Minutes of 32nd meeting of WRPC held on 24.08.2016 preceded by ...

1

32ND TCC/WRPC MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON AUG 23/24 2016 AT PUNE

Baart sarkar

Government of IndiakondIya ivaVut p`aiQakrNa

Central Electricity Authority

piScama xao~Iya ivaVut saimaitWESTERN REGIONAL POWER COMMITTEE

p xao iva sa kI idnaaMk 23 Agast evaM 24 Agast 2016

kao PUNE maoM Aayaaoijat 32 vaI baOzk kI kaya-vaRtMINUTES OF 32ND MEETING OF WRPC

HELD ON 23rd & 24th AUGUST 2016

AT

PUNEHosted by

MSETCLmauMba[-

MUMBAI

1


Baart sarkar







AT

PUNEHosted by

MSETCLmauMba[-

MUMBAI

1


Baart sarkar







AT

PUNEHosted by

MSETCLmauMba[-

MUMBAI

2


C O N T E N T S

ITEM NO. PARTICULARSPAGENO

ITEM NO.1 CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 31ST MEETING OF

WRP COMMITTEE1

ITEM NO.2 STRENGTHENING INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN WESTERNMAHARASHTRA AND SOUTHERN GUJARAT

1

ITEM NO.3 CHRONIC HIGH VOLTAGE IN SOUTHERN MAHARASHTRA SYSTEM 3

ITEM NO.4PROGRESS OF DEDICATED LINE UNDER CONSTRUCTION BYGENERATION DEVELOPERS WHO ARE CONNECTEDTHROUGH INTERIM ARRANGEMENT IN WESTERN REGION

4

ITEM NO.5 INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN CGPL UMPP AND ADANI MUNDRASTPS IN GUJARAT

5

ITEM NO.6 UTILIZATION OF FIBER OPTICAL LINK BETWEEN RINFRA AAREYAND MSETCL BOISAR FOR GRID OPERATION BY WRLDC/WRPC

7

ITEM NO.7 MAINTENANCE OF RTUS INSTALLED UNDER ULDC PROJECTS FORCENTRAL SECTOR GENERATING STATIONS

8

ITEM NO.8ASSESSMENT OF STATUS OF ULDC EQUIPMENTS (RTUS &

COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENTS) AND REQUIREMENT FOR THEIRREPLACEMENT / UP GRADATION

8

ITEM NO.9 NON PAYMENT OF ULDC CHARGES BY THREE GENERATORS (RGPPL, LANCO AND ESSAR)

10

ITEM NO.10RATIFICATION OF PROPOSALS APPROVED IN THE 40TH MEETINGOF STANDING COMMITTEE ON POWER SYSTEM PLANNING INWESTERN REGION HELD ON 01.06.2016

14

ITEM NO.11 MIGRATION TO WEB BASED ENERGY SCHEDULING (WEBES) S/WAT WRLDC

15

ITEM NO.12 EMS/SCADA UPGRADE / REPLACEMENT AT WRLDC AND SLDCS ATGUJARAT, MADHYA PRADESH, CHHATTISGARH, GOA, DNH & DD

15

ITEM NO.13 ARRANGEMENT OF ALTERNATE ALLOCATION OF POWER TOINDIAN RAILWAY, GUJARAT

16

3


ITEM NO.14 STATUS OF URTDSM 16

ITEM NO.15 DELAY IN SCHEDULING OF URS POWER OF CGPL ONACCOUNT OF LATE CONSENT BY THE UTILITIES

17

ITEM NO.16 WIDE BAND NODE CONNECTIVITY FROM PGCIL 18

ITEM NO.17 AGENDA ITEMS FROM NPC 18

ITEM NO.18CERC ORDER DATED 05.08.2015 ON DRAFT PROTOCOL FORCHECKING PROTECTION SETTINGS AND ITS HEALTHINESS(PETITION NO. 009/SM/2015)

21

ITEM NO.19 COMMISSIONING OF NEW SYSTEM PROTECTION SCHEMES INCONNECTION WITH SYNCHRONIZATION OF SR AND NEW GRID

24

ITEM NO.20.IMPLEMENTATION STATUS OF SPS

26

ITEM NO.21 INDIAN ELECTRICITY GRID CODE - 4TH AMENDMENT REGULATIONS

201627

ITEM NO.22 IMPORTANT REGULATIONS/ORDERS FROM HONBLE CERCDURING THE PERIOD APRIL2016 TO JUNE2016

29

ITEM NO.23 DECLARATION OF TRANSMISSION ELEMENTS INTOCOMMERCIAL OPERATION BY ISTS LICENCEES

34

ITEM NO.24 FUNDING ARRANGEMENT OF ESTABLISHMENT ANDCONTIGENCIES FUND OF WRPC SECRETARIAT

35

ITEM NO.25 MEMBERSHIP OF WRPC 42

ITEM NO.26 PERFORMANCE OF WR GRID DURING MARCH 2016 TO

JULY 2016

42

ITEM NO.27ANTICIPATED POWER SUPPLY POSITION IN WESTERNREGION FOR THE PERIOD FROM SEPTEMBER 2016 TONOVEMBER 2016

44

ITEM NO.28STATUS OF COMPLETION OF 765/400 KV AND ABOVE ON GOINGTRANSMISSION SCHEMES BEING EXECUTED/IMPLEMENTED BYTRANSMISSION AGENCIES.

44

ITEM NO.29COMMISSIONING OF NEW GENERATING UNITS IN WESTERNREGION AND THE CAPACITY EXPECTED TO BE COMMISSIONEDDURING THE CURRENT YEAR 2016-17.

46

4


ITEM NO.30 STATUS OF LETTER OF CREDIT (LC) OPENING AGAINSTDEVIATION CHARGES LIABILITY FOR 2016-17

47

ITEM NO.31 STATUS OF DEVIATION CHARGES 49

ITEM NO.32 STATUS OF REACTIVE ENERGY CHARGES 50

ITEM NO.33 STATUS OF CONGESTION CHARGES 50

ITEM NO.34 STATUS OF RECONCILIATION OF DEVIATION AND REC POOLACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD JAN16 TO MAR16

50

ITEM NO.35INTEREST CALCULATION STATEMENT OF DEVIATION POOLACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1ST APR 2016 TO 30TH

JUN201652

ITEM NO.36INTEREST CALCULATION STATEMENT OF REACTIVE CHARGEACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1ST APR 2016 TO 30THJUN2016

54

ITEM NO.37INTEREST CALCULATION STATEMENT OF CONGESTIONCHARGE ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1ST APR 2016TO 30TH JUN2016

55

ITEM NO.38 ANY OTHER ITEM 56

ITEM NO.39 DATE AND VENUE OF NEXT WRPC MEETING 56

**************

5


ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE PARTICULARS

ANNEXURE-1A &1B LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF 32nd TCC/WRPC

ANNEXURE - 3 TYPICAL VOLTAGE DURATION CURVE OF KOLHAPUR , MAPUSA ,SOLAPUR AND PARLI FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, MAY AND JUNE 2016

ANNEXURE - 6 DRAFT MOU SUBMITTED BY RINFRA

ANNEXURE - 7 LETTER FROM DIRECTOR (O), PGCIL DT 25TH JULY2016

ANNEXURE - 10 SCHEMES APPROVED IN THE 40TH STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING

ANNEXURE - 12 RELEVANT PAGE OF MOM OF 19TH SCADA/EMS MEETING HELD ON

27TH APRIL2016 AT BHOPAL

ANNEXURE 12.1 RELEVANT PAGE OF MOM OF 18TH PRM AT VADODARA ON 27.1.2016

ANNEXURE - 14 CE, SLDC, GUJARAT THEIR LETTER SLDC/SCADA/URTDSM/4898DATED 19.07.2016

ANNEXURE - 15 CE, SLDC, GUJARAT THEIR LETTER NO. SLDC/CE/MIS/URS/ALLOCATION/4082 DATED 09.06.2016

ANNEXURE - 16 CE, SLDC, GUJARAT LETTER GETCO/SLDC/SCADA/4962 DATED21.07.2016

ANNEXURE - 17 WRPC LETTER DATED 4TH APRIL 2016

ANNEXURE 17.1 WRPC LETTER DATED 09.05.2016

ANNEXURE - 18 SAMPLE NETWORK AND THE FORMAT IN WHICH DATA IS REQUIREDTO BE SHARED

ANNEXURE - 19 NLDC LETTER DATED 16TH MARCH 2016

6


************************

ANNEXURE - 20 WRPC LETTER DATED 23.05.2016

ANNEXURE - 21 COMMENTS ON DRAFT OPERATING PROCEDURE

ANNEXURE - 25 JAYPEE NIGRIE, SUPER THERMAL POWER PROJECT(JSNTPP), DISTTSINGRAULI, MP VIDE LETTER DATED 04.04.2016

ANNEXURE -26.1(a) FREQUENCY PROFILE

ANNEXURE -26.1(b) DETAILS OF UNRESTRICTED PEAK DEMAND, DEMAND MET ANDENERGY REQUIREMENT AND AVAILABILITY

ANNEXURE 26.2 VOLTAGE PROFILE

ANNEXURE - 27 ANTICIPATED POWER SUPPLY POSITION

ANNEXURE - 31 STATUS OF DEVIATION CHARGES

ANNEXURE 32 STATUS OF REACTIVE ENERGY CHARGES

ANNEXURE - 33 STATUS OF CONGESTION CHARGES

7


MINUTES OF THE 32NDMEETING OF WESTERN REGIONAL POWER COMMITTEEHELD ON 24THAUGUST 2016 (WEDNESDAY) PRECEDED BY TCC MEETING ON

23RDAUGUST 2016 (TUESDAY) AT PUNE (MAHARASHTRA)

The 32nd WRPC meeting was held on 24th August 2016 at Pune. It was preceded

by the TCC meeting on 23rd August 2016. The meeting was hosted by MSETCL. List of

participants is attached at Annexure -1A &1B.

