Elektroprivreda Crne Gore (EPCG) does not want, nor does it have the legal possibility, to transfer the costs incurred by producers, which relate to the use of the transmission system, to the burden of customers, the representatives of the electric power company announced.
They consider unsubstantiated the assessment of the Chairman of the Board of the Regulatory Energy Agency (RAE), Branislav Prelević, that electricity producers are obliged to pay for the use of the transmission system and that EPCG should pay these costs, and not consumers.
"It is the RAE that prescribes the items on the EPCG account that consumers are obliged to pay. In addition to the others, there are also items - engagement of transmission capacity and losses in the transmission system," stated the representatives of the power company.
They added that for the use of network services, EPCG applies regulated prices to customers, approved by RAE.
EPCG stated that based on permanent methodologies, RAE approves the regulatory income of the transmission operator, the Montenegrin Electric Transmission System (CGES), i.e. prescribes the way in which it will be compensated. For that, as they explained, there are two possibilities - completely from customers or partly from customers and partly from producers.
"Based on the decision of the RAE, until the end of 2013, the entire cost was borne by electricity buyers. From January 1 last year, the regulator decided that part of the cost should be reimbursed by the customers, and part by EPCG. There would be nothing disputed if the regulator for the part reimbursed by producers since the beginning of last year, reduced the part reimbursed by consumers," the announcement states.
EPCG claims that RAE, by introducing the fee paid by domestic producers and keeping the already determined one paid by customers in the first seven months of last year, has put CGES in a privileged position by practically charging the same service twice.
"RAE should have relieved the customers of the amount of compensation that domestic producers are obliged to pay", said EPCG and added that the decision is made halfway through the regulatory period, which is contrary to the basic principles of the methodology that regulates the procedure for determining the prices of network services.
They announced that the introduction of payment of compensation for domestic producers connected to the transmission system, halfway through the duration of the regulatory period, cannot be considered a specific element of regulatory income that can be changed in accordance with the provisions of the methodology. It is evident, as they said, that the adoption of amendments to the methodology violated its basic principle.
"Bringing to the public a topic that is still the subject of court proceedings before the Constitutional and Administrative Court, in this way can allude to some kind of pressure on the competent authorities," said EPCG representatives.
They stated that by determining that fee, RAE leaves the jurisdiction defined by law, because the Law on Energy defines that regulated prices for the use of transmission and distribution systems of electricity and gas are determined by the operator of the transmission and distribution system based on methodologies.
The law establishes that RAE only approves, but does not determine the prices for the use of the transmission and distribution system.
"That was the key reason why the Administrative Court annulled the said decision of the RAE in July, so that it could not have any legal effect, and therefore no obligation to pay CGES invoices from EPCG," said representatives of the power company.
They reminded that the RAE, in the repeated procedure, made a new decision at the beginning of August, where it did not take into account all the facts stated in the judgment of the Administrative Court. RAE, in addition, gave the decision retroactive effect, to be applied from January 1 last year.
"That decision is the subject of a lawsuit at the Administrative and Constitutional Courts, which is why the issued CGES invoices were not paid until the final verdicts were passed," EPCG announced.
They said, considering the current opening of the market, that the introduction of the practice that the producer pays for the use of the transmission network is not unique in the region, which is why they believe that it is evident that in this way the competitive ability of EPCG, as a producer on the domestic and regional market, is weakened, especially because that levy is not charged to electricity traders.
"EPCG is only an entity that invoices what RAE determines," concluded the representatives of the power company.
Bonus video:
