Pakistan Power Distribution
Systems Appraisal
Distribution system loading assessment
2016
report states that All electricity distribution companies including K-Electric
could not make any major improvement in their performance standards, failed to
deliver on load shedding schedules, struggled in providing fresh connections to
eligible consumers and found misreporting. This is the crux of a performance
evaluation report of ex-WAPDA distribution companies (DISCOs) and KE for
2015-16 in comparison four succeeding years starting 2011-12 through 2014-15
compiled by the National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA).
`It is noted with concern that 2015-16 also did not witness any major improvement in the performance of Discos and KE under the Performance Standards (Distribution) Rules (PSDR) 2005, said the regulator. Under the said rules, each distribution company is required to submit an Annual Performance Report (APR) in the prescribed format to NEPRA. On top of that, the regulator also `noted with serious concern that DISCOs and KE contributed around Rs49 billion and Rs83bn loss, respectively, to the national exchequer in 2015-16 due to their inefficiency with respect to transmission and dispatch (T&D) losses and recovery targets`.
`It is noted with concern that 2015-16 also did not witness any major improvement in the performance of Discos and KE under the Performance Standards (Distribution) Rules (PSDR) 2005, said the regulator. Under the said rules, each distribution company is required to submit an Annual Performance Report (APR) in the prescribed format to NEPRA. On top of that, the regulator also `noted with serious concern that DISCOs and KE contributed around Rs49 billion and Rs83bn loss, respectively, to the national exchequer in 2015-16 due to their inefficiency with respect to transmission and dispatch (T&D) losses and recovery targets`.
NEPRAs
State of Industry Report 2017 regarding loading position of power transformers
of DISCOs system, the report said that on an overall country basis overloading
on power transformers has slightly reduced in the FY 2016- 17 from that of the
FY 2015-16 but it is still very high, as 36.82percent of the total power
transformers in the DISCOs are overloaded, pointing to potential problems. On
the country-wise overloading on 11 kV feeders of DISCOs the report said that it
has slightly increased, as 29.00 percent of the total feeders are loaded above
80 percent compared to 28.14percent last year. On the overloading of
distribution transformers the NEPRA report said that in case of LESCO at 30.13
percent is the highest among Discos, followed by PESCO and SEPCO. LESCO has the
worst record of overloading of distribution transformers. Similarly FESCO has
very serious issues to tackle with the overloading of its power transformers.
Inflated Bills
Not only are power consumers being charged exorbitant rates to
keep a flailing power sector afloat, there have been reports that electricity
distribution companies continue to overcharge them to the tune of Rs30 billion
per year. The issue of systematic overbilling has been highlighted repeatedly
but little has been actually done to combat the problem. Overbilling is a
systemic practice should not be hard to handle, if it is accidental and not
deliberate. All it should require is for meter readers to take accurate
readings – and even if they are unable to check each meter individually, there
are reasonably accurate ways of predicting electricity consumption based on
past usage. In January alone, consumers paid Rs1.97 billion more than required.
On average, the percentage of overcharged units per bill is said to exceed ten
percent. What is shocking is how little outrage this practice has generated.
Consumers continue to be blamed – and criminalized – for not paying electricity
bills. On the other side, electricity companies continue to operate without
civil or criminal liability.
If the government is committed to stomping out the practice, the
first starting point should be fines for distribution companies for gross
malpractice. These fines should exceed the overbilled amounts and be returned
to consumers in the form of subsidies. The excuse that the power sector is
already in turmoil cannot be used, and consumers cannot be forced to pay tariff
above what NEPRA has approved nor can they be forced to pay for electricity
units that they have not consumed. There is a need for an independent inquiry
into the issue. Some have speculated that Discos may be doing this to show a
reduction in distribution losses, which actually stand at around 19 percent.
