  energy  sector 
reporting. To be streamlined taking into account the 
work  on  indicators  done  in  the  framework  of  the 
Energy  Union.  Annex  I  to  the  MMR,  which  includes  a 
list  of  GHG  Member  States  have  to  report  in  their 
GHG  inventories,    is  to  follow  Article  7.The  list  of 
indicators  in  Annex  III  to  the  MMR,  is  to  be  updated 
and  streamlined  taking  into  consideration  the  work 
on  indicators  done  in  the  framework  of  the  Energy 
Union and to follow Article 7 MMR. This article needs 
to  be  integrated  in  the  plans  and  progress  report 
after  possible  revision  to  streamline  it  with  the 
Statistics 
energy 
Regulation). 

(especially 

Energy 

acquis 

89 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

8 

annual 

Requires 
Member States 
to report 
approximated 
greenhouse gas 
inventories 

Reporting 

MS 

Integrate (in 
National Plans 
and Progress 
Reports) 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Article  important  for  tracking  annual  progress  with 
GHG  emissions  targets,  as  it  provides  approximated 
data for the year x-1 as compared to the inventories 
which  contain  data  on  GHG  emission  with  two  years 
lag (relating to the year x-2). Relevant for the Energy 
Union  as  it  provides  data  to  track  progress  to  ESD 
targets  and  -linked-  international  targets.  Therefore 
also  linked  to  the  integrated  national  energy  and 
climate  plans  and  the  reporting  on  progress  towards 
the  targets,  objectives  and  trajectories  laid  down  in 
these  plans.  To  follow  Article  7  MMR.  This  article 
needs  to  be  integrated  in  the  plans  and  progress 
reports. 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

9 

N/A 

Procedures for 
completing 
emission 
estimates to 
compile the 
Union inventory 
(gap filling) 

Other 

MS and EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

It 

international  obligations. 

important  for  ensuring  compliance  with 
Article 
internal  and 
sets 
modalities  and  procedures  in  case  Member  States  do 
not report their  GHG inventories within the required 
deadlines.  It    is  important  for  tracking  progress 
towards  ESD  GHG  emission  reduction  targets,  as  it 
allows  the  Commission  to  fill  in  the  missing  GHG 
emissions  data  in  case  Member  States  do  not  submit 
it.  Therefore  it  is  also  important  in  the  context  of 
assessing the direction the EU is going with regard to 
its 2030 climate target. To follow Article 7 MMR. This 
article  would  need  to  be  integrated  in  the  new 
legislative initiative on governance. 

90 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

10 

N/A 

Establishment 
and operation of 
registries (for 
Kyoto Protocol 
units) 

Other 

MS and EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Article 
important  for  ensuring  compliance  with 
international  obligations  (UNFCCC)  and  the  ESD 
targets.  The  Union  Registry  enables  the  use  of 
flexibilities under the ESD. The information contained 
in  the  registry  will  be  paramount  for  an  accurate 
tracking  of  progress  with  the  ESD  targets.  To  be 
revised in light of the outcome of negotiations on the 
further detailed rules for implementation of the Paris 
Agreement. Establishment and operation of registries 
is  a  precondition  for  the  retirement  of  units  (Article 
11  MMR)  and  reports  on  the  additional  period  for 
fulfilling  commitments  under  the  Kyoto  Protocol 
(Article  22  MMR).This  article  needs  to  be  integrated 
in  the  new  legislative  initiative  on  governance  after 
revision  to  take  in  consideration  the  developments 
under  the  Paris  agreement  and  to  delete  the  parts 
relating to the Kyoto Protocol. 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

11 

N/A 

Retirement of 
units under the 
Kyoto Protocol 

Other 

MS 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Article 
important  for  ensuring  compliance  with 
international obligations (UNFCCC). Though the Kyoto 
Protocol  second  commitment  period  runs  until  the 
end of 2020, retirement of units needs to take place 
after 
fulfilling 
commitments, in 2023. This Article needs be included 
in  the  new  legislative  initiative  on  governance  after 
deletion  of 
first 
commitment  period  of  the  Kyoto  Protocol.  Linked  to 
Article 11 and Article 22 MMR. 

the  parts 

additional 

referring 

period 

the 

the 

for 

to 

91 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

12 

 updates 
every two 
years 

National 
systems of 
policies and 
measures and 
projections 

Other/rep
orting 

MS and EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

13 

every two 
years 

Reporting 
obligations for 
Member States 
related to 
reporting on 
policies and 
measures 
relevant for 
climate action 

Reporting 

MS 

Integrate (in 
National Plans 
and Progress 
Reports) 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Article  important  for  reporting  on  progress  with  the 
national  plans.  It  supports  the  implementation  of  EU 
objectives  as  it  ensures  systems  for  reporting  are  in 
place  and  continuously  improved,  and  it  ensures  the 
timeliness, 
transparency,  accuracy,  consistency, 
comparability  and  completeness  of  the  information 
reported.  The  scope  of  the  national  systems  should 
be  broadened  to  include  integration  between  energy 
and  climate  enabling  the  compilation  of  coordinated 
progress  reports.  This  Article  needs  to  be  integrated 
in  the  new  legislative  initiative  on  governance  after 
streamlining with ENER acquis. 

Article 
important  with  regard  to  policies  and 
measures  in  the  context  of  the  integrated  national 
energy  and  climate  plans.  Linkages  with  energy 
legislation  (reporting  of  policies  and  measures  under 
EED,  RED),  where  streamlining  could  take  place  to 
avoid  double  reporting  of  policies  and  measures. 
Suitable  to  be 
integrated  to  reduce  overlaps, 
incoherence  and  inconsistencies.  Also  important  for 
ensuring  compliance  with  international  obligations. 
This  Article  needs  to  be  integrated  in  the  plans  and 
progress reports after streamlining with ENER acquis. 

92 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

14 

every two 
years 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

15 

every 4 
years 

Reporting 
obligations for 
Member States 
related to 
projections of 
greenhouse gas 
emissions 

Member States' 
reporting of 
information on 
national 
adaptation 
planning and 
strategies 

Reporting 

MS 

Integrate (in 
National Plans 
and Progress 
Reports) 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Reporting 

MS 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Article  important  with  regard  to  projections  in  the 
context of the integrated national energy and climate 
plans.  Linkages  with  energy  legislation  where  also 
reporting  on  projected  information  takes  place. 
Suitable to be streamlined to come to a single set of 
integrated  climate  and  energy  projections.  Also 
important for ensuring compliance with international 
obligations. This Article needs to be integrated in the 
plans  and  progress  reports  after  streamlining  with 
ENER acquis. 

Indirect link with the integrated national energy and 
climate  plans,  as  information  on  adaptation  is  also 
included  in  the  integrated  national  energy  and 
climate  plans  which  are  to  be  coherent  and 
consistent with the national adaptation actions plans. 
It  is  suitable  to  be  integrated  in  the  legislative 
initiative  on  governance.  Relates  to  UNFCCC.  This 
Article  needs  to  be  included  in  the  new  legislative 
initiative on governance after revision in light of the 
Paris Agreement. 

93 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

16 

annual 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

17 

annual 

Member States' 
reporting 
related to 
financial and 
technology 
support 
provided to 
developing 
countries 

Reporting on 
revenues from 
the auctioning 
of emission 
allowances 
under the EU 
emissions 
trading system 
and on the use 
of project 
credits from the 
ESD 

Reporting 

MS 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Reporting 

MS 

Integrate (in 
National Plans 
and Progress 
Reports) 

Integrate in 
governance act 

in  order 

implementation, 

In  the  context  of  the  UNFCCC  and  Paris  Agreement, 
the  EU  and  its  Member  States  are  committed  to 
scaling  up  the  mobilisation  of  climate  finance  in  the 
context  of  meaningful  mitigation  actions  and 
transparency  of 
to 
contribute  their  share  of  the  developed  countries' 
goal  to  jointly  mobilise  USD  100  billion  per  year  by 
2020 from a wide variety of sources. The EU needs to 
support finance commitments with concrete data and 
information. 
this 
information in the legislative initiative on governance 
is important in order to ensure that all the reporting 
obligations  relating  to  the  implementation  of  the 
UNFCCC are included in a single legal act. This Article 
needs to be included in the new legislative initiative 
on  governance  after  revision  in  light  of  the  Paris 
Agreement. 

Integration  of 

reporting  of 

these 

that  parts  of 

Reporting on the use of revenues from the auctioning 
of  emission  allowances  under  the  EU  emissions 
trading  system  suitable  to  be  integrated  as  it  is 
expected 
sums  will  be 
underpinning  the  financing  component  of  the  plans 
since  MS  are  expected  to  use  50%  of  these  revenues 
for  climate  purposes.  Article  also  important  for 
implementation of the ESD as it relates to the use of 
flexible  mechanisms  under  this  decision.  Suitable  to 
be  integrated  as  it  will  be  an  integral  part  of  the 
analysis under the decarbonisation component of the 
integrated  national  energy  and  climate  plans.  This 
article  needs  to  be  included  partly  in  the  plans, 
partly in the reporting on progress with the plans. 

94 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

18 

every four 
years 

Union and 
Member States' 
submission of 
National 
Communications 
and Biennial 
Reports to the 
UNFCCC and 
copies to the 
Commission 

Reporting 

MS and EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

19 

annual 

Review of GHG 
inventories for 
ESD purposes 

Other 

EC 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

to 

reporting 

international 

the  UNFCCC;  4 

Relates 
yearly  national 
communications  (international  requirement)  require 
reporting  on  a  country's  national  circumstances, 
actual  emissions,  policies  and  measures,  projected 
emissions,  financial  and  technology  support  provided 
to  developing  countries,  adaptation,  research  and 
systematic  observation  and  education.  The  MMR 
includes  all  reporting  requirements  related  to  this. 
Keeping 
national 
communications  and  biennial  reports  together  with 
reporting  obligations  linked  to  international  reports 
(e.g.  projected  emissions,  policies  and  measures) 
enables  easier  access  to  data,  and  leads  to  more 
consistency  and  higher  credibility  of  information 
reported  to  the  Commission  and  internationally.  No 
direct link with the national plans, but the reporting 
under the national plans needs to be consistent with 
the  reporting  of  National  Communications  and 
Biennial Reports. Suitable to be integrated in the new 
legislative  initiative  on  governance  in  light  of  the 
Paris Agreement. 

of 

in  the 

important  for  ESD 

implementation.  This 
Article 
Article  should  be 
legislative 
integrated 
initiative  on  governance  as  the  provision  on  the  ESD 
review  forms  part  of  the  "environment"  of  the  plans 
and supports the implementation of the EU objectives 
by  making  the  information  more  accurate.  Needs 
redrafting to apply to the new ESD. This Article needs 
to  be  included  in  the  new  legislative  initiative  on 
governance  after  revision  in  light  of  the  Effort 
Sharing Regulation proposal of the Commission. 

95 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

20 

N/A 

Addressing the 
effects of 
recalculations in 
the ESD 

Other 

EC 

Repeal 

Governance act 
to repeal the 
obligation 

The  provision  on  addressing 
the  effect  of 
recalculations in the ESD is not needed for the Effort 
Sharing Decision post 2020 and can be deleted. Annex 
II  to  the  MMR  (Formula  to  calculate  the  sum  of  the 
effects  of  the  recalculated  GHG  emissions  for  each 
MS) is to follow Article 20(1) of the MMR. 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

21 

annual 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

22 

in 2023 

Commission 
reporting on 
progress 
towards 
international 
and ESD targets 

Union and 
Member States 
to submit report 
to the UNFCCC 
on the 
additional 
period for 
fulfilling 
commitments 
under the Kyoto 
Protocol 

Reporting 

EC 

Integrate (in the 
Commission's 
monitoring 
Report) 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Reporting 

EC and MS 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Commission  report  on  progress  towards  EU  targets 
and international commitments. Report submitted to 
the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  and  also 
used  internationally  to  demonstrate  at  the  annual 
Climate Conferences, what action the EU is taking in 
the  climate  field  and  to  show  progress  towards  its 
international commitments. Suitable to be integrated 
with  the  Commission's  report  in  the  context  of  the 
governance of the Energy Union. 

