SOUTHERN REGIONAL POWER COMMITTEEBANGALORE

MINUTES OF THE 2 nd MEETING OF THE TCC OF SRPC HELD AT BANGALORE ON 18.02.2007

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The 2nd meeting of the Technical Coordination Committee Southern Regional

Power Committee was held at Bangalore on 18th February, 2007. The list of

participants is at Annexure- I.

1.2 Shri Chandre Gowda, Director (Trans.), KPTCL on behalf of KPCL & KPTCL

welcomed all the delegates to the and expressed that all of them would enjoy

their stay in Karnataka.

1.3 Shri S.M. Zafrulla , Chairperson TCC & Technical Director, KPCL on behalf of

KPTCL and KPCL welcomed all members and delegates to first TCC meeting

of the year 2007.

1.4 Shri K. Srinivasa Rao, Member Secretary, SRPC said that he was

appreciative of KPTCL and KPTCL for the excellent arrangements for

conduct of meeting and finalise accommodation for all at short notice for the

meeting and welcomed all the members and other participants to the

meeting.

1.5 The Agenda items were taken up for discussion.

2. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 1 st MEETING OF TCC OF SRPC

2.1 Minutes of the 1st meeting of Technical Coordination Committee of

Southern Regional Power Committee held at Hyderabad on 30th October,

2006 were forwarded vide letter No.SRPC/SE-II/1:RPC/2006/ 9687-9703

dated 26th December, 2006.

2.2 The Minutes of the 1st meeting of Technical Coordination Committee of S R

P C were approved without any amendment.

3. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF TCC OF SRPC

3.1 Minutes of the Special meeting of Technical Coordination Committee of

SRPC held at Bangalore on 2nd December, 2006 were forwarded vide

letter No.SRPC/SE-II/1:RPC/2006/9220-9236 dated 12th December, 2006.

3.2 NTPC vide their letter dated 11th January 2007(Copy enclosed as Annexure

– II) have requested certain amendment in para 2.8 of the Minutes.

Member Secretary, SRPC said that the recording of the minutes were as

per the deliberations of the meeting and the amendment proposed could be

taken up as new suggestion today under the agenda item “Utilisation of un-

requisitioned power of NTPC Stations” scheduled for discussion later during

the meeting.

NTPC agreed to the above.

3.3 KPTCL vide their letter dated 15th December 2006, had requested

certain amendment in para 5.6 of the Minutes.

Member Secretary, SRPC said that the proposed amendment could be

accepted to ensure reflection appropriately.

The Committee agreed for the above amendment. The Minutes of the

Special meeting of Technical Coordination Committee of SRPC held at

Bangalore on 2nd December, 2006 were approved with the following

amendment to para 5.6 as reproduced below :

“ As long as KSEB & TNEB are paying fixed charges and give

dipatch schedule to Kayamkulam power in full, they are

eligible for MOP allocation of power of Eastern Region

unallocated power. In case no dispatch instructions are

given to Kayamkulam power and KSEB & TNEB are only

utilizing ER unallocated power, then that would be against

2

the spirit of MOP Order for “special allocation of 180 MW ER

power to Tamil Nadu and Kerala for pooling with

Kayamkulam power. “

4. UTILISATION OF UNREQUISITIONED POWER OF NTPC STATIONS

4.1 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 the case of URS transactions,

energy rates would be at 80% PLF plus 2% income tax would be

reimbursed to the original beneficiaries along with that of fixed charges,

while income tax reimbursement will be by way of adjustment from the

income tax recovery of the original beneficiaries. For the past URS

transactions NTPC said that income tax refund was not possible. This was

not agreeable to the beneficiary constituents.

4.2 In the 140th SRE Board meeting on the next day, 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 had been agreed

in the Northern and Western Regions.

4.3 The SRE Board had advised the constituents to further examine the income

tax issue on URS trading for taking up further in the ensuing meeting of

SRPC.

4.4 In the 1st TCC Meeting held on 30.10.2006, NTPC had agreed that they

would make a detailed presentation on this issue in the Special TCC

Meeting proposed for 15th November, 2006 at Bangalore. Accordingly, a

Special TCC meeting was held on 2nd December 2006 and after

deliberations, the following for URS transactions was agreed for being

recommended to the SRPC for approval:

3

- Fixed charges prevailing at that time as per the CERC orders

plus the estimated income tax at 80% PLF would be passed

on to the original beneficiaries.

- Any difference in the estimated income tax and the actual

income tax would have to be borne by the original

beneficiaries.

- Variable charges and incentives received from the buyer will

be retained by NTPC.

- Subsequent to SRPC approval NTPC would be putting up the

scheme to their management for approval

4.5 Subsequent to this NTPC vide letter dated 11.01.2007 sought amendment in

the minutes of the Special TCC meeting held on 2nd December 2006 (Please

refer item No.3.2 above).

4.6 In the 2nd meeting, TCC after deliberations, the following for URS transactions

was agreed for being recommended to the SRPC for approval:

- While NTPC would reimburse fixed charges and the estimated

income tax at 80% PLF in Paise/Kwh to the original

beneficiary(ies), NTPC shall continue to bill fixed charges and

taxes etc. to original beneficiary(ies) as per CERC orders and

the original beneficiary(ies) shall continue to remain liable to

NTPC towards any future variation in fixed charges & income

tax liability towards their share of power from the respective

NTPC station.

- Any variation between the estimated income tax and the

actual income tax would have to be to the account of the

original beneficiary(ies).

- Variable charges and incentives received from the buyer of

URS power would be retained by NTPC.

4

- Subsequent to SRPC approval NTPC would be putting up the

scheme to their management for approval.

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

5.1 Financial aspects

5.1.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31.10.2006 it was noted that TCC had

recommended that all the constituents would address Director

(Transmission), KPTCL with a copy to Member Secretary, SRPC

regarding any point for clarification on the financial aspects of the

issues.

5.1.2 As agreed by SRPC, a special TCC meeting was held at Bangalore on

2nd December 2006 to discuss details of financial issues on asset

transfer. On a query from PGCIL about the process of transfer of asset

KPTCL informed that the asset is in the name of lease financiers and

would be transferred directly to the third party i.e. PGCIL, in this case.

PGCIL intimated that any expenditure on documentation/legal

consultation etc. would have to be borne by the beneficiaries.

APTRANSCO & TNEB noted that while the cost of asset was around

Rs.46 Crores, the interest component was around Rs.62 Crores and

enquired about the break-up of the interest. The views of KSEB were

that KPTCL was charging 2.5 paise/unit as wheeling charges and this

cost would have to be adjusted at the time of transfers and the same

was endorsed by TNEB. TNEB expressed that the tariff of this asset, as

fixed by CERC, would be from the date of take over of the asset by

PGCIL and not with retrospective effect.

5.1.3 Subsequent to this KSEB had raised certain queries vide letter dated

5.12.2006 with KPTCL and KPTCL’s response is furnished vide letter

dated 6/7.12.2006 (Copies of the letters are at Annexure-III).

5.1.4 In the meeting KPTCL informed that request of KSEB on wheeling

charges/maintenance cost have been taken care by them.

5

5.1.5 E.D., SRTS-I said that for finalising tariff, CERC would be scrutinizing

the cost of transfer, wheeling charges etc. and KPTCL would furnish

data in the format specified by CERC.

5.1.6 Member Secretary, SRPC said that there have been many meetings

between KPTCL & PGCIL on the issue; PGCIL could depute their

officers to sort out the issue of furnishing data by KPTCL in the required

format to expedite the issue.

5.1.7 In the meeting, members wanted clarification about the tariff whether it

would be on prospective or retrospective basis.

5.1.8 TNEB opined that if it is on retrospective basis, tariff would be computed

by taking the completion cost and lease expenditure as on that date and

if present day cost is considered then it shall only be prospective.

5.1.9 Director (Tr.), KPTCL informed that their claim was based on actual

payments/ expenditure to the financial institutions. The issue of

prospective or retrospective implementation will be based on KERC

orders.

5.1.10 After deliberation PGCIL & KPTCL were requested to expedite efforts to

coordinate in sorting out all issues regarding finalization of data for

furnishing to CERC in the relevant format in connection with financial

aspects for the asset transfer.

5.2 Technical aspects

5.2.1 It was agreed in the 2nd SRPC meeting that PGCIL and KPTCL would

form joint teams to commence parallel preliminary activities relating to

technical aspects of asset transfer in order to facilitate smooth and

timely transfer. Both KPTCL & PGCIL had already communicated about

the composition of team in this regard.

5.2.2 PGCIL vide their letter No.SRTS-II/O&M/F-161/71 dated 17th January,

2007 (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV) have requested Chief Engineer

6

(Electrical), Transmission Zone, Bagalkot, KPTCL for a suitable date for

a meeting at Hubli to discuss various essential activities.

5.2.3 In the meeting PGCIL informed that meeting with KPTCL had taken

place on 6th February 2007 and it was decided to carry out joint physical

verification including inspection of punctured insulators using detectors.

It was also decided that KPTCL, NPCIL & PGCIL would complete the

works within their scope and co-ordinate to charge circuit I at 400 kV

level on 4th March 2007.

5.2.4 Chairperson TCC advised that the work may be completed on time

since the subject was under consideration for some time now.

5.2.5 Member Secretary, SRPC said that there could be one coordinating

officer each from PGCIL & KPTCL.

5.2.6 Director (Tr.), KPTCL informed that Chief Engineer (Electrical),

Transmission Zone, Bagalkot is their coordinating officer for technical

issues.

6. NEW PROJECTS OF NLC

6.1 2000 MW ( 4x500 )coal based power plant at Orissa (Ib Valley)

6.1.1 It had 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 had been the first

to give firm commitment for power off-take. NLC had informed in the

140th meeting of SREB that the coal supply to the project had been tied

up with Mahanadi Coal Fields Limited (MCL).

6.1.2 In the 1st TCC meeting, NLC intimated that an alternative site for the

project has been identified and the land acquisition issue also taken up

with the Chief Secretary, Orissa Government. NLC had also written to

Chief Engineer (TP & I), CEA to certify the suitability of this land for the

project. In the 2nd SRPC meeting, NLC clarified that the pending issues

7

with the Orissa Government were yet to be resolved. TCC had also kept

in view the fact that whether the entire power allocation from this project

would be made available to SR was also not certain as on date.

6.1.3 Subsequently, NLC vide letter dated 03.02.2007 (copy enclosed as

Annexure-V) intimated that

i) CEA site selection committee has visited the project site on 01.02.2007 and accepted in-principle the site as suitable.

ii) Chief Secretary, Government of Orissa has been requested to direct the IDCO to acquire the identified land for NLC to set up the project site and response is awaited.

6.1.4 In the meeting NLC informed that there were no further developments.

6.2 1000 MW ( 2x500) coal based Joint Venture Project at Tuticorin

6.2.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31.10.2006 it was noted that land had

been identified while the issue of MPP status was still to be resolved.

Tamil Nadu Govt. in regard to award of MPP status had intimated to

MOP that they were agreeable to privatization of distribution without any

time frame and reply was awaited from Government of India. Land

acquisition was in progress with TNEB and the project was expected to

be operational in the 1st year of the12th Plan.

6.2.2 NLC vide their letter dated 20.12.2006 informed that as advised by the

Ministry of Power, the commissioning of this project was scheduled

during the 11th Plan period itself and the necessary works to be carried

out for getting the approval for this project have already been geared up.

Further, vide letter dated 03.02.2007 (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)

NLC intimated that they have submitted the FR along with draft PIB

Memorandum to MOC for circulation among Appraising agencies. The

project proposal is submitted to MOE&F for clearance and it is expected

that GOI clearance would be obtained by June 2007.

6.2.3 In the meeting, NLC informed that entire GOI clearance (from MOC,

MOP, MOE&F) would be obtained by June 2007. The land for the

8

project was partly with Port Trust and would be leased for 50 years for

the project life, balance land would be acquired and the project was

expected during 11th Plan.

6.3 1000 MW lignite based power plant at Jayamkondam

6.3.1 Tamil Nadu had earlier proposed to take up this project as a joint

venture one with NLC and the land acquisition for this project was in

progress. Subsequently, Tamil Nadu Government vide Order dated 6th

July 2006 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

finalization of Feasibility Report the tentative tariff of the project could be

arrived at and the same would be intimated to States seeking share

from this project.

6.3.2 In the 2nd SRPC Meeting, it was noted that Government land was readily

available with TNEB and the project was expected in the 2nd year of the

12th Plan. DGM (Plg.), NLC confirmed that land for Lignite mining was

available for the project and the feasibility report was under preparation.

6.3.3 Subsequently, NLC vide letter dated 03.02.2007 intimated that action

has been taken for floating tenders for engaging Consultant for

preparation of Feasibility Report & EIA/EMP study and other activities.

6.3.4 In the meeting, NLC confirmed that the plant could be expected to come

in the 11th Plan and it was no longer a joint venture project. With regard

to land availability, NLC informed that entire land was with TIDCO and

rates were to be finalised.

6.4 500 MW ( 2X250) lignite based Neyveli-II Expansion

6.4.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting the Committee noted that the power

requirement of SR constituents from Neyveli-II Expansion had already

been firmed up. NLC had informed that the benefits from the project

would accrue during 11th Plan. Further, vide letter dated

9

03.02.2007(copy enclosed as Annexure-V) NLC intimated that Ministry

of Power vide letter No.8/59/94/Th-3 dated 09.03.2004 has tentatively

allocated the power from Neyveli-II Expansion (2x250 MW) and NLC

has planned to commission Unit-I in February 2009 & Unit-II in June

2009.

6.4.2 In the meeting, NLC informed that acquisition of land for mining

operations was in progress. Erection of equipment was also in

progress.

6.5 1000 MW ( 2X500) lignite based Neyveli-III

6.5.1 NLC vide letter dated 03.02.2007 (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)

informed that consultant has been appointed for the preparation of

Feasibility Report for the mining project with alternate mining

technologies. Preparation of FR for TPS and EIA/EMP study for both

mine and power projects would be taken up after completion of FR for

mines.

6.5.2 In the meeting, NLC informed that the plant could be expected in the 12th

Plan.

7. NEW PROJECTS OF NTPC

7.1 1000 MW (2x500) Joint Venture Project of NTPC & TNEB at Ennore

7.1.1 Earlier NTPC had informed that land has been identified, for which

TNEB was to initiate action for land acquisition proceedings with the

State Government and expressed that both units were expected to be

available by end of 11th plan. TNEB had stated that they were taking up

with GOI for according of MPP status also.

7.1.2 In the 2nd SRPC meeting, it was noted that TNEB was to initiate action

for land acquisition proceedings with the State Government on identified

land, both units were expected to be available by end of 11th plan. MPP

status was to be obtained by JVC of TNEB-NTPC, cost assessment for

land was under progress, land was expected to be handed over to the

10

JV TNEB-NTPC by end of November 2006, and site investigation, soil

testing, environment impact assessment etc. by NTPC were under

progress.

7.1.3 Subsequently, TNEB vide Fax dated 5th February 2007 has intimated the

status report of the TNEB-NTPC 2 x 500 MW Joint Venture Project at

Ennore, which is enclosed as Annexure-VI.

7.1.4 In the meeting TNEB informed that they would inform the status of land

acquisition within 15 days.

7.1.5 NTPC had informed that conditional MPP status has been accorded by

Government of India. NTPC was requested to send a copy to SRPC

Secretariat for information and record.

7.2 1950 MW ( 3x650 ) gas based Project at Kayamkulam

7.2.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting the Committee noted that NTPC had informed

that land for the Kayamkulam project was available with them, while the

fuel linkage was yet to be tied up and benefits from the project could be

expected during 11th Plan.

7.2.2 In the meeting NTPC informed that even though the project was planned

for 11th plan, it was linked to the coming up of Cochin LNG terminal.

7.3 1000 MW ( 2x500 ) Simhadri Expansion Project

7.3.1 NTPC informed that Simhadri Expansion was a 11th Plan Regional

project and they had received power requirement from SR constituents

in excess of the installed capacity of 1000 MW. They have already

circulated PPA and Andhra Pradesh had signed the PPA.

8. OPERATION OF TALCHER-KOLAR HVDC TRANSMISSION SYSTEM IN GROUND RETURN MODE

8.1To trace the background, during the GRM operation of Talcher-Kolar HVDC

link, KPTCL transformers experienced vibrations, injection of harmonics and

increased noise levels on account of DC current entering the neutrals whenever

11

the power flow on the HVDC link exceeded 150 MW. The test report submitted

by POWERGRID in this regard recommended a power flow of 450 MW in GR.

Further analysis by POWERGRID revealed 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.

8.2 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.

8.3 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. A meeting was again held on 30th May 2006 at SRPC,

Bangalore to discuss GRM testing activities chalked out by Prof. Nagabhusana,

at the request of KPTCL. In the meeting, he suggested an action plan, on which

further discussions with M/s. Crompton Greaves were to be held by him. This

meeting was attended by KPTCL, Prof. Nagabhusana & SRPC officers. A joint

meeting scheduled for 14th September 2006 to address the issues raised by

Director (T), KPTCL vide letter dated 07.09.2006 could not be held due to

preoccupation of the concerned.

8.4 In the meanwhile, GAIL (India) Limited, vide their letter dated 13.09.2006

addressed to PGCIL had sought some clarifications and details on GRM

operation of HVDC as passage of high currents either in GRM or earth fault

conditions may have some tribulations on the high pressure LPG under ground

pipelines and also generate corrosion on protective lining. The issue was

discussed in the 2nd SPRC meeting held on 31.10.2006 wherein PGCIL

12

informed that the issue has been addressed to their engineering group. TCC

had recommended that the schedule of testing for GRM was to be tied up and

PGCIL and KPTCL should resolve the pending issue.

8.5 In the 2nd TCC meeting, Director (Transmission), KPTCL said that the issue has

been deliberated for a long time. Vide their letter dated 07.09.2006 written to

MS, SRPC, KPTCL had sought some clarifications and intimated the 20

primary stations where simultaneous testing has to be done. PGCIL SRTS-II

representative said that the issue raised by KPTCL vide their letter dated

07.09.2006 could not be discussed as no meeting was held after postponement

of the meeting scheduled on 14.09.2006. Regarding the clarification sought by

GAIL it cannot be assessed, as data is not readily available and for that some

field test has to be conducted.

8.6MS, SRPC said that the issues raised by KPTCL being highly technical in

nature, it was advisable to pose the issues to their expert/consultant. Director

(Transmission), KPTCL said that a meeting date could be fixed so that the

issues could be addressed.

8.7After further deliberations it was agreed that KPTCL after ascertaining the

availability of their consultant/experts would communicate the date to SRPC

secretariat so that a special TCC meeting could be arranged to tie up the

issues involved.

9. REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEMES FOR EXECUTIONBY POWERGRID

9.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31.10.2006, the committee approved

Talcher-Rourkela 400 kV D/C with Quad conductor with provision of series

compensation if required at later stage, for strengthening of transmission

system from Talcher to Rourkela for export of SR surplus power and the

proposal of installation of nine reactors by PGCIL at Hosur, Hiriyur,

Hyderabad, Kolar, Trichy, Madurai, Trivandrum, Kaiga and Davanagere.

9.2 In the 23rd meeting of Standing Committee on Power System Planning in SR

held on 22.01.2007 at Chennai the following issues were deliberated:

13

i) Transmission system for evacuation of Power from Krishnapatnam UMPP (4000 MW) and the corresponding requirements for additional transmission capacity between SR-WR and SR-ER.

ii) Requirement of reactors to contain over voltages in the Southern Region.

iii) Establishment of two numbers of 400 kV Substations near Chennai by TNEB.

iv) Establishment of a 400/230 kV S/S near Tirunelveli and Associated Transmission System for evacuation of power from Wind Projects of Tamil Nadu, by TNEB.

v) Evacuation scheme for Tuticorin TPS (2X500 MW), JV of TNEB & NLC and North Chennai TPS (2X500 MW), JV of TNEB & NTPC.

9.3 Consideration on other issues was deferred pending issue of minutes of the

23rd Standing Committee meeting. In regard to Krishnapatnam UMPP,

agenda note received from Member (PS) CEA was included for discussion

in 3rd SRPC meeting, it was noted.

10. STATUS OF REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SCHEMES

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

10.1.1 Kaiga-Guttur circuit-II was put into regular 400 kV level operation from

14.07.2006 after KPTCL replacing the defective insulators. In the 2nd

SPRC meeting held on 31.10.2006 KPTCL had informed the

upgradation work on Kaiga-Guttur circuit-I to 400 kV level was expected

to be completed by end of December 2006. The L/C on circuit-I was

taken on 1st December 2006 for replacement of line insulators and was

again charged back at 220k kV level on 18th January 2007.

10.1.2 In the meeting Director (Transmission), KPTCL said that they were ready

for charging circuit-1 at 400 kV level, but at the request of NPCIL they

have charged Kaiga-Guttur Circuit-I at 220 kV level on 18th January

2007. NPCIL representative said that NPCIL was not against the

upgradation of 220 kV Kaiga-Guttur Circuit-I to 400 kV level. It was the

state of operation prevailing at that time due to non availability of line

14

reactors at Guttur, single circuit between Narendra-Haveri-Guttur and

400 kV Kaiga-Guttur circuit-II carrying a power flow of 450 MW on

certain occasions, that NPCIL has requested KPTCL to charge Kaiga-

Guttur Circuit-I at 220 kV level on immediate basis as up gradation to

400 kV level involved some works to be done by PGCIL and KPTCL,

which needed adequate preparation time. NPCIL informed that as on

date they have tested the line protection and were ready for charging at

400 kV level. KPTCL informed that one defective line reactor at Guttur

400 kV substation has been rectified and commissioned.

10.1.3 PGCIL, SRTS-II informed that they required 15 days advance intimation

for mobilisation and one day shut down to take up the work of stringing of

400 kV line for one span and destringing of the circuit crossing Kaiga-

Kadra 220 kV line.

10.1.4 NPCIL, PGCIL and KPTCL were requested by TCC that after tying up all

the above pending works, to charge the Kaiga-Guttur circuit-I at 400 kV

level on 4th March 2007, to which they agreed.

10.2 Shifting of one 315 MVA, 400/220 kV Transformer at Trivandrum

10.2.1 MS, SRPC said that in the 2nd SPRC meeting held on 31.10.2006, KSEB

had requested for shifting of one 315 MVA 400/220 kV Transformer (3rd)

planned under Evacuation scheme for 2X1000 MW Kudankulam APP,

from Trivandrum to Madakkathara 400 kV SS wherein KSEB was

requested to furnish a formal request to CEA/PGCIL. KSEB in their letter

dated 24th January, 2007 (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) addressed to

CEA and PGCIL, have intimated that on account of only 480 MVA demand

in Trivandrum district (projected at the growth rate of 7% per annum)

during 2011-12 and considering the fully loaded existing transformers at

Madakathara 400 kV S/S, it would be absolutely necessary for provision of

3rd transformer there, by shifting the 3rd transformer at Trivandrum

scheduled for installation in May 2007.

15

10.2.2 In the meeting, KSEB representative informed that the 3rd 315 MVA

400/220 kV Transformer at Trivandrum was scheduled for commissioning

in May 2007. They raised the issue of shifting it to Madakathara 400 kV

S/S in 23rd Standing Committee meeting and have also written to

CEA/PGCIL. PGCIL said that work of 3rd 315 MVA 400 / 220 kV

Transformer at Trivandrum was in advanced stage, hence it was not

possible to shift the transformer to Madakathara 400 kV S/S at this stage.

Also the Cochin 2X315 MVA, 400/220 kV SS already planned under

Evacuation scheme for 2X1000 MW Kudankulam APP will relieve the

loading on the transformers at Madakathara 400 kV S/S. MS, SRPC

requested PGCIL to examine the issue raised by KSEB.

11. HANDING OVER OF 220 KV KODIKURUCHI-EDAMON LINE REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 400 KV TIRUNELVELI-EDAMON LINE UNDER KUNDANKULAM EVACUATION SYSTEM

11.1 Member Secretary, SRPC said that in the 134th SREB meeting held at

Bangalore on 16.03.2004, SRE Board approved the Kudankulam Atomic

Power Project (KAPP) evacuation system as a regional scheme to be

executed by POWERGRID. As per the approved scheme, “The

construction of Tirunelveli-Cochin 400 kV Quad D/C line and Tirunelveli-

Edamon 400 kV TM D/C line (to be operated initially at 220 kV) would utilize

the ROW of the existing 220 kV inter-state Kayathar-Edamon S/C line in

Kerala. As TNEB would establish Kodikuruchi 220 kV sub-station in Tamil

Nadu by doing LILO of Kayathar-Edamon S/C line, utilization of ROW of

Kayathar-Edamon S/C line in Tamil Nadu would be considered only

between Kodikuruchi and Edamon.”

11.2POWERGRID had intimated that they had awarded the contract for

construction of 400 kV Tirunelveli – Edamon line to be completed by March

2008 and approached both KSEB and TNEB for intimating the compensation

payable and handing over the lines for dismantling. On being approached

TNEB requested for programming the dismantling activity after October 2006.

Further TNEB vide their letter dated 11.12.2006 has expressed their difficulty in

16

handing over the line before June 2007 and have indicated that the 400 kV

Tirunelveli substation has to be commissioned before the line can be

dismantled.

11.3POWERGRID vide their letter dated 14.12.2006 had informed that due to delay

in handing over of the existing 220 kV line whose ROW has to be used for

construction of 400 kV Tirunelveli – Edamon line, the transmission project

would be delayed, leading to increase in project cost besides other attendant

issues. Copy of relevant correspondence is at Annexure-VIII.

11.4 In the meeting, TNEB reiterated that they would be in a position to hand over

the ROW of Kodikuruchi – Edamon line for dismantling activity in June 2007,

provided Tirunelveli 400 kV substation was commissioned by that time,

considering evacuation on needs of Wind Power from Kodikurichi area. TNEB

has planned 230 kV circuits to Tirunelveli 400 kV substation on which work is

progressing at a very fast pace. PGCIL said that neither in the planning stage of

400 kV Tirunelveli – Edamon line nor in the subsequent deliberations of SREB

meetings, TNEB has mentioned any pre-condition for releasing of the ROW of

Kodikurichi-Edamon line. Therefore they had gone ahead with awarding the

contract for execution of 400 kV Tirunelveli – Edamon line.

11.5NPCIL informed that KAPP project is a part of inter government agreement

between Russia and India and it was getting delayed due to delay in supply of

drawings, equipments etc. from the Russian federation. As a result Unit I and II

were rescheduled for commissioning in December 2008 and June 2009

respectively.

11.6After further deliberations PGCIL said that it would make all efforts to

commission Tirunelveli 400 kV substation by June 2007 and requested SR

constituents to agree for bearing the tariff of the same w.e.f. the COD. TNEB

said there was no need of such an agreement, as it was understood that

whenever any element under Regional scheme was commissioned the tariff is

shared by the beneficiaries.

