The representatives of Indal disputed the arguments of KSEB in regard to
transmission charges, losses and surcharge. They reiterated that the Kayamkulam transmission system was dedicated to the Kayamkulam power station and was constructed with 400 kV parameters and the transmission sytsem therefore had a much higher capacity than the 220 kV system. Working out the transmission charge on the basis of Kayamkulam transmission was unscientific as the transmission charge was dependent on the power generated at Kayamkulam. Therefore the petitioner argued that a transmission charge of Ps 35/kWh based on the Kayamkulam transmission charges was
As regards transmission losses, the representatives of the petitioner reemphasised that power imported at Madakkathara would generally flow to the northern parts of the State and the requirements of power in the central areas would be met from the local generation and actually there would not be any physical transmission of imported power from Madakkara to Indal over the dedicated path, as a result of which there would be a reduction in losses to the extent of 0.2 MW in the KSEB's 220 kV system. Thus there would be an indirect gain for the KSEB due to the import of 30 MW for Indal. The petitioner argued that this point also should be taken into account while fixing the wheeling losses for the petitioner.
The representatives of the petitioner further stated that the load of Indal was such that the energy drawals remained more or less constant with a load factor of
overdrawals/underdrawals might take place
minor variations in actual some extent. Therefore, the
energy schedule for drawal should be made on monthly basis.
2.7 Subsequent to the hearing on 2.9.2003, the KSEB vide letter No.TRAC/SERC/INDAL/440 dated 16.10.2003 raised its claim towards total wheeling charges for transmission of power to Indal to Ps.147 per unit of energy as per the following brake-up:
Additional surcharge for compensating fixed cost of transmission and distribution Surcharge to compensate revenue loss
4 Load despatch, scheduling and system operation charges 5 ROE
Ps. 32/40 03
The claim was based on the assumption that power flow to Indal would be taking place over the Edemon-Sabarigiri-Pallom-Brahmapuram-Kalamassery-Indal feeders. The Commission vide letter No.12/4/KERC/2003/310 dated 21st October 2003 asked for details of load flow studies to substantiate the premise that power to Indal would be fed