- (1.) THE petitioner, Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd., has filed this petition seeking clarification/interpretation of Regulation 5 of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Unscheduled Interchange Charges and other related matters) Regulations, 2009 as amended vide Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Unscheduled Interchange Charges and other related matters)(Amendment) Regulations, 2010 (hereinafter "UI Regulations"). Facts of the Case
(2.) THE UI Regulations were amended by the Commission on 28.4.2010 to be effective from 3.5.2010. Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited (CSPTCL), the CSPTCL sent a communication dated 5.6.2010 to the Commission pointing out certain difficulties experienced by it in calculation of UI charges with regard to the scheduling of power under short term open access by the generators/sellers which constitute embedded generation in Chhattisgarh State electricity supply system. CSPTCL in the said letter had submitted that in the State of Chhattisgarh, 34 number of such generators/sellers with total permitted short term open access quantum of 840 MW were allowed to sell power outside the State. CSPTCL noticed that the open access customers among these generators/sellers were often under -injecting against the scheduled power which ranged from 100 to 150 MW in total. According to CSPTCL, the power so scheduled but not injected by generators/sellers was drawn by the buyers which was accounted for against the power pool of Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (CSPDCL) in accordance with Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Open Access in inter -State Transmission) Regulations, 2008 (hereinafter "the Open Access Regulations"). As a result, CSPDCL was put into unwarranted burden and financial disadvantage, especially when CSPDCL had no surplus power to compensate for the deficit injection by these generators/sellers. CSPTCL highlighted that CSPDCL might have to compensate by overdrawal from the grid for which it was required to pay upto Rs.17.46/kWh if frequency was below 49.2 Hz., whereas the seller's liability to pay for under -injection in similar situation is limited to Rs.12.22/kWh. CSPTCL made the following suggestions to be incorporated in the UI Regulations through amendment: "The limit of over injection has been extended from earlier 105% of the schedule in one time block and 101% over a day to 120% and in excess of 120% also with payment mechanism applied at different rates for ex -bus generation limited to 105% in one block and 101% over a day and in second case ex -bus generation more than given above. This would encourage under declaration of schedule and over -injection above the schedule to get the cap rate upto 120% under the condition when the power market is slowing down trend as far as the cost of power is concerned. Therefore, the over injection of power in excess of the schedule should be permitted only when the frequency is below 49.5 Hz for which cap rate for the power injected should be made payable top the seller upto 120% only and no payment for injection above 120%. For frequency above 49.5Hz over injection by the seller more than 105% in one time block and 101% over a day should not be payable to the generator/seller. ......................................................................................................... 4. The limit of 120% has been co -related with the installed capacity of the station. In case of CPP (most of the open access customers in Chhatisgarh are CPP), the generation is controlled by the CPP owner looking to the load requirement, where SLDC/Transmission Licensee/Distribution Licensee has no jurisdiction of control. Therefore, the validation about the installed capacity particularly of the smaller generators would be difficult to establish. It is therefore proposed that the power schedule by such generator against open access should be considered the installed capacity of the CPP for the sake of open access into the State grid."
(3.) IN its subsequent letter dated 28.6.2010 addressed to the Commission, CSPTCL has stated the following: "Under clause 5 of the above regulations, it has been mentioned that the changes for the unscheduled interchange for the injection by the seller in excess of 120% of the schedule subject to a limit of ex -bus generation corresponding to 105% of the installed capacity of the station in a time block or 101% of the installed capacity over a day shall not exceed the cap rate as specified in Schedule A (Rs.4.03 per unit). Further, the changes for the Unscheduled Interchange for the injection by the seller in excess of ex -bus generation corresponding to 105% of the installed capacity of the station in a time block or 101% of the installed capacity over a day shall not exceed the charges for the unscheduled interchange corresponding to grid frequency interval of 'below 50.02 Hz and not below 50.0 Hz (Rs.1.55 per unit). However, the Charges for the Unscheduled Interchange for the excess injection by the seller above the schedule up to 120%, if the ex -bus generation is within 105% in a time block or 101% over a day has not been mentioned in the regulation. Therefore, for the reasons stated in our letter dated 05 -05 -2010 and to discourage the tendency of under scheduling and excess injection over the schedule, the UI has to be regulated and controlled. In view of this, and in absence of clarity on the issue, therefore, the following mode of UI payment (payable to the seller) for excess generation, is followed for the time being: - A. Condition I -The generation within 105% of the installed capacity in one time block and 101% over a day - Excess injection more than the schedule but limited to 120% of the schedule (over a day) -UI Cap rate of Rs.4.03/unit. B. Condition II -When generation crosses the limit of 105% of installed capacity in one time block and 101% over a day - Excess injection (total) over the schedule -Cap rate of Rs.1.55/unit for all range of over injection from schedule." After writing these letters to the Commission, CSPTCL vide its letter dated 7.7.2010 addressed to all embedded customers of the State including Bharat Aluminium Company Limited, the petitioner and raised the bills for inter -State Open Access Provisional UI accounts for the period 3.5.2010 to 9.5.2010. The opening para of the said letter read as under: "The UI mechanism has been as per CERC Notifications and CSTPL's communication to CERC/CSERC dated 5th June 2010 regarding inapplicability on the open access customer of the State and the same is binding for all." ;