Final Tariff Order of UPCL for FY 2015-16 11.04 -...
Transcript of Final Tariff Order of UPCL for FY 2015-16 11.04 -...
Order on
Retail Tariff
for
Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. for
FY 2015-16
April 11, 2015
UTTARAKHAND ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Vidyut Niyamak Bhawan,
Near I.S.B.T., P.O. Majra, Dehradun – 248171
i
Table of Contents
1. Background and Procedural History ............................................................................................. 4
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments ................................................................ 9
2.1 General ...................................................................................................................................... 9
2.1.1 Compliance to Regulations/Directions of Commission ......................................................... 9
2.1.2 Clarification on Commercial Consumer................................................................................. 10
2.1.3 Delays in providing connection and meter reading .............................................................. 10
2.2 Domestic Tariff ....................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.1 Tariff Hike ................................................................................................................................ 11
2.3 Non-Domestic Tariff .............................................................................................................. 15
2.3.1 Tariff Hike ................................................................................................................................ 15
2.3.2 Clarification in fixation of Units ............................................................................................. 16
2.4 Tariff for Charitable Institutions .......................................................................................... 16
2.5 Street Lighting ........................................................................................................................ 17
2.6 Independent Advertising Hoardings ..................................................................................... 17
2.7 Agricultural Tariff .................................................................................................................. 18
2.7.1 Private Tube Wells ................................................................................................................... 18
2.8 Mixed Load (RTS-8) Tariff ..................................................................................................... 20
2.9 Delayed Payment Surcharge (DPS) ....................................................................................... 20
2.10 Rebate and Incentives ............................................................................................................ 21
2.11 Industrial Tariff ...................................................................................................................... 24
2.11.1 Tariff Hike ................................................................................................................................ 24
2.11.2 Textile Industry ........................................................................................................................ 26
2.11.3 Fixed/Demand Charge and Energy Charge .......................................................................... 27
2.11.4 Time of Day Tariff.................................................................................................................... 29
2.11.5 Rostering and Load Shedding ................................................................................................ 31
2.11.6 Load Factor based Tariff.......................................................................................................... 32
2.11.7 Minimum Load for Induction Furnaces ................................................................................. 35
2.11.8 Wheeling Charge ..................................................................................................................... 36
2.12 Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG) .......................................................................... 36
2.13 Energy Sale Forecast............................................................................................................... 39
2.14 Cost of Supply and Cross Subsidy ........................................................................................ 40
ii
2.15 Continuous Supply .................................................................................................................41
2.16 Components on ARR and Revenue ........................................................................................42
2.16.1 Power Purchase Cost ................................................................................................................ 42
2.16.2 Return on Equity ...................................................................................................................... 45
2.16.3 Operation & Maintenance Expenses ....................................................................................... 46
2.16.4 Interest on Working Capital..................................................................................................... 48
2.16.5 Interest & Finance Charges ...................................................................................................... 48
2.16.6 Depreciation .............................................................................................................................. 49
2.16.7 Provision for bad and doubtful debts ..................................................................................... 49
2.16.8 Non-tariff Income (NTI) ........................................................................................................... 51
2.16.9 Sharing of Gains & Losses ........................................................................................................ 52
2.16.10 Capital Cost of Original Assets and Depreciation .................................................................. 53
2.16.11 Non Capitalization of Assets ................................................................................................... 53
2.16.12 Truing-up for Past Years .......................................................................................................... 54
2.16.13 Past Adjustments ...................................................................................................................... 55
2.16.14 Consumer Security Deposit ..................................................................................................... 55
2.17 Enhanced Pension for Employees ..........................................................................................56
2.18 Fuel Charge Adjustment .........................................................................................................56
2.19 Revenue from Tariff and Distribution losses .......................................................................58
2.20 Metering and Billing ...............................................................................................................58
2.21 Distribution Line/ Line Losses...............................................................................................60
2.22 KCC Data ................................................................................................................................64
2.23 Quality of Power ....................................................................................................................64
2.24 Open Access .............................................................................................................................65
2.25 Renewable Energy Promotion ...............................................................................................66
2.26 Views of Advisory Committee Meeting ................................................................................66
2.27 Commission’s Views ...............................................................................................................68
2.27.1 Load Shedding .......................................................................................................................... 69
2.27.2 Compliance to the Directives of the Commission .................................................................. 69
2.27.3 Fuel Charge Adjustment Mechanism ...................................................................................... 70
2.27.4 KCC Data .................................................................................................................................. 70
2.27.5 Recovery of Electricity Dues .................................................................................................... 70
2.27.6 Incentive for Timely Payment.................................................................................................. 70
2.27.7 Customer Services .................................................................................................................... 71
iii
2.27.8 Issue of Voltage wise Losses ................................................................................................... 71
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up
for FY 2013-14 ........................................................................................................................................... 72
3.1 Past Adjustments ................................................................................................................... 73
3.2 Truing-up for FY 2013-14 ........................................................................................................ 74
3.2.1 Sales .......................................................................................................................................... 74
3.2.2 Distribution Losses .................................................................................................................. 83
3.2.3 Power Purchase Expenses (Including Transmission Charges) ............................................. 84
3.2.4 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Expenses ...................................................................... 86
3.2.5 Cost of Assets & Financing ..................................................................................................... 91
3.2.6 Financing of Capital Assets ..................................................................................................... 95
3.2.7 Interest and Finance Charges .................................................................................................. 97
3.2.8 Depreciation ............................................................................................................................ 101
3.2.9 Provision for Bad & Doubtful Debts...................................................................................... 102
3.2.10 Interest on Working Capital (IoWC) ..................................................................................... 104
3.2.11 Return on Equity ..................................................................................................................... 105
3.2.12 Non-Tariff Income .................................................................................................................. 106
3.2.13 Tariff Revenue ......................................................................................................................... 107
3.3 Sharing of gains and losses .................................................................................................. 111
3.3.1 ARR & Revenue for FY 2013-14 ............................................................................................. 113
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual
Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16 ................................................................................................. 115
4.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 115
4.2 Energy Sales .......................................................................................................................... 117
4.3 Distribution Loss Trajectory ............................................................................................... 122
4.4 Power Purchase Quantum and Cost for FY 2015-16 .......................................................... 125
4.4.1 Power Purchase Quantum ..................................................................................................... 125
4.4.2 Energy Availability from UJVN Ltd. ..................................................................................... 126
4.4.3 Energy Availability from Central Generating Stations ........................................................ 127
4.4.4 Energy Availability from Vishnuprayag Hydro Electric Project ......................................... 129
4.4.5 New Generating Stations ....................................................................................................... 129
4.4.6 Energy Availability from Independent Power Producers (IPPs)......................................... 130
4.4.7 Power Purchase to meet RPO Obligations ............................................................................ 131
4.4.8 Summary of Energy Availability for FY 2015-16 .................................................................. 131
iv
4.4.9 Power Purchase Cost .............................................................................................................. 132
4.4.10 Water Charges ........................................................................................................................ 140
4.4.11 Transmission Charges payable to PGCIL and PTCUL ........................................................ 140
4.5 Cost of Assets & Financing .................................................................................................. 141
4.5.1 Capital Cost of Original Assets .............................................................................................. 141
4.5.2 Capitalisation of Assets .......................................................................................................... 142
4.5.3 Financing of Capital Assets.................................................................................................... 144
4.6 Interest and Finance Charges ............................................................................................... 144
4.6.1 Interest on Consumer Security Deposit ................................................................................ 147
4.6.2 Government Guarantee Fee ................................................................................................... 149
4.7 Depreciation .......................................................................................................................... 150
4.8 Return on Equity ................................................................................................................... 152
4.9 Operation and Maintenance Expenses ................................................................................ 154
4.9.1 Employee Costs (EMPn) ......................................................................................................... 154
4.9.2 Repair and Maintenance Expenses (R&Mn) .......................................................................... 157
4.9.3 Administrative and General Expenses (A&Gn) .................................................................... 158
4.10 Interest on Working Capital ................................................................................................ 160
4.11 Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts ............................................................................... 161
4.12 Non-Tariff Income ................................................................................................................ 162
4.13 Revenue Gap for UJVNL....................................................................................................... 163
4.14 (Gap)/ Surplus of Previous Years......................................................................................... 164
4.15 Annual Revenue Requirement for 2015-16 .......................................................................... 164
4.16 Revenue at Existing Tariff .................................................................................................... 165
4.17 Revenue Gap .......................................................................................................................... 166
4.17.1 Revenue Gap for FY 2015-16 at Existing Tariff ..................................................................... 166
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues ....................................................... 168
5.1 Additional Surcharge on account of Re-Determination of Tariff for FY 2010-11 ............ 168
5.2 Tariff Rationalisation and Tariff Design for FY 2015-16 .................................................. 169
5.2.1 General .................................................................................................................................... 169
5.2.2 Petitioner’s Proposals ............................................................................................................. 170
5.2.3 Commission’s Views on Tariff Rationalisation Measures ................................................... 172
5.2.4 Treatment of Revenue Gap .................................................................................................... 192
5.2.5 Cross Subsidy ......................................................................................................................... 192
5.2.6 Category-wise Tariff Design .................................................................................................. 192
v
5.2.7 RTS-2: Non-Domestic Tariff ................................................................................................... 195
5.2.8 RTS-3: Public Lamps ............................................................................................................... 196
5.2.9 RTS-4: Private Tube Wells/Pump sets and Agriculture Allied Activities .......................... 197
5.2.10 RTS-5: Government Irrigation System .................................................................................. 198
5.2.11 RTS-6: Public Water Works .................................................................................................... 198
5.2.12 RTS-7: Industry ....................................................................................................................... 199
5.2.13 RTS-8: Mixed Load ................................................................................................................. 201
5.2.14 RTS-9: Railway Traction ......................................................................................................... 201
5.3 Revenue for FY 2015-16 ........................................................................................................ 202
5.4 Cross Subsidy ........................................................................................................................ 202
5.5 Open Access Charges ............................................................................................................ 204
6. Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner ........................................................... 206
6.1 General .................................................................................................................................. 206
6.1.1 Consumer Mix during FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14 .................................................................. 207
6.1.2 Consumption Pattern during FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14 ....................................................... 209
6.1.3 Revenue Pattern during FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14 ............................................................... 211
6.2 Commission’s Analysis and Directions on Commercial Performance ............................ 212
6.2.1 Metering .................................................................................................................................. 214
6.2.1.1 Status of NA/NR, IDF/ADF/RDF ........................................................................................ 214
6.2.1.2 Replacement of Improper, Non-Functional, Stop/Stuck up defective or IDF Meters ....... 215
6.2.1.3 Replacement of Mechanical Meters ....................................................................................... 216
6.2.1.4 Ghost/Fictitious Consumers .................................................................................................. 217
6.2.1.5 Un-metered Consumers ......................................................................................................... 218
6.2.2 Billing....................................................................................................................................... 219
6.2.2.1 NB & SB Cases ........................................................................................................................ 219
6.2.2.2 Outstanding Arrears ............................................................................................................... 220
6.2.2.3 Load Factor of KCC Consumers ............................................................................................ 221
6.2.2.4 Status of Revenue realisation per unit sold ........................................................................... 222
6.2.3 Collection System ................................................................................................................... 222
6.3 Energy Audit ......................................................................................................................... 224
6.4 AT&C Losses ......................................................................................................................... 225
6.5 Anomalies Observed in Commercial Diary (SG-IV).......................................................... 229
6.5.1 RTS-3 (Public Lamps) ............................................................................................................. 229
6.5.2 RTS-4 (Private Tube Well) ...................................................................................................... 230
vi
6.5.3 RTS-6 (Public Water Works (PWW)) ..................................................................................... 231
UPCL is directed to ensure timely compliances of the directions issued in this regard. The
Commission has also decided to review the monthly performance of UPCL in this regard
and, accordingly, UPCL is also directed to submit the monthly commercial report (SG-IV).232
6.5.4 RTS-7 (LT & HT Industries): .................................................................................................. 232
6.5.5 RTS-8 (Mixed Load): ............................................................................................................... 233
6.6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 234
7. Commission’s Directives ............................................................................................................ 236
7.1 Compliance to the Directives Issued in MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 ......................... 236
7.1.1 Past Adjustments .................................................................................................................... 236
7.1.2 Functioning of UPCL .............................................................................................................. 237
7.1.3 Performance Report ................................................................................................................ 238
7.1.4 Sales ......................................................................................................................................... 239
7.1.5 Load Shedding ........................................................................................................................ 241
7.1.6 AT&C Losses / Energy Audit ............................................................................................... 241
7.1.7 Power Purchase Expenses ...................................................................................................... 242
7.1.8 Power Procurement Plan for the Control Period .................................................................. 242
7.1.9 Power Purchase Quantum and Cost ..................................................................................... 243
7.1.10 Capitalization of Assets added till FY 2011-12 ..................................................................... 244
7.1.11 Fixed Assets Register .............................................................................................................. 244
7.1.12 Electrical Inspector Certificate ............................................................................................... 244
7.1.13 Cost of Assets and Financing ................................................................................................. 245
7.1.14 Interest on Security Deposit ................................................................................................... 246
7.1.15 Depreciation ............................................................................................................................ 247
7.1.16 Return on Equity .................................................................................................................... 247
7.1.17 Employee Expenses ................................................................................................................ 248
7.1.18 A&G Expenses ........................................................................................................................ 250
7.1.19 Bad & Doubtful Debts ............................................................................................................ 250
7.1.20 Reliability Indices ................................................................................................................... 251
7.1.21 Voltage wise Cost of Supply .................................................................................................. 251
7.1.22 Demand Side Management Measures ................................................................................... 252
7.1.23 Electrical Accidents ................................................................................................................ 253
7.1.24 Filing of APR and Truing up Petitions .................................................................................. 253
vii
7.1.25 Issues raised by the Petitioner again despite Commission’s ruling in previous Tariff
Orders ...................................................................................................................................... 253
7.1.26 Additional Surcharge on account of Re-determination of Tariff for FY 2009-10 ................ 254
7.1.27 Additional Surcharge on account of Re-determination of Tariff for FY 2010-11 ................ 254
7.2 Compliance to the Directives issued in APR Order dated April 10, 2014 ........................ 254
7.2.1 Fictitious Sales ......................................................................................................................... 254
7.2.2 Open Access Sale .................................................................................................................... 255
7.2.3 Load Shedding ........................................................................................................................ 256
7.2.4 Metering of unmetered connections ...................................................................................... 256
7.2.5 Interest on GPF Trust.............................................................................................................. 257
7.2.6 Treatment of Assets sent for repairs ...................................................................................... 257
7.2.7 Segregation of LT and HT/ EHT Works ............................................................................... 259
7.2.8 Provision for bad and doubtful debts ................................................................................... 259
7.2.9 Billing of Departmental Employees ....................................................................................... 260
7.2.10 Power Purchase....................................................................................................................... 261
7.2.11 UI Overdrawal and Underdrawal ......................................................................................... 261
7.2.12 Subsidy from GoU for disaster affected areas ...................................................................... 262
7.2.13 Capitalization of Assets .......................................................................................................... 262
7.2.14 Capitalization Policy and Fixed Asset Registers................................................................... 262
7.2.15 Installation of Meter ............................................................................................................... 263
7.2.16 Consumers under Snow Bound (RTS-1 Category) ............................................................... 263
7.2.17 kWh Tariff ............................................................................................................................... 264
7.2.18 MCG Charges .......................................................................................................................... 264
7.2.19 Adjustment of Revenue Surplus ............................................................................................ 265
7.3 Fresh Directives .................................................................................................................... 265
7.3.1 Issue of Voltage wise Loss ...................................................................................................... 265
7.3.2 Power Purchase Expenses (Including Transmission Charges) ............................................ 265
7.3.3 Cost of Deficit Power .............................................................................................................. 265
7.3.4 RTS-4 (Private Tubewells) ...................................................................................................... 266
7.3.5 Status of NA/NR, IDF/ADF/RDF ........................................................................................ 266
7.3.6 Replacement of Improper, Non-Functional, Stop/Stuck up defective or IDF Meters ....... 266
7.3.7 Replacement of Mechanical Meters ....................................................................................... 266
7.3.8 Ghost/Fictitious Consumers .................................................................................................. 266
7.3.9 NB & SB Cases ........................................................................................................................ 267
viii
7.3.10 Outstanding Arrears............................................................................................................... 267
7.3.11 Status of KCC Consumers ...................................................................................................... 267
7.3.12 Status of Revenue realisation per unit sold .......................................................................... 267
7.3.13 Billing and Collection System ................................................................................................ 267
7.3.14 Energy Audit .......................................................................................................................... 267
7.3.15 Abnormal Sales in Public Lamps Category .......................................................................... 268
7.3.16 Abnormal Sales in Private Tubewell Category ..................................................................... 268
7.3.17 Abnormal Sales in Public Water Works Category................................................................ 268
7.3.18 Abnormal Sales in LT Industries ........................................................................................... 268
7.3.19 Abnormal Sales in HT industries (Upto 1000 kVA) ............................................................. 268
7.3.20 Abnormal Sales in Mixed Load Category ............................................................................. 269
7.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 269
8. Annexures ..................................................................................................................................... 270
8.1 Annexure 1: Rate Schedule Effective from 01.04.2015......................................................... 270
8.2 Annexure 2: Schedule of Miscellaneous Charges ................................................................ 296
8.3 Annexure 3: Public Notice .................................................................................................... 297
8.4 Annexure 4: List of Respondents .......................................................................................... 301
List of Respondents for In-House Paper on tariff related issues ............................................... 303
8.5 Annexure 5: Public Notice on Inhouse Paper ...................................................................... 304
8.6 Annexure 6: List of Participants in Public Hearings ......................................................... 305
8.7 layXud ¼nj vuqlwph dk fgUnh :ikUrj.k½ ........................................................................................... 311
ix
List of Tables
Table 1.1: Publication of Notice ................................................................................................................. 5
Table 1.2: Publication of Notice on Inhouse Papers ................................................................................. 5
Table 1.3: Schedule of Hearings................................................................................................................. 6
Table 2.1: Summary of Total Gap as submitted by the Petitioner ........................................................ 14
Table 2.2: Cost of Power as submitted by the Petitioner ....................................................................... 14
Table 2.3: Comparison of Tariff for Private Advertisement Boards ..................................................... 18
Table 2.4: Comparison of Delayed Payment Surcharge (DPS) in various States ................................. 21
Table 2.5: Level of Cross-subsity proposed by the Petitioner ............................................................... 38
Table 2.6: Energy Input requirement for FY 2015-16 as submitted by Petitioner ................................ 40
Table 2.7: Comparison of Power Purchase Cost as submitted by Petitioner ....................................... 44
Table 2.8: Distribution Losses as proposed by the Petitioner................................................................ 63
Table 3.1: Break up of Sales submitted by the Petitioner for FY 2013-14 (MU) ................................... 76
Table 3.2: Consumption Pattern for some of the Consumers of Domestic Category .......................... 76
Table 3.3: Re-casted sales for Domestic Category for FY 2013-14 (MU) ............................................... 78
Table 3.4: Consumption Pattern of PTW for FY 2013-14 as per Commercial Diary ............................ 79
Table 3.5: Consumption Pattern for some of the Consumers of PTW Category ................................. 79
Table 3.6: Average Consumption of PTW for FY 2013-14 considered by the Commission (MU) ...... 80
Table 3.7: Re-casted sales for Public Lamps for FY 2013-14 (MU) ........................................................ 81
Table 3.8: Division-wise Sales recasting for PWW Consumers ............................................................. 82
Table 3.9: Category-wise Sales for FY 2013-14 (MU) ............................................................................. 83
Table 3.10: Assessed Distribution losses for FY 2013-14 (MU) .............................................................. 84
Table 3.11: Power Purchase Expenses for FY 2013-14 ............................................................................ 85
Table 3.12: Revised Employee Expense Trajectory for MYT Control Period (Rs. Crore) .................... 87
Table 3.13: Proposed Sharing of Gains for Employee Expenses (Rs. Crore) ........................................ 87
Table 3.14: Approved Employee Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ................................................ 89
Table 3.15: Approved revised K Factor for MYT Control Period (Rs. Crore) ...................................... 90
Table 3.16: Approved R&M Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ........................................................ 90
Table 3.17: Approved A&G Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ........................................................ 91
Table 3.18: Approved O&M Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ........................................................ 91
Table 3.19: GFA and Additional Capitalisation for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ................. 95
x
Table 3.20: Means of Finance as considered for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ....................... 97
Table 3.21: Interest on Govt. of Uttarakhand Loans (Rs. Crore) ........................................................... 98
Table 3.22: Interest on CSD paid and accounted by Petitioner (Rs. Crore) .......................................... 99
Table 3.23: Carrying Cost on excess CSD allowed by the Commission and that paid by Petitioner
(Rs. Crore) ........................................................................................................................................ 100
Table 3.24: Interest and Finance Charges for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)................................................. 100
Table 3.25: Depreciation for FY 2013-14 submitted by the Petitioner (Rs. Crore) ............................. 101
Table 3.26: Variation in Depreciation for FY 2013-14 submitted by the Petitioner (Rs. Crore) ........ 101
Table 3.27: Depreciation for FY 2013-14 approved by the Commission (Rs. Crore) .......................... 102
Table 3.28: Interest on working capital for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ..................................................... 105
Table 3.29: Variation in Interest on Working Capital for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) .............................. 105
Table 3.30: Return on Equity claimed for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ....................................................... 106
Table 3.31: Variation in Return on Equity FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ..................................................... 106
Table 3.32: Equity approved by the Commission (Rs. Crore) ............................................................. 106
Table 3.33: Return on Equity approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) .................. 106
Table 3.34: Non Tariff Income approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ................ 107
Table 3.35: Revenue loss due to higher distribution loss for FY 2013-14 ............................................ 108
Table 3.36: Revenue for FY 2013-14 Corresponding to Assessed Sales .............................................. 110
Table 3.37: Revenue from Sale of power for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ................................................... 111
Table 3.38: Additional Revenue from Sale due to inefficiency for FY 2013-14................................... 111
Table 3.39: Sharing of gains on account of controllable factors approved by the Commission for FY
2013-14 (Rs. Crore) .......................................................................................................................... 113
Table 3.40: True-up of FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ...................................................................................... 114
Table 4.1: Actual Energy Sales for Consumer Categories from FY 2006-07 to FY 2013-14 (MU) ...... 118
Table 4.2: Sales Forecast from draft 18th EPS ........................................................................................ 119
Table 4.3: CAGR Calculated for Energy Sales to Each Consumer Category ...................................... 120
Table 4.4: Energy Sales (MU) for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 ......................................... 121
Table 4.5: Sales Approved for FY 2015-16 (MU) ................................................................................... 122
Table 4.6: Distribution Loss Trajectory.................................................................................................. 123
Table 4.7: Distribution Loss Trajectory approved by the Commission .............................................. 124
Table 4.8: Energy Input Requirement at Distribution Level for FY 2015-16 ...................................... 124
xi
Table 4.9: Summary of Power Availability projected by UPCL for FY 2015-16 (MU)....................... 125
Table 4.10: Summary of Energy Availability from UJVNL and UREDA for FY 2015-16 (MU) ........ 127
Table 4.11: Summary of Energy Availability from GGS for FY 2015-16 (MU)................................... 128
Table 4.12: Summary of Energy Availability from New Generating Stations for FY 2015-16 (MU) 130
Table 4.13: Summary of Total Firm Energy Available during FY 2015-16 (MU) ............................... 131
Table 4.14: Rate of Free Power approved for FY 2015-16 .................................................................... 136
Table 4.15: Total Power Purchase Cost for FY 2015-16 ........................................................................ 138
Table 4.16: Quarterly Power Purchase Quantum and Cost approved for FY 2015-16 ..................... 139
Table 4.17: Variable Cost of Fuel Based Station for FY 2015-16 (Rs. /kWh) ..................................... 140
Table 4.18: Capital Investments made from FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) .......................... 142
Table 4.19: Phasing of Capital Expenditure (Rs. Crore)...................................................................... 142
Table 4.20: Capital Expenditure and Capitalization Proposed for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs.
Crore) ............................................................................................................................................... 143
Table 4.21: Capitalization approved for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) .............................. 143
Table 4.22: Financing Plan as approved by the Commission (Rs. Crore) ........................................... 144
Table 4.23: Projected Interest Expenses (Rs. Crore) ............................................................................. 145
Table 4.24: Interest Expenses approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) .................. 147
Table 4.25: Projected Consumer Security Deposit (Rs. Crore) ............................................................ 148
Table 4.26: Interest on Consumer Security Deposit approved for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ............... 148
Table 4.27: Guarantee Fees approved for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ...................................................... 149
Table 4.28: Interest and Finance Charges for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ................................................ 149
Table 4.29: Projected Depreciation (Rs. Crore) ..................................................................................... 150
Table 4.30: Opening GFA for FY 2015-16 considered by the Commission (Rs. Crore) .................... 150
Table 4.31: Depreciation for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)............................................................................. 152
Table 4.32: Projected Return on Equity (Rs. Crore) .............................................................................. 152
Table 4.33: Approved Equity eligible for Return (Rs. Crore) .............................................................. 153
Table 4.34: Return on Equity approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) .................. 153
Table 4.35: Projected Employee Costs for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ............................ 156
Table 4.36: Comparison of proposed Recruitment vis-à-vis approved in MYT Order ..................... 156
Table 4.37: Employee Expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ................................................................. 157
Table 4.38: Projected R&M Expenses for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ............................. 157
xii
Table 4.39: R&M expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ......................................................................... 158
Table 4.40: Projected A&G Expenses for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) .............................. 159
Table 4.41: A&G Expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ......................................................................... 159
Table 4.42: O&M Expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ........................................................................ 159
Table 4.43: Projected Interest on Working Capital (Rs. Crore) ............................................................ 160
Table 4.44: Interest on Working Capital approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) 160
Table 4.45: Provision for Bad Debts for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) .......................................................... 161
Table 4.46: Energy Charges to be paid by UPCL for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ..................................... 163
Table 4.47: Capacity Charges to be paid by UPCL for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)................................... 164
Table 4.48: ARR for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)........................................................................................... 165
Table 4.49: Approved Revenue at Existing Tariffs for FY 2015-16 ...................................................... 166
Table 4.50: Revenue Gap for FY 2015-16 claimed by Petitioner(Rs. Crore) ........................................ 166
Table 4.51: Summary of Gap to be recovered in FY 2015-16 submitted by the Petitioner (Rs. Crore)
.......................................................................................................................................................... 167
Table 4.52: Summary of ARR and Revenue Surplus/(Gap) for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore).................... 167
Table 5.1: Additional Surcharge to be recovered from Subsidised Categories and Rebate to
Subsidising Categories on account of re-determination of Tariff for FY 2010-11 ...................... 169
Table 5.2: Tariff proposed for Private Advertisement Boards and Hoardings .................................. 170
Table 5.3 : Tariff for Domestic Consumers............................................................................................ 194
Table 5.4 : Concessional Tariff for Snowbound Areas ......................................................................... 195
Table 5.5: Tariff for Non-domestic consumers ..................................................................................... 196
Table 5.6 : Tariff for Public Lamps ......................................................................................................... 197
Table 5.7: Tariff for Private tube Wells/ Pump Sets............................................................................. 198
Table 5.8: Tariff for Government Irrigation System ............................................................................. 198
Table 5.9 : Tariff for Public Water Works .............................................................................................. 199
Table 5.10: Tariff for LT Industries ........................................................................................................ 200
Table 5.11: Approved Tariff for HT Industry ....................................................................................... 201
Table 5.12: Tariff for Mixed Load .......................................................................................................... 201
Table 5.13: Tariff for Railway Traction .................................................................................................. 201
Table 5.14: Revenue for FY 2015-16 ....................................................................................................... 202
Table 5.15 : Cross Subsidy at Average Cost of Supply......................................................................... 203
xiii
Table 5.16 : Cross Subsidy at Approved Tariffs in FY 2013-14 and FY 2015-16 ................................. 203
Table 5.17: Wheeling Charges approved for FY 2015-16 ..................................................................... 204
Table 6.1: Detail of Sub-stations (S/s) maintained by UPCL as on 31.12.2014 .................................. 206
Table 6.2: Detail of Lines maintained by UPCL as on 31.12.2014....................................................... 207
Table 6.3: Quantum of Power Traded through Open Access............................................................. 210
Table 6.4: Formats prescribed vide Commission’s letter dated 17.05.2012 ....................................... 212
Table 6.5: Revised Formats prescribed by the Commission vide letter dated 27.11.2014 ................ 213
Table 6.6: Status of NA/NR/IDF/ADF/RDF ..................................................................................... 214
Table 6.7: Status of Defective Meters.................................................................................................... 215
Table 6.8: Status of Mechanical Meters ................................................................................................ 216
Table 6.9: Status of Ghost/Fictitious Consumers ................................................................................ 217
Table 6.10: Status of Unmetered Consumers ....................................................................................... 218
Table 6.11: Status of NB & SB Cases ..................................................................................................... 219
Table 6.12: Status of Outstanding Arreas............................................................................................. 220
Table 6.13: Status of KCC Consumers .................................................................................................. 221
Table 6.14: Status of Revenue realisation per unit sold ...................................................................... 222
Table 6.15: Status of AT&C Losses of UPCL........................................................................................ 226
Table 6.16: Divisions having excessive consumption under Public Lamps during FY 2013-14 ....... 230
Table 6.17: Divisions having excessive consumption under Public Water Works during FY 2013-14
.......................................................................................................................................................... 232
Table 6.18: Divisions having lower average revenue in LT Industrial category during FY 2013-14 233
Table 6.19: Divisions having lower revenue in HT Industrial category (upto 1000 kVA) during FY
2013-14 ............................................................................................................................................. 233
Table 6.20: Divisions having lower revenue in Mixed Load category during FY 2013-14 ................ 234
Table 7.1: Detail of Interest on Security Deposit .................................................................................. 246
Table 7.2: Summary of Direct Recruitment........................................................................................... 249
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 1
Before
UTTARAKHAND ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Petition No.: 49 of 2014
In the Matter of: Petition filed by Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited for True-up of FY 2013-14, APR for FY
2015 & determination of ARR and Retail Tariffs for the FY 2015-16.
AND
In the Matter of:
Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited ……… Petitioner
Urja Bhawan, Kanwali Road, Dehradun
Coram
Shri Subhash Kumar Chairman Shri C. S. Sharma Member Shri K. P. Singh Member
Date of Order: April 11, 2015
Section 64(1) read with Section 61 and 62 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to
as “Act”) requires the generating companies and the licensees to file an application for
determination of tariff before the Appropriate Commission in such manner and along with such fee
as may be specified by the Appropriate Commission through Regulations. In accordance with the
provisions under Section 61 and Section 181 of the Act, the Commission had notified MYT
Regulations, 2011 specifying therein terms and conditions and norms of operations for licensees and
the generating companies. Based on the Petition filed by Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
2 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
(hereinafter referred to as “UPCL” or “Petitioner” or “licensee”), the Commission had issued an
MYT Order dated May 6, 2013 covering the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16. As per
the provisions of Regulation 13(2) of UERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff)
Regulations, 2011, UPCL filed a Petition (Petition No. 49 of 2014) and hereinafter referred to as the
“Petition”), giving details of its projections of Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR) and Tariff
Petition for FY 2015-16, based on true up of FY 2013-14 and Annual Performance Review (APR) for
FY 2014-15, on November 29, 2014. Along with the above Petition, UPCL also submitted retail tariff
proposals for different category of consumers so as to meet its projected ARR for FY 2015-16.
The Petition filed by UPCL had certain infirmities/deficiencies. The Commission,
accordingly, vide its letter no. UERC/6/TF-240/14-15/2014/1703 dated December 9, 2014 and
letter no. UERC/6/TF-240/14-15/2014/1714 dated December 10, 2014 directed UPCL to rectify
these infirmities/deficiencies and to submit certain additional information necessary for admission
of the Petition. UPCL vide its letter no. 2695/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated December 16, 2014 submitted
most of the information sought by the Commission. Based on the submissions dated December 16,
2014 by UPCL, the Commission vide its Order dated December 22, 2014 admitted the Petition, with
the condition that UPCL shall furnish any further information/clarifications as deemed necessary
by the Commission during the processing of the Petition and provide such information and
clarifications to the satisfaction of the Commission within the time frame, as may be stipulated by
the Commission, failing which the Commission may proceed to dispose of the matter as it deems fit
based on the information available with it. UPCL further vide its letters no. 2766/UPCL/RM/B-16
dated December 26, 2014, 2794/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated December 29, 2014 and 13/UPCL/RM/B-16
dated January 02, 2015 submitted most of the response to the remaining queries sought by the
Commission.
The Commission issued in-house paper inviting comments and suggestions from all the
stakeholders on same by February 16, 2015 on five tariff related issues as shown below:
1. Levying Fixed Charges for Domestic Consumers based on Consumption;
2. Removal of the Tariff Category ‘RTS-1A:Snowbound’;
3. Extension of Continuous Supply Option to the Non-Continuous Industries as well;
4. Load Factor based slabs for HT Industrial Consumers;
5. Tariff Categorisation for Horticulture and Floriculture Consumers;
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 3
This Order, relates to APR Petition filed by UPCL for FY 2015-16 and is based on the original
as well as all the subsequent submissions made by UPCL during the course of the proceedings
alongwith the relevant findings contained in the MYT Order dated May 6, 2013, APR Order for FY
2014-15 dated April 10, 2014 and suggestions received on inhouse papers on tariff related issues.
Tariff determination being the most vital function of the Commission, it has been the
practice of the Commission to elaborate in detail the procedure and explain the principles utilized
by it in determining the ARR and tariffs. Accordingly, in the present Order also, in line with past
practices, the Commission has tried to elaborate on the procedure and principles followed by it in
determining the ARR requirement of the licensee. For the sake of convenience and clarity, this
Order has further been divided into following Chapters:
Chapter 1 – Background and Procedural History
Chapter 2 – Stakeholders’ Responses and Petitioner‘s Comments
Chapter 3 - Petitioner’s Submissions, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion
on Truing up for FY 2013-14
Chapter 4 – Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on
Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Chapter 5- Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Chapter 6- Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Chapter 7 - Commission’s Directives
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 4
1. Background and Procedural History
Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd. (UPCL) is a company wholly owned by the
Government of Uttarakhand and the sole distribution licensee engaged in the business of
distribution and retail supply of power in the State of Uttarakhand. The Electricity Act, 2003 (Act)
read with the Commission’s relevant Regulations framed under Section 181 of the Act requires the
distribution licensee to file with the Commission, the Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR) & Tariff
Proposals for the ensuing Financial Year, on or before 30th November each year.
In exercise of power conferred on it under Section 61 of the Electricity Act, 2003, and all
other powers enabling it in this behalf, the Commission notified the UERC (Terms and conditions
for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011 in December 2011. Further, the Commission vide its
Order dated May 6, 2013 issued the Order on approval of Business Plan and Multi Year Tariff for
UPCL for the first Control Period FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16. The Commission, in the approval of
Business Plan, approved the Energy Sales Forecast, Efficiency Parameters, Power Procurement Plan,
Capital Expenditure Plan, Capital Structure, Human Resource Plan, and in the approval of MYT,
approved certain elements of Aggregate Revenue Requirement for each year of the Control Period
FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16. In accordance with the Regulation 13(2) of the UERC (Terms and
Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011, the Distribution Licensees are required to
file a Petition/application for Annual Performance Review by November 30 of every year.
As mentioned earlier, in accordance with provisions of the Act and Regulation 13(2) of the
UERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011, the distribution
licensees are required to file a Petition/application for determination of its ARR and Tariff for the
ensuing FY latest by November 30 of current Financial Year. UPCL filed its Aggregate Revenue
Requirement and Tariff Petition for FY 2015-16 on November 29, 2014. The Petition consisted of
truing up of the figures of FY 2013-14 based on the audited accounts, review of the figures of FY
2015-16 based on the revised estimates and projections for FY 2015-16. The Petition was admitted by
the Commission vide its Order dated December 22, 2014. The Commission, through its above
Admittance Order dated December 22, 2014, to provide transparency to the process of tariff
determination and give all the stakeholders an opportunity to submit their
objections/suggestions/comments on the proposals of the Distribution Company, also directed
1. Background and Procedural History
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 5
UPCL to publish the salient points of its proposals in the leading newspapers. The salient points of
the proposal were published by the Petitioner in the following newspapers:
Table 1.1: Publication of Notice S. No. Newspaper Name Date of publication 1. Dainik Jagran 25/12/2014 2. Amar Ujala 25/12/2014 3. Hindustan 25/12/2014 4. Rashtriya Sahara 25/12/2014 5. Hindustan Times 26/12/2014 6. Times of India 26/12/2014
Through above notice, the stakeholders were requested to submit their comments latest by
January 31, 2015 (copy of the notice is enclosed as Annexure-3).
The Commission on its own initiative also sent the copies of salient points of tariff proposals
to the Members of the State Advisory Committee, the State Government and also made available
the details of the proposals submitted by the Petitioner in the Commission’s office and on the
Commission's website.
The Commission received 52 objections/suggestions/comments in writing on the
Petitioner’s ARR and Tariff Petition for FY 2015-16. The list of stakeholders who have submitted
their objections/suggestions /comments is enclosed at Annexure-4.
The Commission on its own initiative invited comments and suggestions on the inhouse
papers on five tariff design related issues as shown below:
1. Levying Fixed Charges for Domestic Consumers based on Consumption;
2. Removal of the Tariff Category ‘RTS-1A:Snowbound’;
3. Extension of Continuous Supply Option to the Non-Continuous Industries as well;
4. Load Factor based slabs for HT Industrial Consumers;
5. Tariff Categorisation for Horticulture and Floriculture Consumers;
The Commission also published the public notice inviting comments on the inhouse papers
in the following newspapers.
Table 1.2: Publication of Notice on Inhouse Papers S. No. Newspaper Name Date of publication 1. Dainik Jagran 17/01/2015 2. Amar Ujala 17/01/2015 3. Hindustan Times 18/01/2015
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
6 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Through above notice, stakeholders were requested to submit their comments latest by
February 16, 2015 (copy of the notice is enclosed as Annexure-5).
The Commission received 04 objections/suggestions/comments in writing on the inhouse
papers issued by the Commission. The list of stakeholders who have submitted their
objections/suggestions /comments is enclosed at Annexure-4.
The Commission also organized a meeting with the Members of the Advisory Committee on
February 05, 2015, wherein, detailed deliberations were held with the Members of the Advisory
Committee on the various issues linked with the Petition filed by UPCL.
For direct interaction with all stakeholders and public at large so as to give them an
opportunity of being heard, the Commission conducted common public hearings on the proposals
filed by UJVNL, PTCUL, SLDC and UPCL at the following places in the State of Uttarakhand:
Table 1.3: Schedule of Hearings S. No. Place Date
1 Almora February 18, 2015 2 Rudrapur February 19, 2015 3 Pauri February 24, 2015 4 Dehradun February 27, 2015
The list of participants who attended the Public Hearing is enclosed at Annexure-6. The
objections/suggestions/comments, as received from the stakeholders in writing as well as during
the course of public hearing were sent to the Petitioner for its response. All the issues as raised by
the stakeholders and Petitioner’s response on the same are detailed in Chapter 2 of this Order. In
this context it is also to underline that while finalizing the Tariff Order, the Commission has, as far
as possible, tried to address the issues raised by the stakeholders.
Based on the preliminary scrutiny of the ARR and tariff proposals submitted by UPCL, the
Commission identified certain data gaps in Petition. Accordingly, following additional
information/clarification from the Petitioner were sought by the Commission vide its letter no.
UERC/6/TF-240/14-15/2014/1703 dated December 9, 2014 and letter no. UERC/6/TF-240/14-
15/2014/1714 dated December 10, 2014.
• Submission of all forms in MS Excel Format.
• Computation of Distribution Losses and Inter-State Transmission Losses for FY 2013-14.
• Clarification on data inconsistency in various figures in the Petition vis-à-vis the Formats.
1. Background and Procedural History
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 7
• Details of Financial Packages as per Form F-7.1
• Actual category wise, month-wise load shedding data for FY 2013-14.
• Copy of Trial Balance for FY 2013-14
• SLDC Certification for intra state transmission losses for FY 2013-14.
• Segregation of the additions in GFA in LT and HT/EHT works giving the means of finance
of the same and clearances of Electrical Inspector with regard to HT/EHT works for FY
2007-08 onwards.
• Details of consumer security deposit for FY 2013-14 (Opening Balance, Additions during the
year, Closing balance) along with computation of interest on consumer security deposit for
FY 2013-14.
• Details of actual interest on consumer security paid/adjusted on security deposit from FY
2011-12 to FY 2013-14.
• Detailed workings in soft copy (MS Excel) for computing scheme-wise IDC for FY 2013-14.
• Necessary documentary support for consideration of Interest on working capital as 14.50%
for FY 2013-14.
• Capitalisation policy for Employee and A&G Expenses.
• Detailed break up of Non Tariff Income for FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 respectively.
• Proposed tariff hike in terms of percentage for each consumer category for FY 2015-16 to
meet the projected revenue gap and justifying the proposed tariff revision, in terms of
reduction of cross-subsidy between various consumer categories in accordance with the
provisions of the EA 2003, Tariff Policy, and previous Orders of the Commission.
• Details of actual employees recruited and retired during FY 2013-14.
• Details of fees/fines/penalties/compensation paid during FY 2013-14 & booked under A&G
expenses.
• Details of asset additions and deletions (asset sent for repair) since FY 2001-02 to FY 2013-14.
• Consumer category wise energy sold and revenue billed.
• Computation of cost of power from stations belonging to NTPC, NHPC, NPCIL, THDC,
SJVNL for FY 2015-16.
• Details of works to be carried out under Deviya Apada & Other Capex during FY 2014-15
and FY 2015-16 alongwith its financing.
• Category wise and Voltage wise cost of supply.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
8 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
In its reply the Petitioner submitted the information vide its letters no. 2695/UPCL/RM/B-
dated December 16, 2014, 2726/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated December 26, 2014, 2794/UPCL/RM/B-16
dated December 29, 2014 and 13/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated January 02, 2015. Further, with an
objective to have a better clarity, for removal of inconsistency in the data submitted in the Petition
and for obtaining additional information, the Commission held a Technical Validation Session
(TVS) with the Petitioner on January 15, 2015, during which the issues raised vide letter no.
UERC/6/TF-240/14-15/2014/1703 dated December 9, 2014, letter no. UERC/6/TF-240/14-
15/2014/1714 dated 10 December, 2014 and replies submitted by Petitioner vide letters no.
2695/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated December 16, 2014, 2766/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated December 26, 2014,
2794/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated December 29, 2014 and 13/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated January 02, 2015,
were discussed.
Based on these discussions, the Commission, vide its letter no. UERC/6/TF-240/14-
15/2014/1914 dated January 20, 2015 forwarded the minutes of the first TVS, seeking some further
clarification/information from the Petitioner. The information as sought by the Commission was
subsequently submitted by the Petitioner vide letters no. 380/UPCL/RM-B-16, 390/UPCL/RM/B-
16 dated February 04, 2015, 402/UPCL/RM/B-14 dated February 05, 2015, 691/UPCL/RM/B-16
dated February 10, 2015, 722/UPCL/RM/B-16 dated February 11, 2015 and 769/UPCL/RM/B-16
dated February 13, 2015.
The submissions made by Petitioner in the Petitions as well as in additional submissions have been
discussed by the Commission at appropriate places in the Tariff Order along with Commission’s
views on the same.
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 9
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments The Commission has received suggestions and objections on UPCL’s Petition for True-up of
Expenses & Revenues for FY 2013-14, Annual Performance Review (APR) of FY 2014-15 and Tariff
for FY 2015-16. The Commission also obtained responses from UPCL on the comments received
from the stakeholders. The Commission also invited comments and suggestions on inhouse papers
issued by it on five tariff related issues as shown below:
1. Levying Fixed Charges for Domestic Consumers based on Consumption;
2. Removal of the Tariff Category ‘RTS-1A:Snowbound’;
3. Extension of Continuous Supply Option to the Non-Continuous Industries as well;
4. Load Factor based slabs for HT Industrial Consumers;
5. Tariff Categorisation for Horticulture and Floriculture Consumers;
Since, several issues are common and have been raised by more than one respondent all
comments have been clubbed issue-wise and summarized below. Further, the Commission has also
considered suggestions received on inhouse papers and had expressed its views in Chapter 5 of this
Order.
2.1 General
2.1.1 Compliance to Regulations/Directions of Commission
2.1.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Pankaj Gupta, President, Industries Association of Uttarakhand submitted that
Tariff/ARR fixation exercise is not only about approving the expense and revenue, but also an
exercise of taking stock of the past work done and setting a road map for future performance. In
this respect the Commission gave various directions to UPCL. These directions have huge
implications on the overall performance of UPCL and impacts cost of supply to the consumers.
These directives are being reiterated in various ARR Tariff Orders, however, with great regret, it is
pointed out that in this Petition there is no mention of such directives or of action taken with respect
to the follow up in respect of these directives. Therefore, he requested UERC to take up the matter
seriously with UPCL for compliance of these directives.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
10 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri Bhagwati Khanduri submitted that thorough investigation should be carried out for all
cables connected from an electric pole for checking its genuineness. He also submitted that
Vigilance Dept. should be active and honest towards their duties.
Shri Suresh Kumar, President, LA OPALA RG Ltd., Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Manager-HR &
Admin, Packaging India Pvt. Ltd., Shri Kumar Gupta, Factory Manager, Khatima Fibres Ltd., Shri
Achal Sharma, President, East West Products Ltd., Shri Rudramurthy N of M/s P.E.S Engineers
Private Limited, M/s Arjan Auto Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Ashok Bansal, President, Kumaun
Garhwal Chamber of Commerce Industry submitted that since beginning the Commission has been
directing the licensee in every Tariff Order to workout actual voltage wise, category wise losses and
cost of supply for fixation of category wise tariffs. However, the licensee has failed to comply with
this direction. The Commission will be again constrained to make assumptions for HT level losses
while approving the ARR/Tariff for FY 2014-15. Such assumption not based on actual facts and
figures may be detrimental to the interest of the HT consumers. The Commission may, therefore,
take serious note for such non-compliance on the part of the licensee on a repeated basis and take
action provided in the Act and fix the tariff of the consumers fixing HT level losses on a rational
basis.
2.1.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the compliance status of the directions issued by Commission
has been submitted. The progress reports in respect of various works are submitted by UPCL as and
when required by the Commission.
2.1.2 Clarification on Commercial Consumer
2.1.2.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Bhagwati Khanduri submitted that all commercial establishment irrespective of their
size and role should be given commercial connection. He also submitted that supply of power from
domestic meter for commercial purpose should be strictly monitored.
2.1.3 Delays in providing connection and meter reading
2.1.3.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri H. D. Arora, President, Mohalla Shwachta Samiti, Rudrapur submitted that there is
delay in providing new connections, installation of meters at premises, timely meter reading and
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 11
disbursement of bills. In this regard, appropriate measures should be taken and the licensee should
improve their collection efficiency.
Shri Avresh Kumar Singh, Perfect Dynamics Auto Private Ltd. submitted that the work of
an industrial feeder was started on 05.08.2014 for their industry at Fulsungha, Rudrapur. This work
was required to be completed in time duration of 1 month, however, the same has not yet been
completed. In this regard, the Commission is requested to take appropriate action.
2.2 Domestic Tariff
2.2.1 Tariff Hike
2.2.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Ms. Rashmi Agarwal of Kashipur submitted that UPCL has proposed the following increase
in tariff for Domestic Consumers:
From To (a) Fixed charges - Rs. 35/- p.m. Rs. 45/- p.m.
Rs. 90/- p.m. Rs. 120/- p.m. (b) Energy Charges- Rs. 2.30/kWh Rs. 2.90/kWh
Rs. 2.70/kWh Rs. 3.40/kWh Rs. 3.35/kWh Rs. 4.20/kWh Rs. 3.50/kWh Rs. 4.40/kWh
In this regard, she submitted that the proposed tariff hike for Domestic Consumers appears
to be very high and, therefore, should not be accepted by the Commission.
Ms. Rashmi Agarwal of Kashipur further submitted that UERC in its first Tariff Order dated
September 20, 2003 had fixed the following Tariff for domestic consumers:
(c) Fixed charges - Nil (d) Energy Charges - Rs. 1.80/kWh
On the insistence of UPCL, the Domestic Tariff is being continuously increased and UPCL
has proposed the following tariff:
(a) Fixed charges - 120/- p.m. (b) Energy Charges - Rs. 4.40/kWh
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
12 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
She further submitted that the honest domestic consumer who is paying electricity charges
regularly should not be penalized by increasing tariff abnormally thereby inducing consumers to
adopt pilferage and theft practices.
Shri Pramod Singh Tomar of Kashipur submitted that UPCL has proposed to increase the
energy charges for RTS-1 (Domestic) by approx 26.24% which is unacceptable. As general consumer
is severely affected by the inflation, therefore, he requested the Commission not to accept such
proposal.
Shri. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal (President and General Secretary, Shri Karuna Jan Kalyan
Samiti, Almora) submitted that the tariff rates are already higher and, therefore, there should be
maximum tariff hike of 5%. There should not be any tariff hike for the Kutir Jyoti Yojana BPL
Consumers. Further, rebate should be provided to consumers living in hilly areas and border areas
to improve their living condition.
Shri. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal further submitted that fixed charges should be removed & if
not then fixed charge should be charged per KW of load and not according to connection for
domestic consumers.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that there were no fixed charges before 2008. Since
2008, fixed charges have increased from Rs 15/month to Rs 35/month and this charge is
unnecessary. Therefore, fixed charges should be removed.
Shri Maherban Singh Negi submitted that there should be no provision of giving free power
to any family, home or office. Rebate should be on the basis of some quota.
Further, Shri H. D. Arora and Shri M. S. Nayaz submitted that the proposed hike in tariff is
unacceptable. Indeed, UPCL should provide 24 hour electricity supply to consumers in State.
Shri Surendra S. Negi, Shri M. S. Nayaz and Shri Gopal Shankar Shrivastav submitted that
UPCL should not give free power to any its employee or to any category for misuse. Further, there
should be some limit for consumption by departmental employees.
Shri Ajay Bhargava, Secretary, Mussoorie Hotels Association and Shri R. N. Mathur,
President, Mussoorie Hotels Association submitted that free/subsidised supply of electricity should
be stopped to the working/retired employees of UPCL so as to curtail misuse of electricity.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 13
Shri Bhagwati Khanduri submitted that any departmental consumer, employee and ex-
employees should not be allowed to use unlimited free electricity irrespective of status.
Shri R. P. Joshi and Shri K. B. Pandey, Secretary, Retired Central Employee Kalyan Samiti
Almora submitted that every departmental employee or ex-employee of UPCL should be metered.
This will result in electricity saving as well as increase in revenue.
Shri V. K. Birdi submitted that in case meters installed by UPCL are running fast than the
standards, then in such cases check meters are installed by UPCL. In this regard, he suggested that
the Commission should arrange for providing seal to check meters after adjusting their speed in
accordance with norms and standards.
Shri Suresh Kumar, President, LA OPALA RG Ltd., Shri Gopal Shankar Shrivastav, Shri
Rudramurthy N and Shri Jaan Ali submitted that the proposed tariff hike of 26.7% for FY 2015-16 is
too high and act as a shock to consumers.
Shri Vijay Singh Verma, Member, Bhartiya Kisan Club Delna submitted that 1 kW load in
domestic connection should be removed as the difference between Contracted Load and Connected
Load is too high. He further submitted that in rural areas, the PTW lines and Domestic Lines
should be separate.
Adv. N. D. Dobriyal, Mahasachiv, Government Pensioners Association, Dehradun
suggested that Fixed Charge, Electricity duty and Surcharge is unnecessarily charged on consumers
and should be abolished
2.2.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
As regards the contention raised by several stakeholders regarding tariff hike, the Petitioner
submitted that UPCL is a commercial organization and is required to meet its Annual Revenue
Requirement out of the revenue realized from the consumers through electricity tariffs. The revenue
deficit for the period upto FY 2015-16 excluding the deficit of FY 2014-15 is expected to be Rs.
1131.38 Crore, which necessitates a tariff hike of 26.24%, and if not recovered, will impose a huge
financial burden on UPCL, which will make the distribution business unviable. Summary of gap to
be recovered in FY 2015-16 is as follows:-
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
14 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 2.1: Summary of Total Gap as submitted by the Petitioner S. No. Particulars Rs. Crore Rs./Unit %
1 Cost of Power* 4047.79 3.91 80.04% 2 Cost of Service 1009.73 0.97 19.96% 3 ARR (1+2) 5057.52 4.88 100.00% 4 Gap for FY 14 385.70 0.37 7.63% 5 Net ARR (3+4) 5443.22 5.25 107.63% 6 Existing Tariff 4311.84 4.16 85.26% 7 Increase in Tariff Required (5-6) 1131.38 1.09 26.24%
The details of the above referred Cost of Power is as follows:
Table 2.2: Cost of Power as submitted by the Petitioner S. No. Particulars Rs./Unit %%
1 Power Purchase 2.81 71.83% 2 Transmission Charges 0.36 9.33% 3 Transmission Loss 0.06 1.50% 4 Cost of Power at Distribution Periphery (1+2+3) 3.23 82.66% 5 Distribution Loss 0.68 17.34% 6 Cost of Power (4+5) 3.91 100.00%
The deficit for FY 2014-15 based on accounts shall be claimed in the next year during truing
up exercise. As against average increase required of Rs. 1.09 per unit (ARR of Rs. 5.25/unit minus
existing Tariff of Rs. 4.16/unit), UPCL has proposed average increase of Rs. 0.76/unit for Domestic
Category.
Further, as per the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, the tariff of each category should be
fixed in a manner that it reflects cost of supply, keeping the cross subsidy level as per law. In case
tariff is not increased, the level of cross subsidy will go beyond permissible limits.
As regards the contention raised by stakeholders regarding fixed charges, the Petitioner
submitted that in accordance with Section 45(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 about 50% of the UPCL’s
total costs are fixed in nature including the capacity / fixed charge of power purchase, which
should be recovered to a certain extent through fixed charges to ensure revenue stability. Hence,
levy of fix charge is necessary and as per the provisions of law. The Commission is in the process of
rationalizing the tariff including levying of Fixed Charges for Domestic Consumers based on the
consumption.
As regards the contention raised by Shri Maherban Singh Negi and Shri Surendra S. Negi
regarding no free power supply, the Petitioner submitted that presently no electricity is being
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 15
supplied to any consumer free of cost. The employees of UPCL are being given the facility of
departmental electricity connection since U.P. State Electricity Board was in existence. Under this
facility, a fix lump-sum amount is charged from the employees, according to their designation,
towards electricity charges for electricity supplied to them. Erstwhile UPSEB was unbundled under
the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Electricity Reforms Act, 1999 and Section 23(7) of the said Act
provides “terms and conditions of service of the personnel shall not be less favourable to the terms
and condition which were applicable to them before the transfer”. The same spirit has been echoed
under first proviso of Section 133(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The benefits for employees/
pensioners as provided in Section 12(b)(ii) of the Uttar Pradesh Reform Transfer Scheme, 2000
include “concessional rate of electricity”, which means concession in rate of electricity to the extent
it is not inferior to what was existing before 14th January, 2000. The rates and charges indicated
above for this category are strictly in adherence of above statutory provisions. As UPCL is the
successor entity of UPPCL (formed as a result of unbundling of UPSEB), the above legal provisions
are also applicable on UPCL. However, UPCL is in process to evolve a mechanism to give the
concession in tariff for supply of Electricity to the employees and pensioners as per Commission’s
directives.
2.3 Non-Domestic Tariff
2.3.1 Tariff Hike
2.3.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Vijay Kumar, President- Atta Chakki Union, Haridwar submitted that it is not justified
to increase tariff when there was profit last year. Further, the fixed charges should not be charged in
electricity bills. Also, the tariff should be reduced for Atta Chakkis.
Shri Ajay Bhargava, Secretary and Shri R. N. Mathur, President submitted that UPCL has
proposed an increase in tariff from Rs. 4.55/kVAh to Rs. 5.65/kVAh in RTS-2 (Non-Domestic)
Category. They also mentioned that as per news article dated January 22, 2015 , the Central
Government had advised all state governments to ensure that the tariff should not be increased as
this will adversely affect the economy of the country and increase inflation. Therefore, the
Commission should not accept the proposed tariff hike.
Shri Ajay Bhargava and Shri R. N. Mathur also suggested that UPCL should take steps to
reduce the theft of electricity and reduce the distribution losses.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
16 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri Jaan Ali submitted that UPCL charges Rs. 80/kW as fixed charge on Atta chakki and
this should be removed. He further submitted that on one hand Government is promoting
industries, but on the other hand UPCL is charging excess bills which has no reference in tariff
order.
2.3.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
With regard to Atta Chakkis, the Petitioner submitted that in accordance with the provisions
of Electricity Act, 2003, tariff of all categories is required to be determined at Average Cost of
Supply with permissible level of cross subsidy. Accordingly, tariff of all categories including Atta
Chakki has been proposed. However, MCG in respect of Atta Chakki has been kept at lower level of
40 unit/kW/Month in place of 60 unit/kW/Month applicable for other LT Industry consumers.
2.3.2 Clarification in fixation of Units
2.3.2.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Ram Kumar, Senior Vice President, Hotel Association requested the Commission to fix
the Unit of energy charges in kWh, fixed charges and the MCG in “kWh/kW” as all the contracted
load of consumers is also in kW and it will be easier for consumers to understand.
2.4 Tariff for Charitable Institutions 2.4.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Kailash Chand Sharma and Shri Raj Singh of Dev Bhumi Dharmsala Committee,
Haridwar submitted that due to flood in Kedarnath, Dharmshalas are empty and they are not able
to pay the tariffs. Therefore, they requested the Commission to abolish the fixed charge per unit for
Dharamshalas. They further submitted that Dharamshalas are put in Domestic Category in other
States of India. However, in Uttarakhand, Dharamshalas are put under Commercial Category and
have the compulsion of Income-Tax Act 1961. In this regard, they requested UERC that all the
dharamshalas/trusts should be exempted from the compulsion of Income-tax Act 1961.
2.4.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that in accordance with the existing categorization of consumers,
Dharamshala/Trust/ Ashrams fall under the category of RTS-2 (Non-domestic). The domestic
category applies only on the residential premises for light, fan & power and other domestic
purposes including single point bulk supply above 50 kW for residential colonies, residential
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 17
multistoried buildings where energy is exclusively used for such purpose. Non-domestic category is
a subsidizing category whereas the domestic category is subsidized category. As per the provisions
of Electricity Act, 2003 and National Tariff Policy, the cross subsidy should be maintained at the
level of ±20% of the average cost of supply. In view of the facts mentioned hereinabove, consumers
covered under subsidizing category cannot be transferred into the subsidized category. Thus, the
Dharamshala/Trust/Ashrams are rightly categorized under Rate Schedule RTS-2 (Non-domestic).
Further, about 50% of the UPCL’s total costs are fixed in nature including the capacity/fixed
charge of power purchase, which should be recovered to a certain extent through fixed charges to
ensure revenue stability. Hence, levy of fix charge is necessary and as per the provisions of law.
2.5 Street Lighting
2.5.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Maherban Singh Negi submitted that there should be proper checking of street
light/security light. LED bulb should be installed. Street light should be installed at proper
direction on each pole with proper location of switches.
Col. S. K. Bhattacharya, Dehradun submitted that there is a huge wastage of electricity due
to street lights as most of the street lights are lit for 24x7 hrs.
Shri Bhagwati Khanduri submitted that every street lights should be metered and local body
should pay the bill on time.
2.5.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that streetlights are controlled by the local authority/municipal
corporations. However, UPCL is always ready to cooperate with the local authority/municipal
corporations to stop the wastage of electricity in street lights.
2.6 Independent Advertising Hoardings 2.6.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that Fixed & Energy Charges for the new category
proposed for “Independent Advertising Hoardings” should be on a lower side.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
18 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2.6.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the new category proposed for Private Advertisement Boards
and Hoardings is on similar lines to the neighbouring states like Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Delhi,
however, the tariff proposed is on a much lower side than that charged by utilities in these States.
The tariff comparison across States has been shown in the Table below:
Table 2.3: Comparison of Tariff for Private Advertisement Boards State Fixed Charge (Per Month) Energy Charge (Per Unit)
Delhi Rs. 500/hoarding Rs.11.20/kVAh Haryana Rs. 150/kW Rs. 7.45/kWh Uttar Pradesh Rs. 1200/kW MCG Rs. 14.00/kWh
2.7 Agricultural Tariff
2.7.1 Private Tube Wells
2.7.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Mukesh Chauhan of Dehradun submitted that Minimum Consumption Charges (MCG)
should be abolished for Private Tube Wells (PTW) connections & per unit charge may be increased
for such connections. He further submitted that chaff cutter, thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller
should not be removed from RTS-4 (PTW) Category.
Shri Pramod Singh Tomar of Kashipur submitted that proposed tariff increase for RTS-4
(PTW/Pumping set) is 27% due to which farmers have to bear extra burden. In this regard, he
requested to reduce the energy charges from Rs. 1.40 per unit to Rs. 1 per unit. He further requested
to remove MCG.
Shri Kuldeep Singh Cheema, Bhartiya Kishan Union submitted that current tariff of PTW
category consumers is Rs 1.10/unit and additional MCG on tariff is an extra burden on farmers. He
also submitted that the in interest of State, tube well connection should be given quickly and at
minimum charges. Further, meters on PTW should be insured from a insurance company to remove
burden from farmers in case of meter defect and theft.
Farmers of Bhartiya Kishan Union, Uddham Singh Nagar submitted that PTW tariff should
not be increased as farmers are not getting proper price for their yields and there is reduction of
around 30% in yield every year. They also submitted that many states have given relief package or
subsidy to farmers in bills to improve financial condition of farmers. They requested to provide
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 19
subsidy to farmers on PTW bills. They further stated that on an average a farmer uses PTW for 97
hrs resulting into a bill of approx Rs. 300/- per month. Farmers have not used PTW connection
since October 2014 for 6 months due to proper rain. Therefore, tariff should not be increased for
PTW category.
Shri Vijay Singh Verma submitted that there should be physical verification of Contracted
Load and Connected Load. In this regard, he suggested that fixed charges should be increased for
unmetered connections from Rs. 180/BHP/month to Rs. 200/BHP/month. Energy charges should
not be increased for metered connections. He further submitted that there are around 70% PTW
meters with IDF billing, but are shown as Not Read (NR) billing. Further, there should be
verification of small sugarcane crushers as most of them are running on PTW connections.
2.7.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that Section 45(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, stipulates for levy of
fixed charges as follows:
“The charges for electricity supplied by a distribution licensee may include:
• a fixed charge in addition to the charge for the actual electricity supplied ;
• a rent or other charges in respect of any electric meter or electrical plant provided by the
distribution licensee.”
About 50% of the UPCL’s total costs are fixed in nature including the capacity/ fixed charge
of power purchase, which should be recovered to a certain extent through fixed charges to ensure
revenue stability. Levy of minimum consumption guarantee charge is a way of ensuring minimum
revenue to the licensee from the consumers. Minimum Consumption Guarantee has been proposed
at very low level of consumption i.e. 70 kWh/ BHP/Month (13% load factor). In case during certain
month, actual consumption is less than MCG, MCG is charged in those months. Any excess of billed
consumption (over actual consumption or minimum consumption, whichever is higher) is adjusted
at the end of the financial year.
Further, UPCL proposed that thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller should be covered under
the Rate Schedule RTS - 7 as these activities are of industrial nature. It may also be noted that under
the existing classification, it is difficult to identify the incidental agricultural production of the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
20 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
connection which is sanctioned for irrigation purpose and are prone to be misused by availing
subsidized tariff for the activities not covered under this rate schedule.
2.8 Mixed Load (RTS-8) Tariff 2.8.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri G. S. Bedi, General Manager of India Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Limited submitted that
proposed increase in fixed/demand charge and energy charge is very high in Mixed Load (RTS-8)
Tariff.
2.8.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
In this regard, the Petitioner submitted that UPCL has proposed a uniform increase of
26.24% in each category.
2.9 Delayed Payment Surcharge (DPS) 2.9.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui, DGM (Commercial), Kashi Vishawanth Textile Mill limited and
Shri P. S. Tomar, Director, Galwalia Ispat Udyog Pvt. Ltd. submitted that at present DPS is levied at
1.25% on the unpaid amount even if the payment is done just after 1 day. This interest translates
into 15% annually which is very high. In this regard, they suggested that Delayed Payment
Surcharge should be charged on pro-rata basis @ 0.75% if the payment is made within 15 days after
the due date and @ 1% if the payment is made after 15 days from the due date.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that late payment surcharge should not be applied
on account of N.R/I.D.F meters.
2.9.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that Delayed Payment Surcharge is the cost of money not received
to UPCL in time. This surcharge is also levied with a view to discourage the consumers who do not
pay their bills within the due date. Delayed Payment Surcharge in Uttarakhand is lower than that
charged by other utilities across various states. The DPS charged across various States are as under:
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 21
Table 2.4: Comparison of Delayed Payment Surcharge (DPS) in various States State DPS
Haryana 1.5 % on unpaid amount of the bill for each 30 days successive period or part thereof until the amount is paid in full.
Uttar Pradesh 1.5% per month on unpaid amount Delhi 1.5% per month on unpaid amount
Accordingly, no change should be made in the Delayed Payment Surcharge.
As regards the contention raised by Shri. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, the Petitioner submitted
that UPCL has already developed a detailed metering plan for replacing all defective meters and to
ensure 100% meter reading. However, late payment surcharge is levied to compensate the cost of
money received beyond due date and borne by UPCL by borrowing this money from market.
Hence, late payment surcharge cannot be discontinued.
2.10 Rebate and Incentives 2.10.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri G. S. Bedi requested the Commission to provide rebate/incentive to consumers directly
connected to PTCUL substation on account of lower line losses. Further, he requested the
Commission to provide rebate/incentive for reactive power management in case of Mixed Load
tariff (RTS-8) as it would encourage consumers for maintaining very high Power Factor based on
kW/kWh billing.
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that the State of Uttarakhand had released its textile
policy on 11.12.2014 extending attractive subsidies and relaxations to promote textile industry in the
State comprising power bill rebate of Rs. 1/- per unit and 100% relief on electricity duty.
Accordingly, he suggested that textile industries in the State should be allowed power rebate @ Rs.
1/- per unit and waiver in electricity duty.
Shri Manu Kochhar and Shri P. S. Tomar suggested that rebates offered for availing supply
at higher voltages than the base voltage should be increased from 2.5% to 7.5% for supply at 33 kV
and from 7.5% to 12.5% for supply at 132 kV and above.
Shri Rajeev Gupta of Kashi Enterprises requested the Commission to provide a rebate of
7.5% to industries connected on independent feeder at 33 kV as distribution losses at independent
feeders is around only 1%.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
22 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal of Kashi Vishwanath Steels Pvt. Ltd. submitted that high voltage
rebate should be provided on both energy charge and demand charge to industries connected to
independent feeder. Further, he requested the Commission to increase the rebate for industries
connected to independent feeder from 1% to 2.5% at 11 kV, from 2.5% to 7.5% at 33 kV and from
7.5% to 12% at 132 kV because the distribution losses at independent feeders is around 1% only.
Shri. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that a rebate should be given for unreasonable
power cut, roastering and for low/high voltage as a penalty to UPCL. Further, a rebate should be
given to consumers for encouraging use of solar power and for using CFL/LED. He requested the
Commission to provide a rebate in bill payment within 15 days to encourage consumers for timely
payment.
Shri Suresh Kumar, (President, LA OPALA RG Ltd.), Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, (Manager-HR
& Admin, Packaging India Pvt. Ltd.), Shri Kumar Gupta, (Factory Manager, Khatima Fibres Ltd.),
Shri Achal Sharma, (President, East West Products Ltd.), Shri Rudramurthy N (M/s P.E.S Engineers
Private Limited), M/s Arjan Auto Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Ashok Bansal, (President,
Kumaun Garhwal Chamber of Commerce Industry) submitted that the Commission in its Tariff
Order dated 25.04.2005 had provided the high voltage rebates to the consumers on rate of charge
(demand and energy charge) as follows:
(a) LT Consumers - 5% for supply voltage at 11 kV.
(b) HT Consumers - 2.5% for supply voltage at 33 kV, 5% for supply voltage above 33 kV i.e.,
for 132 kV and 220 kV.
In the next Tariff Order dated 12.07.2006, the Commission linked the H.V. rebate mechanism
to systems technical requirement ignoring the fact that the tariff therein was not reflecting cost of
supply at different voltages but was being computed on average cost of supply. Based on the
comments/objections on subsequent Tariff Proposals, the Commission restored the HV rebates
partially on rate of charge in its Tariff Order dated 06.05.2013 as under:
(a) LT Consumers - 5% for supply voltage above 400 Volts and upto 11 kV.
(b) HT Consumers – 1.5% for supply voltage of 33 kV, 5% for supply voltage of 132 kV and
220 kV.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 23
Thus, the Commission while restoring previously admissible rebates of other supply
voltages, the rebate for 33 kV voltage was fixed at 1.5% without any justification for such a change.
On being pursued further, the Commission in the last Tariff Order for FY 2014-15 provided for H.V.
rebates on energy charge instead of rate of charge (demand and energy charge) as follows:
(a) LT consumer - 5.0% for supply voltage above 400 Volts and upto 11 kV.
(b) For HT consumer - In case of supply at 33 kV voltage rebate of 2.5% on energy charge
and for supply at 132 kV and above voltages, 7.5% on the energy charge.
Thus, the Commission increased the rebate of HT consumers of 33 kV and above but made it
admissible only on energy charge while previously it was admissible on rate of charge. Therefore,
the Commission is requested to review the matter and allow HV rebates on rate of charge, i.e.
demand and energy charge instead of energy charge only.
2.10.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission increased the voltage rebate on demand of
consumers as follows:-
• at 132 kV supply rebate increased in FY 2013-14 from 2.5% to 5% and in FY 2014-15
from 5% to 7.50%.
• at 33 kV supply rebate increased in FY 2014-15 from 1.5% to 2.50%.
Hence, this rebate should not be increased further.
With regard to providing rebate for timely payment, the Petitioner submitted that timely
payment is the duty of the consumers against the service provided as UPCL has to manage its
working capital requirements. The Commission also allows normative working capital to the
Petitioner, assuming timely payment by all consumers. Hence, no rebate should be allowed to the
consumers for timely payment. Further, in case timely payment rebate is allowed, the proportionate
increase in energy/demand charges will be required.
As regards the contention raised Shri G. S. Bedi regarding rebate/incentive for reactive
power management in case of Mixed Load tariff (RTS-8), the Petitioner submitted that tariff is
determined considering that the consumer will maintain a healthy power factor. Further in
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
24 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
accordance with the provisions of Tariff Orders., penalty is levied on consumers for not maintaining
healthy power factor.
UPCL further submitted that, there is no relation of distribution losses with contracted load
and demand charges and, therefore, voltage rebate should not be admissible on demand charges.
With regard to providing rebate for using CFLs and non-conventional sources of energy, the
Petitioner submitted that consumers using CFLs are automatically awarded in terms of reduced
bills on account of reduced consumption due to CFLs.
2.11 Industrial Tariff 2.11.1 Tariff Hike
2.11.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Dr. Kirit Somaiya, Chairman, Parliamentary Committee on Energy, mentioned that crude oil
prices have reduced from $ 140/barrel to $ 50/barrel during last year. Similarly, there was drastic
reduction in prices of imported coal. Accordingly, UPCL’s expenses will reduce by around 40% in
FY 2014-15 and 50% in FY 2015-16. Therefore, electricity tariff should be reduced.
Shri G. S. Bedi submitted that UPCL has proposed average electricity tariff hike of 26.24% in
the existing retail tariff of consumers. If proposed hike of tariff by PTCUL, SLDC & UJVNL are
accepted by Commission, then it would necessitate a further hike of 10%. He further submitted that
proposed increase in Fixed/Demand charges & TOD charges in RTS-7 (HT industries) is so high
that it may break the back-bone of industries.
Shri Munish Talwar, Head- Electrical, Asahi India Glass Ltd. submitted that any hike in
Tariff at this juncture would put industry into further hardship as their industry is already
burdened by many issues like high manufacturing cost, etc. Therefore, the Commission should ask
for relevant data from UPCL to fix the tariff. Care must be taken to check the cost of inefficiency of
the public/electricity utilities and this should not be passed on the consumers. Rather than the
approach of tariff hike by about 26.24%, UPCL should prepare a “Power system Master Plan” for
estimating the Load forecast, calculating the region wise deficit and formulating ways of bridging
this gap.
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that the average cost of supply for the licensee has gone
up due to increase in power purchase cost and increase in capital expenditure. The increase in
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 25
power purchase cost proposed is not only due to higher rates of CGS considered by UPCL but is
also due to higher system losses. Further, the HT/EHT industries have losses even less than 5%,
however, they are being burdened with the inefficiencies of the distribution licensee. He further
suggested that the tariff should be reduced by 10% keeping in view the net profit of UPCL as per
their balance sheet for the FY 2013-14.
Shri Ram Kumar submitted that UPCL has proposed 26% increase in tariff and has failed to
control its expenses and line losses and wants to put the burden on its honest consumers. In this
regard, he suggested that UPCL may check its expenses by taking the following measures:
a. UPCL should take strict measures to prevent the line losses.
b. No free electricity should be provided to current and retired employees of UPCL.
c. Steps should be taken to encourage the consumers in saving electricity by using energy
efficient appliances.
d. The street lights be changed from sodium and halogens to energy efficient LED lamps with
automatic timers.
e. Proper earthing should be done in the electric poles so that during lightning the
transformers are not damaged.
Shri Anil Kansal and Shri Pawan Agarwal, Vice President, Uttarakhand Steel Manufacturers
Association submitted that UERC charges a cess of 40 to 50 Paise per kWh for the power sourced
from UJVNL. This cess amount is charged so that the consumers are not habitual of cheaper power
and the amount collected is utilized in the power development of the State. He has further
requested the Commission that the cess amount should be adjusted in the tariff determination for
FY 2015-16 to reduce the tariff hike.
Shri Sagar Suman, BST Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. submitted that the proposal of increase in tariff
by 26% is unacceptable and it should be reduced to maximum level.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia, President, Uttarakhand Industrial Welfare Association submitted
that nos. of industrial consumers in State are even less than 1% but industries consume 58%
electricity and accounts for 64% of UPCL’s revenue. Even after so much share, UPCL has proposed
hike in industrial tariff without any appropriate reason.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
26 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
He also submitted that UPCL has huge pending bills on State Government departments like
water department, Nagar Nigam, Ganga Pollution plan, etc. UPCL should take proper steps to
collect such pending bills.
2.11.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that revenue deficit for the period upto FY 2015-16 excluding the
deficit of FY 2014-15 is expected to be Rs. 1,131.38 Crore, which has necessitated a tariff hike of
26.24%, and if not recovered, will impose a huge financial burden on UPCL, which will make the
distribution business unviable. Hence, the Commission is requested to consider the tariff proposal
of UPCL keeping in view the aforesaid facts submitted.
Further, profit in the Annual Accounts of FY 2013-14 is reflecting due to the reason that
some prior period adjustments have been made and the Commission had allowed the gap of Rs.
239.28 Crore in FY 2013-14. Hence, the tariff increase as proposed by UPCL is necessary.
2.11.2 Textile Industry
2.11.2.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri P. K. Rajput, Executive Director of ALPS Industries Ltd. submitted that their first unit in
SIDCUL, Haridwar became operational in 2005. In 2005, the basic rate of electricity was Rs. 1.90 per
unit and total per unit cost was Rs. 2.50 (approx.). However, in few years the basic rate is revised to
Rs. 3.60 per unit & total per unit cost to Rs. 5.29 (approx.). Therefore, any tariff increase is
unjustified. He further submitted that the Textile sector is already in downfall due to rise in raw
cotton price, lower productivity & cost competitiveness and increase in employment cost & other
miscellaneous costs. Further, the Central Govt. was giving 8% incentive in the form of Draw Back &
DEPB under Import & Export Policy. Such incentive was withdrawn in April 2010 particularly for
Cotton yarn and recently only 3% is allowed. Therefore, he requested the Commission for not
revising electricity tariff particularly for Textile Sector as they are already under heavy financial
loss. Moreover, he also requested to provide more concession for smooth working of spinning units
as any tariff increase will affect the viability of their textile units.
Further Shri P. K. Rajput& Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that Uttarakhand State Govt.
vide its Order No. 791/VII-1/40-SIIDCUL/2014 Dehradun dated 11.12.2014 extended a Textile
Policy for the Textile Industries being set up in Uttarakhand. In accordance with Point No.9 (v) of
this Order, there will be no power cut for next 7 years and a rebate of Rs. 1.00 per unit will be
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 27
allowed plus 100% exemption from electric duty for next 7 years. Accordingly, with reference to
such Order, he requested for a rebate of Rs. 1 per Unit plus 100% exemption from electricity duty
for 7 years.
2.11.2.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the revenue deficit for the period upto FY 2015-16 excluding
the deficit of FY 2014-15 is expected to be Rs.1131.38 Crore, which necessitates a tariff hike of
26.24%, and if not recovered, will impose a huge financial burden on UPCL, which will make the
distribution business unviable. Therefore, the Commission is requested to consider the tariff
proposal of UPCL.
As regard the contention raised regarding rebate as per Textile Policy, the Petitioner
submitted that there is around 22 hours per day power supply to all the categories in Uttarakhand
and continuous process industries can avail continuous power. Tariff is determined at cost of
supply plus cross subsidy level allowed under the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003. Government
grant along with equity and loan is also invested in fixed assets of UPCL and PTCUL and such
grant (return/depreciation) is not included in the Tariffs of consumers. Thus, the consumers are
being benefited from this grant. Further, in accordance with section 3 of Uttar Pradesh Electricity
(Duty) Act (Uttarakhand adaptation and modification) Order 2001, State Government is
empowered to fix the rates of Electricity Duty to be charged from various category of consumers.
Government of Uttarakhand has fixed these rates w.e.f. 01.12.2003. The Electricity duty charged
from consumers is payable by UPCL to GoU. Therefore, the matter may be taken up with GoU.
2.11.3 Fixed/Demand Charge and Energy Charge
2.11.3.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Rajeev Gupta of Kashi Enterprises and Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal of Kashi Vishwanath
Steels Pvt. Ltd. submitted that the Commission has increased energy charges by around 20 paisa per
kVAh/Year in the previous financial years for HT Category of consumers. However, UPCL is
demanding a hike of 95 paisa per kVAh , i.e. 26.38%. Further, he submitted that the Commission has
also increased demand charges in the previous financial years for HT Category of Consumers. Such
hike in energy charge and demand charge for HT Category of consumers is unreasonable and
unjustified and should not be approved.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
28 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Kumar Gupta, Shri Achal Sharma, Shri
Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal submitted that the licensee has proposed a hike in the tariff
of industrial category by increase in fixed/demand charges as well as in energy charges. The fixed
charges to LT industries have been proposed as Rs. 130/- per kW against existing rate of Rs. 100/-
per kW and demand charges for HT industries as Rs. 270/- and Rs. 345/- per kVA against existing
rate of Rs. 210/- per kVA and Rs. 270/- per kVA, respectively for contracted load upto 1000 kVA
and contracted load more than 1000 kVA. The steep hike in fixed/demand charges and energy
charges would increase the effective tariff by about 30% from the existing level. Such sharp hike is
not only disgusting but discouraging to the industries in this new State and is highly opposed.
Further, UPCL in its Tariff Proposal has stated that in accordance with provision of Electricity Act,
2003, drawing of demand in excess of contracted demand is unauthorized use of electricity and the
tariff for such unauthorized use should be equal to twice the normal tariff applicable. Accordingly,
UPCL has proposed demand charges and energy charges corresponding to the excess demand to be
charged at twice the normal rate. In this regard, Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri
Kumar Gupta, Shri Achal Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal submitted that the
demand in excess of the contracted demand is not covered in unauthorized usage of electricity as
per Electricity Act, 2003 or UERC Electricity Supply Regulations, 2007. As per the provision in the
Tariff Order the consumers are already being charged at twice the rate of demand charges for the
maximum demand recorded in excess of the contracted load. Unauthorized usage of energy cannot
be said in such cases if load factor on the basis of the contracted load is not more than 100%. As such
the proposal of the licensee is not worth.
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal of Kashi Vishwanath Steels Pvt. Ltd. submitted that demand
charges are charged by UPCL, but assets are not maintained, hence, the tariff hike is not acceptable.
Shri S. S. Chopra, Manager, Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Limited submitted that
fixed/demand charges should be reduced from 80% to 70%.
2.11.3.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the revenue deficit for the period upto FY 2015-16 excluding
the deficit of FY 2014-15 is expected to be Rs.1131.38 Crore, which necessitates a tariff hike of
26.24%, and if not recovered, will impose a huge financial burden on UPCL, which will make the
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 29
distribution business unviable. Therefore, the Commission is requested to consider the tariff
proposal of UPCL.
The Petitioner further submitted that about 50% of the UPCL’s total costs are fixed in nature
including the capacity/ fixed charge of power purchase, which should be recovered to a certain
extent through fixed charges to ensure revenue stability.
The Petitioner also submitted that UPCL does not agree with the contention that assets are
not maintained. Presently 80 number of 33 kV substations in various locations of the State are
under construction to meet the demand of new consumers and to further improve the quality of
power. Further, regular R&M is done by UPCL of all its assets.
2.11.4 Time of Day Tariff
2.11.4.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri G. S. Bedi requested the Commission for abolishing morning peak hours beyond 8 am
because it is obstructing the general shift of 8 hours at normal rates.
