- (1.) Introduction 1.1. The Tata Power Company Limited (TPC) is a Company incorporated on 18 September, 1919 and registered under the Indian Companies Act, VII of 1913. 1.2. TPC owns and operates around 1140 ckt.km. of Transmission Lines at 220 kV / 110 kV with 20 Receiving Stations spread across Mumbai having a transformation capacity of around 8873 MVA as on 31 March, 2014. 1.3. Since TPC's existing Licence expires on 15 August, 2014, TPC submitted an Application for grant of a Transmission Licence on 23 May, 2014 in accordance with Sections 14 and 15 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (EA 2003) read with Regulations 4 and 13 of MERC (Transmission Licence Conditions) Regulations, 2004 along with its Amendment in 2006 ("Transmission Licence Conditions Regulations")for a period of 25 years commencing from 16 August, 2014, for the transmission of electricity as follows: a. Area of transmission covering Mumbai city, Mumbai suburban area and Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation (together called 'Mumbai Transmission Area'); b. All existing Transmission Receiving Stations (including those outside the Mumbai Area) forming part of the Intra -State Transmission System of Maharashtra; c. All existing Transmission Lines of TPC entering Mumbai, forming a part of the Intra -State Transmission System of Maharashtra; and d. All proposed Transmission Lines and Transmission Receiving Stations as mentioned at Annexures 8 and 9 of its Application. 1.4. TPC has made the following prayers in its Application: " a. Admit the present Application along with the attached documents, submitted by Tata Power for the grant of Transmission Licence under Section 14 and 15 read with Section 86(1)(d) of the Electricity Act 2003, and in pursuance of MERC (Transmission Licence Conditions)Regulations, 2004 including amendments thereof; b. Grant Transmission Licence to Tata Power for a period of 25 years with effect from 16th August, 2014, in accordance with the provision of Section 14 read and 15 of Electricity Act, 2003, read with MERC (Transmission Licence Conditions)Regulations, 2004 including amendments thereof, for the Transmission in Mumbai City , the Mumbai Suburban Area, Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation (viz. Mumbai Transmission Area), all existing Transmission Receiving Stations, all Transmission Lines of Tata Power entering Mumbai forming a part of intra -State transmission system (InSTS) of Maharashtra and all proposed Transmission Lines and Transmission Receiving Stations by Tata Power. c. Condone any inadvertent omissions/ errors/ shortcomings and permit Tata Power to add/ change/ modify/ alter this filing and make further submissions as may be required at a future date; and d. Any other relief that Hon'ble Commission may deem fit." 1.5. TPC also forwarded a copy of its Application to the State Transmission Utility (STU) vide letter dated 27 May, 2014.
(2.) Regulatory Proceedings: 2.1. Based on preliminary scrutiny of the Application in accordance with Regulation 5.1 of the MERC (Transmission Licence Conditions) Regulations, 2004 as amended in 2006, the Commission conveyed the following data gaps and sought the following information, documents and clarifications from TPC vide e -mails dated 31 May and 2 June, 2014: a. Inconsistency observed in the data on transformation capacity and length of the Transmission Lines. b. An undertaking, as per the format provided by the Commission, in accordance with Transmission Licence Regulations. c. Specification of the Transmission Lines that originate from and terminate at Receiving Stations of other Transmission Licensees, and the voltage ratings of existing Receiving Stations. d. Details of TPC's Receiving Stations located outside Mumbai, along with their year of commissioning. e. Capacity of Transmission Lines used for transmitting power from outside Mumbai to Mumbai, and the capacity addition planned for these lines in the next 5 financial years. f. The names of the promoters, along with their respective ownership percentage, with appropriate modification in Schedule 1 or revising the date in Schedule 1 in accordance with TPC's submission. g. Management information with respect to the Information Technology (IT) functions. h. Clarification on the inconsistency in the number of Receiving Stations considering that in Annexure 7B of the Application. TPC has furnished details of 20 Receiving Stations, whereas Annexure 7C pertaining to the number of bays at each Receiving Stations, provides details of 24 Receiving Stations. Moreover, the Commission noted that it had not approved the "Dehrand -Nagothane Transmission Line" which TPC has included in the list of proposed Transmission Lines so approved. i. Resubmission of the Single Line Diagram (SLD) for the proposed Transmission Lines and existing Transmission Lines, clearly differentiating the proposed from the existing Transmission Lines. j. List of streets or parts of streets for which TPC has obtained authorisation to undertake transmission work in the proposed area. k. Data pertaining to existing and proposed systems in the following format: Existing System ­ Transmission Lines with voltage levels, line name, i. originating and receiving point, layout and ckt.km length; Existing System ­ List of EHV Substation Bays with Receiving Station ii. name, voltage level and number of bays; Proposed System ­ Transmission Lines with voltage levels, line name, iii. originating and receiving point, layout, ckt.km length with STU and the Commission's approval; iv. Proposed System ­ List of EHV Substation Bays with Receiving Station name, voltage level, number of bays with STU and the Commission's approval; and v. Transmission Systems submitted to the Commission and STU for approval. l. Commission's approval letter date and number (pertaining to capital investments), and dates of submission of Capex proposals for schemes which are not yet approved by the Commission. 2.2. The Commission held the Technical Validation Session (TVS) on 3 June, 2014, when TPC made a presentation on its competencies, technological best practices adopted by it, current transmission assets and plan for future Transmission Lines. 2.3. TPC also elaborated the provisions of EA 2003 and the MERC Transmission Licence Regulations to support its contention that an Area Specific Licence can be granted by the Commission. TPC requested the Commission to grant it an Area Specific Licence for Mumbai Area and a Line Specific Licence for Transmission Lines which are proposed to bring power from outside to the Mumbai area. 2.4. On 4 June, 2014, TPC submitted its response in respect of the data gaps identified by the Commission, as follows: a. Details of length of Transmission Lines and the transformation capacity were provided. b. TPC would submit the undertaking sought by the Commission shortly and requested the Commission to admit its Application in the meantime. c. Details of Transmission Lines originating from or terminating at Receiving Stations of other Transmission Licensees, and the voltage rating of existing Receiving Stations were submitted. d. Details of year of commissioning and purpose of Receiving Stations at IXORA, Panvel and Ambernath, which are located outside the Mumbai Area. e. The current capacity of the tie lines for import of power to Mumbai was stated to be around 1710 MW without any security margin. TPC also submitted details of the additional schemes planned for enhancing import capacity. f. Details of the share holding pattern as on 31 March, 2014. TPC also mentioned that its website is yet to be updated and only the shareholding pattern as on 31 December 2013 has been uploaded. g. The management information pertaining to IT functions. h. TPC clarified that the Grant Road Sub -Station has no transformer but only bays. Accordingly, it has not been considered in the list of existing Receiving Stations under TPC. The Receiving Stations at Davdi and Central Railway (Wadala) are consumer funded schemes and have not been considered in the list of existing Receiving Stations. Further, the bays in the Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Limited's (MSETCL) Receiving Stations which are maintained by TPC have been included (along with the Receiving Stations) in the list of bays pertaining to Receiving Stations maintained by TPC. i. The Commission had given in -principle approval to the Dehrand -Nagothane Transmission Line vide letter No. MERC/CAPEX/20112012/01103 dated 27 July, 2011. It was resubmitted to the Commission only for approval of the revised capital cost. Accordingly, the Transmission Line has been listed in both the categories, viz., "Approved by MERC" and "To be approved by MERC". j. TPC submitted the revised Single Line Diagram (SLD), and stated that not all the Receiving Stations proposed had been shown in the revised SLD as the incoming lines for some of the Receiving Stations are still to be identified. k. The streets which are required to be repaired/ dug up for the purpose of laying cables or lines are under the purview of the Local Authorities. TPC submitted a list of authorities from whom permissions have been sought for laying Transmission Lines and cables. l. Data on the existing and proposed transmission system has been submitted in the format specified. TPC also submitted details of STU and Commission approvals pertaining to various Transmission Systems. 2.5. TPC also submitted that certain submissions that had been made by it were erroneous. Accordingly, it submitted a revised Application for grant of Transmission Licence fulfilling the data gaps identified by the Commission, on 5 June, 2014. 2.6. After verification, the Commission found the revised Application to be complete and accompanied with the requisite information, particulars and documents. 2.7. The Commission accordingly admitted TPC's revised Application for grant of Transmission Licence on 11 June, 2014 vide letter no. MERC/Case No. 112 of 2014/20142015/00500. The Commission directed TPC to furnish an undertaking as per the Transmission Licence Regulations and to issue a Public Notice in accordance with Section 15(2) of EA 2003 read with Regulation 6 of the Transmission Licence Regulations. TPC was also directed to serve a copy of its Application to the Chief Engineer, STU in accordance with Section 15(3) of EA 2003. 2.8. TPC submitted the undertaking on 14 July, 2014. TPC also published a Notice of its Application in two English language (DNA and Financial Express) and two Marathi language (Loksatta and Prahar) newspapers on 13 June, 2014. A copy of the Application along with enclosures was made available on TPC's website. 2.9. In reply to TPC's letter to STU dated 27 May, 2014, STU provided its recommendation for the grant of Transmission Licence vide letter no. MSETCL/CO/C.E -STU/007519 dated 27 June, 2014. 2.10. Section 15(2)(ii) of EA 2003 provides that if an Application for a Licence is received for an area including the whole or any part of any cantonment, aerodrome, fortress, arsenal, dockyard or camp or of any building or place in the occupation of the Central Government for defence purposes, no objection to the grant of the Licence on the part of the Central Government needs to be ascertained. 2.11. Accordingly, the Commission issued letter no. MERC/Case No. 112 of 2014/00701/11072014 dated 11July, 2014 to the Ministry of Defence, Ministry of Shipping and Ministry of Civil Aviation inviting objection(s), if any, with reference to TPC's Application. The Commission did not receive any objections in this respect within two weeks as had been stipulated. 2.12. After evaluating the Application submitted by TPC and considering the recommendations of the STU, the Commission published a Public Notice on 17 July, 2014 in two English (DNA and The Times of India) and two Marathi (Loksatta and Maharashtra Times) newspapers stating the details of the proposed Transmission Licence Application as submitted by TPC in accordance with Section 15(5)(a) of the EA 2003. The Notice specified that the Commission is proposing to grant a Transmission Licence to TPC under Alternative 2 of its Transmission Licence Regulations. Suggestions or objections were invited by 7 August, 2014, and it was stated that the Public Hearing would be held on 12 August, 2014 at the office of the Commission (World Trade Centre, Centre 1, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005). 2.13. The Public Hearing was held accordingly on 12 August, 2014. TPC and STU were represented by their respective officials. The list of persons who were present is at Annexure II. 2.14. During the hearing, TPC made a presentation on TPC's history in the transmission business and steps taken to improve the quality and efficiency of transmission. TPC reiterated its claim for a combination of (i) Licence for Mumbai Transmission Area and (ii) Licence for Receiving Stations (or Transmission Receiving Stations) and Transmission Lines which are situated outside Mumbai Area but are owned by it or proposed to be constructed and owned by it in future and which would form a part of the Intra -State Transmission System (InSTS) of Maharashtra. 2.15. At the Public Hearing, the representative of STU reiterated its recommendations dated 27 June, 2014.
(3.) Objections/ Suggestions 3.1. In response to the Public Notice on the grant of Transmission Licence to TPC, the Commission received no objections from the Central Government. 3.2. The Commission received two objections/ suggestions, as set out below along with TPC's response and the Commission's view. Objection/Suggestion of Shri Ulhas Chaudhari (Received within time) 3.3. While supporting the grant of Transmission Licence to TPC, Shri Ulhas Chaudhari enquired whether TPC had, in past, provided transmission connections to the consumers of R -Infra Ltd and BEST as required, or it planned to do so. Otherwise, the Commission should make TPC responsible for making unwarranted investments. 3.4. He suggested that consumers having consumption of more than 1 MW should be kept under the ambit of the transmission tariff instead of distribution tariff. Such consumers may also be declared as ones purchasing power under Open Access as they have made investments. Further, earlier concession given to BEST on the electricity provided through High Tension (110 kV) connections may be resumed. This Concession should be provided through the transmission fund to BEST. 3.5. The investment proposed by TPC in its Transmission Business Plan for the period from FY 2014 -15 to FY 2019 -20 is unwarranted. Approval should be given only to those schemes that are necessary for capacity building and to meet the rise in demand. 3.6. Shri Chaudhari also submitted that, a. As per the report of Maharashtra Energy Development Agency (MEDA), 70% electricity can be saved. No specific measures have been undertaken so far in this regard; b. 'Green Buildings' can save up to 10% electricity. Additionally, a minimum of 10% of the electricity requirements can be generated through solar rooftop generation in buildings. c. Energy audit of consumption of power in buildings has not been done since long; d. The Commission should make efforts to ensure completion of projects like the Green Liquefied Gas Line project. Approval to the projects proposed by TPC will harm the environment; and 3.7. There is no longer any excavation and back -filling potential in Mumbai and whatever land is available should be utilized judiciously. TPC's Reply 3.8. Vide letter dated 7 August, 2014, TPC responded that the transmission outlets requested by R -Infra and BEST from TPC's transmission system have been given after approval from STU. Further, any capital investment is taken up after due approvals from STU. 3.9. Any consumer can avail of Open Access on the Transmission System by following the procedure specified in MERC (Transmission Open Access) Regulations, 2014, and TPC would play the role of non -discriminatory Open Access provider. 3.10. All capital investments related to the transmission network are made as per the STU Plan, and only after approval of the Commission as well as STU. 3.11. As regards the objections set out at paras 3.3 and 3.5 above, the Commission has noted TPC's reply. All capital expenditures undertaken by TPC are to be carried out as per the approvals of the Commission and STU. The Commission undertakes appropriate scrutiny of the proposed schemes prior to granting such approvals. 3.12. As regards the objections set out at para 3.4, any consumer can avail of Open Access on the Transmission System by following the procedure specified in the MERC (Transmission Open Access) Regulations, 2014. The issue of tariff for consumers connected to High Tension Line (110 KV) is not relevant to grant of Transmission Licence to TPC and may be raised in the proceedings relating to the Tariff Petition of Distribution Licensee. Objection/Suggestion of Shri Prashant K Zaveri (Received after the due date) 3.13. Shri Prashant K Zaveri has stated that the Supreme Court has passed recent Orders to grant the Licence. He stated that the monopoly of BEST must end and healthy competition must be promoted in light of the reforms in the power sector and global investments. Since TPC is supplying directly, its per unit cost will be less than that of BEST. TPC has been providing better service than BEST for the last several years. With this consideration, TPC should be granted the Transmission Licence. 3.14. TPC has stated that it understood that Shri. Zaveri is in favour of grant of Transmission Licence to TPC. The other suggestions/objections made pertain to Distribution Licence, which is not the subject matter of the current Application of TPC. 3.15. The objection/suggestions of Shri. Zaveri relate to competition in distribution of electricity and are not the subject matter of the present Application for grant of Transmission Licence. ;