A utility technician walks toward a fenced grid connection substation with grey switchgear, with wind turbines and a solar array behind on an overcast day

Grid Package 2026: Who May Connect at the Bottleneck Before the Grid Is Built

Germany's grid connection has become the bottleneck of the energy transition. The grid package and EEG reform want renewables and storage to connect at a congested point faster, in exchange for accepting temporary curtailment.

The grid package (Netzpaket) is a BMWE draft bill of 30 January 2026 that aims to speed up the grid connection procedure and synchronise grid and renewables expansion. As of June 2026 it has not yet passed a cabinet decision; the public hearing is scheduled for 24 June 2026 and the bill is still under negotiation, mostly over the contested redispatch proviso. In parallel, the EEG reform would end the fixed feed-in tariff for new solar. On 21 April 2026, EWE and EnBW presented flexible connection agreements (FCA) as a counter-proposal. This article explains the legislative angle: who may connect at the bottleneck, on what terms, and what grid operators, municipal utilities and developers should prepare now.

Summary

The grid package is a BMWE draft bill of 30 January 2026 that aims to speed up the German grid connection (Netzanschluss) procedure and synchronise grid and renewables expansion. As of 12 June 2026 it has not yet passed a cabinet decision; the public hearing is scheduled for 24 June 2026 and the bill is still under government negotiation, mostly over the redispatch proviso. The connection backlog is real: at the end of 2024 the transmission grid operators held around 650 connection requests for large battery storage with a combined capacity of roughly 226 gigawatts. The package replaces pure first-come-first-served with prioritised connections, introduces digital connection portals from 1 January 2028 for capacity information from 135 kilowatts, and adds the contested redispatch proviso (Redispatch-Vorbehalt), which would let grid operators designate grid areas as capacity-limited above a 3 percent curtailment threshold, where newly connected plants waive compensation. On 21 April 2026, EWE and EnBW presented flexible connection agreements (FCA) as a counter-proposal: a connection at the bottleneck without a waiting time in exchange for at most 200 curtailment full-load hours per year, a five-year term and six-monthly transparency, with the connection priority for renewables kept. Both models accept temporary curtailment as the price for a faster connection, and both are contested. Regardless of which prevails, the shared capability is making bottlenecks and remaining capacity transparent, data-based and contract-ready.

Why the connection right is being reformed at all

The German grid connection has become the bottleneck of the energy transition: more renewables and storage want to connect than the grid expansion can absorb in any foreseeable time. For large battery storage alone, connection requests of around 226 gigawatts were on file at the end of 2024, a multiple of the capacity installed today. The grid package (BMWE draft bill of 30 January 2026) therefore aims to speed up the connection procedure and synchronise grid and renewables expansion, rather than leaving plants to wait years for the full grid build-out.

226 GW
storage connection requests
around 650 requests at end of 2024
30 Jan 2026
grid package draft bill
BMWE referral draft (Referentenentwurf)
24 Jun 2026
public hearing scheduled
no cabinet decision as of 12 June
3 %
proviso curtailment threshold
exceeded in the previous year
200 h
FCA curtailment cap
full-load hours per year, EWE and EnBW
1 Jan 2028
digital connection portals
mandatory for capacity info from 135 kW
Two utility workers in hi-vis vests stand by a fenced grid connection substation with grey switchgear, wind turbines and a solar row behind on a grey day
The connection point as the bottleneck: renewables and storage queue at the substation while the grid expansion that would carry them at full power is still years away.

The guiding idea is simple: connect faster by not guaranteeing every plant the full power at every moment, but accepting temporary curtailment instead. The EEG reform runs in parallel and points in the same direction, ending the fixed feed-in tariff for new solar and replacing it with direct marketing and contracts for difference. The legislative question this article follows is not how curtailment works, but under which legal terms renewables and storage may connect at all before the grid is finished.

What the grid package actually changes

The grid package reaches deep into the connection procedure and replaces long-settled principles. Instead of pure first-come-first-served, grid operators (Netzbetreiber) would be allowed to prioritise connection requests by legally defined criteria, backed by a maturity assessment from the transmission grid operators. On top of this come transparency and digitalisation obligations and the option to levy construction cost subsidies on renewable plants too, which was largely excluded before.