Shri Rajeev Gupta submitted that peak hour surcharges should be calculated @ 50% for all
type of load factors. He further requested to discontinue the morning peak hours from 6.00 am to
9.30 am in winter season. He also requested to increase the rebate from 10% to 50% during off peak
hours to encourage utilization of power during off peak hours.
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that ToD tariff at peak hours is 50-77% higher than the
normal rates. Accordingly, rebate of 50-77% should be provided at off peak hours. During off peak
hours, the rate of power purchased through open access should be less.
Shri Anil Kansal and Pawan Agarwal submitted that ToD tariff for peak hours is at a flat
rate of Rs 5.40/kVAh, whereas, for load factor above 50% it is Rs. 3.60/kVAh. Thus, the ToD tariff
for peak hours is 50% higher than the normal rates. In this regard, they suggested that this increase
should not be more than 15%. They further submitted that morning peak hours should not be
allowed as it is not allowed in all other States including Himachal Pradesh. He further submitted
that rebate for night off peak hours should be 20%, instead of 10%.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Kumar Gupta, Shri Achal Sharma, Shri
Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal submitted that morning peak hours as envisaged in the
tariff needs to be reviewed as in no other hill state except Uttarakhand, the morning peak hours
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
30 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
have been specified for charging higher energy charges. In the existing power buy/sale market of
open access higher energy rates are not prevailing for morning hours transactions.
Shri Sagar Suman, BST Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd. submitted that the peak hours from 6:00 am to
9:30 am in winter season is completely wrong and should be abolished immediately.
2.11.4.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the objective of introduction of ToD Tariff was to minimize the
gap between maximum (peak) demand and minimum demand and to bring the peak demand
closer to the average demand as possible. On every reduction of this gap, the generation cost,
transmission cost and distribution cost and power cuts will be reduced and the higher demand can
be catered from the available capacity. In other words, ToD Tariff is a very effective tool of demand
side management which facilitates the optimum utilization of the available capacity of Generation,
Transmission and Distribution, resulting in reduction of costs. The benefit of such reduction in cost
is passed on to the consumers. The nature of consumption of Domestic Category and Non-Domestic
Category is that it cannot be shifted to any other time of the day and, therefore, peak hours
surcharge has been specified for the Industrial Consumers who can shift their load and the rate of
energy charge during peak hours for consumers having any load factor has been kept same and this
is not based on the Energy Charge of any load factor slab.
Further, peak hour extra charges have been kept at a rate more than the rate of rebate during
off peak hours so that the load during peak hours may be shifted to the off peak hours and this
rebate should not be increased.
As regard the contention raised by Shri G. S. Bedi regarding abolition of morning peak
hours, the Petitioner submitted that morning peak hours have been kept only in the winter season,
i.e. from October to March of the financial year. The timings of morning peak hours are from 06:00
hrs to 09:30 hrs. Morning peak hours have been provided due to heating load and reduced
generation in winter season, whereas the Air Conditioning load during summer season in the Hilly
State of Uttarakhand from 06:00 hrs to 09:30 hrs is negligible. Therefore, morning peak hours in
winter are required to be continued.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 31
2.11.5 Rostering and Load Shedding
2.11.5.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui and Shri P. S. Tomar submitted that there has been continuous load
shedding in the State. In the Tariff Order dated May 06, 2013, the Commission directed UPCL to
obtain the prior approval for load shedding to be carried out continuously for certain number of
hours in a day for 15 or more days. However, UPCL has been rostering loads of industrial consumer
continuously for 13 days and after exempting the load shedding for such consumers for 1 or 2 days,
has been again rostering the loads of such consumers. In this regard, they requested the
Commission that 20% rebate should be given in the monthly bill. In case of non–compliance by
UPCL in that month, UPCL should compensate the heavy losses incurred by the industrial
consumers. Further, he requested the Commission for strict action against UPCL for non-
compliances of Commission direction on load shedding. Shri P. S. Tomar further suggested that
area wise emergency rostering should be mentioned in the yearly ARR.
Further, Shri Anil Kansal and Shri Pawan Agarwal submitted that in the current year there
was rostering for 8 to 10 hours per day for the steel industries. In this regard, he suggested that this
rostering should not be more than 4 hours per day. In this regard, they suggested that 20% rebate
should be provided in case of rostering beyond 4 hours instead of applicable 6 hours.
Shri Manu Kochhar, Chairman submitted that UPCL should comply with Commission’s
Order on prior approval of load shedding and number of days should be reduced from 15 days to
10 days.
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that Emergency Rostering and Scheduled Rostering
should be communicated and defined in a proper manner. The duration of rostering per month
should be properly defined and there should be a provision of refund for rostering beyond such
limit.
Shri Jaan Ali submitted that there is load shedding of 5 hours continuously in rural areas,
however, this load shedding is for 3 hours in urban areas. In rural areas, there is load shedding from
morning 6:00 am to 8:00 am and evening 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm on account of over load.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that Commission has directed UPCL as stipulated
below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
32 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
"the Commission observed that the Petitioner is resorting to regular load shedding under the garb of
unscheduled/emergency outages. The Commission hereby once again directs the Petitioner obtain the
prior approval for load shedding to be carried out continuously for certain number of hours in a day
for 15 or more days".
He further submitted that Commission should take step so that Commission order should be
followed.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that there should be no unscheduled load shedding.
2.11.5.2 Petitioner’s Reply
As regard the contention raised regarding 20% rebate on monthly bill, the Petitioner
submitted that the unscheduled/emergency load shedding is done to meet the gap in demand and
availability. It is done only under unforeseen and unavoidable conditions. The communication to
the consumers on the same is given by way of SMS on registered mobile numbers. Further,
continuous supply industries can opt for continuous supply on payment of extra charges.
As regard the contention raised by Shri Anil Kansal regarding 20% rebate for rostering
beyond 4 hours, the Petitioner submitted that scheduled load shedding is done only after approval
from the Commission. The unscheduled load shedding is done to meet the gap in demand and
availability and only under emergency conditions. During this emergency rostering, complete care
is taken that no category is discriminated and equitable curtailment is done.
Further, as per the existing provisions, if the minimum average supply to HT Industry
Consumer is less than 18 hours per day during the month, demand charges for such industry is
reduced by 20%. The supply hours of 18 per day should not be increased for this purpose.
2.11.6 Load Factor based Tariff
2.11.6.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui and Shri P. S. Tomar submitted that higher load factor leads to
better asset utilization and this should be encouraged. Accordingly, he requested the Commission
to reconsider the concept of charging higher energy charges for higher load factor. Additional
charge based on load factor within the sanctioned load should be incentivized with a lower tariff.
The Commission should provide incentives/rebate to the consumers for every unit increase in
power factor.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 33
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui, Shri Munish Talwarand Shri P. S. Tomar, Director submitted that
the Commission in the last Tariff Order for FY 2014-15 had rightly corrected the formula for
calculating the Load Factor by reducing the energy received by a HT Industrial Consumer from the
total consumption. In this regard, they suggested that the power scheduled through open access
may be reduced from the total consumption and that cost of such power must be deducted from the
bill of consumer as the same is received by UPCL.
Shri Anil Kansal and Shri Pawan Agarwal submitted that for consumers with load factor
upto 33%, the tariff is charged at the rate of Rs. 3.05/kWh whereas, for consumers with load factor
above 33% and upto 50%, the tariff is charged at the rate of Rs. 3.30/kWh at total units. For
consumers with load factor above 50%, the tariff is charged at the rate of Rs. 3.60/kWh at total units.
In this regard, he submitted that in case load factor based tariff is imposed, then telescopic basis
should be provided for charging incremental consumption beyond specified load factor limit on
higher rates. He further submitted that there should be less tariff rate for the consumers with high
load factor.
Shri Suresh KumarShri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Kumar Gupta, Shri Achal Sharma, Shri
Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal submitted that load factor based tariff to HT industries is
penalizing them with consumption within their contracted demand being charged in the higher slab
of energy charges on whole of their consumption. This approach is most unscientific and illogical.
Further, the Commission has devised the following formula for the calculation of the load factor as
follows:
In this regard, they suggested that the above formula does not allow consumer for the
consumption for load factor based on the contracted load if the consumer is running load less than
its contracted load and paying demand charges for 80% of contracted load and thus consuming less
power than at the contracted load. On this account, a consumer using less maximum demand than
the contracted demand but paying demand charges for minimum 80% of contracted load is
subjected to higher energy charges for the high load factor based on his actual low maximum
demand even without consuming power for the minimum billable demand. A consumer is legally
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
34 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
entitled to consume power upto the contracted demand or at least for billable demand if it is less
than the contracted demand in lowest load factor slab. In the present tariff structure there are cases
when consumers being billed for MCG units in a month are made to pay higher energy charges
based on their load factor above 33% or 50%. This anomaly can be rectified by revising the formula
for calculation of load factor as follows:
Therefore, the concept of Load Factor based tariff needs to be reviewed.
Shri Sagar Suman submitted that load factor based tariff is completely illegal and should be
abolished immediately as tariff is being designed on average cost of supply.
2.11.6.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that Load Factor based Tariff in Uttarakhand was introduced from
01-03-2008. According to this, the consumers consuming more energy were required to pay higher
rate of Energy Charges. This Load Factor based tariff was introduced keeping in view the fact that
due to heavy industrialization the power surplus State has turned into power deficit State and
UPCL was/is required to buy the deficit power from open market at a rate higher than the average
rate of firm power.
Further, Para 8.2.1(1) of Tariff Policy provides that the consumers willing to avail continuous
and quality power supply are required to pay a tariff which reflects efficient costs. The additional
surcharge for availing uninterrupted continuous supply is a kind of premium that the consumers
will have to pay to enjoy the uninterrupted supply of power irrespective of supply in case of
shortage. If the Licensee has to supply the uninterrupted continuous supply to some of the
consumers, it has to make additional arrangement for procuring such power during supply deficit
scenario or resort to load shedding to other consumers and, hence, the cost of such additional
power needs to be recovered from the consumers getting such benefits.
With regard to disincentivizing higher load factor, the Petitioner submitted that higher
energy charges are levied for higher consumption due to the fact that Uttarakhand is power deficit
State and deficit power is procured at a rate higher than the average rate of firm power. Secondly, at
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 35
higher load factor demand charges per unit is reduced which is an incentive to the consumer for
having higher load factor.
As regards the contention raised regarding open access in formula for calculating the Load
Factor, the Petitioner submitted that the embedded Open Access consumers receive power supply
from UPCL through Open Access on same connection (through same meter) sanctioned by UPCL
and the wheeling charges for the Open Access Energy is adjusted from the demand charges which
are fixed for UPCL Energy. Therefore, the contracted/maximum demand of the connection should
be apportioned on both the energy, i.e. on UPCL Energy and on Open Access Energy. As the
Commission, while defining the load factor formula, reduced the Open Access Energy from the
total consumption but not reduced the demand against the Open Access Consumption from the
total contracted/maximum demand, this formula needs to be revised as follows:
Here, it is assumed that the Maximum Demand/Contracted Demand, whichever is less, will
reduce in proportion to the energy consumed through open access and total energy consumption.
With regard to charging LT/HT industry as per telescopic approach, the Petitioner
submitted that the nature of consumption of Domestic Category and Industrial Category is
absolutely different and should not be treated at par. Presently, the Tariff of Domestic Category is
not load factor based Tariff and only the slabs of consumption (irrelevant of load) have been
specified in this category i.e. 0 to 100 units, 101 to 201 units, 201 to 400 units above 400 units.
However, the Tariff of HT Industries is load factor based Tariff and presently in this category load
varies from 76 kW to 34 MVA. Hence, it is not practical approach to implement the slab system of
Domestic Category into HT Industrial Category.
2.11.7 Minimum Load for Induction Furnaces
2.11.7.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal and Shri P. S. Tomar submitted that there has been tremendous
development and improvement in the furnace technology. Therefore, ceiling of minimum load limit
is 400 kVA of 1 tons furnace should be removed from Steel Industries.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
36 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2.11.7.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission reduced the minimum load of one tonne
furnace on the demand of Industries from 600 kVA to 500 kVA in FY 2013-14 and from 500 kVA to
400 kVA. Accordingly, the demand of further eliminating this limit is not justified.
2.11.8 Wheeling Charge 2.11.8.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Sagar Suman submitted that he didn’t receive any refund of excess wheeling charges
nor received any feedback from UPCL. He further submitted that the Commission in its Tariff
Order for FY 2014-15 imposed Wheeling Charges on open access power @ Rs. 3470.41/MW/Day for
33 kV embedded consumers, but these charges are still being taken by IEX & UPCL also. These
charges are taken by IEX and UPCL from the starting of FY 2014-15. In this regard, he had sent a
letter to the Commission on 05.02.2015 for necessary instructions to UPCL to correct this mistake
and provide full credit to him by adjustment in the electricity bill of February 2015. UPCL has
credited approximately Rs. 6,44,612.34 to his account till January 2015. He further submitted that
wheeling charges should be nil as demand charges are already being paid to UPCL.
He, further, submitted that they are not getting any refund on the unused open access power
due to breakdowns in the UPCL lines etc.
2.12 Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG) 2.12.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Ram Kumar submitted that Small and medium Hotels in hilly areas fall in RTS-2
category above 25 kW load. The tourism industry in hilly areas is seasonal and with minimum
charges, the hotels are penalized to pay the energy charges for electricity not consumed by them
during off-season. In this regard, he requested the Commission to abolish MCG completely in the
interest of consumers. He further submitted to fix the unit of energy charges, fixed charges and the
MCG (if at all to be charged) should be in kWh/kW and the contracted load of the consumers
should be charged in KW.
Shri Manu Kochhar requested theCommission to abolish MCG.
Shri Pankaj Gupta submitted that Minimum Consumption Guarantee should not be
continued as the stage of rationalized tariff structure is reached after a lot of deliberation in the past.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 37
This is also envisaged in the Electricity Act, 2003. Further, UPCL has not projected revenue receipt
on account of MCG. As per past data, this amount is very low and it causes very heavy burden on
the consumer paying such MCG. Therefore, it is requested that MCG should be removed from this
ARR Fixation.
Shri Harpal Singh Sethi requested to abolish MCG. He stated that he is a RTS-2 consumer
having 70 kW load. He further stated that he is also charged Rs. 286650 (= 70 kW x 900 units x Rs
4.55/unit) in the form of MCG on yearly basis apart from actual power consumption.
Shri Avresh Kumar Singh submitted that MCG was charged on their bills which is 50% of
their power consumption and, therefore, should be reduced.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Kumar Gupta, Shri Achal Sharma, Shri
Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal submitted that the Commission had abolished MCG from
Consumers in the Tariff Order for FY 2005-06. Thereafter, in the Tariff Order dated 18.03.2008 the
Commission had again introduced monthly minimum consumption charge over and above the
fixed charges/demand charges on the industrial consumers which has been retained upto the last
Tariff Order for FY 2014-15. The rationale given by the Commission for introducing MCG charges
was deficiency in billing data of the licensee. This clearly indicates that the industrial consumers are
being burdened with an additional charge to compensate the inefficiency of UPCL in ensuring
proper meter reading and billing of its consumers. Ideally, the Commission should have directed
the distribution utility to improve its internal mechanisms to ensure prompt meter reading, billing
and diligent recovery of the bills.
Shri Ajay Bhargava and Shri R. N. Mathur suggested that Minimum Consumption
Guarantee should be removed for hotel industry as this industry is seasonal.
Shri Vijay Singh Verma submitted that MCG Charges per kW should be implemented on
Domestic Connection also as this will reduce power theft.
2.12.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
Petitioner submitted that Section 45(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, stipulates for levy of fixed
charges as follows:
“The charges for electricity supplied by a distribution licensee may include:
• a fixed charge in addition to the charge for the actual electricity supplied ;
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
38 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
• a rent or other charges in respect of any electric meter or electrical plant provided by the
distribution licensee.”
About 50% of the UPCL’s total costs are fixed in nature including the capacity/fixed charge
of power purchase, which should be recovered to a certain extent through fixed charges to ensure
revenue stability. Levy of minimum consumption guarantee charge is a way of ensuring minimum
revenue to the licensee from the consumers.
Minimum Consumption Guarantee has been proposed at very low level of consumption, i.e.
at 8.33% load factor in respect of non-domestic category and LT industry category and at 15% in
respect of HT industry category. In case during certain month, actual consumption is less than
MCG, MCG is charged in those months. Any excess of billed consumption (over actual
consumption or minimum consumption, whichever is higher) is adjusted at the end of the financial
year.
Further, the Petitioner submitted that UPCL while computing the revenue has also
considered revenue from MCG as follows:-
• RTS - 2 - Rs. 6.74 Crore
• RTS - 7 - Rs. 27.81 Crore
The description of the same may be seen in Form F-14 of the Petition. As per the provisions
of Electricity Act, 2003 read with the provisions of Tariff Policy, the level of cross subsidy should be
reduced to the level of ± 20% by FY 2010-11. The proposed level of cross subsidy is as follows:-
Table 2.5: Level of Cross-subsity proposed by the Petitioner Category Cross Subsidy
RTS-1: Domestic -30.00% RTS-2: Non Domestic 17.52% RTS-3: Public Lamps -2.64% RTS-4: Private Tube Wells -74.51% RTS-5: Govt. Irrigation System 2.76% RTS-6: Public Water Works 3.95% RTS-7: Industry 13.50%
LT Industry 6.55% HT Industry 13.91%
RTS-8: Mixed Load -4.92% RTS-9: Railway Traction 19.31%
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 39
Hence, it is clear that the provisions of Tariff Policy are complied by UPCL by having cross-
subsidy level of all subsidizing categories upto 20%. Therefore, MCG should be retained as per the
existing provisions of Tariff Order.
As regards the contention raised by Shri Ram Kumar regarding charging of fixed charges
and MCG in kW/kWh and contracted load in kW, the Petitioner submitted that kVAh based billing
is important to impart discipline in power factor and to discourage losses in the form of reactive
energy, which are not measured in kWh based billing. In kVAh billing, consumer is motivated to
maintain the power factor near to one and in this way he suffers no loss even by preventing energy
loss.
2.13 Energy Sale Forecast 2.13.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that UPCL has reported CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) of past 8 years as
9.62% based on actual energy sales data of previous years. It has assumed energy sales for FY 2015-
16 based on last 5 years CAGR and considered annual growth rate in sales for the main consumer
categories for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16. UPCL has over estimated growth rate of HT and LT
industries. The annual growth rate of these categories on annual basis beyond 2013-14 may not be
more than 4% as many of industries have started winding up due to expiry of benefits of industrial
package and further trend of migration to open access due to deteriorating supply position in the
State in the last 2 years.
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal and Shri Pramod Singh Tomar submitted that UPCL has
proposed energy requirement of 10360.63 MU for 2015-16 which is 17.44% more as compared to last
year. Such proposal of UPCL is unjustified.
2.13.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the sales in FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 is 9047.07
MU (actual), 9678.38 MU (estimated) and 10360.63 MU (projected). Thus, it is clear that during FY
2014-15 and FY 2015-16 growth in sales has been estimated @ 7% p.a. and not 17%. The sales for HT
category consumers has been escalated @ 5% p.a. for FY 2014-15 and 2015-16. Further, the power
available at State periphery for FY 2015-16 is 10625.78 MU. However, the power demand comes out
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
40 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
to be 12766.38 MU after factoring in the distribution losses @ 17.34% & intra state losses of 1.82%.
The detailed calculation has been shown in the table below:
Table 2.6: Energy Input requirement for FY 2015-16 as submitted by Petitioner Particulars As per Petition
Total sales 10360.73 MU Distribution loss 17.34% Power needed after considering Distribution Loss 12534.03 MU Intra state transmission loss 1.82% Total Demand 12766.38 MU
2.14 Cost of Supply and Cross Subsidy 2.14.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that cross subsidy does not depict the true picture of the
burden on subsidizing consumers. In this regard, SERCs should move towards cost to serve
philosophy for tariff determination in light of sales mix being dominated by HT consumers. The
Commission may initiate the process by conducting a detailed study to determine cost to serve for
various categories. This will give the correct picture of tariff vis-à-vis cost to serve.
Shri Manu Kochhar requested the Commission to direct UPCL to work out the cost to serve
for various categories of consumers and that should be reflected in tariff.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that there is a provision to reduce cross subsidy. Even
many times the Commission has directed UPCL on elimination of cross subsidy. However, it seems
that the Commission is itself encouraging cross subsidy. This results in proportionate surcharge to
the industrial consumers. Therefore, cross subsidy should be reduced in accordance with the
Electricity Act, 2003.
Shri Pramod Singh Tomar requested the Petitioner for detailed calculation of Cost to serve to
various categories of Consumers in the State with break-up of proposed sales. He further requested
the Petitioner to shift to determination of tariff based on Cost to serve model.
2.14.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that presently voltage wise/category wise losses are not available
and Category wise Tariff has been calculated on the basis of average cost of supply and permissible
level of cross subsidy. This is as per provision of Tariff Regulations. Further, high voltage rebate has
been proposed in the Petition.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 41
2.15 Continuous Supply 2.15.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that HT consumer has to pay a 15% premium over the
regular tariff charges for getting continuous power supply. In this regard, he requested the
Commission that these charges should not be levied for the full duration but should be charged
only during periods of rostering.
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that UPCL in its ARR had proposed to purchase
power at higher rates from NHPC (Dulhasti @ Rs. 6.20/kWh, Sewa @ Rs. 5.99/kWh), NTPC (NCT-
II), NTPC- Dadri @ Rs. 5.33/kWh, Kahalgaon- II- @ Rs. 6.47/kWh, NTPC- AGPS @ Rs. 6.15/kWh.
Thus, UPCL is trying to burden consumers on account of its poor planning. In this regard, it is
requested that the Commission should put pressure on UPCL to purchase power at lower tariff
instead of higher tariff.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Kumar Gupta, Shri Achal Sharma, Shri
Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal submitted that the Commission in its previous Tariff Order
provided anoption of continuous supply only to continuous process industries operating 24x7
hours basis connected on either independent feeder or industrial feeders with the condition that all
the industries connected on such feeders have to opt for continuous supply and in case anyone
consumer does not wish to opt, the remaining consumers will also not be able to avail continuous
supply. This provision is discriminative and, therefore, needs to be reviewed by the Commission.
In this regard, they further suggested that the industries opting for continuous supply connected on
independent/industrial feeder should be provided continuous supply irrespective of their process
and option by remaining industries. The non-opting industries can be restricted to use small
percentage of load during restricted hours and in case of exceeding such restricted load, they
should be heavily penalized for excess usage of load and continuous supply surcharge can be
imposed on them. Thus, the licensee would be able to get good revenue by way of penalties and
continuous supply surcharge from defaulting and violating consumers.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that by paying 15% premium UPCL provides
uninterrupted power supply. However, other small and medium industrial consumers have to face
power cuts. He further requested that this system should be removed.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
42 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri S. S. Chopra, Manager submitted that the continuous supply charges should be reduced
to 10% as against existing 15%. Further, UPCL should propose to reduce the continuous supply
charges to the extent of NIL or maximum 5% in further three years. He also submitted that the
consumers opting for continuous supply pay additional charges on account of continuous supply
tariff. Such consumers should be provided electricity supply without any interruption/planned
shutdown with advance intimation. This will help industries in minimizing the operational losses.
2.16 Components on ARR and Revenue
2.16.1 Power Purchase Cost
2.16.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Munish Talwar submitted that power purchase at State periphery is Rs. 3483.76 Crore
for FY 2015-16 which is very high. Increase in the power purchase cost (including transmission
charges) along with the increase in Capital Related Expenses has resulted in escalation of revenue
gap of different financial years as highlighted in the Petition and projected by UPCL. Therefore, a
separate energy audit should be carried out to check the actual facts rather than creating an impact
directly on customers.
Shri Munish Talwar further submitted that the high cost of power purchase reflects
inefficient management of utility. Therefore, some comprehensive plan should be created for
efficient utilization of available resources. He further submitted that there is a possibility of energy
deficiency every year due to which power is purchased at higher rates. In this regard, some type of
long term contractual agreement should be made with energy suppliers.
Shri Pramod Singh Tomar submitted that UPCL has different sources to fulfill the demand
of consumer and does not require power purchase from other States. Further, average Cost of
Supply for the licensee has gone up due to increase in power purchase cost due to higher rates of
CGS considered by UPCL & high distribution losses than that approved by the Commission and
increase in capital expenditure. He further suggested that cross subsidies, transmission losses and
continuous supply surcharge should be reduced to promote purchase of power through open
access.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that UPCL in its true up petition for FY 2013-14 has claimed power purchase expense of
Rs. 3182.27 Crore instead of approved power purchase expense of Rs. 3198.42 Crore (as per MYT
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 43
order 2013), means saving of Rs. 16.15 Crore. Therefore, it is requested that the Commission should
scrutinize actual power purchase cost for FY 2013-14.
Shri Jaan Ali submitted that Uttarakhand is known as Power State and every power project
has to give 12% free power towards royalty to State. The consumers are not getting benefit of this
free power.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that UPCL purchased power from within State and
outside State. UPCL has the power purchase from NHPC of around Rs. 450.49 Crore at an average
power purchase cost of Rs. 4.54 per unit. Cost of power of Uttarakhand is Rs. 1.12 per unit. They
have to pay extra cost for power due to poor management of UPCL and lack of infrastructure to
handle power. In this regard, he requested the Commission to consider these factor while
determining tariff.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that UPCL has provided the details of power supply
and demand in its Tariff Petition. In this regard, he suggested that UPCL should also provide feeder
wise details of power consumption and revenue. This will help in checking the feeders with poor
revenue collection and such feeders should be charged with separate tariff instead of burdening all
consumers.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that UPCL has worked out its power purchase requirement on the basis of its proposed
distribution loss trajectory and approved inter-state transmission losses as 4% and intra state
transmission losses as 1.82% as per the last Tariff Order. In this regard, they suggested that power
purchase should be considered as per loss trajectory approved by UERC in its MYT Order, 2013 and
the inefficiency burden of the licensee should not be passed on to the customers.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that licensee has calculated cost of royalty power for each year on the basis of UERC's
approach adopted in its MYT Order 2013 and, accordingly, considered its rate equal to average rate
of power purchased by UPCL from large hydel stations.
2.16.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner has submitted the comparison of power purchase cost of UPCL in current
year with the cost of previous year as follows:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
44 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 2.7: Comparison of Power Purchase Cost as submitted by Petitioner
Source 2013-14 2014-15 (Upto Dec)
MU Rs. Crore Rate MU Rs. Crore Rate NHPC 450.49 203.24 4.51 490.07 183.49 3.74 SJVNL 68.13 19.46 2.86 40.18 20.82 5.18 THDC 202.39 90.05 4.45 106.44 53.59 5.03 NTPC 2757.73 864.86 3.14 1811 583.15 3.22 NPCIL 297.64 95.37 3.20 166.1 53.05 3.19 UJVNL 3866.37 421.03 1.09 3148.47 534.43 1.70 IPPs 346.93 116.95 3.37 520.68 147.69 2.84 State Royalty Power 754.54 118.46 1.57 654.8 111.97 1.71 Open Market Purchases 2520.81 841.08 3.34 1881.37 621.25 3.30 Total 11265.03 2770.5 2.46 8819.11 2309.44 2.62
Hence, it is clear that there is about 7% increase in rates of power with respect to previous
year and such increase has been considered while projecting the power purchase cost for FY 2015-
16. The average rate of power purchase cost projected for FY 2015-16 is Rs. 2.81 per unit.
UPCL further submitted that it purchases power in a planned manner. However, there is
uncertainty on introduction of short term open access allowed to the consumers and, therefore, it is
beneficial to procure deficit power through short term arrangements.
With regard to encouraging power purchase through open access, the Petitioner submitted
that the level of cross subsidy is regularly reducing which is reflected in each Tariff Order. The
transmission losses are also very low i.e. @ 1.81% in FY 2013-14.
With regard to higher power purchase cost, the Petitioner submitted that power is
purchased from NHPC and NTPC stations in accordance with long term Power purchase
agreements (PPAs) and at the rates as allowed by Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
(CERC). Some of the plants are new and the tariff for new plants is higher in the initial years and
decreases afterwards. However, it may be noted that the rates from these plants may be higher
compared to short terms prices in some cases, but short term power purchase do not give certainty
of power availability, it is only long term PPAs, which provide certainty at the pre-fixed prices, and
it is essential to have certainty of power availability to provide reliable and quality supply to the
consumers.
Further, the Petitioner submitted that the details of actual source wise power purchases for
FY 2013-14 as per audited accounts are provided at para 3.4 of the petition. Audited Accounts for
FY 2013-14 are also submitted to the Commission for analysis. Apart from State Generating Stations,
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 45
UPCL procures power from Central Generating Stations as per allocation by Ministry of Power,
Government of India. The shortage in supply due to excess demand is met through various short
term arrangements, i.e. buying power from open market, power exchanges and over drawing
power from the grid within permissible limits. Presently, there is a deficit of about 20% which is
procured through short term arrangements.
In FY 2013-14, UPCL procured 2585.25 MU power through short term sources as against
total power purchases of 11265.02 MU. Similarly against a requirement of 12766.38 MU in FY 2015-
16, UPCL has considered 2140.61 MU to be purchased from open market and 526.69 MU availability
from new Central Generating Stations and IPPs.
2.16.2 Return on Equity
2.16.2.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Munish Talwar submitted that there is a huge gap to the tune of several hundred crores
in case of Return on Equity. This indicates failure in gap analysis and, therefore, proper techniques
must be governed rather than approaching UERC every year with a proposal to increase Tariff
without complying with any directives.
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that UPCL’s claim of Rs. 211 Crore towards RoE for FY
2015-16 against Commission’s approved RoE of Rs. 40 Crore appears to be quiet high and
unreasonable.
Shri Manu Kochhar submitted that UPCL has projected RoE of Rs. 211.03 Crore for FY 2015-
16 which is more than 5 times of Rs. 40.42 Crore approved by the Commission in FY 2014-15.
Shri. Pankaj Gupta submitted that UERC in its Order of April 11, 2012, has commented on
return on equity as follows:
“In this regard, the Commission has already given its view in its Tariff Order dated April 10, 2010
that though conversion of power bonds into share capital has resulted in an increase in the equity base
of the Petitioner, however, as per Tariff Regulations, only that equity which is invested in creation of
fixed assets is entitled for Return. Merely having share capital in the Balance Sheet does not qualify it
to be eligible for return. Share capital lying unutilised, or utilized to finance the current assets or to
cover the losses of the Petitioner Company will not be eligible for return purpose.”
In this regard, he requested UERC to maintain its previous stand on Return on Equity.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
46 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that UPCL has claimed RoE of Rs. 182.23 Crore against Rs. 25.48 Crore as approved RoE
in MYT Order, 2013 for FY 2013-14. Therefore, they requested the Commission to scrutinize the
variation in RoE.
2.16.2.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that Return on Equity has been calculated based on the guidelines
prescribed by UERC in its MYT Regulations, 2011, which are also consistent with the methodology
and guidelines used by other state regulators and CERC. The difference in RoE as allowed by UERC
and as claimed by UPCL is due to the following reasons:-
• As per transfer scheme of Assets and Liabilities executed between UPPCL and UPCL, the
GFA of UPCL as on 08.11.2001 is Rs. 1058.18 Crore but Commission is considering the
same as Rs. 508 Crore. This issue has been challenged before APTEL and Judgment on the
same is awaited.
• As against net addition of assets of Rs. 1789.80 Crore for the period from FY 2007-08 to FY
2012-13, the Commission considered this addition as Rs. 97.08 Crore only due to non-
submission of certificate of Electrical Inspector in respect of HT/EHT assets and due to
non segregation of assets into HT and LT assets.
• UPCL have computed claim in the Petition on the basis of GFA as given in the transfer
scheme and total additions of assets from FY 2007-08 to 2012-13. Hence, it is worthwhile to
mention here that no claim has been made in respect of assets made out of Government
Grant or Consumer Deposits. As UPCL’s investments are involved in creation of above
assets, the Commission is requested to allow return on same as claimed by UPCL in its
Petition.
2.16.3 Operation & Maintenance Expenses
2.16.3.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Munish Talwar submitted that Repair and Maintenance, Employees expenses and
Administrative & General (A&G) Expenses are very high with overall increase of 30% with respect
to O&M expenses in preceding financial years. Therefore, better maintenance practices should be
adopted so that repeated failures are prevented and cost factor will ultimately be reduced. In this
regard, new timely initiatives (such as meter testing, increase in collection centres, adoption of
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 47
effective Maintenance plan and budgeted implementation of strict A&G expenses) should be
implemented in near future so that overall O&M Costs are within limits and control.
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui and Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that 30% increase in
O&M is unrealistic, considering the current inflationary trends and no recruitments in the
preceding years.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
requested the Commission to check the Employee expense as per records and admissibility of
variations claimed by UPCL for FY 2012-13. Further, UPCL has claimed A&G expenses of Rs. 18.01
Crore against Rs. 23.25 Crore as approved in MYT order 2013 resulting into a saving of Rs. 5.24
Crore. Similarly, there is a saving of Rs. 14.09 Crore in R&M expenses for FY 2013-14 as UPCL has
claimed R&M expenses of Rs. 77.10 Crore against Rs. 91.27 Crore approved in MYT Order 2013.
Thus, by taking together all the components, i.e. employee expense, A&G expense and R&M
expense, UPCL is claiming excess O&M expenses of Rs. 13.85 Crore in FY 2013-14. These projections
appear to be overestimated on year to year basis and, therefore, the Commission should allow O&M
expenses on rational basis after proper scrutiny of the claims. They further submitted that UPCL’s
claim of R&M Expenses, A&G Expenses and Employee Cost for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 appears
to be overestimated on year on year basis and, therefore, requested the Commission to allow the
same on rational basis after proper scrutiny.
Shri P. S. Tomar submitted that UPCL has demanded 18.54% higher O&M Expenses which
is on a much higher side in comparison to previous years.
2.16.3.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the Employee expenses are calculated as per UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011 considering the growth factor approved by the Commission in the MYT Order
2013. Further the Administrative & General Expenses & Repair & Maintenance expenses are
considered at the same level as approved by the Commission in the MYT Order, 2013.
Further, the increase in O&M Expenses is appearing primarily on comparison of A&G
expenses and R&M expenses for FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15. As mentioned above, the expenses for
FY 2014-15 are projected at the same level as already approved by the Commission in the MYT
Order. The increase is appearing because the R&M and A&G Expenses incurred by UPCL for FY
2013-14 are comparatively less as compared to that approved by the Commission in the MYT Order.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
48 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
This is because UPCL could not implement number of schemes due to financial constraints. UPCL,
however, has claimed R&M and A&G Expenses as approved in the MYT Order 2013.
The increase in employee expenses is on account of the revision of base year expenses for FY
2012-13. It is hereby assured that UPCL has tried to keep the estimates as conservative as possible
considering inflation rate as the average of past three years.
2.16.4 Interest on Working Capital
2.16.4.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Munish Talwar submitted that the Petitioner has projected higher Interest on working
capital and Gross Expenditure.
Shri Manu Kochhar submitted that UPCL has projected Interest on Working Capital of Rs.
21.03 Crore for FY 2015-16 which is more than thrice of Rs. 6.36 Crore approved by the Commission
in FY 2014-15.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that against approved expense of Rs 7.26 Crore, UPCL has claimed nil interest on
working capital as working capital required was negative. Thus, there is a saving of Rs. 7.26 Crore.
2.16.4.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that it has calculated Interest on Working Capital as per the
provisions of UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 and the detailed computation has been given in the
Petition. In this regard, further replies to queries raised by the Commission have also been
submitted to the Commission.
2.16.5 Interest & Finance Charges 2.16.5.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that UPCL has claimed Interest & Finance Charges of Rs. 126.90 Crore for FY 2013-14
against Rs. 118.99 Crore approved in MYT Order 2013. Thus, there is an excess claim of Rs. 7.21
Crore. They further requested the Commission to check the claim of Rs. 18.39 Crore towards interest
on GPF.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 49
2.16.6 Depreciation
2.16.6.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Manu Kochhar submitted that the projected depreciation for FY 2015-16 is Rs. 151.94
Crore, which is 119% higher than Rs. 69.38 Crore as approved by the Commission in FY 2014-15.
Such hike in depreciation is unjustifiable.
Shri Suresh Kumar, President, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok
Bansal submitted that UPCL has claimed depreciation of Rs. 108.23 Crore against Rs. 69.46 Crore
approved in MYT Order 2013. Thus, there is an excess claim of Rs. 38.77 Crore under depreciation.
UPCL has calculated depreciation on opening and closing values of Gross Fixed Assets (GFA) of Rs.
2031.76 Crore & Rs. 2161.43 Crore, respectively. They further submitted that matter of finalization of
transfer scheme is still sub-judice before APTEL and, therefore, GFA is under dispute. In this
regard, they requested the Commission that excess claim of Rs. 38.77 Crore under depreciation
should not be approved.
Shri Ajay Bhargava and Shri R. N. Mathur suggested that depreciation should be charged on
the assets that are actually in use and in possession of UPCL.
2.16.6.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that depreciation has been claimed on the basis of GFA as given in
the Transfer Scheme and total additions of assets from FY 2007-08 to 2012-13. Hence, no claim has
been made in respect of assets made out of Government Grant or Consumer Deposits. As UPCL’s
investments are involved in creation of the above assets, therefore, the Commission is requested to
allow the depreciation as claimed by UPCL in its Petition.
2.16.7 Provision for bad and doubtful debts
2.16.7.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that UPCL has proposed 1.5% as bad & doubtful debt
which should not be accepted because consumers should not be burdened on account of
inefficiency of UPCL. Indeed, UPCL should try to recover such bad and doubtful debts. Further, if
UPCL want to get rebate of 1.5% for debt collection, then industries, which are also a part of
economy, should also get 2% rebate in tariff.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
50 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri. Pankaj Gupta referring to the relevant sections of the UPCL Petition, submitted that
UPCL is trying to move in its own direction without taking into consideration the observations of
the Commission on bad and doubtful debts. It is the common practice to take utmost care to realise
the money due from its consumers and nowhere a provision as a percentage is allowed for bad
debts. Therefore, the earlier stand taken by the Commission should hold good for this year also.
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that the Commission in its MYT Order 2013 did not allow any provision for bad and
doubtful debts for earlier years. In spite of this, UPCL has again calculated the same in true up as
Rs. 59.11 Crore for FY 2013-14 towards bad and doubtful debts. Rather than making such requests
again and again, UPCL should come clearly with the quantum of bad and doubtful debts written off
in the previous years against the provisioning allowed by the Commission in the earlier ARR and
Tariff orders.
Further, Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok
Bansal submitted that UPCL has made a provision of bad debt of Rs. 81.65 Crore for FY 2015-16 @
2% of projected revenue assessment. The Commission in its Tariff Order for FY 2014-15 disallowed
any provision for bad and doubtful debt and rejected claims stating that the licensee had not
utilized the provisions of bad debts already provided in the previous Tariff Orders. The
Commission had also directed UPCL to carry out audit of its receivables and also identify and
classify such debts and submit the report to the Commission. UPCL has been allowed a total
provision of Rs. 520.31 Crore against bad and doubtful debts upto the financial year 2010-11, but the
quantum of debts written off from the books has not been disclosed by the licensee in any ARR so
far. As the license has not utilized the existing provision of bad and doubtful debt, therefore, it is
not entitled for any further provision in the ARR towards bad and doubtful debts.
Shri H. D. Arora submitted that many government department like Forest dept., SDM
Haridwar, DM, SSP office, Education and Health Dept. etc and some big consumers have huge
pending bills.
Shri Ajay Bhargava and Shri R. N. Mathur suggested that reserve for doubtful debts should
be reviewed properly and only such reserves, which have matching Sundry Debtors, should be kept
into account. Excess reserves should be reverted back. This shall reduce the losses.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 51
2.16.7.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that as per fundamentals of accounting and costing (matching
principle and principle of conservatism) every business should be provided that portion of debtors
which is likely to be bad and not recoverable. This should be provided as an expense in the same
year in which sales revenue is recognized. The Commission in its MYT Order, 2013 has approved
collection efficiency of 98.5% for FY 2015-16. Based on this, UPCL requested the Commission to
approve bad debts @ 1.5% of estimated revenue. As against the provision allowed by the
Commission amounting to Rs. 103.74 Crore for the period from FY 2001-02 to FY 2013-14, UPCL
written off the Bad Debts amounting to Rs 102.01 Crore till FY 2013-14 and the details of such
amount written off has been submitted to the Commission. Thus, UPCL has a balance provision of
Rs. 1.73 Crore only and is entitled for further provision as per Regulation 32 (1) of the UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011.
2.16.8 Non-tariff Income (NTI) 2.16.8.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that Non Tariff Income (NTI) should be shared with the consumer. In this petition, UPCL
has claimed NTI of Rs. 129.09 Crore for FY 2013-14 as per provisional account and this includes
delayed payment surcharge of Rs. 18.11 Crore. UPCL has proposed partial sharing of income with
the consumers of Rs. 86.51 Crore only on account of non-sharing of delayed payment surcharge
earned with a plea of making short term arrangement due to delay in payment by consumers and
50% sharing of rebate earned on account of timely payment of power purchase bills with a plea of
its efficiency in payments of power purchase bills. Thus, UPCL has earned Rs. 19.81 Crore
additionally against provision of Rs. 66.70 Crore claimed in its MYT Petition 2013. In this regard,
they suggested that the gains should be shared with the consumers in accordance with UERC Tariff
Regulation, 2011 which has a provision for sharing of approved gains on account of controllable
factors, i.e. 20% to be passed on to consumers through tariff and balance 80% to be retained and
utilized by UPCL.
Shri Pankaj Gupta submitted that UPCL has not included income from Late Payment
Surcharge in Non Tariff Income. As per the Tariff Regulation, UERC has to provide for all expenses
incurred by UPCL in any year. In this regard, he requested the Commission to include Late
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
52 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Payment Surcharge in Non Tariff Income. He further submitted that any shortfall between income
and expenditure should be met by appropriate increase in Tariff. While truing up for the year in this
tariff fixation, UERC has correctly taken rebate earned out of early payment as income as per Tariff
Regulations for taking in consideration all incomes by appropriate increase of Tariff. Therefore, he
requested the Commission to maintain the rebate as part of income as done by it in past.
2.16.8.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that Late Payment Surcharge is levied on consumers who do not
make timely payment of their electricity bills. Due to the delay in making the payment, there is a
shortfall in cash flow available with UPCL to incur its expenses. In such a situation, to meet such
shortfall in cash flow, UPCL is constrained to meet the expenses through borrowings/internal
accruals. Further, ARR and Tariff of UPCL is determined on the assumption that UPCL receives the
payment of electricity bills from the consumers within time (before due date). Therefore, the
Commission has been requested either to allow interest cost of shortfall in cash flow due to delay in
making the payment of the bills by the consumers or to not treat the Late Payment Surcharge paid
by the consumers as the income of UPCL.
With regard to including entire rebate in Non Tariff Income, the Petitioner submitted that
the Commission while allowing interest on working capital considers one month credit to UPCL by
power suppliers. UPCL by making the payment to power suppliers within 07 days avails 2% rebate,
which is 1% for making payment within 30 days. Due to making the payment within 07 days, there
is excess cash outflow of UPCL. This is managed by UPCL by arranging the funds through internal
accruals/borrowings. Therefore, the Commission has been requested either to consider actual credit
availed by UPCL from power suppliers or not to consider the rebate availed by UPCL due to
making the payment before 30 days.
2.16.9 Sharing of Gains & Losses 2.16.9.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Suresh Kumar, President, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok
Bansal submitted that in FY 2013-14, UPCL has gained against the targets in performance
parameters for Employee Expenses, R & M expenses, A & G expenses and collection efficiency but
has been loser for non-achievement of performance target with respect to distribution losses. Such
failure of UPCL to achieve loss target should be entirely attributed to UPCL and total loss of
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 53
revenue on this account should be absorbed by the licensee rather than sharing the loss with
consumers.
2.16.10 Capital Cost of Original Assets and Depreciation
2.16.10.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri. Pankaj Gupta suggested that the Commission should consider Gross Fixed Assets
(GFA) of Rs. 508.00 Crore as on 08.11.2001 as considered by the Commission in previous Tariff
Orders. Accordingly, depreciation should be allowed on GFA. He further submitted that UERC in
its previous Tariff Orders had not allowed depreciation on assets created out of grant and should
follow the same analogy in Tariff Order for FY 2015-16.
2.16.10.2 Petitioner’s Reply In reply, the Petitioner has submitted the following points:
• GoU vide Order dated 27-04-2012 approved the Transfer Scheme of Assets & Liabilities.
• UERC refused to consider the transfer scheme finalized on the basis of above Order of
GoU.
• UPCL vide its letter dated 22-06-2013 informed the view of UERC to GoU and requested to
issue proper notification in accordance with the Reorganisation Act, 2000.
• No notification is required under Reorganisation Act, 2000. The Act specifically provides
for notification wherever required, such as Section 22(5), 23(1) and (2), 71(2), 80(1)(v),
80(3)(c), 89 etc. Supreme Court in the case of Nasiruddin and Ors Vs. Sita Ram Agarwal
also gave such ruling.
• UPERC in its Order dated 21-05-2013 while truing up the expenses and revenue of UPPCL
considered the GFA of UPCL as Rs. 1058.18 Crore (as given in the Transfer Scheme).
• Depreciation has been claimed on the opening GFA of Rs. 1058.18 Crore.
• However, the matter of GFA is pending before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity.
Further, UPCL in its APR and Tariff Petition for FY 2014-15 has not claimed depreciation on
the assets created out of grants.
2.16.11 Non Capitalization of Assets
2.16.11.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Pankaj Gupta submitted that the Commission in previous tariff orders had not allowed
capitalization of assets pending Electrical Inspector Certificate. In this regard, it is requested that the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
54 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Commission should follow same analogy as no change has taken place in present ARR and not
allow capitalization till such Certificate is received.
2.16.11.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL has segregated the capitalized assets for the period from
FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 into LT Assets and HT/EHT Assets. This segregation has been submitted
to the Commission during this Tariff Petition. On the request of UPCL, Government of Uttarakhand
under the provisions of Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 authorized the officers of UPCL to inspect the
HT/EHT Assets and these officers have started the work of inspection of assets. It is expected that
the clearance certificate in respect of all HT/EHT Assets capitalized from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14
shall be submitted to the Commission by 15.03.2015.
2.16.12 Truing-up for Past Years
2.16.12.1 Stakeholder’s Comment
Shri. Pankaj Gupta submitted that UPCL has not provided clear explanation for variance of
its expenses as against approved by the Commission. He submitted that in this time of
transparency, it is important that the government utilities must also be transparent. If the actual
expenses are more than that approved by the Commission then the same needs to be clearly
explained otherwise licensee will be running its operation in losses and this will not be good for
anyone in the long run. UPCL must, therefore, give better explanations for such variance. He
further submitted that UI overdrawal and open market purchase are being resorted to without
proper sanction from the Commission and such extra expenses are being claimed without any clear
explanation for resorting to such high cost power.
Col. S. K. Bhattacharya submitted that details of the agency auditing the Tariff Petition
should be provided.
2.16.12.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL in the Tariff Petition has provided all details of actual
expenses and revenues for FY 2013-14 including justifications of the same. All other
information/justifications are also being provided as and when required by the Commission.
Further, the actual rate of power purchase cost from open market including UI over drawl has
reduced from Rs. 4.00/unit in FY 2012-13 to Rs. 3.18/unit in FY 2013-14. Thus, UPCL has tried its
best to control the open market purchase and has kept it as low as possible.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 55
With regard to the details of agency auditing the Tariff Petition, the Petitioner submitted
that the Tariff Petition is examined by the Commission through its officers/consultant.
2.16.13 Past Adjustments
2.16.13.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that past adjustments on account of revenue gap of
previous years should not be adjusted in the Tariff for FY 2015-16.
Shri P. S. Tomar submitted that UPCL in its APR has calculated previous year's dispute
burden in the tariff proposal for 2015-16. In this regard, it is requested that this should only be
considered after proper scrutiny.
Col. S. K. Bhattacharya submitted that UPCL should provide the reasons for not computing
revenue details for FY 2014-15. In this regard, gap/surplus should also be provided.
2.16.13.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner in its ARR and Tariff Petition submitted the details of expenses and revenue
for FY 2013-14 as per the Annual Accounts and computed the gap of Rs. 385.70 Crore (including
carrying cost). This has been calculated as per the provisions of UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 and,
accordingly, claimed to be approved along with the ARR for FY 2015-16.
Further, the Petitioner submitted that UERC had approved the estimated expenses and
revenue for FY 2014-15 vide its Tariff Order dated April 10, 2014. These expenses and revenues shall
now be trued up on the basis of actual audited figures, which will be available on completion of FY
2014-15 and, therefore, claim based on truing up for FY 2014-15 shall be claimed in next tariff
determination exercise. However, as per the Tariff Petition for FY 2015-16, the details of revenue
and expenses for FY 2014-15 are as follows:-
• ARR/ Expenses - Rs. 4673.55 Crore
• Revenue - Rs. 4050.92 Crore
• Gap - Rs. 622.63 Crore
2.16.14 Consumer Security Deposit
2.16.14.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that UPCL provides the interest of 9% on Consumer
Security Deposits. However, industries have to pay the interest of 14% on loan to respective banks.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
56 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Accordingly, the interest on Consumer’s Security Deposits should also be increased from 9% to
14%. He further submitted that payment of Consumer Security Deposit should be in the shape of
bank guarantee instead of cash.
Adv. N. D. Dobriyal submitted that UPCL should provide interest on Consumer Security
Deposit.
2.16.14.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that in accordance with Section 47 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and
regulations, security deposits should be deposited only in cash.
2.17 Enhanced Pension for Employees 2.17.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Manu Kochhar submitted that UPCL was directed by the Govt. of Uttarakhand, vide
letter No 173, dated 5 Feb 2013, from Additional Secretary Energy, to release enhanced pension
from their own fund. Accordingly, UPCL has started paying enhanced pension to it employees who
retired during January 1, 1996 to July 20, 2010. He suggested that this cannot be included in O&M
expenses.
2.17.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that the Government had directed it to meet the expenses incurred
due to enhanced pension of employees from its own resources. However, UPCL is compelled to
include it as a part of O&M Expenses projected for FY 2015-16 as the tariff realized from the
consumers is the only source of revenue for UPCL. O&M expenses form an integral part of the
running cost of the business, therefore, it has to be recovered.
2.18 Fuel Charge Adjustment 2.18.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Rajeev Gupta and Shri P. S. Tomar submitted that UERC vide its order dtd. 11.09.2014
has already directed UPCL to stop charging FCA from consumers with immediate effect. However,
UPCL vide its office memo dtd. 17.01.2015 has imposed Fuel Charge Adjustment (FCA) to all the
consumers in Uttarakhand at different rate per unit. Accordingly, he requested that any additional
charges such as FCA should be approved by the Commission before collection from consumer.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 57
Further, FCA charges already been charged in July to September, 2014 by UPCL should be refunded
to the consumers at the earliest.
Brig Kishan Gopal Behl (Retd.), President, All India Consumers Council, submitted that FCA
charges are required to be computed and charged on the basis of actual variation in fuel costs
relating to power generated from own generating stations and power procured from Central
Generating Stations. In accordance with Regulation 83 of the MYT Regulations 2011, the monthly
bills are required to be raised by the Central Thermal generating stations where FCA is applicable.
However, it has been observed that such monthly bills raised by these generating stations include
substantial amount of past year arrears. Regulation 83(2) of the MYT Regulations 2011 specifies that
the FCA charge shall be computed and charged on the basis of actual variation in power purchase
cost on account of increase in cost of fuel during any month during the period under review. The
past years arrears raised by the generating stations do not relate to the cost of fuel consumed for the
months during the period under review and, therefore, past arrears should not be included in
computation of FCA. Further, FCA charges of Rs 0.06/unit is too high and should not be allowed.
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui submitted that currently there is no uniform policy for charging
Fuel Cost Adjustment from the consumers. In the prevailing tariff UERC has directed the surplus of
Rs. 20.92 Crore to be adjusted from FCA and no further guideline was given to UPCL to charge the
same. UPCL without consent/approval of UERC imposed FCA charges on consumers in the month
of July and August, 2014 on which UERC has taken stand to stop charging the same, but the
amount was not refunded. Again assuming post facto approval from UERC, UPCL has again
started charging FCA from January 2015. Therefore, it is requested that the Commission should
provide some clear guidelines for charging FCA.
2.18.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that in accordance with Regulation 83 of the UERC (Terms and
Conditions for determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011, post facto approval is required for
recovery of FCA and no prior approval is required.
As regard the contention raised regarding refund of FCA charges from July to September
2014, the Petitioner submitted that as per Regulation 83 of the UERC (Terms and Conditions for
determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011, post facto approval is required for recovery of FCA and
no prior approval is required. Further, the Commission vide its order dated 11.09.2014 had directed
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
58 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
UPCL to stop charging of FCA and to adjust the recovered amount of FCA in the FCA of the
subsequent quarter of FY 2014-15. As per direction of UERC, levy of FCA was stopped and the
recovered amount has been adjusted in FCA of the subsequent quarter of FY 2014-15.
2.19 Revenue from Tariff and Distribution losses
2.19.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Suresh Kumar, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok Bansal
submitted that during FY 2013-14, UPCL has billed actual revenue of Rs. 3755.67 Crore which is
lower by Rs. 187.27 Crore from UERC approved sale of power of Rs. 3942.94 Crore. In the petition,
UPCL has claimed to predetermine the distribution loss trajectory keeping in view the actual
distribution loss for FY 2012-13 which is 21.70% against 17% considered by the Commission in MYT
Order. In this regard, UPCL requested the Commission to review the distribution loss targets so
that non-achievement of revenue targets could be imposed on the consumers for recovery through
tariff hike. The Commission should not accept such proposal of UPCL as it is against consumer
interest.
2.20 Metering and Billing
2.20.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Bhim Sen Rawat, Coordinator, Dangaria Jan Kalyan Samiti submitted that the bills of
domestic consumers have increased by 3-4 times after installation of new electronic meters at their
premises. He further submitted that tariff should be increased after the slab of 600-700 units only,
else tariff should be reduced.
Shri Maherban Singh Negi submitted that every single electrical equipment should be
connected to meter. Every bill should be paid in time. Bills may also be paid through bank cheque.
Further, electronic meters should be placed outside the premises.
Shri Bhagwati Khanduri submitted that no one should be given unmetered power
irrespective of category of consumer. As un-metered connections are prone to theft and misuse and
if government wants to subsidize then government should pay the bill.
Shri R. P.Joshi submitted that the timing for payment of bill should be done upto 3 PM as
banks and post-office has timing upto 4-5 PM for transaction.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 59
Shri K. B. Pandey submitted that UPCL should install Synthetic Metering Cubical Box (SMC)
at all places and should connect it with all the meters. This will help in actual energy accounting.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that Commission in previous Tariff Order had directed
for abolishing unmetered power supply. However, UPCL has not submitted in its Petition that all
power supply is through meter. Further, the Commission had also directed to replace all
mechanical meters with electronic meters. However, mechanical meters are still in use and no
scheme is available in this regard.
Shri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that the current electricity distribution supply system
and the metering and billing system should be improved.
Shri Manu Kochhar submitted that defective electronic meters are installed in replacement
of mechanical meters.
Shri Vijay Singh Verma submitted that there should be more transparency in metering
system.
Adv. N. D. Dobriyal submitted that there should be proper sitting arrangements in the
billing counters of UPCL.
2.20.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL has metered more than 99.50% electricity connections.
The remaining connections are also being metered. Further, the meter reading of the consumers is
being taken by the meter readers and the bill is being provided at the time of meter reading. The
consumers also have the facility to pay their bills online by using Debit Card/ Credit Card/Net
Banking. Further, UPCL is also in the process to make arrangement with an agency of Central
Government who will collect the payment of Electricity Bills in different locations of the State
including rural and remote areas. This arrangement is expected to be finalized very soon.
Further, all new connections are being released by installing the meter outside the premises
of the consumers. All defective meters are being replaced by installing the new meter outside the
premises of the consumers. All mechanical meters are being replaced by installing the new
electronic meter outside the premises of the consumers.
Further, the Petitioner submitted that proper care is taken for installation of a new meter or
for replacement of the old meter. Electronic Meters are properly tested before being installed in the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
60 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
premises of the consumers. In case of a specific grievance the consumer can approach the concerned
division office or lodge his complait at customer care centre of UPCL. He can also file his complaint
before the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Dehradun/Haldwani.
2.21 Distribution Line/ Line Losses
2.21.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comments
Shri Munish Talwar submitted that Guidelines of Govt. of India, Ministry of Power for
Restructured Accelerated Power development programme (R-APDRP) should be followed. MoP’s
R-APDRP and power generating & transmission bodies should take steps for modernization &
strengthening of distribution system. In this regard, UPCL should plan for installation of energy
efficient equipments in their substations and use insulated transmission lines with good conductor
to keep the losses under control. Existing Infrastructure and utilities should be improved with
reliable Metering and Billing system so as to minimize Distribution Losses. UPCL may also think on
broader level to improve the equipment healthiness of entire EHT System with recent up gradation
and systematic maintenance plan so that losses pertaining to distribution system are minimized.
Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui and Shri Pramod Singh Tomar submitted that the HT/EHT
industries have losses even less than 5%, however, they are being burdened with the inefficiencies
of the distribution licensee. Accordingly, Shri Shakeel A. Siddiqui has suggested that either the cost
to serve to various consumer categories is determined or the voltage rebate may be increased as
under:
a) For supply at 33 kV, the rebate should be increased from existing 2.5% to 7.5%.
b) For supply at 132 kV and above, the rebate should be increased from existing 7.5% to 12%.
Shri Manu Kochhar suggested that UPCL should prepare a detailed plan to bring down
losses and requested the Commission to monitor it on monthly basis.
Shri Pankaj Gupta suggested UERC to direct UPCL to carry out energy audit at Sub-station
level and also at the different voltage levels separately so that actual reason of losses be ascertained
and action be taken to bring down the losses to the level below that directed by UERC. He further
submitted that if transmission and distribution losses will be less, it will result in less purchase of
energy for same level of consumption.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 61
Shri Pankaj Gupta further suggested that for investigating losses and energy audit, the
Commission should appoint an agency for carrying out this investigation. If HT consumers are
consuming more than 50%, whose losses should not be more than 5-6% then the losses in other
categories are more than 45%. This is enough reason for proper investigation. For UPCL, to
properly control losses is the most important issue. It is also suggested that UPCL should convert
their sub-stations into Cost-Centres and any sub-station found to be losing money should be
subjected to penalties.
Shri. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal submitted that distribution lines should be repaired and proper
steps should be taken to rectify line damage caused by monkeys which is a common phenomena.
Further, lines should be maintained in hilly areas.
Col. S. K. Bhattacharya submitted that there are high losses due to widespread power theft
at both domestic & commercial category, tampering of meters, rampant use of ‘kantias’, and no
ceiling limit for free power consumption. UPCL has projected distribution loss of 17.34% and this be
checked by the Commission through an independent auditor of integrity. Further, distribution
losses should be reduced. Further, Shri K. B. Pandey submitted that underground cabling needs to
be done to reduce line damages and power theft.
Shri Dhirendra Maithani submitted that any increase in electricity tariff should be accepted
only after establishing an effective mechanism to stop transmission leakage/loss or theft, misuse of
electricity etc. and recovery of old bills specially from bulk users.
Shri Bhagwati Khanduri submitted that theft prone area should be identified and insulated
cables should be installed instead of naked wire system to reduce the losses.
Shri H. D. Arora submitted that line losses and theft is a serious issue which leads to heavy
financial loss of around 30% to State.
Shri Kuldeep Singh Cheema submitted that farmers have to face lot of problems in case of
damaged/burnt transformers. In this regard, UPCL should take appropriate measures to
replace/repair damaged transformers. Further, there is always a threat of fire in farms due to lose
distribution lines crossing through farms. Therefore, it is requested to maintain distribution lines
properly and replace old cables.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
62 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Shri H. D. Arora submitted that UPCL should properly maintain its department stores. This
will reduce the problem in repair/replacement of burnt/damaged equipment like transformers.
Shri Rakesh Kumar Bhatia submitted that Commission directed UPCL in previous order to
reduce lines losses so that tariff should be reduced. UPCL not only disobeyed Commission’s
directions and didn’t give anything with regard to 21% loss including technical losses, commercial
losses and power theft but also didn’t mention about the level of technical line losses, commercial
losses and power theft and steps taken to reduce losses. UPCL should provide the details of
program to reduce the losses to 15%. He further requested the Commission not to give any
relaxation and should monitor work.
Shri Suresh Kumar, President, Shri Raj Kumar Sharma, Shri Rudramurthy N and Shri Ashok
Bansal submitted that UPCL has fixed a trajectory for reduction in distribution losses considering
actual losses of 21.70% for FY 2012-13 against 17% approved by the Commission. In this regard,
they suggested that losses approved by Commission in MYT Order 2013 should be considered to
calculate power purchase requirement. They further submitted that UERC in its MYT Order 2013
had considered collection efficiency of 97.0% for FY 2012-13 and this should be taken as a base for
achieving 98.5% collection efficiency at the end of Control Period.
Shri Gopal Shankar Srivastava and Shri M. S. Nayaz submitted that UPCL should take strict
action to make its Vigilance Department more efficient to reduce misuse and theft of electricity.
Shri Vijay Singh Verma submitted that the cost of repaired transformer are claimed equal to
the cost of new transformer. However, the cost of repaired transformer should be less than the new
transformer. Further, UPCL should increase the ratio of HT/LT Lines and transformers to reduce
power cuts.
2.21.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that presently voltage wise/category wise losses are not available
and category wise tariff has been calculated on the basis of average cost of supply and permissible
level of cross subsidy. This is as per provision of Tariff Regulations. Further, high voltage rebate has
been proposed in the Petition. The Commission on the basis of actual distribution losses for FY
2002-03 had fixed the Distribution Loss Reduction Trajectory for first five years from FY 2003-04 to
FY 2007-08. The said trajectory is being extended without considering the actual losses which are
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 63
higher than the level of losses fixed in the trajectory. In this regard, the Commission has been
requested to revise the distribution loss reduction trajectory on the basis of Actual Losses of UPCL.
Further, R-APDRP Part-A and Part-B is being implemented in UPCL. UPCL is continuously
committed to reduce its distribution losses. Significant steps have been taken by UPCL to
modernize & strengthen the system and reduce the distribution loss. UPCL has been successful in
reducing its distribution losses in FY 2013-14 by 2.36% (21.70% in FY 2012-13 as estimated by UERC
minus 19.34% in FY 2013-14 as re-casted by UPCL). UPCL has also reduced its losses by 11.68% in
last five years (31.02% in FY 2008-09 as estimated by UERC minus 19.34% in FY 2013-14 as recasted
by UPCL).
The following initiatives are further being undertaken for loss reduction:
• Installation of Capacitor Bank at 33/11 kV substations
• Implementation of R-APDRP Part A scheme
• Implementation of R-APDRP Part B scheme
• Installation of Double metering in selected 11 kV & 33 kV consumers
• Shifting of 1 Phase & 3 Phase meter outside the premises of the consumers
• Implementation of AMR
• Replacement of Mechanical Meters with Electronic Meters and Installation of Electronic
meters in un-metered connections
• Laying of LT ABC cable
• DT Metering
• Replacement of defective meters
• Metering of unmetered consumers
Further, the Petitioner submitted that UPCL in its Tariff Petition has proposed the following
distribution losses:
Table 2.8: Distribution Losses as proposed by the Petitioner Year Target fixed by UERC Proposed by UPCL
2013-14 16% 19.34% (Actual re casted)
2014-15 15.50% 18.34% 2015-16 15% 17.34%
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
64 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
With regard to investigating losses and energy audit, the Petitioner submitted that as per
Commission’s directives, UPCL had conducted the Energy Audit Exercise through a consultancy
firm. The Energy Audit Report has also been provided to the Commission.
With regard to maintaining distribution lines, the Petitioner submitted that UPCL makes all
its efforts to ensure efficient running of all the equipments and their maintenance. However, if there
is any specific complaint, UPCL shall ensure to resolve it in a timely manner.
2.22 KCC Data 2.22.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comment
Shri Pankaj Gupta, President, Industries Association of Uttarakhand submitted that UPCL
has done a good job by compiling data in KCC cell. Though the compilation is excellent, it seems
that enough benefit is not being derived from scrutiny of this data. Industries Association of
Uttarakhand suggested that the Commission should set up one cell either in its own office or in
UPCL’s office for scrutiny of this data. Further, such cell should be independent and should not be
reporting to UPCL. The formation of this cell would help in proper diagnostics of ills and malafides
prevailing in UPCL at division level and would highlight the vital areas to be settled.
2.22.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL has covered all the industrial consumers having load
above 5 kW and non-domestic consumers having load above 10 kW under KCC billing. The MRI
report and billing of the HT consumers are being checked at Corporate Office on regular basis.
Corrective actions are being taken on the irregularities found in the checking of the metering system
and billing of these consumers.
2.23 Quality of Power 2.23.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comment
Shri Pankaj Gupta submitted that quality of power is reducing with the passage of time.
Issues like voltage variations amongst different phases, low voltage, high voltage, frequent
breakdowns, etc. has become a common practice. Therefore, he requested the Commission to give
clear direction to UPCL for improvement of quality of power.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 65
2.23.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that efforts are regularly made by UPCL for improvement in
quality of power. The demand of electricity has become about four times from the date of creation
of State and UPCL is meeting the demand of electricity to the satisfaction of the consumers. It is
worthwhile to mention here that in the whole State average supply of electricity in a day is between
22-24 hours.
2.24 Open Access 2.24.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comment
Shri Manu Kochhar submitted that encouraging open access will help augment power
availability in the State and ease out the deficit power situation. Also the distribution losses
considered for open access need to be rationalized in line with the actual distribution losses
incurred with the consumers on 132 kV and 220 kV.
Shri Jai Bhagwan Agrawal submitted that cross subsidy surcharge should not be charged in
open access.
Shri S. S. Chopra submitted that the renewal of open access should be on yearly basis
instead of monthly basis.
2.24.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL is allowing open access to the consumers as per the
provisions of Regulations issued by Commission in this matter. Further, the Tariff of consumers for
FY 2014-15 has been determined considering the distribution losses of 15.50%, whereas the
distribution losses on open access energy at 33 kV and 132 kV are only 13.88% and 8.92%
respectively.
Further, in accordance with Section 42 of the Electricity Act, 2003, cross subsidy surcharge is
payable by the consumers on the energy imported through open access.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
66 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2.25 Renewable Energy Promotion
2.25.1.1 Stakeholder’s Comment
Shri H. D. Arora submitted that government should encourage projects based on wind,
biomass, solar and hydro power projects. Such power project will increase power generation and
revenue in the State.
Shri Ajay Bhargava and Shri R. N. Mathur suggested that UPCL should encourage the usage
of LED lamps by the consumers. This can be done by arranging such lamps available at subsidized
rates. This will reduce electricity demand.
2.25.1.2 Petitioner’s Reply
Regarding Energy Conversation, the Petitioner submitted that UPCL is already in
discussions with Energy Efficiency Services Ltd. regarding a Scheme of distributing LED bulbs.
Under this project, consumers will be provided LED bulbs at an initial payment of Rs. 10 and
thereafter Rs. 10 per month will be adjusted in their monthly bills. Further, UPCL informed that
UPCL has fulfilled the RPO obligations till FY 2012-13. Further, UPCL will soon execute the PPAs
for fulfilling their solar RPO in ensuing year
2.26 Views of Advisory Committee Meeting
During the advisory Committee meeting held on February 5, 2015, the Members made the
following suggestions on the Petitioner’s Petition for True of FY 2013-14, Annual Performance
Review for FY 2014-15 and Tariff for FY 2015-16.
• Members opined that UPCL has not followed the Distribution loss trajectory as approved by
the Commission. The industrial consumption has increased from 24% to 57% from FY 2003-
04 to FY 2013-14 in Uttarakhand. Members further opined that even though losses in supply
to industries range from 3% to 4%, UPCL has still claimed high distribution loss in the State.
• Members opined that UPCL has projected 5% increase in demand for industrial category
which is on a higher side. 4% increase will be more appropriate assumption for projecting
industrial consumption for FY 2015-16.
• Members opined that UPCL has claimed true up for previous years on the basis of audited
accounts. However, no justification for increased cost has been provided by UPCL in this
regard.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 67
• Members opined that the expenses claimed by UPCL are very high in comparison to that
approved by the Commission. Further, UPCL is repeatedly claiming the expenses, in which
the Commission has already given its ruling in previous tariff orders. The Commission had
disallowed bad & doubtful debts claimed by UPCL in FY 2012-13. Then also, UPCL has
again claimed bad & doubtful debts in FY 2013-14. In this regard, Members further opined
that prudence check is required in approval of actual expenses incurred by UPCL.
• Members opined that 26% hike in tariff should not be allowed. Increase in tariff should be
limited to reasonable level. Members also opined that increase in tariff should not be flat
across all category of consumers and tariff increase should be different for different category
of consumers. Further, increase in tariff should be limited to a reasonable level of around 5-
6%.
• Members opined that the issue of Opening Gross Fixed Assets of UPCL is pending for a long
time and it will be in the interests of all the stakeholders to finalise the same at the earliest.
• Members opined that the ToD slots should be fixed considering the timings of operation of
single shift industry.
• Members opined that fixed charges should be linked for domestic consumers based on
consumption, however, some minimum fixed charge should be levied in case of “zero”
consumption by any consumer.
• Members opined that slabs should be modified for Load Factor based tariff for Industrial
consumers and suggested to check the computations in this regard.
• Members opined that UPCL has proposed to abolish the snowbound category (RTS-1A) as
there are no existing consumers under this category over last 5 years. Such comment about
non-existence of snowbound consumers is not satisfactory. Snowbound areas are not fixed
and vary with the rate of snowfall. Villages with snowbound consumers in hilly areas are in
existence and, therefore, such category should not be removed.
• Members opined that TOD tariffs be designed considering the load pattern of the State and
Demand Supply situation in the State.
• Members opined to link employee expenses with efficiency.
• Members opined that UPCL should outsource for improving billing efficiency. Incentive
should be given for meeting the targets.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
68 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
• Members opined that Rail transport is a means of conveyance of passengers and goods at
low rates in comparison to road transport. In this regard, new electricification projects are
taken up by Railways and accordingly, the tariff for railways should not be increased for
promoting tourism in State.
• Members opined that separate category should be made for Horticulture & Floriculture and
suggested that all other allied activities should also be included in this category.
• Members opined that the tube wells of State Agriculture Department are under separate
category, GIS. The tube wells of State Agriculture Department should also be included in
Private Tube Wells Category with lower tariff as such tube-wells are used for production of
seeds for farmers in hilly areas.
• Members opined that UPCL should come out with a proposal for energy conservation and
take adequate measures for energy conversation. Further, UPCL should fulfil the Renewable
Purchase Obligations.
2.27 Commission’s Views
The Commission has taken note of various suggestions/objections made by the stakeholders
and appreciates the keen interest and participation of various stakeholders and for their feedback
provided to the Commission on various issues. The Commission is of the view that the foundation
stone of any meaningful regulation of utilities is to have an effective platform for exchange of
operational and performance related information. The information exchange with the Utilities
should be on a regular basis and throughout the year, rather than the interactions being limited to
year-end, i.e. at the time of filing of the Petition. The Commission has, therefore, given its
suggestions for improvement to overcome the shortcomings in their information systems and in
various processes.
The Commission has addressed the issues raised by the stakeholders on the aspects of tariff
rationalization and tariffs such as fixed charges, Minimum Consumption Guarantee charges, ToD
Tariffs, Continuous Supply Surcharge, Reduction in Cross Subsidy etc. in Chapter 5 (Tariff
Rationalisation, Tariff Design and related issues) of the Order. Several respondents from different
consumer categories have opposed the increase in tariff proposed by the Petitioner and submitted
that the tariff increase should be reasonable.
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 69
As regards the concerns raised by the respondents, relating to the truing up of expenses and
revenue for FY 2013-14 and projections of expenses and ARR of the Petitioner for FY 2015-16, such
as Power Purchase Cost, O&M expenses, capital related expenditure, Non-Tariff Income, provision
for bad debts, Interest on Working Capital, etc, the Commission has carried out the detailed analysis
of each element of projections, expenses and Revenue as elaborated in Chapter 3 (Truing Up for FY
2013-14) and Chapter 4 (Analysis of Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16) of the Order.
Various stakeholders have requested the Commission to not allow any losses incurred by
the Petitioner to be passed on to the consumers. The Commission, in this regard is of the view that
UERC MYT Regulations, 2011 stipulates sharing of gains as well as losses. The Commission has,
accordingly carried out sharing of gains and losses as discussed in Chapter-3 in this Order.
2.27.1 Load Shedding
With regards to concerns raised on account of frequent load shedding done by the Petitioner
without intimating the consumers, the Commission observed that the Petitioner is resorting to
regular load shedding under the garb of unscheduled/emergency outages.
In this regard, the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 6, 2013 observed that any
outage continuously been affected by the Petitioner for certain number of hours in a day for 15 or
more days shall not be considered as unscheduled/emergency outage. The Commission has also
given directions in its MYT Order dated May 6, 2013. In accordance with the direction, Petitioner
has to obtain the prior approval for load shedding to be carried out continuously for certain number
of hours in a day for 15 or more days. Further, in case, during any month if the average supply
hours are less than 18 hours per day, the Petitioner shall reduce the demand charges for HT
Industrial consumers for that month to 80% of the applicable demand charges for the affected
consumers.
2.27.2 Compliance to the Directives of the Commission
As regards the action taken by the Petitioner on the directives of the Commission, it may be
noted that the Commission obtained the details on the same during the Technical Validation
Session. Moreover, the Commission has included the submission of the Petitioner on the action
taken by it with regard to various directives and the Commission’s views on the same in Chapter 7
(Commission’s Directives) of the Order.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
70 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2.27.3 Fuel Charge Adjustment Mechanism
With regard to FCA recovery mechanism, the Commission has already specified the
mechanism in its UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011.
2.27.4 KCC Data
As regards the suggestion for scrutiny of KCC data, the Commission would like to clarify
that the detailed analysis of KCC data is being done at Commission’s office on regular basis and
monthly report on low load factor consumer is submitted by the Petitioner on regular basis.
2.27.5 Recovery of Electricity Dues
The Commission agrees with the concern raised by the stakeholders /objectors regarding
electricity dues on various Government departments and private consumers. Various stakeholders
suggested that these dues should be recovered. The Commission has been consistently directing the
Petitioner to make concerted efforts for recovering its dues and improve its financial position by
identifying such consumers and writing off dubious/non-existent or ghost consumers from its
records through a policy of writing off bad debts and initiating recovery of its dues from other
consumers. Further, as elaborated in Chapter 4 of the Order, the Commission in this Tariff Order is
not allowing any provision for bad and doubtful debts for FY 2015-16 as proposed by the Petitioner.
2.27.6 Incentive for Timely Payment
As regards the suggestion for incentive for timely payment, the Commission has already
dealt with the matter in its Tariff Order for FY 2003-04 which is being reproduced as under:
“The Commission finds that consumers already enjoy sufficiently long credit for the supplies made to
them. Petitioner has intimated the Commission that even for consumers being billed on monthly basis
the time lag between the first day of supply and actual payment is about two months, resulting in
interest free credit for an average period of 45 days for the entire billed amount. For consumers being
billed once in two months the interest free credit period works out to around two months. This
existing arrangement itself is quite generous and no further concessions seem called for. Allowing
consumers rebate for timely payment and booking the cost of it on tariff through expenses incurred,
gives no real advantage to consumers and is only an exercise of smart packaging. The Commission has
therefore decided to do away with the system of rebate for timely payment of the bills by consumers.”
2. Stakeholder’s Responses and Petitioner’s Comments
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 71
2.27.7 Customer Services
In this regard, the Commission would like to clarify that complaint registers are available at
all the 33/11 kV Substations of UPCL in Uttarakhand. The consumers can also lodge their
complaints on phones. Further, time schedules have been formed for redressal of each category of
complaints. Consumers can also lodge their complaints with the “Consumer Grievance Redressal
Forum” functional in the respective Garhwal and Kumaon Zones of Uttarakhand.
2.27.8 Issue of Voltage wise Losses
The Petitioner in its reply to stakeholder’s comments has submitted that distribution losses
on open access energy at 33 kV and 132 kV is 13.88% & 8.92% respectively. The Petitioner however
has not submitted the basis for the losses as submitted above.
The Commission directs the Petitioner to submit the basis for working out voltage wise
losses alongwith approach & methodology adopted by it within two months from the date of this
Order.
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 72
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and
Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Regulation 13 of the Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions
for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as UERC Tariff Regulations,
2011) notified on December 19, 2011 provides for Truing up of approved expenses and revenue
either on the basis of provisional or audited accounts and stipulates as follows:
“13. Annual Performance Review
(1) Under the multi-year tariff framework, the performance of the Generating Company or
Transmission and Distribution Licensees or SLDC, shall be subject to an Annual Performance
Review.
(2) The Applicant shall under affidavit and as per the UERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations 2004
make an application for Annual Performance Review by November 30th of every year;
……
(3) The scope of the Annual Performance Review shall be a comparison of the performance of the
Applicant with the approved forecast of Aggregate Revenue Requirement and expected revenue from
tariff and charges and shall comprise of following:
a) A comparison of the audited performance of the applicant for the previous financial year
with the approved forecast for such previous financial year and truing up of expenses and
revenue subject to prudence check including pass through of impact of uncontrollable
factors;
b) Categorisation of variations in performance with reference to approved forecast into
factors within the control of the applicant (controllable factors) and those caused by factors
beyond the control of the applicant (un-controllable factors).
c) Revision of estimates for the ensuing financial year, if required, based on audited
financial results for the previous financial year;
d) Computation of the sharing of gains and losses on account of controllable factors for the
previous year”
The above Regulation also specifies the procedure for Truing up. In accordance with these
provisions of the Regulations, UPCL submitted its application for provisional true-up of FY 2013-14
along with the Tariff Petition for FY 2015-16.
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 73
The Commission, in its Order dated April 10, 2014, had already carried out the truing up of
expenses and revenue till FY 2012-13. The Petitioner in this Petition had submitted the provisional
accounts for FY 2013-14 and had requested the Commission for carrying out provisional truing up
of expenses and revenues for FY 2013-14 based on the provisional accounts. However, subsequent
to filing of the petition the final audited accounts for FY 2013-14 became available and the same
were submitted by UPCL. Accordingly, the Commission has decided to carry out the final truing up
of expenses and revenue for FY 2013-14 based on the audited accounts instead of provisional basis.
3.1 Past Adjustments
The Petitioner submitted that it had filed for approval of past adjustments, inter-alia,
considering the value of assets and liabilities as per Transfer Scheme approved by the Government
of Uttarakhand (GoU) along with the Multi-Year Tariff Petition for determination of Tariff for FY
2013-14 including true-up for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12. The Petitioner added that in its MYT
Petition, it had submitted the impact of transfer scheme along with the carrying cost till FY 2012-13
amounting to Rs. 1581.24 Crore. However, the Commission in its Order dated May 6, 2013 did not
consider finalisation of transfer scheme as the same required a notification under the Uttar Pradesh
Re-organization Act, 2000 (Re-organization Act). The Petitioner submitted that from the perusal of
the Re-organization Act, there is no requirement to notify the Transfer Scheme or Order issued by
the Central Government under Section 63 of the Reorganization Act. The Petitioner further
submitted that being aggrieved by the aforesaid MYT Order, it has filed an appeal before the
Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (ATE).
The Petitioner further submitted that the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission
(UPERC) in its Order dated May 21, 2013, has considered the Gross Fixed Assets (GFA) transferred
to the Petitioner as Rs. 1058.18 Crore while carrying out the truing-up of UPPCL for the period from
FY 2000-01 to FY 2007-08, which is the same amount as agreed between UPPCL and the Petitioner in
the Transfer Scheme. The Petitioner added that since the matter is pending before the higher court
of law, it is not filing any claim in this regard in the present Petition.
The Commission is also of the view that as the matter is sub-judice before the Hon’ble ATE,
the higher court of law, it would not be appropriate for the Commission to give any
comments/observations on the issue. Accordingly, the Commission refrains itself from giving any
ruling on the matter of past adjustments in the present Order and decides to maintain status-quo
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
74 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
ante.
3.2 Truing-up for FY 2013-14
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission vide its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013
determined the expenses and revenue of the Petitioner for FY 2013-14 based on the UERC (Terms
and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011 and also on the basis of historical
trends. The Petitioner further submitted the computation of revenue and expenses under various
heads based on actual performance during FY 2013-14 along with relevant records and supporting
documents with reasons justifying such calculations under each head.
The Commission has analysed the head-wise elements of ARR and Revenue for FY 2013-14
in the succeeding paragraphs. The head-wise details of variations in expenses and revenue with
justification are enumerated below.
3.2.1 Sales
The Commission had approved the energy sales for FY 2013-14 in the MYT Order dated
May 06, 2013 as 9283 MU. The Petitioner in the current Petition has submitted the actual sales for FY
2013-14 as 9065 MU. The Petitioner has further re-casted the sales for domestic and PTW category
and has submitted total re-casted sales for FY 2013-14 as 9047 MU.
The Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15 dated April 10, 2014 analysed the actual
billing data for FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 and stated as follows:
“On scrutinizing the billing data it was observed that consumption of some of the consumers was
abnormally very high. Some of the consumers having abnormal consumption data as observed by the
Commission is shown in the Table below:
Table 3.4:Consumption Pattern for some of the Consumers of PTW category Sr. No. Division Name of Consumer Connected
Load (BHP) Consumption
(Units) Month
1 Rudrapur Shri Laxman Singh 5.00 194730.00 Dec 2011 2 Rudrapur Shri Gajendra Singh 5.00 34466.00 June 2011 3 Rudrapur Shri Pradeep Vishwas 5.00 21900.00 June 2011 4 Rudrapur Shri Janaradan Chaudhary 5.00 19962.00 June 2011
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 75
Assuming round the clock running of the tube well each day, expected consumption of a 5 HP pump
is 16,000 units in 6 months period. The consumption shown as recorded/assessed is several times of
this maximum achievable consumption.
Based on the above analysis it is evident that these consumers are being used as a bin to park excess
losses by field officers and that the licensee has failed to exercise due diligence. It is unequivocal that
part of these sales are fictitious. It is extremely unfortunate that even the basic record CS-3 is being
intentionally and surreptitiously manipulated to show inflated sales. It is not feasible to assess actual
sales to these consumers in a short period given the quality of data. The Commission intends to
institute a study to go in to the gamut of basis of recording sales for these and domestic consumers.”
The Commission, accordingly, instituted a study and appointed a consultant to carry out a
study on “Examination and Analysis of the sales of the distribution company for Domestic and PTW
consumers and verification of the same vis-à-vis actual billing data for FY 2013-14 for two distribution
Circles, namely EDC Roorkee & EDC Rudrapur comprising of about 4,87,000 consumers for FY 2013-14”.
The Commission during the course of study also added the examination and analysis of PWW and
Public lamps category for two Circles in the TOR as part of the enhanced scope of the study.
Detailed analysis of sales data of FY 2013-14 for the two circles comprising of four divisions namely
Roorkee Urban, Roorkee Rural, Rudrapur and Sitarganj was done by the consultant including
analysis of variation in number of consumers and sales in CS-3 statements with respect to consumer
ledgers, analysis of metered and unmetered consumption, analysis of billing done on the basis of
metered units and on assessment basis. Based on the detailed analysis, clarifications were sought
from the respective divisions. Responses were received and based on the analysis of these
responses, it was observed that the sales data as recorded in CS-3 and CS-4 was not matching with
consumer ledgers as discussed in the findings of the study in detail while analysing the truing up of
sales for FY 2013-14 for the respective categories in the following sections.
The Commission continuing with its approach adopted in its APR Order for FY 2014-15
directed the Petitioner to submit the breakup of sales for all the consumer categories into three
parts, i.e. sales based on actual meter reading, unmetered sales and sales billed on assessment basis
for FY 2013-14 during the current proceedings. In reply to the Commission’s direction, the
Petitioner submitted the following:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
76 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 3.1: Break up of Sales submitted by the Petitioner for FY 2013-14 (MU)
S. N
o
Sub-
Cat
egor
y Based on Actual Meter
Reading Based on Assessment Un-metered Total
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s (N
o)
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s (N
o)
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s (N
o)
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s (N
o)
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
1 Domestic (i) BPL and Kutir Jyoti 268734 208845 155.95 25254 20203 15.35 0 0 0.00 293988 229048 171.31
(ii) Other Domestic Consumers 1106028 1619642 1643.46 140648 174403 183.12 11238 13703 15.00 1257914 1807748 1841.58
(iii) UPCL Employees and Pensioners 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 7853 24500 52.28 7853 24500 52.28
(iv) UJVNL Employees and Pensioners 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 615 1653 2.58 615 1653 2.58
(v) PTCUL Employees and Pensioners 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 223 594 1.23 223 594 1.23
(vi) Single Point Bulk Supply 84 18672 37.21 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 84 18672 37.21
Total Domestic 1374846 1847159 1837 165902 194606 198 19929 40450 71 1560677 2082215 2,106 2 Non-domestic 167906 705163 970.12 13713 16730 23.76 0 0 0.00 181619 721893 993.87 3 PTW 23092 122887 191.88 2039 10296 17.50 1577 8513 30.37 26708 141696 239.75 4 LT Industry 8700 173683 282.67 570 3060 4.99 0 0 0.00 9270 176743 287.66 5 Public Lamps 464 9850 31.44 32 392 1.41 148 2091 11.21 644 12333 44.06 6 Govt. Irrigation System 1273 48463 101.50 67 1294 2.73 0 0 0.00 1340 49757 104.23 7 Public Water Works 1093 61183 286.82 53 1392 6.54 0 0 0.00 1146 62575 293.37 8 HT Industry 1771 1375494 4804.91 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 1771 1375494 4804.91 9 Mixed Load 71 58483 177.60 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 71 58483 177.60 10 Railway Traction 1 6800 11.49 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 1 6800 11.49 11 Other State Supply 6 985 1.88 0 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 6 985 1.88
Total 1579223 4410150 8697 182376 227770 255 21654 51054 113 1783253 4688974 9065
Note - Consumers shown at Sl. no.1 (iii), (iv) & (V) are metered but their consumption is not being recorded and, therefore, considered as unmetered consumers
a) Domestic Consumers:-
As discussed in the preceding section, the Commission had instituted a study to carry out
analysis of sales data pertaining to FY 2013-14 for four categories of consumers which also included
domestic category. The consultant while analysing the sales data observed various anomalies with
regard to billing of consumers and consumption patterns. Some of the consumers having abnormal
consumption pattern were observed and are shown in the Table below:
Table 3.2: Consumption Pattern for some of the Consumers of Domestic Category Sr. No. Division Meter No. Name of
Consumer Connected Load
(kW) Consumption
(Units) Month
1 Roorkee Urban 109307 Mukammil 2 19288 November 2013 2 Roorkee Rural 733798 Nitin 2 20860 March 2014
3 Rudrapur 323275 Rajeev K Agarwal 5 17085 March 2014
4 Sitarganj 138580 Balram Singh 1 16020 May 2013
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 77
Even if round the clock utilisation of all the electrical fittings and appliances is considered,
the maximum possible consumption for two months (as bi-monthly billing is there in case of
domestic consumers) works out to 1440 units for a consumer having a connected load of 1 kW, 2880
units for a consumer having a connected load of 2 kW and 7200 units for 5 kW connected load. The
consumption shown as recorded/assessed is several times of this maximum achievable
consumption. UPCL in its replies submitted that in certain cases, there was an error in arriving at
consumption. In case of consumer at S. No. 2 (Nitin), the multiplier factor has been used as 10
instead of 1. UPCL in its replies also submitted that in certain cases, the consumption booked is
after the adjustments for previous billing periods during which the consumption was booked on
assessment basis.
Further, during the study it was observed that on an average basis, for the entire FY 2013-14,
the number of consumers billed on the assessment basis was 27% in Roorkee Urban Division, 44%
in Roorkee Rural Division, 29% in Rudrapur Division and 30% in Sitarganj division. The percentage
of consumers being billed on assessment basis is alarming and is also one of the reasons for booking
higher consumption for some of the consumers.
Based on the detailed analysis of the breakup of sales data submitted for FY 2013-14, it is
observed that for domestic consumers, the sales/kW of connected load for unmetered consumers
and consumers whose consumption was recorded on assessment basis was substantially higher
than the sales/kW of connected load for consumers whose consumption was recorded on the basis
of actual meter reading. The distribution licensee has not substantiated the basis of recording
assessed sales and unmetered sales. It has also been observed that there are large number of
defective meters as in previous years and substantial number of these meters have not been
replaced for years. The consumption of the unmetered consumers and consumers whose
consumption was recorded on the basis of assessment is substantially higher than the consumers
whose consumption was recorded on the basis of actual meter reading. The Commission in its
previous Tariff Orders have been recasting the unmetered sales and assessed sales based on the
load factor (sales/kW) of metered consumers.
For carrying out the Truing Up of sales for FY 2013-14 the Commission considering the
abnormalities observed while carrying out the sales analysis for FY 2013-14 has continued with the
approach adopted by it in the previous Orders and has recasted the sales for FY 2013-14 of
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
78 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
unmetered consumers and consumers billed on assessment basis. For recasting sales for domestic
category, the Commission has considered the sales per kW per month of metered consumers as the
basis for deriving the sales of unmetered consumers and consumers billed on assessment basis.
The Commission has also recasted sales of departmental employees equivalent to average
consumption per kW of metered domestic consumers in view of the fact that the Petitioner itself has
admitted that although the Departmental employees have been metered, however, the consumption
of Departmental employees is not recorded and hence, the same is considered as unmetered sales.
Further, during the study on examination and analysis of sales for FY 2013-14, the
distribution divisions of UPCL in their responses submitted that due to errors in the CS-3 reports
for the domestic category there was an overestimation of sales by 21.45 MU, 0.25 MU, and 52 MU in
Roorkee Urban, Roorkee Rural and Rudrapur Division respectively. The total overestimation of
sales in CS-3 Reports, thus, works out to 73.70 MU which has been deducted while approving sales
for domestic category of UPCL.
Accordingly, based on the above, the total re-casted sales for Domestic Category for FY
2013-14 works out to 1997.90 MU against 2106 MU submitted by UPCL and the same is
summarised in the Table below:
Table 3.3: Re-casted sales for Domestic Category for FY 2013-14 (MU)
S. N
o
Sub-
Cat
egor
y Based on Actual Meter Reading Based on Assessment Un-metered Total Total
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Sale
s/kW
/M
onth
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Rec
aste
d Sa
les
(MU
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Rec
aste
d Sa
les
(MU
)
Re-
cast
ed
Sale
s (M
U)
(i) BPL and Kutir Jyoti 268734 208845 155.95 62.23 25254 20203 15.35 15.09 0 0 0.00 171.04
(ii) Other Domestic Consumers 1106028 1619642 1643.46 84.56 140648 174403 183.12 176.97 11238 13703 15.00 13.90 1834.33
(iii) UPCL Employees and Pensioners 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 7853 24500 52.28 24.86 24.86
(iv) UJVNL Employees and Pensioners 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 615 1653 2.58 1.68 1.68
(v) PTCUL Employees and Pensioners 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 223 594 1.23 0.60 0.60
(vi) Single Point Bulk Supply 84 18672 37.21 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 37.21
Total Domestic 1374846 1847159 1837 0 165902 194606 198 192 19929 40450 71 41 2069.72 Less: Reduction of overestimation of Sales in Roorkee and Rudrapur Divisions 73.70 Total Sales approved for FY 2013-14 under Domestic Category 1997.90
b) PTW Consumers
As regards the PTW category, the consultant carried out a comprehensive study of the actual
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 79
sales data for Roorkee and Rudrapur divisions based on the commercial diary for FY 2013-14. The
Commission observed that Rudrapur and Sitarganj divisions were showing an abnormally high
consumption pattern compared to the average consumption as per their commercial diary & the
same as is shown in the Table below:
Table 3.4: Consumption Pattern of PTW for FY 2013-14 as per Commercial Diary
Division No. of Consumers Connected Load (kW)
Consumption (MU)
Consumption kWh/kW/month
Rudrapur 4267 21525 47.08 182.27 Sitarganj 3016 15804 44.88 236.64
The consultants during the study on examination and analysis of sales for FY 2013-14 further
sought clarifications and billing data from respective divisions for sample consumers. On
scrutinizing the billing data it was observed that consumption of some of the consumers was
abnormally high which is as shown in the Table below. Further, no appropriate response was
received from UPCL on the same.
Table 3.5: Consumption Pattern for some of the Consumers of PTW Category
Sr. No. Division Connection
No. Name of
Consumer Connected Load (BHP)
Consumption (Units) Month
Load Factor Computed assuming
consumption is for 6 months
1 Roorkee Urban 312505 Sulochand
Saini 08 19288 November 2013 75%
2 Roorkee Urban 381417 Babagarib
Shaha 10 17005 January 2014 53%
3 Roorkee Urban 391843 Kaliram 08 17360 December
2013 67%
4 Roorkee Urban 010041 Atma Ram 05 26108 February
2013 162%
Assuming that the consumption as provided for these consumers is for 6 months, due to 6
months billing cycle of PTW consumers, the load factor works out to be in the range of 53% to 75%
for first 3 consumers which is substantially higher than the average load factor of around 19% of the
PTW consumers for entire UPCL. Further, in case of consumer at S. No. 4 in the above Table, the
load factor works out to more than 162% which is practically not possible.
While carrying out the sales study it was also observed that there were huge discrepancies in
the sales data submitted in the CS-3 statements and consumer ledgers especially in case of
Rudrapur and Sitarganj divisions. Sales as submitted in CS-3 for Sitarganj division was 44.88 MU
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
80 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
for FY 2013-14 as against which the consumer ledgers showed only 22.18 MU. Further, with regard
to Rudrapur Division it was observed that the sales as submitted in CS-3 was 47.08 MU for FY 2013-
14 as against which the consumption booked in consumer ledgers was 11.65 MU.
The divisions were asked to reconcile the differences as discussed above, however, no
satisfactory response was received for such variations in sales recorded.
Having said that and given the situation, that the exact quantum of metered and unmetered
consumption is not available, the Commission for the purpose of this true up decides to recast the
PTW consumption based on the average consumption/connected load recorded in the Commercial
Diary by excluding the divisions with abnormal consumption pattern, i.e. Rudrapur and Sitarganj
for which no explanation has been provided by the Petitioner.
Table 3.6: Average Consumption of PTW for FY 2013-14 considered by the Commission (MU)
Division No. of Consumers
Connected Load (kW)
Consumption (MU)
Consumption kWh/kW/month
Total as per Commercial Diary 26708 141696 239.75 141 Excluding Rudrapur, Sitarganj 19425 104367 147.79 118
Thus, the Commission approves the recasted sales of 200.65 MU for FY 2013-14 for PTW
category as against the sales claimed by the Petitioner of 239.75 MU. The licensee may note carefully
that if appropriate corrective actions to improve validity and legitimacy of sale data of these
consumes are not taken, the Commission in future may recognise sale to these consumers at
normative basis to be fixed based on study.
c) Public Lamps
While carrying out the sales study it was observed that the Petitioner, in its reply did not
submit the actual number of hours Public Lamps have been considered to operate for estimating
sales of public lamps. The Consultant based on the CS-3 submitted by the Petitioner observed
anomalies in case of consumption of Public Lamps in Roorkee Rural division and Sitarganj division.
It was observed that average hours of operations for public lamps in Roorkee Rural was 20
hours/day and in case of Sitarganj it was just 3.74 hours/day.
Further, from the detailed analysis of the breakup of sales data submitted by the Petitioner,
it was observed that for public lamps, the sales/kW of connected load for consumers whose
consumption was recorded on assessment basis and unmetered basis was higher than the sales/kW
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 81
of connected load for consumers whose consumption was recorded on the basis of actual meter
reading. The distribution licensee did not substantiate the basis of recording assessed and
unmetered sales. It was also observed during the study on examination and analysis of sales for FY
2013-14 that for public lamps which were metered, the bills were issued on assessment basis.
From the data submitted by the Petitioner it was observed that around 23% of consumers in
this category were unmetered and about 5% of metered consumers have been billed on assessment
basis in FY 2013-14. The Commission has carried out similar treatment for the consumers who have
been billed on assessment or unmetered basis as has been done in case of domestic consumers.
Accordingly, the Commission has reduced unmetered consumption and consumption billed on
assessment basis and has approved recasted sales of 39.37 MU as against 44.06 MU claimed by the
Petitioner and the same is as shown in the Table below.
Table 3.7: Re-casted sales for Public Lamps for FY 2013-14 (MU)
S. N
o
Con
sum
er
Cat
egor
y
Based on Actual Meter Reading Based on Assessment Un-metered Total Total
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Sale
s/kW
/M
onth
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Rec
aste
d Sa
les
(MU
Num
ber o
f C
onsu
mer
s
Con
nect
ed
Load
(KW
)
Sale
s (M
U)
Rec
aste
d Sa
les
(MU
)
Re-
cast
ed
Sale
s (M
U)
1 Public Lamps 464 9850 31.44 266 32 392 1.41 1.25 148 2091 11.21 6.68 39.37
d) Public Water Works
The Commission based on the study on examination and analysis of sales for FY 2013-14 for
Roorkee and Rudrapur Circles observed that the consumption in terms of sales/kW in case of
Roorkee Urban and Rudrapur divisions was even more than 720 kWh/kW/month which is
practically impossible. Further, in case of Sitarganj division, the sales/kW/month was observed as
470 kWh/kW/month suggesting a load factor of 65% or a consumption of more than 15 hours per
day, which was again unreasonable.
The Commission, in order to validate such consumption analysed the amount of revenue
booked against such consumption and the average billing rate for all the divisions. The Commission
observed that the energy charges in case of following divisions worked out to be less than the
energy charges approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
82 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 3.8: Division-wise Sales recasting for PWW Consumers
Name of Divisions Sub-Category Energy Sold (MU)
Energy Charges (Rs. Crore)
EC (Rs./kWh)
Reassed Sales (MU)
EDC, Roorkee Jal Nigam 0.93 0.09 0.97 0.22 EDD (R), Haldwani Jal Nigam 0.33 0.13 4.03 0.32 EDD, Almora Jal Nigam 0.11 0.04 3.83 0.10 EDD, Tehri Jal Sansthan 22.48 8.90 3.96 21.70 EDD, Ramnagar Jal Sansthan 6.06 2.28 3.76 5.56 EDD (R), Haldwani Jal Sansthan 6.90 2.76 4.00 6.74 EDD, Bajpur Jal Sansthan 1.71 0.65 3.82 1.59 EDD, Almora Jal Sansthan 12.94 5.27 4.07 12.84 EDD, Rudrapur Jal Sansthan 2.77 0.67 3.01 2.21 EDD, Pithoragarh Jal Sansthan 14.65 6.00 4.09 14.62 EDD, Champawat Jal Sansthan 1.74 0.71 4.06 1.73 EDD, Rishikesh Other Water Works 0.43 0.15 3.56 0.37 Total 71.03 68.01
The Commission has recasted the sales of PWW consumers for above divisions considering
energy charge rate of Rs. 4.10/kWh. The Commission has derived sales for PWW consumers which
works out to be 290.35 MU as against 293.37 MU claimed by the Petitioner.
The Consultant during the study on examination and analysis of sales of Roorkee Urban
Division for FY 2013-14 observed abnormally high consumption under the sub category “Other
Local Bodies” in PWW consumers and directed UPCL to submit the bills of all consumers under the
said sub-category. The Petitioner in its reply submitted that in the month of April 2013, the
consumption under the sub-category was wrongly booked as 9.528 MU as against the consumption
of 0.67 MU which led to an over estimation of 8.86 MU in the CS-3 statements. UPCL having
accepted the error in its CS-3 sales statement and since, this is the basis on which, UPCL has
submitted its actual sales for FY 2013-14, the Commission has appropriately deducted the same
from the above recasted sales and has accordingly, approved total sales of 281.49 MU for FY 2013-
14.
e) HT Industries
The Petitioner submitted the LT and HT sales of 287.66 MU and 4804.91 MU respectively for
FY 2013-14. The Commission in this regard asked UPCL whether the sales made to HT Industrial
category has been adjusted for power consumed by HT Industrial consumers through open access.
The Petitioner in its reply submitted that the energy availed through open access energy by HT
Industrial consumers has been adjusted from the consumption units recorded in respect of HT
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 83
Industries. The Petitioner, further, submitted month wise details of energy availed by the open
access consumers totalling 258.13 MU for FY 2013-14 as published by SLDC on PTCUL website. As
the Petitioner has correctly submitted the sales for this category by excluding the energy consumed
by HT Industries through open access, the Commission has approved the sales for HT Industries as
submitted by the Petitioner.
Based on the above analysis, the total sales for FY 2013-14 as re-worked by the Commission
for FY 2013-14 is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.9: Category-wise Sales for FY 2013-14 (MU)
Categories MYT Order dated 06.05.2013
Claimed in the Petition
Approved after Truing Up
Domestic (RTS - 1) 1878 2108 1998 Non-domestic, incl Commercial (RTS - 2) 1068 994 994 Public Lamps (RTS - 3) 81 44 39 Private Tubewell/Pump Sets (RTS - 4) 198 240 201 Government Irrigation System (RTS - 5) 164 104 104 Public Water Works (RTS - 6) 396 293 281 Industrial Consumers (RTS - 7) 5290 5093 5093 Mixed Load (RTS - 8) 197 178 178 Railway Traction (RTS - 9) 10 11 11 Total 9283 9065 8899
3.2.2 Distribution Losses
In the present Petition, the Petitioner has submitted its distribution losses for FY 2013-14 at
19.34%. However, as per the actual data submitted by the Petitioner and the sales approved by the
Commission, the actual distribution losses for FY 2013-14 works out to 20.66%. The Commission for
the FY 2013-14 had approved distribution losses of 16%.
The Commission, in accordance with the approach adopted in its previous Orders, has
considered actual power purchased by the Petitioner as 11216.31 MU at distribution periphery
(T&D interface) for FY 2013-14 and applying the approved loss level of 16.00% for the year, the
Commission has estimated the sales of 9365.62 MU for FY 2013-14. As against this sale of 9365.62
MU, the actual sales recasted by the Commission for FY 2013-14 is 8899.17 MU. Therefore, there is a
loss of sales to the tune of 466.45 MU on account of commercial inefficiencies of the Petitioner
resulting from its failure to achieve target distribution losses approved by the Commission. The
Commission has considered additional revenue of Rs. 196.93 Crore worked out at an actual average
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
84 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
billing rate of Rs. 4.22/kWh for the sales lost for FY 2013-14. The following Table shows actual
distribution loss and approved distribution loss along with efficiency loss for FY 2013-14 as
explained above.
Table 3.10: Assessed Distribution losses for FY 2013-14 (MU)
Particulars MYT order dated 6.05.2013
Revised Claim
Approved after Truing
Up Actual/ Recasted Sales (MU) 9,283.28 9046.89 8899.17 Distribution Loss Level (%) 17.00% 19.34% 20.66% Actual Distribution Loss (MU) 1,901.39 2169.42 2,317.14 Actual Energy Input at T-D Interface / Power Purchase Requirement (MU) 11,184.67 11216.31 11216.31
Commercial Loss Reduction (%) 1.00% - 1.00% (Loss)/Gain of sales due to inefficiency/efficiency (MU) (Normative Sales-Actual Re-casted Sales)
111.85 - 466.45
Approved Distribution Loss (%) 16.00% - 16.00% Total Normative Sales (MU) 9395.12 9046.89 9365.62 PTCUL Losses (%) 1.84% 1.81% 1.81% Energy Input at State Periphery 11,394.33 11423.07 11423.07
Further, as Distribution Loss is a controllable parameter, the Commission has carried out the
sharing of impact of excess distribution loss in accordance with the provisions of UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011.
3.2.3 Power Purchase Expenses (Including Transmission Charges)
The Petitioner has submitted the actual Power Purchase cost for FY 2013-14 as Rs. 3182.27
Crore. This amount includes inter-State, intra-State transmission charges and short term open access
charges of Rs. 396.66 Crore. The net Power Purchase cost excluding transmission charges for FY
2013-14 works out to Rs. 2785.61 Crore as against the power purchase expenses of Rs. 2841.71 Crore
approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. While working out this power
purchase cost, the Petitioner has submitted that it has considered the cost of free power at the
average power purchase rate in line with the methodology adopted by the Commission.
The Commission has analysed the source-wise actual power purchase from the monthly
data obtained from the Petitioner and audited accounts for FY 2013-14. Further, the Commission has
considered rate for free power equivalent to the average power purchase rate from all major hydro
generating stations except free power in accordance with the methodology laid down by the
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 85
Commission. Based on the above approach the rate of free power works out to Rs. 1.63/kWh. The
Commission, accordingly, approves the total power purchase cost including transmission charges
for FY 2013-14 as Rs. 3182.27 Crore as claimed by the Petitioner and is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.11: Power Purchase Expenses for FY 2013-14
Generating Stations
UPCL Claimed Approved after Truing Up
Quantum (MU)
Cost (Rs. Crore)
Cost per Unit
(Rs./kWh)
Quantum (MU)
Cost (Rs. Crore)
Cost per Unit
(Rs./kWh) NTPC 2757.73 858.07 3.11 2757.73 858.07 3.11 NPCL 297.64 95.39 3.20 297.64 95.39 3.20 NHPC (Excluding Tanakpur & Dhauliganga) 450.49 204.82 4.55 450.49 204.82 4.55
UJVN Ltd. 3866.37 433.24 1.12 3866.37 433.24 1.12 SJVNL 68.13 19.29 2.83 68.13 19.29 2.83 THDC (Excluding Free Power) 202.39 90.05 4.45 202.39 90.05 4.45 IPPS 346.93 117.39 3.38 346.93 117.39 3.38 Open Market Purchase 2271.54 772.10 3.40 2271.54 772.10 3.40 UI Overdrawal 313.71 75.68 2.41 313.71 75.68 2.41 Banking 67.97 0.00 0.00 67.97 0.00 0.00 Sub Total 10642.89 2666.04 2.50 10642.89 2666.04 2.50 Free Power Tanakpur 36.40 5.93 1.63 36.40 5.93 1.63 Dhauliganga 32.19 5.25 1.63 32.19 5.25 1.63 Tehri 465.68 75.87 1.63 465.68 75.87 1.63 Koteshwar 173.52 28.27 1.63 173.52 28.27 1.63 Vishnu Prayag 46.73 7.61 1.63 46.73 7.61 1.63 Sub Total 754.54 122.93 1.63 754.54 122.93 1.63 Transmission & Other Cost 396.66 396.66 Less: UI Underdrawal 43.41 3.36 0.77 43.41 3.36 0.77 Banking 88.99 0.00 0.00 88.99 0.00 0.00 Total 11265.02 3182.27 2.82 11265.02 3182.27 2.82
The Commission further observed that the Petitioner in its audited accounts for FY 2013-14
has written back prior period power purchase liabilities amounting to Rs. 261.45 Crore and has also
booked prior period expenses of Rs. 17.33 Crore. The Commission asked the Petitioner to submit the
information regarding details of Prior Period Income in the Annual Accounts for carrying out the
true up for the respective year alongwith the reasons which resulted in excess booking for each
financial year separately. The Petitioner in its reply submitted the bifurcation of such expenses,
however, the Petitioner did not submit the year wise excess provisioning done and sought more
time to submit the same. To take correct and proper view on adjustments to be made to power
purchase costs already allowed in earlier year, the complete year wise details of liabilities written
back is essentially required. It is also observed that unpaid liability towards power purchase is
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
86 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
shown as Rs. 1097 Crore in the annual accounts of UPCL which relates to the power purchase dues
of CGS, UJVN Ltd., etc. This unpaid liability has come down as compared to that in preceding year
by the amount which has been written off. It would, therefore, also be necessary to verify the
bonafide of this liability. As the basic information could not be made available by the Petitioner, the
Commission at present is not taking final view in the matter. The Commission directs the
Petitioner to submit the year wise details of the excess liabilities written off under the head of
power purchase as also the complete details and documentary evidence of unpaid liabilities
mentioned in the accounts of FY 2013-14 to the Commission in the format already sent to it
within one month from the date of issue of this Order. The Commission will take appropriate
view in the matter in the Tariff Order for FY 2016-17.
3.2.4 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Expenses
The Petitioner has claimed O&M expenses (including employee cost, R&M expenses and
A&G expenses) for FY 2013-14 as Rs. 354.25 Crore based on its audited accounts against the amount
of Rs. 340.40 Crore approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. The sub-
component wise expenses have been discussed below;
3.2.4.1 Employee Expenses
The Petitioner, in its Petition, has submitted that the Commission while approving the
employee expenses for the Control Period had not considered employee expenses for FY 2012-13.
The Petitioner further submitted that since now the actual employee expenses for FY 2012-13 is
available the employee expenses for each year of the Control Period should be revised. The
Petitioner in its Petition has considered employee expenses for FY 2012-13 as the base year expenses
and projected the employee expenses for each year of the MYT Period based on the UERC tariff
Regulations, 2011.
The Petitioner further submitted that it had to bear the responsibility of paying enhanced
pension which is on account of pay revision in third time scale with effect from 01.01.1996 due to
which pension and family pension was revised for the employees who retired between 01.01.1996
and 20.07.2010. The Petitioner further submitted that the treasury department of Uttarakhand
refused to disburse pension on enhanced pay as they did not get contribution on this account. The
Petitioner further submitted that GoU vide GO No. 85 dated 07.07.2011 stated that the
pension/family pension is not allowed on presumptive pay. Further, on February 5, 2013,
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 87
Additional Secy (energy) vide letter no. 173 directed UPCL to release enhanced pension from their
own fund. The Petitioner submitted that in accordance with the directions of GoU, UPCL has
started paying enhanced pension to the employees who retired during 01.01.1996 to 20.07.2010.
The Petitioner submitted that the actual impact of enhanced pension for FY 2013-14 was Rs.
17.23 Crore. The Petitioner further submitted that since enhanced pension was not part of the base
employee expenses, i.e. employee expenses for FY 2012-13, this has been considered additionally in
FY 2013-14.
The Petitioner also submitted that in addition to the above cost, additional expenses
incurred on account of new allowances have been considered as part of employee expenses. The
Petitioner has submitted that it has increased the value of certain allowances such as Motor Cycle
Allowance, Conveyance Charges, Cycle Allowance, Washing Allowance, Distribution Profit
Incentive, Bi-Lingual Allowance etc. w.e.f. August 1, 2013. Further, it submitted that the additional
cost on account of such expenses was Rs. 0.63 Crore in FY 2013-14.
The Petitioner further revised the escalation rates as per prevailing CPI indices, however, the
Petitioner has considered Gn factor as considered by the Commission in its MYT Order.
The Petitioner, accordingly, submitted the revised employee expenses trajectory as shown in
the following Table:
Table 3.12: Revised Employee Expense Trajectory for MYT Control Period (Rs. Crore) Particulars FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Inflation Factor 9.76% 9.50% 9.50% Growth Factor 5.79% 5.80% 5.81% Gross Employee Expenses 257.98 299.55 347.03 402.08 Impact of enhanced pension 17.23 18.87 20.66 Impact of change in Allowances 0.63 0.94 0.94 Gross Employee Expenses 317.41 366.84 423.68
The Petitioner submitted that during FY 2013-14 it has incurred actual gross and net
employee expenses of Rs. 297.53 Crore and Rs. 259.06 Crore respectively and has proposed the
following sharing of gains and losses on account of O&M expenses.
Table 3.13: Proposed Sharing of Gains for Employee Expenses (Rs. Crore) Particulars MYT Order Actual Variation UPCL (80%) Beneficiary (20%)
Gross Employee Expenses - 297.53 - - - Less: Capitalisation - 38.47 - - - Net Employee Expenses 225.88 259.06 33.24 26.59 6.65
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
88 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission has gone through the submissions of the Petitioner, so far as considering
base year as FY 2012-13 is concerned, the Commission observes that Regulation 84(2) of UERC
Tariff Regulations, 2011 clearly stipulates the base year as FY 2011-12 and, therefore, considering FY
2012-13 as base year will be against the provisions of the Regulations.
The Commission has re-worked the Normative Employee Expenses for FY 2013-14 by
revising the escalation rates and growth factor. With regards to revised inflation factor, the
Commission has revised the CPI escalation rate from 8.75% as considered in the MYT Order to
10.40% based on the last three years average increase in CPI from FY 2009-10 to FY 2011-12. The
base year expenses of FY 2011-12 has then been escalated by 10.40% to determine the employee
expenses for FY 2012-13. Similarly the Commission has revised the escalation factor considered for
escalating FY 2012-13 expenses to 9.76% from the earlier value of 8.75% based on the average
increase in CPI during FY 2010-11 to FY 2012-13.
Regarding the growth factor, the Commission observed that the number of employees
retiring during the year have exceeded the number of new recruitments for FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-
14 as UPCL was unable to recruit the employees as submitted by UPCL in its MYT Petition and as
considered by the Commission in MYT Order. The Commission has, therefore, revised the Gn factor
to zero and has, accordingly, determined the employee expenses for FY 2013-14. However, the
Commission expresses its displeasure on the slow or negligible pace of recruitment. In FY 2013-14,
as per the submissions made by UPCL, only 2 employees were recruited on the post of Senior Law
Officers. However, 235 employees have retired during the year which suggests that number of
employees retired have outpaced the number of employees recruited. This in turn is not only
hampering the quality of supply to the consumers but is also adversely affecting the revenues of
UPCL as the core meter reading, billing and bill distribution function of UPCL has been outsourced.
UPCL is directed to expedite the recruitment process and also submit a quarterly status report to
the Commission detailing the steps taken by it in this regard and also the status of the
recruitments planned.
Further, UPCL has included certain additional expenses on account of enhanced pensions
and new/increased allowances. The Commission is of the view that since O&M expenses have been
allowed to it based on certain norms and moreover, these expenses are controllable in nature,
accordingly, UPCL should exercise proper prudence while incurring these expenses as a
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 89
commercial entity. Anything and everything cannot be allowed to be a pass through in tariff.
However, as a one-time exception, the Commission has allowed UPCL the recovery of the burden
of enhanced pension through tariffs since this is a statutory liability of UPCL and has already been
approved by the GoU, however, any further allowance or incentives or benefits granted to its
employees will have to be borne by UPCL from its own resources or through increased efficiency.
Further, the distribution profit incentive should be borne by UPCL from its profit and there is no
rationale for claiming incentive on distribution profit from the consumers. The Commission has,
therefore, not considered any increase in allowances while approving the employee expenses for FY
2013-14.
In the MYT order, the Commission had considered capitalisation of 16.49% of gross
employee expenses based on last five years average. The Commission in this regard is of the view
that since the actual capitalised figures are now available the capitalisation should be done in
proportion of actual employee expenses capitalised. The Commission has, accordingly, capitalised
employee expenses in the same proportion as that submitted by the Petitioner.
The Commission has, accordingly, approved employee expenses as shown in the Table
below:
Table 3.14: Approved Employee Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT Order dated 06.05.2013
Revised Claim
Normative Approved
Employee Cost 270.48 297.53 279.22 Less: Capitalisation -44.60 -38.47 -33.88 Net Employee Cost 225.88 259.06 245.35
3.2.4.2 Repair and Maintenance
The Petitioner in its Petition has submitted that the actual R&M expenses incurred for FY
2013-14 is Rs. 77.18 Crore as against Rs. 91.27 Crore approved in the MYT Order. The Petitioner has,
accordingly, requested for sharing of gains of Rs. 14.09 Crore on account of reduced expenses as per
UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011.
The Commission in its MYT Order had approved K Factor based on the average of actual
R&M expenses and Opening GFA for FY 2009-10 to FY 2011-12 which worked out to 4.98%. The
Commission as discussed in the Asset Capitalisation section has provisionally revised the
capitalisation of assets from FY 2007-08 to FY 2012-13. As the K factor is linked to GFA, the same has
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
90 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
undergone change and the K factor based on the average of FY 2009-10 to FY 2011-12 is revised to
2.84%. The same is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.15: Approved revised K Factor for MYT Control Period (Rs. Crore) Particulars FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 Average of 3 years
R&M Expenses 49.24 55.55 70.38 58.39 Opening GFA 1698.88 2019.76 2449.87 2056.17 K Factor 2.90% 2.75% 2.87% 2.84%
The Commission for approving R&M expenses in MYT Order for the Control Period had
escalated the expenses based on the available WPI. The Commission has revised the average
increase in WPI for projecting the base year’s expenses, i.e. FY 2011-12 expenses to FY 2012-13 from
7.77% to 7.42%. Similarly the Commission has revised the escalation rate for projecting expenses for
FY 2012-13 to FY 2013-14 from 7.77% to 8.62% based on the average increase in the WPI numbers for
preceding three years. Accordingly, the R&M expenses for FY 2013-14 has been re-determined
considering the revised GFA and K factor as above.
The Commission, accordingly, approves R&M expenses as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.16: Approved R&M Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT
Order dated 06.05.2013
Revised Claim
Normative Approved
R&M Expenses 91.27 77.18 101.13
3.2.4.3 Administrative and General Expenses
The Petitioner in its Petition has submitted that the actual gross and net A&G Expenses
incurred in FY 2013-14 is Rs. 24.97 Crore and Rs. 18.01 Crore respectively as against the net A&G
Expenses of Rs. 23.25 Crore approved in the MYT Order. The Petitioner has, accordingly, sought
sharing of gains on account of reduced expenditure of Rs. 5.24 Crore.
The Commission in its MYT Order had approved the A&G expenses based on the average
expenses for FY 2009-10 to FY 2011-12. The Commission for approving the A&G expenses for the
control period had escalated the average A&G expenses by increasing the WPI for last three years.
The Commission based on the available WPI has revised the average increase in WPI for projecting
the expenses for FY 2012-13 from 7.77% to 7.42%. Similarly the Commission has revised the
escalation rate for projecting expenses for FY 2013-14 from 7.77% to 8.62% based on the average
increase in the WPI numbers for preceding three years.
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 91
The Commission had further allowed additional A&G expenses for Rs. 3.48 Crore towards
the data centre cost and call centres. The Commission in its additional queries sought actual
expenses under these heads from the Petitioner. The Petitioner in response submitted that the actual
cost incurred towards the same was Rs. 0.56 Crore. The Commission has, therefore, allowed Rs. 0.56
Crore towards such expenses as against Rs. 3.48 Crore approved by the Commission in its MYT
Order.
With regards to capitalisation of A&G Expenses, the Commission has considered the
capitalisation amount of Rs. 6.96 Crore as submitted by the Petitioner. The Commission has,
accordingly, approved the A&G expenses as shown below.
Table 3.17: Approved A&G Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT
Order dated 06.05.2013
Revised Claim
Normative Approved
Gross Administrative and General Expenses 26.33 24.97 26.45
Provisions for Data Centre Cost and Call Centre 3.48 0.56
Less: Capitalisation -6.56 -6.96 -6.96 Net A&G Expenses 23.25 18.01 20.02
Accordingly, the Commission has allowed net O&M expenses as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.18: Approved O&M Expenses for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT Order dated 06.05.2013
Revised Claim
Normative Approved
Employee Expenses 225.88 259.06 245.35 Repair and Maintenance 91.27 77.18 101.13 Administrative and General Expenses 23.25 18.01 20.02
Total O&M Expenses 340.40 354.25 366.50
3.2.5 Cost of Assets & Financing
3.2.5.1 Capital Cost of Original Assets
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission in its previous Orders has not recognized the
value of GFA amounting to Rs. 441.92 Crore due to non-finalisation of transfer scheme. Though the
matter of finalization of transfer scheme is sub-judice in Hon’ble ATE, the Petitioner has considered
the Gross Fixed Assets including the transfer scheme.
The Commission observed that the issue of original value of fixed assets for the Petitioner
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
92 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
was examined in detail in Paras 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 of the Order dated April 25, 2005. For reasons
provided in the said Order, the original value of GFA as on November 09, 2001 was fixed at Rs. 508
Crore for the Petitioner, instead of the value of Rs. 1058.18 Crore assigned in the Provisional
Transfer Scheme. The Commission had already recorded the reasons for the same in its previous
Tariff Orders. Since, there is no change in the factual position and the matter is pending before the
Hon’ble ATE, the Commission decides to maintain Status-quo ante.
3.2.5.2 Capitalisation of Assets
Prior to Tariff Order for FY 2007-08 and FY 2008-09 dated March 18, 2008, the Commission
had been allowing capitalisations of HT/EHT works without specific need for clearance certificate
by the Electrical Inspector. However, in view of occurrences of electrical accidents and taking
cognizance of the provision of Indian Electricity Rules which compulsorily requires Electrical
Inspector’s Certificate before energization of HT/EHT works, the Commission from the Tariff
Order for FY 2007-08 and FY 2008-09 dated March 18, 2008 onwards, insisted for Electrical
Inspector’s Certificates for capitalisation of any assets and allowed capitalisation of only such
HT/EHT works for which Electrical Inspector’s clearance certificate was provided.
During the proceedings of the MYT Order, the Petitioner had submitted Electrical Inspector
Certificate for Capitalization of Rs. 142.13 Crore from FY 2007-08 onwards. The Commission in its
MYT Order had allowed capitalization of assets for which Electrical Inspector Certificate was
submitted from FY 2007-08 to FY 2011-12 and had, accordingly, updated the value of Opening GFA
for FY 2011-12. Further, in its MYT Order, the Commission had directed the Petitioner to submit the
Electrical Inspector Certificate for the balance assets along with reconciliation of capitalization
amount as per accounts. The Commission had further ruled in its MYT Order that it would consider
allowing the impact of capitalization from FY 2007-08 onwards only after the complete details of the
same are submitted by the Petitioner.
Further, in the APR Order for FY 2014-15 the Petitioner did not comply with the directions
of the Commission and provided the Electrical Inspector Certificate for only few HT works while
for most of the balance assets, the Electrical Inspector Certificate were still not submitted.
Accordingly, the Commission in its APR Oder for FY 2014-15 had approved additional
capitalization only for those HT works for which the Petitioner has submitted the Electrical
Inspector Certificate.
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 93
The Commission in the current proceedings directed the Petitioner to submit the Electrical
Inspector Certificate from FY 2007-08 for all the HT Works executed till date. However, the
Petitioner could only submit EI certificates for few of its HT works. The Petitioner also filed a
supplementary Petition in this regard wherein it stated that on the request of the Petitioner,
Government of Uttarakhand vide its letter no. 208/1/2015-04/08/201 dated 05.02.2015 authorized
the Managing Director of the Petitioner Company to nominate the officers in the pay scale of Rs.
15000 - 39100 (GP Rs. 6600) or above for inspection of works energized on or after 09.11.2001 under
Rule 5 of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956. The Petitioner further submitted that the two officers
were to be nominated from each zone of Nainital, Roorkee and Dehradun.
The Petitioner submitted that in compliance of the above order of the Government of
Uttarakhand, the Petitioner vide its O.M. No. 1510, dated 11.02.2015 nominated its Executive
Engineers to inspect the District – wise HT / EHT works / assets constructed on or after 09.11.2001.
The Petitioner submitted that the authorized officers have started the work of inspecting the
HT/EHT works energized on or after 09.11.2001 and for this purpose the total inspection fee of Rs.
1,62,11,097.00 has already been deposited in the office of Electrical Inspector, Government of
Uttarakhand. The Petitioner further submitted that the certification work in respect of HT/EHT
Assets amounting to Rs. 109.79 Crore has been completed and submitted in the office of the
Commission.
The Petitioner submitted that being the last quarter/month of the year, the officers of the
Petitioner are focusing mainly on Revenue Collection at present. Further, the Petitioner submitted
that the work of certification of HT/EHT Assets shall be focused in the first quarter of FY 2015-16
and, therefore, the Petitioner will be in a position to submit the certificate of Electrical Inspector in
respect of remaining HT/EHT Assets energized for the period from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 by
31.07.2015.
The Petitioner, accordingly, requested the Commission to consider the capitalization of the
Petitioner Company for the period from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 on the basis of Audited Annual
Accounts, while determining the ARR and Tariff for FY 2015-16. The Petitioner has further
provided an undertaking that the certificate of Electrical Inspector in respect of remaining HT/EHT
Assets energized for the period from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 shall be submitted in the office of the
Commission by 31.07.2015.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
94 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
In view of the above and taking cognisance of the efforts made by the Petitioner so far to get
the clearances of all the HT/EHT works and also of the fact that the Petitioner has deposited the
requisite fee & has also given an undertaking to submit EI certificates for all the HT works executed
till FY 2013-14 by July 31, 2015, the Commission has provisionally considered capitalisation of all
the assets as per the audited accounts till FY 2013-14. The capitalisation so allowed is provisional
and is subject to submission of EI certificates. Since the capitalisation of assets is being considered
on the provisional basis, the Commission has not carried out the truing up for FY 2007-08 to FY
2012-13 for capital related expenses and the same shall be carried out in the next tariff proceedings
after the Petitioner submits before the Commission all the clearance certificate of HT/EHT works
capitalised and also upon submission of additional information/details as directed in the Order.
However, the Commission in this regard, in its Order dated 10.04.2014 had held as under:
“The delay on this account clearly shows inefficiency of the Petitioner for which it should be penalized
and, accordingly, in view of the above facts the Commission directs the Petitioner to provide the
desired information at the earliest to carry out the truing up in this regard. As the delay in providing
information is on account of the Petitioner, no carrying cost will be allowed to the Petitioner on the
delayed approval of the capitalization in this regard.”
The Commission, therefore, once again reiterates its views in the matter that the delay in
obtaining clearance certificates from the Electrical Inspector and also the segregation of LT and
HT/EHT works was due to the inefficiency of UPCL, hence, no carrying cost will be admissible to
UPCL on account of truing up of the capital works.
The Commission has, thus, considered the opening GFA for FY 2007-08 based on the closing
GFA of FY 2006-07 approved by the Commission. Further, the assets addition for FY 2007-08 to FY
2013-14 have been allowed as per the Balance Sheet for the respective years on the basis of net asset
addition during the year, i.e. Gross Asset capitalised during the year reduced by the amount of
asset written off/adjusted during the year as provided by the Petitioner.
The details of capitalization as provisionally approved by the Commission for FY 2007-08 to
FY 2013-14 have been presented in the Table given below:
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 95
Table 3.19: GFA and Additional Capitalisation for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
LT Lines 46.85 33.64 83.21 178.80 109.94 18.23 99.22 LT Plants & Machinery 30.32 14.26 35.60 39.36 43.04 22.62 (0.44) HT Lines 182.50 67.82 163.48 175.43 164.51 120.71 59.00 HT Plants & Machinery 36.67 27.15 28.87 (5.14) 4.28 22.12 55.93 Other LT works 3.30 3.41 2.66 35.61 3.17 0.38 5.45 Other HT Works 13.05 12.14 7.06 6.06 12.24 46.44 (34.15) Total 312.69 158.42 320.88 430.11 337.17 230.50 185.01
The negative values appearing above are cases where deletion of assets was higher than the
assets addition during the year.
3.2.6 Financing of Capital Assets
Financing of an asset (i.e. debt, equity and grants components) is required to ascertain the
capital related expenses such as Interest, Depreciation and Return on Equity of a licensee. As
discussed above the GFA for the period FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 have been revised. The
Commission in its additional queries asked the Petitioner to submit the year wise financing details
of capitalisation for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14. The Petitioner in its response submitted the year wise
financing of the capitalisation from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14. The Commission has gone through
the submission of the Petitioner on financing of capitalisation and observed that the financing
submitted by the Petitioner is for the net capitalisation (i.e. total additions less total deletions) which
doesn’t reflect the actual debt and equity position. Further, the Commission in its APR Order for FY
2014-15 stated as follows:
“Till FY 2006-07, the Commission has been allowing UPCL capitalization based on the audited
details of additions and financing submitted by UPCL. The practise of writing off the assets sent for
repairs and capitalising it again after the repairs has been in existence since inception of UPCL. As a
consequence, the Commission had been considering the capitalization and the capital related expenses
on the same considering the entire capitalization as fresh capitalization which may have led to
capitalization of an existing asset more than once. This fact was also not pointed out in the Auditor’s
Report submitted by UPCL in this regard. Hence, there is a need to examine the entire exercise once
again. Accordingly, UPCL is directed to get this examined through an external agency,
preferably a CA firm and submit an audited report on the additions made by it since FY
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
96 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2001-02 and classify them into new additions and additions made after repairs of existing
assets and the financing of the new assets along with the tariff petition for FY 2015-16
failing which the Commission would consider not to allow any capitalization of any
repaired assets put to use thereafter. Similarly, UPCL is also required to submit the break
up of deduction in GFA into assets sent for repairs and assets written off since FY 2001-02.
UPCL is also directed to submit quarterly status in this regard.”
In the above context, it is pertinent to mention that since the old assets sent for repairs are
being written off and again capitalised in the books, therefore, the net capitalisation and deletions as
appearing in the books includes such old assets for which actual financing has not been provided by
the Petitioner. The Commission, therefore, cannot carry out the actual funding analysis of the
capitalisation done. Further, as observed in the APR Order for FY 2014-15, that such principle has
been in practice since the inception of the Petitioner Company. The Commission in the current
proceedings is provisionally considering the financing of the assets as submitted by UPCL.
In this regard, it will also be relevant to mention that UPCL in its statement of accounts for
FY 2011-12 has carried out an adjustment of grants to the tune of Rs. 1296.24 Crore in its GFA in line
with the AS-12 issued by ICAI. However, as per the submissions made by UPCL before the
Commission total assets financed out of grants till FY 2011-12 works out to Rs. 1243.02 Crore. UPCL
is directed to submit the year wise reconciliation of the financing of the assets, submitted to the
Commission within 6 months of the date of the Order.
The Commission also directs the Petitioner to analyse the capitalisation amount from FY
2001-02 onwards and segregate the same under the following heads:
1. Asset class wise actual capitalisation incurred on creation of new assets;
2. Asset class wise capitalisation on account of receipt of repaired assets,
3. Asset class wise actual asset deletion/written off;
4. Asset class wise asset deletion on account of an asset being sent for repairs.
Further, the Petitioner should also segregate the associated financing with regard to S.No
1 to 4, i.e. financing of the assets capitalised and financing of the assets written off. Further, the
Petitioner is required to submit the above information within six months from the date of issue
of this Order and the Petitioner should also submit quarterly status report in this regard. The
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 97
Commission, in absence of required information has, therefore, not carried out final truing up of FY
2013-14 and has not undertaken truing up for previous years. On receipt of such information the
Commission would undertake complete review of capitalisation from FY 2001-02 onwards in the
next tariff proceedings.
The following Table shows the revised means of finance as considered by the Commission
for assets allowed to be capitalised from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 which shall be subject to review
once all the details are submitted by the Petitioner.
Table 3.20: Means of Finance as considered for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
RGVVY Loan 13.24 9.99 6.05 19.94 - - 7.78 AREP Loans 0.02 - - - 16.84 - - State/District Plan 29.43 12.93 10.76 23.19 84.14 10.90 1.89 APDRP Loan - 1.82 0.68 4.17 - - - R-APDRP Part A Loan - - - - - - 2.97* REC Loan - - - - - 42.58 79.90 PMGY/MNP - - - 9.92 17.64 - - PTW Loan 4.63 - - - - - - Deposit Works 26.07 43.52 164.82 60.40 47.25 26.50 28.98 Grant 152.13 35.85 63.06 186.94 104.34 93.20 - Internal Resources 87.18 54.32 75.51 125.56 66.96 57.32 63.49 Total 312.69 158.42 320.88 430.11 337.17 230.50 185.01
* Considered as grant
3.2.7 Interest and Finance Charges
The Petitioner has claimed Interest and Finance Charges of Rs. 126.20 Crore for FY 2013-14
against the amount of Rs. 118.99 Crore approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May
06, 2013.
The Petitioner submitted that it has claimed interest expenses on the following basis:
a) Actual interest accrued during the year has been claimed which is net off
capitalisation.
b) Interest on UPPCL Loans has not been considered.
c) Interest on REC (Old) loans has been taken in accordance with the interest
determined by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
d) Government Guarantee fees is considered on actual basis.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
98 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
e) Interest on GPF has been considered. The Petitioner requested the Commission to
allow interest on GPF as part of interest expense as this is the statutory liability of the
Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted that the Government of Uttarakhand (GoU) has
in the past refused to provide support on account of Interest on GPF. The Petitioner
added that GoU is already bearing the terminal liability of the old employees unlike
other States. The Petitioner, further, requested the Commission that in case the
interest on GPF has to be borne by the State Government, the Commission should
issue suitable directions to GoU in this regard.
f) No Interest on short-term funding through overdraft facility has been considered.
It is observed that the Petitioner has again claimed interest on AREP Loans which has not
been allowed by the Commission in its previous Tariff Orders for reasons given in the respective
Orders. In this regard, the Petitioner submitted that since it is paying interest on AREP Loans, the
same should be allowed. However, the Petitioner chose to ignore the fact that the same was interest
free loan and interest was payable in case of default by the borrower and the costs associated with
any default cannot be allowed to be pass through in tariffs. Hence, the Commission again disallows
the interest claimed on AREP Loans. The Commission has also not considered interest on R-APDRP
Loans for reasons elaborated in Chapter-4 of this Order.
Regulation 28 of the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 stipulates the methodology for
computation of interest expenses. The Commission in accordance with the above regulation has
worked out the Interest and Finance Charges for FY 2013-14 considering the loan amounts
corresponding to assets capitalised in the year based on the approved means of finance, and the
interest rate of 10.81% has been computed on the basis of weighted average interest rate on the
actual loan portfolio at the beginning of each year. The interest approved for FY 2013-14 on Govt. of
Uttarakhand loans is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.21: Interest on Govt. of Uttarakhand Loans (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Opening Balance Repayment Closing
Balance Interest
Approved Total Opening Loan Balance 525.69 70.32 589.38 53.03
The Petitioner has again requested the Commission to allow interest on GPF as part of
interest expenses as the same is a statutory liability of the Petitioner. The Commission in the past
has not allowed such expenses for reasons given in the respective Orders. Hence, the Commission
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 99
again disallows the interest claimed on GPF.
The Petitioner has claimed interest liability on consumers’ security deposits for FY 2013-14
as Rs. 56.35 Crore. The Commission in its additional queries asked Petitioner to submit the opening
value of consumer security deposit, closing balance and average balance of consumer security
deposit (CSD) for FY 2013-14. The Petitioner in response to the query submitted the opening,
closing and average balance of CSD as Rs. 447.78 Crore, Rs. 505.41 Crore and Rs. 476.60 Crore
respectively. The Commission further observed that the data of interest on security deposit from FY
2008-09 to FY 2013-14 is not matching with that given in audited accounts as well as compliance to
the directives submitted in November 2014. The Commission, accordingly, sought the actual data of
interest on security deposit reconciled with audited accounts along with comparison of the same
with the Commission’s approved figures. In response to the above queries, the Petitioner through
its reply dated February 02, 2015 submitted the details as follows:
Table 3.22: Interest on CSD paid and accounted by Petitioner (Rs. Crore)
Year Interest
paid/ adjusted
Accounted for by field
units
Provision made by
Corporate Office
Total Interest
Interest as shown in the
Audited Accounts
Interest allowed by
UERC during truing up exercise
A B C D E (C+D) F G 2008-09 7.75 3.13 6.57 9.70 9.70 9.70 2009-10 9.72 4.10 8.74 12.84 12.84 12.84 2010-11 13.17 6.25 10.32 16.57 16.57 16.41 2011-12 17.19 8.07 12.29 20.36 20.36 20.36 2012-13 36.10 8.49 0.00 8.49 8.49 39.36 2013-14 40.38 94.27 -37.92 56.35 56.35 - Total 124.31 124.31 0.00 124.31 124.31 98.67
The Petitioner further submitted that the interest to be allowed in FY 2013-14 was Rs. 25.64
Crore, i.e. the difference between the interest actually paid till FY 2013-14 and interest allowed by
the Commission till FY 2012-13 while carrying out the truing up till FY 2012-13 (Rs. 124.3 Crore – Rs.
98.67 Crore).
The Commission has analysed the interest expenses approved by it in the previous tariff
Orders and those actually paid by the Petitioner. The Commission has, accordingly, allowed the
interest on CSD for FY 2013-14 which works out to Rs. 25.64 similar to the latest submission made
by the Petitioner. However, the Commission observed that the actual amount paid by the Petitioner
for FY 2008-09 to FY 2013-14 was lesser than the amount approved by the Commission. The
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
100 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Commission has, accordingly, computed carrying cost on the excess amount allowed by the
Commission and has deducted the same from the interest on consumer security deposit as
approved above. The carrying cost computed on the excess amount allowed in the truing up of
previous years expenses is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.23: Carrying Cost on excess CSD allowed by the Commission and that paid by Petitioner (Rs. Crore)
Particulars FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 Opening Gap 0.00 2.07 5.63 9.73 14.37 19.99 Additions 1.95 3.12 3.24 3.17 3.26 0.00 Closing gap 1.95 5.19 8.87 12.90 17.63 19.99 Average 0.98 3.63 7.25 11.31 16.00 19.99 Interest rate 0.12 0.12 11.75% 13.00% 14.75% 14.45% Carrying cost 0.12 0.44 0.85 1.47 2.36 2.89 Closing Gap 2.07 5.63 9.73 14.37 19.99 22.87 Carrying Cost upto FY 2013-14 8.13
The carrying cost of Rs. 8.13 Crore so worked out has been deducted from the interest on
security deposit of Rs. 25.64 Crore and the same works out to Rs. 17.51 Crore. The Commission,
accordingly, approves interest on consumer security deposit for FY 2013-14 as Rs. 17.51 Crore.
Further, the Guarantee Fee and interest on REC Old Loan has been allowed as claimed by
UPCL. Also, the Commission has not reduced the amount of interest capitalised as the Commission
has considered the loans corresponding to the assets capitalised and not the total loans as taken by
the Petitioner.
The Commission has worked out the Interest and Finance Charges for FY 2013-14
considering the loan amounts corresponding to assets capitalised in the year based on the approved
means of finance, as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.24: Interest and Finance Charges for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars MYT Order Revised Claim Approved after Truing Up
Govt. of Uttarakhand Loan 54.16 41.96 53.03 REC Old Loan 26.92 26.92 26.92 Interest on other loans - 34.06 - Total Interest on Loan 81.08 102.94 79.95 Guarantee Fee 2.35 0.56 0.56 Interest on Security Deposit 35.56 56.35 17.51 Other finance and bank charges - 1.20 1.20 Total Interest Charges 118.99 161.05 99.21 Capitalisation - (34.84) - Net Interest and Finance Charges 118.99 126.20 99.21
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 101
3.2.8 Depreciation
The Petitioner in its Petition has submitted that it has calculated depreciation considering
the opening and closing GFA for FY 2013-14 on the average basis. Further, the rate of depreciation
considered by it was as specified in UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011. The Petitioner has computed
depreciation at the rate of 5.16% for FY 2013-14. The Petitioner has, accordingly, claimed total
depreciation of Rs. 108.23 Crore as against Rs. 69.46 Crore approved by it in the MYT Order.
The depreciation claimed by the Petitioner for FY 2013-14 is detailed in the Table below:
Table 3.25: Depreciation for FY 2013-14 submitted by the Petitioner (Rs. Crore) Particulars Actual as per Accounts
Opening GFA minus Grant (Adjustment on account of AS-12) 2031.76 Additions as per Accounts 239.97 Deduction (110.31) Closing GFA 2161.43 Average Depreciation Rate 5.16% Depreciation 108.23
The Table below details the variation in the depreciation approved for FY 2013-14 in MYT
Order against the depreciation claimed by the Petitioner for FY 2013-14:
Table 3.26: Variation in Depreciation for FY 2013-14 submitted by the Petitioner (Rs. Crore)
Particulars MYT Order dated 06.05.2013 Revised Claim Variation Depreciation 69.46 108.23 38.77
The Commission with regard to depreciation rate is of the view that the Petitioner has failed
to submit the asset class wise GFA and, therefore, considering the rate as specified in UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011 is not practical. In absence of the same, the Commission has allowed depreciation
at a weighted average rate of 4.57% based on the audited balance sheet for FY 2013-14.
Further, the Commission has been allowing depreciation on the value of opening GFA
keeping in line with the practice being followed by the Petitioner of capitalising the asset in its
accounts on the last day of the financial year.
The Tariff Regulations of the Commission provides for depreciation on pro-rata basis,
however, the Petitioner has neither been able to provide exact dates of capitalisation of fixed assets,
nor has provided any capitalisation and depreciation policy despite being asked to do so by the
Commission. In fact the Petitioner in its accounts also calculates depreciation on the opening GFA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
102 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
as is evident from its Notes to Accounts. Therefore, the Commission finds no justification to depart
from the practice adopted in previous Tariff Orders of allowing depreciation on the opening
balance of GFA.
The Commission in its additional information asked the Petitioner to confirm that it has not
claimed depreciation in excess of 90% for its assets. The Petitioner in its reply confirmed that
depreciation in FY 2013-14 has been less than 90% of GFA for all assets in accordance with the
UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011.
The Commission has, accordingly, approved the depreciation of Rs. 75.63 Crore for FY 2013-
14 based on the Opening GFA for FY 2013-14 against the Petitioner’s claim of Rs. 108.23 Crore.
The summary of Depreciation approved in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013, depreciation
claimed by the Petitioner and depreciation approved by the Commission in this Order for FY 2013-
14 is shown in the following Table:
Table 3.27: Depreciation for FY 2013-14 approved by the Commission (Rs. Crore) Particulars MYT Order Revised Claim Approved after Truing Up
Depreciation 69.46 108.23 75.63
3.2.9 Provision for Bad & Doubtful Debts
The Petitioner in its Petition has submitted that the Commission in the MYT Order dated
May 06, 2013 did not allow any provisioning of bad debts for earlier years.
The Petitioner submitted that annual provision towards bad & doubtful debts is an accepted
method of accounting and considering the peculiarity of retail supply of electricity business, the
same has also been recognized by the SERCs. The Petitioner added that the amount, if any, written
off towards bad debts is only adjusted against the accumulated provisions in the books, irrespective
of the actual amount of bad debts during any particular financial year.
The Petitioner requested the Commission to allow provision for bad and doubtful debts on
actual basis after considering the geographical spread of the large consumer base across the State
including a large part of the same prevailing in the difficult terrain and hilly region and the problem
of realizing energy dues from retail consumers.
The Petitioner further submitted that in line with the approach followed by Commission in
the previous Tariff Order, the Petitioner has not included any amount on account of provisioning of
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 103
bad debts in the ARR but has calculated the same and has requested the Commission for its
approval.
The Petitioner further submitted that as per the directions of the Commission, the process of
writing off bad debts has already been initiated. The Petitioner in its Petition has requested the
Commission to consider the increase in debtors, which is Rs. 59.11 Crore during FY 2013-14 towards
the provision for bad debts.
It is to be noted that the Commission in its Tariff Order for FY 2011-12 had observed as
follows:
“…Hence, for FY 2011-12 as mentioned in its last Tariff Order dated 10.04.2010, the Commission
has not allowed any Provision for Bad Debts in the ARR as UPCL has not complied with the
direction of the Commission to frame guidelines and procedures for identifying, physically verifying
and writing off the bad debts. The Commission would take a view on this issue in future years when
UPCL submits to the satisfaction of the Commission, its sincere and concerted efforts to realize the
pending dues.”
Further in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 the Commission had observed as follows:
“…it has been observed that the Petitioner has failed to take any serious effort to the satisfaction of the
Commission to arrest the increasing level of bad debts which have reached alarming levels by any
standard for any commercial organisation. The Commission in its Order for FY 2011-12 had directed
the Petitioner to carry out an audit of its receivables and also identifying and classifying the same and
submit the report to the Commission within 6 months of the issuance of the Order. Subsequently,
UPCL was also required to initiate recovery of its dues from the erring consumers.”
The Commission in its APR Order stated as follows:
“The Petitioner is also directed to submit an Action Plan as to how it intends to move
forward upon receipt of the Audit Report within one month of the date of this Order along with
the Audit Report.”
The Petitioner in its current Petition has submitted that the division wise summary of the
Audit Report has been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter dated 22-11-2014. The
Petitioner has further submitted that with a view to writing off fictitious and irrecoverable arrears,
the Petitioner has prepared a policy for writing off of Bad Debts. The Petitioner submitted that the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
104 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
said policy is under finalization and on finalization of the same exercise for writing off of fictitious
and irrecoverable arrears shall be taken up.
Moreover, the MYT Regulations, 2011 specifies as under:
“The Commission may allow a provision for bad and doubtful debts upto one percent (1%) of the
estimated annual revenue of the distribution licensee, subject to actual writing off of bad debts by it in
the previous years.
Provided that where the amount of such provisioning for bad and doubtful debts exceeds five
(5) per cent of the receivables at the beginning of the year, no such appropriation shall be
allowed which would have the effect of increasing the provisioning beyond the said
maximum.”
The Commission had already allowed the Petitioner a total provision of Rs. 333.74 Crore till
FY 2008-09 including the opening balance of the provision inherited from UPPCL. Even considering
the actual write off debt of Rs. 10.96 Crore in FY 2011-12 and Rs. 44.04 Crore during FY 2012-13, the
Petitioner was left with a provision of Rs. 278.74 Crore. The closing debtors of UPCL as on
31.03.2014 were to the tune of Rs. 2,110.00 Crore. Hence, the provision available with UPCL is to the
extent of 13.20% of the existing debtors and any additional provision is not allowable in accordance
with the Regulations as referred above.
The Commission, accordingly, directs the Petitioner to finalise the policy and submit the
same for Commission’s perusal within three months from the date of this Order.
3.2.10 Interest on Working Capital (IoWC)
The Petitioner has submitted that it has computed interest on working capital as per UERC
Tariff Regulations, 2011. However, as per the computation submitted by the Petitioner the net
working capital is submitted as Rs. -33.19 Crore. The Petitioner has submitted that it has not
claimed any IoWC.
. The computation of interest on working capital as submitted by the Petitioner is detailed in
the Table below:
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 105
Table 3.28: Interest on working capital for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars Amount
Operation and Maintenance Expenses (one month) 29.52 Maintenance @ 15% of O&M Expenses 53.14 Receivables (2 months) 625.94 Sub-total 708.60 Less: Adjustment for security deposits & Credit available for Power Purchase 741.79 Net working capital -33.19 Interest on working capital 0.00
The Petitioner submitted the variation in Interest on working capital as claimed by it and
that approved by the Commission & the same is shown in the Table below:
Table 3.29: Variation in Interest on Working Capital for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT Order dated 6.05.2013 Revised Claim Variation
Interest on Working Capital 7.26 0.00 -7.26
The Commission has computed the working capital requirement as per UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011. As in case of Petitioner’s submission, the net working capital as worked out
based on the approved expenses is negative, therefore, the Commission is not approving any IoWC
for FY 2013-14. As the working capital requirement itself is also coming negative considering the
approved expenses, the Commission has not carried out any sharing of gains and losses on account
of working capital requirement.
3.2.11 Return on Equity
The Petitioner submitted that it has computed Return on Equity (RoE) for FY 2013-14 based
on actual equity invested in the business. The Petitioner further submitted that it has calculated RoE
on the basis of the following:
a) Closing Equity for FY 2012-13 has been considered as Opening Equity for FY 2013-14
b) Capitalisation for FY 2013-14 with its funding pattern has been considered.
The Petitioner further submitted that the amount of capitalisation has been reduced by grant
and deposit works and the balance amount has been split in 70:30 debt equity ratio. The Petitioner
further submitted that Internal accrual deployed in the capitalisation higher than 30% equity has
been considered as normative loan.
The Petitioner has calculated the RoE for FY 2013-14 on the basis of average equity for FY
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
106 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2013-14. The Petitioner has calculated RoE on average basis at normative rate of return of 16%. The
RoE claimed by the Petitioner is Rs. 182.23 Crore. The detailed working for the same as submitted
by the Petitioner is provided in the Table below:
Table 3.30: Return on Equity claimed for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars Amount
Opening equity 1107.04 Addition 63.83 Closing equity 1170.87 Average equity 1138.95 RoE (@16%) 182.23
The Petitioner has submitted the variation in Return on Equity approved by the Commission
in the MYT Order against the Return on Equity now claimed for FY 2013-14 as shown in the Table
below:
Table 3.31: Variation in Return on Equity FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars Approved in MYT Order
dated 06.05.2013 Revised Claim Variation
Return on Equity 25.48 182.23 -156.75
As discussed in the preceding section, the Commission has provisionally approved the
capitalisation as per the audited accounts for FY 2013-14. The Commission has, accordingly, revised
the equity component from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 which is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.32: Equity approved by the Commission (Rs. Crore) Equity 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
Opening 68.17 94.32 110.61 133.27 170.94 191.03 208.22 During the year 26.15 16.30 22.65 37.67 20.09 17.20 19.05 Closing 94.32 110.61 133.27 170.94 191.03 208.22 227.27
Thus, the Return on Equity approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14 is shown in the
following Table:
Table 3.33: Return on Equity approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars MYT Order dated 6.05.2013 Revised Claim Approved after
Truing Up Return on Equity 25.48 182.23 33.32
3.2.12 Non-Tariff Income
The Petitioner submitted that the Non-Tariff Income includes income from non-tariff sources
such as income from investments, delayed payment surcharge, etc. The Petitioner in its Petition has
claimed non-tariff income as Rs. 129.09 Crore on the actual basis as per provisionally audited
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 107
accounts, including delayed payment surcharge of Rs. 18.11 Crore. However, the Petitioner has
proposed to share only Rs. 86.51 Crore with the consumers.
The Petitioner has requested the Commission to not include the revenue from delayed
payment surcharge while approving non-tariff income as the Utility has to make short term
arrangements against that amount when the amount due from the consumers is not received in
time. The Petitioner submitted that the Commission allows normative working capital to the
Petitioner, assuming timely payment by all the consumers.
The Petitioner had further proposed to share only 50% of the rebate earned on account of
timely payment of the power purchase bills. The Petitioner submitted that it earns 2% rebate by
paying bill within 2-3 days of production of bill while if it pays on 30th day, it is entitled for 1%
rebate. The Petitioner submitted that it has earned higher rebate (more than 1%) due to its efficiency
and, has, therefore, requested the Commission to allow it to retain the same.
The Commission in this regard is of the view that as the matter is sub-judice before the
Hon’ble ATE, the Commission in line with its previous approach has considered the rebate earned
and delayed payment surcharge as part of Non Tariff Income while carrying out the truing up for
FY 2013-14.
The Commission as discussed above has considered entire NTI of Rs. 111.03 as per the
audited accounts along with delayed payment surcharge of Rs. 40.75 Crore for FY 2013-14 and.
Accordingly. approves the following NTI for FY 2013-14.
Table 3.34: Non Tariff Income approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars MYT Order dated 6.05.2013 Revised Claim Approved after Truing Up
Non–Tariff Income 66.70 86.51 151.78
3.2.13 Tariff Revenue
The Petitioner submitted the revenue at existing tariff as Rs. 3755.67 Crore as against the
revenue of Rs. 3942.94 Crore approved by the Commission in its MYT Order.
The Petitioner submitted that as per UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011, the baseline values for
the Control Period shall be determined by the Commission based on the historical data, latest
audited accounts, estimates for the relevant year and prudence check as applied by the
Commission. The Petitioner further submitted that in case there is a substantial difference between
the estimates provided earlier or considered for the determination of baseline values and the actual
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
108 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
audited accounts, the Commission may re-determine the baseline values for the base year suo-moto
or on an application filed by the Applicant.
Based on the above, the Petitioner has requested the Commission to re-determine the
distribution loss trajectory keeping in mind the actual approved distribution loss for FY 2012-13
which is 21.70% against 17% considered by the Commission in the MYT Order based on which the
trajectory for the Control Period was projected.
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission, in previous Tariff Orders, has been
computing additional deemed revenue earned by the Utility for adjusting the approved losses
against the actual, which in reality is not earned by the Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted that till
FY 2012-13, the Commission has considered additional revenue of Rs. 983.01 Crore, which has not
been received by the Petitioner but has been considered by the Commission for adjustment of
losses.
The Petitioner submitted that it has always strived to achieve the targets of distribution
losses fixed by the Commission and, thereby, provide the best service to its consumers. The
Petitioner further submitted that it has reduced distribution losses and AT&C losses by 5.35% and
9.05% respectively in last 4 years, i.e. from FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14.
The Petitioner, further, submitted that for the loss target not achieved during a particular
year, the Utility is being penalised every year for its non-achievement. It contended that for a Utility
already in a state of financial distress, this amount makes a huge impact. Therefore, the Petitioner
requested the Commission to not consider any additional revenue towards adjustment of losses and
revisit and adjust the revenue that has been considered in the past on this account. However, in
order to comply with the approach adopted by the Commission in its previous Tariff Orders, the
Petitioner has calculated additional revenue for FY 2013-14 and is as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.35: Revenue loss due to higher distribution loss for FY 2013-14 Particulars Formula Amount
Actual/recasted sales (MU) A 9047 Actual energy input at distribution periphery (MU) B 11216 Approved distribution losses (%) C 16% Sales at approved distribution loss level (MU) D = C*(1-B) 9422 Loss of sale due to inefficiency in distribution loss (MU) E=D-A 375 Revenue for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) F 3755.67 ABR (Rs./kWh) G= F/A 4.15 Revenue from additional sale (Rs. Crore) F=E*G 155.52
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 109
The Petitioner has claimed actual recasted distribution losses for FY 2013-14 at 19.34% as
against 16.00% approved by the Commission. Accordingly, the Petitioner has considered deemed
revenue for excess distribution losses at an ABR of Rs. 4.15/kWh.
The Petitioner has submitted that as per UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 distribution losses is
controllable parameter and hence, it has proposed to share losses on account of under achievement
of distribution losses for FY 2013-14.
The Petitioner has further submitted that as per the UERC Tariff Regulation, 2011, collection
efficiency is a controllable parameter. The Petitioner further submitted that the Commission in the
MYT Order dated 6th May, 2013 has fixed the collection efficiency target for the Petitioner for FY
2013-14 as 97.50%. The Petitioner submitted that the actual collection efficiency achieved by the
Petitioner was 98.43%, resulting in gain due to higher collection by Rs. 34.78 Crore. The Petitioner
has further proposed to share gains with the consumer @ 20% in accordance with the UERC Tariff
Regulations 2011. The Commission with regard to Petitioner’s claim of sharing on account of
increased collection efficiency is of the view that as per the Regulations, the Commission has been
approving the revenue to meet the ARR on accrual basis and not on cash basis and hence, sharing
on account of increase in collection efficiency is not correct and, therefore, the Commission has not
considered the same. The Commission as discussed earlier has carried out the sharing of losses for
under-achievement in distribution losses.
The Commission has considered distribution loss for FY 2013-14 as approved by it in its
MYT Order and, accordingly, has computed the loss of sales as 466.45 MU.
As discussed while approving category wise sales for FY 2013-14, the Commission has
recasted the sales of domestic, PTW, PWW, Public Lamps consumers from the sales submitted by
the Petitioner. Since, the sale has been reduced, the Commission has, accordingly, reduced the
revenue corresponding to the assessed sales from the total revenue submitted by the Petitioner for
domestic category and public lamps. The revenue corresponding to the assessed sale is shown in
the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
110 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 3.36: Revenue for FY 2013-14 Corresponding to Assessed Sales
Particulars
Assessed Sales to be reduced based
on average metered sale (MU)
ABR as per CS-4
(Rs./kWh)
Revenue Corresponding to
Assessed Sales (Rs. Crore)
BPL and Kutir Jyoti 0.27 2.10 0.06 Other Domestic Consumers 7.25 2.80 2.03 Public Lamps 0.16 4.20 2.03 Total 7.68 4.12
As regards the revenue from departmental employees both in service and retired, it is
observed that per unit rate of Rs. 0.36/kWh for this category is very low compared to other
domestic category of consumers. The Petitioner has submitted that departmental employees have
been metered, thus, actual consumption of departmental employees should have been recorded on
metered basis and, accordingly, the rate applicable to domestic category of consumers should have
applied to these consumers also. The consumption of these consumers is on assessed basis and as
mentioned earlier even sales booked under this head has been recasted to align it with average
metered sale. The tariff prescribed by this Commission does not provide any special dispensation
for serving or retired employees of the licensee. As such, they are like any other domestic
consumers and revenue recognition for them should be based on tariff prescribed for domestic
consumers. Apparently, this is not being done. It is understood that the licensee has prescribed a
fixed sum to be recovered from them for domestic use of electricity. The cost of subsidised supply of
power to its employees will have to be borne by the licensee and cannot be allowed to devolve on
other consumers. The Commission has added the impact of difference in the ABR of departmental
consumers and the ABR of other domestic consumers in the revenue for FY 2013-14.
Considering the re-casted consumption of 27.14 MU and the average billing rate of other
domestic consumers which are metered, i.e. Rs. 2.80/kWh the revenue works out to Rs. 7.60 Crore.
However, as per the submission of the Petitioner the revenue realized from the departmental
employees is only to the extent of Rs. 2.03 Crore. As detailed in earlier paragraphs, the Petitioner
shall have to bear the burden of any subsidy it wants to provide to the departmental employees
from its own resources and, therefore, the Commission has added the difference of Rs. 5.57 Crore as
additional revenue towards sale to departmental employees.
Based on the above, the revenue from the sale of power, as worked out by the Commission
is shown in the Table below:
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 111
Table 3.37: Revenue from Sale of power for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Particulars Amount
Actual Revenue 3755.67 Less: Revenue corresponding to reduction in Sales 4.12 Add: Revenue corresponding to departmental employees 5.57 Total Revenue 3757.12
Further, as discussed above there is a loss of 466.45 MU on account of commercial
inefficiencies of the Petitioner failing to achieve target distribution loss approved by the
Commission. The Commission has considered the revenue of Rs. 196.93 Crore at an average billing
rate of Rs. 4.22/kWh for this additional loss of sale on account of higher distribution losses while
truing up the ARR for FY 2013-14 as shown in the Table below:
Table 3.38: Additional Revenue from Sale due to inefficiency for FY 2013-14
Sr. No. Particulars Approved in MYT
Order dated 06.05.13 Revised Claim
Approved after Truing
Up a Actual/ Re-casted Sales (MU) 9,283.28 9046.89 8899.17 b Approved Distribution Loss Level (%) 17.00% 19.34% 17.00% c Actual Energy Input at T-D Interface (MU) 11,184.67 11,216.31 11,216.31
d Sales at Actual Energy Input with 16.50% Loss (MU) (c*(1-b)) 9,396 9,047 9,366
e Loss of Sales due to Inefficiency (d-a) (MU) 113 - 466.45 f Revenue at existing Tariff (Rs. Crore) 3942.94 3755.67 3757.12 g ABR (Rs./kWh) 4.19 4.15 4.22
h Additional Revenue due to higher distribution losses (Rs. Crore) 155.52 196.93
i Losses to borne by Petitioner (75% of (h)) 116.64 147.70
Accordingly, the Commission has considered tariff revenue of Rs. 3904.82 Crore including
Rs. 147.70 Crore as deemed revenue on account of excess loss for FY 2013-14 as against total
revenue of Rs. 3872.31 Crore claimed by the Petitioner.
3.3 Sharing of gains and losses
Regulation 13 of the UERC Tariff Regulations, specify that:
“13. Annual Performance Review
………………….
(5) The “uncontrollable factors” shall include the following factors which were beyond the control
of, and could not be mitigated by, the applicant, as determined by the Commission. Some
examples of uncontrollable factors are as follows:-
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
112 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
………………
c) Economy wide influences such as unforeseen changes in inflation rate, market interest rates,
taxes and statutory levies;
…………….
(6) Some illustrative variations or expected variations in the performance of the applicant which
may be attributed by the Commission to controllable factors shall include, but not limited to, the
following:-
…………..
d) Variations in working capital requirements;
……………
h) Variation in operation & maintenance expenses
………………..
(10) Upon completion of the Annual Performance Review, the Commission shall pass on an order
recording-
a) The approved aggregate gain or loss to the Applicant on account of uncontrollable factors and
the mechanism by which the Applicant shall pass through such gains or losses in accordance with
Regulation 14;
b) The approved aggregate gain or loss to the Applicant on account of controllable factors and the
amount of such gains or such losses that may be shared in accordance with Regulation 15;
c) The approved modifications to the forecast of the Applicant for the ensuing year, if any;
The surplus/deficit determined by the Commission in accordance with these Regulations on account of
truing up of the ARR of the Applicant shall be carried forward to the ensuing financial year.”
Regulation 14 of the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 specify that:
“14. Sharing of Gains and Losses on account of Uncontrollable factors
(1) The approved aggregate gain or loss to the Applicant on account of uncontrollable factors shall be
passed through as an adjustment in the tariff/charges of the Applicant over such period as may be
specified in the Order of the Commission;
……………………”
Regulation 15 of the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 specify that:
3. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Truing Up for FY 2013-14
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 113
“15. Sharing of Gains and Losses on account of Controllable factors
(1) The approved aggregate gain to the Applicant on account of controllable factors shall be dealt
with in the following manner:
a) 20% of such gain shall be passed on as a rebate in tariffs over such period as may be
specified in the Order of the Commission;
b) The balance amount of gain may be utilized at the discretion of the Applicant.
(2) The approved aggregate loss to the Applicant on account of controllable factors shall be dealt
with in the following manner:
a) 25% of the amount of such loss shall be allowed by the Commission to be recovered through
tariffs over such period as may be specified in the Order of the Commission under;
b) The balance amount of loss shall be absorbed by the Applicant.”
Hence, in accordance with UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011, the O&M expenses and
Distribution losses are controllable factors and any gain or loss on account of the controllable factors
is to be dealt in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 15.
The sharing of gains on account of controllable factors approved by the Commission for FY
2013-14 is as shown in the Table given below:
Table 3.39: Sharing of gains on account of controllable factors approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Actual Normative as Trued up Aggregate
gain/(loss) Consumer’s
Share Petitioner’s Share
of Gain/(Loss)
A B C=B-A Gain: D=20% x C Loss D=25% x C E=C-D
O&M expenses 354.25 366.50 12.25 2.45 9.80 Distribution Loss 16% 20.66% (196.93) (49.23) (147.70) Total (184.68) (46.78) (137.90)
3.3.1 ARR & Revenue for FY 2013-14
The Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 had approved an ARR for FY 2013-14
as Rs. 3932.60 Crore. The Petitioner has now claimed an ARR of Rs. 3866.67 Crore for FY 2013-14
based on its audited accounts. However, based on the various elements of the ARR as discussed
above and approved by the Commission, the summary of final Truing up for FY 2013-14 is given in
the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
114 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 3.40: True-up of FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Particular MYT Order dated 06.05.2013
Revised Claim
Approved after Truing Up
A. Expenditure Power purchase expenses 2,838.88 2,785.61 2,785.61 Transmission Charges-PGCIL 163.91 201.03 201.03 Transmission Charges-PTCUL 195.63 195.63 195.63 O&M Charges 340.40 354.25 364.05 Interest Charges 118.99 126.20 99.21 Depreciation 69.46 108.23 75.63 Interest on Working Capital 7.26 - - B. Gross Expenditure 3,734.53 3,770.95 3721.16 Return on equity 25.48 182.23 33.32 C. Net Expenditure 3,760.01 3,953.18 3754.47 Less: Non Tariff Income 66.70 86.51 151.78 Add: Impact of truing up for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12 alongwith carrying cost
239.30 239.30 239.30
D. Net annual revenue requirements 3,932.60 4,105.97 3,842.00
E. Revenue at existing tariffs 3,896.00 3,755.67 3757.12 Revenue from additional sale 46.94
147.70 F. Total Revenue 3942.94 3755.67 3904.82 G. Other Adjustment Losses to be borne by UPCL as per sharing statement
0.00 57.44 0.00
H. Adjusted Revenue Surplus/(Gap)[F-D+G)
10.34 (292.86) 62.82
The Petitioner in its Petition had requested the Commission to approve the gap of Rs. 292.86
Crore. However, the Commission has approved a surplus of Rs. 62.82 Crore for FY 2013-14. The
surplus for FY 2013-14 with carrying cost works out to Rs. 77.34 Crore which has been adjusted by
the Commission in ARR of FY 2015-16.
