Popular News

Saturday, 22 August 2009

Jharkhand minister pulls up DVC chairman



By State Bureau


The Damodar Valley Corp (DVC) is completely undermining Jharkhand, according to state industry & forest minister Sudhir Mahato.

The minister also alleged that DVC chairman Ashim Barman was misusing the corporation's funds.

In a letter handed over recently to the Union energy minister Sushil K Shinde, Mahato, who is also one of the two Jharkhand deputy chief ministers, has demanded removal of the DVC chairman as well as a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the 'gross irregularities' committed by him.

Mahato said for every 100 recruited by the corporation, 98 belonged to West Bengal while only two were from Jharkhand.

In the letter written to Shinde, Mahato said he fails to understand how DVC thermal power projects of 1,000mw each, which will come up at Mejia, Durgapur, Koderma and Raghunathpur, have been estimated to cost Rs 4,800 crore each, when a 500mw thermal unit in Bokaro is coming up at just Rs 1,600 crore and the Haryana and Rajasthan governments are erecting 1,200mw thermal power units at a cost of around Rs 3,800 crore each.

"I don't understand why there should be such a huge disparity between a 1,000mw and a 500mw project," said Mahato.

The Jharkhand minister has also alleged several other irregularities in various contracts/projects undertaken by DVC. He said he would like the venue of the board meetings of the corporation to alternate between West Bengal and Jharkhand in the future.

Meanwhile, Mahato said his ministry recently sent a list of 14 projects to the central government that got delayed as papers related to their 'forest land' clearance were kept pending by the previous NDA government in the state.

The minister hoped action taken by the state's forest department now would pave the way for quicker implementation of the projects. Among the projects held up for clearance are NTPC's 2,000mw project, DVC's 1,000mw project in Koderma, Power Finance Corp's 4,000mw super thermal project at Tilaiyya, the SEZ and toll bridge at Jamshedpur, the Deoghar-Dumka and the Deoghar-Koderma railway lines.

DVC may miss generation target, fail to power Games

Kolkata:
Damodar Valley Corp (DVC), the three-way venture between the Union, West Bengal and Jharkhand governments, is way behind its schedule to commission the thermal projects adding up to 5200 mw generation, of which 2500 mw is earmarked to power Delhi Commonwealth Games in 2010.

DVC plans to commission Chandrapura-7 (250 mw) and Chandrapura- 8 (250 mw) in September 2009 and March 2010 and units one and two (2x500 mw) of Mejia-2 in April and July, 2010. Units one and two (2x500 mw) of Koderma are supposed to be commissioned in October 2010 and January 2011, and units one and two (2x600 mw) of Raghunathpur in March and June, 2011.

Two units of Durgapur Steel Thermal Power Station (2x500 mw) are scheduled to start operation by December 2010 and Feburary 2011, respectively and a unit of Bokaro-A by March 2012. However, all these projects are behind schedule, according to the All India Power Engineers Federation (AIPEF), the apex body of power sector engineers.

The AIPEF has already sent a report to the Prime Minister regarding delays in implementing the projects. The slippage in project work is mainly because of the absence of a regular chairman, the report stated.

Although the power ministry had appointed Sreemath Pandey as DVC chairman in June, this year, Rajasthan chief minister Ashok Ghelot is reluctant to release him. When contacted by FE, Pandey said:: "Of course I am keen to join DVC, but the Rajasthan government is not releasing me. Let's see what happens."

Pandey is, currently, the principal secretary of the CM’s department as well as the energy department in Rajasthan. Subrata Biswas, DVC's secretary, said: ‘‘There is no possibility of Pandey joining the DVC. Having a full-time chairman is still uncertain and the ministry is looking into the issue.’’

The post of a full-time DVC chairman is lying vacant since December 2008. GB Pradhan, additional secretary of the ministry of power, was given the additional charge of DVC after Asim Barman retired on November 30, 2008.

Union power minister Sushilkumar Shinde requested Prime Minster to give an extension to Barman in order to ensure timely commissioning of the projects. However, the PM turned down his request

Shinde's letter to the Prime Minister (available with FE) written on April 22, 2008, states: "In order to ensure the commissioning of the massive thermal capacity addition projects including the Commonwealth Games projects in time and also bring the various new initiatives on socio-economic development of the valley (Damodar Valley) to fruitful completion, Shri Barman's continuity as chairman, DVC, after his supperannuation on November 30, 2008, is very desirable."

