While power availability in the country has significantly improved over the last few years, per capita availability of power in some states is just about 1/4 th of the national average. The Prime Minister recently launched the "Saubhagya" scheme to ensure electrification for all willing households across the country.While we await the implementation of the scheme, data shows that availability of power has substantially improved in the last decade and at the same time some states have fallen behind. Per capita availability of power in 15 states is less than the national average and in some states is only about 1/4th of the national average. Power requirement crossed 1000 billion units The assessment of power requirement is made using the past data and trend analysis. This is done for each region/state and then aggregated at the national level. The power requirement at an All-India level almost doubled in 12 years between 2004-05 and 2015-16. The requirement in 2004-05 was 591 billion units. The requirement crossed 1000 billion units for the first time in 2013-14. Only three states (Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh & Gujarat) reported a requirement of more than 100 billion units each in 2015-16. A total of nine (9) states reported a requirement of more than 50 billion units each. Except Uttar Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir, all the other states have reported to have met more than 90% of the requirement. Five (5) states reported to have met 100% of the requirement. Power requirement does not reveal the true picture But the requirement figures do not reveal the true picture of power availability in various states since it is calculated based primarily on past trends. There are multiple states where more than 40% of the rural households are yet to electrified. As of August 2017, 56% of the rural households are yet to be electrified in Jharkhand followed by 55% in Nagaland and 53.5% in Bihar. In Uttar Pradesh, 49% rural households are yet to be electrified. In fourteen (14) states, more than 20% rural households are yet to be electrified. Some states way behind on per capita availability As with the overall availability of power in the country, the per capita availability has also increased over the years. From 533 units per capita in 2004-05, the availability of power increased to 901 per capita in 2015-16. Except for the reduction in 2011-12, the per capita availability has increased continuously. Per Capita Availability in Bihar & Jharkhand is just 1/4 th the National average Goa reported the highest per capita availability in the country with 3512 units. Fourteen (14) states have reported a per capita availability of more than 1000 units. Fifteen (15) other states reported a per capita availability of power in 2015-16 which is less than the national average of 901 units. Bihar with 229 units reported the least per capita availability of all the states. This is almost 1/4th of the national average. Jharkhand also reported only 230 per capita units. Nine (9) states reported less than 500 units of per capita availability in 2015-16.
Saturday, October 14 2017
Header source : Bruegel blog post by Enrico Nano and Simone Tagliapietra (link in Source) Brexit And Euratom: Impact On Cancer Treatment, Nuclear Power Plants And Climate Change. Introduction The European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC or Euratom) is an international organisation which established the Euratom Treaty on the 25th March 1957. It was signed by Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. The UK became part of Euratom when it joined the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973, which was one of the pillars to create the European Union. Its aims are to develop the nuclear market with peaceful civil nuclear fission fuel supply, coordinate research into nuclear fusion, improve nuclear safety and manage training programs across Europe and beyond. The public became aware of Euratom’s existence when the scientific community strongly reacted to the European Union Bill (notification of withdrawal) — Clause 1: “18. The power that is provided by clause 1(1) applies to withdrawal from the EU. This includes the European Atomic Energy Community (‘Euratom’), as the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008 sets out that the term “EU” includes (as the context permits or requires) Euratom (section 3(2))” The announcement to leave the Euratom Treaty was unexpected as it is legally distinct from the European Union. However, it shares the same membership and has links with other EU institutions such as the European Commission, Council and Courts of Justice. Article 106a of the Euratom Treaty (Title III — Chapter 1) says “Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union shall apply to this Treaty”. Steve Peers, Professor of Law and expert on the European Union, explains that it could be read in two ways: you can be free to leave the EU but not Euratom, or leaving the EU implies leaving Euratom . The UK has decided to leave Euratom to become independent of all EU institutions, even though it was not legally required . The Euratom Treaty (Title I — Article 2) says “In order to perform its task, the Community shall, as provided in this Treaty: (g) ensure [..] freedom of employment for specialists within the Community” . Unfortunately, this conflicts with one of the desires of those who voted to leave the European Union. While a country has the possibility to become an “Associated country”, it would nonetheless be required to participate under the same conditions as the Member States. The restriction of EU freedom of movement desired by Brexit remains a red line. It would be a breach of Euratom obligations in the scenario where the UK would stay in the Euratom Community as an Associated Country (e.g. Switzerland). This paper will explain how Euratom impacts our day-to-day lives and how leaving Euratom could affect our future. It will state assumptions on impacts the withdrawal might have. It will affect three different but not unrelated sectors: 1. Nuclear medicine: diagnostic and cancer treatments 2. Power plants and nuclear waste management 3. Research and climate change
