1

Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission

Vidyut Bhawan-II, J. L. Nehru Marg, Patna 800 021
Case No. 17/2015 /2012
In the matter of :
Petition for 4th Amendment in BERC (Terms and
Conditions for Determination of Tariff from Solar
Energy Sources) Regulation, 2010.
And
Bihar State Power Holding Company Ltd. .Petitioner
Coram:
1. Sri U. N. Panjiar - Chairman
2. Sri S. C. Jha - Member
Appearance :
1. Sri. Rajeev Amit, C.E. (Com.)
2. Sri Purushottam Prasad, EEE (Com.)
On behalf of SBPDCL
3 Sri Binod Kumar AEE, (Com.)
4 Sri Pawan Kumar, Accounts Officer
5 Sri Pranav Kumar, EEE, (Com.) On behalf of NBPDCL
6 Sri Awesh Jain On behalf of BIA, and Ruchi
Soya Industries Ltd.

Date of hearing: 29.05.2015 and 25.6.2015

Dated:10/07/2015
Order
1. Director Operations SBPDCL, Patna has filed a petition on behalf of
BSPHCL for 4th amendment in the BERC (Terms and conditions for
Tariff Determination from Solar Energy Sources) Regulations, 2010
for removal of difficulty in commercial settlement of banked solar
energy.
Commission has notified provisions for banking of Solar
Power for captive use, group captive use and for third party sale in
the BERC (Terms and conditions for Tariff Determination from
Solar Energy Sources) (3rd Amendment) Regulations, 2014 dated 1st
July, 2014.
Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP
 2

2. The petitioner SBPDCL has submitted the following:-

(1) BERC has notified BERC (Terms and conditions for Tariff
Determination from Solar Energy Sources) (3rd Amendment)
Regulations, 2014 dated 1st July, 2014.
(2) BERC has allowed facility of banking of Solar Power to Solar Power
Generators for Captive use, group captive use and for third party
sale.
(3) 2% of the banked energy shall be paid by the Solar Power
Generators to the Distribution licensee as banking charge.
(4) Banking facility will be available to the Solar Power Generators or
its users for full calendar year.
(5) Solar Power Generators or its users shall draw energy against
banked energy in a calendar year at any time except during peak
hours.
(6) In case energy against banked energy is not consumed by the Solar
Power Generators or its users it cannot be used in subsequent
years.
(7) The unconsumed energy against the banked energy during the
calendar year shall be paid by the distribution licensee to the Solar
Power Generators at the average power purchase cost of
distribution licensee during the calendar year.
(8) In case of third party sale of solar power, the transmission
licensee/distribution licensee and/or SLDC, as this case may be,
will provide open access within 30 days of application on payment
of required open access charges in addition to 2% banking charges.
(9) The commission has determined the rate at which Solar Power
Developer having no PPA for supply of power to DISCOM will be
charged for drawl of power during shutdown/maintenance of the
plant which is at applicable UI rate plus 5% of the maximum UI

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 3

rate or applicable rate for purchase of power from renewable energy

sources, whichever is higher.
(10) Solar Power Developers for captive use/group captive
use/third party sale falls under the category mentioned at Sl. No. 9
above as it does not have PPA for supply of power to DISCOM and
hence energy drawl in excess of banked energy is chargeable by the
licensee at the rate mentioned at Sl. no. 9 above.
(11) Difficulty arises in commercial settlement of banked energy
under the facility of banking of solar power as per the Regulations
mentioned at Sl no. 1 above in case where the Solar Power
Developer is a regular consumer of the distribution licensee under
HTS tariff which is billed at the applicable tariff notified by the
Commission and has set up Solar Power Generators having
installed capacity more than 1 MW for its captive use.
(12) Such Solar Power Generator is a captive user and have no
PPA for supply of power to DISCOM and falls under Sl. No. 9
mentioned above.
(13) Such Solar Power Generator uses the same
transmission/distribution line for injection and drawl of energy
against banking as well as for consumption of energy as consumer
under HTS tariff.
(14) The rate of drawl of power for such solar generator is as
determined by the Commission at Sl. No. 9 above is applicable UI
rate plus 5% of the maximum UI rate or applicable rate for
purchase of power from renewable energy sources whichever is
higher.
(15) The applicable tariff rate of HTS category is as per the tariff
order of the commission.
(16) The above two rates are different and hence arising difficulty
in commercial settlement of banked energy under Solar Power
Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP
 4

Banking in case where the Solar power Developer is a regular

consumer of the distribution licensee under HTS tariff which is
billed at the applicable tariff notified by the commission and has
set up Solar Power Generators having installed capacity more than
1 MW for its captive use.
(17) BERC has issued draft Regulation on Rooftop Solar Grid
Interactive systems based on Net Metering which is under the
process of finalisation, which shall be applied to the consumers
having maximum 1 MW installed capacity of roof top PV solar
generator in the premises. Further, rooftop solar system under net-
metering arrangement shall be exempted from banking.
(18) Cases in which solar power generators using the same
transmission/distribution line for injection and drawl of energy
against banking as well as for consumption of energy as consumer
under HTS tariff is nothing but a case of net-metering. However, as
per the draft regulation on net-metering, consumers availing net-
metering facility are exempted from solar power banking facility
and vice versa. Further, as a regular consumer under HTS tariff,
the licensee has obligation for 24*7 supply to the consumer as per
the Bihar Electricity Supply Code,2007 which is against the
provision mentioned at Sl. No. 5 above.
BSPHCL has prayed for suitable amendment in BERC
(Terms & condition for Tariff Determination from Solar Energy
Sources) (3rd Amendment) Regulations, 2014 under clause 38
(Power to remove difficulties) of the principal Regulation.

3. Comments /Suggestions/Objections:-

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 5

Bihar Industries association and M/s Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd.

have submitted the following comments for consideration of the
Commission:-

(1) Point no. 9 of the above referred petition has more relevance for a
fossil fuel based thermal power plant (and may have some
relevance for a biomass based thermal power plants) which goes in
annual shut down of 21 days to 2 months or so, whereas in case of
infirm renewable source of power generation i.e. solar.

(a) There is daily shut down of the plant in evening and start up
in the morning.

(b) There is no long duration shut down for maintenance, as

such plants get 14 to 16 hours time on daily basis for
maintenance.

(2) If the petitioner has issue in commercial settlement, a mechanism

can be derived under the guidance of Commission which should be
fair and just to all the stakeholders.

A suggested mechanism can be as under

(a) Banked power withdrawal should not be allowed in evening

peak hours.

(b) Banked solar power can be settled proportionately as per TOD

duration tenure applicability.

(3) Net metering and banking of solar power can be allowed up to 3

MW capacity instead of 1 MW (as proposed in states roof top solar
policy under discussion), as 1 MW is too low a capacity for State
like Bihar where PLF of such solar roof top power plants is
expected to be 16 to 18 %. Also it is highly unlikely for any

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 6

developer to have rooftop available to install rooftop solar above 3

MW. In this way a single regulation of net metering may resolve this
issue. It is worth mentioning here that DERC has proposed
capacity of roof top solar power plants in Delhi equivalent to
contact demand of the consumer cum developer.

(4) Further, all over the World, "on grid" solar power user and producer
uses only one transmission line for seamless synchronization with
grid at HT/LT voltage, so captive solar power plant developers
should be viewed as extension of DISCOMS and both needs each
other 24*7 for proper functioning of their respective businesses.

(5) In order to understand the case of a captive rooftop solar power, we

would like to demonstrate the case with a likely scenario (after 2
years) in case of Ruchi Soya Industries Limited (RSIL) Bihar.

(a) Annual power consumption-1 crore units.

(b) Likely power generation from roof top captive solar power
plant-32 lakhs units.

(c) Likely quantum of solar power consumption at generation

point 20 lakhs units.

(d) Likely quantum of power to be banked with the grid-12 lakhs

units.