The Raghunathpur (2x600mw) Bokaro- A (500mw) and the Mejia (2x500mw) projects were mainly planned to power the Commonwealth Games. But the power ministry and the Central Electricity Authority have already acknowledged the Raghunathpur and Bokaro-A projects would miss the Commonwealth Games deadline.

While Raghunathpur has become controversial with a key file relating to award of the contract missing, Mejia has no coal linkage as yet. There has been little progress in the construction work of Bokaro-A.

AIPEF chairman Padamjit Singh said since the DVC chairman is the only full-time member of the board, having executive power and power secretaries of the West Bengal and Jharkhand governments, who are also directors of the board without any executive powers; major decisions remain pending in absence of a full-time chairman.

Although Pradhan was given the additional charge of DVC chairman, it is becoming increasingly difficult for him to continue with two important positions, Singh said.

AIPEF has written to the Prime Minister that since Pandey's application for the post of DVC chairman was routed through government of Rajasthan and forwarded to the Union government, "there was no justification for the Rajasthan government to do a volte-face and block the entire selection process".

The selection for the post of DVC chairman is a long-drawn process. Moreover, the governors of partner states, West Bengal and Jharkhand, have to approve the chairman's appointment before it is processed through the power ministry, department of personnel and training and appointment committee of the Union Cabinet. Therefore, another appointment would take at least six months, Singh said.

Friday, 21 August 2009

CERC notifies Medium-Term Open Access and Connectivity Regulations

Press Information Bureau
After detailed consultation with the stakeholders, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, CERC has notified the regulations on "Grant of Connectivity, Long Term Access and MediumTerm Open Access in Interstate Transmission". Addressing a press conference in New Delhi today, Chairman CERC, Dr. Promod Deo said that the main objectives in finalizing the regulations have been providing transmission products of different varieties, standardization of procedures, defining the timelines and ensuring level playing field among different categories of market players.

These regulations provide for procedures and requirements for obtaining connectivity to interstate transmission system, availing medium-term open access and availing long term access. The following are the main features of these regulations:

1.Any generating plant having installed capacity of atleast 250 MW and any bulk consumer having atleast a load of 100 MW can seek connectivity to interstate transmission system.

2.All the grid connected entities can seek either medium term open access or long term access to interstate transmission system.

3.Medium term open access would be available for any period between three months to three years and it shall be provided on the basis of availability of transmission capacity in the existing transmission system. No augmentation of transmission system is envisaged for granting medium term open access.

4.An entity who has been granted medium term open access can exit after giving a notice of thirty days or by paying transmission charges for a period of thirty days.

5.Long term access can be availed for any period between 12 years to 25 years and might require construction of new transmission capacities for giving long term access. Following are the important features regarding long term access:

a) Long term access can be applied by indicating the regions in which supply is to be made or power is to be drawn. A generator would have an option to firm up the States in which supply is to be made any time but at least three years in advance before the commencement of long term access so that the transmission service provider can construct necessary last mile connectivity.

b) Long term access can be extended further by giving a notice of six months period.

c) It will be possible to exercise exit option from long term access without any financial liability if the access has been availed for atleast 12 years and an advance notice is given atleast one year before such exit.

d) The regulations provide for exit option even before the period of 12 years at a notice of one year but subject to payment of specified charges if it is likely that the transmission capacity being vacated will remain idle. Only in case the transmission capacity is likely to be stranded, the concerned entity shall be required to pay 2/3rd of the net present value of the estimated transmission charges for the remaining period falling short of 12 years.

One of the important features of the regulations is that thermal generating company of at least 500 MW capacity and hydro generating company of atleast 250 MW capacity, irrespective of ownership (whether government owned or private sector) will be connected to the grid directly and there will be no requirement of constructing a dedicated transmission line.

The regulations have standardized the application fees for different purposes and also the timeframes for disposal of such applications.

The nodal agency for seeking connectivity, medium term open access or long term access would be the Central Transmission Utility (CTU).

CTU has been mandated to prepare detailed procedure for implementation of these regulations within a period of sixty days during which it would consult the stakeholders by giving a notice of one month.

The applications under these regulations would be entertained immediately after CERC gives approval to detailed procedures.

