Romania’s energy regulator ANRE has published a third version of proposed rules aimed at making electricity sharing, supply, balancing and billing work in practice. The consultation runs until Oct. 16. The draft is intended to redesign how energy communities operate commercially.
Residual supplier versus single-supplier structures
A central change in the proposed framework is the separation between a residual supplier and a single supplier. Under the residual model, members receive part of their electricity through the energy community and buy only the remaining volume required from the grid from a supplier they choose. The alternative is a single-supplier structure that covers the member’s entire electricity demand.
The draft also allows an energy community to become its own supplier if it obtains the electricity-supply licence required for that role. This would move the Romanian energy-community model beyond shared generation as a mechanism limited to dividing locally produced power. ANRE’s proposal therefore links community participation with retail supply arrangements.
Procurement, balancing and billing roles expand
The proposed structure could create a retail business environment in which community operators, established suppliers and specialist energy-service companies compete over procurement, balancing and billing responsibilities. It also covers how those parties manage relationships with individual members. The draft frames the opportunity as extending beyond allocating rooftop solar among neighbours.
Energy communities that include households, municipal buildings or small businesses will typically not match generation to consumption in every settlement period. Generation can exceed demand at times, while members may require substantial electricity from the wider market at others. Managing that difference creates an ongoing procurement requirement for electricity not produced within the community.
How external supply would be used
Under the residual-supplier approach, the community can retain control of internally produced electricity while an external retailer supplies the gap between member demand and community generation. That structure would allow existing electricity suppliers to participate without taking over the entire community structure. It separates community-managed electricity allocation from externally sourced volumes needed by members.
The single-supplier model combines responsibilities more tightly by allowing one company to manage both community electricity and external procurement. In that setup, shared generation, market purchases, balancing and customer billing are bundled into one product. The draft notes that large retailers could benefit from existing procurement systems, balancing capabilities and billing infrastructure.
Community scale and potential service platforms
An energy community with sufficient scale could obtain a supply licence and operate as its own retail-energy company. In that case, value would extend beyond ownership of renewable generation because the community would also control the customer relationship. The draft identifies potential additional services including demand response, storage optimisation, dynamic tariffs and aggregation.
For communities with several hundred customers and granular consumption data, the draft describes managing electricity as a portfolio. It outlines allocating solar electricity first to participating members, using storage to absorb part of surplus generation, shifting flexible loads toward periods of higher community production, and purchasing only remaining requirements from the market. These functions would depend on access to detailed metering information across customers.
Forecasting needs and distribution-operator IT deadlines
The supplier role under either structure becomes more complex because it must forecast both consumption and community generation. It would also need to manage imbalances and determine how much electricity must be sourced externally. The draft links improved forecasting and optimisation with smaller volumes exposed to potentially expensive market purchases.
Community-management platforms would need to coordinate metering data, allocation algorithms, contracts, settlement and billing across multiple customers. Romania’s distribution operators have a central role because they must determine and validate quantities of shared electricity allocated to individual consumption points. Under the proposed timetable, distribution operators have until Dec. 31, 2026 to implement IT functionality required for shared-energy allocation.
The draft says energy communities cannot operate efficiently if generation and consumption data cannot be allocated accurately across members for each settlement period. It also points to a service chain involving distribution operators, electricity retailers, community managers, software providers, aggregators and balancing-responsible parties . Digital infrastructure is presented as an immediate bottleneck due to the implementation deadline.
Municipal projects and investor revenue streams
The proposed model could affect how municipalities approach local renewable projects developed for schools, public buildings and local residents . Under the draft approach, such projects would not need to be viewed solely as electricity production assets because the community itself could become an energy-services platform managing supply across multiple public and private customers.
The draft also highlights recurring revenue considerations for investors. It states that owning solar panels produces generation income while operating the community relationship can add supply margins, administration fees, optimisation services and potentially flexibility revenues . The rules remain under consultation, with final ANRE requirements potentially changing before adoption.
ANRE’s consultation materials indicate that Romania is moving energy communities away from simple mechanisms for dividing locally generated electricity toward structures enabling participation directly in the competitive retail market . The draft suggests that future competition could extend beyond building community solar toward controlling customer relationships, managing balancing risk and supplying megawatt-hours not produced within communities.
The draft’s commercial structure and implementation timeline are supported by ANRE’s consultation and analysis of phase III changes .
