PWC Retail

Roll out Plan for
Introduction of
Competition in
Retail Sale of
Electricity
Final Report
July 2015
Assisted by:
Contents
Executive Summary
Overview
21
Objective of the study
21
Approach adopted for completion of the assignment
22
Background of competition in India
25
Competition in Indian power sector
25
Issues in Open Access
27
Competition in supply side of Distribution business
28
Introduction
30
Objectives of introducing retail supply competition
30
FOR report on Introducing competition in retail electricity supply in India
30
Critical Review of Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014
34
Structure of the report
37
Stages of introducing retail supply competition
38
Stage 1: Functional segregation of Discoms
38
1.
Defining new functional entities
39
2.
Defining Roles and Responsibilities of new entities
43
3.
Treatment of existing financial losses
44
4.
Transfer of existing PPAs
47
5.
Defining framework for Consumer Interface
48
6.
Defining framework for Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism
51
7.
Segregation of standards of performance between entities
51
8.
Universal Service Obligation on supply/network licenses
52
9.
Tariff setting mechanism for new entities
52
10.
Balance sheet segregation of current Distribution business among new entities
53
11.
Human Resource Planning
54
12.
Technical studies of as-is condition
55
Stage 2: Preparation for competition
57
1.
Ownership of network and retail supply company
58
2.
Technical and commercial loss allocation across network and supply company
58
3.
Reduction of cross subsidies
59
4.
Upgradation of existing metering
61
5.
Creation and ownership of Consumer Database
61
Roll out Plan for Introduction of Competition in Retail Sale of Electricity - Final Report
PwC
Stage 3: Onset of competition
64
1.
Defining license area and issuance of new supply license
64
2.
Phasing of competition identifying contestable consumer categories or connected load
65
3.
Power procurement model allocation by intermediary company
65
4.
Consumer switching mechanism
66
5.
Process for procurement of new PPAs
67
6.
Balancing and settlement
68
7.
Tariff setting mechanism for consumer open for competition
69
8.
Defining framework for Provider of Last Resort
70
9.
USO extends to new retail supply companies
71
Issues in implementation of retail supply competition
74
Issue 1 Functional Separation of current Discom
74
Issue 2 - Allocation of Technical and Commercial losses between distribution and supply companies
75
Issue 3 Metering Services
77
Issue 4 Delimitation: Area of Supply and phasing of retail supply competition
84
Issue 5 Universal Service Obligation (USO)
89
Issue 6 Allocation of PPAs
91
Alternative roll out plans for introduction of retail supply competition
96
Roll Out Plan for Scenario I
104
Roll Out Plan for Scenario II
108
Roll Out Plan for Scenario III
112
Roll Out Plan for Scenario IV
116
Impact of retail supply competition
120
Achieving objectives of retail supply competition
120
Benefits that can be derived out of retail supply competition by end consumers
120
Barriers which may prevent benefits of retail competition from reaching end consumers
121
Indicators of a successful retail supply competition
121
International Experience
123
United Kingdom
123
Philippines
129
Victoria, Australia
132
Appendix
137
1.
Universal Charge
137
2.
Illustration for limiting cross subsidies to wheeling charges
145
PwC
3.
Illustrations for allocation of PPAs
146
4.
Data for classification of states
153
About PwC
155
PwC
List of abbreviations
Abbreviation
Full Form
APTEL
Appellate Tribunal for Electricity
AT&C
Aggregate Technical and Commercial
AVVNL
Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
BESCOM
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company
BPL
Below Poverty Line
BRPL
BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd.
BSEB
Bihar State Electricity Board
BYPL
BSES Yamuna Power Ltd.
CESU
Central Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha
CGRF
Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum
CHESCOM
Chamundeshwari Electricity Supply Company
DHBVN
Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.
Discom
Distribution Company
DMO
Distribution Market Operations
DNO
Distribution Network Operations
DPO
Distribution Planning Operations
DSO
Distribution System Operations
DT
Distribution Transformer
DVVN
Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
EA 2003
Electricity Act 2003
FOR
Forum of Regulators
GESCOM
Gulbarga Electricity Supply Company
HESCOM
Hubli Electricity Supply Company
IC
Intermediary Company
ISL
Incumbent Supply Licensee
JdVVNL
Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
JVVNL
Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
KESCO
Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Ltd.
KYC
Know your customer
MSEDCL
Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd.
PwC
Abbreviation
Full Form
MVVN
Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
MW
Mega Watt
NBPDCL
North Bihar Power Districution Company Ltd.
NESCO
North Eastern Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha
Pasch VVN
Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
PGVCL
Paschim Gujrat Vij Company Ltd.
POLR
Provider of Last Resort
Poorv VVN
Poorvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.
PPA
Power Purchase Aggrement
PwC
Pricewaterhouse Coopers
RA
Regulatory Assests
RInfra-D
Reliance Infrastructure Distribution
RSL
Retail Supply Licensee
SBPDCL
South Bihar Power Districution Company Ltd.
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SERC
State Electricity Regulatory Commission
SESCO
Southern Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha
SLDC
State Load Despatch Centre
SOP
Standard of Performance
T&D
Transmission and Distribution
TPC-D
TATA Power Company Distribution
TPDDL
TATA Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.
UC
Universal Charge
UHBVN
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.
UK
United Kingdom
USO
Universal Service Obligation
WESCO
Western Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha
PwC
Executive Summary
The Electricity Act, 2003 laid down the foundation for introducing competition at the consumer end of
electricity supply through open access and provision for parallel Distribution licensees. However both these
concepts have seen limited success in the Indian electricity sector. The parallel distribution licensee regime
requires distribution licensees in an area to distribute power through their own distribution system within the
same area. Each distribution licensee investing in its own network not only leads to replication of network but,
in the event of capital investment being a pass-through expense, also pushes up costs/tariffs for the end
consumers. On the other hand open access too has seen lacklustre operationalisation due to factors like power
deficit scenario is many states, inadequate transmission/distribution facilities, high level of cross subsidy etc.
The distribution companies in India manage businesses of two different natures carriage (distribution)
business and content (retail supply) business. Retail supply business would involve the service side of the
business like purchase of electricity from generators, selling electricity to consumers, customer services, billing,
and collection of charges from consumers. On the other hand the Distribution business would involve the
technical side of the business like setting up of physical network in order to wheel electricity to consumer
premises. In a market structure wherein the carriage business as well as content business is handled by a single
distribution company, the scope for introducing open access and retail competition is vague. The carriage
business side of the distribution company by nature is monopolistic and would deter unless made neutral, open
competition in content side of the business.
To overcome this issue and provide end consumer choice, amendment to the Electricity Act, 2003 have been
introduced in the parliament. One of the major amendments proposed in the Act is introduction of competition
in retail supply side of the electricity distribution sector though segregation of Distribution companies
(Discoms) into two parts carriage (distribution) business and content (retail supply) business. While the
Distribution business would be monopolistic in nature, the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 envisages
introducing competition in retail supply side of the Discoms business. Section 14 of The Electricity
(Amendment) Bill 2014 provides for multiple retail supply companies in an area of supply. These multiple retail
supply companies would then compete with each other for supplying electricity to consumers. In such a market
all carriage (Distribution) businesses will serve as common carriers and will be paid a reasonable regulated rate
of return on their investments.
Proposed industry structure
A
Discom
Intermediary Co.
ISL
Consumer 1
Distribution
Network Co.
Generator 1
Transmission Co.
Metering Co. (if any)
Generator 2
Physical Flow
RSL
Consumer 2
Open access financial flow
Financial Flow
PwC
Industry structure under retail supply competition
Single Distribution Company in a supply area: The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 says that
The Appropriate Commission shall not grant license to more than one distribution licensee in any area of
distribution. Section 12 of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 states the following:
The Appropriate Commission shall not grant licence to more than one distribution licensee in any area
of distribution:
Provided that where two or more distribution licensees within the same area of distribution are existing
on the date of the commencement of the Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2014, they shall continue their
operation till such period as specified in their licence.
Multiple Supply Licensees in a supply area: The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 allows for
multiple retail supply licensees in a supply area. Section 14 of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014
states the following:
.Provided also that the Appropriate Commission may grant a licensee to two or more persons for
supply of electricity within the same area of supply, progressively as may , subject to the conditions..
Intermediary Company to be formed for allocation of existing PPAs: the Electricity

(Amendment) Bill, 2014 brings in the concept of Intermediary Company. While the main purpose of this
entity is to succeed the existing PPAs and power procurement arrangements of the current Discoms and
allocate them between various retail supply companies accordingly, the Electricity (Amendment) Bill,
2014 gives Central Government flexibility to define the roles and responsibilities of the Intermediary
Companies. As discussed later in this report, based on the roll out plan finalised by state and central
governments, the Intermediary Company could be given additional responsibilities like handling of Cross
Subsidies, handling of Distribution Marketing Operations (DMO)/Distribution System Operations (DSO),
collection of Universal Charge Fund or amortisation of regulatory assets. Section 2(35B) and Section 131
(4C) of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 states the following:
Section 2 35B) "intermediary company" means the entity succeeding to the existing power purchase
agreements and procurement arrangements of the relevant distribution licensees on re-organization as
per subsection (4A) of section 131 and discharging such other functions as may be assigned to it in terms
of the provisions of the Act.
Section 131 4C) The functions of the intermediary company shall be as prescribed by the Central
government.
Transfer scheme to be made by state governments for segregation of content and carriage
businesses: In Section 131 of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, sub-sections 4A) and 4B) are
added which provide for transfer scheme:
Section 131, 4A) The State Government shall within the period specified under section 51A draw up a
transfer scheme for transfer of such of the functions, the property, interest in property, rights and
liabilities of the distribution licensees relating to supply of electricity to a company who shall be the
incumbent supply licensee for the concerned area of supply and so far as the existing Power Purchase
Agreements and procurement arrangements, to which the distribution licensee is the beneficiary in the
intermediary company and publish such scheme as statutory transfer scheme under the Act.
PwC
Section 131 4B) The distribution licensee shall cease to be charged with and shall not perform the
functions and duties under this Act to the extent of the transfers made under sub clause (a) on and after
the effective date of such transfer.
Stages for introduction of retail supply competition

In order to ensure smooth transition of electricity market into retail supply competition, a three stage
implementation process of the roll out plan is suggested as follows,
Stage
Time period to complete
Functional Segregation of Discoms:

1 - 2 year(s)
In this stage, the current Discoms would be segregated into

Distribution and Retail Supply functions. Their individual roles and
responsibilities will be defined and they would be equipped with
enough financial and manpower resources to take on those roles.
Preparation for Competition:
Start: after stage 1 objectives are

achieved
In this stage the, steps would be taken to make the market conducive
for retail supply competition like ownership segregation, cross
subsidy reduction, upgradation of metering, loss allocation etc.
Entry barriers would be removed in order to create a level playing
field for all and encourage competition.
Onset of Competition:
New Retail Supply Licenses would be given in this stage in order to
give retail consumer choice. The market would be opened up for
competition in phases i.e. initially certain set of consumers would be
open to competition and then gradually other consumers will be
brought under the purview of competition.

achieved
Completion time: 2-3 years after

completion of Stage 1
This stage will be an ongoing

activity till the time all consumers
are open for competition
In each of these stages, certain key tasks would have to be performed in order to prepare the groundwork for
content and carriage separation and to provide a level playing field for new retail supply companies.
Stage 1 | Functional Segregation of Discoms | Key tasks required to be carried out

1. Defining new functional entities: the functions of current Discoms would be split as follows
Distribution business
Retail Supply business
The distribution business itself could be segregated into 4 separate functions:

a. Distribution Network Operations (DNO): this function covers operation of the network. Also
in case the responsibility of other metering related activities 1 is given to the distribution business,
the DNO would be the entity in charge of Meter installation/replacement, ownership of metering
assets, meter operations and testing.
b. Distribution Planning Operations (DPO): this function covers the planning of distribution
network expansion, operating code and technical design of the network.
Detailed discussed in section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under heading Issue 3 Metering
Services
1
PwC
c. Distribution System Operations (DSO): this function covers supervision of the network to
ensure integrated operation for achieving maximum economy and efficiency in the distribution
network.
d. Distribution Market Operations (DMO): this function involves accounting for the energy
handled by the distribution network.
Since each of these 4 functions regarding the Distribution would require completely different skill sets
and technology, in the long run each of them should be a separate function operating independent of each
other. As a transitionary approach till the time separate entities cannot be formed, all of the four
functions of DNO, DPO, DSO and DMO are kept with a single entity the Distribution business.
After segregation of current Discom into Distribution and Retail Supply functions, metering services can
be responsibility of Distribution or Retail Supply company or it could also be given to a 3 rd Party
Company2. The metering service can be broken down into following activities
Meter reading: going to consumer premises to record the meter reading or using data
communication services (in case of meters supporting this feature) for collecting meter reading
data.
Other Meter related activities: Meter installation/replacement, ownership of metering
Each of these activities could either be done separately by Retail Supply Company, Distribution Company
or a 3rd Party or both of these activities can be taken care by either a single entity. Based on the logical
permutations and combinations, several possible approaches for metering are as follows
Approach/Activity
Meter Reading
Other Meter related
Approach 1
Retail Supply Company
3rd Party
Approach 2
Approach 3
Approach 4
3rd Party
3rd Party
Approach 5
Based on the discussions with FOR and analysis of various pros and cons it is suggested that in all cases
the meter reading responsibility be given to retail supply company as the responsibility to reduce
collection inefficiency losses would lie with retail suppliers. However the approach to be adopted towards
other meter related activities would depend on the approach adopted towards loss allocation (discussed
in task 2 of stage 2 of the roll out plan). In case the current level of losses in the state is high, all
commercial losses are allocated to retail supply company. As the retail supply company is responsible for
majority of losses, the responsibility of other meter related activities is also given to them so that they can
better manage their loss reduction strategies. On the other hand if the current level of loss in the state is
low, the distribution company would be allocated major losses along with the responsibility of other
meter related activities.
2. Defining Roles and Responsibilities of new entities: Metering at consumer premises would be the
boundary of separation between the Distribution and Supply businesses. While some of the roles and
responsibilities of the distribution and supply businesses can be clearly defined, others fall in grey area as
Although The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 does not mention Metering as a licensed activity, for the purpose of
illustrating various possibilities, this report assumes that in case a 3rd party company is brought in the sector for the
metering activities, it would be a licensed activity and regulated by appropriate electricity regulatory commission.
2
PwC
10
these roles and responsibilities would have to be defined based on the approach adopted by individual
states towards various issues, while forming their respective roll out plans for retail supply competition.
Business
Distribution
business
(Network
Operations)
Segregated Roles and Responsibilities

Providing neutral access to its network
Expansion and strengthening of network
Operation and maintenance of the network such
as network reinforcement and replacement,
improved overhead line repair, etc.
Ambiguous roles (may

vary based on roll out
plans of individual states)
Consumer Interface
Commercial loss
reduction
Maintaining 24x7 network availability

Reduction in Technical losses (since the network
is owned by distribution business, irrespective of
other issues, the responsibility of technical losses
would lie with distribution business)
Co-ordination with retail supply companies for
new connection release, change in consumer load
and disconnection
Fault restoration
Fulfilling regulatory obligations for distribution
in tariff determination and efficiency targets
Distribution
Planning
Operations
Co-ordination with transmission utility for

network planning
Distribution
Market
Operations
Accounting for the energy scheduled, despatched

to retail supply companies
Balancing and Settlement
Distribution loss calculation
Distribution
System
Operations
Monitoring of the distribution network

operations, supervision and control
Real time operation for distribution network
control and despatch
Ensure integrated operation with other entities
for maximum operational efficiency
Retail Supply
business
Demand Forecasting and business planning

Efficient power procurement
Trade power with other suppliers (to account for
any power shortfalls or access power than
requirement)
Bill generation and distribution
Consumer interface
To ensure contractual
availability of power to its
consumers
Commercial loss
reduction
Revenue collection from consumers

Customer Care
Credit contracts
Fulfilling regulatory obligations
Intermediary
Procurement of power as per existing PPAs
Demand aggregation of
PwC
11
Business
Company
Handling regulatory assets (recognised

accumulated financial losses)
multiple Retail Supply

companies to enable
efficient power
procurement
Handling of unrecognised
financial losses
Installation and maintenance of meters
Meter reading
Allocation of existing PPAs

Managing of existing cross subsidies
Metering
Company (by
Distribution,
Retail Supply
or 3rd party)
Ambiguous roles (may

vary based on roll out
plans of individual states)
Testing of meters
Replacement of meters
3. Treatment of existing financial losses: the existing recognised regulatory assets of current Discoms
would be transferred to Intermediary Company. The Intermediary Company would then amortize these
assets by either collecting a Universal Charge or through financial support from State Government.
Unrecognised financial losses on the balance sheets of the discoms, formed due to either dis-allowance of
certain costs by the appropriate commission or due to imprudent costs, would either be allocated to
existing companies or support may be sought from State Government for cleaning up the balance sheets.
4. Treatment of existing PPAs: the existing PPAs of the incumbent Discoms would be transferred to the
Intermediary Company. The state governments in their respective transfer schemes could explore the
possibility if some PPAs or a certain part of all PPAs could be shifted to wholesale market i.e. power from
such PPAs could then be sold in wholesale market. This may help increase competition in the power
purchase side of the sector and also assist in development of wholesale market. Based on the availability
of power in the state, in the alternative roll out plans discussed later, either all PPAs or some/certain
PPAs are transferred to the Intermediary Company.
In Stage 3 when new retail supply companies would enter the market, the Intermediary Company would
allocate PPAs among retail suppliers in order to help them meet their power requirements as well as
protect the rights of generators who have signed long term PPAs.
5. Defining framework for Consumer Interface: due to the introduction of multiple new players in
the market, a framework for Consumer Interface would have to be designed for speedy redressal of
various types of complaint/queries or requests and for various types of consumers i.e. open access
consumers, regulated consumers and contestable consumers. A single window interface could be offered
by the retail supply company or the distribution company, for all kinds of complaints/queries/requests or
a separate interface could be offered by both distribution and supply businesses for matters related to
their respective businesses. As per the discussions in FOR meeting and based on the analysis of various
pros and cons of each approach, it is recommended that the retail supply companies offer a single window
interface for all types of consumer complaints/queris/requests.
6. Defining framework for Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism: Currently the utilities are
mandated to form a CGRF for redressal of consumer complaints. After the introduction of retail supply
competition a two layered Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism could exist, as follows
A single CGRF for Distribution, Retail Supply and Metering (if any)
PwC
12
Independent ombudsman
7. Segregation of Standards of Performance between entities: before the segregation of current

discoms into distribution and supply companies, the regulatory commissions would have to formulate
separate SOPs for each of the business to be formed. The current set of Standards of Performance (SOP)
may be allocated between the separate businesses of Distribution, Retail Supply, Intermediary Company
and Metering Company (if any).
8. Universal Service Obligation on supply/network licenses: Electricity being an essential product,
the Universal Service Obligation (USO) refers to the practice of providing a baseline level of services to
every consumer. Once separation of distribution business and retail supply is achieved, the Universal
Service Obligation can be split into two
The Duty to Connect the responsibility to connect a consumer to the network. This would be
given to Distribution Company, it being the owner of network.
The Duty to Supply the responsibility to supply electricity to a consumer. Initially this would be
given to the incumbent Retail Supply Company. After the new retail supply companies come into
the market in stage 3 or the roll out plan, the Duty to Supply may extend to them to as well.
9. Tariff Determination Mechanism for new entities: the SERCs will have to determine unbundled
tariffs individually for Distribution Business and Retail Supply Business. For the distribution business,
the SERC would determine a regulated tariff. In this stage till the time consumers are not open up for
competition, the SERCs would determine a regulated tariff for all the consumers of incumbent retail
supply company. However after the introduction of new retail supply companies in stage 3 of the roll out
plan, the SERCs would have to determine two separate tariffs for the retail supply companies a
regulated tariff for the non-contestable consumers and a ceiling tariff for the contestable consumers. In
order to facilitate this, incumbent retail supply company would have to maintain separate financial
accounts for the non-contestable and the contestable consumers.
10. Balance sheet segregation of current Distribution business among new entities. Assuming
meter at consumer premises as the boundary of separation between the distribution and supply
businesses, the balance sheet segregation would bone based on:
Allocation of assets: the fixed assets before the meter would be allocated to the distribution
business, while the fixed assets beyond meter would be given to the retail supply company. The
metering assets would be given to either distribution business or retail supply business
depending upon who gets the responsibility of other metering related activities (meter
installation/replacement, ownership of metering assets, meter operations and testing).
Receivables due from the retail consumers could be allocated to the Intermediary Company.
These assets can be used by the Intermediary Company to service its liabilities. The consumer
security deposits would be given to the Retail Supply Company based on the number and type
of consumer under each of the companies. The guarantee amounts submitted by various
contractors of current distribution company will be allocated between Distribution and Supply
businesses based on the Fixed Assets allocated between them.
Allocation of liabilities: Based on the fixed assets allocation between individual businesses,
the liabilities attached to them will also have to be allocated to the Distribution and Supply
companies respectively. The current liabilities related to power purchase will be transferred to
Intermediary Company. The intermediary company would then further collect these from the
incumbent Retail Supply Company. Liabilities related to contractors payments will be allocated
PwC
13
between the Distribution and Retail Supply companies based on the activities and asset
allocation between the two.
The valuation of assets can be either based on historical book value or the market value of assets. The
valuation of assets should be an interactive process wherein the views of the investors from discussions
should be considered during valuation process. The alternative methodologies would have to be assessed
to arrive at a fair valuation of business/ assets. It is pertinent to mention that the valuation of the assets
and business shall be in accordance with the revenue potential of the newly formed Distribution and
Supply businesses.
11. Human resource planning: the employees of incumbent distribution company will need to be
allocated between the two businesses. This would require transferring staff with adequate skill sets to the
successor entities for carrying out critical activities independently. The approach for developing this
transfer scheme would include understanding the key staff requirements in restructured entities and
identifying the services to be split between the entities. If any particular service cannot be split among the
entities, then the strategy to retain employees in one unit and providing services to other will have to be
formed. Further going forward, the organizational & human resource policies of the separate companies
would have to be formed.
12. Technical studies of as-is condition: In order to prepare the groundwork for next stage, baseline
studies related to technical and commercial losses and cost of supply determination will need to be
carried out. These studies form an important pre-requisite for the introduction of retail supply
competition as the allocation of losses, tariff determination and cross subsidy reduction would be done by
commissions based on these findings of these studies.
Stage 2 | Preparation for competition | Key tasks required to be carried out

1. Ownership of network and retail supply company: while in the previous stage of this roll out plan,
the erstwhile discoms would have been separated into two functions the distribution and retail supply
functions, in this stage, in order to ensure that all retail supply companies get neutral access to the
distribution network and there is no complicity between the distribution company and the incumbent
retail supply company, the state government may either disinvest their retail supply business or continue
it as a state entity but with a separate ownership. It needs to be ensured that while deciding on whether or
not to divest the incumbent retail supply company, the provisions of section 14 of Electricity
(Amendment) Bill 2014 (as and when passed by the parliament) is not violated which states that while
multiple supply licensees could be allowed in a license area, at least one of them should be a government
controlled.
2. Technical and commercial loss allocation across network and supply company: there are
three approaches that can be adopted for allocation of AT&C losses between distribution and retail supply
businesses as follows Type of Loss
Allocation to Approach 1
Distribution
Approach 2
Distribution
Approach 3
Distribution
Theft by Hooking
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
Inaccurate metering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Theft by Meter tampering/bypassing
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Collection inefficiency loss
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Technical
Commercial
PwC
14
While the Technical and Hooking losses should be allocated to Distribution business, as these losses are
related to physical network, it is difficult to measure and differentiate between these losses. Therefore,
except collection inefficiency and technical losses (which can be measured), all the other losses would be
allocated to a single entity. This translates to adopting either approach 1 or 3 of loss allocation.
In license areas where the current level of losses is high, entire commercial losses could be allocated to
the retail supply business to attract investment, improve metering and faster reduction of losses. This
translates to approach 3 of loss allocation.
In license areas where the current level of losses is on the lower side, the commercial losses other than
collection inefficiency could be allocated to the distribution business. This translates to approach 1 of loss
allocation.
Therefore, based on the current level of transmission and distribution losses (AT&C loss less collection
efficiency) in the state, in the alternative roll out plans discussed later, either approach 1 or approach 2 of
loss allocation could be adopted.
3. Reduction of cross subsidies: Identification of actual cost incurred for supply of electricity and tariff
reflecting the cost of supply for various consumer categories is important for retail supply market to work
efficiently. In the existing tariff regime large consumers like industrial and commercial are paying tariff
higher than actual cost of supply and thus cross subsidising domestic and agriculture consumers. There
are four possible approaches for reduction of cross subsidies:
S. No.
Approaches for cross subsidy reduction
1
2
3
4
Year on Year tariff hikes

Universal Charge (UC) fund3
Limiting subsidies to wheeling charges4
Direct Subsidy from State Government
Considering high level of cross subsidies for some categories in certain states, the approach of Year on
Year tariff hikes could lead to tariff shocks. Also the wheeling charges may not be sufficient to subsume
the high level of cross subsidies. Therefore either approach 2 of UC fund or approach 4 of Direct Subsidy
could be adopted to reduce cross subsidies.
4. Upgradation of existing metering: The existing meters would need to be gradually replaced by
advanced meters, which are capable of recording consumption for every 15 min time slots to allow for
accurate measurement of loss levels in each area of supply and voltage levels, calculation of actual power
purchased and sold by each retail supply company and to allow switching power off at consumer end,
rather than at feeder level. the metering infrastructure till the distribution transformer will have to
upgraded by the distribution business. The incumbent supply company would have to convert unmetered consumers to metered consumers.
5. Creation and ownership of Consumer Database: Going forward, a central database would need to
be created with information regarding the consumer such as their billing address, meter number, usage
pattern, bank account details etc. The distribution company (wire business) can be made responsible for
creating and updation of this database. The distribution company would share this database with
commissions, intermediary company, retail supply companies and any other player as required. The retail
suppliers would collect and share data with distribution business regarding the consumers under their
respective jurisdiction. In order to develop this database, an activity similar to Know Your Customer
(KYC) can be carried out for electricity consumers. Such a database would be useful to companies
applying for Retail Supply license as they would need information about the consumer mix in the license
3
4
Detailed working explained in appendix 1

Detailed working explained in appendix 2
PwC
15
area where they want to operate so as to make an informed decision. Also, the subsidies from
Government could be transferred to consumers bank account directly in future using the information
from consumer database.
Stage 3 | Onset of competition | Key tasks required to be carried out

1. Defining license area and issuance of new supply license: After the entry barriers are removed
for the entry of new retail supply companies, second (and further on) retail supply company would be
allowed to enter market in order to compete with incumbent retail supply company. The area of supply
for the new Retail Supply Company would be coterminous with the license area of the incumbent supply
license of the area. States with the large area coming under one distribution license may break the license
area in smaller areas keeping in mind the consumer and sales mix. A package of cities or areas could also
be offered to the new retail supply companies. These packages may consist of areas like an urban area
combined with a rural area. While the urban area would be an attractive proposition for the new retail
supply company due to higher consumer density and therefore greater revenues, the supplier could be
given a rural area along with it so as to promote level playing field to all players and also promote rural
electrification. The various packages formed should be comparable with each other in terms of
parameters like consumer mix, loss levels, connected load patterns etc. This would ensure that new retail
supply companies do not cherry pick within the packages.
2. Phasing of competition identifying contestable consumer categories or connected load:
In a particular supply license area, the retail competition can be introduced in phases, where in each
phase, the new retail supply companies would be allowed to supply electricity to a certain section of
consumers. Phasing is important because it allows a pilot study by introducing competition in a smaller
section of consumers first. Further phasing allows new players time to ramp up their resources gradually
and acclimatise down to new regulations and industry structure. Phasing can be done based on connected
load of consumer, energy consumption of consumer, area of supply or consumer category. Further the
phasing can be done in an increasing or decreasing fashion based on these factors.
Since it is difficult to determine area wise/circle wise losses and costs, phasing based on area of supply
would be difficult to implement. Using consumer category as a factor would require determining
consumer category wise losses which would also be difficult to implement. Phasing based on energy
consumption as a factor would pose operational difficulties in identifying consumers open for
competition as the energy consumption of a consumer could change frequently. As per the discussion
with FOR and pros and cons of various approaches, it is suggested that phasing could be either
decreasing connected load or increasing connected load of consumers. In the decreasing connected load
approach, the consumers with higher connected load, say 100 kW and above, would be open for
competition first and in later phase, threshold limit can be reduced further. In this approach, the number
of consumers open for competition, will be smaller , which will help new retail supply companies in
gradually scaling up there operation, however, bulk of the consumers will not get the option of selecting
their retail supplier in the initial phase in this approach. In the increasing consumer load approach, the
consumers with lower connected load, say up to 20 kW, will be allowed to select their retail supply
company. As majority of these consumers are connected at lower voltage, where majority of distribution
losses incur, the loss reduction opportunity will be higher for the new retail supply company, however,
the scale of operation required, will be a big challenge and may act as an entry barrier for new players and
result in nonstarter of the entire reform process.
3. Power procurement model allocation by intermediary company: PPAs remain one of the
most important sources of power procurement for discoms as the wholesale markets are still in nascent
stages of development. Majority of the generation capacity is tied up in long term PPAs with the current
discoms. Therefore when new retail supply companies enter into the market they may find it difficult to
procure power. As discussed in stage 1 of the roll out plan, the existing PPAs of the current Discoms are to
be transferred to the Intermediary Company. The Intermediary Company would allocate these PPAs
between various retail supply companies based on their power requirements.
PwC
16
In case where the quantum of PPAs with the current discoms is less than the power requirement in the
area of supply, it is possible that the Intermediary Company is unable to meet the entire power demand of
all the retail supply companies. In such case the Intermediary Company could either meet the entire
demand of incumbent retail supply companies and then provide remaining power to the new retail supply
companies or allocate PPAs proportionately between all retail supply companies. Based on the
discussions with the FOR and analysis of various pros and cons, it is suggested that the Intermediary
Company allocate PPAs proportionately between all retail supply companies. A formula will need to be
derived for allocation taking into consideration factors like Duration of PPAs, average/peak demand of
consumers with each Supply company, consumer mix of Supply companies, size of PPAs, etc. Also in such
a case where the quantum of PPAs with the current discoms is less than the power requirement in the
area of supply, the new retail supply companies may be given flexibility to procure power from the market
first and then accept power from the Intermediary Company if required.
Further in case where the quantum of PPAs with the current discoms is more than the power requirement
of the area of supply, the Intermediary Company could be left with excess PPAs after meeting the
requirements of the retail suppliers. Also it is possible that power is available in the market at rates
cheaper than the PPAs. In such cases the retail supply companies would want to not accept power from
the Intermediary Company and purchase power from the market instead. However since the
Intermediary Company does not have assets or sufficient revenue sources to take on financial losses due
to un-allocated PPAs, it is suggested that the retail supply companies mandatorily accept all the power
allocated by the Intermediary Company and then approach the market for any additional requirement
that they may have.
The Intermediary Company could either allocate the PPAs as a whole to retail supply companies or
allocate power from these PPAs to the retail suppliers. Also in case the Intermediary Company allocated
power to retail supply companies instead of PPAs, it may charge a uniform average cost of power
purchase form suppliers or calculate a differential bulk supply tariff. Further the allocation of PPAs
between retail supply companies could either be fixed or dynamic. In a fixed allocation, the PPAs/power
once allocated would not be changed even if the consumer base of retail suppliers change, while under
dynamic allocation the allocation of PPAs/power would be revised at fixed intervals to account for
changing consumer base of retail suppliers. These issues would have to be detailed in the transfer scheme
and roll out plans to be developed by individual states.
4. Consumer switching mechanism: Shifting of consumers from one retail supplier to another would
need deliberation on following changeover activities
Recovery of stranded costs like past revenue gaps or regulatory assets from
consumers: In case SERCs allow creation of new regulatory assets to cover stranded costs of
retail supply companies in future, and if consumers of such retail supply companies switch to
another retail supplier, this would leave with the retail supplier a smaller consumer base to
recover regulatory assets. To prevent this, the Intermediary Company may have to create a
mechanism to ensure collection of these costs from concerned consumers irrespective of the retail
supplier they are taking electricity from.
Recovery of dues from consumer: a consumer may have dues to be paid to its current retail
supply company. The retail supplier would in turn have to make payment to distribution business
for the wheeling charge and generators for the power purchase cost on account of such consumers.
If such consumers who have outstanding dues, switch to another supplier, the recovery of dues for
wheeling and other charges becomes an issue. Also it is possible that current Retail Supply
Company would have disconnected certain consumers due to non-payment of dues. It needs to be
deliberated whether such consumers would be allowed to take a new connection from another
retail supply company or not, before the resolution of its disputes with current retail supply
company. To resolve these issues, a robust communication mechanism will have to be developed
PwC
17
by the retail supply companies among themselves to ensure such consumers are not allowed to
switch retail suppliers without clearing there past dues.
Defining consumer category at the time of switching: it needs to be deliberated whether a

consumer would be allowed to change consumer category while switching its retail supplier.
Security Deposits: It needs to be deliberated whether the existing security deposit of consumer
with the current retail supply company would be refunded to the consumer or settled with the new
retail supply company.
Frequency of consumer switching: it needs to be deliberated that will the consumers be

allowed to switch from one retail supplier to another on certain dates or anytime during the year.
Based on the discussion with FOR and analysis of various pros and cons, it is suggested that a lock
in period of 1 year be kept between consumer switches. The regulators can review this lock in
period later as required. High switching rates of consumers could create difficulties for retail
supply companies in managing their power procurement and demand forecasting.
These issues regarding consumer switching would have to be detailed in the transfer scheme and roll out
plans to be developed by individual states.
5. Process for procurement of new PPAs: while the new retail supply companies would have the
option of forming new PPAs with generators, being small in size than the current discoms, the new retail
supply companies may not have enough bargaining power to negotiate with bigger generators. In such
cases the possibility of Intermediary Company acting as an aggregator for procuring power could be
explored by states in their respective roll out plans and transfer schemes.
6. Balancing and settlement: After the introduction of retail supply competition, the Unscheduled
Interchange charges would have to be calculated separately for each retail supply company in a license
area and thus the mechanism of balancing and settlement would have to defined for these new retail
supply companies. There can be two approaches possible for the mechanism of balancing and settlement
after the introduction of retail supply competition
Making Advanced Metering compulsory for new Retail Supply Companies - Each new
Retail Supply Company entering in the market would be asked to install Advance Metering
systems for new consumers that they acquire. This way the total power sale for this new Retail
Supply Company can be metered on actual basis. With adding normative losses on the consumer
sales, energy consumed by new retail supply companies can be arrived at. The energy consumed
by incumbent retail supply company can be calculated by reducing the figures of new retail supply
companies from the total energy consumed at distribution and transmission interface.
Based on consumer category wise sample load curve under this approach, consumer
category wise sample load curve is prepared based on the historical data. This load curve may vary
for location and season. Based on the energy consumed by consumers of a category for a retail
supply licensee, the load curve for that consumer category of the retail supply company is
prepared. By adding the load curves of all consumers categories of the retail supply company,
aggregate load curve of the retail supply company is prepared. This load curve is then used for
balancing and settlement. The process of preparing the load curve would gradually improve as
more data would be available regarding the energy consumption patterns of consumers. Also
updation in load curves would be required as consumer behaviours change with time and seasons.
Since going forward, advanced metering would be required for better operational management and loss
reduction, approach 1 of making Advanced Metering compulsory for new retail supply companies can be
adopted. While adopting this approach may burden the new retail supply companies with higher
metering costs, this risk would be known to any new retail supplier entering the business and thus can be
suitable hedged for. As a transitional mechanism, as decided by the appropriate SERC, till such time
PwC
18
advanced metering is not available for all consumers, the balancing and settlement may be carried out
using category wise sample load curves.
7. Tariff setting mechanism for consumer open for competition: in this stage after certain
consumers are opened up for competition and new retail supply companies enter the market, the SERCs
would have to determine a ceiling tariff for such contestable consumers. The retail supply companies
would have to mandatorily offer a standard tariff plan charging this ceiling tariff and then along with it
offer their other tariff plans. Since the incumbent retail supply company would have both contestable and
non-contestable consumers, they would have to maintain separate financial accounts for them in order to
file the Annual Revenue Requirement for serving the non-contestable consumers to the SERCs
separately.
8. Defining framework for Provider of Last Resort: a retail supply company may fail to supply
electricity to its consumers in case the supplier goes insolvent or has insufficient power available. In such
cases the responsibility of supplying power to such consumers would fall upon the incumbent retail
supply company. The transfer scheme and the roll out plan would have to detail whether the provider of
last resort i.e. the incumbent retail supply company would be compensated based on the tariff charged to
the consumer by failed retail supply company, competitive tariff, ceiling tariff or actual cost pass through
to the consumers.
9. USO extends to new retail supply companies: After the introduction of second Retail Supply
Company in an area of supply, while the duty to connect would still remain the responsibility of
Distribution Company, whether duty to supply would be applicable on new Retail Supply Companies or
will not be an issue. Based on the discussions with the FOR and the analysis of various pros and cons it is
suggested that USO should be applicable on new retail supply companies as well.
Alternative roll out plans for introduction of retail supply competition

