Portuguese 
The tariff for Roraima Energia has decreased by an average of 14.67% after the National Electric Energy Agency (Aneel) recalculated the approved rate from January and incorporated advanced resources from the repactuated Use of Public Asset.
The new rates are effective as of September 1, 2026. The distributor serves approximately 213,000 consumer units in the state, including homes, businesses, public services, and productive activities.
The board approved the change through deliberative circuit on the 1st. The recalculation altered the rates established by the Homologatory Resolution 3,565, published on January 20.
The average reduction does not mean every bill will decrease exactly by 14.67%. Consumption classes, voltage level, taxes, tariff flags, and the amount of energy used influence individual costs.
-
Contracts for Four Thermal Power Plants Take Effect in September, Adding 1,712.3 MW Under Capacity Reserve in Rio de Janeiro, Ceará, Paraná, and Mato Grosso do Sul
-
CCEE Corrects 800 m³/s Error in NEWAVE and DECOMP Models, Recalculating Energy Settlement Price from September 2
-
Reservoirs in Brazil’s power system drop 5.7 points in one month, reaching 69.5%, while models indicate 100% chance of El Niño lasting until 2027
-
Manaus I Thermoelectric Plant Starts Two Turbines Early, Injecting 114.8 MW into the Electric System, While the Third Unit of 48.1 MW is Scheduled for December
According to the decision reported by Aneel, the republication occurred because the distributor’s process had already been approved prior to the advance of the resources.
The tariff effect stemmed from Law 15,235/2025, which allowed the use of values from the repactuation of UBP quotas to benefit tariff moderation.
Hydroelectric Resources Impact Tariffs
UBP refers to the payments made by certain hydroelectric plants to the government for the right to exploit the generation potential of rivers. The repactuation changed the flow of these funds.
Part of the funds was directed to the Energy Development Account, used for policies in the electricity sector. The advance allowed reductions in charges for distributors covered by this mechanism.
In Roraima’s case, the tariff process had already concluded without considering the new funds. Hence, the agency needed to analyze an administrative appeal and publish recalculated rates.
The regulatory logic is to separate the costs recognized by the distributor from the sources that help pay for them. When sectoral resources enter, the portion required directly from the consumer may decrease.
This does not represent an automatic cut in the operational expenses of the company. The effect comes from an additional financial source incorporated into the regulatory account defined by Aneel.
In August, the agency approved a preliminary distribution of resources for various concessionaires. For Roraima Energia, the amount indicated for transfer at that stage was R$ 123.47 million.
The 14.67% reduction was the final average result announced for the concession area. The percentage will appear in the unit tariffs applied from the effective date.
On the bill, consumers compare prices and quantities. Even with a lower tariff, increased usage may keep or raise the total for the month, especially during periods of intense heat.
Taxes, public lighting, and tariff flags may also appear separately. Thus, checking the line for kilowatt-hour consumption helps clarify the difference between tariff reduction and final amount.
Those receiving a bill that spans the rate change date may find a proportional calculation. The reading takes into account days or consumption within each tariff period, according to the unit’s cycle.
Reduction Affects 213,000 Consumer Units
The universe of 213,000 units does not equate to the number of residents. Each meter represents a service point, which can be a home, store, industry, or public facility.
For a family, the decrease frees up part of the budget if consumption remains stable. For small businesses, cheaper energy reduces a recurring expense, though the impact varies based on the activity.
Companies that use refrigeration, motors, or climate control feel the price change more acutely. Still, the exact effect depends on the tariff group and the structure applied to each client.
The National Electric Energy Agency regulates the tariffs, but the distributor handles billing and customer service. Questions about readings or applications should first be directed to the company, with a protocol kept by the consumer.
If the response does not resolve the issue, the agency’s channels and consumer protection forms subsequent steps. Bills, dates, and consumption history help demonstrate the discrepancy.
We need to avoid a hasty comparison between two bills from different months. Temperature, number of billed days, and changes in habits can obscure the effect of the new tariff.
A simple check compares the unit price and the recorded consumption. This makes it easier to separate what resulted from the regulatory decision from what stemmed from energy use.
The retroactive validity to the first day of September provides a clear benchmark. Bills issued after the change should reflect the new conditions for the corresponding period.
Additionally, consumers on social tariffs need to pay attention to the specific composition of the benefit. The social discount and the recalculation by the utility follow their own rules, although both can reduce the energy portion of the bill.
High-tension clients have structures with demand and consumption different from residential accounts. For this reason, an average for the concession area does not substitute for the table published for each modality.
The homologating resolution is the reference for checking these values. It details tariffs by group and allows companies to project expenses based on their contract and usage profile.
I see comparing the unit tariff as the safest route. The total bill mixes too many variables to prove, alone, whether the 14.67% was applied correctly.
The average percentage of 14.67% is significant for a basic service, but it does not end the discussion about quality. Continuity, response time, and network expansion remain under scrutiny.
Lower prices and reliable service are distinct goals, even though the consumer perceives both in their relationship with the utility. The decision this week directly affects the former.
The next tangible signal will be in the bills. They will show how the recalculation has been distributed among classes and how the reduction coexists with consumption, taxes, and that month’s flag.
For consumers in Roraima, keeping the previous bill and comparing equivalent items will be the most objective way to measure the real effect of the measure.
Has the average reduction of 14.67% already appeared on your electricity bill? Share in the comments.