A technician kneels to check bundled cabling at an open grey medium-voltage cabinet while a colleague holds a printed connection schedule in a grid station yard
Priority over the queue: the package lets grid operators move more mature projects forward and hold back immature requests, supported by a maturity assessment of the transmission operators.
What the package introduces
Prioritisation instead of first-come-first-served, via a maturity assessment
Digital connection portals from 1 January 2028, capacity info from 135 kW
Status deadlines, with a first response within three months
What stays open or contested
The redispatch proviso, the bill's most disputed element
Construction cost subsidies now possible for renewable plants too
No cabinet decision yet; hearing on 24 June 2026

The package would let grid operators bring forward more mature projects and hold back immature requests, replacing the windhund (first-come-first-served) principle with prioritised connections. It is important to keep the status clear: as of June 2026 this is a draft bill, not enacted law, and the most contested piece, the redispatch proviso, is exactly what the government is still negotiating.

The redispatch proviso: faster connection in exchange for waiving compensation

The most contested element is the redispatch proviso (Redispatch-Vorbehalt). It would let grid operators designate grid areas as capacity-limited when curtailment exceeded 3 percent in the previous year, and newly connected plants would receive a connection there only if they waive compensation for Redispatch 2.0 curtailment. The redispatch mechanism itself is not the subject of this article; how distributed flexibility is dispatched is explained in our Redispatch 3.0 congestion management analysis .

Vertical flow diagram of a flexible grid connection at the bottleneck, from a connection request through a grid capacity check to a flexible connection, fast feed-in and later grid expansion
The flexible-connection path: from a connection request through the grid capacity check to a flexible connection with a curtailment proviso, fast feed-in at the bottleneck, and a later grid expansion that lifts the proviso.
Key point

The trigger is a blanket 3 percent curtailment threshold based on the previous calendar year. In capacity-limited areas the compensation for curtailed feed-in falls away for new plants. Fraunhofer IEE (Professor Martin Braun) does not criticise the concept but its design: the threshold, as the sole criterion and built on a single prior year, is too coarse and creates a revenue risk that is hard to calculate. The institute calls for forward-looking grid simulations and regional capacity transparency instead.

The proviso accepts temporary curtailment as the price for a faster connection, which is the same trade-off the FCA model makes. The difference lies in how the trade-off is defined: a blanket area designation from backward-looking statistics on the one side, a contractually capped number of hours on the other. That distinction is the heart of the debate that follows.

The FCA model from EWE and EnBW as a counter-proposal

EWE and EnBW presented flexible connection agreements (FCA) on 21 April 2026 as an alternative to the blanket redispatch proviso. The core is a connection at the local bottleneck without a waiting time, in exchange for a contractually limited and transparently defined curtailment risk rather than a sweeping area designation. The connection priority for renewables is explicitly kept.

Flexible connection agreement (FCA) is a contract that connects a renewable plant or storage at a congested grid point without waiting for the full grid expansion, in exchange for a capped and transparent curtailment risk of at most 200 full-load hours per year over a five-year term, with the connection priority for renewables preserved.
What the FCA model sets
At most 200 full-load hours per year of uncompensated curtailment
Around 8 to 12 percent of a wind turbine's typical annual hours
Hours with negative exchange prices do not count
How the contract is framed
Five-year term with automatic renewal
Six-monthly transparency on where capacity is limited
Three options at the bottleneck: wait, relocate, or connect via FCA

The 200-hour cap corresponds to roughly 8 to 12 percent of the typical annual operating hours of a German wind turbine, and hours with negative exchange prices are not counted toward it. Instead of a flat area designation from last year's statistics, grid operators would have to make capacity limits transparent every six months. A plant operator facing a bottleneck then has three options: wait for the grid expansion, relocate the site, or connect immediately under an FCA.

Redispatch proviso versus FCA: the lines of the debate

Both models accept temporary curtailment as the price for a faster connection, but they differ in transparency, predictability and fairness. The proviso works with a blanket area designation and backward-looking statistics; the FCA model works with a contractually capped number of hours and forward-looking transparency. Associations and researchers position themselves clearly, and the FCA model is not uncontested either.

