The EU legislator is entitled to regulate where an EU treaty authorizes it. The article 194 of TFEU establishes a specific procedure to regulate the decision-making process in the energy area. That procedure is distinct from a more general procedure for decision-making in the environmental area set out in article 192. The resulting distinction has a historical explanation. At the very beginning, the Member States wished to keep their sovereignty in the field of energy. That is why the EC treaty did not contain initially any specific agreement concerning the energy sector. When the Treaty of Lisbon was concluded, it became necessary to give a legal basis to the EU legislator so he could regulate the environmental protection specific to the energy sector. Thus, article 194 was created in a new title called “Title on Energy”.

How may the article 194 of the TFEU interfere with the article 192? First, in environmental area (article 192) and in energy sector (article 194), the competences are shared between the Member States and the EU in accordance with article 4 TFEU. Article 192 has a broader scope of operation than article 194. The areas of competence for those articles are strictly delimited. Article 192 is used in order to fulfil the objectives set out in article 191 such as preserving the quality of the environment or protecting human health.
On the opposite, article 194 provides itself its own aims, which are: ‘ (a) ensure the functioning of the energy market; (b) ensure security of energy supply in the Union; (c) promote energy efficiency and energy saving and the development of new and renewable forms of energy; and (d) promote the interconnection of energy networks.’

From that previous development we can conclude the following: on the one hand, the scope of article 192 is as broad as possible; on the other hand, the scope of article 194 determines as clearly as possible the EU’s competence in the energy sector.

For all decisions taken in order to perform those objectives, as a principle, the ordinary procedure could be used. That ordinary procedure is described in article 289 of TFEU. It consists to “the joint adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of a regulation, directive or decision on a proposal from the Commission”. The decision is taken at the majority qualified. This procedure is also called procedure of codecision.

Both articles 192 and 194 fix exceptions to the ordinary procedure. Indeed, for some fixed areas, the unanimous agreement of the Council is required. The scope of exceptions is broader for article 192 than article 194. In article 194, there is an exception only for decision of fiscal nature, whereas for article 192, the exceptions cover, but not limited to, “measures significantly affecting a Member State's choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply.” That exception illustrates a restriction of article’s 194 scope. Indeed, the requirement of a unanimous agreement for that specific area demonstrates that, besides the creation of article 194, the Member States remain sovereign as regards the ‘choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply’. Such reasoning is also justified by the 2 §2 of article 194, stating that ‘Such measures shall not affect a Member State's right to determine the conditions for exploiting its energy resources, its choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply, without prejudice to Article 192(2)(c).’