Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission no 23 of 15.pdf · Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission...

1

Order-case no 23 of 15

Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission

VidyutBhawan-II, J.L.NehruMarg, Patna 800 021

Case No. 23/2015 /2012 In the matter of :

Petition u/s 86 (1) (c) of Electricity Act, 2003 read with

clause 3,8(2), 12(2), 12(3), 13(2) of BERC (Terms and

condition for open access) Regulations, 2005 seeking

direction for grant of short term open access by BSPTCL

to the petitioner.

And

M/s Shree Cement Ltd., BIADA, Aurangabad, Bihar......…………. Petitioner

Vs.

Bihar State Power Transmission Company Ltd. ..

………Respondents South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd.

Coram:

1. Sri U. N. Panjiar - Chairman

2. Sri S. C. Jha - Member

Appearance :

1. Mr. Kumar Mihir, (Advocate) On behalf of M/s Shree Cement Limited

3 Sri Prabhat Kumar, ESE Trans (O&M) & SLDC,

On behalf of BSPTCL 4 Devendra Kumar Singh, EEE, SLDC,

4. Sri Binod Kumar AEE, (Com.) On behalf of SBPDCL

Date of hearings: 26.06.2015 and 16.07.2015

ORDER

Dated: 13.08.2015

M/s Shree Cement Limited has filed petition under section 86(1)(c)

of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Regulation 3, 8(2), 12 (2),

12(3), 13(2), 27, 28 & 29 of the 'Bihar Electricity Regulatory

2


Commission (Terms and Conditions for open access) Regulations,

2005' seeking directions for grant of short term open access(STOA)

to the petitioner for facilitating transmission and wheeling of

electricity as permitted under the Open Access Regulations in the

State of Bihar.

1.0 Petitioner’s Submission:

1(i) The petitioner M/s Shree Cement Limited, BIADA, Aurangabad has

commissioned a 2 Million Tonne per Annum (MTPA) capacity

cement grinding plant at BIADA, Aurangabad in Bihar in June

2014. The Cement plant has a 12.50 MVA HT-connection with the

respondent no.2 SBPDCL and in May 2015, the company has been

sanctioned enhancement in its contract demand from 12.5 MVA to

13.5 MVA. The Petitioner has a dedicated feeder at the 132 KV GSS

of the Respondent no.1, BSPTCL Aurangabad and has a 132 V

independent transmission line from the GSS to electrical sub-

station at Company's plant. The company has also installed 0.2S

Class ABT complaint meters at its said plant.

(ii) The Commission in exercise of its powers conferred under Section

42 read with Section 181 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003)

and all other powers enabling the Commission in this behalf, had

brought out BERC(Terms and Conditions for Open Access)

Regulations,2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'Open Access

Regulations, 2005) notified on 20th May, 2006. The Commission

subsequently, issued the BERC(Terms and conditions for Open

Access) (1st Amendment) Regulations, 2012 (hereinafter referred to

3


as "1st Amendment Regulatgions,2012") notified on 19th September

2012.

Regulation 3 of the Open Access Regulations explain the scope and

application of the said regulations as under:

"These Regulations shall apply to Open Access for use of intrastate

transmission system and / or the distribution system of licensees in

the Sate, including when such systems are used in conjunction with

inter-state transmission system".

Regulation 7 of the Open Access Regulations, 2005 has allowed short

term open access for all consumers who intend to avail open access

for period of one year or less. The relevant regulation is reproduced

below:

"7. Categorisation of Open Access Customers

(1) Subject to the provisions of Regulations 5 and 6,

the Open Access Customers shall be divided into two

categories, based on the duration of use of the intra-

state transmission system or the distribution system:

(a) Long-term Open Access customers – The persons

availing or intending to avail of the Open Access for a

period of five years or more shall be the long – term

Open Access customers.

(b) Short-term Open Access customers- The persons

availing or intending to avail of the Open Access for a

period of one year or less shall be categorised as the

short – term Open Access customers.

4


(2) Short-term Open Access customers shall be eligible to

obtain fresh Open Access after the expiry of the term and

shall be treated as a new applicant for capacity allocation."

