Case No.71/2011. Date of Hearing : Date of order : Heard the parties on question of admission. Order reserved.

Transcription

1 Order No.1 Case No.71/2011 Date of Hearing : Date of order : Shri J.P. Das, Sr. GM, OPTCL, Shri Ranjit Das, Sr. GM (PP), GRIDCO, Shri Dhaneswar Mohanty, OPGC, Shri S.C. Mohanty, Legal Consultant, DoE, Shri B.K. Nayak, Advocate, Shri M. Guha Roy, Shri Nitin Gandhi, M/s. NPPL, Shri S.S. Nandi, M/s.Visa Power, Shri S.K. Banerjee & Shri Chandan Sandyal, M/s.CESC Ltd., Shri B. Sarkhel, & Shri Joydeb Bandyopadhaya, M/s.ERPC, Kolkata, Shri Ehsan Sharief (DGM) & Shri R.C. Mohapatra, Director KVK Nilachal Power Pvt. Ltd., Shri Sanjay Sen, Advocate, Monnet Power & JR Power Ltd., Shri Debasish Rath, GM (Project), Lanco Power are present. Nobody was present on behalf of CEA, PGCIL, NTPC Ltd., Sterlite Energy Ltd., GMR Energy, Ind-Bharat Energy, Jindal India Thermal, Tata Power, Jindal Steel & Power, Bhusan Energy Ltd., BGR Energy Ltd., and M/s. Orissa Integrated Power Ltd. The Vakalatnama filed by the counsels and the replies filed by the Respondents are taken into record. 2. Heard the parties on question of admission. Order reserved. 3. Respondents are directed to file their written submissions by 20 th October, 2011 on question of admissibility serving copy to the petitioner. The petitioner is also directed to file its rejoinder, if any, thereafter within 7 days. Sd/- Member (M) Sd/- Member (B) 1

2 ODISHA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION BIDYUT NIYAMAK BHAWAN UNIT-VIII, BHUBANESWAR ************ Present : Shri K. C. Badu, Member Shri B. K. Misra, Member Case No. 71 of 2011 IN THE MATTER OF : Application seeking approval of the Evacuation Plan and for directions to Respondent IPPs to have connectivity as envisaged in the Evacuation Plan. A N D IN THE MATTER OF : Odisha Power Transmission Corporation Limited, (OPTCL) Janapath, Bhubaneswar -. Petitioner - Vrs The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary to Govt., Department of Energy, Bhubaneswar. 2. The Chairman -cum-managing Director GRIDCO, Janpath, Bhubaneswar. 3. The Central Electricity Authority Sewa Bhawan, Rama Krishna Puram, New Delhi Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Regd. Office: B-9, Qutab Institutional area, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi Estern Regional Power Committee 14. Golf Club Road, Tollygunje, Kolkata M/s NTPC Ltd. NTPC Bhawan, Scope Complex, 7, Institutional area, Lodi Road, New Delhi M/S OPGC Ltd. Zone-A, 7 th Floor, Fortune Towers, Bhubaneswar M/s Sterlite energy Ltd. Local Office: 1 st Floor, City Mart Complex, Baramunda, Bhubaneswar

3 9. M/s GMR Kamalanga Energy Ltd. Local Office: HIG-28, BDA Colony, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar M/s Ind-Barath Energy (Utkal) Ltd. Local Office: Plot No-249, Unit -3, Kharavela Nagar, Bhubaneswar M/s Navabharat Power Pvt. Ltd. Local Office: 3-A, 3 rd Floor, Fortune Towers, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar M/s Monnet Power Company Ltd. Local Office: Plot No 337, Bhubaneswar Marg, Gautam Nagar, Bhubaneswar M/s KVK Nilachal Power Pvt. Ltd. Local Office: Gangadhar Meher Nagar, Jaydev Vihar, Bhubaneswar M/s Jindal India Thermal Power Ltd. Local Office: 51, Buddheswari Colony, Bhubaneswar M/s Tata Power Company Ltd. Local Office: HIG-22, BDA Colony, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar M/s LANCO Babandh Power Ltd. Local Office: 301A, 3 rd Floor, Palheights, Plot No- J/7, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar M/s CESC Ltd, Local Office: HIG-5, BDA, G M Marg, Jaydev Vihar, Bhubaneswar M/s Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. Local Office: 426, Jayadev Nagar, Nageswar Taangi, Bhubaneswar M/s Bhushan Energy Ltd. Local Office: 41 HIG, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar M/s VISA Power Ltd. Local Office: VISA House, Ekamra Kanan, Nayapally, Bhubaneswar M/s JR Powergen Ltd. Regd. Office: II nd Fkloor, Crown Court, No. 128, Cathedral Road, Chennai