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 115
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
4.1 Background
As regard the MYT framework and determination of ARR, UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011
specifies as follows:
“5. Multi-year Framework
The Commission shall adopt multiyear tariff framework for approval of ARR and expected
revenue from tariffs and charges for the control period. The multiyear tariff framework shall
be based on the following: -
a) Business plan submitted by the applicant for the entire control period for the
approval of the Commission prior to the beginning of the control period;
b) Applicant’s forecast of expected ARR for each year of the control period, based on
reasonable assumptions and financial & operational principles/parameters laid down
under these Regulations submitted alongwith the MYT petition for determination of
Aggregate Revenue Requirement and Tariffs for first year of the control period;
c) Trajectory for specific parameters as may be stipulated by the Commission based on
submissions made by the Licensee, actual performance data of the Applicants and
performance achieved by similarly placed utilities;
d) Annual review of performance shall be conducted vis-à-vis the approved forecast
and categorization of variations in performance into controllable factors and
uncontrollable factors;
e) Sharing of excess profit or loss due to controllable and uncontrollable factors as per
provisions of these Regulations.
...
8. Determination of Baseline
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
116 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The baseline values (operating and cost parameters) for the base year of the control period
shall be determined by the Commission based on historical data, latest audited accounts,
estimates for the relevant year and prudence check as may be applied by the Commission:
Provided that in case of substantial difference between the estimates earlier provided /
considered for determination of baseline values and the actual audited accounts, the
Commission may re-determine the baseline values for the base year suo-moto or on an
application filed by the Applicant.”
In accordance with the above provisions of the Regulations, the Commission approved the
Aggregate Revenue Requirement of the Petitioner for all the years of the first Control Period, i.e.
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 excluding power purchase cost for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 vide
its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
As regards the Annual Performance Review, Regulation 13(3) of the UERC (Terms and
Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011 specify as follows:
“The scope of Annual Performance Review shall be a comparison of the performance of the Applicant
with the approved forecast of Aggregate Revenue Requirement and expected revenue from tariff and
charges and shall comprise the following:-
a) A comparison of the audited performance of the applicant for the previous financial year with the
approved forecast for such previous financial year and truing up of expenses and revenue subject
to prudence check including pass through of impact of uncontrollable factors;
b) Categorisation of variations in performance with reference to approved forecast into factors within
the control of the applicant (controllable factor) and those caused by factors beyond the control of
the applicant (un-controllable factors);
c) Revision of estimates for the ensuing financial year, if required, based on audited financial results
for the previous financial year;
Computation of sharing of gains and losses on account of controllable factors for the previous year.”
The Petitioner in the present APR Petition has requested the Commission to approve the
revised estimates for FY 2015-16 based on the revised submissions in the APR Petition. The
Commission has already approved most of the ARR components for the Control Period FY 2013-14
to FY 2015-16 after detailed analysis, scrutiny and prudence check of the Petitioner’s submission
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 117
vide its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. As the Commission had not approved the power purchase
cost for FY 2015-16 in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013, hence, in the present Order the
Commission has approved the power purchase quantum and cost associated therewith based on the
analysis and scrutiny of Petitioner’s projections in the Petition and considering the subsequent
submissions including actual data available for FY 2013-14. As discussed in previous Chapter, the
Commission in this Order has carried out the Truing up for FY 2013-14 in accordance with the
UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 wherein the Commission has provisionally allowed capitalisation of
assets since FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 pending clearance certificate from Electrical Inspector for
reasons recorded therein. In accordance with Regulation 13(3) of the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011
the scope of annual performance review is limited to the revision of estimates for the ensuing year,
if required, based on the audited financial results for the previous year and give resultant effect on
this account in the estimates of the said current year.
The Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 stated as follows:
“Commission shall carry out the truing up of FY 2013-14 based on the audited accounts for FY 2013-
14 and give effect to the same in the ARR of FY 2015-16 in accordance with Regulation 13(3) of the
UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011.”
Accordingly, the Commission under the provisions of Regulation 13(3) of the UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011 has revised such elements of the ARR for FY 2015-16 which have linkage with
Gross Fixed Assets like the R&M expenses and also other capital related expenses based on the
updated GFA considered for truing up of FY 2013-14. The Commission in the subsequent
paragraphs has elaborated proposal of the Petitioner and its view on each element of ARR for FY
2015-16.
4.2 Energy Sales
The Petitioner submitted that the State of Uttarakhand, like most of the other States in the
country, is operating under an energy deficit scenario, i.e. the demand exceeds the supply of power.
The Petitioner submitted that one of the reasons for the State witnessing a gap between electricity
demand and supply is on account of rising per capita power consumption. According to the Central
Electricity Authority’s (CEA) General Review, 2008, the per capita electricity consumption in the
State was 706.8 kWh in FY 2006-07 which increased to 1112.29 kWh in FY 2009-10 in a span of three
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
118 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
years. The Petitioner submitted that since FY 2009-10, the energy sales in the State have increased at
an average rate of 14.53% per annum upto FY 2011-12. The Petitioner added that there was a
reduction in the rate of growth of sales in FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14 but the same is expected to
recover in the future.
The energy for retail supply depends on the availability of power in the State. The Petitioner
submitted that the projection for the total energy available for sale is based on the total energy input
from all Central and State Generating Stations and added that the State is mainly dependent on
State-owned generation. The Petitioner, further, submitted that based on actual energy sales data,
the energy consumption in the State had increased at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of
9.62% over the past eight years from FY 2006-07 to FY 2013-14, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.1: Actual Energy Sales for Consumer Categories from FY 2006-07 to FY 2013-14 (MU)
Consumer Category 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 RTS-1: Domestic 1108.52 1163.74 1223.06 1388.38 1485.57 1676.70 1795.06 2107.07 RTS-2:Non-Domestic 542.31 607.75 663.48 734.66 812.52 885.42 953.94 993.87 RTS-3: Public Lamps 40.53 45.23 41.36 51.42 53.86 66.89 87.20 44.06 RTS-4: Private Tube-wells/Pumping sets 275.63 205.41 171.35 181.19 183.02 188.46 244.80 222.82 RTS-5:Government Irrigation System 83.36 94.79 94.71 116.96 112.97 136.56 130.20 104.23 RTS-6: Public Water Works 196.07 217.38 207.87 247.30 276.37 324.52 302.68 293.37 RTS-7: LT & HT Industry 1567.91 2287.65 2980.83 3399.16 4197.72 4805.52 4884.88 5092.57 Total LT 155.22 156.20 192.86 201.82 234.96 269.78 289.42 287.66 Total HT 1412.69 2131.46 2787.97 3197.34 3962.76 4535.74 4595.46 4804.91 RTS-8: Mixed Load 65.07 104.68 100.39 122.81 120.86 160.26 167.55 177.60 RTS-9: Railway Traction 6.50 9.48 10.68 7.34 7.80 8.39 7.83 11.49 Total 3885.92 4736.10 5493.73 6249.21 7250.68 8252.72 8574.15 9047.07
The Petitioner assumed that energy consumption in the future will continue to grow based
on the past growth trends in electricity consumption. Further, the Petitioner submitted that
projection of energy sales has been done as specified in Regulation 76 of UERC (Terms and
Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011. The Petitioner submitted that for
projecting category-wise energy sales for the remaining years of the Control Period, the Adjusted
Trend Analysis Method has been applied in line with the approach followed by the Commission in
the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. The Petitioner also submitted the sales projections from the
report of the 18th Electric Power Survey (EPS) undertaken by the CEA which is reproduced below:
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 119
4.2.1.1 Energy Sales from Draft 18th Electric Power Survey Projections
The Petitioner submitted that the primary objective of the 18th EPS forecast is to determine
the electricity demand for States and Union Territories so that they can plan and arrange to meet the
energy demand. The Petitioner submitted that the EPS forecast is a projection of aggregate power
demand over the year and category-wise electricity consumption. The sales forecast for 3 years from
FY 2014-15 to FY 2016-17 as per Draft 18th EPS is given in Table below:
Table 4.2: Sales Forecast from draft 18th EPS Total Annual Sales FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17
Total Sales (MU) 9387 9974 10600
The Petitioner submitted that the projections of the Draft 18th EPS are on the lower side. For
FY 2013-14, the Draft 18th EPS projects a sale of 8832 MU as against the actual recorded recasted
sales of 9047 MU.
4.2.1.2 Projection of Energy Sales – Adjusted Trend Analysis (CAGR) Method
The Petitioner submitted that for projecting the category-wise energy sales, it has considered
past growth trends in each consumer category, as explained below:
a) The Petitioner has adopted an Adjusted Trend Analysis Method for projecting the
sales for all consumer categories. The Petitioner submitted that this method assumes
that the underlying factors which drive the demand for electricity are expected to
follow the same trend as in the past, however, this approach also discounts any out-
lier (relative to the trend) observed in the growth rates over the period of 5 years and
excludes them while projecting energy sales for FY 2015-16.
b) The Petitioner submitted that this method makes use of a statistical tool, namely the
Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) and, accordingly, Compound Annual
Growth Rates (CAGRs) were calculated from the past figures for each category,
corresponding to different lengths of time in the past five years, along with the year
on year growth rates from FY 2008-09 to FY 2013-14.
c) The Petitioner submitted that for projection of sales for FY 2015-16 for each consumer
category, the CAGR of five – year period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2013-14, the CAGR
of four – year period from FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14, the CAGR of three – year period
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
120 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
from FY 2010-11 to FY 2013-14, the CAGR of two – year period from FY 2011-12 to FY
2013-14, along with the one – year growth rate in FY 2013-14 over FY 2012-13 has
been computed for each consumer category as summarised in the Table below:
Table 4.3: CAGR Calculated for Energy Sales to Each Consumer Category Consumer Category 5 Year 4 Year 3 Year 2 Year 1 Year
RTS-1: Domestic 11.49% 10.99% 12.34% 12.08% 17.41% RTS-2:Non-Domestic 8.42% 7.85% 6.95% 5.95% 4.19% RTS-3: Public Lamps 1.27% -3.79% -6.47% -18.84% -36.90% RTS-4: Private Tube-wells / Pumping sets 5.39% 5.31% 6.78% 8.73% -8.98% RTS-5: Government Irrigation System 1.93% -2.84% -2.65% -12.63% -19.95% RTS-6: Public Water Works 7.13% 4.36% 2.01% -4.92% -3.08% RTS-7: LT & HT Industry 11.31% 10.63% 6.65% 2.94% 4.25% Total LT 8.32% 9.26% 6.98% 3.26% -0.61% Total HT 11.50% 10.72% 6.63% 2.92% 4.56% RTS-8: Mixed Load 12.09% 9.66% 13.69% 5.27% 6.00% RTS-9: Railway Traction 1.46% 11.83% 13.75% 16.99% 46.64% Extra State Consumer 17.51% 13.28% 37.11% 55.71% -11.05% Total 10.49% 9.69% 7.66% 4.70% 5.73%
a) The Petitioner further submitted that 5 year CAGR has been chosen for the purpose of
projections, except for few categories like RTS-3 (Public Lamps), RTS-7 (LT and HT
Industry), RTS-5 (Government Irrigation System) and RTS-8 (Mixed Load).
(i) The Petitioner submitted that the sales for LT and HT industry have been projected
to increase at a subjective rate of 5% similar to the assumption of the Commission in
the MYT Order dated 6th May 2013.
(ii) The Petitioner submitted that the Y-o-Y growth in sales for Public Lamps &
Government Irrigation systems has been uneven and, hence, the CAGR
methodology is not reliable in this case. The Petitioner further submitted that sales
projections for these categories have also been done based on a subjective rate of
5%, similar to the assumed rate for Industries.
(iii) The Petitioner submitted that the sales for Mixed Load category has been done
based on Y-o-Y Growth rate as the increase observed was evenly distributed during
the past few years.
b) The Petitioner submitted that for projection of sales for FY 2015-16, the sales for FY
2013-14 for each consumer category have been taken as the base, i.e. the chosen growth
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 121
rate is applied over the sales for FY 2013-14 to make projections for each category for FY
2015-16.
c) The Petitioner submitted that the energy sales to un-metered consumers under
Domestic, Public Lamps and Private Tube Wells in FY 2013-14 have been recasted as
per the methodology (based on the consumption per connected load for the un-metered
consumers vis-à-vis that for metered consumers in the same consumer category)
specified by the Commission before considering them for projections.
The Petitioner has submitted the projected sales for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 for each
consumer category as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.4: Energy Sales (MU) for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16
Consumer Category FY 2013-14
(Actual) Method Adopted
Growth Rate
FY 2014-15 (RE)
FY 2015-16 (Projected)
RTS-1: Domestic 2107.07 CAGR-5 year 11.49% 2348.91 2618.75 RTS-2:Non-Domestic 993.87 CAGR-5 year 8.42% 1077.54 1168.24 RTS-3: Public Lamps 44.06 Subjective Rate 5.00% 46.27 48.58 RTS-4: Private Tube-wells / Pumping sets 222.82 CAGR-5 year 5.39% 234.83 247.50
RTS-5: Government Irrigation System 104.23 Subjective Rate 5.00% 109.54 114.92
RTS-6: Public Water Works 293.37 CAGR-5 year 7.13% 314.29 336.71 RTS-7: LT & HT Industry 5092.57 5347.20 5614.56 Total LT 287.66 Subjective Rate 5.00% 302.04 317.14 Total HT 4804.91 Subjective Rate 5.00% 5045.16 5297.41 RTS-8: Mixed Load 177.60 1 year 6.00% 188.26 199.56 RTS-9: Railway Traction 11.49 CAGR-5 year 1.46% 11.65 11.82 Total 9047.07 9678.38 10360.63
The Commission observed that the Petitioner has projected the sales to the consumers using
CAGR method as done by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. The Commission
has gone through the submissions of the Petitioner. The Commission in its MYT Order dated May
06, 2013 had approved total sales of 10593 MU for FY 2015-16 as against which the Petitioner has
projected sales of 10361 MU. The Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15 considered the sales
for FY 2014-15 as approved by it in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. However, the actual sales in
FY 2013-14 is lower than that considered in MYT Order for FY 2013-14 as discussed in previous
Chapter of the Order on Truing up for FY 2013-14. Considering this fact, the Petitioner itself has
projected lesser sales than that approved by the Commission in MYT Order and hence, the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
122 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Commission is revising the total sales for FY 2015-16 as submitted by the Petitioner. The
Commission observed that the Petitioner has projected higher growth rates. However, the
Commission has not considered the category wise projections as submitted by the Petitioner as it is
observed that the Petitioner for certain categories has considered very high growth rates. The
Petitioner for instance has considered growth rate of 11.49% for projecting sales on actual sales of
FY 2013-14 for domestic category which appears to be very high. Further, as discussed in the
previous Chapter of the Order on Truing up for FY 2013-14, the Commission has re-casted the sales
for Domestic, PTW, Public Lamps and Public Water Works for approving the sales for FY 2013-14
for these categories. The Commission has then projected the re-casted sales for FY 2013-14 by
multiplying it using appropriate CAGR based on historical data and has derived category wise sales
for FY 2015-16. Further, the total sales derived in the manner above works out as 10144.70 MU.
The Commission for approving category wise sales for FY 2015-16 has considered the ratio
of category wise sales to total sales as derived by projecting the re-casted sales for FY 2013-14 and
has applied the same ratio to total sales as submitted by the Petitioner for FY 2015-16.
The Commission has, accordingly, approved the category wise sales as shown in the Table
below:
Table 4.5: Sales Approved for FY 2015-16 (MU)
Category Approved in the MYT Order dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Domestic (RTS - 1) 2214 2619 2477 Non-domestic, incl Commercial (RTS -2) 1289 1168 1214 Public Lamps (RTS - 3) 99 49 44 Private Tubewell/ Pump Sets (RTS - 4) 223 247 226 Government Irrigation System (RTS - 5) 197 115 117 Public Water Works (RTS - 6) 484 337 317 Industrial Consumers (RTS - 7) 5832 5614 5734 Mixed Load (RTS - 8) 243 200 219 Railway Traction (RTS - 9) 11 12 12 Total 10593 10361 10361
4.3 Distribution Loss Trajectory
The Petitioner submitted that the following initiatives are undertaken/proposed to be
undertaken for loss reduction:
a) Installation of Capacitor Bank at 33/11 kV substations
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 123
b) Implementation of R-APDRP Part A scheme
c) Implementation of R-APDRP Part B scheme
d) Installation of Double metering in selected 11 kV & 33 kV consumers
e) Shifting of 1 Phase & 3 Phase meter outside the premises of the consumers
f) Implementation of AMR
g) Replacement of Mechanical Meters with Electronic Meters and Installation of Electronic
meters in un-metered connections
h) Laying of LT ABC
i) DT Metering
j) Replacement of defective meters
k) Procurement of High value consumer management system (HVCMS)
The Petitioner submitted that distribution losses are measured considering the difference
between the energy input at distribution periphery and the energy billed to the consumers. For FY
2013-14, the Petitioner has submitted actual (recasted) distribution losses of 19.34%.
The Petitioner submitted that it has not been able to achieve desired loss reduction in FY
2013-14 as the Commission has set the distribution loss trajectory for each year of the MYT Control
Period based on the target fixed for base year, i.e. FY 2012-13. The Petitioner further requested the
Commission to set realistic distribution loss trajectory for the MYT Control Period considering
actual distribution loss for FY 2012-13. The Petitioner has proposed to reduce the distribution loss
by 1% in FY 2014-15 & 1% in FY 2015-16 in each of the remaining year of the MYT Control Period.
The distribution loss trajectory as proposed by the Petitioner is detailed below:
Table 4.6: Distribution Loss Trajectory
Year FY 2012-13 (Actual)
FY 2013-14 (Actual)
FY 2014-15 (Projected)
FY 2015-16 (Projected)
Distribution Loss 20.53%* 19.34%* 18.34% 17.34%
*re-casted
The Petitioner in this Petition has projected the energy requirement for FY 2014-15 and FY
2015-16 based on the loss trajectory as proposed above.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
124 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission, in its MYT Order, has approved the distribution loss trajectory for the
Control Period with a loss reduction of 1.00% for FY 2013-14 and 0.50% in FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-
16 to attain the overall loss level target of 15.00% in FY 2015-16. The distribution loss reduction
trajectory approved by the Commission for the Control Period in the MYT Order dated May 06,
2013 is given in the Table below:
Table 4.7: Distribution Loss Trajectory approved by the Commission Particulars FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Distribution Loss 17.00% 16.00% 15.50% 15.00%
The Commission has been considering reasonable loss reduction targets in its previous
Orders which should have been achieved. As the issue of distribution loss trajectory has been
challenged by the Petitioner in Hon’ble APTEL and the matter is sub-judice, status-quo ante is being
maintained.
In line with the approach adopted by the Commission in its previous Tariff Orders, the
Commission has considered the entire distribution loss reduction target approved by the
Commission for FY 2015-16 as reduction in commercial losses of the Petitioner and has, therefore,
considered the impact of distribution loss reduction in terms of increase in sales due to efficiency
improvement. Hence, the Commission for arriving at energy input requirement for FY 2015-16 has
considered the distribution loss level of 15.50% and has considered the additional sales equivalent
to 0.50% (loss reduction target) of the energy input requirement, thus, approving the distribution
loss level as 15%.
Accordingly, the estimated energy requirement at distribution periphery, State periphery
and approved loss level for FY 2015-16 are given in the Table below:
Table 4.8: Energy Input Requirement at Distribution Level for FY 2015-16
Particulars Approved in MYT
Order dated 06.05.2013
Proposed Approved
Estimated Sales (MU) 10,593.18 10,360.63 10,360.63 Loss level (%) 15.50% 17.34% 15.50% Energy Input Required T-D Interface / Power Purchase Requirement (MU) 12,536.31 12,534.03 12,261.10
Additional sales due to efficiency improvement (%) 0.50% 0.00% 0.50% Additional sales due to efficiency improvement (MU) 62.68 0.00 61.31 Sales at approved Energy Input with 15.00% loss (MU) 10,655.86 10,360.63 10421.94 Approved Distribution Loss (%) 15.00% 17.34% 15.00% PTCUL Losses% 1.80% 1.82% 1.80% Energy Input at State Periphery (MU) 12,766.09 12,766.38 12,485.85
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 125
4.4 Power Purchase Quantum and Cost for FY 2015-16
4.4.1 Power Purchase Quantum
The Petitioner in its APR Petition has submitted the following major sources from which
power is procured by UPCL:
a) UJVN Ltd.
b) NTPC Ltd.
c) NHPC Ltd.
d) NPCIL
e) SJVNL
f) THDC
g) Independent Power Producers (IPP)
h) New Stations
i) Short-term power arrangements: Banking, open market purchase etc.
The summary of source wise energy projected by the Petitioner as submitted in its Petition is
as given below:
Table 4.9: Summary of Power Availability projected by UPCL for FY 2015-16 (MU) Major Sources Quantum
NTPC 2687.59 NHPC 736.53 UJVN Ltd. Large Hydro 3083.69
Maneri Bali-II 1102.40 Small Hydro 121.80
Sub-total 4307.90 SJVNL 245.63 THDC (inc Free Power) 779.74 NPCIL 251.04 UREDA 18.33 IPPs 1072.32 New Stations 526.69 Total power from firm sources 10625.78 Others Less: Sale of Surplus power 231.51 Add: Procurement of power through short term power purchase 2372.11 Grand-Total 12766.38
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
126 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission for projecting energy availability for FY 2015-16, has considered all the
above mentioned sources as considered by the Petitioner. However, the detailed approach adopted
by the Commission for source wise projection of energy availability from these sources for FY 2015-
16 has been discussed as follows:
4.4.2 Energy Availability from UJVN Ltd.
The Commission has considered the energy availability from generating stations of UJVN
Ltd. for FY 2015-16 as under:
§ For 9 LHPs generating stations of UJVN Ltd., the Commission has considered
average gross generation of FY 2008-09, FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY
2014-15 (i.e. upto Feb 2015). The energy generation for FY 2009-10 has not been
considered as the year was exceptionally dry year and energy generation for FY
2013-14 has not been considered as most of the plants were affected due to natural
calamity. For MB-II generating station, the Commission has considered average of
gross generation of FY 2008-09, FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13. The energy
generation for FY 2009-10 has not been considered as the year was exceptionally dry
year, energy generation for FY 2013-14 has not been considered as the plant was
affected due to natural calamity. Further, during FY 2014-15 as the plant was under
shutdown for considerable time, generation during FY 2014-15 has not been
considered.
§ For the SHPs transferred to UREDA, generation has been considered based on
monthly projections submitted by UREDA.
§ For existing SHPs, generation has been considered based on actual monthly
generation submitted by UJVN Ltd. for FY 2014-15.
The Commission has estimated the energy sent out from these generating stations after
reducing the normative auxiliary consumption and transformation losses (wherever applicable) in
accordance with the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011. Accordingly, the availability of power from
UJVN Ltd. stations to the Petitioner for FY 2015-16 after excluding Himachal Pradesh’s (HP) share
works out to 4395.13 MU. The summary of the energy availability for FY 2015-16 from UJVN Ltd.
stations as estimated by the Commission is shown in the Table below:
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 127
Table 4.10: Summary of Energy Availability from UJVNL and UREDA for FY 2015-16 (MU) Particulars Approved
UJVN Ltd.-Main Stations 3,020.66 Maneri Bhali-II 1,209.24 UREDA-SHPs 11.78 Pathri 99.00 Mohammadpur 54.45 Total 4395.13
4.4.3 Energy Availability from Central Generating Stations
In continuation with the approach adopted by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May
06, 2013 and APR Order dated April 10, 2014, the Commission has considered the average
generation of the previous three years for estimating the energy availability for FY 2015-16 from
existing generating stations of NTPC, NHPC, SJVNL and THDC under operation for three or more
than three years. However, for estimating the energy availability for FY 2015-16 from Dhauliganga,
the Commission has considered the design energy as the available energy as the plant was under
shutdown for substantial time in FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15 and, hence, the average generation of
last three years would not reflect the correct picture for projecting availability in FY 2015-16.
With regard to Chamera-III and URI-II, the Commission has considered available energy on
the basis of their design energy. Further, the Commission has considered monthly design energy as
approved by the CERC for projecting the monthly energy availability for FY 2015-16. The energy
sent out from these stations has been estimated considering the normative auxiliary consumption as
specified by CERC in the CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014.
For Rihand–III, the Commission has considered energy availability from the station equal to
that available from Rihand-II as both the units are of same capacity and unit sizes. Since the plant
has already been commissioned, the allocation from the station to the State of Uttarakhand has been
considered as per the latest allocation order issued by Ministry of Power.
The Petitioner has a firm allocation of share of power from generating stations of NTPC Ltd.,
NHPC Ltd., Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL), Tehri Hydro Development
Corporation Ltd. (THDC) and Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. (SJVNL) stations. In addition to the firm
share allocation, most of these stations have 15% unallocated power. The distribution of this
unallocated power among the constituents of Northern Region is decided from time to time based
on the power requirement and power shortages in different States. For projecting the energy
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
128 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
availability from Northern Region Central Generating Stations for FY 2015-16, the Commission has
considered the average of actual weighted average allocation of power (firm share of UPCL as well
as unallocated power) from March 2013 to February 2014. The Commission has also considered the
northern region transmission losses of 4% based on the submission of the Petitioner, for purchase of
power from Central Generating Stations and other sources outside the State. The summary of the
energy availability to the Petitioner from CGS as estimated by the Commission for FY 2015-16 is
shown in the Table below:
Table 4.11: Summary of Energy Availability from GGS for FY 2015-16 (MU)
Particulars Gross Generation ESO State
Share
Availability after Inter-State Transmission
loss NHPC Salal 3,303.86 3,270.82 1.21% 37.99 Tanakpur 431.74 427.42 3.89% 15.96 Tanakpur Free Power 12.00% 49.24 Chamera-I 2,411.99 2,383.04 3.53% 80.76 Chamera-II 1,427.50 1,410.37 1.55% 21.02 Chamera –III 1,086.38 1,073.34 5.40% 55.02 Uri 2,766.03 2,732.84 3.48% 91.30 Dhauliganga 1,134.69 1,121.07 5.36% 57.03 Dhauliganga free power 12.00% 127.60 Dulhasti 2,086.31 2,061.28 5.40% 106.92 Sewa-II 521.28 515.02 5.46% 27.01 Uri-II 1,123.77 1,121.07 4.92% 51.77 Sub-Total 16,293.55 16,116.29 721.62 THDC Tehri-I 3,435.64 3,394.41 3.55% 115.81 Free Power - Tehri I 12.00% 391.04 Koteshwar 1,303.00 1,287.36 4.24% 52.44 Free-Power Koteshwar 12.00% 148.30 Sub-Total 3,435.64 3,394.41 707.60 SJVNL Nathpa Jhakri 6,934.56 6,851.34 0.855% 56.27 Sub-Total 6,934.56 6,851.34 56.27 NTPC Anta 1,973.63 1,924.29 5.09% 93.99 Auraiya 2,081.04 2,029.02 4.74% 92.26 Dadri Gas 3,475.87 3,388.97 4.01% 130.62 Unchahar-I 3,234.98 2,951.27 8.78% 248.15 Unchahar-II 3,234.98 2,943.83 4.27% 120.58
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 129
Table 4.11: Summary of Energy Availability from GGS for FY 2015-16 (MU)
Particulars Gross Generation ESO State
Share
Availability after Inter-State Transmission
loss Unchahar-III 1,617.49 1,471.92 6.85% 96.74 Rihand-1 8,130.17 7,500.09 4.52% 325.37 Rihand-2 8,130.17 7,662.69 4.02% 295.82 Rihand -3 8,130.17 7,662.69 4.59% 337.73 Singrauli 15,622.46 14,470.30 5.41% 751.86 Dadri-II 12,353.37 11,395.99 0.64% 69.69 Jhajjar 5,752.54 5,306.72 0.65% 33.35 Kahalgaon 9595.18 8965.96 1.87% 160.96 Sub-Total 83,332.06 77673.72 2,757.12 NPC NAPP 2,681.88 2,440.51 4.81% 112.74 RAPP Unit 5&6 3791.72 3450.46 5.13% 169.93 Sub-Total 6,473.60 5,890.98 282.67 Total 1,16,469.41 1,09,926.75 4,525.27
4.4.4 Energy Availability from Vishnuprayag Hydro Electric Project
The Commission with regard to Vishnuprayag station has considered the annual design
energy for estimating the annual energy availability from Vishnuprayag HEP to the Petitioner for
FY 2015-16. Since the plant was under shutdown for most of the part of FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15
due to damages suffered on account of flood, three year generation data has not been considered for
the station. The auxiliary consumption has been considered on normative basis. For projecting the
energy available to the Petitioner, the Commission has considered the free power of 12% available
to the State of Uttarakhand. With these assumptions, the total energy available from this station
during FY 2015-16 is estimated at 192.58 MU at State Periphery.
4.4.5 New Generating Stations
The Petitioner has projected power from new generating stations that are likely to
commence supply in FY 2015-16. The Petitioner for new Central Generating Stations, i.e. Koldam
Parbati Stage-III and Barh STPS has considered 4% allocation for projecting energy availability. The
Commission has considered the monthly/annual quantum energy projected by the Petitioner for
these stations.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
130 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
With regard to Rampur Hydro, the Commission has considered the present allocation of
11.12% and has computed availability on the basis of design energy.
For Sasan UMPP, the Commission has considered 65% PLF and estimated energy available
from six units in a phased manner for FY 2015-16.
For rest of the new generating stations scheduled to get commissioned during FY 2015-16,
the Commission has considered energy availability from the generating stations as projected by the
Petitioner. The Commission has, accordingly, estimated the energy availability from new generating
stations for FY 2015-16 as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.12: Summary of Energy Availability from New Generating Stations for FY 2015-16 (MU)
New Generating Stations Quantum NTPC Koldam 74.31 NTPC- Barh 343.45 NHPC Parbati Stage-III 34.07 SJVNL RHEP 198.48 Others Sasan 466.08 Himalaya Hydro Pvt. Ltd. 17.34 Solar Plant (Dehradun) 0.08 Lakshmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd, Cogen 38.36 Avani Bio Energy Pvt. Ltd, Biomass 0.76 UREDA – Others 38.71 Hershil Hydro 52.03 Gangani 50.00 Badiyar 25.00 Total 1338.67
4.4.6 Energy Availability from Independent Power Producers (IPPs)
The Commission has considered the availability from existing stations based on the
projections submitted by the Petitioner. The total availability from these sources, thus, works out to
333.02 MU.
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 131
4.4.7 Power Purchase to meet RPO Obligations
The Commissioned had notified UERC (Compliance of Renewable Purchase Obligations),
2010, and as per the Regulations the Petitioner has to fulfil the following RPO obligations in FY
2015-16:
1. Solar RPO – 0.10% 2. Non-Solar RPO – 8.00%
The Petitioner, in its Petition, has projected cost of procuring RE Certificates to meet RPO
targets. The Commission is, however, of the view that the Petitioner, on best effort basis, should
procure power from Renewable Energy sources (Solar as well as non Solar) to meet the above RPO
targets set out by the Commission and only if such energy is not available, it should procure RECs.
The Petitioner is already procuring power from various SHPs and solar plants, however, despite the
same, the Petitioner would be required to procure additional 5.99 MU from solar plants for meeting
its solar RPO target and around 284.81 MU from eligible sources for meeting its non-solar RPO
targets. The Commission has, accordingly, considered this energy to be procured from Renewable
Energy sources to meet the RPO targets, and the Commission has considered this energy to be
available to meet the energy requirement for FY 2015-16.
4.4.8 Summary of Energy Availability for FY 2015-16
Accordingly, as discussed above the Commission approves the Energy availability for FY
2015-16 as shown below:
Table 4.13: Summary of Total Firm Energy Available during FY 2015-16 (MU) Source of Power Quantum
UJVNL Total 4395.13 NHPC 721.62 THDC 707.60 NTPC 2757.12 NPC 282.67 Vishnu prayag (free power) 192.58 SJVNL 56.27 Others-IPPs 333.02 New Generating Stations 1338.67 RPO Purchase of Power 290.81 Total Firm Energy Available 11075.48 Monthly Surplus to be Banked 290.08 Firm Energy Available net of Banking 10785.39 Power Purchase Requirement 12485.85 Deficit Power Purchase 1700.46
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
132 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
As shown above, the total energy availability from the above firm sources works out to
11075.48 MU. The Commission has worked out the monthwise energy requirement and energy
availability from various sources. Considering the month wise requirement and availability, it is
observed that surplus power of 290.08 MU is projected to be available during the months of June to
September 2015.
The Commission in its Tariff Order for 2014-15 dated April 10, 2014 has considered the
availability of 1345.54 MU from Medium Term PPA during FY 2014-15. However, as the medium
term PPA during FY 2014-15 is not materialised, UPCL has procured the power through short term
sources as well as received the banking energy during 2014-15. The actual banking energy received
by UPCL for the period April 2014 to January 2015 is around 504 MU, which UPCL will have to
return in FY 2015-16. The Commission in line with its approach adopted in its MYT Order dated
May 06, 2013 directs the Petitioner to utilise the surplus power for returning the energy received
through banking or bank the same for utilisation in next financial year.
Taking into consideration the month wise requirement and availability, the total firm energy
available for meeting the total energy requirement of 12485.85 MU works out to 10785.39 MU
leaving a deficit of 1700.46 MU. Hence, the Commission has considered the deficit power purchase
to the extent of 1700.46 MU during FY 2015-16 as against 2372.11 MU projected by the Petitioner.
4.4.9 Power Purchase Cost
4.4.9.1 Power Purchase Cost from Generating Stations of UJVN Ltd.
The Commission has approved the tariff for ten major generating stations of UJVNL for FY
2015-16 vide its Order dated April 11, 2015 on the ARR Petition filed by UJVN Ltd. for FY 2015-16.
Accordingly, the power purchase cost for UPCL has been estimated from these generating stations
based on UPCL’s percentage share in these generating stations. The Commission observed that
though UPCL was being allowed, the power purchase cost for these stations on the basis of
normative performance, however due to lower generation and plant availability, the actual
payment made to UJVN Ltd. has been considerably lesser. The Commission in its MYT Order dated
May 06, 2013 for FY 2013-14 had approved power purchase cost of Rs. 555 Crore for UJVN Ltd.’s
stations as against which the actual power purchase cost was only Rs. 433 Crore. On detailed
analysis it was observed that the actual Annual PAF of some of the stations (plant availability
factor for the year) on the basis of which capacity charges are allowed to recovered were lower than
the Normative PAF approved by the Commission. Further, actual generation on the basis of which
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 133
energy charges are being recovered for most of the stations were also lower than that approved by
the Commission, which has resulted in reduction in power purchase cost for UJVNL stations.
The Commission, therefore, to project power purchase cost has factored in the expected
performance of these stations based on the past years’ performance. As discussed in the previous
section, the Commission for projecting quantum of power purchase from 9 LHPs has considered
actual generation for FY 2008-09, FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2014-15. The
Commission has also projected the Annual PAF for these stations for FY 2015-16 based on the
average of actual PAF achieved by these stations in FY 2008-09, FY 2009-10, FY 2010-11, FY 2012-13
and FY 2014-15. For Maneri Bhali-II as discussed for projection purpose FY 2008-09, FY 2010-11, FY
2011-12 and FY 2012-13 has been considered. The Commission has also projected the annual PAF
for these stations considering the average annual PAF achieved by the station in these years.
Accordingly, capacity charges have been considered based on the projected PAF of these stations
based on actual PAF achieved in previous years and energy charges have been considered based on
the projected station wise energy availability. In case UJVN Ltd. achieves higher Annual PAF
additional recovery through capacity charges shall be allowed to UJVN Ltd. and shall be pass
through in ARR of UPCL at the time of truing up of FY 2015-16. In cases where the energy
availability works out to be more than the original design saleable primary energy, secondary
energy charge at the rate of 80 paisa/kWh has been considered.
Further, in accordance with the GoU Notification No. 1632/I(2)/2009-04(3)/22/2008 dated
October 26, 2009, while estimating the power purchase cost of the Petitioner from main stations of
UJVN Ltd., the Commission has considered rate of cess imposed by GoU for the purpose of Power
Development Fund as 30 paise/unit. The above cess is, however, not applicable on the generation
from Maneri Bhali-I, Dhalipur, Ramganga, Khodri and Maneri Bhali-II Generating Stations, in
accordance with the Government of Uttarakhand Notification No. 1632/I(2)/2009-04(3)/22/2008
dated October 26, 2009 read with Notification No. 2837/I/2004-05-13/2003 dated June 20, 2005 and
Notification No. (6604/03)/567/IX-3-Urja/Power Fund/03, as their approved energy rate (tariff)
for FY 2015-16 is more than 80 paise/unit and, further, Maneri Bhali-II is a new generating station
commissioned during March 2008 and, hence, it also does not fulfil the eligibility requirement that
the station should be more than 10 years old at the time of notification of the PDF Act. In addition to
the above, the Commission has also considered 10 paise per unit towards the royalty to the State
Government for the purchase of power from UJVN Ltd.’s generating stations excluding MB-I,
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
134 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Dhalipur, Ramganga, Khodri and MB-II based on the notification no. 1933/I/2005-01(3)/1/03 dated
25.04.2005 on royalty. Accordingly, the Commission has worked out total power purchase cost of
Rs. 477.62 Crore for FY 2015-16 for the 10 LHPs of UJVN Ltd.
Power Purchase Cost from other SHP’s, commissioned after 01.01.2002, has been considered
based on the rates approved by the Commission in accordance with the prevalent Renewable
Energy Tariff Regulations. In case of SHP’s having capacity more than 1 MW and commissioned
before 01.01.2002, power purchase cost has been considered based on the rates approved by the
Commission vide its Order dated May 19, 2009. In case of SHP’s with capacity below 1 MW and
commissioned prior to 01.01.2002, power purchase cost has been considered on the principle of
weighted average cost of power allocated to the State from Central Generating Stations as per their
applicable Orders.
4.4.9.2 Power Purchase Cost from Central Generating Stations
CERC had issued the Tariff Orders for the Control Period FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14 for
NTPC and NHPC stations, from which UPCL procures power based on its allocation. However,
CERC is yet to determine the tariff of these stations for FY 2015-16. The Commission in the APR
Order for FY 2014-15 had stated as follows:
“The Commission, with regard to projecting AFC for FY 2014-15, is of the view that as per the CERC
Tariff Regulations, 2014 the tax component of AFC will reduce whereas there will be marginal
increase in AFC due to increase in O&M expenses, increase in special R&M allowance and increase
in compensation allowance for some of the stations. The Commission has, therefore, considered the
AFC approved for FY 2013-14 as the AFC for FY 2014-15.”
The Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15 had not considered any increase in the
AFC. The Commission with regard to CERC Tariff Regulations, 2014 is of the view that for the first
year of the Control Period, i.e. FY 2014-15, the increase in AFC will be due to increase in O&M
expenses including R&M allowance and compensation allowance which is likely to get adjusted
with reduction in tax component of AFC. However, from second year onwards, the AFC may
increase as compared to previous year’s AFC due to the increase in O&M Expenses. Hence, the
Commission for computing AFC for FY 2015-16 has considered 5% escalation on the AFC approved
by the Commission for FY 2013-14.
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 135
Further, while projecting the variable cost of NTPC coal based stations for FY 2015-16, the
Commission has considered an escalation of 5% and applied the same on the actual average
variable charges including Fuel Price Adjustment (FPA) charges for the period October, 14 to
December 2014 as per the actual bills for these three months.
For gas based stations, the Commission has taken cognisance of recent increase in gas price
during FY 2014-15. The applicable gas price is valid till FY 2017-18 and, therefore, the Commission
has not considered any escalation on the variable charges for gas based stations. The Commission
has considered the variable charges for gas based stations on the basis of the energy charges billed
for the month of January and February 2015.
For new central generating stations likely to supply power in FY 2015-16, for whom tariff
orders are yet to be issued by CERC, the Petitioner has projected a rate of Rs. 4.50/kWh. The
Commission, however, has considered a provisional rate of Rs. 4.00/kWh for energy available from
new CGS stations based on the consideration of fixed charge at Rs. 1.80/kWh and variable charge of
Rs. 2.20/kWh except for Parbati Stage III for which CERC has issued provisional tariff.
4.4.9.3 Power Purchase cost from IPPs and UREDA Projects
The cost of power from IPPs and UREDA projects has been considered based on the rates
approved by the Commission, in accordance with the prevalent Renewable Energy Tariff
Regulations.
4.4.9.4 Power Purchase Rate for Free Power
The Commission, in the interest of consumers of the State, in its MYT Order, has revisited
the methodology adopted by it for computation of the rate of free power. The Commission,
accordingly, continues its approach of computing free power rate as the weighted average rate of
power from large hydro generating stations to be received in FY 2015-16 as approved by the
Commission for FY 2015-16. The Commission has, accordingly, computed the rate of free power for
FY 2015-16 as shown in the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
136 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.14: Rate of Free Power approved for FY 2015-16
S. No. Particulars Quantum (MU) Total Cost (Rs. Crore) Average Cost
(Rs. /kWh) 1 UJVNL-Main Stations 3020.66 315.66 1.05 2 Maneri Bhali-II 1209.24 161.96 1.34 3 NHPC 578.85 184.24 3.18 4 Tehri-I 115.81 62.32 5.38 5 Koteshwar 52.44 17.96 3.42 6 SJVNL 254.75 96.44 3.79
Average of LHPs 5231.75 838.58 1.60
4.4.9.5 Cost of Power to meet RPO Targets
The Commission, as discussed earlier, has considered that the Petitioner, for meeting RPO
targets shall endeavour to procure power from eligible sources of power on best effort basis.
Accordingly, the Commission has considered Rs. 4.75/kWh as the cost of power for meeting its
non-solar RPO target and for meeting its solar RPO target, the Commission has considered Rs.
6.99/kWh as approved by the Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15.
4.4.9.6 Cost of Deficit Power Purchase
The Commission for considering the cost of short term power purchase has gone through
the prevailing rates at which the Petitioner has procured power during the period April 2014 to
January 2015 and has considered 5% escalation on the same which works out to be around Rs.
3.88/kWh. The Commission has, therefore, for projecting cost of deficit power considered a rate of
Rs. 3.88/kWh.
The Petitioner, in its APR Petition for FY 2013-14 considered energy availability on account
of Medium Term PPA of 200 MW for FY 2014-15. The Commission also accorded in principle
approval for procurement of 200 MW power on medium term basis. However, no progress has been
made for procurement of medium term power by the Petitioner. Considering the power available
from firm sources, the quantum of power to be procured from market on short term basis works out
to around 13.62% of total energy requirement during FY 2015-16. The Commission is of the view
that the Petitioner needs to plan properly to meet the energy requirement of the State from firm
sources. The Commission directs the Petitioner to expedite the process of medium term
procurement of power through competitive bidding from FY 2015-16 onwards and submit the
details of steps taken towards the same within 3 months from the date of this Order.
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 137
4.4.9.7 Unscheduled Interchange Charges (UI)
The Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 stated as follows:
“As a progressive step towards better management of deficit power, the Commission hereby directs
the Petitioner to restrict the net drawal from the grid within its drawal schedules whenever
the system frequency is below 49.85 Hz. The Commission would further like to clarify that while
truing up the power purchase costs for FY 2013-14, the Commission will consider the actual UI
overdrawls upto the grid frequency of 49.85 Hz and the UI charges and penalty thereof, if applicable,
for any overdrawl below grid frequency of 49.85 Hz shall not be allowed while truing up the ARR for
the FY 2013-14.”
The Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 stated as follows:
“The Commission in accordance with above directs the Petitioner to restrict the net drawal
from the grid within its drawal schedules whenever the system frequency is below 49.90 Hz
in order to ensure better grid discipline.”
The Commission, therefore, directs the Petitioner to restrict the net drawal from the grid
within its drawal schedules whenever the system frequency is below 49.90 Hz in order to ensure
grid discipline.
4.4.9.8 Total Power Purchase Cost for FY 2015-16
Based on the above, the Commission approves the total power purchase cost for the
Petitioner for FY 2015-16 as Rs. 3,254.39 Crore for purchase of 12,775.93 MU which includes surplus
power of 290.08 MU which is to be banked. The summary of the power purchase from different
generating stations during FY 2015-16 and the corresponding costs as approved by the Commission
are shown in the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
138 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.15: Total Power Purchase Cost for FY 2015-16
Source of Power Power Purchase (MUs)
Total Cost (Rs. Crore)
Average Rate (Rs./kWh)
UJVNL-Main Stations 3,020.66 315.66 1.05 Maneri Bhali-II 1,209.24 161.96 1.34 UREDA-SHPs 11.78 2.74 2.32 Pathri 99.00 10.40 1.05 Mohammadpur 54.45 6.53 1.20 UJVNL Total 4395.13 497.28 1.13 NHPC Salal 37.99 3.89 1.02 Tanakpur 15.96 4.15 2.60 Tanakpur free power 49.24 7.89 1.60 Chamera-1 80.76 14.02 1.74 Chamera-2 21.02 6.19 2.94 Chamera III 55.02 20.39 3.71 Uri 91.30 15.45 1.69 Dhauliganga 57.03 17.47 3.06 Dhauliganga free power 127.60 20.45 1.60 Dulhasti 106.92 59.89 5.60 Sewa-2 27.01 12.25 4.53 Parbati Stage-III 34.07 13.69 4.02 Uri-II 51.77 16.86 3.26 NHPC Sub-Total 755.69 212.59 2.81
THDC Tehri-I 115.81 62.32 5.38 Koteshwar 52.44 17.96 3.42 Free Power - Tehri I 391.04 62.68 1.60 Free Power - Koteshwar 148.30 23.77 1.60 THDC Sub-Total 707.60 166.73 2.36 NTPC Anta 93.99 45.64 4.86 Auraiya 92.26 56.03 6.07 Dadri Gas 130.62 71.18 5.45 Unchahar-I 248.15 88.55 3.57 Unchahar-II 120.58 43.12 3.58 Unchahar-III 96.74 39.53 4.09 Rihand-1 325.37 88.12 2.71 Rihand-2 295.82 86.09 2.91 Rihand -3 337.73 96.67 2.86 Singrauli 751.86 147.35 1.96 Koldam 74.31 29.72 4.00 NTPC- Barh 343.45 137.38 4.00 Dadri II 69.69 40.94 5.87
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 139
Table 4.15: Total Power Purchase Cost for FY 2015-16
Source of Power Power Purchase (MUs)
Total Cost (Rs. Crore)
Average Rate (Rs./kWh)
Jhajhar 33.35 23.85 7.15 Kahalgaon 160.96 69.33 4.31 NTPC Total 3174.88 1063.50 3.35 NAPP 112.74 29.21 2.59 RAPP 169.93 63.34 3.73 NPC Total 282.67 92.55 3.27 Vishnu prayag (free power) 192.58 30.87 1.60 NJHPS 56.27 17.05 3.03 RHEP 198.48 79.39 4.00 Sasan 466.08 65.25 1.40 Others-IPPs* 846.12 369.40 4.37 Firm Energy Available 11075.48 2594.62 2.34 Banking for next year 290.08 - Deficit Power Purchase 1,700.46 659.78 3.88 Total Power Purchase 12,485.85 3,254.39 2.61
*Includes power purchase to meet RPO targets
The Commission, further, directs the Petitioner to seek prior approval of the Commission,
in case the variation in power purchase quantum or power purchase cost in any quarter exceeds
by more than 5% of the approved power purchase quantum and cost for the respective quarter
worked out on pro-rata basis from the total approved quantity and cost for FY 2015-16 as
indicated in the Table below, failing which, the Commission may disallow such additional
power purchase cost while truing up the ARR for FY 2015-16:
Table 4.16: Quarterly Power Purchase Quantum and Cost approved for FY 2015-16
Particulars April 15 to June 15 July-15 to Sept-15 Oct-15 to Dec-15 Jan-16 to March 16 FY 2015-16 Quantum
(MU) Cost (Rs.
Crore) Quantum
(MU) Cost (Rs.
Crore) Quantum
(MU) Cost (Rs.
Crore) Quantum
(MU) Cost (Rs.
Crore) Quantum
(MU)* Cost (Rs.
Crore) Power Purchase 3143.44 725.80 3465.49 743.91 3113.87 875.97 3053.13 908.71 12775.93 3254.39
*Includes purchase of surplus energy of 290.08 MU
For the purpose of computing FCA, the base variable cost of thermal stations (base fuel cost)
for the purpose of computation of FCA is given in the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
140 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.17: Variable Cost of Fuel Based Station for FY 2015-16 (Rs. /kWh) Name of Generating Station Variable Charges
Anta 3.506 Auraiya 4.520 Dadri Gas 4.226 Unchahar-I 2.524 Unchahar-II 2.503 Unchahar-III 2.499 Rihand-I 1.815 Rihand-II 1.895 Rihand –III 1.894 Singrauli 1.342 NTPC- Barh 2.200 Dadri II 4.150 Jhajhar 4.621 Kahalgaon-II 2.647
4.4.10 Water Charges
The Commission, in its APR Order for FY 2014-15 in addition to the power purchase cost,
has considered water charges of Rs. 20 Crore for procurement of power from CGS based on the
actual water charges for FY 2013-14. This was due to the reason that CERC in its Tariff Regulations,
2014 has stated that water charges shall be paid separately and, therefore, the Commission had
considered the same separately for FY 2014-15. The Commission, in line with its previous
methodology, has approved water charges of Rs. 20 Crore for FY 2015-16 and hence, the total power
purchase cost approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 is Rs. 3274.39 Crore.
4.4.11 Transmission Charges payable to PGCIL and PTCUL
4.4.11.1 Inter-State Transmission Charges payable to PGCIL
The Petitioner in its Petition has projected PGCIL charges for FY 2015-16 on the following
basis:
i. Inter-state Charges have been projected on “per MU basis” for FY 2013-14.
ii. The actual per MU PGCIL Charge for FY 2013-14 has been escalated at 4% p.a. and
then multiplied by the power projected for FY 2015-16.
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 141
The Commission for the purpose of approval of PGCIL charges has considered the actual
data for FY 2014-15 (April 2014 to December 2014) and computed PGCIL charges on per unit basis.
The per unit charges so derived have been escalated by 3% per annum and multiplied by the Power
Purchase quantum approved to be imported through PGCIL network for FY 2015-16. Accordingly,
the Inter-State Transmission charges approved for FY 2015-16 works out to Rs. 226.72 Crore.
4.4.11.2 Intra-State Transmission Charges Payable to PTCUL
While projecting intra-state transmission charges payable to PTCUL for FY 2015-16, the
Petitioner has projected the same ARR as approved by the Commission in its APR Order for FY
2014-15 dated April 10, 2014. The Commission has determined annual transmission charges for
State Transmission Utility (PTCUL) as Rs. 295.30 Crore for FY 2015-16 vide its Order dated April 11,
2015. In accordance with the aforesaid Order, these charges are payable by the Petitioner and are,
therefore, included in its ARR for FY 2015-16.
4.4.11.3 SLDC Charges
The Commission has determined annual fixed charges for State Load Despatch Centre
(SLDC) as Rs. 7.45 Crore for FY 2015-16 vide its Order dated April 11, 2015. In accordance with the
aforesaid Order, these charges are payable by the Petitioner and are, therefore, included in its ARR
for FY 2015-16.
4.5 Cost of Assets & Financing
4.5.1 Capital Cost of Original Assets The Petitioner has submitted that need for capital expenditure in UPCL is for two primary
reasons:
1. Increase in electricity demand makes it essential for the Petitioner to make investments
in procuring power to meet the demand and also prepare its distribution infrastructure
for evacuating the increasing power that shall be procured and subsequently distributed
to its increasing number of consumers.
2. Making investments to facilitate loss reduction, increase operational efficiency through
IT and automation to improve the quality and reliability of supply.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
142 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission in its MYT Order, 2013 had approved the
capital expenditure amounting to Rs. 360.47 Crore in each year of the Control Period. The Petitioner
further submitted that the Commission had mentioned that the Petitioner did not get the Capital
expenditure schemes approved by the Commission and in the absence of cost benefit analysis; the
Commission had approved the capital expenditure on average basis. The Petitioner submitted that
the Commission in the said Order stated that it will analyse the capital expenditure plan in detail
once the Petitioner submits the scheme wise details while carrying out the Annual Performance
Review.
The Petitioner further submitted the details of Capital Investments made during the last five
years which is as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.18: Capital Investments made from FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) Year Rs. (Crore)
2009-10 250.71 2010-11 264.99 2011-12 301.94 2012-13 256.97 2013-14 313.84 Total 1388.45
The Petitioner further submitted that the capital expenditure for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16
has been projected based on scheme wise capital expenditure and the Petitioner submitted the
phasing of proposed capital expenditure plan as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.19: Phasing of Capital Expenditure (Rs. Crore) Particulars Capex FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
REC Scheme 262.52 106.72 155.80 Devi Aapda 17.20 17.20 APDRP-Part A 42.77 9.86 32.91 R-APRDRP- Part B 512.63 108.63 404.00 Other Capital expenditure 503.93 176.18 217.74 Total 1229.05 418.60 810.45
4.5.2 Capitalisation of Assets
The Petitioner submitted that the Opening CWIP of Rs. 697.90 Crore is proposed to be
capitalised within two years. The Petitioner further submitted that the capital expenditure proposed
in FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 would be capitalised within two years from the year in which the
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 143
expenditure has been incurred. The Petitioner, accordingly, submitted the capitalisation plan for FY
2014-15 and FY 2015-16 as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.20: Capital Expenditure and Capitalization Proposed for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Capital Expenditure FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 Opening CWIP 697.90 348.95 348.95 Capital expenditure for FY 2014-15 418.60 209.30 209.30 Capital expenditure for FY 2015-16 810.45 0.00 405.23 Total 558.25 963.47
The Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15 stated as follows:
“As discussed in the above paragraphs, the Commission is of the view that it would not be appropriate
to revise the capitalisation for FY 2014-15 as approved in the Business Plan and MYT Order based on
the estimated figures submitted by the Petitioner. The Commission shall consider the variation in
capitalisation for each year during the truing up for the respective year based on the audited accounts.
However, it is observed that the Petitioner is going ahead with the capital expenditure without seeking
prior approval from the Commission which is in contravention to the Regulations and license
conditions. In this regard, the Petitioner is directed to seek approval of the Commission before
starting any capital works in accordance with the Regulations, failing which the works not
approved by the Commission would not be considered during truing up.”
Since, FY 2014-15 was not yet over, the Petitioner did not submit the details of assets
capitalised during FY 2014-15. Thus, in view of the above, the Commission has approved the total
Capitalisation as approved by it for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013
and is as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.21: Capitalization approved for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT Order dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Capitalisation for FY 2014-15 350.64 558.25 350.64 Capitalisation for FY 2015-16 355.77 973.47 355.77
The Commission re-iterates its direction and directs the Petitioner to seek approval of the
Commission before starting any capital works in accordance with the Regulations, failing which
the works not approved by the Commission would not be considered during truing up.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
144 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
4.5.3 Financing of Capital Assets
The Petitioner submitted that the funding of RAPDRP – Part A has been considered as
entirely funded through debt and for RAPDRP – Part B, 90% has been considered as funded
through grant and remaining 10% through loan. It added that the remaining capital expenditure is
assumed to be funded through the debt:equity ratio of 70:30. As detailed in the above paragraphs,
the Commission has considered the same capitalization for FY 2015-16 as approved in the MYT
Order dated May 06, 2013, hence, the financing of the capitalisation has also been considered
equivalent to that approved in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. In the MYT Order, the
Commission had considered financing through grants on pro-rata basis based on the Petitioner’s
submission and the balance financing requirement was worked out in line with the Commission’s
earlier approach and as per the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 considering the debt-equity ratio of
70:30 for the Control Period. Further, the Commission in its MYT Order had mentioned that it shall
reconsider the means of financing during the APR and truing up proceedings while approving the
scheme wise capitalisation of the Petitioner.
As discussed in Chapter 3 of this Order, the Commission has provisionally considered
capitalisation amount for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14 as per the audited balance sheets for respective
years. Therefore, the Opening Value of Grant, Loan and Equity have undergone changes. However,
with regard to financing of the capitalisation for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, as discussed above the
Commission has considered the financing as approved in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
Accordingly, the financing plan as approved by the Commission is as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.22: Financing Plan as approved by the Commission (Rs. Crore)
Particulars FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 Grant Loan Equity Total Grant Loan Equity Total
Opening Value 1,394.67 1,329.08 478.80 3,202.56 1,484.58 1,511.60 557.02 3,553.20 Additions in the year 89.91 182.51 78.22 350.64 106.90 174.21 74.66 355.77
Less: Deletions during the year - - - - - - - -
Closing Value 1,484.58 1,511.60 557.02 3,553.20 1,591.49 1,685.80 631.68 3,908.97
4.6 Interest and Finance Charges
The Petitioner submitted that it has computed interest expenses based on the existing loans
and new loans proposed for funding the capital expenditure. The Petitioner submitted that for
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 145
existing loans, it has computed the interest separately for each loan based on the arrangement with
the funding agency from which the loan is taken. The Petitioner further submitted that for any
amount that is to be received in the existing scheme during the year has been covered under
existing loans. As regard the new loans, the Petitioner submitted that the funding agency would be
REC and PFC and the new loans have been considered with 3 years moratorium, 10 years
repayment period and 13% rate of interest. The Petitioner added that the same is in line with
existing arrangement of loans with REC and PFC. The Petitioner further submitted that it has
claimed guarantee fee of Rs. 2.20 Crore. The projected interest expense claimed by the Petitioner for
FY 2015-16 is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.23: Projected Interest Expenses (Rs. Crore) Particulars FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Interest on existing loans 89.42 84.98 Interest on new loans 13.48 47.38 Total 102.90 132.35 Guarantee Fees 2.20 2.20
The Commission has worked out the Interest and Finance Charges considering the loan
amount corresponding to the assets as at the beginning of FY 2015-16 based on the approved means
of finance. As detailed in the above Paragraphs, the Commission has not revised the capitalization
and source of funding for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16. However, as the Commission has
provisionally approved revised capitalisation for FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14, the impact thereof has
been considered while computing the interest on loan amount. Interest rates for estimating interest
for FY 2015-16 has been considered as the weighted average rate of interest calculated on the basis
of the actual loan portfolio corresponding to the asset capitalized at the beginning of the year. As
stated in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 also, any variation in the interest due to change in rate
of interest shall be considered while undertaking true up based on the Audited Accounts of FY
2015-16.
The Regulations provides for treating repayment for each year equal to the depreciation
allowed for that year. However, in case of a distribution company most of the assets are either old
or are created out of grants. Accordingly, depreciation allowed to UPCL would work out lower
than the actual repayment as per the loan schedule. Hence, the Commission has considered the
repayment of loans based on the approved repayment schedule for different schemes and for
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
146 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
normative loans, 10 year repayment period has been considered for computation of interest expense
for the Control Period.
The Commission, unlike the Petitioner, has not considered the works funded through
RAPDRP – Part A as loan. As per the terms and conditions of sanction for loan under Part-‘A’
SCADA/DMS of R-APDRP scheme:
“14.9 Conversion of loan into grant:
I. The Part-‘A’ loan along with interest thereon shall be converted into grant once the
establishment of the required system is achieved and verified by an independent agency
appointed by Ministry of Power (MoP). No conversion to grant will be made in case
projects are not completed within 3 years from the date of sanctioning of the project. In
such cases the concerned utility will have to bear full loan and interest repayment. The
project will be deemed to be completed and the establishment of the required system duly
verified by an independent agency appointed by MoP.
II. Whenever the loan from GoI and FI’s will be converted into grant, interest and other
charges paid on the converted amount will also be treated as grant & reimbursed to
utility. For the loan and interest which could not be converted into grant on account of
not meeting the conditions of conversion, the utility/State will have to bear the balance
burden of loan and interest repayment.”
Thus, from the terms it is very clear that Part-‘A’ loan along with interest thereon shall be
converted into grant once the establishment of the required system is achieved and whenever the
loan from GoI and FI’s are converted into grant, interest and other charges paid on the converted
amount will also be treated as grant & reimbursed to utility. However, for the loan and interest
which could not be converted into grant on account of not meeting the conditions of conversion, the
utility/State will have to bear the balance burden of loan and interest repayment. Accordingly,
UPCL will be getting refund of the interest when the loan is converted into grant on successful
implementation of the Scheme, and thus, the Commission does not see any reason to treat the same
as loan. The Commission has treated the amount as financed through grant. The Commission has
also not considered the AREP loans eligible for interest in line with its approach detailed in the
previous Orders. Further, since the practise of the Petitioner Company is to capitalise the assets in
its accounts on March 31st every year and nothing has been brought on record by the Petitioner to
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 147
show that the asset is capitalised when it is put to use. Hence, the Commission has not allowed any
interest for capitalisation during the year, as any interest before capitalisation forms part of CWIP.
The Commission has worked out the interest on the balance loan worked out by reducing the
opening loans by the amount of repayments considered by it.
Based on the loans and repayment considered and interest rates adopted by the
Commission, the interest for the FY 2015-16 has been estimated, the details of which are indicated in
the Table given below:
Table 4.24: Interest Expenses approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved Loans
Opening Balance Addition Repayment Closing Balance
Loans corresponding to works capitalised till FY 2013-14 APDRP 7.75 0.00 0.28 7.47 District Plan 94.56 0.00 1.28 93.28 PMGY 29.73 0.00 0.60 29.13 REC Loan 105.97 0.00 12.25 93.73 State Plan 0.75 0.00 0.50 0.25 MNP 38.02 0.00 4.23 33.79 APDP 13.84 0.00 0.89 12.95 AREP 11.79 0.00 11.79 0.00 RGGVY 31.52 0.00 6.48 25.04 Normative Loans 188.05 0.00 53.03 135.01 Sub Total 521.98 0.00 91.33 430.65 Loans corresponding to MYT Works for FY 15 & FY16
164.26 174.21 35.67 302.80
Total 686.25 174.21 127.00 733.45 Interest 66.68
4.6.1 Interest on Consumer Security Deposit
The Petitioner submitted that interest on consumer security deposit has been projected
based on enhancement of load in each year as was projected in the MYT Petition. The Petitioner has
claimed interest on consumer security deposit for each year on the average of opening and closing
balance of consumer security deposit @ 9.00%. The projected consumer security deposit as claimed
by the Petitioner is shown in the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
148 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.25: Projected Consumer Security Deposit (Rs. Crore) Particulars FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Opening Balance of Security Deposit 505.41 534.35 Estimated Addition during the year 28.94 31.61 Closing balance of Security Deposit 534.35 565.95 Average Balance 519.88 550.15 Interest Rate 9.0% 9.0% Interest on Security Deposit 46.79 49.51
The Commission has considered the addition of consumer security deposit during the year
as approved by it in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. However, the Commission has revised the
opening balance of security deposit for FY 2015-16 based on the closing balance of security deposit
as on March 31, 2014 in the audited accounts for FY 2013-14. In view of the above, the Commission
has considered the additions in security deposit for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 similar to that
approved in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. Further, the Commission vide Order dated July 27,
2007 had ruled as follows:
“1. With effect from 1st April 2007, the distribution licensee shall pay interest on Security Deposit of
consumer, both consumption and material security, at the Bank Rate as on 1st April of the financial
year for which interest is due. Bank Rate shall mean the Rate as notified by Reserve Bank of India u/s
49 of the RBI Act, 1934.”
Accordingly, the Commission has allowed Interest on Consumer Security Deposit for FY
2015-16 at the interest rate of 8.50% which is the Bank Rate as on April 01, 2015. However, the
amount of interest on security deposit shall be trued up based on the actual amount paid for FY
2015-16 by the Petitioner to the consumers towards interest on their security deposit held by it. The
following Table shows the working of Interest on Consumer Security Deposits for FY 2015-16 as
approved by the Commission in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013, as claimed by the Petitioner
and as approved by the Commission in the present Order:
Table 4.26: Interest on Consumer Security Deposit approved for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) Particulars Approved in the MYT
Order dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Opening Balance of Security Deposit 460.53 534.35 534.35 Estimated Addition during the year 31.61 31.61 31.61 Closing Balance of Security Deposit 492.14 565.95 565.95 Average Balance of Security Deposit 476.34 550.15 550.15 Interest Rate considered 8.50% 9.00% 8.50% Interest on Security Deposit 40.49 49.51 46.76
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 149
4.6.2 Government Guarantee Fee
The Petitioner has further claimed guarantee fee of Rs. 2.20 Crore, which is the fees payable
by it to GoU in FY 2015-16. The Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 had approved
guarantee fees for FY 2015-16 as Rs 2.03 Crore. A Guarantee fee @ 1.00% p.a. is payable to the
Government on the outstanding REC old loans and amount of L/C opened by the Petitioner.
The Commission has considered guarantee fee as approved in the MYT Order dated May 06,
2013. The Guarantee Fee for FY 2015-16 as claimed by the Petitioner and as approved by the
Commission is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.27: Guarantee Fees approved for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 Proposed Approved
Government Guarantee Fees @ 1.00% 2.03 2.20 2.03
In addition, the Commission has considered an interest of Rs. 23.97 Crore towards REC Old
loan, which is as approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
Further, the Commission has not reduced the amount of interest capitalised as the
Commission has considered only those loans which have been utilised for creation of assets and not
the total loans as taken by the Petitioner and the interest on balance loans utilised for capital
expenditure pending capitalisation have been assumed to be in CWIP. The summary of Interest and
Finance Charges approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 is given in the Table below:
Table 4.28: Interest and Finance Charges for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in MYT Order dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Interest on Loan 78.99 132.35 66.68 Guarantee Fee 2.03 2.20 2.03 Interest on Security Deposit 40.49 49.51 46.76 REC Old Loan 23.97 - 23.97 Total Interest Charges 145.47 184.07 139.44 Capitalisation 0.00 0.00 0.00 Net Interest and Finance Charges 145.47 184.07 139.44
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
150 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
4.7 Depreciation
The Petitioner submitted that depreciation has been computed based on the projected gross
fixed assets for each year. The Petitioner submitted that it has computed depreciation at an average
rate of of 5.20% as approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
The Commission observed that the Petitioner had not submitted asset-wise depreciation
details for FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15. In this regard, the Commission directed the Petitioner to
submit the asset-wise depreciation details for FY 2015-16 in the respective format prescribed in the
Regulation. The Petitioner, did not submit the said computation, however, it apportioned the total
depreciation among various asset class in the same proportion of asset class wise depreciation for
FY 2013-14. The depreciation projected by Petitioner is given in the Table below:
Table 4.29: Projected Depreciation (Rs. Crore) Year FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Opening GFA 2161.43 2719.68 Additions 558.25 963.47 Closing GFA 2719.68 3683.15 Opening grant 0.00 97.77 Addition Grant 97.77 363.60 Closing Grant 97.77 461.37 Opening less grant 2161.43 2621.91 Addition less Grant 460.48 599.87 Closing less grant 2621.91 3221.78 Depreciation rate 5.20% 5.20% Depreciation 124.37 151.94
The Commission has considered the opening GFA of FY 2014-15 as the revised closing GFA
of FY 2013-14 after truing up as discussed in Chapter 3 of the Order. Further as discussed in
previous Paras, the Commission has not revised the capitalisation approved for FY 2014-15 and FY
2015-16.
Table 4.30: Opening GFA for FY 2015-16 considered by the Commission (Rs. Crore)
Particulars FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 Opening GFA 3202.56 3553.20 Additions During the Year 350.64 355.77 Closing GFA 3553.20 3908.97 Grant 1394.67 1484.58 Depreciable Opening GFA 1807.89 2068.62
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 151
The Petitioner has claimed depreciation on the average assets held by it during the year, i.e.
on average of opening and closing balance of the GFA. However, as already discussed above, it has
been observed that the Petitioner follows the practice of capitalizing the assets on the last day of the
Financial Year. Nothing has been brought on record by the Petitioner to show that the asset is
capitalised when it is put to use. Hence, the Commission has adopted the similar approach as
adopted by it in the previous Tariff Orders of allowing depreciation on the opening GFA.
Pro-rata depreciation on assets capitalised during the year would not be admissible in case
the asset is capitalised at the year end. Hence, to validate the same, pre-requisite would be the
capitalisation policy as well as the fixed asset register showing the date of additions made in the
assets during the year. In this regard, the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 had
directed the Petitioner to take note of the above pre-requisite and submit the same along with the
next filing and also claim depreciation based on the rates specified in the Regulations for each class
of asset. The Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15 dated April 10, 2014 reiterated its
observation and directed the Petitioner once again to frame a capitalization policy and maintain
fixed asset registers and submit the same along with the next filing and also claim depreciation
based on the rates specified in the Regulations for each class of asset. The Petitioner in its current
Petition has submitted that it has submitted Fixed Asset Register till FY 2012-13 to the Commission.
However, the same has not been maintained up to date. The Commission directs the Petitioner to
maintain proper Fixed Asset Register showing amongst others the date of capitalisation of each
asset, their location, alongwith the accumulated depreciation on the same and submit the same
along with the next filing and also claim depreciation based on the rates as specified in the
Regulations for each class of asset.
In the absence of complete Fixed Asset Register, the Commission at this stage has considered
average rate of 4.57% as computed for FY 2013-14 and has applied the same on the opening GFA.
The depreciation rate and, accordingly, the depreciation expenses will be trued up by applying the
asset wise depreciation rate in accordance with the provisions of UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011 at
the time of truing up in this regard. The summary of Depreciation for FY 2015-16 as approved by
the Commission in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013, as proposed by the Petitioner and as
approved by the Commission in this Order is shown in the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
152 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.31: Depreciation for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in the
MYT Order dated 06.05.2013
Proposed Approved
Depreciable Opening GFA 1877.33 2621.91 2068.62 Depreciation Rate 5.20% 5.20% 4.57% Depreciation 97.68 151.94* 94.54
* Depreciation computed on average GFA
4.8 Return on Equity
The Petitioner submitted that as per UERC MYT Regulations, 2011, equity has to be
calculated on post tax basis at 16%. The Petitioner submitted that it has computed RoE at 16% on the
average equity. The Petitioner further submitted that opening equity for FY 2015-16 has been
considered based on the closing equity for FY 2014-15 which has been projected based on the
opening and closing equity for FY 2013-14. The Petitioner further submitted that addition in equity
in each year is based on the funding pattern projected for investing in the capital expenditure plan.
The projected return on equity as submitted by the Petitioner for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16
is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.32: Projected Return on Equity (Rs. Crore) Year FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Opening Equity 1170.87 1258.76 Additions 87.90 120.29 Closing Equity 1258.76 1379.05 Average Equity 1214.82 1318.91 Rate of Return (%) 16.00% 16.00% Return on equity 194.37 211.03
The Petitioner subsequently revised its computation of Equity, however, it did not revise the
RoE claimed by it.
As regards the sources of internal resource the Commission in its APR Order for FY 2014-15
had stated that it was not appropriate to use the current liabilities as internal resources to create
long term assets, the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 also had stated as follows:
“In case the petitioner has to pay these liabilities it will have to either liquidate its assets or resort to
external borrowings. Both the options would not be in the interest of the corporation. Further, with
holding any payment and utilizing it elsewhere can also attract punitive action which can be in the
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 153
form of penalty or surcharge and the Commission has already taken a view that no penalty or
surcharge due to the inefficiency of the petitioner would be allowed to be a pass through in tariffs. The
management of the petitioner’s company is, therefore, directed to look into the issue and
take appropriate remedial action for correcting this practice.”
In this regard, Regulation 22(3) of UERC (Term and conditions for determination of Tariff)
Regulations, 2011 specifies as under:
“The premium raised by the Generating Company, or the Transmission Licensee or the Distribution
Licensee or SLDC while issuing share capital and investment of internal resources created out of free
reserve, if any, shall also be reckoned as paid up capital for the purpose of computing return on equity,
provided such premium amount and internal resources are actually utilised for meeting capital
expenditure.”
Thus, the Regulations clearly stipulate that investment of internal resources created out of
free reserve shall be considered as equity eligible for return purposes. In view of the above, the
Commission based on its previous approach and the approach as discussed in previous Sections on
truing up for FY 2013-14, has worked out the Return on Equity on opening eligible equity based on
the approved means of finance at the rate of 16% in accordance with UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011.
The Return on Equity approved by the Commission is shown in the Tables below:
Table 4.33: Approved Equity eligible for Return (Rs. Crore) Particulars FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Opening Equity 208.22 227.27 305.49 Addition 19.05 78.22 74.66 Closing 227.27 305.49 380.15
Table 4.34: Return on Equity approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Sr. No. Particulars Approved in MYT Order
dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
1 Opening Equity 322.00 1258.76 305.49 2 Addition 74.66 120.29 74.66 3 Closing Equity (1+2) 396.66 1379.05 380.15 4 Rate of Return 16.00% 16.00% 16.00% 5 Total Return on Equity (1 X4) 51.52 211.03 48.88
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
154 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
4.9 Operation and Maintenance Expenses
The Petitioner submitted that as per UERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of
Tariff) Regulations, 2011, Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Expenses for the nth year shall
comprise of the following components:
a) R&Mn: Repairs and maintenance expenses
b) EMPn: Salaries, wages, pension contribution and other employee costs
c) A&Gn: Administrative and general expenses including insurance charges if any
O&Mn = R&Mn + EMPn + A&Gn
Where, O&Mn–Operation and Maintenance expense for the nth year; EMPn – Employee Costs
for the nth year; R&Mn – Repair and Maintenance Costs for the nth year; A&Gn – Administrative and
General Costs for the nth year.
4.9.1 Employee Costs (EMPn)
The Petitioner submitted that as specified in Clause 84(4) of Uttarakhand Electricity
Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011,
employee costs for the nth year and also for the year preceding the Control Period will be calculated
as per the method given below.
EMPn = (EMPn-1) x (1+Gn) x (CPIinflation)
Where - EMPn-1 : Employee Costs for the (n-1)th year; CPIinflation: is the average increase in
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for immediately preceding three years;
Gn is a growth factor for the nth year. Value of Gn shall be determined by the Commission in
the MYT tariff order for meeting the additional manpower requirement based on
Distribution Licensee’s filings, benchmarking and any other factor that the Commission feels
appropriate.
The Petitioner further submitted that it has followed the same approach as the one followed
in the true-up for FY 2013-14 to calculate the Employee Expenses for FY 2014-15 & FY 2015-16. The
Petitioner further submitted that the Commission had not considered the employee expenses for FY
2012-13 for projecting the employee expenses for the each year of the MYT control Period. It further
submitted that the actual employee expenses for FY 2012-13 based on the audited account is now
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 155
available and the actual gross and net employee expenses for FY 2012-13 are Rs 257.98 Crore and Rs
222.76 Crore respectively. The Petitioner further submitted that it has considered employee
expenses for FY 2012-13 as the base year and projected the employee expenses for each year of the
MYT Period based on the UERC Tariff Regulations, 2011.
The Petitioner further submitted that it had to bear the responsibility of paying enhanced
pension which is on account of pay revision in third time scale with effect from 01.01.1996 due to
which pension and family pension was revised for the employees who retired between 01.01.1996 to
20.07.2010. The Petitioner further submitted that the Treasury department of Uttarakhand refused
to disburse pension on enhanced pay as they did not get contribution on this account. GoU vide GO
No. 85 dated 07.07.2011 stated that the pension/family pension is not allowed on presumptive pay.
The Petitioner also submitted that on February 05, 2013, Additional Secy (energy) vide letter no. 173
directed UPCL to release enhanced pension from its own funds. It submitted that in accordance
with the directions of GoU, it has started paying enhanced pension to the employees who retired
during 01.01.1996 to 20.07.2010. The Petitioner submitted that actual impact of enhanced pension for
FY 2013-14 was Rs. 17.23 Crore and since enhanced pension was not part of the base employee
expenses, i.e. employee expenses for FY 2012-13, the same has been considered additionally in FY
2013-14 and increased in FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 by the same factors as applied for other
employee expenses.
The Petitioner submitted that in addition to the above cost, additional expenses incurred on
account of new allowances has been considered as a part of employee expenses. The Petitioner
submitted that it has increased the value of certain allowances such as Motor Cycle Allowance,
Conveyance Charges, Cycle Allowance, Washing Allowance, Distribution Profit Incentive
Allowance, Bi-Lingual Allowance etc. w.e.f. August 1, 2013. The Petitioner has, accordingly, claimed
additional cost on account of such expenses as Rs. 0.94 Crore for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16.
The summary of total employee cost projected by the Petitioner for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-
16 is shown in the Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
156 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.35: Projected Employee Costs for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) Components FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Gross Employee Expenses 257.98 299.55 347.03 402.08 Inflation Factor (3 years avg.)(CPI) 9.76% 9.50% 9.50%
Growth Factor(Gn) 5.79% 5.80% 5.81% Enhanced Pension 17.23 18.87 20.66 Additional Allowance 0.63 0.94 0.94 Total Employee Expenses 317.41 366.84 423.87 Less: Capitalisation 38.47 57.67 66.80 Net Employee Expenses 278.94 309.17 357.07
The Commission in Chapter 3 while carrying out truing up for FY 2013-14 has already
discussed in detail the reasons for not considering the base year as FY 2012-13. The Commission for
projecting the employee expenses for FY 2015-16 has revised the CPI escalation rate for the Control
Period to 9.50% from the earlier rate of 8.75%.
Also it would be relevant to mention that in the MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 the
Commission had allowed recruitment of 888 employees in FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 to UPCL.
However, the pace of recruitment submitted by UPCL is much below the mark as shown in the
Table below:
Table 4.36: Comparison of proposed Recruitment vis-à-vis approved in MYT Order
Particulars Approved in the MYT Order dated 6.05.2013 Proposed
FY 2013-14* 444 02 FY 2014-15 444 713 FY 2015-16 444 45
*Actual
The Commission has revised the Gn Factor for FY 2013-14 as zero as the number of
retirement exceeded number of new recruitment. The Commission has, however, considered the Gn
factor as approved by it for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. The
Commission once again cautions UPCL that any saving in the employee expenses on this account
would not be shared with UPCL.
Further, UPCL has projected certain additional expenses on account of enhanced pensions.
The Commission is of the view that since O&M expenses have been allowed to it based on certain
norms and moreover, these expenses are controllable in nature, accordingly, UPCL should exercise
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 157
proper prudence while incurring these expenses as a commercial entity. As a one-time exception,
the Commission has allowed UPCL the recovery of the burden of enhanced pension through tariffs
for reasons dealt in Chapter 3 of the Order. However, any further allowance or incentives or
benefits granted to its employees will have to be borne by UPCL from its own resources or through
increased efficiency. Hence, UPCL is advised to exercise caution in incurring the expenditure as
the Commission would allow the expenses during truing up after examining the prudence of the
same. The Commission, however, has not allowed any new allowances for reasons as stated in
Chapter 3 of this Order.
The following Table shows the summary of the projected and approved employee expenses
for FY 2015-16:
Table 4.37: Employee Expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in the MYT Order dated 6.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Employee expenses 299.31 357.07 329.63
4.9.2 Repair and Maintenance Expenses (R&Mn)
The Petitioner submitted that as per Clause 84 (4) of 'Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory
Commission (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2011, repair and
maintenance expenses for the nth year and also for the year preceding the Control Period will be
calculated as per the method given below.
R&Mn = K x (GFAn-1) x (WPIinflation)
The Petitioner in its Petition has considered the R&M expenses for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-
16 as approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
Table 4.38: Projected R&M Expenses for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) Components FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
R&M Expenses 119.56 152.41
It is to be noted that R&M expenses are based on the capitalization approved by the
Commission. As discussed in Chapter 3 of this Order, the GFA of the Petitioner has been
provisionally revised from FY 2007-08 to FY 2013-14. However, as discussed earlier the Commission
has not revised the capitalization for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16. The Commission as discussed in
Chapter 3 of this Order has revised K factor to 2.84% and the Commission has, accordingly, re-
computed the R&M expenses for FY 2015-16. Further the Commission has considered the revised
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
158 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
WPI escalation rate of 7.42% for the control period as against the earlier escalation rate of 7.77%.
However, the Commission in its Order dated May 06, 2013 had held as under:
“The Commission for projecting the various Capital related expenses of ARR, i.e. Depreciation,
Interest on Loan Capital and Return on Equity for the Control Period has considered the Capital
Expenditure Plan and Capitalisation approved for the Control Period in this Order. The Commission
will analyse the actual Capital Expenditure and Capitalisation while carrying out the truing up of
ARR for respective year. In case, the actual Capital Expenditure and Capitalisation during any year
of the first Control Period is less than that approved by the Commission in this Order, the impact of
the same shall be considered while carrying out the truing up and any reduction in expenses on
account of lower actual capitalization as compared to capitalization considered by the Commission in
this Order shall not be considered as reduction in expenses on account of controllable factors.”
Accordingly, UPCL is cautioned that if the actual capitalisation for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-
16 is less than the capitalisation approved by the Commission, the impact of the same shall be
considered while carrying out the truing up and any reduction in expenses including R&M
expenses on account of lower actual capitalization as compared to capitalization considered by the
Commission in this Order shall not be considered as reduction in expenses on account of
controllable factors.
The following Table shows the summary of the projected and approved R&M expenses for
FY 2015-16:
Table 4.39: R&M expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in the MYT Order dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
R&M expenses 152.41 152.41 134.39
4.9.3 Administrative and General Expenses (A&Gn)
The Petitioner submitted that according to the Multi-year Tariff Regulations, 2011 of the
Commission, administrative and general expenses for the nth year and also for the year preceding
the Control Period will be calculated as per the method given below.
A&Gn = (A&Gn-1) x (WPIinflation) + Provision
The Petitioner further submitted that it has considered the A&G expenses as approved by
the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013. Thus, the summary of projected A&G
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 159
Expenses for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, as submitted by the Petitioner, is shown in the Table
below:
Table 4.40: Projected A&G Expenses for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) Particulars FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
A&G Expenses 24.79 27.57
As regards A&G expenses, the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 has
observed as follows:
“The Commission would write back the amount of provisions remaining unutilized with the
petitioner during the truing up exercise for the control period. Here the Commission would also
like to caution the petitioner that the A&G expenses are controllable in nature and the
Petitioner is expected to exercise prudence and propriety while incurring expenses under this
head.”
The Commission has revised the WPI escalation rate for the control period from the earlier
considered rate of 7.77% to 7.42% and has, accordingly, approved the A&G expenses for FY 2015-16
as follows.
Table 4.41: A&G Expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in the MYT Order dated 06.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Net A&G Expenses 27.57 27.57 27.50
4.9.3.1 O&M Expenses
The total O&M expenses claimed and approved for FY 2015-16 based on the discussions
above, are given in the following Table:
Table 4.42: O&M Expenses for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Approved in the MYT Order dated 6.05.2013 Proposed Approved
Employee expenses 299.39 357.07 329.63 R&M expenses 152.41 152.41 134.39 A&G expenses 27.57 27.57 27.50 Total O&M expenses 479.29 537.05 491.52
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
160 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
4.10 Interest on Working Capital
The Petitioner submitted that it has worked out Interest on Working Capital in line with
Regulation 34(a)(i) of the MYT Regulations, 2011 and, accordingly, it has considered rate of 14.50%
as per Regulation 34 of UERC Tariff Regulations which is the prevailing SBAR.
Table 4.43: Projected Interest on Working Capital (Rs. Crore) Year FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
One month O&M expense 37.79 44.75 Add: Maintenance spares @ 15% of O&M 68.03 80.56 Add: 2 months of expected revenue @ prevailing tariff 778.92 907.20 Minus: Amount held as security deposit 519.88 550.15 Minus: One month of PP cost 317.93 337.32 Total 46.94 145.05 Interest Rate 14.50% 14.50% Interest on working capital 6.81 21.03
As per the Regulations, the Commission has computed the net Working Capital
Requirement of the Petitioner by taking into account the allowable O&M expenses, receivables for
two months. Further, necessary adjustments as required under the Regulations for security given by
the consumers and credit given by Generators/Power suppliers have been made. The Commission
has considered the SBAR as on the date of filing of Petition, i.e. November 29, 2014 which is 14.75%,
as the rate at which interest on working capital would be allowed in accordance with UERC Tariff
Regulations, 2011. The Interest on Working Capital claimed by the Petitioner and approved by the
Commission is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.44: Interest on Working Capital approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Proposed Approved O&M expenses for one month 44.75 40.96 Maintenance Spares 80.56 73.73 Receivables (2 months) 907.20 765.15 Sub-Total 1032.51 879.83 Less: Adjustments for security deposits 550.15 550.15 Adjustment for credit by power suppliers 337.32 272.86 Sub Total 887.47 823.02 Net Working Capital 145.05 56.81 Rate of Interest on Working Capital 14.50% 14.75% Interest on Working Capital 21.03 8.38
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 161
4.11 Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts
The Petitioner submitted that as per UERC MYT Regulations, 2011, the Commission shall
allow a provision for bad and doubtful debts upto one percent (1%) of the estimated annual revenue
of the distribution licensee, subject to writing off bad debts by it in the previous years.
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission, in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013, had
not allowed any provision for bad debts in the absence of actual writing off the bad debts. The
Petitioner submitted that the Commission, in the MYT Order, 2013, approved collection efficiency
of 98.50% for FY 2015-16. Based on this, the Petitioner requested the Commission to approve bad
debts at one and half percent (1.50%) of estimated revenue. The Petitioner further submitted that
bad debts have not been included as a part of ARR in compliance with the approach followed by
the Commission. However, the Petitioner requested the Commission to allow this amount and
submitted the provision for bad debts for FY 2015-16, which is reproduced below:
Table 4.45: Provision for Bad Debts for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) Year Amount
Approved Collection efficiency (%) 98.50% Bad debts (%) 1.50% Projected revenue at existing tariff 5443.73 Provision for bad debt 81.65
The Commission in the previous Tariff Orders had again and again directed the Petitioner to
carry out an audit of its receivables and also identify and classify the same, however, till date the
Petitioner has not complied with the directions of the Commission. As detailed in previous section
of truing up of FY 2013-14, the Petitioner has submitted that the policy for writing off bad debts is
under finalisation and upon finalisation of the same exercise writing off of fictitious and
irrecoverable arrears shall be taken up.
As already discussed in Chapter 3 of Truing up of FY 2013-14 the Commission is not
considering any provisioning towards bad and doubtful debts. The Petitioner should submit the
policy with regards to writing off bad debts and the Commission shall take a view on the same at
the time of truing up for FY 2015-16.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
162 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
4.12 Non-Tariff Income
The Petitioner, in its Petition, has submitted that it has claimed non-tariff income by
escalating the actual non tariff income for FY 2013-14 by 5% p.a. Further, the Petitioner in its
Petition has not considered delayed payment surcharge as a part of non-tariff income. The
Petitioner has, accordingly, submitted non-tariff income of Rs. 95.38 Crore.
As per Regulation 86 of UERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff)
Regulations, 2011, the indicative heads to be considered in Non-Tariff Income are as follows:
“The indicative list of various heads to be considered for Non-Tariff Income shall be as under:
(a) Income from rent of land or buildings;
(b) Income from sale of scrap;
(c) Income from statutory investments;
(d) Interest on delayed or deferred payment on bills;
(e) Interest on advances to suppliers/contractors;
(f) Rental from staff quarters;
(g) Rental from contractors;
(h) Income from hire charges from contactors and others;
(i) Income from advertisements, etc.;
(j) Miscellaneous receipts;
(k) Interest on advances to suppliers;
(l) Excess found on physical verification;
(m) Prior period income.
The Commission for FY 2015-16 has considered non-tariff income of Rs. 73.54 Crore as
approved in the MYT Order. The Commission will consider the actual non-tariff income while
carrying out the truing up for FY 2015-16.
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 163
4.13 Revenue Gap for UJVNL
The Commission has issued the Order on UJVNL’s ARR Petition FY 2015-16 on April 11,
2015, in which the Commission has approved a revenue gap of Rs. 118.54 Crore pertaining to MB-II
for the period FY 2007-08 to FY 2012-13 which is to be recovered by UJVNL from UPCL in FY 2015-
16.
The Commission in its APR Order for UJVN Ltd. has also determined the revenue
gap/surplus for 10 LHPs for FY 2013-14. Since the recovery mechanism for FY 2013-14 shall be as
per MYT Tariff Regulations, 2011 which is on the basis of NAPAF and energy billed to UPCL the
recovery of the gap has to be in accordance with the MYT Regulations, 2011. To give effect to the
gap, the Commission analysed the station-wise actual payment made by UPCL to UJVN Ltd.
The Commission while analysing the payments made, has looked into both energy and
capacity charges. The Commission has computed the energy charges corresponding to the actual
billed energy for FY 2013-14 at trued up energy charge rates and has compared the same with the
energy charges already paid by UPCL and recovered by UJVN Ltd. The Commission has
considered any gap or surplus on this account to be recovered or refunded to UJVN Ltd. The
comparison of actual energy charges paid by UPCL and the balance amount payable/recoverable
by UPCL is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.46: Energy Charges to be paid by UPCL for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Name of the Station
AFC Approved (Rs. Crore)
Actual Billed Energy (MU)
Per unit rate trued
up (Rs./kWh)
Total EC (Rs. Crore)
Allowable EC (Rs. Crore)
Secondary energy (MU)
Sec EC (Rs.
Crore)
Total EC paid by
UPCL (Rs. Crore)
Total Energy charges
allowable (Rs. Crore)
Net Gap/(Surplus) (Rs.
Crore) Dhakrani 8.30 113.48 0.36 4.15 4.03 - - 3.85 4.03 0.18 Dhalipur 11.33 189.39 0.40 5.67 7.50 - - 7.92 7.50 (0.41) Chibro 30.00 703.71 0.27 15.00 18.99 - - 20.27 18.99 (1.27) Khodri 17.33 325.41 0.34 8.67 11.01 - - 12.17 11.01 (1.16) Kulhal 7.57 138.65 0.31 3.79 4.29 - - 4.41 4.29 (0.12) Ramganga 22.57 231.47 0.37 11.29 8.46 - - 8.87 8.46 (0.41) Chilla 44.75 767.46 0.34 22.38 24.41 42.46 3.40 25.40 27.81 2.40 Tiloth 45.40 374.76 0.58 22.70 21.69 - - 19.30 21.69 2.39 Khatima 11.71 111.23 0.30 5.86 3.38 - - 3.50 3.38 (0.12) Sub-Total 198.96 2955.55 99.48 103.76 - - 105.68 107.16 1.48 MB-II 223.87 826.12 0.72 111.94 59.64 - - 58.41 59.64 1.23 Total 422.83 3781.67 211.42 163.41 42.46 3.40 164.09 166.80 2.71
With regards to recovery of capacity charges, the Commission has compared the actual
NAPAF with NAPAF approved by the Commission while computing the allowable capacity
charges. The Commission has computed the allowable fixed charges based on the AFC trued up for
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
164 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
FY 2013-14 and has compared the allowable capacity charges with the actual capacity charges
already paid by UPCL in FY 2013-14. The AFC already paid by UPCL, AFC approved now, and the
net recovery/refund for FY 2013-14 is as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.47: Capacity Charges to be paid by UPCL for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Name of the "Station
AFC Approved (Rs. Crore)
Capacity Charges
(Rs. Crore)
NAPAF (%)
Actual PAFY
(%)
Capacity charges
allowable (Rs. Crore)
Capacity charges
after sharing (Rs.
Crore)
Capacity charge
paid (Rs. Crore)
Net impact
(Rs. Crore)
Dhakrani 8.30 4.15 57.00% 70.30% 5.12 4.92 4.88 0.04 Dhalipur 11.33 5.67 57.00% 68.22% 6.78 6.56 7.15 -0.59 Chibro 30.00 15.00 62.00% 65.83% 15.93 15.74 16.98 -1.24 Khodri 17.33 8.67 55.00% 59.35% 9.35 9.21 10.31 -1.10 Kulhal 7.57 3.79 65.00% 77.98% 4.54 4.39 4.66 -0.27 Ramganga 22.57 11.29 19.00% 14.71% 8.74 9.37 9.14 0.24 Chilla 44.75 22.38 74.00% 70.50% 21.32 21.58 20.98 0.60 Tiloth 45.40 22.70 77.00% 64.66% 19.06 19.97 16.93 3.05 Khatima 11.71 5.86 47.00% 52.31% 6.52 6.35 4.50 1.85 Sub-Total 198.96 99.48 97.35 98.10 95.52 2.59 Maneri Bhali - II 223.87 111.94 57.89% 39.37% 76.12 85.07 60.66 24.41 Total 422.83 211.42 173.47 183.18 156.18 27.00
Therefore, as shown in the above, the net amount to be payable by UPCL with regard to
truing up of power purchase cost of UJVNL for FY 2013-14 works out to Rs. 29.71 Crore. After
taking into the carrying cost the net amount to be payable in FY 2015-16 works out to Rs. 36.56
Crore.
4.14 (Gap)/ Surplus of Previous Years
As discussed in detail in the Chapter 3 of Truing up of FY 2013-14, the Commission has
approved a revenue surplus of Rs. 77.30 Crore with carrying cost to be adjusted in the ARR of FY
2015-16.
4.15 Annual Revenue Requirement for 2015-16
The Petitioner has projected a ARR of Rs. 5057.52 Crore for FY 2015-16. However, based on
the various elements of the ARR, as discussed and approved in this Chapter, the Commission
approves the ARR for FY 2015-16 including adjustments for truing up as summarized in the Table
below:
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 165
Table 4.48: ARR for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) Particulars Proposed Approved
Power purchase expenses 3483.76 3274.39 Transmission charges – PGCIL charges 226.55 226.72 Transmission charges – PTCUL charges 238.70 295.30 SLDC Charges - 7.45 Cost to meet RPO 98.78 -* O&M 537.05 491.52 Interest & Finance charges 184.07 139.44 Depreciation 151.94 94.54 Interest on working capital 21.03 8.38 Gross expenditure 4941.88 4537.74 Other expenses RoE 211.03 48.88 Prov for bad and doubtful debts 0.00 0.00 Net Expenditure 5152.91 4586.62 Less: Non-Tariff Income 95.38 73.54 Add: UJVNL gap for previous years - 155.10 Add: Gap/ (Surplus) of previous years including carrying cost 385.70 (77.30)
Net aggregate revenue requirement 5443.22 4590.88 *included in power purchase expenses
4.16 Revenue at Existing Tariff
The Petitioner has submitted a net ARR for FY 2015-16 as Rs. 5057.52 Crore (excluding past
year gap) and the projected revenue at the existing tariff as Rs. 4311.84.
By applying the existing tariff rates applicable for different categories of consumers, the
Commission has estimated the total revenue at existing tariffs for FY 2015-16. Further, the
Commission has considered additional revenue of Rs. 25.21 Crore on account of Revenue from
efficiency gains (commercial loss reduction at average tariff).
The summary of total revenue estimated by the Commission for FY 2015-16 is given in
following Table:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
166 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 4.49: Approved Revenue at Existing Tariffs for FY 2015-16
S No. Category Sale (MU)
Revenue (Rs. Crore)
Average Billing Rate (Rs./Unit)
1 RTS-1: Domestic 2477 753.57 3.04 2 RTS-2: Non Domestic 1214 582.22 4.80 3 RTS-3: Public Lamps 44 18.69 4.22 4 RTS-4: Private Tube Wells 226 32.10 1.42 5 RTS-5: Government Irrigation System 117 50.02 4.26 6 RTS-6: Public Water Works 317 133.12 4.20 7 RTS-7: Industry 5734 2598.29 4.53 LT Industry 324 148.32 4.58 HT Industry 5410 2449.96 4.53
8 RTS-8: Mixed Load 219 86.68 3.95 9 RTS-9: Railway Traction 12 5.56 4.61 Sub-Total 10361 4260.22 4.11 Efficiency Improvement 61 25.21 4.11 Total 10422 4285.43 4.11
4.17 Revenue Gap
4.17.1 Revenue Gap for FY 2015-16 at Existing Tariff The Petitioner submitted that the net ARR for FY 2015-16 works out as Rs. 5057.52 Crore and
the projected revenue at existing tariff works to Rs. 4311.84 Crore and, accordingly, the assessed
revenue gap for the year works out as Rs. 745.69 Crore. The details of revenue gap for FY 2015-16 as
submitted by the Petitioner is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.50: Revenue Gap for FY 2015-16 claimed by Petitioner(Rs. Crore)
Particulars Amount Net ARR 5057.52 Revenue at existing tariff 4311.84 (Gap)/Surplus (745.69)
The Petitioner submitted that the revenue at existing tariff for FY 2015-16 works out to Rs.
4311.84 Crore and the tariff rates are not sufficient to meet the projected expenditure for FY 2015-16
which implies that there is a need for revision of tariff.
The Petitioner has further proposed to recover the total gap of Rs. 1131.39 including
recovery of the gap of Rs. 292.86 Crore on account of true up of FY 2013-14 with carrying cost, by
way of tariff hike in FY 2015-16. The summary of the total gap to be recovered in FY 2015-16 as
submitted by the Petitioner is shown in the Table below:
4. Petitioner’s Submission, Commission’s Analysis, Scrutiny and Conclusion on Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 167
Table 4.51: Summary of Gap to be recovered in FY 2015-16 submitted by the Petitioner (Rs. Crore)
Particulars Amount Gap on account of true-up of FY 2013-14 (292.86) Total Gap (A) (292.86) Carrying Cost on the total gap (B) (92.84) Gap for FY 2015-16 at existing tariff (C) (745.69) Total Gap to be recovered in FY 2015-16 (A+B+C) (1131.39)
Further, based on the discussions above and after considering the impact of truing up for
FY 2013-14 on the basis of audited accounts along with the carrying cost the total revenue gap
approved by the Commission works out to be Rs. 305.45 Crore. The summarized ARR, Revenue and
resultant (gap)/ surplus as projected by the Petitioner and approved by the Commission for FY
2015-16 is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.52: Summary of ARR and Revenue Surplus/(Gap) for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) S.
No. Particulars Projection Approved
1 Net Annual Revenue Requirement including (Gap)/ surplus of previous years 5443.22 4590.88
2 Revenue at Existing Tariff 4311.84 4285.43 3 Revenue (Gap) /Surplus for FY 2015-16 (1131.39) (305.45)
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 168
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
5.1 Additional Surcharge on account of Re-Determination of Tariff for FY 2010-11 Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal of Electricity in its Judgment dated February 27, 2013 issued in
Appeal No. 152 of 2011 filed by Kumaon Garhwal Chamber of Commerce and Industry on the issue
of cross subsidy and re-determination of tariff for FY 2010-11 had directed the Commission to re-
determine the tariff for FY 2010-11 while truing up the expenses in accordance with the ratio
decided by the Hon’ble Tribunal in the Judgment dated 31.01.2011. The Commission had re-
determined the Tariff for FY 2010-11, in its Order dated May 06, 2013 alongwith the MYT and Tariff
Petition for FY 2013-14. The Commission in its Order dated May 06, 2013 re-determined the tariffs
for FY 2010-11 for the cross-subsidised categories, namely, Lifeline & Snowbound, Domestic,
Private Tube Wells, Government Irrigation System, Public Lamps and Public Water Works. The
Commission also determined a total amount of Rs. 18.06 Crore recoverable on the account of re-
determined tariffs from the above mentioned cross-subsidised categories for FY 2010-11. As regards
the recovery towards revised tariffs during FY 2010-11 from these consumer categories, the
Commission in its Order dated May 06, 2013 opined that the recovery of entire amount in one single
year would result into significant increase in retail tariffs of some of the category of consumers and
hence, the Commission allowed the deferred recovery of additional surcharge from these consumer
categories in three years in the proportion of 20%, 40% and 40% in year 1, 2 and 3 respectively,
beginning from FY 2013-14 instead of allowing recovery in a single year. Further, as the amount of
rebate to be allowed to subsidizing categories (LT-Industrial and HT-Industrial) as per re-
determined tariffs for FY 2010-11 should be met out of additional revenue for recovery of additional
surcharge from subsidized categories based on re-determined tariffs, the Commission allowed
rebate to subsidising categories in three years in the proportion of 20%, 40% and 40% beginning
from FY 2013-14.
In view of the above, the Commission has decided to allow the recovery of 40% of additional
surcharge from subsidized categories of consumers and to allow 40% of rebate to subsidizing
categories on account of re-determination of tariffs for FY 2010-11 as shown in the Table below:
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 169
Table 5.1: Additional Surcharge to be recovered from Subsidised Categories and Rebate to Subsidising Categories on account of re-determination of Tariff for FY 2010-11
Particulars Amount (Rs./ month)
Additional Surcharge from subsidised categories Lifeline & Snowbound Consumers Rs. 2 /connection
Domestic
Rs. 8 / connection for metered consumers upto 4 kW and unmetered consumers,
For others: Rs. 8 / connection & Rs. 4 /kW for single point bulk supply
Government Irrigation System Rs. 0.08 /kWh Public Lamps Rs. 0.08 /kWh Public Water Works Rs. 0.16 /kWh Rebate to be allowed to subsidising categories LT-Industrial Rebate of Rs. 2/kW or Rs. 2/kVA per month
HT- Industrial Rebate of Rs. 8/ kVA per month (based on billable demand)
The additional surcharge payable/rebate as shown above will be applicable from April 1,
2015, i.e. for FY 2015-16. Further, in the previous Orders, the Commission had directed UPCL to
maintain separate records of category-wise revenue billed towards additional surcharge and rebate
allowed during FY 2013-14 and also FY 2014-15 and submit the same alongwith the ensuing year’s
tariff Petition, which would be used by the Commission to adjust any excess/shortfall in recovery
from these categories alongwith the carrying cost of deferred recovery/rebate. Since, UPCL has not
submitted the desired information, the Commission redirects UPCL to submit the total recovery
made through additional surcharge on account of re-determination of tariff of FY 2010-11 for FY
2013-14 to FY 2015-16 along with the Annual Performance Review Petition for FY 2015-16.
5.2 Tariff Rationalisation and Tariff Design for FY 2015-16
5.2.1 General In Chapter 4 of the Order, it has been concluded that the revenue projected to be earned by
UPCL during FY 2015-16 at currently prevailing tariffs will be Rs. 4285.43 Crore. Against this, the
ARR approved by the Commission for FY 2015-16 including gap and surplus on account of truing
up of previous years works out to Rs. 4590.88 Crore, leaving a total gap of Rs. 305.45 Crore. In view
of the objections received and the Petitioner’s submission, the Commission considers it appropriate
to first take a view in this section on the tariff rationalisation measures suggested by the Petitioner
and the concerns voiced by other stakeholders.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
170 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
5.2.2 Petitioner’s Proposals
The Petitioner submitted that the tariff proposal has been formulated by the Petitioner with
an attempt to keep the impact on the consumers to the minimum possible and at the same time not
defer a large portion of recovery of the tariff in the coming years. The Petitioner also submitted that
Section 61(g) of the Electricity Act, 2003 states that the Appropriate Commission shall be guided by
the objective that the tariff progressively reflects the efficient and prudent cost of supply of
electricity.
Some of the key alterations proposed by the Petitioner in the retail tariffs for FY 2015-16 are
as follows:
5.2.2.1 Abolish the Snowbound Category (RTS-1A)
The Petitioner submitted that there are no existing consumers under this category over the
last 5 years. The Petitioner has proposed to abolish the snowbound category (RTS-1A).
5.2.2.2 New Sub-category under RTS-2 for Private Advertisement Boards
The Petitioner has proposed to introduce a new tariff sub-category under RTS-2 (Non
Domestic) for Private Advertisement Boards and Hoardings in similar lines of the neighbouring
states like Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Delhi. The tariff proposed for this category and tariff in the
neighbouring states as submitted by the Petitioner is shown in the Table below:
Table 5.2: Tariff proposed for Private Advertisement Boards and Hoardings
State Category/ Sub Category Fixed Charge (Per Month)
Energy Charge (Per Unit)
Delhi Advertisements and Hoardings Rs. 500 /hoarding Rs. 11.20 /kVAh
Haryana Independent Hoardings /decorative lights Rs. 150/kW Rs. 7.45 /kWh
Uttar Pradesh Private Advertising / Sign Posts / Sign Boards / Glow Signs / Flex Rs. 1200/kW (MCG) Rs. 14.00/kWh
Uttarakhand (Proposed Rate) Advertisements and Hoardings Rs. 200/kW Rs. 8.00/kWh
5.2.2.3 RTS-4 (Private Tube Well)
The Petitioner has submitted that RTS-4 currently includes “Incidental agricultural processes
confined to chaff cutter, thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller”. The Petitioner in this regard has
proposed that thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller may be removed from this category as these
activities are of industrial nature and should be covered under Rate Schedule (RTS) 7. The Petitioner
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 171
further submitted that under the existing classification, it is difficult to identify the incidental
agricultural production of the connection which is sanctioned for irrigation purposes and thus, is
prone to be misused by availing subsidised tariff for the activities not covered under this rate
schedule.
5.2.2.4 kWh Tariff
The Petitioner submitted that for RTS-6 (Public water works) category of consumers, the
current tariff schedule has prescribed only kVA/kVAh tariff. The Petitioner submitted that for
PWW connections where connected load is lower than 25 kW, meters capable of recording kVAh
consumption have not been installed, therefore, the petitioner has proposed to introduce kWh tariff
for PWW connections with connected load upto 25 kW.
5.2.2.5 Load Factor Computation for Embedded Open Access Consumers
The Petitioner submitted that as the embedded Open Access Consumers receives power
supply from UPCL and through Open Access on same connection (through same meter) sanctioned
by UPCL and the wheeling charges for the Open Access Energy is adjusted from the demand
charges which are fixed for UPCL, the contracted/maximum demand of the connection should be
apportioned on both the energy, i.e. on UPCL Energy and on Open Access Energy. The Petitioner
further submitted that as the Commission, while defining the load factor formula, has reduced the
Open Access Energy from the total consumption but has not reduced the demand against the Open
Access Consumption from the total contracted/maximum demand, this formula needs to be revised
as follows:
100periodbilling thein hours of No. x less is whichever Demand Contracted or Demand Maximum
periodbilling theduring n Consumptio×
The Petitioner further submitted that it is assumed that the Maximum Demand / Contracted
Demand, whichever is less, will reduce in proportion to the energy consumed through open access
and total energy consumption.
5.2.2.6 Penalty for exceeding contracted demand
The Petitioner submitted that as per the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, drawing of
demand in excess of the contracted demand on any electricity connection is unauthorised use of
electricity and the tariff for such unauthorised use should be at a rate equal to twice the normal
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
172 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
tariff applicable. Accordingly, the Petitioner has submitted that the demand charges and energy
charges corresponding to the excess demand should be charged at twice the normal rates.
5.2.2.7 Tariff Categorisation for Horticulture and Floriculture Consumers;
The Petitioner submitted a copy of GoU’s letter no. 167/I(2)/2015-05-14/2015 dated
February 04, 2015 wherein it had been directed by Cabinet of Ministers to not levy industrial tariff
to such consumers. The Petitioner has, accordingly, requested the Commission to take decision in
view of the above.
5.2.3 Commission’s Views on Tariff Rationalisation Measures
Several respondents have appreciated the tariff rationalisation measures taken by the
Commission in the previous Tariff Orders. The Commission believes that tariff rationalisation is a
dynamic and ongoing process and is essential to accommodate the socio-economic and
technological changes taking place in the system over a period of time. The Commission on its own
initiative issued the In-house Papers on five tariff related issues and invited comments on the same.
The In-house Papers covered the existing provisions on the issues in the current applicable Tariff
Schedule, Commission’s views and changes made with respect to the issue in previous Tariff
Orders, practices adopted in Other States and the Commission’s proposals on the same. The five
issues deliberated by the Commission in the In-house Papers are as follows:
1. Levying Fixed Charges for Domestic Consumers based on Consumption;
2. Removal of the Tariff Category ‘RTS-1A:Snowbound’;
3. Extension of Continuous Supply Option to the Non-Continuous Industries as well;
4. Load Factor based slabs for HT Industrial Consumers;
5. Tariff Categorisation for Horticulture and Floriculture Consumers;
The Commission in addition to the tariff rationalisation proposed by the Petitioner has also
discussed the above issues on which the in-house papers were published. There were number of
suggestions given by the Respondents in this regard. The following Sections discusses the tariff
rationalisation measures suggested by the Petitioner, Respondents, tariff related issues in the in-
house paper and the Commission’s view on the same.
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 173
5.2.3.1 Levying Fixed Charges for Domestic Consumers based on Consumption
The Commission in its in-house Paper opined that the data related to Connected Load for
the domestic consumers was not an authenticated data as the actual connected load kept on
changing from time to time, while the same was not updated in utilities records and the most
authenticated data available with respect to domestic consumers was the consumption data which
is based on meter reading and is regularly updated. The Commission, in this regard in the in-house
Paper proposed as follows:
“The Commission therefore intends to introduce billing of fixed charges in case of domestic consumers
linked to consumption which is authenticated data and to ensure that the fixed charges are more
reflective of the costs incurred to supply electricity to the domestic category. It is also intended to
progressively reduce cross subsidy available to such domestic consumer who have higher consumption
as they are affluent consumers and should be paying the cost of supplying electricity to them. Under
this mechanism, it is proposed to specify the fixed charges per connection per month based on
consumption for each 100 units or part thereof per month.
Ø For Consumption upto first 100 units/month
Ø For Consumption between 101-200 units/month
Ø For Consumption 201-300 units/month
Ø For each incremental consumption of 100 units or part therof/month”
Several stakeholders during the public hearing and also some of the Members of the State
Advisory Committee in the meeting of the Committee appreciated the concept of levying fixed
charges linked to consumption.
UPCL in its response also welcomed the move and stated that the differential charges
should be based on the sanctioned load instead of actual consumption as in some cases the actual
consumption for consumers with higher sanctioned load may be even less than 100 kWh. UPCL
further submitted that the differential charges should be linked to sanctioned load as UPCL will
have to provide services on demand irrespective of actual consumption of energy, for which it shall
have to incur certain amount of expenditure which should be charged, accordingly, to the
consumers on the basis of actual sanctioned load. UPCL further submitted that domestic
consumers with higher consumption are affluent people and, therefore, they should not be cross-
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
174 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
subsidised and the tariff for them should be reflective of cost of supply. UPCL, accordingly,
requested to fix higher fixed charge for these consumers.
UPCL also proposed that the fixed charge should be linked to energy charges and should be
fixed at some percentage of energy charge and this percentage of energy charge should be higher
for higher consumption. UPCL also proposed that slabs of energy charges should also be kept
similar to slabs for fixed charges.
As discussed in previous Tariff Orders as well as in the in-house Paper, the connected load
data is not an authentic data as the same is not updated regularly, while the consumption data is
more reliable as the same is based on meter readings. The Commission is of the view that it will not
be appropriate to specify the fixed charges linked to both consumption and connected load as it will
defeat the purpose of specifying the fixed charges based on consumption which is more reliable
data.
As regards UPCL’s suggestion of specifying the fixed charges as some percentage of energy
charges, the Commission is of the view that if UPCL’s suggestion is accepted then the Fixed
Charges will not remain fixed charges and it will defeat the basic objective of recovering certain
proportion of the costs through fixed charges.
Considering the views of several stakeholders and UPCL, the Commission has decided to
specify the fixed charges for domestic consumers linked to the consumption. The Commission has
approved the differential fixed charges linked to the consumption as follows:
• For Consumption upto first 100 units/month
• For Consumption between 101-200 units/month
• For Consumption between 201-300 units/month
• For Consumption between 301-400 units/month
• For Consumption between 401 -500 units/month
• For Consumption above 500 units/month
5.2.3.2 Snowbound sub-category (RTS-1A)
As discussed earlier, the Petitioner has requested the Commission to abolish the RTS-1A
category stating that there have been no consumers under this category over the last five years.
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 175
The Commission in its in-house Paper invited the views/suggestions from the stakeholders,
i.e. consumers, State Government (including concerned District Magistrates) as to whether the
separate tariff category for Snowbound Consumers be abolished.
UPCL in its comments to the above proposal submitted that as there are no existing
consumers in this category for last five years, it has proposed to abolish the category. UPCL further
submitted that views of District Magistrates may be sought and considered in this matter.
State Union of working journalists made the following submissions in this regard:
• People were not aware that there is a separate category for Snow Bound Areas
• This category should not be abolished
• The Commission may also ask District Magistrates to notify the Snow Bound Areas
Further, some of the SAC members also suggested for not abolishing this sub-category.
In this regard, it is important to note that the Petitioner has been filing the Tariff Proposal for
this sub-category of consumers in its previous Petitions and, accordingly, the Commission has been
approving the Tariff for this category since FY 2005-06. The Commission is of the view that it is
unlikely that there are no consumers in the snow bound areas, however, it appears that the
Petitioner has not identified such consumers and placed them under such sub-category and the
consumers are also not aware of the same. Thus, considering the views expressed by various
stakeholders, the Commission has decided to continue with the sub-category of RTS-1A-
Snowbound.
The Commission also advises State Government to notify the Snow Bound Areas so that
both UPCL and the consumers are aware about the same and the consumers in Snow Bound sub-
category can be billed based on tariff applicable for this sub-category.
5.2.3.3 Continuous Supply Surcharge and Extension of Continuous Supply Option to Non
Continuous Industries
The Commission, in its Tariff Order dated October 23, 2009, had approved continuous
supply surcharge @ 10% of the Energy Charge for consumers opting for supply during restricted
hours (continuous). Further, all the consumers had this option to opt for continuous supply
irrespective of whether they were on dedicated independent feeder or on mixed feeder. In
accordance with the above provision, even if a single consumer in mixed feeder opted for
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
176 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
continuous supply, its benefit got extended to all the consumers on that mixed feeder. This was a
sort of discrimination amongst the consumers who had opted for continuous supply on mixed
feeder and those who had not opted for continuous supply on mixed feeder as both enjoyed the
benefit of continuous supply irrespective of the fact that they were paying any continuous supply
surcharge or not. On the other hand, if the supply of the mixed feeder was required to be cut during
rostering, the supply of continuous supply consumer was also required to be unintentionally cut.
The Commission in order to rectify this anomaly had taken a view in its Tariff Order dated
April 10, 2010 that the option of continuous supply should be made available only to consumers
who are connected on a dedicated independent feeder or industrial feeder provided that all the
industrial consumers on such feeder opt for continuous supply option. The Commission was also of
the view that considering the supply shortage position, this option was to be provided only to the
continuous process industries requiring continuous supply due to continuous nature of their
process. In this connection, the Commission would like to refer to Regulation 3(2) of UERC (Release
of new HT & EHT Connections, Enhancement and Reduction of Loads) Regulation, 2008, which
provides that loads for all HT consumers having continuous processes, irrespective of load applied
for, shall be released through independent feeder only. The Commission in its Tariff Order dated
April 10, 2010 had, therefore, decided that with effect from May 1, 2010, the option of continuous
supply shall remain available only to continuous process industries operating twenty four hours a
day and for seven days in a week without any weekly off. Further, this option was only to be
available to continuous process industries connected through an independent feeder or industrial
feeder provided that all the industrial consumers on such feeder opted for continuous supply
option and for availing such an option, they were required to pay 15% extra energy charges at
revised tariff with effect from May 1, 2010 or from the date of connection, whichever is later till 31st
March, 2011 irrespective of actual period of continuous supply option. Further, the Commission in
its Tariff Order dated April 10, 2010 also decided that the load shedding should be applicable for all
the consumer categories except continuous process industries availing continuous supply option
and, hence, the Commission abolished the mechanism of allowing utilisation of power upto 15% of
contracted load by industrial consumers who did not opt for continuous supply.
In its Tariff Order for FY 2011-12 dated May 24, 2011, Tariff Order for FY 2012-13 dated April
11, 2012, MYT Order dated May 06, 2012 and APR Order dated April 10, 2014 the Commission
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 177
decided to continue with the same provisions for Continuous Supply as approved in its Order
dated April 10, 2010.
The Commission considering the views expressed by various industrial consumers during
the previous tariff exercise in its in-house Paper proposed to extend the continuous supply
provision for non-continuous industries and invited comments from various stakeholders. The
Commission in this regard in its in-house Paper proposed as follows:
“In view of the above, the Commission intends to extend an option of continuous supply to non-
continuous process industries also and to remove the condition of continuous process industries
operating twenty four hours a day and for seven days in a week without any weekly off provided these
industries are connected through an:
(a.) independent feeder ; or
(b.) industrial feeder provided that all the industrial consumers on such feeder opt for continuous
supply option. “
UPCL in its response submitted that it was agreeable to the Commission’s proposal of
extending the continuous supply option to Non-Continuous Industries. However, it requested the
Commission to increase the continuous supply surcharge to 20% from existing 15% as it would have
to buy more costly power.
Several other stakeholders during the public hearing as well as in SAC meeting welcomed
the Commission’s proposal of extending the continuous supply provision for non-continuous
industries as well. M/s Kashi Vishwanath Steels Pvt. Ltd. submitted that the continuous supply
surcharge be reduced from 15% to 7.5%. Further, it also suggested that continuous supply surcharge
should not be imposed on power purchase through open access as it will help UPCL by not
procuring extra power to meet the requirement on higher rate.
Several other Industrial Consumers as well as members of State Advisory Committee have
objected to the increase in Continuous Supply Surcharge of 20% as proposed by the Petitioner.
Considering the views of stakeholders, the Commission has decided not to increase the
continuous supply surcharge and has retained the same as 15% of energy charges. However, as
proposed in the in-house Paper, the Commission has decided to extend the option of continuous
supply to non-continuous process industries in addition to the continuous process industries.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
178 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
However, this option will only be available to continuous and non-continuous industries
connected on an independent feeder or industrial feeder provided that all the industrial consumers
on such feeder opt for continuous supply option. The existing non-continuous process industrial
consumers opting for continuous supply shall pay 15% extra energy charges with effect from May
01, 2015 or in case of new consumers from the date of connection, till March 31, 2016 irrespective of
actual period of continuous supply. However, in case of re-arrangement of supply through
independent feeder, the Continuous Supply Surcharge shall be applicable from the date of
energisation of aforesaid independent feeder till March 31, 2016, irrespective of actual period of
continuous supply option.
In this regard, the Commission would like to clarify certain key issues, pertaining to
applicability conditions for existing and new continuous and non-continuous supply consumers in
order to avoid any misinterpretation of the conditions, and the same are discussed as under:
• Consumers who have opted for Continuous supply shall continue to remain
Continuous Supply Consumers and they need not to apply again for seeking
continuous supply option. Such consumers shall pay 15% extra energy charges,
in addition to the energy charges approved, w.e.f. April 01, 2015 till March 31,
2016. However, in case of any pending dispute with UPCL in the matter of
continuous supply on certain feeders, those consumers will have to apply afresh,
for availing the facility of continuous supply, by April 30, 2015.
• The new applicants for continuous supply of power (including those who are
applying afresh as per above) can apply for seeking the continuous supply option
at any time during the year. However, continuous supply surcharge for such
existing consumers shall be applicable with effect from May 01, 2015 till March
31, 2016. UPCL shall provide the facility of continuous supply within 7 days from
the date of application, subject to fulfilment of Conditions of Supply as
mentioned in Clause 6 under Tariff Schedule of RTS-7. However, in case of re-
arrangement of supply through independent feeder, UPCL shall provide the
facility of continuous supply from the date of completion of work of independent
feeder subject to fulfilment of Conditions of Supply.
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 179
• The existing consumers availing continuous supply option, who wish to
discontinue the continuous supply option granted to them earlier, will have to
communicate, in writing, to UPCL latest by April 30, 2015 and they shall continue
to pay continuous supply surcharge alongwith the tariff approved in this Order
till April 30, 2015. Further, in this regard, if due to withdrawal by one consumer
from availing continuous supply option on a particular feeder, the status of other
continuous supply consumers in that feeder is affected, then UPCL shall inform
all the affected consumers on writing, well in advance.
• UPCL shall not change the status of a continuous supply feeder to a non-
continuous supply feeder.
• UPCL/PTCUL shall take up augmentation, maintenance and overhauling works
on top priority, specially in the sub-stations where circuit breakers, other
equipments, etc. are in dilapidated condition and, thereby, shall ensure
minimisation of interruptions of the continuous supply feeders.
• UPCL/PTCUL shall carry out periodical preventive maintenance of the feeders
supplying to continuous supply consumers. The licensees shall prepare
preventive maintenance schedule, in consultation with continuous supply
consumers, well in advance, so that such consumers can plan their operations,
accordingly.
5.2.3.4 Load Factor Based Slabs for HT Industrial Consumers
During previous tariff determination exercise, some stakeholders suggested that some of the
industries operating in single shift also had to pay the higher tariffs as their load factor worked out
to marginally higher than 33% and this also resulted in mal-practices in certain instances. Some
stakeholders suggested to re-categorise the load factors slabs in two slabs.
Considering the views of some of the stakeholders whose consumption is marginally higher
than 33%, the Commission in the In-house Paper proposed to modify the load factor based slab
structure for HT Industry and specify the tariff for two slabs as under:
Ø Slab 1 : Load Factor upto 40%
Ø Slab 2 : Load Factor above 40%
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
180 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission in its in-house Paper also mentioned that this will address the issue faced
by some single shift industries whose consumption is marginally above 33% as their total period of
operation would normally be around 9-10 hours per day and even with this modification also, the
effective tariff of HT Industry consumers with the load factor in the range of 33% to 50% will not be
lower than the average cost of supply.
UPCL in response submitted that it was agreeable to the Commission’s proposal of
modifying the load factor based slab structure for HT Industry. However, it requested the
Commission to ensure that the same did not affect the revenue of UPCL adversely. Several other
stakeholders during the public hearing as well as in SAC meeting welcomed the Commission’s
proposal of modifying the load factor based slab structure for HT Industry.
Considering the views of the stakeholders, the Commission has decided to modify the load
factor based slab structure for HT Industry and specified the tariff for two slabs as under:
Ø Slab 1 : Load Factor upto 40%
Ø Slab 2 : Load Factor above 40%
5.2.3.5 Tariff Categorisation for Horticulture and Floriculture Consumers;
Various suggestion from stakeholders including Government of Uttarakhand were received
on not considering horticulture and floriculture consumers as industrial consumers. The
Commission in its in-house paper mentioned that as the activities involved in horticulture and
floriculture are in nature close to agricultural activities, the Commission intends to create a separate
category for the Agriculture Allied Activities which will apply to the consumers engaged in
Horticulture, Floriculture, etc. with an appropriate tariff.
UPCL in its response submitted a copy of GoU’s letter no. 167/I(2)/2015-05-14/2015 dated
February 04, 2015 wherein it had been directed by Cabinet of Ministers to not levy industrial tariff
to such consumers. UPCL, accordingly, requested the Commission to take decision in the matter.
Some other stakeholders during the public process as well as during SAC meeting suggested that in
line with the practice in other States, there should be a separate category for Horticulture and
Floriculture consumers. The Commission, accordingly, has created a new sub-category for such
consumers and has designed the tariffs for such sub-category at 50% of the Average Cost of Supply.
The Commission in order to avoid any ambiguity in identifying such consumers has defined this
sub-category “Agriculture Allied Activities” as follows:
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 181
“Agriculture Allied Activities: All Consumers involved in nurseries growing
plants/saplings, polyhouses growing flowers/vegetables and fruits which doesn’t involve any
kind of processing of product except for storing and preservation.”
Such consumers shall now be charged at separate tariff under rates as approved for
“Agricultural Allied Activities”.
5.2.3.6 RTS-4 (Private Tube Well)
The Petitioner has proposed to remove the thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller from this
category mentioning that as these activities are of industrial nature and should be covered by Rate
Schedule RTS-7. The Petitioner however, did not submit any data regarding the load and
consumption in such activities and, hence, it is difficult to assess the impact of the same. In this
regard, the Commission directs the Petitioner to conduct a study to identify and assess the load
and consumption of thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller consumers and submit its report to the
Commission within 6 months from the date of this Order. The Commission shall take a final view
on this after submission of data by the Petitioner in the next tariff exercise.
5.2.3.7 kWh Tariff for PWW
The Petitioner, in its Tariff proposal, has requested the Commission to introduce kWh tariff
for PWW connections with connected load upto 25 kW as the meters capable of recording kVAh
consumption have not been installed till now. The Commission in this regard in its APR Order for
FY 2014-15 stated as follows:
“It is observed that the kVAh tariff has been specified since FY 2009-10 based on the proposal of
Petitioner, raising of this issue after almost five years is amiss and reasons for not providing meters
compatible to tariff prescribed need to be explained by the Petitioner. Hence, the Commission has
decided to continue with existing tariff structure only. The Commission directs the Petitioner to
replace the old meters with new meters capable of recording kVAh consumption within three
months of this Order and also furnish basis of billing so far done to these consumers with
explanation for not providing appropriate meters so far by July 31, 2014.”
The Petitioner in compliance to the above direction vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10,
dated June 17, 2014 submitted that it had issued instructions to the field units to replace all the
meters in Public Water Works category not capable of recording kVAh unit of electricity by new
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
182 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
meters capable of recording kWh unit of electricity. The Petitioner submitted that the work is
expected to be completed by March 31, 2015.
The Commission vide its Order dated April 10, 2014 had already issued the direction to the
Petitioner to replace the old meters with new meters capable of recording kVAh consumption
within three months of the date of the Order. However, failing to ensure timely compliance as
required, the Petitioner vide its letter dated June 17, 2014 informed the Commission that the work of
meter replacement was expected to be completed by March 31, 2015. The Petitioner ignoring its own
submission in this regard the same, in its Petition, yet again requested the Commission to allow it
the kWh tariff for PWW connections with connected load upto 25 kW.
The Commission expresses its displeasure on the repeated non-compliance by UPCL of its
directions, and considering the submissions made by it that the meters shall be replaced by March
31, 2015, the Commission does not find it proper to re-introduce the kWh tariff and, therefore, the
Commission retains the present tariff structure with regard to PWW category.
5.2.3.8 Load Factor Computation for Embedded Open Access Consumers
The Petitioner in its Petition has proposed to modify the Load Factor Computation formula
for embedded open access consumers.
The Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 modified the load factor computation
formula for embedded open access consumers. The Petitioner filed the Review Petition before the
Commission for reviewing the Load Factor Computation Formula. The Commission in its Order
dated November 07, 2014 in Petition No. 24 of 2014 reviewed its Order and modified the formula as
follows:
100period billing in the hours of No. x less is whicheverDemand Contractedor Demand Maximum
period billing theduring Access)Open through receivedenergy the(excludngn Consumptio×
Provided that in cases where maximum demand during the month occurs in period when open access
is being availed by the consumer, then maximum demand for the purpose of computation of load factor
shall be that occurring during the period when no open access is being availed.
The Commission is of the view that this is a case of Review of Order passed by the
Commission on the Review Petition and it is not legally sustainable to consider review of the Order
that was passed on the review petition. The principle that no appeal shall lie from an order passed
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 183
in appeal is enshrined in Section 104 of the Code of Civil procedure, 1908. Hence, there can be no
review of an Order passed in the review.
The Commission has, therefore, decided to continue with the formula as approved by the
Commission in its Order dated November 07,.
5.2.3.9 Independent Advertisement Boards/Hoardings
The Petitioner has proposed a new sub-category to be introduced in FY 2015-16 as
“Independent Advertisement Hoardings” under Non-Domestic category to differentiate these
consumers as purely commercial in line with the practices adopted in other States. Considering the
power deficit situation in the State, the Commission agrees with the Petitioner’s suggestion to
introduce a separate category for “Independent Advertisement Boards/Hoardings” having tariffs
higher than the Non-Domestic Category.
However, in order to avoid any ambiguity in identifying such consumers, the Commission
defines such sub-category as follows:
1.2 “Independent Advertisement Boards/Hoardings: All commercial (road side / roof top or
on the side of the buildings etc.) standalone independent advertisement hoardings such
as private advertising sign posts/ sign boards/ sign glows/flex that are independently
metered through a separate meter.”
Such consumers shall now be charged at separate tariff under rates as approved for
“Independent Advertisement Boards/Hoardings”.
5.2.3.10 Penalty for exceeding contracted demand
The Petitioner submitted that as per the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003, drawing of
demand in excess of the contracted demand on any electricity connection is unauthorised use of
electricity and the tariff for such unauthorised use should be at a rate equal to twice the normal
tariff applicable. Accordingly, the Petitioner has submitted that the demand charges and energy
charges corresponding to the excess demand should be charged at twice the normal rates.
The Commission is of the view that drawing demand in excess of the contracted demand is
not an unauthorized use as the demand may vary some times for which the higher demand charges
have already been provided in the Tariff Schedule. The unauthorized use means the connection is
taken under one particular category and is being used for some other purpose for which there is a
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
184 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
separate category. Thus, the Commission does not find it appropriate to make any change in this
regard.
5.2.3.11 Fixed Charges, Minimum charges and Minimum Consumption Guarantee
It is a well-accepted economic principle that the fixed costs of the Utility should be
recovered to a certain extent through fixed charges to ensure revenue stability. At the same time, the
Commission recognises that if the entire fixed cost is recovered through fixed charges, then the
Utility shall have no incentive to bother about sales and, hence, quality of supply may suffer.
Historically, the fixed recovery has been done through a mix of minimum charges and fixed
charges. Levy of Minimum Consumption Guarantee Charges (MCG) is a way of ensuring minimum
revenue to the Utility from the consumers, however, if the consumption exceeds specified units,
then no MCG charges are levied on the consumers and entire charges recovered by the Utility are
through energy/fixed charges.
The fixed charge component reflecting the fixed cost of providing the service to the
consumer and the energy charge component reflecting the cost of energy actually consumed should
ideally be taken in the two-part tariff structure.
Section 45(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 also provides for levy of fixed charges. The relevant
Section is reproduced below:
“The charges for electricity supplied by a distribution licensee may include:
(a) a fixed charge in addition to the charge for the actual electricity supplied;
...”
Further, the licensee is incurring fixed cost directly attributable to individual consumers
such as meter reading, bill preparation, bill distribution and collection, which should ideally be
allocated to and recovered from each consumer. One of the guiding factors mentioned in Section 61
of the Electricity Act, 2003 for specifying terms and conditions of tariffs is that the tariff has to be
gradually cost reflective. Considering that levy of higher fixed charges should not impact the
consumers adversely, the Commission, in its Tariff Order dated March 18, 2008, introduced a
nominal fixed charge for all the categories as a progression towards designing the tariff structure
linked to cost structure. Further, in its subsequent Tariff Orders for FY 2009-10, FY 2010-11, FY 2011-
12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14 considering the level of proportion of fixed costs, as percentage of
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 185
total costs of UPCL and level of revenue recovery from fixed charges, the Commission marginally
increased the fixed charges for most of the categories to increase the revenue recovery from fixed
charges and at the same time avoiding tariff shock to any consumer category.
The Commission in its Tariff Order dated March 18, 2008 mentioned that ideally, the fixed
charges should be levied on the basis of contracted/sanctioned load for all the categories. However,
for domestic category, considering the data on sanctioned load which had number of consumers
having fraction of load (<1 kW) and also considering the quality of metering and billing data, the
Commission introduced the fixed charges on per connection basis. The Commission in its Tariff
Order dated October 23, 2009, specified different fixed charges on per connection basis for domestic
consumers having contracted/sanctioned load upto 4 kW and consumers having contracted
/sanctioned load above 4 kW. Further, as discussed above, the Commission has for FY 2015-16
introduced consumption based fixed charges for domestic consumers.
The Commission in its Tariff Order dated March 18, 2008 had re-introduced the Minimum
Consumption Guarantee (MCG) Charges for the industrial category and in its Tariff Order dated
October 23, 2009 re-introduced the Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG) Charges for the Non-
Domestic Category. The Commission in its Order dated April 11, 2012 has introduced MCG for
metered PTW category also.
Some of the stakeholders submitted that the MCG burdens the consumers with additional
charges and results in wasteful consumption of electricity. They also represented that the MCG on
seasonal industry should be abolished as it encourages unnecessary wastage of electricity by
consumers during off season. Some of the stakeholders also represented that due to demand supply
shortage situation, load shedding is being carried out by UPCL and, hence, MCG should either be
abolished or reduced. Some of the stakeholders also submitted that due to MCG, they are either
forced to consume/waste electricity during off season or are penalized to pay the energy charges
for electricity not consumed by them during off season which is against the principles of energy
efficiency.
The Commission would like to clarify that the MCG is only applicable for the consumers
having very low load factor, in the range of 10-15% with 3-4 hours/day usage of electricity. The
MCG charges would actually be recovered from consumers having abnormally low consumption of
electricity with respect to their sanctioned/contracted load. While for other consumers having
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
186 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
reasonable level of consumption with respect to the load, the MCG charges gets subsumed in
energy charges.
Though the Commission in its Tariff Order dated March 18, 2008 had mentioned that it may
review the continuation of the MCG charges in subsequent Tariff Orders. However, as no
substantial improvement has been achieved by UPCL with respect to metering and billing issues,
the Commission has decided to continue with the levy of MCG charges for entire Industrial
category and for Non-Domestic consumers having contracted load of more than 25 kW and for
PTW Consumers.
Further, the Commission would like to clarify that the minimum consumption guarantee
charges are computed by considering the applicable base energy charges for the relevant category
of consumer alongwith the specified MCG and adjusted only towards the energy charges. Further,
as per the prevalent mechanism, in case cumulative actual consumption, from the beginning of
financial year, exceeds the units specified for annual minimum consumption guarantee (MCG), no
further billing of monthly MCG is done and in such cases, differential paid, in excess of actual
billing is adjusted in the bill for the month of March. This mechanism has been elaborated through
example in the Tariff Schedule. In case of HT Industry, the annual adjustment (refund) of the energy
charges for units billed to cover MCG, if any, shall be given at the energy charge during normal
hours for load factor upto 40%.
The Commission taking into cognisance various representations received for reduction in
MCG and also in line with its plan for gradual elimination of MCG has decided to reduce the MCG
from current level of 60 units/kWh/month to 50 units/kWh/month for all those sub-categories on
which MCG has been currently specified as 60 units/kWh/month. For HT industries the same has
now been fixed at 100 kVAh/kVA/month from the earlier level of 110 kVAh/kVA/month. For Atta
chakkis, the MCG is now revised to 30 units/kWh/month from the existing level of 40
units/kWh/month. This new MCG mechanism shall be applicable from April 01, 2015.
Further, it has come to the notice of the Commission that the consumers issued temporary
connections for non-domestic or industrial usage are also being charged the MCG. In this regard,
the Commission would like to clarify that RTS-10 (Temporary Supply) is applicable to temporary
supply of light & fan, public address system and illumination loads during functions, ceremonies
and festivities, temporary shops and also for power taken for construction purposes including civil
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 187
work by all consumers including Government Departments. The rate of charge for such consumers
is the corresponding rate of charge in appropriate Schedule Plus 25%. Hence, a consumer given a
temporary connection for non-domestic or industrial usage in addition to 25% higher charges than a
normal consumer is also subjected to MCG charges irrespective of the period of usage. Hence, if a
consumer has a temporary supply for industrial use for a period of 6 months, he might be subjected
to MCG but he doesn’t get the benefit of annual adjustment of MCG as he surrenders his connection
before the year gets over. Hence, the Commission has decided that MCG shall not be applicable on
consumers given temporary supply.
For PTW consumers, the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013 had modified
the Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG) mechanism on the basis of units/month and
units/annum. The Commission in this Order reduces MCG to 60 units/BHP/month or 720
units/BHP/annum.
It is observed that bills for these consumers are being issued twice a year as per provision in
the Tariff Order and that such bills are being issued in June and December of each year. The
Commission has also noted certain anomalies in accounting of the energy billed on normative/
minimum consumption guarantee basis. Further, this year, the MCG is being revised. For the sake
of clarity and with a view to ensure uniform basis of billing, the Commission hereunder lays down
the procedure to be followed:
1) For bills to be issued in June 2015:
The MCG per BHP for bills to be issued in June 2015 would be as under:
a) December 2014 to March 2015 – 70 X 4= 280 units
b) April 2015 to May 2015– 60 X 2= 120 units
c) Total – 400 units (280+120)
2) For bills to be issued in December 2015 the MCG shall be reckoned as 360 units/ BHP (60
units per BHP/ month X 6)
The MCG will be attracted only if the actual recorded consumption is lower than MCG
indicated above. In both cases, i.e. for bills based on MCG or based on actual meter
reading adjustment of units and amount included in CS-3 and CS-4 of months December
14 to April 15 and May 2015 to November 2015 shall be ensured. The Commission
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
188 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
directs that the licensee tenders a certificate under affidavit, that appropriate
modification based on the above have been incorporated in its billing software on or
before June 15, 2015.
5.2.3.12 Time of Day Tariff
The Commission in its Tariff Order for FY 2010-11 dated April 10, 2010 approved the peak
hour rate as 50% higher than the normal hour rate for Industrial Category. Further, in case of HT
industries, the Commission has specified the peak hour rate as 50% higher than the normal hour
rate applicable for highest load factor slab, i.e. energy charge for load factor above 50% for all the
HT industrial consumers. The Commission kept the rebate during off peak hours to 10% to
incentivise the shift in consumption from peak hours to off peak hours.
The Commission, in each of its tariff determination exercise, has been analysing the shift
from the peak hours to normal and off-peak as well as the consumption pattern during the peak
and off-peak hours. The Commission has analysed the unrestricted load curves of summer as well
as winter month to assess the consumption during peak hour period during these months. The load
curves for the days having highest peak load in the months of summer and winter season, i.e. April
2014, May 2014, January, 2015 and February 2015 have been examined and the same are graphically
presented below:
Graph 1: Load Curve for April 26, 2014
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 189
Graph 2: Load Curve for May 22, 2014
Graph 3: Load Curve for January 10, 2015
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
190 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Graph 4: Load Curve for February 06, 2015
It is observed from the above graphical presentations that during the winter season both
morning as well as evening peak demand exists in the State. Infact, in the months of January and
February, 2015, the morning peak demand has been found to be even higher than the evening peak
demand. The Commission feels the need for DSM and having ToD tariff as a measure for ensuring
curtailment of morning as well as evening peaks. Considering all these aspects, the Commission in
the present Order is continuing with the same Peak, Normal and Off Peak hour duration for ToD
metering slots including percentage of peak hour surcharge and peak hour rebate as approved in
the earlier Tariff Orders for FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13, MYT Order for FY 2013-14 and
APR Order for FY 2014-15.
5.2.3.13 Differential Tariff for Rural and Urban for Public Lamp and PWW categories
The Commission observed that the supply hours to rural areas for Public Lamps and PWW
categories is considerably lower as compared to Urban areas and, accordingly, the load factor for
these categories in rural areas works out to be substantially lower than the urban areas. The
Commission has, therefore, decided to fix differential fixed charges for urban and rural consumers.
Hence, the Commission has kept fixed charges for these categories in rural areas lower than that in
urban areas.
5.2.3.14 Tariff for Unmetered Consumers
Section 55(1) of the Electricity Act, 2003 stipulates as under:
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 191
“No licensee shall supply electricity, after the expiry of two years from the appointed date, except
through installation of a correct meter in accordance with regulations to be made in this behalf by the
Authority:”
The Commission in its previous Orders have been directing UPCL to meter all the
consumers. The Commission in its MYT Order dated May 6, 2013 directed the Petitioner as follows:
“The Commission hereby directs the Petitioner that no new connection should be released without
installation of proper meters. Further, the Petitioner is directed to submit the detailed Action Plan
giving timeframe in which it intends to meter the remaining unmetered consumers within 2 months
of the date of the Order.”
The Commission in its MYT Order dated May 6, 2013 also submitted that as the Petitioner
has sought time for metering the unmetered rural domestic consumers, the Commission is
permitting to retain this sub-category.
The Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 directed the Petitioner as follows:
“The Commission now accords final opportunity to ensure that all unmetered consumers are metered
by September 30, 2014. The Commission intends to discontinue prescribing norms of billing and
tariff for unmetered consumers from ensuing years.”
UPCL was required to meter all the unmetered consumers by September 30, 2014. However,
in compliance to the directions, UPCL submitted that there were 6373 unmetered connections as on
31-07-2014 and it had metered 169 unmetered connections from April to September, 2014. The
remaining unmetered connections would be metered by 30-06-2015.
Despite categorical directions in this regard & repeated non-compliance of the Act & Orders
of the Commission, UPCL has again proposed to meter all the remaining unmetered connections by
30th June 2015. The Commission has now decided to discontinue the unmetered tariff and has,
accordingly, not approved the tariff for unmetered consumers separately. Till the meter reading is
carried for such consumers, the billing for the converted unmetered connections into metered
connections will be done as detailed out in Rate Schedule enclosed at Annexure-1.
The Commission directs the Petitioner to meter all the remaining unmetered connections
immediately and submit compliance to the Commission latest by 31st May, 2015.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
192 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
5.2.4 Treatment of Revenue Gap
As concluded in Chapter 4 of the Order, the revenue at existing tariffs leaves a revenue gap
of Rs. 305.45 Crore to meet the ARR for FY 2015-16, post adjustment of the revenue surplus and gap
determined after truing up of expenses and revenue based on the audited accounts for FY 2013-14.
The Commission in order to recover the gap has revised the tariffs for FY 2015-16. The
approved tariff will be applicable from April 1, 2015 and will be effective till revised by the
Commission.
5.2.5 Cross Subsidy
As per the provisions of Tariff Policy, the Regulatory Commission has to reduce the cross
subsidies with respect to cost of supply in a gradual manner. The Commission in its MYT Order for
FY 2013-14 dated May 06, 2013 had computed the cross subsidies for different category of
subsidising consumers which were in accordance with the Tariff Policy. Further, since the
Commission in its APR order for FY 2014-15 did not revise the tariff, the cross subsidy levels
remained the same as that approved by the Commission in its MYT Order dated May 06, 2013.
The Commission has now revised the tariff and ensured that the cross subsidy has reduced
with respect to previous levels and the same is in accordance with the Tariff Policy.
5.2.6 Category-wise Tariff Design
The Commission has designed the category-wise tariffs for full recovery of approved
Annual Revenue Requirement for FY 2015-16. The category-wise tariffs approved by the
Commission are discussed below and are also shown in the Approved Rate Schedule placed at
Annexure-1. These rates shall be effective from April 1, 2015 and shall continue to be applicable till
further revised by the Commission.
5.2.6.1 RTS-1: Domestic Tariff
The Commission, recognising the fact that lifeline consumers were one of the most
economically weaker sections of the consumers, in its Tariff Order for FY 2003-04 had approved a
tariff of Rs. 1.50/kWh for such consumers when the average cost of supply was Rs. 2.28/kWh.
Considering the fact that the Tariff Policy permits that the tariffs for such lifeline consumers can be
determined at 50% of the average cost of supply, the Commission in order to gradually reduce the
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 193
cross subsidy and also to enable the licensee to recover some of its Fixed Cost, in its Tariff Order for
FY 2011-12 dated May 24, 2011 had introduced a Fixed Charges of Rs. 5/connection/month which
was further nominally increased to Rs. 6/connection /month and then to Rs. 7/connection/month
in the Tariff Order for FY 2012-13 dated April 11, 2012 and MYT Order dated May 06, 2013
respectively.
Since the average cost of supply has increased further, therefore, with a view to reduce the
cross-subsidy, the fixed charges of lifeline consumer have now been increased from Rs.
7/connection /month to Rs. 11/connection/month. However, the energy charges have not been
increased and are kept intact at Rs. 1.50/kWh.
For other domestic consumers, as discussed in the previous section the Commission had
taken a view to introduce fixed charges linked to consumption. As per the prevailing tariff structure
differential fixed charges have been determined for consumers with connected load upto 4 kW and
above 4 kW. The current fixed charges are Rs. 35/ connection/month for consumers with load upto
4 kW and Rs. 90/connection/month for consumers with load above 4 kW. The Commission as
discussed earlier has now decided to introduce slab wise differential fixed charges linked to the
consumption. Accordingly, the Commission has approved the fixed charges linked to consumption
as follows:
• For Consumption upto first 100 units/month - Rs. 35/connection/month
• For Consumption between 101-200 units/month – Rs. 50/connection/month
• For Consumption between 201-300 units/month - Rs. 70/connection/month
• For Consumption between 301-400 units/month – Rs. 95/connection/month
• For Consumption between 401 -500 units/month – Rs. 120/connection/month
• For Consumption above 500 units/month - Rs. 145 /connection/month
The energy charges for lowest slab, i.e. consumption upto 100 units/month have been
nominally increased from the existing level of Rs. 2.30/kWh to Rs. 2.40/kWh. The energy charges
for the second slab, i.e. for consumption between 101-200 units/month have been fixed as Rs.
2.90/kWh. The energy charges for the third slab, i.e. for consumption between 201-400 units/month
energy charges have been fixed as Rs. 3.80/kWh, for consumers having consumption above 400
units/month, the energy charges have been fixed at Rs. 4.00/kWh.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
194 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
For single point bulk supply connections, the energy charges have been increased to Rs.
3.40/kWh from Rs. 3.15/kWh and fixed charges has been increased to Rs. 40/kW/month from Rs.
35/kW/month.
A comparison of the tariff, i.e. existing, proposed by the Petitioner and that approved by the
Commission, is given in the Table below:
Table 5.3 : Tariff for Domestic Consumers
S. No Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved
Fixed Charge (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed Charge (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed Charge
(Per Month)
Energy Charges
RTS-1: Domestic 1.1 Life Line Consumers Rs. 7/
Connection Rs.
1.50/kWh Rs. 10/
Connection Rs.
1.90/kWh Rs. 11/
Connection Rs.
1.50/kWh
1.2 Other Domestic Consumers
(i) 0-100 Units / Month
Rs. 35/ Connection upto 4 KW
and Rs. 90/connection
for above 4 kW
Rs. 2.30/kWh
Rs. 45/ Connection upto 4 KW
and Rs 120/connection for above 4 kW
Rs. 2.90/kWh
Rs.35/ Connection
Rs. 2.40/kWh
(ii) 101-200 Units / Month Rs. 2.70/kWh
Rs. 3.40/kWh
Rs.50/ Connection
Rs. 2.90/kWh
(iii) 201-300 Units /Month Rs. 3.35/kWh
Rs. 4.20/kWh
Rs.70/ Connection
Rs. 3.80/kWh
(iv) 301-400 Units /Month Rs. 3.35/kWh
Rs. 4.20/kWh
Rs.95/ Connection
Rs. 3.80/kWh
(v) 401-500 Units /Month Rs. 3.50/kWh
Rs. 4.40/kWh
Rs.120/ Connection
Rs. 4.00/kWh
(vi) Above 500 Units/Month Rs. 3.50/kWh
Rs. 4.40/kWh
Rs.145/ Connection
Rs. 4.00/kWh
2 Single point bulk supply Rs. 35/kW Rs. 3.15/kWh Rs. 45/kW Rs.
4.00/kWh Rs. 40/kW Rs. 3.40/kWh
5.2.6.2 RTS 1-A: Concessional Snowbound Area Tariff
As discussed above, the Commission has decided to continue with the RTS 1-A Concessional
Snowbound Area Category. The Commission has increased the tariffs for domestic and non-
domestic consumers in snow bound areas to gradually reduce the cross subsidy.
A comparison of the tariff, i.e. existing, proposed by the Petitioner and that approved by the
Commission, is given in the Table below:
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 195
Table 5.4 : Concessional Tariff for Snowbound Areas
S. No Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved
Fixed Charge (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed Charge (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed Charge (Per Month)
Energy Charges
RTS-1A: Snowbound 1 Domestic Rs. 7/
Connection Rs.
1.50/kWh Not Proposed Rs. 11/ Connection
Rs. 1.50/kWh
2 Non-Domestic upto 1 kW
Rs. 7/ Connection
Rs. 1.50/kWh Not Proposed Rs. 11/
Connection Rs.
1.50/kWh
3 Non-Domestic above 1 kW & upto 4 kW
Rs. 7/ Connection
Rs. 2.15/kWh Not Proposed Rs. 11/
Connection Rs.
2.25/kWh
4 Non-Domestic above 4 kW
Rs. 14/ Connection
Rs. 3.25/kWh Not Proposed Rs. 20/
Connection Rs.
3.40/kWh
5.2.7 RTS-2: Non-Domestic Tariff
For Non-domestic consumers, the Commission has increased the energy charges and fixed
charges to enable the licenses to recover its fixed cost and revenue gap. The Commission has
separately specified the tariff for concessional sub-category of educational institutions, hospitals
and charitable institutions, which shall include:
• Government/Municipal Hospitals;
• Government/Government Aided Educational Institutions; and
• Charitable Institutions registered under the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and
whose income is exempted from tax under this Act.
Further, as discussed in preceding section, the Commission had decided to introduce a new
sub-category as “Independent Advertisement Boards/Hoardings” under RTS 2 and has fixed tariff
for the same separately.
Further, the Commission has reduced the MCG to 50 kVAh/kW/month and 600
kVAh/kW/ annum for non-domestic consumers having load above 25 kW. The existing tariff, tariff
proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission is given in Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
196 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 5.5: Tariff for Non-domestic consumers
Sl. No. Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved
Fixed / Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges MCG
Fixed / Demand Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges MCG
Fixed / Demand Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges MCG
1 Government, Educational Institutions and Hospitals etc.
1.1 Upto 25 kW Rs. 35/ kW
Rs 3.85/ kWh
Rs. 45/ kW
Rs 4.90/ kWh
Rs. 40/ kW
Rs 4.05/ kWh
1.2 Above 25 kW Rs. 35/ kVA
Rs 3.45/ kVAh
60 kVAh /kVA
/month & 720 kVAh/
kVA/annum
Rs. 45/ kVA
Rs 4.50/ kVAh
60 kVAh /kVA
/month & 720 kVAh/
kVA/annum
Rs. 45/ kVA
Rs 3.65/ kVAh
50 kVAh /kVA
/month & 600 kVAh/
kVA/annum 2 Other Non-Domestic Users
2.1
Upto 4 kW and
consumption upto 50 units
per month
Rs. 35 / kW
Rs 4.00/ kWh
Rs. 45 / kW
Rs 5.10/ kWh
Rs. 45 / kW
Rs 4.20/ kWh
2.2
Others upto 25 kW not
covered in 2.1 above
Rs. 35 / kW
Rs 4.55/ kWh
Rs. 45 / kW
Rs 5.75/ kWh
Rs. 45 / kW
Rs 4.85/ kWh
2.3 Above 25 kW Rs. 35 / kVA
Rs 4.55/ kVAh
60 kVAh /kVA
/month & 720 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
Rs. 45 / kVA
Rs 5.75/ kVAh
60 kVAh /kVA
/month & 720 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
Rs. 45 / kVA
Rs 4.75/ kVAh
50 kVAh /kVA
/month & 600 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
3 Single Point Bulk Supply above 75 kW
Rs. 35 / kVA
Rs 4.45/ kVAh
60 kVAh /kVA
/month & 720 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
Rs. 45/ kVA
Rs 5.65/ kVAh
60 kVAh /kVA
/month & 720 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
Rs. 45 / kVA
Rs 4.65/ kVAh
50 kVAh /kVA
/month & 600 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
4 Independent
Advertisement Hoardings
Rs. 200 / kW
Rs. 8.00/kWh Rs. 60/
kW Rs.
4.90/kWh
5.2.8 RTS-3: Public Lamps
As discussed above, the Commission has decided to approve differential tariff for urban and
rural consumers. However, the tariff for this category has been approved in such a manner so that
the average billing rate for category is close to average cost of supply. The existing tariff, tariff
proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission is given in the Table below:
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 197
Table 5.6 : Tariff for Public Lamps
Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand
Charges (Per Month)
Energy Charges
RTS-3: Public Lamps 3.1 Urban 1. Metered Rs. 30/kW Rs. 4.10/
kWh Rs. 40/kW Rs. 5.15/ kWh Rs. 40/kW Rs. 4.35/ kWh
3.2 Rural 1. Metered Rs. 30/kW Rs. 4.10/
kWh - - Rs. 35/kW Rs. 4.35/ kWh
5.2.9 RTS-4: Private Tube Wells/Pump sets and Agriculture Allied Activities
The Commission in order to gradually reduce the cross subsidy to this category has
increased the tariff for this category of consumers. The Petitioner has proposed a tariff of Rs.
230/BHP/Month from the existing rate of Rs. 180/BHP/Month for unmetered consumers and
energy charges of Rs. 1.40/kWh from Rs. 1.10/kWh for metered consumers.
As already discussed, the Commission has decided to do away with the unmetered tariff,
hence, the Commission has approved a energy charge of Rs. 1.40/kWh for all the Tubewell
consumers.
As dicsused earlier, the Commission has reduced the Minimum Consumption Guarantee
level to 60 units /BHP/month on monthly basis and 720 units /BHP/annum on annual basis. The
Commission would like to clarify that minimum consumption guarantee is strictly not a tariff and
will be levied on monthly basis only when monthly bill is less than the amount specified for
monthly minimum charges. In case, cumulative actual consumption from the beginning of financial
year exceeds the amount specified for annual minimum consumption charges, no further billing of
monthly minimum consumption shall be done and the same shall be adjusted as detailed in Tariff
Schedule.
Further, as discussed earlier, the Commission has created new sub-category for Agriculture
Allied Activities and the Commission has fixed the tariffs for such sub-category at 50% of Average
Cost of Supply. The minimum consumption charges as applicable for PTW category shall also be
applicable for this sub-category.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
198 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The existing tariff, tariff proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission are
given in the Table below:
Table 5.7: Tariff for Private tube Wells/ Pump Sets
Category
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved Fixed /
Demand Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges
Minimum Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges
Minimum Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges
Minimum Charges
RTS-4: Private Tube-wells / Pumping sets
Metered Nil Rs. 1.10/ kWh
70 units/ BHP/
month & 840
units/BHP/ annum
Nil Rs. 1.40/ kWh
70 units/ BHP/
month &. 840 units /BHP/ annum
Nil Rs. 1.40/ kWh
60 units/ BHP/
month & 720 units /BHP/ annum
RTS-4A:
Metered Nil Rs. 2.25/ kWh
60 units/ BHP/
month & 720 units /BHP/ annum
5.2.10 RTS-5: Government Irrigation System
The tariff for this category has been approved in such a manner so that the average billing
rate for this category is close to the average cost of supply without any element of cross-subsidy.
The existing tariff, tariff proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission is given in
the Table below:
Table 5.8: Tariff for Government Irrigation System
Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand
Charges (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
RTS-5: Government Irrigation System Upto 75 kW Rs. 30/kW Rs. 4.10/ kWh Rs. 40/kW Rs. 5.15/ kWh Rs. 40/kW Rs. 4.35/ kWh
Above 75 kW Rs. 30/kVA Rs. 3.95/ kVAh Rs. 40/kVA Rs. 5.00/
kVAh Rs. 40/kVA Rs. 4.20/ kVAh
5.2.11 RTS-6: Public Water Works
As discussed earlier the Commission has decided to allow separate tariff for urban and rural
consumers under PWW. The tariff for this category has been approved so that the average billing
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 199
rate for this category is close to average cost of supply. The existing tariff, tariff proposed by the
licensee and that approved by the Commission is given in the Table below:
Table 5.9 : Tariff for Public Water Works
Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved Fixed / Demand
Charges (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
Urban Rs. 30/kVA Rs. 4.00/ kVAh
Rs. 45/kW Rs. 5.10/ kWh Rs. 40/kVA Rs. 4.25/
kVAh Rs. 45/kVA Rs. 5.10/ kVAh
Rural Rs. 30/kVA Rs. 4.00/
kVAh - - Rs. 35/kVA Rs. 4.25/ kVAh
5.2.12 RTS-7: Industry
The Commission while determining the tariff of HT and LT Industries have taken into
consideration average cost of supply and cross subsidy. The Commission has ensured that the cross
subsidy for this category has reduced from the existing levels.
Further, as discussed in the preceding section, the Commission with regard to HT industrial
consumers has decided to keep only two slabs, i.e. industries with load factor below 40% and with
load factor above 40%.
The Commission has decided to retain the peak hour rate as 50% higher than the normal
hour rate applicable for highest slab, i.e. with load factor above 50% for all the HT industrial
consumers. Further, consumers opting for continuous supply as per eligibility given in this Order
shall have to pay 15% additional energy charges as continuous supply surcharge.
Further, as discussed above in tariff rationalisation measures, the Commission has retained
MCG on monthly basis with adjustment as detailed out in Tariff Schedule. The existing tariff, tariff
proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission for LT Industry is given in the
Table below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
200 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 5.10: Tariff for LT Industries
Category
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Approved Fixed
Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges MCG
Fixed Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges MCG
Fixed Charges
(Per Month)
Energy Charges MCG
RTS-7: Industry LT Industry 1. LT Industries (upto 25 kW)
Rs. 100/ kW
Rs. 3.75/ kWh
*60 kWh/ kW/month &
720 kWh /kW/annum
Rs. 130/ kW
Rs. 4.65/ kWh
*60 kWh/ kW/month &
720 kWh /kW/annum
Rs. 105/ kW
Rs. 3.95/ kWh
*50 kWh/ kW/month &
600 kWh /kW/annum
2. LT Industries (above 25kW & upto 75 kW)
Rs. 100/ kVA
Rs. 3.40/ kVAh
60 kVAh/ kVA/month &
720 kVAh /kVA/ annum
Rs. 130/ kVA
Rs. 4.30/ kVAh
60 kVAh/ kVA/month &
720 kVAh /kVA/ annum
Rs. 105/ kVA
Rs. 3.60/ kVAh
50 kVAh/ kVA/month &
600 kVAh /kVA/ annum
*30 kWh/kW/month and 360 kWh/kW/annum for Atta Chakkis.
The existing tariff and tariff proposed by the licensee for HT Industry is given in the Table
below:
Table 5.10: Existing and Proposed Tariff for HT Industries
Sl. No. Category Load Factor
Existing Tariff Proposed Tariff
Energy Charges
(Rs./kVAh)
Fixed /Demand Charges
(Rs./kVA)
MCG Charges
Energy Charges
(Rs./kVAh)
Fixed /Demand Charges
(Rs./kVA)
MCG Charges
1 HT Industry having contracted load above 88kVA/75 kW (100 BHP)
1.1 Contracted Load up to 1000 kVA
Upto 33% 3.05 Rs. 210/kVA of
the billable demand
110 kVAh/kVA/month & 1320 kVAh
/kVA/ annum
3.85 Rs. 270/kVA of the billable
demand 110
kVAh/kVA/month &1320
kVAh /kVA/a
nnum
Above 33% and upto 50% 3.30 4.15
Above 50% 3.60 4.55
1.2
Contracted Load More than 1000 kVA
Upto 33% 3.05 Rs. 270/kVA of
the billable demand
3.85 Rs. 345/kVA of the billable
demand
Above 33% and upto 50% 3.30 4.15
Above 50% 3.60 4.55
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 201
The approved tariff for HT Industry is given in Table below:
Table 5.11: Approved Tariff for HT Industry
S. No Category Load Factor
Energy Charges
Fixed Charges MCG
Rs./kVAh Rs./kVA/ month
kVAh/kVA of contracted load
1 HT Industry having contracted load above 88kVA/75 kW (100 BHP)
1.1 Contracted Load up to 1000 kVA
Upto 40% 3.40 Rs. 230/kVA of the billable
demand 100 kVAh/kVA/month & 1200 kVAh
/kVA/annum
Above 40% 3.75
1.2
Contracted Load More than 1000 kVA
Upto 40% 3.40 Rs. 290/kVA of the billable
demand Above 40% 3.75
5.2.13 RTS-8: Mixed Load
The Commission has increased the tariff for this category to reduce the level of cross
subsidy. The existing tariff, tariff proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission is
given in the Table below:
Table 5.12: Tariff for Mixed Load
Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Tariff Design Fixed /
Demand Charges
Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges
Per Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand
Charges (Per Month)
Energy Charges
RTS-8: Mixed Load Mixed Load Single Point Bulk Supply above 75 kW including MES as deemed licensee
Rs. 40/ kW Rs. 3.80/ kWh Rs. 50/ kW Rs. 4.80/ kWh Rs. 50/ kW Rs. 4.15/
kWh
5.2.14 RTS-9: Railway Traction
The existing tariff, tariff proposed by the licensee and that approved by the Commission is
given in Tables below:
Table 5.13: Tariff for Railway Traction
Description
Existing Tariff UPCL Proposed Tariff Tariff Design Fixed /
Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand Charges (Per
Month)
Energy Charges
Fixed / Demand
Charges (Per Month)
Energy Charges
RTS-9: Railway Traction
Rs. 190/kVA Rs. 3.25/ kVAh Rs. 240/kVA Rs. 4.10/
kVAh Rs. 200/kVA Rs. 3.60/ kVAh
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
202 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
5.3 Revenue for FY 2015-16
Considering the revised tariffs, the Commission has computed the projected revenue at the
approved tariffs from each category for FY 2015-16. The summary of category-wise projected
revenue for FY 2015-16 is given in the following Table:
Table 5.14: Revenue for FY 2015-16
S No Category Sales Revenue Average Billing Rate
MU Rs. Crore Rs./Unit 1 RTS-1: Domestic 2477 820.97 3.31 2 RTS-2: Non Domestic 1214 621.12 5.12 3 RTS-3: Public Lamps 44 19.97 4.50 4 RTS-4: Private Tube Wells 226 36.63 1.62 5 RTS-5: Government Irrigation System 117 53.50 4.56 6 RTS-6: Public Water Works 317 142.09 4.48 7 RTS-7: Industry 5734 2769.25 4.83 LT Industry 324 157.01 4.85 HT Industry 5410 2612.24 4.83
8 RTS-8: Mixed Load 219 95.18 4.34 9 RTS-9: Railway Traction 12 6.08 5.04
10 Sub-Total 10361 4564.78 4.41 11 Revenue on Account of Efficiency Improvement 61 27.01 4.41 12 Total 10422 4591.79 4.41
The estimated revenue for FY 2015-16 works out to Rs. 4591.79 Crore, as against the net ARR
of Rs. 4590.88 Crore worked out after adjusting trued-up surplus/gaps of previous years, leaving a
surplus of Rs. 0.91 Crore.
5.4 Cross Subsidy
As discussed above, the Commission has designed the tariffs for various categories with an
objective of gradually reducing the cross subsidy with respect to average cost of supply. The extent
of category-wise cross-subsidy at approved tariffs computed at average cost of supply is given in
the Table below:
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 203
Table 5.15 : Cross Subsidy at Average Cost of Supply
Category Approved Average Billing
Rate (ABR) Average Cost of Supply (ACoS) ABR / ACoS Cross
Subsidy Rs./kWh Rs./kWh % %
Domestic 3.31 4.41 75.16% -24.84% Non Domestic 5.12 4.41 116.05% 16.05% Public Lamps 4.50 4.41 102.13% 2.13% PTW 1.62 4.41 36.76% -63.24% GIS 4.56 4.41 103.37% 3.37% PWW 4.48 4.41 101.66% 1.66% LT Industrial 4.85 4.41 109.92% 9.92% HT Industrial 4.83 4.41 109.49% 9.49% Mixed Load 4.34 4.41 98.34% -1.66% Railways 5.04 4.41 114.38% 14.38%
The comparison of Cross Subsidy at Approved Tariffs with respect to the Average Cost of
Supply in Tariff Order for FY 2013-14 and as approved in this Tariff Order for FY 2015-16 is given
below:
Table 5.16 : Cross Subsidy at Approved Tariffs in FY 2013-14 and FY 2015-16
Category Cross Subsidy at Approved Tariff for FY 2013-14
Cross Subsidy at Approved Tariff for FY 2015-16
Domestic -26.86% -24.84% Non Domestic 16.05% 16.05% PTW -63.98% -63.24% GIS 0.04% 3.37% Public Lamps -0.59% 2.13% PWW -0.47% 1.66% LT Industrial 10.09% 9.92% HT Industrial 9.53% 9.49% Mixed Load 14.70% -1.66% Railways -5.94% 14.38%
The Commission while designing the tariffs for FY 2015-16 has either reduced or retained
the cross subsidies for most of the categories with respect to approved tariffs for FY 2013-14 and has
ensured to bring the cross-subsidy levels within the range specified in the National Tariff Policy. It
can be seen from the Table above, cross-subsidies of all the subsidising consumers is within the
range of 120% as required in the Tariff Policy.
The Commission going forward in future years would attempt to reduce the cross-subsidy
for subsidised categories with respect to the average cost of supply and would reduce the cross
subsidies in next 2-3 years to adhere to the provisions of Tariff Policy.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
204 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Further, once the cross-subsidy level has been reduced to be within +20%, there is no
mandate under the Act or Tariff Policy to reduce it further. The criteria of ± 20 % of the average cost
of supply for all the categories including subsidised categories depends upon the consumption mix
of the Licensee. However, in case of the Petitioner, the consumption mix is skewed towards
subsidising categories with subsidising categories constituting almost two third of total sales, while
the consumption by subsidised categories is around one third of the total consumption. Therefore,
in case of Petitioner, though the tariff for all the subsidising categories have been within 120% of the
overall average cost of supply of the Petitioner, the average tariff for some of the subsidised
categories is less than 80% of the overall average cost of supply of the Petitioner.
Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal of Electricity, in its Judgment dated February 28, 2012, in
Appeal No. 159 of 2011 has expressed similar views. The relevant extract given in Para 16 of the
Judgment is reproduced as under:
“.... Provision of restricting cross subsidy to +/- 20% in Tariff Policy is applicable to areas where
proportion of both the categories, subsidizing and subsidized, are comparable. The same yard stick
cannot be applied in areas where consumer mix is highly biased in favour on one category.”
5.5 Open Access Charges
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Intra State Open
Access) Regulations, 2015 inter-alia specify wheeling charges applicable on the customers seeking
open access through distribution system, based on the category/nature of open access these
customers come under in accordance with the regulations.
In accordance with the methodology provided in the regulations, the rate of these charges
for FY 2015-16 (applicable upto 31st March 2016) are based on the Tariff approved by the
Commission for the financial year 2015-16.
Wheeling Charges applicable for FY 2015-16 shall be:
Table 5.17: Wheeling Charges approved for FY 2015-16 Description Rs. /MW/day
Wheeling Charges 10067.71
*“Embedded open access consumers” shall not pay the wheeling charge as above who shall
otherwise pay net wheeling charges calculated in accordance with the methodology
5. Tariff Rationalisation, Tariff Design and Related Issues
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 205
specified in the regulations and the same works out to Rs. 1963.60/MW/day for HT
industry consumers and Rs. 8810.18/MW/day for Non-Domestic consumers.
However, where a dedicated distribution system for open access has been constructed for
exclusive use of an open access customer, the wheeling charges for such dedicated system shall be
worked out by the distribution licnesee for its respective system and shall get it approved by the
Commission and will be borne entirely by such open access customer till such time the surplus
capacity is allotted and used by other open access customers, where after, the cost of the above
sytem will be shared on pro-rata basis depending upon open access capacity allotted to them.
Provided that wheeling charges shall not be levied on the open access customers connected
to the transmission system at 132 kV and above voltage levels.
The distribution losses applicable to open access customers for FY 2015-16 shall be the
pooled average system distribution losses, i.e. 15.00% considered in this Order.
Cross subsidy surcharge applicable, in accordance with the regulations, to open access
customers for FY 2015-16 have been determined as Rs. 0.42/kWh.
206 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
6. Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
6.1 General Uttarakhand, the 27th State of India was created on 9th November 2000 as the 10th
Himalayan State of the country blessed with the natural resources in abundance with an approx.
53,483 sq. km area and presently having a population of approximately 101.17 lakh. The Electricity
Distribution Network in the State of Uttarakhand is managed by Uttarakhand Power Corporation
Ltd (UPCL) the sole distribution licensee in the State. UPCL, had been entrusted to cater to the
Transmission & Distribution Sectors inherited after the de-merger from UPPCL (erstwhile UPSEB)
since 1st April 2001. The Electricity Act, 2003 mandated the separation of Transmission functions
under Power Sector Reforms. Consequently, on 1st June 2004, the Power Transmission Corporation
Limited (PTCUL) was formed to maintain & operate 132 KV & above Transmission Lines &
substations in the State.
Today UPCL, the sole Power Distribution Utility of the State of Uttarakhand caters to the
Sub –Transmission & Distribution, owns & operates Substations & Distribution Lines of 66 KV &
below voltages in 13 Districts of Uttarakhand namely Dehradun, Pauri, Tehri, Uttarkashi,
Rudraprayag, Chamoli, Haridwar, Pithoragarh, Bageshwar, Almora, Nainital, Champawat, &
Udhamsingh Nagar details of which are given below in Table 6.1 & 6.2.
Table 6.1: Detail of Sub-stations (S/s) maintained by UPCL as on 31.12.2014
S. No. Name of District
66/11 kV S/s 33/11 kV S/s 11/0.415/11 kV S/s
Nos. No. of Transformers
Total MVA capacity Nos. No. of
Transformers Total MVA
capacity Nos. Total MVA capacity
Garhwal Zone 1 Dehradun 51 99 619 5766 666 2 Uttarkashi 8 13 44 1720 57 3 Pauri 31 50 211 5223 227 4 Tehri 14 23 101 3466 127 5 Chamoli 4 6 48 10 15 55 1914 68 6 Rudraprayag 5 6 28 1647 48 7 Haridwar 51 106 884 13295 847
Total Garhwal Zone 4 6 48 170 312 1942 33031 2041 Kumaon Zone
1 Nainital 28 50 281 4328 380 2 U.S. Nagar 45 94 691 10432 654 3 Almora 20 35 107 3939 136 4 Bageshwar 6 10 32 1697 55 5 Pithoragarh 15 23 106 3238 106 6 Champawat 7 11 45 1275 46
Total Kumaon Zone 0 0 0 121 223 1261 24909 1377 Total UPCL 4 6 48 291 535 3203 57940 3419
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 207
Table 6.2: Detail of Lines maintained by UPCL as on 31.12.2014 S. No. Name of District 66 kV Line (In Km.) 33 kV Line (in Km) 11 kV Line (in Km) LT Line (in Km)
Garhwal Zone 1 Dehradun 834 5247 10471 2 Uttarkashi 248 1525 2127 3 Pauri 603 5046 7168 4 Tehri 364 3786 3953 5 Chamoli 121 173 1957 2775 6 Rudraprayag 134 1217 1720 7 Haridwar 416 3248 4186
Total Garhwal Zone 121 2772 22026 32400 Kumaon Zone
1 Nainital 20 328 2679 4315 2 U.S. Nagar 503 3544 4251 3 Almora 354 3025 4575 4 Bageshwar 136 1562 2190 5 Pithoragarh 229 2796 3336 6 Champawat 166 1647 2136
Total Kumaon Zone 20 1716 15252 20803 Total UPCL 141 4488 37278 53203
The State has distinct advantage over other comparable State as a small number of
consumers consume major share of power and hence a large portion of revenue of the Petitioner
comes from a very small number of consumers. There were 17.03 Lakh consumers as on March 2013
and 17.83 Lakh consumers as on March 2014. This increase of total 79,993 consumers during the
year was primarily in Domestic category. The Consumer Mix, Consumption pattern & Revenue for
FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14 are elaborated below:
6.1.1 Consumer Mix during FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14
As at the end of FY 2012-13, out of the total approximately 17.03 Lakh consumers in the
State, the composition of the consumer mix for Domestic, Non-Domestic & Industrial category of
consumers was 87.51%, 10.18% & 0.65% respectively. It was also observed that during the FY 2012-
13, industrial (HT+LT Industries) consumers which were only about 0.65% of total consumers in
number, contributed about 63.92% of Petitioner’s revenue. The following Chart depicts the
consumers mix in the State during FY 2012-13.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
208 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
CHART 1: Consumer Mix (FY 2012-13)
In FY 2013-14, out of the total approximately 17.83 Lakh consumers in the State, there were
87.52%-Domestic consumers, 10.18%-Non-Domestic consumers and only 0.62% consumers of the
Industrial category. It is seen that these industrial (HT+LT Industries) consumers contributed about
63% of Petitioner’s revenue. The following Chart depicts the consumers mix in the State during FY
2013-14.
CHART 2: Consumer Mix (FY 2013-14)
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 209
6.1.2 Consumption Pattern during FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14
In FY 2012-13, it was observed that with respect to the %age of total consumption of the
State, the consumption of Industrial consumers (HT+LT Industries) was 56.95% and for Domestic &
Non-Domestic consumers the consumption was 20.98% & 11.12% respectively. The following Chart
shows the consumption pattern in the State during FY 2012-13.
CHART 3: Consumption Pattern during FY 2012-13
In FY 2013-14, it was observed that with respect to the %age of total consumption of the
State, the consumption of Industrial consumers (HT+LT Industries) was 56.17% and for Domestic &
Non-Domestic consumers the consumption was 23.23% & 10.96% respectively. The following Chart
shows the consumption pattern in the State during FY 2013-14.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
210 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
CHART 4: Consumption Pattern during FY 2013-14
Comparison of consumption pattern in FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14 depicts that %age share
of Industrial consumption has decreased by 0.78%, whereas, %age share of domestic consumption
has increased by 2.25% and the %age share of non-domestic consumption has decreased by 0.16%. It
has also been noticed that besides other reasons for decrease in industrial consumption, one of the
primary reasons for this decrease is due to implementation of Open Access Mechanism which gives
liberty to the consumer to arrange power from sources located outside the State via short term Open
Access agreements through power exchanges. Considering this fact, in case the Petitioner does not
improve its performance and ensure the availability, quality and reliability of power for these
consumers, the volume of power being sold by the Petitioner to this category of consumers may get
reduced progressively. The following table gives the quantum of power traded through Exchanges
(Open Access) by the Embedded Open Access Consumers.
Table 6.3: Quantum of Power Traded through Open Access
Year Quantum of Power Traded through Open Access (MU) FY 2011-12 10.34 FY 2012-13 100.93 FY 2013-14 281.03
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 211
6.1.3 Revenue Pattern during FY 2012-13 & FY 2013-14
With regard to the revenue from sale of energy during FY 2012-13, the contribution of
Industrial consumers was 63.92% [HT Industrial consumers was 60.14%, LT industrial consumers
was 3.79%] and of Domestic consumers were contributing around 14.54%. The following Chart
shows the Revenue Pattern of various consumer categories in the State.
CHART 5: Revenue Pattern in FY 2012-13
With regard to the revenue from sale of energy during FY 2013-14, the contribution of
Industrial consumers was 63.00% [HT Industrial consumers was 59.37%, LT industrial consumers
was 3.63%] and of Domestic consumers were contributing around 15.92%. The following Chart
shows the Revenue Pattern of various consumer categories in the State.
CHART 6: Revenue Mix in FY 2013-14
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
212 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
On comparing the revenues of FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14, it is noticed that the %age
revenue share of Industrial Consumers & non-domestic consumers with respect to the total revenue
had decreased by 0.93% & 0.35%, whereas the %age revenue share of domestic consumers had
increased by 1.37%.
6.2 Commission’s Analysis and Directions on Commercial Performance
The Commission has been monitoring & reviewing the performance of the Petitioner based
on the information/reports submitted by it, further, by conducting study of various performance
parameters and also through field visits of various sub-divisions/divisions of the Petitioner. Being
of the view that higher distribution losses in distribution system are detrimental to financial and
commercial viability of the Petitioner, this analysis of Petitioner’s performance especially in respect
of metering, billing and revenue collection is vital with focus on reducing the Aggregate Technical
and Commercial (AT&C) losses of the Petitioner. With the performance analysis of the Petitioner
with respect to metering, billing and collection activities and other factors affecting Commercial &
financial performance of the Petitioner, the Commission from its very first Tariff Order has been
issuing various directions/Orders in this regard from time to time. However, the Petitioner has
always been non-compliant. The Commission had, therefore, decided to monitor the commercial
performance of the Petitioner in a more structured way on a monthly basis and, accordingly,
prescribed formats were issued to the Petitioner vide Commission’s letter UERC/7/CL/152/2008-
09/284 dated 17.05.2012. Details of the formats prescribed by the Commission are as follows:
Table 6.4: Formats prescribed vide Commission’s letter dated 17.05.2012 Particular Information required on Format
Metering
a) Status of NA/NR/IDF/ADF/RDF Annexure 1 b) Circle-wise Status report of Defective meters Replacement Annexure 1(A)
c) Ghost/Fictitious Consumers Annexure 2 d) Replacement of Mechanical meters Annexure 5 e) Un-metered Connections Annexure 6
Billing
a) SB cases Annexure 3 b) NB cases Annexure 3(2) c) Outstanding Arrears Annexure 4 d) Load Factor of KCC Consumers Annexure 7 e) Rate of Energy Input Annexure 8
AT&C Losses of UPCL AT&C losses Annexure 9 Audit Report of 11 kV Feeders Audit Report of 11 kV Feeders Annexure 10
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 213
The Petitioner was directed to submit the above information in these Formats regularly for
each month by 15th day of the next month.
Despite, the specific directions issued by the Commission in its previous Tariff Order for FY
2014-15, the Petitioner has neither been submitting the periodical reports timely nor in accordance
with the prescribed formats. Notwithstanding the aforesaid anomalies, the Commission examined
the reports submitted by the Petitioner and observed that the Petitioner has been submitting the
erroneous reports lacking consistency in information rendering any trend analysis of its
performance parameters/indices month on month basis.
Going by the past experience of performance monitoring of the petitioner, the Commission
felt that monitoring should be on Division basis. In order to quantify the improvement on month on
month basis on any of the performance indicators, it is necessary that Division wise targets on each
parameter be provided by the licensee which would make the whole monitoring process more
meaningful. Hence, the Commission vide its letter no. UERC/5/Tech/112/2014-15/1622 dated
27.11.2014 issued following revised Commercial Performance Monitoring formats directing UPCL
to submit information on these formats in hard as well as in soft copy (MS-excel file in CD) on
regular basis latest by 25th day of the next month from January, 2015 onwards:
Table 6.5: Revised Formats prescribed by the Commission vide letter dated 27.11.2014 S. No. Description Format
1 No. of Consumers 1 2 Quarterly Targets of NA/NR/IDF/ADF/RDF 2 3 Status of Not Accessible (NA) Consumers (in Percentage) 2(A) 4 Status of Not Read (NR) Consumers (in Percentage) 2(B) 5 Status of Identified Defective Meters (IDF) (in Percentage) 2(C) 6 Status of Appeared Defective Meters (ADF) (in Percentage) 2(D) 7 Status of Reading Defective Meters (RDF) (in Percentage) 2(E)
8 Quarterly Targets of IDF Meters/Mechanical Meters/Un-metered Consumers/Ghost Consumers 3
9 Status of Identified Defective Meters (IDF) 3(A) 10 Status of Un-metered Consumers 3(B) 11 Status of Mechanical Meters 3(C) 12 Status of Ghost Consumers 3(D) 13 Status of NB/SB Cases 4 14 Status of Outstanding Arrears 5 15 MRI Status of KCC Consumers 6 16 Status of Revenue realisation per unit of Energy Sold 7 17 Status of AT&C Losses of UPCL 8
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
214 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission’s analysis on the information submitted by the Petitioner for the period
April 2014 to November 2014 is being discussed in the following paragraphs:
6.2.1 Metering
The Commission in its earlier Tariff Orders had been repeatedly giving directions to the
Petitioner to energise new connections as well as unmetered connections only with the
static/electronic meters and to replace all old electromechanical meters with new electronic meters
in accordance with CEA Regulations.
Despite, Commission’s specific directions in the Tariff Order dated 10.04.2014, the Petitioner
failed to furnish timely and correct report to the Commission. Also the reports submitted in the
prescribed formats namely Annexure-1, 2, 5 & 6 pertaining to Status of NA/NR/IDF/ADF/RDF,
Ghost/Fictitious Consumers, Replacement of Mechanical meters & Un-metered Connections
respectively during FY 2014-15 were full of infirmities and deficiencies. The Commission however,
communicated these short comings and subsequently the Petitioner again submitted the reports for
the said period. These reports pertaining to various performance parameters on metering and other
issues have been analysed and findings thereof are being presented below:
6.2.1.1 Status of NA/NR, IDF/ADF/RDF
The Commission has observed that total NA/NR, RDF/ADF/IDF cases are still at
alarmingly high percentages vis-a-vis total number of consumers as shown in the Table given
below:
Table 6.6: Status of NA/NR/IDF/ADF/RDF
Status As on 31st March 2012
As on 31st March 2013
As on 31st March 2014
As on 30th November 2014
NA (%) 2.68 2.5 3.3 3.9 NR (%) 6.47 6.6 5.7 5.9 IDF (%) 12.63 11.9 8.6 8.2 ADF (%) 0.81 0.7 0.5 0.5 RDF (%) 0.82 0.8 1.0 1.6 Total (%) 23.41 22.5 19.2 20.2 Total Billed Consumers (Nos.) 1501961 1647224 1664159 1720034
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 215
From the above table, it can be observed that the Petitioner has failed to demonstrate any
reduction in NA/NR/IDF/ADF/RDF cases rather it have increasing trend in FY 2014-15 (upto 30th
November 2014).
The Commission vide its Tariff Order dated April 10, 2014, had issued directions that the
Petitioner to bring the defective meters to 3% as required by the Regulation and submit action plan
for the same. Further, the Commission also directed petitioner to ascertain the reasons for high
meter failure rate.
The Petitioner vide its letter no. 865/UPCL/Comm/IDF/D (P) dated 19.02.2015 had
submitted an action plan under affidavit for replacement of defective meters and bring it down to
4.21% as on 31.03.2015.However, as per the progress made till November, 2014, it appears that
Petitioner would not be in a position to achieve its committed target of 4.21% defective meters as on
31.03.2015.
Taking cognizance of the same, the Commission directs Petitioner to take effective steps
to reduce the percentage of provisional billing cases namely under NA/NR, IDF/RDF/ADF below
3% and submit an Action Plan in this regard within 2 months of this Order.
6.2.1.2 Replacement of Improper, Non-Functional, Stop/Stuck up defective or IDF
Meters
Circle-wise number of defective meters as reported by the Petitioner is shown in the table
given below:
Table 6.7: Status of Defective Meters S.
No. Name of Circle No. of Defective
Meters as on 31.03.2012
No. of Defective Meters as on
31.03.2013
No. of Defective Meters as on
31.03.2014
No. of Defective Meters as on
30.11.2014 1 EDC Dehradun (R) 27086 23166 19278 18872 2 EDC Roorkee 16832 12127 13182 11589 3 EDC Haridwar 14724 16715 9705 8691 4 EDC Srinagar 29035 36515 40586 44805 5 EDC Dehradun 13148 9162 4250 2660 6 EDC Kashipur 8013 9984 4017 3726 7 EDC Rudrapur 22549 27221 16950 13947 8 EDC Ranikhet 33069 36056 24320 26324 9 EDC Haldwani 21396 25260 10430 9263
Total 185852 196206 142718 139877
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
216 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
From the above Table, it can be seen that the Petitioner, in FY 2013-14, had managed to
reduce number of defective meters by 27.26% while in FY 2014-15 (upto November, 2014) the
reduction in defective meters is only 2%. This shows that pace of defective meter replacement, could
not be sustained and has got derailed.
It is an admitted fact that by expeditious replacement of defective meters on the basis of well
laid down defective meter replacement programme, the Petitioner will not only be able to contain
this menace but will also comply with the provisions of SoP Regulations in this regard and achieve
below 3% target of overall defective meter as mandated by the Regulation. The Commission is of
the view that unless the Petitioner undertakes diligent efforts for minimizing the IDF cases, this will
remain a perennial problem for the Petitioner affecting adversely its commercial viability.
Therefore, the Commission directs the Petitioner to incorporate logic in its billing
software for such bill basis namely NA/NR, IDF /ADF/RDF in accordance with The Electricity
Supply Code & Standard of Performance Regulations of the Commission. The Commission also
directs the Petitioner to restrict percentage defective meters (IDF) to 3% in accordance with the
Regulations by 30th September, 2015.
6.2.1.3 Replacement of Mechanical Meters
Table 6.8: Status of Mechanical Meters Description As on
30.11.2010 As on
30.11.2011 As on
30.11.2012 As on
30.11.2013 As on
30.11.2014 Balance Electro-mechanical Meters required to be replaced by Electronic Meters
257764 228493 199479 178681 164838
From the above Table, it can be seen that the rate of replacement of electro-mechanical
meters by electronic meters is extremely low. The Commission vide its Order dated April 10, 2014
had directed Petitioner to replace all the existing electro-mechanical meters by static/electronic
meters by 30th September, 2014.
The petitioner in its submission vide letter no. 2445/UPCL/RM/C-10 dated 22.11.2014 had
stated that it had issued instructions to all its field officers to replace all electro mechanical meters
by Static/electronic meters by 15.09.2014. However, still as on 30.11.2014 a staggering figure of
164838 numbers of electromechanical meters exist in petitioner’s network.
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 217
A meeting was held on 29.09.2014 between officers of the Commission and representatives
of UPCL, in which it was submitted by UPCL that priority is given for replacement of defective
meters due to which rate of replacement of Mechanical meters is not encouraging and had also
submitted that R-APDRP scheme is being implemented in 31 towns of the State and therefore the
report of replacement of mechanical meters of towns covered under this scheme are not available.
It is an established fact that by replacing the electro-mechanical meters with
static/electronic meters, the Petitioner will not only comply with the prevailing SoP Regulation but
also will have more precise recording of its billed energy. Therefore, the Petitioner will have
incentive in terms of augmentation of its revenue if it takes all necessary steps for replacing all
remaining electro-mechanical meters including those not covered under R-APDRP funded schemes
in a planned time bound program.
Therefore, the Commission directs Petitioner to replace all the existing electro-mechanical
meters by static/electronic meters by 31st December, 2015 and consolidate its complete database
for electro-mechanical meters including R-APDRP covered towns and submit correct reports to
the Commission latest by 30th June, 2015.
6.2.1.4 Ghost/Fictitious Consumers
Table 6.9: Status of Ghost/Fictitious Consumers
Status As on
31st March 2012
As on 31st March
2013
As on 31st March
2014
As on 31st November
2014 Nos. of Ghost/Fictitious Consumers 2610 1368 1135 1003
The Commission in its previous Tariff Orders, had directed the Petitioner for identifying and
writing off ghost/fictitious consumers from its billing database. However, from the above table, it
can be seen that the Petitioner has not made any concerted efforts in identifying and writing off
such consumers from its billing database. The Commission is of the view that there is an urgent
need for identifying and writing off such consumers from its billing database as existence of such
consumers in the database prevents proper energy accounting resulting in erroneous figures of both
Technical & Commercial losses (AT&C losses).
The Petitioner vide its letter No. 865/UPCL/Comm/IDF/D(P) dated 19.02.2015 had
submitted that “...Divisions are directed to transfer the duplicate/ghost consumers and non-traceable
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
218 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
connection to Not billed/Stop billed category in the first instance and later to permanently disconnect such
connections.”
The Commission is of the view that the petitioner should proactively identify and write off
ghost/fictitious/non-existent consumers from its billing database under a transparent policy.
Hence, the Petitioner is directed to write off ghost/fictitious/non-existent consumers from
its billing database under a transparent policy framed by the Petitioner latest by 30th September,
2015.
6.2.1.5 Un-metered Consumers
The Commission vide its Tariff Order dated April 10, 2014, had directed the Petitioner to
achieve 100% metering by 30th September, 2014 and submit its compliance report to the
Commission by 30th October, 2014. Further, the Commission had categorically stated that no tariff
for unmetered connection from FY 2015-16 shall be prescribed and failure to ensure 100% metering
would entail no billing to unmetered consumers.
However, Petitioner has failed to achieve the same which is evident from the Commercial
Performance Monitoring Report of un-metered connections shown in the Table given below:
Table 6.10: Status of Unmetered Consumers
Status As on 3/13
As on 3/14
As on 4/14
As on 5/14
As on 6/14
As on 7/14
As on 8/14
As on 9/14
As on 10/14
As on 11/14
Nos. of Un-metered Consumers
13947 6542 6722 6569 6440 6373 6279 9566 9359 8999
From the above table, it is established that the Petitioner has not made serious efforts for
metering the un-metered connections and on the contrary new un-metered connections were
identified in September, 2014 resulting in increase in total no. of unmetered consumers, which
proves that the Petitioner was wrongly submitting the data to the Commission. Under these
circumstances the Commission is of the view that the Petitioner’s Commercial wing in its Head
Quarter should thoroughly check and authenticate all the reports/information before submitting
the same to the Commission so as to ensure their consistency. The Commission is of the view that
providing meters to unmetered consumers has turned out to be an unending exercise and Petitioner
has neither made serious efforts for eliminating of un-metered connections nor has correctly
quantified the number of un-metered connections.
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 219
6.2.2 Billing
The Commission, vide its earlier Tariff Orders, and various directions issued from time to
time has been directing the Petitioner to improve its billing, bill distribution and revenue collection
system. It is noted that the Petitioner has made a beginning in this direction and created an online
billing platform for its Key Consumers thus enabling Petitioner to monitor such consumers
centrally from its Head Quarter. Further, the Petitioner has also started reaping the benefits of spot
billing which has resulted in improved billing & collection efficiency. Besides this, in order to
increase billing efficiency, the Petitioner has already initiated implementation of GSM based
Integrated Automatic Meter Reading system (IAMR) covering 7100 Key Consumers (with load 16
kW & above). Despite these IT interventions in its billing/metering system, the Petitioner still
remains inconsistent and erratic in submission of information/periodical reports to the
Commission. The Commission feels that probably this may be due to lacunas in Petitioner’s
operations lacking timely flow of correct information between its field offices and Head
Quarter/Corporate office.
Analysis of the Petitioner’s Commercial Performance Report in respect of Not Billed (NB)
and Stop Billed (SB) is being presented in the Table given below:
6.2.2.1 NB & SB Cases
Table 6.11: Status of NB & SB Cases Status As on 3/12 As on 3/13 As on 3/14 As on 11/14
No. of NB/SB Cases NB 49149 62800 139614 144136 SB 82576 74660
The Commission, in its earlier Tariff Orders, had been directing the Petitioner to frame-out
electricity distribution division-wise time bound programme for liquidating and finalisation of
NB/SB cases on priority and recover outstanding arrears. Further, the Commission has been
directing the Petitioner to conduct regular drive for finalizing of NB/SB consumers. However, the
Petitioner failed to liquidate and finalise these cases.
Accordingly, the Petitioner is hereby again directed to liquidate and finalise NB/SB cases
and set a target of realisation from at least 25% of these cases within 6 months from the date of
issuance of this Order.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
220 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
6.2.2.2 Outstanding Arrears
The Commission, through its earlier Tariff Orders and various other Orders issued from
time to time, had given directions to expedite recovery of arrears, considering that this parameter
directly inflicts Petitioner’s financial and commercial viability. Despite these directives, the
Commission has observed that Petitioner have been lackadaisical towards collection of arrears and
lacks seriousness in laying down a planned programme/roadmap. This is mammoth problem faced
by the Petitioner and may weed away the Petitioner’s financial viability since 1.73 Lakh cases of
arrears have been pending as on November, 2014 with an staggering amount of Rs 92373 Lakh
pending recovery by the Petitioner and the same from FY 2011-12 to FY 2014-15 (upto November
2014) has been shown in Table given below:
Table 6.12: Status of Outstanding Arreas. Description As on 03/12 As on 03/13 As on 03/14 As on 11/14
Arrear No. Amount (Rs. Lac) No. Amount
(Rs. Lac) No. Amount (Rs. Lac) No. Amount
(Rs. Lac) Arrear>=5 Lac 1060 34954 774 19563 714 25794 1237 52215 1=<Arrear<5 Lac 6225 11726 4260 7989 4306 7747 4199 7705 0.5 Lac=<Arrear<1 Lac 14214 9252 13237 8179 15401 10056 15305 10214 0.1 Lac=<Arrear<0.5 Lac 83486 20246 59115 13673 75696 16140 81940 17180 0.05 Lac=<Arrear<0.1 Lac 59269 4196 46703 3318 60664 4308 71154 5059 Total 164254 80374 124089 52722 156781 64044 173835 92373
From the above table it is evident that the Petitioner has been able to reduce number of
arrear cases during FY 2012-13 , however, number of arrear cases during FY 2013-14 & FY 2014-15
(upto November) has increased to all time high.
With respect to amount of arrears, the petitioner did reduce the amount of arrear in FY 2012-
13 in comparison to FY 2011-12, whereas, the amount of arrear increased in FY 2013-14 and the
same has considerably increased in FY 2014-15 (upto November).This depicts nothing but
Petitioner’s lack of efforts in recovery of arrears during the first, second & third quarter of the
Financial year and the progress appears only during the last quarter or probably in the month of
March.
This by all standards in any commercial organization is not a healthy practice conducive
and reflects fire fighting approach by the Petitioner on year on year basis.
Therefore, the Commission hereby directs Petitioner to make sincere efforts in
mobilizing its resources to continuously make efforts throughout the year for collection of
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 221
Arrears under a structured programme besides taking corrective actions against the habitual
defaulters.
6.2.2.3 Load Factor of KCC Consumers
The Commission in its earlier Tariff Orders had been directing the Petitioner to analyse MRI
reports including Tamper reports, Phasor diagrams etc. of each KCC consumers on a monthly basis
so as to enable proper check on tampering of meters resulting in theft/pilferage of electricity.
Presently, the Petitioner has a consumer base of about 18 Lakh consumers in the state. Out of
which around 19574 consumers (Industrial category consumers having load 5 kW & above and
Commercial category consumers having load 10 kW & above) have been identified as Key
Consumers (KCC). These key consumers which are only about 1% of the total consumer base of the
Petitioner contribute nearly 70% of its total annual revenues. Before delving on this parameter with
regard to load factors of these KCC consumers, as submitted in Petitioner’s Commercial
Performance Report has been shown in Table given below:
Table 6.13: Status of KCC Consumers Description As on 03/12 As on 03/13 As on 03/14 As on 11/14
Total KCC Consumers 10332 16939 18668 19574 *Abnormal cases 1384 2257 2554 2748 L.F<10% 3945 6884 7513 8218 L.F>10% 6387 10055 11155 11356
*Abnormal cases- Consumers exceeding sanctioned demand, Consumers having CT, PT by-pass, Tamper Report, unbalanced Tamper Report & any other Tamper Report.
From the above chart, it can be seen that as on November, 2014, number of consumers
having load factor less that 10% were 8218, which is around 41.98% of the total number of KCC
consumers. This by all standards, the Commission feels is an alarmingly high number of cases.
Besides this, there are around 13.92% of these KCC consumers who mainly exceeded their
sanctioned/contracted demand.
Therefore, the Commission hereby directs the Petitioner that KCC consumers having less
load factor should be closely monitored and average consumption pattern and abnormality in
consumption pattern should be checked and duly analysed. The Commission also directs
Petitioner to check KCC consumers who are repeatedly exceeding their sanctioned/contracted
demand and take corrective action in such cases.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
222 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
6.2.2.4 Status of Revenue realisation per unit sold
Table 6.14: Status of Revenue realisation per unit sold
Year Sold
Energy (MU)
Collection (Rs. Lac)
Average Realization Rate
(Rs./unit)
Average Power Purchase Cost per
Unit sold (Rs./unit)
Approved /Trued-up Average Cost of
Supply (Rs/Unit) FY 2011-12 8252.72 292757.00 3.55 3.81* 4.17 FY 2012-13 8577.01 346873.32 4.04 3.78 4.23 FY 2013-14 9065.02 387651.15 4.28 3.58 4.32 FY 2014-15 #6429.92 #246731.69 3.84 - -
#Upto November 2014
*This was mainly on account of other charges and adjustments of NTPC/NHPC power stations bills.
From the above Table it has been observed that the average realization [collection/unit] is
marginally above the average Power purchase cost per unit sold (except in FY 2011-12) and is below
the overall average cost of supply of the Petitioner for respective financial years which reveals that
the Petitioner is not even realizing its power purchase cost comfortably and therefore for
compensating its other expenses, Petitioner is either withholding Govt. Duty/cess etc or bills of the
Generating Companies. The Commission feels that for any Commercial organization this cannot
continue for a longer period as by and by it will threaten financial viability of the Petitioner’s
organization.
Therefore, the Commission directs the Petitioner to take immediate steps to frame a time
bound programme along with laying down standard procedure for realising pending arrears and
accordingly a report on the action taken, arrears realised, arrears remaining outstanding and
reasons for the same should be submitted to the Commission within three months of the
issuance of this Order.
6.2.3 Collection System
Taking cognizance of various complaints received from the consumers to the Commission in
writing and also during hearing, it has been observed that generally the consumers are either not
getting their bills on time or getting wrong bills. This reflects that Petitioner’s billing
system/software needs strengthening with proper checks & balances. The Commission had earlier
specially directed the Petitioner to explore alternative bill collection means and modes such as
Cheque drop boxes at Banks, on-line payment facility including use of credit/debit cards through
IT applications in consumer services. From the submission of the Petitioner, it has been observed
that the Petitioner has entered into an agreement with Punjab National Bank on 01.10.2011 for
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 223
collecting the payment of electricity bills through all its branches across the state of Uttarakhand
and also the Petitioner has launched online bill payment facility on 15.07.2013 at its web portal
www.upcl.org. The Commission nominated an Expert Committee to check the Bill collection
arrangements with respect to the directives issued by the Commission in its Order dated 01.09.2005.
The Expert Committee submitted in its report that despite Commission imposing heavy
consolidated penalty of Rs 1,00,000 and additional penalty of Rs 2,500 per day on UPCL vide its
Order dated 01.09.2005 for non-compliance of its directions with respect to bill collection system,
not much has improved except for new Bill Collection Centres constructed under R-APDRP
schemes which are relatively clean and have all the basic facilities for the consumer. The Committee
also submitted that all other Bill Collection Centres were lacking in basic conveniences, be it
cleanliness, be it proper drinking water facility, proper sitting arrangement or clean and hygienic
toilets. The Petitioner cannot run away from its responsibility of keeping the Bill Collection Centres
consumer friendly and attractive so that the consumers do not avoid them.
The Commission in its Order dated 21.01.2015 had categorically directed MD, UPCL to
submit, within one and a half months, a comprehensive action plan alongwith time lines, for
compliance of the directions of the Commission in the matter of Bill Collection System issued in its
Order dated 01.09.2005 distinctly for Rural and Urban areas across the State. However, no action
plan has been received from the Petitioner.
The Petitioner vide its letter No. 1010/UPCL/Comm/CSC dated 19.03.2015 had submitted
to the Commission details of proposal of Common Service Center E-Governance Services India
Limited for enabling collection of electricity bills through approximately 2056 numbers Common
Service Center (CSCs) as front end points both in rural and urban areas and requested the
Commission to give the post facto approval regarding agreement with Common Service Center E-
Governance Services India Limited for providing online electricity bill payment collection through
CSCs in Uttarakhand so that cost incurred for same, may be incorporated in ARR by the Petitioner.
In this regard the Commission directed the Petitioner to submit a proposal including the number of
consumers estimated by the Petitioner who would avail this facility, charges which would be
payable to CSC on such estimation, for the ensuing FY 2015-16 and ascertaining the impact of such
agreement on A&G expenses of Petitioner by 15.04.2015.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
224 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission is of the view that the consumer services viz. online payment, payment
through debit/credit card etc. can be easily availed by the urban consumers and would be very
handy, however, for the consumers residing in the rural areas the Petitioner will have to provide
other options like bill collection facilities at rural branches of the Banks, payment facility at CSCs,
sub-post offices in rural areas etc. in addition to the above bill collection & payment facilities.
Therefore, the Petitioner should make concerted efforts to put in place such systems which are
friendly as well as conducive for the consumers residing in rural areas of the State.
Therefore, Commission directs the Petitioner to comply with the directions issued in the
Commission’s Order dated 21.01.2015 and furnish an Action Plan in the matter of Bill Collection
System distinctly for Rural and Urban areas across the State latest by 01.05.2015.
6.3 Energy Audit
The Commission in its earlier Tariff Orders had been reiterating its direction for conducting
the energy audit of 11 kV feeders and submit the audit report before the Commission. In
compliance to the directions, the Petitioner made submission and on examination of the same, it has
been found that the methodology adopted by the auditing agency was based on the theoretical
calculations and assumptions and therefore, cannot be relied upon. Actually energy auditing should
be done with proper metering at each feeder, ‘T’ points, DTs & consumers in the entire network to
ensure proper energy accounting & auditing of the network of a particular area without which this
audit exercise is futile. The present exercise fails to achieve the objective of energy auditing.
Further it is to point out that the Petitioner in past has stated before the Commission that the
sample energy audit report of 11 kV feeders in five distribution Circles would be furnished ,
however, no such report has been received till date. Further, the Petitioner till date has failed to
submit information on the prescribed formats (Annexure-10) pertaining to progress of energy audit
of 11 kV feeders and has been continuously requesting the Commission to waive off the said format
citing some frivolous reasons. The Commission has taken cognizance of this act of the Petitioner
and is of the view that it cannot accept or subscribe to this inaction of the Petitioner on this vital
management tool. Proper energy accounting can throw-up several actionable issues which, when
addressed, will result in marked improvement in distribution losses.
Therefore, the Commission hereby directs the Petitioner to provide meters at each feeder,
‘T’ points, DTs & consumers in the entire network for efficient energy auditing of the whole
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 225
network or part of the network area and thereafter, start conducting energy audit on periodical
basis and submit action taken report to the Commission on quarterly basis.
6.4 AT&C Losses
From the above comprehensive analysis of metering, billing & collection activities of the
Petitioner, it is evident that these functions of the Petitioner still need lot of improvement. The
AT&C losses of the Petitioner are around 27.88% as on November, 2014. The reason for such high
AT&C loss is primarily high distribution losses and low collection efficiency of the Petitioner. The
Commission vide its Order dated 19.12.2014 had given investment approval for the project
covering the works covered under Part-‘B’ of Restructured-Accelerated Power Development &
Reform Program of Ministry of Power, Government of India for reduction of AT&C losses to the
extent of 15%. Further, the Commission in its aforesaid Order had categorically directed the
petitioner to ensure completion of the R-APDRP works within the specified time lines and also to
achieve the specified target for reduction of AT&C losses to the extent of 15% in the selected towns
within the stipulated timeframe for availing the benefits of conversion of loan into grant. In case the
petitioner fails to do so, the servicing cost/cost of the loan in whole or part may not be allowed as
pass through in the ARR.
Therefore, the Commission is of the view that with the above linkage of cost of funding with
the AT&C loss achievement, this program can be construed as a double edged sword, which might
cause adverse financial impact in case the Petitioner fails to obtain required reduction in AT&C
losses of the target area.
The status of AT&C losses of UPCL for the various financial years have been shown in the
Table given below:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
226 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 6.15: Status of AT&C Losses of UPCL
Year
Inpu
t Ene
rgy
(MU
)
Ener
gy S
old
(MU
)
Ass
essm
ent (
Rs
Lac)
Col
lect
ion
(Rs
Lac)
Dis
trib
utio
n Lo
ss (%
)
App
rove
d D
istr
ibut
ion
loss
es
(%)
Col
lect
ion
Effi
cien
cy
(%)
Act
ual A
T&C
Los
s (%
)
Com
pute
d A
T&C
lo
sses
(Tar
iff O
rder
) (%
)
FY 2011-12 10310.64 8252.72 315899.00 292757.00 19.96 18.00 92.67 25.82 20.46 FY 2012-13 10789.11 8577.01 356995.26 346873.32 20.50 17.00 97.16 22.76 19.49 FY 2013-14 11216.31 9065.02 393412.4 387651.2 19.18 16.00 98.54 20.36 18.52 FY 2014-15 (upto Nov, 14) 8080.2 6429.92 272223.1 246731.7 20.42 15.50 90.64 27.88 18.04
It is evident that in the above table, the Petitioner’s distribution loss levels are higher than
approved levels. Further, the actual AT&C losses for above period are higher than AT&C losses
computed on the basis of approved level of distribution losses & collection efficiency of respective
Tariff Orders. Had the Petitioner achieved the targets as approved by the Commission, it would
have resulted in additional revenue, which not only would have reduced or even wiped out the
accumulated losses of the Petitioner but also would have led the Petitioner towards achieving
sound financial position resulting in better quality of service for the consumers.
It is also apparent that Petitioner, in order to substantially reduce its AT&C losses, needs to
concentrate on the domestic and non-domestic consumers and reduce the distribution losses at LT
level. The Commission would also like to point out that reduction in distribution losses by the
Petitioner, is on account of the share of HT consumption in the State. The trend of HT consumption
in the State is depicted below:
Chart 7: HT Consumer Sales as % of Total Sales
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 227
From the above chart, it can be seen that there is a reduction in HT sales in FY 2013-14. This
is primarily due to some power being taken through open access which was around 281.03 MU.
Also this could be due to slow down in economy and load shedding in furnace feeders owing to
transmission constraints as submitted by the Petitioner. On long term basis, this might have an
adverse impact on tariff of subsidized consumers viz. PTW, Domestic etc. since the amount of cross
subsidy cannot be increased beyond a limit as per National Tariff Policy.
The trend of losses in other category of consumers (excluding HT consumers) is shown in
the table given below:
Chart 8: Losses in other category of consumers (excluding HT consumers)
It is observed that for past 5 years virtually there has been no reduction in losses of other
category of consumers. It is evident that Petitioner has not put in serious efforts in reducing AT&C
losses for other categories thereby failing to bring these losses within acceptable limits. Further, to
reduce the distribution losses at LT level and to achieve losses level in acceptable limits, the
Petitioner should take up the following works at the earliest:
1. The Petitioner must replace all mechanical / electro-mechanical meters in a time bound
manner in all the divisions on a war footing. It is a known fact that the cost incurred in
purchasing the electronic meter shall be recovered within no time as there shall be
substantial increase in the revenue of the Petitioner.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
228 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
2. The Petitioner must remove all ghost/fictitious/non-existent consumers from its billing
database.
3. The Petitioner must conduct planned regular actions for early recovery of outstanding
arrears.
4. The Petitioner must analyse KCC consumers having load factor less that 10% on a regular
basis and lay down mechanism for checking inspection/tamper analysis/condition
monitoring of MRI reports and metering equipments.
5. The Petitioner must ensure that all the meters of the consumers are read and their bills
prepared and distributed within time. The Petitioner shall also ensure that no provisional
bills namely NA/NR are issued for more than two billing cycles in accordance with the
provision of Electricity Supply Code Regulation, 2007. Divisional head must be held
accountable for not controlling provisional billings. The Petitioner should make efforts to
always issue computerized bills to its consumers requiring no human intervention.
6. The Petitioner should prepare a time bound plan/programme to replace all the bare
overhead conductors with insulated aerial bunched conductors (AB conductor) in theft
prone areas alongwith effective monitoring mechanism for its implementation.
7. The Petitioner should also prepare a time bound plan/programme for segregation of rural
feeders this would be an effective measure for reduction of theft/pilferage of electricity.
8. The Commission has observed that the collection efficiency with respect to realization of
arrears/dues from the Government Departments has been very low and it is showing no
signs of improvement. The Petitioner should make extra efforts to get the arrears realised
from the defaulting Government departments. The Commission is of the view that the
Petitioner should implement the pre-paid metering as per the direction of the
Commission in Tariff Order dated April 11, 2012 for Government consumers which
would not only ensure recovery of old dues/arrears but also prevent accumulation of
electricity dues in future.
9. The Petitioner have to ensure that meters are installed at each point of energy accounting
and are kept in proper working condition.
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 229
10. The Petitioner should also develop GIS based consumer indexing database in areas other
then the areas covered under R-APDRP, which shall be helpful in providing prompt services
to consumer and shall be helpful in planning the new connections, transformer
augmentation, phase change, localising fault, supply restoration and other services to
consumers necessarily provided by any distribution utility having consumer services
orientation as its Vision & mission.
6.5 Anomalies Observed in Commercial Diary (SG-IV)
During the ongoing tariff proceedings, UPCL submitted the division wise Commercial diary
(SG-IV) for FY 2013-14 before the Commission. Examination of the same revealed certain glaring
abnormalities which needs examination by the Petitioner and also corrective actions. In some cases,
the average billing rate herein referred as average revenue which is nothing but revenue per unit
billed has been found to be even lower than the energy charges approved for that category. Further,
in some cases, the energy consumption per kW per month was observed to be abnormally high and
in few cases exceeded, even the total number of hours in the month. Category wise analysis is dealt
hereunder.
6.5.1 RTS-3 (Public Lamps)
Public Lamps is one such category which is reported as metered, however, interaction with
the field officers of UPCL has suggested that most of the street lights points are still unmetered and
are being billed at unmetered tariffs. Going by UPCL’s submission that consumption is derived
from revenue generated at flat un-metered, the per/kW/month consumption would translate into
430 units/kW/month. However, there are many divisions of UPCL which have booked
consumption in excess of 500 units/kW/month. EDD Kashipur and EDD Almora have infact
booked the consumption even in excess of 1500 units/kW/month which is beyond imagination.
Consumption of more than 360 units/kW/month equivalent to 12 hours per day lighting of public
lamp either reflects towards the wastage of electricity or a means of camouflaging losses by the field
officers. UPCL is directed to examine the same and report to the Commission the reasons for such
high consumption in public lamps within 2 months of the date of the Order.
Further, it also came to the notice of the Commission during one of its visit in EDD
Kashipur, that public lamps load is not known and each point is billed on the consumption being
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
230 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
recorded in the meter installed on the pilot basis irrespective of wattage of the lamps and no fixed
charges were being billed to this category due to the aforesaid reasons that their load couldn’t be
ascertained. This clearly indicates the casual approach of UPCL towards the distribution business as
a result of which it is losing revenue and the load factor (unit/kW/month) for this category in such
division following such approach is abnormally high. UPCL is directed to examine the same
alongwith the status of billing of fixed charges to public lamps in other divisions and report to
the Commission the reasons for such negligence within 2 months of the date of the Order.
The divisions showing excessive consumption in Public Lamps during FY 2013-14 are given
in the Table hereunder.
Table 6.16: Divisions having excessive consumption under Public Lamps during FY 2013-14
Name of Division/Circles
No. of Consumers
Load (KW)
Energy Sold (MU)
Sales/KW/ month
Revenue/kWh
EDD, Rishikesh 2 614 3.247 440.69 4.12 EDD (C), Dehradun 103 427 3.087 602.46 4.27 EDD, Srinagar 3 128 1.188 773.44 2.59 EDD, Pauri 3 175 0.787 374.76 4.78 EDD, Tehri 8 205 1.361 553.25 4.13 EDD, Gopeshwar 7 92 0.688 623.19 4.96 EDD, Kotdwar 8 100 0.478 398.33 4.80 EDD (R), Roorkee 3 108 0.773 596.45 8.68 EDD, Kashipur 6 340 4.224 1035.29 4.79 EDD, Bajpur 4 98 0.504 428.57 4.92 EDD, Almora 7 70 0.981 1167.86 4.35 EDD, Bageshwar 1 39 0.180 384.62 3.06 EDD, Ranikhet 10 79 0.396 417.72 4.20 EDD, Champawat 5 73 0.388 442.92 4.19
6.5.2 RTS-4 (Private Tube Well)
EDD (R), Haldwani has shown 8 PTW consumers having total load of 169 BHP and an
annual consumption of 0.612 MU for FY 2013-14. The aforesaid data was same for FY 2012-13 as
well with no change in the number of consumers and their consumption. It appears that all such
consumers are either unmetered or do not exist. UPCL is directed to examine the same and report
to the Commission the status of such consumers within 2 months of the date of the Order.
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 231
6.5.3 RTS-6 (Public Water Works (PWW))
Public Water works is a category which is reported as metered, however, it appears that
once they had been released connection UPCL has not carried out any survey regarding the loads
and meters of such consumers. Infact, UPCL in its last Tariff Order had also requested the
Commission to allow it to bill the PWW consumers below 25 kW on kWh basis instead of kVAH
basis. The Commission vide its Order dated April 10, 2014 had directed the Petitioner to replace the
old meters with new meters capable of recording kVAh consumption within three months of the
date of the Order. However, UPCL has still not replaced the meters of such consumers.
Even if a 12 hours running of a public water works connection on an average basis is
assumed, the consumption in a month should not be greater than 360 units/kW/month. However,
there are many divisions of UPCL which have booked consumption in excess of 360
units/kW/month. EDD Kashipur and EDD Roorkee (U) have infact booked the consumption even
in excess of 1000 units/kW/month and 2700 units/kW/month which is beyond imagination.
Consumption more than 12 hours per day either reflects towards the means of camouflaging losses
by the field officers or improper loads issued as a result of which not only specific consumption is
working on a higher side but UPCL may also be losing revenue by billing fixed charges on a lower
load. UPCL is directed to examine the same and report to the Commission the reasons for such
high consumption in public water works and also the action plan for rectifying the anomaly
within 2 months of the date of the Order.
Further, Jal Nigam connections of EDD (U) Roorkee has a average billing rate of less than Rs.
1 per unit, Jal Sansthan connection of EDD Rudrapur has a average billing rate of less than Rs. 2.50
per unit. UPCL is also directed to give reasons for such low average billing rate within two
months of the date of the Order.
The divisions showing excessive consumption in Public Water Works during FY 2013-14 are
given in the Table hereunder.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
232 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Table 6.17: Divisions having excessive consumption under Public Water Works during FY 2013-14
Name of Division/Circles
No. of Consumers
Load (kW)
Energy Sold (MU) Sales/kW/month Revenue/kWh
Jal Nigam EDD (U), Roorkee 4 99 0.928 781.14 0.97 Jal Sansthan EDD (R), Dehradun 88 2723 17.548 537.03 4.24 EDD, Rishikesh 50 1363 6.480 396.18 4.54 EDD (N), Dehradun 38 3170 20.241 532.10 4.12 EDD (S), Dehradun 68 2859 19.647 572.67 4.09 EDD (C), Dehradun 62 2838 20.988 616.28 4.11 EDD, Srinagar 25 3633 18.543 425.34 4.34 EDD, Pauri 15 1583 10.512 553.38 4.25 EDD, Tehri 20 4704 22.476 398.17 3.96 EDD (U), Roorkee 25 562 6.546 970.64 5.74 EDD (U), Hardwar 91 3720 21.817 488.73 4.24 EDD, Kashipur 42 803 11.000 1141.55 4.64 EDD, Bajpur 16 217 1.707 655.53 3.82 EDD, Rudrapur 41 491 2.766 469.45 2.43 EDD, Sitarganj 30 421 4.858 961.60 5.52 EDD, Almora 9 1653 12.936 652.15 4.07 EDD, Pithoragarh 13 2281 14.653 535.33 4.09 EDD, Champawat 15 247 1.744 588.39 4.06 Other Water Works & Plastic Recycling Plant EDD (U), Roorkee 16 231 7.543 2721.14 3.85
UPCL is directed to ensure timely compliances of the directions issued in this regard. The
Commission has also decided to review the monthly performance of UPCL in this regard and,
accordingly, UPCL is also directed to submit the monthly commercial report (SG-IV).
6.5.4 RTS-7 (LT & HT Industries):
6.5.4.1 LT Industry
The energy charges approved for LT Industrial consumers for FY 2013-14 was Rs. 3.75/kWh
with the approved average revenue of Rs. 4.61 per unit, however, the revenue per unit in case of
EDD Tehri, EDD Almora and EDD Haldwani (R) for FY 2013-14 is Rs. 3.87 per unit, Rs. 3.82 per unit
and Rs. 4.02 per unit which is below the approved average revenue for this category and even
below the approved average cost of supply of Rs. 4.19 per unit for FY 2013-14. This is also beyond
imagination as the LT Industries is cross-subsidising category and hence, the revenue below the
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 233
average cost of supply is unacceptable. The Petitioner is directed to examine the same and report
the reasons for such low revenue alongwith the corrective action taken in this regard, within 2
months of the date of the Order. The divisions having lower average revenue during FY 2013-14 in
LT Industrial category is given in the Table hereunder.
Table 6.18: Divisions having lower average revenue in LT Industrial category during FY 2013-14
Name of Division/Circles
No. of Consumers
Load (kW)
Energy Sold (MU) Sales/kW/month Average Revenue
(Revenue/kWh) EDD, Tehri 169 1888 2.638 116.44 3.87 EDD, Almora 97 931 0.763 68.30 3.82 EDD (R), Haldwani 710 6812 9.080 111.08 4.02
6.5.4.2 HT Industries upto 1000 kVA
The approved average revenue for HT Industries for FY 2013-14 was Rs. 4.58 per unit,
however, the average revenue in case of EDD Tehri, EDD Haldwani (R) and EDD Almora for FY
2013-14 is Rs. 3.38 per unit, Rs. 3.78 per unit and Rs. 3.61 per unit respectively which is even below
the approved average cost of supply of Rs. 4.19 per unit for FY 2013-14. This is also beyond
imagination as the HT Industries is cross-subsidising category and hence, the revenue below the
average cost of supply is unacceptable. The Petitioner is directed to examine the same and report
the reasons for such low revenue alongwith the corrective action taken in this regard, within 2
months of the date of the Order. The divisions having lower revenue during FY 2013-14 in HT
Industrial category is given in the Table hereunder.
Table 6.19: Divisions having lower revenue in HT Industrial category (upto 1000 kVA) during FY 2013-14
Name of Division/Circles
No. of Consumers
Load (kW)
Energy Sold (MU) Sales/kW/month Average Revenue
(Revenue/kWh) EDD, Tehri 8 1470 2.266 128.46 3.38 EDD (R), Haldwani 54 16879 45.210 223.21 3.78 EDD, Almora 1 552 0.778 117.45 3.61
6.5.5 RTS-8 (Mixed Load):
The energy charges approved for Mixed Load category for FY 2013-14 was Rs. 3.80/kWh,
however, the average revenue in case of EDD Rishikesh and EDD Gopeshwar for FY 2013-14 is
almost Rs. 3.00 per unit against the average revenue of Rs. 3.94 per unit approved by the
Commission. The Petitioner is directed to examine the same and report the reasons for such low
revenue alongwith the corrective action taken in this regard, within 2 months of the date of the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
234 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Order. The divisions having lower revenue during FY 2013-14 in Mixed Load category is given in
the Table hereunder.
Table 6.20: Divisions having lower revenue in Mixed Load category during FY 2013-14 Name of
Division/Circles No. of
Consumers Load (KW)
Energy Sold (MU)
Sales/kW/ month
Revenue/kWh
EDD Rishikesh 1 1020 5.623 459.40 3.08 EDD, Gopeshwar 5 1360 3.590 219.98 2.98
6.6 Conclusion
After analyzing the data related to the Petitioner’s Commercial Performance, it is concluded
that the Petitioner has to take immediate action in reducing the
unmetered/ghost/electromechanical meters/NA/NR/IDF cases which are adversely inflicting
upon the Petitioner’s commercial & financial viability.
The performance improvement can be done by judiciously allocating the responsibilities in
field as well as at Corporate level. Moreover, the Petitioner should understand the significance of
Commercial Performance Monitoring Reporting mechanism and should bring sincerity in its
approach towards it. Further, a sense of belongingness/ownership has to be inculcated in every
employee of the Petitioner’s Organisation to bring prosperity to the organization.
Further, it is imperative to highlight that the Commercial Performance Reporting
mechanism not only brings transparency in the system but also is an eye-opener for the Petitioner
for taking timely corrective actions. Therefore, authenticity of reports is of paramount importance.
Petitioner is required to strengthen its Commercial Wing so that timely authentic reports are
furnished to the Commission and it shall also help in prompt percolation of information within the
organization which shall be beneficial for the Petitioner as well as for consumers in general.
Going by the past experience of monitoring performance of the petitioner, the Commission
opines that monitoring should be Division wise and in order to quantify the improvement on
month on month basis on any of the performance indicators, it is necessary that Division wise
targets on each parameter should be provided by the petitioner so that the whole monitoring
process is meaningful. Therefore, the Commission vide its letter no. UERC/5/Tech/112/2014-
15/1622 dated 27.11.2014 issued revised Commercial Performance Monitoring formats and directed
the petitioner to submit information on the revised formats in hard as well as soft copy (i.e. MS-
6.Review of Commercial Performance of the Petitioner
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 235
excel file in CD) on regular basis from January’ 2015 onwards, so as to reach to the Commission
latest by 25th day of the following month.
Therefore, the Commission directs Petitioner to submit monthly Commercial
Performance Monitoring reports strictly in the prescribed formats on regular basis from January,
2015 onwards, so as to reach to the Commission latest by 25th day of the following month.
236 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
7. Commission’s Directives
The Commission in its previous Orders had issued a number of specific directions to the
Petitioner with an objective of attaining operational efficiency, efficient manpower deployment and
streamlining the flow of information. These objectives would be beneficial not only for the Sector
but also for the Petitioner’s company, both in terms of short and long term perspective. These
directions aim at creating a conducive, competitive and healthy environment for the Petitioner to
provide good quality of electricity supply and service to the consumers of Uttarakhand at optimum
and affordable costs. This Chapter deals with the compliance status and the Commission’s views
thereon on the directives issued vide MYT Order dated May 06, 2013, APR Order dated April 10,
2014 as well as the summary of new directions (given in preceding Chapters of this Order) for
compliance and implementation by the Petitioner.
7.1 Compliance to the Directives Issued in MYT Order dated May 06, 2013
7.1.1 Past Adjustments
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to expedite its efforts for getting the Transfer
Scheme finalised within six months from the date of this Order.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that GoU vide order dated 27-04-2012 approved the Transfer
Scheme of Assets & Liabilities. However, the Commission refused to consider the transfer scheme
finalized on the basis of the above Order of the GoU. The Petitioner submitted that vide its letter
dated June 22, 2013 it had informed the view of the Commission to the GoU and requested the GoU
to issue proper notification in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Re-organisation Act, 2000. The
Petitioner had further opined that no notification is required under Re-organisation Act, 2000. The
Act specifically provides for notification, wherever required, such as section 22(5), 23(1) and (2),
71(2), 80(1)(v), 80(3)(c), 89 etc. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Nasiruddin and Ors Vs.
Sita Ram Agarwal has also given such ruling. The Petitioner also added that UPERC in its Order
dated May 21, 2013 while truing up the expenses and revenue of UPPCL considered the GFA of
UPCL as Rs. 1058.18 Crore (as given in the Transfer Scheme).
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 237
Further, the Petitioner submitted that it has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble ATE in the
matter.
The Commission has taken note of the Petitioner’s reply in this regard. However, the
Petitioner has filed an Appeal before the Hon’ble ATE against the Commission’s MYT Order dated
May 06, 2013. As the matter is sub-judice the Commission feels it would be inappropriate to express
its views further on the matter.
7.1.2 Functioning of UPCL
The Petitioner was directed to submit detailed plan for creating and operating one or two
sub-stations as Profit Centres. The Petitioner was also directed to submit a time bound Action Plan
indicating their proposals for reduction in AT&C Losses, Energy Audit, Realisation of Arrears,
Improvement in Collection System, Installation of ABC Conductors in High Loss prone areas and
replacement of Meters.
The Commission further directed the Petitioner to comply with the above mentioned
measures/action plan and submit status report on the development to the Commission on quarterly
basis.
Petitioner’s Submission
As regards the detailed plan for creating and operating one or two sub-stations as Profit
Centres, the Petitioner submitted that it had awarded the work for carrying out Energy Audit to
M/s Enzen Global Solution Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore on September 04, 2013. The Energy Audit Report
submitted by the Consultant has been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no.
182/CE(Coml.)/Enzen Global dated April 30, 2014.
The Petitioner further submitted that 72,804 defective meters have been replaced during FY
2014-15(upto September). 19,159 meters have been shifted outside the premises of the consumers
from April, 2014 to September, 2014. Further, 11,072 Mechanical Meters have been replaced by
Electronic Meters from April, 2014 to September, 2014.
The Petitioner further submitted that it had conducted checking of consumers’ premises for
the period from April to September, 2014. During this checking, it had observed commercial use in
1,214 connections released for domestic purposes. In this regard, amount assessed to Rs. 26.83 lakh
has been raised on these connections.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
238 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Further, there is a provision for laying of LT AB Cable of 548 km under State Plan, 1871 km
under R-APDRP and 2115 km additional . Out of this, 904 km AB Cable has been laid upto
September 30, 2014. Further, online billing and collection system has been introduced in the
Company.
The Commission has taken note of the steps taken by the Petitioner and further directs
the Petitioner to comply with the above mentioned measures/action plan and submit the status
report on the development to the Commission on quarterly basis.
7.1.3 Performance Report
The Commission had decided to monitor the commercial performance of the Petitioner on
monthly basis and, accordingly, formats were prescribed and issued to the Petitioner vide
Commission’s letter UERC/7/CL/152/2008-09/284 dated 17.05.2012. In its MYT Order dated May
06, 2013 the Petitioner was directed to submit the above information in the prescribed Formats
regularly on monthly basis by 15th day of the following month.
Despite, the specific directions issued by the Commission in its previous Tariff Orders for FY
2013-14, the Petitioner was neither submitting the periodical reports timely nor in accordance with
the prescribed formats. Notwithstanding the aforesaid anomalies, the Commission examined the
reports submitted by the Petitioner and observed that the Petitioner had been submitting the
erroneous reports lacking consistency in information hampering the trend analysis of its
performance parameters/indices on month on month basis. Hence, to quantify the improvement
and to make whole monitoring process more meaningful, the Commission further decided to issue
revised commercial performance monitoring formats vide its letter no. UERC/5/Tech/112/2014-
15/1622 dated 27.11.2014 directing the Petitioner to submit monthly Commercial Performance
Monitoring reports strictly in the prescribed formats on regular basis from January, 2015 onwards,
so as to reach to the Commission latest by 25th day of the following month.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the Commercial Performance Report for the month of July,
2014 was submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 2173/UPCL/RM/J-10, dated 09-10-
2014 and for the month of August, 2014 in the month of November, 2014.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 239
The Commission has noted the compliance made by the Petitioner in this regard.
Therefore, the Commission directs the Petitioner to thoroughly check the correctness and
validity of the reports/information being submitted to the Commission and to submit monthly
Commercial Performance Monitoring reports strictly in the prescribed formats on regular basis,
so as to reach to the Commission latest by 25th day of the following month.
7.1.4 Sales
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to analyse the average consumption of the
departmental employees including the reasons for such high consumption based on actual meter
readings and submit the report to the Commission on quarterly basis.
The Petitioner was directed to submit the mechanism for reimbursement of expenses against
electricity consumed by the departmental employees of UPCL within 1 month of the date of the
MYT Order. The Petitioner was also directed to issue instructions to the field offices to record the
sales of the departmental employees based on meter reading and submit compliance of the same
within 1 month of the date of the MYT Order.
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to issue instructions to its field offices to either
record the BPL/Kutir Jyoti consumers under domestic category or book them as a separate BPL
category having consumption in excess of the ceiling specified by the Commission, in the month in
which their consumption exceeds the ceiling fixed by the Commission and report compliance
within 1 month of the date of the MYT Order.
The Petitioner was also directed to submit the detailed Action Plan giving timeframe in
which it intends to meter the remaining unmetered consumers within 2 months of the date of the
MYT Order.
The Petitioner was directed to correct the practices creeping in the metering and billing
system in these categories which were primarily Government categories except for single point bulk
supply (non-domestic). The Commission had also directed the Petitioner to submit the audited sales
and revenue figures after scrutiny of information received from field offices and correct the
discrepancies observed by the Commission during the proceedings of the MYT Order along with
the Petition for Final Truing Up for FY 2011-12 failing which the Commission may consider
working out the revenue of the Petitioner on the basis of approved ABR for FY 2011-12.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
240 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Further, the Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 again directed the Petitioner
to comply with all the above directives and submit the compliance to the Commission on regular
basis failing which the Commission shall be forced to take stringent action against the Petitioner.
Petitioner’s Submission
As regards the consumption of departmental employees, the Petitioner submitted that UPCL
vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10 dated 17-06-2014 (Annexure –A) directed its field officers
to record the consumption of Departmental Employees and Pensioners on the basis of actual meter
reading.
As regards the recording of consumption of BPL category consumers, UPCL vide its letter
no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10, dated 17-06-2014 (Annexure –A) directed its field officers to record the
consumption of BPL Category separately billed at the (i) Tariff for the BPL category and (ii) Tariff
for the General Domestic category. The Petitioner has directed these field officers to show such
consumption records in the monthly Commercial Diary on a separate sheet.
Further, the Petitioner submitted that in accordance with the report submitted to the
Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 1465/UPCL/RM/J-10, dated 09-07-2014, there were 6542
unmetered connections as on March 31, 2014. UPCL vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10 dated
17-06-2014 (Annexure–A) issued instructions to its field officers to meter all the unmetered
connections within the time allowed by the Commission. As per report submitted to the
Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 2173/UPCL/RM/J-10 dated 09-10-2014, there were 6373
unmetered connections as on July 31, 2014. The remaining unmetered connections shall be metered
by March 31, 2015.
The Commission has taken note of the replies submitted by the Petitioner. However, the
Commission is not satisfied with the replies of the Petitioner while complying with the
directives of the Commission in this regard. As discussed in detail in previous Sections of this
Order, the Commission has found huge abnormalities in the metering and billing system of the
Petitioner. Thus, in this regard the Commission hereby directs the Petitioner to comply with all
the above directives covered under Para 7.1.4 above and submit the compliance to the
Commission on regular basis.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 241
7.1.5 Load Shedding
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to obtain the prior approval for load shedding
to be carried out continuously for certain number of hours in a day for 15 or more days.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it shall comply with the above directive.
The Commission has taken note of the Petitioner’s reply. With regard to concerns raised
by the stakeholders on frequent load shedding done by the Petitioner without intimating the
consumers, the Commission observed that the Petitioner is resorting to regular load shedding
under the garb of unscheduled/emergency outages. The Commission, hereby, once again directs
the Petitioner to obtain the prior approval of the Commission for load shedding to be carried out
continuously for certain number of hours in a day for 15 or more days.
7.1.6 AT&C Losses / Energy Audit
The Commission directed the Petitioner to regularly incorporate monthly target level of
distribution losses alongside actual level of Distribution losses, as directed by the Commission vide
its Order dated 04.03.2013, in the Petitioner’s future submissions.
The Commission further directed the Petitioner to provide meters at each feeder, ‘T’ points,
DTs & consumers in the entire network for efficient energy auditing of the whole network or part of
the network area and, thereafter, start conducting energy audit on periodical basis and start
submitting audit report in the prescribed format on monthly basis.
Further, the Commission also directed the Petitioner to submit the sample energy audit
report of the exercises conducted by it during recent past as has been started by it at many occasions
earlier. Such report was to be submitted within 1 month of the APR Order dated April 10, 2014.
Petitioner’s Submissions
With regard to the sample energy audit report, the Petitioner submitted that as per
Commission’s directive it had awarded the work for carrying out Energy Audit to M/s EnZen
Global Solution Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore on September 04, 2013. The Energy Audit Report submitted by
the Consultant was provided to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 182/CE(Coml.)/Enzen
Global, dated 30.04.2014.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
242 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner. However, the
Commission hereby directs the Petitioner to regularly incorporate monthly target level alongside
actual level of Distribution losses as directed by the Commission vide its Order dated 04.03.2013
in the Petitioner’s future submissions.
7.1.7 Power Purchase Expenses
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to submit the details of energy overdrawn and
UI charges imposed on UPCL at system frequency below 49.2 Hz and 49.7 Hz for FY 2010-11 and
FY 2011-12 respectively within two month from the date of issue of the MYT Order dated May 06,
2013.
Further, the Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 observed that UI
Overdrawal and UI underdrawal details submitted by the Petitioner for FY 2012-13 did not match
with the data available on NRPC website. In this regard, the Petitioner was required to submit
reconciliation of the same. With the lack of information, the Commission did not consider the
impact of the same in the Power Purchase Cost. Thus, the Petitioner was required to submit details
of energy overdrawn and UI charges imposed on UPCL at system frequency below 49.2 Hz and 49.7
Hz for FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14 along with the Annual Performance
Review Petition for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the required data is not available in the bills received from
NRLDC for UI overdrawal. Further, the required data could not be derived from information
posted at the website of NRLDC. In this regard, the Petitioner submitted that it is determined to
overdraw from grid within the limits as prescribed by the Commission. There may be any little
amount of energy overdrawn beyond the permissible limit and this is unintentional. Accordingly,
the Petitioner requested the Commission to exempt it from submission of this information.
The Commission has noted the reply of the Petitioner in this regard.
7.1.8 Power Procurement Plan for the Control Period
The Commission directed the Petitioner that in case the rates for medium term PPA received
by the Petitioner is in excess of Rs. 3.75/kWh, then it shall seek prior approval of the Commission
before executing the PPA with the suppliers.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 243
Petitioner’s Submission:
The Petitioner submitted that this shall be complied with, when the time situation arise.
The Commission has taken note of the reply to the compliance made by the Petitioner.
Despite several directions in the past, the Petitioner has not complied with the Commissions
directive of entering into a long term or medium term agreement for procurement of power. The
Commission as discussed in Chapter 4 of the Order has given direction to the Petitioner in this
regard, which is summarised in subsequent section on New Directives issued in this Order.
7.1.9 Power Purchase Quantum and Cost
The Commission directed the Petitioner to restrict the net drawal from the grid within its
drawal schedules whenever the system frequency is below 49.90 Hz.
The Commission, further, directed the Petitioner to seek prior approval of the Commission,
in case the variation in power purchase quantum or total power purchase cost in any quarter
exceeds by more than 5% of the approved power purchase quantum and cost for the respective
quarter worked out on pro-rata basis from the total approved quantity and cost for FY 2014-15 as
indicated in Table 4.17 of the APR Order dated April 10, 2014, failing which, the Commission may
disallow such additional power purchase cost while truing up the ARR for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it is drawing power from the grid within permissible limits.
Further, it has applied for approval of the Commission for higher power purchase cost incurred
during first quarter and second quarter of FY 2014-15.
The Commission hereby once again directs the Petitioner to restrict the net drawal from
the grid within its drawal schedules whenever the system frequency is below 49.90 Hz in order
to ensure grid discipline. (Refer Para 4.4.9.7)
The Commission, further, directs the Petitioner to seek prior approval of the Commission,
in case the variation in power purchase quantum or power purchase cost in any quarter exceeds
by more than 5% of the approved power purchase quantum and cost for the respective quarter
worked out on pro-rata basis from the total approved quantity and cost for FY 2015-16 as
indicated in the Table 4.16 of this Order, failing which, the Commission may disallow such
additional power purchase cost while truing up the ARR for FY 2015-16. (Refer Para 4.4.9.8)
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
244 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
7.1.10 Capitalization of Assets added till FY 2011-12
The Commission had directed UPCL to submit the details of its LT/HT works capitalised
since 2007-08 within 6 months of the date of the Order, so that they may be considered during the
APR, failing which the Commission would be forced to consider the issued closed once for all.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the audited details of LT & HT works Capitalized from FY
2007-08 to FY 2011-12 have been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter dated 07-10-2013.
As regards shortcomings pointed out by the Commission in the report, the Petitioner requested the
Commission to consider the figures of either accounts or audit report and allow eligible return/
expenses to UPCL in the matter. Delay in allowing the eligible return is adversely affecting the
financial position of UPCL.
The Commission has discussed this issue in detail in Chapter 3 of the Order and issued
the directions which are summarised in subsequent section.
7.1.11 Fixed Assets Register
The Commission directed the Petitioner to expedite and submit the updated Fixed Assets
Register within 3 months of the date of the APR Order for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that Fixed Assets Register for the period upto March, 2010 has
already been submitted to the Commission. Further, the Fixed Assets Register for FY 2010-11, 2011-
12 and 2012-13 have been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 1889/UPCL/RM/
C-10, dated 29-08-2014.
The Commission hereby once again directs the Petitioner to expedite the process and
submit the updated Fixed Assets Register within 3 months of the date of the Order.
7.1.12 Electrical Inspector Certificate
While approving the capitalization for truing up of FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 the
Commission had considered capitalization of only those HT works for which the Electrical
Inspector Certificate was given. Thus, considering the importance of the Electrical Inspector
Certificate for approval of capitalisation for HT works, the Petitioner was directed to expedite the
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 245
matter and obtain the Electrical Inspector Certificates for the balance assets along with
reconciliation of capitalization amount as per accounts.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it had approached GoU in the matter and Secretary (Energy),
GoU directed the Electricity Inspector to inspect all the HT / EHT works of UPCL. The Petitioner
submitted that Electrical Inspector has issued clearance certificate in respect of various assets. These
certificates have been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no.-342/UPCL/RM /B-13,
dated 13-02-2013 for Rs. 142.13 Crore and letter no. 03/UPCL/RM/B-14, dated 07-01-2014 for Rs.
46.76 Crore. The Petitioner added that the major part of remaining HT works pertains to APDRP
and RGGVY schemes and it is facing difficulty in obtaining certificate in respect of these assets.
Accordingly, the Petitioner has requested the Commission to consider all assets created upto March
31, 2014 for the purpose of tariff determination.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner. The
Commission has discussed this matter in detail in Chapter 3 of the Order and has issued the
direction, which is summarised in subsequent section.
7.1.13 Cost of Assets and Financing
The Commission directed the Petitioner to get the audit of the assets capitalized since FY
2009-10 till FY 2012-13 and submit the complete Audit Report to the Commission within 6 months
of the issue of the MYT Order.
The Commission in its APR Order dated April 10, 2014 observed that there were certain
mismatches between the additional capitalisations appearing in the audited Report submitted by
UPCL and in the accounts which were submitted during TVS. Further, the Petitioner had not
submitted the basis of categorization of assets in LT and HT and reconciliation of differences as
shown in the Accounts, Auditors Report and Electrical Inspector Certificate etc. Accordingly, the
Petitioner was directed to submit the complete audit report reconciling with the accounts and
electrical inspectors certificates. Further, the Commission clarified that without proper segregation
of LT and HT/ EHT works along with financing of the same the Commission would not approve
the capitalization for LT and HT works submitted by the Petitioner.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
246 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the Audited details of LT/HT works capitalized has been
submitted to the Commission vide letter dated 7-10-2013. As regards shortcomings pointed out by
the Commission in the report, the Petitioner requested the Commission to consider the figures of
either accounts or audit report and allow eligible return/expenses to UPCL in the matter. Delay in
allowing the eligible return is adversely affecting the financial position of UPCL.
The Commission has discussed this matter in detail in Chapter 3 of the Order and has
issued the direction in this regard, which is summarised in subsequent section.
7.1.14 Interest on Security Deposit
The Commission directed the Petitioner to submit the actual interest paid on the security
deposit to the consumers during FY 2009-10, FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14
against the provisions made in the Audited/Provisional Accounts within 2 months from the date of
the APR Order for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted the year wise details of interest provided/actually paid on
Consumer Security Deposit for FY 2009-10 to FY 2013-14 as per audited/provisional Accounts of
UPCL as follows:
Table 7.1: Detail of Interest on Security Deposit Year Provision Paid
2009-10 12,83,89,883.37 4,18,99,747.17 2010-11 16,57,95,990.43 4,88,27,952.36 2011-12 20,35,91,393.99 6,92,23,782.44 2012-13 8,49,40,468.78 9,69,74,978.13 2013-14 56,34,55,506.25 56,24,99,353.3 Total 1,14,61,73,242.82 81,94,25,813.38
In the above table, the Petitioner further submitted that the provisions/actual payment of
Interest for FY 2013-14 includes interest of Rs. 15,96,05,438.55 pertaining to previous years, i.e. FY
2008-09 to 2012-13.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner and has,
accordingly, allowed the Interest on Security Deposit while carrying out the truing up of FY
2013-14 as discussed in detail in Chapter 3 of the Order.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 247
7.1.15 Depreciation
The Petitioner was required to formulate a proper capitalization policy including all the
matters related to capital expenditure, capitalization and other indirect expenses like insurance
charges, O&M expenses etc. In this regard, the Petitioner should understand that for validation of
the assets the above requirement are a pre-requisite and the Commission cannot allow the pro-rata
depreciation on assets capitalized during the year in case the asset is capitalized at the year end.
Thus, the Commission directed the Petitioner to submit capitalisation policy as well as the fixed
asset register showing the date of additions made in the assets during the year along with the next
filing and also claim depreciation based on the rates specified in the Regulations for each class of
asset.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the capitalization policy has already been submitted to the
Commission during tariff determination exercise for FY 2014-15. As regards inclusion of interest
during construction, the Petitioner submitted that the same is included in the cost of assets
completed. Further, Fixed Assets Register for the period upto March, 2010 had already been
submitted to the Commission. Also, the Fixed Assets Register for FY 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13
have been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 1889/UPCL/RM/ C-10, dated 29-
08-2014. However, the same has not been maintained up to date.
The Commission directs the Petitioner to maintain proper Fixed Asset Register showing
amongst others the date of capitalisation of each asset, their location, alongwith the accumulated
depreciation on the same and submit the same along with the next filing and also claim
depreciation based on the rates as specified in the Regulations for each class of asset.
7.1.16 Return on Equity
The Commission directed the Petitioner to look into the issue of creating long term assets
from current liability and take appropriate remedial action for correcting this practice. Further, the
Petitioner was directed to expedite the matter and submit the details of assets created by mode
other than loan/grants/subsidies/deposit works/consumer contributions from FY 2001-02
onwards and submit the source of such finances duly validating the same from their cash flow and
fund flow statements from FY 2001-02 within 3 months of issue of APR Order for FY 2014-15.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
248 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it is very difficult task to prepare the details of assets created
by mode other than loan grants/subsidies/deposit works/consumer contributions from FY 2001-02
onwards. Therefore, the Commission has been requested to exempt UPCL to submit the said
information. In this regard, the Petitioner further submitted that some capital assets are created out
of payables to GoU towards State Royalty Power / Electricity Duty / Cess and Royalty.
The Commission does not agree with the submissions of the Petitioner that it is
appropriate to use the current liabilities as internal resources to create long term assets. Thus, the
Commission once again directs the Petitioner to look into the issue of creating long term assets
from current liability and take appropriate remedial action for correcting this practice. Further,
the Petitioner is directed to expedite the matter and submit the details of assets created by mode
other than loan/grants/subsidies/ deposit works/consumer contributions from FY 2001-02
onwards and submit the source of such finances duly validating the same from their cash flow
and fund flow statements from FY 2001-02 within 3 months of issue of this Order.
7.1.17 Employee Expenses
As compared to the required manpower as approved by the Commission in the MYT Order,
the actual recruitment done by the Petitioner is on lower side. Thus, the Commission had directed
the Petitioner to expedite its recruitment drive in accordance with approved plan.
Petitioner’s Submission:
The Petitioner submitted that direct recruitment is in process for the following positions:
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 249
Table 7.2: Summary of Direct Recruitment Position No. Updated Status
Deputy Chief Personnel Officer 03 Interviews are to be conducted.
Accounts Officer 11 Advt. released. Finalization of Recruitment Agency is under process. Open tender invited, Part –1 of tender opened on 30-10-2014. Law Officer 02
Assistant Engineer 14 Finalization of Recruitment Agency is under process. Open tender invited, Part-1 of tender opened on 30-10-2014.
Junior Engineer (E&M) 13
Advt. Released on 9-02-2014 by Board of Technical Education, Uttarakhand. As per BOTE scrutiny / shortlisting of received applications is under process.
Junior Engineer (Civil) 20
Office Assistant – III 77
TGT-2 496 Advertisement has been released on 8-12-2013 by Board of Technical Education, Uttarakhand. Rectt. process withheld as per directions of GoU till further orders.
Assistant Accountant 57 Advertisement has been released on 8-12-2013 by Board of Technical Education,
Uttarakhand. Written exam for the post of AA held on 07-09-2014 & for the post of ASK held on 28-09-2014. Assistant Store
Keeper 20
Total 713
Note : The recruitment is less, since only Interim Staff Structure has been sanctioned and the remaining
structure is still in process of approval.
The Petitioner further added that on UPCL’s request of 574 posts, GoU sanctioned only 61
posts on June 28, 2014. These posts includes 15 posts of Executive Engineers sanctioned in earlier
structure. All these 61 posts are promotion posts and promotion process is in progress on the basis
of availability in various cadres.
As already discussed in Chapter 3 of this Order, the Commission expresses its displeasure
on the slow or negligible pace of recruitment. In FY 2013-14, as per the submissions made by UPCL,
only 2 employees were recruited on the post of Senior Law Officers. However, 235 employees have
retired during the year which suggests that number of employees retired have outpaced the number
of employees recruited. This in turn is not only hampering the quality of supply to the consumers
but is also adversely affecting the revenues of UPCL as the core meter reading, billing and bill
distribution function of UPCL has been outsourced. UPCL is directed to expedite the recruitment
process and also submit a quarterly status report to the Commission detailing the steps taken by
it in this regard and also the status of the recruitments planned. (Refer Para 3.2.4.1)
Further, the Commission once again cautions UPCL that any saving in the employee
expenses on this account would not be shared with UPCL. Also, UPCL is advised to exercise
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
250 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
caution in incurring the expenditure as the Commission would allow the expenses during truing
up after examining the prudence of the same. (Refer Para 4.9.1)
7.1.18 A&G Expenses
The Commission directed the Petitioner to separately maintain account for the provisions
allowed by the Commission in the MYT Order.
The Commission further directed the Petitioner to submit the details of the aforesaid account
along with the Truing up for FY 2013-14.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner has submitted the details and the Commission has considered the same while
carrying out the truing up for FY 2013-14.
7.1.19 Bad & Doubtful Debts
The Petitioner was directed to submit an Action Plan as to how it intends to move forward
upon receipt of the Audit Report within one month of the APR Order for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that Audit of receivables of UPCL as on March 31, 2012 is
completed with the following findings of Auditors:-
(i) Arrears as per ledger – Rs. 2117.20 Crore
(ii) Arrears identified as fictitious as per ledger – Rs. 153.56 Crore
(iii) Arrears in Commercial Diary – Rs. 1952.47 Crore
(iv) Arrears as per Accounts – Rs. 2026.35 Crore
Further, the Petitioner has submitted the division wise summary of the Audit Report.
As regards write off of fictitious and irrecoverable arrears, the Petitioner further submitted
that it has prepared a policy for writing off of Bad Debts. The said policy is under finalization and
on finalization of the same, exercise for writing off of fictitious and irrecoverable arrears shall be
taken up.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 251
The Commission has taken note of the reply submitted by the Petitioner in this regard.
The Commission directs the Petitioner to finalise the policy and submit the same for
Commission’s perusal within three months from the date of this Order. (Refer Para 3.2.9)
7.1.20 Reliability Indices
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to comply with provisions of the Regulations
and submit the target indices along with the next tariff filing. The Commission further directed the
Petitioner to submit monthly report on Reliability Indices in the format prescribed by the
Commission vide letter no. 1200/UERC/Tech/9/2010 dated 28.09.2010. These reports should also
be submitted in MS-Excel soft form.
Petitioner’s Submissions
The Petitioner submitted that division wise report on reliability indices for the month of
April 2014 & May 2014 has been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter dated 17-07-2014.
This report shall regularly be provided to the Commission on monthly basis. .
The Commission has noted Petitioner’s reply in this regard. However, the Commission
would like to clarify that as per the Regulations and for tariff determination process, scrutiny of
Performance Indices of any distribution utility is mandatory. The Commission hereby directs the
Petitioner to comply with the above provision of the Regulations and submit the target indices
along with the next tariff filing. The Commission, therefore, directs the Petitioner to submit
monthly report on Reliability Indices in the format prescribed by the Commission vide letter no.
1200/UERC/Tech/9/2010 dated 28.09.2010. These reports should also be submitted in MS-Excel
soft form.
7.1.21 Voltage wise Cost of Supply
The Commission had directed the Petitioner to submit status of metering at various voltage
levels, Distribution Transformers and at consumer level within one month from the date of APR
Order for FY 2014-15 along with the action plan for completion of the metering at various points
necessary for assessment of voltage wise losses namely sub-station, DTs, and at consumer level
along with the present status of metering at various voltage levels within one month of the APR
Order for FY 2014-15. The Petitioner was also directed to submit the detailed progress report
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
252 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
indicating the status of the work of energy audit and key findings on quarterly basis within 15 days
of the end of each quarter.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it had awarded the work of Energy Audit to M/s Enzen
Global Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The Energy Audit Report submitted by the Consultant was provided to
the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no. 182/CE(Coml.)/Enzen Global, dated 30-04-2014. This report
also includes the details of metering at various voltage levels and distribution transformers. The
Petitioner further submitted that it is in process to compile such metering status and thereafter the
action plan for metering shall be prepared and submitted to the Commission.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner. The
Commission once again directs the Petitioner to submit the action plan along with the timelines
by which the Petitioner will be completing the above work as per the action plan, within one
month of issue of this Order.
7.1.22 Demand Side Management Measures
The Commission directed the Petitioner to submit the complete details of Bachat Lamp
Yojana Scheme alongwith DPR for the Commission’s approval by June 2014. The Commission also
directed the Petitioner to submit initiatives planned for energy efficiency and demand side
management measures for the Control Period along with the APR Petition in terms of approved
cost of the schemes and savings expected on implementation of the above schemes.
Petitioner’s submission
The Petitioner submitted that Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) has launched a programme
for capacity building of DISCOMS with the objective of strengthening the capacity for load
management, energy conservation, load analysis, development of DSM action plan and
implementation of DSM activities. As per the provision of the programme, an MoU has been
executed between BEE and UPCL on 04-08-2014 and UPCL has established a DSM Cell. Energy
Efficiency Service Limited (EESL) is an implementation agency for DSM plan and they have
selected two DSM consultants namely Mr. Ashish Kumar Sharma (Financial Analyst) and Mr.
Utkarsh Arora (Technical Analyst) for UPCL. EESL has also selected agency – M/s Idam
Infrastructure Advisory Pvt. Ltd. for load research of UPCL.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 253
Accordingly, the Petitioner submitted that it shall continue with Bachat Lamp Yojna as per
recommendation of consultants / EESL.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner. The
Commission directs the Petitioner to submit the report on various Demand Side Management
measures at regular quarterly intervals to the Commission.
7.1.23 Electrical Accidents
The Commission directs the Petitioner to submit the reasons for increase in fatal accidents
and indicate measures taken or planned to reduce the occurrence of such accidents within 3 months
of the date of issue of the Order.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that field officers have been directed to comply with the safety
rules and to ensure that no electrical accident occur in their areas.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner. The
Commission directs the Petitioner to submit the data on year wise fatal accidents for last 4 years,
i.e. from FY 2011-12 to FY 2014-15 within 3 months from the date of this Order.
7.1.24 Filing of APR and Truing up Petitions
The Commission directed the Petitioner to carry out this exercise regularly and file the APR
and truing up Petitions within the timeframe specified in the Regulations.
Petitioner’s submission
The Petitioner submitted that filing of APR and truing up petitions shall be done as per the
provisions of Law.
7.1.25 Issues raised by the Petitioner again despite Commission’s ruling in previous Tariff
Orders
The Commission directed the Petitioner to not raise such issues again in the subsequent
ARR and Tariff Petitions on which the Commission have already taken the decision and given its
ruling in the previous Tariff Orders, failing which, the Commission may reject the Petition upfront.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
254 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the same shall be done as per the provisions of law.
The Commission has noted the Petitioner’s reply in this regard. The Commission would
like to clarify that the directives issued by the Commission are also in accordance with the
provisions of law. Further, the Commission agrees with the views of State Advisory Committee
members that UPCL is raising same issues again in its subsequent ARR and Tariff Petitions.
Hence, the Commission hereby once again directs the Petitioner to not raise such issues again in
the subsequent ARR and Tariff Petitions on which the Commission have already taken the
decision and given its ruling in the previous Tariff Orders, failing which, the Commission may
reject the Petition upfront.
7.1.26 Additional Surcharge on account of Re-determination of Tariff for FY 2009-10
The Commission directed the Petitioner to submit the total recovery made through
additional surcharge on account of re-determination of tariff of FY 2009-10 in FY 2011-12 to FY 2013-
14 separately along with the Annual Performance Review for FY 2014-15.
The Petitioner was required to submit the desired details during the present tariff
determination exercise. The Petitioner is now directed to submit these details alongwith the
APR Petition for FY 2015-16.
7.1.27 Additional Surcharge on account of Re-determination of Tariff for FY 2010-11
The Commission directed the Petitioner to submit the total recovery made through
additional surcharge on account of re-determination of tariff of FY 2010-11 in FY 2013-14 as well as
during FY 2014-15 along with the Annual Performance Review Petition for FY 2014-15.
The Petitioner was required to submit the desired details during the present tariff
determination exercise. The Commission redirects UPCL to submit the total recovery made
through additional surcharge on account of re-determination of tariff of FY 2010-11 for FY 2013-
14 to FY 2015-16 along with the Annual Performance Review Petition for FY 2015-16.
7.2 Compliance to the Directives issued in APR Order dated April 10, 2014
7.2.1 Fictitious Sales
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 255
Anomalies were observed in sales data for FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13. Accordingly, the
Commission directed the Petitioner to come up with an action plan within 3 months of the APR
Order for FY 2014-15 to weed out fictitious sales and also as to how it proposes to furnish correct
and verifiable sales data for these and domestic consumers.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10, dated 17-06-
2014 directed its field officers to record the consumption of Departmental Employees and
Pensioners on the basis of actual meter reading. Further, it also directed them to record the
unmetered consumption in domestic and PTW categories on the basis of average load factor of
metered consumers in these categories.
The Commission has taken note of the replies submitted by the Petitioner. However, the
Commission is not satisfied with the replies of the Petitioner while complying with the
directives of the Commission in this regard. The Commission has discussed this issue in detail
in Chapter 3 of the Order.
7.2.2 Open Access Sale
As regards the recording of Open Access Sales in the Commercial Diary the Petitioner was
directed to frame a mechanism to correct the previous sales in this regard and to ensure that sales
recorded in the Commercial Diary should exclude the energy received by a consumer through open
access. UPCL was required to submit the compliance within three months of the date of this Order.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10, dated 17-06-
2014 issued instructions to all its field officers that (i) all information in commercial statements, i.e.
CS-3, CS-4 and SG- IV shall be shown only in respect of energy supplied by the respective
distribution division to its consumers (ii) no information in respect of energy drawn by open access
consumers through open access from other sources shall be included in CS-3, CS-4, SG – IV
statements and energy account (iii) the commercial information in respect of energy received by the
consumers through open access shall regularly be shown in a separate format in the monthly
Commercial Diary.
The Commission has noted the compliance made by the Petitioner.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
256 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
7.2.3 Load Shedding
Some of the consumers submitted that a 32 km Power Control Plan Rural Feeder named
Fulsunga Feeder at village Fulsunga, Rudrapur originates from Bhadai Pura Power House and
supplies power to five villages, viz. Gangpur, Fulsunga, Fulsungi, Shimlabahadur and Ganeshpur.
There are frequent breakdowns of 4-5 hrs daily in this line due to overloading. In addition, this line
is 40-50 years old. Thus, in this regard the Commission had directed the Petitioner to inspect the
line, take timely action, and submit the report to the Commission within 60 days from the date of
this Order.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL’s 11 kV Bagwara Feeder which feeds the nearby area of
Fulsunga village at Rudrapur, originates from 33/11 kV s/s Bhadaipura Power House and supplies
power to five villages, viz. Gangpur, Fulsunga, Fulsungi, Shimlabahadur and Ganeshpur. This
feeder is about 40 years old and the length of the same is 35 km. With a view to solve the problem
and to provide continuous supply to the consumers of the area, the Petitioner decided to construct a
new 11 kV feeder having length of 2.5 km. The work has been awarded and a line of 27 poles is
completed so far and the work is in progress.
The Commission has noted the compliance made by the Petitioner. The Commission
directs the Petitioner to expedite this work and submit the report to the Commission within 3
months from the date of this Order.
7.2.4 Metering of unmetered connections
The Commission in its previous Tariff Orders had been repeatedly directing the Petitioner to
get its unmetered connections converted into metered connections. However, UPCL has not been
taking the directives of the Commission seriously. Accordingly, the Commission accorded final
opportunity to ensure that all unmetered consumers were metered by September 30, 2014. The
Commission intended to discontinue prescribing norms of billing and tariff for unmetered
consumers from ensuing years. Failure to provide meters to unmetered consumers within the time
frame mentioned above may result in licensee having no avenue to raise bills to such consumers.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 257
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that a report has been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s
letter no. 1465/UPCL/RM/J-10 dated 09-07-2014 and as per report there were 6542 unmetered
connections as on March 31, 2014. Further, UPCL vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10, dated
17-06-2014 issued instructions to its field officers to meter all the unmetered connections within the
time allowed by the Commission. In accordance with the report submitted to the Commission vide
UPCL’s letter no. 2173/UPCL/RM/J-10 dated 09-10-2014, there were 6373 unmetered connections
as on July 31, 2014. Thus, UPCL has metered 169 unmetered connections from April to September,
2014. The Petitioner further added that remaining unmetered connections shall be metered by June
30, 2015.
The Commission has noted the compliance made by the Petitioner. The Commission has
discussed this issue in para 5.2.3.14 of Chapter 5 of the Order and directs the Petitioner to meter
all the remaining unmetered connections immediately and submit the compliance to the
Commission latest by 31.05.2015.
7.2.5 Interest on GPF Trust
The Petitioner’s management is directed to look into this issue and get the accounts
prepared and audit conducted of the Trust in a timely manner to avoid any misappropriation of
funds and submit the report on the same along with the next filing.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the appointment of Auditor to conduct the Audit of Accounts
of trust is in process. The completion of Audit is targeted by June 30, 2015.
The Commission has noted the compliance made by the Petitioner. The Commission
directs the Petitioner to expedite the matter to ensure that audit is completed by June 30, 2015
and to submit the audit report to the Commission by July 31, 2015.
7.2.6 Treatment of Assets sent for repairs
a) UPCL was directed to get this examined through an external agency, preferably a CA
firm and submit an audited report on the additions made by it since FY 2001-02 and
classify them into new additions and additions made after repairs of existing assets and
the financing of the new assets along with the tariff petition for FY 2015-16 failing which
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
258 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
the Commission would be constraint not to allow any capitalization thereafter. Similarly,
UPCL was also required to submit the breakup of deduction in GFA into assets sent for
repairs and assets written off since FY 2001-02. UPCL was also directed to submit
quarterly status in this regard.
b) The Commission directed the Petitioner to submit its response/comment on the
approach discussed in Chapter 3 of Truing up of FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 regarding
the treatment of assets sent to repair to the Commission within 3 months of the APR
Order for FY 2014-15. The Commission based on UPCL’s response would finalise this
approach to be incorporated by UPCL in its accounts from FY 2014-15 onwards.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that accounts of UPCL are audited by statutory auditor under the
provisions of the Companies Act and by Comptroller & Auditor General of India. The audit for the
period upto FY 2012-13 has been completed and for FY 2013-14 is in process. Accordingly, the
Petitioner has requested the Commission for no further Audit of Assets.
The Petitioner further submitted that the Central Government, in consultation with
Comptroller & Auditor of India and State Governments, had issued the Electricity ( Supply) Annual
Accounts Rules, 1985. The Accounts of UPCL are being maintained as per the provisions of said
accounting rules and, therefore, the Petitioner has requested the Commission to not change the
accounting for assets sent to repair.
As already discussed in Para 3.2.6 of this Order, the Commission in the current proceedings
is provisionally considering the financing of the assets as submitted by UPCL.
Further, UPCL in its statement of accounts for FY 2011-12 has carried out an adjustment of
grants to the tune of Rs. 1296.24 Crore in its GFA in line with the AS-12 issued by ICAI. However, as
per the submissions made by UPCL before the Commission total assets financed out of grants till FY
2011-12 works out to Rs. 1243.02 Crore. UPCL is directed to submit the year wise reconciliation of
the financing of the assets submitted to the Commission within 6 months of the date of the
Order.
The Commission also directs the Petitioner to analyse the capitalisation amount from FY
2001-02 onwards and segregate the same under the following heads:
1. Asset class wise actual capitalisation incurred on creation of new assets;
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 259
2. Asset class wise capitalisation on account of receipt of repaired assets,
3. Asset class wise actual asset deletion/written off;
4. Asset class wise asset deletion on account of an asset being sent for repairs.
Further, the Petitioner should also segregate the associated financing with regard to S.No
1 to 4, i.e. financing of the asset capitalised and financing of the asset written off. Further, the
Petitioner is required to submit the above information within six months from the date of issue
of this Order and the Petitioner should also submit quarterly status report in this regard.
7.2.7 Segregation of LT and HT/ EHT Works
The delay on the account of segregation of LT/HT works on the part of the Petitioner clearly
shows inefficiency of the Petitioner for which it should be penalized. Accordingly, the Commission
had directed the Petitioner to provide the desired information at the earliest to carry out the truing
up in this regard. As the delay in providing information is on account of the Petitioner, no carrying
cost will be allowed to the Petitioner on the delayed approval of the capitalization in this regard.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the audited details of LT and HT works capitalized from FY
2007-08 to FY 2011-12 have been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter dated 07-10-2013.
As regards shortcomings pointed out by the Commission in the report, the Petitioner requested the
Commission consider the figures of either accounts or audit report and allow eligible return/
expenses to UPCL in the matter.
The Commission has discussed this matter in detail in Chapter 3 of the Order.
7.2.8 Provision for bad and doubtful debts
Regarding the audit of receivables, the Petitioner had submitted that the works of audit of
receivables had already been awarded and the audit report is expected to be received in March
2014. The Petitioner was directed to submit an Action Plan as to how it intends to move forward
upon receipt of the Audit Report within one month of the date of APR Order for FY 2014-15 along
with the Audit Report.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the Audit of receivables of UPCL as on March 31, 2012 has
been completed with the following findings:-
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
260 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
(i) Arrears as per ledger – Rs. 2117.20 Crore
(ii) Arrears identified as fictitious as per ledger – Rs. 153.56 Crore
(iii) Arrears in Commercial Diary – Rs. 1952.47 Crore
(iv) Arrears as per Accounts – Rs. 2026.35 Crore
As regards writing off fictitious and irrecoverable arrears, the Petitioner submitted that it
has prepared a policy for writing off of Bad Debts. The said policy is under finalization and on
finalization of the same exercise, for writing off of fictitious and irrecoverable arrears shall be taken
up.
Accordingly, the Commission directs the Petitioner to finalise the policy and submit the
same for Commission’s perusal within three months from the date of this Order. (Refer Para
3.2.9)
7.2.9 Billing of Departmental Employees
The Petitioner was directed to ensure appropriate modification in its billing software so that
revenue for sale to the departmental employees is recognised at the slab wise rate prescribed for
domestic consumers. The difference between revenue so recognised and actual amount recovered
from its employees be shown as subsidy in its annual accounts.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10 dated 17-06-
2014 (Annexure –A) directed its field officers to record the consumption of Departmental
Employees and Pensioners on the basis of actual meter reading. Further, the Petitioner has
incorporated the logic in its billing software for billing of the departmental employees and
pensioners. The basic information required for start of billing is being collected in respect of
departmental employees and pensioners, thereafter, billing shall be started as per the direction of
the Commission.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by Petitioner in this regard. The
Commission directs the Petitioner to expedite the process for collection of information and start
the billing as per Commission’s directive in this regard.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 261
7.2.10 Power Purchase
The Petitioner was directed that from FY 2013-14 onwards it should record fixed charges
and variable charges for a given period separately and the past adjustments to be recorded
separately further segregating it under fixed charges, variable charges and other costs. The
Petitioner should revise its COMDATA for FY 2013-14 as per above methodology and submit the
same to the Commission within 4 months from the date of APR Order for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it is maintaining the power purchase (com) data from April,
2014 onwards as per methodology suggested by the Commission, however, it is facing difficulty to
convert the already prepared data for FY 2013-14. In this regard, the Petitioner has requested the
Commission to exempt UPCL from this direction.
Further, the Petitioner submitted that annual accounts for FY 2013-14 have been prepared
and in these accounts, power purchase cost is shown in the old format. From FY 2014-15 onwards
power purchase costs will be shown in the accounts as per methodology directed by the
Commission.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by Petitioner in this regard.
7.2.11 UI Overdrawal and Underdrawal
UPCL was directed to reconcile the UI data submitted by it with the UI data available on the
Northern Region Power Committee (NRPC) and submit the same along with the Tariff Petition for
FY 2015-16 failing which the Commission would be forced to carry out the necessary corrections in
this regard based on the data available on NRPC’s website.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that such data is not available in the bills received from NRLDC for
UI overdrawal and UPCL also could not derive such data from the information posted at website of
NRLDC. In this regard, the Petitioner further submitted that UPCL is determined to overdraw from
grid within limits prescribed by the Commission. There may be any little amount of energy
overdrawn beyond the permissible limit and this is unintentional. Accordingly, the Petitioner
requested the Commission to exempt it for submission of this information.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
262 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
7.2.12 Subsidy from GoU for disaster affected areas
The Petitioner was required to maintain a separate account for the sales and revenue data
with respect to subsidy applicable for such consumers.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that it has issued instructions to the field officers to maintain the
billing data of disaster affected areas exempted from paying electricity bills. The Petitioner also
directed them to maintain the said details in regular monthly commercial diary.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by the Petitioner and directs the
Petitioner to submit this information to the Commission alongwith APR Petition for FY 2015-16.
7.2.13 Capitalization of Assets
The Petitioner was directed to seek approval of the Commission before starting any capital
works in accordance with the Regulations, failing which the works not approved by the
Commission would not be considered during truing up.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that filing of petition seeking approval of the Commission for
capital works shall be ensured as per the provisions of Regulations.
In this regard, the Commission re-iterates its direction and directs the Petitioner to seek
approval of the Commission before starting any capital works in accordance with the
Regulations, failing which the works not approved by the Commission would not be considered
during truing up.
7.2.14 Capitalization Policy and Fixed Asset Registers
The Commission had observed that the Petitioner was not complying with the directives of
the Commission in this regard. Accordingly, the Petitioner was again directed to frame a
capitalization policy and maintain fixed asset registers and submit the submit the same along with
the next filing and also claim depreciation based on the rates specified in the Regulations for each
class of asset, however, the Commission would like to point out that in case the Petitioner fails to
comply with the directions of the Commission, the Commission would be compelled to take strict
actions against the Petitioner.
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 263
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that Fixed Assets Register for the period upto March, 2010 had
already been submitted to the Commission. Further, the Fixed Assets Register for FY 2010-11, FY
2011-12 and FY 2012-13 have been submitted to the Commission vide UPCL’s letter no.
1889/UPCL/RM/C-10, dated 29-08-2014. As per Commission’s directive, depreciation shall be
claimed on the rates specified in the regulations for each class of asset shown in the FAR.
7.2.15 Installation of Meter
As regards the Objection raised by the Railways, the Petitioner was required to ensure
installation of appropriate meters at the consumer’s premises, i.e. railway traction sub-station
within three months from the date of issue of APR Order for FY 2014-15 for billing purpose.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that Regulation 2(2)(a) of the Central Electricity Authority
(Installation and Operation of Meters) Amendment Regulations, 2010 provides that the consumer
meter shall be installed by the distribution licensee either at the consumer premises or outside the
consumer premises. Hence, it is the discretion of distribution licensee to provide the meter either at
consumer premises or outside the consumer premises. UPCL has installed the consumer meter at
Grid substation, i.e. outside the consumer premises.
The Commission expresses its displeasure on the compliance made by UPCL in this
regard. UPCL is decided to ensure proper compliances as directed by the Commission.
7.2.16 Consumers under Snow Bound (RTS-1 Category)
The Commission directed the Petitioner to check this aspect about existence or non existence
of consumers in Snowbound Area and submit the same with evidence duly validating its claim in
this regard in the Annual Performance Review Petition for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that UPCL vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10 dated 17-06-
2014 (Annexure–A) issued instructions to all the executive engineers of distribution divisions
covering any hilly areas to contact the concerned District Magistrate and to seek the copies of orders
by which any area has been notified as snow bound/snow line. During discussion in the meetings,
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
264 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
field officers informed that no snow bound / snow line areas have been notified in the supply area
of their distribution divisions / circles / zones and, therefore, no consumer / consumption details
are being shown in the commercial statements. Accordingly, the Petitioner requested the
Commission to abolish the rate schedule RTS –IA (Snow bound).
The Commission has discussed this issue in detail in Chapter 5 of the Order.
7.2.17 kWh Tariff
The Commission directed the Petitioner to replace the old meters with new meters capable
of recording sales in kVAh for all PWW consumers within three months of the APR Order for FY
2014-15 and also furnish basis of billing so far done to these consumers with explanation for not
providing appropriate meters by July 31, 2014.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner vide its letter no. 1319/UPCL/RM/C-10 dated 17-06-2014 issued instructions
to the field units to replace all meters in public water works category not capable of recording kVAh
unit of electricity by new meters capable of recording kWh unit of electricity. This work is expected
to be completed by March 31, 2015.
The Commission has discussed this issue in detail in Chapter 5 of the Order and has
issued fresh directive in this regard, which is summarised in subsequent section on New
Directives issued in this Order.
7.2.18 MCG Charges
The Commission directed that the licensee tenders a certificate under affidavit, that
appropriate modification based on the above have been incorporated in its billing software on or
before June 15, 2014.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that necessary modification has been made in the billing software
of UPCL to charge the MCG from PTW Consumers. This has been reported to the Commission vide
UPCL’s letter no. 1602/UPCL/RM/B-14 dated 24-07-2014.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by Petitioner in this regard.
Further, the Commission has revised MCG in this Order. The Commission directs that the
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 265
licensee tenders a certificate under affidavit, that appropriate modification based on the above
have been incorporated in its billing software on or before June 15, 2015.
7.2.19 Adjustment of Revenue Surplus
The Petitioner was directed to adjust the estimated revenue surplus for FY 2014-15 in FCA if
it becomes due as applicable for FY 2014-15 and shall continue to adjust the surplus of Rs. 20.92
Crore till it is exhausted, from the Fuel Cost Adjustment becoming due for FY 2014-15.
Petitioner’s Submission
The Petitioner submitted that the Commission vide its Order dated 11-09-2014 approved the
claim of UPCL of FCA amounting to Rs. 19.80 Crore and ordered to adjust the same from the
revenue surplus of Rs. 20.92 Crore. Accordingly, after the adjustment of FCA for the first quarter of
FY 2014-15, UPCL had a surplus of Rs. 1.12 Crore. The Petitioner has taken action as per the Orders
of Commission.
The Commission has taken note of the compliance made by Petitioner in this regard.
7.3 Fresh Directives
7.3.1 Issue of Voltage wise Loss
The Commission directs the Petitioner to submit the basis for working out voltage wise
losses alongwith approach & methodology adopted by it within two months from the date of this
Order. (Refer para 2.27.8)
7.3.2 Power Purchase Expenses (Including Transmission Charges)
The Commission directs the Petitioner to submit the year wise details of the excess
liabilities written off under the head of power purchase as also the complete details and
documentary evidence of unpaid liabilities mentioned in the accounts of FY 2013-14 to the
Commission in the format already sent to it within one month from the date of issue of this
Order. The Commission will take appropriate view in the matter in the Tariff Order for FY 2016-
17. (Refer Para 3.2.3)
7.3.3 Cost of Deficit Power
The Commission directs the Petitioner to expedite the process of medium term
procurement of power through competitive bidding from FY 2015-16 onwards and submit the
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
266 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
details of steps taken towards same within 3 months from the date of this Order. (Refer Para
4.4.9.6)
7.3.4 RTS-4 (Private Tubewells)
The Commission directs the Petitioner to conduct a study to identify and assess the load
and consumption of thrasher, cane crusher and rice huller consumers and submit its report to the
Commission within 6 months from the date of this Order. (Refer Para 5.2.3.6)
7.3.5 Status of NA/NR, IDF/ADF/RDF
The Commission directs the Petitioner to take effective steps to reduce the percentage of
provisional billing cases namely under NA/NR, IDF/RDF/ADF below 3% and submit an Action
Plan in this regard within 2 months of this Order. (Refer para 6.2.1.1)
7.3.6 Replacement of Improper, Non-Functional, Stop/Stuck up defective or IDF Meters
The Commission directs the Petitioner to incorporate logic in its billing software for such
bill basis namely NA/NR, IDF /ADF/RDF in accordance with the Electricity Supply Code &
Standard of Performance Regulations of the Commission. The Commission also directs the
Petitioner to restrict percentage defective meters (IDF) to 3% in accordance with the Regulations
by 30th September, 2015. (Refer para 6.2.1.2)
7.3.7 Replacement of Mechanical Meters
The Commission directs the Petitioner to replace all the existing electro-mechanical
meters by static/electronic meters by 31st December, 2015 and consolidate its complete database
for electro-mechanical meters including R-APDRP covered towns and submit correct reports to
the Commission latest by 30th June, 2015. (Refer para 6.2.1.3)
7.3.8 Ghost/Fictitious Consumers
The Commission directs the Petitioner to write off ghost/fictitious/non-existent
consumers from its billing database under a transparent policy framed by the Petitioner latest by
30th September, 2015. (Refer para 6.2.1.4)
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 267
7.3.9 NB & SB Cases
The Commission directs the Petitioner to liquidate and finalise NB/SB cases and set a
target of realisation from at least 25% of these cases within 6 months from the date of issuance of
this Order. (Refer para 6.2.2.1)
7.3.10 Outstanding Arrears
The Commission directs the Petitioner to make sincere efforts in mobilizing its resources
to continuously make efforts throughout the year for collection of Arrears under a structured
programme besides taking corrective actions against the habitual defaulters. (Refer para 6.2.2.2)
7.3.11 Status of KCC Consumers
The Commission directs the Petitioner that the KCC consumers having low load factor
should be closely monitored and average consumption pattern and abnormality in consumption
pattern should be checked and duly analysed. The Commission also directs the Petitioner to
check KCC consumers who are repeatedly exceeding their sanctioned/contracted demand and
take corrective action in such cases. (Refer para 6.2.2.3)
7.3.12 Status of Revenue realisation per unit sold
The Commission directs the Petitioner to take immediate steps to frame a time bound
programme along with laying down standard procedure for realising pending arrears and,
accordingly, a report on the action taken, arrears realised, arrears remaining outstanding and
reasons for the same should be submitted to the Commission within three months of the
issuance of this Order. (Refer para 6.2.2.4)
7.3.13 Billing and Collection System
The Commission directs the Petitioner to comply with the directions issued in the
Commission’s Order dated 21.01.2015 and furnish an Action Plan in the matter of Bill Collection
System distinctly for Rural and Urban areas across the State latest by 01.05.2015. (Refer Para 6.2.3)
7.3.14 Energy Audit
The Commission hereby directs the Petitioner to provide meters at each feeder, ‘T’ points,
DTs & consumers in the entire network for efficient energy auditing of the whole network or
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
268 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
part of the network area and thereafter, start conducting energy audit on periodical basis and
submit action taken report to the Commission on quarterly basis. (Refer Para 6.3)
7.3.15 Abnormal Sales in Public Lamps Category
The Commission directs the Petitioner to examine the same and report to the Commission
the reasons for such high consumption in public lamps within 2 months of the date of the Order.
UPCL is directed to examine the same alongwith the status of billing of fixed charges to public
lamps in other divisions and report to the Commission the reasons for such negligence within 2
months of the date of the Order. (Refer Para 6.5.1)
7.3.16 Abnormal Sales in Private Tubewell Category
The Commission directs the Petitioner to examine the same and report to the Commission
the status of such consumers within 2 months of the date of the Order. (Refer Para 6.5.2)
7.3.17 Abnormal Sales in Public Water Works Category
The Commission directs the Petitioner to examine the same and report to the Commission
the reasons for such high consumption in public water works and also the action plan for
rectifying the anomaly within 2 months of the date of the Order. UPCL is also directed to give
reasons for such low average billing rate within two months of the date of the Order.
UPCL is directed to ensure timely compliances of the directions issued in this regard. The
Commission has also decided to review the monthly performance of UPCL in this regard and,
accordingly, UPCL is also directed to submit the monthly commercial report (SG-IV). (Refer Para
6.5.3)
7.3.18 Abnormal Sales in LT Industries
The Commission directs the Petitioner to examine the same and report the reasons for
such low revenue alongwith the corrective action taken in this regard, within 2 months of the
date of the Order. (Refer Para 6.5.4.1)
7.3.19 Abnormal Sales in HT industries (Upto 1000 kVA)
The Commission directs the Petitioner to examine the same and report the reasons for
such low revenue alongwith the corrective action taken in this regard, within 2 months of the
date of the Order. (Refer Para 6.5.4.2)
7.Commission’s Directions
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 269
7.3.20 Abnormal Sales in Mixed Load Category
The Commission directs the Petitioner to examine the same and report the reasons for
such low revenue alongwith the corrective action taken in this regard, within 2 months of the
date of the Order. (Refer Para 6.5.5)
7.4 Conclusion
Having considered the submissions made by the Petitioner, the responses of various
stakeholders and the relevant provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Regulations of the
Commission, the Commission hereby approves that:
(i) Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd., the distribution and retail supply licensee
in the State will be entitled to charge the tariffs from consumers in its licensed
area of supply as given in the Rate Schedule for FY 2015-16 annexed hereto as
Annexure-1. These Tariffs will be effective from April 01, 2015.
(ii) Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd., the distribution and retail supply licensee
in the State will realize from consumers of Electricity in the State, miscellaneous
charges as listed out in Annexure- 2 of this Order and shall not recover any other
charge, fee, deposit etc., unless approved by the Commission.
(iii) The above tariffs shall continue to be applicable till revised by the Commission.
(iv) The Petitioner shall forward a report on compliance of the directions given in this
Order within one month of time stipulated for compliance.
(K.P. Singh) Member
(C.S. Sharma) Member
(Subhash Kumar) Chairman
270 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
8. Annexures
8.1 Annexure 1: Rate Schedule Effective from 01.04.2015
A. General Conditions of Supply
1. Character of Service
i) Alternating Current 50 Hz., single phase, 230 Volts (with permissible variations) up to a
load of 4 kW.
ii) Alternating Current 50 Hz, three phase, 4 wire, 400 Volts or above (with permissible
variations) for loads above 4 kW depending upon the availability of voltage of supply.
2. Conditions for New Connections
i) Supply to new connections of more than 75 kW (88 kVA) and up to 2550 kW (3000 kVA)
shall be released at 11 kV or above, loads above 2550 kW (3000 kVA) and upto 8500 kW
(10000 kVA) shall be released at 33 kV or above and loads above 8500 kW (10000 kVA)
shall be released at 132 kV or above.
ii) All new connections shall be given with meter conforming to CEA Regulations on
Installation and Operation of Meters.
iii) All new 3 phase connections above 4 kW shall be released with Electronic Tri-vector
Meter having Maximum Demand Indicator.
iv) All new Single Point Bulk Connection shall be given only for Load of more than 75 kW.
v) Consumers having motive loads of more than 5 BHP shall install Shunt Capacitor of
appropriate rating and conforming to BIS specification.
vi) All new connections at HT/EHT should be released only with 3 phase 4 wire meters.
3. Point of Supply
Energy will be supplied to a consumer at a single point.
4. Billing in Defective Meter (ADF/IDF), Meter Not Read/Not Accessible (NA/NR)
and Defective Reading (RDF) Cases
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 271
In NA/NR cases, the energy consumption shall be assessed and billed as per average
consumption of last one year average consumption (as per Regulations 3.1.2 (3) of the Electricity
Supply Code) which shall be subject to adjustment when actual reading is taken. Such provisional
billing shall not continue for more than two billing cycles at a stretch. Thereafter, the licensee shall
not be entitled to raise any bill on provisional basis. In case of defective meter (ADF/IDF) and
defective reading (RDF) cases, the consumers shall be billed on the basis of the average
consumption of the past three billing cycles immediately preceding the date of the meter being
found or being reported defective (as per Regulations 3.2(1) of the Electricity Supply Code). These
charges shall be leviable for a maximum period of three months or two billing cycle in case of bi-
monthly billing only during which time the licensee is required to replace the defective meter.
Thereafter, the licensee shall not be entitled to raise any bill without correct meters.
The checking and replacement of defective meter cases namely IDF and ADF and defective
reading cases namely RDF shall be done by the licensee in accordance with Regulation 3.1.4 of the
Electricity Supply Code.
5. Billing in case of domestic metered consumers in rural/hilly areas whose meters
are not being read
For cases relating to domestic metered consumers in rural/hilly areas, where meter reading
is either not being taken regularly or taken randomly over delayed interval of time, the provisional
billing under these circumstances for such consumers shall be done at the normative levels of
consumption as given below, which shall be subject to annual adjustment based on actual meter
reading.
Category Normative Consumption Domestic (Rural-Hilly Areas) 30 kWh/kW/month Domestic (Rural-Other Areas) 50 kWh/kW/month
For this purpose, the contracted load shall be rounded off to next whole number. Billing on
this basis is subject to annual adjustment and the licensee is to ensure meter reading of such
consumers at least once a year.
6. Billing in New Connection or conversion from unmetered to metered Cases
For cases such as new connections or conversion of unmetered to metered connection, where
past reading is not available, the provisional billing shall be done at the normative levels of
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
272 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
consumption as given below, which shall be subject to adjustment when actual reading is taken.
Category Normative Consumption Domestic (Urban) 100 kWh/kW/month Domestic (Rural-Hilly Areas) 30 kWh/kW/month Domestic (Rural-Other Areas) 50 kWh/kW/month Non-domestic (Urban) 150 kWh/kW/month Non-domestic (Rural) 100 kWh/kW/month Private Tube Wells 60 kWh/BHP/month Industry LT Industry 150 kWh/kW/month HT Industry 150 kVAh /kVA /month
For this purpose, the contracted load shall be rounded off to next whole number. Billing on
this basis shall continue only for a maximum period of 2 billing cycles, during which the licensee
should ensure actual reading. Thereafter, the licensee shall not be entitled to raise any bill without
correct meter reading. In all other categories 1st bill shall be raised only on actual reading.
7. Delayed Payment Surcharge (DPS) (for all categories except PTW)
In the event of electricity bill rendered by licensee, not being paid in full within 15 days’
grace period after due date, a surcharge of 1.25% on the principal amount of bill which has not been
paid shall be levied from the original due date for each successive month or part thereof until the
payment is made in full without prejudice to the right of the licensee to disconnect the supply in
accordance with Section 56 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The licensee shall clearly indicate in the bill
itself the total amount, including DPS, payable for different dates after the due date, after allowing
for the grace period of 15 days, taking month as the unit as shown exemplified below:
EXAMPLE:
Amount payable by Due date Due Date
Rs. 100/-
1st May 2015
AAmmoouunntt PPaayyaabbllee
On or Before 16th May 2015
Rs. 100/-
After 16th May 2015
Rs. 101.25
After 1st June 2015
Rs. 102.50
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 273
8. Solar Water Heater rebate
If consumer installs and uses solar water heating system, rebate of Rs. 100/- p.m. for each
100 litre capacity of the system or actual bill for that month whichever is lower shall be given
subject to the condition that consumer gives an affidavit to the licensee to the effect that he has
installed such system, which the licensee shall be free to verify from time to time. If any such claim
is found to be false, in addition to punitive legal action that may be taken against such consumer,
the licensee will recover the total rebate allowed to the consumer with 100% penalty and debar him
from availing such rebate for the next 12 months.
9. Rebate for Prepaid Metering
Prepaid metering scheme approved by the Commission in the Tariff Order dated 11.04.2012
for FY 2012-13 shall continue to be in force. A rebate of 4% of energy charges for Domestic category
(RTS-1 and RTS-1A) and 3% of energy charges for Other LT consumers shall be allowed to the
consumers under the Prepaid Metering Scheme from the date of installation and operationalisation
of Prepaid Meters. However, no rebate shall be applicable on Part (A) of RTS-10, i.e. Temporary
Supply for Illumination & Public Address Needs.
10. Rebate/surcharge for availing supply at voltage higher/lower than base voltage
(i) For consumers having contracted load upto 75 kW/88 kVA - If the supply is given at
voltage above 400 Volts and upto 11 kV, a rebate of 5% would be admissible on the
Energy Charge.
(ii) For consumers having contracted load above 75 kW/88 kVA – In case the supply is
given at 400 Volts, the consumer shall be required to pay an extra charge of 10% on the
bill amount calculated at the Energy Charge.
(iii) For consumers having contracted load above 75kW/88 kVA – In case of supply at 33
kV the consumer shall receive a rebate of 2.5% on the Energy Charge.
(iv) For consumers having contracted load above 75 kW/88 kVA and receiving supply at
132 kV and above, the consumer shall receive a rebate of 7.5% on the Energy Charge.
(v) All voltages mentioned above are nominal rated voltages.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
274 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
11. Low Power Factor Surcharge (not applicable to Domestic, PTW categories and
also to other categories having kVAh based Tariff)
(i) On the consumers without Electronic Tri Vector Meters who have not installed shunt
capacitors of appropriate ratings and specifications, a surcharge of 5% on the current
energy charges shall be levied.
(ii) On consumers with Electronic Tri Vector Meters, a surcharge of 5% on current energy
charges will be levied for having power factor below 0.85 and upto 0.80 & a surcharge
of 10% of current energy charges will be levied for having power factor below 0.80.
12. Excess Load/Demand Penalty (Not applicable to Domestic, Snow bound and PTW
categories)
In case of consumers where electronic meters with MDI have been installed, if the maximum
demand recorded in any month exceeds the contracted load/demand, charges for such excess
load/demand shall be levied equal to twice the normal rate of fixed/demand charge as applicable.
Such excess load penalty shall be levied only for the month in which maximum demands exceeds
contracted load.
Example:
(i) For consumers where fixed charges on the basis of contracted load/demand have been
specified:
Contracted load 30 kW, Maximum Demand 43 kW,
Excess Demand 43-30=13 kW, Rate of Fixed Charges= Rs. 40/kW
Fixed Charges for contracted load = 30 x 40=Rs. 1200
Fixed Charges for excess load = 13x (2 x40) =Rs. 1040
Total Fixed Charges = 1200+1040= Rs. 2240
(ii) For industrial consumers billed on billable demand:
Contracted demand 2500 kVA, Maximum Demand 2800 kVA, Billable Demand =2800
kVA
Excess Demand =2800-2500=300 kVA, Rate of Demand Charges= Rs. 290/kVA
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 275
Demand Charges for contracted demand =2500 x 290=Rs. 725000
Demand Charges for excess demand = 300x (2 x 290) =Rs. 174000
Total Demand Charges = 725000+174000= Rs. 899000
13. Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG)
The minimum consumption guarantee (MCG) charges shall be applicable to all non-
domestic consumers having load above 25 kW, metered PTW consumers and all industrial
consumers for their consumption in kWh (where kWh tariff is applicable) and kVAh (where kVAh
tariff is applicable). The Commission has specified the minimum consumption guarantee on
monthly basis as well as on annual basis. The minimum consumption guarantee charges will be
levied on monthly basis when monthly consumption is less than the units specified for monthly
minimum consumption guarantee (MCG). In case Cumulative actual consumption from the
beginning of financial year exceeds the units specified for annual minimum consumption guarantee
(MCG) no further billing of monthly MCG shall be done. In such cases differential paid in excess of
actual billing shall be adjusted in the bill for month of March 2016.
Example:
Illustrative case for LT Industry-Connected load of 10 kW
Month Actual
consumption (kWh)
Cumulative Actual
Consumption (kWh)
Billed Consumption
(kWh)
Cumulative Billed
Consumption (kWh)
Apr 450 450 500 500 May 550 1000 550 1050 Jun 540 1540 540 1590 Jul 600 2140 600 2190 Aug 350 2490 500 2690 Sep 300 2790 500 3190 Oct 400 3190 500 3690 Nov 700 3890 700 4390 Dec 800 4690 800 5190 Jan 550 5240 550 5740 Feb 650 5890 650 6390 Mar 550 6440 50 6440
Further in accordance with the Tariff Orders the bills for PTW consumers will be raised
twice in a financial year, i.e. June and December of each year. For the uniform basis of billing, the
following procedure shall be adopted for billing the PTW consumers:
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
276 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
1) For bills to be issued in June 2015:
The MCG per BHP for bills to be issued in June 2015 would be as under:
a) December 2014 to March 2015 – 70 X 4= 280 units
b) April 2015 and May 2015 – 60 X 2= 120 units
c) Total – 400 units (280+120)
2) For bills to be issued in December 2015 the MCG shall be reckoned as 360 units/ BHP (60
units per BHP/ month X 6)
The MCG will be attracted only if the actual recorded consumption is lower than MCG
indicated above.
14. Single Point Bulk Supply for Domestic, Non Domestic and Mixed Load
Categories
(i) Single Point Bulk Supply connection shall only be allowed for Sanctioned/Contracted
Load above 75 kW with single point metering for further distribution to the end users.
However, this shall not restrict the individual owner/occupier from applying for
individual connection.
(ii) The person who has taken the single point supply shall be responsible for all payments
of electricity charges to the Licensee and collection from the end consumer as per tariff
prescribed for such consumer. The Licensee shall ensure that tariff being charged from
end consumer does not exceed the prescribed tariff for the concerned category of the
consumer.
(iii) The person who has taken the single point supply shall also be deemed to be an agent
of Licensee to undertake distribution of electricity for the premises for which single
point supply is given under seventh proviso to section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003
and distribution licensee shall be responsible for compliance of all provisions of the
Act and Rules & Regulations thereunder within such area.
(iv) Single Point Bulk Supply under “Domestic” shall only be applicable for Residential
Colonies/Residential Multistoreyed Buildings including common facilities (such as
Lifts, Common Lighting and Water Pumping system) of such Residential
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 277
Colonies/Residential Multistoreyed Buildings. In case these Residential
Colonies/Residential Multistoreyed Buildings also have some shops or other
commercial establishments, the tariff of Mixed Load shall be applicable for such
premises.
(v) Single Point Bulk Supply Under “Non-Domestic” shall only be applicable for Shopping
Complexes/Multiplex/Malls.
15. Rounding off
(i) The contracted load/demand shall be expressed in whole number only and fractional
load/demand shall be rounded up to next whole number.
Example:
Contracted/Sanctioned Load of 0.15 kW shall be reckoned as 1 kW for tariff purposes.
Similarly, contracted/sanctioned load of 15.25 kW/kVA shall be taken as 16 kW/kVA.
(ii) All bills will be rounded off to the nearest rupee.
16. Other Charges
Apart from the charges provided in the Rate of Charge and those included in the Schedule of
Miscellaneous Charges, no other charge shall be recovered from the consumer unless approved by
the Commission.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
278 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
B. Tariffs RTS-1: Domestic
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power to:
(i) Residential premises for light, fan, power and other domestic purposes including common facilities (such as Lifts, Common Lighting and Water Pumping system)
(ii) Single Point Bulk Supply above 75 kW for Residential Colonies, Residential Multi-storeyed buildings where energy is exclusively used for domestic purpose including common facilities (such as Lifts, Common Lighting and Water Pumping system) of such Residential Colonies/Residential Multistoreyed Buildings
(iii) Places of worship, i.e. Mandir, Masjid, Gurudwara, Church, etc. (only for standalone places of worship and not for the places of worship which have other facilities such as Dharamshala, Community Hall, Dormatories, etc. attached with it)
(This rate schedule shall also be applicable to consumers having contracted load upto 2 kW
as also consumption upto 200 kWh/month and who are using some portion of the premises
mentioned above for non-domestic purposes. However, if either contracted load for such premises
is above 2 kW or consumption is more than 200 kWh/month, then the entire energy consumed shall
be charged under the appropriate Rate Schedule unless such load is segregated and separately
metered.)
2. Rate of Charge
Description Fixed Charges Energy Charges
1) Domestic
1.1) Life line consumers
Below Poverty Line and Kutir Jyoti having load upto 1 kW and consumption upto 30 units per month
Rs. 11/connection/month Rs. 1.50/kWh
1.2) Other Domestic Consumers
Upto 100 units per month Rs. 35 /month Rs. 2.40/kWh
101-200 units per month Rs. 50 /month Rs. 2.90/kWh
201-300 units per month Rs. 70 /month Rs. 3.80/kWh
301-400 units per month Rs. 95 /month Rs. 3.80/kWh
401-500 units per month Rs. 120 /month Rs. 4.00/kWh
Above 500 units per month Rs. 145 /month Rs. 4.00/kWh
2) Single Point Bulk Supply Rs. 40/kW/month Rs. 3.40/kWh
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 279
RTS-1A: Snowbound
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power to:
(i) Domestic and non-domestic consumers in snowbound areas.
(ii) This Schedule applies to areas notified as snowbound/snowline areas by the
concerned District Magistrate.
2. Rate of Charge
Description Fixed Charges Energy charges 1) Domestic
Rs.11/connection/month Rs. 1.50/kWh
2) Non-domestic upto 1 kW Rs. 1.50/kWh 3) Non-domestic more than 1kW & upto 4 kW Rs. 2.25/kWh 4) Non-Domestic more than 4 kW Rs. 20/connection/month Rs. 3.40/kWh
3. All other conditions of this Schedule shall be same as those in RTS-1.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
280 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
RTS-2: Non-Domestic 1. Applicability
This schedule should apply to supply of power to:
1.1 (i) Government/Municipal Hospitals (ii) Government/Government Aided Educational Institutions
(iii) Charitable Institutions registered under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and whose income is exempted from tax under this Act 1.2 Small Non Domestic Consumers with connected load upto 4 kW and consumption upto 50
units per month
1.3 Other Non-Domestic Users including single point bulk supply above 75 kW for shopping
complexes/multiplex/malls including common facilities (such as lifts, common lighting and
water pumping system).
1.4 Independent Advertisement Boards/Hoardings - All commercial (road side / roof top or on
the side of the buildings etc.) standalone independent advertisement hoardings such as
private advertising sign posts/ sign boards/ sign glows/flex that are independently
metered through a separate meter.
2. Rate of Charge S.
No. Description Fixed Charges
Energy charges
MCG (kVAh/kW of contracted load)*
1.1
(i) Government/Municipal Hospitals (ii) Government/Government Aided Educational
Institutions (iii) Charitable Institutions registered under the Income
Tax Act, 1961 and whose income is exempted from tax under this Act
(a) Upto 25 kW Rs. 40/ kW Rs. 4.05/ kWh
(b) Above 25 kW Rs. 45/ kVA
Rs. 3.65/ kVAh
50 kVAh /kVA /month & 600 kVAh/
kVA/annum
1.2.
Other Non Domestic Users (a) Small Non Domestic Consumers with connected load
upto 4 kW and consumption upto 50 units per month Rs. 45 /
kW Rs. 4.20/
kWh
(b) Others upto 25 kW not covered in 1.2(a) above Rs. 45 / kW
Rs. 4.85/ kWh
(c) Above 25 kW Rs. 45 / kVA
Rs. 4.75/ kVAh
50 kVAh /kVA /month & 600 kVAh/
kVA/ annum
1.3 Single Point Bulk Supply** Rs. 45 / kVA
Rs. 4.65/ kVAh
50 kVAh /kVA /month & 600 kVAh/
kVA/ annum 1.4 Independent Advertisement Hoardings Rs. 60/kW Rs. 4.90/kWh
* For consumers having contracted load in kW, the contracted load for MCG purposes shall be calculated by considering a power factor of 0.85.
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 281
The Minimum Consumption Guarantee Charge shall be in addition to fixed/demand charge and shall be levied if Consumption during a month
is less than MCG and will be subject to adjustment
** For loads above 75 kW for shopping complexes/multiplex/malls
(i) ToD Meters shall be read by Meter Reading Instrument (MRI) only with complete
dump with phasor diagram, Tamper Reports, full load survey reports etc. shall be
downloaded for the purpose of complete analysis.
(ii) All consumers above 25 kW shall necessarily have ToD Meters.
(iii) No meter shall be read at zero load or very low load. Licensee shall carry appropriate
external load and shall apply the same, wherever, necessary to take MRI at load.
(iv) Copy of MRI Summary Report shall be provided alongwith the Bill. Full MRI Report
including load survey report shall be provided on demand and on payment of Rs. 15/
Bill.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
282 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
RTS-3: Public Lamps
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power to public lamps including street lighting
system, traffic control signals, lighting of public parks, etc. The street lighting of Harijan Bastis and
villages are also covered by this Rate Schedule.
2. Rate of Charge
Category Fixed Charges Energy Charge
Urban (Metered) Rs. 40/kW Rs. 4.35/ kWh
Rural (Metered) Rs. 35/kW Rs. 4.35/ kWh
3. Maintenance Charge
In addition to the “Rate of Charge” mentioned above, a sum of Rs. 10/- per light point per
month shall be charged for operation and maintenance of street lights covering only labour charges
where all material required will be supplied by the local bodies. However, the local bodies will have
the option to operate and maintain the public lamps themselves and in such case no maintenance
charge will be charged.
4. Provisions of Street Light Systems
In case, the maintenance charge, as mentioned above, is being charged then the labour
involved in the subsequent replacement or renewals of lamps shall be provided by the licensee but
all the material shall be provided by the local bodies. If licensee provides material at the request of
local body, cost of the same shall be chargeable from the local body.
The cost involved in extension of street light mains (including cost of sub-stations if any) in
areas where distribution mains of the licensee have not been laid, will be paid for by the local
bodies.
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 283
RTS-4: Private Tube Wells/ Pumping Sets
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power to private tube-wells / pumping sets for
irrigation purposes and for incidental agricultural processes confined to chaff cutter, thrasher, cane
crusher and rice huller only. However, the tariff applicable for RTS-4 shall only be applicable if such
incidental agricultural processes are being carried out for agricultural produce of the connection
sanctioned for irrigation purposes.
2. Rate of charge
Category Fixed Charges Rs./BHP/Month
Energy Charges Rs./kWh
Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG)
RTS 4: PTW (Metered) Nil 1.40 60 units /BHP/Month & 720 units /BHP/Annum
3. Payments of bills and Surcharge for Late Payment
The bill shall be raised for this category twice a year only, i.e. by end of December (for
period June to November) and end of June (for period December to May). The bill raised in
December may be paid by the consumer either in lump-sum or in parts (not more than four times)
till 30th April next year for which no DPS shall be levied. Similarly, bill raised in June may be paid
by 31st October without any DPS. In case consumer fails to make payment within the specified
dates, a surcharge @ 1.25% per month for the period (months or part thereof) shall be payable on the
outstanding amount.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
284 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
RTS-4A: Agriculture Allied Activities
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power for use in nurseries growing plants/saplings,
polyhouses growing flowers/vegetables and fruits which doesn’t involve any kind of processing of
product except for storing and preservation.
2. Rate of charge
Category Fixed Charges Rs./BHP/Month
Energy Charges Rs./kWh
Minimum Consumption Guarantee (MCG)
RTS 4(A): Agricultural Allied Services Nil 2.25
60 units/ BHP/ month & 720 units /BHP/ annum
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 285
RTS-5: Government Irrigation System
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power to:
(i) State Tubewells, World Bank Tubewells, Pumped Canals and Lift irrigation schemes,
Laghu Dal Nahar etc.,
(ii) Irrigation system owned and operated by any Government department.
2. Rate of charge
Description Fixed Charges Energy Charges 1. Upto 75 kW Rs. 40/kW/month Rs. 4.35/kWh
2. More than 75 kW Rs. 40/kVA/month Rs. 4.20/kVAh
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
286 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
RTS-6: Public Water Works
1. Applicability
This Schedule shall apply to supply of power to Public Water Works, Sewage Treatment
Plants and Sewage Pumping Stations functioning under Jal Sansthan, Jal Nigam or other local
bodies and Plastic Recycling Plants.
2. Rate of charge
Particulars Fixed Charges Energy Charges
Urban Rs. 40/kVA/month Rs. 4.25/kVAh Rural Rs. 35/kVA/month Rs. 4.25/kVAh
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 287
RTS-7: LT and HT Industry
1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to supply of power to:
(i) Industries and /or processing or agro- industrial purposes, power loom as well as to
Arc/Induction Furnaces, Rolling/Re-rolling Mills, Mini Steel Plants and to other
power consumers not covered under any other Rate Schedule
(ii) The vegetable, fruits, floriculture & Mushroom integrated units engaged in processing,
storing and packaging in addition to farming and those not covered under RTS-4A
shall also be covered under this Rate Schedule.
2. Specific Conditions of Supply
(i) All connections shall be connected with MCB (Miniature Circuit Breaker) or Circuit
Breaker / Switch Gear of appropriate rating and BIS Specification.
(ii) The supply to Induction and Arc Furnaces shall be made available only after ensuring
that the loads sanctioned are corresponding to the load requirements of tonnage of
furnaces. The minimum load of 1 Tonne furnace shall in no case be less than 400 kVA
and all loads will be determined on this basis. No supply will be given for loads below
this norm.
(iii) Supply to Steel Units shall be made available at a voltage of 33 kV or above through a
dedicated individual feeder only with check meter at sub-station end. Difference of
more than 3%, between readings of check meter and consumer meter(s), shall be
immediately investigated by the licensee and corrective action shall be taken.
(iv) Supply to all new connections with load above 1000 kVA should be released on
independent feeders only with provisions as at (iii) above.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
288 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Description Energy Charge Fixed /Demand
Charge per month
Minimum Consumption
Guarantee (MCG) ** 1. LT Industry having contracted load upto 75kW (100 BHP)
1.1 Contracted load up to 25 kW Rs. 3.95/kWh Rs. 105/ kW of contracted load
$50 kWh/kW of contracted load /
month &
600 kWh/kW of contracted load /
annum
1.2 Contracted load more than 25 kW Rs. 3.60/kVAh Rs. 105/ kVA of contracted load
50 kVAh/kVA *** of contracted load /
month &
600 kVAh/kVA of contracted load /
annum 2. HT Industry having contracted load above 88kVA/75 kW (100 BHP) Load Factor# Rs./ kVAh
2.1 Contracted Load up to 1000 kVA upto 40% 3.40 Rs. 230/kVA of the
billable demand* 100 kVAh/kVA of contracted load /
month &
1200 kVAh/kVA of contracted load /
annum
Above 40% 3.75
2.2 Contracted Load More than 1000 kVA
Upto 40% 3.40 Rs. 290/kVA of the billable demand* Above 40% 3.75
$ 30 kWh/kW/month and 360 kWh/kW/annum for Atta Chakkis. * Billable demand shall be the actual maximum demand or 80 % of the contracted load whichever is higher.
** The Minimum Consumption Guarantee Charge shall be in addition to fixed/demand charge and shall be levied if Consumption during a month is less than MCG and will be subject to adjustment on annual basis. The energy charges for units billed to cover MCG during any month shall be charged at the rates specified for load factor upto 40% during normal hours and the annual adjustment (refund) of such excess energy charges, if any, shall also be given at the rates
specified for load factor upto 40% during normal hours. *** For consumers having contracted load in kW, the contracted load for MCG purposes shall be calculated by
considering a power factor of 0.85.
#For tariff purposes Load Factor (%) would be deemed to be =
100period billing in the hours of No. x less is whicheverDemand Contractedor Demand Maximum
period billing theduring access)open through receivedenergy the(excludingn Consumptio×
Provided that in cases where maximum demand during the month occurs in a period when open access is being availed by the consumer, then maximum demand for the purpose of computation of load factor shall be that occurring during the period when no open access is being availed.
3. Time of Day Tariff
(i) The rates of energy charge given above for LT industry with load more than 25 kW
and HT industry shall be subject to ToD rebate/surcharge.
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 289
(ii) ToD Meters shall be read by Meter Reading Instrument (MRI) only with complete
dump with phasor diagram, Tamper Reports, full load survey reports etc. shall be
downloaded for the purpose of complete analysis and bills shall be raised as per ToD
rate of charge.
(iii) No meter shall be read at zero load or very low load. Licensee shall carry appropriate
external load and shall apply the same wherever necessary to take MRI at load
(iv) Copy of MRI Summary Report shall be provided along with the Bill. Full MRI Report
including load survey report shall be provided on demand and on payment of Rs. 15/
Bill
(v) ToD Load shall be as under:
Season/Time of day
Morning Peak hours
Normal hours
Evening Peak Hours
Off-peak Hours
Winters 01.10 to 31.03 0600-0930 hrs 0930-1730 hrs 1730-2200 hrs 2200-0600 hrs
Summers 01.04 to 30.09 -- 0700-1800 hrs 1800-2300 hrs 2300-0700 hrs
The, ToD Rate of Energy Charges shall be as under:
For LT Industry Energy Charge during
Normal Hours Peak Hours Off-peak Hours Rs. 3.60/kVAh Rs. 5.40/kVAh Rs. 3.24/kVAh
For HT Industry
Load Factor* Energy Charge during Normal Hours Peak Hours Off-peak Hours
Upto 40% Rs. 3.40/kVAh Rs. 5.63/kVAh Rs. 3.06/kVAh Above 40% Rs. 3.75/kVAh Rs. 5.63/kVAh Rs. 3.38/kVAh
* Load Factor shall be as defined in Clause 2 above
4. Seasonal Industries
Where a consumer having load in excess of 18 kW (25 BHP) and ToD meter and avails
supply of energy for declared Seasonal industries during certain seasons or limited period in the
year, and his plant is regularly closed down during certain months of the financial year, he may be
levied for the months during which the plant is shut down (which period shall be referred to as off-
season period) as follows.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
290 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
(i) The tariff for ‘Season’ period shall be same as “Rate of Charge” as given in this
schedule.
(ii) Where actual demand in ‘Off Season’ Period is not more than 30% of contracted load,
the energy charges for “Off-Season” period shall be same as energy charges for
“Season” period given in Rate of Schedule above. However, the contracted demand in
the “Off Season” period shall be reduced to 30%.
(iii) During ‘Off-season’ period, the maximum allowable demand will be 30% of the
contracted demand and the consumers whose actual demand exceeds 30% of the
contracted demand in any month of the ‘Off Season’ will be denied the above benefit of
reduced contracted demand during that season. In addition, a surcharge at the rate of
10% of the demand charge shall be payable for the entire ‘Off Season’ period.
Terms and Conditions for Seasonal Industries
(i) The period of operation should not be more than 9 months in a financial year.
(ii) Where period of operation is more than 4 months in a financial year, such industry
should operate for at least consecutive 4 months.
(iii) The seasonal period once notified cannot be reduced during the year. The off-season
tariff is not applicable to composite units having seasonal and other categories of
loads.
(iv) Industries in addition to sugar, ice, rice mill, frozen foods and tea shall be notified by
Licensee only after prior approval of the Commission.
5. Factory Lighting
The electrical energy supplied under this schedule shall also be utilised in the factory
premises for lights, fans, coolers, etc. which shall mean and include all energy consumed for factory
lighting in the offices, the main factory building, stores, time keeper’s office, canteen, staff club,
library, creche, dispensary, staff welfare centres, compound lighting, etc.
6. Continuous and Non-continuous supply
(i) Continuous Process Industry as well as non continuous process industrial consumers
connected on either independent feeders or industrial feeder can opt for continuous
supply. For industrial feeder, all connected industries will have to opt for continuous
supply and in case any one consumer on industrial feeder does not wish to opt for
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 291
continuous supply, all the consumers on such feeder will not be able to avail
continuous supply. Such Industrial consumers who opt for continuous supply shall be
exempted from load shedding during scheduled/unscheduled power cuts and during
restricted hours of the period of restriction in usage approved by the Commission from
time to time, except load shedding required due to emergency breakdown/shutdown.
The existing non-continuous process industrial consumers opting for continuous
supply shall pay 15% extra energy charges, in addition to the energy charges given
above, with effect from May 01, 2015 or in case of new consumers, from the date of
connection, till 31st March 2016, irrespective of actual period of continuous supply
option. However, in case of re-arrangement of supply through independent feeder, the
Continuous Supply Surcharge shall be applicable from the date of energisation of
aforesaid independent feeder till 31st March 2016, irrespective of actual period of
continuous supply option. Demand charge and other charges remain same as per rate
of charge given above.
(ii) Consumers who are existing Continuous Supply Consumers shall continue to remain
Continuous Supply Consumers and they need not apply again for seeking continuous
supply. Such consumers shall pay 15% extra energy charges, in addition to the energy
charges given above, w.e.f. April 01, 2015 till March 31, 2016. However, in case of any
pending dispute with UPCL in the matter of continuous supply on certain feeders,
those consumers will have to apply afresh, for availing the facility of continuous
supply, by April 30, 2015;
(iii) The new applicants for continuous supply of power (including those who are applying
afresh as per above) can apply for seeking the continuous supply option at any time
during the year. However, continuous supply surcharge for such consumers shall be
applicable with effect from May 1, 2015 till March 31, 2016. UPCL shall provide the
facility of continuous supply within 7 days from the date of application, subject to
fulfilment of Conditions of Supply. However, in case of re-arrangement of supply
through independent feeder, UPCL shall provide the facility of continuous supply
from the date of completion of work of independent feeder subject to fulfilment of
Conditions of Supply.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
292 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
(iv) The existing consumers availing continuous supply option, who wish to discontinue
the continuous supply option granted to them earlier, will have to communicate, in
writing, to UPCL latest by April 30, 2015 and they shall continue to pay continuous
supply surcharge alongwith the tariff approved in this Order till April 30, 2015.
Further, in this regard, if due to withdrawal by one consumer from availing
continuous supply option on a particular feeder, supplying to other continuous supply
consumers as well, the status of other continuous supply consumers on that feeder is
affected, then UPCL shall inform all the affected consumers in writing, well in
advance.
(v) UPCL shall not change the status of a continuous supply feeder to a non-continuous
supply feeder.
(vi) UPCL/PTCUL shall take up augmentation, maintenance and overhauling works on
top priority, specially in the sub-stations where circuit breakers, other equipment, etc.
are in dilapidated condition and, thereby, shall ensure minimisation of interruptions of
the continuous supply feeders.
(vii) UPCL/PTCUL shall carry out periodical preventive maintenance of the feeders
supplying to continuous supply consumers. The licensees shall prepare preventive
maintenance schedule, in consultation with continuous supply consumers, well in
advance, so that such consumers can plan their operations accordingly.
(viii) The Licensee should show the energy charges and continuous supply surcharge
thereon separately in the bills.
7. Demand Charges for HT Industry
If the minimum average supply to any HT Industry Consumers is less than 18 hours per day
during the month, the Demand Charges applicable for such HT Industry Consumer shall be 80% of
approved Demand Charges for HT Industry.
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 293
RTS 8: Mixed Load
1. Applicability
This schedule applies to single point bulk supply connection of more than 75 kW where the
supply is used predominantly for domestic purposes (with more than 60% domestic load) and also
for other non-domestic purposes. This schedule also applies to supply to MES.
2. Rate of Charge
The following rates shall apply to consumers of this category
Fixed Charges Energy Charges Rs. 50/kW/month Rs. 4.15/kWh
3. Other conditions
Apart from the above, other conditions of tariff shall be same as those for RTS-1 consumers.
However, excess load penalty shall be applicable as per clause 12 of General Conditions of Supply.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
294 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
RTS 9: Railway Traction
1. Applicability
This schedule applies to Railways utilizing power for traction purposes.
2. Rate of Charge
The following rates of energy and demand charge shall apply to this category:
Demand Charges Energy Charges Rs./kVA/month Rs./ kVAh
200/- Rs. 3.60
3. Other conditions
Apart from the above, other conditions of tariff shall be same as those for General HT
Industries under RTS-7 consumers except applicability of ToD tariff and surcharge for continuous
supply.
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 295
RTS-10: Temporary Supply
(A) Temporary Supply for Illumination & Public Address Needs 1. Applicability
This schedule shall apply to temporary supply of light & fan up to 10 kW, public address
system and illumination loads during functions, ceremonies and festivities, temporary shops not
exceeding three months.
2. Rate of Charge
Description Fixed Charges (1) For Illumination / public address/ ceremonies for load up to 15 kW Rs. 1200 per day (2) Temporary shops set up during festivals / melas and having load upto 2 kW Rs. 80 per day
(3) Other Temporary shops/ Jhuggi /Jhopris for load upto 1 kW 3.1) Rural Rs. 110/month/connection 3.2) Urban Rs. 220/month/connection
The amount of Fixed Service Charge as specified in 2 above shall be taken in advance.
(B) Temporary Supply for Other Purposes
1. Applicability (i) This schedule shall apply to temporary supplies of light, fan and power loads for the
purposes other than mentioned at (A) including illumination/public address/ceremonies
for load above 15 kW.
(ii) This schedule shall also apply for power taken for construction purposes including civil
work by all consumers including Government Departments. Power for construction
purposes for any work / project shall be considered from the date of taking first connection
for the construction work till completion of the work / project.
However, use of electricity through a permanent connection sanctioned for premises
owned by the consumer for construction, repair or renovation of exsisting building, shall
not be considered as unauthorised use of electricity as long as the intended purpose/use of
the building/appurtenants being constructed is same/permissible in the sanctioned
category of the connection.
2. Rate of Charge The rate of charge will be corresponding rate of charge in appropriate Schedule Plus 25%.
The appropriate rate schedule for the temporary supplies for cane crusher upto 15 BHP given for
maximum period of four (4) months will be RTS-7. However, the minimum consumption guarantee
charges shall not be applicable for temporary supply.
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
296 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
8.2 Annexure 2: Schedule of Miscellaneous Charges
Sl. No
Nature of Charges Unit Approved
(Rs.)
1
Checking and Testing of Meters a. Single Phase Meters Per Meter 50.00 b. Three Phase Meters Per Meter 75.00 c. Recording Type Watt-hour Meters Per Meter 170.00 d. Maximum Demand Indicator/ LT CT operated Meters Per Meter 350.00 e. Tri-vector Meters/ HT Meters with CT/PT Per Meter 1000.00 f. Ammeters and Volt Meters Per Meter 65.00 g. Special Meters Per Meter 335.00 h. Initial Testing of Meters Per Meter NIL
2 Subsequent testing and installation other than initial testing Per Meter 80.00
3
Disconnection and Reconnection of supply on consumers request or non-payment of bill (for any disconnection or reconnection the charge will be 50%)
a. Consumer having load above 100 BHP/75 kW Per Job 600.00 b. Industrial and Non Domestic consumers upto 100 BHP/75 kW Per Job 400.00 c. All other categories of consumers Per Job 200.00
4
Replacement of Meters a. Installation of Meter and its subsequent removal in case of Temporary Connections
Per Job 75.00
b. Changing of position of Meter Board at the consumer's request
Per Job 100.00
5
Checking of Capacitors (other than initial checking) on consumer's request:
a. At 400 V/ 230 V Per Job 150.00 b. At 11 kV and above Per Job 300.00
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 297
8.3 Annexure 3: Public Notice
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
298 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 299
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
300 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
8.4
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 301
Annexure 4: List of Respondents
Sl.No. Name Designation Organization Address
1. Sh. P.K. Rajput Executive Director M/s Vista Alps Industries Ltd.
B-2, Loni Road, Industrial Area (Opp. Mohan Nagar),
Sahibabad- 201007, Ghaziabad
2. Dr. Kirit Somaiya Chairman Parliamentary
Committee on Energy 203, South Avenue, New Delhi-110001
3. Sh. G.S. Bedi General Manager M/s Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Virbhadra, Rishikesh-249202, Uttarakhand
4. Sh. Munish Talwar - M/s Asahi India Glass
Ltd.
Integrated Glass Plant, Village-Latherdeva Hoon, Manglaur-Jhabrera Road,
P.O. Jhabrera, Tehsil Roorkee, Distt. Haridwar, Uttarakhand
5. Shri S.A. Siddiqui DGM (Commercial) M/s Kashi Vishwanath
Textile Mill Ltd. 5th Km. Stone, Ramnagar Road, Kashipur-244713, Uttarakhand
6. Sh. Ram Kumar Sr. Vice President Hotels Association Mussoorie
C/o Hotel Vishnu Palace, Gandhi Chowk, Mussoorie
7. Sh. Raj Singh Chairman
Devbhoomi Dharmshala
Prabhandak Sabha (Regd.)
Narsingh Bhawan, Upper Road, Haridwar, Uttarakhand
8. Ms. Manu Kochhar Chairman M/s Confederation of
Indian Industry
Uttarakhand State Council, Northern Region, 30/1, Rajpur Road,
Dehradun-248001
9. Shri Bheem Sen Rawat Convener
Dagadia Jan Kalyan Samiti (Regd.)-Uttarakhand
Village-Chamriya, Post-Laldhang, Haridwar, Uttarakhand
10. Shri Rajeev Gupta - M/s Kashi Enterprises B-25-29, Industrial Estate, Nainital Road,
Kashipur–244713, Udham Singh Nagar
11. Sh. Jai Bhagwan Agrawal Director M/s Kashi Vishwanath
Steels Pvt. Ltd.
Narain Nagar Industrial Estate, Bazpur Road, Kashipur–244713,
Udham Singh Nagar
12. Shri Vijay Kumar Chairman Aata Chakki Union Bheemgauda, Haridwar
13. Sh. Pankaj Gupta President
M/s Industries Association of Uttarakhand
Mohabewala Industrial Area, Dehradun-248110.
14. Sh. P.S. Tomar Director M/s Galwalia Ispat Udyog Ltd.
Narain Nagar Industrial Estate, Nainital Road, Kashipur-244713,
Distt. Udham Singh Nagar
15. Sh. Mukesh Chauhan - - S/o Sh. Digambar Singh, Peliyo,
P.O.-Naya Gaon, Dehradun
16. Smt. Rashmi Agrawal - -
A-12, Prakash Residency, Stadium Road, P.O. Kashipur-244713,
Distt. Udham Singh Nagar
17. Sh. Anil Kansal President M/s Uttarakhand Steel
Manufacturers Association
C/o Shree Sidhbali Industries Ltd., Kandi Road, Kotdwar, Uttarakhand
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
302 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Sl.No. Name Designation Organization Address
18. Sh. Pramod Singh Tomar - - Prabhu Sadan, Girital Road,
Kashipur, Uttarakhand
19. Sh. Sanjay Kumar Agrawal
Director & General Secretary
Shree Karuna Jan Kalyan Samiti (Regd.)
Sanjay Bhawan, Malla Joshi Khola, Almora, Uttarakhand-263601
20. Sh. M.S. Negi - - 48, Subhash Nagar, Clement Town, Dehradun
21. Col. S.K. Bhattacharyya - - 8/8, Nashville Road, Dehradun
22. Sh. Dhirendra Maithani - - E-mail ([email protected])
23. Sh. S.S. Negi - - E-mail ([email protected])
24. Sh. K.G. Behl President All India Consumer Council-Uttarakhand 8-A Nemi Road, Dalanwala, Dehradun
25. Sh. Suresh Kumar President (Works) M/s LA OPALA RG
LTD.
B-108, Eldeco Sidcul Industrial Park, Sitargunj, Udham Singh Nagar,
Uttarakhand-262405
26. Sh. Kumar Gupta, Factory Manager, M/s Khatema Fibres
Ltd. UPSIDC Industrial Area,
Khatima-262308, Uttarakhand
27. Sh. Raj Kr. Sharma,
Manager-HR & Admn.,
M/s Packaging India Pvt. Ltd.
C-60 B, Eldeco Sidcul Industrial Park, Sitargunj, Udham Singh Nagar,
Uttarakhand-262405
28. Sh. Achal Sharma, President, M/s East West
Products Ltd., Lohia Head Road, Khatima-262308,
Udham Singh Nagar
29. Sh. Sagar Suman, - M/s BST Textile Mills
Pvt. Ltd.
Plot 9, Sector 9, IIE, SIDCUL, Pantnagar, Rudrapur-263153,
Udham Singh Nagar
30. Sh. V.K. Virdi, - - 1/13, Gita Bhawan Marg, Vikasnagar, Dehradun-248198
31. Sh. Jaan Ali - - S/o Rasid Ahmed, Village-Bahadarpur Khadar, Laksar, Haridwar
32. Sh. B.P. Khanduri - - E-mail ([email protected]).
33. Sh. Ajay Bhargava Secretary, Mussoorie Hotels
Association C/o Hotel Vishnu Palace,
Gandhi Chowk, Mussoorie
34. Sh. Ashok Bansal President
M/s Kumaon Garhwal Chamber of Commerce
& Industry Uttarakhand
Chamber House, Industrial Estate, Bazpur Road, Kashipur,
Udhamsingh Nagar
35. - - Media Prabhari Dehradun
36. Sh. Kuldeep Singh Cheema - -
Village-Dakiya Kalan, Post Off.-Dakiya No.-I,
Udhamsingh Nagar
37. - President Mohalla Swachhata Samiti
Doctors Colony, Civil Lines, Rudrapur, Udhamsingh Nagar
38. Sh. Shakeel A. Siddiqui DGM (Commercial), M/s Kashi Vishwanath
Textile Mill Ltd. Works : 5th Km. Stone, Ramnagar Road,
Kashipur-244713, Uttarakhand
39. - - Bhartiya Kisan Union Ganna Samiti, Kashipur, Udhamsingh Nagar.
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 303
Sl.No. Name Designation Organization Address
40. Sh. R.P. Joshi Secretary Retd. Central
Employees Welfare Committee
Baans Gali, Jauhar Market, Almora, Uttarakhand
41. Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Singh - M/s Perfect Dynamics
Auto Pvt. Ltd.
Near Bala Ji Dharam Kata, Village-Fulsunga, Transit Camp, Rudrapur,
Distt. Udham Singh Nagar-263153
42. Sh. Harpal Singh Sethi Land Lord Lilliput World 21, Rajpur Road, Dehradun
43. Sh. Rakesh Bhatia -
M/s Uttarakhand Industrial Welfare
Association
Off. G-31, UPSIDC, Industrial Area, Selaqui, Dehradun, Uttarakhand
44. Sh. Abhinav Singh - M/s Bhilangana Hydro
Power Ltd. B-37, Sector-1, Noida-201301,
Uttar Pradesh
45. Sh. Vijay Singh Verma Member Bhartiya Kisan Club Village-Delna, P.O.-Ghabreda,
Haridwar
46. Sh. M.S. Nayal - - Near Tarai Petrol Pump, Bazpur-Haldwani Road,
Bazpur, Udhamsingnagar
47. Sh. Rudramurthy - M/s P.E.S. Engineers
Pvt. Ltd.
Heavy Engineering Workshop, Plot No. A-10, Phase-I, Eldeco-Sidcul Industrial Park Ltd., Sitarganj-262405,
Udhamsingh Nagar
48. - - M/s Arjan Auto Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
D-81, ESIP Sitarganj-262405, Udhamsingh Nagar
49. Sh. N.D. Dobriyal General Secretary Government
Pensioners’ Association 40/3, Bhandari Bagh,
Dehradun-248001
50. Sh. S.S. Chopra Manager M/s Hindustan
National Glass & Industries Ltd.
Village & Post Veerbhadra, Rishikesh - 240922, Dehradun
51. Sh. R.K. Atoliya Chief Electrical
Distribution Engineer
Northern Railway Headquarters Office, Baroda House, New Delhi-110001
52. Sh. Rajendra Singh Negi State Secretary Communist Party of
India Lal Jhanda Office: Nai Basti, Gandhi Gram,
Kanwali Road, Dehradun-248001
List of Respondents for In-House Paper on tariff related issues Sl. Name Designation Organization Address
1. Sh. S.S. Yadav Managing Director
Uttarakhand Power Corporation Ltd.
Victoria Cross Vijeta Gabar Singh Bhawan, Kanwali Road, Dehradun.
2. Sh. Jai Bhagwan Agrawal Director M/s Kashi Vishwanath
Steels Pvt. Ltd.
Narain Nagar Industrial Estate, Bazpur Road, Kashipur–244713,
Udham Singh Nagar
3. Sh. Manoj Rawat Secretary General
State Union of Working Journalists
1, Man Singh Wala, DBS Road, Dehradun
4. - District Magistrate - Bageshwar, Uttarakhand
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
304 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
8.5 Annexure 5: Public Notice on Inhouse Paper
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 305
8.6 Annexure 6: List of Participants in Public Hearings
List of Participants in Hearing at Almora on 18.02.2015
Sl. No. Name Designation Organization Address
1. Sh. N.C. Joshi Ex. Warrant Officer -
S/o Late Sh. T.D. Joshi, Buxi Khola,
PO & Distt Almora-263601
2. Sh. Vinod Chandra Pant - - 117, Kunjpur,
Distt. Almora-263601
3. Sh. P.G. Goswami - - East Pokharkhali, Near Home Guard office, Distt. Almora-263601
4. Sh. R.P. Joshi - - Mohalla-Malla Joshi Khola, P.O. & Distt. Almora-263601
5. Sh. Shyam Lal Sah District President
Prantiya Udyog Vyapaar Pratinidhi
Mandal Kachhari Bazaar, Distt. Almora
6. Sh. N.L. Verma - - Narsingh Bari, Near Niran Kari Bhawan, Distt. Almora
7. Sh. Prakash Chandra Joshi Chairman Nagar Palika Distt. Almora
8. Sh. H.C. Joshi - - Summer House Cantt, Distt. Almora-263601
9. Sh. Y.K. Joshi - - Purnachal Niwas, Near MES, Distt. Almora
10. Sh. M.B. Sah - - Khazanchi Mohalla, Distt. Almora-263601
11. Sh. D.C. Tiwari - - Joshi Khola, Distt. Almora 12. Sh. Rinku Bisht SDM (Sadar) - Distt. Almora-263601
13. Sh. Shiv Raj Sah - - Khazanchi Mohalla, Distt. Almora-263601
14. Sh. Rajendra Singh Sati - - Chowdhury Khola,
Distt. Almora-263601
15. Sh. Puran Singh Airi - - Near Indira Colony, Khatiyadi, Distt. Almora
16. Sh. Sanjay Kumar Agrawal
Director/ General
Secretary
Shri Karuna Jan Kalyan Samiti
Sanjay Bhawan, Malla Joshi Khola, Distt. Almora
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
306 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
List of Participants in Hearing at Rudrapur on 19.02.2015 Sl. No. Name Designation Organization Address
1. Sh. S.K. Garg - M/s BST Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd.
Works : Plot No. 9, IIE, SIDCUL, Pantnagar,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
2. Sh. Suresh Kumar
President (Works) M/s La Opala RG Ltd.
B-108, Eldeco Sidcul Industrial Park, Sitarganj,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
3. Sh. A.K. Singh - M/s Perfect Dynamics Auto Pvt. Ltd.
Fulsunga, Transit Camp, Rudrapur, Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
4. Sh. A.K. Jaiswal - M/s Perfect Dynamics Auto Pvt. Ltd.
Village – Fulsunga, Post – Transit Camp, Tehsil – Kichha, Rudrapur,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
5. Sh. Manish Tanwar - M/s HCL Infosystems
Ltd.
Plot No. 1,2, 27 & 28, Sector-5, IIE, SIDCUL, Pantnagar, Distt.
Udhamsingh Nagar, Uttarakhand
6. Sh. Jai Bhagwal Agrawal Director M/s Kashi Vishwanath
Steels Ltd.
Narain Nagar Industrial Estate, Nainital Road, Kashipur-244713,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
7. Sh. Sushil Kumar Tulsyan Director M/s Umashakti Steels
Pvt. Ltd. Village-Vikrampur, PO-Bazpur,
Udhamsingh Nagar
8. Sh. Shakeel A. Siddiqui
DGM (Commercial)
M/s Kashi Vishwanath Textile Mill Ltd.
Works : 5th Km. Stone, Ramnagar Road,
Kashipur-244713, Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
9. Sh. Sanjay Kumar Adlakha
Manager (Elect.)
M/s Pioneer Polyleather Pvt. Ltd.
Plot No.-74, Sector-4, SIDCUL, Pantnagar,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
10. Sh. Rajeev Gupta - M/s Galwalia Ispat
Udyog Ltd.
Narain Nagar Industrial Estate, Nainital Road, Kashipur-244713,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
11. Mohd.
Ishteyaque Ahmed
- M/s Right Tight Fasteners Ltd.
Plot No. 70, Sector-6, IIE, Pantnagar,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
12. Sh. Darbara Sinjh -
M/s Kumaon Garhwal Chamber of Commerce &
Industry
Chamber House, Industrial Estate, Bazpur Road, Kashipur, Distt.-
Udhamsingh Nagar
13. Sh. Umesh Sharma - M/s Voltas Ltd.
Plot No. 2-5, Sector-8, IIE, SIDCUL, Pantnagar,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
14. Sh. Nitin Kaushik - AICA Laminates Sector-5, Pantnagar,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
15. Sh. Vijay Pal Yadav - M/s Yadav Food Ltd. Rudrapur Road, Kichha,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
16. Sh. Vinod Vyas - M/s Varroc Engg. Sector-9, Plot No. 20, SIDCUL, Patnagar,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
17. Sh. Hem Chandra Tiwari - M/s Videocon Industry
Ltd. 5 Km. Stone, Moradabad Road,
Kashipur,
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 307
Sl. No. Name Designation Organization Address
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
18. Sh. S.K. Mittal - M/s Shivalik Industries Malsa Road, Shimla Pistaur, Lalpur,
Rudrapur, Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
19. Sh. Ashok Bansal Director M/s. Rudrapur Solvents
Pvt. Ltd. Lalpur, Kichha, Rudrapur, Distt.- Udhamsingh Nagar
20. Sh. Balkar Singh Fozi - - Village-Raipur Khurd, Kashipur,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
21. Sh. Harlok
Singh Naamdhari
- - Village-Gadarpur, Rudrapur, Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
22. Sh. H.D. Arora - - D1, D2, 27/1, Civil Lines, Rudrapur, Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
23. Sh. Kuldeep Singh - Bhartiya Kisan Union
Village-Dhakia Kalan, PO-Dhakia No. 1, Tehsil-Kashipur,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar-244713
24. Sh. Jeet Singh - -
Village-Dhakia Kalan, PO-Dhakia No. 2, Tehsil-Kashipur,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar-244713
25. Sh. Puran Singh - -
Baanskheda Kalan, Fauzio Ka Dera, Raipur, Civil Lines, Rudrapur,
Distt. Udham Singh Nagar
26. Sh. Kulwant Singh - -
Baanskheda Kalan, Fauzio Ka Dera, Raipur, Civil Lines, Rudrapur,
Distt. Udham Singh Nagar
27. Sh. Thakur Jagjeet Singh - -
Village-Dharampur, PO-Chatarpur, Tehsil-Rudrapur,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
28. Sh. Yashwant Mishra - -
Village & PO-Pratappur, Tehsil-Rudrapur,
Distt. Udhamsingh Nagar
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
308 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
List of Participants in Hearing at Pauri on 24.02.2015 Sl. No. Name Designation Organization Address
1. Sh. Vipin Chandra Maithani Chairman Nagar Palika
Parishad Srinagar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal,
Uttarakhand
2. Sh. Devanand Nautiyal - - Dipty Dhara, Thana Mohalla, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
3. Sh. Maneesh Rawat - -
S/o Sh. Rajendra Singh, Village-Lasera, PO- Seelsu,
Patti-Banailsyun, Distt. Pauri Garhwal-249301
4. Sh. D.N. Shaha - - Village-Bhattegaon, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
5. Sh. Rambhagti Lal - - Uppar Bazaar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
6. Sh. R.P. Bhatt - M/s Himalaya Bakers
Agency Chowk, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
7. Sh. Shiv Prasad Raturi - - Near Krishi Bhawan, Srinagar Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
8. Sh. Padvendra Bisht - - Bisht Niwas, 16-Vikas Marg, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
9. Sh. Harish Chandra - - Maithana Village, Post-Choura, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
10. Sh. Virendra Singh Rawat Chairman Vyapaar Sangh
Rawat Taint & Bartan Bhandar, Chowdhury Bhawan,
Uppar Bazaar, Distt. Pauri Garhwal, Uttarakhand
11. Sh. Brijendra Singh Rawat Ex. Chairman Vyapaar Sangh Brij Vastra Bhandar, Uppar Bazaar,
Distt. Pauri Garhwal 12. Sh. Anil Bahuguna - - Dobhal Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
13. Sh. Omprakash Jugran - - Uma Niwas,
Power House Mohalla, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
14. Sh. Sanjay Baluni - - Village-Kanda, PO-Buransi, Block-Kot, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
15. Sh. Rajendra Singh Rawat - - Near Prathana Bhawan,
Kotdwar Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
16. Sh. Rajendra Prasad Tamta Ex. Chairman Nagar Palika
New Vikas Colony, Srinagar Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal, Uttarakhand,
Uttarakhand
17. Sh. Khushal Singh Negi - - Near Petrol Pump, Kodtwar Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
18. Sh. Priyank Dobhal - M/s Dobhal Electricals
Uma Niwas, Near Laxmi Narayan Mandir, Kotdwar Road,
Distt. Pauri Garhwal
19. Smt. Neelam Rawat Ward
Member-5 & DPC Member
- Village-Pauri, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
20. Sh. Manoj Negi Ward Member-9 - Village-Pauri,
Distt. Pauri Garhwal
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 309
Sl. No. Name Designation Organization Address
21. Sh. Jagdesh Rawat - - Vikas Marg, Near Bus Station, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
22. Sh. Kameshwar Rana - - Rana Bhawan, Vikas Marg,
Near Bus Station, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
23. Sh. Govind Singh Rawat - - Vikas Marg, Near Bus Station, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
24. Sh. Sitab Singh Bisht - - Village-Marora, Paabau, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
25. Ms. Kamla Rawat - - Ward No. 07,
Near Power House, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
26. Ms. Sangeeta Dobhal - - Srinagar Road,
Near Krishi Vibhag, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
27. Sh. Vijendra Pokhriyal - - Buwakhal, Post Off.-Pauri,
Near Power House, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
28. Sh. Raghuveer Singh - - Thana Mohalla, Dobhal Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
29. Sh. Uma Charan - - Power House Mohalla, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
30. Sh. Jagdish Singh Bisht - - Bisht Kuteer, Uppar Chopra, Kotdwar Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
31. Sh. Jagmohan Singh Negi - -
House No. 61, Uppar Petrol Pump, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
32. Sh. Sukhdev - - Laxmi Narayan Road, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
33. Sh. Jaspal Singh Negi - - Village-Dungri,
Patti - Paidul Syun, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
34. Sh. Sunil Mamgain - - Village-Baingwari,
Post Off.-Chandola Rainn, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
35. Sh. Kesar Singh Negi - - Village-Srikot, PO-Gadwagad, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
36. Sh. Mukesh Joshi - -
Village-Joshiyana, PO-Persundakhal, Patti Paidul Syun,
Distt. Pauri Garhwal
37. Sh. Ghanshyam Singh - - Village-Thaili,
PO-Chandola Rainn, Distt. Pauri Garhwal
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
310 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
List of Participants in Hearing at Dehradun on 27.02.2015 Sl. No. Name Designation Organization Address
1 Sh. D.K. Shukla - - 29, Inder Road, Dehradun
2 Sh. Rajiv Agarwal Sr. Vice-President
M/s Industries Association of Uttarakhand
C/o Satya Industries, Mohabbewala Industrial Area,
Dehradun
3 Sh. Pankaj Gupta President M/s Industries Association of Uttarakhand
C/o Satya Industries, Mohabbewala Industrial Area,
Dehradun
4 Sh. R.N. Mathur President M/s Mussoorie Hotel Association
Price Hotel, Mussoorie, Dehradun
5 Sh. Ram Kumar - M/s Mussoorie Hotel Association
Price Hotel, Mussoorie, Dehradun
6 Sh. G.S. Manchanda Proprietor M/s Hotel India Gandhi Chowk, Mussoorie, Dehradun
7 Sh. Dalip Dua Vice
President (Publications)
M/s Himalaya Power Producers
Association
Dehradun Chapter, 12-D, Race Course, Dehradun.
8 Sh. Dinesh Mugdal - M/s Industries Association of Uttarakhand
C/o Satya Industries, Mohabbewala Industrial Area,
Dehradun
9 Sh. Shivam Rohila - M/s Bhilangana
Hydro Power Ltd.
B-37, Sector-1, Noida-201301, Uttar Pradesh.
10 Sh. Harpal Singh Sethi - - 21, Rajpur Road, Dehradun
11 Sh. Rakesh Bhatia President
M/s Uttarakhand Industrial Welfare
Association
Off. G-31, UPSIDC, Industrial Area, Selaqui, Dehradun,
Uttarakhand
12 Sh. P.K. Rajput Executive Director
M/s Alps Industries Ltd.
1-A, Sector-10, SIDCUL, Haridwar
13 Sh. Man Singh General Manager (Engg.)
M/s Alps Industries Ltd.
1-A, Sector-10, SIDCUL, Haridwar
14 Sh. Vijay Singh Verma - - Village-Delna, Post-Jhabreda, Roorkee, Haridwar-247665
15 Sh. K.L. Sundriyal - - 4(4/3), New Road (Amrit Kauri
Road), Near Hotel Relax, Dehradun
16 Sh. Vishwamitra - - 36-Panchsheel Park, Chakrata Road, P.O.-New Forest, Dehradun
17 Sh. Biru Bisht - Mohanpur, Post Off.-Premnagar, Dehradun
18 Sh. Deepak Thapliyal - - Pattiyon wala, PO-Mohabbewala, Chanderbani, Dehradun-248110
19 Sh. V.S. Bhatnagar - - 98/3, Bell Road, Clementown, Dehradun
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 311
8.7 layXud ¼nj vuqlwph dk fgUnh :ikUrj.k½
layXud 1% 01-04-2015 ls izHkkoh nj vuqlwph &
,- vkiwfrZ gsrq lkekU; “krsZ&
1- lsok dh izd`fr i) 4 kW ds Hkkj rd vkWYVjusfVax djsaV 50 Hz flaxy Qst 230 oksYV ¼vuqeU; ifjorZuksa ds lkFk½A ii) oksYVst vkiwfrZ dh miyC/krk ij fuHkZj djrs gq, 4 kW ls Åij Hkkjksa ds fy, vYVjusfVax djsaV 50 Hz. 3 Qst] 4 ok;j] 400 oksYV~l ;k blls Åij ¼vuqeU; ifjorZuksa ds lkFk½A
2- u;s la;kstuksa ds fy, “krsZa& i) 75 kW (88 kVA) ls vf/kd rFkk 2550 kW (3000 kVA) rd ds u;s la;kstuksa dks vkiwfrZ 11 dsoh
;k blls Åij ij fuxZr dh tk;sxh] 2550 kW (3000 kVA) ls Åij 8500 KW (10000 kVA) rd
Hkkj 33 kV ;k blls Åij ij fuxZr fd;s tk;saxs rFkk 8500 kW (10000 kVA) ls Åij 132 kV Hkkj ij fuxZr fd;s tk;saxsA ii) lHkh u;s la;kstu] laLFkkiu rFkk ehVjksa ds ifjpkyu ij lh-bZ-,- ds fofu;eksa dh iqf’V djus okys
ehVj ds lkFk fn;s tk;saxsA iii) 4 kW ls Åij ds lHkh u;s 3 Qst la;kstu] vf/kdre ekax ladsrd okys bySDVªkWfud VªkbZ&osDVj
ehVj ds lkFk tkjh fd;s tk;ssaxsA iv) LkHkh u;s flaxy IokbaV cYd la;kstu] 75 kW ls vf/kd Hkkj ij tkjh fd;s tk;saxsA v) 5 BHP ls vf/kd ds eksfVo Hkkj j[kus okys miHkksDrk mi;qDr jsfVax ds rFkk BIS fof”kf’V dh iqf’V
djus okys “kaV dSisflVj laLFkkfir djsaxsA vi) HT/EHT ij lHkh u;s la;kstu dsoy 3 Qst 4 ok;j ehVlZ ds lkFk tkjh fd;s tk;saxsA
3- vkiwfrZ dk fcUnq&
miHkksDrk dks ÅtkZ dh vkiwfrZ ,d ,dy fcUnq ij dh tk;sxhA
4- =qfViw.kZ ehVj ¼ADF/IDF½] ehVj ugha i<+k@igWqp ugha ¼NA/NR½ rFkk =qfViw.kZ jhfMax ¼RDF½ ds ekeys
esa fcfyax%& NA/NR ekeyksa esa ÅtkZ miHkksx dk fu/kkZj.k rFkk fcfyax fiNys ,d o’kZ ds vkSlr miHkksx ds
vuqlkj fd;k tk;sxk ¼fo|+qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk ds fofu;e 3-1-2 ¼3½ ds vuqlkj½ tks fd okLrfod jhfMax fy;s
tkus ij lek;kstu ds v/khu gksxkA ,slh vaufre jhfMax ,d ckj esa nks fcfyax pdzksa ls vf/kd ds fy, tkjh
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
312 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
ugha jgsxhA blds i”pkr~ vuqKkih dks vuafre vk/kkj ij dksbZ fcy tkjh djus dk vf/kdkj ugha gksxkA
=qfViw.kZ ehVj ¼IDF/RDF½ rFkk =qfViw.kZ jhfMax ¼RDF½ ds ekeys esa miHkksDrkvksa dh fcfyax] ehVj ds =qfViw.kZZ
ik;s tkus ;k =qfViw.kZ fjiksVZ fd;s tkus dh frfFk ls Bhd igys ds rhu fcfYkax pdzksa ds vkSlr miHkksx ds
vk/kkj ij dh tk;sxh ¼fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk ds fofu;e 3-2]¼1½ ds vuqlkj½A ;s izHkkj dsoy ml vf/kdre
rhu eghus dh vof/k vFkok f}ekfld fcfyax dh n'kk esa nks fcfyax lkbZfdy gsrq mn~xzg.kh; gksaxs] ftlesa
vuqKkih }kjk =qfViw.kZ ehVj cnyk tkuk vko”;d gksxkA blds i”pkr~ vuqKkih dks lgh fd;s x;s ehVj ds
fcuk fcy tkjh djus dk vf/kdkj ugha gSA
=qfViw.kZ ehVj ds ekeys] ;Fkk IDF/ADF rFkk =qfViw.kZ jhfMax ekeys ;Fkk RDF dh tkap o cnyus dk
dk;Z] fo|qr vkiwfrZ lafgrk ds fofu;e 3-1-4 ds vuqlkj vuqKkih }kjk fd;k tk;sxkA
5- Xkzkeh.k@ioZrh; {ks= ds ?kjsyw ehVMZ miHkksDrkvksa dh fcfyax] ftuds ehVj ugha i<s+ tkrs gSa&
Xkzkeh.k@ioZrh; {ks= ds ?kjsyw miHkksDrkvksa ftudh ehVj jhfMax fu;fer :i ls ugha yh tk jgh gS
vFkok le; esa nsjh vUrjky ls vfu;fer :i ls yh tk jgh gS] ,slh nksuksa fLFkfr;ksa esa miHkksDrkvksa dh
vufUre fcfyax ukWjesfVo miHkksx ds vk/kkj ij fuEuor~ dh tk;sxh] ftldk okLrfod ehVj jhfMax ds
vk/kkj ij okf’kZd lek;kstu fd;k tk;sxk%&
Js.kh ukWjesfVo miHkksx
?kjsyw ¼xzkeh.k&ioZrh; {ks=½ 30 kWh/kW/ ekg ?kjsyw ¼xzkeh.k&vU; {ks=½ 50 kWh/kW/ ekg
bl mn~ns”; gsrq lafonkd`r Hkkj vxys iw.kkZad rd iw.kkZfdar fd;k tk;sxkA vuqKkih }kjk ,sls
miHkksDrkvksa dh ehVj jhfMax o’kZ esa de ls de ,d ckj fy;k tkuk lqfuf”pr fd;k tk;sxk ,oa bl vk/kkj
ij fcfyax okf’kZd lek;kstu gsrq izkalfxd gksxhA
6- Uk;s la;kstuksa esa fcfyax ;k vuehVMZ ds ehVMZ ekeyksa esa laifjoZru
Uk;s la;kstu ;k vuehVMZ ls ehVMZ esa laifjorZu tSls ekeyksa esa tgk¡ fiNyh jhfMax miyC/k ugha gS]
ogka vuafre fcfyax] uhps fn;s vuqlkj miHkksx ds ekudh; Lrjksa ij dh tk;sxh] tks okLrfod jhfMax fy;s
tkus ij lek;kstu ds v/khu gksxhA
Js.kh Ekkudh; miHkksx
?kjsyw&¼”kgjh½ 100 kWh/kW/ ekg ?kjsyw ¼xzkeh.k&ioZrh; {ks=½ 30 kWh/kW/ ekg ?kjsyw ¼xzkeh.k&vU; {ks=½ 50 kWh/kW/ ekg v?kjsyw ¼”kgjh½ 150 kWh/kW/ ekg v?kjsyw ¼xzkeh.k½ 100 kWh/kW/ ekg futh V;wo oSYl 60 kWh/BHP/ ekg m|ksx
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 313
,y-Vh- m|ksx 150 kWh/kW/ ekg ,p-Vh- m|ksx 150 kVAh/kVA/ ekg
bl mn~ns”; ds fy,] lafonkdr Hkkj vxys iw.kkZad rd iw.kkZafdr fd;k tk;sxkA bl vk/kkj ij dh
xbZ fcfyax dsoy vf/kdre 2 fcfyax pØksa dh vof/k ds fy;s tkjh jgsxh ftl nkSjku vuqKkIkh }kjk
okLrfod jhfMax yh tk pqdh gksA mlds Ik”pkr~ fcuk lgh ehVj jhfMax fy;s vuqKkIkh dks fcy tkjh djus
dk vf/kdkj ugha gksxkA vU; lHkh oxksZa esa igyk fcy dsoy okLrfod jhfMax ij gh tkjh fd;k tk;sxkA
7- foyafcr Hkqxrku vf/kHkkj ¼DPS½ ¼PTW dks NksM+dj lHkh oxksZa ds fy;s½
;fn vuqKkih }kjk fn;s x;s fcy dk Hkqxrku fu;r frfFk ds Ik”pkr~ 15 fnu dh fj;k;r vof/k ds
Hkhrj iw.kZ :Ik ls ugha fd;k tkrk gS rks fo|qr vf/kfu;e] 2003 dh /kkjk 56 ds vuqlkj vkiwfrZ vla;ksftr
djus dk vuqKkih ds vf/kdkj ij izfrdwy izHkko Mkys fcuk iwoZ Hkqxrku fd;s tkus rd izR;sd mRrjksÙkj ekg
;k mlds Hkkx ds fy;s ewy ns; frfFk ls] Hkqxrku u fd;s x;s fcy dh ewy jkf”k ij 1-25 izfr”kr vf/kHkkj
yxk;k tk;sxkA vuqKkih] uhps n”kkZ;s vuqlkj] ekg dks ;wfuV ds :Ik esa] 15 fnu fj;k;r vof/k gsrq iznku
dj] fu;r frfFk ds Ik”pkr~ fofHkUu frfFk;ksa ds fy;s ns; Mh-ih-,l- lfgr] fcy esa gh dqy jkf”k Li’V :Ik ls
n”kkZ;sxkA
mnkgj.k
fu;r frfFk rd ns; jkf”k :0 100@&
fu;r frfFk 1 ebZ] 2015
ns; jkf”k
ij ;k iwoZ Ik”pkr~ Ik”pkr~
16 ebZ] 2015 16 ebZ] 2015 1 twu] 2015
:0 100@& :0 101-25 :0 102-50
8- lksyj okVj ghVj NwV
;fn miHkksDrk lksyj okVj ghfVax iz.kkyh laLFkkfir djrk gS rFkk mldk mi;ksx djrk gS rks iz.kkyh
dh izR;sd 100 yhVj {kerk ds fy, :0 100@& ;k ml ekg dk fcy] nksuksa esa ls tks de gks] dh NwV
bl “krZ ds v/khu nh tk;sxh fd miHkksDrk vuqKkih dks ;g “kiFki= nsxk fd mlus og iz.kkyh
laLFkkfir dh gS] ftls vuqKkih le;≤ ij lR;kfir djus ds fy;s Lora= gksxkA ;fn ,slk dksbZ
nkok >wBk ik;k tkrk gS rks ,sls miHkksDrk ds fo:} dh tk ldus okyh n.MkRed fof/kd dk;Zokgh ds
vfrfjDr vuqKkih] 100 izfr”kr tqekZus ds lkFk miHkksDrk dks vuqeU; dqy NwV dh olwyh djsxk rFkk
vxys 12 ekg rd ds fy;s ,slh NwV izkIr djus ls fooftZr djsxkA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
314 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
9- izhisM ehVfjax gsrq NwV
vk;ksx }kjk izhisM ehVfjax ;kstuk foÙkh; o’kZ 2012&13 ds VSfjQ vkns”k fnukafdr 11-04-2012 }kjk
vuqeksfnr dh x;h tksfd orZeku esa Hkh ykxw jgsxhA izhisM ehVfjax ;kstuk ds vUrxZr ?kjsyw Js.kh
¼vkjVh,l&1 ,oa vkjVh,l&1,½ gsrq fo|qr izHkkj ij 4 izfr”kr rFkk vU; ,yVh miHkksDrkvksa dks fo|qr
izHkkj ij 3 izfr”kr dh NwV] izhisM ehVj ds laLFkkiu rFkk dk;Z djus dh frfFk ls iznkfur gksxhA
fdUrq vkjVh,l&10 ds Hkkx ¼,½ esa mYysf[kr iznhiu o lkoZtfud lacks/ku vko”;drkvksa gsrq vLFkk;h
vkiwfrZ ds fy, NwV vuqeU; ugha gksxhA
10- csl oksYVst ls mPp@fuEu oksYVst ij vkiwfrZ dk mi;ksx djus ds fy;s NwV@vf/kHkkjA i) 75 kW@88 kVA rd lafonkd`r Hkkj okys miHkksDrk ;fn vkiwfrZ 400 oksYV~l ds Åij o 11 kV rd nh tkrh gS rks fctyh izHkkj dh nj ij 5% NwV Lohdk;Z gksxhA ii) 75 kW@88 kVA ls Åij lafonkd`r Hkkj okys miHkksDrkvksa ds fy;s & ;fn vkiwfrZ 400 oksYV~l ij
nh tkrh gS rks miHkksDrk dks fctyh izHkkj dh nj ij ifjdfyr fcy jkf”k ij 10% dk vfrfjDr
izHkkj nsuk gksxkA iii) 75 kW@88 kVA ls Åij lafonkd`r Hkkj okys miHkksDrk & 33 kV ij vkiwfrZ ds ekeys esa] fctyh
izHkkj dh nj ij 2-5% dh NwV izkIr djsxsaA iv) 75 kW@88 kVA ls Åij lafonkdr Hkkj okys miHkksDrk tks 132 kV ;k vf/kd ij vkiwfrZ izkIr dj
jgs gksa] fctyh izHkkj dh nj ij 7-5% dh NwV izkIr djsaxsA v) mijksDr lHkh oksYVst ukWfeuy jsVsM oksYVstst gSaA
11- fuEu ikoj QSDVj vf/kHkkj ¼?kjsyw] PTW rFkk kVAh vk/kkfjr “kqYd okys vU; Jsf.k;ksa ij ykxw ugha½A i) fcuk bySDVªkWfud VªkbZosDVj ehsVlZ okys miHkksDrkvksa] ftUgksaus mi;qDr jsfVaXl rFkk fofunsZ”ku ds “kaV
dSisflVlZ laLFkkfir ugha fd;s gSa a] muls orZeku fo|qr izHkkjksa ij 5% dk vf/kHkkj mn~xzghr fd;k
tk;sxkA ii) bySDVªkWfud VªkbosDVj ehVlZ okys miHkksDrkvksa ds fy, 0-85 ls uhps rFkk 0-80 rd ds ikoj QSDVj
gksus ij orZeku fo|qr izHkkjksa ij 5% dk vf/kHkkj rFkk 0-80 ls fuEu ikoj QSDVj gksus ij orZeku
fo|qr izHkkjksa dk 10% dk vf/kHkkj mn~xzghr gksxkA 12- vfrHkkj@ekax naM ¼?kjsyw] fgekPNkfnr o PTW Jsf.k;ksa ij ykxw ugha½
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 315
,sls miHkksDrkvksa ds ekeys esa tgakW MDI ds lkFk bySDVªkWfud ehVlZ laLFkkfir gS] ;fn fdlh ekg esa
vfHkfyf[kr vf/kdre~ ekax lafonkdr Hkkj@ekax ls vf/kd gks tkrh gS rks ,sls vfrfjDr Hkkj@ekax ij izHkkj
ykxw fLFkj@ekax izHkkj dh lkekU; nj ls nksxquk ds cjkcj &mn~xzghr fd;k tk;sxkA ,slk vf/kd Hkkj naM
dsoy ml ekg ds fy;s yxk;k tk;sxk] ftlesa vf/kdre~ ekax] lafonkd`r Hkkj ls vf/kd gksxhA
mnkgj.k %& i) mu miHkksDrkvksa ds fy;s] tgk¡ lafonkdr Hkkj@ekax ds vk/kkj ij fLFkj izHkkj fofufnZ’V fd;s x;s gSa% lafonkdr Hkkj 30 kW, vf/kdre~ ekax 43 kW vfr ekax 43&30= 13 kW, fLFkj izHkkjksa dh nj = :0 40@kW
lafonkdr Hkkj ds fy;s fLFkj izHkkj =30x40= :0 1200/- vfr Hkkj ds fy;s fLFkj izHkkj =13 (2x40) = :0 1040/- dqy fLFkj izHkkj =1200+1040= :0 2240/- ii) fcy;ksX; ekax ij fcy fy;s tkus okys vkS|kSfxd miHkksDrkvksa ds fy;sss% lafonkdr ekax 2500 kVA] vf/kdre ekax 2800 kVA] fcy ;ksX; ekax=2800 kVA vfr ekax 2800&2500=300 kVA ekax izHkkjksa dh nj =:0 290/kVA lafonkdr ekax gssrq ekax izHkkj = 2500 x 290 = :0 725000/- vfr ekax gsrq ekax izHkkj = 300 x (2x290) = :0 174000/- dqy ekax izHkkj = 725000 + 174000 = :0 899000/-
13- U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh ¼MCG½
25 kW ls Åij Hkkj okys lHkh v?kjsyw miHkksDrkvksa] ehVMZ ihVhMCY;w miHkksDrkvksa rFkk lHkh
vkS|kSfxd miHkksDrkvksa dks kWh ¼tgkaW kWh “kqYd ykxw gS½ rFkk kVAh ¼tgkaW kVAh “kqYd ykxw gSa½] esa
muds miHkksx gsrq U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh izHkkj ykxw gksaxsA vk;ksx us ekfld vk/kkj ij rFkk okf’kZd vk/kkj
ij U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh fofufnZ’V dh gSA U;wure~ miHkksx xkajVh izHkkj ekfld vk/kkj ij yxk;k tk;sxk
tc ekfld miHkksx ekfld U;wure~ miHkksx xkajVh ¼ MCG½ gsrq fofufnZ’V ;wfuVksa ls de gksxkA ;fn foRrh;
o’kZ ds izkjaHk ls lap;h okLrfod miHkksx okf’kZd U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh ¼MCG½ gsrq fofufnZ’V ;wfuVksa ls
vf/kd gksrk gS rks ekfld ,e0lh0th0 gsrq vkxs dksbZ fcfyax ugha dh tk;sxhA ,sls ekeyksa esa okLrfod
fcfyax ls vf/kd ds fy;s fd;k x;k Hkqxrku ekpZ] 2016 ds ekg gsrq fcy esa lek;ksftr fd;k tk;sxkA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
316 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
mnkgj.k %
VSfjQ vkns”k ds vuqlkj foRrh; o’kZ esas nks ckj ih0Vh0MCY;w0 miHkksDrkvksa lss fcy fy;s tk;saxs] tSls
izR;sd o’kZ twu ,oa fnlEcj ekg esaA fcfyax esa ,d:irk yk;s tkus ds mn~ns”; ls ih0Vh0MCY;w0
miHkksDrkvksa gsrq fcfyax ds fy;s fuEu izfØ;k,¡ vey esa yk;h tk;saxh%&
i) Twku] 2015 esa fcy tkjh djus ds fy;s% Twku] 2015 esa fcyksa dks tkjh djus ds fy;s ,e0lh0th0 izfr ch-,p-ih- fuEukuqlkj jgsxh%
a) fnlEcj] 2014 ls ekpZ] 2015 & 70 X 4 = 280 ;wfuV~l b) vizSy] 2015 ,oa ebZ] 2015 & 60 X 2 = 120 ;wfuV~l c) dqy & 400 ;wfuV~l ¼280+120½
ii) fnlEcj] 2015 esa fcy tkjh djus ds fy;s ,e0lh0th0 dh x.kuk 360 ;wfuV~l@ch-,p-ih- ¼60
;wfuV~l izfr ch-,p-ih-@ekg X 6½ ij dh tk;sxhA OkkLrfod vfHkfyf[kr miHkksx ds mifjfyf[kr ,e0lh0th0 ls de jgus dh fLFkfr esa gh ,e0lh0th0
fy;k tk;sxkA 14- ?kjsyw] v?kjsyw rFkk fefJr Hkkj Jsf.k;ksa ds fy;s ,dy fcanq Fkksd vkiwfrZA i) 75 kW ls Åij dqy Hkkj okys ?kjsyw@v?kjsyw&Hkou@ekWYl@lgdkjh lkewfgd vkokl
mnkgj.k Lo:Ik ,yVh0 la;kstd ds fy,& lafonkd`r Hkkj 10 kW
Ekkg okLrfod miHkksx
kWh
Lkap;h okLrfod miHkksx
kWh
fcy fd;k miHkksx
kWh
Lkap;h fcy fd;k
miHkksx
kWh
viSzy] 450 450 500 500
ebZ 550 1000 550 1050
Tkwu] 540 1540 540 1590
tqykbZ] 600 2140 600 2190
vxLr] 350 2490 500 2690
flrEcj] 300 2790 500 3190
vDVwcj] 400 3190 500 3690
uoEcj] 700 3890 700 4390
fnlEcj] 800 4690 800 5190
Tkuojh] 550 5240 550 5740
Qjojh] 650 5890 650 6390
ekpZ] 550 6440 50 6440
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 317
lfefr;ka@dkWyksfu;ksa esa vkxs forj.k gsrq ,dy fcanq ehVfjax ds lkFk ,dy fcanq ij la;kstu izkIr
dj ldrs gSaA rFkkfi O;fDrxr la;kstu gsrq vkosnu djus esa oS/kkfud Lokeh@dCtk/kkjh ds fy;s
dksbZ jksd ugha gksxhA ii) ,dy fcUnq vkiwfrZ ysus okyk O;fDr] vuqKkih dks fo|qr izHkkjksa ds lHkh Hkqxrku djus rFkk ,sls
miHkksDrkvksa gsrq fu/kkZfjr VSfjQ ds laxzg djus ds fy, mRrjnk;h gksxkA vuqKkih ;g Hkh lqfuf”pr
djsxk fd miHkksDrk dh lEcfU/kr Js.kh ls fy;k tk jgk VSfjQ fu/kkZfjr VSfjQ ls vf/kd u gksA iii) ,slk O;fDr ftlus ,dy fcanq vkiwfrZ yh gS] og fo|qr vf/kfu;e] 2003 dh /kkjk 14 ds lkrosa
ijUrqd ds v/khu nh xbZ ,dy fcanq vkiwfrZ okys ifjlj ds fy, fo|qr ds forj.k dh ftEesnkjh gsrq
vuqKkih] vfHkdrkZ Hkh le>k tk;sxk rFkk forj.k vuqKkih] ,sls {ks= ds Hkhrj mlds v/khu vf/kfu;e
rFkk fu;eksa o fofu;eksa ds lHkh micU/kksa ds vuqikyu gsrq mRrjnk;h gksxkA iv) ^?kjsyw^ ds vUrxZr flaxy ikabZaV cYd lIykbZ dsoy ,slh vkoklh; dkyksfu;ksa@vkoklh; cgqeaftyk
bekjrksa dh vke lqfo/kkvksa ¼tSls fy¶Vksa] lkoZtfud izdk”k vkSj ty ifEiax iz.kkyh ds :Ik esa½ lfgr
vkoklh; dkyksfu;ksa@cgqeaftyk bekjrksa ij ykxw gksxhA ;fn bl izdkj ds vkoklh;
dkyksfu;ksa@vkoklh; cgqeaftyk bekjrksa esa dqN vU; nqdkusa vFkok vU; dksbZ O;kolkf;d izfr’Bku
gksa] blh fLFkfr esa mu ij fefJr yksM dk VSfjQ ykxw gksxkA v) v?kjsyw ds vUrxZr flaxy ikabZV cYd lIykbZ dsoy 'kkWfiax dkWEiySDl@eYVhIySDl@ekWYl~ ds fy,
ykxw gksxhA 15- Ikw.kkZadu %
i) Lkafonkd`r Hkkj@ekax dsoy iw.kZ la[;k esa vfHkO;Dr dh tk;sxh rFkk [k.M Hkkj@ekax dh vxyh iw.kZ
la[;k rd iw.kkZafdr fd;k tk;sxkA mnkgj.k%
0-15 kW dk lafonkdr@Lohd`r Hkkj] “kqYd mn~ns”; gsrq 1 kW ekuk tk;sxkA blh izdkj
15-25 kW/kVA dk lafonkdr@Lohd`r Hkkj 16 kW/kVA fy;k tk;sxkA ii) lHkh fcy fudVre~ :Ik;s rd iw.kkZafdr fd;s tk;saxsA
16- vU; izHkkj %
izHkkj dh nj esa fn;s x;s izHkkjksa rFkk fofo/k izHkkjksas dh vuqlwph esa lfEefyr izHkkjksa ds flok; vU;
dksbZ izHkkj vk;ksx dh Lohd`fr ds fcuk miHkksDrkvksa ls olwy ugha fd;s tk;saxsA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
318 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
Ckh- “kqYd njsa
vkj-Vh-,l-&1 % ?kjsyw
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk %
fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq ;g vuqlwph fuEu ij ykxw gksxh %
i) jks”kuh] ia[kk] ikoj o vU; ?kjsyw mn~ns”;ksa ds fy, vkoklh; ifjlj lkewfgd lqfo/kkvksa lfgr ¼tSls
fy¶V] lkoZtfud izdk”k rFkk okVj ifEiax lsV½A
ii) 75 kW ds Åij ds ,dy fcUnq Fkksd vkiwfrZ ds fy, vkoklh; dkWyksfu;kaW] cgqeaftys Hkou tgk¡ ÅtkZ
dk iz;ksx dsoy ,sls mn~ns”; ¼tSls fy¶V] lkoZtfud izdk”k rFkk okVj ifEaix lsV½ ds fy;s gksrk
gks] lfEefyr gSA
iii) /kkfeZd LFkyksa tSls efUnj] efLtn] xq:}kjk] ppZ bR;kfn ¼tgkWa ij ek= iwtk@bcknr dh txg
vdsys esa@vyx ls gks] mu iwtk LFkykas@bcknrxkgksa ds fy, tgkWa /keZ”kkyk] lkeqnkf;d dsUnz]
“k;ux`g bR;kfn lEc) gks] ogkWa ;g vuqlwph ykxw ugha gksxhA½
¼;g nj lwph mu miHkksDrkvksa ij Hkh ykxw gksxh] ftuds ikl 2 kW rd dk lafonkd`r Hkkj gS lkFk
gh 200 kWh@ekg rd dk miHkksx gS rFkk tks mijksDr ifjlj dk dqN Hkkx mijksDr v?kjsyw mn~ns”;ksa ds
fy;s dj jgs gSaA rFkkfi ;fn ,sls ifjljksa ds fy, lafonkdr Hkkj 2 kW ls vf/kd o miHkksx 200 kWh@ekg ls vf/kd gS rks tc rd fd Hkkj dks vyx&vyx ugha fd;k tkrk rFkk iFkd :Ik ls ehVj
ugha fy;k tkrk] nksuksa esa ls dksbZ ,d] miHkksx dh xbZ leLr ÅtkZ mi;qDr nj vuqlwph ds v/khu izHkkfjr
dh tk;sxhA½
2- izHkkj dh nj %
fooj.k fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
1- ?kjsyw
1-1½ ykbZQ ykbu miHkksDrk
xjhch js[kk ls uhps o dqVhj T;ksfr ftudk 1 kW rd
Hkkj rFkk 30 ;wfuV izfr ekg miHkksx gks
:0 11@la;kstu@ ekg :0 1-50@ kWh 1-2½ vU; ?kjsyw miHkksDrk 100 ;wfuV~l@ekg rd miHkksx gsrq :0 35@ekg :0 2-40@kWh 101&200 ;wfuV~l@ekg miHkksx gsrq :0 50@ekg :0 2-90@kWh 201&300 ;wfuV~l@ekg miHkksx gsrq :0 70@ekg :0 3-80@kWh 301&400 ;wfuV~l@ekg miHkksx gsrq :0 95@ekg :0 3-80@kWh 401&500 ;wfuV~l@ekg miHkksx gsrq :0 120@ekg :0 4-00@kWh 500 ;wfuV~l@ekg ls Åij :0 145@ekg :0 4-00@kWh 2½ ,dy fcUnq Fkksd vkiwfrZ :0 40@kW@ekg :0 3-40@kWh
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 319
vkj Vh ,l 1¼,½ % fgekPNkfnr
1- Ikz;ksT;rk
fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq ;g vuqlwph fuEu ij ykxw gksxh % (i) fgekPNkfnr {ks=ksa ds ?kjsyw o v?kjsyw miHkksDrkA (ii) ;g vuqlwph] lacaf/kr ftykf/kdkjh }kjk fgekPNkfnr@fge js[kk ds :Ik esa vf/klwfpr {ks=ksa ij
ykxw gksrh gSA 2- vkiwfrZ izHkkj dh nj
fooj.k fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
1½ ?kjsyw
:0 11@la;kstu@ekg
:0 1-50@ kWh 2½ v?kjsyw 1 kW rd :0 1-50@ kWh 3½ v?kjsyw 1 kW ls 4 kW rd :0 2-25@ kWh 4½ v?kjsyw 4 kW ls Åij :0 20@la;kstu@ekg :0 3-40@ kWh
3- bl vuqlwph dh vU; lHkh “krsZ ogh gksaxh tks fd vkjVh,l&1 esa gSA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
320 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
vkj-Vh-,l-&2 % v?kjsyw
1- iz;ksT;rk %
fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq ;g vuqlwph fuEu ij ykxw gksxh %
1-1 (i) ljdkjh@uxj ikfydk fpfdRlky;
(ii) ljdkjh@ljdkjh lgk;rk izkIr “kSf{kd laLFkku
(iii) vk;dj vf/kfu;e] 1961 ds v/khu iathd`r ,slh /kekZFk laLFkk,a ftudh vk; dks bl
vf/kfu;e ds v/khu dj dh NwV izkIr gksA
1-2 NksVs v?kjsyw miHkksDrk ftudk vuqcfU/kr Hkkj 4 kW rd rFkk miHkksx 50 ;wfuV@ekg rd gksA
1-3 75 kW ds Åij ,dy fcanq Fkksd vkiwfrZ ds vU; [email protected];d mi;ksxdrkZ ftlesa “kkWfiax
dkWEiysDl@eYVhIySDl@ekWYl ftlesa lkewfgd lqfo/kkvksa lfgr ¼tSls fy¶V] lkoZtfud izdk”k rFkk
okVj ifEaix lsV½ lfEefyr gks gsrq lfEefyr gSaA
1-4 LorU= foKkiu cksMksZa@gksfMZaXl& lHkh O;olkf;d ¼lM+d fdukjs@Nr ij ;k bekjrksa ds fdukjs
bR;kfn½ ij vdsys [kM+s LorU= foKkiu gksfMZaXl tks fd futh foKkiu lkbZu iksLV@lkbZu
cksMZ~l@lkbZu Xykst~@¶ySDl gS] ftudks iFkd ehVj ls LorU= ehVfjax dh tk jgh gSA
2- izHkkj dh nj
dze la0 fooj.k fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY; MCG ¼lafonkdr Hkkj dk
KVAh/KW½* 1-1 (i) ljdkjh@uxj ikfydk fpfdRlky; (ii) ljdkjh@ljdkj lgk;rk izkIr
“kSf{kd laLFkku (iii) vk;dj vf/kfu;e 1961 ds v/khu
iathdr ,slh /kekFkZ laLFkk,a ftudh
vk; ij bl vf/kfu;e ds v/khu
dj dh NwV izkIr gSA
¼,½ 25 kW rd :0 40@kW :0 4-05@ kWh
¼ch½ 25 kW ls Åij :0 45@kVA :0 3-65@kVAh 50 kVAh/ kVA / ekg o
600 kVAh/ kVA/ okf"kZd
1-2
vU; v?kjsyw miHkksDrkvksa
¼,½ NksVs v?kjsyw miHkksDrk ftudk
vuqcfU/kr Hkkj 4 kW rFkk miHkksx
50 ;wfuV izfrekg gksA
:0 45@ kW :0 4-20@kWh
¼ch½ 25 kW rd mijksDr 1-2 ¼,½ esa
“kkfey ugha :0 45@ kW :0 4-85@kWh
¼lh½ 25 kW ls Åij :0 45@ kVA :0 4-75@kVAh 50 kVAh/ kVA / ekg o 600 kVAh/ kVA / okf"kZd
1-3 ,dy fcanq Fkksd vkiwfrZ** :0 45@ kVA :0 4-65@kVAh 50 kVAh/ kVA / ekg o
600 kVAh/ kVA / okf"kZd
1-4 LorU= foKkiu gksfMZaXl~~ :0 60@ kW :0 4-90@kWh
*kW esa lafonkdr Hkkj okys miHkksDrkvksa ds fy;s ,e lh th mn~ns”;ksa gsrq lafonkdr Hkkj 0-85 ds ikWoj QSDVj ij
fopkj djrs gq, ifjHkkf’kr fd;k tk;sxkA
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 321
U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh izHkkj] fLFkj ekax izHkkj ds vfrfjDr gksxk rFkk rc mn~xzghr fd;k tk;sxk tc miHkksx ,d ekg
esa ,e lh th ls de gksxk ,oa ;g okf’kZd vk/kkj ij lek;ksftr fd;k tk;sxkA
** “kkfiax dkWEIysDl@eYVhIySDl@ekWYl ds fy;s 75 kW ls Åij
(i) Vh vks Mh ehVlZ] dsoy ehVj jhfMax midj.k ¼,e vkj vkbZ½ }kjk i<s tk;saxsA iw.kZ fo”ys’k.k
ds iz;kstu gsrq Qstj Mk;xzke] Vsaij fjiksVZ] iw.kZ Hkkj losZ{k.k fjiksVZ bR;kfn iw.kZ MaIk ds lkFk
Mkmu yksM fd;k tk;saxsA (ii) 25 kW Lks Åij ds lHkh miHkksDrkvksa gsrq vko”;d :Ik ls Vh vks Mh ehVj gksaxsA (iii) “kwU; Hkkj ;k vR;Ur de Hkkj ij dksbZ ehVj ugha i<+k tk;sxkA vuqKkih mi;qDr okg~; Hkkj
j[ksxk rFkk mDr Hkkj ij ,e vkj vkbZ ysus ds fy, tgk¡ vko”;d gks mls mi;ksx djsxkA (iv) ,e vkj vkbZ lkjka’k fjiksVZ dh izfr fcy ds lkFk miyC/k djokbZ tk;sxhA Hkkj losZ{k.k fjiksVZ
lfgr iw.kZ ,e vkj vkbZ fjiksVZ] ekax djus ij o 15 :0 ds fcy dk Hkqxrku djus ij iznku
dh tk;sxhA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
322 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
vkj Vh ,l&3% ifCyd ySaIl
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk
;g vuqlwph fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq ifCyd ySaIl ij ykxw gksxh] ftlesa LVªhV ykbfVax flLVe] VSªfQd
flXuy] lkoZtfud m|kuksa dh ykbZfVax bR;kfn lfEefyr gSA gfjtu cfLr;ksa rFkk xkaoksa dk iFk izdk”k Hkh
bl vuqlwph esa lfEefyr gSA
2- izHkkj dh nj
Js.kh fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
'kgjh ¼ehVMZ½ :0 40@kW :0 4-35@ kWh xzkeh.k ¼ehVMZ½ :0 35@kW :0 4-35@ kWh
3- vuqj{k.k izHkkj
mijksDr **izHkkj dh nj** ds vfrfjDr :0 10@&izfr ykbZV IokbaV izfr ekg dsoy etnwjh “kkfey
djrs gq, LVªhV ykbZV ds ifjpkyu ,oa vuqj{k.k gsrq izHkkfjr fd;k tk;sxkA lHkh visf{kr lkexzh dh vkiwfrZ
LFkkuh; fudk;ksa }kjk dh tk;sxhA rFkkfi LFkkuh; fudk;ksa ds ikl ifCyd ySEil dk ifjpkyu o vuqj{k.k
Lo;a djus dk fodYi gksxk rFkk ,slh fLFkfr esa dksbZ vuqj{k.k izHkkj ugha fy;k tk;sxkA
4- LVªhV ykbZV flLVe ds fy, mica/k
;fn] mijksDrkuqlkj vuqj{k.k izHkkj izHkkfjr fd;k tk jgk gS rks ySaIl ds cnyus ;k blds
uohuhdj.k esa yxus okys Jfed vuqKkih }kjk miyC/k djk;s tk;saxs fdarq lHkh lkexzh LFkkuh; fudk;ksa }kjk
miyC/k djk;h tk;sxhA ;fn LFkkuh; fudk; ds vuqjks/k ij vuqKkih lkexzh miyC/k djokrk gS rks bldh
ykxr LFkkuh; fudk; }kjk izHkk;Z gksxhA
,sls {ks=ksa esa tgk¡ vuqKkih ds forj.k esUl ugha fcNk;s x;s gSa ogk¡ LVªhV ykbZV esUl ¼mi LVs”kuksa dh
ykxr] ;fn dksbZ gS] lfgr½ ds foLrkj dh ykxr dk Hkqxrku LFkkuh; fudk; }kjk fd;k tk;sxkA
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 323
vkj Vh ,l & 4% futh uydwi @iafiax lsV~l
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk%
;g vuqlwph fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq mu lHkh miHkksDrkvksa ij ykxw gksrh gS tks flapkbZ ds mn~ns”; ls
rFkk pkjk dkVus dh e”khu] /kku dh Hkwlh fudkyus dh e”khu] xUUkk fijkbZ dh e”khu o vukt ds nkus
vyx djus dh e”khu rd lhfer izklafxd d`f’k dk;ksZ ds fy, futh uy dwiksa@iafiax lsV~l gsrq vkiwfrZ
izkIr dj jgs gSaA gkykafd izklafxd d`f’k ds mn~ns”; gsrq flapkbZ gsrq fy;s x;s la;kstu ij vkjVh,l&4 ds
vUrxZr VSfjQ ykxw gksxkA
2- izHkkj dh nj%
Js.kh fLFkj izHkkj :0@ch,pih@ekg fo|qr ewY;
:0@KWh U;wure [kir xkjsUVh
¼,elhth½
vkjVh,l& 4 %
PTW ¼ehVMZ½ “kwU; 1-40
60 ;wfuV~l /BHP/ ekg rFkk 720 ;wfuV~l /BHP/
okf"kZd
3- fcyksa dk Hkqxrku rFkk foyafcr Hkqxrku gsrq vf/kHkkj%
bl Js.kh ds fy;s fcy o’kZ esa nks ckj vFkkZr fnlacj var ¼twu ls uoEcj dh vof/k ds fy;s½ rFkk
twu var ¼fnlEcj ls ebZ dh vof/k ds fy;s½ tkjh fd;s tk;sxsaA fnlEcj esa tkjh fd;s x;s fcyksa dk Hkqxrku
miHkksDrk }kjk ,d lkFk ;k vxys o’kZ 30 viSzy rd ¼vf/kdre pkj Hkkxksa esa fd;k tk;½ fd;k tk ldrk gS
ftlds fy;s dksbZ Mh ih ,l mn~xzghr ugha fd;k tk;sxkA blh izdkj twu esa tkjh fd;s x;s fcyksa dk
Hkqxrku fcuk Mh ih ,l ds 31 vDVwcj rd fd;k tk ldrk gSA ;fn miHkksDrk fofufnZ’V frfFk;ksa rd
Hkqxrku djus esa vlQy jgrk gS rks cdk;k jkf”k ij ml vof/k ¼ekg ;k mlds Hkkx½ ds fy, 1-25% izfrekg dh nj ls vf/kHkkj yxsxkA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
324 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
vkj Vh ,l & 4 ¼,½ % d`f"k lEc) lsok;sa
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk%
;g vuqlwph fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq mu ij ykxw gksrh gS tks ikS/kk ulZjh] ikWyhgkÅl esa mxk;s
Qwyksa@lfCt;ksa rFkk Qyksa] tgka Hk.Mkj.k ,oa laj{k.k ds vfrfjDr fdlh izdkj ds mRiknu dh izkslsflax
u dh tkrh gksA
2- izHkkj dh nj
Js.kh fLFkj izHkkj
:0@ch,pih@ekg
fo|qr ewY;
:0@KWh U;wure [kir xkjsUVh
¼,elhth½
vkjVh,l&4 ¼,½ %
df"k lac) lsok;sa
'kwU; 2-25
60;wfuV~l@ch,pih@ekg ,oa
720 ;wfuV~l@ch,pih@okf"kZd
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 325
vkj Vh ,l & 5% xouZesaV bfjxs”ku flLVe
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk%
fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq ;g vuqlwph fuEu ij ykxw gksxh %
(i) jkT; uy dwiksa] fo”o cSad uydwiksa] iai dh xbZ ugjksa] fy¶V flapkbZ ;kstukvksa] y?kq ny ugj
bR;kfnA
(ii) fdlh ljdkjh foHkkx ds LokfeRo o mlds }kjk ifjpkfyr flapkbZ iz.kkyhA
2- izHkkj dh nj%
fooj.k fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
1- 75 kW rd :0 40@ kW/ekg :0 4-35@ kWh 2- 75 kW ls vf/kd :0 40@ kVA/ekg :0 4-20@ kVAh
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
326 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
vkj Vh ,l & 6% ifCyd okVj oDlZ
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk
;g vuqlwph fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq lkoZtfud ty dk;ksZa] lhost VªhVesaV IykaV~l rFkk ty laLFkku]
ty fuxe ;k vU; LFkkuh; fudk;ksa ds v/khu dk;Zjr lhost iafiax LVs”kuksa vkSj IykfLVd fjlkbZfdfyax
IykUV~l ij ykxw gksxhA
2- izHkkj dh nj
fooj.k fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
'kgjh :0 40@ kVA /ekg :0 4-25@kVAh xzkeh.k :0 35@ kVA /ekg :0 4-25@kVAh
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 327
vkj Vh ,l 7% ,y Vh rFkk ,p Vh m|ksx
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk
fo|qr dh vkiwfrZ gsrq ;g vuqlwph fuEu ij ykxw gksxh %
(i) vkS|kSfxd rFkk@;k izlaLdj.k ;k d`f’k vkS|kSfxd mn~ns”;ksa] fctyh dj?kk o lkFk gh
vkdZ@bUMD”ku QusZlst] jksfyax@fj&jksfyax feYl] y?kq LVhy la;a=ksa ds fy;s rFkk fdlh vU;
nj vuqlwph ds v/khu lfEefyr u fd;s x;s miHkksDrkA
(ii) lCth] Qy] Qwyksa o e”k:e dh [ksrh] izlaLdj.k] HkaMkj.k o iSdsftax ds lkFk d`f"k rFkk tks
vkjVh,l&4 ¼,½ esa vkPNkfnr u gksrs gkas] bl izdkj dh bdkb;k¡ Hkh bl nj vuqlwph esa
lfEefyr gksxhA
2- vkiwfrZ dh fof”k’V “krsZa
(i) lHkh la;kstu] mi;qDr jsfVax rFkk ch vkbZ ,l fofunsZ”kuksa ds ,e lh ch ¼fefu;spj lfdZV cszdj½
;k lfdZV cszdj@fLop fx;j ds lkFk la;ksftr fd;s tk;sxsaA
(ii) baMD”ku o vkdZ QusZlst dks vkiwfrZ ;g lqfuf”pr dj ysus ds Ik”pkr gh miyC/k djkbZ tk;sxh
fd Lohdr Hkkj QusZlst ds Vust dh Hkkj vko”;drkvksa ds rn~uqlkj gSA 1 Vu dk U;wure~ Hkkj
fdlh Hkh n”kk esa 400 kVA ls de ugha gksxk rFkk lHkh Hkkj blh vk/kkj ij vo/kkfjr fd;s
tk;saxsA bl ekud ls uhps ds fdlh Hkkj ds fy;s dksbZ vkiwfrZ ugha dh tk;sxhA
(iii) LVhy ;wfuV~l dks vkiwfrZ] mi&LVs”ku ds Nksj ij psd ehVj ds lkFk dsoy ,d MsfMdsVsM
bafMfotqoy QhMj ds ek/;e 33 kV ;k blls Åij dh oksYVst ij miyC/k djokbZ tk;sxhA psd
ehVj rFkk miHkksDrk ehVj ¼jksa½ dh jhfMaXl ds e/; 3 izfr”kr ls vf/kd ds vaarj dh vuqKkih
}kjk rqjar tk¡p djokbZ tk;sxh rFkk lq/kkjkRed dk;Zokgh dh tk;sxhA
(iv) 1000 kVA ls vf/kd ds Hkkj ds lkFk lHkh u;s la;kstuksa dks vkiwfrZ] mijksDr ds (iii) mica/kksa ds
lkFk dsoy Lora= iks’kdksa ij fuxZr dh tkuh pkfg;sA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
328 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
fooj.k fo|qr ewY; fLFkj@ekax
izHkkj izfrekg
U;wure miHkksx xkWj.Vh
¼MCG)** 1- 75 kW ¼100BHP½ rd
lafonkd`r Hkkj okys ,yVh m|ksx
1-1 lafonkd`r Hkkj 25 kW rd :0 3-95@kWh lafonkd`r Hkkj
dk :0 105@ kW
$ Lakfonkdr Hkkj@ekg
dk 50 kWh/ kW rFkk
lafonkdr Hkkj/ okf"kZd
dk 600 kWh/kW
1-2 lafonkd`r Hkkj 25 kW ls
vf/kd
:0 3-60@ kVAh lafonkd`r Hkkj
dk :0 105@ kVA Lakfonkd`r Hkkj@ekg
dk 50 kVAh/ kVA*** rFkk lafonkdr Hkkj/
okf"kZd dk 600 kVAh/kVA 2- 88 kVA /75 kW ¼100 BHP½ ls
Åij lafonkdr Hkkj okys ,pVh
m|ksx
yksM QSDVj#
:0@ kVAh
2-1 lafonkd`r Hkkj 1000 kVA rd 40% rd 3-40
* fcy ;ksX;
ekax dk :0
230@ kVA Lakfonkd`r Hkkj/ ekg dk 100 kVAh/ kVA
rFkk
Lakfonkdr Hkkj/ okf"kZd
dk 1200 kVAh/KVA 40% ls Åij 3-75
2-2 lafonkd`r Hkkj 1000 kVA ls
Åij
40% rd 3-40 * fcy ;ksX;
ekax dk :0
290@ kVA 40% ls Åij 3-75
$vkVk pDdh ds fy, 30 kWh/ kW@ekg rFkk 360 kWh/kW/okf"kZd
*fcy ;ksX; ekax] okLrfod vf/kdre ekax ;k lafonkd`r Hkkj dk 80%] tks vf/kd gks] gksxhA
**U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh izHkkj] fLFkj@ekax izHkkj ds vfrfjDr gksxk rFkk rc mn~xzghr fd;k tk;sxk tc ,d ekg dh
vof/k esa miHkksx ,e lh th ls de gks rFkk ;g okf’kZd vk/kkj ij lek;kstu ds v/khu gksxkA ekg esa
U;wure~ miHkksx xkjaVh izHkkj ds vkPNknu gsrq fcYM ;wfuV~l ij fctyh izHkkj dh x.kuk lkekU; vof/k esa 40% rd ds
yksM QSDVj ds fy;s mfYyf[kr izHkkj ij dh tk;sxh rFkk ,sls vfr fctyh izHkkj ds fy;s okf’kZd lek;kstu dh x.kuk]
vxj gksa rks] lkekU; vof/k esa 40% rd ds yksM QSDVj ds fy;s mfYyf[kr izHkkj ij dh tk;sxhA
*** ftu miHkksDrkvksa dk lafonkdr Hkkj kW esa gks] mudk lafonkd`r Hkkj ,elhth ds mn~ns”; gsrq ikoj QSDVj 0-85 ls
x.kuk dh tk,xhA #“kqYd mn~ns”;ksa ds fy;s yksM QSDVj ¼%½ fuEu :Ik esa le>k tk;sxk%&
= fcfyax vof/k esa miHkksx ¼mUeqDr vfHkxeu ls izkIr fo|qr jfgr½ x 100 vf/kdre~ ekax ;k lafonkdr ekax] nksuksa esa ls tks de gks x fcfyax vof/k esa ?kaVksa dh la[;k
;|fi tgk¡ miHkksDrk }kjk mUeqDr vfHkxeu vof/k ds nkSjku fy, tkus ij vf/kdre ekax ml ekg esa c<+ tkus dh
n'kk esa] yksM QSDVj ds vkadyu ds mn~~ns'; gsrq vf/kdre ekax ogh gksxk ftl vof/k esa mUeqDr vfHkxeu u fd;k
x;k gksA
3- le;kuqlkj “kqYd ¼ ToD½ ¼VSfjQ½
(i) 25 KW ls vf/kd Hkkj ds ,y Vh m|ksx rFkk ,p Vh m|ksx ds fy;s Åij fn;s x;s ÅtkZ izHkkj
dh njsa ToD NwV@vf/kHkkj ds v/khu gksaxhA
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 329
(ii) ToD ehVlZ] dsoy ehVj jhfMax bULVwesaV (MRI) }kjk i<s+ tk;saxsA iw.kZ fo”ys’k.k gsrq Qstj
Mk;xzke] Vsaij fjiksZV~lZ] iw.kZ Hkkj losZ fjiksV~lZ bR;kfn ds iw.kZ Mai Mkmu&yksM fd;s tk;saxs rFkk
fcy] izHkkj ToD nj ds vuqlkj tkjh fd;s tk;saxsA (iii) dksbZ Hkh ehVj “kwU; Hkkj ij ;k vR;Ur fuEu Hkkj ij ugha i<+s tk;saxsA vuqKkih mi;qDr okg~;
Hkkj j[ksxk rFkk mDr Hkkj ij MRI ysus ds fy;s tgka vko”;d gks ogk¡ bls ykxw djsxkA (iv) MRI lkjka”k dh izfr] fcy ds lkFk miyC/k djokbZ tk;sxhA Hkkj loZs fjiksVZ lfgr iw.kZ ,e vkj
vkbZ fjiksVZ ekax ij rFkk :0 15@& ds Hkqxrku ij miyC/k djokbZ tk;sxhA (v) ToD Hkkj fuEukuqlkj gksxk %
lhtu@fnu dk
le;
lqcg ihd
vkolZ lkekU; ?k.Vs Lkak; ihd vkolZ
vkWQ ihd
vkolZ
“khrdky
01-10 ls 31-03 0600&0930 cts 0930&1730 cts 1730&2200 cts 2200&0600 cts
Xkzh’edky
01-04 ls 30-09 & 0700&1800 cts 1800&2300 cts 2300&0700 cts
fo|qr ewY; dh ToD nj fuEukuqlkj gksaxh %
,y Vh m|ksx ds fy;s vof/k esa izHkkj dh nj
lkekU; ?k.Vs ihd vkolZ vkWQ ihd vkolZ
:0 3-60@KVAh :0 5-40@KVAh :0 3-24@KVAh
,p Vh m|ksx ds fy;s
yksM QSDVj* vof/k esa izHkkj dh nj
lkekU; ?k.Vs ihd vkolZ vkWQ ihd vkolZ
40% rd :0 3-40@kVAh :0 5-63@kVAh :0 3-06@kVAh 40% ls Åij :0 3-75@kVAh :0 5-63@kVAh :0 3-38@kVAh
*yksM QSDVj Åij [k.M 2 esa ifjHkkf’kr fd;k x;k gSA
4- lhtuy m|ksx
tgk¡ fdlh miHkksDrk ds ikl 18 kW (25 BHP) ls vf/kd dk Hkkj gks rFkk Vh vks Mh ehVj gks rFkk og
o’kZ esa dqN fuf”pr ekSleksa esa ;k lhfer vof/k ds nkSjku] ?kksf’kr ekSleh m|ksx ds fy;s ÅtkZ dh vkiwfrZ dk
mi;ksx djrk gS rks ftl vof/k esa la;a= can jgrk gS mu eghuksa ¼ftls vkWQ lhtu dgk tk;sxk½ ds fy,
mn~xzg.k fuEukuqlkj fd;k tk;sxk %
(i) *lhtu* vof/k ds fy;s “kqYd ogh gksxk tks bl vuqlwph esa fn;s vuqlkj **izHkkj dh nj** gSaA (ii) tgk¡ **vkWQ lhtu** vof/k esa okLrfod ekax lafonkdr Hkkj ds 30% ls vf/kd ugha gS] ogk¡ **vkWQ
lhtu** vof/k gsrq fo|qr ewY; ogha gksxsa tks Åij vuqlwph dh nj esa nh xbZ **lhtu** vof/k ds
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
330 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
fy;s gSaA rFkkfi **vkWQ lhtu** lafonkdr ekax ?kVkdj 30% dj nh tk;sxhA (iii) vkWQ lhtu vof/k esa vf/kdre vuqKs; ekax] lafonkd`r ekax dk 30% gksxh rFkk ,d miHkksDrk
ftudh okLrfod ekax vkWQ lhtu ds fdlh ekg esa lafonkd`r ekax ds 30% ls vf/kd gksrh gS rks
mUgsa ml lhtu dh vof/k esa ?kVh gqbZ lafonkd`r ekax dk ykHk ugha fn;k tk;sxkA blds vfrfjDr
ekax izHkkj ds 10% dh nj ls iw.kZ **vkWQ lhtu** vof/k gsrq vf/kHkkj ns; gksxkA lhtuy m|ksxksa ds fy;s fuca/ku ,oa “krsZa&
(i) ifjpkyu dh vof/k ,d foRr o’kZ esa 9 ekg ls vf/kd ugha gksuh pkfg;sA (ii) tgk¡ foÙk o’kZ esa ifjpkyu dh vof/k 4 ekg ls vf/kd gS ogk¡ ,sls m|ksx dks de ls de pkj
dzfed ekg rd ifjpkfyr gksuk pkfg;sA (iii) ,d ckj vf/klwfpr lhtuy vof/k dks o’kZ dh vof/k rd ?kVk;k ugha tk ldrkA lhtuy yksM
ds lkFk vU; yksM /kkfjr dEiksftV bZdkbZ;ksa ij ^vkWQ lhtu^ “kqYd ykxw ugha gksxkA (iv) Pkhuh] cQZ] jkbZl fey] tM+hd`r vkgkj ¼Qzkstu QwM½ rFkk pk; ds vfrfjDr m|ksx vk;ksx ds iwoZ
vuqeksnu ds Ik”pkr~ gh vuqKkih }kjk vf/klwfpr fd;s tk;saxsA 5- QSDVjh ykbZfVax
bl vuqlwph ds v/khu vkiwfrZ dh xbZ fo|qrh; ÅtkZ dk mi;ksx QSDVªh ifjlj esa ykbZV~l] ia[ks] dwylZ]
bR;kfn ds fy;s Hkh fd;k tk;sxk ftlesa dk;kZy;ksa] eq[; QSDVªh Hkou] LVkslZ] VkbZe dhij ds dk;kZy;]
dSUVhu] LVkQ Dyc] iqLrdky;] f”k”kq lnu] vkS’k/kky; LVkQ dY;k.k dsUnzksa] vgkrksa esa QSDVªh ykbfVax ds
fy;s miHkksx dh xbZ lHkh ÅtkZ lfEefyr gksxhA
6- fujarj o vfujarj vkiwfrZ %
(i) fujUrj izfdz;k m|ksx ds lkFk vfujUrj izfØ;k m|ksx ds miHkksDrk tks fd Loa=r QhMj ;k
vkS|kSfxd QhMj ls tqMs+ gkas] fujUrj vkiwfrZ gsrq fodYi pqu ldrs gSA ,d vkS|kSfxd QhMj ls tqMs+
gq, lHkh m|ksxksa ds fujUrj vkiwfrZ fodYi pquus ds mijkUr gh fujUrj vkiwfrZ iznku dh tk;sxh
rFkk ;fn muesa ls dksbZ vkS|kSfxd miHkksDrk fujUrj vkiwfrZ ugha pkgrk gks rks ,sls QhMj ij lHkh
miHkksDrk fujUrj vkiwfrZ dk ykHk mBkus ds fy, vgZ ugha gksaxsA bl rjg dh fujUrj izfdz;k okys
vkS|ksfxd miHkksDrk tks fujUrj vkiwfrZ pqurs gS] os iwoZ esa lwfpr@vuwlwfpr fctyh dVkSrh ls rFkk
le;≤ ij vk;ksx }kjk vuqeksfnr fctyh miHkksx esa izfrca/k dh vof/k dh lhfer ?kaVs ds
nkSjku ÅtkZ ds vkikrdkyhu :Ik ls BIi gksus ;k can dh fLFkfr dks NksM+dj vU; le; yksM “kSfMax
ls NwV izkIr gksxhA orZeku ds vfujUrj izfØ;k m|ksx ds miHkksDrk fujUrj vkiwfrZ gsrq Åij
mYysf[kr fo|qr ewY; ds vykok 15 izfr”kr vfrfjDr fo|qr ewY; pqdk;saxsA 1 ebZ 2015 ls vFkok
fnuakd 31 ekpZ] 2016 rd ds u;s la;kstu dh n”kk esa] fcuk okLrfod vof/k ds fujUrj vkiwfrZ
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 331
fodYi gsrq Åij fn;s x;s izHkkj dh nj ds vuqlkj ekax izHkkj rFkk vU; izHkkj ogha jgsaxsA ;|fi Lora= QhMj ds ek/;e ls vkiwfrZ dh iquO;ZoLFkk dh n'kk esa fujUrj vkiwfrZ izHkkj] fujUrj
vkiwfrZ ds fodYi dh okLrfod vof/k ds LFkku ij mDr LorU= QhMj ds Åthdj.k dh frfFk ls
31 ekpZ 2016 rd ykxw gksxkA ekax izHkkj vkSj vU; izHkkj mijksDr izHkkj dh nj ds vuqlkj leku
jgsxhA (ii) os miHkksDrk tks fd iwoZ esa fujUrj vkiwfrZ fodYi pqus gq, gS] dks fujUrj vkiwfrZ pquus gsrq iqu%
fodYi nsus dh vko”;drk ugha gSA ,sls miHkksDrkvksa dks fnukad 01-04-2015 ls 31-03-2016 rd
Åij mYysf[kr fo|qr ewY; dk 15 izfr'kr vfrfjDr fo|qr ewY; ns; gksxkA ;wihlh,y ls ;fn dksbZ
fookn fdlh QhMj esa gks rksml QhMj ds miHkksDrkvksa dks 30 vizSy] 2015 rd u;s rkSj ls fujUrj
vkiwfrZ gsrq vkosnu djuk gksxkA (iii) fo|qr fujUrj vkiwfrZ ¼tks mijksDrkuqlkj u;s rkSj ij vkosnu dj jgs gksa lfgr½ ds fy, u;s
vkosnd o’kZ esa dHkh Hkh vkosnu ns ldrs gSaA gkykafd] ,sls vkosndksa ds fy;s fujUrj vkiwfrZ ljpktZ
1 ebZ] 2015 ls 31 ekpZ] 2016 rd ds fy;s ykxw jgsxkA ;wihlh,y] vkosnu dh frfFk ls 7 fnuksa ds
nkSjku] fujUrj vkiwfrZ dh “krkZsa dh iwfrZ ds fy, lqfo/kk iznku djsxkA gkykafd] Lora= QhMj ls
vkiwfrZ dk izcU/ku dj fy;s tkus dh fLFkfr esa ;wihlh,y }kjk fujUrj vkiwfrZ dh lqfo/kk] Lora=
QhMj }kjk dk;Z iw.kZ dj fy;s tkus dh frfFk ls] fujUrj vkiwfrZ dh “krkZsa dh iwfrZ ds lkFk] iznku
djsxkA (iv) orZeku esa fujUrj vkiwfrZ dk ykHk mBkus okys miHkksDrk] tks iwoZ esa nh x;h fujUrj vkiwfrZ dks can
djuk pkgrs gks] dks fnuakd 30 vizSy 2015 ls iwoZ fyf[kr esa lwfpr djuk gksxk vkSj mUgsa fujUrj
vkiwfrZ vf/kHkkj ds lkFk bl vkns”k esa mYysf[kr VSfjQ njksa ds vk/kkj ij 30 vizSy] 2015 rd dh
vof/k dk Hkqxrku djuk gksxkA blds vykok] bl lEcU/k esa ;fn dksbZ miHkksDrk }kjk ,d fo”ks"k
QhMj ij fujUrj vkiwfrZ dk ykHk mBkus ds fodYi NksM+ fn, tkus ij] vU; miHkksDrkvksa dks nh tk
jgh fujUrj vkiwfrZ ds lkFk] mDr QhMj ls tqMs vU; fujUrj vkiwfrZ ds miHkksDrk izHkkfor gksrs gS
rks ;wihlh,y lHkh izHkkfor miHkksDrkvksa dks iwoZ esa fyf[kr :i ls lwfpr djsxkA (v) ;wihlh,y xSj fujUrj vkiwfrZ QhMj ds fy, ,d fujUrj vkiwfrZ QhMj dh fLFkfr dks ifjofrZr ugha
djsxkA (vi) ;wihlh,y@fiVdqy 'kh"kZ izkFkfedrk ds vk/kkj ij ;g lqfuf”pr djsaxs fd of+)] j[k&j[kko vkSj
ejEer dk;Z fo”ks’kr;k lc&LVs’kuksa esa tgk¡ lfdZV czsdlZ] vU; midj.kksa bR;kfn tksfd th.kZ&”kh.kZ
gkyr esa gS] mulss fujUrj vkiwfrZ QhMj esa :dkoV u gksA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
332 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
(vii) ;wihlh,y@fiVdqy fujUrj vkiwfrZ ds miHkksDrkvksa dks fn;s tk jgs QhMj dh vkof/kd fuokj.k
vuqj{k.k djsxkA ykbZlsalh fujUrj vkiwfrZ ds miHkksDrkvksa dks iwoZ esa vkof/kd fuokj.k vuqj{k.k
dk;Zdze ds ckjs esa lykg mijkUr ;kstuk cukdj lwfpr djsxk] ftlls ,sls miHkksDrk vius dk;Z
dj ldsaA (viii) vuqKkih dks fo|qr ewY; rFkk ml ij fujarj ÅtkZ vf/kHkkj fcy iFkd :Ik ls fn[kkuk pkfg;sA
7- ,pVh m|ksxksa gsrq ekax izHkkj
;fn fdlh ,pVh m|ksx miHkksDrk] tks ekg esa ,d fnu ds 18 ?k.Vs dh U;wure vkSlru vkiwfrZ izkIr
ugha djrs gSa] muds fy, ekax izHkkj Lohd`r ekWax izHkkj dk 80 izfr”kr vuqiz;ksT; gksxkA
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 333
vkj Vh ,l 8% fefJr Hkkj
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk%
;g vuqlwph 75 kW ls vf/kd ds ,dy fcanq Fkksd vkiwfrZ la;kstu ij ykxw gksrh gS tgk¡ vkiwfrZ
izeq[kr% ?kjsyw mn~ns”;ksa ¼60% ls vf/kd ?kjsyw Hkkj½ ds fy;s rFkk lkFk gh vU; v?kjsyw mn~ns”;ksa ds fy;s
iz/kku :Ik ls mi;ksx esa ykbZ tkrh gSaA ;g vuqlwph MES dks vkiwfrZ ij Hkh ykxw gksrh gSA
2- izHkkj dh nj%
bl Js.kh ds miHkksDrkvksa ij fuEufyf[kr njsa ykxw gksxh %
fLFkj izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
:0 50@kW@ekg :0 4-15@kWh
3- vU; “krsZa %
mijksDr ds vfrfjDr “kqYd dh vU; “krsZ ogh gksaxh] tks vkj Vh ,l&1 miHkksDrkvksa ds fy;s gSaA
rFkkfi] vfrHkkj naM] vkiwfrZ dh lkekU; “krksZa ds [k.M 12 ds vuqlkj ykxw gksxkA
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
334 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
vkj Vh ,l 9% jsyos VªSD”ku
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk
;g vuqlwph VSªD”ku mn~ns”;ksa ds fy;s ÅtkZ mi;ksx djus okyh jsyos ij ykxw gksrh gSA
2- izHkkj dh nj%
bl Js.kh ds fy;s fuEufyf[kr fo|qr ewY;] ekax izHkkj ykxw gksaxsA
ekax izHkkj fo|qr ewY;
:0@kVA@ekg :0@kVAh 200@& :0 3-60
3- vU; “krsZ %
mijksDr ds vfrfjDr] “kqYd dh vU; “krsZ ogh jgsaxh tks fujarj vkiwfrZ gsrq ToD VSfjQ ,oa vf/kHkkj
dh iz;ksT;rk dks NksM+ dj vkjVh,l&7 ds v/khu lkekU; ,p Vh m|ksxksa ds fy;s gSaA
8. Annexures
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission 335
vkjVh,l 10 % vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ
¼,½ iznhiu o lkoZtfud lacks/ku vko”;drkvksa gsrq vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk
;g vuqlwph 10 kW rd ds ykbZV vkSj ia[ks] lkoZtfud lacks/ku iz.kkyh] mRloksa] vuq’Bkuksa] eaxy
dk;ksZ ds nkSjku iznhiu Hkkjksa] vf/kdre rhu ekg rd dh vLFkk;h nqdkuksa dh vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ ij ykxw
gksxhA
2- izHkkj dh nj
fooj.k fLFkj izHkkj
¼1½ 15 kW rd ds Hkkj ds iznhiu] lkoZtfud lacks/ku] mRloksa ds fy;s :0 1200 izfrfnu
¼2½ 2 kW rd ds Hkkj okyh] mRloksa ds nkSjku LFkkfir vLFkk;h nqdkusaA :0 80 izfrfnu
¼3½ 1 kW rd ds Hkkj ds fy;s vU; vLFkk;h nqdkuas@>qXxh@>ksiM+h
3-1½ xzkeh.k :0 110@ekg@la;kstu
3-2½ “kgjh :0 220@ekg@la;kstu
mijksDr 2 esa fofufnZ’V fLFkj lsok izHkkj dh jkf”k vfxze :Ik esa yh tk;sxhA
¼ch½ vU; mn~ns”;ksa ds fy;s vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ
1- vuqiz;ksT;rk
(i) ;g vuqlwph 15 kW ls Åij ds Hkkj ds fy;s ¼,½ ij mfYyf[kr ls vU; mn~ns”;ksa ds fy;s
ykbZV] QSu o ÅtkZ Hkkjksa dh vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ ij ykxw gksxh ftlesa iznhiu@lkoZtfud
lacks/ku@mRlo lfEefyr gSaA (ii) ;g vuqlwph] ljdkjh foHkkxksa lfgr lHkh miHkksDrkvksa }kjk flfoy dk;ksZa lfgr fuekZ.k
iz;kstuksa ds fy;s yh xbZ ÅtkZ ds fy;s Hkh ykxw gksxhA fdlh dk;Z@ifj;kstuk ds fy;s
fuekZ.k iz;kstu gsrq ÅtkZ dk;Z@ifj;kstuk ds iw.kZ gksus rd fuekZ.k dk;Z ds fy, izFke
la;kstu ysus dh frfFk ls ekuh tk;sxhA rFkkfi Hkou ds fuekZ.k] ejEer ;k uohuhdj.k ds
fy;s miHkksDrk ds Lo;a ds ifjlj gsrq Lohd`r ,d LFkk;h la;kstu }kjk fo|qr ds iz;ksx dks
fo|qr dk vukf/kdr mi;ksx ugha ekuk tk;sxk] tc rd fd fuekZ.k fd;s tk jgs orZeku
Hkou@vuqyXud dk vk”kf;r iz;kstu@mi;ksx] la;kstd dh Lohdr Js.kh esa ogh vuqKs;
gSA 2- izHkkj dh nj
izHkkj dh nj] mi;qDr vuqlwph esa izHkkj dh rn~uq:Ik nj /ku (+) 25% gksxhA pkj ¼4½ ekg dh
vf/kdre~ vof/k ds fy;s fn;s x;s 15 BHP rd ds bZ[k nyu ;a= gsrq vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ ds fy;s mi;qDr nj
Order on Retail Supply Tariff of UPCL for 2015-16
336 Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
vuqlwph vkjVh,l&7 gksxhA ;|fi vLFkk;h vkiwfrZ gsrq U;wure miHkksx xkWj.Vh ¼MCG½ izHkkj ykxw ugha
gksaxsA
8-2 layXud 2% fofo/k izHkkjksa dh vuqlwph
dz0
la0 izHkkjksa dk LoHkko ;wfuV
nj
¼:0½
1- ehVjksa dh tkWp o ijh{k.k
,- flaxy Qst ehVlZ izfrehVj 50-00
Ckh- rhu Qst ehVlZ izfrehVj 75-00
Lkh- fjdkfMZax VkbZi okWV&vkoj ehVlZ izfrehVj 170-00
Mh- vf/kdre ekax ladsrd@,yVh lhVh lapkfyr eksVlZ izfrehVj 350-00
bZ- VªkbZ osDVj ehVlZ@,pVh ehVlZ lhVh@ihVh ds lkFk izfrehVj 1000-00
,Q- ,ehVlZ ,aM oksYV ehVlZ izfrehVj 65-00
Tkh- Lis”ky ehVlZ izfrehVj 335-00
,p- ehVjksa dk izkFkfed ijh{k.k izfrehVj “kwU;
2- izkFkfed ijh{k.k ls vU; ckn dk ijh{k.k rFkk laLFkkiu izfrehVj 80-00
3- fdlh Hkh dkj.k ls ¼fdlh la;kstu ds dkVus ;k iquZla;kstu ds fy;s½
vkiwfrZ dk la;kstu dkVuk ;k iqula;kstu dk izHkkj 50 izfr”kr gksxkA
,- 100 BHP@75 kW ls Åij Hkkj okys miHkksDrk Ikzfr tkWc 600-00
Ckh- 100 BHP@75 kW rd ds v?kjsyw rFkk vkS|ksfxd miHkksDrk Ikzfr tkWc 400-00
Lkh- miHkksDrkvksa dh vU; lHkh Jsf.k;ka Ikzfr tkWc 200-00
4- ehVjksa dk cnyuk
,- ehVj dk laLFkkiu rFkk vLFkk;h la;kstu dh voLFkk esa bldk gVk;k
tkukA Ikzfr tkWc 75-00
ch- miHkksDrk ds fuosnu ij ehVj cksMZ dh fLFkfr esa ifjorZu Ikzfr tkWc 100-00
5- miHkksDRkk ds fuosnu ij dSisflVlZ dh tkWp ¼izkjafHkd tkWp ds vfrfjDr½%
,- 400V@230 V ij Ikzfr tkWc 150-00
ch- 11 kV rFkk blls Åij ij Ikzfr tkWc 300-00