null | TARIFF ORDER FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 - openaccessforum.org

TARIFF ORDER FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 - openaccessforum.org
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
(AERC)
TARIFF ORDER
FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16
Assam Power Distribution Company Limited
(APDCL)
Petition No. 5/2013
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
A.S.E.B. Campus, Dwarandhar,
G. S. Road, Sixth Mile, Guwahati - 781 022
Website: www.aerc.gov.in
Email: aerc_ghy@hotmail.com
Contents
ORDER.................................................................................................................................. ix
1.
Introduction ............................................................................... 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMISSION .................................................................. 1
TARIFF RELATED FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMISSION ........................................ 1
BACKGROUND........................................................................................................... 2
2.
Summary of ARR and Tariff Petition ........................................ 10
3.
Brief Summary of Objections raised, Responses of APDCL
and Commission’s comments ........................................................... 13
4.
Analysis and Determination of Annual Revenue Requirement
for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 ............................................................. 73
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
ENERGY SALES....................................................................................................... 73
APPROACH FOR SALES PROJECTION ................................................................ 73
CATEGORY-WISE PROJECTED ENERGY SALES ............................................... 73
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ENERGY SALES PROJECTED ................................... 82
TOTAL ENERGY SALES ........................................................................................ 102
DISTRIBUTION LOSSES ....................................................................................... 103
ENERGY REQUIREMENT ..................................................................................... 104
ENERGY BALANCE ............................................................................................... 105
ENERGY AVAILABILITY TO APDCL ..................................................................... 106
POWER PURCHASE.............................................................................................. 107
4.10.1
4.10.2
4.10.3
4.10.4
4.10.5
Approach for Calculation of Power Purchase Cost ............................................ 107
Power Purchase cost for the period from FY 2013-14 to 2015-16 .................... 107
Transmission Charges ........................................................................................ 110
SLDC Charges .................................................................................................... 110
Commission’s Analysis and Decision ................................................................ 110
(Rs./kWh) ........................................................................................................................... 114
Total Cost (Rs. Crore) ...................................................................................................... 114
Rate .................................................................................................................................... 114
(Rs./kWh) ........................................................................................................................... 114
(1)
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
Transmission Costs............................................................................................. 116
TOTAL POWER PURCHASE COST...................................................................... 117
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) EXPENSES .................................... 117
CAPITAL INVESTMENT ......................................................................................... 121
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AND SOURCES OF FUNDING ................................... 123
Source ............................................................................................... 123
4.15
INTEREST AND FINANCE CHARGES .................................................................. 125
30.16 .................................................................................................. 128
42.58 .................................................................................................. 128
48.81 .................................................................................................. 128
0.99 .................................................................................................... 128
1.34 .................................................................................................... 128
28.89 .................................................................................................. 128
41.38 .................................................................................................. 128
42.47 .................................................................................................. 128
i
4.16
4.17
4.18
4.19
4.20
4.21
4.22
4.23
4.24
4.25
4.26
5.
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6.
INTEREST ON WORKING CAPITAL ..................................................................... 129
DEPRECIATION ..................................................................................................... 130
INTEREST ON CONSUMER SECURITY DEPOSIT ............................................. 135
PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS ................................................ 136
RETURN ON EQUITY ............................................................................................ 136
NON TARIFF INCOME ........................................................................................... 137
OTHER INCOME .................................................................................................... 138
SUBSIDY ................................................................................................................. 139
REVENUE AT EXISTING TARIFF ......................................................................... 140
ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT (ARR) ........................................................ 140
REVENUE GAP FOR FY 2013-14 TO FY 2015-16 ............................................... 141
Tariff Principles and Design .................................................... 146
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 146
REVENUE DEFICIT / SURPLUS FOR FY 2013-14............................................... 147
TARIFF DESIGN ..................................................................................................... 148
CROSS SUBSIDY................................................................................................... 153
FUEL PRICE AND POWER PURCHASE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES (FPPPA) .. 154
Compliance of Directives by APDCL and new Directives ..... 156
6.1
COMPLIANCE OF DIRECTIVES ISSUED BY THE COMMISSION ..................... 156
6.2
COMPLIANCE OF OLD DIRECTIVES ................................................................... 156
6.3
COMPLIANCE OF THE FRESH DIRECTIVES ISSUED BY THE COMMISSION
IN ITS TARIFF ORDER DATED 16TH MAY, 2011............................................................. 159
7.
7.1
7.2
7.4
7.5
Wheeling Charges and Cross subsidy surcharge ................. 176
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 176
ALLOCATION MATRIX ........................................................................................... 176
WHEELING CHARGES .......................................................................................... 177
CROSS SUBSIDY SURCHARGE .......................................................................... 178
8.
Schedule of Tariff ..................................................................... 180
Annexure-1 ....................................................................................... 206
Annexure-2 ....................................................................................... 216
Annexure-3 ....................................................................................... 224
Annexure-4 ....................................................................................... 225
ii
List of Tables
Table 2.1: ARR and Revenue Gap for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)........ 10
Table 4.1: Historical Trend in Category-wise Units sold (MU) ................................. 74
Table 4.2: Category wise Growth Rate of Energy Sale ............................................ 75
Table 4.3: Category wise Number of Consumers ..................................................... 76
Table 4.4: CAGR in Number of Consumers ............................................................. 77
Table 4.5: Category-wise Connected Load (kW)...................................................... 78
Table 4.6: CAGR of Connected Load ....................................................................... 79
Table 4.7: Energy Sales Projected by APDCL (FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14)........ 80
Table 4.8: Energy Sales Projected by APDCL (FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16)........ 81
Table 4.9: Connections and Energy Sales Projected by APDCL ............................ 82
Table 4.10: Target vs. Achievement of RGGVY ....................................................... 83
Table 4.11: Jeevan Dhara category Sales approved by the Commission (MU) ...... 84
Table 4.12:
Table 4.13:
Table 4.14:
Table 4.15:
Table 4.16:
Table 4.17:
Domestic-A category Sales approved by the Commission (MU) .......... 84
Energy Sales projected by APDCL for Domestic – B Category (MU) ... 85
Sales for Domestic B category approved by the Commission (MU) ..... 85
Energy Sales projected by APDCL (MU) .............................................. 86
Approved Sales for Commercial Category (MU) .................................. 86
Sales for General Purpose Supply Category as projected by APDCL
(MU) .................................................................................................... 86
Table 4.18:
Table 4.19:
Table 4.20:
Table 4.21:
Table 4.22:
Table 4.23:
Approved Sales for LT General Purpose Supply Category (MU) ......... 87
Sales to Public Lighting Category as projected by APDCL (MU).......... 87
Approved Sales for Public Lighting Category (MU) .............................. 88
Sales to Agriculture Category as projected by APDCL (MU) ................ 88
Approved Sales for Agriculture Category (MU) .................................... 89
Sales to Small Industries- Rural up to 20 kW Category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 89
Table 4.24: Approved Sales for Small Industries- Rural up to 20 kW Category (MU)
................................................................................................................................. 90
Table 4.25: Sales to Small Industries- Urban Category as projected by APDCL (MU)
................................................................................................................................. 90
Table 4.26: Approved Sales to Small Industries - Urban category (MU) ................. 91
Table 4.27: Approved Sales to Temporary Category .............................................. 91
Table 4.28: Sales to HT Domestic (25 kVA and above) category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 92
Table 4.29: Approved Sales to HT Domestic (25 kVA and above) category (MU) .. 92
iii
Table 4.30: Sales to HT Commercial (25 kVA and above) category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 92
Table 4.31: Approved Sales to HT Commercial (25 kVA and above) category (MU)
................................................................................................................................. 93
Table 4.32: Sales to Public Water Works category as projected by APDCL (MU) .. 93
Table 4.33: Approved Sales to Public Water Works category (MU) ........................ 94
Table 4.34: Sales to Government Educational Institutions category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 94
Table 4.35: Approved Sales to Government Educational Institutions category (MU)
................................................................................................................................. 95
Table 4.36: Sales to Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above-others) category as projected
by APDCL (MU) .................................................................................. 95
Table 4.37: Approved Sales to Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above-others) category
(MU) .................................................................................................... 96
Table 4.38: Sales to HT Small Industries upto 50kVA category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 96
Table 4.39: Approved Sales to HT Small Industries upto 50 kVA category (MU) .... 97
Table 4.40: Sales to HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA) category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 97
Table 4.41: Approved Sales to HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA) category (MU)
................................................................................................................................. 98
Table 4.42: Sales to HT Industries-II (above 150 kVA) category as projected by
APDCL (MU) ....................................................................................... 98
Table 4.43: Approved Sales to HT Industries-II (above 150 kVA) category (MU) ... 99
Table 4.44: Sales to Tea, Coffee and Rubber category as projected by APDCL (MU)
................................................................................................................................. 99
Table 4.45: Approved Sales to Tea, Coffee and Rubber category (MU) ............... 100
Table 4.46: Sales to Oil and Coal category as projected by APDCL (MU) ............ 100
Table 4.47: Approved Sales to Oil and Coal category (MU) .................................. 101
Table 4.48: Sales to HT Irrigation (above 7.5 HP) as projected by APDCL (MU) .. 101
Table 4.49: Approved Sales to HT Irrigation (above 7.5 HP) category (MU) ......... 101
Table 4.50: Total Energy Sales for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 (MU) .................... 102
Table 4.51: Distribution Losses Projected by APDCL for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16
............................................................................................................................... 103
Table 4.52: Approved Distribution Loss Trajectory ................................................ 104
Table 4.53: Approved Energy Requirement for the Control Period (MU) .............. 104
Table 4.54: Energy Balance for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 as projected by APDCL
(MU) .................................................................................................. 105
Table 4.55: Energy Balance approved by the Commission (MU) .......................... 106
iv
Table 4.56: Power Purchase Cost and Quantum for FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14 as
projected by APDCL ......................................................................... 107
Table 4.57: Power Purchase Cost and Quantum for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 as
projected by APDCL ......................................................................... 109
Table 4.58: Transmission Charges for the Control Period as projected by APDCL
(Rs. Crore) ........................................................................................ 110
Table 4.59: APGCL Generation approved by the Commission ............................. 110
Table 4.60: Approved Energy Balance .................................................................. 111
Table 4.61: Approved Power Purchase Cost for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 ........ 114
Table 4.62: Approved Transmission Charges (Rs. Crore)..................................... 116
Table 4.63: Approved Total Power Purchase Costs during the Control Period (Rs.
Crore)................................................................................................ 117
Table 4.64: Normative O&M Expenses submitted by APDCL (Rs. Lakh).............. 118
Table 4.65: Approved Employee Expenses .......................................................... 119
Table 4.66: Approved R&M Expenses .................................................................. 120
Table 4.67: Approved A&G Expenses ................................................................... 121
Table 4.68: Capital Investment Plan – FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ..... 121
Table 4.69: Funding of Capital Expenditure Schemes Proposed by APDCL (Rs.
Crore)................................................................................................ 122
Table 4.70: Summary of Funding Pattern projected by APDCL (Rs. Crore).......... 123
Table 4.71: Funding for GoA and GoI Capex Schemes as projected by APDCL (Rs.
Crore)................................................................................................ 123
Table 4.72: Projected CWIP, Capex and Capitalisation for FY 2013-14 to FY 201516 (Rs. Crore) ................................................................................... 124
Table 4.73: Approved capital expenditure and capitalization for FY 2013-14 to FY
2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ......................................................................... 124
Table 4.74: Source wise outstanding Loan and Interest Payment ........................ 126
Table 4.75: Approved Loan Schedule ................................................................... 128
Table 4.76: Approved Interest and Finance Charges (Rs. Crore) ......................... 128
Table 4.77: Interest on Working Capital projected by APDCL (Rs. Crore) ............ 129
Table 4.78: Approved Interest on Working Capital (Rs. Crore) ............................. 130
Table 4.79: Depreciation for the Control Period (Rs. Crore) .................................. 130
Table 4.80: : Depreciation approved for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)........................ 131
Table 4.81: Depreciation approved for FY 2014-15 (Rs. Crore) ............................ 132
Table 4.82: Depreciation approved for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore) ........................... 134
Table 4.83: Approved Depreciation (Rs. Crore) .................................................... 135
Table 4.84: Approved Interest on Consumers’ Security Deposit ........................... 136
Table 4.85: Return on Equity for the Control Period (Rs. Crore) ........................... 137
Table 4.86: Approved Return on Equity (Rs. Crore) .............................................. 137
v
Table 4.87: Projected Non Tariff Income for the Control Period (Rs. Crore) ......... 138
Table 4.88: Revenue from Other Income for the Control Period as projected by
APDCL (Rs. Crore) ........................................................................... 138
Table 4.89: Annual Revenue Requirement for the Control Period as Projected by
APDCL (Rs. Crore) ........................................................................... 140
Table 4.90: ARR Approved for the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16
(Rs. Crore) ........................................................................................ 141
Table 4.91: Government Subsidy allocated to Jeevan Dhara and Domestic A
Categories (Rs. Crore) ...................................................................... 144
Table 4.92: Estimated Revenue gap/surplus for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore) ............. 145
Table 5.1:
Category-wise full cost recovery tariff and increase/decrease in tariff in
FY 2013-14 ....................................................................................... 150
Table 5.2:
Category-wise retail supply tariff and increase/decrease in tariff in FY
2013-14, after accounting for State Government subsidy ................. 151
Table 5.3: Category-wise cross-subsidy in FY 2013-14 ........................................ 153
Table 7.1: Allocation of matrix for separation of wheeling charges and costs supply
cost ................................................................................................... 176
Table 7.2: Allocation of matrix for separation of wheeling charges and retail supply
cost (Rs. crore) ................................................................................. 177
Table 7.3: Wheeling charges approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14......... 177
Table 7.4: Cross subsidy surcharge for FY 2013-14 ............................................. 179
vi
Abbreviations
A&G
Administration and General
ABITA
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association
ADB
Asian Development Bank
AEGCL
Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited
AERC
Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission
APDCL
Assam Power Distribution Company Limited
APGCL
Assam Power Generation Corporation Limited
APTEL
Appellate Tribunal For Electricity
ARR
Annual Revenue Requirement
ASEB
Assam State Electricity Board
AT&C
Aggregate Technical & Commercial
BPL
Below Poverty Line
BTPS
Bongaingon Thermal Power Station
CAG
Comptroller and Auditor General
CAGR
Compounded Annual Growth Rate
CERC
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission
CSGS
Central Sector Generating Stations
CTU
Central Transmission Utility
CVO
Central Vigilance Office
CWIP
Capital Work-In-Progress
DPR
Detailed Project Report
DSM
Demand Side Management
EPFI
Employees’ Pension Fund Investment
ERC
Electricity Regulatory Commission
ERP
Enterprise Resource Planning
FAR
Fixed Asset Register
FCC
Financial Completion Certificate
FINER
Federation of Industry & Commerce of North Eastern Region
FPA
Fuel Price Adjustment
FPPPA
Fuel & Power Purchase Price Adjustment
GFA
Gross Fixed Assets
GoA
Government of Assam
GOI
Government of India
HVCMS
High Value Consumer Management System
vii
IPS
Indian Police Services
JNNSM
Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission
KMSS
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti
kW
Kilo Watt
kWh
Kilo Watt Hour
MOD
Merit Order Dispatch
MRI
Meter Reading Instrument
MU
Million Units
MW
Mega Watt
MYT
Multi Year Tariff
NCE
Non-Conventional Energy
NEIPP
North East Industrial and Investment Promotion Policy
NEP
National Electricity Policy
NESSIA
North Eastern Small Scale Industries Association
NVVNL
NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Ltd
O&M
Operation and Maintenance
PAC
Public Accounts Committee
PGCIL
Power Grid Corporation Limited
PPA
Power Purchase Agreement
R&M
Repairs and Maintenance
R-APDRP
Restructured Accelerated Power Development Reforms Programme
RE
Renewable Energy
REC
Rural Electrification Corporation
RGGVY
Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana
RLDC
Regional Load Despatch Centre
RoE
Return on Equity
SAC
State Advisory Committee
SLDC
State Load Despatch Centre
STU
State Transmission Utility
T&D
Transmission & Distribution
TOD
Time of Day
viii
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Guwahati
Present
Shri Naba Kumar Das, Chairperson
Dr. Rajani Kanta Gogoi, Member
Shri Tapan Chatterjee, Member
Petition No. 5 of 2013
Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL)
Petitioner
ORDER
(Passed on 21.11. 2013)
(1)
The Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) filed the Petition for
approval of Annual Revenue Requirement (hereafter called as ARR) for the period
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 and approval to the proposal for revision of the retail
supply tariff, on 31 January, 2013 under Section 62 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
(2)
The Commission on preliminary scrutiny found that the above Petition filed by
APDCL was incomplete in some material particulars. Therefore, additional data and
clarifications on the Petition were sought for from APDCL from time to time and
replies received. Although, additional information and clarifications continued to be
submitted, the Commission in the larger interest of the consumers as well as the
licensee and abiding by the statutory obligation of tariff determination, admitted the
Petition on April 4, 2013.
(3)
The Commission while examining the MYT Petition had observed that truing up for
FY 2011-12 and Annual Performance Review for FY 2012-13 has not been sought by
APDCL explicitly. Accordingly, the Commission, vide its letter dated 14 March, 2013
directed APDCL to file the Petition for True up of FY 2011-12 (along with the Audited
Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12 and justification for variation in actual
expenses vis-Г -vis expenses approved in the Order), and Annual Performance
Review of FY 2012-13 on or before March 21, 2013.
(4)
However, as APDCL had not submitted the Petition for true-up of FY 2011-12,
therefore, the Commission sent reminder letter on 26 March, 2013. APDCL filed the
ix
Petition for truing up for FY 2011-12, however, the same was not supported with the
Audited Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12. APDCL vide its letter dated 1
June, 2013 submitted the Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12 along with
CAG Audit Report. Due to delay in filing of the Petition along with the Audited Annual
Statement of Accounts during the regulatory process, the True up Petition was not
published for objections/suggestions from the public and hence, the Commission has
not undertaken true up for FY 2011-12 and Annual Performance Review for FY 201213 for APDCL in this Order.
(5)
Although, the Petition from APDCL was admitted on April 4, 2013, the Commission
continued to receive additional data and clarifications from APDCL on various
aspects as late as June 17, 2013.
(6)
After the Petition was admitted, in accordance with Section 64 of the Electricity Act
2003, the Commission directed APDCL to publish a summary of the ARR and Tariff
filings in local dailies to ensure due public participation. A copy of the Petition and
other relevant documents were also made available to consumers and other
interested parties at the office of the Managing Director of APDCL and offices of the
Deputy General Manager of each circle of APDCL. A copy of the Petition was also
made available on the website of the Commission and APDCL.
(7)
Accordingly, a Public Notice was issued by APDCL inviting objections/suggestions
from stakeholders to be submitted on or before April 30, 2013. The notice was
published in 11 (Eleven) leading newspapers of the State on April 9, 2013.
Meanwhile, the Commission received requests for extending the time limit for filing
objections/suggestions from some consumers/ consumer organizations. With a view
to allow some more time for obtaining views of stakeholders, the Commission
positively considered the request and extended the time limit for filing
objections/suggestions upto May 13, 2013. APDCL was asked to issue a public
notice to this effect, which was published in 11 (Eleven) newspapers on May 4, 2013,
as aforesaid.
(8)
The Commission received 43 (Forty three) objections on the Petition filed by APDCL
and sent communication to the objectors and served personally/by Registered Post
informing the date and time of Hearing to take part in the Hearing to be held at the
Circuit House, Jorhat on May 17, 2013 and at the Assam Administrative Staff
College, Guwahati on May 18, 2013. Also, a comprehensive Notice was published in
the seven newspapers on May 12, 2013 in Assamese and English language. The
Hearing was held at the Circuit House, Jorhat on May 17, 2013 as scheduled. The
Commission commenced the Hearing at the Assam Administrative Staff College,
Guwahati on May 18, 2013, however, few objectors/respondents who were present in
the Hearing submitted that the Utilities have either not satisfactorily responded or not
at all responded in certain cases and appealed to the Commission to adjourn the
x
Hearing. APDCL responded that they have replied to objections submitted till last
date of submission and they have not submitted the replies to recently received
objections. During the deliberations, the Commission also clarified the mandate
under the Act, and also referred to the recent Judgment of Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal
for
Electricity.
However,
based
on
persistent
requests
from
few
objectors/respondents who were present, the Commission directed APDCL to submit
replies to all such objections on or before May 24, 2013, and adjourned the hearing
to a later date to be notified in due course.
(9)
The Commission rescheduled the adjourned Hearing on July 2, 2013 and July 3,
2013. In this context Notices were served on the objectors personally/by Registered
Post informing the date and time of Hearing. Also, a comprehensive Notice was
published in the seven newspapers on June 26, 2013.
(10)
The Commission held Hearing at Circuit House, Guwahati, on July 2, 2013 and July
3, 2013, respectively, as notified, so that the objectors may make their oral
submissions. However, a section of the objectors/respondents insisted upon that the
Hearing be held in open space on both the days so that all people who desire to take
part may participate and also that the media including live coverage on Television be
allowed to cover the proceedings and disrupted the proceeding. The Commission
stated that all the proceedings of the Commission are deemed to be judicial
proceedings in terms of Section 95 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and therefore, allowing
media inside the Hearing premises would not be appropriate. The Commission
further clarified that the Hearing is being held only on the response petitions filed
under affidavit by individuals/organizations. The Commission appealed to
objectors/respondents to maintain faith in the Commission and allow the Commission
to complete the proceedings with objective participation. Even after several requests
from the Commission some of the objectors/respondents refused to co-operate and
created pandemonium inside the Hearing premises.
(11)
The Commission rescheduled the Hearing on September 27, 2013 and September
28, 2013, respectively. In this context, Notices were served on the objectors
personally/by Registered Post informing the date and time of Hearing. Also, a
comprehensive Notice was published in the seven leading newspapers in the State
on September 19, 2013.
(12)
The Commission held Hearing at Karmabir Nabin Chandra Bordoloi Indoor Stadium,
Sarusajai, Guwahati, on September 27, 2013 and September 28, 2013, respectively,
as notified.
(13)
The details are discussed in the relevant section of this Tariff Order. Besides, all
stakeholders who participated in the Hearing were afforded the opportunity to
express their views on the Petition. The MYT Petition was also discussed in the
meeting of the State Advisory Committee (constituted under Section 87 of the
xi
Electricity Act, 2003) convened on May 9, 2013 held at the Assam Administrative
Staff College, Guwahati.
(14)
The Commission, now in exercise of the power vested under Section 61 and 62 of
the Electricity Act, 2003 and all other powers enabling it in this behalf and taking into
consideration and submissions made by the petitioners, objections and suggestions
received from stakeholders and all other relevant materials on record, has
determined the ARR for APDCL for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 and
the retail tariff for FY 2013-14 and issued the Order accordingly, making the new tariff
effective from December 1, 2013.
(15)
The Commission further directs APDCL to publish a Public Notice 7 days before the
implementation of the Order.
(16)
Before parting, it would be worth mentioning that while passing the Tariff Order some
delay could not be avoided and the factors attributed for the same have been stated
herein before.
Sd/(T. Chatterjee)
Sd/(Dr. R.K. Gogoi)
Sd/(N. K. Das)
Member, AERC
Member, AERC
Chairperson, AERC
xii
1. Introduction
1.1
CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMISSION
1.1.1
The Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as the AERC
or the Commission) was established under the Electricity Regulatory Commissions
Act, 1998 (14 of 1998) on February 28, 2001. The first proviso of Section 82(1) of the
Electricity Act, 2003 has ensured continuity of the Assam Electricity Regulatory
Commission under the Electricity Act, 2003.
1.1.2
The AERC came into existence in August 2001 as a one-man Commission.
Considering the multidisciplinary requirements of the Commission, it was made a
Multi-Member Commission consisting of three Members (including Chairperson) from
January 27, 2006. The Commission has started functioning as Multi Member
Commission on joining of two Members from February 1, 2006.
1.1.3
The Commission is mandated to exercise the powers and functions conferred under
Section 181 of the Electricity Act 2003 (36 of 2003) (hereinafter referred to as the
Act) and to exercise the functions conferred to it under Section 86 of the Act from 10
June, 2003.
1.2
TARIFF RELATED FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMISSION
1.2.1
Under Section 86 of the Act, the Commission has the following tariff related
functions:
(a) To determine the tariff for electricity, wholesale, bulk, grid or retail, as the case
may be;
(b) To regulate power purchase and procurement process of the transmission utilities
and distribution utilities including the price at which the power shall be procured
from the generating companies, generating stations or from other sources for
transmission, sale, distribution and supply in the State;
(c) To promote competition, efficiency and economy in the activities of the electricity
industry to achieve the objects and purposes of this Act.
1.2.2
Under Section 61 of the Act in the determination of tariffs, the Commission is to be
guided by the following:
1
(a) The principles and methodologies specified by the Central Commission for
determination of the tariff applicable to generating companies and transmission
licensees;
(b) That the electricity generation, transmission, distribution and supply are
conducted on commercial principles;
(c) The factors which would encourage efficiency, economical use of the resources,
good performance, optimum investments, and other matters which the State
Commission considers appropriate for the purpose of this Act,
(d) The interests of the consumers are safeguarded and at the same time, the
consumers pay for the use of electricity in a reasonable manner,
(e) That the tariff progressively reflects the cost of supply of electricity at an adequate
and improving level of efficiency and also gradually reduces cross subsidies,
(f) The National Power Plans formulated by the Central Government including the
National Electricity Policy and Tariff Policy.
1.2.3
In accordance with the Act, the Commission shall not show undue preference to any
consumer of electricity in determining the tariff, but may differentiate according to the
consumers load factor, power factor, voltage, total consumption of energy during any
specified period or the time at which the supply is required or the geographical
position of any area, the nature of supply and the purpose for which the supply is
required (Section 62 of the Act).
1.2.4
If the State Government requires the grant of any subsidy to any consumer or class
of consumers in the tariff determined by the Commission, the State Government shall
pay the amount to compensate the person affected by the grant of subsidy in the
manner the Commission may direct as a condition for the license or any other person
concerned to implement the subsidy provided for by the State Government (Section
65 of the Act).
1.3
BACKGROUND
1.3.1
The Government of Assam notified Vide Memo No. PEL151/2003/Pt./165 dated
December 10, 2004, the restructuring of the erstwhile Assam State Electricity Board
(ASEB) into five entities namely:
(i)
Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited (AEGCL) to carry out function as
State Transmission Utility (STU).
2
(ii)
Assam Power Generation Corporation Limited (APGCL) to carry out function
of generation of electricity in the State of Assam.
(iii)
Three Electricity Distribution Companies, namely Lower, Central and Upper
Assam Electricity Distribution Company Limited to carry out functions of
distribution and retail sale of electricity In the districts covered under each
company area.
1.3.2
All Companies are duly incorporated with the Registrar of Companies as per the
Companies Act.
1.3.3
Further, in exercise of power under Section 172 of the Electricity Act 2003, the State
Government authorized ASEB to continue its trading functions by periodic notification
till September 2009.
1.3.4
In May 2009, as per GOA notification No PEL.41/2006/199 dated May 13, 2009, in
accordance with the Assam State Reform (Transfer and merger of Distribution
Functions and undertakings) scheme, 2009, CAEDCL and UAEDCL distribution
companies merged with the LAEDCL, thereby forming one distribution Company for
the State.
1.3.5
The name of the Company was changed from LAEDCL to Assam Power Distribution
Company Limited (APDCL) vide Certificate of Incorporation dated October 23, 2009.
1.3.6
The Government of Assam vide Notification dated March 12, 2013 dissolved ASEB
under Section 131 of the Act with effect from March 31, 2013 and transferred ASEB’s
current functions and reassigned its personnel to its successor entities namely
APDCL, AEGCL and APGCL in accordance with the Scheme of Reorganization.
1.3.7
The Commission notified the AERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of
Tariff) Regulations, 2006 (hereafter referred to as AERC Tariff Regulations) vide
Notification No. AERC.2005/19 dated April 28, 2006, which was published in the
Assam Gazette on May 24, 2006.
1.3.8
In accordance with Regulation 5.3 of the AERC Tariff Regulations, the tariff will be
determined on the basis of the principles enunciated under the Multi Year Tariff
principle for a period of three years commencing from April 1, 2006.
3
APDCL had filed the MYT Petition for the Control Period of three years beginning
from FY 2010-11 to FY 2012-13 on 15 February 2010. The Commission, after
following the due procedure issued the Tariff Order on 16 May, 2011.
The Commission vide Order dated February 28, 2013 carried out True up for FY
2009-10 and suo-motu proceedings for True up of FY 2010-11, Performance Review
for FY 2011-12 and determination of ARR and Tariff of APDCL for FY 2012-13.
1.4
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
1.4.1
As per the AERC Tariff Regulations, 2006, APDCL is required to file the Petition for
determination of ARR and tariff latest by 1st December before the Commission. The
APDCL has filed the Petition for the approval of ARR and Tariff for the Control Period
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 on January 31, 2013.
1.5
ADMISSION OF THE PETITION AND PUBLIC PROCESS
1.5.1
The Commission conducted preliminary analysis of the information submitted by
APDCL on January 31, 2013 and found that the Petition was incomplete in material
particulars. Although, Volume I and II of the Petition were submitted, the Petition was
not accompanied by Volume III, which was submitted vide letter dated February 14,
2013. Accordingly, required additional information along with para-wise clarifications
on the MYT Petition was sought from APDCL vide letter dated March 15, 2013.
APDCL submitted its reply vide letter dated April 2, 2013. APDCL, vide its letter
dated April 5, 2013, submitted the revised Schedule of Tariff and ARR as part of the
MYT Petition for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 after modification of
some of elements in ARR and tariff vide Interlocutory Petition. The Commission
admitted the Interlocutory Petition (Petition No. 7/2013) on April 6, 2013. The Petition
was also uploaded on website for receiving comments/responses. While examining
the revised submission, the Commission observed additional data requirements visГ -vis replies to original data requirement as well as in the Interlocutory Petition, which
were sought from APDCL vide letter dated April 23, 2013. Technical Validation
Session with APDCL to discuss and sort out data gaps and shortcomings was
conducted in the office of the Commission on April 26, 2013. APDCL, vide letter
dated May 3, 2013 submitted its reply. The Commission vide letter dated May 13,
2013 communicated the status of data submitted and directed APDCL to submit the
pending information. APDCL, vide its letter dated May 21, 2013 (received on May 23,
4
2013) submitted its reply. The Commission vide letter dated May 28, 2013 again
directed APDCL to submit the pending information. APDCL, vide its letter dated May
31, 2013 submitted its reply. APDCL, vide its letter dated June 1, 2013 submitted the
Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12 along with CAG Audit Report. Further,
the Commission vide its letter dated June 4, 2013 also sent the format for submitting
capital expenditure related details for earliest compliance and clarified that APDCL
had forwarded details in such format in its earlier MYT filing. APDCL, vide its letter
dated June 15, 2013 submitted the capex related data in the formats provided by the
Commission. APDCL vide its letter dated June 17, 2013 submitted the status of
compliance with the Commission’s directives.
1.5.2
In accordance with Section 64 of the Act, the Commission directed APDCL to publish
the information in the abridged form and manner to ensure due public participation.
1.5.3
The copies of the Petition and other relevant documents were made available to
consumers and other interested parties at the office of the Deputy General Manager
of each Distribution Circle of APDCL and office of the Chief General Manager
(Commercial), APDCL. APDCL was also directed to make the copy of the Petition on
APDCL’s website. A copy of the Petition was made available on the website of the
website of APDCL (www.laedcl.gov.in) and also on the website of the Commission
(www.aerc.nic.in) in downloadable format. A Public Notice was issued by APDCL
inviting objections/suggestions from stakeholders on or before April 30, 2013, which
was published in the following newspapers on April 9, 2013.
Date
09.04.2013
Name of newspapers
Language
The Assam Tribune
English
The Sentinel
English
The Telgraph
English
The Pratidin
Assamese
The Amar Asom
Assamese
Janasandharan
Assamese
Dainik Janambhumi
Assamese
Jugashankha
Bengali
Sakalbela
Bengali
Pratahkhabar
Hindi
Purbnchal Prahari
Hindi
5
1.5.4
The time limit for submitting objections/suggestions was stipulated in accordance
with the AERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2006. Moreover, the same were
also in line with the time limit given by most of State Electricity Regulatory
Commission in India, and the time allowed by the Commission in earlier tariff
proceedings. Meanwhile, the Commission received requests for extending the time
limit
for
filing
objections/suggestions
from
some
consumers/consumers
organizations. The Commission positively considered the requests from different
stakeholders, and extended the time limit for filing objections/suggestions upto May
13, 2013.
1.5.5
The Commission considered the objections received and sent communication to the
objectors to take part in the hearing process for presenting their views in person
before the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission scheduled a Hearing in the
matter on May 17, 2013 at Jorhat and on May 18, 2013 at Guwahati. In this context,
Notices were dispatched to the objectors personally/by Registered Post stating the
date and time of hearing. Also, a comprehensive Notice was published in the
following seven newspapers on May 12, 2013 in Assamese and English language.
The Hearing was held at the Circuit House, Jorhat on May 17, 2013 as scheduled. All
objectors/respondents who participated in the Hearing were given opportunity to
express their views on the Petition.
Date
12.05.2013
1.5.6
Name of Newspaper
Language
The Sentinel
English
The Assam Tribune
English
Amar Asom
Assamese
Pratidin
Assamese
Dainik Janambhoomi
Assamese
Dainik Jugashankha
Bengali
Purbachal Prahari
Hindi
The Commission commenced the Hearing at the Assam Administrative Staff College,
Guwahati on May 18, 2013, however, few objectors/respondents who participated in
the Hearing submitted that the Utilities have either not satisfactorily responded or not
at all responded in certain cases and requested the Commission to adjourn the
hearing. ADPCL responded that they have replied to objections submitted till last
6
date of submission, and they have not submitted the replies to recently received
objections. During the hearing, the Commission also clarified the mandate under the
Act, and also referred to the recent Judgment of Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal of
Electricity. However, based on persistent requests from few objectors/respondents
who participated in the hearing, the Commission directed APDCL to submit replies to
all such objections on or before May 24, 2013.
1.5.7
The Commission rescheduled the adjourned hearing on July 2, 2013 and July 3,
2013. In this context, Notices were dispatched to the objectors personally/by
Registered Post stating the date and time of hearing. Also, a comprehensive Notice
was published in the aforementioned seven newspapers on June 26, 2013.
1.5.8
The Commission held a hearing at Circuit House, Guwahati, on July 2, 2013 and July
3, 2013 so that the objectors may make their oral submissions. However, a section of
the objectors/respondents insisted that the hearing be held in open space on both
days so that all people who desire to take part may participate and also that the
media, including live coverage on Television, be allowed to cover the proceedings,
and did not allow the hearing to proceed. The Commission stated that all the
proceedings of the Commission are deemed to be judicial proceedings in terms of
Section 95 of the Act and therefore, allowing media inside the hearing premises
would not be appropriate. The Commission further clarified that the hearing is being
held only on the response petitions filed under affidavit by individual/organizations.
The Commission appealed to objectors/respondents to maintain faith in the
Commission and allow the Commission to complete the proceedings with objective
participation. Even after several requests from the Commission some of the
objectors/respondents refused to co-operate and created pandemonium inside the
premises.
1.5.9
The Commission scheduled the hearing on September 27, 2013 and September 28,
2013. In this context, Notices were dispatched to the objectors personally/by
Registered Post stating the date and time of hearing. Also, a comprehensive Notice
was published in the abovementioned same following seven newspapers on
September 19, 2013.
1.5.10 The Commission held hearing at Karmabir Nabin Chandra Bordoloi Indoor Stadium
Sarusajai, Guwahati, on September 27, 2013 and September 28, 2013.
7
1.5.11 All objectors/respondents who participated in the Hearing were given the opportunity
to express their views on the Petition. All the written representations submitted to the
Commission and oral submissions made before the Commission in the hearing and
the responses of APDCL have been carefully considered while issuing this Tariff
Order. The major issues raised by different consumers and consumer groups along
with the response of the Petitioner, APDCL and views of the Commission are
elaborated in Chapter 3 of this Order.
1.6
Approach of this Order
1.6.1
The Commission, while examining the MYT Petition had observed that truing up for
FY 2011-12 and Annual Performance Review for FY 2012-13 has not been sought
explicitly. Accordingly, the Commission, vide its letter dated March 14, 2013 directed
APDCL to file the Petition for
(i)
(ii)
1.6.2
True up of FY 2011-12 (along with the Audited Annual Statement of Accounts
for FY 2011-12)
Annual Performance Review of FY 2012-13 (along with the
Audited/provisional Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2012-13) on or
before 21 March, 2013.
However, as APDCL had not submitted the Petition for true-up of FY 2011-12, the
Commission sent reminder letter on March 26, 2013. APDCL filed the Petition for
truing up for FY 2011-12, however, the same was not supported with the Audited
Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12. APDCL, vide its letter dated June 1,
2013 submitted the Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12 along with CAG
Audit Report. Due to delay in filing of the Petition along with the Audited Annual
Statement of Accounts during the regulatory process, the True up Petition was not
published for objections/suggestions from the public and hence, the Commission has
not undertaken true up for FY 2011-12 and Annual Performance Review for FY 201213 for APDCL in this Order. However, for the purpose of determination of ARR for the
period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, the ARR for FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13
have been considered based on latest available figures furnished by the Utility, since
they are the base values for the MYT period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16.
8
1.7
State Advisory Committee Meeting
A meeting of the State Advisory Committee (constituted under section 87 of the
Electricity Act, 2003) was convened on May 9, 2013 and members were briefed on
the MYT Petition of APDCL. The minutes of the meeting are appended to this Order
as Annexure 1.
9
2. Summary of ARR and Tariff Petition
2.1
ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PERIOD FROM FY 2013-14 TO FY
2015-16
The Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. (APDCL) submitted the Petition on 31
January, 2013 seeking approval of Annual Revenue Requirement (ARR) and
approval to the proposal for revision of the retail supply tariff. APDCL has projected
Annual Revenue Requirement of Rs. 3726.60 Crore for FY 2013-14, Rs. 4179.50
Crore for FY 2014-15, and Rs. 4677.13 Crore for FY 2015-16.
2.2
SUMMARY OF THE PETITION
Summary of the Petition filed by APDCL for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 201516 is shown in the Table below:
Table 2.1: ARR and Revenue Gap for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Sr.
No.
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
2720.26
3024.74
3328.77
1
Cost of power purchase
2
Operation & Maintenance Expenses
715.47
835.77
1000.4
2.1
Employee Cost
634.77
741.50
887.53
2.2
Repair & Maintenance
48.61
56.78
67.97
2.3
Administrative & General Expenses
32.09
37.49
44.87
3
Depreciation
63.61
68.70
72.14
4
Interest and Finance Charge
96.94
106.64
117.3
5
Interest on Working Capital
68.61
77.84
88.33
6
Provision for Bad Debts
26.9
30.7
35.11
7
Return on Equity
35.11
35.11
35.11
8
Net Prior Period charges/ (credit)
9
Total ARR
3726.6
4179.5
4677.13
10
Revenue at existing Tariff
2713.18
3049.04
3460.03
11
Other Income
203.5
227.92
255.27
12
Revenue Subsidies/ Grants
13
Total Earning
2916.68
3276.97
3715.30
15
(Gap)/ Surplus
(809.92)
(902.53)
(961.83)
10
APDCL has thus estimated the total revenue gap for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY
2015-16 as Rs.809.92 Core, Rs.902.53 Crore, and Rs.961.83 Crore. To meet this gap,
APDCL has submitted a Tariff Proposal for the Commission’s approval, wherein APDCL has
proposed average tariff increase of around 37% (i.e., increase in Average Cost of Supply
from Rs. 5.72 per kWh to Rs. 7.87 per kWh).
APDCL added that it would adjust the Fuel and Power Purchase cost if it varies during the
course of the MYT period as per the provision of the AERC (FPPPA) Regulations, 2010, (1st
Amendment, 2012) notified by the Commission.
While projecting its ARR, APDCL has proposed norm based O&M expenses to address the
growing demand of O&M requirements due to increased assets after implementation of large
number of capital expenditure schemes.
APDCL has proposed to recover the power purchase related cost through Energy Charges,
and the remaining retail supply cost on the basis of the number of consumers. Considering
this, APDCL proposed to rename the fixed charges as �Capacity Charges’ for the specific
categories of HT consumers (HT IV/V(A)/V(B/V(C)/VI/VII), which are proposed to be
recovered on the basis of Connected load/Contracted Demand as the case may be, and
�Customer Charge’, which shall be recovered on the basis of number of consumers in the
two broad groups of LT and HT consumers.
2.3
PRAYERS OF APDCL
APDCL, in its Petition, has prayed as under:
“
1. To admit this Petition and determination of ARR/Tariff for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16.
2. To approve revised Annual Revenue Requirement of FY 2009-10, FY 2010-11 and
FY 2011-12 based on results of Truing up and other under pending before the
Commission and to allow its recovery through a suitable mechanism.
3. To allow recovery of Revenue Gap for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 as given in the
Petition, in addition to past period dues.
4. To approve the capital expenditure for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16.
11
5. To consider approved parameters/ARR of APGCL, AEGCL and SLDC while finalizing
tariff of APDCL.
6. To grant any other relief as the Commission may consider appropriate.
7. Pass any Order as the Commission may deem fit and appropriate under the
circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”
12
3.
Brief Summary of Objections raised,
Responses of APDCL and Commission’s
comments
The Commission has received 43 (Forty three) no. of objections/suggestions on the
Petition filed by APDCL from the following stakeholders:
Sr.
Name of the Objector
No.
1
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity,
Guwahati
2
Assam Branch, Indian Tea Association (ABITA), Guwahati
3
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), Assam
4
Shri. Jayanta Deka, Advocate and Others, Darrang
5
Assam Jyeshta Nagarik Sanmilan, Jorhat
6
All Assam Students' Union, Guwahati
7
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization, Tinsukia
8
North
Eastern
Small
Scale
Industries
Association
(NESSIA),
Guwahati
9
Grahak Suraksha Sanstha, Guwahati
10
Assam Sahitya Sabha
11
M/s. Frontier Publications Pvt. Ltd, Guwahati
12
Shri. D. D. Baruah, Jorhat
13
Assam Tea Planters Association, Jorhat
14
Chief Editor, Asom Sahitya Sabha
15
Shri Sarbeswar Das, Nalbari
16
Grahak Surakhsha Santha, Nalbari
17
Shri Deven Dutta, Public Activist
18
Bharatiya Cha Parishad, Dibrugarh
19
Brihattar Guwahati Maati Pattan Daabi Samittee, Guwahati
20
Indian Association of Lawyers (Assam Branch), Guwahati
21
All India Trade Union Congress, Guwahati
13
Sr.
Name of the Objector
No.
22
Asom Mahila Sangha, Guwahati
23
Shri. J. N. Khataniar, Guwahati
24
Assam Chamber of Commerce, Guwahati
25
All Assam Student Union, Guwahati
26
Aam Aadmi Party, Assam State Preparatory Committee, Guwahati
27
Shri Dibakar Baruah, Guwahati
28
All India Students Federation, Guwahati
29
Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik Santha, Guwahati
30
Assam Tea Planters Association, Jorhat
31
Retired Employees’ Forum, Jagiroad, Morigaon
32
North Eastern Tea Association, Golaghat
33
Dibrugarh Nagarik Sangha, Dibrugarh
34
Tezpur Nagarik Sabha, Tezpur
35
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee, Guwahati
36
All Assam SSI Association, Bamunimaidam
37
Federation of Industry & Commerce of North Eastern Region
(FINER), Guwahati
38
Shri Robindra Nath Barthakur, Guwahati
39
Ahom Royal Council Assam, Rangpur, Sivasagar
40
Assam Jatiyatabadi Yuva Chatra Parishad, Jorhat
41
Bharatiya Janata Party, Guwahati City Committee
42
Dr. Durlav Kumar Baruah, Jorhat
43
Centre of Indian Trade Unions, Kamrup (M) District Committee,
Guwahati
APDCL has submitted its responses to the objections/suggestions from various
stakeholders.
The Commission considered the objections/suggestions received and sent
communication to the objectors/respondents to take part in hearing process by
presenting their views in person before the Commission, if they so desired.
14
The Commission held hearing at the Circuit House, Jorhat on May 17, 2013 and at
the Administrative Staff College, Guwahati on 18 May, 2013. The Commission held a
further hearing on July 2, 2013 and July 3, 2013 at Circuit House Guwahati. The
Commission also held hearing at Karmabir Nabin Chandra Bordoloi Indoor Stadium,
Sarusajai, Guwahati, on September 27, 2013 and September 28, 2013.
The
objectors/respondents
attended
the
hearings
and
submitted
their
views/suggestions. All the written representations submitted to the Commission and
oral submissions made before the Commission in the hearing and the responses of
APDCL have been carefully considered while issuing this Tariff Order.
As a part of the tariff exercise, a meeting of the State Advisory Committee (SAC) was
convened on May 9, 2013 at Assam Administrative Staff College, Guwahati to obtain
views of SAC members on the ARR and Tariff proposals of APDCL. The suggestions
made by the members of SAC were duly taken into consideration by the Commission
while finalizing the Tariff Order.
The objections/suggestions made by the stakeholders and responses of the
Petitioner are briefly dealt with in this Chapter. The major issues raised by different
consumers and consumer groups are discussed below along with the response of the
Petitioner, APDCL and views of the Commission.
It is observed that the objections/suggestions filed are by and large repetitive in
nature. Some of the objections/suggestions are general in nature and some are
specific to the proposal submitted by APDCL for approval of ARR and Tariff revision.
While all the objections/suggestions have been given due consideration by the
Commission, only major responses/objections received related to ARR and Tariff
Petition and also those raised during the course of Hearings have been grouped and
addressed issue-wise rather than objector-wise, in order to avoid repetition.
Issue No. 1: Publication of Public Notice, Time limit for submission of
Objections
Objections:
Shri. Jayanta Deka and others, All Assam Students' Union and others have
submitted that publication of Public Notice in English language had deprived the
15
common consumers of the opportunity to file objections, and the Public Notice should
have been published in all vernacular languages of the State to enable the common
consumers to express their grievances.
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, and
Abasarprapta Jestha Nagrik Santha submitted that by publishing the Public Notice in
certain
newspapers,
giving
one-month
time
limit
for
submission
of
observations/suggestions, uploading document on website in zip format, and
requiring submission of representations through affidavit, APDCL intends to restrict
representation by a large section of consumers.
M/s Frontier Publications Pvt. Ltd submitted that the time allowed for submitting
objections is evidently inadequate and at least 45 days ought to have been allowed
for submission of objections in order to bring such exercise within the purview of the
phrase �effective opportunity of hearing’.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL has submitted that it has complied with the directives issued by the
Commission in this regard.
Comments of the Commission:
As outlined under the Introduction Chapter of this Order, a Public Notice was
published in eleven newspapers, in English and Assamese languages. The time limit
for submitting objections/suggestions was set as per Regulation 16 of the AERC
(Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004, and as per past practice. Moreover, the
same were also in line with the time limit given by most State Electricity Regulatory
Commissions in India. Moreover, the Commission considered the requests received
from
different
stakeholders,
and
extended
the
time
limit
for
filing
objections/suggestions up to May 13, 2013.
Issue No. 2: Truing up for FY 2011-12
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association (ABITA) submitted its observations on the
various parameters of the ARR and requested the Commission to devise a profit/loss
sharing mechanism due to controllable and uncontrollable factors so as to ensure
16
progressive reduction in tariff for end-use consumers, while at the same time
incentivizing the Utilities to perform efficiently. ABITA requested the Commission to
apply proper judgement while approving the variations in the true-up on account of
controllable and uncontrollable parameters and allowing the same in the tariff for
consumers. ABITA also submitted that some of the variations have occurred due to
errors in projecting the parameters and submitted that consumers should get relief on
account of lower than approved expenditure on such parameters.
The Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association submitted
that the proposed ARR is not supported by the Statutory Audit or CAG Audit and it
lacks authenticity and reliability and submitted that unless the Audited Statement of
Accounts is made available, the Petition must not be accepted and considered.
Response of APDCL:
It is obligatory for APDCL to submit the True-up Petition along with the MYT Petition.
The true up Petition for FY 2011-12 has been submitted with actual figures supported
by Financial Statements of APDCL. APDCL has prayed that the Commission should
pass the Order after scrutinizing the records placed before it.
The financial statement up to FY 2010-11 has been audited and vetted by CAG. For
FY 2011-12, the audited statement has been sent to CAG for finalization.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has analysed the True up Petition filed by APDCL for FY 2011-12
vis-à -vis the Order issued for APDCL, and APDCL’s Annual Accounts, in order to
have the base figures for the future period. APDCL, vide its letter dated June 1, 2013
submitted the Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2011-12 along with CAG Audit
Report. Due to delay in filing of the Petition along with the Audited Annual Statement
of Accounts during the regulatory process, the True up Petition was not published for
objections/suggestions from the public and hence, the Commission has not
undertaken true up for FY 2011-12 and Annual Performance Review for FY 2012-13
for APDCL, in this Order.
Issue No. 3: Maintainability of the MYT Petition
Asom Mahila Sangha, All Assam SSI Association, Indian Association of Lawyers
(Assam Branch), All India Trade Union Congress, Assam Chamber of Commerce, All
India Students Federation, Brihattar Guwahati Maati Pattan Daabi Samittee, Retired
17
Employees’ Forum, Aam Aadmi Party, All Assam Student Union, and others
submitted that MYT Petition filed by APDCL has many anomalies, such as
(i) Photocopies of affidavit are without any Petition number, Case Number,
signature and date, etc.
(ii) Blank formats in Page Nos. 112, 113, 114, 115, 121 and at other places,
(iii) The Petition includes technical, financial and legal details without signature
and seal of any responsible officer/ engineer,
(iv) There is no list of concerned officers along with contact numbers so that
general public can contact them and get clarifications on different issues,
(v) In the affidavit format, the first sentence at top is written as “Before The
Assam State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Guwahati”, whereas it
should be “Before The Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission, Guwahati
(AERC)”.
They submitted that with all these anomalies, the present Petition is not maintainable.
They further enquired from APDCL and the Commission, the reasons for publishing
the MYT Petition having mistakes at the cost of Rs. 300/- each, from 17 April, 2013
for finalization of tariff proposal for next three years.
They further submitted that APDCL, in its MYT Petition has mentioned that “In this
ARR and Tariff Petition, the ARR and Tariff has been calculated based on estimation
of requirements under different heads, without taking into consideration of numerous
recoverable claims for past period which are under pendency before the Hon'ble
Commission”. They requested the Commission to direct APDCL to clarify and present
the actual picture along with the impact on the proposed tariff proposal for nonrecovery of Rs. 262.26 Crore and claim pending for an amount Rs. 855.89 Crore for
better understanding of the consumers on such a vital issue.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL has noted the various observations. The Petition no. is provided by the
Commission and all the documents submitted to the Commission have been made
available to public as per procedure adopted. All the information is furnished in the
Petition in table no. 2.10, under clause 2.4.6 in page no. 21 to 24. The other
information is also furnished in different tables.
18
Comments of the Commission:
In this context, the last MYT Tariff Order also refers to certain mistakes by APDCL,
which were corrected by the Commission at the time of issuance of the Petition. The
Commission is of the view that the anomalies pointed out by objectors are avoidable.
In this context, the Commission has already issued separate directives regarding
creation of a dedicated Tariff Regulatory Cell. As regards non-maintainability of the
Petition, the Commission has carried out due scrutiny of the Petition and has
obtained necessary information for issuance of the Tariff Order. As regards the past
revenue gaps, the same have been addressed in Chapters 4 and 5 of the Order.
Issue No. 4: Hike in Tariff
Objections:
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), Assam, submitted that APDCL’s rationale for
increased power tariff is based on poor arguments and irrational urge for converting a
public service to a business. APDCL has failed to deliver regular supply of electricity
to various consumers of Assam and therefore, has no moral right to increase tariff.
Shri Jayanta Deka and others submitted that proposed tariff hike is too high in
comparison with past increases and is also not in consonance with the tariff
prevailing in other States such as Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, West Bengal, Delhi
and Gujarat, and therefore, the same should be rejected.
Grahak Suraksha Sanstha opposed APDCL’s proposal to hike fixed charges by
100% to 300%, and requested the Commission to disapprove the same. They further
submitted that proposed increase for Jeevan Dhara and Domestic A category of
consumers is not justified and accordingly requested the Commission to disapprove
the same.
NESSIA and M/s Frontier Publications Pvt. Ltd requested the Commission to reject
the proposal to hike tariff.
Assam Jyeshta Nagarik Sanmilan submitted that frequent price hike for supply of
electricity are leading to harassment of consumers, and requested a thorough
discussion on the issue.
19
Shri. Sarbeswar Das, Bharatiya Janata Party and others submitted that electricity
tariff has been hiked a number of times in the past, and further tariff hike is
unreasonable.
All Assam SSI Association requested the Commission not to encourage increase in
electricity tariff until a significant improvement in quality of power supply along with
formulation of transparent strategy for improvement of scheme for uninterrupted
power supply is achieved by APDCL.
Shri Robindra Nath Barthakur submitted that the tariff structure proposed in the
Petition is much higher as compared to what it should have been as per rules. He
submitted that the reasons that have contributed to the proposed tariff structure
include the failure of APDCL to collect proper revenue due to abolition of internal
financial controls of erstwhile ASEB, loss incurred due to financial mismanagement
and lack of inventory control of APDCL.
Shri. R. N. Barthakur submitted that financial mismanagement of APDCL as
elaborated below has resulted in the need for tariff hike:
a) As per CAG Report for FY 2008-09, due to non-incorporation of Income Tax
clause in the Power Purchase Agreement with M/s Eastern India Powertech
Limited (EIPL), APDCL has incurred a loss of Rs. 6.95 crore
b) Showing Rs. 3.52 crore as provision for additional power purchase cost is
incorrect
c) Power purchase cost has been shown higher by Rs. 12.25 crore
d) Due to wrong computation of depreciation for Lower Assam Electricity
Distribution Company Limited (LAEDCL) for FY 2006-07, a loss of Rs. 37.72
crore has been reported
e) The value of obsolete equipment for FY 2007-08 has been shown wrongly as
Rs. 6.75 crore.
f)
Non-maintenance of accounts for interest by Central Assam Electricity
Distribution Company Limited (CAEDCL) has led to a wrong figure of Rs. 5.39
crore.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that the common consumers have every
right to protest against the tariff hike caused by faulty electricity policy and gross
mismanagement in the matter of electricity generation, transmission, and distribution.
20
Shri Kumud Ch. Borah, Bhartiya Cha Parishad, Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik
Sanstha requested that the Commission should devise a proper profit/loss sharing
mechanism due to controllable and uncontrollable factors so as to ensure
progressive reduction in tariff for end use consumers, while at the same time
incentivize the Utilities to perform efficiently.
Shri Deven Dutta referred to APDCL’s proposal for Jeeban Dhara, Domestic A,
Domestic B and Bulk consumer category and submitted that proposal for increase in
tariff is not acceptable. He cited various reasons for increase in the A&G expenses
and submitted that there is no logic in proposed increase of electricity tariff and
requested the Commission to dismiss the proposal to increase tariff.
Ahom Royal Council, Assam and Assam Jatiyatabadi Yuva Chatra Parishad and
others submitted that the Commission should not permit the hike proposed by
APDCL. Further, Ahom Royal Council, Assam submitted that they shall approach the
High Court in case the tariff is increased.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it has proposed a uniform tariff increase, and the Commission
may pass the Order as it deems appropriate. APDCL also submitted that the
comparison of existing tariff and proposed tariff has not taken into consideration the
FPPPA charge already levied. It submitted that once this charge is merged with the
existing tariff, the proposed percentage increase in tariff will be minimal. In reply to
objections raised by Shri Barthakur, APDCL submitted that the tariff proposal has
been prepared with due care considering all aspects and as per Regulations. While
denying the allegation pertaining to financial mismanagement, lack of Inventory
control, and abolishment of Internal Financial Control, APDCL submitted that it has
adopted strict financial control. Further, all the CAG observations have been dropped.
As regards increase in A&G expenses, APDCL submitted that it has noted the
comments.
APDCL submitted that as per AERC Regulations, proposal for tariff fixation is to be
submitted each year. Accordingly, APDCL had filed the Petition before the
Commission. The Commission issued Order on May 16, 2011, which was made
applicable from May 24, 2011. It further submitted that cost of distribution along with
other items expenditure for electricity production has increased significantly. Further,
there is increase in demand of power/electricity to large extent, resulting in increased
amount of energy requirement and hence, power purchase, to meet the demand.
21
APDCL replied that the present average tariff in the State of Assam, based on a
comparison of latest Tariff Orders issued in various States, is not the highest.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has carried out due prudence check of various parameters of ARR,
and examined the assumptions and proposals made by the Utility. The Commission
has considered the objections/suggestions of the objectors and APDCL’s views while
determining the tariff. As per Section 111 of the Act, any person aggrieved by an
Order made by the Commission may prefer an appeal before the Hon’ble Appellate
Tribunal of Electricity.
Issue No. 5: Cross Subsidy
Objections:
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), Assam, submitted that tariff for those who
are at the higher end of the consumption slab can be increased substantially to cross
subsidise the poorest consumers.
ABITA and Bharatiya Cha Parishad submitted that the domestic and other LT
consumers continue to remain highly subsidized and in the absence of any direct
subsidy from the State Government to the economically weaker sections, Industrial
and other HT consumers are required to bear the burden of cross-subsidy. ABITA
requested the Commission to approve a time frame for removal of cross subsidy in
the MYT Control Period.
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, submitted
that the State Government should provide subsidy in the manner provided by other
States to reduce the burden of tariff hike.
Assam Tea Planters Association, Bharatiya Cha Parishad and North Eastern Tea
Association submitted that APDCL is not showing any desire or proposal to claim
subsidies from the State Government. They requested that any tariff so approved
must take into account the subsidy component to be received from the Government
of Assam.
22
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that one of the indirect methods to minimize the cross-subsidy has
already been made applicable in the form of FPPPA charges, which is the same for
all categories of consumers. The other method is the fixed consumer charge. APDCL
welcomed the suggestions made by the objectors in this regard. In reply to objection
regarding APDCL’s desire/proposal to claim subsidy, APDCL submitted that it is the
prerogative of the State Government to declare subsidy and accordingly the tariff is
adjusted.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has attempted to limit the cross subsidy to + 20% of average cost of
supply while determining the tariffs for different categories of consumers as per the
guidelines stipulated under the Tariff Policy. As regards provision of subsidy by State
Government, APDCL vide its letter no. APDCL/ACT/HQ-Cash/Copr.A/C/2010/53
dated April 23, 2013 has requested the State Government to consider grant of
subsidy/assistance under Section 65 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Further, the
Commission vide its letter dated May 4, 2013 has brought to the notice of the State
Government, the tariff hike proposal made by the Utility, and has requested the State
Government to communicate its decision regarding subsidy being offered to any
class of consumers to reduce the cost of power to those categories, if the
Government decides, so that the same can be considered while determining the
tariff. The State Government vide its letter dated August 22, 2013 communicated its
decision to provide financial support to APDCL amounting to maximum of Rs. 200
Crore for FY 2013-14. The State Government vide its letter dated September 23,
2013 clarified that it is pleased to allow targeted subsidy of Rs. 1.10 per unit for
Jeevan Dhara (BPL consumers) for consumption upto 30 units per household per
month or else allow a subsidy of Rs. 0.70 per unit per household per month for total
consumption upto 120 units by Jeevan Dhara consumers if they consume more than
30 units in a month, and a subsidy of Rs. 0.70 per unit for upto 120 units per month
by domestic category �A’ consumers and further clarified that the balance amount, if
any, may be utilized against the past period outstanding liabilities in the ARR of
APDCL. The Commission has considered the subsidy white determining the tariff.
23
Issue No. 6: Consumer Charges
Objections:
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, questioned
the rationale behind APDCL’s proposal to levy Customer Charges.
ABITA submitted that no justification has been provided regarding proposed
Consumer Charges. ABITA also submitted that as per Para 8.4(1) of the Tariff Policy,
the Utility is allowed to recover the ARR in the form of two part tariff and requested
the Commission to disallow such charges, which are outside the legal framework.
All Assam SSI Association submitted that in Part III No. 24, Tariff Income (d) of
AERC Tariff Regulations, it is clearly mentioned that distribution licensee can charge
only Fixed Charge, Wheeling Charge, Demand Charge and Energy Charge, hence,
the proposed consumer charge as per the Tariff Petition in unjustified.
Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik Santha and FINER submitted that the consumers are
already paying fixed charges, electricity duty and FPPPA charge in addition to energy
charge, and proposed enhancement would jeopardise the economic condition of the
common consumer.
Grahak Suraksha Sanstha submitted that the proposed Consumer Charge is very
high and also amounts to indirect increase in tariff and requested the Commission to
disapprove the same.
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that the proposed Consumer
Charge is penal in nature and should be disallowed by the Commission.
Assam Tea Planters Association, Bharatiya Cha Parishad, and North Eastern Tea
Association submitted that Consumer Charges for HT Category – VI is not warranted
as APDCL is already collecting the fixed charge/capacity charges every month and
this proposal should be disallowed by the Commission.
KMSS opposed APDCL’s proposal to levy Consumer Charges.
24
Response of APDCL:
Consumer Charges are being levied by every Utility for the services rendered to the
consumer. The proposal is based on the Tariff Policy, where the tariff should be fixed
based on cost considerations. The Consumer Charge as proposed in the MYT
Petition is another means of achieving the ARR allowed by the Commission. If this
Charge is not allowed, then this amount will have to be accommodated in Demand
Charge and/or Energy Charges in the tariff. The proposed Consumer Charge is same
for all categories of consumers in HT category.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has examined the proposal of APDCL and considered it prudent to
reject the proposal of the Utility, for reasons elaborated in the Tariff Philosophy in
Chapter 5 of this Order.
Issue No. 7: Distribution Losses
Objections:
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS) and Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan
Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, submitted that Assam has high T&D losses and
there has not been much improvement in recent years.
All Assam SSI Association submitted that in spite of AERC guidelines and huge
funds being pumped into the modernization of the distribution network, T&D loss
shown in the Petition is very high. He submitted that the loans and grants received
from ADB, R-APDRP, and the State Government have not been utilized properly by
APDCL to modernize the distribution network resulting in huge Transmission and
Distribution losses, which ultimately has to be borne by the consumer by way of
increased tariff. He further submitted that due to APDCL’s mismanagement, more
power than the actual requirement has to be purchased. He added that in other
States, Distribution Licensees adopt adequate measures to minimize T&D loss while
the same is not being done by APDCL.
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that distribution loss projected by APDCL under different
tables mentioned in the Tariff Petition do not tally and are misleading.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association and Bharatiya
Cha Parishad requested the Commission to direct APDCL to reduce high T&D losses
25
and bring the same to the all-India level by identifying the feeder-wise /sub-division
wise causes and take appropriate steps before submitting their Petition.
North Eastern Small Industries Association submitted that the distribution losses are
on the higher side, and the data regarding actual losses should be published.
M/s Frontier Publications Pvt. Ltd submitted that APDCL has not mentioned the
reasons for failure to achieve the target level of distribution losses nor has it
mentioned the measures taken by it to achieve such targets.
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that
(i)
The present level of losses at 24.90% as claimed for FY 2012-13, and the
proposed reduction in losses at 0.50% for each year of the Control Period, is
indicative of the Petitioner’s lack of focus on efficiency improvements in the
power distribution business.
(ii)
ABITA requested the Commission to consider the approved loss level at
19.60% for FY 2012-13 and approve the annual reduction of 1% during the
Control Period in line with Abraham Committee recommendations.
(iii)
ABITA also prayed to the Commission to disallow the power purchase cost
against the additional units purchased on account of the higher distribution
losses.
(iv)
Even after undertaking huge amount of capital expenditure, there seems to be
no improvement in the system losses, which raises serious concerns
regarding the appropriateness of the Capital Expenditure incurred.
Dibrugarh Nagarik Sangha submitted that from the Petition, it is seen that the
transmission and distribution losses during the Control Period are almost double of
the all India utility norms of about 22%. They further submitted that as compared to
past trend, from Table 2.9 of the Petition, it is clear that rather than decreasing, T&D
losses have increased and no measures have been adopted to eradicate T&D losses
during the years up to FY 2012-13. They further submitted that the energy loss due to
theft/ pilferage is visibly rampant and APDCL has failed to contain losses. They
further requested the Commission to disallow losses proposed by APDCL and direct
APDCL to adopt a foolproof scheme to reduce the losses to all-India levels, by
indentifying the areas and causes of such losses and taking necessary steps, before
approving the ARR and Tariff. They also requested the Commission to allow
26
distribution loss as per the target provided for FY 2011-12 in the true-up and
ascertain target as per the Abraham Committee Report.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that despite considerable expenditure on
system improvement in the past years in order to enhance the distribution capacity
and to reduce T&D losses, neither actual cost benefit assessment of these schemes
has been quantified nor breakup analysis of cumulative projects in terms of optimum
T&D losses and efficiency of the system has been considered by APDCL. The
manner of project allotment and execution needs to be investigated by an appropriate
independent enquiry, as this would ultimately get reflected in tariff in the form of
either interest burden, return on equity, or depreciation account of APDCL,
irrespective of whether such funds have come as grant or loan to APDCL.
Asom Mahila Sangha, All Assam Student Union, Shri Dibakar Baruah, All India Trade
Union Congress, Shri. R. N. Barthakur and others enquired from APDCL regarding
the details of loss due to the huge amount of unpaid energy bills, theft of energy, and
loss due to mismanagement in terms of planning. They further enquired as to where
these losses are loaded if not under distribution losses.
Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik Santha requested the Commission to direct the Utilities
to give details of AT&C losses as against T&D losses and reduced these losses
effectively, within a given time frame. It further suggested that appropriate loss
reduction at least 5% annual reduction will ensure reduction in the end use tariff.
FINER submitted that keeping in mind the proposed Capital Expenditure Plan on the
strengthening and up-gradation of sub-transmission and distribution works under RAPDRP and under ADB, the loss reduction trajectory should be approved in
accordance with the suggestions of the Abraham Committee Report.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that due to implementation of RGGVY schemes, the LT network
has increased manifold in the rural areas, making it difficult to arrest T&D losses.
Reducing the distribution losses is always at the top of APDCL’s agenda and it has
achieved considerable improvement in this regard. The loss figures show some
upward trend and one of the reasons for increase in distribution losses of APDCL is
the expansion of LT distribution network for meeting the target of providing
connections to additional 10 lakh BPL connections mostly in the remote areas of the
27
State, in order to fulfil the obligation to provide electricity as per the National
Electricity Policy. APDCL is striving to achieve the distribution loss targets of 15% by
implementation of ongoing projects under R-APDRP and other upcoming projects.
As regards different loss levels provided in the tables in the Petition, APDCL
submitted that the total transmission and distribution loss is not arrived by mere
arithmetical addition-subtraction at different levels.
Comments of the Commission:
The high distribution losses of the Distribution Licensee has always been a cause of
concern to the Commission and several directives have been issued from time to
time to restrict the Distribution Losses. These include introduction of prepaid meters
in the Government departments/commercial buildings, spot billing, MRI downloads
for all HT and non domestic consumers, etc. However, the Commission notes that
APDCL’s efforts in this regard have not been up to the mark and APDCL will have to
make conscious efforts to reduce the distribution losses from the existing levels. The
Commission has given detailed directives to APDCL in this regard, as elaborated in
Chapter 6 of this Order. For the purpose of determination of ARR and Tariff, the
Commission has considered the distribution losses for FY 2012-13 as approved in
the Order for FY 2012-13 and fixed the distribution loss trajectory for FY 2013-14 to
FY 2015-16 after due consideration to the recommendations of the Abraham
Committee. The target distribution loss trajectory for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 have
been elaborated in Chapter 4 of this Order.
Issue No. 8: Sales Forecast
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that there are a number of
anomalies in the data provided by APDCL as regards sales to Jeevan Dhara
category, such as monthly consumption per consumer of 35 units has been
considered during FY 2011-12 and has also been retained for the MYT period,
though the ceiling monthly consumption for this category is 30 units per month.
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that APDCL has projected increase of around 32% to
35% in load against Jeeban Dhara category consumers as compared to that in FY
2012-13. APDCL has submitted that there will be similar growth in consumers of the
said category due to implementation of RGGVY. However, as per Power Department
and ASEB sources, the completion of work was targeted by December, 2012. He
28
further sought various details from APDCL such as approved no. of villages and BPL
households to be electrified, work completed till date and balance work, additional
power requirement, etc. He submitted that the growth of rural small Industries, Urban
Small Industries and Small industries up to 50 kVA is projected at 4.4%, 1.67% and
6.1%, respectively, and sought the details for the same.
ABITA submitted that APDCL, in its Petition, has stated that its sales forecast is
based on historical sales trend. However, the sales growth projected for FY 2013-14,
FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16 at 10.7%, 12.6% and 13.6%, respectively, are very
much on the higher side in comparison with the immediate 4-year Compounded
Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 8.9% as well as year-on-year growth rate of 7.7%
and opined that the sales forecast is grossly on the higher side and is not
substantiated by historical trends submitted by APDCL. ABITA also submitted that in
other States, CAGR of sales for 5 to 10 years is generally considered as a reliable
basis for sales forecasting along with applications pending for release of connection
in case of HT consumers. They requested the Commission to approve overall yearon-year sales growth of not more than 8.9% for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY
2015-16.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association submitted that
the growth rate considered for projecting the category-wise number of consumers
and the connected load are unrealistic and requested the Commission to reject this
data.
FINER submitted that as per provisions of the Tariff Regulations, 2006, the
Distribution Company is required to submit actual monthly load curves of previous
two years, indicate particulars of open access consumers, traders and other
licensees’ (category-wise) using its system, demand and energy wheeled for them
separately for supply within and outside the area of supply and such data must be
provided by the licensee to the Commission for better sales forecasting. However,
APDCL has considered the break-up of past sales and CAGR growth rates for
different categories of consumers from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 for the purpose of
sales estimation. FINER further indicated certain discrepancies in the computation of
CAGR as submitted by APDCL in its Petition.
29
Response of APDCL:
The projection of Jeevan Dhara connections have been made as per the target of
RGGVY projects for Assam for the respective period. The anomaly pointed out by the
Respondent has been addressed based on Data Validation Meeting held with
officials of the Commission.
For other categories, APDCL has projected the sale of electricity considering both the
historical trends and based on the expansion of network as a result of number of
projects undertaken with financial assistance from different agencies as a part of
reform process. Further, the projected figures are in line with 18th Electric Power
Survey Report made by CEA.
Comments of the Commission:
The energy sales to Jeevan Dhara (BPL) consumers who are being connected under
RGGVY have been revised based on the connections likely to be given and based on
normative consumption of 30 units per connection per month. The energy sales to
other categories of consumers have been estimated based on past trends, which is a
well established method for demand forecast. The details of category-wise sales and
growth rates considered by the Commission for projection have been elaborated o
Chapter 4 of this Order.
Issue No. 9: Power Purchase
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that the power purchase cost
projected for the Control Period is an over-estimate and has not been substantiated
by APDCL, and requested the Commission to direct APDCL to submit the actual
invoices from various sources for power purchased during FY 2012-13 so that the
Commission can approve the power purchase cost after due validation.
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), Assam, submitted that optimum generation
from the existing generating stations need to be ensured. The plant load factor of
thermal generating stations is low and needs to be improved. Further, power
generation at Kopili HEP and Karbi Longpi HEP is continuously declining.
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that APDCL should undertake
collaborative arrangements to keep uncertain power purchase costs under control.
30
All Assam SSI Association submitted that sources of power purchase considered in
the Petition are yet to be commissioned and have rare chances of being
commissioned in FY 2014-15 also. They submitted that APDCL has failed to mention
additional power requirement in lean period when the hydro power output is reduced
significantly. They further submitted that as per information provided by APDCL, it
could not procure additional power due to exceeding the allotted capacity of
transmission feeder operated by PGCIL. They added that the auditors report
available in audited Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 2010-11, reflected that
supporting documents relating to power purchase are not available for verification.
They requested the Commission to reject the Petition on the grounds of nonsubmission of power purchase bills and documents.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that APDCL has failed to supply load to the
consumers as per the contract agreement entered into with the consumers. They
submitted that despite knowing the fact that the generating capacity of NE region
invariably fails in the lean hydel generation period of the year, APDCL is over
dependent on hydel generation, therefore, a pragmatic energy procurement plan
needs to be made. As regards the power purchase cost they submitted that since the
actual power purchase cost differed from the approved cost, the cause of such
escalation should have been verified along with redressal measures as the same is
shared by the State and the common consumers. They further requested the
Commission to probe into the matter.
Retired Employees’ Forum, Shri Dibakar Baruah, Asom Mahila Sangh, Assam
Chamber of Commerce, Brihattar Guwahati Maati Pattan Daabi Samittee, Indian
Association of Lawyers (Assam Branch) and others submitted that on comparison of
energy injected without transmission losses submitted by AEGCL and the gross
energy generation within the State submitted by APDCL, it is clearly evident that the
State generation capacity is merely around 27% to 32% of the total demand. As
regards the same, they enquired from APDCL regarding various details of the total
project-wise generation capacity of power project within the State of Assam, its
present status; along with proposed projects if any for the period 2013 to 2025; and
the steps and initiatives that have already been taken by the concerned Power
Companies to increase the power generation capacity related to the existing projects
during year 2000 to March 2013 along with the achievements and visions to generate
more power in the next twelve years (FY 2013 – FY 2025).
31
Shri Deven Dutta sought certain details from APDCL regarding power purchase and
transmission constraints.
Shri. R. N. Barthakur submitted that a loss of Rs. 79.53 lakh was incurred as per
CAG Report of FY 2008-09, due to violation of Power Purchase Agreements (PPA)
with power suppliers.
Response of APDCL:
The power purchase cost has been projected based on tariffs approved by the
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) for the existing stations, and for
upcoming stations, the power purchase rates have been taken from their respective
Detailed Project Reports (DPR’s). Other relevant documents and records have been
made available to the Commission to substantiate the rates and quantum of energy
to be purchased. There is no intention on the part of APDCL for getting any extra
amount, which is not based on facts supported by proper records.
APDCL submitted its reply to various details sought regarding power purchase and
transmission constraints, and submitted that the tariff of all the Central Generating
Stations has shown s manifold increase mainly due to revision of gas price as well as
revision of Annual Fixed Charge for all the CGS Units by the CERC for the Control
Period 2009-14.
As regards the loss on account of violation of PPA, the matter has been taken up with
the competent authority.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has kept in view the objector’s suggestions and APDCL’s
responses and approved the power purchase cost after due verification of applicable
CERC Orders, power purchase bills, etc., as elaborated in Chapter 4 of this Order.
Issue No. 10: Power from Renewable Energy Sources
Objections:
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), Assam submitted that solar power should be
encouraged.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it has taken the following initiatives
32
(i)
APDCL has signed a Power Supply Agreement with NVVNL on February 29,
2012 for sale of bundled power (5 MW solar + 5 MW Thermal) on long-term
basis under scheme of JNNSM Phase-1. Further, the bundled power is
allocated to Assam vide letter no. NVVN/SO & Comml/JNNSM Phase-I dated
July 12, 2013.
(ii)
APDCL has also signed a PPA with Moser Baer for purchase of Solar Power
from their proposed plants (5 MW) in the State of Assam. Similar PPA has
also been approved by APDCL for purchase of 5 MW Solar power from
LANCO.
(iii)
APDCL has installed 100 kW roof-top off grid Solar power plant in its
Headquarter Building situated in Paltanbazar, Guwahati, Assam, which was
commissioned in Sept. 2012.
(iv)
APDCL, at the request of Rajiv Bhawan, Guwahati has allowed installation of
a 2 kW LT Roof Top Solar PV under net metering arrangement, which was
commissioned on 02.10.2012. It was further observed that the plant is running
successfully and contributing approximately 180 units per month to the grid
and the consumer in return is getting a benefit of Rs.900/month. APDCL
opined that the scheme may be popularized for mass acceptance by the
consumers by offering capital subsidy and other benefits extended under
North East Industrial and Investment Promotion Policy (NEIPP).
(v)
APDCL also submitted certain other initiatives taken for promoting solar
energy.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has considered purchase from Renewable Energy (RE) sources for
each year of the Control Period in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 4 of
the AERC (Renewable Purchase Obligation and its Compliance) Regulations, 2010,
which specify the Renewable Purchase Obligation for the respective year. APDCL
has to ensure that it procures the necessary quantum of RE power and fulfil its RPO
requirements.
Issue No. 11: Capital Expenditure
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that APDCL has not provided the
complete details of the Capital Expenditure proposed during the Control Period. They
further requested the Commission to study the proposed Capital Expenditure
33
schemes in detail and direct APDCL to justify the technical and financial feasibility of
such projects.
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, submitted
that APDCL has not made any proposal for improving the operation and maintenance
of the system, such as upgradation of the systems by introduction of IT, and
requested the Commission to direct APDCL accordingly.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association, Dibrugarh
Nagarik Sangha, and Bharatiya Cha Parishad requested the Commission not to allow
any further Capital Expenditure until direction of Physical Verification Report of Fixed
Assets by competent and reliable authority at the end of each financial year is
produced/ complied.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that capitalization of fixed assets is done on the basis of physical
verification report and is a pre-requisite for finalization of the Financial Statements.
APDCL further submitted that detailed schemes for Capex funding have been
submitted to the Commission during the Data Validation meeting.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objections and APDCL’s reply. The Capital
Expenditure and Capitalisation for the Control Period have been considered after due
prudence check and after considering the past trend in this regard.
As regards submission of the Physical Verification Report on Fixed Assets, the
Commission in its latest Tariff Order has issued necessary directives and directed
APDCL to commence the verification at the earliest and confirm the same to the
Commission.
Issue No. 12: Interest and Finance Charges
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that APDCL has not provided any
details of the outstanding loans, repayment, interest rate on each loan, etc., and
requested the Commission to clarify all discrepancies and the basis of computation of
34
interest expenses before allowing any interest expenses to APDCL for the MYT
period.
Krishak Mukti Sangram Samiti (KMSS), Assam, submitted that APDCL should
immediately submit the details of loans procured from ADB and also publish a White
Paper on this matter. KMSS further submitted that Assam receives aid and the State
needs to return only 28% of the loan taken from the Centre or international
organizations. However, Assam has been shown as paying more interest than the
other States.
Shri. R. N. Barthakur submitted that the loan taken from ADB has been misused and
false utilisation report has been submitted to ADB, without actual completion of work
for which the loan was taken.
Bharatiya Cha Parishad requested the Commission to seek detailed information
regarding loans and interest charges from APDCL and allow Interest and Finance
charges based on reasonable level of approved capitalization.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL has claimed interest and finance charges in the ARR as per actuals only, and
the interest has been calculated as per respective terms and conditions of loan
agreements. Any further data that may be required by the Commission will be
submitted. APDCL supports the respondent’s prayer that these charges may be
allowed judiciously by the Commission after due scrutiny of the available records.
APDCL submitted that the interest on Consumers’ Security Deposit has been
included in the financial statement of APDCL.
APDCL has been drawing the funds from ADB under direct payment module. As
such, the issue of submission of false utilisation certificate does not arise.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has allowed interest and finance charges as per AERC Tariff
Regulations after prudence check of utilization of loans for capital works.
35
Issue No. 13: Depreciation
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that as the Petition has been filed
as per AERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2006,
consideration of depreciation rate as per the CERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff)
Regulations, 2009, which allows higher rate of depreciation is not justified. The higher
rate of depreciation would allow APDCL to charge higher depreciation and would
unnecessarily increase the ARR. ABITA requested the Commission to allow
depreciation only on assets created out of loan and equity contributions at the rate of
depreciation approved by the Commission.
Dibrugarh Nagarik Sangha and Bharatiya Cha Parishad requested the Commission
allow depreciation only on the assets created out of loan and equity contribution at
the rate of depreciation approved by the Commission.
Response of APDCL:
The depreciation rate of 5.27% is the prevailing depreciation rate in the electricity
sector across the country as per the norms specified by CERC. Hence, the objection
that APDCL is claiming higher depreciation is not based on facts.
Comments of the Commission:
The depreciation has been allowed as per the applicable AERC Tariff Regulations,
and not as per the CERC Tariff Regulations as sought by APDCL. Depreciation has
been allowed only on the assets capitalized, and depreciation has not been allowed
on assets created through grants, subsidies, etc.
Issue No. 14: Bad Debts
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association and North Eastern Tea Association
submitted that bad and doubtful debts should not be allowed in the ARR as this item
shows the inefficiency of the Utility to recover the dues from the consumers, and
requested the Commission to direct APDCL to take appropriate action for recovery of
past dues.
36
The All India Manufacturers Organization submitted that the proposed expenses are
without any justification and reflects very strongly on the efficiency and productivity of
the staff employed as well as the administrative systems and practices. They
submitted that there is lot of scope to minimize such expenses and to reduce the
burden on the electricity consumers.
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that every year, the scheme is announced by APDCL for
waiver of interest surcharges and payment of principal amount for last six months for
some of the consumers, who failed to pay their bills for years. He sought details such
as revenue lost by APDCL due to such waiver of interest surcharges and nonpayment of bills for last six months, along with reasons for imposition of such revenue
loss on genuine and law abiding consumers.
Assam Tea Planters Association submitted that provision for bad debts is without any
basis and APDCL should be held accountable for recovery of such dues.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the provision for bad and doubtful debts specified in the AERC
Tariff Regulations is after due consideration only, and is not linked with efficiency or
inefficiency of the Utility. APDCL is taking all necessary steps to recover its
arrears/dues, in spite of this, there are always some debts which are totally
unrecoverable. APDCL further submitted that there is no logic in linking arrears to the
inefficiency of the Utility.
In response to objections from Shri Deven Dutta, APDCL submitted that there is a
provision in AERC Tariff Regulations to accommodate the gap due to bad debts. In
line with the Regulations this gap is kept at 1% of total revenue.
Comments of the Commission:
A small amount of bad debts may be inevitable in the electricity distribution business
where a number of consumers are involved and are spread over a vast area.
However, this does not mean that the Utility should assume that the entire revenue
billed will not be recovered, and accept certain proportion of bad debts. Also, once a
provision for bad debts is created, any write-off of bad debts, in accordance with
clearly prescribed policies and guidelines, should be set off against this provision,
rather than creating an ever-increasing provision for bad debts. However, since,
37
APDCL has not written off the bad debts and there is sufficient provision for bad
debts, the Commission has disallowed further provisioning for bad debts.
The necessary directive in this regard is given in Chapter 6 of this Order.
Issue No. 15: Return on Equity (RoE)
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association, Bharatiya Cha Parishad submitted that the
performance of APDCL is extremely poor on several grounds such as availability and
reliability of power supply, consumer services, etc., and requested the Commission to
allow RoE at 7% against the proposed RoE of 14% for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16.
FINER submitted that although no equity infusion has been done by APDCL in FY
2013-14, yet it has claimed RoE of Rs. 35.11 Crore. Further, FINER in its rejoinder
submission objected to APDCL’s contention that not allowing the RoE will jeopardize
APDCL doubly. It also submitted that AERC Tariff Regulations provides for an RoE of
14%, and there can be no question of following any other Regulations or principles.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the RoE claimed at 14% on the equity base is as per the
AERC Tariff Regulations, which is lower than the prevailing norms across the power
sector, i.e., 16.5%. The Commission, in its previous Tariff Orders, has allowed the
ARR after considering all the factors including the performance. Therefore, underperformance of the Utility, if any, has already been penalized and further
disallowance of RoE will jeopardize the interests of APDCL further, which is against
the general principle of natural justice.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has allowed the Return on Equity as per the AERC Tariff
Regulations. However, the Commission has given several directions to APDCL in this
Order, in addition to the directions given in the previous Orders, requiring APDCL to
improve its performance in several areas.
38
Issue No. 16: Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Expenses
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that APDCL has computed some
norms for projecting the O&M expenses, without providing any basis for the base
norms for FY 2009-10. Further, though APDCL has proposed 5.60% increase in the
norms, the actual increase proposed in O&M expenses is more than 13% for each
year of the Control Period. They added that segregation of O&M expenses into the
different sub-heads, viz., Employee, A&G and R&M expenses, has not been
provided. While submitting that the proposed higher O&M expenses have not been
substantiated by reasons, ABITA requested the Commission to allow escalation only
upto 8% on the approved FY 2012-13 numbers in line with the methodology followed
by the Commission in the last MYT Order.
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that mechanical increase in
employee expenses is not justified, as the Sixth Pay Commission liabilities have
already been met. They also requested the Commission to do a detailed scrutiny of
O&M expenses.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association submitted that
details regarding number of employees, etc., are not available and projection of
employee expenses on account of wage revision, normal increase in salary and
allowances is very high and needs to be brought to the optimum level. They further
requested not to allow the recruitment of additional staff.
All Assam SSI Association submitted that salary paid to the employees of APDCL is
very high and no recruitment has been done for last few years, which resulted in
average age of employees of organization above 50 years, thereby leading to
inefficiency.
Dibrugarh Nagarik Sangha submitted that for FY 2012-13, the total O&M expenses
projected by APDCL in its Petition is Rs. 618.45 Crore including Rs. 540.54 Crore
employee expenses and the same has increased due to sale of 4277 MU. However,
as per directive 4, APDCL has admitted the employee cost to be 24% of the total
revenue income from sale of power at existing tariff. They submitted that from
Annexure B of the Petition, it is evident that APDCL has failed to keep its
commitment to identify surplus staff and deploy them after proper training, in the
39
areas including customer services, meter reading, billing, and revenue realization so
as to provide better service to the customer. They submitted that contrary to the
promise of rationalization, APDCL has projected higher employee expense at
(26.66%) in FY 2015-16, while the same is claimed to be (23.42%) in FY 2012-13. He
added that on similar lines, O&M expenses for FY 2015-16 are estimated at 30%
while for FY 2012-13, the same is 26.80%. They submitted that all this clearly
indicates APDCL’s intention to retain its top heavy establishment simply by
increasing tariff of the consumers and therefore, requested the Commission to
disallow the proposed mechanical increase in tariff which is barely a speculation
without any comprehensive policy for rationalization.
Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik Santha submitted that APDCL has not made any
attempt to rationalize the O&M cost. It further submitted that APDCL has a huge
number of employees who are neither profitably engaged nor efficiently managed. It
further submitted that APDCL is spending a huge sum of money by maintaining a
large number of employees in the rolls and restricting and rationalizing the work force
of APDCL might yield a good amount of savings.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that in the truing up of FY 2009-10 and FY
2010-11, the employee expenses have been brought down from the approved
amount, which is a relief to the electricity consumers. However, there is still scope for
reducing the same further with better human resource planning.
FINER submitted that it is extremely important to deliberate on R&M expenses for
new and old assets for FY 2009-10 before the Commission approves the norms for
O&M. FINER further submitted that derived O&M expenses for FY 2010-11 and FY
2011-12 are higher than the actual O&M expenses. FINER requested the
Commission to direct APDCL to submit a detailed comparative chart of O&M
expenses for past ten years, and then approve the norms for O&M expenses.
Further, the employee expenses during FY 2013-14 have been proposed by
considering 25% increase over actual base expenditure for FY 2011-12 and FY
2012-13 with additional annual increase of 18%. This proposal has been made as per
broad guidelines of CERC Tariff Regulations; however, the same must be restricted
to a maximum of 8% as approved in last Tariff Order.
FINER in its rejoinder submission submitted that APDCL instead of giving
comparative chart has contended that the projections are based on FY 2009-10
40
audited accounts. It further submitted that APDCL still has not provided the break-up
of employee cost, A&G cost and R&M cost.
KMSS submitted the per unit O&M cost for various States (Andhra Pradesh-3.48
paise, Gujarat- 11.92 paise, Himachal Pradesh- 6.01 paise, West Bengal- 0.94 paise,
Maharashtra – 8.93 paise, Tamil Nadu- 5.70 paise) along with the national average of
around 7.66 paise. It further submitted that per unit O&M cost for Assam for FY 201112 is around 23.14 paise and the same need to be justified. KMSS also referred to
the report of the Planning Commission for the year 2009-10 and submitted that
establishment and administrative cost for Assam is around 25.7%. It further
submitted that no. of employees per unit sale of electricity in case of Assam is of 4.57
(Andhra Pradesh-0.71, Karnataka-0.95, Pondichery-0.79, Gujarat- 1.14, West
Bengal- 0.94)
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the MYT Petition contains the basis of O&M norms in para
2.7.1 (page 28). APDCL added that the objector has erred in considering only the
increased claim for O&M expenses, without taking into consideration the increase in
the asset base. The assets related to distribution lines and substations have
increased considerably along with increase in the number of consumers. To serve
these extra consumers, APDCL has already recruited many employees at different
levels in the recent past. This has also resulted in increase in O&M expenses to
some extent. The year on year escalation of 5.6% considered by APDCL is lower
than the CERC norm of 5.72%. APDCL also clarified that segregation of the O&M
expenses is given in the Forms annexed to the Petition.
APDCL submitted that APDCL is burdened with unavoidable employee cost as per
the terms of the agreement at the time of unbundling of erstwhile ASEB.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objections and APDCL’s reply. The O&M expenses
for the Control Period have been considered after due prudence check and after
considering the past trend in this regard, as elaborated in Chapter 4 of this Order.
41
Issue No. 17: Interest on Working Capital
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that the amount of Consumer
Security Deposit available with APDCL has not been adjusted against the working
capital requirement, resulting in over-projection of working capital requirement and
higher interest cost.
FINER submitted that APDCL in the Petition has stated that according to the AERC
Tariff Regulations, 2006. The Commission, in its MYT Order on July 24, 2009 has
taken the rate of interest on working capital equal to the short-term prime lending rate
of SBI as on April 1, 2008, which was 13.25%, and accordingly, APDCL has used the
same principle for computing the interest on working capital during FY 2013-14 to FY
2015-16. FINER further submitted that this claim of APDCL is not in accordance with
the provisions of the AERC Tariff Regulations, 2006 wherein it is stated that the
interest rate to be considered would be the short-term prime lending rate of SBI as on
April 1 of the financial year for which the licensee files Petition for ARR and tariff
proposal and yet APDCL has considered SBI prime lending rate as on April 1, 2008.
FINER further submitted that SBI has stopped declaring the Prime Lending Rate after
August, 2011 and hence, some other parameter needs to be prescribed by the
Commission for computing the interest rate. FINER suggested that since, all the
banks have shifted to Advance Rate/Base Rate regime, a linkage may be made with
the Advance Rate/Base Rate of SBI.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it is not claiming any extra amount under this head as pointed
out by the objector. Though, there is an amount of security deposit collected from the
consumers, it is to be appreciated that APDCL is allowing interest on this amount at a
rate higher than the prevailing Bank Rate. Further, details of payments towards this
head are given in the Financial Statements of APDCL for the respective years.
APDCL submitted that the interest on working capital shall be as per Tariff
Regulations.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has computed the working capital requirement and interest thereon
in accordance with the AERC Tariff Regulations, after deducting the amount of
Consumer Security Deposit, as elaborated in Chapter 4 of this Order.
42
Issue No. 18: FPPPA
Objections:
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that as per the FPPPA formula,
fuel supply costs are periodically revised leading to neutralization of the fuel cost
component, therefore, the costs on other direct/indirect heads should be minimal.
Tezpur Nagarik Sabha submitted that as APDCL is not a power generating company
but only a power supply company, therefore, the question of purchase of fuel by
APDCL does not arise. He further requested that Fuel Purchase Adjustment (FPA)
should be abolished from the monthly bills.
Dibrugarh Nagarik Sangha requested the Commission that the FPPPA charges
should be struck down since such illegal payments cannot be imposed on the
consumers after paying due energy charges approved by the Commission.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the FPA charge has been already abolished. But due to
increase of power purchase cost, FPPPA cost is to be recovered from the consumers
as per the approved formula.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objection. The Commission has allowed the different
heads of expenditure in accordance with the AERC Tariff Regulations and after due
prudence check.
Issue No. 19: Periodicity of filings and past claims
Objections:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that as APDCL is not complying
with the periodicity in filing of its Petitions as per the Regulations, it is leading to
delays in issuance of Tariff Orders. Also, there is large accumulated gap for which
APDCL is proposing carrying cost, which results in further burdening the existing
consumers. The objector requested the Commission to disallow any revenue gap of
previous years and recovery of interest charges on the same, as the delay is purely
attributable to APDCL. ABITA also submitted that as per the Tariff Policy, power
43
purchase cost is the only uncontrollable parameter, which is already allowed to be
recovered as per the FPPPA formula specified by the Commission, hence, any
claims of past years, i.e., FY 2008-09, FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 should not be
allowed in the current Control Period.
All Assam SSI Association submitted that as per guidelines provided by the
Commission, MYT Petition should be filed on or before December 1, 2012, however,
APDCL has filed the ARR and Tariff Petition on January 31, 2013.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the MYT Petition was to be filed by December 1, 2012 and
APDCL filed the Petition on January 31, 2013 with due permission from the
Commission. The delay is mainly due to the suo-motu proceedings (Order) of the
Commission dated October 31, 2012 for submission of Petition for truing up for FY
2010-11, performance review for FY 2011-12 and ARR & Tariff for FY 2012-13, by
November 15, 2012. As a result of being occupied with the aforementioned Petition,
there was a delay in submission of the MYT Petition, which is not purely attributable
to APDCL. APDCL further submitted that past period claims are always made in case
of un-controllable costs or amount payable to APDCL but considered as Regulatory
Asset by the Commission for certain reasons.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission shares the concerns raised by the objectors regarding the delay in
filing of the ARR and Tariff Petitions by APDCL, and this issue has also been
deliberated from time to time in the fora such as State Advisory Committee. During
the present proceedings also, APDCL had to be reminded to file the Petition for trueup for FY 2011-12. In this context, the Commission is of the opinion APDCL should
build the necessary skills/capacity to comply with the regulatory requirements, in view
of the APTEL Judgment. The Commission has given detailed directives in this regard
in Chapter 6 of this Order.
Issue No. 20: Assumptions while projecting ARR
Objection:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that the ARR for each year of the
Control Period has been over-projected by considering assumptions, which are
44
unreasonable and unsubstantiated and requested the Commission to continue with
the existing tariff thereby disallowing the proposed tariff hike.
Bharatiya Cha Parishad submitted that some of the variations have occurred due to
errors/misappropriations considered by APDCL while projecting the parameters and
further requested the Commission to apply proper judgement while approving the
variations while Truing up on account of controllable and uncontrollable parameters.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the ARR has been calculated based on the components
explained in the Petition. Further, APDCL has no intention of making any extra claim
that is not due to it, and the amount claimed by it under different heads of ARR are
required for efficient running of the organization and for delivering service to the
esteemed consumers.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objection. The Commission has allowed the different
heads of expenditure in accordance with the AERC Tariff Regulations and after due
prudence check.
Issue No. 21: Determination of Contract Demand
Objection:
The Assam Branch of India Tea Association and Bharatiya Cha Parishad submitted
that the Commission, in its earlier Order, has fixed the lower limit of the Contract
Demand as 65% of the Connected Load, and such a limitation in respect of HT
consumers is not prevalent in any of the power Utilities. They submitted that the
maximum demand actually required by tea gardens is between 30% to 50% of total
connected load and not 65%.
Assam Tea Planters Association, Bharatiya Cha Parishad, North Eastern Tea
Association, and ABITA further submitted that the billable demand should be linked to
the sanctioned / contract demand as declared by the consumer based on his
understanding of power requirement / loading pattern and not on the connected load,
as connected load comprises of several electrical load/installations, which are not
45
used simultaneously. They requested the Commission to modify the proposal to suit
the ground realities of the Tea Industry, together with settlement of past disputes.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that this point has already been addressed before various
platforms including the judiciary. Therefore, it needs no further explanation that this
method is the best suited method for both the consumer as well as the Utility.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission does not see any need to revisit the present arrangement at this
juncture.
Issue No. 22: Voltage-wise cost of supply
Objection:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association submitted that the Commission had
proposed the voltage wise “Cost of Supply” mechanism in its Tariff order for FY 200607 and along with Bharatiya Cha Parishad requested the Commission to pursue the
determination of voltage-wise “Cost of Supply” for realistic determination of retail
tariffs. ABITA also submitted that the Commission, in its MYT Order, had directed
APDCL to prepare such data, which would be useful for implementing the voltagewise cost of supply, however, till date, APDCL has not submitted any such
information.
FINER suggested that the Commission may fix the tariff at 132 kV level for EHT
category also, since during the Control Period, EHT category will become a reality
and consumers will start taking power at 132 kV level. FINER further submitted that
this will lead to substantial decrease in the loss levels and the tariff of the industrial
consumers can be based on voltage wise cost of supply to such industrial
consumers. FINER in its rejoinder submission stated that APDCL in its reply has not
dealt with the Policies and Judgments cited by FINER and reiterated its contention.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it will surely submit the required data, if it is so directed by the
Commission. APDCL clarified that it has no reservation to any form of tariff structure
or calculation thereof, so long as it benefits the consumers as well as the Utility.
46
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission expresses its displeasure towards APDCL’s casual approach in
responding to this objection. As rightly pointed out by the objector, the Commission
had directed APDCL to submit the desired computations of voltage-wise and
category-wise cost of supply, first in FY 2006-07 and thereafter from time to time. In
this context, though the Commission had directed APDCL to carry out studies to
ascertain the voltage-wise and consumer category-wise cost of supply over a period
of one year, APDCL, in the present Petition, in its compliance to Directive 9, has
submitted few samples of MRI data. For the purpose of this Order, the Commission
has continued with the approach of determining tariffs on the basis of average cost of
supply, in the absence of any data regarding voltage-wise cost of supply.
Issue No. 23: Pro-rata adjustment of Fixed Charges based on availability of
supply
Objection:
Assam Branch of Indian Tea Association and Bharatiya Cha Parishad submitted that
APDCL has started allowing relief to certain consumers in accordance with the
formula for pro-rating of Fixed Charges, and highlighted certain related issues. ABITA
requested the Commission to
(i) allow prorating of Fixed Charges directly on the basis of the duration for which
power is made available by the Utility,
(ii) direct the Utility not to apply any Fixed Charges for Tea and Coffee establishment
category unless the hours of supply is substantiated by meter downloaded data
provided to consumers,
(iii) direct APDCL to set up a special camp for Tea and Coffee establishments for onthe-spot resolution of anomalies that have been observed in several bills over the
past year/months.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association, Bharatiya Cha
Parishad submitted that the consumer never gets constant voltage and constant
frequency of supply and it requested the Commission to allow prorating of Fixed
Charges directly on the basis of the duration for which power is made available by
APDCL.
47
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the methodology adopted in this regard is in accordance with
the provision of Supply Code Regulations notified by the Commission. APDCL
contended that it has implemented the directive in a very transparent manner.
APDCL further averred that if there is some variation, which is most unlikely, the case
may be forwarded with specific mention of such consumers and APDCL will take
necessary action as per the provision of the Regulations.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objection and APDCL’s response in this regard.
However, for individual grievances regarding billing disputes, etc., the consumers
should seek relief under the appropriate grievance redressal mechanism established
by the Commission, since, the Commission does not have the jurisdiction to
adjudicate on individual billing disputes.
Issue No. 24: Fixed Charges and Energy Charges
Objections:
Tezpur Nagarik Sabha submitted that at the time of release of new connections, the
consumers provide all the materials and equipment required for electricity
connection, and even pay load security for every kW of connecting load. They added
that fixed charges per kW per month are arbitrary and absolutely unreasonable. They
further requested that fixed charges per kW per month should be abolished
immediately. As regards energy charges, they submitted that increase in electricity
energy charges up to 37% is absolutely unacceptable to the consumers.
North Eastern Small Industries Association submitted that the proposed revision of
Fixed Charges for Industries upto 50 kVA from Rs. 40 to Rs. 90 per kVA would
adversely affect the functioning of small scale industries and requested the
Commission to reduce the existing Fixed Charges along with power tariff and reject
the proposed hike in Fixed Charges.
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that the proposed increase in
the Fixed Charges for various categories of industries, when the industries are in
dismal position, and the State and Central Governments are offering incentives to
attract investors, cannot be justified. They further submitted that the proposed
48
increase will adversely affect the small entrepreneurs and encourage unhealthy and
illegal practices.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee has requested the Commission to intervene in the
matter and ensure a reasonable wheeling charge.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the aim of two-part tariff is to realise revenue as per use of
electricity. The fixed cost is related to maintaining the power supply system, whereas
other part is directly related to the unit consumption. Since, all the consumer
categories do not use power in the same pattern during the 24 hrs. of the day, the
fixed charge is calculated accordingly. If this is abolished, the fixed component of the
tariff will have to be borne by all the consumers equally, which will affect the domestic
consumers as a whole.
APDCL submitted that the proposed tariff hike corresponds to the increase in ARR
and considers the past pattern adopted in each case, and is also guided by the Tariff
Policy and the State Industrial Policy.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has considered the objections/suggestions of the objectors and
APDCL’s views, while determining the tariff including Fixed Charges and Energy
Charges.
Issue No. 25: Quality of Supply
Objections:
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, highlighted
the problems related to voltage fluctuation and overloaded transformers, and
submitted that APDCL should ensure maintenance of adequate voltage. They also
submitted that Energy Charges should be based on the voltage supplied to
consumers, and Chagres should be appropriately reduced on the basis of voltage
fluctuation.
North Eastern Small Industries Association complained that there is prolonged
unscheduled load shedding, frequent power interruptions, and poor quality of power
supply, with consumers in the domestic category and Small Scale Sectors being the
worst sufferers.
49
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that prolonged power failures
and low voltage have forced industrial consumers to install and run captive gensets.
Further, the quality of supply is also damaging the electronic equipment and plant
and machinery, adding to their operational costs.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association submitted that
the quality and the availability of power supply is not in accordance with the AERC
Regulations and APDCL continues to disregard the directives issued by the
Commission. They further submitted that APDCL must improve the quality and
reliability of power supply to consumers, where the plant operations are critical. They
requested the Commission to adopt some mechanism to monitor this aspect of
electricity supply and requested the Commission to fix responsibility and penalties on
the concerned officers.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that though there is a massive shortage of
electricity for the general people, APDCL has been maintaining continuous and
quality power supply to Government residential complexes and other VIP areas,
which are not even metered and whose electricity bills are paid by the state
exchequer based on single point metering. They submitted that creation of privileged
consumers by APDCL is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, as it has
discriminated against the common consumers vis-a-vis such privileged consumers.
They further requested the Commission to direct APDCL to restore the equity for all
consumers.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it shall take due care to ensure the quality of supply including
the prescribed voltage of supply. As regards the incidences of load shedding, APDCL
submitted that due to unprecedented drought conditions, non-supply of allotted power
by the Central Sector Utilities, and also the restriction imposed on the ER-NER
transmission corridor, which are beyond the control of APDCL, there was acute
shortage of power, resulting in load shedding beyond schedule. However, APDCL is
trying its best to manage power procurement from different sources in order to
maintain the system. With the onset of the monsoon, the situation has improved
considerably, and is expected that the situation will further improve in the coming
days.
50
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objections in this regard, and has issued a directive
to APDCL to improve the quality of supply to all categories of Consumers, particularly
in rural areas, and submit periodical reports with all backup data. The Commission
will closely follow up on the action taken by the Utility.
Issue No. 26: Billing of Government Connections
Objections:
Shri Jayanta Deka and others have submitted that an effective campaign should be
launched among the consumers specially among the employees of the State and
Central Government for prevention of misuse of electricity during the office hours.
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, submitted
that prepaid meters should be installed in all government departments.
NESSIA submitted that realization of electricity bills from Government establishments
needs to be improved.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it has noted the suggestion regarding running a campaign to
increase the awareness regarding energy conservation amongst Government
employees. As such, the tariff proposal has been submitted after duly factoring the
constraints and limitations.
APDCL submitted that it is a misconception that Government establishments have
large outstanding dues. The Government of Assam pays a fixed amount every month
against the electricity bills. At the end of each financial year, the accounts are
reconciled and the outstanding, if any, is paid by the Government in the subsequent
year. It may be mentioned that balance outstanding dues of Rs. 70.83 Crore for FY
2012-13 have been already been provided for in the budget for FY 2013-14 and are
expected to be realized shortly.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted APDCL’s reply in this regard. The Commission in this
Order has also issued a directive to APDCL for submitting the report indicating Circle
51
wise outstanding past dues till March 2013, and initiatives taken for recovery of past
dues.
Issue No. 27: Recovery of past dues from consumers
Objection:
Shri Jayanta Deka and others submitted that a number of bills amounting to several
crores of rupees are outstanding and strong measures need to be taken to realize
those amounts. He submitted that the illegal connections should be checked and
measures for imposition of fines and disconnections should be taken, which would
cover up the deficit to some extent and would give relief to low-income consumers.
Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik Santha submitted that there are huge recoverable dues
and if APDCL could recover the same, it would substantially improve the financial
situation of APDCL. However, instead of making such attempts, APDCL is passing
this on to consumers by increasing the charges.
Shri D. D. Baruah submitted that APDCL should try to recover unpaid bills along with
the interest.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that as a result of various steps taken up by APDCL, outstanding
dues have been reduced from 115 days to 85 days during the last three years.
APDCL also submitted that the following initiatives have been taken
(i)
Special recovery cell is created,
(ii)
Revenue recovery fortnight is organized from time to time
(iii)
Money suits are filed to recover outstanding dues from PD consumers
(iv)
Special Police Station has been constituted to arrest theft of power.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objection and APDCL’s reply in this regard.
The Commission in this Order has also issued a directive to APDCL for submitting
the report indicating Circle wise outstanding past dues till March 2013, and initiatives
taken for recovery of past dues.
It is also clarified that recovery of past dues will help to improve the cash flow of
APDCL, however, the past deficits will not reduce, since the revenue for the previous
52
periods has been considered on accrual basis, and is not dependent on the actual
amounts collected by APDCL.
Issue No. 28: Consumer related issues
Objections:
Brihattar Dakshin Guwahati Unnayan Samannayrakshi Samity, Guwahati, submitted
that there is only one consumer service phone line/number for serving entire
Guwahati city, which remain busy all the time. They added that for handling
complaints, more phone lines and regional complaint booths functioning on 24x7
basis should be provided.
Grahak Suraksha Sanstha submitted that it is essential that the consumers are given
importance as stakeholders in the power sector and it is necessary for the service
provide to educate consumers on issues relating to changes in the power sector.
NESSIA submitted that supply voltage to the consumer should be mentioned in the
monthly electricity bill, and the bill should be prepared on the basis of voltage of
supply.
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association submitted that in
case of metering done through electronic meters, the consumers should be trained to
extract digital reading data from such meters to utilise the same for practising
conservation of energy. They further submitted that the present condition allowing
payment to be made by cash/local cheque/DD needs to be modified to allow payment
by bank electronic transfer.
Further, Abasarprapta Jestha Nagarik Santha submitted that APDCL’s services need
improvement, like establishing regional complaint booths functioning 24x7, increasing
the number of transformers to reduce the load of existing transformers, maintenance
of adequate voltage and printing the same on all energy bills, and reducing the
charges on the basis of voltage fluctuations.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it appreciates the suggestions and shall take due care.
53
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission, in its earlier Orders, has issued directives to APDCL to improve the
quality of service. The Commission has given further directives in this regard, as
elaborated in Chapter 6 of this Order.
Issue No. 29: Tea Sector - Treatment of non-factory and statutorily prescribed
facilities as non-industrial and charging the same at domestic rate
Assam Tea Planters Association and North Eastern Tea Association submitted that
the Tea sector has availed the electricity service/connection for providing and
maintaining statutory welfare measures like hospital, dispensaries, crГЁches, schools,
water supply and recreational facilities to the resident population of workers in the
Tea Estates, at the tariff applicable for tea category. They submitted that there is no
commercial activity involved in providing statutory welfare measures to workers in tea
plantations, whereas, the operation in the estates like growing tea, coffee and rubber
are primarily agricultural operations and real commercial activity in the plantation is
only the manufacturing activity. They requested to treat all non-factory and statutorily
prescribed facilities as non-industrial activities, to be charged at the electricity tariff
applicable for domestic category.
Bharatiya Cha Parishad submitted that Tea Industry being one of the prime industries
in the State of Assam, is one of largest employers in the State and in other States
prime industries are required to pay lower tariff in order to further promote the
industry. However, the tea and coffee estates are being charged higher fixed charges
and energy charges as compared to other categories in Assam. Bharatiya Cha
Parishad requested the Commission that since, tea/coffee growing and processing is
a major contributor to the GDP of the State and provide employment to socially
weaker sections of society, hence, impetus should be provided to the industry by
approving fixed and energy charges that are lower than the applicable tariff for
general industry and other HT consumers.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the issues raised by Assam Tea Planters Association and
North Eastern Tea Association are prayers before the Commission.
In response to issues raised by Bharatiya Cha Parishad, APDCL submitted that the
figures submitted by the respondent do not show the actual position as far as
financial accounting is concerned, Further, though the tariff for this category is high
54
as compared to others, the payment made by the category is lower than that made
by other categories having lower charges. APDCL also submitted that the incentives
given to them by allowing the off-season facility is not available to other categories
with lower fixed charges, which they must acknowledge.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the submission and dealt with the same while discussing
the Tariff Philosophy in Chapter 5 of this Order.
Issue No. 30: Revenue from Sale of Power
All Assam SSI Association submitted that in FY 2010-11, APDCL has shown revenue
from sale of power to single-point franchisees, which are not an approved category in
AERC Tariff Order. They had demanded for an enquiry as well as intervention from
the Commission for gross violation of MYT Order and outright rejection of the latest
Petition filed by APDCL.
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that such unscientific and unprofessional
management of its rural distribution network by APDCL affects the electricity tariff,
since, realization from the franchisee is lower than the cost of energy consumed.
They further submitted that APDCL is yet to implement any complete energy auditing
system even in the towns and at Guwahati in particular, let alone the rural areas and
from the recent tariff proposal filed by APDCL it is evident how it has deflected from
the issue.
Mr. R. N. Barthakur submitted that the appointment of Franchisees under SPPS/IBDF
Schemes are not taken up properly by APDCL and all norms have been flouted.
Response of APDCL:
ADPCL submitted that Franchisee system has been developed in accordance with
the provision of the EA 2003 and Rules and Regulations made thereunder and as per
the policy recommended by the Government of India, and has resulted in increase of
revenue. Therefore, the sale of power through the franchisee will figure in the total
sale.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objections in this regard, and has issued a directive
to APDCL to inform the Commission on each occasion when it appoints a
55
Franchisee, and the terms of such appointment as well as process of such
appointment shall be submitted to the Commission. Further all details of such
schemes, including number of feeders, number of agencies, revenue and collection
before and after handing over to Franchisee, rate at which power is sold to
Franchisee, etc., shall be submitted every six months for each such Franchisee
scheme.
Issue No. 31: Calculation of total Load
Tezpur Nagrik Sabha submitted that the methods for calculation of total load for a
consumer by ASEB/APDCL are totally unreasonable. He submitted that the
concerned authorities add the wattage of all electrical equipment and appliances and
then the computation is done by considering every 5 ampere plug point as 100 W
and 15 ampere plug point as 1000 W. He added that a household does not use all
electrical equipment/ appliances and every available plug point simultaneously. He
further suggested that the electrical load of a household should be computed on the
basis of actual average consumption of power.
Response of APDCL:
The calculation of connected load on the basis of electrical appliances connected is a
generally accepted principle all over the country. As the average consumption will
vary from time to time, the electrical load will also keep changing if this method is
allowed. This will jeopardize the works of distribution and also require the consumer
to change their agreement frequently.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission agrees with the response of the APDCL.
Issue No. 32: Compliance to directives-Energy Auditing
Mahanagar Unnayan Samittee submitted that vide its Tariff Order dated 16 May
2011, the Commission had issued certain directives on pilferage and energy auditing
to APDCL. They submitted that in compliance to above directives, APDCL has
appointed some unqualified private contractors as distribution franchisees to take
possession of 11 kV feeders and related consumers to ensure power supply and
realize payments, to give fresh connections, etc., in the rural areas. However, such
franchisees give unmetered electrical connection to rural consumers by realizing
exorbitant amount, and most of these franchisees have defaulted even in making the
calculated payment amount to APDCL. They submitted that in spite of the above,
56
these franchisees are neither penalized nor have they been disallowed from
continuing their business at the cost of APDCL’s own loss.
Response of APDCL:
ADPCL submitted that energy auditing is presently being undertaken by APDCL to
reduce Distribution loss. APDCL has installed meters at all 33 kV sub-station, 33 kV
lines, 11 kV lines and DTRs. Further, in order to assess the LT line loss, energy audit
at DTR level has also taken up. APDCL submitted that with the implementation of RAPDRP project, it is expected that the loss level will come down to below 15% in the
coming years.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission’s comments on the status of compliance of old and fresh Directives
are discussed in Chapter 6 and the Commission has issued a directive to APDCL to
inform the Commission on each occasion when it appoints a Franchisee, and the
terms of such appointment as well as process of such appointment shall be
submitted to the Commission. Further all details of such schemes, including number
of feeders, number of agencies, revenue and collection before and after handing over
to Franchisee, rate at which power is sold to Franchisee, etc., shall be submitted
every six months for each such Franchisee scheme.
Issue No. 33: Advisory Committee
Brihattar Guwahati Maati Pattan Daabi Samittee, Indian Association of Lawyers
(Assam Branch), Aam Aadmi Party, All India Students Federation (Assam State
Council) and others enquired from the Commission regarding the details of the 21
member Advisory Committee of the Commission that needs to be formed as per the
Act. They further enquired regarding the details of all the meetings and participants of
such meetings held between FY 2005-06 to FY 2012-13.
Response of APDCL:
No response.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission vide its notification dated August 30, 2004 has notified the AERC
(Constitution of State Advisory Committee and its function) Regulations, 2004. The
Commission has already constituted the State Advisory Committee under the
aforementioned Regulations. The Commission has been annexing the minutes of
57
meetings of the State Advisory Committee to the Tariff Order. Additionally, objectors
may obtain details of such meeting from the office of the Commission by following
proper procedure.
Issue No. 34: Interest on Security Deposit
FINER submitted that APDCL has considered interest on security deposit @7% p.a.
on the opening balance for respective years whereas, the Commission in its MYT
Order for the Control Period from FY 2010-11 to FY 2012-13 had considered RBI
interest rate for determination of interest on security deposit. FINER submitted that
there is no rationale for seeking 7% p.a. on the security deposits with respect to the
interest on loan.
Grahak Suraksha Sanstha submitted that in spite of the Commission’s directions,
APDCL has not included the interest payable to consumers on the Security Deposit.
On the issue of interest on Security Deposit, All Assam SSI Association submitted
that APDCL has in its Petition shown Interest on Security Deposit being adjusted in
the consumer’s bills, however, in reality consumers are deprived of the interest being
accrued against the load security.
The All India Manufacturers’ Organization submitted that payment or adjustment of
interest amount due is not transparently shown in the monthly bills and details of
amount due, period of adjustment and method of adjustment are not shown in the
monthly bill. They requested the Commission to formulate a mechanism for
refund/adjustment of interest amount due.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that it claims interest and finance charges in the ARR as per
actuals only. APDCL submitted that the interest on Consumers’ Security Deposit has
been included in the financial statement of APDCL.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has allowed the Interest on Security Deposit as per the AERC
(Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004 (First Amendment),
2007, as elaborated in Chapter 4 of this Order. Further, the Commission has also
issued directions to APDCL in this Order.
58
Issue No. 35: Peak Tariff or Peak Hour Surcharge
FINER submitted that Peak hour surcharge or Higher energy charge during peak period is being applied by the licensees across the country to balance the
consumption between peak and off-peak period as well as to maintain the grid
stability. FINER submitted that APDCL has proposed peak hour surcharge at level of
Rs. 11.50 per unit, which is highest in the country. FINER submitted that such a high
surcharge will lose the objective to stagger the load or optimization of consumption
as it may lead to shut down of operation by industries during peak hours to remain
competitive in the market. FINER further requested the Commission to approve peak
hour charges that are at a reasonable level.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the pattern of tariff is devised mainly for the benefit of
consumers who can use power for night hours, thereby shifting the demand from
peak to off-peak. In case consumer uses power for 24 hours a day, the average rate
will be respective average tariff. The duration of peak hours is calculated from the
demand curve of the respective State only. Proposed TOD tariff for peak hours is far
below the alternate cost of energy at the prevailing time.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has considered the objections/suggestions of the objector and
APDCL’s views, while determining the tariff. The tariff differential in TOD tariffs has
been retained at existing levels.
Issue No. 36: Long Peak Period
FINER submitted that duration of peak hours approved in MYT Order for last Control
Period of FY 2012-13 was between 1700-2200, i.e., five hours, and energy charges
levied on power consumption during this period was Rs. 6.25 per unit. FINER further
submitted that while the peak period has been projected same in this MYT Petition,
the peak hour charges have almost doubled (Rs. 11.5 per unit). FINER submitted
that APDCL’s inability to reduce peak hour period indicates the incompetence in
power supply planning by the State. FINER also added that the consumers are not
aware of changes in load curves over the years so as to reach to a conclusion if the
peak period for utility has changed. FINER further requested the Commission to
direct APDCL to provide annual load curves with the Petition to give a clear picture of
the peak load period available to the consumers.
59
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the system load curve shows that the peak hour period is
longer in comparison to other parts of the country, which may be due to geographical
location.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has considered the objections/suggestions of the objector and
APDCL’s views, while determining the tariff. The duration of the peak period has
been retained at existing levels.
Issue No. 37: Open Access Charges
FINER, in its rejoinder, submitted that the Commission may consider fixing the open
access charges along with the tariff, so that persons wishing to take open access can
plan their transactions.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the Commission vide its Order in the Suo-Motu Petition No. 1/
2012 has already determined the transmission charge, wheeling charge and crosssubsidy charge. Further, APDCL has started implementation of the Open Access
provision for consumers having connected load of 1 MW and above and connected
on 33 kV and above network through dedicated service.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission vide its Order dated 28 February, 2013 had determined wheeling
charges for use of distribution system of APDCL by other licensees or generating
companies or captive power plants or consumers / users who are permitted open
access at 33 kV voltage level under Section 42(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The
Commission has determined wheeling charges in Chapter 7 of this Order.
Issue No. 38: Use of English Language in Commission’s administrative works
and proceedings
Assam Sahitya Sabha submitted that they are not opposed to use of English
language as such, and opined for use of Assamese language as a State language for
all purposes by the Commission.
Response of APDCL:
No response.
60
Comments of the Commission:
Regulation 4 of the AERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004 specifies the
language of the Commission to be followed by the Commission. The Regulations
empower the Commission to conduct the proceedings in Assamese language.
Further, documents in languages other than English are accepted by the Commission
subject to the same being accompanied by a translation thereof in English.
Issue No. 39: Peak-Off Peak Tariff
Assam Branch Indian Tea Association in their additional submission submitted that in
the tea industry, irrigation is primarily required during the winter months, i.e., October
to April when the rainfall is scanty and drought conditions prevail. Therefore, the tea
estates are compelled to draw power during the off-peak season resulting in higher
recorded demand and incidence of overdrawal penalty. It requested that in respect of
irrigation related load, the concept of peak and off-peak season should be reversed
for seasonal industries like Tea Industries. It also proposed that October to April
should be classified as the peak season and the remaining months as off-peak
season for the purpose of irrigation load.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that with changing climate and demand profile of tea garden it is
seen that power demand remains substantial for all months of year. Power
consumption cannot be differentiated for irrigation or factory under one category. The
Commission may abolish the off-season tariff to accommodate such eventuality.
APDCL further submitted that the penalty and incentive is for discouraging and
encouraging consumers in order to maintain a standard load according to the
network capacity.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission agrees with the response of the APDCL. The seasonal
consumption cannot be differentiated for irrigation load and factory load under the
same connection.
Issue No. 40: Levy of Penalty in respect of Regulation 2.2 of Supply Code
Assam Branch Indian Tea Association vide their additional submission submitted that
as per Regulation 2.2 of AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters)
Regulations, 2004, the maximum Contract Demand for 11 kV supply voltage is 1200
kVA. In line with the Regulations, the levy of additional 3% metering charges to
61
consumers drawing power at 11 kV should be on the basis of contracted demand and
should be applicable when the contracted demand exceeds 1200 kVA. However, the
consumers are being penalized on this account based on their connected load if the
same is above 1000 kVA, which is incorrect and is not compliant with the existing
provisions of the Regulations, It further requested the Commission to clarify the same
in the Schedule of Tariff.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that the connected load is the maximum demand of a consumer
who is connected to the system. Such connected load is considered for construction
of network. The Supply Code deals with the reliability and hence the connected load
is considered for this purpose.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has reviewed the provisions in this regard vis-a-vis the AERC
Supply Code Regulations in view of the objector’s submissions. APDCL should
strictly adhere to the AERC Supply Code Regulations and Tariff Order issued from
time to time.
Issue No. 41: Expenditure on Installation of 11 kV HT Breaker to be undertaken
by APDCL
Assam Branch Indian Tea Association vide their additional submission submitted that
Zonal Electrical Inspectorate has mandated the installation of 11 kV HT breaker in
place of Gang Switch. As APDCL is responsible for up-gradation and up-keep of the
distribution system, the responsibility of installation of the same lies with the
distribution Utility. It also submitted that it will be impossible to bear the huge
expenditure towards installation of such breakers by the consumers. Therefore, the
Commission is requested to direct APDCL for inclusion of such cost towards
installation of HT Breakers in their Capital Expenditure Plan.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that as per the CEA (Measures relating to Safety and Electric
Supply) Regulations, 2010, all consumers having load above 5 MW are required to
be connected through a breaker.
62
Comments of the Commission:
The CEA Regulations are required to be followed, and the cost of 11 kV Circuit
Breaker has to be borne by the consumer.
Issue No. 42 : Process for submission of objection
Sh. D.D. Baruah submitted that the process for the submission for objection is very
critical and expensive and not possible for general consumers and the same needs to
be modified.
Response of APDCL:
No response.
Comments of the Commission:
The AERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004 specifies the manner of filing of
reply/objections. The aforementioned Regulations have been followed since the date
of notification of the above-said Regulations, and are also in accordance with the
procedure followed by Regulatory Commissions in other States.
Issue No. 43: Cost of the Petition
Assam Jatiyatabadi Yuva Chatra Parishad and others submitted that the cost of tariff
Petition of Rs. 300 is very high and it should be made available free of cost.
Response of APDCL:
No response
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission has noted the objection. As regards availability of the Petition free
of cost, a copy of the Petition was made available on the website of APDCL
(www.laedcl.gov.in) and also on the website of the Commission (www.aerc.nic.in) in
downloadable format. However, the printed copy of the Petition cannot be made
available free of cost.
Issue No. 44: Government Dues and CAG Report Observations
KMSS submitted that as per CAG reports, a loss of around Rs. 2300 Crore has been
incurred during the period from FY 2002-03 to FY 2012-13 by various
Board/Companies of the Power Department of Assam due to misappropriation/loss of
revenue/fraudulent expenditure/loss of subsidy-incentives. It submitted that this loss
63
is based on the area-wise sample survey conducted by CAG during the last decade
and the total amount of irregularities during this period are unimaginable. It further
submitted that the above amount includes an amount of Rs. 1187 crore due from the
State Government for FY 2002-03, and if the same is collected from the State
Government, then there would be no need for tariff hike. It further submitted that the
Company is trying to be financially secure by transferring the entire load of these
irregularities onto the consumers through tariff hike.
Key points from compilation of reports submitted are as under:
a)
Expenses against false/doubtful/ unnecessary accounts – Rs. 100.27 Crore
(Sample based)
b)
Loss of revenue – Rs. 63.08 Crore (Sample based)
c)
T&D loss- Rs. 464.77 Crore (FY 2006-07 to FY 2010-11 – 5 years) (This loss
is in excess of loss approved by the Commission in the respective tariff
Orders for the above mentioned years)
d)
Subsidy receivable from Assam Government – Rs. 1181.51 Crore. This was
to be received from the State Government against rural electrification
e)
Non receipt of incentives from the Government of India – Rs. 105.99 Crore.
This amount was not received from the MOP, GOI due to lackadaisical
attitude of the Department.
f)
Division of funds – Rs. 326.27 Crore
g)
Overrun of Cost- Rs. 62.32 Crore
Response of APDCL:
In response, the APDCL has submitted a note on the present status of the audit
paragraphs
(a) on the expenses on the account of false/doubtful and unnecessary accounts,
amounting to Rs. 100.27 crore. All these paras have been settled by the Public
Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Legislative Assembly.
(b) Loss of revenue amounting to Rs. 63.08 Crore. All paras have been settled by the
PAC.
(c) T&D losses amounting to Rs. 464.77 Crore. In this regard they have not been
allowed any excess T&D loss over and above the approved level
(d) Subsidy receivable from the Government of Assam amounting to Rs. 1181.51
Crore. RE subsidy has been provided in the Annual Statement of Accounts on
accrual basis. Subsidy receivable on this account accumulated upto 2003-04 (i.e.,
1181.51 Crore) has been adjusted in the Annual Statement of Accounts for FY 200405 as per the approved Financial Reconstruction Plan. PAC has dropped the para.
64
(e) Non–receipt of incentive from the Government of India amounting to Rs. 105.99
Crore. The incentive for efficiency improvement was not applicable to APDCL/ASEB
due to non-achievement of requisite parameters and hence, there was no loss on this
account.
(f) The Management agreed to such short diversion to avoid accumulation of
surcharge to avail rebate for timely payment from Power Suppliers. Amount thus
diverted was recouped on receipt of funds from the Government of Assam under
FRP. The PAC noted the same and dropped the para.
(g) Overrun of costs amounting to Rs. 62.32 Crore. The para has been settled by the
PAC.
Comments of the Commission:
APDCL has clarified the position, which has been noted. These matters are already
within the realm of the Public Accounts Committee of the Assam Legislative
Assembly and the Commission would not like to make any further comment at this
stage. However, the issues raised have been taken into account and the Commission
has allowed different heads of expenditure in accordance with the AERC Tariff
Regulations and after due prudence check.
Issue No. 45: Objections on Compliance of Directives
1. Directive 1- Power Theft
Shri. Deven Dutta submitted that although 12 nos. of special police stations have
been established to arrest power theft, the police personnel engaged by the police
department are posted there as “punishment posting” and are not at all competent to
arrest power theft. Further, as these police personnel are deprived of extra income
due to non-placement at main police stations, they are conniving with the persons
indulging in power theft and do not file cases, in order to earn some extra money. He
submitted that merely by establishing one cell to arrest power theft and keeping one
telephone connection to arrest power theft, power theft cannot be arrested. Further,
no employees are present during night time and even if one is present, the phone is
unattended. He sought the detailed district wise list of number of cases filed by these
special police stations, no. of cases where punishment has been given to criminals,
and the money realized by the CVO by imposing penalty.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted the performance of ASEB Special Police Stations since inception.
APDCL further submitted that:
65
(1) As per agreement with Department of Home of Govt. of Assam and Assam State
Electricity Board, on June 2008, 12 nos. of district wise special police stations
were established and the police personnel were placed from the concerned office
of Superintendent of Police to arrest power theft.
(2) These 12 nos. of special police stations are under the 12 nos. of Deputy General
Manager (DGM) of APDCL. As per the prepared list of concerned DGM, antipower theft operation is carried out in different areas of Sub-Divisions. The legal
actions are taken by concerned Sub-divisional engineers, against the accused
persons after the anti-power theft operation by filing cases in the concerned
special police stations as per the provisions of Electricity Act 2003. The
concerned Sub-divisional engineers impose penalty as per legal provisions. This
provision of imposing penalty is not legally delegated to special police stations.
(3) For the benefit of the public, APDCL established a Central Power Theft
Information Cell to lodge complaint for power theft and other matters. This cell
receives complaints by Telephone No. 9678005271 and sends information to
different Deputy General Manager/ Sub-Divisional Engineers to take appropriate
action. The appropriate action is taken about the complaints. The reports of these
appropriate actions are sent to Chief General Manager of APDCL.
(4) A Central Vigilance Office of APDCL is functioning under the supervision of one
senior retired IPS officer. He along with his team of CVO, under the direction of
CMD of APDCL, have carried out operations in different areas of Assam against
power theft and irregular practices in power connections. The cases against these
persons are filed in special police stations and local police stations as per
provisions of Electricity Act 2003. Also, investigations are done on corruption
charges against officers, employees and related personnel of APDCL and the
reports are placed before CMD. It may be mentioned that APDCL has not
delegated power to Vigilance Cell for imposing penalty on criminals indulging in
power theft, etc. So, after filing of cases, the matter is informed to Sub-Divisional
officer and he imposes the appropriate penalty.
2. Directive 2 - Energy Audit
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that under APDRP, the meters were installed on all the
33 kV lines, 11 kV lines, Power Transformers and distributions transformers. He
requested a sample energy audit of subdivision-wise 11 kV and Distribution
Transformers of Guwahati Electrical Circle- I and Guwahati Electrical Circle–II.
66
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted the energy audit report of GEC- II as a sample for the energy
injected in March 2013 and billed in April 2013.
3. Directive 3 - Annual Audit
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that APDCL and other companies spend huge amount of
money for annual audit by engaging private establishment / auditor. Even then,
companies have not been able to file audit report in a timely manner. He asked
APDCL to submit the information about the financial years for which audited annual
accounts are yet to be submitted to the AERC.
He further questioned about
possibility of determination of tariff without certification of the CAG on audited
accounts, as the same is illegal.
Response of APDCL:
Please refer the page No. 80 of APDCL’s main petition.
4. Directive 6 Customer complaint booth
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that although customer complaint booths are established
by spending public money, the services to the consumers are deteriorating day by
day.
In these complaint booths, either there is no employee or if there is an
employee, then APDCL gives the excuse of non-availability of vehicle to attend
complaints. Most of them do not have telephone connections. APDCL has not
complied with the directive of the AERC.
Response of APDCL:
Please refer the page No. 82 of APDCL’s main petition.
5. Directive-7 APDRP
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that (a) As per Table 2.2 of APDCL’s tariff petition, it is
projected that about 414 km of new LT line and 3054 km of reconductoring of LT line
will be done. He enquired as to how much technical loss will be reduced by reconductoring thousands of LT lines by above mentioned scheme. The Power
department of Assam and ASEB had given assurance about reduction of power loss
after completion APDRP works. The Commission also approved year-wise
transmission and distribution loss while determining the Tariff. He also sought the list
67
of year wise approved loss and the achieved actual loss by the electricity utilities for
FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13.
(b) The number of Jeeban Dhara consumer connections, power connection and
growth and quantum has increased enormously during FY 2010-11, FY 2011-12 and
FY 2012-13 due to execution of RGGVY. The details of revenue realised from this
category during the above mentioned years should be submitted.
Response of APDCL:
Please refer the page No. 82 of APDCL’s main petition.
6. Directive-8 Prepaid meters
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that APDCL had delegated the authority to some of the
Franchisees for realisation of revenue. As per information, most of the franchisees do
not deposit the collected money to APDCL or deposit only part of it. He sought the
following information of the above mentioned franchisees by APDCL:
(1) Circle wise list.
(2) How much balance outstanding payments are to be paid to APDCL by
franchisees along with number of franchisees?
(3) The number of franchisees leaving this business without paying the revenue?
Who has given the authority to Electricity Authority to impose the burden of
meeting this gap due to above reasons, on genuine and general consumers?
(4) Has APDCL taken any legal or any other procedure against these franchisees,
who have not paid the revenue? If not, how this money can be realised?
(5) Why prepaid meters are not installed in LT line and Distribution Transformers
allotted to franchisees?
Response of APDCL:
Please refer the page No. 83 of APDCL’s main petition. APDCL further submitted the
information in response to point no.1, 2 and 3.
7. Directive-14
Shri Deven Dutta sought details on the following:
(a) At present how many electro-mechanical or Ferrari meters are being replaced?
(b) How many these types of meters are still in service under Guwahati Electrical
Circles?
(c) When will these meters be changed to digital static meters?
(d) Whether separate meters have been installed in residential quarters of ministers,
68
MLAs and other government employees of Dispur Capital complex as well as in
quarters of residential colonies of Jawaharnagar IAS colony? If not, why and the
time limit of when it will be taken up should be intimated.
(e) How the electricity bills of these residences are realised and at what rate?
Response of APDCL:
(a) At present around 1,20,000 electro-mechanical meters are to be replaced in
Assam.
(b) Presently 15,245 numbers of electro-mechanical meters are still in service
(c) These meters are expected to be replaced within one year.
(d) The separate meters are not connected till date as the billing for the consumption
as a whole is done based on single point metering.
(e) The electricity bills of these residences are realized under bulk category.
8. Directive-16 – Conservation of Energy
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that APDCL has not taken adequate steps for
conservation of power, e.g.,
(a) The street lights are often lit much before sunset (after noon 4/4-30) and
sometimes they continue to be lit long after sunrise and sometimes even for the
entire day.
(b) The use of energy efficient transformers is only on paper.
(c) The lights and fans are kept �on’ continuously in the offices of ASEB and
government establishments throughout day and night as well as the ACs are also
kept running much before the presence of staff-officers in offices and also late
into the evening, i.e., long after employees leave their offices. The electrical
appliances in many government conference halls and offices are seen to be
running throughout the day even without any programme for meetingconferences of ministers or bureaucrats in the halls.
(d) No initiative appears to have been taken by APDCL for propagation of energy
conservation and efficient use of electricity through media coverage. Will it be
possible for the energy conservation mission to succeed? Is ASEB setting the
right example? Why should the public bear these failures?
The directives of the Commission have not been complied with.
Response of APDCL:
Please refer the page No. 88 of APDCL’s main petition. APDCL also submitted that it
has taken the advice of the objector seriously.
69
9. Directive-17 – Consumer Education and Consumer consciouness
Shri Deven Dutta sought details such as
1. How many meetings are being held with consumers during the last year at subdivision, division and circle levels for advocacy of consumer knowledge,
consumer consciousness as well as for different rules and regulations?
2. The list of number of responsible higher officials from headquarters present
during the meeting and the number of meetings held has to be submitted. The
copies of minutes of the meeting of at least ten such meetings have to be
submitted.
Response of APDCL:
Please refer the page No. 88 and 89 of APDCL’s main petition.
10. Directive-19
Shri Deven Dutta enquired regarding the reasons for not installing meters at
governmental residences of Ministers-Bureaucrats and employees apart from
government offices.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL submitted that electricity billing for these residences are realized as a whole
based on single point metering. As such, the separate metering is not done.
11. Directive-20 – Interest on Consumer Security Deposit
Shri Deven Dutta submitted that the Commission had directed in FY 2007 for
payment or adjustment of interest on security deposit for the year in the last bill of the
year. He further sought the details such as whether such payment is made in the
following years, list of category wise consumer’s security deposit, interest on security
deposit and adjusted amount up to March 31, 2013.
Response of APDCL:
As regards payment made against interest on security deposit, APDCL submitted
that it has made payment upto March 13, 2012. APDCL further submitted the list.
Comments of the Commission:
The Commission’s comments on the status of compliance of old directives and fresh
Directives, are discussed in the Chapter 6 and further directives have been issued,
70
Issue No. 46: Loss due to improper implementation of RGGVY Scheme
Shri. R. N. Barthakur submitted that all the materials utilised in the works of RGGVY
Schemes are sub-standard, which result in high maintenance cost thereby increasing
the ARR. This also increases the difficulty of the consumers due to frequent
interruption of power supply as well as unwarranted financial burden.
Response of APDCL:
The Government of Assam has already formed a Committee to look into the matter
and necessary action will follow in due course.
Comments of the Commission:
Noted.
Issue No. 47: Material Accounting System
Shri. R. N. Barthakur submitted that earlier, in the ASEB regime, material accounting
system was foolproof. There was a proper system of accounting for procurement,
utilisation, transfer, and transportation of material. However, after unbundling of
ASEB, such system is not in practice, which has resulted in loss of accounting
records of valuable material already purchased under different Government
schemes.
Response of APDCL:
APDCL is strictly following standard accounting practices as per Accounting
Standards (AS-2) for inventory management. The Company is also going to
implement Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) with Material Management module.
Comments of the Commission:
Noted. APDCL should expedite the implementation of ERP and ensure strict
adherence to Accounting Standards.
Issue No. 48: Loss of Interest on Parking of Funds
Shri. R. N. Barthakur submitted that APDCL has wrongly parked some funds in
different Financial Institutions, resulting in lower interest earnings. This has resulted
in a loss of Rs. 1.83 crore as per the CAG.
71
Response of APDCL:
The amount of Rs. 1.83 crore is a presumptive loss calculated on hypothetical basis
and APDCL has already replied to PAG with proper reasoning. APDCL added that
parking of surplus funds is done after due consideration of anticipated requirement,
better liquidity to facilitate smooth and timely implementation of projects,
administrative convenience and optimum return. Considering the above practical
reasons and volume of transactions, APDCL has requested PAG to drop the above
para.
Comments of the Commission:
Noted.
72
4.
4.1
Analysis and Determination of Annual Revenue
Requirement for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16
ENERGY SALES
Appropriate estimation of category-wise energy sales for the Control Period is
essential to arrive at the quantum of power to be purchased and the likely revenue
from sale of energy. This Chapter examines in detail the consumer category-wise
energy sales projected by APDCL in its Multi Year Tariff Petition for the Control
Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, and the category-wise sales approved by the
Commission.
4.2
APPROACH FOR SALES PROJECTION
APDCL submitted that as the historical trend method has proved to be a reasonably
accurate and well accepted method for estimating the number of consumers, the
connected load, and energy consumption, it has estimated sales for various
customer categories primarily based on the CAGR trends during past years. APDCL
further submitted that wherever the trend seemed unreasonable or unsustainable, it
has corrected the growth factors to arrive at more realistic projections.
APDCL submitted that for the purpose of sales projections for the period from FY
2013-14 to FY 2015-16, it has analysed the growth in energy consumption for each
consumer category. APDCL submitted that the analysis of the growth rate lends
insight into the behaviour of each category and hence, forms the basis of forecasting
the sales for each category.
4.3
CATEGORY-WISE PROJECTED ENERGY SALES
APDCL submitted that it has considered the past sales and CAGR for different
categories of consumers for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12. APDCL
submitted that for the period between FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 it has considered
the year on year (Y-o-Y) growth rate, whereas the growth witnessed between FY
2010-11 and FY 2011-12 based on provisional figures for FY 2011-12 is also
indicated. The category-wise sales and rate of growth in sales as submitted by
APDCL, are shown in the Tables below:
73
Table 4.1: Historical Trend in Category-wise Units sold (MU)
Sr.
No.
Category
FY
FY
FY
FY
2008-09
2009-10 2010-11
2011-12
LT Category
1
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1 kWh/day
34
40
215
273
2
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
965
973
929
1038
3
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
82
100
119
140
4
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20 kW
275
315
354
403
5
General Load
58
64
66
79
6
Public Lighting
6
8
9
10
7
Agriculture up to 7.5 HP
4
4
5
7
8
Small Industries Rural up to 20 kW
41
45
45
49
9
Small Industries Urban
24
25
27
28
LT TOTAL
1489
1573
1769
2025
HT Category
10
HT Domestic 20 kW and above
31
29
27
37
11
HT commercial 20 kW & above
152
167
181
218
12
Public Water Works
47
55
62
58
13
Bulk Supply 20 kW and above
13 A
Government Educational Institutions
42
45
44
55
13 B
Others
294
289
297
330
14
HT Small Industries upto 50 kVA
19
41
53
20
15
HT Industries-I 50 kVA to 150 kVA
47
50
70
61
16
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
475
482
551
685
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
358
412
356
389
18
Oil & Coal
69
80
99
65
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
21
24
26
25
HT TOTAL
1555
1674
1767
1945
Grand Total
3044
3247
3535
3970
74
Table 4.2: Category wise Growth Rate of Energy Sale
Sr.
Category
No.
CAGR (3
FY 2010-11
FY 2011-12
years) FY
over FY
over FY
2011-12 over
2009-10
2010-11
FY 2008-09
LT Category
1
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1 kWh/day
2
3
4
24%
27% #
27%
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
6%
6%
12%
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
19%
20%
17%
14%
12%
14%
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20
kW
5
General Load
11%
4%
19%
6
Public Lighting
15%
15%
8%
7
Agriculture up to 7.5 HP
21%
6%
41%
8
Small Industries Rural up to 20 kW
6%
1%
8%
9
Small Industries Urban
4%
7%
3%
11%
12%
14%
LT TOTAL
HT Category
10
HT Domestic 20 kW and above
8%
-8%
39%
11
HT commercial 20 kW & above
13%
9%
21%
12
Public Water Works
8%
13%
-6%
13
Bulk Supply 20 kW and above
13 A
Government Educational Institutions
10%
-1%
24%
13 B
Others
4%
3%
11%
14
HT Small Industries up to 50 kVA
18%
22%
-64%
15
HT Industries-I 50kVA to 150 kVA
11%
40%
-13%
16
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
13%
14%
24%
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
4%
-13%
9%
18
Oil & Coal
2%
23%
-34%
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
7%
7%
-3%
-2%
1%
-3%
9%
9%
12%
HT TOTAL
All Total
# Due to large number of RGGVY connections in FY 2010-11, the actual energy sale growth
in Jeevan Dhara category from FY 2009-10 to FY 2010-11 is observed to be more than
400%. Hence, for the purpose of CAGR calculation, this abnormal growth rate has not been
considered, instead the Y-o-Y growth rate of next period (FY 2010-11 to FY 2011-12) has
been taken for the calculation.
75
The category-wise number of consumers and rate of growth in number of consumers
for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12, as submitted by APDCL, are shown in
the Tables below:
Table 4.3: Category wise Number of Consumers
Sr.
No.
Category
FY
FY
FY
FY
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
LT Category
1
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1 kWh/day
2
3
4
70688
252151
417681
647072
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
1265735
1190050
1257757
1371900
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
15106
20210
23065
28933
150677
157229
163125
170737
22241
24417
26373
28204
650
842
877
961
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20
kW
5
General Load
6
Public Lighting
7
Agriculture up to 7.5 HP
2354
2993
4176
6171
8
Small Industries Rural up to 20 kW
6225
7092
6986
7040
9
Small Industries Urban
3383
3377
3508
3635
1537059
1658361
1903548
2264653
LT TOTAL
HT Category
10
HT Domestic 20 kW and above
711
824
624
641
11
HT commercial 20 kW & above
1414
1589
1831
2046
12
Public Water Works
1805
2225
2353
2765
13
Bulk Supply 20kW and above
Government Educational Institution
161
134
191
231
Others
712
798
876
869
14
HT Small Industries up to 50 kVA
667
714
757
817
15
HT Industries-I 50kVA to 150 kVA
599
654
721
776
16
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
393
437
498
540
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
916
816
870
971
18
Oil & Coal
112
236
256
697
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
929
960
871
847
8419
9387
9848
11200
1545478
1667748
1913396
2275853
13
A
13
B
HT TOTAL
Grand Total
76
Table 4.4: CAGR in Number of Consumers
CAGR (3 years)
Sr.
No.
Category
FY
2011-12
over FY 200809
FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12
over
over
FY
FY2009-10
2010-11
LT Category
1
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1 kWh/day
59%
66%
55%
2
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
6%
6%
9%
3
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
24%
14%
25%
4
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20 kW
4%
4%
5%
5
General Load
8%
8%
7%
6
Public Lighting
14%
4%
10%
7
Agriculture up to 7.5 HP
38%
40%
48%
8
Small Industries Rural up to 20 kW
4%
-1%
1%
9
Small Industries Urban
2%
4%
4%
14%
15%
19%
LT TOTAL
HT Category
10
HT Domestic 20 kW and above
-2%
-24%
3%
11
HT commercial 20 kW & above
13%
15%
12%
12
Public Water Works
16%
6%
18%
13
Bulk Supply 20 kW and above
13 A
Government Educational Institution
16%
43%
21%
13 B
Others
7%
10%
-1%
14
HT Small Industries up to 50 kVA
7%
6%
8%
15
HT Industries-I 50kVA to 150 kVA
9%
10%
8%
16
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
11%
14%
8%
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
2%
7%
12%
18
Oil & Coal
97%
8%
172%
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
-3%
-9%
-3%
HT TOTAL
10%
5%
14%
Grand Total
14%
15%
19%
The category-wise connected load and CAGR of connected load for the period from
FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12, as submitted by APDCL, are shown in the Tables below:
77
Table 4.5: Category-wise Connected Load (kW)
Sr.
No.
Category
FY
FY
FY
FY
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
LT Category
1
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1kWh/day
34848
168422
217189
294603
2
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
1275870
1225722
1278855
1426015
3
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
116642
149020
160067
208288
245330
265055
284511
323142
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20
4
kW
5
General Load
48013
58450
62726
69713
6
Public Lighting
11289
4373
5205
4666
7
Agriculture up to 7.5 HP
6035
7214
9873
12720
8
Small Industries Rural up to 20 kW
70343
72980
76994
82421
9
Small Industries Urban
44142
39092
37744
37995
1852512
1990327
2133162
2459563
24622
36995
39044
29885
104894
118952
136550
156603
26233
33047
33691
31603
24311
22513
25184
32185
139785
138385
143733
165504
LT TOTAL
HT Category
10
HT Domestic 20 kW and above
11
HT commercial 20 kW and above
12
Public Water Works
13
Bulk Supply 20 kW and above
13 A
Government Educational Institution
13 B
Others
14
HT Small Industries up to 50 kVA
21126
35098
38938
25107
15
HT Industries-I 50 kVA to 150 kVA
42560
44551
50011
54928
16
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
256592
230553
279861
327868
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
298393
276722
282753
310264
18
Oil & Coal
33916
80485
85732
31906
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
49335
47759
46558
50326
HT TOTAL
1021787
1065058
1162055
1216180
Grand Total
2874299
3055385
3295217
3675743
78
Table 4.6: CAGR of Connected Load
Sr.
No.
Category
CAGR
(3
years)
FY
2011-12 over
FY 2008-09
FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12
over
over
FY
FY2009-10
2010-11
LT Category
1
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1 kWh/day
34%
29%
36%
2
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
7%
4%
12%
3
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
22%
7%
30%
4
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20 kW
10%
7%
14%
5
General Load
13%
7%
11%
6
Public Lighting
-2%
-3%
7%
7
Agriculture up to 7.5HP
28%
37%
29%
8
Small Industries Rural up to 20 kW
-6%
-22%
10%
9
Small Industries Urban
-5%
-3%
1%
LT TOTAL
10%
11%
2%
HT Category
10
HT Domestic 20 kW and above
11%
6%
-23%
11
HT commercial 20 kW & above
14%
15%
15%
12
Public Water Works
7%
2%
-6%
13
Bulk Supply 20 kW and above
13 A
Government Educational Institution
11%
12%
28%
13 B
Others
6%
4%
15%
14
HT Small Industries up to 50 kVA
14%
11%
-36%
15
HT Industries-I 50kVA to 150 kVA
9%
12%
10%
16
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
9%
21%
17%
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
2%
2%
10%
18
Oil & Coal
27%
7%
-63%
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
1%
-3%
8%
HT TOTAL
6%
9%
5%
Grand Total
9%
8%
12%
Based on the above rate of growth of energy sold, number of consumers and connected
load, APDCL has projected the category-wise energy sales for the period from FY 2012-13
to FY 2015-16, as given in the Table below:
79
Table 4.7: Energy Sales Projected by APDCL (FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14)
Sr.
FY 2012-13
No.
Category
FY 2013-14
Sale
Number of
Connecte
Sale
Number of
Connecte
(MU)
Consumers
d Load
(MU)
Consumers
d Load
300
711779
324063
398
944117
429843
1099
1453137
1510456
1156
1528287
1588570
168
34720
249946
207
42823
308281
4
LT Category
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1
kWh/day
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to
5 kW
Domestic-B above 5 kW to
20 kW
Commercial Load above 0.5
kW to 20 kW
420
178002
336891
438
185575
351225
5
General Load
85
30530
75462
92
33047
81684
6
Public Lighting
11
1076
5226
12
1225
5949
7
Agriculture upto 7.5 HP
9
8525
17527
13
11777
24276
8
Small Industries Rural upto
20 kW
Small Industries Urban
1
2
3
9
LT TOTAL
51
7350
86049
53
7673
89837
28
3635
37995
28
3702
38690
2171
2428754
2643615
2397
2758226
2918355
40
687
32021
40
689
32140
247
2314
177143
280
2618
200378
67
3194
36505
78
3689
42167
HT Category
10
11
12
HT Domestic 20 kW and
above
HT commercial 20 kW and
above
Public Water Works
13 A
Bulk Supply 20 kW and
above
Government Educational
Institution
64
267
37196
74
309
42988
13 B
Others
354
930
177119
378
995
189549
21
850
26111
23
903
27743
13
67
846
59871
73
922
65268
16
HT Small Industries upto 50
kVA
HT Industries-I 50 kVA to
150 kVA
HT Industries-II above 150
kVA
761
600
364577
847
668
405395
17
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
389
971
310264
396
989
315934
18
Oil & Coal
69
746
34140
121
1302
59613
19
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5
HP
27
902
53580
27
902
53580
14
15
HT TOTAL
2106
12306
1308527
2336
13986
1434754
Grand Total
4277
2441060
3952142
4733
2772212
4353108
80
Table 4.8: Energy Sales Projected by APDCL (FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16)
FY 2014-15
Sr.
Category
No.
FY 2015-16
Number of
Sale
Number of
Connecte
Sale
(MU)
Consumers
d Load
(MU)
466
1259096
520222
550
1671600
631434
1260
1597683
1779198
1386
1821358
1992702
263
52732
370107
336
65022
449489
481
193319
374788
529
201518
402383
Consumer
s
Connecte
d Load
4
LT Category
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1
kWh/day
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to
5 kW
Domestic-B above 5 kW to
20 kW
Commercial Load above 0.5
kW to 20 kW
5
General Load
100
35858
91313
110
38830
101734
6
Public Lighting
14
1406
6603
17
1603
7263
7
16
16043
32098
21
22112
42463
8
Agriculture upto 7.5 HP
Small Industries Rural upto
20 kW
56
8067
94056
59
8432
98728
9
Small Industries Urban
29
3761
39077
30
3828
39468
2685
3167965
3307462
3037
3834303
3765663
67
1455
56888
115
1728
101261
333
2968
234442
403
3562
281330
88
4247
47749
98
4903
53000
89
353
49006
107
408
56847
394
1081
198231
414
1159
210331
31
958
33356
37
1017
37361
1
2
3
LT TOTAL
10
11
12
13
13 A
13 B
HT Category
HT Domestic 20 kW and
above
HT commercial 20 kW and
above
Public Water Works
Bulk Supply 20 kW and
above
Government Educational
Institution
84
1008
71142
95
1099
78968
16
Others
HT Small Industries upto 50
kVA
HT Industries-I 50 kVA to
150 kVA
HT Industries-II above 150
kVA
934
746
440336
1048
830
506387
17
Tea Coffee & Rubber
440
989
319094
484
1004
323069
18
Oil & Coal
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5
HP
151
2078
89711
179
3577
121581
32
902
55187
36
902
56291
HT TOTAL
2642
16784
1595143
3014
20189
1826426
All Total
5328
3184749
4902604
6051
3854492
5592089
14
15
19
81
4.4
DETAILED ANALYSIS OF ENERGY SALES PROJECTED
The category-wise energy sales for the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 201516 have been projected based on 3-year Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR)
during the period from FY 2009-10 to FY 2012-13, and 4-year Compounded Annual
Growth Rate (CAGR) during the period from FY 2008-09 and FY 2012-13, as
appropriate. The category-wise energy sales projected by APDCL for the Control
Period, as summarised in Table 4.7 and Table 4.8 above, are discussed below.
During the scrutiny of the Petition, APDCL was required to submit the category-wise
growth rate considered for estimating energy sales, number of consumers and
connected load. APDCL submitted that estimated sales, number of consumers and
connected load are calculated based on Compounded Average Growth Rate, which
is different from the Compounded Annual Growth Rate considered by the
Commission. Further, in response to the Commission’s query, APDCL also submitted
the details of numbers of category-wise consumers and sales for FY 2012-13 till the
month of February 2013, which has been considered by the Commission while
projecting the sales for the period from FY 2012-13 to FY 2015-16.
LT CATEGORIES
4.11.1 Jeevan Dhara
APDCL has projected new connections and sales to this category as given below:
Table 4.9: Connections and Energy Sales Projected by APDCL
Sr
No.
Particulars
1
No. of connections
2
Sales (MU)
FY 2010-
FY 2011-
11
12
(Actual)
(Actual)
FY 2012-
FY 2013-
FY
FY 2015-
13
14
2014- 15
16
417681
647072
711779
944117
1259096
1671600
215
273
300
398
466
550
53.53
35.11
35.11
36.40
35.27
31.29
Average sales per
connection/month
3
(kWh)
Under Jeevan Dhara category, the consumer is expected to consume not more than
1 kWh/day on an average. However, APDCL has considered more than 30 units per
connection per month for projecting the sales during the period from FY 2013-14 to
FY 2015-16.
82
During scrutiny of the Petition, the Commission directed APDCL to submit the details
of targeted and actual addition of consumers under RGGVY scheme. However,
APDCL submitted that the targeted addition of consumers under RGGVY scheme for
the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 is yet to be finalized by the Government
of Assam and REC, and that the addition under the Jeevan Dhara category of
consumers is based on CAGR as well as historical basis.
As part of additional data requirement, APDCL was required to submit details of
targeted and actual addition of consumers under RGGVY. In spite of several
requests APDCL has not submitted the addition for the future years. Further, APDCL
submitted that the targeted addition of consumers under RGGVY for the period from
FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 is yet to be finalised and addition under the Jeevan Dhara
category of consumers is based on CAGR as well as historical addition.
In this context, the target and achievement of RGGVY Works (no. of BPL
households) in Assam during FY 2010-11 to FY 2012-13 are as shown below:
Table 4.10: Target vs. Achievement of RGGVY
Year
Targets (BPL Households)
Achievements (BPL
Households)
FY 2010-11
660312
368959
FY 2011-12
513996
232060
FY 2012-13
343307
101260
As against the new connections projected by APDCL, the Commission has
considered addition of new connections constant at 250000, during each year of the
Control Period, which in the Commission’s view is a reasonable assumption given
the past trend. For arriving at number of connections for FY 2013-14, the
Commission has considered addition of 250000 new connections to 877110 number
of consumers for FY 2012-13, as submitted by APDCL. The release of new services
in any year has to be spread out for all 12 months to assess sales during that year.
The Commission has also considered consumption of 30 kWh per month for this
category of consumers.
83
The sales under the �Jeevan Dhara’ consumer category are approved by the
Commission as below:
Table 4.11: Jeevan Dhara category Sales approved by the Commission (MU)
Year
Energy Sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
361
FY 2014-15
451
FY 2015-16
541
4.11.2 Domestic – A
APDCL has projected the energy sales to this domestic category at 1156 MU for FY
2013-14, 1260 MU for FY 2014-15, and 1386 MU for FY 2015-16.
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and the 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 6%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 6%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 12%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 6% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, APDCL
has considered the growth rates as 9% and 10%, respectively. From the historical
trend in category-wise units sold, the computed 3-year, 2-year, and 1-year CAGR
with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13 works out to around 4%, 9% and
5%, respectively.
Accordingly, for FY 2013-14, the Commission has considered an annual growth of
5% over the FY 2012-13 sales. For FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 also, the same
growth of 5% has been considered over the sales of previous year.
Based on above, the Commission approves the sales for Domestic A category
for the Control Period, as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.12: Domestic-A category Sales approved by the Commission (MU)
Year
Energy Sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
1150
FY 2014-15
1207
FY 2015-16
1268
84
4.11.3 Domestic - B
APDCL has projected the sales for the Domestic - B category for the Control Period
as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.13: Energy Sales projected by APDCL for Domestic – B Category (MU)
Year
Energy Sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
207
FY 2014-15
263
FY 2015-16
336
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12,
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 19%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 20%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 17%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 26% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the
growth rate by APDCL considered is around 27% and 28%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 works out to 18%.
Hence, the Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 18% for projecting the
sales to this category during the Control Period.
Based on above, the Commission approves the sales for Domestic-B category
for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.14: Sales for Domestic B category approved by the Commission (MU)
Year
Energy Sales
FY 2013-14
194
FY 2014-15
229
FY 2015-16
271
4.11.4 LT Commercial
APDCL has projected energy sales for LT Commercial category for the Control
Period as shown in the Table below:
85
Table 4.15: Energy Sales projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales
FY 2013-14
438
FY 2014-15
481
FY 2015-16
529
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 14%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 12%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 14%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 4% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the
growth rate considered by APDCL is around 10%. The computed 3–year, 2-year and
1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13 is 10%, 9% and 4%
respectively. The 3-year CAGR seems reasonable, as the commercial activity will
pick up with the growing economy.
Therefore, the Commission has considered a growth rate of 10% for projecting the
sales during all years of the Control Period.
Based on above, the Commission approves the sales for the Commercial
category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.16: Approved Sales for Commercial Category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
463
FY 2014-15
510
FY 2015-16
561
4.11.5 LT General Purpose Supply
APDCL has projected energy sales for the LT General Purpose Supply category for
the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.17: Sales for General Purpose Supply Category as projected by
APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
92
FY 2014-15
100
FY 2015-16
110
86
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 11%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 4%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 19%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 16% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and for FY 2015-16, the
growth rate considered by APDCL is around 8% and 10%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 is 8%, 10% and 7%, respectively.
Therefore, the Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 8% for approving the
sales for the Control Period.
Based on above, the Commission approves the sales for LT General Purpose
Supply category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.18: Approved Sales for LT General Purpose Supply Category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
86
FY 2014-15
93
FY 2015-16
100
4.11.6 Public Lighting
APDCL has projected energy sales for Public Lighting category for the Control Period
as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.19: Sales to Public Lighting Category as projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
12
FY 2014-15
14
FY 2015-16
17
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 15%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 15%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 8%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered zero
growth over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the growth
87
rate considered by APDCL is around 15% and 17%, respectively. The computed 3–
year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13
are 17%, 18% and 28%, respectively.
Considering the growth in sales under this category in the past few years, the
Commission has considered 3- year CAGR of 17% as the growth rate during the
entire Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves the sales for Public Lighting
category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.20: Approved Sales for Public Lighting Category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
14
FY 2014-15
17
FY 2015-16
20
4.11.7 Agriculture (upto 7.5 HP)
APDCL has projected energy sales for the Agriculture category for the Control Period
as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.21: Sales to Agriculture Category as projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
13
FY 2014-15
16
FY 2015-16
21
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 21%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 6%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 41%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 116% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and for FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 26% and 29%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 are 10%, 12% and -12%, respectively.
88
Accordingly, the Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 10%, for projecting
the sales over the Control Period, since, it was observed that the actual sales for FY
2010-11 to FY 2012-13 to this category is very low as compared to that approved in
the Tariff Order dated 16 May, 2011.
Based on the above, the Commission approves the sales for Agriculture
category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.22: Approved Sales for Agriculture Category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
6
FY 2014-15
7
FY 2015-16
8
4.11.8 Small Industries - Rural upto 20 kW
APDCL has projected energy sales for Small Industries- Rural up to 20 kW category
for the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.23: Sales to Small Industries- Rural up to 20 kW Category as projected
by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
53
FY 2014-15
56
FY 2015-16
59
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 6%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 1%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 8%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered a
growth rate of 12% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and for FY 201516, the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 5%. The computed 3–year, 2year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13 are 2%,
3%, and -2%, respectively.
89
It is further observed that the growth levels are significantly lower than that approved
for the last Control Period. Therefore, while approving the sales for the Control
Period, the Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 2%.
Based on above, the Commission has approved the sales for Small IndustriesRural upto 20kW category for the Control Period, as shown in the following
Table:
Table 4.24: Approved Sales for Small Industries- Rural up to 20 kW Category
(MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
49
FY 2014-15
50
FY 2015-16
51
4.11.9 Small Industries – Urban
APDCL has projected energy sales for Small Industries- Urban category for the
Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.25: Sales to Small Industries- Urban Category as projected by APDCL
(MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
28
FY 2014-15
29
FY 2015-16
30
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 4%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 is about 7%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over
FY 2010-11 as 3%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered
growth rate of 7% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 3%. The computed 3–year, 2-year
and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13 are 2%, -1%,
and -5%, respectively.
It is observed that the year on year growth in the provisionally approved sales for FY
2012-13 over FY 2011-12 shows a declining trend, however, since there are
90
opportunities for the growth of Industry-Urban in the State, the 3-year CAGR of 2%
has been considered for approving the sales for the Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves the sales for Small IndustriesUrban category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.26: Approved Sales to Small Industries - Urban category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.10
FY 2013-14
27
FY 2014-15
27
FY 2015-16
28
Temporary Supply
APDCL has not projected energy sales for Temporary category for the Control
Period. However, from the scrutiny of APDCL’s subsequent submission, it is
observed that temporary connections are present. The provisional sales for
Temporary Category comprise of 5 MU viz. 1 MU towards Domestic Category and 4
MU towards Non-Domestic category. For projecting sales for the Control Period, the
Commission considers appropriate to add provisional sales of FY 2012-13 of
temporary category.
Based on the above, the Commission approves the sales for temporary supply
for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.27: Approved Sales to Temporary Category
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
5
FY 2014-15
5
FY 2015-16
5
HT CATEGORIES
4.11.11
HT Domestic (25 kVA and above)
APDCL has projected energy sales for HT Domestic (25 kVA and above) category for
the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
91
Table 4.28: Sales to HT Domestic (25 kVA and above) category as projected by
APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
40
FY 2014-15
67
FY 2015-16
115
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 8%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as -8%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 39%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 10% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the
growth rate considered by APDCL is around 70%. The computed 3–year, 2-year and
1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13 are 8%, 17% and 2%, respectively.
In view of the past trend, the Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 8% for
approving the sales for the Control Period.
Based on above, the Commission approves the sales for HT Domestic (25 kVA
and above) category, for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.29: Approved Sales to HT Domestic (25 kVA and above) category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.12
FY 2013-14
39
FY 2014-15
42
FY 2015-16
46
HT Commercial (25 kVA and above)
APDCL has projected energy sales for HT Commercial (25 kVA and above) category
for the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.30: Sales to HT Commercial (25 kVA and above) category as projected
by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
280
FY 2014-15
333
FY 2015-16
403
92
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 13%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 9%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 21%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered growth
rate of 23% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the
growth rate considered by APDCL is around 19% and 21%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 are 11%, 12% and 4%, respectively. In view of the past trend, the
Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 11%, while approving the sales for
the Control Period.
Based on above, the Commission approves the sales for HT Commercial (25
kVA and above) category, for the Control Period, as shown in the following
Table:
Table 4.31: Approved Sales to HT Commercial (25 kVA and above) category
(MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.13
FY 2013-14
253
FY 2014-15
281
FY 2015-16
312
Public Water Works
APDCL has projected energy sales for Public Water works category for the Control
Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.32: Sales to Public Water Works category as projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
78
FY 2014-15
88
FY 2015-16
98
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 8%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 13%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as -6%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered a
93
growth rate of 24% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and for FY 201516, the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 14% and 11%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 are 5%, 1% and 9%, respectively.
The Commission considers it appropriate to consider the 3-year CAGR of 5% while
approving the sales for the Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves the sales for Public Water
Works category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.33: Approved Sales to Public Water Works category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.14
FY 2013-14
66
FY 2014-15
69
FY 2015-16
73
Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above)
a) Government Educational Institutions
APDCL has projected energy sales for Government Educational Institutions category
for the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.34:
Sales to Government Educational Institutions category as
projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
74
FY 2014-15
89
FY 2015-16
107
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 10%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as -1%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 24%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered the
growth rate of 27% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 21% and 20%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 are 9%, 14% and 5%, respectively.
94
In view of the past trend, the Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 9%
while approving sales during the Control Period..
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for Government
Educational Institutions category for the Control Period, as shown in the
following Table:
Table 4.35: Approved Sales to Government Educational Institutions category
(MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
63
FY 2014-15
69
FY 2015-16
73
b) Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above-others)
APDCL has projected energy sales for Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above-others)
category for the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.36: Sales to Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above-others) category as
projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
378
FY 2014-15
394
FY 2015-16
414
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 4%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 3%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 11%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered a
growth rate of 16% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 4% and 5%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 are 4%, 5% and -1%, respectively. From the past trend it is evident that
the high growth has not sustained.
95
Accordingly, the Commission considers it appropriate to consider the 3-year CAGR
of 4% while approving the sales for the Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for Bulk Supply (25 kVA
and above-others) category, for the Control Period, as shown in the following
Table:
Table 4.37: Approved Sales to Bulk Supply (25 kVA and above-others)
category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.15
FY 2013-14
340
FY 2014-15
354
FY 2015-16
368
HT Small Industries – Upto 50 kVA
APDCL has projected energy sales for HT Small Industries (upto 50kVA) category for
the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.38: Sales to HT Small Industries upto 50kVA category as projected by
APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
23
FY 2014-15
31
FY 2015-16
37
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 18%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 22%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as -64%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered a
zero growth rate over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 35% and 20%, respectively. The
computed 4-year, 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional
sales of FY 2012-13 are 4%, -18%, -34% and 13%, respectively.
There is a significant dip in the actual sales in FY 2011-12 and the provisionally
approved sales for FY 2012-13 over the actual sales of FY 2010-11, whereas, the
year on year growth of sales in FY 2012-13 over FY 2011-12 is 13%, hence, it would
be prudent to consider a growth rate of 4% equivalent to 4 year CAGR over the
96
period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2012-13, as the growth rate while approving the sales
for the Control Period.
Based on above, the Commission approves sales for HT Small Industries upto
50 kVA category, for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.39: Approved Sales to HT Small Industries upto 50 kVA category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
24
FY 2014-15
25
FY 2015-16
26
4.11.16
4.11.17
HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA)
APDCL has projected energy sales for HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA) category
for the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.40: Sales to HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA) category as projected
by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
73
FY 2014-15
84
FY 2015-16
95
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 11%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 40%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as -13%. For projecting the sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered a
growth rate of 33% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-1 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 15% and 13%, respectively. The
computed 4-year, 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional
sales of FY 2012-13 are 4%, 3%, -12% and -11%, respectively.
While computing the growth rate for HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA) category,
the Commission has considered the provisional sales of FY 2012-13 and accordingly,
has computed the 3-year CAGR for the sales consumption from FY 2009-10 to FY
2012-13, which works out to 3%.
97
Though, the actual sales in FY 2010-11 and for FY 2011-12 have been higher than
that approved in the previous Tariff Order, however, the growth rate from FY 2010-11
to FY 2012-13 is showing a declining trend. Therefore, it would be prudent to
consider growth rate of 4% equivalent to 4 year CAGR from FY 2008-09 to FY 201213 during the Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for HT Industries-I (50
kVA to 150 kVA) category for the Control Period, as shown in the following
Table:
Table 4.41: Approved Sales to HT Industries-I (50 kVA to 150 kVA) category
(MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.18
FY 2013-14
57
FY 2014-15
59
FY 2015-16
62
HT Industries-II (above 150 kVA)
APDCL has projected energy sales for HT Industries-II (above 150 kVA) category for
the Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.42: Sales to HT Industries-II (above 150 kVA) category as projected by
APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
847
FY 2014-15
934
FY 2015-16
1048
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 13%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 14%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 24%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered the
growth rate of 10% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 10% and 12%, respectively. The
computed 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of
FY 2012-13 are 17%, 18%, and 12% respectively.
98
The Commission has considered the 3-year CAGR of 17% for approving the sales
during the Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for HT Industries-II
(above 150 kVA) category for the Control Period, as shown in the following
Table:
Table 4.43: Approved Sales to HT Industries-II (above 150 kVA) category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.19
FY 2013-14
902
FY 2014-15
1055
FY 2015-16
1234
Tea, Coffee and Rubber
APDCL has projected energy sales for Tea, Coffee and Rubber category for the
Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.44: Sales to Tea, Coffee and Rubber category as projected by APDCL
(MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
396
FY 2014-15
440
FY 2015-16
484
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 4%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as -13%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 9%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered the
growth rate of 2% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 11% and 10%, respectively. The
computed 4-year, 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional
sales of FY 2012-13 are 2%, -2%, 5%, and -1%, respectively.
It is observed that the growth of 7% approved in the last Control Period has not been
sustained and the actual sales have been lower than the approved sales. Though,
the 3-year CAGR is -2%, however, 2-year CAGR from FY 2010-11 to 2012-13 has
99
again increased to 5%. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider a growth of 2%
equivalent to 4-year CAGR during the Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for Tea, Coffee and
Rubber category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.45: Approved Sales to Tea, Coffee and Rubber category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.20
FY 2013-14
398
FY 2014-15
406
FY 2015-16
414
Oil and Coal
APDCL has projected energy sales for Oil and Coal category for the Control Period
as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.46: Sales to Oil and Coal category as projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
121
FY 2014-15
151
FY 2015-16
179
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 2%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 23%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as -34%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered the
growth rate of 61% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered by APDCL is around 25% and 19%, respectively. The
computed 4-year, 3–year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional
sales of FY 2012-13 are 2%, -2%, -13%, and 31%, respectively.
In view of the past trend, it is reasonable to consider the growth level of 2%
equivalent to 4-year CAGR during the entire Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for Oil and Coal category
for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
100
Table 4.47: Approved Sales to Oil and Coal category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
4.11.21
FY 2013-14
77
FY 2014-15
78
FY 2015-16
80
HT Irrigation (above 7.5 HP)
APDCL has projected energy sales for HT Irrigation (above 7.5 HP) category for the
Control Period as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.48: Sales to HT Irrigation (above 7.5 HP) as projected by APDCL (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
27
FY 2014-15
32
FY 2015-16
36
APDCL has submitted the sales during the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12
and 3-year CAGR for the period from FY 2008-09 to FY 2011-12 as 7%, Y-o-Y
growth in FY 2010-11 over FY 2009-10 as 7%, and growth in FY 2011-12 over FY
2010-11 as 3%. For projecting sales for FY 2013-14, APDCL has considered the
growth rate of -6% over FY 2012-13 sales. Further, for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16,
the growth rate considered is around 18% and 14%, respectively. The computed 3–
year, 2-year and 1-year CAGR with respect to the provisional sales of FY 2012-13
are 5%, 4%, and 13%, respectively. In view of the past trend, it is reasonable to
consider the 3-year CAGR of 5% during the entire Control Period.
Based on the above, the Commission approves sales for HT Irrigation (above
7.5 HP) category for the Control Period, as shown in the following Table:
Table 4.49: Approved Sales to HT Irrigation (above 7.5 HP) category (MU)
Year
Energy sales (MU)
FY 2013-14
30
FY 2014-15
31
FY 2015-16
33
101
4.5
TOTAL ENERGY SALES
Total energy sales as projected by APDCL and approved by the Commission
during the Control Period is given in the following Table:
Table 4.50: Total Energy Sales for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 (MU)
Sr.
No.
Category
Energy Sales projected by
APDCL
FY
FY
FY
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Energy Sales approved by
the Commission
FY
FY
FY
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
4
LT Category
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and
1kWh/day
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5
kW
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20
kW
Commercial Load above 0.5
kW to 20 kW
5
General Purpose Supply
92
100
110
86
93
100
6
Public Lighting
12
14
17
14
17
20
7
13
16
21
6
7
8
8
Agriculture upto 7.5HP
Small Industries Rural upto 20
kW
53
56
59
49
50
51
9
Small Industries Urban
28
29
30
27
27
28
5
5
5
1
2
3
10
12
13
14
14
A
14
B
466
550
361
451
541
1156
1260
1386
1150
1207
1268
207
263
336
194
229
271
438
481
529
463
510
561
Temporary Supply
LT TOTAL
11
398
HT Category
HT Domestic 25 kVA and
above
HT commercial 25 kVA &
above
Public Water Works
2397
2685
3037
2356
2596
2851
40
67
115
39
42
46
280
333
403
253
281
312
78
88
98
66
69
73
74
89
107
63
69
75
378
394
414
340
354
368
23
31
37
24
25
26
73
84
95
57
59
62
Bulk Supply 25 kVA and above
Government Educational
Institutions
Others
847
934
1048
902
1055
1234
18
HT Small Industries upto 50
kVA
HT Industries-1 50kVA to 150
kVA
HT Industries-II above 150
kVA
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
396
440
484
398
406
414
19
Oil & Coal
121
151
179
77
78
80
20
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5
HP
15
16
17
HT TOTAL
Grand Total
27
32
36
30
31
33
2337
4734
2643
5328
3014
6051
2249
2470
2722
4605
5066
5574
102
4.6
DISTRIBUTION LOSSES
APDCL submitted that it has achieved a significant reduction in distribution losses
during the recent years and that these efforts shall continue and will be enhanced.
APDCL submitted that loss reduction is a slow process and it becomes increasingly
difficult as the loss levels come down. APDCL submitted that it has not been able to
achieve the loss reduction targets for FY 2012-13 as approved by the Commission
vide Tariff Order dated 16 May, 2012. The projected distribution loss for the period
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, as submitted by APDCL, is shown in the Table
below:
Table 4.51: Distribution Losses Projected by APDCL for FY 2013-14 to FY
2015-16
Sr.
FY 2012-13
Distribution Loss
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
No.
(Actual)
1
LT Lines
16.80%
16.00%
15.80%
15.65%
2
DTRs
3.53%
3.00%
2.78%
2.60%
3
11 kV Lines
7.52%
7.00%
6.90%
6.75%
4
PTR
3.40%
2.50%
2.40%
2.30%
5
33 kV Lines
6.55%
6.00%
5.86%
5.72%
6
Total
25.21%
23.00%
22.50%
22.00%
Commission’s view
During the scrutiny of the Petition, the Commission directed APDCL to justify the
proposed distribution loss for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 along with
the proposed loss reduction trajectory of 0.5% per annum during the Control Period
and to submit a note on loss reduction measures. APDCL submitted that due to
various ongoing loss reduction measures, the expected distribution loss for FY 201314 may come down to 23%. However, the Commission is of the opinion that the
justification provided by APDCL is insufficient to substantiate the trajectory proposed.
For the purpose of determination of ARR and tariff, the Commission has considered
the distribution losses for FY 2012-13 as approved in the Order for FY 2012-13.
Though the Abraham Committee in its Report on R-APDRP has recommended an
ATC loss reduction trajectory of 2.0% per annum for losses between 20% to 30%
and 1.0% per annum where the losses are lower than 20%, in view of the practicality
of achieving the targets and the fact that the Commission has stipulated distribution
loss reduction trajectory rather than AT&C loss reduction trajectory, the
103
Commission has stipulated the loss reduction of 1.0% per annum for the
period from FY 2012-13 to FY 2013-14 and 0.5% per annum for the period from
FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16. Accordingly, the Commission approves the loss
trajectory for the Control Period as below:
Table 4.52: Approved Distribution Loss Trajectory
Year
Distribution Loss (%)
FY 2012-13
19.60%
FY 2013-14
18.60%
FY 2014-15
18.10%
FY 2015-16
17.60%
ADPCL shall make efforts to reduce the distribution losses to the level approved by
the Commission, with particular focus on reducing the non-technical loss.
4.7
ENERGY REQUIREMENT
The total energy requirement of the distribution licensee to meet the total energy
demand is the sum of approved energy sales and the system losses (distribution
losses) approved by the Commission. The approved energy sales, distribution
losses, and approved energy requirement for the Control Period (FY 2013-14 to
FY 2015-16) is given in the following Table:
Table 4.53: Approved Energy Requirement for the Control Period (MU)
Sr.
No.
As projected by APDCL
Particulars
As approved by the
Commission
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
1
Approved energy sales
4733
5328
6051
4605
5066
5574
2
Distribution loss (%)
1414
1547
1707
1052
1120
1190
23.00%
22.50%
22.00%
18.60%
18.10%
17.60%
6148
6875
7758
5657
6186
6764
3
Energy input required to
the distribution system
104
4.8
ENERGY BALANCE
APDCL submitted that the energy requirement will be met by supply from APGCL,
CSGS, IPPs, and other sources. The Energy Balance for the period from FY 2013-14
to FY 2015-16, as projected by APDCL, is shown in the following Table:
Table 4.54: Energy Balance for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 as projected by
APDCL (MU)
FY2012-13
Particulars
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
(Actual)
Energy Sale (MU)
4277
4733
5328
6051
Distribution Loss (MU)
1319
1414
1547
1707
Distribution Loss (%)
23.57%
23.00%
22.50%
22.00%
Energy Requirement
5596
6148
6875
7758
230
253
283
319
3.95%
3.95%
3.95%
3.95%
5826
6400
7158
8077
197
216
240
237
Pooled Loss of PGCIL (%)
3.27%
3.27%
3.24%
2.85%
Total Energy Requirement
6023
6616
7397
8314
Transmission Loss (MU)
Transmission Loss (%)
Total Energy at input of
AEGCL (MU)
Pooled
Loss
of
PGCIL
(MU)
Commission’s Views
While working out the energy balance, the Commission has considered the
transmission loss as approved in the MYT Order dated November 21, 2013 for
AEGCL for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, and the pooled inter-State
loss of PGCIL (Regional power loss) have been considered on the power sourced
from outside the State (except MeSEB) as determined by the RLDC/Power
Committee of North Eastern Region for FY 2012-13. The energy balance has been
worked out in accordance with energy sales and distribution losses approved by the
Commission in Table 4.50 and Table 4.52, respectively. The energy balance
approved by the Commission is shown in the table below:
105
Table 4.55: Energy Balance approved by the Commission (MU)
Sr.
Particulars
Unit
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15
No
FY 2015-16
1
Energy sales
MU
4605
5066
5574
2
Distribution loss
MU
1052
1120
1190
18.60%
18.10%
17.60%
%
3
Energy requirement
MU
5657
6186
6764
4
Intra-State (AEGCL)
MU
241
247
256
Transmission loss
%
4.08%
3.84%
3.64%
MU
5898
6433
7020
MU
165
176
189
3.87%
3.87%
3.87%
6063
6609
7209
5
Energy input to transmission
system
6
Inter-State (PGCIL) pooled
loss
%
Total Energy Requirement
MU
Note: The PGCIL pooled losses have been considered only on the energy procured from
outside the State (except MeSEB)
4.9
ENERGY AVAILABILITY TO APDCL
APDCL submitted that it has been allocated power from the following sources:
(i)
All existing and proposed generators under APGCL are fully allocated to
APDCL.
(ii)
Capacity of Central Sector Generating Stations is allocated as per the
allocation from the Government of India.
APDCL further submitted that out of the total allocated capacity, some of the stations
have not been commissioned yet but are expected to start operations during the
period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16.
APDCL submitted that in order to minimize the power purchase cost, it has worked
out comprehensive Merit Order Dispatch (MOD) on similar lines as given in previous
Tariff Order from the dispatch available based on its PPA with allocated generating
stations. APDCL submitted that Non-conventional Energy (NCE) power plants
proposed to be commissioned during the period and hydro power plants have been
considered as must-run power plants and so they have been excluded from merit
order calculations. APDCL submitted that the dispatch from individual generating
106
stations has been worked out based on the merit order of the variable cost of each
generating unit.
APDCL, vide its letter dated May 21, 2013, submitted the power purchase quantum
along with cost considering the NCE sources, viz., Solar, Small Hydro, and Biomass.
4.10
POWER PURCHASE
4.10.1 Approach for Calculation of Power Purchase Cost
APDCL submitted that on the basis of the gross energy requirement computed
above, the purchase of units from each existing generating station as well as from
those proposed to be commissioned under different agencies having contract with
APDCL, has been arrived at by preparing a Merit Order for each year. APDCL
submitted that the fixed cost for APGCL has been taken as projected by APGCL in its
MYT Petition before the Commission for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16,
while the variable cost has been considered as per prevailing fuel cost for FY 201213. APDCL submitted that for IPPs and Central Sector generating stations, fixed cost
and variable cost have been considered as per available Tariff Orders of respective
Electricity Regulatory Commissions (ERCs). APDCL submitted that for ongoing
projects, the latest available estimates have been considered for estimation of power
purchase.
4.10.2 Power Purchase cost for the period from FY 2013-14 to 2015-16
Based on the allocated capacities and the merit order stack as described above, the
station-wise power purchase quantum and costs for the period from FY 2012-13 to
FY 2015-16 as submitted by APDCL, is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.56: Power Purchase Cost and Quantum for FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14
as projected by APDCL
FY2012-13
Sr.
No.
Total
Agency/ Source
Quantum
Charge
(MU)
(Rs.
Crore)
1
APGCL (Provisional)
2
NEEPCO (Hydro)
1709.65
477.5
FY2013-14
Rate
(Rs./
kWh)
2.79
Total
Quantum
Charge
(MU)
(Rs.
Rate
(Rs./
kWh)
Crore)
1740.72
677.19
107
3.89
FY2012-13
Sr.
No.
Total
Agency/ Source
Quantum
Charge
(MU)
(Rs.
Crore)
FY2013-14
Rate
(Rs./
kWh)
Total
Quantum
Charge
(MU)
(Rs.
Rate
(Rs./
kWh)
Crore)
KOPILI I
311.7
53.72
1.72
441.91
50.03
1.13
KOPILI II
44.94
6.31
1.4
39.36
7.27
1.85
KHANDONG
78.83
10.49
1.33
108.92
29.55
2.71
RHEP
498.53
159.59
3.2
455.89
134.32
2.95
DHEP
80.47
69.93
8.69
80.66
35.23
4.37
AGBPP
935.4
309.44
3.31
883.42
322.9
3.66
AGTPP
292.71
99.02
3.38
265.76
97.12
3.65
5
NHPC Existing, Lg HEP
153.09
38.03
2.48
131.91
32
2.43
6
NTPC (Existing)
FARAKKA
242.86
114.63
4.72
242.86
113.24
4.66
KAHELGAON-I
102.38
41.72
4.08
102.38
42.13
4.12
KAHELGAON-II
445.76
187.86
4.21
445.76
189.75
4.26
134.8
37.21
2.76
134.8
37.81
2.8
136.11
57.11
4.20
7.52
7.52
10.00
337.10
107.49
3.19
8.50
4.42
5.20
3
NEEPCO (TH)
TALCHER
7
NTPC (New) BTPs
8
RE Sources
Solar (NVVN/NTPC +
Oth)
23.72
7.57
3.19
Small Hydro
Biomass
BANSKANDI (SIPP)
52.05
13.5
2.59
52.05
13.74
2.64
9
MeSEB
18.03
7.27
4.03
18.03
7.27
4.03
10
IOCL (AOD)
8.5
2.97
3.49
8.5
2.97
3.49
11
Trading Purchases
695.75
170.18
2.45
0
0
0
12
OTPC
156.04
41.66
2.67
973.74
241.54
2.68
Total
5985.19
1848.54
3.09
6615.88
2210.59
3.34
38.77
19.85
5.12
UI Pool
AEGCL
Charges
439.67
(Provisional)
Total
6023.96
2308.06
509.67
3.83
6615.88
2720.26
108
4.11
Table 4.57: Power Purchase Cost and Quantum for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16
as projected by APDCL
Sr.
No.
Agency/ Source
1
APGCL (Provisional)
2
NEEPCO (Hydro)
FY 2014-15
Total
Quantum
Charge
(MU)
(Rs.
Crore)
1907.2
732.74
Rate
(Rs./
kWh)
3.84
FY 2015-16
Total
Rate
Quantum Charge
(Rs./k
(MU)
(Rs.
Wh)
Crore)
2495.57
894.13
3.58
KOPILI I
383.41
50.03
1.3
475.6
50.03
1.05
KOPILI II
39.36
7.27
1.85
39.36
7.27
1.85
KHANDONG
108.92
29.55
2.71
122.53
29.55
2.41
RHEP
455.89
134.32
2.95
512.87
134.32
2.62
DHEP
80.66
35.23
4.37
80.66
35.23
4.37
AGBPP
883.42
322.9
3.66
883.42
322.9
3.66
AGTPP
265.76
97.12
3.65
265.76
97.12
3.65
5
NHPC Existing, Lg HEP
131.91
32
2.43
131.91
32
2.43
6
NTPC (Existing)
67.66
31.55
4.66
87.11
40.51
4.65
KAHELGAON-I
102.38
42.13
4.12
102.38
42.13
4.12
KAHELGAON-II
133.73
56.92
4.26
133.73
56.92
4.26
134.8
37.81
2.8
134.8
37.81
2.8
857.09
376.54
4.39
994.72
433.86
4.36
4
NEEPCO (TH)
FARAKKA
TALCHER
7
8
NTPC (New) BTPs
RE Sources
Solar (NVVN/NTPC +
Oth)
16.64
16.64
0
25.03
25.03
10.00
474.67
4.62
5.43
653.81
208.52
3.19
8.50
4.62
5.43
8.50
4.73
5.57
BANSKANDI (SIPP)
52.05
13.47
2.64
52.05
13.74
2.64
MeSEB
18.03
7.27
4.03
18.03
7.27
4.03
8.5
2.97
3.49
8.5
2.97
3.49
0
0
0
0
0
0
Small Hydro
Biomass
9
10.0
10
IOCL (AOD)
11
Trading Purchases
12
OTPC
1266.48
312.35
2.68
1087.32
293.05
2.86
Total
7397.03
2495.07
3.37
8313.66
2769.1
3.33
UI Pool
AEGCL Charges
(Provisional)
Total
529.57
7397.03
3024.74
559.67
4.09
8313.66
3328.77
109
4.00
4.10.3 Transmission Charges
APDCL submitted that the Transmission Charges payable to AEGCL including
PGCIL Charges have been calculated as per the charges projected by AEGCL in its
MYT Petition for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16. The Transmission
Charges payable to AEGCL (including PGCIL Charges) as submitted by APDCL are
given in the Table below:
Table 4.58:
Transmission Charges for the Control Period as projected by
APDCL (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
AEGCL Charges (Provisional)
FY 2014-15
509.67
FY 2015-16
529.67
559.67
4.10.4 SLDC Charges
APDCL submitted that the Commission has directed AEGCL to file separate ARR for
State Load Despatch Centre (SLDC), as per Regulation No. 5 of 2006 of AERC and
accordingly, AEGCL has included the SLDC charges along with Transmission ARR
in its Petition. Accordingly, SLDC Charges are included in the AEGCL Charges
shown above.
4.10.5 Commission’s Analysis and Decision
Availability
The net generation by APGCL approved by the Commission in the MYT Order for
APGCL for the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 is as given below:
Table 4.59: APGCL Generation approved by the Commission
Sr.
Name of the Station
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
No.
1
Namrup TPS
499.86
209.15
209.72
2
Lakwa TPS with WHRU
808.26
726.01
432.46
3
Namrup
-
383.39
384.44
replacement
with
WHRU
4
NRPP WHRU
-
104.36
209.87
5
Lakwa replacement
-
-
401.75
6
Karbi Langpi HEP
388.05
388.05
389.11
7
Lungnit SHEP
-
6.61
26.60
110
Sr.
Name of the Station
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
No.
8
Myntriang SHEP
Total
17.60
59.24
66.85
1713.76
1876.82
2120.81
In order to ascertain the availability of the energy individually from each station, the
availability as filed by APDCL has been compared with the availability computed on
the basis of past 3 years performance of the Generating Stations. Further, while
going through the Station-wise energy availability projected by APDCL for the Control
Period, the Commission observed that the energy availability from NTPC Farakka-III
has not been considered, though some energy from Farakka-III has been allocated to
Assam. The Commission has considered the energy availability from Farakka-III also,
as per the allocation.
APDCL submitted that the first Unit of NTPC BTPS generating station is likely to be
commissioned on 31 March, 2014. However, as the approved energy requirement is
being met from the existing generating stations, the Commission has not considered
energy availability from this station.
The energy balance for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 approved by the Commission
is given below:
Table 4.60: Approved Energy Balance
Sr.
Particulars
Unit
No
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
A
Energy Requirement
1
Energy sales
MU
4605
5066
5574
2
Distribution loss
MU
1052
1120
1190
18.60%
18.10%
17.60%
%
3
Energy requirement
MU
5657
6186
6764
4
Intra-State (AEGCL)
MU
241
247
256
Transmission loss
%
4.08%
3.84%
3.64%
MU
5898
6433
7020
Inter-State (PGCIL) pooled
MU
165
176
189
loss
%
3.87%
3.87%
3.87%
5
Energy input to
transmission system
6
111
Sr.
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
MU
6063
6609
7209
(a) APGCL
MU
1713.76
1876.82
2120.81
(b) CSGS
MU
3564.73
4421.82
4559.45
(c) RE
MU
70.30
100.03
130.13
(d) MeSEB
MU
18.03
18.03
18.03
(e) Banskandi
MU
52.05
52.05
52.05
(f) IOCL
MU
8.5
8.50
8.5
(g) OTPC
MU
345.58
132.18
319.53
MU
290
MU
6063
6609
7209
0
0
0
No
7
Total Energy Requirement
B
Energy Available
Purchase from bilateral
sources/traders/Exchange
Unit
Total
Total Energy Requirement
Surplus Energy available
Note: 1. The PGCIL pool losses have been considered only on the energy procured from
outside the State (except MeSEB).
2. Any shortfall in the energy availability from OTPC can be met through purchases from
bilateral sources/traders/Power Exchanges, depending on the lowest rate at which power is
available
Power Purchase Cost
The Commission in its various communications directed APDCL to submit the
detailed breakup of power purchase cost. However, the replies submitted by APDCL
were incomplete and lacked consistency, thereby making it difficult for the
Commission to analyse the power purchase cost.
APGCL Stations
The tariff approved by the Commission for APGCL’s Stations in the MYT Order dated
November 21, 2013 for APGCL have been considered for approving the cost of
power purchase from APGCL for the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16.
Central Generating Stations - Thermal
The power purchase cost has two elements, i.e., fixed cost and variable cost.
APDCL, in reply to the Commission’s query, submitted that the allocation of power
from the NTPC Stations are from the unallocated quantum and keeps on varying.
112
APDCL also submitted that instead of considering the Annual Fixed Cost, the cost
has been estimated on historical basis.
For the purpose of fixed cost determination of individual stations, the Commission
has considered latest available Tariff Orders issued by CERC. Further, the
Commission has considered latest share allocation. However, to determine the
energy cost for FY 2013-14, the Commission has considered variable cost as
charged by CGS Stations in their latest bills, as submitted by APDCL.
For FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, the annual fixed charges and energy charges have
been kept constant at FY 2013-14 levels, for the purpose of approving the power
purchase expense.
Central Generating Stations - Hydel
For computation of cost of power purchase from Hydel Stations, the Commission has
considered latest available Tariff Orders issued by CERC for individual stations.
Fixed cost recovery has been considered as per recovery of fixed charges
Regulations specified in CERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2009.
Purchase from bilateral sources/traders/Power Exchanges
Due to uncertainty in energy availability from OTPC, the Commission has
provisionally
considered
procurement
from
bilateral
sources/traders/Power
Exchanges at the rate of Rs. 2.45/kWh, which is the average rate of power purchase
from such sources in FY 2012-13.
Renewable Energy (RE) Sources
The minimum purchase requirement by APDCL from RE energy sources is approved
as per relevant Regulations.
The power purchase cost thus, approved for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY
2015-16, is given in the Table below:
113
Table 4.61: Approved Power Purchase Cost for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16
FY 2013-14
Sr.
No.
Agency/Source
FY 2014-15
Quantum
Total
Rate
Quantum Total
Rate
(MU)
Cost
(Rs./kWh)
(MU)
(Rs./kWh)
Cost (Rs.
(Rs.
Crore)
Crore)
1
APGCL
2
NEEPCO (Hydro)
3
1713.76
495.11
2.89
1876.82
477.64
2.54
KOPILI I
441.91
47.71
1.08
441.91
47.71
1.08
KOPILI II
46.70
6.97
1.49
46.70
6.97
1.49
KHANDONG
108.92
32.31
2.97
108.92
32.31
2.97
RHEP
517.68
145.43
2.81
517.68
145.43
2.81
DHEP
100.97
40.03
3.96
100.97
40.03
3.96
AGBPP
963.29
301.19
3.13
963.29
301.19
3.13
AGTPP
292.26
60.38
2.07
292.26
60.38
2.07
166.85
35.86
2.15
166.85
35.86
2.15
166.04
47.64
2.87
166.04
47.64
2.87
KAHELGAON-I
82.21
23.61
2.87
82.21
23.61
2.87
KAHELGAON-II
426.37
147.53
3.46
426.37
147.53
3.46
TALCHER
128.59
27.86
2.17
128.59
27.86
2.17
FARAKKA-III
122.95
44.76
3.64
122.95
44.76
3.64
0
0
0
857.09
376.26
4.39
Oth)
12.13
12.13
10.00
16.53
16.53
10.00
Small Hydro
50.00
15.95
3.19
75.00
23.93
3.19
8.50
4.42
5.20
8.50
4.62
5.43
NEEPCO (TH)
NHPC Existing –
4
Lg HEP
5
NTPC (Existing)
FARAKKA
NTPC (New)
6
BTPS
7
RE Sources
Solar
(NVVN/NTPC +
Biomass
BANSKANDI
8
(SIPP)
52.05
13.74
2.64
52.05
13.74
2.64
9
MeSEB
18.03
7.27
4.03
18.03
7.27
4.03
8.5
2.97
3.49
8.5
2.97
3.49
345.58
92.27
2.67
132.18
35.42
2.68
290
71.05
2.45
0
0
0
10
IOCL (AOD)
11
OTPC
12
Purchase from
114
FY 2013-14
Sr.
Agency/Source
No.
FY 2014-15
Quantum
Total
Rate
Quantum Total
Rate
(MU)
Cost
(Rs./kWh)
(MU)
(Rs./kWh)
Cost (Rs.
(Rs.
Crore)
Crore)
bilateral
sources/Traders/
Power
Exchanges
Total
6063.28
1676.16
2.77
6609.44
1918.91
2.90
UI Pool
AEGCL Charges
SLDC Charges
Total
456.03
495.66
2.07
2.12
2134.26
2416.69
FY 2015-16
Sr.
No.
Agency/ Source
1
APGCL
2
NEEPCO (Hydro)
3
Quantum (MU)
Total Cost (Rs.
Rate
Crore)
(Rs./kWh)
2120.81
577.70
2.72
KOPILI I
441.91
47.71
1.08
KOPILI II
46.70
6.97
1.49
KHANDONG
108.92
32.31
2.97
RHEP
517.68
145.43
2.81
DHEP
100.97
40.03
3.96
AGBPP
963.29
301.19
3.13
AGTPP
292.26
60.38
2.07
166.85
35.86
2.15
166.04
47.64
2.87
KAHELGAON-I
82.21
23.61
2.87
KAHELGAON-II
426.37
147.53
3.46
TALCHER
128.59
27.86
2.17
FARAKKA-III
122.95
44.76
3.64
NTPC (New) BTPS
994.72
433.70
4.36
NEEPCO (TH)
NHPC Existing –
4
Lg HEP
5
NTPC (Existing)
FARAKKA
6
115
FY 2015-16
Sr.
No.
7
Agency/ Source
Quantum (MU)
Total Cost (Rs.
Rate
Crore)
(Rs./kWh)
RE Sources
Solar (NVVN/NTPC + Oth)
Small Hydro
Biomass
21.63
21.63
10.00
100.00
31.90
3.19
8.50
4.73
5.57
8
BANSKANDI (SIPP)
52.05
13.74
2.64
9
MeSEB
18.03
7.27
4.03
8.5
2.97
3.49
247.93
71.65
2.89
0
0
0
7208.51
2146.25
2.98
10
IOCL (AOD)
11
OTPC
Purchase from bilateral
sources/Traders/ Power
12
Exchanges
Total
UI Pool
AEGCL Charges
572.81
SLDC Charges
2.15
Total
(1)
2721.21
Transmission Costs
The Transmission Charges and SLDC charges approved by the Commission in the
MYT Order dated November 21, 2013 for AEGCL have been considered for
approving the charges payable to AEGCL for the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to
FY 2015-16. The transmission costs include the charges to be paid to AEGCL for
inter-State transmission to PGCIL for regional transmission of power, and SLDC
charges.
The Commission approves the Transmission Charges payable to AEGCL as
shown in the table below:
Table 4.62: Approved Transmission Charges (Rs. Crore)
Sr. Details
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
No.
1
Transmission Charges
2
SLDC Charges
Total
456.03
495.66
572.81
2.07
2.12
2.15
458.10
497.78
574.96
116
4.11
TOTAL POWER PURCHASE COST
The total power purchase cost from various sources, transmission charges,
and SLDC charges to be paid to AEGCL is aggregated to arrive at total power
purchase cost of APDCL as shown in table below:
Table 4.63: Approved Total Power Purchase Costs during the Control Period
(Rs. Crore)
Sr. Details
No.
4.12
FY 2013-14
1
AEGCL cost (including SLDC)
2
Cost of Power
Total
Cost
Purchase
of
Power
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
458.1
497.78
574.96
1676.16
1918.91
2146.25
2134.26
2416.69
2721.21
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) EXPENSES
The O&M expenses include Employee expenses, Repair and Maintenance (R&M)
expenses and Administrative and General (A&G) expenses. APDCL submitted that
the three components of O&M expenses are mostly linked with the inflationary
indices as well as to the addition of assets, which required enhanced expenditure to
maintain the assets. APDCL further submitted that the increase of employee expense
is also linked with the inflationary pressure, which is reflected as enhanced Dearness
Allowance payable to the employees as well as increase in number of employees
due to new recruitment required to maintain the assets and other activities.
APDCL submitted that CERC Regulations for transmission assets allows normative
amount based on the first year of MYT Period from FY 2003-04 to FY 2008-09 and
continued upto FY 2009-14. APDCL stated that although in the past, an attempt was
made to introduce norm-based O&M expenses for distribution assets and services,
the same did not materialise due to uncertainty of credible data in this regard.
APDCL submitted that it has calculated normative data based on different services
required to be delivered by the Discom and quantum of assets in respective years.
APDCL further submitted that to arrive at the normative figure for FY 2009-10 it has
considered the audited figures of FY 2009-10. APDCL submitted that it has
enhanced the norms thus arrived by 5.6% annually with increase in the number of
services and assets for respective year up to FY 2015-16. ADPCL further clarified
that it has considered an annual increase of norms at 5.6% on previous year’s
117
expenses against 5.72% considered and approved by the CERC, considering the
present trend during FY 2009-10 onwards and to avoid tariff shock. The normative
O&M expenses submitted by APDCL are shown in the Table below:
Table 4.64: Normative O&M Expenses submitted by APDCL (Rs. Lakh)
Sr.
No
Particulars
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
.
No. of Consumers
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
1667748
1913396
2275853
2605863
2772212
3184748.9
3854492
7.50
7.92
8.36
8.83
9.33
9.85
10.40
O&M - A (Rs. Lakh)
12508.11
15154.10
19034.14
23014.66
25854.93
31365.78
40087.77
Energy sale (MU)
3247.38
3535.43
3969.89
4277.34
4733
5328
6051
3.00
3.17
3.35
3.53
3.73
3.94
4.16
O&M-B (Rs. Lakh)
9742.13
11200.24
13280.90
15110.78
17657.29
20988.91
25173.93
33 kV Network (Ckt-km)
5800.96
5885.86
6359.01
6472.53
6716.06
6968.75
7230.94
9.50
10.03
10.59
11.19
11.81
12.48
13.17
O&M-C (Rs. Lakh)
551.09
590.47
673.66
724.08
793.40
869.36
952.58
11 kV Network (ckt-km)
46450.83
49457.85
53981.09
55331.42
58673.57
62217.58
65975.67
6.00
6.34
6.69
7.07
7.46
7.88
8.32
O&M -D (Rs. Lakh)
2787.05
3133.65
3611.78
3909.44
4377.73
4902.12
5489.32
LT Network (Ckt-km)
139352.49
148373.55
161943.27
165994.26
176020.70
186652.75
197927.01
3.50
3.70
3.90
4.12
4.35
4.60
4.85
O&M-E (Rs. Lakh)
4877.34
5483.89
6320.61
6841.52
7661.04
8578.71
9606.31
33/11 kV Substation (MVA)
1775.92
1824.01
1945.53
1983.05
2057.74
2135.23
2215.65
2.50
2.64
2.79
2.94
3.11
3.28
3.47
O&M-F (Rs. Lakh)
4439.80
4815.39
5423.83
5838.02
6397.13
7009.79
7681.13
11/0.4 kV Substation (MVA)
2803.86
2986.76
3308.20
3338.11
3540.50
3755.17
3982.85
2.00
2.11
2.23
2.36
2.49
2.63
2.77
5607.72
6308.03
7378.18
7861.81
8805.43
9862.32
11046.06
40513.24
46685.76
55723.09
63300.32
71546.96
83576.99
100037.10
40930.62
44764.96
51987.00
Normative charge - A
(Rs. Lakh/1000 consumer)
Normative Charge - B
(Rs. Lakh/MU)
Normative Charge - C
(Rs. Lakh/100 km)
Normative Charge - D
(Rs. Lakh/100 km)
Normative Charge - E
(Rs. Lakh/100 Km)
Normative Charge - F
(Rs. Lakh/MVA)
Normative Charge - G
(Rs. Lakh/MVA)
O&M-G (Rs. Lakh)
Total (A+B+C+D+E+F+G)
Actual
Audited
expenses (Rs. Lakh)
O&M
APDCL requested the Commission to consider the above and approve the proposed
normative O&M expenditure.
118
Commission’s Analysis
During scrutiny of the Petition, the Commission observed that APDCL has submitted
O&M expenses in the main Petition as well as under different formats. Further, during
Technical Validation Session, APDCL was required to submit the basis of allocation
of expenses in FY 2009-10 under different heads. However, the Commission is not
satisfied with the justification provided by APDCL. Further, the Regulations provide
determination of O&M expenses based on normative level of O&M expenses
specified by the Commission. The Commission is of the opinion that such
specification of normative O&M expenses will have to be undertaken separately and
need to be supported by appropriate data, methods and justification. Accordingly, for
the purpose of determination of tariff, the Commission has analyzed each head of
O&M expenses separately, as discussed below.
4.12.1 Employee Expenses
APDCL has projected the employee expenses at Rs. 634.77 Crore, Rs. 741.5 Crore,
and Rs. 887.53 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively.
Commission’s Analysis
The actual employee expenses for FY 2011-12 are Rs. 461.23 Crore. For arriving at
reasonable expenses for FY 2013-14, the Commission has considered an increase
of around 8% p.a. twice over the actual employee expense for FY 2011-12.
Employee costs for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 are arrived at by further escalating
FY 2013-14 costs by 8%, which in view of the Commission should meet the
requirement during the said period. Accordingly, the Commission approves the
employee expenses as below:
Table 4.65: Approved Employee Expenses
Year
Amount (Rs. Crore)
FY 2013-14
537.98
FY 2014-15
581.02
FY 2015-16
627.50
119
4.12.2 Repair and Maintenance (R&M) Expenses
APDCL has projected the R&M expenses at Rs. 48.61 Crore, Rs. 56.78 Crore, and
Rs. 67.97 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively.
Commission’s Analysis
The actual R&M expenses for FY 2011-12 are Rs. 29.13 Crore. This is an item of
expenditure which has to be controlled and should be done as such. In view of the
vintage of assets and the need to maintain quality of supply to the consumers, for
arriving at reasonable expenses for FY 2013-14, the Commission has considered to
allow 10% increase per annum twice over the base expense of FY 2011-12. R&M
expense for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 are arrived at by further escalating FY
2013-14 costs by 10%, which in the view of the Commission is reasonable.
Accordingly, the Commission approves the R&M expenses as below:
Table 4.66: Approved R&M Expenses
Year
Amount (Rs. Crore)
FY 2013-14
35.25
FY 2014-15
38.77
FY 2015-16
42.65
4.12.3 Administration and General (A&G) Expenses
APDCL has projected the A&G expenses at Rs. 32.09 Crore, Rs. 37.49 Crore, and
Rs. 44.87 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively.
Commission’s Analysis
The actual A&G expenses for the FY 2011-12 are Rs. 15.02 Crore. For arriving at
reasonable expenses for FY 2013-14, the Commission has considered an increase
of 6% per annum twice over the actual A&G expenses for FY 2011-12. This is an
item of expenditure which has to be controlled and has to be done as such. A&G
expense for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 are arrived at by further escalating FY
2013-14 costs by 6%, which in view of the Commission is considered reasonable.
Accordingly, the Commission approves the A&G expenses as below:
120
Table 4.67: Approved A&G Expenses
Year
Amount (Rs. Crore)
4.13
FY 2013-14
16.88
FY 2014-15
17.89
FY 2015-16
18.96
CAPITAL INVESTMENT
The scheme-wise projected capital expenditure as submitted by APDCL is shown in
the Table below:
Sr.
Table 4.68: Capital Investment Plan – FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Scheme
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
No.
1
TSP
3.50
3.50
3.50
2
SCCP
5.00
5.00
5.00
3
Chief Minister’s Power Supply Mission
44.38
15.00
15.00
4
Counterpart Fund
41.50
43.90
-
5
Trade Dev. Fund – Project Related
46.00
-
-
6
Improvement of Distribution System
10.62
10.00
10.00
7
Electrification of L&U Primary School
10.00
-
-
8
Debt servicing of RGGVY
30.00
32.40
34.99
9
JNNSM
5.12
3.00
3.00
R-APDRP (GoA Share)
25.00
25.00
12.10
Dedicated Power Supply to Courts
16.00
-
-
4.00
-
-
ERP
15.00
-
-
ADB
162.49
144.07
-
R-APDRP
403.28
271.87
-
21.22
21.22
21.22
843.31
574.96
104.81
Consultancy for PPP_UAR
Consumer Contribution
Total
APDCL submitted that it has envisaged funding of the above mentioned Capital
expenditure through various sources, namely, Consumer Contribution, Grants,
Equity, and Debt. APDCL submitted that it has considered the grants based on the
present budgeted figure available with the Companies. APDCL submitted that the
capital expenditure projected for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 have
121
been proposed to be funded through debt and equity grant as per funding patterns of
the schemes.
The detailed breakup of funding of capital expenditure under various projects during
the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 as submitted by APDCL is shown in the
Table below:
Table 4.69: Funding of Capital Expenditure Schemes Proposed by APDCL (Rs.
Crore)
Consumer
1
TSP
3.50
-
3.50
-
3.50
-
2
SCCP
5.00
-
5.00
-
5.00
-
44.38
-
15.00
-
15.00
-
41.50
-
43.90
-
-
-
–
-
46.00
-
-
-
-
of
10.62
-
10.00
-
10.00
-
Electrification of L&U
-
10.00
-
-
-
-
of
-
30.00
-
32.40
-
34.99
JNNSM
-
5.12
-
3.00
-
3.00
R-APDRP (GoA Share)
-
25.00
-
25.00
-
12.10
Dedicated
Power
-
16.00
-
-
-
-
for
-
4.00
-
-
-
-
3
Chief Minister’s Power
Contribution
Grant
Loan
Consumer
Grant
Loan
FY 2015-16
Contribution
FY 2014-15
Consumer
Contribution
FY 2013-14
Grant
Scheme
Loan
Sl.
Supply Mission
4
Counterpart Fund
5
Trade
Dev.
Fund
Project Related
6
Improvement
Distribution System
7
Primary School
8
Debt
servicing
RGGVY
9
11
Supply to Courts
12
Consultancy
PPP_UAR
13
ERP
15.00
-
-
-
-
-
14
ADB
16.27
146.42
14.41
129.66
-
-
15
R-APDRP
16
Consumer Contribution
Total
403.28
-
271.81
-
-
-
-
-
21.22
-
-
21.22
-
-
539.55
282.54
21.22
363.68
190.06
21.22
33.50
50.09
The total funding of Capex during the Control Period comes from loans, grant and
consumer contribution, as given below:
122
21.22
Table 4.70: Summary of Funding Pattern projected by APDCL (Rs. Crore)
Consumer’s
Year
Loan
Grant
Total
Contribution
FY 2013-14
539.55
282.54
21.22
843.41
FY 2014-15
363.68
190.06
21.22
574.96
FY 2015-16
33.50
50.09
21.22
104.81
Total
936.73
522.69
63.66
1523.08
APDCL has projected loan component as Rs. 936.73 Crore. The proposed capital
expenditure and funding is approved provisionally.
4.14
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AND SOURCES OF FUNDING
APDCL submitted that it has projected capital expenditure against different schemes
of GOI and GOA for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, as shown in the
Table below, along with the source of funding:
Table 4.71: Funding for GoA and GoI Capex Schemes as projected by APDCL
(Rs. Crore)
Source
Nature of
Funding
Government Loan
FY 2012-13
FY2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
43.75
120.00
77.40
33.50
Grant
230.60
136.12
60.40
50.09
Total
274.35
256.12
137.80
83.59
Loan
1.84
16.27
14.41
0.00
Grant
16.57
146.42
129.66
0.00
Total
18.41
162.69
144.07
0.00
R-APDRP
Loan
173.37
403.28
271.87
0.00
PFC Part
Grant
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
173.37
403.28
271.87
0.00
Loan
218.96
539.55
363.68
33.50
Grant
247.17
282.54
190.06
50.09
Total
466.13
822.09
553.74
83.59
of Assam
ADB Part
TOTAL
The CWIP, capital expenditure, and capitalization for the Control Period from FY
2013-14 to FY 2015-16 as submitted by APDCL are summarized in the table below:
123
Table 4.72: Projected CWIP, Capex and Capitalisation for FY 2013-14 to FY
2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013FY 2014FY 201512
Opening balance
13
14
15
16
1 471.09
1829.38
2070.76
2618.82
2987.98
i) Capital Expenditure
411.81
565.56
972.55
822.28
262.04
ii) Interest & Finance
3.21
3.91
4.92
5.49
6.14
415.03
569.47
977.46
827.77
268.17
56.74
328.09
429.41
458.61
212.44
1829.38
2070.76
2618.82
2987.98
3043.71
Add:
Charges capitalized
iii) Other expenses
capitalized
Total
Capital
expenditure for the
year
Less:
Expenditure
Capitalised
Closing Balance
The Commission has observed that projected major capital expenditure is covered
under R-APDRP and ADB schemes. As such the Commission would not like to prune
down the proposed capital expenditure but would like to reiterate that APDCL should
ensure that such proposed capital investment schemes are necessary and do not
impose avoidable burden on the consumer by way of tariff increase. The
Commission, in this regard, invites attention to the guidelines detailed in para 7.9 of
Tariff Order for FY 2008-09 and FY 2009-10 dated July 24, 2009.
Taking into consideration the distribution schemes planned for execution during the
Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, the capital expenditure and
capitalization is provisionally approved as detailed in the table below:
Table 4.73: Approved capital expenditure and capitalization for FY 2013-14 to
FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013FY 2014FY 201512
Opening balance of
1414.59
13
1760.01
14
2059.31
15
2759.41
16
3153.58
CWIP
Add:
124
Particulars
FY 2011-
FY 2012-
FY 2013-
FY 2014-
FY 2015-
12
13
14
15
16
i) Capital Expenditure
398.95
487.35
843.31
574.96
104.81
ii) Interest & Finance
3.21
2.27
1.66
2.19
7.68
402.16
489.62
844.97
577.15
112.49
56.74
190.33
144.86
182.98
265.99
1760.01
2059.31
2759.41
3153.58
3000.08
Charges capitalized
iii) Other expenses
capitalized
Total
Capital
expenditure for the
year
Less:
Expenditure
Capitalised
Closing Balance of
CWIP
4.15
INTEREST AND FINANCE CHARGES
APDCL submitted that interest expenditure on account of long-term loans depends
on the outstanding loan, repayments, and prevailing interest rates on the outstanding
loans. APDCL further submitted that projected capital expenditure and funding of the
same also have a major bearing on the long-term interest expenditure. APDCL
submitted that the opening balance of Loan for the period from FY 2013-14, FY
2014-15, and FY 2015-16 is Rs. 950.39 Crore, Rs 1489.94 Crore, and Rs. 1853.61
Crore, respectively. APDCL submitted that the loan addition has been computed in
accordance with the Capex funding plan.
APDCL submitted that repayment of loan or each year has been computed as per
terms and conditions of respective loans. APDCL submitted that it has computed
Interest on Opening Loans considering the weighted average rate of interest for the
last year. APDCL further submitted that the Interest and Finance Charges for the
period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 have been computed on the basis of
proposed capital investment plan. APDCL has claimed interest and finance charges
at Rs. 96.94 Crore, Rs.106.64 Crore, and 117.3 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15,
and FY 2015-16, respectively.
125
Commission’s Analysis
The APDCL has not furnished the details of institution-wise outstanding loans,
proposed drawal and proposed repayment of loans during the period from FY 201213 to FY 2015-16. In reply to a query, APDCL vide its letter dated 21 May, 2013
submitted the details shown in the table below:
Table 4.74: Source wise outstanding Loan and Interest Payment
A. Government of Assam (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2012-13
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
315.09
358.84
478.84
556.24
43.75
120.00
77.40
33.50
-
-
-
-
358.84
478.84
556.24
589.74
203.38
242.88
292.41
353.34
39.50
49.53
60.93
67.61
242.88
292.41
353.34
420.95
11.72%
11.83%
11.77%
11.80%
FY 2012-13
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3.02
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Principal
Opening Balance
Addition
Repayment
Closing Balance
Interest
Opening Balance
Addition
Repayment
Closing Balance
Average RoI
B. ASE Bond (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
Principal
Opening Balance
Addition
Repayment
Closing Balance
Interest
Opening Balance
Addition
Repayment
3.02
Closing Balance
-
Average RoI
-
126
C.
R-APDRP (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2012-13
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
Opening Balance
176.10
349.47
752.75
1,024.62
Addition
173.37
403.28
271.87
-
349.47
752.75
1,024.62
1,024.62
Opening Balance
15.79
41.94
92.49
177.45
Addition
26.14
50.55
84.96
95.97
41.94
92.49
177.45
273.43
10%
9%
10%
9%
FY 2012-13
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
-
1.84
18.11
32.52
1.84
16.27
14.41
-
1.84
18.11
32.52
32.52
-
0.08
0.89
2.97
0.08
0.82
2.07
2.66
0.08
0.89
2.97
5.63
8%
8%
8%
8%
Principal
Repayment
Closing Balance
Interest
Repayment
Closing Balance
Average RoI
D.
ADB (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
Principal
Opening Balance
Addition
Repayment
Closing Balance
Interest
Opening Balance
Addition
Repayment
Closing Balance
Average RoI
In spite of repetitive directions given by the Commission in the earlier Tariff Orders,
during the present tariff exercise APDCL has not provided any supporting
data/documents to establish that the loan borrowed from the State Government was
utilized for capital expenditure. Therefore, the opening balance in respect of the State
Government loans has not been taken into consideration for computation of interest
and finance charges. For the purpose of calculation of interest expenses, the
repayment has been considered equivalent to depreciation. The addition to the loan
127
is considered in proportion to the approved capitalization during the year. In the
absence of supporting documents, the rate of Interest during the Control Period has
been considered equivalent to the average rate of interest for FY 2011-12. Based on
the data, the interest and finance charges are approved as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.75: Approved Loan Schedule
R-APDRP (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
Opening Balance
292.53
425.73
588.39
Addition
139.24
173.78
-
6.04
11.12
14.24
425.73
588.39
574.15
8%
8%
8%
30.16
42.58
48.81
Repayment
Closing Balance
Average rate of Interest
Interest
ADB (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
Opening Balance
2.00
7.58
16.59
Addition
5.62
9.21
-
Repayment
0.04
0.20
0.40
Closing Balance
7.58
16.59
16.19
8%
8%
8%
0.39
0.99
1.34
Average rate of Interest
Interest
Table 4.76: Approved Interest and Finance Charges (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
R-APDRP
FY 2015-16
30.16
42.58
48.81
ADB
0.39
0.99
1.34
Total
30.55
43.57
50.15
1.66
2.19
7.68
Less: Interest Capitalized
Interest
28.89
41.38
42.47
The Commission accordingly approves the Interest and Finance Charges at Rs.
28.89 Crore, Rs. 41.38 Crore, and Rs. 42.47 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15,
and FY 2015-16, respectively.
128
4.16
INTEREST ON WORKING CAPITAL
APDCL submitted that it has computed Interest on Working Capital based on the
formula for normative working capital interest specified by the Commission in the
AERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2006.
APDCL submitted that vide its MYT Order dated July 24, 2009, the Commission has
considered 13.25% as the rate of interest on working capital, which was equal to the
short-term prime lending rate of SBI as on 1 April, 2008. APDCL submitted that it has
used the same principle for computing interest on working capital during the period
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16. The Interest on Working Capital as projected by
APDCL is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.77: Interest on Working Capital projected by APDCL (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
59.62
69.65
83.36
448.27
511.59
578.54
17.54
17.54
17.54
525.43
598.78
679.45
13.00%
13.00%
13.00%
68.31
77.84
88.33
Working Capital Requirement
O&M expenses- 1 month
2 month Receivables
1% of GFA
Less: Consumer Security Deposit
Total Working Capital
Rate of Interest on Working Capital
Interest on Working Capital
Commission’s Analysis
As per the AERC Tariff Regulations, 2006, the Interest on Working Capital is to be
allowed on normative basis and shall consist of
a) O&M expenses for one month;
b) Maintenance spares at 1% of the historical cost of Fixed Assets
c) Receivables equivalent to 60 days of Average billing of consumers less security
deposits of consumers.
Accordingly, the Interest on working capital has been examined and approved
as shown in the Table below. The rate of interest has been considered at 14.75%
as per SBI PLR.
129
Sr.
No.
Table 4.78: Approved Interest on Working Capital (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
1
One month O&M Expenses
53.83
58.94
64.54
2
Maintenance spares @1% of GFA
20.82
25.12
29.70
3
Receivables 60 days
433.62
488.27
543.04
4
Less: Consumer Security Deposit
324.89
331.38
338.01
5
Receivables
excluding
security deposit
108.73
156.89
205.03
183.38
240.94
299.28
14.75%
14.75%
14.75%
27.05
35.54
44.14
consumer
6
Working Capital requirement
7
Rate of Interest on Working Capital
8
Interest on Working Capital
4.17
DEPRECIATION
APDCL submitted that it has computed depreciation after taking into consideration
the opening balance of assets in the beginning of the year and the provisional
capitalisation. APDCL submitted that as per AERC Regulations CERC rates have to
be used for computation of the depreciation to be charged during the year. APDCL
submitted that earlier the weighted average rate of depreciation by applying rates
specified by CERC was 3.61%. However, with the CERC notification for new rates for
FY 2009-10 onwards period, the same has been used for computation of the
depreciation charged during the year and the weighted average rate of depreciation
works out approximately 5.27%. APDCL submitted that after the computation,
depreciation charges have been claimed after apportioning the grant component of
assets funding. The detailed computations of depreciation as submitted by APDCL
are shown in the following Table:
Table 4.79: Depreciation for the Control Period (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
Assets qualifying for Tariff
2808.70
3282.92
3757.15
Accumulated Depreciation
1034.56
1103.27
1175.41
Assets qualifying for Depreciation
1716.23
2190.48
2664.71
Statements
63.61
68.70
72.14
Depreciation for Tariff
53.63
57.92
60.81
Depreciation
as
per
Financial
130
APDCL has claimed Depreciation of Rs. 63.61 Crore, Rs. 68.70 Crore, and Rs. 72.74
Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16, respectively.
Commission’s Analysis:
As per AERC Tariff Regulations, the depreciation has to be calculated on 90% of
opening GFA and the addition during the year at the rates prescribed in the
depreciation schedule. In the absence of data submitted by APDCL, the Commission
has assumed that the assets will be added in the middle of the year. The weighted
average rate of depreciation on 90% of fixed assets is considered for arriving the
deprecation on the gross fixed assets.
APDCL, vide its letter dated 15 June, 2013, has projected the grants and consumer
contributions for the MYT Control Period. The Commission has considered the
apportionment of Grants and Contributions as on first day of the financial year for the
MYT Control Period and deducted the depreciation on the grants and consumer
contribution components from the eligible depreciation for the relevant years. Further,
though, APDCL has claimed the depreciation as per the revised depreciation rates in
accordance with the CERC Tariff Regulations, 2009, the Commission has computed
the depreciation based on the depreciation rates specified in Annexure I of the AERC
(Terms and Conditions for determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2006, for the period
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, as given in the Tables below:
Table 4.80: : Depreciation approved for FY 2013-14
Sr.
Nature of Asset
No.
GFA
as Additions
on
during
1.04.2013
2013-14
(Rs. Crore)
Rate
of Depreciation
FY Depreciati
on
as per AERC
Regulations
1
Land & Right
12.62
0.03
2
Buildings
48.03
0.36
1.80%
0.78
3
Hydraulics
0.00
0.00
2.57%
0.00
4
Other Civil Works
41.43
0.37
1.80%
0.67
5
Plant & Machinery
548.68
3.70
3.60%
17.84
6
Lines
Network
870.95
8.54
3.60%
28.36
7
Vehicles
11.68
0.03
18.00%
1.89
8
Furniture & Fixtures
12.68
0.24
6.00%
0.69
9
Office equipment
20.77
0.41
6.00%
1.13
&
Cable
131
Sr.
Nature of Asset
GFA
No.
10
as Additions
on
during
1.04.2013
2013-14
Rate
of Depreciation
FY Depreciati
on
as per AERC
Regulations
Other items (provide
list)
Total
377.62
131.18
0.00
1944.47
144.86
51.37
Average assets OB &
CB in FY excluding
Land & Rights and
Consumer for 201314
excluding
land
cost
1797.61
2.86%
Particulars
As on 01.04.2013
Grants Available
3464.91
GFA (excluding Consumer Contribution and Lands & Rights)
1735.80
CWIP
2059.31
Total
3795.11
Cumulative grants apportioned in the ratio of GFA GFA
1584.78
and CWIP
CWIP
1880.13
Total
3464.91
Depreciation calculated as per the Regulation on the GFA
51.37
Weighted Average Rate of Depreciation
2.86%
Depreciation to be deducted on the assets built on the grants
component on 90% asset value
45.29
Depreciation approved
6.08
Table 4.81: Depreciation approved for FY 2014-15 (Rs. Crore)
Sr.
Nature of Asset
GFA as Additions
Rate
of Depreciation
No.
on
during
FY Depreciati
1.04.2014
2014-15
on
as per AERC
Regulations
1
Land & Right
12.65
0.04
2
Buildings
48.39
0.43
1.80%
0.79
3
Hydraulics
0.00
0.00
2.57%
0.00
132
Sr.
Nature of Asset
GFA
No.
as Additions
on
during
1.04.2014
2014-15
Rate
of Depreciation
FY Depreciati
on
as per AERC
Regulations
4
Other Civil Works
41.79
0.50
1.80%
0.68
5
Plant & Machinery
552.38
5.03
3.60%
17.98
6
Lines
Network
879.50
11.62
3.60%
28.68
7
Vehicles
11.71
0.04
18.00%
1.90
8
Furniture & Fixtures
12.92
0.28
6.00%
0.71
9
Office equipment
21.18
0.49
6.00%
1.16
10
Other items (provide
508.80
164.56
0.00
2089.32
182.98
51.89
&
Cable
list)
Total
Average assets OB &
CB in FY excluding
Land & Rights and
Consumer for 201415
excluding
land
cost
1940.27
2.67%
Particulars
As on 01.04.2014
Grants Available
3768.67
GFA (excluding Consumer Contribution and Lands & Rights)
1859.41
CWIP
2759.41
Total
4618.82
Cumulative grants apportioned in the ratio of GFA GFA
1517.16
and CWIP
CWIP
2251.51
Total
3768.67
Depreciation calculated as per the Regulation on the GFA
Weighted Average Rate of Depreciation
51.89
2.67%
Depreciation to be deducted on the assets built on the grants
component on 90% asset value
40.58
Depreciation approved
11.32
133
Table 4.82: Depreciation approved for FY 2015-16 (Rs. Crore)
Sr.
Nature of Asset
GFA as Additions
Rate
No.
on
during
1.04.2015
2015-16
of Depreciation
FY Depreciati
on
as per AERC
Regulations
1
Land & Right
12.69
0.13
2
Buildings
48.82
1.36
1.80%
0.80
3
Hydraulics
0.00
0.00
2.57%
0.00
4
Other Civil Works
42.29
1.80
1.80%
0.70
5
Plant & Machinery
557.41
18.16
3.60%
18.35
6
Lines & Cable Network
891.11
41.93
3.60%
29.55
7
Vehicles
11.75
0.13
18.00%
1.91
8
Furniture & Fixtures
13.20
0.89
6.00%
0.74
9
Office equipment
21.67
1.54
6.00%
1.21
10
Other
673.36
200.06
0.00
2272.31
265.99
53.27
items
(provide
list)
Total
Average assets OB &
CB in FY excluding
Land
&
Rights
and
Consumer for 2015-16
excluding land cost
2143.46
2.49%
Particulars
As on 01.04.2015
Grants Available
3979.95
GFA (excluding Consumer Contribution and Lands & Rights)
2021.13
CWIP
3153.58
Total
5174.72
Cumulative grants apportioned in the ratio of GFA GFA
1554.49
and CWIP
CWIP
2425.47
Total
3979.95
Depreciation calculated as per the Regulation on the GFA
Weighted Average Rate of Depreciation
53.27
2.49%
Depreciation to be deducted on the assets built on the grants
component on 90% asset value
38.63
Depreciation approved
14.64
134
The Commission thus, approves the depreciation for the MYT Control Period
from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, as below:
Table 4.83: Approved Depreciation (Rs. Crore)
Year
Amount (Rs.Crore)
4.18
FY 2013-14
6.08
FY 2014-15
11.32
FY 2015-16
14.64
INTEREST ON CONSUMER SECURITY DEPOSIT
APDCL submitted that it has considered the Interest on Security Deposit at the rate
of 7% p.a. on the opening balance for respective years. APDCL submitted that these
are legacy loans which have come from the erstwhile ASEB and thus, these charges
are beyond the control of APDCL and hence, are required to be considered in the
total financial cost.
Commission’s Analysis:
APDCL has projected opening balances of consumer security deposit for the Control
Period at Rs.318.52 Crore, Rs. 324.89 Crore and Rs. 331.38 Crore for FY 2013-14,
FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively.
As per the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004
(First Amendment), 2007 the Distribution Licensee shall pay interest on consumer
security deposit at a rate equal to RBI rate as on 1st April of the financial year plus
one percent. Hence, the applicable rate of interest works out to 10%, since the RBI
Bank Rate as on April 1, 2013 was 9%. The interest on the average consumer’s
security deposit at 10% works out to Rs. 32.17 Crore, Rs. 32.81 Crore and Rs. 33.47
Crore during the Control Period.
Accordingly, the Commission has approved the interest on Consumer’s Security
Deposit for the MYT Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 as shown in
the Table below:
135
Table 4.84: Approved Interest on Consumers’ Security Deposit
Year
Amount (Rs. Crore)
4.19
FY 2013-14
32.17
FY 2014-15
32.81
FY 2015-16
33.47
PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS
APDCL submitted that it has considered Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts at 1%
of the revenue from sale of power. APDCL submitted that the above expense is a
legitimate expenditure, which is associated with business risk and since APDCL is in
the distribution business, the same is a consumer related expense. APDCL
submitted that accordingly, it has computed Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts at
Rs. 26.9 Crore, Rs. 30.7 Crore and Rs. 35.11 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15,
and FY 2015-16, respectively, which is a 10.4% annual increase from estimated
amount of Rs. 24.36 Crore for FY 2012-13.
Commission’s Analysis:
It is observed that APDCL has not written off Bad Debts, so far. As per the audited
Annual Statement of Accounts, for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12, APDCL has written
off only Rs. 5 Lakh and Rs. 76 Lakh of bad debts, which indicates that there is
sufficient provisioning for bad debts. Allowing further provision towards Bad debts
would impact the retail tariff to be determined. Hence, the Commission has not
considered Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts for the MYT Control Period from FY
2013-14 to FY 2015-16. APDCL should analyse the potential of collecting the
receivables during these 3 years and submit to the Commission for review and
further directions in the matter.
4.20
RETURN ON EQUITY
APDCL submitted that as per the AERC Tariff Regulations, it has claimed the Return
on Equity at the rate of 14% on the equity base, which it considered as inadequate.
APDCL submitted that it has shown definite sign of improvements during last Control
Period and accordingly, it has computed Return on Equity (RoE) considering a rate of
return at 14% on average equity based on the opening balance of equity. APDCL
submitted that for further boost to the performance there is a need to enhance RoE in
line with CERC Regulations.
136
APDCL submitted that equity capital has been inherited from the Opening Balance
Sheet of the Company notified in 2005, which has been considered as apportioned
with the assets. APDCL further submitted that with the rearrangement of equity
capital of ASEB at Rs. 9984 Lakh, the same has now been transferred to APDCL in
the process of winding up of ASEB as per provisions of the Act. APDCL submitted
that this rearranged equity base is lower than the stipulated 30% of GFA, and no
other new equity has been infused into the capital base during this period, and
therefore it has claimed RoE on total equity capital. APDCL has computed
the
normative return on equity for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 at Rs. 35.11 Crore annually
as shown in the Table below:
Table 4.85: Return on Equity for the Control Period (Rs. Crore)
Particular
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
Equity Capital as per Financial
Statements
250.81
250.81
250.81
Equity Capital for Tariff for the year
250.81
250.81
250.81
35.11
35.11
35.11
Return on Equity at 14%
Commission’s Analysis:
As per the AERC Taiff Regulations, Return on Equity shall be computed on the
Equity Capital employed in the business. The equity capital as on 31.03.2012 stood
at Rs. 162.27 Crore. Accordingly, the Return on Equity approved by the
Commission is given in the Table below:
Table 4.86: Approved Return on Equity (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
Equity Capital
Return on Equity @14%
4.21
FY 2015-16
162.77
162.77
162.77
22.79
22.79
22.79
NON TARIFF INCOME
APDCL submitted that Non Tariff Income from trading of surplus energy by the
Discom occasionally to other Utilities outside the State without affecting the peak
demand of the system has been estimated from the demand and availability in the
system and due to severe constraint in the supply side, the earning has been
estimated as nil during the MYT Period, as shown in the following Table:
137
Table 4.87: Projected Non Tariff Income for the Control Period (Rs. Crore)
Sr.
No.
Particulars
FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16
Energy Available from Allocated sources
1
(MU)
6616
7397
8314
2
Energy Demand for APDCL (MU)
6616
7397
8314
3
Surplus (MU)
0
0
0
4
Estimated Trading Income (Rs. Crore)
0
0
0
As per Table 4.60, there is no surplus energy available for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15,
and FY 2015-16. The Commission accordingly considers the non tariff income
as nil during the Control Period.
4.22
OTHER INCOME
APDCL submitted that the revenue from other consumer related Income comprises
of revenue on account of charges imposed other than the basic charges applicable to
the consumers including income on account of meter rent, wheeling charges,
inspection charges and miscellaneous charges. APDCL submitted that in line with
the methodology adopted by the Commission in its MYT Order dated 16 May, 2011,
it has projected its other Income for the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 by
escalating the provisional figures of FY 2011-12 by the average increase in number
of consumers during FY 2012-13. The revenue from other income as submitted by
APDCL is shown in the Table below:
Table 4.88: Revenue from Other Income for the Control Period as projected by
APDCL (Rs. Crore)
Particulars
Other Income
Number of Consumers
FY 2013-14
FY 2014-15
FY 2015-16
203.50
227.92
255.27
2772212
3184749
3854492
The Commission approves the Other Income at Rs. 203.50 Crore, 227.92 Crore
and Rs. 255.27 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively,
as projected by APDCL.
138
4.23
SUBSIDY
APDCL submitted that it has received revenue subsidy/grant of Rs. 252 Crore from
Government of Assam (GoA) as assistance for power purchase cost during FY 201011 and Rs. 150 Crore during FY 2011-12 and the same have been treated in
accordance to the provisions of Section 65 of the EA, 2003. APDCL submitted that it
is further expecting an amount of Rs. 150 Crore to be received from GoA as
assistance for additional power purchase cost during FY 2012-13. APDCL submitted
that in order to balance the level of cross subsidy among different consumer groups it
is expected that GoA may provide some amount of subsidy to APDCL and further
relieve some section of consumers under Jeevan Dhara, Domestic, Agricultural and
small industry, the categories identified by APDCL.
Commission’s Analysis:
As regards provision of subsidy by State Government, APDCL vide its letter no.
APDCL/ACT/HQ-Cash/Copr.A/C/2010/53 dated April 23, 2013 has requested the
State Government to consider grant of subsidy/assistance under Section 65 of the
Electricity Act, 2003. Further, the Commission vide its letter dated May 4, 2013 has
brought to the notice of the State Government, the tariff hike proposal made by the
Utility, and has requested the State Government to communicate its decision
regarding subsidy being offered to any class of consumers to reduce the cost of
power to those categories, if the Government decides, so that the same can be
considered while determining the tariff. The State Government vide its letter dated 22
August, 2013 communicated its decision to provide financial support to APDCL
amounting to maximum of Rs. 200 Crore for FY 2013-14. The State Government vide
its letter dated 23 September, 2013 clarified that it is pleased to allow targeted
subsidy of Rs. 1.10 per unit for Jeevan Dhara (BPL consumers) for consumption upto
30 units per household per month or else allow a subsidy of Rs. 0.70 per unit per
household per month for total consumption upto 120 units by Jeevan Dhara
consumers if they consume more than 30 units in a month, and a subsidy of Rs. 0.70
per unit for upto 120 units per month by domestic category �A’ consumers and further
clarified that the balance amount, if any, may be utilized against the past period
outstanding liabilities in the ARR of APDCL. The Commission has considered the
subsidy white determining the tariff, as discussed in Chapter 5.
139
4.24
REVENUE AT EXISTING TARIFF
APDCL has projected Rs. 2713.80 Crore, Rs.3049.04 Crore, and Rs.4310.18 Crore
towards revenue income at the existing tariff for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY
2015-16, respectively.
Commission’s Analysis:
The Commission has estimated the sales at 4605 MU, 5066 MU, and 5574 MU for
FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively, and accordingly revenue
income from sale of energy works out to Rs. 2703.54 Crore, Rs. 2965.99 Crore,
and Rs. 3260.90 Crore, respectively.
4.25
ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT (ARR)
APDCL submitted that based on expenses discussed above, it has computed the
Annual Revenue Requirement during the period from FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16, as
shown in the Table below:
Table 4.89: Annual Revenue Requirement for the Control Period as Projected
by APDCL (Rs. Crore)
Sr.
No.
Particulars
1
Cost of power purchase
2
FY 2013-14
FY2014-15
FY2015-16
2720.26
3024.74
3328.77
Operation & Maintenance Expenses
715.47
835.77
1000.4
2.1
Employee Cost
634.77
741.50
887.53
2.2
Repair & Maintenance
48.61
56.78
67.97
2.3
Administrative & General Expenses
32.09
37.49
44.87
3
Depreciation
63.61
68.70
72.14
4
Interest and Finance Charge
96.94
106.64
117.3
5
Interest on Working Capital
68.61
77.84
88.33
6
Provision for Bad Debts
26.9
30.7
35.11
7
Return on Equity
35.11
35.11
35.11
8
Net Prior Period charges/ (credit)
9
Total Expenditure/ ARR
3726.6
4179.5
4677.13
10
Revenue at existing Tariff
2713.18
3049.04
3460.03
11
Other Income
203.5
227.92
255.27
12
Revenue Subsidies/ Grants
13
Total Earning
2916.68
3276.97
3715.30
14
ARR
3726.60
4179.5
4677.13
140
Sr.
No.
15
Particulars
FY 2013-14
(Gap)/ Surplus
(809.92)
FY2014-15
FY2015-16
(902.53)
(961.83)
The ARR approved by the Commission for the Control Period from FY 2013-14
to FY 2015-16 is given in the Table below:
Table 4.90: ARR Approved for the Control Period from FY 2013-14 to FY 201516 (Rs. Crore)
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
4.26
Particulars
Cost
of
Power
Purchase
Employee cost
Repair & Maintenance
Expenses
Admin.& Gen. Exp.
Depreciation
Interest & Finance
charges
Interest on working
Capital
Interest on CSD
Provision
for
Bad
Debts
Return on Equity
ARR
Non-Tariff Income
Other Income
Net ARR
Revenue at Existing
Tariff
Revenue
Deficit/(Surplus)
FY 2013-14
Filed
Approved
FY 2014-15
Filed
Approved
FY 2015-16
Filed
Approved
2720.35
634.77
2134.26
537.98
3024.72
741.50
2416.69
581.02
3328.85
887.53
2721.21
627.50
48.61
32.09
63.61
35.25
16.88
6.08
56.78
37.49
68.70
38.77
17.89
11.32
67.97
44.87
72.41
42.65
18.96
14.64
96.94
28.89
106.64
41.38
117.30
42.47
68.31
0.00
27.05
32.17
77.84
0.00
35.54
32.81
88.33
0.00
44.14
33.47
26.90
35.11
3726.69
89.30
203.50
3433.88
0.00
22.79
2841.34
0.00
203.50
2637.84
30.70
35.11
4179.48
100.02
227.92
3851.54
0.00
22.79
3198.20
0.00
227.92
2970.28
35.11
35.11
4677.48
112.02
255.27
4310.18
0.00
22.79
3567.82
0.00
255.27
3312.55
2713.18
2703.54
3049.04
2965.99
3460.03
3260.90
720.70
-65.70
802.50
4.28
850.15
51.66
REVENUE GAP FOR FY 2013-14 TO FY 2015-16
APDCL submitted that the estimated category wise revenue based on the existing
tariff works out to Rs. 2713.18 Crore, Rs. 3049.04 Crore, and Rs. 3460.03 Crore for
FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively.
Based on approved category-wise sales, the total revenue from sale of power at
existing tariff including FPPPA is Rs. 2703.54 Crore, Rs. 2965.99 Crore, and Rs.
3260.90 Crore for FY 2013-14, FY 2014-15, and FY 2015-16, respectively. It should
141
be noted that the average billing rate (total revenue divided by total sales) in FY
2013-14, with existing tariff, works out to Rs. 5.87 per kWh, as against Rs. 5.64 per
kWh in FY 2012-13, though the tariff is the same. This is on account of the change in
sales mix in FY 2013-14 as compared to the sales mix in FY 2012-13.
Further, in the suo-motu Order for FY 2012-13 dated February 28, 2013, the
Commission had observed as under:
“5.4 Estimated Revenue and Revenue (Deficit) / Surplus for FY 2012-13
The total Revenue from sale of Power estimated by the Commission at existing Tariff
is Rs.2660.04 crore excluding FPPPA.
The estimated deficit for FY 2012-13 is given in the table below.
Table 5.3: Estimated Revenue and Revenue deficit / (surplus) for FY 2012-13
Sl.
Parameters
No.
Estimated by
Commission
(Rs. Crore)
1
Approved ARR for FY 2012-13 under MYT order dated 16.5.2011
2250.09
2
Add: Deficit in Truing up for FY 2010-11
(259.11)
3
Add: Deficit in Truing up for FY 2009-10
(261.98)
4
Revised ARR for FY 2012-13
2771.18
5
Less: Revenue from sale of power at the existing tariff including
2660.04
FPPPA
6
Net Deficit for FY 2012-13 (4-5)
111.14
...
8.2 REVENUE DEFICIT / SURPLUS FOR FY 2012-13
The Commission has estimated the revenue deficit of Rs.521.09 crore based on the
truing up of FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 and net revenue deficit of Rs.111.14 crore
for FY 2012-13 as shown in the Table 5.3.
While estimating the revenue at existing tariff for FY 2012-13, the Commission has
adopted the actual average revenue realized per unit through FPPPA charges during
FY 2011-12 which was about Rs.0.51 per unit. The Commission noted that the
licensee is charging FPPPA per unit at Rs.0.69 from May 2012 to July 2012, Rs.0.76
142
from August 2012 to October 2012 and at Rs. 1.03 from November, 2012 upto March
2013. Hence ,the Commission expects that the revenue through FPPPA charges will
be more than Rs.150 crore than that estimated by the Commission as a result of
which there may not be any revenue deficit during FY 2012-13. Hence it is decided
not to revise the tariff for FY 2012-13.”
As can be seen from the above extracts of the Tariff Order for FY 2012-13, the
Commission had included the revenue gap of FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11, in the
revenue requirement of FY 2012-13, and had estimated that the revenue in FY 201213 would amount to Rs. 2810 crore, which was sufficient to meet the entire revenue
requirement of FY 2012-13, including the revenue gap of FY 2009-10 and FY 201011. However, in reality, APDCL has not earned such revenue. Based on actual
revenue earned by APDCL for the first 11 months of FY 2012-13, for which data is
available with the Commission, it is estimated that APDCL’s revenue in FY 2012-13
would be Rs. 2398 crore, which is a shortfall of Rs. 412 crore as compared to the
revenue projected by the Commission in the suo-motu Tariff Order for FY 2012-13.
As a result, APDCL has not been able to recover the past revenue gaps of FY 200910 and FY 2010-11, as envisaged by the Commission.
Also, as elaborated earlier, the Commission is not undertaking the final truing up for
FY 2011-12 and the provisional truing up for FY 2012-13 in this Order, and hence,
the full impact of such lower revenue cannot be accurately assessed at this point in
time. At the same time, the recovery of these past revenue gaps cannot be delayed
indefinitely. Hence, the Commission has decided to allow recovery of Rs. 230 crore
out of the past revenue gaps of FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11, to be recovered
through the revised tariffs for FY 2013-14. Once, the final truing up for FY 2011-12
and provisional/final truing up for FY 2012-13 is done, the balance unrecovered
revenue gap of previous years can be computed accurately, and the Commission will
take a view on the recovery of the same in the subsequent Tariff Orders.
Against this background, the Commission, vide its letter dated May 4, 2013 brought
to the notice of the State Government, the tariff hike proposal made by the Utility, and
requested the State Government to communicate its decision regarding subsidy
being offered to any class of consumers to reduce the cost of power to those
categories, if the Government decides, so that the same can be considered while
determining the tariff. The State Government vide its letter dated 22 August, 2013
(Annexure 3) communicated its decision to provide financial support to APDCL
143
amounting to maximum of Rs. 200 Crore for FY 2013-14. The State Government vide
its letter dated 23 September, 2013 (Annexure 4) clarified that it is pleased to allow
targeted subsidy of Rs. 1.10 per unit for Jeevan Dhara (BPL consumers) for
consumption upto 30 units per household per month or else allow a subsidy of Rs.
0.70 per unit per household per month for total consumption upto 120 units by
Jeevan Dhara consumers if they consume more than 30 units in a month, and a
subsidy of Rs. 0.70 per unit for upto 120 units per month by domestic category �A’
consumers and further clarified that the balance amount, if any, may be utilized
against the past period outstanding liabilities in the ARR of APDCL, subject to
maximum of Rs. 200 Crore. The Commission has considered the subsidy white
determining the tariff.
In accordance with the above subsidy commitment of the State Government, the
subsidy to be allocated to the Jeevan Dhara (BPL consumers) and domestic
category �A’ consumers, based on the sales approved for FY 2013-14, works out to
around Rs. 100 crore, as shown below:
Table 4.91: Government Subsidy allocated to Jeevan Dhara and Domestic A
Categories (Rs. Crore)
Sl.
Category
1
Jeevan Dhara
2
Domestic A –
Approved
State Government
Total amount of
Sales (MU)
Subsidy (Rs/kWh)
subsidy (Rs. Crore)
361
1.10
40
758.91
0.70
53
first 4 kWh/day
TOTAL
1119.67
93*
Note: * - the subsidy amount to be allocated to Jeevan Dhara and Domestic category has
been considered as Rs. 100 crore, to accommodate variation in consumption patterns, since,
only the balance amount can be utilized against the past period outstanding liabilities in the
ARR of APDCL
Accordingly, the balance amount of State Government subsidy of Rs. 100 crore (Rs.
200 crore – Rs. 100 crore) has been utilised against the past revenue gap of Rs. 230
crore proposed to be recovered through the revised tariffs, thereby, resulting in a
past revenue gap of Rs. 130 crore to be recovered through the ARR of FY 2013-14.
Hence, the estimated revenue gap/surplus for FY 2013-14 is given in the table
below:
144
Table 4.92: Estimated Revenue gap/surplus for FY 2013-14 (Rs. Crore)
Sr. Parameters
No.
Estimated
by the
Commission
1
Approved ARR for FY 2013-14
2637.84
2
Add: Revenue Gap of previous years
considered for recovery
230
100
3
Less: Revenue Subsidy available
reducing previous years’ revenue gap
4
Total Revenue Requirement
2767.84
5
Less: Revenue from sale of power at the
existing tariff including FPPPA
2703.54
6
Net Deficit for FY 2013-14 (4-5)
for
64.30
145
5.
5.1
Tariff Principles and Design
INTRODUCTION
In determining the revenue requirement and the retail supply tariff of APDCL for the
Control Period, the Commission has been guided by the provisions of the Electricity
Act, 2003 and the National Electricity Policy (NEP), the Tariff Policy, CERC (Terms
and Conditions of Tariffs) Regulations as well as AERC Regulations.
Section 61 of the Act lays down the broad principles and guidelines for determination
of retail supply tariffs. The basic principle is to ensure that tariff should progressively
reflect the cost of supply of electricity and reduce the cross subsidies amongst
categories within a period to be specified by the Commission. The Act lays down
special emphasis on safeguarding of consumers interest and also requires that the
costs should be recovered in a reasonable manner. The Act mandates that tariff
determination should be guided by factors which “encourage competition, efficiency,
economical uses of resources, good performance and optimum investment”. The
Tariff Policy notified by the Government of India provides comprehensive guidelines
for determination of tariff as also working out the revenue requirement of power
utilities. The Commission has followed these guidelines, as far as possible.
The Commission has carried forward, the process of rationalization of tariff in order to
ensure that the tariffs reflect as far as practicable, the cost of supply. In order to
determine the voltage-wise cost of supply, the Commission requires a number of
inputs from the Utility based on the data developed on sustainable basis.
The Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in its Judgment dated 14 March, 2006
in Appeal No. 3 of 2005 filed by some consumers in Assam has observed on
implementation of cost of supply as under:
“___ The cost of supply of electricity must be determined in accordance with
the principle laid down in the Act. Since the relevant data was not available
with the Commission, it was not possible for it to determine the “cost of
supply of electricity” we cannot ask the Commission to do the impossible.
Since in the past the Commission was not in a position to give appropriate
146
direction for want of data. We will now direct the utilities that the installations
be metered at strategic locations to perform energy audit for determining
losses and supply to various classes of consumers immediately, so that it is
possible for the AERC to determine the cost of supply to different categories
of consumers. We presently decide not to interfere with the order of the
Commission in this aspect of the matter”.
In this context, the Commission in its Order dated 16 May, 2011 had issued
directives to APDCL to carry out a study to ascertain voltage wise and consumer
category wise cost of supply. Compliance with the Directives issued and Commission
comments have been elaborated in the Directives Chapter.
The data available from APDCL is not adequate to workout the realistic “cost of
supply” to various categories of consumers. The Utility shall have to develop
sustainable data over a period to arrive at cost of supply for various categories of
consumers. Until then, the Commission would follow the mandate of the Tariff Policy
that tariff should be within +/- 20% of the average cost of supply at the same time
taking into consideration the “cost of supply” implemented by the Commission to
various categories of consumers in its earlier Tariff Order. The Commission has set a
loss reduction target for the Control Period. Reduction of distribution loss and better
performance by APDCL will result in reduction of losses and consequently the
average cost of supply.
5.2
REVENUE DEFICIT / SURPLUS FOR FY 2013-14
It is to note that for determination of the ARR for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 and tariff
for FY 2013-14, the Commission has considered the latest ARR approved for APGCL
and AEGCL. Further, as clarified in the Tariff Order for APGCL, the Commission has
considered the impact of truing up for FY 2011-12.
Further, as explained under Chapter 4, the State Government vide its letter dated 22
August, 2013 communicated its decision to provide financial support to APDCL
amounting to maximum of Rs. 200 Crore for FY 2013-14. The State Government vide
its letter dated 23 September, 2013 clarified that it is pleased to allow targeted
subsidy of Rs. 1.10 per unit for Jeevan Dhara (BPL consumers) for consumption upto
30 units per household per month or else allow a subsidy of Rs. 0.70 per unit per
household per month for total consumption upto 120 units by Jeevan Dhara
147
consumers if they consume more than 30 units in a month, and a subsidy of Rs. 0.70
per unit for upto 120 units per month by domestic category �A’ consumers and further
clarified that the balance amount, if any, may be utilized against the past period
outstanding liabilities in the ARR of APDCL. Accordingly, as explained earlier, the
Commission has considered it appropriate to utilise the balance financial support
amounting to Rs.100 Crore, as a revenue subsidy, against the past period revenue
gap of APDCL. It is pertinent to mention that Para 8 of the Tariff Policy states that
�Making the distribution segment of the industry efficient and solvent is the key to
success of power sector reforms and provision of services of specified standards.
Therefore, the Regulatory Commissions need to strike the right balance between the
requirements of the commercial viability of distribution licensees and consumer
interests…..’
The Commission has estimated the revenue from sale of power at the existing
tariff including FPPPA at Rs. 2703.54 Crore. Accordingly, the net revenue gap
for FY 2013-14 is of Rs. 64.30 Crore.
5.3
TARIFF DESIGN
The Commission in the present Tariff Order has determined the tariff for the first year
of the Control Period. As outlined under earlier Chapter 2 of the Order, ADPCL has
proposed category wise retail tariff to meet the revenue gap of around Rs. 720.70
Crore for FY 2013-14. However, on detailed scrutiny of APDCL’s revenue
requirement proposal, the Commission has arrived at more realistic net revenue gap
of around Rs. 64.30 Crore only. The Commission has revised the category-wise
tariffs in order to recover the revenue gap of Rs. 64.30 crore, which amounts to an
average tariff increase of 2.4%.
The Commission has not contemplated any change in the existing tariff categories
and consumption slabs.
APDCL has proposed to levy Consumer Charges in addition to Fixed/Demand
Charges and Energy Charges, under the present Petition. The ARR is presently
recovered through two part tariff structure Fixed/Demand charges and Energy
charges, and allowing recovery through separate charges is not warranted. The
Commission has hence, rejected APDCL’s proposal to recover Consumer Charges.
148
The Commission has also retained the fixed charges at the existing levels.
As regards the Tea Sector’s request that all non-factory and statutorily prescribed
facilities should be treated as non-industrial and charged at domestic rate, the
Commission is of the view that this is impractical and the entire consumption of a
particular consumer has to be charged under any one category only.
The Commission has reduced the tariffs for Public Water Works category (both HT
and LT), since, these categories are public services and may not be required to
subsidise other categories. Hence, the Commission has reduced the tariff for this
category such that this category neither subsidises nor is subsidised by other
categories.
The Commission has also reduced the tariff for the LT General Purpose Supply
category, since, this category which primarily includes premises of Charitable
organisations, places of worship, small Government offices, etc., may not be required
to subsidise other categories to this extent.
The Commission has also retained the tariffs of the Jeevan Dhara category and first
slab of the Domestic A category (first 4 kWh per day or first 120 units per month) at
the existing levels, with the intention of reducing the burden on these categories, and
also since the level of cross-subsidy is also within limits. However, in real terms, the
tariff for these two categories will actually be lower than the existing tariff, on account
of the State Government subsidy being provided to these two categories.
The Commission has not accepted APDCL’s proposal to increase the tariff differential
in the TOD tariffs, since the tariff differential sought by APDCL was high, and the
existing tariff differential is reasonable. Also, APDCL has not submitted any data to
justify its request for increase in the tariff differential in TOD tariffs. Hence, the
Commission has retained the existing tariff differential in the TOD tariff for different
time slots during the day, so as to ensure that the DSM and energy conservation
measures are continued. The necessary directive regarding submission of TOD data
has been given in Chapter 6 of this Order.
The Commission has considered marginal increase in tariffs of certain categories of
consumers, while it has considered it prudent to reduce the tariff of certain
categories, while keeping in view the overall objective of maintaining the cross-
149
subsidy within the limit of +20%, as given below. The full cost recovery (before
Government subsidy) based category-wise tariffs and increase/decrease in
tariff is given in the following Table:
Table 5.1:
Sr.
No.
Category-wise full cost recovery tariff and increase/decrease in
tariff in FY 2013-14
Consumer
Increase/decrease (-) in
Revised tariffs
Category
tariffs
Fixed
Charges
Jeevan Dhara 0.5
kW and 1kWh/day
Domestic
Aabove 0.5 kW to 5
kW
No change
Energy
Charges
paise per
unit
No change
First 4 kWh/day
Next 4 kWh/day
Balance
No change
No change
No change
No change
No change
12
12
12
30
30
30
30
428
545
615
575
No change
12
110
615
No change
(-) 33
125
515
No change
No change
(-) 43
(-) 3
120
30
530
375
No change
17
30
400
Industries
No change
17
40
425
Temporary
Supply
Domestic
Non-Domestic
Non- Agriculture
Agriculture
No change
No change
37
47
80
125
765
975
No change
37
50
565
No change
27
30
570
No change
27
115
600
LT Group
LT-1
LT-II
LT-III
LT-IV
LT-V
LT-VI
LT-VII
LTVIII(i)
LTVIII(ii)
Domestic-B
above 5 kW to 20
kW
Commercial Load
above 0.5 kW to
20 kW
General Purpose
Supply
Public Lighting
Agriculture upto
7.5HP
Small Industries
Rural upto 20 kW
Small
Urban
Fixed
Charges
Rs/kW or
Rs/kVA
15
Energy
Charges
paise per
unit
353
HT Group
HT-I
HT-II
HT Domestic 25
kVA and above
HT commercial 25
kVA & above
150
Sr.
No.
HT-III
HT-IV
HTIV(i)
HTIV(ii)
HTV(A)
HTV(B)
HTV(C)
HT-VI
HT-VII
HTVIII
Consumer
Category
Increase/decrease (-) in
tariffs
Revised tariffs
Fixed
Charges
No change
Energy
Charges
(-) 38
Fixed
Charges
125
Energy
Charges
520
No change
7
110
535
No change
17
145
575
No change
22
40
450
No change
12
100
515
HT
Industries-II
above 150 kVA
No change
35
140
548
Tea, Coffee
Rubber
Oil & Coal
No change
17
230
565
No change
No change
27
27
270
40
580
500
Public
Water
Works
Bulk Supply 25
kVA and above
Government
Educational
Institutions
Others
HT
Small
Industries upto 50
kVA
HT
Industries-1
50kVA to 150 kVA
&
HT Irrigation Load
above 7.5 HP
The Commission after due consideration to the letter given by Government of
Assam indicating its commitment to provide subsidy u/s 65 of the Electricity
Act 2003 to selected categories/consumption slabs, has determined the Retail
Supply Tariff for APDCL for FY 2013-14, as under:
Table 5.2:
Sr.
No.
Category-wise retail supply tariff and increase/decrease in tariff in
FY 2013-14, after accounting for State Government subsidy
Consumer
Increase/decrease (-) in
Revised tariffs
Category
tariffs
Fixed
Charges
Energy
Charges
paise per
unit
Fixed
Charges
Rs/kW or
Rs/kVA
Energy
Charges
paise per
unit
15
243*
LT Category
LT-1
LT-II
Jeevan Dhara 0.5
kW and 1kWh/day
Domestic
A-
No change
(-) 110
151
Sr.
No.
Consumer
Category
Increase/decrease (-) in
tariffs
Fixed
Charges
Energy
Charges
Revised tariffs
Fixed
Charges
Energy
Charges
above 0.5 kW to 5
kW
First 4 kWh/day
Next 4 kWh/day
Balance
LT-III
LT-IV
LT-V
LT-VI
LT-VII
LTVIII(i)
LTVIII(ii)
No change
No change
No change
No change
(-) 70
12
12
12
30
30
30
30
358*
545
615
575
No change
12
110
615
No change
(-) 33
125
515
No change
No change
(-) 43
(-) 3
120
30
530
375
No change
17
30
400
Industries
No change
17
40
425
Temporary
Supply
Domestic
Non-Domestic
Non- Agriculture
Agriculture
No change
No change
37
47
80
125
765
975
No change
37
50
565
HT Domestic 25
kVA and above
HT commercial 25
kVA & above
Public
Water
Works
Bulk Supply 25
kVA and above
Government
Educational
Institutions
Others
No change
27
30
570
No change
27
115
600
No change
(-) 38
125
520
No change
7
110
535
No change
17
145
575
HT
Small
Industries upto 50
kVA
HT
Industries-1
No change
22
40
450
No change
12
100
515
Domestic-B
above 5 kW to 20
kW
Commercial Load
above 0.5 kW to
20 kW
General Purpose
Supply
Public Lighting
Agriculture upto
7.5HP
Small Industries
Rural upto 20 kW
Small
Urban
HT Category
HT-I
HT-II
HT-III
HT-IV
HTIV(i)
HTIV(ii)
HTV(A)
HT-
152
Sr.
No.
Consumer
Category
Increase/decrease (-) in
tariffs
Fixed
Charges
Revised tariffs
Energy
Charges
Fixed
Charges
Energy
Charges
50kVA to 150 kVA
V(B)
HTV(C)
HT-VI
HT-VII
HTVIII
HT
Industries-II
above 150 kVA
No change
35
140
548
Tea, Coffee
Rubber
Oil & Coal
No change
17
230
565
No change
No change
27
27
270
40
580
500
&
HT Irrigation Load
above 7.5 HP
Note:
*The above determined rates for LT-I Jeevan Dhara and LT II (A) Domestic A category are
contingent on payment of subsidy as agreed by the Government of Assam, failing which, the
rates contained in the full cost recovery tariff schedule (Table 5.1) shall become operative
5.4
CROSS SUBSIDY
The Commission has attempted to limit the cross subsidy to + 20% of the average
cost of supply in determining the tariffs to different categories of consumers as per
guidelines in the Tariff Policy, as shown in the Table below:
Table 5.3: Category-wise cross-subsidy in FY 2013-14
(Rs/kWh)
Sr.
Category of consumers
No.
Average
Average
Cross-subsidy
Tariff
Cost of
as Ratio of
Supply
Average Tariff
to ACOS
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
LT Category
1.
Jeevan Dhara 0.5 kW and 1kWh/day
4.09
6.01
68.10%
2.
Domestic A- above 0.5 kW to 5 kW
5.23
6.01
87.05%
3.
Domestic-B above 5 kW to 20 kW
6.28
6.01
104.58%
4.
Commercial Load above 0.5 kW to 20
7.15
6.01
118.99%
kW
5.
General Purpose Supply
6.58
6.01
109.45%
6.
Public Lighting
5.90
6.01
98.10%
7.
Agriculture upto 7.5HP
5.10
6.01
84.88%
153
Sr.
Category of consumers
No.
Average
Average
Cross-subsidy
Tariff
Cost of
as Ratio of
Supply
Average Tariff
to ACOS
8.
Small Industries Rural upto 20 kW
4.67
6.01
77.64%
9.
Small Industries Urban
4.94
6.01
82.19%
10.
Temporary Supply
(i) Domestic
7.65
6.01
127.30%
(ii) Non Domestic non Agriculture
9.75
6.01
162.25%
HT Category
11.
HT Domestic 25 kVA and above
5.97
6.01
99.32%
12.
HT commercial 25 kVA & above
6.90
6.01
114.81%
13.
Public Water Works
5.99
6.01
99.64%
14.
Bulk Supply 25 kVA and above
14A Government Educational Institutions
6.09
6.01
101.38%
14B Others
6.55
6.01
108.97%
15.
HT Small Industries upto 50 kVA
4.96
6.01
82.62%
16.
HT Industries-1 50kVA to 150 kVA
6.28
6.01
104.48%
17.
HT Industries-II above 150 kVA
6.10
6.01
101.51%
18.
Tea, Coffee & Rubber
7.22
6.01
120.16%
19.
Oil & Coal
7.16
6.01
119.20%
20.
HT Irrigation Load above 7.5 HP
5.72
6.01
95.16%
As can be seen from the above Table, the average billing rate for almost all
categories is within the band of 80% to 120% of average cost of supply, which is in
accordance with the Tariff Policy.
5.5
FUEL PRICE AND POWER PURCHASE ADJUSTMENT CHARGES (FPPPA)
Fuel Price and Power purchase adjustment charges as per the Regulations notified
by the Commission are applicable, which are appended to this Order as Annexure 2.
As per Regulations 5.2 of the AERC (Fuel and Power Purchase Price Adjustment)
Regulations, 2010 “The FPPPA charges shall not exceed 25% of the variable cost
component of tariff or such other ceiling as may be stipulated by the Commission
from time to time, where the variable component of tariff is defined as total estimated
revenue from energy charges (EC) in a year the approved in the Tariff Order divided
154
by total estimated sales of the year. When FPPPA charges exceed 25% of the
variable component of tariff, the licensee shall make a petition to the Commission for
recovery of the charges over the specified cap which shall be recovered after
Commission’s scrutiny and directives”.
APDCL shall strictly follow the above Regulation and when FPPPA charges exceed
25% of the variable components of the tariff the APDCL shall file a Petition before the
Commission and FPPPA charges beyond 25% of the variable cost component of
tariff shall be recovered only after Commission’s scrutiny and approval.
155
6.
6.1
Compliance of Directives by APDCL and new
Directives
COMPLIANCE OF DIRECTIVES ISSUED BY THE COMMISSION
The Commission in its MYT Order dated 16 May, 2011 for FY 2010-11 to FY 2012-13
and Tariff Order dated 28 February, 2013 had issued certain directives to APDCL.
APDCL has submitted the Compliance of Directives vide its letter dated 14 February,
2013 under Volume-III of the Petition. Further, APDCL vide its letter dated 17 June,
2013 submitted status of Compliance of Directives/New Directives issued in the Tariff
Order dated 28 February, 2013 for FY 2012-13.
The Commission’s comments on the status of compliance of old and fresh Directives
by APDCL are discussed in this Chapter and further directives have been issued,
wherever necessary.
6.2
COMPLIANCE OF OLD DIRECTIVES
Directive 3: File Fixed Assets Registers duly authenticated incorporating Gross
Fixed Assets (GFA) at the beginning of the relevant financial year, addition,
dispositions / sale proceeds, if any, made during the relevant financial year, and the
written down value of the assets at the end of the relevant financial year.
Further, to maintain proper and detailed Fixed Asset Registers at field offices to work
out depreciation expenses, the Commission directs them to submit a report to the
Commission citing clearly as to how they are maintaining fixed assets registers for
the various assets.
Compliance by APDCL:
The Fixed Assets Registers have been prepared unit wise and updated Fixed Asset
Registers upto 31.03.2011 submitted.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted.
Directive 4: File Physical Verification Report of Fixed Assets by a competent and
reliable authority as at the end of each financial year beginning with FY 2005-06 and
156
onwards.
Compliance by APDCL:
APDCL has decided to outsource the work of Physical Verification of its fixed assets.
Commission’s Comments:
Physical verification of the Fixed Assets should be commenced at the earliest with
confirmation to the Commission, and the Physical Verification Report should be
submitted at the earliest.
Directive 6: Capital Work-in-progress:- To submit the detailed analysis of amount
locked up in Capital Work-in-progress year-wise beginning from FY 2005-06 to FY
2007-08 and the conversion of CWIP into Fixed Assets duly reconciling with the
Assets Register within two months from date of issue of Tariff Order 2008-10. The
utilities shall submit in detail the cost and time of completion of each project and
reason for delay (if any).
Compliance by APDCL:
Scheme wise CWIP details for different years is attached.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. The Commission is separately studying the same and shall communicate its
observations to APDCL, if required, separately.
Directive 17: Power from Co-generation and Renewable sources:- The utilities /
Discoms should make all efforts to procure more power from co-generation and
renewable sources, may be through competitive bidding process to promote
Renewable Generation.
Compliance by APDCL:
APDCL is committed to purchase Non Conventional Energy from all upcoming
generators through MOU/PPA route. Report submitted.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted.
Directive 18: Circle-wise Trajectory for Loss Reduction: - Discom is directed to
fix-up circle-wise trajectory for loss reduction and prepare a detailed action plan for
157
reduction of Distribution and AT&C losses during 2009-10. The action plan for
reduction of losses during 2009-10 should be submitted to the Commission within 2
months from the date of this order.
Compliance by APDCL:
Various projects in different circles are under implementation under different scheme
as R-APDRP, TDF, ADB, etc. Details are attached.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. APDCL should submit the report on the loss levels vis-Г -vis the loss reduction
trajectory for each circle on a six-monthly basis.
Directive 19: Database on TOD consumption: - The Commission intended to
extend the benefit of TOD tariff to other HT category consumers. At present under
HT group, Domestic, Commercial, Public Water Works, HT Small Industries and HT
Irrigation are not covered under TOD tariff. The Utilities have to build up some
database and make available to the Commission the pattern of consumption during
different periods of day by different categories under TOD tariff. But the volumes of
data in sample forms are not sufficient. The Commission directs that the Load
Research Cell under Discoms will collect more data of such consumers and submit to
the Commission for making a database on TOD consumption. The data submitted by
utilities should be both in hard and soft copy forms.
Compliance by APDCL:
CMRI data of consumers having load of 25 kVA and above are downloaded and
monitored under HVCMS project. APDCL has analyzed the consumption pattern in
different times of the day of several consumers under HT category and is planning to
introduce TOD tariff in HT-Commercial group. Load curve samples of consumers
under HT-Commercial category, in support of our opinion are enclosed.
Commission’s Comments:
The data given is insufficient. More data as called for in the directive should be
submitted at the earliest.
158
6.3
COMPLIANCE OF THE FRESH DIRECTIVES ISSUED
COMMISSION IN ITS TARIFF ORDER DATED 16TH MAY, 2011
BY
THE
Directive 1: Pilferage of Energy
The need of the hour is to activate the organization to curb the pilferage of power
within the premises of provisions of Indian Electricity Act 2003 and also the Indian
Penal Code. A task force is to be constituted in different zones to which the entire
Licensee area is to be divided to carry out massive raid to arrest pilferage. In case of
detection of such theft/pilferage, the concerned authority of the area and personnel
attached to them, who have duties to supervise the work, have to be made
answerable for punitive action. Those found committing mischief of pilferage should
be booked and penal action should be taken.
Compliance by APDCL:
To detect the case of Pilferage and theft of electricity, 12 numbers of special police
stations have been constituted at Dhubri, Goalpara, Guwahati, Nalbari, Mangaldoi,
Silchar, Nagaon, Tezpur, Golaghat, Jorhat, Dibrugarh and Lakhimpur. A 24 hour
�Central Electricity Theft Control Centre’ has been formed at Guwahati dial9678005171. Performance of APDCL special police station is attached.
Commission’s Comments:
The Commission vide its Order dated 16 May 2011 directed APDCL that the
Performance Report of special police stations for FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 should
be submitted to the Commission within April, 2013. The Performance Report should
include the number of FIRs lodged, number of persons arrested, number of cases
filed in Court, number of persons convicted, total amount of monthly assessment
bills, number of raids conducted, etc. Besides, the Report should mention the action
taken by the licensee to motivate the police personnel of these police stations,
number of police personnel sanctioned for these stations separately for each station,
number of personnel actually in position and the payment disbursed to them during
the above mentioned years.
ADPCL has submitted the report. However, APDCL should strengthen the special
police stations and intensify the process of arresting power theft.
159
Directive 2: Energy Audit and Demand Side Management
Energy audit is an important and essential tool to identify the high loss (technical and
commercial) areas in the system. For carrying out the energy audit, meters are
required to be provided at all the feeders from 220 kV to 11 kV level and also
distribution transformers on LT side.
The energy audit should be taken up first in all the towns with a population of fifty
thousand and above. The first status report on the action taken for energy audit in all
the towns should be reported to the Commission by end September, 2011 to issue
further directives in this regard, if required.
One of the effective methods to minimize the demand-supply gap is by expediting
Demand Side Management (DSM) activities. The Commission vide letter No. AERC
180/2005/Pt I/68 dated 15/09/2010 directed APDCL to constitute a DSM Cell for
carrying out load research, formulation of DSM Plans, design, development and
implementation of DSM activities, etc. The Commission directs that a status report on
the activities of DSM Cell be submitted within 60 days from the date of issue of this
Order.
Compliance by APDCL:
A DSM cell is being created in APDCL
1.
APDCL initiated the plan for distribution of CFL lamps to rural consumers. Out of
19,98,600 numbers of CFL lamps delivered to different areas, 10,33,500 lamps
are already distributed.
2.
APDCL has already purchased and installed 3 star rated transformers.
3.
APDCL has already undertaken monitoring of High Value consumers through
special audit.
4.
In order to monitor the consumption of high value consumers, CMRI download of
all H.T. consumers have been taken up. In the first phase, APDCL has taken up
downloading of CMRI data of consumers having load of 500 kVA and above, and
the data has been analyzed and corrective measures taken.
5.
To cover all H.T. consumers, a central HVCMS project (High Value Consumer
Management System) has been taken up and for implementation of the same
M/s. PwC Ltd. has been engaged as Consultant. The project works started in the
160
month of September 2012. Completion of CMRI download and analysis for all
consumers is targeted within 31 January, 2012.
6.
Further, from January 2013, APDCL has to discontinue manual reading of meter
data and switch over to billing by direct CMRI downloaded data.
7.
Further, as stated above, under the initiative of GOI, a smart grid pilot project is
proposed under RAPDRP, which includes DSM initiative by segregating
consumer load under essential/ nonessential etc.
8.
APDCL would implement Bachat Lamp Yojna and the Malaysian firm M/s C
Quest Capital Malaysia Ltd. was selected for the project.
9.
ADPCL, at the request of Rajeev Bhawan, Guwahati, has allowed installation of
2 kW LT roof top solar PV under a net metering arrangement, which was
commissioned on 2 Oct, 2012. The plant is running successfully and contributing
approximately 180 units per month to the grid and consumer in return is getting a
benefit of approximately Rs. 900 per month.
10. A total of 3253 numbers of pre-paid meters are already purchased, out of which
2624 numbers are installed.
Commission’s Comments:
The steps taken by the licensee are noted. The Commission notified the Assam
Electricity Regulatory Commission (Demand Side Management) Regulations, 2011
on 10 April, 2012. These Regulations specify �Constitution of DSM Cell, its Roles and
Responsibilities’. The Commission hereby directs APDCL to submit the DSM Plan
formulated as per the Regulations to the Commission.
Directive 3: Annual Accounts
The APDCL is directed to accord highest priority and ensure that the accounts are
got audited by the Accountant General in time. The provisional accounts for FY 200910 are not yet furnished to the Commission. The audited accounts for 2009-10 shall
be furnished at the earliest.
Compliance by APDCL:
Submitted up to FY 2011-12
161
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. The APDCL is directed to accord highest priority and ensure that the accounts
are got audited by Accountant General in time.
Directive 4: Employee Cost
As per the information made available, the employee cost of APDCL is high which
stands at about 24% of the total revenue income from sale of power at existing tariff.
APDCL is directed to enforce economy and austerity measures in their operations
and take urgent steps to reduce establishment cost by utilizing the existing manpower optimally, and imposing restriction on creation of posts, introducing revised
work load norms. APDCL is directed to identify surplus staff and deploy them after
proper training, in the area of customer service, in the meter reading, billing and
revenue realization so as to provide better service to the consumer. A first report on
the action taken may be sent to the Commission by 30, June 2011.
Compliance by APDCL:
Need
based
analysis
has
been
carried
out
and
recruitments
and
mobilization/redeployments are done. Extract from the report of organization
structure submitted by PwC is attached to the Petition. Training details are enclosed
in Annexure.
Commission’s Comments:
The HR profiling is noted. However, the reply from APDCL is silent regarding
introduction of revised work load norms, provision of training to the existing staff, etc.
The Commission in its Order dated 28 February, 2013 had already directed APDCL
to provide the information in this regard within April, 2013.
It is observed that ADPCL till date has not submitted the report. APDCL is hereby
directed to submit the report without any further delay.
Directive 5: Power from Sishugram Sub-station
North Eastern Small Scale Industries Association represented that two big steel
industries in Amingaon area have submitted requisition for entire power requirement
of expansion of 50 MVA Sishugram Sub-station and the SSI Industries were asked to
wait till the Sishugram project is completed. They request a reservation of 40% power
162
to be made available to Small Sector Industries from Sishugram Sub-station. A report
on the expansion of the Sishugram sub-station capacity, pending industrial small
scale sector and other industrial applications, etc., may be submitted to the
Commission before 30 June, 2011.
Compliance by APDCL:
Sishugram substation has the capacity of 31.5 x 2 MVA and 40 x 1 MVA. The
substation can take power either from Kahilipara or Rangia Grid Substation.
However, due to line constraints (Panther Conductor), the line cannot be fully loaded.
Steps are being taken to remove the bottlenecks. The present status of load released
and yet to be released to different consumers has been already submitted to the
Commission.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. APDCL should furnish the latest status of compliance.
Directive 6: Improvement in quality of service
APDCL is directed to take appropriate steps to improve the quality of service,
especially quality of supply to its consumers. The quality of power being supplied to
consumers, especially in the rural areas needs substantial improvement. Adequate
steps need to be taken so that reliable, uninterrupted and quality power is made
available to the consumers.
Compliance by APDCL:
Schemes under different funding are being undertaken to improve quality and
reliability of service. A total of 27 nos. of Customers Care Centres have been
established at the division level and 29 nos. of Consumer’s Service Centres at the
Sub-division level to take care of consumer complaints, revenue billing and
collection, etc., in remote or rural areas.
APDCL has taken initiative for payment of compensation on receipt of claim by the
consumers after scrutiny and by adjustment of demand charges. However, no such
claims are pending with the department as of now.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. The Commission has received a number of objections pertaining to quality of
163
supply. APDCL should improve the quality of service to all categories of Consumers,
particularly in rural areas, and should submit half-yearly report for all Circles on
Reliability Indices (SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI) with all backup data..
Directive 7: APDRP Schemes
st
The status of implementation of APDRP schemes, amount utilized upto 31 March,
2011, the benefits accrued by way of increase in metered sales, reduction of
transmission loss, improvement of quality of supply, revenue etc., shall be reported to
the AERC by end of July 2011.
Compliance by APDCL:
Report attached.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted.
Directive 8: Prepaid Meters
Prepaid meters eliminate the cost of meter reading, bill serving, disconnection /
reconnection and avoids wrong readings, delay in bill serving, etc. Since the payment
is upfront, it improves the cash flow of the Discom. APDCL may procure some
prepaid meters initially after ensuring service facilities and provide to some domestic
consumers as a pilot study to encourage and make the consumers to observe the
advantages of having prepaid meters facility. Subsequently, APDCL may suggest the
consumers to purchase the prepaid meters at their own cost by offering some rebate
say about 10% in energy charges.
Compliance by APDCL:
For reduction of AT&C loss and DSM an initiative has been taken by APDCL to install
pre-paid meters in consumer’s premises. A total of 3253 numbers of pre-paid meters
are already purchased, out of which 2624 numbers are installed and a directive has
been issued to make it mandatory to install pre-paid meters in all up-coming
residential flats of Guwahati city.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. The Commission directs APDCL to take appropriate initiatives along with the
164
State Government for installation of prepaid meters in the Government Departments
as well as autonomous bodies, within three months of issue of this Order, in order to
achieve timely settlement of power dues from Government departments to the
distribution licensee.
Directive 9: Cost of Supply and Cross Subsidy
As per Section 61 (g) of the Electricity Act, 2003, the Commission has to ensure that
the tariff progressively reflects the cost of supply and cross subsidy is reduced within
a specified period. In this context, the Commission directs APDCL to carry out a
study to ascertain voltage-wise and consumer category-wise cost of supply. The
study should be for a period of one year. APDCL may appoint a consultant if
necessary to carry out the study. APDCL is also directed that a team of young
engineers of APDCL should interact continuously with the consultant and fully
familiarize themselves with the subject so that they are in a position to take up such
studies themselves in future. The study shall be completed with a period of 18
months from issue of this Order. The progress on this study shall be reported to the
Commission every month.
Compliance by APDCL:
With the monitoring and MRI data of higher consumption consumers, required
information regarding consumption patterns are being made available for study and
updating of cost of supply and cross subsidy. Few samples of MRI data of High value
consumers are submitted along with the Petition.
Commission’s Comments:
The Commission directs that a detailed report on the study on voltage wise cost of
supply and cross subsidy be submitted without any further delay.
Directive 10: Spot Billing
To avoid errors in meter reading / recording delay in bill serving, action may be taken
to read/record the meter reading and bill serving for the LT consumers on the spot
with handheld computers. Handheld computer prices have come down considerably
and many utilities are successfully implementing these procedures.
APDCL shall initiate action in this regard and the progress in this matter may be
shared with the Commission.
165
Compliance by APDCL:
Spot billing machines are introduced in some circles of APDCL on experimental
basis. Due to some software related issues some of the circles have discontinued
this practice of billing. However, it is still in practice in few sub-divisions.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. APDCL should resolve the software related issues and ensure that more
circles of APDCL initiate spot billing in their areas.
Directive 11: Independent third party meter testing arrangement
The National Electricity Policy (NEP) emphasizes the need for establishment of an
independent third-party meter testing arrangement. It is noted that the Licensee has
not been establishing reliable Independent Testing Laboratories.
The Licensee shall establish more number of testing laboratories in each circle to test
more number of meters either new or defective. Setting up of a meter testing lab may
not cost much but the persons have to be trained in testing. The progress on
upgrading the existing labs and setting up of new labs may be reported to the
Commission quarterly. The first such report shall be submitted by July, 2011.
Compliance by APDCL:
All circles are now equipped with electronic test branches for testing of energy
meters. Third party inspection arrangement is not yet ready. However, APDCL has
proposed setting up of three independent third party meter testing entities in Assam
Engineering College, Guwahati, Jorhat Engineering College, Jorhat, and NIT, Silchar.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. All circles should be equipped with independent meter testing laboratories
without further delay.
Directive 12: Efficient meter reading billing and collection
Timely meter reading, billing and collection for energy consumed by the consumers
can significantly improve the cash flow of the Licensee. The present system should
be reviewed with a view to streamlining the process and minimizing the time between
actual delivery of power and receipt of revenue. Supervisory officers must counter
166
check the meter readings taken by the meter readers. Further, the area of meter
readers should be changed every year. Although MRI billing is in place for some of
the consumers, the Licensee now shall conduct billing through Meter Reading
Instrument (MRI) for all HT consumers and large non-domestic consumers. Spot
billing preferably by palm top computers may be introduced in the urban areas. The
present status of MRI billing for the consumers shall be submitted to the Commission
by end June, 2011.
Compliance by APDCL:
It is decided that all the consumers having load of 25 kVA and above will be billed
through MRI and data will be analysed.
Commission’s Comments:
Meter Reading Instrument (MRI) downloads for all HT consumers and large nondomestic consumers should be made compulsory within a period of three months
from the date of this Order and the status report shall be submitted to the
Commission by the end of January, 2014. The MRI data should be analysed.
Computer generated bills with the sole purpose of avoiding human element in bill
generation should be implemented within a fixed time line.
Directive 13: Meter Reading of HT services
The monthly meter reading of HT services shall be entrusted to a Committee of high
level officers of the APDCL. All the HT services below 500 kVA contracted demand,
meter reading may be done by the concerned Assistant Manager and those above
500 kVA by the concerned Senior Manager / Manager / Deputy Manager. Further,
certain percentage of meter readings in each category of consumers shall be done
by senior officers of the APDCL upto the level of GM / DGM to control pilferage of
electricity. APDCL shall issue suitable instructions in this regard immediately and the
Licensee shall also review the percentage of check readings and take action in case
of variation between normal meter reading read by meter reader and the check meter
reading taken by the officers of the APDCL.
Compliance by APDCL:
All dedicated service lines are now equipped with check meters with required
agreement to arrest pilferage of energy. All HT consumers are billed through CMRI
reading only.
167
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. Meter Reading Instrument (MRI) downloads for all HT consumers should be
made compulsory within a period of three months from the date of this Order and the
status report shall be submitted to the Commission by the end of January, 2014.
Directive 14: Replacement of old electromagnetic meters with static meters
A report on the status of metering, type of meters provided in HT and other high
value LT installations along with a programme for replacement of such meters with
static meters shall be submitted to the Commission by July, 2011.
Compliance by APDCL:
As per demand, the following numbers of old electromechanical meters have been
replaced by static Digital meters by different circles of Lower Assam Region under
O&M and ABY schemes.
Name of the Circle
Single Phase Meters
Three Phase Meters
GEC-I
4287
152
GEC-II
2653
Rangia
3888
Mangaldoi
400
Kokrajhar
4347
Bongaigaon
2200
36
Meters replaced under ADB funded schemes:
Single Phase Meters
Three Phase Meters
LAR
145515
7640
UAR
11003
5690
Commission’s Comments:
The above data does not provide details of total number of electro-mechanical
meters and percentage replacement achieved till date. Efforts should be made to
replace more electro-mechanical meters with Static Digital meters and the latest
status report for the entire State of Assam should be submitted to the Commission by
January, 2014.
168
Directive 15: Management Information System
The Board is directed to take urgent steps to build a credible and accurate database
and Management Information System (MIS) with unbundled costs and expenditure of
the three businesses of the Board, viz., Generation, Transmission and Distribution to
make information available on operational and financial issues and get such data
updated on monthly basis. Advantage of IT must be taken to institute the MIS. Action
must be taken urgently on this and the action taken shall be reported to the
Commission by October, 2011. Care must be taken to see that the next tariff petition
is supported by an accurate and credible database.
Compliance by APDCL:
Currently, APDCL has taken up a major IT intervention project, i.e., implementation
of state-of-art Commercial and Customer Management Systems under GOI funded
R-APDRP in 72 towns. The proposed application systems under the R-APDRP will
help APDCL in strengthening its consumer interfaces in terms of improvements to
metering, billing and collection, asset management, network maintenance, energy
accounting, consumer payments and customer relationship management.
Given the massive improvements in business processes in these front office areas,
APDCL needs to implement concurrent interventions for the support functions of
finance and accounts, human resources management and materials management /
procurement, in order to support the initiatives taken under R-APDRP through
appropriate intervention. An enterprise resource planning (ERP) programme will be
able to support as desired, by providing visibility on management practices of scarce
resources e.g. cash, people and distribution infrastructure and by developing the
employees to be more accountable and responsible in discharging their functions.
Commission’s Comments:
The above direction should be complied without further delay and the report on the
same should be submitted by January, 2014.
Directive 16: Energy conservation
A well-known proverb is that energy conserved is energy generated and to conserve
energy, the consumers are required to be well educated by way of demonstrations,
holding meetings at various levels and through print media so that energy
169
consumption can be reduced considerably by adopting economy measures such as
use of energy efficiency lighting, high efficiency and standard make household
appliances, high efficiency pumpsets preferably with labels of Bureau of Energy
Efficiency (BEE) and other energy conservation devices. All categories of consumers
should be well apprised of the newly developed latest energy conservation devices
so that the energy conserved can be utilized for more productive purposes and in
consonance with the direction issued by the Ministry of Power, Government of India.
Compliance by APDCL:
Decision has taken to introduce energy efficient DTR in all new schemes.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. More initiatives should be taken by the Company as per schemes formulated
by the Government of India.
Directive 17: Consumer education and awareness
The Commission directed APDCL to establish and earmark funds for consumer
education and awareness. APDCL was also directed to provide details about the
scope of activities to be taken up under this initiative to the Commission within 3
months from the date of issue of the Tariff Order for FY 2008-09 and FY 2009-10.
Although, it was informed by APDCL that some measures were taken in this regard,
whole hearted approach to this cause seems to be lacking. The Commission vide
letter No. AERC 123/2005/Pt I/358 dated 04/02/2011 directed APDCL to incorporate
some additional vital information on the reverse of the electricity bills to be served to
the consumers. This information in the electricity bills will benefit the consumers in
redressal of their grievances. However, till date the required information has not been
incorporated in the energy bills. Therefore, the Commission now directs the APDCL
to take immediate measures for creating consumer awareness through the
print/electronic media, hold meetings at different levels and publish the information as
directed on the reverse of the electricity bills. The Commission directs that APDCL
submit a status report on the action taken within 60 days from the date of issue of
this Tariff Order.
Compliance by APDCL:
For consumer’s awareness, periodic advertisements are released in local dailies.
Steps to be taken for Grievances redressal are also printed on the reverse side of
170
energy bills for consumer’s knowledge
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. Such endeavours by APDCL should continue.
Directive 18: Standards of Performance
In pursuance to the provisions stipulated in Clause 5.1 and Clause 5.4 of the AERC
(Distribution Licensees’ Standard of Performance) Regulations, 2004 the Licensee is
required to furnish to the Commission, in a report for every quarter and in a
consolidated annual report for each financial year information as to the Guaranteed
and Overall Standards of Performance. The Commission prepared a proforma
reflecting the required performance parameters of the distribution licensee and the
same was sent to APDCL vide letter No. AERC 326/2009/10 dated 04/12/2009 and
the licensee was directed to make arrangements for filling up the required information
in the proforma and send it to the Commission regularly as specified in the
regulations. Although, information in this regard was received from LAEDCL for FY
2009-10, calculations on service reliability indices were not submitted as specified in
the formats. A report on these submissions is available on the Commission’s website.
No information was received by the Commission for FY 2010-11. The Commission
therefore, directs that the required information for FY 2010-11 be submitted within 60
days from the date of issue of this Tariff Order and such information be submitted to
the Commission regularly as stipulated in the Regulations.
Compliance by APDCL:
The approved SOP format has been finalized and APDCL has made it mandatory for
all circles to submit the SOPs on monthly basis, from July’ 2013 onwards.
Commission’s Comments:
APDCL has not submitted the information on SOP as per the proforma prepared by
the Commission for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12 till date despite several reminders
for compliance. This information on SOP is required to be published by the
Commission as per Section 59 (2) of the Electricity Act, 2003. The Commission had
published the information for FY 2009-10. APDCL is required to submit all required
details to the Commission for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12 latest by the end of
December, 2013.
171
Directive
19:
Metering
System
in
All
Government
Departments
and
autonomous Bodies
It has been ascertained that due to accumulated outstanding dues of various
Government departments, Autonomous bodies and Municipal bodies, the burden of
arrears has adversely affected the licensee’s Distribution business as well as
financial growth of the utility. In view of the above it has become incumbent on the
part of Distribution Licensee to switch over to prepaid meters for the Autonomous
bodies. The prepaid meters of different locations would be identified and installed by
the Distribution Companies and the cost of which would be borne by the Government
departments. The APDCL is therefore directed to act accordingly and to take all
necessary steps in implementing prepaid metering system within six months from the
date of issue of this order. APDCL is directed to engage a Consultant for providing
necessary technical assistance and software support required for implementation of
prepaid metering system effectively and action taken report on this needs to be
intimated to the Commission within two months of the issue of the order.
Compliance by APDCL:
All the Government departments are metered. Further, APDCL is planning to install
pre-paid meters in all the government buildings.
Commission’s Comments:
Noted. The Commission directs APDCL to take appropriate initiatives along with the
State Government for installation of prepaid meters in the Government Departments
as well as autonomous bodies within three months of issue of this Order, in order to
achieve timely settlement of power dues from Government departments to the
distribution licensee.
Directive 20:
APDCL is directed to submit all financial figures in the petition filed for the future ARR
and Review / True-up in units of rupees crore.
Compliance by APDCL:
Noted. All figures have been submitted in Rs. Crore.
172
Commission’s Comments:
Noted.
Directive 2: Submission of Power Procurement Plan for the Control Period FY
2013-16
In absence of monthly power procurement plan provided by the APDCL in the MYT
Petition for FY 2010-11 to FY 2012-13, the Commission had approved annual power
purchase quantum for the period in the MYT Order 16th May, 2011. However, as per
Regulations 5.9 of the AERC (Fuel and Power Purchase Price Adjustment Formula)
Regulations, 2010, variation in quantum and cost of power procurement has to be
considered. Therefore, APDCL is directed to submit the monthly power procurement
plan for the subsequent Control Period, i.e., FY 2013-16 along with the MYT Petition.
Compliance by APDCL:
The annual power purchase quantum for the Control Period (2013 to 2016) has been
calculated based on the allocated power and merit order stacking. Further, Load
Generation Balance Report (LGBR) for 2013-14 is not yet available from different
generators at present, hence, monthly power procurement plan for FY 2013-14 has
not been prepared at the moment.
Commission’s Comments:
In the absence of monthly power procurement plan provided by the APDCL in the
MYT Petition, the Commission had approved annual power purchase quantum for
the period in this MYT Order, and has also approximated monthly power purchase
plan based on the pattern of monthly power purchase observed in the earlier years.
APDCL will be entitled for variation in quantum and cost of power procurement with
respect to the above approved monthly power procurement plan.
Directive 3: Power Procurement undertaken by APDCL
As per the Section 86(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003, the Commission directs the
APDCL to procure all long-term power in line with the “Guidelines for Determination
of Tariff by Bidding Process for Procurement of Power by Distribution Licensee”
issued by the Ministry of Power vide No. 23/11/2004-R&R(Vol.II) dated 19th January,
2005 and amendments dated 30.3.2006, 18.8.2006 and 27.9.2007. Further, it is
directed that all short-term power purchases has to be undertaken as per “Guidelines
for short-term (i.e., for a period less than or equal to one year) procurement of power
by Distribution Licensees through Tariff based bidding process” issued by Ministry of
173
Power vide No. 23/25/2011-R&R dated 15th May, 2012.
Compliance by APDCL:
At present APDCL is receiving allocated long term power from the Central power
sector in line with CERC Regulations. Also, for short-term power procurement,
APDCL has been following most of the clauses stipulated under the MoP guidelines.
It is expected that short term power procurement w.e.f. April’ 2013 will be undertaken
fully under the guidelines of the MoP.
Commission’s Comments:
The Commission reiterates its direction that all short-term power purchases have to
be undertaken as per “Guidelines for short-term (i.e., for a period less than or equal
to one year) procurement of power by Distribution Licensees through Tariff based
bidding process” issued by Ministry of Power vide No. 23/25/2011-R&R dated 15th
May, 2012. In case the same are not followed, then the Commission may be
constrained to disallow such purchases in future.
6.4
NEW DIRECTIVES
Directive 1: Creation of Tariff Regulatory Cell
APDCL shall create/constitute a Tariff Regulatory Cell (under an Officer of
status/rank not below that of General Manager or equivalent) within one month from
date of issue of the Order. A Cell so constituted/created shall be provided with
necessary authority and resources so as to look after all the tariff regulatory matters,
primarily to provide correct and timely information to the Commission as well
stakeholders, who should be the primary source of all data and submissions being
filed before the Commission, so as to ensure consistency and timelines of the data
submitted and proper co-ordination with the Commission in the tariff determination
process.
Directive 2: Distribution Loss reduction
Despite several directives issued by the Commission from time to time, APDCL’s
efforts towards distribution loss reduction have not been up to the mark. APDCL will
have to make conscious efforts to reduce the distribution losses from the existing
levels. The action plan for reduction of losses during FY 2013-14 should be
submitted to the Commission within 3 months from the date of this order.
174
Directive 3: Recovery of Past dues
APDCL should submit the report indicating Circle wise pending past dues of the
consumer till March 2013, and initiatives taken from recovery of such past dues.
Directive 4: Load Survey
APDCL shall undertake load survey for all Government connections/Utility officials,
on a priority basis to assess the present connected load realistically, and modify its
consumer records accordingly, in order to recover the fixed charges based on the
correct level of connected load, within six months of issue of this Order.
Directive 5: Interest on Consumer’s Security Deposit
Interest on Consumers’ Security Deposit has to be paid/adjusted in the bills of all the
consumer categories, in accordance with the EA 2003 and AERC (Electricity Supply
Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004 (First Amendment), 2007, since the
same is being allowed to be recovered through the ARR and tariff.
Directive 6: Distribution Franchisees (IBDF Scheme)
APDCL shall inform the Commission on each occasion when it appoints a
Franchisee, and the terms of such appointment as well as process of such
appointment shall be submitted to the Commission. All details of such schemes,
including number of feeders, number of agencies, revenue and collection before and
after handing over to Franchisee, rate at which power is sold to Franchisee, etc.,
shall be submitted every six months for each such Franchisee scheme.
Directive 7: Submission of Data on Time of Day (TOD) consumption
APDCL shall submit the data on the category-wise consumption for the categories
having TOD tariff, for different time slots during the day, along with the next Tariff
Petition.
Directive 8: Submission of Data on Waiver Scheme
APDCL should submit details of waiver schemes offered to consumers for payment
of arrears, launched from time to time along with the reasons for launching waiver
scheme vs. benefit accrued,
175
7.
7.1
Wheeling Charges and Cross subsidy
surcharge
INTRODUCTION
The Commission has in the present Order specified the wheeling charges for
distribution business of the licensee.
7.2
ALLOCATION MATRIX
The Commission has considered the following matrix for allocation of rates between
the wires business and retail supply business in its Order passed on 21 June, 2012.
Table 7.1: Allocation of matrix for separation of wheeling charges and costs
supply cost
Sr.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
7.3
Particulars
Power purchase expenses
Employee expenses
Repair and Maintenance expenses
Administration and General expenses
Depreciation
Interest and Finance charges
Interest on working capital
Interest on Security deposit
Bad debts written off
Income tax
Return on equity
Other income
Non-tariff income
Wire
Business
Retail Supply
Business
0%
60%
90%
50%
90%
90%
10%
0%
0%
90%
90%
10%
0%
100%
40%
10%
50%
10%
10%
90%
100%
100%
10%
10%
90%
100%
The Commission has adopted the same allocation matrix given in above Table 93 for
segregation of the approved ARR for wires business and retail supply business for
APDCL for FY 2013-14 as given below:
176
Table 7.2: Allocation of matrix for separation of wheeling charges and retail
supply cost (Rs. crore)
Sr. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
7.4
Particulars
Wire
Retail
Business Supply
Business
Power purchase expenses
Employee expenses
R&M expenses
A&G expenses
Depreciation
Interest and Finance charges
Interest on working capital
Interest on consumers security
deposit
Income tax
Return on equity
Total expenditure
Less: Other income
Less: Non-tariff income
ARR
Total
0.00
322.79
31.72
8.44
5.47
26.00
2.71
2134.78
215.19
3.52
8.44
0.61
2.89
24.36
2134.78
537.98
35.25
16.88
6.08
28.89
27.06
0.00
0.00
20.51
417.64
20.35
0.00
397.29
32.17
0.00
2.28
2424.24
183.15
0.00
2241.09
32.17
0.00
22.79
2841.87
203.50
0.00
2638.37
WHEELING CHARGES
The wheeling charges for distribution open access consumers and 33 kV voltage
level has been determined from distribution ARR as arrived in Table 7.2 above.
Table 7.3: Wheeling charges approved by the Commission for FY 2013-14
Sr.
No.
1
Particulars
Unit
Total
Employee expenses
Rs. Crore
322.79
2
Repair and Maintenance expenses
Rs. Crore
31.72
3
Administration and General expenses
Rs. Crore
8.44
4
Depreciation
Rs. Crore
5.47
5
Interest and Finance charges
Rs. Crore
26.00
6
Interest on working capital
Rs. Crore
2.71
7
Income tax
Rs. Crore
0.00
8
Return on equity
Rs. Crore
20.51
9
Total expenditure
Rs. Crore
417.64
10
Less: Other income
Rs. Crore
20.35
177
Sr.
No.
11
12
13
14
15
Particulars
Unit
Total
Net ARR
Rs. Crore
397.29
Total energy input into Distribution system
Total distribution cost
Distribution cost for wires business for 33
kV voltage level (assuming 35% of cost at
33 kV)
Wheeling charges for 33 kV voltage level
MU
Rs. Crore
Rs. Crore
5657.38
397.29
139.05
Paise/kWh
25
The wheeling charges as given above are applicable for use of distribution system of
APDCL by other licensees or generating companies or captive power plants or
consumers / users who are permitted open access at 33 kV voltage level under
Section 42(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003.
7.5
CROSS SUBSIDY SURCHARGE
The open access consumers are liable to pay the cross subsidy surcharge to
compensate the utility for any loss of revenue due to the shifting of the consumer to
the open access system. The cross subsidy surcharge for open access customer is
to be calculated as per the following formula recommended in the Tariff Policy.
S = T – [C(1+L/100)+D]
Where,
S is the Surcharge
T is the overall Tariff payable by the relevant category of consumers
C is the weighted average cost of power purchase of top 5% at the margin excluding
liquid fuel based generation and renewable power.
D is the Wheeling charges
L is the system losses for the applicable voltage level expenses as a percentage.
In accordance with Regulation 4.3 of the AERC (Terms and Conditions for Open
Access) Regulations, 2005 consumers with a connected load of 3 MW and above
shall be allowed open access with effect from 1 April, 2008. Accordingly, HT category
V (C): HT-II Industry consumers may likely opt for open access.
The cross subsidy surcharge based on the above formula for HT-II industry category
is shown in the Table below:
178
Table 7.4: Cross subsidy surcharge for FY 2013-14
Sl.
Particulars
Unit
Amount
No.
1
T
Rs./kWh
6.10
2
C
Rs./kWh
3.74
3
D
Rs./kWh
0.25
4
L
%
13.04
5
S=cross subsidy surcharge
Rs/kWh
1.63
Note: The Cross Subsidy Surcharge (CSS) has increased from Rs. 0.23 per kWh to
Rs. 1.63 per kWh, primarily on account of the merger of the FPPPA of Rs. 1.03 per
kWh with T, which is already being paid by the consumers
179
8. Schedule of Tariff
This chapter lists the tariffs which are applicable in the State of Assam with effect
from 01.12.2013 until replaced by another order of the Commission.
For the purpose of this schedule the consumers are divided into two distinct groups
based on consumption and the nature of supply. The consumers are further divided
into categories that are supplied electricity at LT and HT voltages.
LT GROUP
Supply Voltage 1 Ph, 230 V AC and 3 Ph, 415 V AC
LT Category-1 Jeevan Dhara:
Applicability
This Tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to any premises exclusively for the
purpose of own requirements with a Connected Load of not more than 0.5 kW and
consumption upto 1 kWh/day or 30 kWh per month.
(a)
Tariff :
Consumption
For consumption upto
30 kWh per month.
N.B:
Energy Charge
Without Government
subsidy
With Government
Subsidy
Rs. 3.53/kWh
Rs. 2.43/kWh*
Fixed Charge
Rs. 15 per
connection per month
If, during any billing period the consumption exceeds the stipulated
1 kWh/day or 30 kWh per month the consumers will be considered as if they
are shifted to the next appropriate higher category.
* - The above determined energy charge for LT-I Jeevan Dhara category is
contingent on payment of subsidy as agreed by the Government of Assam,
failing which, the energy charge without Government subsidy stipulated
above shall become operative.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part thereof
at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made in full on or before
the due date.
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer (where
180
applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne by the
consumers.
(d)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
LT Category –II: Domestic _A.
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers having connected
load below 5 kW for residential premises, exclusively for domestic purposes only.
This shall also include supply of power to occupants of flats in multi storied buildings,
if the premises have not been classified under Domestic B or HT Domestic and
receiving bulk power at single point without any individual metering arrangements for
domestic purposes.
(a)
Tariff
Consumption
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Without
Government
subsidy
With
Government
Subsidy
For consumption between 0 - 4
kWh/day or 0 – 120 kWh per
month
Rs. 4.28/kWh
Rs. 3.58/kWh*
For consumption of next 4
kWh/day or 121 – 240 kWh per
Month
Rs. 5.45/kWh
Rs. 30/kW/month
Balance kWh
Rs. 6.15/kWh
Rs.
30/kW/month.
N.B:
Rs. 30/kW/month
* - The above determined energy charge for LT-II Domestic A category for
consumption between 0-4 kWh/day is contingent on payment of subsidy as
agreed by the Government of Assam, failing which, the energy charge without
Government subsidy stipulated above shall become operative.
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5. For consumer having connected load below
0.5 kW, connected load shall be rounded off to 0.5 kW.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof in simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made in full on or
before the due date.
181
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by local cheque/DD, commission
shall be borne by the consumers.
(d)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
NOTE:
If any part of the domestic connection is utilised for any use other than dwelling
purpose like commercial, industrial etc. the entire consumption shall be treated as the
case may be, for corresponding category and the respective tariff shall be applied for
the entire consumption.
LT Category-III: Domestic-B
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers having Connected
Load 5 kW and below 20 kW exclusively for domestic purposes only. This shall also
include supply of power to occupants of flats in multi storied buildings, receiving bulk
power at single point with individual metering for domestic purposes.
Tariff:
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs 5.75/kWh
Rs. 30/kW/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5.
(a)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(b)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by local cheque/DD, commission
shall be borne by the consumers.
(c)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
182
NOTE:
If any part of the domestic connection is utilised for any use other than dwelling purpose
like commercial, industrial etc. the entire consumption shall be treated as the case may
be, for corresponding category and the respective tariff shall be applied for the entire
consumption.
LT Category-IV: LT Commercial
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers having Connected
Load below 20 kW to all establishments and institutions of commercial nature and
connected with trading activities, including commercial offices, Government. and
public sector commercial installations, commercial houses, optical houses, shops,
hotels, restaurants, bars, refreshment stalls, showcases of advertisements, theatres,
cinema halls, guest houses, laundries, dry-cleaners, Railway stations, public and
private bus-stands not covered under any other category of consumers, copy works,
X-ray installations, private nursing homes/clinical laboratories, photographic studios,
battery charging units, workshops, petrol pumps, factory & printing presses not using
motive power in the manufacturing process, private educational and cultural
institutions, lodging and boarding houses.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 6.15/kWh
Rs. 110/kW/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5. For consumer having connected load below
0.5 kW, connected load shall be rounded off to 0.5 kW
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part thereof
in simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before the due
date.
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer (where
applicable): For all payments made by local cheque/DD, commission shall be
borne by the consumers.
(d)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
183
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
(e)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
LT Category V- LT General Purpose Supply
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers having Connected
Load below 20 kW to all Non-commercial and Non-domestic users of electric power
like Government offices, Semi-Government Educational and cultural institutions,
Government hospitals, dispensaries, Charitable institutions and Trusts (public or
private formed solely for charitable or religious purposes), Dharamshalas, Noncommercial boarding and lodging houses and other Non-commercial institutions.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.15/kWh
Rs. 125/kW/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5. For consumer having connected load below
0.5 kW, connected load shall be rounded off to 0.5 kW.
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part thereof at
simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before the due date.
(b)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
184
(c)
(d)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
LT Category VI-Public Lighting
Applicability
This tariff is applicable to supply of power for street lighting systems in
Municipalities, Town Committees and Panchayat etc., Signal systems in roads and
park lighting, in areas of Municipality/Town Committee/Panchayat etc.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.30/kWh
Rs. 120/kW/month
N.B. In case any unmetered supply is provided in exigency, the energy shall be
assessed considering 12 hours per day burning hours for the energy charge. For
example, if the total connected load of the street light service is 1 kW, energy shall be
asses as 12 units per day.
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5. For consumer having connected load below
0.5 kW, connected load shall be rounded off to 0.5 kW.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part thereof
185
at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before the due
date.
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer (where
applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne by the
consumers.
(d)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
LT Category VII-Agriculture
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power for agriculture / irrigation purpose in
the agricultural sector for pump sets upto 7.5 HP.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 3.75/kWh
Rs. 30/kW/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5. For consumer having connected load below
0.5 kW, connected load shall be rounded off to 0.5 kW.
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part thereof at
simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before the due date.
(b)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer (where
applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne by the
consumers.
(c)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
186
LT Category VIII – Small Industries
Applicability
This tariff is applicable for supply of power for industrial purposes having licence from
designated authority of appropriate government and not covered under any other
category, for consumers having Contract Demand/Connected Load below 25 kVA
(20 kW).
(a)
Tariff
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
(i)
Rural Industries - For all
consumption.
Rs. 4.00/kWh
Rs. 30/kW/month
(ii)
Urban Industries - For all
consumption.
Rs. 4.25/kWh
Rs. 40/kW/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5. For consumer having connected load below
0.5 kW, connected load shall be rounded off to 0.5 kW.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(d)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(e)
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
187
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
LT Category IX: Temporary Supply:
Applicability
This Tariff will be applicable for electric supply of power which is temporary in nature
for a period not exceeding one month.
Charges
Domestic
Rs. 80/kW/day or Rs. 7.65/kWh whichever is higher
Non Domestic non
agricultural
Rs.125/kW/day or Rs. 9.75/kWh whichever is higher
Agricultural
Rs. 50/kW/day or Rs. 5.65/kWh whichever is higher.
HT GROUP
Tariff for this group is applicable for those consumers availing power supply at
11 kV or above. Calculations shall be deemed to be in kVA for consumers
under this part of the tariff schedule. However, consumers above 25 kVA
connected load and drawing power at LT are also covered under this group.
During the period of conversion from LT supply to HT supply, the consumer
shall have to pay the necessary compensatory charges (10% & 3% of total
energy consumption for LT line & DTR respectively).
HT Category I: HT Domestic
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers having Connected
Load 25 kVA and above to residential premises, exclusively for domestic purposes
only. This shall also include supply of power to occupants of flats in multi storied
buildings/ residential colony, receiving bulk power at single point with single metering
for domestic purposes.
(a)
Tariff:
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs 5.70/kWh
Rs 30/kVA/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5.
188
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(d)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(e)
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
NOTE:
If any part of the domestic connection is utilised for any use other than
dwelling purpose like commercial, industrial etc. the entire consumption shall
be treated as the case may be, for corresponding category and the respective
tariff shall be applied for the entire consumption.
189
HT Category-II: HT Commercial
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers having Connected
Load 25 kVA and above to all establishments and institutions of commercial nature
and connected with trading activities, including commercial offices, Government and
public sector commercial installations, commercial houses, optical houses, shops,
shopping malls, restaurants, hotels, bars, refreshment stalls, showcases of
advertisements, theatres, cinema halls, guest houses, laundries, dry-cleaners,
Railway stations, public and private bus-stands not covered under any other category
of consumers, copy works, X-ray installations, private nursing homes/clinical
laboratories, photographic studios, battery charging units, workshops, petrol pumps,
factory & printing presses not using motive power in the manufacturing process,
private educational and cultural institutions, lodging and boarding houses.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 6.00/kWh
Rs. 115/kVA/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5.
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(d)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
190
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
(e)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
HT Category - III: Public water Works
Applicability
This tariff is applicable for public water supply maintained by Government or
Government Corporations, Municipalities, Town Committees and Panchayats.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.20/kWh
Rs. 125/kVA/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5.
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and related matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part thereof
at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before the due
date.
191
(c)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer (where
applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne by the
consumers
(d)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(e)
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
HT Category – IV: Bulk Supply
Applicability
This tariff is applicable to Bulk consumers with a Connected Load not less than 25
kVA provided that the consumers not covered by any other category such as any
domestic connection, industries, tea etc. and who make their own internal distribution
arrangement at their own cost and receive power at the point of supply at high or
extra high voltage. This is further classified as under:
(i)
Government educational institution-like universities, engineering colleges,
medical colleges with residential facilities and
(ii)
Others
(a)
Tariff
(i)
Bulk Government educational institutions
For all consumption.
(ii)
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.35/kWh
Rs. 110/kVA/month
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.75/kWh
Rs.145/kVA/month
Others
For all consumption.
•
Energy Charge
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec
192
2.2 of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations,
2004, as amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on
energy consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
(b)
In case, metering is done on the L.T side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an
additional energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @
3% on the consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Contract Demand: The Contract Demand shall be between 70% to 105% as
declared by the consumer of the Connected Load converted to kVA at 0.85
power factor. In case declaration /option is not made by the consumer within
the stipulated time, 100% of the Connected Load converted to kVA shall be
the contracted demand.
(d)
Billable Demand: Billing demand shall be 100% of Contracted Demand or
Recorded Demand, whichever is higher. In case the meter remains defective
in a month, billing demand shall be considered as per clause 4.2.2.4 of AERC
(Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as amended from
time to time , Procedure for Assessment of Consumption in case of incorrect
or stopped meter for seasonal consumer.
(e)
Overdrawal Penalty: If the Recorded Demand is higher than the Contracted
Demand in a month, then fixed charge based on Contracted Demand shall be
levied at three times the normal rate for the portion of demand exceeding the
Contracted Demand.
(f)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(g)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
193
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(h)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
HT Category V (A): HT Small Industries;
Applicability
This tariff is applicable for supply of power for industrial purposes having licence from
designated authority of appropriate government and not covered under any other
category, for consumers with Connected Load above 25 kVA and upto 50 kVA,
irrespective of location of the industry in rural area or urban area.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 4.50/kWh
Rs. 40/kVA/month
For the purpose of determination of Monthly fixed charge, the Connected Load shall
be rounded up to the next higher kW if the decimal is higher than 0.5 and the nearest
lower kW if the decimal is lower than 0.5.
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
194
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(d)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(e)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
HT Category V (B)-HT-I Industries
Applicability
This tariff is applicable for supply of power to industrial consumers having licence
from designated authority of appropriate government and not covered under any
other category, at a single point for industrial purposes with Contract
Demand/Connected Load above 50 kVA to 150 kVA.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.15/kWh
Rs. 100/kVA/month
TOD tariff
Time of Day (TOD) tariff for HT-I industries
•
Description
Energy charge
Time
Rs./kWh
0600 hrs to 1700 hrs (normal)
5.15
1700-2200 hrs (peak)
7.40
2200-0600 hrs (night )
4.50
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and related matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
195
•
(b)
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Contract Demand: The Contract Demand shall be between 70% to 105% as
declared by the consumer of the Connected Load converted to kVA at 0.85
power factor. In case declaration /option is not made by the consumer within
the stipulated time, 100% of the Connected Load converted to kVA shall be
the contracted demand.
(d)
Billable Demand: Billing demand shall be 100% of Contracted Demand or
Recorded Demand, whichever is higher. In case the meter remains defective
in a month, billing demand shall be considered as per clause 4.2.2.4 of AERC
(Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as amended from
time to time, Procedure for Assessment of Consumption in case of incorrect
or stopped meter for seasonal consumer.
(e)
Overdrawal Penalty: If the Recorded Demand is higher than the Contracted
Demand in a month, then fixed charge based on Contracted Demand shall be
levied at three times the normal rate for the portion of demand exceeding the
Contracted Demand.
(f)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(g)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(h)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
196
HT Category V (C): HT-II Industries
Applicability
This tariff is applicable for supply of power at a single point for industrial purposes
having licence from designated authority of appropriate government and not
covered under any other category, for Contract Demand/Connected Load above
150 kVA.
(a)
Tariff
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Option -1.
Rs. 5.48/kWh
Rs. 140/kVA/month
Option -2
Rs. 4.78/kWh
Rs. 270/kVA/month
A consumer may opt for any one option depending on his requirements by prior
intimation to concerned billing unit of Discom. A consumer may change his option
only after six months of availing that particular option.
TOD tariff for Option-1 above (only), no TOD Tariff will be applicable for consumers
opted for option-2. However, supplier may impose peak hour restriction due to
system constraints.
T.O.D tariff for HT-II industries
Description
Energy charge
Time
Rs./kWh
0600-1700 hrs (normal)
4.10
1700-2200 hrs (peak)
5.55
2200-0600 hrs (night)
3.60
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and related matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
197
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Contract Demand: The Contract Demand shall be between 70% to 105% as
declared by the consumer of the Connected Load converted to kVA at 0.85
power factor. In case declaration /option are not made by the consumer within
the stipulated time, 100% of the Connected Load converted to kVA shall be
the contracted demand.
(d)
Billable Demand: Billing demand shall be 100% of Contracted Demand or
Recorded Demand, whichever is higher. In case the meter remains defective
in a month, billing demand shall be considered as per clause 4.2.2.4 of AERC
(Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as amended from
time to time, Procedure for Assessment of Consumption in case of incorrect
or stopped meter for seasonal consumer.
(e)
Overdrawal Penalty: If the Recorded Demand is higher than the Contracted
Demand in a month, then fixed charge based on Contracted Demand shall be
levied at three times the normal rate for the portion of demand exceeding the
Contracted Demand.
(f)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(g)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(h)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
198
HT Category VI-Tea, Coffee and Rubber: Seasonal
Applicability
This tariff is applicable for tea, coffee and rubber plantation/production by utilisation
of electrical power in factory, irrigation, lighting etc. in the Estate.
(a)
Tariff
(i)
Seasonal Tariff (April to November)
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.65/kWh
Rs. 230/kVA/month
TOD tariff applicable
T.O.D tariff for Tea, Coffee & Rubber
Description
Energy charge
Time
Rs./kWh
0600-1700 hrs (normal)
5.65
1700-2200 hrs (peak)
7.45
2200-0600 hrs (night)
5.40
Off- Season Tariff (December to March)
Off-Season energy charge for Tea, Coffee and Rubber is Rs. 5.65 / kWh.
Consumer under this category shall have the option to select any continuous
maximum 4 (four) months period between September to March in lieu of normal offseason period of December to March. Such option must be exercised on or before
31st August of every year.
Off-Season fixed charge for Tea, Coffee & Rubber minimum 40% of contracted
demand during season period.
No benefit of ToD tariffs can be availed by consumers if they opt for the off season
tariff option during off-season period.
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
199
•
(b)
In case, metering is done on the L.T side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Contract Demand: The Contract Demand shall be between 65% to 105% as
declared by the consumer of the Connected Load converted to kVA at 0.85
power factor. In case declaration /option is not made by the consumer within
the stipulated time, 100% of the Connected Load converted to kVA shall be
the contracted demand. Contract Demand for off-season shall be minimum
40% of the seasonal Contract Demand.
(d)
Billable Demand: Billing demand shall be 100% of Contracted Demand or
Recorded Demand, whichever is higher. In case the meter remains defective
in a month, billing demand shall be considered as per clause 4.2.2.4 of AERC
(Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as amended from
time to time, Procedure for Assessment of Consumption in case of incorrect
or stopped meter for seasonal consumer.
(e)
Overdrawal Penalty: If the Recorded Demand is higher than the Contracted
Demand in a month, then fixed charge based on Contracted Demand shall be
levied at three times the normal rate for the portion of demand exceeding the
Contracted Demand.
(f)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(g)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
200
by the consumers.
(h)
In the event that it is not possible to measure availability to a particular
consumer, Fixed Charge @ Rs.230/kVA will be applicable.
(i)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
HT Category VII -Oil and Coal
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for supply of power to consumers at a single point for
installations of Oil and Coal Sector.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
(i)
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs 5.80/kWh
Rs. 270/kVA/month
T.O.D Tariff
T.O.D tariff for Oil & Coal
Description
Energy charge
Time
Rs./kWh
0600-1700 hrs (normal)
5.80
1700-2200 hrs (peak)
7.55
2200-0600 hrs (night)
5.65
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and related matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
201
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Contract Demand: The Contract Demand shall be between 70% to 105% as
declared by the consumer of the Connected Load converted to kVA at 0.85
power factor. In case declaration /option is not made by the consumer within
the stipulated time, 100% of the Connected Load converted to kVA shall be
the contracted demand.
(d)
Billable Demand: Billing demand shall be 100% of Contracted Demand or
Recorded Demand, whichever is higher. In case the meter remains defective
in a month, billing demand shall be considered as per clause 4.2.2.4 of AERC
(Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as amended from
time to time, Procedure for Assessment of Consumption in case of incorrect
or stopped meter for seasonal consumer.
(e)
Overdrawal Penalty: If the Recorded Demand is higher than the Contracted
Demand in a month, then fixed charge based on Contracted Demand shall be
levied at three times the normal rate for the portion of demand exceeding the
Contracted Demand.
(f)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(g)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(h)
In the event that it is not possible to measure availability to a particular
consumer, Fixed Charge @ Rs.270/kVA will be applicable.
(i)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
202
HT Category VIII: HT Irrigation
Applicability
This tariff shall be applicable for electricity supply for agriculture / irrigation purpose in
the agricultural sector for pump set above 7.5 HP and for whom power has been
supplied at 11 kV or above.
(a)
Tariff
For all consumption.
Energy Charge
Fixed Charge
Rs. 5.00/kWh
Rs. 40/kVA/month
•
For supply at voltages higher than as applicable to the consumers as per sec 2.2
of the AERC (Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time, rebate @ 3% shall be applicable on energy
consumption for each higher level of voltage.
•
In case, metering is done on the L.T. side of the distribution transformer, for a
group of consumers receiving power, then for the purpose of billing an additional
energy consumption on account of transformer loss computed @ 3% on the
consumer’s Energy Charges shall be added.
(b)
Power factor penalty and rebate:
(a)
Power factor penalty: In case average power factor in a month for a
consumer falls below 85%, a penalty @1% for every 1% fall in power
factor from 85% to 60%; plus 2% for every 1% fall below 60% to 30%
upto and including 30% shall be levied on total unit consumption.
Power factor penalty shall be levied on those consumers where power
factor is recorded electronically.
(b)
Power factor rebate: In case average power factor as maintained by
the consumer is more than 85%, a rebate of 1% and if power factor is
above 95%, a rebate of 2% on unit consumption shall be applicable.
Power factor rebate shall be allowed on those consumers where
power factor is recorded electronically.
(c)
Surcharge for delayed payment: Surcharge @ 1.5% per month or part
thereof at simple interest shall be levied, if payment is not made on or before
the due date.
(d)
Payments shall be made by cash/local cheque/DD/Electronic Transfer
(where applicable): For all payments made by DD, commission shall be borne
by the consumers.
(e)
The Tariff does not include any tax or duty etc. on Electrical Energy that may
be payable at any time in accordance with any law /State Government Rule in
force. Such charges, if any, shall be payable by the consumers in addition to
tariff charge.
203
REBATE FOR CONSUMERS
•
In order to encourage consumers to switch over to solar water heating system, the
Commission introduced a monthly rebate of Rs.30/- in Tariff Order for FY 2005-06 for
all consumers who have installed such solar water heating systems for meeting their
hot water requirements and these are actually used. The Commission had decided to
increase this rebate to Rs. 40/- per month in Tariff Order for FY 2006-07 and
continued with same rebate for FY 2007-08 also. To further encourage the use of
Solar Water Heaters in the State, the Commission decided to allow the rebate at Rs.
40/- per consumer per month per 100 litres per day (LPD) capacity Solar Water
Heaters on fulfillment of the following conditions:(a)
The solar water heating system being used by the consumer has to be an
authorised/approved product of the Ministry of Non-conventional Energy
Sources (MNES), Government of India or the State Nodal Agency.
(b)
To avail this rebate, the consumer will be required to give the licensee an
affidavit to the effect that such a system has been installed on his premises
and is being used to meet his water heating requirements. The declaration
can be verified by the licensee’s meter readers / representative, if required.
(c)
In case, any such declaration is found to be false, the licensee apart from
taking appropriate legal action against such consumer would be entitled to
recover the entire rebate allowed to such consumers with 100% penalty.
The amount of rebate on Solar Water Heaters will be reimbursed by the
Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Sources (MNES), Government of India,
to the utilities vide Notification No. 3/1/2007/UICA (SE) dated 18th August,
2008, Clause No. 3.3 : Amendment in building bye-laws &
announcement of rebate in property tax/electricity tariff which states:
“Grant of upto Rs. 10 lakhs will also be available to State Electricity
Boards/Utilities that announce rebate in electricity tariff to the users of solar
water heating systems in their monthly electricity bills.”
The Discoms may claim for grant for the rebate on solar water heating
systems from MNES as per the above circular.
In case of Domestic category of consumers, the higher rating of only one
equipment shall be considered for determination of connected load if both
Geyser and Air-Conditioner (without heater) are installed and used for
domestic purpose only.
These Tariffs take effect from 01.12.2013.
This Tariff Order shall continue to be applicable until it is replaced by
another Order passed by the Commission.
204
This Tariff Order is signed by the Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission
on 21.11.2013.
Sd/-
Sd/-
Sd/-
(T. Chatterjee)
(Dr. R. K. Gogoi)
(N. K. Das)
Member, AERC
Member, AERC
Chairperson, AERC
***********
205
Annexure-1
Minutes of the 17th Meeting of the State Advisory Committee of the Assam Electricity
Regulatory Commission held on 9th May, 2013
at Assam Administrative Staff College, Khanapara, Guwahati.
The 17th meeting of the State Advisory Committee was held on 9th May, 2013 at the Assam
Administrative Staff College, Khanapara at 11:00 a.m.
List of members of the State Advisory Committee along with the officers of the Commission
present in the meeting are appended at Annexure-I.
At the beginning Shri M.J. Baruah, Secretary, AERC, welcomed the members present and
requested the Chairperson, AERC, Shri J. Barkakati to preside over the meeting.
Chairperson, AERC once again welcomed the members and stated the objectives of the
State Advisory Committee as mandated by Section 87 and 88 of the Electricity Act, 2003
which are mainly to advise the Commission on major questions of policy, matters relating to
quality, continuity and extent of service provided by the licensees, protection of consumer
interest, electricity supply and overall standards of performance by the utilities. The
Chairperson stated that the Commission has been making utmost efforts to discharge its
functions effectively as mandated by Section 86 of the Electricity Act 2003. It was stated that
altogether 28 Regulations have been notified by the Commission on different aspects of the
power sector for its overall improvement. These include Regulations for promotion of
generation of electricity from renewable sources, promotion of investment in electricity
industry, specifying standards with respect to quality, continuity and reliability of service by
licensees, encouraging demand side management, protection of consumers’ interests, etc.
The Chairperson, AERC stated that MYT petitions have been submitted by the power utilities
of the state for the FYs 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 and notifications on the summary of
these petitions were already published in 11 newspapers. He stated that the meeting of the
State Advisory Commission is convened to discuss these petitions. He further stated that the
Commission has been consulting the members of the State Advisory Committee every time
as and when the Commission receives any petition for tariff revision from the State power
utilities for discussion and their views on the petitions. The Chairperson referred to the
judgment of the Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal for Electricity dated 11th November, 2011 which
directed every State Commission to issue tariff order for a financial year before 1st April of
that year and stated that this is being strictly monitored by the APTEL through the Forum of
Regulators.
The Chairperson stated that in the last suo-motu Tariff Order for 2012-13 issued on 28th
February 2012, there was no increase in tariff. He further stated that in the Multi Year Tariff
206
Order for 2010-13 issued on 16.05.2011, the Commission had approved an increase of 15
paise per unit for Jeevan Dhara category and 25 paise per unit for the rest of the categories
of consumers and therefore, for the last two years, no tariff resetting had taken place other
than FPPPA charges.
The Chairperson said that the Power Purchase Cost accounts for 75% of the Annual
Revenue Requirement of the distribution company and due to less contribution from the
hydro based Central Sector Generating Stations in the NE region and also due to less
availability of gas, the distribution company has been procuring power from the energy
exchanges, NTPC, IPPs, etc through short/ medium term arrangements at an average cost
of approximately Rs 4.56 per unit. The Chairperson stated that the power purchase cost has
been increasing and the petitioners have demanded a tariff increase of 37% over the present
tariff. He stated that the Commission is presently scrutinizing the materials/ information
submitted by the utilities and shall take an appropriate decision only after prudent checking
of all submissions made so far. Meanwhile, it was informed that the Commission had written
to the State Government as per section 65 of the Electricity Act 2003 to offer any subsidy to
any class of consumers deemed necessary by the Government to provide relief to that class
of consumers.
The Chairperson further stated that in the MYT Order for FY 2010-13, the Commission gave
directions to the distribution utility to reduce their distribution losses from 22.60% to 19.60%
in 2012-13. However, the Chairperson expressed concern that the losses have been
increasing over the last two years and as per submissions available, actual distribution loss
in 2010-11 is 25.44% against AERC approved 21.60% - an increase of 3.84% and in 201112, actual distribution loss in 2011-12 is 26.60% against AERC approved 20.60% - an
increase of 6%. The Chairperson called upon all members to actively participate in the
discussions and share their views liberally and offer their valuable suggestions and advice.
The Chairperson AERC than asked Shri Anurag Goel, the Commissioner & Secretary to the
Government of Assam, Power Department to address the gathering.
Shri Goel stated that the Multi Year Tariff Petitions have implications for the next three years
and therefore, these need to be discussed and scrutinized in detail. Speaking on the present
power scenario, Shri Goel informed that the power sector is treading in the path of progress
since 2004-05 after re-organisation of the erstwhile Assam State Electricity Board in the
state. Shri Goel stated that distribution losses have declined to some extent over the last ten
year while the number of consumers have more than doubled and demand for power have
also increased 2-3 times during the peak period.
Shri Goel informed the members that the Government of Assam has provided the state
transmission and distribution companies around Rs 1000 Cr over the last 2-3 years from the
Trade Development Fund for improvement of the transmission and distribution networks.
Shri Goel also informed that on the insistence of the Government of Assam for increasing
the generation capacity of the State, one tranche of the 3 tranches of ADB loan which are
usually granted for development of the transmission sector has been earmarked for the state
207
generation sector. Shri Goel stated that due to many critical issues, the hydro potential of the
state could not be harnessed to the maximum; however, efforts are on to develop
Renewable Energy projects including solar energy projects. Shri Goel informed that
investment in the power sector from the Government of Assam shall continue through inprinciple support in the form of equity in the upcoming power projects as in the case of 70
MW Phase I - Lakwa Replacement Project where Rs 79.2 Cr has been invested by the State
Government as Equity. Shri Goel stated that the power companies must recover their cost of
supply in order to be economically viable; however, the Commission also has to take into
account the interests of the consumers while deciding on the tariff.
The Chairperson, AERC thanked Shri Goel and stated that the tariff regulations on
renewable energy projects notified by the Commission shall act as guidelines while
determining tariff for such projects. The Chairperson further stated that the cost of
generation from Solar PV is much higher in Assam and other north eastern states due to
higher cost of the projects (as it is remotely located and solar insolation level is much less
than that of Gujrat and Rajasthan) and low Capacity Utilization Factor (CUF). In
consideration of the above, a high solar tariff in the state is pertinent to ensure viability of
solar projects. However, he said that any solar tariff without financial incentive will be
prohibitively high and would dissuade the distribution licensee from procuring such power
and at the same time will not encourage developers to invest in such projects. The
Chairperson stated that in order to attract developers to solar PV power generation in Assam
and for economic viability of such projects, adequate policy and regulatory support would be
necessary. As such, there is a justification in making a strong plea to the Central
Government/MNRE not only to fix higher incentive but also to review the normative operating
and financial parameters for solar technology in Assam in particular and North East in
general. A realistic capping of solar tariff for Assam will have to be at least Rs 10/kWh. The
Commission is concerned that a project cannot financially sustain without such a tariff
support.
The Chairperson then asked Shri Jitesh Khosla, Additional Chief Secretary to the
Government of Assam, Power Department, to speak on the occasion.
At the outset, Shri Khosla appreciated the good functioning of the Commission since its
inception despite several impediments. Shri Khosla stated that the Commission has been
regularly issuing tariff orders with several directives to the power utilities, although many
Commissions in other advanced states have failed to do so. He called upon all stakeholders
to effectively participate in the tariff making process to make the exercise successful. Shri
Khosla stated that there are a few challenges faced by the power sector in the state today.
These include:
i)
Rising cost of fuel (coal, natural gas) which causes hike in tariff.
ii)
Increasing the efficiency of the existing power stations.
208
iii)
Balancing the hydro:thermal mix of power by building/enhancing the thermal
capacity in the state. Hydro potential is seasonal and generation from the hydro
based power stations in the North Eastern Region (NER) dips during the lean
winter season causing shortages and hike in power purchase cost.
Shri Khosla stated that keeping in mind the peaking power requirement for trade,
household and other purposes, a separate set of regulatory provisions seems
essential for effective management of the peak demand and the Commission may
formulate a separate set of Regulations in this regard.
Shri Khosla further stated that some excellent projects have been undertaken in the
transmission system and this has helped in reducing the transmission losses marginally
and the trend needs to be maintained. In the distribution sector too, investments have
been made under various schemes of the State and Central Government and distribution
losses have been reduced from above 40 % (ten years back) to 27% equivalent to the
National Average. It was stated that a lot of investment is necessary to strengthen the
transmission and distribution systems further. Shri Khosla stated that the distribution
network is expanding rapidly with the Rajiv Gandhi Gramin Vidyutikaran Yojana and
appealed to the Commission that electricity usage and pricing may be regulated through
tariffs in such a manner so that wastage is minimum. Shri Khosla said that the fuel prices
are internationally linked and therefore, its pricing cannot be regulated. However, a part
of the extra burden of the fuel cost may be offset through increase in efficiency in
production and preventive maintenance of the necessary infrastructure/ equipments.
Shri Khosla emphasized that quality of service needs to improve further, particularly in
the rural areas. He also emphasized on the effective usage of Demand Side
Management and conservation efforts in reducing electricity consumption, through use of
LEDs/ CFLs, energy efficient equipments, etc. Shri Khosla assured that the Government
would continue to support all efforts that are made towards DSM activities and for
increasing the efficiency of the system.
The Chairperson AERC stated that the Commission is contemplating to draft some
Regulations in line with Karnataka and Orissa on Peak Power management.
On a request from the Chairperson AERC, the Managing Director and Chairman,
APDCL, Shri Rajiv Yadav, spoke on the occasion. Shri Yadav expressed concern that
with the growth of the BPL consumers in rural areas, the distribution losses have
increased. He stated that the Company is making efforts to arrest these losses by
applying different technological options. Shri Yadav stated that as a State owned utility,
implementation of the RGGVY is a priority.
Shri Yadav further stated that the share allocation from the Central Sector Generating
Stations (CSGS) located in the North Eastern region was only on paper, the CSGS could
provide only 50% of the allocated power to the Distribution Company during the last few
209
months. Shri Yadav appealed to the Commission that the issue be communicated and
deliberated with the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission as the distribution
licensee had to pay the fixed charges despite non-availability of energy from the
Stations. He further appealed to the Commission that the Central Electricity Authority
may be requested to increase the share allocation of Assam from the CSGS located in
the North Eastern Region, particularly from the thermal stations. Shri Yadav reiterated
that the Company is making efforts to reduce its commercial losses through proper
metering, more IT- Based applications, use of prepaid meters, etc. He further informed
that the Company is making efforts to increase the number of HT consumers so that
distribution losses could be curtailed significantly. Shri Yadav requested the State
Government to provide financial assistance of Rs 463.00 Cr in power procurement so as
to support the BPL consumers added through the RGGVY.
The MD, APDCL stated that a number of power projects are being envisaged in
coming years, some through the PPP mode which shall contribute in stabilizing
power demand and availability ratio. . He stated that the Company has submitted
MYT petitions for FY 2013-16 before the Commission and expressed hope that
Commission would provide a very judicious tariff structure which would help
the
the
the
the
the
company to effectively discharge its duties and obligations. Shri Yadav appealed to the
Commission that it may allow the distribution company to recover the tariff gap which has
accumulated over the last three years to be realized through electricity tariffs.
The Chairperson, AERC stated that increase in distribution losses is alarming and
measures already suggested by the Commission in the last tariff orders need to be
implemented to curtail these losses. He further stated that the Government of
Assam should take adequate steps to implement the Margherita Project in right
earnest and efforts should be made to use the expertise of NTPC by forming a JV
Company in implementing the project.
The Chairperson then took up the Agenda for the meeting item-wise.
(1)
Agenda Item No. 1: To confirm the Minutes of the 16th Meeting of the State
Advisory Committee held on 19.12.2012.
The minutes of the last meeting of the Advisory Committee held on 19.12.2012, was placed
before the Committee for confirmation. The minutes of the 16th meeting were accepted and
confirmed.
(2)
Agenda Item No. 2: Action taken on the Minutes of the 16th Meeting of the
State Advisory Committee held on 19.12.2012.
The action taken reports on the minutes of the last meeting were submitted by the APGCL,
AEGCL and APDCL to the Commission for information. Copies of the same were also
210
distributed among the members in the meeting. The deliberations that took place on these
minutes are briefly recorded below:
On the issue of higher Auxiliary Power Consumption (APC) than approved, it was informed
by APGCL that higher auxiliary consumption is due to Lakwa Waste Heat Recovery Unit
commissioned in January, 2012 having APC of 9% and consumption in gas booster
compressor in Lakwa TPS and transformer loss of NTPS 132 KV substation for distribution
transmission feeders. It was informed by APGCL that action is being taken to remove the
distribution feeders from the NTPS 132 KV substation. Further action is also being taken up
in LTPS for calibration of energy meter to eliminate possible errors. Regarding higher Station
Heat Rate (SHR), it was further informed that as advised by AERC, IIT Guwahati has been
engaged for studying the actual SHR of the generating units of LTPS and NTPS and the
study report will be submitted to the Commission to review the SHR of NTPS and LTPS in
due course of time. APGCL also informed that the Company has been pursuing seriously to
expedite the progress of the project works at various levels for their timely completion.
On the status of the 2x250 MW Margherita Coal based Thermal Power Project, it was
informed that instead of coal linkage, Government of India would be allocating coal block to
the state for the project. A member suggested that Case II bidding may be invited from
investors willing to participate in implementation of this project.
On the hydro power stations, it was informed that the 2nd phase (2x1.5 MW) of the 9 MW
Myntriang Small Hydro Power Project is likely to be commissioned in June 2013 at a tariff of
Rs 0.99/ unit. It was informed that no other hydro project is likely to be commissioned during
the FY 2013-14.
The Chairperson AERC suggested that the Detailed Project Reports of the Small Hydro
Projects in the State should be taken up immediately and the projects should be
implemented within the scheduled timeframe.
AEGCL informed that during the last four years i.e. 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13,
transmission losses have been gradually reduced from 6.04%, 4.81%, and 4.21% to 4.15%
respectively. AEGCL also informed that the PGCIL transmission charges have been
increased to Rs 178.34 Cr and Rs 209.58 Cr for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12 respectively
from the approved cost of Rs 134.24 Cr mainly due to tariff revision of PGCIL by CERC.
APDCL informed that efforts are being made to motivate personnel at the field level to
improve system reliability and for submission of Standards of Performance (SOP) achieved
as per formats of AERC for FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12.
On a query from a member regarding formation of the Load Shedding Protocol (LSP)
Committee, APDCL informed that the process for constitution of the Committee is under
progress as suggested by the Commission. The Advisory Committee members requested
that a meeting of the LSP Committee be held to discuss the Principles and Protocols
of Load Shedding Hours without further delay.
On the issue of arrear dues to the APDCL from the Government departments, it was
211
informed that the State Government has made a budget provision of Rs 70.83 Cr against
Government consumers and power subsidy for FY 2013-14 which shall be released shortly.
It was also informed that for the current year, the Government releases Rs 8 Cr/ month
against consumption in Government departments. It was however, informed that the amount
is insufficient and no budget provision has been made against arrear of above Rs 13 Cr
against the NHRM Hospitals.
The Chairperson AERC, suggested that the distribution company should work out the
total amount outstanding upto FY 2012-13 and submit this to the State Government
for necessary decision on the matter.
Regarding prepaid meters, it was informed that a total of 3253 prepaid meters have been
purchased out of which 2624 were installed and a directive has also been issued to make it
mandatory to install prepaid meters in all upcoming residential flats of Guwahati city.
Regarding installation of prepaid maters in Government buildings, it was informed
that APDCL has not received any action plan from the State Government.
Shri Khosla stated that the matter regarding installation of prepaid maters in
Government buildings would be considered and informed in due course.
(3)
Agenda Item No 3: Appraisal of members of the State Advisory Committee on
the present power scenario of the State.
Representatives from APDCL gave a power-point presentation on the prevailing power
situation in the state. It was informed during the course of the presentation that 47.62% out
of installed capacity of 1235 MW from the Central Sector Generating Stations (CSGS) in
North Eastern Region (NER) is allocated to the state of Assam. Out of total installed capacity
of 4940 MW from the CSGS located in the Eastern Region (ER), Assam has been allocated
only 157 MW. It was further informed that during the past few months, APDCL received only
50% of the power allocated from the NER CSGS. Therefore, there was a shortfall of about
250-300 MW all through these months, particularly, during the peak hours. It was informed
that out of 107 MW allocated to the state, only 43 MW was received from the Kopili Hydro
Electric Project.
The Chairperson AERC informed that during the recently held Coordination Forum Meeting,
the representative from NEEPCO informed that the underwater machineries had undergone
corrosion due to acidity in the water and repairs & maintenance works have been taken up.
On a query from the Commission as to when the project would be able to generate to its
effective capacity, it was informed that the repairs and maintenance works are likely to be
completed by March 2014 and the project would be able to generate to its full capacity
depending on the inflow of water.
The Chairperson, AERC informed the Committee that Rs 1.03 /unit is being charged as
Fuel and Power Purchase Price Adjustment (FPPPA) on electricity consumption for all
consumers and therefore, as the distribution licensee is now aware of the fact that
power from Kopili Hydro Electric Project will be partially available until March 2014,
212
the licensee may find some alternative economic source of power to mitigate the
shortage.
APDCL informed that the Company was trying to procure power at an average price of Rs
2.50/unit from the Indian Energy Exchange and through Short term Open Access.
(4)
Agenda Item No 4: Appraisal of members of the State Advisory Committee on
Multi Year Tariff Proposal by the respective utilities.
As per AERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations 2006, the
generation, transmission and distribution companies are required to file Multi Year Tariff
petitions for FYs 2013-16 for determination of ARR and tariff by 01.12.2012. Each of the
power utilities approached the Commission with petition to grant extension of time upto
31.01.2013 for filing MYT petition for FY 2013-14 to FY 2015-16 stating that the necessary
information to submit the petitions was not available and therefore, the documents were not
ready. Accordingly, the Commission extended the time by two months upto 31.01.2013.
The Commission informed the members of the State Advisory Committee that the petitions
subsequently received from APGCL, AEGCL and APDCL were also deficient in material
particulars and Technical Validation Sessions were held between officials of the Commission
and the petitioners. Some data/clarifications were further sought from the Commission from
time to time and most of these have been submitted except for those required to be
submitted after the validation sessions.
The Commission further informed that, as per the Electricity Act 2003, and in line with the
procedure followed by AERC for the previous years, notices regarding petitions received for
determination of ARR and Tariff for FY 2013-16 were asked to be published in widely
circulated dailies. The notifications were published in 11 dailies – 4 Assamese dailies, 3
English, 2 Bengali and 2 Hindi dailies. The last date for receipt of objection petitions was
stated in the notifications as 30.04.2013. However, the Commission received a number of
requests to extend the time for submission of response petitions and it was decided to
extend the date for submission of comments and objections upto 13.05.2013. It was also
informed that some petitioners requested that the notices be published in Assamese
language in the Assamese newspapers. The Commission directed the power utilities to
comply with and accordingly notices in Assamese language were published on 01.05.2013
in Assamese dailies.
The MYT petitions submitted by the utilities were briefly discussed during the meeting and
power point presentations on these petitions were also given by all the companies.
After the presentations, a few members of the State Advisory Committee (SAC) enquired
regarding billing and collection efficiency. APDCL sources informed that average current
billing and collection efficiency was 75% and 95% respectively. The members suggested
that third party study of AT&C losses of the distribution company needs to be
conducted and measures to reduce such losses must be taken as in rural areas, it can
213
be seen that the losses were in the range of 40%-45%. It was further suggested that
third party energy audit need to be done.
Some SAC members enquired on the success of involving franchisees in Single Point Power
Supply Scheme. APDCL informed that 26 Nos. of feeders and more than a 100 transformers
entrusted to rural franchisees are running smoothly. APDCL further informed that in some
areas in Central Assam like Nagaon, franchisee system has been very successful while in
lower and upper Assam, it has not been that successful. It was informed that in Nazira and
Sivasagar of Upper Assam, new feeders have been allocated to franchisees.
A SAC member pointed out that there were allegations that franchisees were not willing to
enter into agreement with the distribution licensee as the revenue target offered to the
franchisee were on the higher side and sometimes not achievable. Besides, there were also
allegations that in some areas, either the franchisee DTRs were not metered or meters were
not working and franchisees were billed on average consumption which led to financial
losses to the company.
The Chairperson AERC asked the distribution licensee to make public the number of
feeders and transformers offered to franchisees, the commission being offered to the
franchisees and other details including increase in the revenue of APDCL after the
franchisee system was introduced in a particular area to enhance transparency in the
functioning of these franchisees.
It was suggested by a SAC member that the ongoing power projects within the state like
Bongaigaon Thermal Power Project, need to be expedited and the Government of Assam
should make sure that the law & order situation does not stand as an impediment in timely
commissioning of these projects.
Shri Khosla assured the members that action in this regard would be taken.
No other matter was discussed and the meeting ended with a vote of thanks by the
Secretary, AERC to everyone present in the meeting.
Sd/(J. Barkakati)
Chairperson,
Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission
214
Annexure – I
th
List of Persons attending the 17 Meeting of the
State Advisory Committee held on 9th May, 2013
(1)
Shri J. Barkakati, Chairperson, AERC
(2)
Dr. R. K. Gogoi, Member, AERC
(3)
Shri T. Chatterjee, Member, AERC
(4)
Shri J. Khosla, Additional Chief Secretary, Power Deptt., Govt. of Assam.
(5)
Shri A. Goel, IAS, Commissioner & Secretary, Power Deptt., Govt. of Assam
(6)
Shri R. Yadav, IAS, Chairman, ASEB & CMD, APDCL.
(7)
Shri M.R. Dutta, Joint Secretary, Agriculture Deptt., Govt. of Assam
(8)
Shri G. K. Das, MD, AEGCL
(9)
Shri C. Baruah, Director (Technical), APDCL.
(10)
Dr P.K. Bordoloi, Professor & HoD, Deptt. of AEI, GIMT, Guwahati-17.
(11)
Shri D. Kedia, Member, Power Committee, FINER, Guwahati.
(12)
Shri J. Madhav, Former Chief Advisor to the Chief Minister, Govt. of Assam.
(13)
Shri A. K. Baruah, President, All Assam Small Scale Industries Association.
(14)
Shri G.C. Baishya, President, Grahak Suraksha Sanstha
(15)
Shri S. Baruah, President, North Eastern Small Scale Industries Association
(16)
Shri K. C. Medhi, State Secretary, North Eastern Small Scale Industries
Association.
Officers of AERC present :
(1)
Shri M.J. Baruah, ACS, Secretary, AERC.
(2)
Shri D. K. Sharma, Joint Director (Tariff), AERC
(3)
Shri T. Mahanta, Deputy Director (Engg.), AERC
(4)
Shri A. Purkayastha, Deputy Director (Finance), AERC
Consultants of AERC present:
(1)
Ms P. Sharma, Consultant (Finance, Database and Consumer Advocacy), AERC
(2)
Shri N.K. Deka, Consultant (Technical), AERC
215
Annexure-2
ASSAM ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
FUEL AND POWER PURCHASE PRICE ADJUSTMENT FORMULA REGULATIONS,
2010, (AMENDMENT) 2012
NOTIFICATION
The 31st March, 2012
No. AERC. 28/2012.– In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 61(d), 62(4),
86(1)(b) sub-section (1) of section 181 and clause (zp) of sub-section (2) of section 181 of
the Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003) and all other powers enabling it on that behalf, the
Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission makes the following regulations :-
216
REGULATIONS
1.
Short title, extent and commencement:
(1) These regulations may be called the Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission
(Fuel and Power Purchase Price Adjustment Formula) Regulations, 2010,
(Amendment) 2012.
(2) These regulations shall extend to the whole of the State of Assam.
(3) These regulations shall come into force from the date of their publication in the
Assam Gazette
2.
Introduction: As per Section 62(4) of the Electricity Act 2003, no tariff or part of any
tariff may ordinarily be amended more frequently than once in a financial year except in
respect of any changes expressly permitted under the terms of any fuel surcharge
formula as may be specified. A reference can be drawn to the provisions of the Tariff
Policy notified by the Government of India specifying that the uncontrollable costs be
recovered speedily to ensure that the future consumers are not burdened with past
costs. The uncontrollable costs include fuel cost, cost on account of inflation, variations
in power purchase unit cost including on account of hydrothermal mix in case of
adverse natural events etc. The AERC (Terms and conditions for determination of
Tariff) Regulations, 2006 also states that “The Commission shall allow the recovery or
refund; as the case may be, of additional charge for adjustment of tariff on account of
change in fuel related costs of electricity generation and purchase of electricity within
the period of a notified tariff order of the Commission.” In this regulation, a fuel
surcharge formula is specified in order to recover the additional burden on account of
changes in fuel price and power purchase cost. Accordingly, the Commission proposes
to introduce the regulations to recover the change in fuel price for the approved quantity
of generation and power purchase for the distribution licensee.
3.
Definitions:
(1)
In these Regulations, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a)
“Act” means the Electricity Act 2003 (36 of 2003);
(b)
“Commission” means the Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission;
(c)
“Generating Company” means any company or body corporate or associating or
body of individuals, whether incorporated or not, or artificial juridical person, which
owns or operates or maintains a generating station;
(d)
“Licensee” means a person who has been granted a licence under section 14 of
the Act, including a person deemed to be a licensee referred to under any of the
provisions to Section 14 of the Act;
(e)
“Tariff” shall mean the schedule of charges for generation and bulk supply,
transmission, wheeling and supply of electricity together with terms and conditions
thereof;
(f)
“Unscheduled Interchange” (UI) shall mean unscheduled interchanges as defined
in Indian Electricity Grid Code;
(g)
“Year” shall mean financial year ending on 31st March;
(h)
“Current Year” shall mean the year in which the statement of annual accounts or
petition for determination of tariff is filed;
(i)
“Previous Year” shall mean the year immediately preceding the current year;
217
4.
(j)
“Ensuing Year” shall mean the year next following the current year; and
(k)
"State" means the State of Assam.
(2)
The words of expressions occurring in these regulations and not defined herein
but defined in the Act shall bear the same meaning as in the Act.
FUEL & POWER PURCHASE PRICE ADJUSTMENT (FPPPA) FORMULA
(i) The amount of Fuel & Power Purchase Price Adjustment (FPPPA) shall be
computed as under :
V = VF + VPP
Where,
V
= Amount of incremental Cost in a specified period on account of Fuel &
Power Purchase (`).
VF
= Amount of differential cost on account of fuels on generation by different
power stations of the state generators (`).
VPP = Amount of differential cost on account of Power purchase (`)
(ii) The FPPPA rate shall be calculated as,
V (`)
FPPPA Recovery Rate = --------------------------- x 100
(Paise/kWh)
Energy sales (KWH)
Where Energy sales consist of,
(a) Metered sale of Energy…. (ES1)
(b) Assessment of unmetered sale …. (ES2)
(c) Deemed sale of Energy on account of excess T&D losses …(ES3)
Less (d) Energy sale to the Exempted categories of consumers.(ES4)
The deemed sale of energy on account of excess T&D losses is equal to actual T&D
losses minus losses allowed by the Commission. In case the figure is negative, the
same may be ignored.
The recovery formula shall be as under:
FPPPA Recovery Rate = QC (RC2-RC1) + QO (R02- R01 ) + QG(RG2 – RG1)+
(Paise /Kwh)
QPP (RPP2-RPP1)
------------------------------------------------
x 100
ES1 + ES2 + ES3 - ES4
218
FOR COAL BASED STATION:
QC
=
Quantity of coal consumed during the period in MT as per normative
parameter.
QC
=
SHR
USO (MU)
------ X [----------------] X (1+LO) X 103
NCVO
(1-AUX)
QO
=
Quantity of oil consumed during the period in KL as per normative parameter.
=
Generation (in MU) x specific oil consumption (ml/kWh) as approved by the
Commission
USO
=
Actual unit sent out in MU.
AUX
=
Auxiliary Consumption Approved by the Commission (in %)
SHR
=
Station heat rate as approved by the Commission in Kcal./Kwh.
NCVO =
Approved calorific value of coal fired in kcal/kg.
LO
=
Transit & storage losses of coal as approved by the Commission.
RC1
=
Average rate of coal Ex. Power station coal yard as approved by the
Commission for the period in ` / MT.
RC2* =
Average rate of coal Supplied Ex. Power station coal yard as per actual for
the period in ` / MT.
RO1
=
Average rate of oil Ex. Power Station approved by the Commission for that
period in ` /K.L.
RO2
=
Average rate of oil actually supplied Ex. Power station during the
period in ` / K.L.
* If the grade of coal supplied is inferior or superior to the grade considered in the
last tariff order, then average rate of coal supplied (RC2) will be corresponding to the
grade of coal considered by the Commission in the last tariff order.
FOR GAS BASED STATION:
QG
=
Quantity of Natural Gas consumed as per normative parameters during the
period in 1000 SCM.
QG
=
SHR
USO
3
-------- X [--------------] X (1+LG) X 10
NCVG
(1-AUX)
219
USO
=
Unit sent out in MU.
AUX
=
Auxiliary Consumption approved in percentage.
SHR
=
Station heat rate as approved by the Commission in kcal/kWh.
NCVG =
Approved calorific value of Gas fired in kcal/SCM.
LG
=
Transit & storage losses of Gas as approved by the Commission, if any.
RG1
=
Average rate of Natural gas as approved by the Commission including
Transportation in `/1000 SCM
RG2* =
Actual Average rate of Gas Supplied during the Period including
Transportation in `/1000 SCM.
* If the grade of Gas supplied is inferior or superior to the grade considered in the
last tariff order, then average rate of Gas supplied (RG2*) will be corresponding to the
grade of Gas considered by the Commission in the last tariff order.
[QC and QO & QG will have to be calculated station wise.]
LEGENDS:
SCM
= Standard Cubic Metre
MU
= Million Unit
KCal
= Kilo Calorie
Kwh
= Kilowatt Hour
FOR POWER PURCHASE:
RPP1 =
Average rate of power purchase as approved by the Commission in `/kWh.
RPP2 =
Actual Average rate of power purchase during the period in `/kWh.
QPP
Actual Quantity of power purchased during the period in kWh for sale to the
=
Distribution Licensee’s scheduled consumers.
N.B: For computation of Power Purchase, the ex-bus cost of energy from generating
stations including associated transmission cost shall be considered.
5.
Implementation of the formula
5.1
The FPPPA will be recovered in the form of an incremental energy charge (`/KWh) in
proportion to the energy consumption and will be forming a part of the energy bill to
be served on monthly or any other periodical basis.
5.2
The FPPPA charge shall not exceed 25% of the variable component of tariff or such
other ceiling as may be stipulated by the Commission from time to time, where the
220
variable component of tariff is defined as total estimated revenue from energy
charges (EC) in a year approved in the last Tariff Order divided by total estimated
sales of the year. When FPPPA charges exceed 25% of the variable component of
tariff, the Licensee shall make a petition to the Commission for recovery of the
charges over the specified cap which shall be recovered after Commission’s scrutiny
and directives.
5.3
The formula will be applied at the end of each quarter by Distribution Licensee
without making it necessary to go through the regulatory proceedings. The
Distribution Licensee shall, however, be obligated to provide all relevant information
to the Commission simultaneously and in any case where the Commission observes
any discrepancies, the same will be adjusted during the next quarter. This
mechanism will provide administrative and regulatory simplicity.
FPPPA charge is usually incurred by the generating company which is passed on to
the distribution utility who in turn recover it from the end consumers. Therefore, the
generating company owned by the state shall also provide all relevant details and
supporting documents at the end of each quarter to the Commission for
reconciliation.
5.4
The Fuel and Power Purchase Price Adjustment (FPPPA) charge will be made
effective from the date of publication of the Regulations in the official Gazette.
Provided further that the FPPPA charge applicable to each tariff category of
consumers shall be displayed prominently at the cash collection centres and on the
website of the Distribution Licensee.
Provided that the Distribution Licensee shall put up on its website such details of the
additional burden on account of changes in fuel price and power purchase cost and
the FPPPA charges levied to all consumers for each quarter along with detailed
computations.
5.5
Each control period shall be a quarter year i.e. 3 months. Accordingly, Distribution
Licensee shall compute and adjust the amount as Fuel and Power Purchase
Surcharge. Thus FPPPA surcharge for a quarter shall be charged from the first
month of next quarter.
5.6
This fuel surcharge formula shall be applicable to the Distribution Licensee till it is
amended either on petition or suo-moto. The FPPPA formula will be applicable for all
consumers unless exempted by the Commission.
5.7
Distribution Licensee shall file detailed computation of actual fuel cost in `/kWH for
each financial year for each of power stations of the state generators as well as cost
of power purchase (Fixed and Variable) from each source/station based on audited
accounts and a separate set of calculations with reference to permitted level of
parameters as stated in the AERC (Terms and Conditions for determination of Tariff)
Regulations, 2006. (audited and certified by cost accountant / chartered accountant).
5.8
Distribution Licensee shall file with the Commission all information including actual
sales data required for calculation of the Fuel Surcharge (audited and certified by
Cost Accountant/ Chartered Accountant) within 60 days of the end of the respective
quarter failing which it shall forfeit any future claims on this account. It will also be
221
incumbent upon Distribution Licensee to reconcile these figures at the end of the
year based on audited accounts.
5.9
Distribution Licensee shall undertake its power procurement during the year in
accordance with the power procurement plan for such year approved by the
Commission in accordance with AERC (Terms and Conditions for determination of
Tariff) Regulations, 2006. Any variation, during any quarter of a financial year, in the
quantum or in the cost of power procured and any procurement from a source other
than a previously approved source, in excess of five percent (5%) of quantum or cost,
as the case may be, of power procurement for such quarter, as approved by the
Commission in the power procurement plan of the Distribution Licensee, shall be only
with the prior approval of the Commission.
Provided that a variation in the cost of power procured on account of changes in the
price of fuel of allocated/approved generators, calculated in accordance with
Regulation 4. above shall not be included in determining the need for prior approval
of the Commission under this regulation 5.9.
5.10 Distribution Licensee can include a prior period expense for recovery in the
subsequent quarters if it can prove to the satisfaction of AERC that the details of the
expenses claimed were not available for reasons beyond the control of Distribution
Licensee at the time of filing.
5.11 In the application of FPPPA formula, Distribution Licensee shall bear all
costs/charges accruing on account of purchases done in contravention of the merit
order principles.
5.12 The actual variable costs computed for all generating stations shall exclude transit
and handling losses of all types of fuels beyond the limits specified in Commission’s
relevant Regulation.
5.13 Calculation and levy of such charge shall be subject to scrutiny of the Commission.
The Commission shall make available the calculations of licensee or generating
company for inspection by any person. The licensee or generating company shall
refund or recover, as the case may be, any difference of such charge already
recovered by it and approved by the Commission.
5.14 In case of any reduction in power purchase and fuel cost if the licensee or generating
company fails to refund the additional charge to the consumers/customers within the
stipulated time, the Commission shall suo-moto order the licensee or generating
company to refund the same with 10 days notice to the licensee.
5.15 The Commission shall charge a fee in each quarter for verification of all relevant
documents pertaining to FPPPA claimed by the Distribution Licensees and Generating
Companies.
The amount of fees shall be zero point one percent (0.1%) of the claimed amount.
5.16 In case of any dispute, an appropriate petition in accordance with the Assam
Electricity Regulatory Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004, as
amended from time to time or any statutory re-enactment thereof, shall be made
before the Commission.
6.
Overriding Effect
Notwithstanding anything contained contrary a)
in the AERC (Terms and Conditions for Open Access) Regulations, 2005; and
222
b)
in the AERC (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff) Regulations, 2006;
and
c)
in the AERC (Co-generation and Generation of Electricity from Renewable
Sources of Energy) Regulations 2009; and
d)
in the AERC (Fees) Regulations, 2009.
framed by the Commission under section 181 of the Electricity Act 2003; these
regulations will have overriding effect.
7.
Power to remove difficulties:
(a) In case of any difficulty in giving effect to any of the provisions of
these
Regulations, the Commission may by General or special order, direct the Licensee
to take suitable action not inconsistent with the provisions of Electricity Act 2003
which appears to be necessary or expedient for the purpose of removing the
difficulty.
(b) The Distribution Licensee may take an application to the Commission and seek
suitable orders to remove any difficulty that may arise in implementation of these
Regulations.
8.
Issue of orders and directions:– Subject to the provisions of the Act and these
regulations, the Commission may, from time to time, issue orders and practice
directions with regard to the implementation of these regulations and procedure to be
followed for such implementation and matters incidental or ancillary thereto.
9.
Saving of Inherent Powers of the Commission:- Nothing contained in these
Regulations shall limit or otherwise affect the inherent powers of the Commission to
adopt a procedure, which is at variance with any of the provisions of these regulations,
if the Commission, in view of the special circumstances of the matter or class of
matters and for reasons to be recorded in writing, deems it necessary or expedient to
depart from the procedure specified in these regulations.
10. Power to Amend:- The Commission may from time to time add, vary, alter, suspend,
modify, amend or repeal any provision of these regulations.
11. Interpretation:- All issues arising in relation to interpretation of these regulations shall
be determined by the Commission and the decision of the Commission on such issues
shall be final.
GAURI REGON,
Secretary,
Assam Electricity Regulatory Commission
223
Annexure-3
224
Annexure-4
225
Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Download PDF

advertising