Regulation 8 of the Open Access Regulation, 2005 provides for the

criteria to grant Open Access indicating that power flow is an

important criteria to be taken into consideration while considering

any application seeking open access. The relevant provisions of the

said Regulation read as under:

"(2) The short-term Open Access shall be ordinarily allowed, if such

request can be accommodated without jeopardising the safety of the

grid system by utilising:

(a) Inherent Design Margins;

(b) Margins available due to variation in power flows; and

(c) Margins available due to in-built spare transmission /

distribution capacity created to cater to future load

growth.

(3) The State Transmission Utility and distribution licensees shall at all

times endeavour to provide Open Access to their system and shall

always equip their system to meet the future demand for Open

Access and create sufficient capacity in the system to provide Open

Access and thereby competition."

Further, Regulation 9(2) of the Open Access Regulation, 2005 has

specified State Load Dispatch Centre (SLDC) as the nodal agency for

grant of short term open access. Further the State Transmission

Utility and / or a distribution licensee concerned have been made

5


responsible for co-ordination with the SLDC and provide all relevant

information required to take decision for providing Open Access.

The relevant Regulation is reproduced below:

"9. Nodal Agency

(1) The Nodal Agency for arranging long-term Open

Access in all cases shall be the State Transmission

Utility whether its system is used or not: and for

that purpose, a distribution licensee and / or a

transmission licensee, whose system gets associated

with such long-term Open Access, shall be

responsible to co-ordinate with the State

Transmission Utility and provide all relevant

information required to take decision for providing

Open Access.

(2) Similarly, the Nodal Agency for short-term Open

Access shall be the State Load despatch Centre and

in such case, the State Transmission Utility and / or

a transmission and/or a distribution licensee

concerned, as the case may be, shall be responsible

for co-ordination with the State Load Despatch

Centre and provide all relevant information required

to take decision for providing Open Access.

Regulation 12 (2) of the Open Access Regulation, 2005 provide the

method for determination of the transmission capacity in the state

in the following manner:

6


"The availability of capacity in the distribution system, for

long-term and short-term Open Access, including the

existence or absence of operational constraints affecting the

Open Access being allowed shall be determined by the State

Load Despatch Centre after considering the representation of

the distribution licensees and the persons seeking the Open

Access.

(3) In the event of any dispute on the capacity of the transmission

system available or absence of operational constraints in the

distribution system, to be determined by the State Transmission

Utility or State Load Despatch Centre, as the case may be, the

same shall be referred to the Commission for adjudication."

As per Regulation 13(2) (d) of the Open Access Regulation 2005,

Commission has specified that SLDC shall process an application

seeking Open Access for a term of up to 30 days in a maximum time

limit of 7 days.

The relevant regulation is reproduced below:-

"(d) The State Load Despatch Centre shall take a decision on the

application within the time period as specified below:

S. No.

Term of Open Access Maximum Processing Time

1 Up to one day 12 hours 2 Up to Seven days Two day

3 Up to thirty days Seven Days 4 Up to one hundred and

eighty days Fifteen days

5 Up to one year Thirty days"

7


Further, Regulations 27, 28 and 29 of the Open Access Regulations,

2005 provide as under:

"27. dispute Resolution Mechanism

(1) The complaints regarding all grievances and disputes relating

to Open Access shall be made to the State Transmission Utility

or State Load Despatch Centre, as the case may be, which may

investigate and endeavour to resolve the grievance amicably.

(2) If State Transmission Utility or State Load Despatch Centre is

unable to redress the grievance or complaint or dispute, the

matter may be referred to the Commission by the State

Transmission Utility or State Load Despatch Centre as the case

may be, for adjudication.

28. Savings

(1) Nothing in these Regulations shall be deemed to limit or

otherwise affect the power of the Commission to make such

orders as may be necessary to meet the ends of justice.

(2) Nothing in these Regulations shall bar the Commission from

adopting in conformity with provisions of the Act, a procedure

which is at variance with any of the provisions of these

Regulations, if the Commission, in view of the special

circumstances of a matter or a class of matters, deems it just or

expedient for deciding such matter or class of matters.

(3) Nothing in these Regulations shall, expressly or impliedly, bar

the Commission dealing with any matter or exercising any power

under the Act for which no Regulations have been framed, and the

8


Commission may deal with such matters, powers and functions in

a manner, as it considers just and appropriate.

29. Powers to Remove Difficulties:

If any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of the provisions of

these Regulations, the Commission may by general or special

order, direct the State Transmission Utility, State Load Despatch

Centre, licensees and the Open Access customers, to take such

action, as may appear to the Commission to be necessary or

expedient for the purpose of removing difficulties."

