Cross-Jurisdiction Balancing Responsibility Coordination

1. Introduction

Cross-jurisdiction balancing responsibility coordination refers to the legal and institutional coordination of electricity balancing responsibilities when electricity systems operate across different jurisdictions.

Electricity must be produced and consumed almost at the same time. If generation and demand do not match, the system frequency can become unstable. System operators therefore use balancing mechanisms to maintain the system in real time.

When electricity flows across borders, balancing becomes more complicated because several jurisdictions may be involved.

For example:

Country A generator → interconnector → Country B consumers

A change in generation in Country A can affect the system in Country B. The law therefore needs clear rules about:

who is responsible for balancing;

who operates the balancing market;

who pays balancing costs;

how cross-border balancing energy is exchanged; and

which regulator supervises the arrangements.

2. Meaning of Electricity Balancing

Balancing means maintaining a real-time relationship between:

Electricity generation + imports

and

Electricity consumption + exports

If demand suddenly increases, the system operator may need additional generation.

If generation suddenly exceeds demand, the operator may need to reduce generation or increase consumption.

A simplified model is:

Generation − Demand = System Balance

The objective is to keep the electricity system within its required operating parameters.

3. Why Cross-Jurisdiction Coordination Is Necessary

Electricity networks do not stop at national borders.

Interconnectors allow electricity to move between jurisdictions.

For example:

France ↔ Great Britain

or

Ireland ↔ Northern Ireland ↔ Great Britain

A balancing action in one jurisdiction can therefore affect another jurisdiction.

Without coordination, there could be:

conflicting dispatch instructions;

double procurement;

inefficient use of balancing resources;

disputes over costs;

inadequate reserve capacity; and

system-security problems.

4. European Legal Framework

The EU has developed a detailed legal framework for cross-border balancing.

A particularly important instrument is Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/2195, known as the Electricity Balancing Guideline (EBGL).

It establishes rules for:

balancing markets;

balancing capacity;

balancing energy;

imbalance settlement;

cross-zonal exchange;

transmission-system operators (TSOs); and

balancing platforms.

The purpose is to integrate balancing markets while maintaining system security.

5. Transmission System Operators

Transmission System Operators are central to balancing coordination.

A TSO is responsible for maintaining the security and stability of the transmission system within its area.

Where several TSOs are interconnected, they must coordinate their actions.

For example:

TSO A

↕ interconnection

TSO B

Each TSO retains responsibility for its own control area, but cross-border rules determine how balancing resources can be shared.

This creates a balance between:

national responsibility

and

regional coordination.

6. Balancing Responsibility

A major legal question is identifying the responsible party.

Responsibility can involve:

the TSO;

balancing responsible parties (BRPs);

generators;

suppliers;

aggregators; and

market participants.

A Balancing Responsible Party is generally responsible for ensuring that its electricity injections and withdrawals are properly balanced under the applicable market rules.

If a market participant deviates from its scheduled position, an imbalance may arise.

The market participant may then have to pay an imbalance settlement price.

7. Imbalance Settlement

Suppose a supplier schedules:

100 MWh

but actual consumption is:

110 MWh

There is a:

10 MWh imbalance

The balancing mechanism must determine:

how the additional electricity is procured;

who supplied it;

what price applies; and

who bears the cost.

Cross-border systems require compatible settlement rules so that these calculations work across jurisdictions.

8. Cross-Border Balancing Platforms

EU electricity balancing rules support common European balancing platforms.

Important platforms include:

PICASSO — automatic frequency restoration reserves;

MARI — manual frequency restoration reserves;

TERRE — replacement reserves; and

IGCC — imbalance netting.

These mechanisms allow TSOs to use balancing resources across borders.

The basic principle is:

Unused balancing resource in Country A

↓

Cross-border exchange

↓

Balancing need in Country B

This can reduce the need for each country to maintain completely separate reserves.

9. Cross-Zonal Capacity

Cross-border balancing requires transmission capacity.

If Country A has balancing energy available but the interconnector is already congested, that energy may not be transferable to Country B.

Therefore:

Balancing energy

Cross-zonal capacity

must be coordinated.

This is why balancing regulation is closely connected with congestion-management rules.

10. Brexit and Great Britain

Brexit significantly changed cross-border electricity-market governance between Great Britain and the EU.

Great Britain is no longer part of the EU's internal electricity market in the same way as before Brexit.

Cross-border electricity trading now operates through arrangements that differ from the EU's internal market coupling framework.

However, electricity interconnection with the EU remains important.

This means that balancing coordination increasingly depends on:

intergovernmental arrangements;

interconnector agreements;

market rules;

technical cooperation; and

regulatory coordination.

11. Northern Ireland and the Single Electricity Market

Northern Ireland has a special position.

Northern Ireland participates in the Single Electricity Market (SEM) with the Republic of Ireland.

