The AGU (Attorney General's Office), through the Federal Prosecutor's Office at ANEEL (National Electric Energy Agency), concluded that the so-called "accounting cut" applied to MMGD (micro and mini distributed generation) is not supported by current legislation, while the physical cut of generation has a legal basis in certain circumstances.
Requested by director Agnes da Costa, within the scope of Public Consultation 45/2019, which, in its final phase, deals with the definition of criteria for generation cuts by the ONS (National System Operator), the statement, dated February 13, was eagerly awaited by the market.
The Attorney General's Office is specifically analyzing the controversy surrounding a potential accounting system that would combine different sources of generation, such as hydroelectric, solar, and wind power, for the purpose of economically distributing the effects of the power cut.
According to the document, this system does not constitute a structural risk reallocation mechanism between agents, but rather an ancillary accounting adjustment intended to reflect, ex-post, the economic effects of an operational decision to contain generation.
Accounting cut depends on law
In the conclusions of the report, the AGU This establishes a key distinction. Physical disconnection of the MMGD (Multimedia Distribution Network) can be legally permitted, both in operational security situations and, in theory, in ordinary operation, provided it is technically feasible and justified under the principle of equality in network use.
On the other hand, the so-called "accounting cut," understood as the ex-post reduction or redistribution of credits already established in the SCEE (Electric Energy Compensation System), does not stem from the legal regime of physical cuts and conflicts with Law No. 14.300/2022. The Attorney General's Office states that such a mechanism would require specific legislative authorization, under penalty of legal uncertainty.
The opinion also highlights that Law 14.300 qualifies MMGD as a generating plant connected to a consumer unit and ensures compensation for the energy actually injected, but does not guarantee an unrestricted right to injection immune to operational restrictions.
Regulatory transition maintains uncertainties.
The issue of generation cuts in centralized generation remains under regulatory transition, contingent on both Law No. 15.269/2025 and the conclusion of the 3rd phase of Public Consultation No. 45/2019, which is still pending final deliberation.
Therefore, the reduction in generation in centralized power plants is currently treated as a recognized systemic risk, but with an economic treatment that is still undefined, pending regulatory details in the short term.
The AGU's conclusion, therefore, establishes legal guidelines, meaning that the ONS (National System Operator) can determine physical power cuts within legal and operational limits, but any economic reconfiguration affecting distributed generation credits will depend on legislative change, a signal considered crucial by the electricity market given the increasing judicialization of the issue.
According to the report, it was also suggested that the ANEEL Utilize alternative instruments, such as tariff adjustments and regulation of network access and use.
Furthermore, the opinion classified any discussion about reimbursement to MMGD via ESS (System Service Charges) as premature, warning that such a measure cannot be presumed and would depend on an explicit legal framework.
all the content of Canal Solar is protected by copyright law, and partial or total reproduction of this site in any medium is expressly prohibited. If you are interested in collaborating or reusing part of our material, please contact us by email: redacao@canalsolar.com.br.
