| Work Detail |
In a recent development regarding the petition filed under Clause 17 read with Clause 7(A) 6 of MPERC (Grid Interactive Renewable Energy System and Related Matters) Regulations, 2022, and under Clause 6.40 of Madhya Pradesh Electricity Supply Code, 2021, the Madhya Pradesh Power Management Co. Ltd., Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore, and Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Bhopal, have sought the imposition of grid support charges on consumers with grid-connected rooftop renewable energy (RE) systems.
The matter was brought before the Commission during a motion hearing on July 18, 2023, where it was decided that the State Government and MP Urja Vikas Nigam Limited should be heard before deciding on the admissibility of the petition. The petitioners were directed to serve copies of the petition to the relevant authorities, and responses were to be filed within 15 days.
The New and Renewable Energy Department and MP Urja Vikas Nigam Limited submitted their responses in September and October 2023, respectively. At the hearing on October 10, 2023, additional time was granted for the New and Renewable Energy Department to submit responses on merit, and the petitioners were allowed to make a rejoinder within seven days. The case was scheduled for a hearing on October 31, 2023.
In response to the submissions, the Commission noted that the petitioners proposed the introduction of Network Support Charges (NSC) or Grid Support Charges (GSC) on consumers using grid support under net metering, net billing arrangement, and base load reduction during the day. The petitioners argued that the existing regulations result in unjust enrichment for consumers with rooftop RE systems at the expense of others.
The respondents, on the other hand, opposed the imposition of GSC without a public hearing, stating that the installed capacity of rooftop plants in the state is not significant enough to impact the distribution companies (Discoms). They argued that rooftop solar has reduced costly power purchases for Discoms and that any additional charges would hinder progress.
Interveners, including Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd, Pickrenew Energy Pvt. Ltd., and Vardhaman Textile Ltd, sought permission to intervene, expressing concerns about the potential impact on their interests. They were granted permission to submit objections/comments.
In the hearing on October 31, 2023, it was revealed that Vardhaman Textile had not submitted responses within the stipulated time, and comprehensive rejoinders from the petitioners were also not received. As a result, the Commission closed the opportunity for responses from Vardhaman Textile and the petitioners.
The key contention was whether grid support charges should be imposed to recover perceived losses incurred by Discoms due to factors such as deviation charges and wheeling charges related to rooftop solar generation. The respondents argued that the existing installed capacity of rooftop plants in the state is not significant enough to justify such charges.
In its decision, the Commission considered various factors, including the Ministry of Power’s recent notification specifying the minimum share of consumption of renewable energy for designated consumers. The Commission emphasized the need to encourage the enhancement of distributed energy sources in the state and dismissed the petition, stating that it is not inclined to consider the imposition of grid support charges at this stage. In conclusion, the Commission highlighted the gap between the required and installed capacity of distributed energy sources in the state and expressed the intention to review the matter regarding grid support charges as necessary. The decision reflects a careful consideration of the interests of Discoms, consumers, and the broader goals of promoting renewable energy in the state. |
