ML20056D010
| ML20056D010 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 07/22/1993 |
| From: | Wilson Z WILSON, Z.D., P.A. |
| To: | Grant G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9308020126 | |
| Download: ML20056D010 (26) | |
Text
o s
L Aw omcE OF ZACil ARY DAVID WILSON, P.A.
321 M APLE STitI LT NOR111 L !TT1 L ROC K, Akk ANs As '2114 M AllING ADDkESS TI 1 EPilON E POST OFFICE BOX WB (501) 3764M NORTli t ITTLE ROCK, AkkANSAs 72119 I AN DIRE CT DI AL ZA(ll ARY D WILSON
!!RI AN C. DON AlIUL July 22, 1993 Mr. Geoffrey Grant, Acting Chief Inspection and Licensing Policy Branch Program Management, Policy Management and Analysis Staff Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 RE:
Gulf States Utility Company; River Eend Station, Docket No. 50-458; Proposed Transfer of ownership of River Bend Station from Gulf States Utility Company (GSU) to Entergy Corporation (Entergy)
Dear Mr. Grant:
Thank you for your letter of July 7,
- 1993, requesting additional information concerning wholesale power transactions which are presently under way or being negotiated that would have to be foregone if the proposed Entergy/GSU merger is consummated.
This reply should provide you with enough information to continue your evaluation.
I.
ARKANSAS CITIES AND COOPERATIVE TRANSMISSION ACCESS AND ELECTION OF TRANSMISSION PATH TO GSU Arkansas Cities and Cooperatives are entitled to general access to the Arkansas Power and Light Company
( AP& L) transmission grid pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated November, 1989.1 The MOU was attached as Exhibit A to Arkansas Cities and 1
Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's other agreements with AP&L are briefly summarized in Exhibit A to this letter.
- . o v {u ~ '.
t G fl v>
9300020126 930722 7~
bhb PDR ADOCK 05000458 1
M PDR gl I l
m
+
t Mr. Geoffrey Grant July 22, 1993 Page 2 l
5 Cooperative's initial Comments in this matter.
The MOU
[
provides access to AP&L's transmission system and a number of other rights to Arkansas Cities and Cooperative in consideration of Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's support for the creation of Entergy Power, Inc. (EPI) and the transfer to EPI of AP&L's interest in the ISES 2 and Ritchie 2 plants.2 This transmission access may be used by Arkansas Cities and Cooperative to purchase power from other wholesale electric suppliers after February 27, 1993, notwithstanding any prohibition or limitation contained in pre-existing Service Agreements.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) confirmed the continuing validity of the MOU in Enterav Services, Inc., 58 FERC
$61234 (1992).
The MOU initially authorized Arkansas Cities and Cooperative to designate two (2) transmission contract paths to assure existence of adequate transmission capacity and availability of the transmission system after February 27, 1993.
MOU, 56.
In 1991, shortly i
after the MOU's approval in March 1990, Arkansas Cities and Cooperative each designated transmission paths to GSU (via Louisiana Power and Light Company) as designated paths for service after February 27, 1993.
AP&L accepted the election of the transmission path to GSU for each member of Arkansas Cities and Cooperative as one assured path.
Copies of various transmission
[
path elections and responses were attached to the initial Comments as Exhibits D, G and J.
ISES 2 and Ritchis 2 are coal and ghs fired j
2 elect _lc generating statione which were transferred by AP&L or " spun off" to EPI to be used for "off system" wholesale power transactions by EPI for the banefit of the Entergy system.
See e.g. Enterav Services, Inc.,
FERC Docket No. ER90-38-000 (June 29,- 1990) ; City of New Orleans, Louisiana v.
Enterav Corporation, FERC Docket no. ER90-48-000 and Enterav Corporation,'et.al.
Release No. 35-25136, SEC Docket No. 70-7684 (August 27, 1990) ; Arkansas Electric Enerov Consumers v. FERC.
et al, 696 F.2d 1663 (D.C.Cir. 1992).
1
u
=
-+ '
i Mr. Geoffrey Grant July 22, 1993 Page 3 i
The principal reason that the GSU path was selected and is now available for Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's load is that GSU actively sought to acquire Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's business in a series of marketing efforts in 1990 and 1991.
See Exhibit B, which are copies of proposals' submitted by GSU.