4 22. M/s BGR Energy Systems Ltd. Regd. Office: A-5, Pannamgadu Industrial Estate, Ramapuram Post, Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh M/s Orissa intregrated Power Ltd. (Orissa UMPP) Regd. Office : 1 st Floor, Urjanidhi, 1, Barakhamba Lane, Connaught Place New Delhi For Petitioner: For Respondents: Mr. J P Dash, CGM (Construction) OPTCL. Respondents Shri Ranjit Das, Sr. GM (PP), GRIDCO, Shri Dhaneswar Mohanty, Advocate on behalf of OPGC, Shri S.C. Mohanty, Legal Consultant, DoE, Shri B.K. Nayak, Advocate, Shri M. Guha Roy, Shri Nitin Gandhi, M/s. NPPL, Shri S.S. Nandi for M/s.Visa Power, Shri S.K. Banerjee & Shri Chandan Sandyal for M/s.CESC Ltd., Shri B. Sarkhel, & Shri Joydeb Bandyopadhaya, M/s. ERPC, Kolkata, Shri Ehsan Sharief DGM & Shri R.C. Mohapatra for KVK Nilachal Power Pvt. Ltd., Shri Sanjay Sen, Advocate on behalf of Monnet Power & JR Powergen Ltd., Shri Debasish Rath, GM (Project) for M/s. Lanco Power were present. Nobody was present on behalf of CEA, PGCIL, NTPC Ltd., M/s. Sterlite Energy Ltd., M/s. GMR Energy, M/s.Ind- Barath Energy, M/s. Jindal India Thermal, M/s. Tata Power, Jindal Steel & Power, M/s. Bhusan Energy Ltd., M/s. BGR Energy Ltd., and M/s. Orissa Integrated Power Ltd. The Vakalatnama filed by the counsels and the replies filed by the respondents are taken on record. Date of Hearing: Date of Order: ORDER 1. GM(R&T) OPTCL filed an application on before the Commission for approval of the Evacuation Plan and for directions to Respondent IPPs to have connectivity as envisaged in the Evacuation Plan prepared by OPTCL based on the following grounds: Sec 39 of the Electricity Act, 2003 empowers OPTCL as STU to discharge all functions of Planning & Co-ordination relating to Inter-state Transmission System with CTU / Authority etc. Sec 38 of the Act empowers PGCIL as CTU to discharge all functions of Planning & Co-ordination relating to Inter-state Transmission with STU/ Authority etc. 4

5 Regulation 2.3 of Odisha Grid Code & Chapter 3 of OGC provides that STU would discuss, review & finalize the State Transmission proposals including system strengthening. 29 nos. IPPs have signed MOU with Govt. of Odisha to setup Thermal Power Plants of Installed Capacity of 40,620 MW & Odisha share is about 10,653 MW The Commission vide Order dated in Case No 145/2010 while approving ARR & Transmission Tariff for Fy at Para 361 directed OPTCL- the STU to file before 30 th April,2011 the Prospective Action Plan for drawal of Odisha share as well as evacuation of balance surplus power from these Mega Thermal Power Plants. OPTCL from a Study forecasts that Odisha will be surplus from Fy of about 4860 MW from NTPC & Odisha UMPP scheduled for commissioning in Fy & thereafter need be connected with ISTS for evacuation of total power. OPTCL has proposed for evacuation of 16nos IPPs only under Phase-I Evacuation Plan now filed before the Commission. OPTCL submitted that IPPs want to connect with ISTS network for their own interest. This will overburden the State consumers with CTU Transmission charges. Further, if each IPP is connected to CTU network directly, more ROW, more forest clearance & more investment will be involved. OPTCL proposed 5 nos of 400KV Pooling Stations at Lapanga, Nisha, Khuntuni, Bhushan & at GMR. By such arrangement, OPTCL submitted that about MW Power will be evacuated through STU Network & 19,050 MW will flow through ISTS/ CTU Network. OPTCL has proposed that Lapanga Pooling Station will be constructed by OPTCL for which Consultancy Offers have been invited through Transactional Advisors empanelled by Deptt. Of Economic Affairs. OPTCL will have JV with successful bidders for 26 % equity and the investment will follow a Debt: Equity ratio of 70:30. OPTCL will also follow a Design, Build, Finance, Operate & Transfer (DBFOT) Model for 25 years & after 25 years the Lapanga Pooling Station will be handed over to OPTCL for O & M. 5

6 OPTCL prayed before the Commission To approve the Evacuation Plan. To direct IPPs to have connectivity as envisaged in Evacuation plan 2. The application was registered as Case No. 71 of 2011 & was heard on on the question of admission. The Commission heard the parties & reserved the Order allowing the Respondents to file their written submissions by 20 th October, 2011 on question of admissibility duly serving the copy to the Petitioner- OPTCL. The OPTCL was also directed to file its rejoinder, if any, thereafter within 7 days. 3. OPTCL through an affidavit dtd submitted before the Commission that OPTCL had received the written submissions of 11 nos. of Respondents as mentioned below which contained certain Legal & Technical issues. OPTCL therefore prayed before the Commission to extend time upto to file its submission on the rejoinders of Respondents. a) M/s LANCO Babandh Power Ltd b) M/s GMR Kamalanga Energy Ltd c) M/s KVK Nilachal Power Pvt. Ltd. d) M/s Navabharat Power Pvt. Ltd. e) M/S OPGC Ltd f) M/s Monnet Power Company Ltd. g) M/s VISA Power Ltd. h) M/s CESC Ltd, i) M/s Ind-Bharath Energy (Utkal) Ltd j) M/s Sterlite energy Ltd. k) M/s JR Powergen Ltd 4. Almost all IPPs have objected to the application of OPTCL before the Commission seeking approval of the Evacuation Plan & for directions to the IPPs to have connectivity as envisaged in the Evacuation Plan. The broad issues for objection are as under: Construction of dedicated lines from the Generating Stations of IPPs to the nearest State Pooling Stations In this connection they have quoted Regulation 8(8) of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Grant of connectivity, Long-Term Access and Medium-Term Open Access in Inter-State Transmission and related Matters) Regulations, 2009 which inter-alia is reproduced below: An applicant may be required by the Central Transmission Utility to construct a dedicated line to the point of connection to enable connectivity to 6

7 the grid: Provided that a thermal generating station of 500 MW and above and a hydro generating station of 250 MW and above, other than a captive generating plant, shall not be required to construct a dedicated line to the point of connection and such stations shall be taken into account for coordinated transmission planning by the Central Transmission Utility and Central Electricity Authority. Responsibility of GRIDCO to draw Odisha share of power from the Generating Stations of the IPPs In this connection they have quoted Clause 4.0 of the PPA executed with GRIDCO which reads as under: Power to GRIDCO shall be made available by the Generating Stations of the IPPs at the Bus-bars of the Station connected to the transmission lines of OPTCL/PGCIL and it shall be the obligation and responsibility of GRIDCO to make the required arrangements for evacuation of remaining power from the station at IPP costs and responsibility. CEA had advised PGCIL to inform all the IPPs in Odisha not to connect their Inter-State Generating Stations with Odisha grid without prior approval of CTU. In this connection IPPs have submitted to refer to the Letter dtd of Chief Engineer (SP&PA), CEA to Executive Director PGCIL which prohibits them to connect their Generating Stations in Odisha without prior approval of CTU & have produced the relevant abstract of the letter which inter-alia is reproduced below: Integrated planning studies have to be carried out before a decision can be taken at the CTU/CEA level to simultaneously allow an inter-state generating station to be connected to the ISTS and State Grid. It has been observed from the recent system studies carried out by PGCIL that when the upcoming IPPs in Orissa are connected to both CTU and STU system, there is a huge power flow from CTU system at Angul and Dhenkanal to the Orissa grid. In view of the above, you are requested to issue advice to all the concerned IPPs, particularly in Orissa, that they cannot enter into direct agreement to connect their inter-state generating station with the Orissa grid without prior approval of CTU, being the nodal agency under the Act for coordinated planning of inter-state transmission system. Some Respondents submitted that no transmission system can be planned in the country without any approval of Standing Committee for Planning Transmission System under the auspicious of CEA. Some IPPs raised their doubt on Track Record of timely completion of Transmission Network Projects by OPTCL. They submitted that the Track 7

8 Record of CTU is superior & much ahead than that of OPTCL for which they opt to evacuate their power through CTU network. Some IPPs opined that the State Commission has no jurisdiction on connectivity of their IPPs to CTU/ STU network & hence the petition filed by OPTCL for approval of Evacuation Plan is not maintainable. On approval of Standing Committee for planning any transmission system/ Evacuation Plan, OPTCL submitted that one Standing Committee Meeting (SCM) was held on In that SCM, GRIDCO and OPTCL suggested for deferring the construction of 765 KV/400 KV Sub-station at Dhenkanal and to connect some IPPs to STU network only. MD (WBSETCL) and Member Secretary, ERPC supported the views of GRIDCO/ OPTCL. As per the decision in the said SCM, subsequently two rounds of Meetings took place between CEA, PGCIL, OPTCL, GRIDCO & ERPC. In one meeting, it was suggested by PGCIL that one unit each of some of the IPPs may be connected with STU network. Thereafter several rounds of Meetings took place between the IPPs, GRIDCO & OPTCL; but no consensus could be arrived. Since no consensus could be arrived and to provide equitable treatment to all IPPs, the Petitioner OPTCL framed the present Evacuation Plan having State Pooling Stations connecting all IPPs with least ROW and least forest involvement. The proposal of State Pooling Stations filed by OPTCL in its application is the right technical solution with economic consideration which must be appreciated. There will not have any additional burden for construction of two lines separately connecting to Pooling stations of STU & CTU. In the present Evacuation Plan, any one line would come to State Pooling Station and then go to CTU Pooling Station. Such an arrangement will require less RoW/ Forest clearance, thereby reducing transmission cost. The Evacuation Plan now proposed by OPTCL is therefore a win-win situation for IPPs, STU &CTU. The IPPs can have LTOA through the State Pooling Stations, which will be built by OPTCL through competitive tariff bidding route and plough back the investment made in the project. 5. OPTCL submitted its rejoinder on dtd before the Commission on the issues/ objections raised by the respondents on approval of Evacuation Plan & 8

9 direction to the concerned IPPs to have connectivity as envisaged in the Evacuation Plan. These are briefly stated as under: The MoUs signed with the Govt. of Odisha specify that the IPPs are to set up its own transmission facility for evacuation of power to the point of off take by the buyer(s) or make request to the STU and the CTU for evacuation of power. Many IPPs have revised their PPA with GRIDCO for having its connectivity with OPTCL S/s. They have only approached the CTU for evacuation of power to outside the state but not to the STU for evacuation of state share of power. Such action of those IPPs deliberately sidelining the STU is a deviation from the stipulation of the MoU signed with the Govt. of Odisha and PPA signed with GRIDCO. This has resulted into an isolated system plan by the CTU. The letter dtd of the Chief Engineer (SP&PA), CEA to Executive Director, PGCIL advising PGCIL to inform all the IPPs of Odisha that they cannot enter into direct agreement to connect their Inter-State Generating Stations with the Odisha Grid without the prior approval of CTU is unethical and uncalled for. This shows the motto of CEA for hindering the evacuation of state share of power. Such attitude of CEA needs to be viewed seriously. PGCIL has agreed LILO arrangement on Talcher Meramundali DC line as a temporary arrangement of evacuation of power from the GMR proposed Thermal Power Plant. PGCIL has also agreed for LILO on the Meramundali Jeypore line to other Respondents like M/s Monnet Power Company Ltd. and M/s Jindal India Thermal Power Ltd. This will create congestion in 400 KV Meramundali Substation of OPTCL and OPTCL will be forced to disconnect the IPPs at Meramundali. The GMR Kamalanga Thermal Power Plant has also made advance payment of 15% of estimated value of the works towards consultancy charges on the bay works to PGCIL. IPPs have entered into BPTA with PGCIL to obtain LTOA, but they did not approach STU for such an agreement or facility as per the provisions of the MoU/ PPA. The comprehensive transmission system plan as evolved by CEA was finalized without consultation with the STU. This has created the present problem in evacuating the state share of power from the IPPs. 9

