Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
PRESENT:-
M.P.No.10 of 2016
In the matter of: Approval of Capital Investment Plan filed by Tamil Nadu
Transmission Corporation Limited (TANTRANSCO) for the Control Period from
FY 2016-17 to FY 2018-19
referred as “CIP”) for the MYT Control Period from FY 2016-17 to FY 2018-19 in
Page 1 of 30
M.P. No. 10 of 2016. The Petition came up for final hearing on 29.12.2016. The
Commission upon perusing the above petition and other connected records and after
ORDER
1. Prayer of TANTRANSCO
“The CIP for the FY 2016-17 for Rs. 2823.40 crores, for the FY 2017-18 for
Rs. 2926 crores and for the FY 2018-19 for Rs. 3945 crores is now filed and
may be approved and to issue any other order as this Hon’ble Commission
deems fit.”
provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred as “the Act” or “the EA,
2003”), read with Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and
“Tariff Regulations”) and TNERC (Terms and conditions for Determination of Tariff
carefully considered the submissions of the Petitioner and stakeholders and passes
October 19, 2010 from November 1, 2010. Since then, the Petitioner has been in the
Page 2 of 30
Transmission services to TANGEDCO, Captive and Open Access (OA) Customers.
centres (under TANGEDCO) with the help of transmission network (GRID). The
voltage levels. Based on the capacity and location of the addition of generation
capacity and quantum and area of demand in the distribution side, augmentation of
transmission system by creating new network and upgrading the existing system, it
comprising 1436 sub-stations of voltage rating 66 kV and above and 28701.31 ckt
kms of EHT lines. During FY 2015-16, 67 Nos. sub-stations with a capacity of 2597
MVA, 1962.839 ckt Kms of EHT Lines and 141 Nos. power transformers with a
including Hydro, Thermal, Gas, Share from CGS, IPP and CPP. The installed
capacity of renewable energy sources was 9,629.52 MW. The addition in generating
capacity has been planned by forecasting the increase in demand for power at
Page 3 of 30
Thermal Projects is shown in the following Table:
2.3. The projected demand as on April 1, 2016 was 14,538 MW, and the demand
a vital role in any Transmission Utility to ensure that adequate and reliable
transmission system is in place to cope with the capacity addition in generation and
the demand for power in the distribution side. The revised Tariff Policy dated January
28, 2016, has stated the objective of ensuring optimal development of transmission
network ahead of generation with adequate margin for reliability and to promote
efficient utilization of generation and transmission assets. Keeping in view the above
objective, the transmission planning is carried out considering the following factors
Page 4 of 30
(iv) Reliability
(v) Redundancy for operational flexibility
(vi) Line loss reduction
2.3. The Petitioner has designed transmission schemes taking into account the
submitted year-wise Capital Investment Plan for Rs.2823.40 Crore, Rs.2926 Crore
2.4. The following Table summarises the Capital Expenditure and Capitalisation of
Page 5 of 30
Table 2: Capital Expenditure and Capitalisation proposed by TANTRANSCO (Rs. Crore)
Page 6 of 30
2.5. The Petitioner submitted that North Chennai area has become the power
generation hub. Four (4) new thermal projects with an installed capacity of 3,440 MW
are proposed in North Chennai area. The Petitioner has proposed to evacuate this bulk
power at 765 kV level. The administrative approval has been accorded for 765 kV GIS
pooling station at North Chennai, with connectivity to the already sanctioned 765 kV
Ariyalur AIS Substation and 400 kV Pulianthope GIS Substation. The 765 kV North
submitted that the tender is to be floated again for the 400 kV Pulianthope GIS
substation.
2.6. Further, 765 kV Ariyalur substation is proposed to distribute the generated power
and the power sourced from other States effectively, with connectivity to 765 kV
Thiruvalam PGCIL substation. The tender is under process for 765 KV Ariyalur
Substation. The work is under progress for 765 kV line from Thiruvalam to Ariyalur. The
2.7. The Petitioner further submitted that the administrative approval has been
Chennai 765 kV substation. The land is being identified for establishment of 765 kV
evacuation of about 1980 MW from Udangudi Complex, i.e., 1320 MW MW (2x660 MW)
from Udangudi STPP and 660 MW (1x660 MW from Udangudi Stage II with
Page 7 of 30
2.8. Thus, a 765 kV network is being formed with establishment of four (4) 765 kV
765 kV lines for transfer of bulk power from generating stations and for transfer of inter-
State power with downstream connectivity for effective distribution of generated power.
2.9. Further, for evacuating power of about 730 MW from private generators in
connectivity to the proposed 400 kV Manali substation and 400 kV Korattur substation.
