ML19208A673
| ML19208A673 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1979 |
| From: | Koester G KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Toalston A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909170214 | |
| Download: ML19208A673 (77) | |
Text
e KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY GLENN L. ROESTER vict past osmi-opteatioset September 11, 1979 Mr. Argil Toalston, Chief Power Supply Analysis Section Antitrust and Indemnity Group Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation United States Nuclear Regulatory Cornission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re: Docket No. STN 50-482 Kansas Gas and Electric Company Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No. 1
Dear Mr. Toalston:
In connection with the Application for Amendment of Con-struction Permit No. CPPR-147 filed with the Commission on July 30, 1379, we submit the enclosed information con-cerning Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. pursuant to Appendix L of 10 CFR, Part 50.
Yours very truly, l
W/ M GLK:bb Attach 5 Cys
\\.
(<
\\
(
o O t~
o y>
e l J Ka.g ( <.*
s,. v.
7'709/702/7' 201 N. Market - Wichita, Kansas - Mail Address: P. O. Bcx 208 i Wichita, Kansas 67201 - Telephone: Area Code (316) 2641111
lRJestion No.1:
State separately for hydroelectric and thermal generating resources applicant's most recent peak load and dependable capacity for the same time period.
State applicant's dependable capacity at time of system peak for each of the next 10 years for which information is available.
Identify each new unit or resource.
For hydroelectric generating capacity, indicate the number of kilowatt-hours of use associated with each kilowatt of capacity during the " adverse water year" upon which dependable capacity is based.
Indicate average annual kilowatt-hour loads per kilowatt, associated with each system peak shown (exclusive of interchange arra ngements).
i Answer No.1:
At the present time, KEPCo has no hydroelectric or thermal generating resources.
However, KEPCo has contracted to purchase 90 megawatts of hydroelectric peaking power from the Southwestern Power Administration (SPA).
Thirty megawatts of this power will beccme available to KEPCo on July 1,1980, while 60 megawatts are contingent on the date of commercial operation of power production of the Truman Dam in Missouri.
This hydro-electric power resource is guaranteed to provide 1200 kilowatt hours per kilowatt annually and reserves for this resource will be supplied by the SPA.
I In addition, KEPCo has negotiated for the purchase of 17%, or 195.5 megawatts of power capacity in the Wolf Creek Nuclear Plant near Burlington, Kansas.
KEPCo is in the process of completing arrangements for the purchase of reserve power arid energy when the Wolf Creek unit is out of service or if it should become derated.
Consequently, the i
19S.5 megawatts of nuclear power capacity will be firm power.
At this date, KEPCo has not made a commitment for ownership of additional capacity in the next 10 years.
Supplemental e
power and energy that KEPCo will require to supply its members needs will be purchased by KEPCo from the overlying investor owned utilities that cu rently sell power to KEPCo's Members. These companies include:
Kansas City Power and. Light Ccmpany (KCPL),
headquartered'in Kansas City, Missouri; Kansas Gas and Electric Company (KG&E, head-quartered in Wichita, Kansas; Kansas Power and Light Company (KPL), headquartered in
<I.5'd10.3
2 Topeka, Kansas; Western Power Division of Central Telephone and Utilities (CTU), headquartered in Great Bend, Kansas; and the Empire District Electric Company (Empire), headquartered in Joplin, Missouri.
Information on KEPCo's projected peak loads is contained in the response to Question 2.
315;2104
Q_ueition tb. 2:
State applicant's estimated annual load growth for each of the next 20 years or for the period applicant utilizes in system planning.
Indicate 9rowth both in kilowatt requirements and kilowatt-hour requirements.
Answer fio. 2:
Applicant's system planning currently extends through the year 1995.
