Page 1 of 30 MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED [Plot No. G-9, Prakashgad, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051] Website: www.mahadiscom.in PUBLIC NOTICE Comments / Suggestions on MSEDCL’s Annual Performance Review (APR) Petition for FY 2007-08 under MYT framework, truing up for FY 2006-07 and determination of ARR and tariff for FY 2008-09 (MERC Case No 72 of 2007) 1. The MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED (MSEDCL) had filed the original Petition on January 11, 2008, for Approval of Annual Performance Review (APR) for FY 2007-08 under the MYT framework, truing up for FY 2006-07 and determination of ARR and tariff for FY 2008-09 before the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission under the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 and MERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2005, which was admitted by the Commission for hearing on 14.01.2008. MSEDCL had published a Public Notice under Section 64 (2) of the Act on admission of the Petition. 2. The petition filed by MSEDCL on 11 th Jan 2008 sought a significant increase in revenue requirement as it had captured the impact of the deductions made by the GoM. MSEDCL and GoM both being concerned about the possible steep rise in tariff, a spontaneous consultative dialogue was opened between the two. MSEDCL trusted its efforts to showcase its inability to carry the cost of the deductions from subsidy payments as the liabilities were not in the books of accounts of MSEDCL after restructuring of MSEB. The discussions has resulted in a situation that the GoM has taken cognizance of the difficulties of MSEDCL. Government of Maharashtra vide its letter No. Reforms 2008/C.R. 44/NRG-3 dated 1 st March 2008, has agreed to bear the liabilities pertaining to principal & interest on loans taken by the erstwhile M.S. Electricity Board prior to restructuring, i.e. prior to 6th June 2005, along with other liabilities like State Government Bonds, Loan from Power Finance Corporation, Banks and others, Repayment under Central Plan Allocation and CPSU Bonds, as approved by the cabinet on 20 th May 2005.
Transcript
Page 1 of 30
MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED[Plot No. G-9, Prakashgad, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051]
Website: www.mahadiscom.in
PUBLIC NOTICE
Comments / Suggestions on MSEDCL’s Annual Performance Review (APR) Petitionfor FY 2007-08 under MYT framework, truing up for FY 2006-07 and determination
of ARR and tariff for FY 2008-09 (MERC Case No 72 of 2007)
1. The MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED (MSEDCL) had filed the original Petition on January 11,2008, for Approval of Annual Performance Review (APR) for FY 2007-08 under the MYT framework, truing up for FY 2006-07 and determination ofARR and tariff for FY 2008-09 before the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission under the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 and MERC(Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2005, which was admitted by the Commission for hearing on 14.01.2008. MSEDCL had published aPublic Notice under Section 64 (2) of the Act on admission of the Petition.
2. The petition filed by MSEDCL on 11th Jan 2008 sought a significant increase in revenue requirement as it had captured the impact of the deductions madeby the GoM. MSEDCL and GoM both being concerned about the possible steep rise in tariff, a spontaneous consultative dialogue was opened betweenthe two. MSEDCL trusted its efforts to showcase its inability to carry the cost of the deductions from subsidy payments as the liabilities were not in thebooks of accounts of MSEDCL after restructuring of MSEB. The discussions has resulted in a situation that the GoM has taken cognizance of thedifficulties of MSEDCL. Government of Maharashtra vide its letter No. Reforms 2008/C.R. 44/NRG-3 dated 1st March 2008, has agreed to bear theliabilities pertaining to principal & interest on loans taken by the erstwhile M.S. Electricity Board prior to restructuring, i.e. prior to 6th June 2005, alongwith other liabilities like State Government Bonds, Loan from Power Finance Corporation, Banks and others, Repayment under Central Plan Allocationand CPSU Bonds, as approved by the cabinet on 20th May 2005.
3. Under the circumstances described above, MSEDCL has now filed its Revised Petition on 13.02.2008 after removing the impact of deductions by GoM.It is to be noted that the proposed tariff schedule in the current petition has also undergone little change with proposed introduction of two new categories.Therefore, the petitions filed by MSEDCL for Annual Performance Review of FY 2007-08 and for determination of ARR and Tariff for FY 2008-09 on30/11/2007 and 11/01/2008 stands modified accordingly. The Commission has admitted the revised Petition for hearing on 05.03.2008, and directedMSEDCL to publish the Public Notice under Section 64 (2) of the Act on admission of the Petition.
4. The salient features of the Petition are provided below:
4True up amount for FY 2006-07 (after considering gains and losses due tocontrollable/ uncontrollable factors)
968
5 Total Additional Claims 886 Requirement on Account of Pending Claims 10777 Revenue Gap in respective years 403 2915
Net Revenue Requirement of FY 2008-09Sl. Particulars FY 2008-091 Revenue Gap at Existing tariff 2915
2Provisional True-Up Requirement of FY 2007-08(according to the requirement of Hon’ble MERC during Technical validation)
403
4 Net Revenue Requirement 3319
5. MSEDCL has proposed to introduce two new consumer categories - Power looms and Flour Mills separated from LT V industry.
Page 9 of 30
a) LT-V: Power Loom
MSEDCL proposes that this category will be applicable for power loom industry operating in a common shed or individual shed, and using electricity
for the purpose of power loom industry, including Humidification Plant, Kandi Machine, Compressor, etc. This tariff will not be applicable for
consumers doing job works. Also, it should be noted that the subsidised tariff should not be applicable to a consumer having only the other allied
machinery of weaving preparatory without any power loom.
Any industry having any or all of the following activities/machinery is a weaving preparatory unit and can be considered as eligible for power loom
tariff, provided the said industry does also have weaving machinery (Power looms), In other words, an industry having any or all of the following
mentioned weaving preparatory machinery and do not have power looms in the same premises under one roof, then such industry shall not be eligible
for Power loom tariff. Further the following list of machinery may not be an exhaustive list and may also include such other machinery necessary for
weaving preparatory
1. Single yarn Sizing
2. Twist Sizing
3. Warping
4. Pirn Winding
5. Twisting
6. Yarn Dying
7. Humidification Plant
8. Dust Separator etc.
b) LT-V: Flour mills
Page 10 of 30
MSEDCL proposes that this category will be applicable for Flour Mills operating in a common shed or individual shed, and using electricity for the
purpose of Flour Mills. This tariff will be applicable to Flour mill operating at 0 to 10 HP. This tariff will be applicable to all the flour mills excluding
Masala Mills, Rice Mills, etc.
The retail tariff proposed by MSEDCL is summarized below:
HT Tariff
Existing Tariff Proposed Tariff Average Energy Chargeincluding ASC Charges
a. Relationship of load shedding with costly power purchase and hence with ASC
Page 20 of 30
The basic premise of ASC was that consumers benefiting from the reduced load shedding hours vis-à-vis the uniform load sheddinghours should pay for the costly power procured to mitigate load shedding, through Additional Supply Charge in addition to the baseretail tariffs. Details are available in chapter of ASC contained in APR petition.
b. Extent of load shedding if the costly power purchase is not undertaken – month-wise projections for FY 2008-09§ Considering all sources
Considering availability from all sources (in Hrs)
MONTH Group Urban & Industrial agglomeration Other region Ag. Dominated*
Note : *RCI Consumers in Agri- Dominated areas will be benefited by reduced load shedding and will get power as per LS protocol of Otherregions
§ Considering RGPPL as costly power, Costly Power not undertaken
Considering availability without costly power (in Hrs)
Page 22 of 30
MONTH Group Urban & Industrialagglomeration Other region Ag. Dominated*
A 6.75 10.25 15.0
B 7.5 10.75 15.5
C 8.25 11.25 16
D 9 11.75 12
APRIL--08
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)A 5.50 8.50 14.50
B 6.25 9 15
C 7 9.5 15.5
D 7.75 10 16
MAY—08
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)A 3.25 5.25 11.50B 4 5.75 12C 4.75 6.25 12.5
D 5.5 6.75 13JUNE—08
Additional one day staggering to Industries( Fortnightly)
A 3.50 5.75 12.00
B 4.25 6.25 12.5
C 5 6.75 13JULY—08
D 5.75 7.25 13.5
Page 23 of 30
Considering availability without costly power (in Hrs)
MONTH Group Urban & Industrialagglomeration Other region Ag. Dominated*
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)
A 3.50 5.75 12.50
B 4.25 6.25 13
C 5 6.75 13.5AUGUST--08
D 5.75 7.25 14
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)
A 3.75 6.00 13.00
B 4.5 6.5 13.5
C 5.25 7 14SEPTEMBER--08
D 6 7.5 14.5
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)
A 5.00 7.75 14.50
B 5.75 8.25 15
C 6.5 8.75 15.5
OCTOBER--08
D 7.25 9.25 16
Page 24 of 30
Considering availability without costly power (in Hrs)
MONTH Group Urban & Industrialagglomeration Other region Ag. Dominated*
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)A 7.00 10.50 14.50
B 7.75 11 15
C 8.5 11.5 15.5
D 9.25 12 16
NOVEMBER--08
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)A 6.75 10.25 14.50
B 7.50 10.75 15.00
C 8.25 11.25 15.50
D 9.00 11.75 16.00
DECEMBER--08
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)A 6.50 10.00 0.00
B 7.25 10.5 0.00
C 8 11 0.00
D 8.75 11.5 0.00
JANUARY--09
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)FEBRUARY--09 A 7.50 11.25 0.00
Page 25 of 30
Considering availability without costly power (in Hrs)
MONTH Group Urban & Industrialagglomeration Other region Ag. Dominated*
B 8.25 11.75 0.00
C 9 12.25 0.00
D 9.75 12.75 0.00Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)
A 8.50 12.50 0.00
B 9.25 13.00 0.00
C 10.00 13.50 0.00
D 10.75 14.00 0.00
MARCH--09
Additional one day staggering to Industries(Weekly)
Note : *RCI Consumers in Agri- Dominated areas will be benefited by reduced load shedding and will get power as per LS protocol of Otherregions
MSEDCL would like to submit that if RGPPL is considered as non-costly source than the higher cost of RGPPL power would have to borne by all thecategories of consumers who are actually not benefited from the reduce load shedding. Hence, MSEDCL has considered RGPPL as costly source, so thatconsumers benefiting from the reduced load shedding hours vis-à-vis the uniform load shedding hours should pay for the costly power procured to mitigateload shedding.
Page 26 of 30
c. The ASC matrix proposed, for different hours of load shedding, based on the costly power purchase being projected, for both the above scenarios
ASC matrix considering RGPPL as Costly SourceASC MATRIX
HT-I Industry
Industry On express feeder having no staggering day 52.82%
Industry (Not on express feeder) 38.93%
HT III –RAILWAY 52.66%
LT-V Industry 37.32%
LT Domestic , LT Non Domestic and HT VI Bulk Supply in Industrial & Urban AgglomerationArea
21.35%
LT Domestic , LT Non Domestic and HT VI Bulk Supply in Other Regions13.33%
8. Regulatory Liability Charges (RLC)The issue pertaining to Regulatory Liability Charges is subjudice. Without prejudice to its rights, MSEDCL submits the present status which is as under:-
(a) Vide MERC Order dated 18-5-2007 and subsequent Clarificatory Order dated 24-8-2007, MERC had given directions for refund of RLC.
(b) MSEDCL had preferred an appeal against the original Order dated 18-5-2007 in the Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.
Page 27 of 30
(c) MSEDCL had preferred a Review Petition before the Hon’ble Commission against the Clarificatory Order dated 24-8-2007.
(d) MERC vide its Order dated 1-11-2007 rejected the Review Petition of MSEDCL.
(e) MSEDCL preferred an appeal against this rejection Order of MERC along with the earlier Orders.
(f) The Appellate Tribunal vide its Order dated 23-01-2008 directed MERC to hear the Review Petition of MSEDCL.
In view of above-mentioned judgement of the Appellate Tribunal, MSEDCL has submitted on 06th February 2008 that MSEDCL’s review petition dated 24th
September 2007 needs to be heard by the Hon’ble Commission. In view of the above-mentioned facts, it is humbly submitted that the RLC issue may bedealt separately.
9. Copies of the following documents can be obtained on written request from the Offices of MSEDCL mentioned below, and all divisional offices ofMSEDCL:a) Executive Summary of the proposals (free of cost, in Marathi or English)b) Detailed Petition documents along with CD (in English) (on payment of Rs 250/- in cash or by DD/ Cheque drawn on MAHARASHTRA STATE
ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED payable at Mumbai).c) Detailed Petition documents (in English) (on payment of Rs. 200/-).d) CD of detailed Petition document (in English) (on payment of Rs. 50/-).
10. The Commission has directed MSEDCL to invite objections or comments from the public on the above Petition through this Notice. Objections orcomments may be sent to the Secretary, Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission, 13th Floor, Centre No. 1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade,Mumbai – 400 005 [Fax : 22163976 : E-mail - [email protected]] by March 30, 2008, along with proof of service on the SE (TRC),MSEDCL. Public is also free to file objections or comments at the time of Public Hearing in the specified formats and in specified number of copies.
11. Every person who intends to file objections or comments can file the same in English or in Marathi, in four copies, and should carry the full name, postaladdress and e-mail address, if any, of the sender. It should be indicated whether the objections or comments is being filed on behalf of any organization ofcategory of consumers. It should also be mentioned if the sender wants to be heard in person, in which case opportunity would be given by theCommission at the Public Hearing to be held at the following venues, for which no separate notice will be given.
Sl. Place /Venue of Public Hearing Date Time1 Amravati
Sant Gyaneshwar Sanskritik Bhavan, Morshi Road, Amravati03.04.2008(Thursday)
11:00 hours
2 NagpurMeeting Hall, Ravi Bhavan, Civil Lines Nagpur
04.04.2008(Friday)
11:00 hours
3 AurangabadMeeting Hall, Office of the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad
Note: In case of any change in the date/venue of the Public Hearing due to any reasons, the same will be intimated through Public Notice
12. Stakeholders should note that objections or comments filed prior to the admission of the revised Petition, i.e., objections or comments filed on theearlier admitted APR Petition of MSEDCL, will not be considered. Stakeholders are requested to file objections or comments on the revisedPetition, in order to be considered.
13. MSEDCL shall reply to each of the objections or comments received within three days of the receipt of the same but not later than April 2, 2008 for allthe objections or comments received till March 30, 2008. Stakeholders can submit their rejoinders on replies provided by MSEDCL either during thepublic hearing/s or latest by April 20, 2008.
14. The detailed Petition document and the executive summary are available on MSEDCL’s website www.mahadiscom.in and the executive summary is alsoavailable on the website of the Commission [http://www.mercindia.org.in] in downloadable format (free of cost).
