SOUTHERN REGIONALPOWER COMMITTEE

BANGALORE

MINUTES OF THE 62NDMEETING OF THE OPERATION COORDINATION

COMMITTEE OF SRPC HELD ATBANGALOREON8THAUGUST 2011

  1. INTRODUCTION
  2. The 62ndmeeting of the Operation Coordination Committee was held at Bangaloreon 8thAugust 2011. The list of Participants is given at Annexure-I.

1.2Shri S.D.Taksande,MemberSecretary I/c, SRPC welcomed the delegates to the 62ndOCC Meeting. Hesaid that with good rains the grid parameters in Southern Region had improved and expressed hope that the efforts would be sustained. He on behalf of OCC placed on record the excellent grid discipline shown by Karnataka under the able guidance of CEE (LD) KPTCL which had not received any violation message during past three months. HVDC Bhadravathi related issues were deliberated in detail in a Special Meeting held in Mumbai on 29th July 2011. The importance of the link was highlighted since this link had imported about 6549 MU during 2010-11 (which was around 30% of Kerala consumption). It was pointed out to WRTS PGCIL that the healthiness of the link was very essential to SR constituents. The issue regarding provision of under voltage relays at critical nodes was taken up with TCC members and reply was awaited from all the constituents. LILO of 400 kV Almatti - Sriperumbdur at Vallur was completed by PGCIL and CoD was from 1st August 2011. The LILO of 400 kV Gazuwaka – Vemagiri at Simhadri Stage II was also commissioned and put into commercial operation on 1st August 2011 by PGCIL. The LILO of 400 kV Sriperumbudur – Puducherry line at Sunguvarchatram was completed on 31st July 2011 by TANTRANSCO. NTPC had been advised to take one unit of 500 MW for maintenance during July 2011 which they were unable to take up. However one unit of 500 MW at Talcher Stage II had been taken for shut down from 7th August 2011. The hydro position was relatively better compared to previous yearby around 2000 MU. NTPC could appraise the forum of the developments at Talcher Stage II with regard to the directives of OSPCB. Other generators could also apprise the committee of the action initiated by them to avoid such contingency. He said that availability of Ramagundam Stage I & II was more than 100% during July 2011 which deserved appreciation.

1.3SE (LD&GO) TANTRANSCO thanked PGCIL and SRLDC for the timely assistance and also SRPC for coordination with regard to the completion of LILO workat Sunguvarchatram.

1.4MS I/C SRPC requested Shri S.R.Bhat, SE-I, SRPC totake up the Agenda items for discussion.

1.5The agenda items were taken up for discussion.

2.CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 61STMEETING OF OCC OF SRPCHELD ON 8THJULY 2011

TheMinutes of the 61stOCC were confirmed since there were no comments from constituents.

3.MAJOR ISSUES

3.1Shutdown of Talcher units

3.1.1Talcher Stage-II units were taken outfrom the gridunder the directions of Orissa StatePollutionControlBoardas given below:

Unit III:1816 hrs of 30.06.2011

Unit IV:0546 hrs of 04.07.2011

Unit V:0551 hrs of 05.07.2011

3.1.2In the 61st OCC meetingfollowingwas noted:

  • Seniorofficials of NTPC were visiting Orissatoreview the situation
  • NTPC had hired a Consultantfrom IIT, Chennai
  • APTRANSCO had pointed out thatthere had been information blockageon behalf of NTPC. NTPC should have come out with details.Other constituents had also endorsed thisview of APTRANSCO.
  • KPTCL had observed that the OSPCBissue wouldhave been long pending. The SR constituents were kept in the dark about the situation. NTPC should apprise the SR constituents on why appropriate precautionary and timely measures had not been taken which hadeventually led to such a big crisis.
  • NTPC had informed that four units from Talcher were tobe taken outasper the directives. M/s. MCL had also been directed by the OSPCB to restrict the coal supply for 1000 MW generation only.
  • SRLDC had pointed outthat NTPC had not shared anyinformationabout the crisisearlier. SRLDC was informed only when the third unit was taken out of the bars. Subsequently also very little information was forthcoming from NTPC.

  • MS I/c, SRPC had observed thatthere would have been a build-up for the crisis, and NTPC ought to have shared the information with the constituents earlier. This would have helped them plan their load generation balance.
  • NTPC was requested that sufficient advance notice regarding bringing back of the Talcher units be given to SRLDC/SRPC enabling corridor management to be carried out suitably. A detailed report on the crisis and steps taken by NTPC to avoid such situation in other NTPC stations in the region should also be made available to the SR constituents.
  • Subsequently units were revived as given below:

Unit V 0400 hrs of 13thJuly 2011

Unit IV 0632 hrs of 13thJuly 2011

Unit III 1041 hrs of 13thJuly 2011

3.1.4AGM, Talcher NTPC informed that on 2ndJune 2011 there was subsidence of the ash lagoon -2 of Ash Dyke-1which had resulted in reduction of ash handling capacity. The subsidence had not affected any private land, agricultural land or river. Subsequently to the incidence, there was no spillage of ash outside the outer periphery of ash dyke. On 28th June 2011, OSPCB had directed the closure of four units at Talcher Stage II citing mainly the above incidence alongwith few other issues. The other issues earlier raised by OSPCB from time to time were addressed regularly by NTPC. Action plan and action taken reports were submitted to OSPCB on a regular basis. CMD, Director (Operation) and top officers of NTPC had visited Bubaneshwar to resolve the issue. Theyapprised the PCB of the situation and also action taken by them. NTPC had consulted IIT Chennai on the stability of the ash pond. A Professor from NIT Rourkela was also monitoring situation at the site itself. OSPCB had permitted NTPC to run the Stage-II units up to 31st August 2011. The progress on action plan was being regularly monitored andperiodical reports were being submitted. Future course of action would be decided on 31st August 2011 after OSPCB visited the site and reviewed the situation. He assured that NTPC was taking all efforts to ensure that the action plan works were completed as per schedule.The issues related to subsidence and stability would be done on an emergent basis and would be completed within a month’s time. Certain long term action plan had also been finalized which would be implemented by 2013. Though the notice for shut down was given on 28th June 2011 NTPC had convinced OSPCB and no unit was taken out for shut down. On 30th June 2011 Unit III went out on BTL and the unit was not allowed to be revived by PCB. Unit IV and V were taken out on 4th and 5th July respectively, however by lot of persuasion Unit VI was kept on bars. SRLDC was regularly apprised of the situation. The revival of the units was informed on 12th July 2011 as and when the permission was granted by PCB.

3.1.5DD, PCKL enquired why only Talcher stage II units were asked to be shut down while there was no such directive for Stage I.

3.1.6MS, I/C, SRPC said that the constituents mayapprise their respective management that theOSPCBconsent was conditionalandsituation would be reviewed bymonth end. He requested NTPC to keep the constituents / SLRDC / SRPC appraised of the developments on a regular basis.

3.1.7SE (LD &GO), TANTRANSCO suggested that MoP could be approached foradditionalallocationfrom unallocated quota of other regions, in case Talcher Stage II units wereforcedto be shutdown from 31stAugust 2011 onwards.

3.1.8SRLDC emphasized that advanceinformationregardinganyfurther outage duetoPollutionControlBoarddirective should bemade available. This was in view of limited corridor available. In case, Talcher Stage IIunits were again shutdown for any reason, corridor could be made available to the constituents.

3.1.9It was also viewed with concernby OCC that though the ash dyke was commonforStage I & II units of Talcher, only Stage II units were orderedtobe shutdown by OSPCB.

3.1.10OCC suggested that developments, if any,on the above issues maybe communicated by NTPC forbettergrid planning.

3.1.11 AGM, NTPC assured that action for all other stations had been initiated and directives from NTPC top management had been given to each of the stations.

3.1.12MS I/c, SRPC suggested that other generating stations should alsoinitiatesimilar action in this regardtoavoidany contingency.

3.2 Tripping of HVDC Bhadravathi

3.2.1The issueregardingtripping of HVDC Bhadravathi was deliberated in the 60th & 61st OCC Meetings. MS I/C, SRPC informed that the issue was further taken up in a Special Meeting held at Mumbai on 29th July 2011 with participation from Power Grid, WRLDC, SRLDC, WRPC & SRPC. Minutes of the meeting is enclosed as Annexure-II.

3.2.2It was noted that WRTS-I, PGCIL vide letterdated 5thAugust 2011
(Annexure-III) had expressedconcern on the harmonic levels whenever the link was getting loaded beyond 800 MW. DGM, SRTS-II, PGCIL said that the issue of inter area oscillations needed to be addressed and till such time the flow needed to be restricted. PSS tuning of the generators also needed to be carried out. He added that their OEM (M/s ALSTOM) had recommended that flow should not be more than 800 MW on sustained basis.

3.2.3MS I/c, SRPC observed that the averageloading on the HVDC terminal at Bhadravathi in comparisonto the worldwide figures was on the higher sideleaving no margin for any contingency which had also beennotedduring the Special Meeting. The reasons for the harmonics and their intensity at different levels of power flow were yet to be ascertained.

3.2.4PGCIL also said that whenever the flow was more than 800 MW humming sound was being observed and in the past PGCIL had faced bushing / converter transformer problems.

3.2.5GM, SRLDC said that simultaneous measurements of harmonics at Chandrapur & Ramagundam needed tobecarried out at various power levels. PGCIL could makeavailable the necessary instruments requiredfor the study. However, it was yet to be established whether the harmonics would come down, in case the power flow was getting reduced.

3.2.6SE-I, SRPC pointed out that it was decided in the SpecialMeeting that the issueregarding higher harmonic level at Ramagundam andpower oscillations was to bereferredby WRTS-I with the Corporate Office. The issue raised by PGCIL regarding restricting the flow to 800 MW also needed to be examined by the constituents, since demands for higher inter-regional ATC were already there.

3.2.7MS I/c, SRPC said that after scrutiny byCorporate Office, PGCIL maytake up the issue with SR constituents. The issue would need to be taken at higher level since it had technical/commercial implications.

3.3Coal StockPosition

3.3.1It wasnoted that as perCEA norms, coalstockposition is termed as critical (< 7 days) or super critical (< 4 days) of coal stock. The daily Coal stock position report as on 7thAugust 2011 as downloaded from CEA website is furnished at Annexure-IV. It was noted that the coal stock position in the following thermal stations was less than that for 7 days generation:

a)Kothagudem TPS – 4days

b)Rayalaseema TPS – 6 days

c)Raichur – 5 days

d)Tuticorin TPS – 3 days

e)Ramagundam (NTPC) – 4 days

3.3.2It was noted that the issueregardingCoalStockpositionandother associated issues wasalsodeliberated in the SRPC meeting held on 30thApril 2011. SRPC had suggested that generators maintain the coal stock position as per norms to avoid any loss of generation.

3.3.3OCC expressedconcernover the lowcoalstockpositionin the stations mentioned in Para – 3.3.1 above. It was also notedwith concern that the coal stock at Ramagundam was adequateonly for 4 days.

3.3.4DE (PP), APTRANSCO pointed out that a strikein Telengana was planned from 17thAugust 2011 onwards andhence the coalsupplyspecifically from Singareni Mines could get affected.

3.3.5DGM, Ramagundam, NTPC said that they were making efforts to augment the coalstockand the generation was notlikely to beaffectedif the strike was for 2-3 days only. NTPC was coordinating withlocaladministration and the Railways in this regard.

3.3.6The constituents pointed out that NTPC could planmaintenance of one of its units during this period. NTPC pointed out that it would be difficult to plan for Annual Maintenance at such short notice and moreover the duration of the strike was also not certain.

3.3.7OCC suggested that NTPC, Ramagundam could declare 90% of normative DC till the coalstock builds to at least 7 days which would actasbufferduring the strike period. NTPC pointed out that the coal storage position may not improve since supply from Coal Companies was also linked to the daily consumption of coal in the station and reduction in DC would affect coal supply position. NTPC was making all efforts including imported coal to augment the coal stock. They were in constant touch with local administration and railways to overcome the situation. However, NTPC was requested to consider all possible measures to augment the coal storage position at Ramagundam STPS through higher off take of imported coal etc.

3.3.8OCC alsoexpressedconcernover NTPC notfurnishing the requisiteinformation in the format thoughall the generators of Southern Region were furnishing this information. OCC againrequestedNTPC to furnish the information in the format given below:

COALSTOCK POSITION

Generating Company: ......

Month: ......

Name of the StationName of the station / StatutoryRequirement / Minimumcoalstock in the month / Coalstockasonlastday of the month / Steps taken to supple-ment stock / Timeby which positionlikelytoimprove
In lakh T / In no. of days / In lakh T / In no. of days / In lakh T / In no. of days

Signature:

Designation:

Contact Tel. No:

InformationfurnishedbyAPTRANSCO, KPCL & TN is given in Annexure-V.

3.3.9OCCurged the generators to maintaincoalstockasper the norms to avoidanyloss of generation.

3.4Facilitation ofInter-State/Inter-Regional transfer of powerutilization of IPPs

3.4.1On a review of the bilateral exchanges madeby the constituents andalso by the embedded IPPs duringJuly2011, it wasnoted that Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala& Tamil Nadu had importedpower inter-regionally Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Lanco & IPPs/CPPs located Karnataka had exported power inter-regionally. During the month, Utilities located inAndhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala & Tamil Nadu had imported power through Power Exchange while the utilities located in Andhra Pradesh,Karnataka andLancohadalso exported power.

3.4.2The constituents were beingrequestedtofurnish details of anyrequirement/surplus (quantum, period, time of day, tentative rates, etc.) along with details of contactperson to enable SRPC to post this information on its website, to enable faster buyer/seller interaction.

3.4.3It was alsonotedthat Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala & Tamil Nadu had furnished the relevantdetailsregardingenergy exchanges through Power Exchanges (Annexure-VI).

3.5Generation Schemes scheduled for 2011-12

3.5.1Progress of generation schemes scheduled tobecommissionedduring 2011-12wasreviewed. The updated information as furnishedby the constituents is given at Annexure-VII.

3.5.2On a queryaboutprogress of Unit I at TS – II Expansion, CM, NLC informed thatthough Unit I wastest synchronized on 18thMay 2011 and lignite fired on 30th May 2011, there were number of issues and the unit was presently generating around 55 MW only. With oil firing, the Unit was getting stabilized while there were some difficulties in lignite firing which were being addressed. He added that the station was based on CFBC technology which was new.

3.6Pump modeoperation of Kadamparai and Srisailam

3.6.1It was noted that Kadamparai machines had consumedabout51.39 MU in pumpmodeduring the month. Srisailam had not operated in pump mode during the month due to sickle plate problem.

3.6.2 On a query, ADE, APGENCO said that they would furnish the summary records of the discussion of the Expert Committee consisting of CWC Engineers and other experts which had met on 8th, 9th & 10th June 2011 at Srisailam Left Bank Power House.

3.7Minimum toMaximumdemand ratio

3.7.1It was noted that Members were aware that the matterregardingwide variation betweenmaximumdemand and minimum demand was beingregularly taken up with the constituents in the OCC meetings. The details of percentage variation between maximum and minimum demand for the month ofJuly2011are given below:

State / MaximumtoMinimumDemandVariation %
Highest / Lowest / Average
Andhra Pradesh / 23.39
24th(Sunday) / 8.11
1st(Friday) / 17
Karnataka / 38.95
7th (Thursday) / 23.82
10th(Sunday) / 32
Kerala / 51.34
26th (Tuesday) / 34.69
1st (Friday) / 44
Tamil Nadu / 20.71
2nd(Saturday) / 9.06
23rd (Saturday) / 15
Puducherry / 37.5
2nd (Saturday) / 10.55
24th(Sunday) / 18
Southern Region / 25.10
7th(Thursday) / 10.75
1st (Friday) / 17

Note: Highest and lowest have been computed from daily values over the month.

3.7.2It wasrequested that the constituents initiateallpossible measures toensure appropriate DemandSideManagement and EnergyEfficiency Programmes considering that there were sizeable energy and demand shortages in the States with capacityadditiongenerallynot matching with demand growth in addition to also limitations in possible import of power. MS I/c, SRPC informed that the SRPC/TCC were also appraised of the above in the recent meeting. The constituents were requested to come out with specific details of proposed new approaches to Demand Side Management so that these recommendations could be put up to TCC/SRPC.

3.8LGBR forecasted figures vs. actual figures

It was notedthat the variationsbetweenactualand forecasted availability/requirements LGBR figureswere less than 10% inrespect ofall the Statesexcept in the following cases:

Forecasted / Actual / DeviationfromActual / % Variation / Reason
Karnataka
EnergyAvailability in MU / 4588 / 4175 / -413 / +10 / Planned purchases were reduced.
EnergyRequirementin MU / 4099 / 4552 / +453 / +10 / Very highgrowthrate of 26%
Demand Availability in MW / 7598 / 6907 / -691 / -10 / Reductionin thermal and purchases
Kerala
Energy Availability in MU / 1356 / 1517 / +161 / +11 / Morehydro, purchasesand ISGS generation

3.9MoP targets vs. actuals

3.9.1It was noted that MoP monthlygeneration targets for the month of July2011inrespect of hydro generation targets for Andhra Pradesh & Tamil Nadu had not been met. Gas/Diesel generation targets for Andhra PradeshKeralahad not been met for the month. Private sector targets had not been met for Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka & Tamil Nadu. In respect of CGS, the generation target had not been achieved by Kayamkulam, Neyveli TS-I, TS-I Expansion, Talcher Stage-II MAPS. On a cumulative basis (April – July 2011) hydro targets had not been met by Andhra Pradesh. Gas/diesel targets for Karnataka, Kerala & Tamil Nadu had not been met. Private sector targets had not been met by Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka & Tamil Nadu. In respect of CGS generation target had not been achieved by Kayamkulam, Neyveli TS-I,Neyveli TS-I Expansion, Talcher Stage-II & MAPS.

3.9.2DE (PP), APTRANSCO said that the gasallocation had reduced toabout 70% andtherefore there was somedeficitin gas generationboth in Joint and Private sector. Hydro inflows had improved only after 22nd July 2011 and hence the target was lagging for the month and on cumulative basis also.