ML19309D529
| ML19309D529 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 03/20/1980 |
| From: | Wilson W MATTHEWS, NOWLIN, MACFARLANE & BARRETT, SAN ANTONIO, TX |
| To: | JUSTICE, DEPT. OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309D528 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004100444 | |
| Download: ML19309D529 (16) | |
Text
'?' l G
/
6, *-
g C:cx w
'\\
3
- .;s m-p UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
, E I/AR 2 o 1980 ;>
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION JT.
d Ch? Of 15. Sscr:::7l./
r '. -,
e,
~ y~
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 4" # 6 l
IN THE MATTER OF HOUSTON S
LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY, S
ET AL. (SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT, 5
Docket Nos. 50-498A, 50-499A UNITS 1 & 2)
S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Now comes the City of San Antonio, acting by and through the City Public Service Board of San Antonio
(" San Antonio" or " CPS"), and files this Supplemental Response to the First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents of the Department of Justice dated November 30, 1978.
INTERROGATORY 2 In order of their relative importance, describe the underlying policies or bases upon which San Antonio justifies its refusal to engage in the interstate transmission or reception of electrical power or energy or to be interconnected with any other electric utility engaged in interstate cccmerce; provide any documents which state or describe these policies or bases.
SUPPLEMENTAL.*'d:SPONSE In addition to San Antonio's w-itten answer and documents rMiVTtdUUD1(0lO
provided in response to the Department of Justice's First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production: of Documents, San Antonio's position with respect to this issue has additionally been set out in its Petition to Intervene in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission proceeding initiated by Central Power and Light Company, et al, Docket No. EL 79-8, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
INTERROGATORY 11 (a)
State for every wholesale customer of San Antonio, if any:
the full name or title of the customer; complete address of the customer; the amount of wholesale power purchased by that customer by year; and the crevious supplier of that customer, if any.
(b)
State all requests received by San Antonio for wholesale service whether or not such service was ever provided, specifying when the request was received, by whom the request was made, and whether the requesting party was at the time of the request engaged in interstate commerce.
(c)
Provide all documents relating to the response to this interrogatory.
SUPPLDIENTAL RESPONSE (a)
An updated version of the schedule provided by San Antonio in its initial response to this interrogatory, showing electric sales to other utilities through'the end of i
fiscal year 1979-80 (ending 1/31/80), is attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
(b)
Inquiries concerning sale of power by San Antonio were received from Houston Lighting and Power Company in February, 1979.
Although no transaction has been finalized, discussions are continuing.
At the time of the request, Houston Lighting and Power Company was not engaged in interstate commerce.
(c)
Documents relating to the Houston Lighting and Power Company request are attached hereto as Exhibit C.
Respectfully submitted, Jon C. Wood W.
Roger Wilson 1500 Alamo National Building San Antonio, Texas 78205 By 84T/A Attorneys (#r the City of San Antonio acting by and through the City Public Service Board of San Antonio Of Counsel:
Matthews, Nowlin, Macfarlane & Barrett Exhibit A U.. - n. _D a-m. m. = a O =
n~.v =.o..r - ~,
n u.
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY 5
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF OKLAHOMA 5
Docket No. EL79-8 SOUTHWESTERN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY 5
WEST TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY 5
- a. r m v m. v O N m 0 v N. m. r_ e. r__.s ;w_ 3v.
- m. er_
1 CITY OF SAN ANTONIO
.r.
Pursuant to 51.9 of the Ccmmission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and the Commission's notice issued February 22, 1979, the City of San Antonio, acting by and through the City Public Service Board of San Antonio (San Antonio),
hereby petitions to intervene in the above proceeding.
..41.
All correspondence or ccmmunications regarding this matter should be addressed to counsel for San Antonio:
Jon C. Wood W.
Roger Wilson
- Matthews, Nowlin, Macfarlane & Barrett 1500 Alamo National Building San Antonio, Texas 78205 7..
_A2.
In support of its petition, San Antonio hereby submits the following:
The City of San Antonic is a home-rule city and political subdivision of the State of Texas which owns and, through the City Public Service Board, a municipal board, operates the San An:cnio gas and electric systems.