There are reports that the government is planning to criminalize overbilling by
Disco officials. This is the right approach but the problem is that
distribution companies will continue to rely on overbilling when the government
remains focused on revenue collection, instead of systemic reform in the power
sector. A NEPRA report in 2015 confirmed that 70 percent of ToU meters are
either outdated or out-timed based while around 35 percent of consumers never
have their meters read.
Distribution losses
Losses also have registered an
improvement. Losses are presented as follows:
T&D LOSSES
|
||||
units for
|
units
|
units
|
units
|
|
Trans
|
billed
|
lost
|
lost
|
|
Year
|
M.kWh
|
M.kWh
|
M.kWh
|
%
|
2009
|
82702
|
62286
|
20416
|
24.69
|
2010
|
87115
|
68878
|
18237
|
20.93
|
2011
|
90575
|
71672
|
18903
|
20.87
|
2012
|
88987
|
71368
|
17619
|
19.80
|
2013
|
87080
|
70508
|
16572
|
19.03
|
2014
|
94089
|
76543
|
17546
|
18.65
|
2015
|
95979
|
78113
|
17866
|
18.61
|
2016
|
100871
|
81737
|
19134
|
18.97
|
Growth
|
2.88
|
3.96
|
-0.92
|
-3.69
|
Electricity losses in the
distribution systems have a major impact on both the supply and demand side and
should be reduced as far and as early as possible. On the supply side, a
reduction in losses result in gains in the efficiency of the electricity system,
helping to reduce the amount of electricity production required to meet demand,
with significant financial and associated environmental benefits. On the demand
side, non-technical losses are synonymous with unpaid consumption, potentially
fostering overconsumption of electricity and putting a heavy burden on
electricity supply capacity. From a business approach, a reduction of power
losses would lead to increased financial sustainability of the sector, mainly
resulting from increased billing and cost reductions associated with a better
match between capacity investment and demand. Similar to the practice followed
by other countries, NEPRA allows a cap on the percentage of losses that can be
factored into the tariff by any DISCO. However, this cap is high for most of
the DISCOs and, more importantly, the reduction targets given by NEPRA have not
been historically achieved by them. As a result, some of the system losses are
passed on to consumers through raised electricity tariffs while a bulk leads to
the further ballooning of circular debt.
DISCOs Allowed and Actual Losses %
|
|||||
FY 2014-5
|
FY 2015-6
|
||||
Allowed
|
Actual
|
Requested
|
Allowed
|
Actual
|
|
PESCO
|
26.00
|
34.81
|
32.00
|
26.00
|
33.76
|
TESCO
|
22.31
|
21.41
|
20.00
|
20.00
|
18.96
|
IESCO
|
9.44
|
9.41
|
9.39
|
9.39
|
9.10
|
GEPCO
|
9.98
|
10.72
|
11.60
|
9.98
|
10.58
|
LESCO
|
11.75
|
14.1
|
13.85
|
11.75
|
13.94
|
FESCO
|
9.5
|
11
|
10.98
|
9.50
|
10.24
|
MEPCO
|
15
|
16.8
|
16
|
15.00
|
16.45
|
HESCO
|
20.5
|
27.08
|
22
|
20.50
|
26.46
|
SEPCO
|
27.5
|
38.17
|
34.15
|
27.50
|
37.87
|
QESCO
|
17.5
|
23.85
|
21.5
|
17.5
|
23.92
|
National Average
|
15.27
|
18.7
|
15.23
|
17.95
|
|
The
National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (NEPRA) has noted that Discos have
failed to show any improvement in reducing Transmission and Distribution losses
as their overall losses have been recorded as 17.95percent for 2016-17. Regarding
the T&D losses, the Authority noted that as a whole, DISCOs did not show
any improvement in transmission and distribution losses, as their overall
losses have been recorded as 17.95percent for both the years.
Factors responsible for distribution system losses
As the total distribution
losses, being the combination of technical and commercial losses, have
consistently remained at a high level (17.95% in 2016-17), reducing them by a
large margin within a short time poses a huge challenge. The commercial losses
are mainly due to theft by two categories of costumers: (1) Domestic consumers
that are adversely affected due to negative economic conditions (inflation
and/or low incomes); and (2) Industry/Agriculture customers who would like to
reduce the cost of inputs, electricity being a major one. A third factor is
customer response to low-quality service or poor monitoring by the utilities.
As the factors responsible for system losses vary by types of customers, there
is a need to devise loss reduction programs which ensure a proper
characterization of the target population in order to properly address the
problem
Technical losses:
Technical losses are basically
unavoidable as they are caused by physical inefficiencies such as hysteresis,
Eddy Current losses in the iron core of transformers, and the corona effect in
transmission lines. These losses are proportional to the square of the voltage
and are independent of power flow. Since voltage varies relatively little from
its nominal value, these losses are treated as a constant that depends mainly
on the quality of the line. Variable technical losses happen when power current
flows through the lines, cables, and transformers of the network and these are
responsible for bulk of technical losses in the distribution systems.
Commercial losses:
Receivables of DISCOs Financial Year ended
June, 2016 (Rs. in Billion)
|
|||||
Receivables
|
Receivables
|
||||
(FY ended
|
July, 2015 to June, 2016
|
(FY ended
|
|||
S.No
|
Category
|
June, 2015)
|
Billing
|
Collection
|
Billing Collection June, 2016)
|
1
|
Federal Government
|
||||
a
|
Federal Government /
departments
|
0.15
|
12.35
|
12.43
|
0.02
|
b
|
Local bodies under
Federal Government
|
1.73
|
3.55
|
4.23
|
1.04
|
c
|
Autonomous Bodies under
Fed. Govt.
|
1.58
|
5.90
|
5.84
|
1.66
|
d
|
Defence
|
-0.04
|
15.53
|
15.58
|
-0.10
|
e)
|
W&P
|
1.92
|
1.17
|
1.26
|
1.38
|
Total Federal Governemt
|
5.34
|
38.50
|
39.34
|
4.00
|
|
2
|
AJ&K GOVERNMENT
|
||||
1)
|
GoP Share
|
0.4
|
0
|
0
|
0.4
|
ii)
|
DISCOs Share
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
iii)
|
AJ&K Share
|
52.73
|
16.33
|
4
|
65.07
|
Total AJ&K
|
53.13
|
16.33
|
4
|
65.47
|
|
3
|
PROVINCIAL GOVT. DEPTTS./AGENCIES
|
||||
a)
|
Punjab
|
3.46
|
18.86
|
20.46
|
1.84
|
b)
|
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
|
19.72
|
5
|
5.36
|
19.41
|
c)
|
Sindh
|
66.21
|
20.6
|
9.18
|
73.44
|
d)
|
Balochistan
|
7.7
|
2.92
|
5.69
|
4.94
|
Total Provincial Govt.
Deptts./Agencies
|
97.09
|
47.38
|
40.69
|
99.63
|
|
Total 1 to 3
|
155.56
|
102.21
|
84.03
|
169.10
|
|
4
|
FATA (DOMESTIC CONSUMERS)
|
37.09
|
2.47
|
18.96
|
20.6
|
5
|
AGRICULTURAL TUBE WELLS IN BALOCHISTAN
|
||||
i)
|
GoP Share excluding GST
subsidy
|
4.93
|
7.21
|
9.62
|
11.75
|
ii)
|
GOB Share
|
2.77
|
10.81
|
13.82
|
13.61
|
Total Agri. Tube wells in
Balochistan
|
7.7
|
18.02
|
23.44
|
25.36
|
|
6
|
6 PRIVATE (Including 4+5)
|
433.58
|
853.3
|
818.52
|
468.71
|
7
|
IPPs
|
0.02
|
0.99
|
0.99
|
0.03
|
8
|
KE
|
43.7
|
40.64
|
38.38
|
46.24
|
GRAND TOTAL
|
632.86
|
997.14
|
941.92
|
684.08
|
|
These are the difference between electricity delivered by a
supplier but not paid for by the users, resulting in direct financial losses
for the entire supply chain. These losses may be due to actions external to the
power system but are also a result of poor overall management of the DISCOs. Theft
is the major cause of distribution losses and to prevent it the judiciary’s
active involvement (which gives stay orders against disconnection of service to
those who are caught stealing) is essential. DISCOs also need their own police
stations and/or dedicated police stations to deal with theft with the
assistance of provincial government machinery.
The
different types of commercial losses with suggested mitigation measures for
their reduction are given in Table below.
Table-:
Commercial losses and their mitigation
Losses due
to
|
Explanation
|
Mitigation
measure(s)
|
Primary
Responsibility
|
Secondary
Responsibility
|
Theft
|
Energy which is illegally appropriated from the
network by users through illegal connections
|
Legal measures through enforcement of electricity
theft law
|
District administration with the help of police
|
DISCOs
|
Fraud
|
Modifying meters to register lower levels of
consumption than actually used (tampering)
|
Sealing, monitoring and replacement with smart meters
|
DISCOs
|
DISCOs
|
Unmetered supply
|
For example, street lighting and traffic lights
|
Enact and enforce rules for billing and recovery
from city administration
|
DISCOs
|
City/District administrations
|
Mismanagement
|
Miscalculations or errors in accounting and record
keeping
|
Modernize accounting systems
|
DISCOs
|
DISCOs
|
Non-recovery
|
Electricity billed but amount not received
|
Feeder closures to reduce hours of supply (already
in force)
|
Ministry of Energy (Power Division)
|
DISCOs
|
Future projections
If not checked the total
distribution losses will reach 113,364 GWh by 2040 – a four-fold increase as
compared to 26,411 GWh in 2016. This would translate into an annual financial
loss of Rs. 1,360 billion by 2040 as compared to Rs. 316 billion in 2018. Unless
it is countered effectively, this situation threatens the sustainability of
Pakistan’s electricity sector by reducing its financial capacity to undertake
investments for improving the overall system infrastructure. Moreover, this
lost income indirectly affects progress towards the target of universal access
to electricity, as distribution companies will have fewer resources to improve
electrification rate in rural areas. The start can be made by directing the
investments to Distribution as a top priority action for the power sector.
Failing this, new power generation additions will continue but the bottlenecks
in the distribution systems will result in more than 15% of the energy
generation dissipating as system loss.
A summary of investment needs
for the 5- year period from FY2019 to FY2023 is given in Table-below. The list
of projects is long and due to inadequate institutional capacity of DISCOs to
build a huge infrastructure in a short time-frame, a system should be devised
to assign priority for those projects which have the shortest payback period.
This can be achieved through adoption of a “Results-Based Investment”
methodology so that projects with high benefit-to-cost ratio are implemented
first. A strict criterion which demonstrates reduction in losses should be
adhered to in making investment decisions.
Table-:
Five-Year (2018-19 to 2022-23) Distribution Investment Plan[1]
Serial Number
|
Name of Program
|
Investment Needed (Billion Pak
Rupees)
|
Component-1
|
Distribution of Power
|
88,378
|
Component-2
|
Energy Loss Reduction
|
62,192
|
Component-3
|
Secondary T&G
|
173,825
|
TOTAL AMOUNT
|
324,395
|
|
INADEQUATE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Governance at the company level leaves much to be desired.
For the most part the DISCOs’ BODs do not have sufficient
authority or capacity to demand accountability of management and staff and are
ineffective in managing DISCO performance. Politically driven appointments of
CEOs and top management continue to prolong and enhance self interest groups in
maintaining the status quo.
Customer Service rules are not enforced and do not
adequately reward good customer
Performance or discourage poor performance. At times,
companies have deliberately overbilled
Customers, yet were able to escape meaningful punishment. It
has been alleged that
Power and fuel thefts are often conducted with employee
collusion. The result is a culture
that ignores theft on the part of some workers and poor
performance on the part of others and does not reward those who try to perform
their functions honestly and with high professional ethics. A Customer Service
manual and other performance documents prescribed by NEPRA set out parameters
of service. However, none of the DISCOs adhere to such parameters, nor does
NEPRA seem to have the will to do so.
GOVERNANCE BY NEPRA
NEPRA was established in 1997, and is legally responsible for the
regulation of Pakistan’s power sector. It is legally an independent,
quasi-judicial authority The procedure
for tariff determination is lengthy, resulting in tariffs that are
non-compensating by the time they are put in force. Similarly,
NEPRA’s administration of fuel price adjustment charges is ex post facto
with a significant time delay, thereby failing to cover the rising fuel costs
for the power producers resulting in a distorted price signal to customers.
NEPRA members are nominated by the provinces and appointed by the
federal government.
While professional standing of appointees is one of the qualifications
for appointment, nominations are driven by various personal and political
considerations. Consequently, NEPRA is subject to pressure from political and
executive quarters in the performance of its functions and generally lacks the
professional competency needed to effectively perform its regulatory functions.
Moreover, NEPRA’s inability to move beyond the single buyer model in which CPPA
is the sole purchaser of power from the power producers and sole seller to the
DISCOs needs to be strengthened. This lack of ability inhibits movement towards
a competitive power market where power producers and customers are empowered to
make direct arrangements to buy and sell electricity on a competitive basis.
The regulator is short of qualified technical staff and has to increasingly
depend on contract and seconded government staff, which often creates a
conflict of interest. A review of the numbers and composition of its staff and
subsequent realignment to ensure that staffing matches
the needed capability should be done. In addition, the perks and benefits
structure for the staff at NEPRA also needs to be reviewed. NEPRA could not
retain the professionals it has had as they eventually moved on, having been
offered better packages elsewhere in the country.
NEPRA also lacks effectiveness in enforcing accountability
of the DISCOs, particularly with respect to reducing T&D loss levels, and
meeting performance standards and license conditions as set out through the
investments allowed through the tariff petitions filed and performance targets
set. In addition, the public does not clearly understand the regulator’s role
and rationale, resulting in consumers’ confusion and unrealistic expectations.
POOR REVENUE COLLECTION
Poor revenue collection contributed Rs86.9 billon to the
circular debt in 2012. Five of the DISCOs had good collection rates while the
other four (Hyderabad Electric Supply Company – HESCO, Sukkur Electric Power Company – SEPCO, Peshawar Electric Supply
Company– PESCO, and Quetta Electric Supply Company – QESCO) contributed Rs72.14
billion or 83% of the total uncollected amount. Poor revenue collection is due
to a number of factors, .Non-payment of electricity
dues by private consumers is one of the largest contributors to circular debt.
The problem is not uniform across the country as some DISCOs have good track
records while others display poor collection efficiency. Of the Rs197 billion14
receivables from private consumers at the end of FY 2012, 73% is attributable
to PESCO (including Tribal Areas Electric Supply Company (TESCO)), HESCO
(including SEPCO),and QESCO. The position of each company is shown in following
Table
Private Receivables –
Million Rs.
|
|||||
DISCOs
|
2008-09
|
2009-10
|
2010-11
|
2011-12
|
% Share
|
PESCO*
|
26,809
|
32,902
|
41,282
|
51,360
|
26%
|
HESCO
|
18,856
|
25,454
|
33,344
|
44,237
|
22%
|
QESCO
|
4,297
|
5,238
|
24,780
|
48,193
|
24%
|
LESCO
|
10,957
|
15,968
|
17,081
|
23,080
|
12%
|
GEPCO
|
3,585
|
5,322
|
5,631
|
5,912
|
3%
|
FESCO
|
3,719
|
5,676
|
5,866
|
7,068
|
4%
|
IESCO
|
2,287
|
2,286
|
2,762
|
2,703
|
1%
|
MEPCO
|
7,252
|
10,505
|
11,900
|
14,638
|
7%
|
All DISCOs
|
77,762
|
103,351
|
142,646
|
197,191
|
100%
|
PESCO includes TESCO and HESCO includes SESCO
|
|||||
In terms of annual performance in the collection of revenue, the overall
efficiency was 87%16 in FY 2012. The financial impact of not recovering the
remaining 13% is estimated to be around Rs86 billion, or equal to 41 days of
furnace oil costs for thermal power plants.17 Again, PESCO, HESCO, SEPCO, and
QESCO had the worst collection efficiency, as shown in Table
DISCO Wise Revenue
Collection Efficiency
|
|||||
DISCOs
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
PESCO*
|
71%
|
67%
|
227%
|
78%
|
68%
|
HESCO
|
77%
|
68%
|
60%
|
59%
|
60%
|
QESCO
|
86%
|
80%
|
76%
|
41%
|
36%
|
LESCO
|
98%
|
96%
|
93%
|
98%
|
96%
|
GEPCO
|
98%
|
95%
|
96%
|
99%
|
98%
|
FESCO
|
99%
|
97%
|
97%
|
100%
|
98%
|
IESCO
|
98%
|
97%
|
96%
|
93%
|
96%
|
MEPCO
|
97%
|
96%
|
94%
|
98%
|
97%
|
All DISCOs
|
89%
|
92%
|
106%
|
89%
|
87%
|
Smart Metering, Jan.,23,2019: Federal Minister for Power has directed
electricity distribution companies to immediately undertake GIS (geographic
information system) mapping of all 11-kilovolt feeders and replace 100,000
electromagnetic meters with digital meters by the end of February 2019 in order
to reduce line losses. The minister told the meeting that the Power Division
was in the process of initiating the smart metering infrastructure project in
all areas covered by the distribution companies. He particularly mentioned
Peshawar and Multan electricity companies, which were the next in line, as
Lahore and Islamabad companies had already initiated the process.
Mobile Phone based energy theft detection,
Jan., 23, 2019: A mobile company has launched a pilot
project to track and curb electricity theft in one of the most difficult areas
of the country. The project will be
implemented on the electricity feeder of Karkhano area in Peshawar that has a
theft ratio of more than 54 per cent. UK’s GSMA is sponsoring the project by
funding 200,000 pounds sterling, while digital solutions will be presented to
the cellular company, JAZZ. This pilot project would be implemented in the area
that has 25,000 consumers, but the cost of monitoring electricity theft under
this solution is far less than the smart metering solution presented .The new
solution presented by the CISNR works on the basis of installation of ‘smart
electronic’ devices at various stages of electricity supply chain and the
monitoring offices would detect the quantity of electricity consumption from
meters and electricity supplied to that area. With the detection of imbalance in supply and consumption, the
relevant electricity company would further narrow down to catch power thieves.
Distribution losses 2018: Jan., 28, 2019: The
overall line losses of distribution companies (Discos) in the public sector
remained unchanged at 18.3 per cent during the current financial year.The
Sukkur Electric Power Company is the most inefficient distribution firm with
41.3 pc line losses this year against 36.7 pc of the last financial year. The
line losses of the Peshawar Electric Supply Company dropped by almost 2 pc in a
year, but it continues to be the second most inefficient company with line
losses of 36.2 pc in 2018-19. Its line losses stood at 38.1pc during the last
financial year.The Hyderabad Electric Supply Company came number three as its
line losses jumped to 33.6pc in 2018-19 from 29.9 pc last fiscal year.The Quetta
Electric Supply Company`s line losses dropped to 21.8 pc this year from 22.4 pc in
2017-18.The Multan Electric Power Company`s line losses jumped to 17.5 pc this
year from 16.6 pc the previous financial year.The line losses of the Lahore
Electric Supply Company soared to 14.5 pc in 201819 as compared to 13.8 pc in
2017-18.The Tribal Electric Supply Company`s line losses went up to 13.3 pc this
year from the previous year`s 12.5 pc.The line losses of the Gujranwala Electric
Power Company jumped to 11.1 pc in 2018-19 from 10 pc last year.The Faisalabad
Electric Supply Company`s line losses dropped to 9.8 pc this year from 10.5 pc
last year.The Islamabad Electricity Supply Company continues to be the most
efficient firm as it reduced its line losses to 7.9 pc this year from 9.1 pc in
2017-18.
NEPRA report 2018: July, 7, 2019:
National exchequer suffered a loss of
more than Rs. 45 billion in 2017-18 due to the inefficiency of power
distribution companies (Discos). It is noted with concern that during the
period under report, DISCOs contributed the loss of more than Rs. 45 billion on
account of T&D losses, whereas, they failed to make recovery of Rs. 78
billion against bills charged, noted NEPRA in the Performance Evaluation Report
of Distribution Companies (2017-18). Under Performance Standards Distribution
Rules (PSDR) 2005, each distribution company is required to submit to NEPRA an
Annual Performance Report (APR) in a prescribed format. The APRs for the FY
2017-18, submitted by the distribution licensees, were reviewed on the basis of
parameters namely, transmission and distribution (T&D) losses, recovery,
system average interruption frequency index (SAIFI), system average
interruption duration index (SAIDI), time frame for new connections,
loadshedding, nominal voltage, consumer complaints, safety, and fault rate. No
remarkable improvement in the performance of distribution companies
particularly PESCO, SEPCO, HESCO and QESCO has been observed.
Regarding T&D losses it was
observed by the report that most of the DISCOs have made gradual improvement
except PESCO, FESCO and HESCO. Particularly, if the values of losses in 2017-18
are compared with the values of 2016-17, it has been observed that all have
shown improvement except IESCO and PESCO. While most of the DISCOs have made
improvement, KE continued to take the lead among all reducing it from 25.30% in
2013-14 to 20.4% in 2017-18.
Regarding T&D losses &
recovery, the report noted with concern that during the period under report,
DISCOs contributed the loss of more than Rs. 45 billion on account of T&D
losses, whereas, they failed to make recovery of Rs. 78 billion against bills
charged. Examination of T&D losses has revealed that none of the DISCOS
except IESCO could meet regulator’s expectations. It is relevant to state here
that the T&D losses of PESCO were 38.1% against 27.62% as allowed by NEPRA.
In the field of recovery of bills, MEPCO & IESCO have shown better
performance, whereas, QESCO with a recovery of 46.1% stood lowest among all the
DISCOs during FY 2017-18.
MEPCO has shown highest recovery
followed by IESCO among all other DISCOs and almost has touched the target of
100%. Further, GEPCO, FESCO and LESCO have also shown good performance in this
regard and achieved more than 97% recoveries. Rest of the DISCOs, however are
lagging behind the target of 100% which will definitely impact their services
to the consumers. Particularly, HESCO & SEPCO have performed poorly.
QESCO’s performance is exceptionally bad in terms of recovery rates in 2017-18
which stands at 46.1%. KE achieved 91.04 percent target. On the financial
impact of breach of recovery targets, the report said that the loss of revenue
which was not recovered by the DISCOs and KE due to their poor management. The
loss to the national exchequer accumulates to more than 78 billion rupees. It
is also observed that MEPCO & IESCO have incurred very small loss as
compared to other DISCOs under this head during the year 2017-18. Whereas,
K-Electric has incurred highest loss.
Recovery rates of QESCO, IESCO,
GEPCO, FESCO, LESCO, MEPCO have gone down whereas PESCO, SEPCO, HESCO and
K-Electric have shown marked improvement during the last 3 years. The report
suggests that by applying good governance and management techniques, DISCOs can
further improve their recovery rates. Regarding System Average Interruption
Frequency Index (SAIFI) and System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI),
the report said that SEPCO’s performance in this indicator remained worst of all
with a reported number of 568, followed by MEPCO and HESCO with 316 and 180
respectively. On the other hand, PESCO, LESCO, K-Electric and QESCO showed
marked improvement. The regulator noted with concern huge variations in SAIDI
numbers and maintained that reliable power can be supplied to the end users by
improving SAIFI & SAIDI by carrying out regular maintenance of distribution
system.
On new connection, the NEPRA report
said that in comparison to 2016-17, PESCO, FESCO, LESCO QESCO and K-Electric
have shown improvement in provision of new power connections during 2017-18.
Whereas, IESCO has shown zero pendency of new connections same as in last year,
which is far away from ground realities. NEPRA team during visit of different
distribution companies noted with serious concern the number of pending
applications. IESCO, PESCO, QESCO, SEPCO, HESCO and K-Electric have provided
more than 95% connections to eligible consumers in 2017-18. However, GEPCO’s
performance is worst in this regard followed by FESCO. Further, slight breach
of targets has also been made by LESCO & MEPCO.
On the issue of consumer service
complaints, the report said that the number of complaints received by DISCOs
over the period of last five years through different modes indicates a mixed
trend with LESCO, QESCO, SEPCO, KE and HESCO receiving a greater number of
complaints in 2017-18 as compared to 2016-17. The data provided by the
distribution companies shows that except GEPCO, LESCO and K-Electric, all other
DISCOs have not received even 2 complaints on average per complaint center per day.
This is not rationalized as the same was verified by NEPRA team during visits
of different DISCOs.
On the safety issue, NEPRA report
said that it was observed that a total of one hundred and fifty two (152)
fatalities occurred in all distribution companies in 2017-18. The breakup of
data reveals that 72 of these were employees and 80 were general public.
GEPCO reported the highest fatal
accidents of 29 in 2017-18 followed by LESCO, IESCO, MEPCO, SEPCO and HESCO
with 21, 20, 17, 17 and 15. NEPRA noted with serious concern that these DISCOs
have failed to adhere the safety procedures and develop a safety culture.
DISCOs are required to prioritize safety as of losses and recovery.
Theft: July,24,2019: public sector distribution companies (Discos)
were now following the KE model in the rest of the country and slowly the
system was changing to ABC transformers. AMI system was not a practical
solution in areas where theft was taking place through kundas, rather it was effective
in areas with theft through meters. AMI was a successful model against
electricity theft in Punjab while ABC cabling was a better idea for Discos of
Hyderabad, Sukkur and Quetta . Most of the electricity theft in the country was
taking place not through meters but through direct cables bypassing meters and
it could be addressed with the help of ABC system.
T&D Losses: Sep., 22, 2019:
Transmission, distribution losses of Discos go up by 0.37pc. Recovery ratio has
also been deteriorated in eight out of ten Discos and overall recovery ratio
has seen a dip of more than four percentage points. NEPRA has said that
transmission and distribution losses of the Discos have increased by 0.37
percent during last year and seven DISCOs (excluding LESCO, SEPCO and TESCO)
booked a total loss of Rs. 207.3 billion during 2017-18. According to the
report, the overall receivables of all the DISCOs have increased by Rs. 166.26
billion which are considerably higher than the receivables of Rs. 45.82 billion
during FY 2016-17. As on June 30, 2018, the overall distribution sector
receivables stood at Rs. 896.15 billion whereas, the receivables at the start
of this financial year were Rs. 729.89 billion. Since DISCOs are centrally
controlled by the Ministry of Energy (Power Division), therefore overall
responsibility lies with the federal government for taking necessary steps for
improvement in this area. . https://nation.com.pk/21-Sep-2019/transmission-distribution-losses-of-discos-up-by-0-37pc
No comments:
Post a Comment