SOUTHERN REGIONAL POWER COMMITTEE BANGALORE

MINUTES OF THE 1st MEETING OF TCC OF SRPC

HELD AT HYDERABAD ON 30.10.2006

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The 1st meeting of the Technical Coordination Committee of SRPC was

held at Hyderabad on 30th October, 2006. The list of participants is at

Annexure-I.

1.2 Welcoming all participants to the meeting, Shri K.Gopala Krishna,

Director (Projects, Coord &GO), APTRANSCO stated that it was a great

privilege for them to host the 1st TCC meeting of SRPC.

1.3 Shri K. Srinivasa Rao, Member Secretary, SRPC welcomed all the

members and other participants to the meeting and thanked

APTRANSCO for the excellent arrangements made for the comfortable

stay at Hyderabad.

1.4 Shri S.M.Zafrulla, Chairperson TCC & Technical Director, KPCL

welcomed all the members to the1st TCC meeting of SRPC. He also

congratulated AP for the excellent arrangements made for the meeting,

and said that they had set a new benchmark.

1.5 Chairperson, TCC welcomed the following new members:

i) Shri S.K.Sridhara, Director (Tech), BESCOM, Bangalore

ii) Shri K.Gopala Krishna, Director (Projects, Coord & GO),

APTRANSCO

iii) Shri G.Vijaya Kumar, Director (Thermal), APGENCO

iv) Shri R.Reddy, Director (Operation), APCPDCL, Hyderabad

v) Shri A.G.Bhadran, Member (Transmission), KSEB

vi) Shri S.Arounassalame, Member (Generation), TNEB

vii) Shri V.N.Mathiyalagan, Member (Distribution), TNEB

viii) Shri A.N.Dave, Executive Director (SR), NTPC

ix) Shri N.S.M.Rao, General Manager (Transmission), NPCIL

2

1.6 TCC placed on record the excellent services rendered by the following

outgoing members:

i) Shri G.Kesava Rao, Director (Tr & GO)), APTRANSCO

ii) Dr S.V.M.Bhuvanaika Rao, OSD (Tech), APGENCO

iii) Shri P.N.Mohanan, Member (Trans), KSEB

iv) Shri V.Naganathan, Member (Generation), TNEB

v) Shri L.V.Rao, Executive Director, NTPC

vi) Shri M.K.Kannan, Chief Engineer (Tr), NPCIL

vii) Shri A.Nagaraj, Chief Engineer (ED), KPCL

viii) Shri Sanjeev Mehra, Senior Vice President, PTCIL, New Delhi

The Agenda items were taken up for discussion.

2. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF 118th TCC MEETING OF SREB

2.1 The 118th meeting of TCC of SREB was held on 17th March 2006. The

Minutes of the meeting were forwarded vide SREB letter No: SREB/SE-

II/7/118: TCC/2006/3932-72 dated 17.5.2006.

2.2 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that General Manager, SRLDC had

vide letter No: GM/SRLDC/06 dated 26.05.2006 suggested following

amendment in item No. 3.7.5 of the Minutes.

QUOTE

“GM, SRLDC said that the line reactors available at Talaguppa and

Nelamangala are suitable for on-line switching and can be converted to

bus reactor on requirement. He further stated that LILO of 400 kV

Kadapa-Sriperumbudur S/C line at Chittoor has increased the voltage

stability at Chittoor. Closing of 220 KV Chittoor-Tiruvalam line will further

increase the voltage stability and security of SR grid shall be enhanced.

Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh were requested to concur for closing this

line at the earliest”.

UNQUOTE

3

2.3 After deliberations, the Committee confirmed the Minutes with the above

amendment.

3. GRID OPERATION

3.1 Over drawals at low frequency

3.1.1 Chairperson, TCC & Technical Director, KPCL said that the Southern

Region had seen very high demand and consumption.

3.1.2 Member Secretary, SRPC said that over drawal at low frequency by all

the constituents except Kerala had been an issue of concern. There

have been overdrawals to the tune of 500 – 1000 MW causing

vulnerability to secure grid operation. He requested the constituents to

explore the possibilities of harnessing the available generation within &

outside the Region to ensure maintenance of grid security. He added

that number of type A Type B and Type C Messages had been issued by

SRLDC to the constituents (copies are at Annexure-II), which went to

show violations of grid norms in operation.

3.1.3 Chief Engineer (GM), CEA stated that in a meeting taken by Secretary,

Ministry of Power, Government of India, on 19th October, 2006 on the

issue of low frequency operation of integrated Northern & Central Grid.

It was observed that overdrawal by the Northern Regional Constituents

caused low frequency operation. With setting set at 48.8 Hz number of

UFRs trippings were reported but load relief was less than expected. In

view of this, all the States had agreed to reduce the their over drawal by

50% at 49.5 Hz. itself and stop any overdrawal at 49.2 Hz. Despite

these, if the frequency were to touch levels below 49.0 Hz, the

respective RLDCs were authorised to open out radial feeders to avoid

the frequency touching 48.8 Hz.

3.1.4 GM, SRLDC also expressed concern over the overdrawals at low

frequency and said that some of the States had continuously over

drawn, even though number of Type A, Type B and Type C messages

4

were issued by SRLDC. He added that during such low frequency

operation any tripping of Talcher-Kolar Pole, would cause grid security

threats. He said that on 26th October 2006, more than 1000 MW of IPP

generation was not scheduled even under low levels of frequency of

operation. He said that if states had to meet their demands, the

unscheduled generations would have to be dispatched, and requested

avoidance of overdrawal from grid, particularly at low frequencies.

3.1.5 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO said that the bilateral sale of power

had been curtailed and action was being taken to maintain grid

discipline.

3.1.6 ED (Operation), TNEB said that the constituents should restrict over

drawals and maintain frequency above 49.5 Hz to enable TNEB to run

its Kadamparai pumps, which in turn support the SR Grid during peak

hours. Member Secretary, SRPC said that the issue had been regularly

addressed in the OCC meeting and requested the Committee to make a

note of it.

TCC observed that grid security be maintained at all times.

3.2 Low Generation at Neyveli – TS II and Kaiga GS

3.2.1 Member Secretary, SRPC appraised the Committee about the

continuous low generation from Neyveli TS-II and Kaiga GS.

3.2.2 Director (Tr.), KPTCL raised concern over low generation from NLC TS –

II and said that since NLC power was much cheaper than the IPP power

some quick action would have to be taken by NLC. He noted that NLC

was planning addition of another 2000 MW of generation while they had

no lignite for the existing projects.

3.2.3 DGM, Neyveli TS-II said that the generation at TS-II was affected due to

non-availability of land for mining purposes. He added that the TN

Government had given the land to NLC and the acquisition was in

progress. However, some of the landowners had approached the court,

thereby delaying the acquisition process. He informed that NLC had

5

already taken up this issue with the TN Government. He requested

SRPC also to take up the issue with the TN Government.

3.2.4 GM (Tr), NPCIL said that the mismatch about fuel supply continued, and

about 70% PLF could be ensured from Kaiga GS.

3.2.5 ED (O), TNEB said that NLC and NPCIL should put all efforts in ensuring

higher availability from their plants keeping in view the ensuing peak

period during the months of January 2007 to April 2007.

3.2.6 Member Secretary, SRPC said that the constituents should plan &

ensure their load generation balance also under the contingency of

continuing lower availability from Neyveli TS-II and Kaiga GS stations.

He requested TNEB to use its good offices regarding the land acquisition

issue for NLC with the TN Government.

3.3 Grid Events (March 2006 to 15th October 2006)

• Frequency remained within IEGC range (49.0 Hz. to 50.5 Hz.) for

94.13% of time.

• Frequency remained above 50.0 Hz for 24.77% of time and

average frequency was 49.64 Hz.

• Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu exported 279

MU, 700 MU, 678 MU & 111 MU respectively, for the period March

2006 to September 2006 by way of bilateral exports to recipients in

WR & NR.

• Andhra Pradesh imported 50 MU between March 2006 and

September 2006, from other Region.

• Andhra Pradesh met a maximum demand of 8542 MW in the month

of March 2006. While Southern Region met maximum demand of

23520 MW in the month of April 2006, Tamil Nadu met a maximum

demand of 8449 MW in the month of May 2006, Kerala &

Puducherry met a maximum demand of 2614 MW & 265 MW

respectively in the month of September 2006, all of which are

maximum till date.

6

• Andhra Pradesh met a maximum per day consumption of 185 MU

in the month of March 2006, while Karnataka, Puducherry &

Southern Region met maximum per day consumptions of 128 MU,

5.4 MU & 536 MU respectively in the month of April 2006, and

Kerala met a maximum per day consumptions of 45 MU in the

month of May 2006, and Tamil Nadu met a maximum per day

consumption of 189 MU in the month of June 2006, all of which are

maximum till date.

• Record flow of 2,030 MW was ensured on HVDC Talcher-Kolar on

3rd September, 2006.

• Andhra Pradesh, Kerala & Tamil Nadu had drawn 3,360 MW (2nd

September 2006), 1,257 MW (20th August 2006) & 3,140 MW (11th

May 2006) respectively from the Southern Region Grid which are

maximum till date.

• SR had imported as much as 1560 MW power under UI from

Central Grid on 1st September 2006 and exported around 970 MW

UI power to Central Grid on 23rd August 2006.

• ER/NER power upto a maximum of 220 MW (25.68 MU from March

– August)) wheeled through SR to WR/NR in the last week of July

2006.

• Unit 1 of Vemagiri CCGT (137 MW) in Andhra Pradesh was

synchronized on 9th June 2006.

• Unit 1& 2 of Bhavani Kattalai Barrage-1 (of 15 MW each)

synchronized on 1st August 2006 & 22nd September 2006

respectively by TNEB.

• LILO of 400 kV Nellore-Sriperumbudur D/C lines at Alamathi 400

kV S/S of TNEB successfully commissioned on 24/25th May 2006

and declared under commercial operation from 1st June 2006 by

PGCIL.