Shri Sanjeev Kumar, IAS, CMD MSEDCL and Chairman, WRPC welcomed all

the delegates to the WRPC meeting.He informed that TCC has yesterday deliberated

the agenda items in details and in todays meeting the decisions could be taken up for

finalization. He hoped the stay was comfortable and facilities provided were adequate.

Shri S.D.Taksande, Member Secretary, WRPC thanked MSETCL for hosting the

meeting. He thanked all the team of officers from MSETCL for making excellent

arrangements for transport, stay and conduct of meeting.

He informed that yesterday, the TCC was chaired by Shri O.K.Yempal,

Director(Operation), MSETCL and the TCC deliberated the various issues and made its

recommendations for the WRPC meeting for finalization.

Before proceeding to the agenda items, he welcomed incoming members and

placed on record the valuable contribution of outgoing members since last WRPC/TCC

meetings.

8


LIST OF WRPC MEMBERS CHANGED ( 32nd WRPC MEETING)

Sl.No. Name ofOrganisation

Name & Designation ofIncoming Members

Name & Designation of

Outgoing Members

1 Chhattisgarh SLDC Shri B.R.Soni, (In charge)

Chief Engineer (LD)

Shri W.R.Wankhede

Chief Engineer (LD)

2 Gujarat Discom. Shri Bijal Shah,IAS

Managing Director.

Uttar Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd

Shri P.K.Solanki,

Managing Director,

Dakshin Gujarat Vij.Co.Ltd

3 M.P.Discom. Shri R.S.Shrivastava,

Director (Technical),M.P.Madhya

Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co.Ltd.

Shri Manoj Kumar Jawahar,

Director (Commercial)

M.P.Paschim KVVCL.

4 UT of Daman & Diu Shri J.B.Singh, IAS

Secretary(Power)

Shri Sandeep Kumar, IAS

Secretary (Power)

5 UT of DNH Shri J.B.Singh, IAS

Secretary(Power)

Shri Sandeep Kumar, IAS

Secretary (Power)

6 NTPC Shri U.P.Pani,

Director (HR)

Shri Gurdeep Singh,

CMD& Director(Commercial)

7B Discoms-Otherthan

State Discoms.

Shri Ashok Sethi,

COO & Executive Director

Tata Power Company Ltd.

Shri R.R.Mehta,

CEO,

Reliance Infrastructure Ltd.,

9


LIST OF TCC MEMBERS CHANGED ( 32nd TCC MEETING)

Sl.No. Name ofOrganisation

Name & Designation ofIncoming Members

Name & Designation of

Outgoing Members

1

Chhattisgarh SLDC Shri B.R.Soni, (In charge)

Chief Engineer (LD)

Shri W.R.Wankhede

Chief Engineer (LD)

2 Gujarat Discom. Shri B P BUCH

Chief Engineer- OPN

Uttar Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd

Smt.Samta Naik,

Chief Engineer (IT & C&R),

Dakshin Gujarat Vij.Co.Ltd

3 M.P.Discom. Shri Vijay Kshirsagar,

Director (Commercial), M.P.Madhya Kshetra Vidyut VitaranCo.Ltd.

Shri G.K.Sharma

Addl.Chief Engineer(Operations),M.P.Paschim

Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co.Ltd.,

4 Other Gencos Satish Dukare DHARIWAL Shri H.M.Jain,

Sr.Vice President,ACB(India)Ltd

5 Discoms Otherthan

State Discoms.

Shri T.K.Bhaskaran,

Head, Tata Power Com.Ltd.

Shri Avinash Waghambare,

Vice President (Operation),

Reliance Infrastructure Ltd.,

With the permission of Chairman, WRPC the agenda items were taken up for

discussion.

ITEM No.1: CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 31STMEETING OF WRPCOMMITTEE

The minutes of 31STmeeting of WRP Committee held on 31st March 2016 at Raipur

were forwarded to the members vide letter No. WRPC/31stWRPC Mtg./AS/2016/5456

dated 24.05.2016.

10


No comments were received from any of the constituent members therefore theminutes were confirmed without any modification.

ITEM No. 2: STRENGTHENING INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN WESTERNMAHARASHTRA AND SOUTHERN GUJARATAgenda Background:WRLDC vide email have intimated that South Gujarat is presently connected to

Western-Maharashtra system through 400 kV Vapi-Boiser S/C and 220 kV Nasik-

Navsari D/C.

Constraints observed in South Gujarat and Western Maharashtra system are as under:

Critical loading in North-South corridor within Gujarat system during high demand

and poor generation at the Kakrapar APS, as well as other Gas based stations of

South Gujarat. Critical loading of 400 kV Sugen-Vapi-Boiser S/C during

contingencies

Overloading of 400/220 kV ICT at Bableshwar and Overloading of 400 kV

Bableshwar-Padghe D/C. One ckt of 400 kV Ektuni-Bableshwar D/C is kept open

by SLDC-Kalwa.

In view of the above, strengthening the interconnection of South Gujarat with

Western Maharashtra needs to be explored so as to address the constraint on both

sides. The proposed options and their perceived benefits to the system are as

follows;

Option Proposal Perceived benefits to power system

A Interconnect 220 kV Nasik with

400/220 kV IB Nasik and uprate

the conductor of 220 kV Nasik-

Navsari D/C

Load of Nasik area could be met through

400/220 kV ICT at Nasik. 400/220 kV ICTs

at Bableshwar would get de-stressed.

Utilization of 220 kV Nasik-Navsari D/C

would also be enhanced. Both circuits of

400 kV Taptithanda-Bableshwar D/C could

be kept in service.

11


B Upgradation of 220 kV Nasik-

Navsari D/C to 400 kV by using

the existing RoW. (As

recommended in in para 3.11 of

CEA Manual on Transmission

Planning Criteria). Since the lines

are jointly owned, STUs could

upgrade the sections lying within

their jurisdiction.

This will enhance dispersal of power from

400 kV Bableshwar and relieve the

constraint at Bableshwar. Both circuits of

400 kV Taptithanda-Bableshwar D/C can be

kept in service. Transmission Losses would

reduce. Enhanced reliability of Bableshwar /

Nasik /Navsari area.

C Interconnection of 400 kV Nashik

/Bableshwar and 400 kV Vapi

Same as above

The suggestions were discussed in the 483rd meeting of the OCC in May 2016.

There was a consensus on the envisaged benefits of the proposal. However, CE,

SLDC Gujarat stated that they were keen on the proposal and the same has been

forwarded to transmission wing of GETCO. The option to uprate the 220 kV Nasik-

Navsari D/C with higher ampacity conductor is also being considered. SLDC Kalwa

also agreed on the envisaged benefits of the proposal. It was agreed that the

proposal should be taken up in ensuing WRPC meeting for approval.

TCC Discussions:MS, WRPC informed TCC about the agenda position. He stated that the above

options were proposed in the OCC by WRLDC.

The options in short that were suggested are:

(i) Interconnect 220 kV Nasik with 400/220 kV IB Nasik and uprate the

conductor of 220 kV Nasik-Navsari D/C.

(ii) Upgradation of 220 kV Nasik-Navsari D/C to 400 kV by using the existing

RoW. (As recommended in in para 3.11 of CEA Manual on Transmission

Planning Criteria). Since the lines are jointly owned, STUs could upgrade

the sections lying within their jurisdiction.

(iii) Interconnection of 400 kV Nashik /Bableshwar and 400 kV Vapi

12


He queried whether WRLDC had arrived at these options from real time

observations or any studies were conducted.

GM, WRLDC informed that the above options were suggested due to real time

conditions. With less generation at Kawas, Kakrapar areas, South Gujarat and

Maharashtra had experienced some bottlenecks. The suggestions were given with a

view of utilizing existing ROW. Further certain small grid incidents/disturbances in

Gujarat and MP were seen, which had strengthened the need for Gujarat and

Western Maharashtra interconnections, and WRLDC has done some preliminary

studies and hence the possible options were studied and proposed.

CE, SLDC Gujarat stated that any of the above options would have to be a joint

implementation between Maharashtra STU and Gujrat STU. Accordingly, they would

like to discuss the same after involving Maharashtra STU also.

CE, SLDC MSETCL informed that Maharashtra Study group will discuss the same

with Gujarat STU. However already 400 kV Nasik S/S is in the planning stage and

with connectivity envisaged to Kudus. The options given above can be studied, and

also integrated with any already planned schemes, and then the outcome can be put

in the CEA Standing Committee on power system planning.

It was suggested that a group from Maharashtra STU, Gujarat STU and WRLDC

along with Gujarat Discoms and Maharashtra Discoms may study the proposal and

outcome of the studies and options can be discussed in Standing Committee on

PSP of CEA.

WRPC:GM WRLDC informed that they have already done the studies and can present the

findings if the house desires it.Chairman WRPC informed that it would be better to

13


study the technical options considering the technical as well as cost implications.

Hence the concerned utilities and Discoms should be involved. He suggested that a

group comprising of STUs of Maharashtra and Gujarat and DISCOMS of

Maharashtra and Gujarat and WRLDC can discuss the various options. Necessary

meeting can be called quickly.

MD GETCO informed that any ISTS proposal such as the present one has to get an

investment approval. For this it has to be taken in the Standing Committee of Power

system planning of CEA where the CTU and STU are involved in the planning

process.

It was therefore decided that a group comprising of STUs of Maharashtra andGujarat and DISCOMS of Maharashtra and Gujarat and WRLDC can discussthe various options and study the proposals and put up the matter to SCM forfurther decision.

ITEM NO. 3: CHRONIC HIGH VOLTAGE IN SOUTHERN MAHARASHTRA SYSTEMAgenda Background:WRLDC vide email have intimated that Chronic high voltage constraints are

experienced in South Maharashtra system. The condition worsens during the monsoon

with low demand and high wind generation in Karad and Kolhapur area. Following

actions are taken to control the overvoltage:

Taking all Switchable Shunt Reactors in service

Blocking of HVDC Chandrapur-Padghe Bipole, Reduction in power order on

Talcher-Kolar HVDC Bipole

Reduction in power order of HVDC Bhadravati and Gazuwaka Back to back

Operation of two units of Koyna in synchronous condenser mode

Manual Opening of under-loaded and redundant EHV lines [400 KV Koyna-

IV-Lonikhand S/C, One ckt of 400 kV Karad-Kolhapur, One ckt of 400 kV

Karad-Jaigad, one ckt of Kolhapur-Mapusa, one ckt of 400 kV Solapur-

Kolhapur, two ckts of 765 kV Wardha-Aurangabad, 765 kV Solapur-Pune]

14


Even after taking the above measures, persistent high voltage is experienced at

Karad, Kolhapur, Mapusa, Pune, Parli, Lamboti and Solapur GIS. Typical Voltage

duration curve of Kolhapur , Mapusa , Solapur and Parli for the month of April, May

and June 2016 is given in Annexure - 3. It may be noted that during June 2016, thevoltage at these stations remained above 420 kV for 47 % - 63% of the time. There

have been instances of tripping of EHV lines on over voltage. Manual opening of

EHV lines in South Maharashtra weakens the interconnection with Southern Region.

Consequently, oscillations with poor damping have also been observed during off-

peak hours.

In addition to being a threat to grid security, persistent high voltage reduce the life of

the insulation in electrical equipment and makes them vulnerable to failure and

breakdown. The voltage constraints of South Maharashtra and the associated issues

have been highlighted in several Operation as well as Protection Coordination

Committee meetings. The matter needs urgent intervention to expedite the following

actions:

a. Commissioning of the envisaged 125 MVAr shunt reactors at Akola,

Kolhapur, Solapur and Nanded by MSETCL.

b. Commissioning of shunt reactor at RGPPL

c. Operation of third unit of Koyna in synchronous condenser mode

d. Monitoring and Switching off the Shunt capacitor banks in the LT system

within Maharashtra during off-peak hours.

e. Utilization of LR of 765 kV Wardha-Aurangabad ckts at Aurangabad end as

Bus Reactors through NGR bypass arrangement

f. Absorption of reactive power by generating units within the capability curve

g. Planning of additional Shunt Reactors in South Maharashtra

h. Commissioning of STATCOM at Aurangabad, Gwalior, Sholapur and Satna

15


TCC:MS WRPC informed the above agenda position. Various memebers gave the position of

the follow-up which is as given below.

a. 125 MVAr shunt reactors at Akola, Kolhapur, Solapur & Nanded.-CE,SLDC,MSETCL informed that tendering is already done for reactors at

Akola Kolhapur & Nanded. Further the Tender opening is scheduled on 26th

Aug 2016. The reactor at Solapur will be covered in phase-II.

b. Commissioning of shunt reactor at RGPPL-AGM(Comml), RGPPL was ofthe view that cost recovery of reactor is an issue since major beneficiaries are

not availing power from RGPPL. If the beneficiaries agree to bear the cost,

then the reactor can be thought of. CE, SLDC, MSTECL informed that with

generation at RGPPL being very much reduced, and all the four lines of

evacuation are in service. This gives rise to lot of reactive power generation

by the line. Hence RGPPL should install the reactors. RGPPL representative

informed that if beneficiaries are willing to bear the cost, the same can be

procured.

c. Running of 3rd unit of Koyna in synchronous condenser mode-CE,SLDC, MSETCL informed that already two units are utilized in synchronous

condenser mode. The 3rd unit is facing Compressor problem and presently

cant be operated in synchronous mode. Hence this option is not feasible at

the present.

d. Monitoring and Switching off the Shunt capacitor banks in the LTsystem during off-peak hoursSLDC representatives informed that this isbeing monitored & done. Usually this is done on seasonal basis. GM WRLDC

informed that wind generators also generate a lot of reactive power, and so

LT shunt capacitors at these locations required to be switched off. He

requested CE,SLDC of all states to look into the matter.

e. Utilization of LR of 765 kV Wardha-Aurangabad ckts at Aurangabad endas Bus Reactors through NGR bypass arrangement- ED,PGCIL,WR-1informed that this option was studied by them but is not feasible because

16


there exists space constraints at Aurangabad, in converting the Line Reactor

to Bus Reactor. Also NGR bypass cannot be implemented because these

lines are having line length is 370kM and PIR(pre insertion resistor) cannot be

bypassed..Hence this option is not feasible technically.

f. Absorption of reactive power by generating units within the capabilitycurve- This is being done & monitored regularly. MS WRPC requestedgenerators to absorb MVAR in low peak conditions and control the grid

voltage. CE,SLDC,MSETCL informed that they have instructed

MAHAGENCO generators not to inject MVAR at high voltage conditions.

g. Planning of additional Shunt Reactors in South Maharashtra-CE,SLDC,MSETCL informed that 8 reactors are planned at 8 Sub stations in

second phase.

h. Commissioning of STATCOM at Aurangabad, Gwalior, Sholapur andSatna-ED(AM),CC,PGCIL representative informed that at Aurangabad,Sholapur & Satna STATCOM order is already awarded in June 15 and

expected Commissioning by Sept. 2017. Gwalior is under process for award.

WRPC:

WRPC noted the status of the above.

(i) To a query by MD GETCO, regarding the problem faced in using the line

reactor as a bus reactor,ED(AM),CC,PGCIL informed that NGR should be

bypassed if the line reactor is to be used as a bus reactor. There is space

constraint for putting a new breaker. Also being a long line, when auto

reclosing PIR should be there. This is not possible in the present case.

(ii) CE,SLDC MSETCL informed that MSETCL has already identified reactors

and are in procuring the reactors.

(iii) AGM,RGPPL informed that there is not enough fund for reactor. Chairman,

WRPC informed that reactors have to be put as per technical requirement.

Once the requirement is ascertained, the reactor has to be put. RGPPL

17


agreed to take the issue to their board and revert back. It was also suggested

that possibility of funding through PSDF could be explored.

(iv) CE, SLDC, GETCO informed that SSP-Dhule is a long line and reactors are

required to be provided. The high voltage is quite detrimental. He requested

that the reactors at Dhule be repaired and restored quickly. Director(Opn),

MSETCL informed that the breaker problem at Dhule and Karad is being

attended by BHEL and expected to be in September 2016.

Member(Power)NCA informed that the Dhule reactors are also very old and

small in capacity. There may be a need to consider replacement of the old

reactors by 125 MVAR capacity new reactor. Chairman, WRPC requestedMSETCL to look into the options suggested.

WRPC noted reactor planning as above.

ITEM NO : 4 PROGRESS OF DEDICATED LINE UNDER CONSTRUCTION BYGENERATION DEVELOPERS WHO ARE CONNECTED THROUGH INTERIMARRANGEMENT IN WESTERN REGION.

Agenda Background:WRLDC vide email have intimated that in the 40th Standing committee Meeting held at

NRPC on 1st June16 , the issue of delay in commissioning of the associated

transmission lines by the generation Developers and continuing to evacuate power

through the temporary LILO arrangements was discussed. The status of the dedicated

transmission line of the following IPPs in Western Region who have been granted

interim arrangement is summarized below:

Sl.No.

Name of IPP/Ownership

InterimConnectivityArrangement

DedicatedConnectivityline

Oninterimsince

TargetCompletion ofdedicated line(as informedby developer)

1. Korba WestPower

LILO of 2nd ckt ofRaigarh - Raipur

KWPCL -Raigarh PS

Feb13 Alreadycommissioned

18


Co. Ltd. (KWPCL)(1x600MW)M/s AvanthaPower &Infrastructure Ltd.

400kV 1st D/cline(PresentlyRaigarhKWPCL-Raipur)

(near Kotra)400kV D/c line

in Apr16

2. Bharat AluminiumCo. Ltd. (BALCO)(4x300MW)M/s Vedanta

LILO of 2nd ckt ofKorba -Birsinghpur400kV D/c line

BALCO DharamjaygarhPS 400kV D/c(Triple / Quad)line

Oct11 DedicatedlinesCommissioned on14&16.06.16

3. KSK MahanadiPower Co. Ltd.(KMPCL)(6x600MW)M/s KMPCL

LILO of Raigarh -Raipur 400kVIII&IV line

KMPCL Champa PS2xD/c (Quad)line

Aug12 30.06.2016 (1stD/c);31.12.2016(2nd D/c)

4. RKM PowergenPvt. Ltd.(RKMPPL)(4x360MW)M/s RKMPPL

LILO of 3rd ckt ofRaigarh - Raipurline(PresentlyRaigarh-RKM-KMPCL-Raipur)

RKMPPL-RaigarhPS (Near Kotra)400kV D/c(Quad) line

Sep14 15.06.2016

5. Essar Power M.P.Ltd (EPMPL)(2x600MW)M/s Essar PowerLtd

LILO of 1st ckt ofKorba STPS VindhyachalSTPS400kV D/c line

EPMPL -Bilaspur PS400kV D/c(triple) line

Dec11 Dec16 (5 6Months)

6. Vandana VidyutLtd. (VVL)(2x135+270MW)M/s VVL

LILO of 1st ckt ofKorba STPS VindhyachalSTPS400kV D/c line

VVL DharamjaygarhPS 400kV D/cline

July12 Not present.As informed byM/s BALCO,work ondedicated linehas not yetstarted.

TCC:MS, WRPC informed the above agenda position. He informed that for some of the

above generators in some cases the dedicated lines have been commissioned. For

others it is still not commissioned.

He informed the following status of dedicated lines:

(i) For Korba West (KWPCL) dedicated line is already commissioned.

(ii) For BALCO dedicated line is already commissioned.

19


(iii) For KSK Mahanadi Power co Ltd, dedicated line is not commissioned so far.

