NSPCL 20 MW Floating Solar Bhilai: USolar Wins EPC

TL;DR — NSPCL 20 MW Floating Solar EPC Award, August 3 2026

On August 3 2026, NTPC-SAIL Power Company Limited (NSPCL) selected U-Solar Clean Energy Solutions as L1 bidder for a 20 MW floating solar PV project at Maroda Reservoir-2, Bhilai, Durg district, Chhattisgarh.
USolar quoted Rs 127.47 crore, but the award was based on lowest cost per unit of estimated annual generation (Rs per MU) — USolar won with Rs 2.90 crore per MU against estimated annual generation of 43.90 MU.
Five other bidders competed: InSolare Energy (L2, Rs 2.96/MU), SLNKO Energy (L3, Rs 3.12/MU), Oriana Power (L4, Rs 3.14/MU), Floatex Solar (L5, Rs 3.17/MU), and BVG India (L6, Rs 3.17/MU).
Full EPC scope: engineering, design, supply, installation, testing, commissioning — floating platforms, anchoring, solar modules, civil/electrical/mechanical works, 33 kV underground evacuation, SCADA monitoring.
O and M for 3 years post-commissioning, completion within 1 year.
Implied EPC cost: approximately Rs 6.37 per Wp (Rs 127.47 crore / 20 MW) — a useful benchmark for industrial buyers evaluating floating vs rooftop vs ground-mount.
The bottom line: floating solar is gaining traction for land-constrained industrial and PSU sites, and the Rs per MU evaluation ensures NSPCL optimizes for lifetime energy yield, not just upfront capex.

Key Takeaways

Awarding authority: NSPCL, a JV of NTPC and SAIL
L1 bidder: U-Solar Clean Energy Solutions
Project: 20 MW floating solar PV at Maroda Reservoir-2, Bhilai, Durg, Chhattisgarh
USolar bid: Rs 127.47 crore; winning metric: Rs 2.90 crore per MU, estimated annual generation 43.90 MU
Evaluation criterion: Lowest Rs per MU, NOT lowest total cost
EPC cost benchmark: approximately Rs 6.37 per Wp
O and M: 3 years post-commissioning; completion within 1 year
Bidding system: domestic competitive bidding, single-stage two-envelope
Award date: August 3 2026

What Is NSPCL and Why This Project Matters

NTPC-SAIL Power Company Limited (NSPCL) is a joint venture between NTPC Limited, India's largest power generation company, and Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL). NSPCL operates captive power plants for SAIL's steel manufacturing facilities and has expanded into renewable energy.

The 20 MW floating solar project at Maroda Reservoir-2 in Bhilai is part of NSPCL's renewable expansion. Bhilai is home to the Bhilai Steel Plant, one of SAIL's flagship integrated steel plants. The Maroda Reservoir serves as a water source for the steel plant, making it a natural floating solar site — the reservoir surface is already industrial infrastructure, and placing panels on it does not consume additional land.

Floating solar is particularly relevant for industrial sites like steel plants, which typically have large water reservoirs, cooling ponds, and treatment basins — untapped surfaces for solar generation without competing for scarce land. For a solar EPC company in India evaluating deployment at an industrial complex, floating solar is increasingly a viable third option alongside rooftop and ground-mount.

The Bid Evaluation: Why Rs per MU, Not Total Cost

The most important detail is the evaluation methodology. NSPCL did not award to the lowest total project cost. Ranking was based on the lowest cost per unit of estimated annual electricity generation — Rs per MU (one MU equals one million kWh). This is a significant departure from standard EPC bidding, where the lowest lump-sum bid wins. The Rs per MU methodology rewards bidders who offer competitive cost and higher energy yield — a bidder with slightly higher total cost but significantly higher generation can win.

Full Bidder Ranking

Rank	Bidder	Total Project Cost (Rs crore)	Rs per MU	Estimated Annual Generation (MU)
L1	U-Solar Clean Energy Solutions	127.47	2.90	43.90
L2	InSolare Energy	134.88	2.96	45.54
L3	SLNKO Energy	138.30	3.12	—
L4	Oriana Power	137.71	3.14	—
L5	Floatex Solar	139.15	3.17	—
L6	BVG India	144.61	3.17	—

USolar won with the lowest Rs per MU (Rs 2.90 crore per MU) and also the lowest total project cost (Rs 127.47 crore). InSolare Energy (L2) quoted a higher total cost (Rs 134.88 crore) but projected higher annual generation (45.54 MU versus USolar's 43.90 MU). Despite the higher generation, InSolare's Rs per MU (Rs 2.96) was still higher than USolar's (Rs 2.90). This shows that the Rs per MU methodology balances cost and yield — a bidder must optimize both to win.