The San Antonio electric system previfes the public utility electric needs of the residences, businesses and industry of San Antonio, OM h% h i!d[JJA
!b suWAL
-n o c:.9py f ON[b Texas and surrounding areas having a population cf approximately one million persons.
The City Council of the City of San Antonio is the regulatory authority having jurisdiction over the rates, services, and operations of the City's municipally owned electric system within its city limits.
As an electric generating utility since 1942, San Antonio has maintained electrical interconnections with other electric utilities in South Texas in an organization known as the South Texas Interconnected Systems (STIS),
which, in addition to San Antonio, is comprised of Central Power and Light Company (an Applicant herein), Housten Lighting & Power Company, the Lower Colorado River Authority, the City of Austin, and, since 1977, South Texas Electric Co-op/Medina Electric Co-op.
Since 1967, the STIS utilities have participated in an expanded coordination group known as the Texas Interconnected Systems (TIS), which, in addition to the STIS members includes the Texas Utilities Companies, West Texas Uti.1ities Company (an Applicant herein), and, more recently, the Texas Municipal Power Pool.
San Antonio has direct interconnections with Central Power and Light Company and the Lower Colorado River Authority.
The members of STIS have historically operated wholly within the State of Texas.
IV.
~
San Antonio has participated as a party in a number of the proceedings initiated by the Applicants or resulting from the action of their parent, Central and South West Corporation, of unilaterally seeking a change in the historical interconnected operation.of San Antonio and other Texas utilities, beginning on May 4, 1976.
These proceedings include the pending Nuclear Regulatory Ccenission antitrust proceeding relating to the operating licenses for the South Texas Nuclear Project, in which San Antonio is one of four participants; the Federal Power Commission proceeding in Docket E-9 558 growing out of the May 4, 1976, events; the pending Securities and Exchange Commission proceeding initiated by the Applicants to demonstrate that their systems can be economically integrated to comply with the Public Utility Holding Ccapany Act of 1935; and the Public Utility Commission of Texas proceeding (Docke: 14) which was convened to resolve serious operating problems in TIS resulting from the events of May 4, 1976.
D
(/h m San Antonio took the position in Docket 14 and its participation in each of the other cited proceedings has been based on the contention that TIS in its present intra-state configuration has provided the optimum mode, from both economic and reliability standpoints, for San Antonio's operation of its electric system as demonstrated by the past record of TIS, and that no change in that mode of operation is warranted unless such a change provides incremental advantages to San Antonio's ratepayers and is shown to be in the public interest.
The Texas Public Utility Commission determined in its Docket 14 Order, after notice and hearing and based on the evidence before it, that TIS had been developed over a long period of time to operate as an independent group of systems, and that interconnection of TIS with the South West Power Pool would not increase the reliability of TIS, but that the cost of such interconnection would exceed the benefits to ratepayers on the Texas Interconnected System.
On apoeal, San Antonio has supported that order, which prohibits interstate connections only unless this Commission orders such connections or unless the Texas Public Utility Commission authorizes them upon notice and determination that they would serve the public interest.
San Antonio's position in this proceeding is that any change in the interconnections approved by the Texas Public Utility Commission in Docket 14, as sought by the Applicants herein, must be fully justified by the Applicants under the
. criteria set out in the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act.
V.
As a municipally owned electric system which would be directly affected by any action taken by the Co==ission.in l
this proceeding, as shown by the foregoing, and whose interest is not adequately represented by any other party or potential party to this proceeding, San Antonio submits that it is in the public interest for the Commission to grant its Petition to Intervene and prays that its petition be granted.
Respectfully submitted, JON C. WOOD W.
ROGE?. WILSON 1500 Alamo National Building San Antonio, Texas 73205
!/
Yi fj Of Counsel:
By:
u MATTHEWS, NOCIN, MACFAPr-dE & 3ARRETT '
j VERITICATION OF PECITION TO INTERVENE J.
- 3. Poston, being duly sworn, says that he is Assistant General Manager for Operations for the San Antonio electric system (City Public Service Board of San Antonio), and that he has read and, in his capacity as Assistant General Manager for Operations, is familiar with the factual allega-tions made in the foregoing petition to inte.vene and states that the said allegations are t_ae and correct.