The 400 kV Thervaikandigai substation is back charged at 230 kV level on April 15,
2016. Further, 400 kV line works are under progress and the substation at 400 kV level
2.10. The Petitioner submitted that Tamil Nadu, being a pioneer in promoting
Renewable Energy (RE) owing to its huge potential of wind along with other forms of
RE including Solar, has planned its transmission infrastructure to match with the
ambitious RE capacity addition. The estimated RE addition in the next five years will be
(a) For evacuation of about 3,000 MW wind power in Theni and Udumalpet
Rasipalayam with associated 400 kV lines of 788 ckt-km are proposed. The
works are under progress for these substations. The 400 kV line from
Page 8 of 30
commissioned during FY 2016-17.
(b) Further, two (2) substations are proposed at Kanarpatty and Thennampatty
2017. The works are under progress for 400 kV Thennampatty substation,
lines will be used beneficially for load transfer in both directions, i.e., during
(c) Further, erection of second 400 kV D/C line from 400 kV Rasipalayam
KfW funding. The works are under progress. These two double-circuit 400 kV
lines will enable power flow to load centres of Coimbatore, Salem and Vellore
also be beneficial for Coimbatore region. Tender is under process for above
line work.
2.11. As regards power evacuation from Solar Sources, the Petitioner submitted that
2016-17.
Page 9 of 30
2.12. A 400 kV substation at Vellalaviduthi in Pudukkottai district is also proposed for
Tamil Nadu network, the Petitioner has proposed to establish 400 kV substations, viz.,
Ottapidaram.
Kamudhi, Rameshwaram, Thiruchuli and Pudukkottai area, the solar and wind power
2.14. Considering the demand growth rate of 7%, various proposals for establishment
of substations up to 400 kV level are planned and executed. In addition to the projected
load growth, the schemes are designed to ease present congestion and to improve
2.15. While focussing on Chennai region with its rapidly growing demand, three (3)
nos. of 400 kV substations at Manali, Sholinganallur and Korattur have been proposed
in the periphery of Chennai city. Also, two (2) nos. of substation at Guindy and
Taramani have been proposed in the heart of the city. The works are under progress for
400 kV Manali substation and 400 kV Sholinganallur substation. These substations are
Page 10 of 30
planned to be commissioned during FY 2016-17. The tender is under process for 400
kV Guindy substation. The tender is to be floated for 400 kV Korattur substation and
400 kV Tharamani substation. In addition to this, seven (7) nos. of 230 kV substations
are proposed out of which, works are under progress for five (5) substations at
Ambattur 3rd Main Road, Central CMRL, R.A. Puram, Mambalam and Porur. The re-
tender is to be floated for one 230 kV GIS substation at TNEB Head Quarters and
downstream substation and lines are designed keeping in view of the following:
(a) Evacuation hub for the State/Private power plants with connectivity to major
400 kV substations of Chennai city.
(b) Effective load management of Chennai city.
(c) Meeting out the vital loads of Government buildings, industrial, metro rail, IT
parks, educational institutions and the concentrated loads of domestic,
commercial establishments.
(d) To resolve the present congestion, improve reliability of supply to the heart of
Chennai city and to facilitate operational flexibilities.
For other regions, details of 400 kV and 230 kV substations are tentatively
proposed to meet out the load growth, obliviate the existing overloading constraints,
below:
Page 11 of 30
Kondagai, Arasanur, Periyar
Kinnimangalam 230 kV Samayanallur
Madurai PH, Usilampatty and K.
SS 230 kV SS
Pudur 230 kV substations
Erode, Edapady and
Erode Valayapatty 230 kV SS
Karuppur 230 kV substations
Kumbakonam, Poiyur,
Thuvakudi and
Jambunathapuram,
Trichy Narimanam 230 Velliyanai 230 kV SS.
Mondipatti 230 kV
kV substations.
substations.
Gangaikondan (Thalayuthu),
Tirunelveli Savasapuram 230 kV SS Srivilliputhur/Virudunagar
230 kV SS
Uddanapally and Sathumadurai,
Tirupathur 230 kV Viswanathapuram IT Park
Vellore
substations. and Denkanikottai 230 kV
Substations
Sankarapuram and
Purisai 230 kV SS
Villupuram Neyveli 230 kV
(Commissioned)
substations
Chennai
Kanchipuram 230 kV SS.
South
proposed to reduce the overloading in the existing substations, improve the voltage
etc. The addition and enhancement of power transformers in the existing substations
are also taken up to ensure optimum loading of the substations, provide adequate
system support for load development in the area and to improve the quality of power
supply.
2.16. The Petitioner added that there will be saving in line loss relatively due to
establishment of substations in the range of 1-4 MW, based on the load flow analysis.
upgrading the existing system, strengthening the existing aged transmission lines with
higher capacity conductors, standardisation of conductor sizes for various voltage levels
with Panther for 110 kV lines, Zebra for 230 kV lines, etc., replacement of old 110 kV
Page 12 of 30
and 230 kV lines with bunched conductors and Dog conductor in a phased manner.
2.17. The Petitioner submitted that the execution of some of the schemes has been
Anikadvu, awarded to M/s BHEL, is getting delayed due to slow progress of work by the
contractor. The review meetings at Head Quarters and at field level are being
some of them filing suit in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Judgment has been
commenced with police protection. In the meanwhile, again case was filed by some
2.19. The Petitioner further submitted that even though 400 kV Kanarpatty substation
works have been completed, the commissioning is being delayed due to Right of Way
(RoW) issues in line work. As regards 400 kV line work from Kanarpatty to Kayathar,
the permission was requested from District Collector-Tuticorin due to severe objections
by land owners and the same is still awaited. In another line works from Kanarpatty to
Abishekapatty, the line is aligned through lake area and work could not be taken up for
quite some time due to heavy monsoon rains and water logging. Now, the work has
been completed and the substation has been commissioned on January 9, 2017.
Page 13 of 30
2.20. As regards 400 kV Karamadai substation, 400 kV line work is delayed due to
severe RoW issues, even though substation work has been completed. After close
follow up, line work was completed and the substation has been commissioned on
August 24, 2016. Delays are also being experienced in getting the required details from
works, work is getting delayed in obtaining permission from Corporation, Public Works
department, etc.
2.21. In view of the reasons stated above, there are slippages in completion schedule
for transmission schemes. All efforts are taken by TANTRANSCO at field level as well
as at Head Quarters level to resolve the issues and to commission the substations and
2.22. The Petitioner submitted that the funds for financing the various transmission
schemes are being raised from various Financial Institutions such as REC, PFC, Tamil
Cooperation Agency (JICA), etc. For creation of transmission infrastructure for RE,
financial assistance of 40% Grant under National Clean Energy Fund (NCEF) by
Government of India (GoI), 40% as soft loan from KfW German funding under Indo-
Transmission Line improvement works, funding is also being tied up with REC/PFC.
Page 14 of 30
3. Legal Provisions:-
3.1. The CIP submitted by TANTRANSCO has to be approved as per the relevant
3.1.1. The relevant provisions of the Tariff Policy notified by Government of India on
a) Return on Investment
………
While allowing the total capital cost of the project, the Appropriate
Commission would ensure that these are reasonable and to achieve this
objective, requisite benchmarks on capital costs should be evolved by the
Regulatory Commissions.
b)to (f) … … … …
g) Renovation and Modernization
………
A multi-year tariff (MYT) framework may be prescribed which should also
cover capital investments necessary for renovation and modernization and
an incentive framework to share the benefits of efficiency improvement
between the utilities and the beneficiaries with reference to revised and
specific performance norms to be fixed by the Appropriate Commission.
Appropriate capital costs required for pre-determined efficiency gains
and/or for sustenance of high level performance would need to be
assessed by the Appropriate Commission. ……” (emphasis added)
Page 15 of 30
(2) The Commission may consider the licensee’s investment plan for
approval and for this purpose, may require the licensees to provide
relevant technical and commercial details. The costs corresponding to the
approved investment plan of a licensee for a given year shall normally be
considered for its revenue requirement.
(3) In presenting the justification for new projects, the licensee shall detail
the specific nature of the works and the results to be achieved. The details
must be shown in physical parameter (e.g.) new capacity to be added,
length of lines to be energised, number of sub-stations / Bays to be added,
meters to be added, replaced, etc. so that it is amenable for physical
verification. In case of significant shortfall in achieving physical targets,
the Commission may require the licensee to explain the reasons, and may
proportionately reduce the provision, including interest and return
component made towards revenue requirement, in the next tariff proposal.
(4) The licensee may, at any time, during the tariff year, seek provision for
additional capital expenditure to meet natural calamities involving
substantial investment and the Commission shall examine and review
these provisions in the manner as given in this regulation and approve
their inclusion in the revenue requirement in the next period.
(5) The licensee shall get the Capital Investment Plan approved by the
Commission before filing ARR and Application for determination of
tariff.”
3.1.3. Regulation 3 (v) of the Terms and Conditions for determination of Tariff for
The licensee shall get the approval of the Capital Investment Plan for
each year of the initial control period in accordance with the Regulation 17 of
TNERC Tariff Regulations. It may be ensured that the approval of the
Commission is obtained before tariff filing under MYT framework. The capital
investment plan shall have capitalization schedules for each year of the control
period.
The source of finance to meet the capital expenditure in each year of the
control period shall also be furnished along with Capital Investment Plan.”
3.1.4. Further, the Hon’ble APTEL in its Judgment dated October 18, 2014 in Appeal
No. 197 of 2013 filed by TANTRANSCO against the Tariff Order 1 of 2013 had given
Page 16 of 30
certain directions regarding the approval of CIP. After taking cognizance of such
directions, the Commission in the Suo-motu Tariff Order dated December 11, 2014
3.2. TANTRANSCO filed the Miscellaneous Petition on November 25, 2014 for
approval of its CIP for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 (M. P. No. 54 of 2014). After due
verification and scrutiny of the Petition, the Commission vide Order dated June 28,
2016 approved the CIP for TANTRANSCO for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16.
4. Procedure adopted
TANTRANSCO submitted its Petition for approval of CIP for the Control Period
The Commission held a preliminary hearing in the matter on, April 25, 2016. During the
hearing, the Petition was admitted, and the Petitioner was directed to file the additional
affidavit detailing the projected demand and generation growth, expected load centre
and generation hubs and transmission schemes required to meet the same including
Page 17 of 30
5. TANTRANSCO submitted its additional affidavit with details as directed by the
asked TANTRANSCO to submit the updated status of capital expenditure incurred and
capitalisation for FY 2016-17 to FY 2018-19. The Commission has analysed the final
proposals for transmission schemes for the Control Period from FY 2016-17 to FY
2018-19.
5.1. The Commission notes that the Petitioner has submitted the transmission
scheme-wise details for the Control Period from FY 2016-17 to FY 2018-19. The
Petitioner has filed the CIP in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Tariff Regulations.
The transmission schemes include the On-going schemes, which are started prior to
commencement of the Control Period and new schemes, which are going to be started
5.2. Since FY 2016-17 is already over, the Commission has considered the revised
TANTRANSCO. The Commission has analysed the details submitted by the Petitioner
Page 18 of 30
for each scheme. The Petitioner has submitted the cost of capital works based on the
initially approved cost by the Board of TANTRANSCO. For schemes for which the
approval of Board of TANTRANSCO is awaited, the cost based on the scheme DPR
has been submitted. For the purpose of the approval, the Commission has considered
5.3. The Commission in the last Order on approval of CIP had approved the Capital
expenditure only. However, in the present Order, the Commission approves the Capital
5.4. As regards the 765 kV level substation schemes, the Petitioner has proposed
four (4) nos. of 765 kV Substations, viz., Ariyalur, North Chennai Pooling Station,
Coimbatore and Virudhnagar. Out of this, the Board Approval for 765 kV Virudhnagar
Substation is awaited and no capital expenditure for the said scheme was projected.
The Commission accepts the submission of the Petitioner and has not considered the
capital expenditure towards 765 kV Virudhnagar Substation. After taking into account
the present status of other substation works, the Commission has considered the
Corporation Agency (JICA), the Petitioner has proposed five (5) nos. of 400 kV
Guindy. The Commission has considered the scheme-wise capital expenditure based
Page 19 of 30
on the details provided by the Petitioner. The Commission has considered the
works. As regards 400 kV level substation schemes funded by sources other than JICA,
(Upgradation) and Kolappalur. Out of these schemes, the Board Approval is awaited for
400 kV Kolappalur substation. The Commission has considered the capital expenditure
required at initial stage of the project, i.e., Rs. 5 Crore in FY 2017-18 and Rs. 50 Crore
in FY 2018-19. For other schemes, the capital expenditure and capitalisation have been
schedule.
5.6. As regards 400 kV transmission lines scheme, the Petitioner has proposed
transmission lines scheme for link lines, power evacuation lines and improvement lines.
The Commission has considered the capital expenditure based on present progress of
the schemes.
5.7. The Commission notes that in the CIP Petition, the Petitioner has submitted
lumpsum provision towards capital expenditure and capitalisation for schemes funded
by JICA and KfW. The Commission sought scheme-wise Capital Expenditure and
Capitalisation against each of the JICA and KfW schemes. After perusing the details of
the project cost, status of the project and the anticipated completion of the project, the
Page 20 of 30
Commission observes that the capitalisation figures are not proportionate to the
progress of work. It is seen that a few schemes under JICA funding that have been
charged/commissioned during 2016-17 have not been capitalised fully in the respective
year. The Commission has considered actual capitalisation of the individual schemes
submitted by the petitioner subsequently for FY 2016-17 and allowed the balance cost
lower for FY 2016-17 and on the higher side for FY 2017-18 as against that proposed
by the Petitioner. Regarding KfW funded schemes, the Commission observes that as
the schemes are under progress, the Petitioner has proposed lower capitalisation for
FY 2017-18 and FY 2018-19 only. The Commission has considered the capitalisation
based on progress of work and hence, the capitalisation approved by the Commission
5.8. Further, as regards 230 kV Substation schemes, the Commission notes that
Board Approval is yet to be accorded for some of the schemes, hence, the Commission
has considered the capital expenditure for such scheme based on the submissions
made by the Petitioner and status of implementation. As regards the 110 kV substation
schemes, the Commission has considered the ongoing schemes as submitted by the
Petitioner. For the Control Period, the Petitioner has submitted the total expenditure for
undertaken during the Control Period along with cost details. Based on this, the
Commission has approved the capital expenditure and capitalisation towards 110 kV
Page 21 of 30
expenditure and capitalisation has been approved by the Commission considering the
status of the project, scope of work, technical justification, cost of project, etc.
5.9. As regards the execution of the projects, the Commission notes that the
Petitioner has submitted the various issues involved in execution of works such as filing
of case by land owners, ROW issues, permissions from Government Departments, etc.
Regarding the delay in implementation of the schemes, the Commission in Order dated
June 28, 2016 regarding approval of CIP for FY 2014-15 and FY 2015-16 has observed
as under:
5.10. After going through the details of schemes submitted by the Petitioner, the
Commission has observed huge time gap between the initial approval of scheme and
execution of work in this Petition also. For example, the Board Approval for 400 kV
the actual work completion date proposed is March 31, 2017. Similarly, Board Approval
for 230 kV Kancheepuram Substation was accorded on June 15, 2011,however, actual
Page 22 of 30
between the sub-station works and its associated line works in certain sub-station
schemes i.e either the sub-station works have been completed but line works are under
5.11. Transmission Licensee cites Right of way issues and litigations by contractors on
whom certain works have been awarded as the main reasons for the delay in execution
of the projects. However, we have also noticed that there is lack of coordination and
synchronization in taking up the sub-station works and associated line works, tenders
getting multiple times lodged causing undue delay in taking up approved schemes
contributing to delays. TANTRANSCO with rich experience and expertise in the field
must be able to complete the projects/schemes well within the scheduled time line with
transmission schemes.
This Commission would also like to point out that the petitioner shall ensure that
thoroughly analysed and necessity established. Though the Commission is aware that
the investments proposed by TANTRANSCO for establishing 230 kV and 110 kV sub-
stations are primarily to meet the increasing demand, to avoid overloading of the nearby
sub stations, to accommodate future loads and reduce loss, the Utility shall refrain from
and let the distribution licensee viz. TANGEDCO to propose more 33 kV sub-stations.
This will result in reduction in line losses for both TANTRANSCO and TANGEDCO.
Page 23 of 30
where the 11 kV loads to an extent of not less than 10 MW is consumed within a radius
of say 5 Kms. This rule will be applicable to this order also even though the
5.12. The Commission, in this Order, has accorded the approval of capital
schemes commencing during the Control Period, i.e., April 1, 2016 onwards, the
expenditure incurred along with detailed justification for delay, if any, at time of
actual capital expenditure incurred and actual capitalisation done separately for
the schemes commencing after April, 2016, which shall be submitted to the
Commission at the time of next Tariff Petition. The Commission shall approve the
5.13. The Petitioner has submitted the scheme-wise cost benefit analysis and
justification. The Petitioner has submitted the benefits towards the proposed Capital
5.14. The Commission notes that the Act mandates that the primary function of State
Page 24 of 30
Transmission Utility (STU) is to ensure development of an efficient, coordinated and
economical system of intra-State transmission lines for smooth flow of electricity from a
generating station to the load centres and to provide non-discriminatory open access to
its transmission system for use by any Licensee or Generating Company or any
consumer on payment of the Transmission Charges. Also, the Tariff Policy, 2016
stipulates that:-
(a) STU should undertake network expansion after identifying the requirements
in consonance with the National Electricity Plan and in consultation with
stakeholders, and taking up the execution after due regulatory approvals. For
smooth operation of the grid, efforts should be made to develop transmission
system ahead of generation;
(b) STU should ensure upgrading of transmission systems to avoid the situations
of overloading, as the additional flows above a level of line loading lead to
significantly higher losses. The Appropriate Commission should permit
adequate capital investments in new assets for upgrading the transmission
system.
5.15. In the proposed CIP, the Petitioner has proposed the transmission Schemes for
meet the increasing demand, to avoid overloading of the nearby sub stations, to
and maintain reliable transmission network across the State in order to cater to the
needs of the consumers of the State and to operate its transmission system in the most
economical manner. The Petitioner is required to ensure that each element of the
Page 25 of 30
modern facilities that are available in order to achieve the targeted reliability in an
economic manner.
5.17. As regards the quantification of losses, the Commission in its order dated
“19.2.5. … … …
Another important aspect that the Utility shall consider is optimizing the
transmission losses. Optimisation of transmission loss necessarily
involves consideration of cost benefit. It is necessary that whenever a new
transmission scheme is proposed, the utility shall assess the transmission
loss before inclusion of the element and after inclusion of the same.
Similarly whenever a new improvement scheme is proposed, it is very
essential to quantify and compare the reduction in transmission loss that
would result on account of the commissioning of the proposed scheme vis
a vis the cost incurred for setting up the same.”
5.18. Considering the schemes proposed by the Petitioner in the present CIP, the
Commission re-iterates that TANTRANSCO should quantify and compare the reduction
scheme.
5.19. In view of this, the Commission directs the Petitioner to quantify the
submit such actual cost benefit analysis to the Commission along with details
reduction in transmission loss, cost incurred for such scheme, etc., after
earlier sections of this Order, the summary of the approved CIP is given in the following
Table:
Page 26 of 30
Table 4: Approved Capital Expenditure and Capitalisation for the Control Period from FY 2016-17 to FY 2018-19 (Rs. Crore)
Page 27 of 30
5.21. As regards the Capitalisation, many of the Ongoing schemes planned to be
completed by the end of FY 2016-17 have not been completed, hence, the Commission
has considered the capitalisation of such schemes in FY 2017-18. Hence, the approved
the Petitioner.
5.22. The Petitioner has submitted that the funds for financing the various transmission
schemes are being raised from various Financial Institutions such as REC, PFC, Tamil
Nadu Investment Promotion Programme (TNIPP), NABARD, etc. JICA funding was
approved to the extent of Rs. 3572.93 Crore with an interest rate of 0.5% per annum.
Further, for creation of transmission infrastructure for RE worth Rs. 1593 Crore,
financial assistance of 40% Grant under National Clean Energy Fund (NCEF) by
Government of India (GoI) for Rs. 637.20 Crore, 40% as soft loan for Rs 637.20 Crore
from KfW German funding under Indo-German Bilateral Cooperation, and 20% as
5.23. The Commission notes that the Petitioner has submitted the funding source for
each scheme. As regards the schemes financed by REC/PFC, the Commission has
NABARD, the debt:equity ratio has been considered as 80:20. For schemes for which
funding is yet to be tied up, the Commission has considered the funding in normative
debt:equity ratio of 70:30. As regards the scheme financed by JICA, the Commission
has considered 100% loan against such schemes. For the schemes financed under
Page 28 of 30
TNIPP, grant has been considered at 80% of amount of capital expenditure and
regards KfW schemes, the Commission has considered 40% of amount of capital
expenditure as grant and loan each and remaining amount of capital expenditure is
5.24. It is noted that there might be a situation where the Petitioner may receive the
grant for particular scheme upfront during the starting year of the scheme. However, in
the present Order, the Commission has considered the funding for capital expenditure
from grant, loan and equity in the same proportion. The Commission directs the
scheme approved in this Order during the next Petition. The Commission shall
prudence check.
5.25. The funding of capital expenditure approved by the Commission is shown in the
following Table:
Table 5: Approved Funding of Capital Expenditure for the Control Period from FY 2016-
17 to FY 2018-19 (Rs. Crore)
Page 29 of 30
5.26. In the light of the above, we issue the following directions:-
(a) For transmission schemes commencing during the Control Period from April
1, 2016, TANTRANSCO shall submit the year-wise actual capital expenditure
incurred along with detailed justification for delay, if any, at the time of
approval of actual capital expenditure and capitalisation.
(b) TANTRANSCO shall maintain the record for the scheme-wise actual capital
expenditure incurred and actual capitalisation done separately for the
schemes commencing after April, 2016, which shall be submitted to the
Commission at the time of next Tariff Petition. The Commission will approve
the actual Capital expenditure and actual capitalisation based on such
information, subject to prudence check.
(c) The Petitioner is directed to quantify the reduction in transmission loss on
account of commissioning of scheme and submit such cost benefit analysis
to the Commission along with details such as scope of scheme, methodology
adopted for quantification of losses, reduction in transmission loss, cost
incurred for such scheme, etc. after completion of schemes on annual basis.
(d) The Petitioner shall submit the actual source-wise funding for each
transmission scheme approved in this Order along with the next Tariff
Petition. The Commission will approve the actual funding of capital
expenditure and capitalisation, after prudence check.
6. Appeal
An appeal against this Order shall lie before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity
under section 111 of the Electricity Act 2003, within a period of 45 days from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order by the aggrieved person.
/ True Copy /
Secretary
Tamil Nadu Electricity
Regulatory Commission
Page 30 of 30
ANNEXURE 1
Initial Approved capital Cost
TANTRANSCO's Submission Approved by the Commission
Capacity for (Rs.Lakhs.) with B.P. Date of
Sr. SubStation/ No. Completion Capital Expenditure (Rs.
Type of Scheme Location Capitalisation (Rs. Lakh) Capital Expenditure (Rs. Lakh) Capitalisation (Rs. Lakh) Justification Present status Funding
No. Length for EHT Scheme cost (Actual/ Lakh)
Lines in Ckm B.P.No. Anticipated) FY 2016- FY 2017- FY 2018-
(Rs in Lakhs) FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19
17 18 19
Manufacturing,
supply, erection
Testing and
commissioning of 400
kV DC line with Quad
Moose ACSR with MC
line from Kayathar 400
kV SS to common The corrected specification for fresh tender
point (17 kms) and DC has been sent to KfW on 22.8.16. NOC issued
line with Quad Moose by KfW on 30.8.16 and 16.12.2016. The Board
91 400 kV KfW Schemes ACSR from common - 1,000 6,000 - - 20,000 - 1,000 6,000 - - 20,000 approved for specification with BQR and for KfW
point to issuing NIT on 26.10.16. NIT issued on
proposedThennampatt 06.11.16 and 18.12.2016 with extended due
i 400 kV SS (7 kms) date of tender opening on 07.01.2017.
for a total length of 24
km falling in wind
zone -2. ii) Providing 4
Nos Bay extension at
Kayathar 400 kV SS for
Thennampatti Feeder
and future bay.
Capacity for Date of
Sr. SubStation/ Completion Capital Expenditure (Rs. Capitalisation (Rs. Lakh) Capital Expenditure (Rs. Lakh) Capitalisation (Rs. Lakh)
Type of Scheme Location Justification Present status Funding
No. Length for EHT Scheme cost (Actual/ Lakh)
Lines in Ckm B.P.No. Anticipated) FY 2016- FY 2017- FY 2018-
(Rs in Lakhs) FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19
17 18 19
400 KV DC Line
connecting
92 400 kV KfW Schemes Rasipalayam & 36,000 14,400 - - 20,000 30,000 36,000 14,400 - - 20,000 30,000 Works are under progress. KfW
Singarapet and 2 Nos
400 KV bays
230 kV transmission
lines connecting
various sub-stations in
93 230 kV KfW Schemes 20,000 10,000 - - 10,000 20,000 20,000 10,000 - - 10,000 20,000 Works are under progress. KfW
Tirunelveli, Madurai,
Coimbatore region &
13 Nos 230 kV bays
Augmentation of
transformation
94 400 kV KfW Schemes 2,000 9,600 - 2,000 9,600 2,000 9,600 - - 2,000 9,600 Works are under progress. KfW
capacity at 6 sub-
stations
Additional/Enhancem Various
95 Others 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 To be tied up
ent of Transformers approvals
96 Others TRANSCO Building 1,000 500 - - 1,600 400 - 1,000 500 - 1,600 400 To be tied up
97 Others Capacitor Bank 2,000 - - 1,600 400 - 1,000 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 - To be tied up
Budget for JICA
98 Others 60,000 30,000 30,000 60,000 30,000 30,000 - - - - - - To be tied up
Schemes
282,340 292,600 394,500 238,288 299,721 382,916 270,799 272,169 394,331 148,351 326,234 364,315 -
ANNEXURE 2
LIST OF SUBSTATIONS FOR 2016-17
Voltage/ Capacity Scheme
Type of Date of
Sl.No Name of the Substation Ratio in BP.No/Date cost Rs. In
SS Total commissioning
K.V Nos. Lakhs
MVA
110 KV SUBSTATIONS
Malayadipalayam at
16 110/11 New 1x16 16 19.11.16 3/06.01.15 1311.04
S.Ayyampalayam
1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11
110 kV Substations
1 Thiru Nagar at Tirupur Town 110/11 New 3x16 82 11.12.15 2066.06 Work under progress
3 Sogathur 110/33-11 New 1x16+ 2x16 81 04.09.14 1616.47 Work under progress
4 Kamandoddy 110/11 New 2x16 80 04.09.14 802.8 Work awarded and is being commenced
5 Thogarapally 110/33 New 2x25 17 08.01.15 2039.01 Work awarded and is being commenced
7 UPCL (Udangudi) 110/33/11 New 2x16+1x8 84 11.12.15 1875.57 Work under progress
9 Dharmapuri 110/11 Intro 1x16 24 04.02.16 227.14 Work awarded and to be commenced
10 Thirumudivakkam Intro 110/33 Intro 2x25 64 14.03.17 654.02 Estimate under preparation
11 Padikasuvaithanpatty - Intro 110/33 Intro 1x16 67 18.03.17 216.6 Estimate under preparation
12 Kanyakumari - Intro 110/33 Intro 1x16 68 18.03.17 222.997 Estimate under preparation
13 Kallakudi - Intro 110/33 Intro 1x10 69 18.03.17 212.921 Estimate under preparation
14 Uranipuram - Intro 110/33 Intro 1x16 70 18.03.17 212.09 Estimate under preparation
15 Kalingapatty - Intro 110/33 Intro 1x16 71 18.03.17 217.865 Estimate under preparation
16 Chetpet - Intro 110/33 Intro 1x16 75 23.03.17 476.58 Estimate under preparation
20 Mampatty 110/33 New 2x16 13 04.02.16 783.29 Work awarded and to be commenced
25 Sathamangalam 110/33 Intro 1x16 126 11.08.15 244.59 Work awarded and to be commenced
40 K.G.Chavady 110/22 2x16 53 06.09.16 1991.58 Tender opened and under process
Tentative List of Substations for 2018-19
Cost of
Voltage Adm.
Sl. Type of Pr. Tr. Scheme
Name of the Substation. Rating Approv Date Remarks
No. SS Capacity (Rs.in
in KV al No.
Lakhs)
1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 12
110 kV Substations
4 Pappanaickenpalayam 110/11 New 2x16 11 03.03.11 963.74 Land will be handed over shortly
Alamarathur 110/11 KV SS at
7 110/11 2x16 23 07.06.16 1313.49 Estimate under scrutiny
Somawarapatty
Nallamanaickenpatty (Sattur
17 110/33/11 1x16+1x8 61 07.09.16 1237.74 Tender to be floated
Taluk)
Ganapathypalayam at
20 110/22 2x10 82 08.12.16 1337.89 Tender to be floated
Punjailalamangalam
3 Sogathur 110/33-11 New 1x16+ 2x16 81 04.09.14 1616.47 PFC Work under progress
7 UPCL (Udangudi) 110/33/11 New 2x16+1x8 84 11.12.15 1875.57 REC Work under progress
To be tied
17 Vinnamangalam Intro 110/33 1x16 134 16.08.16 232.74 Tender to be floated
up
To be tied
18 Punalkulam intro 110/33 1x16 1 05.01.17 231.96 Tender to be floated
up
To be tied
19 Uthukuli Intro 110/33 1x16 18 18.01.17 225.58 Tender to be floated
up
22 Ariyalam 110/33 New 2x25 57 23.07.15 1096.32 REC Tender under process
23 Samathur 110/22 New 2x16 71 09.10.15 849.88 PFC work under progress
Work awarded and to be
24 Andimadam 110/33/11 UG 2x16 22 02.02.16 835.98 PFC
commenced
Work awarded and to be
25 Sathamangalam 110/33 Intro 1x16 126 11.08.15 244.59 PFC
commenced
SSE awarded. Tender
26 Kolathur 110/33/11 UG 2x16 32 26.02.16 1486.51 PFC under finalisation for civil
works.
Control room work
awarded and to be
27 Denkanikottai 110/33 UG 2X16 148 29.09.15 1432.09 TNIPP-II commenced. Tender is
under finalisation for SSE
works.
Musiri at Puthur DCW amount to be paid
To be tied
28 keelmugam 110/22 New 1x10 11 04.02.16 820.26 by the company. Tender
up
(Under DCW) under process .
To be tied
29 Checkanurani Intro 110/33 1x16 60 30.05.16 242.62 Tender under process
up
To be tied
30 Watrap Intro 110/33 1X16 68 31.05.16 258.74 Tender under process
up
To be tied
31 Elumalai Intro 110/33 2x16 75 02.06.16 393.03 Tender under process
up
To be tied
33 Arasady 110/22 1x10 60 07.09.16 673.91 Tender to be floated
up
To be tied
34 Collectorate /Tirupur 110/11 2x16 22 07.06.16 1014.85 Work to be awarded
up
To be tied
35 Uppur. 110/33/11 1x16+2x8 38 02.09.16 1527.14 Tender to be floated
up
To be tied
36 Lakshmanampatty 110/33- 22 1x16+2x10 21 07.06.16 825.56 work under progress
up
To be tied
37 Beach road 110/22 2x10 24 07.06.16 1928.49 Civil work commenced
up
To be tied
38 Devanampalayam 110/22 2x16 51 06.09.16 1136.94 Estimate under Sanction
up
To be tied
39 Athani 110/22 2x16 72 02.11.16 817.31 Estimate under scrutiny
up
Adm.
Sl. Voltage Rating Cost of Scheme
Name of the Substation. Type of SS Pr. Tr. Capacity Approval Date Funding Remarks
No. in KV (Rs.in Lakhs)
No.
1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12
110 kV Substations
4 Pappanaickenpalayam 110/11 New 2x16 11 03.03.11 963.74 PFC Land will be handed over shortly
Alamarathur 110/11 KV SS at
7 110/11 2x16 23 07.06.16 1313.49 Estimate under scrutiny
Somawarapatty
Nallamanaickenpatty (Sattur
17 110/33/11 1x16+1x8 61 07.09.16 1237.74 Tender to be floated
Taluk)
Ganapathypalayam at
20 110/22 2x10 82 08.12.16 1337.89 Tender to be floated
Punjailalamangalam