Estimated peak loads and kilowatt-hour requirements through that date are:
Peak Loads Peak Load Annual Increase Year IG lid 1980 484.2 1981 515.4 31.2 6.4 1982 548.4 33.0 6.4 1983 583.8 35.4 6.5 1984 621.3 37.5 6.4 1985 661.5 40.2 6.5 1986 702.4 40.9 6.2 1987 745.9 43.5 6.2 1988 792.1 46.2 6.2 1989 841.4 49.3 6.2 1990 893.8 52.4 6.2 1991 949.7 55.9 6.3 1992 1,009.7 60.0 6.3 1993 1,072.3 62.6 6.2 1994 1,139.6 67.3 6.3 1995 1,211.3 71.7 6.3 l
Input to System Annual Increase Year (million kWh)
(millions kWh) 1980 2,020.3 l
1981 2,157.6 137.3 6.8 1982 2,305.1 147.5 6.8 1983 2,463.0 157.9 6.8 1984 2,632.8 169.8 6.9 1985 2,814.8 182.0 6.9 1986 2,983.4 168.6 6.0 1987 3,162.3 178.9 6.0 1988 3,352.1 189.8 6.0 1989 3,553.5 201.4 6.0 1990 3,767.5 214.0 6.0 1991 3,994.7 227.2 6.0 1992 4,235.7 241.0 6.0 1993 4,4 91.6 255.9 6.0
.?).5:d.lOfji 1994 4,763.3 271.7 6.0 1995 5,052.0 288.7 6.0
.. ;3 3r
.o.
Stafe estimated annual load growth in kilowatts and kilowatt-hours of companies or pools upon wh'.ch the economic justification of the subject unit is based for each of the next 20 years or for the period applicant utilizes in system planning.
Identify each company or pool member.
Answer tio. 3:
Economic justification of the Wolf Creek Generating Station fia.1 is based on the load growth of KGSE, KCPL, Sunflower Electric Cooperative and KEPCo.
KEPCo's i
estimat ed annual peak loads and load growth thrnughout the current plannin9 period are tabulated in the response to Question 2.
KG&E's system planning currently extends through the year 1995.
Estimated peak loads and annual energy production for KG&E, based on 1978 M0KAfi Pool projections, are listed below.
It shculd be understood that these projections include loads and energy for KG&E's wholesale municipal and REC customers.
Peak Loads Peak Load Annual Increase Year MW MW 1979 1,605 1980 1,675 70 4,4 1981 1,750 75 4.5 1982 1,825 75 4.3 1983 1,905 80 4.4 1984 1,985 80 4.2 1985 2,075 90 4.5 1986 2,160 85 4.1 1987 2,245 85 3.9 1988 2,337 92 4.1 1989 2,432 95 4.1 1990 2,531 99 4.1 1991 2,634 103 4.1 1992 2,742 108 4.1 1993 2,854 112 4.1 1994 2,970 116 4.1 1995 3,091 121 4.1 Energy Production Annual Increase Year (millions kWh)
(millions kWh) 1979 7,556 1980 7,927 371 4.9 1981 8,358 431 5.4 1982 8,713 355 4.2 1983 9,095 382 4.4 1984 9,477 382 4.2 1985 9,906 429 4.5
<3,ryg1()6 1986 10,312 406 4.1 1987 10,718 406 3.9 1988 11,157 439 4.1 1989 11,611 454 4.1 Energy Production Annual Increase Year (millions kWh)
(millions kWh) 7 1990 12,084 473 4.1 1991 12,575 4 91 4.1 I
1992 13,091 516 4.1 l
1993 13,626 535 4.1 1994 14,179 553 4.1 j
1995 14,757 578 4.1 i
KCPL's sytem planning currently extends through 1987 for system peak loads and 1984 for energy production.
However, a 20-year load and energy forecast to be f
used for system planning purposes is presently being prepared by KCPL.
This report shoul be completed by the fall of 1979.
Present estimated peak loads and annual energy production are-l Peak Loads Peak Load Annual Increase Year fG tG l
1979 2,116 l
1980 2,197 81 3.8 l
1981 2,283 86 3.9 1982 2,383 100 4.4 l
1983 2,507 124 5.2 1
1984 2,638 131 5.2 1985 2,775 137 5.2 1986 2,918 143 5.2 1987 3,059 151 5.2 i
i l
Energy Production Annual Increase Year (millions kWh)
(millions kWh) l i
1980 9,697 I
1981 10,066 369 3.8 1982 10,431 365 3.6 1983 10,836 405 3.9 1984 11,245 409 3.8 Sunflower Electric Cooperative's system planning currently extends through the year 1995.