J YA'% -.
i O'. ' 3. ' Po s son SUBSCRI3ED AND SWORN TO 3EFORE ME this J Lu.' day of
,s March, 1979.
m n
a v
$/'JN % $2J s,
Notarv Pucirc in and for 3exar Conntf, Texas v
m.n't:/ar r ro SourT. Ptd.Se, Beur Camq, Tc.ns 9
~
9[!5)h[JUL b
]j.3'l@Q t
41'6lj
=2 l
ij CERTIFICATE'OF SERVICE I hereby certify than a crue and correct ccpy of the foregoing Petition to Inte: vene by the City of San Antonio was : nailed to counsel for the Applicants, Messrs. Richard D.
Cudahy and David M.
Stahl, Isham, Lincoln & 3eale, one First National Plaza, Chicago, Illinois 60603, on this the 28th day of March, 1979.
/./ Ovet b (-
W. Rogergilson 9
6 I
I I
I l
l
)
eI - a ec=+ e 4s3h C er ** er= a e - e e ocem C *"*=c-*'" C e 4 e e a=-
eW m
wi r= + e c t. *= 4 ** 4 om a== * C = ? n = ' e c= ** = 4 4
==*=g e c en m1 ml
' U"%
4 cP. **.==. r* d. 4. tc. em e) ** 4. C.==. e. d..a. e. c. =. e=. e. e.. em. c. c. d. e. C. ec.=
en
.e n e e en" e e= = e e= c= c= c= 0 ** n' e em e
4 e C e e m e am e e *
@ C e em C e d. * *= 4 W C * * ** ** 4 e
c D
.= e e e==== e e,.a e O + is *= e e 8'n 45 C.
==
e an om e ew
==
==
- ==.*e j
[ m s
~.
C
=
h.,
s" -
- e. a.
=
1 p
==. 5. ee.
e n e en
.=e m
Q e
W
\\
ei
== m3 C,
6*
wm *
.e em V,
r / OG wa. *e=t e"
=
. ' % \\ \\( \\J
=.
w
\\ '
O. i nks A \\\\
'.T.
}
>=
'N/
Ce eI
>= = e=
em J
A
\\
h\\
$ ml
=m,.6 3
/,'.T\\
s\\\\\\>\\*'
e w
g \\g\\
e m N
e V
- s.==
e T4 Asx ni C
O'
- Ja C
O.
= = m C es q mDg C.
O s,. m. es.
o2 o
- k A
O O
- ad' en om 4
oe 4
l 3
- m e
.a e
emi.
si t
O O
O 8 8 8
e.
.e, e.
em es em
.em
>= 3 to em c
(s n
e a
CCOOC=OOOOOOCOOOOCCOO C
O O
COOOOOCCOOOCCOOOOOOO C
O O
en. O. en. O. O. m. C. C. O. O. O. O. O. O. C. O. O. O. O. O.
O.
O.
e*
edu
- = O e em 8b en e O m em== c= 4 *= em e= - e * **
.e es
t
c ee * *w m eo ee e= e's C
- m e
e m e. C.. e.em. = ce.em.e= e, C 4 m e en e.n.o oe. em.==.
=.
ce.
.J m em
- w
. e.
. cm 4. cm p=
e a
es em..= m em.m. O. es to *w no. e O m a O e=
es em em em==.e a=
- ==
ed me e= en m
=
. ew
==
e=
en me a
s==
l
=4 COOOO OOO OOOO O
s=
i COOOO OCO CCOO O
em cm
=.=4
.2
- =. em. =s. O. e.. O. O. O.
O. O. O. O.
O.
en.
=
e we 4
p O *= o em e a m em em O = e's
.e e em
- =
.o.
C e em a.
~ eu em
=r e e= **
=0 0
eD w=
.F eN
+
em O
1 W
em. O. em. "." em. r=. ep== =r e
= =
w c.
s sn h O 40 N.* *e et om
.R
=0 eD
,4
.C.e
.=
= = =
em O
Q N
e y
5 hd I
i,
- A
==
8 8 8 8 8,8 8 8_ 8 8 8. e. C. 8. C. O. ~. ~. e. e.8.~.,.~..e.S 8 9 8,5 S, 888888 0
.. e. d
~ e.
