No connection at this number? - Questions (and answers) about the regulatory treatment of electricity storage facilities

Implementing the regulatory framework for dealing with large-scale battery energy storage systems (BESS) continues to raise many questions in practice. Even with the best will, grid operators cannot resolve the extremely high number of requests for grid connections for BESS projects in the short term to everyone's satisfaction. In addition to the privileged status of BESS projects in rural areas under building law questions about construction subsidies – even after the decision of the Federal Court of Justice – and the basics of the grid connection procedure are most frequently discussed.

In response to these challenges, the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) recently published FAQ on the regulatory treatment of BESS. The German regulator intends to provide  a guide ensuring uniform application practices with addressing questions relating to the grid connection regime and construction subsidies.

Grid connection according to the BNetzA

Due to the dual role of battery storage systems as both consumption and generation facilities, BNetzA considers the “regulation governing the grid connection of facilities for the generation of electrical energy” (KraftNAV) being applicable to the electricity generation side of BESS. Applicability requires BESS falling under the additional applicability requirements of KraftNAV, i.e. a nominal output of at least 100 megawatts and a planned connection to electricity supply grids with a voltage of at least 110 kilovolts. The dual role of BESS according to BNetzA also means that battery storage facilities require sufficient grid connection capacity for both feed-in and feed-out and that separate capacity allocation procedures may have to be carried out under certain circumstances. 

In this context, BNetzA recognises the first-come, first-served principle provided for in KraftNAV exclusively for competition at the respective grid connection point between connection applicants who are subject to the scope of application of the KraftNAV. Other competing grid connection applicants would not be displaced. 

Furthermore, the catalogue addresses rights and obligations of the grid operator specifically dealing with the grid operator's communication obligations and the right to demand security deposits from project developers. In BNetzA's view, such "implementation deposits" (Realisierungskautionen) are permissible in appropriate cases, e.g. in situations of shortage. As a rule, the deposit should be credited towards construction subsidies, connection cost contributions, or refunded upon completion of the project. If the project is not realised, the deposit may be forfeited. BNetzA cites EUR 1,500/MW as a standard for an appropriate deposit amount.

Classification and outlook

The FAQs have already been criticised as insufficient by BESS operators. Too many questions would remain unanswered. Also the FAQ would add no value due to the lack of binding force. In fact, the catalogue does not contain any binding clarifications of the issues discussed, although this has been requested on many occasions.

On the contrary, the uncertainties are unlikely to have diminished, as BNetzA's statements on the applicability of KraftNAV seem to contradict current legislative discussions. In its statement on the draft law amending energy industry law to strengthen consumer protection in the energy sector and to amend other energy law provisions, BT-Drs 21/2076 of 8 October 2025, the Federal Council (Bundesrat) suggests to expressly exclude large BESS from the scope of application of KraftNAV (BT-Drs. 21/2076, p. 12). 

Such amendment would also impact the current applicability of the first-come, first-served principle to large battery storage systems which then would no longer necessarily apply. With its proposal, the Bundesrat aims to enable grid operators to develop a rule-based reservation procedure that departs from the first-come, first-served principle. Instead of the date of receipt of the application, it should be possible to base decisions on the actual progress of the project, thus counteracting strategic or speculative securing of grid connection capacities. Otherwise, planning security for large-scale battery projects would deteriorate significantly (BT-Drs. 21/2076, p. 13). Furthermore, the willingness to conclude flexible grid connection agreements could also be taken into account within the framework of a reservation procedure based on the Energy Industry Act (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz, EnWG), for example (BT-Drs. 21/2076, p. 14). 

It remains to be seen whether the proposed amendments will be adopted and implemented in a timely manner. Regardless of which solution is ultimately pursued, a binding solution is needed offering planning security for all parties involved.

Against this background, it is even less clear to what extent BNetzA will achieve its goal of promoting uniform application practices. In any case, BNetzA's FAQ is to be gradually expanded.