January 2017 REGULATORY TRACKER

Transcription

1 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 January 2017 REGULATORY TRACKER Meant for (ternal Circulation) Rev No. Reason for Revision Prepared By & Date Farrukh Aamir + Shubhayu+ R0 Ambica Gupta + Sarika Jerath ( ) Checked By & Date Farrukh Aamir ( ) Approved For Issue By & Date -

2 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 Status of Cases 1. The analysis covers the 126 cases filed from the beginning of FY-17 and updated as of 31 st Jan 2017 involving Tata Power and Tata Power Group Companies (excluding TPDDL) at SERCs, CERC, APTEL, High Courts and the Supreme Court. Of the 126 cases filed, in 34 cases the order/ judgment has been pronounced, in 18 cases the order are reserved, 3 cases have been withdrawn and the remainder 71 cases are presently being heard. 2. The table below gives the break-up of cases filed in different forums. Table 1: Cases volving Tata Power Group (TPDDL not included) Petition/ Appeal Filed with No Passed Hearing in progress APERC 1 1 KERC 1 1 Yet to commence Withdrawn/ Dismissed MERC JSERC CERC APTEL Supreme Court Bombay High Court 1 1 Total As of 31 Jan Total As of 31Dec The table below gives the break-up of cases filed by Tata Power in different forums. Table 2: Cases Filed by Tata Power Group (TPDDL not included) Petition/ Appeal Filed with No TPC-MO Jojobera TPREL Powerlinks MPL CGPL TPTCL APERC 1 1 KERC 1 1 MERC JSERC 3 3 CERC APTEL Supreme Court Bombay High Court 0 Total As of 31 Jan Total As of 31Dec s have been passed in 34 matters and reserved in matters are being heard and date for first hearing is awaited in 11 cases. 2

3 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 Figure 1 : Status of Cases as of 31 st Jan 2017 Yet to commence, 13 Withdrawn/ Dismissed, 3 Passed, 34 Hearing in progress, 58, Of the 34 orders passed, 22 have been in favour and 10 against Tata Power. s MERC JSERC CERC APTEL Bombay HC Supreme Court s Issued % favour % Not in favour/ Neutral % Total / Judgment Issued, cases dismissed/ withdrawn in Jan the month of Jan, one order was passed by JSERC and one by Supreme Court. Table 3: / Judgment Issued or withdrawn during the Jan 2017 No 1 2 Case/ Appeal/ Petition JSERC Case No 3 of Civil Appeal No.230 of 2017 Case APR Petition FY -16 along with Truing-up of FY and FY Civil Appeal field by Tata Power-G & T arising out of the final Judgment and dated in Review Petition No. 13 of and Judgment and dated in Appeal Nos. 244 and 246 of passed by the APTEL. / Judgment Summary JSERC has passed the Tariff on APR Petition FY -16 wherein the Commission has conducted the Truing-up for FY and FY All the issues decided in favour of Tata Power in the APTEL Judgment dated have been settled for FY to FY including the Truing-up of actual Ash Disposal Expenses and retaining of 100% gain on operational parameters along with the associated tax. The Civil Appeal was listed for hearing on 20th January, 2017 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that imposition of costs was the discretion of Ld. Tribunal. However, upon hearing both parties the Hon ble Supreme Court reduced the costs by Rs.25,000/- and directed Ushanagar to deposit the balance sum of Rs.25,000/- within 4 weeks. 3

4 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 New Petitions/ Appeals filed in Jan Six petitions and an appeal have been filed involving Tata Power. The case details are as follows: Table 4: New Petitions/ Appeals filed in Jan 2017 No Case No Filed By Filed with Case Summary and Status 1. MERC Case No 171 of Suo-moto MERC Verification of Renewable Purchase Obligation for FY -16 of Tata Power-Distribution Business. Tata Power had filed its submissions furnishing details of compliance of RPO targets for FY - 16 to the Commission on 20th December,. The matter was listed for hearing on 2nd February, Upon hearing the submissions, the Hon'ble Commission has reserved the matter for orders. Petition of MSEDCL seeking directions under Distribution Open Access Regulations,. 2. MERC Case No 8 of 2017 MSEDCL MERC MSEDCL has filed a Petition on under the MERC (Distribution Open Access) Regulations, challenging /seeking clarification of various regulations in the DOA Regulations. MERC issued notice on 16th January, Tata Power was served with a copy of the petition 21st January, Next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. Petition of Shri Ashok Kulkarni under Section 128 of the EA, 2003 for investigation of the books of accounts of Tata Power. 3. MERC Case No 16 of 2017 Shri Ashok Kulkarni MERC Shri Ashok Kulkarni has filed a Petition on for investigation of books of accounts for inflated costs from FY2004 onwards, more particularly the contracts awarded to M. Pallonji and Company Private Ltd (MPCPL), M Pallonji Shipping Private Limited (MPSPL) and M Pallonji Shipping Singapore pte Limited (MPSSPL). MERC issued notice on 7th February, Tata Power is yet to be served with a copy of the petition. Next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. MYT Business Plan and MYT Petition for Jojobera Unit 2 & Unit 3 for the Control Period FY along with Truing-up for FY TPC JSERC 5. CERC Petition No 04/ MP/ 2017 MPL CERC The first set of queries have been posted by JSERC. The response to the same along with the revised MYT Business Plan FY approved by the Board of Directors shall be submitted by Petition before CERC in connection with disputes and differences arising under the MT PPA between MPL & BRPL. 4