12. COMPUTATION OF UI EXCHANGES BETWEEN ER-SR

17

12.1 Differences have been observed between UI accounts issued by SRLDC

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

regional UI charges with ER for the period from 03.04.2006 to 27.08.2006.

12.2 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 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.

12.3 SRPC Secretariat requested SRLDC to communicate the methodology

adopted by SRLDC for UI computation. The Communication dated

12.10.2006 received from SRLDC in this regard is at Annexure-IX.

12.4 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31.10.2006, the Committee advised the

Commercial Sub-Committee to discuss the issue in detail and after that the

deliberations could be put up to TCC/SRPC.

12.5 Accordingly, the issue was discussed by Commercial Sub-Committee in its

2nd meeting held on 7th December 2006. Extract of the minutes of 2nd

Commercial Sub Committee Meeting is at Annexure-X.

12.6 In the meeting, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, KSEB, TNEB & Puducherry

were of the view that methodology followed by SRLDC should be continued

and NTPC said that the methodology followed by SRPC Secretariat was

meeting the provisions of IEGC/CERC orders on the subject.

18

12.7 APTRANSCO, KSEB, TNEB & NTPC were of the view that clarification from

CERC should be sought. In the interim the beneficiaries wanted SRLDC

methodology to be adopted by SRPC Secretariat.

12.8 Member Secretary, SRPC said that any deviations to CERC approved

principles/methodology could be adopted with the approval of Competent

Authority.

13. SPECIAL PROTECTION SCHEME (SPS) FOR 2x1000 MWKUDANKULAM ATOMIC POWER PROJECT

13.1 The 2x1000 MW units at Kudankulam Atomic Power Project (KAPP) being

executed by NPCIL are scheduled to be commissioned by December 2007

(1st Unit) and December 2008 (2nd Unit). The 1000 MW units are the biggest

size generators in SR as well as in the country, whose outage may cause

security threats in the Southern Region grid. To take care of this situation a

SPS for Kudankulam project (2X1000 MW) was discussed in the 77th

Protection Coordination Committee of SREB, 1st and 2nd Protection Sub-

Committee of SRPC meetings held on 30.01.2006, 25.07.2006 and

08.12.2006 respectively. The following are the salient features of the

scheme:

• The approximate cost the scheme as indicated by SRTS-II is Rs. 59 lakhs.

• It envisages generation of two trip signals. First trip signal trips a load of about 700 MW and the second trip signal

trips a load of about 800 MW.

• The same load feeders (700MW + 800 MW through trip signal 1 &2) identified for the operation of SPS for Talcher – Kolar HVDC link would be connected for relief in this scheme also.

13.2 A Special Group comprising Members from the Constituent systems was

entrusted with the task of finalising the design of the logic scheme for SPS

with various micro level engineering options. The Special Working Group

met on 24th November 2006 at SRLDC Bangalore and the

recommendations made were put to the Protection Sub-Committee, which

19

in its 2nd meeting on 08.12.2006 agreed to the recommendations made by

Special Group, except on the issue of the implementing agency for the

scheme.

13.3 The Special Group recommendations on roles of organizations was:

NPCIL – Implementation and extending potential free contacts

for trip tranfer upto communication panels and maintenance of

PLCs and communication eqpt. at Kudankulam. NPCIL not

agreeable.

SRTS-II – Communication logistics for transmitting trip signals

from Kudankulam through wideband point to Kolar and

maintenance of the communication equipments beyond

Kudankulam up to Kolar including interface equipments at

Kolar. SRTS-II agreeable.

13.4 Further, Protection Sub-Committee also could not arrive at a consensus

regarding the roles of various organizations in implementing the scheme.

13.5 In the meeting, GM (Tr.), NPCIL reiterated their stand and said that

communication is not their area of expertise. They will provide the signal

from the generator terminals to switchyard after which it can be processed

by PGCIL or any other agency. PGCIL said that a similar SPS exists at

Kolar station, which is implemented and maintained by HVDC Kolar Station.

And for maintaining communication equipments for SPS at Kudankulam

generating station, they have no such establishment and neither they can

depute a person for it.

13.6 Chairperson, TCC wanted to know of CEA’s views in this regard. CE (GM),

CEA said that if NPCIL has no expertise in communication field then PGCIL

could take up the work and train NPCIL. Once the scheme is implemented

NPCIL can look after the maintenance portion. ED, SRTS-I, PGCIL concurred

with CEA views.

20

13.7 GM, (Tr.), NPCIL said that they have got MoU with PGCIL for maintaining all

PLCC equipments. Only routine maintenance work is done by NPCIL and in

case of major problems PGCIL is called for attending the problem. This policy

matter, would be taken up in the quarterly Director level meeting between

NPCIL and PGCIL.

13.8 The matter was further deliberated and it was agreed to request ED (O),

NPCIL, a member of SRPC, in the next day’s SRPC meeting.

14. MONTHLY MEETING OF COMMERCIAL SUB-COMMITTEE

14.1 KSEB required Commercial Sub-Committee Meeting to be conducted

monthly to reconcile the weekly accounts on monthly basis and an exercise

similar to the erstwhile commercial committee meetings of SREB where

energy accounts were verified and signed. This was essential to settle minor

discrepancies.

14.2 The issue was discussed by Commercial Sub-Committee in its 2nd meeting

held on 7th December 2006. It was noted that erstwhile Commercial

Committee meetings of SREB were for finalisation of monthly REA.

Representatives from Karnataka, TNEB & Kaiga GS supported the

suggestion of KSEB, while representatives from Andhra Pradesh,

Puducherry, NLC, NTPC & PGCIL opted for continuance of quarterly

meeting only. After deliberation, the sub-Committee decided to put up the

issue for consideration of TCC.

14.3 In the meeting, after deliberation TCC agreed to not to have monthly

meeting but requested Member Secretary, SRPC for authentication on all

the pages of REA.

15. PUMP MODE OPERATION AT KADAMPARAI

15.1 Chairman, TNEB vide letter No.ED/O/SE/LD&GO/EG/AZ/F.SRPC/D.8/07

dated 3.1.2007 (copy enclosed as Annexure-XI) has requested that the

Southern Regional frequency be maintained above 49.5 Hz at least during

night off-peak hours to enable Tamil Nadu to put its Kadamparai machines

21

in pump mode operation. Further that the subject be included for discussion

by the Committee.

15.2 In the 6th OCC meeting held on 7th December 2006, TNEB had informed that

BHEL had communicated that keeping in view the design features it would

not be advisable to run the Kadamparai units in pump mode below 49.5 Hz.

TNEB in various forums had stated that Kadamparai units cannot run on

pump mode at frequencies below 49.5 Hz. The issue had been deliberated

in various OCC meetings in which constituents were requested to maintain

frequency level above 49.5 Hz to enable Kadamparai pump mode

operation. It was noted that the machines could then run in generator mode

during peak hours which would be beneficial to all SR constituents by way

of better system performance.

15.3 In the meeting ED(O), TNEB reiterated their request of cooperation of the

constituents in maintaining the frequency above 49.5 Hz, at least during

night off peak hours which would enable TNEB to run their Kadamparai

machines in pump mode.

15.4 Member secretary, SRPC said that the issue has been deliberated in

various OCC meetings and in one of the OCC with the cooperation of

KPTCL, TNEB was able to put their kadamparai unit pump mode in real

time.

15.5 ED (GO), APTRANSCO said that AP is not putting its Srisailam pumps if the

frequency is between 49.0 Hz and 49.5 Hz. He suggested that TNEB should

also look for long term solution of the problem in consultation with BHEL.

15.6 ED (O), TNEB said that BHEL had communicated that keeping in view the

design features it would not be advisable to run the Kadamparai units in

pump mode below 49.5 Hz and safety of the machine is utmost importance

to them. He added that 400 MW of peaking power help would help TNEB to

restrict their overdrawal and would help the region as whole as TN peak and

SR peaks fall in the evening peak hours generally.

22

TCC noted TNEB’s request.

16. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE OF BALANCE NTPC UNITS IN 2006-07

16.1 Executive Director (SR), NTPC had requested to consider the matter

regarding Annual Maintenance of balance NTPC units in 2006-07 vide letter

dated 15.12.2006 (copy enclosed as Annexure-XII). Unit 5 (500 MW) of

Ramagundam STPS and Unit 3 (500 MW) of Talcher STPP-II were yet to be

taken up for maintenance, during the current year 2006-07. Further, NTPC

vide their letter No.09:GM(OS):SRHQ dated 23.01.2007 have

communicated the views of M/s. Siemens in regard to maintenance of Unit 5

of Ramagundam STPS (copy enclosed as Annexure-XIII).

16.2 In the 7th meeting of OCC held on 10th January 2007, NTPC explained that

for carrying out re-blading of turbines for which material were already

available in site and Siemen experts have confirmed their availability during

February & March 2007. Accordingly, there was a compulsive need for

shutdown during that time. MS, SRPC had enquired whether 500 MW

power for SR constituents could be arranged through NVVN during the

proposed shutdown, the commercial aspects of which could be tied up

between NVVN and the constituents. This was keeping in view the

increased demand during the said period. However, constituents expressed

their inability to concur for the shutdown till April 2007.

