ACER's Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on REMIT transaction reporting


Question 3.1.43


Reference to documents: TRUM V2 page 18 and Annex II p. 183/184
A colleague reported back that of their PPA providers we are the only one who think there is a monthly reporting requirement. (Executions under a non-standard frame contract reporting according to the billing cycle.)

Another market participant has legal advice and has also received guidance from ACER that it is a one off reporting requirement. Just to report the contract. Furthermore, they got informed that the monthly reporting would kill the ARIS system.

In this context, we have the question if this information is correct? Do we only need to report the frame contract in the non-standard contract and do not need to report the
executions (actual volumes) each month (billing cycle)? The same then would apply to all other metered business.



It is our understanding that a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) is a bilateral agreement with defined Pricing, Delivery point and Billing and Payments conditions. Furthermore, it is our understanding that a contract under a PPA is not traded at an organised market place. The contract will be reported under Table 2 and, following the billing, the executions specifying an outright volume and price will be reported no later than 30 days after the invoicing date, using Table 1 of the Annex to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1348/2014.




ACER's Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on REMIT transaction reporting

Question 3.1.53 (published on 30 April 2021)

We are enabling a corporate PPA between a consumer and a generator. The consumer does not have an individual consumption unit >600GWh but the applicable generators capacity does exceed 10MW.
We are not contracting direct with the generator but are registering the export meters to our supply.
We will be the registered supplier of the consumer. In terms of cashflow we will be paying the consumer who will in turn pay the generator for the generation.
What, in your opinion, would be the best way to report this?

We think it could be either of the following:
1. We report transaction(s) with the consumer with the generator as beneficiary
2. Consumer reports transaction with Generator only If option 1 is applicable, and we report both sides of the transaction(s) through our designated RRM, would this mean that all 3 entities have met their reporting requirements or would the generator and consumer still need to submit their own reports?

If it turns out option 2 is the recommended approach, is it possible for us, as a 3rd party, to submit reports on behalf of both the generator and the consumer?


Based on your description we understand that there are two contracts concluded in your example:

1. a power purchase agreement concluded between the Consumer and MP A to purchase renewable energy from the generator

2. a supply contract concluded between the Consumer and the Generator MP A and the generator have no contractual relationship.

According to Article 3(1)(a)(vii) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 1348/2014, contracts for the supply of electricity or natural gas to a single consumption unit with a technical capability to consume 600 GWh/year or more are reportable to the Agency.

Based on your description we understand the technical capability of the Consumer to consume (being involved in the above-mentioned two contracts) is less than 600 GWh/year, which means that the contracts are not reportable under REMIT.

Please be aware that this conclusion applies only if the Consumer uses the purchased energy solely for own consumption and not for resale.

For further information related to the application of Article 3(1)(a)(vii), please refer to Questions III.3.18, III.3.20, III.3.22, III.3.33, III.3.42, and II.4.44 in the Q&A document available on the REMIT Portal.




IMG 0744   Documentation






ACER's Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on REMIT transaction reportingQuestions 3.1.43, 3.1.53





clip2   Links






Power Purchase Agreement (PPA)