Rating Criteria for Power Distribution Utilities. February 2018

Similar documents
Rating criteria for the mining industry. February 2018

Rating Criteria for Sugar Industry. February 2018

CRISIL s criteria for grading real estate developers

Rating criteria for upstream oil & gas sector. February 2018

Ratings. Sample Report. Abc Limited. June 2017

CRISIL s bond fund credit quality ratings criteria. February 2018

The infrastructure sector: unique rating drivers. February 2018

CRISIL Criteria for Rating Hybrid Instruments Issued by NBFCs/HFCs. December 2016

Rating criteria for toll road projects. February 2018

Ratings. REIT and InvIT. A primer. August 2016

Rating criteria for the construction industry. February 2018

CRISIL s criteria for consolidation. December 2016

Rating criteria for securities firms. July 2017

CRISIL s criteria for rating Education institutions. January 2017

CRISIL s rating process. June 2017

CRISIL Real Estate Star Ratings (CREST) FAQs

CRISIL Composite Bond Fund Index

CRISIL s bank loan ratings process, scale and default recognition. August 2017

CRISIL s rating methodology for collateralised debt obligations (CDO) September 2018

Ind AS impact. Financial statements to undergo changes, but no major rating or criteria changes foreseen since fundamentals remain the same

CRISIL s ratings and rating scales June 2017

CRISIL s criteria for rating instruments backed by guarantees

Criteria for Rating power transmission projects. October 2016

Rating criteria for state governments. May 2018

CRISIL revises rating scale for micro and small enterprises

Grading Assigned: Mumbai 5 Star out of 7 Star (Assigned in September 2017) Vartak Nagar, Thane, Mumbai. Total 98,237 sq. ft.

Ofira. Project profile. Grading Assigned: Surat 7 Star out of 7 Star (Assigned in September 2017) Valid till September 25, Location of project

CRISIL Unit Linked Insurance Plan (ULIP) Ranking. Methodology document

Planet SKS. Project profile

CRISIL Indices. Summary of indices relevant for mutual fund categories specified by SEBI

CRISIL Mutual Fund Ranking Methodology

Changes in Hybrid Segment of Indices. CRISIL Funds and Fixed Income Research

Built up area: LIG ( sq.ft.); MIG ( sq.ft.); HIG ( sq.ft.)

In a sweet spot. Firm prices, deleveraging to improve the credit profiles of sugar companies. May 2017

Swastik Universal. Project Profile. Existing Rating: Surat 5 Star. November No. of villas/blocks. No. of units Offices: 278, corporate house: 5

Evaluating risks in securitisation transactions: A primer. September 2018

Criteria for rating wind power projects

Securitisation Market Overview Securitisation market hits a trillion, propelled by PTCs

Rating criteria for banks and financial institutions. November 2017

CRISIL - AMFI Balance Fund Performance Index. Factsheet March 2018

Tata Teleservices (Maharashtra) Limited Ratings upgraded to 'CRISIL AA-/Stable/CRISIL A1+', removed from 'Watch Developing'

Residential : 2,71,235 square feet Commercial : 1,940 square feet

CRISIL - AMFI ELSS Fund Performance Index. Factsheet September 2017

10,11,497 square feet (sq ft; developer s share is 8,26,133 sq ft)

CRISIL - AMFI GILT Fund Performance Index. Factsheet December 2017

CRISIL - AMFI Short Term Debt Fund Performance Index. Factsheet March 2018

Complying with CECL. We assess five ways to implement the new regulations. September 2017

CRISIL - AMFI Hybrid Fund Performance Index. Factsheet September 2017

CRISIL - AMFI Small & Midcap Fund Performance Index. Factsheet March 2018

CRISIL - AMFI Income Fund Performance Index. Factsheet March 2018

CRISIL - AMFI Liquid Fund Performance Index. Factsheet December 2017

GDP to grow at 7% in fiscal CRISIL Outlook September 2017

Oranje Castle. Project profile. Grading Assigned: Lucknow 4 Star out of 7 Star (Assigned in January 2018) Valid till January 23, 2019

Seafood exports to stay robust, US shrimp export realisations to drop 10% April 2018

CRISIL s approach to financial ratios. December 2017

Labour pain. Chartbook. Research

CRISIL s criteria for rating annuity road projects. June 2018

CRISIL - AMFI Money Market Fund Performance Index. Factsheet March 2018

CRISIL - AMFI Diversified Equity Fund Performance Index. Factsheet September 2017

CRISIL s rating methodology for RMBS transactions. September 2018

Criteria for notching down standalone ratings of companies based on support extended to parent

CRISIL Unit Linked Insurance Plan Ranking. As on October 2017

CRISIL - AMFI Equity Fund Performance Index. Factsheet March 2018

CRISIL s criteria for rating annuity road projects. January 2017

Sentiment sustains. CriSidEx readings, Jan-Mar and Apr-Jun April 2018 Volume 2

Managed by ICICI Prudential Asset Management Company Ltd.