16.3 The maintenance of generating units is planned in the annual outage plan

and is being reviewed periodically in the OCC meetings. The OCC in its 6th

meeting held on 7th December 2006, had expressed concern over the

maintenance works being carried out over to the peak period from January

to April 2007. It had also expressed that, in future, the maintenance works

should be carried out as planned and should not ordinarily be postponed.

16.4In the Meeting, NTPC once again apprised the Committee on the condition of

the unit and the necessity of the shutdown

23

16.5Member Secretary said that in the OCC meeting it was noted that the

management of APTRANSCO, KPTCL and TNEB were not agreeable for the

shutdown before June 2007, while KSEB management was agreeable for the

shutdown subject to the condition that Unit 3 (200 MW) of Ramagundam STPS

would come back & shutdown would be limited to 25 days.

16.6Director (Tr.), KPTCL said that during the months of June to Nov/Dec. all the

shutdowns should be taken up.

16.7NTPC said that expert manpower availability, statutory requirements, request of

postponement by constituents, condition of the machine were some of the

reasons which pushed the maintenance to the peak months.

16.8After discussion it was noted that the beneficiaries except KSEB had expressed

their inability to concur for the shut down of the 5th Unit of Ramagundam, STPS

during the peak demand period of February-May 2007 and they had concurred

to give shutdown in the month of June 20007.

17. EVACUATION SCHEMES FOR NEW CENTRAL GENERATING STATIONS

17.1Three nos. of Central generating stations viz. Kaiga 3 & 4, NLC TPS-II Expn.

and Kudankulam APP scheduled to be commissioned in the coming couple of

years and the evacuation schemes from these projects were under execution

by PGCIL, which would inject power to the State grids at the sub-stations

finalised by the Standing Committee on Power System Planning of SR. The

programme of commissioning transmission schemes of PGCIL were also

generally matching with the scheduled commissioning of the generating units.

In order to ensure full and timely utilisation of power from these projects, the

evacuation systems from the injection points were to be implemented by the

beneficiary constituents within the time frame of commissioning of generating

units. The issue was being followed up in the SRPC/ TCC /OCC meetings.

17.2In the meeting, MS, SRPC said that Kaiga Stage II Unit-1 and Unit-2 are

scheduled for commissioning by March 2007 and September 2007 respectively,

but the Kozhikode 400 kV SS along with Kozhikode-Mysore 400 kV D/C line

24

under evacuation scheme is scheduled for commissioning in December 2007.

So there is a mismatch between the two. PGCIL said that the delay is due to

ROW problem in Kerala. Kerala said that they making all efforts to expedite the

same. NPCIL informed that the Unit 1 of Kaiga Stage II will attain criticality by

26th February 2007 and the unit is expected to be commissioned before end of

March 2007. He requested KPTCL to complete the works of the 2nd circuit

between Narendra-Haveri-Guttur. KPTCL said that all the works related to both

the terminal bays at Haveri would be completed by March 2007.

17.3KSEB had informed in the 1st TCC meeting that the evacuation system at 220 kV

level from Cochin 400 kV SS of PGCIL may not match PGCIL schedule of

November 2008. MS, SRPC requested KSEB to make all possible effort to

minimise the delays in evacuation system at 220 kV level from Cochin 400 kV

SS.

17.4In the 2nd TCC meeting the constituents had furnished the updated information.

The information compiled from the details received from the constituents is at

Annexure-XIV.

18. TERMINATION OF TIRUNELVELI - EDAMON 400 kV CIRCUIT UNDER KUDANKULAM EVACUATION SCHEME AT EDAMON

18.1 Tirunveli-Edamon 400 kV D/C line under Kudankulam Evacuation scheme

was line initially to be operated at 220kV level utilizing the right of way of

existing Kayathar - Edamon link.

18.2 In the 22nd Standing Committee meeting held on 17.8.2006, KSEB had

requested termination of Tirunelveli-Edamon 400 kV D/C line at Edamon

itself on account of less load at Thiruvananthapuram. At that time, PGCIL

had indicated that this might not be technically feasible on account of the

fact that other evacuation lines may get overloaded.

18.3 The issue was further raised by KSEB in the special TCC meeting held at

Bangalore on 02.12.2006 wherein CE, KSEB reiterated his request for the

above. Executive Director, SRTS-II, PGCIL recalled that the issue was

25

already discussed in the 22nd Standing Committee meeting, wherein it was

noted that the line could not be terminated at Edamon on account of

reasons outlined.

18.4KSEB vide letter dated 25th January, 2007 (copy enclosed as Annexure-XV)

addressed to CEA/PGCIL have again raised the issue of termination of both

circuits of Tirunelveli-Edamon 400 kV D/C (charged at 220 kV level) at Edamon

substation and construction of a new bay at Edamon, cost for which was to be

shared as a Regional Transmission Scheme.

18.5In the meeting, KSEB again reiterated its request for terminating the Tirunelveli-

Edamon circuit at Edamon and said that they have written to CEA and PGCIL

in this regard. MS, SRPC requested PGCIL to examine the issue for

clarification.

19. TUNING OF POWER SYSTEM STABILISERS IN SR

19.1 In the 1st meeting of TCC 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 modal analysis was to be developed and expected to take further 3-4 weeks time. 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.

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

• Further follow up is on.20. REVISED UNIT TRIPPING SCHEME UNDER HVDC POLE OUTAGES AT

TALCHER STPS STAGE-II

26

20.1 MS, SRPC said that the Tripping scheme for Talcher STPS Stage II units

during outage of Talcher-Kolar HVDC link was finalised in the special meeting

of TCC held at SREB, Bangalore on 09.09.2005 to limit the jerk to 450 MW in

ER-WR system. It was agreed in the meeting that the scheme could be

reviewed after commissioning of Tala transmission scheme.

20.2 The revised scheme proposed by NTPC was discussed in a meeting taken by

Member (PS), CEA on 22.12.2006 whose minutes are enclosed as Annexure-

XVI. NTPC vide letter dated 28.12.2006 addressed to Member (PS), CEA had

intimated the modified scheme (copy enclosed as Annexure-XVII). Through

this letter NTPC had advised Talcher to implement the modified scheme at the

earliest.

In the meeting NTPC informed that the revised scheme is awaiting

implementation pending ERLDC and WRLDC obtaining clarifications from

CEA on certain aspects of the revised scheme.

21. PREPONEMENT OF COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF PGCIL TRANSMISSION ELEMENTS

21.1 PGCIL vide their letter No: C/OS/SRPC dated 17.01.2007 have requested

the pre-ponement of the following transmission elements:

i) Concurrence for preponement of commercial operation of 400 kV Narendra-Davanagere line

PGCIL in the above letter had communicated

“M/s NPCIL vide letter dated 18.10.2006 have requested

for early commissioning of 400 kV Narendra – Davanagere

line to enable them evacuate Kaiga power reliably. As per

the investment approval, the above line is due for

commissioning by Sept.07. In terms of CERC regulation,

2004 beneficiaries have to concur for pre-ponement of

commercial operation. Beneficiaries may intimate their

concurrence to enable POWERGRID expedite the works

for early commissioning”.

27

TCC recommended for the pre-ponement of the above line from

June 2007.

ii) Concurence for preponement of commercial operation of 80 MVAR Bus-reactor at Nellore Substation

PGCIL in the above letter had communicated

“80 MVAR Bus-reactor at Nellore 400 kV Substation is

getting ready for charging during Feb.’07 against the

scheduled date of charging 16.06.07. Concurrence may

please be given for early commissioning and commercial

operation of the same”.

In the meeting, ED(GO), APTRANSCO said that the preponement

of the reactor before monsoon did not sound convincing.

SRLDC and PGCIL emphasized on the need of the reactor at the

earliest considering the voltage condition at Nellore, the failures of

number of lightning arresters in that area and the threat to system

security.

After discussion, TCC did not agree to recommend for pre-

ponement of the above Bus-reactor.

28

22. GRID OPERATION

22.1 Low Frequency Operation

22.1.1 The issue of low frequency operation and overdrawals at low frequency

was discussed in the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31st October, 2006.

The issue was further deliberated in the 5th to 8th OCC meetings held

during November 2006 to Feburary 2007. During the period under

review, a number of Type ‘A’, Type ‘B’ & Type ‘C’ messages (copy

enclosed as Annexure-XVIII) and also messages regarding non-

compliance of IEGC provisions were issued to the constituents by

SRLDC. The range of drawal by constituents is at Annexure-XIX. On the

request of SRLDC, the matter regarding termination of persistent non-

compliance of IEGC provisions had been taken up by Member-

Secretary, SRPC as per the provisions of Clause 1.5 of IEGC with the

defaulting constituent(s). Director (Operation), PGCIL has also

expressed concern over the issue of low frequency operation of the

Southern Grid and has requested that the subject be included for

discussion by the Committee vide letter No.C:SO:SRPC dated 14th

December, 2006 addressed to Chairperson, SRPC .

22.1.2 During the OCC meetings held during November 2006 to February

2007, provisions of clauses 6.4.5 & 5.4.2 of IEGC were brought to the

attention of the constituents.

Clause 6.4.5 of IEGC

QuoteThe SLDCs / STUs shall regularly carry out the necessary

exercises regarding short-term and long-term demand

estimation for their respective States, to enable them to plan

in advance as to how they would meet their consumers’ load

without overdrawing from the grid.

Unquote

29

Clause 5.4.2 of IEGC

QuoteManual Demand Disconnection

(a) As mentioned elsewhere, the constituents shall

endeavour to restrict their net drawal from the grid to

within their respective drawal schedules whenever the

system frequency is below 49.5 Hz. When the frequency

falls below 49.0 Hz, requisite load shedding (manual)

shall be carried out in the concerned State to curtail the

over-drawal.

(b) Further, in case of certain contingencies and/or threat

to system security, the RLDC, may direct an

SLDC to decrease its drawal by a certain quantum.

Such directions shall immediately be acted upon.

(c) Each Regional constituent shall make arrangements

that will enable manual demand disconnection to

take place, as instructed by the RLDC/SLDC, under

normal and/or contingent conditions.

(d) The measures taken to reduce the constituents’

drawal from the grid shall not be withdrawn as

long as the frequency/voltage remains at a low

level, unless specifically permitted by the RLDC.

Unquote

The following action plan to control the low frequency of operation was

agreed in the 5th OCC meeting held on 10th November, 2006:

- Schedule/drawals should be done Discom-wise and MW

wise.

- Communication for demand disconnection should be

through written mode.

30

- SRLDC would communicate the days of low frequency of

operation and the States would furnish the details of efforts

taken by them to curtail low frequency of operation,

restricting overdrawals and details of demand

disconnection etc.

- Loads disconnected would not be brought back until the

frequency improved or the overdrawal was contained.

- In case all the States were drawing as per the schedule

and the frequency of operation was still low, the frequency

correction to improve the frequency had to be taken by all

the constituents. In other cases, States should take into

account their overdrawals and frequency correction factor.

- Each State would make an action plan to implement the

above.

22.1.3 While on the subject, SRLDC had filed a petition with CERC for ensuring

reliable operation of Southern Regional Grid by maintaining the grid

frequency above 49.0 Hz and also review of UI price vector, vide

No.145/2006 dated 15.12.2006.

22.1.4 The Hon’ble Commission has issued Press Release titled ‘Grid Indiscipline shall not be tolerated: CERC’ on 12th January, 2007

(copy enclosed as Annexure-XX) which was communicated to the

constituents vide SRPC letter dated 12th January, 2007 (copy enclosed

as Annexure-XXI).

22.1.5 It had been suggested in agenda that keeping in view that the peak

period for Southern Region is between January to April, Committee may

kindly like to decide on action plan to advise the beneficiary constituents

on modes of operating the Grid within the frequency range of 49.0 Hz to

50.5 Hz, as stipulated by IEGC. The decision of the Special TCC

meeting held in March 2006 to resort to load shedding at 49.2 Hz itself

31

to avoid the frequency going below 49.0 Hz at any instant of time also

merits attention in this context.

22.1.6 In the meeting, MS, SRPC raised concern over the range of over drawal

at very low frequencies and about the number of violation of IEGC

provisions by the constituents. He informed the TCC about the CERC

hearing on ensuring secure and reliable operation of SR grid by

maintaining the grid frequency above 49.0 Hz. He enquired about the

steps being taken by the constituents in this regard.

22.1.7 ED (GO), APTRANSCO said that additional generation & even captive

generation is being harnessed, imports from other region to the tune of

300-400 MW are being utilised, naptha generation is being utilized and

there has been increased generation from the hydro. Overdrawals have

considerably reduced and number of Type ‘C’ messages issued to AP

have reduced. He added that load shedding up to 1200 MW has been

carried out.

22.1.8 Director (Tr.), KPTCL said that KPTCL has been concerned about the

low frequency of operation, IPPs and Yelahanka are being dispatched,

hydro generation has been more than schedule, 40 MW of power has

been negotiated through PTC and load shedding upto 700 MW has been

carried out. Number of violation messages from SRLDC have reduced.

22.1.9 ED (O), TNEB said that TN is availing costly power from BSES, IPPs,

Kerala’s share from Kayamkulam , TN’s own share from Kayamkulam,

generation from hydro and CPPs has been more than scheduled, Basin

Bridge whose variable cost is around Rs. 10/- is being dispatched for

more than 6 hours, number of violation messages from SRLDC have

reduced. He assured that if TNEB is allowed to run the Kadamparai

pump there would be no overdrawal by TNEB at frequency less than

49.0 Hz.

22.1.10 CE (GM), CEA said that overdrawal in the composite grid of NR,WR, ER

& NER has been a issue of concern, in WR and NR there has been lot of

32

resentment and in some cases radial feeders were to be disconnected

by RLDC. He requested better coordination among the SLDC and RLDC

and requested SLDC to adhere to the instructions given by SRLDC.

22.1.11 The TCC recommended the following:

i) The frequency would be maintained at above 49.0 Hz.

ii) Constituents would not over draw at frequency below49.0 Hz.

iii) Load shedding would be carried out in case demand exceeds the availability.

iv) Constituents would harness all available generation.

v) Explore possibility to import power from other region.

22.2 Tripping of radial feeders as regulatory measure tomaintain frequency

22.2.1 In the 130th meeting of SREB held on 21.9.2002, it was decided that the

constituents would identify radial loads at 220/132/110 kV for tripping as

regulatory measure to maintain the frequency. These feeders would be

tripped by the concerned SLDC as per instructions of SRLDC.

22.2.2 SRLDC vide their letter No.GM/SRLDC/2006 dated 29.12.2006 had

requested the constituents to furnish the updated list of feeders

considering the change in network topology and load profile. The issue

was also discussed in the 7th OCC meeting held on 10th January 2007.

In this regard, Clause 5.4.2 I of IEGC relating to Manual Demand

Disconnection merits attention.

22.2.3 In the meeting, ED(O), TNEB informed that details are under

consideration of their Management.

22.2.4 Member Secretary, SRPC said that with this SRLDC would be in a

position to ensure needful action with SLDCs at times of threat to grid

security in line with provisions of IEGC.

33

22.3 Change in the set points of UFRs

22.3.1 In the context of increased percentage of operation of system below

49.0 Hz in the recent past, the issue of changing the 1st stage tripping

set points of the under frequency relays in the Region to 48.7 Hz from

48.5 Hz was brought up by SRPC in the 7th OCC meeting held on 10th

January 2007. After deliberations, it was agreed to continue with the

present setting taking into account assurance given by the constituents

to maintain the frequency within IEGC range.

22.3.2 In the meeting, MS, SRPC said that in the OCC meeting on 13th February,

2007 the constituents once again assured that they would maintain the

frequency above 49.0 Hz. In view of this, the issue was deferred for later

consideration.

22.3.3 All constituents assured that they would maintain the frequency above

49.0 Hz, and the present setting of UFR may continue.

22.4 Low Generation at Neyveli – TS II

22.4.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31st October 2006, the low generation

output from Neyveli TS-II was discussed. In the meeting, MD, KPTCL

had suggested that it could also be examined whether the land can be

acquired under emergency clause, in which land is handed over

immediately and disputes could be handled in due course. MD, KPTCL

had also said that the low generation from Neyveli TS-II should be

brought to the kind attention of Secretary, Ministry of Power,

Government of India. DGM (Plg.), NLC had said that the land acquisition

was under Industrial Acquisition Act and that maximum generation of

about 700 MW could be ensured from Neyveli TS-II. It was also agreed

that the issue could be taken with Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu for using

his good offices for handing over the land to NLC at the earliest.

34

22.4.2 Subsequently, NLC vide letter dated 25.11.2006 (copy enclosed as

Annexure-XXII) had communicated the status of land for acquisition for

advancing mining activities.

22.4.3 Chairperson, SRPC vide letter No. SREB/SE-II/9834 dated 28th

December, 2006 had requested Secretary (Power), Government of India

to use his good offices in the issue regarding low generation output and

also requesting TN Government to speed up acquisition of lands for

NLC Lignite extraction. The issue was taken up by Joint Secretary

(Thermal), Ministry of Power vide D.O. letter dated 23.01.2007 (copy

enclosed as Annexure-XXIII) with Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil

Nadu for expediting the process of acquisition and handing over of land

to NLC for mining of the lignite for Neyveli TS-II stations (1470 MW).

22.4.4 In the meeting, Member Secretary, SRPC informed that generation at

Neyveli TS-II Station had picked up to the range of 1000-1200 MW since

around 12th January 2007. He added that NLC had earlier assured

average 700 MW till March 2007 and enquired to know how increased

level of generation could be ensured by NLC presently.