Wednesday, 19 August 2009

Determination of generation and inter-State transmission tariff for Damodar Valley Corporation in terms of the judgment dated 23.11.2007 of the Appell

CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
NEW DELHI

Record of Proceedings
I.A.19/2009 in Petition No.66/2005

Subject: Determination of generation and inter-State transmission tariff for
Damodar Valley Corporation in terms of the judgment dated 23.11.2007
of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in Appeal No. 273/2006.

Coram: Dr. Pramod Deo, Chairperson
Shri R.Krishnamoorthy, Member
Shri S.Jayaraman, Member
Shri V.S.Verma, Member

Date of Hearing: 16.6.2009

Petitioner: Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkatta

Respondents: State of West Bengal, State of Jharkhand, WBSEDCL, JSEB and Ministry
of Power, Govt. of India.

Parties present: Shri M.G.Ramachandran, Advocate, DVC
Shri T.K.Gupta, DVC
Shri D.K.Majumdar, DVC
Shri P.K.Choudhuri, DVC
Shri A.Biswas, DVC
Shri D.K.Aich, DVC
Shri P.Bhattacharya, DVC
Shri R.Goswami, DVC
Shri G.Bhunia, DVC
Shri G.Chaudhury, DVC
Shri Shyamal Sarkar, Advocate, BSAL
Shri Gautam Shroff, Advocate, BSAL
Shri K.P.Roy, BSAL
Shri R.R.Dubey, Advocate, JSEB