Outage for one circuit commissioning is planned in this month.

(iv) RKM Powergen Pvt. Ltd. Intimated telephonically that second line will be

completed within two months.

(v) Regarding the cases of Essar Power M.P &M/s Vandana Vidyut Ltd. (VVL)

they are still connected through interim connectivity.

(vi) In 40th SCM, since no progress report of the commissioning of lines from M/s

Vandana was forthcoming, the SCM had decided/advised CTU to proceed

with the opening the interim connectivity lines of M/s Vandana Vidyut. M/s

Vandana has since communicated their financial constraints to CEA. The

same letter was forwarded to WRPC by CEA. TCC discussed the issue of M/s

Vandana and concluded that some response from M/s Vandana has started

coming. Accordingly, the matter may be looked at SCM level, as it was a

SCM decision and role to remove the interim connectivity. Further it was

suggested to look into the interim connectivity agreement and conditions of

M/s Vandanain case of disconnection, since the interim connectivity might

have been given conditionally. POWERGRID agreed to look into the

agreement and take appropriate steps.

(vii) Regarding progress of Essar, they have intimated that order has been placed

to EPBL and dedicated connectivity is expected to be completed by May 2017

end.

(A) Meeting to understand the transmission charges billingdetails:DyE(Comml),GUVNL informed that regarding new IPPs as listed above,many such power projects have been planned and CTU has commissioned the lines

from these projects. However, these IPP projects have not materialised and the

burden of the transmission billing is increasing on the DISCOMs. He stated that in

case of Gujarat the transmission billings have raised more than four times however

the energy rise is not seen correspondingly. Hence there has to be a discussion on

how the billing is done in such cases. He informed that GUVNL had requested that

20


this issue be discussed in the TCC/WRPC forum. MS WRPC informed that thisissue was not discussed in the lower forums of WRPC in detail and so it maybe discussed in the CCM first and then put up in the next TCC/WRPC meeting,which was accepted.AGM(Comml),CC,PGCIL informed that charges and rates arecalculated by NLDC and approved by CERC. POWERGRID is not calculating the

rates. POWERGRID is only raising bills as per REA of RPCs. Also POWERGRID is

revenue neutral and so when REA is revised accordingly some utilities may get

more bill and others less, but total realisation for POWERGRID remains the same,

only sharing percentages gets changed as per REA. She further informed that lines

have increased and congestion incidents have reduced. The cost of power also gets

reduced as cheaper power available elsewhere can be exported and thus is

beneficial. Further, CTU is vested with the responsibility of developing lines. They

have to make planning as realistic as possible. CE,SLDC Gujarat informed that there

is a need to look into the matter from the DISCOM perspective and see the projects

and the cost implication and understand the billing. Hence he requested to discuss

in detail in a separate meeting so that there is clarity on the issue. It was decidedthat a meeting can be held involving NLDC, RLDC, CTU and beneficiaries sothat the matter is more transparent.

(B)Deregistering of M/s Vandana Vidyut: GM,WRLDC informed that M/s VandanaVidyut is connected through the interim connectivity and draws auxillary power.

However, they are not paying even the DSM charges and WRLDC fees & Charges.

Earlier cases of payment defaults were taken to Honble CERC and section 25 A of

power supply regulation could now be invoked for not allowing STOA. Now in the

case of Vandana, they are not even paying regular DSM Chargesand also there is

no generation to be curtailed under STOA, leading to DSM accounts not getting

settled. There have been objections raised by the auditors of WRLDC in regard to

not closing of DSM accounts in a timely manner. Hence he suggested that WRLDC

shall be approaching the Honble CERC for de-registering for which WRLDC would

file petition to CERC requesting de-registration for Vandana.TCC agreed to thesuggestion since CERC was the appropriate authority to guide in suchmatters.

21


WRPC:MS WRPC informed the above discussions. He stated that

(i) GM WRLDC informed that they are planning to approach the CERC for de-

registering of Vandana as User. AGM(Comml),CC,PGCIL requested that they

should be respondents in this petition. MD, GETCO suggested that in M/s

Vandana case, PGCIL can encash Bank Guarantee. PGCIL representative

informed that this case was a part of the Chhattisgarh evacuation system.

LTA was still not granted to Vandana. Hence the encashing of BG may not be

possible. As the projects in Chhattisgarh evacuation system are completed, ,

the LTAs are getting granted. Overall WRPC members were of the view that

payments for DSM charges must be paid and if not the BG should be

encashed. WRPC noted that WRLDC is planning to take the case to CERC.

WRPC noted as above.

ITEM NO 5 : INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN CGPL UMPP AND ADANI MUNDRASTPS IN GUJARAT.

Agenda Background:The issue of interconnection between CGPL UMPP and Adani Mundra STPS was

discussed in 38th SCM of WR held on 17.07.2015 and in special meetings held on

09.10.2015 at CEA & 17.02.2016 at Adani Mundra STPS Gujarat. The possible

interconnections identified in the meeting held on 17.02.2016 are as given below:

(i) Provision of 400/220 kV,315 or 500 MVA transformer along with one no. of 400 kV

bay and one no. of 220 kV bay at M/S CGPL 400 kV / 220 kV switchyard.

The space for provision of transformer and bays are available at CGPL switchyard. The

transformer would be normally kept disconnected either at 400 kV side or 220 kV side.

22


In case of emergency start up power could be extended from Nanikhakar 220 kV

substation to 400 kV CGPL bus.

(ii) LILO of Adani Mundra STPS -Varsana 400 kV S/C line -1 at CGPL UMPP 400 kV

switchyard. Implementation of this alternative would require one or two nos. of 400 kV

bays at CGPL switchyard. The LILO line has to cross two nos. of 220 kV D/C lines

emanating from Adani Mundra switchyard and three nos. of 400 kV D/C lines emanating

from CGPL switchyard.

(iii) A direct 400 kV interconnection between CGPL UMPP and Adani Mundra STPS.

For implementation of this 400 kV S/C line, one 400 kV line bay each at Adani Mundra

STPS and CGPL UMPP is required. Space for bays are available at both the switchyard

but there are constraints in taking out the line from the Adani Mundra STPS 400 kV

switchyard. This line has to cross Mundra - Mahendragarh HVDC line, Adani Mundra

STPS to Earth electrode station line, three nos. of 400 kV D/C lines, two nos. of 220 kV

lines emanating from Adani Mundra switchyard and three nos. of 400 kV D/C lines

emanating from CGPL switchyard. He requested members to finalize one of the above

three alternatives as interconnection between CGPL UMPP APL Mundra TPS.

In the 40th SCM held on 01.06.2016, POSOCO,in view of interconnection already

existing through 400kV Adani Mundra STPS Varsana Bhachau CGPL UMPP line,

stated that startup power to CGPL Mundra could be provided from Bachau 400 kV

substation which is around 100 kms from the CGPL, but for tha,t the adequacy of the

reactors available at Bachau needs to be checked.

Member Secretary, WRPC clarified that the issue is that although CGPL UMPP and

Adani Mundra STPS are physically adjacent to each other,they are not directly

connected with each other (Adani Mundra STPS Varsana Bhachau CGPL UMPP

400 kV link is about 200 km in length). Therefore there is a need for direct link that could

interconnect both the plants whenever required, say for extending start up power.

23


After deliberations, members agreed on option(i) given above, i.e. provision of 400/220

kV, 315 or 500 MVA transformer along with one no. of 400 kV ICT bay and one no. of

220 kV ICT bay at M/S CGPL 400 kV/220 kV switchyard. The direct interconnection

between Adani Mundra STPS and CGPL UMPP would be normally open and would be

used whenever required. Further, members agreed that the implementation modalities

for the scheme may be finalized in the WRPC.

TCC:MS, WRPC informed that these two large generation complexes are within a close

vicinity at Mundra. However electrically they are far. Hence when it comes to providing

start up power in case of black out, of any one station, there is no direct line. The

possibility and options to provide the start-up power were discussed by separate group

of SCM and in the last meeting of SCM, it was agreed to make provision of 400/220 kV,

315 or 500 MVA transformer along with one no. of 400 kV ICT bay and one no. of 220

kV ICT bay at M/S CGPL 400 kV/220 kV switchyard. The direct interconnection

between Adani (Mundra) STPS and CGPL UMPP would be normally open and would

be used whenever required. Further, members agreed that the implementation

modalities for the scheme may be finalized in the WRPC. He requested TCC to discuss

the modalities.

Head-EMD,CGPL stated that technical aspects of ICT connectivity at CGPL during

inrush power needs to be studied. This aspect would be studied by GETCO & CGPL.

And second aspect is who shall procure the ICT and bays cost. If CGPL has to procure

then that has to be done under some form of CAPEX which their beneficiaries have to

agree.

GM WRLDC opined that if this interconnection had been available, then restoration at

CGPL would have been faster in July 2016 disturbance. Hence the technical need is

also proved in practice also.

SE(Prot) WRPC informed that the provision of ICT will help not only CGPL but also

APL-Mundra, as startup power can be supplied to APL also. These stations are

24


remotely located in Gujarat and extension from the rest of the grid would take a much

longer time. Hence this qualifies for system improvement also.

After discussion, TCC recommended that the already existing 220kV line from

Nanikhakar to CGPL can be used and additional ICT and associated bays at CGPL as

given above was principally agreeable. Technical feasibility study as to whether

Nanikhakar S/S and CGPL units can sustain switching transients of 315 or 500MVA ICT

as desired by CGPL would be studied by GETCO & CGPL.

It was recommended that this element and all associated equipments like bays required

to provide the above ICT, as mentioned in SCM for this option, shall be treated as ISTS

and the cost be recovered through PoC, because it was for overall system improvement

and not just limited to CGPL.

WRPC:MS WRPC informed the above position.

He stated that TCC recommended that this element and all associated equipments like

bays required to provide the above ICT, as mentioned in SCM for this option, shall be

treated as ISTS and the cost be recovered through PoC.

Chairman, WRPC queried about the nature of booking the cost. He stated that if it is

booked as ISTS then all the DISCOMs in the country shall have to pay. The DISCOMs

are not even aware of the booking. There is a need to rethink on the booking aspects

under PoC. The other possible models are the beneficiaries of CGPL and APL can pay

for the same. He requested that the aspect of booking of cost be studied by a group and

discussed in the next meeting.

WRPC agreed to the technical requirement of the ICT at CGPL, to help extendpower between the two large power generation complex. It was decided that agroup would study the booking of charges under PoC and other models and put-up in next TCC/WRPC meeting.

25


ITEM NO 6: UTILIZATION OF FIBER OPTICAL LINK BETWEEN RINFRA AAREYAND MSETCL BOISAR FOR GRID OPERATION BY WRLDC/WRPC

Agenda Background:

The matter was discussed in the 31st WRPC meeting wherein M/s Reliance

representative confirmed that Reliance management had given its approval for the

usage of one pair of optic fibre on Boiser - VersovaAareyColony (Reliance lines) for

transmission of WR system data to WRLDC for system operation at no usage cost.

Accordingly RINFRA has submitted the draft MoU to be signed between RINFRA &

POWERGRID for the consent of WRPC forum. The draft MoU submitted by RINFRA is

enclosed at Annexure -6

TCC:MS WRPC informed the agenda position.

DGM,WRTS-1,PGCIL stated that the modalities and conditions for sharing the above

fibre link to WRLDC using spare pairs available in RInfra and TPCIL optic fibre cables

were already decided in the 09th June 16 meeting and agreed. Therefore, he stated that,

no separate MoU is required to be signed between PGCIL & RINFRA as PGCIL is only

a facilitator. The requirement of the data is for WRLDC. As all the discussions are

already minuted there is no need for a separate MOU. TCC agreed with the views of

PGCIL and recommended that there is no requirement of separate MoU, as the

modalities and conditions as decided in the 09th June 16 meeting should be binding on

all the parties involved.

PGCIL representative also informed that the approval from MSTECL for utilization of

Boisar-Boisar link still yet awaited. MSETCL was requested to furnish the necessary

clearance.

WRPC:MS WRPC informed the TCC discussions.

26


Chairman, WRPC queried whether WRLDC has any problems signing the MoU as they

are using the services.

GM,WRLDC informed that POWERGRID has to provide the communication facilities. If

they cannot provide, but are using the Reliance fiber optic connection, then

POWERGRID has to sign the necessary MoU. WRLDC has no role to play nor is it

using the services. The data has to be provided by PGCIL to WRLDC. Hence WRLDC

cannot sign the MoU as it is not a party.

ED(AM),CC,PGCIL informed that MoU must be signed between Reliance Infra and

WRLDC. PGCIL is merely a facilitator.

GM WRLDC informed that the regulation clearly specifies that PGCIL has to

supply the data to WRLDC through the communication network. Hence PGCIL may sign

any MoU if required.

PGCIL representative informed that actually there is no need for MoU in the first place,

as all the points are minuted and all parties are binding on the agreed points.

Chairman WRPC, opined that an MoU could be signed between PGCIL and Reliance.

Since all the points are already agreed there should be no big issue in signing an MoU.

However, if PGCIL can convince Reliance Infra about the fact there is no need to sign a

MoU, that should also be fine. He asked POWERGRID to look into the matter and sign

MoU if required.

ITEM NO. 7: MAINTENANCE OF RTUS INSTALLED UNDER ULDC PROJECTS FORCENTRAL SECTOR GENERATING STATIONS

Agenda Background:

During the 19th SCADA/EMS meeting held on 27th April2016 at Bhopal and special

meeting held on 9th June2016 at WRPC Mumbai, it was decided that a committee

comprising members from WRPC , WRLDC, Maharashtra, Gujarat, MP, Chhattisgarh,

27


PGCIL & ISGS will be formed for assessment of current status of the RTUs and suggest

for replacement / up gradation of the RTUs.

A letter from Director (O), PGCIL dt 25th July2016 ( Enclosed as Annexure -7) as

regards to maintenance of RTUs has been received, wherein it has been stated that, as

per CERC Regulations for ULDC projects, the recovery period of the capital cost

towards investment by POWERGRID through tariff is 15 years and accordingly

POWERGRID will continue the maintenance of the RTU installed till the completion of

15 years since DOCO for the respective regions. Any maintenance required for the

above referred RTU beyond this period has to be carried out by the concerned

Generating companies/Utilities. On completion of the useful service life of 15 years,

these RTUs are to be replaced / upgraded by individual concerned utilities.

TCC:MS, WRPC informed the above agenda position.

ED(AM),CC,PGCIL informed that they shall be giving support for RTUs installed in the

ULDC scheme till 2019 (life of 15 years) as per the regulations. Now constituents shall

have to either migrate to new RTUs, and/ or maintain the same on their own. The

assets have also completed their useful life and utilities have to maintain the same, or

go for replacements. After 2019, it is the utilities responsibilities to maintain the RTUs.

GM(Comml),WRHQ-1,NTPC stated that after receipt of PGCILs letter on the subject,

they have already initiated action to gear up for maintenance of RTUs in their system.

Associate Director(Trans),NPCIL representative stated that they apprehend getting

vendors for RTUs and requested PGCIL to take care of the maintenance. However,

PGCIL representative stated that PGCIL would be able to maintain the RTUs only till

completion of 15 years. Further the utilities shall have to make arrangement for

procuring the same as most of RTUs are obsolete. PGCIL agreed to give peripheral

support to NPCIL if any problems are faced by NPCIL in getting vendors/ technical help

or suggestions(but not contractual support to maintain the RTUs) and any other help to

28


NPCIL such as specifications & suppliers and based on this NPCIL shall take necessary

steps. Further NPCIL shall process for new RTUs accordingly so that there is no

problem in the future.

MS WRPC requested all state utilities to also gear up accordingly.


After 15 years the individual utilities have to take care of RTUs or replace them and

gear up for the same. Any help can be provided by PGCIL, but no contractual support is

feasible by POWERGRID after 15 years. Till completion of 15 years, PGCIL shall

continue to provide the maintenance.

WRPC requested all utilities to gear up accordingly.

ITEM NO. 8 ASSESSMENT OF STATUS OF ULDC EQUIPMENTS (RTUS &COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENTS) AND REQUIREMENT FOR THEIRREPLACEMENT / UP GRADATION

Agenda Background:

The status of ULDC equipment and requirement for replacement/upgradation was discussed

during 483rd OCC meeting held on 12th May 2016 at Jabalpur wherein initial discussion on the

subject during 19th SCADA/EMS PRM held on 27th April 2016 at Bhopal was also referred.

Relevant extract of the MOM of 19th SCADA/EMS PRM the meetings is reproduced below:

With reference to above, it emerged during discussion that data interruption is partly due to

technological obsolescence and partly due to old equipment in operation. Some of the ULDC

and associated equipments (RTUs & communication equipments) have been commissioned

during 2003-05 and are rendered obsolete, more-so, due to non-availability of spares &

maintenance agencies. After detailed discussion, it emerged that a committee comprising

members from WRPC, WRLDC, Maharashtra, Gujarat, MP, Chhattisgarh, PGCIL & ISGS would

29


be formed for assessment of current status of these equipment and suggest for replacement /

up gradation. It has also been agreed that WRPC would coordinate for the committee formation

and assessment & recommendation. The committee recommendation would be taken up in

WRPC forum for implementation.

Subsequently a meetingwas held on 09.06.206 at WRPC Mumbai wherein a Working-group

was formed comprising of representatives from each constituent of WR including WRPC,

WRLDC, Maharashtra, Gujarat, MP, Chhattisgarh, PGCIL & ISGS. Following Terms of

Reference (TOR) have also been decided:

I. Constituents to provide current status of RTUs & associated communication system (As

per TCT)

II. Working-group will decide about criterion for replacement/up-gradation.

III. Working-group to carry out assessment for replacement / upgrade

IV. Working-group to assess and suggest additional / future communication requirement

based of grid operation / CEA standards

V. Working-group will suggest the replacement / upgrade requirement vis.a.vis area of

responsibility

VI. Working-group to submit a detailed report to WRPC/TCC

Further ameeting on assessment of status of ULDC equipments (RTUs & Communicationequipments) and requirement for Upgradation/Replacement in Western Region was held at

WRLDC, Mumbai on 09.08.2016 to review the current status.

During the meeting members opinioned that, following things to be finalized from all utilities:

1. Collection data related RTU & Communication System

2. Criteria for Replacement

3. BoQ preparation

4. Additional Requirement ( Including future)

5. Area of Responsibility

6. Agency for Execution of procurement & Installation

7. Maintenance of Existing RTU & Communication system

Working group finalized the following criteria for Upgradation/Replacement of RTUs &

Communication equipments:

30


1. RTUs & Communication system more than 15 years and above

2. Below 15 years , but degraded performance

3. Compatibility Issues with Control Centre integration

4. Technical Obsolesce & non availability of vendor support

5. RTUs requirement for RE Station

6. Additional requirements for next 5 year shall also be incorporated.

Working group requested PGCIL, WRTS I to prepare a report on existing RTUs working under

Central & State sector with their age and requirement of replacement. However data shall be

submitted to WRTS - I by each utility through WRPC and WRLDC latest by 15September, 2016.

WRTS-I, PGCIL submit the draft report to Working-group by the 30th September, 2016 for

onward assessment & put up the same to next WRPC meeting. PGCIL agreed the same.

TCC:MS WRPC informed the above position. PGCIL, WRTS I shall prepare a report on

existing RTUs working under Central & State sector with their age and requirement

of replacement and submit the draft report to Working-group by the 30th September,

2016 for onward assessment & recommendations of the same shall be put up in the

next WRPC meeting.

