Source - FNA Bilagor I-V (2025-2026)

Annexes to the Swedish national FNA implementation agreement (Source - FNA Överenskommelse Svenskt genomförande 2026 (2025)). Five documents providing the operational detail for Sweden’s first Flexibility Need Assessment cycle.

Bilaga I — Definition av flexibilitetsbehov

Formal definition

“Med flexibilitetsbehov avses behov av att ändra eller begränsa kunders inmatning och uttag av el.”

(Flexibility need = need to change or limit customers’ electricity injection and withdrawal.)

What is reported

The summated maximum average hourly power [MW] needed to ensure all grid assets stay within the DSO’s operational transfer limits (operationella överföringsgränser), given:

• Base year: 2024
• Target years: 2030 and 2035 (NUP spans 2029–2031 / 2032–2036 may substitute)
• Grid structure = current structure plus investments expected to be in service by target year
• Excluded: connections >50 MW consumption (Svk already has this data in its scenarios)
• N-1 situations: flexibility to handle N-1 events where customers remain energized counts. Events leading to customer disconnection do not count.

Up-regulation vs down-regulation

Down-regulation (nedreglering) — DSO acts to reduce injection or increase withdrawal:

• Activates/limits customer to reduce their injection
• Enables customer to withdraw more than normal
• Activates customer to increase withdrawal

Up-regulation (uppreglering) — DSO acts to increase injection or reduce withdrawal:

• Activates/enables customer to increase injection
• Reduces customer’s allowed withdrawal
• Activates customer to reduce withdrawal

Predefined reasoning categories (for time period selection)

• Down-regulation: Planerat underhåll (planned maintenance), Soligt/Blåsigt/Höga vattenflöden (sunny/windy/high water), Annat skäl
• Up-regulation: Planerat underhåll, helgresdagar vid varmt väder, helgresdagar vid kallt väder, längre kalla perioder, längre varma perioder, Annat skäl

Explicit exclusions from FNA 2026

• Voltage regulation needs (kräver omfattande metod- och processutveckling — deferred)
• SO GL §182 (customers participating in balancing markets and constrained for grid safety reasons) — §182 not yet implemented in Sweden

FNA scope vs DNDP scope — an important distinction

The DNDP flexibility need is a subset of the FNA flexibility need. A DSO that uses only DNDP data for its FNA report is likely underreporting.

Bilaga II — Rapportstruktur

Draft slide template for the FNA 2026 national report. Low text content (slide framework), but establishes key structural points:

• Svk is the Designated Entity for Sweden’s FNA (responsible for compiling and submitting the national report)
• Report structure: Sammanfattning → Definitionslista → Bakgrund → Metod och data → Resultat → Slutsatser
• Method section: follows FNAM indicator by indicator (system needs → network needs → …); documents all Svk-DSO-Ei method choices and deviations from FNAM

Four key questions the Slutsatser (conclusions) must answer:

1. What flexibility need does Sweden have to achieve its renewable electricity production targets for the next 5–10 years?
2. What potential does non-fossil flexibility have to meet needs at transmission and distribution level?
3. What market barriers exist? How can they be counteracted?
4. How has increased digitalization contributed to the transmission and distribution system?

Bilaga III — Tabell 15 (data collection form)

The actual Excel form each DSO fills in. Main content:

8 mandatory rows + optional rows

Each mandatory row covers one combination of: direction (up/down) × target year (2030/2035) × season (winter/summer):

Multiple rows per row number allowed (one per reasoning category if multiple reasons apply to same combination).

Columns per row

• Direction (up/down) — predefined
• Target year (2030/2035) — predefined
• Season (winter/summer) — predefined; optional: specific month
• Reasoning — predefined categories (see Bilaga I)
• Bidding area (SE1–SE4) — predefined
• Regionnät — predefined: Vattenfall Eldistribution, Ellevio, E.ON Energidistribution, Jämtkraft Elnät, Skellefteå Kraft Elnät
• Reporting area (ReID) — predefined: ~175 REL/RER codes identifying individual lokalnät reporting units
• Voltage level (40/130/220 kV) — aggregate to highest
• MW need — integer, mandatory; 0 if no need
• RES curtailment share (MW) — share of downward need attributable to solar/wind/hydro curtailment
• Qualitative reasoning (fritext) — mandatory description of the MW need scenario; replaces MWh for FNA 2026
• Which DNDP is the basis (2026 preferred; 2024 acceptable; other: specify)

Note: MWh not reported in FNA 2026; will be mandatory from FNA 2028.

Bilaga IV — Tidsplan fas 2

Phase 2 timeline for Swedish FNA 2026 (from agreement signing to ACER submission):

As of 2026-04-06, FNA 2026 is between the lokalnät delivery deadline (March 16) and the regionnät-to-Svk delivery deadline (April 7). The data collection phase is complete (or should be); aggregation and analysis by Svk is beginning.

Bilaga V — Utvärdering av hinder för flexibilitet och digitalisering

Legal basis

Art. 19e of the Electricity Market Regulation (EU) 2019/943 (as amended) requires that the national flexibility needs report include:

• An evaluation of market barriers for flexibility, with proposals for remedial measures
• An evaluation of the contribution of digitalization to transmission and distribution systems

Six FNAM barrier categories

These are the categories from the FNAM methodology; Svk surveys against them:

1. Lack of proper legal framework for market access to new entrants and small actors
2. Lack of enablers and incentives to provide flexibility
3. Restrictive requirements to provide balancing services
4. Restrictive requirements to provide congestion management
5. Complex, lengthy, and discriminatory administrative requirements
6. Lack of regulatory incentives to system operators to consider non-wire alternatives ← directly corresponds to the CAPEX bias and Ei‘s TOTEX reform

Survey design

Both DSOs and flexibility providers/aggregators are surveyed. Key questions by category:

Market access / legal barriers: Which laws/rules are most restrictive? (Ellagen, Elmarknadsförordningen, NC DR, national regulations, DSO/Svk/Ei interpretation of rules)

Incentives and enablers: Which markets are important going forward? Which are designed with sufficient incentives to drive investment? What is most important to make flexibility provision more attractive? (clearer rules, revenue regulation, earlier connection, long contracts, investment support)

Balancing services: Prequalification restrictions? Minimum bid size? Aggregation barriers? Digitalization opportunities?

Congestion management (local markets): Do DSOs have local markets? Contract duration, gate closure timing, physical prequalification, response time requirements, endurance requirements, metering, settlement timing; product preferences (energy only / capacity only / combined); contract duration preferences (multi-year / days-weeks / hours-quarters)

Administrative burden: Prequalification processes? Duration (weeks/months/years)?

Non-wire alternative incentives: “Are there sufficient incentives for network companies to consider flexibility solutions as an alternative to building grid?” (Yes/No + free text) — this directly tests whether DSOs perceive the CAPEX bias as a real constraint on their behavior.

Significance

The market barriers survey is Sweden’s first systematic, EU-mandated collection of data on what prevents flexibility markets from working. Results will be compiled by Svk and included in the July 2026 FNA report — creating a public, official record of structural gaps. This could be significant input for future regulation (NC DR implementation, Ei RP5 methodology, elmarknadshubb).