1. Nuclear medicine:diagnostic and cancer treatments Nuclear technology is not only used to produce electricity, it is also used in the medical sector. Nuclear medicine is used to diagnose (medical imaging) and treat cancer (radiotherapy). The common radioisotopes used in nuclear medicine are Technetium-99m (Tc99m) and Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99). They are provided by the Euratom Supply Agency (ESA). Nuclear medicine is used to diagnose/treat about 35 million patients (in 10000 hospitals) world wild every year, of which 9 million in Europe (20% of the global market) . The medical radioisotopes Tc-99m and Mo-99 decay very quickly, which makes storage and transport time-critical (Tc-99m has a half-life of 6h, Mo-99 has a half-life is 66h). To be imported, Mo-99 is supplied by specialised radiopharmaceutical companies in the form of Tc-99m generators. These generators contain Mo-99 and produce Tc-99m as the Mo-99 decays. The life-time of the generators is a week. It is very important that the withdrawal from Euratom must not introduce delays in the shipment of these medical supplies. With a very short life-time, this essential material -used to diagnose cancer- might not arrive in a viable state, which could lead to delays in cancer treatment and putting patients at risk. Leaving Euratom would affect access to these radioisotope supplies and would need to form part of the Brexit negotiations. The Brexit negotiations will determine the conditions on how, when and the quantity of elements that will be delivered. Current British nuclear reactors are unable to produce them; therefore, the supplies are currently imported. Hinkley Point C, the newest British nuclear reactor, will have the technology to produce medical radioisotopes (explained in more detail in the “Power plants and nuclear waste management” section). When the plant will be delivered, it should help to address the global shortage of supplies that we currently face, including the anticipated increase of demand of 5% per annum [ 7 ]. However, Hinkley Point C is not planned to come online until 2025 and its construction is also likely be impacted by the decision to withdraw from Euratom. At present, under Euratom it is easy to transfer material across Europe. While it will depend on the outcome of any renegotiation, there is a risk that the UK may face additional costs. Given the NHS is a large user of radioisotopes, any increased administrative costs related to the transport and shipment of the medical supplies to the UK would be an additional financial burden for the NHS. Under the Euratom Treaty, the European Commission is also responsible for the protection of patients and other individuals in medical facilities. It is likely that the safety rules covering the use of radioisotopes will be copied from the Basic Safety Standards Directive (2013/59/Euratom) which are the basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation. It is in everyone’s interest to follow them. As the safety rules are in the public domain, the UK can simply copy them, though the UK will need to keep in step with future updates (as they are continuously evolving).
2. Power plants and Nuclear wastes managementThe nuclear power stations generate 21% of electricity produced in the UK. The UK has 15 operational power generating nuclear reactors located in seven plants (14 advanced gas-cooled reactors [AGR] and one pressurised water reactor [PWR]). There is a nuclear reprocessing plant (at Sellafield) for waste management and storage . Nuclear power is a low-carbon emission power source and a key component for the UK in meeting Paris Agreement’s environmental targets. In order to produce electricity, nuclear reactors rely on Uranium to fuel the nuclear chain reaction. The fission reaction generates heat, which is absorbed by the reactor coolant and used to produce steam. The steam then runs through turbines, which in turn, produce electrical power. Uranium is a naturally occurring heavy metal able to release abundant concentrated energy via a nuclear chain reaction. Uranium is found in uranium ore, which is a mix of Uranium and other elements. To be used as fuel in a nuclear power plant, Uranium ore must be processed to extract the fissile Uranium. This is then packaged to create fuel rods, which are complicated to produce and specific to a particular reactor design. The UK does not have any natural uranium ore deposits, uranium must be imported. The Euratom Treaty — Article 2 (d) ensures “that all users in the Community receive a regular and equitable supply of ores and nuclear fuels”. The Euratom Supply Agency (ESA) provides access to the European Fuel Market and the Euratom Community’s Nuclear Co‑operation Agreements (NCA), though which the UK obtains its nuclear fuels. If the post-Brexit agreements do not meet the current NCA standards, additional pressures on stocks and delays might -in the worst-case scenario- lead to a