GSU has been, therefore, available as a supplier to all of Arkansas Cities and Cooperative under the MOU since February 27, 1993.
T II.
I I
NORTH LITTLE ROCK'S PENDING SOLICITATION l
Due to the imminent expiration of its Power Agreement with AP&L (July 1994), the City of North Little Rock, Arkansas (NLR), is currently negotiating with potential wholesale power suppliers as part of an ongoing, formal competitive wholesale power supply solicitation.
The NLR solicitation is of gres.t significance to AP&L and other power suppliers, including GSU, due to the City's size.
At a load of 240 megawatts, NLR is AP&L's largest single customer.
Unless specifically requested by your office and i
held in confidence, NLR cannot provide specific details
[
of proposals (price, term, and conditions of sale) provided by power suppliers.
This limitation reflects l
the state law exemption from disclosure of matters giving any bidder a " preference".3 However, NLR may provide certain information concerning its request for proposals and other non-sensitive information.
I hope i
this information is adequate for your purposes.
If you require additional information to assist your analysis,
'i please contact me.
On or about February 24, 1993, NLR began-a l
competitive solicitation for the acquisition of its l
partial requirements power supply in excess of its i
The specific RFQ made by NLR and the ongoing I
3 responses are not subject to public disclosure in
)
Arkansas and are exempted from the State Freedom of 1
Information Act, A.C.A.
5 25-19-105 (b) (9) (a).
1
=,, -
Mr. Geoffrey Grant July 22, 1993 Page 4 owned generation and back-up power for.the City's Murray Hydroelectric Plant on the wholesale market.
NLR solicited Entergy's first tier inter-connected utilities.
A list of the parties solicited is attached hereto as Exhibit C, and a copy of a solicitation which was distributed at that time is attached as Exhibit D.
Ten utilities, including investor-owned, cooperatives and municipally owned entities, have responded with proposals.
Seven of these proposals are still under active consideration by NLR and its consultants.
The seven utilities include GSU.
Therefore, GSU is a material participant in the City's current power solicitation.
Since the City's Power Agreement will expire on June 30, 1994, a decision must be made promptly.
Active negotiations are scheduled to begin in early August.
As was stated in Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's initial Comments, the Southern Company, the eastern United States' major utility competitor of Entergy, refused to submit proposals to Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's solicitations for power sales across Entergy's transmission grid in 1990, due to Entergy's then policy of requiring wheeling utilities to grant Entergy equivalent transnission access to their own systems.
Such Reciprocal Wheeling was modified by Entergy in its open access filing at FERC and approved by FERC in Enterav Services, Inc., Docket No. ER91-569-000 at 58 FERC $61234 (1992).
NLR again solicited the Southern Company in its current RFP, which is described above.
The Southern Company has once again refused to submit a proposal in response to a request for the transmission of power across the Entergy grid.
The effect of these actions leaves GSU as the largest i
single competitor for NLR's load to Entergy.
i III.
CONCLUSION 1
The Entergy/GSU merger will clearly harn-J competition for wholesale power sales within the area controlled by Entergy's Operating Company subsidiaries.
Entergy will not allow its Operating Company i
i Mr. Geoffrey Grant July 22, 1993 Page 5 subsidiaries (including GSU) to compete with AP&L for power sales within'AP&L's service territory once the acquisition is completed, and, thus, with the elimination of GSU, Entergy's primary serious competitor will be eliminated.
Since GSU actively solicited Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's business in 1991, Arkansas Cities and Cooperative attempted to preserve GSU as a competitor in this market.
On December 4, 1992, Arkansas Cities 4
and Cooperative requested that the FERC condition the proposed Entergy/GSU merger by requiring Entergy to allow GSU to compete freely for wholesale power sales located within the retail service territories of Entergy's other Operating Company subsidiaries.
December 18, 1992, Entergy and GSU objected to the Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's request asserting I
generally that independent elements of a utility conglomerate like Entergy cannot compete against one
___ther.
This response clearly indicates that post-merger, GSU will be prohibited from competing freely for wholesale sales in Arkansas.
On January 28, 1993, FERC denied the Arkansas Cities and Cooperative request to condition the merger to ensure continued wnolesale competition between GSU and Entergy's Operating Company subsidiaries.
Enterav Services. Inc. and Gulf States Utilities Company, Docket ER92-21-000 and ER92-806-000, 62 FERC $61073 (1993).
Entergy has never analyzed the effect of the merger cui Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's ability or rights to make wholesale power-purchases, nor has any federal regulatory agency.
Loss of GSU as a competitor in the market will seriously impair competitive access to wholesale power supplies.
Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's initial Comments and exhibits made a-prima facie case that the Entergy/GSU merger as filed will degrade competition for bulk power sales inside Entergy's service territory.
Acquisition of GSU and its ownership interest in the River Bend Station by Entergy constitute ' changed circumstances" warranting modification of GSU's and Entergy's existing nuclear plant license under $105(c) of the Atomic Energy Act and creates a " situation
~.
i i
1
]
Mr. Geoffrey Grant July 22, 1933 Page 6 i
inconsistent with the anti-trust laws".
The Commission should conduct a thorough anti-trust review and give.
consideration to the imposition of anti-trust license conditions which would grant comparable rights to all l
of Entergy's Operating Company subsidiaries' wholesale customers.and.would allow and require that GSU be allowed to compete for wholesale load in the Entergy-Company's retail service areas.
j Sincerely,
/
A l
- "A W'
3
/ Zachary D. W lson t
ZDW/jl cc:
Clients E
T l'
7 1
i I
1
.w.,
w
. ~
4 3
SUMMARY
OF SERVICE AGREEMENTS Arkansas Cities and Cooperative own and/or operate electric generation and distribution systems or electric distribution systems within the State of Arkansas which are full or partial requirements wholesale customers of AP&L under various Service Agreements which are described in some detail below.
Arkansas Cities and Cooperative compete at retail with AP&L and became entitled to compete in the wholesale power market under the authority of various Agreements with AP&L.
These wholesale agreements are filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
1.
Partial Reauirements Formula Rate Customers / Third Party Purchase Richts.
The Conway Corporation, West Memphis Arkansas Utility Commission, I
and City of Osceola (CWO) own jointly with AP&L and others undivided ownership interests in two large coal-fired steam electric generating stations located within the State of Arkansas.
CWO also receive partial requirements electric utility service under various Service Agreements with AP&L.
These agreements are Power Coordination Interchange and Transmission Agreements (PCITA) and Peaking Power Agreements (PPA).
The PCITAs and PPAs provide for two principal categories of power purchases.
First, under the PCITA, CWO make purchases at " cost of service" formula rates c
EXHIBIT A
L
t
+
i for " supplemental" power and energy supplies.
These PCITA purchases supplement the Cities' " owned" I
generation and the purchases under the PPA's.
Within the PCITAs, CWO are authorized to purchase peaking power from third parties.
Rates under the PPA's are i
fixed for energy provided during the summer months of i
the year and for specific amounts of capacity yearly.
-[
The current PPA's are a Second Amendment to Peak [ng Eower Aarecuent for Conway and West Memphis and the f
i Third Amendment to Peakina Power Aareement for Osceola.
j At present, CWO's Service Agreements specifically allow
[
purchases from third parties at any time for capacity I
and energy amounts in excess of specified " minimums" required to be purchased by CWO under the PPA's.
Finally, under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and t
Addenda, CWO may elect to purchase frcm third parties i
from and after February 27, 1993.
2.
Full and Partial Reauirements Fixed Rate Customers / Third Party Purchase Richts.
The Cities of t
Benton, North Little Rock and Prescott, Arkansas and 3
the Farmers Electric Cooperative Corporation receive either full or partial requirements electric service
+
from AP&L.
Since 1985-86 for Benton, Prescott, and i
Farmers Electric Cooperative Corporaticn (PPF) service was provided pursuant to Service Agreements known as
[
Aareement For Purchase Of Electric Service and for l
l.!
l a
!-i
~
b f
North Little Rock (NLR) a Power Acreement.
These Service Agreements provided for fixed power and energy charges from 1986-7 through mid 1991.
In March 1990 AP&L and NLR agreed to extend North l
Li'.tle Rock's Service Agreement until June 30, 1994 while BPF and AP&L recently have agreed to supersede their existing Service Agreements with new Service j
Agreements named Aareement For Wholesale Electric Power
[
Service.
Benton's and Prescott's version of the Aareement for Purchase of Electric Power with AP&L allows power purchases from third parties for quantities of power in excess of " minimum billing quantities" set forth in the agreements for Benton and Prescott.