Relates to the UNFCCC/ Kyoto Protocol. Relevant for 
the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol 
after  expiry  at  the  end  of  2020,  as  it  deals  with 
reports  that  are  to  be  drawn  up  after  the  expiration 
of  the  second  commitment  period.  No  direct  link  to 
the national climate and energy plans. However, this 
Article  should  be  integrated  in  the  new  legislative 
initiative on governance after revision. 

96 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

23 

N/A 

Cooperation 
between 
Member States 
and the Union 

Other 

EC and MS 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

24 

N/A 

Role of the 
European 
Environment 
Agency 

Other 

EEA 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

Full  cooperation  and  coordination  between  the 
Member States and the Commission is paramount, for 
example  in  the  context  of  inventory  reviews.  Full 
cooperation  and  coordination  will  also  be  important 
in the context of the governance of the Energy Union. 
Article  linked  to  Article  7  MMR.  Needs  to  follow 
Article  7  of  the  MMR.  This  Article  needs  to  be 
initiative  on 
integrated 
governance. 

in  the  new 

legislative 

The EEA assists the Commission in its work to comply 
with various Articles of the MMR , including tasks that 
are very relevant in the context of the Energy Union, 
such  as  compiling  the  information  reported  by 
Member  States  on  policies  and  measures  and 
projections, performing quality assurance and quality 
control  procedures  on  the  information  reported  by 
Member  States  on  projections  and  policies  and 
measures,  preparing  estimates 
for  data  on 
projections  not  reported  by  the  Member  States  (gap 
filling) and compiling data as required for the annual 
report  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council 
prepared by the Commission (Climate Action Progress 
Report).As  there  are  streamlining  opportunities  as 
regards  projections  and  policies  and  measures,  this 
streamlining also entails consequences as to the role 
of  the  EEA.  To  be  included  in  the  new  legislative 
initiative on governance, 

97 

 
 
Name of 
obligation 

Legal 
basis 

Article  Frequency 

Description 
of 
obligation 

Type 
(planning / 
reporting / 
evaluation) 

Entity 
targeted 
by the 
obligation 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
National Plans, 
Progress Reports, 
Commission 
Monitoring 

Recommendation 
in relation to 
legislative 
initiative 

Short Reasoning 

Monitoring 
Mechanism 
Regulation 

Regulation 
(EU) No 
525/2013 

25 

N/A 

Climate Change 
Committee to 
assist the 
Commission 

Other 

N.a. 

Linked 

Integrate in 
governance act 

in 

The Climate Change Committee is relevant for all the 
climate acquis (EU ETS, ESD, transport) and has a role 
as  committee 
the  meaning  of  Regulation 
(EU)182/2011.  For  the  purposes  of  the  Energy  Union 
the role of the Committee may have to be updated in 
the context of future implementing powers under the 
legislative initiative on governance. To be integrated 
in the new legislative initiative on governance. 

* Legend for the column "Recommendation in relation to National Plans, Progress Reports, Commission Monitoring": Integrate means the obligation is 
integrated in National Plans, Progress Reports and integrated Commission monitoring (and at the same time being amended in or repealed from current 
sectorial legislation); Linked means the obligation is remaining a separate obligation from National Plans, Progress Reports and integrated Commission 
monitoring but, given its relation to obligations to be integrated in National Plans, Progress Reports and integrated Commission monitoring, linked to those 
obligations and to follow the legal destination of those obligations; Repeal means the obligation is fully repealed from current sectorial legislation and thus 
removed from the EU energy and climate acquis. 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  8:  BACKGROUND  ON  PLANNING,  REPORTING  AND  MONITORING 
OBLIGATIONS 

As examined by the Fitness Check, the current EU energy and climate acquis relating to the 
Energy Union includes a large number of planning, reporting and monitoring obligations for 
Member  States,  the  Commission  and  also  private  entities.  In  the  energy  field  there  are  91 
obligations, of which 17 are planning obligations and 42 are reporting obligations for Member 
States, in addition to 32 monitoring obligations for the Commission. In the climate field, the 
Monitoring  Mechanism  Regulation  (MMR)  establishes  a  mechanism  for  monitoring  and 
reporting greenhouse gas emissions and for reporting other information at national and Union 
level relevant to climate change, and already represents the result of a previous streamlining 
exercise. 