This interlocutory application has been filed by the petitioner, Damodar Valley
Corporation, to consider certain additional information for re-determination of generation
and inter-State transmission tariff for the period from 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2009 in Petition
No. 66/2005, stated to be in terms of the judgment dated 23.11.2007 of the Appellate
Tribunal for Electricity in Appeal No. 273/2006. The additional information submitted by
the petitioner has been taken on record and will be considered to the extent found
relevant.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in terms of the directions
contained in the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal dated 23.11.2007 in Appeal
No.273/2006, it had submitted the estimated revenue requirements for its generation,
transmission and distribution networks, for the period 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2009 in
Annexure-I, at Page 199 of the interlocutory application. Learned counsel for the
petitioner also submitted that the estimated revenue requirements submitted included
audited capital expenditure for the period 2004-08 and the provisional accounts for the
year 2008-09, additional capital expenditure incurred for the period 2006-09, additional
expenditure incurred towards employee cost on account of revision of pay, pension and
gratuity contribution (as per actuarial valuation) pursuant to the implementation of the
sixth pay commission, additional O&M expenses incurred (at actual) on old units and on
account of compliances towards environmental laws. Learned counsel for the petitioner
while justifying the expenditure incurred on old units, submitted that it could not afford to
shut down the old units of the generating station for comprehensive refurbishment
activities in the interest of its consumers in the command area and hence the old units
whose uselife had already expired and have no comparable benchmark with other
plants in the country were being operated and maintained. Learned counsel for the
petitioner further submitted that in the absence of economic viability of major R&M of
the old units, the O&M expenses to arrest capacity de-rating had considerably
increased as a result of which it had become difficult for the petitioner to operate and
maintain the units within the norms specified by the Commission in the Central
Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2004
(hereinafter referred to as “the 2004 regulations”).Learned counsel for the petitioner
accordingly prayed that the Commission may relax the norms for O&M expenses in
respect of the old generating stations, while re-determining the tariff.
3. Learned counsel for Bhaskar Shrachi Alloys Ltd (in short “BSAL”), one of the
consumer of the petitioner, submitted affidavit containing preliminary submissions to the
interlocutory application and pointed out that the petitioner had widened the scope of
determination of tariff in Petition No.66/2005 vis-a-vis the directions contained in the
judgment of the Appellate Tribunal by including additional capital expenditure incurred
for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08, additional O&M expenses and liabilities towards
employees cost on account of revision of pay, pension and gratuity contributions and
prayed that the Commission may re-determine the tariff only in accordance with the
directions contained in the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal. Learned counsel referred
to Annexure– E at Page 191 of the interlocutory application and submitted that the
normative debt-equity ratio of 70:30 may be considered for Unit-3 of Bokaro Thermal
Power Station, as it had been commissioned during the year 1993. Learned counsel
also submitted that the Appellate Tribunal while confirming that the Commission had
allowed O&M expenses after prudence check in order dated 3.10.2006, in Petition
No.66/2005, had only allowed an increase of 4% per year towards O&M expenses, for
the period 2006-09 and hence additional O&M expenses as claimed by the petitioner
may not be considered. Summing up, learned counsel further submitted that the prayers
of the petitioner which were not allowed by the Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to
have been rejected and may not be considered by the Commission while re-determining
the tariff for the generating stations of the petitioner.
4. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioner objected to the contentions
raised by the counsel for BSAL and submitted that the directions contained in the
judgment of the Appellate Tribunal on the various issues shall have to be read and
interpreted in toto while re-determining tariff. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred
to paras A-5 and A-6 of the said judgment and submitted that even though commercial
operation of Unit-3 of Bokaro Thermal Power Station commenced during the year 1993,
the said project had been approved by the Govt. of India prior to 1992 and hence the
debt-equity ratio of 50:50 may be considered by the Commission. As regards additional
expenditure incurred towards employee cost on account of revision of pay, pension
liability etc, the learned counsel referred to Commission’s order dated 7.4.2005 in
Petition No.31/2001 and submitted that additional expenditure incurred towards
employee cost be considered in the re-determination of tariff. Learned counsel for the
petitioner also submitted that additional liabilities towards contribution and interest
payments for sinking fund may be allowed as an item of expenditure to be recovered
through tariff as mandated under section 40 of the DVC Act, 1948 and in terms of the
directions contained in the judgment dated 23.11.2007. Learned counsel for the
petitioner further submitted that IDC on loans deployed during the period prior to the
date of commercial operation of the generating station may be considered by the
Commission in the light of the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal dated 10.12.2008 in
Appeal Nos.151 and 152/2007.
5. Learned counsel for BSAL submitted that the claims submitted by the petitioner
may be considered in terms of the directions contained in the judgment of the Appellate
Tribunal dated 23.11.2007 subject to the final outcome of the appeals against the said
judgment, pending before the Supreme Court.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent, JSEB, adopted the submissions made by
the learned counsel for BSAL.
7. The petitioner in compliance with the directions of the Commission during the
hearing on 28.4.2009 had submitted additional information containing details of the
additional capital expenditure incurred during the years 2004-05 and 2005-06 vide
affidavit dated 11.6.2009.It is noticed that the petitioner had claimed capitalization of
certain assets on account of replacement of old assets which had outlived their useful
life and had become unserviceable. However, the details of corresponding decapitalisation
of the old assets for the year 2004-05 had not been submitted. As
capitalization of assets under replacement can only be allowed after de-capitaisation of
the old assets under replacement for the purpose of tariff, the petitioner was directed to
submit the following information, in respect of the assets under replacement category:
(a) Gross value of the old asset (original);
(b) Year in which the asset was put to use; and
(c) Depreciation recovered in tariff during the service of the old asset.
8. The information may be submitted by the petitioner by 5.7.2009.
9. Subject to the above, order in the petition was reserved.


Sd/-
K.S. Dhingra
Chief (Legal)

Approval of tariff for Mejia Thermal Power Generating Station, Unit Nos 5 & 6 (250 MW each) of Damodar Valley Corporation

CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
Record of Proceedings
Petition No.155/2008
Subject: Approval of tariff for Mejia Thermal Power Generating Station, Unit
Nos 5 & 6 (250 MW each) of Damodar Valley Corporation

Coram: Dr. Pramod Deo, Chairperson
Shri R.Krishnamoorthy, Member
Shri S.Jayaraman, Member
Shri V.S.Verma, Member

Date of Hearing: 16.6.2009

Petitioners: Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkatta

Respondents: WBSEDCL, JSEB and MPPTCL

Parties present: Shri M.G.Ramachandran, Advocate, DVC
Shri T.K.Gupta, DVC
Shri D.K.Majumdar, DVC
Shri P.K.Choudhuri, DVC
Shri A.Biswas, DVC
Shri D.K.Aich, DVC
Shri P.Bhattacharya, DVC
Shri. R.Goswami, DVC
Shri G.Bhunia, DVC
Shri G. Chaudhury, DVC
Shri Shyamal Sarkar, Advocate, BSAL
Shri Gautam Shroff, Advocate, BSAL
Shri K.P.Roy, BSAL

This petition has been filed by the petitioner, Damodar Valley Corporation for
approval of tariff for Mejia Thermal Power Station, Unit Nos 5 & 6 (250 MW each)
(hereinafter referred to as “the generating station”) from the dates of commercial
operation up to 31.3.2009.

