Summary:

—

### **1. PETITION OVERVIEW**

* **Petitioner:** Himachal Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited (HPPTCL)
* **Respondents:** Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited (HPSEBL) and Others
* **Subject:** A petition filed under the **Electricity Act, 2003** and relevant CERC regulations for:
1. **Truing up** of the transmission tariff for the **2019-24** period (adjusting past tariffs based on actual costs).
2. **Determination** of the transmission tariff for the **2024-29** period (setting future tariffs).
* **Assets Involved:** The petition pertains to **three (3) Inter-State Transmission System (ISTS) assets** owned by HPPTCL.

—

### **2. PROCEEDINGS & COMMISSION’S DIRECTIONS**

During the hearing, the Petitioner’s counsel confirmed the petition’s purpose. The Commission then issued the following procedural and substantive directions:

**A. Procedural Timeline:**
1. **Notice** to be issued to all Respondents.
2. **Respondents** must file their **replies (on affidavit) within two weeks**, with an advance copy to HPPTCL.
3. **HPPTCL** may then file its **rejoinder within one week**.

**B. Specific Information Sought from HPPTCL (on affidavit within two weeks):**
The Commission directed HPPTCL to provide the following critical documents and justifications:
1. **Justification for Weighted Average Rate of Interest (WAROI):** HPPTCL must explain its use of a **10% WAROI** in its calculations.
2. **Tax Documentation:** Submission of **Assessment Orders or Income Tax Returns** for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) for Financial Years **2022-23 and 2023-24**.
3. **Detailed Note on Disputed Financial Components:** A comprehensive explanation claiming:
* **Interest on Loan (IoL)** for Asset-1.
* **Return on Equity (RoE)** for all assets in this petition.
* **Critical Context:** The Commission had previously **disallowed** these very components (IoL & RoE) in its past orders dated **16.5.2016 (Petition 119/TT/2014)** and **27.9.2021 (Petition 305/TT/2020)**. HPPTCL must now justify why these claims should be reconsidered.
4. **Auditor’s Certificates:** Submission of auditor-certified statements for the assets covering both the **2019-24 and 2024-29 tariff periods**.

**C. Next Hearing Date:** The petition is scheduled for the next hearing on **19 February 2026**.

—

### **3. KEY BUSINESS & REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS**

* **Regulatory Scrutiny:** CERC is subjecting HPPTCL’s tariff claims to **rigorous scrutiny**, especially on financial parameters that have been contentious in the past.
* **Critical Financial Disputes:** The core of the inquiry revolves around **Interest on Loan (IoL)** and **Return on Equity (RoE)**, which are major components of the tariff. HPPTCL’s ability to successfully justify these claims, contrary to past rejections, will significantly impact the final approved tariff and its revenue.
* **Data-Driven Justification:** The Commission demands **concrete evidence and detailed justifications** (WAROI rationale, tax proofs, auditor certifications) rather than mere claims, emphasizing **prudence and transparency**.
* **Historical Precedent:** HPPTCL faces an uphill task as it must argue against the **Commission’s own past decisions** that disallowed similar claims. This indicates a potentially significant regulatory hurdle.
* **Impact on Tariff:** The outcome of this petition will determine the **transmission charges** that HPPTCL can levy on users (like HPSEBL) for using its three ISTS assets for the next five years (2024-29) and will settle accounts for the previous five years (2019-24).

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—

### **1. PROCEEDINGS & COMMISSION’S DIRECTIONS**

After hearing PGCIL’s representatives, the Commission issued the following procedural directions:

**A. Timeline for Submissions:**
1. **Respondents** (State Utilities) to file their **replies within two weeks**, with an advance copy to PGCIL.
2. **PGCIL** may file its **rejoinder within two weeks** thereafter.

**B. Specific Information Sought from PGCIL (on Affidavit within two weeks):**
The Commission directed PGCIL to provide detailed, asset-specific information for most petitions. The **common themes** across the data requests are:

1. **Detailed Cost Breakdowns:**
* **Item-wise unit cost** for claimed Additional Capital Expenditure (ACE) related to asset replacement.
* **Element-wise/Party-wise break-up** of capital costs (as on 31.3.2019) and claimed ACE.

2. **Historical Comparison & Justification:**
* **Comparison tables** showing ACE **allowed in previous tariff orders vs. claimed now** for 2019-24, with justifications for any variations.
* **Reconciliation of cost overruns** (e.g., Petition 525/TT/2025 notes a variation of ₹1117.53 lakh).

3. **Regulatory Form Compliance:**
* Submission of specific **Forms (e.g., Form-5, 7B, 9C, 9E, 13)** related to plant & machinery cost, depreciation, and tariff calculations for both 2019-24 and 2024-29 periods.

4. **Technical & Economic Justification for Future Capex (2024-29):**
* **Basis, technical justification, and cost-benefit analysis** for ACE/De-capitalization claimed under **Regulation 25(2) of the 2024 Tariff Regulations**.

5. **Supporting Documentation:**
* **Certificates of obsolescence** from OEMs or competent authorities for replaced equipment.
* **Minutes of relevant committee meetings** approving projects (e.g., NERPC/TCC for Kumarghat substation in Petition 539/TT/2025).
* **Liquidated damages recovery statements** and **initial spares discharge statements**.

—

### **2. KEY BUSINESS & REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS**

* **Regulatory Scrutiny:** The Commission is conducting a **detailed, granular review** of PGCIL’s capital expenditures, both past (truing up) and future (tariff determination). The focus is on **prudence, justification, and cost-effectiveness**.
* **Focus on ACE:** A significant portion of the inquiry revolves around **Additional Capital Expenditure (ACE)**, indicating scrutiny of project cost overruns, replacements, and upgrades.
* **Transparency & Accountability:** The directives emphasize **transparency** through standardized formats (tables, forms), comparisons with past approvals, and demand for third-party certificates (OEM).
* **Procedure:** The process follows a standard regulatory timeline: **Petition → Hearing → Directions for Information → Respondent’s Reply → Rejoinder → Final Order**.
* **Subject Matter:** The petitions cover a wide range of transmission assets—from system strengthening schemes to project-specific systems—highlighting PGCIL’s ongoing role in national grid development and the subsequent periodic tariff resets.
* **Next Steps:** The matters are **reserved for order** after compliance with the above directions. The final tariff orders will determine the revenue PGCIL can recover from beneficiary states for using these transmission assets for the next five years.

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—

### **1. BACKGROUND & CONTEXT**

HAPL operates a manufacturing plant in Solapur, Maharashtra, and is an MSEDCL consumer (Consumer No. 341629059470). It had installed a **983 kW rooftop solar system** under a **Net Metering Agreement** with MSEDCL (executed August 2022). HAPL also entered into **Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs)** for captive renewable energy supply through open access.

The dispute arose because after availing **Open Access** for its offsite renewable power, MSEDCL **refused to allow Net Metering** for HAPL’s rooftop solar generation, instead treating it on a **Gross Metering basis** from November 2023 onward. This resulted in significant financial loss to HAPL.

—

### **2. HAPL’S MAIN PRAYERS**

1. Direct MSEDCL to treat HAPL’s rooftop solar system under **Net Metering** arrangement.
2. Grant **retrospective adjustment** of amounts paid from the start of Open Access (November 2023) based on Net Metering.

—

### **3. KEY ARGUMENTS OF HAPL**

– HAPL is eligible under **Regulation 3.2** of the Distribution Open Access (DOA) Regulations (Contract Demand > 1 MVA).
– The **DOA (Second Amendment) Regulations 2023** (effective 10 November 2023) **deleted the 8th proviso** that earlier mandated Gross Metering during Open Access.
– New **Regulation 3.4** explicitly permits simultaneous Open Access and Net Metering for eligible consumers.
– MSEDCL’s continued Gross Metering billing is **contrary to the amended regulations**.
– HAPL had repeatedly requested MSEDCL to allow Net Metering (Jan–July 2025) but received no response.
– MSEDCL’s reliance on its own **Clarification Petition (Case No. 232 of 2024)** is misplaced as the regulation is already in force.

—

### **4. MSEDCL’S DEFENSE**

– At the time of commissioning (Nov 2022), the **DOA (First Amendment) Regulations 2019** applied, which required Gross Metering during Open Access.
– The 2023 Amendment is **prospective**, and HAPL did not apply for **Green Energy Open Access (GEOA)** through the proper **Nodal Agency (MSLDC)** as required.
– MSEDCL filed **Case No. 232 of 2024** seeking clarification on the interpretation of Regulations 3.3 and 3.4, which is still pending.
– Until clarity is provided, existing billing (Gross Metering) continues.
– HAPL’s failure to comply with GEOA procedure renders its claim invalid.

—

### **5. MERC’S ANALYSIS & RULINGS**

#### **a) Regulatory Framework (Issue a)**
– The **8th proviso of the 2019 Regulations** (requiring Gross Metering during Open Access) was **deleted** in the 2023 Amendment.
– **Regulation 3.4** now explicitly allows **simultaneous Open Access and Net Metering**.
– Since HAPL’s Open Access started in **November 2023**, billing **must follow Net Metering** from 10 November 2023 onward.