Redispatch proviso (the draft bill)
Blanket area designation above a 3 percent threshold
Backward-looking statistic from a single prior year
BDEW and BEE warn of hard-to-calculate investment risk
FCA model (EWE and EnBW)
Contractually capped hours and six-monthly transparency
Forward-looking signal on where capacity is limited
BEE calls the 200-hour limit not viable, a second proviso by another name

BDEW and BEE criticise the draft bill for hard-to-calculate investment risks, and Fraunhofer IEE calls for forward-looking grid simulations instead of a one-year threshold. The BEE welcomes the FCA standardisation but holds the 200-hour limit to be not viable and sees in it a second redispatch proviso under another name. There are international precedents for flexible connections: the United Kingdom (ENA curtailable connections via DERMS since 2023) and the Netherlands (non-firm grid connections) already use them to stretch scarce capacity.

What grid operators, municipal utilities and developers should prepare now

Regardless of which model prevails, everything comes down to the same capability: making bottlenecks and remaining capacity transparent, data-based and contract-ready. Whoever builds capacity transparency, digital connection portals and a flexible contract logic early can connect without a break after the law passes, rather than retrofitting under time pressure once it does.

  1. Build capacity and bottleneck transparency

    Regional, forward-looking grid data is the shared precondition of both models. Treat capacity transparency as the foundation, not as a reporting afterthought, so connection decisions rest on data rather than on last year's statistics.

  2. Prepare the digital connection portals and status processes

    The portal obligation for capacity information from 135 kilowatts applies from 1 January 2028. Build the portals and status deadlines now, with a first response within three months, rather than under time pressure later.

  3. Design a reusable flexible contract logic

    Treat the curtailment proviso, full-load-hour caps and transparency deadlines as a reusable process, not as a one-off case, so that whichever model passes can be applied without rebuilding the workflow.

  4. Watch the regulation actively

    Track the grid package, the EEG reform and the proviso-versus-FCA debate, because a cabinet decision is still outstanding as of June 2026 and the hearing is set for 24 June 2026. The chosen design will define the terms of every future connection.

Key point

The reform will only work on a data and contract foundation that exists before it is needed. Whoever builds capacity transparency, the connection portals and a flexible contract logic now turns a regulatory waiting state into a usable basis. The same controllable assets behind the control box and Section 14a grid control and the bundling logic of virtual power plants point to the same shift toward a flexible, data-coordinated grid.

Further reading

Frequently asked questions

What is the German grid package? +

The grid package (Netzpaket) is a draft bill from the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWE) of 30 January 2026 that aims to speed up the grid connection (Netzanschluss) procedure and synchronise grid and renewables expansion. As of June 2026 it has not yet passed a cabinet decision; the public hearing is scheduled for 24 June 2026 and the bill is still under government negotiation, mostly over the redispatch proviso. It replaces pure first-come-first-served with prioritised connections, introduces digital connection portals and adds a contested redispatch proviso.

What is the redispatch proviso in the grid package? +

The redispatch proviso (Redispatch-Vorbehalt) is the most contested element of the grid package. It would let grid operators (Netzbetreiber) designate grid areas as capacity-limited when curtailment exceeded 3 percent in the previous year. Newly connected renewable plants in those areas would receive a connection only if they waive compensation for Redispatch 2.0 curtailment. The redispatch mechanism itself is not the subject of this reform debate; it is explained separately in our Redispatch 3.0 analysis.

What are flexible connection agreements (FCA)? +

Flexible connection agreements (FCA) are a counter-proposal that EWE and EnBW presented on 21 April 2026 as an alternative to the blanket redispatch proviso. The core idea is a connection at the local bottleneck without a waiting time, in exchange for a contractually capped and transparently defined curtailment risk of at most 200 full-load hours per year. The contract runs for five years with automatic renewal, grid operators must publish capacity limits every six months, and the connection priority for renewables is kept.

How do the redispatch proviso and the FCA model differ? +

Both models accept temporary curtailment as the price for a faster connection, but they differ in transparency, predictability and fairness. The redispatch proviso works with a blanket area designation triggered by a backward-looking 3 percent statistic from a single year. The FCA model works with a contractually capped number of curtailment hours and forward-looking, six-monthly transparency. The FCA model is itself contested: the BEE welcomes the standardisation but considers the 200-hour limit not viable.

What should grid operators, municipal utilities and developers prepare now? +

Regardless of which model prevails, everything comes down to the same capability: making bottlenecks and remaining capacity transparent, data-based and contract-ready. Whoever builds capacity transparency, digital connection portals and a flexible contract logic early can connect without a break after the law passes, rather than retrofitting under time pressure. The digital connection portal obligation applies from 1 January 2028 for capacity information from 135 kilowatts.