ML19329E462
| ML19329E462 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 09/20/1973 |
| From: | Brand W, Leckie D JUSTICE, DEPT. OF |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006160266 | |
| Download: ML19329E462 (29) | |
Text
p
- .A..
f.*
~
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS POOR QUAL.lTY PAGES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION soks In the Matter of
)
CONSUIERS POWER COMPANY DocketNos.(0-329A (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
57 MCIION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF MICHIGAN POOL CO:GIITTEE MINUTES The Department of Justice moves the Board to compel opplicant to produce forthwith all meeting minutes relating to power pooling of each committee established under the Electric Power Pooling Arcemant between Applicant and Detroit Edison, dated December 22, 1962, and the E3setric Coordination Agreement between Applicant and Detroit Edison, dated May 1,1973.
As directed by the Board at the September 7, 1973, prehearing conference, we made a prompt, uritten specific request to Applicant's counsel for these documents.
(Our letter is attached as Appendi:t A hereto.)
Applicant has declined to produce them (letter of Wm. Warfield Ross, Appendix B hereto).
Accordingly, further pursuant to the Board's direction (Transcript, p. 529), we make this motion.
Applicant's counsel would have the Board believe the request at issue is identical to one previously considered
)
l and limited by the Bocrd (letter of Mr. Ross refusing prcduction; l
l 8006160
{
M
-o
l copy sent to Board; Appendix B). This is not so.
The present request differs significantly from item no. 4 of the First Joint Request which was the subject of a Board ruling (Order of November 28, 1972).
This request is limited to minutes; the earlier request included also reports and documents relating thereto.
This request is limited to cool committees; the earlier request included also subcommittees and task forces.
This request is limited to the Michigan Pool (Applicant and Detroit Edison); the earlier request included also all other pooling and coordination agreements to which Applicant is party.
This request is limited to minutes relatine to cower cooling; the earlier request would have swept in all documents relat-ing to all of the committees, subcon."ittees and task forces.
In short, this is a much narrower document regtest.
Section 2.740(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules permits discovery regarding any matter, not privileged which is relevant to the sub-ject matter involved in the proceeding, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party.
The Department's request meets this test.
It also meets the further requirement of Section 2.740(b)(1)--that discovery... shall relate only to those matters in controversy which have been 4L identified by the Commission or the presiding officer in the prehearing order entered at the conclusion of [the initial) pre-hearing conference.
2
In its Prehearing Conference Order of August 7, 1972, the Board formulated the " relevant matters in controversy" as follows:
The basic thrust of Justice's case is that (a) applicant has the power to gant or deny access to coordination; (b) applicant has used this power in an anticompetitive fashion against the smaller utility systems; (c) applicant's said use of its power has brought into exis-tence a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws, which situation would be maintained by activities under the licenses that applicant seeks.
Neither the inter-vening parties nor the Atomic Energy Commission's regulatory staff enlarge this scope.
Hence, the scope of the rele-vant matters in controversy is an herein outlined.
At the most recent prehearing conference, Chairman Garfinkel explained this was meant as a broad formulation of the issue in the case, with many factors necessarily included thereunder:
But I will tell you this very clearly, we made it clear that What the issue is in this case, right, Doc Clark, What is encomoassed by these issues in this case is a very oroaa ening.
We didn't asx specifically for what the defense will be from the Applicant.
But on the contrary, the only issue in this case is the question of coordination and the--wait a minute.
You are missing my point, Mr. Brand--what makes un the power and everythine else are ractors in there.
'ihe.swar to ceny, not to market,
~
all the factors that make up this question of power to deny and injury.
Of course injury is a big factor.
MR. BRAND:
Your Honor, you granted tremendous discovery to the Applicant con-cerning whether or not these people are making a profit.
3
CHAIRMAN GARFni1GL:
That is right.
We are saying to you that has a relation-ship to the ouestion of coordinatijn.
Now t' at is wnac we are say)ing (Transcript, n
pp. 515-516; emphasis added Coordination, then, is the essence of this case--
and pooling is coordination.
What could be more relevant than inquiry into Applicant's coordinating / pooling activities?