Subsequently, the BERC (Terms and Conditions for Open Access)

(1st Amendment) Regulations, 2012 has amended the Regulation 2

of Open Access Regulation 2005 to include definition for Collective

Transactions ["Collective transaction" means a set of transactions

discovered in power exchange through anonymous, simultaneous

competitive bidding by buyers and sellers]. The relevant regulation

is reproduced below:

"In Regulation 2 of the principal regulations, after clause 2 (1)

(L) the following shall be inserted, namely: (m) "Bilateral

Transaction, means a transaction for exchange of energy (MWh)

between a specified buyer and a specified seller, directly or

through a trading licensee or discovered at power exchange

though anonymous bidding, from a specified point of injection

to a specified point of drawl for a fixed, for varying quantum of

power (MW) for any time period during a month.

9


(n) "Collective transaction" means a set of transactions

discovered in power exchange through anonymous,

simultaneous competitive bidding by buyers and sellers".

(iii) It is evident from the above quoted regulations that the

Commission has already put in place the necessary regulatory

framework enabling all consumers desirous of sourcing power from

the power exchanges to seek Short Term Open Access in the State

of Bihar.

(iv) It is also mentioned that the CERC(Open Access in inter-State

Transmission) Regulations, 2008 has specified that, if, required

energy metering and transmission capability are available, the

SLDC has to accord the NOC for open access with in 3 working

days of receipt of the open access application. The relevant

Regulation 8 of the CERC(Open Access in inter-State

Transmission) Regulations, 2008" is reproduced below for a ready

reference :

"(3) In case the infrastructure required for energy

metering and time block wise accounting already exists,

and required transmission capacity in the State network

is available, the State Load Despatch Centre shall

accord its concurrence or 'no objection' or stranding

clearance, as the cases may be, within three (3) working

days of receipt of the application.

10


(4) In case SLDC decides not to give concurrence or 'no

objection" or standing clearance as the case may be, the

same shall be communicated to the applicant in writing,

giving the reason for refusal within the above stipulated

period of 3 days."

From the above Regulation, it is evident that even Central

Commission has made it mandatory for SLDC to accord NOC for

Open Access or give its reason for refusal within a stipulated period

of 3 days from the receipt of application.

(v) Petitioner had applied on 20.12.2013 to the Chief Engineer (CE)

Transmission-O&M,BSPTCL (who was also in-charge for SLDC

functions as in Bihar SLDC is a part of Respondent no.1, BSPTCL)

for seeking NOC for grant of open access for purchase of power from

power-exchanges upto 10MW at its plant in Aurangabad, Bihar. The

said application was made after preliminary discussions with various

officials of Respondent no.1, BSPTCL/SLDC and was made in line

with this Commission's Open Access Regulation 2005 and was

submitted along with the necessary fees as specified by the

Commission.

(vi) In response to the said application submitted by the Petitioner, the

officials of the Respondent no.1 working as the SLDC wrote to the

Petitioner on 27.12.2013 asking for submission of details in the

prescribed PX1 format.

(vii) Accordingly, as directed, the Petitioner herein submitted the

application for Open Access in the specified format PX1 on

11


13.01.2014. Subsequently, the SLDC had highlighted some

corrections required in the PX1 format and the same were duly

corrected and re-submitted to SLDC on 30.01.2014.

(viii) Subsequent to the submission of all required details as aforesaid by

the Petitioner Company, it had numerous discussions with various

officials of Respondent BSPTCL and SLDC to ensure timely

processing of its Open Access application. During the course of such

discussions, the petitioner was orally communicated that an inquiry

on technical feasibility for operationalization of open access to the

petitioner was sought by the respondent no.1 from the local officials

at transmission circle of BSPTCL at 'Dehri on Sone' (circle within

which the plant of the petitioner is located). While no communication

on the outcome of the technical study obtained from the local

transmission circle was provided to the petitioner, the petitioner was

orally communicated that the required report was duly received at

BSPTCL Patna office.

(ix) During discussions at various levels (including interaction with MD

Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. (BSPHCL), Director,

BSPTCL, Chief Engineer-BSPTCL, etc, the petitioner was informed

that its application was under process and given that this was the

first application of this nature (an HT consumer seeking open access)

it was taking time but final outcome was expected to be

communicated to it at the earliest.

