REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on the review of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/2577 of 22 December 2022 laying down a framework to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy
Date: 2023-11-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Energy, European Commission
Subjects: carbon neutrality, energy crisis, energy efficiency, energy production, heat pump, price of energy, renewable energy, renewable resources, security of supply, self-sufficiency in energy

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 28.11.2023  COM(2023) 764 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on the review of Council Regulation (EU) 2022/2577 of 22 December 2022 laying down a framework to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy  
 
 
I. 

Introduction 

This  report  reviews  Council  Regulation  (EU)  2022/2577  of  22  December  2022  laying 
down  a  framework  to  accelerate  the  deployment  of  renewable  energy1  (the  Council 
Regulation).  

The  Council  Regulation  is  one  of  the  emergency  measures  adopted  by  the  Council  in 
2022 to respond to the energy crisis following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It is based on 
Article  122(1)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  according  to 
which  the  Council,  on  a  proposal  from  the  Commission,  may  decide  upon  measures 
appropriate  to  the  economic  situation,  in  particular,  if  severe  difficulties  arise  in  the 
supply of certain products, notably in the area of energy.  

At  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  Council  Regulation  in  December  2022,  the  overall 
geopolitical  context  and  very  high  energy  prices  called  for  urgent  acceleration  of  the 
deployment  of  renewable  energy  in  the  Union  in  order  to  mitigate  the  effects  of  the 
energy  crisis  by  strengthening  the  Union’s  security  of  supply,  reducing  volatility  in  the 
market  and  lowering  energy  prices.  As  lengthy  and  complex  permitting  formed  a  key 
obstacle  hampering  the  speed  and  scale  of  investments  in  renewables  and  related 
infrastructure,  the  Council  Regulation  aimed  to  achieve  an  immediate  acceleration  of 
permit-granting  procedures  applicable  to  certain  renewable  energy  projects  and 
technologies with the highest potential for quick deployment to mitigate the effects of the 
energy  crisis.  To  this  end,  the  Regulation  introduced  exceptional,  targeted  and  time-
limited measures across the EU.  

This Council Regulation applies to all permit-granting processes that have a starting date 
within  the  period  of  its  application.  Member  States  may  also  apply  the  Council 
Regulation  to  ongoing  permit-granting  processes  which  had  not  resulted  in  a  final 
decision  before  30  December  2022,  provided  that  this  shortens  the  permit-granting 
process and that pre-existing third party legal rights are preserved.  

Importantly,  on  9  October  2023,  Directive  (EU)  2023/24132  amending  the  Renewable 
Energy  Directive  (EU)  2018/2001  (“the  amending  Directive”  and  “revised  RED”, 
respectively)  was  adopted,  increasing  substantially  the  level  of  renewable  energy 
ambition that the Union must collectively achieve by 2030: from the previous 32% target 
to  a  42.5%  target  with  an  aspiration  to  reach  45%.  This  amending  Directive,  which 
entered  into  force  on  20  November  2023,  includes  extensive  provisions  to  streamline 
permitting  procedures  applicable  to  renewable  energy  projects  in  a  comprehensive 
manner  through  spatial  planning,  simplification  and  shortening  of  procedures.  The 
amending  Directive  includes  provisions  covering  the  same  topics  as  the  Council 
Regulation.  Some  are  very  similar,  while  others  include  significant  differences  (see 

1  Council  Regulation  (EU)  2022/2577  of  22  December  2022  laying  down  a  framework  to  accelerate  the 
deployment of renewable energy. OJ L 335, 29.12.2022, p. 36–44. 
2 EUR-Lex - 32023L2413 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu). 

1 

 
 
 
section  IV).  Moreover,  the  Directive  did  not  mirror  some  of  the  more  exceptional 
measures contained in Regulation (EU) 2022/2577, thus delimiting their exceptional and 
temporary  nature.  Instead,  the  Directive  introduced  a  stable  and  long-term  permanent 
regime  to  accelerate  permit-granting  procedures  which  establishes  dedicated  steps  and 
procedures which require a longer implementation time. Several of the permitting rules of 
the  revised  directive,  i.e.  all  permitting  rules  except  those  related  to  renewables 
acceleration areas, have to be transposed by 1 July 2024 - immediately after the expiry of 
the validity of the Council Regulation.  

Pursuant to Article 9 of the Council Regulation, the Commission shall carry out a review 
of this Regulation by 31 December 2023 at the latest, in view of the development of the 
security of supply and energy prices and the need to further accelerate the deployment of 
renewable energy, and submit a report on the main findings of that review to the Council. 
Article  9  of  this  Council  Regulation  also  provides  that,  based  on  that  report,  the 
Commission may propose its prolongation. 

In  order  to  decide  whether  a  prolongation  of  this  Council  Regulation  is  necessary,  the 
conditions  for  such  prolongation  must  be  met.  In  this  context,  the  Commission  must 
assess  (i)  the  recent  evolution  of  the  Union’s  security  of  supply  and  energy  prices, 
including the contribution that the deployment of renewable energy sources has made in 
this  regard;  (ii)  the  need  to  further  accelerate  renewable  energy  sources  and  (iii)  the 
specific effects of this Council Regulation to promote such acceleration. Moreover, given 
the entry into force of the amending Directive, it is appropriate to assess the relationship 
between the provisions included in this Council Regulation and the permitting provisions 
included in the revised RED.3  

To this end, this report describes the recent developments on security of supply, energy 
prices and the contribution of renewable energy sources as well as examines the need to 
further  accelerate  renewables  deployment  (section  II)  and  the  effect  that  this  Council 
Regulation had in this context (section III). Finally, the review looks at the scope of the 
Council  Regulation  and  the  new  permitting  provisions  in  the  revised  RED  (section  IV) 
before providing conclusions and a recommendation for further action (section V). 

II. 

Developments  on  security  of  energy  supply  and  energy  prices;  need  to 
accelerate deployment of renewable energy  

As  regards  developments  on  security  of  supply  in  the  Union,  there  has  been  an  overall 
improvement regarding the security of energy supply in the Union. However, significant 
risks still remain.  

As  regards  gas  supply,  imports  of  Russian  gas  have  decreased  in  line  with  the 
REPowerEU  objectives,  thanks  to  diversification  efforts  and  savings.  EU  underground 

3 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 as amended by Directive (EU) 2023/2413 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
storage facilities are filled at well over 90% of their capacity as the heating season starts. 
Nevertheless,  Russia’s  war  on  Ukraine  continues  and  presents  serious  threats  to  the 
Union’s security of energy supply. Due to the significant decrease in Russian pipeline gas 
imports  over  the  past  year,  availability  of  gas  supplies  to  the  Union  is  considerably 
reduced  compared  to  the  pre-crisis  situation.  With  the  current  level  of  gas  imports,  the 
Union is expected to receive approximately 20 bcm of Russian pipeline imports in 2023, 
approximately 110 bcm less than in 2021.   