The spread between L1 and L6 is Rs 0.27 per MU (roughly 9.3 percent), indicating a competitive bidding field with meaningful differentiation on the cost-per-unit-of-generation metric.

Project Scope and Technical Specifications

Full EPC Scope

Scope Element	Details
Engineering and design	Complete plant design, floating layout, anchoring, electrical
Supply	Solar modules, floating platforms, anchoring, inverters, cables, SCADA
Installation	Platform assembly, module mounting, anchoring and mooring
Testing and commissioning	Performance ratio verification, grid synchronization
Floating platforms	HDPE or equivalent, designed for reservoir conditions
Power evacuation	33 kV underground cable to grid connection
Monitoring	SCADA-based central monitoring

O and M and Completion

Parameter	Specification
O and M	3 years post-commissioning
Completion	Within 1 year of award
Award date	August 3 2026
Bidding	Domestic competitive bidding, single-stage two-envelope

The single-stage two-envelope system means bidders submit technical and financial proposals simultaneously, but financial bids are opened only for technically qualified bidders. The 3-year O and M period post-commissioning ensures the EPC contractor remains responsible for plant performance during initial years, when most teething issues — inverter failures, anchoring adjustments, floating platform settling — are likely to surface.

The EPC Cost Benchmark: Rs 6.37 per Wp

The USolar bid of Rs 127.47 crore for 20 MW translates to an EPC cost of approximately Rs 6.37 per Wp — a useful benchmark for industrial buyers evaluating floating solar relative to other formats.

EPC Cost Comparison: Floating vs Rooftop vs Ground-Mount

Deployment Format	Typical EPC Cost (Rs per Wp, 2026)	Key Cost Drivers	Land Requirement
Ground-mount solar	Rs 3.50 to Rs 4.50	Land, civil works, mounting structures, fencing	Yes — approximately 4 to 5 acres per MW
Rooftop solar (industrial)	Rs 3.50 to Rs 4.50	Roof structural assessment, waterproofing, ballasted mounting	No additional land
Floating solar	Rs 5.50 to Rs 7.00	Floating platforms, anchoring, mooring, underwater cabling	No land — uses water surface

Floating solar carries a premium of roughly Rs 1.50 to Rs 2.50 per Wp over ground-mount and rooftop, reflecting floating platforms, anchoring, mooring, and underwater cabling. However, this premium must be evaluated against land costs. In industrial areas, land can add Rs 0.50 to Rs 2.00 per Wp to ground-mount. When land is expensive or unavailable — as at existing industrial sites — floating solar on existing water bodies can be more cost-effective.

For a detailed comparison, see our floating solar vs ground mount India guide. For broader EPC cost benchmarks, see our solar EPC cost per MW in India guide.

Why Floating Solar Is Growing for Industrial Sites

The NSPCL award is part of a broader trend of floating solar adoption at industrial and PSU sites. Several factors drive this growth.

Land constraint: Industrial complexes — steel plants, refineries, thermal stations, chemical factories — occupy large land for core operations but have limited unused land for solar. These complexes frequently have associated water bodies: cooling ponds, reservoirs, ash pond areas, treatment basins. These surfaces can host floating solar without competing with industrial operations.

Evaporation reduction: Floating panels cover the water surface, reducing evaporation. For industrial reservoirs in water-stressed regions — including Chhattisgarh — this is a meaningful co-benefit.

Improved panel efficiency: Floating panels run 5 to 10 percent cooler than ground-mount or rooftop panels due to water cooling, improving energy yield and partially offsetting the higher EPC cost.

PSU renewable targets: NTPC has committed to 60 GW of renewable capacity by 2032. Floating solar at reservoirs associated with NTPC and SAIL facilities contributes directly to these targets while utilizing infrastructure already under the PSU's control.

How the Rs per MU Methodology Benefits Buyers

The Rs per MU methodology used by NSPCL is worth understanding for any C and I buyer procuring solar EPC. In a standard lump-sum bid, the lowest total cost wins, incentivizing upfront cost minimization — potentially at the expense of long-term yield. A bidder could win by quoting lower-quality modules or a design that sacrifices generation.

The Rs per MU methodology corrects this by dividing total project cost by estimated annual generation. A bidder with higher total cost but also higher generation can achieve a lower Rs per MU and win. This rewards bidders who invest in higher-quality modules, optimal tilt and orientation, and design choices that maximize yield.

For the buyer, this means the contract goes to the bidder offering the lowest cost per unit of energy over the project's lifetime. Over a 25-year plant life, the difference between 43.90 MU per year and 40.00 MU per year is roughly 97.5 MU — at Rs 4.00/kWh, approximately Rs 39 crore in additional energy value.