shortage of electricity supply if stocks of fuel drop too low. The Department for Exiting the European Union stated that the UK must leave Euratom at the same time as exiting the European Union (2 years). The Nuclear Industry Association (NIA) recommends to negotiate a post-Brexit NCA “…with key markets; however, the negotiations, agreements and approval could take years” [ 11 ]. Pressures on the negotiations’ timeline could lead to flaws which could legally hamper the flow of fuel. The transport of nuclear fuels (and radioactive wastes) are within the scope of the Euratom Directives on Trans-frontier Shipments of Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste (Directive 2006/117/Euratom) and Safety of Waste (Directive 2011/70/Euratom) implemented under UK regulations [ 11 ]. The Euratom Treaty has safeguards and reporting requirements, which provide for monthly inspections of nuclear sites, especially for plants with a higher risk of hazards. The Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant is Europe’s largest nuclear site, which manages an important stockpile of civilian plutonium accumulated from reprocessed nuclear fuel coming from all over the world. It is one of the most complex reprocessing plants in the world . The UK has a safeguard agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Euratom . The UK would likely need to re-negotiate it’s safeguard agreements with Euratom following withdrawal due to requiring access to shared nuclear materials. Three new nuclear power plant projects are under construction. One of these projects is the “Hinkley Point C” power station, located in Somerset (South West England). It will consist of two European Pressurised Reactors (EPR), a new reactor design. Hinkley Point C has a projected lifetime of 60 years and a cost of £18bn [ 14 ] and is expected to deliver 7% of the UK’s total electricity. The construction will provide 25,000 jobs and the finished plant should offer 900 jobs [ 15 ]. The “Hinkley Point C” power station could give the UK the opportunity to produce its own nuclear medical supplies (see chapter on Euratom and Nuclear medicine). The uncertainty caused by the withdrawal from Euratom regarding management of nuclear safety, movement of goods, technology and people might cause delays and put the project at risk. The other two projects, from Horizon nuclear power (Gloucestershire) and NuGeneration (Cumbria), rely on international cooperation with Japan and the USA. The current nuclear cooperation agreement allows Euratom community members to collaborate with non-EU countries (considered as “third-countries”). However, it will become illegal under US laws for the UK (outside Euratom) to continue its collaboration with the US [ 11 ]. The new NCA post-Brexit would have a specific arrangement with the UK to allow collaboration.
3. Research and Climate changeThe negative impact of human activities on Earth cannot be denied. The population is continuously growing; consequently, global demand for energy is increasing. At present, 80.8% of the developed world’s energy comes from fossil fuels [ 16 ]. It is the most common source of energy, due to its low price and its accessibility. The harm caused to Earth and the threat to our long-term future is analysed by The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which assesses the scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant to the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change. The 21st Conference of the Parties (COP) adopted the Paris Agreement, defining objectives to limit the environmental impact of human activities. It was signed by 195 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) members — in Paris, on the 12th December 2015. It has been ratified by 148 countries [ 17 ]. The aim of the Paris agreement is to slow down the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C. To reach this goal it is necessary to reduce world wild use of fossil fuels in favour of low greenhouse gas emission energy sources. At present, no single “clean” technology is able to fulfil our needs: to address the increase in energy demands whilst simultaneously reducing the negative impact of human activities on the planet. Meeting the 2°C target entails a 41% reduction in total energy related CO2 emissions and a 70% reduction in power sector emissions [ 18 ]. Due to negligible greenhouse gas emissions, nuclear energy is among the best energy sources that could help to meet the climate-energy challenge. To meet the Paris Agreement, a combination of nuclear and renewable energies will be required. However, there is a limited supply of fuel (Uranium) for nuclear fission. A joint report by the Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) [ 19 ] estimated that the exploitation of the entire conventional resource base -based on current uranium consumption in power reactors- would be sufficient for over 240 years. However, the demand is continuously growing and new power plants are being built in countries that are rapidly developing (e.g. China, India). The European Commission estimates that the known Uranium resources will only last for 72 years [ 20 ]. It implies that there is an urgent need for a new long-term nuclear solution. Nuclear fusion energy technology could be the solution. Nuclear fusion is one of the most promising options for generating large amounts of carbon-free energy in the future. It has multiple advantages such as supply reliability, no carbon emissions, abundant fuel (millions of years!), energy efficiency, and no long-lived radioactive waste . The