- e. r. m. e.. e.
~
e
)
o
=..
e a e' m *M=e== e em e e e e* e o e O. *e* O es e em. e m O e em a'n ** ee O
- = e *= em O M 4 e em e ** ** p=
== to e ** *e em or e e
.O
.==*== me eC e g
c=6 e= e em O.
- e. e. e. e3 O. ce. >=. 0. e. ai= e.
- *=
==.e *=..e. 4. e. e. m. a. er.i i
he e
m n
e e
.e u
y
.e
==.=== ew me ce n es m e.a e W's e e e= e= c= ** em up en ed ee and en8 es 0 C C O O O O O O C O O O O e d O O O O O O O O O O O Om'*Cf om
==
0 C e ** c- *= m o O O O C C O ** em O es m w% e e C e C e *w e e ep *=
==
e e e e ** e em - O ar = ** *"s e e= em c's== em e's =.e c
- m. e. e. e. e.
- e.==. c. e'.s em. 8..==. e. e. e. m.m *=,a. ce..a. 4. e= ce. e. e. e.==. e. e=
ew
==
.= C e O m
et O em
- ===== es e=== en = ****e**P=
em en. m e= en ** c= *== === m C e e c== a=
ed a
e. *=. m. e..=. *. a. h. *=. em. em== m. e.==. em.e=.==.e'.s ac. O. e. **. e. O. @. d. O. to. *=.e C=
I
==
o 8
em to na e- *= en==*=a O
- e e= 0 ** 'm e e *= c e* O== 8'S ecs e a0== e'*
- == e.I en en em em 90 98 em
==
I
== 8'e ** ** *= ** =* ** es ce ** ** es **
- "I
'"4 e'l 4 e-tas l
p.
-ep 4.
4 em O O O O O O O C C C O O C O O O O O O.c C e O # O e a O OO O O O O O O.* Cl 4 a
erem o C C O O O O C C COOCOOCCO 4
- e. em. C. a* =r. m. *=. C. e. O. m. N. e. ew Q==. **. *=. am. 4. %D. d. *..F. er.* e. e. en.
O.
O ae e3.e =r e O.e O e e m== >=
- O em ee na en e e em e.a e em e ei E
or e. e em
== e e m,o==** @ e o em se e== e m.e C o e= e or em en O s s e a= em
- e se. cm.==. ce. e. em. e. ia. e=. O. e. er.s e= m e. e. ce. es. em. O. m. cm. e> no. *=. e'> em. e. c=. O.
e ep.
=
O = m e *= ** * *= 0 *= m
=0 O.O e e ** e C=== *=== **e*== e=o
.**e m e e en es em en me ce ce av ew ee 884
- 't e] e em o e =
e s
ce e e b
eOOOO OOOOOO se e
& OCCO OOOOOO 9
==
.C.*'.5e*
- =
e i
e d
W= 0f
.==.m.. C. ep 4 a
E 8"t
@ @ e e e t$ e, L
C me t=
a= ** f e6 =0 e @ c't em E'
tS. *'=. ee. 4D. e'%. m3. cm. e= c. e'. c=. ee.
eWj 5
O W% 8U% W'% 48 @
se ce c'=e me== e *o we d e=, @ U'%
i i
=
.D.
-e #'
e= me 8'%.F.* 98 et O== c'= *=*.e em se e.==e e= 0
[-
w% tm og ga to ec,a em e em O== ** m.
op e= e (*
.e sm
- 8t=
e-p=
e'= s ** a= es o go es go op =c P=
go m en e en ef'm em em em om e
e e e e e e e e e e a e e o e e
se e c'%
e e e a e e o e e e e
e a dW N M ep W'n @ *= e e o C.e e W'*enen e enam e e no e w is' gp*=eO e O m.
. ep e em e'is O'%
O =a 8
.P ert eiO *= C fm em er===,
we so e e ** e em ** s=. em *= en *= em. > =
h= se. =,
e b
e y
~
e d=
n.
e.;. ),
=.
.i, MEMORANDUM 5%Mhk C
~
~
n Mr. H. L. Freeman RE HL&P Request for Power from C?S Assistant General Manager DATE February 7, 1979 N O.
^
For Finance & Adminis ration As you know, HL&P has requested a rate quotation from C?S with respect l
to a potential sale of some 200 MW to 300 MW of electric power and asso-ciated energy.
HL&P indicated,that CPS could expect a monthly load factor of about 80 percent on this sale of power.
The associated rate development assumes that gas will be used as the fuel, with the LT generated at the Braunig Power Plant.
'Jith this in mind, the expected February and March 1979 HL&P bills are detailed below.
.. c..,%-_...:..
~} (~[
FEBRUART 1979 EXPECTED HL&P BILL,,,
~
250 MW DEMAND. 96.000.000 Wd USAGE' De=and Charge:
Sl.15/W x 250,000 W
$ 287,500.00 Energy Charge:
Fuel (Cas) c2.773644/Wd x 96,000,000 Ud 2,662,698.24 O&M c0.142535/Wd x 96.000.000 GT 136.833.60 Subcotal, Energy Charge S2,799,531.84 Total Charge S3,087,031.84
.r..
<.... g
.y The price per LT is:
$3,087,031.84 + 96 x 10 GT = c3.216 per WH The city payment portion is:
14: x $3,087,031.84 - $432,184.46 MARCH 1979 EXPECTED HL&P BILL',3
.c 250 MW DEM.AND. 148.800.000 Wd USAGE l
- - ?
Demand Charge:
$1.15/ W x 250,000 W
$ 287,500.00 Energy Charge:
~
4,127,182.27 Fuel (Cas) c2.773644/LT x 148,800,000 GT O&M c0.142535/LT x 148.800.000 Wd 212,092.03 1.....
S4,339,274.35 Subtotal, Energy Charge.
-y c... +:. e....... 4. ;r-e.:
._a: a;;.M..
Total Charge.r.
-e.
f,7Rh5'ft;ai.' yG?.~~~';:~.
- .-+= 9 ':f4.9 ~ :..,626,774. 35 /..
(12.'. -
- w m + r. s. /a. W m s :3'ip.:5pY
.'S4
'#'~ f
.7pq:..- ~
6 The price per LT is:
$4,626,774:35 + 148.8 x 10 LT = c3.109.per LT
.n.
The city payment portion is:
142 x S4,626,774.35 - $647,748.41 t
1The sale wculd le f rom CPS to HL&P during the =ench'-o.. bruary 1979 ed-n possibly March 1979, also, um
p; *mI,.
s s.
[Fobrutry7,1979 Mr. H. L. Frctman
',.. r.. *
. Pfy).{Q t yl.5Q. t ll.
-p_>-n..
?
3.
j gp
-,. m y,e g
,.....;.,, z r g :.
....L.
f.gy
- w..,..,
Cp.,
w.
.g..
.. ~ -
It should be noted that the San Antonio City Payment is included in I
all figures above for both months.
The combined city payment for both....-
~
months would come to some S1',080,000.
Also, the minimum =onthly bill.. ' f.'.
would be set at $230,000, based on a mini =um billing de=and of 200,000 W.
?.
The. computation is:. 51.15 per W x 200,000 W - $230,000.
.. ?.r MW..;;.:.. :
- .t.y. ex.
- n.
- The $1.15 per W demand charge is somewhat lower than the $1.50 per f' -
W used in the STEC/MEC Firm Power Purchase Agreement.
The smaller'HL&P charge stems from the assumption that all WH generated will be from the oil / gas units, i.e. no coal.
The lower oil / gas investment indicates a lower demand charge.
STEC/MEC on the other hand has first prioritv, after the needs of CPS regular customers are met, on CPS coal-fired generation.
Thus, STEC/MEC should share in the higher required coal plant investment.
4 through a somewhat higher demand charge..
- ' O -,.:--- ~,
~
~.
- i.
- ...N -1%,7.= * --:. : - em. + -
7, g,
- er.g
.s::...c.. w..v,~,~
y
-t.
u
~It should be noted that the only'line' losses included in this deriva-L.1 -
~
tion are those'of the CPS' Transmission ~ System.- In other words,. line losses I l'.
from the CPS s'ervice' area to the HL&P service area are not included.
...s..<..
.2,
..e.
