The present petition has been filed for approval of transmission charges for 400 kV Nathpa-Jhakri Transmission System in Northern Region for the period 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2004, based on the terms and conditions for determination of tariff contained in the Commission's notification dated 26.3.2001, hereinafter referred to as “the notification dated 26.3.2001”.

2. The Central Government in Ministry of Power accorded its approval for Nathpa-Jhakri Transmission System for evacuation of power generated from 6 × 250 MW Nathpa-Jhakri Hydroelectric Project in Northern Region vide letter dated 5.4.1989 at an estimated cost of Rs. 88995.00 lakh including IDC of Rs. 9559.00 lakh, based on 1st quarter 1989 price level. However, subsequently there were changes made in the scope and structure of the Transmission System, which included those relating to transmission line configuration, relocation of transformers and sub-stations and the route of transmission lines. Accordingly, Ministry of Power vide its letter dated 25.5.2001, accorded fresh administrative approval and expenditure sanction to the Revised Cost Estimate of Rs. 156163.00 lakh (including IDC of Rs. 35358.00 lakh) for the Transmission System, with the revised scope of work as under:

Transmission Lines

(i) 400 kV D/C Nathpa-Jhakri - Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line,

(ii) 400 kV D/C Nathpa-Jhakri - Nalagarh-Hissar transmission line,

(iii) 400 kV D/C Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line,

(iv) 400 kV S/C Hissar-Jaipur transmission line,

(v) 220 kV D/C Jallandhar-Dasuya transmission line, and

(vi) LILO of 400 kV D/C Chamera-Moga transmission line at Jallandhar.

Sub-stations

(i) 400/220 kV sub-station at Abdullapur (new) (2×315 MVA ICT, 1×50 MVAR Bus Reactor and 2×50 MVAR Bus Reactor with associated bays),

(ii) 400/220 kV sub-station at Nalagarh (new) (2×315 MVA ICT, 1×50 MVAR Bus Reactor and 2×50 MVAR Bus Reactor with associated bays),

(iii) 400/220 kV sub-station at Jallandhar (new) (2×315 MVA ICT with associated bays),

(iv) Extension of 400/220 kV sub-station at Bawana and Malerkotla (1×315 MVA ICT, and 2×50 MVAR Bus Reactor with associated bays),

(v) Extension of 400/220 kV sub-station at Jaipur (2×315 MVA ICT, and 1×50 MVAR Line Reactor with associated bays),

(vi) Extension of 400 kV sub-station at Hissar (3×50 MVAR Line Reactor with associated bays),

(vii) Extension of sub-station at Malerkotla by (1×315 MVA ICT with associated bays), and

(viii) Extension of 220 kV sub-station at Dasuya.

3. The date of commercial operation of the components of the Transmission System forming the subject matter of the present petition, their apportioned approved cost and the completion cost as furnished by the petitioner are given hereunder.

(Rs. in lakh)

Details of the Assets Date of commercial operation Apportioned Approved cost (Rs. in lakh) Estimated completion cost (Rs. in lakh) ICT at Malerkotla 1.4.1996 1291 918.23 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 1.8.1997 11338 11175.00 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana 1.9.1997 9678 5957.78 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 1.2.1998 1394.66 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station 1.1.2000 21507 20201.02 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 1.1.2000 33023 28627.99 ICT-I at Nalagarh 1.9.2000 1338 1467.04 ICT-II at Nalagarh 1.3.2000 1338 1268.98 ICT-II at Jalandhar 1.1.2001 1304 1217.86 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 1.4.2000 827 589.27 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 1.10.2000 2477 2272.43 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 1.12.2000 1207 184.74 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 1.3.2001 794.90 220 kVD/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 1.1.2001 2360 1528.17 LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 1.1.2001 1808 1206.31 400/220 kV ICT-I and associated bays at Jalandhar 1.1.2001 5680 5437.20 Total 95176 84241.58

4. The petitioner has claimed asset-wise transmission charges as under:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Year Interest on Loan Interest on Working Capital Depreciation Advance against Depreciation Return on Equity O & M Expenses Total ICT at Malerkotla 2001-2002 22.11 4.52 33.06 0 78.08 14.62 152.39 2002-2003 16.63 4.52 33.06 0 78.08 15.5 147.79 2003-2004 11.15 4.54 33.06 0 78.08 16.43 143.26 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-2002 1197 67.54 308.42 389.5 448 187 2597.50 2002-2003 997.68 59.68 308.42 121.82 448 197.06 2132.70 2003-2004 925.73 62.27 308.42 253.99 448 209.99 2208.40 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-2002 882.41 45.73 208.64 329.76 142.66 156.70 1765.90 2002-2003 747.02 41.52 208.64 204.28 142.66 165.28 1509.40 2003-2004 677.08 43.11 208.64 305.11 142.66 175.98 1552.58 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur substation and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 2001-2002 5580.57 277.11 1333.66 2183.03 1132.12 605.73 11112.22 2002-2003 5024.97 248.16 1337.82 972.94 1162.35 638.60 9384.84 2003-2004 4582.38 268.78 1340.48 2176.22 1182.93 680.25 10231.04 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-2002 114.19 6.21 53.21 0.00 37.54 14.62 225.77 2002-2003 110.20 6.27 53.21 0.00 37.54 15.50 222.72 2003-2004 109.29 6.39 53.21 0.00 37.54 16.43 222.86 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-2002 107.69 3.97 47.39 0.00 26.18 14.62 199.85 2002-2003 102.50 3.97 47.39 0.00 26.18 15.50 195.54 2003-2004 101.25 4.07 47.39 0.00 26.18 16.43 195.32 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-2002 130.78 7.05 44.34 0.00 56.28 29.24 267.69 2002-2003 127.71 8.07 47.95 0.00 88.34 31.00 303.07 2003-2004 117.16 8.87 48.14 39.86 90.02 32.86 336.91 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-2002 45.06 2.54 22.19 0.00 13.27 14.62 97.68 2002-2003 43.61 2.58 22.19 0.00 13.27 15.50 97.15 2003-2004 42.06 2.62 22.19 0.00 13.27 16.43 96.57 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-2002 228.14 9.16 83.23 0.00 69.66 58.48 448.67 2002-2003 228.14 9.43 84.76 0.00 76.47 62.00 460.80 2003-2004 222.20 10.82 84.78 71.80 76.56 65.72 531.88 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I At Jaipur 2001-2002 18.58 1.72 7.48 0.00 6.46 29.24 63.48 2002-2003 18.58 1.83 7.79 0.00 7.85 31.00 67.05 2003-2004 18.09 1.99 7.79 4.96 7.85 32.86 73.54 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-2002 85.61 4.38 29.06 0.00 17.14 29.24 165.43 2002-2003 85.61 4.55 29.50 0.00 19.09 31.00 169.75 2003-2004 80.00 5.12 29.50 28.84 19.09 32.86 195.41 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-2002 130.66 9.59 42.23 0 51.82 115.18 349.48 2002-2003 130.67 9.91 42.34 0 52.47 121.69 357.08 2003-2004 123.52 11.15 42.34 53.16 52.47 129.39 412.03 400/220 kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 2001-2002 508.49 26.71 215.42 0.00 225.17 93.65 1069.44 2002-2003 508.51 27.35 215.42 0.00 225.17 99.24 1075.69 2003-2004 490.18 28.42 215.42 38.25 225.17 105.24 1102.68

