F-3, MIDC Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400 093 dUrBaaYa [email protected]/ccm/66ccm_minute.pdf ·...

Baart sarkar Government of India kond`Iya ivaVut p`aiQakrNa

Central Electricity Authority piScama xao~Iya ivaVut saimait

Western Regional Power Committee ef -3, emaAayaDIsaI xao~, AMQaorI (pUva-), mauMba[- - 400 093

F-3, MIDC Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400 093

Aa[- esa Aao : 9001-2008 ISO : 9001-2008

dUrBaaYa Phone: 022- 28221681; 28250004; 28200195; fO@sa Fax : 022 – 28370193 Website : www.wrpc.gov.in E-mail : [email protected]

saM#yaa : pxaoivasa /vaaiNaijyak –I / saIsaIema / kaya-vaR%t /2014- idnaaMk :30.01.2014 No. : WRPC/Comml.-I/CCM/Minutes/2014- Date:30.01.2014 saovaa maoM / To, ( saUcaI ko Anausaar ) ivaYaya : 66 vaIM vaaiNaijyak saimait kI baOzk ka kaya-vaR%t . Sub : Minutes of 66th Commercial Committee Meeting.

mahaodya / Sir, [sa p~ ko saaqa idnaaMk 13.01.2014 kao 1100 bajao p xao Baa p, kond,, emaAa[DIsaI

maraola, AMQaorI pUva-, mauMba[- maoM hu[- p xao iva saimait kI vaaiNaijyak saimait kI 66 vaIM baOzk ka kaya-vaR%t AapkI saUcanaa evaM AavaSyak kar-vaa[- hotu saMlagna hO.

Please find enclosed herewith Minutes of the 66th Commercial

Committee Meeting of WRPC held on 13.01.2014 at 1100 Hrs at WRLDC,

MIDC Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai for your information and necessary action.

BavadIya / Yours faithfully, saMlagna :- ]prao@tanausaar /As above sd/-

( S.Satyanarayan) AQaIxaNa AiBayaMta (vaaiNaijyak)

Superintending Engineer (Comml.)

Mailing list for 66th CCM 1. General Manager (Comml), Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd., Vadodara-390 007 2. Chief Engineer (LD), Gujarat Energy Transmission Corpn. Ltd., Vadodara- 390 021 3. Chief General Manager (Comml), MP Power Management Co.Ltd., Jabalpur-482 008 4. Chief Engineer (LD), M P Power Transmission Company Ltd.,SLDC, Jabalpur 482 008. 5. Chief Engineer (Comml), Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Co. Ltd., Raipur – 492 013 6. Chief Engineer (LD), Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Co. Ltd., Bhilai-490 024. 7. Chief Engineer (PP), Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Mumbai-400 051 8. Chief Engineer (LD), State Load Despatch Centre, MSETCL, New Mumbai - 400 708 9. Chief Electrical Engineer, Panjim, Goa-403 001 10. Executive Engineer, Electricity Department, Daman-396 210 11. Executive Engineer (Elect),Electricity Department, Silvassa-396 230 12. Addl. General Manager (Comml), Nuclear Power Corpn. of India Ltd., Mumbai-400 094 13. General Manager (Comml), NTPC Ltd., New Delhi-110 003 14. Regional Executive Director (West), NTPC Ltd., Mumbai-400 093 15. General Manager (Com. & CP), NTPC SAIL Power Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi -110 066 16. Executive Director (Comml), PGCIL, Gurgaon, Haryana-122 001 17. General Manager, WRTS-I, PGCIL, Nagpur-440 026 18. Addl. General Manager (Comml), WRTS-I, PGCIL, Nagpur-440 026 19. Executive Director, POSOCO,WRLDC, Mumbai-400 093 20. Dy. General Manager (Comml), Ratnagiri Gas & Power Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai-400 093 21. Vice President, Adani Power Limited, Ahmedabad – 380015 22. Addl. Chief Engineer (R & C), Gujarat Energy Trans. Corpn. Ltd., Vadodara-390 007 23. Chief Engineer (Trans. O&M), MSETCL, Mumbai-400 051 24. General Manager (Comml), LANCO Amarkantak Power Private Ltd., Gurgaon – 122 016 25. Member(Power), Narmada Control Authority, Indore.-452 010 26. Vice President, Jindal Power Ltd., Tamnar, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh – 496 001 27. Executive Director (Comml), Torrent Power Ltd., Ahmedabad- 380 009 28. DGM(PS), SAIL, Bhilai Plant, Bhilai-490 001. 29. AVP(Power Trading),GMR Energy Trading Ltd., Bangalore-560 029. 30. DGM Finance, CGPL, UMPP Mundra, Kutch-370 435. 31. Member Secretary, Northern Regional Power Committee, New Delhi 110 016 32. Member Secretary, Southern Regional Power Committee, Bangalore 560 009 33. Member Secretary, Eastern Regional Power Committee, Kolkata-700 033 34. Member Secretary, North Eastern Regional Power Committee, Shillong 793 303 35. Chief Engineer (GM), Central Electricity Authority, New Delhi –110 066.

Minutes of the 66th Commercial Committee Meeting held on 13.01.2014 at Mumbai

Page

1

MINUTES OF THE 66th MEETING OF COMMERCIAL COMMITTEE HELD ON 13th JANUARY 2014 AT MUMBAI

The 66th meeting of the commercial committee was held at Mumbai on 13th January 2014

at WRLDC Mumbai . Shri Satyanarayan S, Superintending Engineer (C & P), W.R.P.C welcomed the participants of

the 66th CCM. He stated that Member Secretary could not make himself available to today’s

meeting due to some urgent meeting at New Delhi. He briefly highlighted the various issues in

agenda. He hoped that members would deliberate on these issues and arrive at decisions in an

amicable manner.

ITEM No.1: Confirmation of the minutes of the 65th meeting of Commercial Committee S.E (C & P) stated Minutes of the 65th meeting of Commercial Committee held on 25.09.2013

at Mumbai were circulated vide WRPC letter no. : WRPC/Comml.-I/ CCM/ Minutes/2013-

10612, Dated 18.10.2013.

MSEDCL requested to delete the following sentence in para 3 of Item 2(2.3)

“MSEDCL representative stated that even though they are not scheduling their entitlement in

RGPPL, they are paying capacity charges as per their entitlement”

Committee agreed to the same. Accordingly, the above line stands deleted from the

MOM.

ITEM No.2: Availability declaration based on imported/domestic coal by NTPC stations: Background:

2.1: GUVNL vide letter No GUVNL: GM(comml):1590 dated 06.09.2013, have informed that

to maximize generation from its coal based power plants, NTPC has resorted to utilization of

blended coal through blending of imported coal and indigenous coal. However the availability

declaration for such power stations by NTPC is single availability i.e. without bifurcating the

availability on indigenous coal and imported coal. It has further suggested that NTPC should

declare availability separately for coal based generation from domestic coal and costly

imported coal like in case of gas based generation so as to enable the beneficiary to plan and

decide about the off take of power in order to meet the demand in the most economical

manner.

2.2: 65th CCM & 24th WRPC meeting discussions:


Page

2

The matter was discussed in the 65th CCM and 24th WRPC meeting and beneficiaries have

opined that to maximize generation from its coal based power plants, NTPC has resorted to

blending of imported coal with indigenous coal. However the availability declaration for such

power stations by NTPC is on single availability i.e. without bifurcating the availability on

indigenous coal and imported coal and suggested that NTPC should declare availability

separately for domestic coal and imported coal on similar lines of gas based generating stations

so that beneficiaries can plan and decide about the off take of power in order to meet the

demand in the most economical manner.

A special meeting was held on 27/11/2013 at WRLDC Mumbai, to discuss the blending of

imported and domestic coal by NTPC Stations. The minutes of the meeting is enclosed at

Annex.-2. In that meeting, NTPC reiterated its views expressed in the 24th WRPC meeting.

After exchange of concerns by NTPC and beneficiaries, it was concluded that for

implementing any decision, consensus among all the members is required and as no common

approach/consensus was evolved, matter would be referred to Chairperson CEA and to WRPC

forum for final decision.

Accordingly, the issue was taken up with Chairperson CEA vide letter No.

SLDC/CE/MIS/CEA/2778 dated 06.12.2013(copy enclosed at Annex.-2.2) by Chairperson

TCC & MD GETCO.

Committee noted.

ITEM No.3: Shutdown of ISGS units under RSD (Reserve Shut Down) during low regional demand.

Background:

3.1: In 449th OCC meeting held on 15.07.13 at Dahanu, CE, SLDC, Gujarat expressed concern

regarding the steep regional demand drop of around 30%-40% observed during night hours in

rainy season. In spite of shutting down State generating units and reducing shares from ISGS

units, under drawl of the States remained around 500 MW due to high wind injection. Under

such condition, it was extremely difficult for SLDCs to curb under drawl especially during

night hours. Hence it was proposed that under such circumstances, RLDC should examine the

option of shutting down Central Sector (ISGS) unit(s) at least for a few days considering

anticipated low demand and which in turn would enhance the network security. The selection

of the unit could be governed by merit order at Regional level.

The matter was further discussed in the 450th OCC meetings and following was noted:-


Page

3

• NTPC submitted that the units could be taken under RSD provided that the RSD shutdown shall be for a minimum period of 5 days and imminent O&M cost (which includes start-up, shut down cost and cost of running essential auxiliaries during RSD) along with fixed charges as per declared capacity should be borne by the beneficiaries.

• WRLDC stated that if the outage is proposed for at least 72 Hrs., consent has to be given by all the beneficiaries then proposal could be implemented.

• MPPTCL had pointed out that they are requisitioning their share however if they are deprived of power due to RSD, then the Beneficiary requesting the RSD shall have to pay MPPTCL’s fixed charges.

Since the matter involved commercial issues, it was decided that the same would be discussed

in Commercial forum.

3.2: Discussions of 65th CCM:

The matter was discussed in the 65th CCM. NTPC confirmed to participating in RSD provided

their conditions as mentioned above are satisfied.

Beneficiaries expressed following commercial aspects are required to be resolved in the RSD.

NTPC coal fired units have many Beneficiaries and each of them have their right to scheduling

of power as per their requisitions. Under the existing regulations, available capacity is declared

by the generating agency. Depending on the demand and merit order considerations, the

Beneficiaries give their requisitions. The operation of the unit is the concern of the generating

company.

The Beneficiaries did not agree to the inclusion of imminent O&M costs during RSD, since the

capacity charges are already being paid by the Beneficiaries during RSD.

The Beneficiaries also could not agree for the period of five or three days for RSD. They

opined that if the demand is there in that case the generating unit shall have to be brought on

bar. They also opined that the generating unit may look into the possibility of two shift

operation to optimize fuel efficiency.

In the case of some Beneficiaries, the merit order of the NTPC coal fired stations is higher

(cheaper) and so it will be difficult to forgo cheaper power for five days proposed. They opined

that the Beneficiary proposing the RSD shall have to bear the corresponding fixed charges if

the unit taken in to RSD.


Page

4

NTPC pointed out that the operation of unit below specific limit is not advised by technical

specification and if they continue to operate the unit at sustainable level, they would have to

increase generation above the requisitions. This would not only mean a commercial impact to

NTPC but also would result in UI, and also encroach upon grid security.

The CCM discussions could not converge to a mutually acceptable solution and therefore was

referred to TCC/WRPC.

3.3: 24th WRPC/TCC Discussion:

1. During the TCC discussion, NTPC once again brought to the notice of the forum the

very low requisitioning which is not practical to operate the NTPC coal based

generating unit. Further when a day change over takes place ( 96th Block of previous

day and 1st block of next day), ramp up or down rates constraints are not adhered to by

WRLDC. He requested the beneficiaries to give at least technical minimum schedules

or if they foresee very low demand give consent to implement RSD.