Global gas markets remain very tight and are expected to remain as such for some time. 
As noted by the IEA,1 global LNG supply grew only modestly in 2022 (4%) and in 2023 
(3%)  because  of  “limited  liquefaction  capacity  additions,  outages  at  major  export 
facilities  and  declining  feedgas  supply  at  LNG  plants  fed  by  ageing  fields”.  Significant 
new LNG liquefaction capacity globally (especially in the US and Qatar) is set to come 
online as of 2025 but “market balances remain precarious in the immediate future”.2 This 
situation is having negative consequences on gas prices which, despite being much lower 
than  the  peak  experienced  in  summer  2022  (when  prices  spiked  above  300  €/MWh)  ) 
remain more than twice as high as pre-crisis levels (ranging between EUR 40/MWh and 
EUR 50/MWh in early Autumn 2023) with inevitable repercussions on the EU citizens’ 
purchasing  power  and  the  competitiveness  of  European  businesses.  Market  volatility  is 
also  a consequence of the market  tightness and represents  an  additional risk  for the EU 
economy.  Summer  and  autumn  2023  saw  a  number  of  episodes  of  significant  volatility 
which  show  that  gas  markets  are  still  fragile  and  may  overreact  to  any  unexpected  and 
sudden  shock  to  supply  and  demand,  as  was  the  case  following  the  strike  in  Australian 
LNG  facilities,  the  Middle  East  crisis  and  the  disruption  of  the  Balticconnector.  Under 
these  conditions,  the  fear  of  scarcity  may  trigger  large  reactions  with  serious 
repercussions on prices across the EU.  

These severe difficulties are exacerbated by a number of  additional risks  which, if they 
materialised, would considerably worsen the situation. These risks include: a rebound in 
Asian  LNG  demand  that  reduces  the  availability  of  gas  on  the  global  gas  market,34 
extreme  weather  conditions  potentially  affecting  hydropower  storage  or  nuclear 
production  which  would  require  higher  recourse  to  gas-fired  power  generation,  and 
further  possible  gas  supply  disruptions,  including  a  complete  halt  of  gas  imports  from 
Russia,  or  a  disruption  of  existing  critical  gas  infrastructure.  Moreover,  armed  conflicts 
affect  several  regions  relevant  for  EU  energy  supply,  such  as  Ukraine,  Azerbaijan,  or 
Middle East. 

Recent  examples  illustrate  the  relevance  of  the  risks  related  to  the  disruption  of  energy 
infrastructure.  In  September  2022,  the  NordStream  1  pipeline  was  damaged  by  acts  of 
sabotage to such a degree that it currently cannot transport any gas and will not be able to 
do  so  in  the  foreseeable  future.  In  October  2023,  the  Balticconnector,  an  important 
pipeline connecting Finland to Estonia, was disrupted. Following the incident, the Finnish 
authorities  declared  an  alert  level  which  indicates  a  significant  deterioration  of  the  gas 
supply situation.5  

3 

 
 
As  regards  electricity,  the  level  of  preparedness  ahead  of  next  winter,  and  thus  our 
security of supply in this sector, is generally considered to be better than last year. Next to 
more  availability  of  nuclear  generation  for  next  winter  and  higher  hydropower  storage 
levels, the addition of new renewable capacities have improved the outlook. Yet, caution 
is still called for. As a result, those Member States with emergency measures in place will 
maintain them at least until the end of the winter. Moreover, many Member States have 
planned to maintain or reinstall energy savings measures as well.  

The improved security of supply situation is also reflected in gas and electricity prices. At 
the peak of the crisis in summer 2022, gas prices reached unprecedented levels above 300 
€/MWh,  and  this  had  immediate  repercussions  on  electricity  prices  which  spiked  well 
above  400  €/MWh.  Since  then,  gas  and  electricity  prices  have  fallen  significantly, 
currently  fluctuating  around  50  €/MWh  and  100  €/MWh,  respectively,  although  they 
remain more than twice as high as pre-crisis level. 

The  need  to  achieve  Union’s  energy  and  climate  targets  for  2030  and  the  long-term 
objective  of  climate  neutrality  will  require  a  massive  increase  in  renewable  energy 
capacities  across  the  EU.  The  Union’s  response  to  the  energy  crisis  under  the 
REPowerEU  initiative  calls  for  a  large  speed-up  and  scale-up  in  renewable  energy  in 
order  to  accelerate  the  Union’s  phasing  out  of  Russian  fossil  fuels.  Therefore,  the 
acceleration in the deployment of renewable capacity plays a fundamental role both in the 
long-term  EU  strategy  for  decarbonisation  and  in  the  short-term  strategy  to  address  the 
energy  crisis.  Renewables  have  been  instrumental  in  increasing  security  of  supply  and 
keeping  energy  prices  in  check  during  the  energy  crisis.  The  main  reason  was  the 
replacement  of  natural  gas  by  renewable  energy,  especially  in  the  power  sector,  which 
then  impacted  overall  gas  demand.  The  additional  power  generation  from  renewable 
energy sources in this year replaced ca. 107 TWh of fossil-based electricity generation - 
equivalent to ca. 10 bcm of gas.  

Considering  that  the  Dutch  Title  Transfer  Facility  (TTF)  price  averaged  around  120 
€/MWh in 2022, the Commission estimates the saving achieved thanks to the deployment 
of  additional  renewable  capacity  at  more  than  EUR  10  billion.  Also  the  International 
Energy Agency estimated substantial positive impacts of new renewables deployment on 
energy  prices:  according  to  their  calculations,  the  average  wholesale  electricity  prices 
would  have  been  8%  higher  in  all  European  markets  in  2022  without  the  additional 
installed  capacity.  Thanks  to  additional  photovoltaic  and  wind  capacity  installed, 
European consumers are expected to save ca. EUR 100 billion from 2021-2023. Low-cost 
new wind and solar PV installations have displaced an estimated 230 TWh of fossil fuel 
generation since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine4. With 70 GW of new renewable capacity 
projected to come online in 2023, additional savings could be achieved driving further the 
reduction of Russian gas imports. 

4 How much money are European consumers saving thanks to renewables? – Renewable Energy Market Update 
- June 2023 – Analysis - IEA 

4 

 
 
 
In the renewable heating sector, the sale of heat pumps rose by 39% in 20225 compared to 
2021, while the solar heat market grew by 12% for a total installed capacity of 40.5 GW.6 
Some of these newly installed appliances will have led to a replacement of gas, coal and 
oil  boilers,  however,  there  is  no  data  available  allowing  to  draw  conclusions  as  regards 
the extent to which this occurred. 

In conclusion, the accelerated rollout of renewables has proven its ability to reduce risks 
for the Union’s security of supply, especially for gas and electricity and has contributed to 
reduce energy prices for EU citizens and businesses.  

Having  in  mind  that  significant  risks  remain,  further  rapid  deployment  of  renewable 
energy  is  necessary  to  strengthen  the  Union’s  resilience  even  further.  New  renewable 
installations  are  needed  to  phase  out  rapidly  the  remaining  Russian  gas  imports.  The 
quicker  the  rollout  of  renewables  is  carried  out,  the  higher  its  positive  impact  on  the 
Union’s  security  of  energy  supply,  energy  prices  and  independence  from  Russian  fossil 
fuels.  

III.  Effects of the Council Regulation 

Given the limited period of application of the Council Regulation, the quantification of its 
effects  in  terms  of  acceleration  of  deployment  of  renewables  is  challenging.  This  is 
mainly  due to  the fact  that  there are no official  statistics available on renewable  energy 
deployment for the period since its entry into force since such statistics for 2023 will only 
be  available  by  the  end  of  2024.  However,  some  positive  developments  have  been 
observed.   