So just to avail facility of power banking for 12 lakhs units,

the Developer may have to pay UI charges on 70 lacs units,
which may expose the Developer cum Consumer to
unnecessary hardship and the same may prove to be
counterproductive and there will hardly be any developer who
can come forward to set up roof top solar power plant.

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 7

(6) M/s Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd has further submitted that in
CERC (Grant of Connectivity, Long Term Access & Medium Term
Open Access in Inter-State Transmission and related matters)
(Third Amendment) Regulations, 2013, it is given that In case of
solar generation, no UI shall be payable / receivable by Generator.
The host State shall bear the UI charges for any deviation in actual
generation from the schedule.

Also as per CERC Procedure for implementation of the

mechanism of Renewable Regulatory Fund ( Annexure-II), point no.
7 regarding Scheduling and settlement of accounts in case of
Solar Generators, it is given, in sub-point (7.1) The schedule of
Solar Pooling Stations shall be given by the Coordinating Agency
based on availability of the generator, weather forecasting, solar
insolation, seasonal and normal solar generation curve and shall be
vetted by the concerned SLDC/RLDC in which the generator is
located and incorporated in the intra-state/inter-state schedule. If
SLDC/RLDC is of the schedule is not realistic, it may ask the
concerned Coordinating Agency to modify the schedule.
(7.2) In the case of solar generation, no UI shall be payable
by/receivable to the Solar Generator/Coordinating Agency.
(7.3) In the case of intra-state sale of solar energy, the purchaser
shall pay the pooling station at the contracted rate for actual
generation.
(7.4) In the case of inter-state sale of solar energy, the purchaser
shall pay the Solar Generator at the contracted rate for actual
generation.
(7.5) the implication of UI charges due to the deviation for
purchasing State and host State shall be settled through the RRF.

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 8

Policies (and/or drafts) of A.P., Haryana, Karnataka,

Rajasthan, Tamilnadu, Telangana & UP do not recommend
imposition of UI charges for CPP (Captive Power Plants).
(7) The Commission should look into provisions in CERC guidelines /
other States policy and make necessary amendment & disallow
imposition of any type of UI charges or any other additional
financial burden on Rooftop CPP developers to encourage private
investors to invest in renewable energy sector (i.e. solar).
As a State, we (Bihar) have very little potential of wind power
and with the population density of 1100+ per sq. km., we hardly
have any land to develop land mounted solar power plants in one of
the most fertile area of the world, so installation of Rooftop Solar
must be encouraged through conducive policy framework.
(8) Commission & DISCOMs may pay a visit to 10 MW solar
power plant of our associate Company M/s GHI Energy Pvt. Ltd.,
Porbandar, Gujarat or they may request M/s ITC Ltd. Munger,
Bihar to show their Off-grid 100 kW Rooftop Solar Power Plant.
This visit will help all the Stakeholders to understand others
requirement.
(9) M/s Ruchi Soya is not getting power at proper voltage and
frequency from the grid. Voltage drops to as low as 27 kV. In such
situation imposition of UI charges for 16 to 18 hours a day will be
a double whammy for the consumer cum CPP developer.
4. Hearings :

Matter was heard on 29.05.2015. Earlier Commission had issued

notice of hearing and 17 stakeholders were informed to submit their
comments/suggestions/objections on the petition of SBPDCL. The case
was heard again on 25.06.2015 and Order was reserved.

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 9

5. Commission's View and Findings:-

5.1 The petitioner BSPHCL has raised the issue that the Commission
has determined in Regulation 35 (3) (vii) of the Bihar Electricity
Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions for Tariff
Determination from Solar Energy Sources) Regulations, 2010 added
by the BERC (Terms and Conditions for Tariff Determination from
Solar Energy Sources) (3rd Amendment) Regulations, 2014, the
tariff for power drawn by solar power developer have no PPA with
the distribution licensee during shut down/maintenance for plants.
The tariff for power drawn by such generators during shut
down/maintenance of the plant is applicable UI rate plus 5 %
maximum UI rate or applicable rate for purchase of power from
renewable energy sources, whichever is higher. But if the solar
power developer is also a consumer of the petitioner licensee, he
has to be charged the tariff at the rate applicable for the relevant
category of consumer. Thus difficulties arises in commercial
settlement of banked energy under the facility of banking of solar
power in case where the solar power developer is also a regular
consumer of the distribution licensee under HTS tariff which is
billed at the applicable tariff notified by the Commission and has
set up solar power generating plant having installed capacity more
than 1 MW for its captive use.

The Commission is of the view that the provision of

Regulation 35 (3) (vii) of the Bihar Electricity Regulatory
Commission (Terms and Conditions for Tariff Determination from
Solar Energy Sources) Regulations, 2010 as added by the 3rd
Amendment applies only to the generator and not to a consumer.
Power generated from a solar power plant is an infirm power since
it generates electricity only when solar light is available and does
Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP
 10

not generate in the night and during a rainy/cloudy period. The

period when solar power plant does not generate electricity due to
non-availability of solar light cannot be considered as the period of
shut down for maintenance since solar power plant does not
require shut down for its maintenance. Therefore, Regulation 35
(3) (vii) of the Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and
Conditions for Tariff Determination from Solar Energy Sources)
Regulations, 2010 amended by the BERC (Terms and Conditions
for Tariff Determination from Solar Energy Sources) (3rd
Amendment) Regulations, 2014 does not apply to captive solar
power plant. At a time when the solar power plant is not
generating electricity, the captive solar power generator requires
energy for its consumption as a consumer and not as a generator.
Solar power generator availing banking facility may also be a
consumer.

The tariff applicable for relevant category of HTS consumer

shall apply to the consumer having captive solar power plant also.
Therefore the Commission clarifies that if an HTS consumer
consumes energy in the peak hours, he will be charged at the tariff
determined by the Commission for relevant category of consumer
for peak hours and the energy consumed by him during the
periods other than peak hours, will be billed net of banked energy,
at the tariff determined by the Commission for non-peak hours.

5.2 The petitioner has also raised the issue that if the captive solar
power developer having capacity more than 1 MW uses the same
transmission and distribution line for injection and drawl of energy,
it will be a case of net metering and such consumer cannot avail
the facility of banking and vice-versa.

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP

 11

The Commission has notified BERC (Rooftop Solar Grid

Interactive System Based on Net Metering) Regulations, 2015
published in Bihar Gazette vide Notification No. 737 dated
07.07.2015. These Regulations are applicable to consumers
generating upto 1 MW of Rooftop Solar Power for captive use, using
net metering facilities and will not apply to consumers who have
roof top solar power plant of capacity more than 1 MW.

Therefore, if a consumer is also a captive solar power

generator of capacity more than 1 MW, he will not be covered by
the BERC (Rooftop Solar Grid Interactive System Based on Net
Metering) Regulations, 2015 and may avail banking facility under
BERC (Terms and Conditions for Tariff Determination from Solar
Energy Sources) (3rd Amendment) Regulations, 2014.

5.3 Coming to the issue of use of same transmission and

distribution line for injection and drawl of energy against banking
by a captive solar power generator, the BERC (Terms and
Conditions for Tariff Determination from Solar Energy Sources) (3rd
Amendment) Regulations, 2014 do not specify that a solar power
generator availing banking facility for captive use shall necessarily
use different transmission and distribution lines and different
meters for injecting power into the grid and for drawl of energy from
the grid. Similarly the Regulations do not specify that a solar power
developer availing banking facility for captive use cannot use the
same transmission and distribution lines for injection of energy
into the grid. Therefore it is clarified that if a solar power developer
is also a consumer and is availing banking facility for captive use,
he can inject solar power into the grid and draw energy from the
grid using the same transmission and distribution lines and same
meter. As provided in the banking regulations, he cannot consume
Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP
 12

banked energy during peak hours and the consumption during the
peak hours shall be billed at the appropriate tariff for that category
of consumers as determined by the Commission.

Accordingly the clarification may be issued.

The petition is disposed of with the above directions.

Sd/- Sd/-
(S. C. Jha) (U. N. Panjiar)
Member Chairman

Case No. 17/2015 4th Amdt.- Solar-SKP