2. TCC first discussed issues relating to scheduling to technical minimum as a first option

and then implementing RSD as a second option for NTPC coal fired stations.

3. TCC Chairperson pointed out that up to technical minimum scheduling there is no

problem. He requested WRLDC to elaborate whether any issue surfaces when

requisitioning is below technical minimum and the same is limited to technical

minimum.

4. WRLDC stated that if the requisitions of beneficiaries are below technical minimum,

and if WRLDC adjusts the same to technical minimum, the states/beneficiaries have to

agree for the same. If the states do not agree then WRLDC would have to schedule in

line with requisition, after taking due care of ramping rates, to NTPC.

5. The TCC then discussed issues involving RSD. WRLDC pointed out that un-allocated

quota power from NTPC coal fired stations are allocated by MOP to other regions and

recently even international allocations to Bangladesh. If the unit is pulled out, then

these transactions would also be affected. Further since the RSD shall be effective for

at least 72 hrs it should not cause unnecessary complications with inter-regional

transfers. This issue needs to be addressed.

6. Further WRLDC opined if a unit is under RSD, it shall have ‘two’ DCs. One on bar DC

and other the DC before RSD for fixed charges calculation. This may impact


Page

5

calculations of available margins for STOA. This aspect also requires to be addressed

with clarity.

7. If some Beneficiary makes more requisitioning than others in station having RSD of

say one or two units, in order to ensure that he gets the power as per requisitioning, the

possibility of transferring of shares from other running units in the station to this

beneficiary was discussed.

8. WRLDC informed that allocations are done by MOP. If any Beneficiary does not want

the power then another Beneficiary can avail it under URS. This may not be opted by

the Beneficiary because it is costlier. Changing of allocations was not feasible as it is

MOP matter.

9. TCC Chairperson felt that these issues are required to be resolved. He however

requested the members to temporarily resort to issuing schedules at technical minimum

and call a meeting shortly to resolve other issues related to RSD.

10. Accordingly TCC discussed and recommended that the NTPC coal fired thermal units

having capacity more than 500 MW and above shall scheduled at technical minimum of

60% of their capacity and below 500 MW (200/210 MW) shall be scheduled at 70% of

their capacity till issue of RSD is resolved in separate meeting.

11. WRLDC shall ensure ramping up and down rates for the units/stages and particularly

between the 96th block and 1st block of next day while issuing the schedule. Also

WRLDC shall ensure that beneficiaries who had already given requisition for its entire

entitlement, the same shall not be reduced.

WRPC/TCC recommended the points (ix) to (xi) above only till the RSD issues are resolved in

a separate meeting to be conveyed by WRPC Secretariat.

A special meeting was held on 27/11/2013 at WRLDC Mumbai, to discuss the above issue

wherein the proposal for implementation of RSD and issues regarding technical minimum

scheduling was discussed. The minutes of the meeting is enclosed at Annex.-2.

During the meeting difficulties were expressed by WRLDC in the practical implementation of

the proposal. Chairperson TCC suggested that WRPC and WRLDC may discuss the issues

separately and if amicable methodology is evolved, same could be circulated to beneficiaries /

WRPC for final nod. Further, Chairperson TCC stated that implementation of technical


Page

6

minimum shall be done by WRLDC on the ideology at 2.2 of the MoM and shall continue till

the methodology for RSD is finalised/approved by WRPC.

Subsequent to the meeting, concerns raised by WRLDC through their e mail dated 28.11.2013

on the proposed methodology (discussed on 27.11.2013) were replied by WRPC vide email

dated 11.12.2013.

Discussions in the 66th CCM:

During the discussions, CGPL representative requested that CGPL should also be considered

for RSD and technical minimum scheduling be given to the same. SE(C&P), WRPC informed

CGPL that in case of NTPC units, there are other units/stations available at cheaper energy

rates because of which the RSD is feasible. The same is not true for CGPL. Also the tariff of

NTPC stations is regulated by the Central Commission whereas for CGPL it is adopted by the

Central Commission and is governed by the PPA’s. Hence technical minimum scheduling

decision of last WRPC meeting was limited to NTPC coal based stations

1) After discussion on the RSD, beneficiaries and NTPC were in agreement with the

principle of the proposed RSD by WRPC Secretariat and the same may be

informed to the TCC/WRPC.

2) NTPC representative stated that in spite of decision of WRPC regarding

scheduling of NTPC stations at technical minimum still there are occasions when

NTPC stations are scheduled below technical minimum.

3) WRLDC representative stated that unilaterally WRLDC shall not enhance the

requisitions. Any shortfall towards meeting technical minimum shall be conveyed

to the beneficiaries, and they shall have to agree to the same, as per the WRPC

decision, and convey the same to WRLDC. This was not done in the past, creating

instances wherein technical minimum schedule was not met.

4) The Committee discussed the matter in detail. Whenever schedules are furnished

by the beneficiaries, WRLDC shall examine the same. If the sum total of the

schedules received is greater than the technical minimum, scheduling shall be

done accordingly.

5) If the sum total is less than the technical minimum, WRLDC shall advise those

SLDCs to give revised schedules for those beneficiaries scheduling below technical

minimum entitlements, in proportion to their entitlements. Scheduling shall be

done accordingly.


Page

7

ITEM No.4: Rescheduling of SSP units:

Background:

4.1) GETCO vide letter GETCO/SLDC/TECH/497 dtd.25.04.2013, have intimated that

presently the practice adopted to schedule SSP units is from 09:00hrs to 15:00hrs and 19:00hrs

to 22:00hrs daily to cope up the winter season demand. However the demand pattern is not the

same in the summer season and therefore there is a need to review the scheduling of SSP.

Further GETCO have requested to modify the scheduling timing of SSP stations during

summer season from 11:00hrs to 14:30hrs and 19:00hrs to 00:30hrs.In the 64th CCM, MP and

Maharashtra representatives endorsed the views of GETCO. NCA representative intimated that

the matter needs approval from NCA. The proposal would be put up in the Power sub-

committee meeting of NCA.

4.2) SLDC GETCO vide letter No GujSLDC/SCH/F-12 dated 17.09.2013 have intimated that

new methodology for scheduling of RBPH machine of SSP had been proposed by NCA. It was

discussed in 51st Power sub Committee held on 09.07.2013 at Bhopal. In the meeting, it was

decided that the methodology would be examined by their technical, financial and legal wing

and submit their views and suggestions within 15 days of issue of MoM.

4.3) 65th CCM discussions:

NCA representative informed that an emergency meeting of Power Sub Commitee (PSC) of

NCA was held recently. In the meeting beneficiary States were requested to suggest workable

solution within the provisions of NWDT Award and IECG, 2010 agreeable to all beneficiary

States so that power requirement of the States during different parts of the day could be

fulfilled.

Based on the discussion and the consensus, NCA suggested a methodology of best fit schedule

in the 51st PSC meeting of NCA. The PSC decided that each State will get the proposed

methodology examined by their technical, financial and legal wing and submit their views and

suggestions.

No comment has yet been received from any of the beneficiary States. Based on the views

expressed by respective SLDCs and the comments from Governments, if any, the same will be


Page

8

put up in the next PSC meeting till then the existing guidelines of operation of RBPH will

prevail.

The main features of the new methodology proposed in the 51st Power sub Committee held is

as follows :

a. Based on quantum of water allocated for RBPH in Ten Daily issued by S.S.R.R.C.,

NCA will inform total machine hours and MW generation possible for a given day in

advance to each beneficiary State.

b. On receipt of above information, each beneficiary State will submit their Demand to

NCA in terms of MW (15 minutes time block wise requirement). Additional

requirement if any has to be indicated separately.

c. NCA will prepare Best Fit Schedule for the next day as per the following method:

Situation I : In a particular 15 minutes time block if Td <= Tav (where Td= Total Demand of

all the three States, Tav = Total MW generation possible in that time block), then scheduled

power in that time block will be equal to demand of each State.

Situation II : In case 1 or 2 States having demand less than their entitlement then, their non-

requisitioned share will be given to other party States having demanding more than their share.

Situation III: If Td > Tav & All the three States have demand more than their entitlement then

Total MW generation will be distributed in 57: 27:16 as per NWDT award.

d. Mutual agreement among three beneficiary States for particular time blocks if any

adjustment will be made accordingly.

The sub-Committee requested beneficiary States to get the proposed methodology examined

by their technical, financial and legal wing and submit their views and suggestions at the

earliest to NCA for further action.

4.4) 24th TCC/WRPC recommendations:


Page

9

a. During the TCC discussion, constituents agreed for scheduling during spill over

condition. Constituents also requested that WRLDC shall make best efforts to

accommodate the schedule under such conditions.

b. TCC agreed that NCA shall prepare schedule in consultation with beneficiaries and

accordingly WRLDC shall despatch as per operational feasibility of grid real time

conditions. However as far as possible the schedule shall be accommodated.

c. Beneficiary States may get the proposed methodology examined by their technical,

financial and legal wing and submit their views and suggestions at the earliest to NCA.

However since their views are also recorded and the same may be used by NCA.

d. It was suggested that the energy mismatch shall be adjusted in reasonable time,

preferably by the end of the day by NCA. MPPMCL representative suggested that the

energy mismatch adjustment on a daily basis would not be feasible, since State having

low demand scenario would not schedule their entitled energy within that day, therefore

the same shall be adjusted at the end of the month. In view of avoid complication in

reconciliation.

e. New methodology shall be adopted after consensus from beneficiaries (1st November,

2013).

WRPC agreed to the above TCC recommendations and decided that the adjustment of the

energy mismatch may be done on weekly basis initially and the same shall be reviewed, if

required. WRPC agreed for implementation of new methodology from 1st Nov 2013.

Discussions in the 66th CCM: NCA vide fax, intimated that they have approached the state

governments for approval and no communication has been received from the governments,

which is causing delays in implementing this methodology.

Beneficiaries stated that scheduling of SSP units is re distribution of energy to which all

beneficiaries are mutually agreed to and it is sufficient to implement this methodolgy.

It was decided that the matter shall be reported to the TCC/WRPC.

ITEM No.5: Bus splitting of Kahalgaon STPS Stage-l & stage-Il to contain fault level :

Back ground :

5.1) NTPC vide letter No 01:CD:202 dated 13.09.2013 along with the relevant portion of the

ERPC MoM), have informed that the issue of Bus splitting of Kahalgaon STPS Stage-l


Page

10

& Stage-Il to contain fault level as per the decision of CEA's Standing Committee

Meeting was approved in the 24th ERPC meeting held on 27th April 2013.

System studies were carried out by PGCIL to examine the short circuit levels at various

substations of Eastern Region and the study results showed that short circuit levels at

various 400 KV substations are exceeding the permissible limit of 40 KA in near future

at Maithon, Durgapur, Kahalgaon, and Biharshariff Substations. Accordingly, further

studies were carried out for measures to contain the fault current within 40 KA. Based on

the above studies it was proposed to carry out bus splitting with bus/tie sectionalization

breaker for Maithon, Durgapur, Kahalgaon, Biharshariff substations in Eastern Region.

The estimated cost of the scheme for splitting of Kahalgaon switchyard is Rs.

98.94 crore.

The scheme was discussed in the 24th ERPC meeting wherein implementation of the

scheme by NTPC was approved and it was decided that apportionment of the

cost for implementation of the scheme shall be between Kahalgaon Stage-l & Stage-II in

ratio of annual fixed Cost of Kahalgaon-I & Kahalgaon-II.

5.2) Discussion of 65th CCM :

NTPC representative informed that the implementation of the above scheme has already

been approved by constituents of ERPC and NRPC. Since WR constituents have share in

Kahalgoan Stage –II, the Add. Cap. Expenditure for this scheme needs to be approved in

principle by WRPC constituents.

