1. 19 TH Commercial sub-committee meeting UI &REC reconciliation STOA reconciliation LC statusSEM Outstanding UI/Rec Others POC RRF

2. Reconciliation of SR UI & Reactive accounts Details of payments and disbursement of UI/Reactive energy accounts of the following months furnished to all entities for verification and reconciliation December 11 09.01.2012 January 1208.02.2012 February 1208.03. 2012 March 1210.04.2012 April 1207.05.2012 May 1211.06.2012 Confirmation received from KPTCL and NLC I Expansion No comments received from others and hence to be treated as reconciled. Letters

3. Reconciliation of STOA disbursements Details of payments and disbursement of UI/Reactive energy accounts of the following months furnished to all entities for verification and reconciliation January 1213.02.2012 February 1209.03. 2012 March 1210.04.2012 April 1214.05.2012 May 1211.06.2012 No comments received and hence to be treated as reconciled All applicants requested to verify the details of curtailment published in SRLDC website by 2 nd of every month Letters

4. Out standing of UI/REC accounts UI account as on 10.07.12 To the pool account: Tamilnadu :Rs.16,9150,035/- KNPP :Rs.2292/- MEPL :Rs.259/- From pool account: Nil Reminders

5. Out standing of UI/REC accounts TN reminder Reactive energy account as on 10.07.12 To the pool account : Tamilnadu :Rs.1,22,65,924/- From pool account : APTRANSCO: Rs.36,99,548/- KPTCL : Rs.30,02,300/- KSEB : Rs.5,66,421/- Puducherry : Rs. 2,011/- MEPL : Rs.1,00,811/-

6. Status of L/C for UI payment TN opened LC for Rs.5Crs TN to enhance the LC amount to 32.84Crs as per their liability TN to enhance the LC amount to 32.84Crs Entities yet to open LC for delayed UI payment Kudamkulam (KNPP) Rs.62 Lakhs NLC II Expansion Rs.10 Lakhs Meenakshi (MEPL) Rs.7 Lakhs Simhapuri (SEPL) Rs.9.18 Lakhs Reminder SEPL Reminder others

7. Instances of delay in SEM data receipt (Jan12-Jun 12) Details ANDRAPRADESHKARNATAKAKERALA Kothagudam 5 Sedam 6 Edamon 2 KTPP 5 JSW 5 Moolamattom 1 Mehboobnagar 4 Guttur 4 Moozhiyar 1 Ragulapadu 4 Bellary 3 Kaniampetta 1 Tandur 3 BTPS 2 Ditchipally 1 Ambewadi 1TAMILNADU Kalpaka 1 Hoody 1 Arni 4 kakinada 1 Kadakola 1 SV Chatram 4 Mamidipally 1 Yerendanahally 1 Kuzhithurai 2 Gajwel 1 Raichur 1 SP Coil 2 Sulurpet 1 Nelamangala 1 Alamathy 2 Kadra 1 Sirucheri 1 Kodasalli 1 GOAPOWERGRID (SR-I)POWERGRID (SR-II) Ponda 2 Nellore 2 Hiriyur 3 Xeldom 1 Vijayawada 2 Cochin 2 PUDUCHERRY Hyderabad 1 Hassan 1 Yanam 1 Munirabad 1 Madurai 1 NLC Talcher HVDC 1 Palakkad 1 NLC stg II 2 Cuddapa 1 Arasur 1 NLC stg II Expn 1 Pondicherry 1 NPC Vallur 3 Mysore 1 Bhavni 3 MEPL 1 KNPP 2 Kaiga 1 The status of weekly SEM data receipt as on every Monday 1700hrs and Tuesday 1200hrs is available at SRLDC website : srldc.org\commercial\weekly sem data Stations and SLDCs may pl check this and ensure timely data transmission

8. Details Time drift report receipt status: ANDHRAPRADESH: Not sending KARNATAKA: Nelamangala & Raichur only sending. TAMILNADU: Only Gumdipundi, Hosur,Kuzhithurai sending. PUDUCHERRY: Villianur not regular ISGS STATIONS: MAPS : Not sending NLC Expn I : Not regular CTU STATIONS: Time correction being done but report not being received regularly from few stations

9. Non-conformity to Tech.specification of SEMs installed by NLC TS-I Expansion Extract from Technical Specification of SEM installed as Interface meters by CTU 16.0 Each meter shall have a built-in calendar and clock, having an accuracy of 30seconds per month or better. The calendar and clock shall be correctly set at the manufacturer’s works. The date (year-month-day) and time (hour- min.-sec.) shall be displayed on the meter front (when VT supply has been connected), on demand. Only limited clock adjustment shall be possible at site, using the DCD. When an advance or retard command is given, six subsequent time blocks shall be contracted or elongated by ten seconds each. The meter shall not accept another clock correction command for seven days. All clock corrections shall be registered in the meter’s memory and suitably shown on print out of collected data.

10. No stamping of Time correction ‘rr’/’aa’ observed in the data of SEMs at NLC I Expn whenever time correction is done. SRLDC requested NLC to look into the matter for compliance No response from station in this regard till 29.06.12 NLC replies on 29.06.12 stating software corruption Request to rectify the problem Letters

11. Time correction problem of L&T SEMs correspondence SEMs of NP 7xxx-A series supplied by L&T being installed at new locations. Time correction done through DCD SEMs stopped functioning as reported by Simhadri, Nellore &RSTPS stations SRLDC requested CTU to take up the matter with L&T Defective SEMs being replaced as correction But corrective action by L&T yet to be informed. Recently same problem reported by Kaiga for new SEMs installed.

12. Status Status of standby SEM installation SRLDC advised installation of stand by SEMs in line with CEA (installation & operation of Meters) Regulations,2006 Accordingly SEMs installed at Kadra & Kodasalli and replaced 2Nos SEMs at KaigaAccordingly SEMs installed at Kadra & Kodasalli and replaced 2Nos SEMs at Kaiga Yet to be installed at other locations as advised Appropriate software for converting to text format not provided either to location or SRLDC at the time of installation Request to provide the software and acquaint the site personal at the time of SEM installation Also the same software to be installed at SRLDC Letters

13. Calibration of SEMs Calibration testing of CTU installed SEMs in progress SEMs installed by NLC also to be testedSEMs installed by NLC also to be tested Communication received from NLC in this regardCommunication received from NLC in this regard SRPC reply to NLC CTU/NLC to inform the status of calibration

14. The entire amount accrued (including interest) in the IRE account disbursed to the receivable entities on 28.05.2012The entire amount accrued (including interest) in the IRE account disbursed to the receivable entities on 28.05.2012 All entities received the IRE amount to confirm the same. The following is the status of funds transferred to PSDF Funds transferred Date UI A/c. Rs. Reactive A/c. Rs. Congestion Amount (e- bidding charges) Rs. Grand Total Upto 30.06.11 4,97,00,00,0002,42,42,16904,99,42,42,169 From 01.07.11 46,42,00,00003,33,38,191 49,75,38,191 Total543,42,00,0002,42,42,1693,33,38,191 549,17,80,360

15. Start up power drawal of Simhadri II Communication received from SRPC to be adhered CTU to assess the requirement of SEM for future as per connection agreement None of the stations furnishing the monthly variable cost to SRLDC as agreed in 17 th CSCM

16. PoC computation for October 2012 to March 2013 As per CERC order dt 10.02.12, PoC rates to be computed on Half Yearly basis for the year 2012-13. 5 th Validation committee for the FY 2012-13 held on 27.06.12 Final computation expected in July 2 nd week Last Validation committee meeting expected by July end

17. Mock Exercise on RRF Task Force on RRF constituted by MNRE for facilitating implementation of RRF mechanism 1 st meeting 10th April 2012 2 nd meeting 24 th April 2012 3 rd meeting - 21 st May 2012 4 th meeting held on 12-06-12 5 th meeting held on 02-07-12 Draft report of Task Force on RRF submitted to MNRE

18. Key Implementation Issues & Task Force Recommendations Issue-1 Issue-1: Criteria for identifying candidates for RRF 1.It is recommended that ‘ Pooling Station ’ be considered as basic ‘ building block ’ in respect of wind/solar generating stations for the purpose of scheduling, metering and energy accounting 2.The term ‘ Connection Point ’ and ‘ Pooling Station ’ arrangements may be defined clearly under IEGC/RRF Procedures in line with definition and types of arrangements as suggested at Para 3.3 of the Report. 3.Implementation of scheduling requirement and participation in RRF mechanism may be made mandatory for all Wind/Solar projects connected to Pooling Stations that are commissioned on or after 03.05.2010.

19. Issue-2: Evolving an alternate system of settling imbalances and RRF accounting irrespective of contract rate 1.It is recommended that ‘ Schedule Energy ’ instead of ‘ Actual Energy ’ based accounting treatment and commercial settlement mechanism will have to be followed for RRF eligible entities, similar to conventional generation projects with UI computations at Pooling Station end together with RRF Overlay account to determine the amount of hand-holding required for RE Generators (to provide immunity from UI mechanism for deviation of +/- 30% of schedules in case of wind and for deviation of +/-100% of schedules in case of solar). 2.Above accounting treatment for the purpose of RRF mechanism would be compatible with existing regional energy accounting framework However,the issue of ‘ Reference Rate ’ and proper accounting of ‘ green attributes ’ will have to be addressed. Key Implementation Issues & Task Force RecommendationsIssue-2

20. Issue-3: Roles and responsib ilities of various entities as well as institutio nal arrangem ents required for smooth implemen tation of the RRF mechanis m. 1.It is suggested that all State Utilities undertake urgent measures for installation of interface meters at Interconnection Points and at Pooling Station end and to account for energy injections and deviations at intra-State boundaries. 2.It is suggested that suitable Institutional Arrangement/ Registry for tracking/collating information regarding RE installations on regular basis needs to be put in place as highlighted under Para 3.2 and format for information tracking by Registry is provided at Annexure-8 3.The Task Force recognizes that the primary responsibility for scheduling and variability rests with the Generators. However, in order to facilitate implementation of the scheduling, accounting and de-pooling arrangements, a separate Institutional Entity needs to be recognised under regulatory framework for co-ordination and undertaking commercial settlement on behalf of Generators. 4.Task Force suggests that either the franchisee model or the Qualified Scheduling Entity model (as elaborated under Para 5.15) could be followed but the ground rules for the same should be laid out by the regulator. 5.Further, roles and responsibilities of various entities (RE Generator/ SLDC/ RLDC/ NLDC/ RPC/ Qualified Scheduling Entity) for the purpose of RRF Implementation may be clearly specified (as suggested under Para 5.17) through Regulations/Order. Key Implementation Issues & Task Force Recommendations Issue-3

21. Issue-4:Minimizing volatility in earnings due to the new mechanism 1.It is recommended that references to ‘ Contract Rate ’ under RRF procedures may be substituted with ‘ Reference Rate ’ either uniform Reference Rate at national level or State specific Reference Rate. 2.Various options for Reference Rate were deliberated. However, it is preferred that Reference Rate may be determined upon analysis of outcome of mock exercise that would have minimal impact on volatility of earnings due to new mechanism. Key Implementation Issues & Task Force Recommendations Issue-4

22. Issue-5: Ensuring sanctity of ‘ green energy ’ accounting. 1.The concerns of compliance of RPO framework on account of ‘ schedule energy ’ based accounting may be addressed through REC mechanism, however, the same would require modification to existing REC framework, which needs to explored further. 2.In any case, RPO is to be fulfilled in energy terms and annual basis as against RRF implementation which needs to be accounted in MW terms and on time-block basis. Key Implementation Issues & Task Force Recommendations Issue-5

23. Issue-6: Residual issues raised by stakeholders - Centralised v/s De- centralised forecasts for RE power - Handling backing down of RE power due to transmission constraints 1.Task Force opines that hybrid approach involving de- centralized forecasting as well as centralized forecasts is necessary to facilitate large scale grid integration of variable RE power.The De-centralised forecasting approach is necessary for commercial reasons and for which the developer is responsible while the centralized forecast approach is essentially for system security for which all the Load DespatchCentres (LDCs) are responsible. 2.As regards backing down of RE power due to transmission constraints, the Task Force observes that once the generators came under the scheduling process, there would be transparency and it would be possible to clearly quantify the extent of backing down due to different reasons and suitable mechanisms could be put into place. Key Implementation Issues & Task Force Recommendations Issue-6