THE UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, LUCKNOW

Transcription

1 Petition No 851 & 861 of 2012 Before THE UTTAR PRADESH ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, LUCKNOW Date of Order: IN THE MATTER OF: Deemed Energy claim of RPSCL Petition No 851 of 2012 BETWEEN M/s Rosa Power Supply Company Limited (RPSCL) Administrative Block Hardoi Road, P.O. Rosar Kothi, Tehsil Sadar Distt. Shahjahanpur. U.P Petitioner AND U.P. Power Corporation Limited (through its Chairman and M.D.) Shakti Bhawan, Ashok Marg, Lucknow Respondent Petition No 861 of 2012 U.P. Power Corporation Limited (through its Chairman and M.D.) Shakti Bhawan, Ashok Marg, Lucknow Petitioner AND M/s Rosa Power Supply Company Limited (RPSCL) Administrative Block Hardoi Road, P.O. Rosar Kothi, Tehsil Sadar Distt. Shahjahanpur. U.P Respondent The following were present: 1. Sri U.C. Pant, CE (PPA), UPPCL 2. Sri S.P. Pandey, SE(PPA), UPPCL 3. Sri S.K. Sinha,EE(PPA), UPPCL 4. Sri Vibhav Agarwal, Director, RPSCL 5. Sri Sumeet Notani, DGM, RPSCL 6. Sri Ambuj Shukla,Manager, RPSCL

2 7. Sri Vivek Singh,Manager, RPSCL 8. Sri Sidharth Mohata, RPSCL Order (Date of Hearing ) 1. At the outset, the issue of fee was discussed before the Commission as UPPCL vide letter dated has represented some dispute in the fee deposited in above petition. UPPCL has also requested that although the notice was not issued in their petition no. 861 of 2012 but being similar in nature with petition no. 851 of 2012 the Hon ble Commission may allow their petition for hearing. The Commission decided to take up the hearing in petition no. 861 of 2012 filed by UPPCL pending the issue of fee which shall be decided by the Commission separately and shall be intimated to the parties accordingly. 2. There is no provision of deemed generation under the regulation and it is only specific to PPA agreed between the parties i.e. RPSCL and UPPCL. Had the dispute been arisen exactly within the framework of PPA or provisions of regulation there would have been no problem to settle the dispute. UPPCL agreed that as per provision of the PPA, RPSCL is entitled for deemed generation but in the absence of DC they could not ascertain it and hence the petition no. 851 of 2012 and 861 of The petitioner synchronized unit III of Rosa Power Station on and as per procedure the 72 hours full load test was carried out in order to declare the COD. Finally, the COD was declared on in the presence of respondent s representative. Pursuant to the report of UPPCL s representative UPPCL accepted the COD vide their letter dated with the condition that the fixed charge will be paid only after the evacuation facility is available or whichever is earlier. 4. Against this conditional acceptance of the COD by UPPCL the petitioner approached the Commission with following prayer:- This Hon ble Commission may kindly pass a suitable order confirming the COD of Unit III of the project from hours of and also confirming the liability of UPPCL to pay fixed charges from the same freight as per provisions of the PPA for the power supply from the Unit. 5. The Commission while disposing of above petition issued the Order dated that COD of the Unit III shall be considered as Accordingly under the existing

3 provisions of the PPA the fixed charges for the supplied power shall be determined. As for as the issue of deemed energy, if any, is concerned, it may be filed by the petitioner to the Commission by a separate petition along with all supporting documents to establish their claim, hence this petition no. 851 of The representative of RPSCL raised the issue of non-availability of evacuation system and non availability of payment security mechanism for payment of deemed generation in case of phase-ii of Rosa Thermal Power Station. UPPCL submitted that in any case, for verification of deemed energy, declared capacity was required which was not given by RPSCL. RPSCL submitted that in the regime of Availability Based Tariff (ABT), not supplying after declaring the capacity may attract penalties in the form of UI on Generator and hence they did not declare the capacity. Sri U.C. Pant, CE (PPA) submitted that the issue of UI penalty could have occurred only when there was Scheduled Generation given by them on the basis of Declared Capacity and as finalized by SLDC so the reason for not providing the DC as given by the RPSCL was not acceptable. UPPCL submitted that they reiterate their earlier submission as made by them in the petition no. 802 of 2011 and the Hon ble Commission may take a view accordingly. 7. As per the provision of PPA Section 9.1(d) UPPCL shall complete construction of external inter connection facilities ninety (90) days prior to schedule synchronization date for Unit 1 or any extension thereto due to any force majeure event, in accordance with the construction schedule of the station. The same is applicable in case of Unit III also by way of a supplemental PPA dated & where all terms & conditions of PPA dated are applicable in case of Unit III & IV mutatis mutandis. Further, provision for start up power as per section 9.3(a) which says that Normal start up and reserve standby power for the station shall be provided by the Rosa Station Transformer. UPPCL shall make available start up Power 180 days prior to the schedule synchronization date for Unit 1 or any extension thereto due to any force majeure event in accordance with the construction schedule in the station 8. Third Unit of Rosa Thermal Power Station which is under question was scheduled to be synchronized on As per provision of PPA the transmission lines were to be ready 180 days prior to the scheduled synchronization date. The existing transmission lines, by the time the third Unit of Rosa was commissioned, were not capable of

