FlexSource - CCR Hansa RCCS Methodology and Ei Approval (2024)

Source - CCR Hansa RCCS Methodology and Ei Approval (2024)


Reference: Two linked documents grouped together:

  1. CCR Hansa TSOs’ Common Redispatching and Countertrading Cost Sharing Methodology (RCCS Methodology) — Art. 74 CACM Regulation (EU) 2015/1222; dated 20 January 2024
  2. Ei Decision 2024-102967, 2024-11-29 — Ei’s approval of the amendment to the methodology; decision-maker: Caroline Törnqvist (Avdelningschef); analysts: Tobias Johansson, Fredrik Prinz Blix

Raw files: Raw/CACM-Artikel-74-Hansa-extracted.txt (9 pp); Raw/Eis beslut Prövning av förslag till ändring av metod för att dela kostnader för omdirigering och motköp för kapacitetsberäkningsregion Hansa-extracted.txt (8 pp)

Summary

The RCCS Methodology defines how costs for redispatching (RD) and countertrading (CT) of cross-border relevance are shared between TSOs in Capacity Calculation Region (CCR) Hansa. Required under CACM Regulation Art. 74. Developed jointly by all CCR Hansa TSOs; each national NRA must approve amendments.

Amendment history: original approved February 2019; amended March 2021, October 2022, and this version November 2024.

What the 2024 amendment adds: NorNed (NO2–NL) and NordLink (NO2–DE/LU) were added to CCR Hansa by ACER Decision 08/2023 (31 March 2023) and were missing from the cost-sharing methodology. The amendment adds them at 50%/50% (Statnett/TenneT). Also renames “Regional Security Coordinator” → “Regional Coordination Centre” throughout. No other material changes.

CCR Hansa — bidding zone borders in scope

Since ACER Decision 08/2023 (March 2023), CCR Hansa covers eight bidding-zone borders:

BorderInterconnectorTSOsSharing key
DK2–DE/LUKontekEnerginet, 50Hertz, Vattenfall ABSouthbound 585 MW: 190/195/200; Northbound 600 MW: 1/3 each
Krieger’s Flak CGSEnerginet, 50Hertz50%/50% (wind forecast error: responsible party pays)
DK1–DE/LUEnerginet, TenneT TSO GmbH50% / 50%
SE4–PLSwePol LinkSvenska Kraftnät, PSE S.A.50% / 50%
DK1–NLCOBRAcableEnerginet, TenneT TSO B.V.50% / 50%
SE4–DE/LUBaltic CableBaltic Cable AB100%
NO2–NLNorNedStatnett, TenneT TSO B.V.50% / 50%
NO2–DE/LUNordLinkStatnett, TenneT TSO GmbH50% / 50%

Cost-sharing principles

Three situations, three different rules:

1. HVDC technical limits, fault/failure, or KF wind forecast error → costs split between owners of the relevant interconnector per Annex 1 sharing key above.

2. Operational security analysis identifies congestion (normal case) → costs covered by the TSO in whose control area the physical congestion took place. This is the most common situation. It creates a direct financial incentive for TSOs to manage congestion in their own control area — letting it develop becomes costly.

3. Cross-CCR requests → same principle: TSO in whose control area the congestion took place.

The Baltic Cable 100% rule

The SE4–DE/LU sharing key assigns 100% of costs to Baltic Cable AB. Every other CCR Hansa interconnector uses 50%/50% or thirds. This means:

  • When redispatching or countertrading is needed to relieve congestion on the SE4–Germany link, Baltic Cable AB bears the full cost
  • No sharing with Svenska kraftnät or German TSOs for this link’s congestion costs
  • The rationale is not explained in the methodology text; likely reflects the unique private ownership structure of Baltic Cable AB (the cable is privately owned, unlike most public TSO-operated interconnectors)

Relevance to the wiki

Wiki pageConnection
Baltic Cable100% cost rule for SE4–DE/LU redispatching/countertrading costs
Congestion ManagementCross-border cost-sharing framework; “physical congestion location” principle creates incentive for TSOs to manage domestic congestion
Flow-Based Capacity CalculationRCCS Methodology is the cost-sharing complement to the flow-based capacity calculation methodology for CCR Hansa
Svenska kraftnätProposed the amendment; operates SwePol Link (SE4–PL) at 50%/50% cost sharing with PSE
ACERACER Decision 08/2023 expanded CCR Hansa to include Norwegian interconnectors
Source - CACM Regulation (EU) 2015-1222Legal basis (Art. 74 CACM Regulation); this methodology is a derived instrument under that regulation