DERC announces amendment to norms for shifting lines, bus depot electrification
These works are now to be divided into three broad stages — design and procurement, execution and installation, and testing, commissioning & handover. This structured approach aims to bring more clarity and accountability in implementing such government-backed projects.
The DERC said that these changes were made based on directions from the Government of NCT of Delhi under Section 108 of the Electricity Act, 2003. The amendment, which is now in effect from the date of its publication in the official gazette, introduces new provisions under Regulation 24 to address electricity-related infrastructure works carried out by distribution companies on behalf of the Delhi government.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
4 days ago
- Business Standard
SC rules in favour of Himachal in power dispute with JSW Hydro Energy
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled against JSW Hydro Energy, a subsidiary of JSW Energy, in its dispute with the Himachal Pradesh government over the supply of 18 per cent free power to the state. JSW Hydro Energy had argued that, under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) Tariff Regulations, it was required to supply no more than 13 per cent as free power. 'We have allowed the appeal by the State of Himachal Pradesh by interpreting the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the CERC Regulations, 2019 in the context of the subsisting and continuing contractual relationship between the parties,' said a Bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi. The Bench held that the CERC Regulations, 2019, did not prohibit the company from supplying free power beyond 13 per cent and that the Implementation Agreement remained valid and enforceable. While CERC must give effect to its regulations and allow a pass-through of up to 13 per cent free power in tariff calculation, any additional supply is a contractual obligation governed by the Implementation Agreement. On interpreting the CERC Regulations, the court stated that the 13 per cent limit applies only for tariff purposes and does not prevent the company from supplying more than that amount of free power. 'Further, a writ petition before the High Court for aligning the Implementation Agreement with the CERC Regulations, 2019, and the CERC's order dated 17.03.2022 is not maintainable,' the court held. In allowing the state's appeal, the Supreme Court criticised the High Court for intervening in the tariff fixation domain, which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the CERC. 'Considering the expertise and specialisation of the CERC as a statutory regulator and the wide-ranging jurisdiction it exercises under the Electricity Act, as well as Respondent No. 1's (JSW Hydro Energy) conduct in not seeking relief against the appellant (State of Himachal Pradesh) before the CERC, we have held that the present writ petition was not maintainable before the High Court,' the Bench added. JSW Hydro Energy Limited operates a 1,045 MW hydroelectric project at Karcham Wangtoo, originally allotted to Jaiprakash Industries Limited under a Memorandum of Understanding signed in 1993. Under the subsequent Implementation Agreement with the Himachal Pradesh government, JSW (through its predecessor) had agreed to provide 18 per cent of net power generation to the state free of cost after the first 12 years of commercial operation. Later, JSW approached the CERC and then the High Court when the state declined to revise the free power obligation to 13 per cent in line with the 2019 regulations. The High Court had ruled in favour of JSW and directed the state to align the Implementation Agreement with the CERC Regulations. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.
The Print
5 days ago
- The Print
CERC rejects CESC's 300 MW hybrid power tariff bid over procedural lapses
CESC sought to adopt a tariff of Rs 3.81 per kWh for the hybrid power procurement. The power utility had failed to obtain prior approval for deviations in the bidding process from the appropriate authority, which in this case should have been the Centre and not the West Bengal government, the CERC said in its report. Kolkata, Jul 15 (PTI) The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has rejected a petition by CESC Ltd seeking approval for the adoption of tariff for the long-term procurement of 300 MW power from grid-connected wind-solar hybrid projects, citing non-compliance with competitive bidding guidelines. 'We reject the adoption of the tariff so discovered, as the petitioner has not complied with the bidding guidelines under Section 63 of the Electricity Act. The petitioner may go for re-bidding, if so advised, strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Act,' the CERC said in the order. CESC had floated the tender on November 8, 2024, for procuring 150 MW wind-solar hybrid power with a greenshoe option for an additional 150 MW, aiming to meet its renewable purchase obligations. The project was proposed to be located in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh. The final tariff was discovered through competitive bidding and an e-reverse auction conducted on December 27, 2024. Purvah Green Power Pvt Ltd, a subsidiary of CESC, emerged as the successful bidder for the entire 300 MW capacity. CESC did not respond to requests for comments till the time of filing of this report. The Commission noted that despite being aware from a previous case (Petition No. 365/AT/2024) that approval for deviations in inter-state transmission system (ISTS)-connected projects must be obtained from the central government, CESC proceeded with approvals from the West Bengal government. The Commission also observed that CESC had misled the state government by not disclosing the ISTS nature of the project and continued the tender process despite being aware of the requirement to approach the Centre. 'The Commission had condoned this requirement once as an exception, but cannot make the exception a rule,' the order said, referring to a previous instance where similar deviations were allowed in view of exigencies. 'Acceptance of the petitioner's prayers in the instant petition would not be in consonance with the principles as contained in Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003,' it added. CESC defended the higher-than-average tariff by citing two key advantages in the winning bid. First, the project promised a higher Capacity Utilisation Factor (CUF) of 50 per cent, well above the usual 30 per cent for comparable hybrid projects. Additionally, the bidder committed to completing the project within 20 months, shorter than the standard 24-month timeline, which CESC claimed could result in potential savings of Rs 0.02 per kWh. The Commission further pointed out that awarding the entire 300 MW capacity to a related party. 'Another interesting point to note is that in response to the RfS in Petition 365/AT/2024 as well as the present petition, the bidders participating in the bids are precisely the same, and the winning bidder, being a wholly owned subsidiary of the petitioner, is also the same. While this could be a coincidence, it raises a question mark on transparency,' the order noted. The Commission also rejected CESC's justification of the higher tariff on the grounds of higher capacity utilisation and project timelines, noting that the company's comparison of the discovered tariff with short-term prices in the Green Day-Ahead Market (G-DAM) was misplaced. CERC clarified that such comparisons are not valid under the guidelines, which require benchmarking against tariffs discovered through long-term competitive bidding. The July 9 order advised CESC to go for re-bidding strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Electricity Act. PTI BSM NN This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Time of India
5 days ago
- Time of India
CERC rejects CESC's 300 MW hybrid power tariff bid over procedural lapses
The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has rejected a petition by CESC Ltd seeking approval for the adoption of tariff for the long-term procurement of 300 MW power from grid-connected wind-solar hybrid projects, citing non-compliance with competitive bidding guidelines. The power utility had failed to obtain prior approval for deviations in the bidding process from the appropriate authority, which in this case should have been the Centre and not the West Bengal government, the CERC said in its report. CESC sought to adopt a tariff of Rs 3.81 per kWh for the hybrid power procurement. "We reject the adoption of the tariff so discovered, as the petitioner has not complied with the bidding guidelines under Section 63 of the Electricity Act. The petitioner may go for re-bidding, if so advised, strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Act," the CERC said in the order. CESC had floated the tender on November 8, 2024, for procuring 150 MW wind-solar hybrid power with a greenshoe option for an additional 150 MW, aiming to meet its renewable purchase obligations . The project was proposed to be located in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh. The final tariff was discovered through competitive bidding and an e-reverse auction conducted on December 27, 2024. Purvah Green Power Pvt Ltd, a subsidiary of CESC, emerged as the successful bidder for the entire 300 MW capacity. CESC did not respond to requests for comments till the time of filing of this report. The Commission noted that despite being aware from a previous case (Petition No. 365/AT/2024) that approval for deviations in inter-state transmission system (ISTS)-connected projects must be obtained from the central government, CESC proceeded with approvals from the West Bengal government. The Commission also observed that CESC had misled the state government by not disclosing the ISTS nature of the project and continued the tender process despite being aware of the requirement to approach the Centre. "The Commission had condoned this requirement once as an exception, but cannot make the exception a rule," the order said, referring to a previous instance where similar deviations were allowed in view of exigencies. "Acceptance of the petitioner's prayers in the instant petition would not be in consonance with the principles as contained in Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003," it added. CESC defended the higher-than-average tariff by citing two key advantages in the winning bid. First, the project promised a higher Capacity Utilisation Factor (CUF) of 50 per cent, well above the usual 30 per cent for comparable hybrid projects. Additionally, the bidder committed to completing the project within 20 months, shorter than the standard 24-month timeline, which CESC claimed could result in potential savings of Rs 0.02 per kWh. The Commission further pointed out that awarding the entire 300 MW capacity to a related party. "Another interesting point to note is that in response to the RfS in Petition 365/AT/2024 as well as the present petition, the bidders participating in the bids are precisely the same, and the winning bidder, being a wholly owned subsidiary of the petitioner, is also the same. While this could be a coincidence, it raises a question mark on transparency," the order noted. The Commission also rejected CESC's justification of the higher tariff on the grounds of higher capacity utilisation and project timelines, noting that the company's comparison of the discovered tariff with short-term prices in the Green Day-Ahead Market (G-DAM) was misplaced. CERC clarified that such comparisons are not valid under the guidelines, which require benchmarking against tariffs discovered through long-term competitive bidding. The July 9 order advised CESC to go for re-bidding strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Electricity Act.
