Reading Time: 2 minutes
Sitac Kabini Renewables Private Limited has filed a petition under Section 79(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003, seeking adjudication of a dispute arising from Power Grid Corporation of India Limited’s (PGCIL) revocation of Long-Term Open Access (LTOA) granted to the petitioner for evacuating 300 MW from its Wind Power Project. The revocation was based on the delay in submitting a Bank Guarantee, a requirement under the Long-Term Access Agreement dated 23.01.2019.
The petitioner, following MNRE guidelines, won a bid from SECI for a 300 MW ISTS-connected Wind Power Project. Initially planning to connect to the Existing Bhuj GSS, the petitioner faced a change in the delivery point to Bhuj-II PS (GIS) (New) due to connectivity complications. Despite uncertainties, the petitioner proceeded, securing Stage II Connectivity and LTA at Bhuj-II PS. However, issues arose, including the delayed disclosure of the substation’s location, impacting project viability.
PGCIL, on 09.01.2019, granted LTA for evacuation from Proposed Bhuj-II S/s, and the petitioner entered into agreements with PGCIL and SECI. Delays in the Bhuj-II project, resulting from regulatory compliance issues, further complicated matters. The petitioner requested an extension for submitting the Connectivity BG but faced challenges due to uncertainties about the substation’s location.
PGCIL, on 03.06.2019, revoked the LTA, citing the petitioner’s failure to submit the required Bank Guarantee. The petitioner, subsequently, filed a fresh application for LTOA on 28.12.2019, which was granted on 19.02.2020, along with a new Long-Term Access Agreement. The petitioner sought a refund of the Application Bank Guarantee of ₹30 lakh, conceding other prayers.
PGCIL argued that the petitioner’s non-compliance led to the revocation, emphasizing the importance of timely submission of the LTAA Bank Guarantee. The petitioner, however, pointed to uncertainties arising from changes in the delivery point and delays in regulatory processes.
The regulatory framework, including the Connectivity Regulations 2009 and Detailed Procedure, outlines conditions for encashing the Application Bank Guarantee. The petitioner, citing a Commission order dated 30.12.2019, sought relaxation, but the Commission noted distinctions between the cases.
The Commission rejected the petitioner’s request for a refund, emphasizing the clarity in the regulatory framework regarding the conditions for encashment. The failure to furnish the LTAA Bank Guarantee within the stipulated period resulted in the revocation of LTA and encashment of the Application Bank Guarantee.
This case highlights the challenges faced by renewable energy projects in navigating regulatory complexities and underscores the importance of adherence to timelines and compliance requirements. The decision emphasizes the need for clear communication and transparency between stakeholders to avoid uncertainties that can impact the financial viability of such projects.
Please view the document below for more details.
