ML20033C469
| ML20033C469 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 12/01/1981 |
| From: | Vogler B NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Fabrikani R JUSTICE, DEPT. OF |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-A, NUDOCS 8112030287 | |
| Download: ML20033C469 (45) | |
Text
_
~.
e to e
A Decenber 1, 1981 g
k b> h95 }'
.t Robert Fabrikant, Esc.
95 4
Acting Chief Energy Section
-} p M.
,p Antitrust Divis.fon U.S. Departnent of Justice k
Mg.>)g P. O. Box 14141 rG Hashington, D.C.
20044 Re:
In the t'atter of Illinois Power Conpany, et al., Clintnn Nclear Power Statinn, IJnit 1, flRC Docket l'o. 50-461 A
Dear l'r. Fabrikant:
Pursuant to Sectior. 105(c)(2) of the Atonic Energy Act, as arended and the Connissior.s Rules thereunder, I an enclosing for your review and coment.a draft " Operating License Antitrust Fevieu Finding of No Significant Change" for the captionea nuclear unit. This docunent was prepared by the Antitrust and Economic Analysis Branch of the Office of tbclear Peactor Regulation.
If you have any questions concerning this document or the nuclear facility in question, please give ne a call.
i Sincerely, t
Benjanin H. Vogler Popr>ty Antitrust Counsel i
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
I NRC Docket Chron.
Shapar/Engelhardt Christenbury/Scinto
\\
Olmstead g
.30(o ng e
e o,,,cc )
....... 0..E..L..D........
...E..L D........
..........................................................J r.....................
Chandler d'
BVogler:am
..J. R,,u,,
r,,h......
8112030287 81120105000461 -
~~/
SUANAME)
- - ~
PDR ADOCK 12!,,,!.zgl, 1,.,,f,,,/p!,,,,,,,, n e on,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
o,n >
I I
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
. uso m ies-s,m nac rosu ais oo-so> uncu ono
~_
1 w,
e 4
J i
1 CLINTON NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY, 50YLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. AND WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-461 i
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ANTITRUST CHANGES i
t
.i
(
b
'h v.,,e..,,.~en-.
r,,>-.,,-naa~,r.
,,,,.--,,,..wn--m.,-,
.~,-,.,---,-vn.,--,.w w,nv--~,,.,,,+w,
o.
INDEX I.
Introduction II.
Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois A.
Investor Owned Utility Systems 1.
Illinois Power Company 2.
Central Illinois Public Service Company 3.
Central Illinois Light Company 4.
Electric Energy, Inc.
B.
Municipal Electric Systems C.
Cooperative Power Systems III.
The Construction Permit Antitrust Review IV.
Changes Since the Construction Permit Review A.
Changes Resulting from License Conditions B.
Changes Not Resulting from License Conditions V.
Summary and Conclusion Appendices A.
Illinois Power Service Area Map B.
Municipal Generating Systems Located in Illinois C.
Members of Soyland Power Cooperative D.
Members of Western Illincis Power Cooperative E.
Clinton CP Licenst Conditions and Department of Justice " Advice Letter" F.
FERC Litigation e
a l
e I.
Introduction Unl.ike the procedure established for review of construction permits, prospective operating licensees are not required to undergo formal antitrust reviews unless the NT'C staff 1 has made the determination that there have been "significant changes" in the licensee's activities or proposed activities subsequent to the review by the Attorney General and the Commission at the construction permit (CP) stage.2 The Commission in its recent Summer 3 decision has provided the staff with a set of criteria to be used in making the significant change determination for prospective operating license (OL) applicants.
"The statute contemplates that the change or changes, (1) have occurred since the previous antitrust review of the licensee (s);
(2) are reasonably attributable to the licensee (s); and (3) have antitrust implications that would most likely warrant some Commission remedy."4 To warrant an affirmative significant change finding, i.e., triggering a fermal OL antitrust review, the particular change (s) must meet all three of these criteria.
Staff has documented two groupings of " changes" in its analysis of the Clinton OL application that warrant analysis under Summer:
- 1) those resulting from the 1This responsibility was officially delegated to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in a memorandum dated September 12, 1979 from Chairman Hendrie to the Directors of NRR and NMSS.
2Section 105c(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
3 Virgil C. Sommer Nuclear Station, No.1, Docket No. 50-395A, dated June 30, 1980.
45ummer, p. 7
c applicant's CP license conditions; and 2) those not directly resultant from the CP license conditions.
Staff has found no change in either group that meets all three Summer criteria and consequently is not recommending a formal OL antitrust review.
To put these changes in prospective, it is helpful to first review the structure of the market pertinent to this review and the basis or benchmark from which change is measured.
II.
Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois The electric power industry in Illinois can be segmented into two portions, that integral to the City of Chicago and its surrounding area, and the remainder of the state.
The Chicago area is serviced by one of the largest domestic electric power companies, Commonwealth Edison Company.
The remainder of the state (i.e.,
from the north central portion, to the southern tip of the state) is serviced by a group of power companies including muni.cipal, cooperative and private power companies.
The relevant marketing area for the Clinton Nuclear Power Station focuses on the central and southern portions of the State of Illinois, i.e., the area in which the incidence of any anticompetitive practices associated with the activities of the Clinton Applicants will have the greatest impact.
This is the area in which the three applicants serve and the a-ea where the use of the power ar.d energy generated by the Clinton nuclear plant will be most concentrated.
A.
Investor-Owned Utility Systems (IOU) 1.
Illinois Power Company (Illinois Pover)
Illinois Power, the company responsible for constructing and operating the Clinton plant, is the largest electric utility system in the relevant marketing 2
O' area, in terms of owned or controlled generating capacity, high voltage transmission facilities and electric load served.
In 1979, Illinois Powcc had 3,749 W of generating capacity; 2,448 miles of transmission lines 69 kv or higher; and a (summer) peak load of 3,019 W.
Illinois Power's service area is concentrated in the central and southern portions of the state, where roughly 80% of its revenues are generated--the remainder of the Company's operating revenues comes from properties located in the northern portion of the state.
The three geographic service areas are non-contiguous, however they are all linked by company-owned high voltage transmission lines as well as with interconnections to other power companies in the area.
(See map ~of Illinois Power's service area, included as Appendix A.)
Illinois Power's operating revenues for 1979 amounted to $752 million (approximately 65 percent from electric operations and 35 percent from gas facility operations), with net income of $91 million.
2.
Central Illinois Public Service Company (Central Illinois)
Outside of the Chicago area, in the lower two-thirds of the State, Central Illinois is the second largest IOU following closely behind Illinois Power in generating and transmission facilities owned and electric load served.
In 1979 Central Illinois owned or controlled 2,581 W of generating capacity; 3,581 miles of transmission line 69 kv or higher; and had a summer peak load of 1,818 N.
Central Illinois had cperating revenues of $448 million for 1979 and net income of $67 million.
Central Illinois and Illinois Power are the principal producers of electric power and energy in the southern two-thirds of the state.
Each system is fully integrated and the two systems are also interconnected extensively by high voltage and extra high voltage transmission ties.
3
3 c
1 3.
Central Illinois Light Company (Central Illinois Light) i Central Illinois Light's service area is primarily in the central portion of the state centering around the cities of Peoria and Springfield, Illinois.
Although the Company is one of the smaller IOUs in the state, it has inter-connections with Central Illinois Public Service,' Commonwealth Edison, Illinois Power and the City of Springfield electric system to provide for interchange of electric energy on an emergency and mutual help. basis.
In 1979 Central Illinois Light had generating capacity of 1,501 Mw, 339 miles of transmission li'ne 69 kv or higher and a summer peak load of 1,055 Mw.
The Company's 1979 operating revenues amounted to $364 million with a net income of $53 million.
4.
Electric Energy, Inc.
The Company was incorporated in Illinois in 1950 by four private utility companies to supply a specified amount of firm power to an Atomic Energy 6
Commission project near Paducah, Kentucky.
Electric Energy Inc. is interconnected with the four sponsoring companies and with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
Electric Energy, Inc. does not represent an integral competitive system in the area primarily because all power in excess to that supplied to the Federal installation in Paducah is contracted to each of the sponsoring companies in amounts equal to their ownership shares.
In 1979 Electric Energy, Inc. had generating capacity of 1,100 Mw, and 55 miles of transmission lines above 69 Kv.
Of the total generating capacity available, 735 Mw has been contracted to the government facility through December 31, 1989.
Operating revenues amounted to $124 million with $3 million net income for 1979.
6The sponsoring companies are:
Central Illinois Public Service Company, 20%
cwnership; Illinois Power Company, 20% ownership; Kentucky Utilities Company, 20% ownership and Union Electric Company, 40% ownership.
4
~,
e Of the 12 investor-owne'd utilities doing business in Illinois, those mentioned above represent the largest in terms of load served and the most relevant for purposes of assessing competition in the electric power industry in the state outside of the Chicago area.7 B. Municipal Electric Systems Twenty-Three of the thirty-eight municipally owned electric systems in the state possess some degree of self generation'.a Of these twenty-three systems, the largest is that owned and operated by the City of Springfield, Illinois with 530 Mw of capacity in 1979.
Most of the remaining generating municipals are very small and typically supply only por tions of their loads, purchasing the remainder from other supplier.s -- usually the larger IOU's throughout the State.
(This is typical of the structural format for the industry nationwide, with the larger private investor-owned companies supplying varying amounts of partial requirement service to the smaller self generating utilities and full 2
requirements service to those municipals or cooperatives with no generation.
1 There are however, pockets throughout the industry where very large municipal or government systems, e.g., in the City of Los Angeles or the TVA throughout the State of Tennessee respectively, where-the private systems do not represent i
the predominant source of power and energy, but these areas represent exceptions to the norm.) None of the municipal systems in Illinois is a co-owner of the Clinton nuclear plant, however, many of the systems have benefited from the license conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit.
See section t
entitled, " Changes Since the Construction Permit Review."
7The other IOU's operating within the state are:
Cedar Point Light and Water Company, Mt. Carmel Public Utility Company, Sherrard Power System, South Beloit Water, Gas and Electric Company, Interstate Power Company, Union Electric Company and Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Company.
(Though most of Electric Energy, Inc.'s load is outside of the state much of the excess capacity produced by the Company goes to members operating in the relevant area.)
8See Appendix B for : listing of all municipal generating systems located in the State of Illinois.
t 5
l
\\
y --
, _y=
4.
C.
Cooperative Power Systems'(Coops)-
l -
There are thirty rural electric coops in the state of Illinois, two of which j
are co-owners of the Clinton nuclear plant, i.e, Soyland Power Cooperative,
)
Inc.'(Soyland) and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc. (WIPCO).
The j
majority of the coops are distribution coops and have no generation or trans-mission facilities of their own.
They are characteristically supplied by the private 100's or larger generation and transmission (G&T) cocps serving in the area.
4 i
Presently, there are two G&T coops in the state, WIPC0 and the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative (SIPCO).
SIPCO had generating capacity of 280 Mw in 1979 witn 100 miles of transmission line supplying its three distribution cooperattves at wholesale.
In 1979 WIPC0 had generating capacity of 57 Mw f
and 545 miles of transmission line.
Soyland is an organization (which presently has no generation or transmission t
facilities) set up to acquire a 10.5% interest'in Clinton Unit 1.
It is com-8 located in the central and southern prised of fifteen member distribution coops portions of the State of Illinois - essentially, the non-Chicago area of the I
State.
Once Soyland Power Coop (Soyland) begins taking Clinton nuclear power, it too will function as a G&T coop supplying its member systems with wholesale bulk power.
The Construction Permit Antitrust Review III.
4 In order to make a "significant change" determination it is necessary to have l
some benchmark from which to measure " change." A brief resume of_the results f
of the CP review chould provide an adequate framework in which change can be
~
measured.
i
- See Appendix C for names and add.4 esses of Soyland members, and Appendix 0 for names and addresses of WIPC0 members.