(x) Despite more than a year (during which the petitioner had written

and met senior officials repeatedly) from the date of the application,

12


the Petitioner did not receive any communication from Respondent

BSPTCL on grant of Open Access for purchase of power from the

power-exchanges. The Petitioner had written to BSPHCL/BSPTCL

officials numerous time requesting for early grant of open access.

(xi) It is stated that the Petitioner was orally communicated that its file

was sent by MD,BSPTCL to MD,SBPDCL for their comments. The file

was returned by MD,SBPDCL with some technical constraints cited

for grant of open access.

(xii) After numerous follow-ups and discussions on the matter, the

Petitioner received a letter dated 02.02.2015 issued by CE-

(Transmission-O&M) BSPTCL denying open access to the Petitioner

company due to non-availability of corridor.

(xiii) Being aggrieved of the aforesaid letter dated 02.02.2015, the

Petitioner is filing the instant petition before this Commission on the

following grounds:-

(xiv) This Commission has notified the necessary Regulations allowing

open access for consumers intending to purchase power on the

power exchanges (collective transactions). Thus, the application for

grant of NOC for open access made by the Petitioner herein is well

supported with the State's Regulatory framework.

(xv) The petitioner has an approved HT connection with SBPDCL with a

contract demand of 12.5 MVA (now approved to be enhanced to

13.50 MVA). SBPDCL at the time of approving the contract demand

of petitioner has done the necessary technical evaluation of feasibility

of their system to provide power up to contract demand to the

13


Petitioner. On the basis of this technical feasibility of the electrical

system, SBPDCL has done an agreement with the Petitioner for the

approved contract demand of 12.5 MVA (to be now enhanced to 13.5

MVA).

(xvi) Thus, the electrical system is capable of providing 12.50 MVA, now

13.5 MVA Power to the petitioner herein. This capability of the

system is irrespective of the source of that power, discom supply

(SBPDCL) or open access supply. The quantum of open access

requested by the petitioner (10 MW) is less than the sanctioned

contract demand with SBPDCL and even in the case of grant of open

access to the petitioner, the total power consumption of the Petitioner

from all sources put together (power supplied by discom and Power

procured from Power Exchange) at any time shall be within the limit

of its sanctioned load. Thus there will be no technical constraint

related to corridor availability in grant of the required NOC for open

access to the Petitioner herein.

(xvii) It is stated in Regulation 8 of the Open Access Regulations that the

margin in power flow or actual flow of power has to be taken into

consideration while deciding the application for open access. In terms

of the said Regulation and as submitted above, the total power

consumption of the petitioner from all sources put together (power

supplied by Discom and Power procured from Power Exchange) at

any time shall be within the limit of its sanctioned load and therefore,

there is/was no impediment in granting open access to the petitioner

herein.

14


(xviii) It is further submitted that an opinion has been sought from Sri.

Shanti Prasad, Ex-Chairman, Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory

Commission on the subject. Shri Shanti Prasad has opined that

"normally there cannot be a transmission system constraint when

total supply remains within contract demand."

(xix) It is added further that the Petitioner has already installed Special

Energy meters (0.2S Class ABT complaint meters) as required under

the Open Access Regulations 2005 and is thus having the necessary

infrastructure for implementation of open access. In view of the

above, there is no impediment in granting open access to the

petitioner herein and therefore, the ground taken in the letter dated

02.02.2015 denying open access to the Petitioner is untenable in

facts as well as in law and is liable to be set aside.

(xx) The Plant of the Petitioner is located in the State of Bihar and the

open access is being sought for the Transmission System of the State

Transmission Utility of the State of Bihar in terms of the Open Access

Regulations, 2005 framed by this Commission. As per Regulation 12,

the jurisdiction to decide the disputes regarding availability of

transmission capacity lies with this Commission. Further, as per

Regulation 27 of the said Open Access Regulations, 2005, this

Commission had exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes

regarding open access in the State of Bihar. Regulation 28 gives

inherent powers to this Commission to make such orders as may be

necessary to meet the ends of justice and Regulation 29 grants

powers to remove difficulty to Commission. Accordingly, this

15


Commission has jurisdiction to decide the instant dispute between

the parties herein in the interest of justice and for seeking

implementation of Regulations on the subject.

(xxi) This petition is being made bonafide and in the interest of justice.