#### **b) Compliance with Open Access Procedure (Issue b)**
– MSEDCL delayed implementing the 2023 Amendment until directed by MERC in **Case No. 129 of 2024** (Sept 2024).
– HAPL applied to MSEDCL (as Nodal Agency under earlier rules), and MSEDCL approved monthly Open Access.
– **MSEDCL’s own failure to implement the new system cannot deny HAPL its rightful benefit.**

#### **c) Overlap with MSEDCL’s Clarification Petition (Issue c)**
– In **Case No. 197 of 2024** (July 2025), MSEDCL had already **agreed to provide Net Metering adjustments** subject to the outcome of its clarification petition.
– MERC held that **MSEDCL cannot discriminate** between similarly placed consumers.
– The regulation is **in force**, and MSEDCL must comply.

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—-

### **1. Overview and Context:**
– **Date of Hearing:** 13th January 2026.
– **Common Petitioner:** Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (PGCIL).
– **Subject:** Multiple petitions (listed below) for **truing up of tariffs for the 2019-24 period** and **determination of tariffs for the 2024-29 period** for various transmission assets across India.
– **Regulatory Framework:** Petitions filed under the relevant tariff regulations (e.g., CERC Tariff Regulations, 2019).

### **2. List of Petitions & Key Respondents:**
The petitions involve transmission schemes across different regions. Key respondents are primarily the state power distribution companies (DISCOMs) of the respective beneficiary states.

| Petition No. | Scheme/Project Name | Region | Key Respondent(s) |
| :— | :— | :— | :— |
| **924/TT/2025** | Integration of Pooling Stations in Chhattisgarh… | Western | MPPMCL & 5 Others |
| **926/TT/2025** | System Strengthening XXVI | Southern | TANGEDCO/TNPDCL & 13 Others |
| **921/TT/2025** | System Strengthening Scheme-XIII | Southern | TANGEDCO/TNPDCL & 13 Others |
| **920/TT/2025** | Transmission System for Pavagada Solar Park Phase-I | Southern | TANGEDCO/TNPDCL & 13 Others |
| **962/TT/2025** | Substation works beyond Vemagiri | Southern | TANGEDCO/TNPDCL & 14 Others |
| **964/TT/2025** | WR-NR Corridor for Chhattisgarh IPPs | Northern | UPPCL & 21 Others |
| **413/TT/2025** | North Eastern Region Strengthening Scheme-IV | North Eastern | APDCL & 6 Others |
| **435/TT/2025** | Inter-Regional Strengthening (WR & NR Part-A) | Inter-Regional | MPPMCL & 5 Others |
| **411/TT/2025** | Raipur-Rajnandgaon TL for Chhattisgarh IPPs | Western | MPPMCL & 8 Others |
| **518/TT/2025** | Transmission for Phase-I Gen Projects in Odisha | Western | MPPMCL & 5 Others |
| **420/TT/2025** | Western Region System Strengthening Scheme-V | Western | MPPMCL & 5 Others |
| **731/TT/2025** | *(Details not fully specified in snippet)* | *Not Specified* | *Not Specified* |

### **3. Proceedings and Core Issue:**
– PGCIL, as the Central Transmission Utility (CTU), is seeking **regulatory approval for the final tariffs** for its transmission assets.
– The process involves two key steps for each asset:
1. **Truing Up (2019-24):** Final reconciliation of actual capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operational costs against earlier estimates to determine the final payable tariff for the past period.
2. **Tariff Determination (2024-29):** Setting the approved tariff for the next regulatory period based on the trued-up capital cost and normative operational parameters.

### **4. Business & Regulatory Implications:**

– **For PGCIL:** This is a critical, routine regulatory process to **secure revenue recovery** for its vast transmission investments. Timely and accurate submission of the voluminous data is essential to avoid delays in tariff approval and cash flow.
– **For Respondent DISCOMs:** They have the opportunity to **review and challenge** PGCIL’s cost claims. Their scrutiny is vital to ensure that only prudent and efficient costs are passed through to the end consumers via tariffs.
– **For End Consumers:** The outcome of these petitions will ultimately influence the **transmission component of electricity bills** for consumers in the beneficiary states.
– **For the Power Sector:** The process underscores the **regulated, cost-plus nature of transmission tariffs** in India. It ensures transparency and allows recovery of investments for critical national grid infrastructure.

—-

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—-

**1. Official Details of the Amendment:**
– **Regulation Name:** Telangana Electricity Regulatory Commission (Licensee’s Duty for Supply of Electricity on Request) Second Amendment Regulation, 2026.
– **Regulation No.:** 01 of 2026.
– **Date of Notification:** 17th January 2026.
– **Effective From:** The date of its publication in the Telangana Gazette.
– **Amends:** The Principal Regulation (No. 4 of 2013) and its First Amendment (No. 1 of 2015).