UK is a world leader in fusion energy and hosts the Joint European Torus (JET) scientific experiment. The JET project started in 1983 and is located at the Culham Centre for Fusion Energy (CCFE) in Abingdon (Oxfordshire). The CCFE is responsible for running the JET facilities, via a contract between the European Commission and the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). It receives around $60 million annually from Euratom via the EUROfusion consortium. The JET fusion reactor (known as a tokamak) is currently the world’s largest fusion experiment and the only one able to perform experiments with real fusion fuel, Deuterium-Tritium (DT). The very specific DT operations that JET is able to perform -under Euratom funding- are vital to understanding the physics of fusion and to prepare for operations in next generation tokamak experiment, known as ITER (Latin for “the way”, formerly International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor). Located in France, the ITER project -an international collaboration, with a cost over $14 billion- is expected to enter operation around 2030, with the first DT plasma experiments around 2035. The future of ITER depends on JET, which is why JET has to run as long as possible to allow a better understanding of the physics and allow the physicists to continue their research. A strong collaboration between projects is necessary, physicists will need to be able to travel between the UK and France to bring their expertise together, especially when ITER will produce its first plasma. Freedom of movement of labour -required by the Euratom Treaty (Title I, Article 2 [g]) - is important in most scientific projects, however it is essential in the European and international fusion research projects. Following ITER, the DEMOnstration fusion power plant (DEMO) will be built which will be the first nuclear fusion project to produce electricity. It will lead the way to the commercialisation of the fusion energy. If successful, it is estimated that fusion nuclear energy will produce at least 20% of the world’s energy by 2100 . The JET operating contract with Euratom -via EUROFusion- runs out in 2018; the negotiations for an extension up to 2020 are ongoing, but have been impacted heavily by the Brexit vote. Leaving Euratom puts the world-wide fusion program at increased risk due to the impact on the ITER project [ 2 ]. Negotiations to find a suitable solution have to be carefully handled as the consequences of failure could be disastrous to the program. The possibility of transitional arrangements is under negotiation but the limited negotiation time to agree both -a Euratom replacement and a new JET funding agreement- is a major concern in the community. Fusion energy could be a key solution in meeting the climate change challenges. It is likely that arrangements will be made to allow fusion experiments to continue. However, the delay of the negotiations for finding an equivalent replacement for Euratom, along with the delay caused by the General Election 2017, are likely to cause threats to, and postponements of, the future JET experiments necessary to ITER, DEMO and the future fusion power plants. Conclusion This paper is a statement of facts about three Euratom core areas which could suffer the most from exiting the Euratom Community. It should be noted that the scope of Euratom goes even further. It also includes the promotion of innovation and industrial competitiveness and the safeguarding controls to ensure the nuclear materials are not diverted from peaceful purposes to weapons. The Euratom Community and its Treaty plays a key role in our life, our health and in the fight against climate change. Protracted negotiations could lead to multiple issues. The shortage of supplies caused by possible delays could lead to insufficient electricity supply to consumers, and put the users of nuclear medicine at risk of not receiving their vital treatments on time. The delays in negotiations to extend the JET contract could add pressure to the DT experiments. It might delay all fusion energy research projects, as the results depend on JET. It could threaten our ability to meet the Paris Agreement challenges and to ensure our extended future generations have access to secure, efficient, low-carbon emission energy. The UK needs to decide promptly the negotiation terms of the withdrawal from Euratom to obtain -at least- the equivalent of the Euratom Community’s Nuclear Co‑operation Agreements (NCA). Any loss would be extremely damaging. In the author’s opinion, the replacement of the Euratom Treaty would maybe be achievable within the two-years deadline if it was the only negotiation on the agenda, excluding the delays caused by the early General Election 2017. Unfortunately, Euratom is one area amongst hundreds of others impacted by the decision to leave the European Union (EU). Exiting the Euratom Treaty and Community rapidly will likely lead to unsatisfactory agreements, which could be avoided as there is no legal requirement to leave both entities at the same time . If the UK’s decision to leave Euratom is irrevocable, the UK should agree to make concession on EU freedom of movement to become an Associated country, and therefore, limit the damages whilst it is still possible. This paper was reviewed and facts-checked by Dr Alexander Meakins. It was improved with a non-scientific review by Axel Antoni and Monique Hawkins to ease the understandability for a non-scientific community. Thank you for your honesty. Article offered for publication on the thinkagain.hub portal.