2.0 Comments/Objections/Suggestions:-

SBPDCL has submitted vide letter no.892 dated

26.06.2015 following Comments/suggestions on the petition of

Shree Cement Ltd seeking direction for grant of short term open

access:-

2.1 The petition has been filed by M/s Shree Cement Ltd seeking

direction for grant of short term open access. As per Regulation-

9 of BERC (Term & Conditions for Open Access) Regulations,

2005, The Nodal Agency for Long Term Open Access is the

Transmission Utility (BSPTCL) and for Short Term Open Access

is the State Load Dispatch Centre (SLDC).

2.2 It is further stated that Shree Cement Ltd. is an HT Consumer

of SBPDCL at 132 KV level which is a transmission line of

BSPTCL, the maintenance and augmentation/development of

which is under the perview of BSPTCL.

Petitioner case seeking open access was sent for comments to

SBPDCL. The reply in the matter of granting of open access has

been sent to MD, BSPTCL vide this office letter no. 1595 dated

11.08.2014.

In this matter Regulation 12 (2) & 12 (3) of open Access

Regulation, 2005 may be seen which is reproduced as below:-

16


12 (2) "The availability of capacity in the distribution system, for

long-term and short term Open Access, including the existence or

absence of operational constraints affecting the Open Access being

allowed shall be determined by the State Load Despatch Centre

after considering the representation of the distribution licensee and

the persons seeking the Open Access."

12 (3) "In the event of any dispute on the capacity of the

transmission system available or absence of operational constraints

in the distribution system to be determined by the State

Transmission Utility or State Load Despatch Centre, as the case

may be, the same shall be referred to the Commission for

adjudication."

2.3 MD,SBPDCL vide letter no.1595 dated 11.08.2014 sent her opinion

to BSPTCL with regard to no objection certificate for 10 MW at 132

KV under short term open access to Aurangabad grinding unit of

Shree Cement Ltd

The open access regulations 2005 under clause 8 (2) provides that

the short term open access shall be ordinarily allowed if such request

can be accommodated without jeopardising the safety of grid system

by utilising.

(A) Enhance design margins.

(B) Design available due to variation in power flows and.

(C) Margins available due to in built spare

Transmission/distribution capacity created to cater to future

load growth.

In this regard it is imperative to mention here that the

distribution company is in the process of augmenting and enhancing

the distribution capacity under various ongoing schemes/projects.

This will lead to much higher power demand from Transmission

network and grid sub-stations.

17


In view of the above, BSPTCL may defer the grant of NOC to M/s Shree

Cement till the existing GSS capacity is augmented.

3.0 BSPTCL has submitted following Objections/Suggestions vide letter

no.264 dated 17.7.2015 :-

3.1 As per Regulation 9(2) of the Open Access Regulations, 2005

notified on 20th May 2006, the Nodal Agency for Short Term Open

Access is the State Load Dispatch Centre and in such case, the

State Transmission Utility (BSPTCL) and/or a transmission licensee

and/or a distribution licensee (SBPDCL) concerned, as the case may

be, shall be responsible for coordination with the State Load

Dispatch Centre and provide all relevant information required to

take decision for providing Open Access."

3.2 In accordance with the above said provision, the views of the

SBPDCL were obtained on the issue related with M/s Shree

Cement, Aurangabad, an HT consumer of SBPDCL at 132 KV level

having contract demand of 12.5 MVA. 132 KV line from Aurangabad

GSS to M/s Shree Cement Plant at BIADA, Aurangabad was

charged on 28.05.2014.

3.3 The petitioner has requested for grant of Short Term Open Access

(STOA) to avail 10 MW power against contracted demand of 12.5

MVA with SBPDCL and has applied for enhancement of load to 13.5

MVA. In this regard, SBPDCL had informed that the distribution

capacity under various ongoing schemes/projects, will cause

increase in the demand of power in the distribution licensee area.

18


Copy of letter No.1595 dated 11.08.2014 of SBPDCL is enclosed for

reference.

3.4 It is also relevant to mention that Aurangabad GSS can be fed

power from two sources i.e. from 220/132 KV Dehri Grid Sub-

station and 220/132 KV Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station through

Chandauti Grid sub-station. M/s Shree Cement Ltd. avails 132 KV

power from Aurangabad Grid sub-station.

A. 220/132 KV Dehri Grid Sub-station: Out of the 4x100 MVA,

220/132 KV transformers of Dehri Grid Sub-station 2x100 MVA

transformers are very old as a result loading of these transformers

are limited to 60% of its capacity. The maximum load which at

present can be met from Dehri Grid Sub-station is 240 MW only.

The off peak and peak demand of the Dehri Complex is 287 MW and

425 MW respectively (Annexure-II). As such, open access corridor is

not available from Dehri Grid Sub-station.

B. 400/132 KV Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station through Chandauti Grid

sub-station: Chandauti Grid sub-station is fed power from 400/132

KV Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station through two very old double circuit

lines. One double circuit can be loaded up to 70 MW (35MW each)

and the other 110 MW (55 MW each) in order to avoid frequent

snapping of conductor/jumper. As such, total 180 MW power can

be drawn at Chandauti Grid sub-station from Bodh Gaya Grid sub-

station. The off peak and peak demand of the Gaya Complex is 228

MW and 311 MW respectively (Annexure-II). Hence open access

corridor is not available from Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station. However,

BSPTCL is in the process of replacing the all old conductors of Bodh

Gaya-Chandauti double circuit lines with new conductors.

It is therefore evident that both the power sources are operating

with load restrictions/load curtailment of SBPDCL (discom).

3.5 M/s Shree Cement Ltd. was accordingly informed that corridor is not

available at present vide letter No.70 dated 02.02.2015.

3.6 As per Clause 11(1) of BERC Open Access Regulations, 2005

notified on 20th May 2006 under allotment priority, SBPDCL has the

19


first allotment priority for allowing Open Access. M/s Shree Cement

Ltd., being a production unit and HT Consumer of SBPDCL gets

uninterrupted power supply and priority over other consumers of

SBPDCL. As such, load restrictions are being done in rotation in

SBPDCL for its other Consumers because of the system constraint.

3.7 As per Clause 11(3) of BERC Open Access Regulations under

Curtailment Priority, short term Open Access customers shall be

curtailed first in case of system constraints or otherwise. SBPDCL

being a distribution licensee shall however, be the last to be

curtailed.

In view of the position explained in the preceding paragraph,

respondent BSPTCL has prayed the following:-

a. BSPTCL is not in a position to allow STOA to M/s Shree Cement

at present.

Pass an order as Commission deem fit and proper in the light of the

facts explained above.

4.0 Petitioner's Rejoinder

Petitioner has made following submission in the rejoinder dated

4.8.2015:-

(i) Aggregation of off-peak and peak demand of all consumers is

not correct, as peak and off-peak of different consumers arrive at

different time in a day. By presenting the data in aggregate form,

BSPTCL is trying to prove that there is congestion in the system,

whereas this is not the case. The most appropriate would be to

consider transformer loading which they have not presented

before the Commission.

(ii) BSPTCL has also not shared details of inter-connection of

Dehri GSS with Aurangabad GSS. Furthermore, it has not been

shared whether Aurangabad GSS is drawing power

20


simultaneously from Dehri GSS and Chandauti GSS or not. In

case Aurangabad GSS is receiving supply simultaneously from

Dehri GSS and Chaundauti GSS, its transmission capability

would increase substantially.

(iii) The maximum capacity of 240 MW of Dehri GSS is also

factually incorrect. Even if loading of two old transformers is

taken at 60% (though this is not the practice in other Utilities

like RVPN) the capacity would exceed 300 MW considering full

loading of new transformers.

(iv) No basis of limiting capacity of 132 kV lines to 55 MW per

circuit and of old as 35 MW per circuit has been indicated.

BSPTCL's statement of apprehending snapping of

conductor/jumper is not supported by tripping logs of the lines

or breaking of conductor strand during annual maintenance or

any other relevant report.

(v) Central Electricity Authority has published the Manual On

Transmission Planning Criteria which provides for line loading

up to thermal limit as per its Clause 5.2 (a). The maximum

permissible loading as per this manual at 480 ambient

temperature and 'Panthar' conductor temperature of 750 is 76

MW. Ambient temperature of 480 remains for very short

duration. In case ambient temperature is lower the permissible

loading limit would further go up.

(vi) When 4 lines are operating in parallel, each one will have

equal loading unless loads have been segregated and parallelism

21


has been broken at Chandauti S/S. BSPTCL's reply does not

indicate any such mechanism.

(vii) It is not clear from Annexure II that whether or not (a) Chandauti

(Gaya) GSS load includes Aurangabad S/S and SCL's load and

(b) Aurangabad S/S load includes SCL's load or not. In case the

above loads are included in Chandauti GSS then the peak and

off-peak load would be lesser than what has been claimed in the

Annexure.