According to Solar Power Europe, in the three quarters of 2023 following the entry into 
force  of  the  Regulation,  more  new  solar  PV  capacities  (over  45  GW)  have  been  added 
across the EU than in the whole 2022. In the first six months of the year Germany added 
6.5  GW  (+10%)  of  new  solar  capacity,  while  Poland  added  over  2  GW  (+17%)  and 
Belgium  added  at  least  1.2  GW  (+19%).  Italy  installed  2.5  GW  of  solar  in  the  first  six 
months of 2023 compared to a total of 3 GW for the whole of 2022. Spain is expected to 
increase its deployment from 4.5 GW in 2022 to 7 GW in 20237. 

As  concerns  permitting,  available  data  signals  that  several  Member  States  have 
experienced double-digit increases in the volume of permits issued for onshore wind since 
the  entry  into  force  of  the  Regulation.  Wind  Europe’s  overview  of  the  evolution  of  the 
capacity  showed  positive  developments  in  France,  which  in  the  first  three  quarters  of 
2023  significantly  increased  the  amount  of  wind  capacity  that  received  a  permit. 
Belgium’s  Flemish  Region  permitted  300  MW  of  additional  wind  capacity  in  the  first 
eight months of 2023, surpassing thereby the amount of capacity permitted in the whole 
year of 2022. A record 5.2 GW of new permits for onshore wind were issued in Germany 

5 Market data – European Heat Pump Association (ehpa.org). 
6 Solar Heat Europe – Decarbonising heat with Solar thermal, Market Outlook 2022/2023. 
7 EU fossil generation hits record low as demand falls | Ember (ember-climate.org) 

5 

 
 
 
in the first nine months of 2023 and 2.44 GW of new capacity was added.8 In this regard, 
Germany  has  indicated  that  the  volume  of  permitted  wind  onshore  projects  this  year  is 
expected to grow by 75% compared to last year. 

In terms of renewable power production, not less than 17 Member States saw new record 
shares over the first six months of the year with Greece and Romania passing 50% for the 
first  time  and  Denmark  and  Portugal  both  breaking  75%.  In  Portugal,  wind  and  solar 
accounted for more than half of total generation in both April and May. The Netherlands 
hit 50% wind and solar for the first time in July, while Germany came close with a record 
49% share in the same month9. The repowering rate for wind energy in Germany rose to 
34%10. 

Additionally,  at  least  in  one  Member  State,  grid  projects  important  for  increased 
penetration  for  renewables  and  amounting  to  over  2000  km  in  total  are  also  benefitting 
from accelerated permitting. 

However, as also signalled by stakeholders, it is difficult to isolate the extent to which the 
increase  observed  in  renewables  deployment  and  production  in  this  period  can  be 
attributed to the effects of the Council Regulation. Other factors, such as the high energy 
prices, weather or other policies and measures applied by Member States such as support 
schemes or other type of incentives, have contributed to such increase as well.  

Therefore,  to  get  better  insights  on  the  effects  of  this  Regulation,  the  Commission  has 
sought  input  from  the  Member  States  and  stakeholders  such  as  representatives  of  the 
renewable energy sector as well as environmental associations.  

As  regards  Member  States,  the  Commission  sent  a  letter  to  all  Member  States  on  14 
September  2023  asking  to  receive  written  feedback  regarding  the  application  of  the 
Regulation. As of, 15 November 2023, 15 Member States had replied to the questionnaire 
and provided written input. The application of the Council Regulation was also discussed 
at  the  last  meeting  of  the  Concerted  Action  on  the  Renewable  Energy  Directive  (CA-
RES) which took place on 18 October 2023, where five Member States provided input on 
their experience regarding the application of the Council Regulation.  

In addition to individual replies, on 17 October of 2023, a joint letter by the ‘Friends of 
Renewables’, signed by the Ministers of 11 Member States (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, 
Germany,  Greece,  Ireland,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  Malta,  the  Netherlands,  Portugal)  called 
for  a  prolongation  of  the  Council  Regulation.  The  signatories  recalled  that  renewable 
energy enhances the Union’s independence from external energy sources and reduces its 
vulnerability to  geopolitical  disruptions and  external  price shocks, while  contributing  to 
the  EU’s  technological  and  industrial  leadership  and  the  creation  of  jobs.  The  letter 
stressed in this context the importance of the Council Regulation to mitigate the impact of 

8 https://www.fachagentur-windenergie.de/aktuelles/detail/kraeftiger-aufwind-in-den-ersten-neun-monaten-2023  
9 EU fossil generation hits record low as demand falls | Ember (ember-climate.org) 

6 

 
 
 
 
Russia’s  war  of  aggression  against  Ukraine  on  the  energy  market  and  called  for  the 
prolongation of the Council Regulation beyond 2024 and as long as necessary to further 
reduce barriers for permitting for renewable energies. 

On 26 October, the Commission organised an exchange of views with key stakeholders, 
including  renewable  energy  industry  associations,  the  transmission  network  ENTSO-E 
and  environmental  NGOs.  Furthermore,  it  received  position  papers  from  several 
stakeholders. 

The  following  sub-sections  summarise  the  input  received  on  the  different  provisions  of 
the Regulation. 

1.  Article 1: Subject matter and scope 

to  continue 

One  Member  State  suggested  that  the  scope  of  application  should  be modified  to  allow 
Member  States 
the  Council  Regulation’s  framework  for 
environmental  impact  assessments  beyond  30  June  2024.  It  deemed  this  necessary  to 
provide clarity to projects that had not been completed at the time of the expiration of the 
Regulation.  Furthermore,  it  proposed  to  specify  the  ‘third  party  rights’  mentioned  in 
Article 1 as ‘third party rights to judicial review’. 

to  apply 

Another Member State also provided feedback on this article indicating that this provision 
had  been  essential  to  ensure  certainty  for  the  deployment  of  renewable  energy  projects. 
More specifically, it considered it of key importance that renewable energy projects did 
not  have to  be concluded within the period of application of this  Council  Regulation  to 
benefit from the measures regulated therein. This Member State also considered that the 
period of application of the Regulation was too short because the permitting starting point 
for many projects would not occur within its time frame, in particular the projects for the 
development  of  grid  infrastructure  required  to  integrate  renewables  into  the  electricity 
system.  

2.  Article 2: Definitions 

The  Commission  has  received  very  limited  feedback  regarding  the  definitions.  One 
stakeholder  (Solar  Heat  Europe)  criticised  that  in  several  cases  the  definition  of  solar 
energy equipment had been interpreted as referring to solar photovoltaics only, while in 
fact it expressly refers to both solar thermal and solar photovoltaic equipment. 

3.  Article 3: Overriding Public Interest 

From  the  feedback  received  regarding  the  application  of  this  article,  the  Commission 
notes  that  there  is  some  confusion  among  Member  States  regarding  the  scope  and 
functioning of the overriding public interest presumption included in Article 3, although 
the  Council  Regulation  is  directly  applicable  and,  therefore,  this  presumption  can  be 

7 

 
 
relied  upon  by  project  developers  in  national  permitting  procedures  and  court  litigation 
without the need for further national legislation. Article 3 however allows Member States 
to adopt national legislation to restrict the application of this presumption to certain types 
of  technology  or  certain  areas  of  their  territory,  in  accordance  with  the  priorities  set  in 
their  integrated  national  energy  and  climate  plans.  If  Member  States  make  use  of  these 
exceptions, this presumption will only be applicable for certain technologies or territories.  

14  Member  States  gave  feedback  regarding  Article  3.  Regarding  the  scope  of  the 
presumption,  the  Commission  observes  a  tendency  by  Member  States  to  limit  the 
application of this presumption to certain technologies (namely wind and solar, but also 
infrastructure  projects),  and  to  a  more  limited  extent  to  specific  areas.  Solar  Power 
Europe  reported  that  one  Member  State  had  restricted  the  application  of  the  overriding 
public  interest  presumption  to  public  projects  only,  while  another  one  left  potential 
exemptions to be defined by decree. On the other hand, one Member State has expanded 
the  scope  of  this  presumption  so  that  renewable  projects  are  in  the  overriding  public 
interest in relation to architectural heritage.  

Member States applying this presumption generally reported positive results, considering 
it  a  useful  tool  for  accelerating  the  deployment  of  renewable  energy  sources  or 
infrastructure or a risk reduction factor.   

One  Member  State  reported  positive  effects  in  individual  cases  (namely  for  wind,  solar 
PV,  and  grid  projects),  resulting  from  the  application  of  this  presumption  both  by 
permitting authorities and courts. Another Member State highlighted the  added value of 
the provision, which helped to make the relationship between different public entities in 
the planning process more efficient. Two other Member States indicated that they did not 
need to apply this presumption to any specific project yet (among other reasons due to the 
fact  that  many  projects  had  not  yet  reached  the  permitting  stage)  but  welcomed  its 
potential  to  accelerate  permitting  for  specific  projects  and  expressed  interest  to  benefit 
from it in the near future. On the other hand, one Member State believed that their current 
wind and solar projects were moving forward sufficiently fast and therefore this provision 
was not needed.  

However,  two  Member  States  indicated  challenges  to  unfold  the  full  potential  of  the 
overriding  public interest  presumption.  In particular,  the fulfilment of  another condition 
in the Habitats and Birds Directives, requiring the absence of other alternative solutions, 
is perceived as a challenge which limits the practical usefulness of the overriding public 
interest presumption One Member State therefore  called for the introduction of targeted 
modifications to  Article  3 to  provide for flexibility  to  comply with  the  other  conditions 
for  the  derogation  criteria  in  the  relevant  environmental  Directive,  in  particular  the 
obligation to show that there are no other alternative solutions. The requirement to outline 
compensatory measures was also perceived by one Member States as a limiting factor of 
the usefulness of the overriding public interest provision.  

8 

 
 
 
Wind  Europe,  Solar  Power  Europe  and  EREF  provided  feedback  regarding  the 
application  of  the  overriding  public  interest  presumption.  These  stakeholders  expressed 
concerns that  most Member States  did  not  apply  or only  partially applied  an overriding 
public  interest  status  for  renewable  projects  or  that  permitting  authorities  sometimes 
disregard  the  presumption  and  prioritised  other  interests.  However,  they  also  provided 
positive  examples  where  this  had  been  used  to  some  extent  and  specific  cases  where  it 
had  helped  to  move  some  projects  forward.  Wind  Europe  indicated  that  there  was 
generally  appetite to  make more use of this provision,  but  that there  was uncertainty  as 
regards its scope and how it should be implemented in practice. 

EU  DSO  Entity  referred  to  the  high  potential  of  the  overriding  public  interest 
presumption  to  help  alleviate  bottlenecks  faced  by  distribution  projects  and  also 
highlighted  the  symbolic  value  of  Article  3.  They  stated,  however,  that  in  practice  the 
Council  Regulation  had  hardly  had  practical  impact  on  distribution  grid  projects.  EU 
DSO Entity recommended prolonging the Regulation and called upon the Commission to 
ensure actual implementation. 

Two environmental stakeholders (BirdLife and Climate Active Network, “CAN Europe”) 
shared their general remarks about this provision. They expressed caution about the use of 
the  overriding  public  interest  narrative,  which  in  practice  may  loosen  the  standard  for 
environmental  protection  by  facilitating  the  permitting  for  highly  problematic  projects 
while  not  bringing  any  additional  value  for  renewable  projects  which  already  took 
appropriate measures and safeguards. CAN Europe claimed that in one Member State, the 
provision  on  the  presumption  of  overriding  public  interest  had  inspired  the  legislator  to 
exempt  nine  hydropower  plants  from  the  requirement  to  carry  out  an  environmental 
impact  assessment,  despite  their  significant  environmental  impacts  while  also  declaring 
them as being of overriding public interest. 

Overall,  it  can  be  concluded  that  the  presumption  contained  in  Article  3  is  generally 
perceived  as  a  useful  tool  to  accelerate  the  deployment  of  renewable  energy  sources 
(mainly  wind  and  solar)  and  infrastructure  projects  in  the  Member  States  where  it  has 
been applied. This relates not only to positive impacts observed on the ground for specific 
projects, but also to the importance that this presumption attributes to renewable energy 
deployment  more  generally,  also  for  other  purposes  beyond  the  specific  derogations 
foreseen in the environmental directives referred to in Article 3. Regarding the concerns 
expressed about an expansive application of this provision and the impact this may have 
on a high level  of  environmental  protection, the Commission  recalls that  the overriding 
public  interest  presumption  in  favour  of  renewables  is  rebuttable,  which  means  that 
permitting authorities and courts can disapply it where there is clear evidence that those 
projects  have  major  adverse  effects  on  the  environment  which  cannot  be  mitigated  or 
compensated  for.  Moreover,  Member  States  may  limit  its  application  to  specific 
technologies and areas.  

In  addition,  there  could  be  scope  for  an  increased  application  of  Article  3  in  the  near 
future when more renewable energy projects reach the permitting phase after the expiry 
of  the  Regulation.  Moreover,  the  usefulness  of  this  provision  seems  to  be  limited  by 

9 

 
 
factors  such  as  a  restrictive  interpretation  of  other  conditions  to  benefit  from  the 
derogations, e.g. the assessment whether alternative solutions exist. 

4.  Article  4:  Acceleration  of  the  permit-granting  process  for  the 

installation of solar energy equipment 

12 Member States provided specific feedback regarding the application of Article 4 or the 
installation  of  small  solar  equipment  more  generally.  Several  of  those  Member  States 
reported  a  strong  increase  in  solar  installations  in  recent  times,  although  without 
specifically  attributing  such  increase  to  the  Council  Regulation  but  rather  to  different 
factors such as popular national support schemes or the evolution of energy price. 

Most  of the Member States reacting to  this point indicated that they  applied even more 
ambitious  permitting  rules  to  small  solar  installations  than  those  included  in  Article  4. 
More  particularly,  seven  Member  States  indicated  that  their  national  legislation  did  not 
require specific permits for small solar installations on artificial structures under certain 
conditions or for solar  equipment below a certain capacity threshold or even in general. 
Two Member States indicated that their national legislation prior to the entry into force of 
the  Regulation  already  did  not  require  an  environmental  impact  assessment  for  solar 
energy equipment  projects. Consequently, the positive effects  of Article  4 appear  rather 
limited in these Member States which have adopted more ambitious national legislation. 

One Member State stated that it introduced changes in its national permitting system as a 
result  of  the  Council  Regulation.  In  particular,  it  introduced  tacit  approval  within  one 
month following the submission of an application for the issuance of a building permit for 
the  installation  of  solar  facilities  for  the  production  of  electricity  from  solar  energy  for 
self-consumption  purposes  with  a  total  installed  capacity  of  20-50  kW  on  structured 
buildings and structures in urbanised areas, including the roof and facade structures and 
their adjacent land properties. 

Solar Power Europe and Solar Heat  Europe  provided feedback regarding the  effects  of 
Article  4.  Solar  Power  Europe  indicated  that  Article  4  was  generally  well  implemented 
although  some  restrictions  were  observed.  For  instance,  in  some  cases,  Member  States 
interpreted  the  notion  of  artificial  structures  too  narrowly  (limiting  it  to  rooftops  only), 
which  calls  for  a  clarification  of  the  notion  of  “artificial  structures”.  Similarly,  most 
Member  States  were  not  ambitious  enough  regarding  simplification  of  grid  connections 
(since  they  applied  the  lower  threshold  of  10.8  kW  and  not  50  kW).  However,  they 
provided some positive examples such as the case of one Member State where the use of 
a  simplified  model  was  envisaged  for  the  installation  of  rooftop  photovoltaics  up  to 
200kW capacity. Solar Heat Europe indicated that its members had not experienced any 
noticeable change in the permitting procedures for solar heat installations during the last 
year. 

From the above, the Commission observes that, while the installation of solar equipment 
is  increasing,  it  is  difficult  to  attribute  the  effects  of  such  increase  specifically  to  the 
Council  Regulation  since  other  factors  (such  as  support  schemes  or  high  energy  prices) 

10 

 
 
played  an  important  role.  The  Commission  welcomes  that  at  least  one  Member  State 
reported  to  have  recently  introduced  changes  to  streamline  the  permitting  of  solar 
installations and that several Member States have introduced in their national legislation 
provisions  that  are  even  more  ambitious  than  those  of  Article  4,  such  as  no  permit 
requirement for small solar installations under certain conditions and that they can apply 
directly  for  grid  connection.  Article  4  is  still  relevant  for  these  Member  States  since  it 
introduces  maximum  deadlines  also  for  the  connection  to  the  grid  of  these  installations 
(i.e. the maximum  deadlines of one or three months  also  cover the grid  connection  and 
provides  certainty  to  applicants  by  virtue  of  tacit  approval  provision  for  some 
installations). The Commission notes the issue of grid connections as an area for further 
improvement.  

5.  Article 5: Repowering of renewable energy power plants 

11  Member  States  provided  feedback  regarding  the  application  of  Article  5  and  the 
permit-granting process for repowering of renewable energy plants more generally. 

Several  Member  States  indicated  that  they  did  not  yet  have  significant  experience  with 
repowering  due  to  the  relatively  recent  installation  of  most  renewable  energy  plants,  or 
that they did not have relevant data on this. Only one Member State reported an increase 
in  applications  mostly  for  the  repowering  of  solar  installations,  while  other  Member 
States  indicated  that  they  could  not  detect  an  increase  in  repowering  under  the  Council 
Regulation. Several Member States explained that they had introduced similar permitting 
procedures as those laid down in Article 5. 

One  Member  State  indicated  that,  usually,  the  permit  granting  process  for  repowering 
with increase in capacity did not exceed six months for solar projects, although in cases 
where an environmental impact assessment should be carried out (this may be necessary 
for wind power plants), the procedure might be longer. The deadline laid down in Article 
5(1)  covers  all  relevant  permits  and  steps  of  the  permit-granting  process,  including 
environmental impacts assessments. Therefore, this deadline seems to be fulfilled in this 
Member  State  for  those  technologies  that  do  not  require  an  environmental  impact 
assessment, although further adaptations  may be  required to  comply with  such deadline 
when an environmental impact assessment is required. Moreover, in this Member State a 
permit from the relevant Ministry is not required for the repowering of renewable energy 
power  plants  if  the  type  of  electricity  generation  and  the  total  permitted  electricity 
generation capacity do not change as a result of the repowering. 

A  few  Member  States  reported  ambitious  permitting  rules  for  the  repowering  of 
renewable  energy  projects.  One  of  them  has  adopted  a  national  law  in  September  2023 
with measures dealing with the same topics covered in Article 5 but with an even more 
ambitious scope. In particular, such law  introduces  a one-month deadline for issuing  an 
opinion on grid connection in the case of modernisation of a site when the total installed 
capacity  is  expected  to  increase  up  to  50%  compared  to  the  existing  capacity,  which  is 
more  ambitious  than  Article  5(3)  both  in  terms  of  deadline  and  increase  in  capacity. 

11 

 
 
Moreover, in line with Article 5(4), this law does not require to apply the environmental 
procedures when the modernisation of the site does not lead to the use of additional land 
and such modernisation complies with the environmental protection measures imposed to 
the original site. 

Another  Member  State  also  applies  ambitious  permitting  rules  for  the  repowering  of 
renewable  energy  projects.  For  instance,  with  regard  to  grid  connection,  the  installed 
power  of  the  repowered  installation  may  be  increased  by  up  to  a  limit  of  20%  of  the 
connection power, without requiring an increase in the capacity of the connection. 

Wind  Europe  expressed  concerns  that  very  few  Member  States  applied  a  fast-track 
procedure  for  the  repowering  of  projects.  It  claimed  that  there  was  only  one  exception 
having the most ambitious regime in place, with a few other Member States also having 
rules  to  this  aim  to  some  extent  in  place.  Wind  Europe  indicated  that,  overall,  the 
Regulation had had so far limited effects to accelerate the repowering of projects. Wind 
Europe  noted  that  the  rules  included  in  Article  5  could  be  even  more  ambitious.  For 
instance, the 15% threshold foreseen in Article 5(3) was perceived as too low compared 
to the higher output of new wind turbines. 

From the above, the Commission observes that the situation concerning the repowering of 
renewable energy projects is quite mixed. While in several Member States there is limited 
scope  for  repowering  of  projects  given  the  recent  installation  of  renewable  energy 
projects, in others there is much more significant and growing unused potential to achieve 
bigger volumes of renewables deployment by promoting and facilitating the repowering 
of  existing  plants.  The  repowering  of  renewable  energy  power  plants  presents  multiple 
benefits  as  it  enables  the  continued  use  of  sites  with  significant  renewable  energy 
potential,  it  benefits  from  the  existing  grid  connection,  a  likely  higher  degree  of  public 
acceptance and knowledge of environmental impacts.  

The  Commission  welcomes  that  some  Member  States  with  a  high  potential  for 
repowering  of  renewable  energy  projects  have  introduced  measures  to  simplify  their 
permitting rules, and that other Member States have adopted simplification measures as a 
result of this Council Regulation, to some extent even more ambitious than those included 
in Article 5. However, the Commission shares the concerns that the Member States with 
the biggest repowering potential should accelerate efforts to further shorten and simplify 
the related permitting procedures. 

