ML20003E837
| ML20003E837 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/07/1981 |
| From: | Howson T GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | Karlowicz M NRC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104170331 | |
| Download: ML20003E837 (13) | |
Text
.
GPU Service Corporation pm e
'J Nme 100 Interpace Parkway Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 201 263 6500 TELEX 136-482 Wnter's Direct Dial Number April 7, 1981 Mr. Michael Karlowicz U.S.
Nuclear Regulatoly Commission Room 255 - PHIL 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20014
Dear Mike:
Enclosed is a copy of the material that you requested.
(Presentation before the GPU Board of Directora by F.
D.
Hafer dated April 2, 1981, and Met-Ed Short-Term Debt and Credit forecast reflecting the ALJ recommendation).
The short-term debt material has been marked " draft" because the austerity spending levels for Met-Ed, reflected in the forecast, are currently under Management review.
The annual reports were mailed to you and Jim Petersen last week.
Very truly y~urs, 1
y'Ae t + S Mcj.&IiQ, T.
G.
Howson f,
S
,.,l jb l
TGH/dp
.' D
}
~ } $ Degge
_.4 Enclosure
')
Y l
cc:
J.
G. Graham (w/o Enc.)
l L. Gentieu
(,
\\ g-e 9
%k \\
E'
~
ff M
810417oSh l
GPU Servce Corporat:en is a subsid:ary of General Public Utikt:es Corporation
l I
p A A F.T I
I I
I I
I I
I i
i i
1 25 z.
~
S,E,a
.l A
eke N.
e z
= _.
_.=_
m m
.m r
a m,
o ts.
.m 32.
'-,8 amg c
5'm s
g
.E
~
i
=
=g a.
_l :s x, - ri w
i l
0**
.: *MW..
J{
8 0
<l !**
o!
~
m-I QC
'o E
m i
=
3 es i
i e:
m W
e 8
f Q
E E
g w
a W
+9
~
,l 1
I I
9--
cl z
i y
g i
m ei 8
=
r
.e I
O
'i' i
cl e
i i
W e
I E
g e
I l
~
1 I
l i
I I
I I
I I
I I
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
M N
o m
00 P=
to m
v M
gu e
og
,4
.e
,e EM 34WoZ oo3 Cmm
Met-Ed Short-Term Debt - April 1982 Full Rate Relief per January Testimony (S Millions)
J.
G. Graham Supplement 1 Testimony:
$108.7 Spending at $149 for 1981, No Rate Relief Changes for Full Relief Full Rate Relief (74.4)
Spending at $165 level, July-Dec.
8.0 Tax Payments 5.2 Interest Savings on Above (4.8)
Short-Term Debt Full Rate Relief S 42.7 RCA Limit Uranium S 20 Accounts Receivable 22 S 42 i
l
Met-Ed Short-Term Debt-April 1982 ALJ Recommendation with Forecast Updates
($ Millions)
J. G. Graham Supplement 1 Testimony:
$108.7 Spending at $149 for 1981, No Rate Relief Changes for ALJ Rate Relief ALJ Rate Relief S(48.9)
Tax Payments 3.0 April starting Balance Change (14.6)
Change in 1982 Energy Clause 5.3 Change in Surcharge Revenues 6.6 Change in 1982 Spending Level (0.9)
Nuclear Fuel Sale to Florida (2.6)
Rotor Sale to Virginia (3.1)
Spending at 5149 level, July-Dec.
Decrease in A/R from Prior Forecast (7.7)
Interest Savings on Above (4.7)
"Short-Term Debt ALJ Rate Relief
$(41.1)
RCA Limit Uranium S 20 Accounts Receivable 32 Decrease in A/R from Prior Forecast (7)
S 45 l
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORPORATION Presentation Before the Board of Directors by F. D. Hafer April 2, 1981 Ease Annualized Effect of Pending Base Rote Case Recommendations GPU System................
A.1 JCP&L................
A.2 Met-Ed...............
A.3 Penelec,... ;
A.4 Retail Rate Changes Since the TMI-2 Accident GPU System................
B.1 JCP&L...................
B.2 Met-Ed..................
B.3 Penelec..................
B.4
A.1 General Public Utilities Annualized Effect in Pending Base Rate Cases:
NJBPU Staff Recommendation - JCP&L Docket No. 804-285 Pa. ALJ Recommendation - Met-Ed Docket Ns. R-80051196 Pa. ALJ Recommendation - Penelec Docket No. R-80051197
($ millions)
Change In:
JCP&L Met-Ed Penelec Total.
