POWER SECTOR STATUS & TARIFF IN ANDHRA PRADESH (2000-01)

POWER SECTOR STATUS & TARIFF IN ANDHRA PRADESH (2000-01)

1. The Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board (APSEB) used to be one

of the most efficiently managed Electricity Boards in India. It had consistently won Awards for the high Plant oad !actor (P !) achie"ed by its generating stations. But of late# the annual re"enue deficit of APSEB had steadily

increased from $s. %&' (r. in year 1))*+)& to $s. ,&-- (r. in year 1)))+ ,---. The increase in tariff from time to time was neither regular nor

ade.uate. The deficit amount was met by /o"ernment of Andhra Pradesh (hereinafter called /oAP) as subsidy# which had also not been 0aid in cash most of the time. Table+1 below gi"es!( the details. Table-1 EXPENDITURE - REVENUE SUBSIDY-TARIFF REVISION 1escri0tion 1))*+ )& 4144 ($s. in (rores) 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+,--(Pro".) 4&', *,%&*)% '-42 '4'& ,**4 11,) 141,&)
Ad9usted against oan

E30enditure $e"enue $eco"ered ,,'2 $e"enue 1eficit5 oss %&' 46 $7$ on 8et !i3ed Assets %' Total Subsidy )** E.uity Subsidy written Paid5ad9usted by off /oAP

4&&% ',, 1,) %&1

*424 114& 1,, 1,&2

*2,) ,*-' 11, ,&1)

(ash oan of $s. &*& (r.# Bonds $s.11-- (r. Total $s.12*& (r. 1-6 41.1,.)%

*%'& ,&-1', ,2',

(ash grant of $s.1-& (r. : Bonds for $s.4-14.,* (r. raised +

Ad9usted $s.*%4 against (r. oan Ad9usted against oans 4,6 1.%.)2 +

Tariff $e"ision

1)6 ,.%.)&

,.

The reasons for the huge deficits were hea"y subsidi;ation of 0ower to

Agricultural and 1omestic consumers and growing transmission and distribution losses. 4. The consum0tion 0attern of 0ower in the State showed that about 4)6

of 0ower sold was consumed by the !arm sector but it contributed only about 46 of the re"enues because of highly subsidi;ed tariff. Category S. 8o 1etails Table-2 !"e # Sale" $ # Re%e&'e Real!"at!o& 1)))+,--6 To Total Sales 6 To Total $e"enue

1))'+)% 1))%+)) (Actls) (Actls) APSEB APSEB

6 To Total Sales 6 To Total $e"enue 6 To Total Sales 6 To Total $e"enue

,---+,--1 (Pro9ected)
6 To Total Sales 6 To Total $e"enue

1 , 4 * & 2 *.

1omestic
8on+domestic

Agricultural Industrial Traction 7thers

1) * 4) ,% * 2

,% * &) % 1

,* 4) ,2 4 %

,1* &2 % ,

,1 & *,, * %

1) 1* &% ' ,

,4 & 42 ,' 4 2

,1 1& && ' ,

The domestic sector was also subsidi;ed substantially. The le"els of

subsidi;ation both in Agricultural and 1omestic tariffs were as gi"en below< Table-(
S. 8o. 1 , 4 9 1 , 4 9 7 REVENUE RECOVERY PER UNIT 1)))-2*** R"+ ,1etails
.T.
,Pro%!"!o&al/ ./ # o0 a%erage 1o"t 2er '&!t

Do3e"t!1 8on+domestic Industrial Agr!1'lt'ral =.T. Industrial (ategory+I Industrial (ategory+II Traction+> A%erage real!"at!o& 2er U&!t A%erage Co"t 2er U&!t

1456 *.14 4.2) *416 *.4) *.)1 *.,% 14)8 24)1

7848( 1*1.), 1,2.%541) 1&-.%2 12%.'4 1*'.-% 5848* 1**4**

&.

The resultant deficit amount was co"ered 0artly by cross+subsidi;ation

during tariff fi3ation and the balance# which was a substantial amount "arying from $s. )** (r. to $s. ,2', (r. was 0aid by the /o"ernment annually as e30lained earlier (Table+1). 2. The transmission and distribution losses were high at about 446.

These were wor?ed out as the difference of the gross units of 0ower 0urchased and units of 0ower sold. 7"er the last si3 years# while the 0ower 0urchases increased by 446 0ower losses increased by 1'46. =owe"er# following the energy audit conducted by APT$A8S(7 during 1))2+)'# APT$A8S(7 conceded the e3istence of energy theft in the system and reduced the consum0tion attributed to the Agricultural Sector. This e30lains the sudden increase in the loss figures from 1))2+)'. Table-9 T $ D :OSSES
@ear Power Power Total Energy /enerated Purchased =andled in in AB in AB AB Power Sales in AB oss of Power in AB oss Percentage

1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))5-)8 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+-,---+-1

(Pro9ected)

1)#&-,-#*1' 2(;*)) ,*#241 ,&#,*2 ,'#4)* ,'#,,1

)#1,) %#'4, 6;7*1 11#1%' 1,#422 14#42& 1&#*-'

,%#2,) ,)#1*) (1;5** 4&#%1% 4'#21, *-#'&) *,#2,%

,4#-)& ,4#&2, 21;*56 ,4#)** ,&#,,* ,'#&,4 ,'#&4%

&#&4* &#&%' 1*;7(2 11#%'* 1,#4%% 14#,42 1&#-)-

1).44 1).1' ((4(( 44.1& 4,.)* 4,.*' 4&.*-

'.

!or the year ,---+,--1 the 0ro9ected losses were 4&.*-6. The units of

0ower shown against agriculture might not reflect the actual consum0tion of 0ower by the !arm sector as the 0ower consum0tion by !arm sector was not metered. In Andhra Pradesh# all ser"ices e3ce0t the !arm sector were 4

metered. The metered consum0tion accounted for only *16 of the total 0ower handled. Table-7
PERCENTA<E OF UNITS BI::ED TO T.E TOTA: ENER<Y PURC.ASED

S4 No 1 , 4 * &

De"1r!2t!o& 1omestic 8on+1omestic Industrial Public ighting =igh Tension TOTA: =

1))9-)7 1))7-)5 1))5-)8 1))8-)6 1))6-)) 1)))-** 116 ,6 *6 16 ,46 91# 116 ,6 *6 16 ,,6 91# 1,6 ,6 *6 16 ,,6 91# 1,6 46 *6 16 ,-6 9*# 146 46 *6 16 1%6 ()# 1*6 46 *6 16 1%6 91#

%.

The balance 0ower related to !arm Sector (onsum0tion and TC1

losses including commercial losses. As the !arm sector was not metered# it was not ?nown what 0art of it was the actual consum0tion by the !arm sector and what 0art of it was on account of theft and other commercial losses. This meant that it was not 0ossible to arri"e at a firm figure of total T C 1 losses in Andhra Pradesh. Tariff for Agriculture was fi3ed in terms of the ca0acity of the 0um0 set e30ressed in =orse Power (=P). Power was su00lied to the !arm sector for ) hours a day. There were 1.%) million agricultural ser"ice connections as of Aarch ,---. As these were not metered# the consum0tion of 0ower by !arm sector was wor?ed out# ta?ing & =P as the a"erage ca0acity of 0um0sets and that su00ly was used for 12-- hours in a year . The a"erage ca0acity and the e3tent of usage of 0ower were only best assum0tions. The Agricultural consum0tion so estimated was )%1& AB for the year ,---+,--1. This amounted to an a"erage annual consum0tion of &1,2 DE= 0er consumer as against ,-41 DE= during 1)%1+%,# when Agricultural consum0tion was metered.

).

The consum0tion mi3 of 0ower in the State was .uite ad"erse. Ehile

the !arm sector consum0tion was *-6 of the total consum0tion# the Industrial consum0tion remained almost stagnant at ,,6. Table - 5
Category 1omestic 8on+domestic Agricultural Industry $aiway Traction 7thers Total CATE<ORY- ISE CONSU>PTION IN >U" )9-)7 )7-)5 )5-)8 )8-)6 )6-)) ))-** 4,14 2', 1-),, 22)&)* %** ,,)4& 4,'2 '-* 114)) 22*' 24, '*, ,4*-4%-1 ')& '%4& 2'%4 2%2 1-,4 ,-),4 *&4& ),' )442 2''%&14,* ,4'*, &-)1-2)%22 22&4 %&, 12,4 ,&1** &%&* 14&1114% 21*1 )-,1*,'&,4
# o0 total 1o&"'32t!o&

,1 & *,, * % 1--

1-.

It a00eared that bul? of the increase in 0urchase of 0ower was to meet

the growing demand of !arm and 1omestic sectors# thereby causing more re"enue losses through increased 0urchase of 0ower. There being no corres0onding increase in the consum0tion of industry# the burden of increasing cross+subsidi;ation fell on e3isting industries and therefore there had to be a limit to the cross+subsidi;ation in tariff. The tariff for industrial sector had already reached a le"el where any further increase was li?ely to render e3isting industries to go in for ca0ti"e 0ower generation or relocation. Table - 8
S. 8o. 1 , 4 * 1 , 4 9 7 REVENUE RECOVERY PER UNIT 1)))-2*** R"+,1etails ,Pro%!"!o&al/ .T. 1omestic 8on+domestic Industrial Agricultural =.T. Industrial (ategory+I Industrial (ategory+II Traction+> A%erage real!"at!o& 2er U&!t A%erage Co"t 2er U&!t 1.2% *.14 4.2) -.1% *.4) *.)1 *.,% 14)8 24)1
./ # o0 a%erage 1o"t 2er '&!t

&'.'4 1*1.), 1,2.%2.1) 1&-.%2 12%.'4 1*'.-% 5848* 1**4**

11.

The cost reco"ered from the sales was less than the a"erage cost of

su00ly due to huge losses incurred# highly subsidi;ed tariff for su00ly of 0ower to !arm sector# substantially subsidi;ed domestic sector# limitation to further cross+subsidi;ation and the tariff not being re"ised regularly or ade.uately. Table - 6 COST RECOVERY FRO> SA:ES ($s5Dwh) 1escri0tion A"erage (ost of Bnit
(ost reco"ered from sales

1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+-,Pro%!"!o&al/

1.4* -.)% ',6

1.&1 1.-4 2%6

,.-4 1.2% %46

,.,) 1.%, ')6

,.'% 1.%4 226

,.)1 1.)' 226

Percentage 1,.

The /oAP had been 0ro"iding subsidy to the e3tent of about 4- to 4&6

of the total e30enditure to meet the re"enue deficit as well as the statutory 46 return on the net fi3ed assets to the Board. Table - ) <o%er&3e&t S'b"!?y ($s. in (r.) 1escri0tion Total Subsidy Total (ost Allowed Percentage of Subsidy to full cost 14. 1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+-,Pro%!"!o&al/

)** 4144

1,&) 4&',

%&1 *,%-

1,&2 &*)%

,&1) '-42

,2', '4'&

4-.146 4&.,&6 1).%%6 ,,.%*6 4&.%-6 42.,46

The StateFs financial 0osition also being not so good# the subsidy was

mostly ad9usted against the /o"ernment loans. In other words# the Electricity Board did not recei"e "irtually any amount in cash to co"er the re"enue deficit resulting in cash crunch and li.uidity 0roblems.

Table-1* EXPENDITURE - REVENUE - SUBSIDY ($s. in (rores) 1escri0tion Total Subsidy 1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+,--(Pro".) )** 1,&) %&1 1,&2 ,&1) ,2',
Ad9usted $s. *%4 (ash oan of (ash grant of $s. &*& (r.# $s.1-& (r. : against (r. Bonds Bonds for oan Ad9usted $s.11-- (r. $s.4-14.,* against Total $s.12*& (r. raised (r. oans

Subsidy E.uity Ad9usted Paid5ad9usted by written off against /oAP oan

1*.

This had in turn forced the Board to borrow money to settle the bills for 0urchase of coal and 0ower. The Board also raised funds by way of Bonds guaranteed by the /o"ernment. The /o"ernment was re.uested to ser"ice the debt arising out of these Bonds as the Bond issue was resorted to on account of the non+recei0t of subsidy from the /o"ernment. The /o"ernment had agreed to ser"ice the debt arising out of the bonds raised to the e3tent of $s. 11-- (r. during 1))% as 0art settlement of the subsidy for the year 1))%+

)). The non+a"ailability of funds in cash to the e3tent of the re"enue deficit had resulted in increased borrowing and increased debt ser"ice. 1&. Table -11 REPAY>ENT OF :OANS ($s.in (r.)
S. 8o. 1 , 4 Particulars A. Instl.(reditors B. /o"t. oans Total (A:B) 1e0reciation 1))*+)& *1& 4% *&4 ,%' 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 2%2 &) '** 4*% '2) , ''1 *1) 11,1 ,11*1 *4& %', 4-11', *&) 1)))+--G ,---+-1G (Pro".) (Pro9ected) 2*1 &2)1 4-, ,11 &1 ,2, 44'

(G) !igures relate to APT$A8S(7 only.

Table-12 INTEREST C.AR<ES

($s. in (r.)

S. 8o.

Particulars

1))*+)& *&1 ,-) 22-

1))&+)2 2)1 14%,1

1))2+ )' %4& 4% %'4

1))'+ 1))%+)) 1)))+,---G ,---+,--1G )% (Pro".) (Pro9ected) )21 4* ))& 1,-2 ,11*12 2&2.&* )).%1 '&2 *,-.44 1'&.22 &)2

1 A. Instl. (reditors , B. /o"t. oans 4 Total (A : B)

(G) !igures relate to APT$A8S(7 only.

1&.

iability on re0ayment of loans was higher than de0reciation.

The

Board was therefore not able to ser"ice the debts and this in+turn had resulted in rescheduling of loans or further borrowing resulting in hea"y outstanding liabilities. Table -1( OUTSTANDIN< :IABI:ITIES ($s. in (r.) Deta!l" H45)' T7TA ,1),
(G) !igures relate to APT$A8S(7 only.

E&? o0 H45)% ,2-45)) 1%''

G

45,--1--*G

12.

It was assured that the /oAP would 0ro"ide the necessary funds to the

e3tent it had to 0ay towards the subsidy. Another $s.4--- (r. were raised by APT$A8S(7 during 1))) by way of Bonds. The /o"ernment was e30ected to ser"ice these bonds. 1'. It was in this bac?ground# the /oAP had ta?en u0 the $eforms in the

Electricity Industry and enacted Andhra Pradesh Electricity $eform Act# 1))% (hereinafter called the I$eform ActI) which came into effect from -1+-,+1))). The Andhra Pradesh Electricity $egulatory (ommission (hereinafter called the I(ommissionI) was constituted on 41+-4+1))) under the $eform Act. 9

FUNCTIONS OF T.E CO>>ISSION UNDER APER ACT; 1))6 1%. Bnder the $eform Act# the /oAP had di"ested itself of all regulatory

functions in fa"our of the (ommission# retaining for itself 0olicy matters including 0lanning and co+ordination. The functions of the (ommission included inter+alia the following:

To aid and ad"ise the State /o"ernmentJ To issue licences To regulate the wor?ing of the licenseesJ To 0romote efficiency# economy and safety in the use of the electricityJ To regulate the 0urchase# distribution# su00ly and utilisation of
electricity# the .uality of ser"ice# the tariff and charges 0ayableJ

To 0romote com0etition and 0rogressi"ely in"ol"e the 0artici0ation of

0ri"ate sectorJ

To collect data and forecast on the demand and use of electricityJ To re.uire licensees to formulate 0ers0ecti"e 0lansJ To regulate assets# 0ro0erties and interest in 0ro0erties related to the
electricity industry in the StateJ

To lay down a uniform system of accounts among the licensees.

1). 7f the "arious functions of the (ommission# fi3ation of tariff for bul?

and retail su00ly of 0ower was an im0ortant function of the (ommission. Ehile fi3ing tariff# the (ommission was re.uired to ?ee0 in "iew both the interest of the consumer as well as the consideration that su00ly and

10

distribution could not be maintained unless the charges for the electricity su00lied were ade.uately le"ied and duly collected. ,-. Eith the enactment of the $eform Act# the APSEB was unbundled into

K/enerationF and KTransmission C 1istributionF entities by constituting /eneration (or0oration of Andhra Pradesh (AP/E8(7) C Transmission (or0oration of Andhra Pradesh imited (APT$A8S(7) on -1.-,.)). The

Andhra Pradesh Electricity $egulatory (ommission was constituted on 41.-4.1))). APT$A8S(7 was further unbundled w.e.f. -1.-*.,--- into LTransmission (or0orationM and four L1istribution (om0aniesM (1IST(7AS)# which would function as subsidiaries of the Transmission com0any till the 0ri"ati;ation of the 1IST(7AS too? 0lace. APT$A8S(7 was both the Bul? and $etail Su00ly icensee. icensing of the 1IST(7AS had been under

0rocess in the (ommission.

,1.

As one could see# there were se"eral challenging issues before the

$egulatory (ommission to handle in order to achie"e the ob9ects of the $eform Act. These were essentially related to fi3ation of tariff and efficient management of 0urchase# transmission and distribution of 0ower.

,,.

The immediate tas?s before the (ommission was to im0ro"e the

o0erational efficiency of the sector# reduce technical C commercial losses and the scale of cross+subsidi;ation to the minimum by ensuring that within a category of consumers# the total cost of su00ly to the category was reco"ered which would hel0 efficient use of 0ower# introduce metering in the agriculture sector# le"y tariff or raise tariff for su00ly of 0ower to !arm sector# meet situations arising out of non+0ayment of subsidies assured by the /o"ernment 11

while subsidi;ing su00ly of 0ower to !arm and 1omestic sectors and for this reason reduce the de0endence on e3ternal subsidy# mo"e towards (om0ensatory tariffs# im0ro"e the financial "iability and credibility of the utility to attract 0ower de"elo0ers and finally reduce the cost of su00ly. I33e?!ate Ta"@" be0ore tAe Co33!""!o& Im0ro"e o0erational efficiency. Ainimise cross+subsidy. Aetering of Agriculture (onsum0tion $educe TC1 osses. $educe e3ternal subsidy. Ao"e towards com0ensatory tariffs. Aa?e the icensee financially "iable. $educe the cost of su00ly of 0ower.

ANNUA: REVENUE REBUIRE>ENT ,4. The icensee was re.uired to file the Annual $e"enue $e.uirement

(A$$) 5 E30ected $e"enue (harges (E$() for the ensuing year in 1ecember# i.e. three months before the new financial year. The filings must include the re.uired tariff 0ro0osal for filling the ga0 and might include commitment if any# with regard to subsidy from the /oAP.

,*.

APT$A8S(7 filed the first A$$5 E$( before the (ommission on 7n A0ril 2#,--- a

1ecember ,)# 1))) for the year ,---+,--1.

su00lementary A$$5E$( was filed before the (ommission.

12

,&.

7n A0ril '# the !iling for Pro0osed tariff was made. A correction to

su00lementary A$$ 5 E$( was filed on Aay %# ,---. The filing of A$$5 E$( was as follows< Date o0 ERC F!l!&g

,2.

APT$A8S(7 first filed the A$$5E$( on 1ec ,)# 1))) 7n A0ril 2#,--- a su00lementary E$(5A$$ was filed 7n A0ril '# ,--- filing of Tariff Pro0osal was made A correction to su00lementary E$(5A$$ was filed on Aay %#,---

It would be noted from the se.uence of e"ents that the icensee did

not file its 0ro0osal for tariffs in the first instance. Instead it filed the same in A0ril after the financial year had commenced.

,'.

In their filing the icensee had re.uested for< i. 1e"iation from the Si3th Schedule of the Electricity (Su00ly) Act# 1)*% by including recei"ables on the 0ositi"e side of the ca0ital base# 0ayables and wor?ing ca0ital borrowings on the negati"e side of the ca0ital base. The de"iation was re.uested as a measure to better align the ca0ital base with the shareholders e.uity. ii. Eai"ers for incom0lete information due to limitations of database. A ma9or data limitation 0ertained to estimation of losses and thereby to un+metered consum0tion# which was largely constituted by agricultural consum0tion. iii. A !uel C Power Purchase Ad9ustment (!PPA) formula that 0ro"ided for additional 0urchase of 0ower a0art from increase in fuel costs.

13

i".

Ta?ing into account $s. &-- (r. which the APT$A8S7 would generate as efficiency gains.

"i.

(reation of a $egulatory Asset in case of une30ected e"ents that cause either e30enditure to increase or re"enues to fall.

,%.

APT$A8S(7Fs A$$ was 0resented as $s.),44 (r. To begin with#

two ad9ustments were incor0orated by the (ommission to the re"enue re.uirement for the year (,---+-1). These were e3clusion of $s ,12 (r for !uel and Power Purchase Ad9ustment and deduction of $s. &-- (r towards efficiency gains. After ad9ustment of these# the A$$ 0ro9ected wor?ed out to $s. %&1' (r. Against the A$$ of $s. %&1' (r# after ta?ing into account the estimated sales re"enue at current tariff of $s. &*42 (r# the ga0 that remained unco"ered was $s. 4-%- (r To co"er this ga0# APT$A8S(7 0ro0osed a

tariff increase of 1&6 that allowed them to earn additional $s. %-% (r and indicated that the balance amount of $s. ,,', (r. was e30ected to be co"ered by e3ternal subsidy from /oAP. Table- 19 ANNUA: REVENUE REBUIRE>ENT ($s. in (r.) 1escri0tion APT$A8S(7 A$$ + Pro0osed ),4* >ariable (ost Ad9ustment Efficiency gains A$$+after deductions $e"enue at (urrent Tariffs /AP to be co"ered Pro0osed Tariff Increase + 1&6 Subsidy E30ected from /oAP ,12 &-%&1% &*4' 4-%1 %-% ,,', 14

PURC.ASE OF PO ER ,). The most critical element of the A$$ was the cost of 0ower. This had

been steadily increasing as a 0ro0ortion of the total e30enditure from &*6 of the total e30enditure during 1))*+)&# to %*6 during ,---+-1. Table - 17 PoCer P'r1Aa"e Co"t to Total ED2e&?!t're 1escri0tion E30enditure Power Purchase (osts 6 of Power Purchase (osts to E30enditure 4-. 1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+-(Pro".) 4144 12%2 &*6 4&', ,1-& &)6 *,%,*1& &26 &*)% 4*2* 246 '-42 &--2 '16 '4'& &'*2 '%6 ,---+-1 (Pro9ected) %422 '-*1 %*6

The (ommission has therefore made a critical e3amination of "arious

sources of 0ower and costs of 0ower from these sources. 41. Sources of Power (ost of Power Prudence in E30enditure

APT$A8S(7 had estimated 0urchase of *,2,%.*4 ABs of Energy for

the year# ,---+-1 as the re.uirement for meeting the consum0tion demands. The (ommission had ta?en into consideration the following factors in its methodology of estimating the 0ower costs. Au3iliary (onsum0tion as 0er actual trends. 7"erhauls (AP/E8(7) as 0er schedules. A"ailability from 8TP(s as 0er 0ast trends. >isa?ha Steel Plant gross generation ta?en to the grid.

15

Eindage losses ad9usted to 16 Transit losses included in the coal cost. !ree Eheeling + Transmission by 1is0lacement + only )- ABs ta?en.

4,.

Additional units (1-- AB) from un+utilised ca0acity of AP/P( . =ydel /eneration on the basis of ten year a"erage. Aerit order selection.

The (ommission acce0ted the 0ro9ected .uantum of 0ower but

redefined the sources of 0ower based on the methodology ado0ted abo"e ta?ing into account actual a"ailability of 0ower from "arious sources including the merit order selection to o0timi;e 0ower costs as gi"en below. Table - 15 So'r1e" a&? B'a&t'3 o0 E&ergy APTRANSCO CO>>ISSION R"4+U&!t AP/E8(7 ,2)'%.1& ABs ,',,1.*' ABs 1.4) AP/P( 4%4.-- ABs **4.-- ABs 1.*' (/S )2'-. -- ABs ))4-.-- ABs 1.&1 SEBs 2*-.&- ABs 2*-.&- ABs ,.-* 7thers *1%.** ABs *1%.** ABs ,.1IPPFs *,4%.,* ABs 4%%&.-- ABs ,.)!ree wheeling -.-- ABs )-.-- ABs Total U&!t" 9252649( >U" 92526491 >U" 44. As a result# APT$A8S(7Hs 0ro9ected e30enditure of $s. '4,4.*, (r

for 0urchase of 0ower was reduced to $s.'-*1.21 (r. The (ommission thus reduced 0ower 0urchase costs by $s.,%1.%1 (r. Table - 18 D!00ere&1e !& 1o"t" !& 2oCer 2'r1Aa"e ($s. (r) APT$A8S(7 '4,4.*, (7AAISSI78 '-*1.21 1I!!E$E8(E ,%1.%1

16

PRUDENCE IN OT.ER CRITICA: ITE>S OF EXPENDITURE 4*. below< (a0ital Base. Eages C Salaries. $e0airs C Aaintenance. Ta3es. 1e0reciation. (ontribution to Em0loyee funds etc. 4&. (a0ital base inclusi"e of ca0ital wor?s in 0rogress< N A00ro"al of the The (ommission e3amined other critical items of e30enditure shown

items to be included in this category was based on the consideration of used and useful assets with regard to e3isting ca0ital em0loyed. In the case of new 0ro9ects# the (ommission allowed the in"estments for system im0ro"ement. In"estments for re0airs and moderni;ation were also allowed as such in"estments hel0ed reduce losses. The (ommission did not agree to the de"iation from the Si3th Schedule re.uested by the icensee for inclusion of recei"ables# 0ayables and wor?ing ca0ital ad9ustment in the ca0ital base as such a re.uest was not considered a00ro0riate# es0ecially since it would# among other as0ects lead to loading of future consumers the burden of 0ast mismatches in recei"ables and 0ayables. The (ommission was howe"er# o0en to the idea of allowing interest as an e30ense on any loan ta?en to meet the additional wor?ing ca0ital re.uirements with corres0onding ad9ustment in the ca0ital base. At one stage as an alternati"e# it was re.uested by APT$A8S(7 that consumer de0osits be ta?en out from the negati"e side of

17

the ca0ital base but this was re9ected by the (ommission as APT$A8S(7 was using those de0osits. 42. Eages and Salaries<+ The 1A rates were moderated ta?ing the trends

of increase in the consumer 0rice inde3. The 1A increases estimated by the licensee at &6 on each date a re"ision was due from -1.-1.,--- onwards i.e. -1+-'+,--- and -1+-1+,--1 with cumulati"e effect was considered high in "iew of the 0resent trends of increase in the consumer 0rice inde3. 4'. 1e0reciation<+ This was reduced by about $s. 4- (r. on account of

reduced le"el of ca0itali;ation for the year 1)))+,--- as the incom0lete wor?s were not ta?en in the (a0ital Base. 4%. (ontribution to Em0loyee !unds<+ icensee had 0ro0osed contribution

for 0ension and gratuity at 4,.*46 based on the re0ort of an Actuary. As this a00eared to be "ery high# the (ommission too? a .uic? estimate from another Actuary who estimated it as only 146. Pending further e3amination of the issue# the (ommission allowed only 146 towards 0ension and gratuity contributions. The (ommission further directed the icensee to 0ut such

funds in a trust fund with a Ban? on a non+drawal account so as to 0re"ent the 0re"alent 0ractice of abuse of such funds. 4). As a result of the abo"e e3amination# the (ommission reduced the

A$$ by $s.2&, (r. Table - 16 D!00ere&1e !& Co"t"

($s. In (rores)

A3o'&t" Re?'1e? Power Purchase Eages C Salaries ,%, *)

A3o'&t" I&1rea"e? $easonable $eturn Ta3 on Income 4 % 18

A00ro"ed oan Int. 1e0reciation Bad 1ebts (ontribution to Em0l. !unds Total $eduction

1&' ** ), %) '14

1ebt $edem0tion 8on Tariff Income

4) 11

Total Increase

21

Net Re?'1t!o& ,81(-51/ E 572 *-. The !uel C Power Purchase Ad9ustment formula# based on which a

0ro0osal for inclusion of $s.,12 (r. was made# was not allowed as only fuel cost charges could be allowed as 0ass through under Section ,2()) of the $eform Act. Accordingly the (ommission disallowed $s.,12 (r. The licensee would howe"er be entitled to fuel surcharge ad9ustment based on actual increase in fuel cost on a formula to be a00ro"ed by the (ommission.

*1.

The 0ro0osal made by APT$A8S(7 to mobili;e $s. &-- (r. towards

Kefficiency gainF during ,---+,--1 through reduction in losses and im0ro"ed 0roducti"ity measures was acce0ted by the (ommission. The (ommission committed the icensee to the offer of $s.&-(r as efficiency gain. This was considered more 0ositi"e and concrete ste0 than sti0ulating any decreases in transmission C distribution losses. 1irecti"es were also issued to su00lement the efficiency gains with regard to billing and reduction of losses. $e.uest for treating the amount not achie"ed from efficiency gains as $egulatory Asset was re9ected. *,. The icensee was committed to the offer of efficiency gains by

ad9usting the same in the annual re"enue re.uirement. Inclusion of efficiency gains in the o0inion of the (ommission was an im0ortant ste0 es0ecially since 19

the offer was "olunteered by the icensee itself. This ob"iated the need for the (ommission sti0ulating any 0ercentage reduction in transmission and distribution losses since any such sti0ulations would be meaningful only if losses were measurable and were accurately measured.

*4.

After ad9ustment of amounts towards !uel and Power Purchase

Ad9ustment formulae and efficiency gains# the (ommission determined the A$$ as $s. '%2& (r for the ensuing year. !urther re"enue from current tariffs was increased to $s. &**% (r by including additional $s. 11 (r of non+tariff income o"erloo?ed by the icensee in its filings. The /a0 to be co"ered finally was $s. ,*1' (r as against the $s. 4-%1 (r filed by APT$A8S(7. Table - 1) F!&al Re%e&'e <a2 - APERC 1escri0tion A$$ + before deductions >ariable (ost Ad9ustment Efficiency gains A$$+after deductions $e"enue at (urrent Tariffs /AP to be co"ered Pro0osed Tariff Increase + 1&6 Subsidy E30ected **. APT$A8S(7 ),4* ,12 &-%&1% &*4' 4-%1 %-% ,,', APE$( %&%1 ,12 &-'%2& &**% ,*1'

At this stage it would be a00ro0riate to discuss the issue of

Transmission C 1istribution losses (TC1)# which were "ery high. =igh Transmission losses are largely due to inade.uate system# 0oor maintenance and outdated e.ui0ment. In the case of distribution losses# a large 0ercentage was due to theft and 0ilferage. osses in transformers and long T lines were

considerable. Eithout reduction in T C 1 losses# the "iability of the sector 20

could not be ensured.

The 0roblem# howe"er# was how could the

(ommission sti0ulate defined reductions in T C 1 losses when estimates of these losses were only KguestimatesFO Agriculture consum0tion was not metered and it was 0aid on a flat rate based on ca0acity in terms of =P of the 0um0set. The (ommission therefore 0referred to acce0t the icenseeFs

estimates of Transmission losses at *.&-6 and 1istribution losses of 4-.)-6 for this tariff filing. (Slide-26)

As 0er the 0ro9ections of APT$A8S(7< E=> + *.&- 6. 1ist osses + 4-.)- 6 to gross 0urchases. Technical N 1'.)- 6. (ommercial N 14.-- 6.

*&.

Puantified estimates of efficiency gains were instead considered more

a00ro0riate than sti0ulation of loss reductions. 1irecti"es were gi"en to the icensee to immediately install meters at interface 0oints for 0ro0er energy audit and also to fi3 meters at a00ro0riate re0resentati"e 0oints for arri"ing at a reliable assessment of Agricultural (onsum0tion.

*2.

The methodology used by APT$A8S(7 to arri"e at agricultural Aany States face the same 0roblem with

consum0tion was interesting.

regard to estimates of agricultural consum0tion. In its filings# APT$A8S(7 0ro9ected agricultural consum0tion as )%1& ABs. This was based on a figure of 1%.)- la?h 0um0sets wor?ing for % hrs a day for ,-- days using an a"erage 0um0set ca0acity of &=P. 1ifferent estimates of studies by other grou0s were e3amined. 8o estimate could be said to be better than the other. Some of the studies 0ro9ected consum0tion figures as low as *&-- ABs. Aany contended 21

during the 0ublic hearing that 0um0sets were used only for * to & hours a day and only for about 1*- + 1&- days. The (ommission howe"er 0referred to acce0t the estimates 0ro9ected by APT$A8S(7 for the current filing as all other estimates were also guestimates. It# howe"er# directed the licensee to conduct immediately studies on i) census on agricultural 0um0sets# and ii) sam0le study of agricultural consum0tion on the basis of metered dis0atch on related feeders5transformers and metering of re0resentati"e sam0le 0um0sets. At the same time# the (ommission had designed the metered tariff in such a manner that it 0ro"ided incenti"e for metering of agriculture. *'. In their A$$ filings the icensee had stated that billing on the basis of

meters re0resented only *16 while the rest &)6 constituted Agricultural consum0tion and all losses. The (ommission had directed the icensee to im0ro"e the metered billing le"els from *16 to *%6 by the end of the year. TARIFF DESI<N AND TARIFF RATES < *%. The a00roach to tariffs was summari;ed in the Tariff Philoso0hy of the

(ommission. This 0hiloso0hy was to address immediate and long+term concerns of the 0ower sector. *). The immediate concerns related to< $eduction of technical and non+technical losses and metering of all customer consum0tionJ (ost reflecti"e tariffsJ Subsidy to the 0ower sector to continue to a"oid a rate shoc? in the short runJ 22

Adherence by the (ommission to the financial 0rinci0les and their a00lications 0ro"ided in the Si3th Schedule in the near term and de0arture from those factors when it belie"ed that a de0arture would encourage efficiency and o0timum use of resources by the licensee and its consumers.

(oncern about the 0aying ca0acity of consumer to be addressed through designing of the tariff structure and in 0articular# in 0ricing of indi"idual slabs of usage. Im0lementation of cost reflecti"e tariffs which would re.uire a transitional 0eriod to allow consumers 0articularly the agricultural and domestic classes to ada0t to the new tariff regime.

Ado0tion of the rate of return regulation combined with select 0erformance 0arameters which would encourage reduction of technical and non+technical losses and im0ro"ement in the .uality of ser"ice.

&-.

The long term concerns were as follows< In the long run# once the financial "iability of the licensee had been achie"ed and reliable 0erformance statistics had been built u0# some form of Performance Based $egulation including 0rice or re"enue ca0s ($PI+Q) should be considered. In the absence of re.uisite data# the actual historical accounting costs with ad9ustment for e30ected changes and benchmar? should be ado0ted in the immediate years. A future test year and load growth model might be ado0ted subse.uently once the 23

(ommission was satisfied that all systems were in 0lace and a com0etiti"e mar?et for electricity was established. In the near term# the re"enue re.uirement should be allocated among different consumer classes on the basis of embedded costs to ser"e and with due regard to the social as0ects during the transition 0eriod. In future years# once the re.uisite data of load 0rofile# 0aying ca0acity# resource 0lans etc. were a"ailable# the re"enue re.uirement would be allocated among different consuming classes based on the marginal cost. The ultimate aim to mo"e towards com0etiti"e 0ower mar?ets.

&1.

In order to im0lement the short term concerns enunciated in the tariff

0hiloso0hy# the tariff design addressed itself to i) ensuring the "iability of APT$A8S(7 by reducing e3ternal subsidy from the /oAP# ii) establishing the basis for full cost com0ensatory tariff# and iii) balancing the rate structure to reduce cross subsidies.

&,.

The basic design ado0ted by the (ommission for tariffs was the Lcost

to ser"eM model using embedded costs as shown below< In line with the tariff 0hiloso0hy the tariffs were designed on the basis of L(ost to Ser"eM using embedded costs. The costs were the annual re"enue re.uirement of AP Transco a00ro"ed by the (ommission 24

These costs were distributed among the different categories of consumers on the basis of their L(ost to Ser"eM.

&4.

oad 0ro9ections were based on the study underta?en by S8( a"alin#

the consultants of APT$A8S(7 as 0ro"ided by APT$A8S(7.

&*.

!or the L(ost to Ser"eM model# in the initial stages of reform 0rocess#

embedded cost a00roach was used in the absence of reliable data. This was 0rimarily because of non+a"ailability of reliable data on load forecasts# in"estment 0lans# cash flows etc.

&&.

K(ost to Ser"eF model was the basic framewor? for estimating the cost

of 0ro"iding a unit of electricity to the consumer. (ost to ser"e includes generation# transmission and distribution cost. It also included the costs of transmission and distribution losses.

&2.

In order to facilitate calculation of the different cost items that add u0 to

the cost to ser"e a consumer category# consumers are differentiated on the basis of different critical as0ects of electricity consum0tion such as "oltage le"els# time of consum0tion# 0atterns of usage# number of consumers etc. In the K(ost to ser"eF model# the abo"e differentiation was ca0tured under the classification of energy consum0tion# 0ea? demand consum0tion and customer ser"ices. Energy (onsum0tion denotes the amount of energy

consumed at a s0ecified "oltage le"el. >oltage le"els determined the e3tent of transmission and distribution losses that a 0articular consumer category was sub9ected to. 7b"iously those at higher le"els of "oltage consum0tion 25

bore lower le"els of transmission and distribution losses.

(ost to the

icensee of 0ro"iding the facilities to ser"ice the consumers also de0ended on the "oltage le"els. 1emand factor re0resented the contribution of a consumer category towards the 0ea? demand on the system. (osts incurred by the

icensee for meeting 0ea? demand were allocated in 0ro0ortion to the contribution of the res0ecti"e consumer categories to the 0ea? demand. !urther# the ser"icing costs namely# billing 0rocess of reading the meters and billing them# collection of re"enue etc were influenced by the number of consumers in a category.

&'.

The basic model was 0re0ared by APT$A8S(7 with the assistance

of their consultants# A5s. S8( a"alin. The (ommission made a change in res0ect of the 1emand factor in the Aodel. (oincident Pea? 1emand was used instead of 8on+(oincident 1emand used by A5s. S8( a"alin to reflect contribution by each of the categories to 0ea? demand and the costs were allocated among the consumers on the basis of their consum0tion. The

change in the 1emand factor made the model closer to reality and in line with APT$A8S(7Fs 0ro9ections.

&%.

As a first ste0 all the e30enditure items filed in the A$$ of

APT$A8S(7 were first di"ided into energy com0onent# demand com0onent and customer com0onent. The di"ision into the three com0onents was based on either actual di"ision of wor? 0ractice or on the 0re"ailing norms. These were called classification factors. Similar classification was done with regard to the Asset Base. (ategori;ation of different items of e30enditure into the three com0onents# might be seen from the Table below< 26

Table 2* E>BEDDED COST >ODE: ( ASSI!I(ATI78 7! EQPE8SE A81 $ATE BASE DESCRIPTION ED2e&?!t're" Purchase of Power (effecti"e) $e0airs and Aaintenance Em0loyee (osts Administration C /eneral E30ense 1e0reciation Interest C !inancial (harges Sundry E30enses Pro"ision for Income Ta3
7ther $e"enues5 8on Tariff Income<

ENER<Y &%.%-6

DE>AND *1.,-6 )-.--6 &-.--6 &-.--6 )1.%,6 )1.%,6 )1.%,6 )1.%,6 &-.--6 1--.--6 &-.--6 1--.--6 )-.--6 &-.--6 &-.--6 &-.--6 1--.--6 1--.--6 1--.--6 1--.--6 )1.%,6

CUSTO>ER 1-.--6 &-.--6 &-.--6 %.1%6 %.1%6 %.1%6 %.1%6 &-.--6 &-.--6 1-.--6 &-.--6 &-.--6 &-.--6

-.--6 -.--6 -.--6 -.--6 -.--6

A""et Ba"e and C $ights Buildings Plant C Aachinery ines# (ables# 8etwor?s# Etc. >ehicles !urniture and !i3tures 7ffice E.ui0ment S0ares and other Assets Eor?ing (a0ital Borrowings ess /rants C Subsidies (onsumers (ontibutions Total Asset Base with Ad9ustments (effecti"e) &).

-.--6

%.1%6

Purchase of 0ower consisted of fi3ed costs and "ariable costs. =ence#

the classification of this item of e30enditure was only between energy and demand com0onents on the basis of the actual di"ision between fi3ed and "ariable costs. 8o customer charges were attributed to this category. In the case of APT$A8S(7Fs filed data &%.%-6 related to fi3ed costs and hence this 0ro0ortion was allocated to energy category. The remaining *1.,-6

27

constituted "ariable costs and were accordingly a00ortioned to the demand category.

2-.

In the case of em0loyee costs# they were di"ided between demand

category and customer category on the basis of &-<&- between the two. This di"ision was based on the real functioning of Electricity com0anies where the em0loyees were in"ol"ed in both distribution of electricity as well as loo?ing after customers in almost e.ual 0ro0ortion. Each e30enditure item was "erified to chec? whether the allocation basis was reasonable and acce0table. It would be noted here that e3ce0t for 0ower 0urchase# all other items of e30enditure were classified between demand and customer categories.

21.

The cost com0onents were then allocated among the consumer

categories into the res0ecti"e energy com0onent# demand com0onent and customer com0onent. The energy com0onent and demand com0onent too? the full energy re.uired by that category in terms of ABs as gi"en in the load forecast. The full energy re.uired for customer category for energy com0onent and coincident 0ea? demand was the basis for allocating the classification factors mentioned abo"e to the different consumer categories and are called allocation factors. (ustomer charges are based on actual number of customers in that consumer category.

2,.

The actual consum0tion and the res0ecti"e allocation factors might be

seen from the table below<

28

Table - 21
E>BEDDED COST >ODE: - A::OCATION FACTORS (ate gory ENER<Y DE>AND CUSTO>ER Energy Energy (oincident (oincident 8o. of (ustomers including allocation demand demand (ustomers allocation all losses factor including allocation factor in AB all losses factor in AB 1-#1,,#))1 1&#''4 4#*4, 9*;81* ,*.%26 '.4&6 4%.'&6 %.*46 1**4**# 4#412 *21 1#-&1 *%' 5;828 *).,)6 2.%26 1&.2,6 '.,*6 %#&%)#-)141#)1& 1#%)'#1-,#&') '4.*46 1.146 12.,,6 -.-,6 1**4**#

1escri0tion

:T 1omestic (at+I :T Indl. Su00ly (at+III :T Irrn. C Agrl. (at+> .T Indl. Seg. (at+I :T$.T Total ,All 1at4/=

1**4**# 11;5)8;*19

24.

Bsing classification factors and allocation factors# the cost to ser"e for

each category was estimated. The 0er unit cost was determined on the basis of consum0tion net of losses. Table a e!ed e30lains the wor?ing of H(ost to

Ser"eH in res0ect of 1omestic (ategory of (onsumers.

2*.

Accordingly# !ully Allocated (osts (!A() were wor?ed out for all !or the ma9or consumer categories the !ully

categories of consumers.

Allocated Bnit (osts (!A() and the current realisation 0er unit from these categories of consumers were as gi"en below< Table - 22 FU::Y A::OCATED COSTS S8( a"alin APE$( A"erage !A( in !A( in $ealisation in Ps5Bnit Ps5Bnit Ps5unit *&& 4'& 442 4,) ,-4 ,-, *)2 42% 4,* ,42 ,-% 1)4 12% *14 42) 1% *4) *,%

(ategory

6 to !A(

T 1omestic T 8on+domestic T Industrial T Agriculture =T Industry =T $ailway Traction

4*6 11,6 11*6 %6 ,116 ,,,6 29

2&.

It would be obser"ed from the abo"e that

T 8on+domestic#

Industry# =T industry C =T $ailway Traction (ategories of (onsumers were 0aying higher than their L(ost to Ser"eM and thus subsidi;ing Agricultural and 1omestic (ategories of (onsumers. $e"enue reali;ation from domestic category was only 4*6 of the cost to ser"e while that for agriculture was e"en lower at %6. This ty0e of cross subsidi;ation had resulted in the following outcome< !light of industry from the grid to ca0ti"e consum0tion 1istorted cro00ing 0atterns with the resultant inefficient usage of water Inefficient usage of electricity

22.

As stated earlier the re"enue ga0 according to the (ommission was

estimated to be $s. ,*1' (r after ta?ing $s.&-- (r. e30ected from efficiency measures into account. This ga0 had to be co"ered either through tariff increase# or through subsidies or a combination of both. 1esign of tariff 0olicy should address this issue.

2'.