Farmer's current Service Agreement, on the
{
other hand, is a full requirements contract.
l i
The curral.t NLR/AP&L Service Agreement is a " Power
)
Agreement" and is a partial requirements contract for electric requirements in n~ess of the city's owned hydro generation at a fix...
(;e of $.05 per KWH.
Additionally, NLR and AP&L have a Transmission Services Agreement for the transportation of hydro electric power generated from NLR's Murray Hydro Electric project.
The Power Agreement allows aeneral access to the transmission system during its contract life; however, unlike Conway, West Memphis, Osceola, Benton, l
a i
a.-
l'l Prescott and Farmers Agreements the NLR Agreement expires in 1994.
Since the MOU was executed in November, 1989, Arkansas Cities and Cooperative and AP&L have, executed j
extended, modified and superseding Service Agreements.
These Agreements do not, however, disturb Arkansas Cities and Cooperative's rights under the MOU.
Arkansas Cities and Cooperative have also executed 3
Addenda to their various Service Agreements with AP&L pursuant to 53 of the MOU in order to formalize the rights granted Arkansas cities and Cooperative by the MOU and to continue transmission rights.
BPF, North Little Rock, like CWO, may elect to buy power from third parties under the MOU and Addenda at any time frcm and after February 27, 1993.
4 I
T l
4 i
- B GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY P O S T O F F I C C B O X 2 9 51 DEAUMONT. TEXAS 77704 AREACODE409 838 6631 December 26, 1990 North Little Rock Electric Department Cathern Wilkins, General Manager P. O. Box 159 North Little Rock, AR 72115
Dear Ms. Wilkins:
As you requested in our recent meeting in North Little Rock, a proposal under which Gulf States Utilities Company would provide wholesale electric service to Arkansas Punicipal Power Association members has been prepared and is attached.
We are agreeable to contract with any or all of your members.
Individual members would receive a separate monthly bill; however, the billing would be based on each member's contribution to the total concurrent KW loads of all participating members.
This totalizing of billing loads offers an opportunity to reduce billing load charges by taking advantage of the benefits of any diversity both within an individuel electric system and among the participating members.
An additional benefit of our proposal is that we propose to treat the load charges of all participating members as if a single customer was being billed.
As a result, members would share any savings derived from having a portion of their electrical load billed under the lower second step of the load charge (Attachment 2). This arrangement is conditioned on contracting for a total electrical load of 60,000 kilowatts or more.
Many thanks for considering Gulf States as your future power supplier.
We would welcome an opportunity to meet with you again to discuss our proposal and respond to any additional questions you may have.
Sincerely,
- msc Delbert R. Zimmer y Manager, Power Interconnections DRZ/ JAR /wbl drz90-085 Attachment pc
Z. D. Wilson EXHIBIT 8
~
c.
I PROPOSAL FOR ELECTRIC POWER AND ENERGY FOR ARKANSAS MUNICI?:1 POWER ASSOCIATION MEMBERS A.
OVERVIEW:
Gulf States Utilities Company ("GSU") would provide wholesale electric service tc Arkansas Municipal Power Association Member (s)
(" Member")
through December 31, 2002, with provisions for extension. The following is a description of tLe pricing and terms and conditions under which this service would La provided.
This information is to be used as a basis to finalize an Agreement (s) for Wholesale Electric Service
(" Agreement') between Member and GSU.
B.
C!,2 rges : This proposal would allow for the totalization of the
~
concurrent peak loads, adjusted for losses and member generation resources, of the Member's points of delivery (as listed on ) for billing purposes. Member would receive individual bills from GSU based on their respective contribution to the concurrent peak loads and their respective energy consumption.
Service under this proposal would be priced on a monthly basis as follows:
- ' A '-
T' Load Charge:*
First 60,000 Kw or less:
$8.00 per Kw Additional Kw:
$5.00 per Kw Energy Charge:
All Kwh:
$0.002 per Kwh Fuel Charge:
varies monthly **
~
eV..
M-.
3
Proposal for Electric Power & Energy Page 2 Arkansas Municipal Power Association I
These load and energy charges would be fixed through December 31, 1996.
For services after this date, GSU would have the right to i
apply to the -Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") under.
I Section 205 of the Federal Power Act for changes in the non-fuel charges.