22.4.5 CGM (TSII & TSII Exp), NLC informed that the land acquisition problem

still exists and intensive mining at some of the areas in the existing

mines have resulted in higher availability. He added generation of at

least 1000 MW would be ensured from TS-II till April 2007. He

requested that the SRPC should also take up the issue of land

acquisition with Tamil Nadu Government.

22.4.6 Member Secretary, SRPC enquired about the the time it would take for

lignite availability once the land is handed over to NLC.

22.4.7 CGM (TSII & TSII Exp) , NLC said that it would take about 6-9 months

for lignite availability once the land is handed over to NLC.

22.4.8 Constituents requested that the higher availability at TS-II Station could

be maintained by NLC up till May 2007.

35

22.5 Grid Events (October 2006-January 2007)

• Frequency remained within IEGC range (49.0 Hz to 50.5 Hz) for 92.42 % of time.

• Frequency remained below 49.0 Hz for 7.7% of time and average frequency was 49.37 Hz.

• Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu exported 152 MU, 520 MU, 398 MU & 382 MU respectively, for the above period by way of bilateral exports to recipients in WR & NR (this also includes the exports by embedded IPPs located in respective States).

• Andhra Pradesh had imported 92 MU from other regions during the period December 2006-January 2007.

• Southern Region had wheeled Nil energy during the period under review.

• Andhra Pradesh & Puducherry met a maximum demand of 8409 MW & 255 MW respectively in the month of October 2006, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu & Southern Region met maximum demands of 5640 MW, 2664 MW, 8393 MW & 23434 MW respectively in the month of January 2007 during the period of review. Figures of Karnataka and Kerala are maximum till date.

• Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry & Southern Region met average per day consumptions of 162 MU, 113 MU, 40 MU, 158 MU, 4.79 MU & 476 MU respectively during the period of review.

• 52 MW of Wind Mills were commissioned by Enercon Wind firms (IPP) in Karnataka on 26.10.2006.

• Rayalaseema TPP Unit-3 (210 MW) commissioned on 24.01.2007 by APGENCO.

• 315 MVA, 400/230 kV ICT at Almathi was synchronized to grid on 8.12.2006 by TNEB.

• 400 kV Nelamangala-Somanahally D/C line along with associated bays and equipments at both Nelamangala & Somanahally substations were commissioned and put under commercial operation w.e.f. 01.01.2007 by PGCIL.

36

• 220 kV Vemagiri-II – Bheemavaram D/C line charged on 08.01.2007 by APTRANSCO.

• 150 MVA, 220/66/11 kV additional power transformer commissioned at Subramanyapura Receiving Station on 28.01.2007 by KPTCL.

• MOP, GOI vide their letter No.3/2/2006-OM dated 26.12.2006 have restored 115 MW firm share in Kaiga APS Unit 1 & 2 which was temporarily re-allocated to Tamil Nadu in April 2002, to Andhra Pradesh. The above allocation was implemented w.e.f. 00:00 hrs. of 28.12.2006 for operational and regional energy/commercial accounting purposes.

• Keeping in view the relative power supply position of constituents of Southern Region, allocation of unallocated power from Central Generating Stations in Southern Region stands partially modified by Ministry of Power vide letter No.3/3/2007-OM dated 22.01.2007. The revised percentage allocated (firm + unallocated) to the constituents of Southern Region/Powergrid was implemented for operational and Regional energy/commercial accounting purposes with effect from 00:00 hrs of 25th January 2007.

In the meeting the Member Secretary, SRPC said that on an average 500

MW of energy has been exported to other Regions by SR and requested the

constituents to explore all avenues to utilize the energy of Southern region

in the region itself.

22.6 Grid Frequency

22.6.1 The frequency profile of the region from October 2006 to January 2007

is given in Table – I below:

37

Table-I

Month

Percentage of time when frequency was

Less than 48.5Hz

48.5Hz to49.0Hz

49.0Hz to49.5 Hz

49.5Hz to50.0 Hz

50.0Hz to50.5 Hz

More than50.5Hz

Month average

Hz

Within IEGC range:49.0Hz to 50.5Hz

Oct. 2006 0.08 10.45 41.67 36.10 11.69 0.01 49.48 89.46

Nov. 2006 0.00 0.69 50.37 44.08 4.85 0.01 49.52 99.30

Dec. 2006 0.00 10.40 78.06 11.42 0.12 0.00 49.24 89.60

Jan. 2007 0.00 9.26 78.60 1.79 0.30 0.05 49.23 90.69

22.7 Hydro Availability

22.7.1 The storage levels in the major hydel reservoirs in MU as on 31st

January 2007 is given in Table - II below:

Table-II

Energy storage in major hydel reservoirs

At FRL (in MU)

Inflows during April- January 2007

(in MU)Storage as on 31st

January 2007

Anticipated Actuals MU %ANDHRAPRADESH Jalaput Srisailam

495 6383056

10039432

370 74.75

KARNATAKA Linganamakki Supa

45473152

46171902

63663425

28232034

62.0864.53

KERALA Idukki Pamba & KakkiTotal Kerala

21909164083

230214606141

239116716855

13975992678

63.7965.3965.59

TAMIL NADUNilgirisTotal Tamil Nadu (excluding Mettur)

15042183

19463575

25274434

11341472

75.4067.43

38

22.7.2 The reservoirs position as on 31st January 2007 was about 65% for the

Southern Region.

22.8 Grid Voltages

22.8.1 SR grid had been experiencing sustained over voltage conditions during

the monsoon and low demand period 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.

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

Table-III below:

Table – IIIVoltage profile in kV at the selected 400 kV Sub-stations

from October 2006 to January 2007

400 kV StationsOctober 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007

Average of Average of Average of Average ofMax. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min.

Hyderabad 419 406 423 412 420 411 418 411Ramagundam 412 407 413 407 413 407 411 406Nagarjunasagar 417 405 422 410 418 408 417 408Cuddapah 418 401 421 404 417 403 417 404Vijayawada 424 411 424 411 424 411 422 408Gooty 429 411 432 415 430 415 433 418Gazuwaka 419 413 423 416 423 417 424 418Bangalore 410 388 414 389 410 386 411 388Kolar 419 400 422 402 418 401 419 402Narendra 408 397 409 398 407 394 404 390Trivandrum 420 400 424 406 418 402 419 401Trichur 411 394 413 397 407 391 408 389Chennai 418 401 423 405 418 403 418 405Hosur 411 395 415 396 412 395 411 394Neyveli-II 418 381 421 411 417 408 416 407

39

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

22.9.1 The issue of over voltages has also been taken up in the various OCC

meetings and short-term measures like

• 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 been discussed. Specific steps taken by constituents to

contain over voltage have been discussed. Area specific high voltage

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

discussed in the various OCC meetings.

22.10 VAR absorption by Generators within capability limits

22.10.1 The issue of VAR absorption was discussed in the 6th & 7th OCC

meetings held on 7th December, 2006 & 10th January, 2007. In view of

the high voltage conditions being faced in Southern Region during low

demand period, the MVAR absorption capability of various generators

may be utilised in improving the voltage condition of the grid.

22.11 Hydro Machines in synchronous condenser mode

22.11.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31st October, 2006 it was noted that

TCC had suggested that running of major hydro machines in SR in

synchronous condenser mode may be explored.

In this regard, the following may be noted:

Sharavathy machines of KPCL were more than 30 years old and some modifications were required to run the machines in synchronous condenser mode.

40

Machines at Srisailam and 4 machines at Nagarjunasagar could be run in synchronous condenser mode.

Idukki machines could run in synchronous condenser mode for about one hour only.

At Lower Periyar in KSEB, an air cushion with pressurized air is to be maintained for operating the machine in synchronous condenser. The pressurised air will lower the water level so that Francis turbine rotates in air. This air cushion is not adequate presently due to air leakage through the hollow shaft. So the generators cannot be operated as synchronous condensers.

At Kuttiadi in KSEB, three machines with 25 MW capability can be operated as synchronous condensers. However, when the temperatures reach alarm point, the machines have to be switched back to generator and cooled for some time.

22.11.2 In the meeting, SE, APGENCO said that the generators may be given

incentives to run the machines in synchronous condenser mode.

22.11.3 Technical Director, KPCL said that the issue of auxiliary consumption,

use of lubricants, commercial incentives needs to be worked out.

22.11.4 GM, SRLDC said that at BBMB the machines are running their

machines on synchronous condenser mode and all the beneficiary state

utilities are sharing the commercial implications.

22.11.5 Director (Tr.), KPTCL said the generators should agree in principle for

running the machines in synchronous condenser mode and in the next

meeting the generators may put up the commercial implications for this

mode of operation.

22.11.6 Technical Director, KPCL said that a common approach is required to

understand the implications of synchronous condenser mode of

operation.

22.11.7 ED (GO), APTRANSCO said that the synchronous condenser mode of

operation may be needed not only in the monsoon period but other

periods also.

41

22.11.8 TCC recommended formation of a Sub-Committee comprising Technical

Director, KPCL, Chief of Generation, KSEB with the approval of

Chairman, KSEB, Superintending Engineer, APGENCO & Member

(Generation), TNEB to look into the technical, operational, protection,

control and commercial aspects of running the hydro machines in

synchronous condenser mode.

