The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) has directed NTPC to pay intra-state transmission charges to Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam (HVPNL) for evacuating power from a 5 MW solar project at its Faridabad gas power station in Haryana.

NTPC had declined to pay these charges, arguing that the transmission corridor used to evacuate power from the solar project constituted an interstate transmission system and that it did not utilize the state transmission network.

Background

HVPNL filed an appeal with APTEL on December 14, 2016, against the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) order, which held that NTPC was not entitled to pay intra-state transmission charges because ISTS lines were used to evacuate power from its 5 MW solar project.

The solar project was commissioned on March 31, 2014.

On June 17, 2014, HVPNL demanded monthly transmission charges and a late-payment surcharge from NTPC for using the state transmission network. At this time, the transmission charges were ₹238,000 (~$2,587.55). It also raised monthly invoices for transmission and state load dispatch center (SLDC) charges. The SLDC charges at this time were ₹25,000 (~$271.8).

NTPC declined to pay these charges, arguing that the transmission corridor used to evacuate power from the solar project constituted an ISTS, a central transmission network, and that the project did not utilize state transmission. Therefore, HVPNL was not entitled to raise invoices, as it could only do so for power evacuation through intra-state assets.

NTPC filed a petition with CERC, which held that the solar project was connected to the transmission systems of the Central Transmission Utility of India and the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB), which are ISTS lines. Therefore, HVPNL was not entitled to collect intra-state transmission charges from NTPC.

HVPNL filed an appeal with APTEL on December 14, 2016, against the CERC order.

It contended that the solar project’s power evacuation included multiple components of Haryana’s state transmission network. NTPC’s claim that only central transmission lines were used was incorrect.

It submitted that CERC’s determination that the Faridabad–Samaypur and Faridabad–Palla transmission lines passed through substations belonging to BBMB, a central authority, was incorrect.

HVPNL requested that NTPC pay the unpaid transmission and SLDC charges, with interest calculated from April 1, 2014.

In its arguments, NTPC maintained that the Faridabad–Samaypur and Faridabad–Palla lines were owned by the Powergrid Corporation of India and formed part of the ISTS network, not the intra-state transmission system.

Tribunal’s Analysis

The Tribunal observed that HVPNL’s intra-state transmission network was used by NTPC to evacuate the solar power.

It held that CERC’s order stating that the transmission lines passed through BBMB-owned assets was incorrect and set it aside. It observed that although the Faridabad–Samaypur and Faridabad–Palla lines qualified as ISTS, they are still treated as state transmission lines for cost recovery, as Haryana bears their charges outside the point of connectivity.

This meant that the 5 MW solar project’s power was evacuated through Haryana’s transmission assets as well, and not only through the central transmission networks.

Last month, APTEL dismissed an appeal filed by solar prosumers challenging the Kerala State Electricity Regulatory Commission’s order on the levy of fixed charges.

Subscribe to Mercom’s real-time Regulatory Updates to ensure you don’t miss any critical updates from the renewable industry.