Residential market unlikely to look up soon

Fund Insights. Liquid funds - an alternative to savings bank deposits. Satish Prabhu Senior Manager - CRISIL FundServices

CRISIL Default Study. Default and rating transitions in February 2017

The County Phase 1A (3 Blocks) Rating assigned: Kolkata 4 Star

Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited

Criteria for rating solar power projects

Project Profile. March Opp. Air force Ground, Mandoli Road, Chougulewadi, Belgaum. Joint Development 2 Acres 26 Guntas 0.4 million sq ft.

Rating Watch/Outlook. Weaknesses Modest asset-liability management (ALM) profile Limited market share, and geographic concentration in revenue profile

CREDIT RATING REPORT. Gruh Finance Limited

Insights. CRISIL'S CRITERIA FOR CORPORATE SECTOR HYBRIDS (Including perpetual securities) EQUITY H BRIDS Y. May 2011

CREDIT RATING REPORT. Gruh Finance Limited. September 2017

August CRISIL Insight. Expected Loss Based Provisioning

2017 CRISIL Ltd. All rights reserved. Debt s it! Why debt funds are as good a wealth-creation tool as any, and can also aid in nation building

RATINGS Rs.17.0 Billion Commercial Paper Programme (Enhanced from Rs.12.0 Billion) Fixed Deposit Programme. Short- Term. Rating Watch/Outlook

Distribution Tariff Determination and Rationalization

CRISIL s rating methodology for ABS transactions

MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION MUMBAI

Competitive bidding set to transform wind power market

CRISIL Independent Equity Research & IPO Grading

ABC-CA Consumption Theme Mixed Securities Investment Fund

Fidelity Funds - ASEAN Fund (the ILP Sub-Fund )

Raising the bar on corporate governance in India

REG FOCUS. Identify and reduce the risk of market abuse

Principle 1 Institutional investors should publicly disclose their policy on how they will discharge their stewardship responsibilities

Enabling Low Cost Financing to Renewable Energy in India

TOWARDS A COMPETITIVE ELECTRICITY MARKET: THE BERTHING OF ELIGIBLE CUSTOMERS

A LIQUID BENCHMARK FOR PRIVATE REAL ESTATE

Treasury Services: Innovating For The Next Generation

Offshore electricity transmission: a new model for delivering infrastructure

States of growth. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, fastest-growing Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala bring up the rear. January 2018.

BANK OF CHINA (CANADA) BASEL III DISCLOSURES AS AT DECEMBER 31, 2013

SEBI Investor Programme Guide for Mutual Fund Investors

Treatment of Losses by Network Operators an ERGEG Position Paper for public consultation

REG FOCUS Identify and reduce the risk of regulatory censure

Transcription:

Rating Criteria for Power Distribution Utilities February 2018

Criteria contacts Pawan Agrawal Chief Analytical Officer CRISIL Ratings Email: pawan.agrawal@crisil.com Ramesh Karunakaran Director Rating Criteria and Product Development Email: ramesh.karunakaran@crisil.com Somasekhar Vemuri Senior Director Rating Criteria and Product Development Email: somasekhar.vemuri@crisil.com Manish Kumar Gupta Director - CRISIL Ratings Email: manish.gupta@crisil.com In case of any feedback or queries, you may write to us at Criteria.feedback@crisil.com 2

Executive summary Power distribution licensees service customers in a geographically demarcated area. Typically, a distribution licensee purchases power in bulk from a transmission licensee, and supplies the same to a largely retail customer base within its service area. Traditionally, a number of power distribution licensees have been state-owned, while some urban centers do have privately-owned entities. The credit rating framework for distribution licensees evaluates players on their business, financial and management risks. While the management risk is evaluated as in the case of other corporate entities, the main components of business risk for power distribution utilities are: Industry risk Regulatory risk Market position and service area economics Operating efficiency parameters and track record The financial risk is evaluated critically looking at the capital structure, ability to raise capital, debt coverage metrics and financial flexibility. Scope While the broader criteria of manufacturing companies 1 applies to all the firms in the manufacturing sector, this note 2 brings out the parameters considered by CRISIL in credit ratings, which are specific to power distribution companies. Business Risk Industry risk The industry risk assessment is driven by an appreciation of the overall demand-supply scenario for power, and of the overall policy environment within which entities operate. In CRISIL's opinion, a distribution licensee's ability to provide quality power at a competitive rate is a critical rating determinant. At an industry level, this would eventually shift the balance towards better-performing distribution licensees, who generate a higher quantum of cash from operations, and are better placed to service their obligations towards generation and transmission licensees. 1 The detailed criteria is present on the CRISIL website under the Criteria and Methodology section - Rating Criteria for Manufacturing and Services Sector Companies and CRISIL s Approach to Financial Ratios 2 For accessing previous published document on Rating Criteria for Power distribution utilities, Kindly follow below mentioned link: https://www.crisil.com/content/dam/crisil/criteria_methodology/utilities/archive/crisil-ratings-crieria-power-distributionutilities_2007.pdf 3