1 6
i e-,,nw-,-,g-m.-w,,4ne,
---, van.
.nn-,en
- w.,
.-e,--...m,n-mm m,,,n~ m m. e nn.-,
en, m,..
---,--nn,
---m,nwv~
,r
Illinois Power Company, the principal applicant and operator of the Clinton Plant, applied for a construction permit to build its first nuclear power plant in 1973.
Like all other non grandfathered nuclear applicants (those applicants setking cps or OLs after the 1970 amendment), Illinois Power had to undergo an antitrust review at the CP stage to insure that its activities in connection with the construction of the plant did not " create or maintain a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws" -- as prescribed by Sec.105c of the amended Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
During the review process, the staff's of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the AEC/NRC became aware of certain allegations of misconduct by Illinois Power in conjunction with its dealings with cooperative and municipal power systems in or adjacent to Illinois Power's service area.
These concerns were addressed by the Department in a letter to the AEC requesting additional information from the Applicant:
"Among the alleged matters with possible antitrust implications which the Department [of Justice] seeks to clarify by means of the requested documents are:
refusals of the Applicant to inter-connect with other electric utilities.on reasonable terms; efforts to preclude development of alternative bulk power supply sources by others; acquisitions of other electric utilities; refusals to wheel power for small systems; allocation of territories and restrictions on end use of purchased power."10 After submitting additional clarifying data in response to D0J': document request and after the anticompetitive concerns were aired, the Applicant agreed to a set of policy commitments that were attached as license conditions to its construction permit for Units 1 and 2 of the Clinton nuclear plant.
I Letter dated January 24, 1974 from Thomas Kauper, Assistant Attorney General, (signed by Joseph Saunders) to Howard Shapar, Assistant General Counsel, AEC.
e 7
General 5/, the policy commitments addressed the following areas:
11 a.
Illinois Power (Company) will interconnect with any neighboring entity and will assist in coordination of reserves and the sale of emergency and maintenance power to interconnected entitites; b.
Interchange arrangements between the Company and neighboring entities will not include restrictive provisions which would preclude a party from engaging in interconnection and coordination arrangements with others; c.
Interconnectons will be available for a neighboring electric system on any of the Company's installed transmission and subtransmission facilities; d.
The Company will afford an opportunity to participate to any neighboring electric system that makes a timely request therefor in the ownership (or unit power purchase) of the Clinton nuclear plant or any other nuclear plant owned by the Company which is scheduled for commercial operation prior to January 1,1989; The Comp 6ny will sell bulk power to any neighboring electric system with e.
no restriction upon use or resale; f.
The Company will wheel power over its transmission facilities; and, g.
The Company will include in its planning and construction programs sufficient transmission capacity to provide for the wheeling requirements of neighboring electric systems.
Subsequent to Illinois Power agreeing to the antitrust policy commitments listed above, the Department of Justice issued its CP advice to the Commission by letter dated April 29, 1974.
The letter concluded as foll.ows:
1 11See Appendix E for complete listing of all of the antitrust conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit.
8
4-s 6
"In our opinion, these policy commitments should provide competitors of Applicant with competitive alternative sources of bulk power supply and substantially eliminate the grounds on which complaints made to the Department by smaller systems were based.
On the strength of these policy commitments, and with the expectation that the Commission will include them as conditions to the license, we
~
conclude that an antitrust hearing will not be necessary with respect to the instant applicaticn.n12 The Attorney General's advice lette. was published in the Federal Register in May of 1974.
Since no petitions to intervene were received, the CP antitrust review effectively ended with the publication of the Attorney General's advice letter, although the construction permit was not issued until February of 1976.
IV.
Changes Since the Construction Permit Review The Commission's Regulatory Guide 9.3 for OL applicants requests data pertaining to changed activities since the CP antitrust review:
"This regulatory Guide identifies the type of information that the Regulatory staff considers germane for a decision as to whether a second antitrust review is required at the operating license stage."
By letter of May 23, 1980 the principal applicant, Illinois Power Company, submitted on behalf of itself and as agent for the co-owners, Soyland Power Coop. and Western Illinois Power Coop., responses to the Commission's 9.3 data request.
From staff's review of the 9.3 data response and analysis of various public information sources, two distinct types of " changes" since the CP review 12 Appendix E, 00J " advice" letter dated April 29, 1974, pp. 4-5.
9 r
--=
have bran isolated:
- 1) chtngas resultant from implem:ntation of CP licenst j
conditions; and 2) changes not-directly related to the CP license conditions.
A.
Chances Resultina from Licer.se Conditions Many of the changed activities which have occurred in the Illinois electric power industry since the CP antitrust review have resulted from extensive i
negotiations between the larger IOU's, the smaller municipal and cooperative systems a.d various governmental agencies concerning various forms of coordin-ation and power supply.13 The fruits of these negotiations have been realized by many of.the smaller systems in the area.
For example:
1)
Several municipal generating systems have obtained interconnection agreements with Illinois Power Company, agreements that were similar to those Illinois Power already had with its neighboring investor-owned electric systems.
Although the interconnection agreements were imple-i' mented after the CP review terminated in 1974, they were directly related t.o requirements imposed by licen'se conditions n,egotiated during the CP antitrust review; 2)
The same municipals which sought interconnection agreements from Illinois Power have recently opted to take partial requirement wholesale service rather than taking service under the provisions of the previously negotiated interconnect'on agreements.
This represents a new option for these systems; 3)
Illinois Power entered i.nto an interconnection agreement with the electric system operated by the City of Springfield, Illinois; 4)
Two smaller power companies, Soyland and Western Illinois Power Coops, have purchased ownership shares of the Clinton Nuclear Plant, thereby sharing in the benefits of a large, fuel efficient baseload power plant:.
T!lllinois Power is also currently ir.volved in several rate proceedings with various Illinois municipals before the FERC.
These issues were current during the CP review and consequently do not involve changes since'that review.
For a brief description of these proceedings, see Appendix F.
10
^
5)
The City of Waterloo, Illinois opted for a partial ccouirement wholesale power agreement rather than agreeing to an offer of purchase (of its electric system) by Illinois Power; 6)
Illinois Power received interconnection requests from the Villages of Flora and Chatam, Illinois and from the Farmer City, Illii.ois electric system; 7)
The City of Springfield,-Illinois has approached WIPC0 regarding possible participation in a joint generating plant; and, 8)
As a result of WIPCD's 138 kv tie with Illinois Power in 1978, the Coop became a member of NAPSIC (North American Power Systems Inter-connection Committee) a data gathering organization formed to ensure acceptable levels of operation and reliability of its members.
Although the above changes have occurred subsequent to the CP antitrust review, they were anticipated during that revibw as reflected in the CP license condi-tions. Thus, in so far as the changes are consistent with those license conditions, they do not connote changes in the " proposed activities" of the Applicant.
Consequently, staff needs only to assure itself that these changes are indeed consistent with the license conditions.
As discussed earlier, the licer.se conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit were structured to remedy certain allegations of anticompetitive conduct by Illinois Power.
Generally, the license conditions were designed to increase the alternatives and oppcrtunities of smaller systems in central and southern Illinois in their quest in seeking and obtaining sources of power supply, and specifically to facilitate both the sharing of nuclear power and the ancillary functions of power supply that make baseload nuclear desirable.
By increasing coordination between the varicus industry participants (notably the large and small systems), the newly acquired competitive alternatives listed above, have become significant (beneficial) determinants in the planning processes of smaller power systems in central and southern Illinois.
Moreover, the implementation of the license conditions has had positive performance effects 11 r
e-
on the availability of bulk power supply in central and southern Illinois, and should any antitrust significance be attributed to these activities, it would be constructive, i.e., not requiring any remedial action by the Commission.
B.
Changes Not Resulting from License Conditions There have been changes in the electric power industry in central and southern Illinois not directly attributable to the Clinton CP license conditions.
These changed activities, documented by the 9.3 response, have not detrimentally affected the competitive process among electric power systems in the relevant marketing area.
Moreover, these changed activities have had no negative anti-trust implications that would trigger a "significant change determination" as interpreted by the Commission in Summer.
The changes are as follows:
1)
The addition of new members to the Mid-American Interpool Network (MAIN):
i a)
The Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin, b)
Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc., and c)
Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc.
Normally, the addition of new members to operating power pools directly increases the coordination and cooperation among power systems in common or adjacent marketing areas.
Even though the MAIN pool is basically a regional planning organization with little or no control over the operating practices of its members, the addition of the three new systems will enable them to participate in periodic planning sessions among regional systems and generally become more familiar with new generation and transmission planned for the area.
The admission of these new members to MAIN is a change since the CP review, however, this change is procompetitive and consequently does not satisfy the remaining two Summer criteria, i.e., attributable to the applicant and having negative antitrust implications; 12
.__J
2)
Joint planning among Soyland Power Coop., Western Illinois Power Coop and Southern Illinois Power Coop.:
These three G&1 cooperatives (Soyland will become a G&T once it begins to receive Clinton power) have joined together to disucss the possibility of constructing various size coal-fired generating plants in the late 1980s.
Soyland has already contracted with the Peabody Coal Company for a one billion dollar, thirty year supply of coal for its plant to be built in Pike County, Illinois in the late 1980s.14 l
This type of joint planning and development is indicative of competitive forces at work within the bulk power market.
By joining forces, these relatively small power suppliers are able to build a generating plant that will provide the benefits of large baseload power normally reserved for the large IOUs in the industry.
The increase in coordination, and cooperation among these firms has provided more meaningful competition between the large and the not so large power generating systems in central and southern Illinois.
Only the first Summer criterion is met by this change, i.e., the planning has occurred since the CP review.
The joint planning is not attributable to the applicant nor does it carry any negative antitrust implications that would likely be remedied by the Commission.
3)
Illinois Power's new retail rate structure was redesigned to encourage off peak usage on its system.
Many systems throughout the country have instituted this retail rate structure in an attempt to ward off or delay construction of costly new generating plants and to level their system loads throughout the year.
The Commission has no jurisdiction over retail rate structure and would not likely impose any remedy if a dispute over retail rates ever arose.
(Certain rate conflicts may fall within the purview of the Commission, e.g., when a wholesale rate and a retail rate are manipulated by an applicant to impose a " squeeze" on customers, however, this is-not the case with the change instituted by Illinois Power);
14See the April 10, 1981 issue of the Wall Street Journal.
13
~
n.
._o...
N
S r-a 4)
Illinois Power has made offers to acquire three electric power systems since the completion of the CP review:
the City of Waterloo, the Village of Ladd and the private system supplying the City of Mt. Carmel (all Illinois systems).
In view of Illinois Power's history of acquiring smaller electric systems in its area, it is important to fully consider these proposals, particularly in the context of the third Summer criterion, i.e., negative antitrust implications.
Prior to the institution of the CP license conditions, Illinois Power's prospective acquisition partners did not have the option of purchasing partial requirements power and thereby remaining more viable, independent power entities while at the same time meeting the future needs of their customers.
The Clinton license conditions provided the smaller systems in the relevant marketing area with an alternative to acquisition.
The municipal systems located in central and southern Illinois can now conduct feasi-bility studies and determine if they can provide efficient and reliable service to their customers with various forms of sup-port available from Illinois Power Co., without being acquired by Illinois Power.
(Support Illinois Power has offered other interconnected systems in its area for years.)
However, if these studies indicate that remain'ing in the electric power industry is no longer feasible for the municipal, they may then choose to sell out to Illinois Power.
The systems serving Mt. Carmel and the Village of Ladd are very small and the City of Waterloo has exercised its recently obtained option and requested a partial requirement service agreement from Illinois Power, in lieu of being acquired, under the negotiated
" Agree lent for Purchase of Power, dated May 1, 1979.