WRPC:MS WRPC informed the TCC discussions. It was suggested that report brought out

by PGCIL WRTS-I shall be discussed and quantum and other modalities could be

firmed up by the group formed for the said purpose.

WRPC noted.

ITEM NO. 9 NON PAYMENT OF ULDC CHARGES BY THREE GENERATORS (RGPPL, LANCO AND ESSAR)

Agenda Background:GM, PGCIL, Gurgaon informed that in CERC Tariff regulation 2009-14, provision was

not available for claiming tariff of the ULDC system. Based on above POWERGRID filed

a tariff petition No. 57/2012 for tariff order for ULDC system with Honble CERC and

31


Honble CERC issued the order against this tariff petition on 14-11-2013. The order

says:

< Quote>The fees and charges for the Central portion shall be shared by all concernedin accordance with Paragraph No.40 of the order dated 8.12.2011 in Petition No.

68/2010.The paragraph No.40 of the order dated 8.12.2011 in Petition No. 68/2010 says :

< Quote >In our view, all users of the communication system including the transmissionlicensee should share the tariff as the communication system would also be used to

transmit operational data of the assets of the users. We direct that the sharing of tariff of

the communication system shall be on similar lines as the system operation charges for

the Regional Load Dispatch Centre under RLDC regulation< Un- Quote >Accordingly POWERGRID raised the bill for the period April09 to Dec2013 in Jan14

and for the period of Jan14 to March14 in April14 to all the Generators and Licensees.

Out of these billing, 4 Generators, RGPPL, SSL, LANCO and ESSAR have not released

the amount and the invoice details are given below:

Sl No. Party name Jan14 bill(For April 09-

Dec13)

April 14 bill(for Jan 14

Mar 14)

Total

01 SSL 2,44,73,475 13,17,362 25790837

02 RGPPL 1,06,91,920 11,72,050 11863970

03 Essar 13,56,221 3 ,18,005 1674226

04 Lanco 91,14,926 4 ,69,328 9584254

05 Total 4,89,13,287

06 Less paid by SSL 2,57,90,837

07 Balance 2,31,22,450

On taking up the issue in various CCM meetings of WRPC from Oct 2014 onwards and

with constant follow up, SSL has paid the amount of Rs. 2.58 Cr on 16-02-2016.

However the other three generators (RGPPL, Essar, Lanco) are still to release the

payment till date and their main contention for not releasing the payment is as follows:

i. M/s RGPPL contended that they have installed their own communication system to

transmit operational data from RGPPL to POSOCO SCADA system on specific

32


insistence of POSOCO as no other communication facilities including POWERGRID

was available in this zone for monitoring and scheduling activities. Therefore RGPPL

is not a user of POWERGRID communication network.

However since Scheduling of all power, including for RGPPL, could be done by

WRLDC in communiqu with Central and State LDCs and other stakeholders by

using communication networks in entirety which includes communication network of

POWERGRID. As RGPPL is one of the beneficiaries of using the POWERGRID

communication network, they are liable to share the communication expenses.

This point was clarified and reminders were sent through letter dated 28-06-2016,

17-02-2016, 12-01-2016, 16-12-2015, 11-09-2015, 17-04-15, 12-12-14

ii. M/s LANCO contended that their entire power is traded through PTC and the same

can be remitted on receipt of the amount from PTC .

LANCO was informed that as per the CERC order dtd 14.11.2013 in petition

No.57/TT/2012,

clause 43. The fees and Charges paid by the Generators or ISTSLicensee shall be recovered by them from their beneficiaries in accordance to tariff

regulations 42A of the Tariff Regulations.This implies that Generators have to initially make payment to POWERGRID and

later get it reimbursed from their beneficiaries.

This point also clarified and reminders sent through letter dated 29-06-2016, 21-06-

2016, 27-05-2016, 10-05-2016,19-04-201617-02-16,17-04-15, 12-12-14

iii. M/s ESSAR is not releasing the amount due to their financial crisis

Reminders sent through letter dated 17-02-16, 17-04-15, 12-12-14

The conclusions given by the Chair of CCM for the above issue are tabulated below

SlNo.

Meeting No anddate

Conclusion

01 68th CCM dated

28-10-2014

Committee requested to release the payment at the

earliest.

02 69th CCM dated

23-01-2015

Committee once again requested the payments be

made by the above constituents and further suggested

33


that if the payments are not made, POWERGRID may

take steps as per the regulatory frame work

03 70th CCM dated

04-06-2015

Committee noted the defaulters havent released the

payment.

04 71st CCM dated

03-11-2015

Committee directed the parties to release the payment

immediately.

05 72nd CCM dated

03-03-2016

PGCIL representative stated that SSNL have made the

payments recently. Committee once again requested

RGPPL, LANCO Amarkantak and EASSAR Power

(MP) to make the payments at the earliest. Also

Committee felt that PGCIL may invoke the provisions

of Honble CERC regulations

Since the recovery of the dues totalling Rs. 2.31 Crs is pending for quite long time of

more than 27 months, further it is requested to invoke clause 59 C of CERC order in

petition 142/MP/2012 on the three defaulting Generators ( RGPPL, LANCO and

ESSAR) and the clause says:

< Quote>During the period of regulation of power supply, for defaults in payment oftransmission charges, STOA to the regulated entity shall be denied by NLDC/RLDCsunder Regulation 25A of Open Access Regulations from the date of commencement ofregulation of power supply. When Regulation 25A is invoked independent of regulationof power supply, default trigger date for invoking Regulation 25A of Open AccessRegulations shall be 90 days from the due date of payment of various charges coveredunder the respective Regulations. NLDC/RLDCs shall deny short term open access tothe defaulting entity on occurrence of the default trigger dates as mentioned abovewithout having to approach the Commission on the basis of the request of concernedRLDC or Central Transmission Utility, as the case may be< Unquote >

TCC discussions:MS WRPC informed that NCA/SSL has already paid up the charges.

34


1) RGPPL case: AGM(Comml), RGPPL informed that the ULDC project whichcame under 2004-09 regulations and was implemented in WR in 2006, and at

that time RGPPL was not existing. RGPPL became ISGS in 2011 and at that

time, it was asked to create its own assets for communication of system data to

WRLDC. Accordingly, RGPPL has created its own assets and therefore in their

opinion they are not required to share the ULDC charges of WR as they have

installed their own communication system to transmit operational data from

RGPPL to POSOCO SCADA system on specific insistence of POSOCO as no

other communication facilities including POWERGRID was available in this zone

for monitoring and scheduling activities. Therefore, RGPPL believes that is not a

user of POWERGRID communication network and hence they need not pay

these charges..

2) He further informed that if this forum were to direct RGPPL to pay these charges,

then the beneficiaries should give the consent to reimburse the cost for ULDC,

then only RGPPL shall be able to pay the charges.

3) He felt that they can discuss the matter with the stake holders and if there is no

agreement, then RGPPL can file a petition with the Honble CERC.

4) POWERGRID and POSOCO opined that RGPPL satisfies the definition of a Userand as such is liable to pay these charges, and reimburse from the beneficiaries.

However, RGPPL is free to seek the Honble Commissions order if they feel so.

5) Essar Mahan Case:ED(AM),CC,PGCIL queried whether section 25 A ( forSTOA) under RPS regulation can be applied to Essar and similar cases. GM,

WRLDC informed that a petition was filed by WRLDC regarding outstanding

payment of DSM charges and RLDC fees and charges of ESSAR MAHAN to

CERC. ESSAR requested to be permitted STOA so that it can pay the dues to

RLDC and DSM liability. In its order CERC denied application of clause 25A and

Regulation of power Supply (RPS) on ESSARs plea that without generation how

can ESSAR pay its pending dues. Hence to enable ESSAR to pay its dues, and

ESSARs assurance to pay the DSM and RLDC dues, STOA was permitted by

the Commission. Therefore, notice for applying 25A and RPS cannot be given to

35


ESSAR till such time its outstanding DSM charges and RLDC fees and charges

are cleared. The same is expected to be cleared within 1 to 2 months thereafter

RPS notice &thereafter invoking 25A can be thought of.

3) LANCO case: Regarding LANCO case and applicability of section 25 A (forSTOA), GM WRLDC informed that as already discussed and regulation is clear on

the matter. However article 25 A (STOA) of RPS cannot be applied to LANCO or

RGPPL as they are long term open access cases. However, if PGCIL gives letter

under RPS then WRLDC can take action under RPS regulation.

TCC noted the Views of RGPPL, PGCIL and WRLDC as recorded above. SinceRGPPL was not agreeable to the interpretation of PGCIL, TCC felt that RGPPLhas to sort out the issue by making payments or Seek the guidance ofHonble Commission. Regarding Essar the position was noted. RegardingLANCO the views of WRLDC were noted.


(i) RGPPL case: RGPPL informed the above position, as stated in TCCyesterday. Since they have created their own communication system, outside

the ULDC project, they are not liable to pay. PGCIL representative stated that

RGPPL has to share the ULDC charges, as the ULDC charges comprise of

other receiving end equipments also.

(ii) Chairperson, WRPC stated that since RGPPL has created its own RTUs and

communication, is it acceptable to PGCIL that they remove their component

of the billing and pay for the other components at the receiving end. PGCIL

stated that if RGPPL is not paying, then these charges would be recovered

from other beneficiaries.

(iii) Member(Power),NCA informed that their position is also similar to RGPPL.

They had created the communication network and installed RTUs. If the

36


present proposed methodology as decided for RGPPL is adopted, NCA will

also be eligible for a refund.

(iv) Chairman, WRPC stated that there is a need to look into all theseaspects by a group and suggest solutions, so that there is clarity in theissue. WRPC agreed to work accordingly.

(v) Essar case: The position of TCC is noted(vi) Lanco: WRPC suggested that there is a payment security mechanism in the

form of revolving LC or other payment security mechanism either with the

trader or the generator available with PGCIL. PGCIL shall have to utilize the

same. WRPC felt that existing payment security mechanisms available with

PGCIL shall have to be used to resolve such problems.

ITEM No.10.RATIFICATION OF PROPOSALS APPROVED IN THE 40TH MEETINGOF STANDING COMMITTEE ON POWER SYSTEM PLANNING IN WESTERNREGION HELD ON 01.06.2016

Agenda Background:

DGM, PGCIL, Gurgaon intimated that number of ISTS schemes were approved in the

40th Meeting of Standing Committee (SCM) on Power System Planning in Western

Region held on 01.06.2016. The MoM of the Standing Committee Meeting has been

issued by CEA on 24.06.2016. The following schemes approved in the 40th Standing

Committee meeting is given below and their details are enclosed at Annexure - 10for

ratification of WRPC.

1. Interconnection between CGPL UMPP and Adani Mundra STPS in Gujarat.

2. Transmission System for Banaskantha (Radhanesda) Ultra Mega Solar Power Park

being developed by GPCL at Banaskantha, Gujarat (700 MW)

3. Transmission System for Solar Power Parks in Madhya Pradesh (2250 MW)

4. Connectivity of 2x 660 MW Generation Project of M/s Lanco Vidarbha Thermal

Power Ltd. (M/s LVTPL)

37


5. Measures to control High fault levels observed in Korba STPS (3x200MW +

4x500MW)

6. Additional 400kV feed to Goa Reactive Compensation

7. INTER - REGIONAL CORRIDOR BETWEEN WR AND NR

8. Connectivity & LTA application for 750MW by REWA Ultra Mega Solar (RUMS) Ltd.

for development of Solar Park in Rewa, Madhya Pradesh

9. Transmission System for Srijan Wind Farm in Bhuj, dist. Kutch Gujarat

10. Connectivity Application of M/s Renew Power Ventures Pvt. Ltd. (4x100MW)

11. Connectivity Application of Ostro Kutch Wind Pvt. Ltd.

12. Long Term Access application of M/s Essel Saurya Urja Company of Rajasthan Ltd.

13. Connectivity Application of Adani Green Energy Ltd. (AGEL) : 300 MW

TCC:MS WRPC informed the above position.

(i) Regarding proposal 5, CE, SLDC, CSEB informed that operational difficulties arelikely to be experienced. He therefore requested to study the proposal and take the

discussion in OCC. MS WRPC informed that these comments may be taken for

discussion in the SCM. He requested CSEB to write to CEA on the above.

(ii) Points pertaining to Navi Mumbai station was raised by CE,SLDC,MSETCL which isseparately discussed under Item No 38.

WRPC noted as above.

ITEM NO. 11: MIGRATION TO WEB BASED ENERGY SCHEDULING (WEBES) S/WAT WRLDC

Agenda Background:

In order to improve operational efficiency and reduce cycle time, with the support of all

users - constituents / ISGS / IPP & other users, WRLDC has migrated to Web Based

38


Energy Scheduling (WBES) on 1.7.2016 with continued parallel operation on old

platform till 31.7.2016 and complete operationalisation has been done on 1.8.2016.

All users have been given web access through password protection for day head and

real time scheduling of their portion as per IEGC defined time line. The declare capacity

and the requisition are being filled in the WBES by the respective regional entities

through the web interface provided to them. From 1st August2016, the implemented

schedule file for regional energy accounting would be generated from the new software.

TCC:CE,SLDC,MSETCL informed regarding web based scheduling some difficulties were

faced by them, which he appraised as a feedback. The data for export schedules at a

glance should be seen for easy day to day scheduling. The remaining data for

generators ( assuming some are filled and others are not) to be filled should be seen

easily. User interface such as display of variable rates of stations under URS and other

issues such as STOA and schedule data of embedded entities required to be included.

STOA transactions to various DISCOMs within Maharshtra should be separately shown.

Also Railway as a separate entity should be shown for RGPPL and not under DISCOM.

GM,WRLDC informed that it is not possible to display embedded entities schedules

hence Railway and individual STOA transactions cannot be shown separately .

However certain issues such as look and feel of the software can be improved for which

PwC representative will be available at WRLDC for the next two weeks. He requested

that SLDCs, ISGS & NTPC to depute their representatives for interacting with PwC

representative.

CE, SLDC,CSEB informed that when power is exported to SR (to KSEB) the revisions

in schedule is not updated immediately, giving wrong figures and idea about deviation of

CSEB in DSM. Hence the same should be updated immediately. He further informed

that their SLDC engineers are also facing problems in requisitioning in the web page.

This information should be available in a single web page for all the generators, instead

of going to each individual generator. GM WRLDC agreed to look into such user friendly

39


features. He also thanked all the utilities for their feedback. Further all were requested

to attend the meeting with PWC representative.

WRPC:It was suggested that minor hitches experienced by constituents could be takenup with PwC and schedule software could be more user friendly.

ITEM NO. 12 : EMS/SCADA UPGRADE / REPLACEMENT AT WRLDC AND SLDCSAT GUJARAT, MADHYA PRADESH, CHHATTISGARH, GOA, DNH & DD

Agenda Background:

New SCADA system has been commissioned at WRLDC Mumbai, SLDCs at Gujarat,

Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Goa, DNH & DD. Grid operation is done through new

Alstom system at all above locations. During the 19th SCADA/EMS meeting held on 27th

April2016 at Bhopal (relevant page enclosed at Annexure 12), ED LD & C

POWERGRID have requested Alstom to complete the pending points by September

2016. During the meeting he has requested to take over the system considering grid

operation is done through the new Alstom system. Further as per the discussion during

18th PRM at Vadodara on 27.1.2016 ( relevant page enclosed at Annexure 12.1),

deviations on 15 Delta Design Note (DDN) points have been technically agreed and

accordingly, committee has been constituted consisting members from POWERGRID

and POSOCO to arrive financial implications. As per the committee recommendation,

contract closing would be initiated.

TCC:ED(AM),CC,PGCIL informed that in SR the same problems are being faced and

shall be resolved. Thereafter the same points and solutions shall be resolved in WR.

He informed that the meeting for SCADA committee of WR is tentatively scheduled

on August 30th 2016.

40


CE, SLDC CSEB informed that Backup SLDC commissioning at Chhattisgarh SLDC

is lagging behind schedule. Further in the main SLDC EMS module is not installed.

He requested that Back up SLDC work may be expedited by PGCIL. PGCIL

representative agreed to look into the matter and resolve the same.

CE, SLDC, MPPTCL informed that Collection of old equipments under buy back is

pending. Due to shortage of space, these buybacks should be expedited.

Maintenance & services of the SCADA is a must. PGCIL informed that these issues

shall be resolved in the meeting at August 30, 2016.

WRPC:MD, GETCO queried whether Maharashtra (since it is not a part of this scheme)

SCADA is up-to-date with the present SCADA upgradation. CE,SLDC ,MSETCL

informed that they are up-to-date with the similar features.

ITEM NO. 13 : ARRANGEMENT OF ALTERNATE ALLOCATION OF POWER TOINDIAN RAILWAY, GUJARAT.

Agenda Background:

CE, SLDC, Gujarat has intimated that Indian Railway,Gujarat (IR_Guj) is allotted power

from RGPPL on e-bid RLNG. As per the availability/capacity declaration of RGPPL and

requirement of IR_Guj, power is scheduled on daily basis. At present, IR_Guj has only

one source of power to meet their requirement (i.e. allocation from RGPPL). In case of

eventualities/tripping at RGPPL, schedule of IR_Guj gets reduced/or down to ZERO.

(e.g.reduction of DC of RGPPL on 12th March 2016 & 27th March 2016).

Further, looking to the type of services, IR_Guj has limit scope of demand reduction.

Hence, in case of such eventualities, State has to bear the consequences. Therefore, it

is necessary that instead of having single allocation, IR_Guj has to tie up multiple

sources to take care of such eventualities.

Indian Railways may give the status.

41


TCC:MS WRPC informed the above agenda position.

CE,SLDC GETCO informed that IR is a deemed DISCOM and have tied up power with

only RGPPL. There is no alternate arrangement of power supply to IR in case of tripping

or low generation at RGPPL. Under such cases IR is drawing power under DSM.

Without a tie-up or standby arrangement, drawl of power from the grid is not correct. IR

has to enter a tie up, preferably with Discoms of state for stand-up power, in case of

tripping of RGPPL. Other SLDCs agreed to the observations of Gujarat.

AGM(Comml),RGPPL informed that railways representative will attend the WRPC

meeting and will share its point of view on the above. He informed that the chances of

tripping of units is reduced as they are operating two blocks instead of only one.

TCC recommended that IR should have a standby arrangement preferably with State

Discoms as the possibility of unit tripping is always there and standby arrangement is

must. This option is better than tying standby with exchange or any other generator will

not be suitable.Alternatively, RGPPL can sign up with the DISCOMs for such standby

arrangement. It was also decided to bring the above points to the knowledge of

Railways representative who was to attend the WRPC meeting the following day.

WRPC:MS WRPC informed the agenda position and TCC discussions.

(i) Dy CEE, HO, Western Railways who was Indian Railways (IR) representative

informed that as per their agreement with RGPPL, in the case of tripping of

units, RGPPL shall have to procure the power, and any differential rates in

this power shall be borne by RGPPL. Further IR is also tying up with Power

Exchange to have power in case the RGPPL units trip. During the time the

RGPPL units trip, the drawl of IR is very small compared to the grid, and the

exchange is accounted under DSM.

(ii) Chairman WRPC informed that IR is a 24 hour load. Further it is has recently

acquired a DISCOM status. He stated that IR has to enter a standby

42


arrangement with the state Discoms to cater to the contingency of RGPPL

tripping. To clarify, he cited that Mumbai is an example of a 24 hour load.