The SEM operates on an all-island basis.

This creates an important example of cross-jurisdiction balancing coordination.

The system involves:

Northern Ireland

↕

Republic of Ireland

while Northern Ireland remains constitutionally part of the UK.

Therefore, electricity balancing involves cooperation across a constitutional and international boundary.

12. Relevant Case Law: Germany v Commission

Germany v Commission, Case C-848/19 P

The CJEU considered the legal framework governing cross-border electricity transmission capacity and the relationship between national authorities and EU-level electricity-market rules.

Relevance

The case demonstrates the importance of Union-level rules for cross-border electricity flows.

National authorities cannot necessarily design electricity-market arrangements independently where EU legislation establishes common cross-border requirements.

This principle is relevant to balancing because balancing energy also depends on coordinated cross-border network capacity.

13. Case Law: E.ON Energie v Commission

E.ON Energie AG v Commission, Case C-89/11 P

The CJEU considered issues concerning electricity-market regulation and the legal consequences of regulatory obligations imposed on energy-market participants.

Relevance

The case illustrates the importance of regulatory compliance in technically complex electricity markets.

Balancing arrangements similarly require market participants to comply with detailed regulatory and technical obligations.

14. Case Law: RWE Supply & Trading v ACER

RWE Supply & Trading GmbH v ACER, Case T-95/23

The General Court considered ACER's role concerning the methodology for pricing balancing energy and related temporary price limitations.

Relevance

The case is directly relevant to balancing governance because it demonstrates that balancing-energy pricing methodologies can be subject to EU regulatory and judicial review.

It also illustrates the importance of clearly defined institutional powers in cross-border electricity regulation.

15. Case Law: Uniper Global Commodities v ACER

Uniper Global Commodities SE v ACER, Case T-96/23

The case also concerned ACER's regulatory approach to balancing-energy pricing.

Relevance

It demonstrates how regulatory decisions concerning balancing prices can affect energy-market participants and why legal mechanisms for challenging regulatory decisions matter.

The case also illustrates the relationship between:

ACER

national TSOs

market participants

within European electricity governance.

16. ACER's Role

ACER supports coordination among national energy regulators.

Its role includes:

cross-border regulatory coordination;

monitoring;

dispute-related functions;

methodologies; and

supervision of certain European electricity-market arrangements.

This helps avoid situations where one national regulator adopts a rule that undermines a cross-border electricity mechanism.

17. Imbalance Netting

One important coordination mechanism is imbalance netting.

Suppose:

Country A has +100 MW surplus

while

Country B has −80 MW shortage.

Instead of procuring separate balancing resources, the two systems may offset part of their imbalances.

The result can be:

100 MW surplus − 80 MW shortage = 20 MW remaining surplus

This can reduce balancing procurement and improve system efficiency.

The legal framework must establish:

calculation methods;

priority rules;

settlement procedures;

responsibility;

data exchange; and

cross-border capacity arrangements.

18. Renewable Energy and Balancing

Cross-border balancing is becoming more important because renewable generation is variable.

Wind and solar output can change rapidly.

One country may experience:

High wind generation

while another experiences:

Low renewable output

Cross-border balancing arrangements allow available flexibility to be used more efficiently.

This is particularly important for an integrated European electricity system.

19. Main Legal Challenges

1. Allocation of Responsibility

Which TSO or market participant is responsible?

2. Cost Allocation

Who pays for balancing energy?

3. Cross-Border Capacity

Is sufficient interconnector capacity available?

4. Regulatory Conflicts

National rules may differ.

5. Data Exchange

Real-time balancing requires rapid information sharing.

6. Market Manipulation

Balancing markets must be protected against strategic or abusive behaviour.

7. Brexit

Great Britain's separation from EU market arrangements creates additional legal complexity.

20. Conclusion

Cross-jurisdiction balancing responsibility coordination provides the legal framework for managing electricity imbalances across interconnected jurisdictions.

Its principal elements include:

TSO responsibility;

Balancing Responsible Parties;

imbalance settlement;

balancing-energy markets;

cross-border balancing platforms;

cross-zonal capacity allocation;

imbalance netting;

ACER and regulatory coordination; and

intergovernmental arrangements after Brexit.

The Electricity Balancing Guideline (EU) 2017/2195 is central to the EU framework because it establishes common rules for balancing energy, balancing capacity, imbalance settlement and cross-border exchange.

The cases Germany v Commission, RWE Supply & Trading v ACER, and Uniper Global Commodities v ACER demonstrate the importance of coordinated institutional authority and legally controlled methodologies in cross-border electricity markets.

For PhD-level energy law, the central issue is how jurisdictions can retain responsibility for their own electricity-system security while creating sufficiently integrated balancing arrangements to share flexibility, reduce balancing costs, manage renewable intermittency and maintain reliable cross-border electricity flows.