In this light, 14
/
en eJ Illinois Power's recent overtures to purchase the electric facilities in Ladd, Waterloo and Mt. Carmel do meet the first two Summer criteria -- the activity has occurred since the CP review and is attributable to the Applicant -- however, the proposed acquisitions do not appear to detrimentally affect the competitive process in central and southern Illinois -- thereby failing to meet the third Summer criterion dealing with significant antitrust implications -
capable of being remedied by the Commission.
Consequently, these overtures of acquisition do not invoke a significant change determination; and lastly, 5)
A group of time-related changes has been documented since the CP antitrust review.
This grouping of changed activity is characterized by variations in system load and individual growth patterns and is largely dependent upon economic conditions within the service area of each individual. system.
These changes are as follows:
a)
Nestern Illinois Power Coop (WIPCO) has planned to add new generating capacity to its system by adding a new 100 N coal plant in 1988; b)
WIPC0 reduced the size of a newly planned turbine plant from 75 N to 72 N and slipped the planned on line date from 1985 to 1986; c)
WIPCO's projected annual load factor for 1979 was projected in 1973 at 53, however, the actual load factor for the system for 1979 was 50.9; j
d)
WIPCO's peak load increased from 42 N in 1978 to approximately 45 Mw in 1979; e)
Illinois Power's peak load and generating capability have l
changed since 1976.
Net generating capability wereased from approximately 3,400 N in 1976 to approximately 3,800 N in 1980, while peak load increased from 2,570 N to 3,150 N over j
the same period; and, 15 i
~~
~
f)
Soyland Power Cooperative has announced plans to construct a j
baselo2d coal-fired plant in Pike County, Illinois to go on line ir,the late 1980s.
The above changes meet the first two Summer criteria but not the third, i.e.,
the changes have occurred since the CP review and are attributable to the Applicant (s), however, none of the changes has negative antitrust implications and would not require Commission remedy.
In sum:
within the two groups of changes, those related and those unrelated to CP license conditions, staff has not identified any instances that satisfy all three of the Summer criteria.
Consequently, it is the staff's opinion that no affirmative significant change determination be made pursuant to Applicants' application for an OL for the Clinton nuclear plant.
V.
Summary and Conclusion The principal applicant, Illinois Power Company, represents the largest power system in the relevant marketing area.
Additions of large baseload power plants and increases in accompanying transmission. facilities generally tend to increase the oversight or planning role of the larger systems in a particular marketing area, i.e., usually enhancing any existing market power of the system.
By subjecting all nuclear applicants to an antitrust review at the CP stage, the NRC via its Section 105c charge, prevents the economies associated with large baselcad nuclear plants from being captured by only the largest power systems throughout the country, thereby thwarting increases in existing market power.
During the Clinton CP antitrust review, it became apparent that Illinois Power had been less than cooperative with smaller power systems in its service area and adjacent areas.
Consequently, a set of antitrust license conditions was attached to the Clinton construction permit which was designed to implement greater coordination between Illinois Power and smaller municipal and cooperative systems in the relevant area - thereby furthering the competitive process among these same power systems.
The economies associated with the Clinton nuclear plant and those linked to Illinois Power's integrated network of power supply were subsequently made available to smaller systems in the area.
16 m
Staff has identified a number of changes that, (1) have occurred since the construction permit antitrust review, and (2) are reasonably attributable to thelicensee(s).
However, many of these changes are in conformance with the construction permit antitrust license conditions and have had positive perfor-mance effects on the availability of bulk power supply and on competition in the area generally.
Other changes which have occurred, ha've.not had significant negative antitrust implications that would likely warrant a Commission remedy, and therefore do not warrant a significant change finding.
Based upon the successful implementation of CP license conditions and the lack of any detrimental conduct or activity (to the competitive process in central and southern Illinois) on the part of Illinois Power Company, Soyland Power Cooperative or Western Illinois Power Cooperative, staf# recommends that no affirmative significant change determination be made pursuant to the application for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station.
O e
17
APPENDIX A:
ILLIN0IS F AER C0. SERVICE.~REA l'AP
._*.v.
e
.s
' '3,*
e,, e f..C. *{t },.,*: s * '-W.QT* '-e..\\'.C.A.e *i l,,....,.
- .Q p,,$p,W.*r 'f....q.,*.:.,'
4
.r -
. f.
.i-et.,"'PC. O..'..R. 4-Q.
- "N,..,.M
.y
..m *c u.& -2.? t:~:.-
vw 5%]_.?q.p*~.~C..
- v. ~ ~
%4 ww.
+=.w;.f w
- k.
.. pt
. g 3%.i.,t.a.#.c.,n.-s.e=.;e -.u..- e.%o.a..t.*.*-
t
.. aa o
aw.. s - _..y
(
g
? *d'.W['.heT.'... ?.O*'** C.*.'." *. '*."A O.2 4'*.'*g.h f** C V.I$
= -MQw.W.r.@.#L.,.%. 4.@vWWh,4..- +Gs
., s...:,,.:- - m., <
- 1.. y...m.
. n,+
U..**
J.c.,y2... v 4.,.%-..A.e..
o
. r. : %.. -
.w;.
-e.
..,?.. a *. L i -....
- 3. &iQ.h*l.< *. -.
,. p p.'. /.N't '."M".C'.. '..:' ' O. '%.a.w
'r P.*
- .. ~n W. '.i. ;
a- *.
s.u'. e'; wem.m w-,f )
. p-L ?;
...a... ~.r w..-;,,.s.~..
.u.,,.. : ~ er.v
.-m w..*s.
,7 w.
m w
- a ~.,.: ; _.. - ' -
e...w w
- -w w
_.. w.
..e q.s u.v. n:
h$h.. !h?h&h5.. 5W# h..f..~b.. S.~?_h,,,,$
q.
m w.. w a k.
..e
. n J@.
LA SALLE 717.%.M.f,.9. 3:5-MW m
-w a
--s.+
HENNEP!N
,f.W;.-%,F. <... ~C,'. E,, -
.m..
/g-M
.$.-D. x + W-INJU. i STATION
.~.'.R'R. M bp $ x P F *'2 W y'J s
NM-m w.'.u..*' v.7 W 6 C* C "," w@
.r.c.. W-- w-7.
. -- e..
- c.'
c:: : AW.U*.w.v: M.1*n*=w * *:f*w' =. w.. 7;-'s A*;*s-u.s w s
O c'*.h.~._
C.
~ *-
. -W'.w.:..-m.'.',";:m.L"v.a :z.g'..e"..:~a
,'A..v. _;N.'.g::* *
~"A'
'M'" m""."r:
" T **-
- GALESBURG n
s y
e w >,,,.
p
- w-m..a
.s c.. r.
p.a W: m%-1 pm-
- . gf.. -
.a
'...'- :.M..W.>%....f,.d, E
sea.WF A
.. w.....
WN+. 4'rf.d..a-#
e.'.'.'..-..$Q-...'s..N...W.Y.
F.4h..s..M...
s==
n
' 9%gv.' - ' -
@5.E;PA
.n. mn.e e..S~ts
.~
n.
.n.<--
, ~..s..'.
'p'tset..'%., s...,
s-.
. - - r.?.
>- m.
O.
- n;xgi 3,m s. tWM u. ', =.J
%- og:
=
s....
_ 4.+
z-w-
...~.e.m c.
-.~.. -
.. ~..
wcK::M :U w.
-M
. t ' r: CLOOMtNGTON w w --- ~~ n L;c W' ::wp:,,
NTO, :.v.W==..yVERMIUON..
w
.v*w ~~.>r.
~:yyzm&*wx.:-m. a TAT 1'0- - -
r v
m.r w. n.. ~.-;.n
. : w,:.. y %..<.-;
VANA-a m.u.s
..; w * -
TION m'
m
- rv.%r.,,.g.r a.x$ d.
c.W.r,m L:-W. STATION
. w -_..ts... c:.yd STA
,.. -r%:
- -
- ...::-u DANT,ILLE
.. w e..w,.~ mm
-m i.y-n.
..e...a.w~.. a....
u.. -.n..% ~.-. :
u'ioER g.
w.
~.w
-- NiG'f4*f/?5.W $'?.,.*
CCNST.
3,g#,,,s1'./
u
-e h.q.bi E+ T-Y.-I.'-['.f
- 3 '::
D:
u
.-.a.,.v :.
-n..g.pm. w,a%-+-.4
.e... r_x m.
- .w g
w 7.y U
8=M $w$3&c.
e
$.M,e. '51$It"1 DECATUR NAUINM.*7 /
mm w
- c.
y m**Wa m.n:.+
e-.c e4.=e.-* *==-
b'A.N.
- =-*e av.s.f J n.
.;s,.w:a..:
W *if/ u v,w.,. u..w.-< ~.o. N w-c.
tw y-s..
w..--
4 CW,.W.W+ q i En.%>
v.; +y?.;2 po.
- 3.. ~... fa:-r?-'.*JA,p,KSONVIL,LE 'Ur-M :
i
- M-C
._ n.. nMc: n,A
~
.s.-
~w r-
- :v. d o.
- e.
d,.
.w. ;.m.,.s. 6.,
C. i. m,.~.,..e.z
.v &,..e.n.4.>w,. -,.-.
m
.a.,.n n.:s v..-
..W:-g*3 p.n-d..;r.-*c.a.MS... _ m.a--W e *-t.M e-aw
?..e. s.e.A... w w-.
i
-,-.n
.u
.~,.s
- r. N. e.. w-,'j
%d
- p. n.gM-. 3 W e W.x.:.'cMrene N C.
v-
- i..p u.r
.s eorn
.-L
- , 1 &,sa.+c.
w-r.v, v.nm.2 w. % w-.~
r-
~- m w
- u< & *-#,._. m,. +. -m, g
w HILLSBORO I< 4:w a.r u, : e
--->x.
b :.::F.er:a.(. :w.-4.g.e..
.~
4
- p.m.c-T eas
, m -;
<.,..J. m,,c. W-%-n.-- Mes.,r. < v ~c
.W-u
- r. :N%..w:,a
+.e--
w c.c-q. r,-w.
.<-e,...
g
- *8'~--M T
WIM. Mt W.E*=nt*40.*M8a*
- .ac W.Wh +
wp z G e M.w. -r-.. -~. r.%, :e k
-N.- WOOD RIVER w
w,w.~
xn M.MGV4%n*.+W@@
STATION
@iMCMowH4.ee 9
'"' W ST. LOUIS
'== >me GRANITE CITY gge$, $.w,.p.,.,gg%eF
_9% ew....* y..
6:irw-gW.
e BELLEVILLE t u 3 d E-p '* N MT.Vgggg'.?
e
., '%."'E..'.: :.9.t'*is.,J. 5..
LEGEND
. 'to ~
W'.@..s.-
BALDWIN O
r= mw..r..W..,
- N'#"'5 STATION u
A rm d
.c. :,
7
.t. k n W m*Sc M..-d~w".U K a
~. ~. - w
~,5..c....
SPARTA MAJOR GENERATING STATION
.n.-...;r.-
..c.....-.
E
$m NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
.-e.
i
- N.MNi w.r w.:st.4..W. Mr.,
Is/,.+ Fe shthdM-g*rW; D..w... -
e GAS STORAGE FIELD
. u.
... c....m
%.. ~.
f
..u.
w -- 2..r.:. ::.r
.. n.:.~.j.
e Nw
$$~$
-, n e,.- A. 2..
.R:~. '.B?=M.N,.. j.'t %-
s - n. e -.-
...,..:... ~ ~
w
.3 w.
..c.
- a.a.
- n.e
. ~,..'::'
- 4 %.:n.. & s.
^ s,.
i; A*.
.g.