Thursday, October 12 2017
Tamil Nadu Government 7th CPC Pay Fixation : Revised Pay Calculation for Additional Director with illustration Tamil Nadu Government 7th CPC Pay Fixation : Revised Pay Calculation for Additional Director with illustration TN 7th CPC Pay Fixation : Revised Pay Calculation for Additional Director with illustration Tamil Nadu State Government Employees Revised Pay Calculation with Pay Matrix Table. The Pay Fixation methodology is same as the calculation adopted for Central Government Employees. An Additional Director is presently drawing a Basic Pay of Rs. 53,590 (Pay in the Pay Band Rs. 44790 + Grade Pay Rs.8800 = Rs.53590). After multiplying Rs. 53,590 with 2.57, a figure of Rs. 1,37,726.30 is arrived at. This is rounded off to Rs. 1,37,726. The level corresponding to GP 8800 is Level 29 , as may be seen from Table, which gives the full correspondence between existing Grade Pay and the new Levels being proposed. In the column for Level 29, the figure equal to or higher than Rs.1,37,726 is Rs. 1,38,800. Hence the pay of Additional Director will be fixed at Rs.1,38,800 in level 29 in the new pay matrix as shown below: 1. Existing Pay Band : PB-4 2. Existing Grade Pay : Rs.8800 3. Existing Pay in PB : Rs. 44,790 4. Existing Basic Pay : Rs. 53,590 (A) 5. Pay after multiplication by a fitment factor of 2.57 : 137726 x 2.57 = Rs. 1,37,726.30 (rounded off to 1,37,726) 6. Level corresponding to GP 8800 : Level 29 7. Revised Pay in Pay Matrix (either equal to or next higher to Rs. 137726 in Level 29
Monday, October 23 2017
Good news for Haryana , Dearness Allowance (DA) hiked Haryana DA hiked: The payment of arrears of enhanced DA from July to September 2017 would be made in November 2017. It’s a good news for Haryana . The state government has decided to enhance the Dearness Allowance (DA) for its employees from the existing four per cent to five per cent of the pay, with effect from July 1, 2017. While giving this information in Chandigarh on Monday, a spokesman of the Finance Department said that the installment of DA payable under these orders would be paid in cash to all with the salary for the month of October to be paid in November, 2017. The payment of arrears of enhanced DA from July to September 2017 would be made in November 2017. Earlier, the Central government on Oct 11 had announced that it has extended the benefits of the Seventh Pay Commission for the teaching faculty of central and state universities and aided colleges. The move will benefit 7.58 lakh professors, assistant professors and others, HRD minister Prakash Javadekar told reporters after a cabinet meeting, where the decision was taken. He said the hike would be anywhere between Rs 10,000 and Rs 50,000. Also, ahead of Diwali, the Rajasthan government implemented the recommendations of the 7th Pay Commission, a decision that will benefit over 12 lakh employees and pensioners. Rajasthan will get the revised salary from the month of October.
Thursday, October 26 2017
The Mizoram government has decided to set up a committee to study the Seventh Pay Commission recommendations even as it agreed in principle to implement it in the state.This was decided at a meeting of the Council of Ministers last evening. The 42,457 regular would require additional allocation of Rs 563 crore annually if the Seventh Pay Commission recommendations were implemented, state finance department officials said. Chief Secretary Lalmalsawma said that at present, 36-37 per cent of the total state annual budget is used for paying off the salaries of the . The expenditure on salaries did not include the salaries of employees of Lai, Mara and Chakma autonomous district councils, teachers working in deficit schools and contract and muster roll workers, Lalmalsawma said. The meeting also approved the proposal for creation of 629 new posts for the proposed establishment of the lone Medical College – Mizoram Institute of Medical Education and Research (MIMER) – at the Falkawn village near Aizawl.
Tuesday, October 24 2017
In response to two different RTI applications, the government mentioned two different numbers with respect the number of blocked URLs/websites. In both cases, the government refused to disclose the list of URLs. In response to an application under RTI, the Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology (MEITY), Government of India said that a total of 11422 URLs/websites have been blocked since 2010. In response to another RTI application from SFLC, the government said 23030 websites are blocked in India. But the government refused to disclose the list of URLs in both cases citing a provision in Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for blocking for Access of Information for Public) Rules, 2009. But is it fair on the government to not disclose the list of blocked URLs?
Why & how is a website blocked?The Government of India in 2009 notified the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for blocking for Access of Information for Public) Rules, 2009 . These rules were made specifically to exercise powers under Sec 69A of the Information Technology Act 2000 which was subsequently amended. Sec 69A was added to the IT Act 2000 to introduce blocking of access to certain websites.The rules notified in the year 2009 detail out the process for blocking any URL/website. The request for blocking will not be accepted from any individual except the designated nodal officer of a department or the Chief Secretary of a state government. The rules also specify process to be followed in cases of emergency and in cases where a competent court has issued an order.
So how many URLs are blocked so far?In response to an application under RTI by Factly, MEITY said that a total of 11422 URLs were blocked since 2010 (till Sep 2017). The most number of URLs were blocked in the year 2015 when 4839 websites were blocked. It was in 2015 when the government initially banned more than 800 porn websites, but later revoked the ban. In 2016, the number URLs blocked dropped to almost 25% of previous year. The year 2017 also seems to be following a similar trend as of 2016. The further break up of these numbers in terms of why the website was blocked (because of a court order etc.) is not available. Conflicting numbers provided by the Government In response to another RTI application by Ms. Priyanka of the Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC), MEITY said that the number of websites blocked in India in 23030. Whether it is the number of websites blocked till date (including those prior to 2010) is not known. Even that is the case, it is not believable that more than 12000 websites were blocked before the 2009 rules. In response to both the RTI applications, MEITY stated that as per Rule 16 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for blocking for Access of Information for Public) Rules, 2009, strict confidentiality shall be maintained regarding all the requests and complaints received and actions taken thereof. And because of the confidentiality, it cannot disclose the list of URLs. However, MEITY says if one would like to know about a specific URL whether it is blocked or not, they will provide such information.
Non-Disclosure of the list violates the provisions of the RTI actIt has to be noted that neither the details of requests nor action taken were requested in the RTI applications. Only the list of URLs that were finally blocked was sought. How will disclosure of the list affect confidentiality of complaints received and action taken is something only MEITY can answer. Moreover, Section 22 of the RTI act makes it clear that the provisions of the RTI act will prevail in case there is any inconsistency in any other law with respect to information disclosure. If anything, the government should examine the request in accordance to Section 8 of the RTI act that lays down exemptions to disclosure of information and decide if disclosure of the list of URLs attracts any of the exemption provisions. MEITY hasn’t done this. Another issue to be noted is that most court orders these days are public documents. Mot such orders that direct blocking a particular URL are already in the public domain. For instance, in one the Supreme Court orders , an earlier direction of the government is mentioned along with the list of blocked URLs.
Monday, October 23 2017
Download paper US Military needs during the Cold War induced a mathematical modeling of rational allocation and control processes while simultaneously binding that rationality with computational reality. Modeling strategies to map the optimal to the operational ensued and eventually became a driving force in the development of macroeconomic dynamics. Key features of macroeconomics that originated in US military-funded research on applied mathematics in the 1950s and 1960s included recursive optimization taking uncertainty into account, agents modeled as collections of decision rules, and the certainty equivalent and equilibrium modeling strategies. The modeling strategies that opened the door to economists’ agile underpinning of macroeconomics with microfoundations had their own foundation in empirical microeconomics. In the 1950’s the United States Air Force Project SCOOP (Scientific Computation of Optimum Programs) and the Office of Naval Research awarded contracts to establish and maintain a research center for the Planning and Control of Industrial Operations at the Graduate School of Industrial Administration of the Carnegie Institute of Technology in Pittsburgh. Faced with client demands for computable decision rules that would minimize costs in the face of uncertain demand, the Carnegie team reverse engineered effective computational protocols to derive optimal forms and properties. They also developed procedures to narrow the modeling choices in dynamic programming. The formal analysis of the statistical and mathematical properties of bridges connecting the rational with the computable formed a modeling self- consciousness and channeled a new disciplinary focus on modeling strategies. The rational expectations theorists built on the modeling strategies that had been fabricated for planning in their attempt to bridge aggregative economics with the optimizing behavior of the individual and the clearing capacities of markets. The state-transition models that in the 1970s gave macroeconomists a framework for recursive optimization with uncertainty had similarly transformed control engineering in the 1960s. In both disciplines a “modeling-strategy turn” narrowed the primary analytical focus to the properties of mathematical models with less emphasis on the phenomena being modeled. Keywords: modeling strategy, bounded rationality, rational expectations, forecasting, dynamic programming, empirical microeconomics, macroeconomics, operations research, history of economics, Herbert E. Simon, John F. Muth, Carnegie Institute of Technology Working Paper Series By
Sunday, October 15 2017
भाजपा सरकार आने के बाद यूपी में पहला घोटाले का पर्दाफाश हुआ है. पंचायती राज विभाग में 107 करोड़ के घोटाले का सच सामने आया है. घोटाले का सच सामने आते ही अफसरों की गज गिरनी शुरू हो गयी है हर कोई अपने को बचाने की कोशिश कर रहा है. इस मामले में उत्तरप्रदेश सरकार के पंचायती राज मंत्री भूपेंद्र चौधरी ने 12 अफसरों को निलंबित कर दिया है. बताया जा रहा है की इस रिटायर पंचायत राज निदेशक अनिल कुमार दमेले का भी हाथ है, दमेले समेत 13 अफसरों के खिलाफ कठोर करवाई करने के निर्देश दिए गए है. मंत्री भूपेंद्र चौधरी ने बताया की सतर्कता विभाग की जाँच रिपोर्ट के बाद उप्पर निदेशक राजेन्द्र कुमार सिंह शामिल है. इनके अलावा मुख्या वित्त अधिकारी केशव सिंह को भी निलंबित किया गया है अपर निदेशक एस के पटेल, उपनिदेशक गिरीश चन्द्र रजक के खिलाफ करवाई के निर्देश जरी किये गए है. साथ ही 6 एडीओ पंचायत को योगी सरकार ने निलंबित कर दिया. इन सभी पर
14 वे वित्त आयोग में बड़े घोटाले का आरोप है.पंचायती राज मंत्री भूपेंद्र चौधरी के मुताबिक, 14वें वित्त आयोग के अंतर्गत ग्रामीण निकायों को 2016-17 के ग्राम पंचायतों को 699.75 करोड़ में दिए गए थे. जिसमें उन ग्राम पंचायतों का चयन किया जाता है, जिनका 2013-14 और 2014-15 ऑडिट पूरा कर लिया गया हो. लेकिन यह रुपया ग्राम पंचायतों तक नहीं पहुंचा. Loading...
Thursday, October 12 2017
Tamilnadu Government Employees 7th CPC Pay Matrix Table 7th CPC Pay Matrix Table for TN Govt Employees New Pay Matrix Table for Tamil Nadu Government Regular Employees Pay Matrix Table for Level 1 to 10 (Grade Pay from 1300 to 2800) Pay Matrix Table for Level 11 to 20 (Grade Pay from 4200 to 5100) Pay Matrix Table for Level 21 to 27 (Grade Pay from 5200 to 7700) Pay Matrix Table for Level 28 to 32 (Grade Pay from 8700 to 10000)
Thursday, October 12 2017
How to Calculate Revised Pay? Tamil Nadu Government Pay Commission How to Calculate Revised Pay? Tamil Nadu Government Pay Commission TN Govt Pay Commission: Calculation of Revised Pay with illustrations for Tamil Nadu State Government Employees. A Junior Assistant is presently drawing a Basic Pay of Rs.12,560 in GP 2400 [Pay in the PB Rs.10,160 + GP Rs.2,400 = Rs.12,560]. For Normal Fitment, his/her Basic Pay will first be multiplied by a factor of 2.57 and then rounded-off to the nearest Rupee i.e. 12560 x 2.57 = 32,279.20, which will be rounded-off to Rs.32,279. He/She will then be placed in the Pay Matrix in the Level corresponding to GP 2400 (Level-8 in this case) in a cell either equal to or next higher to Rs.32,279. Accordingly, his/her salary will be fixed at Rs.33,200 as shown below: 1. Existing Pay Band : PB-1 2. Existing Grade Pay : Rs.2400 3. Existing Pay in PB : Rs.10,160 4. Existing Basic Pay : Rs.12,560 (A) 5. Pay after multiplication by a fitment factor of 2.57 : 12560 x 2.57 = Rs.32,279.20 (rounded off to 32279) 6. Level corresponding to GP 2400 : Level 8 7. Revised Pay in Pay Matrix (either equal to or next higher to Rs.32279 in Level 8)
Thursday, October 12 2017
शहर के मेहता मार्केट से बुधवार रात हवाला व्यापारी के यहां काम करने वाले मुनिम का कुछ बदमाशों ने अपहरण कर लिया। युवक को सूनसान जगह पर ले जाकर मारपीट के बाद बांधकर आरवा सरहद में फेंक दिया। ग्रामीणों की सूचना पर रात को ही युवक को हाड़ेचा सीएससी में भर्ती करवाकर पुलिस की ओर से पर्चा बयान लिए गए। गुरुवार सुबह तक पुलिस में मुकदमा दर्ज नहीं हो पाया था। घायलावस्था में मिले युवक ने ग्रामीणों को 35 लाख रुपए की लूट होने की बात बताई थी, लेकिन अब तक पुलिस में आधिकारिक तौर पर इस सम्बंध में कोई रिपोर्ट दर्ज नहीं हो पाई है। जानकारी के अनुसार भाभर (गुजरात) निवासी जवानभाई ठक्कर शहर के मेहता मार्केट में एक हवाला व्यापारी के यहां मुनिम का काम करता है। सूत्रों के अनुसार बुधवार शाम करीब साढ़े छह बजे कुछ युवक वाहन लेकर यहां पहुंचे और उन्होंने जवानभाई को बुलाकर गाड़ी में बैठा दिया। इसके बाद उसे जबरन यहां से उठा ले गए। रास्ते में बदमाशों ने युवक के साथ बुरी तरह मारपीट करने के बाद उसे बांधकर घायलावस्था में आरवा सरहद में फेंक दिया। इस दौरान वहां से गुजर रहे ग्रामीणों ने उसे देखा तो पुलिस को जानकारी दी। इस दौरान युवक ने घायलावस्था में 35 लाख रुपए की लूट होने की बात बताई थी। रात को करीब साढ़े ग्यारह बजे तक सांचौर पुलिस भी मौके पर पहुंच गई। इस दौरान युवक को हाड़ेचा सीएससी में ले जाकर उपचार करवाया गया। सुबह तक उसे सांचौर ले गए। हालांकि पुलिस ने युवक के पर्चा बयान दर्ज किए थे, लेकिन गुरुवार सुबह तक कोई मुकदमा दर्ज नहीं हो पाया था। लूट की चौथी वारदात गौरतलब है कि इससे पहले भी सांचौर क्षेत्र में लूट की तीन वारदातें हो चुकी है। इन वारदातों में अधिकांश के तार हवाला व्यापार या बड़े व्यापारियों से जुड़े हुए थे। लेकिन हवाला की रकम होने के कारण आमतौर पर इस मामले में लूट की राशि को लेकर आधिकारिक तौर पर पुष्टि करने से व्यापारी भी पीछे हटते हैं। यही वजह है कि इस मामले में भी पूर्व में युवक ने करीब 35 लाख रुपए की लूट होने की बात बताई थी, लेकिन पुलिस में अब तक इस सम्बंध में आधिकारिक तौर पर कोई रिपोर्ट दर्ज नहीं हो पाई है। क्षेत्र में सनसनी अपहरण व लाखों रुपए की लूट की वारदात होने की खबर रात को ही सोशल मीडिया से जिलेभर में फैल गई। इससे क्षेत्र में सनसनी फैल गई। इसके साथ ही पुलिस अधीक्षक के निर्देश पर पुलिस भी सक्रिय हो गई, लेकिन आरोपियों का कोई सुराग नहीं लग पाया।
Monday, October 30 2017
