M A I N   N E W S

Coal scam: PSEB stops payments
Sarbjit Dhaliwal
Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, October 20
Whole Time Members (WTMs) of the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB), after holding brain storming sessions for two days over news reports published in The Tribune with regard to failure of imported coal samples, today stopped all pending payments to coal suppliers. The payment to a private company for two rakes is pending. The coal was imported from China.

The WTMs have also stopped the clearance of the 10 per cent payment which had been withheld from an earlier payment.

With regard to the failure of the two samples of coal, which were tested by the Shriram Institute laboratory in Delhi, the WTMs today decided to take strict action against those involved, particularly the laboratory staff of the Ropar Thermal Plant and the Lehra Mohabbat Thermal Plant. The PSEB has coal testing labs at all of its thermal plants.

The Chairman of the PSEB, Mr Y.S. Ratra, talking to The Tribune said the issue of specifications for coal, which is a highly technical matter, would be referred to the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC).

The NTPC would also be asked to give its opinion on the changes made in the specifications after receiving imported coal at two PSEB thermal plants. It was reported by The Tribune that the authorities concerned had made as many as five specifications irrelevant by amending the purchase order after receiving the coal at coal yards at its plants.

Mr Ratra said that he had today talked with the Chief Managing Director of the NTPC to refer the whole issue to him for expert advice and independent opinion.

Meanwhile, member (Generation) of the PSEB, Mr H.M. Jain, in a statement admitted that the specifications were changed. “But, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that it was done to benefit the suppliers of coal,” he said.

Mr Jain said that the amendment in the annexure with regard to the specifications was made to remove ambiguities and mismatch in the relevant clause of the purchase order that deals with coal below specifications.

However, he failed to explain why the specifications were changed when the suppliers had not asked for it.

If the five specifications that were removed had no significance, then why were they included in the list of 11 specifications which the company was asked to fulfill with regard the imported coal in the first place?

And why were the specifications changed after the execution of tenders, placing purchase order and receiving coal?

Mr Jain said that two changes were made in the specifications annexed with the purchase order. By making the amendments, the upper limit on the Hardgrove Grindability Index (HGI) was removed. This was done after taking written advice of the BHEL.