Such changes when applied to the appropriate billing determinants would not result in a non-fuel revenue percentage increase that exceeds the net cumulative percent increase in the National Producer Price Index for Electricity ("PPI") from January 1, 1994 through the effective date of the rate increase.
The billing load charges are $8.75 per KW for the first 60,000
[
3 KW of billing load and $5.75 per KW for billin] load in excess of the first 60,000 KW with a credit of $0.80 per KW for
{
deliveries at voltages of 230 KV and greater and a credit of
$0.40 per KW for deliveries at 138KV.
Power and energy would be delivered from GSU to the system of Louisiana Power and Light l
("LP&L") through their mutual interconnections.
Voltage related ad,iustments to the wholesale load charoes would be made in 1
proportion to the capacity of the GSU interconnections with LP&L at each voltage level.
Currently, approximately 93.3% of the capacity is at a voltage of 230 KV or greater and 6.7% is at the j
138 KV voltage level. The resultant credit for deliveries 10 2,
the LP&L system is approximately $0.75 per KW of billing load.
l The resultant charges are $8.00 per KW and $5.00 per KW, I
respectively.
May increase or decrease monthly based on GSU's system average i
fuel cost.
1 j
_\\
3 e
,m-
1 4
^
Proposal for Electric Power & Energy Page'3 Arkansas Municipal Power Association C.
Application of Charges:
The load (KW) used in calculating the load charge would be the greater of the sum of the billing load for each entity or 60% of the Contract Power.
Contract Power would be initially established per Attachment 1 and would remain the-Contract Power throughout the term of the Agreement, unless exceeded in any billing month.
If in any billing month, the sum of the concurrent loads for each entity, adjusted'for
~
losses, exceeds the then current contract power such load (KW) would establish a new contract power.
The energy (KWH) applicable to the energy charge would be the sum of each entity's KWH usage during the billing month, adjusted for losses.
This adjusted KWH usage would also be used for calculation of tra fuel charge.
D.
Term:
The Agreement would be effective on the first day of the month following FERC's acceptance of the filing. The primary term wou g i. g
~'
begin on the earliest date that an entity is free to accept service from GSU, but not later than March 1, 1993 unless otherwise mutually agreed. The initial term of the Agreement would be through Decemb'er 31, 2002.
If Member desires to extend the Agreement commencing January 1, 2003, then GSU and Member would enter into negotiations after January 1, P002 regarding charges and terms and conditions for such an extension.
If the negotiations for such an extension have not been finalized in writing by December 31, 2002,- then service would P
L Proposal for Electric Power & Energy Page 4 Arkansas Municipal Power Association continue Under the charges contained in the Agreement through December 31, 2004. Under this option the cumulative PPI ceiling on I
non-fuel-rate increase applications would be extended from December
'l r
31, 2002 to December 31, 2004.
-l E.
Transmission Service:
The load and energy charges contained in this proposal include the provision of transmission service on GSU's transmission system.
These charges do not include the cost of transmission service and i
the attendant losses on other sy:tems.
For the service to the Member, power and energy would be delivered from GSU to the system of LP&L and, subsequently, to the system of AP&L.
GSU would contract with LP&L for the, appropriate transmission service arrangements to accommodate ~ the' proposed transaction with Members bearing the cost of such transmission service.
Under current LP&L rates, '.he cost of such service would be $0.885 per kilowatt / month.
GSU would input to the LP&L system 102% of the net energy to be delivered to the AP&L system to cover losses. Member would make all necessary arrangements at their costs with AP&L for the receipt and transmission of power and energy frgm,l[;jgj the LP&L system to the Member's systems.
In determining Member's billing load the transmission losses on LP&L's and AP&L's syste,ms would be included with Member's load.
F.
Control Area Service:
At the election of Member and subject to arrangements with AP&L and on -terms acceptable to GSU, GSU would include the delivery points of the members within GSU's operating control area.
Under-such arrangements, GSU would schedule' power and energy from the l
Member's resources in the AP&L control area into the GSU control area to meet in part the Member's load and energy requirements.
GSU i
Proposal for Electric Power & Energy Page 5 i
Arkansas Municipal Power Association I
would also provide regulation of load and frequency for the Member's load.
Member would provide remote terminal units, communications, metering, and other such equipment as may be required to aggregate such loads into one control signal for GSU's use. GSU would receive the control signal at the Member's location and be responsible for the communication of such signal to its control center.
