State Electricity Regulatory Commission Issues 2010 Power Supply Regulation Report

Author:  Source:   Published time: December 23, 2010

Recently, the 2010 Power Supply Regulation Report (Report for short) was issued by the State Electricity Regulatory Commission. The Report aims to ensure smooth operations of the electric power system, and orderly and stable power supplies, meet power requirements for socioeconomic development and people’s daily lives, protect the legitimate rights of power consumers, encourage power supply enterprises to continuously enhance their power supply ability, improve their level of service, and regulate power supply market conducts.

This Report was made on the basis of routine power supply regulation carried out by the State Electricity Regulatory Commission since early this year and power supply inspections it had conducted earlier. On June 7, 2010, the Commission conducted onsite inspections at some power supply enterprises after the power supply enterprises had made self-checks and corrections. This Report represents the first publicity of power supply regulation since the issuance of the Methods for Power Supply Regulation (Methods for short) on November 26, 2009.

According to the Report, in 2010, most power supply enterprises extensively communicated and studied the Methods over various media in various ways in combination with the actual situation of the local area or the enterprise. Some of the power supply enterprises even drew inferences from the problems disclosed in the power supply regulation reports over the previous years, conducted comprehensive sorting-out and checks over the power supply quality management system, power supply service operations system, power supply market, etc., solved the identified problems, and improved where they were weak; through more grid investments and innovative service, they effectively further improved their power supply service.

The Report disclosed the problems identified during the power supply checks. Statistically, 460 problems of various categories were found, involving 128 power supply enterprises. 78 of the problems were serious, affecting 50 enterprises accounting for 24.3% of all the checked enterprises. The problems were mainly related with the power supply capability, quality, service, market conduct, costs, etc. To be specific, they were represented by weak supporting grids, low ability of power supplies, and inadequate quality of power supplies; information on power outage and limitation not disclosed as required by rules; troubleshooting not timely; applications for installation due to business expansion not handled properly. In particular, some enterprises violated rules and regulations in implementing the state power tariff, charges, power supply costs, and administrative license policies and in signing power supply contracts and ensuring the openness and fairness of the power supply market; these violations have breached the rights and interests of power consumers.

According to the analysis in the Report, of all the problems identified in the power supply checks, three were problems with the capability of power supply, accounting for 0.7% of all the problems; three power supply enterprises were involved, taking up 2.4% of all the checked enterprises. To be specific, grids in some areas had a structural problem, with insufficient investments in the grids and with the improvement of the distribution networks delayed, especially in remote and rural areas, where grid infrastructure was weak and grid development failed to meet the ever-increasing demand for power. There were 141 problems with the quality of power supplies, accounting for 30.6% of all the problems; 84 enterprises were involved, taking up 41% of all the checked enterprises. To be specific, the voltage pass rate at some power supply enterprises did not meet the requirements as specified in the Methods; voltage monitoring statistical data of some enterprises was not true, while their monitoring points had not been selected as required and failed to represent the voltage conditions at the consumer end; power supply reliability data recorded by some power supply enterprises was not accurate while the statistical data was not true; in power supply service, there were 145 problems, accounting for 31.5% of all the problems; 82 enterprises were involved, taking up 39.8% of all the checked enterprises. To be specific, power service procedure was not standard or timely while relevant information was incomplete and content untrue; some power supply enterprises did not cut power supplies by following the specified procedures; some enterprises failed to troubleshoot in time; some power supply enterprises did not provide service for electrical engineering projects in a standard manner and did not exercise enough control over quality; in business conduct in the power supply market, there were 159 problems, accounting for 34.6% of all the problems; 81 power supply enterprises were involved, taking up 39.3% of the checked enterprises. To be specific, they violated the principle of fair competition in the market by setting up market barriers; some power supply enterprises were involved in conduct featuring “designated designer, designated contractor, and designated equipment and material supplier”; the disclosure of power supply information was non-standard, inaccurate, and incomplete; some power supply enterprises violated the state’s relevant rules on power administrative license; some power supply enterprises did not strictly implement the state’s power tariff policies; some power supply enterprises created their own charge items and set their own charging standards; the power supply and consumption contracts of some power supply enterprises contained clauses violating relevant regulations, while a few power supply enterprises breached the rights and interests of consumers. In power supply costs, there were 12 problems, accounting for 2.3% of all the problems; seven power supply enterprises were involved, taking up 3.4% of all the checked enterprises. To be specific, the cost accounting of these enterprises was non-standard and untrue; the scope of costs was exceeded while false power supply costs were added, or costs and expenditure were not handled in a standard manner; the information on power construction costs was incomplete, affecting the truth of costs; false costs and expenditure were listed.

As for the problems identified in the checks, the Report required corrections in five aspects. First, grid planning and development should be strengthened to fully improve the capability of power supply. Second, power supply management should be stepped up to gradually improve the quality of power supplies. Third, management should be reinforced to gradually improve the level of power supply service. Fourth, power supply enterprises should enhance their awareness of legitimate operations, develop a keen market awareness, effectively guarantee the autonomy of users, legally disclose power supply information, fully guarantee the right of users to knowledge, strengthen their sense of responsibility, seriously implement the state policy on the power tariff, charge fees pursuant to laws and regulations, and avoid any improper transactions such as “designated designer, designated contractor, and designated equipment and material supplier” imposed on consumers.

Meanwhile, the Report also made four suggestions about regulation. First, plans should be coordinated to strongly promote the construction and improvement of rural and urban grids. Second, legislation should be stepped up to address the many problems facing power supply enterprises. Third, multiple measures should be taken to achieve the goal of energy efficiency and emission reduction in the whole society. Fourth, reforms should be deepened to actively promote the spinoff of the third-industry business and diversified business from grid enterprises.