Newsletter-21

307 ENERGY LAW Conclusion The major concern of the investors is that the Draft Regulation has not been properly structured, and may fail to provide the sustainability of the investments. In such uncertain circumstance, the investments cannot be expected to be intense and long-term. Another expectation of the investors according to the Draft is that the definitions concerning local products, equipment technology criteria in the tender specifications, determination and supervision of local products must be explanatory and clear. When the subject Draft is reviewed within the aspect of com- petitive market conditions, in the event that the tenders are allocated between various several large-scaled companies, it brings the con- cerns of the monopolization of the market and the failure to ensure competitive market standards. According to another view, in order to increase the rates of realization of the projects, the projects should be allocated between several large-scaled investors that meet some spe- cific criteria. Intensifying the Draft with a mechanism supporting the competitive market conditions can whet investors’ appetite to invest in such projects. The lack of criteria on the distribution of licenses, such as capac- ity and scale, draws the attention as one of the deficiencies of this Draft. Despite the insurance of this structure, it would make a posi- tive impact on competitive market conditions to allocate some small- scaled projects to investors that have lower potential as to electricity generation. Even if there are some imperfections and deficiencies on several aspects in the Draft Regulation, the Draft, on the other hand, promises an increase in the capacity of electricity generation by means of local production, productive utilization of resources, and finalization of the investments promptly.