**2. Primary Objective:**
– To **simplify and expedite** the process for releasing **new LT connections** and **additional loads** in electrified areas.
– To introduce **uniform, objective, and load-based Service Line Charges**, eliminating the need for individual site inspections and case-by-case estimations.

**3. Key Amendments Introduced:**

**A. New Service Line Charges (SLC) for Overhead Line Connections (Clause 7.1):**
– Applies to new/additional **LT connections** (excluding LT-VIII: Temporary supply & Electrification of Layouts) within **1 km of an electrified network**.
– Charges are **per kW of contracted load** and vary by consumer category.
– **Excludes** cost of terminal and metering arrangements (borne by licensee).
– **Distribution Licensee must supply and erect the Distribution Transformer at its own cost and maintain it.**

**B. Category-wise Service Line Charges (Rs./kW):**

| Category | Load Bracket | Service Line Charges |
| :— | :— | :— |
| **LT-I: Domestic** | Up to 1 kW | ₹500 |
| | Above 1–5 kW | ₹500 + ₹600/kW |
| | Above 5–20 kW | ₹2,900 + ₹1,500/kW |
| | Above 20 kW | ₹10,000/kW |
| **LT-II: Non-Domestic/Commercial, LT-VI (Street Lights), LT-VII (General)** | Up to 1 kW | ₹1,000 |
| | Above 1–5 kW | ₹1,000 + ₹1,200/kW |
| | Above 5–20 kW | ₹5,800 + ₹2,000/kW |
| | Above 20 kW | ₹10,000/kW |
| **LT-III: Industries** | Up to 20 kW | ₹4,000/kW |
| | Above 20 kW | ₹10,000/kW |
| **LT-IV: Cottage Industries** | All loads | ₹1,000/kW |
| **LT-V: Agriculture** | All loads | ₹1,000/kW (No ORC from farmers) |
| **LT-IX: EV Charging Stations** | Up to 1 kW | ₹1,000 |
| | Above 1–20 kW | ₹1,000 + ₹1,200/kW |
| | Above 20 kW | ₹8,000/kW |

**Important Note for Apartments/Complexes:** Combined contracted load of the building is considered for levying SLC.

**C. Revised Rules for Development Charges & Transformers (Clause 8.3):**
– **For dedicated transformers** in commercial complexes/apartments **NOT covered under the new SLC system**, the licensee recovers the **full transformer cost**, owns and maintains it, and cannot supply other consumers from it. **No Development Charges** are levied.
– **For connections COVERED under the new SLC system (Clause 7.1):**
– **Load ≤ 20 kW** (individual or combined for buildings): Pay **Development Charges** (as per Schedule) **plus SLC**.
– **Load > 20 kW** (individual or combined for buildings): Pay **SLC only**. **No Development Charges**.

**D. New Clauses Added:**
– **Clause 13:** Empowers the Commission to issue **orders and practice directions** for implementing this regulation.
– **Clause 14:** Grants the Commission the power to **amend, suspend, or repeal** any provision of this regulation in the future.

**4. Business Implications:**
– **For Consumers (Applicants):**
– **Predictable Costs:** Transparent, upfront Service Line Charges based on load and category.
– **Faster Processing:** Simplified process eliminates individual estimations and inspections for standard cases.
– **Lower Cost for Agriculture & Cottage Industries:** Fixed low rate of ₹1,000/kW.
– **EV Charging Support:** Separate, slightly lower tariff slab to promote EV infrastructure.
– **No Transformer Cost:** Licensee bears the cost and maintenance of the distribution transformer for connections under the new SLC system.

– **For Distribution Licensees (DISCOMs):**
– **Streamlined Operations:** Uniform charges reduce administrative burden.
– **Revenue Clarity:** Clear framework for recovering connection costs.
– **Asset Ownership & Maintenance:** Responsible for transformers under the new SLC system.
– **Proposal Right:** Can file for revision of Service Line Charges periodically.

– **For the Regulatory Framework:**
– **Standardization:** Moves away from discretionary site-specific estimates.
– **Promotes Electrification:** Simplified and subsidized rates for key sectors (Agriculture, Cottage Industries, EV).
– **Future Flexibility:** Commission retains power to issue directives and amend rules as needed.

—-

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—-

**1. Official Details of the Amendment:**
– **Regulation Name:** Telangana Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Open Access) First Amendment Regulation, 2026.
– **Regulation No.:** 2 of 2026.
– **Date of Notification:** 24th January 2026.
– **Effective From:** The date of its publication in the Telangana Gazette.

**2. Purpose of the Amendment:**
– To align with clarifications from the **National Load Despatch Centre (NLDC)** regarding issuance of **Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)**.
– To implement provisions under **Clause 7.2(e)** of the **CERC Procedure for Implementation of REC Mechanism 2024** (dated 07.03.2024).
– To enable **REC issuance to Renewable Energy Generators** for unutilised/banked surplus energy injected into the grid.

**3. Key Amendments to the Principal Regulation (No. 1 of 2024):**
– **Clause 14.11 – Energy Injected Before Wheeling Agreement:**
– Energy injected into the licensee’s network **between the grant of Green Energy Open Access (GEOA) and the submission of a wheeling agreement** will **not be paid for**.
– Such energy will be treated as **inadvertent power**.

– **Clause 33.5 – Issuance of RECs:**
– **Renewable Energy Generating Stations** will now be **entitled to RECs** for the **unutilised banked quantum of energy**.
– Previously, this entitlement was limited to the GEOA consumer; now it extends to the **generator**.

**4. Business Implications:**
– **For Renewable Energy Generators:**
– Can now monetise **surplus/unutilised banked energy** through RECs, improving project economics.
– Provides an additional revenue stream and enhances the viability of green energy projects.

– **For Open Access Consumers:**
– No change in REC entitlement for consumers—they remain eligible as before.
– Clarifies treatment of energy injected before formal wheeling agreements.

– **For Distribution Licensees (DISCOMs):**
– Clear guidelines on handling **inadvertent injection** during the pre-wheeling phase.
– No payment obligation for such energy.

—-

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—

**1. Overview of Petitions**
All three petitions filed by **Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (PGCIL)** seek:
– **Truing up** of transmission tariff for the period **2019–24**.
– **Determination** of transmission tariff for the period **2024–29**.

**2. Petition-wise Summary**

| Petition No. | Scheme / Asset Description | Region | Key Respondents |
|————–|—————————-|——–|——————|
| 1021/TT/2025 | Transmission System for **Vindhyachal-IV & Rihand-III (1000 MW) Generation Project** | Western Region | MPPMCL & 20 others |
| 925/TT/2025 | Transmission System for **Ultra Mega Solar Park in Anantapur, AP – Part A (Phase-I)** | Southern Region | TANGEDCO (TNPDCL) & 14 others |
| 731/TT/2025 | **400 kV S/C Singrauli–Vindhyachal TL** with **(2×250 MW) HVDC Back-to-Back at Vindhyachal (NR-WR)** | Inter-regional | UPPCL & 20 others |

**3. Key Proceedings & Directions from CERC**

– **No replies received** from respondents in any of the three petitions.
– **Fresh notices** to be issued to all respondents.
– **Respondents** given **2 weeks** to file replies; **PGCIL** may file rejoinder within **1 week** thereafter.
– **Next hearing date:** 17 February 2026 at 2:30 PM.

**4. Specific Information/Documents Directed by CERC**

**A. For Petition No. 1021/TT/2025:**
1. **Element-wise capital cost breakdown** (Land, Buildings, Transmission Line, Substation, PLCC, IT, etc.) as of 31.03.2019.
2. **Form 9C** in Excel for both tariff periods.
3. **Liability Flow Statement** in Excel.
4. **Asset-wise LD (Liquidated Damages) recovery details**.
5. **Form 7B** for both periods.
6. **Cumulative depreciation details** for IT & PLCC as of 31.03.2019.

**B. For Petition No. 925/TT/2025:**
1. **Justification for variation** in opening capital cost vs. previous order.
2. **Initial Spares discharge statement**.
3. **Form 5 & Form 13**.
4. **Liability Flow Statements** in Excel.
5. **Form 9C** with proper linkages.
6. **Interest rate calculations** for each loan.
7. **Reconciliation of CFA (Central Financial Assistance) grant** – received, deployed, balance.
8. **Documentary proof of CFA grant utilization**.
9. **Evidence of asset decommissioning**.
10. **Justification for ACE (Additional Capital Expenditure) beyond cut-off date**.
11. **Form 7B** for both periods.

**C. For Petition No. 731/TT/2025:**
1. **Basis, technical justification & cost-benefit analysis** for ACE claimed.
2. **Liability Flow Statements for ACE**.
3. **Justification for variation in ACE vs. previous order**.
4. **Details of spillover works** from 2019–24 to 2024–29 with delay justification.
5. **Form 7B** for both periods.
6. **Clarification on IDC (Interest During Construction)** adjustments previously disallowed.

**5. Key Business & Regulatory Implications**
– **Transparency & Scrutiny:** CERC ensuring rigorous validation of capital costs, grants, and expenditures.
– **Stakeholder Engagement:** Despite no replies, fresh notices indicate emphasis on participatory regulation.
– **Renewable Integration:** Petition 925/TT/2025 relates to solar park evacuation – critical for green energy.
– **Inter-regional Assets:** Petition 731/TT/2025 involves HVDC link between NR & WR – strategic for grid stability.
– **Financial Discipline:** Detailed requirements on LD, ACE, IDC, and grants ensure accountable use of capital.

—-

For more information please see below link:

The Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission (OERC) has issued draft regulations titled the OERC (Grid Support Charges for Captive Generating Plants) Regulations, 2026. The regulations will be applicable to all co-located conventional captive generating plants that [...]

The post Odisha releases draft regulations for grid support charges for captive generating plants appeared first on Renewable Watch.

Data centers are the backbone of modern digital infrastructure. They power cloud services, financial systems, healthcare platforms, and nearly every technology-driven business. As demand for data storage and processing grows, so do the operational, financial, and risk-related challenges data centers face. For managers, understanding these issues and knowing how to address them proactively is critical to maintaining uptime, security, and long-term viability. This is what you need to know to ensure you can meet up with demand.

Rising Energy Costs and Efficiency Demands

One of the most persistent challenges for data centers is energy consumption. Powering servers, cooling systems, and redundancy infrastructure requires enormous amounts of electricity, and energy costs continue to rise globally. Beyond cost, there is increasing pressure from regulators and customers to reduce environmental impact.

Managers can address this by investing in energy-efficient hardware, optimizing airflow and cooling layouts, and adopting real-time monitoring tools to identify waste. Long-term strategies may include transitioning to renewable energy sources or partnering with utility providers for more favorable pricing structures.

Cooling and Thermal Management Challenges

Heat is an unavoidable byproduct of high-density computing. Inefficient cooling not only increases costs but also raises the risk of equipment failure and downtime. As server densities increase, traditional cooling methods often struggle to keep up.

Modern solutions include hot-aisle/cold-aisle containment, liquid cooling, and AI-driven thermal monitoring systems. For managers, the key is treating cooling as a dynamic system rather than a fixed infrastructure. However, this needs to be one that evolves alongside hardware demands.

Financial Risk and Insurance Considerations

Data centers face significant financial exposure from equipment damage, downtime, liability claims, and unforeseen events. Even with strong operational controls, risk cannot be eliminated entirely.

This is where insurance becomes a critical part of risk management. Evaluating coverage that aligns with the unique needs of data center operations can help protect against losses that would otherwise threaten business continuity. BOP insurance by Next Insurance can help managers think more holistically about protecting assets, operations, and revenue streams as part of an overall risk strategy.

Downtime and Business Continuity Risks

Even brief outages can result in significant financial losses, reputational damage, and contractual penalties. This downtime may be caused by:

• Power failures
• Human error
• Equipment malfunction
• External events

To mitigate this risk, managers should prioritize redundancy at every critical point, including power supplies, network connections, and backup systems. Regular testing of disaster recovery plans is just as important as having them documented, too. A plan that hasn’t been tested is often unreliable in real-world conditions. You put your business and those whom you cater to at risk.

Cybersecurity and Physical Security Threats

Data centers face a dual security challenge: digital threats and physical risks. Cyberattacks continue to grow in sophistication, while physical threats such as unauthorized access, theft, or vandalism remain real concerns.

Addressing this requires layered security. On the digital side, this includes continuous patching, network segmentation, and monitoring for unusual activity. Physically, access controls, surveillance systems, and strict visitor protocols are essential. Managers should also ensure that staff training keeps pace with evolving threats, as human error remains a major vulnerability.

Compliance and Regulatory Pressure

Data centers often operate under complex regulatory requirements related to data privacy, industry standards, and regional laws. Compliance failures can result in fines, legal exposure, and loss of customer trust.

Managers can stay ahead by maintaining clear documentation, conducting regular audits, and working closely with legal and compliance teams. Building compliance into operational processes, rather than treating it as an afterthought, reduces risk and simplifies reporting.

Turning Challenges Into Strategic Advantage

While data centers face a wide range of operational and strategic challenges, these issues also present opportunities for improvement and differentiation. Managers who address all of the above proactively are better positioned to deliver reliability and value in a competitive market. Don’t let yours be the one that falls victim to the issues and instead take action.

# # #

About the Author:

James Daniels is a freelance writer, business enthusiast, a bit of a tech buff, and an overall geek. He is also an avid reader, who can spend hours reading and knowing about the latest gadgets and tech, whilst offering views and opinions on these topics.

The post Issues Data Centers Face and How to Overcome Them: A Guide for Managers appeared first on Data Center POST.

