- (1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioner, NTPC, for review of the order dated 21.1.2014 in Petition No. 204/GT/2011 as regards approval of generation tariff of Farakka Super Thermal Power Station, Stage -III (1 x 500 MW) (hereinafter referred to as 'the generating station') for the period from the actual date of commercial operation i.e. from 4.4.2012 to 31.3.2014.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said order, the petitioner has submitted that there is error apparent on the face of order and has sought review raising the following issues: (a) The cost over run for the delay of 14 months have to be shared equally between NTPC and the beneficiaries on the ground that NTPC cannot be absolved of its responsibility even though the delay was for reasons not attributable to NTPC; (b) Not allowing the delay of 1 month on account of the Parliamentary Elections in 2009; (c) Non -consideration of the delay of 2 months due to the damaged sluice gate as a force majeure event; (d) Disallowance of Rs. 2132 lakh on pro rata basis as increase in the contract price due to escalation of cost for the period of delay of 14 months for the main plant turnkey package and the main plant civil work package; (e) Disallowance of Rs. 7920.52 lakh (50% of 15841.04 lakh to be shared equally between NTPC and the beneficiaries) as cost overrun towards Interest During Construction & Financing Charges; (f) Non -consideration of the start date for interest calculation in few Bond Series; (g) Calculation of the weighted average rate of coal as Rs. 3494.27 per MT instead of the recomputed Rs. 3544.99 per MT; (h) Non -consideration of the increase in Water charges; (i) Non consideration of relaxation of Target Availability to 80%; (j) Disallowance of Rs. 760.18 lakh (50% of Rs. 1520.36 to be shared equally between NTPC and the beneficiaries) as cost overrun due to time overrun for Incidental Expenditure During Construction. Other Issues (k) Surveillance fee of 0.03% paid by the petitioner in all bond series to be considered in calculation of weighted average rate of interest (l) In case of PFC -V loan, D -22 repayment has not been considered in calculations at Form -13; (m) Values at depreciation computation table at para 61 is different from the AFC components considered in the instant order.
(3.) THE petition was heard on 8.5.2014 on 'admission' and the Commission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner admitted the petition on the issues raised above. Reply to the petition has been filed by the respondent, GRIDCO and the petitioner has filed its rejoinder to the same. The petitioner has also filed its written submissions vide affidavit dated 29.5.2014.;