. t Alternately, GSU would schedule the amounts of power and energy required to meet the load of Member through the LP&L system to the AP&L system.
i t
G.
Reserves:
At the Member's option, GSU would contract for the provision of
{
reserves for any resource that Member may own or for which the Member has entitlements.
The reserve capacity sold would be equal l
to the then applicable SPP reserve criteria (currently a 15.25%
capacity margin) for the maximum dependable capacity under typical i
summer conditions for the resource to be reserved.
Reserves would be sold at GSU's FERC approved reserve rate which is currently $5.10 j
per kilowatt / month.
If additional transmission service through the LP&L or AP&L system are required, such additional transmissign 1[,f) 4,
[
service costs would be born by Member.
H.
Regulatory Agencies:
The provisions of an agreement resulting from this proposal I
would be subject to approval or acceptance for filing by the FERC.
The foregoing is subject to finalization of all necessary contractual documents among Member, GSU, AP&L, and LP&L.
.,p-
,.-,_.%m-y
.n--
m
-TT r --
s 3
em GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY P O S T O F FIC E B O X 2892-LAKECHARLESLOUIStANA70602 A A E A C O D E 318 436-4351 Jaucs r r/cianosan April 3, 1991 Indust.nal/ Wholesale Account.s Mange' i
Honorable Jim Presnall, Mayor City of Benton 222 West South Street Benton, AR 72015 Mr. Larry G. Stockton Manager - City of Prescott 118 West Elm Street Prescott, AR 71857 Mr. Gene Sweat, General Manager Farmers Electric Cooperative Corp.
U. S. Highway 67 North Newport, AR 72112 AMENDED PROPOSAL FOR WHOLESALE ELECTRIC SERVICE Gentlemen:
As you requested in our meeting of March 27, 1991 in North Little Rock, an amended Section B, Charges, of the proposal dated December 26, 1990 under which Gulf States Utilities Company would provide wholesale electric service to Arkansas Municipal Power Associ.ation members is attached.
Y This amended Section B, which reduces all load chcrges to 55.00 per KW month through December 31, 1996, replaces the original Section B in its entirety.
These charges do not include the cost of transmission service or losses on the Entergy transmission system. The minimum total Contract Power under the amended proposal for your three entities would be 90,000 KW.
All other provisions of the original proposal are unchanged.
Also attacised is a summary of the provisions of the amended proposal and an updated Letter of Intent to indicate your acceptance.
Thanks for considering Gulf States as your future power supplier. Please let me know if you need additional information Sincerely, in C
Attachment--. _
cci Z.;D. Wilson,
' David Carne
v.
L..
B. Charnes:
This proposal would allow for the totalization of the concurrent peak loads, adjusted for losses and Member generation resources, of the Member's points of delivery (as listed on Attachment 1) for billing purposes.
Member would receive individual bills from GSU based on their respective contribution to the concurrent peak loads and their respective energy consumption.
Service under this proposal would be priced on a monthly basis as follows:
(1)
For the period from the effective date of the Agreement to December 31, 1996:
Load Charge:
All KW of Billing Load
$5.00 per KW Energy Charge:
All Kwh of Billing Energy
$0.002 per Kwh Fuel Charge:
^
All Kwh of Billing Energy Varies Monthly *
(2)
For the period from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 20G2 the load and energy charges outlined below will be used as the basis for determining the applicable load and energy charges.
For charges effective January 1, 1997, GSU would have the right to apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC")
under Section 205 of the Federal Power Act for changes in the non-fuel charges.
Such changes when applied to the appropriate billing determinants would not result in a non-fuel revenue percenta[' increase that exceeds the net cumulative percent increase in the National Producer Price Index for Electricity
("PPI") from January 1, 1994 through the effective date of the rate increase.
Load Charge:**
First 60.000 KW or less
$8.00 per KW Additional KW
$5.00 per KW i
Energy Charge:
All Kwh of Billing Energy
$0.002 per Kwh Fuel Charge:
All Kwh of Billing Energy Varies Monthly
- 1 J
i
+
sa'
+ -
1: '
}
i
)
May increase or decrease monthly based on GSU's system average-fuel cost.
The billing load charges are $8.75 per KW for the first 60,000 KW of billing load and $5.75 per KW for billing load in exc ess of the first 60,000 KW with a credit of $0.80 per KW for deliveries at voltages of 230 KV and greater and a credit of $0.40 per KW for deliveries at 138 KV.
