Transcript Ring Fencing of System Operation and independent

Ring Fencing of System Operation and
independent functioning of Load Despatch Centres
by
Western Regional Load Despatch Centre, Mumbai
PSTI Bengaluru
20th April 2011
Outline
• Unbundling………rationale
• Ring fencing of System Operation
• Milestones & Achievements
• The ultimate mantra to functional autonomy
2
Unbundling…………rationale
Source: Sally Hunt: Making Competition Work in Electricity
3
Unbundling…………rationale
Source: Sally Hunt: Making Competition Work in Electricity
4
Unbundling…………rationale
Source: Sally Hunt: Making Competition Work in Electricity
5
Unbundling…………rationale
Source: Sally Hunt: Making Competition Work in Electricity
6
Ring fencing of system operation & transmission (1)
• The major locus of conflict of interest in the short term is the
system operator. As we have stated before, the system operator
has to have complete control over the short-term operations of
the generating plant and interface with the transmission system.
He has a hundred subtle ways of influencing access to
transmission, which are hard to police, because the system
operator’s judgment is relied on at very short notice to resolve
problems on the transmission system by telling generators what
to do. If he is employed by a company that also owns
generation, he is not independent, he is a competitor: no one will
trust him. In a competitive world, the system operator needs to
be independent of all generators, and indeed all traders, buyers,
and sellers. Everyone agrees on this and independence of the
system operator is always a central objective of restructuring.
Source: Sally Hunt: Making Competition Work in Electricity
7
Ring fencing of system operation & transmission (2)
• A second source of conflict is the responsibility for expanding the
transmission system—the short-term problem of transmission
access translated into the long term. If a competing generating
company or utility owns the transmission system and has
responsibility for maintaining and expanding it, there are many
subtle ways in which it can thwart competitors by being dilatory
about construction and maintenance of the transmission assets.
This is not so immediately apparent, since any bad results are
longer term, not day by day, as with the system operator.
Competitive generators also complain about delays and costs
involved in connection of their generators to a transmission
system that is under the control of a competitive company.
Source: Sally Hunt: Making Competition Work in Electricity
8
Other areas necessitating functional autonomy
• Non-discriminatory open access
• Outage planning
• Backing down or re-scheduling
• Switching instructions
• Availability certification
• Real time data availability at LDCs
• Metering and settlement system
• Incident investigation and analysis
• Proper feedback to planners and regulators
9
Milestones and achievements
• Pre 1994: RLDCs were operated by CEA with budgetary
support from Govt. of India.
• 1994-1996: RLDCs transferred in a progressive manner
to POWERGRID. Budgetary support from GOI stops.
• July 1998: CEA finalizes an adhoc arrangement for
reimbursement of RLDC expenses.(Rs. 12 Crores for
1996-97)
10
Milestones and achievements…..contd/• 8th May 2003: CERC approves RLDC fees and charges from 20002001 ( Rs. 21.52 Crs. in the starting year)
• 2005 onwards: ULDC scheme charges merged with RLDC fees &
charges and approved by CERC
• 5th Nov 2007: Interactive session convened by Ministry of Power with
Forum of Regulators and State Government. Pradhan Committee on
Ring fencing of LDCs constituted in Feb 2008 after this meeting.
• 4th July 2008: Ministry of Power directed POWERGRID for formation
of POSOCO
11
Milestones and achievements…..contd/• 11th August 2008: Gireesh B. Pradhan Committee Report on” “
Manpower, Certification and Incentives for System Operation and
Ring fencing Load Despatch Centres” submitted. Report accepted
and a meeting called on 7th Oct 2008 by Secretary Power.
• 15th Nov 2008: Forum of Regulators (FOR) approves formation of
‘Forum of Load Despatchers (FOLD) and approves FOLD charter in
Jan 2009
• 20th March 2009: Power System Operation Corporation Ltd.
incorporated as a 100% subsidiary of POWERGRID with authorized
share capital of Rs.200 crores.
12
Milestones and achievements…..contd/• March 2009: Satnam Singh Task force report on on “Capital
Expenditure and Issues Related to Emoluments for Personnel in
Load Despatch Centres “ submitted.
• June 2009: Rakesh Nath Committee Report on “Manpower
Selection, Recruitment Procedure and Tenures for Personnel in
SLDCs”
• 18th Sept’ 2009: CERC notifies Regulation on Fees and Charges of
Regional Load Despatch Centres for the control period 2009-2014.
13
Milestones and achievements…..contd/• 19th March 2010: Dhiman Committee Report on “Training
and Certification of System Operators” submitted.
• March 2010: All RLDCs and NLDC file petitions with CERC
for the Fees & Charges for the control period 2009-2014
• 23rd March 2010: Certificate of
Business obtained for POSOCO.
commencement
of
• 1st June 2010: Transfer of manpower from POWERGRID to
POSOCO on secondment basis.
14
Milestones and achievements…..contd/• 9th June 2010: Ministry of Power designated National
Power Training Institute (NPTI) as the Certification
Authority for executives of SLDCs , RLDCs and NLDC for
an initial period of 3 yrs i.e up to 31st March 2013
• 26th Sept 2010: Gazette notification by Central Govt. of
India that the POSOCO a wholly owned subsidiary of
POWERGRID shall operate RLDCs/NLDC wef 1st Oct
2010.
• Feb/March 2011: CERC notifies the fees and charges for
NLDC and all five RLDCs
15
Ultimate mantra for ensuring functional autonomy
• Technical and managerial excellence
• Comprehensive set of regulations by the ERCs covering system
operation
• Minimizing discretion
• Ensuring high level of transparency in Operations
• Any exercise of judgment by operator in few cases……..beyond
question or reproach
• Devote more time to participation in rule making rather than disputes
after notification of rules
• International benchmarking with other system operators
16
Thank you
Discussion………
17
MoP Communication to POWERGRID
• MoP has directed POWERGRID
July 2008 the following :
vide letter dated 4th
1.To set up a wholly owned subsidiary company of
PGCIL responsible for independent system operation
with separated accounting and Board structure.
2.This company will gradually made independent from
PGCIL over a period of 5 yrs.
18
MoP Communication to POWERGRID
–Structure and Functions
STRUCTURE
• The wholly owned subsidiary of the PGCIL will be called Power System
Operation Corporation (POSOCO)
• CMD of POWERGRID will be non-executive Chairman of the new
Corporation.
• There will be three functional Directors ie MD, Dir(Per &Engg),
Dir(Comml & Fin)
• Five part time directors one each from each region nominated by
respective RPC.
• One independent Director from PGCIL
• Chief Executive of the five RLDCs will be special permanent invitee on
the Board
19
Structure and Functions..Cont.
• FUNCTIONS
1. To supervise and control all aspect concerning operations and
manpower requirement of RLDCs and NLDC.
2.
To act as apex organization for HR requirement of NLDC and
RLDCs.
3.
To ensure planning and implementation of infrastructure
required for smooth operation and development of NLDC.
4.
To advise assist SLDCs including specialized training etc.
5.
To perform any other function entrusted by MoP
20
Recommendation 1
The Committee recommends that the LDCs should be
ring-fenced suitably to ensure their functional
autonomy by taking the following steps:
a)
The Appropriate Government should take suitable steps to facilitate
independent functioning of the Load Despatch Centres in line with
the Electricity Act 2003 and National Electricity Policy. To begin with,
the State Governments are urged to create a separate
representative board structure for governance of LDCs on the lines
of wholly owned subsidiary being created for the independent
System Operation of RLDCs and NLDC.
b)
The financial accounts should be separated for all LDCs by 31st
March 2009 with the appropriate Electricity Regulatory
Commissions (ERC) specifying the fees and charges payable. 21
Recommendation 1 (contd/-)
c)
Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) plans for modernization of all LDCs
during 2009-12 should be submitted and the approval of the
respective Electricity Regulatory Commission (ERC) should be
obtained by 31st March 2009. The Central Transmission Utility
(CTU) and Regional Load Despatch Centres (RLDCs) should
extend the necessary assistance to SLDCs in this area.
d)
In the next stage, rolling 5-year CAPEX plans should be prepared
by each LDC and got approved by the respective ERCs to take
care of the system expansion, associated real-time data
requirements as well as technological innovations and
obsolescence of control centre equipment. ERCs may examine
CAPEX proposal considering a shorter life cycle of 7-10 years for
such equipment.
22
Recommendation 2
For making LDCs financially self-reliant, the Electricity Regulatory
Commissions (ERCs) should recognize the three distinct revenue streams:
a) Fees and charges for system operation
b) Tariff for decision support system and IT infrastructure (currently only ULDC
tariff)
c) Operating charges for scheduling, metering and settlement for market
players.
d) All Generating Companies and licensees using the services of the LDCs
would make all the above payments. In addition the LDCs could provide
value added services (studies, manpower development, reports, access to
data archives etc), on chargeable basis.
23
Recommendation 3
The Committee recommends
a) Introduction of a system of certification of System Operators by an
independent Central body, similar to the system followed in case of
Air Traffic Controllers.
b) Establishment of a Central Institute for training of System
Operators. Initially the National Power Training Institute (NPTI) may
be entrusted with the responsibility of training and certification.
c) Within the next one year, all the course material, systems and
procedures required for administering a “basic level” of training and
certification should be developed.
24
Recommendation 3 (contd/-)
The Committee recommends
d) All LDCs must ensure that all the personnel of LDCs undergo this
‘basic level’ training and certification and only certified personnel
staff the LDCs within two years from the release of this report. The
appropriate Electricity Regulatory Commissions would be furnished
with an Annual Compliance Report of this requirement.
Subsequently advanced level training and certification programme
must be introduced.
e) Fresh recruitment at regular intervals for lowering the average age
of the work force in the LDCs.
f) Introduction of suitably designed courses in the Indian Institutes of
Technology and National Institutes of Technology for ensuring
availability of skilled manpower.
g) Active collaboration of LDCs with educational institutes for research
and development related to Indian power system and electricity
25
market operation.
Recommendation 4
The highly specialized and technical nature of LDC function
necessitates a suitable compensation structure to attract and
retain talent. The Committee recommends
a) The compensation structure for LDC personnel should be
substantially higher than comparable companies in the power
sector both in the public as well as private.
b) Apart from the compensation structure, innovative incentive
schemes, such as sabbaticals for higher learning and opportunities
for Professional Engagement (PE) in the form of attending
seminars/workshops and conferences both in India and abroad
must be provided.
c) Once the certification system is introduced, monetary incentives
similar to Air Traffic Controllers can be provided to the System
Operators based on their ratings.
26
Recommendation 5
For standardizing and harmonizing the LDCs work, the committee
recommends
a) The NLDC in consultation with CEA, would lay down the
“Standard Operating Procedures” (SOPs) which would be
adopted by the SLDCs. Suitable Quality Standards and an
Integrated Management System (IMS) may also be
implemented.
b)
A ‘Forum of Load Despatch Centres’ with the secretariat
provided by National Load Despatch Centre must be
established. This Forum could take up issues of common
interest and also formulate a Code of Ethics for the LDC
personnel.
c)
At a future date, if all the State Governments agree, an
umbrella structure of SLDCs integrated with RLDCs and
NLDC may be considered.
27
Task Force: Terms of Reference
• To look into the
– Financial aspects for augmentation and
upgradation of State Load Despatch Centres
– Issues related to emoluments (compensation
structure, incentives etc.) for the personnel in
System Operations
28
About the Task Force
• Members
–
–
–
–
–
CMD, Power Finance Corporation: Chairman
Director (Finance), POWERGRID: Member
Secretary (Power), Haryana Govt.: Member
Managing Director, GETCO: Member
Secretary, CERC: Member Secretary
• Meetings
– 17th December, 2008
– 27th February, 2009
: New Delhi
: New Delhi
• Report
– Submitted on 5th May 2009
29
Structure of the Report
• Part-I
– Financial Aspects for augmentation and upgradation of Load Despatch Centres
• Functional Autonomy of Load Despatch Centres
– Identification & transfer of assets/liabilities to
» NLDC/RLDCs from CTU
» SLDCs from CTU/STU
• Financing the above transfer of assets/liabilities
• Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) plans and its
financing
• Part-II
– Emoluments for personnel
• Study of existing Compensation structure
• Proposed structure for compensation and
incentives for personnel
30
Part-I
Financial Aspects
for augmentation and Upgradation
31
Past Investments
32
Past Investment in ULDC project
by POWERGRID (2002-2006)
As on 31st December 2008
Region
Central
Sector
(Rs. Crore)
State
Specific
(Rs. Crore)
Gross Block
(Rs. Crore)
Net Block
(Rs. Core)
South
128
417
545
388
North
260
311
571
396
North-east
119
78
197
154
East
142
194
335
289
West
106
71
177
151
Total
755
1072
1826
1378
Outstanding
Source of funds
Total
(Rs. Crore)
Total
(Rs. Crore)
Central
Sector
(Rs. Crore)
State
Specific
(Rs. Crore)
Equity
264
195
43
152
Grant for Northeast
175
147
77
70
Loan
ULDC: Unified
and Communication
1387Load Despatch
1036
410
Figures rounded off
626
33
Segregation of Assets and Outstanding
liabilities in respect of past investments
• Region-wise and State-wise segregation
– Carried out by the Task Force
– Details as Annex-III of the Report
• Total Outstanding apportioned into ‘outstanding
equity’ and ‘outstanding loan’ for
– Remote Terminal Units
– Communication System
– Control Centre Equipment
Annex-III
Page 57-71
34
Transfer of POWERGRID’s existing assets and
liabilities under ULDC project: Recommendations
• Central Sector Assets
Para 4.1, Page 11
– Control Centre equipment installed at NLDC/RLDCs to be
transferred to the wholly owned subsidiary of POWERGRID
– Building/parts of building where NLDC/RLDCs are operational
along with associated facilities like staff quarters to be
transferred to NLDC/RLDCs
– Field equipment and communication infrastructure to remain with
POWERGRID
– Condemned items to be written off
• State Specific Assets (under ULDC)
– Control Centre equipment to be transferred to SLDC
– Field equipment and communication infrastructure to be
transferred to STU
• Transfer to be completed by 30th June 2009
Para 4.8, Page 16
Field equipment: Remote Terminal Unit and associated infrastructure
35
Financing the transfer of existing assets
Recommendations
• Central Sector
– Transfer of assets and liabilities pertaining to
NLDC/RLDCs from POWERGRID to the books of
accounts of the wholly owned subsidiary
Para 4.3, Page 13
• State Specific
– Three alternatives for financing suggested by Task
Force
Para 4.4, Page 13
36
•
Financing transfer of State specific assets
from CTU to respective STUs/SEBs and
SLDCs
Alternative-1
–
–
–
–
Preference to alternative-1
Equity liquidated by concerned STU/SLDC
Loan transferred to STU/SLDC
Other alternatives to be
Agreement by lenders required
explored in case of difficulties
Capital Recovery Charge specified by SERCs
– Alternative-2
Para 4.8, Page 16
• Equity liquidated by concerned STU/SLDC
• Existing loan swapped with fresh loan taken by concerned
STU/SLDC
• Capital Recovery Charge specified by SERCs Para 4.4, Page 13
– Alternative-3
•
•
•
•
Para 4.8, Page 16
Assets continue to be treated as given on lease
POWERGRID continue to collect tariff as lease rental
STU/SLDC make provisions in Annual Revenue Requirement
Assets transferred to STU/SLDC after full recovery
37
Past investment in SLDCs by
STUs/SEBs
Region
North
East
West
Investment
in Rs.
Crore
64
9
7
South
North
east
124
13
Total
219
Funded by
State Govt.
State Govt.
State Govt.
State Govt.
100 % grant by
Central
Governmet
Table-2, Page 7
38
Transfer of existing assets and liabilities of
STUs/SEBs under ULDC project
Recommendations
• Investment by STUs/SEBs
– Infrastructure with SLDCs to be transferred from
STUs/SEBs to SLDCs
Para 4.1, Page 11
– Field equipment and communication infrastructure to
remain with STUs/SEBs
• Assets, liabilities of STUs and SLDCs to be
segregated and transferred to the subsidiary
or the successor company created in State
Para 4.5, Page 14
as the case may be
Para 4.8, Page 16
• To be completed by June 2009
39
Future Investments
40
Capital Expenditure plans to cover
• Augmentation of Communication System for
data transfer from field units to Control
Para 5.1, Page 18
Centre
• Augmentation of Control Centre
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Para 5.2 to 5.4
Page 18-20
Civil Infrastructure
Computer System and peripherals
Specialized Software
Smart Grid
Auxiliary power
Cyber Security and Infrastructure security
Back up Control Centre
Others
41
Execution of CAPEX plans
• Centralized mechanism adopted in the past as in ULDC no
longer suitable due to
–
–
–
–
–
Para 5.5, Page 21
Large diversity in local requirements
Need for capacity building in State Sector
Need for vendor development to reduce monopoly
Implementation and financing is challenging
Fast evolving changes in power system operational needs
• Recommended approach for Control Centre augmentation
–
–
–
–
Decentralized at each LDC level
Integrated for seamless data flow
Flexible to address changing requirements
Open systems for interoperability
– Load Despatch Centres may harmonize technical
specifications through Forum of Load Despatchers
42
Financing CAPEX and O &M
• Plans to be examined by respective ERCs
• Fund requirement of moderate range
• Typically Rs. 75 crore per LDC staggered over 5
years (Annex-IV)
Para 6, Page 21
• Financial Institutions would be willing to lend if
recovery is through ‘Fees and Charges’ approved by
respective ERCs
• Regulations are necessary to give comfort to the
lenders
Para 8 (iv), Page 26
• Revenue from Open Access to add to reserves and
surplus of LDCs (Margin money for CAPEX)
43
Methodology for recovery
• Fees and Charges
Para 8 (a), (b), (c), Page 25
• Charges for servicing of CAPEX
– Return on Equity, Interest on Loan, Depreciation
• Charges for Human Resource
– Salary, perquisites, incentives, Training,
Certification
• Charges for O&M and General Expenses
– Repair, Communication, Travel, Statutory duties,
Taxes
– Interest on Working Capital
44
Revenue streams and sharing of
charges
• Services from LDCs
Para 9, Page 27
– System Operation
– Market Operation
– System Logistics
– Charges to be shared by beneficiaries of LDC
service
– Modus Operandi to be specified by
Para 11, Page 28
respective ERCs
45
Part-II
Emoluments of Personnel
46
Major Issues
• Problems being experienced in attracting and
retaining talent
– Wide variation in emoluments among SLDCsRLDCs/NLDC as per organizations managing LDCs
Para 13, Page 32
• SLDCs managed by respective STU/SEBs
• 5 RLDCs and 1 NLDC managed by POWERGRID
Annex-V, Page 75-94
– Existing emoluments incommensurate with the job
responsibilities and associated physiological and mental
stress
Para 12, Page 30
• Urgent need for
• Broad Harmonization and scaling up of emoluments to facilitate
movement of personnel across different LDCs Para 14, Page 33
• Suitable incentives for personnel
47
Recommended Compensation
Structure
• Basic pay and perquisites
Para 15, Page 36
• Performance Related Pay (PRP)
• Incentive-linked to certification
• Contingency duty allowance
• Special awards
48
Performance Related Pay:
Recommendations
Para 15.2, Page 37
• Linked to performance of
– Load Despatch Centre
– Individual concerned
Illustration in
Annex-VI, Page 95
• Performance Indicators for LDCs
•
•
•
•
•
•
System Operation (20 %)
Market Operation (20 %)
System Logistics (20 %)
Documentation (10 %)
Learning and growth perspective (20 %)
Financial (10 %)
Annex-VIII, Page 101
49
Performance Related Pay: Recommendations
contd…
• Performance Indicators for Individuals
• Management defined Key Result Areas
• Individual informed in the beginning of assessment period
• 70 % weightage
• General competencies, skills and personal traits
• 30 % weightage
• 360 degree feedback for assessment of LDC-Head
Annex-IX, Page 105
• Forum of Load Despatchers (FOLD)
• To carry out further work
• To harmonize Performance Management System
50
Certification-linked Incentive
Recommendation
• Eligibility after Certification
Para 15.3, Page 42
– Basic, Specialist, Management level
– Certificates to be renewed periodically
• Lump-sum monthly entitlement
– Linked to ceiling basic pay at the middle management level
Table-8, Page 44
– Subject to certain minimum limits
Certification level
Percentage of Ceiling Basic
Pay at the middle
management
Basic Pay assumed Rs.
50,000
Monthly Incentive
(Minimum amount)
Basic level
10 %
Rs. 5000
Specialist level
15 %
Rs. 7500
Management
level
10 %
Rs. 5000
51
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• Components of annual charges. (a) Return on equity
(b) Interest on loan capital
(c) Depreciation
(d) O&M expenses excluding HR expenses
(e) Human resource expenses
(f) NLDC charges and corporate office
expenses
(g) Interest on working capital
52
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• Allocation and apportionment of components of annual
charges to system operation function and market
operation function:
i)Towards system operation function= 80% of the annual
charges.
ii)Towards market operation function=20 % of annual
charges.
53
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• Collection of SOC:
(i) Inter state transmission licensees: 10% of SOC (on
the basis of the ckt.-km of the lines owned by them)
(ii) Generating stations and sellers: 45% of SOC
(proportion to their installed capacity or contracted
capacity)
(iii)Distribution licensees and buyers: 45% of SOC.
(proportion to the sum of their allocations and contracted
capacities)
54
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• Collection of Market Operation Charges: equally from all
the users except inter state transmission licensees.
• Registration fees. - All users whose scheduling, metering
and energy accounting is to be coordinated by RLDC
shall register themselves with the RLDC concerned by
filing application in the format prescribed
• The application for registration shall be accompanied by
a one time fees of Rs 10 lakh.
55
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• LDC Development Fund. – The Power System
Operation Company shall create and maintain a
separate fund called ‘LDC Development Fund’.
• The charges on account of return on equity, interest on
loan, depreciation and other income of the RLDC and
NLDC such as registration fee, application fee, shortterm open access charges, etc shall be deposited to the
LDC development fund.
56
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• The Power System Operation Company shall be
entitled to utilise the money deposited to the LDC
development fund for loan repayment, servicing the
capital raised in the form of interest and dividend
payment, meeting stipulated equity portion in asset
creation and margin money for raising loan from the
financial institutions and funding R & D projects.
57
CERC’s Notification for RLDC fees and
charges
• The LDC development fund shall not be utilized for any
other revenue expenditure.
• Any asset created by the Power System Operation
Company out of the money deposited to the LDC
development fund shall not be considered for
computation of return on equity and interest on loan.
58
Summary – CAPEX
(As per petition)
All figures are in Rs. Lakhs
Particulars 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
TOTAL
NLDC*
0
400
200
300
150
1050
NRLDC
26
677
1321
1143
781
3947
ERLDC
48
115
80
1080
1270
2592
WRLDC
6
101
979
1211
1526
3823
SRLDC
40
60
1415
1515
160
3190
NERLDC
36
382
140
1600
1372
3530
TOTAL
155
1735
4135
6849
5259
18132
* - Adcap towards balance works/ payments under NLDC scheme of Rs. 694 Lakhs is also been approved
59
Summary - Annual charges of
RLDCs and NLDC
(As per Petition)
All figures are in Rs. Lakhs
Particulars 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
TOTAL
NLDC*
2631
3451
4087
4669
4869
19706
NRLDC
7653
7842
5675
6599
7044
34813
ERLDC
3368
4001
3772
3810
4524
19474
WRLDC
2992
3726
4379
5433
6279
22810
SRLDC
3048
3498
3852
4619
5059
20076
NERLDC
1901
2332
2333
2831
4015
13412
TOTAL
18961
21399
20012
23292
26921
110586
Note: The NLDC charges have been apportioned in the RLDC charges for billing to the users
of the RLDCs
60
Summary – CAPEX
(As per order)
Particulars 2009-10 2010-11
201112
All figures are in Rs. Lakhs
2012-13 2013-14
TOTAL
NLDC*
0
400
200
300
150
1050
NRLDC
20
661
1310
1132
16
3139
ERLDC
48
115
20
1000
1270
2452
WRLDC
1
31
669
990
1400
3091
SRLDC
34
44
1399
1514
155
3146
NERLDC
36
87
110
1590
1362
3185
TOTAL
138
1339
3708
6526
4352
16063
* - Adcap towards balance works/ payments under NLDC scheme of Rs. 694 Lakhs is also been approved
61
Summary - Annual charges of RLDCs and
NLDC
(As per order)
All figures are in Rs. Lakhs
Particulars
NLDC*
NRLDC
ERLDC
WRLDC
SRLDC
NERLDC
TOTAL
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
TOTAL
2351
7321
3170
3067
7702
3618
3595
5645
3842
4076
5960
3502
4341
5596
4375
17431
32223
18507
2666
2621
965
3233
2936
1076
3624
3353
1204
4179
3878
1600
4750
4306
2238
18453
17094
7084
16744
18565
17668
19119
21265
93361
Note: The NLDC charges have been apportioned in the RLDC charges for billing to
the users of the RLDCs
62