2. Unit Nos.5 and 6 of the generating station was commissioned on 29.2.2008 and
24.9.2008 respectively. The petitioner has been supplying power from Unit-5 of the
generating station to the respondents, in terms of the single part provisional tariff of Rs
2.90/kWh approved by the Commission vide its order dated 30.4.2008 in I.A.No.4/2008
in Petition No. 53/2008, subject to the adjustment after approval of final tariff.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the tariff for the generating
station may be determined after taking into consideration the directions contained in the
judgment dated 23.11.2007 of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity in Appeal
No.273/2006 and the detailed information filed by it as desired by the Commission.
4. Learned counsel for Bhaskar Shrachi Alloys Ltd, (BSAL) one of the consumers of
electricity generated at the generating station, submitted that it had filed an appeal
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the judgment dated 23.11.2007 in Appeal
No.273/2006 and other related appeals. Learned counsel further submitted that subject
to the outcome of the appeals, the tariff of the generating station may be fixed after
considering the directions of the Appellate Tribunal in its judgment dated 23.11.2007,
particularly with reference to the debt-equity ratio of the projects commissioned after the
year 1992.
5. The petitioner was directed to submit the following information on affidavit, along
with soft copies, latest by 30.6.2009, with advance copy to the respondents.
(a) Details of deployment of actual equity during each quarter of the year after the
commencement of the project work and upto completion for Unit V and Unit VI
respectively.
(b) Details of deployment of each loan during each quarter of the year from the
commencement of the project work and upto completion, for computation of IDC
for Unit V and Unit VI respectively.
(c) Funding Pattern in Form No. 6.
(d) Price of HFO to be revised in terms of Rs/KL in Form-19 of the petition instead of
Rs/MT presently given.
6. Subject to the above, order in the petition was reserved.


Sd/-
K.S. Dhingra
Chief (Legal)

Friday, 7 August 2009

India would add 100,000 Mw capacity (equal to what China does in a year) in the 12th Plan period.

Setting ambitious targets is something that Sushilkumar Shinde is quite comfortable with. Early last week, the power minister said the country would add 100,000 Mw capacity (equal to what China does in a year) in the 12th Plan period. This is on top of his target to add 60,000 Mw in the current Plan period, which ends in 2012.
Like most ministers who are enthusiastic about setting high targets, Shinde is also setting up a committee comprising former power secretaries and industry experts to advise the ministry on how to reach the set targets. The committee will have a tough time, for sure.

For, the actual performance has been woefully short of target. For the record, the ministry failed to add even half of the targeted 44,000-Mw capacity during the Tenth Plan (2002-07).

Shinde, however, has been quick to blame it all on the public sector Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd (BHEL), which is committed to supply close to 70 per cent of the required machinery for the upcoming power projects, and other equipment manufacturers. The minister said the slow progress was mainly on account of delay in supply of equipment from BHEL.

BHEL Chairman and Managing Director K Ravikumar said the company had delivery issues because of capacity constraints, shortage of equipment for logistics and the like, “but we are rectifying it. Our capacity will double to 10,000 Mw by 2010 and we are on schedule”.

BHEL is sitting on an order book worth over Rs 1,26,000 crore and is attempting to float four joint ventures to tap the boom in the power sector, besides venturing into manufacturing of locomotives.

Coming back to the current Plan’s target, the ministry has to commission around 47,500 Mw capacity in the three years to 2012 if it has to meet the target of 60,000 Mw. This is because the first two years have seen an addition of just over 12,500 Mw.

The government is banking on the private sector to generate over 30 per cent, or 20,000 Mw, to reach that target. But the private sector has so far been able to set up just 3,750 Mw and the rest is ‘under construction’.

“We are targeting to complete one or two units of Rosa Power (600 Mw) , Butiburi (300 Mw) and a few units of Sasan (1,320 Mw) before 2012,” said J P Chalasani, chief executive of Anil Ambani’s Reliance Power, which is setting up over 32,000 Mw of power projects, including three ultra mega power projects, or UMPPs. This means R-Power’s contribution will be only about 2,200 Mw for the period.

India’s largest private sector power utility Tata Power is planning to reach a group power generation target of over 5,800 Mw from the current 2,800 Mw by 2012, an addition of about 3,000 Mw in three years. According to the company, this includes a few units of the Mundra UMPP. The company’s joint venture with Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC), 4,000-Mw Mython, is also slated for commissioning before 2012-end. So far, half of Mython’s civil work has been completed and one-fourth in the case of Mundra.

Other major private players like JSW Energy, Lanco Infratech, GVK Power, Adani Power and Indiabulls have projects under implementation, but large-scale capacity addition is unlikely before 2012.

Issues such as land acquisition, environmental and other procedural hurdles are delaying most of the projects, besides other issues like lack of skilled manpower and delay in delivery of equipment. The global recession is also delaying financial closure of the projects.

India’s largest power producer National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC), which has an installed capacity of over 36,000 Mw and accounts for about 30 per cent of the country’s power generation, is targeting to reach 50,000 Mw by 2012. Considering the pace at which the NTPC projects are progressing, that target may remain just a target.

Former power secretary R V Shahi said the private sector would not invest in unfamiliar businesses until they were sure about the returns. “We opened up other sectors like telecom and airlines and it took many years for the private sector to start investing in them. Anticipating this and the future demand, we should not have allowed monopoly by one BHEL for power equipment making, NTPC for power generation and NPCIL for nuclear power in the public sector,” he said on the sidelines of a power conference organised by the India-Tech Foundation.

The scene with hydropower, which contributes one-fourth of India’s power requirement, is also not bright. State-run hydel power company NHPC’s plans are to commission about 250 Mw in 2008-09, 2040 Mw in 2010-11 and another 2,000 Mw in 2011-12 — together only about 5,000 Mw in the Eleventh Plan period.

PTI News -The Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) has decided to shut down two big deer parks in it plant sites at Chandrapura and Maithon

The Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) has decided to shut down two big deer parks in it plant sites at Chandrapura and Maithon respectively for different reasons.

Stating this on Monday, DVC soil conservation and afforestation director Sanjay Kumar said the Chandrapura deer park, set up by the DVC near the the Chandrapura Thermal Power Station some 25 years ago as part of the corporation's beautification plan, had to be closed due to setting up two more units (Nos. 7 and 8).

Kumar said as the DVC did not acquire additional land for setting up the two more units raising two more units at Chandrapura, the corporation required the 7-8 hectares of land which was occupied by the deer park.

Another reason cited by Kumar was that since the deer park had about 52 spotted deer who are highly sensitive to noise and pollution, it was felt that they should be translocated from Chandrapura to another place where they would feel safe and won't be disturbed by any type of sound, noise and smoke pollution.

He said the DVC authorities wrote to the PCCF (Wildlife)-cum-chief wildlife warden, government of Jharkhand, for its suggestion on where to shift the deer. The Jharkhand government informed the DVC management that these species of animals could be translocated to the Hazaribag National Park which has adequate space to accommodate hundreds of deer and other species and entrusted the entire work to the DFO (Wildlife Division), Hazaribag.

Accepting the proposal, the DVC management approached the DFO (Wildlife Division) Hazaribag A K Mishra who said that to accommodate the 52 deer from Chandrapura park to the Hazaribag National Park it will require Rs 38 lakh for constructing fenced enclosure and providing other infrastructure for the purpose.

The DVC management accepted the proposal and handed over Rs 38 lakh to the PCCF(Wildlife) and work for setting up the required infrastructure at the Hazaribag national park would begin soon, Kumar said.

He said the animals would be translocated to Hazaribagh National Park from November next. He said in addition to Rs 38 lakh, Mishra informed the DVC authorities here that the transport cost for translocating the 52 deer from Chandrapura to Hazaribag will be about Rs 7 lakh which was accepted by the DVC.

In the second phase the DVC have also decided to close its deer park covering an area of 12.5 hectares near the Maithon Dam reservoir due to rise in deer population. The park currently has about 155 spotted deer.

Kumar said as the Maithon Deer Park is located on an island, the DVC has no other space to accomodate more deer, the corporation has decided to shift the animals to different place.

Kumar said the DVC has again written to the Jharkhand government for its suggestion in this regard.