Deregulating Grid Connections: How to Accelerate New Capacity Without Losing Quality Control

Ukraine urgently needs both energy-sector development and smart deregulation. In the current environment—where energy infrastructure is subjected to systematic attacks—these decisions are not only about investment, but also about energy resilience and national security. One of the most important “front lines” for scaling renewables and distributed generation is grid connection. This is often where a narrow “bottleneck corridor” emerges and determines the real speed at which new capacity can be commissioned.

Below is a clear explanation of why connection deregulation has become a top priority, what mechanism can shorten timelines by months, how other jurisdictions handle it, and what Ukraine needs to do so acceleration remains safe, predictable, and system-friendly.

1) Why Grid Connection Has Become Priority #1

Not just “build” — but “switch on”

In recent months, one message has become increasingly evident: having equipment or installations “ready on paper” does not automatically deliver electricity to the system. What matters is physical connection and commissioning.

A public indicator of this trend is the reporting that Ukraine has already connected over 1 GW of cogeneration capacityto the grid, while emphasizing the need for fast connection and commissioning solutions.

Regulation is already moving toward simplification

Ukraine’s wartime framework already contains a principle that can be scaled up: for temporary connections, it is formally established that the customer has the right to build the linear part of the connection independently (including via contractors), and the distribution system operator cannot refuse.

2) The “Customer Builds — Operator Controls” Model: What It Means

The logic is simple: the operator keeps safety and standards control, while execution becomes more flexible and faster.

How it works:

• The system operator (DSO/TSO) defines technical requirements, approves engineering solutions, provides technical supervision/control, accepts the facility, and integrates it into the network.

• The connection customer receives the right to procure the necessary works/equipment/services for connection-related network construction independently (via accredited/approved contractors), instead of waiting for the operator’s internal procurement cycles and execution queues.

• After completion and compliance verification, assets are commissioned and can become part of the operator’s network through an acceptance/adoption mechanism.

Internationally, this approach is often described as contestable works: certain elements can be delivered by independent accredited contractors, while the operator remains the “quality gatekeeper” and network owner.

3) Why This Can Cut Timelines by Months

In many projects, delays occur not at the application stage, but in the area of:

• procurement and tender procedures,

• limited contractor capacity within operators,

• long “turnkey” approval cycles,

• queues for construction and equipment supply when everything runs through one buyer/executor (the operator).

When customers can run construction in parallel with their own contractors, while the operator focuses on requirements, supervision, and acceptance, schedules become more controllable and timelines often shrink by 3–12 months primarily by removing “procedural downtime.”

4) International Practice: How Others Do It

United Kingdom: contestable vs non-contestable as the standard framework

Operators typically split works into:

• contestable (can be delivered by independent accredited providers),

• non-contestable (must remain with the operator).

After completion, network assets go through an adoption/acceptance process.

Ireland: contractors build to operator standards, operator adopts assets

Official guidance reflects a similar approach: independent providers build to technical standards, the operator supervises, and then adopts/accepts the network assets after completion.

Romania: user choice of contractor with operator control preserved

European practice includes models where users can select contractors while operators retain technical requirements, supervision, and acceptance into the network; reforms also aim to reduce queues and increase predictability of grid connections.

5) Risks and Safeguards: What Must Be Addressed in Rules

To ensure deregulation accelerates projects without undermining safety, six areas must be clearly regulated:

1. Standards and safety: requirements for equipment, protection and automation, testing, staff qualifications, and liability for defects.

2. Supervision: the operator’s role in intermediate inspections, control of critical stages, and the right to suspend works in case of non-compliance.

3. Transparent contractor accreditation: open criteria, a registry, non-discriminatory access, and appeal mechanisms.

4. Standard technical solutions: catalogs/standardized designs for typical connection nodes.

5. Asset adoption and documentation: as-built documentation, passports, digital asset records, warranties.

6. Protection of other users: rules preventing deterioration of reliability or power-quality indicators in the network.

6) How to Implement It in Ukraine: A Practical Roadmap

The best approach is phased implementation through pilots and standardization:

Step 1. Pilot projects and standardized document packages
—from technical conditions through acceptance and asset adoption.

Step 2. Contractor accreditation/registry
—clear criteria + quality control.

Step 3. Clear split of works
—what can be “contestable” (delivered by the customer’s contractor) and what must remain with the operator.

Step 4. Align with wartime rules and scale proven elements
—use the already established principle in temporary connections (customer-built linear part) as a foundation for sustainable procedures.

Conclusion

Connection deregulation is about turning grid connection from an “administrative queue” into a controlled engineering process. When customers can deliver connection-related network works through accredited contractors, while operators retain technical requirements, supervision, and acceptance, the country gains what it most needs in wartime conditions: faster commissioning of capacity, more predictable timelines for investors, and preserved safety and quality standards.