Federal deputy Lafayette de Andrada (Republicanos/MG), together with federal deputy José Nelto (PP/GO), filed in the Chamber of Deputies PDL 59/2023 (Legislative Decree Project 59/2023) which aims to suspend, that is, suspend certain parts of Normative Resolution 1.000/2021 of the ANEEL, which was recently amended by Resolution 1.059/2023. THE
The parliamentarian, who is the author of Law 14.300/2022, requests that articles dealing with B Optante, the cost of availability and the deadline for pending payments of distributors be ceased to be in force.
In the justification, Lafayette highlights that the ANEEL brought negative innovations with Resolution 1.059/2023. Among them, the parliamentarian highlights the one that deals with new rules for consumers who were already connected (with a signed contract) in the B Optante regime, requirements that were not mentioned in Law 14.300/2022.
“In effect, the impositions now present in Resolution 1.059 amount to a flagrant attack on perfect legal acts and the acquired rights of thousands of consumers, insofar as they entered into legal transactions under the protection of a certain standardization, but now find themselves compelled to a new compulsory and surprising regime, which puts them in an absolute situation of financial discredit”, says Lafayette.
“This PDL is necessary because ANEEL when regulating Law 14.300/22, through Resolution 1059/23, in some provisions it clearly exceeded its jurisdiction as a Regulatory Agency. It is clear that some provisions impose measures that the aforementioned law does not provide for, and others even distort the legal command”, adds the deputy.
“When this occurs, the Constitution provides that the National Congress must resume its role, being responsible for suspending such illegal provisions of the Normative Resolution of the Regulatory Agency, through a Legislative Decree”, he adds.
See below which items the deputy asks for their effects to be suspended.
- art. 71, items I and II;
- art. 292, § 3, item III;
- art. 655-G, § 4;
- art. 655-I, §§ 1st, 2nd and 3rd;
- art. 655-O, §5º;
- art. 671-A.
Click here to consult Resolution 1.000/2021 to check the items that the federal deputy requests to be suspended.
And to access PDL 59/2023 click here.
For Hewerton Martins, President of Movimento Solar Livre, the decree proposed by deputies Lafayette de Andrada (MG) and José Nelto (GO), corrects and brings back legal certainty caused by Aneel in regulation 1059 on 07/02/23.
“Thousands of consumers were affected by undue charges and we had the sector that generated the most employment during the pandemic come to a standstill. The energy distributors sent a letter to consumers informing them of undue charges from those who had old systems installed. This insecurity blocked the sector and left more than 500 jobs distributed across all municipalities in Brazil at risk,” said Martins.
“The MSL and regional associations are in Brasília seeking support and collecting signatures for the urgent request for the decree, aiming for the vote as quickly as possible”, he concludes.
Comments (4)
Comments are moderated before publication.Comments should be respectful and contribute to a healthy debate. Offensive comments may be removed. The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author. Canal Solar.
A ANEEL seems to defend the Distributors. What to expect if she (ANEEL) does not make operators comply with what is clearly defined in the law, that is, not charging twice. Here at RGESul, it has been charged without complying with the law for a year now. They claim that it is due to a lack of regulation. But how is that possible if it is clear in the law. And now ANEEL I gave until June to regularize it… and what happens to the liabilities of what was charged…
Ericka Araújo, congratulations on the excellent article about Law 14.300 of the Legal Framework for Photovoltaic Energy. Her report brings hope to a sector that is facing numerous difficulties due to Aneel's misinterpretation of the legislation. Unfortunately, as you mentioned, many companies are laying off employees or closing their doors because of a lack of clarity in the law.
Despite this, I believe that the work of the deputy author of the project is an important step towards resolving the situation. I hope that the law is complied with and that the items highlighted by the deputy are suspended, so that companies can resume their activities in a safe and consistent manner.
I agree with you that solar energy is a renewable and eternal source, and that the country needs to increasingly encourage the adoption of clean and sustainable technologies. Unfortunately, as a Brazilian citizen, I see that the current political and economic scenario is challenging and many national and multinational companies are facing difficulties and uncertainties.
But, it is important to continue believing and working for a better future. Thank you for your work and for bringing light to this important topic. I look forward to your next reports.
Sincerely.
Fabiano Mucciaccia
A total disrespect for the Brazilian citizen. What is the point of this rule going back in time, harming those who have already invested in the energy market? We need to mobilize the sector because this will certainly be the end of all
Good morning... this is all about legal security... from the beginning I was against it... and I still am because it has nothing to do with legal security... but blz... I would like to ask the channel to comment on this impasse...