Meeting to discuss role of PTCC regarding delay in transmission line projects of PGCIL -reg. – EQ

Summary:

—-

### Key Discussions

1. **PTCC Process Overview** (Presented by CEA):
– PTCC ensures power systems do not interfere with telecom/signaling lines via electromagnetic induction.
– Legal basis: Section 160 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
– Risks include induced voltage, earth potential rise (EPR), and threats to railway signaling & BSNL copper cables.

2. **PGCIL’s Position**:
– In the last decade, only one PTCC protection recommendation was received (Khetri-Narela line).
– Transmission lines cross railway tracks at 70–90°, minimizing induction risk.
– Existing protections (tower footing resistance 10–20 ohms, substation earth grid <1 ohm) are adequate.
– **Suggestion:** PTCC clearance may not be required due to negligible induced voltage impact.

3. **CEA’s Counterpoint**:
– Induced voltage is calculated under **fault conditions**, not normal operations — fault currents are high.
– Even perpendicular crossings have parallel stretches, creating induction risk.
– PTCC remains necessary for safety and regulatory compliance.

4. **BSNL’s Stance**:
– Most network now on Optical Fibre Cable (OFC), but legacy copper cables exist in remote/rural areas.
– **Proposed:** Discontinue BSNL’s issuance of Route Approval Certificate (RAC); instead, CEA should issue clearances using data from BSNL field units.
– No need for NoC from private telcos (Airtel, Jio, Vodafone-Idea) as their networks are OFC-based.

5. **Indian Railways’ Concern**:
– >50% of railway communication (signaling & control) still uses copper (quad) cables.
– These are sensitive to induced voltage, especially under fault conditions.
– Safety measures exist in traction OHE, but vulnerability remains.

6. **CEA Chairperson & Member (Power System)**:
– PTCC is important but needs **process simplification** and **timeline rationalization**.
– Proposed an online portal under NSWS (National Single Window System) for PTCC clearances.
– Suggested examining PGCIL’s proposal for **self-certification** on telecom safety.

### Final Decision (Point 10 of Minutes)

> **“There shall be no requirement of PTCC Clearance w.e.f. 1st July 2026. Meanwhile, CEA may issue technical guidelines as may be required.”**

This marks a significant policy shift — abolishing mandatory PTCC clearance from July 2026.

—

## Business Points (Key Takeaways for Action & Strategy)

| Business Point | Implication |
|—————|————–|
| **PTCC clearance mandatory only until 30 June 2026** | Transmission line projects (especially PGCIL) can proceed without PTCC approval post-June 2026, reducing project delays. |
| **CEA to issue technical guidelines** | Industry must prepare to comply with new CEA guidelines on electromagnetic safety, replacing PTCC clearance. |
| **BSNL no longer to issue Route Approval Certificates** | Eliminates a historical bottleneck; CEA will take over coordination with BSNL field units. |
| **Private telcos’ NoC not required** | Simplifies approvals for power lines crossing areas with OFC-based networks (Airtel, Jio, Vi). |
| **Railways remain a concern** | Despite PTCC removal, power transmission companies must still coordinate with Indian Railways where copper-based signaling exists — liability risks remain. |
| **Opportunity for digitization** | Proposed NSWS portal for PTCC-like processes suggests future digital clearances for other statutory approvals (Sections 68, 164). |
| **Self-certification possibility** | PGCIL’s proposal to be examined — could further reduce regulatory overhead for telecom safety. |

—

For more information please see below link: