- (1.) THIS petition has been filed for approval of transmission charges for (i) ICT-I along with associated bays at Meerut sub-station (Asset-I), (ii) 800 kV Tehri-Meerut Ckt-I along with associated bays (Asset-II), (iii) 800 kV Tehri-Meeut Ckt-II and 400 kV S/C Meerut-Muzaffarnagar transmission line along with associated bays (Asset-III), and (iv) ICT at Muzaffarnagar along with one No. 400 kV and one No. 220 kV bay (Asset-IV) under Tehri Transmission System (the transmission system) from the date of commercial operation to 31.3.2009 , based on the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2004 regulations") after accounting for additional capitalization during 2005-06 and 2006-07. The petitioner has also prayed for reimbursement of expenditure from the beneficiaries incurred towards publishing of notices in newspapers and the petition filing fee.
(2.) The provisional transmission charges for the transmission assets covered in the present petition were approved by the Commission in its order dated 15.2.2007 in Petition No.150/2006. The dates of commercial operation of the transmission assets are stated to be as under: JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20080.htm 3. The original investment approval for the transmission system was accorded by the Central Government in Ministry of Power vide letter dated 15.3.1994 at an estimated cost of Rs. 42100 lakh, which included IDC of Rs. 5000 lakh. Subsequently, revised cost estimate for the transmission system was approved by the Ministry vide its letter dated 20.8.2002 at an estimated cost of Rs. 70229 lakh which included IDC of Rs. 13601 lakh. The cost estimate for the transmission system was again revised by the Ministry vide letter dated 9.1.2006 to Rs. 91384 lakh, which includes IDC of Rs. 26916 lakh. 4. The details of the apportioned approved cost, the estimated completion cost, etc. of the transmission assets are as under: JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20081.htm JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20082.htm The petitioner has claimed the transmission charges as under: JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20083.htm JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20084.htm 6. The details submitted by the petitioner in support of its claim for interest on working capital are given hereunder: JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20083.htm JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20085.htm 7. The reply to the petition has been filed by U.P. Power Corporation Limited (UPPCL). In response to the public notices published by the petitioner in accordance with the procedure specified by the Commission, no comments have been received from the general public. CAPITAL COST 8. As per Clause (1) of Regulation 52 of the 2004 regulations, subject to prudence check, the actual expenditure incurred on completion of the project shall form the basis for determination of final tariff. The final tariff shall be determined based on the admitted capital expenditure actually incurred up to the date of commercial operation of the transmission system and shall include capitalised initial spares subject to a ceiling norm as 1.5% of original project cost. The regulation is applicable in case of the transmission system declared under commercial operation on or after 1.4.2004. 9. The petitioner has claimed additional capitalization for the year 2005-06 for Asset-I and for the year 2006-07 for Asset-I, Asset-II and Asset-III. The capital expenditure on the date of commercial operation and additional capitalization claimed for tariff purposes are given hereunder: JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20086.htm JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20087.htm Additional capitalization 10. Clause (1) of Regulation 53 of the 2004 regulations provides- (1) The following capital expenditure within the original scope of work actually incurred after the date of commercial operation and up to the cut off date may be admitted by the Commission, subject to prudence check: (i) Deferred liabilities; (ii) Works deferred for execution; (iii) Procurement of initial capital spares in the original scope of works subject to the ceiling norm specified in regulation 52; (iv) Liabilities to meet award of arbitration or compliance of the order or decree of a court; and (v) On account of change in law: Provided that original scope of work along with estimates of expenditure shall be submitted along with the application for provisional tariff: Provided further that a list of the deferred liabilities and works deferred for execution shall be submitted along with the application for final tariff after the date of commercial operation of the transmission system. 11. The details submitted by the petitioner in support of its claim for additional capital expenditure are given hereunder: JUDGEMENT_372_TLET0_20088.htm
(3.) THE additional capital expenditure claimed is within the original scope of work and is found to be in order as it was against the committed liability. Accordingly, capitalization of the additional expenditure claimed by the petitioner has been allowed for the transmission assets. Time Over-run;