After deliberations following was decided;

1) The Bus splitting is a technical requirement approved by SCM of ER and shall have to

be implemented and the additional capitalization shall be part of tariff approved by

Hon’ble CERC.

2) The proposal of ERPC regarding sharing of the estimated cost of Rs 98.94 crores on the

basis of Annual fixed cost of Kahalgaon-I & Kahalgaon-II is not acceptable to WR

constituents, and the cost apportionment shall be as per the provision 4 (2) (i) of the

“Terms and Conditions of Tariff, Regulations for 2009-14” of Hon’ble CERC, which is

based on the installed capacity.

5.3) 24th WRPC decision:


Page

11

Members agreed to the recommendations of CCM at 2, regarding sharing of the cost.

NTPC representative clarified that the expenditure would be done with the approval of

Hon’ble CERC. Chairman TCC suggested that the matter be taken up first in the SCM of

WR.

Committee suggested that the recommendations of CCM be intimated to ERPC/NTPC

and noted the above.

The above decision of WRPC was intimated to ERPC/NTPC by WRPC vide letter

WRPC/Comml/NTPC-Kh/1921 dated 14.11.2013(copy enclosed at Annex.-5).


SE(C&P), WRPC informed that CE (SP&PA),CEA was informed to take up the issue in the

Standing Committee for power system and planning of Western Region and ERPC was

informed about the decisions taken in 24th WRPC meeting.

Committee noted

ITEM No.6: Entitlement and schedule data issues of MP: 6.1) MPPTCL vide letter No 07-05/RPC-17/2598 dated 27.08.2013, have requested for

inclusion of following agenda items for the meeting.

6.1.1): Station wise details of entitlement and schedule of MP in DVC

MP has power station wise capacity allocations in DVC Mejia (200MW), Chandrapura

(200MW) and Durgapur (100MW) power stations and each of these station has different tariff.

SLDC MP is giving station wise requisition to DVC/WRLDC on the basis of merit order of the

stations. However WRLDC is indicating the consolidated entitlement and schedule of MP in

DVC (Mejia & Chandrapura) and separately for DVC (Durgapur) accordingly WRPC is

issuing the REA. The schedule energy indicated in the REA of WRPC is not matching with the

REA issued by ERPC and implemented schedule available in the WRLDC web site. It is

requested that station wise entitlement & schedule may be uploaded by WRLDC on its web

site and the station wise accounting may be done by WRPC in its REA matching with REA of

ERPC.

6.1.2) Entitlement of MP:

(i) ISGS: The entitlement of MP in ISGS available at WRLDC web site is not tallying with

the entitlement indicated in the REA. Therefore ex-post facto revisions in entitlement of ISGS


Page

12

if any done by WRPC may be uploaded along with ex post facto revisions of schedule already

being provided under “Data for MP UI”, section of weekly UI Reports in the WRPC website.

(ii)Other LTA: The entitlement of MP in other LTA i.e. LANCO AMK & Torrent is not

available in the WRLDC website as well as in REA issued by WRPC. The same may be

incorporated.

6.1.3) Schedule of MP in other LTOA/MTOA:

MP has PPA under LTA at sending end with LANCO AMK, Torrent Power and also have

PPA underMTOA at MP periphery with BALCO Power plant-II and CSPDCL. WRLDC is

indicating the schedule at sending end only whereas MP SLDC requires the schedule at

sending end as well as at MP periphery for the purpose of energy accounting. WRLDC should

indicate the entitlement and schedules of LTA/MTOA power scheduled at MP periphery and

sending end both.

6.1.4) Discrepancy in the REA issued by WRPC and Ex-post facto schedule revisions:

WRPC is indicating the block-wise ex-post facto revisions under “Data for MP UI” under the

section of weekly UI reports in the WRPC website. On comparing the same with REA issued

by WRPC, it is observed that the ex-post facto schedule is not matching with the REA for

some of the stations particularly for Kawas Gas for the month of April 2013. It is therefore

requested that WRPC may upload the final ex-post facto revisions as considered for REA

under “Data for MP UI”.

In accordance with the decision in the 65th CCM, a meeting was held between WRPC and

SLDC MPPTCL on 18.10.2013 at WRPC. All the issues pertaining to WRPC were resolved.


S.E (C&P) stated the issues related to WRPC were resolved and MPPMCL

representative stated that SLDC will communicate through a letter to WRPC .

Committee noted.

ITEM No.7: Implementation of Automatic Meter Reading in Western Region

WRLDC vide letter WRLDC/MO-I/1551/2013 Dated: 12th Sept, 2013, have intimated that

in the 23rd WRPC meeting held on 12th June’2013, it was agreed for implementation of AMR

in WR on one time capital cost reimbursement basis and recurring cost be included in the fees


Page

13

and charges of WRLDC. The mode of implementation of AMR would be as followed by

POWERGRID as in case of ABT meters.

In the 65th CCM, committee requested POWERGRID to expedite the implementation of AMR

in WR.


Power Grid representative stated that a pilot project is underway which is outsourced

and at a 765 KV substation communication RF interference problems are being faced.

The feedback from the contractor is expected in 15 days, which would be communicated

to TCC/WRPC. It was suggested that PGCIL may explore the possibility of GSM

technology in such cases.

ITEM No.8: Revision of CSPDCLs drawl schedule of SIPAT STPA Stage-I and SIPAT

STPS Stage-II by WRLDC:

CSPDCL vide letter No-02-02/ACE-I/3152 dtd. 14.11.2013 and 02-02/SE-I/3179 dtd

21.11.2013(copy enclosed at Annex-8.1) have intimated that the drawl schedules of CSPDCL

were unilaterally revised by WRLDC in some blocks of 14.11.13 from SIPAT STPS Stage-I

and SIPAT STPS Stage-II. Due to this CSPDL system was put in overdrawl condition. CSPDL

have requested WRPC Secretariat to advice WRLDC for necessary corrections in the schedule

and they will not pay any UI charge for overdrawl on account of this unilateral revision of

schedules.

WRPC vide letter No. WRPC/Comml-I/3/ABTREA/corrs/2013/2092 dated 03.12.2013 have

requested WRLDC to clarify on this issue. WRLDC vide letter WRLDC/GM/IMPLE/13/12

dtd 27.12.2013 (copy enclosed at Annex-8.2) have replied that revision of drawal schedule of

Sipat Stage-I & Stage-II on 14.11.2013 was due to heavy Under-drawal by Chattisgarh leading

to violation of Bhilai flow gate. The matter has already been taken up with CE(LD) CSPTCL.


CSPDCL representative stated that there was no violation of bhilai flowgate and the

decision of WRLDC to unilaterally reduce the schedules of CSPDCL to zero is incorrect.

He further enquired whether the provisions of Grant of connectivity regulations, Grant

of Long Term medium term and short term open access regulations of CERC have been

adhered to before suo-motu revision of schedules.


Page

14

WRLDC representative stated that as per clause 6.5.20 of IEGC WRLDC is empowered

to revise the schedules in the interest of better system operation.

CSPDCL representative asked whether the over injection by generators was also

controlled to avoid violation at bhilai flow gate. To which WRLDC representative replied

that due consideration was taken while revising the schedules under clause 6.5.20 of

IEGC and if CSPDCL is not satisfied it can approach the Hon’ble commission.

ITEM No.9: Disbursal of STOA charges collected by WRLDC during scheduling of

Koba-7 under STOA

WRLDC vide letter WRLDC/MO-I/1551/2013 Dated: 12th Sept, 2013, have intimated that

POWERGRID in its communication dated 26th Aug’2013 intimated that they had filed a

petition at Hon’ble Supreme Court challenging the order of APTEL on Korba-7 scheduling

during period March’2012 to July 2012 and requested WRLDC not to deduct any payment

from STOA payments to CTU.

The matter was discussed in the 24th TCC/WRPC meeting and following was discussed /

decided:

1. During the TCC meeting, WRLDC once again expressed that unless POWERGRID

gives consent for adjustment for the above charges, they shall not be able to adjust the

same from other transactions.

2. TCC Chairperson informed WRLDC that as per CERC order, WRLDc has a right to

adjust the charges. The non-adjustment of charges is liable to interpreted as a non

compliance to the Hon’ble CERC orders.

3. Since WRLDC maintained that their policy of adjustment is only after taking

necessary consent from the party where the adjustment is made, TCC then enquired

PGCIL why they are not giving consent to WRLDC or alternatively making payments

to the constituents. PGCIL agreed to reply on this point in WRPC meeting, the next

day.

4. As the case is pending with ATE and no stay has been granted to CERC order, TCC

decided that PGCIL will immediately refund the entire amount along with applicable

interest, in this case at 15%.


Page

15

WRPC noted the recommendations of TCC and decided that POWERGRID shall refund the

amount along with interest to beneficiaries within a week’s time and In case the decision of

ATE comes in favour of Powergrid, constituents will pay back the amount within seven days.


POWERGRID representative stated that no payment has been made as on date due to

the inclusion of Lanco Kondapalli in the revised REA’s issued by WRPC

MPPMCL and GUVNL representative stated when there is no stay on encashing the LC

of Lanco Kondapalli by ATE, which was a specific prayer by Lanco Kondapalli to

Hon’ble ATE then PowerGrid should make the payments by dissolving the LC as the

payments are substantial and long due. To which PowerGrid representative stated that

ED Power Grid would send a communication to WRPC.

It was decided to inform TCC/WRPC on the above.

ITEM No. 10.: Hon’ble CERC’s order dated 16th Jan 2013 in petition no.209/2011 in the

matter of the Renewable Regulatory Funds Mechanism under

CERC(IEGC) Regulations 2010.

The implementation of the RRF mechanism was discussed in the 64th & 65th CCM. A

separate meeting was also held on 29.07.2013 at Mumbai wherein the issues regarding Mock

Billing viz., Non receipt of schedule from Wind farm/CA (coordinating Agency)/Developer

and future actions were discussed. In the above meeting it was decided that the eligible

wind/solar generators not scheduling their generation shall be treated as zero. WRPC, have

sought clarification from NLDC (being implementing agency), on the above. Further it was

decided that SLDC would compile the data from the eligible wind and solar

generators/CA/Developers and submit the same to WRLDC. WRLDC would forward the

weekly data, complete in all respect to WRPC for preparation of the weekly RRF A/cs in line

with the above regulation.

WRPC have started issuing the RRF A/cs based on the above decisions w.e.f. 1st July 2013.

However it is observed that WRLDC is not forwarding the data for all the eligible developers,

since all the SLDCs are not submitting the data to them as per the accounting schedule.



Page

16

SE(C&P), WRPC informed that as per Hon’ble Commissions order on Suo-Motu petition No 356/SM/2013 dated 07.01.2014 the forecasting and scheduling of wind generation shall continue as per the provisions of the Grid Code and RRF procedure approved vide their order dated 9.7.2013, the commercial mechanism outlined therein shall remain suspended till further orders. The sub- committee discussed the order and following was decided:-

1. The wind farm generators and solar generators would continue to forecast and schedule their generation.

2. The Commercial settlement in respect of RRF accounts issued by WRPC stands

suspended till further orders.

3. Therefore any commercial settlements as per their contracts with the wind farm generators and solar generators prior to the above regulation, shall continue.

ITEM No.11: Declaration of generating units into commercial operation. No generating unit was declared in to commercial operation during the period 25.09.13 to

31.12.2013.

ITEM No.12:Declaration of transmission elements into commercial operation by PGCIL.

12.1: PGCIL vide letter No. WR-II/VDR/COML/3666 dtd. 01/07.10.2013 have intimated

that 400kV, 125MVAR Bus Reactor at Indore along with associated bays under Transmission

System for phase-I Generation Projects in Orrissa Part-C, have been charged successfully on

30.09.2013 and put into regular operation in WR, and the same is under commercial operation

w.e.f. 01st Oct. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for above element will be

payable from 01st Oct. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC Regulation.