Summary:

—-

## **1. Overview**
This document is a **Record of Proceedings (ROP)** from a hearing before the **Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC)**. The hearing pertains to **Petition No. 11/TD/2026**, filed by **Adarsh Stainless Private Limited (ASPL)** seeking **upgradation of its inter-state electricity trading licence** from **Category IV to Category III**.

—

## **2. Key Details**
– **Petition Filed Under**:
– **Section 14** of the Electricity Act, 2003
– **Section 15(1)** of the Electricity Act, 2003
– **Regulation 15(1)** of the CERC (Procedure, Terms and Conditions for grant of trading licence and other related matters) Regulations, 2020
– **Regulation 9(4)** of the same Regulations
– **Petitioner**: Adarsh Stainless Private Limited (ASPL)
– **Date of Hearing**: 2.1.2026
– **Bench (Coram)**:
– Shri Jishnu Barua, Chairperson
– Shri Ramesh Babu V., Member
– Shri Harish Dudani, Member
– Shri Ravinder Singh Dhillon, Member

—

## **3. Commission’s Directions**
The Commission directed ASPL to **submit the following documents on affidavit within one week**:
1. **Auditor’s Report** and **Notes to Accounts** as prescribed under the **Companies Act, 2013**.
2. These must pertain to the **special balance sheet as on 15.11.2025**.
3. The submission must include **details of loans and advances to, and investments made in, associate entities** (if any).

—

## **4. Order Reserved**
– Subject to the above compliance, the **Commission reserved its order** in the matter.
– The order will likely be issued after reviewing the submitted documents.

—

## **5. Implications**
– **Licence Upgradation**: Upgradation from Category IV to Category III allows for **higher trading volumes** and expanded market participation.
– **Compliance Requirement**: ASPL must provide detailed financial disclosures, ensuring **transparency and regulatory compliance**.
– **Regulatory Scrutiny**: The Commission is conducting **due diligence** before approving the upgradation.

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—-

## **1. Overview**
This document is a **public notice/circular** issued by the **Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC)**. It announces the **proposal to amend** the existing **Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions for Open Access) Regulations, 2005** (referred to as the “Principal Regulations”). The amendment is titled **”Draft Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Open Access) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2025″**.

—

## **2. Legal Authority**
The amendment is proposed in exercise of powers conferred under:
– **Section 39** of the Electricity Act, 2003
– **Section 40** of the Electricity Act, 2003
– **Section 42** of the Electricity Act, 2003
– **Section 181** of the Electricity Act, 2003

—

## **3. Availability of Draft Regulations**
– The **draft amendment regulations** are available on the **DERC website**: **[www.derc.gov.in](http://www.derc.gov.in)**

—

## **4. Invitation for Stakeholder Feedback**
– **Stakeholders** (including consumers, generators, distribution companies, traders, etc.) are invited to submit:
– **Suggestions**
– **Comments**
– **Objections**
– **Submission Deadline**: **12 February 2026, by 5:00 PM**
– **Submission Methods**:
1. **By Post**: To the **Secretary, DERC** at the Commission’s address.
2. **By Email**: **[secyderc@nic.in](mailto:secyderc@nic.in)**

—

## **5. Issuance Details**
– **Date of Circular**: **23 January 2026**
– **Issued By**: **Joint Director (PS&E)**, Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission

—

## **6. Key Implications**
– **Regulatory Update**: This amendment aims to revise the open access terms and conditions in Delhi’s electricity sector, potentially impacting **power generators, distribution licensees, consumers, and traders**.
– **Public Consultation**: DERC is following a **transparent, consultative process** by inviting stakeholder feedback before finalizing the regulations.
– **Next Steps**: After the feedback period, DERC will review the inputs and issue the final amended regulations.

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—-

## **1. Overview**
This document is a **Record of Proceedings (ROP)** from a hearing before the **Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC)**. The hearing relates to **Review Petition No. 55 of 2025**, filed under **Section 94 of the Electricity Act, 2003**, along with relevant DERC regulations. The review petition seeks a **review of the Commission’s Order dated 19.07.2024** issued in **Petition No. 03/2022**.