10 Regarding evacuation of 1320 MW of OPGC from Ib Thermal Power Station,OPTCL has submitted that one 400KV DC line between Ib and Meramundali already exists. Its restoration work is under progress. OPGC need not draw another line connecting either to CTU network or to STU network except establishing one LILO connectivity of about 6 km to 400 KV Ib- Meramundali DC line. Such an arrangement will not affect the LTOA and connectivity of the OPGC with CTU. OPTCL submitted that the tender for construction of Lapanga Pooling Station has been floated and the restoration of 400 KV Ib Meramundali line will be completed in November From Lapanga State Pooling Station; there will be connectivity to 765/400KV Pooling Station of PGCIL. Balance 50% power of OPGC could be evacuated to CTU network through Lapanga Pooling Station. Submission of Eastern Regional Power Committee (ERPC) 6. Regional Power Committee (RPCs) have been constituted by the Central Govt. in accordance with the Electricity Act, 2003 for the specified Region for facilitating the integrated operation of the power system in the Region. The RPC in the Region may, from time to time agree on matters concerning the stability & smooth operation of the integrated grid & economy & efficiency in the operation of the power system of that Region. 7. The role of Regional Power Committee is of greater importance in evacuation system planning of any region as per Para of IEGC, 2010 which is extracted below: The following functions which go to facilitate the stability and smooth operation of the systems are identified for the RPC: To undertake Regional Level operation analysis for improve in grid performance. To facilitate inter-state/inter-regional transfer of power. To facilitate all functions of planning relating to inter-state/ intrastate transmission system with CTU/ STU. 8. The submission of Eastern Regional Power Committee, Kolkata is as under: The National Electricity Plan has emphasized that transmission planning should include considerations of environment and rehabilitation of resettlement issues. As per CERC (Grant of Connectivity, Long-term Access and Medium-term Open Access in inter-state Transmission and related matters) Regulations, 10

11 2009 [Regulation 8 (8) the Standing Committee on transmission planning is the organ through which such transmission systems are planned. In the 9 th ERPC meeting held on , Director (Projects), POWERGRID stated that POWERGRID have not objection against OPTCL proposal of pooling of IPP powers by OPTCL Sub-stations and then injecting this pooled power to CTU system. For this, IPPs have to agree with the OPTCL proposal. He further emphasized that as per the existing connectivity regulations of CERC, IPPs can directly approach CTU for connectivity. So he suggested that OPTCL should take up with the IPPs for getting the power pooled at proposed 400 KV S/S of OPTCL. ERPC further submitted that the route to be followed by an IPP from the source of generation to the point of connection at CTU network should be consistent with the overall planning of the State in which the IPP is located. Further, in case an IPP is directly connected to the grid, SLDC, OPTCL has no role in scheduling the power of that IPP as the IPP would be considered as a separate control area. RLDC would be scheduling the power. However, to avail home State share, if any, Odisha shall pay the withdrawal PoC charges as per the existing CERC Regulation. However, in case the IPPs are first connected to OPTCL sub-stations and then to the CTU networks, then the IPPs would be considered as embedded in Odisha system. In that case SLDC, OPTCL has to co-ordinate with RLDC for dispatch of power through CTU networks. Whatever be the arrangement of connectivity with the CTU network, it has to be ensured that the Evacuation link should be in place matching with the generation. Submission of GRIDCO Ltd. vide affidavit dtd GRIDCO has submitted that 12 nos of IPPs have signed MoUs in June & September 2006 where at Para 1 (vi) both the IPPs & Govt. of Odisha have agreed as under: IPP may set up its own transmission facility for evacuation off power to the point of off-take by the buyer (s) or may request the State Transmission Utility (STU) and Central Transmission Utility (CTU) or any other transmission utility or Licensee for evacuation of power from the Thermal Power Plant and may enter into agreements for such purpose. The Government and its concerned agency shall assist IPP in the matter of transmission facility for evacuation of power from the Thermal Power Plant. In case IPP evacuates power through State Transmission Utility or Central 11