-.k.,,
9
. b
.e
e Appendix B - Municipal Generators in Illinois
- Altamont Municipal Electric Light Plant Batavia Municipal Electric System Breese Water and Light Department Bushnell Municipal Electric Light and Power Utility Carlyle Municipal Utilities Carmi Water and Light Department Fairfield Municipal Electric Department Farmer City Electric System Freeburg Municipal Light Plant Geneseo Municipal Utilities Highland Electric Light Department Marshall Water and Light Department Mascoutah Municipal Light Department McLeansboro Municipal Light and Water Plant Peru Municipal Electric Princeton Municipal Utilities Department Rantoul Light and Power Department Red Bud Municipal Power Plant Rochelle Municipal Utilities Springfield Water, Light and Power Department Sullivan Electric Department Waterloo Light and Power Winnetka Electric Department i
Source:
Electrical World Directory of Electric Utilities, 1979-80, 8th Edition.
B-1
[
APPENDIX.C SOYLAND PCWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
Coceerative Members
~
Address Name Clay Electric Co-operative, Inc.
P. O. Box 517
~
Flora, Illinois 62839 s
Clinton County Electric P. O. Box 40 Cooperative, Inc.
475 N. Main Street Breese, Illinois 62230 Coles-Moultrie Electric,
P. O. gox 709 East Route 316 and Logan Street Cooperative, Inc.
Mattoon, Illinois 61938 Corn Belt Electric Cooperative, P. O. Box 816 1502 Morrissey Drive Inc.
Bloomington, Illinois 61701 Eastern Illinois Power P. O. Box 96 330 West Ottawa Street Cooperative Paxton, Illinois 60957 P. O. Box 190 Edgar Electric Co-operative.
Association RFD 6 Paris, Illinois 61944 Farmers Mutual Electric Company
'P. O. Box 43 1004 S. Chicago Street Geneseo, Illinois 61254 Illini Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 637 1605.S. Neil Street Champaign, Illinois 61820 Illinois Valley Electric P. O. Box 70 Princeton, Illinois 61356 Cooperative, Inc.
McDonough Power Cooperative P. O. Box 352 West Jackson Road Macomb, Illinois 61455 Monroe County Electric P.
O. Box 128 Illinois Route 3 and Country Co-operative, Inc.
Club Lane Waterloo, Illinois 62298 W
y 3
i
\\
Name
- Address Shelby Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 368 Route 128 ard North 6th Street Shelbyville, Illinois 62565 Ecuthwestern Electric Cooperative, P. O. Box 409 Inc.
South Elm Street and Route 40 Greenville, Illinois 62246 Tri-County Electric Cooperative, P. O. Drawer 309 Inc.
3906 N. Broadway Mt. Verndn, Illinois 62864 Wayne-White Counties Ele ~ctric P. O. Drawer E Cooperative West Highway Fairfield, Illinois 62837
(
e O
e e
0 e
8 e
O
')
APPENDIX D WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
Coocerative Membe'rs Name Address Adams Electrical Co-Operative P. O. Box 247 Camp Point, Illinois 62320 Illinois Rural Electric Co.
2-12 South Main Street Winchester, Illinois 62694 M.J.M. Electric Cooperative, Inc.
P. O. Box 219 Carlinville, Illinois 62626 Menard Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 279 Petersburg, Illinois 62675 Rural Electric Convenience P. O. Box 9 Cooperative Co.
Auburn, Illinois 62615 Spoon River Electric Co-operative, 930 South Fifth Street Inc.
Canton, Illinois 61520
_ Western Illinois Electrical Coop.
P. O. Box 338 Carthage, Illinois 62321 9
e 4
e e
8 l
t l
i
g, g q,,,,,, s v v w 15S93 7 -
NITICES -
Sec* ion 427.f3 Wh:t fa:cB!c. All (ther return m investment fcund herein to be Arracaxxarr 1 g }I.
property. real or person 1. is sub.tect to tars = reesonab10, 1116.000. Th3 combined total tion in tav r., ann:r prescrited, and this sec-is 3341.033.
.Vam 29.1974.
d tion is also intended to embrace:
.ceived in 1972. both from highway and from Stat;on. I[ntts 1 and 2: AEC Docket Nos. 5>-
As already ' stated the total revenues r,.
Illinois ~ Power Company. C1!nton Power F
- 1. Ferry franchises and tell bridges, wh!ch.
\\ } l' for the purpose of this chapter are consid-railroad tons, as well as mtseensceous in.
461A and So-462A: Department of Just:ce ered real prcperty.
oome, amounted to only $353.947 and thag Fue No. 60-415-67.
w g an of the quoted provisions of the sum was insudicient to provide the return You have requested our advice pursuant to n
Iowa Code in context. it seems clear that found here!.n to be rea.sonable. Accordingly, the provisions of section 105 of the Ato=::
the Code in efect gives the City the discre. M must be considered that the present tog Energy Act, as amended.12 regud to the I
tion to permit tamation of a bridge if such structure is not excessive.
abou-cited applicaticn.
bridge is otherwise exempt
- rom taxation.
Upon all the evidence I and that the as-Introdtetton.nts is an applicatten to cch.
but the Code does not exempt bridges which saued rates of toll for the transit of the Mis-struct two nuclear elecMc generating unr_s.
are held for pront: rather the Code specia-missippi R!ver via the Keokuk bridge have not each wim a nc=1 sal rating of 950 myawar.s cany includes as taxable res.1 property au been shown to be unjust or unreasonable of capacity, to be located at a alte in Ex.p T wnship. DeWitt County. IUinois. Units I bridges except those municipally owned and within the meaning of the General Br.idge not beld for proat. I conclude that the taxes Act of.1 God.
and 2 are tentatively scheduled to commen:e g
paid to Lee County const:tute an item that commercial operation in 1980 and 1S62. re.
As properly chargeable as a bridse expense.
[FR Doc.74-10335 Fued 5-3-74;8:45 am]
spectively. ns. units are to be interested l
Although the tax is cles:17 charges.cle as with App!! cant's electric bulk power sup; y a bridge cost, the amount of the experm ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION system and the pown marreted as a penan l
abould te reduced to the extent that the of its system output.
I ta.x was actually refunded to the City. For
[Dociet No. 50-412A]
Appheent. Applicant is the second 1 arrest I'
it is shown in the C:ty brief that 32.2 per" DUQUESNE LIGHT CO ET AL peak load was 2.127 mw: its generating espa.
l cent of the 1972 levy was paid over to the I
City, thereby constituting an efective re-Assignment of Members of Atomic Safety tty at that time ecnsisted cf 2.4 mw depene.
I fund of that much of the erpense. Accord-and Ucensing Appeal Board able capacity f hydroelectric generattne re.
tagly the claimed expense abould be raiueed In the matter of Beaver Valley, Unit 2. oYtheNCe$e'raur C re P'
in the amount of 314.232.
u Notice is hereby given that. in accordance App 11 cant's pest load ts expected to deut e other e.penses, ne cIaimed expe=ses in-clude an item of $3. coo which was a contri.with the authority in 10 CFR.787(a), in the next to yean, and it has pla.ned o-bution to a recreation fu.nd and is clearly not the Chairman of the Atcmic Safety and undu construction additim! generating en-an expense prope.!y c argeable to the bndge. Licensing Appeal Panel has as:!gned the paeny to inenase it.s depeneste, sys;e=
ne Federa! Highway Administation als fcllowing panel members to terve as the capacuy to SM m by 1982. Cnnton Unns :
crittetred an expense item of 25.042 in at.
Atomic Safety and Liceming Appeal $,2aseIca t
torners fees. ne reconi does not sacw how Scard for this anti-trust proceeding:
Applicant has h'!Ih voit*E' or extra *"m.
much. if any, of said fees were !ct the non.
s-voltage (ehr) intereennect:ons to a nu recurring expense of prosecuting this case. Alan S. Rosenthal. Chairman No other bs. sis is shown for excluding what Mictael C. Farrar. Me:.nber ber of In&Jor systems adjacent to its serv::e is otherwise uncontested as an actual er. VISU mm C. Parler. a! ember area, including Ccrnmonwealth Eatsen Co.
Union Eltetric Co Centrn! Duncts F
- ]
thSt it 18. P' P'ilT Dated: April 30,1974.
Service Co. (C:Ps), and Centrs.t in:
WM C. W h eth Unten m n:
' The compia.tnants argue generacy what
- MARGAKr:E. DU FI.o, j in Qj*.
1s unamHable in theo y, i.e. that funds Secretary fo lhe AppealBoard..
A pl p rt p e
[FR Doc.76d0085 Filed 5-4-14;8:45 am]
Missourt Pool (n!cto), trough C1b and ide as e e u inWc nmcuon and coordin e n g
However, with the exceptions siready listed, i
complainanta pointed to no item of the ag e
4pHean engaps in a su.S
[ c et
- a. H A and M62A) cant degm cf ecordinate,c planning, cm.
/
cis.tmed, expenses in Estabit A-1 whleh con.
. st!tute such an expenditure fer nen.tr:d o ILLINOIS POWER CO.
fly 's
~
b Igea$e Receipt of Attorney General's Advice and App!!eant is also a :nember cf the af::.
.dg related o
. year 1s72 nre as renows:
Time for Filin:: of Petitions To Intervene Amican Interpool Netwik (MADO, a re.
on Antitrust Matters g:cnai numbuny cancil.
Claimed ex5*=Jes...
. s2e2.587 Structure of the Bulk Po*rer hfarket n Add: Depreetation expense 13,:ss The Comm9sie has rece'ived, pursu. nHnois. CommonwcrJth Edison..erving pnn.
ant to secticn 105c. of the Atomic hergy esps.ny in the northern one-third et n;:n::
i
. : Total.
295,8 2 Act of 1954, a.s amended a letter of ad-is by far the largert supp!!er cf electricny in l
vice frcm the Attorney General of the the 8t*t*> With a 1972 rett lead c! 11.m Iess: Refun'd of Lee County..
17,tas United States, dated April 23, 1974, a mw, Commonwealth Edison is more than De
~
copy of which is attached as Attachment mes as large as Appneant, ns nearest C.
. Tar. paid.
I*
nois com;etitor.
14,239 Recreation fund.
3,600 App!! cant and Central Dunois PuNic Se:v.
Any person whose interest may be tee Co. (peat load 1.334 :nw).hrough a Total bridge re:ated ecats_. 278,033 a!!ected by thi.s proceeding may, pur. patchwork design of service areas, are tre no City introduced an exhittt su-~..
sunnt to 12.714 of the Ccm~ission's domine nt suppuers of e:ectrietty, toth a-rinng its c aimed costs during recent re.rs " Rules of Prac ke,** 10 CFR Part 2, nle wt.olesale and reta!!. in the lower two.thre and points out that those ecsts haie been a petition fer leave to intervene and re. of nuncts. Each syttem is fuur tuturne:
increasing stescily wn:le revenues have re.
quest a hearmg en the antitrust aspects
- 1th h!8h ' It'E' ""d 'h' int *fconn':t :28 mtnad a:= mat constant. on the buis of this of the applicr. tics. Petiticus for leave M
- !*h * **D **D ""d **** *'I8hD*'1 8 8 9 '
showing the C:ty argues that in fizt=g rates intervene t.nd requests for Pearing shall tie $1n g narat:$ Nd t$s lE"~
for the future, it is not reisenable to con.
bc by m um ma A mm Pmm7gM
. deu..h by he,5,1974, either (1) sider only past costs and that some consider.
ery t tue..EC Public Document uttiny, Centrat niinois I.ight Co. (peat 1:a:
u atten should be given to anticipated in.
creases. Accordingly, the City accounting Rocm at 1717 H Street, FN Wading-istmw), serves in two ares.s in the central witness projected future costs based upon ton, D.C., or (2) by mail or telegram part of the state.
an assumed continuing of the same rate of addressed to the Secretary, UE, Atcmic f
increase as ts.s been experienced in the recent Energy Comm!.ssien, Washington, D.C.,
.a sce the Department's Iette s of Adrice t.s
- 0345* Attn: Chief. Public Proceedings past. In my cptnlon this projection is too
- TanCg, the Comm2:s 1cn concerning Commonwes:.s speculative to be given efect in dednite ind.