As discussed the introduction of competition in retail sale of electricity, would require several tasks to be
performed in three stages namely functional segregation of discoms, preparation for competition and onset of
competition. However since the sector scenarios and contributing factors may vary from state to state in India
and also the interpretation of these factors may vary, we have devised alternative roll out plans based on these
variations.
Factors based on which various current scenarios can be defined, are as follows
Current level of Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses: based on the current level of
losses, the responsibility of AT&C losses is allocated between Distribution and Supply Functions.
Further based on the loss allocation the metering responsibility is also given to either Retail Supply or
Distribution functions. The possible scenarios for current level of losses are defined as follows o
High where the T&D losses (AT&C Loss less collection inefficiency loss) are more than 15%
Low where the T&D losses (AT&C Loss less collection inefficiency loss) are less than or equal to
15%
Availability of Power: based on the availability levels of power in a state, the approach towards
Transfer of existing PPAs from current Discom to Intermediary Company and Allocation of PPAs
between retail supply companies are decided. The possible scenarios for availability of power are
defined as follows o
Energy Surplus where the current Discom has power procurement arrangements for more
than its energy requirement
Energy Deficit where the current Discom has power procurement arrangements for less than
its energy requirement
PwC
19
Based on the permutation and combinations of these factors, 4 scenarios are defined and a roll out plan is
devised for each of these scenarios.
Current level
of losses
High
Low
Technical Loss Distribution

All other Losses - Retail Supply
Meter reading Retail Supply
Meter installation/ownership - Retail Supply
Availability
of Power

Meter installation/ownership - Distribution
Energy
Surplus
Energy
Deficit
All PPAs transferred to IC

or Some PPAs shifted to
market

market
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
RSL buys power from
market and then goes to IC
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
RSL accepts power from IC
and then goes to market
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
RSL buys power from
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
Energy
Deficit
Roll Out
Plan 1
Factors
common for
all scenarios
Collection Loss Retail Supply

All other Losses - Distribution
Roll Out
Plan 2
Cross Subsidy reduced via

UC fund or direct subsidy
USO on all Suppliers
Mandatory advanced metering

for RSLs to facilitate
Consumer database
POLR on ISL for first year,
maintained by Distribution later as decided by SERC
*Caveat of phasing based on
increasing connected load
Roll Out
Plan 3
Consumer Interface
with retail suppliers
Energy
Surplus
Roll Out
Plan 4
1 year lock in period

after consumer switch
Tariff determination:
Distribution Regulated tariff
Supply Ceiling for contestable consumer,
Regulated for non contestable consumer
Separate SOPs for

distribution & supply
Phasing based on decreasing or increasing

connected load or hybrid mode*
Majority number of consumers would have connected load of less than 20 kW, opening competition to a large
consumer base at a go. This coupled with USO, might be difficult to implement and become a non starter for reforms.
As such a feasible option is to phase out based on decreasing load but with mandatory requirement of urban/rural
consumer mix.
PwC
20
Overview
The Forum of Regulators (FOR) has been constituted by the Government of India in terms of Section 166 (2) of
the Electricity Act, 2003. The Forum is responsible for harmonization, coordination and ensuring uniformity of
approach amongst the Electricity Regulatory Commissions across the country, in order to achieve greater
regulatory certainty in the electricity sector.
Ministry of Power proposed amendment to the Electricity Act, 2003 inter alia including separation of carriage
and content in distribution sector giving choice to consumers to select the supplier for electricity. The roll out
plan for carriage and content separation has, however, not been detailed in the proposed amendments.
The Ministry of Power requested the Forum of Regulators to evolve a model transfer scheme and at the same
time provide different variations, so as to bring the desired clarity on the issues involved in implementing the
framework. This would help facilitate the Ministry to suggest a Model Scheme for use by the States.
PricewaterhouseCoopers Pvt. Ltd. (PwC) was appointed by FOR to assist in carrying out the tasks required for
the study.
Objective of the study

The objective of this study is to develop a model transfer scheme for separation of carriage and content as
envisaged in the Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 for implementation by the States in India. As per the Terms
of Reference, PwC was required prepare a detailed roll out plan for retail supply competition, which includes
Review existing literature on framework for separation of carriage and content;
Suggest alternative variations for separation of network and supply business in distribution of
electricity with due regard to the power sector scenario in India
Develop a model framework for separation of carriage and content which inter alia includes, but is not
limited to:
o
Clarity of roles and responsibilities across distribution network and supply businesses & the
role of Intermediary Companies
Phasing of retail sale competition
Processes and stages of separation of distribution and supply business viz. functional
segregation and physical segregation
Treatment of losses
Treatment of power purchase agreements
Treatment of Regulatory Assets
Treatment of cross-subsidies
Framework for consumer interface with licensees & Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism
Framework for Provider of last resort
Framework for compliance of Universal Service Obligation by the licensees
Mechanism to address cherry-picking by the supply licensees
Treatment of issues involving Open Access Consumers
PwC
21
Establishment of performance standards for network and supply businesses
Such other related issues
Approach adopted for completion of the assignment

In order to meet requirements of the Scope of Work, PwC, in consultation with the Forum of Regulators
adopted the following phase wise approach for completion of the assignment.
Phase
Activities
Phase 1Analysis
1.
Review of current status of competition in Indian Power Sector

1.1. Identification of issues in open access
1.2. Understanding of issues in areas with multiple distribution companies
2. Review of FOR report on Introducing competition in Retail Electricity Supply in India

Study of major recommendations as per the report
3. Review of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 to identify major changes in the sections
that envisage the introduction of retail supply competition
4. Identification of issues for implementation of retail supply competition
5.
Brief international review
Deliverable 1: Inception Report

Based on the review and analysis performed during Phase 1 of this assignment, as discussed
above, an Inception Report was prepared
Phase 2Recommen
dations
1.
Established objectives and guiding principles for introducing retail supply competition
2. Preparation of detailed stage wise plan for introduction of retail supply competition
3. Consultation with stakeholders for finalisation of roll out plan
3.1. Four brainstorming sessions were organised by FOR with various stakeholders from
government and private sector
3.2. Comments and suggestions were received during these brainstorming sessions and
also separately through written /verbal methods
4. Preparation of alternative roll out plans with various possible approaches towards issues,
based on the current scenarios of power sector in Indian states
Deliverable 2: Draft Report
The draft report included recommendations and the way forward on the basis of analysis
carried out in Phase I & Phase II of the assignment
Discussions were held with FOR and various other stakeholders identified on the
recommendations of Draft Report
Deliverable 3: Revised Report
Based on the discussions with FOR secretariat, a revised report was submitted to FOR, with
alterations as discussed.
PwC
22
After the submission of revised report, we presented the findings of our study along with
suggested recommendations before the FOR.
Phase 3
Final
Report
Deliverable 4 - Final Report

Based on the comments on the draft report, the final report is prepared and submitted
Details of Brainstorming Sessions held at FOR

In order to get the views of various stakeholders on the implementation of retail supply competition, 4
brainstorming sessions were held at FOR where participants were invited from various sector players like state
governments, electricity regulators, industry associations, distribution utilities, transmission companies,
consumer groups, academicians etc.
Date of session
Participant
Organisation
06th May 2015
Chetan Bundela
Torrent Power
S.K. Sonee, S.K. Aggarwal
POSOCO
Dr. Anoop Singh
IIT Kanpur
Neerja Verma
CEA
Prafulla Varhade
MERC
Prabir Neogi
CESC
Praveer Sinha
TPDDL
Sandeep Dhamija
TATA Power, New Delhi
Rajarajeshwari Mishra
SBI Capital Markets
Nidhi Sarin
British High Commission
Dr. Anoop Singh
IIT Kanpur
Aditya Pyasi
BYPL
Daljit Singh
Independent Consultant Energy Policy
Prabir Neogi
CESC
Vivek Mishra, Kapil Sharma
Reliance Infrastructure
Shantanu Dixit
Prayas Energy Group, Pune
Rahul Tongia
Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Praveer Sinha
TPDDL
Sandeep Dhamija
TATA Power, New Delhi
Jonathan Brearley
Brearly Economics
Nidhi Sarin
British High Commission
Sanjeev Singhal
SBI Capital Markets
Vishal Anand, Poonam Verma
J. Sagar Associates
Debasish
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company
Neeraj Sati
Uttarakhand Electricity Regulatory Commission
20th May 2015
PwC
23
Date of session
Participant
Organisation
04th June 2015
Narayan Swaroop Nigam
WSEDCL
Rajat Misra
SBI Capital Markets
Gopal Saxena
BSES
Praveer Sinha
TPDDL
I.C.P. Keshari
Principal Secretary (Power), Madhya Pradesh
Devender Singh
Principal Secretary (Power), Haryana
8th July 2015
Draft report was presented to FOR on 10th June 2015 where views were received from various state regulatory
commissions on the issues involved in implementation of retail supply competition. The comments and
suggestions received from various state regulators have been incorporated in this final report.
PwC
24
Background of competition in India

Competition in Indian power sector
The Preamble to Electricity Act 2003 talks of promoting competition in electricity sector and the Act in its
various provisions gives direction to the regulators to take necessary steps to promote competition in electricity
sector. Key points related to competition, in the 4 major sectors of Electricity Industry are:
i.
Generation competition in electricity sale by generation was introduced through the route of
competitive bidding under section 63 of the Electricity Act 2003. Ministry of Power issued Guidelines
for Determination of Tariff by Bidding Process for Procurement of Power by Distribution Licensees in
2005 to promote competitive procurement of electricity by Discoms. The competitive tariffs at which
Discoms buy power, puts backward pressure on generators to efficiently generate electricity at lowest
possible costs.
ii.
Transmission while the transmission business is inherently monopolistic in nature, competition was
introduced in this sector by Tariff based Competitive-bidding Guidelines for Transmission Service,
2006 by Ministry of Power. The objective of these guidelines was to promote competitive procurement
of transmission services through competitive bidding route under section 63 of the Electricity Act 2003.
iii.
Distribution the Electricity Act 2003 allowed parallel distribution licensees in an area of supply,
subject to approval by appropriate state regulators. The word parallel signifies that the distribution
licenses are required to setup their own distribution wire networks to supply electricity. Further Open
Access was introduced which allowed generators to compete directly with distribution companies for
supplying electricity to large consumers.
iv.
Supply the Electricity Act 2003 did not identify Supply as a separate business but as a part of
distribution itself.
Electricity Act,
2003
MoP Guidelines for

Procurement of Power by
Distribution Licensees
2005
MoP, Competitivebidding Guidelines for

Transmission
2006
Electricity
(Amendment) Bill
2014
Section 63 allowed for

adoption of tariff determined
through competitive bidding
Competition introduced under
Sec 63 of EA 2003 through
competitive bidding in power
procurement by Discoms
Generation
Competition introduced under

Sec 63 of EA 2003 through
competitive bidding for
setting transmission projects
Transmission
Monopolistic business
Distribution
Parallel Distribution
licensees allowed
Open Access introduced
Supply
Segregation of
Distribution and
Supply business
Multiple suppliers
allowed in an area
PwC
25
Competition in Generation and Transmission sector

Following the enactment of the Electricity Act 2003, power generation was de-licensed and a number of fiscal
and financial incentives were offered under various schemes such as Mega Power Policy and tax holiday. This
attracted significant investments from private sector to leverage the demand-supply gap in the sector.
Subsequently, the Ministry of Power came out with competitive bidding guidelines for procurement of power in
2005, which allowed price discovery through market based mechanism. This ensured that private generation
companies are allowed equal platform and opportunity to access the market as the public companies but most
importantly it ensured competitive prices to benefit both, the consumers and the market.
Some of the key provisions of the Guidelines for Determination of Tariff by Bidding Process for Procurement of
Power by Distribution Licensees, 2005 are:
2.1. These guidelines are being issued under the provisions of Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for
procurement of electricity by distribution licensees (Procurer) for:
a) long-term procurement of electricity for a period of 7 years and above;
b) Medium term procurement for a period of upto 7 years but exceeding 1 year.
4.1. For procurement of electricity under these guidelines, tariff shall be paid and settled for each payment
period (not exceeding one month). A multi-part tariff structure featuring separate capacity and energy
components of tariff shall ordinarily form the basis for bidding. However, for medium term procurement the
procurer may, at his option, permit bids on a single part basis, and the same shall be clearly specified in the
Request for Qualification (RFQ) / Request for Proposal (RFP).
In 2006 similar competitive bidding guidelines were put in place for enabling competition in power
transmission as well. Inter-state transmission projects were awarded under the competitive bidding regime. A
number of states such as UP, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Odisha embraced
competitive bidding in power transmission to enable private sector investments in the sector.
Key provisions of the Tariff based Competitive-bidding Guidelines for Transmission Service, 2006 are:
2.1. These guidelines are being issued under the provisions of Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for
procurement of transmission services for transmission of electricity.
2.4. Procurement of transmission services would include all activities related to survey, detailed project
report formulation, arranging finance, project management, obtaining transmission license, obtaining right
of way, necessary clearances, site identification, land compensation, design, engineering, equipment,
material, construction, erection, testing and commissioning, maintenance and operation of transmission lines
and/orsubstations and/or switching stations and/or HVDC links including terminal stations and HVDC
transmission line.
7.1. For procurement of transmission services under these guidelines, transmission charges shall be paid and
settled for each payment period (not exceeding one month). A transmission charge for providing transmission
service and operation and maintenance required for the various transmission elements shall form the basis
for bidding and evaluation. Tariff structure will have two components one scaleable and the other nonscaleable. The scaleable component shall not be more than 15% of the non-scaleable component.
PwC
26
Competition in Distribution sector

The Electricity Act, 2003 laid down the foundation for introducing competition at the consumer end through
open access and provision for parallel Distribution licensees.
14 Provided also that the Appropriate Commission may grant a licence to two or more persons for
distribution of electricity through their own distribution system within the same area.
However, the parallel licensee regime requires distribution licensees in an area to distribute power through
their own distribution system within the same area. This has potential adverse consequences on tariff. Each
distribution licensee investing in its own network would not only lead to replication of network but, in the event
of capital investment being a pass-through expense, would also push up costs/tariffs for the end consumers.
Issues in Open Access

The concept of Open Access was introduced by The Electricity Act, 2003 however very few consumers have
taken benefit of this. The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 envisages the concept of open access to remain
even after the introduction of retail supply competition. The set of reforms required for introduction of retail
supply competition could resolve some of the issues afflicting open access as well. Some of these issues afflicting
open access and benefits to be brought in by retail supply competition are:
High levels of Cross Subsidy: In case subsidising consumers (like commercial or industrial
consumer categories) purchase electricity through Open Access, the distribution companies are left only
with subsidised consumers (like domestic and agricultural consumers). In such a scenario the
distribution companies are left with no means to cover the cross subsidy benefit extended to subsidised
consumers. Therefore this conflict of interest prevents distribution companies from promoting open
access. A high amount of cross subsidy surcharge is charged from consumers who want to migrate from
distribution companies to Open Access which acts as a deterrent for consumers to make use of Open
Access.
The issue of cross subsidies is also an entry barrier for new retail supply companies. The effect of cross
subsidies would have to be negated by tariff hikes, universal charge model, direct government subsidy
or limiting the cross subsidy amount to wheeling charges. Regardless of the method adopted for
negation of cross subsidies, at the end for all the consumers buying electricity from retail supply
companies or through open access would attract same cross subsidies, therefore eliminating any
conflict.
Repercussions of moving away from Discoms: the fear of repercussions from distribution utility
to which consumers have so far been connected acts as a deterrent for shifting to Open Access. The
consumers fear the distribution utility may deny services like technical support, standby power in
emergency etc.
After the separation of supply and distribution business, the distribution company would have no
incentive to differentiate between a retail supply company and a generator wishing to supply through
open access.
Lack of information access to small consumers: Consumers, especially smaller commercial or

industrial users, are often at a loss about the process of Open Access along with specifics such as which
trader/generator to approach, etc.
Even after the introduction of retail supply competition, the consumers may still find it difficult to
approach generators for Open Access. But the consumers would get multiple retail supply companies to
choose from, which would give choice to consumers to move away from their Discoms.
PwC
27
Lack of incentive for generators: The generators lack incentive to provide electricity to smaller
industrial or commercial consumers through Open Access as it forces them to deal with multiple buyers
on individual basis and reduced their financial security over a longer period of time. Further, through
electricity exchange buyers can enter into only short term contracts, leading to uncertainty in future
electricity prices for the consumers.
In a scenario with multiple retail supply companies in an area, the generators would also have option to
tie up with various supply companies and not look out for smaller consumers on individual basis. This
would not directly translate into open access regime but indirectly allow consumers to get better deals
from generators.
Inappropriate estimation of Loss Levels: The amount of technical loss levels loaded on open
access consumers is based on estimates of the Discoms/Commission.
With the introduction of retail supply competition, the loss levels loaded on open access consumers
would be same as that on other retail supply companies, therefore eliminating the conflict.
Lack of infrastructure: Another key issue is the lack of adequate transmission and distribution
infrastructure leading to congestions in the network.
With the separation of supply and distribution business, focussed investments will be possible by the
distribution business in improvement of networks. The government owned distribution companies
would be able to concentrate their capital investments plans towards strengthening the technical
network while the private players coming in the retail supply sector would bring in increased
investments into the consumer interface and operations.
Non Availability of 24x7 power supply: in a power deficit scenario, the prices of electricity
generated are pushed up which in-turn erodes the extent of savings in power purchase cost that are
envisaged through open access. Further even when the power is available in the market, the discoms
find it difficult to purchase that power due to poor financial health.
With the introduction of overall reforms for retail supply competition, the financial health of both
distribution companies and retail supply companies would improve. The private players entering the
retail supply side of the business would be better equipped in terms of investment and technology to
reduce commercial losses and make financial profits. This would in turn increase their power
purchasing capacity and thus increase the availability of power.
Competition in supply side of Distribution business

The business of Distribution companies (Discoms) can be segregated into carriage (distribution) business and
content (retail supply) business. Retail supply involves the service side of the business like purchase of
electricity from generators, selling electricity to consumers, customer services, billing, and collection of charges
from consumers. On the other hand the Distribution business involves the technical side of the business like
setting up of physical network in order to wheel electricity to consumer premises. While the Distribution
business is monopolistic in nature, the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 envisages introducing competition in
retail supply side of the Discoms business. For achieving this the existing distribution company needs to be
segregated into a distribution and a retail supply business 5. Section 14 of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014
provides for multiple retail supply companies in an area of supply. These multiple retail supply companies
would then compete with each other for supplying electricity to consumers. Further section 12 of The Electricity
(Amendment) Bill 2014 says that The Appropriate Commission shall not grant licence to more than one
distribution licensee in any area of distribution in areas. In areas where two or more distribution businesses coexist, they can continue to operate till the expiry of their licenses.
The retail supply company formed by segregating the current Discom is referred to as incumbent retail supply company
while any other retail supply company competing with it is referred to as new retail supply company.
5
PwC
28
Current industry structure
Consumer 1
Discom 1
Generator 1
Discom 2 (if any)
Transmission Co.
Duplicate network
Generator 2
Consumer 2
Physical Flow
Proposed industry structure

A
Discom
Intermediary Co.
ISL
Consumer 1
Distribution
Network Co.
Generator 1
Transmission Co.
Generator 2
Physical Flow
RSL
Consumer 2
Financial Flow
PwC
29
Introduction
Objectives of introducing retail supply competition
It is imperative to conceptualise broad objectives of introducing retail supply competition. These objectives
would serve as the guiding blocks to evaluate the possible approaches towards resolution of various issues in
retail supply competition. The objectives for introducing retail supply competition in Indian electricity sector
are:
Objective
Benefits derived from retail supply competition
Improvement in efficiency
and loss reduction
The licensees can focus on their respective responsibilities. distribution company

would focus entirely on technical and operational efficiency, while the retail
supplier would focus entirely on power procurement and consumer interface
To give choice to consumers
Choice allows consumers to differentiate between suppliers on the parameters

like quality of supply, supply tariffs and customer service. This in turn would put
pressure on supply companies to provide better services.
Improved access and

availability of power
Owing to focused investments of distribution in network upgradation and

increased efficiencies in power procurement by retail supply companies, in the
long run power availability to consumers will improve.
Efficient power procurement In order to capture a greater market share in their supply area, the retail supply
companies would work towards improving efficiency in power procurement.
Each individual State Government while forming the transfer scheme would have to identify the key objective of
introducing retail supply competition, depending upon the current electricity scenario in their respective states.
This key objective would serve as the driving force for the introduction of retail supply competition in their
state. For example in states like Bihar Jharkhand or Odisha where current levels of AT&C losses is on the higher
side, the key objective could be Improvement in efficiency and loss reduction. On the other hand in states like
Delhi where current level of losses is on the lower side but cost of power procurement is high, the key objective
could be Efficient power procurement.
As various states would have different objectives to introduce retail supply competition, the roll out plan
required to achieve that objective would also differ. Later in this report under the section Alternative roll out
plans for introduction of retail supply competition, for each roll out plan the key objective/driving force is
defined which can be achieved with the help of that roll out plan.
FOR report on Introducing

electricity supply in India
competition
in
retail
In June 2013, Forum of Regulators came up with a study report on introducing competition in retail segment of
India. The report discussed in detail the following:
Status of competition across various segments of the Indian power sector
Issues plaguing customer choice and competition in Distribution sector
PwC
30
Five international case studies in retail supply competition
Brief discussion of Indian case studies viz. Maharashtra model of parallel licensees and electricity
supply to Special Economic Zones in Gujarat and Kerala
Blueprint for introducing retail competition in India (including pre-requisites and risk factors for
introducing retail supply competition in India)
Some of the major findings and recommendations of this study report on Retail Supply Competition were
1. Development of a Wholesale Market
Retail competition, in context of international experience and also with relevance to the existing scenario in
India, is a stage of reforms that typically requires the state of affairs in the power sector to be already liberalized
to a great extent, and in particular requires a well-functioning wholesale market. Countries which have
successfully adopted a competitive retail supply model ensured that a robust wholesale market was in place
before opening up the retail supply sector. The following are requisites for market design
Reducing dominant market power in generation: to ensure there are many players in the market and no
player has a dominant position, enough to manipulate the market
Creation of voluntary public wholesale spot energy and operating reserve market institutions
Development of Ancillary Market: the resources required for reliable operation have been treated as an
ancillary service that the system operator has to obtain from other industry participants.
The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 defines ancillary services as in relation to power system or
grid operation, means the services necessary to support the power system or grid operation for
maintaining power quality, reliability and security of the grid.
2. Cost Reflective Tariffs

Currently in India, tariffs are designed keeping socio-economic considerations in mind. Domestic and
agricultural consumers pay tariffs lower than the actual cost of supplying power, therefore getting crosssubsidized by commercial and industrial consumers who typically pay tariffs higher than their cost of supply. If
commercial and industrial consumers move away to other retail suppliers, the incumbent retail supply company
would suffer a loss, because significant cross subsidies would get eroded. Also existence of cross subsidies
would encourage cherry picking among retail suppliers, who would want to attract consumers who are paying
more than their cost of supply. Therefore the following steps are required before the introduction of retail
supply competition
Determination of voltage wise and category wise cost of supply so as to accurately identify amount of
cross subsidy existing between consumer categories
Gradual reduction of cross subsidies following a trajectory over a time period
3. Treatment of existing distribution and financial losses

Before designing any model for separation of the distribution and retail supply businesses, consensus needs to
be built on the treatment of distribution losses in supply of power, and current financial losses on the books of
accounts of existing distribution companies. Following steps are required before the introduction of retail
supply competition
Segregation of accounts and preparation of separate accounts for the distribution and retail supply
businesses
Existing distribution losses of distribution companies need to be assessed and classified into technical
and commercial losses accurately which can then be allocated between distribution and retail supply
respectively
PwC
31
All technical losses may be allocated to the incumbent Distribution network operator since these losses
are on account of technical parameters
Commercial losses that arise on account of various issues such as faulty meters, non-metering, meter
bypassing, etc. may be attributed to the retailers
Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) may be created to take over all recognised financial losses of the Discoms
Regulatory Surcharge can be levied on all consumers (of incumbent Discom as well as competitive
supply retailers) which would go towards the SPV
4. Suitable supply infrastructure

Separation of distribution and retail supply of electricity would require advanced metering for consumers in the
competitive segment of the market because in the absence of separate meters and till the time that sufficient
power availability is attained, imposition of load restrictions by the incumbent Discom would needlessly impact
competitive market customers and vice versa. Therefore distribution utilities would require advanced metering
for consumers in the competitive segment of the market. Considering the huge cost and time involved, there
might be several practical issues involved in ensuring advanced metering for all consumers. Therefore, keeping
in view transitional requirements, three approaches may be considered in this regard:
PwC
32
As a transitional approach consumers in the competitive market segment may take supply from any of
the retail suppliers, irrespective of the their connected feeder, if they are willing to undergo load
restrictions announced in advance by retail suppliers
Meters should be separated for the concerned consumer segment by the time competition is introduced
for that consumer segment
Advanced metering may be completed for various segments of the market as and when they are opened
up to competition in a phased manner
5. Segregation of ownership of the distribution (wire) and retail supply functions

One potential distribution sector reform is the segregation of ownership of the distribution (wire) and retail
supply functions. This is neccesary before the introduction of retail supply competition because of
Need to bring in neutrality in the Distribution network by separating the Distribution and Retail Supply
functions, as consumer choice is bottlenecked without such neutrality due to prevailing cross subsidies
Encourage investment in distribution networks by making the distribution business a distinct,

regulated business with assured returns
Focussed efforts at efficiency improvement Distribution company to focus on technical losses while
Retail Supply company to focus on Commercial losses
6. Phased approach with clear milestones

Based on preliminary discussions, study and analysis of the sector environment, a timeline was suggested for
the introduction of retail supply competition in India, in line with the mandate of this advisory assignment. The
broad phases suggested were as follows
Activity
Timeline
Step 1
Separation of accounts and employees
0 2 years
Step 2
1.
2.
3.
4.
Step 3
Invite Applications for second/subsequent supply license
1 year from completion of step 1

and step 2
Step 4
1. Ownership separation of network and supply businesses

2. Introduction of second retail supply licensee
3. Tariff determination for consumer open to competition
3 year from completion of step 3
Step 5
Extension of retail supply competition to include all

consumers in phased manner
6th year onwards
Two separate licences (with same ownership)

Transfer of PPAs to Supply Licensee
Tariff Determination
Development of Capacity Market Medium Term
7. Standards of Performance
The current Standards of Performance would have to be segregated between the distribution and supply
businesses. In the initial stages of retail competition, Standards of Performance would continue to be imposed
on all the players including competitive retail supplier(s). With time, once the competitive retail market is
deemed to be sufficiently evolved, Standards of Performance may be withdrawn since competition itself would
demand and foster quality supply and good performance standards.
PwC
33
Critical Review of Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014

The Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 envisages to promote competition in retail electricity supply through
separation of carriage (distribution) and content (retail) business. While the Electricity Act, 2003 had
provisions for allowing competition in Retail Supply, it did not distinguish between Distribution licensee and
Supply licence. The Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 provides for Supply Licensee under Section 12 of Part
IV.
Electricity Act, 2003
Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014
Section 12
of Part IV
Section 12
of Part IV
No person shall
(a) transmit electricity; or
No person shall
(a) transmit electricity; or
(b) distribute electricity; or
(b) distribute electricity; or
(c) undertake trading in electricity,
(c) undertake trading in electricity, or
unless he is authorized to do so by a
license issued under section 14, or is
exempt under section 13
(d) supply of electricity to consumer

unless he is authorized to do so by a
license issued under section 14, or is
exempt under section 13
Under section 2 of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, the following definitions have been added/modified
Area of Distribution and Area of Supply

Area of distribution means the area within which a distribution licensee is authorised by his licence
to distribute electricity.
Area of supply means the area within which a supply licensee is authorised by his licence to supply
electricity.
Supply Licensee Supply licensee means a person authorised under section 14 to supply electricity to consumers and
shall also include, incumbent supply licensee.
Provider of Last Resort

Provider of last resort means the supply licensee who from time to time is designated by the
Appropriate Commission.
While Section 43 of the Electricity Act 2003 placed Duty to Supply consumers on Discoms, the Electricity
(Amendment) Bill 2014 changes that to Duty to Connect consumers, as follows
Section 43
Section 43
Duty to Supply on request

Save as otherwise provided in this
Act, every distribution licensee, shall,
on an application by the owner or
occupier of any premises, give supply
of electricity to such premises, within
Duty to Connect on request

Save as otherwise provided in this Act,
every distribution licensee, shall, on an
application by the owner or occupier of
any premises in the area of distribution,
give connection to such premises to
PwC
34

one month after receipt of
application requiring such supply

the
enable supply of electricity, within fifteen

days after receipt of the application
requiring such supply
The Electricity Act, 2003 allowed for multiple Distribution licensees in an area. This is amended in Electricity
(Amendment) Bill, 2014 which allows a single Distribution licensee in an area with multiple supply licensees.
Section 14
Section 14
.Provided also that the Appropriate

Commission may grant a licensee to two
or more persons for supply of electricity
through their own distribution system
within the same area of supply,
progressively as may , subject to the
conditions..
Section 12
The Appropriate Commission shall not

grant licence to more than one
distribution licensee in any area of
distribution:
Provided also that the Appropriate

Commission may grant a licensee to
two or more persons for distribution of
electricity
through
their
own
distribution system within the same
area, subject to the conditions that the
applicant for grant of license within
the same area
Provided that where two or more

distribution licensees within the same
area of distribution are existing on the
date of the commencement of the
Electricity (Amendment) Act, 2014, they
shall continue their operation till such
period as specified in their licence.
In the Mumbai region of the Maharashtra state, four distribution licensees i.e. BEST, RInfra-D, MSEDCL and
TPC-D hold the licence to distribute electricity within the areas specified in their respective licences. While
BEST, RInfra-D, and MSEDCL operate within specific distribution licence areas allocated to them, distinct from
each other, TPC-D, on account of its historical background and the Supreme Court judgment delivered on 8th
July, 2008, is licensed to distribute power in the entire Mumbai region excluding the Mira-Bhayander area
served by RInfra-D and excluding all the areas served by MSEDCL. The treatment of such a distribution system
under section 12 of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 would have to be deliberated in the transfer scheme
of the state of Maharashtra.
The Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 introduces the concept of Intermediary Company. This entity will
succeed the existing PPAs and procurement arrangements of the current discoms and allocate them between
various retail supply companies accordingly.
Section 2 35B) "intermediary company" means the entity succeeding to the existing power purchase
agreements and procurement arrangements of the relevant distribution licensees on reorganisation as per
subsection (4A) of section 131 and discharging such other functions as may be assigned to it in terms of the
provisions of the Act.
PwC
35
The Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 further gives Central Government flexibility to define the roles and
responsibilities of the Intermediary Companies.
Section 131 4C) The functions of the intermediary company shall be as prescribed by the Central government.
Transfer Scheme
In Section 131 of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, sub-sections 4A) and 4B) are added which discuss the
issue of transfer scheme from Distribution Companies to Retail Supply Companies.
Section 131, 4A) The State Government shall within the period specified under section 51A draw up a transfer
scheme for transfer of such of the functions, the property, interest in property, rights and liabilities of the
distribution licensees relating to supply of electricity to a company who shall be the incumbent supply
licensee for the concerned area of supply and so far as the existing Power Purchase Agreements and
procurement arrangements, to which the distribution licensee is the beneficiary in the intermediary company
and publish such scheme as statutory transfer scheme under the Act.
Section 131 4B) The distribution licensee shall cease to be charged with and shall not perform the functions
and duties under this Act to the extent of the transfers made under sub clause (a) on and after the effective
date of such transfer.
However it is not clear from the bill whether State Governments would also have power to define a transfer
scheme for private distribution companies also or not. As per the discussions with FOR, it is envisaged that the
state government would develop transfer scheme for state discoms only.
Metering
Section 55 of The Electricity Act 2003 as well as The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, states that a licensee
after a period of two years from appointed date, cannot supply electricity without installation of a meter. The
appointed date can further be extended by the SERCs.
Section 55 (1) No licensee shall supply electricity, after the expiry of two years from the appointed date,
except through installation of a correct meter in accordance with the regulations to be made in this behalf by
the Authority:
.PROVIDED FURTHER that the State Commission may, by notification, extend the said period of two years
for a class or classes of persons or for such area as may be specified in that notification.
Further Section 55 of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 states that
Provided that smart meters, as specified by the Authority, shall be installed at each stage for proper
accounting and measurement for the purpose of metering and consumption from the point of generation up
to such consumers who consume more than the quantity of electricity in a month as prescribed by the Central
Government.
PwC
36
Structure of the report

The following report is divided into three sections as follows
1. Stages of introducing retail supply competition: this section discusses the various tasks that
need to be performed in order to ensure successful implementation of retail supply competition. These
tasks are divided into three stages to be implemented in succession, where tasks performed in previous
stage prepare the groundwork for the next stage of tasks. Also several logical approaches to implement
each of these tasks are discussed in this report, along with their pros and cons.
Some of the tasks discussed are non-critical i.e. the approach adopted to complete these tasks does not
affect the overall implementation of the retail supply competition, provided the task is completed
successfully. For such tasks, based on the sector scenario and views of stakeholders, decision would
have to be taken to select an appropriate approach. Such decision points are highlighted in a box.
On the other had there are certain tasks which can be termed as critical issues. Such issues are
interdependent upon each other and approach adopted towards them could affect the overall
implementation of retail supply competition. Such critical issues that may arise during implementation
of retail supply competition are highlighted in a box. These issues are then discussed in detail in the
next section of the report.
2. Issues in implementation of retail supply competition: this section discusses in detail the
critical issues identified. The possible approaches to resolve these issues are then objectively analysed
based on various contributing factors and state scenarios. This analysis also discusses the
interdependence of issues by explaining the effects of approach adopted towards one issue resolution
on the possible approaches for other issues.
3. Alternative roll out plans: this section of the report formulates the alternative roll out plans
wherein each roll out plan has a separate combination of the approach adopted towards major issues.
The states or regulators can choose upon the most suitable roll out plans for their respective state
scenarios.
PwC
37
Stages of introducing retail supply

competition
In order to ensure smooth transition of electricity market into retail supply competition, a three stage
implementation process of the roll out plan is suggested as follows,
Stage
Time period to complete
Functional Segregation of Discoms:

1 - 2 year(s)
In this stage, the current Discoms would be segregated into

Distribution and Retail Supply functions. Their individual roles and
responsibilities will be defined and they would be equipped with
enough financial and manpower resources to take on those roles.
Preparation for Competition:

achieved
In this stage the, steps would be taken to make the market conducive
for retail supply competition like ownership segregation, cross
subsidy reduction, upgradation of metering, loss allocation etc.
Entry barriers would be removed in order to create a level playing
field for all and encourage competition.
Onset of Competition:
New Retail Supply Licenses would be given in this stage in order to
give retail consumer choice. The market would be opened up for
competition in phases i.e. initially certain set of consumers would be
open to competition and then gradually other consumers will be
brought under the purview of competition.