5 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 No Case No Filed By Filed with Case Summary and Status The matter is yet to be listed CERC Petition No 05/ MP/ 2017 Appeal No. 341 of & I A No. 742 of Civil Appeal No.230 of 2017 MPL Appeal filed by MIAL against MY of Tata Power- D Civil Appeal by New Ushanagar CHSL challenging CERC APTEL Supreme Court Petition before CERC in connection with disputes and differences arising under the MT PPA between MPL & TPDDL. The matter is yet to be listed. MIAL has filed the said Appeal challenging the tariff determined by the Hon'ble MERC for MIAL in the MYT of Tata Power-D. The appeal was admitted by the Hon ble Tribunal on 9th January, 2017 and is now listed for further hearing on 13th February, Civil Appeal field by Tata Power-G & T arising out of the final Judgment and dated in Review Petition No. 13 of and Judgment and dated in Appeal Nos. 244 and 246 of passed by the APTEL. The Civil Appeal was listed for hearing on 20th January, 2017 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that imposition of costs was the discretion of Ld. Tribunal. However, upon hearing both parties the Hon ble Supreme Court reduced the costs by Rs.25,000/- and directed Ushanagar to deposit the balance sum of Rs.25,000/- within 4 weeks. Matter listed for hearing in Feb Following are the matters that are listed to be heard in the month of Feb No Case No MERC Case No 137 of MERC Case No 171 of CERC Petition No 141/MP/ Appeal No 201 of 2014 & IA of 2014 Petitioner/ Respondent P - TPC R - MERC P - MERC R - TPC-D P - CGPL R - GUVNL & Others P - R fra R - MERC, TPC-D Date of hearing Case Application filed by The Tata Power Company Limited under Section 18 of the EA, 2003 and the MERC (Transmission License Conditions) Regulations, 2004 as amended in 2006 seeking amendment of the Transmission License No.1 of 2014 dated Verification of Renewable Purchase Obligation for FY -16 of Tata Power- Distribution Business Change in Law Petition pertaining to Construction Period-FY12,FY13 & FY14 R-fra s Appeal along with a stay Application against the Distribution License granted to Tata Power on

6 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 No Case No Appeal No 190 of Appeal No 237 of Appeal No 272 of Appeal No 296 of IA No. 473 of in DFR no of and I.A. No. 475 of in DFR No of Appeal No 43 of Appeal No 21 of Review Petition 16 of Petitioner/ Respondent P - MPL R - WBSERC P - R fra R - MERC & Others P - MPL R - JSERC, DVC & Others P - R-fra R - MERC & TPC D P - Kamlesh Lalji and Harishchandr ra Yaswant Govalkar R - MERC, TPC & Others P - TPREL R - MERC P - BEST R - MERC, TPC P - MPL R - CERC Date of hearing Case MPL Appeal against the WBERC MYT for DVC for FY to FY -17 Appeal filed by Rinfra to set aside the of MERC to the extent as challenged in the Appeal. MPL has challenged the disallowances of the Power Purchase Cost for the sale of Power from MPL to DVC by JSERC in the MYT Tariff for DVC for FY to FY -16 on account of erroneous application of Merit Dispatch Principle. Rinfra's Appeal against interim of the Hon'ble MERC dated 9th November, in Case No. 182 of 2014 Appeals filed by Kamlesh Lalji and Harishchandrra Yaswant Govalkar challenging the terim dated 9th November, of the Hon'ble MERC primarily on the grounds that the is in teeth of the directions given by this Hon ble Tribunal in Judgment dated in Appeal No. 246 of The proceedings in Case No. 182 of 2014 are continuation of the license proceedings and therefore non issuance of public notice / public hearing is contrary to Section 15 of the Electricity Act. TPREL has filed an appeal against the of the Hon'ble MERC in Review Petition 71 of dated 6th Nov, BEST has filed an Appeal before the Hon'ble APTEL on 22nd Dec, inter alia challenging the terim of the Hon'ble MERC dated 9th November, in Case No. 182 of 2014 "MPL had earlier challenged two disallowances in dated passed by CERC approving the capital cost and determining generation tariff regarding:- (a) Wrongful disallowance of terest during Construction. (b) Part disallowance of cost of secondary fuel. The of CERC has been upheld by APTEL. A review of the Judgment has been sought at APTEL. 6

7 CREG/INT-Regulatory Tracker//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 No Case No I.A. No. 647 of in DFR No of Appeal No. 236 of & IA NoS. 500 & 501 of Appeal No. 341 of & I A No. 742 of Petitioner/ Respondent P - TPC R - MERC P - NESCO R - MERC & TPC D P - MIAL R - TPC-D Date of hearing Case Tata Power - Generation filed an Appeal under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003 challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the MYT dated in Case No.32of passed by Ld. Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission Appeal filed by NESCO challenging MERC's order in Case No. 124 of MIAL has filed the said Appeal challenging the tariff determined by the Hon'ble MERC for MIAL in the MYT of Tata Power-D. 9. The table below summaries the status of each case which are being heard and for those for which the order is reserved. Cases for which orders have been issued have not captured in the table below. The case updates for the month are highlighted in orange and new cases added to the tracker are highlighted in green. 7

8 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 Petitions filed with MERC (Being heard) The matter was heard on 14th Oct MERC has stated that since, the matter is subjudice before the Supreme Court, it would not be appropriate to proceed Petition of TPC for determination of further in the matter till the final Judgment TPC's Petition for compensation as per ATE judgment of the Supreme Court. TPC is directed to 117 of determination of payable to Tata Power D for nonscheduling of 198 MW of power in the %20%20Case%20No.%2 pdf/%2058%2042/daily implead MSEDCL, R-fra-D and BEST as compensation parties in the matter and serve the copies payable by MSLDC months February 2011 and March of petition and submissions upon them. 0117%20of% pdf 2011 by MSLDC Next date of hearing shall be communicated by the Secretariat of the Commission on receipt of final Judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court of of 2014 Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai has filed the present petition seeking an appropriate mechanism for compensating revenue loss of past revenue gaps and cross subsidy from the BEST's consumers who would migrate to TPC in the BEST's license area. Network Rollout Plan of Tata Power- D Petition for relief on account of certain issues that may affect BEST Undertaking and its financial sustainability due to migration of consumers to TPC-D Network Rollout Plan of Tata Power-D submitted under petition as per the directives of MERC in the Tata Power- D Grant of Distribution License in Case 90 of 2014 Matter was heard on 13th Jan. BEST sought adjournment due unavailability of its senior officers due to its budget presentation and discussion in the House of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. Accordingly the Commission adjourned the hearing. TPC-D pointed out that BEST had filed this Petition on 9 June, 2014 prior to granting of Distribution License to TPC-D and the subsequent Judgments of Hon APTEL on various Appeals filed, related with the TPC-D License matter. this background a point was raised on whether BEST wishes to continue or reconsider this Petition. BEST may respond to this point, before the next hearing. Next date of hearing will be communicated to the parties by the Secretariat of the Commission. MERC issued the public notice on 20th May, inviting suggestions/objections for the public. The Public hearing was scheduled on 21st June,. Upon hearing all suggestions/objections to the 8

9 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 network rollout plan of Tata Power and the committee Report, the matter is now reserved for order. Tata Power needs to file its response to the objections raised of of Petition for determination of Tariff from Cogeneration plant Petition for approval of switchover protocol in line with ATE judgment Petition with revised prayers to the Petition filed in 56 of 2011, under Section 62 (1) (a) and 86 (1) (e) of the Electricity Act 2003 for determination of tariff for supply of electricity from dustrial waste heat recovery cogeneration Power plant of 30 MW capacity at Ghugus, Dist Chandrapur of Maharashtra to the Distribution licensee in Maharashtra and fixation of purchase obligation for electricity produced from waste heat recovery based Co-generation plants. Tata Power has been impleaded in the matter as Respondent. Petition for approval of protocol to enable consumers to select any electricity distribution network in Mumbai as per judgment of the ATE in Appeal No. 246 & 229 of 2012 dated 28th November, The matter was listed for admission hearing on 3rd September,. Counsel for Lloyds metals made its submissions that the Hon'ble Commission could promote the fossil fuel based Cogeneration by any other measures such as facilitate sale of electricity from such sources, grid connectivity etc. Further, MSEDCL, opposed the admission of the Petition limited to the extent of prayers made by the Petitioner regarding concessional CSS and wheeling charges. MSEDCL, further submitted that there could be a policy for promotion of Cogeneration. Tata Power filed its submissions on 1st Sept. Upon hearing the parties, the Hon'ble MERC has directed the Petitioner to amend its petition with revised prayers along with submission on the issue of admission. On the last date of hearing i.e. 12th January,, all parties concluded their arguments. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Commission has reserved the matter for orders. The matter was listed for final hearing on 16th September,, wherein all parties submitted that the pleadings in the matter are complete. Tata Power submitted that the protocol of migration of consumers is linked with Case No. 182 of 2014 (Network Rollout Plan of Tata Power), where the Hon ble Commission had constituted a committee and a public hearing has also been conducted. Tata Power has submitted its submissions on the migration 9

10 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 protocol and also filed its objections on the committee report. The Hon ble Commission may consider these submissions while passing an order in the present matter. After hearing the submissions of all concerned, the Hon ble Commission reserved the captioned matter for orders of CWIP Petition of and M.A. No 02 of 115 of Petition of Sai Wardha seeking declaration of compliance of Captive Status along with Tata Power's application for intervention Petition of PXIL for allowing Power Exchange dia Limited to Tata Power has filed this petition for approval of commissioning and capitalization of the ongoing work on the Distribution Network Development for feeding consumers where considerable investment had been made till November, 2014 Petition of M/s Sai Wardha Power Limited, seeking declaration of compliance of captive status with respect to its generating units of 2x135 MW for FY Petition filed by Power Exchange dia Limited under Sections 30, 42, 66, 86 (1) (c) & (k) of the Electricity Act, 2003 & Regulation 32 of MERC (Conduct of The matter was listed for final hearing on 16th September, wherein all parties made detailed submissions/arguments. After hearing the submissions of all concerned, the Hon ble Commission reserved the orders subject to any additional information which may be sought by this Hon ble Commission from the parties. Tata Power had approached the Hon'ble MERC during the hearing in the matter held on 3rd February, for impleadment in the matter. MERC has accordingly impleaded Tata Power in the matter with directions to Sai Wardha to approach the Distribution Licensees (MSEDCL and TPC-D) and thereafter approach the Commission if there was a dispute. Tata Power had vide its letter dated requested you to serve a copy of the Petition along with other documents/ information for necessary validation and reconciliation. On , Sai Wardha served a copy of the Petition upon Tata Power. Thereafter, Sai Wardha has provided certain documents (not all) on and 28th March,. the last date of hearing i.e. 9th December,, detailed submissions were made by all parties including the intervening party i.e. IEX. Upon hearing the 10

11 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 commence and operate intra-state power market of IEPL Petition for Transmission License Business) Regulations, 2004 & Regulation 42, 43 & 44.5 of MERC (Distribution Open Access) Regulations, 2014 for allowing Power Exchange dia Limited to commence and operate intra-state power market in the State of Maharashtra IEPL on 4th September filed its Application for Transmission License under the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (Transmission License Conditions) Regulations, parties, MERC has directed the PXIL to file its Rejoinder/ additional submissions on submissions made by tervener /Respondents within 10 days. Tata Power filed its affidavit on 9th December,. The Petition was filed on 4th September. The Hon'ble MERC vide its notice dated 29th December, was listed the matter for TVS on 21st January,. The matter was listed for TVS again on 6th September, of Petition of Gupta Energy Pvt. Limited for determination of tariff and Commercial issues for sale of Power to Distribution Licensees Petition of Gupta Energy Pvt. Limited under Section 62 (1) (a) & 64 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for determination of tariff and Commercial issues for sale of Power to Distribution Licensees in the State of Maharashtra from dustrial Waste-to- Energy Power Plant The revised petition of Gupta Energy was listed a TVS on 6th September,. Tata Power is no more a Respondent to this petition as the Petitioner has sought for Tariff Determination to be made applicable only to MSEDCL of Petition of REI Power Bazar Pvt. Ltd. for approval of tra-state Power Market in Maharashtra Petition has been filed by REI Power Bazar seeking permission for setting up and operation of intra-state power market in the State of Maharashtra The matter was listed for hearing on 16th February,. PXIL filed an application for intervention. Upon hearing the parties, the Hon'ble MERC directed REI to file the detailed submission about its proposal for operation of tra State Power Exchange mentioning By laws, Rules and Regulations and any other details as may be necessary within two weeks' time. The

12 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 respondents were directed to file their response thereafter. Next date of hearing would be intimated in due course of 21 8 of Suo moto proceeding on Committee Report submitted by CE (STU) in compliance to directives given in in Case No 172 of 2014 Review Petition of PTC dia Limited Sup-Motu proceeding by the Hon'ble MERC regarding the Committee Report submitted by CE(STU) in compliance to directives given in in Case No 172 of 2014 for recommendations for a protocol to resort to idle capacity and apportionment and commercial settlement, in case of disruption in Mumbai s embedded generation Review Petition of PTC dia under Section 94 of the Electricity Act 2003 read along with Regulation 85 of MERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004 for seeking review of dated passed in Case No. 65 of. PTC has prayed for the following: 1. Review dated 6th November, ; 2. Direct that IEPL should sell its 170 MW power through PTC dia; 3. recall its order dated The matter was listed on 21st January, wherein Tata Power made a presentation highlighting concerns in operating Unit 6 at lower PLF. It stated that impact on performance parameters of low PLF needs to be addressed and requested for the additional cost incurred due to unusual circumstances of multiple start up/shut downs as per instructions of MSLDC. Rfra, BEST and STU also made their submissions. Upon hearing the parties, the Hon'ble Commission noted that MSEDCL was part of the Committee constituted vide dated 19 March, in Case No. 172 of 2014 and is also a Distribution Licensee in part of Mumbai. Therefore, it is necessary to consider MSEDCL s say, if any, on the Committee Report. The Commission directed all the Parties to send a copy of their submissions to MSEDCL within a week and it shall submit its say, if any, on the Committee Report within 10 days thereafter. PTC has filed the said petition on 21st January, for seeking Review of dated passed in Case No. 65 of. The matter was listed for admission hearing on 18th February,. All parties made their submissions. Tata Power made its submissions on 25th February,. The case is now reserved for orders. 12

13 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 passed in Case No. 65 of ; and 4. not grant approval for direct sale of 170 Megawatt power from IEPL to Tata Power Ltd of of of Petition seeking abeyance of PPA between Tata Power -Distribution and IEPL Petition of BEST to issue directions to Tata Power Company under Section 128 of the Electricity Sai Wardha' s Petition for refund of excess transmission charges Petition of The Tata Power Company Limited for seeking abeyance of Power Purchase Agreement between Tata Power Company Limited - Mumbai Distribution and Ideal Energy Projects Limited (IEPL) approved in-principle by Hon ble Commission in Case No. 65 of. BEST has submitted the Petition on for issuing directions to Tata Power Company under Section 128 of the Electricity Act, BEST has prayed to investigate and ensure that Tata Power does not gain any illegal or undue commercial advantage over BEST in the island city of Mumbai, by partial or selective rollout of distribution network by Tata Power to cater to only high end or lucrative commercial and / or residential electricity consumers, during the pendency of approval of its revised network plan by MERC under the Case No.182 of 2014 filed by Tata Power. Sai Wardha Power Limited has submitted a Petition under Section 42(2), 86 (1) (c) and other applicable provisions of the EA, 2003 and Regulation 39 of the Open Access Regulations, seeking directions against MSETCL, in regard to the The matter was listed for hearing on 13th October,, wherein all parties made detailed submissions on the maintainability of the Misc. Application for intervention filed by PTC. Upon hearing the parties, the Hon'ble Commission reserved the matter for order in the Misc. Application. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Commission vide its daily order rejected the Application filed by PTC with the observation that PTC in its Review Petition in Case No. 8 of has already raised certain issues in that matter, the outcome of which maybe awaited. The matter was listed for hearing on 16th September, wherein BEST sought time from the Hon'ble Commission to file its rejoinder to the reply filed by Tata Power on 15th September,. Accordingly, the same was granted. The next date of hearing would be intimated by the Commission in due course. Further BEST submitted additional submissions on which were served upon Tata Power in 16th September,. Tata Power filed its response on 21st October,. The next date of hearing will be intimated by the Commission in due course. Pursuant to the directions of the MERC vide its daily order dated 18th October,, MSETCL conducted a meeting on 17th November, to resolve the issues involved in the levy of Transmission Charges with all the Distribution Licensees and concerned Generators under the 13

14 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 transmission charges recovered by the MSETCL for the electricity transmitted from the generating station of the Sai Wardha to the point of consumption of the Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, and refund of excess transmission charges levied and collected by MSETCL. chairmanship of CE (STU), and thereafter submitted the report to the Commission of of of 110 of Rinfra's Petition for determination of standby charges MSEDCL's Review Petition against MERC's in Case No. 43 of Petition of SEEPZ- SEZ for specific condition of Distribution License Review of the MYT of Tata Power-Transmission Yet to Commence Rinfra has filed a petition for determination of standby charges pursuant to the Judgment dated in Appeal No. 160 of 2012 MSEDCL has filed a petition on 5th July, seeking review of the order of the Hon'ble MERC dated 10th May, in Case No. 43 of Development Commissioner cum Chairperson, SEEPZ-SEZ has filed a petition for Distribution License to undertake distribution of power within SEEPZ SEZ area through existing network of existing Licensee, under the provisions of Act 2003, till its own distribution network is developed. Tata Power filed a petition on 5th August, seeking review of the The petition was listed for hearing on 8th November, however, Rinfra sought time to file their rejoinder to the response filed by Tata Power. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned. The next date of hearing with be intimated in due course. Tata Power filed a Miscellaneous Application on 8th November, challenging the maintainability of the Review Petition. The matter was listed for hearing on 17th November,, however the same was adjourned on account of unavailability of counsel for Tata Power. The next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. The matter was listed for hearing o 24th November, wherein all parties made their submissions. The Commission upon hearing the parties has issued certain directions to the Petitioner w.r.t. providing detailed information on the license area and thereafter Respondents to file their say on the same. The next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. Representatives of Tata Power met with the officials of SEEPZ on 6th February, 2017 to discuss issues regarding usage of TPC network by SEEPZ consumers. All parties will submit their submissions accordingly. The matter was listed for hearing on 27th December, wherein Tata Power made detailed submissions regarding the 14

15 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 MYT of Tata Power- Transmission of 137 of 142 of Petition for determination of generic Capital cost for Mini and Micro Hydro power projects Tata Power's Petition for amendment in Transmission License Petition by Tata Power seeking review of STS dated 22nd July, Yet to Commence Petition of Shri Taraprakash Prabhakar Vartak under Section 61 (h), 62(1) (a) and 86(1)(e) of EA 2003 for determination of generic Capital cost for Mini and Micro Hydro power projects for sale of electricity to Distribution Licensees of Maharashtra under BOT Policy of Water Resources Department, GoM. Application filed by The Tata Power Company Limited under Section 18 of the EA, 2003 and the MERC (Transmission License Conditions) Regulations, 2004 as amended in 2006 seeking amendment of the Transmission License No.1 of 2014 dated Petition seeking review of in Case No. 91 of dated 22nd July, for determination of Transmission Tariff of tra-state Transmission System for 3rd Control Period FY -17 to FY issues raised in the petition, The Hon'ble Commission raised certain queries to which Tata Power is required to file additional submissions. Submissions have been filed by Tata Power on 17th January, 2017, The matter was listed for hearing on 10th January, Upon hearing the parties, the Hon'ble Commission has directed the petitioner to file additional submissions related to queries raised during the hearing. MERC has issued notice on 25th October directing Tata Power to serve the Petition to Respondents. The TVS is scheduled on 9th February, 2017 Tata Power filed the petition on 26th Oct,. MERC issued notice on 29th Nov, posting the matter for hearing on 3rd January,. Subsequent to the aforementioned notice of MERC, the STU, at the behest of the TPC-D conducted a meeting on 22nd Dec, along with Central Railways, to review of Base Transmission Charge Rate (TCR) of TPC- D considering removal of demand of 100 MW of Central Railways. Accordingly, TPC-D sought an adjournment for 4 weeks in view of the formalities of reviewing the existing BPTA between STU and Central Railways etc. The matter was accordingly adjourned and the next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. 15

16 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 The matter was listed for final hearing on Rfra has submitted a Petition under Rfra' s Petition for 16th September, wherein all parties Sections 142 and 146 of the Electricity directions under made detailed submissions/arguments. Act, 2003 for seeking directions Section 142 and After hearing the submissions of all 151 of against Tata Power (Distribution) for 146 and other concerned, the Hon ble Commission 36 contravening the decision and applicable reserved the present matter for orders directions of the Hon ble Commission provisions of the subject to any additional submissions issued in the terim dated Electricity Act, 2003 which may be sought by this Hon ble in Case No. 182 of Commission from the parties of 165 of 159 of 171 of Review Petition by Kolhapur Green Energy Review Petition on behalf of Tata Power -D against the MYT dated 21st October, Petition of Sai Wardha seeking declaration of compliance of Captive Status for FY -16 Verification of Renewable Purchase Obligation for FY -16 of Tata Power- Distribution Business Yet to Commence Yet to Commence Yet to Commence Petition seeking review of MERC's order dated 10th October, in Case No. 87 of towards the annual O&M escalation rate specified by the MERC in the Impugned. Review Petition of Tata Power-D against the MYT dated 21st October, Petition of Sai Wardha Power Limited seeking declaration of compliance of captive status with respect to the generating units of 2x135 MW of the Petitioner, Sai Wardha Power Limited for the financial year -16 As per the provision of its Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO), its Compliance and Implementation of Renewable Energy Certificate Framework Regulations, 2010, the MERC verifies the compliance of RPO targets by Distribution Licensees on yearly basis. Based on the data submitted by Maharashtra Energy Development Agency (MEDA), the The petition was served upon Tata Power on 26th December,. MERC is yet to intimate the date of hearing in the said petition. Tata Power filed the Review Petition on 8th December, The Petition has been filed by Sai Wardha on 29th November,. MERC vide its notice dated 13th December, directed Sai Wardha to serve a copy of the Petition upon the Respondents. Tata Power had filed its submissions furnishing details of compliance of RPO targets for FY -16 to the Commission on 20th December,. The matter was listed for hearing on 2nd February, Upon hearing the submissions, the Hon'ble Commission has reserved the matter for orders. 16

17 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 Commission initiated proceedings for FY of of 2017 Petition of MSEDCL seeking directions under Distribution Open Access Regulations, Petition of Shri Ashok Kulkarni under Section 128 of the EA, 2003 for investigation of the books of accounts of Tata Power Yet to Commence Yet to Commence Petition of Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. for directions under the MERC (Distribution Open Access) Regulations. Petition of Shri Ashok Kulkarni under Section 128 of the EA, 2003 for investigation of the books of accounts of Tata Power Company Limited in respect of various contracts awarded in respect of painting, dredging, coal handling, coal freight, shipping cost etc. from FY MSEDCL has filed a Petition on under the MERC (Distribution Open Access) Regulations, challenging /seeking clarification of various regulations in the DOA Regulations. MERC issued notice on 16th January, Tata Power was served with a copy of the petition 21st January, Next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. Shri Ashok Kulkarni has filed a Petition on for investigation of books of accounts for inflated costs from FY2004 onwards, more particularly the contracts awarded to M. Pallonji and Company Private Ltd (MPCPL), M Pallonji Shipping Private Limited (MPSPL) and M Pallonji Shipping Singapore pte Limited (MPSSPL). MERC issued notice on 7th February, Tata Power is yet to be served with a copy of the petition. Next date of hearing will be intimated in due course. 42 Petitions filed with JSERC JSERC has passed the Tariff on As per the JSERC Generation Tariff APR Petition FY -16 wherein the Regulations 2010, an APR Petition is APR Petition FY - Commission has conducted the Truing-up required to be filed during every year 16 along with Truingup of FY and Passed issues decided in favour of Tata Power in for FY and FY All the 44 3 of of the Control Period FY We have through this Petition furnished FY the APTEL Judgment dated the actual operational & financial have been settled for FY to FY 14- details for Truing-up of FY 14 & 15 and 15 including the Truing-up of actual Ash 17

18 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 the estimated operational & financial details for FY MYT Business Plan and MYT Petition for Jojobera Unit 2 & Unit 3 for the Control Period FY along with Truing-up for FY -16 Yet to Comme nce As per the JSERC Generation Tariff Regulations, the MYT Business Plan & MYT Petition is required to be filed before the Control Period FY We have through this Petition furnished the operational & financial plan for FY along with the ARR for the above Period. We have also sought for Truing-up of FY 16 based on the actual operational and audited financials for FY -16. Disposal Expenses and retaining of 100% gain on operational parameters along with the associated tax. The first set of queries have been posted by JSERC. The response to the same along with the revised MYT Business Plan FY approved by the Board of Directors shall be submitted by Petitions filed with APERC APPC charged compensation of Rs crore for curtailing the power OP No. Posted with APERC & TSERC (OP No 16 flow on the instructions of MSLDC. 16 of of 2010 & OP No 32 of ) respectively. APPC had approached AP High Court 2010 & Matter has been stayed by DB of AP High challenging Jurisdiction of APERC to OP No. Dispute with respect to Court in (W.A. No 818 of 2012) and adjudicate on the issue. The HC of compensation charges Matter is pending in the HC after dismissed APERC petition. deducted by APPC bifurcation of AP. TPTCL has filed a APPC has filed a writ appeal against petition for expeditious disposal with AP the judgment to DB of AP High Court W.A. 818 High Court in December. We await which had granted a stay till issue of of 2012 the listing of our Application for jurisdiction is resolved. (W.A. No 818 expeditious disposal in the AP High Court. of 2012). Petitions filed with KERC 18

19 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 Respondents have filed their WS and Petition filed against PCKL deducted UI charges payable by TPTCL its Rejoinder. Arguments OP No. SLDC and PCKL the generator to Karnataka SLDC from completed from TPTCL. Respondent's 18 of against wrongful 47 the power sale by TPTCL to BESCOM arguments on next date of hearing TPTCL deduction of UI under a different contract allowed to file written synopses that have charges been finalized. Petitions filed with CERC Matter was heard on 15 Sept. The senior counsel for CGPL submitted that 49 confidentiality has been claimed in respect Petition under Sections of the Shareholders Agreement between 61, 63 and 79 of the Tata Power Limited and the other Electricity Act, 2003 for Shareholders of the donesian Coal establishing an Company, namely PT Kaltim Prima Coal appropriate (KPC). Learned Senior Counsel submitted mechanism to offset in that CGPL intends to file an affidavit tariff the adverse Petition seeking to establish an containing the extracts of the impact of the appropriate mechanism to offset in shareholders Agreement which are unforeseen, tariff the adverse impact of: (i) the 159/MP/2 relevant to the adjudication of the issue in uncontrollable and unforeseen, uncontrollable and 012 the present proceedings relating to CGPL unprecedented unprecedented escalation in the which can be shared with the respondents escalation in the imported coal price and (ii) the change including Prayas. Learned Counsel for the imported coal price in law by Government of donesia. respondents and Prayas had no objection due to enactment of to the suggestion of the learned senior new coal pricing counsel for CGPL. The Commission Regulation by further directed CGPL to file the affidavit donesian by after serving copy on the Government and other respondents including Prayas., Hearing factors before the Commission in the petition is closed and orders reserved. The order in the matter has been pronounced by 19

20 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 CERC and the same is to be placed before SC for approval /MP/2 014 Petition under Regulation 63 (iii) of CERC (Power Market) Regulations, 2010 seeking consent for enabling cross border transactions at dian Energy Exchange. Petition under Regulation 63 (iii) of Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Power Market) Regulations, 2010 seeking consent for enabling cross border transaction at dian Energy Exchange Hearing was held on awaited /515/5 16 of /SM/ /SM/ Truing-up Petition for FY along with Tariff Petition for FY Remove difficulties and effective implementation of Commission's dated in Petition No 310/MP/2014 Mis- declaration of Commercial Operation of Unit 20 to Unit 50 of UMPP Mundra Petition for Truing-up of FY along with Tariff Petition for FY for Eastern Region, Northern Region and terconnector Region have been submitted to CERC on Suo-Motu Petition initiated by CERC to adjudicate upon the difficulty encountered in implementation of CERC's dated in Pet. No.310/MP/2014 qua scheduling of unrequisitioned surplus power from ter-state Generating Stations. Suo-moto petition in the matter of declaration of commercial operation of Unit 20 to 50 of Mundra Ultra Mega Power project developed by Coastal Gujarat Power Limited. CGPL has filed relevant information as sought by CERC. On , CERC has reserved the order on the The matter was listed for hearing on Submissions were made on behalf of Powerlinks and the issues were placed before CERC. BRPL has responded to the Petition by its reply and submissions were made on behalf of Powerlinks rebutting the contentions of BRPL Further, time was sought to file a rejoinder to the reply filed by RRPL. Further CERC has sought certain additional information which has been raised through the ROP. The Response to the RoP queries have been submitted on reserved on On , CERC has reserved the order on the maintainability of the proceedings as well as locus standi of Mr. Bansal as a party to the present proceedings.

21 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 maintainability of the proceedings as well as locus standi of Mr. Bansal as a party to the present proceedings /GT/ /MP/ /MP/ /MP/ Tariff Petition for FY along with Truing-up of FY Change in Law Petition for Operation Period- FY12,FY13 & FY14 Effective Implementation of PPA Provisions. Sale of power to third parties on Procurer Event of Default Miscellaneous Petition praying for appropriate directions restraining NTPC from recovering the Energy Charge Rate strictly in terms of the Tariff Regulations framed CERC. As per the CERC Tariff Regulations 2014, MPL is required to file the Tariff Petition for FY along with the Truing-up for FY CERC has provided the extension to file the same till Accordingly, MPL has filed the same on CGPL had filed a Petition under Article 13 of the PPA to give effect to the Change in Law events which have occurred during the period of FY 12, 13 and 14. Petition for declaratory relief to the effect that WRLDC refusal to schedule electricity to third parties in accordance with the PPA is illegal and contrary to the Electricity Act, 2003 TPDDL has filed the captioned Petition before CERC against NTPC seeking refund of excess amount billed towards Energy Charges due to significant difference between GCV of Coal on which CIL has billed vs GCV of Coal for which TPDDL has been billed. TPDDL has in the Petition emphasized on the fact that the Regulations stipulate billing based on GCV on 'as received' basis, and hence grade slippage should not be allowed. CERC has reserved the after the hearing on and has further directed WBSEDCL to submit reply to the final presentation, if any, and also provided MPL the opportunity to submit the counter rejoinder. WBSEDCL submitted its response on and the rejoinder to the same have been submitted on Hearing concluded on and is reserved Hearing concluded on and is reserved During the hearing dated , NTPC, TPDDL and BRPL (in 64/MP/ tagged along with this Petition) have placed their arguments before CERC. CERC has declined to grant any stay on the recovery of the dues against TPDDL and BRPL. NTPC have The matter would be further taken up for final hearing on MPL has in the meantime submitted the detail procedure on Sampling of Coal for measurement of 'As Received' GCV on During the hearing dated , the matter has been argued at length by BRPL, TPDDL and NTPC. CERC has through the RoP directed NTPC to furnish the details regarding landed price of coal

22 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 giving breakup of base price of coal, royalty, green energy cess, excise duty, railway transportation and any other charges for FY -16, comparison of Energy Charges based on 'As Received' and 'As Fired' GCV for FY -16 and proof of implementation of new GCV measurement process /MP/ /MP/ Petition seeking clarification on methodology for computation of Plant Availability Petition seeking inprinciple approval of Environment related Abstract Schemes MPL raised the supplementary invoices to all the long-term beneficiaries including DVC on the basis of the Tariff dated However, DVC has raised a dispute regarding payment of the arrears based on difference in computation of Plant Availability Factor and has withheld the payment of such arrears which has led to serious financial impact on the cash flows of MPL. MPL has approached CERC seeking clarification in the matter of computation of Availability in the above case. MPL has filed a Petition before CERC for obtaining in-principle approval on Environmental Capex Schemes in view of recent MoEF Notification dated MoEF has vide the above notification amended the Environment Norms applicable to Thermal Power Generation and has issued the Environment (Protection) Amendment Rules,. The Rules are mandatory in nature and revised norms need to be complied with within December This would entail Capital and Revenue Expenditure to the tune of Rs 2066 Crores. Based on the DPR prepared by the Engineering Team, the Petition seeking in-principle The matter has been concluded during the hearing on wherein both WBSEDCL and MPL have made their pleadings. The has been reserved by CERC. The matter was listed for admission on However, during the hearing, CERC has clarified that that since there is no provision of in-principle approval of Capex Schemes in CERC Tariff regulations 2014, the corresponding prayer of MPL may not be admissible. CERC has reserved the in the Petition without further hearing.

23 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 approval of CERC on the proposed Abstract Capex Schemes have been proposed with estimated impact on Tariff. The same has been filed before CERC on /MP/ /MP/ /MP/ /MP/20 17 principle approval Capital Cost of equipment in order to comply with MoEF notification dated Change in Law Petition pertaining to Construction Period- FY12,FY13 & FY14 Petition before CERC in connection with disputes and differences arising under the MT PPA between MPL & BRPL. Petition before CERC in connection with disputes and differences arising under the MT PPA between MPL & TPDDL. Yet to Comme nce Yet to Comme nce CGPL had filed a Petition under Article 13 of the PPA for seeking in-principle approval of the additional capital and operating expenditure to be incurred by CGPL due to the MoEFCC Notification revising the emission norms applicable to thermal power plants Petition filed by CGPL seeking increase in Tariff as a result of Change in Law events during the Construction Period Petition filed by MPL u/s 79 (1)(d) and 79 (1) (f) of the Act in connection with the payment related dispute with BRPL pursuant to the MTPPA dated Petition filed by MPL u/s 79 (1)(d) and 79 (1) (f) of the Act in connection with the payment related dispute with TPDDL pursuant to the MTPPA dated Matter was listed for hearing on CERC is consulting CEA with regard to the expenditure required for comply with the revised norms. The matter is now listed on The matter is next listed on and the pleadings are to be completed. The matter is yet to be listed. The matter is yet to be listed. 23

24 CREG/INT-//13/R0 Date of Issue: 13/02/2017 Appeals filed with ATE R-fra s Appeal along of with a stay Application Appeal to set aside the to the The matter was listed for hearing on 19th 2014 & IA against the Distribution extent that Tata Power should not be December,, however the same got of License granted to allowed to use R-fra's network adjourned to 9th February, Tata Power on of 190 of 237 of 243 of Global Energy's appeal against the MERC s in Case No.148 of 2014 MPL Appeal against the WBERC MYT for DVC for FY to FY -17 Rinfra-D appeal against order dated 26th June, in Case No. 4 of MIAL Appeal against MERC dated 26th June, in Case No. 18 of GEPL has filed an appeal against the MERC s dated in Case No.148 of Tata Power had filed a caveat with regard to the said order of MERC however, the registry erroneously listed the matter without giving a formal intimation/ serving a copy of the Appeal paper book. MPL has challenged the disallowances of the Power Purchase Cost for the sale of Power from MPL to DVC by WBERC in the MYT Tariff for DVC for FY to FY -17 on account of erroneous application of Merit Dispatch Principle. Appeal filed by Rinfra to set aside the of MERC to the extent as challenged in the Appeal. Appeal filed by MIAL to set aside the of the MERC to the extent that it has classified MIAL in HT-Public Services (B) (Others) Category and not provided a separate category for MIAL. On 15th Dec,, Counsel appearing for Tata Power-D sought for adjournment on account of non-availability of leading counsel in the matter. The matter was listed for hearing on 30th January, 2017, however due to paucity of time, the matter could not be taken up and thus adjourned to 7th March, APTEL has further directed to submit the consolidated written submissions by and listed the matter for further hearing, if required, on The matter was listed for hearing on 30th January, 2017 however, due to paucity of time, the matter could not be taken up for hearing. Accordingly the matter has been re-notified for hearing on Since the bench did not assemble, the matter has been re-notified for hearing on 7th March, ts/ia%20no.314%20of% %20IN%20APPEAL %20No.201_ pd f of Tata Power-D Appeal against MERC Tata Power -Distribution filed an Appeal under Section 111 of the The matter was posted for fresh arguments on 8th November,, 24