Edison's LaSalle County Unt:s I end 2. AI-ings terein.
For the Atomic Energy Commission.
Docket Nos. 50-373 A and 54-374 A. Depr -
ment cf Justice Ft'e No. (3-4:5-41, Cecern:.r azasowantzuzas of Tetts APRAllAh! BRAI! MAN, 2o.1972. and Byron Station, Unitt I scd O.
ne total, reasorAbie bridge revenue needs Chief, O5ce of Ant: trust & In.
nraidwood station. Units 1 and 2.
Ar:
of the City for the present are ascertained by derttnt t *f, Directorate of Lf.
Docket Nos. So-454A. 50-455A, 50-556A, nr.c adding to the btal 1972 costs, 3278.033, the Ce713in9.
60-557A, March 4.1974.
g J
~
- r. -ed ccie-6 d 7&
4 4
f tD!tAL ttGISTit, VOL. 39, NO, 88.-MCtt0A,Y,g,AY 6,1974 TCe
yy -
y.
~
Ullon Eectric Co. (h large Misecurt. based hearing wul tot be necessary with, respect mm!1 text.nce cupenses. ecpital costs tad a gtinty), Interstate Power Co,ShIrrarti Power to the instant rpp12cetita.
reesonibt) return en inttstmInt tehtch ary properly rpp!!cabis to tha pirticular tesns.
System. and Iow,-nlihots Cas and Zixt:13 p,3,4 g reti n and the tsc111ttas tavotral ta that Co. serve small geographtu.I areas along the Elinois Power Cornpany. Cunton Power transaction.
western border of U11 cots.
Station. Units.1 and 21 AIC Docket Nos. 50-
- 1(c). " Neighboring electric rystem" means Rural electric cocperatives cover all of Elg.
461A and So-462A1 Department of Justice (1) a SnanctM17 responsible busineu corpo 3 gets geographicany but serve main 1T in rural Pile No. EO-41M.
tico, not for proat corporation. rural e:ee.
artaa in the southern three-quart *rs of the We set forth me AppendLE A to this letter tric cooperauve, municipal corporation cr.
state. Twenty-seven distributton cooperatives a statement of pol!cy of lutnota Power Com* ganized under the laws of the State of 011 and two generation and transmission co. pany concerning bu!* power supply arnote* nots. company, assectation. joint stoct com.
eperatives (Western Clinois Power Coopers =
m nts with neighboring electrte synte ns pany. Srm. partnersnap, or person own.: _e Live and Southern IU1sota Power Coopers. which it is prepared m make in connection or operating, or proposing bona adely and in ggve) comprise the :nembership of the Asso. with its Clinton Power Stauon Units 1 and good faith to own or operate, fae:11ttes for clation of Illinois Electric Cocperatives.
- 2. (The decnitions contained in the state
- the generation, transmission or distributics Western U11nois Power Cooperative serves ment ere intended to apply also to the text of electricity for buDt power suppl?. tut several dis *rtbutton cooperatives Ln the west. of this letter.) This commitment is made by whose faculttes are or WC1 be located in 1:.e ern. central portion of the state. Its g* 1ers. the Co=ps'sy with the understanding that State of HILnots. ("!) whose fact!1 ties are llon is suMc:ent to supply appre ri=ately 20 the Department of Justice will recommend interconteeted, or a.e p;cposed to te inter
- 25 percent of Ita 1 cad. De rez=s tuder is pur. to the Atomio Energy Co"*1on that an connected, for the purpose of ca:Tytnt out chseed at wholesale from App 11 cast and CIPS antitrust hearing will not be require 4 in con
- one or more cf the trsusaction reietrvd *.o in approximate ratios of 40 percent and 60 nection with the Ucensing of the Company's herein with fact 11ttes of the Company f;ro-percent respectivelT.
Clinton Power Staen Unas 1 and 2. On mia vided that any proposed interconnecton Southern 011=ots Power Cooperative gen. basts. the Company agrees that its poucy shan be lawful and feasible), and (!?I whit 2.
trates roughly 100 mv from three units. This statementa may be Lncluded as conditions is or wn! be a pubue ut!Uty under t*:e laws G&T serves exclusively the three southern. to the construction permits and operating of the SW of mots cr tM Fede* I Pne*
most coopermures with their entire supply licenses to be tasued by the Atomic Energy Act and is or wiu be providing elect;tc se-t-af bulk pour.
Commfon with uspect to these uni *.a.
Ice under a contract er rate schedule on f*e Other distribution cooperatives purchase no Company believes and matstains that with and subject to the regulation of the buli power entirely from Applicant entirely 1*.a rate and servlee policies and practices II 1: nots Corr.mer:e Commission er the Fed.
from C73. or partially frem both.
have bun and an consis'.ent e.th acutrust eral Power Commission. De requirement IU1 nota contains a number of municipal that a neighboring electric syste:n sha';
61ectric systema, many of which are located C
u es d tha ce.a n n-I r a munie:M1 cc' po-in or ad;acent *.o Applicant's service arts. fermation has been received by and anegs-electric c perative Appiteant suppites the total buli power re*
tions have ben made to tu Anutrust
- I quirements of two such municipal sys* ems.
- p. vision which may rabe certain possible the Oglesby L!ght and Power Department antitrust questions. Whue the Cornpany LS f" #
., '. ~ ~ ~
~
- and the, Valage of Ladd Electric De;e-t-con.adent that any such queauons can be
" I.d
~ **
g ctyo on an ate s
d e
y of h v
['"
plying its total requirements from small their resolution in an antitrust hearing. It generating umta
- therefore has determined to rnake the state-Quiredents e tN'no'r e EEN"
- in t Reruits of Antitrust Retieto. In the coune ment of policy and commitment-espressed 1(d). "Neighbottog ent!!** means a ne'gh.
of our antitrust review. certata al*egauons herein.
boring electric system owning or opent nr.
were received by the Department the general Paragraph 7 of the stat-ment of polley or propg ha $dCy and in good fa'*4 *J 1mport of which was that Appucant hr.s used applies to any addittonal nue!est generating own or operate, faculues for the generauon its dominant position in generation and unit of the Company which.in an application of elec*.ricity f or bult power su y transmission in Lte service s.res to restrain to the Atornie Energy Com.'nission. is sched-
- 2. ne bread purposes of any tnketcha:ft g
the competitive opportunitics of smaller sys-uled to com.z ence commercial operation
}
tems. For its part. Applicant hu denied that prior to Janua.ry 1.1989. no Ccnipany des k,
[t
["a th y
-f its polic!es and practices have been cr are not, however, have any present plans for neighboring electric system are to im*rtte incenststent v.th the antitrust 1sws. How-any nuclear generattog units in addition to tM niiabutty and quauty of ser'vMe. *4 arc.a Ever, in crder to e11&tmte any questicas as Clinton Power Station Units 1 and 2.
the dupucation of f act1*1es, and to._.._...
%0 k* ' PC11C188 th*k is '"*".,0d* to follow dur*-
- A question has been raised concerning the costa. Any such arrangernent vul mTCt ing the period of the C1 ton license. Ap-applicaucn of the Company's Service Clasai-planning by the parties acd should be tecn*
'l'tlita* " J*t $" *to L 7 S " **ic Ef'I Se*uen 4. P.8 ot"^2* ***": S*r"c' ' ' =te=217 and econ tnies:17 fessis:. and tru-uest. De anangment abould also M McG-pa M
a e
sa conditions to the Dcense. nese po!!cies wholesale custemt to be limited by that regal as nearly as Inay be although 1 J are set out in the attachment to the letter rate as to the trema la s htch 1.,urnithes recognized that. In any partteu'a.r arrane-of Appucant's vice president, dated April 5 e ectric service or as to the number and ment, the benents snar not t'e equst er Me:-
1974' which is attached hertto.
location of delivery pctnts fer receivir.g ser'*
ttcal for each party and that a amaner e.co In our opinion, these pclicy commitments ice. If the Company sere to recette a ro-tric system may real' e benedts stich art should provide competitcrs cf Applicant with eluest from a neighboring electric eystem for greater than those reallred by a laryer sys*e m.
competitive alternattve sources of butt pow.
the purchsse of electric service for ressie No party should te obugated to enter '.nw ar.
tr supply ar.d outstantially eMNnate the wm is not presently a customer of the arrangement t! it would res!1re no net bere-grounds on whica complaints made to the Compey. the Company would sea power to fi'a from the arrangement, cr tf the arranze-Department by amaner sTstems were tawd. that system either pursuant to Se:vice ment would result Ln tet burdens to ". e C& W 3 a8 y
a party, ne pcuctu MW upussed ut.
In nts w
e es ec t1 ta the the partteular circumstances or pursuant to be implemented unilaterally by the C;m-Comm'tulon satt include them s.s condit1cns pany. U an anangemnt utwun the Ccm-new H a8 87 8CC8 r
to the itcense, we conclude that an antitrust approved by the Federal Power Cornmission pany and a neighboring electric system u u and any other regulatcry authority having be successful and is to operate in the pu::;:
jurisdiction.
interest. it must be negotiatad and ;ericr=e:
' Applicant also supplies the entire bult in good faith ar.d wnh M coopnatan U power requirements of the Cedar Point 1.14ht Arrunu A the parties to it. No party should capric::.aJ and Water Co.,
a small privately-owned stmoza rms cmaM repet a proposal sucralmd by anc her pam utinty (peak load 378 kw).
and the Company and nemmg Cm 8 D ese municipal systems include the Statement of Policy concerning Bulk Power systems ahom gin nasonsoW conseam Cit 1*e of Psru. Altamont. Dreese. Bushnell.
Supply Arracgements w1*.h Netghboring to proposals made by each other.
Carlyle. Freeburg. 111ghland. Ma'.cou tah.
Cecttte Systems in Ccnnecuon with Citn-3.no Company w!!! interconnect with an' Princ-ton. F.e<1 Bud. Suuttan, and Waterloo.
ton Power Station Unita 1 and 2 neighboring entity in order that the S t.rt.M 111Lnots, which are presently complainanta Arnu.5.1971.
rnay seet and reanre all benedts p-scti:2:
in a proceeding bercre the Federal Power Commissten (City of Peru. et cL. FPC DNket 1(a). " Comp an y'* nicans P.11noh Power to be effected through the coordmanch an' No.M514. fded Decentber 5.1M3) in which Company and includes each present or fu.
development of taetr resMetite systems at; they are seeking an order from the FPC ture wholly-owned subsidtary of the Can-in carrying out variotts interecnnecnen w-Lees and transactions. The Ccmpany win su directing Applicant or CIPS to interconnect pany and any successor to it.
Mth their facilities.
1(b). ** Costs" means mal operating and stst to the fullest estent feastole any ne@*
FIDERAL RECi$itt, VOL 39. NO. S8-MONDAY, MAY 4,1974
4
'8960
- NOTICES i
w
' boring thtity in the coordination of reserves cendIttins anion () baats that w111 fully
!!(t). Bis statemeIt of po11ty is net e'
through the sal) an?, pur2ame of Emergency compensate th) Ccmp+ny for its costs tended to aNect in any way tha tran:
's energy us 3 malntenance power upos terms incurred and to be incurred and thtt will not certi$ cotes of puilic convinicncy and nm i t' that wul provide for the fun compenwtan adversely afect thn Snancing of such power sity, or other rights of the Company c.-
I.
of the Company s costa. No party shan be re.
station. The request shall be deemed timely ~ any neighbcring electric system to rer.
.(
quired to provide emergency energy or main.
with respect to Cunton Power Station Units electric service in the State t' Iuinoa tenance power Lf to do ao wul impair the 1 and 2 !! received by June 30.19M, and 11(b). Nothing berein shw be const:-
g supplying party's abuity to render adequate with respect to any additional generating as a waiver by the Company of its rtgn:
.i and reliable service to its customera or to unit if received within a reasonable period contest whether or not and the extent i.
ettarhrge its prior commitments. If any, to of time from a planning and operating which a particular factual situat*cu =a-
- I{*
ether electric systems.
standpoint after the public announcement covered by this statement et polley er r
- 4. De Company and the neighboring on.
by the Company of the proposed instanation clude the Company from contes j.
tity shan each provide sufic2ent *=partty of any such unit. As a part of any arrange. aUeged act of unfair competition.,"::.g
?
(which may include Srm contracted for ca. ment that may be reached with respect to 11(c). no Company recognizes tnat y
pacity) In 1:a system to enable it to carry its such participauon. the Company wiu inter. carrying out of some of the pouctes planned for peak demand plus an adequate connect with and deliver any power to which pressed herein in particular 'c rc*m*c reserve. An adequate minimum reserve re.
the neighboring electric system may be en. may. not be tu the mutual interert c' quirement shan be mutually determined titled under such arraw.sment at a deuvery Company and a neighbortsg electric s n from time to time as a percentage of planned point or potnts on the Company's system Notning herein is intended to pret!:de for. peak demand (unless otherwise agreed) on a basis that w13 funy compensate th*
Company and a neighboring electric syr and snau take into account such reserve cri. Company for its costs.
firm reaching an agreernent which exte-teria as the nature of the rest ective systems
- 8. De Company win seu bulk power to varies or supplements the provtsicus c*
and plami for peak demand require in any neighboring electric system in accord-foregoing paragraphs in a manner net t. t order to assure reliabuity of servlee and an ance with rates, terms and conditions which sis *.ent with the broad purposes exprese" equitable sharing of reserve responsibuity. funy compensate the Company for its costs, paragraph 2 and app 11 cable law Each party shalt prottdo such amount of and which do not restrict use or resale en*
11(d), ne Company dces not inte~"
sp!"ing reserve as sha3 avoid the impost. cept as may be necessary to protect the reu* this sts'.ement of polley to become a'c' tion of an unreasonsole demand on the sys. abuity of the Company's sys'em. and as are mon carrier.
tem of the other party. However. such spin. accepted or approved by the appropriate.
- 12. ne fcregaing policies are to be *--
ning reserve requirer:ent staiknot exceed th e regulatory body or bodies, no Company mented and applie1 in a manner cor$UI minimum instaned reserve. requirement. If stan not be required to make any such sale with Federal. Str.te and local laws. --
over a reasonable pertod. a party hr.s failed if the Ccunpany c!ces not have ava!Isble auf* tions and orders. All rate? charge to de11ter emergency energy, cr if a party has ac!ent generation to provtco the requested ditions terms and pract!ces are and b""
appeared to make excessive cans for emer. service or if the sale would impair the Com. subject to the acceptance er approval o' gency energy. the parties shan Jotatly study pany a ability to render adequate and fella. regulatory arenctes or courts havtnr I the matter for the purpose of deter =Ining ble service to its customers or to discharge dict!cn over them. To the estent that's~
the adequacy or inadequacy of the reserve its prior cousmitments. if any, to other elec. action may at th th h gm m -
generating capacity and trsnsmission facul. tric systems.
to eCect u m m ges, the Corees.y 4 ties being provided to meet the requirements
- 9. 'Ito Company will work with neighbor.
an i
of the interconnected systems and of deter. Ing electrio systems to facilitate the ex.
anF f e ICMroing poHetes teem the r mtntnr the manner of correcting any dea. ciange of bull power by trmNssion over o; Mcourse to the approprtate forum : :
c!ancies.
Su transmission facilities between or among
- 5. De agreement for the interchange ar.
two or more neighbortog electric systems and such changes therein as 2nsy at the tt a rangement between the Company and a between any neighbertug electric system and EppfCpriste in accordance with law. the p-neighboring entity wiu not include restric. say other-electric system enggtng in bulh, 1 merest, of good industry practi:es, ttve provisions which would preclude a parry power supply outalde the Company a service
[FR Doc.74-10372 Filed %3.*413:45 ar' from engaging in interconnection and coor. area between whese facilities the Com.
dinat6on arrangements with others, but may pants trmmuston lines and other trans.
j include appropriate provis!cns to amurs (1) znissten unes would form a continuous elec.
[ Docket No. PnM.50-10]
that the Compen7 rece!ns adequate notice og trical path, provided that (1) permisalon to UE M EV JERSEY-NUCLEA':
such additiona! interconnection or coordina. unlirm sach other transmisston lines has ENERGY COUNCIL t!on. (11) that the partice wtil joinur con. been obtained by the proponent of the ar.
sider and agree upon such measures, if any, rangement, and (11) the arrangements res.
FU!ng of Petition for Rule Makir.;
as are reasonably necessary to protect the aor. ably can be ac-odated from a func.
reusbuity of the interconnected sysees and tionat and technical standpotnt. suca Notice is hereby given that tha E
.to prev.nt undue burdens frons being im.
traumission sbat: de on terms snat fuur of New Jersey through its Nuclear I peaed on any erstem, and (tu) that the Com. compensate the Company for its costa. Any ergy Council, by letter dated 31sr:h pany wiu be ful:y compensated ter its cocca, neignbor:cg electric system requesung such 1974, has Sled with the Atcmic Int:
Good industry prs.ctice as developed in the trmm* Mon arrangements am give Ms.
Commission a petiticn for rule mLc:
area from time to tune (if not unreasonasty sonable advance neuce of its echedule and The petitioner requests that t'"-
restrictive) wul satisfy this provision.
requirements. ne Cerspany shan not be re-6 interconneettens win be avausble for a qurect to enter into any arrangement which quirements in Appendix E of IC C neighboring electr:e system en any of the would impsir. notem renabtuty or e=er.
Part 50 for emergency planning an i company a instaued tr-tisaton r.nd sub. gency trmenn capacity. It being rec. terfacing by Commission Ucensees r transmission facinues if the proposed inter.. ognized that while some tranamtulon facau. State and local govemments be 2:in connection is technicauf and econemteany ties may be operated fuur lonaed, other and appted to Comrnission licensees -
feasible and the Company is fuuv compen. tremMon facilities may be for emergency are DCt otherwise subject to Ap;2r sated for its costs. interconnect!ons win nog use and operated either unloaded or par. E and Who receive, store process, a~.
be limited to low voltages when higher vott. Cally loaded.
ages are avauable from the company a sn.
- 10. The Company shall include in its plan, distribute large quantities of radicat'.
staned factuues in the area where the inter. ning and construetton programs sucesent. Insterials routinely (e.g. Sm w _
connection is desired. Control and telemeter. tranamhalon capacity as required for the process radioact1Ve d112r! of kilr.
ing faciuties stati be provided as required transacuona referred to in paragraph 9. pro-irradiators).The petitioner request 3 t; for the safety and rettsututy of the inter. vided any neighbcring elec. rte system stves rules be developed which will ic=
connected systems.
the Company succient advance nottee as clear identiacation of critical E;
l
- 7. De Company will afford an opportu. may be necessary to accommodate its re. critical pathways, and critical fer'T nity to partic:pate to any nelgaboring elec. quirementa from a functional and technical of the populadon potentially at *"*s I
tric systent that makes a timely request standpoint and that sach neighboring elec.
therefor in the ownership of, or purchase of tric syste'n fuuy compensates the Company D M-unts pruespat:en power from. Canton fer its costs. The Ccmpany shall not be re.
variabil'ty of critical nuclides as a."
Power stauon Units 1 and. an 1 any ad.
quired to construct transnussion facutues if tion of var */ing product mi:t. The p:
dational nuclear snerating unit which the it ends construction of such faculues in.
tiener requests that the require. :en.:
Company may construct, own, and operate feasible, or if 1*.s cests in connect:en there. the Commis: ton's " Reactor S!:e ;
and which in the appiteauon tied with the wtta would e reced its benents therefrom, or teria." 10 CFR Part 100 be scie..
Atomic Energy rsm**on. or a y succes.
if it 2nds such factiltles would imp 4tr system modiced and incorporated into 17.e t '
aor scency. is scheduled for commercial op.
eracon prior to January 1, toes, to a res. reuabinty or, emergency transmiaston posed rule, and that the rene de,,a,-
r smatte extent and on reasonable tesma and capac;ty, be reviewed and Protective Act!ca 2 NDERAL afGISTit, VOL. 39, NO.18-MONDAY, MAY 6,1974 t
a
)
3 APPENDIX F:
FERC Litigation Involving' Illinois Power Company Wholesale Rate Proceedings Illinois Power and several municipalities in Illinois have been involved in various rate proceedings before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and its predecessor agency, the Federal Power Commission (FPC).
Many of the issues raised by the cities originated in the late 1960s and early 1970s and were resultant in part from Illinois Power's reluctance to offer power and back-up services to many smaller systems in its service area and also as a result of the oil squeeze beginning in the winter of 1973.
It is staff's opinion that the issues raised during these proceedings to date were current at the time of the CP antitrust review'and for this reason do not representchanges(inactivitiesorproposedactivities)sincetheCPreview.
Moreover, the issues raised by the intervening parties addressed rate matters and would be more properly aired before the FERC, i.e., any negative antitrust implice^ms would be more likely remedied before the FERC than the NRC.
Conseg ently, the issues pending before the FERC do not satisfy all of the criteria established by the NRC in Summer and no matter what the outcome before the FERC, these issues would not trigger an affirmative significant change finding and an ensuing OL antitrust review.
However, the issues and contentions raised by the intervening parties before the FERC do shed light on competition among members of the electric power industry in Illinois Power's service area and for this reason a brief discussion seems in order.
In the late 1960s a group of Illinois (self generating) municipal electric systems comprised of the Cities of Breese, Carlyle, Highland, Mascoutah, Peru, Princeton, Waterloo and the Village of Freeburg, petitioned the Federal Power Commission, "for an order under Section 202(b) of the Federal Power Act requiring Illinois Power Company to interconnect its facilities t
F-1
-.v=
cnd Exchanga capacity and en:rgy with th:m on tha sama terms as those prevailing in interconnection agreements between the Company
[ Illinois Power] and its neighboring utilities."1 This case was settled in 1974 after Illinois Power agreed to the municipals' request for interconnection agreements.
At about the same time, Illinois Power agreed to a set of policy commitments (which later became formal license conditions attached to the C1;inton construction permit) with the Department of Justice which required Ill'inois Power, inter alia, to offer interconnections to neighboring power systems.
~.
Subsequent to the municipalities' obtaining interconnections with Illinois Power, the oil embargo reached its peak and placed intense capacity and cost burdens on their systems.
(Their systems were largely comprised of oil-fired peaking facilities.) The municipal systems requested long-term power supply arrangements under existing interconnection agreements with Illinois Power, I
to assure continuous operation and reliability of their systems and to limit radical upward movements in their costs of supplemental power requirements in future years.
At issue before the FERC at present is the rate at which the municipals would pay for the partial requirements power only recently offered by Illinois Power.
According to Illinois Power, the rate schedule under which the municipals had been taking service was not designed for long-term continuous reservations of capacity, i.e., the type of service proposed by the municipals, because energy charges were unpredictable due to the incremental nature of the costs attribu-table to said reservations -- Illinois Power alleged that energy charges were a function of hour-by-hour load conditio~ns and capacity availabil'.ty.