• 2nd ICT at 400 kV Guttur Substation was commissioned on31st

March 2006 by KPTCL.

7

• 1st ICT of 315 MVA and 2nd ICT of 200 MVA at 400/230 kV Alamathi

Substation were commissioned on 16th June & 28th July 2006 by

TNEB.

• LILO of 230 kV NCTPS-Mosur Ckt 1 at Alamathi Substation was

completed on 5th August 2006 by TNEB.

• 2nd ICT of 315 MVA at 400/220 kV Narendra Substation was put on

Commercial Operation from 1st September 2006 by PGCIL.

• 100 MVA ICT at 220/110kV Nittur Substation was charged on 12th

September 2006 by KPTCL.

• 400 kV Nelamangala-Mysore DC line put on commercial operation

with effect from 01.05.2006 by PGCIL.

• KPTCL has established Carrier Protection on following 220 kV links

in Kaiga Corridor between 17th to 19th August 2006:

o Nagjheri PH- Kodasalli D/C Line

o Kadra-Kodasalli S/C Line

o Kaiga-Kadra S/C Line

o Kaiga-Kodasalli S/C Line

3.4 Grid Frequency

3.4.1 The frequency profile of the region from March 2006 to 15th October

2006 is given in Table – I below:

8

Table-I

Percentage of time when frequency was

Month Less than

48.5Hz

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 50.5Hz

Month average

Hz

Within IEGC range: 49.0Hz

to 50.5Hz

March 2006

0.00 10.24 46.55 39.29 3.84 0.08 49.42 89.68

April

0.00 23.70 59.00 15.58 1.62 0.10 49.21 76.20

May

0.00 4.32 47.66 37.81 10.13 0.08 49.51 95.60

June 0.00 1.20 36.17 43.69 18.88 0.06 49.67 98.74

July 0.00 0.48 7.75 53.66 38.00 0.11 49.89 99.41

August 0.00 0.37 6.56 27.89 64.77 0.41 50.01 99.22

September 0.00 1.38 28.24 34.33 36.03 0.02 49.76 98.60

Upto 15th October 2006

0.17 6.33 23.99 47.38 22.11 0.02 49.65 93.48

3.5 Hydro Availability

3.5.1 The storage levels in the major hydel reservoirs in MU as on 30th

September 2006 is given in Table - II below:

9

Table-II

Energy storage in major hydel reservoirs

Inflows during April-September 2006

(in MU)

Storage as on 30th September 2006

At FRL (in MU)

Anticipated Actuals MU %

ANDHRAPRADESH Jalaput Srisailam

495

477

2086

862 8675

488 1087

98.59

KARNATAKA Linganamakki Supa

4547 3152

4139 1786

5870 3135

4527 3152

99.56

100.00

KERALA Idukki Pamba & Kakki

2190@

916

1730 1004

1717 1044

1358 645

63.22 75.35

TAMIL NADU Nilgiris

1504

1526

2005

1358

90.29

@ KSEB has informed that consequent to the commissioning of Malankara

SHEP(10.5 MW) downstream of Idukki reservoir, the MU capability of Idukki reservoir has been revised to 2190 MU w.e.f. 24.10.2005.

3.5.2 The reservoirs position as on 30th September 2006 is about 90% for the

Southern Region.

3.6 Grid Voltages

3.6.1 SR grid had been experiencing sustained over voltage conditions during

the last 2-3 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. It has been noted regularly in the OCC that adoption of

adequate voltage management measures by the constituents would

improve the situation.

3.6.2 The grid voltages at the selected 400 kV stations in SR are given in

Table III below:

10

Table – III

Voltage profile in kV at the selected 400 kV Sub-stations from March 2006 to May 2006

400 KV Stations

March 2006 April 2006 May 2006

Average of Average of Average of

Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min.

Hyderabad 417 406 417 406 425 414

Ramagundam 411 404 409 403 414 409

Nagarjunasagar 414 401 412 401 418 406

Cuddapah 418 398 417 400 416 398

Vijayawada 427 413 425 414 426 415

Gooty 424 404 421 404 430 412

Gazuwaka 421 413 423 415 423 416

Bangalore 411 387 409 386 414 389

Kolar 418 399 417 399 419 400

Narendra 418 406 416 405 422 409

Trivandrum 423 413 423 410 423 408

Trichur 411 395 407 392 412 394

Chennai 421 398 413 393 411 390

Hosur 415 399 413 397 411 393

Neyveli-II 418 407 416 406 418 406

11

Table – III (Contd.)

Voltage profile in kV at the selected 400 kV Sub-stations from June 2006 to July 2006

400 KV Stations

June 2006 July 2006

Average of Average of

Max. Min. Max. Min.

Hyderabad 429 418 425 411

Ramagundam 415 409 418 408

Nagarjunasagar 421 409 421 408

Cuddapah 420 402 418 398

Vijayawada 425 414 425 411

Gooty 432 414 430 410

Gazuwaka 421 414 421 412

Bangalore 417 392 412 390

Kolar 423 402 420 401

Narendra 421 408 419 403

Trivandrum 424 407 423 405

Trichur 415 396 415 395

Chennai 417 397 415 394

Hosur 416 395 412 394

Neyveli-II 419 408 417 406

12

Table – III (Contd.)

Voltage profile in kV at the selected 400 kV Sub-stations from August 2006 to September 2006

400 KV Stations

August 2006 September 2006

Average of Average of

Max. Min. Max. Min.

Hyderabad 423 408 422 408

Ramagundam 417 408 415 408

Nagarjunasagar 419 406 419 407

Cuddapah 416 399 417 400

Vijayawada 427 412 427 415

Gooty 430 411 430 413

Gazuwaka 422 414 421 412

Bangalore 410 388 410 386

Kolar 419 400 419 401

Narendra 421 407 412 397

Trivandrum 423 407 422 407

Trichur 413 394 413 394

Chennai 413 398 416 398

Hosur 412 395 412 396

Neyveli-II 418 408 418 408

3.7 Short term/long-term measures to contain over voltages

3.7.1 Member Secretary, SRPC said that the issue of over voltages had been

taken up in the various OCC meetings and short-term measures like

13

• Switching off of the capacitors

• Putting reactors into service

• Identifying the optimal tap positions

• Opening of parallel lightly loaded lines

• Absorption of VARs by units within their capability limits

• Running of units in synchronous condenser mode

• Export to other regions through bilateral exchanges

• Export to other regions as UI power

etc. have also been discussed. He added that area specific high voltage

problems and the steps to be taken by the constituents had also been

discussed in the various OCC meetings.

3.7.2 He said as a long-term measure, PGCIL’s proposal to CEA for

placement of reactors at various locations in Southern Region was

deliberated in the 22nd meeting of the Standing Committee on Power

System Planning of Southern Region held at Bangalore on 17th August,

2006 and covered in the agenda item Regional Transmission Schemes

for execution by PGCIL. GM (Tr.), NPCIL also raised concern over the

over voltage problem at Kaiga.

3.7.3 Member Secretary, SRPC said that the over voltage condition normally

worsened during the monsoon season, and necessary efforts should be

initiated by constituents to avoid recurrence at least during the next

monsoon.

3.8 Hydro Machines on synchronous condenser mode

3.8.1 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. It was 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. It was further agreed to examine the

14

possibility of running the machines in 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. In the 118th meeting of the TCC held on 17th March 2006,

KPCL had informed that the team had gone to Srisailam to study the

operation of hydro machines in synchronous condenser mode and would

come out with technical capabilities of their machines.

3.8.2 In the meeting, Technical Director, KPCL said that since the Sharavathy

machines were more than 30 years old, certain modifications were

required in the cooling water circuit to enable the machines run in

synchronous condenser mode. He added that Sharavathy was running

at 90% PLF and since all the machines were required to provide peaking

support to Karnataka, availing shut down for modifications would not be

feasible now.

3.8.3 Director (Tr.), KPTCL said that the shut down, if necessary, could be

availed during the period July 2007 to August 2007 when the Karnataka

system demand would be less.

3.8.4 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO informed that the machines at

Srisailam and four machines at Nagarjunasagar could be run in

synchronous condenser mode. These machines also absorb MVAR as

per the requirement of the Grid.

3.8.5 Member (Tr & Dist.), KSEB informed that the machines at Idukki could

run in synchronous condenser mode for about one hour only, and in

recent past they had not been put in synchronous condenser mode.

3.8.6 TCC suggested that running major hydro machines of SR in

synchronous condenser mode could be explored.

15

3.9 Installation of Shunt Capacitors

3.9.1 Installation of new capacitors matching with the demand growth, along

with monitoring the healthiness of existing capacitors in the grid, is a

continuous process for maintaining good voltage profile at main as well

as at far away grid stations.

3.9.2 The progress of installation of capacitors by the constituents during the

year so far is given in Table -IV below:

Table – IV

HT capacitors programmed for 2006-07

by SEB/TRANSCO in MVAR

Installed as on 30th Sep. 2006 in MVAR (April-06 to Sep. 06)

APTRANSCO 190.0* 80.0

KPTCL # 2.9

KSEB 0.0 0.0

TNEB 84.0* 45.6

Total 274.0 128.5

* Balance for the year 2005-06 # Programme for the year 2006-07 under finalization

4 ANTICIPATED POWER SUPPLY POSITION FOR THE PERIOD FROM

NOVEMBER 2006 TO JANUARY 2007

4.1 The anticipated power supply position for the period from November

2006 to January 2007 based on the data furnished by the constituents is

at Annexure-III.

16

5 TRANSFER OF SIRSI-GUTTUR (DAVANGERE) 400kV D/C LINK OF KPTCL TO PGCIL AS A REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEME.

5.1 SRE Board in its 131st meeting held at Bangalore on 22.02.2003

approved the proposal to include the 400kV Sirsi-Guttur D/C line and two

400kV 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 finalised between them.

5.2 In the above context, it is seen that 400kV Sirsi-Guttur link 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.

5.3 On 4th January 2006, a meeting took place among M/s. KPTCL, PGCIL

& their lease financiers M/s. IL&FS, wherein it was decided to complete

the entire process of transfer of leased assets of Sirsi-Guttur 400kV D/C

line from KPTCL to PGCIL by 31.03.2006, by ensuring full cooperation

and coordination between themselves. In the 118th meeting of TCC held

on 17.3.2006 at Bangalore, Director (Trans.), KPTCL had informed that

the matter was under negotiation & reconsideration with IL&FS and was

likely to be finalised in about two weeks time.

5.4 Subsequently KPTCL vide letter dated 24th July 2006 addressed to

PGCIL (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV) had furnished the details of

provisional sale consideration payable to KPTCL by PGCIL, and had

sought the views of PGCIL in the matter.

5.5 PGCIL vide letter dated 31st July 2006 (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)

requested KPTCL to circulate the provisional sale value consideration to

all the constituents so that the matter may be taken up in the next

TCC/SRPC meeting and that on clearance of proposal by SRPC, PGCIL

would take up the same for approval of their Board.

17

5.6 PGCIL vide letter dated 08.08.06 (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) in

response to M.S., SRPC letter dated 4.8.2006 intimated that they have

written to Director (Finance), KPTCL that since the acceptance of

financial implication is the prerogative of SR constituents, the same

should be discussed with them in appropriate forum and once the

financial implication are ratified by SRPC, the same will be put up to

POWERGRID Board for approval.

5.7 While on the subject, it is noted that soon after completion of

enhancement works on Sirsi-Guttur circuit - I also to 400 kV level by

KPTCL, the technical aspects of the asset take over by PGCIL would be

tied up between PGCIL & KPTCL.

5.8 Consultant TNEB said that the reasonableness of the cost of the above

asset should be compared with costs of PGCIL asset of similar nature,

and requested PGCIL for assistance in this regard.

5.9 Chief Engineer (SP & PA), CEA said that the cost of asset varied from

terrain to terrain and from time to time, and it would be difficult to

ascertain reasonableness of the cost compared to other PGCIL assets.

5.10 MS, SRPC and Director (Tr), KPTCL endorsed the above views.

5.11 ED, SR-II, PGCIL said that the reasonableness of the cost had to be

settled among the beneficiaries only.

5.12 Member (Tr. & Dist.), KSEB enquired why the maintenance charges

incurred had also been included in the capital cost.

5.13 Director (Tr), KPTCL said that the cost details were clearly specified by

KPTCL. In case any constituent had any specific query on the issue,

KPTCL was willing to clarify the same.

18

5.14 In the Meeting, ED, SR-II, PGCIL said that the inspection of the Kaiga-

Guttur I and II would start as soon as the upgradation works are

completed.

5.15 Member Secretary, SRPC said that joint teams between KPTCL and

PGCIL may be formed to start preliminary activities in regard to

technical aspects of asset transfer for smooth and early transfer of the

asset.

5.16 It was decided that all the constituents would address the Director

(Transmission), KPTCL with copy to Member Secretary, SRPC for any

point for clarification of the issues. It was also agreed that PGCIL and

KPTCL would form joint teams to start preliminary activity. Member

Secretary added that the issue would be discussed further in a special

TCC meeting scheduled for 15th November, 2006.

6. NEW PROJECTS OF NLC

6.1 2000 MW coal based power plant at Orissa (Ib Valley)

6.1.1 It has been deliberated that the issue of availability from the plant has

been taken into consideration by the Southern Region constituents in

their estimation for 11th Plan availability, Orissa Government has raised

certain issues and the Southern Region constituents have been the

first to give firm commitment for power off-take.

6.1.2 In the 140th meeting of SREB, NLC informed that there were positive

signals from the Government of Orissa and Energy Secretary had

assured NLC that the issue would be taken up with the Chief Secretary

to Government of Orissa and would revert back. NLC also informed

that coal supply to the project had been tied up with Mahanadi Coal

fields Limited (MCL), land for the project has been identified and soon

after hearing from Government of Orissa, the process for the land

acquisition would be commenced. NLC expressed that it would be

19

possible to bring the project by the end of 11th Plan, in case the issues

got resolved appropriately.

6.1.3 NLC vide their letter dated 11.08.2006 (Copy enclosed as Annexure-

VII) informed that as directed by the Secretary (Power), MOP in the

meeting held at New Delhi on 22.05.2006, NLC met Chief Secretary,

Govt. of Orissa on 27.05.2006, when it was informed that an

alternative site would be located for the project. Identification of

suitable land was under progress and after finalisation of site location,

Govt. of Orissa would be approached for land acquisition.

6.1.4 In the Meeting, Member Secretary, SRPC said that NLC had informed

that the new land had been identified and the land acquisition issue

also taken up with Chief Secretary, Orissa Govt. NLC had also written

to Chief Engineer (TP & I), CEA to identify the suitability of this land.

6.1.5. DGM (Plg.), NLC informed that the pending issues with the Orissa

Govt. were yet to be resolved. He said that NLC was optimistic that

CEA clearance for the new proposed site for the project would be

obtained.

6.1.6 TCC also noted that the entire power allocation to SR from this project

was also not certain as on date.

6.2 1000 MW coal based power plant at Tuticorin

6.2.1 Chairman, SREB had taken up the matter with the Secretary (Power),

Ministry of Power, Government of India for waiver of the condition

relating to privatisation of distribution attached to granting Mega Power

Project status. In the 140th SREB meeting CMD, APTRANSCO &

Chairman SREB requested all the constituents, that they could once

again take up the issue through their Government regarding de-linking

of privatization of distribution from reform issues, lest it may prove as a

disincentive to capacity additions.

20

6.2.2 In the Meeting Member Secretary, SRPC informed that the issue of

MPP status had not been resolved and the cost with and without MPP

status had not been worked out by NLC as yet.

6.2.3 DGM (Plg.), NLC informed that land had been identified while the issue

of MPP status had still not been resolved.

6.3 1000 MW lignite based power plant at Jayamkondam

6.3.1 In the 139th SREB meeting held on 19.12.2005 at Hyderabad, TNEB

confirmed that the project was under joint venture as on that date and

land acquisition was in progress. MD, KPTCL had stated that if the

project was getting delayed as a Joint Venture one, NLC might

consider developing the project independently so that other SR

constituents could also requisition power from the project. In the

meeting, Board advised NLC to workout the cost alternatives for the

scenarios of joint venture/ independent one, for which NLC informed

that they would be able to submit the cost alternatives to the Board in

the next meeting. CGM, TS-II NLC had confirmed that the first unit

could be expected after 56 months from the date of clearance. Further

in the 118th TCC meeting held on 17.3.2006 at Bangalore NLC

intimated that the various cost alternatives would be furnished within

one month.

6.3.2 A copy of Government Order dated 6th July 2006 issued by

Government of Tamil Nadu received from NLC vide letter

No.GM/P&BD/2006/818 dated 31.08.2006 is at Annexure-VIII.

Government of Tamil Nadu has accorded administrative approval to

develop Jayamkondam Lignite Project by NLC independently. NLC

vide letter No.GM/P&BD/2006/85 dated 11.08.2006 informed that soon

after finalisation of Feasibility Report the tentative tariff of the project

could be arrived at and the same will be intimated to States seeking

power from this project.

6.3.3 Entire 1000MW has been included in CEA’s list of 11th plan Shelf of

Thermal power projects. Considering that CGM, NLC had intimated

21

that the 1st unit could be expected in 56 months from the date of

clearance, action plan may have to be chalked out to ensure timely

realisation of the benefits from this project in the 11th plan.

6.3.4 In the Meeting ED (O), TNEB said that Government Land was readily

available and expected to be handed over to NLC shortly.

6.3.5 DGM (Plg.), NLC informed that feasibility report was under preparation.

He added that both land and lignite are available for this project.

6.3.6 Chief Engineer (SP & PA), CEA said that the 11th Plan Targets are to

meet the requirements of the States and any delay could lead to

shortfall in availability as per the projected demands. He requested SR

Constituents to also explore the possibility of seeking shares from the

ultra-mega projects and hydro projects coming up in various parts of

the country. He said that the individual constituents may do their cost

benefit analysis of projects in SR with MPP status and without MPP

status vis a vis the cost of ultra-mega projects located in other regions.

He quoted example of DVC where a project is on fast track in which

the constituents had come forward and even PPAs had been signed,

though the project was in early stage of planning.

6.3.7 Member Secretary, SRPC said that all the above projects were facing

the MPP status problem and land acquisition problems and also

suggested a systematic approach to monitor the progress of these

projects.

6.3.8 Chairperson, TCC & Technical Director, KPCL said that the above

projects seemed to be in early stages of planning and expressed doubt

whether they could be taken for load generation balance during the

11th Plan by the SR Constitutents.

7. JOINT VENTURE PROJECT OF NTPC AND TNEB AT ENNORE

7.1 NTPC had informed that land has been identified, for which TNEB was

to initiate action for land acquisition proceedings with their Government

22

and expressed that both units were expected to be available by end of

11th plan. TNEB stated that they were taking up with GOI for according

of MPP status also.

7.2 In the 118th TCC meeting, NTPC had intimated that the process was

going on smoothly and 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.

7.3 In the Meeting, ED (O), TNEB intimated that the land had been

identified and the cost assessment was under progress. He said that

the Govt. land was expected to be handed over to the JV - NTPC –

Tamil Nadu Energy Co. Ltd. by end of November 2006. He said that

Tamil Nadu Government in regard to award of MPP status intimated to

MOP that Tamil Nadu was agreeable to privatization of distribution

without any time frame and reply was awaited from them.

7.4 NTPC informed that the site investigation, soil testing, environment

impact assessment etc. were under progress and MPP status had

been applied for.

7.5 Director (Thermal), APGENCO said that the projects were being

considered during the very early stages of Planning. He said SRPC

should take up the follow up of the projects only when the projects

fructify.

7.6 The TCC deliberated the above issue and noted that the generation

being planned was needed to meet the projected loads, and any delay

may lead to load generation imbalance and therefore the projects

needed to be monitored at early stages of planning itself.

23

8. 11th PLAN CENTRAL SECTOR THERMAL POWER PROJECTS FOR

SR

8.1 As per information available in the website of CEA the following

Central Sector thermal projects of SR are also expected during 11th

Plan:

Sl.No Name of Scheme By Fuel/ Location

Benefits (MW)

1. Kayamkulam, 3 x 650 Kerala

NTPC Gas 1950

2. Neyveli –II Exp. 2x250 Tamil Nadu

NLC Lignite 500

3. Neyveli –III 2x500 Tamil Nadu

NLC Lignite 1000

8.2 GM (OS), SRHQ, NTPC informed that land for the Kayamkulam project

was available with them while fuel linkage was yet to be tied up.

8.3 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that the allocation for Neyveli-II

Expansion had already been firmed up.

8.4 NLC and TNEB informed that Neyveli-III was same as the

Jayamkondam Project.

8.5 Member Secretary, SRPC requested NTPC and NLC to furnish the

project updates regularly to SRPC Secretariat.

9. KAIGA A.P.S. TARIFF

9.1 Managing Director, KPTCL vide communication

No.CEE/SLDC/EE/PS/604-07 dated 21st February 2006 had stated

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

24

level had also been raised, considering the range of PLF achieved by

Kaiga during the past years.

9.2 In the 140th meeting it was decided that the Board would take up the

issue with CEA/MOP/DAE, while the constituents also would take up

the issue individually also regarding

1) Payment of fixed charges + variable charges up to 68.5% PLF

2) Payment of variable charges + incentive beyond 68.5% PLF

3) Rationalisation of Tariff.

4) Increase in threshold PLF based on past performance.

9.3 As advised by Chairperson, SRPC, Member Secretary had in his

correspondence with Heads of beneficiary States vide letter No:

SRPC/SE-1/9(Kaiga)/2006/6517-23 dated 14th September 2006

conveyed his request that the matter may kindly be taken up by

individual constituents through the Chief Minister of the State with the

Hon’ble Prime Minister of India in order to effectively impress about the

importance of the issue of tariff fixation in respect of Kaiga APS and

other Nuclear Power Stations.

9.4 In the Meeting, Chief Engineer (GM), CEA informed that mainly due to

the efforts of SR constituents, a Committee had been constituted by

Department of Atomic Energy to look into the details of tariff fixation of

Nuclear Power Plants (A copy of the DAE letter dated 12th September,

2006 is enclosed as Annexure-IX). The Committee was expected to

submit its report within 9 months.

9.5 GM (Tr), NPCIL informed that the committee had met twice and was

expected to meet again in a fortnight’s time.

10. OPERATION OF TALCHER-KOLAR HVDC TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

IN GROUND RETURN MODE

10.1 It is now well known that during the GRM operation of Talcher-Kolar

HVDC link, KPTCL transformers experienced vibrations, harmonics

25

and increased noise levels on account of DC current entering the

neutrals of KPTCL transformers whenever the power flow on the link

exceeded 150 MW. The test report submitted by POWERGRID in this

regard recommended a power flow of 450 MW in GRM. Further

analysis made by POWERGRID reveal that the entire stretch from

Talcher to Kolar was a rocky terrain and setting up of any earth

electrode stations in between linked by overhead lines from Kolar

would not help in improving the situation.

10.2 A Special meeting of TCC was held on 15th of February 2006 to

discuss the test report of CPRI – on the test carried out in the presence

of KPTCL officers – wherein certain apprehensions were expressed by

KPTCL on the conduct of test as well as results. Accordingly, it was

decided that an action plan would be chalked out for carrying out the

test in the presence of KPTCL, POWERGRID & their

experts/Consultants.

10.3 Subsequently, a meeting was held on 15th March 2006, wherein it was

agreed that Prof. Nagabhusana, Specialist Consultant to KPTCL would

carry out laboratory experiments as a first step and would examine all

available data, make a detailed test procedure proposal for discussion

and tie up within a period of two weeks. At the request of KPTCL, a

meeting was again held on 30th May 2006 at SRPC, Bangalore to

discuss GRM testing activities chalked out by Prof. Nagabhusana. In

the meeting, he suggested an action plan on which he wanted further

discussions with M/s. Crompton Greaves. This meeting was attended

by KPTCL, Prof. Nagabhusana & SRPC officers.

10.4 A joint meeting of representatives from KPTCL, POWERGRID & their

experts/consultants was organized by SRPC Secretariat to be held on

14th September 2006 to evolve an action plan for the Talcher-Kolar

HVDC link testing programme in GR. The meeting could not be held

due to non-availability of a mutually convenient date for Dr.

Nagabhushana and others.

26

10.5 Member Secretary also informed about a letter dated 13-09-2006 from

GAIL India Ltd. (copy enclosed as Annexure-X) addressed to PGCIL

seeking clarifications and details about the GRM operation of Talcher-

Kolar Poles. He added that the next meeting of SRPC Secretariat,

KPTCL, Prof. Nagabhushan and representative from Engineering

Division of PGCIL would be convened shortly.

10.6 ED, SR-II, PGCIL informed that the letter from GAIL had been referred

to the Engineering division of PGCIL.

10.7 TCC noted that the schedule of testing for GRM was yet to be tied up.

It was decided that PGCIL and KPTCL should resolve all pending

issues at an early date.

11. SHARING OF O&M COST FOR LOWER SILERU-BARSOOR

NATIONAL HVDC PROJECT, AN INTER-REGIONAL LINK BETWEEN SR&WR

11.1 Lower Sileru – Barsoor is a 200 MW, 200 kV monopolar HVDC link

between SR and WR, built indigenously at a cost of about 125 Crores,

under National HVDC project. Operation & Maintenance at Lower

Sileru (SR) and Barsoor (WR) were being done by APTRANSCO and

CSEB respectively. The utilisation of this national asset is very low.

11.2 To utilize this national asset, Secretary (Power) in a meeting with

BHEL on 23.04.2005 had desired that the efforts should be made to

utilize the NHVDC project and keep the link continuously in operation

so that investment made could be put to use.

11.3 In various meetings with APTRANSCO, CSEB, BHEL and PGCIL

following issues had transpired.

• APTRANSCO and CSEB have 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

27

• Wheeling charges would be payable to APTRANSCO & CSEB,

whenever this link is 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.

11.4 It had 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 at the

appropriate time.

11.5 The issue was deliberated in the 140th meeting of SRE Board. In the

meeting 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. 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. PGCIL were also

agreeable to the proposal, it was informed.

11.6 A meeting on reenergization of this HVDC line was taken by Member

(PS), CEA on 18.07.2006 at CEA, New Delhi wherein it was agreed

that concurrence of APTRANSCO and CSEB for 20 MW to 50 MW

power flow initially on NHVDC link would be sought by CEA and visit

by a team comprising of BHEL, PGCIL and CEA would be organized

soon thereafter to assess the condition of the equipments.

11.7 Subsequently, a meeting was taken by Member (PS), CEA on 4th

August 2006, on the same subject project. The copy of Minutes of the

above meeting issued vide letter No: CEA/SETD/402/2006/1538 dated

10th August 2006 is enclosed at Annexure-XI.

11.8 In the Meeting, Member Secretary, SRPC informed that another

meeting on the above was proposed to be taken by Member (PS),

CEA on 9th November, 2006.

11.9 Member (Tr. & Dist.), KSEB said that they had certain reservations on

the commercial aspects of the use of the above asset.

28

11.10 TCC recommended for in principle sharing of O&M charges.

12. REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEMES FOR EXECUTION BY POWERGRID

12.1 Transmission schemes agreed by the constituents for execution by

POWERGRID as per the Minutes of 22nd Meeting of Standing

Committee on Power System Planning of SR held on 17.08.2006,

which has been communicated by CEA vide letter No. 51/4/SP & PA-

2006/319-29, are as given below:

A. Evacuation scheme for Tuticorin TPS (2X500 MW), JV of TNEB & NLC

i) Tuticorin JV TPS – Madurai 400 kV Quad DC line

ii) 2X315 MVA, 400/230 kV autotransformer at Tuticorin JV TPS

iii) LILO of 2 nos. 230 kV circuits at Tuticorin TPS JV *

* a) With the above, there would be provision of 2 nos. of 400 kV line bays and 4 nos. 230 kV line bays at Tuticorin JV TPS

b) Works for LILO of 230 kV line would be under purview of TNEB

B. Evacuation scheme for North Chennai TPS (2X500 MW), JV of TNEB & NTPC

i) LILO of Alamathi –Sriperumbudur 400 kV DC at North Chennai TPS

ii) Melakottaiyur – Alamathy 400 kV DC with twin moose conductor

iii) 2X315 MVA, 400/230 kV autotransformer at North Chennai TPS

iv) 4 no.230 kV bays at switchyard of North Chennai TPS JV

v) 230 kV interconnection with existing North Chennai TPS (under scope of TNEB at their cost)

29

C. Strengthening of transmission system from Talcher to Rourkela for export of SR surplus

i) Talcher – Rourkela 400 kV DC with Quad conductor with

provision of series compensation if required at later stage

D. PGCIL made a presentation on the studies carried out by them for

determining the requirements of reactors in Southern Region in the

22nd Standing Committee meeting. It was agreed in the meeting

that installation of 25 nos. of reactors (20 bus reactors + 5 line

reactors) would be taken up as a regional system-strengthening

scheme. However, before firming up, PGCIL was to ascertain the

following:

• the proposed installation would be feasible at each of the

identified location. If there were any constraints, the scheme

would be appropriately revised.

• the reactor procured under the scheme did not become

redundant in the study of long-term conditions.

12.2 In the Meeting Chief Engineer (SP &PA), CEA informed that item A

and B may be firmed up later as some fine tuning was required taking

into consideration the wind power being injected into TNEB Grid. He

added that switchyard provisions for Item A and B had been firmed up,

the final transmission system could be different from the above.

12.3 He added that Engineering Division of PGCIL had submitted the study

results for providing reactors in SR. He said that certain clarifications

had been sought by CEA in this regard. He added that PGCIL had

suggested that some reactors be provided by State Utilities, Central

Sector Generators & PGCIL and the cost to be borne by the respective

utilities initially while the asset would be included in the Regional

Transmission System subsequently.

12.4 In the first instance, PGCIL was requested to furnish a list of reactors

to be commissioned by PGCIL, for approval of the SRPC.

30

12.5 GM, SRLDC said in view of the prevailing high voltage conditions in

SR Grid, it was desirable that the reactors be commissioned at the

earliest.

12.6 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO enquired whether Vemagiri,

Mehboob Nagar, Chittoor stations and new gas based Generating

Stations of AP had been considered in the above studies.

12.7 Chief Engineer (SP &PA), CEA said that in the final studies these

stations would also be taken into consideration.

12.8 TCC requested PGCIL to furnish the location of the reactors to be

commissioned by PGCIL for approval of the SRPC.

12.9 After deliberations, Item C (i) was recommended for approval of the

Committee.

13. FACILITATION OF INTER-STATE/INTER-REGIONAL TRANSFER OF

POWER

13.1 The facilitation of inter-State/inter-Regional transfer of power has been

entrusted to SRPC by the Government of India Resolution dated 25th

May, 2005. The issue has been taken up in OCC forum and the

information regarding surplus power and the details of contact persons

in this regard is being posted from time to time on SRPC website

(www.srpc.kar.nic.in).

13.2 In the Meeting, Member Secretary, SRPC requested the constituents

to furnish any suggestion in this regard.

14. UTILISATION OF UNREQUISITIONED POWER OF NTPC STATIONS

14.1 In the 118th meeting of TCC held on 17.3.2006 at Bangalore, the issue

of income tax liability for the sale of un-requisitioned power URS by

NTPC was discussed and NTPC agreed that in case URS

31

transactions, energy rates would be 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.

This was not agreeable to the beneficiary constituents. In the 140th

SRE Board 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 scheme has been agreed in

Northern and Western Regions.

14.2 The SRE 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.

14.3 In the meeting, TNEB representative said that the tariff approved by

CERC included the recovery of income tax.

14.4 NTPC representative said that NTPC was willing to recover income tax

on notional basis, however any surplus / deficit would have to be

absorbed by constituents.

14.5 TNEB representative said that TNEB was agreeable to above

proposal.

14.6 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO agreed with the view of TNEB and

said that other incidental charges like water cess should also be

refunded.

14.7 Chief Engineer (SP & PA), CEA said that NTPC could not possibly

charge tariff more than the CERC approved tariff. ED (OS), SRHQ,

NTPC endorsed the above views.

32

14.8 After deliberation it was agreed that NTPC would make a detailed

presentation on this issue in the Special TCC Meeting to be held on

15th November, 2006.

15. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTER-TRIP SCHEME FOR OUTAGE OF TALCHER-KOLAR HVDC TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

15.1 The scheme of graded trip signals in the context of transfer of 2000

MW from Talcher STPS Stage-II, to compensate for different loss of

HVDC power flow, was discussed and finalised in the 73rd Protection

Committee of SREB held on 30th December 2004. The graded trip

signals were to be provided by POWERGRID at the substations of the

constituents.

15.2 SRE Board in the 137th meeting held at Chennai on 12.4.05 approved

the scheme for implementation by POWERGRID for provision of

graded trip signals in the context of transfer of 2000 MW from Talcher

STPS Stage-II, to compensate for varying measures of loss of HVDC

power flow at an estimated cost of Rs. 7.50 crores.

15.3 In the 140th meeting of SRE Board, 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 connected with extending signals to the loads, designed to be

tripped, would be completed by end of March 2006.

15.4 The revised inter-trip scheme with graded signals and wide band

medium associated with the defense mechanism on tripping of

Talcher-Kolar HVDC link has been commissioned and the scheme put

into continuous operation w.e.f 29.03.2006.

TCC noted the above.

33

15.1.1 Blocking of Talcher-Kolar Pole

15.1.1.1 Member Secretary, SRPC apprised the committee about the

frequent blocking of Talcher-Kolar Pole and the remedial action

taken by PGCIL in this regard. He said that blocking of Talcher-

Kolar Pole was leading to tripping of Talcher Stage-II Units as per

the existing tripping scheme. He added that NTPC had written to

CEA to reconsider the tripping scheme, with the commissioning of

Tala Evacuation System.

15.1.1.2 NTPC said that the tripping of units due to the above scheme was

reducing their availability since the poles were coming back within

15 to 30 minutes, while the NTPC units were coming back after 3 to

8 hours.

15.1.1.3 Member Secretary, SRPC said that the above outages are being

treated in line with the provisions of the existing CERC orders and

NTPC may take up the issue appropriately.

15.1.1.4 Chief Engineer (SP &PA), CEA informed that the CEA was

considering changes in the tripping scheme consequent to

commissioning of Tala Evacuation System. He added that the

scheme would be reviewed after the commissioning of Talcher-

Rourkela Line.

16. COMPUTATION OF TALCHER STPS-II INJECTION

16.1 The computation of actual injection of Talcher STPS-II for accounting

purposes was done using SEMs installed on the outgoing feeders till

31.03.2006.

16.2 Clause 7.4.6. of revised IEGC effective from 1st April 2006, provided

that the actual injection of Talcher STPS-II shall be as metered on

400kV side of generator transformers of Talcher STPS-II units.

34

SRPC/SRLDC implemented the above, accordingly, while finalising

REA .

16.3 NTPC in the special meeting of TCC held at SRPC Secretariat on 26th

April 2006 had stated that it would be appropriate to wait for

regulations of CEA on installation and operations of meters, in the

context of REA finalisation using the methodology described in the

foregoing paragraph.

16.4 The Central Electricity Authority (Installation and Operations of Meters)

Regulations, 2006 subsequently has come into force from 22nd March

2006, as per which the computation of actual injection of Talcher

STPS-II for accounting purposes shall be done with meters installed on

all outgoing feeders.

16.5 Vide their letter dated 9th May 2006, DGM (OS/SIIS), Corporate Office,

NTPC had brought out (copy enclosed at Annexure-XII) that the

context prevailing during the special meeting of TCC of April, 2006 was

different and the regulations of CEA published in the gazette of

Government of India with effect from 22.3.2006 were directly arising

out of Section 73 (e) of Electricity Act, 2003 would be overriding the

provisions of IEGC, if any to the contrary, as provided under Section

79 (h) of the Act. Accordingly NTPC representative requested that the

metering practice specified by CEA regulations should be followed.

16.6 SRLDC for their computation were still using the provisions of clause

7.4.6 of revised IEGC effective from 1st April 2006, it was seen.

16.7 In the first Commercial Sub-Committee meeting held on 27th July 2006

explaining the metering scheme at Talcher STPS-II NTPC

representative said that while engineering the metering scheme,

measurements on the outgoing feeders were only considered. CEA

regulations were framed in consultation with all concerned utilities and

Indian Electricity Grid Code (IEGC) does not have any stipulation on

metering. He added that under ‘ Role of CEA’, clause 2.5.1(1) (v) of

IEGC, one of the functions of CEA was to specify the conditions for

35

installation of meters for transmission and supply of electricity. The

actual injection of Talcher STPS-II given in Para 6 in Chapter-7 of

IEGC may be incidental. In the meeting GM, SRLDC said that they

were aware of CEA regulations, but IEGC provision also was to be

viewed and in this regard clarification should be obtained. He added

that till such time the existing scheme would be continued.

16.8 Referring to the aspect that under ‘Role of CEA’ defined under Clause

2.5.1(1)(v) of IEGC, that the function of CEA was to specify the

conditions for installation of meters for transmission and supply of

Electricity, Member Secretary, SRPC said that mention by CERC in

IEGC Chapter 7 Para 6 could only be incidental in the overall context

(taking mention in clause 2.5.1(1)(v) of IEGC also into account) and

that since accounting was done by SRLDC, they may have to seek

clarification appropriately. NTPC representative also requested G.M.,

SRLDC to seek clarification from CERC. In this context, SRLDC letter

dated 21st August 2006 and NTPC letter dated 7th September 2006 are

enclosed as Annexure-XIII.

16.9 In the meeting, APTRANSCO and TNEB said that the procedure

adopted by SRLDC be continued.

16.10 NTPC representative said that the accounting should be done as per

the provisions of the CEA Regulations on metering and SRLDC should

revise the account.

16.11 GM, SRLDC said that Talcher II STPS had got specific mention in

Clause 7.4.6 of IEGC, which was effective from 1st April, 2006. SRLDC

had finalized the UI accounts in line with the provisions of IEGC. He

added that there were no objections from any constituent in this regard

on the IEGC provision (effective from 1st April, 2006) issued by CERC.

He said that if any change in methodology was to be done it would

have to be done with prospective effect.

16.12 Member Secretary, SRPC said that as per relevant Sections of

Electricity Act 2003, CEA had to notify the Regulations on Metering for

36

accounting and audit purpose. He informed that the accounting had

been done by the SRPC Secretariat as per the CEA Regulations on

metering.

17. STATUS OF REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEMES

17.1 Upgradation of 400 kV level of operation of Kaiga-Guttur D/C line

17.1.1 The upgradation of Kaiga-Guttur DC line for 400 kV operations was

taken up by KPTCL in stages. In the first stage, circuit-II of Kaiga-

Guttur D/C link upgradation work was taken up which also involved

insulator replacement and circuit-II was synchronized for 400 kV

operation on 8th August, 2005. After charging at 400 kV level there

were many trippings in the circuit-II, due to over voltage, insulator

decapping etc.

17.1.2 In the 139th meeting of SREB, MD, KPTCL 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.

17.1.3 In the 140th meeting of SREB, Director (Tr.), KPTCL intimated that

the work of replacement of insulators on circuit II would be completed

prior to monsoon by June/July 2006. Replacement of insulators on

circuit I would be taken up after monsoon.

17.1.4 Director (Tr.), KPTCL vide letter dated 18.07.2006 intimated that 400

kV Kaiga-Guttur circuit-II has been put into regular operation from

14.07.2006 after replacing the defective insulators.

17.1.5 In the Meeting, Director (Tr), KPTCL informed that all the insulators in

Sirsi-Guttur II had been changed and line was performing well. He

said full supply of insulators for Sirsi-Guttur –I was expected by end

November 2006 and the replacement works were expected to be

completed by December 2006.

37

17.2 400 kV Madurai-Trivandrum D/C line

17.2.1 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 not to be technically practicable/ implement able 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.

17.2.2 In the 140th meeting of SREB, POWERGRID intimated that they had

already submitted a proposal to CEA during January 2006. In the

22nd Standing Committee meeting held on 17.08.2006 at Bangalore,

Powergrid made a presentation on their studies done for placement

of reactors at various locations in SR to contain over-voltage. In their

proposal a 63 MVAR line reactor has been proposed in Madurai-

Trivandrum line-I at Trivandrum. It was agreed in the meeting that

installation of 25 nos of reactors (20 bus reactors + 5 line reactors)

would be taken up as a regional system-strengthening scheme.

However, before firming up, PGCIL was to ascertain the following:

• the proposed installation would be feasible at each of the identified location. If there were any constraint, the scheme would be appropriately revised.

• the reactor procured under the scheme did not become redundant in the study of long-term conditions.

17.2.3 In the Meeting Member (Tr. & Dist.), KSEB informed that the loading

pattern at Trivandrum had improved slightly. He also requested for

shifting of one 400 kV Transformer (3rd) from Trivandrum to

Madakkathara S/S of Kerala.

17.2.4 ED, SR-II, PGCIL said that since the transformer at Trivandrum was

expected to be commissioned within 5 to 6 months, it would be

38

difficult to accommodate the requests of KSEB at this stage, as the

work had been already awarded.

17.2.5 Chief Engineer (SP &PA), CEA said that the schemes were finalized

with respect to the data furnished by the States and in consultation

with States. If any change were envisaged/proposed, the same

should have been communicated at the appropriate time to

CEA/PGCIL.

17.2.6 Member (Tr. & Dist.), KSEB said that the request of KSEB was based

on observation of the present condition in Kerala System.

However, KSEB was requested to furnish a formal request to

CEA/PGCIL in this regard.

18. EVACUATION SCHEMES FOR NEW CENTRAL GENERATING

STATIONS

18.1 In the 138th SREB meeting, MS, SREB brought out that three nos. of

Central generating stations viz. Kaiga 3 & 4, NLC TPS-II- Expn. and

Kudankulam APP were scheduled to be commissioned in the next

couple of years and the evacuation schemes from these projects were

under execution by POWERGRID, which would inject power to the

State grids at the sub-stations finalized by the Standing Committee on

Power System Planning of SR. He added that programme of

commissioning transmission schemes of POWERGRID were also

generally matching with the scheduled commissioning of the

generating units. In order to ensure full and timely uitilisation of power

from these projects, the evacuation plans from the injection points

were to be implemented by the beneficiary constituents within the time

frame of commissioning of generating units.

18.2 In the 139th SREB meeting beneficiary constituents furnished details of

associated evacuation system from their side to utilize power from the

POWERGRID sub-stations, to enable monitoring in OCC /TCC

meetings, which was included as enclosure to the minutes.

39

18.3 As per records available with the Secretariat the anticipated dates of

commissioning of Unit-III & IV of Kaiga GS is March 2007 & September

2007 respectively. However, CMD, NPCIL vide his D.O letter dated

08.06.2006 addressed to Chairperson CEA had indicated that Kaiga

Unit-III was planned to be commissioned by December 2006. In order

to ensure full and timely utilisation of power from Kaiga Stage –II, the

evacuation transmission lines and substations being implemented by

Powergrid and the evacuation system from Powergrid substations

being implemented by the beneficiary constituents need to be

completed within the time frame of commissioning of generating unit of

Kaiga stage-II. In this regard, Director (O), NPCIL vide letter No:

NPCIL/Dir. (O)/2006/M/8162 dated 5th September 2006 to Director

(Transmission), KPTCL, had also requested early completion of

Narendra-Haveri-Guttur 220 kV second circuit.

18.4 In the Meeting Director (Tr.), KPTCL informed that tender was floated

for Narendra-Mahalingapur Line, and it was expected as per the

schedule of December 2007. He said that the work was in progress on

Mahalingapur - Kudachi - Chikkodi and the line was expected in

December 2006. He said that the survey of Narendra – Ghatprabha

line was over and tenders are to be floated.

18.5 General Manager (Tr.), NPCIL informed since the third unit at Kaiga

GS was expected to be synchronized to Grid by December 2006 end

and put on commercial operation by March 2007, all related

transmission system should be in place. He requested KPTCL to

complete the up gradation work on Sirsi-Guttur I and that the

Narendra-Haveri-Guttur D/C should be commissioned before the

synchronization of unit III of Kaiga GS.

18.6 Director (Tr.), KPTCL said that the Narendra-Haveri-Guttur D/C was

expected to be completed around July, 2007 as the Contractor of the

works, M/s. BHEL had failed. He informed that in 12 locations out of

the 70 locations of Mysore –Kadakola line, some problems were

observed and the line was expected around June 2007.

40

18.7 Member (Tr. & Dist.), KSEB said that the inter connecting line to 400

kV PGCIL S/S of Kozhikode would be completed by December 2007.

He informed that LILO of Kaythar-Sankaneri 230kV line is proposed at

Tirunelveli and single circuit line is proposed from Tirunelveli 400 kV

S/S to Udayathur 230 kV S/S & single circuit line from Tirunelveli 400

kV S/S to Veeranam 230 kV S/S for Kudankulam evacuation system.

He informed that there were some apprehensions among the public

regarding PGCIL line for Kudankulam evacuation and it had been

proposed to increase the tower height to 70 mtrs. He said that KSEB

was also educating the public about the importance of the line and

expressed hope that all litigations will be over by the month end and

the lines are expected before December 2007. He informed that the

S/S in Cochin may be delayed and may not match with the PGCIL

schedule.

18.8 ED (O), TNEB informed that LILO of SP Koil – Tharamani feeder at

Melakottaiyur is also planned for Kaiga II evacuation system.

18.9 Member Secretary, SRPC requested the constituents to furnish the

information regularly to SRPC Secretariat.

18.10 The information compiled from details received from the constituents

during the meeting is at Annexure-XIV.

19. COMPUTATION OF UI EXCHANGES BETWEEN ER-SR

19.1 Differences have been observed between SRLDC UI account and UI

computed by SRPC as per IEGC in respect of inter-regional UI

charges with ER.

19.2 In the context of the above the Indian Electricity Grid Code (IEGC)

stipulates following provisions:

i) As per Para 7.6.1(d) of Revised IEGC the regional

boundaries for scheduling, metering and UI accounting of

41

ER-SR inter-regional exchanges shall be 400 kV Bus

couplers between Talcher-I and Talcher-II and 400 kV East

Bus of Gazuwaka HVDC.

ii) Para 7.6.3. of IEGC stipulates that no attempt shall be made

to split the inter-regional schedules into link-wise schedules

( where two regions have two or more connections).

iii) In the CERC’s Suo Motu order dated 23rd June 2006 in the

matter of Indian Electricity Grid Code in response to CTU

letter dated 5.4.2006, it was directed that the pre-existing

practice of UI accounting for inter-regional exchanges shall

continue with effect from 1.4.2006.

19.3 SRPC Secretariat requested SRLDC vide letter

No.SREB/SEI/17(SRLDC)/ 2006/5764 dated 9th August 2006 to

communicate the methodology adopted by SRLDC for UI computation.

Communication from SRLDC in this regard is awaited.

19.4 In the Meeting Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO said that the

procedure adopted by SRLDC may be continued. TNEB, KSEB and

KPTCL endorsed the views of APTRANSCO.

19.5 GM, SRLDC informed that methodology adopted was as per the IEGC

provisions.

19.6 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that computations were being

done by SRPC Secretariat is as per IEGC provisions and will be

continued.

20. COMPUTATION OF UI FORMULAE FOR AVAILABILITY & PLF FOR

NLC TPS-II STATION

20.1 The methodology for computation of UI and formulae for computation

of Availability and PLF in respect of NLC TPS-II station (enclosed at

Annexure-XV) based on clause 10 of CERC order dated 3rd March

2006 (last but one clause) in NLC Petition No.1/2006 have been

42

discussed in the special meeting of TCC held at SRPC Secretariat on

26th April 2006. The constituents had said that they would examine the

methodology/formulae and revert back. Accordingly, the committee

had decided to defer the item for subsequent discussion.

20.2 In the first Commercial Sub-Committee meeting held on 27th July

2006, NLC representatives explained Method-3 detailed in Agenda for

this meeting and it was expressed that NLC preferred Method-3, but

they were agreeable for any of the methods. KSEB representative said

that they were agreeable for Method-3.After deliberations, the other

constituents intimated that they would further examine the

methodology /formulae suggested for subsequent discussion in the

next meeting.

20.3 TCC recommended Method-III for UI Computation, formulae for

Availability and PLF of NLC-TPS II Station for approval.

21. UI ACCOUNT FOR THE WEEK 26.06.06 TO 02.07.06

21.1 In the UI account for the week from 26.06.06 to 02.07.06, inter regional

UI in respect of ER & WR were at payable side and the receivable

amount by the constituents of SR was less than even that payable by

ER&WR. Hence after restricting lesser of the two as per approved

methodology there was a surplus amount of Rs.1,16,40,193. SRLDC

issued the UI account stating that surplus amount of Rs.1,16,40,193/-

is retained in the SR Pool and the same will be discussed for

finalisation of approach in the forth -coming Commercial Sub-

Committee meeting of SRPC.

21.2 In the first Commercial Sub-Committee meeting held on 27th July

2006, the sub Committee members agreed about distributing the

amount to the beneficiary constituents in the overall ratio of weighted

average entitlement in ISGS for sharing transmission charges for the

month of June 2006 and to transfer the amount to CTU’s transmission

43

account by way of credit towards payable transmission charges of the

respective beneficiary constituents.

21.3 TCC recommended the same for approval. TCC also recommended

that in future, decision would be taken on a case-to-case basis.

22. BIFURCATION OF ENERGY TO THE DISCOMS OF ANDHRA

PRADESH AND ESCOMS OF KARNATAKA IN THE MONTHLY REA.

22.1 In the monthly REA issued by SRLDC bifurcation of energy to the

DISCOMS of Andhra Pradesh and ESCOMs of Karnataka was not

available. SRLDC in their communication dated 12th June 2006

addressed to TSS, MAPS in response to MAPS Fax Message Ref.

NPC-MAPS/MIS-TU/2006 dated 09.06.2006 had indicated that as per

the Indian Electricity Act, 2003 and the revised IEGC, the SLDCs were

responsible for keeping the accounts of the quantity of electricity

transmitted through the State’s grids and preparation of intra-state

energy accounts.

22.2 In the first Commercial Sub-Committee meeting held on 27th July 2006

this was discussed and most of the constituents expressed that

SRLDC should furnish the bifurcation details in the REA.

22.3 In the meeting Member Secretary, SRPC stated that CERC on many

occasions had advised resolution of issues among the parties

concerned and a petition to CERC should be as a last resort.

Accordingly, he advised SRLDC to consider acceding to the request

for furnishing bifurcated accounts to the DISCOMS & ESCOMS, which

were direct beneficiaries to the ISGS. He also suggested that SRLDC

should seek clarifications in case they had doubts about the provision

relating to furnishing of bifurcated statements in respect of DISCOMS

& ESCOMS having direct share in ISGS.

22.4 Earlier, SREB prepared REA with bifurcation of energy to DISCOMS &

ESCOMS based on the request made by the respective states. Copies

44

of letter received from Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are enclosed as

Annexure –XVI.

22.5 In the meeting G.M., SRLDC reiterated that as per the Indian Electricity

Act, 2003 and the revised IEGC, the SLDCs are responsible for

keeping the accounts of the quantity of electricity transmitted through

the State’s grids and preparation of intra-state energy accounts.

22.6 TCC noted that since the accounting had been transferred to SRPC

Secretariat, there was no need of further discussion on this item.

23. REACTIVE CHARGES ON HOSUR-YERANDAHALLI LINE

23.1 The issue of reactive charges being claimed by KPTCL from TNEB has

been discussed in the OCC meetings. In the 2nd meeting of OCC of

SRPC, it was informed by KPTCL that the issue had been referred to

their higher management and a decision in this regard was expected in

the near future. Subsequently the line had been opened on 22nd

August 2006. OCC requested TNEB & KPTCL to resolve the issue

amicably since the closing of the line would be beneficial to the States

as well as the grid.

23.2 In the Meeting Member Secretary, SRPC informed about the letter

from CEE, SLDC, KPTCL dated 19.9.2006 (Copy enclosed as

Annexure-XVII) enclosing the Office Memorandum by Director

(Procurement), SPPCC, GOK, Bangalore in which reactive energy

charges already claimed to the tune of Rs.21.28 lakhs had been

withdrawn and also in future the Var billing would not be done for

Hosur-Yerandahalli 230/220 kV line.

23.3 TCC expressed appreciation that the issue had been resolved

amicably.

45

24. OUTAGE REQUIRED FOR KOLAR UPGRADATION WORKS AND

ALTERNATE PLANS FOR POWER EVACUATION

24.1 Director (O), POWERGRID vide his letter dated 13th September, 2006

had informed that shutdown was planned to be availed for three weeks

for each pole and one week for bi pole for upgradation works in about

six months time. POWERGRID would communicate to the

beneficiaries two months in advance, details of exact requirement of

shutdown. Alternate plan for power evacuation from Talcher – II also

needed to be worked out during the shutdown period.

24.2 In the Meeting, ED, SR-II, PGCIL said that the outage was necessary

for the upgradation works, while the time schedule furnished was

tentative and the final schedule would be furnished later.

24.3 Chief Engineer (SP & PA). CEA said that the upgradation work had

been linked with 10th Plan targets of Inter-Regional capacity and had

been delayed by six months. He added that the commitment in this

regard had been given to the Parliament and the same was being

monitored by Min. of Power. He therefore requested the constituents

to concur to finish the work before March 2007. Chief Engineer (SP &

PA), CEA said that February was generally a low demand period for

Northern Region and constituents may consider the shut down during

that period.

24.4 APTRANSCO, KPTCL, KSEB and TNEB said that January 2007 to

April 2007 being peak demand period for them, the shut down could be

contemplated only in the next monsoon.

24.5 It was concluded that the APTRANSCO, KPTCL, KSEB & TNEB were

not in favour for according in principle approval for availing the shut

down before next monsoon.

46

24.1.1 Planned Annual maintenance of Unit IV of Talcher Stage II

24.1.1.1 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that Annual Maintenance of

Unit IV of Talcher Stage II was postponed in deference to the

request of SR constituents and NTPC was planning to avail the

shut down during the month of January 2007. He added that SR

constituents were requesting in the OCC forum that the shutdown

be availed before the year-end.

24.1.1.2 ED (OS), SRHQ, NTPC said that generator problem had been

observed in Unit IV of Talcher stage II and experts from BHEL and

Siemens had been called to attend the problem. He informed that

maintenance of other 500 MW units of Talcher Stage II and

Ramagundam STPS of NTPC for SR had also been planned so

that there would not be overlap of maintenance of any two 500 MW

units.

24.1.1.3 After deliberation, TCC requested NTPC to take balance 500 MW

units of Talcher Stage II and Ramagundam STPS for annual

maintenance one after the other and complete the outage plan for

all the units at the earliest, so that the units are available during the

peak demand period.

25. 500 MW LONG TERM OPEN ACCESS FOR SR BENEFICIARIES IN ER

TRANSMISSION SYSTEM

25.1 In the 139th meeting of SREB held at Hyderabad on 19th December

2005, the following back up transmission system for evacuation of

power from Talcher- II had been approved :

• 400 KV D/C Mendhashal – Behrampur – Gazuwaka line

• 500 MW long term open access in ER Grid from Talcher-

Gazuwaka

47

25.2 Director (O), POWERGRID vide letter No: C/OS/SRPC dated 13th

September 2006 had sought details of date from which the SR

beneficiaries require access, so that POWERGRID could formalize the

same.

25.3 In the Meeting Chief Engineer (SP & PA), CEA informed that some of

the constituents in ER were not agreeable for system strengthening

works in their system. In this scenario, he suggested that SR

constituents could go for 100% stake in 400 KV Mendhashal –

Behrampur - Gazuwaka along with the switching station at Behrampur

and could also seek short term open access for transfer of 500MW

from ER on the other associated lines needed for evacuation of this

power from ER. He said that this option has been economically

equivalent to the other option with 50 % stake and as per CEA’s

studies no constraint was expected in ER for evacuation of this power

so the SR Constituents consider availing short-term open access.

25.4 GM, SRLDC said that with SR constituents going for short-term open

access, the power would be available on opportunity basis.

25.5 Member Secretary, SRPC said that the option of sharing the cost by

ER constituents should not be closed.

25.6 After deliberation TCC recommended that in case the Eastern Region

Constituents did not agree for sharing transmission charges of 400 KV

Mendhashal – Behrampur-Gazuwaka along with the switching station

at Behrampur, the same could be built fully by Southern Region

Constituents and SR could seek short term open access for transfer of

500MW from ER on the other associated lines needed for evacuation

of this power from ER.

26. RADIAL POWER THROUGH 220 kV BALIMELA-UPPER SILERU S/C

LINE

26.1 The issue of availing power on 220 kV Balimela-Upper Sileru S/C line

was discussed in the 3rd OCC Meeting held on 8th September 2006.

48

The issue had been taken up by GM, SRLDC with Director (T),

APTRANSCO vide letter No: GM/SRLDC dated 4th September 2006

(copy enclosed as Annexure-XVIII).

26.2 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO said that since AP was having

around 700 MW generation in the Sileru basin, there could be problem

in evacuating the power.

26.3 GM, SRLDC said that as per studies carried out by them, evacuation

problems were expected during two months, while during the rest of

the year no constraints were observed.

26.4 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO said that since appropriate loads

also had to be identified, the nearest load at Vishakapatnam was

already facing high voltage problem. He added that since this line also

goes through heavy jungle, reliability was not ensured which is

necessary as the associated evacuation lines feed city loads and

certain traction loads also. He informed that the issue had been taken

by APTRANSCO vide letter dated 09.10.2006 with SRLDC (copy

enclosed as Annexure-XIX).

TCC recommended further deliberation of the issue.

27. TUNING OF POWER SYSTEM STABILISERS IN SR

27.1 In the 137th meeting of SRE Board, it was intimated that the first

meeting of the Core Group was held on 4th April 2005, wherein the

constituents shared the details about occurrence of oscillations in the

past in their systems. It was felt that study was required to ascertain

the need or otherwise of PSS tuning of the generators in SR and it was

decided to collect all related data in this regard.

27.2 In a meeting with Prof. Ramanujam at Anna University, Chennai on

19.05.2006 the following methodology for doing the study for PSS

tuning in SR was suggested by Prof. Ramanujam.

49

o Identify two to four base cases to reflect the operating

conditions of SR.

o One to two contingency analysis on each base case to be

done.

o Eigenvalue analysis for each base to identify the least

damped mode. If any of the rotor modes are very close to

imaginary axis then PSS is suggested.

o Arrive at PSS parameters for each case and freeze on the

one that is best compromise for all cases identified above.

o Perform Transient Stability analysis runs with PSS to check

for large-signal performance.

Interaction is on by Prof. Khincha, IISc with all concerned.

27.3 In the Meeting Member Secretary, SRPC informed the following :

• As per last meeting some clarification was sought by Prof. Ramanujam with regard to load flow data. The same has been clarified by EE, SRPC.

• Machine data furnished by KPCL were not in requisite format, so Prof. Khincha has asked Prof. Ramanujam to assume some data based on manufacturers record furnished by KPCL with regard to these data.

• As per last discussion some programme for model analysis was to be developed and expected time to take further 3-4 weeks. The same has been done. And testing was done on test data. The results are to come from Prof. Ramanujam from Chennai.

• The test was done regarding general stability of the system. PSS setting and tuning studies will be done subsequently.

• 1st set of results for PSS to be expected to be ready by Feb. 2007.

• After the results are available meeting may be called for further discussion and future plan of action.

• Prof. Khincha will give formal request for release of money.

28. GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION SCHEMES COMING UP IN 2006-07

28.1 The progress on generation and transmission schemes coming up in

2006-2007 are being followed up in the various OCC meetings. The

updated information as per the data furnished by the constituents

during the meeting is at Annexure-XX.

50

29. UI EXCHANGES WITH OTHER REGIONS

29.1 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that In the 2nd meeting of OCC of

SRPC held on 8th August 2006, TNEB had pointed out that on certain

occasions SRLDC had exported power to other Region although the

frequency was around 49.5 Hz., and some of the States in the SR

were over drawing, causing further dip in frequency and resulting in

higher UI commitment (copy of Schedule and Actuals for 2nd August

2006 enclosed as Annexure-XXI). AGM, SRLDC had stated that the

transactions were done as per the provisions of IEGC and that each

event had to be seen in totality i.e., grid conditions prior to such

exports also had to be examined to appreciate the complete picture,

and that such inter-regional assistance was mutual. In the same

meeting, Member Secretary, SRPC said that such events may be

discussed and minimum frequency for exports may be fixed keeping in

view the provisions of IEGC.

29.2 In the meeting, GM, SRLDC said that as per the provisions of IEGC

with a frequency differential of 0.2 Hz between two regions, export of

power could take place. He said that SRLDC was willing to share

information on how this system had also proved beneficial to the SR

constituents.

29.3 ED (O), TNEB said that some minimum frequency could be fixed below

which SRLDC should not export UI power as it was affecting the

availability of the SR constituents. He added that the frequency

differential of 0.2 Hz should not be the sole criteria for export of power.

29.4 Chief Engineer (GO), APTRANSCO said that SR constituents were

also availing power from ER, and in case minimum frequency was

fixed, that reciprocal assistance may be lost.

29.5 TCC requested SRLDC to furnish details to constituents and the issue

could be deliberated in the next TCC meeting.

51

30. UNDER FREQUENCY RELAYS

30.1 The extract of para 29 of the Orders of CERC dated 31st July 2006 on

alleged non-compliance of the direction of NRLDC by UPPCL is

reproduced below:

QUOTE

“During the course of hearing, various other issues like blocking of UFRs,

in-effective free governor mode of operation (FGMO) at generators, lack of

training of SLDCs engineers and frequent transfers of SLDCs staff came

on the surface. I ordered NRPC and NRLDC to closely monitor the health

of UFRs and in case of non-compliance of its instructions by any State,

the matter should be reported to the Commission.”

UNQUOTE

30.2 This matter has also been discussed in the OCC meetings. Officers

from SRPC have also carried out inspection of the Under Frequency

Relays at different sub-stations, as per the provisions of IEGC.

Inspection Reports have been circulated. Periodical inspections as per

the provisions of IEGC, are also being designed.

30.3 Member Secretary requested the Constituents to ensure continuous,

healthy operation of UFRs at all times, especially keeping note of

Hon’ble CERC’s directions. He said that SRLDC and SRPC would

monitor the healthiness of UFRs.

TCC noted the above.

31. DEMAND VARIATION (Peak Vs Offpeak)

31.1 The issue of minimum to maximum demand ratio has been under the

consideration of TCC/SREB/SRPC for some time now. The issue has

been discussed in the OCC meetings, wherein the following was

observed for the period March 2006 to July 2006:

52

Maximum and Minimum Demand Variation %

March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 State

Highest Lowest Highest Lowest Highest Lowest

Andhra Pradesh

21.39 0.85 26.91 0.91 18.35 0.79

Karnataka 42.44 9.35 36.01 14.93 45.77 15.65

Kerala 52.83 31.40 48.81 28.39 56.47 29.35

Tamil Nadu 28.77 14.63 25.16 11.49 28.53 13.40

Puducherry 48.03 5.71 24.35 7.73 31.95 11.06

Maximum and Minimum Demand Variation %

June 2006 July 2006 Aug 2006 State

Highest Lowest Highest Lowest Highest Lowest

Andhra Pradesh

14.92 5.55 25.12 10.54 38.87 10.55

Karnataka 47.49 22.88 44.30 24.69 36.86 24.64

Kerala 41.62 3.23 55.72 42.80 52.77 43.65

Tamil Nadu 26.31 15.08 25.62 11.70 26.00 10.62

Puducherry 65.92 14.98 32.78 10.91 26.00 6.27

31.2 During the OCC meetings it was observed that Andhra Pradesh had

shown improvement over a period of time in the system parameters.

The committee felt that measures like shifting of Agricultural Loads,

Industrial Loads, Differential Tariff, Exports to other regions during off

Peak hours etc. could help in bridging the gap.

31.3 Member Secretary, SRPC said that the issue was being deliberated in

the OCC forum. With the generation capacity being not able to meet

the load growth, Demand Side Management techniques had a greater

role to play. He suggested study and adoption of some of the DSM

approaches. (copy enclosed as Annexure-XXII).

53

31.4 Member (Tr. & Dist.), KSEB said that though 70% of KSEB’s

consumers were domestic, efforts were being made to put additional

loads during the night hours to flatten the load curve.

31.5 Member Secretary, SRPC requested the constituents to further

analyse the DSM approaches for the mutual benefit of the region.

32. COMMISSIONING OF IMPORTANT ELEMENTS BY THE

CONSTITUENTS

32.1 Member Secretary, SRPC said that it was observed during the OCC

meetings that synchronization and commissioning of important

elements like generating units, transmission lines, ICTs was not being

informed to SRLDC and SRPC by the constituents at times. This was

causing operational and commercial difficulties. It was felt that all the

synchronization and commissioning of major transmission elements,

generating units should be informed to the respective SLDCs, SRLDC

& SRPC for smoother operational planning.

32.2 TCC requested the constituents to furnish the information to SRPC /

SRLDC for generating units, transmission lines, ICTs above 220 kV /

400 kV level & 132 kV level and above for inter-state lines.

33. REVIEW OF PROGRESS OF WORKS ON NEW GENERATION

SCHEMES

33.1 The progress of works on new generation schemes under construction

in the Southern Region was reviewed and updated information based

on the data furnished by the constituents is given in Annexure-XXIII.

34. REVIEW OF PROGRESS OF WORKS ON NEW TRANSMISSION LINES

AND SUBSTATIONS 34.1 The progress of works on the new 400 kV/230 kV transmission lines

and substations in the State Sector under construction in the Southern

Region was reviewed and updated information based on the data

furnished by the constituents is at Annexure-XXIV.

54

34.2 The progress of works on the new transmission line and substations in

the Central Sector (POWERGRID) under construction in Southern

Region reviewed and updated information based on the data furnished

by the constituents is at Annexure-XXV.

35. AMC FOR SCADA-EMS SYSTEM UNDER SR ULDC SCHEME

35.1 In the first meeting of SRPC held at Chennai on 6.6.06, the matter

regarding Comprehensive Maintenance Support Services for SCADA-

EMS system under SR ULDC scheme was discussed and SR

constituent members gave their in-principle acceptance authorizing

SRLDC to enter into Maintenance Contract on their behalf and also

agreed to release the payments to PGCIL on pro-rata basis, based on

their actual components in the equipment. In the meeting the issue of

Overheads charges over and above the AMC charges to be paid by

SR constituents to PGCIL was also discussed and after detailed

deliberations, it was finally agreed that as the constituent members

were in agreement for entering into AMC for SCADA-EMS system and

were authorizing PGCIL to sign the agreement on their behalf, PGCIL

would go ahead in signing of the agreement and the actual percentage

overhead charges (which would be lower than 16%) would be decided

mutually between PGCIL and the constituents.

35.2 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that the item was brought by GM

SRLDC as an additional agenda for the 1st TCC of SRPC (copy

enclosed as Annexure-XXVI).

35.3 GM, SRLDC said that in deference to the request of SR constituents,

the overhead charges had been charged at the rate of 10% only. He

added that a few days back, data from Hindupur and Gooty was not

available for two days and emphasized the need for continuous and

reliable data for smooth functioning of SRLDC, which could be possible

only if proper maintenance was carried out.

55

35.4 After deliberation TCC recommended for approval of Comprehensive

Maintenance Support Services for SCADA-EMS system under SR

ULDC scheme.

36. CONCURRENCE FOR AUGMENTATION OF EXISTING ULDC WIDE

BAND NETWORK FOR ENSURING DATA REDUNDANCY

36.1 Member Secretary, SRPC informed that the issue was brought by

PGCIL as supplementary agenda for discussion in the TCC/ SRPC

Meetings (Copy enclosed as Annexure-XXVII ).

36.2 It was decided that this issue could be discussed in the special TCC

meeting scheduled for 15th November 2006.

37. DATE & VENUE OF THE NEXT TCC MEETING

37.1 It was decided to hold the 2nd TCC Meeting, one day prior to the next

SRPC meeting.

38. VOTE OF THANKS

38.1 Chairperson TCC, thanked members from Andhra Pradesh for the

excellent arrangements made for the stay and conduct of the meeting.

...

56