1
Order-case no 23 of 15
Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission
VidyutBhawan-II, J.L.NehruMarg, Patna 800 021
Case No. 23/2015 /2012 In the matter of :
Petition u/s 86 (1) (c) of Electricity Act, 2003 read with
clause 3,8(2), 12(2), 12(3), 13(2) of BERC (Terms and
condition for open access) Regulations, 2005 seeking
direction for grant of short term open access by BSPTCL
to the petitioner.
And
M/s Shree Cement Ltd., BIADA, Aurangabad, Bihar......…………. Petitioner
Vs.
Bihar State Power Transmission Company Ltd. ..
………Respondents South Bihar Power Distribution Company Ltd.
Coram:
1. Sri U. N. Panjiar - Chairman
2. Sri S. C. Jha - Member
Appearance :
1. Mr. Kumar Mihir, (Advocate) On behalf of M/s Shree Cement Limited
3 Sri Prabhat Kumar, ESE Trans (O&M) & SLDC,
On behalf of BSPTCL 4 Devendra Kumar Singh, EEE, SLDC,
4. Sri Binod Kumar AEE, (Com.) On behalf of SBPDCL
Date of hearings: 26.06.2015 and 16.07.2015
ORDER
Dated: 13.08.2015
M/s Shree Cement Limited has filed petition under section 86(1)(c)
of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Regulation 3, 8(2), 12 (2),
12(3), 13(2), 27, 28 & 29 of the 'Bihar Electricity Regulatory
2
Order-case no 23 of 15
Commission (Terms and Conditions for open access) Regulations,
2005' seeking directions for grant of short term open access(STOA)
to the petitioner for facilitating transmission and wheeling of
electricity as permitted under the Open Access Regulations in the
State of Bihar.
1.0 Petitioner’s Submission:
1(i) The petitioner M/s Shree Cement Limited, BIADA, Aurangabad has
commissioned a 2 Million Tonne per Annum (MTPA) capacity
cement grinding plant at BIADA, Aurangabad in Bihar in June
2014. The Cement plant has a 12.50 MVA HT-connection with the
respondent no.2 SBPDCL and in May 2015, the company has been
sanctioned enhancement in its contract demand from 12.5 MVA to
13.5 MVA. The Petitioner has a dedicated feeder at the 132 KV GSS
of the Respondent no.1, BSPTCL Aurangabad and has a 132 V
independent transmission line from the GSS to electrical sub-
station at Company's plant. The company has also installed 0.2S
Class ABT complaint meters at its said plant.
(ii) The Commission in exercise of its powers conferred under Section
42 read with Section 181 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003)
and all other powers enabling the Commission in this behalf, had
brought out BERC(Terms and Conditions for Open Access)
Regulations,2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'Open Access
Regulations, 2005) notified on 20th May, 2006. The Commission
subsequently, issued the BERC(Terms and conditions for Open
Access) (1st Amendment) Regulations, 2012 (hereinafter referred to
3
Order-case no 23 of 15
as "1st Amendment Regulatgions,2012") notified on 19th September
2012.
Regulation 3 of the Open Access Regulations explain the scope and
application of the said regulations as under:
"These Regulations shall apply to Open Access for use of intrastate
transmission system and / or the distribution system of licensees in
the Sate, including when such systems are used in conjunction with
inter-state transmission system".
Regulation 7 of the Open Access Regulations, 2005 has allowed short
term open access for all consumers who intend to avail open access
for period of one year or less. The relevant regulation is reproduced
below:
"7. Categorisation of Open Access Customers
(1) Subject to the provisions of Regulations 5 and 6,
the Open Access Customers shall be divided into two
categories, based on the duration of use of the intra-
state transmission system or the distribution system:
(a) Long-term Open Access customers – The persons
availing or intending to avail of the Open Access for a
period of five years or more shall be the long – term
Open Access customers.
(b) Short-term Open Access customers- The persons
availing or intending to avail of the Open Access for a
period of one year or less shall be categorised as the
short – term Open Access customers.
4
Order-case no 23 of 15
(2) Short-term Open Access customers shall be eligible to
obtain fresh Open Access after the expiry of the term and
shall be treated as a new applicant for capacity allocation."
Regulation 8 of the Open Access Regulation, 2005 provides for the
criteria to grant Open Access indicating that power flow is an
important criteria to be taken into consideration while considering
any application seeking open access. The relevant provisions of the
said Regulation read as under:
"(2) The short-term Open Access shall be ordinarily allowed, if such
request can be accommodated without jeopardising the safety of the
grid system by utilising:
(a) Inherent Design Margins;
(b) Margins available due to variation in power flows; and
(c) Margins available due to in-built spare transmission /
distribution capacity created to cater to future load
growth.
(3) The State Transmission Utility and distribution licensees shall at all
times endeavour to provide Open Access to their system and shall
always equip their system to meet the future demand for Open
Access and create sufficient capacity in the system to provide Open
Access and thereby competition."
Further, Regulation 9(2) of the Open Access Regulation, 2005 has
specified State Load Dispatch Centre (SLDC) as the nodal agency for
grant of short term open access. Further the State Transmission
Utility and / or a distribution licensee concerned have been made
5
Order-case no 23 of 15
responsible for co-ordination with the SLDC and provide all relevant
information required to take decision for providing Open Access.
The relevant Regulation is reproduced below:
"9. Nodal Agency
(1) The Nodal Agency for arranging long-term Open
Access in all cases shall be the State Transmission
Utility whether its system is used or not: and for
that purpose, a distribution licensee and / or a
transmission licensee, whose system gets associated
with such long-term Open Access, shall be
responsible to co-ordinate with the State
Transmission Utility and provide all relevant
information required to take decision for providing
Open Access.
(2) Similarly, the Nodal Agency for short-term Open
Access shall be the State Load despatch Centre and
in such case, the State Transmission Utility and / or
a transmission and/or a distribution licensee
concerned, as the case may be, shall be responsible
for co-ordination with the State Load Despatch
Centre and provide all relevant information required
to take decision for providing Open Access.
Regulation 12 (2) of the Open Access Regulation, 2005 provide the
method for determination of the transmission capacity in the state
in the following manner:
6
Order-case no 23 of 15
"The availability of capacity in the distribution system, for
long-term and short-term Open Access, including the
existence or absence of operational constraints affecting the
Open Access being allowed shall be determined by the State
Load Despatch Centre after considering the representation of
the distribution licensees and the persons seeking the Open
Access.
(3) In the event of any dispute on the capacity of the transmission
system available or absence of operational constraints in the
distribution system, to be determined by the State Transmission
Utility or State Load Despatch Centre, as the case may be, the
same shall be referred to the Commission for adjudication."
As per Regulation 13(2) (d) of the Open Access Regulation 2005,
Commission has specified that SLDC shall process an application
seeking Open Access for a term of up to 30 days in a maximum time
limit of 7 days.
The relevant regulation is reproduced below:-
"(d) The State Load Despatch Centre shall take a decision on the
application within the time period as specified below:
S. No.
Term of Open Access Maximum Processing Time
1 Up to one day 12 hours 2 Up to Seven days Two day
3 Up to thirty days Seven Days 4 Up to one hundred and
eighty days Fifteen days
5 Up to one year Thirty days"
7
Order-case no 23 of 15
Further, Regulations 27, 28 and 29 of the Open Access Regulations,
2005 provide as under:
"27. dispute Resolution Mechanism
(1) The complaints regarding all grievances and disputes relating
to Open Access shall be made to the State Transmission Utility
or State Load Despatch Centre, as the case may be, which may
investigate and endeavour to resolve the grievance amicably.
(2) If State Transmission Utility or State Load Despatch Centre is
unable to redress the grievance or complaint or dispute, the
matter may be referred to the Commission by the State
Transmission Utility or State Load Despatch Centre as the case
may be, for adjudication.
28. Savings
(1) Nothing in these Regulations shall be deemed to limit or
otherwise affect the power of the Commission to make such
orders as may be necessary to meet the ends of justice.
(2) Nothing in these Regulations shall bar the Commission from
adopting in conformity with provisions of the Act, a procedure
which is at variance with any of the provisions of these
Regulations, if the Commission, in view of the special
circumstances of a matter or a class of matters, deems it just or
expedient for deciding such matter or class of matters.
(3) Nothing in these Regulations shall, expressly or impliedly, bar
the Commission dealing with any matter or exercising any power
under the Act for which no Regulations have been framed, and the
8
Order-case no 23 of 15
Commission may deal with such matters, powers and functions in
a manner, as it considers just and appropriate.
29. Powers to Remove Difficulties:
If any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of the provisions of
these Regulations, the Commission may by general or special
order, direct the State Transmission Utility, State Load Despatch
Centre, licensees and the Open Access customers, to take such
action, as may appear to the Commission to be necessary or
expedient for the purpose of removing difficulties."
Subsequently, the BERC (Terms and Conditions for Open Access)
(1st Amendment) Regulations, 2012 has amended the Regulation 2
of Open Access Regulation 2005 to include definition for Collective
Transactions ["Collective transaction" means a set of transactions
discovered in power exchange through anonymous, simultaneous
competitive bidding by buyers and sellers]. The relevant regulation
is reproduced below:
"In Regulation 2 of the principal regulations, after clause 2 (1)
(L) the following shall be inserted, namely: (m) "Bilateral
Transaction, means a transaction for exchange of energy (MWh)
between a specified buyer and a specified seller, directly or
through a trading licensee or discovered at power exchange
though anonymous bidding, from a specified point of injection
to a specified point of drawl for a fixed, for varying quantum of
power (MW) for any time period during a month.
9
Order-case no 23 of 15
(n) "Collective transaction" means a set of transactions
discovered in power exchange through anonymous,
simultaneous competitive bidding by buyers and sellers".
(iii) It is evident from the above quoted regulations that the
Commission has already put in place the necessary regulatory
framework enabling all consumers desirous of sourcing power from
the power exchanges to seek Short Term Open Access in the State
of Bihar.
(iv) It is also mentioned that the CERC(Open Access in inter-State
Transmission) Regulations, 2008 has specified that, if, required
energy metering and transmission capability are available, the
SLDC has to accord the NOC for open access with in 3 working
days of receipt of the open access application. The relevant
Regulation 8 of the CERC(Open Access in inter-State
Transmission) Regulations, 2008" is reproduced below for a ready
reference :
"(3) In case the infrastructure required for energy
metering and time block wise accounting already exists,
and required transmission capacity in the State network
is available, the State Load Despatch Centre shall
accord its concurrence or 'no objection' or stranding
clearance, as the cases may be, within three (3) working
days of receipt of the application.
10
Order-case no 23 of 15
(4) In case SLDC decides not to give concurrence or 'no
objection" or standing clearance as the case may be, the
same shall be communicated to the applicant in writing,
giving the reason for refusal within the above stipulated
period of 3 days."
From the above Regulation, it is evident that even Central
Commission has made it mandatory for SLDC to accord NOC for
Open Access or give its reason for refusal within a stipulated period
of 3 days from the receipt of application.
(v) Petitioner had applied on 20.12.2013 to the Chief Engineer (CE)
Transmission-O&M,BSPTCL (who was also in-charge for SLDC
functions as in Bihar SLDC is a part of Respondent no.1, BSPTCL)
for seeking NOC for grant of open access for purchase of power from
power-exchanges upto 10MW at its plant in Aurangabad, Bihar. The
said application was made after preliminary discussions with various
officials of Respondent no.1, BSPTCL/SLDC and was made in line
with this Commission's Open Access Regulation 2005 and was
submitted along with the necessary fees as specified by the
Commission.
(vi) In response to the said application submitted by the Petitioner, the
officials of the Respondent no.1 working as the SLDC wrote to the
Petitioner on 27.12.2013 asking for submission of details in the
prescribed PX1 format.
(vii) Accordingly, as directed, the Petitioner herein submitted the
application for Open Access in the specified format PX1 on
11
Order-case no 23 of 15
13.01.2014. Subsequently, the SLDC had highlighted some
corrections required in the PX1 format and the same were duly
corrected and re-submitted to SLDC on 30.01.2014.
(viii) Subsequent to the submission of all required details as aforesaid by
the Petitioner Company, it had numerous discussions with various
officials of Respondent BSPTCL and SLDC to ensure timely
processing of its Open Access application. During the course of such
discussions, the petitioner was orally communicated that an inquiry
on technical feasibility for operationalization of open access to the
petitioner was sought by the respondent no.1 from the local officials
at transmission circle of BSPTCL at 'Dehri on Sone' (circle within
which the plant of the petitioner is located). While no communication
on the outcome of the technical study obtained from the local
transmission circle was provided to the petitioner, the petitioner was
orally communicated that the required report was duly received at
BSPTCL Patna office.
(ix) During discussions at various levels (including interaction with MD
Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. (BSPHCL), Director,
BSPTCL, Chief Engineer-BSPTCL, etc, the petitioner was informed
that its application was under process and given that this was the
first application of this nature (an HT consumer seeking open access)
it was taking time but final outcome was expected to be
communicated to it at the earliest.
(x) Despite more than a year (during which the petitioner had written
and met senior officials repeatedly) from the date of the application,
12
Order-case no 23 of 15
the Petitioner did not receive any communication from Respondent
BSPTCL on grant of Open Access for purchase of power from the
power-exchanges. The Petitioner had written to BSPHCL/BSPTCL
officials numerous time requesting for early grant of open access.
(xi) It is stated that the Petitioner was orally communicated that its file
was sent by MD,BSPTCL to MD,SBPDCL for their comments. The file
was returned by MD,SBPDCL with some technical constraints cited
for grant of open access.
(xii) After numerous follow-ups and discussions on the matter, the
Petitioner received a letter dated 02.02.2015 issued by CE-
(Transmission-O&M) BSPTCL denying open access to the Petitioner
company due to non-availability of corridor.
(xiii) Being aggrieved of the aforesaid letter dated 02.02.2015, the
Petitioner is filing the instant petition before this Commission on the
following grounds:-
(xiv) This Commission has notified the necessary Regulations allowing
open access for consumers intending to purchase power on the
power exchanges (collective transactions). Thus, the application for
grant of NOC for open access made by the Petitioner herein is well
supported with the State's Regulatory framework.
(xv) The petitioner has an approved HT connection with SBPDCL with a
contract demand of 12.5 MVA (now approved to be enhanced to
13.50 MVA). SBPDCL at the time of approving the contract demand
of petitioner has done the necessary technical evaluation of feasibility
of their system to provide power up to contract demand to the
13
Order-case no 23 of 15
Petitioner. On the basis of this technical feasibility of the electrical
system, SBPDCL has done an agreement with the Petitioner for the
approved contract demand of 12.5 MVA (to be now enhanced to 13.5
MVA).
(xvi) Thus, the electrical system is capable of providing 12.50 MVA, now
13.5 MVA Power to the petitioner herein. This capability of the
system is irrespective of the source of that power, discom supply
(SBPDCL) or open access supply. The quantum of open access
requested by the petitioner (10 MW) is less than the sanctioned
contract demand with SBPDCL and even in the case of grant of open
access to the petitioner, the total power consumption of the Petitioner
from all sources put together (power supplied by discom and Power
procured from Power Exchange) at any time shall be within the limit
of its sanctioned load. Thus there will be no technical constraint
related to corridor availability in grant of the required NOC for open
access to the Petitioner herein.
(xvii) It is stated in Regulation 8 of the Open Access Regulations that the
margin in power flow or actual flow of power has to be taken into
consideration while deciding the application for open access. In terms
of the said Regulation and as submitted above, the total power
consumption of the petitioner from all sources put together (power
supplied by Discom and Power procured from Power Exchange) at
any time shall be within the limit of its sanctioned load and therefore,
there is/was no impediment in granting open access to the petitioner
herein.
14
Order-case no 23 of 15
(xviii) It is further submitted that an opinion has been sought from Sri.
Shanti Prasad, Ex-Chairman, Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory
Commission on the subject. Shri Shanti Prasad has opined that
"normally there cannot be a transmission system constraint when
total supply remains within contract demand."
(xix) It is added further that the Petitioner has already installed Special
Energy meters (0.2S Class ABT complaint meters) as required under
the Open Access Regulations 2005 and is thus having the necessary
infrastructure for implementation of open access. In view of the
above, there is no impediment in granting open access to the
petitioner herein and therefore, the ground taken in the letter dated
02.02.2015 denying open access to the Petitioner is untenable in
facts as well as in law and is liable to be set aside.
(xx) The Plant of the Petitioner is located in the State of Bihar and the
open access is being sought for the Transmission System of the State
Transmission Utility of the State of Bihar in terms of the Open Access
Regulations, 2005 framed by this Commission. As per Regulation 12,
the jurisdiction to decide the disputes regarding availability of
transmission capacity lies with this Commission. Further, as per
Regulation 27 of the said Open Access Regulations, 2005, this
Commission had exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes
regarding open access in the State of Bihar. Regulation 28 gives
inherent powers to this Commission to make such orders as may be
necessary to meet the ends of justice and Regulation 29 grants
powers to remove difficulty to Commission. Accordingly, this
15
Order-case no 23 of 15
Commission has jurisdiction to decide the instant dispute between
the parties herein in the interest of justice and for seeking
implementation of Regulations on the subject.
(xxi) This petition is being made bonafide and in the interest of justice.
2.0 Comments/Objections/Suggestions:-
SBPDCL has submitted vide letter no.892 dated
26.06.2015 following Comments/suggestions on the petition of
Shree Cement Ltd seeking direction for grant of short term open
access:-
2.1 The petition has been filed by M/s Shree Cement Ltd seeking
direction for grant of short term open access. As per Regulation-
9 of BERC (Term & Conditions for Open Access) Regulations,
2005, The Nodal Agency for Long Term Open Access is the
Transmission Utility (BSPTCL) and for Short Term Open Access
is the State Load Dispatch Centre (SLDC).
2.2 It is further stated that Shree Cement Ltd. is an HT Consumer
of SBPDCL at 132 KV level which is a transmission line of
BSPTCL, the maintenance and augmentation/development of
which is under the perview of BSPTCL.
Petitioner case seeking open access was sent for comments to
SBPDCL. The reply in the matter of granting of open access has
been sent to MD, BSPTCL vide this office letter no. 1595 dated
11.08.2014.
In this matter Regulation 12 (2) & 12 (3) of open Access
Regulation, 2005 may be seen which is reproduced as below:-
16
Order-case no 23 of 15
12 (2) "The availability of capacity in the distribution system, for
long-term and short term Open Access, including the existence or
absence of operational constraints affecting the Open Access being
allowed shall be determined by the State Load Despatch Centre
after considering the representation of the distribution licensee and
the persons seeking the Open Access."
12 (3) "In the event of any dispute on the capacity of the
transmission system available or absence of operational constraints
in the distribution system to be determined by the State
Transmission Utility or State Load Despatch Centre, as the case
may be, the same shall be referred to the Commission for
adjudication."
2.3 MD,SBPDCL vide letter no.1595 dated 11.08.2014 sent her opinion
to BSPTCL with regard to no objection certificate for 10 MW at 132
KV under short term open access to Aurangabad grinding unit of
Shree Cement Ltd
The open access regulations 2005 under clause 8 (2) provides that
the short term open access shall be ordinarily allowed if such request
can be accommodated without jeopardising the safety of grid system
by utilising.
(A) Enhance design margins.
(B) Design available due to variation in power flows and.
(C) Margins available due to in built spare
Transmission/distribution capacity created to cater to future
load growth.
In this regard it is imperative to mention here that the
distribution company is in the process of augmenting and enhancing
the distribution capacity under various ongoing schemes/projects.
This will lead to much higher power demand from Transmission
network and grid sub-stations.
17
Order-case no 23 of 15
In view of the above, BSPTCL may defer the grant of NOC to M/s Shree
Cement till the existing GSS capacity is augmented.
3.0 BSPTCL has submitted following Objections/Suggestions vide letter
no.264 dated 17.7.2015 :-
3.1 As per Regulation 9(2) of the Open Access Regulations, 2005
notified on 20th May 2006, the Nodal Agency for Short Term Open
Access is the State Load Dispatch Centre and in such case, the
State Transmission Utility (BSPTCL) and/or a transmission licensee
and/or a distribution licensee (SBPDCL) concerned, as the case may
be, shall be responsible for coordination with the State Load
Dispatch Centre and provide all relevant information required to
take decision for providing Open Access."
3.2 In accordance with the above said provision, the views of the
SBPDCL were obtained on the issue related with M/s Shree
Cement, Aurangabad, an HT consumer of SBPDCL at 132 KV level
having contract demand of 12.5 MVA. 132 KV line from Aurangabad
GSS to M/s Shree Cement Plant at BIADA, Aurangabad was
charged on 28.05.2014.
3.3 The petitioner has requested for grant of Short Term Open Access
(STOA) to avail 10 MW power against contracted demand of 12.5
MVA with SBPDCL and has applied for enhancement of load to 13.5
MVA. In this regard, SBPDCL had informed that the distribution
capacity under various ongoing schemes/projects, will cause
increase in the demand of power in the distribution licensee area.
18
Order-case no 23 of 15
Copy of letter No.1595 dated 11.08.2014 of SBPDCL is enclosed for
reference.
3.4 It is also relevant to mention that Aurangabad GSS can be fed
power from two sources i.e. from 220/132 KV Dehri Grid Sub-
station and 220/132 KV Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station through
Chandauti Grid sub-station. M/s Shree Cement Ltd. avails 132 KV
power from Aurangabad Grid sub-station.
A. 220/132 KV Dehri Grid Sub-station: Out of the 4x100 MVA,
220/132 KV transformers of Dehri Grid Sub-station 2x100 MVA
transformers are very old as a result loading of these transformers
are limited to 60% of its capacity. The maximum load which at
present can be met from Dehri Grid Sub-station is 240 MW only.
The off peak and peak demand of the Dehri Complex is 287 MW and
425 MW respectively (Annexure-II). As such, open access corridor is
not available from Dehri Grid Sub-station.
B. 400/132 KV Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station through Chandauti Grid
sub-station: Chandauti Grid sub-station is fed power from 400/132
KV Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station through two very old double circuit
lines. One double circuit can be loaded up to 70 MW (35MW each)
and the other 110 MW (55 MW each) in order to avoid frequent
snapping of conductor/jumper. As such, total 180 MW power can
be drawn at Chandauti Grid sub-station from Bodh Gaya Grid sub-
station. The off peak and peak demand of the Gaya Complex is 228
MW and 311 MW respectively (Annexure-II). Hence open access
corridor is not available from Bodh Gaya Grid Sub-station. However,
BSPTCL is in the process of replacing the all old conductors of Bodh
Gaya-Chandauti double circuit lines with new conductors.
It is therefore evident that both the power sources are operating
with load restrictions/load curtailment of SBPDCL (discom).
3.5 M/s Shree Cement Ltd. was accordingly informed that corridor is not
available at present vide letter No.70 dated 02.02.2015.
3.6 As per Clause 11(1) of BERC Open Access Regulations, 2005
notified on 20th May 2006 under allotment priority, SBPDCL has the
19
Order-case no 23 of 15
first allotment priority for allowing Open Access. M/s Shree Cement
Ltd., being a production unit and HT Consumer of SBPDCL gets
uninterrupted power supply and priority over other consumers of
SBPDCL. As such, load restrictions are being done in rotation in
SBPDCL for its other Consumers because of the system constraint.
3.7 As per Clause 11(3) of BERC Open Access Regulations under
Curtailment Priority, short term Open Access customers shall be
curtailed first in case of system constraints or otherwise. SBPDCL
being a distribution licensee shall however, be the last to be
curtailed.
In view of the position explained in the preceding paragraph,
respondent BSPTCL has prayed the following:-
a. BSPTCL is not in a position to allow STOA to M/s Shree Cement
at present.
Pass an order as Commission deem fit and proper in the light of the
facts explained above.
4.0 Petitioner's Rejoinder
Petitioner has made following submission in the rejoinder dated
4.8.2015:-
(i) Aggregation of off-peak and peak demand of all consumers is
not correct, as peak and off-peak of different consumers arrive at
different time in a day. By presenting the data in aggregate form,
BSPTCL is trying to prove that there is congestion in the system,
whereas this is not the case. The most appropriate would be to
consider transformer loading which they have not presented
before the Commission.
(ii) BSPTCL has also not shared details of inter-connection of
Dehri GSS with Aurangabad GSS. Furthermore, it has not been
shared whether Aurangabad GSS is drawing power
20
Order-case no 23 of 15
simultaneously from Dehri GSS and Chandauti GSS or not. In
case Aurangabad GSS is receiving supply simultaneously from
Dehri GSS and Chaundauti GSS, its transmission capability
would increase substantially.
(iii) The maximum capacity of 240 MW of Dehri GSS is also
factually incorrect. Even if loading of two old transformers is
taken at 60% (though this is not the practice in other Utilities
like RVPN) the capacity would exceed 300 MW considering full
loading of new transformers.
(iv) No basis of limiting capacity of 132 kV lines to 55 MW per
circuit and of old as 35 MW per circuit has been indicated.
BSPTCL's statement of apprehending snapping of
conductor/jumper is not supported by tripping logs of the lines
or breaking of conductor strand during annual maintenance or
any other relevant report.
(v) Central Electricity Authority has published the Manual On
Transmission Planning Criteria which provides for line loading
up to thermal limit as per its Clause 5.2 (a). The maximum
permissible loading as per this manual at 480 ambient
temperature and 'Panthar' conductor temperature of 750 is 76
MW. Ambient temperature of 480 remains for very short
duration. In case ambient temperature is lower the permissible
loading limit would further go up.
(vi) When 4 lines are operating in parallel, each one will have
equal loading unless loads have been segregated and parallelism
21
Order-case no 23 of 15
has been broken at Chandauti S/S. BSPTCL's reply does not
indicate any such mechanism.
(vii) It is not clear from Annexure II that whether or not (a) Chandauti
(Gaya) GSS load includes Aurangabad S/S and SCL's load and
(b) Aurangabad S/S load includes SCL's load or not. In case the
above loads are included in Chandauti GSS then the peak and
off-peak load would be lesser than what has been claimed in the
Annexure.
(viii) The statement that various construction and augmentation
works are in progress in the transmission system to improve the
transmission capability and that NOC will be issued only with
the availability of corridor after meeting the load demand of
SBPDCL, is vague as it has uncertainty of time frame by which
open access will be available. No specific work of addition or
augmentation of transmission line and transformation capacity
have been indicated with likely commissioning schedule.
(ix) However, without going into these details, it is submitted that
reply does not indicate SD ('sustained demand' in MW) and SP
(i.e. Substation peak in MVA) with and without open access as
per Regulation 12 of BERC Open Access Regulation. Had it been
determined, it would have indicated no change in SD and SP
with open access and so no transmission capacity is required for
open access thereby implying no operational constraint. In this
respect, we submit that STOA of 10MW is within the contract
demand of 12.5 MVA and not in addition to it. As such off peak
22
Order-case no 23 of 15
and peak load of Shree Cement limited, considered at Gaya
Complex respectively as 10 MW and 12 MW respectively in table
at Annexure-II, will remain the same as 10MW and 12 MW even
with STOA. If this demand has been met with available
transmission capacity between Gaya and Chandauti s/s, then
there is no basis that with STOA it cannot be met.
Finally, petitioner has prayed that this rejoinder may kindly be
taken on record and the petition filed by the petitioner may
kindly be allowed in terms of the prayer made therein under10(2)
of BERC Open Access Regulations 2005.
5.0 Hearings:
Matter was heard on 26.06.2015.
SBPDCL submitted reply vide letter No.892 dated 26-06-2015,but
Bihar State Power Transmission Company Ltd neither submitted
any reply nor was present in the hearing. BSPTCL was directed vide
letter no.631 dated 17-06-2015 by the Commission, to file reply and
be present at the time of hearing.
Matter was heard again on 16.07.2015. During last hearing on
26.06.2015, BSPTCL was absent which was brought to the notice of
the M.D. BSPTCL. BSPTCL was also directed to file reply by
16.07.2015, but no reply was filed.
Representative of BSPTCL made oral submission that open access is
not being provided to the petitioner due to overload on the sub-
station. Representative of BSPTCL prayed for time to file reply.
Commission allowed the prayer.
Petitioner's advocate again made oral submission in support of the
petition and submitted that if any reply is filed by BSPTCL, a copy
of the same may be made available to the petitioner so that
petitioner may file rejoinder. He also submitted that in the order
dated 26.06.2015 of the Commission at page no. 1, para 3 in line
23
Order-case no 23 of 15
no. 8 the word "over and above" may be read as "within the existing
contract." Commission allowed the prayer with the direction to the
BSPTCL that a copy of the reply may also be served on the
petitioner.
Commission heard the parties. Order was reserved.
6.0 Views and findings of the Commission.
Commission has examined the petitioner's submission and
comments/ objections/suggestions submitted by the respondent
SBPDCL and BSPTCL and has observed the following:-
(1) M/s Shree Cement Ltd., an H.T. consumer of SBPDCL having a
contract demand of 12.50 MVA connected through a 132 KV
dedicated feeder, has been denied Short Term Open Access (STOA)
by the respondent BSPTCL stating non-availability of Open Access
Corridor. The petitioner submitted application seeking NOC for
grant of Open Access for purchase of power from power-exchange
up to 10MW to the Chief Engineer (Transmission-O&M),BSPTCL
(who was also in-charge of SLDC) on 20.12.2013. Subsequent to it
as advised by SLDC vide letter dated 27.12.2013, application in
prescribed PXI format was submitted on 30.01.2014. In spite of
regular follow up and discussions, the issue remained unresolved.
After a year vide letter no.70 dated 02.02.2015, the petitioner was
denied open access by Chief Engineer (Transmission- O & M). Non-
availability of corridor has been stated as reason for denial.
(2) As per Regulation 12 of the BERC (Terms and Conditions for Open
access) Regulations,2005,the jurisdiction to decide the disputes
regarding availability of transmission capacity lies with the
Commission. Regulation 27 provides that the Commission has
jurisdiction to adjudicate the disputes regarding Open access and
Regulation 28 gives inherent powers to make such orders as may be
necessary to meet the ends of justice and Regulation 29 grants
power to remove difficulty to the Commission.
(3) SBPDCL vide letter no. 1595 dated 11.08.2014 submitted their
opinion on the issue to BSPTCL stating that distribution Company
24
Order-case no 23 of 15
is in the process of augmenting and enhancing the distribution
capacity under various ongoing schemes/projects. This will lead to
much higher power demand from transmission network and grid
sub-stations. BSPTCL may defer the grant of NOC to M/s Shree
Cement till the existing GSS capacity is augmented.
Load growth and augmentation of system is a continued process.
The opinion given by SBPDCL appears to be to deny open access to
the petitioner and is not as per provisions of the Regulation8.
Regulation 8 provides for the criteria to grant open access indicating
that power flow is an important criteria to be taken into
consideration while considering any application seeking open
access. The relevant provisions of the sub-regulation 8(2) read as
follows-
"(2) The short term open Access shall be ordinarily allowed, if such
request can be accommodated without jeopardising the safety of the
grid system by utilizing (a) inherent design margins (b) margin
available due to variation in power flows; and (c) Margin available
due to inbuilt spare transmission/distribution capacity created to
cater to future load growth.
In the present case of M/s Shree Cement, the total power
consumption of the petitioner i.e. through discom source and open
access, at any time, shall be within the limit of its sanctioned load.
Petitioner has applied for open access for 10 MW load which is not
more than the sanctioned contract demand or revised contract
demand) with SBPDCL. If open access is allowed, the total power
consumption of the petitioner (i.e. sum of power supplied by the
discom and power procured from power exchange) at any time shall
be within the limit of its contract demand and therefore, this cannot
be a reason to deny grant of NOC for open access to the petitioner.
(4) BSPTCL has submitted that Aurangabad GSS which can be fed
power from two sources namely 220KV/132 KV Dehri GSS and 220
KV/132 KV Bodh Gaya GSS. Shree Cement avails power at 132 KV
from Aurangabad Grid S/S. The maximum load which at present
can be met from Dehri GSS is 240 MW only. The off peak and peak
25
Order-case no 23 of 15
demand of the Dehri GSS is 287 MW and 425 MW respectively.
Thus open access corridor is not available from Dehri GSS.
Similarly, Bodh Gaya GSS is also overloaded and hence open access
corridor is not available from Bodh Gaya GSS also.
However, the details submitted by BSPTCL indicate only the sum of
peak loads and off peak loads respectively and not the actual
maximum load drawal. The data furnished do not establish
operational constraint.
(5) It has been provided in regulation 8 (3) that "STU and distribution
licensees shall at all times endeavour to provide open access to their
system and shall always equip their system to meet the future
demand for open access and create sufficient capacity in the system
to provide open access and thereby competition".
Although, BSPTCL has mentioned that BSPTCL is in the process of
replacing all old conductors of Bodh Gaya, Chandauti double circuit
lines with new conductors, but has not indicated the time frame as
to when the open access shall be allowed to the petitioner.
(6) Accordingly, to provisions in Regulation 12 (2), availability of
capacity in the distribution system for open access shall be
determined by the SLDC after considering the representation of the
distribution Licensee and the person seeking the open access.
But the petitioner’s submission that even in case of grant of open
access, the total power consumption shall be within the contract
demand, has not been considered.
(7) It is provided in Regulation 12 (3) that in the event of any dispute on
capacity of transmission system available or absence of operational
constraints in distribution system to be determined by SLDC or
transmission utility, shall be referred to the Commission for
adjudication.
In the present case, since the total power consumption including
open access power purchase through exchange, shall be within the
contract demand, there is hardly any issue to be resolved. The
petitioner has not been denied open access on any valid ground.
26
Order-case no 23 of 15
It took the Respondent BSPTCL over one year to even deny open
access to the petitioner whereas Regulation 13 (2) (d) provides that
SLDC shall process an application seeking open access for a term
up to one year in a maximum time limit of thirty days. This delay is
clear violation of the regulation.
(8) The Electricity Act, 2003 under section 42(3) has specified provision
for non-discriminatory open access. BERC (Term and condition for
open Access) Regulations, 2005 has also provided necessary
regulatory framework for providing open access. But till date, no
open access has been granted by BSPTCL or SBPDCL to any
consumer
In view of the observations made in foregoing paragraphs,
Commission directs BSPTCL/SLDC to provide NOC for availing
open access facility to the petitioner within 15 days time.
Sd/- (S. C. Jha) Member
Sd/- (U. N. Panjiar)
Chairman