(
Revenues Base
$57.6(1)
$49.7
$53.4
$160.7 Energy Surcharge (30.0)
(30.0)
,g,,,
Total
$57.6
$19.7
$53.4
$130.7 Operating Inc ome
$12.2
$21.2
$23.9
$ 57.3 Earnings per Share ($/ share) without Forked River AFUDC write off
$ 0.20(2)
$ 0.35
$ 0.39
$ 0.94(2) with Forked River AFUDC write off
$(0.24)(2)
$ 0.35
$ 0.39
$ 0.50(2)
Impact on Credit / Loan Relationship Additional Credit
$28.6
$ 28.6 Improved Cash Flow
'50.9 18.9
'25.3
-95.1 Total
$50.9
$47.5
$25.3
$ 123.-7 (1) The $57.6 million base revenue increase is incremental to the $60 million interim increase (wnich would be made permanent).
(2) The NJBPU staff recommendation reflects a 15 year amortization of $368.5 l
million of the $395.4 million net investment in the Forked diver Project.
The remaining investment ($26.9 million) represents AFUDC that was accrued on the Forked River Project subsequent to the date of fMI-2 accident. If the NJ BPU rules that the $26.9 million of AFUDC is disallowed for racemaking pur-poses, it will be written off to current income (as a reversal of AFU0C).
i
Ao2 JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT ANNUALIZED EFFECT OF NJ BPU STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION (1)0N REVENUES EXPENSES AND RETURN (Docket No. 804-285)
Base Rate Base Rate Base Rate
($ MILLIONS)
Increase Increase (2)
Increase Excluding Forked River Change In:
Forked River Component TOTAL Revenues Base
$25.8
$31.8
$57.6(3)
Expenses Taxes Other Than Income Taxes 3.0 3.7 6.7 Amortization of Forked River 24.6 24.6 Income Taxes - Current 10.6 13.0 23.6
- Deferred (9.5)
(9.5)
Total
$N
$U
$TT.T i
Operating Income
$M A
$M
]
Impact en Credit / Loan Relationship 1
Additional Credit Improved Cash Flow i
. $50.9 Total
$g i
(1) Position of the Staff of the NJ BPU, filed on 3-17-81.
(2) Reflects a 15 year amortization of $368.5 million of the $395.4 million net investment in the Forked River Project. The remaining investment
($26.9 million) represents AFUDC that was accrued on the Forked River project subsequent to the date of the IMI-2 accident. If the NJ BPU rules that the $26.9 million of AFUDC is disallowed for ratemaking purposes, it will be written off to current income (as a reversal of AFUDC).
(3) The $5'.6 million base revenue increase is incremental to the $60 million interia increase (which would be made permanent).
4 zb 1
8/
8
/
4
)
)))
)
207 466443.3 2
69.l l
8 8'T a
90 9
378092I 1
t 43 1
212(
1l 2
217 o
(
((
T de t y at fl i
)
eoece 4
l B as
(
)
)
b g pn 6
29 9
l n2 ae ei Cp 2 - - -
l 0
0 sk6 s
2 l1 1
oe
.E
(
(
F eI s s-e I R H
H C
T
.s N
e O
l I
d e
a S
f e el s
I ot o
t bs C
a2 e aai l
E ld& s mlh e a
D anl n iiT m n
r a-e t a i
o D
rMI p svtT i
YE e-Ms E aA t
NI N fCYE n
ANR eR it 8c fEU DN d
M9 T e
E) t GDR6 t
s O
9 u
EDl j
0M RNI n
I IS 0
n&i U
n ES A%
2 o o
D S0 ol t
)
)
n E 'J E 8 6
66 0
i - a 9E t S -
t I l o
NANR aHc S
t A
E I
I OX o.
sTe 1
TFP s
s
(
d ef p e
L EN
.C oe t
oS D
a rT
.t c
oCS e o
BEEK t
TFt c t
f EFN o o
H F. ED t n V(
ao
. s 4
DE ot se EB dCt 0 el Z
d e a
))
)))
)
$l a 814430 I
er ya 03O 0
6488 am L
cr gl es A
uert s
l U
dt er 1
2(1 etl N
eeno (d
1d
(
(
t t e N
RDE n at A
A st e er
'n r o
o
)
t ot 2
t t e
(
)
e 8
eea 2
2 8
0 2 4.3 1
e89 s
r18 0-405 4
p9 st e 9 -
9 1
aar 4
4 2{2 2
o d
BR c d e a
yet l
. nt a s aac epco umol noll ecl e g
v a
i el h
s a 9
e n
eo6. 0 e
s t
s o
gt61 e
i r
e t
t an a
mt e l
h o=-
c a
n e
d c
e rdlI e
n oonr R
ue- -
g e
t cer ssL I r
t ns nre n
aMH a
aooirf a
w nbTT i c ue o
t o a
h lat ncd L
i l t e..
cr may a
/
df s62 u
i gh - -
s t
e f a s
d cr t e
i cs ri1 rh oel2 nee s
c d
t ar nr e c
e a
ecS$
)
s peex a
r l c va
)
ol ne h a l
l C
a l
l l = =
e
(
t i
eo t
a n
oet u822 n
l ca oddt t a
nd a e
o n
i i
s y o s t d r s
o n
o i vo l
t e
gT e aer ee T
i t oT c0I t i
e u er s
rk ecc t
t i r s5 Ha t
t n
n s e n
eof u c a
c d p e$TT H
n e a n e
poeaa r
a J e a
v BE poBDTl e
l p
))I) e e
x g
m
((U(
t2 4
1 C R
E o
I CKl C-P 33 3
e I
j i!
- i l,
Il
5 8/
l
/
4
)
1
}
4 p
35 04 1600 39 1~5g
.f h
1 Id 1
5 3
I(
2(1 2
~
2]
g g
de t y at fl l eoee
)
l p ee 4
blei Ce
-..l.
g rs
(
)
n2 an 7.3 4
mk&
p l
55 5
oo
. s l
(
P oI sE g
s-e I R N
M O
T N
s 0
e 1
d la 3
f e e
s l
ot el a C
a2.
t bl l
E lJ6 e aah e a
D an8 s el T m n
t a-n t i i e
TD sMI e t att N*N t
e-N evA fCTA At t
t ra e
PkR eH n
t l
tS U Dl U
d i e T E) e t wX B7 l
Ct 9
r ED1 e
IRB N1 e
)
j T
A5 2 n 3
CS 0
n&i n
(
o E
S0 el t
)
)
n L 'J E 8 l - a 5 -
45D 35 El S -
tI t o
Ats R nHe A
E eT e
(
}
t I FP.
s r
d NOX o e2 g 3
e A
EN C*De VS t
LT
,t a
Y CS e c
SEEK o
l Nf U c NFN o l
EEED t n a
P V(
so DE oi 5
ER dCt 1 ss Z
d e a
$ ee 7
I erys L
c r gi ll eaa A
uert sss U
df er N
eeno e
N sDE m l l lll A
A_
sae t t
'n e e er r
)
t 2
t oo e
(
)
et t s
eea 4
2 4
- - 108.I.
2 r
6 0'T e51 st e 3
1 0
5 6
p71 aar 5
2 2
a,9 9 BR c n
ydd I
. nee sat t epaa umcc nooo ecll ig v
ll el aa b
r a s
s t
e n
eo34 n
o gt o
i r
15 e
t t
an$$
c a
n e
d l
h e c
a mt e e
rd e
n oonr R
ueI5 g
e t cer es- -
r t nsnr e n
aI I a
nooirf a
w sbMH h
ii c ue n.
t o a
TT c
at ncd l
il t e r
maya
/
df s.,
u i gh - -
=
t e
f s50 o
dcrt
=
i cs r56 rh oo nee s
e d
t ar nr e c
e a
ec$$
)
s peen n
r l c v a s
)
ol ne h e l
i C
a l
ll = =
ne i
l ca edJt t a
nd a e
n
(
t l
eo-t a
n oet u922 t
s yo sed r e
o n
o i v o t
ll l_
gT i
e.
e er s m T
i nRk e
eeo t
t it oT c4iI er e
r a5 HH g
n s e of s c a
c J p e$TT Q
n.
e an e
oean r
a J e e BE goBDTI e
p Al
))))
e n
p m
12I4 i g n E
o I
((I(
33-
%._V T
D3 2
2l C ::
C ll I
i i
.i*
4 1
l l
.i I
B.1 GkU System Summary of Retail Rate Changes Since the TMI-2 Accident (Includes Recommended Increases, Cases Pending as of April 1,1981)*
(5 millions)
Total Annual Increases Granted 4
TMI-Non-TMI-Amount Incr.**
Related Related Jersey Central Base Rates S
88
$ (29)
$117 Energy Clause 352 113 239 Total
$ 440 73%
64 TI3T Met-Ed Base Rates 5
23
$ (16)
$ 39 Energy Clause 155 155 Total 5 178 54%
5 139
$ 39 Penelec Base Pates 5
16
$ (3 2)
$ 48 Energy Clause 60 65 (5)
Total 8
76 15%
I""'77 5 43 GPU Base Rates
$ 127
$ (77)
$204
- Energy Clause 567 333 234 Total Y T97 50%
s75T 3T3T If NJ BPU staff position is accepted by the NJBPU in the current JCP&L base and energy clause cases, and if the ALJ's recommendation is accepted by the PaPUC in the current Met-Ed and Penelec Base Cases.
- % Change in total annual revenue per KWH of Retail Sales, Rates in effect May 1981 over rates in effect in March 1979.
-.....w.,.,..
B.2 Jersey Central Summary of Retail Rate Changes Since the TMI-2 Accident (Includes Recommended Increases, Cases Pending as of April 1, 1981)
($ millions)
Total Increases TMI-Non-TMI-Granted Related Related a
July 1979 Base Rates (TMI-2)
$(29)
Energy Clause 74
$(29) 74 Total
$ 45
$ 45 September 1979 Base Rates 3
S Energy Clause 70 70 Total -
TTF
$ T6 March 1980 Base Rates (1)
$ (1)
$ (1)
Energy Clause 85 85 Total
$ 84 5
$ 84 April 1980 Base Rates (2)
Energy Clause 34 34 Total FTF TTC May 1980 Base Rates 5 60 S 60 Energy Clausa l
Total
$ 60 S 60 i
April 1981 (3)
Base Rates S
Energy Clause 89 5
84 Total N
5
$ 84 May 1981 (3)
Base Rates S 58 S 58 Energy Clause Total TIF
$ "5T TOTAL
$440
$ 84
$356
% TMI/Non-TMI 1004 19%
814
% Increase over 73%
March 1979 rates r
l l
(1)
Change in revenue tax rate.
(2)
Deferred energy cost amortization increased by an amount equivalent to TMI-l revenue requirements ($18 million per year).
(3)
If staff position is accepted by NJBPU.
Timing reflects anticipated effective dates, t
l
\\
~.
B.3 Met-Ed Summary of Retail Rate Changes Since the TMI-2 Accident (Includes Recommended Increases, j
Cases Pending as of April 1, 1981)
($ millions)
Total Increases TMI-Non-TMI-Granted Related Related July 1979 Base Rates (1)
Energy Clause 45 49 (4)
Total
$ 45
$ 49
$ (4)
March 1980 Base Rates 3
Energy Clause 55 55 Total N
N June 1980 Base Rates (TMI-1)
$(27)
$(27)
Energy Clause (2) 86 76 10_
Total
$ 59 5 49
$ 10 Januarv 1981 Base Rates 3
Energy Clause (1)
(1)
Total
$ (1)
$ (1)
April 1981 (3)
Base Rates
$ 50
$ 11
$ 39 Energy Clause (30)
(25)
(5)
Total 5 20
$ (14)
$ 34 TCr"AL
$178
$139
$ 39
% TMI/Non-TMI 100%
78%
22%
% Increase over 54%
March 1979 rates i
(1)
TMI-2 rates ($52 million) had been approved by PaPUC's March 1979 Order, but were not implemented due to TMI-2 accident.
Deferred energy cost amortization increaseo by about $3 million per year (difference between TMI-2 revenue l
requirements and $49 million total increase authorized by March Order).
(2)
Includes surcharge to recover May 1980 deferred balance over approximately 18 months.
(3)
If ALJ recommendation is accepted by PePUC. Timing reflects anticipated effective date.
l l
l l
3.4 Penelec Summary cf Retail Rate Changes Since the TMI-2 Accident (Includes Recommended Increases, Cases Pending as of April 1, 1981)
($ millions)
Total Increases TMI-Non-TMI-Granted Related Related April 1979 Base Rates (TMI-2) (1)
$( 25)
$(25)
Energy Clause Total TIITT ITI5T Julv 1979 Base Rates
. Energy Clause 36 21 15 Total
$ 36
$ 21
$ 15 June 1980 Base Rates (TMI-1)
$(12)
$(12)
Energy Clause (2) 26 44 (18)
Total
$ 14 N
$ '(15 )
Januarv 1981 Base Rates 3
Energy Clause (2)
(2)
Total
$ (2)
$ (2)
April 1981 (3)
Base Rates 5 53 5
$ 43 Energy Clause Total TT7 U
3"TF TCTAL
$ 76 5 33
$ 43
% TMI/Non-TMI 100%
43%
57%
% Increase over 15%
March 1979 rates (1)
Deferred energy cost amortization also increased by about $2 million per year (difference between TMI-2 revenue requirements of $27 million and $25 million base rate reduction).
(2)
Includes surcharge to recover May 1980 deferred balance over approximately 18 months.
i l
(3)
If ALJ recommendation is accepted by PaPUC. Timing reflects
~
anticipated effective.date.
l
~
. -