Examples  for  relevant  planning  obligations  include  Member  States'  National  Renewable 
Energy  Action  Plans  that  are  provided  once  and  amended  in  case  of  insufficient  progress 
made (Article 4 of the Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC), National Energy Efficiency 
Action  Plans  provided  every  three  years  (Article  24  of  the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive 
2012/27/EU), long-term strategies for mobilising investment in the renovation of the national 
buildings  stock  provided  every  three  years  (Article  4  of  the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive 
2012/27/EU)  and  national  plans  for  increasing  the  number  of  nearly  zero-energy  buildings 
provided  once  (Article  9  of  the  Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive  2010/31/EU). 
Other  important  examples  of  Member  States'  planning  obligations  are  Preventive  Action 
Plans and Emergency Plans for security of gas supply (Article 4 of the Gas Security of Supply 
Regulation (EU) No 994/2010). As concerns other entities, under Article 5 of the Regulation 
on  Guidelines  for  Trans-European  Energy  Infrastructure  ((EU)  No  347/2013),  project 
promoters  are  obliged  to  draw  up  an  implementation  plan  for  Projects  of  Common  Interest 
(PCIs). In the climate field, Member States are required to prepare low-carbon development 
strategies  once  and  to  inform  the  Commission  on  updates  (Article  4  of  the  Monitoring 
Mechanism Regulation MMR (EU) No 525/2013).  

Many of the planning obligations require a corresponding reporting component, or are due to 
international obligations by the EU and Member States. For example, under the energy acquis 
Member States submit progress reports on the promotion and use of renewable energy to the 
Commission  every  two  years  (Article  22  of  the  Renewable  Energy  Directive)  and  annual 
progress reports on the achievement towards national energy efficiency targets (Article 24 of 
the  Energy  Efficiency  Directive).  Other  important  examples  of  Member  States'  reporting 
obligations include the monitoring of security of gas supply based on Article 5 of Directive 
2009/73/EC  on  common  rules  for  the  internal  market  in  natural  gas.  As  concerns  other 
entities,  under  Article  5  of  the  Regulation  on  Guidelines  for  Trans-European  Energy 
Infrastructure ((EU) No 347/2013), project promoters are due to, inter alia, report on progress 
achieved in the development, construction and commissioning of the infrastructure projects. 
In addition, in the energy acquis there are other legislative acts with reporting obligations that 
do not mirror a planning obligation, for example the Directive 2009/72/EC on common rules 
for  the  internal  market  in  electricity  and  Directive  2005/89/EC  on  measures  to  safeguard 

99 

 
 
security of electricity supply. In the climate field, under the MMR Member States provide on 
an annual or biennial basis information to the Commission related to progress to targets (GHG 
emissions, projections, and policies and measures to reduce GHG emissions), but also other 
climate-related  information  such  as  on  adaptation  to  climate  change,  EU  ETS  auctioning 
revenues  and  climate  finance.38  Under  the  MMR  Member  States  report  once  to  the 
Commission  on  the  status  of  implementation  of  their  low-carbon  development  strategy  and 
provide the Commission with updates on progress in its implementation biennially, as well as 
communicate substantial changes. 

On  the  basis  of  reports  by  Member  States  or  other  relevant  sources  of  information,  the 
Commission  is  monitoring  progress  at  EU  level.  For  example,  the  Commission  reports  on 
Member  States'  progress  on  the  promotion  and  use  of  renewable  energy  every  two  years 
(Article  23  of  the  Renewable  Energy  Directive).  The  Commission  also  annually  assesses 
Member  States'  progress  towards  the  achievement  of  the  national  energy  efficiency  targets 
(Article 24 of the Energy Efficiency Directive) and reports on the progress of Member States 
in increasing the number of nearly zero-energy buildings every three years (Article 9 of the 
Energy  Performance  of  Buildings  Directive).  A  Commission  report  on  the  security  of  gas 
supply  is  requested  by  Article  14  of  the  Gas  Security  of  Supply  Regulation  (EU)  No 
994/2010).  Under  Article  17  of  the  Regulation  on  Guidelines  for  Trans-European  Energy 
Infrastructure  ((EU)  No  347/2013)  the  Commission  shall  report  on  the  implementation  of 
Projects  of  Common  Interest  and  evaluate  the  implementation  of  the  regulation  by  the  year 
2017. In  the climate  field, the Commission  annually reports on progress to the international 
(Kyoto Protocol related) and the EU targets, covering historic GHG emissions and projected 
future  GHG  emissions  for  every  Member  State,  and  also  information  on  EU  policies  and 
measures,  climate  finance  and  adaptation  (Article  21  of  the  MMR).  The  MMR  therefore 
provides  a  single  framework  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  Union  and  Member  States' 
commitments  and  obligations.  In  addition,  the  MMR  also  implements  reporting  and  review 
requirements  related  to  the  current  Effort  Sharing  Decision  (ESD)39  and  the  EU  ETS 
Directive.40 