6. 

 Article  6:  Acceleration  of  the  permit-granting  process  of  renewable 
energy projects and for related grid infrastructure which is necessary to 
integrate renewables into the system 

The  application  of  this  provision  is  optional  for  Member  States.  14  Member  States 
provided  feedback  regarding  this  article.  Of  these,  three  reported  to  have  applied  the 
provision. 

12 

 
 
Two Member States stated that they were currently applying Article 6 to identify specific 
renewables  or  grid  infrastructure  areas  where  projects  can  be  exempted  from  dedicated 
environmental impact assessment and species protection assessments.  

One  Member  State  indicated  that  it  had  implemented  this  provision  to  identify  specific 
areas  for  wind  energy  onshore  and  offshore  areas  as  well  as  for  electricity  grids  above 
110  kW.  It  reported  very  positive  impacts  so  far  on  the  acceleration  of  grid  and 
renewables deployment. In particular, it already observed that the first permits for wind 
power  plants  had  been  granted  under  the  Council  Regulation  and  that  the  number  of 
successful wind power projects was rising. It expects that the Council Regulation and in 
particular Article 6 would help to achieve its ambitious expansion objective of around 10 
GW onshore wind per year. Not prolonging the Council Regulation would, according to 
this  Member  State,  risk  resulting  in  major  disruptions  in  the  pace  of  deployment  of 
renewables, claiming that the installation of around 41 GW of wind power onshore could 
be  delayed  and  take  approximately  two  years  longer  or  could  even  be  halted  altogether 
without a prolongation of the Regulation. 

Regarding  grids,  four  German  transmission  operators  indicated  that  the  Council 
Regulation had been a substantial accelerating factor of formal planning and authorisation 
processes for upgrading  and extending electricity grids in Germany and advocated  for a 
prolongation of the Regulation  until  spring 2025 to ensure  a smooth  transition until the 
relevant  provisions  of  the  amending  Directive  were  transposed  into  national  law.  Also, 
ENTSO-E provided positive feedback regarding the application of Article 6 in Germany 
and  reported  an  acceleration  potential  of  7  months  on  average  for  the  majority  of  grid 
projects  benefiting  from  Article  6  (i.e.  those  submitted  after  the  entry  into  force  of 
Regulation). Regarding offshore projects, ENTSO-E expects an even greater acceleration 
potential of up to three years. ENTSO-E indicated that TSOs are in regular contact with 
national  ministries  regarding  the  implementation  of  the  new  Article  15e  of  the  revised 
RED  related  to  infrastructure  areas.  However,  they  have  serious  doubts  whether  a 
transposition  of  this  provision  was  feasible  by  July  2024  and  consequently  called  for  a 
prolongation of the Council Regulation to ensure a smooth transition until Article 15e of 
the revised RED would be fully transposed. Germany stated that a prolongation of Article 
6 would allow to shorten the permitting process of many grid projects by approximately 
12 months, for some projects even by up to 36 months.  

Another Member State also decided to make use of Article 6, although renewable energy 
projects were still at the planning and not yet at the permitting phase. Thus, it considered 
that Article 6    had not  yet  reached its  full  effect  but  had the potential to  do in  the near 
future. 

Most Member States that  provided feedback  reported that they  did  not  make use of the 
option  included  in  Article  6.  One  of  them  indicated  that  it  was  still  considering  its 
application given that national legislation was necessary to further develop this provision. 
Another  Member  State  stated  that  its  national  legislation  already  included  ambitious 
measures with clear rules and criteria to delimit which renewable energy projects had to 
undergo  a  screening  or  an  environmental  impact  assessment.  Two  other  Member  States 

13 

 
 
indicated that, while they had not applied Article 6, they were currently working on ways 
to  further  streamline  the  environmental  assessments  related  to  renewables  permitting. 
Another  Member  State  stated  that  they  had  not  applied  Article  6  due  to  their  national 
legislative procedure for implementing “may clauses” included in EU Regulations, which 
required  the  adoption  of  national  legislation  to  develop  such  provisions.  Moreover,  this 
Member  State  underlined  that  the  exemptions  and  new  conditions  foreseen  in  Article  6 
mainly  focused  on  species  protection,  whereas  the  delays  in  the  permitting  process  of 
renewables installations (especially wind large power plants) and grid developments were 
mostly related to habitat protection. Nevertheless, it acknowledged Article 6 as a positive 
symbolic measure for speeding up permitting procedures  for renewables and a signal to 
solve  gridlocks.  ENTSO-E  stated  in  this  regard  that  there  would  be  a  political  push  to 
apply this provision in relation to two offshore infrastructure projects.  

Some  stakeholders  (CAN  Europe,  BirdLife)  expressed  general  concerns  regarding  the 
application of  exemptions  from  certain  assessments  under EU environmental legislation 
and  about  potential  biodiversity  impacts  due  to  acceleration  of  renewable  energy 
the  depth  and  quality  of  Strategic 
that 
deployment.  CAN  Europe  mentioned 
Environmental Assessments varied across different regions and might not be sufficiently 
detailed  in  order  to  ensure  a  comparable  standard  of  protection.  Nevertheless,  CAN 
Europe  noted  that  in  one  Member  State,  the  application  of  Article  6  had  provided  a 
solution  for a population-based  approach to species protection by establishing  a  species 
protection  fund  whose  resources  were  entrusted  for  specific  purposes.  BirdLife  raised 
concerns  with  regards  to  the  diminished  transparency  for  NGOs  and  the  reduced 
engagement of the local community in the planning process. 

From the above, it can be concluded that Article 6 has been a useful tool to accelerate the 
deployment of renewable energy and related infrastructure projects in the Member States 
that have opted to make use of this provision. In the specific case of Germany, which has 
made use of this provision,  there appear to  be tangible positive results  both  in  terms  of 
number of successful renewable and grid projects going ahead and acceleration potential 
and  shortening  of  permitting  time.  The  Commission  observes  that  this  provision  is  also 
positively perceived among those Member States that have not made use of this provision 
or that have decided to do so but are at an earlier stage due to its symbolic value and as a 
risk reduction factor. 

As  regards  the  concerns  expressed  about  the  exemptions  from  assessments  under  EU 
environmental  legislation  and  the  impact  on  biodiversity  protection,  the  Commission 
recalls that Article 6 imposes specific conditions to exempt projects from environmental 
assessments,  aiming  to  ensure  a  balance  between  the  need  to  deploy  renewable  energy 
projects  at  a  much  faster  speed  and  the  need  to  ensure  protection  of  environmentally 
sensitive areas.  

7.  Article 7: Acceleration of the deployment of heat pumps 

14 

 
 
12  Member  States  provided  feedback  regarding  the  application  of  this  article  and  the 
permit-granting process for the installation of heat pumps more generally. Two Member 
States  stated  that  they  did  not  have  recent  data  regarding  heat  pumps,  so  it  was  not 
possible to evaluate the impact of the Regulation on this technology. 