This is particularly relevant for commercial and industrial solar buyers. When comparing EPC quotes, look beyond per-Wp cost and evaluate expected energy yield per Wp. Our solar IRR calculation methodology for India and solar panel ROI and payback period guides cover how to incorporate yield differences into financial analysis.

What This Means for C and I Solar Buyers

When to Consider Floating Solar

Industrial sites with large water bodies: Steel plants, refineries, chemical factories, cement plants with cooling ponds, reservoirs, or treatment basins should evaluate floating solar to generate renewable power without consuming additional land.
Land-constrained sites: If a factory's rooftop is utilized and ground-mount land is unavailable or expensive, floating solar on an on-site water body can unlock generation capacity.
Sites with evaporation concerns: In water-stressed regions, the evaporation reduction co-benefit can justify the cost premium, particularly for industries depending on reservoir water.

When Rooftop or Ground-Mount Remains Better

For most C and I buyers without large on-site water bodies, rooftop solar remains the most cost-effective option at Rs 3.50 to Rs 4.50 per Wp — 30 to 40 percent lower than floating solar. For buyers who can procure land, ground-mount through open access or group captive offers similar costs at larger scale.

The decision framework: evaluate rooftop first, then ground-mount, and consider floating solar only when both are constrained and a suitable water body is available. For a detailed comparison, see our floating solar vs ground mount India guide.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the NSPCL 20 MW floating solar project at Bhilai?

A floating PV installation at Maroda Reservoir-2 in Bhilai, Durg district, Chhattisgarh, developed by NTPC-SAIL Power Company Limited (NSPCL). USolar Clean Energy Solutions was selected as L1 bidder on August 3 2026 with Rs 127.47 crore, winning on the lowest cost per unit of estimated annual generation (Rs 2.90 crore per MU). Full EPC scope with 3 years of O and M, completion within 1 year.

Who won the NSPCL floating solar EPC contract?

U-Solar Clean Energy Solutions won as L1 bidder, quoting Rs 127.47 crore total and Rs 2.90 crore per MU against estimated annual generation of 43.90 MU. Awarded August 3 2026 through domestic competitive bidding, single-stage two-envelope. Five other bidders competed: InSolare Energy (L2), SLNKO Energy (L3), Oriana Power (L4), Floatex Solar (L5), and BVG India (L6).

How was the NSPCL floating solar bid evaluated?

NSPCL evaluated bids on the lowest cost per unit of estimated annual electricity generation (Rs per MU), not the lowest total project cost. This methodology divides total project cost by estimated annual generation. USolar won with Rs 2.90 crore per MU. This approach rewards bidders who optimize for lifetime energy yield, not just upfront capex.

What is the EPC cost benchmark from this project?

The USolar bid of Rs 127.47 crore for 20 MW translates to approximately Rs 6.37 per Wp. Ground-mount and rooftop solar typically cost Rs 3.50 to Rs 4.50 per Wp, meaning floating solar carries a premium of Rs 1.50 to Rs 2.50 per Wp due to floating platforms, anchoring, and underwater power evacuation.

What is the scope of work in the NSPCL floating solar EPC contract?

The scope includes engineering, design, supply, installation, testing, and commissioning — floating platforms, anchoring and mooring systems, solar PV modules, civil, electrical, and mechanical works, 33 kV underground power evacuation cable, and SCADA-based central monitoring. Includes 3 years of O and M post-commissioning, completion within 1 year.

Is floating solar more expensive than rooftop or ground-mount solar?

Yes, floating solar typically costs Rs 5.50 to Rs 7.00 per Wp, versus Rs 3.50 to Rs 4.50 per Wp for rooftop and ground-mount. The premium reflects floating platforms, anchoring, specialized water installation, and underwater cabling. However, when land is expensive or unavailable, floating solar on existing water bodies can be more cost-effective. The evaporation reduction co-benefit and 5 to 10 percent efficiency gain from water cooling can further offset the cost difference.

How does the NSPCL award compare to other floating solar projects in India?

The NSPCL 20 MW project is a mid-scale installation. NTPC, the parent of the NSPCL JV, has pioneered large-scale floating solar with the 100 MW Ramagundam, 92 MW Kayamkulam, and 15 MW Simhadri projects. Six competing bidders, including specialized companies like Floatex Solar, indicate a mature EPC ecosystem is developing.

Should C and I buyers consider floating solar for their facilities?

C and I buyers should consider floating solar if they have large on-site water bodies and are land-constrained. For most buyers, rooftop solar remains the most cost-effective option at Rs 3.50 to Rs 4.50 per Wp. The decision framework: evaluate rooftop first, then ground-mount through open access or group captive, and consider floating solar only when both are constrained.