New power generation exemption framework creates fresh hurdles for IPPs

28th February 2018 By: Terence Creamer - Creamer Media Editor

New power generation exemption framework creates fresh hurdles for IPPs

Photo by: Duane Daws

A warning has been sounded that recent amendments to the Electricity Regulation Act relating to licence exemptions for generation plants could create further impediments to the deployment of private generation facilities.

Titled ‘Licensing Exemption and Registration Notice’, the amendment was published in the Government Gazette of November 10, 2017, and signed by former Energy Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi-Ngubane, who occupied the position ahead of David Mahlobo, who himself has since been replaced by Jeff Radebe. In fact, the amendment was initiated during Tina Joemat-Pettersson’s stint at Energy Minister.

Specialist energy lawyer Sue Röhrs argues that the amendment reduces the scope of those generation activities that can be exempt from licensing. It also raises new uncertainties, which could delay the implementation of independent power producer (IPP) projects.

A key area of uncertainty relates to the need to register exempt projects with the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (Nersa), she explained to members of the South African Independent Power Producer Association (SAIPPA) in Johannesburg this week.

The amendment exempts several categories of generation activity, including:

 

Registration with Nersa is required for all exempted generation facilities, including those generation facilities exempted from licensing ahead of the change to the legislation, as it is for facilities that declared non-compliance, but have signed an agreement with the regulator to comply within a specified timeframe.

However, in the absence of rules, which are still being finalised by Nersa, Röhrs says it is unclear whether the exemption becomes effective immediately, or only after registration has taken place.

Should registration be treated as an administrative requirement only, exemption would be effective even in the absence of registration with Nersa. However, there is a risk that exemption will only be considered to be effective once registration has taken place.

Röhrs is concerned that Eskom could refuse to sign a CUOSA with an IPP until registration, while municipalities would also hold off on offering their approval until a standardised set of guidelines was in place.

Already the Association of Municipal Electricity Utilities (AMEU) is advising that municipalities should wait for the Nersa rules before making any determination on projects that should be exempted from licensing.

AMEU strategic adviser Vally Padayachee tells Engineering News Online that each municipality, in terms of their Constitutional mandate with regard to electricity service delivery, has the prerogative to implement the amendments as they deem fit.

In the absence of the final implementation rules from Nersa each municipality would, thus, still be empowered to implement the amendments, while being cognizant of the dictates of the law, their internal rules, as well as the specific conditions affecting the municipality. “[Therefore], in the interim IPPs should continue to liaise and consult with the respective municipality.”

However, Padayachee says that the issue has been flagged as a priority both for the South African Local Government Association (Salga) and AMEU, which are also keen to “influence these rules before they are finalised by Nersa”.

The issue will also be discussed as Salga’s upcoming ‘Energy Summit’, which will be held from March 7 to 9 in Sandton.

It is understood that Nersa is indeed preparing the rules and is likely to release these for public comment. However, Engineering News Online was not able to verify this ahead of publication.

Röhrs says that, in a context where Eskom has returned to a power surplus position and the market opportunity for IPPs is limited to agreements with private customers, the exemption amendment is proving to be a serious impediment to the development of new projects.

“We now have a situation where, because of the lack of rules around registration, there is a lacuna. So, a project may be exempt, but if Nersa’s view is that you can’t claim the exemption until registration, then effectively the amendment is not yet applicable. Therefore, IPPs are stuck in a bit of a Catch 22,” Röhrs explained.

She also indicated that there was a growing apprehension among IPPs that the amendment’s primary aim was to protect Eskom, rather than facilitate the introduction of private generators.

SAIPPA chairperson Thomas Garner says that, while he understands the desire to protect Eskom, technology was advancing at a pace where it was becoming increasingly difficult to employ legislation and regulation to protect an inefficient utility.

He argued that seeking to regulate technology disruption after the fact is resulting in further inefficiency, but stressed that SAIPPA stood ready to work with government and the regulator to ensure that solutions could be found.