38  The  Monitoring  Mechanism  Regulation  (MMR)  largely  follows  from  the  EU's  and  its  Member  States'  
obligations  under  the  United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change  (UNFCCC)  and  the  Kyoto 
Protocol  and  enables  the  implementation  of  respective  international  requirements  on  reporting  in  the  climate 
field. 
39 Decision No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the effort of 
Member  States  to  reduce  their  greenhouse  gas  emissions  to  meet  the  Community’s  greenhouse  gas  emission 
reduction commitments up to 2020. The ESD lays down for each Member State binding annual targets for the 
period  2013-2020  for  greenhouse  gas  emissions  outside  the  scope  of  the  EU  Emissions  Trading  System.  The 
Commission  presented  its  legislative  proposals  for  an  Effort-Sharing  Regulation  and  on  land  use,  land  use 
change and forestry (LULUCF) in July 2016 to implement the agreed 2030 regulatory framework in a fair and 
cost-efficient manner. The MMR establishes a review and compliance cycle under the ESD; it ensures that solid 
information is available to allow annual determination of compliance with the ESD. 
40  Directive  2003/87/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  13  October  2003  establishing  a 
scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 
96/61/EC. In 2015 the Commission presented a legislative proposal to amend the ETS for the period after 2020. 
The  MMR  incorporates  the  reporting  requirements  for  the  use  of  revenues  from  the  auctioning  of  emission 
allowances to see for which purposes they are used. 

100 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
ANNEX  9:  POLICY  OPTIONS  ON  STREAMLINING  PLANNING,  REPORTING  AND 
MONITORING  OBLIGATIONS:  ANNUAL  COSTS  FOR  MEMBER  STATES  AND  ONE-
TIME IMPLEMENTATION COSTS 

Impacts of the baseline scenario 

Annual  costs  including  administrative  and  reporting  costs  (for  planning  and  reporting 
activities), ICT/equipment costs (for equipment and ICT system installation, maintenance and 
use)  and  service  outsourcing  costs  (for  outsourcing  of  planning  and  reporting  services  to 
external  consultants)  for  Member  States  amount  to  approximately  €21.2  million  (annual 
costs), with administrative and reporting costs amounting to €4.2 million (annual costs). This 
represents  an  unchanged  administrative  burden  from  existing  planning  and  reporting 
obligations (except for inflation correction).41  

Implementation  costs  due  to  legislative  changes  ensuring  the  continuation  of  existing 
obligations  beyond  2020  amount  to  approximately  €13.8  million  (one-time  costs). 
Implementation  costs  occur  in  the  baseline  scenario  due  to  the  legislative  procedure  of 
prolonging  the  respective  legal  provisions  that  would  otherwise  expire  in  2020.  Therefore, 
implementation costs include costs both for revision or renewal of existing legislation for the 
Commission  (€3.1  million)  and  for  transposition  and  implementation  by  Member  States 
(€10.7 million). 

Impacts of policy options for streamlining obligations 

Annual costs for planning, reporting and monitoring obligations originate from administrative 
and reporting costs, ICT/equipment costs and service outsourcing costs. When comparing the 
annual costs to the baseline, it shows that the total costs for Member States are higher than in 
the baseline scenario for options S1, S2 and S6, but lower for options S4 and S5. For S3, costs 
are  estimated  to  be  in  between  S2  and  S4.  As  regards  the  annual  costs  for  planning  and 
reporting, these are lower than in the baseline scenario for all options, reflecting cost savings 
from streamlined obligations (except for S1 for which the costs remain the same). The costs 
for integrated planning and reporting by the new National Plans and Progress Reports are new 
administrative costs, as integrated planning and reporting is part of the Governance initiative. 
An  overview  of  annual  administrative  costs  for  Member  States  for  each  policy  option  is 
presented in Table 14. 