—

## **2. Parties Involved**
– **Petitioner**: **Government of NCT of Delhi**
– **Respondent**: **BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. (BRPL)**

—

## **3. Coram (Bench)**
– **Sh. Ram Naresh Singh**, Member
– **Sh. Surender Babbar**, Member

—

## **4. Appearance of Counsels**
### **For the Petitioner (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)**:
1. Ms. Swapna Seshadri, Learned Counsel
2. Ms. Harsha V. Rao, Learned Counsel
3. Ms. Aishwarya Subramani, Learned Counsel

### **For the Respondent (BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd.)**:
1. Mr. Buddy Ranganadhan, Learned Senior Advocate
2. Mr. Amit Kapur, Learned Counsel
3. Mr. Rahul Kinra, Learned Counsel
4. Mr. Anupam Varma, Learned Counsel
5. Mr. Aditya Ajay, Learned Counsel
6. Mr. Adamya Ojha, Learned Counsel
7. Ms. Mahima Kaur, Learned Counsel

—

## **5. Hearing Details**
– **Date of Hearing**: 20.01.2026
– **Date of Order**: 20.01.2026

—

## **6. Proceedings & Order**
– The **Learned Counsels for both parties were heard in part**.
– The matter was **not concluded** and has been **adjourned**.
– **Next Date of Hearing**: **27.01.2026** for further hearing.

—

## **7. Implications & Key Takeaways**
– **Nature of Proceeding**: This is a **review petition**, indicating that the petitioner (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) is seeking a reconsideration or modification of the earlier DERC order dated 19.07.2024.
– **Legal Framework**: The petition is filed under **Section 94 of the Electricity Act, 2003** and **Regulations 7(iv) & 57 of the DERC Comprehensive (Code of Conduct) Regulations, 2001**.
– **Adjournment**: The hearing is part-heard, suggesting that detailed arguments are being presented, requiring additional time.
– **Next Step**: The case will resume on **27.01.2026** for continued hearing.

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—

### **1. PETITION DETAILS**
– **Petitioner:** BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd.
– **Legal Basis:** Filed under **Sections 86(1)(c), 86(1)(e), and 86(1)(k)** of the Electricity Act, 2003, read with:
– **Regulation 14** of the DERC (Net Metering for Renewable Energy) Regulations, 2014.
– **DERC (Peer-to-Peer Energy Transaction) Guidelines 2024.**
– **Nature:** Petition concerning a **pilot project** related to net metering and/or peer-to-peer energy transactions.

—

### **2. HEARING & COMMISSION’S ORDER**
1. **Petition Admitted:** The Commission has **admitted the petition** for the pilot project.
2. **Jurisdictional Issue:** The Commission raised a question regarding its **jurisdiction over interstate transactions** (referenced in **Prayer C** of the petition).
3. **Additional Submissions:** The Petitioner’s Senior Counsel requested time to make additional submissions. The Commission directed:
– Petitioner to make **additional submissions by 27.01.2026** on the jurisdictional aspect.
– DERC officers may seek **additional clarifications** from the Petitioner in the meantime.
4. **Next Hearing:** Listed for **27.01.2026**.

—

### **3. KEY IMPLICATIONS**
– The **pilot project petition is admitted**, but its scope—particularly concerning **interstate energy transactions**—remains subject to jurisdictional determination.
– The Commission’s final decision will depend on the **additional legal submissions** to be filed by the Petitioner.
– The case highlights the evolving regulatory landscape for **peer-to-peer energy trading** and **cross-state electricity transactions**.

—

For more information please see below link:

Summary:

—

### **1. PARTIES PRESENT**
– **Representative of DTL (Petitioner):** Mr. Deepak Soni, DGM (C&RA) Division.

—

### **2. KEY SUBMISSIONS BY DTL**
1. **Accounts for FY 2022-23** will be filed with the Commission **within 7 days**.
2. Due to **administrative reasons**, the accounts will be submitted **provisionally**—without an audited report.
3. The accounts will be **signed and authenticated by the General Manager (Finance) of DTL**, under the authority of the Managing Director.
4. **Ratification/authorization** by the Board of Directors of the Managing Director’s approval will be placed on record **in due course**.

—

### **3. COMMISSION’S DIRECTIONS & OBSERVATIONS**
1. The **True-up Petition** will be considered based on the **approval/authentication by the General Manager (Finance)** of DTL.
2. However, the **True-up Order will remain provisional** until audited accounts are submitted.
3. Once DTL submits the **audited accounts**, the True-up will be **revisited for finalization**.
4. DTL officers will provide **additional details and clarifications** as required by the Commission.
5. **Order is reserved** (to be issued later).

—

### **4. NEXT STEPS & IMPLICATIONS**
– DTL must submit provisional FY 2022-23 accounts within **7 days**.
– The True-up process will proceed on a **provisional basis** pending final audited accounts.
– DTL must later submit **audited accounts** and **Board ratification** for final True-up determination.
– The Commission retains the right to seek further clarifications.

—

For more information please see below link:

The Ministry of Power has issued the draft National Electricity Policy (NEP) 2026, outlining a comprehensive roadmap to transform India’s power sector. The draft policy takes stock of the significant transformation achieved in the power [...]

The post Ministry of Power issues draft NEP 2026 appeared first on Power Line Magazine.