MEMORANDUM FOR REVIEW OF ELECTRICITY ACT: 2003
UNDER NCMPTO PRIME MINISTER BY NATIONAL CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE OF
ELECTRICITY EMPLOYEES & ENGINEERS
9.7.2004
Memorandum to the Hon’ble
Prime Minister of India regarding the Electricity Act: 2003
Dear Sir,
We have seriously deliberated on the subject
referred to above and decided to submit the following for your kind
consideration and suitable action.
-
Preamble
The UPA government have announced a Common Minimum Programme for
implementation in which they have stated “Electricity Act: 2003 will be
reviewed” and the Prime Minister in his address to the Nation has stated “
Higher rates of economic growth, urbanization and the modernization of
agriculture will continue to increase the demand for energy. This demand can
only be met with new investment, increased efficiency and rational pricing. Even
as we plan to make more efficient use of conventional sources of energy, we must
invest in the development of non-conventional sources. We will evolve an energy
policy package that will cover all sources of energy and will address all
aspects like energy security, access and availability, affordability and
pricing, efficiently and environment.”
The experience of the power sector in the last 15 years of reform
driven by the policy of liberalisation and privatisation, in a nutshell are: -
-
This new act proposed
separation of rural India from urban. The power supply for the peasantry and
rural area is left out to local self -governments, NGOs etc..
-
In the name of resources
crunch the private monopolies -- foreign and Indian -- were invited for power
generation as Independent Power Producers (IPPs) and offered major incentives.
These incentives were guaranteed return on equity @ 16%, higher rate of
depreciation to an average of 8.04%, Higher O&M cost related to the Project
cost, full reimbursement of income tax treating it as a pass through item to
tariff, treating the exchange rate variation as a pass through item to tariff,
etc.
-
This resulted in increase in
cost of power. Central Public Sector Organizations also exploited the
situation and increased power cost like other IPPs and expedited the process
of SEBs becoming sick and a more than 3 fold increase in the cost of power
supply.
-
The high price of
electricity in the country led to closure of industries in many areas and
making Indian industry non-competitive. India’s power tariff for industry
currently is one of the highest in the world. The story of agriculture sector
needs no narration.
-
The power requirement of the
country has been inflated purposely, creating a panic situation and allowing
for more and more concessions to private and foreign capital.
-
The fuel policy has been
changed for using hydrocarbons for power generation. The use of naphtha as
fuel has led to huge increases in the costs of such power.
-
The power losses and theft
under the Electricity Boards has been exaggerated up to and above 50% and in
the name of improving efficiencies, the SEBs are being dismantled.
-
The cross subsidy system in
vogue has been changed and tariff rates for the peasants and poor sections
have been increased, in almost all cases faster than for other sections.
-
The private operators came
into field failed to fulfill their contract and hence power shortages become a
continuing process. We do not go into the experience of Orissa, Andhra, and
latest in Delhi and the notorious experience of Enron in Maharashtra. This is
in short our experience of reform period.
In
this context we are offering an alternative framework to that contained in the
Electricity Act 2003 from our experience.
The Engineers and
Employees are of the firm view that the Electricity (Supply) Act 1948 was the
appropriate instrument for the development of the Electricity Supply Industry in
the country. We have strong reservations on the need for enacting the
Electricity Act 2003 as it fails to addresses the core concerns of the power
sector, such as the need to reduce the cost of electricity, customer
satisfaction, rural electrification and the necessity for electricity service to
have a universal service obligation. The Act has not led to the reduction of the
subsidy burden on the Government; it merely shifts the nature and content of the
subsidy. The Electricity Supply Act 1948 was a time-tested legislation that has
enabled the growth and development of the electrical power supply industry. The
Electricity (Supply) Act 1948 enables private sector participation, open access
and trading consistent with public interest. What it does not allow is unbridled
profits to investors and speculation in power. Major improvements in the
functioning of the electricity industry can be brought about with within the
framework of the Electricity Supply Act 1948. The problem was not with the
legislation but with the implementation of the legislation. We, The engineers
and the employees of the Electrical power Supply Industry therefore demand that
the Electricity (Supply) Act 1948 be restored.
Without prejudice
to the above demand in view of the intention expressed in the Common Minimum
Programme (CMP) of the United Progressive Alliance to review the Electricity
Act: 2003 we are proposing a set of amendments that need to be made in the
present legislation.
-
Amendments Proposed
2.1 Amendment in the Statement of
Objectives of the Electricity Act 2003
-
Service to the customer and extension of
supply to rural areas should be the principal objective of the Act.
Privatisation and development of private market for power cannot and should
not be the objective of the Act.
-
Delivering power at affordable prices by
optimizing generation at the least cost.
-
Ensuring continued supply, at affordable
rates, to the agriculture sector in order to sustain food production and food
security, to government aided educational institutions, hospitals, small-scale
industries including cottage industries etc..
-
Ensuring that this essential and public
service has an obligation for universal service provision and is accessible to
all citizens and that electricity enables the balanced and coordinated
development of the all regions of the country.
-
Ensure that the balance between the Centre
and the states in the federal structure of India as envisaged in the
Constitution of India and Electricity (Supply) Act 1948 is not diluted.
-
Ensure that the wealth and assets created by
the Indian people is not taken over by Indian and foreign monopolies.
-
Rights and privileges of the employees
should be safeguarded.
-
Enable the conservation of energy through
suitable instruments in demand side management and proper choice and use of
fuels.
-
The profits of a regulated sector like power
should be capped based on the prime RBI lending rate and not an arbitrary
figure such as 16%. This should be part of the Act as it was in the 1948 Act.
The depreciation rate should also be realistic in line with the anticipated
life of the plant.
-
Cross-subsidies should continue in the
tariff formulation subject to an upper limit beyond which it will have to be
direct subsidy from the Government.
-
Power should be made available at affordable
to all sections of the people with special provision for agriculture.
-
Electricity development has to correct the
very large regional imbalances that exist in the country.
-
Tariff is to be fixed by the concerned
governments. The regulatory authorities should only be responsible for an
equitable implementation of such policies.
-
State Electricity Boards
Fundamental Issues: Generation, transmission and distribution are closely
interconnected activities that need to be coordinated in a holistic manner.
Considering the importance of electricity as an essential intermediate input for
economic development, there is a distinct advantage in integrating the
activities within a single organisational structure. Public ownership and
control is desirable as electricity supply is a utility service and its control
not to be left to be dictated by the market forces, would be detrimental to the
interests of a developing country like ours. Experience in various states has
shown that unbundling of the State Electricity Boards (SEBs with or without
privatisation) has not resolved the fundamental problems – burden of losses to
the SEBs or subsidy from the Government and T&D and other commercial losses. On
the other hand the other overheads on account of multiple organisations has
increased and so also the coordinated working. Experience of privatisation in
Orissa and Delhi is equally dismal.
The following are
the principles for detailing the amendments to the Electricity Act 2003
regarding SEBs:
-
The State Electricity Boards should be
retained as they are and restore where they have been split.
-
Budgetary subventions should be used to
reimburse the State Electricity Boards for sale of electricity below the cost
to serve.
-
Concessions made to any section of consumers
should be made transparent and quantified.
-
SEBs should be allowed to be financially
viable as envisaged in Section 59 of the Electricity Supply Act 1948 and the
Regulatory Commissions should ensure the financial viability.
-
SEBs must provide supply at defined
standards and ensure customer satisfaction even under conditions of shortages
-
Central Electricity Authority (CEA)
Fundamental
Issues: Electrical Power is an extremely capital and skill intensive industry.
Since its inception sections of the industry have exhibited cartel and monopoly
characteristics. Regulation of this industry is only possible with technical
knowledge. Since power has no finished goods inventory and can only be produced
when consumed. The planning is an integral part of regulation of the industry.
The following are
the principles for detailing the amendments to the Electricity Act 2003
regarding CEA:
-
CEA should be the repository of technical
excellence in India so as to enable it to a) Prepare a National Power Plan b)
Provide technical support to the Regulatory Commissions and governments c)
Apprise the techno-economic viability of generation and transmission projects
and d) evaluate the technical and commercial claims of manufacturers and
service providers.
-
CEA should maintain and regularly publish
for public consumption cost and performance data regarding the power industry.
The data should include all captive generation and all investments made in
transmission and distribution by private and public companies/boards.
-
CEA should periodically review and publish
the performance of all private or public distribution companies/boards.
-
Adherence to the National Electricity Plan
and Technical advice of CEA should be made mandatory.
-
Techno-economic clearance of all Power
Projects should be mandatory above 100 MW.
-
REBs, the main instrument of grid control,
should be made more effective and strengthened by restoring RLDCs with them.
-
CEA should be responsible for managing the
NLDCs and RLDCs so as to ensure that they function on a non-commercial and
impartial manner.
-
In order to ensure high standards, the
provision that the Chairman must be selected from amongst the members should
be restored.
3.0 Regulatory Commission (RCs)
-
RCs should be
professional bodies. No person should be made Chairman or Member of the RC
unless her/she has been associated with the electrical power industry for a
minimum period of 15 years.(Civil servants must only be permitted only if
their experience in industry related postings is more than 10 years)
-
Appointments to
RCs should be transparent and notified in public in order to invite objections
to the appointment of a person. The selection committee report should be
tabled in the legislature.
-
The expenditure
of the RCs should be a charge on the Budget.
-
The term “public
interest” should be clearly and specifically defined in its application with
regard to the jurisdiction and decisions of the RCs and the State Governments.
In case of a dispute between the RC and the State Governments opinion should
be sought from CEA/appellant tribunal/CERC.
-
RCs should have
the obligation to review all PPAs entered into before their coming into force
and regulate them in order to enable least cost supply to the consumer.
-
Responsibilities,
obligations and powers of the RCs should be clearly defined.
-
National
Guidelines should be issued by CERC so that there is some form of uniformity
in the decisions of the SERCs.
4.0 Generation
-
“Captive Generation” must be defined more
precisely so as to prelude large industrial units from making a back door
entry into generation and trading without assuming responsibility for rural
electrification that shall remain in the domain of the SEBs. The captive
generators should be regulated and should pay surcharge to compensate the SEBs
for their obligation for universal service provision.
-
Hydro power should not be privatized (A
hydro power site is a gift of nature and is finite, privatizing should not be
allowed of this finite resource)
-
There has to be social control on the
techno-economics of power plants. Choice of fuel and cost of the power plant
and consequent cost of generation must be regulated.
5.0 Open Access
and Trading
-
“open access” is meaningless in a situation
of supply shortages and shortfall in transmission capacity. Therefore, it is
neither desirable nor feasible to have unfettered open access.
-
Provisions for 2nd licencee for
distribution should be removed.
-
Universal service obligation is directly
hindered by unfettered open access since it tends to segregate the profitable
and the loss making segments of the supply industry and privatise only the
former.
-
Trading should be restricted only to the
public owned agencies since there is a grave danger of large speculative
profits if there is inadequate regulation leading. Under the present
conditions of shortages it is not possible to have on line market regulation,
consequently there will be cherry picking and domestic and agricultural
consumers will be the causality.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Akhil Bharatiya
Vidyut Mazdoor Sangh
All India Federation of Electricity Employees
All India Federation of Power Diploma Engineers
All India Power Engineers Federation
National Working Group on Power Sector
Electricity Employees Federation of India