41  Cost  estimates  are based on  the  associated  cost of  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring obligations in  energy 
field presented in the Fitness Check. 

101 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Table 14: Annual costs for Member States in million EUR 

Policy option 

Total costs 

Baseline 
Option S1 (soft guidance) 
Option S2 (sector-specific legislation) 
Option S3 (2 legislative acts replacing 
parts of energy acquis and MMR) 
Option S4 (single act replacing relevant 
parts of energy acquis and MMR) 
Option S5 (single act replacing relevant 
parts of energy acquis and full MMR) 
Option S6 (single act for all actors and 
stakeholders) 

21.2 
22.7 
29.4 
n.a. 

20.1 

20.1 

21.9 

Planning and 
reporting 
costs 

Costs for 
integrated 
planning and 
reporting 

4.2 
4.2 
3.6 
n.a. 

3.0 

3.0 

2.0 

-- 
1.5 
5.5 
n.a. 

3.7 

3.7 

7.4 

n.a. = not available as this policy option was not evaluated by the external expertise; impacts for this option are 
therefore assessed qualitatively.  
The total costs include administrative and reporting costs, ICT/equipment costs and service outsourcing costs. 
Planning  and  reporting  costs  as  well  as  costs  for  integrated  planning  and  reporting  are  sub-components  of 
administrative and reporting costs.  

For the Commission, one-time implementation costs relate to the legislative changes (revision 
or renewal of legislation, provision of templates, introduction of a new legislative act) that are 
needed  to  implement  each  option  as  well  as  the  preparation  of  guidance.  One-time 
implementation  costs  for  Member  States  originate  in  particular  from  transposition  and 
implementation  of  legislation  and  the  adoption  of  National  Plans.  Further  one-time 
implementation  costs  include  ICT/  equipment  costs  as  well  as  service  outsourcing  costs. 
When  comparing  the  one-time  implementation  costs  to  the  baseline,  it  shows  that  the  total 
implementation  costs  are  higher  for  all  options  than  the  baseline,  but  highest  for  option  S2. 
Given  the  fact  that  all  options  imply  that  the  Commission  adopts  additional  measures 
(legislative  or  guidance)  and  Member  States  implement  adopting  additional  legislation  and 
prepare National Plans that are not existent in the baseline, one time implementation cost for 
all  options  are  higher  than  in  the  baseline  scenario.  In  addition,  all  options  necessitate  a 
certain  amount  of  implementation  costs.  An  overview  of  one  time  implementation  costs  for 
each policy option is presented in Table 15. 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 15: One-time implementation costs for Member States and the Commission in million 
EUR 

Policy option 

Baseline 
Option S1 (soft guidance) 
Option S2 (sector-specific legislation) 
Option S3 (two legislative acts replacing 
relevant parts of energy acquis and 
MMR) 
Option S4 (single act replacing relevant 
parts of energy acquis and MMR) 
Option S5 (single act replacing relevant 
parts of energy acquis and fully 
replacing MMR) 
Option S6 (single act for all actors and 
stakeholders) 

Total 
implementation 
costs 

Member States 
costs 

Commission 
costs 

13.8 
20.6 
45.1 
n.a. 

22.0 

22.0 

30.0 

10.7 
17.5 
36.1 
n.a. 

18.3 

18.3 

24.6 

3.1 
3.2 
9.0 
n.a. 

3.6 

3.6 

5.4 

n.a. = not available as this policy option was not quantitatively evaluated by the external expertise; impacts for 
this option are therefore assessed qualitatively. The costs for option S3 are estimated to be between options S2 
and S4. 
Commission  costs  =  costs  for  the  revision  of  the  existing  legislation  as  well  as  for  preparing  templates  for 
National  Plans  and  Progress  Reports.  Member  States  costs  =  costs  of  transposition  and  implementation  of 
legislation as well as for the adoption of their National Plans. 

103