Here the Discoms of Tata and Reliance have Standby arrangement with

Maharashtra Discom, which ensures that in the event of tripping or shortfall at

Mumbai due to loss of generation by Tata or Reliance, Mumbai loads are fed

by Maha Discom in that period. Similar Standing Arrangement has to be

entered by IR with the State Discoms and that is irrespective of their RGPPL

tie-up or power exchange or any other tie-up. If such an arrangement does

not exist, and the source of power for Railways such as RGPPL is not

available, then as per the law the SLDCs are supposed to disconnect the

Railway loads. That will lead to a lot of inconvenience to IR and embarrassing

situation for all of us. However, if IR is not willing to enter such a standby

arrangement, then the next time RGPPL trips, the SLDCs shall instruct the IR

loads to be cut off accordingly. He asked IR representative to take up the

issue seriously with their management and immediately enter into a standby

arrangement.

(iii) WRPC also suggested that Member Secretary, WRPC on behalf 0f WRPC

shall also write a letter to Min of Railways informing the position.

(iv) MD, GETCO enquired about who is to disconnect the IR in the event of

tripping of RGPPL and no standby arrangement made by them in spite of so

much persuasion. It was clarified by WRLDC that IR is an embedded

customer of the states. The IR schedule at state boundary is communicated

by WRLDC. Any control of an embedded customer lies in the jurisdiction of

the respective SLDCs. Hence the SLDCs have to take the action to curtail the

load of IR.

(v) MD, GETCO suggested that all DISCOMs should file a petition with the

CERC on this issue as so far no response is coming from IR in spite of so

much of persuasion.

(vi) Chairman WRPC once again asked IR representative to immediately proceed

to make a standby arrangement with states Discoms, so that IR loads need

not be tripped when the source of power for IR (either RGPPL or power

43


exchange etc) is not available. If IR fails to enter the standby arrangementand the event of such loss of power takes place, then IR loads shallhave to be tripped by the law, and IR is responsible for the same.So farin the past, somehow the SLDCs have not tripped the IR loads on the past

few occasions of RGPPL shortfall or tripping and the matter was pleaded with

IR to make standby arrangements. Now the SLDCs cannot continue this

practice and they will be forced to cut of the IR loads in such cases. The

matter is very serious and IR representative was advised to take up with

management on top priority.

WRPC agreed as above.

ITEM NO. 14: STATUS OF URTDSM

Agenda Background:

CE, SLDC, Gujarat vide their letter SLDC/SCADA/URTDSM/4898 dated 19.07.2016

(copy enclosed at Annexure- 14) has requested to convey detailed status of URTDSM

covering schedule of erection and commissioning, FAT, SAT, status of analytics

development by IIT-Mumbai, future plan of the project, time line of the project and status

of Phase-II.. Further, it has been requested that a detailed presentation may be given by

PGCIL.

TCC:MS WRPC requested the progress of the project be informed by PGCIL.

ED(AM),CC, PGCIL informed that in Phase-I 305 PMUs are to be installed by March 17.

Out of these 54 PMU have been installed. IIT-B has developed two analytics. The

CERC have not cleared the phase II. After completion of Phase-I CERC may give a go

ahead for phase-II and therefore PGCIL cannot take up phase-II till CERC gives

clearance for the same.

44


CE SLDC MPPTCL informed that only 3 S/s of MP are covered under Phase I and

other important stations in their system are included in phase-II. Therefore, PGCIL

should give the status on Phase-II.

CE, SLDC GETCO informed that progress of URTDSM should be monitored regularly.

The schedule of erection and commissioning, FAT, SAT, status of analytics

development by IIT-Mumbai, future plan of the project, time line of the project and status

of Phase-II. Since the major PMUs in state system are getting covered under Phase II,

in order to have full benefit of the project, Phase II must get clearance from CERC.

It was suggested that PGCIL shall give a copy of the petition filed with CERC and

constituents may join so that the Honble Commission may direct PGCIL for Phase II.

WRPC:MS WRPC informed the above position.

(i) ED(AM),CC,PGCIL informed that hardware scope of Alsthom included 5

PDCs in WR and covered 70 substations in WR. The protocols for the

hardware part is developed. Regarding software analystics aspects, IIT-B has

developed the proto types but none has so far been deployed. He clarified

that proto-type analytics are tested for small group of substations forming a

sub-region in NR. They are not deployed for the entire system. He also

informed that hardware scope (under Alsthom) shall be completed for this

phase by March 2017.

(ii) MD,GETCO informed that the project has been delayed very much. He also

suggested that many of the analytics presently researched by IIT-B, are

practically available as finished products, which could be procured..

(iii) CE,SLDC GETCO informed that WR constituents have not been informed

about the progress of the project at regular intervals at all.

(iv) Chairman WRPC informed that PGCIL shall have to complete the project as

per the deadlines of March 2017. He informed that all projects should have a

utility value, which is sadly missing. If the projects get delayed, then

45


technology obsolescence becomes an important factor making it necessary to

buy further new technology. He asked PGCIL to explore the availability of

readymade analytics and get utility value of the project. If research

development work at IIT-B is not progressing satisfactorily in a time bound

manner then world wide readily available analytics may be put up in the next

WRPC meeting. It was also decided that PGCIL shall call meeting to indicate

the URTDSM progress with the WR constituents at the earliest.

WRPC decided as above.

ITEM NO. 15 : DELAY IN SCHEDULING OF URS POWER OF CGPL ON ACCOUNTOF LATE CONSENT BY THE UTILITIES.

Agenda Background:

CE, SLDC, Gujarat vide their letter No. SLDC/CE/MIS/URS/Allocation/4082 dated

09.06.2016 (copy enclosed at Annexure- 15) has intimated that whenever SLDC-

Gujarat had applied for URS from CGPL (during tripping of large size unit in State or to

meet sudden RE variation), it took substantial time in scheduling the same, due to

casual approach of Generators with beneficiaries who has surrendered the share and

also due to noncooperation of concerned State SLDCs as well as concerned State

Discoms. Also, many times, concerned State SLDCs (whose beneficiaries has

surrendered the share) are not taking prompt actions for giving consent to the State

SLDC who has applied for URS and passing their responsibility on shoulders of State

Discoms.

Further it believes that in exigency condition, there is no need to take consent of

respective SLDCs (whose beneficiaries has surrendered the share) / Discoms /

Generators as in normal practice.As per existing practice, whenever the original

beneficiary requests their share (earlier surrendered by beneficiary), same has been

allocated to the beneficiaries of respective State as per the scheduling procedure

without informing / taking consent of State SLDC / beneficiaries who has availed URS.

46


Also, delay in scheduling of URS from UMPP would lead:

1. Picking up costly generation by the utility in need

2. Sometimes, utility in need has to run gas based station for short period thatattributes frequent start / stop of gas based station which is not desirable.

3. DSM violation at State / Regional boundary

4. Frequent ramp up / down of large size units of UMPP.

It is clear that the delay in URS scheduling from UMPP is not at all desirable for all

participants for economical grid operation.

Therefore, quick scheduling of URS from UMPPs is helpful in many ways. Prior to

ramping down of UMPP units on account of surrender of power by any utility, other

beneficiaries may be informed for scheduling of URS power of UMPP, so that such

national asset can be optimally utilized and for benefit of all.

TCC:CE, SLDC GETCO informed that, as already discussed in the agenda notes, cheaper

power available at CGPL, is not getting utilised under the URS power, due to late

consent by the utilities. Further CGPL is not accepting one time standing instruction. As

in the case of NTPC & SASAN where a standing consent for scheduling of URS power

has been taken from beneficiaries and scheduling of URS is done by WRLDC, thereby

avoiding delays. Hence CGPL should follow the same system.

Head-EMD,CGPL stated that as per the directions of CERC in SASAN URS order, it is

the responsibility of generator to take consent from the surrendering beneficiary, which

would then be communicated to WRLDC for scheduling the same and would like to

continue with this arrangement.

GM, WRLDC informed that if standing consent from beneficiaries through generator is

obtained then WRLDC can perform their scheduling as being done for SASAN and

NTPC.

47


TCC recommended CGPL to follow the arrangement of one-time standingconsent, followed by NTPC & SASAN and for that explore with other regionbeneficiaries for obtaining one-time consent.

WRPC:MS WRPC informed the above TCC decision.

ED&CEO, CGPL stated that they are following the Honble CERCs order, which

stipulates that they first seek consent of the beneficiaries. They are not agreeable to a

one-time standing instruction.

MD, GETCO stated that they shall take steps to get one-time standing instruction,

instead of each time instruction. This will ensure URS power is scheduled in real time to

other needy beneficiaries. He queried whether CGPL will honour such one-time

standing instruction. CGPL representative stated that they shall not be in a position to

honour the one-time standing instruction.

To a query by MD, GETCO, GM WRLDC informed that they shall be able to schedule if

generator forwards them the one-time consent of beneficiaries. Since the generator is

not ready, WRLDC shall not be in a position to do the same.

EE,Prot,WRPC informed that a similar case for URS delay in real time exists in SR, for

which suo-motto petition has been raised by the Honble Commission vide petition

pertaining to simplification of rules for URS, which incidentally is in line with GETCOs

requirements in the agenda item. (Petition No 16/SM/2015 ROP dated 5.01.2016. on

difficulties encountered in implementation of the Commissions order dated 5.10.2015 in

Petition No 310/MP/2014 regarding scheduling of URS from ISGS stations wherein in

point 2 The representative of SRPC submitted that the utilities of SR are facing

difficulties in obtaining real time consent each time for URS reallocation from original

beneficiary to new beneficiary.) Since this exactly the same issue faced by GETCO,

so if GETCO joins the petition this will be helpful.

48


MD, GETCO informed that Gujarat shall seek the one-time standing instructions from

the bene

Minutes of 32nd meeting of WRPC held on 24.08.2016 preceded by ...

Documents

Transcript of Minutes of 32nd meeting of WRPC held on 24.08.2016 preceded by ...