Estimated peak loads and annual energy production through I
that date are:
I l
i D523.07 i
- Peak Loads Peak Load Annual Increase Year MW FM T
1979 286 1980 309 23 8.0 1981 335 26 8.4 1982 362 27 8.1 l
1983 377 15 4.1 1984 392 15 4.0 l
1985 408 16 4.1 1986 425 17 4.1 1987 442 17 4.0 1988 461 19 4.2 1989 480 19 4.1 1990 499 19 4.0 1991 520 21 4.2 l
1992 541 21 4.0 1993 563 22 4.1 1994 586 23 4.1 l
1995 610 24 4.1 l
l Energy Production Annual Increase l
Year (millions kWh)
(millions kWh) i l
1979 1,138 1980 1,247 109 9.6 l
1981 1,368 121 9.7 1982 1,500 132 9.6 1983 1,570 70 4.7 1984 1,643 73 4.5 l
1985 1,71 9 76 4.6 1986 1,798 79 4.6 1987 1,883 85 4.7 1988 1,988 105 5.6 1989 2,100 112 5.6 1990 2,217 117 5.6 1991 2,342 125 5.6 1992 2,473 131 5.6 1993 2,612 139 5.6 1994 2,758 146 5.6 1995 2,913 155 5.6 l
95z108 1
l I
Ouestion ib. 4:
For the year the subject unit would first come on line, state estimated I
annual load growth in kilowatts and kilowatt hours of any coordinating group l
or pool of which the applicant is a member (other than the coordinating
. group or pool referred to in the applicant's response to Item 3) which has generating and/or transmission planning functions.
Identify each company or pool member whose loads are indicated in the response thereto.
Answer No. 4:
At present, KEPCo is not a member of a planning group.
However, in the near future, KEPCo intends to participate in the M0KAN Pool and the Southwest Power Fool.
All of the members of the M0KAN Pool are meiaber systems in the Southwest Power Pool.
As projected in the: latest report of.the MOKAN Pool dated April '25,1979, the 1983 peak load growth is expected to be 690 TG or 6.0% greater than the peak load estimated for 1982. Energy projections by the M0KAN Pool are not available.
As estimated in the latest report of the Southwest Power Pool, dated April 1, 1979, 1983 peak load growth will be 3,009 MW or 6.1% above the estinated 1982 peak.
This report also projects a 1983 growth of 15,250,000 MWH, 6.2% greater than the estimate for 1982.
The companies included in this report are:
Alexandria Light & Power Department Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
Central Louisiana Electric Company, Inc.
Gulf States Utilities Company Lafayette, Louisiana Utility System Middle South Utilities, Inc.
Grand River Dam Authority Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company Public Service Company of Oklahoma gtj*d109 i
l I
Southwestern Electric Power Company Southwestern Power Administration j
Southwestern Public Service Company Western Farmers Electric Cooperative Board of Public Utilities, Kansas City, Kansas t
Central Kansas Power Company, Inc.*
City Power & Light, Independence, Missouri The Empire District Electric Company
- Kansas City Power and Light Company
- Kansas Gas and Electric Company
- The Kansas Power and Light Company
- Missouri Public Service Company
- St. Jo: 2ph Light and Power Company Sunflower Electric Cooperative
- Western Power Division, Central Telephone and Utilities Corporation
- City Utilities, Springfield, Missouri City of Houma, Louisianna Jonesboro (AR) City of Water and Light Ponca City (0K) Water and Light Ottawa (KS) Water and Light City of Ruston, Louisianna
~
Winfield, Kansas, Municipal Light and Water f
Chanute Municipal Utilities Coffeyville Municipal Water 11nd Light Department Indicates member systems. of the MOVAfi Pool fXi'2110
t Question No. 5:
State applicant's minimum installed reserve criterion (as a percentage cf load)I f.r the period when the subject unit will first come on line.
If the applicant shares reserves with 0;her systems, identify the other systems and provide minimum installed reserve criterion (as a percentage of load)I by contracting parties or
~
pool for the period when the proposed unit will first come on line.