Power and energy would be delivered from i
GSU to the system of Louisiana Power and Light
("LP&L") through their mutual. interconnections.
Voltage related adjustments to the wholesale e
load charges would be made in proportion to the capacity of the GSU interconnections with LP&L at each voltage level.
Currently, approximately 93.3% of the capacity is at a voltage of 230 KV or greater and 6.7% is at the 138 KV voltage level.
The resultant credit for deliveries to the LP&L system is approximately $0.75 per KW of billing load.
The resultant charges are $8.00 per KW and $5.00 per KW, respectively.
f
- i
F, b
SUMMARY
-0F AMENDED PROPOSAL
- TO PROVIDE WHOLESALE ELECTRIC SERVICE FOR SELECTED ARKANSAS MUNICIPAL POWER ASSOCIATION MEMBERS f.
Charges:
- Billing Load Charge for all KW
$5.00 per KW Month
- Energy Charge for all KWH 2.0 mills per KWH (Fuel excluded)
Average Cost Approximately 14 Mills /KWH (Fuel excluded)
- Fuel Charge for all KWH System Average Fuel
& Purchased Power Cost
- Availability of Charges in Through December 31, 1991 Amended Proposal Effective 01/01/97 Charges will become those in Proposal dated 12/26/90 Contract, Contract Power and Billing Load:
- Effective Date Not later Than 03/01/93
- Minimum Contract Power 90 MW
~ Minimum Billing Load Contract Power times 0.60 I
Regulatory Approval:
- FERC and Other Applicable Prior to Implementation Jurisdictions Qualifications:
1.
These proposed charges are for new electrical load not presently served frca GSU's system.
2.
This proposal is predicated on no additional transmission or substation investment being required by GSU.
Proposed modifications to proposal of 12/26/90 to Arkansas Municipal Power Association Members.
4/3/91 i
']
.g GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY POSTOFFICEBOX 2951 BEAUMONT, TEXAS 77704 AREACODE409 B 3 8 6 6 31 April 1, 1991 JAMES E. MOSS Vke President Marketing (409) 839 2186 Farmers Electric Cooperative Corporation Gene Sweat, General Manager U. S. Highway 67 North Newport, AR 72112
Dear Mr. Sweat:
RE:
LETTER OF INTENT This will confirm our mutual intent that Gulf States Utilities Company ("GSU") will sell to Arkansas Municipal Power Association Member (s)
(" Member") and Member will purchase from GSU electric service through at least December 31, 2002. The charges, terms and conditions of the service will be as generally set forth in GSU's proposal to Members dated December 26, 1990, and as amended April 3,
1991, a copy of which is attached.
These charges, terms and conditions will be incorporated in contracts, which will be filed with the appropriate regulatory authorities.
This expression of intent is predicated upon completion of negotiations between GSU and Member of the Agreement (s) for Wholesale Electric Service (" Agreement"); completion of negotiations among Member, Arkansas Power and Light, Louisiana Power and Light, and GSU for certain other electric service; the acceptance for filing by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") of the Agreement; and the receipt of any other necessary regulatory approvals. The effective date of the service will be the first day of the month following the FERC's acceptance of the filing.
1 Please sign and return a copy of this letter to me to indicate your agreement to the foregoing.
sincerely,
% f,
==r James E. Moss J
Vice President - Marketing
)
i NAME:
s 3
TITLE:
j FOR:
i
r 1
1.
Arkansas Electric Co-Op Corp.
Little Rock, AR 72209
)
l l
2.
Assoc. Electric Coop, Inc.
1 Springfield, MO 65801 3.
Benton Utilities Benton, AR 72015 4.
Campbell Munic Light Dept.
Campbell, MO 63933 5.
Cajun Electric Power Co-Op.
Baton Rouge, LA 70895 6.
SWEPCO Shreveport, LA 71156 i
7.
Central Power & Light Company Corpus Christi, TX 78403 8.
Public Service Company of Oklahoma Tulsa, OK 74102 9.
West Texas Utilities Company Abilene, TX 79604 10.
Central Louisiana Electric Co.
Pineville, LA 71361-5000 11.
City of Lafayette Lafayette,LA 70502 12.
Farmers Elec Co-Op Newport, AR 72112 13.