The incrementa,1 cost issue was resolved when Illinois Power agreed to offer the municipals a partial requirement power agreement (also required by the license 2 Letter from S. L. Swarthout, Illinois Power Co., to Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary, FERC, dated May 25, 1979, p. 2.
l F-2 i
t t
c::nditions attachgd to the Clinten nuclear plant) for rentw ble fivs yent periods and based upon fuel costs incurred by the company's plants during the period the contract is in force.
In a separate proceeding, two municipal eiectric systems (Cities of Ladd and Oglesby) and one small private distribution system (Cedar Point, Light and Water Company) (all total requirements customers of Illinois Power) have intervened beforetheFERCtoprotesta}976wholesalerateincreasebytheCompany (DKt. E-9520). The principal contention of the intervenors was that Illinois Power could not unilaterally raise rates under their existing contracts with the Company.
Ultimately, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the two Cities and against Cedar Point Light stating that Illinois Power's contract with Cedar Point Light permitted unilateral raising of rates by Illinois Power.
This decision reversed the FERC order regarding Cedar Point.
The FERC has yet to respond to the Court of Appeals decision which was issued on August 21, 1979.
1 In a similar rate proceeding involving the same parties (ER77-531), the intervenors petitioned the FERC requesting relief from another wholesale rate increase by Illinois Power in 1977.
The FERC recently ruled upon this inter-by granting Illinois Power a t00-tier rate increase.
Here again, the vention3 issues in dispute were FERC issues and not NRC related issues and they were resolved accordingly.
Generic Interconnection Rate Proceedings Illinois Power has instituted new wheeling rates with all of the power systems it has interconnection agreements with -- as required by FERC Order No. 84.
There has b,een no intervention by parties in the relevant marketing area.4
~
x.
See"WnolesaleElectricServiceAgreement,"ExhibitA,betweenIllknoisPower 2
and the mu.aicipals, attached to Appendix F.
~
3See FERC orders dated April 10, 1981 and June 8, 1981.
4 Docket N0s. ER 80-595 (Illinois Power / Commonwealth Edison); ER80-674 (Illinois Power / City of Springfield, Illinois); ER 80-675 (Illinois Power / Western Illinois Power Coop); and ER 80-731 (Illinois Power / Central Illinois Public Service Co.,
TVA and Union Electric Company.)
7-'""**,
=
==
an.m... - -. -
A
I Moreover, the nature of these proceedings rests solely on justification of wheeling rates and it is staff's positivn that the actual determination of rates rests more within the jurisdiction of the FERC and not the NRC.
Conse-quently, staff believes that the issues raised in the generic Order N3. 84 proceedings would not invoke antitrust implications that would warrant remedy by the NRC.
a 4
O I
ee 4
1 F-4
s AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF POWER
{--
FROM ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY This is an agreement dated this 1st day of May,1979, between ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY (" Utility" or " Company"), and the
(" Customer").
U,tility is an Illinois corporation with its business office at 500 South 27th Street in Decatur, Illinois, is engaged
~
.in the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electric energy to the public in various municipalities and areas in the State of Illinois, and is a public utility within the' meaning of an Act entitled "An Act Concerning Public Utilities,"
29, 1921, as amended, set forth in Chapter 111-2/3, approved June Section 1 et sec..of the Illinois Revised Statutes, and now in -
force. '.
Customer owns and operates an electric generating and distribution facility and provides electric public utility service to customers located in and about Customer desires to purchase electric energy for municipal uses and.for resale to its customers, and Utility f('
desires and is willing and able to supply Customer with electric energy for these purposes, on the terms and conditions herein-after set forth.
In consideration of the mutual agreements herein con-tained, the. par ties agree as. follows:
I.
General Terms Utility shall supply electric energy and Customer shall accept and pay for service rendered under the terms of Exhibits A and D, attached hereto, entitled Wholesale Elec Service for Resale to Agreement shall control if there is any conflict between the provisions of Exhibits A and D, except for the determination cf. contract capacity.
II.
Conditions of Service 1.
Customer requires and Utility agrees to supply a minimum amount of capacity according to the following five year schedule, beginning with commencement of the Agreement under'Section X.
p e
F
s f-II.
Conditions of Service (continued )
lst year Kva 2nd year Kva 3rd year Kva 4th year Kva 5th year Kva This capacity will be the initial " contract capacity"
- governed by the provisions of Section 5(a) of Exhibit A.
At the expiration of each year, Customer will specify a new contract capacity for the fifth year following.
In the absence of such specification, the contract capacity specified.
for the-fourth year shall carry over to become the contract capacity for the fifth year.
s 2.
Customer shall provide a volt substation at the point of delivery to transform energy received from Utility at volts to the volts required by Customer.
(See Exhibit B.)
3.
Utility requires an automatic circuit switcher or oil circuit brcaker and lightning arresters at f(-
the point of delivery to protect its system from
( L.
any faults on Customer's system.
If Customer elects
~
to install'at its expense a KV oil circuit breaker satisfactory to Utility, Utility shall control, operate, and maintain at Customer's expense such oil circuit breaker tc assure satisfactory oper-ation with its electric system.
Customer shall either install or pay Utility the non-salvable cost of installing such lightning arresters plus a monthly rental for the salvable cost of the lightning arresters, all as provided in Exhibit C.
4.
Utility shall extend its line to the point of delivery to Customer and shall furnish and install meters,-
recording devices and other apparatus necessary'for the purpose of measuring the energy received by Customer at the point of delivery.
The point of delivery shall be at the Kv bus installed in, the Ky substation referred to i'n the preceding paragraph 2 located on Customer's propdrty.
5.
Customer agrees that any existing towers, poles, wires ~
or equipment placed by Utility on the streets, avenues, alleys and public places in the shall be exempt from any special tax assessments, license or rental fee to Customer during the term
(-
~
of this Agreement.
O e -
e
v II.
Conditions of Service (continued) 6.
Customer agrees to use reasonable care to design its circuits so that loads of the individual phases on its lines at the point of delivery will be balanced as nearly as practicable..
Customer and Utility agree to maintain and operate' '
7.
their syst' ems in accordance with sound utility practices, so as to minimize the likelihood of a disturbance in either system which might cause impairment of service to the other party's sys, tem.
-III.
Rates and Charges
- 1.
Customer agrees to pay Utility monthly.for. electric service rendered during the preceding month at-the rates and charges due and payable therefor as provided in Exhibit A, attached, or as subsequent 1y ' revised under Section X, paragraph 3.
2.
Dtility shall add to all charges under this Agreement and those provided for in Exhibit A the amount of any tax or charge of any kind levied, assessed,. or charged by any municipal, state, or federal government, or authority becoming effective after the execution date r(
of this Agreement, measured by but not included in the porchase price paid or revenues received by Utility account of the service rendered under this Agreement.
o.:
IV.
Meter Reading and Billing 1.
Utility shall read meters and render bills monthly.
Bills will be rendered at a gross charge using the rates and charges contained in Exhibit A in effect at the time, including other charges in this Agreesent increased by two percent.
Payment shall~ be due thirty days from the date of rendering the bill, and if made within that period, Customer shall be entitled to a two percent prompt payment discount from the gross charge.
The gross charge shall be payable with respect to each bill paid after the due date.
Should either over-billing or under-billing occur due 2.
to causes other than inaccurate meter registration, t
it shall be corrected by proper allowance or payment upon written notice by either party to the other, 'by mail or by personal delivery, provided that such notice must be given within one year following the date on which the bill to be corrected is rendered.
g f
s Y
)
)
IV.
Meter Reading and Billing (continued) 3.
If Customer has failed to pay any bill accruing under this Agreement on or before the thirtieth day af ter day of billing, Utility may discontinue delivery of electric energy provided at least fifteen days prior written notice has been given to Customer.
Utility will not be. liable in any manner for any loss or damage arising from such discontinuance'of electric service.
Testing and Billing Adjustments V.
- Metering, Utility shall own and maintain the number of meters,
1.
and relatei netering equipment necessary to measure the demand and energy delivered to Customer by Utility at the point of delivery, s
2.' Utility shall test and calibrate the meters by com -
parison with accurate standards at approximately twelve month intervals.
Utility shall make special meter tests at the written 3.
request of Customer.
If a special test made at
-(,-
. Customer's requesr shall disclose that meters are registering within 2 percent of 100 percent accuracy, p
Customer shall bear the expense of the test; otherwise, the cost of such test shall be borne by Utility.
Utilit; shall give Customer three days advance notice of its intention to test.and calibrate meters when such test is Customer shall be pere requested in writing by Customer.
mitted to witness any neter tests nade by Utility.
4.
Meters found by test to be registering inaccurately shall be restored to a condition of accuracy.
If the inaccuracy exceeds two percent, the meter readings
'taken during the period of 90 days preceding (or during such shorter period as may have intervened since the previous test) shall be corrected by the percentage of inaccuracy found by the test and payment adjusted ~
accordingly.
No prior readings will be corrected.
VI.
Rights of Access Duly authorized representatives of either party he'reto shall be permitted reasonable access to the premises of the other party if required to carry out the pro-visions of this Agreement.
Each party shall have access to the f acilities of the other party at a mutually agreed-upon time for the purpose of removing
(
its own f acilities from the f acilities of the other L
party where such removal is permitted under this Agreement.
s.
~
VII.
Continuity of Service
- 1. - Utility agrees to provide adequate and reliable service to Customer.
However, Utility shall not be liable to Custoce'r for. interruption or inadequacy.
of service, loss or damage to property, or injury (including death) to any person caused by act of God, public enemy, vandalism, strikes and other labor troubles or their equivalent, legal process, state, municipal or other governmental regulation, windstorm, flood, fire or explosion, or other matter or, thing beyond Utility's control, whether the same shall affect or o'ccur in connection with the operations or property of Customer, Utility or any other person.
Utility shall nct be responsible for damages due to any' 2.
failure to supply electricity, or for interruption, or reversal of the supply, if such failure, inter-ruption, or reversal is without willful default or negligence on its part, no: for interruptions, by underfrequency relays or otherwise, to preserve the integrity of Utility's system or' interconnected systems.
Utility may interrupt service to make necessary repairs
("('
3.
~
or to make changes in equipment or to install new equipment, but only for such reasonable times as may If the nature of the situation permits, be unavoidable.
reasonable advance notice of these interruptions shall be given by Utility.
VIII.
Liability l
l Customer shall'not be liable for and Utility shall save Customer harmless against any and all claims, damages, resulting from or occasioned liability or expense, by the presence, use or maintena'nce of any electrical conductor or other type of' equipment owned or maintained j
I by Utility or Customer or by the escape of electric energy in or from any such conductor or equipment, provided that such claims, damages, liability or expense shall be caused by Utility's negligence or, misconduct..
Utility shall not be liable and Customer shall save '
Utility harmless against any and all claims, damages; i
f
~
. liability or expense resulting from or occasioned by i
the presence, use or maintenance of any electrical conductor or other type of equipment owned or maintained by Utility or Customer, or by the escape of electric energy in or from any such conductor or equipment,
,(
provided that such claims, damages, liability or expense
(
G m.
~
~
- 7...,.
VIII.
Liability (continued) shall be caused by Customer's negligence or misconduct.
Negligence or misconduct, as used herein, shall include but not be limited to failure to comply with all General Orders of the Illinois Commerce Commission applicable to the furnishing of electric service by Utility or Customer, all regulations of the United States Occupa-tional Safety and Health Administration and the Structural Work Act of the State of Illinois, or.
failure to meet any standard of care derived from any of such orders, regulations or statute.
1.
IX.
Annexed Areas and Other Services 1.
Utility shall be permitted to. continue to provide retail electric service on a non-exclusive basis to its existing' customers or existing' customers' premises served by Utility within the municipal limits as of the effective date hereof.
F 2.
Whenever, after the date of this Agreement, Customer annexes an area in which Utility is providing electric s ervice, the ' parties shall meet and shall negotiate in good faith as to the party to provide and the manner of providing electric service to present and. future electric customers in the annexed area.
Such negotia-({ " -
tions shall be conducted by the parties in the light of all relevant matters, and any agreements made and
. procedures established by them shall be in the public interest and in accordance with then prevailing law
. and applicable regulatory authority.
3.
Neither party to the detriment of the other party
^
shall require any person to take electric service from it as a condition to, or in combination with, any other commodity or service, including but not limited to gas, sewer, water, or any other municipal or utility service.
X.
Term of Agreement 1.
.This Agreement shall be for a term of five years commencing on the first date that Utility completes construction and installation of facilities necessary to provide service contracted for in Section II, paragraph 1. Such date shall be stated in a letter of understanding to be effected between the parties after service is commenced.
The Agreement shall continue
~
thereaf ter from year to year unless cancelled by either party at the expiration of the primary or extended term upon..not..less.th'ax..two; years -pri6r written notice.
g-G O
W
l,.u-s 7
,.. v
,{.-
S X.
Term of Agreement (continued) 2.
During the period prior to the beginning of the term of this Agreement as specified in Section X, paragraph 1, which is the interim period beginning May 1, 1979 and ending when Utility has coopleted the construction'and installation of facilities necessary to pro, vide the service contracted for in Section II, paragraph 1, Utility will supply service to Customer pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Interim Wholesale Electric Service Agreement which is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
3.
All provisions of this Agreement which are obligatory upoi. or shall inure to the benefit of Utility shall inure to the benefit of all successors and assigns
~
of Utility.
4.
Nothing contained herein shall be construed as p( * -
' affecting in any way the right of either party under this Agreement to unilaterally make appli-cation to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or any successor agency for a change in rates set forth in Section 3 of Exhibits A and D hereof under Section 205, or any similar provision, of the Federal Power Act and pursuant to the Commission's Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder or under any other applicable federal law or commission.
It is f
further provided, however, that in the absence of agreement by Customer no change shall be made in any term or condition of this Agreement for Purchase of Power, or in any term or condition l
in Sections 1, 2, 4 or 5 of Exhibits A and D, until it has been finally approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (or any successor I
agency) under Section 206 of the Federal Power Act.
l i
e 6
e
,____r h
IN WITNESS WIICRCOF, the parties hereto have duly entered C.~
into this Agreement the day and year first above mentioned.
ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY By By
~
Title Title Date Date Attest:
Attest:
e e
As to Illinois Power Company As'to (Secretary (Village Clerk) e 5
6 a
a i
i I
e
+
?
l p
e I
{_
H
/
}-
ys
,,,I
yy
.. ~
~
Wholesale Electric Service Agreement 1.
Availibility Service hereunder is available to the
("C,stomer") subject to the following conditions:
u Thac Customer is engaged in the distribution and sale of
~
a.
electricity to the general public within the service terri-tory served by Utility; b.
That Customer is located. adjacent to Utility's lines having a capacity adequate to supply Customer's requirements in
/
addition to the requirements of other customers already receiving service from such liner or that Utility shall have sufficient time before customer shall require service to construct such lines.
Prior to commencement.of service hereunder, Utility will construct additional facilities to provide service to Customer, provided the cost of such facilities does not exceed one'and one-half times annual revenue estimated by Utility to be received from Customer.
Any costs in excess of one and.one-half times this esti-mated annual revenue shall be paid by customer to Utility; That prior to the commencement of service hereunder, Customer
~
,c.
shall execute and shall thereafter keep in full force and effect a written agreement with Utility with a primary term of five years.
~ 2.
Conditions of Service Service hereunder shall be provided to Customer subject to' the following conditions:
Should Customer desire to receive electric ' energy from any a.
source other than capacity owned and operated by Customer and to operate in parallel uith the power supplied by Utility to Customer under this schedule, it shall, in the absence of existing arrangements with Utility for the deliver.
~
./'
of such power, giv.e the Utility reasonable notice of such desire, specifying the requirements involved and the date when it desires such transfers to commence.
Reasonable
' notice shall be defined as notice sufficient to allow Utility
^
to continue saf e and ef ficient operation of its system and shall be interpreted in an engineering context considering the facilitics and requirements involved; o
/
r
s 2.
Conditions of Service (continued)
.b.
Utility shall be reimbursed for any expenses' incurred by it by resson of the transfer of electric energy require-ments referred to in subsection 2(a);
Service hereunder will be initially delivered to Customer c.
for a volt three phase electric line having _
capacity sufficient to serve Customer's energy require-ments.
Utility. retains discretion to select the supply line or lines from which service will be rendered to Customer.,The supply line selected shall be the best-available source with adequate capacity based on good engineering practices.
Utility also retains discretion to change such supply line or lines and to change the voltage of'the supply line or lines'or other conditions of service..
If such change is initiated by baility, the cost of prov,iding service under the new conditions including-the cost of transformation shall be borne by Utility.
In all other cases, except for changes caused by an increase sx in Customer's electric energy requirements which shall,
be governed by subsection 1(b), costs of changes shall be borne by. Customer; d.
~ Customer shall provide and maintain all transformers and related facilities ne'cessary for handling and utilizing
{
the energy" delivered hereunder; "e.
Utility will' provide and maintain one three phase' voltage
~
i connection, provided Custo~ er will make available, without m
J s charge to Utility,.. space required for Utility's lines and delivery' facilities, and; s
Utility will provide and maintain one point of delivery and f..
metering equipnent therefor.
Such metering equipment.shall be located on the high voltage side of Customer's trans-formation.
Utility, at its discretion, may elect to install e
such metering equipment or. the low voltage side of trans-
~
formation (whether or not ' 'a the convenience of Utility s
or Customer) and in such case, both the demand and energy consumption will be-increased to compensate Utility for transformer losses as measured by such metering equipment, or in the absence of such measurement, by computing such losses based on the manufacturer's data pertaining to the specific tiansformers installed.
?-
L 3.
Rates and Charges The gross charge shall equal the sum of the charges belou and any other applicable charges increased by two percent.
a.
Customer Charge:
Delivery Voltage Char.ge 4160 or 12,470 volts
$ 80.00 per mont?
34,500, 69,000 or
$110.00 per mont':
138,000 volts e
~
3.
Rate and Charges (continued)
Charga por Kva o.
Billing Demand i
(,
b.
Denand Charge:
Delivery Voltage Any onc 11onth 4160 or 12,470 volts
$3.73 per Kvc 34,500, 69,000 or
$3.18 per,Kva 138,000 volts
. c.
Energy Charge:
1.25C per hwh for all Kwh delivered by Utility in any one month d.
Cost of Power Adjustment:
(1) 'A Cost of Power Adjustment (CPA) will be applied to cach Kwh of energy billed hereunder during.the.
" billing period" as defined herein.
(FCCG + ECPP + ECIP - FCIS) X 100 ~ ~ *
(2)
CPA =
(CG + PP + IP - IS) X LF Where:
~
CPA = Cost of Power Adjustment.
The. amount rounds to the nearest.001C per Kwh to be charged f each Kuh billed hereunder during any monthly
" billing period" as defined herein.
FCCG = Fuel Cost of Company Generation.
The cost c
(('~,
fossil fuel as included in Account 151 and t l
cost of nuclear fuel as included in Acccunt-518, according to the FPC Uniform System of Accounts, consumed in " Company's plants" der the "determinatien period."
ECPP = Energy Cost of Purchased Power.
The net enE cost of energy purchased on an economic dis-patch basis from other utilities under pur-chased power agreements during the "determi:
tion period," exclusive of capacity or dera:
charges.
Otherwise, the actual identifiabl; fuel cost associated with such energy purcht ECIP = Energy Cost of Interchange Purchases *.
The -
energy cost of energy purchased on an ecentg dispatch basis from other utilities during
" determination period" under interchange er interconnection: agreements irrespective of designation assigned to such transactions.
Otherwise, the actual identifiabl~e fuel cor associated with such energy purchased.
FCIS = Fac1 Cost of Interchange Sales."
The cost c:
f fuel consuced in " Company's plants" to gent t{
energy sold to other utilities during the
" determination period" through all inter-system sales.
9"
e.
7,..
3.
Rates and Charges (continued)
CG = Company Generation.
All Kwh generated durin:
the " determination period" in Company's plan-PP = Purchased Power.
All Kwh purchased, except interchange purchases, from other utilities during the " determination period" irrespecti<
of the designation of such purchases.
IP = Interchahge Purchases.
All Kuh purchased or receive.d from other utilities during the
" determination period" under interchange or interconnection agreements irrespective of the designation of such purchases.
IS = Interchange Sales.
All Kwh generated in
" Company's plants" which were sold or furnis) to other utilities during the," determination
. period" through all inter-system sales.
LF = Loss Factor.
The estimated ratio of Kuh sal at the average delivery voltage of wholesale sales for resale to the Kwh generated for su sales.
This ratio is.97.
l t
1 (3)
Definitions (a)
The " determination period" is defined as the calendar month immediately preceding the billing month.
(b)
The " billing period" is defined as the period beginning with the 4th billing cycle of the month following the " determination period" and ending with the 3rd billing cycle of the next month.
(c)
" Company's plants" is-defined as Company's. fossil and nuclear generating plants and Company's share of any jointly owned or leased fossil and, nuclear generating plants.
4.
Determination of Demands a.
Maximum kilovolt ampere (Kva) demand will be the highest average Kva delivered during any fifteen minute period.
b.
Billing demand for any billing month shall be the greater of:
(1) 50% of the maximum Kva demand measured for the billing month, or Y
t
],*
4.
Determination of Demands (continued)
(2) the contract capacity Additional conditions and Contract Provisions 5.
A capacity (called " contract capacity" herein) shall be a.
as provided in irticle II, Section 1 of the Agreement.
In the event Customer's maximum Kva demand during the 13 ' consecutive hours of 10:00 a.m. through 11:00 p'.m. on weekdays occurring during the period June 15 through 1
September 14, in any one year, exceeds the contract capacity in effect at that time during any 3 fifteen minute intervals, no two of which shall be selected in any one calendar day the contract capacity shall be increased, without notice or other actio'n by the amount by which the average of the three highest measured Kva demands exceeds the then ex'isting contract capacity, and any existing contract shall be deemed to have b.een amended to include such increased capacity.
Customer may reduce Customer's contract capacity upon b.
providing Utility with twelve months' prior written notice..
-However, in no event shall Customer be permitted to reduce Customer's contract capacity to a level below that speci-fied under Article II, Section 1 of 'the Agreement.
If Customer requires service at the delivery point sp'ecified i
c.
herein for existing, new or added capacity of 500 Kva or more in excess of the contract capacity which requires Utilir to install special apparatus, Customer shall execute and keep in full force and effect a written contract with Utilit; for service which shall specify a contract capacity and other l
terms and conditions of service not inconsistent with. those l
provided for herein.
Th,e primary term for such written agreement shall be five year,s.
The primary or extended term of any agreement provided~
d.
for herain shall be automatically extended from year, to year with the privilege of either party to terminate the agreement at.the end of the primary term, or any exte.nded term, on not less than two years' prior written notice.
e.'
Nothing contained herein shall be construed as affecting -
in any way the right of either party under this rate schedule to unilaterally make application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or any successor agency for a change in rates set forth in Section 3 hereof under Section 205, or any similar provision, of the Federal. Power ursuant to the Commission's Rules and Regulations Act and promulgated thereunder or under any other applicable federal' i
y P
. law or commission.
It is further provided, however, that t
l e
,,,~.--..,---_.-,,,_,._,~_.-.,_.,-.,-...,_.m-
ii (continued) t, 4 3, Additional Conditions and Contract Prov c ons in the absence of agreement by Customer no change shall be made in any term or condition or service specified
.e in Sections 1,2,4, or 5 hereof until it has been finally approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or ency under section 20G of the Federal any succer Power Act L.
8 V