Answer No. 5:
'n'olf Creek Nuclear Unit No.1 is scheduled for commercial operation on April 1, 1983.
KEPCo is in the process of completing arrangements to purchase its reserve requirements for its ownership capacity in that -unit from the Kansas Gas and Electric Company (KG&E).
Pursuant to such arrangements, KEPCo will maintain a reserve capacity in a range of 15 to 20 percent of its projected peak load i
r,equirements.
l i
I t
s 1
i Indicate whether loads other than peak loads are considered.
l l3:i;al1:L
puestion tb. 6:
~
Describe nethods used as a guide in establishing the criteria for applicant's and/or applicant's pool's minimum amount of installed reserves.
(E.g.,(a) single largest unit down, (b) probability methods such as loss of load 1 day f
in 20 years, loss of capacity once in 5 years, (c) other methods and/or (d) l judgment.
List contingencies other than ri.sk of forced outage that enter f
into the determination. )
Answer fio. 6:
KEPCo plans on becoming a participant in the M0KAti Pool which is a group within f
the Southwest Power Pool.
The following is an'cexcerpt from the Southwest Power Pool Report to the Economic Regulatory Administration, Department of Energy, April,1978, page 6-D-4.
" Planning of-capacity additions must provide that the total generating capacity available to the Southwest Power Pool system shall be such that the capacity available shall exceed the predicted annual peak load obligation by a margin of 15%, or as an alternative, a probability study made so as to insure that the probability of load exceeding capacity available shall not be greater than one occurrence in ten years provided that in no case shall the reserve be less than the peak load obligation by 12%."
The report goes on to state:
"The method of calculating the probability of load exceeding available capacity shall include consideration of uncertainty in prediction of load and shall employ the best available statistical data on generator forced outage rates.
The method will.also consider hour-by-hour characteristics of the load, availability of quick-start generation with neighboring companies.
There shall be r.o greater dependence upon n
interconnections with adjacent areas than is agreed to by said areas
'T l
or is deemed prudent by good engineering judgment.
The maximum capability assigned to any generating unit shall be that which has been demonstrated by actual test under the rnost adverse conditions that might exist during the loading period being considered."
The MOVAN Pool requires each of its members to. carry a reserve margin of at least 15% c' their peak load.
~
W
Question No. 7:
Indicate whether applicant's system interconnections are credited explicity or implicitly in establishing applicant's installed reserves.
Answer No. 7:
Currently, applicant has no interconnection with other companies.
However, when interconnections are established they will not be explicity credited in establishing applicant's installed reserves.
As a general rule, each individual member of the MOKAN Pool and the Southwest Power Pool does not carry reserves sufficient to cover the outage of the such individual member's largest unit on its system.
Consequently, these individual members rely upon the neighboring utilities for emergency and maintenance support when necessary.
Since this emergency and maintenance support is imported into each individual system over its interconnections, the inter-connections are implicitly credited with establishing applicant's reserve levels.
Through transmission load flow studies coordinated through the Southwest Power Pool, individual companies establish the maximum import capacity through their system interconnections.
These maximum capacity studies aid each system in determining the actual amount of generating capacity reserves to maintain; they also aid in determining the location and capacity of interconnections with other systems.
SWi114
- t Question No. 8:
List rights to receive emergency power and obligations to deliver deficiency power or unit power, or other coordinating arrangements, by reference to applicant's Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) rate schedules
- (i.e., ABC Power & Light Co., FERC Rate Schedule No.15 including supplement 1-5),2 and also by reference to applicant's state commission filings.
Where documents are not on file with the FERC, supply copies, or where not reduced to writing describe arrangements.
Identify for each such arrangement the participating parties other than applicant.
Provide one line electrical and geographic diagrams of coordinating groups or power pools (with generation or transmission planning functions) of which applicant's generation and trans-mission facilities constitute a part.
l Answer No. 8:
At the present time, KEPCo has no': such rate schedules.
However, KEPCo is in the process of completing arrangements for emergency power and other coordinating provisions with other utilities.
2List separately and identify certificates of concurrence.