Hope Water & Light Plant Hope, AR 71801 14.
Jonesboro Water & Light Plant Jonesboro, AR 72401 15.
Louisiana Energy and Power Authority Lafayette, LA 70501 16.
Municipal Energy Agency of Mississippi l
Jackson, MS 39202 1
17.
Osceola Municipal L & P Plant Osceola, AR 72370 t
l EXHIBIT C
c-
- , f *
. 3 l
' +
18.
West Memphis Utilities West Memphis, AR 72301 i
19.
'Prescott Water & Light Plant Prescott, AR 71857
.l 22.
Ruston' Utilities System Ruston, LA 71273-0280 i
23.
Sam Rayburn G & T Electric Co-Op, Inc.
Rockwall, TX 75087 24.
Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency j
Livingston, TX 77351 i
25.
South Mississippi Electric Power Assn Hattiesburg, MS 39401 f
26.
Thayer Electric Dept.
Thayer, MO 65791 e
i 27.
The Southern Companies Services Atlanta, GA 30346 28.
Alabama Power Company l
Birmingham, AL 35291
]
i 29.
Florida Power Company Miami, FL 33174
-1 30.
Georgia Power Company Atlanta, GA 30308 j
31.
Gulf Power Company i
Pensacola, FL 32520 j
i 32.
Mississippi Power Company
'l Gulfport, MS 39501 33.
Gulf States Utilities Company Beaumont, TX 77701 i
34.
City of Springfield, Missouri Springfield, Missouri 65801 i
35.
Independence County Hydro Project l
Batesville, AR 72501 j
-l 36.
Oklahoma Gas and Electric l
Oklahoma City, OK 73101-0321 c-
s 9-37.
The Southern Companies-Birmingham, AL 35202 38.
Entergy Enterprises Little Rock, AR 72211 39.
Grand River Dam Authority Vinita, OK 40.
Union Electric St. Louis, MO 63103
= -
e g \\0 Y*
N A Yg
.A FAX O
yg$
CITY HALL P.O. DOX 5757 NORTH LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72119 February 24,1993 I
Arkansas Electric Co-op Corp.
8000 Scott Hamilton Drive L.Ittle Rock, Arkansas 72209 Ccar Sir or Madam:
Recent decisions of the FederalEnergy Regulatory Commission have called for the development of a regionalbulk power market. The City of North Little Rock, Arkansas is presently seeking proposals from interested generatlag utilities for proposals to supply a portion of the City's power and energy requirements.
This letter willgenerally describe the City's operations and should be considered a request for a proposal.
The City of North Little Rock owns and operates the North Little Rock Electric Department (NLRED), which supplies electricity to the City's residents.
The NLRED system includes owned generation, is, the Murray Hydroelectric Project, FERC License #3449, a 39 MWdualunit low head run of the river l
hydroelectric facility operatedin cooperation with the U.S. Corps of Engineers on i
the Arkansas River.
The City currently generates approximately 25% of the energy delivered to its residents. The City currentlypurchases the remainder ofits power supply requirements from tho Arkansas Power and Light Company (AP&L). A copy of the City's current Power Agreement with AP&L is attached for your review, along with the most recent twelve (12) month billings which demonstrate the City's bulk l
i power usage. That Agreement expires June 30,1994. Since AP&L's sales are at an energy-only, one-part rate, the City recch es a direct KWH-for-KWH credit on its billings from AP&L for the actualoutput ct the Murray Project.
r li EXHIBIT D
w
]
>==-N
, y
.{
February 24,1993 Page Two As stated above, North Little Rock's current Wholesale Power Agreement expires June 30,1994. The City would like to have a new agreement in place by January 1,1994 Based on these assumptions, I would anticipate engaging in negotiations with laterestedpower suppliers between April 15,1993 and December 1,1993.
If you are Interestedin, and capable of, providing some of all of the power
. and energy supplies necessary for the City of North Little Rock, please provide yourproposal to my office on or before April 15,1993. Any additionalquestions you might have should be addressed to Ms. Cathern Wilkins, General Manager, North Little Rock Electric Department, P.O. Box 159, North Little Rock, Arkansas 72119.
Sincerely, 7
i
- w.
s.
'~.....hb h
i Mayor Patrick N.
ays
.l
.i
.l'l PHH:wim l
1 i:
j t
i
.