On August 11, 2020, it was sent by ANEEL (National Electric Energy Agency), to CPFL Energia, a letter in response to a query made on the subject of adherence to the compensation system by Group A consumers who opt for Group B billing, in the case of DG (distributed generation). Since then, according to ABGD (Brazilian Association of Distributed Generation), the document has been the subject of several distorted interpretations throughout the sector in Brazil.
In this context, this and other letters issued by ANEEL are being used by several energy distribution concessionaires to generally limit and/or deny access to consumers with DG in their consumer unit, in cases of users served at medium voltage (Group A) and who have chosen to benefit from having their billing through Group B.
However, according to lawyer Frederico Boschin, a specialist in electricity sector regulation, the document deserves disapproval. “CPFL insists on normative or regulatory force – and that there is no such office, let it be said. This situation has become widespread and widely used by other concessionaires to justify failures, demands, delays and all sorts of arbitrary acts within the scope of GD”.
Boschin commented that the situation creates legal and regulatory uncertainty in the already tumultuous sector and heightens the climate between consumers and dealerships, in general. “Since the offices of the ANEEL "They do not have a normative nature and the agency could not regulate such an important matter as this via official letter. In other words, if the understanding is that the rule has flaws, what should be changed is the resolution itself and not the presentation of understandings via official letters or even technical notes", he explained.
“The market needs to have the certainty, or the appropriate regulatory signal, that the agency will be guided in an isonomic and appropriate manner when issuing a resolution on the aforementioned subject”, added the lawyer.
In what cases is the Opting B valid?
Article 100 of RN 414/2010 establishes the technical criteria for a medium voltage accessor (Group A) to opt for the benefit of having their billing done as a Group B accessor.
This is the consumer's prerogative to choose the economic advantage that suits them, as long as the requirements defined in the rule are respected, for example, the sum of the transformers' nominal powers is equal to or less than 112,5 kVA.
"What does that mean? The consumer who accesses a distribution system, when he implements the conditions set out in Article 100, is given the option of being billed in Group B. This is not just a tariff and price issue. The relationship established concerns the very structure of the tariff that he will compose with the distributor, that is, Monômia or Binomial.”, said the specialist.
“In other words, in Group B, to date, the tariff structure is Monômia. So, in practice, this consumer is not required to contract demand (including by applying the provisions of §8 of Article 63, of Normative Resolution No. 414/2010: contracting demand does not apply to group A consumer units that opt to apply group B tariffs)”, he reported.
This directly implies, according to him, the greater profitability and attractiveness of the DG system. “In Group A pricing, the tariff structure is different, with the need to contract demand, that is, for the concessionaire there is an extra remuneration”.
Frederico Boschin explained that the majority of consumers with distributed generation installations then make connections of up to 112,5 kVA and request group B billing, because it is allowed by the REN 414 rule.
“When I am given the option of being billed by Group B, instead of Group A, I become a consumer of Group B, for all intents and purposes, regardless of whether there is (or not) DG in the consumer unit”, he stated.
“If I, within another regulation of the ANEEL, which is REN 414, I can choose to be A or B because I meet the requirements, the concessionaire cannot choose which benefit it will grant me. It cannot simply decide based on, strictly, no regulatory basis to insist that a microgenerator must pay the availability cost and a minigenerator the power demand, because that is not what is stated in the regulation”, pointed out the lawyer.
The expert also adds that the REN 482 rule itself (Normative Resolution 482/2012), for example, does not say that a microgenerator must pay for availability and a minigenerator for demand. “Literally, what it says is that consumers in Group A receive demand and consumers in Group B pay for availability. Therefore, the interpretation made by the concessionaires goes against the very literalness of the rule”.
In fact, according to him, this has generated many other problems, as the technical notes of ANEEL They say that this is not the spirit of the rule. “That matters little. Regardless of what any kind of interpretation given by the alleged spirit of the rule means, its literal meaning must, in absolute terms, prevail, and it points precisely in the other direction,” he emphasized.
“In other words, the consumer's option to be billed in Group B must be respected and fulfilled, and for all intents and purposes it is Group B, considering advantages that specifically relate to being able to do DG up to the limit of 112,5 kVA without paying demand”, he concluded.
Marina Meyer, legal director of ABGD (Brazilian Association of Distributed Generation), also emphasized that a mini-generator that falls within any of the provisions of article 100 cannot be charged for contracted demand and must pay only for the cost of availability
“Those opting for Group A in distributed generation will pay for contracted demand (use of the wire that GD calls MUSd – amount of use of the distribution system) and prosumers opting for Group B contracts pay for the cost of availability”, concluded Marina.
Letter to ANEEL
ABGD sent a letter to ANEEL, signed by Carlos Evangelista, president of ABGD, Tássio Barboza, technical advisor of ABahiaSolar (Bahia Solar Energy Association), Marina Meyer and Frederico Boschin – with the observations cited above – so that the agency reconsiders the official letter regarding the compensation system for Group A consumers who opt for Group B billing. The document is still under analysis.