In order to minimi;e the im0act of further cross subsidy# the

(ommission had fi3ed a reasonable ceiling on tariff increases in res0ect of those categories which were already cross subsidi;ing other consumer categories. Accordingly# as a first ste0# the (ommission sti0ulated the following ceilings# which were built into the tariff model<

30

Table - 2( Tar!00 :!3!t" 0or S'b"!?!"!&g Co&"'3er Categor!e" % Increase in Tariffs Increase in Rev. in Rs.Cr 1escri0tion T N 8on+domestic 1&6 ').&4 T+ Industrial 1&6 %).%=T+Industrial58on+Seg. &6+26 14-.21 =T+$ailway Traction 26 ,4.*, Total: (2(4(5 2%. Increase in tariff at the abo"e rates in res0ect of the abo"e categories The

of consumers had resulted in an additional re"enue of $s.4,4 (r. increased a"erage reali;ation 0er unit was as follows< Table - 29 Category C!"e tar!00 !&1rea"e A"erage A"g. $elisation (ategory APE$( $ealisation in in Ps5 Bnit +After !A( in Ps5unit NBefore increase in tariff Ps5Bnit increase in tariff T 8on+domestic T Industrial =T Industry =T $ailway Traction 2). 42% 4,* ,-% 1)4 *14 42) *4) *,% *'& *1% *2, *&*

Efficiency gains of $s. &-- (r and the cross+subsidisation

amount of $s.4,4 (r. were then ad9usted among the consumer categories whose re"enue realisation was less than the cost to ser"e in 0ro0ortion to the difference between their current re"enue realisation and their cost to ser"e 0er unit (1istributi"e ratio). Table - 27 F'lly Allo1ate? Co"t"
(ategory APE$( !A( in A"erage Ps5Bnit $ealisation in Ps5unit 1istributi"e ratio

T 1omestic T Agriculture T (ottage Ind. (at. I>

T Public ighting ( ocal Bodies) (at.>I

=T Irrigation5Agrl. (at I> =T $ural Elec. (o+o0. Societies

*)2 ,42 *-4 4%2 1%* ,*1

12% 1% 1,) 11' %1 &

4,% ,1% ,'* ,2) 1-4 ,42

Table - 25 31

Cro"" S'b"!?y a?F'"te? to Re%e&'e <a2 ($s. in (rores) Re%e&'e <a2 2)18 Total Amount of (ross+ 4,4 Subsidi;ation Efficiency /ains &-TOTA:= 62( Bala&1e Re%e&'e <a2 2*)9

'-.

After ad9ustments for efficiency gains and cross subsidi;ation# the

balance re"enue re.uirement of $s. ,-)* (r was loaded on the consumer categories whose realisation of re"enue was less than the cost to ser"e in the same 0ro0ortion as e30lained abo"e to arri"e at the !ully Allocated (ost (!A() tariff. In the tariff so arri"ed# a"erage realisation 0er unit "is+R+"is the K(ost to Ser"eF was as follows< Table - 28 FU:: COST TARIFF !A( in Ps5 Bnit A"g. $elisation in Ps5 Bnit T N 1omestic *)2 4&T N non+domestic 42% *'& T N Industrial 4,* *1% T N Agriculture ,42 )2 G =T+Industry ,-% *2, =T+$ailway Traction 1)4 *&* G An o0tional tariff &- 0s. 0er unit for metered agricultural consum0tion was 0ro"ided. '1. After the !A( was finalised# a 0ro"ision was made to 0ro"ide for an (ategory

o0tional tariff of &- 0aise 0er unit for metered Agricultural (onsum0tion. The (ommission was ?een on 0ro"iding an incenti"e for metering through its tariff 0olicy. So far# a flat rate was a00licable to agriculture. This necessarily went against those farmer grou0s who did not use 0ower for the entire 0eriod of su00ly. It also o0erated against efficient utili;ation of water a0art from 32

allowing the APT$A8S(7 from co"ering u0 their other losses. The o0tional tariff fi3ed at &- 0s 0er unit. for metered consum0tion# was found to be attracti"e in fi"e out of the eight categories for use o"er the s0ecified duration as gi"en in the A$$ !ilings i.e. % hours 0er day for ,-- days in a year . As a matter of fact if the o0eration of the 0um0sets was limited to * to & hours# and for 1*-+12- days a year as claimed during the 0ublic hearing# almost all agricultural consumers would stand to gain by metered tariff. Table - 26 Pro2o"e? Agr!1'lt're Tar!00 Flat Rate V"4 >etere? Rate
=P $ating 8o. of hours 0um0set is o0erated in ,-- days !lat $ate 0er =P !lat $ate $e"enue !lat rate realisation in Ps5unit APE$( $e"enue in Agri Tariff $u0ees in 0aise 5 unit

DPAP 4 & '.& 14 & '.& 1',. % % % % % % % % 4-&&%-1--*-2&1--1,-)-,'&2--1---N-DPAP 1,-4,&'&-1,--44 &* %4 1-&&&&1%-4--*&-2--,& *2 2' %4 &&&&1%-4--*&-2---

1omestic Tariff was wor?ed out on the basis of telesco0ic slab system

following an o"erwhelming demand during the 0ublic hearing to switch o"er from the e3isting non+telesco0ic to telesco0ic slab system of tariffs ?ee0ing it re"enue neutral. The telesco0ic slab rates for 1omestic (ategory of

consumers were fi3ed as follows ?ee0ing the re"enue neutral. The earlier si3 slabs were reduced to four. In doing so the consideration was that the lowest slab should re0resent those who were lifeline consumers and the highest 33

slab should re0resent the rich while the two slabs in between re0resent the middle class and the u00er middle class. The intention was that the rich and the u00er middle class should share the subsidi;ation re.uirement of the lifeline consumers at least to some e3tent< Table 2) Do3e"t!1 Tar!00" No&-Tele"1o2!1 ED!"t!&g APTRANSCO Tele"1o2!1 APERC Slab" rate" Pro2o"e? Slab" Pro2o"e? rate" rate" *-7* *-1** *-2** *-(** *-9** G9** '4. %1,12& ,1,)4*1,1%,&4-4&4)*-7* 71-1** 1*1-2** 2*1-(** (*1-9** G9** ,,*'& *'& 24& 24& ''& T

The (ommission had also introduced telesco0ic slab system for

non+domestic category.

'*.

The tariffs so wor?ed out were con"eyed to the /oAP for consideration

of subsidy if any before the tariff was notified by the (ommission.

'&.

The /oAP after e3amining the tariff wor?ed out by the (ommission#

con"eyed that they would 0ro"ide subsidy of $s 14*& (r mainly towards T domestic and agriculture categories and also indicated the le"els of subsidy# category wise as gi"en below<

34

Table- (* Category-C!"e :e%el" o0 S'b"!?y 8ame of the (ategory T 1omestic (at.I T (ottage Ind. (at.I> T Irrigation5Agrl. (at > T Public ighting ( ocal Bodies) (at.>I =T Irrigation (at.I> =T $ural Elec.(o+o0.Societies
Additional Subsidy to T Agrl.(at.> on account of annualisation

($s. in (r) Subsidy allocated &-1 , '-4 ,' G ),, 1(97

TOTA:= GIncluded in T (ategory > '2.

7n account of the /o"ernment sanctioning subsidy# the e3isting tariffs

were re.uired to be increased to generate only $s.1-', (r. Table - (1 Tar!00 I&1rea"e a0ter S'b"!?y by <OAP ($s. in (r.) 1escri0tion APT$A8S(7 APE$( A$$ + before deductions >ariable (ost Ad9ustment Efficiency gains A$$+after deductions $e"enue at (urrent Tariffs /AP to be co"ered Pro0osed Tariff Increase Subsidy E30ected ''. ),4* ,12 &-%&1% &*4' 4-%1 (1&6) %-% ,,', %&%1 ,12 &-'%2& &**% ,*1' (,-6) 1-', 14*&

In "iew of this subsidy of $s. 14*& (r# agriculture flat rate tariffs were

re"ised and ad9ustments were made to the domestic category. The a"erage reali;ation 0er unit after the /o"ernment subsidy# was as under<

35

Table - (2 Tar!00 Not!0!e? by tAe Co33!""!o& C!tA a S'b"!?y o0 R"41(97 Cr4

(ategory !A( in Ps5Bnit A"g. A"erage $ealisation reali;ation at in Ps5unit after full cost subsidy of $s. 14*& (r. 4&*'& *1% &*2, *&* ,&% *'& *1% 4*2, *&*

T 1omestic T 8on+domestic T Industrial T Agriculture =T Industry =T $ailway Traction

*)2 42% 4,* ,42 ,-% 1)4

'%.

The (ommission rewor?ed the re.uired metered tariff on the basis of

the re"ised flat rates and fi3ed 4& 0aise 0er unit for metered Agricultural consum0tion. This resulted in four out of eight categories finding the metered tariff attracti"e. Table - ((
Re%!"e? Agr!1'lt're Tar!00 Flat Rate V"4 >etere? Rate
=P $ating 8o. of !lat !lat $ate !lat rate hours $ate $e"enue realisation 0um0set is 0er =P in Ps5unit o0erated in ,-- days DPAP % ,-2-1' % 4&1'&,) % &-4'&4% % &&&&-*2 N-DPAP % ,&'&,1 % *-,--44 % &-4'&*, % 2-2--&APE$( Agri Tariff in 0aise 5 unit $e"enue in $u0ees

4 & '.& 14 & '.& 1-

4& 4& 4& 4& 4& 4& 4& 4&

1,2,1-41&*,-1,2,1-41&*,--

').

=ere again# if we go by what had been said during the 0ublic hearing#

almost all agricultural consumers would stand to gain by metered tariff at 4& 0s. 0er unit.

36

%-.

If the use of 0um0sets was limited only for four hours and for 1*- to

12- days in a year# the metered tariff would benefit all categories of farmers as shown below< Table - (9 Agr!1'lt'ral Tar!00" 0or 9 Ao'r" (ol+1. Bnit $ate5in 0aise C (ol+, Annual Payment in $s. * =ours for 12- days in 1PAP
Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

S 4 =P *1 2-4& &-% S 4 =P &, '&4& &-% S 4 =P *% 2-4& *4% S 4 =P 2- '&4& *4%

& =P '4 1'&4& %*& =P %4 ,--4& %*& =P %4 1'&4& '4& & =P )& ,--4& '4&

'.& =P )* 44'& 4& 1,&' '.& =P 1-* 4'&4& 1,&' '.& =P 1-' 44'& 4& 11-4 '.& =P 11) 4'&4& 11-4

T 1- =P 11& &&-4& 12'1 T 1- =P 1,2 2--4& 12'1 T 1- =P 14, &&-4& 1*21 T 1- =P 1** 2--4& 1*21

* =ours for 12- days in 8+ 1PAP

Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

* =ours for 1*- days in 1PAP

Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

* =ours for 1*- days in 8+ 1PAP

Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

%1.

Similarly# if the use of 0um0sets was limited only for fi"e hours and for

1*- to 12- days in a year# all farmers would benefit by metered tariff e3ce0t those who used 4 =P ca0acity 0um0sets in 1PAP area. They would lose only $s. ,' in a year. Table - (7 Agr!1'lt'ral Tar!00" 0or 7 Ao'r" (ol+1. Bnit $ate5 in 0aise C (ol+, Annual Payment in $s. & =ours for 12- days in 1PAP S4=P &=P '.&=P T1- =P Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount 4* 2-- &% 1'&'& 44'& ), &&-Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount 4& 2,' 4& 1-&4& 1&22 4& ,-)1 & =ours for 12- days in 8+1PAP
Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

S4=P *, '&4& 2,'

&=P 2' ,--4& 1-&-

'.&=P T1- =P %* 4'&- 1-- 2--4& 1&22 4& ,-)1

37

& =ours for 1*- days in 1PAP

Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

S4=P 4% 2-4& &&1 S4=P *% '&4& &&1

&=P 2' 1'&4& )1) &=P '2 ,--4& )1)

'.&=P T1- =P %2 44'& 1-& &&-4& 14'* 4& 1%,) '.&=P T1- =P )2 4'&- 11& 2--4& 14'* 4& 1%,)

& =ours for 1*- days in 8+ 1PAP

Bnit $ate as 0er !lat $ates5 Bill Amount
Bnit $ate as 0er metered Tariff $ates5 Bill Amount

%,.

The (ommission belie"ed that with some effort to educate the

agricultural farmers# a large number of farmers would switch o"er to meters. APT$A8S(7 would soon be mo"ing in this direction.

%4.

After the /o"ernment subsidy was ta?en into account# the telesco0ic

slab rates of domestic category were fi3ed as under< Table (5

Do3e"t!1 Tar!00" (Ps. 0er unit) No&Tele"1o2!1 Slab" *-7* *-1** *-2** *-(** *-9** G9** ED!"t!&g APTRANSCO Tele"1o2!1 rate" Pro2o"e? rate" Slab" %1,12& ,1,)4*1,1%,&4-4&4)*-7* 71-1** 1*1-2** 2*1-(** (*1-9** G9** APERC Pro2o"e? rate" ,,*'& *'& 24& 24& ''& A0ter S'b"!?y o0 R"4 1(97 Cr 14& 42& 42& &'& &'& 22&

%*.

As the filing of the tariff 0ro0osal was made only on ' th A0ril# ,--- and

by the time the 0rocessing of the tariff 0ro0osal was com0leted# only 1months in the year ,---+-1 were left for collection of charges# tariffs were annuali;ed. As the re"enue re.uirement was wor?ed out on an annual basis# it was considered necessary to 0ro"ide annualised tariff for 1- months. Aore im0ortant was that the (ommission was not ?een on introducing the conce0t 38

of $egulatory Asset for the re"enue difference in its "ery first tariff order. The a"erage realisation based on annuali;ed tariffs was as follows< Table - (8 A&&'al!"e? Tar!00" (ategory T 1omestic T 8on+domestic T Industrial T Agriculture =T Industry =T $ailway Traction !A( in Ps5unit *)2 42% 4,* ,42 ,-% 1)4 A"g. $ealisation in Ps5unit ,'2 *%% *,% 4*2' *2-

%&.

After annualisation# the telesco0ic slab rates for 1omestic (ategory of

consumers were as under< Table - (6

Do3e"t!1 Tar!00" No&Tele"1o2!1 Slab" *-7* *-1** *-2** *-(** *-9** G9** %1,12& ,1,)4*1,1%,&4-4&4)*-7* 71-1** 1*1-2** 2*1-(** (*1-9** G9** ED!"t!&g rate" APTRANSCO Pro2o"e? rate" Tele"1o2!1 Slab" APERC rate" ,,*'& *'& 24& 24& ''& A0ter R"4 1(97 Cr 14& 42& 42& &'& &'& 22& 1*& 4)4)21& 21& '-& (Ps. 0er unit) A&&'al!"e? rate"

Pro2o"e? S'b"!?y o0

%2.

The Agricultural tariff was not annualised as the additional sum of $s.

,, (r. in annualised tariff was 0ro"ided by the /o"ernment as subsidy.

%'.

The (ommission notified these tariffs on ,% th Aay ,-- to ta?e effect

from *th Uune ,---. 39

%%.

!ollowing an u0roar from general 0ublic and 0ress against the stee0

increase in the tariff of 1omestic category# the /o"ernment directed further subsidi;ation of domestic category and agreed to 0ro"ide $s.,%1 (r. as additional subsidy to the 1omestic (ategory. This was acce0ted by the (ommission. This reduced the a"erage realisation from 1omestic category

of consumers from ,'20s to ,140s.

%).

The telesco0ic slab rates for 1omestic (ategory of (onsumers after

additional subsidy by /o"ernment were as under< Table - ()

Do3e"t!1 Tar!00" Slab" ED!"t!&g rate" APTRANSCO Pro2o"e? rate" Slab" APERC Pro2o"e? rate" (Ps. 0er unit) A0ter A&&'al!"e? A0ter A?l4 S'b"!?y rate" S'b"!?y o0 R"4 o0 R"4 1(97 Cr 261Cr Tele#$"%i$ 14& 42& 42& &'& &'& 22& 1*& 4)4)21& 21& '-& 14& ,)& ,)& *&*&&,&

N" -Tele#$"%i$ *-7* *-1** *-2** *-(** *-9** G9** %1,12& ,1,)4*1,1%,&4-4&4)*-7* 71-1** 1*1-2** 2*1-(** (*1-9** G9** ,,*'& *'& 24& 24& ''&

)-.

As a result of the additional subsidy of $s. ,%1 (r.# the total subsidy

went u0 from $s.14*&(r to $s.12,2 (r and tariff increase reduced from $s.1-', (r to $s.'), (r# which was less than $s. %-% (r. 0ro0osed by APT$A8S(7 while submitting the tariff 0ro0osals. Table - 9* Re%e&'e <a2 a0ter A??!t!o&al S'b"!?y by <OAP ($s. in (r.) 40 increase

1escri0tion A$$ + before deductions >ariable (ost Ad9ustment Efficiency gains A$$+after deductions $e"enue at (urrent Tariffs /AP to be co"ered Tariff Increase Subsidy E30ected

APT$A8S(7 ),4* ,12 &-%&1% &*4' 4-%1 %-% (1&6) ,,',

APE$( %&%1 ,12 &-'%2& &**% ,*1' 1-', 14*&

After Addl.Subsidy %&%1 ,12 &-'%2& &**% ,*1' '), 12,2

)1.

The re"enue reali;ation from the different consumer categories had

gone down with the increase in subsidy committed by the /oAP. The final 0icture on a"erage reali;ation basis was as below< Table - 91 F!&ally Allo1ate? Co"t"
(ategory !A( in Ps5Bnit A"erage $ealisation in Ps5unit N before increase in tariff 12% *14 42) 1% *4) *,% 6 to !A( A"erage $ealisation in Ps5Bnit + After Tariff increase ,14 *'& *1% 4*2, *&* 6 to !A( 6 increase in $ealisation

T 1omestic T 8on+domestic T Industrial T Agriculture =T Industry =T $ailway Traction

*)2 42% 4,* ,42 ,-% 1)4

4*6 11,6 11*6 %6 ,116 ,,,6

*46 1,)6 1,)6 146 ,,,6 ,4&6

,'6 1&6 146 226 &6 26

),.

The tariff for 1omestic category# conse.uent to the additional subsidy

0ro"ided by /oAP was then lower than what was 0ro0osed by the icensee in their filings. Table - 92

Increase in Tariff
41

(ategory

!A( in Ps5Bnit

After E3isting APTransco A"g. additional A"g. Pro0osed realisation subsidy $ealisation after tariff in Ps5unit increase in a"erage Ps5unit $alisation in Ps5unit

T 1omestic T 8on+domestic T Industrial T Agriculture =T Industry =T $ailway Trac. )4.

*)2 42% 4,* ,42 ,-% 1)4

12% *14 42) 1% *4) *,%

,,* *&& 4), 4*22 *22

,&% *'& *1% 4*2, *&*

,14 *'& *1% 4*2, *&*

At the end of the day# the tariff had a downward tra9ectory + 8on+

annuali;ed tariff increased by the (ommission was of the order of ,-6J annuali;ed tariff increase by the (ommission was of the order of ,*6J final tariff increase after additional subsidy by the /o"ernment was only 1*.&6# while the tariff for domestic and agriculture remained unannualised. )*. The s0ecial characteristics of the tariffs gi"en by the (ommission

might therefore be summed u0 as under< Introduction of (ost $eflecti"e tariffs Im0osition of constraints on categories of consumers whose tariffs are already well o"er cost to ser"e Introduction of Incenti"e for metering of agriculture consum0tion Introduction of telesco0ic rates for T+domestic and T+ 8on+domestic categories $eduction in the number of slabs from si3 to four for domestic category $educed de0endence on subsidy.

42

)&.

A 0oint of interest was the increase in re"enue reali;ation from tariffs

from 226 to '%6 with a tariff increase of only 1*.&6 as might be seen from the table below< Table - 9( COST RECOVERY FRO> SA:ES ($s5Dwh)
1escri0tion 1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+-,---+-1 (Pro"l.) (Post Tariff) (Pro9ected)

A"erage (ost of Bnit (ost reco"ered from sales Percentage )2.

1.4* -.)% ',6

1.&1 1.-4 2%6

,.-4 1.2% %46

,.,) 1.%, ')6

,.'% 1.%4 226

,.)1 1.)& 226

4.-* ,.4' '%6

The a"erage cost to ser"e now stands at 4-* 0s 0er unit while the

a"erage reali;ation# at ,4'0s. 1etails of re"enue reali;ations category+wise was as below< Table - 99 REVENUE RECOVERY PER UNIT $s5(DE=) S. 8o. 1 , 4 * 1 , 4 9 7 )'. 1etails .T. 1omestic 8on+domestic Industrial Agricultural =.T. Industrial (ategory+I Industrial (ategory+II Traction+>
A%erage Real!"at!o& 2er U&!t
1)))+,--- # o0 a%erage ,---+,--1 (Pro"isional) 1o"t 2er '&!t (Post Tariff) (0ro9ected)
# o0 a%erage 1o"t 2er '&!t

1.2% *.14 4.2) -.1% *.4) *.)1 *.,% 14)8 24)1

57.73 141.92 126.80 6.19 150.86 168.73 147.08 6&'&0 100'00

,.14 *.'& *.1% -.41 *.2, &.1% *.&* 24(8 (4*9

70.07 156.25 137.50 10.20 151.97 170.39 149.34 &&'(6 100'00

A%erage 1o"t 2er '&!t

The mo"e towards reduction of subsidy might be gauged from the fact

that 0ercentage of subsidy to full cost had decreased from 4&6 to 1).*6 as shown below<

43

Table - 97
($s. in (r) State3e&t o0 S'b"!?y 1escri0tion 1))*+)& 1))&+)2 1))2+)' 1))'+)% 1))%+)) 1)))+-Total Subsidy $ecei"ed )** 1,&) %&1 1,&2 ,&1) ,2', Total (ost Allowed 4144 4&', *,%&*)% '-42 '4'& Percentage of Subsidy to full cost 4-.146 4&.,&6 1).%%6 ,,.%*6 4&.%-6 42.,46 ,---+-1 12,2 %422 1).**6

)%.

The real contribution by 1omestic and Agricultural (onsumers "is+R+

"is the total cost of ser"ice was as below< Table - 95

A1t'al Co&"'32t!o& by Do3e"t!1 $ Agr!1'lt'ral Co&"'32t!o& (ategory Total (ost (in $s. (r) Efficiency gains (in $s.(r) (ross Subsidy (in (r) /o"t. Subsidy (in (r) $e"enue A"erage 6 of realisation collected realisation from consumer by tariffs in in Ps5unit to total cost $s. (r

1omestic

41--

1%2 14%

%-4 11%1

'%, '-,

14,) ,)-

,14 4-

*4 14

Agriculture ,411 )).

Before concluding this 0resentation it would be of interest to see how

tariff increases were made from -1+-,+1)),. It would be seen from the Table below that the recent increase for the 1omestic (ategory was less than the increase made in 1))& and 1))2. 1uring the 1))) re"ision# domestic

consumers with less than 4-- units of monthly consum0tion# who constituted )%6 of the total domestic consumers# were not sub9ect to re"ision of tariff. But# for other domestic consumers the increase was ,16 to ,%6. The recent increase for T 8on+domestic# T Industrial# =T Industrial# =T 8on+Industrial and =T $ailway Traction was the lowest of the four re"isions in the last Eight @ears.

44

PoCer Tar!00 - Category

Category T (at+I T (at+II T (at+III T (at+I> P'r2o"e 1omestic 8on+domestic Industrial Agricultural

Table - 98 !"e I&1rea"e 0ro3 *1-*2-1))2 O&Car?"

A%erage Real!"at!o& P"+ U&!t + Per1e&tage !&1rea"e o%er earl!er tar!00 *1-12-1))2 *2-*6-)7 *1-*6-)5 *1-*1-1))) *9-*5-2*** )11) (4,6) 1&, (,%6) 12-:' (26)(G) ,14 (,'6) 1),'* (**6) 4&2 (4-6) *44 (,,6) *'& (1&6) ,-' ,&, (,,6) ,)) (1)6) 42- (,-6) *1% (146)
'& to *-- 5=P5 @ear &- 5=P5 @ear 1&- to *-5=P5 @ 1PAP< 1-- to *-5=P5@ 1&- to *-- 5=P5 @ 1PAP< 1-- to *-- 5=P5@ ,&- to 2-- 5=P5 @ 1PAP< ,-- to &&- 5=P5@ 4& 0s5B (70tional)

=T (at+ICIII Industrial ,,2 ,2& (1'6) =T (at+II 8on+Industrial ,&1 41& (,&6) =T (at+> $ailway ,1, ,2& (,&6) Traction T C =T 7"erall 1-, 1,, (,-6) A"erage (G) The increase u0to 4-- units5 month is (G) The increase for - to *-- units5 month is (G) The increase for - to T*-- units5 month is

441(,&6) *-- : % (,46) 4'2 (1)6) &-- : % (4&6) 4*- (,%6) *,- : % (,26) 12, (446) 8il ,16 ,%6 1)% (,-6)

*2, (&6) &1% (&6) *&* (26) ,,' (1*.&6)

45

Annexure
Table o0 Co"t allo1at!o& o0 ea1A 1ategory o0 eD2e&?!t're to :T Do3e"t!1 - 1 ,R"4 !& 1ror"/ E8E$/@ $E ATE1 (7STS 1EAA81 $E ATE1 (7STS (BST7AE$ $E ATE1 (7STS
1eman (usto (usto Total Energy d mer (lassifi Allocati Energy (lassifi 1emand (lassifi m er Total A"g. Allocation Allocation charges (harge (harge Amount cation related Amount cation (ost 5 on related Amount cation related E30end factor factor in s in s in cost Bnit in factor factor cost factor factor in $s. iture Ps.5unit Ps.5 Ps.5 Ps. a?hs unit unit

8ame of (onsum0tion the E30enditure

Energy in ABs

Purchas e of Energy $e0aris C Aaintanenc e Em 0loyees (ost Admn. C /eneral E30. 1e0reciatio n Interest and other !in. (h. Pro"is ion for Ta3es 7ther $e". (8on+Tariff Income) $eturn on (a0ital Bas e

/ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el 8et e"el /ros s e"el

1-1,- '4%1)* &%.%-6 ,*.%26 1-')1* '4%1)* *1.,-6 *).,)6 1*)%)4 '4%1)* -.--6 '4.*46 2,&1 1-')1* 1*)%)4 1-1,- 141&1 -.--6 ,*.%26 - 141&1 )-.--6 *).,)6 &%4* 141&1 1-.--6 '4.*46 2,&1 1-1,2,&1 1-1,2,&1 1-1,2,&1 1-1,2,&1 1-1,2,&1 &*,&* )-4* ,*&&, 4,%&1 1,)* -.--6 ,*.%26 -.--6 ,*.%26 -.--6 ,*.%26 -.--6 ,*.%26 -.--6 ,*.%26 -.--6 ,*.%26 &*,&* &-.--6 *).,)6 )-4* )1.%,6 *).,)6 ,*&&, )1.%,6 *).,)6 4,%&1 )1.%,6 *).,)6 1,)* )1.%,6 *).,)6 &%4* 144'1 144'1 ,,,2 ,,,2 1111 1111 1*%2' 1*%2' &%2 &%2

- ,&'%-' )22 2%-44,)&&*4 1,&%' 12%*1 224

1-' 1'4 -

1*% ,*2 ) 14 ,1 , * 11 1% 1& ,* 1 1 +11 +1% * 2 1%% 4-&

1 , ,4, 4 & 1 , , 4 +1' +,' 1 1 11 1%

,&& *1, ' 11 44 &4 & ) 1, ,1' ,' 1 1 +,% +*& & ' 4-2 *)2

)22 &*,&* &-.--6 '4.*46 1))1) 1))1) )-4* %.1%6 '4.*46 441' ,*&&, 4,%&1 1,)* %.1%6 '4.*46 %.1%6 '4.*46 %.1%6 '4.*46 441' 1*'& 1*'& 1)'* 1)'* '% '%

1-1,- +*&'*' 2,&1 1-1,%)'1

- +*&'*' &-.--6 *).,)6 +11,'& +*&'*' &-.--6 '4.*46 +12')2 +,%-'1 +11,'& %)'1 )1.%,6 *).,)6 *-2%)'1 %.1%6 '4.*46 *-2*).,)6 1)-2'* %42&&* +12')2 &4) *&)) &4) '4.*46 11*'1 41--&)

-.--6 ,*.%26

1-' 1'4

8et e"el /ros s e"el Total (ost 8et e"el

2,&1 1-1,- %42&&* 2,&1

,*.%26 1-')1* %42&&*

46