Similarly as for small solar installations, a few Member States indicated that they did not 
require  permits  for  heat  pumps  under  certain  conditions  (usually  for  small  heat  pumps, 
such as up to 1 m3, 500 kW or up to 30 kW in private houses). One Member State stated 
that  air  source  heat  pumps  did  not  generally  require  an  application,  with  very  few 
exceptions. Therefore, the legislation in these countries is more ambitious than Article 7 
of the Council Regulation. Other Member States mentioned that their national legislation 
provided  planning  exemptions  for  the  installation  of  heat  pumps  or  exemption  from 
environmental impact assessment.  

One Member State raised concerns about the requirement to grant permits for heat pumps 
up to 50 MW within one month, explaining that such short deadline may raise technical 
and safety concerns for the electricity grid. The Commission notes in this regard that the 
Council Regulation introduces flexibility for Member States regarding the application of 
this deadline. Member States may exclude certain areas or structures from the provisions 
of this article, including for safety reasons.  

A few Member States reported a recent increase in installations of heat pumps but were 
not certain if this increase was due to the effects of the Council Regulation. Instead, they 
attributed  it  to  other  factors  such  as  the  Russian  war  on  Ukraine  or  national  subsidies. 
Several  Member  States  specified  that  the  Council  Regulation  did  not  affect  the 
development due to lacking national permitting requirements for certain heat pumps.   

The European Heat Pump association (EHPA) provided detailed feedback regarding the 
status of permitting procedures applicable to heat pumps and the effects of Article 7. For 
most  heat  pumps  (excluding  geothermal)  permits  were  usually  not  required,  while  for 
geothermal heat pumps, permits were usually necessary. However, for heat pumps up to 
25 kW thermal capacity, it was possible to grant permits within one month.  

Given  that  for  most  small-scale  heat  pumps  a  permit  is  usually  not  required  (with  the 
exception of geothermal), the impact of Article 7 appears to be limited. However, EHPA 
still viewed this provision positively since the introduction of maximum deadline served 
to  provide  legal  certainty.  In  order  to  increase  the  usefulness  of  this  provision,  EHPA 
proposed some targeted modifications, i.e. to reduce the permitting time to one month for 
residential  geothermal  heat  pumps  up  to  25  kW  thermal  capacity,  coupled  with  tacit 
approval  and  to  use  thermal  capacity  instead  of  electrical  capacity  (except  when 
specifically  referring  to  grid  connection,  where  electrical  capacity  might  be  more 
appropriate).  

From the above, it can be concluded that, while permitting does not seem to be the main 
bottleneck  for  the  installation  of  heat  pumps,  the  Council  Regulation  and  more 
particularly  the  introduction  of  clear  maximum  deadlines  has  positively  contributed  to 
ensure  legal  certainty  for  the  installation  of  this  type  of  equipment,  in  particular  for 

15 

 
 
geothermal  and  larger  heat  pumps.  The  Commission  welcomes  that  in  several  Member 
States the national legislation in place seems to be even more ambitious than the content 
of Article 7 since no permits are required for small heat pumps. 

8.  Article 8: Timelines for the permit-granting process for the installation 
of solar energy equipment, the repowering of  renewable energy power 
plants and for the deployment of heat pump 

No  feedback  was  received  from  Member  States  or  stakeholders  on  this  article,  which 
stipulates  that  the time  to  build  or  repower  related  necessary  grid  infrastructure  and  the 
time for certain administrative stages necessary for significant upgrades to the grid are not 
included in the timelines for permit granting. 

IV. 

Scope of the Emergency Regulation and of the new permitting provisions in 
the revised RED 

As  mentioned  above,  the  revised  RED  includes  provisions  to  streamline  permitting 
procedures  applicable  to  renewable  energy  projects,  including  rules  on  the  same  or 
similar  topics  as  those  covered  by  the  Council  Regulation.  While  several  of  these  rules 
cover  the  same  topics  as  those  included  in  the  Regulation,  there  are  some  important 
differences between the two texts:  

-  Article  16f  regulates  the  overriding  public  interest  presumption,  which  is  also 
regulated  in  Article  3  of  the  Regulation.  However,  Article  3  of  the  Regulation 
contains  a  second  paragraph  which  calls  to  give  priority  to  the  projects  that  are 
recognised  as  being  of  overriding  public  interest  whenever  a  balancing  of  legal 
interests is required in the individual case.  

-  Article 16d contains specific rules for the permit-granting process for the installation 
of  solar  energy  equipment,  which  are  also  covered  in  Article  4  of  the  Council 
Regulation. The wording of the two provisions is very similar  although Article 16d, 
paragraph 2 of the revised RED includes a higher threshold of 100 kW (as opposed to 
50 kW), which allows to increase the number of installations that fall under the very 
short permitting procedure of one month. 

-  Article  16c  (and  also  Article  16b)  contain  rules  applicable  to  the  permit-granting 
process for the repowering of renewable energy plants outside renewable acceleration 
areas,  which  is  also  covered  by  Article  5  of  the  Regulation.  The  main  difference 
between  the  texts  is  that  Article  5  of  the  Regulation  contains  a  short  six-months 
deadline  for  all  permits  applicable  to  the  repowering  of  renewable  energy  projects, 
while the revised RED contains a deadline of one year for projects outside renewable 
acceleration  areas  (in  renewable  acceleration  areas,  Article  16a  also  foresees  a  six-
month  deadline,  but  the  designation  of  those  areas  have  a  longer  implementation 
deadline of 27 months).  

-  Article  16e  contains  rules  on  the  permit-granting  process  for  heat  pumps  which  are 
also covered in Article 7 of the Regulation. The wording of the two provisions is very 

16 

 
 
similar  although  the  revised  RED  contains  additional  precisions  regarding  deadlines 
for  grid  connections  (two-weeks-deadline  for  connections  to  the  transmission  or 
distribution grid).  

-  Article  15c  imposes  an  obligation  on  Member  States  to  designate  renewable 
acceleration  areas  for  at  least  one  renewable  technology.  Article  15e  introduces  the 
possibility  for  Member  States  to  designate  areas  for  grid  and  storage  infrastructure 
necessary  to  integrate  renewable  energy  into  the  electricity  system.  In  these  areas, 
targeted  exemptions  to  environmental  assessment  may  apply,  subject  to  conditions. 
Article  6  of  the  Regulation  introduces  an  optional  provision  which  allows  Member 
States to identify specific areas where they can  exempt projects  from  environmental 
impact  assessment  and  species  protection  assessments.  While  the  provisions  in  the 
revised  RED  and  Article  6  of  the  Regulation  relate  to  the  identification  of  specific 
areas  for  a  faster  deployment  of  renewables,  the  content  of  those  provisions  differ 
significantly:  

o  One  of  the  main  differences  is  that  the  revised  RED  foresees  a  “screening” 
procedure  which  could  result  in  the  need  to  carry  out  a  dedicated 
environmental  impact  assessment,  while  Article  6  of  the  Regulation  directly 
foresees the application of mitigation or compensation measures.  

o  Under  Article  6  of  the  Regulation,  projects  can  also  be  exempted  from  the 
species  protection  assessments  under  Article  12(1)  of  Directive  92/43/EEC 
and  under  Article  5  of  Directive  2009/147/EC.  In  the  revised  RED,  these 
exemptions are only foreseen for grid and storage projects in dedicated areas, 
not for renewable energy projects. 

o  Article 6 of the Regulation does not foresee an exemption from Article 6(3) of 
Directive 92/43/EEC. Such an exemption is possible in the revised RED for all 
projects (for renewable energy installations, grid and storage). 

-  Article  16(8)  clarifies  which  steps  are  not  included  in  the  deadlines  of  the  permit-
granting  process,  i.e.  that  the  steps  do  not  count  as  part  of  the  timelines  set  in  the 
directive.  This  is  similar  to  Article 8 of the Regulation.  The main difference is  that 
Article 16(8) of the revised RED contains an additional point to clarify that the time 
for  any  judicial  appeals  and  remedies,  other  proceedings  before  a  court  or  tribunal, 
and  alternative  dispute  resolution  mechanisms,  including  complaint  procedures  and 
non-judicial  appeals  and  remedies  are  not  included  in  the  duration  of  the  permit-
granting  procedure,  except  if  it  coincides  with  other  administrative  stages  of  the 
permit-granting procedure.  

Several  of  these  permitting-related  rules  from  the  revised  RED  (i.e.  all  permitting  rules 
except  those  related  to  renewables  acceleration  areas)  have  to  be  transposed  by  1  July 
2024, immediately after the expiry of the validity of the Regulation. This is in particular 
the  case  of  Articles  15e  (optional),  16(8),  16c,  16d,  16f.  The  remaining  permitting 
provisions (i.e. those related to renewable acceleration areas) have a transposition date 18 
months after entry into force of the revised RED. Moreover, article 15c, which introduces 

17 

 
 
the obligation to designate renewable acceleration areas, has an implementation deadline 
of 27 months after the entry into force of the Council Regulation.  

Therefore,  some  of  the  measures  introduced  by  the  Regulation  were  included  by  the 
revised  RED.  However,  the  Directive  did  not  mirror  some  of  the  more  exceptional 
measures contained in Regulation (EU) 2022/2577, thus delimiting their exceptional and 
temporary nature.  

Overall, the biggest substantive differences between the provisions included in the revised 
RED and the Council Regulation are those included in Article 3(2) on overriding public 
interest, the maximum deadline for repowering included in Article 5(1) and Article 6 of 
the  Council  Regulation.  From  the  feedback  received  from  Member  States  and 
stakeholders,  these  provisions  appear  to  bring  about  a  substantial  acceleration  to  the 
permitting of renewable energy and related grid projects in those Member States that have 
applied these provisions. It is appropriate to prolong these selected emergency measures 
which  have  the  greatest  potential  for  renewables  acceleration,  are  immediately  and 
directly  applicable  across  the  Union  and  are  different  from  the  ones  included  in  the 
revised RED and can therefore complement it.  However, to ensure consistency with the 
rules laid down in  the revised RED, the short deadline of six  months for permitting  for 
repowering  should,  after  30  June  2024  only,  apply  to  repowering  of  renewable  energy 
projects located in a dedicated renewable area pursuant to Article 6 of this Regulation.  

V. 

Conclusion on prolongation of the measure and recommendation 

In view of the above, the Commission considers that the conditions for a prolongation of 
this Council Regulation are met.  

As  explained  in  section  II,  the  Union’s  security  of  supply  has  substantially  improved 
compared to last winter and prices for gas and electricity have dropped. This results to a 
very  large  extent  from  the  swift  actions  adopted  at  Union  level,  notably  the  emergency 
measures  adopted  on  the  basis  of  Article  122  TFEU,  including  this  Council  Regulation 
and  the  higher  penetration  of  renewables  resulting  from  it.  However,  serious  risks  still 
exist and in such a context of continuous volatility of energy prices and security of supply 
concerns,  significant  additional  efforts  are  still  needed  in  terms  of  renewable  energy 
deployment in order to further stabilise the situation.  

While it is difficult to precisely quantify the impact of this Council Regulation given its 
limited  period  of  application  and  lack  of  official  statistics,  section  III  shows  that  the 
targeted  measures  included  in  this  Council  Regulation  have  positively  contributed  to 
accelerate the pace of deployment of renewable energy sources. They have done so in two 
main  ways:  (i)  by  streamlining  the  procedures  applicable  to  specific  permit-granting 
processes, and (ii) by raising political awareness regarding the importance of accelerating 
permitting for renewables, as confirmed by several Member States and stakeholders.  

The Commission  observes a positive impact  regarding all areas covered  by the Council 
Regulation,  although  sometimes  it  is  difficult  to  attribute  specific  effects  to  the 
Regulation.  Some  measures  of  the  Regulation  (i.e.  Articles  4  and  7)  have  had  a  more 

18 

 
 
limited impact partially because Member States already apply more ambitious permitting 
rules  for  the  installation  of  small  solar  installations  and  heat  pumps,  while  others  (in 
particular  Articles  3  and  6)  have  led  to  significant  concrete  and  tangible  simplification 
effects in the Member States which have applied them.  

Many Member States and  five consulted  stakeholders (ENTSO-E, European Renewable 
Energy  Federation,  Solar  Heat  Europe,  Solar  Power  Europe,  and  Wind  Europe)  have 
voiced  strong  calls  for  a  prolongation  of  the  Regulation  or  specific  articles.  Some  also 
requested the introduction of targeted modifications.  

An important aspect to take into account for the decision on a prolongation of the Council 
Regulation  is  the  fact  that  the  revised  RED  contains  several  measures  to  streamline 
permitting  procedures  which  to  some  extent  overlap  with  those  included  in  the  Council 
Regulation. More specifically, Articles 3(1), 4, 5(2), 5(3) and 5(4) and 7 of the Council 
Regulation  are  almost  identically  replicated  in  Articles  16c,  16d  and  16e  of  the  revised 
RED, with some small modifications, explained in section IV.  Moreover, the upcoming 
end  of  the  mandate  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the  time  usually  required  to  adopt 
legislation under the ordinary legislative procedure resulted in such procedure not being 
an appropriate option to have the temporary measures in place in time.  

As mentioned above, the biggest substantive differences between the provisions included 
in the revised RED and the Council Regulation are those included in Articles 3(2), 5(1) 
and  6  of  the  Council  Regulation.  From  the  feedback  received  from  Member  States  and 
stakeholders,  these  provisions  appear  to  bring  about  an  important  acceleration  to  the 
permitting of renewable energy and related grid projects in those Member States that have 
applied  these  provisions  or  have  a  significant  potential  to  do  so  in  the  near  future.  It  is 
therefore appropriate to prolong these specific provisions in a targeted manner.  In view 
of  the  challenges  raised  by  some  Member  States  regarding  the  practical  application  of 
Article  3,  additional  measures  may  be  justified  to  exploit  the  full  benefits  of  this 
prolonged provision.  

The prolongation of Articles 3 (2), 5(1) and 6 of the Council Regulation would require the 
prolongation of  Article  1, which defines its subject  matter  and scope of  the Regulation, 
and  Article  2(1),  which  defines  ‘permit-granting  process’,  a  term  that  is  used  in  Article 
3(2). 

The Commission therefore propose a targeted prolongation of Articles 1, 2(1), 3(2), 5(1) 
and  6  of  the  Council  Regulation,  including  targeted  modifications  to  these  provisions 
where appropriate.  

19