4 evacuating the power of third Unit of Rosa Power Station i.e. 300 Mw. Further, all the lines meant for Unit I & II are not available even till date. 9. After going through the merit of the case based on facts submitted by both the petitioner and the respondent followed by argument during the course of hearing the Commission finds the following as the main ground for the petitioner s claim for deemed energy: (a) A 400 Kv transmission line was under construction by the petitioner to evacuate 50% of the power which was initially not to be supplied to UPPCL from Unit III and Unit IV of Rosa Power Station connecting to ISTS network of Power Grid Corporation to sell it in open market, though subsequently this 50% power from Rosa which RPSCL was to supply in open market agreed to supply to UPPCL under an agreement dated This line got completed and was commissioned on by RPSCL. Through this line UPPCL started evacuation of power of Unit III from Rosa Power Station. In this way the petitioner helped the respondent UPPCL to evacuate power from stage II of Rosa Power Station to mitigate the power shortfall in the State. (b) PPA provided for calculation of deemed energy based on daily declared capacity by the generator which in the present case was a mere formality. The main purpose of Daily Declared Capacity in advance is for planning purpose by SLDC for scheduling the generation. The evacuation facility was not available and this fact was necessarily in the knowledge of SLDC which has also been admitted by the respondent vide their letter no.1116/ce/ppa, dated DC means Daily Declared Capacity shall be the capacity of the Station at the generator terminals, declared by ROSA at hours every day for the next 24 hours, or a modified declared capacity through a written notice to UPPCL, for the purpose of calculating Deemed Energy or any Declared Capacity Penalty calculated pursuant to Schedule 8. (c) If the SLDC had provided the schedule generation (SG) against the daily declared capacity (DC), given by the petitioner without taking into account any transmission constraints it would not have been possible for the petitioner to generate as per schedule and incur UI charges and this would have put the Units to the risk of tripping and damage.

5 (d) So far as the basis for calculation of deemed energy is concerned, it has already got established by the UPPCL after successful completion of 72 hours of full load test proving the capacity of Unit to generate at its rated capacity. (e) The provision of the PPA in section 9.5(a) says that Notwithstanding any other provision in this agreement, if Unit I scheduled commercial operation date is delayed due to: (i) the external inter connection facility described in section 9.2 & 9.4, and schedule 5 (which are the responsibility of UPPCL) not being completed and operational ninety (90) days prior to the scheduled synchronization date of Unit 1 for any reason not attributable to a default by Rosa or any force majeure or (ii) any other UPPCL default (e.g. non-supply of start of power) and it is certified by the designated engineer that Unit 1 is ready for synchronization, Unit 1 shall be deemed commissioned on scheduled commercial operation date of Unit 1 and UPPCL shall from the schedule COD of Unit 1 pay for the first forty five (45) days fixed charges to Rosa. After forty five days UPPCL shall pay an amount equivalent to full fixed charges plus the incentives for the Units generated for the plant operation at 85% plant load factor. (f) Conditional COD with deferment of payment of fixed charges by the respondent UPPCL does not have any commercial logic. (g) UPPCL could not provide payment security mechanism as was required in the PPA. This default also qualified for deemed energy as provided in the definition of deemed energy in the PPA. Deemed Energy shall mean, for any Operating Period, the number of units of energy (kwh) which ROSA was in a position to generate during such operating period, with reference to actual level of generation then existing and with reference to the Daily Declared Capacity or the most recent modification thereto as last modified and indicated to UPPCL, but did not generate as a result of (i) Dispatch Instruction from UPPCL or (ii) failure to take delivery of electricity by UPPCL due to grid disturbance attributable to UPPCL as determined by Northern Regional Electricity Board (NREB) or similar authority but not due to any Force Majeure Event or (iii) payment

6 default by UPPCL including any failure to provide/sustain agreed security package. (h) If the deemed energy claim of the petitioner is rejected merely on the ground that DC (which is the operational requirement of the Grid by the SLDC) is not available as asserted by the respondent in its submission, it will not be justifiable to the petitioner. Therefore in view of the above the Commission accepts the claim of the deemed energy of the petitioner and hereby directs the respondent: (i) acknowledge the same and make the payment accordingly. (ii) Deemed Energy shall be worked out as per rated capacity of Unit III established during 72 hours full load test, acknowledged by UPPCL. 10. UPPCL in petition no. 861 of 2012 has asked the Commission to clarify on the following: (a) In absence of declared capacity, whether Deemed Energy can be calculated on the basis of available capacity as mentioned by the firm. (b) Any other methodology for calculation of Deemed Energy, as the Commission deems it proper in accordance with the PPA. After examining all facts on record, the Commission is of the opinion that any written intimation by the RPSCL to UPPCL/SLDC informing that it s unit(s) is/are available but has been kept under shut down due to any default of UPPCL, qualified under the definition of Deemed Energy, is as good as daily declared capacity and shall be taken into account for all calculations of Deemed Energy. 11. The Petitions are therefore disposed of. (Meenakshi Singh) Member (Shree Ram) Member Place : Lucknow Dated:

7