12.2 : PGCIL vide letter No. WR-II/VDR/COML/3668 dtd. 01/07.10.2013 have intimated

that 400kV, 125MVAR Bus Reactor#2 at Gwalior along with associated bays under

Transmission System for phase-I Generation Projects in Orrissa Part-C, have been charged

successfully on 30.09.2013 and put into regular operation in WR, and the same is under

commercial operation w.e.f. 01st Oct. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for

above element will be payable from 01st Oct. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC

Regulation.


that switchable scheme for Reactor at Bina S/S under Western Region Strengthening Scheme-

IX, have been charged successfully on 21.09.2013 and put into regular operation in WR, and

the same is under commercial operation w.e.f. 01st Oct. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly


Page

17

transmission charges for above element will be payable from 01st Oct. 2013 by concerned

DICs as per CERC Regulation.


that 400kV, 125MVAR Bus Reactor#1 at Gwalior along with associated bays under

Transmission System for phase-I Generation Projects in Orrissa Part-C, have been charged

successfully on 30.09.2013 and put into regular operation in WR, and the same is under

commercial operation w.e.f. 01st Oct. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for

above element will be payable from 01st Oct. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC

Regulation.


that 765/400kV, 4x500MVA ICT-I at 765/400kV Indore (New) S/S along with associated bays

under Regional System Strengthening for SASAN UMPP, have been charged successfully on


w.e.f. 01st Oct. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for above element will be

payable from 01st Oct. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC Regulation.


that 765kV, 3*80MVAR Bus Reactor#1 at 765/400kV Indore S/S along with associated bays

under Regional System Strengthening for SASAN UMPP, have been charged successfully on


w.e.f. 01st Nov. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for above element will

be payable from 01st Nov. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC Regulation.

12.7 : PGCIL vide letter No. WRTS-I:COMML:NGP:580 dtd. 01.11.2013 have intimated that

400/220kV, 1x315MVA ICT-III at Mapusa S/S under “Augmentation of Transformer & Bays

in WR” has been put into regular operation in WR, and the same is under commercial

operation w.e.f. 01st Nov. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for above

element will be payable from 01st Nov. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC Regulation.

12.8 : PGCIL vide letter No. WRTS-I:COMML:NGP:646 dtd. 18.12.2013 have intimated that

400kV Pune(Talegaon)-Parli line 1 & 2 implemented by M/s WRTMPL has been

commissioned successfully and put into regular operation in WR, and the same is under

commercial operation w.e.f. 01st Dec. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for


Page

18

above element will be payable from 01st Dec. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC

Regulation.

12.9 : PGCIL vide letter No. CGP/EDO/RPR/CD/9217 dtd. 02.12.2013 have intimated that

second bank of 765/400kV, 1500MVA ICT at Raigarh Pooling station (Near Tamnar) and

765kV, 240MVAR Bus Reactor at Raigarh Pooling Station (Near Tamnar) along with

associated bays under Transmission System associated with IPPs Generation in Chattisgarh

(Set-B) has been commissioned successfully on 30.11.2013, and the same is under commercial

operation w.e.f. 01st Dec. 2013. Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for above

element will be payable from 01st Dec. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC Regulation.

12.10 : PGCIL vide letter No. CGP/EDO/RPR/CD/9216 dtd. 02.12.2013 have intimated that

765/400kV, 1500MVA ICT at Raigarh Pooling station (Durg) and 765kV, 240MVAR Bus

Reactor at Raigarh Pooling Station (Durg) along with associated bays under Transmission

System associated with IPPs Generation in Chattisgarh (Set-A) has been commissioned

successfully on 30.11.2013, and the same is under commercial operation w.e.f. 01st Dec. 2013.

Accordingly, the monthly transmission charges for above element will be payable from 01st

Dec. 2013 by concerned DICs as per CERC Regulation.

Committee noted

ITEM No. 13: Grant of MTOA and LTOA by POWERGRID. The list of LTOAs/MTOAs received from NLDC and applicable from the month of December-

13 for computation of RTA is enclosed at Annex-13.

Committee noted. Item No.14: Ensuring adequacy in the planning and development of Inter State

Transmission System trough the concept of GNA:

A meeting was convened by SP&PA Division of CEA on 26.12.2013 at Bangalore to discuss

the concept of GNA, wherein, CEA gave a presentation on the concept paper titled “Ensuring

adequacy in the planning and development of Inter State Transmission System”. The same was

circulated to constituents of WR for offering views/comments on the same to CEA, before

submitting the proposal to Hon’ble CERC. The background and concept in brief is described in

the following paras.


Page

19

CERC regulations allow system strengthening (fresh investment) on the basis of application

for LTA. No system strengthening can be done for giving Connectivity, MTOA or STOA.

The investment of the transmission system is therefore made on the assurance of payment of

transmission charges for a longer period by the LTA users.

The existing philosophy is based on the premise that long term PPAs are predominant. Short

term market, seeking MTOA/STOA, shall be catered through available margins.

Historically, additional drawal capacity for the States was created whenever new central/ISGS

power projects came up with known beneficiaries. New drawal points/capacity additions for

States were created on request by the STU considering the quantum of allocated power and

grid requirements after agreement in the Standing Committee for power system planning.

There are no clear formulations in CERC regulation for creation of drawal capacity for the

States corresponding to the grant of ‘Connectivity’ or the ‘LTA with Target Regions’.

CERC regulations provide for free of cost connectivity to ISTS. This provides perverse

incentive for generators to under-declare their transmission requirement and to piggy ride on

the existing transmission network. By simply getting connectivity, the generation developer

can avoid the liability of paying monthly transmission charges which would be payable under

LTA service.

Under the target region LTA service, the generation developer has to undertake to pay

transmission service charges (PoC injection + PoC notional drawal) for 25 years. However in

lieu of the above commitment to pay, the generation developer is not provided any service at

all as long term customer.

Generation developers who seek LTA (target region) have to separately stand in the queue for

MTA or STOA for actually scheduling their power. The charges paid by them for availing

MTA or STOA service are not adjusted against their monthly LTA bill if they sell power

outside the declared target region or through PX. This is resulting in double payment by the

generators.

The generation developers are resorting to LTA based on target region as they are not able to

finalize the long term beneficiaries. The root cause of this is that the power procurements

through Case-I bidding route are not getting finalized by the respective States and also due to

delay in bidding process and various litigations. Significant amount of power transfer takes


Page

20

place under MTOA/STOA. This is leading to congestion in various transmission corridors

across the country.

In view of the fact that the long term PPA may not materialize at the time of planning for

transmission to a significant extent the existing transmission service products need to be

reviewed as well as the approach to planning so as to provide flexibility to buyers and sellers.

New transmission systems would have to be developed to cater to the need of short/ medium

term market including power exchanges (PX). However, any fresh investment should be

supported by commitment to pay for it. States who are availing far more import capacity

through ISTS than their LTA capacity should proportionally share the PoC charges at the point

of drawal.

The fact that short/ medium term market can no longer be restricted to “spare margins” on the

lines, which was the basic premise of the first open access regulations introduced in 2004 when

long term PPAs were predominant. As of now fresh investment in transmission is permitted

only for providing long term access. It needs to be recognized that in the current scenario if

short term/ medium/PX transactions are curtailed it results in significant bottling up of

generation and distress to Discoms.

It is required that:

• The IPPs/generators should be given comfort to sell their powers under

• long/medium/short-term time frame with lesser congestion events.

• The transmission system is built with due commitment from its users i.e. the (i)

• injectors (generators, captive plants and surplus State utilities) and (ii) drawing

• entities (State utilities and bulk consumers).

• The stranded transmission assets do not get created.

Sharing of transmission charges becomes fairer and equitable with commitment from all stake

holders that is STOA/MTOA customers, injecting entities and LTA costumers.

Since a strong all India mesh grid would emerge by end of 12th Plan i.e. 2016- 17, it should be

possible to do planning with fair degree of certainty without prior knowledge of pairs of

injection and drawal. System strengthening for additional drawal and additional injection could

be done without knowing the contracted source of purchase or sale because power in a meshed

network would be transferred by displacement. In other words, the generator and the


Page

21

States/Consumer could be given General Network Access (GNA) to ISTS for the agreed

quantum of power (MW). While granting GNA the generation and load scenarios and other

assumptions would be declared by the Central Transmission Utility (CTU). A GNA agreement

could become the driver for investment.

The new approach should therefore involve introduction of General Network Access (GNA)

mechanism in Inter-State Transmission System for transmission system development and

hassle free access to the transmission system by the Generators.

WRPC Secretariat has submitted its suggestions/comments on the above concept and is

enclosed at Annex.-14.

Beneficiaries stated that interests of beneficiaries were well taken in the suggestions.

Item No.15: Outstanding payment between WR & SR (Aug 2002 to Dec 2002) :

A meeting was held on 04th Dec 13 at SRPC Banglore to discuss the outstanding payment

position for the period from Aug 2002 to Dec 2002.

PTC vide letter PTC/OPN/19920-29 dated 26.12.2013(copy enclosed at Annex-15.1) have

intimated that after checking their book of account, it has emerged that PTC had not paid Rs.

2,03,46,839 on 18.10.2002 and Rs. 1,67,38,252 on 25.10.2002 to WRPC UI account but to

PGCIL towards adjustment of transmission charges as per the understanding. The same has

already confirmed by POWERGRID, WRTS,Nagpur. Further they have intimated that there

was no dispute of payment for the month of Sep. 2002. The dispute was for the month of

Aug.2002 and WRLDC has already admitted receipt of the entire money. Hence the amount

for Aug 2002 is required to be re-distributed to the beneficiaries once the amount is received

back from WRLDC.

Further SRPC vide letter No SRPC/SE-I/2014 dated 02.01.2014(copy enclosed at Annex-

15.2), have compiled a statement giving details of receivable/payable amount by beneficiaries

of SR & WR.


1) Constituents were requested to cross check the statements received from SR

2) There was a need to examine Aug-2002 REA/UI accounts and to trace the payments

made by PTI in this regard.

ITEM No.16: UI Pool account & REC Pool account Status of Western Region


Page

22

WRLDC have intimated that the UI Pool account & REC Pool account Status of Western

Region as on 02.01.2014 is as follows;

Status of UI Charges Payable/Receivable to UI Pool Account Last updated on 02/01/14

Total dues Payments

overdue Principal Principal CSPDCL 11561203 MP Power Management Co. ltd. -38584 GETCO -50347094 MSLDC -28236113 Goa -6230770 D&D -3518311 DNH 7119243 3836161NTPC -20309302 NR Exchange 432498481 188748340SR Exchange 2218593.5 ER Exchange -111445859 JINDAL POWER -32707778 HVDC V'chal 16298 38038HVDC B'vati -117343 Lanco Amarkantak Power Ltd -1677262 Mundra APL 0 NSPCL -5306254 ACB India Ltd. 5344462 RGPPL -643783 BALCO 1826636 448976CGPL UMPP MUNDRA 7102172 2015431DCPP JSPL 469354 JAYPEE BINA TPP 0 0Essar (MAHAN) TPP 38690250.1 37769855.13SASAN Power limited 6543375 11663577KSK Mahanadi 3049038 2389084Vandana Vidyut Ltd -1788524 EMCO Energy ltd -1443231 KORBA WEST POWER PVT LTD 127662 D. B.Power 1928580 1435011JAYPEE NIGRI TPP 518560 Essar Steel ltd 603901 2150255DGEN MEGA POWER PROJECT -898766 Differential amount from capping due to injn. >105% -356710373 Amount araised from additional UI -75028660


Page

23

Amount araised from capping on Over Injn.and under drawal -23924247 Net Total -200754445 NR Exchange 0 0WR to pay to NR UI Pool(-) 0 0Payable by WR to WR-NR Pooled Assets(-) 0 0Payable by NR to WR-NR Pooled Assets(-) 0 0SR Exchange 0 0WR to pay to SR UI Pool(-) 0 0Payable by WR to WR-SR Pooled Assets(-) 0 0Payable by SR to WR-SR Pooled Assets(-) 0 0ER Exchange 1352805473 0WR to pay to ER UI Pool(-) 1392862257 714016925Payable by WR to WR-ER Pooled Assets(-) -127154930 0Payable by ER to WR-ER Pooled Assets(-) -200039091 0Note : This includes : 1. UI Accounts issued upto 36th week of 2013-14 ie., 02.12.13 to 08.12.13. 2. UI Payments received and distributed upto 30.12.13

Status of Reactive Energy Charges Payable to REC Pool Account Last updated on 02/01/14

(+) Payable / (-) Receivable from Pool Amount in Rs. Total dues Total overdues Principal Principal CSPDCL -490320 -490320 MPPTCL -3083214 -3083214 GETCO -2911982 -2911982 MSEDCL 0 0 Goa -91550 -91550 DD -5574 -5574 DNH 16499578 16499578 TOTAL 9916938 9916938 *When Receivables are more than payable, total of all receivables made equal to payable. *When all are receivable, all receivables made zero . Note : This includes : 1. REC Accounts issued upto 35th week of 2013-14 ie.,25.11.2013 to 01.12.2013 2. REC Payments received up to 23.12.13

Committee noted.