Regulatory risk Distribution licensees are regulated by the State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs). These SERCs ensure independent and objective criteria for tariff determination, based on adequate recovery of expense to the distribution licensee, subject to its achieving the requisite performance benchmark. CRISIL views this process of tariff setting positively as it is free of external discretions. Reform legislations also stipulate that each licensee should file annual revenue requirements with an option to file a separate tariff petition, in case a tariff revision is warranted. Although regulations provide for most costs to be passed through, along with reasonable returns on the equity component, regulatory risk emanates from the fact that the SERCs may impose stricter performance standards, or disallow certain cost components stemming from inefficiencies of distribution licensees. SERCs thus, essentially balance out customer interests with what is legitimately due to the distribution licensee. If information used to support the distribution licensees' rationale for tariff revision is insufficient or under doubt, SERCs have also been known to take a tough stance in not allowing the tariff revisions sought by the licensees. Nature and scope of tariff orders already passed by an SERC are a useful index of its regulatory stance. Having said that, timeliness and accuracy of filing tariff petitions by discoms is critical. In the absence of which, discoms would report losses as tariffs are not retrospective in nature. Also, electricity is politically sensitive, hence many a time, SERCs defer tariff hikes (at times over multiple years) Market position and service area economics Availability of widespread distribution infrastructure and retail reach of such infrastructure are key discriminators of a licensee's market position. Distribution licensees have traditionally operated in exclusive zones though legislation now permits non-exclusive licensees to operate in the same geographical area. Although the mix of customers - residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural - within a service area and their purchasing power, are key considerations, service quality and reliability offered by a distribution licensee are also important determinants of sustainability of such a relationship. While the market may be willing to offer a price premium for a more responsive and reliable licensee, the latter has to maintain this value proposition for the premium to be sustainable. Growth of a lower-paying customer segment and shifts in better-paying customer segments are other trends that would be appropriately factored in under this parameter. A service area with a higher base of industrial customers registering good growth rates, is seen as a positive, as long as such customer concentration is within acceptable limits. Existence of a depreciated distribution infrastructure within a densely populated urban service area is a key entry barrier and could work to the benefit of incumbent licensees. Operating efficiency parameters and track record Given their direct customer interface, distribution licensees have to develop necessary processes, credit guidelines, billing systems and collection mechanisms to ensure that the business is run efficiently. Operating efficiency will ultimately impact the metering, billing and collection (MBC) cycle, which could affect cash flows. Another parameter covered under operating efficiency is the actual cost of power (whether generated or purchased externally), which, within a given tariff structure, could be the most significant determinant of profitability. Therefore, a distribution licensees' ability to procure sufficient quantum of power, at minimum prices, for supply purposes is a critical rating determinant. This assumes even greater significance in the open access regime where a customer 4