achieved
Completion time: 2-3 years after

completion of Stage 1
This stage will be an ongoing

activity till the time all consumers
are open for competition
Stage 1: Functional segregation of Discoms

In this stage, steps will have to be taken for the functional segregation of current Discoms into distribution and
retail supply functions. During this stage, the distribution and retail supply functions would operate as separate
entities, but they would be separated by a virtual Chinese Wall under the same ownership. Roles and
responsibilities will have to be defined for these new functions as per the changed sector scenario. Also a
transfer scheme will have to be developed for segregation of assets, liabilities and human resource between the
successor entities.
Industry Structure at the beginning of Stage 1

Under the current industry structure i.e. before the implementation of stage 1 of roll out plan, the discoms carry
out both the content and carriage business. The discoms purchase electricity from the generators, wheel this
electricity from the transmission network till the premises of consumer and sell it to consumers.
PwC
38
Current industry structure
Consumer 1
Discom 1
Generator 1
Transmission Co.
Discom 2 (if any)

Duplicate network
Generator 2
Consumer 2
Physical Flow
Key tasks required to be carried out in the stage

1. Defining new functional entities
2. Defining Roles and Responsibilities of new entities
3. Treatment of existing financial losses
4. Treatment of existing PPAs
5. Defining framework for Consumer Interface
6. Defining framework for Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism
7. Segregation of Standards of Performance between entities
8. Universal Service Obligation on supply/network licenses
9. Tariff setting mechanism for new entities
10. Balance sheet segregation of current Distribution business among new entities. This task can be further
sub-divided into smaller tasks as follows
Valuation and allocation of assets (long term and current)
Valuation and allocation of liabilities (long term and current)
11. Human resource planning

12. Technical studies of as-is condition
Description of the tasks along with various possible approaches for each of the task
1. Defining new functional entities
Under current scenario, the discom has the responsibility to purchase electricity from generators, wheel it
through its network and supply it to retail consumers. While the technical part of this business i.e. wheeling
of electricity to the consumer premises is monopolistic in nature, the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014
envisages introducing competition in retail supply side of the Discoms business. For achieving this, the
functions of current discoms would have to be split as follows -
PwC
39
ii.
Distribution business: This functional entity would wheel electricity via its network to the
premises of the retail consumer.
Issue The distribution function can further be broken down into several sub functions like:
Distribution Market Operations (DMO)
Distribution Network Operations (DNO)
Distribution Planning Operations (DPO)
Distribution System Operations (DSO)
These are discussed in the section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under
the heading Defining roles and responsibilities of new entities.
iii.
Retail Supply business: this functional entity would purchase power from generators and sell it
to retail consumers.
iv.
Intermediary Company: This functional entity will succeed the existing PPAs and procurement
arrangements of discoms and allocate them between various retail suppliers. Besides this the
Intermediary Company could carry out tasks common to all retail suppliers or tasks that require a
neutral approach towards various industry players. For e.g. tasks like collection of Universal Charge
from all consumers which can be used for amortisation of regulatory assets.
Decision Point formation of intermediary company
While section 2 35B) of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 defines the role of Intermediary
Company, the bill is silent on the following issues regarding its formation
1.
Jurisdiction of Intermediary Company: it needs to be deliberated that in states like

Madhya Pradesh, Delhi, Haryana etc. where multiple discoms exist in the state with
segregated area of supplies, whether a common intermediary company would be formed
for the entire state or an Intermediary Company would be formed for each of the current
Discoms. Since these power sector reforms are at electricity distribution level, which is a
state subject under the federal structure of India, formation of a regional or a national level
Intermediary Company would be a challenge. Possible approaches for the jurisdiction of
Intermediary Company can be as follows
o
State Wide Intermediary Company single intermediary company for the

entire state. For e.g. although Haryana has two Discoms, UHBVN and DHBVN, the
state could have a single intermediary company with jurisdiction over the entire
state.
Discom wise Intermediary Company one intermediary company for each of

the current Discom. For e.g. since Haryana has two Discoms, UHBVN and
DHBVN, the state could have two intermediary companies with jurisdiction over
area of supply of UHBVN and DHBVN respectively.
Since one of the major responsibilities of the Intermediary Company is to assume
responsibility for the existing PPAs of discoms, states where the power
procurement is centralised, a single state wide Intermediary Company could be
formed. For e.g. in Madhya Pradesh, while multiple discoms exist in the state with
each having its own area of supply, their power procurement is still centralised and
therefore all of their PPAs can be transferred to a single Intermediary Company.
On the other hand where multiple discoms operating in a state have their separate
PPAs, the possibility of Discom wise Intermediary Company can be explored. As
PwC
40
per the discussions with FOR, it is envisaged that there be a single state wide
Intermediary Company which would take over PPAs of all discoms in the state.
2. Ownership of Intermediary Company: it needs to be deliberated whether the
Intermediary Company formed will be owned by Government or can it be owned by Private
players. In states like Delhi, where all discoms are privately owned, the formation of a
Government owned Intermediary Company would require formation of a new company
rather than segregation from a current discom. As per the discussions with FOR, it is
envisaged that the Intermediary Company could be State Government owned.
3. Payment Obligations of PPAs: it needs to be deliberated whether the Intermediary
Company would settle the payments between Generators and Retail Supply Companies
itself i.e. act like a clearing house or will it just allocate the PPAs/power between Retail
Supply Companies and leave it on them to make necessary payments to generators.
The pros and cons of these approaches for the discussion points are as follows
Approach
Pros
Cons
Jurisdiction of Intermediary Company

State Wide
Inter-regional activities: a state wide

intermediary company would be able to
handle activities like inter-regional cross
subsidies prevailing in a state.
Ease in conducting business: a
single intermediary company in state
could face lesser operational or
regulatory hurdles.
Separate accounting for treatment

of PPAs and regulatory assets of
each Discom: the PPAs and the
regulatory assets of one discom may
vary significantly from other discoms. A
state wide intermediary company would
have to maintain separate accounts for
each of the Discom (for PPAs and
Regulatory assets) so as to calculate cost
of PPA allocation and universal charge
for amortisation of Regulatory Assets in
area of supply.
Discom wise
Ease in formation: in states where

single discom exists in an area of supply,
the intermediary company could be
formed from each discom separately.
Separate treatment of PPAs of
each Discom: the PPA duration, cost
or type of PPAs of one discom could
differ substantially from the PPAs of
other discoms. This could be taken care
of with discom wise Intermediary
Companies.
Treatment for area of supply with

parallel discoms: in areas where
parallel discoms exist in an area of
supply, for e.g. in the area of Mumbai,
multiple intermediary companies in an
area of supply cannot be formed. A
mechanism would have to be developed
for a combined intermediary company
in such areas.
Mechanism for inter-regional
activities: a mechanism would have to
be developed between intermediary
companies for treatment of interregional activities.
Ownership of Intermediary Company

Government
Financial support from state:

regarding the treatment of cross subsidies
or accumulated losses, a Government
Political Interference: political

interference could affect issues like
treatment of cross subsidies or
PwC
41
Approach
Private
Pros
Cons
owned Intermediary Company could get

financial backing of state government.
amortisation of accumulated losses via

collection of a Universal Charge.
No Political Interference: a privately

owned Intermediary Company might be
independent of political motivations.
Limited support from State: It would

be difficult for a private company to get
financial or regulatory support from the
State Government.
Payment obligations of PPAs

Intermediary
company acts as
clearing house
Generators and lenders are protected even

if the Intermediary Company fails to
collect revenue from Retail Supply
Company.
Intermediary Company does not have

assets to make guarantees to generators.
This would put financial burden on State
Government.
Supplier pay
directly to
generators
Suppliers would like to ensure timely

revenue collection from retail consumers
in order to pay generators on time.
Generators could face the brunt if

Intermediary Company and Retail Supply
Company enter into dispute over
allocation of PPAs.
v.
Metering: Metering is one of the most important activity affecting the commercial side of
electricity supply business. Several activities like commercial loss reduction, demand side
management etc. are dependent upon the level of metering and the type of meters installed in a
license area. The metering service can be broken down into following activities a.
communication services (in case of meters supporting this feature) for collecting meter reading
data.
b. Other Meter related activities: Meter installation/replacement, ownership of metering

After segregation of current discom into Distribution and Retail Supply functions, the responsibility
of metering services can be given to Distribution business, Retail Supply business or it could also be
given to a 3rd Party Company6, depending upon the allocation of responsibility of technical and
commercial losses.
Issue Metering services involves several activities like installation of meters, operation of meters,
meter reading, data communication etc. Each of these activities could be taken care by Supply
Company, Distribution Company or a 3rd Party Company. The issue of metering is closely
associated with how losses are allocated between segregated entities and therefore this issue is
discussed in detail in section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under the
heading Metering Services.
In this stage of the roll out plan, the license area for both Distribution Business and Retail Supply Business
would remain same as of the incumbent Discom from which these new entities are formed.
As the number of players in the industry would increase after introduction of retail supply competition, and the
complexity of energy flows may increase, capacity building would have to be done for SLDCs and SERCs in
order to prepare them for the increased responsibilities.
metering activities, it would be a licensed activity and regulated by appropriate electricity regulatory commission.
6
PwC
42
2. Defining Roles and Responsibilities of new entities

The Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014 discusses the duties and powers of a Distribution and Supply licensee. A
detailed list of Roles and Responsibilities for each of these businesses after the introduction of retail supply
competition would have to be developed.
Boundary of Separation between Distribution and Retail Supply Businesses: The Electricity
(Amendment) Bill 2014 while discussing about the separation of Distribution and Retail Supply businesses, is
silent on the boundary/physical separation between them. Based on discussions with various stakeholders and
FOR, Metering at consumer premises is taken as the boundary of separation between the Distribution and
Supply businesses.
Based on the boundary of separation between the businesses, there are some roles and responsibilities which
can be clearly allocated between the separate businesses. However some of the roles fall in grey area as to who
would be responsible for them. Such ambiguous roles and responsibilities would become clear as approach
towards various other issues are finalised. The roles and responsibilities of the respective entities are:
Business
Distribution
business (Network
Operations)

Providing neutral access to its network
Expansion and strengthening of network
Operation and maintenance of the network such as
network reinforcement and replacement, improved
overhead line repair, etc.
Ambiguous roles
Consumer Interface
Commercial loss
reduction
Maintaining 24x7 network availability

Reduction in Technical losses (since the network is
owned by distribution business, irrespective of other
issues, the responsibility of technical losses would lie
with distribution business)
Co-ordination with retail supply companies for new
connection release, change in consumer load and
disconnection
Fault restoration
Fulfilling regulatory obligations for distribution in
tariff determination and efficiency targets
Distribution
Planning Operations
Co-ordination with transmission utility for network

planning
Distribution Market
Operations
Accounting for the energy scheduled, despatched to

retail supply companies
Distribution loss calculation
Distribution System
Operations
Monitoring of the distribution network operations,

supervision and control
Real time operation for distribution network control
and despatch
Ensure integrated operation with other entities for
maximum operational efficiency
PwC
43
Retail Supply
business
Demand Forecasting and business planning

Efficient power procurement
Trade power with other suppliers (to account for any
power shortfalls or access power than requirement)
Bill generation and distribution
Revenue collection from consumers
Consumer interface
To ensure contractual
availability of power
to its consumers
Commercial loss
reduction
Customer Care
Credit contracts
Fulfilling regulatory obligations
Intermediary
Company
Procurement of power as per existing PPAs

Allocation of existing PPAs
Managing of existing cross subsidies
Handling regulatory assets (recognised accumulated
financial losses)
Metering Company
(by Distribution,
Retail Supply or 3rd
party)
Installation and maintenance of meters
Demand aggregation
of multiple Retail
Supply companies to
enable efficient
power procurement
Handling of
unrecognised
financial losses
Meter reading
Testing of meters
Replacement of meters
With such a demarcation of roles and responsibilities, all technical aspects of providing supply to consumers
would be handled by the distribution business. The retail supply business would be responsible for the
commercial aspects of the business like procurement of power and customer-interface post delivery of
electricity.
Also, as per this division of roles, any technical issue beyond the consumer meter (e.g. internal wiring/tripping)
would be the responsibility of the retail consumer and any technical faults that are not related to the
distribution network or consumer meter would have to be repaired by consumer on his own.
3. Treatment of existing financial losses

As per the PFC report on Performance of state power utilities for the years 2010-11 to 2012-13, the aggregate
book losses (on accrual basis) for all the utilities selling electricity directly to consumers stood at Rs. 69,108
crores in the year 2012-13. These book losses can be further classified into recognised regulatory assets and
other unrecognised losses. Regulatory assets are the revenue gap of utilities which are recognised by the state
electricity regulatory commissions but which could not be passed onto consumers in the form of a tariff hike
and are therefore to be amortised in due course of time. Unrecognised financial losses are the revenue gap
created because of dis-allowance of certain costs of the utilities by the regulatory commissions due to reasons
like failure to meet performance targets by the utilities and imprudent expenditures.
PwC
44
Revenue
Expenditure
(a) - (b)
(a)
Utility submits its

revenue requirement
to SERC
(b)
SERC approves
revenue requirement
of utility
Unrecognised
losses
(b) - (c)
(c)
Revenue of utility at
existing tariff
(d)
Revenue allowed to be
recovered via tariff
hike
(b) (c)
(d)
Regulatory asset
Revenue to be
recovered via tariff
hike
The following approaches can be adopted to deal with existing financial losses
(i)
Regulatory Assets: Regulatory Assets can be transferred to Intermediary Company and amortised
through one of the following approaches
Decision Point amortisation of regulatory assets
a.
Collection of a Universal Charge A universal charge could be collected from all

consumers to amortise the regulatory assets gradually.
b. Support from State Government State Governments could give a one-time financial
relief for liquidating the regulatory assets or gradually amortising them.
c.
(ii)
Hybrid approach State Governments could fund a part of Regulatory Assets, the rest being
collected through a Universal Charge. Alternatively, the State Government could fund the
Universal Charge to be levied on economically weaker consumer categories like agricultural
consumers or BPL consumers.
Un-recognised financial losses on balance sheet of Discoms: Unrecognised financial losses on

the balance sheet of existing Discoms are due to factors like costs disallowed by the regulators or failure
to meet loss reduction performance targets. These unrecognised financial losses too would have to be
cleaned from the balance sheets of Discoms before the introduction of retail supply competition in
order to ensure the incumbent retail supply companies remain competitive in an open market.
Following approaches can be adopted for the treatment of these losses
Decision Point amortisation of unrecognised financial losses
a. Asking incumbent Distribution and Supply companies to take a financial hit: since
the unrecognised financial losses could be on account of operational inefficiencies of discoms,
that were not allowed by the appropriate commissions to be passed on to consumers through
tariff, the incumbent Distribution and Supply Companies could be asked to take a financial hit
PwC
45
on account of these losses. The factors for division of these losses between distribution and
supply companies will need to be deliberated.
b. Recovery of unrecognized financial losses to be allowed: the unrecognised losses, or a
part of them, could be allowed by the appropriate Commissions to be passed on to consumers.
This can be done through financial Support from State Government.
The pros and cons of these approaches are as follows
Approach
Pros
Cons
Collection of
Universal Charge (UC)
Transparent mechanism: UC
could be shown as a separate item
in the consumer bill
Additional financial burden on

consumers: Since UC is non bypassable charge, it adds financial
burden on even marginalised
consumers
State Government
support
One time settlement: existing

Regulatory Assets can be amortised
as a one-time benefit by State
Government
Additional burden on tax payers

Already high fiscal deficit of State
Governments may not allow this
additional burden
State Government may not be able
to extend support to private utilities
Regulatory Assets (RA)
Hybrid approach
Government Support to select

consumers: The UC obligations of
select marginalised consumers like
agricultural category could be
funded by State Government
Additional burden on tax payers

Already high fiscal deficit of State
Governments may not allow this
additional burden
State Government may not be able
to extend support to private utilities
Un-recognised financial losses on balance sheet of Discoms

Incumbents take a hit
Full or part recovery

allowed
Right signal to improve

efficiencies in future: sends a
signal in industry to improve
efficiency
Sector viability: would help

utilities to raise funds in future and
ensure sector viability
Allocation between
companies: allocation between
Distribution and Retail Supply
company will be an issue
Incumbent Supplier may

become uncompetitive: owing
to heavy loss burden on its balance
sheet, the Incumbent supplier may
become uncompetitive against new
suppliers with the commencement
of reforms itself
Deterrent for efficiency

improvement: discoms who
managed to reduce losses efficiently
would be penalised indirectly as
now other discoms will also be
allowed to recover back their losses
PwC
46
4. Transfer of existing PPAs

As per Section 2(35B) of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, the Intermediary Company would succeed the
existing PPAs of incumbent Discoms. These PPAs would then be allocated by the Intermediary Company among
the retail supply companies. The possibility needs to be explored if certain PPAs or part of PPAs of current
discoms could be shifted to wholesale market i.e. power from such PPAs could then be sold in the wholesale
market. There are three approaches of transferring PPAs to the Intermediary Company:
Transfer all PPAs of current Discom to Intermediary Company
Transfer select PPAs of current Discoms to Intermediary Company (for instance certain expensive
PPAs or PPAs of plants older than 12 years which have already repaid their loans can be dissolved i.e.
their power is to be sold through wholesale market while the remaining PPAs to be transferred to
Intermediary Company)
Transfer partial PPAs of current Discoms to Intermediary Company (a certain percentage of power
from all PPAs could be transferred to the Intermediary Company while the rest of the power to be sold
in wholesale market)
Another issue that needs deliberation is that if a private discom has PPAs with its group companies, whether
such PPAs would also be transferred to Intermediary Company or not. As per the discussions with FOR, it is
envisaged that such PPAs would also be transferred to the Intermediary Company.
The pros and cons of dissolving certain PPAs/part of PPAs versus transferring all of them to Intermediary
Company are as follows
Approach
Pros
Cons
Transfer all PPAs

to Intermediary Company
Existing contracts between generators

and discoms to continue with discoms
being replaced by retail suppliers.
Both parties get long term financial
and power procurement certainty.
Helps in development of wholesale

market.
Select expensive PPAs or PPAs where

loan has been repaid could be
dissolved, allowing retail suppliers to
better manage their costs.
A mechanism would have to be

developed for selecting PPAs to
be dissolved. The mechanism
would have to be objective,
transparent and acceptable to all
stakeholders including lenders.
Easy to implement. Leaves no

subjectivity in the hands of
Intermediary Company to select PPAs
to be dissolved.
This approach would not go well

with financial institutions which
use PPAs as securities against
loan to generators.
Separate percentages would have
to be devised for different types of
generation plants with different
age.
Transfer certain PPAs

Transfer partial PPAs

Hampers development of
wholesale market due to lesser
unavailability of un-tied power.
Expensive PPAs due to increased
cost pass through could leave
retail supply companies uncompetitive.
PwC
47
The parameters that could be considered while deciding on which PPAs to be dissolved can be
Age of PPA PPAs of generations plants which have already repaid their loan could be considered for
dissolution as the lenders would not have any conflict of interest.
Cost of PPA PPAs which are exceptionally expensive compared to the power available in the
wholesale market or other PPAs could be considered for dissolution to promote efficiency.
The parameters that could be considered while deciding on the percentages of PPAs to be dissolved in case of
partial PPA transfer to Intermediary Company can be
Type of generation plant
Age of generation plant
Source of fuel
Cost of power
Once multiple supply licensees come into an area of supply, the PPAs transferred to Intermediary Company will
have be allocated between them in a fair and appropriate manner, allowing supply companies to serve their
consumer base. The Intermediary Company would take on this role by adopting one of the various approaches
available to allocate PPAs (discussed separately in Issues in implementation of retail supply competition
section under the heading Allocation of PPAs).
5. Defining framework for Consumer Interface

There can be following types of consumer complaints/queries/requests -
i.
Related to supply or metering: For e.g. new connection, incorrect billing complaint, tariff related
query, duplicate billing request, meter not working complaint, last meter reading query, meter
replacement request etc.
ii.
Related to distribution network: For e.g. Power outage complaint, voltage fluctuations complaint,
outage time query, shifting of connection request etc.
Also there can be two types of consumers which can have above mentioned complaints/queries/requests
i.
ii.
Retail Consumer
Open Access Consumer
After the introduction of retail supply competition, a Consumer Interface would have to be designed for speedy
redressal of each type of complaint/query/request and for all types of consumers. Following approaches for
developing such a consumer interface can be adopted:
Decision Point Consumer Interface
Single Window interface by Retail Supply Company: Supply Company could become single
window for all types of consumer complaints/queries/requests.
Supply company would then resolve the consumer complaints/queries/requests regarding Distribution
or metering by representing consumer to Distribution Company or Metering Company (if any)
respectively.
PwC
48
Single Window interface by Distribution Company: Distribution Company could become single
window for all types of consumer complaints/queries/requests.
Distribution company would then resolve the consumer complaints/queries/requests regarding Supply
or metering by representing consumer to Supply Company or Metering Company (if any) respectively.
Separate interface for distribution and supply/metering: Consumer could be given the
responsibility to identify whether to approach Distribution Company or Retail Supply Company or
Metering Company (if any) for complaints/queries/requests. For e.g. a customer care number could be
created for issues related to power cuts and a separate customer care for other issues. Under this
approach, during a transition period, both distribution and supply companies could be given mandate
to route calls properly to appropriate entity i.e. if a call comes to a wrong entity, they divert it to correct
entity rather than making the customer go to and fro.
For each of the approaches discussed above, the table below describes pros & cons and the resolution process
for each type of complaint/query/request. Further the approaches towards consumer interface are evaluated
based on the following parameters
Ease of consumers
Setting the accountability (between Retail Supply and Distribution businesses)
Duplication of work
Need for new customer care assets
Issue/Approach
Approach 1 Single
Interface by Retail Supplier
Approach 2 Single
Interface by Distribution
Approach 3 Separate
interface for Supply and
Distribution
Features of approaches Type of consumers

Interface for
retail consumer
Supply Company
Supply Company
Interface for
open access
consumer
Supply Company
Features of approaches Type of complaints/queries/requests

Resolution of
supply related
issues
Supply Company would take

care at its end
would redirect to supplier
Supply Company would take

care at its end
Resolution of
distribution
related issues
Supply Company would

redirect to Distribution
Company
would take care at its end
would take care at its end
Parameters for evaluation of approaches

Ease of
consumers
Single Interface would

work well even in areas with
lower consumer awareness.
Single Interface would

work well even in areas with
lower consumer awareness.
Multiple Interface
would require consumer
awareness campaigns.
Setting the
accountability
Could misguide
consumer and shift
responsibility for
Could misguide
consumer and shift
responsibility for
Supplier and
Distributor both
accountable for their
PwC
49
complaint/query/request on
distribution company.
complaint/query/request on
supply company.
respective issues.
Duplication of
work
complaints/queries/req
uests related to distribution
would have to be routed
from supply companies
without any value addition.
complaints/queries/req
uests related to supply
would have to be routed
from distribution
companies without any
value addition.
assuming the consumer

is able to identify the right
body to approach for
complaint/ query/ request,
a lot of duplication of efforts
could be prevented.
Need for new

customer care
assets
the existing customer

care centres would be
shifted to retail supply
company.
the existing customer

care centres would be
shifted to Distribution
Company.
in order to ensure
availability of each type of
customer care centre in each
area, new assets would have
to be developed.
Setting the accountability between retail supply and distribution businesses

One of the major disadvantages of Single Interface (approach 1 and approach 2) is setting the accountability
between retail supply and distribution businesses. For instance there can be multiple reasons for power
outage/load shedding like
Transmission or Distribution issues capacity constraints, line outage, fault in transformers, grid
security etc.
Supply issues non clearance of past dues with distribution or transmission companies, balancing and
settlement issues etc.
In such a scenario the consumer could be misguided by the business responsible for the single window
interface, regarding the reasons for the power outage. This can be validated from independent agencies like
SLDC. SERCs would have an important role in tackling this issue by acting as a strict market regulator and
ensuring heavy penalties in case of non-adherence of standards. In order to carry out its duties in a changed
industry scenario with multiple players, the SERCs would require capacity building in order to ensure effective
implementation of Single Window interface.
Actions taken against licensees by Ofgem in United Kingdom
Electricity distribution companies in UK are required to abide by several performance standards related to
maintaining supplies, repairing faults and responding to customer complaints. The adherence to these
standards is monitored by Ofgem, the energy regulator of UK. These standards set specific times by which
licensees must resolve or respond to customer queries/complaints/requests. Consumers can receive
compensation if these targets are missed by the licensee. Ofgem reports on company performance in an annual
quality of service report.
Should the Ofgem find that a licence breach or Competition Act infringement has occurred, it has the power to
impose large financial penalties, of up to 10% per cent of turnover. For example,
In 2005 SP Manweb (part of Scottish Power) a distribution network operator was found to be
discriminating in the provision of connection services against companies that werent part of the
Scottish Power group. Ofgem accepted a commitment from the company to end this practice.
In August 2004, financial penalty of 700,000 was imposed on Powergen for the way it had objected to
its customers switching to another supplier. Earlier that year Npower and Scottish Power had both been
fined 200,000 each for the same behaviour.
PwC
50
6. Defining framework for Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism

The current framework of consumer grievance redressal mechanism consists of consumer first going to the
internal complaint centre of utilities. In case the complaint remains unresolved at this stage or if the consumer
is unsatisfied with the resolution, the consumer can go to the CGRF (consumer grievance redressal forum). The
CGRF is governed by the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum and Ombudsman regulation of the respective
state. The CGRF is appointed by the utility on the directions of SERCs. There can be multiple CGRFs setup by
utility, each having a sub-jurisdiction area within the jurisdiction area of utility. In case the consumer complaint
is still unresolved at the CGRF stage, the consumer can then approach Ombudsman. Ombudsman is an
independent body appointed by the SERCs. In case the consumer complaint is still not resolved the consumer
can move to APTEL (Appellate Tribunal for Electricity) or the SERC for query resolution.
After the introduction of retail supply competition a two layered Consumer Redressal Mechanism could exist, as
follows
A single CGRF for Distribution, Retail Supply and Metering (if any)
Independent ombudsman
Complaint/Call
Centre
Consumer /
Complainant
If unresolved
(of single window

consumer interface
or separate entities)
Complaints such as:

Defect or deficiency in supply
Unfair/ restrictive trade practice
Tariff/rates in excess of approved rates
Unsafe / Hazardous services
Supreme
Court
CGRF (single
for all entities
Distribution,
Retail Supply
and Metering
(if any)
If unresolved
APTEL
If unresolved
Ombudsman
SERC
If unresolved
7. Segregation of standards of performance between entities

With the introduction of Retail Supply Competition, the issue may arise of how Standards of Performance
(SOP) be allocated between the separate businesses of Distribution, Retail Supply, Intermediary Company and
Metering Company (if any). The list of current SOPs would be allocated between successor companies based on
the division of roles and responsibilities, which in turn would be become clear once approaches towards various
issues are finalised. The below table shows an illustrative allocation of SOPs between various entities. The SOPs
related to metering would be allocated to the entity which gets the responsibility of metering related activities.
SOP
Operation of Call Centre
Restoration of Supply
Quality of Supply
Meter Complaints
Shifting of meter
Shifting of service lines
New Connection
Additional Load
Distribution
Supply
Intermediary
Metering (if any)
PwC
51
SOP
Transfer of Ownership
Change of Category
Temporary supply of Power
Consumer bill complaint
Disconnection of Supply
Reconnection of Supply
Distribution
Supply
Intermediary
Metering (if any)
8. Universal Service Obligation on supply/network licenses

Electricity being an essential product, the Universal Service Obligation (USO) refers to the practice of providing
a baseline level of services to every consumer. Once separation of distribution business and retail supply is
achieved, the Universal Service Obligation can be split into two i.
The Duty to Connect This could be given to Distribution Company, it being the owner of network.
ii.
The Duty to Supply This could be given to the incumbent Retail Supply Company.
The USO obligations of new Retail Supply Companies other than the incumbent player has been discussed in
the Stage 3 of the Roll Out Plan.
9. Tariff setting mechanism for new entities

SERCs will determine unbundled tariffs individually for Distribution Business, Retail Supply Business and
Intermediary Company. The tariff setting mechanism for individual entities before stage 3 i.e. before retail
supply competition is allowed, would be:
Tariff for Distribution Business: The SERCs would determine a regulated tariff, based on the filling made
by Distribution Company. The tariff would allow for recovery of following costs
Network Capital Expenditure depreciation, return on capital employed
Operation and Maintenance Expenditure employee expenses, administration and general expenses,
repair and maintenance expenses, interest on working capital etc.
Losses
Tariff for Retail Supply Business: The SERCs would determine a regulated tariff, based on the filling made
by Supply Company. The tariff would allow for recovery of following costs
Capital assets depreciation, return on capital employed
Power Purchase cost
Operation and Maintenance Expenditure employee expenses, administration and general expenses,
repair and maintenance expenses, interest on working capital etc.
Losses
Intermediary Company: The SERCs would allow the following costs (passed onto consumers through Retail
Supply Company)
Costs incurred towards PPAs (for instance financial loss due to inability to recover all power purchase
cost for all PPAs)
Operational Expenditure employee expenses, administration and general expenses
PwC
52
While tariff would be calculated separately for the new entities, the collection responsibility would lie with
Retail Supply Business. A mechanism will have to be developed for financial settlement between Distribution
Business, Retail Supply Business and Intermediary Company.
10. Balance sheet segregation of current Distribution business among new entities
Assuming meter as the boundary of separation between the distribution and supply businesses, the balance
sheet segregation can be done as described below.
Valuation/Allocation of assets
i. The fixed assets can be allocated as follows
1.
Fixed Assets of metering and beyond the fixed assets of beyond metering like customer care
centres would go to incumbent Retail Supply Company. The metering assets would go to the entity
responsible for metering related services i.e. incumbent Retail Supply business, Distribution
business or 3rd Party metering service (if any).
2. Fixed assets before metering these assets would be allocated to Distribution Company, it
being the owner of network.
ii. The allocation technique for current assets of discom would be:
1.
Receivables receivables due from the retail consumers could be allocated to the Intermediary
Company. These assets can be used by the Intermediary Company to service its liabilities. The
Retail Supply Company would act as a collection agency of these receivables from retail consumers
on behalf of Intermediary Company, and they could charge a commission for providing this
collection service.
2. Consumer Security Deposits The consumer security deposits would be given to the Retail
Supply Company based on the number and type of consumer under each of the companies.
While Section 47 of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 says that the Distribution Company may
require a security deposit from consumers for providing connectivity, Section 51E states that the
Retail Supply Company too may require a security deposit from consumers in order to provide
electricity supply. Considering the financial settlement process between Distribution and
Transmission Company in the current scenario, after the introduction of retail supply competition
the retail supply company may be held responsible for payments to be made to distribution
business i.e. the Distribution Company does not collect revenue directly from the consumer but
from the Retail Supply Company. In case a consumer defaults, the responsibility to pay the
distribution company would still lie on the retail supply company. Therefore the security deposit
should also be with the Retail Supply Company only.
3. Contractors guarantees the guarantee amounts submitted by various contractors of current
distribution company will be allocated between Distribution and Supply businesses based on the
Fixed Assets allocated between them.
Valuation/Allocation of liabilities
i. Based on the fixed assets allocation between individual businesses, the liabilities attached to them would
be allocated to the Distribution and Supply companies respectively.
ii. The allocation technique for current liabilities of discom would be:
1.
Related to Power Purchase these will be transferred to Intermediary Company. The

intermediary company would then further collect these from the incumbent Retail Supply
PwC
53
Company. A certain part of these could also be mitigated against the current asset receivables of
retail supply companies, also transferred to the Intermediary Company.
2. Related to contractor payments - these will be allocated between the Distribution and Retail
Supply companies based on the activities and asset allocation between the two.
Decision Point Valuation of Assets
The valuation of assets can be done based on two approaches
a.
Historical book value of assets the value at which the assets are carried on the balance sheet
b. Market value of assets the price at which the utility can sell its assets
We believe that the valuation of assets should be an interactive process wherein the views of the investors from
discussions should be considered during valuation process. The alternative methodologies would have to be
assessed to arrive at a fair valuation of business/ assets. It is pertinent to mention that the valuation of the
assets and business shall be in accordance with the revenue potential of the newly formed Distribution and
Supply businesses.
The below table summarises the allocation criterions for various costs and assets in order to separate
Distribution and Supply business as required in the first stage
No.
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
8.
9.
Allocation of
Fixed Assets
Long term liabilities
Current Assets - Receivables
Current Assets Security
Deposits
Current Assets Contractors
guarantees
Current Liabilities Power
Purchase
Current Liabilities
Contractor payments
Allocation based on
Transfer Scheme
Fixed asset allocation
Consumer base
Consumer base
Allocated to
Distribution or Supply Company
Supply Company
Existing PPA allocation
11. Human Resource Planning

Apart from segregation of assets and liabilities, the human resource capital of the discoms would also have to be
segregated between distribution business, retail supply business and metering function (if any). While
significant capacity building would be required for these new entities in terms of human resource capital, the
skill sets of the current employees would also have to be matched with the requirements of the new entities. The
human resource planning would have to ensure that the new entities remain competitive against private players
in future while having the capacity to service large number of regulated consumers as well. Following concerns
regarding human resource planning will need to be deliberated while forming the transfer scheme of individual
states:
Transfer Scheme of existing employees the employees of discoms will have to be allocated
between the successor entities. This would require transferring staff with adequate skill sets to the
successor entities for carrying out critical activities independently. The approach for developing this
transfer scheme would include understanding the key staff requirements in restructured entities and
identifying the services to be split between the entities. If any particular service cannot be split among
PwC
54
the entities, then the strategy to retain employees in one unit and providing services to other will have
to be formed.
Going forward, finalization of organizational & human resource policies of the separate
companies defining the Human Resource policies, post the implementation of transfer scheme.
This may include:
o
Assessment of actual requirement of human resources for various successor companies
Suggesting ways for upgrading staff competencies
Implementing an appropriate communications strategy
Compliance with legal requirements and reduce disputes/litigations and addressing

stakeholder concerns
12. Technical studies of as-is condition

In order to prepare the groundwork for next stage, the following studies will need to be carried out in this stage:
Study of Technical and Commercial losses current distribution companies will have to carry out
technical studies including energy audit to accurately measure voltage wise and area wise technical and
commercial losses.
Cost of Supply and Cross Subsidy Reduction study most of the State Commissions continue to
use average cost of supply for the entire Discom to determine the tariffs. In order to make tariffs cost
reflective, technical studies will have to be done by Discoms and SERCs to accurately calculate consumer
category wise and area wise cost of supply. This would also help in measuring the existing level of cross
subsidies. The discoms and SERCs would then have to chalk out a trajectory to reduce these cross
subsidies in order to create a level playing field for all retail supply companies and remove entry barriers
for new players.
Scenario at the end of stage

Implementation of the steps discussed above would result in following
Discoms would be segregated into distribution and retail supply businesses
Assets/liabilities and Human Resource are segregated between the successor companies
A new mechanism is developed for consumer interface
Financial losses of incumbent Discoms are either disallowed or amortization started
Standards of Performance are established for each individual business
PwC
55
Flow chart of Stage 1

Stage 1
Functional Separation
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Existing Distribution Licensee
Distribution
Network Co.
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Same ownership
License
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of PPAs
Handling
Regulatory assets
Handling cross
subsidies
Roles and
Responsibility
Current license area

Issue: whether
Multiple Discoms
allowed?
Network operation
Co-ordination with
Transco
Power procurement
Meter reading
Billing and
Collection
Metering function
Distribution, or
Supplier, or
3rd Party
Dist. System Ops

Dist. Planning Ops
Dist. Market Ops
Same/separate
entities
Installation and
maintenance
Testing
Replacing
Consumer interface
Financial Losses
Regulatory Assets
Amortisation via
UC Charge, or
Govt. Fund, or
Hybrid
Un-recognised losses
Incumbent companies take a hit, or
Part/Full recovery allowed via
UC Charge, or
Govt. Fund, or
Hybrid
Transferred to
Intermediary Co.
Existing PPA
transfer
Consumer
interface
Single Window by Supply Co., or

Issue: interface for
Single Window by Distribution Co., or open access
Separate for Distribution and Supply consumers
Consumer grievance
redressal mechanism
Two layers
Single CGRF for all entities
3rd Party independent ombudsman
Supply Restoration
Call Centre ops
New line/connection
Category Change
Shifting of line
Temporary Supply
Disconnection
Bill Complaints
Reconnection
Name transfer
Quality of Supply
Meter related
Performance
Standards
USO
SERC allows
following costs Related to PPA
A&G
Tariff
B/S Segregation
Fixed Asset/liability
Duty to Connect
Duty to Supply
SERC approves
regulated tariff Network capex
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
regulated tariff Capital assets
Power Purchase
Opex
Losses
Before metering
Metering and Beyond
Current Assets
Receivables
Bad Debts
Consumer Contracts
Cash, Loans and advances
Contractors guarantees
Short Term Liability
Related to Power
Purchase
Related to Contractors
payments
HR Planning
Transfer scheme of current employees into separate functional entities

Going forward, finalization of organizational & human resource policies of the separate companies
As-is Study
Study on Technical and Commercial Losses

Study on Cost of Supply and Cross Subsidies
Scenario at the
end of this stage
Financial losses of incumbent discoms are either disallowed or amortization started
PwC
56
Stage 2: Preparation for competition

In the second stage of the roll out plan, before the second retail supply licensee is allowed to compete with the
incumbent supply company, steps will have to be taken to create a level playing field. Also entry barriers will
have to be removed in order to attract new players in the supply business.

Owing to the tasks performed in Stage 1, the platform is set for introduction of retail supply competition. At the
beginning of this stage, the current Discoms would have been segregated into separate Distribution and
Incumbent Retail Supply functions.
Industry structure at the beginning of Stage 2
Intermediary Co.
Incumbent Retail Supply Co.
Consumer 1
Distribution
Network Co.
Generator 1
Transmission Co.
Generator 2
Physical Flow
Consumer 2

Financial Flow

1. Ownership of network and retail supply company
2. Loss allocation across network and supply company
3. Reduction of cross subsidies
4. Up gradation of existing metering
5. Creation and ownership of Consumer Database
PwC
57
1.
Ownership of network and retail supply company
In the beginning of Stage 2, the Distribution and Retail Supply Company would have been segregated, but with
the same ownership. In order to ensure that all retail supply companies (as and when new retail supply
companies are allowed in the market) get neutral access to the distribution network and there is no complicity
between the distribution company and the incumbent retail supply company, the matter arises whether the
Retail Supply Company should be divested so as to have separate ownership or should it continue to be a State
owned entity.
Decision Point Ownership of Retail Supply Company
At the beginning of Stage 2 i.e. after the functional segregation of Distribution and Supply business, the Retail
Supply Company could be:
Divested to have separate ownership from Distribution Company the state government could divest a
majority share in the incumbent retail supply company while maintaining monopoly in the distribution
company
Continued as a State entity the state government could continue to own the incumbent retail supply
company but ensure the utility works as an independent autonomous body
Section 14 of The Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, states that while multiple supply licensees could be
allowed in a license area, at least one of them should be a government controlled.
Provided also that at least one of the supply licensee shall be a Government company or Government
Controlled Company
It needs to be ensured that while deciding on whether or not to divest the incumbent retail supply company, the
provisions of Electricity Act (as and when passed by the parliament) are not violated.
2.
Technical and commercial loss allocation across network and supply company
Aggregate Technical and Commercial Losses incurred by the exisiting distribution licensees can be classified as:
Technical: These are losses are due to energy dissipated in the conductors, equipment used for
transmission line, transformer, sub transmission line and distribution line and magnetic losses in
transformers.
Commercial: These can further be divided into following parts:

o
Losses due to inaccurate metering. For eg. Defective metering, assessment based billing,
unmetered connection and pilferage.
Losses due to theft
Losses due to hooking
Losses due to meter tampering/bypassing
Collection inefficiency losses These are losses due to collection inefficiency of the bill
generated
The responsibility of these losses would have to be allocated between the distribution business and the retail
supply business.
PwC
58
Issue - The method of allocation of losses will also effect the approach towards other issues (like metering) as
well. The possible approaches for this issue are discussed in detail in the later section regarding Issues in
implementation of retail supply competition under the heading Allocation of Technical and Commercial Losses
between distribution and supply companies.
3.
Reduction of cross subsidies
Retail tariffs in India are fixed by SERCs keeping socio-economic considerations in mind and are hence pegged
to capacity-to-pay rather than cost of supply. Traditionally the Domestic and Agricultural consumers are
subsidised by Industrial and Commercial consumers. In case cross subsidies exist even after the introduction of
retail supply competition, following concerns may arise
Imbalance between cost and revenue streams of supply companies - as and when the retail
supply market is thrown open to competition, the first segment to avail the benefits of competition by
changing the retail suppliers would be large consumers like Industrial or Commercial. If cross subsides
continue to exist in such a scenario, the incumbent supply company (which would continue supplying
power to subsidised consumer categories) would suffer a loss, because significant cross subsidies would
get eroded.
Cherry Picking of consumers Retail Supply Companies would want to supply only in those areas
where the number of subsidizing consumers is more than subsidised consumers.
These are the following approaches to negate the effect of cross subsidies on retail supply competition
Decision Point approach for negating the effects of cross subsides
(i)
Reduce Cross Subsidies through year on year tariff hikes This can be done through following
a trajectory to increase cost coverage of tariffs, making tariffs reflective of their cost of supply.
(ii)
Reduce Cross Subsidies using a Universal Charge (UC) - The Universal Charge would be an
identical charge imposed on per-unit basis on sales to all consumers of incumbent distribution
companies. Collection of UC would go towards a state-wide/national fund to reduce the extent of cross
subsidy in retail supply and any revenue gap created in doing so. The working of Universal Charge is
explained with the help of a model in appendix 1.
(iii)
Limiting subsidies to the wheeling charges Cross subsidies should be located in the wires
component of the distribution tariff. Since wires are a monopolistic regulated industry and, therefore,
are not subject to competition, market signals, though distorted, would not explicitly affect
competition. This would ensure neutrality in level of cross subsidies across retail supply companies.
This method is explained with the help of an illustration in the appendix 2.
(iv)
Direct Subsidy from Government The State Government can fund the gap between tariffs and
cost of supply for cross subsidised consumer categories like agricultural and domestic.
By using either of these approaches, the effect of cross subsidies will need to be negated before multiple retail
supply companies are allowed in a license area. In case cross subsidies still remain before the introduction of
retail supply competition, a mechanism will be developed for determination and collection of cross subsidy
surcharge. This cross subsidy surcharge would have to be collected from retail supply companies as per the
number of subsidizing consumers with each of them and redistributed among them in line with the number of
subsidised consumers with each of the retail supply company. This mechanism of collection and distribution of
Cross Subsidy Surcharge could be taken care by the Intermediary Company.
PwC
59
The pros and cons of these approaches for negating effect of cross subsidies are:
Approach
Pros
Cons
Reduce cross
subsidies through
year on year tariff
hike
Cost reflective tariffs: all consumer

categories (as envisaged in Tariff Policy)
would be paying tariffs as per their cost
of supply.
Political will: increasing tariff

for agricultural or domestic
consumers could have socioeconomic consequences.
Government can fund tariff hikes

of marginalised consumers: State
Govt. in order to prevent socioeconomic consequences of tariff hikes
could then fund partial tariff hikes of
consumers like BPL7 or Agricultural.
Ability to Pay: steep tariff

hikes could lead to consumer
protests.
Transparent mechanism: this

allows user to know the amount of
benefit he/she is receiving/giving as
cross subsidy.
Government can fund UC of

marginalised consumers: State
Govt. in order to prevent socioeconomic consequences of tariff hikes
could then fund UC obligations of
consumers like BPL or Agricultural.
Complex mechanism: the

calculation of UC by SERC, its
collection by Supply Companies
and allocation by Intermediary
Company would entail a complex
implementation mechanism.
UC would indirectly lead to

tariff hikes: for consumers
who do not get government
support for their UC obligations
would indirectly be affected by
tariff hike.
Reduce cross
subsidies using a
Universal Charge
Limit subsidies to the

wheeling charges
Level playing field for all retail

supply companies irrespective of
which Retail Supply Company a
consumer chooses the absolute amount
of cross subsidy benefit would remain
same.
The wheeling charges may not be

enough to consummate the
current high levels of cross
subsidies.
Direct subsidy from

Government
Can be implemented immediately:

this could be used as a temporary
measure for creating a level playing field
for all retail supply companies.
Transparent mechanism: this

allows user to know the amount of
benefit he/she is receiving/giving as
cross subsidy.
Additional financial burden

on state: the financial burden
on the state government would
increase year on year as
consumer sales increase or cost
of supply increases.
Direct approach: this does not

penalise other consumers for extending
benefit of lower tariffs to some
consumers. Instead the Government
takes the burden for such support.
Below Poverty Line: domestic consumer with monthly consumption below a threshold say 100 units. Also known as Kutir
Jyoti consumer category in some states.
7
PwC
60
4.
Upgradation of existing metering
In order to accurately calculate loss levels and to assist in balancing and settlement between multiple retail
supply companies, the metering infrastructure till the distribution transformer will have to upgraded by the
distribution business.
The incumbent supply company would have to convert un-metered consumers to metered consumers. Further
the existing meters of retail consumers would need to be gradually replaced by advanced meters, which are
capable of recording consumption for every 15 min time slots to allow for
Accurate measurement of loss levels in each area of supply and voltage levels. This data would be
required to determine allowed level of losses for retail supply companies in a given license area.
Calculation of actual power purchased and sold by each retail supply company.
Switching power off at consumer end, rather than at feeder level (switching power off at feeder level
affects consumers of all retail supply companies).
5.
Creation and ownership of Consumer Database
Going forward, a central database would need to be created with information regarding the consumer such as
their billing address, meter number, usage pattern, bank account details etc. In order to develop this database,
an activity similar to Know Your Customer (KYC) can be carried out for electricity consumers. Such a database
would be useful in following cases
Companies before applying for Retail Supply license would need information about the consumer mix
in the license area where they want to operate, in order to make an informed decision.
Subsidies from Government could be transferred to consumers bank account directly in future.
The issues that will arise regarding such a database are
Data fields to be collected data related to following categories can be collected

o
Data related to consumer address, meter details, consumer category etc.
Entities serving consumer appointed distribution company, metering company (if any), retail
supplier
Data related to energy usage consumption pattern, connected load, load profile
Responsibility of ownership, collection and maintenance of database The data collection

agency will collect data individually and then share this data with other entities. The data collection can
be done through o
3rd party metering company (if any)
Data privacy issues it needs to be deliberated whether database of consumers of specific license
area be accessible to only retail supply companies and distribution companies of that area or anyone
who wants to access it.
While deciding the ownership of the consumer database, it needs to be ensured that the consumer database has
an independent and neutral access to all retail supply companies. Hence based on the discussions with FOR it is
suggested that the consumer database be maintained by the Distribution Company. The retail suppliers would
collect and share data with distribution business regarding the consumers under their respective jurisdiction.
PwC
61
The distribution company would share this database with commissions, intermediary company, retail supply
companies and any other player as required.
Consumer database in United Kingdom
Each regional electricity distributor in the UK (also known as the Distribution Network Operator, or
DNO) operates the Meter Point Administration Service (or MPAS) for a specific area of the UK. The
MPAS database, known as the Electricity Central Online Enquiry Service (or ECOES; previously known
as MPAS Online), contains information about the supply of electricity to each address in the UK.
One important piece of information found on the database is the supply number or Meter Point
Administration Number (MPAN). The MPAN is a 21 digit number used to uniquely identify your
electricity supply. This number is needed by electricity suppliers when you want to switch your supply.
A supply receiving power from the network operator (DNO) has an Import MPAN, while generation
and micro generation projects feeding back into the DNO network are given Export MPANs
Electricity Central Online Enquiry Service (ECOES) is a website that allows users and authorised
industry parties to search for supply details (past and present) using such things as the 13-digit MPAN
bottom line number, the meter serial number or the postcode.
The user can determine a wide range of data relating to the supply including the full address, meter
details, the current energisation status and also the appointed parties (i.e. the supplier, distributor,
MOP, DC and DA). The site is populated from information sent from the supplier regarding the
metering system.

By the virtue of steps taken in Stage 1 and Stage 2, major hurdles in the introduction of Retail Supply
Competition would be done away with. Key pointers of sector scenario at the end of this stage are
Technical and Commercial losses are allocated between Distribution and Supply Companies
Level playing field is created between the retail supply companies due to reduction of cross subsidies
PwC
62

Stage 2
Preparation for Competition
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide or
Discom wise
Distribution
Network Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Incumbent Supply Co. Metering

function
Divested by
incumbent or
As decided in
Govt. Owned
Stage 1
Gradual replacement
by advanced meters
Up-gradation of
metering
Cross Subsidy
Reduced by
Y-o-Y tariff hikes
UC Charge
Limiting subsidies
to wheeling charge
State Govt. direct
subsidy
Consumer
Database
Issue:
Who will collect data?
Who will be the owner of data (Distribution Co. or Intermediary Co. or 3rd Party)?
Who can access data and what will be the process for accessing it?
What data fields to be collected and at what frequency?
Scenario at the
end of this stage
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
1. Collection inefficiency loss Retail Supply

Other loss Distribution
2. Technical & hooking loss Distribution
Other loss Retail Supply
3. Technical loss Distribution
Other loss Retail Supply
Allocation of
Technical and
Commercial Loss
Tariff
Dist. System Ops
SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
PwC
63
Stage 3: Onset of competition

In this stage of the roll out plan for retail supply competition, second Retail Supply Company would be
introduced in a particular area of supply which would compete with incumbent supply company. Steps will have
to be taken in this stage to provide the new retail supply companies with appropriate mechanisms like power
procurement, balancing and settlement and tariff determination, required to conduct their supply business in
an efficient manner.

While the industry structure would remain same at the beginning of stage 3 as in the beginning of stage 2,
owing to the tasks performed in Stage 2, the industry would have become conducive for the entry of second
Retail Supply Company in a license area.

This Stage discusses tasks required to eliminate issues that may arise due to multiple retail supply companies in
an area:
1.
2. Phasing of competition identifying contestable consumer categories or connected load

3. Power procurement model allocation by intermediary company
4. Consumer switching mechanism
5.
6. Balancing and settlement

7.
8. Defining framework for Provider of Last Resort

9. Extending USO to new retail supply companies
1.
One of the objectives of introducing retail supply competition is to give choice to consumers. To support this
objective, Section 14 of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014 provides for multiple supply licensee in an area.
Reduce
entry
barriers
Increase
customer
choice
Improved
quality of
Supply and
Lower
electricity prices
Section 14 .Provided also that the Appropriate Commission may

grant a licensee to two or more persons for supply of electricity
within the same area of supply, progressively as may, subject to the
conditions..
It is expected that multiple retail supply licensee in an area competing
for market share would bring in operational efficiencies, improved
quality of services and reduction in electricity costs for consumers. In
this stage, after the entry barriers are removed for new retail supply
companies due to tasks performed in Stage 1 and Stage 2, second (and
further on) retail supply company would be allowed to enter market
in order to compete with incumbent retail supply company.
PwC
64
Issue - The license area in which this new retail supply company would be allowed to operate is an issue for
discussion. This issue is discussed in detail in the later section Issues in implementation of retail supply
competition under the heading Delimitation: Area of Supply and phasing of retail supply competition.
2.
Phasing of competition identifying contestable consumer categories or connected

load
In a particular supply license area, the retail competition can be introduced in phases, where in each phase, the
new retail supply companies would be allowed to supply electricity to a certain section of consumers. For e.g.
lets assume a new retail supply company is given licensee to supply electricity in the license area of the
incumbent Discom. During first year of its operation, the new retail supply company could be allowed to sell
electricity to only consumers with connected load 1 MW and above, i.e. only the consumers with connected load
of 1 MW and above get choice to select their retail supply company, the remaining being served by incumbent
supplier. Gradually this threshold of 1 MW could then be lowered in phases to bring in more and more
consumers under the purview of retail supply competition.
The benefits of gradual phasing of retail supply competition are:
Phasing allows to carry out a pilot study by introducing competition in a smaller section of consumers
New players may get time to ramp up their resources as consumers are gradually opened up for
competition
Gradual introduction of competition allows new players and consumers in the industry to acclimatise
down to new regulations and industry structure
Issue The method in which phasing would be done and the time-line in which it would be implemented, is
discussed in detail in the later section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under the heading
Delimitation: Area of Supply and phasing of retail supply competition.
3.
Power procurement model allocation by intermediary company
The PPAs which are transferred to the Intermediary Company would need to be allocated amongst retail supply
companies. This task is important to both Intermediary Company and retail supply companies as:
Power purchase cost forms a major part of retail tariffs (80 90% in most of the cases). Any saving in
the power purchase cost can give advantage to one retail supply company over other.
Existing Discoms have large number of long term PPAs with varying periods and costs which would be
transferred to Intermediary Company. In order to meet financial obligations of these PPAs, the
Intermediary Company would have to allocate them to retail supply companies i.e. PPAs transferred to
the Intermediary Company would have to be disposed of against demand of retail supply companies.
A retail supply companies could procure power through
Long term PPAs

o
With Cost Plus tariff of upto 25 years time period
With tariffs discovered through competitive bidding of 12 years or above time period
Medium term PPAs of more than 3 years time period
Own generating stations
Energy traders
Energy exchange / Whole sale market
PwC
65
Currently most of the installed generation capacity is tied up under long term PPAs with existing Discom and
power available through energy exchange / wholesale market is minimal. Therefore retail supply companies
would have to rely largely on allocation of PPAs from Intermediary Company for meeting the power demand of
their consumers.
Issue since power purchase cost forms a major part of retail tariffs and because current disocms have large a
quantum of long term PPAs, a fair and efficient mechanism would have to be developed to either allocate PPAs
of current discoms to new retail supply companies or to allow them to enter into new PPAs. This issue is
discussed in detail in the later section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under the heading
Allocation of PPAs.
4.
Consumer switching mechanism
After the introduction of multiple retail supply companies in a license area, the consumers would get the option
to choose from among available retail suppliers. Shifting of consumers from one retail supplier to another
would need deliberation on following changeover activities, during forming the individual roll out plan of
states:
Recovery of stranded costs like past revenue gaps or regulatory assets from consumers:
While the treatment of accumulated recognised regulatory assets was discussed in the task treatment
of existing financial losses in stage 1, the SERCs may allow creation of new regulatory assets in the
future. If consumers of such retail supply companies switch to another supplier, the retail supply
company which has to amortise its regulatory assets would be left with a smaller consumer base to
recover these assets. This could lead to tariff shock for the balance consumers of the retail supplier. To
prevent this, the Intermediary Company may have to create a mechanism to ensure collection of these
costs from concerned consumers irrespective of the retail supplier they are taking electricity from.
Recovery of dues from consumer: If a consumers switches to another supplier without clearing its
past dues with its existing retail supply company, the recovery of these dues becomes an issue. In case
the security deposit of the consumer is insufficient to cover these dues the retail supplier may have to
take a financial hit on account of payments already made to distribution and generators for supplying
electricity to such consumers. Also it is possible that current Retail Supply Company would have
disconnected certain consumers due to non-payment of dues. It needs to be deliberated whether such
consumers would be allowed to take a new connection from another retail supply company or not,
before the resolution of its disputes with current retail supply company. To resolve these issues, a
robust communication mechanism will have to be developed by the retail supply companies among
themselves to ensure such consumers are not allowed to switch retail suppliers without clearing there
past dues.
Defining consumer category at the time of switching: it needs to be deliberated whether a

consumer would be allowed to change consumer category while switching its retail supplier or will the
consumer be allowed to switch in the same consumer category only.
Security Deposits: at the time of consumer switching, the new retail supply company taking over the
consumer would have to inform consumer of the security deposit requirements. It needs to be
deliberated whether the existing security deposit of consumer with the current retail supply company
would be refunded to the consumer or settled with the new retail supply company.
Frequency of consumer switching: it needs to be deliberated that when will the consumers be
allowed to switch from one retail supplier to another. High switching rates of consumers could create
difficulties for retail supply companies in managing their power procurement and demand forecasting.
PwC
66
Decision Point allowed frequency of consumer switching

The consumer could be allowed to switch retail supply company on
5.
On certain dates
Anytime during the year
After the expiry of a lock-in period with current retail supplier
One of the pre-requisites of introduction of Retail Supply Competition could be setting up of an efficient
Wholesale Electricity market. However considering the nascent stages of development of such a market, the
Retail Supply companies will have to rely on PPA route in the near future to procure power for long term.
Installed
capacity
Tied capacity under existing PPAs
Unitied capacity, selling power

through wholesale market
Considering majority of the existing generation capacity would

be tied up in long term PPAs with current discoms, the new
retail supply companies would have to explore the option of
entering into new PPAs with the stranded generation capacity.
Close to ~52 GW bid capacity out of ~76 GW of coal based
power projects awarded through competitive bidding under
Section 63 of Electricity Act 2003 between 2006 and 2014 are
facing viability challenges and are stranded. The new retail
supply companies would have opportunity to bargain preferable
terms with such generators and form medium to long term PPAs
with them.
In future as smaller new retail supply companies come into the

market, their individual bargaining power with the generators
could decrease. This situation can be avoided by ensuring that in
generation sector also there are no dominant players which can arm twist the retail suppliers.
Stranded capacity due to under
recovery of costs
In a scenario where dominant generating companies are not broken down, the Intermediary Company could
provide a service to smaller retail supply companies of aggregating their energy demands and entering into
PPAs with generators.
Decision Point procurement of new PPAs
The Retail Supply Companies can enter into new PPA through following approaches
(i) Individual Contracts with generators: each Retail Supply Company could enter into PPA with
generators individually.
(ii) Demand Aggregation: The Intermediary Company can act as a demand aggregator for smaller
Retail Supply Companies and enter into PPAs with generators on their behalf. This role of Intermediary
Company will have to be defined in the roles and responsibilities of Intermediary Company.
In case Retail Supply Companies are not allowed to enter into PPAs after the expiry of their existing PPAs, and
they are asked to procure power through Wholesale Electricity Markets, the following issues will arise
It needs to be deliberated on how to compare electricity from different power generating stations on a
common platform of wholesale electricity market to avoid undue advantage to certain generators. For
e.g. Hydro plants in their later stages of life will have lower generation costs than their competitors.
PwC
67
6.
Generators in India have to show PPAs in order to secure financing for their projects. Therefore in
future with a fully functional wholesale market, it needs to be deliberated on how banks will change
their lending covenants.
Balancing and settlement
The energy balancing and settlement allows parties (generators and Discoms) to make submissions to SLDCs to
either buy or sell electricity into/out of the market at close to real time in order to keep the system from moving
too far out of phase. SLDCs monitor the actual positions of generators and suppliers, based on the metering
data provided by Transmission Company, against their contracted positions and settling imbalances when
actual delivery or offtake does not match contractual positions. Unscheduled Interchange charges are then
calculated based on these imbalances between actual delivery/offtake and contractual positions.
Generator
Provide schedules on a day
ahead basis
Their payments are settled as
per the terms of the PPA
Generators provide day
ahead injection schedule
UI charge calculated based

on difference between actual
and scheduled injection
SLDC
The loss adjusted load forecast is
compared with the capacity availability
schedule to understand if any surplus
exists for inter-state trading
Prepares the least cost dispatch schedule
Energy Accounting
Coordinates with RLDC for inter state
schedules`
Discom gives load forecast for each

trading period
These forecast are loss adjusted
based on transmission losses
provided by Transco
Generator 1
Generator 2
Generator 3
Transmission Co
Metering at interconnection
points and provision of data
from all metering points
When multiple Supply
Companies would exist in same
supply area, differentiating
between actual injection for
each of them would be an issue
Discom
Provide schedule for drawal of
power on day ahead basis
After the introduction of retail supply competition, the Unscheduled Interchange charges would have to be
calculated separately for each retail supply company in a license area. This is required in order to encourage
retail suppliers to do better load forecasting, refrain from over/under drawal from the gird and ensure overall
grid security. However to calculate the deviation of each retail supply company from its scheduled power
drawal, actual power used/consumed by each individual retail supply company will need to be calculated. Since
the current metering is done at interface between transmission and distribution for Unscheduled Interchange
(UI) settlement, wherein multiple retail supply companies could exist after the introduction of retail supply
competition, calculation of this actual power used/consumed by each individual retail supply company at any
given point of time would be an issue.
Decision Point Balancing and Settlement
There can be two approaches possible for the mechanism of balancing and settlement after the introduction of
retail supply competition
Making Advanced Metering compulsory for new Retail Supply Companies - Each new
Retail Supply Company entering in the market would be asked to install Advance Metering systems for
new consumers that they acquire. This way the total power sale for this new Retail Supply Company can
be metered on actual basis. With adding normative losses on the consumer sales, energy consumed by
new retail supply companies can be arrived at. The energy consumed by incumbent retail supply
PwC
68
company can be calculated by reducing the figures of new retail supply companies from the total energy
consumed at distribution and transmission interface.
Based on consumer category wise sample load curve under this approach, consumer
category wise sample load curve is prepared based on the historical data. This load curve may vary for
location and season. Based on the energy consumed by consumers of a category for a retail supply
licensee, the load curve for that consumer category of the retail supply company is prepared. By adding
the load curves of all consumers categories of the retail supply company, aggregate load curve of the
retail supply company is prepared. This load curve is then used for balancing and settlement. The
process of preparing the load curve would gradually improve as more data would be available regarding
the energy consumption patterns of consumers. Also updation in load curves would be required as
consumer behaviours change with time and seasons.
The pros and cons of these approaches are:

Approach
Making Advanced Metering
compulsory for new retail
supply companies
Based on consumer category

wise sample load curve
Pros
Would ensure gradual

replacement of existing
metering by Advanced
Metering.
Actual values of power

consumption for each retail
supply company can be
calculated.
No need of expensive Advanced

Meters in initial stages.
Cons
High cost of Advanced Meters

could become entry barrier
for new retail supply
companies.
Would not give actual values

of power consumption of
retail supply companies.
Settlement of Renewable Energy

In future as the usage of renewable energy increases, retail consumers could start producing energy locally at
their premises to meet their electricity requirements, through sources like wind or solar. In such a scenario,
while initially the electricity generated through such renewable sources would complement the electricity
supply from retail supply companies, later on as the generation from renewable sources increase or the
consumption pattern of consumers change, the retail consumers could begin to inject electricity into the grid.
To deal with such scenarios, bi-directional meters (import export meters) would have to be installed at
consumer premises in order to measure both electricity withdrawn by the consumer from the grid and
electricity injected by the consumer to the grid. Also a mechanism would have to be developed to take this
electricity into consideration while doing balancing and settlement.
7.
After the introduction of new retail supply companies, the SERCs would have to determine tariffs separately for
distribution company, incumbent retail supply company and the new retail supply companies. The tariff
determination process for Distribution Company would remain same as in stage 1 of the roll out plan i.e. the
SERCs would approve a regulated tariff. Since Incumbent Retail Supply Company would be allowed to sell
power to both consumers open to competition and consumers not open to competition, separate accounts
would have to be maintained by them for cost allocation between these two types of consumers. The SERCs
would determine a ceiling tariff for contestable consumers and a regulated tariff for consumers not open for
competition. The Incumbent Retail Supply Company would need the financial data of costs involved in
supplying electricity to non-contestable consumers (consumers not open for competition) separately for tariff
PwC
69
fillings to SERCs to determine regulated tariff.For the new Retail Supply Companies the SERCs would have to
determine a ceiling tariffs for consumers open to retail supply competition. The new retail supply companies
could then devise tariff plans of their choice within these ceiling tariffs.
Distribution
business
Incumbent retail
supply company
New retail supply
company
Consumers open to
competition
Consumer not open to

competition
Regulated tariff
Regulated tariff
Ceiling tariff
Regulated tariff
Ceiling tariff
N/A
Open Access
consumers
Wheeling tariff Regulated Tariff
Cross Subsidy Surcharge
Regulated Tariff
N/A
The ceiling tariff determined by SERCs for consumer open to competition would be used to create a Standard
Tariff Plan, which all Retail Supply Companies would have to offer to their consumers mandatorily.
While currently the Discoms maintain separate accounting units for open access consumers in order to
calculate the wheeling charges for them, after the introduction of retail supply competition the treatment for
calculation of regulated tariff for open access consumers would be same as that of other consumers.
Also it needs to be deliberated while forming the roll out plan of individual states, whether offering different
tariffs to different consumers under same consumer category and in the same supply area, based on certain
objective parameters approved by appropriate commission, will amount to discrimination or not. The objective
parameters based on which differentiation in tariff could be done, can be:
i.
ii.
Consumers credit history
iii.
Consumers consumption pattern. For e.g. the peak hours in which consumers draw electricity
iv.
Marginal cost of power
v.
8.
Consumers load profile
Or any other factor determined by the Commission
Defining framework for Provider of Last Resort
When multiple Retail Supply Companies would exist simultaneously in a license area, a retail consumer may
not get electricity in following scenarios
Retail Supply Company is unable to supply electricity to a consumer because of unavailability of power
with the Retail Supply Company
Retail Supply Company is unable to continue its business and therefore cannot service its obligation
towards its consumers
PwC
70
In such cases a designated Provider of Last Resort (POLR) would have to supply electricity to such marooned
consumers. The following issues will need deliberation regarding the POLR i.
Tariff determination: The tariff at which the POLR would supply electricity to consumer can have
various approaches.
Decision Point tariff for POLR
The following approaches may be adopted for compensating the POLR a.
Tariff of failed retail supply company - the tariff at which the previous retail supply
company was providing electricity to consumer (in order to honour the contract between
consumer and the failed retail supply company)
b. Competitive tariff - as charged by the respective supplier

c.
Ceiling tariff the retail supply companies can decide their tariff subject to a ceiling decided by
the Appropriate Commission
d. Actual cost pass through In case the POLR is allowed to pass on the actual cost incurred,
the method for the State Commission to monitor these costs will be an issue of deliberation.
ii.
Penalty: the penalty and security mechanism in case Retail Supply Company or Distribution Company
does not fulfil its obligation, will need to be decided.
iii.
Implementation and Monitoring: Mechanism will have to be developed for monitoring by

Appropriate Commissions, of Retail Supply Companies and Distribution Company.

Approach
Pros
Regarding tariff determination for POLR
Tariff of failed retail The consumers would be at benefit
supply company
here as they might get to continue
enjoying same tariffs as before
Cons
The State Government or

Intermediary Company might have
to fund the difference between actual
cost of supply
Competitive tariff
(this tariff would be
lower or equal to the
regulated ceiling
tariff)
Ceiling tariff
POLR would not differentiate between

regular consumers and consumers
who came through POLR route
Consumers could be exploited with

higher tariffs
Consumers would be protected against

high tariffs from POLR
The State Government or

Intermediary Company might have
to fund the difference between actual
cost of supply
Actual cost pass

through
No financial burden on POLR
The POLR might load more than fair

share of costs on such consumers
9.
USO extends to new retail supply companies
In stage 1 we had defined that under Universal Service Obligation (USO) the duty to connect would be of
Distribution Company and Duty to Supply would be of incumbent Retail Supply Company. After the
introduction of second Retail Supply Company in an area of supply, while the duty to connect would still remain
PwC
71
the responsibility of Distribution Company, whether duty to supply would be applicable on new Retail Supply
Companies or not needs to be deliberated.
Issue the various options of applicability/non applicability of USO on all new retail supply companies is
discussed in detail in the section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under heading
Universal Service Obligation (USO).

This stage would continue till all the consumers are not open for retail supply competition and a wellfunctioning retail supply market is created. After the end of this stage multiple retail supply companies would
exist simultaneously offering various tariffs plans to the consumers, fostering healthy competition. Consumers
would be able to choose the retail supply company which best suits their needs. Due to introduction of this
competition, improvement could be seen in loss levels, metering and power procurement efficiency. The
industry structure at the end of this stage would look like the proposed industry structure, as shown in the
section Background to Competition in India under the heading Competition in Indian Power Sector.
Industry structure at the end of stage 3
A
Discom
Intermediary Co.
ISL
Consumer 1
Distribution
Network Co.
Generator 1
Transmission Co.
Generator 2
Physical Flow
RSL
Consumer 2
Financial Flow
PwC
72

Stage 3
Onset of Competition
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide or
Discom wise
Distribution Co.
Retail Supply
Co.
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
Current
license area
Current
license area
New
entity
Metering
function
As decided
in Stage 1
Dist. System Ops

Dist. Planning Ops
Dist. Market Ops
Current area, or
Break up of
areas
Factors
Inc/dec load, or
Inc/dec sales, or
Area of supply, or
Consumer category
Phasing
Timelines
Nation wide, or
State wise, or
Licence wise
Allocation and pricing
of existing PPA
Allocation of
Actual PPAs, or
Power (MW)
Method Fixed allocation
Dynamic allocation
Pricing
Uniform
Actual cost
Differential Bulk
Supply Tariff
Allowed on
Certain dates, or
Anytime, or
After expiry of a lock-in period
Consumer switch
Mechanism
Procurement of
new PPAs
Demand
aggregation
Balancing and
settlement
Sales of new supply

co. (with AMR)
reduced from DT
level reading, or
Based on consumer
category wise sample
load curve
Tariff
SERC allows
A&G
Individual contracts with

generators
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
SERC sets
Ceiling tariff
applicable on
all Supply Co.
for consumers
open for
competition
Issue: whether differential

tariff allowed within consumer
category basis certain factors,
or not allowed
POLR
USO
With incumbent
Tariff for POLR
Tariff of failed Supply Co, or
Regulated, or
Competitive, or
Ceiling, or
Actual Cost
USO
for all
USO only for

consumer open
for competition
PwC
73
Issues in implementation of retail

supply competition
As discussed in the previous section, while implementing various tasks of the roll out plan, there are several
issues that may arise and that need to be taken care of. In this section we discuss each of them and identify
various approaches that can be adopted to deal with them, along with the pros and cons of each approach. Most
of the issues discussed in this section are interdependent on each other i.e. the resolution of an issue is
dependent on resolution of another issue. Every approach of each issue is given a unique code. This code is used
to show the interdependence of various issues. The code is defined as follows
Sample Code D1A, stands for
D Discussion Point
1 Issue number 1 (1,2,3.so on)
A Approach number of the issue (A, B, C.so on)
Issue 1 Functional Separation of current Discom

During Stage 1 we functionally separate the current Discoms into a Distribution Business, a Retail Supply
Business, an intermediary company and probably a 3rd party metering service company (in case metering is
made a separate licensed activity). The Distribution business itself could be further broken down into following
functions:
a. Distribution Network Operations (DNO): this function covers operation of the network. Also in
case the responsibility of other metering related activities8 is given to the distribution business, the DNO
would be the entity in charge of Meter installation/replacement, ownership of metering assets, meter
operations and testing.
b. Distribution Planning Operations (DPO): this function covers the planning of distribution network
expansion, operating code and technical design of the network.
c. Distribution System Operations (DSO): this function covers supervision of the network to ensure
integrated operation for achieving maximum economy and efficiency in the distribution network.
d. Distribution Market Operations (DMO): this function involves accounting for the energy handled
by the distribution network.
These functions could either be given to separate entities or kept with the same entity. In case these functions
are allocated to separate entities it would ensure no conflict of interest between various functions and focused
operations/investments in each function. On the other hand allocating these functions to a single entity would
facilitate ease of business and regulations by limiting the number of industry players. In the initial stages of
retail supply competition, the functions of DNO and DPO could be given to a single entity while the functions of
DSO and DMO could be given to a separate single entity.
Detailed discussed in section Issues in implementation of retail supply competition under heading Issue 3 Metering
Services
8
PwC
74
Function
Entity responsible
Distribution Planning Operation (DPO)
Distribution Business or Intermediary

Company
Distribution Network Operation (DNO)
Distribution Business
Distribution System Operation (DSO)
Appropriate SLDC or
Company or a new entity
Distribution Market Operation (DMO)
Intermediary
Since many of the current Discoms do not have SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System)
installed, allocating the Distribution System Operation function (DSO) to the SLDC could be difficult. Therefore
before the introduction of retail supply competition, capacity building exercise would have to be done for
SLDCs along with installation of SCADA. In the meanwhile a transitionary approach could be that all of the four
functions of DNO, DPO, DSO and DMO are kept with a single entity the Distribution business.
Immediate
effect
Capacity building for

SLDC/ Intermediary
Co./ SERCs
DNO
DPO
DSO
DMO
Distribution
Business
Interim
effect
Formation of separate
entities for
DSO/DPO/DMO
Long
term
DNO
DNO
DPO
Distribution Business or
Intermediary Co.
DPO
Separate entity
DSO
Separate entity
DMO
Separate entity
DSO
DMO
SLDC or
Intermediary Co.
Since each of these 4 functions regarding the Distribution would require completely different skill sets and
technology, in the long run each of them should be a separate function operating independent of each other.
Issue 2 - Allocation of Technical and Commercial losses between distribution

and supply companies
It is important to asses the current distribution loss levels based on the energy audit and technical studies and
classify it in technical and commercial losses. These technical and commercial losses would have to be allocated
between distribution and retail supply companies. A trajectory for performance improvement would then be
given to these entities based on the losses allocated to them, allowing approved losses to be passed onto
consumers in the form of tariff. However accurate estimation of these losses would be difficult in view of the
fact that many states still have substantial unmetered consumers whose consumption (for the purpose of
estimating total sales and hence total distribution losses) and low levels of reliable metering.
Following approaches can be adopted for allocation of technical and commercial losses between Distirbution
and Retail Supply functions
PwC
75
Type of Loss
Allocation to Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Theft by Hooking
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
Inaccurate metering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Theft by Meter
tampering/bypassing
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Technical
Commercial
Discussion Point allocation of technical and commercial losses
(D2A) - Allocation of collection losses to Retail Supply Company and remaining losses to
In this approach, only collection inefficiency loss is allocated to retail supply company while the
remaining losses are allocated to the distribution company. Although the commercial losses should
idealy come under the purview of retail supply business, since it is difficult to differentiate between
losses due to hooking and losses due to meter/tampering or bypassing of meter, all of these losses are
allocated to the Distribution company under this approach.
(D2B) - Allocation of technical loss and hooking loss to Distribution company and
remaining losses to Retail Supply Company
In this approach, the Technical Losses would be allocated to Distribution company as the network is
owned by it. Commercial Loss due to Hooking would also be allocated to Distribution business as the
hooking would be done on Distribution companys network line.
The Collection ineffciency losses would be allocated to Retail Supply Company as the roles and
responsibility of Retail Supply Company consists of revenue collection from consumers. The losses due
to inaccurate metering and meter tampering/bypassing would also be allocated to Retail Supply
Business.
In this approach however, differentiating between hooking losses and meter tampering / bypassing
losses (in order to allocate them separately between distribution and supply businesses) would require
extensive investment in metering at several levels (even upto the level of electricity poles in order to
calculate hooking losses), which makes it difficult to implement this approach.
(D2C) Allocation of all commercial losses (collection inefficiency, meter

tampering/bypassing and hooking losses) to Retail Supply Company and technical losses
to Distribution Company
In this approach, the Technical Losses would be allocated to Distribution company as the network is
owned by it. The Collection inefficiency losses and meter tampering/bypassing losses would be
allocated to Retail Supply Company as the roles and responsibility of Retail Supply Company consists of
revenue collection from consumers. Also the losses due to hooking would be allocated to Retail Supply
Company as their employees would be visiting the consumer premises for meter reading and therefore
could be in a better position to identify and report cases of hooking. A mechanism would have to be
developed to ensure that the cases of hooking reported by supply company are resolved by Distribution
PwC
76
Company in a timely and efficient manner. This mechanism could be enforced through stringent
Standards of Performance on distribution business.
Another option that could arise is in case metering is made a licensed activity. In such a case the commercial
losses (other than collection inefficiency) could be allocated to the metering company (done by either Retail
Supply Company, Distribution Company or a 3rd Party).
Discussion Point regarding area wise losses
Also regarding the area of supply, the following issues would need deliberation while forming the roll out plans
for individual states
(D2D) whether the entire supply area of a distribution company would have same allowed levels of
technical losses or area wise technical losses are calculated
(D2E) Whether all Supply Licensee in a given supply area would have same commercial losses or area
wise commercial losses are calculated
Issue 3 Metering Services

Metering activity is an important cornerstone of the commercial side of the distribution sector. The metering
service can be broken down into following activities a.
communication services (in case of meters supporting this feature) for collecting meter reading data.
b. Other Meter related activities: Meter installation/replacement, ownership of metering assets,

meter operations and testing.
After the separation of current Discom into Distribution and Supply functions, which one of them gets the
responsibility for which metering activity, becomes an issue. Each of these activities could either be done
separately by Retail Supply Company, Distribution Company or a 3 rd Party Metering Company9 or both of these
activities can be taken care by either a single entity. Therefore based on the logical permutations and
combinations, several possible approaches for metering are:
Approach/Activity
Meter Reading
Other Meter related
Approach 1 (D3A)
3rd Party
Approach 2 (D3B)
Approach 3 (D3C)
Approach 4 (D3D)
3rd Party
3rd Party
Approach 5 (D3E)
The approach to be adopted towards metering would depend on the approach adopted towards loss
allocation. The various loss allocation approaches discussed are:
D2A Allocation of collection inefficiency losses to Retail Supply Company and remaining losses to
Distribution Company.
metering activities, it would be a licensed activity and regulated by appropriate state commissions.
9
PwC
77
D2B Allocation of technical loss and hooking loss to Distribution company and remaining losses to
D2C Allocation of all commercial losses (collection inefficiency, meter tampering/bypassing or

hooking losses) to Retail Supply Company and technical losses to Distribution Company.
The possible approaches of metering combined with various loss allocation approaches are evaluated on
following parameters:
Prevent any Conflict of Interests
Encourage capital investment in metering services
Ease of Billing
Minimise number of visits to consumer premises and minimise duplication of efforts
Loss Reduction o
Prevent possibility to manipulate loss figures (inaccurate metering)
Incentive to reduce hooking losses
Incentive to reduce meter tampering/bypassing losses
Approach 1 (D3A) for metering

Allocation of metering related activities under this approach would be as follows
Meter reading Retail Supply Company
Other metering activities 3rd Party Company
Under this approach, assuming metering is a licensed activity, the 3 rd party company which is brought in for
metering services could also be allocated the responsibility of commercial losses related to inaccurate metering
or meter bypassing/tampering. A separate loss allocation approach is also evaluated wherein inaccurate
metering and meter tampering/bypassing losses are allocated to the 3 rd party company.
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Approach 4
Technical Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Hooking Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
3rd party company
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
3rd party company
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
3rd party company
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Since both meter

tampering/
bypassing and
collection inefficiency
losses are allocated to
supply company, they
would have no
incentive to shift
losses from collection
inefficiency to meter
Since all
commercial losses are
allocated to Supplier,
it would make efforts
to reduce them.
In order to shift
to other losses
(hooking or meter
tampering/bypassing),
the Supply Company
would have to generate
lesser billing from
actual energy sold,
which is unlikely
Inaccurate
Distribution
Metering
Meter tampering Distribution
Collection Loss
Retail Supply
Factors affected by loss allocation

Possibility to
In order to shift
manipulate
losses
to other losses
(hooking or meter
tampering/bypassing),
the Supply Company
would have to
generate lesser billing
from actual energy
sold, which is unlikely
PwC
78
Loss allocation
Hooking losses
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
because by doing so
the supplier would be
letting go of revenue.
tampering/
bypassing.
because by doing so
the supplier would be
letting go of revenue.
Supplier would
have no incentive to
report hooking cases.
Supplier would
Since hooking
have no incentive to losses are allocated to
report hooking cases. Supplier, it would
have incentive to
report such cases.
Mechanism would be
needed to enforce
Distribution company
to reduce them.
Since hooking losses

are allocated to 3rd
party metering
company, 3rd party
company would have
incentive to report
such cases.
Mechanism would be
needed to enforce
to reduce them.
However the retail
supply company would
3rd party would have
incentive to reduce the
losses.
Meter tampering Supplier would

/ bypassing
losses
report meter
tampering/ bypassing
cases.
Factors other than losses
Conflict of
Interest
Capital
investment
Ease of billing
Supplier would
have incentive to
reduce the losses.
Approach 3 (D2C)
Supplier would
have incentive to
reduce the losses.
Approach 4
As per section 55 of the Electricity (Amendment) Bill 2014, a licensee cannot supply
electricity to a consumer without a metered connection. While the duty to install a meter
would be applicable on 3rd Party, Supplier would be at loss if the 3rd party does not abide by
its responsibilities.
3rd party can bring in capital and technology to do focus investments.
Both meter reading and bill generation with same entity.
Number of visits Separate visits required for meter reading and meter operations.
to consumer
premises
Ease of
No change required in metering when a consumer switches supplier.
consumer
switching
PwC
79
Approach 2 (D3B) for metering

Other metering activities Retail Supply Company
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Technical Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Hooking Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
Inaccurate Metering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Meter tampering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Collection Loss
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Since both meter

tampering/ bypassing and
collection inefficiency losses
are allocated to supply
company, they would have
no incentive to shift losses
from collection inefficiency
to meter tampering/
bypassing.
Since all commercial

Supplier, it would make
efforts to reduce them.
Supplier would have no

incentive to report hooking
cases.
Since hooking losses are

allocated to Supplier, it
would have incentive to
report such cases.
Mechanism would be
needed to enforce
Distribution company to
reduce them.
Supplier would have
losses.

Possibility to
In order to shift losses
manipulate losses
to other losses (hooking or
meter tampering/
bypassing), the Supply
Company would have to
generate lesser billing from
actual energy sold, which is
unlikely because by doing
so the supplier would be
letting go of its revenue.
Hooking losses
incentive to report hooking
cases.
Meter tampering /
bypassing losses

Supplier would have
incentive to report meter
tampering/bypassing cases. losses.
Conflict of Interest
Duty to install meter is with the supplier itself, therefore as per section 55 of the EA
2003, the supplier would install meter and then supply electricity.
Capital investment
Supplier can invest capital but it may lead to non-uniformity and duplication of
assets i.e. each supplier would install its own meters for their respective consumers.
Ease of billing
Number of visits to
consumer
Single visit required to consumer premises for meter reading and meter operations.
Ease of consumer
switching
Change of metering asset may be required on changing the supplier.
PwC
80
Approach 3 (D3C) for metering

Meter reading Distribution Company
Other metering activities Distribution Company
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Technical Loss
Distribution
Hooking Loss
Distribution
Inaccurate Metering Distribution
Meter tampering
Distribution
Collection Loss
Retail Supply
Possibility to
manipulate losses
could inflate billing to hide
meter tampering/
bypassing or hooking losses
and shift them to collection
inefficiency.
Approach 2 (D2B)
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Approach 3 (D2C)
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
could inflate billing to hide
meter tampering/
bypassing or hooking losses
and shift them to collection
inefficiency.

Supplier, Distribution
business cannot shift
technical losses to
commercial losses, thus
would not have incentive to
fudge meter readings.
Distribution Co. would
have no incentive to reduce
losses.
losses.
Hooking losses

have incentive to reduce the have incentive to reduce
losses.
losses.
Meter tampering /
Distribution Co. would have Distribution Co. would
bypassing losses
losses.
losses.
electricity to a consumer without a metered connection. Therefore while the duty to
install a meter would be applicable on Distribution Company, Supplier would be at loss
if the Distribution Company does not abide by its responsibilities.
Capital investment
Distribution Company being State owned, with substantial accumulated losses, may
find it difficult to invest capital for metering improvement.
Ease of billing
Meter reading and billing with separate entities i.e. Distribution and Retail Supply
companies respectively. This could lead to disputes between the two entities.
Number of visits to
Separate visits required for meter reading and meter operations.
consumer
Ease of consumer
switching
PwC
81
Approach 4 (D3D) for metering

Meter reading 3rd Party Company
Other metering activities 3rd Party Company
Under this approach, assuming metering is a licensed activity, the 3 rd party company which is brought in for
metering services could also be allocated commercial losses related to inaccurate metering or meter
bypassing/tampering. Therefore a separate loss allocation approach is also considered wherein inaccurate
metering and meter tampering/bypassing losses are allocated to the 3 rd party company.
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Approach 4
Technical Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Hooking Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
3rd party company
Inaccurate
Distribution
Metering
Meter tampering Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
3rd party company
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
3rd party company
Collection Loss
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply

Possibility to
3rd Party company would have no incentive to fudge losses, as
manipulate
losses are not its responsibility.
losses
Hooking losses
3rd party would have no incentive to report or reduce loss.
Meter tampering 3rd party would have no incentive to report or reduce loss.
/ bypassing
losses
Conflict of
Interest
Capital
investment
3rd party company

could inflate billing to
shift losses to
collection inefficiency.
Since hooking losses
are allocated to 3rd
party metering
company, 3rd party
company would have
incentive to report
such cases.
Mechanism would be
needed to enforce
to reduce them.
However the retail
supply company would
3rd party company
would have incentive
to reduce losses.
electricity to a consumer without a metered connection. Therefore while the duty to install a
meter would be applicable on 3rd Party, Supplier would be at loss if the 3rd party does not
abide by its responsibilities.
3rd party can bring in capital and technology to do focus investments.
PwC
82
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Approach 4
Ease of billing
Meter reading and billing with separate entities i.e. Distribution and Retail Supply
companies respectively. This could lead to disputes between the two entities.
Number of visits
to consumer
Single visit required to consumer premises for meter reading and meter operations.
Ease of consumer No change required in metering when a consumer switches supplier.

switching
Approach 5 (D3E) for metering
Other metering activities Distribution Company
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Technical Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Distribution
Hooking Loss
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
Inaccurate Metering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Meter tampering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Collection Loss
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Since both meter

tampering/ bypassing and
collection efficiency losses
are allocated to supply
company, they would have
no incentive to shift losses
to meter tampering/
bypassing.

Supplier, it would make
efforts to reduce them.
Appropriate entity will

take care on consumer visit.


Possibility to
manipulate losses
In order to shift losses

from collection to other
losses (hooking or meter
tampering/bypassing), the
Supply Company would
have to generate lesser
billing from actual energy
sold, which is unlikely
because by doing so the
supplier would be letting go
of its revenue.
Hooking losses
Meter tampering /
bypassing losses
Capital investment
Ease of billing
electricity to a consumer without a metered connection. Therefore while the duty to
install a meter would be applicable on Distribution Company, Supplier would be at loss
if the Distribution Company does not abide by its responsibilities.
Distribution Company being State owned, with substantial accumulated losses, may
find it difficult to invest capital for metering improvement.
PwC
83
Loss allocation
Approach 1 (D2A)
Approach 2 (D2B)
Approach 3 (D2C)
Number of visits to
consumer
Ease of consumer
switching
Separate visits required for meter reading and meter operations.

Competition in metering services

In case an approach is adopted wherein the responsibility of other metering related activities are given to a 3rd
Party Metering Company, competition could be introduced in metering services as well. The retail supply
companies could be given the option to choose from various metering service companies (approved by SERCs).
Later the retail consumer could also be given the choice to select not only its retail supply company but also its
metering company. The 3rd Party metering companies could be government owned (segregated from
government Discoms) or private companies. Introduction of multiple private players in the metering sector
would encourage efficiency and capital investment.
Issue 4 Delimitation: Area of Supply and phasing of retail supply competition

Under this issue we discuss the mechanism through which the retail consumers would be gradually opened up
for competition. This mechanism would have to be defined at two levels delimitation of area of supply and
phasing of retail consumers. Under delimitation of area of supply, the current license area of the discoms could
either be opened to competition entirely at once or be broken down into smaller areas and gradually opened up
for competition. Phasing of retail consumers would act as the next level of progressive introduction of
competition. In each area of supply open for competition, only a particular set of consumers would be made
contestable i.e. the new retail supply companies would be able to supply to only such contestable consumers,
the remaining being served by their respective incumbent supply companies. This phasing of consumers within
an area of supply could be based on factors like connected load, consumer categories etc.
The objectives of phasing and delimitation of area of supply are:
Ensuring maximum incentive for consumer switching
Attracting new players in retail supply space
Providing opportunity for understanding the sector and settling down
Delimitation of Area of Supply

There can be two approaches for defining the area of supply to be given to the new Retail Supply Company:
D4A Same area of supply: The area of supply of incumbent retail supply company is offered to
the new retail supply company as well
D4B Breaking up of supply area: The current area of supply would be broken down into smaller
regions, in which the new Retail Supply Company would be allowed to supply electricity. Under this
approach a package of cities or areas could also be offered to the new retail supply companies. These
packages may consist of areas like
o
An urban area with a rural area: while the urban area would be an attractive proposition for the
new retail supply company due to higher consumer density and therefore greater revenues, the
supplier could be given a rural area along with it so as to promote level playing field to all
players and also promote rural electrification.
PwC
84
An industrial area along with agricultural area: while an area with majority industrial
consumers would be attractive proposition for new retail supply companies due to higher
billing per consumer, the supplier could be given an area with majority agricultural consumers.
Depending upon the objectives of the state government for introducing retail supply
competition, similar other packages for area of supply could be designed. The various packages
formed should be comparable with each other in terms of parameters like consumer mix, loss
levels, connected load patterns etc. This would ensure that new retail supply companies do not
cherry pick within the packages.
The factors to be considered while deciding the approach for area of supply are
Current area size of incumbent discom
Loss variation in the area of supply under review
Consumer mix and sales mix in the area of supply under review
The approach to be adopted for defining area of supply for new retail supply companies is interdependent on
approach to be adopted for Universal Service Obligation (USO). The approaches possible for USO are:
D5A (USO on incumbent supplier): USO continues to be applied on incumbent Retail Supply
Company for all consumers but not on new retail supply companies
D5B (USO on all suppliers): USO continues to be applied on incumbent Retail Supply Company for
all consumers. For retail consumers open for competition, the USO applies on new Retail Supply
Companies as well
The table below discusses various pros and cons of the two possible approaches towards defining the area of
supply:
Issue/Approach
Approach 1 (D4A) same area of

supply
Approach 2 (D4B) breaking up

area of supply
USO on incumbent supplier: new

supply company could choose whom to
supply.
bigger areas could be broken down

to attract new players with less capital
also.
Parameters
Current area of discom
USO on all suppliers: new retail

supplier could find big area of supply as
an entry barrier.
Loss variation
average losses could be given to all

suppliers.
Suppliers could cherry pick areas

with lower loss levels, to supply
electricity. It would be important to
take care of this while breaking down
the area of supply.
Consumer profile
variation of consumer profiles

would average out in a bigger area of
supply.
Suppliers could cherry pick areas

with better consumer profiles, to supply
electricity. It would be important to
take care of this while breaking down
the area of supply.
PwC
85
Phasing of retail supply competition

In a particular supply area, the retail competition can be introduced in phases, where in each phase, the new
retail supply companies would be allowed to supply electricity to a certain section of consumers. This phasing of
competition gives allows new industry players and consumers to acclimatise down and scale up their
operations. There are two aspects to be taken care of while devising phases for introduction of competition
i.
(i)
Basis of dividing market sections the retail consumer market needs to be divided into several
sections. Each of these consumer sections would then be opened up to retail supply competition one by
one in different phases. The basis for dividing the market into sections can be connected load of
consumers, area of supply or consumer category. Based on these factors there can be following
approaches for phasing of retail supply competition
Based on increasing connected load: Retail competition is first opened to consumers with
connected load below a threshold (for e.g. < 20 kW) and gradually this limit is increased to get
more consumers into retail supply competition. For deciding these threshold levels
deliberations will be required from various stakeholders.
Based on decreasing connected load: Retail competition is first opened to consumers

with connected load above a threshold (for e.g. > 100 kW) and gradually this limit is decreased
to get more consumers into retail supply competition. For deciding these threshold levels
deliberations will be required from various stakeholders.
Based on increasing annual energy consumption: Retail competition is first opened to

consumers with average annual energy consumption below a threshold level (for e.g. 5000
units per annum) and gradually this limit is increased to get more consumers into retail supply
competition. For deciding these threshold levels deliberations will be required from various
stakeholders.
Based on decreasing annual energy consumption: Retail competition is first opened to

consumers with average annual energy consumption above a threshold level (for e.g. 50,000
units per annum) and gradually this limit is decreased to get more consumers into retail supply
competition. For deciding these threshold levels deliberations will be required from various
stakeholders.
Based on area of supply: Certain supply areas are opened to retail supply competition first,
giving consumers in those areas option to choose their retail supply company. Gradually other
areas are brought under the retail supply competition purview. The factor for deciding which
area of supply would be opened to competition first will require deliberations from various
stakeholders.
Based on consumer categories: Certain consumer categories (for e.g. industrial) are
opened to retail supply competition first, giving consumers in those categories option to choose
their retail supply company. Gradually other consumer categories are brought under the retail
supply competition purview. The factor for deciding which consumer categories would be
opened to competition first will require deliberations from various stakeholders.
Timelines for each phase - timelines for phasing of Retail Supply competition will require
discussions, study and analysis of the requisite environment necessary for introducing retail sector
reforms. There can be two approaches for defining timelines of phasing
Fixed nation-wide timeline
State Government could devise separate timelines for their respective supply areas, with upper
time limits being defined in the Act.
PwC
86

Approach
Pros
Cons
Approaches for selecting criterion for phasing
Increasing
connected load
Greater efficiency: Since consumer

with lower connected loads are connected
at LT level which accounts for maximum
technical and commercial losses in the
system, introducing competition at this
level will help in reducing AT&C losses
faster and would bring greater efficiency.
Prevention of cherry picking: under
increasing connected load approach of
phasing the subsidizing consumers
(industrial and commercial) would not be
opened for competition initially instead
the subsidized consumers (domestic and
agricultural) would become contestable.
Therefore the new retail supply
companies would not get an opportunity
to cherry pick.
Difficulty in implementation:
Implementing competition at lower
connected load first would bring in
large number of consumers spread
over the entire geography of the
distribution license area, under the
purview of competition. This would
entail huge investment from the new
retail supply companies and more
power purchase requirement to meet
possible demand. Any lack in
implementation at this scale would
have a huge negative impact on the
overall scheme and leave lesser
opportunity for course correction.
Nonstarter for reforms: new retail
supply companies could find this
proposition not attractive since
consumers with lower load could have
higher losses or lower revenues. The
cost of switching a consumer may be
more than benefits derived.
Decreasing
connected load
Since electricity forms a greater part of

costs for consumers with larger
connected load, they would be more likely
to take advantage of supply competition
Lower losses among consumers with
larger connected load would be an
incentive for new private players to enter
into retail supply business
In case cross subsidies and loss levels

are not improved before introduction
of retail supply competition, a large
number of good consumers of existing
supply companies could migrate
(cherry picking by other supply
companies)
Increasing
annual
consumption
Greater efficiency: Since consumer

with lower annual consumption are
connected at LT level which accounts for
maximum technical and commercial
losses in the system, introducing
competition at this level will help in
reducing AT&C losses faster and would
bring greater efficiency.
Changing consumption patterns:

increase or decrease of energy
consumption during a period could
pose difficulties in deciding whether a
consumer should be allowed for
supply competition or not
Difficulty in implementation:
Implementing competition at lower
annual sales first would bring in large
number of consumers under the
purview of competition. This would
entail huge investment from the new
retail supply companies and more
power purchase requirement to meet
possible demand. Any lack in
PwC
87
Approach
Pros
Cons
implementation at this scale would
have a huge negative impact on the
overall scheme and leave lesser
opportunity for course correction.
Nonstarter for reforms: new retail
supply companies could find this
proposition not attractive since
consumers with lower annual sales
could have higher losses or lower
revenues. The cost of switching a
consumer may be more than benefits
derived.
Decreasing
annual
consumption
Area of Supply
Consumer
categories
1.
Fixed nationwide timelines
Since electricity forms a greater part of

costs for consumers with greater energy
consumption, they would be more likely
to take advantage of supply competition
Areas with lower loss levels could be
identified and opened to competition first
to attract new retail supply companies
Or vice versa, areas with greater losses
could identified and opened to
competition first to promote efficiency
Pilot scheme could be introduced in some
areas to gather feedback and response
Consumer categories with lower loss

levels could be identified and opened to
competition first to attract new retail
supply companies
Or vice versa, consumer categories with
greater losses could identified and
opened to competition first to promote
efficiency
Approaches for setting timelines for phasing
2. State wise
timelines
Changing consumption patterns of

consumers could pose difficulties in
deciding whether a consumer should
be allowed for supply competition or
not
Determination and allocation of area
wise losses and costs between retail
supply companies would be an issue.
Circle wise losses and costs are
difficult to be determined.
Determination and allocation of area

wise losses and costs between retail
supply companies would be an issue.
Circle wise losses and costs are
difficult to be determined.
Greater accountability on State

Governments to bring in reforms in a
timely manner
States in different phases of reforms

could find it difficult to adhere to a
common timeline
Getting a political consensus for
common timeline could be a non-starter
Greater flexibility to States
State may delay the implementation of

reforms
PwC
88
Issue 5 Universal Service Obligation (USO)

The Universal Service Obligation (USO) refers to the practice of providing a baseline level of services to every
consumer. The Universal Service Obligation can be split into two separate obligations i.
The Duty to Connect
ii.
The Duty to Supply
The duty to connect a consumer would lie with the distribution business. In areas like Mumbai wherein
multiple Distribution Companies exist simultaneously, it needs to be deliberated whether after the introduction
of Retail Supply Competition which one of them would get the Duty to Connect consumers. One of them would
have to divest their network assets so as to ensure there is a single Distribution network provider in any area of
supply. However till such time, the appropriate SERC would have to determine which distribution company(s)
would get the Duty to Connect.
Deliberation required for deciding who gets
DUTY TO CONNECT during this period
Electricity (Amendment)
Bill, 2014 is passed
Discom 1
Discom 2
Functional separation of
Discoms achieved
Distribution
Co. 1
Supply
Co. 1
Distribution
Co. 2
Supply
Co. 2
As decided by Appropriate
Commission, Single
Distribution Co. is achieved
Single
Distribution
Co.
Supply
Co. 1
Supply
Co. 2
USO in the retail supply sector translates into Duty to Supply wherein if a consumer approaches a retail
supplier and demands supply of electricity and service at same costs as other consumers of same category
(and/or area of supply), the retail supplier would have an obligation to fulfil that demand of consumer. After
the introduction of new retail supply companies into an area of supply, the issue arises whether or not the new
retail supply companies should have USO (Duty to Supply) obligation for consumers open to retail supply
competition in their respective area of supply. There can be two approaches going forward for USO after the
introduction of new retail supply companies
1. D5A: USO continues to be applied on incumbent Retail Supply Company for all
consumers but not on new retail supply companies
In this approach the new retail supply company would not have an obligation to supply electricity to a
consumer. The new retail supply companies need not procure power for all incremental energy sales
expected for all consumers, since USO would not apply on them. Only the incumbent supplier would
have to make arrangements for all consumers in case it is called upon to service USO obligation
2. D5B: For retail consumers open for competition, the USO applies on all Retail Supply
Companies. For consumers not open for competition, USO only on incumbent Retail
Supply Company.
In such a scenario all retail supply companies would have to make arrangements for all consumers.
However in case power is not available with supplier, it will have to either -
PwC
89
Refuse to supply and pay penalty, or
Procure power inefficiently and pass on the costs to consumers (subject to ceiling tariffs set by
SERCs)
USO applicable on Incumbent Supply Company only
USO applicable on all Supply Companies
Each new Supplier creates

power backup for demand
forecast of its market share
Market share of
Supplier 1, and
so on
Incumbent Supply
Company creates power
backup for entire
consumer base
Demand Forecast
(2015)
Demand Forecast
(2016)
Market share of
Supplier 1, and
so on
Incumbent Supply
Company and Each new
creates power backup
for entire consumer
base
Demand Forecast
(2015)
Demand Forecast
(2016)
Incremental Demand
Forecast
Incremental Demand
Forecast
*the demand forecast charts in above diagram are for consumers open for competition
While deciding which approach to adopt, following issues would have to kept in mind
Availability of surplus electricity and power procurement planning to fulfil USO obligations
Scrutiny and penalty mechanism for non-adherence to USO obligations
Issue/Approach
Approach 1 (D5A)
Approach 2 (D5B)
For consumers open to

competition
USO obligation on Incumbent

USO obligation on all Retail Supply

Companies
For consumer not open to

competition


Energy availability and

planning
only the incumbent retail

supply company would have to
make arrangements for all
consumers in case it is called upon
to service USO obligation
all retail suppliers would have to

make arrangements for all consumers
open for completion in case they are
called upon to service their USO
obligations. In a supply constrained
scenario this may not be possible or
may lead to excess generation
capacity.
Scrutiny and penalty

mechanisms
the incumbent Retail Supply

Company being the POLR will be
allowed to collect a regulated tariff
as allowed by SERCs
~ it will need to be deliberated that

based on what conditions will a Retail
Supply Company be allowed to refuse
service to the consumer.
USO Obligation
Issue
PwC
90
Efficient power procurement techniques for changing demand forecasts

Based on the mechanism of Demand Forecasting, the approach towards USO obligation and the frequency at
which this activity is done, an efficient power procurement mechanism would also need to be developed for new
retail supply companies in order to meet their demand forecasts. The new retail supply companies could
procure power from Wholesale Markets, by entering into new individual PPAs with generators or through
allocation of PPA/Power by Intermediary Company. The issues with each of these power procurement routes
are as follows
Wholesale Markets medium to long term wholesale markets are not sufficiently developed in
India. Therefore if the frequency of change in demand forecast is high i.e. the time period between
changes in the demand forecasts of a Retail Supply Company is small, then Wholesale Markets could
prove to be a good power procurement mechanism to account for changes in demand forecasts.
New individual PPAs with generators PPAs are generally for very long time periods of up to 30
years. Therefore if the frequency of change in demand forecast is very low i.e. the time period between
changes in the demand forecasts of a Retail Supply Company is very high, then entering into new PPAs
could prove to be a good power procurement mechanism to account for changes in demand forecasts.
Allocation of Power/PPAs by Intermediary Company in case of energy deficit scenario

wherein enough untied capacity is not available in the market, PPAs transferred to Intermediary
Company would have to be allocated between new retail supply companies. However these PPAs also
would be of longer terms. Therefore for matching the frequency of demand forecasting with the
allocation of PPAs, the following two approaches could be adopted
o
The Intermediary Companies could adopt a dynamic approach of allocating PPA/Power.

Therefore at a pre-determined frequency the allocation of PPAs to retail supply companies
would be refreshed to take care of any changes in the demand forecasts.
The Intermediary Company could adopt a fixed approach of allocating PPA/Power. Thereafter
if the demand forecasts of retail supply companies change, they may trade power among
themselves to account for such changes.
The supply companies could also adopt a hybrid approach based on the pattern of their demand forecasts.
Issue 6 Allocation of PPAs

After the introduction of second Retail Supply Company in an area of supply, mechanism would have to be
developed so that these new supply companies can procure power to meet the electricity demand of their
consumers. There can be following possible ways for the new suppliers to procure power for their electricity
demand, except for demand that they can meet by their own generation plants (if any)
Wholesale electricity market or New PPAs with individual generators: under this method,
the New Retail Supply Company first goes to market or individual generators to procure power. Then it
asks Intermediary Company to allocate PPA/Power for any remaining requirements.
Allocation of PPA by Intermediary Company: as per this method, the new Retail Supply
Company mandatorily takes power from Intermediary Company (IC). Then it goes on to procure power
from market or individual generators for any remaining requirements.
However till such time the wholesale electricity market is still in nascent stages, PPA would remain an
important method of power procurement. The new retail supply companies could either enter into new PPAs
with the generators or ask the Intermediary Company to allocate PPAs/Power to it. Therefore a mechanism
PwC
91
would have to be developed to allocate the current PPAs with the Intermediary Company, to new retail supply
companies i.e. a mechanism to expend the electricity supply with the Intermediary Company. From the point of
view of Intermediary Company, there can be following possible mechanisms for allocating Power/PPA to retail
supply companies
a.
Allocation to Incumbent Supply Company: Intermediary Company first fulfils the entire power
requirements of incumbent retail supply company, then allocates the remaining PPAs/Power to the
new retail supply company.
b. Allocation to new Retail Supply Company: Intermediary Company first fulfils the entire power
requirements of new retail supply company, then allocates the remaining PPAs/Power to the
incumbent retail supply company.
c.
Proportionate allocation to all Supply Companies: Intermediary Company devises a formula to

allocate power/PPA to all retail supply companies, meeting power requirement for each them partially
or fully.
The allocation of PPAs by Intermediary Company to retail supply companies would initially be done taking into
consideration the business plan (approved by commission) submitted by the retail supply companies. As the
market matures the allocation could be done on actual market share basis.
Combining the various mechanisms available to new Retail Supply Company and Intermediary Company, the
following 6 possible approaches can be developed for allocating PPAs
D6A:
RSL IC Market | IC ISL RSL
New Retail Supply Company mandatorily asks and accepts power/PPA from IC. IC fulfils the power
requirements of incumbent supply company, and then allocates power/PPA to new Retail Supply
Company.
D6B:
RSL Market IC | IC ISL RSL
New Retail Supply Company first goes to market or generators to procure power then ask IC for any
remaining requirement. IC fulfils the power requirements of incumbent supply company, and then
allocates power/PPA to new Retail Supply Company.
D6C:
RSL IC Market | IC RSL ISL
New Retail Supply Company mandatorily asks and accepts power/PPA from IC. IC fulfils the power
requirements of new retail supply company first and then allocates power/PPA to incumbent retail
supply company.
D6D:
RSL Market IC | IC RSL ISL
remaining requirement. IC fulfils the power requirements of new retail supply company first and then
allocates power/PPA to incumbent retail supply company.
D6E:
RSL IC Market | IC Proportionate allocation
New Retail Supply Company mandatorily asks and accepts power from IC. IC based on a formula
allocates power/PPA to all retail suppliers to meet partial or complete requirements for each of them.
D6F:
RSL Market IC | IC Proportionate allocation
remaining requirement. IC based on a formula allocates power/PPA to all retail suppliers to meet
partial or complete requirements for each of them.
PwC
92
PPA allocation approaches
Mechanism
by new
supplier
Mechanism by Intermediary Company

a (first incumbent)
b (first new supplier)
c (allocation to all)
1 (IC first)
D6A
D6C
D6E
2 (Market first)
D6B
D6D
D6F
However based on the market conditions, each of the approaches discussed above could have different
outcomes for suppliers as well as the Intermediary Company. There are two aspects of the market conditions
that need to be taken care of while evaluating the above mentioned approaches of PPA allocation
Availability of Energy: whether the state under review is energy surplus or deficit
o
Energy Deficit States - There isnt enough tied up generation capacity in the market to make
new PPAs
Energy Surplus States If the new retail supply company enters into new PPAs, the
Intermediary company could be left with surplus PPAs which it would not be able to pay for in
case new retail supply companies break away consumers of incumbent supply company
Cost of PPAs: whether the existing PPAs are expensive or cheaper than the power available in the
market
o
Existing PPAs are expensive than the power available in the market
Existing PPAs are cheaper than the power available in the market
Therefore there are following possible market scenarios

Market Scenarios
Cost of PPAs
Availability of Energy
Energy Surplus
Energy Deficit
PPAs expensive
than market
III
PPAs cheaper
than market
II
IV
In order to simulate the opportunity gain/loss for all entities in case of each approach discussed above, under
various market scenarios discussed above, illustrations are shown in appendix 3 of this report.
Therefore based on the market scenario (energy deficit or energy surplus) of respective states and the risk
appetite of State Governments to allow loss to Intermediary Company, one of the approaches will have to be
adopted that best suits the respective states. The selection of approach can be guided by the following factors
Approach adopted should be such that financial losses to Intermediary Company can be avoided, as the
Intermediary Company would not have any assets to setoff these losses
Approach adopted should be such that any opportunity gain or loss to be made by retail supply
companies gets distributed among them proportionately.
After deciding upon the approach to be followed for allocation of PPAs between IC and retail supply companies
the following questions would also need discussion ile forming the roll out plan of individual states 1. Who bears the financial loss in case Intermediary Company is unable to fulfil its PPA
obligations The IC may not pay generators for their PPAs if Retail Supply Companies either refuse
PwC
93
to take on the PPAs or are unable to make timely payments. In such a scenario who would bear the
financial loss is an issue for discussion. The possible approaches in such a scenario could be:
i.
State Government Support the state government could fund the losses of Intermediary
Company.
ii.
Socialisation through universal charge the losses could be passed on to all consumers
of all retail supply companies in the form of a universal charge.
2. PPA or Power allocation - There can be two approaches for allocation of PPAs:
i.
Allocation of PPA Individual PPAs are allocated to various retail supply companies. In this
case the Retail Supply Company will have to pay the power purchase costs as per the PPA
allocated to them.
ii.
Allocation of power The Intermediary Company could allocate power to Retail Supply
Companies i.e. the PPAs could be broken or combined to meet power requirements of Retail
Supply Companies.
3. Parameters basis which allocation will be done as per the 3rd mechanism by Intermediary
Company could allocated PPAs between Retail Supply Companies, a formula will need to be derived for
allocation taking into consideration factors like Duration of PPAs, average/peak demand of consumers
with each Supply company, consumer mix of Supply companies, size of PPAs, etc.
4. Price for allocation: In case the allocation is done of power and not actual PPA, the price at which
the power would be allocated would be the next issue. The following approaches can be adopted for
determining the price which will be charged from Retail Supply Companies by Intermediary Company
for allocated power:
i.
Uniform/Average cost: Intermediary companies can charge an average power purchase cost to
all retail supply companies.
ii.
Differential Bulk Supply Tariff: A formula is derived wherein each individual Retail Supply
Company is charged a different power purchase price by the Intermediary Company.
It is to be noted that the rate at which power is allocated to various Supply Companies
by the Intermediary Company could lead to inter-regional or inter-category cross
subsidies.
5. Fixed or Dynamic allocation of PPAs/Power when multiple retail supply companies would
exist, the allocation of PPAs between them can be done in two ways, fixed or dynamic. One of the
following approaches would have to be selected for allocation of PPAs
i.
Fixed Allocation of PPAs/Power The PPAs could be allocated between various retail supply
companies based on certain parameters. In case consumers shift from one retail supply
company to another, leaving a supply company power surplus while other retail supply
company power deficit, the retail supply companies can trade power between them to account
for such imbalance.
An issue of deliberation will be that how fixed allocation of PPAs will be revised if a new retail
supply company comes in a supply area. An approach would be revisiting the fixed allocation
factors each time a new retail supply company gets added.
ii.
Dynamic Allocation of PPAs/Power The initial allocation of PPAs between the Retail Supply
Companies is refreshed at fixed intervals (as decided by the appropriate Commission or
regulatory body) based on factors like consumer mix, number of consumers, energy sales or
connected load of each Retail Supply Company at the end of this interval.
The pros and cons of these issues are as follows
PwC
94
Approach
Pros
Cons
Regarding price of allocating PPAs
Actual cost of PPA
Ease of settlement between

generator and retail supply
company
Certain Retail Supply Companies

could get stuck with costlier
PPAs or PPAs which expire soon
Inter-regional or inter-category
cross subsidies could get created
Uniform/Average cost
Level playing field could be

created for all retail supply
companies
Settlement with generators due

to several escalable and non
escalable components could
become an issue
Differential Bulk Supply

Tariff
Could be used as a tool for cross

subsidy management
Inter-regional or inter-category
cross subsidies could get created
No need to define consumer

switching frequency. Supply
companies will have to trade
power among themselves to
account for any change in
consumer base
Mechanism would have to be

developed for trading among
retail supply companies
Accounting for different

duration of PPAs would become
more complex due to inability to
refresh allocation based on
consumer base of supplier
Will allow Intermediary Company

to adopt for any changes in power
scenario in future
The frequency at which

consumers would be allowed to
switch supplier would have to be
linked with frequency of
dynamic allocation of PPAs
Regarding allocation mechanism
Fixed allocation of
PPAs/Power
Dynamic allocation of
PPAs/Power
PwC
95
Alternative roll out plans for

introduction of retail supply
competition
As discussed in the previous sections, for the introduction of competition in retail sale of electricity, several
tasks would have to be performed in three stages namely functional separation, preparation for competition and
onset of competition. Further we highlighted several issues that may arise while implementing these tasks and
possible approaches to resolve each of these issues. These approaches were then evaluated based on various
sector scenarios and contributing factors. Since the sector scenarios and contributing factors may vary from
state to state in India and also the interpretation of these factors may vary, we have devised alternative roll out
plans based on these variations.
Various current scenarios

Factors based on which various current scenarios can be defined, are as follows
Current level of Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses: based on the current level of
losses, the responsibility of AT&C losses is allocated between Distribution and Supply Functions.
Further based on the loss allocation the metering responsibility is also given to either Retail Supply or
Distribution functions. The possible scenarios for current level of losses are defined as follows o
High where the T&D losses (AT&C loss less collection inefficiency loss) are more than 15%
Low where the T&D losses (AT&C loss less collection inefficiency loss) are less than or equal to
15%
Availability of Power: based on the availability levels of power in a state, the approach towards
Transfer of existing PPAs from current Discom to Intermediary Company and Allocation of PPAs
between retail supply companies are decided. The possible scenarios for availability of power are
defined as follows o
Energy Surplus where the current Discom has power procurement arrangements for more
than its energy requirement
Energy Deficit where the current Discom has power procurement arrangements for less than
its energy requirement
Based on the permutation and combinations of these factors, 4 scenarios are defined and a roll out plan is
devised for each of these scenarios.
Treatment of issues/tasks for 4 scenarios

The treatment of various issues/tasks for 4 scenarios would be as follows
Allocation of Technical and Commercial Losses and Metering Services:

o
There are three possible approaches to allocate losses between Distribution and Retail Supply
businesses.
PwC
96
Type of Loss
Allocation to Approach (D2A)

Distribution
Approach (D2B)
Distribution
Approach (D2C)
Distribution
Theft by Hooking
Distribution
Distribution
Retail Supply
Inaccurate metering
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Theft by Meter tampering/bypassing
Distribution
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Retail Supply
Technical
Commercial
However out of these, approach 2 (D2B) requires high level of metering in order to distinguish
between hooking losses and other commercial losses. Since the level of metering is low and
unreliable in majority of the license areas, this approach would be very difficult to implement.
Therefore based on the current level of losses in a respective license area, either approach 1 (D2A)
or approach 3 (D2C) can be adopted.
Further the approach to be adopted towards metering would depend on the approach adopted
towards loss allocation. There are five possible approaches for the metering services.
Approach/Activity
Meter Reading
Other Meter related
Approach 1 (D3A)
3rd Party
Approach 2 (D3B)
Approach 3 (D3C)
Approach 4 (D3D)
3rd Party
3rd Party
Approach 5 (D3E)
However since the Electricity Amendment Bill 2014, does not envisage the metering service to be a
separate licensed activity, a 3rd party metering company (if any) would not be governed by SERC
regulations. In such a scenario the responsibility of metering related activities would lie with either
retail supply or distribution business itself, who can then outsource a particular activity to a 3rd
party company. Therefore based on the approach adopted towards loss allocation, either approach
2 (D3B), approach 3 (D3C) or approach 5 (D3E) can be adopted.
o
Scenario - High current level of losses:
Allocation of Technical and Commercial losses - In license areas where the current level of
losses is high, the balance sheet of distribution business may not be able to sustain these
losses. Therefore the entire commercial losses could be allocated to the retail supply business.
This translates to approach 3 (D2C) of loss allocation.
Metering - Further in this scenario since majority of the losses are allocated to retail supply
business the metering responsibility is also allocated to the retail supply business as per
approach 2 (D3B) of metering services.
Scenario - Low current level of losses:
Allocation of Technical and Commercial losses - In license areas where the current level of
losses is on the lower side, the commercial losses other than collection inefficiency could be
allocated to the distribution business. This translates to approach 1 (D2A) of loss allocation.
PwC
97
Metering - Further in this scenario since majority of the losses are allocated to distribution
business the metering responsibility is also allocated to the distribution business as per
approach 3 (D3C) of metering services.
Transfer and Allocation of PPAs:

o
As discussed earlier in the section Stages of introducing retail supply competition under the
heading Transfer of existing PPAs, there are three approaches for transferring PPAs to the
Intermediary Company, as follows
Transfer all PPAs of current Discom to Intermediary Company
Transfer select PPAs of current Discoms to Intermediary Company (for instance certain
expensive PPAs can be dissolved i.e. their power is to be sold through wholesale market while
the remaining PPAs to be transferred to Intermediary Company)
Transfer partial PPAs of current Discoms to Intermediary Company (a certain percentage of

power from all PPAs could be transferred to Intermediary Company while the rest of the power
to be sold in wholesale market)
Detailed analysis of the power procurement arrangements of the existing Discom would have to
done in order identify the right approach for shifting of PPAs to a wholesale market (by either
transfer of select PPAs or transfer of partial PPAs). However based on the availability of Power, it
can be decided whether all PPAs should be transferred to the Intermediary Company or some PPAs
can be shifted to the wholesale market.
o
There are six possible approaches to PPA allocation.

PPA allocation
approaches
Mechanism by Intermediary Company

a (first incumbent)
b (first new supplier)
c (allocation to all)
Mechanism
by new
supplier
1 (IC first)
D6A: RSL IC Market |

IC ISL RSL
D6C: RSL Market IC |

IC RSL ISL
D6E: RSL IC Market |

IC proportionate allocation
2 (Market
first)
D6B: RSL Market IC |

IC ISL RSL
D6D: RSL Market IC |

IC RSL ISL
D6F: RSL Market IC |

IC proportionate allocation
Based on the illustrations (in appendix 3), in order to distribute any potential opportunity gain/loss
proportionately among all retail supply companies and in order to avoid financial losses to the
Intermediary Company, either approach 5 (D6E) or approach 6 (D6F) can be adopted.
o
Scenario - Energy Surplus:
Transfer of existing PPAs under this scenario, some of the PPAs which are in addition to
the energy requirements, could be shifted to wholesale market in order to promote efficiency
in power procurement of retail suppliers.
Allocation of PPAs in an energy surplus scenario, approach 5 (D6E) of PPA allocation could
be adopted for matching the power demand of Retail Supply Companies with the power
supply of Intermediary Company. As per this approach the Intermediary Company allocates
power proportionately between all Retail Supply Companies and the Retail Supply
Companies have to mandatorily accept this power. The RSL is mandated to accept power
from Intermediary Company because in an energy surplus scenario, any power left
unallocated with the intermediary company could cause financial loss to the Intermediary
Company.
PwC
98
Scenario - Energy Deficit:
Transfer of existing PPAs - in an energy deficit scenario, there would be no improvement in

power procurement efficiency by shifting PPAs to wholesale market, as the generators in an
energy deficit scenario would have undue bargaining power in a wholesale market and could
inflate electricity prices. Therefore in this scenario, all the existing PPAs are transferred to the
Intermediary Company.
Allocation of PPAs - in an energy deficit scenario, approach 6 (D6F) of PPA allocation could
be adopted for matching the power demand of Retail Supply Companies with the power
supply of Intermediary Company. As per this approach the Intermediary Company allocates
power proportionately between all Retail Supply Companies However the RSL has the option
to procure power from market first and then approach Intermediary Company for any
additional requirements. The RSL is allowed to procure power from market first because in
an energy deficit scenario, the ISL should be able to lift all existing PPAs from Intermediary
Company reducing the chances of any financial loss to the Intermediary Company.
Treatment of other major issues/tasks

The approach to be adopted for issues and tasks discussed below are not dependent on the current scenario of
the state/Discom, and therefore would remain same across all alternative roll out plans.
Universal Service Obligation in order to prevent cherry picking among retail supply companies,
the USO would be applicable on all retail supply companies for consumer categories open for
competition. For RSLs, the USO would apply for contestable consumers i.e. consumers which are open
to competition, while for ISL the USO would be applicable on all consumers.
Issue/Approach
Approach 1 (D5A)
Approach 2 (D5B)

competition

USO obligation on all Retail

Supply Companies
For consumer not

open to competition


USO Obligation
Cross Subsidy as discussed in the section Stages of introducing retail supply competition under
the heading Reduction of Cross Subsidies there are four possible approaches for reduction of cross
subsidies, as follows:
S. No.
Approaches for cross subsidy reduction
Year on Year tariff hikes
Universal Charge (UC) fund
Limiting subsidies to wheeling charges
Direct Subsidy from State Government
Considering high level of cross subsidies for some categories in certain states, the approach of Year on
Year tariff hikes could lead to tariff shocks. Also the wheeling charges may not be sufficient to subsume
the high level of cross subsidies. Therefore either approach 2 of UC fund or approach 4 of Direct
PwC
99
Subsidy could be adopted. Irrespective of the current scenarios of the state/Discom, any of these two
approaches could be adopted towards cross subsidy reduction.
Consumer Database in order to ensure an independent approach and neutral access of consumer
database to all retail supply companies, the database could be maintained by the Distribution
Company. The retail suppliers would collect and share data with distribution business regarding the
consumers under their respective jurisdiction. The distribution company would share this database
with commissions, intermediary company, retail supply companies and any other player as required.
Provider of Last Resort after the introduction of retail supply competition, the responsibility of
POLR during the first year would lie with the incumbent retail supply licensee. Later on the appropriate
SERC may define the supplier which is to act as POLR for retail consumers.
Consumer Interface there are three approaches for the consumer interface, as follows
S. No.
1
Approaches for consumer interface

Single window interface by Retail Supply Companies
Single window interface by Distribution Company
Separate interface by Retail Supply and Distribution Company
In order to facilitate ease of access to consumers the approach of single window can be adopted instead
of separate interface by Distribution Company and Retail Supply Company. Further since the retail
supply company would handle the commercial part of the electricity business, they can create better
synergies and operational efficiencies in consumer service as well. Therefore for consumer interface,
approach 1 could be adopted wherein a single window interface is provided by Retail Supply
Companies.
Consumer Switch mechanism regarding the frequency of consumer switching, a one year lock in
period could be kept i.e. after a consumer switches its retail supplier, he/she will have to continue with
that retail supplier for at least next one year. This period can be reduced later by the appropriate
commission as required. In case dynamic PPA allocation approach is adopted i.e. the quantum of PPAs
allocated between various retail supply companies is revised at a certain frequency, the time of lock in
period could also be liked with that frequency. This would help retail supply companies in managing
their business planning and demand forecasting activities.
Standards of Performance based on the segregation of roles and responsibilities between the
retail supply and distribution business, the Standards of Performance for each business would have to
be defined separately.
Tariff Determination the appropriate SERCs would have to determine un-bundled tariffs
separately for Distribution and Retail Supply businesses. The Distribution business being a monopoly
business would be allowed a regulated tariff. Regarding the tariff for retail supply business, for noncontestable consumers i.e. consumers not open for competition, the appropriate SERCs would
determine regulated tariffs while for contestable consumers i.e. consumers open for competition, the
appropriate SERCs would determine a ceiling tariff. The need for determining ceiling tariff may be
reviewed by SERCs in future in case sufficient competition exists.
Phasing of Retail Supply Competition phasing of retail supply competition refers to practice of
gradually opening up the consumer base to competition i.e. allowing new retail supply companies to
compete for only certain sections of consumer base initially and then gradually adding other consumer
sections to this contestable consumer base. There are several factors basis which the phasing of
competition can be done. These factors are connected load of consumer, energy consumption of
PwC
100
consumer, area of supply or consumer category. Further the phasing can be done in an increasing or
decreasing fashion based on these factors.
S. No.
1
Approaches for Phasing of competition

Increasing connected load
Decreasing connected load
Increasing energy consumption
Decreasing energy consumption
Based on area of supply
Based on consumer category
Under the decreasing connected load or decreasing energy consumption method the consumers with
higher connected load or energy consumption would be opened for competition first and then gradually
decreasing the limit to allow other consumers into purview of competition. On the other hand under the
increasing connected load or increasing energy consumption method the consumers with lower
connected load or energy consumption would be opened to competition first and gradually the limit
would be increased. Since it is difficult to determine area wise/circle wise losses and costs, phasing
based on area of supply would be difficult to implement. Similarly using consumer category as a factor
would require determining consumer category wise losses which would also be difficult to implement.
Further using energy consumption as a factor would pose operational difficulties in identifying
consumers open for competition as the energy consumption of a consumer could change frequently.
Therefore the approach to be adopted towards phasing could be either increasing connected load or
decreasing connected load of consumers.
Phasing based on Increasing Connected Load: Increasing connected load approach

will help in driving efficiency improvement through loss reduction among consumers with
lower connected loads like LT consumers. Since LT consumers could account for a major part
of commercial losses, new retail supply companies could target loss reduction among such
consumers so as benefit form efficiency improvements. Also excluding HT/EHT consumers
from the retail supply competition in initial phases would prevent cherry picking (in case
cross subsidies are not removed completely). However this approach of phasing, coupled
with USO, might be difficult to implement and become a non-starter for reforms for large
states. This approach may be adopted in smaller states/UTs like Chandigarh, Goa and
Puducherry etc.
Phasing based on decreasing connected load: as per this approach the competition is
first opened to consumers with higher connected load. Such consumers are generally
connected at HT/EHT voltage levels and form a smaller number of consumers with higher
average billing per consumer. This approach would allow retail supply companies to develop
resources for tackling a bigger consumer base later on and acclimatise to change in
regulations.
Since increasing connected load approach is difficult to implement, a hybrid approach could be
followed wherein decreasing connected load approach is adopted but with a mandatory requirement of
urban/rural consumer mix.
PwC
101
Balancing and Settlement there are two approaches possible as follows

S. No.
1
2
Approaches for balancing and settlmement

Making Advanced Metering compulsory for new retail supply
companies
Based on consumer category wise sample load curve
Since going forward, advanced metering would be required for better operational management and loss
reduction, approach 1 of making Advanced Metering compulsory for new retail supply companies can
be adopted. While adopting this approach may burden the new retail supply companies with higher
metering costs, this risk would be known to any new retail supplier entering the business and thus can
be suitable hedged for. As a transitional mechanism, as decided by the appropriate SERC, till such time
advanced metering is not available for all consumers, the balancing and settlement may be carried out
using category wise sample load curves. Also as more data is available the process of determining
sample load curves would also improve.
Current level
of losses
High
Low
Technical Loss Distribution

All other Losses - Retail Supply
Collection Loss Retail Supply

All other Losses - Distribution

Meter installation/ownership - Retail Supply
Availability
of Power
Energy
Surplus
Energy
Deficit

market

market
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
RSL buys power from
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
RSL buys power from
IC allocates PPA
proportionately
Energy
Deficit
Roll Out
Plan 1
Factors
common for
all scenarios

Meter installation/ownership - Distribution
Roll Out
Plan 2
Cross Subsidy reduced via

UC fund or direct subsidy
USO on all Suppliers
Mandatory advanced metering

for RSLs to facilitate
Consumer database
POLR on ISL for first year,
maintained by Distribution later as decided by SERC
*Caveat of phasing based on
increasing connected load
Roll Out
Plan 3
Consumer Interface
with retail suppliers
Energy
Surplus
Roll Out
Plan 4
1 year lock in period

after consumer switch
Tariff determination:
Distribution Regulated tariff
Supply Ceiling for contestable consumer,
Regulated for non contestable consumer
Separate SOPs for

distribution & supply
Phasing based on decreasing or increasing

connected load or hybrid mode*
Majority number of consumers would have connected load of less than 20 kW, opening competition to a large
consumer base at a go. This coupled with USO, might be difficult to implement and become a non starter for reforms.
As such a feasible option is to phase out based on decreasing load but with mandatory requirement of urban/rural
consumer mix.
PwC
102
Classification of states/utilities
Based on the current levels of Distribution losses (AT&C excluding collection inefficiency loss), availability of
power and cost of power purchase, the Indian states/utilities are classified as follows
Scenario
States/Utilities
Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar (BSEB, NBPDCL, SBPDCL), Chhattisgarh, Jammu & Kashmir,
Jharkhand, Karnataka (CHESCOM, GESCOM, HESCOM), Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram,
Nagaland, Odisha (CESU, NESCO, SESCO, WESCO), Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh (DVVN,
KESCO, MVVN, Pasch VVN, Poorv VVN), Uttarakhand
Gujarat (PGVCL), Haryana (DHBVNL, UHBVNL), Madhya Pradesh (Madhya Kshetra VVCL,
Paschim Kshetra VVCL, Purv Kshetra VVCL), Punjab, Rajasthan (AVVNL, JDVVNL, JVVNL),
Sikkim, West Bengal
Andhra Pradesh (APCPDCL, APEPDCL, APNPDCL, APSPDCL), Karanataka (BESCOM,
MESCOM), Maharashtra (MSEDCL), Puducherry
Delhi (BRPL, BYPL, TPDDL), Goa, Gujarat (DGVCL, MGVCL, UGVCL), Himachal Pradesh
II
III
IV
The data for classification of these states is attached in appendix 4 of this report.
PwC
103
Roll Out Plan for Scenario I (applicable in states with high levels of losses and deficit power |
Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka (CHESCOM,
GESCOM, HESCOM), Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh,
Uttarakhand | Driving force for efficiency Loss Reduction and Power Procurement efficiency)
Roll Out Plan 1

Cross Subsidy
Loss
Allocation
Distribution
Business
Incumbent Supply
Business (ISL)
Universal Charge (UC) Fund

A UC fund will cover any revenue gap
created due to tariff realignments as per
cross subsidies reduction trajectory
Technical
Losses
New Retail Supply

Business (RSL)
or
Commercial Losses
(Hooking, Inaccurate metering, Meter
tampering/bypassing, collection inefficiency)
Losses to be measured voltage wise
SLDC
Direct Government Subsidy

The State Government funds the gap
between tariffs and cost of supply
Initial level of losses (technical and commercial)
to be estimated & factored in regulated tariff
with trajectory for reduction in subsequent
years. Loss reduction will be major driver for
efficiency in this plan.
Cherry Picking
Will not be an issue as cross subsidy and losses are taken care of as above
Phasing of
competition
Based on Decreasing Connected Load

Initially 100 kW and above
Later 20 kW and above
Further all consumers
For all consumers
USO
Regulatory
Assets & losses
Regulatory Assets
&
Un-recognised
financial losses
or
Based on Increasing Connected Load

Initially 20 kW and below
Later 100 kW and below

competition (as per
phasing)
Amortised using a Universal Charge (UC), or

Support from State Government, or
Hybrid approach of the two above methods
All PPAs are transferred
to IC
IC proportionately
allocates power between
all suppliers based on
consumer mix/load
RSL may approach market first for power

procurement
For any remaining requirement they go to
either wholesale market or enter into new
PPAs
PPA Allocation
Intermediary
Company (IC)
Meter Reading, and

Other activities
(Meter installation/replacement, ownership of
metering assets, meter operations and testing)
Metering
Advanced metering
mandatory for RSL
Balancing &
Settlement
Existing arrangement
of energy accounting
at Distribution
periphery to continue
Suppliers give schedule to SLDC. Payment to generators based on this

Actual consumption of Suppliers measured using Advanced metering.
These are then used for deviation settlement.
POLR
On ISL in 1st year
Consumer
Interface
1st time connection, Billing, Complaints and

Grievances
After 1st year, as decided by SERC
Switching
One year of lock in period after switching, to start with (to be reviewed by the regulator subsequently)
SOP
Separate SOPs for Retail Supply and Distribution Business

To be enforced by regulator
Tariff
Determination
Regulated Tariff
Consumer
Database
Owned and
Maintained
Distribution
Functions
Network Ops (DNO)

Planning Ops (DPO)
System Ops (DSO)
Market Ops (DMO)
Consumers not open to

competition Regulated
Consumers open to competition Ceiling Tariff
Data collected and shared with Distribution
business
PwC
104
Stage Wise Flow Chart for Roll Out Plan I (Stage 1)

Roll Out Plan 1- Stage 1
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Distribution
Network Co.
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Same ownership
License
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
PPAs
Handling
Regulatory assets
Handling cross
subsidies
Roles and
Responsibility
Financial Losses
Regulatory Assets
Amortisation via
UC Charge, or
Govt. Fund, or
Hybrid

Issue: whether
Multiple Discoms
allowed?
Network operation
Co-ordination with
Transco
Power procurement
Meter reading
Billing and
Collection
Consumer interface
Meter related
By Retail Supply
Company
Same/separate
entities
Single window (for

new connection,
billing, complaint etc.)
Two layers
Supply Restoration
Call Centre ops
New line/connection
Category Change
Shifting of line
Temporary Supply
Disconnection
Bill Complaints
Reconnection
Name transfer
Meter related
Quality of Supply
Consumer grievance
redressal mechanism
Performance
Standards
USO
SERC allows
A&G
Tariff
B/S Segregation
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
Part/Full recovery allowed via State Govt. Fund
Consumer
interface
Dist. System Ops
All PPA transferred

to Intermediary Co.
Existing PPA
transfer
Current Assets
Metering function
Duty to Connect
Duty to Supply
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
Before metering
Receivables
Bad Debts
Related to Power
Purchase
Metering and Beyond
Consumer Contracts
payments
HR Planning

As-is Study

Scenario at the
end of this stage
PwC
105

Roll Out Plan 1 - Stage 2
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
Technical and
Commercial Loss
Distribution
Network Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Incumbent Supply Co.

Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
Technical Loss
Commercial loss
(Hooking, inaccurate
metering, meter
tamper/ bypass,
collection efficiency)
Metering
function
By Retail Supply
Company
Cross Subsidy
Reduced by
UC Charge, or
State Govt. direct
subsidy
Consumer
Database
Issue:
Scenario at the
end of this stage
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
Gradual replacement
by Advanced meters
Up-gradation of
metering
Tariff
Dist. System Ops
SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
regulated tariff Capital Cost
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
PwC
106

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Distribution Co.
Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
New
entity
Current
license area
Current
license area
Current
license area
All PPAs transferred,

Proportionate allocation
to all suppliers
Allocation of
Actual PPAs, or
Power (MW)
Dynamic allocation
Pricing
Uniform
Actual cost
DBST
By Retail
Supply
Company
Dist. System Ops

Dist. Planning Ops
Dist. Market Ops
RSL may go to market for power

procurement first and then go to IC
for any remaining requirements.
ISL accepts power from IC first and
then go to market for any
remaining requirements.
One year of lock-in period after

switching (to start with)
Demand
aggregation

generators/Wholesale
Mandatory
Advanced Meter
Balancing and
settlement
Tariff
Metering
function
Based on decreasing connected load:

OR based on increasing connected load:
Consumer switch
Mechanism
Procurement of
new PPAs
Retail Supply
Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Phasing

of existing PPA
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Payment to generators based on

schedule given by supplier
Actual consumption of Suppliers
measured using AMR, used for
deviation settlement.
SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
regulated tariff Capital cost
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
SERC sets
Celling tariff
applicable on
all Supply Co.
for consumers
open for
competition

or not allowed
POLR
USO
With incumbent
Tariff for POLR
Regulated, or
Competitive, or
Ceiling, or
Actual Cost
USO
for all
USO for
consumer open
to competition
PwC
107
Roll Out Plan for Scenario II (applicable in states with high levels of losses and surplus power |
Gujarat (PGVCL), Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, West Bengal | Driving force for
efficiency Loss Reduction and Power Procurement efficiency)
Roll Out Plan 2

Cross Subsidy
Loss
Allocation
Distribution
Business
Incumbent Supply
Business (ISL)

Technical
Losses
New Retail Supply

Business (RSL)
or
Commercial Losses
(Hooking, Inaccurate metering, Meter
tampering/bypassing, collection inefficiency)
Losses to be measured voltage wise
SLDC

years. Loss reduction will be major driver for
efficiency in this plan.
Cherry Picking
Phasing of
competition

For all consumers
USO
Regulatory
Assets & losses
Regulatory Assets
&
Un-recognised
financial losses
or


competition (as per
phasing)

to IC or some PPAs
shifted to market
IC proportionately
consumer mix/load
All suppliers mandatorily accept power from

IC first
PPAs
PPA Allocation
Intermediary
Company (IC)
Meter Reading, and

Other activities
(Meter installation/replacement, ownership of
metering assets, meter operations and testing)
Metering
Advanced metering
mandatory for RSL
Balancing &
Settlement
at Distribution

POLR
On ISL in 1st year
Consumer
Interface

Grievances
Switching
SOP

Tariff
Determination
Regulated Tariff
Consumer
Database
Owned and
Maintained
Distribution
Functions
Network Ops (DNO)

Planning Ops (DPO)
System Ops (DSO)
Market Ops (DMO)

business
PwC
108
Stage Wise Flow Chart for Roll Out Plan II (Stage 1)

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Distribution
Network Co.
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Same ownership
License
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
PPAs
Handling
Regulatory assets
Handling cross
subsidies
Roles and
Responsibility
Financial Losses
Existing PPA
transfer
Regulatory Assets
Amortisation via
UC Charge, or
Govt. Fund, or
Hybrid

Issue: whether
Multiple Discoms
allowed?
Network operation
Co-ordination with
Transco
Power procurement
Meter reading
Billing and
Collection
Consumer interface
Meter related
By Retail Supply
Company
Same/separate
entities
Single window (for

new connection,
Two layers
Supply Restoration
Call Centre ops
New line/connection
Category Change
Shifting of line
Temporary Supply
Disconnection
Bill Complaints
Reconnection
Name transfer
Meter related
Quality of Supply
Performance
Standards
USO
SERC allows
A&G
Tariff
B/S Segregation
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
All PPA transferred to

IC or some PPA shifted
to market.
Consumer grievance
redressal mechanism
Dist. System Ops
Consumer
interface
Current Assets
Metering function
Duty to Connect
Duty to Supply
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
Before metering
Receivables
Bad Debts
Related to Power
Purchase
Metering and Beyond
Consumer Contracts
payments
HR Planning

As-is Study

Scenario at the
end of this stage
PwC
109

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
Technical and
Commercial Loss
Distribution
Network Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent

Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
Technical Loss
Commercial loss
(Hooking, inaccurate
metering, meter
tamper/ bypass,
collection efficiency)
Metering
function
By Retail Supply
Company
Cross Subsidy
Reduced by
UC Charge, or
State Govt. direct
subsidy
Consumer
Database
Issue:
Scenario at the
end of this stage
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
Gradual replacement
by Advanced meters
Up-gradation of
metering
Tariff
Dist. System Ops
SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
PwC
110

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Distribution Co.
Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
New
entity
Current
license area
Current
license area
Current
license area
Proportionate
allocation by IC to all
suppliers
Allocation of
Actual PPAs, or
Power (MW)
Dynamic allocation
Pricing
Uniform
Actual cost
DBST
By Retail
Supply
Company
Dist. System Ops

Dist. Planning Ops
Dist. Market Ops
All suppliers accept power from IC

first and then go to market for any

Demand
aggregation

Mandatory
Advanced Meter
Balancing and
settlement
Tariff
Metering
function

Consumer switch
Mechanism
Procurement of
new PPAs
Retail Supply
Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Phasing

of existing PPA
Incumbent
Supply Co.

SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
SERC sets
Celling tariff
applicable on
all Supply Co.
for consumers
open for
competition

or not allowed
POLR
USO
With incumbent
Tariff for POLR
Regulated, or
Competitive, or
Ceiling, or
Actual Cost
USO
for all
USO for
consumer open
to competition
PwC
111
Roll Out Plan for Scenario III (applicable in states with low levels of losses and deficit power |
Andhra Pradesh, Karanataka (BESCOM, MESCOM), Maharashtra (MSEDCL), Puducherry | Driving force for
efficiency Power Procurement efficiency)
Roll Out Plan 3

Cross Subsidy
Loss
Allocation
Distribution
Business
Incumbent Supply
Business (ISL)

All other Losses
(technical,
hooking, meter
tampering/bypass)
New Retail Supply

Business (RSL)
or
Collection inefficiency Losses
SLDC

years. Power Procurement efficiency will be
driver for efficiency in this plan.
Cherry Picking
Phasing of
competition

For all consumers
USO
Regulatory
Assets & losses
Regulatory Assets
&
Un-recognised
financial losses


competition (as per
phasing)

to IC
IC proportionately
consumer mix/load
RSL may approach market first for power

procurement
PPAs
PPA Allocation
Metering
or
Intermediary
Company (IC)
Meter Reading
Other activities
(install/replace,
ownership of assets,
operations & testing)
Advanced metering
mandatory for RSL
Balancing &
Settlement
at Distribution

POLR
On ISL in 1st year
Consumer
Interface

Grievances
Switching
SOP

Tariff
Determination
Regulated Tariff
Consumer
Database
Owned and
Maintained
Distribution
Functions
Network Ops (DNO)

Planning Ops (DPO)
System Ops (DSO)
Market Ops (DMO)

business
PwC
112
Stage Wise Flow Chart for Roll Out Plan III (Stage 1)
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Distribution
Network Co.
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Same ownership
License
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
PPAs
Handling
Regulatory assets
Handling cross
subsidies
Roles and
Responsibility
Financial Losses
Regulatory Assets
Amortisation via
UC Charge, or
Govt. Fund, or
Hybrid

Issue: whether
Multiple Discoms
allowed?
Network operation
Co-ordination with
Transco
Meter related
Power procurement
Meter reading
Billing and
Collection
Consumer interface
By Retail Supply
Company
Same/separate
entities
Single window (for

new connection,
Two layers
Supply Restoration
Call Centre ops
New line/connection
Category Change
Shifting of line
Temporary Supply
Disconnection
Bill Complaints
Reconnection
Name transfer
Meter related
Quality of Supply
Consumer grievance
redressal mechanism
Performance
Standards
USO
SERC allows
A&G
Tariff
B/S Segregation
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
Consumer
interface
Dist. System Ops
All PPA transferred

to Intermediary Co.
Existing PPA
transfer
Current Assets
Metering function
Duty to Connect
Duty to Supply
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
Metering and before

Receivables
Bad Debts
Related to Power
Purchase
Beyond Metering
Consumer Contracts
payments
HR Planning

As-is Study

Scenario at the
end of this stage
PwC
113
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
Technical and
Commercial Loss
Distribution
Network Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent

Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
Other losses
(Technical, Hooking,
inaccurate metering,
meter tamper/ bypass)
Collection efficiency
loss
Metering
function
By Retail Supply
Company
Cross Subsidy
Reduced by
UC Charge, or
State Govt. direct
subsidy
Consumer
Database
Issue:
Scenario at the
end of this stage
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
Gradual replacement
by Advanced meters
Up-gradation of
metering
Tariff
Dist. System Ops
SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
PwC
114
Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Distribution Co.
Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
New
entity
Current
license area
Current
license area
Current
license area
All PPAs transferred,

Proportionate allocation
to all suppliers
Allocation of
Actual PPAs, or
Power (MW)
Dynamic allocation
Pricing
Uniform
Actual cost
DBST
By Retail
Supply
Company
Dist. System Ops

Dist. Planning Ops
Dist. Market Ops
RSL may go to market for power

procurement first and then go to IC
for any remaining requirements.
ISL accepts power from IC first and
then go to market for any

Demand
aggregation

Mandatory
Advanced Meter
Balancing and
settlement
Tariff
Metering
function

Consumer switch
Mechanism
Procurement of
new PPAs
Retail Supply
Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Phasing

of existing PPA
Incumbent
Supply Co.

SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
SERC sets
Celling tariff
applicable on
all Supply Co.
for consumers
open for
competition

or not allowed
POLR
USO
With incumbent
Tariff for POLR
Regulated, or
Competitive, or
Ceiling, or
Actual Cost
USO
for all
USO for
consumer open
to competition
PwC
115
Roll Out Plan for Scenario IV (applicable in states with low levels of losses and surplus power |
Delhi (BRPL, BYPL, TPDDL), Goa, Gujarat (DGVCL, MGVCL, UGVCL), Himachal Pradesh | Driving force for
efficiency Power Procurement efficiency)
Roll Out Plan 4

Cross Subsidy
Loss
Allocation
Distribution
Business
Incumbent Supply
Business (ISL)

All other Losses
(technical,
hooking, meter
tampering/bypass)
New Retail Supply

Business (RSL)
or
Collection inefficiency Losses
SLDC

years. Power Procurement efficiency will be
driver for efficiency in this plan.
Cherry Picking
Phasing of
competition

For all consumers
USO
Regulatory
Assets & losses
Regulatory Assets
&
Un-recognised
financial losses


competition (as per
phasing)

to IC or some PPAs
shifted to market
IC proportionately
consumer mix/load
All suppliers mandatorily accept power from

IC first
PPAs
PPA Allocation
Metering
or
Intermediary
Company (IC)
Meter Reading
Other activities
(install/replace,
ownership of assets,
operations & testing)
Advanced metering
mandatory for RSL
Balancing &
Settlement
at Distribution

POLR
On ISL in 1st year
Consumer
Interface

Grievances
Switching
SOP

Tariff
Determination
Regulated Tariff
Consumer
Database
Owned and
Maintained
Distribution
Functions
Network Ops (DNO)

Planning Ops (DPO)
System Ops (DSO)
Market Ops (DMO)

business
PwC
116
Stage Wise Flow Chart for Roll Out Plan IV (Stage 1)

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Distribution
Network Co.
Incumbent
Supply Co.
Same ownership
License
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
PPAs
Handling
Regulatory assets
Handling cross
subsidies
Roles and
Responsibility
Financial Losses
Existing PPA
transfer
Regulatory Assets
Amortisation via
UC Charge, or
Govt. Fund, or
Hybrid

Issue: whether
Multiple Discoms
allowed?
Network operation
Co-ordination with
Transco
Meter related
Power procurement
Meter reading
Billing and
Collection
Consumer interface
By Retail Supply
Company
Same/separate
entities
Single window (for

new connection,
Two layers
Supply Restoration
Call Centre ops
New line/connection
Category Change
Shifting of line
Temporary Supply
Disconnection
Bill Complaints
Reconnection
Name transfer
Meter related
Quality of Supply
Performance
Standards
USO
SERC allows
A&G
Tariff
B/S Segregation
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
All PPA transferred to

IC or some PPA shifted
to market.
Consumer grievance
redressal mechanism
Dist. System Ops
Consumer
interface
Current Assets
Metering function
Duty to Connect
Duty to Supply
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
Metering and before

Receivables
Bad Debts
Related to Power
Purchase
Beyond Metering
Consumer Contracts
payments
HR Planning

As-is Study

Scenario at the
end of this stage
PwC
117

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Allocation of
Technical and
Commercial Loss
Distribution
Network Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent

Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
Other losses
(Technical, Hooking,
inaccurate metering,
meter tamper/ bypass)
Collection efficiency
Loss
Metering
function
By Retail Supply
Company
Cross Subsidy
Reduced by
UC Charge, or
State Govt. direct
subsidy
Consumer
Database
Issue:
Scenario at the
end of this stage
Dist. Planning Ops

Dist. Market Ops
Gradual replacement
by Advanced meters
Up-gradation of
metering
Tariff
Dist. System Ops
SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
PwC
118

Intermediary Co.
Ownership
Area of Supply
State wide, or
Discom wise
Distribution Co.
Divested by
incumbent or
Govt. Owned
New
entity
Current
license area
Current
license area
Current
license area
Proportionate
allocation by IC to all
suppliers
Allocation of
Actual PPAs, or
Power (MW)
Dynamic allocation
Pricing
Uniform
Actual cost
DBST
By Retail
Supply
Company
Dist. System Ops

Dist. Planning Ops
Dist. Market Ops
All suppliers accept power from IC

first and then go to market for any

Demand
aggregation

Mandatory
Advanced Meter
Balancing and
settlement
Tariff
Metering
function

Consumer switch
Mechanism
Procurement of
new PPAs
Retail Supply
Co.
Separate Co. of
incumbent
Phasing

of existing PPA
Incumbent
Supply Co.

SERC allows
A&G
SERC approves
Opex
Losses
SERC approves
Power purchase
Opex
Losses
SERC sets
Celling tariff
applicable on
all Supply Co.
for consumers
open for
competition

or not allowed
POLR
USO
With incumbent
Tariff for POLR
Regulated, or
Competitive, or
Ceiling, or
Actual Cost
USO
for all
USO for
consumer open
to competition
PwC
119
Impact of retail supply

competition
Achieving objectives of retail supply competition
As discussed in the section Introduction under the heading Objectives of introducing retail supply
competition of this report, there are several objectives which can be achieved by implementing the various roll
out plans of retail supply competition. Each roll out plan can become the driving factor for achieving one or
more of these objectives, as follows Objective
How can Retail Supply Competition help achieve this objective?
Improvement
in efficiency
and loss
reduction
The licensees can focus on their respective responsibilities.

Distribution company would focus entirely on technical and
operational efficiency, while the retail supplier would focus
entirely on power procurement and consumer interface
To give choice
to consumers
Choice allows consumers to differentiate between suppliers on

the parameters like quality of supply, supply tariffs and customer
service. This in turn puts pressure on Supply companies to
improve their services.
Owing to focused investments of distribution in network up
gradation and increased efficiencies in power procurement by
Retail Supply Competition, in the long run power availability to
consumers will improve.
In order to capture a greater market share in their supply area,
the retail supply companies would work towards improving
efficiency in power procurement.
Improved
access and
availability of
power
Efficient power
procurement
Roll out plans which help

in achieving this objective
Roll Out Plan 1 and 2
All Roll Out Plans
All Roll Out Plans
Roll Out Plan 2 and 4
From the above table it can be observed that irrespective of the roll out plan adopted, the introduction of retail
supply competition would impact consumers by helping in achieving objectives of giving choice to consumers
and improving access and availability of power. Further the roll out plan adopted can drive the following
objectives
Improvement in efficiency and loss reduction this can be the driven through roll out plans 1,
and 2 as the current scenario in these roll out plans would include high level of losses which in turn give
opportunity to new retail supply companies to bring in efficiencies.
Efficient power procurement this can be driven through roll out plans 2 and 4 wherein the
availability of power is surplus. In such a scenario new retail supply companies are allowed to procure
power from market first rather than the Intermediary Company and certain/partial PPAs are shifted to
wholesale market.
Benefits that can be derived out of retail supply competition by end consumers
Earlier in this section we discussed the various objectives that retail supply competition could drive. In this
section we discuss the various benefits that end consumers or other market participants can derive out of retail
supply competition, which are as follows
Reduction in tariffs: as more suppliers enter into business, competition among them would put
downward pressure on end consumer tariffs.
PwC
120
Innovative products for end consumers: as the competition in the market increases, suppliers
could come up with innovative products based on concepts of time based tariffs or easy payment plans
in order to acquire a larger market share. The new suppliers would look to offer an array of products
that match the varying consumer needs.
Dual fuel deal United Kingdom
Dual fuel energy tariff is an innovative product offered in UK, wherein a consumer gets both gas and
electricity from the same energy supplier. The consumer therefore has only one bill and one payment to
think about. Suppliers offered discounts to consumers on taking up this service.
Reducing market imperfections: the new retail suppliers or other market participants would enter
the market segments where incumbent supplier used to make extra normal profits and put a downward
pressure on costs as well as tariffs.
Increased use of renewable and clean sources of energy: retail supply companies in order to
extract maximum profit margins out of the competitive tariffs would want to reduce their costs.
Therefore suppliers would want to purchase power increasingly from either cheaper renewable sources
or more efficient and cleaner generation plants in order to save on their power purchase costs.
Efficiency in services: as competition in the market increases, the retail suppliers would not only
compete with each other on tariffs but also service related issues like response time to complaints,
guarantee of 24x7 power supply (or for say certain hours a day, depending upon the power availability
scenario).
Barriers which may prevent benefits of retail competition from reaching end
consumers
Little scope for differentiation electricity being a homogenous product, the differentiation that a
retail supplier can bring is not in the product itself but in its packaging and pricing. However retailing
activities represent a very small part of the electricity tariffs, therefore leaving limited space of creating
value additions for customers.
Network congestion the service of retail suppliers is limited by the physical capacity of the
network. Therefore even if a retail supply is able to procure power at cheaper rates, the physical flow of
the electricity could be affected by deficient network or network congestion at the distribution
companys end.
Switching costs there are three types of costs that a consumer (or a supplier on consumer behalf)
might have to bear in order to shift retail supplier, as follows:
o
Search Costs identifying the best possible retail supplier and comparing their offers.
Learning costs the efforts in understanding the business methods of the new retail
supplier, such as how to make bill payments or how to contact customer service. A customer
may have developed a long relationship with its incumbent retail suppliers support staff.
Transaction cost cost and efforts involved in ending the previous contracts with the
incumbent supplier and forming new ones with the new retail supplier.
The new retail supplier would have to offer services with benefits that outweigh these costs.
Indicators of a successful retail supply competition

Earlier in this section we discussed the various objectives that we expect to achieve with the implementation of
retail supply competition. However in order to objectively measure the successful implementation of retail
supply competition, the following parameters can be used as indicators
Number of retail suppliers operating in a license area
PwC
121
Percentage share of consumer switching retail supplier
Improvement in efficiency parameters like losses, availability of power etc.
Total amount of switching costs (an indirect indicator of barriers to consumer switch)
PwC
122
International Experience
Internationally, the competitive retail supply model has been implemented in a full-fledged manner in the
United Kingdom, New Zealand, Norway, Finland, Spain, certain States of Australia and United States of
America. It is currently under various stages of implementation in other countries such as the Philippines. Of
these, the United Kingdom and the Australian state of Victoria are widely regarded as successful models of
implementation where introducing competition in retail supply.
Three international experiences, viz. UK, Australia and Philippines are chosen as case studies for a detailed
study as the energy reforms process in these countries involved separate distribution and supply functions as
envisaged in the Indian context. In this section we discuss the relevant portions from the international
experience of these countries.
United Kingdom
Industry structure before introduction of retail supply competition
After World War II and before the introduction of privatisation reforms in 1989, the power sector of United
Kingdom, looked as follows
Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) owned and operated the transmission system and the
generating stations in England and Wales
14 area boards 12 in England and Wales and 2 in the south of Scotland, each constituted as a separate
public corporation, were responsible for the distribution and retail of electricity in its own region.
The Electricity Council exercised a co-ordinating role on matters of industry-wide concern.
The Electricity Act 1989 paved the way for restructuring and privatisation of the electricity industry in Great
Britain. The Act had provisions for privatization, introduction of competitive markets, and a system of
independent regulation. Some of the major changes in the sector were
On 31 March 1990, all coal-fired and oil-fired generating plants in England and Wales that had
previously been under the control of the state-owned Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) were
allocated (vested) to two new companies, National Power and Powergen.
The vertically integrated CEGB was split into 3 generating companies (National Power, Powergen and
Nuclear Electric) and one transmission company (National Grid Company i.e. NGC).
Regional area boards were replaced with 12 regional electricity companies (RECs) and the local
distribution systems were transferred to the RECs. In due course of time, the government also sold off
all 12 RECs.
Established the electricity pool as the wholesale market mechanism through which electricity was
traded in England and Wales.
Abolished the Electricity Council and created a system of independent regulation, headed by the
director general of electricity supply, covering England, Wales and Scotland, and supported by a
regulatory office, the Office of Electricity Regulation (Offer), to regulate the newly privatised electricity
industry.
PwC
123
Privatisation
The RECs were privatised in 1990 by public floatation on stock market. This was followed, on 12 March 1991, by
the floatation of National Power and Powergen, with 60% of the shares of each sold. The government sold its
remaining 40% of the shares of Powergen and National Power in March 1995, retaining a special share. On 18
June 1991, Scottish Hydro-Electric and Scottish Power were floated. At this stage, the two nuclear companies,
Nuclear Electric and Scottish Nuclear, remained in public ownership.
Introduction of retail supply competition

The supply market was opened up to competition in three phases, starting from April 1990 and culminating in
May 1999. The retail side of the market was divided into franchise and non-franchise customers. The
franchise market consisted of customers with load of 100 kW or less. Non-franchise market consisted of the
remaining consumers with larger loads. Two types of suppliers existed
First Tier Suppliers Each of the REC in its respective supply area was known as the first tier supplier
Second Tier Suppliers RECs operating outside their designated supply areas, generators and new
independent energy companies were known as second tier supply companies
Till 1998, the first tier suppliers i.e. RECs in their respective supply areas, had exclusive right to supply
electricity to franchise consumers. Non-franchise customers were given the option of choosing their supplier
from among the first tier supplier or second tier suppliers.

As discussed in the previous section, the supply market was divided into franchise and non-franchise
consumers and these were then gradually opened up for retail supply competition in three phases as follows
Phase I: Apr'90
Loads above 1
MW
Phase II: Apr'94

Loads between
100 kW to 1 MW
With effect from 1 April 1990, customers with peak loads of more than 1 MW (about 45% of
the non-domestic market and 26% of total sales) were allowed to choose their supplier;
These customers numbered around 5200 and they were predominantly major
manufacturing plants and hospitals;
At this stage, separation between distribution and retail services was not mandatory;
There were two types of supply licenses. The local monopoly distribution company needed
a first-tier supply license for selling retail services in its area. Other companies, generating
companies, brokers, or distribution companies from other locations needed a second-tier
supply license.
In 1994 the open market was extended to some 45,000 users with a 100 kW and above
annual demand;
With time, more and more consumers opted for competitive supply;
As per OFGEM estimates, in 1999-2000, customers accounting for nearly 80% of the
output in the 1 MW market in England and Wales chose to take their supply from a
company other than their local Public Electricity Suppliers (as compared with 43% in 199091);
Similarly, by 1999-2000 customers accounting for 67% of the output in the 100 kW to 1
MW market in England and Wales chose to take their supply from a company other than
their local PES.
PwC
124
Phase III: Sept'98

to Mar'04
All loads
Opening up of the domestic market (below 100 kW) to competition also met with
success;
By September 2001, 38% of domestic electricity customers had switched supplier one or
more times since the introduction of competition;
However, after an initial increase in the numbers of licensed electricity suppliers
operating in the electricity supply market, there was an increase in merger and
acquisition activity suggesting a trend toward consolidation of the electricity supply
market, as falling prices and relentless competition spurred on companies to seek
opportunities for consolidation to become more competitive.
Functional separation of distribution business and reorganisation of supply areas

The Regional Electricity Companies (RECs) ran regional distribution networks as well as supplied electricity
directly to consumers. The industry regulator was concerned that companies were using their effective regional
monopolies on distribution to subsidise their retail activities. In 1997 the companies were required to effect a
complete separation their distribution and retail businesses although they could still continue to own both
operations.
The Utilities Act 2000 abolished the existing distribution/retail licences, and introduced a Great Britain-wide
licence, allowing all suppliers to supply customers nationwide. The Utilities Act also made provision for the
separation of supply and distribution activities, requiring the separation of the supply and distribution
businesses of the former Public Electricity Suppliers (PES). Any company holding an electricity supply licence
could now sell electricity, and all customers became free to choose their own supplier.
Metering Services
Competition in metering was introduced for larger customers in the electricity market in 1994. Up until that
time all metering work had been performed by regional or national monopolies. As independent Meter
Operators entered the market the original metering businesses were separated from their corporate companies.
New trading arrangements were introduced to the electricity and gas markets to enable competition in energy
supply to develop. The business interests of Meter Operators were found to be different to those of other parties
to the trading arrangements.
As per the current industry structure, metering is the responsibility of the supplier. The metering activity is
further subdivided into two 3rd party activities
MAP (Meter Asset Provider) procurement, asset management and tracking, fault triage,
warranty claim management
MOP (Meter Operator) Installation and maintenance of meters
Both of them are appointed by Retail Supply Company. MAP and MOP can be handled by same agency as well.
In April 2000, agent competition was introduced to the electricity market, allowing suppliers to choose who
provides them with metering services. Suppliers are now able to contract with any accredited metering service
provider.
Issue of metering in case of consumer switching

A Meter Point Administration Number (MPAN) is a 21-digit reference used in Great Britain to uniquely identify
electricity supply points such as individual domestic residences. The system was introduced in 1998 in order to
provide a competitive environment for the electricity companies, and allow consumers to switch their supplier
PwC
125
easily as well as simplify administration. Although the name suggests that a MPAN refers to a particular meter,
a MPAN can have several meters associated with it, or indeed none where it is an unmetered supply. A supply
receiving power from the network operator (DNO) has an Import MPAN, while generation and microgeneration projects feeding back into the DNO network are given Export MPANs.
Consumer interface and consumer grievance redressal

In the current sector scenario of United Kingdom, the Distribution
business and the retail supply business have separate Consumer
Interface to deal with consumer complaints or queries or requests. If
consumer has a complaint or enquiry about a supplier or network
operator, he/she should
Contact that company directly in the first instance
If the customer is still dissatisfied from the solution to

complaint, then consumer can go to Ombudsmen
The Supply Company educates consumers on who to call in case of

Power Cuts (Network related issues). A contact number is
mentioned on the consumer bills which guides consumer regarding
where to call in case of power cuts. This is in addition to the
customer care number of Retail Supply Company. Still in case the
consumer calls the Supply Company for network related issue, the
consumer will be directed to right interface based on their postal
code.
Independent Consumer Grievance Redressal mechanism

Ombudsman Services: Energy is the free independent redress scheme set up to investigate complaints from
domestic and micro business consumers that the energy company cannot resolve (after eight weeks or
deadlock).
Powers of Ombudsman: Ombudsman can require the company to correct the problem, apologise, explain
what happened, and make a financial award. Its decisions are binding on the energy company but not the
consumer.
Funding of Ombudsman: Case fee is charged to company. Its payment is not dependent on outcome. The
service is free for consumers. This means that the more complaints companies resolve in-house, the less they
pay; this provides an incentive for them to improve.
Independence of Ombudsman: Ombudsman Services is governed by a board of directors, of which nonexecutive directors are the majority. Board ensures the independence of the Ombudsman service and has
responsibility of appointing the chief ombudsman.
Procurement of Power
In 1990, a Wholesale electricity trading arrangements (Pool) was established. The Pool worked on the
basis of bids from the generating companies setting the price at which they would sell electricity in 48 halfhourly blocks over a 24-hour period. 2 problems emerged in Pool -
PwC
126
The generating companies could restrict supply and therefore push up the price of wholesale electricity.
This was certainly a main worry in the opening years when National Power and Powergen were by far
the dominant players in the market.
Extensive use of contract for differences. These were hedging contracts designed to limit the exposure
of participants in Pool to price fluctuations. This effectively meant that the generators and regional
electricity supply companies, could sidestep the Pool
In 2001, New Electricity Trading Arrangements (NETA) was established. It would operate like other
commodity markets whilst making provision for the electricity system to be kept in physical balance at all times
to maintain security and quality of supplies. The main differences between NETA and the electricity pool were
Self-dispatch each generator is responsible for determining the level of output from each of its units
as opposed to the National Grid Company (NGC) scheduling on behalf of all generators as under the
pool
Paid as bid all trades are valued at the bid price for that trade rather than at the bid price for the
most expensive trade for a given time period;
Firmness of markets any difference between physical consumption or production and contracted
positions at 3.5 hours is cashed out through the balancing mechanism at a penal rate (the pool was nonfirm, resulting in reduced incentives to tailor contract positions to actual patterns of consumption and
production and hence reduced liquidity in contract markets);
Ex-post price the cash-out price is determined after the event, as opposed to in the pool where the
cash-out price was known to a high degree of certainty at the day ahead stage;
Trading closer to the event under NETA, trading continues up to 3.5 hours ahead of real time,
allowing market participants greater opportunity to tailor their contracted position to match their
physical position (under the pool, offers were made between 19 and 43 hours ahead of real time).
NETA was expanded into the British Electricity Transmission and Trading Arrangements (BETTA)
in 2005, bringing Scotland into the market.
Tariff determination
The purpose of price controls on tariffs is to prevent utilities from exploiting consumers and stimulate some
aspects of competitive market. It follows, therefore, that once competition has developed and customers are free
to choose from whom they purchase, these price controls are no longer needed. Competition between suppliers
for sales will put downward pressure on prices and create the necessary incentive for suppliers to operate
efficiently.
Till 1998, before opening competition to consumer with load 100 kW or less
Until April 1998, the former RECs supply charges were regulated by a RPI-X+Y revenue yield control. The Y
factor, which had five components, enabled each REC to pass through to customers costs already regulated by
another price control, that is:
transmission costs (excluding exit charges for transferring electricity from the grid to the RECs own
distribution network)
distribution costs
electricity purchase costs
the Fossil Fuel Levy
administration payments to the pool
PwC
127
From 1998 to 2000

The next supply price restraint ran from April 1998 for two years during the transition to competition in the
supply market. The price controls applied only to the PESs. Second tier suppliers were not subject to any price
restraint. The controls covered domestic and small non-domestic customers, known as designated customers,
and took the form of maximum price restraints rather than the cost pass-through controls that applied prior to
this.
From 2000 to 2002
The next electricity retail price controls were introduced in April 2000 for two years. These price controls on the
ex-PES suppliers took the form of a restriction on the weighted average unit price they could charge to standard
domestic customers and the weighted average unit price they could charge to domestic economy customers
within their supply service areas.
2002 onwards
From 2002 onwards, Ofgem replaced price controls with the use of powers of investigation and enforcement
under competition law. This also resulted in the removal of the two remaining prescribed standards of
performance in electricity supply, and the lifting of the requirement on ex-PES suppliers to submit regulatory
accounts to Ofgem.
Energy Supply Probe by Ofgem

During the period 2004-2007, concerns were expressed about the operation of Great Britain's gas and
electricity retail supply markets for domestic and small business consumers. Unprecedented increase in world
fuel prices caused increase in wholesale and retail gas and electricity prices. A typical household's energy bills
had more than doubled since early 2004 and many households were struggling to pay their bills. The numbers
of consumers in debt to their energy suppliers, average debt levels and disconnection rates were rising.
In view of this, in 2008 Ofgem (Office of gas and electricity markets) launched the Energy Supply Probe
investigation into the electricity and gas supply markets for households and small businesses. The regulator
found that although there was no evidence of cartelisation in the market and that the retail price rises could be
justified by wholesale costs, the market was not working in the best interests of consumers. Some of the
positives and negatives of the energy market identified by the probe were as follows
Positives
Negatives
Customer
Engagement
Easy switching process: High rates of

switching (18%) as compared to other
European countries.
Consumer switching was based on

partial information: Switching did not
put pressure on suppliers to reduce prices.
As many as 1/3rd of the consumers that
switched may not have received tariff
reduction.
Supply
pricing
Innovative products: Fixed or variable

prices, green energy deals, social tariffs,
energy service packages and a wide range
of incentive/reward deals introduced by
suppliers.
Differential pricing: Instances of

Differential Pricing were observed, wherein
certain consumers were charged 6% higher
tariff on average than other consumers.
Suppliers were charging more to their
existing consumers in order to offer higher
discounts to acquire new customers.
No evidences of cartelisation found.
Lag between wholesale and retail

electricity tariffs: evidence was found of
time lag between changes in wholesale and
retail prices. lag was greater when prices
are falling than when they were rising
PwC
128
Pre-Payment
Meter (PPM)
Consumers
Positives
Negatives
Most active consumer segment in

switching supplier
Price premium charged to PPM consumers

varied significantly between geographic
regions, suppliers and range of energy
consumption.
In order to overcome these negatives of the market operations, the Ofgem developed a package of measures,
divided into two parts, to improve the functioning of the market. The main features of this package were as
follows
The first part of this package addressed concerns over unjustified price differentials through two new
licence conditions for domestic suppliers, which came into effect on 1 September, 2009. These
conditions:
o
Required any difference in the terms and conditions offered by suppliers in respect of different
payment methods to be cost reflective
Prohibited undue discrimination in any terms and conditions offered to consumers.
The second part of the package promoted competition and consumer engagement and included
obligations on suppliers to:
o
Improve the information they provide to customers on bills and in an annual statement
Help vulnerable and indebted customers who are currently blocked from changing suppliers
due to outstanding debts
Improve the conduct of their sales and marketing activities
Help small business customers by providing them with better information regarding the terms
and conditions of their contracts
Improve the transparency of their supply and generation activities.
These measures became part of suppliers licences in October 2009, and were implemented between October
2009 and July 2010.
Philippines
Power market structure prior to reforms
The electricity industry of Philippines was an integrated utility before the watershed reforms of 2001. At that
time, generation and transmission were under the control of the National Power Corporation (NPC).
Meanwhile, the distribution of electricity to end-users was done by private investor-owned electric utilities,
local government-owned utilities and electric cooperatives located within distinct franchise areas. Electricity
end-users had no choice but to buy power only from their local distribution companies. At the same time,
generating companies could sell power only to distribution companies, which in turn would re-sell the
electricity to household and corporate end-users.
Reform process
The Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA) was introduced to bring in watershed reforms in the
then unsustainable power sector. The main features of this act are as follows:
Deregulation of the generation sector
Creation of a new government-owned transmission company and the eventual privatization of the
transmission system
PwC
129
Unbundling of supply activities from the regulated distribution sector
Elimination of cross-subsidies within and among various grids, and among various classes of
consumers
Creation of an independent regulatory body (Energy Regulatory Commission) and a Joint

Congressional Power Commission to oversee legal implementation
Privatization and sale of NPC assets and contracts with Independent Power Producers (IPPs) Creation
of a Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM) for the trading of energy, by which competitive market
forces would establish generation tariffs
Implementation of retail competition and open access
The process of introducing retail supply competition in Philippines is currently on-going in a phase-wise
manner. EPIRA, 2001 called for a number of changes to the power sector before the commercial
implementation of retail supply competition. These reforms were meant to remove the existing barriers to
competition and ensure the smooth functioning of retail supply competition. The changes brought in were as
follows:
Privatisation of NPC assets: Privatization and sale of NPC assets as well as contracts with IPPs
were crucial for the implementation of retail supply competition. This would give government the cash
flows needed to pay off NPCs debts and create a level playing field among generators, thus encouraging
private sector investment. By the end of 2012, the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management
Corporation (PSALM) had privatized more than 70% of the total capacity of generating assets of NPC in
Luzon and Visayas. It had also transferred more than 70% of the total energy output of power plants
under contract with NPC to the IPP administrators.
Removal of cross-subsidies: EPIRA, 2001 required all cross-subsidies to be phased out in a gradual
manner. As of October, 2005 all inter-grid, intra-grid and inter-class subsidies were removed. The
lifeline rate scheme which subsidises marginalized end-use consumers prevails.
Universal charge (UC): The ERC was mandated to establish Universal Charge to be recovered from
all electricity end-users to account for, among other factors, all forms of cross subsidies that remain
during the phase out period (other factors being payment for stranded debts, missionary electrification,
equalization of taxes, and an environmental charge). This was to be non-bypassable charge collected
from all end-users (except threshold and lifeline consumers) every month based on the approval of the
ERC.

The commercial implementation of retail supply competition and open access in the Luzon and Visayas grids
began on June, 2013. The phase-wise approach envisioned in official sources is as follows:
First Phase (2013 2015): Consumers with a connected load greater than 1 MW would be considered
contestable, i.e. they would have the right to choose their electricity retailer
Second Phase (to commence by end 2015): Consumers with a connected load greater than 750 KW are
to become a part of the contestable category
Subsequently and every year thereafter, the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) shall evaluate the
retail performance of the market in terms of the readiness of consumers (volume of consumption) and
the Central Registration Boards (CRB) infrastructure and facilities. On the basis of such evaluation,
ERC shall gradually reduce the threshold level until it reaches the household demand level.
According to studies by the ERC, there were 1,046 contestable consumers, 17 licensed retail energy suppliers
and 24 local retail energy suppliers as of January, 2015.
PwC
130
Metering services
The Philippines' ERC has directed distribution companies in Luzon and Visayas to undertake the installation of
time-of-use (TOU) meters for qualified contestable electricity customers under the first phase of
implementation of open access and retail competition. The ownership of electric meters will remain with
distribution companies as a general rule.
The installation of TOU meters by the concerned distribution companies is a requirement under Section 4.5.1,
Article IV of the Distribution Services and Open Access Rules (DSOAR) and is reiterated in Section 5.1, Article
II of the Rules for Contestability. The meters must be capable of measuring energy use and demand in a fashion
consistent with WESM energy settlement intervals and distribution and transmission demand charge intervals.
Furthermore, under the Rules on Customer Switching, distribution companies will be the sole metering service
provider (MSP) for the retail electricity market until metering services at the retail level become competitive as
determined by the ERC. The distribution companies shall also conduct meter reading and data dissemination as
a regulated service prior to the competitive metering service regime.
Consumer interface & consumer grievance redressal

Retail supply companies in the Philippines are required to have a helpdesk to address the concerns of its
customers. This is of prime importance since the customer no longer deals directly with the distribution
company. Furthermore, in case of issues such as failure of power lines the retail supply companies and the
relevant distribution company need to agree on a protocol regarding the steps to be taken in addressing the
issue and the information dissemination program of such to the affected customers.
In case a customer has an unresolved dispute with his/her retail supply company or distribution company,
he/she may file a complaint with the ERC. The ERC then undertakes to resolve the dispute as quickly,
effectively and in as costless a manner as possible.
Procurement of power
The WESM was created following the restructuring of the energy sector by EPIRA, 2001. The market provides
the mechanism for identifying and setting real-time prices taking into consideration actual variations from the
quantities transacted under contracts between sellers and purchasers of electricity.
After several months of trial operations, the WESM commenced commercial operations in the Luzon grid on
June, 2006 while the Visayas grid was integrated into the WESM in December, 2010. The Philippine Electricity
Market Corporation (PEMC) facilitates the trading at WESM.
Currently, the trading process at WESM works in the following manner:
Stakeholders determine the total
demand for electricity for a certain
hour
The highest priced offer that is

accepted becomes the spot markets
price for the hour
The trading process commences once

the sellers observe the demand and
submit their bids
Electricity is transferred to the grid

and facilitated by the National Grid
Corporation of the Philippines
(NGCP)
PEMC ranks the bids from the lowest

to the most expensive, until it has
enough supply bids to meet the total
demand for power
It is then distributed to households

and businesses through distribution
companies or retail companies
PwC
131
Presently the PEMC is exploring the possibility of introducing forward-market contracts in the wholesale
energy market.
Electricity tariffs in Philippines have been recorded to be among some of the highest in the world. However,
regulators do not consider it to be a bad sign as these tariffs reflect the actual costs of supplying power. The
components of power tariffs charged are as follows:
Generation charges
Transmission charges
System losses
Taxes, subsidies and universal charges
Distribution, metering and supply charges
Currently, competitive pricing mechanisms are used by generation and retail supply companies and
performance-based pricing mechanisms apply for transmission and distribution companies.
Supplier of Last Resort (SOLR)

In case the retail supply company fails to provide electricity to a contestable consumer or a contestable
consumer is unable to have a retail supply contract with a retail business, the consumer may enter into a
contract with a Supplier of Last Resort (SOLR) designated by the ERC. The last-resort supply of electricity
serves as a temporary/short-term contract (lasting to a minimum of one billing cycle) until the consumer is able
to switch to an energy retailer. In the initial phases of the reform process, the franchised distribution company
is to serve as the SOLR for the contestable market in its franchise area.
The terms and conditions applicable to the supply of power through SOLR are proforma and are regulated by
the ERC. The SOLR rate is the higher of:
The applicable WESM ex-ante nodal energy price
The bilateral contract price entered into by the SOLR plus a 10% premium
Victoria, Australia
Power market structure prior to reforms
Before the reforms in the 1990s, there was little scope for competition in the provision of electricity services in
Australia. At that time, the electricity industry was largely characterised by government-owned vertically
integrated entities.
In Victoria, it was the State Electricity Commission of Victoria (SECV) that was responsible for the generation,
transmission and delivery of electricity to all citizens. Even though there were a number of small
retail/distribution entities serving the urban areas, the existence of exclusive franchises for many of the entities
and the absence of arrangements to permit new entry into parts of the industry effectively precluded
competition.
PwC
132
Reform process
In August 1993, the State Government of Victoria commenced a review of the structure and operation of its
electricity industry, which led to a phased disaggregation of the electricity industry. The main objectives behind
restructuring Australia's electric power industry were to improve its economic efficiency as well as reduce state
and national debt. The salient features of this process were as follows:
Commercialization of state-owned electric organizations through privatization and through
corporatization into separate governmental business units
Structural unbundling of generation, transmission, distribution and retailing functions (and assets) to
achieve vertical and horizontal disaggregation of the electricity industry
Creation of a National Electricity Market (NEM) organized as a centralized, market-based trading pool
for buying and selling electricity
Establishment of appropriate regulatory regimes
The unbundling of Victorias power sector led to the creation of:
Several competing generation companies
A monopoly transmission business
Distribution companies with geographical monopoly franchises
A two-tier system for retail businesses

o First-tier retailers were those attached to a distribution business with a monopoly geographical
franchise in the state. The retail business was ring fenced from the distribution business (i.e.
established as a separate accounting entity within one holding company).
o Second-tier retailers were the stand-alone businesses not attached to a distribution business in the
state. A second-tier retailer in Victoria could also be a first-tier retailer in another state.
In this manner, the natural monopoly functions of transmission and distribution of electricity were separated
from the competitive functions of generating and retailing electricity. Generators and retailers traded electricity
in a competitive wholesale market (NEM) as contestability was phased in over time. Transmitters and
distributors charge regulated tariffs for transporting the electricity to customers and as of 2009 the existing
caps on retail supply prices were removed. According to a report by the Essential Services Commission, there
were 33 licensed electricity retailers in Victoria at the end of 2014 of which 23 were active in the market for
residential and/or business consumers in 2013-14.

Retail supply competition was introduced in Victoria in a phase-wise manner beginning from December, 1994
and culminating in January, 2002 making it the first state in Australia where full retail competition was
introduced. Retail Consumers were divided into two categories:
Franchise consumers - consumers not open to competition i.e. they cannot chose their retail supplier
and were supplied by the first tier retail supplier (the incumbent retail supplier in their area of supply).
Non-franchise consumers contestable consumers open to retail supply competition, who have the
option of choosing their energy retailer.
Till a consumer became contestable (franchise consumers), the distributor who controlled the particular
franchise area would also perform the functions of a retailer. Once consumers became contestable (Non
franchise consumers), they were free to choose any licensed retailer, regardless of their base.
PwC
133

As discussed in the previous section, competition was introduced in Victorias electricity retail market in phases
based on decreasing annual energy consumption. The five phases of the process are outlined in the following
table:
Time Period
December, 1994
Load Details (per

annum)
Above 40 GWh
Approximate No. Of
Consumers
47
July, 1995
4 GWh 40 GWh
July, 1996
750 MWh 4 GWh
1,500
July, 1998
160 MWh 750 MWh
9,000
December, 2000
Below 160 MWh
330
957,300
Source: Australian Parliament Research paper
Metering services
The responsibility for metering services in Victoria lies with the retail supply company, which can fulfil this duty
in either of the following ways:
Appoint the distribution company as the company responsible for provision, installation and
maintenance of metering systems
Appoint a Metering Provider (a service provider accredited by the Australian Energy Market Operator)
to undertake the duties of provision, installation and maintenance of metering systems
If the consumer has not chosen a retailer, the first-tier retailer would have to perform the metering
services
Furthermore, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) is in charge of collecting metering data,
processing of that data and delivery of the processed data to the metering database and to the parties entitled to
that data. The AEMO hires a Metering Data Provider to undertake these responsibilities.
Joint Metering: The Australian Electricity Rules (AER) contains the provision for joint metering. Under this
provision more than one retail supply company can use a single meter for a particular connection point. They
may choose to appoint the local distribution company to undertake the duties involved in metering or agree to
appoint one of the retailers amongst them to undertake the same. In the absence of either of these two
arrangements, the AEMO may step in and nominate one the retailers to fulfil the metering responsibilities.
National Metering Identifier (NMI): The NMI is a ten character unique identifier provided to each
metering installation in the NEM. A two character suffix to the NMI is used to identify the data stream
associated with a connection point. This identification number is provided by the distribution company at the
request of the retail supply company. The NMI remains unchanged with a change in consumer, consumer
details or registration details and cannot to be reassigned to another connection point.
PwC
134
Consumer interface & consumer grievance redressal

In the current sector scenario of Victoria, the distribution business and the retail supply business have separate
consumer interfaces to deal with consumer complaints or queries or requests. If consumer has a complaint or
enquiry about a supplier or network operator, he/she should:
Contact that company directly in the
first instance
If the customer is still dissatisfied
with the solution to the complaint,
then the consumer can approach the
Ombudsman
The Supply Company educates consumers
on who to call in case of Power Cuts
(Network related issues). A contact
number is mentioned on the consumer
bills which guides consumer regarding
where to call in case of power cuts. This is
in addition to the customer care number
of retail business. Still, in case the
consumer calls the Supply Company for
network related issues, the consumer will
be directed to the right interface based on
their postal code.
Independent Consumer Grievance Redressal mechanism

Ombudsman Services: The Energy and Water Ombudsman (Victoria) (EWOV) is the free independent
redressal scheme set up to investigate complaints from consumers who are unable to resolve issues with their
distribution/supply company.
Powers of Ombudsman: Ombudsman can require the company to correct the problem, apologise, explain
what happened and make a financial award. Its decisions, once approved by the consumer, are binding on the
energy company.
Funding of Ombudsman: Case fee is charged to company. The fee may also depend on the number of
complaints the company receives in the financial year. Its payment is not dependent on outcome. The service is
free for consumers. This means that the more complaints companies resolve in-house, the less they pay.
Independence of Ombudsman: Ombudsman Services is governed by a board of directors and an
independent Chairperson. The board ensures the independence of the Ombudsman service and has
responsibility of appointing the Ombudsman.
Procurement of power
On December, 1998 the National Electricity Market (NEM) was established. This was to be Australias major
wholesale electricity market. It serves the states of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia,
Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. Generation companies produce electricity and compete to sell it
at the NEM. The transport of electricity from generators to consumers is then facilitated through a pool, or
spot market, where the output from all generators is aggregated and scheduled at five minute intervals to meet
PwC
135
demand. The spot price set every five minutes (and averaged over half hour periods) is determined by the most
expensive generator selected to run.
Additionally, there is also a separate over-the-counter short term forward trading market for electricity. In this
market, purchasers lock in prices for future delivery of bulk electricity through financial hedging contracts. The
NEM is one of the few purely cash settled electricity markets (i.e. financial contracts do not involve physical
delivery of electricity). This arrangement enables participants such as hedge funds and banks to participate in
the market without a requirement to own physical generation assets. AEMO is the market operator for the NEM
and is responsible for generator dispatch, reliability management and financial settlements in accordance with
the National Electricity Law and National Electricity Rules.
Electricity tariffs charged to consumers in Victoria comprise three parts:
Consumption cost which can vary with the amount of energy consumed and when the energy is
consumed (peak and off-peak)
Supply charge which includes the regulated distribution charge or network cost
Any additional retail charges (charge relating to the sale of energy by a retailer to a customer other than
a charge based on the tariff applicable to the customer) as allowed under the Energy Retail Code
Retail prices in Victoria are not regulated for either the first-tier retailers or the second-tier retailers.
Starting from September, 2013 electricity consumers in Victoria with remotely-read smart meters were given
the option to choose between a flat rate tariff policy and a flexible rate tariff policy. The option of flexible tariffs
meant that the rates charged for electricity consumption would differ according to the time of the day.
Retailer of Last Resort (RoLR)

If an energy retailer fails due to reasons such as revocation of licence, suspension of rights to buy electricity
from the wholesale market, etc., all of its customers will be automatically transferred to the RoLR with no loss
of connection. The RoLRs in Victoria are the three local retailers namely AGL, Origin Energy and Energy
Australia which cover the entire state. In case one of the local retailers fails, its customers will be transferred to
the two remaining local retailers.
Small customers (energy consumption less than or equal to 160 MWh) are sold electricity by their RoLR at
tariffs, terms and conditions approved by the Essential Services Commission. Large customers (energy
consumption greater than 160 MWh) will be sold electricity by their RoLR at tariffs, terms and conditions
determined by commercial negotiation between them and the RoLR. The obligations of the RoLR cease after
three months. For small customers who have not transferred to another retailer or have not entered a market
contract with the RoLR, a default arrangement with their local retailer will prevail after three months.
Consumers can also choose to enter into a market contract with their RoLR. For market contracts, the tariffs,
terms and conditions are negotiated between the consumer and the retailer. The terms and conditions,
however, are required to be consistent with the Commissions Energy Retail Code.
PwC
136
Appendix
1. Universal Charge
A Universal Charge (UC) model is suggested for bringing about transparency and facilitating the cross subsidies
reductions as per trajectories determined by the states. The UC, similar to the one levied in Philippines, would
be an identical charge imposed on per-unit basis on sales to all consumers of incumbent distribution
companies. Collection of UC would go towards a state-wide/national fund to reduce the extent of cross subsidy
in retail supply and any revenue gap created in doing so.
The UC fund is proposed to cover any revenue gap created due to tariff realignments as per cross subsidies
reduction trajectory. The duration of levy of this UC would be subject to the time period till the cross subsidies
are reduced with 100% cost coverage for all consumer categories, and may be continued for as long as deemed
to be required by the appropriate regulatory commission.
An illustration using cost of supply data from Punjab shows a simplified working model presenting the
proposed mode of levying Universal Charge (UC) and its subsequent utilization towards reducing cross
subsidies. The following assumptions are taken for the purpose of this illustration
Figures for category wise sales and CoS are taken from report by TERI on Voltage wise-Category wise
Cost of Supply in Punjab with base year of FY2012-13
The current category wise sales figures are projected based on last 10 year CAGR
Category wise CoS is projected based on a 5% y-o-y increase
The assumed losses are maintained at current level throughout the time period of this model. Any
improvement in efficiency may lead to a scenario where the increase in CoS is lower than expected,
leading to lower tariff hikes.
The illustration looks at a five-year time period. Cross subsidies (in this illustration) are entirely
removed within this time period. SERCs may be extended this model to further years and/or modify the
model accordingly once a timeframe is decided for elimination of cross-subsidies.
There are three stages in the proposed UC model

STAGE 1 Tariff hikes required to maintain the current cost coverage
Category wise tariffs are increased by the same percentage as the increase in their respective Cost of Supply. For
instance if the CoS of a category XYZ increase by 5%, then the tariff for that category is also increased by 5%.
This stage will only ensure that the current cost coverage is maintained for all consumer categories.
STAGE 2 Tariff hikes required to reach the targeted cost coverage
Category wise cost coverages for subsidising/subsidised categories are decreased/increased respectively in a
uniform fashion so as to reach 100% cost coverage by the end of next 5 years. These targeted category wise cost
coverage values are multiplied with their respective CoS to get the required tariff from each consumer category.
This stage therefore gives us the tariff hikes required for achieving 100% cost coverage in 5 years period. The
table below shows the targeted category wise cost coverage trajectory for the state of Punjab.
PwC
137
Table 1 Targeted category wise cost coverage trajectory for UC model illustration of Punjab
Consumer
Categories
Industrial - 66 kV
BASE
YEAR
116%
Industry LS
109%
107%
106%
104%
102%
100%
Domestic 11 kV
119%
115%
111%
107%
104%
100%
Commercial - 11 kV
118%
115%
111%
107%
104%
100%
Bulk
113%
111%
108%
105%
103%
100%
Industry MS
91%
93%
95%
96%
98%
100%
Industry SP
78%
82%
87%
91%
96%
100%
Domestic (0-100)
74%
79%
84%
90%
95%
100%
Domestic (101-300)
99%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Domestic (above 300)
105%
104%
103%
102%
101%
100%
Agriculture
78%
83%
87%
91%
96%
100%
Commercial
102%
101%
101%
101%
100%
100%
107%
106%
104%
103%
101%
100%
Public Lighting
Source: PwC analysis
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
YEAR 4
YEAR 5
113%
110%
107%
103%
100%
STAGE 3 UC Charge calculation to meet the revenue gap generated

Due to imbalance between tariff and cost of supply in current scenario, gap exists between the revenue
generated (category wise tariff multiplied by energy sales) and revenue required (category wise CoS multiplied
by energy sales). The Universal Charge is collected from all consumer categories in order to compensate for this
revenue gap. As the tariffs are increased/decreased year on year as per the calculation in Stage 2, this revenue
gap decreases and so does the amount of Universal Charge.
The tables below present the illustration for a UC Fund based reduction in cross subsidy over a period of five
years.
PwC
138
BASE YEAR
YEAR 1
STAGE 1
Tariff after CS
Neutral Hike
Consumer Categories
CoS
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Industrial - 66 kV
4.82
5.61
116%
Industry LS
5.13
5.61
109%
Domestic 11 kV
4.90
5.81
Commercial - 11 kV
5.09
6.03
Bulk
4.94
Industry MS
STAGE 2
Increase due to
targeted CoS
coverage
Revenue
from stage
2 tariff (A)
Gap to be
filled by UC
(A - B)
Additional
fund
required
from govt.
Revenue
generated
from UC
CoS
Tariff
2,426
5.06
5.89
116%
5.72
113%
1,389
1,228
(161)
6.22
121
5,100
5.39
5.89
109%
5.79
107%
2,953
2,747
(206)
6.29
255
119%
80
5.15
6.10
119%
5.91
115%
47
41
(6)
6.41
118%
622
5.34
6.33
118%
6.13
115%
381
332
(49)
6.63
31
5.59
113%
293
5.19
5.87
113%
5.73
111%
168
152
(16)
6.23
15
6.17
5.61
91%
1,861
6.48
5.89
91%
6.01
93%
1,118
1,206
88
6.51
93
93
Industry SP
6.57
5.10
78%
904
6.90
5.36
78%
5.66
82%
512
623
112
6.16
45
45
Domestic (0-100)
5.52
4.09
74%
5,440
5.80
4.29
74%
4.59
79%
2,499
3,153
653
5.09
272
272
Domestic (101-300)
5.52
5.49
99%
3,193
5.80
5.76
99%
5.77
100%
1,843
1,851
6.27
160
160
5.52
5.81
105%
1,550
5.80
6.10
105%
6.04
104%
936
898
(38)
6.54
77
Agriculture
5.33
4.18
78%
11,772
5.60
4.39
78%
4.63
83%
5,451
6,588
1,137
5.13
589
589
Commercial
5.92
6.03
102%
2,469
6.22
6.33
102%
6.31
101%
1,557
1,535
(23)
6.81
123
Public Lighting
5.62
6.03
107%
140
5.90
6.33
107%
6.25
106%
88
83
(5)
6.75
19,554
20,957
1,404
1,852
1,174
Total
37,035
UC Charge
0.50
UC Fund at start
0.00
UC Fund at end
448
Tariff
Increase due to cost/revenue mismatch
CoS
coverage
Sales
CoS
coverage
STAGE 3
ARR (B)
Tariff + UC
PwC
139
YEAR 2
STAGE 1
STAGE 2
STAGE 3
Tariff after CS Neutral

Hike
Increase due to
targeted CoS coverage

Revenue
from stage
2 tariff (A)
Gap to be
filled by UC
(A - B)
Tariff + UC
1,303
(128)
6.14
74
2,906
(163)
6.27
154
51
46
(5)
6.30
422
380
(42)
6.53
20
Consumer Categories
Sales
CoS
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Industrial - 66 kV
2,453
5.31
6.19
116%
5.84
110%
1,431
Industry LS
5,139
5.66
6.19
109%
5.97
106%
3,070
Domestic - 11 kV
85
5.40
6.41
119%
6.00
111%
Commercial - 11 kV
677
5.61
6.65
118%
6.23
111%
Bulk
ARR (B)
Revenue
generated
from UC
Additional
fund required
from govt.
301
5.45
6.16
113%
5.88
108%
177
164
(13)
6.18
Industry MS
1,908
6.80
6.19
91%
6.43
95%
1,227
1,298
71
6.73
57
57
Industry SP
916
7.24
5.62
78%
6.27
87%
575
664
89
6.57
27
27
Domestic (0-100)
5,766
6.09
4.51
74%
5.14
84%
2,964
3,509
545
5.44
173
173
Domestic (101-300)
3,458
6.09
6.05
99%
6.07
100%
2,097
2,104
6.37
104
104
1,616
6.09
6.41
105%
6.28
103%
1,015
983
(31)
6.58
48
Agriculture
12,594
5.88
4.61
78%
5.12
87%
6,443
7,401
958
5.42
378
378
Commercial
2,688
6.53
6.65
102%
6.60
101%
1,774
1,755
(20)
6.90
81
146
6.20
6.65
107%
6.47
104%
94
90
(4)
6.77
21,982
23,169
1,187
1,169
748
Public Lighting
Total
38,974
UC Charge
0.30
UC Fund at start
448
UC Fund at end
430
PwC
140
YEAR 3
STAGE 1
STAGE 2
STAGE 3

Hike
Increase due to

Revenue
from stage 2
tariff (A)
ARR (B)
107%
1,474
104%
3,190
6.09
107%
118%
6.33
107%
Consumer Categories
Sales
CoS
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Industrial - 66 kV
2,479
5.58
6.49
116%
5.95
Industry LS
5,178
5.94
6.49
109%
6.16
Domestic - 11 kV
90
5.67
6.73
119%
Commercial - 11 kV
737
5.89
6.98
Bulk
Gap to be
filled by
UC (A - B)
Tariff + UC
Revenue
generated
from UC
Additional
fund required
from govt.
1,383
(91)
3,075
(115)
6.20
62
6.41
129
55
51
(4)
6.34
467
435
(32)
6.58
18
309
5.72
6.47
113%
6.02
105%
186
177
(9)
6.27
Industry MS
1,956
7.14
6.49
91%
6.88
96%
1,347
1,397
51
7.13
49
49
Industry SP
929
7.61
5.90
78%
6.92
91%
643
707
63
7.17
23
23
Domestic (0-100)
6,112
6.39
4.73
74%
5.73
90%
3,501
3,906
405
5.98
153
153
Domestic (101-300)
3,744
6.39
6.36
99%
6.38
100%
2,387
2,392
6.63
94
94
1,685
6.39
6.73
105%
6.52
102%
1,100
1,077
(23)
6.77
42
Agriculture
13,474
6.17
4.84
78%
5.64
91%
7,596
8,314
717
5.89
337
337
Commercial
2,928
6.85
6.98
102%
6.90
101%
2,021
2,006
(15)
7.15
73
152
6.51
6.98
107%
6.70
103%
102
99
(3)
6.95
24,741
25,633
892
1,026
663
Public Lighting
Total
41,047
UC Charge
0.25
UC Fund at start
430
UC Fund at end
565
PwC
141
YEAR 4
STAGE 1
STAGE 2
STAGE 3

Hike
Increase due to

Revenue
from stage 2
tariff (A)
ARR (B)
Gap to be
filled by UC
(A - B)
Tariff + UC
Revenue
generated
from UC
Additional
fund required
from govt.
103%
1,517
1,468
(48)
6.15
25
102%
3,314
3,253
(61)
6.45
52
6.18
104%
59
57
(2)
6.28
118%
6.42
104%
515
497
(18)
6.52
Consumer Categories
Sales
CoS
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Industrial - 66 kV
2,506
5.86
6.82
116%
6.05
Industry LS
5,217
6.24
6.82
109%
6.35
Domestic - 11 kV
96
5.96
7.06
119%
Commercial - 11 kV
803
6.19
7.33
Bulk
317
6.00
6.79
113%
6.16
103%
196
191
(5)
6.26
Industry MS
2,006
7.50
6.82
91%
7.36
98%
1,477
1,504
27
7.46
20
20
Industry SP
942
7.99
6.20
78%
7.63
96%
719
752
34
7.73
Domestic (0-100)
6,479
6.71
4.97
74%
6.36
95%
4,122
4,347
225
6.46
65
65
Domestic (101-300)
4,054
6.71
6.67
99%
6.70
100%
2,717
2,720
6.80
41
41
1,757
6.71
7.06
105%
6.78
101%
1,192
1,179
(12)
6.88
18
Agriculture
14,415
6.48
5.08
78%
6.20
96%
8,936
9,339
403
6.30
144
144
Commercial
3,188
7.20
7.33
102%
7.22
100%
2,303
2,294
(9)
7.32
32
158
6.83
7.33
107%
6.93
101%
109
108
(2)
7.03
27,879
28,381
502
433
282
Public Lighting
Total
43,264
UC Charge
0.10
UC Fund at start
565
UC Fund at end
496
PwC
142
YEAR 5
STAGE 1
STAGE 2
STAGE 3
Increase due to rise in

CoS
Increase due to targeted

CoS coverage
ARR (B)
Gap to be
filled by UC
(A - B)
Tariff + UC
Revenue
generated
from UC
Additional
fund required
from govt.
Consumer Categories
Sales
CoS
Tariff
Industrial - 66 kV
2,534
6.15
7.16
116%
6.15
100%
1,559
1,559
6.15
Industry LS
5,256
6.55
7.16
109%
6.55
100%
3,441
3,441
6.55
Domestic - 11 kV
102
6.25
7.42
119%
6.25
100%
64
64
6.25
Commercial - 11 kV
875
6.50
7.70
118%
6.50
100%
568
568
6.50
Bulk
326
6.30
7.13
113%
6.30
100%
205
205
6.30
2,056
7.87
7.16
91%
7.87
100%
1,619
1,619
7.87
Industry MS
Industry SP
Tariff
CoS
coverage
Revenue
from stage 2
tariff (A)
CoS
coverage
956
8.39
6.51
78%
8.39
100%
801
801
8.39
Domestic (0-100)
6,867
7.05
5.22
74%
7.05
100%
4,838
4,838
7.05
Domestic (101-300)
4,390
7.05
7.01
99%
7.05
100%
3,093
3,093
7.05
1,833
7.05
7.42
105%
7.05
100%
1,291
1,291
7.05
Agriculture
15,422
6.80
5.33
78%
6.80
100%
10,491
10,491
6.80
Commercial
3,472
7.56
7.70
102%
7.56
100%
2,623
2,623
7.56
164
7.17
7.70
107%
7.17
100%
118
118
7.17
31,446
31,446
Public Lighting
Total
45,636
UC Charge
0.00
UC Fund at start
496
UC Fund at end
496
PwC
143
From the above discussed model we can observe that the year on year tariff hikes for subsidised categories due
to tariff rationalisation can be very high leading to tariff shocks. These tariff hikes are further increased due to
UC charge on all consumer categories. In order to protect subsidised categories from these tariff shocks, the
state government can contribute to the UC Fund for the initial years on behalf of subsidised categories. The
additional funds required from state government in the illustration of UC Model in Punjab, would be as follows:
Table 2 Additional fund requirement from state government based on UC model illustration of
Punjab
(in Rs. Crore)
Industry MS
Industry SP
Domestic (0-100)
Domestic (101-300)
Agriculture
Total
YEAR1
YEAR2
YEAR3
YEAR4
YEAR5
93
45
272
160
589
1,174
57
27
173
104
378
748
49
23
153
94
337
663
20
9
65
41
144
282
PwC
144
2. Illustration for limiting cross subsidies to wheeling

charges
Elimination of cross subsidies is important to allow for level playing field between various supply licensees
under retail supply competition. However given the current situation, cross subsidies are likely to continue in
the near future even after the content carriage segregation. Two basic principles may be adopted for dealing
with residual cross subsidies in a retail supply competition scenario:
Cross subsidies should be located in the wires component of the distribution tariff. Since wires are a
monopolistic regulated industry and, therefore, are not subject to competition, market signals, though
distorted, would not explicitly affect competition.
It is possible, however, that the size of the some customer categories subsidy is too great to be captured
in the wires tariff alone. In that case, the proper solution would be for the subsidy to be paid directly by
government to the affected category.
Illustration For the purpose of illustrating this strategy, we have assumed there are four consumer categories with cost of
supply and tariffs as given in the table below. The cost of supply is further broken down into wheeling charge,
energy charge and customer charge.
After the advent of retail supply competition, the tariffs must be cost reflective, i.e. the tariff of any category
must cover the energy and customer related costs.
If retail supply competition is to be introduced then cross subsidies need to be either reduced or located within
the wires business only. Therefore the maximum possible cross subsidy for domestic consumer can be equal to
the wheeling charges paid by them i.e. Rs 0.80/kWh. Under retail supply competition, either the tariff for
domestic consumers must rise to at least 90% of CoS or the State Government will have to bear the cost of
subsidization.
Table 3: Illustration for cross subsidies under retail supply competition (all figures in Rs/kWh)
CoS
Cost of Supply
W
Wheeling
E
Energy
C
Customer
T
Tariff
T-CoS
Existing cross subsidy
E+C
Min Tariff payable
W/CoS
Max cross subsidy possible
Domestic
Agricultural
Industrial
Commercial
6
2
2
2
4
(2)
4
33%
9
4
2
3
5
(4)
5
44%
2
0.5
1
0.5
5
3
-
4
2
1
1
7
3
-
PwC
145
3. Illustrations for allocation of PPAs

Market Scenario I
Energy Surplus State
The following assumptions are made for the illustration:
Total number of consumers 10,00,000
Current Power Requirement of Discom 500 MW ( or ~4.4 billion units)
Current PPAs of Discom (transferred to Intermediary Company) 450 MW (or ~4 billion

units)
United generation capacity - 100 MW (or ~800 million units)
Number of Retail Supply Companies after introduction of competition 2
Number of consumers with Incumbent Supplier 8,00,000
Number of consumers with new Supply Company 2,00,000
Power requirement of Incumbent Supplier 400 MW (or ~ 3.5 billion units)
Power requirement of new Supply Company. 100 MW (or ~ 0.9 billion units)
Rate of power allocated by IC Rs. 1 per unit (same as cost of its PPAs)
Rate of power purchased from market/generator Rs. 0.5 per unit
Since this a market scenario wherein the cost of power in market is cheaper than cost of PPAs,
any power purchased by a supplier from the market instead of IC is Opportunity Gain. On the
other hand any power left with IC, is Opportunity Loss for IC.
The formula used for allocation of power by IC to retail supply companies as per the 3 rd
mechanism is as follows
Power allocated = (Number of consumers with supplier/total number of consumers)*Current
PPAs
PwC
146
Scenarios/Approach
Approach
1 D6A
Approach
2 D6B
Approach
3 D6C
Approach
4 D6D
Approach
5 D6E
Approach
6 D6F
Power allocated by
IC to incumbent
supplier
400 MW
400 MW
350 MW
350 MW
360 MW
360 MW
Power allocated by
IC to new Supply Co.
50 MW
50 MW
100 MW
100 MW
90 MW
90 MW
Power accepted by
new Supply Co. from
IC
50 MW
100 MW
90 MW
Power purchased
from market by
incumbent supplier
50 MW
50 MW
40 MW
40 MW
Power purchased
from market by new
Supply Co.
50 MW
100 MW
100 MW
10 MW
100 MW
Gain/loss to IC
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 90
million)
(Rs. 81
million)
Gain/loss to
incumbent supplier
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 36
million
Rs. 36
million
Gain/loss to new
Supply Co.
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 90
million
Rs. 90
million
Rs. 9
million
Rs. 45
million
Market Scenario II
Energy Surplus State
Current PPAs of Discom (transferred to Intermediary Company) 450 MW (or ~4 billion

units)
United generation capacity - 100 MW (or ~800 million units)
PwC
147
Power requirement of new Supply Company 100 MW (or ~ 0.9 billion units)
Since this a market scenario wherein the cost of power in market is expensive than cost of PPAs,
any power purchased by a supplier from the market instead of IC is Opportunity Loss. On the
other hand any power left with IC, is Opportunity Gain for IC.
PPAs
Scenarios/Approach
Approach
1 D6A
Approach
2 D6B
Approach
3 D6C
Approach
4 D6D
Approach
5 D6E
Approach
6 D6F
Power allocated by
IC to incumbent
supplier
400 MW
400 MW
350 MW
350 MW
360 MW
360 MW
Power allocated by
50 MW
50 MW
100 MW
100 MW
90 MW
90 MW
Power accepted by
new Supply Co. from
IC
50 MW
100 MW
90 MW
Power purchased
from market by
incumbent supplier
50 MW
50 MW
40 MW
40 MW
Power purchased
from market by new
Supply Co.
50 MW
100 MW
100 MW
10 MW
100 MW
Gain/loss to IC
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 90
million
Rs. 81
million
Gain/loss to
incumbent supplier
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
Gain/loss to new
Supply Co.
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 90
million)
(Rs. 90
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
PwC
148
Market Scenario III
Energy Deficit State
Current PPAs of Discom (transferred to Intermediary Company) 400 MW (or ~3.5 billion
units)
United generation capacity 50 MW (or ~ 400 million units)
Since in this market scenario the total power available (450 MW) is less than the total demand
(500 MW), any supplier which is allocated power less than its power requirement, suffers an
opportunity loss. Also since the power available in the market is cheaper than the power
available with the Intermediary Company, any supplier which has to buy power from market,
also gets an opportunity gain.
Since this is a power deficit scenario, if both the suppliers approach market for purchasing
power from the untied capacity, we assume that both the suppliers get proportionate amount of
power. However in actual scenario the market price would be discovered through competitive
bidding and suppliers with highest bid (or lowest tariffs, depending upon the auction
mechanism) would get the power.
PPAs
PwC
149
Scenarios/Approach
Approach
1 D6A
Approach
2 D6B
Approach
3 D6C
Approach
4 D6D
Approach
5 D6E
Approach
6 D6F
Power allocated by
IC to incumbent
supplier
400 MW
400 MW
300 MW
300 MW
320 MW
320 MW
Power allocated by
100 MW
100 MW
80 MW
80 MW
Power accepted by
new Supply Co. from
IC
100 MW
100 MW
80 MW
80 MW
Power purchased
from market by
incumbent supplier
50 MW
50 MW
40 MW
40 MW
Power purchased
from market by new
Supply Co.
50 MW
50 MW
10 MW
100 MW
Gain/loss to IC
Gain/loss to
incumbent supplier
on account of power
purchase
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 36
million
Rs. 36
million
Loss to incumbent
supplier on account
of un-availability of
power
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
Gain/loss to new
Supply Co. on
account of power
purchase
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 45
million
Rs. 9
million
Rs. 9
million
Loss to new Supply

Co. on account of unavailability of power
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
PwC
150
Market Scenario IV
Energy Deficit State
Current PPAs of Discom (transferred to Intermediary Company) 400 MW (or ~3.5 billion
units)
United generation capacity 50 MW (or ~ 400 million units)
Since in this market scenario the total power available (450 MW) is less than the total demand
(500 MW), any supplier which is allocated power less than its power requirement, suffers an
opportunity loss. Also since the power available in the market is expensive than the power
available with the Intermediary Company, any supplier which has to buy power from market,
also faces an opportunity loss.
Since this is a power deficit scenario, if both the suppliers approach market for purchasing
power from the untied capacity, we assume that both the suppliers get proportionate amount of
power. However in actual scenario the market price would be discovered through competitive
bidding and suppliers with highest bid (or lowest tariffs, depending upon the auction
mechanism) would get the power.
PPAs
PwC
151
Scenarios/Approach
Approach
1 D6A
Approach
2 D6B
Approach
3 D6C
Approach
4 D6D
Approach
5 D6E
Approach
6 D6F
Power allocated by
IC to incumbent
supplier
400 MW
400 MW
300 MW
300 MW
320 MW
320 MW
Power allocated by
100 MW
100 MW
80 MW
80 MW
Power accepted by
new Supply Co. from
IC
100 MW
100 MW
80 MW
80 MW
Power purchased
from market by
incumbent supplier
50 MW
50 MW
40 MW
40 MW
Power purchased
from market by new
Supply Co.
50 MW
50 MW
10 MW
100 MW
Gain/loss to IC
Gain/loss to
incumbent supplier
on account of power
purchase
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
Loss to incumbent
supplier on account
of un-availability of
power
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
(Rs. 36
million)
Gain/loss to new
Supply Co. on
account of power
purchase
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
Loss to new Supply

Co. on account of unavailability of power
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 45
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
(Rs. 9
million)
PwC
152
4. Data for classification of states

Utility
Andhra Pradesh - APCPDCL
Andhra Pradesh - APEPDCL
Andhra Pradesh - APNPDCL
Andhra Pradesh - APSPDCL
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar - BSEB
Bihar - NBPDCL
Bihar - SBPDCL
Chhattisgarh
Delhi - BSES Rajdhani
Delhi - BSES Yamuna
Delhi - TPDDL
Goa
Gujarat - DGVCL
Gujarat - MGVCL
Gujarat - PGVCL
Gujarat - UGVCL
Haryana - DHBVNL
Haryana - UHBVNL
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Jharkhand
Karnataka - BESCOM
Karnataka - CHESCOM
Karnataka - GESCOM
Karnataka - HESCOM
Karnataka - MESCOM
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh - Madhya
Kshetra VVCL
Madhya Pradesh - Paschim
Kshetra VVCL
Madhya Pradesh - Purv Kshetra
VVCL
Maharashtra - MSEDCL
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Odisha - CESU
Odisha - NESCO
Odisha - SESCO
Odisha - WESCO
Surplus/
Deficit,
FY15
(%)10
-4.87%
-4.87%
-4.87%
-4.87%
-9.90%
-7.05%
-2.77%
-2.77%
-2.77%
-1.25%
-0.43%
-0.43%
-0.43%
-0.93%
-0.02%
-0.02%
-0.02%
-0.02%
-0.39%
-0.39%
-0.90%
-19.09%
-2.75%
-4.34%
-4.34%
-4.34%
-4.34%
-4.34%
-1.48%
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
AT&C less
collection
loss, FY13
(%)11
13%
6%
13%
11%
57%
26%
48%
39%
48%
22%
13%
13%
12%
13%
12%
13%
30%
14%
22%
31%
11%
54%
35%
14%
15%
19%
20%
12%
9%
-0.55%
Surplus
31%
High
-0.55%
Surplus
26%
High
-0.55%
Surplus
26%
High
-1.35%
-3.83%
-15.34%
-6.59%
-3.92%
-1.62%
-1.62%
-1.62%
-1.62%
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
15%
31%
35%
29%
38%
37%
35%
43%
38%
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Availability
of Power
Loss
Levels12
Roll Out
Scenario
Low
Low
Low
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
High
Low
High
High
Low
High
High
Low
High
High
High
Low
Low
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
4
2
2
4
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
3
Source: MoP report on Load Generation Balance Report, 2015-16

Source: PFC report on The Performance of State Power Utilities for the years 2010-11 to 2012-13
12 States with losses above 15% are put under High losses category while the states with AT&C losses on or below
15% are put under Low losses category
10
11
PwC
153
Utility
Puducherry
Punjab
Rajasthan - AVVNL
Rajasthan - JDVVNL
Rajasthan - JVVNL
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu - TANGEDCO
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh - DVVN
Uttar Pradesh - KESCO
Uttar Pradesh - MVVN
Uttar Pradesh - Pasch VVN
Uttar Pradesh - Poorv VVN
Uttarakhand
West Bengal
Surplus/
Deficit,
FY15
(%)10
-1.08%
-1.00%
-0.62%
-0.62%
-0.62%
0.00%
-3.14%
-15.62%
-15.62%
-15.62%
-15.62%
-15.62%
-15.62%
-3.00%
-0.55%
Availability
of Power
Deficit
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Surplus
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Deficit
Surplus
AT&C less
collection
loss, FY13
(%)11
12%
17%
21%
18%
19%
39%
21%
27%
27%
31%
25%
28%
26%
21%
30%
Loss
Levels12
Roll Out
Scenario
Low
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
High
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
PwC
154
About PwC
PwC firms help organisations and individuals create the value theyre looking for. Were a network of firms in
158 countries with close to 169,000 people who are committed to delivering quality in assurance, tax and
advisory services. Tell us what matters to you and find out more by visiting us at www.pwc.com. In India, PwC
(www.pwc.com/India) offers a comprehensive portfolio of Advisory and Tax & Regulatory services; each, in
turn, presents a basket of finely defined deliverables. Network firms of PwC in India also provide services in
Assurance as per the relevant rules and regulations in India. Providing organisations with the advice they need,
wherever they may be located, our highly qualified, experienced professionals, who have sound knowledge of
the Indian business environment, listen to different points of view to help organisations solve their business
issues and identify and maximise the opportunities they seek. Our industry specialisation allows us to help cocreate solutions with our clients for their sector of interest.
About GRID
PwCs GRID (Government Reforms and Infrastructure Development) SBU is an industry-focussed consultancy
team of 250 professionals working for governments, regulators, utilities and investors in infrastructure.
Leveraging PwC global experience in these industries, this team advises on policy, regulation, institutional
strengthening, performance improvement, financing and other related matters. We are located in these cities:
Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhubaneshwar, Chennai, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Mumbai and Pune.
Contacts
Kameswara Rao
Executive Director, National Leader - Power & Mining
+91 (40) 6624 6688
kameswara.rao@in.pwc.com
Sambitosh Mohapatra
Executive Director, Power & Mining
+ 91 (124) 330 6008
sambitosh.mohapatra@in.pwc.com
www.pwc.in
2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited. All rights reserved. In this document, PwC refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Private
Limited (a limited liability company in India having Corporate Identity Number or CIN : U74140WB1983PTC036093), which is a member
firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited (PwCIL), each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.

PWC Retail

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PWC Retail

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PWC Retail

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Roll out Plan for

Objective of the study

Approach adopted for completion of the assignment

Background of competition in India

Competition in Indian power sector

Issues in Open Access

Competition in supply side of Distribution business

Objectives of introducing retail supply competition

FOR report on Introducing competition in retail electricity supply in India

Critical Review of Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2014

Structure of the report

Stages of introducing retail supply competition

Stage 1: Functional segregation of Discoms

Defining new functional entities

Defining Roles and Responsibilities of new entities

Treatment of existing financial losses

Transfer of existing PPAs

Defining framework for Consumer Interface

Defining framework for Consumer Grievance Redressal Mechanism

Segregation of standards of performance between entities

Universal Service Obligation on supply/network licenses

Tariff setting mechanism for new entities

Balance sheet segregation of current Distribution business among new entities

Human Resource Planning

Technical studies of as-is condition

Stage 2: Preparation for competition

Ownership of network and retail supply company

Reduction of cross subsidies

Upgradation of existing metering

Creation and ownership of Consumer Database

Stage 3: Onset of competition

Defining license area and issuance of new supply license

Phasing of competition identifying contestable consumer categories or connected load

Power procurement model allocation by intermediary company

Consumer switching mechanism

Process for procurement of new PPAs

Balancing and settlement

Tariff setting mechanism for consumer open for competition

Defining framework for Provider of Last Resort

USO extends to new retail supply companies

Issues in implementation of retail supply competition

Issue 1 Functional Separation of current Discom

Issue 3 Metering Services

Issue 4 Delimitation: Area of Supply and phasing of retail supply competition

Issue 5 Universal Service Obligation (USO)

Issue 6 Allocation of PPAs

Alternative roll out plans for introduction of retail supply competition

Roll Out Plan for Scenario I

Roll Out Plan for Scenario II

Roll Out Plan for Scenario III

Roll Out Plan for Scenario IV

Impact of retail supply competition

Achieving objectives of retail supply competition

Indicators of a successful retail supply competition

Illustration for limiting cross subsidies to wheeling charges

Illustrations for allocation of PPAs

Data for classification of states

Appellate Tribunal for Electricity

Aggregate Technical and Commercial