- (1.) THE petitioner, a successor of the erstwhile Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board constituted under section 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 read with Section 58 of the Madhya Pradesh Re -organization Act, 2000 to act as the Electricity Board for the State of Chhattisgarh, seeks adjudication of the dispute arising out of the implementation of the mechanism with regard to reactive energy charges specified in Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Indian Electricity Grid Code) Regulations, 2010 (Grid Code) amended from time to time. The petitioner has sought the following specific reliefs, namely: - (a) Direct Respondent No. 1 to pay to the Petitioner reactive energy charges in the sum of Rs. 11,64,84,711/ - (Rupees Eleven Crore Sixty Four Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Eleven only) as billed by Respondent No. 3 for the period from April 2006 to 1.7.2012 together with surcharge @ 0.04% per day on the outstanding amount as on 31.7.2012 amounting to Rs. 3,12,32,619/ - (Rupees Three Crore Twelve Lakh Thirty Two Thousand Six Hundred Nineteen only), aggregating to Rs. 14,17,57,330/ - (Rupees Fourteen Crore Seventeen Lakh Fifty Seven Thousand Three Hundred Thirty only); (b) Direct Respondent No. 1 to pay to the Petitioner further surcharge @ 0.04% per day on the outstanding amount of Rs. 11,64,84,711/ - (Rupees Eleven crore Sixty Four Lakh Eighty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Eleven only) towards reactive energy charges from 1.8.2012 till payment thereof; (c) Direct Respondent No. 1 to pay to the Petitioner reactive energy charges as billed or may be billed to it by Respondent No. 3 for the period from 2.7.2012 together with surcharge @ 0.04% per day on the delayed payment whenever applicable; (d) Direct Respondent No. 3 to furnish detail of outstanding reactive energy charges payable by Respondent No. 1 to the Petitioner for the period prior to April 2006 and further direct Respondent No. 1 to pay the said amount to the Petitioner along with surcharge @ 0.04% per day on the outstanding amount from the date it has become due; (e) Initiate penal proceedings against Respondent No. 1 under Section 142 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for failing to comply with the provisions of the Indian Electricity Grid Code, 2006 and the Indian Electricity Grid Code, 2010 notified by the Commission, as may be applicable, towards payment of reactive energy charges as billed by Respondent No. 3; (f) And pass any other or further order (s) as the Commission deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Respondent No. 1, erstwhile Madhya Pradesh Power Trading Company, is a successor of Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board and is performing the functions relating to purchase and sale of power and undertaking in relation thereto.
(2.) THE Commission notified the Indian Electricity Grid Code, 2006 (Grid Code, 2006) which came into effect from 1.4.2006. Regulation 6.6 of the Grid Code, 2006 provides as under: 1. Reactive power compensation should ideally be provided locally, by generating reactive power as close to the reactive power consumption as possible. The beneficiaries are therefore expected to provide local VAr compensation/generation such they do not draw VAr compensation/generation such that they do not draw VArs from the EHV grid, particularly under low -voltage condition. However, considering the present limitations, this is not being insisted upon. Instead, to discourage VAr dawals by Beneficiaries, VAr exchanges with ISTS shall be priced as follows: - The Beneficiaries pays for VAr drawal when voltage at the metering point is below 97% - The Beneficiaries gets paid for VAr return when voltage is below 97% - The Beneficiaries gets paid for VAr drawal when voltage is above 103 - The Beneficiaries pays for VAr return when voltage is above 103% Provided that there shall be no charge/payment for VAr drawal/return by a Beneficiary on its own line emanating directly from an ISGS. 2. The charge/payment for VARs, shall be at nominal paisa/kVArh rate as may be specified by CERC from time to time, and will be between the Beneficiary and the regional pool account for VAr interchanges. In suppression of the Grid Code, 2006, the Commission on 28.4.2010 notified Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Indian Electricity Grid Code) Regulations, 2010 (Grid Code) which were came into effect from 3.5.2010. Regulation 6.6 of the Grid Code provides as under: 1. Reactive power compensation should ideally be provided locally, by generating reactive power as close to the reactive power consumption as possible. The beneficiaries are therefore expected to provide local VAr compensation/generation such they do not draw VAr compensation/generation such that they do not draw VArs from the EHV grid, particularly under low -voltage condition. However, considering the present limitations, this is not being insisted upon. Instead, to discourage VAr dawals by beneficiaries, VAr exchanges with ISTS shall be priced as follows: - The Regional Entity except Generating Stations pays for VAr drawal when voltage at the metering point is below 97% -The Regional Entity except Generating Stations gets paid for VAr return when voltage is below 97% - The Regional Entity except Generating Stations gets paid for VAr drawal when voltage is above 103% Provided that there shall be no charge/payment for VAr drawal/return by a Regional Entity except Generating Stations on its own line emanating directly from an ISGS. 2. The charge for VArh shall be at the rate of 10 paise/kVArh w.e.f. 1.4.2010, and this will be applicable between the Regional Entity, except Generating Stations, and the regional pool account for VAr interchanges. This rate shall be escalated at 0.5 paise/kVArh per year thereafter, unless otherwise revised by the Commission.
(3.) THE petitioner has submitted that the present petition has been filed for implementation of the mechanism for reactive energy charges specified in the Grid Code and payment of such charges by the Respondent No. 1 for the period from 1.4.2006 onwards. The petitioner has submitted that reactive energy is required to be minimized so as to reduce the losses and bring efficiency in the system. The petitioner has submitted that Regulation 6.6 of the Grid Code, 2006 set out the mechanism for reactive power pricing and also provides for payment of charges towards reactive energy for which accounting is done by the concerned RLDC. The petitioner has submitted that Regulation 6.6 of the Grid Code, 2006 also provides for settlement of reactive energy charges and accordingly, the Respondent No. 1 has to pay the reactive energy charges for its drawal during voltage conditions of grid to the petitioner for supplying the same reactive energy during that period. The petitioner has submitted that Regulation 6.6 and Annexure 1 to Chapter 6 of the 2010 Grid Code also provides for reactive energy pricing mechanism and complementary commercial mechanisms, respectively in line with Grid Code, 2006. In terms of Chapter 6 of the Grid Code, the defaulting constituents are required to pay simple interest @ 0.04% for each day of delay and in case of persistent payment default towards reactive energy charges, the matter is to be reported by RLDC to Member -Secretary, Regional Power Committee for initiating remedial action.;