ML19322C540
| ML19322C540 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1979 |
| From: | Vandenberg R NRC OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM ANALYSIS (MPA) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001170869 | |
| Download: ML19322C540 (2) | |
Text
Includes tel cony y"< cg'o of 7/30 also.
UNITED STATES 4
? ;f c,,, *[,%I ' k -', ' $
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASH:NGTON, D. C. 20555 k h $ a [,8, RECORD OF TELEPHONE C0flVERSATI0il July 27,1979 10:00 a.m. - 10:10 a.m.
Mr. Lorin H. (Mike) Drennan Chief Accountant, FERC 77,Kpgj f
Room 3410 North Building 825 North Capitol Street Washington, D. C.
20425 Since Nike had only a few minutes at this time, I quickly went over the question areas I wanted to discuss later on either with Mike or members of his staff.
1.
Since Met Ed anticipated and needed additional financing in 1979 (per SEC Form 10K and FERC Form 1) would having TMI-2 in commercial service by the end of calendar year 1978 affect the financing alterr.atives available to Met Ed or the cost of the various alternatives?
Mike believed the commercial operation decision would have an impact but could not answer definitively.
Perhaps a commercial operation declaration was a precondition to making TMI-2 bondable plant.
2.
What are the FERC criteria for changing from CWIP to Plan' in Service?
Merely at end of test period.
3.
Does Met Ed receive benefit from Investment Tax Credit or is benefit
" flowed through" to rate payers?
(will discuss later) 4.
When does FERC's 120-day test period start for a nuclear unit and did i
Met Ed file with FERC on explanation of why TMI-2 testing extended beyond 120 days.
This report would have been referred to the Office of Electric Power Generation.
5.
From the information in the FPC Form 1,it is not clear if Met Ed/GPU was in a surplus or deficit position with the Pa.-N.J.-Md. Pool.
What was status before and after declaring TMI-2 to be in commercial operation?
t 8001170(([ j
1 e'
Record of teiephone conversation 2
July 27, 1979 Will probably need additional information from Met Ed to supplement FERC data to determine position with pool.
6.
What was the status of TMI-2 in FERC rate case?
FERC rate people may have answer.
7.
Need copy of FERC Uniform System of Accounts with full explanation.
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 18, Parts 0-49 latest edition 4/1/79 contains complete set of accounts for electric utilities and explanations Record of telephone conversation July 30,1979 Mike Drennan called again,10:30 a.m. Monday, July 30, and provided the following information:
1.
Met Ed did not submit a report indicating that test period extended beyond 120 days so FERC assumes that test period was less than' 120 days.
2.
FERC conducted audit of Met Ed in 1978 for year ending December 1977.
Purpose of audit was to assure compliance with FERCis Uniform System of accounts particularly to assure correct classification and reporting of plant expenditures, 3.
Met Ed, per 1978 FERC Form 1, was clearly in a deficit position with respect to ParN.J.-Md. Pool.
Could have been caused by coal strike.
4.
Mr. Gordon Murdock, Office of Electric Power Reculation. 275-4657 has worked on TMI and is available to provide more detailed answers to our questions, i
R. L. Vandenberg 4
_