22.12 Installation of Shunt Capacitors

22.12.1 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.

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

year so far is given in Table -IV below:

Table – IV

(Figures in MVAR)HT capacitors programmed

for 2006-07 by SEB/TRANSCO

Additional shunt capacitor requirement for the year 2006-07 at rated voltage by System Study

Sub-Committee

Installed as on 31st Jan. 2007

(April-06 to Jan. 2007)

Andhra Pradesh 190.0* 150 $ 150.00Karnataka # Nil 139.45Kerala 0.0 Nil 0.00Tamil Nadu 84.0* Nil 52.80Total 274.0 150 342.25

* Balance for the year 2005-06# Programmed Nil$ Existing capacitors, switched off in the studies, to the tune of 130 MVAR can be diverted to the required locations

23. ANTICIPATED POWER SUPPLY POSITION FOR THE PERIOD FROM FEBRUARY 2007 TO MARCH 2007

23.1 The anticipated power supply position for the period from February 2007 to

March 2007 based on the data furnished by the constituents is at

Annexure-XXIV.

42

24. CLOSING OF 220 kV BALIMELA – UPPER SILERU S/C LINE

24.1 In the 2nd SRPC meeting held on 31st October 2006, the Committee had

noted that in the 1st TCC meeting held on previous day, the issue of

availing radial power through 2320 kV Balimela-Upper Sileru S/C line was

taken up by GM, SRLDC with Director (T), APTRANSCO in September

2006. The issue was discussed in the 1st TCC held on previous day in

which APTRANSCO had expressed certain apprehensions in closing the

line considering the generation in that corridor and line loading of certain

lines. The preliminary studies conducted by SRLDC had shown that closing

of the lines may not have any major constraints except during 2 months in a

year when generation in that corridor was high. TCC had recommended

further deliberation on this issue.

24.2 The issue was further deliberated in the 5th & 6th OCC meetings held

during November & December 2006 in which APTRANSCO had informed

about the letter dated 28.11.2006 from Chief Engineer, APTRANSCO to

SRLDC on the above subject (copy enclosed as Annexure-XXV). SRLDC

had informed that they had considered three cases, with separation of 2x40

MW units at Balimela (Orissa) from ER, connection of the same to SR grid

through 220 kV Balimela-Upper Sileru link and also considering different

generation patterns in Sileru Complex.

24.3 In the meeting, MS, SRPC said that APTRANSCO has been expressing

operational difficulties in closing the above line while SRLDC has been

emphasizing on management approval for closing of the line in times of

need.

24.4 GM, SRLDC said that the results of the studies by SRLDC and

APTRANSCO have been shared and the results of both the studies are

showing same trends. He said that as per the studies when the generation

at the Sileru basin is low the link could be used for about 6 months in a

year. He added that in contingencies like Talcher-Kolar out and one pole of

43

Gazuwaka out as happened few days back the link could have been used.

If management approval is there, there would be no time delay in time of

contingencies and in real time the link would be closed with the approval of

APTRANSCO.

24.5 ED (GO), APTRANSCO said that for past 6-7 months only 2-3 machines

are on bars at Lower Sileru because of some foundation bolts problems.

With all the generation available at Sileru basin it would be difficult to close

the line. He added AP is drawing less from Donkarayi reservoir. The non

uniform and unreliable flow of power on this line was also a issue of

concern.

24.6 It was agreed to refer the issue for discussion in SRPC meeting.

25. DEMAND VARIATION (Peak Vs Off-peak)

25.1 The issue regarding large variation between minimum and maximum

demands has already been under the consideration of TCC/SREB/SRPC.

The issue has also been discussed in the OCC meetings, wherein the

following was observed for the period October 2006 to November 2006:

StateMinimum to Maximum Demand Variation %

October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007Highest Lowest Highest Lowest Highest Lowest Highest Lowest

Andhra Pradesh 24.20 12.04 25.59 15.75 24.70 6.13 16.22 5.51

Karnataka 47.78 17.52 40.90 18.98 43.91 2.20 38.49 26.00

Kerala 52.71 42.40 52.87 41.58 57.11 1.46 54.89 42.24

Tamil Nadu 40.80 17.19 40.05 28.64 38.71 9.75 40.93 25.00

Puducherry 28.70 4.07 33.47 14.71 36.87 - 36.17 10.88

Southern Region 29.11 14.62 32.97 22.39 31.33 1.79 27.07 14.99

Note: Highest & lowest figures have been computed on the daily values during the month.

25.2 During the deliberations on the issue in the 5th & 6th OCC meetings held

during November & December 2006, some of the suggestions/measures

which emanated are furnished below:

44

Consumer awareness programmes were being held in Kerala about the peak load management measures, with an objective of shifting some of the loads away from peak hours (18:00 to 22:00 hours)

BESCOM was encouraging sale of CFL to its consumers at reduced prices and also on instalment basis for which they had tied up with manufacturers to reduce demand.

KPTCL had offered concessional tariff rate for consumption during off-peak hours with the objective of reducing the peak load.

Staggering of weekly holidays for various DISCOMs in Karnataka was suggested.

‘Pune’ Model was discussed in which Pune had demand of 1050 MW and availability of 900 MW and were hence resorting to load shedding. 13 captive generators in that area were approached to supply energy during peak hours, and the extra cost was booked on those consumers who were consuming more than 300 units per month which approximately worked out to be 42 paise/unit. Pune consumers were thus spared of load shedding.

25.2 In the meeting, MS, SRPC said that with shortages expected in Southern

Region and with reduced capacity addition planned in 11th Plan for

Southern Regional Constituents, the DSM techniques requires attention,

awareness and implementation

25.3 Director (Tr.), KPTCL said in Maharashtra industrial holidays are spread

over a week, with the intention of flattening of load curve on all days of the

week but the practical applicability of it being implemented in SR states had

to be examined. BESCOM was encouraging sale of CFL to its consumers at

reduced prices and also on instalment basis for which they had tied up with

manufacturers to reduce demand. Energy efficient pumps are also being

encouraged by Karnataka and three manufactures have approached for

vendor approval to supply these pumps at cheaper rate.

25.4ED (O), TNEB said that agriculture grouping is being done to stagger the

loads, Staggering of industries is also being done, some concessions are also

there for use of power during off peak hours.

45

25.5 CE (GM), CEA said that the issue was also deliberated in Northern Region

that DTL is encouraging use of CFL, energy efficient pumps and solar

lamps. He said that the consumer should be given incentives for use of

energy efficient equipments.

25.6Director (Tr.), KPTCL said that Karnataka is giving a discount of 35 paisa/unit,

maximum up to Rs. 35 per month for the use of solar water heaters. Over 1

lakh solar heaters have been installed in Bangalore. By approximate estimates

load reduction of around 10% has been noticed in Bangalore. Vendors for CFL

have also been identified which would supply at 20% less than MRP and

around 1 lakh lamps have already been sold.

26. UI EXCHANGES WITH OTHER REGIONS

26.1 The issue was discussed in the 1st TCC meeting held on 30.10.2006. In the

meeting, GM, SRLDC had 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. 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. 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. TCC had requested SRLDC to furnish details to constituents and

the issue could be deliberated in the next TCC meeting. The issue was

further deliberated in the 5th OCC meeting held on 9th November 2006, the

extract of which is at Annexure-XXVI.

26.2 In the meeting, GM, SRLDC said that seen from the last para of the above

Annexure (extract of 5th OCC meeting) the importance of UI transactions

with other regions was evident.

46

26.3 ED (O), TNEB said keeping in view the explanation of SRLDC, the issue

could be dropped.

26.4 The TCC decided to drop the issue.

27. REVIEW OF PROGRESS OF WORKS OF NEWGENERATION SCHEMES

27.1 The progress of works on the new generation schemes under construction

in the Southern Region was reviewed by the TCC and revised target dates

of commissioning of the schemes as intimated by the constituents are given

in Annexure-XXVII.

28. REVIEW OF PROGRESS OF WORKS ON NEW TRANSMISSION LINES AND SUB-STATIONS

28.1 The progress of works on the new 400 kV and 220 kV/230 kV transmission

lines and sub-stations in the State Sector under construction in the Southern

Region was reviewed by the TCC and the revised target dates of

commissioning of the schemes as intimated by the constituents are given in

Annexure-XXVIII.

28.2 The progress of works on the new transmission lines and substations in the

Central Sector (POWERGRID) under construction in Southern region was

reviewed by TCC and the revised target dates of commissioning as

intimated by POWERGRID are given in Annexure-XXIX.

29. DATE & VENUE OF THE NEXT TCC MEETING

29.1 It was decided to hold the 3rd Meeting of the TCC of SRPC one day prior to

4th SRPC Meeting. Date and venue of the meeting would be finalized in due

course, it was informed.

47

30. VOTE OF THANKS

30.1 Chairperson, TCC & TD, KPCL thanked the TCC members and delegates for

the detailed discussions that took place in smooth and cooperative

environment.

30.2 Member Secretary, SRPC once again KPCL & KPTCL for the excellent

arrangements made in connection with hosting of the meeting.

***

ANNEXURES

48