It should also be noted that there may be extra charges, over and above those computed above, due to extra CPS generating unit startups (if any) due to the HL&P power loads.
Last summer when E&P purchased some " emergency"
.i'I
'. power from CPS, the bill included an amount for extra startups such as these.
These charges would be developed by Operations and applied to the
'Y bill on a "$ per occurrence".
basis.
.. r.
~ n-.
'. V '. u.
?,6J a % T4 :.e -
~> %.'..
.l.i
.:.. A.
'I and my staff are always available to explain this race derivation
~
in further detail if you should so desire.
', d
% ;2~q.P.l%~W,=t r'1-w:%;~;r..ig..f..%tr y7,
.h.::
2 e.
- 7.:.r... -: m.f x c.. m......
. n..m :.r ~
O
,.,s
......,.; ;...g....
. g..
....g.
-2..
. ~....
.. Ir
-F Donald S. Thomas
- y..,_-. u...;..
,anager
.s~
s.
.:.. p.:
e.
Information Services.
.T
a.;..
. ~ -
2'& 3N'. { DST /bj k.[ v] E,}g.,- h-.
. -. u.:w.
.,.,.1
.s.....
f:..g.7 [t h $.I,h.
.f. j.., Q.Y...:g..
r; $., ~i[.
j v.:
.: ; g.. r.. -
- .;.. m -
- n.:.,3. p. r.. S.. p..,, w. c. q 4.. ;. m. &..y.
2,
, s.. Copy to Mr. R. C. Mecke
.e < ~..
. u..
-'.,,.5-w a
..s..
..g...
. e.,. _
.c s
.a+.
... x,.
~..,..
q.-
s.
.s
. ;,' {.
l;*h- :,rf *$, *] ~i!. ? ;. ~ Q *
'l ;.Q: '.'.j [y*,,,*. a, j
..,.v'
- .. x..'ls
- " Y,. p
' l k '.,%%*. }. &...
~.
'. ' ~,
3
- ~.
q l).
r < '22,N~ '. :...?. l~.=.p.=7J,.Q$1.$'Q"i:; %.-n..WM7.c,< v. r ':d;f &~rj.
i i
33,%~x+W;1,
.. :.,c-a;
- 53~-M.. w, &JW.e,i -.,,D:. -t.y:c#4@.,;.,;i~.q-(
.;/:e.d.J.J D.{Q.l'.".- $ 4:%
W.
, g.,,%.L..M....U_.F 4'r.,-i.d_.W..: H..?. T.m.e.
M.
M.. 7.F-
- -.~
j-c;f.J.c.
..u,. -
.,.,; {:.d,w.' g..,g h.*c.c..
..w ".5.~'A
... #;M*.y
- r's;;
.=. g.
7.t, N,J.% r p v. t..: 3. +. yp,,,,.3.-ls'y;- S. - ~ g
'74. A.W.
g yr
. ::r Y
..
- Y, ;,. +.'*y. (. ~. ' '
,. ~,i qe
. T riv=.'t / :
-Assuming approxi=ately 20 days rc=aining in February. 1979 for billing:.1
-l~
^
7.
~
Usage (WH) - Load Factor x Days x 24 hrs / day x De=and
~
1-
~.~
, N
- 80: x 20 days x 24 hrs / day x 250,000 W - 96,000,000 WH.
U 3 sing the entire 31 days in March:;...,. '
4
~
Usage ( WR) - SO: x 31 days x 24 hrs / day x 250,000 W - 148,800,000 WH.
4This may be offset due to the aforementioned benefits of cheaper fuel (coal) availability.
~~"i lines n.s [.inimso & PowEn COMi'ANY
< ~ -
aucsw. nw nw:
O C.S.e = =o=. s
~
-.~. %
Mr. Arbur von Rosenberg Manager, Planning &
Development Depar ment City Public Service Board P. O. Box 1771 San Antonio, Texas 73295
Dear Arthur,
This is in reply to your letter of June 12, 1979, regarding the possible pt:rchase of generatica capacity by HL&P from CPSB. Our pctential utilization of this capacity may be as much as 300 megawa: s for the years 1982 drough
,198.Sm We look forward to receiving information from you on the -
basis of your supplying scme or all of this capacity.
Sincerely yours, g=^
DES:1w cc: M essrs. G. W. Oprea, Jr.
J. D. Greenwade R. E. Dean J. B. Po s to n - C PSB R. C. Mecke - C?SE v5. S. Domas - CPSB 1
MTM T,AN01LM
,m..,,
Mo.. A. VGti RC3EtjiERG'5 CTF1ti
~
RECElvED L
t RE g gdv c
- ng-ev 331 9 e
Mr Arthur von Dosenbe-0:#136/0 ntt.................h...DME e r e 1 1 1979 NO.
q
--,.o-
..m..
REFERRE0 T0.....II e t.. 4,,
~nm,.1,,
a In reference to our short discussion Tuesday relating to possible energy sales to Houston Lighting & Power, there are several coments I would offer to keep in mind.
The Generator Capability Rating memo you and I signed is valid for a study.
The 0.W.S. #2 unit is slightly over rated on gas, but not enough to alter any stucy.
s Referencing your letter to Mr. 0.E. Si=ons of June 12, 1979, relating to potential firm power sales, the delay in S.T.P. needs to be factored in.
At this time, I would be hesitant to include S.T.?. in the firm capability for 1935.
This, of course, reduces our potential firm power sales.
The 22.5". reserve is adequate, but we must rememoer this includes spinning reserve requirements.
In order to consider reliable fir n power sales in 1982, it is my recom-mendation that we perform an extensive inspection and maintenance program on Leon Creek No. 3 & 4, and M.P..P. No. 3.
Mr. Wheeler has reviewed previous maintenance records on the three units and he estimated the inspection and maintenance necessary to restore tne units to a reliable coerating condition.
He would prefer to overhaul L.C. No. 4 in May-June 1981 and M.R. No. 3 in July-August 1981.
His estimate for each unit is 5101,380.
No time period has been selected for L.C. No. 3 and tne estimated cost would be approximately 550,000.
In my review, I believe the estimates are somewhat conservative and I would suggest a 5300,000 tab for tne three units.
The Republic electronic boiler con:rols on M.R.
No. 3 and L.C. No. 4 are obsolete and parts are unavailable, :nerefore a further review and possible operation may be necessary to determine minimum control requirements.
At the present time, there are no operators stationed' at Leon Creek Plant or Mission Road Plant.
Some operators for minimum staffing for either of the two plants are presently assigned in :ne coal yard to reduce staffing on :ne par: of railcar maintenance.
Some coerators have also been assigned to tne V.H. Braunig Tank Farm and in coal clant training.
We would be facing a situation of loca:ing sufficien: exoerienced c:erators originally assigned to Leon Creek anc Mission Road to restaff.
- However, we coulc prooably criege :nat gap :ne way or ano:ner.
If we wantec to
/
consicer Leon Creek No. 3 & 4 operationai in 1982, we snould censicer abou:
20 additional operators.
If you then acd M.R. No. 3 recuirement, 21 i
adcitional coera:ces may be recuired.
Tne coera:or recuiremen Oculc be temoered somewna cy cefining unit coerating recuirement to five cays per l
week, daily cycling, overtime, e c.
6 o
,,h 'b a eE
\\
O, J d
U.
J
Mr. Ar:nur von ?csenberg Septembir 13, 1979 The maintenance requirements are less stringen in that scme maintenance could be performee on overtime on weekends, during cycling, and by using maintenance personnel from o:ner plants.
However, sustained coeration for three or four years would justify approxima:ely six maintenance emoloyees per plant.
In order to estimate croduction costs for the two older plants, I would suggest using 0 & M costs curing previous years 11at the plants operated and escalate the cos:s for inflation to the years of potential sales.
This would be a reasonable maximum cost.
0 & M cost in a potential sales contract could be adjusted for Board potential need of the units.
The Power Department has become increasingly concerned about the idle deteriorating condition in the two plants, the reali::ation that units may be required for future operation, and the requirements on our part to meet the needs.
f 71HL&wA M.M. Hormuth Manager Power Department MMH:jmh 00 h a df) d 5
~,
g m
y
I,m m,'
MEMORANDUM m e,b r e r_ rf r u
fk (
m D
I d
I$
I d
MULl
^
~
f A L t LT Lh d
Mr'. Ernes:
Gragg RE EL&? ?cuer Sa
- a.