ITEM No.17: Status of LC opening toward UI payments.


Page

24

WRLDC, have intimated that the status of LC to be opened by WR entities for the FY 2013-14

is given below.

Sl No.

WR Entity who have to

open LC

No.of times UI payment

was delayed ( From 01-Apr-12 to 31-Mar-

13)

No of weeks in which UI payable

Average payable

weekly UI (Rs in lakhs)

LC Amount (Rs in lakhs)

Revised LC

Amount (Rs in lakhs)

Status of LC opening

1 MP Power

Management co. ltd

6 21 254 279 LC opened for

Rs 318 lakhs on 01.07.13

2 GOA 9 39 87 96

3 DNH 10 10 101 111 LC opened for

Rs 124 lakhs on 21.06.13

4 D&D 21 21 30 34 186

5 ACBIL 12 26 26 29 LC opened for Rs 29 lakhs on

26.06.13

6 CGPL 9 28 79 87 LC opened for Rs 87 lakhs on

17.12.13

7 RGPPL 2 38 50 55 LC opened for Rs 55 lakhs on

05.12.13

8 SASAN 22 27 9 10 262

9

Essar MAHAN Thermal

Power Plant

30 52 8 9 127

9 JPL LC opened for

Rs 201 lakhs on 17.04.13

9 LANCO LC opened for

Rs 212 lakhs on 16.07.13


Page

25

WRLDC representative stated that ESSAR MAHAN has defaulted on payment and has

not opened LC.

Committee noted. ITEM No.18: Any other items: 1) Non payment of RGPPL dues: RGPPL representative stated that RGPPL has been raising monthly energy bills based on REA issued by WRPC. Payments are not forthcoming from beneficiaries. Current outstanding dues as on date are

Sl. No.

Name of Beneficiary

Outstanding Amount (including

surcharge) (Rs.Crs)

Payment received in last 30 days

1 MSEDCL 1274.02 77.76 2 GOA 9.75 0.18 3 DD 12.65 0.00 4 DNH 8.43 4.18

MSEDCL representative replied that there is no outstanding payment as per their PPA between RGPPL and MSEDCL and petition is pending in ATE on outstanding claims of RGPPL. Committee noted that the matter is sub judice. 2) Reduction in unallocated share of MSEDCL due to cross-border trading: MSEDCL representative stated that 150MW power from un-allocated quota of Maharashtra (100MW allocated to J&K and 50MW for cross border trading with Bangladesh) is causing undue financial implication and this 150 MW share from un-allocated may be re-instated to Maharashtra. S.E(C&P), WRPC replied that the share allocations is a prerogative of MOP and are issued by WRPC as per MOP orders and all orders of MOP have been followed. He informed that till date no directive has been received by WRPC from MOP to change the share allocation and re-instate 150MW to Maharashtra. Committee noted ITEM No.17: Date and venue of next meeting

The date and venue of next CCM would be communicated separately.

* * * * *


Page

26

Participants list for 66th CCM held on 13.01.2014 at WRLDC, Mumbai

Sl.No. Name Designation Organisation E-mail Mobile No. 1 Shri Satyanarayan S. S E

(Comml.) WRPC [email protected] 9223399938

2 Shri P.D. Lone E E (Comml.)

WRPC [email protected] 9867186701

3 Shri D.N. Gawali E E (Comml.)

WRPC [email protected] 9930666765

4 Shri L.K.S. Rathore EE(Opn.) WRPC [email protected] 9833371844 5 Shri Shiva Suman A D

(Comml.) WRPC [email protected] 9869910968

6 Shri A.K. Juneja G M NTPC, Mumbai [email protected] 9004497010 7 Shri P.B. Behere G M NTPC, Mumbai [email protected] 9004497088 8 Shri E.P.Rao A G M NTPC, Mumbai [email protected] 9004497144 9 Shri H. Hari Nath A G M NTPC, Mumbai [email protected] 9004497133

10 Mis. Suchitra Maggon A G M NTPC, Delhi [email protected] 9650990428 11 Shri H. Harchandani A G M NTPC, Raipur [email protected] 9424209158 12 Shri V.K. Shrivastav A G M WRLDC [email protected] 9869450221 13 Shri Abhimanyu Gartia D WRLDC [email protected] 9869088508 14 Smt. Pushpa S. C M WRLDC [email protected] 9869404482 15 Smt. S. Usha C M WRLDC [email protected] 9869404458 16 Smt. Roselind

Varghese C M WRLDC [email protected] 9869404618

17 Shri Rajendra Dubey D G M POWERGRID [email protected] 8275039218 18 Shri R.B. Chaubal A E Ele.Dept. DNH [email protected] 9924155572 19 Mis. Swati Vyavahare G M MSEDCL [email protected] 9930316764 20 Shri V.M. Bhatkar S E MSEDCL [email protected] 9969732021 21 Shri B.B. Mehta C E SLDC, GETCO [email protected] 9879200736 22 Shri P.J. Jani E E GUVNL [email protected] 9879618754 23 Shri R.K. Awasthi Addl. C E CSPDCL [email protected] 9826116736 24 Shri Balram Soni Addl. C E CSPTCL [email protected] 9425188807 25 Shri K K Agrawal C G M MPPMCoLtd [email protected] 9425805853 26 Shri M.P. Chincholkar C G M MPPMCoLtd. [email protected] 9425602570 27 Shri Gagan Diwan A O MPPMCL [email protected] 9407009786 28 Shri Arvind Jhalani AGM NSPCL [email protected] 9650990603 29 Shri B.K. Mohanty D G M CGPL [email protected] 9619099925 30 Shri Avinash Kumar Sr. Mgr. CGPL [email protected] 8866058628 31 Shri R.C. Gupta Sr. G M Jindal Power

Ltd. Tamnar [email protected] 7898905010

32 Shri M H Kshatriya G M Torrent Power Company

[email protected] 9227410148

33 Shri Hemant Shinde Sr. Mgr. RGPPL [email protected] 9004497094


Page

27

dUrBaaYa PhWebsite

NO. W

To As per Sir/Ma at WRLgeneratyour inf

Copy fo1 MD, G

hone: 022- 2e: www.wrp

WRPC/Comm

list

adam, Please find

LDC, Muming units anformation a

orwarded foGUVNL &

Wef -

F-3, M28209506, 2pc.gov.in

mercial/RS

d enclosed hmbai to discu

nd blendingand necessa

or informatiChairman,

Govkon

Central piSc

Western Reg-3, emaAayaDIsaI

MIDC Area, A28200195; 2 e-mail: c

SD/2013-14

here with thuss the RSDg of importary action.

on: WRPC, Va

Baart sarkarvernment of Ind`Iya ivaVut p`aiQakElectricity Acama xao~Iya ivaVut gional PowaI xao~, AMQaorI (pU

Andheri (East28200196; fOcomml-wrp

4/2121

he Minutes oD (Reserveted & dom

adodara

India krNa Authority saimait

wer CommitpUva-), mauMba[- - 400t), Mumbai -fO@sa Fax : [email protected] ,

of the specie Shut Dowestic coal b

SE (Prote

ttee 0 093 400 093

I

22 – 28370, commerci

al Meeting wn) of centrby NTPC s

ction, Comm

Aa[- esa Aao : 9IS/ISO: 90

0193 ialwrpc@g

Date: 09.

held on 27.ral sector costations. Th

Yours’ fai

SdSatyanar

mercial & SWRPC - M

9001-2008 001-2008

gmail.com

.12.2013

11.2013 oal fired

his is for

ithfully,

d/- rayan. S Studies), Mumbai.

2

Mailing List 1 MD, GETCO & Chairman, TCC, Vadodara. 2 Director (Operation), MSEDCL, Mumbai. 3 Chief Engineer (Comml.), CSPDCL, Raipur 4 Chief Electrical Engineer, Electricity Dept., Goa 5 Dy.CAO (R&C), Paschim Gujarat Vij. Company Ltd., 6 DGM (Operation), MPMadhya Kshetra VVCL, Bhopal 7 CMD, MP Tradeco, Jabalpur. 8 GM (Comml), GUVNL, Vadodara. 9 Executive Engineer, DD, Nani Daman 10 Executive Engineer, DNH, Silvassa 11 Regional ED, NTPC Ltd., WRHQ-I, Mumbai. 12 Regional ED, NTPC Ltd., WRHQ-II, Raipur 13 General Manager, POSOCO, WRLDC, Mumbai. 14 Chief Engineer (LD), SLDC, Raipur. 15 Chief Engineer (LD), SLDC, GETCO, Vadodara. 16 CE (LD), SLDC, MPPTCL, Jabalpur. 17 Chief Engineer (LD), SLDC, MSETCL, Kalwa. 18 Executive Director (Gen.), GSECL, Vadodara 19 Director (Operation), MSEGCL, Bandra (E), Mumbai: 400 051 20 Executive Director (O&M Gen.), CSPGCL, Danganiya, Raipur: 492 013 (CG) 21 Executive Director (O&M-gen), M.P. Power Gen. Com. Ltd., Jabalpur: 482 008 22 Executive Director (Comml-gen), M.P. Power Gen. Com. Ltd., Jabalpur: 482 008

3

Minutes of the Special meeting held on 27.11.2013 at WRLDC Mumbai to discuss the

Reserve Shut Down of Coal fired Central Sector generating units and blending of imported and domestic coal by NTPC Stations.

A meeting was held on 27/11/2013 at WRLDC Mumbai, to discuss the Reserve Shut Down (RSD) of Coal fired Central Sector generating units and blending of imported and domestic coal by NTPC Stations.

The list of participants is enclosed at Annexure- I. Shri S. D. Taksande, Member Secretary, WRPC welcomed Shri S.K.Negi,

Chairperson TCC & MD, GETCO, special invitees Shri Gurdeep Singh, MD, GSECL, Shri A.P.Bhairve, Director (Comml), MPPGCL, Shri G.J. Deshpande, RED (W-I), NTPC, Shri M.S.Soin RED (W-II), NTPC, Shri P.Pentayya GM, WRLDC, TCC Members and participants for the meeting.

He thanked Shri S.K.Negi and Shri Gurdeep Singh for taking keen interest in the

issues of RSD of Coal fired Central Sector generating units and blending of imported and domestic coal by NTPC Stations and sparing their valuable time for the meeting. He stated that the meeting has been convened in accordance to the decision taken in the 24th WRPC meeting held on 09th October 2013 at Goa. He further stated that the issues of RSD and blending of imported and domestic coal by NTPC Stations are vexed one and requested participants to resolve these issues amicably and with open mind.

He requested Shri S.K.Negi, Chairperson TCC & MD GETCO to chair the meeting.

Shri S K Negi, chairperson TCC & MD GETCO welcomed all participants and thereafter the agenda items were taken up for discussion.

Item No. 1. Availability declaration based on Imported/Domestic coal by NTPC Stations:

MS WRPC stated that the matter was discussed in the 65th CCM and 24th WRPC meeting and beneficiaries have opined that to maximize generation from its coal based power plants, NTPC has resorted to blending of imported coal with indigenous coal. However the availability declaration for such power stations by NTPC is on single availability i.e. without bifurcating the availability on indigenous coal and imported coal and suggested that NTPC should declare availability separately for domestic coal and imported coal on similar lines of gas based generating stations so that beneficiaries can plan and decide about the off take of power in order to meet the demand in the most economical manner. He requested NTPC to elaborate their stand on the issue of blending of imported and domestic coal by NTPC Stations, in view of the concerns raised by the beneficiaries on this issue.

Shri G.J.Deshpande RED (W-I) NTPC stated that they stand by their views expressed in the 24th WRPC meeting, and iterated its views which are given below :

4

1.1 : NTPCs view points : (i) Blending of imported coal had become necessary because of inadequate availability of indigenous coal. Further, NTPC has resorted to import of coal based on the directions/guidelines of CEA/MoP/GoI. (ii) The design of boilers at NTPC generating stations are based on the Indigenous/domestic coal and boilers cannot be fired only on imported coal. (iii) The provision of the Hon’ble CERC’s (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) (Third Amendment) Regulations, is being followed by NTPC and complete details of blending ratio, GCV etc is being provided to the beneficiaries. (iv) The coal is blended before transporting to the Coal bunkers. Coal bunkers have to be loaded with the coal (domestic or blended) at least 4-6hrs before till it is fired. Therefore it is not possible to change the blending ratio as per requisition. Therefore they are not in position to give declaration on domestic and imported coal separately. (vi) Separate Scheduling on domestic and imported coals can't be made organization specific and has to be applied uniformly to all generators. There has to be uniform methodology and policy in this regard. (vii) The current CERC Regulations/lEGC also do not envisage / provide for separate scheduling on domestic and imported coal in case of coal based plants due to the technical limitations. Further, Central Commission vide its 3rd Amendment to the Tariff Regulations dated 31.12.2012 has made it mandatory for generating companies to provide details of coal prices, GCV separately for domestic, e-auction and imported coal in a transparent manner as also the blending ratio of various types of coal. NTPC is already providing all such relevant details to the beneficiaries on monthly basis. Here also CERC has asked for blending of coal and not exclusive use of imported coal at any stage. (viii) The above issues on similar lines were raised before CERC through a petition by GRIDCO (the distribution utility of Odisha) and the same has not been considered by Hon'ble CERC vide its order dated 23.07.2013. (ix) The recently concluded FSAs for the plants commissioned after 01.04.2009, ensures only 80% availability of coal out of which around 65% quantity shall be domestic coal and balance 15% quantity shall be arranged by CIL by import of coal and balance to be arranged by generator from other sources. This clearly indicates that scenario of shortage of domestic coal is likely to continue in future also. 1.2 : Following view points were expressed by GUVNL: (i) During low demand scenario GUVNL has to shut down their cheaper stations and avail costlier

power from NTPC stations. The blending of domestic and imported coal is resulting in increasing the cost of energy of NTPC stations even though there is no requirement of this costlier energy by beneficiaries.

(ii) The generation at NTPC stations only on domestic coal is adequate to meet the requirements of beneficiaries.

(iii) NTPC shall use only designated fuel for generation at its various stations as per PPAs signed by beneficiaries with NTPC. The buyer/beneficiary has right to ask the generator to generate energy on the designated fuel and the fuel used for generation other than the designated fuel shall not be laden on the beneficiaries since this have financial implications on the

5

beneficiaries. Therefore NTPC should seek permission from beneficiaries before resorting to any other fuel including the blending of domestic coal with imported coal, than the designated fuel.

(iv) Either they shall give separate declaration on domestic and imported coal or they shall declare capacity of their stations on domestic coal only. The requirement beyond firm tie up of coal with CIL shall be met by NTPC through domestic markets (e-auction) only and should not import the same.

(v) Regulatory frame work is made through discussions only and if any amicable solutions/suggestions are evolved through mutual discussions, then it would be beneficial to both the parties and the same could be implemented.

1.3) MD GSECL, expressed that the energy market has shifted from generation driven market to load driven market due to surplus generation in the system and this is likely to continue in the near future. In view of low demand of beneficiaries he suggested that all the beneficiaries shall unanimously ask NTPC to give their capability on domestic coal only, if they feel that they can meet their requirement from availability of NTPC stations on domestic coal alone. 1.4) Representatives from MP, Maharashtra and Gujarat agreed for declaration by NTPC stations on domestic coal only. Chairperson TCC expressed that the views expressed at 1.3 and 1.4 should be taken care by NTPC while declaring their capability and also decide on import of coal in light of the views expressed by beneficiaries as above. He further suggested that the matter may be referred to Chairperson CEA for advice. MS WRPC requested NTPC to explain the rational for imposing the blending of imported coal with domestic coal, if the beneficiaries are not willing to avail power generated from imported coal. 1.5) ED (WR-I & II) NTPC stated the following to clarify the viewpoints expressed by

beneficiaries and MS WRPC : (i) Capacity of NTPC stations only on domestic coal cannot be declared since the blending is

done in the ratio of around 90%:10% of domestic and imported coal. Declaration on only domestic coal means the availability of the NTPC stations would get adversely affected even though they are arranging the fuel and making available full capacity to the beneficiaries.

(ii) Declaration separately on domestic and imported coal is not possible as expressed at 1.1 (i), (ii), (iv), (vi) and (ix) due to technical and operational constraints and in view of regulatory frame work at explained at (iii), (vii) and (viii).

(iii) It is possible to declare and run the units on domestic coal only. However, hypothetically, even if they accept to declare capacity on domestic coal only, it may happen that the annual domestic coal inventory available from domestic sources would exhaust in 9-10 months and NTPC would be compelled to declare capacity (which they would practically be not in a position to do) for rest of the months of the year on imported coal. In view of technical difficulty of running unit on imported coal as explained above, it would neither be possible to demonstrate the capability nor run their units. This would violate the relevant clause of IEGC

6

2010, regarding faithful declaration of capability by generators and demonstration of the capability, if asked to do so by WRLDC.

(iv) The issue is before the Hon’ble commission and is under discussion in the draft for “Terms and Tariff regulation 2014-19”. NTPC have already filed its view on this issue and beneficiaries are also free to file their views. The final regulation will come into force from April-2014, and they are of the view that the issue would be addressed through the regulation, till such time the practice of declaration based on blended coal be continued.

(iii) The views expressed by beneficiaries shall not be viewed as decision of WRPC, since NTPC do not agree to them and the decision would not be with absolute consensus.

After exchange of concerns by NTPC and beneficiaries, it was concluded that for implementing any decision, consensus among all the members is required and as no common approach/consensus was evolved, matter would be referred to Chairperson CEA and to WRPC forum for final decision. Item No 2: Reserve Shut Down (RSD) of coal fired Central sector Generating Units: MS, WRPC stated that the matter was discussed in the 24th meeting of WRPC and it was decided

a separate meeting shall be convened by WRPC Secretariat to discuss the issues raised in the above meeting and evolve methodology of RSD for coal fired Central Sector Generating Units of NTPC. He further stated that the proposed methodology was circulated with the agenda notes for the meeting. A presentation on the proposed methodology was made and the same is enclosed at Annex.-2. 2.1 : Option 1 : The proposed methodology was prepared by giving considerations to following issues;

(i) The proposed RSD shall be at least for 72hrs, as decided earlier. (ii) Beneficiaries having shares from the proposed RSD unit and their entitlement post RSD

should not be affected. (iii) International/Inter regional allocations from such RSD unit should not be affected.

The salient features of the RSD proposal is as follows: (i) No constituent shall propose RSD. The beneficiaries shall only give the excessive power,

it is willing to forgo for at least next three days on a day ahead basis. (ii) NTPC shall give merit order list of all coal fired stations of NTPC based on variable cost

to WRLDC. (iii) WRLDC based on excessive power beneficiaries are willing to forgo for next 3 days shall

choose the unit size from the costliest station for RSD. (iv) NTPC would be informed the unit selected for putting it under RSD. (v) The DCs and entitlements of this RSD unit from the stage will be frozen (If a station/stage

have more than one unit then the DC frozen would be = (DC of the station * ex bus capacity of the unit/Ex bus capacity of the station on bar before putting it under RSD) and capacity charges would be shared as per the percentage share cited in TABLE-1 of the presentation (is attached at annexure -II).

7

(vi) The excessive power, beneficiaries are willing to forgo would be distributed amongst the beneficiaries as per TABLE-2. This would mean that the un-requisitioned surplus power is temporarily allocated to other beneficiaries thus keeping their total entitlement unaffected. It may be noted that the Hon’ble CERC has already approved the URS procedure followed in WR vide their order dated 11.01.2010, and is quoted below; " All generating stations, government by the tariff regulations of the commission be allowed to change schedule for the unrequisitioned quantum of power from one beneficiary's) to another beneficiary's) of the same power station on the requisition by these beneficiary's) through the provision of IEGC 6.5.18( the clause was 6.5.20when the order came). These schedule revisions would be treated as re-allocation of power on temporary basis and would not be taken as open access transactions".

WRLDC will give the revised entitlements to beneficiaries as per TABLE-3 arrived as per the normal scheduling procedure.

(vii) Capacity charges would be paid as per entitlements arrived at given in TABLE-1. Therefore capacity charges obligations on beneficiaries without RSD methodology and with RSD methodology would remain same. Energy charges would be paid based on the requisitioned power as per entitlements given in TABLE-3.

(viii) The off line and on line DC would be different as followed in case of Fuel Shortage condition.

(ix) WRLDC would furnish both the DC’s to WRPC for incorporating them in REAs as in the cases of fuel shortage conditions. Discussions: ED (WR-II) NTPC stated that in principle, they are in agreement with the proposal. The

unit under RSD would be brought back into service within 6-8hrs, if the duration of the unit under RSD is around 3-6 days. If the unit is put under RSD for more than 7 days, the lit up time required would be around 24 hrs, since the unit requires degasification. The ramping up and ramping down at the specified rates should be allowed for bringing back the unit on bar and the DC for this period shall be preserved. However NTPC would make all efforts to minimise the lit up time. The cost of start up requirement shall be compiled by them. He further suggested that to avoid frequent start stop of the unit, and the cost implication due to this, it would be appropriate to put the unit under RSD for longer durations and the same unit shall not be put under RSD frequently (i.e. units shall be put under RSD on rotational basis).

All beneficiaries, in principle agree to adopt the methodology suggested above by WRPC.

AGM WRLDC stated that the proposed methodology is being followed in the URS

scheduling. He further stated that the staff of WRLDC have examined the methodology and they have expressed that implementation of this methodology is practically impossible. He cited various difficulties faced by WRLDC during the recent past in implementation of technical minimum scheduling approved in the 24th WRPC meeting. Further he stated that the proposed methodology suggests WRLDC to do reallocation of shares, already allocated by MoP and they are not authorised to do so.

8

GM WRLDC stated that the scheduling done by WRLDC is not centralised scheduling as in the case of SLDCs, where the SLDCs is empowered to schedule as per the requirement of one beneficiary. In case of scheduling by WRLDC, interest of all the beneficiaries in WR has to be kept in mind. Further it has to work within the regulatory framework of CERC. Member Secretary, WRPC, clarified that the proposed methodology do not suggest reallocation of shares, but it only suggests that the surplus power of a beneficiary/beneficiaries be temporarily allocated to other beneficiary/beneficiaries (as is done in case of URS), such that their entitlement from the coal fired station with RSD and without RSD remains the same and these beneficiaries are required to pay for actual energy scheduled out of these temporary entitlements. Therefore there is neither violation of regulatory frame work nor the interest of the beneficiaries as explained above. Regarding difficulties expressed by WRLDC in the practical implementation, it was suggested by Chairperson TCC that WRPC and WRLDC may discuss separately and if amicable methodology is evolved, same could be circulated to beneficiaries / WRPC for final nod. 2.2 : Option No 2: Technical minimum scheduling:

MS, WRPC stated that in the 24th WRPC meeting it was decided that NTPC coal fired thermal units having capacity 500 MW and above shall be scheduled at technical minimum of 60% of their capacity and thermal units below 500 MW (200/210 MW) shall be scheduled at 70% of their capacity in case the RSD issue remains unresolved. He further informed that WRLDC shall ensure ramping up and down rates for the units/stages and particularly between the 96th block and 1st block of next day while issuing the schedule. Also WRLDC shall ensure that beneficiaries who had already given requisition for its entire entitlement, the same shall not be reduced. This is presently being followed till the RSD methodology is finalised. Representatives from SLDC opined that the technical minimum scheduling done by WRLDC should be such that after receipt of schedules from the beneficiaries, if the sum total(say “Y”) of this schedule for a particular stage/station is less than the technical minimum (say “X”) then “X”-“Y” schedule shall be imposed on the beneficiaries in proportion to their entitlements such that the total schedule of beneficiary does not exceed its technical minimum entitlement from the stage/station. They opined that this is not being done presently by WRLDC. GUVNL representative stated that the technical minimum is not defined in any of the regulation. MD, GSECL stated that the technical minimum for a coal fired unit is minimum power the unit can stably generate without taking oil support and is machine specific. He shared that the newer 800MW machines even have technical minimum of 40-50% of their capacity without oil support. SLDC Maharashtra representative intimated that as per the directives of MERC they have carried out the third party(CPRI) testing of all the machines in Maharashtra and certification for technical minimum for all the units in their system had already been done. As per this certification the technical minimum for older generating units (i.e. date of manufacturing :before 1995) were certified around 73-74% of the capacity, technical minimum for newer generating units (i.e. date of manufacturing :after 1995) were certified around 60% of the capacity and technical minimum for Chinese make generating units is around 40-50% of the capacity.

9

Member Secretary stated that the technical minimum decided in the 24th WRPC meeting, in general is as per the above observations of members. Chairperson TCC stated that implementation of technical minimum shall be done by WRLDC on the above ideology and shall continue till the methodology for RSD is finalised/approved by WRPC. As regards to separate declarations on Imported & domestic coal by NTPC, it was concluded that the views on both sides be placed before the WRPC. As regards to methodology on RSD it was concluded that WRLDC and WRPC secretariat shall discuss the issue. The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair.

********

10

Annexure - I LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF RSD MEETING HELD ON 27.11.2013

Sl.No. Organisation, Name & Designation E-mail Mobile No.

I GETCO / GVCL 1 Shri S.K. Negi, M.D. 2 Shri Gurdeep Singh, M.D. [email protected] 9687533666 3 Shri K.P. Jangid, G.M. [email protected] 9879200655 4 Shri B.B. Mehta, C.E. [email protected] 9879200736 5 Shri P.J. Jani, E.E. [email protected] 9879618754 II MSETCL / MSEDCL/Maha Genco 6 Ms. Swati Vyavahare, G.M. [email protected] 9930316764 7 Ms. Kavita Gharat, S.E. [email protected] 9820954353 8 Shri V.M. Bhatkar, S.E. [email protected] 9769732021 9 Shri Vasant D. Pande, E.E. [email protected] 9820741941 10 Shri K.M. Shirbhaiye, E.E. [email protected] 8879770740 11 Shri D.S. Raut, D.E.E. [email protected] 9920634320 III MPPTCL / MPPGCL 12 Shri K.C. Badkul, Director [email protected] 9425150654 13 Shri A.P. Bhairve, Director [email protected] 9425805265 14 Shri P.A.R. Bende, C.E. [email protected] 9425805264 15 Shri A.K. Saxena [email protected] 9425540113 IV CSPTCL / CSPGCL 16 Shri K.S. Manothiya, E.D. [email protected] 9826710989 17 Shri R.K. Awasthi, Addl.C.E. [email protected] 9826116738 V WRLDC / POWERGRID 18 Shri P. Pentayya, G.M. [email protected] 9869072437 19 Shri V.K. Shrivastava, A.G.M. [email protected] 9869450221 20 Shri K.S. Deva Prasad, D.G.M. 9869483904 21 Smt. Pushpa Seshadri, C.M. [email protected] 9869404482 22 Smt. Sachala Mishra, C.M. [email protected] 9869450223 23 Smt. S.Usha, C.M. [email protected]

24 Shri Vivek Pandey, C.M. [email protected] 9869404673

11

VI NTPC

25 Shri G.J. Despandey,R.E.D. 26 Shri M.S. Soin, R.E.D. [email protected] 9424209194 27 Shri A.K. Juneja, G.M. [email protected] 9004497010 28 Shri P.P. Francis, G.M. 9650990308 29 Shri Rajnish Bhagat, G.M. [email protected] 9650991060 VII WRPC 30 Shri S.D. Taksande, M.S. [email protected] 9820878384 31 Shri M.M. Dhakate, S.E. [email protected] 8108787778 32 Shri L.K.S. Rathore, E.E. [email protected] 9833371844 33 Shri P.D.Lone, E.E. [email protected] 9867622823

12

Annexure - II Entity 1 2 3 4 5 Total

A 210 300 495 198 100 1303 B 263 200 396 198 0 1057 C 315 300 594 165 150 1524 D 158 150 297 99 125 829 E 105 50 198 0 125 478

Total 1050 1000 1980 660 500 5190 Reduce / Increase of utilities

1 2 3 4 5 Tot. A red 0 0 202 198 100 500 B add 0 0 0 0 0 0 C add 0 0 76 74 0 150 D add 0 0 63 62 0 125 E add 0 0 63 62 0 125

Final drawl by entities

1 2 3 4 5 Tot. A 210 300 293 0 0 803 B 263 200 396 198 0 1057 C 315 300 670 239 0 1524 D 158 150 360 161 0 829 E 105 50 261 62 0 478

Tot. 1050 1000 1980 660 0 4690 Considering table 1 as base case, utility A is surrendering 500 MWs. So 100, 198 & 202 MWs power

to be reduced from its entitlement (5, 4 & 3 respectively). As generating entity 5 has taken for RSD,

the shares of other utilities (B, C, D & E) have to adjust from A’s entitlement. By considering A’s

reduction from each generating entity, the same was adjusted to other utilities on their proportional

entitlement (shown in table 2). Final drawls of utilities and power to be generated from entities have

shown in table 3.

Remarks

Entity / Location of Generating Station

Region Entity / Location of Loads

Region

1 SAIL - VISP NSPCL, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh WR 10.92 01.11.2011 31.05.2014 SAIL-VISP, Karnataka SR

2 WBSEDCL Baghlihar, Jammu & Kashmir NR 100 01.07.2012 30.06.2015 WBSEDCL, West Bengal ER

3 CSPDCL CSPDCL, Chhatisgarh WR 309 01.04.2013 31.03.2014 MPPMCL, Madhya Pradesh WR

4 U TDNH NSPCL, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh WR 40.5 01.04.2013 31.03.2014 Dadra & Nagar Haveli WR

5 UT-DD NSPCL Bhilai WR 22 01.04.2013 31.03.2014 UT-DD WR

6 WBSEDCL Mejia Unit-7&8, DVC ER 200 01.05.2013 31.10.2015 WBSEDCL, West Bengal ER

7 National Energy Trading and Service Ltd. Lanco Anpara Power Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

NR 100 16.06.2013 31.05.2016 TANGEDCO, Tamil Nadu SR

8 Jindal Power Limited Jindal Power Limited, Chhattisgarh WR 200 16.06.2013 30.11.2015 TANGEDCO, Tamil Nadu SR

9 PTC India Limited Sterlite Energy Ltd., Odisha ER 100 16.06.2013 31.05.2014 Kerala State Electricity Board, Kerala

SR

10 Adani Enterprises Limited Adani Power Limited Stage -III, Mundra, Gujarat

WR 200 16.06.2013 31.12.2015 TANGEDCO, Tamil Nadu SR

11 PTC India Limited Chhattisgarh State Power Trading Co. Ltd., Chhattisgarh

WR 100 16.06.2013 31.05.2014 Kerala State Electricity Board, Kerala

SR

12 KSK Mahanadi Power Company Limited KSK Mahanadi Power Co. Ltd., Chhattisgarh

WR 400 16.06.2013 15.06.2016 APCPDCL, Andhra Pradesh SR

13 Corporate Power Limited Corporate Power Limited, Jharkhand

ER 150 16.06.2013 15.06.2016 APCPDCL, Andhra Pradesh SR

14 BALCO BALCO, Korba, Chhattisgarh WR 102 01.08.2013 31.03.2014 MPPMCL, Madhya Pradesh WR15 Jindal Power Limited Jindal Power Limited, Chhattisgarh WR 2.32 01.12.2013 31.03.2014 Kirloskar Ferrous Industries,

MaharashtraWR

16 Jindal Power Limited Jindal Power Limited, Chhattisgarh WR 6.56 01.12.2013 31.03.2014 POSCO Maharashtra Steel Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra

WR

2043.3

MTOA Status for the month December, 2013Sl. No.

Name of the Applicant MTOA Granted for

(MW)

Date from which MTOA is Granted

Date upto which MTOA Granted

Injection of Power Drawl of Power

Page 1 of 1

S. No. Name of LTA Customer (Injecting utility) Generator/Load/Trader

Region Quantum of LTA granted

LTA with tied up beneficiaries

Name of the beneficiaries

Whether applicable during the

month

Remarks

NR ER WR NER SR TOTAL

1 ACB Limited Generator WR 243 200 Gujarat - - 43 - - 43 Yes2 Adani Power Limited Generator WR 342 0 NA 342 - - - - 342 Yes The injection point changed to WR from NR

w.e.f October 1, 2013.3 Adani Power Limited Generator WR 1495 1495 Haryana - - - - - 0 Yes Based on CERC order dated 29/07/2013, for

APL Mundra TPS stage #3 to Haryana LTA, the APL would pay for the LTA of 1495 MW at both Mundra TPS stage#3 injection POC rate as well as Haryana with drawl POC rates.

4 Adani Power Limited Generator WR 200 0 NA - - 200 200 Yes5 ADHPL Generator NR 192 0 NA 192 - - - - 192 Yes6 BRPL (DVC Power) Load NR 100 100 BRPL - - - - - 0 Yes7 BRPL (DVC Power) Load ER 31 31 BRPL - - - - - 0 Yes With effect from 01.10.20138 BYPL (DVC Mejia U#7) Load NR 119.19 119.19 BYPL - - - - - 0 Yes9 BYPL (DVC Mejia U#8) Load NR 119.19 119.19 BYPL - - - - - 0 Yes Since BYPL is not making payment of

transmission charges, DVC is to be billed for this quantum w.e.f. 01.09.2013. DVC was informed by POWERGRID vide letter dtd 11.07.2013.

10 BYPL (DVC Power) Load NR 63 63 BYPL - - - - - 0 Yes11 BYPL (DVC Power) Load ER 19 19 BYPL - - - - - 0 Yes With effect from 01.10.201312 DD (NSPCL) Load WR 70 70 DD - - - - - 0 Yes13 DNH (NSPCL) Load WR 100 100 DNH - - - - - 0 Yes14 DVC (DVC Durgapur U#2) Generator ER 100 100 PSPCL - - - - - 0 Yes15 DVC (DVC Koderma U#1) Generator ER 50 50 Haryana - - - - - 0 Yes16 DVC (DVC Mejia U#7) Load ER 12.5 12.5 DVC - - - - - 0 Yes17 DVC (DVC Mejia U#8) Load ER 12.5 12.5 DVC - - - - - 0 Yes18 DVC (MPL U#1) Load ER 140.5 140.5 DVC - - - - - 0 Yes19 DVC (MPL U#2) Load ER 140.5 140.5 DVC - - - - - 0 Yes20 EMCO Energy Limited Generator WR 520 0 NA - - 520 - - 520 Yes

21 Haryana (DVC Mejia U#7) Load NR 50 50 Haryana - - - - - 0 Yes22 Haryana (DVC Mejia U#8) Load NR 50 50 Haryana - - - - - 0 Yes23 Haryana (PPCL) Load NR 140 140 Haryana - - - - - 0 Yes24 Himachal Sorang Generator NR 100 0 NA 100 - - - - 100 Yes25 HPSEB(BASPA) Load NR 300 300 HPSEB - - - - - 0 Yes26 Jaiprakash Power Ventures Limited(JPVL) Generator NR 704 0 NA 528 - 176 - - 704 Yes

27 Jaypee Karcham Hydro Power Corporation Limited (JPVL)

Generator NR 176 0 NA 176 - - - - 176 Yes

28 JINDAL Generator WR 500 0 NA - - 500 - - 500 Yes29 Lanco Anpara Generator NR 100 0 NA 100 - - - - 100 Yes30 Lanco Green Power Private Limited Generator NR 8.4 8.4 NA - - - - - 0 Yes31 Lanco Kondapalli PPL Generator SR 250 0 NA 100 - 150 - - 250 Yes32 Maithon Power Limited (MPL U#1) Generator ER 140.5 0 NA - 140.5 - - - 140.5 Yes33 MPPTC (DVC Power) Trader WR 500 500 MP - - - - - 0 Yes34 NDPL (CLP Jhajjar) Load NR 124 124 NDPL - - - - - 0 Yes35 NDPL (DVC Power) Load NR 67 67 NDPL - - - - - 0 Yes36 NDPL (MPL U#1) Load NR 140.5 140.5 NDPL - - - - - 0 Yes37 NDPL (MPL U#2) Load NR 140.5 140.5 NDPL - - - - - 0 Yes38 NDPL (DVC Power) Load ER 20 20 NDPL - - - - - 0 Yes With effect from 01.10.201339 PTC (Budhil) Trader NR 61.6 0 NA 61.6 - - - - 61.6 Yes40 PTC(Lanco Amarkantak) Trader WR 300 0 NA - - 300 - - 300 Yes41 PTC(Malana-II/Everest Power) Trader NR 86 86 PSEB - - - - - 0 Yes42 Punjab (DVC Durgapur U#1) Load NR 100 100 PSPCL - - - - - 0 Yes43 Punjab (PPCL) Load NR 140 140 Punjab - - - - - 0 Yes44 Spectrum Coal & Power Generator WR 60 0 NA - - 60 - - 60 Yes45 Torrent Power Generator WR 300 100 MP - - 200 - - 200 Yes46 WBSEDCL (MPL U #1&2) Load ER 140.5 140.5 WBSEDCL - - - - - 0 Yes47 WBSEDCL (MPL U#1) Load ER 70 70 WBSEDCL - - - - - 0 Yes48 WBSEDCL (MPL U#2) Load ER 70 70 WBSEDCL - - - - - 0 Yes

Total 8908.38 5019.28 1599.6 140.5 2149 0 0 3889.1

LTA Status for the month December, 2013Quantum for target Regions (MW) - for LTA with

untied beneficiaries

Annex.‐14

The comments of the WRPC Secretariat on the concept paper on GNA, titled “Ensuring adequacy in the planning & development of Inter‐state Transmission System” are as follows:

1) Power System planning based on GNA concept: a) In the GNA concept, it has been suggested that the system planning shall be done by

assessing the individual peak requirements of the users. The peak demands of all the users generally are not coincidental; also many paths of the transmission networks are used by more than a single user. Since the peak demands of the users occur at different times and periods of the year, therefore a system designed based on the assumption that all the peak demands/requirements of users occur simultaneously would result in considerable over sizing of the system. Further most of the capacity so generated would remain stranded for a large portion of time in the real time operation.

b) The existing system planning through point to point identification of generator‐load pair is a techno‐economical method of planning a system, since the transmission paths are decided based on the notional commitments of the generators and loads which is missing in the GNA concept.

c) All the users would assess their GNAs for the next 3‐4 years, therefore there would be a significant imbalance between the injection GNAs and drawl GNAs. The gap between the Generation GNA and Load GNA has to be distributed based on assumptions only. Therefore the paths designed would lack certainty of catering the GNAs through development of the transmission system. e.g. If sum of generation GNAs =120MW and sum of load GNAs=80MW There is a gap of 40MW load. The system has to handle either for 80MW or 120MW. As per the GNA concept the system shall be able to handle 120MW, so that no constraints are felt. For Load generation balance additional 40MW load is required to be simulated. The planner will have to fix this load either by making certain assumptions or distribute it throughout the grid. It may happen that the assumptions may go wrong and therefore the system planning. On the other hand the distribution of load equally throughout the grid would mean under development of system in certain regions and over development of system in other regions. The same would be applicable for Load GNA is greater than Generation GNA.

d) During the discussions it was suggested that the GNA shall be assessed considering the following; (i) the user shall consider its peak requirement. (ii) the user shall eliminate all the state generators which have uncertain

inputs/fuel linkages i.e. wind, solar, hydro, costlier Gas, and thermal stations which are not having coal linkages.

(iii) The gap between the peak requirement and the available generation resources by eliminating generations at (ii) above shall be the assessed GNA.

This is highly techno commercially infeasible, since by creating transmission assets with above considerations would result in considerable transmission capacity unutilized for most of the period.

e) The main operational issue with over sized transmission system will be the over voltages in the system. With design and development of such a over sized system would result in over voltages in the real time since the assessed loadings would not always prevail in the system in real time. Reactors of uneconomical scale will have to be installed, since most of the time the system will remain in under loaded condition.

f) The over voltages shall affect life of equipments.

2) Alignment of GNA with PoC : There is a need for GNA to align with PoC on following points; a) In the concept of PoC, 50% of the cost of every transmission element is assigned to

generator and 50 % to the drawl entity. However as per the concept of GNA the whole cost of certain transmission elements associated with the GNA would be assigned to the user (i.e. Generator and drawl entity), since this concept suggests that system shall be planned such that the system would handle all the GNAs without declaring the source or sink (there would not be any point to point declaration of source and sink).

b) Electrically, transmission network is used equally (50%: 50%) by a generator and load, therefore it would be illogical to assign certain transmission assets either to only generator or buyer. The concept has been captured in the PoC mechanism, however GNA concept lacks it.

c) In the concept of PoC, the user has to pay drawl PoC and Injection PoC charges which is based on the notional point to point commitment of LTA/MTOA. However as per the concept of GNA, the user has to pay only one charge i.e. drawl charges ( if the user is buyer) and injection charges (if the user is generator).

d) The PoC mechanism also ensures that the deviation by the user from its approved LTA/MTOA/STOA is charged with additional penalty through the Regional Transmission Deviation Accounts (RTDA) prepared every month, which acts as a deterrent for over using the transmission assets.

e) The average per unit (kwh) transmission charge under PoC regime is around 28 paise (considering injection PoC charge of Rs 100000/‐ per MW per month and withdrawl PoC charge of Rs 100000/‐ per MW per month). This would considerably go high since the GNA assessed by considering (1) above would be 2‐3 times the existing LTA+MTOA and therefore the average cost of transmission would increase 2‐3 times

the existing charges(56‐84 paise per unit), such a high transmission cost is not desirable.

3) Change in the connectivity, LTA MTOA & STOA, PoC regulations of CERC : a) If the connectivity regulation is amended such that the generator seeking

connectivity shall be granted connectivity along with LTA (to the extent of their installed/ex‐bus capacity) only, the generator getting such conditional connectivity would be charged through the existing PoC mechanism for the LTA that he has been granted along with connectivity. This seems to be a very simple solution.

b) The concept of GNA tries to explain the issues of grant of LTA to generators aimed at target region without identified beneficiary. Though there is hardship on those availing such LTAs, since they do not get compensated and would be required to pay STOA charges in addition to LTA charges, if they wish to sell power through STOA aimed at target regions other than declared in LTA or through power exchanges, the quantum of such LTAs is very low. Also the generators seeking such LTAs have taken LTAs for a quantum far lesser than their installed/ex‐bus capacity. The PoC regulation has tried to avoid pan caking, however such cases have been left out and the same can be addressed through proper amendments in the PoC/LTA, MTOA, STOA regulations. Further even 4‐5 years after commissioning of the generating stations, almost all of the generators have failed to locate their market and tie up their power with the beneficiary. Theoretically this issue remains unaddressed, since no one in advance knows, where these generators would be selling their power in future(if the generator himself cannot identify his customers in advance) and therefore in which area transmission network is required to be strengthened for absorbing this power. The planner either has to simulate the loads commensurate to these capacities in all the load centers (so that this capacity can be absorbed by all the load centres) for successfully implementation of the GNA concept and therefore result in over sizing of the system. The commission has therefore left the responsibility (in the 2004 reg) of identification of the loads (market) to the generators (for availing LTA aimed at target region without identified beneficiary) where they would sell their power so that they could judiciously identify the target regions.

4) Assessment of GNA for the period 3‐4years down the lane: As per the GNA concept, the assessment of GNA (which includes LTA/MTOA/STOA/Power Exchange) by the users shall be done yearly for 3‐4 years down the lane and system planning shall be done according to the GNA assessments. a) Once GNA is assessed by a user (beneficiary), the user (beneficiary) during the

subsequent assessments would not be able to reduce the GNA quantum since the system planned and transmission assets created would be based on the earlier GNA assessed. Any erroneous assessment of GNA (on the higher side) by an user during initial period cannot be corrected (reduced) by the user during subsequent period due to decrease in requirement by the user from ISTS, since the assets already created to cater the GNA cannot be decommissioned.

b) The transmission charges would be payable by the user based on the assessed GNA after 3‐4years. This does not guarantee the user that the required transmission assets would be ready within this time frame to cater the GNA. There can be slippages of timelines w.r.t. commissioning of generators/ transmission lines for reasons in the control and not in control of such users. These slippages are not addressed in the GNA concept.

c) Due to upfront payment for GNA, the user may under declare its GNA. d) The STOA and Power Exchange transactions are temporary requirements for short

period; therefore it would be difficult to predict these requirements 3‐4 years earlier.

Therefore appropriate changes/amendments in the existing regulations may solve many of the above issues. GNA concept at this stage seems to be practically difficult, since predictive tools/approaches with certainty are not in place as of date with the decision (State/Generators/IPPs) making authorities. A comprehensive approach toward predicting loads and generation needs to be developed for proper assessment of requirements the system studies.

F-3, MIDC Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400 093 dUrBaaYa [email protected]/ccm/66ccm_minute.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of F-3, MIDC Area, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400 093 dUrBaaYa [email protected]/ccm/66ccm_minute.pdf ·...