Twitter Reddit The UIDAI issued a circular requesting states not to deny benefits to those without an Aadhaar and laid down an exception handling mechanism. But the task is easier said than done. After a 11-year old girl passed away in Jharkhand allegedly due to denial of rations because their Aadhaar card was not linked, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) issued a circular to all the state governments & various departments/ministries about exception handling in the Public Distribution System (PDS) & other welfare schemes. The circular talks about non-denial of benefits in case the beneficiary does not have an Aadhaar and that the benefit/subsidy should be extended based on an alternate identification document as per the relevant notification issued by the department. A cursory look at the notifications issued by various departments reveals that it is easier said than done. What does the UIDAI circular say? The UIDAI circular refers to Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act 2016 which says that the central government or any state government can use Aadhaar for authentication for extension of subsidy or benefit. It also says that for those without an Aadhaar, they have to furnish proof of having applied for Aadhaar enrollment. The section also states that individuals will be offered alternate means of identification for delivery of benefit or subsidy till the time Aadhaar is not assigned The circular then talks about the exception handling process in case the Aadhaar authentication fails or if the individual has no Aadhaar. In the case of PDS, the circular says that any member of the family can authenticate and receive the benefit. What is the issue then? While the circular lists the exception handling mechanism, it is easier said than done if one looks at the notification issued in February 2017 by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution. The notification makes possession of Aadhaar or authentication mandatory for individuals who are eligible to receive subsidised food grains under the National Food Security Act. In cases where an individual does not have an Aadhaar, the notification states that the following documents be produced for providing food grains. Ration Card issued by the State Government Department and Copy of Aadhaar enrollment ID slip or copy or request made for Aadhaar enrollment; and Any of the eight (8) documents specified in the notification like Voter ID, PAN card etc. The notification further says that the above documents will be checked by an officer designated by the State government. This is where it gets problematic. In states where there are lakhs of PDS transactions in a single day, it is very difficult for states to designate officers for this purpose. Most PDS dealers simply refuse to provide food grains to the beneficiary instead of going through the exception handling mechanism. Huge fluctuation in the number of PDS transactions in Jharkhand Data on number of PDS transactions in Jharkhand points to this trend. Ever since Aadhaar was made mandatory for availing the food grains under the PDS in Jharkhand late last year, the number of monthly transactions has been fluctuating without any set pattern as per the data available on the Jharkhand government’s PDS portal. From just 8.68 lakh transactions in August 2016, the number of transactions slowly increased to 47.55 lakh in December 2016. In April 2017, there were only 37.65 lakh transactions. In August 2017, the transactions reached an all-time high of 52.41 lakh. The number of transactions in October 2017 (till 28th October) was down to 34.66 lakh. This fluctuation was seen across products (Rice, Wheat, Kerosene, Salt & Sugar). As on date, there are about 56.34 lakh cardholders in Jharkhand. While the exact reasons for such fluctuation are not known, authentication failures & denial of food grains to individuals like Koyla Devi could very well be one of the causes. Authentication failure rate still high While the authentication failure rates at an All-India level are not available, the data from the Pension disbursement scheme in Andhra Pradesh shows that both biometric & IRIS authentication failure rate is close to 10% every month (the data for October 2017 is accessed on 29th October from the website). This would mean that the authentication of more than 3 lakh pensioners is failing every month. The UIDAI circular is supposed to lay down the exception handling mechanism in cases mentioned above. But with the kind of documentation required as per various notifications, it’s easier said than done.