12 Transmission Utility, transmission of entire capital Transmission Utility transmission of entire capital cost for strengthening such lines for evacuation for entire power of the Thermal Power Plant will be borne by IPP. 10. GRIDCO further submitted that 03 IPPs M/s KU Projects Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi, M/s NSL Orissa Power & Infretach Pvt. Ltd, Hyderabad & M/s SPI Port Pvt. Ltd, Chennai have executed MoU on with Govt of Odisha with an additional provision on connectivity which is reproduced below: For power evacuation the Independent Power Producer will get connected at appropriate voltage and most suitable designated location(s) as may be suggested by Orissa Power Transmission Corporation Limited (OPTCL) at the cost of the said Independent Power Producer. 11. Pursuant to the MoUs signed with Govt. of Odisha, GRIDCO signed PPAs with IPPs for off-take of States entitlements & Para 4 of the PPA is as under: Transmission / Wheeling of Power Power to GRIDCO shall be made available by the IPP at the Busbars of the Station connected to the transmission lines of OPTCL?PGCIL and shall be the obligation and responsibility of GRIDCO to make the required arrangement for evacuation of power from such delivery points. IPP shall make independent arrangements for evacuation of the remaining power from the Station at IPP cost and responsibility. 12. GRIDCO further submitted that subsequently it was decided to modify the provision of connectivity to the extent that an IPP shall get connected to the nearest Grid Substation of OPTCL to facilitate drawl of GRIDCO s entitlement through OPTCL network. Accordingly; all the IPPs were requested to amend their respective PPAs. In response the request of GRIDCO; 17 nos. IPPs who have signed MoU with State Govt. have executed the revised PPA modifying the provision on connectivity which is reproduced below for ready reference: TRANSMISSION / WHEELING OF POWER State share of power shall be made available to GRIDCO by (IPP) at the Bus bar of OPTCL nearest EHV Sub-station at required voltage level. OPTCL as STU with the help of GoO will assist (IPP) in getting clearances/approvals within the State jurisdiction. However all the responsibility for obtaining the clearances/approvals shall remain with (IPP). (IPP) would need to bear the cost of: (i) Dedicated transmission line for their generating plant to the designated Grid Sub-station of the STU at available voltage level. (ii) Interfacing at both the ends including works at the Grid Sub-station, cost of Bays etc. (iii) Replacement/ up-gradation /augmentation of existing equipments/transmission system(s) if any of STU XXXXXX 13. GRIDCO in its letter No.CGM(Const)-01/2010/9908(4) dtd has requested Govt. of Odisha to consider incorporating the provision on connectivity, as mentioned 12

13 at paragraph above, in the supplemental /renewal MoUs for all IPPs. GRIDCO submitted before the Commission that after signing of supplemental /renewal MoUs by Government of Odisha, GRIDCO shall execute PPAs with the remaining IPPs incorporating the provision on connectivity as mentioned at paragraph GRIDCO has finally concluded in its submission vide affidavit dtd that OPTCL has developed a comprehensive Evacuation Scheme suitable to the generating companies and consumers of the State. Therefore, all the generating companies need to agree to the proposal of OPTCL to facilitate development of the same in a time bound manner in commensuration with commissioning of different generating Units so that no power station shall be get stranded because of non-availability of evacuation system, which is in the interest of the generating companies, consumers in the State as well as in the country. COMMISSION S OBSERVATION 15. The Commission went through the submissions put forth by the Petitioner and respondents and found the broad issues involved in this case as follows : (a) (b) (c) Whether SERC is empowered to involve in the transmission and distribution planning in a state? Whether a transmission project involving both interstate and intrastate operation can be approved, cleared and plant in isolation of any one among CEA, CTU, RPC or STU? If not then what sort of modality should be adopted in the overall interest of the state? 16. The Commission went through the basic philosophy behind the Evacuation Plan proposed by OPTCL. OPTCL claims that its proposal is cost effective and environment friendly and in the interest of the society as a whole. It is a matter of fact that there are 29 nos. of IPPs with installed capacity of 40,620 MW out of which Odisha share is about 10,000 MW. So the Commission cannot look into the planning for feeding of such a huge quantity of power to the consumers of the state and the commercial implication arising out of such transmission planning. 17. The Commission perused Regulation 11(2) of CERC (Sharing of Inter State Transmission Charges and Losses) Regulations, 2010 which is reproduced below: 11(2) The bill for the use of the ISTS shall be raised by the CTU on the concerned Designated ISTS Customers. The SEB/STU may recover the transmission charges for the 13

14 use of the ISTS from the distribution companies, generators and bulk customers Sharing of Inter State Transmission Charges and Losses Regulations, 2010 connected to the transmission system owned by the SEB/STU/intrastate transmission licensee in a manner approved by the Appropriate Commission. The aforesaid CERC Regulation clearly indicates that if the Evacuation Plan is not planned properly then the consumers of Odisha will have to bear an additional financial burden apart from environmental and social implications. 18. Section 86(b) of Electricity Act, 2003 mandates the State Commission to regulate purchase and procurement process of Distribution Licensees including purchase, transmission and sale of electricity. Further, it is the responsibility of the State Commission to advise the State Govt. in the matters concerning generation, transmission, distribution and trading of electricity so as to promote competition and for effective and economic use of electricity. This has also been endorsed vide Sec.11(1)(d) of Orissa Electricity Reform Act, 1995 which is reproduced below: 11.(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Commission shall be responsible to discharge, amongst others, the following functions, namely:- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (d) to promote efficiency, economy and safety in the transmission, distribution and use of the electricity in the State including and in particular in regard to quality, continuity and reliability of service so as to enable all reasonable demands for electricity to be met. 19. As per Section 61(c) & (d) of the Act, 2003, it is the responsibility of the Commission to look for the factors which would encourage competition, efficiency, economical use of the resources, good performance and optimum investments; and safeguarding of consumers interest and at the same time, recovery of the cost of electricity in a reasonable manner; 20. The Commission is of the opinion that Regulation 8 of CERC Connectivity Regulation, 2009 has been misread by some of the respondent IPPs which has been already quoted vide Para 4 of this order. The above para should read with Regulation 14 of the same regulation which does not imply that transmission charges for electricity will be free of cost for the generation. The CTU will be responsible for carrying out the transmission planning and construction for evacuation of power from the generating points of such generators but the transmission charges have to be paid by the Long Term Open Access customers only. In case of those generators who have not signed Long Term Open Access Agreements and want to sell on short term basis, the transmission charges will be shared on proportionate basis depending upon 14

15 quantum and distance of power flow between generation, consumption node of the participants as guided by Reg 4(1) of CERC (Sharing of Inter State Transmission Charges and Losses) Regulations, 2010 which is as quoted below: 4. Principles for sharing ISTS charges and losses. (1) Based on the Yearly Transmission Charges of ISTS Transmission Licensees and transmission losses in the ISTS network, the Implementing Agency shall compute the Point of Connection charges and Loss Allocation Factors for all DICs:- (a) Using load-flow based methods; and (b) Based on the Point of Connection Charging method. Where DIC means the users of any segments/elements of the ISTS and shall include all generators, state transmission utilities, SEBs or load serving entities directly connected to the ISTS including Bulk Consumer and any other entity/person; 21. Further Section 73(m) of the Electricity Act, 2003 mandates CEA to have transmission planning pertaining to CTU and STU is reproduced below: 73 The Authority shall perform such functions and duties as the Central Government may prescribe or direct, and in particular to - 73(M) advise any State Government, licensees or the generating companies on such matters which shall enable them to operate and maintain the electricity system under their ownership or control in an improved manner and where necessary, in coordination with any other Government, licensee or the generating company owning or having the control of another electricity system; This is further strengthened from Para of National Electricity Policy which is reproduced below: The Central Transmission Utility (CTU) and State Transmission Utility (STU) have the key responsibility of network planning and development based on the National Electricity Plan in coordination with all concerned agencies as provided in the Act. The CTU is responsible for the National and Regional Transmission System planning and development. The STU is responsible for planning and development of the intrastate transmission system. The CTU would need to coordinate with the STUs for achievement of the shared objective of eliminating transmission constraints in cost effective manner. Thus it is the responsibility of CEA and CTU to take up with STU for the evacuation plan of any IPP from its generating bus-bar to the CTU Pooling Station. Of course from the CTU Pooling Station onward transmission is the responsibility of CTU and CEA. STU, in consultation with CTU/CEA, may plan the ultimate evacuation plan considering the ground realities of optimization of RoW requirement, forest clearance requirement and the list investment so as to safeguard the interest of the State Consumers for drawal of State quota of power from the IPPs located in Odisha. Any 15

16 violation of this procedure would make the Project Non-Stator in the federal set up were electricity is concurrent subject. We hereby admit the Case and direct to put up the case for next hearing preferably during first fortnight of May, We hereby direct that Secretary CEA & CMD PGCIL (CTU) to file their written views on the petition of OPTCL by 30 th April, 2012 before the Commission & to attend the next date of hearing (to be informed to them by the Commission s secretariats ) for taking a final decision on the Evacuation Plan proposed by the Petitioner OPTCL. We further direct that a copy of this interim order may be posted in OERC website for the information of all concerned Sd/- Member (M) Sd/- Member (B) 16