(viii) The statement that various construction and augmentation

works are in progress in the transmission system to improve the

transmission capability and that NOC will be issued only with

the availability of corridor after meeting the load demand of

SBPDCL, is vague as it has uncertainty of time frame by which

open access will be available. No specific work of addition or

augmentation of transmission line and transformation capacity

have been indicated with likely commissioning schedule.

(ix) However, without going into these details, it is submitted that

reply does not indicate SD ('sustained demand' in MW) and SP

(i.e. Substation peak in MVA) with and without open access as

per Regulation 12 of BERC Open Access Regulation. Had it been

determined, it would have indicated no change in SD and SP

with open access and so no transmission capacity is required for

open access thereby implying no operational constraint. In this

respect, we submit that STOA of 10MW is within the contract

demand of 12.5 MVA and not in addition to it. As such off peak

22


and peak load of Shree Cement limited, considered at Gaya

Complex respectively as 10 MW and 12 MW respectively in table

at Annexure-II, will remain the same as 10MW and 12 MW even

with STOA. If this demand has been met with available

transmission capacity between Gaya and Chandauti s/s, then

there is no basis that with STOA it cannot be met.

Finally, petitioner has prayed that this rejoinder may kindly be

taken on record and the petition filed by the petitioner may

kindly be allowed in terms of the prayer made therein under10(2)

of BERC Open Access Regulations 2005.

5.0 Hearings:

Matter was heard on 26.06.2015.

SBPDCL submitted reply vide letter No.892 dated 26-06-2015,but

Bihar State Power Transmission Company Ltd neither submitted

any reply nor was present in the hearing. BSPTCL was directed vide

letter no.631 dated 17-06-2015 by the Commission, to file reply and

be present at the time of hearing.

Matter was heard again on 16.07.2015. During last hearing on

26.06.2015, BSPTCL was absent which was brought to the notice of

the M.D. BSPTCL. BSPTCL was also directed to file reply by

16.07.2015, but no reply was filed.

Representative of BSPTCL made oral submission that open access is

not being provided to the petitioner due to overload on the sub-

station. Representative of BSPTCL prayed for time to file reply.

Commission allowed the prayer.

Petitioner's advocate again made oral submission in support of the

petition and submitted that if any reply is filed by BSPTCL, a copy

of the same may be made available to the petitioner so that

petitioner may file rejoinder. He also submitted that in the order

dated 26.06.2015 of the Commission at page no. 1, para 3 in line

23


no. 8 the word "over and above" may be read as "within the existing

contract." Commission allowed the prayer with the direction to the

BSPTCL that a copy of the reply may also be served on the

petitioner.

Commission heard the parties. Order was reserved.

6.0 Views and findings of the Commission.

Commission has examined the petitioner's submission and

comments/ objections/suggestions submitted by the respondent

SBPDCL and BSPTCL and has observed the following:-

(1) M/s Shree Cement Ltd., an H.T. consumer of SBPDCL having a

contract demand of 12.50 MVA connected through a 132 KV

dedicated feeder, has been denied Short Term Open Access (STOA)

by the respondent BSPTCL stating non-availability of Open Access

Corridor. The petitioner submitted application seeking NOC for

grant of Open Access for purchase of power from power-exchange

up to 10MW to the Chief Engineer (Transmission-O&M),BSPTCL

(who was also in-charge of SLDC) on 20.12.2013. Subsequent to it

as advised by SLDC vide letter dated 27.12.2013, application in

prescribed PXI format was submitted on 30.01.2014. In spite of

regular follow up and discussions, the issue remained unresolved.

After a year vide letter no.70 dated 02.02.2015, the petitioner was

denied open access by Chief Engineer (Transmission- O & M). Non-

availability of corridor has been stated as reason for denial.

(2) As per Regulation 12 of the BERC (Terms and Conditions for Open

access) Regulations,2005,the jurisdiction to decide the disputes

regarding availability of transmission capacity lies with the

Commission. Regulation 27 provides that the Commission has

jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes regarding Open access and

Regulation 28 gives inherent powers to make such orders as may be

necessary to meet the ends of justice and Regulation 29 grants

power to remove difficulty to the Commission.

(3) SBPDCL vide letter no. 1595 dated 11.08.2014 submitted their

opinion on the issue to BSPTCL stating that distribution Company

24


is in the process of augmenting and enhancing the distribution

capacity under various ongoing schemes/projects. This will lead to

much higher power demand from transmission network and grid

sub-stations. BSPTCL may defer the grant of NOC to M/s Shree

Cement till the existing GSS capacity is augmented.

Load growth and augmentation of system is a continued process.

The opinion given by SBPDCL appears to be to deny open access to

the petitioner and is not as per provisions of the Regulation8.

Regulation 8 provides for the criteria to grant open access indicating

that power flow is an important criteria to be taken into

consideration while considering any application seeking open

access. The relevant provisions of the sub-regulation 8(2) read as

follows-

"(2) The short term open Access shall be ordinarily allowed, if such

request can be accommodated without jeopardising the safety of the

grid system by utilizing (a) inherent design margins (b) margin

available due to variation in power flows; and (c) Margin available

due to inbuilt spare transmission/distribution capacity created to

cater to future load growth.

In the present case of M/s Shree Cement, the total power

consumption of the petitioner i.e. through discom source and open

access, at any time, shall be within the limit of its sanctioned load.

Petitioner has applied for open access for 10 MW load which is not

more than the sanctioned contract demand or revised contract

demand) with SBPDCL. If open access is allowed, the total power

consumption of the petitioner (i.e. sum of power supplied by the

discom and power procured from power exchange) at any time shall

be within the limit of its contract demand and therefore, this cannot

be a reason to deny grant of NOC for open access to the petitioner.

(4) BSPTCL has submitted that Aurangabad GSS which can be fed

power from two sources namely 220KV/132 KV Dehri GSS and 220

KV/132 KV Bodh Gaya GSS. Shree Cement avails power at 132 KV

from Aurangabad Grid S/S. The maximum load which at present

can be met from Dehri GSS is 240 MW only. The off peak and peak

25


demand of the Dehri GSS is 287 MW and 425 MW respectively.

Thus open access corridor is not available from Dehri GSS.

Similarly, Bodh Gaya GSS is also overloaded and hence open access

corridor is not available from Bodh Gaya GSS also.

However, the details submitted by BSPTCL indicate only the sum of

peak loads and off peak loads respectively and not the actual

maximum load drawal. The data furnished do not establish

operational constraint.

(5) It has been provided in regulation 8 (3) that "STU and distribution

licensees shall at all times endeavour to provide open access to their

system and shall always equip their system to meet the future

demand for open access and create sufficient capacity in the system

to provide open access and thereby competition".

Although, BSPTCL has mentioned that BSPTCL is in the process of

replacing all old conductors of Bodh Gaya, Chandauti double circuit

lines with new conductors, but has not indicated the time frame as

to when the open access shall be allowed to the petitioner.

(6) Accordingly, to provisions in Regulation 12 (2), availability of

capacity in the distribution system for open access shall be

determined by the SLDC after considering the representation of the

distribution Licensee and the person seeking the open access.

But the petitioner’s submission that even in case of grant of open

access, the total power consumption shall be within the contract

demand, has not been considered.

(7) It is provided in Regulation 12 (3) that in the event of any dispute on

capacity of transmission system available or absence of operational

constraints in distribution system to be determined by SLDC or

transmission utility, shall be referred to the Commission for

adjudication.

In the present case, since the total power consumption including

open access power purchase through exchange, shall be within the

contract demand, there is hardly any issue to be resolved. The

petitioner has not been denied open access on any valid ground.

26


It took the Respondent BSPTCL over one year to even deny open

access to the petitioner whereas Regulation 13 (2) (d) provides that

SLDC shall process an application seeking open access for a term

up to one year in a maximum time limit of thirty days. This delay is

clear violation of the regulation.

(8) The Electricity Act, 2003 under section 42(3) has specified provision

for non-discriminatory open access. BERC (Term and condition for

open Access) Regulations, 2005 has also provided necessary

regulatory framework for providing open access. But till date, no

open access has been granted by BSPTCL or SBPDCL to any

consumer

In view of the observations made in foregoing paragraphs,

Commission directs BSPTCL/SLDC to provide NOC for availing

open access facility to the petitioner within 15 days time.

Sd/- (S. C. Jha) Member

Sd/- (U. N. Panjiar)

Chairman

Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission no 23 of 15.pdf · Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission...

Documents

Transcript of Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission no 23 of 15.pdf · Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission...