- (1.) JSW Energy Limited (JSWEL) has filed a Petition on 5 May, 2014 under Sections 30, 32, 33 and 86 of the Electricity Act (EA), 2003 read with the provisions of the MERC (State Grid Code) Regulations, 2006 for directions to the Maharashtra State Load Despatch Centre (MSLDC) to accept the declared capacity of upto 300 MW of its 4 Generating Units as declared, and to schedule despatch in accordance with the capacity as declared by it from time to time.
(2.) JSWEL's prayers are as follows: - "a) Direct the State Load Despatch Centre to accept the Declared Capacity of upto 300 MW of the 4 units as Declared by the Petitioner from time to time; b) Direct the State Load Despatch Centre to schedule despatch in accordance with the Capacity as Declared by the Petitioner from time to time; c) pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Commission may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case."
(3.) The facts as stated in the Petition are as under: (1) JSWEL has established a Generating Station (4 X 300 MW) at Jaigad, Distt. Ratnagiri in Maharashtra. The State Transmission Utility (STU) has granted it connectivity with the Intra State Transmission System (InSTS) network for 1200 MW of capacity. (2) On various occasions, JSWEL has declared ex -bus capacity for each unit over 275 MW and requested MSLDC) to schedule accordingly. However, without specifying any cogent reason, MSLDC has not done so, and limited its scheduling to only 275 MW. (3) Vide letter dated 25 January, 2013, JSWEL asked MSLDC in writing to accept its declared capacity beyond 275 MW (up to 285 -290 MW) for each Unit. JSWEL cited the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) which had deleted the requirement that declared capacity should not exceed installed capacity in terms of the Tariff Regulations of 2001, and WRLDC data to show that it was not restricting capacity declaration and scheduling power as declared by intra -State generators. By letter dated 20 February, 2013, MSLDC refused, stating that "...As per the quoted rulings of Hon'ble MERC in Case No. 9 of 2009 therein, the power shall be scheduled on the basis of the name plate capacity, which as per the details provided by you and OEM [Original Equipment Manufacturer] details submitted by you at the time of synchronization 300 MW gross and 275 MW ex -bus. In view of the above, your request for scheduling of power for more than 275 MW cannot be accepted". (4) In reply, it was pointed out that, in JSWEL's case, there is no issue of overloading of transformer or other equipment as was involved in Case No. 9 of 2009. In any event, even in its Order dated 7 July, 2009 in that Case, the Commission had directed MSLDC to make despatch schedules in MW based on the declared capacity or nameplate rating of the plant, whichever is lower. JSWEL has declared capacity of Units which is lower than its name plate capacity. Hence, its request is justified even presuming that the observations in Case No. 9 of 2009 are applicable. JSWEL also pointed out to MSLDC that, in the case of Rinfra's Dahanu plant, MSLDC itself was permitting schedule beyond its ex -bus capacity of 460 MW. (5) On 4 June, 2013, MSLDC directed JSWEL to have the ex -bus capacity of its Units certified by the Central Power Research Institute (CPRI). It assured that, thereafter, power can be scheduled as per the declared capacity certified by CPRI. Accordingly, the Petitioner got its units' capacity certified by CPRI. CPRI has certified ex -bus energy generation of the four Units as under: a. Unit -1: 284.76 MW b. Unit -2: 291.96 MW c. Unit -3: 290.37 MW d. Unit -4: 291.58 MW (6) While the certification process was underway, MSLDC, vide its letter dated 11 July, 2013 and enclosing a copy of the Commission's letter dated 27 June, 2013, directed JSWEL to approach the Commission for redressal of its grievances in respect of the issue of the declared capacity of the units. However, the interpretation, purport and scope of the Commission's letter has been misinterpreted and misapplied by the Respondent. JSWEL had communicated with MSLDC vide letter dated 1 January, 2014 to accede to its long pending request while enclosing the certification and report of CPRI. This was again refused vide MSLDC's letter dated 28 April, 2014. (7) Regulation 2(20)(a) of the MERC MYT Regulations, 2014 (Second Amendment, 2013), reads as follows: 2(20)(a) "Declared Capacity" means - "for a thermal Generating Station, the capability of the Generating Station to deliver ex - bus electricity in MW declared by such Generating Station in relation to any period of the day or whole of the day, duly taking into account the availability of fuel or water, and subject to further qualification in the relevant regulations, inter -alia Regulation 49.2" (8) As per Section 61(a) and 86(h) of EA, 2003, in all matters relating to scheduling and despatch as well as Tariff, the Commission is guided by the principles and methodology notified by the Central Commission. (9) For Rinfra's Dahanu Plant, MSLDC is allowing scheduling of 475 -478 MW, which is beyond its ex -bus capacity of 460 MW (derived based on the Normative Auxiliary Power Consumption of 8%). Not permitting JSWEL to avail the same benefits as Rinfra is discriminatory and biased. (10) The Commission's Order dated 7 July, 2009 in Case No. 9 of 2009 does not provide that the declaration of capacity must be after adjustment of any proportionate auxiliary consumption. Even if the said Order dated 7 July, 2009 is interpreted to mean that the declared capacity should not exceed the name plate capacity, MSLDC cannot reduce it further by auxiliary consumption from any of the Units. (11) JSWEL cannot be penalized for offering the net available capacity for delivery up to the installed capacity of 300 MW. (12) The Commission may direct MSLDC to allow JSWEL to declare the net available capacity of more than 275 MW ex -bus and, in any event, up to the rated capacity of 300 MW. ;