DATE July 16, 1979 N O.
You asked me to give you an estimate of the increase in trans=issio: losses tha: GS vould incur should we contrac: to sell Houston Lighting and Jover Cc=pany as =uch as 300 W during the period 1982-1986.
I= the past, we have been asked to provide loss infor=ation under sd-dlar circunstances.
I a= vriting this =e=o to =ake sure you understand da: the data that we give you for trans=ission loss is =ot an absolute nu=ber that can be used indiscri=inately without realizing its ' relation to the operating conditions under which 1: was calculated.
Conditions affecting trans=ission losses include, but are not li=ited :o:
load level, generatics (both quantity and loca:ica), circuit outages, transfer:zar tap settings and interchange.
Trans=issic: losses in de City Public' Service electrical syste=
are not caly affec:ed by operating condi-J.ons vidin de CPS service boundary but also by the cc=dizions present c= the electri"' syste=s of other u:#' d ties 1 the Texas laterconnec:ed System.
Since the opera:ing cendi:ic=s s-idin C?S and the T.I.S. are c==stan:17 changing, it is virtually i=possible to predic: wha: the ~ans=issio: losses over a given period of
-d ~ vill be.
The culy
^3 g we are able to do is to run a "Loadflow" study for a specific se: of ec=diticas (load level, generatic level, etc.) and calculate -le losses for da: soecific set of conditices.
Attached is a s"- ary of Loadflow studies that I ra ec= paring the effects of exporting 300 W :o EL&P during the 19 82,1983 and 1985 su=:ser peaks (High Te=p.
Peak). You vill note tha: 1: the ec=pa-isen of the 1983 and.1985 studies the transmission losses decrease rader dan increase when exper ing power to Houston.
This is due to the representation of S':2 in the studies and CPS receiving our 700 W share.
~herefore, the CPS net interchange 1: the study is -400 W (-700
+ 300) rather tha: +300 W.
Selld g Hous:c: 300 W in these studies reduces the power flow oc the 175 =ile CPS to S~? ::ans=ission 1d es, therefere reducing he losses on :hese
'd es.
As you can see fro = the above, the trans=issics losses are a function of operating conditions and selling EL&P power =sy or =ay not increase losses depending on these ec=diticus, =ainly :he sta:us of the Soud Texas Project.
Sc=eding else of which you should be aware is that selling pcver during the 1982-1986 period vill probably require breakar upra.d_ g projects at an earlier da:e dan presently pla-ed.
You may possibly van: :o include dis in your rate calcula: ices.
t
_ jp[
v.
G. v = -" elder
?rejec: I:;ineer
~ransmissi== 21=r-" g GME:bb 7.= closure
s I.DADFLC'J SU.* M D@
D "l D ]bl1 "
T[
A 0
d.IL u
?aak Year (1) b d Level (2)
Net h. Msses heresented s'
Interchan2e W'
Cc=:nents 1982 2480
- 50 31.22.'
Expor: 300 to ELE
'~
~
1982 2480
-350 29.60....
Base case l.62
!= crease due to expor:.
m 1983 2630
-400 37.28...
7.xpor: 300 to ele 1983 2630
-700 37.52 3ase case
-0.24 Decrease due to eroor:
1 1985 2945
-400 35.76 ~
Expor 300 :o ele 19 85 2945
-700 36.72 3ase case
=~... -
-0.96
~
Decrease due to exoo::
.., y..
m...- -;-.:
c
- ~
..t 9..
3ased on Loadflow cases set up by the I.I.S. Pla==ing Subco- # tee to represen:
su=:ner peax. cccc.,::.ons :o tuue give: year.
'( )
C?S high te=perature peak de=and
--t-- - ~ *,
+.... -
-n.o 8., V., - a
.a s
.6
..s j
9f p.q-a 2
/,,,, 7
, e.
."'.-.. Q-as
.,,z,., *.:
~.
n.
s
.s
.s...
,.u~--
gI
- 3 s,
=[.
a,
w, g
n
?.,,
_.: q -
s a.
p
~
e
?
4 m
..