5. The details furnished by the petitioner in support of its claim for interest on working capital are summarised as under:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Year Maintenance spares O&M expenses Receivables Total Rate of interest Interest ICT at Malerkotla 2001-2002 12.66 1.22 25.40 39.28 11.5% 4.52 2002-2003 13.42 1.29 24.63 39.34 4.52 2003-2004 14.22 1.37 23.88 39.47 4.54 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-2002 138.8 15.58 432.91 587.29 11.5% 67.54 2002-2003 147.13 16.42 355.44 518.99 59.68 2003-2004 155.95 17.5 368.07 541.52 62.28 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana upto Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-2002 90.3 13.06 294.32 397.68 11.5% 45.733 2002-2003 95.72 13.77 251.57 361.06 41.522 2003-2004 101.46 14.67 258.76 374.89 43.112 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 2001-2002 507.11 50.48 1852 2409.63 11.5% 277.11 2002-2003 540.53 53.22 1564.14 2157.89 248.16 2003-2004 575.35 56.69 1705.17 2337.21 268.78 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-2002 15.18 1.22 37.63 54.03 11.5% 6.21 2002-2003 16.09 1.29 37.12 54.50 6.27 2003-2004 17.06 1.37 37.14 55.57 6.39 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-2002 0.00 1.22 33.31 34.53 11.5% 3.97 2002-2003 0.61 1.29 32.59 34.49 3.97 2003-2004 1.47 1.37 32.55 35.39 4.07 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-2002 14.25 2.44 44.62 61.31 11.5% 7.05 2002-2003 17.11 2.58 50.51 70.20 8.07 2003-2004 18.24 2.74 56.15 77.13 8.87 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-2002 4.58 1.22 16.28 22.08 11.5% 2.54 2002-2003 4.96 1.29 16.19 22.44 2.58 2003-2004 5.35 1.37 16.10 22.82 2.62 ICT-I at Jaipur with 2 Nos. LILO and associated bays 2001-2002 0.00 4.87 74.78 79.65 11.5% 9.16 2002-2003 0.00 5.17 76.80 81.97 9.43 2003-2004 0.00 5.48 88.65 94.13 10.82 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 2001-2002 1.97 2.44 10.58 14.99 11.5% 1.72 2002-2003 2.17 2.58 11.17 15.92 1.83 2003-2004 2.30 2.74 12.26 17.30 1.99 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-2002 8.11 2.44 27.57 38.12 11.5% 4.38 2002-2003 8.72 2.58 28.29 39.59 4.55 2003-2004 9.24 2.74 32.57 44.55 5.12 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-2002 15.55 9.60 58.25 83.40 11.5% 9.59 2002-2003 16.52 10.14 59.51 86.17 9.91 2003-2004 17.51 10.78 68.67 96.96 11.15 400/220kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 2001-2002 46.24 7.80 178.24 232.28 11.5% 26.71 2002-2003 50.28 8.27 179.28 237.83 27.35 2003-2004 54.57 8.77 183.78 247.12 28.42

6. In addition, the petitioner has prayed for approval of other charges like Foreign Exchange Rate Variation, Income Tax, incentive, Development Surcharge, late payment surcharge, other statutory taxes, levies, cess, filing fee, etc in terms of the notification dated 26.3.2001

CAPITAL COST

7. As laid down in the notification dated 26.3.2001, the project cost, which includes capitalised initial spares for the first 5 years of operation, as approved by CEA or an appropriate independent agency, other than Board of Directors of the transmission utility, as the case may be, shall be the basis for computation of tariff. The notification dated 26.3.2001 further provides that the actual capital expenditure incurred on completion of the project shall be the criterion for the fixation of tariff. Where the actual expenditure exceeds the approved project cost the excesses as approved by the CEA or an appropriate independent agency, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be the actual capital expenditure for the purpose of determining the tariff, provided that excess expenditure is not attributable to the ‘Transmission Utility’ or its suppliers or contractors and provided further that where a transmission services agreement entered into between the Transmission Utility and the beneficiary provides a ceiling on capital expenditure, the capital expenditure shall not exceed such ceiling.

8. The tariff for these assets for the period ending 31.3.2001 was approved by the Commission in petitions No. 39/2000, 69/2000, 87/2000, 3/2001 and 51/2001. For the purpose of present petition, the capital cost as admitted by the Commission in its earlier orders in these petitions has been adopted as the base for computation of tariff. The capital cost considered for tariff purposes is given hereunder:

(Rs. in lakh)

Details of the Assets Capital Cost ICT at Malerkotla 918.23 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 11175.00 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana 5957.78 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 1394.66 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station 20201.02 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar line with associated bays 28627.99 ICT-I at Nalagarh 1467.04 ICT-II at Nalagarh 1268.98 ICT-II at Jalandhar 1217.86 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 589.27 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2272.43 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 184.74 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 794.90 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 1528.17 LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 1206.31 400/220 kV ICT-I and associated bays at Jalandhar 5437.20 Total 84241.58

ADDITIONAL CAPITALISATION

9. The notification dated 26.3.2001 provides that tariff revisions during the tariff period on account of capital expenditure within the approved project cost incurred during the tariff period may be entertained by the Commission only if such expenditure exceeds 20% of the approved cost. In all cases, where such expenditure is less than 20%, tariff revision shall be considered in the next tariff period.

10. The petitioner has claimed additional capital expenditure on works for the period after 1.4.2001 in the petition as shown below:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2002 Balance anticipated capital expenditure shown to be incurred after 31.3.2002 TOTAL Apportioned approved capital cost % age of the approved cost 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station 27.00 0.00 27.00 21507 0.13% 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 93.66 257.26 350.92 33023 1.06% ICT-II at Jalandhar 379.78 20.99 400.77 1304 30.73% ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 83.90 1.18 85.08 2477 4.13% 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 17.32 0.00 17.32 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 24.43 0.00 24.43 1207 2.02% 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 8.13 0.00 8.13 2360 0.34%

11. The capital expenditure during the tariff period does not exceed 20% of the approved capital cost, except in the case of ICT-II at Jalandhar. However, on overall basis, the additional capitalisation does not exceed 20% of the approved capital cost. Accordingly, the question of considering additional capitalisation on works for the purpose of tariff at this stage in respect of other assets does not arise.

EXTRA RUPEE LIABILITY

12. The notification dated 26.3.2001 provides that

(a) Extra rupee liability towards interest payment and loan repayment actually incurred, in the relevant year shall be admissible; provided it directly arises out of foreign exchange rate variation and is not attributable to the Utility or its suppliers or contractors. Every utility shall follow the method as per the Accounting Standard-11 (Eleven) as issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India to calculate the impact of exchange rate variation on loan repayment.

(b) Any foreign exchange rate variation to the extent of the dividend paid out on the permissible equity contributed in foreign currency, subject to the ceiling of permissible return shall be admissible. This, as and when paid, may be spread over the twelve-month period in arrears.

13. The Commission has already considered the matter. In view of the fact that the method up to 31.3.2001 to allow FERV was on repayment of the loan and payment of interest on actual basis, it has been decided that FERV to be capitalised for adding in the gross block as on 1.4.2001 would be arrived in the following manner:

Foreign Loan outstanding as on 31.03.2001 × (Exchange Rate as on 31.03.2001 - Exchange Rate as on DOCO/01.04.1992 as given in the petition).

14. FERV amount calculated as above has been added to the loan and equity as on 1.4.2001 in the debt-equity ratio in which the tariff was allowed by the Commission by its earlier orders.

15. The capital expenditure considered in the calculations for tariff for different elements of the transmission system involving foreign currency loan is under:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Capital expenditure up to 31.3.2001 FERV up to 31.3.2001 Capital Expenditure up to 31.3.2001 Additional Capital Expenditure Capital Expenditure 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station 20201.02 0.00 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 28627.99 386.76 49215.77 0.00 49215.77 ICT-I at Nalagarh 1467.04 11.14 1478.18 0.00 1478.18 ICT-II at Nalagarh 1268.98 47.34 1316.32 0.00 1316.32 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 589.27 27.15 616.42 0.00 616.42 220kVD/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 1528.17 (−) 0.75 1527.42 0.00 1527.42 LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 1206.31 (−) 0.00 400/220kV ICT-I and associated bays at Jalandhar 5437.20 6.08 6637.43 0.00 6637.43

16. The petitioner shall furnish a certificate within four weeks of this order that there has been No. drawl of the foreign loan after the date of commercial operation of the respective transmission element tariff for which is claimed in the petition. If petitioner fails to submit the certificate within stipulated time frame, No. amount on account of FERV would be allowed as “pass through” in tariff of concerned line.

SOURCES OF FINANCING. DEBT - EQUITY RATIO

17. As per clause 4.3 of the notification dated 26.3.2001, capital expenditure of the transmission system shall be financed as per approved financial package set out in the techno-economic clearance of CEA or as approved by an appropriate independent agency, as the case may be.

18. The petitioner has claimed tariff by taking debt and equity in the same ratio of as was considered earlier by the Commission while notifying tariff for the period ending 31.3.2001 It is pointed out on behalf of the respondents that taking debt and equity as claimed by the petitioner for ICT at Malerkotla will result into higher return on equity (ROE). The respondents have submitted that equity of 20% or 30% should be considered for the purpose of fixation of tariff. The debt-equity ratio as considered by the Commission earlier has been maintained for determination of tariff in the present petition. It is pointed out that except in the case of ICT at Malerkotla, actual equity considered for tariff determination is less than 38%. The debt-equity ratio considered for different assets is indicated below:

Name of the asset Debt-Equity ratio as per previous tariff setting Debt-Equity ratio as considered in current tariff setting ICT at Malerkotla 50:50 50:50 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 74.94:25.06 74.94:25.06 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana 89.19:10.81 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 82.23:17.77 87.87:12.13 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station 81.41:18.59 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 89.29:10.71 86.03:13.97 CIT-I at Nalagarh 84.40:15.60 84.40:15.60 ICT-II at Nalagarh 88.97:11.03 88.97:11.03 ICT-II at Jalandhar 86.71:13.29 86.71:13.29 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 88.26:11.74 88.26:11.74 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 82.69:17.31 82.69:17.31 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 82.82:17.18 82.82:17.18 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 88.06:11.94 88.06:11.94 220kVD/C Jalandhar-Dasuya Tr. Line alongwith associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 79.05:20.95 79.05:20.95 LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 71.87:28.13 400/220kV ICT-I and associated bays at Jalandhar 80.30:19.70 78.77:21.23

INTEREST ON LOAN

19. As provided in the notification dated 26.3.2001, interest on loan capital is to be computed on the outstanding loans, duly taking into account the schedule of repayment, as per financial package approved by CEA or any independent agency.

20. In the calculation, the interest on notional loan for ICT at Malerkotla has been worked out as detailed below:

(i) Closing balance of the notional loan as on 31.03.2001 is taken as opening balance of the loan as on 1.4.2001

(ii) Repayment of the loan during the year has been worked out in accordance with the following formula or actual repayment during the year as claimed by the petitioner, whichever is higher:

Actual repayment during the year × normative net loan at the beginning of the year/actual net loan at the beginning of the year.

(iii) On the basis of actual rate of interest on actual average loan, the weighted rate of interest on loan is worked out and the same is applied on the notional average loan during the year to arrive at the interest on loan.

21. In case of other assets, in the calculation, the interest on loan has been worked as detailed below:

(i) Gross amount of loan, repayment of loan up to 31.3.2001 and net outstanding loan as on 31.3.2001 as considered by the Commission in its earlier orders has been considered.

(ii) The repayment for the year 2001-2002 to 2003-2004 and rate of interest etc. of the loan have been worked out from the loan details submitted by the petitioner vide affidavits dated 5.2.2003, 26.3.2003 and 30.4.2003

(iii) Notional loan arising out of FERV has been worked out as per para 18 above.

(iv) Repayment of the loan during the year has been worked out in accordance with the following formula or actual repayment during the year as claimed by the petitioner, whichever is higher:

Actual repayment during the year × normative net loan at the beginning of the year/actual net loan at the beginning of the year.

(v) Rate of interest etc. of the above notional loan has been taken of the respective foreign loan from the loan details submitted by the petitioner vide affidavits dated 5.2.2003, 26.3.2003 and 30.4.2003

22. Based on above, the year-wise details of interest worked out are as hereunder:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Year Gross Loan-Opening Cumulative Repayment up to previous year Net Loan Opening Repayment during the year Net Loan Closing Interest ICT at Malerkotla 2001-2002 459.12 280.37 178.75 33.39 145.36 27.18 2002-2003 459.12 313.76 145.36 24.22 121.13 22.65 2003-2004 459.12 337.98 121.13 24.22 96.91 18.53 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-2002 8374.58 678.93 7695.65 1816.16 5879.49 1094.46 2002-2003 8374.58 2495.08 5879.49 616.06 5263.43 871.26 2003-2004 8374.58 3111.14 5263.43 748.22 4515.21 769.78 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana upto Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-2002 6460.84 645.99 5814.85 1332.66 4482.19 838.99 2002-2003 6460.84 1978.65 4482.19 412.92 4069.27 676.11 2003-2004 6460.84 2391.57 4069.27 513.75 3555.51 606.27 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar line with associated bays 2001-2002 42340.30 83.08 42257.22 4792.42 37464.80 5523.59 2002-2003 42340.30 4875.50 37464.80 2310.76 35154.04 4948.55 2003-2004 42340.30 7186.25 35154.04 3677.06 31476.99 4507.95 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-2002 1247.56 0.00 1247.56 36.00 1211.56 113.41 2002-2003 1247.56 36.00 1211.56 1.20 1210.36 109.63 2003-2004 1247.56 37.20 1210.36 34.27 1176.09 107.78 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-2002 1171.19 0.49 1170.70 45.51 1125.19 105.04 2002-2003 1171.19 46.00 1125.19 1.50 1123.69 100.22 2003-2004 1171.19 47.50 1123.69 43.44 1080.25 99.01 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-2002 1056.00 0.00 1056.00 0.00 1056.00 130.74 2002-2003 1056.00 0.00 1056.00 0.00 1056.00 127.71 2003-2004 1056.00 0.00 1056.00 165.43 890.57 117.27 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-2002 544.06 0.00 544.06 13.00 531.06 43.75 2002-2003 544.06 13.00 531.06 7.61 523.45 42.09 2003-2004 544.06 20.61 523.45 12.19 511.26 40.63 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-2002 1879.00 0.00 1879.00 0.00 1879.00 228.14 2002-2003 1879.00 0.00 1879.00 0.00 1879.00 228.14 2003-2004 1879.00 0.00 1879.00 177.90 1701.10 221.81 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 2001-2002 153.00 0.00 153.00 0.00 153.00 18.58 2002-2003 153.00 0.00 153.00 0.00 153.00 18.58 2003-2004 153.00 0.00 153.00 14.50 138.50 18.06 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-2002 700.00 0.00 700.00 0.00 700.00 85.61 2002-2003 700.00 0.00 700.00 0.00 700.00 85.61 2003-2004 700.00 0.00 700.00 75.13 624.87 79.81 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line alongwith associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-2002 1207.41 0.00 1207.41 0.00 1207.41 130.71 2002-2003 1207.41 0.00 1207.41 0.00 1207.41 130.71 2003-2004 1207.41 0.00 1207.41 95.50 1111.91 123.32 400/220 kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 2001-2002 5228.21 0.00 5228.21 0.00 5228.21 508.85 2002-2003 5228.21 0.00 5228.21 0.00 5228.21 508.85 2003-2004 5228.21 0.00 5228.21 277.87 4950.34 489.56

23. The difference between the interest on loan claimed by the petitioner and that allowed in this order is generally attributable to the following reasons:

(i) Interest on foreign currency loan has been worked in foreign currency, which has been multiplied with exchange rate as on 31.3.2001 in the petition. However, in the calculations considered by us, interest has been worked out in foreign currency and that has been multiplied with exchange rate applicable on the date of commercial operation.

(ii) The petitioner has claimed interest by division of FERV into notional loan and equity in the ratio of 50:50 against the actual debt-equity ratio considered in the calculations by the Commission.

(iii) Repayment-Depreciation on FERV in the petition against in proportion to repayment of foreign currency loan in the calculations by the Commission.

(iv) Weighted average rate of interest of total outstanding loans as on 1.4.2001 in the petition against rate of interest on foreign currency loan in the calculation

(v) In case of ICT at Malerkotla, (a) depreciation has been taken as repayment during the year by the petitioner against the repayment worked out as per the methodology given at para 20 above. (b) Weighted average rate of interest of 16.59% considered in the petition against 16.7738% for 2001-2002 and 17.00% for the years 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 considered by us.

(vi) In case of assets at 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line and 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt-I) including line bay and ICT at Bawana (a) difference in outstanding amount and repayment amount of GoI loan. As break up calculations have not been made available, the details as per affidavit dated 26.3.2003 have been considered in the calculations, and (b) working out interest based on month-basis by the petitioner against interest worked out on days basis in the calculations.

(vii) Repayment of Corporation loan not considered in the petition while the same has been considered in our calculations based on affidavits dated 5.2.2003 and 26.3.2003

24. It is observed that in case of Grid Bond-I loan the details furnished in the earlier petitions and the present petition are at variance. The petitioner had claimed interest on loan in the earlier petitions by indicating repayment of Grid Bond-I loan during March 2002 and accordingly No. repayment was considered while approving tariff for the period ending 31.3.2001 However, in the present petition, part repayment of loan has been shown prior to 31.3.2001 The outstanding amount shown as on 31.3.2001 indicated in present petition is in agreement with the corresponding outstanding amount shown in loan allocation details submitted by the petitioner in its affidavits dated 5.2.2003, 26.3.2003 and 30.4.2003 filed in the present proceedings. The position gets clarified from the comparative details given in the table below:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the Element As per earlier petitions As per loan allocation details As per present petition Rate of Interest 13.92% 9% 9% Opening balance as on the date of commercial operation Repayment up to 31.3.2001 Closing balance as on 31.3.2001 Gross loan allocated Repayment up to 31.3.2001 Closing balance as on 31.3.2001 Opening balance Repaym ent up to 31.3.2001 Closing balance as on 31.3.2001 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 48.00 0.00 48.00 24.70 0.00 24.70 48.00 23.30 24.70 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana 31.00 0.00 31.00 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 6.00 0.00 6.00 19.04 0.00 19.04 37.00 17.96 19.04 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur substation, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station 58.00 0.00 58.00 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar line with associated bays 95.00 0.00 95.00 78.72 0.00 78.72 153.00 74.28 78.72 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.51 0.00 0.51 1.00 0.49 0.51

25. Interest on loan has been allowed by considering the details of repayment of loan submitted in present petition. Further, in the calculation, for working out the interest on loan, the repayment for the years 2001-2002 to 2003-2004 and rate of interest etc. of the above loan have been worked out from the loan details submitted by the petitioner in its affidavits dated 5.2.2003, 26.3.2003 and 30.4.2003

26. IOB-II, SBI-II, SBI-I, Corp Bank, PNB and BOI FC loans carry floating rate of interest and the interest rates as submitted by the petitioner vide affidavits dated 5.2.2003, 26.3.2003 and 30.4.2003 stated to be prevailing as on 1.4.2001 have been taken in the calculation. Any change/resetting of the interest rate of the above loans during the tariff period covered in this petition would require settlement of the same mutually between the parties. In case the parties are unable to settle the issue, any one of them is at liberty to approach the Commission for an appropriate decision.

DEPRECIATION

27. With regard to depreciation, Clause 4(b) of the notification dated 26.3.2001 provides:

(i) The value base for the purpose of depreciation shall be the historical cost of the asset. Depreciation shall be calculated annually as per straight-line method at the rate of depreciation as prescribed in the Schedule attached to the notification. But the total depreciation during the life of the project shall not exceed 90% of the approved Original Cost. The approved original cost shall include additional capitalisation on account of foreign exchange rate variation also.

(ii) On repayment of entire loan, the remaining depreciable value shall be spread over the balance useful life of the asset.

(iii) Depreciation shall be chargeable from the first year of operation. In case of operation of the asset for part of the year, depreciation shall be charged on pro-rata basis.

(iv) Depreciation against assets relating to environmental protection shall be allowed on case-to-case basis at the time of fixation of tariff subject to the condition that the environmental standards as prescribed have been complied with during the previous tariff period.

28. The petitioner has claimed the depreciation on the capital expenditure in accordance with above principles.

29. In the calculation, the depreciation has been worked out on the capital cost as per para 15 above and the rates as prescribed in the notification dated 26.3.2001 for different heads of capital cost. For working out cumulative depreciation the depreciation as per last tariff setting has been considered.

30. The calculations in support of depreciation allowed are appended hereinbelow:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Year Rate of Depreciation Depreciable Value Remaining Depreciable Value Depreciation ICT at Malerkotla 2001-02 3.60% 826.41 546.04 33.06 2002-03 512.65 33.06 2003-04 479.59 33.06 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-02 2.76% 10057.50 7715.26 308.42 2002-03 7017.38 308.42 2003-04 6401.32 308.42 400 kV Bawana - Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana upto Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-02 2.84% 6617.20 5097.83 208.65 2002-03 4559.42 208.65 2003-04 4146.50 208.65 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar line with associated bays 2001-02 2.71% 44294.19 40907.43 1332.03 2002-03 37379.07 1332.03 2003-04 35068.31 1332.03 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-02 3.60% 1330.361 1263.27 53.21 2002-03 1210.06 53.21 2003-04 1156.85 53.21 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-02 3.60% 1184.69 1076.91 47.39 2002-03 1029.52 47.39 2003-04 982.13 47.39 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-02 3.36% 1096.07 1075.01 40.92 2002-03 1034.09 40.92 2003-04 993.17 40.92 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-02 3.60% 554.78 508.58 22.19 2002-03 486.39 22.19 2003-04 464.20 22.19 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 3.60% 2045.19 1956.82 81.72 2002-03 1875.10 81.72 2003-04 1793.38 81.72 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 2001-02 3.88% 166.27 161.41 7.17 2002-03 154.24 7.17 2003-04 147.07 7.17 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 3.60% 715.41 710.23 28.62 2002-03 681.61 28.62 2003-04 652.99 28.62 220kVD/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-02 2.76% 1374.68 1353.19 42.13 2002-03 1311.06 42.13 2003-04 1268.93 42.13 400/220kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 2001-02 3.25% 5973.69 5857.48 215.44 2002-03 5642.04 215.44 2003-04 5426.60 215.44

31. It is observed that there are some differences between depreciation allowed and that claimed. These differences are due to-

(a) Not considering the depreciation on the capital expenditure subsequent to 31.3.2001 in the tariff allowed.

(b) Allocation of FERV to transmission line, sub-station and PLCC (as the case may be) only in the petition against allocation to all the heads of gross block in proportion to their ratio to the total gross block in the tariff being approved.

ADVANCE AGAINST DEPRECIATION

32. In addition to allowable depreciation, the petitioner becomes entitled to Advance Against Depreciation when originally scheduled loan repayment exceeds the depreciation allowable as per schedule to the notification dated 26.3.2001 Advance Against Depreciation is computed in accordance with the following formula:

AAD = Originally scheduled loan repayment amount subject to a ceiling of 1/12th of original loan amount minus depreciation as per schedule.

33. The petitioner has claimed Advance Against Depreciation on the basis of

(i) 1/12th of gross loan worked out from 50% of the gross block as was admitted by the Commission in the order dated 1.11.2002

(ii) Repayment of actual loans during the year, and

(iii) Depreciation as claimed in the petition.

34. For working out Advance Against Depreciation, 1/12th of the notional loan has been considered while repayment of loan as worked out as per para 22 above has been taken as repayment of the loan during the year. The petitioner is entitled to Advance Against Depreciation as calculated below:

Name of the asset Year 1/12th of Gross Loan(s) Scheduled Repayment of Loan(s) Minimum of the two Depreciation during the year Advance Against Depreciation ICT at Malerkotla 2001-02 38.26 33.39 33.39 33.06 0.33 2002-03 38.26 24.22 24.22 33.06 0.00 2003-04 38.26 24.22 24.22 33.06 0.00 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-02 697.88 1816.16 697.88 308.42 389.46 2002-03 697.88 616.06 616.06 308.42 307.64 2003-04 697.88 748.22 697.88 308.42 389.46 400 kV Bawana - Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana upto Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-02 538.40 1332.66 538.40 208.65 329.75 2002-03 538.40 412.92 412.92 208.65 204.27 2003-04 538.40 513.75 513.75 208.65 305.10 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 2001-02 3528.36 4792.42 3528.36 1332.03 2196.33 2002-03 3528.36 2310.76 2310.76 1332.03 978.73 2003-04 3528.36 3677.06 3528.36 1332.03 2196.33 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-02 103.96 36.00 36.00 53.21 0.00 2002-03 103.96 1.20 1.20 53.21 0.00 2003-04 103.96 34.27 34.27 53.21 0.00 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-02 97.60 45.51 45.51 47.39 0.00 2002-03 97.60 1.50 1.50 47.39 0.00 2003-04 97.60 43.44 43.44 47.39 0.00 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-02 88.00 0.00 0.00 40.92 0.00 2002-03 88.00 0.00 0.00 40.92 0.00 2003-04 88.00 165.43 88.00 40.92 47.08 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-02 45.34 13.00 13.00 22.19 0.00 2002-03 45.34 7.61 7.61 22.19 0.00 2003-04 45.34 12.19 12.19 22.19 0.00 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 156.58 0.00 0.00 81.72 0.00 2002-03 156.58 0.00 0.00 81.72 0.00 2003-04 156.58 177.90 156.58 81.72 74.86 2 Nos. LILO bays associated ICT-I at Jaipur 2001-02 12.75 0.00 0.00 7.17 0.00 2002-03 12.75 0.00 0.00 7.17 0.00 2003-04 12.75 14.50 12.75 7.17 5.58 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 58.33 0.00 0.00 28.62 0.00 2002-03 58.33 0.00 0.00 28.62 0.00 2003-04 58.33 75.13 58.33 28.62 29.71 220kVD/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-02 100.62 0.00 0.00 42.13 0.00 2002-03 100.62 0.00 0.00 42.13 0.00 2003-04 100.62 95.50 95.50 42.13 53.37 LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar and 400/220kV ICT-I at Jalandhar 2001-02 435.68 0.00 0.00 215.44 0.00 2002-03 435.68 0.00 0.00 215.44 0.00 2003-04 435.68 277.87 277.87 215.44 62.43

35. The difference in the amount of Advance Against Depreciation claimed and allowed is generally due to the following reasons:

(i) The petitioner has considered division of FERV into notional loan and equity in the ratio of 50:50. However, actual debt-equity ratio has been considered in the calculation.

(ii) Interest on foreign currency loan has been worked in foreign currency and which has been multiplied with exchange rate as on 31.3.2001 in the petition. However, in the calculations considered by us, interest has been worked out in foreign currency and that has been multiplied with exchange rate applicable on the date of commercial operation.

(iii) Repayment of notional loan has not been considered by the petitioner.

(iv) In case of ICT at Malerkotla the difference is due to (a) 1/12th of gross loan worked out from 50% of the gross block claimed in the petition against 50% of NFA as on 1.4.1997 in the calculation (b) repayment during the year of actual loan in the petition against repayment worked out as per the methodology indicated above at para 20 above.

(v) In case of 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line, the difference is due to difference in scheduled repayment amount due to difference in outstanding amount and repayment amount of GoI loan. As break up calculations has not been made available, the details as per affidavit dated 26.3.2003 have been considered in the calculations.

(vi) There is a discrepancy in Corporation Bank loan repayment during 2003-2004. As break up calculations have not been made available, the details as per affidavit dated 26.3.2003 are considered in the calculations.

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES

36. In accordance with the notification dated 26.3.2001, Operation and Maintenance expenses, including expenses on insurance, if any, are to be calculated as under:

i) Where O&M expenses, excluding abnormal O&M expenses, if any, on sub-station (OMS) and line (OML) are separately available for each region, these shall be normalised by dividing them by number of bays and line length respectively. Where data as aforesaid is not available, O&M expenses in the region are to be apportioned to the sub-station and lines on the basis of 30:70 ratio and these are to be normalised as below:

O&M expenses per Unit of the line length in Kms (OMLL) = Expenses for lines (OML)/Average line length in Kms (LL)

O&M expenses for sub-stations (OMBN) = O&M expenses for substations (OMB)/Average number of bays (BN)]

ii) The five years average of the normalised O&M expenses for lines and for bays for the period 1995-1996 to 1999-2000 is to be escalated at 10% per annum for two years (1998-1999 and 1999-2000) to arrive at normative O&M expenses per unit of line length and per bay for 1999-2000.

iii) The normative O&M per unit length and normative O&M per bay for the year 1999-2000 for the region derived in the preceding paragraph is to be escalated @ 6% per annum to obtain normative values of O&M expenses per unit per line length and per bay in the relevant year. These normative values are to be multiplied by line length and number of bays (as the case may be) in a given system in that year to compute permissible O&M expenses for the system.

iv) The escalation factor of 6% per annum is to be used to revise normative base figure of O&M expenses. Any deviation of the escalation factor computed from the actual inflation data that lies within 20% of the notified escalation factor of 6% shall be absorbed by utilities/beneficiaries.

37. The different elements of Operation & Maintenance expenses have been considered in the succeeding paragraphs in the light of provisions of the notification dated 26.3.2001 based on the data available since 1995-1996.

Employee Cost

38. The petitioner has, inter alia, claimed incentive and ex gratia as a part of employee cost. The petitioner was asked to specify the amount of minimum statutory bonus paid to its employees under the Payment of Bonus Act. The petitioner vide its affidavit dated 6.2.2003 has stated that the incentive paid to employees does not include minimum statutory bonus. The petitioner has further stated that the ex gratia was being paid in lieu of bonus, as is customary and a normal practice followed in private and public sectors. The petitioner has also furnished a write-up on Incentive scheme in support of the claim. It has been clarified on behalf of the petitioner that even the top management of the petitioner company is paid incentive and ex gratia included as a part of employee cost in O&M expenses claimed. The payment of incentive other than the statutory minimum bonus is at the discretion of the petitioner company and should be borne out of its profits or incentive earned from the respondents for higher availability of the Transmission System. In view of the above, the incentive and ex gratia payments made by the petitioner to its employees have been kept out of consideration for calculation of employee cost.

39. The petitioner was directed to furnish details of the arrears on account of pay and allowances for the period prior to 1995-1996, but paid between 1995-1996 to 1999-2000. The petitioner has submitted the details of such arrears, amounting to Rs. 14.99 lakh and Rs. 19.33 lakh paid for Northern Region during 1995-1996 and 1996-1997. Similarly, the arrears for the previous years included in the employee cost for 1995-1996 and 1996-1997 for Corporate Office were stated to be Rs. 9.61 lakh and Rs. 35.60 lakh. The petitioner has also submitted that the arrears on account of pay revision from 01.01.97 to 31.03.2000 have been paid during the years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 also. The amounts of these arrears as claimed by the petitioner are Rs. 362.56 lakh and Rs. 263.86 lakh for Northern Region and Rs. 297.13 lakh and Rs. 109.95 lakh for the Corporate Office for the years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 respectively. The petitioner has prayed that the arrears on account of pay and allowances for the period prior to 1995-96 should be deducted while those pertaining to the period from 1995-1996 to 1999-2000 but paid subsequent to 1999-2000 should be added to O&M charges. The petitioner has argued that since these pay arrears pertain to the period being considered for fixation of normative O&M, the arrears should be considered while fixing the normative O&M. We find the submission of the petitioner to be logical and have considered the submission in the calculation of employee cost.

Repair & Maintenance Expenses

40. The petitioner has submitted that the increase of 152.77% in Repair & Maintenance expenses in 1997-1998 (Rs. 1121.85 lakh) over the previous year (Rs. 443.82 lakh) is due to major repair of converter transformer under HVDC project. HVPNL has prayed for exclusion of such abnormal charges for calculating average O&M expenses. It is noted that the converter transformers in the Rihand-Dadri HVDC project have been under outage several times, which is not a normal phenomenon. It may be mentioned that in view of repeated outages in converter transformers, the petitioner has procured 3rd spare transformer for which the Commission has approved the tariff. In view of this, such major repair has been considered as abnormal and hence increase in expense has been limited to Rs. 532.58 lakh (i.e 20% over the previous year). In the next year i.e 1998-1999, the petitioner has claimed Repair and Maintenance expenses of the same order (Rs. 1131.38 lakh) as in 1997-1998. Thus, the Repair and Maintenance expenses in 1998-1999 are also substantially high. Hence, in this year also the increase has been limited to Rs. 639.10 lakh (i.e 20% over the expenses considered admissible in previous year) for the purpose of normalisation. The abnormal increase of Repair and Maintenance expenses during 1997-1998 and 1998-1999 is evident from the O&M expenses for the year 1999-2000, which is Rs. 602.4 lakh. However, if any major repairs are undertaken during the tariff period covered by this order, the petitioner may approach the Commission with proper justification to claim the actual expenses as a part of O&M expenses.

Power Charges

41. In case of Corporate Office, the power charges as claimed by the petitioner have been considered in the calculation of O&M expenses. As regards Northern Regional Transmission System (for short “the NRTS”) the petitioner was directed to submit break up of power charges between sub-station facilities and residential colonies. The petitioner expressed its inability to furnish the data as it was not maintained. However, the petitioner has furnished details of power consumption for the residential colony in Western and Eastern Regions, which work out to be in the range of 20% of the total power charges. On the same basis, the power charges for the residential colony have been considered as 20% of total power charges claimed for Northern Region. As power charges for the residential colony need to be recovered from the employees, admissibility of power charges in case of the NRTS has been limited to 80% of the total claim.

Insurance

42. It has been noted that the petitioner has a policy of self-insurance for which it has created the insurance reserve. The insurance charges claimed by the petitioner are credited to the insurance reserve. The petitioner was directed to furnish the management policy on creation of insurance reserve, items of loss secured and the conditions thereto. The petitioner has submitted insurance policy of the petitioner company under affidavit dated 6.2.2003 The key features of the policy submitted by the petitioner are as under:

(a) Insurance reserve is created @ 0.1% on gross value of fixed assets at the close of the year, to meet the future losses arising from uninsured risks, except machinery breakdown for valve hall of HVDC, and fire risk of HVDC equipment and SVC sub-stations.

(b) The policy generally covers following:

(i) Fire, lightning, explosion/implosion, and bush fire

(ii) Natural calamity: flood, earthquake, storm, cyclone, typhoon, tempest, hurricane, tornado, subsidence and landslide

(iii) Riot, strike/malicious and terrorist damage

(iv) Theft, burglary, Missile testing equipment, impact damage due to rail/road or animal, aircraft and articles dropped there from.

(c) The losses of assets caused by the above causes are adjusted against insurance reserve as per the corporation guidelines.

(d) The amount so set aside in the insurance reserve has not been separately claimed from the respondents and the expenses have been met from the permitted O&M charges under the tariff.

43. The petitioner has stated that the policy of self-insurance has also been followed by NHPC, where 0.5% per annum of the gross block of O&M projects is transferred to self-insurance reserve account. It has also been informed that the rate of 0.1% as booked under O&M expenses towards self-insurance reserve is lower than the insurance premium (0.22%) being charged by the insurance companies for the risks covered in the self-insurance policy. In support of this claim, the petitioner has placed on record a letter from Reliance General Insurance Company quoting for the insurance rate of the assets covered in the self-insurance policy of the petitioner company.

44. In view of the explanation furnished on behalf of the petitioner, the insurance charges as claimed have been considered in O&M expenses. We, however, make it explicit that the self-insurance provided by the petitioner is for replacement of the damaged assets and the beneficiaries shall not be charged anything in case of damage due to any of the events mentioned in the insurance policy.

45. In case of Training & Recruitment expenses, Communication expenses, Traveling, Rent, and Miscellaneous Expenses as claimed by the petitioner have been considered for calculation, both in the case of the NRTS as well as Corporate Office.

Other Expenses

46. In case of NRTS, under the subhead “provisions”, the petitioner has claimed amount of Rs. 10.69 lakh, Rs. 30.08 lakh and Rs. 5.71 lakh for the years 1997-1998, 1998-99 and 1999-2000 respectively for loss of stores. Similarly, amount of Rs. 5.15 lakh in 1998-1999 has been claimed on account of writing off of advance. These have not been 29 considered admissible, since, these items are controllable by the petitioner and reflect the managerial efficiency of the petitioner. In case of Corporate Office, following expenses have not been admitted for reimbursement:

(a) Donation of Rs. 0.05 lakh, Rs. 30 lakh, Rs. 34.78 lakh and Rs. 600.03 lakh for the years 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1898-1899 and 1999-2000, as these donations are not related to transmission business. The expenditure on account of the donations need be borne by the petitioner out of other profits of the corporation.

(b) Provisions of Rs. 1107.61 lakh, Rs. 385.8 lakh and Rs. 0.27 lakh for the year 1996-1997, 1997-1998 and 1999-2000. These provisions were made for the loss of stores in Eastern Region and North Eastern Region, for bad and doubtful debt in Northern Region and for shortage of store in North Eastern Region. As all these items are controllable by the petitioner and reflect the managerial efficiency. However, an amount of Rs. 11.14 lakh on account of fire at the corporate office in 1998-1999 has been considered as admissible under the head provisions.

(c) Legal expenses amounting to Rs. 2.65 lakh in the Corporate Office on legal opinion on CERC matters have not been allowed in line with the Commission's policy of allowing only the fees for the petitions filed in the Commission. However, other legal expenses for disputes related to compensation, contracts, service matters and labour cases have been admitted.

Recoveries

47. The details of the recoveries for the NRTS and the Corporate Office were furnished by the petitioner vide affidavit dated 6th February 2003. The petitioner in the aforesaid affidavit also furnished the “complete details” of the recoveries for the NRTS. According to the petitioner, the income from sale of bid documents has already been adjusted for under the sub-head Tender Expenses under the head Other Expenses. Hence, income under this sub-head has not been considered in the recovery for the NRTS as well as Corporate Office. Similarly, electricity charges recovered from employees residential buildings and other residential buildings have not been considered under the head “recovery” as 20% of the power charges for colony consumption have been deducted in case of the NRTS.

Allocation of Corporate Office Expenses to Various Regions

48. The petitioner has submitted the method for allocation of Corporate Office expenses to various Regions. The key steps in the apportionment of Corporate Office expenses among the regions are as under:

i) Expenses booked under Training & Recruitment, Directors sitting fees, provisions, R&D, Write off of fixed assets/non-operating expenses and donations are considered exclusively as O&M expenses.

ii) After deducting these exclusive O&M expenses, the balance Corporate Office expenses are allocated in the ratio of Transmission charges to annual Capital outlay to obtain expenses allocated to O&M and construction activity.

iii) The allocation to O&M activity obtained in step (ii) is added to exclusive O&M expenses obtained in step (i) to arrive at total O&M expenses in the Corporate Office

iv) RLDC expenses are then deducted from the total O&M expenses obtained in step (iii) to arrive at O&M expenses allocated to transmission business.

v) O&M expenses allocated to transmission business are then allocated to various regions in the ratio of their respective transmission charges.

49. The methodology adopted by the petitioner for allocation of Corporate Office O&M expenses has been approved and followed in the calculation of O&M expenses. The comparative statement of O&M expenses claimed by the petitioner and those allowed and considered for the years 1995-1996 to 1999-2000 for the purpose of computation of O&M expenses for the tariff period are given herein below:

DETAILS OF O&M EXPENSES FOR POWERGRID SYSTEM IN NORTHERN REGION

(Rs. in lakh)

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Items As per Petitioner As allowed for As per Petitioner As allowed for As per Petitioner As allowed for As per Petitioner As allowed for As per Petitioner As allowed for Employee Cost 1475.76 1312.61 1651.14 1485.26 2224.24 2266.33 2686.78 2701.83 3287.71 2929.61 Repair & Maintenance 373.53 373.53 443.82 443.82 1121.85 532.58 1131.38 639.10 602.04 602.04 Power Charges 351.00 280.80 501.27 401.02 486.21 388.97 497.64 398.11 602.04 481.63 Training & Recruitment 7.88 7.88 9.54 9.54 11.57 11.57 13.29 13.29 11.57 11.57 Communications 81.37 81.37 69.53 69.53 100.32 100.32 85.82 85.82 75.13 75.13 Traveling 201.61 201.61 208.75 208.75 274.35 274.35 329.98 329.98 347.30 347.30 Printing & Stationery 25.14 25.14 33.62 33.62 30.15 30.15 26.65 26.65 27.59 27.59 Rent 14.93 14.93 15.79 15.79 24.54 24.54 23.48 23.48 20.86 20.86 Miscellaneous Expenses 342.46 342.46 402.74 402.74 495.03 495.03 619.64 619.64 632.82 632.82 Insurance 406.59 406.59 542.03 542.03 719.81 719.81 640.90 640.90 725.33 725.33 Others 215.95 215.95 150.09 150.09 292.18 281.49 188.39 145.16 237.43 231.72 Corporate Expenses Allocation 949.51 929.40 1216.57 598.75 1191.95 1028.16 1068.85 1066.49 1348.99 1090.89 TOTAL 4445.73 4192.27 5244.89 4360.93 6972.20 6153.30 7312.80 6690.45 7918.81 7176.49 Less: Recoveries 44.79 24.31 52.45 13.88 39.17 Net O & M Expenses 4445.73 4147.48 5244.89 4336.62 6972.20 6100.85 7312.80 6676.57 7918.81 7137.32

Method of Normalizing O&M Expenses

50. The following formulae for calculation of normative O&M expenses as per the notification dated 26.3.2001, as amended vide Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2003 published in the Gazette of India on 2.6.2003 have been followed

Where:

AVOMLL and AVOMBN are average normalized O&M expenses per Ckt. km of line length and per bay respectively.

OMLi and OMSi are O&M expenses for the lines and for the substations for the i year respectively.

LLi and BNi are the total line length in Ckt. km and total number of bays in the ith year respectively.

51. As per the above method, AVOMLL and AVOMBN are calculated based on the data for the years 1995-1996 to 1999-2000. These normalized averages correspond to the year 1997-1998. After escalating these averages by 10% per annum for two years, the normative O&M expenses for the base year 1999-2000 have been obtained. Normative O&M expenses for subsequent years are obtained by escalating these normative figures by 6% per annum. Following table gives comparison of the normative O&M expenses as calculated by the petitioner and as per our calculations allowed for the base year i.e 1999-2000 and afterwards:

S. NO. Items 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Total for five years 95-96 to 99-00 99-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 1 Total O & M expenses (Rs. in lakh) 4147.48 4336.62 6100.85 6676.57 7137.32 2 Abnormal O & M expenses 0.00 0.00 57.64 107.13 99.08 263.85 3 Normal O & M expenses (S. No. 1-S. No. 2) 4147.48 4336.62 6043.21 6569.44 7038.24 4 OML (O & M for lines)= 0.7 × S. No. 3 2903.24 3035.63 4230.25 4598.61 4926.77 19694.50 5 OMS (O & M for substation) = 0.3×S. No. 3 1244.24 1300.99 1812.96 1970.83 2111.47 8440.49 6 Line length at beginning of the year in Kms. 9622.13 9622.13 9743.48 10561.88 10819.55 7 Line length added in the year in Kms. 0.00 121.35 818.40 257.67 1705.07 8 Line length at end of the year in Kms. 9622.13 9743.48 10561.88 10819.55 12524.62 9 LL (Average line length in the Region) 9622.13 9682.81 10152.68 10690.72 11672.09 51820.43 10 NO. of bays at beginning of the year 157 157 161 183 185 11 NO. of bays added in the year 0 4 22 2 31 12 NO. of bays at the end of the year 157 161 183 185 216 13 BN (Average number of bays in the Region) 157.0 159.0 172.0 184.0 200.5 872.50 14 AVOMLL(OML/LL) 0.302 0.314 0.417 0.430 0.422 1.884 15 AVOMBN(OMS/BN) 7.925 8.182 10.540 10.711 10.531 47.890 16 NOMLL (allowable O & M per unit of line length) 0.3768 0.4145 0.4560 0.4560 0.4833 0.5123 0.5431 0.5756 17 NOMBN (Allowable O & M per bay) 9.5780 10.5358 11.5894 11.5894 12.2847 13.0218 13.8031 14.6313 NOMLL (as calculated by petitioner) 0.42 0.51 0.54 0.57 0.60 0.64 NOMBN (as calculated by petitioner) 10.75 13.01 13.79 14.62 15.50 16.43

52. The differences in NOMLL and NOMBN as calculated by the petitioner and as allowed are mainly on account of certain expenses disallowed by us as explained in preceding paragraphs. Using these normative values, O&M charges have been calculated.

53. In our calculations the escalation factor of 6% per annum has been used. In accordance with the notification dated 26.3.2001, if the escalation factor computed from the observed data lies in the range of 4.8% to 7.2%, this variation shall be absorbed by the petitioner. In case of deviation beyond this limit, adjustment shall be made on by applying actual escalation factor arrived at on the basis of weighted price index of CPI for industrial workers (CPI_IW) and index of selected component of WPI (WPI_TR).

54. The details of O&M expenses allowed are given hereunder:

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Line length in Ckm No. of bays O & M expenses (Rs. in lakh) Line length in Ckm No. of bays O & M expense s (Rs. in lakh) Line length in Ckm No. of bays O & M expense s (Rs. in lakh) ICT at Malerkotla 0 1 13.022 0 1 13.803 0 1 14.631 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 276.77 2 167.838 276.77 2 177.909 276.77 2 188.583 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 197.96 3 140.484 197.96 3 148.913 197.96 3 157.848 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 831.84 9 543.364 831.84 9 575.966 831.84 9 610.524 ICT-I at Nalagarh 0 1 13.022 0 1 13.803 0 1 14.631 ICT-II at Nalagarh 0 1 13.022 0 1 13.803 0 1 14.631 ICT-II at Jalandhar 0 2 26.044 0 2 27.606 0 2 29.263 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 0 1 13.022 0 1 13.803 0 1 14.631 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 0 4 52.087 0 4 55.212 0 4 58.526 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 0 2 26.044 0 2 27.606 0 2 29.263 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 0 2 26.044 0 2 27.606 0 2 29.263 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 99.48 4 103.053 99.48 4 109.236 99.48 4 115.790 400/220kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 10.4 6 83.459 10.4 6 88.467 10.4 6 93.775

RETURN ON EQUITY

55. As per the notification dated 26.3.2001, return on equity shall be computed on the paid up and subscribed capital and shall be 16% of such capital. It further provides that premium raised by the Transmission Utility while issuing share capital & investment of internal resources created out of free reserve of the existing utility, if any, for the funding of the project, shall also be reckoned as paid up capital for the purpose of computing the return on equity, provided such premium amount and internal resources are actually utilised for meeting the capital expenditure of the transmission project and forms part of the approved financial package as set out in the techno-economic clearance accorded by the Authority.

56. The petitioner has claimed return on the basis of equity as was admitted in Ministry of Power notification while notifying tariff, along with notional equity arising out of FERV claimed. The same methodology has been followed for working out the return on equity. Thus, the amount of equity considered and the return on equity allowed thereon are as under:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Equity allowed in previous tariff setting Notional Equity on account of FERV Total Equity Return on Equity Each year @ 16% ICT at Malerkotla 459.12 0.00 459.12 73.46 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2800.42 0.00 2800.42 448.07 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 643.78 247.82 891.60 142.66 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 6821.44 54.03 6875.47 1100.08 ICT-I at Nalagarh 228.88 1.74 230.62 36.90 ICT-II at Nalagarh 139.91 5.22 145.13 23.22 ICT-II at Jalandhar 161.86 0.00 161.86 25.90 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 69.17 3.19 72.36 11.58 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 393.43 0.00 393.43 62.95 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 31.74 0.00 31.74 5.08 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 94.90 0.00 94.90 15.18 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 320.17 (−) 0.16 320.01 51.20 400/220 kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 6643.51 (−) 6.08 6637.43 225.48

57. On the above basis, the petitioner shall be entitled to return on equity of Rs. 2221.76 lakh each year during the tariff period.

58. The difference between equity on which return has been allowed and equity claimed for different assets is mainly due to:

(i) Additional equity corresponding to capital expenditure subsequent to 31.3.2001 considered by the petitioner has not been considered in the calculations.

(ii) Division of FERV into notional loan and equity in the ratio of 50:50 by the petitioner against the actual debt-equity ratio considered in the calculation.

(iii) In case of ICT at Malerkotla, the additional capital expenditure from 1997-98 to 2000-2001 has been considered out of equity only by the petitioner whereas the additional capital expenditure has been divided by us into notional loan and notional equity in the ratio of 50:50 as admitted by the Commission for the period ending 31.3.2001

INTEREST ON WORKING CAPITAL

59. As provided in the notification dated 26.3.2001, the interest on working capital shall cover:

(a) Operation and maintenance expenses (cash) for one month;

(b) Maintenance spares at a normative rate of 1% of the capital cost less 1/5 of the initial capitalised spares. Cost of maintenance spares for each subsequent year shall be revised at the rate applicable for revision of expenditure on O & M of the transmission system; and

(c) Receivables equivalent to two months' average billing calculated on normative availability level, which is 98%.

60. The petitioner has claimed the maintenance spares on the basis of maintenance spares allowed in Ministry of Power for the year 1997-1998 escalating the same as per weighted price index taking into account 60% of weightage for WPI & 40% of CPI and @ 6% p.a for the years 2001-2002 to 2003-2004 and deducting the 1/5th of the initial capitalized spares therefrom.

61. In keeping with the methodology prescribed in the notification dated 26.3.2001, working capital has been worked out. The value of maintenance spares for 1997-1998 has been taken as considered by Ministry of Power and the same has been escalated up to 2000-2001 as per respective WPI/CPI and thereafter the same has been further escalated @ 6% per annum for the tariff period 2001-2002 to 2003-2004.

62. The petitioner has claimed interest on working capital at the rate of 11.5%, based on annual SBI PLR for the year 2001-2002, which has been allowed separately by the Commission in certain other petitions and, therefore, the same has been allowed here also despite the objections of some of the respondents. The detailed calculations in support of interest on Working Capital are as under:

Interest on Working Capital

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Year Maintenance spares O & M expenses Receivables Total Rate of Interest Interest ICT at Malerkotla 2001-02 12.67 1.09 25.26 39.01 11.5% 4.49 2002-03 13.43 1.15 24.58 39.16 4.50 2003-04 14.23 1.22 24.04 39.49 4.54 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-02 138.75 13.99 412.20 564.94 11.5% 64.97 2002-03 147.08 14.83 362.26 524.17 60.28 2003-04 155.90 15.72 360.93 532.55 61.24 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and 400 kV transmission line from Bawana up to Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-02 90.28 11.71 284.16 386.14 11.5% 44.41 2002-03 95.70 12.41 236.71 344.82 39.65 2003-04 101.44 13.15 243.62 358.21 41.19 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 2001-02 500.82 45.28 1828.07 2374.17 11.5% 273.03 2002-03 530.87 48.00 1529.64 2108.50 242.48 2003-04 562.72 50.88 1668.22 2281.82 262.41 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-02 15.18 1.09 37.11 53.38 11.5% 6.14 2002-03 16.09 1.15 36.62 53.87 6.19 2003-04 17.06 1.22 36.47 54.75 6.30 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-02 0.00 1.09 32.08 33.17 11.5% 3.81 2002-03 0.00 1.15 31.40 32.55 3.74 2003-04 0.00 1.22 31.33 32.55 3.74 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-02 11.87 2.17 38.27 52.31 11.5% 6.02 2002-03 12.58 2.30 38.04 52.92 6.09 2003-04 13.34 2.44 44.56 60.34 6.94 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-02 4.48 1.09 15.49 21.06 11.5% 2.42 2002-03 4.75 1.15 15.35 21.25 2.44 2003-04 5.03 1.22 15.25 21.50 2.47 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 0.00 4.34 72.29 76.62 11.5% 8.81 2002-03 0.00 4.60 72.82 77.42 8.90 2003-04 0.00 4.88 85.03 89.91 10.34 2 Nos. LILO bays associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 2001-02 1.76 2.17 9.74 13.67 11.5% 1.57 2002-03 1.87 2.30 10.01 14.18 1.63 2003-04 1.98 2.44 11.16 15.58 1.79 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 7.96 2.17 26.61 36.74 11.5% 4.23 2002-03 8.44 2.30 26.89 37.63 4.33 2003-04 8.94 2.44 31.25 42.63 4.90 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line alongwith associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-02 15.88 8.59 56.06 80.52 11.5% 9.26 2002-03 16.83 9.10 57.14 83.07 9.55 2003-04 17.84 9.65 66.10 93.58 10.76 400/220kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 2001-02 47.71 6.95 176.64 231.30 11.5% 26.60 2002-03 50.57 7.37 177.55 235.50 27.08 2003-04 53.61 7.81 185.85 247.27 28.44

TRANSMISSION CHARGES

63. In the light of above discussion, we approve the transmission charges as given in the Table below:

(Rs. in lakh)

Name of the asset Year Interest on Loan Interest on Working Capital Depreciation Advance against Depreciati on Return on Equity O & M Charges Total ICT at Malerkotla 2001-02 27.18 4.49 33.06 0.33 73.46 13.02 151.54 2002-03 22.65 4.50 33.06 0.00 73.46 13.80 147.47 2003-04 18.53 4.54 33.06 0.00 73.46 14.63 144.22 400 kV Hissar-Jaipur transmission line with associated Bays 2001-02 1094.46 64.97 308.42 389.46 448.07 167.84 2473.21 2002-03 871.26 60.28 308.42 307.64 448.07 177.91 2173.58 2003-04 769.78 61.24 308.42 389.46 448.07 188.58 2165.56 400 kV Bawana-Bhiwani transmission line (Ckt.-I) including line bay at Bawana and ICT at Bawana and transmission line from Bawana upto Bhiwani (Ckt.-II) and line bay at Bawana 2001-02 838.99 44.41 208.65 329.75 142.66 140.48 1704.94 2002-03 676.11 39.65 208.65 204.27 142.66 148.91 1420.25 2003-04 606.27 41.19 208.65 305.10 142.66 157.85 1461.73 400 kV D/C Abdullapur-Bawana transmission line with associated bays, 315 MVA ICT-II at Abdullapur sub-station, 220 kV Jorian (HVPNL) bay at Abdullapur sub-station and 400 kV D/C Nalagarh Hissar transmission line with associated bays 2001-02 5523.59 273.03 1332.03 2196.33 1100.08 543.36 10968.42 2002-03 4948.55 242.48 1332.03 978.73 1100.08 575.97 9177.83 2003-04 4507.95 262.41 1332.03 2196.33 1100.08 610.52 10009.31 ICT-I at Nalagarh 2001-02 113.41 6.14 53.21 0.00 36.90 13.02 222.68 2002-03 109.63 6.19 53.21 0.00 36.90 13.80 219.73 2003-04 107.78 6.30 53.21 0.00 36.90 14.63 218.82 ICT-II at Nalagarh 2001-02 105.04 3.81 47.39 0.00 23.22 13.02 192.48 2002-03 100.22 3.74 47.39 0.00 23.22 13.80 188.38 2003-04 99.01 3.74 47.39 0.00 23.22 14.63 187.99 ICT-II at Jalandhar 2001-02 130.74 6.02 40.92 0.00 25.90 26.04 229.62 2002-03 127.71 6.09 40.92 0.00 25.90 27.61 228.22 2003-04 117.27 6.94 40.92 47.08 25.90 29.26 267.37 Bus Reactor with associated bays at Nalagarh 2001-02 43.75 2.42 22.19 0.00 11.58 13.02 92.96 2002-03 42.09 2.44 22.19 0.00 11.58 13.80 92.11 2003-04 40.63 2.47 22.19 0.00 11.58 14.63 91.51 ICT-I at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 228.14 8.81 81.72 0.00 62.95 52.09 433.71 2002-03 228.14 8.90 81.72 0.00 62.95 55.21 436.93 2003-04 221.81 10.34 81.72 74.86 62.95 58.53 510.20 2 Nos. LILO associated with ICT-I at Jaipur 2001-02 18.58 1.57 7.17 0.00 5.08 26.04 58.44 2002-03 18.58 1.63 7.17 0.00 5.08 27.61 60.06 2003-04 18.06 1.79 7.17 5.58 5.08 29.26 66.94 ICT-II at Jaipur with associated bays 2001-02 85.61 4.23 28.62 0.00 15.18 26.04 159.68 2002-03 85.61 4.33 28.62 0.00 15.18 27.61 161.35 2003-04 79.81 4.90 28.62 29.71 15.18 29.26 187.49 220 kV D/C Jalandhar-Dasuya transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar & Dasuya 2001-02 130.71 9.26 42.13 0.00 51.20 103.05 336.36 2002-03 130.71 9.55 42.13 0.00 51.20 109.24 342.83 2003-04 123.32 10.76 42.13 53.37 51.20 115.79 396.58 400/220 kV ICT-I and LILO of Chamera-Moga transmission line along with associated bays at Jalandhar 2001-02 508.85 26.60 215.44 0.00 225.48 83.46 1059.83 2002-03 508.85 27.08 215.44 0.00 225.48 88.47 1065.32 2003-04 489.56 28.44 215.44 62.43 225.48 93.78 1115.12

64. In addition to the transmission charges, the petitioner shall be entitled to other charges like Development Surcharge, income tax, incentive, surcharge and other cess and taxes in accordance with the notification dated 26.3.2001 subject to directions if any, of the superior courts. The petitioner shall also be entitled to recovery of filing fee of Rs. 2 lakh, which shall be recovered from the respondents in five monthly installments of Rupees forty thousand each and shall be shared by the respondents in the same ratio as other transmission charges. This is subject to confirmation that the amount is not already included in the O&M charges.

65. The petitioner has already billed the respondents on provisional basis in accordance with the Commission's notification dated 4.4.2001 as extended from time to time. The provisional billing of tariff shall be adjusted in the light of final tariff now approved by us.

66. The transmission charges approved by us shall be included in the regional transmission tariff for Northern Region and shall be shared by the respondents in accordance with the notification dated 26.3.2001

67. This order disposes of Petition No. 73/2002.