can choose to buy power from different sources. A distribution licensee with a high power procurement cost would risk losing its customers to more efficient players. Further, CRISIL views long-term power purchase agreements with an efficient generating entity as a positive. Absence of such agreement can constrain an entity's ability to ensure uninterrupted supply of power to customers, which can have an adverse impact on business prospects. Transmission and distribution (T&D) losses within the service area are either technical or commercial in nature. Industry benchmarks are available for permissible technical losses at lower voltages. Such benchmarks are a function of voltage stability, and reflect the efforts to minimize distribution transformer losses via regular maintenance. Commercial losses, on the other hand, include leakage of revenue due to non-paying customers or outright theft. Consistent efforts are required to track energy flows in the system to ensure that all the energy being input into the T&D system is also being billed after accounting for system losses. Moreover, power tariff advised by the regulator assumes specific improvement in performance indicators and hence, a firm s ability to achieve the same is critical for its profitability. Besides T&D and commercial losses, manpower productivity parameters and other administrative expenses will also need to be closely tracked and assessed in relation to regulatory forbearance on these expense levels. Financial Risk Existing financial position A licensee's historical operational results are captured in its current capital structure and profitability parameters. While the rating itself is a forward-looking assessment of the licensee's ability to service its debt, the starting point would be the existing financial statements. The licensee is assessed based on its current debt-servicing ability, which is determined by the debt load on the balance sheet vis-à-vis the cash flows. Delay in preparation of financial statements, which is a generally observed phenomenon, increases information availability risk. While a distribution licensee's business is inherently more amenable to a larger debt load due to the pass-through nature of cost, this debt load has to be viewed in relation to the licensee's performance capabilities. In a benign regulatory environment, performance parameters may not be very important, but if the regulatory stance is adverse to the licensee's business, the entire cost may not be entirely recovered through tariff revisions. The impact on the rating is determined by materiality of such cost components and frequency of such incidences of non-recovery. Future financial position The future assessment is based on material aspects in the business environment, including the regulatory stance, changing market conditions, differential growth rates of various customer segments, tariff levels for various segments and the distribution licensee's growth orientation, all of which translate into financial projections underlying the licensee's future financial performance. Debt service coverage and cash flow coverage of debt are important financial parameters considered in any such assessment of future debt servicing ability. Cash flow adequacy and financial flexibility The company's parentage and track record in raising funds from various sources such as banks, capital markets, reflect its financial flexibility. Given that the loss funding is no longer allowed under Ujwal DISCOM Assurance 5

Yojana (UDAY), financial flexibility of a discom is also dependent on health of the respective state governments. In a steady state operation, a distribution licensee is expected to have minimal capital requirements, essentially to accommodate its maintenance capital expenditure requirements. Capital outlays become substantial when the licensee embarks on acquisitions or seeks to significantly upgrade its physical infrastructure. A company's ability to raise the required capital would thus have a significant bearing on its rating. A significant amount of cash generation from a demonstrably well-run distribution licensee operation would considerably enhance the company's ability to raise capital (debt and equity) from the markets. Management Risk For the analysis of the management risk of power distribution utility companies, CRISIL follows the standard criteria used for all manufacturing companies. This criteria is presented in detail in our publication, Rating Criteria for Manufacturing and Services Sector Companies. Conclusion A well-run distribution licensee constantly generates cash, which improves its liquidity and overall financial profile. But the existence of essential systems and a specific assessment on key performance parameters, which will determine the ability to consistently generate cash in future, are critical determinants of the credit rating. Extent of regulatory oversight is a positive feature, though a regulatory directive may also be adverse to a distribution licensee in case of non-performance or inadequate performance. 6

About CRISIL Limited CRISIL is an agile and innovative, global analytics company driven by its mission of making markets function better. We are India s foremost provider of ratings, data, research, analytics and solutions. A strong track record of growth, culture of innovation and global footprint sets us apart. We have delivered independent opinions, actionable insights, and efficient solutions to over 100,000 customers. We are majority owned by S&P Global Inc., a leading provider of transparent and independent ratings, benchmarks, analytics and data to the capital and commodity markets worldwide. About CRISIL Ratings CRISIL Ratings is part of CRISIL Limited ( CRISIL ). We pioneered the concept of credit rating in India in 1987. CRISIL is registered in India as a credit rating agency with the Securities and Exchange Board of India ( SEBI ). With a tradition of independence, analytical rigour and innovation, CRISIL sets the standards in the credit rating business. We rate the entire range of debt instruments, such as, bank loans, certificates of deposit, commercial paper, non-convertible / convertible / partially convertible bonds and debentures, perpetual bonds, bank hybrid capital instruments, asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, partial guarantees and other structured debt instruments. We have rated over 24,500 large and mid-scale corporates and financial institutions. CRISIL has also instituted several innovations in India in the rating business, including rating municipal bonds, partially guaranteed instruments and microfinance institutions. We also pioneered a globally unique rating service for Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) and significantly extended the accessibility to rating services to a wider market. Over 1,10,000 MSMEs have been rated by us. CRISIL Privacy Notice CRISIL respects your privacy. We use your contact information, such as your name, address, and email id, to fulfil your request and service your account and to provide you with additional information from CRISIL and other parts of S&P Global Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively, the Company ) you may find of interest. For further information, or to let us know your preferences with respect to receiving marketing materials, please visit www.crisil.com/privacy. You can view the Company s Customer Privacy at https://www.spglobal.com/privacy Last updated: April 2016 Argentina China Hong Kong India Poland Singapore UK USA CRISIL Limited: CRISIL House, Central Avenue, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai 400076. India Phone: + 91 22 3342 3000 Fax: + 91 22 3342 3001 www.crisil.com