Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SOUTHERN REGIONAL ELECTRICITY BOARD BANGALORE
MINUTES OF THE 140th MEETING OF SREB
HELD AT BANGALORE ON 18.03.2006
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The 140th meeting of Southern Regional Electricity Board was held at
Bangalore on 18th March, 2006. The list of participants is at Annexure-I.
1.2 Welcoming the Members and all the participants to the meeting, Member
Secretary, SREB stated that this will be the last meeting of the Board
under the aegis of Southern Regional Electricity Board and Southern
Regional Power Committee comes into existence henceforth. He
thanked M/s. PTC India Ltd. for agreeing to host the meeting and for the
nice arrangements for comfortable stay and conduct of the meeting. He
expressed hope that the ambience and the surroundings of the Angsana
Oasis and Resort would provide a conducive atmosphere for smooth
conduct of the proceedings.
1.3 Shri T.N. Thakur, CMD, PTC India Ltd, welcomed the Chairperson,
Members and participants to the meeting. He expressed great pleasure
and privilege in hosting the concluding meeting under the aegis of the
SRE Board and also briefed on the vision, mission, activities, growth etc.
of PTCIL. He informed that PTC had come into existence in 1999 with
the following objectives:
• Develop power market for optimal utilization of energy
• Promote power trading to optimally utilize the existing resources
• Catalyze development of power projects particularly
environment friendly hydro projects
• Promote exchange of power with neighbouring countries.
2
He informed that a lot of progress had been made towards achieving the
above objectives and the emphasis was to make PTC India Ltd a power
solution provider. PTCIL has provided consultancy/advise to state
utilities, State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Central Electricity
Regulatory Commission, IPPs etc. PTCIL has helped the utilities in
overcoming short-term coal deficit by arranging imported coal to the
utility of which three consignments of coal have already come to
Chennai. PTCIL has been collaborating with the generating companies
throughout the development process. He informed about the consortium
of Sikkim, APGENCO and PTCIL which has helped in power
development. PTCIL has small equity in some of the projects where the
developer wants it. PTCIL has earned high level of financial credibility
during these years. An Australian Developer and a Chinese Contractor
who were setting up 750 MW Hydro Project in Nepal got an excellent
rating report about PTC’s financial credibility from Mumbai financial
market.
1.4 Smt. Rachel Chatterjee, Chairman SREB & CMD, APTRANSCO
welcomed the Members of the Board, Member (GO &D) & Member,
(PS), CEA and participants to the concluding meeting of SRE Board.
She expressed hope that same type of cooperation and coordination that
prevailed under SRE Board set up would continue under SRPC also.
She thanked CMD and Director, PTCIL and their team for making the
stay comfortable. She thanked PTCIL for highlighting the activities of
PTC and expressed hope that it will grow from strength to strength.
The agenda items were taken up for discussions.
2. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 139TH MEETING OF SREB
2.1 Member Secretary, SREB intimated that the Minutes of the 139th
meeting of Southern Regional Electricity Board held at Hyderabad on
3
19th December 2005 were forwarded vide letter No.SREB/SE-
II/8/139:SREB/2005/454-507 dated 17th January, 2006.
2.2 He said that Executive Director (Operation), NPCIL vide letter No.
NPCIL/ED(O)/2006/M/380 dated 30th January, 2006 had requested to
include new paras No. 7.1.6 & 7.1.7 as modification. The suggested
paras are reproduced hereunder:
Quote
7.1.6 In response to the problems of over voltage trips on 400 kV
Kaiga-Guttur line, it was informed that the over voltages in the
Southern Regional System have been a cause for concern.
Further, it was indicated that in the Southern Regional Power
System Planning Committee Meeting held at Bangalore on
22.9.2005, a decision was taken to make relevant power
system studies to identify solutions to resolve the above
problem. The studies are underway at CEA which are likely to
be completed by January 2006. The SR Power System
Planning Committee would meet to discuss the same
immediately after the completion of the above studies. As
soon as the standing committee finalises the proposal, it would
be discussed in SREB on priority basis, if required by
organizing a special meeting.
7.1.7 ED (O), NPCIL further informed that the underlying 220 kV
Transmission system at Narendra (400/220 kV S/S of
POWERGRID) was not ready even though 400 kV Narendra
S/S was commissioned on 28th October, 2005. M/s. KPTCL
informed that the 220 kV Narendra-Haveri D/C lines were
completed but the lines are not taken into service as bay
equipments at Haveri were still to be supplied. Member (PS),
CEA suggested that the Narendra-Haveri lines be made as
4
Narendra-Guttur lines by-passing the Haveri S/S, until the bay
equipments are received. This evacuation route from Kaiga to
Guttur via Narendra would provide an alternate path for
evacuation of Kaiga power, pending stable operation of 400
kV Kaiga-Guttur line and upgradation of the other 200 kV
Kaiga-Guttur line to 400 kV.
Unquote
2.2.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that under para 7.2.2 of 139th
Board meeting minutes, POWERGRID has intimated that a
comprehensive proposal for the entire Southern Region for
placement of reactors at various locations to contain over voltage
would be presented to CEA by mid January 2006. As the recording
reflected the content expressed in suggested amendment vide para
7.1.6, he suggested that in this case, the minutes need not be
amended as suggested by NPCIL. This was agreed.
2.2.2 Regarding new para 7.1.7 suggested by Executive Director
(Operation), NPCIL, it was suggested by Member Secretary, SREB
that it provided extra information and could be included in the
minutes. This was agreed.
2.2.3 Accordingly, the agreed Para for modification is reproduced
hereunder:
Quote
7.1.6 ED (O), NPCIL further informed that the underlying 220 kV
Transmission system at Narendra (400/220 kV S/S of
POWERGRID) was not ready even though 400 kV Narendra
S/S was commissioned on 28th October, 2005. M/s. KPTCL
informed that the 220 kV Narendra-Haveri D/C lines were
completed but the lines are not taken into service as bay
5
equipments at Haveri were still to be supplied. Member (PS),
CEA suggested that the Narendra-Haveri lines be made as
Narendra-Guttur lines by-passing the Haveri S/S, until the bay
equipments are received. This evacuation route from Kaiga to
Guttur via Narendra would provide an alternate path for
evacuation of Kaiga power, pending stable operation of 400
kV Kaiga-Guttur line and upgradation of the other 200 kV
Kaiga-Guttur line to 400 kV.
Unquote
2.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Executive Director (Engg),
POWERGRID vide letter No: C\ENG\SEF\S\Talcher–II\4467 dated
16.02.2006 had requested for modification, under Para 18: “Backup
Transmission System for evacuation of power from Talcher-II
STPS”, as under:
2.3.1 Quote
In this regard, it may be mentioned that during the deliberations on
the subject it was agreed that Mendhashal-Behrampur-Gazuwaka
400 kV D/C line be constructed to provide reliability to the existing
transmission system for which SR constituents shall bear the
transmission charges. However, in regard to requirement of 3rd
module of HVDC back-to-back at Gazuwaka as indicated in CEA
letter referred in the said minutes, the same was not agreed to be
taken up along with the aforesaid transmission scheme.
Unquote
2.3.2 He added that keeping in view the suggested amendment by
Executive Director (Engg.), POWERGRID, paras 18.3 and 18.4 of
the 139th Board meeting minutes may be replaced by the paras
18.3 & 18.4, outlined hereunder:
6
Quote
18.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that TCC in the 117th
meeting held on the previous day had agreed to the following
proposal as the backup transmission system for SR constituents
for Talcher-Kolar HVDC link:
“400 kV D/C Mendhashal – Behrampur – Gazuwaka
line to strengthen ER system together with seeking
500 MW long term transmission access in ER grid from
Talcher to Gazuwaka”.
18.4 Board approved the above.
Unquote
2.3.3 The Board agreed with the above suggested amendments.
2.4 Accordingly, the minutes of 139th SREB meeting stood approved with the
modifications/amendments agreed in paras 2.2 and 2.3 above.
3. TRANSFER OF ASSETS OF SIRSI-GUTTUR (DAVANGERE) 400 KV D/C LINE UNDER KPTCL TO PGCIL AS REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEME
3.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that SRE Board in its 131st meeting
held at Bangalore on 22.2.2003 approved the proposal to include the
400 KV Sirsi-Guttur D/C line and two 400 kV line bays at Guttur of
KPTCL in the Regional transmission scheme and the modalities for
transfer of assets of this line from KPTCL to PGCIL were to be finalized
between them. The 400 KV Sirsi-Guttur D/C line being a leased asset,
the agreement of KPTCL with the funding agencies, made in the year
1999, had not included a formal clause for premature closure. The,
financial Institutions, for the premature closure of the lease, were
demanding hefty compensation amounting to Rs.1.05 Crores.
7
3.2 He added that Director (Trans.), KPTCL had in the 139th meeting of SRE
Board stated that a meeting with IL & FS was scheduled to take place
during the first week of January 2006, after which KPTCL would be in a
position to indicate the details of amount agreed mutually between
KPTCL and the financiers, for the benefit of the constituents. The
meeting with IL & FS in the above connection was held on 04.01.2006,
wherein it was decided to complete the entire process of transfer of
leased assets of Sirsi-Guttur 400 kV D/C line from KPTCL to PGCIL by
31.03.2006, by ensuring full cooperation and coordination between
themselves.
3.3 Member Secretary, SREB intimated that in the 118th meeting of TCC
held on previous day, Director (Transmission), KPTCL had informed that
the matter was under negotiation & reconsideration with IL & FS and
was likely to be finalized in about two weeks time.
3.4 Chairman, SREB requested KPTCL and PGCIL to resolve the issues at
the earliest for smooth transfer of the asset and to bring the proposal
before the next SRPC meeting. MD, KPTCL assured expeditious action
in this regard.
4. NEW PROJECTS OF NLC
4.1 2000 MW coal based power plant at Orissa (Ib Valley)
4.1.1 Member Secretary, SREB stated that the Members were aware of
the issues raised by Orissa Government and also the deliberations
in the meetings of the Board in regard to shifting of the project
location to the Southern Region near to Orissa Border, in case the
coming up of the project in Orissa got delayed further, for which
various cost options were to be considered. He added that the
constituents were also aware that the availability from this plant had
been taken into consideration by SR constituents during 11th plan
and in the 139th meeting of the SRE Board, held on 19th December
8
2005, NLC were advised to work out the various cost alternatives to
help the constituents in assessment of power requirement from the
project. NLC were to submit the details before the Board in its 140th
meeting.
4.1.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting of the
TCC held on previous day GM, NLC had expressed that they could
not complete the job of working out the various cost alternatives.
After discussions, the constituents had once again requested NLC
to work out the various cost alternatives, within one month’s time
for which NLC has agreed. Member Secretary said that the issue
has been under the consideration of the Board for about five
meetings now and expressed that Members may like to consider
whether the benefits of the project would accrue during the 11th
Plan with the present pace of progress.
4.1.3 Director (Power), NLC informed that there were some positive
signals from the Government of Orissa. NLC had a meeting with
the Energy Secretary to Government of Orissa wherein it was
explained that NLC was a Public Sector Company, while the
policies being framed by Government of Orissa were generally for
the IPPs. Energy Secretary had assured that the issue would be
taken up with the Chief Secretary to Government of Orissa and
would revert back to NLC. NLC had also a meeting with Secretary
(Power) MOP, GOI wherein help was assured to expedite the
project.
4.1.4 On a query from Member Secretary, SREB on the aspect of coal tie
up etc., Director (Power), NLC informed that linkage for Talberra
Mines have been tied up with MCL and no difficulty was envisaged
as far as coal supply to the project was concerned. The land for
the project had also been identified and soon after receiving
positive signal from Government of Orissa, the process for the land
acquisition would commence. He further added that it would be
9
possible to bring the project by the end of 11th Plan, in case the
issues got resolved appropriately.
4.2 1000 MW coal based power plant at Tuticorin
4.2.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Chairman, SREB had
taken up the matter for waiver of condition relating to privatization
of distribution attached to granting Mega Power Project status with
Secretary (Power), Government of India in pursuance of request by
the Members in the 139th meeting of the SRE Board. In order to
elicit early response from Ministry of Power, Government of India,
Chairman, SREB had once again taken up this matter with
Secretary (Power), Ministry of Power, Government of India.
4.2.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the 118th meeting of the
TCC held on previous day, TNEB informed that in a meeting held
on 19th December 2005 taken by Secretary (Power) regarding
delinking of conditions of MPP status it was recorded that the said
condition was being satisfactorily fulfilled/satisfied by NTPC in the
various other projects by incorporating necessary clause in their
PPAs which could also be contemplated to be suitably included by
TNEB in their two joint venture projects.
4.2.3 Director (Power), NLC informed that the feasibility report was
ready, pollution clearance was expected shortly from TNPCB while
the PPA was pending and the draft PPA had already been sent to
all the beneficiary constituents. The beneficiary constituents had
broadly agreed to the format of the draft PPA except for the
condition relating to privatization of distribution attached to granting
of MPP status.
4.2.4 CMD, APTRANSCO & Chairman, SREB expressed that the
condition relating to privatization of distribution attached to granting
of MPP status was hampering new capacity addition. She further
added that the decision and time frame in regard to privatization of
10
distribution could have been left to the respective State
Governments.
She added that during the forthcoming meeting to be taken by the
Prime Minister with the State Chief Ministers, the issue of de-linking
of privatization as condition for according MPP status could also be
discussed and said that APTRANSCO have included this issue for
the meeting.
4.2.5 Chairman, KSEB stated that while the scope of privatization of
distribution vested with the State Governments each Government
had its own limitations about the implementation.
4.2.6 MD, KPTCL felt that the policy of privatization of distribution will
have to be looked into keeping in view the associated aspects
relating to urban and rural areas.
4.2.7 Chairman, TNEB informed that the project was on fast track and
after approval, tendering activities are likely to commence by
September 2006.
4.2.8 CMD, APTRANSCO & Chairman, SREB requested all the
constituents, that they could once again request their Governments
to take up the issue regarding de-linking of privatization of
distribution from reform issues, lest it may prove as a disincentive
for capacity additions.
4.3 1000 MW lignite based power plant at Jayamkondam
4.3.1 Member Secretary, SREB said that in the 139th SREB meeting,
Member (Generation), TNEB had confirmed that the project was
under joint venture as on that date and land acquisition was in
progress. This was in response to the point raised by Managing
Director, KPTCL that if there was any delay in execution of the
project on account of being a joint venture one, NLC might consider
developing the same independently, so that SR constituents could
11
also requisition power from this project. CGM, TS-II, NLC had
confirmed that the 1st unit could be expected after 56 months from
the date of clearance.
4.3.2 In the same meeting, CMD, APTRANSCO & Chairman, SREB had
stated that the main difference between the two scenarios would be
those relating to the land cost and equity participation and that NLC
should, therefore work out cost for the alternatives and put up in the
next Board meeting. After deliberations, Board had advised NLC to
workout the cost alternatives for the above scenarios. NLC had
intimated that they would be able to submit the cost alternatives to
the Board in the next meeting.
4.3.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting of the
TCC held on previous day GM, NLC had intimated that the various
cost alternatives would be furnished within one month.
4.3.4 Director (Power), NLC stated that as already informed by TNEB in
the context of review of progress for Tuticorin Project (reported in
para 4.2.2), necessary clause could be incorporated by the
constituents in the PPA of this project also to ensure early
accordance of MPP status. He added that both issues viz.
precondition, in the form of privatization of distribution attached to
grant of MPP status as well as procedural delay associated with
grant of MPP status, would result in cost increase which needed to
be appropriately addressed.
5. JOINT VENTURE PROJECT OF NTPC AND TNEB AT ENNORE
5.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 139th meeting of SREB,
as per decision taken in the 117th TCC meeting, NTPC had informed
that land has been identified, for which TNEB was to initiate action for
land acquisition proceedings with their Government. TNEB stated that
they were taking up with GOI for according of MPP status also. NTPC
12
expressed that both units were expected to be available by the end of
11th plan. The Board had requested Chairman, SREB to once again
take up with MOP, the issue regarding de-linking generation addition
from reform issue, lest it may prove as a disincentive for capacity
additions. Members were advised by Chairman, SREB to take up
individually also with MOP.
5.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting of the TCC
held on previous day NTPC had intimated that the process was going on
smoothly and the land has to be acquired by TNEB, for which TNEB had
informed that the land had been identified and would be handed over to
NTPC.
5.3 Board noted the above.
6. FREQUENCY LINKED PENALTY/INCENTIVE SCHEME FOR OVER/UNDER DRAWALS OF SHARES
6.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 139th SREB meeting, he
had intimated to the Board that as per decision of 138th meeting of SRE
Board, engineers from the constituent States had carried out studies at
SRLDC from 5.9.2005 to 14.9.2005 and the results of the studies were
discussed by the Special Technical Committee in its meeting held on
22nd September 2005. The issue was deliberated and the Board had
decided to defer this matter for further consideration.
6.2 In the meeting, Chairman, KSEB and Chairman, TNEB suggested that a
flexible approach could be worked out among the States. After
deliberations it was decided that APTRANSCO, KPTCL, KSEB and
TNEB would have a meeting among themselves separately in the next
quarter to resolve the issue. It was decided that this issue need not be
included as an agenda item for the Board’s consideration in the future
meetings.
13
7. STATUS OF REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEMES
7.1 Upgradation of 400 kV level of operation of Kaiga-Guttur D/C line
7.1.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that the constituents were
aware that after charging of Kaiga-Guttur Circuit-II at 400 kV level
on 8th August, 2005 by KPTCL, there were trippings due to over
voltage, insulator decapping etc. In the 139th meeting of SREB, MD,
KPTCL had informed that all the insulators in the Sirsi-Guttur DC
link were of BHEL make and had some manufacturing defects and
therefore, KPTCL had taken a decision to change all the insulators
in circuit-I and the balance insulators (Loc. 1 to Loc.157) on circuit-
II. The work was expected to be completed by April 2006. It was
agreed that for ensuring reliable operation of 400 kV Kaiga-Guttur
circuit-II, replacement of balance old insulators in circuit-II would be
taken up first and replacement/upgradation work on circuit-I would
be taken up subsequently.
7.1.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting of the
TCC held on previous day Director (Tr.), KPTCL intimated that
tender for 40,000 insulators was floated in response to which only
one supplier was in a position to assure supply to the level of
10,000 insulators by end of May 2006. With this, the change in
insulators on circuit II would be completed prior to monsoon by
June/July 2006. Change of insulators on circuit I would be taken up
after monsoon.
7.1.3 Director (Tr.), KPTCL, in the meeting, stated that the tender date
had been extended twice and all the insulator manufacturing
companies were seeking six months time for the supply of
insulators. He requested PGCIL to consider loaning/sale of
insulators to KPTCL for enabling completion of the work at the
earliest. He added that another tender would be floated for the
balance insulators.
14
7.1.4 ED, SRTS-II, PGCIL replied that they were not having spare
insulators.
7.1.5 Director (TR.&GO), APTRANSCO requested KPTCL to explore the
possibility of using silicon rubber insulators. Director (O), PGCIL
and Member (PS), CEA stated that silicon rubber insulators were in
use for last ten years in small sections, mainly for heavily polluted
areas and their performance capabilities for longer periods was still
to be ascertained. PGCIL felt that simulation of performance of
silicon-rubber insulators for the long periods of 30 to 40 years into
the future was not feasible.
7.1.6 Member (PS), CEA said that it was in the interest of KPTCL to get
the issues settled and complete the works of insulator changing at
the earliest since PGCIL would take over the asset in a healthy
condition and any delay will lead to further cost escalations.
7.2 400 kV Madurai-Trivandrum D/C line
7.2.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 138th meeting of
SREB, it was intimated that ICT at 400 kV Trivandrum substation
was frequently tripping on over fluxing due to high voltages during
low load period. The short-term operational measures suggested by
SRLDC to avoid frequent tripping were found to be technically not
practicable/ implementable by KSEB & TNEB. As a long-term
solution, PGCIL was requested to examine provision of Reactor on
this line as one of the feasible solutions and to put up a proposal to
the Standing Committee on Power System Planning of SR.
7.2.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the 139th meeting of
SREB, POWERGRID intimated that a comprehensive proposal for
the entire Southern Region for placement of Reactors at various
locations to contain over-voltage would be presented to CEA by
mid January 2006.
15
7.2.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting of the
TCC held on previous day PGCIL had informed that they have
already submitted a proposal to CEA during the month of January
2006 for placement of reactors at various locations in Southern
Region.
7.2.4 Board noted the above.
8. OPERATION OF TALCHER-KOLAR HVDC TRANSMISSION SYSTEM IN GROUND RETURN MODE
8.1 Member Secretary, SREB, stated that as the constituents were aware,
the problem of power flow exceeding certain quantity in GRM arose
since the transmission system of KPTCL, with DC current entering the
neutrals of transformers in their system, started experiencing vibrations
and noise. The Report of POWERGRID as a result of tests conducted
between 20th November 2004 and 1st December, 2004 had
recommended a power flow of 450 MW in GRM on Talcher-Kolar HVDC
link. However, keeping in view the safety of equipment in Karnataka
system, it was agreed that increasing power flow in excess of 150 MW in
GRM would be taken up with the consent of KPTCL only.
8.2 The possibility of setting up an earthing station near river Pennar
(around Cuddapah) was also explored by POWERGRID and it was
informed that the setting up of the new earthing station, as proposed,
might not solve the problem due to the presence of rocky terrain through
the entire stretch from Talcher to Kolar.
8.3 As agreed in the 138th SREB meeting, tests were carried out by CPRI
during December 2005 on GRM operation in the presence of KPTCL
officials. The test report of CPRI was discussed in a special meeting of
TCC held in the office of SREB, Bangalore on 15th February, 2006. In
the special meeting, Director (Tr. & GO), APTRANSCO and Chairman,
TCC had mentioned that while safety of equipment in KPTCL system
was of primary concern to all, it was also equally important that the GRM
16
operation capability was utilized fully keeping in view the investment that
had gone into and import through HVDC in GRM was made possible for
all the constituents to draw their share and that the tests for GRM
operation may need to be conducted once again to the satisfaction of
KPTCL.
8.4 Member Secretary, SREB stated that a meeting was convened on 15th
March, 2006 in the office of SREB in order to enable experts/consultants
of KPTCL/POWERGRID to evolve an action plan for the testing with all
details tied up, keeping in view the provisions of relevant international/
Indian standards. Copy of the Minutes of the meeting is enclosed as
Annexure-II. Considering the details of interaction of KPTCL with the
transformer manufacturers, it was unanimously agreed in the meeting
that no DC current exceeding 5 amperes would be allowed to flow in the
neutrals of transformers. It was decided that testing would be carried out
in such a way that simultaneous measurement of DC current through all
transformers would be made possible. For this purpose, it was agreed
that Prof. Nagabhusana, Specialist Consultant to KPTCL would carry out
laboratory experiments as a first step and would examine all the
available data with reference to testing done for GRM operation and
make a detailed test procedure proposal for discussion and tie up of the
same, within a period of two weeks.
Board noted the above.
8.5 MD, KPTCL said that care should be taken for future projects to avoid
such contingencies, for which ED, SRTS-II, PGCIL stated that this being
a unique case due care will be taken in case of future projects.
8.6 Member (PS), CEA said that the decision on the power flow during GRM
operation should be taken at the earliest since it had bearing on ER –
WR grid operation also.
17
9. REGIONAL POWER COMMITTEE
9.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in response to SREB’s
communication in respect of nomination of members for the Regional
Power Committee, constituents had furnished the list of members. The
same is enclosed as Annexure–III. Communication had also been
addressed to licensed traders in the region to nominate their
representative to the RPC as a member through their association, in line
with the provisions of Ministry of Power resolution dated 29.11.2005.
9.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that SREB had received a copy of
communication from CEO & ED of Tata Power Trading Company
Limited, Mumbai dated 13.02.2006 addressed to the Director (O), PTC
India Limited. The same is enclosed in Annexure-IV. As can be seen
therefrom it has been decided by the traders, in the meetings held
between Dec.2005 and Feb.2006, that till Power Trading Association
was formed, representation in Southern Regional Power Committee will
be by M/s. Reliance Energy Trading Limited for six months from 1st April
2006 to take up the concerns of all other traders in the RPCs. It was
also agreed by the traders to form the Power Trading Association to
work out the modalities for finalising byelaws, registration and
organisational setup.
9.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in line with the provisions
contained in the resolution of Government of India, Ministry of Power
dated 25th May 2005, the communication has been addressed to
Director General, IPPAI, to nominate their member to represent the
IPP’s operating in the region (other than those having 1000 MW installed
capacity). A copy of letter dated 13.3.06 from IPPAI conveying the
nomination is enclosed as Annexure-V.
9.4 Chairman, SREB said that since the nomination received from M/s. Tata
Power Trading Company Ltd. was not routed through their association,
the nominee could not get the status of Member of RPC, as per MOP
18
resolution. The nomination of member should be for the complete period
by the association and as such ad-hoc nominations prior to the formation
of the association could not be accepted. CMD, PTC opined that the
nominated members of traders may be invited to attend the SRPC
meeting as a special invitee till the formal association was formed.
9.5 Member Secretary, SREB informed that the Member from Union
Territory of Pondicherry did not find specific mention similar to that of
States in the MOP resolution dated 29th November 2005. It was agreed
that Union Territory of Pondicherry could be represented in SRPC
meetings by virtue of Para 3 of MOP resolution dated 29th November
2005, which read as :
QUOTE
In pursuance of the aforesaid provision, the Government of
India hereby establishes the Southern Regional Power
Committee (SRPC) comprising the States of Kerala, Andhra
Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of
Pondicherry.
UNQUOTE
9.6 Member Secretary, SREB informed that the draft copy in regard to
‘Southern Regional Power Committee - Conduct of Business Rules’ had
been circulated to the members. It was agreed that provisions would be
discussed in the first meeting of SRPC.
9.7 Board decided to have the first SRPC meeting in the third week of April
2006. It was also noted that as per alphabetical order, in line with para 4
of Ministry of Power resolution dated 29.11.2005, Karnataka will have
the Chairpersonship for the year 2006-07.
19
10. EVACUATION SCHEMES FOR NEW CENTRAL GENERATING STATIONS
10.1 Member Secretary, SREB stated that in connection with ensuring
avoidance of bottling up of power at the 400 kV substations of
POWERGRID, to be executed as a part of evacuation schemes of
Central Sector Generating Stations coming up as Kaiga (3 & 4),
Kudankulam & NLC TPS-II expansion projects, the constituents in the
139th SREB meeting furnished details of associated evacuation system
from their side to utilize power that would become available at the
POWERGRID substations. This was with a view to enable monitoring
the progress for timely availability of States’ evacuation systems.
10.2 Member Secretary, SREB said that in the 118th meeting of the TCC held
on previous day, all the constituents agreed to send the updated data to
SREB. The information compiled from details received from the
constituents is at Annexure-VI. It is proposed to be taken up for
discussion in the Standing Committee of Southern Region.
10.3 ED (O), NPCIL said that first unit of Kudankulam was expected by
November 2007 and PGCIL was coordinating with them on evacuation
from the station. He wished to know the progress relating to the
evacuations from Tirunelveli and Trivandrum by TNEB and KSEB. It was
seen that TNEB had communicated to SREB that they would be in a
position to evacuate power from Tirunelveli.
10.4 Member (PS), CEA said that Trivandrum was presently less loaded and
with the third transformer coming under Kundankulam evacuation
scheme the position may worsen at Trivandrum unless appropriate
configuration of loading is ensured. He added that 400 kV substations
were being setup by PGCIL at the instance of constituents and therefore
it was in their interest to ensure evacuation of power from these
substations in the appropriate time frame. While ED, SR-II, PGCIL
informed that the 400 kV Mysore substation of PGCIL was proposed to
20
be commissioned in another 15 days, Member (PS), CEA enquired
about KPTCL’s readiness for power evacuation.
10.5 Director (Tr.), KPTCL said that they will take the load as soon as the
transformer was commissioned. He added that four circuits were
coming up and KPTCL required four more bays, the request for which
they had communicated to PGCIL a year back.
10.6 Member (PS), CEA informed that one 315 MVA ICT can be loaded to
250 MVA and for that two feeders were sufficient for evacuation. As
approved, these minimum bays per ICT would be provided by PGCIL
and the cost would be shared under Regional Transmission Charges.
For any additional number of bays payment would be borne by the
States and added that States could provide close to actual requirements
to enable Planning Studies for evacuation scheme to be optimal.
10.7 Member (Tr.), KSEB said that the power should be available at Kadakola
(Mysore) to enable evacuation of power for KSEB.
10.8 Chairman, SREB added that timely requests for bays etc. for States
could be made to PGCIL to enable inclusion of these appropriately in the
project schemes.
10.9 Director (Tr &GO), APTRANSCO enquired about the second transformer
at Vijayawada and about the 400 kV substation of PGCIL at Warangal to
which ED, SRTS-II, PGCIL responded that land acquisition at Warangal
was under process.
10.10 ED, SRTS-II, PGCIL stated that in the 118th meeting of TCC, KSEB had
desired that the quad line going to Edamon be terminated at Edamon
S/S. Member (PS), CEA stated that the matter could be studied and
suitable proposal in this regard can be put up to the Standing Committee
for consideration in the next meeting.
21
11. VAR EXCHANGES ON STATE OWNED INTER STATE LINES:
11.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that as the constituents were aware,
CERC had issued revised Indian Electricity Grid Code (IEGC) for
implementation w.e.f. 1st April 2006. He added that they have outlined
details of procedures in regard to commercial handling of VAR
exchanges directly between two beneficiaries on the interconnections
owned by them, on case-by-case basis.
11.2 He added that in the 118th TCC meeting held on the previous day, SR
constituents agreed that in line with Clause 6.6 (7)(iii) of Chapter 6 of
IEGC (effective 1.4.2006), the present accounting methodology could be
continued for commercial handling of VAR exchanges between
constituents on State owned inter-State lines in the Southern Region.
11.3 Board approved the above agreement of the constituents in the TCC
meeting.
12. UTILISATION OF UNREQUISITIONED POWER OF NTPC STATIONS
12.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 139th meeting of SREB, it
was decided that TNEB would bring out a proposal detailing a viable
commercial proposition for NTPC to effect the trading of unrequisitioned
power on behalf of the beneficiaries and the proposal of TNEB would be
examined keeping in view of the provisions of IEGC and orders on ABT,
in a Special meeting of TCC proposed to be held in the third week of
January 2006. The proposal, with the modalities for utilisation of
unrequisitioned power of NTPC stations, received from TNEB on
18.01.2006 was circulated to the constituents. In the special meeting of
TCC held on 31st January 2006 at Bangalore the issue was discussed. A
copy of the record of discussions held in the meeting is enclosed as
Annexure-VII. As can be seen therefrom KSEB and TNEB expressed
that the beneficiaries may individually approach traders in connection
with sale of their share of URS power.
22
12.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that the TCC in the 118th meeting
held on previous day, the issue of income tax liability for the sale of un-
requisitioned power by NTPC was also discussed and NTPC agreed that
in case of future URS transactions, energy rates would be at 80% PLF
plus 2% income tax would be reimbursed to the original beneficiaries
along with that of fixed charges, while income tax reimbursement will be
by way of adjustment from the income tax recovery of the original
beneficiaries. For the past URS transactions NTPC informed that income
tax refund was not possible. This was not agreeable to the beneficiary
constituents.
12.3 In the meeting, ED (SR), NTPC said that NTPC could not charge tariff
more than that fixed by CERC. As such, NTPC was not in a position to
charge income tax from the buyers of URS power for future transactions
also. He added that such a scheme has been agreed in Northern and
Western Regions.
12.4 After discussions, Board advised the constituents to further examine the
income tax issue on URS trading and the issue could be discussed in
the ensuing meeting of SRPC.
13. KAIGA A.P.S. TARIFF
13.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Managing Director, KPTCL vide
his communication No. CEE/SLDC/EE/PS/604-07 dated 21st February,
2006 (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) had stated that two-part tariff
should have been applied to Kaiga A.P.S., as against the prevalent
single part tariff. This would have cost them less amount of outflow. The
issue of increasing the PLF to 80% or other appropriate level had also
been raised, considering the range of PLF achieved by Kaiga during the
past years.
13.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting held on the
previous day, communication dated 16th March, 2006 received from
23
NPCIL (copy at Annexure-IX) was discussed in which NPCIL had stated
that this agenda item was not under the purview of SRE Board and
should not be taken up for discussion. After deliberations, TCC
recommended that the matter may be taken up by the Board/individual
constituents with DAE/CEA.
13.3 Chairman, KSEB said that KGS tariff works out to around 280 paise of
which 190 paise goes to fixed charges at 68.5% PLF and 90 paise for
variable charges and incentive is given above 68.5%. At present, KGS
was getting 280 paise for energy supplied above 68.5% PLF also, while
they were eligible for only 115 paise (90 paise variable charges + 25
paise incentive). Besides this, nuclear stations were getting first priority
in scheduling since power from these stations could not be surrendered.
He added that seeing the past performance of nuclear stations, their
PLF should be increased.
13.4 ED (O), NPCIL said that tariff was not decided by NPCIL but by DAE in
consultation with CEA.
13.5 MD, KPTCL said that there should be transparency and rationale in
fixing the tariff and norms for nuclear stations.
13.6 CMD, APTRANSCO endorsed the views expressed by MD, KPTCL and
Chairman, KSEB and said that the Board may seek clarification from
CEA about the fixation of tariff and how CEA proposed to advise DAE.
13.7 Member (PS), CEA said that comments had been received from various
constituents from other regions also regarding fixation of tariff and
target PLF for NPC’s stations. CEA was in discussion with NPCIL on
these issues. CEA will put forth its recommendations to MOP for
discussions with DAE.
13.8 Member (GO&D), CEA felt that it was a matter of time for two-part tariff
to become applicable to NPC stations.
24
13.9 After deliberations, it was decided that the Board would take up the
issue with CEA/MOP/DAE while the constituents also would take up the
issues individually also regarding
i) Payment of fixed charges + variable charges upto 68.5% PLF
ii) Payment of variable charges + incentive beyond 68.5% PLF &
iii) Rationalisation of tariff.
iv) Increase in threshold PLF based on past performance.
14. WATER SUPPLY TO RSTPS
14.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 136th meeting of SREB
held on 9th November 2004, Commissioner, Irrigation Department,
Government of Andhra Pradesh had requested for proportionate cost to
be borne by NTPC for supply of 6.5 TMC water from the Yellampally
barrage project across Godavari river. After discussions, Chairman,
SREB and TNEB had then advised APTRANSCO and NTPC to look
into the original records wherein the 10% allocation to Home state might
have been given for the provision of infrastructure facilities and that
based on the furnished details the SRE Board could have a re-look into
the matter. Subsequently, a copy of letter dated 06.09.2005 from
Principal, Secretary, I & CAD (PW) Department, Government of Andhra
Pradesh on alternative water supply to Ramagundam STPS was also
forwarded by APTRANSCO.
14.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the 139th SRE Board meeting
held on 19.12.2005, TNEB stated that special allocation of 10% to the
Home State, where the power plant was located, was towards provision
of facilities such as land, water etc. Further in the O&M expenses of
NTPC, the quantum of water requirement had already been spelt out.
Managing Director, KPTCL stated that the water rates should be
reasonable. He pointed out that Central Generating Stations were
25
located in other States also like Kaiga Atomic Power Project. Director
(Fin.), KPTCL had opined that the PPA should be examined in this
regard. It was agreed in the meeting that after getting the cost details
from Irrigation Department, NTPC would work out the difference in
variable cost due to change in tariff of water supply to RSTPS.
14.3 In the meeting, ED (SR), NTPC said that there has been no
communication from Andhra Pradesh in this regard.
14.4 Chairman, SREB said that APTRANSCO would organize a meeting
with Irrigation Department of AP Government and NTPC will be
informed about the developments.
15. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTER-TRIP SCHEME FOR OUTAGE OF TALCHER-KOLAR HVDC TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
15.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that the scheme of providing
graded trip signals by POWERGRID at the substations of constituents,
to compensate for varying measures of loss of HVDC power flow, in the
context of transfer of 2000 MW from Talcher STPS Stage-II was
discussed and finalised in the 73rd Protection Committee of SREB held
on 30th December 2004. SRE Board in the 137th meeting held at
Chennai on 12.4.05 had approved the above scheme at an estimated
cost of Rs. 7.50 crores.
15.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the 139th meeting of SRE
Board held at Hyderabad on 19th December 2005, PGCIL stated that
protection couplers have already been received and works were
expected to be completed by the end of January 2006.
15.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th meeting of TCC
held on the previous day, PGCIL had informed that the scheme had
been implemented and the mock exercise of sending trip signals had
been completed successfully. Certain works still remained to be
completed by the constituents and it was agreed by them that all works
26
connected with extending signals to the loads, designed to be tripped,
would be completed by end of March 2006.
15.4 Board noted the above.
16. COLLECTION AND TRANSFER OF SPECIAL ENERGY METER (SEM) READINGS BY ALL UTILITIES
16.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Powergrid has proposed vide
their Letter No: C/OS/SREB/4830 dated. 6th March 2006 to include the
following item in the agenda.
“ In terms of Clause 47, Chapter 2 of CERC (Terms and
Conditions of tariff) Regulations, 2004 dated 26th March 2004,
all utilities have to collect the meter readings from the SEMs
installed in their premises and transfer the same to RLDC. So
far, POWERGRID has been doing this job on behalf of utilities.
In all the other regions, the readings are being collected and
transferred by utilities themselves. POWERGRID has already
written to all SEBs to collect the readings and furnish to SRLDC
directly in line with the CERC provision and practice in other
regions w.e.f. 01.04.2006. Beneficiaries may do the needful
accordingly.”
16.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th TCC meeting held
on previous day, constituents agreed to the proposal of PGCIL. It was
agreed that PGCIL and Constituents would jointly collect the readings
till June 2006. Subsequently, the constituents would individually collect
& transfer data to SRLDC. SEM locations from where the data is to be
collected is at Annexure-X.
16.3 This was agreed by the Board.
27
17. COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF 400 KV NELAMANGALA- SOMANAHALLI LINE
17.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Powergrid has also proposed
vide their Letter No: C/OS/SREB dated 6th March 2006 to include the
following item in the agenda:
“Investment approval for SR system Strengthening Scheme-III
includes the following:
i) 400 kV Raichur – Gooty line (160 km) and
ii) 400 kV Nelamangala-Somanahalli line (50 km)
The investment approval stipulated a commissioning schedule
of 30 months for both the lines. 400 kV Nelamangala-
Somanahalli line is a short line and hence requires lesser time.
The works on this line are progressing well and it can be
completed earlier than the scheduled completion time. Since,
the line is a part of system strengthening scheme meant to
improve grid security, commissioning of the line earlier would
facilitate the same. Beneficiaries are requested to concur for
early commissioning of 400 kV Nelamangala-Somanahalli line
to enable POWERGRID take up accordingly.”
17.2 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th TCC meeting held
on previous day, TCC had recommended concurrence for early
commissioning of 400 kV Nelamangala-Somanahalli line.
17.3 Board approved the same.
18. SHARING OF O&M COST FOR LOWER SILERU-BARSOOR NATIONAL HVDC PROJECT, AN INTER-REGIONAL LINK BETWEEN SR & WR
18.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Lower Sileru - Barsoor a
200 MW, 200 kV monopolar HVDC link between SR and WR, was built
indigenously at a cost of about Rs.125 Crores, under National HVDC
project. Operation & Maintenance at Lower Sileru (SR) and Barsoor
28
(WR) was being done by APTRANSCO and CSEB respectively. The
utilisation of this national asset has been very low. To ensure utilization
of this national asset, Secretary (Power), Ministry of Power,
Government of India, in a meeting with BHEL on 23.04.2005 desired
that efforts should be made to utilize the NHVDC project and keep the
link continuously in operation so as to ensure appropriate utilization of
investment made.
18.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the meetings with
APTRANSCO, CSEB, BHEL and PGCIL, the following issues have
transpired:
APTRANSCO and CSEB had agreed to hand over this link to
PGCIL.
O&M charges as per CERC formula to be paid to PGCIL by
the beneficiaries of SR & WR.
Wheeling charges would be payable to APTRANSCO &
CSEB, whenever this link was utilized by beneficiaries other
than APTRANSCO & CSEB.
Before handing over the asset to PGCIL, it is desired that the
link should be made fully operational by BHEL.
It has been decided in CEA to put up the proposal to the REBs
for concurrence for sharing the O&M cost of this inter-regional
link.
18.3 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 118th TCC meeting held
on previous day, APTRANSCO & PGCIL were not in a position to
confirm the above.
18.4 Director (O), PGCIL said that PGCIL was agreeable to the proposal.
29
18.5 Member (PS), CEA said that during the meetings held in the Ministry of
Power, all the concerned parties had agreed for the proposal after
demonstration of functionality by BHEL.
18.6 Chairman, SREB & CMD, APTRANSCO said that APTRANSCO was
also agreeable to the proposal and the sharing of the O&M charges
may be put up to the Board at the appropriate time.
19. GRID OPERATION
19.1 Grid Events (December 2005 to February 2006)
Member Secretary, SREB highlighted the major events of the Southern
Region grid for the period between December 2005 and February
2006, as outlined below:
• Frequency remained within IEGC range (49.0 Hz. to 50.5 Hz.) for
97.19% of time.
• Frequency remained above 50.0 Hz for 26.03% of time and
average frequency was 49.77 Hz.
• 400/220 kV Nellore substation of APTRANSCO was charged on
18.12.2005. The 400 kV voltage was extended to APTRANSCO
bus from PGCIL S/S on 18.12.2005. One No.315 MVA ICT was
also idle charged on 18.12.2005.
• 400 kV Vemagiri - Nunna line of 140 Km length was charged on
28.12.2005 by APTRANSCO.
• LILO of 220 kV Nellore-Sulurpet line at 400 kV Nellore S/S of 12.1
Km was charged on 26.12.2005 by APTRANSCO.
• LILO of 220 kV Edamon-Kayamkulam at Kundara was completed
on 5th January 2006.
• Unit 1 of MAPS was put on bars on 18th January 2006, which was
under EMCCR and upgradation since 20th August 2003. The life of
30
the reactors has been extended for another 30 years, it has been
reported.
• Andhra Pradesh met a maximum demand of 8519 MW, Tamil Nadu
met a maximum demand of 7992 MW and Southern Region met a
maximum demand of 23164 MW during February 2006, all of which
are maximum till date.
• 1915 MW of power flow on Talcher-Kolar HVDC link was recorded
(maximum till date) on 20th January, 2006.
• Record import of 1,106 MU was made (maximum till date) on
Talcher-Kolar HVDC link during the month of January 2006.
• Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu exported
521 MU, 279 MU, 273 MU, and 443 MU respectively during
December 2005 to February 2006 by way of bilateral exports.
• RSTPS STAGE III of NTPC exported 2.8 MU of un-requisitioned
Power during December 2005 by way of bilateral exports.
• It has been decided by MOP vide letter No3/4/2006-OM dated
10.02.06 that 25 MW of share of Goa in Ramagundam STPS
(2100 MW) temporarily allocated to Daman & Diu and Dadra &
Nagar Haveli be restored back to Goa, and accordingly it was
implemented from 0000 hrs. of 12.02.06.
• LILO of 400 KV Cuddapah-Chennai line at Chittor station of
APTRANSCO was commissioned on 16th February 2006.
• 220 kV Narendra-Haveri-Guttur line was charged on 7th January,
2006 by KPTCL.
• 220 KV Chikkodi-Kolhapur (KAR-MAH link): power flow of 50 MW
from JINDAL to Maharashtra commenced from 20th January, 2006.
19.2 Grid Frequency
19.2.1 The frequency profile of the region from December 2005 to
February 2006 is given in Table – I below:
31
Table- I
Percentage of time when frequency was
Month Less than
48.5 Hz
48.5Hz to
49.0Hz
49.0Hz to
49.5 Hz
49.5Hz to
50.0 Hz
50.0Hz to
50.5 Hz
More than
50.5 Hz
Month average
Hz
Within IEGC range:
49.0 Hz to 50.5 Hz
December2005
0.00 0.20 3.49 48.93 47.33 0.05 49.94 99.75%
January 2006
0.00 0.08 5.39 68.48 26.00 0.05 49.83 99.87%
February 2006
0.00 8.55 33.41 55.67 2.31 0.06 49.49 91.39%
19.2.2 During the period under review, though the frequency remained
within IEGC range i.e. 49.0 to 50.5 Hz for 97.19% of the time, the
minimum frequency touched was 48.53 Hz on 09/21/26.02.2006
and the maximum frequency touched was 50.87 Hz on 29.1.2006
and 05.02.2006.
19.2.3 Due to the widening gap in demand and availability for considerable
period of time, the system frequency was operating at low levels
from 21st Feb.2006, on account of sustained over drawals by some
of the states. Another reason for low availability was low
generation at the plants of NLC and NPC.
19.3 Low Frequency Operation
19.3.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that from 21st February, 2006,
the Southern Regional grid was operated at low levels of frequency
for considerable period of time, on account of sustained
overdrawals by some of the constituents. He informed that a
Special meeting of TCC was held on 6th March 2006 to discuss low
frequency of operation wherein it was agreed that IEGC provisions
will be adhered to by all the constituents in letter and spirit. Over
drawing constituents shall endeavor to restrict the net drawal from
the grid within their respective drawal schedules whenever the
32
system frequency was below 49.5 Hz. The constituents had also
agreed to resort to load shedding at 49.2 Hz. itself to avoid the
frequency going below 49.0 Hz. at any instant of time. Load relief
schemes would also be kept in operational readiness to avoid any
contingency, it was stated by the constituents.
19.3.2 Member (GO & D), CEA expressed concern over the prolonged low
frequency operation of the SR grid and said that un-requisitioned
power should be utilized and constituents should strictly adhere to
the provisions of the IEGC. GM, SRLDC said that when the Region
was facing low frequency problems about 300 MW power available
in Southern Region was not harnessed. He also stated that while
the frequency was low, certain constituents were over drawing
while running their machines in pump mode.
Board noted the above.
19.3.3 Board felt that during contingencies like prolonged low frequency of
operation available un-requisitioned capacities may be brought into
the grid on the instructions of the SRLDC/SLDC. Since it involved
operational and commercial issues, the Board suggested that it
could be discussed by the TCC meeting.
19.4 Low Generation at NLC TS-II, MAPS & Kaiga GS
19.4.1 Member Secretary, SREB stated that Director (Power), NLC vide
letter dated 24.02.2006 (Annexure-XI) informed that the coal
production in Mines II, the feeding source for TPS-II, was badly
affected due to non-availability of land for mining operations. Only
5 units were kept in service and that too at about 60% rated
capacity. The situation may deteriorate further, with shutdown of
one or two units in the next two days.
19.4.2 He added that in the 118th TCC meeting held on previous day, it
was informed that the generation at Neyveli TS-II would be around
33
680 MW and 15 MU per day. MAPS generation would be around
320 MW and that of KGS 270 MW.
19.4.3 Constituents were requested to adopt appropriate demand
management measures keeping in view the reduced availability
from these stations.
19.4.4 Board noted the above.
19.5 Changes in UI Price Curve
19.5.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that Managing Director, KPTCL
vide his letter No.CEE/SLDC/EE/PS/05-06/619-23 dated 25th
February, 2006 (copy enclosed as Annexure-XII) had suggested
that ABT tariff may be reworked so as to impose heavier tariff in
case of overdrawals at lower frequencies and for taking up the
matter at an appropriate forum.
19.5.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the 118th TCC meeting
held on the previous day, various alternatives/suggestions
regarding changes in UI price curve were discussed and it was felt
by TCC that the issue required detailed analysis. It was decided
that it could further be discussed in the next TCC meeting.
19.5.3 Board noted the above.
19.6 Hydro Availability
19.6.1The storage levels in the major hydel reservoirs in MU as on 28th
February, 2006 is given in Table - II below:
34
Table- II
Energy storage in major hydel reservoirs
Inflows during April-February 2006
(in MU)
As on 28th February 2006
At FRL (in MU)
Anticipated Actuals MU %
ANDHRAPRADESH Jalaput
495
655
834
352
71.11
KARNATAKA Linganamakki Supa
4547 3152
4530 1869
5690 3088
2522 2029
55.47 64.37
KERALA Idukki Pamba & Kakki
2190
915.93
2259 1479
2974 1909
1278 603
58.36 65.83
TAMIL NADU Nilgiris
1504
1898
2802
1042
69.28
19.6.2 It is noted that in almost all the reservoirs, the inflows have been
more than anticipated. The storage position as on 28th February
2006 was to the extent of about 62% energy content.
19.6.3 Member Secretary, SREB said that to minimize spillage, suitable
commercial mechanism could be worked out among the
constituents so that surplus States could in the process maximize
their generation and sell power to deficit States.
19.7 Grid Voltages
19.7.1 Member Secretary, SREB said that SR grid has been experiencing
sustained over voltage conditions during the last 4-5 months and
there have been resultant manual/automatic trippings of both
Central and State Sector 400 kV lines in large numbers. In fact, a
few 400 kV lines remained in open condition continuously for long
periods. There have been frequent switching in and out of the 400
kV lines both in Central as well as State Sector. It has been noted
35
regularly in the OCC meetings that adoption of adequate voltage
improvement measures by the constituents would improve the
situation.
However with the loads picking up the over voltage situation has
been contained largely.
19.7.2 The grid voltages at the selected 400 kV stations in SR are given in
Table III below:
Table – III
Voltage profile in KV at the selected 400 kV Sub-stations from December 2005 to February 2006
December 2005 January 2006 February 2006
Average of Average of Average of 400 KV Stations
Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min.
Ramagundam 415 405 415 405 413 404
Hyderabad 427 412 427 413 422 410
Nagarjunasagar 422 406 419 405 416 402
Cuddapah 426 406 421 402 419 398
Vijayawada 425 408 427 411 427 413
Kolar 427 403 421 402 419 400
Bangalore 413 389 408 386 411 388
Hosur 421 398 415 396 412 394
Chennai 427 410 426 410 425 404
Neyveli-II 424 412 420 412 419 410
Trichur 419 396 414 399 413 396
Gazuwaka 420 411 420 412 423 415
Gooty 429 407 430 407 426 405
19.8 High voltage at Nellore
19.8.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 139th meeting of
SREB, APTRANSCO had informed that the ICT at Nellore had
been charged on 18.12.2005. However the high voltage condition
persisted at Nellore, due to inadequate loading of the ICT, which
was discussed in the 403rd OCC Meeting. The average maximum
voltage at Nellore during February, 2006 was 427 KV, while the
average minimum voltage was 406 KV.
36
19.8.2 He added that in the 118th TCC meeting held on previous day,
Director (TR&GO), APTRANSCO had informed that the loading has
increased to 160 MW and with two more lines coming up by April
2006 the over voltage at Nellore would be contained.
19.9 Hydro Machines on synchronous condenser mode
19.9.1 Member Secretary, SREB informed that in the 139th SRE Board
meeting held on 19.12.2005, Director (Technical), KPCL had stated
about certain commercial implications, since auxiliary consumption
would result .He had also agreed to send a team to
Nagarjunasagar to study the operation of the units there, in order to
assess the technical capability of machines of KPCL for
synchronous condenser mode of operation. In the 139th SRE
Board meeting it was further agreed to examine the possibility of
running the machines on synchronous condenser mode by major
hydro stations and a list of machines capable/not capable of
running in the synchronous condenser mode would be furnished to
SREB/SRLDC. The information in this regard from the constituents,
other than from KSEB was awaited. The above information would
be extremely helpful in operational planning in the coming monsoon
season and light load period.
19.9.2 Member Secretary, SREB added that in the 118th meeting of TCC
held on the previous day, KPCL informed that the team has gone to
Srisailam to study the operation of hydro machines in synchronous
condenser mode and would come out with the technical capability
of their machines.
19.10 Installation of Shunt Capacitors
19.10.1 Installation of new capacitors matching with the demand growth,
along with monitoring the healthiness of existing capacitors in the
37
grid, was a continuous process for maintaining good voltage profile
at main as well as at far away grid stations.
19.10.2 The progress of installation of capacitors by the constituents during
the year so far is given in Table -I V below:
Table – IV
HT capacitors programmed for 2005-
06 by SEB/TRANSCO in MVAR
Installed as on 28th February 2006 in
MVAR (April- 05 to February 06)
APTRANSCO 200.0 0.0
KPTCL 72.9 75.8
KSEB 140.0 100
TNEB 213.6 122.4
Total 626.5 298.2
20. ANTICIPATED POWER SUPPLY POSITION FOR THE PERIOD FROM
MARCH 2006 TO JUNE 2006
20.1 The anticipated power supply position for the period from March 2006
to June 2006 as agreed in the 118th meeting of the TCC held on
previous day is given as Annexure- XIII.
21. ANY OTHER ITEM
21.1 MD, KPTCL enquired about the evacuation scheme for the proposed
4000 MW ultra mega project planned to come up in coastal Karnataka.
He said that the inter-regional link should continue to be an agenda item
to keep the constituents updated about the progress.
21.2 Member (PS), CEA said that there were right of way problems foreseen
at that particular site. It was agreed that the evacuation scheme for the
proposed ultra mega project would be discussed in the Standing
Committee meeting.
38
22. VOTE OF THANKS
Member Secretary, SREB once again thanked PTC India Ltd. on behalf of
the Board for the excellent arrangements made for stay and conduct of the
meeting.
23. DATE & VENUE OF THE FIRST SRPC MEETING
It was decided to hold the first meeting of SRPC during third week of April
2006. NTPC agreed to host the meeting. Venue and date of the meeting
would be intimated in due course, it was informed.
Sd/- Sd/- (K. SRINIVASA RAO) (RACHEL CHATTERJEE) IAS MEMBER SECRETARY, SREB CHAIRMAN, SREB & CMD, APTRANSCO
