Regulator questions Enel’s request for technical review

Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency (ANEEL) Director-General Sandoval Feitosa called Enel São Paulo’s request for a technical review “unusual” in a proceeding that could lead to a recommendation to terminate the power utility’s concession. The request will be considered by the agency’s board at its next public meeting on Tuesday (25), before a decision is made on the merits of the case.

“It is a different request. It is unusual. Aneel has been around for 30 years and has never had its impartiality, technical expertise or independence questioned. In Brazil, the leading experts in auditing and overseeing public electricity distribution, transmission and generation services are at ANEEL. Our staff has public legitimacy, their findings carry official standing, and they are state employees. We are not here to serve any specific interest. My assessment will be based on this,” Feitosa said.

He made the remarks in an interview with reporters Thursday (20), after attending the event “Super El Niño and the resilience of Brazil’s power sector,” hosted by ANEEL in Brasília.

Enel submitted the request for a technical review in May, together with its defense in the concession termination proceeding. The utility asked the regulator to dismiss the case that could lead to forfeiture of its concession and requested an independent technical review to reassess the criteria used by the agency in evaluating the December 2025 extreme-weather event.

Independent review

In practice, Enel is seeking the production of technical evidence through an independent expert supported by a qualified multidisciplinary team, to be jointly selected with the agency. According to Enel, the move is intended to ensure that the key technical issues underlying the decision are examined by an expert independent of both the utility and the regulator, allowing the assumptions used in the proceeding to be properly assessed.

ANEEL’s technical staff and its federal legal counsel have stated that there is no need for the review. Feitosa stressed that their position was not to reject the request, but rather to conclude that an independent review was unnecessary, with the final decision resting with the agency’s board. In his view, the legal counsel’s opinion reaffirms the agency’s authority to conduct the assessment.

“The federal legal counsel and the technical staff did not reject it; they issued an opinion, which is their role, saying that it is not necessary. And why is it not necessary? ANEEL is a state institution responsible for regulating and overseeing [the sector],” Feitosa said.

“ANEEL is independent, its findings carry official standing, and it is Brazil’s regulatory, supervisory, and tariff-setting authority. There is no other authority in Brazil with this mandate; only ANEEL does. So it is the one that has to speak,” the regulator’s director-general said.

The proceeding that could lead to a recommendation to terminate the concession was opened in April after the agency’s board found that Enel São Paulo had committed failures and violations in providing services during extreme-weather events in recent years. The regulator will decide whether to recommend the penalty, but the final decision on any concession termination will rest with the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME).

Enel’s response

In a statement, Enel Distribuição São Paulo said its request for a technical review does not question ANEEL’s technical expertise or independence.

“The company believes that an independent, multidisciplinary technical assessment is essential to clarify disagreements over the evaluation of distributing companies’ performance during extreme weather events and the methodologies used to restore service, expanding the information available to the agency’s board in making its decision.”

Enel said it will continue cooperating with the regulator and presenting evidence of improvements in its operations and service quality.