#transmissionsector

OPTCL has launched a major transmission-modernisation initiative through its Rs301.22 crore Meramundali–Mendhasal HTLS reconductoring project. The package involves replacement of existing twin AAAC Moose conductors with twin HTLS conductors on an operational 400kV double-circuit transmission line together with associated substation upgrades. The procurement is a notable addition to Transmission equipment tenders in India.

The project differs from traditional transmission expansion programmes because it focuses on increasing capacity within an existing corridor. Rather than developing a new line, the utility intends to improve asset utilisation through advanced conductor technology. The contractor will undertake engineering, procurement, erection, testing and commissioning responsibilities under a turnkey EPC framework.

Execution complexity is expected to be higher than in a greenfield project because work must be performed on a live transmission asset. Outage planning, safety management, commissioning schedules and system integration will play a major role in project delivery. These factors make Transmission equipment tenders in India involving HTLS reconductoring particularly attractive to specialised EPC contractors.

The package also highlights a growing industry preference for infrastructure optimisation. Utilities facing corridor constraints, land-acquisition challenges and environmental considerations are increasingly exploring reconductoring as a practical alternative to new transmission construction. Similar trends are emerging across T&D projects contract opportunities and strategic Power Grid projects.

EnergylineIndia.com observes that Transmission equipment tenders in India are increasingly driven by capacity enhancement objectives rather than corridor expansion alone. As HTLS technology adoption grows, Transmission equipment tenders in India and Transmission equipment tenders in India are expected to attract specialised participation, making Transmission equipment tenders in India an important indicator of transmission-sector modernisation.

Substation Package contract structuring is becoming more nuanced in India’s transmission build-out, and PGCIL’s latest 765 kV tender pair is a good example. One package is for AIS extension at Ahmedabad and Vataman, while the second is for GIS extension linked to Lakadia, Jam Khambhaliya, and Jamnagar renewable corridors. Both were issued on 13 April 2026 with bids due on 11 May 2026.

This matters because the two packages are not interchangeable in risk profile. The AIS side points to brownfield augmentation under live substation conditions. The GIS side points to higher-density integration across multiple renewable nodes. That makes this Substation Package contract development a marker of technology-led procurement separation rather than a routine transmission release. It also suggests PGCIL is aligning package design with site constraints instead of forcing a single engineering template across the corridor.

For readers following Green Energy transmission project activity, this is a useful signal. GIS work may pull in more technically specialised bidders, while AIS may remain more open to conventional EPC participation. Yet the lower-entry profile of AIS does not remove execution risk, especially where outage coordination and live-system interfaces shape timelines and margins. In that sense, Substation Package contract strategy is now influencing bidder behaviour well before financial terms are disclosed.The note does not provide EMD, PBG, qualification thresholds, automation layers, or OEM obligations. That leaves commercial uncertainty in place for bidders evaluating Power Grid projects. EnergylineIndia.com is watching closely because Substation Package contract choices now say a lot about where complexity sits in the renewable evacuation chain and how procurement is being segmented to manage it.

Indian Power news  highlights a key transmission infrastructure award in West Bengal where WBSETCL has selected Kalpataru Projects International Ltd as the lowest bidder for a Rs 485.7 crore EPC package combining transmission line construction with sub-station bay works. The contract forms part of the utility’s grid strengthening programme designed to expand network capacity and support rising electricity demand.

Three major transmission EPC companies participated in the financial bid stage. Kalpataru Projects International Ltd emerged as L1 with a price of Rs 485.7 crore. KEC International Ltd submitted a bid of Rs 499.9 crore, while Larsen & Toubro Ltd quoted Rs 503 crore. According to Indian Power news, the final price spread remained within a tight range, with the L2 bid only 2.9% higher than L1.

This narrow clustering of bids reflects disciplined cost modelling across the transmission EPC sector. Contractors appear to be protecting margins rather than pursuing aggressive undercutting strategies, particularly as tower steel, conductor supply, and logistics costs remain closely monitored across infrastructure projects.

The EPC scope integrates transmission tower erection, conductor stringing, hardware installation, and sub-station bay interface works required for grid synchronisation. Such bundled packages reduce project coordination delays between line construction and sub-station readiness.

For readers tracking Indian Power news, the outcome reinforces the competitive landscape among India’s largest EPC transmission contractors. Projects linked to grid expansion, renewable integration, and Inter State Transmission System development continue to attract participation from established engineering firms.

EnergylineIndia.com continues to monitor procurement outcomes, transmission project awards, and electricity infrastructure investments across India, Electricity Infrastructure, Transmission Sector, Power Projects.

Private transmission developers are locking in multi-decade, billion-rupee debt structures based on the assumption of seamless grid integration, while the regulatory architecture governing that physical access is paralyzed by systemic litigation.

Transmission financing and availability-based tariffs

Large-scale transmission infrastructure is financed on the promise of a 35-year availability-based tariff, meaning the developer is guaranteed revenue as long as the physical line is built and ready for use.

However, for the grid to actually utilize that line, the dependent power generators must legally secure General Network Access (GNA) and Connectivity approvals.

When these approvals are bottlenecked by multi-party regulatory disputes, developers still lock in their massive capital debt structures, shifting the financial risk of an idle asset onto retail consumers who must pay the tariff regardless of whether electricity flows.

Regulatory dockets reveal structural misalignment

Regulatory and financial records from March 2026 illustrate the disconnect.

A rating rationale for Rajasthan IV A Power Transmission Limited (RIVA) describes the financial closure of a Rs. 1,200 crore capital structure, based on a 35-year tariff adoption for a new 400-kV transmission network.

At the same time, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) Advance Hearing Schedule shows the regulatory docket crowded with disputes under Regulations 41 and 42 governing Connectivity and General Network Access (GNA).

These cases involve multiple generators and state utilities locked in prolonged litigation over grid access rights.

Protected developer revenue versus stranded assets

Transmission developers argue that their financial model is legally sound because availability-based tariffs protect them from external disputes.

If the developer builds the transmission line on time and maintains availability, they remain contractually entitled to tariff recovery regardless of downstream connectivity issues.

However, this legal structure creates systemic risk for the public. If generators cannot legally connect due to GNA disputes, the infrastructure may remain idle while consumers still finance decades of transmission debt through regulated tariffs.

Regulatory implication

The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) may need to align tariff adoption with the resolution of connectivity approvals.

Without such safeguards, transmission infrastructure financing can become disconnected from actual grid utilization, leaving consumers responsible for servicing long-term infrastructure debt tied to underutilized transmission corridors.