More specifically, the Department proposes to show that Applicant engages in extensive coordination with Detroit Edison while refusing for anticompetitive reasons, in an to coordinate abuse of monopoly power,/with the smaller municipal, coopera-tive and private systems in Michigan, for whom we seek relief here.
Fundamental to any such showing is the extent to which Applicant can and does coordinate when willing to do so, i.e.,
the benefits Appl. ; ant derives from its practice of coordination.
"Coordina*cion" and " pooling" are nebulous terms in the abstract.
Even formal pooling agreements like those between Applicant and Detroit Edison, do no more than establish a framework for coordination between the parties.
The essence of coordination is the implementation of such agreements, i.e., the operating and planning decisions made pursuant thereto.
The cosnittees established under the agreecmats
, make these decisions, and their minutes reflect those decisions.
The committees ' fundamental role is plainly evident from their functions as described in the current Michigan Pool agreement.
Article VII, dealing with committees, begins:
O 4
a.
1.
Five committees are hereby established to carry out the obiectives of this Acreement; an Administrative Committee, a Hanning Committee, an Operating Committee, a Fiscal Committee and a Public Infor=ation Committee.
(Emphasis added)
The Article continues with detailed descriptions of each connittee's responsibilities or duties.
We have included these descriptions (and the sLailar ones of the earlier Agreement) as Appendix C to this motion and urge the Board to examine them.
We find nothing in any of the descriptions that is irrelevant to an ascertainment of the extent of Applicant's coordinating activities with Detroit Edison.
The minutes will show what coordination is really like for the Applicant--and what it could be for the small municipal, cooperative and private systems to whom it is denied.
The previous discussion has related this discovery to the Department's own case.
As mentioned at the prehearing conference, however, a prime reason we want these minutes is to prepare to cross-examine and rebut the Applicant's case.
Section 2.740(b)(1) leaves no doubt that discovery may be had for this purpose as well as to support our direct case.
A few examples will indicate the relevancy of pooling committee minutes in this regard.
~
A most important example concerns the decision of Applicant and Detroit Edison to replace their 1962 Pool Agree-ment with the 1973 Agreement.
It was suggested on deposition that Applicant and Detroit Edison had became dissatisfied with 5
o the operation of the 1962 Agreement over the years and decided to draft a new, improved agreement.
One area of dissatis faction allegedly was the Pool's reserve requirement formulation.
The 1962 Agreement was silent concerning any requirement that each of the pool members maintain reserves equivalent in size to the single J
largest generating unit on its system; it spoke only in terms of adequate reserves for the Pool as a whole.
The 1973 Agreement, on the other hand, contains such a single-largest-unit requirement.
We cannot conceive any legitimate engineer-ing justification for this requirement, and we believe it was 1
inserted to deny any smaller municipal, cooperative or private systems the full benefits of coordination should they ever I
l gain admission to the Michigan Pool.
Another change from the 1962 Agreement to the 1973 l
Agreement was the elimination of the " pool unit" method of coordinated development of generation in favor of an arrangement that appears to us on les face severely to limit the coordination benefits smaller systems could achieve by I
admission to the Pool.
As with the reserve requirement, mere dissatisfaction with the operation of the old agreement, rather than anticompetitive intent, was the claimed justifica-tion for the change.
The documents produced by Applicant so far, however, contain no indication of dissatisfaction with the 1962 Agree-ment--not a hint that the reserve requirement needed revising, 6
- =
nor any hint that pool unit coordinated development had proven unworkable.
The minutes must show what difficulties, if any, were encountered under the old Agrecment, and what I
led to the decision to replace it with the new one.
We need them to cross-examine and rebut Applicant's claims that only legitimate business or technical reasons prompted the change.
4 We understand Applicant to contend that the Inter-venors and other small systems already have fair access to coordination and therefore denying them participation in the Michigan Pool is not inconsistent with antitrust law or policy.
l The minutes show the level of coordination actually practiced between Applicant and Detroit Edison, which we believe far exceeds anything available to the outsider small systems, to the substantial detriment of those systems.
We anticipate claims that the theoretical economic benefits of pooling are not achieved in practice, or that they are less than one would suppose, so that de.tial of access to pooling cuases no injury to the small systems.
The minutes show what the economic benefits are and how they are allocated between the parties.
1 We anticipate claims that techn'ical difficulties, rather than any anticompetitive motives, underlie Applicant's refusals to coordinate.
The minutes tell how the Pool actually operates; such information is a prerequisite to informed cross-examination or rebuttal of any technical difficulty or infeasibility claims.
7 l
O
~
A final example of the relevancy of these minutes to our preparation for this hearing is found in our recent interrogatory no.17 and Applicant's response thereto.
Applicant's deponents had indicated to us that 'butual bene-fit" was prerequisite to an interconnection by Applicant with another electric system.
We were unable to pin down on deposition precisely what the term meant, and interrogatory no.17 was a further attempt to do so.
Applicant responded as follows:
' Mutual benefit,' as used by Appli-cant's officers, means that each party to an interconnection should obecin from that interconnection a not benefit, on balance, and taking all relevant circum-stances into account.
It is not neces-sary that a party benefit equally or from all aspects of a transaction but only, in its judgment, that on balance, the positive gspects outweigh the negative.
It is not necessary that a party agree with an opposite party's assessment of benefits and burdens.
Benefits can involve lower costs and enhanced reliability, but are not necessarily confined to these factors.
This was not particularly helpful, and we probably should not have expectsd it to be.
The only way to come to grips with
'butual benefit" must be to examine the specifics of Appli-cant's decisions to enter into interconnection transactions and the specifics of the economic arrangements agreed upon.
Most of these transactions have taken place within the Nichigan Pool, or between the Michigan Pool and third parties; and the minutes show how the " mutual benefit" prerequisite has been l
analyzed and put into practice.
8 l
1
=
We must note that while contesting the relevancy of this request (and the earlier, broader joint request),
Applicant nevertheless believed it relevant and proper itself to request not only all committee meeting minutes of the Michigan Municipal and Cooperative Power Pool, but also all documents concerning those meetines (Applicant's Initial Interrogatories and Request for Documents to MMCPP, August 4, 1972).
These documents were produced without objection by the Intervenors.
W'e find most incongruous that Applicant raises doubt as to the relevancy of documents relating to its power pooling activities--which activities are under challenge as contributing to a situation inconsistent with the anti-trust laws--while itself cocking full inquiry not only into the power pooling activities of systems t ho are not license applicants, but also the entire spectrum of these systems '
planning, operations, rate making, rates, profitability, tax and financing advantages--and the same for twenty-one other electric systems who are not even parties to the proceeding.
Surely, if Applicant's discovery is to be permitted to range so far afield--far beyond the scope of hearing for which the Department has contended and the Board adopted for evidence admissibility purposes in its August 7,1972, order--
~
there can be no basis for denying the Department discovery of matters the Board has found central to the case.
All of the committee meeting minutes are relevant; Mr. Ross admits as much in his September 17 letter:
9
Since the committees to which vcu make reference are exclusively concernea with power cooling, y_our request seeks procuc-tion of tne minutes of all meetings.
(p. 1, emphasis added)
Mr. Watson said the same at the prehearing conference:
To restrict it to power pooling, as he concedes, is no restriction at all because it is the committees of a power pooling agreement, therefore they all relate to the power pooling in one way or another.
(Tr., p. 526)
CONCLUSION The Department has gone well beyond the normal show-ing of general relevancy in supporting this motion to compel discovery of Applicant's Michigan Pool co=mittee meeting minutes.
We have demonstrated in some detail how this dis-covery relates to our direct case and to our cross-examination and rebuttal of the Applicant's case; we have shown not only why we are entitled to it, but why we need it.
We urge the Board to grant this motion to compel discovery.
Respectfully submitted, GA/,f
/L DAVID A. LECKIE WALLACE E. BRAND Attorneys, Antitrust Division Department of Justice Washington, D. C.
September 20, 1973 i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
)
CONSUSERS POWER COMPANY
)
Docket Nos. 50-329A (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
50-330A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of MOTION TO COMPEL PRO-DUCTION OF MICHIGAN POOL COMIITTEE MINUTES, dated September 20, 1973, in the above-captioned matter have been served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, first class or air mail, this 20th day of September,1973:
Honorable Jerome Garfinkel Mr. Frank W. Karas, Chief Chairman, Atomic Safety and Public Proceedings Branch Licensing Board Office of the Secretary of U. S. Atomic Energy Commission the Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Honorable Hugh K. Clark
' Atomic Energy Codmission ~
William W. Ross, Esquire Post Office Box'127A Keith S. Watson, Esquire.
Kennedyville, Maryland 21645 Wald, Harkrader & Ross 1320 Nineteenth Street. N.W.
Honorable J. Venn Leeds, Jr.
Washington, D. C.
20036 i
Atomic Energy Cc mission Post Office Box 941 Harold P. Graves, Esquire Houston, Texas 77001 Vice President and General Counsel Consumers Pcwer Ccmpany Atomic Safety and Licensing 212 West Michigan Avenue Board Panel Jackson, Michigan 49201 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Robert A. Jablon, Esquire James C. Pollock, Esquire Chairman, Atomic Safety and Spiegel and McDiarmid Licensing Appeals Board 2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.
U. S. Atomic Energy Cc: mission Washington, D. C.
20037 Washington, D. C.
20545
~
Joseph Rutberg, Esquire Mr. Abraham Braitman, Chief Benjamin H. Vogler, Esquire Office of Antitrust and Indemnity Antitrust Counsel for AEC U. S. Atomic Energy Co= mission Regulatory Staff Washington, D. C.
20545 U. S. Atcmic Enargy Ccamission Washingtcn, D. C.
20545
s onorable Frank Kelly Attorney General State of Michigan Lansing, Michigan 48913 nY DAVID A. LECKIE Attorney, Antitrust Division Department of Jus tice Washington, D. C.
20530 e
O O
e 9
l e
W l
l i
i l-
O
~
/ffP.SvD/x A n... -
Septe:nbar 12, 1973 TEK:JJS:D5 I ~ ~ ~ ~
~
60-415-20 William tiarfield Ross, Esquire Wald, Harkrader & Roca 1320 Minotaenth Street, N.W.
Wachington, D. C.
20036 f
Re:
Consu=cra Power Cc=pany 1Iidicnd Plant, Unita 1 and 2
/,EC Dochet "cs. 50-329 A rnd 50-330A j
Dear !!r. Ross:
i Th'.s letter cc=,lica uith the Eccrd's prehearing conference I
instructions (Gentcraer 7,1973) concernint; our require =ent i
for di::covery of ce=2iteco minutes pursuan: to the procent i
and previous !!ichic:n Pool agreccents.
l We requent all centing =inutes rc12 tin ~ to "- :cr neoliaG l
of cach com:2ittee catabli;hed under can acetric.cuar root::.ng i
Agroccont between Apclicent and Detroit 2dicen, dated Daccacer 22, 1902, and the Eicccric Coorcination s3 rec = enc between applicant cnd Ectroit Edicen, da:cd Oy 1, l'.'73, Cc.mittec minutes not i
dealing in any way with power pooling are not requested.
Applicant's officers cado clear en dcoccitien that the nature cnd c:: tent of t.ppliennc's pcuer poolin:; activitics with i
Detroit Ediren and others vill be a ci nificcat part of ita case in this prococding.
1he escence of this poucr pcoling is the wori: of the coccittoos whose ninucca ue acek.
This is obvious fres an enaminction of their responsibilitica cnd functions as set out in t':e pool c3rcaconto (c::ccrpts enclosed).
l We need their minutaa to prepare for cross-enaminacion and rebuttal of &" licact'9
- c. i m - ia.-r Y a f-a, ~.,
o -awne to j
=see anticipach.d cialas caac certain typea or cosrennatica are t
not carried out within tic pool, that a fear of giant unit unreliability lea to revicien ci tic raccrve requirc=ent forcuintien, or that technical operating prchicca would precludo full participaticn by small systoma in the pcol.
L 1
2 4
i
In order to niinimize any burden of this request upon Appliennt, wo would bo villin?, to inspect these minutes at its offices, and ue trould arrange for ti::aly local copying of those cinutos fcund useful.
Pleaso cdvice us of your response to this request uithin three working days as contemplated by the Eoard.
Sincerely yours, TIICf.as E. L*.UE Assistant.Tttorney General Antitrust Division Ey:
Dcvid A. Lechio Attorney, Depart =cnt of Justico Enclosure I
cc:
I?cnorc*alo Jere 2 Gar inhol l
Honorchie Hutn 1;. Cicrk J
i licncrealo J. 'l nn Iacds, Jr.
j Ate J.c Safety and Liconning Board Panol Robart A. Jaalcn, Escuiro i
{
Eobert J. Vordicco, E:quira I
e 4
f l
1 i
's i
se s
i 1
i d
3
~.
^
APPEND />< ~B law orrices WALD, H ARKR ADER & ROSS
- CSERT L WALO sno w:NcTccNTH STRcCT. N W. WASHINGTON.O C. 20036 c,Aats, von A Mga,a,Acca STEPHEN 3 IVCS. J N Asta COOT t03 OONALO M OmEEN CA.kE ADDR 33: ALMARK TM M AS C M TT M EW S. J R 0 t'."f't,".'"
4%'" C1"."Ml':","
~e',~5'." 5Wn'a,
- nt" "i.", 5',"r'"
0 ",',*," "," "o',,
September 17, 1973 TO NI R.GQLOCN JAMES DOUGLAS WCLCM ML*.U'w"."fuu'uc.
......m.....
HAND CARRIED Hon. Thomas E.
Kauper Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division Department of Justice Washington, D.
C.
20530 Attention:
David A. Leckie, Esq.
Re:
Consumers Power Company, Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2, AEC Docket Nos. 50-329A and 50-330A, Department of Justice File No. 60-415-20
Dear Mr. Leckie:
This is in response to your letter of September 12, 1973 in which you request "all meeting minutes relating to power pooling of each committee established under the Electric Power Pooling Agreement between Applicant and Detroit Edison, dated December 22, 1962, and the Electric coordination Agreement between Applicant and Detroit Edison, dated May 1, 1973."
Since the committees to which you make reference are exclusively concerned with power pooling, your request seeks production of the minutes of all meetings of the five such committees held during the entire ll-year period since December 1962.
In accordance with the instruc-tions of the He'aring Board (Tr. 514-529) at the prehearing conference, held on September 7, 1973, we are responding to your request within three working days.
Consumers Power Company has given careful considera-tion to your request in the light of the statements of
o
.- Mr. Wallace Brand at the prehearing conference and the statements made in your letter of September 12, 1973.
Consumers Power declines to respond further to the request, which is identical to that already considered and sub-stantially limited by the Hearing Board.
See Board's Order Ruling on Applicant's Objections, November 28, 1973,
- p. 3.
If you decide to pursue the request, we assume you will follow the procedure prescribed by the Hearing Board and file a formal motion setting out the reasons and justifications therefor, and that we will have an opportunity to respond to that motion under the Commis-sion's rules.
Sincerely /you)s,
N//o
'W k
Wm. Warfield Ross WWR:BRM CC:
Board Members Joseph Rutberg, Jr., Esq.
James Carl Pollock, Esq.
4
)
e
A/ROfA/b'X C 17 Excerpt from the Electric Coordination Agreement between Applicant and Detroit Edison, dated Mav 1,1973.
ARTICLE VII Comittees 1.
Five co==ittees are hereby established to carry out the
(,.~.,!
objectives of this Agreement; an Ad=inistrative Co==ittee, a Planning Con:mittee, an Operating Coc=ittee, a Fiscal Co==ittee and a Public
/
r Infor=ation C:==ittee. Each party shall designste in writing three 1
members for the Administrative Con::r.ittee, and the Administrative Cc=-
mittee shall, from ti=e to time, agree to the n rber of cembers each party shall have on each of the other Co -ittees, provided that ea,ch party shail at all times have the sa=e nu=ber of members on each Comittee. Each party shall continuously have on record with the I
other party the names of its Principal Mc=ber and Principal Alternate
- Member of each Cc==ittee. The expenses necessary for the establish-ment and c:aintaining cf these Co==ittees shall be the responsibility
.(
of each individual party as regards their respective personnel, Any p
expenses jointly, incurred for activities to implement and administer 1
t I
e 18
-s f,
ARTICIE VII (Contd) this Agreement, other than for the parti.es' personnel, shall be shared equally by the parties hereto.
Administrative Cc==ittee 2.
The responsibilities of the Administrative Com=ittee include:
(a) Cons'ideration of any matters in connection with the administration of this Agreement as may, from time to time, arise; such as interpretation of the Agree-ment, possible amendments or alterations thereto, supplementary agreements desirable or necessary in carrying out the objectives of this Agreement o.nd
(
i related matters not specifically covered by this
,~./
Agreccent. However, any amendment or supplement to this Agreement shall be cade only by the parties h(teto as provided in Article XV, Paragraph 2.
(b) Making reco==endations to the respective parties hereto in regard to those matters respecting which the Administrative Ccz=ittee is not empcVered to act.
l (c) General supervision over, and the coordination of, the Planning, Operating, Fiscal and Public Informs-tion Committees provided for herein.
~
~
Planning Cc 4ttee p
3.
The duties of the Planning Cc=mittee include:
(a) All catters related to the ccordinated planning of the
~
parties' combined systems for lowest practicable
, 9 f.
ARTICIE VII (Contd) overall cost consistent wd.th a hiSh degree of relia-bility.
(b) Establishment of the planned seasonal installed reserve percentage for each peak load season throughout the pro-
~
jected generation planning perio,d and detemination of B
each party's conformance thereto.
(c) Recor:mendation of capability requirements and planned seasonal installed reserve criteria.
(d) Detemination of duration of each peak load season and each projected generation planning period.
(e) Development of transmission reliability criteria.
5 (f) Development of and making recc= endations respecting opti=us M
and reliable generation and transmission expansion planr.
/
(g) Development of and making recommendations respecting methods to share the savings from coordinated plan-ning of the parties' systems consonant with the
/
provisions of this Agreement.
(h), Development of and making reco=mendations respecting jointly executed written agreements covering future l-interconnections and interchanges with third parties.
(1) Develop =ent of specific?.t @ cs and =aintenance of accounts for the 3%f :y of ecsts and benefits asso-c3.ated with the c.,asb t Men and maintenance -of
~
. transmission facilities under this' Agreement and under joint'ly executed agreements with third parties.
s
20
~
ARTICIS VII (Contd)
G (j) Preparation and imple=entation of coordinated plannirq practices.
~
(k) Consideration of such other planning matters as may, from ti=e to' time, arise in carrying out the objectives of this Agreement or as =ay be referred to it by the Administrative Committee.
1 It is expected that subco==ittees and task forces will be 4
formed in order to bring navi* e knowledge and experience to bear on the many ec= plex proble=s to be encodntered in coordinated planning.
5.
All coordinated planning practices and other planning pro-cedures shall be in writing and subject to approval by the Administrative Co=mittee.
Operati m Cc==ittee
/
6.
The duties of the Operating Co==ittee include:
(a) All matters related to the operation of the parties' combined systems for 1cwest practicable overall cost consistent with a high degree of reliability.
(b) Reco==endation of operating reserve criteria.
.(c) Establishment of weekly and daily reserve require-
/-
ments and deter =ination of each party's confor=nnce
'thereto.
(d) Development of procedures for and implementation of
~
capacity and energy exchanges, including preparation of appropriate service schedules.
(e) Coordination of maintenance of generating units and
~
transmission lines.
e
.l..
x g
~
/~
ARTICLE VII (Contd)
(f) Formulation and implementation of coordinated operating practices.
(g) Development of and rmking reco=endations respecting methods to share the savings from coordinated opera-tion of the parties' combined systems consonant with the provisions of this Agreement.
(h) Determination and =aking of reco=endations respect-ing maximum net demonstrated capability for all owned generation, c5. king reco=endations respecting periodic testing procedures to deter =ine ec=on capacity rating methods, determination of the availability of genera-
[]
tion facilities and their status if on cold stan:iby, V
and making recc=endations respecting the timing and rating for any change in capacity.of either party's generation.
(i) The development of methods and principles for ascer-taining the actual amounts of all the various types of energy interchanged between the parties hereto, es.well as the associated accounting procedures.
/'
This includes the deter =ination of the method of obtaining the incremental costs of production to be utili::ed in co._puting E'conomy Energy interchange charges.
, - ~,
(j),PreparationofperiodicreportstotheAdmiIbstrative
/
\\
Committee covering energy interchange, status of q.
N e
g
~
)
ARTICIZ VII (Contd) e-.
d maintenance, billings, unusual operating conditions, generating unit availability, etc.
(k) Consideration of such other operating matters as =ay, from time to time, arise in carrying out the objectives of this A6reement or as may be referred to it by the Administrative Cc=mittee.
7.
It is expected that subcor:=ittees and task forces will be formed to bring maximum knowledge and experience to bear on the many complex technical operating matters to be encountered.
8.
All coordinated operating practices and other operating procedures shall be in writing and subject, to approval by the Administ>a-tive Cos:=ittee.
\\
Fiscal Cc=::ittee N/
9.
The duties of the Fiscal Co==ittee include:
(a) Development of capitalization bases to be utili::ed in accordance with the ter=s.of this Agreement.
(b) Develop =ent of appropriate fixed charge rates to be utilized in accordance with the terms of this Agree-
. ment.
s' (c) Advising the Administrative Co=mittee promptly of any change or revision of plant accounting or fiscal l
procedures of either party as affects this Agreement.
(d) Maintenance of appropriate financial records as re-
' quested by the Adr.inistrative Co==ittee.
(e) Consideration of such other fiscal or plant account-ing'catters as may, from time to time, arise in g
s.
g I
\\
I
23 ARTICIE VII (Contd) carrying out the objectives of this Agreement or as may be referred to it by the Administrative Co::cittee.
(f) Review of billing procedures and auditing of ::enthly invoices.
Public Infor=ation Co=iittee
- 10. The duties of the Public Infor=ation Co-4ttee include the develop =ent of principles and policies regarding the disse =ination of publ'c infor=ation on any phase of coordinated activity hereunder and the dissemination of such infor=ation.
r i
\\
,-S
- h..*
s s
=
I g
o
~
i f
i
\\
from the Electric Power Pooling Agreement between Excerpt Applicant and Detroit Edison, dated December 22, 1962.
ARTICLE VIII Comittees Five cor:nittees are hereby established to carry out the 1.
i en Administrative Cor:nittee, a Planning
. /
objectives of this Agreenent; Comittee, an Operatins Comittee, a Fiscal Co: nittee end a Public Information Ccmmittee. Each party shall designate in writing three members for the Administrative Comittee, and the Administrative Co:=nittee shall, from time to time, agree to the number of members each party shall have on each of the other Comittees, provided that each party shall at all times have the same number of members on each Comittee. Each party shall continuously have on record with the other party the names of its Principal Member and Principal Alternate Member of each Comittee. The expenses necessary for the establishment and maintaining of these Cemittees shall be the responsibility of each individual party as regards their respective personnel. Any expenses
, jointly incurred for activities of the pool, other than for the parties'
..s l
personnel, shall be shared equally by the parTien hereto.
1 23 1
ARTICIE VIII (Contd) i Administrative Com..
tee.
2..
The retpons:.t,ilities of the Administrative Cer=nittee include:
I (a) Ccnsideration of any matters in connection with the administration of this Agreement as may, from time to time, arise; such as interpretation of the Agreement, possible amendments or alterations thereto, supplementary agrtements desirable or necessary in carrying out the objectives of this Agreement and related matters not specifically covered by this Agreement. However, any amendment or supplement to this Agreement shall be made only by the parties hereto as 9
provided by Article XVI, Paragraph 2.
f I
(,j (b) Making reccmmendations to the respective parties hereto in regard to those aatters respecting which the Adminictra-tive Ccmmittee is not empovered to act.
(c) General supervision over, and the coordination of, the Planning, Operating, Fiscal and Public Information Co:-c_itteca herein provided for.
j t
l Planning Committee 4
i 3
The duties of the Planning Co:mnittee include:
(a) Correlation of forecasts of loads and capability require-ments.
J J
1 (p')
= ~.... - -.
e 9
24 ARTICLEVIII(Contd)
(b) Development of and making recommendations respecting optimum expansion plans and Supplements and written Agreements required with respect thereto.
(c) Development of and making recccmendations respecting methods to share the savings from coordinated planning and operation of the parties' systems consonant with the pro-visions of this Agreement.
(d) Consideration of such other engineering matters as may, frcn time to time, arise in carrying out the objectives of this Agreement or as may be referred to it by the Adminis-trative Cem ittee.
!(
,1 4.
It is expected that cubec=mittees and tack forces vill be formed in order to bring maxi::n:m kncvledge and experience to bear on the many complex problems to be encountered in coordinated planning.
Operating Cecmittee 5
The duties of the Operating Co:t:mitti.:e include:
(a) All matters related to the day-to-day operation of the pool for lowest over-all cost consistent with security of bulk power supply.
(b) Development of procedures for and i:::plementation of power exchanges between the pool and other pools.
(c) Coordination of maintenance of generating units and transmission lines.
(d) Derivation, supplementation and implercntation of Tool orcratin' Ornetices.
m.__
_ m. _
,....,.o,
..ca.
25 O.
f
. ARTICLE VIII (Contd) v (c) Detemination and making of recommendations respecting net demonstrated capability for all owned Generation, making recocnendations whether or not to include non-utility party capacity in forecasted pool capability and if included to recommend ratings therefor, making recommendations respect-ing periodical testing procedures to determine common capacity rating methods, determinaticn of the availability of generation facilities and their status if on cold standby, and making reco=:endations respecting the timing and rating for any change in capacity of either party's generation facilities.
'~' N (f) Calculation of capacity and energy charges required i
between the parties hereto, and between a party or the
~'
parties hereto and other entities, in accordance with the provisions and principles of this Agreement and its Supplements.
(g) Preparation of semiannual reports to the Administrative Committee covering energy interchange, status of maintenance, billings, unusual operating conditions, etc.
(h) Consideration of such other operating matters as may, from time to time, arise in carrying out the objectives of this Agreement or as may be referred to it by the Adminis-1 trative Committee.
6.
It is expected that subcommittees and task forces will be
,_s i
~
formed to bring u.ximun knouledge and exrcrience to bear on the many complex technical operating r.atters to be encountered.
i I
a e m-e,
26
~
p I
ARTICLE VIII (Contd)
\\v Written procedures concerning pool operating practices ard
- l.
other operating procedures shall be subject to approval by the Administrative Ca=sittee.
Fiscal Cm:mittee 6.
The duties of the Fiscal Committee include:
(a) Development cf appropriate elements, methods of cal-culation, and values for capacity billins; charges and cost rates for principal capacity ca.ualization chartres ard cost rates for secondary capacity adjustment charges.
(b) liaking recen:=endations respecting appropriate payments between the parties hereto to equalize annual costs for
,y lince and other facilities which interconnect the partiec'
/
systems.
(c) Development of capitalization bases to be utilized in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
(d) Maintenance of appropriate financial records as requested by the Administrative Cm:mittee.
(e) Advising the Administrative Ccemittee prcmptly of any change or revision of plant accounting or fiscal procedures of either party as affects this Agreement.
(f) Consideration of such other fiscal or plant accounting
~
matters as =ay, frem time to time, arise in carrying out the objectives of this Agreement or as may be referred to it by D
the Administrative Ccamittee.
f
- - ~.
_-,.-..--~..;
-s 27 c.
i N~/
ARTICIE VIII (Contd)
Public Information Co=mf atee 9
The duties of the Public Information Committee include:
a (a) Development of principles and policies regarding the dissemination of public infor:r.ation on any phase of ';ooling activity hereunder.
(b) The preparation and release of all public announce-ments and information to newspapers, radio, television and other news media that portain to (1) major planning developments of the pooi, and (ii) major developments and events in the operation of the pool.
)
- 10. It is the intent of the parties hereto that the preparation
~ _. -
and release of public announcements and information to newspapers,
~
radio, television and other news media pursuant to (b) of foregoing Paragraph 9 shall not be made until authorized by the Public Informa-tion Committee, and that the dissemination of all other public information, whether oral or in writing, shall be in conformance with the principles and policies developed by the Public Information Committee pursuant to (a) of-said Pare"raph 9 9
m
.=e
\\
~
1 i