5'
._ I.h E
Y' 2
Question No. 9:
3 List Non-affiliated electric utility systems with peak loads smaller than j
applicant's which serve either at wholesale or at retail adjacent to areas j
i served by applicant.
Provide a geographic one line diagram of applicant's j
generating and transmission facilities (including subtransmission), indicating 1
the location of adjacent systems and as to such systems indicate (if available) l their load, their annual load growth, their generating capacity, their largest thermal generating unit size, and their minimum reserve criteria.
Answer No. 9:
Sinca KEPCo does not presently have any transmission facilities, a one line diagram would not be applicable.
However, the attached schedule gives information j
on non-affiliated utility systems.
KEPCo has no interconnections with the utilities
.on the attached schedule.
3Systerr.s not in the same holding company system.
I i
t i
952116
. Answer tio. 9:
Adjacent non-affiliated electric utility systems with peak loads less than KEPCo's:
Estimated Estimated Generating Largest tiinimum 1978 Peak Load Load Growth Capacity Generating Reserve (kW)
(kW)
(kW)
(kW)
Criteria ivate Utility
- entral Kansas Power Co.
158,000 5,000 83,460 35,000 15%
iperatives Joniphan Electric Coop.
3,740 200 None None None
- aw Valley Electric Coop.
15,750 500 None None fione iemaha-Marshall Elec. Coop.
9,840 400 None lione None
.sas Municipal Utilities card of Public Utilities, Kansas City, KS 430,000 35,000 589,000 160,000 15%
ity of Anthony 8,700 300 12,500 la fiA
.ity of Attica 1,900 100 5,000 NA tm
.ity of Augusta 12,980 630 16,235 tiA tiA l
ity of Beloit 11,900 1,400 12,700 NA iM ity of Burlington 5,000 800 3,600 1,290 25%
ity of Chanute 25,255 2,380 21,832 9,825 25%
ity of Clay Center 12,000 200 17,605 tm NA ity of Coffeyville 41,500 4,500 73,000 40,000 25%
ity of Erie 2,500 100 NA im NA ity of Fredonia 8,400 200 NA 1,250 Largest Unit i ty of Garnett 5,900 200 8,080 3,700 Largest Unit ity of Girard 6,300 310 NA 3,250 Largest Unit ity of Herington 5,850 200 9,000 tiA NA ity of Hoisington 7,200 300 13,980 NA NA ity of Holton 6,600 200 13,540 im NA ity of Horton 3,800 400 5,865 NA NA ity of Iola 17,800 1,254 23,750 6,100 Largest Unit i ty of Kingman 9,000 1,000 10,920 NA NA i
i ty of Larned
~11,700 900 20,450 NA NA
- ty of Lindsborg 5,800 500 6,750 tiA tiA ity of McPherson 60,000 7,500 160,400 iM ta ty of Minneapolis 4,400 200 8,174 NA NA ty of Mulvane 7,000 500 tM IM IM ty of Neodesha 8,000 100 NA NA 15%
{
ity of Osowatomie 7,600,
300 8,100 2,600 NA
' ty of Osborr 4,600 250 7,540 NA NA I
ty of Ottawa 20,400 1,350 24,070 10,300 fM ty of Pratt 18,300 1,500 25,250 fM Largest Unit ty of Russell 15,000 300 16,500 fM tiA ty of Sabetha 6,000 250 7,500 iM IM ty of St. John 2,700 90 3,628 fiA NA ty of Stafford 3,350 250 3,800 NA la ty of Sterling 4,450 270 5,380 fM tiA l
Ly of Wamego 6,450 700 5,910 iM tm ty of Washington 2,950 50 5,000 in NA j
Ly of Wellington 22,600 500 34,500 22,000 25%
i ty of Winfield 33,600 600 58,000 26,725 25%
l 952117
l Question No.10:
List separately those systems in item 9 which purchase from applicant (a) all bulk power supply and (b) systems which purchase partial bulk power supply require-ments.
Where information is available to applicant, identify those item 9 systems purchasing part or all of their. bulk power supply requirements from suppliers other than applicant.
Answer No.10:
Presently there are no non-affiliated electric utility systems which purchase any portion of their bulk power supply requirements from KEPCo.
Furthermore, it is not anticipated that there will be any systems which will purchase a portion of their bulk power supply requirements from KEPCo in the future; however, it is a possibility that Sunflower Electric Cooperative, Inc., headquartered in Hays, Kansas, may be a non-affiliated electric utility that purchases some of its bulk power supply require-ments from KEPCo.
It is now anticipated, however, that Sunflower Electric Cooperative will become a member of KEPCo in the relatively near future.
With the exception of Sunflower Electric Cooperative, all of the systems listed in item 9 qualify as those purchasing part or all of their bulk power su-
.equirements from suppliers other than KEPCo.
352118
'Ouestion No. 11:
State as to all power generated and sold by applicant the most recent average cost of bulk power supply experienced by applicant (a) at site of generating facilities (b) at the delivery points from the primary transmission (backbone) system, (c) at delivery points from the secondary transmission system, and (d) i at delivery points from the distribution system, in terms of dollars per kilowatt per year, in mills per kilowatt hour, and in both the kilowatt costs i
and kilowatt hour costs divided by the kilowatt hours.
If wholesale sales are made at varying voltages, indicate average costs at each voltage.
I Answer No.11:
i Since KEPCo does not presently own any generation or transmission facilities, this question is not applicable.
i Sii2118
Question No.12:
State (a) for generating facilities and (b) for transmission subdivided by voltage classes the most recent estimated cost of applicant's bulk power supply expansion program of which the subject unit is a part, in terms of dollars per kilowatt /per year, in mills per kilowatt hours.
Also state separately the most recently estimated cost of the subject unit (s).
Answer No. 12:
Current projections of XEPCo power cost estimates do not include plans for i
ownership of transmission facilities, consequently, the only power cost estimates i
available are at the member delivery point level which is in general as delivered into the.subtransmission system. At that level,1983 cost of power from KEPCo, which includes 90 megawatts of hydro peaking energy purchased from the Southwestern Power
. Administration,195.5 megawatts of ownership capacity in the Wolf Creek Nuclear Plant, and supplemental purchases from investor cwned utilities, is projected as follows:
$89.16 per kilowatt /per year, for demand costs 17.55 mills per kilowatt hour' for energy costs
{
i for a total of 37.35 mills per kilwatt hour in the aggregate The estimated total cost of the Wolf Creek Nuclear Unit is itemized below:
Direct Construction Costs
$813,103,200 j
Taxes Accrued During construction 25,688,500 Allowance for Funds Used During Constrt.ction 250,303,700 31,089,095,400 l
% 2120 l
i
Question fio.13:
List and describe all requests for, or indications of interest in, interconnection and/or coordination and purchases or sales of coordinating power and energy from adjacent utilities listed in item 9 since 1960 and state applicant's response of full or partial requirements or bulk power for the same period and state applicant's response thereto.
Answer tio.13:
KEPCo was incorporated on February 13, 1975.
Since that time, KEPCo has not received any formal requests for interconnecting with other utilities.
- However, three distributien electric cooperatives that are not presently members of KEPCo have expressed interest in KEPC6 and KEPCo has offered membership to them.
These cooperatives are:
Doniphan' Electric Cooperative Association, Inc., Kaw Valley Electric Cooperative Company, Inc., and fiemaha-Marshall Electric Cooperative Associa-tion, Inc.
Sunflower Electric Cooperative, Inc., a generation and transmission cooperative. in Western Kansas, is currently negotiating a cocrdination and sales agreement with KEPCo that.will benefit both organizations and may result in Sunflower becoming a member of KEPCo.
I i
l 352121 i
Question No. 14:
List (a) agreements to which applicant is a party (reproducing relevant paragraphs) and (b) State laws (supply citations only), which restrict or preclude coordination by, with, between, or among any electric utilities or systems identified in applicant's response to items 8 and 9.
List (a) agreements to which the applicant is a party (reproducing relevant paragraphs) and (b) State laws (supply citations only) which restrict or preclude sub-stitution of service or establishnent of service of full or partial bulk power supply requirements by an electric utilitiy other than applicant to systems identified in items 8 and 9.
Where the contract provision appears
' in contracts or rate schedules on file with a Federal agency, identify each in the same form as in previous responses. Where the contract has not been filed with a Federal agency, a copy should be supplied unless it has been supplied pursuant to another item hereto.
Where it is not in writing, it
.should be described.
Answer No. 14:
KEPCo has no such agreements which restrict coordination by, with, between, or among any electric utilities or systems.
e UTdi:.!Z
I I
i Question No. 15:
1 State, at point of delivery, average future costs of power purchased from applicant to adjacent systems identified in applicant's response to item 9 in terms of dollars / month /kW for capacity, mills /kWh for energy and mills /kWh for both power and energy at purchaser's present load factor (a) at present load (b) at 50 percent increase over present load, (c) at 100 percent increase over present load, and (d) at 200 percent increase over present load.
(All costs should be determined under present rate schedules.)
Where sales are me under contracts or rate schedules on file with a Federal agency and not incivaed in the response to item 9, identify each in the same form as in previous responses.
Where the contract has not been filed with a Federal agency, a copy should be s up,r l i ed.
1 Answer No.15:
As previously mentioned in item 9 KEPCo is not interconnected with the adjacent systems mentioned in the schedule accompanying Answer No. 9.
At the pres ^:0 time, KEPCo has no existing rate schedules and does not plan to sell power to tt.ose systems. listed.
Therefore, the information req' rested :is not applicable.
l l
l h
Y
Question No. 16:
State whether applicant has prepared, caused to be prepared, or received engineering studies for generation and transmission expansion programs which include loads of each system in item 9.
Answer No.16:
A study, dated January 18, 979, was prepared by the KEPCo staff called "The Statewide Transmission Line Power Flow Study".
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of KEPCo's intended power transfers on the state's transmission network in the future time frames of 1980, 1983 and 1986.
The study was conducted through the use of the computer facilities available to the Southwest Power Pool and its load flow program and associated data base which was compiled in early 1978.
In addition, the study included.a determination of overloaded facilities, high and low voltage conditions and possible solutions to these problems.
The study also-included the loads ofthose systems mentioned in item 9.
l l
8 Question flo.17:
1 List adjacent systems to which applicant has offered to sponsor or to j
conduct system surveys in contemplation of an offer by applicant to purchase, merge, or consolidate with said adjacent system, subsequent to January 1, 1960.
Answerfio. 17:
Applicant has not made any such offer to purchase, merge or consolidate with an adjacent system since its da'te of incorporation.
-Question No. 18:
List applicant's offers or proposals to purchase, merge or consolidate with electric utilities, subsequent to January 1,1960.
Answer No. 18:
No offer or proposal to purchase, merge or consolidate with electric utilities has been made by KEpCo.
352126
?*
Question No. 19:
List all acquisitions of or nergers or consolidations with electric utilities by applicant, subsequent to January 1,1960, including:
(a) The name and principal place of business of the system prior to the acquisition, merger, or consolidation; (b) The date the acquisition, merger or consolidation was consumated; (c)
Gross annual revenue and most recent peak load, dependable capacity and the largest thermal' generating unit of the system, prior to the dates of consummation.
Answer No.19:
No such acquisitions, mergers or consolidations have been pr] posed or carried out by KEPCo.
4 o
Sfi' f.27
Question No. 20:
State applicant's six (or fewer if there are not six) lowest industrial or i
large commercial rates for firm electric power supply in terms of cost for power
'j i
and energy in mills per kilowatt hour (and separately, the demand and energy components) and indicate the portion of the charge attributed to bulk power supply.
State the. rates or rate blocks applicant utilizes for its six (or fewer if there are not six) promotional services such as electric space heating, electric hot water heating, and the like, in terms of mills per kilowatt hour for power and energy and indicate the portion of the rate or rate blocks attributed to bulk power supply.
Answer No. 20:
}
At' the present -time, KEPCo does not supply. power and-has no filed rates; therefore, -the above question is not applicable.
-M i
l 6
h 35'd128
'