ML20135D156
| ML20135D156 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1985 |
| From: | Lambe W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Padov B ILLINOIS, STATE OF |
| References | |
| A, NUDOCS 8509130364 | |
| Download: ML20135D156 (1) | |
Text
. -.
/
September 10, 1985 Mr. Burt Padov, Esq.
Antitrust Division Illinois Attorney General's Office Room 2118 188 W. Randolph Chicago, IL 60601
Dear Mr. Padov:
Re: Clinton Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Updated Operating License Antitrust Review The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has made an updated finding of no significant antitrust changes pursuant to the operating license antitrust review of the captioned nuclear unit. This finding will be published in the Federal Register and if no requests for reevaluation are received from the public, the initial finding will become final.
t j
Because of the interest you have previously expressed in the antitrust review of this project, I am forwarding you a copy of the Federal Register notice and the staff analysis upon which the finding was based.
Sincerely, William Lambe, Economist Antitrust and Economic Analysis Section Site Analysis Branch Division of Engineering
Enclosures:
As stated Dietribution:
Docket Files NRC PDR LPDR SAB Plant File JP Knight WV Johnston DP Cleary A Toalston W Lambe po[g$$$
1 r
M
_____:_. g.
l..kftDE:SAB.p : _ __ __pg}dj :
OFC
- DE:SA p NAME :WLa'tb :js
- A ToaT5 ton :
..._ _ : _ _ __ g/8 5_...._:..__h_85 DATE :09/l
- 09/ /
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
c September 9, 1985 7590-01 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPHISSION DOCKET NO. 50-461A ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY, 50YLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
AND WESTERN ILLINDIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
NOTICE OF UPDATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ANTITRUST CHANGES AND TIME FOR FILING REQUESTS FOR REEVALUATION The Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has made a finding in accord-ance with Section 105c(2) of. the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, that no significant (antitrust) changes in the licensees' activities or proposed activities have occurred subsequent to the construction permit review of Unit 1 of the Clinton Power Station by the Attorney General and the Commission. The finding is as follows:
"Section 105c(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides for an antitrust review of an application for an operating license if the Comission determines that significant changes in the licensee's activities or proposed activities have occurred
[
subsequent to the previous construction permit review. The t
Comission has delegated the authority to make the "significant change" determination to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Based upon an examination of the events since issuance of the clinton 1 and 2 construction permits to the Illinois Power Company, the staffs of the Antitrust and Economic Analysis Section of the Site Analysis Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and the Antitrust Section of the Office of the Executive Legal Director, hereafter referred to as " staff," have jointly concluded, d
\\L$
/
r-
]
. after consultation with the Department of Justice, that the changes that have occurred since the antitrust construction permit review are not of the nature to require a second anti-trust review at the operating license stage of the application.
"In reaching this conclusion, the staff considered the structure of the electric utility industry in central and southern Illinois, the events relevant to the Clinton construction permit review and the events that have occurred subsequent to the construction permit review and the initial no significant change analyses.
"The conclusion of the staff's analysis is as follows:
' Staff completed its initial antitrust operating license review of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (Clinton) in I
February of 1982. Several changes in the applicants' t;
activities since the original construction permit (CP) review in 1974 were identified; however, staff concluded
- that, i
" 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, staff recom-mends that no affirmative significant change deter-mination be made pursuant to the application for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station."
(Clinton " Finding of No Significant Antitrust Changes," March 11, 1982, Federal Register,
- p. 10655.)
'Since the staff completed its initial antitrust operating license review in February of 1982, there have been construc-tion delays necessitating changes in scheduled fuel. load dates for the Clinton plant. Fuel loading is now scheduled for January of 1986, approximately four years after the staff P
completed its initial antitrust review. Staff felt this four
. f-year period created a " review vacuum" and requested updated g
I information from the applicants pursuant to any changed activity since the initial antitrust operating license review.
'After reviewing the updated Regulatory Guide 9.3 information and contacting various electric utility representatives in l
Illinois and other interested parties, staff identified several changes in the applicants' activities (principally those of
i
. 1 Illinois Power Company) since the initial operating license review. Many of the changes, e.g., new interconnections and f
partial requirements wholesale power sales, by Illinois Power Company, represented extensions of those changes identified in j
the original operating license review and have provided additional procompetitive stimuli to the Illinois bulk power industry.
Smaller power systems in Illinois have been able to successfully
" shop" for alternative sources of power and energy. Applicants Illinois Power Company, Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc. and j
Western Illinois Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. have initiated a study to determine whether or not future jointly owned generat-ing facilities would be economically feasible. New transmission agreements have been consumated between Illinois Power and its f
i wholesale power customers that provide these smaller power systems with the means to take advantage of the benefits nor-t mally associated with larger, fully integrated power systems, e.g., access to short term economy and diversity power and energy sales and access to transmission for long term block purchases of power and energy from a number of different power suppliers.
i Increased coordination between those fully integrated power systems and the smaller, less diversified power systems has led to greater competition in the Illinois bulk power industry. This trend toward l
greater coordination among industry participants began with the l
. institution of antitrust license conditions at the construction permit review stage.
'The changes that have been identified since the construction per-mit review have by and large provided momentum for greater coordi-nation, and consequently increased competition between all groups of power supply systems in central and southern Illinois. Staff observed this trend toward increased competition among bulk power suppliers in its initial antitrust operating license analysis.
This trend has continued since 1982 and consequently staff sees no reason to change its recomendation that "no affimative significant change determination be made pursuant to the appli-cation for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station."'
t
" Based on the staff's analysis, it is my finding that a formal
/
operating license antitrust review of the Clinton Power Station, Unit 1 is not required."
Signed on September 4,1985 by Harold R. Denton, Director of Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
. Any person whose interest may be affected by this finding may file with full particulars a request for reevaluation with the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555 for 30 days from the date of the publication of the Federal Rereste-4 notice. Requests for a reevaluation of the updated no significant changes determination shall be accepted after the date when the Director's finding becomes final but before the issuance of the OL only if they contain new infonnation, such as infonnation about facts or events of antitrust sig-
- nificance that have occurred since that date, or information that could not reasonably have been submitted prior to that date.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Donald P. Cleary, Acting Ch Site Analysis Branch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation P
t h
1
(
l
_.~
or
- 4 CLINTON NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY, SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. AND WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-461 UPDATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ANTITRUST CHANGES P
D
+
e p
~
CONTENTS I.
Introduction II.
Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois A.
Applicant Systems III. Previous Antitrust Reviews of Clinton A.
Construction Permit Review B.
Operating License Review C.
Monitoring Review IV.
Changes Since the Initial Operating License Review A.
Interconnections B.
Wholesale Power Developnents Proposed Mergers and Acquisition Involving Applicant Systems L.
D.
Miscellaneous Changes V.
Summary and Conclusion Appendices:
A.
Clinton Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 -- Finding of No Significant Antitrust Changes.
B.
.Clinton Nuclear Plant Unit 1 -- OL Monitoring Review.
C.
Letter dated February 21, 1985 Pursuant to Updated Regulatory Guide 9.3 l
Information from F. A.-Spangenberg;-Director #Nucierr~ticensing amf- -
~l
{
Configuration, I'linois Power Co., to Wm. H. Regan, Chief. Site Analysis i
Branch, Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
f D.
Letter dated January 29, 1985 Pursuant to the Proposed Merger of Soyland Power Cooperative and Western Illinois Power Cooperative from John T.
Ward, of Wasker, Sullivan & Ward to Sheldon A. Zabel, of Schiff.
Hardin & Waite.
j E.
Coordination and Operation Agreement Between Soyland Power Cooperative j
1 and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, dated July 24, 1984.
t t
l I.
Introduction A prospective operating licensee is not required to undergo a femal anti-trust review unless the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC or Comission)*
detemines that there have been "significant changes" in the licensee's activities or proposed activities subsequent to the review by the Attorney General and the Comission at the construction permit (CP) stage. Concen-tration on changes in the applicant's activities since the previous antitrust review expedites and focuses the review on areas of possible competitive con-flict heretofore not analyzed by the Attorney General or the Comission.
In its Sumer decision.** the Comission has provided the staff *** with a set of criteria to be used in making the significant change determination for operatinglicense(OL) applicants:
"The statute contemplates that the change or changes (1) have occurred since the previous antitrust-review-of-the-1icensee(s),
" ~~ ~ '
(2)arereasonablyattributabletothelicensee(s);and(3)have antitrust implications that would most likely warrant some Connission remedy."****
- The Consission has delegated the responsibility for making a significant change determination to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
- Virgil C. Sunner Nuclear Station Unit 1. Docket No. 50-395A, June 26, 1981at13NRC862(1981).
- " Staff" hereinafter refers to the antitrust staffs of the Office of Nuclear l
Reactor Regulation and the Executive Legal Director.,
- Connission Memorandum and Order, p. 7, dated June 30,1980(CLI-80-28).-
l
.:s.=
m:.x
,z_ w. = a -.. - -
- .w. w.m. aa,.wrw_.,
i To warrant a significant change finding, i.e., to trigger a fobnal OL antitrust review, the particular change (s) must meet all three of these criteria.
I On February 23, 1982, the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued a finding pursuant to' the antitrust operating license 3
review for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (hereinafter Clinton) recommending that no formal operating i,1 cense antitrust review was required
{
j for Clinton.*
Since the Director's initial finding in 1982, the fuel load
\\
date for Clinton was changed twice, fron) January of 1983 to January of 1984
\\
and from January 1984 to January 1986. 'The original change in the fuel load
\\
date created a gap in staff's anti *; rust hperating license review and ant i
i much of the data used by staff in its original review procedure.
\\-
Consequently, staff initiated a " monitoring review" of Clinton which was completed in January of 1983.**
Staff's monitoring review "found no reason to amend its
~
'no significant change' determination pur uant to Unit 1 of the Clinton i
Nuclear Station."***
I As a result of the change to the most recent fuel load date, i.e., January i
I of 1986, applicant's original (and most comprehensive) data submission would be almost six years old at the time of fuel load and staff felt not an ade-quate reflection of the current status of applicants' activities in central i
- Clinton Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 - Finding of No Significant Antitrust Changes.
Hereinafter, "No Significant Change Finding." (Attached as Appe
- Clinton Nuclear Plant Unit 1 - OL Monitoring Review.
Review." (AttachedasAppendix8.)
Hereinafter, " Monitoring
- Ibid., p. 5.
._____.......m~..__...m-m..
s 3-and southern Illinois. For this reason staff requested updated data responses from all applicants pursuant to changed activity since the original OL antitrust data response in May of 1980. After reviewing these data and after contact with members of the electric power industry in Illinois, staff recomends that no affirmative significant change finding be made pursuant to Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station.
II. Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois The basic structure of the electric power industry in Illinois has not changed since staff's original significant change review. The state is still separated into Chicago area and non-Chicago area components with large investor owned utilities dominating each segment. The Chicago area is served by one of the largest domestic electric power companies, Common-wealth Edison Company. The remainder of the state, from the north central portion to the southern tip of the state, is served by a group of power ccapanies including municipal, cooperative and private power companies.
The relevant marketing area for the Clinton 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 owners of Clinton will have the greatest impact. This 1s the area in which the three applicants serve and the area where the l
use of the power and energy generated by the Clinton plant will be most concentrated.
a.
.mv.m axwn.. u.s m w c.au m._,..._.._m.
m. u zmm c ;. u..
j i
i 4-j A.
Applicant Systems l
Illinois Power Company, with approximately 82% ownership of the plant, is j
the lead applicant responsible for construction and operation of the plant.
The remaining 18% of the plant is owned by two cooperative power systems, Western Illinois Power Cooperative (WIPCO) and Soyland Power Cooperative (Soyland).
Illinois Power Company is a fully integrated power system (i.e., engaged in generation, transmission and distribution of electric power and energy) i i
serving primarily the central and southern portions of the State of Illinois.
I Western Illinois Power Cooperative is a GAT cooperative -- engaged primarily
)
in the generation and transmission of electric power and energy serving j
distribution cooperative members in the west' central portion of the state.
Soyland Power Cooperative was established by a group of 15 distribution cooperatives specifically to acquire an ownership interest in Clinton. The j.
i members currently provide service to retail loads in central and southern portions of Illinois.
(See Appendix A for a more detailed description of j
applicant systems.)
l l
III. Previous Antitrust Reviews of Clinton i
i A.
Construction Permit Review The initial antitrust review of Clinton was conducted by the Department l
_,.w---.
,..-,__.,-.,-.._..,-___._--__,---.___,,._.--..__,..,_-,--_______,.-y
..-.ma.a..u.u e m u.a.x w w__ ass =.
m.au.._ -
l.
of Justice (Department or DOJ) and the Commission at the construction per-mit (CP) stage in the early 1970's. During the construction pemit review, i
"... the staffs 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."*
After additional data was collected and the anticompetitive concerns were fully aired, the applicant agreed to a set of policy connitments intended to prohibit any future refusals to deal or similar anticompetitive conduct by Illinois Power Co. in its dealings with other power entities in or adjacent to its service area. These policy commitments later became license conditions that were attached to the Clinton construction permits.** Based upon the policy connitments agreed to by Illinois Power and the inclusion of these connitments as license conditions to the Clinton construction per-mits, the Department issued an advice letter to the Commission dated April 29, 1974 reconnending no hearing. No petitions to intervene were received and the CP antitrust review was effectively completed with the 1
publication of the advice letter in the Federal R_ecister in May of 1974.
l l
- No Significant Change Finding, p. 7.
I
- Illinois Power received construction pemits for both Units 1 and 2.
i Unit 2 has since been cancelled.
\\
- l. -
= :.. u..
~
m.
. B.
Operating License Review
~
As indicated supra, the Commission's operating license review focuses only on changes in the applicants' activities since the antitrust review at the construction permit review stage. After reviewing the data submitted by the applicants pursuant to changes since the CP review, talking to members in the industry and reviewing various public documents,
" Staff identified a number of changes that. (1) have occurred since the construction permit antitrust review, and (2) are reasonably attributable to the licensee (s).
[Thereby meeting two of the Sumer criteria necessary for a "significant change."] However,many of these changes are in conformance with the' construction permit anti-trust license conditions and have had positive performance effects on the availability of bulk power supply and on competition in the
}
i area generally. Other changes which have occurred inve not had significant negative antitrust implications that would warrant a Commission remedy, and therefore do not. warrant a significant change finding."*
t t
I i
1
~
i 5taff completed its initial operating license review in February of 1982 j
and found no reason to recomend that the Director of NRR issue a signifi -
l cant change finding. The review concluded that, i
l i
" Based upon the successful implementation of CP license conditions and the lack of any detrimental conduct or activity.... staff j
recomends that no affirmative significant change determination be e
j made pursuant to the application for an operating license for i
Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station."**
l l
- No Significant Change Finding, p. 17 s
1 i
- Ibid.
I
me..s_ a._ wm:_.
u-
.c
. C.
Monitoring Revie.w Subsequent to staff's initial significant change analysis in February of 1982, the fuel load date for Clinton was changed from January of 1983 to January of 1984.
Staff felt such a development necessitated a " fresh look" at the Illinois electric bulk power industry and any changes in the activi-ties of the Clinton applicants in particular. The staff monitoring review i
was not intended as an in depth significant change analysis, but more of a flash review, intended to pick up flegrant changes in conduct or particular complaints from affected parties engaged in or interested in the Illinois electric power industry.
(The fomality and extensive data requests that characterize the significant change analysis are not a part of the monitorin reviewprocess.) Staff's monitoring review for Clinton was completed in January of 1983. The review concluded, "In sum:
Because of a delay in issuing the Clinton Unit 1 OL, i
. staff has reviewed Illinois Power's activities since last con-ducting its significant change analysis appro::imately a year ago.
No one has come forth to re cant change detemination,' quest reevaluation of staff's signifi nof have~th' era been any submissior.s of complaints or views af affected parties during the interim since February 1982. After reviewing industry trade journals and initiating contact with power entities in the relevant areas, staff, as of this date, has found no reason to amend its 'no 1
significant change' detemination pursuant to Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Station."*
1 l
1 Both the initial significant change analysis and staff's monitoring review concluded that there have been no significant changes in the applicants'
- Monitoring Review, p. 5.
\\
~
i i
1
.~
= -
=,
., = _ -
w,.
-- ~
. activities since the antitrust construction permit review that would warrant
~
a hearing recommendation pursuant to the applicants' application for.an.
operating license for Clinton.
IV. Changes Since the Initial Operating License Review I
Considering the most recent delay in fuel loading from January of 1984 to January of 1986, and the fact that staff's broad data base of the Illinois electric power industry is based upon dated information, i.e., that pro-i vided by the applicant in 1980, staff decided to request updated responses i
to Regulatory Guide 9.3* from the applicants and conduct a supplemental 1
significant change analysis, focusing on those changes which have taken place since the initial operating license review was completed in 1982.
This supplemental significant change review, in conjunction with staff's 1982 and 1983 reviews, encompasses all of applicants' changed activity
{
(with competitive implications) since the antitrust review at the construc-tion pemit stage.
From the applicants' updated responses to Regulatory Guide 9.3** and infor-nation gathered from public print sources as well as contacts with govern-mental agencies and members of the electric power industry, staff has
- "Infomation Needed by the AEC Regulatory Staff in Connection with its Antitrust Review of Operating License Applications for Nuclear Power t
Plants." October 1974.
- Data submitted by letter dated March 12, 1984.
,,~v
. - - - - - - - -.,. ~. - - - - - - -
> + -.
~' ""-..
^'
j 9-i 4
identified several changes associated with the applicants' conduct and I
activity since the initial significant change review.
Among the three applicant systems, Illinois Power Company has experienced the greatest number of changes (with possible competitive implications) since the initial OL review. As evidenced during the original OL review, these changes have come about largely through new interconnections and sales of wholesale power by Illinois Power Company to smaller power systems
{
i in Illinois.
t A.
Interconnections i
The trend toward new interconnections involving all applicant systems and l
particularly Illinois Power evidenced during the initial OL review has I
j continued.
Illinois Power has consummated a number of interconnections, i
i
~
with both large and small systems, since 1982.
i 4
1.
Illinois Power Co./ Southern Illinois Power Coop. -- In i
September of 1984 Illinois Power energized a 138 kV interconnection i
withtheSouthernIllinoisPowerCoopeca^ive(SIPC). Representatives of both parties began discussiore t Fir > tt' to the feasibility of an I
t interconnection between the two wyst %. chat, according to SIPC, would eliminate the need for SIPC to construct approximately 16 1
miles of 69 kV line.
The two systems are presently interchanging I
I short term and economy power over the intertie and according to i
l l
l
- l
x.-
w =. z.. a. =- w:
~,.c.
- .~.~.
l I
. l SIPC, the interconnection agreement also includes provisions for wheeling over Illinois Power's lines, but the coop has not had a need to activate that provision of the agreement to date.
i 2.
. Illinois Power Co./ Western Illinois Power Coop. -- On i
June 25,1982 a 138 kV interconnection between Illinois Power and i
one of its co-applicant systems in the Clinton project, Western Illinois Power Cooperative (WIPCO), was coupleted. The interconnec-s tion was initiated by WIPC0 primarily to sarve one of its customers, a coal company.
t Another 138 kV interconnection between Illinois Power and WIPCO was t
completed on August 30, 1982. The. interconnection was initiated by l
i WIPC0 according to Illinois Power "in drder to improve service to the 1
l i
)
69 kV system in the area."
l l
l i
3.
Illinois Power Co./Kentucki-Utilities Co. -- By agreement i
dated January 1, 1983 Illinois Power entered into an interconnection I
agreement with the Kentucky-Utilities Co. The agreement provides for l
various power transactions between the parties.
I i
4.
Illinois Power Co./ Central Illinois Public Service Co. --
A 345 kV interconnection was energized on October 25, 1983 between Central Illinois Public~5ervice Co.'s Kansas Substation and Illinois Power's Sidney Substation.
l l
a = =.:.._
2... =.:. = :- -.. =..-
u.. =:
a. x.=x.u; : ~
.z::: aa,.o....
l l
l i {
5.
Illinois Power Co./ Farmer City -- An interconnection to provide wholesale power service to the Farmer City electric system was energized in October of 1984.
i Illinois Power Co. has energized numerous interconnections since the initial OL antitrust review in 1982. New agreements have been consumated with both large, fully integrated power systems as well as smaller municipal and cooperative power systems. The new interconnections identified by staff represent a continuation of a trend toward interconnection which was stimu-lated by the antitrust license conditions attached to the Clinton construc-tion permit as well as general. reliability and service requirements imposed upon a large public utility system.
It is staff's view that applicants' interconnections since the CP antitrust review have had a procompetitive effect upon the bulk power services market in central and southern Illinois.
i To the extent that new interconnections have increased reliability of par-4
~
ticipating power systems and broadened access to power supply alternatives for Illinois power entities, staff would encourage applicants to continue the development of new interconnections and interconnection agreements evidenced since the completion of the construction pemit review.
l B.
Wholesale Power Developments f
I l
t The applicants, principally Illinois Power Co., have been responsible for a series of power supply developments at the wholesale level since the CP l
antitrust review.
i L
f
.=
=.
..m._
..____._.m.m.._..-
-. q i i 1.
During the period 1981-82, the City of Flora Illinois expressed an interest in purchasing wholesale for resale power from Illinois Power. According to a representative of the City, Illinois Power offered to supply the City; however, the City managed to negotiate a more favorable agreement with another bulk power supplier.
1 2.
As a result of the newly energized interconnection between
)
Illinois Power and Farmer City Illinois (see " Interconnections"), the City requested and received full requirements wholesale power from Illinois Power beginning on October 4,1984.
3.
According to Illinois Power's Regulatory Guide 9.3 response, the City of Red Bud, Illinois expressed interest in obtaining wholesale service from Illinois Power. When contacted, the City representative stated that Red Bud had no interest in service from Illinois Power.
4.
The Mt. Carmel Public Utility Co. began taking partial l'
requirements wholesale service from' Illinois' Power on~ January 1, 1983.
Illinois Power delivered power under this Purchase Power Agreement to Central Illinois Public Service Co., which in turn provided trans-mission service for delivery of the power to Mt. Carmel. Effective l
January 1,1984, Mt. Carinel transferred to a full requirements whole-sale Purchase Power Agreement and. began taking all of its power require-ments from Illinois Power Co. over the transmission lines of Central l
Illinois Public Service Co.
m.e r
m
-4
,~-
n
., -.. +
,-,_,,_,,,.,-,-,,.,-m__7...,,-,m.,
~..
~
..~.~..
l 5.
Once the interconnection between Illinois Power ~and the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative was energized in September of 1984(see" Interconnections"),thecoopbeganpurchasingblocksof short term wholesale power from Illinois power, reportedly utilizing the full 40 MW capacity of the intertie.
6.
The Wabash Valley Power Association was involved in dis-cussions with Illinois Power in the spring /sunener of 1984 pursuant to the purchase of a large block of short term power. The generation and transmission cooperative did not consununate a power purchase agree-ment with Illinois Power because Wabash was able to negotiate a more favorable purchase agreement with another supplier.
7.
On May 24, 1983 Western 11'11nois Power Cooperative entered j
into a new three year agreement for purchase of power from Illinois
{
Power Co. The agreement will terminate upon comunercial operation of i
the Clinton nuclear plant. The agreement provides supplemental power.
j to WIPCO until such time that WIPCO, a co-owner of the Clinton nuclear j
plant, can begin taking power from the plant once it begins to produce comunercial electric power.
i 8.
The Western Illinois Power Cooperative has anticipated various l
Power shortages through 1993 and plans to meet any deficiencies with new i
generation (i.e.,Clinton)andpowerpurchasesthroughitsinterchange agreements with Illinois Power and the Springfield (Illinois) City, Water, i
Light and Power electric system.
l
=
_ ~. _
_,.__m_
m
~
4 f,
9.
As part of a FERC rate settlement reached with its wholesale power customers on November 18, 1983, Illinois Power agreed to a Short i
Term Energy Transmission Agreement and a long term Electric Transporta-tion Service Agreement. These particular service agreements now allow Illinois Power's smaller wholesale customers to more effectively shop for competitively priced power in both the market for " spot" or short term econonty and diversity power and energy, as well as longer term (more than 5 years) power from various power suppliers interconnected
{
with the Illinois Power system.
These two transmission agreements complement agreements reached earlier between Illinois Power and its wholesale customers that enabled these customers to take partial requirements power from Illinois Power.
(See Appendix F of the initial antitrust operating license review.) These two transmission agreements represent positive, proconipetitive developments since the earlier OL antitrust review, allowing smaller power sfstems to com-pete more effectively with the larger, fully integrated power systems for the most efficient sources'of power and energy in and adjacent to.
j 4
the Illinois bulk power market.
Those changes attributable to the applicants which have taken place in the Illinois wholesale power market since the initial Clinton operating 1
j license review have for the most part been representative of a continuum which began after the completion of the antitrust construction permit l
review. Power systems, both large and small, have continued their i
efforts to minimize costs by " shopping" for the most cost efficient l
i i
. _,. _,,. _. _ _ _ _ _.. ~ _
._.._-,,..._._.._l
,._.-~.=....--wa.c
" " " * ~ ' " ~
source of power to meet their individual loads. The Wabash' Valley Power i
i Cooperative and the City of Flora expressed interest in purchasing whole-sale power from Illinois Power but managed to negotiate more favorable agreements with other suppliers. The Mt. Carmel Public Utility Co. (a i
private power company located in Mt. Carmel Illinois), the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative and the Farmer City electric system all have
't begun taking wholesale power from Illinois Power since the original OL review. Moreover, the Western Illinois Power Cooperative has negotiated new interconnection and wholesale power agreements with Illinois Power that will enable WIPC0 to meet anticipated load deficiencies until Clinton comes on line.
A1.1 of these developments in the Illinois wholesale bulk power market 4
point toward the continuation of increased coordination and competition 1
among industry members evidenced during the initial operating license 4
antitrust review. Staff encourages industry members to continue to
" test the market" and explore new alternative sources of power supply..
The wholesale power developments identified since the original OL anti-i trust review have come about largely as a result of the antitrust license conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit and for the most i
part have resulted from procompetitive forces at work in the Illinois i
wholesale bulk power market.
t i
}
l
\\,
i C.
Mergers and Acquisition Involving Applicant Systems Since the initial OL antitrust review was completed in 1982, staff has identified two proposed mergers and one acquisition involving applicant systems.
1'.
Early in 1981 Illinois Power Company began discussions with the Cedar Point Light & Power Company regarding a merger of the two systems. On March 29, 1985, Illinois Power purchased the assets of Cedar Point Light & Power. Cedar Point was a privately owned electric distribution system serving approximately 180 custo-mers in the Illinois town bearing the same name. Prior to the acquisition, Cedar Point purchased 100% of its power requirements from the Illinois Power Company.
2.
Illinois Power and the Mt. Cannel Public Utility Company executed a stock exchange merger agreement late in 1981. The companies are presently awaiting federal and state regulatory approval before proceeding with the merger.*
- I!!ir.cis Power and the Mt. Carmel Public Utility Com agreement with the Illinois Commerce Comission (ICC)pany filed the merger on December 7, 1981.
The Central Illinois Public Service Co. intervened and protested the proposed The ICC initially ruled against the Illinois Power /Mt. Carmel merger, merger.
indicating that greater cost efficiencies would result from a Mt. Cannel / Central Illinois Public-Service Co. merger.
The case was introduced into the judicial system at the circuit court level where the ICC ruling was upheld--ruling against the Illinois Power /Mt. Cannel merger.
the decision which was overruled by the appellate court.Both Illinois Power and Ml i
The State of Illinois l
appealed the appeals court ruling to the State Supreme Court where the case is now pending.
l i
The Illinois Power /Mt. Carmel merger is also awaiting approval before the
[
Federal Energy Regulatory Comission (FERC). Docket No. EC82-4-00. At the request of Illinois Power Company, the FERC delayed a ruling on the merger pending a resolution at the State level; however, the FERC has recently l
decided to proceed with its own hearings and not wait for the ruling by the Illinois State Supreme Court.
r-_.._.nm_
m _
m=. m. _ ma
.m.
. _. a ar., g.=weuxq 3.
By letter dated February 21, 1985
- Illinois Power acting j
as agent for the owners of the Clinton nuclear plant, forwarded infor-mation pertaining to the planned merger of Western Illinois Power j
Cooperative and Soyland Power Cooperative. A copy of a " Coordination I
and Operation Agreement" between Soyland and WIPC0 dated July 25, 1984 l
was included along with the February 21 letter. According to the
" General Provisions" of the Agreement.
4 i
"As of Janua 1,1985, Soyland Power Cooperative (Soyland) andWesternblinoisPowerCooperative(WIPCO[)]will' pool' i
all electric power and energy and transmission capacity avail-i able from their respective facilities so that the electric power and energy and transmission capacity will be utilized as though i
l the two cooperatives were merged as of January 1,1985. The Agreement goes on to provide that a plan of merger will be pre-pared, and that the formal merger under Illinois law will take l
place effective as of July 1, 1986."**
Staff does not believe that the Cedar Point acquisition or the proposed Mt. Carmel merger pose significant anticompetitive problems in the Illinois t
bulk power market. Both systems serve small municipalities and were 4
wholesale customers of Illinois Power prior to being acquired.
(The i
' s-still pending.)- The' proposed Scyland/ '
l Mt. Carmel/ Illinois Power merge-i WIPCO merger represents a marriage of convenience and appears to provide the surviving system significant operating economies not available to i
t
- LettertoWm.H.Regan, Chief,SiteAnalysisBranch(NRC)from F. A. Span Power Co.)genberg, Director Nuclear Engineering and Configuration (Illinois j
(AttachedasAppendixC.) This letter wcs precipitated by a letter from Wm. H. Regan, dated January 16, 1985, requesting all information j
pertaining to the merger or proposed merger between Soylend and WIPCO.
}
i i
- Cited from letter to Sheldon A. Zabel (counsel for Illinoio Power) from j
John T. Ward 29, 1985.
(Attachedas
{
Appendix D.) (counsel for Soyland) dated January L
i t
a=ua.x x.a u.m :
. s.z x, =muumu y..
~~
4 either system standing alone. For example, the Coordination and 0peration Agreement between Soyland and WIPC0 provides for a joint pooling of the resources of each system,
"... in order that adequate supplies of electric power and energy be delivered to load centers of the distribution cooperative member-consumers of Soyland and WIPC0 on a cooperative not-1 for-profit basis at the lowest feasible cost through the cor di-nation and use of the facilities and capabilities of both Soyland and WIPC0 acting as a single entity."*
l Soyland's member systems are located primarily in central and southern i
Illinois, while WIPCO's member systems primarily serve the western counties of Illinois. The combination of the two systems should result in cost efficiencies normally associated with membership in an operating pool once Soyland becomes a generating entity, i.e., when Clinton comes on line. The more efficient Soyland/WIPC0 has the potential to provide i
j stronger competition in the Illinois bulk power industry, particularly in its dealings with larger more fully integrated power systems.**
Staff sees no significant anticompetitive effects befalling the Illinoit
\\
bulk power market as a result of the acquisition or proposed mergers which
{
have occurred since the original 01. antitrust review.
1
- Coordination and Operation Agreement between Soyland and WIPC0 dated July 24, 1984, page 3.
(Attachedas,AppendixE.)
~
l I
- A possible extension of the Soyland/WIPC0 Pool involves a recent power supply study by the combined cooperative pursuant to the benefits, if any, i
associateo with joint participation in any of Illinois Power's existing fossil-fired generating units.
j
x 2,a a w am c.c a:
.w..
-:: - ~ a;.
..n.1a w wr.maacw;
,w ;-a aa&x.,a~.~
i
. I l
D.
Miscellaneous Changes I
Staff has identified additional, unrelated, changes in applicants' conduct and activity since the initial OL review, none of which have resulted in significant negative competitive impact upon the Illinois bulk power industry.
i 1.
Co-owners Soyland Power Cooperative and Western Illinois Power Cooperative initially agreed to a combined 20% ownership share i
in the Clinton nuclear plant. Due to cost overruns associated with
}
the construction of the plant Soyland and WIPC0 have placed a dollar j
limit on their participation in the plant of.$450 million. According to Illinois Power, this sum now amounts to an ownership interest of approximately 18%.
l 2.
During 1983 Illinois Power Co. entered into discussions with
~
the City of Peru Illinois pursuant to a requ'est by the City to trans port energy for the City from its proposed Starved Rock Hydro Plant to l
the City's distribution facilities.
Illinois Power made a proposal to transport the puwer, however, the City cancelled its plans to build the i
l hydro facility and consequer.tly no transmission agreement was consunnated with Illinois Power.
t I
3.
Effective June 8, 1983, eight members of the Soyland Power Cooperative, which had been purchasing their wholesale power require-ments directly from Illinois Power Co., had their wholesale power
nw :.nw w a.n - - - -
- a, mm_a~ n.an. ~..,
... ~,.
contracts assigned to Soyland (at Soyland's request). Subsequent to this date, these eight distribution coop members have been served directly through the parent, Soyland.
The rationale for this change-over, according to Soyland, was to realize administrative efficiencies associated with a more closely monitored power supply for all of its member systems.
(Presumably, these administrative efficiencies would become operating efficiencies once Soyland became a generating entity l
with the commercial operation of the Clinton power station.)
None of these miscellaneous changes have had any significant negative impact on tne aihnois bulk power market.
Co-owner's Soyland and WIPC0 have assessed their comitment and ability to financially participate in the Clinton project and have reached a business decision to limit their' participation in the plant.
to $450 million. Though Illinois Power wi11 retain any ownership rights over and above the Soyland/WIPC0 comitment, staff believes that*the co-owners made a business decision based upon their ability to pay for their share of the plant and were not pressured into giving up a portion of the plant to Illinois Power.
Moreover, the decision by Soyland to consolidate its wholesale power contracts and the decision by the City of Peru not to build a hydro facility have not had significant detrimental effects upon the Illinois bulk power industry.
V.
Sumar.y and Conclusion Staff completed its initial antitrust operating license review of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (Clinton) in February of 1982. Several changes in the
a.u a u : x r z :: :.
.~..w.u.nmax.n. x,x=w.:.:,u w..=...
.x 4
1 21 -
applicants' activities since the original construction permit (CP) review in 4
1974 were identified; however, staff concluded that.
[
i i
" 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 Pcwer 4
Cooperative, staff 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."
(Clinton " Finding of No Significant Antitrust Changes," March 11, 1982 Federal Register, p.10655.)
1 i
j Since the staff completed its initial antitrust operating license review in February of 1982, there have been construction delays necessitating changes 1
I in scheduled fuel load dates for the Clinton plant. Fuel loading is now i
scheduled for January of 1986, approximately four years after the staff com-plated its initial antitrust review.
Staff felt this four year period created a " review vacuum" and requested updated information from the applicants i
i pursuant to any changed activity'since the initial antitrust operating license review.
1 After reviewing.the updated Regulatory Guide 9.3 information and contacting i
various electric utility representatives in Illinois and other interested
{
parties, staff identified several changes in the applicants' activities j
(principally those of Illinois Power Company) since the initial operating license review.
Many of the changes, e.g., new interconnections and partial i
requirements wholesale power sales, by' Illinois Power Company, represented i,
extensions of those changes identified in the original operating license review and have provided additional procompetitive stimuli to the Illinois i
i
_.....-.----__-w-_.,-.,m...-_-e-=.-
--w--,,...-
.._,-...~----..-e.._,..,_.,
r~
'= ~ :m~ u ~~~ =~ " w ".
m-
~'-~"=M
^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~
l s
ha n a~~
industry. Smaller power systems in Illinois have been able to successfully " shop" for alternative sources of power and energy." Applicants Illinois Power Company, Soyland Power Cooperative. Inc. and Western Illinois Electric Power Cooperative. Inc. have 'nitiated a study to determine whether f
i I
or not future jointly owned generating facilities would be economically feasible.
i New transmission agreements have been consuunnated between Illinois Power and I
its wholesale power customers that provide these smaller power systems i
with the means to take advantage of the benefits normally associated with
{
1arger, fully integrated pwer systems, e.g., access to short term economy I
and diversity power a.d energy sales and access to transmission for long term l
i i
block purchases of power and energy from a number of different power suppliers.
g Increased coordination,between those fully integrated power systems and the smaller, less diversified power systems has led to greater competition in the Illinois bulk power industry. This trend toward greater coordination among i
industry participants began with the institution of antitrust license condi-i l
tions at the construction permit review stage.
i 1
The changes that have been identified since the construction permit review have by and large provided momentum for grea'ter coordination, and consequently i
l increased competition, between all groups of power supply systems in central and southern Illinois. Staff observed this trend toward increased competition among b'ulk power suppliers in its initial antitrust operating license analysis.
I This trend has continued since 1982 and consequently staff sees no reason to change its recomunendation that "no affirmative significant change determina-tion be made pursuant to the application for an operating license for Unit 1 i
)
of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station."
i
wt..w 2d e. p.a.:.x
.c c. ; ; ' a :..;>.
e e
e e
e APPENDIX A D
e e
e e
b
m..w w w a ;s: - =
- ..u.
.. ;. i:av
~
t P
CLINTON NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY, SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. AND WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-461 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ANTITRUST CHANGES
'O e
e
-. :.g. -
~n I
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 8.
Changes Not Resulting from License Conditions V.
Sunmary and Conclusion i
Appendices i
A.
Illinois Power Service Area Map 8.
Municipal Generating Systems Located in Illinois C.
Members of Soyland Power Cooperative D.
Members of Western Illinois Power Cooperative l
E.
Clinton CP License Conditions and l
Department of Justice ", Advice Letter" F.
FERC Litigation n
v.-
e,--
wagav
-~
~ ~ '
I.
Introduction Unlike the procedure established for review of construction permits, prospective operating licensees are not required to undergo formal antitrust reviews unless the NRC 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 tNe construction permit (CP) stage.2 The Commission in its recent Summer 8 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.
"T.'.: -t:tuta 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., tri gering a formal OL antitrust review, the particular change (s) must meet all three of these criteria'.
I i
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
'This 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.
l sVirgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, No.1, Docket No. 50-395A, dated. June 30, 1980.
- Summer, p. 7
i o
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 J
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.
i II.
Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois l
The electric power industry in Illinois can be segmented into two portions, l
that integral to the City of Chicago and its surrounding area, and the remainder of the state.
I The Chicago area is serviced by one of the largest domestic electric power j
companies, Commonwealth Edison Company.
The remainder of the state (i.e.,
j from the north central portion, to the southern tip of the state) is serviced l
by a group of power companies including municipal, cooperative and private l
power companies.
j 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
~
j in which the incidence of any anticompetitive practices associated with the activities of the Clinton Applicants will have the greatest impact.
This is t
i the area in which the three applicants serve and the area where the use of the power and energy generated by the Clinton nuclear plant will be most concentrated.
A.
Investor-Owned Utility Systems (IOU) i l
1.
Illinois Power Company (Illinois Power)
I 4
Illinois Power, the company responsible for constructing and operating the Clinton plant, is the largest electric utility system in the relevant marketing f
I 2
l
z-
- a s
area, in terms of owned or controlled generating capacity, high voltage transmission facilities and electric load served.
In 1979, Illinois Power had
'4 7dQ N nf nanerating capacity; 2,448 miles of transmission lines 69 kv or higher; and a (summer) peak load of 3,019 N.
I 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 l
transmissiin lines as well as with interconnections to other power companies I
i in the area.
(See map of Illinois Power's service area, included as Appendix A.)
r Illinois Power's operating revenues for 1979 amounted to $752 million j
(approximately 65 percent from electric operations and 35 percent from gas tacility operations), with net income o'f $91 million.
f 2.
Central Illinois Public Service Company (Central Illinois) f I
f 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 Mw 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 operating revenues of $448 million for 1970 nd act income of $67 million.
t
- I 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 l
fully integrated and the two systems are also interconnected extensively by high voltage and extra high voltage transmission ties.
(
l I
l 3
3.
Central Illinois Licht Company (Central Illinois Light)
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 N, 339 miles of transmission line 69 kv or higher and a summer peak load of 1,055 N.
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 companiass to supply a specifled amount of firm power to an Atomic Energy 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 tee 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 N, 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 not income for 1979.
'The sponsoring companies are:
Central Illinois Public Service Company, 20%
ownership; Illinois Power Company, 20% ownership; Kentucky Utilities Company, 20% ownership and Union Electric Company, 40% ownership.
4
-. -. - - - -. ~. -, _.... -
.... ~,.
i j
Of the 12 investor-owned utilities doing business in Illinois, those mentioned L
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
~
i i
L l
- 8. Municipal Electric Systems 2
Twenty-Three of the thirty-eight municipally owned electric systems in the state possess some degree of self generation.s Of these twenty-three systems, the largest is that owned and operated by the City of Springfield, Illinois l
with 530 Mw of capacity in 1979.
Most of the remaining generating municipals i
are very small and typically supply only portions of their loads, purchasing l
the remainder from other suppliers -- usually the larger 100's throughout the i
State.
(This is typical of the structural format for the industry nationwide, i
j with the larger private investor-owned companies supplying varying amounts of l
partial requirement service to the smaller self generating utilities and full t
i requirements service to those municipals or cooperatives with no generation.
1 j
There are however, pockets throughout th's industry where very large municipal j
or government systems, e.g., in the City of Los Angeles or the TVA throughout l
l the State of Tennessee respectively, where the private systems do not represent f
j thepredominantsourceofpowerandenergy,but,theseareasrepresentexceptions I
}
to the norm.) None of the municipal systems in Illinois is a co-owner of the l
Clinton nuclear plant, however, many of the systems have benefited from the license conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit.
See section entitled, " Changes Since the Construction Permit Review."
I I
i i
,~
'The other IOU's operating within the state are:
Cedar Point Light and Water Company, Mt. Carmel Public Utility Company, Sherrard Power System, South j
Beloit Water, Gas and Electric Company, Interstate Power Company, Union 1
Electric company and Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Company.
(Though most l
l of Electri-Energy, Inc.'s load is outside of the state much of the excess l
ll capacity produced by the Company goes to members operating in the relevant area.)
sSee Appendix 8 for a listing of all municipal generating systems located in
)
the State of Illinois.
I r
I l
5 1
i
= - -
C.
Cooperative Power Systems (Coops)
There are thirty rural electric coops in the state of Illinois, two of which are co-owners of the Clinton nuclear plant, i.e, Soyland Power Codperative, Inc. (Soyland) and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc. (WIPCO).
The majority of the coops are distribution coops and have no generation or trans-I mission facilities of their own.
They are characteristically supplied by the private 100's or larger generation and transmission (G&T) coops serving in the area.
Presently, there are two G&T coops in the state, WIPCO and the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative (SIPCO).
SIPCO had generating capacity of 280 N in 1979 with 100 miles of transmission line supplying its three distribution
]
cooperatives at wholesale.
In 1979 WIPC0 had generating capacity of 57 N i
and 545 miles of transmission line.
Scyland is an organization (which presently has no generation or transmission facilities) set up to acquire a 10.5% interest in'Clinton Unit 1.
It'is com-prised of fifteen member distribution coops' located in the central and southern portions of the State of Illinois -- essentially, the non-Chicago area of the State.
Once Soyland Power Coop (Soyland) begi'ns taking Clinton nuclear power, i
it too will function as a G&T coop supplying its member systems with wholesale bulk power.
III.
The Construction Permit Antitrust Review 1
In order to make a "significant change" determination it is necessary to have some benchmark from which to measure " change." A brief resume of the results of the CP review should provide an adequate framework in which change can be i
measured.
i I
h l
'See Appendix C for names and addresses of Soyland members, and Appendix 0 i
l for names and addresses of WIPC0 members.
I 6
[
i i
t Illinois Power Company, the principal applicant and operator of the Clinton j
Plant, applied for a construction permit to build its first nuclear power plant in 1973.
Like all other non grandfathered nuclear applicants (those f
i applicants seeking cps or OLs after the 1970 amendment)
Illinois Power had to undergo an antitrust review at the CP stage to insure that its activities l
in connection with the construction of the plant did not " create or maintain f
a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws" -- as prescribed by Sec. 105c f
of the amended Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
j r
i 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 I
in conjunction with its dealings with cooperative and municipal power systems f
in or adjacent to Illinois Power's service area.
These concerns were addressed f
l by the Department in a letter to the AEC requesting additional information from the Applicant:
i L
j "Among the alleged matters with possible antitrust implications f
l which the Department (of Justice] seeks to clarify by means of f
the requested documents are:
refusals of the Applicant to inter-l I
connect with other electric utilities on reasonable terms; efforts l
to preclude development of alternative bulk power supply sources f
4 by others; acquisitions of other electric utilities; refusals to wheel power for small systems; allocation of territories and f
j restrictions on end use of purchased power."10 f
I d
After submitting additional clarifying data in response to D0J's dccument request and after the anticompetitive concerns were aired, the Applicant agreed l
to a set of policy commitments that were attached as license conditions to i
{
its construction permit for Units 1 and 2 of the Clinton nuclear plant, f
(
i
" Letter dated January 24, 1974 from Thomas Kauper, Assistant Attorney General, I
(signed by Joseph Saunders) to Howard Shapar, Assistant General Counsel, AEC.
I 7
i 7
i
o Generally, the policy commitments addressed the following areas: I!
Illinois Power (Company) will interconnect with any neighboring entity a.
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 Company 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, The' Company will include in its planning and construction programs g.
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 follows:
- 5ee Appendix E for complete listing of all of the antitrust conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit.
8 9
i 1
l j
"In our opinion, these policy commitments should provide competitors f
of Applicant with. competitive alternative sources of bulk power j
..d substantially eliminate the grounds on which complaints i
f 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 f
conclude that an antitrust hearing will not be necessary with respect to the instant application.nxa l
l The Attorney General's advice letter was published in the Federal Register in
[
f May of 1974.
Since no petitions to intervene were received, the CP antitrust
{
j review effectively ended with the publication of,the Attorney General's advice i
l letter, although the construction permit was not issued until February of I
i i
j 1976.
i, j
IV.
Chances Since the Construction Permit Review I
l The Commission's Regulatory Guide 9.3 for OL applicants requests data pertaining te changed activities since the CP antitrust review:
[
i 4
i "This regulatory Guide identifies the type of information that j
l the Regulatory staff considers germane for a decision as to t
l whether a second antitrust review is required at the operating l
license stage."
L j
By letter of May 23, 1980 the principal applicant, Illinois Power Company, j
submittea on behalf of itself and as agent for the co-owners, Soyland Power l
Coop. and Western Illinois Power Coop., responses to the Commission's 9.3 data request.
i f
From staff's review of the 9.3 data response and analysis of various public j
l information sources, two distinct types of " changes" since the CP review l
l
" Appendix E, 00J " advice" letter dated April 29, 1974, pp. 4-5.
l l
9 i
h
-~
l have been isolated:
- 1) changes resultant from implementation of CP license conditions; and 2) changes not directly related to the CP license conditions.
A.
Chances Resultina from License Conditions l
t Many of the changed activities which have occurred in the Illinois electric power industry since the CP antitrust review have resulted from extensive
{
negotiations between the larger IOU's, the smaller municipal and cooperative
[
systems and various governmental agencies concerning various forms of coordin-
[
ation and power supply.18 The fruits of these negotiations have been realized j
by many of the smaller systems in the area.
For example:
l l
6 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-mented after the CP review terminated in 1974, they were directly
'f dustU,$~r"2""""'"'"'""'
n t
i 2)
The same municipals which sought in'terconnection agreements from j
Illinois Power have recently opted to take partial requirement l
wholesale service rather than taking service under the provisions of
'f
+
- the previously negotiated interconnection agreements.
This represents l
a new option for t'hese systems; I
3)
Illinois Power entered into an interconnection agreement with the electric system operated by the City of Springfield, Illinois; 4)
Two smallet* power companies, Soyland and Western Illinois Power Coops, have purchased ownership shares of the Clinton Nuclear Plant, thereby sharing in the benefits of a 1,arge, fuel efficient baseload power plant; "I))inois Power is also currently involved in several rate proceedings with various Illinois runicipals 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 requirement wholesale power agreement rather'than agreeing to an offer of purchase l
(of its electric system) by Illinois Power; 6)
Illinois Power received interconnection requests from the Villages of Flora and Chatan, Illinois and from the Farmer City, Illinois electric system; 7)
The City of Springfield, Illinois has approached WIPCO regarding possible participation in a joint generating plant; and, 8)
As a result of WIPCO's 138 kv tie with, Illinois Power in 1978, the Coop became a member of NAPSIC (North American Power Systems Inter-connection Committee) a dats gathering organization formed to ensure acceptable levels of operation and reliability of its members.
Mtnougn tne above changes have occurred subsequent to the CP antitrust review, they were anticipated during that review 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 license conditions attached to the Clinton constructio'n permit were structured to remedy certain allegations of anticompetitive conduqt by Illinois Power.
Generally, the license conditions were-designed-to-increase----
the alternatives and opportunities 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 4aseload nuclear desirable.
By increasing i
coordination between the various 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 positiv' performance effects e
i j
11 l
.]
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 Comission.
8.
Chances 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):
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
.r 2)
Joint planning among Soyland Power Coop., Western Illinois Power
These three G&T 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."
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 no'r does it carry any negative antitrust implications that would likely be remedied.by the Commission.
t
- 3), Illinois Power's new retail rate structure was redesignad 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-i or delay construction of costly new generating plants and to level i
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 f
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);
"See the April 10, 1981 issue of the Wall Street Journal.
l 13 l
~. -
-.i
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 t
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 detemine if they can provide efficient and reliable service to their customers with various foms 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 remaining in the electric power
~
industry is no longer feasible for the municipal, they may then choose to sell out to Illinois Power.
l The systems serving Mt. Camel and the Village of Ladd are l
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
" Agreement for Purchase of Power," dated May 1, 1979.
In this light, i
14
[
4 i
l
e o
N Illinois Power's recent overtures to purchase the electric facilities in Ladd, Waterloo and Mt. Carmel do meet the first two Summer M teria -- the activity has occurred since the CP review and is attributable to the Applicant -- however, the proposed a'cquisitions 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:
4 a)
Western Illinois Power Coop (WIPCO) has planned to add new generating capacity to its system by adding a new 100 Mw coal 4
plant in 1988; i
i b)
WIPCO reduced the size of a newly planned turbine plant from 75 h to 72 Mw 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; 3
d)
WIPCC's peak load increased from 42 h in 1978 to approximately 45 % in 1979; e)
Illinois Power's peak load and generating. capability have
~
changed since 1976.
Net generating capability increased from approximately 3,400 Mw in 1976 to approximately 3,800 W in 1980, while peak load increased from 2,570 Mw to 3,150 W over the same period; and, i
1 15 l
f)
Soyland Power Cooperative has announced plans to construct a baseload coal-fired plant in Pike County, Illinois to go on line in 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 baseload 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 I
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 i
4 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.
- l 16 L
O O
e o
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, have 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 i
of any detrimental conduct or activity (to the competitive process in central and southern Illinois) on the part of Illinois Power Company, Soyland Power l
Cooperative or Western Illinois Power Cooperative, staff recommends that no I
affirmative significant change determination be made pursuant to the application for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station.
I h
I i
i I4
~
L i
17 i
l
APPENDIX A:
ILLIN0IS POWER CO. SERVICE ABEKYAP
...Wi.e.;C.
.....u
%.,;.2.5;k. &n zbM : 5.W.T;/d. :. ;t 2.m.m.,.~ w..:.. pt-1 W-m...
W.-$i f= M T 5-E. 5?.. -WCN v
+ hs;-S:S6f.Or66-F:-s.du.:ts?'w:k3f4'D..
54:i.*@iHdrR.
' 4;.uc446 -.m.r*.2 4f4e' k.%an. $[;.5.iyi.p:
- ,..w,24J-M.$.%.-r.O. v.c'JEM$'.d.<r,. -,. 5*6 3,lf m
~-
nQQ+
.yy* CHlCAGO f# Me;#4-1*'lliYa 9.Q*:J%#;d.
yigj..
- '*;;;.',,-
- % @",CM.k..
'QT*h v*.MA,.
'nt1C* Wy NY'?.y
.~w s.v.:;
,2 s, ^ -uqww-M ~3*.
a
- E.a. - n:
-r w.WWK- ~~&'W. '%~WY
.e.
4,-. e2,m'% wygf J'd%,"C* '
,4.fr 4
~
-~
%. N. -
y:Bm-;-7 --^h
...t.,
_. c t
. gm e-y LA SALLE
.'Jq:.
. g~"ggj^~
.,..., r+.'.li:
HENNE9tN t-
=
'fr&v.0np.t. -
STATION 1
.. t M
'M gy&QQ gnwmmm
,s :.a"sa".C'.".?.
r#4,
Jahr * ~
i> GALESBURG
~ ^ ?w &.. ?, & Q~... $ q ~$ #_- Wh...-
hi-
'. n
..a -
ee_ -.;-- - -
ama
,,,W*
Q;~.&3.
- h"" ~ 5.w*
= x-p.
v ~ ;.:. ~ei
.. n t'
Y hrn:-
b; l$.hb t :-
SNINGTON h-9,'.*.*.*'". %w6,',@r.w".*.gh wr=&--
' 'TATIOll";'
-o
-. msagt.....
rHAVANA
-- "i. - -
~.d.h f '.Q.1 TATION MS *TJd,y,:*.%A';
4 1
se_. _~ -%i.~.=v.e.Wt'. t.'da.6(6 M.ys.
x STATION g DAN; ILLE
- w. p.[r, ** :.w.S p
- 4
.583iD' CHAMPAIGN w.
n ~~_s~-nn. - ~ m m
L.i EW:Ms-T~a :.rNH95-W.
U
-m:,,an...aww.L'.997.
, anst
.CW
.m w.:;, x..
&*4h
. ~. - -
w.h.h.g'h
& h. ~',..
j QRCATUR r
rem..
-r
.w., e.
,.Pir.gphe.aC.
M6 e:
~ ^%
J., 5vM Nrwwp,CKSONVILLEP9'/4:{s -
+g.-
t~
.IC.~r'd. T4'."';..ca.t';_WS2sh..-Wi-t
. %, e.g..
c:3 t c
W.
f-y'.: ^%&FC.S"3 W,
AL2 is,m.'-=6 e*'=**f 5%5wAb
.s w==
i.2 d e'Sai$. HILLS 80RO
"_h _
F'T w N
-_. m eaetyatie,.,,
e I. A&[y. Q : g*
y
-@e,.,2 M E e
y
=.wi w m-w.-
. **.'""./ wooo river e w -'e r Ge*C*a. *L h
t.r; _v4_* -- =.. -. _ x.-e STATION
-m N m 2. y,,.-.'w"-i'hm - D
ST. LOUIS GRANITE CITY MQ'. _
m :+=+Ee_._ w :n O
w.
.,m......
gg, m' wm' u%r-SELt.EVILLE SALDWIN T.
1.EGS4D M M-kv-r v h
AREA SERVED g
- m
.}'s w?'+ N NM**T.
E umaoR GENERATING STATION SPARTA P- "
-7
'75.'--
i
[e
-".' W Q i b NUCLEAR GENERATING STATICN M/? ','2;.=. w--
' u.+'t.n>g:s.,.sw.
O GAS STORAGE FIELD 1
c.:5.n - ~"'
. ra : ;;.;w---
\\
u.E-s.
- - _ _ -.... rw ' -
l g'
s1. '
,,o I
.;. --.3 : -s.a.e p;e. 4. e, t.
e
}
.c..
r
..kW..ud:.'.t.p=~
i
.-i.s.,...<.~.
..w c e.4. - -,t r
e sev
'.o
- f
=[
t..
g.
.---..n..-
g
.~
P 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 Utflities Carmi Water and Light Department Fairfield Municipal Electric Department Farmer City Electric System Freeburg Municipal Light Plant Geneseo Municipal Utilities Highland Electric Light Department Marsnall 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 l
Springfield Water, Light and Power Department Sullivan Electric Department -- -----, ----
Waterloo Light and Power Winnetka Electric Department Source:
Electrical World Directory of Electric Utilities, 1979-80, 8th Edition.
B-1
s,
.e APPENDIX.C
'SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
Coocerative Members Name Address Clay Electric Co-operative, Inc.
P. O. Box 517 Flora, Illinois 62839 Clinton County Electric P. O. Bex 40 Cooperative; Inc.
475 N. Main Street Breese, Illinois 62230 coles-Moultrie Electric,
P. O. gox 709 Cooperative, Inc.
East Route 316 and Logan Street Mattoon, Illinois 61938
~
Corn Belt Electric Cooperative, P. O. Box 816 Inc.
1502 Morrissey Drive Bloomington, Illinois 61701 Eastern Illinois Power P. O. Box 96 Cooperative 330 West Ottawa Street Paxton, Illinois 60957 Edgar Electric Co-operative P. O. Box 190 Association RFD 6 Paris,' Illinois 61944 Farmers Mutual Electric Company P. O. Box 43 f
1004 S. Chicago Street Geneseo, Illinois 61254 Illini Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 637 1605 S'.
Neil Street--
i Champaign, Illinois 61820 j
t Illinois Valley Electric P. O. Box 70 l
l Cooperative, Inc.
Princeton, Illinois 61356 j
\\
McDonough Power Cooperative P. O. Box 352 i
West Jackson Road Macomb, Illinois 61455
]
Monroe County Electric P. O. Box 128 l
Co-operative, Inc.
Illinois Route 3 and Country Club Lane i
i Waterloo, Illinois 62298 l
Name Address Shelby Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 368 Route 128 and North 6th Street Shelbyville, Illinois C2565 Southwestern Electric Cooperative, P. O. Box 409 2..:.
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
[
P g
4
.O e
f i
l t
j r
l i
i I
l I
l f
i i
t i
i I
t I
- - ~.
s APPENDEFS
/
WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
Cocoerative 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 i
Inc.
Canton, Illinois 61520 Western Illinois Electrical Coop.
P. O. Box 338
[
Carthage, Illinois 62321 1
J
'Y J
t 1
l
- l i
{ *})
6-
- ~
^J
~@j@ES -^ " '
~ ~ ~ ~5 T
i zertson asy.r3 what ressble. Au ather return on lavestment round hereta to be Arneancart 1 41
<\\
property, rent or personal. Is subject to tasa. reasonab12 9118.0oo. The combined total tien la sne -a=*
prearribed, and this sec. As 43Stoss.
han, se* 2974.
4 usa ts amo i.=nt.4 te embruet
- 4..irewy 'eutw. ta. tout =wo.,
zumoa rown company, cunton pows 5
- 1. Ferry fyanahh and tou bridges, which. 'estred la 1972. both frona higaway and froma Stat en. Wts 1 and 2; AEC Docket Nos. $4 I"
for the purpose of this chapter are consid.
l ared raal property.
~
Faumed tells, as wen as misceDaneous ta.
441A and 50-442A; Department or Justici enee, amounted to only 8358.947 and taag Fue No. do.415-67.
mandme an oc me quased p=issoas et me sum was issuecant provide the neura T** han =tuated our edvtos purms =
l.
so o.de sa oatest, is seems r. lear thas round hemin to be reaseeable. Aeoordmgiy, ** p=282a8 c! ****5** 20s or me Atomo i
- m. oom ca erset 3t= tae city tae duem. m mun be onessered that tae pn ent teu rangy Act. m amned, m. agud a tw t.
tsaa to permit tasation of a heldge se such structure is not ascensive.
abow-cited appucauen.
tridge w.inerwi.e esemps froaa taustsen.
up.a au ine e, seance I and tant tae me.
- "'d"**'** Th '* ** *, plication to coh<
1 was me com does aos esempt bridgw whica muod rame or ton rce ne wannt of ta. Mis. ""** '"' ***2"' '2"*88 8'** $28 u8"'
I am heid ror pecat: rather the code specin.
ently includes as tasable real property su masapps mine va tae reorum bridge h = not of especity."2 be located at a site in Ear been shows to be unjust or unmaaaaaM.
beldges oncept those municipally owned and wtata the meanlag of the General artdp Townsalp. DeWitt county. Tulnois. Units 1
. aos head for praat. I senclude tapa the tases Aos or*1. sos.
- 8 *" ***'**8'*1r men duled to coininenei pod a zee county esasseme sa item ans
- ommweial opersuca in loeo and 1ssa, n, i
m paperty shargesak as a bridge espnos.
[PE Dee.74. loss 5 Fued 6-4-74;8:48 am) spectively. Ths untta are to be Integrated g*
Although the tan le elearly chargentle as wt2 Appucent's slutric Indk poww suppl 1 a betdse ass. ** amount or me ap===
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
$'a"F** usa and me poww marzeted u a pon I'
abou14 he remnaed to me estems taas me
'P,
I tas was actuaur refunded to me city. per
[Deekst No.So-41sA)
JppHeest. App 11onal la the second largest y $ 8* **1m wey wes ped ooer Q DUQUESNE LIGHT Co., ET AL.
seet$[s nNtsgenmttAgca ac 8
crey. thereter enesutussag an edresetw re.
l
' rund or that muca of me espnse. Aesord. Assignment of Members of Atomic Safety "Y ** *** *'"* ****888*d or 2.e mw depend.
and Ucensing Appeal Board able capacity of hydroelectrse genmung M-h887. me staan ed espaae should he naused
- "***'81' se In the matter of 2kavyy.lley., Unit 2s et m erm at sen rYrsoEw*.
a
'P'#
8*$**E. [,,,,,, up*
g, Motice is hereby given that in accort!Ance Appucaat's peak load is especud to doubt etwee an ss,sco which was a ennet.with the authority in 10 CFR 2.787(a). la the nest to yeare. and it has planned e basses to a rearmsoa rund and a esaarty nos the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and under constmetsoa utdational getawating ese an empense property enargable to me bridge.
TM*"**= Appeal Panel has * **irned the pacity to taenese its dependable erstem The pedesul Eighway adminimustaan also fol]cwing panel memhers to serve as the
- E 8 6 mw by 1942. citaten Units 1 eressansed an espense staan or es.oes sa as. Atomic Safety and Ucensing Appeal sad ma r pa t t tass pro)wted termy's fas. The twoord does not show how amandspecity$1gh voltage or estra much, tr any, et and rees were ibe-me non-Board for this anti.trGat proceeding 1 Appucant has mourring espaae d preseartmg am ease. Alma s.aosenthat. chatrean
,,gtage (ehr) mtercommettons to a num.
,No e,mer, beam is shown for escludlag waas Mashaat c.ramr. Member hw d masw syeums adjaeont u its smice e e he,w,e uncontested as na as a1 es. wnhan c.,arier. m.--
m=. =ci=u:4 ~-iweem adaon co.
pondsture. I eenenade taas it is property Dated: Apr!130.1s74.
ch).
es co.
and central The a
ts argue generany whns
-
- MAacAarr E.De Fr.o.
' C *' g,
m 38 "*"*"*"" la theory. id-that runds Secretary to fad AppealBoard. -
g ca Appucant participates ta nIta$ts.
7*es"p#8' an'ag
[Fa Doe.wisess Fned 4-4-14;s:45 ami Maaseurs Pool (m.Mo). Through EI.Mo sad i
ases mowerw. with me essepuses already insed.
ether laserenaaectsoa and esorainstion
---p.i== =*= panted to no Rom et me acre====ta. Appucaat engages ta a ssgnia.
esassmed,espeaans la Estabes A-1 which sea.
[ en et M.
1A nad 88-4e:AJ Ma egm et #cedinated planning. cpen.
j sestate such an espondsture ter ama.brsage ILLINOIS POWER CO.
[ey's"u" dempmat or im bulk power sup-emarganade M ree Itoceipt of Attorrisy Generers Advice and Applicant is alas a saember et the Mid.
.. year 1973 were as rouove:
Time for Fillne of Petitions To latervene Amersaan zaterpool Network (MAIN). a te.
en Antitrust Afettere geomet roumanity sounen, cialmed m ases. set Add: Depnciasses espense 13,ses T2te t*==i==4=
bas rece'ived. pursu-ssemovere of iAs 8=34 Poerer Jternet ta 3
rutmoss.commonwaaith maina= serving pria.
I*
t TDISI asst to section 10$c. of the Atosnic Ettergy espelly la the moreera one third or nunots.
SS.FFs Act of 1964, as amended g jetter of ad-le by far the largest supp!ser or electr$ city la f.'
- I'"M d 3a* ***"*7 vice froen the Attorney General of the me state. with a Is73 peak lead or 11.7sc ty. e" united states, dated April 2s.1s74. a ** C==ea=82 82a= = =m than n'e
. gn,.M 14.sse e0py of which is attached as Attach nent j u Mucant na meanst nu.
asenessoa * "
s.aos 1*
Appu m
-Aar parecur whose-interest may he'liis co.amat and contralsuaois pu"' M !
thenansedessessedenem sis.ess afected by this proceedtar atay yttr-(paa med 1.ase aw) arou The city 1strednese as ashames seman saant to I2.714 of the Commission's patchwork desen or sorrice areas, we the i dommaat suppuere er weetrtetty, both at j stelag as elskmed aeste during rwsont yeare
- Rules of Practice." 13 CFR Part 2. Als whaisese and reta11. la the lower two thirds i and pesats out thes mese omsta have mena g
naarenatag meaduy whne revennes have re. a petitisu for leave to tatervene and r,.
et n11ams. seen eyesem to ruur tasegrsted l M almens esas; ant. Os es bass or this stuest a hearms en the antitrust aspects W12 high voltage ud eht interconnecucas showsag. the city argues thes la 1 stag rates of the appilcagjan. ;'etiticas for leave le w*.th each other and with neighbottag sys.
'i ser the tutmo,33 se aos rosasashte to sea. yttervette and red;uesta f0E" hearing M tems. '2he two sysseams smalatata a dominans alder only past easts and that acene eenskler.. be Sled by Jtane 5.1s74, either (1) by posit 2em la genera.soa and tramataston, tu attaa should be given to aa'teir=*ad in. dehfery to the EC Public Doctreet meer servlee maa. A smaller piram17.ownsit <
3 eressen. Aseertilagty, the City esseuaung 1toon at 1717 E Street. NW Washing-ut!!!ty, central Zulacis Ilght ca. (peak load witness puolessed reture emess hamma spea ten. D.C er (2) by mall or telegrasa.fstaw). serves la two wow ta me annutt en assumed saattantas or the same rate et addressed to the Secretary. U.S. Atomic p,g g g.,ma, i
tassesse as has been esperseased la the ressag Energy C""".*an. Washington. D.C pass. In say optales Mis pmjoetsaa h too 20548. Attsal Chief. Public Fweisse a see the Department's Intters or speestattu to be given etest la desatte Sad. Branch.
the N==e aa= eenceratag Commonwealth i lage haussa.
,7tr.the Atomic Ettergy t'==i==faa Baassa's ZaSalle county Units 1 end 2. AEC Decast Nos. 8M73A and 56-374A. Depart.
saa m rassmese w staa r Justsee File No. 80-41H1. December m, eat,o.ts, and myron station. Unita 1 s AnaAstaas BaArrasaar.
3,3 Tae tesal. reasonatie bridge rever.ua ames Chief, Oplce of Antitrisef A In.
arasewood stanoa. Unita 1 and
- 3. Arc er the city for the preseas are essereas==d my demnity, Directorate of U.
Dennet Nos. so-4s4A. 80-484A. 50-884A. and addsag to the tota 1s72 eessa as7s. css. the esasday.
~
a u s7A marsh 4.le74.
/
Cf M
- t. :ed
' Dana
,esau umme; vot. s, no..- m.,cy m.
l 1
rr.e
Uplon Electric Co. (S targe mm aurt. based heartng vtti not be neoneaary wit 2p respect mahtenn.e crpenses, capital costs and a utility). Interstate Power Co.Shorfmed Power to the instant tpplientarn.
reasonable return on inv3ctmsnt which arv properly appitombts to ths p*.rticular trsas.
3ystem. and Iowa *D11nMs Osa ana Zuctr13 g, gg Co. serve emau geogra;hical areas along the acuan and ths facilities involved in that western bariier of Illinois.
Eno3 Power Compmy. Cuntan Power transacuin, stural electric coopermures cover 611 of IHl. Station. Units 1 and 2: AZC Docket Nos. W 1(c). " Neighboring electric system
- means eats geographicauy but serve mainly in rurs! 461A and 50-462A1 Department of Jusuce (1) a AnanciaUy responsible business corpora.
areas in the southern three-quarters of the File No. 80 415-47, tion, not.for-proot corporation. rural elec.
state. Twenty.eeven distribution cooperatives We set forth as Append 12 A to this letter trte cooperstive, municipal corporation or.
and two generation and transmission co. a statement of polley of D11nois Power Com* ganised under the laws of the state of D11 operstates (Western D11 nots Power Coopers. pany concerning bulk power supply arnnge* nois, company, assectation, joint stock com.
trve and Southern D11nois Power Coopers. ments with neighboring. electrto systems pany. Arm partnership, or penon owning stw) comprise the membership of the Asso. which it la prepared to make in connect 2n or operating. or proposing bona ade!T and in esation of IHinois Electric Cooperatives.
with its Clinton Power Station Unita 1 and good faith to own or operate, facillttee for Western IHinola Power Cooperstate serves
- 2. (The dean 1tions contained in the state
- the generstion, transmission or distribution several distribution cooperatives in the west. ment are intended to apply also to the text of electricity for buir power supply. qui wn.oentist port 2n of me state. Its geners. of this letter.) This commitment is made by whose facihtaes are or wn! be located in the gaan is sugletent to supply apprarimately > the Company with the underson e g that State of D11 mots, (111) whose fact 11 les are se percent of its load. The remainder la pur, the Department of Jusuce wul recommend interconnected, or are proposed to be inter.
ehased at wholesale from Applicant and CIPS to the Atomic Energy Commission that an connected. for the purpose of carrytag out sa approsamate ration of 40 percent and 60 anutrust hearing wn! mt be m1M in con
- one or more of the transactions refermd to at respecunty section with the licensing of the Company,a herein wtta facilities of the Company (p:o.
Cunton Power Station Unita 1 and 2. On this vided that any proposed interconsecuan uthwn Inanote Power Cooperstin gen.
erstes roughly 100 mw from three unita. This baals, the Company agme est its poucy ahan be lawful and feasible), and (17) which O&T' serves esclusteely the three southern, statements may be included as condluons te or wiu be a puhuc utluty under the laws most cooperstates with their entare supply to the construction permits and operaung of the State of Dunots of the Federst Power Iloonses to be laeued by the Atomic Energy Act and is or win be providing electrte serv.
of bulk poww.
Cther distributton cooperatives purchamo r*amm8=aion with respect to neee unna.
Ice under a contract or rste schedule on S!e kulh power entirely from Applicant, enurely The Company benene and maintains that with and subject to the reguistion of the from CIPS. or paruauy from both.
Its rste and service polletes and practices D111nois Commerce Commisalon or the Ped.
have been and are conalstant with anutrust eral Power Commission. The requirement
,g g,g era ma ny o which ocate undern da tha n tn b
til ty oes app to a 1
E~n No$c Yh8 5 E.trt
_m $..ce'[ =[e6 2 'buT M "!r'.'snS
$e ~ m@b ~ t and - t'[a' 8' "
- wrr = a m ena a.
. C.mp, t.
and the Vinage of Zadd Electrte Depart. oonadent that any such questions can be tion of "public ut111ty* under the D11 nots ment.' Seveft1 other municipal systems pma. saustactoruy answered, the Company destru Public Utgities Act or under a aimilar act.
ently operate on an l# Mated basta, each sup. to svold the ponetbility of having to east (The deSnition of neighboring electrte sys.
Ptying sta total requincnonts fresa small their resolution in an anuuust hearing. It taan includes systems which meet the above genersting units.a therefore has determined to make the state.
ents either now or in the future.)
Jteevita of Antstrust seedew. In the course ment of potter and commitment. expremmed requirem.Netshbortng enuty" means a neigh.
- 3g43, of our antstrust retter, certain allegauons herein.
bertng tiectric system owning or opersung.
- were received by the Department the sonoral Paragraph 7 of the statement of polley or proposing bona 8dely and in good faith to import of which was that Applicant has used appines to any additional nuclear generating own or operste, fac111ues for the generation las dominant position in generatton and unit of the Company which.tn an application of electricity for bult power supply.
transmissen in 1 a aervtco area to restraan to the Atomic Energy Comminafon. as ached.
L m W pur p m of W in n han e the oog ttive opportunities df smaner sys* uled to comanence aa=marcial operation w e maput tw bulk pr supply totas. For its part. Applicant has denied that prior to January 1.1980. The Company does trsnanctions between the Company sad a its poucles and practices have been or are not, however have any present plans for notgnbortag electric system are to unprove Snoonsistent with the antitrust laws. Now" any nuclear generating unita in addition to the retisbtlity and quality of service, to atobi over. In order to alimanate any questions as. Cunton power Station Unita 1 and 2.
the dupucation et f aculues, and to mini:ntre to the policies that it intends to follow dur.
A queouon has bun rataed "coccarning the em W such ar'rgment wul into1M Ap.
tag the period of the Cunton a=ama applicauen of the Company *e Servios Clases* planning by the parues and should be tech.
Pileant has formaused sta ponctu and indl. Scatton 40 (Wholesale E!octrt! Service tot nacauy and economicaur feasible and prac.
ested its wmtagn=== to have theat tactuded naanle). De Company does not regard a taeal.De arrangement should also be rec:p.
- P wholesale sustomer to be,11mited by that regna as nearly as may be although it la are in me s
't W1 rate as to the artes in which it turnaabee rooognised that. In any particular arrsage.
et Appucant's vue prwident, dated Apr2 8, electrie serrtoe or as to the 3. umber and asent, the beneSta may not be equal or ideo.
1M which as attached m loestlan of deltvery points for receiving sert
- tanna for each party and that a smaller elec.
h our opintoa theen policy scanstner.ta too. If the Company were to recel'* a fo*
1rie erstem may realise benedta watch are abould provide competitore of Appilcant w12 quest freut a neLghboring electric erstem for greater than those realisett by a larger system.
anapeutive alternattu sources of bulk pow. the purchase of electrio serrtoo for reen!* No party abould be obligsted to snter into an er supply and substantaany ahaa** the which ta not preecotly a customer of the arrangement if it would realize no net bene.
grounds on which complainta snade to the Company, the Company would seu power to Ate from the arrangement or if the arrange.
Departasent by smauer eyeteme were based. that eyetem either pursuant to Servtco seent ovuld result in r.et burdens to the On the etrength ci these pouer esamit.
C'a==**uce 40 es it may be amor.ded in petty. The pcaicies herein expreeded cannot mente, and with tale orpeatattou that the the particular c2rcutmatances or pursuant to be implemented un!!stersuy by me Coen-i r'a==ma will include them se ecod1McDa new rate schedulee as may be accepted or pony. If an arrangement between the Com.
to the license, we conclude that sa anutrust apptgend by the Federal Powot Commtaesca pany and a neighboring electric systets is to and any other regulatory authortty havtaf be succeentua and is to operate in the public
- App!! cant also supptles the enure bu!E jurtadiction.
laternet,it must be negotiated ana performed power requiremants of the Cedar Point Z.1ght Appeareas A in good faith and with fuu cooperacon by the parties to it. No party should carrteteusly and Water Cn, a sena11 privately-owneq maapon rewst opetran ppet a pnycent subnuued by ano*.hu party
. utuity fpeak load 375 kw).
e Thees municipal systeme include the Statement of Polley Concerning Bulk Power and the Company and nQbeg HwM C1tles of Peru. Altamont. 3reese. Suahnell.
Supply Armagements with Neighbortus symme am pn masMe maahamn Carlyte. Froeburg. 211ghisad. Mascoutah.
Electric Systems in Connocussa with Citn. to propose.s made by each othu.
Prtaceton, Red Bud. Sullivan, and Watartoo.
ton Power station Unita 1 and 3 3.The Coaspany wiu interconnect with any l
B11 acts, s' bach are presently coenplainante heighboring entity in ortler that the partlee AFEE 8. M-may ma and reause au tunedta prscticable l
in a proceeding before the Pedwal Power r"menmtanton (Ctty of Peru, et al. FPC Docket 1(a). " Company" aseens Illinois Power to be efeewd through the coordination and '
No. 5-7514. Aled December 5.1999) in watch Company and includes each present or fu. development of taetr respective systems and they are asektng an order frota the FPC ture wholly-owned subeldiary of the cosa. In carrying out,various interconnection serv. ;
directing App!! cant or CIPS to Interconnect pany and any successor to 11.
toes and trannettons. 'Ibe Contpany will as.
- 1th their facitaties.
1(b). " Costa
- means all operating and east to the fullest estent feastble any netgh.
i O
pgegaAL 30045T98. VOL 39, NO. SS-MONOAy, MAY 4.1774 I
~_ _,..
4*
u.
J'15960
- *MOTICES f,
bortar enuty en ths coordinauon of reserns condturns ans'en a bants that wtn fuur 11(a). nas etatemest of poucy is n through * **3* and Purchase of emergency compensate the Company for its costs tended to acect in any way the tranc j (I.
energy and amatatenance power upon terms incur ed and to be incurred and that will not certiacates of puhuc convenience and that win provide for the fun compenandon adversely adect the Anancing of such power sity. or other rights of the Company
,I el the Company's oceta. No party shan be re. station. De request shan be deemed timely any netshboring electric syste:n to quired to provide emergency energy or mam. with respect to Cunton Power Station Units electric service in the State of Iuinois.
tenance power !! to do ao wul impair the 1 sad 2 tf received by June 30,1976, and 11(b). Nothing herein shan be g
supolying party's abluty to render adequate with respect to any additional generating as a waiver by the Company of tta rig i
g and rettaale service to its customers or so unit if received within a reasonable perted contest whether or not ar.d the este omer electric systems. "a"=aats if any, to of time from a planning and operating which a particular factual attuation discharge its prior a=
41
- andra'at after the puhuc announcement 43
- 4. The Company and the nalghboring on.
by the Company of the proposed Anataustion sovered by this statement of po!!cy or ciude the Company from contas j ;*
tity shau each provide sualcaent empeerty of any such unit. As a part of any arrange
- anaged act of unfatt competition.
3 (which may include Arm contracted for es. anent that may be reached with respect to 11(c). The Company recogntzes tha pacity) In its system to enante it to carr7 tta such participation. the Company wiu inter.
plaaned for peak demand plus an adeque,te connect with and deliver any power to which entrytag out of sosne of the pouci resern. An adequate sannimum reserve re. the neighbortag electrte systema may be en. preened hereta in particular circums may. net be in the mutual intmet quirement aban be asutuauy determlaed uued under such arrangement at a deuvery Company and a neighboring Moctric from time to time as a pertestage of planned potat or points on the Company's system Nothing hersta le intended to preclud for pena semand (unless otherwise agvood) on a bassa that win fully compensate the and shad take into account such reserve crl. Cosapany for its costs.
Company and a netshboring electric e tarta as the nature of the respeettre systema
- s. De Company win seu bult power to from reaching an agreement which ex and piammed for peak dammad require in any netshboring electric system in accord. vartes or supplements the provisions geregoing paragraphs in a manner not order to assure re11abutty of service and an ance with rates terms and condluons which equitable sharing of reserve responsibility, fully compenaste the Company for its ocess. saatent with the broad pws expnse Each party aban provide such amount og and which do not restrict use or resale e**
paragraph 2 and appucable law.
spinalng reserve as than svold the impost. eept as may be necessary to protect the reu*
11(d). The Company does not inten ties of an unr===a=Ma damaad on the sys. abatty of Me Company's sptem. and as are this statement of poucy to become a mon carrier, tema of the other party. However, such spin. eecepted or approved by the appropriate.
slag reserve requirement shalbmot esosed tBe regulatory bosy or bodies. De Compan7
- 12. The foregotag poucles are to be t stannusa lastalled reserve. requirement. Ir. shan not be requind to make any such onl* anented and app!!ed in a manner cons ever a reasonable period. a party has failed if the Company does not have available suf* with Federal. State and local laws, to deliver emergency energy. or if a party has actant gonaration to provide the requested Mona and orders. Au m em appeared to make esoeestte cans for esmer. service or if the sale would impair the Com* 41 Mons, terms and practica m W m gency energy, the parties shan jotatly study pany's abtuty to render adequate and rena. sub)ect to the acceptance or approval or the saatter for the purpose of desersaintag ble servios to its customers or to disadarge regulatory apactes or courts hm the adequacy er landequacy of the reserve its prior ocuamatments if any, to other elec* diction over them. Tth the ettent that actica may at m tim k gm m generating especity and tranamtaates fact!!. trio syntama.
to efect any such champs, the Company tasa being provided to anset the requemmaats S. The Cosapany wiu work with neighbor.
of the intereaaaammad syetates and of deter. tag etestrie systems to fact 11 tate the et.
any netshboring ele e '$
M
=Naa **====** or correcting any deg. shange of bula power by transmission over anIof the f i gP es the of recourne be appropriate forum to steacasa.
Sts transalastoa facuttles between or among S. The agreement for the laterchange ar. two ce more neighbortag electrse systems and such changes mereta se may at the stm rangement between the Company and a between any neighbortag electric system and ttate la accordance with law the e
any other.electrie system engastag ta bula, g( terest. or good industry practice metthbortag entity win not include restric.
tive prortsaans whash would prectude a party power supply otrtside the Cosapany's service
[FE Dec.413373FUed 5 3 74;B:43 am from engaging in interesanection and coer. area between. whose fari N aa the Com.
diastaos arrangessents with others, but may paaf's tran==h=saa 11aes and other traus.
tactude appropriate provinsons to assure (1) ausstaa Maes would form a esattauous eles.
[ Docket No.FRnf.5010]
mat me cos:peny recetres ascquase moties og trieel path, provsdad that (1) parassa:oa to seen addiena==2 interesanectson er coordsas. uttuae such other tr.a.a-unes has STATE OF NEW JERSEY.-NUCLEA taan. (u) mat the partses wiu jotacy sea, been ebeataed by the proponent er the a,.
ENERGY COUNCIL ander and agree spos such ameneures. af any, rangesmens. and (11) the arrangements rua.
FWag of Petition for Rule Making as sto r=maaamhty N to prosen the My can be amaasaamada'ad M a fume.
aaunanny or the tatereemaseted systems and teemas and ea*h a uai standpoint. such Nouco is hereby given that the S
.to prevent undue burdens fresa besar tea.
tr===="-
shan be em terms est runy of New Jersey through its Nuclear posed on ear steses, and (tu) that the coma.
raa-'a ao company for its aussa. Any orgy Council, by letter dr.ted March pany win be runy compensased for ate eense.. astsamernas eiessrte syssam requestang such ooed sadustry practase as de,esoped ta ihe tramentaea arrangements maan gtvo res. 1314. has filed with the Atcmic En eres trees same to tune (if not unremennably someEe advanee socos or its sehedule and Commi==Mn a peut:nn for ru:e senartenve) win satasty taas prortssen.
requaesnesta. The company chan nos be re.
The pectioner requeats that the
- d. Interconneestems win be avouable for a quared to enter sate any arrangement which actretnants in 4 pend E cf 10 masthhastas eteatris syssena en any at the would tapear system rouantuty or emer. Part b0 for emergency planning and company's tastaued tr====iatan and sub. somey tr-en espacity, at betag too. terfacing by Comunission licensees transmust.aa reefuum it the prwomme later esassed that whue sosee traawatastoa facau. State and local govemments be adap ensnesuoa sa techasesur and econeaucan tasa anny be operated fany needed othee and app 1!ed to Cm mfie'on !!censee:,
faamma and the ceanpany is en:2y.m p.y tr-wa= fastutses anay be for emergeme7 assed for its costa. Inter.aaaaarnaam win aos use and operated esther *aalended er pet. are et otherwise subW to Appen be uanited to low vettages when hisner vets. asany sendet.
E and who rective. siere, process. asd ages are aratlable froma the campsey's ta.
- 10. The ra ray shan saatude ta sta p;as, distabute large quancties of radioac saaned factutses sa the eres where the saner. mang and somstruetton progroms sucesent anatadals routinely (eg. Sms emanecties sa destrod. controt and telemeter. traneausanos espeetty as regstred for me process radioactive dn2gs or kil tag raetunas shan be preetced as requsreg treassessoas referred to la paragraph 9. pm. trradiators).The petitioner requests t for the astety and reustutty or the tater. vided any neighbortrg electris system gives rules be developed which will rec esaaeeted systems, me company settesent advanee motsee as clear identinestion of critical nuell 7, The ceampany win asord sa opporte. anny be asessenry se
--ada*a les ro*
mity to paruespass to any messabortag else, quirments fram a rumettonal and techascal criuent pathways, and critical segm tras systeca that mates a tamely request senadpoEnt and that such amaghhartag alec. of the populauon potenually at risk there.'av ta the ownernhap et, or purtheon at tres system runy compementes the company provtsions Inade for chansical fom unst partscapatsoa power from, cuason te ste easts. The company shau not be r variabi!!ty of critical nuclides as a f
. Fower statson Unsts 1 and 2. and any ag. quared to osastreet tre===iaa== faenisses tr tion of varying product In1L he p dauenaa nuclear generattag unts which me it ands enastrustsen et such taenttaes is. tiener requests that the requiremena company many constract, own, and operate and which la the appuestion Aled with the feasable, or if its eests la eenasettaa aero. the Cotntnission's ** Reactor $1te with would onesed its benetts therstrema, er teria.** 10 cm ' Part 100 be sulta
[ M **'IT,c3 "7,",",,','
tr it ands seen facuttses would tapatt seeseen modi!!ed and incorporated into the p erassoa pelar to January 1.1ses, to a run. ressabiusy er, esmergemey tr.a-aasaa posed rule, and that the zone deSniti asanale essent and es reasoashie torens and espeetty.
l be reviewed and Protective Action I4v NDERAL REGIS19s, V04. 39, NO. gg-A40NOAy, MAy 4,1974 W
.w APPENDIX F:
FERC Litigation Involving Illinois Power Company Wholesale Rate Proceedings i
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 1
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 tilte of the CP antitrust review and for this reason do not represent changes (in activities or proposed activities) since the CP review.
f 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 implications would be more likely remedied before the FERC than the NRC.
Consequently, the issues pending before the FERC do not satisfy all 'f the o
criteria established by the NRC in Summer and no matter what the outcome before the FERC, these issues would not trigger an affirmative significant
}
I 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.cf_the electric. power _ industry _in.Il.linois, Poweris
.m j
service area and for this reason a brief discussion seems in order.
In the late 1960s a group of Illinois (self generating) municipal electric l
systems comprised of the Cities of Breese, Carlyle, Highland, Mascoutah, Peru, i
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 l
I l
I l
F-1 I
and exchtnga,cipacity and ansrgy with thIm 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 Illin'ois Power agreed to t'he municipals' i
request for interconnection agreements.
At about the same time, Illinois Power agreed to a set of policy commitments (which later became foimal 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.
t
~
Suo' sequent 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, to assure continuous operation and reliability of their systems and to limit I
radical upward movements in their costs of supplemental power requirements i
in future years.
At issue before the FERC at present is the rate at which the
(
i
==ici;:c1:: 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 i
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-i table to said reservations'-#TitincT(76weFalWife'" twat enEr'gy'cfia7ges were '
}
d a function of hour-by-hour load conditions and capacity availability.
f The incremental cost issue was resolved when Illinois Power agreed to offer the municipals a partial requirement power agreement (also required by the license i
t t
' Letter from S. L. Swcethout, Illinois Power Co., to Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary, FERC, dated ricy 25, 1979, p. 2.
r F-2 i
l
- c,-
,-+
..v.
i conditions attachgd to tha Clinten nuclear plant) for rcniwable fivs year
[
periods and bcsed upon fuel costs incurred by the company's plants during the period the contract,is in force.2 i
i In a separate proceeding, two municipal eiectric systems (Citie's of Ladd and Oglesby) and one small private distribution system (Cedar Point, Light and Water y Company) (all total requirements customers of Illinois Power) have intervened before the FERC to protest a }976 sholesale rate increase by the Company
(
(Dkt. E-9520).
The principa1 contention of the intervenors-was that-Illinois Power could not unilaterally rai,se rates under their existing contracts with
)
the Company.
Ultimately, the D.'. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the two C
Cities and against Cedar Point Light stating that Illinois Power's contract with Cedar Point Light permitted uniflateral raising of rates by Illinois Power.
This decision reversed the FERC order regarding Cedar Point.
The FERC has j
yet to respond to the Court of Appeals decision which was issued on August 21, 1979.
i i
In a similar rate proceeding involving the same parties (ER77-531), the intervenors petitioned the FERC requesting relief from another wholesale rate t
increase by Illinois Power in 1977.
The FERC recently ruled upon this inter-l f
vention3 by granting Illinois Power a two-tier rate increase.
Here again, the
{
issues in dispute were FERC issues and not 'NRC related issues and they were resolved accordingly, i
i Y
l o.
Generic Interconnection Rate Proceedinos I
L,_,
Illinois Power has-instituted new wheet%hrates*Wttff*aTT*dt'tfirgidweFsystn it has interconnection agreenents with -- as required by FERC Order No. 84.
{
There has t[een no intervention by parties in the relevant mark.tting area.4 8See " Wholesale Electric Service Agreement," Exhibit A and the municipals, attached to Appendix F.
, between Illinois Power See FERC orders dahd April-3 10, 1981 ind 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.)
e
~
Moreover, the nature of these proceedings rests solely on justification of wheeling rates and it is staff's position 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 Ordel No. 84 proceedings would not invoke antitrust implications that would warrant remedy by the NRC.
9 L
e
~F e
l e
e F-4 r
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 gener'ation, transmission,-distribution and sale of electric energy to the public in various municipalities and areas in the State of Illinois, and is a publii: utility within the' meaning of an Act entitled "An Act Concerning Public Utilities,"
approved June 29, 1921, as amended, set forth in Chapter 111-2/3,
.c ction 1 e_t, ss..of the Illinois Revised Statutes, and now in e
t force.-
Customer owns and operates an electrf.c. 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 r
desires and is will'ing and able to supply customer with electric e
energy for these purposes, on the terms and conditions herein-after set,forth.
In consideration of the mutual agreements herein con-tained, the. parties agree as follows:
I.
General Terms Utility shall supply electric energy and Customer shall accept and pay for service rendered under the terms
~...
. of Nbits - A 'and-erattachedwheretoy::enti.tled.JOvales=V El =
Service for Resale to Agreement shall control if there is any conflict between the provisions of Exhibits A and D, except for the determination of,contrar capacity.
l II.
Conditions of Service I
1.
Customer requires and Utility agrees to supply a minimum amount of capacity according to the l
following five year schedule, beginning with
'l i
commencement of the Agreement under'Section X.
i
-l 1-l-
i l
l t-
~
II.
Conditions of Service (continued) 1st year Kva 2nd year Kva 3rd year Kva 4th year Kva Sth year Kva
' This capacity will be the initial " contract capacity".
- governed by the provisions of Section 5(a) of I
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 q
specification, the contract capacity specified.
for the-fourth year shall carry over to become the contract capacity for the fif th year.
I l
2.-
Customer shall provide a volt substation at the point of delivery to transform energy received from Utility at volts to the s
volts required by Customer.
(See Exhibit B.)
3.
Utility requires an automatic circuit switcher or oil circuit brcaker and lightning arresters at
- the point of delivery to protect its system from any faults on Customer's system.
If Customer ^ elects to install at its expense a Kv oil circuit i
breaker satisfactory to Utility, Utility shall control, operate, and maintain at Customer's expense
. such oil circuit breaker to assure satisfactory oper-ation with its electric system.
Customer shall either j
install or pay Utility the non-salvable cost of installing such lightning arresters plus a monthly l
l rental for 'the salvable cost of the lightning arresters, j all as provided in Exhibit C.
i i
-g q..
p to Customer and shall furnish and install meters,-
i recording devices ar.d other apparatus necessary'for
.'l the purpose of measueing the energy received by 1
(
Customer at the point of delivery.
The point of delivery shall be at the Ky bus installed in,
~
l the Ky substation referred to l'n the preceding paragraph 2 located on Customer's propurty.
l 5.
Customer agrees that any existing towers, poles, wires *i or equipment.placed by Utility on the streets, avenues, !
l alleys and public places in the i
l shall be exempt from any special tax assessments,
[
license or rental fee to customer during the term of this Agreement.
l l
e i
.,._,._e.,
~
I i
l II.
Conditions of Servica (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.
7.
Customer and Utility agree to maintain and operate' their syst'ms in accordance with sound utility e
practices, so as to minimi== 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 j
in Exhibit A, attached, or as subsequently revised under Section X, paragraph 3.
4 2.
btility 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
'g-by any municipal, state, or federal government, or s
authority becoming effective after the execution date of this Agreement, measured by but not included in the purchase price paid or revenues received by Utility onaccountoftheservicerenderedunderthisAgreemeng IV.
Meter Reading and Billing l
l.
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 Agreement '
increased Ay A oJernant J,ayment. phall l.be.,due'thigtyj 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.
2.
Should either over-billing or under-billing occur dua to causes other than inaccurate meter registration, 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 noticq must be given within one year following the date on which the bill to be corrected is rendered.
l5 e
)
-.n.
,-,-n---n,-----.n,-
w
c,,-:,-mm---m,e----,--
e-.---
i IV.
Meter Reading and D'illing (continued) 3.
If Customer has failed to pay any bill accruing under this Agreement on or before the thirtieth day after 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 J
service.
V.
Metering, Testing and Billing Adjustments l'.
Utility shall own and maintain the number of meters, -
and related. metering equipment necessary to measure the demand and energy delivered to customer by Utility at the point of delivery.
3 2."
Utility shall test and calibrate the meters by com -
parison with accurate standards at approximately i
twelve month intervals.
i
)
3.
_ Utility shall make special meter tests at the written request of Customer.
If a special test made at l'*-
. Customer's reques shall disclose that meters are registering within 2 percent of 100 percent accuracy, 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 i
i intention to test.and calibrate meters when such test is requested in writing by Customer.
Customer.shall be per<
mitted to witness any neter tests made by Utility.
4.
Meters found by test to be registering inaccurately shall be restored to a condi. tion of accuracy.
If'
- m
(
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 i
previous test) shall be corrected by the percentage of '
j inaccuracy found by the test and payment adjusted' accordingly.
No prior readings.will be corrected.
VI.
Rights of Access Duly authorized represen,tatives 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 facilities of the other party at a mutually agreed-upon time for the purpose of removing its own facilitics from the. facilities of the other party where such' removal is permitted under this Agreement.
l
=
- ,r VII.
Continuity of service
- 1.. Utility agrees to provide adequate and reliable service to Customer.
However, Utility shall not i
be liable to custome'r for. interruption o'r inadequacy.
of service, loss or damage to property, or injury I
(including death) to any person caused by act of God, i
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 t
I i
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..
2.
Utility shall not be responsible for damai es due' to anyl J
failure to supply electricity, or for interruption, or reversaI of the supply, if such failure, inter-i ruption, or reversal is without willful default or l
negligence on its part, nor for interruptions, by l
underfrequency relays or otherwise, to preserve the l
integrity of Utility's system or interconnected systems.
'u 3.
Utility may interrupt service to make necessary repairs or to make changes in equipment or to install new equipment, but only for such reasonable times as may be unavoidable.
If the. nature of the situation parmitst reasonable advance notice of these interruptions shall he given by Utility.
3 VIII.
Liability
~
l customer shall not be liable for and Utility shall save l
Custcmer harmless against any and all clains, damages, liability or erpense, resulting from or occasioned by the presence, use or maintenance of any electrical j
ccnductor 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 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;
. liability or expense resulting from or occasioned by the presence, use or maintenance of any electrical conductor or other type of equipment owned or maintained 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
\\
)
l r
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 f ailure 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.
IX.
Annexed Areas and Other Services i
l.
Utility shall be permitted to continue to provide i
retail electric service on a non-exclusive basis j
to its existing " customers or existinci customers' premises served by Utility within the municip q limits l i
as of the effective date hereof.
2.
Whenever, after the date of this Agreement, Customer j
annexes an area in which Utility is providing electric service, the parties shall meet and shall negotiate jl 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-i tions shall be conducted by the parties in the light
~
{
of all relevant matters, and any agreements made and 1
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
- e. e --
limited -to-gas,= sewer,=waterr or~ any ethur municipui--"
or utility service.
X.
Term of Acfreement 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 undprstanding to be effected between the parties after service is commenced.
The Agreeinent shall continue thereafter from year to year unless cancelled by either party at the expiration of the primary or extended term upon..not less th'an..two years.pri6r written notice.
o 3
~
~-...--.. -
r-mm,-
3,..._~.-
,-,,_..__.--__.,_,_u
q i
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 completed the construction and installation of facilities
'necessary to provide the service contracted for in Section II, paragraph 1, Utility will supply sekvice to customer pursuant' to the terms and provisions of the Interim Wholesale Electric Service Agreement which is attached hereto as hhIhit D.
1 I
3.
All provisions of this Agreement which are obligatory upon 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 i (, *.
affecting in any way the right of either party l
under this Agreement to unilaterally r.ake appli-cation to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission j
or any successor agency for a change in rates set i
forth in Section 3 of Exhibits A and D hereof n'nder i
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 l
further provided, however, that in the absence i
of agreement by Customer no change shall-be made-t l
in any term or condition of this Agreement for Purchase of Power, or in any term or condition 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
j agency) under Section 206 of the Federal Power l
Act.
~
~
i 1
+
i
IN ICTNESS WIIEREOF, the parties hc::rato have duly entered '
into this Agroomont the day and year first above mentioned.
ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY By By Title Title Date Date l
Attest:
Attest:
e 1
As to Illinois Power Company As to (Occretary (Village Clerk) l.
'l l
I J
l ll l
1 i
l A
Page 1 of 6 Wholesale Electric Service Agreement 1.
Availability
.9ervice hereunder is available to the
("C,ustomer") subject to the following conditions:
a.
That Customer is engaged in the distribution and sale of electricity to the general public within the service terri-i tory served by Utility; e
b.
That Customer is located. adjacent to Utility's lines having.
4 a capacity adequate to supply Customer's requirements in addition to the requirements of other customers already receiving service from such lines or that Utility shall have sufficient time before Customwr 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 Custoner to Utility; Thatpriortothecommencemen,tofservicehereunder,Customed c.
shall execute and shall thereafter keep in full force and effect a written agreement with Utility with a primary term lof five years.
~
' 2.
Conditions of Service Service hereunder shall b'e provided to Customer subject to the/following conditions:
)
Should Customer desire to receive electric' energy from any a.
i source other than capacity owned and operated by Customer and to operate in parallel with the power supplied by Utility to Customer under this schedule, it shall, in the l-absence of existing arrangements with Utility for the delived of such power, give the Utility reasonable notice of such desire, specifying the requirements involved and the date i
when it desires such transfers to commence.
Reasonable notice shall be defined as notice sufficient to allow Utilitg to continue safe and efficient operation of its system and i
shall be interpreted in an engineering context considering the facilitics and requirements involved; O
e r,
~i- -
.p
,er, - _ -
,s,-w.-
,y
-ww, m
+e
.,-~,i,-.-,,---,*-m-=%%m-3 e.
--,e--..,
w -eee--er-ww--
W-
. - - * *ee--
=
a-
--1--
i 2.
Conditions of Sarvice (continued) b.
Utility shall be reimbursed for any expenses incurred by it by reason of the transfer of electric energy require-ments referred to in subsection 2(a);
e Service hereunder will be initially delivered to customer c.
for a volt three phase electric line having capscity sufficient to serve Customer's energy require-Utility. retains discretion to select the' supply i
ments.
line or lines from which service will be rendered to cu.tomer.
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 Utility, the cost of providing service under the new conditions (ncluding-the cost of transformation shall be borne by Utility.
In all other cases, except for changes caused by an increase in customer's. electric energy requirements which shall l
be governed by subsection 1(b), costs of changes shall t
be borne by Customer; d.
Cu.Lumer shall provide and maintain all transformers and related facilities necessary for handling and utilizing
~
j the energy delivered hereunder; e.
Utility will provide and maintain one three phase voltage connection, provided customer will make available, without l
charge to Utility, space requ' ired for Utility's lines and j
delivery facilities, and; f.
Utility will provide and maintain one point of delivery and l
metering equipment therefor.
Such metering equipment.shall l
be located on the high voltage side of customer's trans-l formation.
Utility, at its discretion, may elect to install such metering equipment on the low voltage ~ side of trans-t formation (whether or not for the convenience of Utility 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, o t
l in the absence of such measurement, by computing such lossesL based on the manufacturer's data pertaining to the specific l
transformers installed.
9 j
l 3.
Rates and Charges l
The gross charge shall equal the sum of the charges below and any other applicable charges increased by two percant.
a.
Customer Charge:
Delivery Voltage charge 4160 or 12,470 volt 8
$ 80.00 per mont-34,500, 69,000 or
$110.00 per monG 138,000 volts
t
~~
3.
Rato and Charges (continued)
Chargo par Kva Billing Demand b.
Demand Charge:
Delivery voltage Any one Mont]
4160 or 12,470 volts
$3.73 per Kv!
34,500, 69,000 or
$3.18 per'Kv1 138,000 volts
~ '.
l
. c.
Energy Charge:
1.254 per Kwh for all Kwh delivered by; l
Utility in any one month d.
Cost of Power Adjustment:
(1)
A Cost of Power Adjustment (CPA) will be applied to each Kwh of energy billed hereunder during the.
" billing period" as defined herein.
(FCCG + ECPP + ECIP - FCIS) X 100 (2)
CPA =
~~'*
(CG + PP + IP - IS) X LF Where:
CPA = Cost of Power Adjustment.
The. amount round to the nearest.001C per Kwh to be charged each Kwh billed hereunder during any monthl
" billing period" as defined herein.
FCCG = Fuel Cost of Company Generation.
The cost'
~
fossil fuel as included in Account 151 and cost of nuclear fuel as included in Account 518, according to the FPC Uniform System of Accounts, consumed in " Company's plants" du the " determination period."
ECPP = Energy Cost of Purchased Power.
'ihe net en 4
i cost of energy purchased on an economic dis patch basis from other utilities under pur-chased power agreements during the "determi tion period," exclusive of= capacity _.or_dema charges.
Otherwise, the actual identifiabl fuel cost associated with such energy purch l
ECIP = Energy Cost of Interchange Purchasus*[
The energy cost of energy purchased on an econo l
dispatch basis from other utilities during!
" determination period" under interchange o$
interconnection agreements irrespective of designation assigned to such transactions. l otherwise, the actual identifiable fuel cod associated with such energy purchased.
FCIS = Fuel Cost of Inter' change Sales.'
Thecostg fuel consumed in " Company's plants" to gene energy sold to other utilities during the i
" determination period"'through all inter system sales.
c
6 L.
3.
Rates and Charges (continued)
~
CG = Company Generation.
All Kwh generated duri; the " determination period" in Company's plar PP = Purchased Power.
All Kwh purchased, exceph interchange purchases, from other utilities during the " determination period" irrespectf of the designation of such purchases.
IP = 1.1terchahge Purchases.
All Kwh purchased of 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 furnig to other utilities during the,"determinatiou l period" through all inter-system sales.
LF = Loss Factor.
The estimated ratio of Kwh sa at the average delivery voltage of wholesal sales for resale to the Kwh generated for a sales.
This ratio is.97. '
(3)
Definitions (a)
The " determination period" is defined as the calendar month Mediately preceding the billing month.
(b)
The " billing period" is defined ac 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.
l l
4.
Determination of Demands l
a.
Maximum kilovolt ampere (Kva) demand will be the highest average Kva delivered duting any fifteen minute period, b.
Billing demand for any billing month shall be.the greator of:
(1) 50% of the maximum Kva demand measured for the billing month, or l'
=
4.
Determination of Demands (continued) i (2) the contract capacity 5.
Additional Conditions and Contract Provisions i
a.
A capacity (called " contract capacity" herein) shall be as provided in Article II, section 1 of the Agreement.
i In the event customer's maximum Kva demand durin~g the 13' consecutive hours of 10:00 a.m. through 11:00 p'.m. on weekdays occurring during the period June 15 through September 14, in any one year, exceeds the conttact 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 existing contract capacity, and any existing contract shall be deemed to have been amended to include such increased capacity.
b.
Customer may reduce Customer's contract capacity upon providing Utility with twelve months' prior written notice
.However, in no event shall Customer be permitted to reduce i
Customer's contract capacity to a level below that speci-
~ '
fied under Article II, section 1 of the Agreement.
c.
If Customer requires service at the delivery point sp'ecified herein for existing, new or added capacity of 500 Kva or more in excess of the contract capacity which requires Utili-to install special apparatus, Customer shall execute and i
keep in full force and effect a written contract with Utilit for service which shall specify a contract capacity and.othe' terms 'and conditions of service not inconsistent with. those i
provided for herein.
The primary term for such written l
i agreement shall be five year's.
d.
The' primary or extended term of any_ agreement provided' for herein shall be automatically extended from year,to year with the privilege of either party to terminate the I
agreement at the end of the primary term, or any exte.nded l
term, on not less_than two years' prior written notice.
l Nothing contained herein shall be construed as aff5cting l
e.
l in any way the right of either party under this rate schedule to unilaterally make application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commistion 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 Act and pursuant to the Commission's Rules a'nd Regulations promulgated thereunder or under any other applicable federal 1aw or commission.
It is further provided, however, that r
m v.-,-
- t-w n-
---r-r,,--e
.--r-
,--,,--m
-e
-w.n---
,--v.
er--
- --ee
---rw Aw--,,,ne
- - - - - - -.--orr,
$. '5.
Additionn1 conditions and Contract Proviaions (continued) in the cbs:enca of agracment by customef no changa chc11 be made in any term or condition or service specified i
in Sections 1,2,4, or 5 hereof until it has been finally 1
approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or any successor agency under Section 20G of the Federal l
Power Act.
l 3
6 i
l O
e l
i I
i-t
?
f i
f O
G O
e i
F t
-~
e i
r
?
- j l
i I
g i
I i
i t
[
y h
O e
9 b
I e
O m
e i
e
=
1 0
9 i
APPENDIX B e
a B
e i
a 9
e 9
F f
b o
e 1
9 6
a
6-cf h,
UNITED STATES E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
.,I wash:NGTON, D. C. 20555
'v
....+
JAN 3 l 1533 Docket No. 50-461 MEMORANDUM TO: The Files FROM:
W.
Lambe, AEAB
SUBJECT:
MONITOR 11G REVIEW - CLINTON NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 Attached is staff's initiel monitoring review for Clinton Unit 1.
As of this date, the Unit is not scheduled for construction completion until August of 1984.
Attachment:
As stated I
i a
e I
i l
[
l I
l m
p2, y
i.*
CLINTON NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 1 -- OL MONITORING REVIEW t
Construction delays have become c:mnon place for the nuclear power industry.
Applicants have delayed construction completion of facilities for months and j
sometimes several years from the time they initially have requested an operating license. From the standpoint of our significant change review, these delays i
I create voids in the review process 1f the OL significant change review is j
f completed far in advance of the construction completion date.
In the instant f
i case, the significant change review was completed in February of 1982 while j
i i
4 the construction completion date has been moved back to August 1984--leaving l
j a two and one half year void in the review process (one and a half years longer l
[
than our one year lead time). To remedy this chronic problem, AEAB has developed j
a " monitoring review" procedure that fills this void through periodic contact
{
t with pertinent power entities and research of public data, i.e., trade and l
related peHodicals.
i Staff completed its operating license significant change determination I
i (significant change) for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Plant on February 23 1982. The review concluded that no significant antitrust changes had occurred 1
since the completion of the construction permit (CP) antitrust review in May
[
{
of 1974. The no significant change determination was published in the Federal i
Register on March 11, 1982.
[
j The function of the significant change analysis is two-fold in that it,1) captures l
any changes in applicants' competitive activities since the CP review, and 2) reduce.,
l I
- / Applicants include:
Illinois Power Co. (lead applicant). Soyland Power Tooperative, Inc. and Western Illinois Power Cooperative Inc.
[
i f
._--_-____.2--
~ i
.m 2-the probability of a full-fledged antitrust review at the OL stage.
Certain antitrust license conditions were attached to the Clinton cps which.were designed to implement greater coordination between Illinois Fower Co. (IP) and smaller power ertities in central and southerr. Illinois. These conditions generally required IP to interconnect, participate in baseload nuclear plants, wheel power and sell bulk power to neighboring entities. With these conditions in mind, staff has initiated contact (telephonic) with several municipal power i
systems in and/or adjacent to IP's service area in an effort to determine if any changes in IP's activities (of a competitive nature) have taken place since the original _significant_ change determination was made in February of 1982.
City. Systems The city systems ranged in size from Farmer City Illinois with a peak load of approximately 4.5MW to the' City of Springfield, Illinois with generating t
capacity of over 500MW and a system peak of approximately 338MW.
Farmer City is involved in interconnection negotiations with Illinois Power., The represen-tative of the system contacted indicated that negotiations were continuing and that Illinois Power wanted the City as a customer and the only roadblock to the
~
interconnection to 'date has been attributable to difficulties in obtaining financ-ing for construction of the necessary facilities.
[
The City of Chatham, Illinois (peak load of approximately 10MW) requested an f
interconnection with Illinois Power in 1979, about the same time it.s wholesale supply contract was to expire with central Illinois Light Co. Tho interconnection i
was not built, according to the Mayor because IP refused to finance the entire j
construction cost of the required seven mile intertie line.
When asked if the City considered wheeling IP power (in lieu of constructing the direct tie line) l
. 4 over Central Illinois Light's (CILCO) lines, the Mayor said yes and that IP was willing, but the wheeling charges imposed by CILCO would have made the j
transaction uneconomical. According to the Mayor, the City negotiated a i
settlement with its existing supplier (CILCO) through 1986 that was very i
favorable to the City. The City was faced with expiration of its wholesale supply contract and after shopping around, ultimately negotiated a new contract with its existing supplier.
Illinois Power's responses to the City's requests l
do not appear anticompetitive--IP offered to wheel its power but did not feel it cost efficient to construct and finance a long intertie to a relatively small load.
(Moreover, the Mayor indicated that he had not had any contact with Illinois Power in the last 18-24 months--our monitoring is concerned with e
i thelast12 months.)
Waterloo, Illinois (approximately10mlsystempeak)energizedaninterconnection 3
with Illinois Power in 1979 and is now taking all of its requirements from IP.
i Illinois Power allows the City to peak shave with its own diesel capacity during i
the sununer months, i.e., credits the City's generation against power sales by 1
IP to the City. According to the Superintendent of the system, this is very
- beneficial to the City and the arrangement has worked out fine to date.
LWaterloooptedtotakepowerfromIPinlieuofbeingacquiredbyIPinthe i
mid-1970's. Contact was initiated to determine how smoothly this arrangement i
wasgoing;7
~
The City of Springfield, Illinois was the largest system contacted, with 500MW f
of generation and of the systems contacted, probably most resembles Illinois Power's fully integrated power system.
The City energized its interconnection l
l t
t h
. with TP in 107Q and according to the Superintendent of Electric Operations has had satisfactory dealings with the company ever since.
Presently,theCity and IP exchange emergency power when needed and share in economy power.transac-tions when available (the City usually sells more to IP than IP to City).
IP and the City also compete for wholesale loads, e.g., they share a conson tie with Western Illinois Power Cooperative and the coop has been served by both suppliers in the past.
During 1982, the City purchased more power from IP than it sold, however, this was primarily due to an emergency outage on the City's system in March of 1982 that lasted about three months.
During this period, Illinois Power supplied the City with both emergency and maintenance power. The City has also made use of IP transmission lines by wheeling over them in a sale of power to a neighboring private utility.
According to the superintendent, the Nty hu enjoyed a good working relationship with Illinois Power Co.
These four cities were chosen for individual coritact in the monitoring program because of their diversity in size and integration and tecause some had
~
experienced difficulty in dealing with Illinois Power Co. in the past.
The responses from these cities indicate that in terms of its dealing with smaller -
systems in its service area Illinois Power has not engaged in any anticompet-itive activity that would warrant staff changing its significant change determination reached in February of 1982.
(See notes of telephone conver-sations attached to this memorandum.)
Mt. Carmel Merger As mentioned in staff's significant chiinge analysis, Illinois Power tendered an offer to acquire a privately-owned, small electric system serving the City of Mt. Carmel Illinois.
The acquisition has yet to be consummated and in fact
4
- t l
is being held up by the state consnerce commission. The acquisition is not being challenged under competitive reasons, but for reasons that pertain to reliability and serviceabil.ity to existing customers.
Staff still feel' this s
acquisition by IP poses no significant threat (or change since the February i
~
review for that matter) to competition in the bulk power industry in central I
and southern Illinois.
In sum: Becauseof$~ delay'inissbingtheClintonUnit1OL,staffhasreviewed Illinois Power's activities since last conducting its significant change analysis approximately a year ago. No one has come forth to request reevaluation of i
i staff's significant change determination, nor have there been any submissions I
of complaints or views of affected parties durina the interim since February.1982.
i After reviewina industry trade journals and initiatino contact with power entities in the relevant area, staff, as of this date, has found ne reason to l
i t
amend its "no significant change" determination pursuant to Unit 1 of the t
Clinton Nuclear Station.
i t
k i
I 4
1 i
Farmer City. Illinois (January 13,1983)
Contact:
Mr. Richard Hardesty. Assistant Superintendent "
Electric Department Phone #:
(309)928-3421 During the significant change review staff noted that Farmer City had requested an interconr.ection with Illinois Power Co. (IP). According to Mr. Hardesty, the City was still negotiating with IP for the intertie and the only thing' holding up construction was obtaining financing.
Hardesty i
stated that IP wanted the City as a customer and the company was not holding up construction of the entertie.
G e
I e
b t
I
l City of Chatham. Illinois (January 18,1983)
Contacts:
T. Kaufman, Superintendent
\\
John Whitney, Mayor
\\.
-Phone #:
(217)483-2451 i
l The City had requested an interconnection with Illinois Power Co. (IP) in j
late 1979 and early 1980.
I phoned the City to ascertain the status of I
i this interconnection request.-
i
?
I originally telephoned Mr. Kaufman, however he referred me to the Mayor, 4
Mr. John Whitney, as he was the principal negotiator dealing with IP.
I i
left a message with Mr. Kaufman for the Mayor to phone me when he returned to the office. He returned my call later in the morning.
f
/
I asked him if he ever consumated the interconnection he requested from IP in 1979-80.
He said no, because IP was unwilling to pay for the cost of f
i constructing the seven mile tie necessary to serve the City.
l I asked the Mayor if he had considered having the IP power wheeled to the City over the existing Chatham/ Central Illinois Light Co. intertie (i.e., the 1
City'sexistingsupplier). He said he had looked into it but decided that the wheeling charge quoted by CILCO was exorbitant and would make the transaction
{
uneconomical.
l The request for an interconnection with IP came about after the City's wholesale
[
supply contract had expired with CILCO -- the City was searching for an alternative t
i power source to CILCO.
i l
i
. According to the Mayor,'the City negotiated a settlement with CILC0 through 1986 which was very favorable to the City--i.e., in terms of rate increases over the life of the contract.
Mayor Whitney stated that he hadn't had any contact with IP in the last 18-24 months. Although the City is now taking all of its power from CILCO, the Mayor stated that when it comes time to negotiate a new supply contract he wouldcontactWIPCO(WesternIllinoisPowerCoop)whichhadjustbuilta transmission line near the City as well as other surrounding systems capable of serving the City.
(These include CILCO, CIPSCO (Central Illinois Public Service Co.) City of Springfield and IP.)
N~
In sum:
the Mayor has had no contact with IP since staff's significant change review was completed.in March of 1982, therefore no changes can be attributed to IP activity in regards to the City of Catham since this determination was made.
j j
i e
r t
t 4
4
_.... ~..
1 City of Waterloo. Illinois (January 24,1983)
Contact:
Mr. P. Schlemmer, Superintendent of Electric Department Phone f:
(618)939-6413 During the significant change review staff noted that the City of Waterloo had recently begun taking power from Illinois Power Co. (IP) -- in lieu of being acquired by IP.
Staff contacted the City to ascertain the present relationship between the two systems.
According to Schlemmer the City is now taking all of its power requirements from IP with the option of peak shaving with its own generation during the summer months.
The City has no plans of adding any new generation of its own i
and has considered wheeling over IP lines but hasn't negotiated anyth1 g firm 0
to date.
(Apparently Waterloo is among a group'of seven cities that negotiates asonevoicewithIP.) Mr. Schlemmer stated that he was completely satisfied in his dealings with IP and that, "IP has power to sell and we want to buy."
1 d
e i
1 I
b
=
w -
. w-=.
c v-l 1
l City of Springfield._ Illinois (January 17,1983) i
)
Contact:
Mr. L. Gladish, Superintendent of
~
Electric Operations
{
Phone #:
(217)789-2120 j
I 1
I telephoned the superintendent of the Springfield utility division to inquire whether or not the City was having any specific difficulties in its dealings i
with Illinois Power Co. (IP). The City had recently energized an inter-connection with IP (late 1979) and given Springfield's substantial size, the i
i City's input into staff's monitoring program seemed essential.
}
I ii arrarM aa ta Mr Gladish, the City normally sells more power and energy to IP than purchases from IP.
Presently, the City deals in short term power exchanges '
with I."--:: enc =y exchanges and emergency and maintenance power exchanges.
t (Prior to 5/80, the City had been under contract to supply 65MW/yr. of non-firm capacity to IP--primarily economy or diversity power.)
l l
In 1982, because of an emergency in the City's system in March, Springfield
{
purchased more energy from IP than it sold--51,000 mwhrs compared to 27,000 I
mwhrs. The City's entire system went out in March of 1982 requiring extensive l
maintenance that lasted about three months.
During this period IP supplied l
the City with emergency and maintenance power.
l J
Besides IP, the City has interties with Central Illinois Light Co. (CILCO) j
'i k
and the Western Illinois Power Cooperative (WIPCO). When asked whether the l
City ever had occasion to use IP's transmission facilities, Mr. Gladish i
l
~e.
~.
described a recent sale to the Central Illinois Public Service Co. (CIPSCO),
which was facilitated by IP wheeling the power over its ifnes to CIPSCO.
Mr. Gladish noted that the City and IP compete for wholesale load with their common intertie to WIPCO.
He stated that he has encountered no problems (with IP) in this relationship to date.
According to Mr. Gladish, the City solicited a share of the Clinton Nuclear Plant when it was in the construction planning stages (50MW).
He said IP gave the City a year to make up its mind, but the City council procrastinated too long and the proposed share was sold to another utility.
(Hethoughtthe utilitywasWIPCO.)
Generally, Mr. Gladish stated that he had a good working relationship with Illinois Power Co.
e 4
l
'\\
l 1
8 e
e e
O O
O e
O O
e e
APPENDIX C e
e U
a 8
e 6
e e
.s.
U-0799 L30 85 (02-21)-L 1A.120 l
lLLIN018 POWER COMPANY
\\ LV\\
CUNTON POWER $7ATION, P.O. SOE 478, CUNTON. ILUNCIS 61727 l
February 21, 1985
~
Docket No. 50-461 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j
Atta: Mr. Un. H. Regan, Jr., Chief-Site Analysis Branch Division of Engineering U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 70555 i
Subject:
Clinton Power Station Unit 1 Planned Merger of Soyland Power Cooperative Inc.
and Western Illinois Power Cooperative Inc.
)
1
Dear Mr. Regan:
i 1
4 By letter dated January 16, 1985, you requested that we furnish all information pursuant to the merger or planned merger between Soyland Power Cooperative. Inc. (Soyland) and Western !111acis Power Cooperative Inc. (WIPCO), the co-applicants with Illinois Power Company for the Clinton Power Station operating license.
l I an enclosing herewith for your information and review a copy of the " Coordination and Operation Agreement" dated July 25. 1984, between Soyland and VIPCO. This agreement providas for the pooling of Soyland j
and WIPCO's operations effective January'1, J985. In addition, as set forth in Article III, the agreement contemplates a merger of Soyland t
)
and WIPCO on July 1, 1986 or such later data as they any autually agree.
i It is my understanding, that a merger is required to be approved by the vote of two-thirds of the membership of each cooperative voting l
separately.
t j
Should you have any questions or require further information do not i
hesitate to contact me.
)
5 care yours l
F. A. Ip enb g Direc or - Nuclear Licensing l
and Configuration l
Nuclear Station Engineering I
Inclosure l
JLP/1s B. L. Siegel, NRC Clinton Licensing', Project Manager l
cc l
NRC Resident Office g
Regional Administrator, Region III USNRC i
l filinois Department of Nuclear Safety
~,
, [l' l
- t"[.li". M
- h 'NMM w
w -
W O
e e
e O
O e
O e
O O
O 9
0 APPENDIX D e
e t.
P e
e E
O e
l f
e a
9 3
9 g e
9 e
i e
law Orricas WAsxrR, SutuVAN & WARD a.n.
oss womas, sowa sosce
- ,g C'.'. *,,#'".,'.
January 29, 1985 Vg6scomt.
Fogg 6 00 33,..,,,
Sheldon A. Zabel, Esq.
Schiff, Hardin & Waite 7200 Sears Tower 233 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 Re:
Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Nuclear Station, OL Antitrust Review--Merger of Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc.
and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc.
Dear Mr. Zabel:
Mr. E. H. Williams of Soyland Power Cooperative has forwarded to this office a copy of the letter from William H. Regan to Mr. Frank Spangenberg dated January 16;a application for an1985'concerning the anL wiew of Illinois Power Company operating license of the Clinton Nuclear Station.
In accord with my conversation with Mr. Williams, I am enclosing for your'use a copy of the " Coordination and Operation Agreement between Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc. and Watstern Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc."
dated July 24, 1984.
This Agreement provides in pertinent part the following terms and conditions:
l l.
General Provisions.
Pages 1 and 2 of the Agreement i.
(the Whereas provisions), set out the general intents of the Agreement.
As of January 1, 1985 Soyland Power l
Cooperative (Soyland) and Western Illinois Power Cooperative (WIPCO will " Pool" all electric power and energy and transmission capacity available from their respective facilities so that the electric power and energy and transmission capacity will be utilized as though the two cooperatives were merged as of January 1, 1985.
The Agreement goes on to provide that a plan of merger will be prepared, and that the formal merger j
under Illinois law will take place effective as of July 1, 1986.
2.
Management.
At a meeting' held in January, the parties met and selected Mr. C. E. Ferguson as Chairman of the joint operation, and Mr. R. E. Gant as Secretary.
l l
i l
. ~. _. _. ~. ~. _..,....... _.. _ _ _.. _ - _ _
o I
~
Sheldon A. Zabel, Esq.
January 29, 1985 i
~
Page 2 j
Mr. E. H. Williams was selected as Executive Vice President, l
Mr. Don Bringman as Vice President and General Manager.
Article III, Section 2 provides that any action by the Pool requiring board approval must be presented to the Joint Pool Board and approved by an affirmative vote of i
the directors of each cooperative member.
l 3.
Furnishing of power and ' energy by the Pool and trans-f mission capacity.
Articles V and VI of the Agreement i
provide that the Pool will provide all power and energy 1
and transmission capacity to Soyland and WIPCO from and i
after January 1, 1985.
{
j 4.
Merger.
Article XII provides the terms wherein the parties l
will merge by July 1, 1986.
j i
l 5.
Term of the Agreement.
Article XIV, Section 2 provides
[
that the Agreement shall begin operation on January 1, t
1985 and shall terminate on December 31, 2025 unless i
extended by mutual agreement of the parties.
)
l l
Please' do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any i
question concerning any aspect of the Agreement between Soyland l
i and Western Illinois Power Cooperative.
1 l
We would appreciate reviewing any material planned' for sub-
[
j mission to the Nuclear Licensing and Configuration Management t
i Office prior to that submission.
I i--
{
Very truly yours, WASKER, SULLIVAN & WARD i
l John T. Ward I
JTW:ss cc:
Mr. Donald Br4====n i
Mr. E. H. Williams l
l r
i l
l t
5 O
S 4
O 8
O e
e 6
9 e
e APPENDIX E 8
O e
e G
S P
e 9
e 9
d O
9 e
e e
4 s*
..r,.....,,....
- e-y t
a p
}-
t i
4 i.
+
t l
i t
i I
t COORDINATION AND OPERATION AGREE!ENT i
i i
BETWEEN t
t SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
L 5
AND f
t l
- WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
t l
t i
i e
t I
l I
s
?
i l
f e
a i
I i
e h
a f
l e
[
i l
b 1
[
t l
b i
L i.
b
s e
I r
i TABLE OF CONTENTS l
j Zage t
i Article I -- Purpose 3
l
)
Article II -- General Definitions.
3 l
I j
Article III -- Administration.
6 i
i
~
Article IV -- Delivery of Power By i
Members to Sovland/WIFCO 10 i
1 Article V -- Furnishing of Power and Energy By the Pool 11
[
l Articic VI -- Availability of Transmission Capacity 11 f
l Article VII -- Operation and Maintenance.
12 Article VIII -- Construction of Additional Facilities.
13
[
4 I;
Article IX -- Charges and Credits..
14 i
i Article I -- Accountins and Payment.
17 l
Article XI -- Insurance -- Indemnification 18 l
Article III -- Mermer 22 j
Article XIII -- General Provisions 24 i
Article XIV -- Effeer.ive Date. Term and Continuencies.
28 l
Exhibit 1 31 Exhibit 2 32 j
Exhibit 3 33 Exhibit 4 34 l
Schedule 1 35
(
Schedule 2 36 l
L h
.i t
~ _ - _ _ - - _ _,, _ - - - _. _ _ -. - - -. _
._.. _, ~. _. _ _ _ _ - -... - - _ - - - -
s'
- COOktDINATIONANDOPERATIOMAGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this 24th day of July 1984, by and between SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.,
hereinafter called "SOYLAND."
a not-for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, and WESTERU ILLINOIS POWER COOPERkTIVE, INC.,
hereinafter called "WIPCO," a not-for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois.
S0YLAND and WIPCO may be and/or are sometimes referred to hereinafter as " PARTY," " PARTIES," " MEMBER," or " MEMBERS."
WITNESSETH:
W EF.!AS, SOYLAND and WIPCO are engaged in the generation and transmission of electric energy and are the wholesale power suppliers for their distribution cooperative Members in Illinoisi
~
and j
ICIEREAS, SOYLAND and WIPCO now purchase portions of their i
l, electric power requirements from Central Illinois Public Service i
- Company, hereinafter called "CIPS,"
and from Illinois Power
(
l Company, hereinaf ter called "IP" and others.
WIPCO now generates a portion of its own power requirements and the Parties will lease and/or purchase capacity and use of facilities of CIPS IP, and/or others hereafter in lieu of or in addition to the Purchase Agreements above-referred tog and, WHERIAS, SOYLAND and WIPCO presently own 10.51 and 9.5% shares respectively of Clinton Power Station Unit No.
1, hereinafter called "CLINTON": and,
' h.
WHEREAS, UIPCO has transmission ownership and obligations for its distribution cooperative Members
- and, WHEREAS, the pritmry purpose of SOYLAND and WiPCO is to furnish adequate supplies of electric power and energy to the lead centers of their distribution cooperative member-consumers on a cooperative not-for-profit basis at the lowest feasible cost, and, to this end, SOYLAND and WIPCO have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated February 15,
- 1984, to further the primary objective through the coordination and use for the benefit of each l
l of the electric pouer and energy and the transmission capacity i
available from their respective facilities and any facilities constructed jointly by SOYLAND and WIPCO acting as a single entity:
(
l
- and, i
WHEREAS, to further the interests of actir.g as a single entity
~
the Parties believe it to be in the best interests of their distribution,c.coperative member-consumers to operate on
- a. pool
[
?
basis from January 1,.1985, to July 1, 1986, and to merge into one
~
corporate entity effective as of July 1, 1986, and l
WHEREAS, the agreement herein described shall be referred to l
i as "SOYLAND/WIPC0" or " POOL."
l i
- NOU, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE HUTUAL AGREEMENT f
REREIN CONTAINED AND MUTUAL BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED THEREFRO11, IT IS i
AGREED BY AND BETUEEN SOYLAND/WIPCO AS FOLLOWS:
f 4
i l
t I
3
' ~'
ARTICLE I PURPOSE Section 1.
The purpose of this Coordination and ' Operation Agreement is to combine power supply facilities and costs from
.Tamtarv 1. 1985, to July 1, 1986, and to merge into one corporate 4
entity effective as.of July 1,
- 1986, in order that adequate supplies of electric power and energy be delivered to load centers l
of the distribution cooperative member-consumers of SOYLAND and 1
WIPCO on a cooperative not-for-profit basis at the lowest feasible
^
i cost through the coordination and use of the facilities and capabilities of both SOYLAND and WIPCO acting as a single entity.
ARTICLE II 1
4
~
l GENERAL DEFINITIONS i
Section 1.
Existing Generating Facilities.
Any reference to
" Existing Generating Facilities" shall mean the generating and related facilities, described in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and by l
this reference made a part hereof.
t Section 2.
Existing Transmission Facilities.
Any reference l
l to " Existing Transmission, Facilities" shall mean the 34.5 kV or l
1 i
l higher transmission and related facilities, described in Exhibit 2.
l Section 3.
Additional Generating Facilities.
Any reference to " Additional Generating Facilities" shall mean generating and related facilities
- con'struccad by 50YLAND or
- WIPCO, or i
SOYLAND/WIPCO as a single entity in accordance with Article VIII of this Agreement.
l Section 4 Additional Transmission Facilities.
Any reference l
co " Additional Transmission Facilities" shall mean the transmission l
l
[
i f
r
. _ _ _. ~ _ _ _
~
' l'.
and related facilities constructed by SOYLAND or UIPCO for the POOL for operation at 34.5 kV or higher in accordance with Article VIII of this Agreement.
Section 5.
Pool Transmission Capacity.
Any caference to "SOYLAND/WIPCO or POOL Transmission Capacity" shall mean capacity and transmission facilities which will be available to the POOL:
(a) pursuant to this Agreements and (b) pursuant to contract between the POOL and any other company or companies.
,Section 6.
Installed Cost.
Any refererice to " Installed Cost"
' he Existing Generating Facilities, the shall mean:
(a) as to t
i installed cost thereofs (b) as to the Existing Transmission Facilities, the installed cost thereof:
and (c) as to the Additional, Generating Facilities or Additional Transmission Facilities, the installed cost thereof as shown on the books of the members or as may be determined from time to time by the members.
i Section 7.
Monthlv Billins:
Period and Month.
The term l
" Monthly Billing Period" and the term " Month" shall'mean the period beginning at 0001 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> on the first day and extending through 2400' f
~
l hours the last day of.each calendar month.
l Section 8.
Contract Year and Fiscal Year.
The term " Contract l
Year" and the term " Fiscal Year" shall mean the 12-month period beginning on January 1st of each calendar year and extending through December 31st of the same year.
Section 9.
Uncontrollable Force.
The term " Uncontrollable l
Force" shall mean any force which is not within the control of the party affected and which by exercise of due diligence and foresight could not reasonably have been avoided, including, but not limited i
i i
to, failure of facilities, flood, earthquake, storm, lightning, l
fire, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance, labor disturbance, sabotage, collision, or restraint, or order by a court or public authority having jurisdiction.
f Section 10.
SOYLAND/WIPCO, PCOL, Member.
For purposes of this Agreement, reference to SOYLAND/UIPCO shall mean the l
l contractual power pooling created by this Agreement, together with the Memorandum of Understanding dated February 15, 1984, and any other contract or document associa'ted therewith.
The " POOL" shall mean the combined Power Pool of SOYLAND and WIPCO facilities and l
l Member or Members shall refer individually to SOYLAND and/or WIPCO as a Member or Members of the Power Pool.
6 :tien 11.
Merger.
Soyland and WIPCO have ' agreed to merge r
into one corporation effective as of July 1.1986.
All reference to " merge" or " merger" herein will be to -such event.
Section 12.
NRUCFC.
NRUCFC means National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corpor'stion.
j Section 13.
REA.
REA means Rural Electrification i
i Administration, Department of Agriculture of the United States.
i' Section 14 Pool Board.
Pool Board means the Board of Directors of SOYLAND and the Board of Directors of WIPCO meeting together at a duly called special or regular meeting.
The Pool Board will elect its Chairman and Secretary and adopt appropriate rules of procedure.
~
i Section 15.
Pool Board Aporoval.
Any action of the combined Boards of Directors of SOYLAND and WIPCO and such action to be approved shall be passed by a majority voce of the elected j
I l
+.
. Directors of SOYLAND and a majority vote of the elected Directors of WIPCO.
A quorum of the Pool Board exists when a majority of the
~
members of each board be present, except that a meeting of less than a quorum may adjourn said meeting to a later date.
No other action may be taken unless a quorum is present.
ARTICLE III ADMINISTRATION Sectiori 1.
Manastement.
The Parties agree that the POOL will be initially managed by a Management Coccittee consisting of the General Manager of each of the Parties to tihis Agreement.
An Executive Vice President and General Manager will be named of the Management Cor:mittee as approved at a joint meeting of the Board of Directors of the Members.
Initially, the POOL will have no permanent staff.
The Management Committee shall be responsible to the POOL Board and subject to supervision and direction by such Board.
l The Management Committee shall act as a settlement committee and shall decide any controversy, claim, counterclaim or dispute.
arising out of or relating to this Agreement (except as otherwise l
provided herein), including other committee functions and actions.
In the event the Management Committee is unable to reach a settlement, the dispute shall be submitted to the Pool Board for l
l settlement.
l Section 2.
Pool Board Approval.
Any action by the POOL requiring Board approval shall,be presented at a joint Board Heating of the Members and. such action must be adopted by an affirmative vote of a majority of all of the directors as defined under Article II - Definitions.
i
'I 5
7_
Section 3.
Board Meetings.
The combined Board of Directors of the Members shal'1 meet at least quarterly for regular meetings on the second business day of the months of February, 'May, August and November to take action upon such business as may be necessary or appropriate for POOL consideration.
Special meetings of the Pool Board may be called by any of the following:
the Chairman of thePoolBoard,thePresidentofSOYLANDohthePresidentofWIPCO.
The Pool Board Secretary shall give at least ten - days ' written notice to SOYLAND and WIPCO who will then notify its respective,
1 Directors.
Section 4.
Coc:mittees.
To administer, coordinate, carry out the intent of this Agreenent and to assist the Hanagement Coccittee and the Boards in impleEentation of this Agreement, various committees (in addition to the Management Committee) shall be I
l appointed.
They shall be as follows:
the Power Supply Committee, l
the Audit Consnittee, and the Operating and Engineering Planning Committee and such other committees as created by thd* Pool Board.
Section 5.
Power Suoply Cocunittee.
The existing Power Supply-
~
f Committee of SOYLAND and of WIPCO shall serve as a Joint Power I
l Supply Committee for the Pool.
The Joint Power Supply Committee j
shall be composed of eight directors from Soyland and seven l
directors from WIPCO 9td said Committee shall be responsible for advising the Management Committee.on all matters pertaining to this l
i Agreement, and the operation of the combined power supply system.
{
The Power Supply Committee shall meet as often as necessary, j
but at least once quarterly.
The Power Supply Comunittee shall j
r i
l f
F i
review at its mid-year meeting the annual plan submitted by the Management Comittee.
)
Section 6.
Audit Comittee.
The Parties shall each appoint l
one, representative to serve on the Audit Committee which shall have j
the duties and responsibilities set forth below:
A.
The Committee shall meet at least once each month and shall confirm that the j
i costs outlined herein are proper and correct, and if requested by either party, certify that they are so by copies of
- invoices, affidavits, or such other information to establish beyond reasonable
~
doubt that costs are properly accounted for and inclusive.
?
B.
The Committee shall also audit invoices or i
bills from other parties including l
auditing the books and records of others.
j f
C.
A dispute between Members of the Audit l
Comittee shall be settled by the Pool l
Board.
l l
Stetion 7.
Operating and Engineering Planning Committee.
The Parties each shall appoint two representatives to' serve on the Operating and Engineering Planning Committee which shall have the l
\\
general duties and responsibilities to assure that Existing and' l
Additional Generation and Transmission Facilities install.ed i
i l
i hereunder are in the best interests of the POOL set forth below,
{
r subject to review by the Management Comittee.
l A.
The Committee shall be responsible for i
advising the Management Committee as to performing or carrying out* the terms and conditions of this Agreement as they pertain to the day-to-day operation of the POOL.
i 4
B.
The Committee shall be responsible for the reporting of all. system
- loads, load i
forecasting, and for dispatching of capacity and energy and for transmission j
system operation.
i I
s
' C.
The. Comittee shall be responsible for advising the Management Comittec upon acceptance into service of all construction projects.
~
D.
The Cocnittze shall be fully informed as to the operating standards set forth in all POOL agreements to which the Parties shall subscribe, and shall have the responsibility to maintain within the POOL conditions compatible with such
, requirements as may be set forth therein.
E.
The Comittee shall be responsible for -
joint system planning of the Transmission and Generation Facilities and for the engineering criteria for the acceptance of same as a part of the POOL.
F.
The Comittee annually shall prepare a
long-range plan to meet requirements of l
the ~ POOL, which plan shall include a
i proposed in-service date or effective date i
tor each item or transaction recommended.
This plan shall be submitted to the i
Management Comittee by July 1st of each year.
G.
The Comittee shall be responsible for I
necessary studies to ' determine future requirements of the Parties
- and, upon f
I approval of the Management committee, may retain outside consultants for such i
purposes.
The costs of such studies shall be shared by the parties as mutually I
i agreed.
~
r H.
The Committee shall prepare and keep current all load and capacity tables for the Management Comittee zor capacity i
purchases,
- sales, etc.,
as may be necessary to meet the requirements of the POOL.
(
I.
The Committee shall perform such other f
duties as provided for in this Agreement or as may be assigned to it by the i
Management Committes.
t h
. ARTICLE IV DELIVERY OF POWER BY MEMBERS TO SOYIAND/WIPCO
~
Section 1.
Deliverv of Power.
Each POOL Member shall deliver or cause to be delivered to the POOL and the POOL shall receive or cause to be received under the terms and conditions hereinafter see
)
forth, the entire electrical output from any and all generating
- units, from Participation Agreements, contract purchasers, and electrical output from any other source, for the ' sale, use, and benefit of the POOL and Members (exclusive of power and energy required for station service), in such manner and in such amounts, from time to time as the POOL shall specify and schedule; provided that the POOL shall not schedule energy from any such unit at a rate:
(a) greater than the safe generating capacity of such unit; i
or (b) less than that required for stable operation of such unit.
Except in case of an emergency, Members shall at all times cause each unit in said generating facilitiet to be maintained in such a state of raa'diness or in such.other state or condition as shall be specified by the POOL.
- l Section 2.
Character of Service and Deliverv Poines..
Electric energy from the Existing Generating Facilities, if any, shall be delivered or caused to be delivered by each Member to the POOL as three-phase alternating current at a
frequency of approximately sixty hertz at such voltages and points as are specified in Exhibit 3 as existing points of delivery.
Said points may be deleted and additional points may be added, as required, to i
said Exhibit 3.
i 1
l _
11_
ARTICLE V FURNISHING OF POWER AND ENERCY BY THE POOL j
i Section 1.
Furnishing of Pouer and Energy.
The POOL shall I
furnish or cause to be furnished to each Member, and each Member shall receive or cause to be received from the POOL, all power and energy which each Member shall require in accordance with the terms hereof.
Section 2.
Utili=ation of POOL Resources and Transmission j
Cacacity.
The POOL shall reserve all POOL Generating Properties, j
i power supply contracts, and POOL transmission capacity in their j
i entirety for the securing of power and energy
- for, and the l
1 furnishing of power to, the Members.
All personnel of WIPCO and L
Soyland, excluding only those personnel associated with design,
~
i operation and maintenance of distribution facilities, shall be made j
~
t available and utilized by the Pool at the direction of the i
i
]
Management Committee.
The POOL shall have the right to use the Transmission Facilities o'f the Members for the purpose of l
t
~
utilization of its resources.
l t
I ARTICLE VI j
AVAILABILITY OF TRANSMISSION CAPACITY Section 1.
Availability of Capacity of Transmission j
i Facilities.
Each Member shall make available to the POOL, on the l
terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the entire capacity of the Existing Transmission Facilities, and any Additional Transmission Facilities.
l l
Section 2.
C_onnections.
The POOL shall have the right at any l
1 I
time and from time to time to make, or cause to be made, any l
l
l
.7 i.
- connection between the Existing or Additional Transmission Facilities and any other facilities.
ARTICLE VII OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Section 1.
Routine Occration and Maintenance of Member Facilities.
Each Member shall operate, inspect, and maintain, and make any and all routine necessary repairs and replacements on the Existing Generation and Transmission Facilities, the Additional Generation and Transmission Facilitics (1) in accordance with all applicable laws and with standards and specifications at least equal to those provided by the National Electric Safety Code published by the United States Department of Councree, National Bureau of Standards:
(ii) in conformity with established and acceptable electrical utility practices in the areas and (iii) in the most economical manner consistent with the aforesaid laws and standards.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, each Member shall (1) make all repairs and replacements with materials of quality and specifications and at a standard of workmanship at
~
l least equal to those used in the construction of the aforesaid facilities:
(ii) perform routine generating plant inspection and line patrols and properly perform any necessary maintenance, repair, and replacements; and (iii) carry out the purchase of materials, supplies and services in the most economical manner.
Any repair, replacement, or maintenance cost on Existing Generation and Transmission Facilities owned.or controlled by 'the POOL other than routine must be approved by the POOL.
13 i
ARTICLE VIII CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONAL FACILITIES Section 1.
Ownershio of Facilities.
SOYLAND and WIPCO shall each retain their present ownership of generation facilities, transmission
- lines, substations and equipment and all other property owned by each Party until the merger is completed as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
In cases where future undivided joint ownership of facilitics is advantageous to the Pool, such undivided joint owncrship interests shall be mutually agreed upon prior to installation of said facilities or equipment and such undivided ownership shall be appropriately documented.
Section 2.
Determination of Construction and Ownershin.
Determination of construction, ownership and operation of all Additional Generation Facilities and all Additional Transmission Facilities shall be subject to Fool Board approval.
Section 3.
Construction of Additional Facilities by a Member.
From time to time it may be desirable for a Member'of the POOL to be the owner of Additional Generating Facilities, Additional' Transmission Facilities,, or to contract for additional power j
j supply.
Such determination and approval shall be subject to POOL Board approval, subject to the following codditions:
I A.
Determination of ownership of Additional Facilities or contract for additional power supply shall be determined by the POOL Board, based upon the best interests of the POOL and its Members.
B.
The entire cost. associated with~
the additional facilities or contract for power supply shall be the obligation of I
the POOL.
l I
t
?.
_14 Section 4.
Construction by Members.
If loan funds are obtained for the construction of additional facilities by a POOL Member, said Member shall, subject to the conditions of the loan agreement, construct the additional facilities or additional power supply involved in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, or the requirements of the appr6vals provided that except as otherwise determined by the POOL:
A.
The plans and specifications in respect of any such construction shall be subject to approval by the POOL Board.
B.
The POOL Member shall enter into no i;
contract with respect to such construction without prior written POOL Board approval.
ARTICLE IX
~
CHARGES AND CREDITS Section 1.
Operation of the POOL.
Beginning on January 1, 1985, SOYLAND and WIPCO shall combine their power supply costs, based upon REA proper accounting methods and procedures, combining cost of purchased power, power production costs, wheeling expenses,,
costs paid to other parties including. production and transmission costs, all transmission costs, administrative and general costs, 4
and all other proper system costs on a monthly basis for purposes i
of determining total power costs of the POOL.
These power supply costs shall include a..
costs related to power supply billed by others and incurred by the Parties.
Section 2.
Records.
The Parties shall keep complete cost records to substantiate all of its. costs and expenses of facilicies owned by each and other proper expenditures pursuant to this Agreement, and said records shall be available for an inspection by
- e
--v-
_ -.,,,_ _ _,_ __. _ __s
~'
- the duly authorized representatives of each Party at all reasonable
- . L...
- 11 expenses and costs shall be prudent, proper, reasonable and in keeping with good utility practices and are subject to review by either Party.
Section 3.
Division of Costs Between Parties.
The combined costs of the Parties shall be divided into, Fixed Costs and Variable Costs.
Fixed Costs shall be allocated to SOYLAND and to WIPCO based on SOYLAND's contribution to and WIPCO's contribution to the maximum one-hour coincidental demand of the POOL on a summer and j
winter basis as mutually agreed upon by the Parties.
Each Party l
t shall pay its share of these Fixed Costs as so determined until cot:mercial operation of the Clinton Power Station.
Variable Costs l
4 shall be allocated to SOYLAND and to WIPCO on the basis of actual l
kilouatt-hours sold.
1 The division of costs as determined above shall be effective l
l from January 1,
- 1985, until Clinton Power Station becomes l
l commercial, even though the.two Cooperatives be merged by July 1, l
i
~
1986.
l 1
Other revenues shall be allocated to the Parties in the same l
manner as above outlined.
Section 4 Combining of Costs.
Combining of costs to the POOL and charges thereto shall be as outlined on Schedules 1 and 2
]
attached hereto and made a part hereof.
~
Section 5.
Payment of Costs and Expenses.
SOYLAND and WIPCO l
incurred' directly which j
will each pay its costs and expenses as i
shall include all production
- costs, including ownership, transmission costs, including ownership, and administrative and
,,-------------,,,,p-
i 1
' j t
general costs, and any other expenses chargeable directly to it.
Ownership costs shall include depreciation, interest and taxes.
Billings from other Parties, such as IP and CIP5, shall be billed to SOYLAND/WIPCO, c/o Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc., Post Office Box A1606, Decatur, Illinois 62525, and SOYLAND shall pay these expenses insofar as funds are available.
Other revenues shall be paid to SOYLAND/WIPCO in care of the above address.
At the end of each accounting month, total power costs in accordance with Schedule 2, shall be determined and the Party owing the difference shall make payment to the other Party as provided i.n Article X.
f i
Any delay in making said payment shall accrue interest at the
~
rate charged by NRUCFC for its then line-of-credit loans until paid from the date said payment was due.
In the event advance of funds are required each Party will advance equal amounts as adjusted by 'the principles of Section 3 hereof.
If such advances are not equal as above adjusted, the
{
Party making an excess advance shall be entitled to interest frem.
~
the date of said advance on said excess at the rate of interest above set forth.
Section 6.
Fuel and Working Capital Funds.
Advances for fuel to other parties and working capital advances to other parties shall be advanced by SOYLAND and WIPCO from cash balances of each i
as required in proportimt to SOYLAND's and WIPCO's power cost responsibilities as determined in accordance with the principles of Section 3 hereof.
i I
L
-.--)
l 17 Section 7.
Contribution of ' Funds By Parties.
SOYLAND and WIPCO agree that it is desirable to reduce-future debt requirements l
related to Clinton.
In order to do so, the Parties will generace cash from their Members by additions to their power costs in an scount equal to Eighty Million Dollars ($80,000,000) of which WIPCO shall obtain Thirty-Eight Million Dollars ($38,000,000) and SOYLAND will obtain Forty-Two Million Dollars
($42,000,000).
The proportionate responsibility of the Parties for said funds is based upon their current proportion of ownership in Clinton and shall be adjusted if said ownership proportions change.
The contribution shall be returned to the Members of the POOL over an appropriate period of years by reduction in power costs as shown by~ Exhibit 4.
Such annual sums shall not be less than those showri by Exhibit 4.
j i
ARTICLE X ACCOUNTING AND PAYMENT i
1 Section 1.
Billing Aaent.
The POOL Board shall designate a i
i Member as Accounting and Billing Agent.
The duties of the Billing
-l i
Agent shall include, but not be limited to, maintaining the records i
of the POOL and billing, paying and/or crediting the Members of the POOL.
Section 2.
Records.
Each Member shall maintain, or cause to l
be maintained, accurate records, in such form and manner as may be l
prescribed or approved by the POOL and REA of (a) the respective I
components of the Annual Costs and matters relating thereto, (b) monthly costs related to Monthly Reimbursement, and (c) such other i
matters as shall be prescribed by the POOL.
I
~
~
' Section 3.
Monthlv Accounting Stacements.
On or before the t
20th day of each month, !! ember shall prepare and submit to the POOL an acccunting statement, in fom prescribed or approved by the POOL, covering the preceding month and setting forth in necessary detail the charges (hereinafter called " Monthly Charges"), payable to the Member.
Section 4 Monthly Payments.
On or before the last working day of each month (a) Member shall pay the POOL the amount above decamined, and (b) the POOL shall pay Member the amount of any difference, if the Monthly Reimbursement exceeds the Monthly Charges.
Any payment made pursuant to the foregoing shall not constitute a waiver of the right. of any Member or the POOL to question 'dr contest the correctness of the charge by the POOL or Member, but no payment by the Member or Members or the POOL shall i
be delayed due to a question or contes't as to.the correctness of any charge by the POOL or Members.
ARTICLE XI INSURANCE -- INDDINIFICATION Section 1.
Insurance for Generating Stations.
The Parties vill carry in the name of SOYLAND and WIPCO as their interest now or hereinafter exist, insurance to provide appropriate protection for SOYLAND and WIPCO from the usual hazards as owners and i
operators of generation facilities.
The said insurance shall include, but may not be limited go, comprehensive ' general public liability, fire, extended coverage, and vandalism, as are now owned and operated pursuant to this Agreement and if available on i
19 reasonable
- terms, all-risk insurance coverage on breakdown of generating station facilities, all with such repair and replacement and extra expense endorsements, and with such limits, deductibles and other features, when available as the Parties shall agree upon through the Management Conunittee.
Section 2.
Insurance for Transmission Properties.
SOYLAND and WIPCO shall individually procure such insurance as is customary
~
and necessary in the industry respecting transmission and substation properties, when said transmission or substation properties are constructed, oparsted and/or maintained pursuant to
~
this Agreement, including, but not limited to, comprehensive General Public Liability and such other insurance in such amounts and with such deductibles and other features as may be decernined by the Management Committee.
Section 3.
Other Insurance.
The' Parties will carry in the l
name ' of SOTLAND and VIPCO. as their interests now or hereafter l
- exist, all other necessary insurance covering idrnership and
~
operations pursuant to this Agreement in such amounts and with such deductibles and other features as may be determined from time to time by the Management Consmittee.
Section 4 WIPCO Liability to SOYLAND.
Except-for fraudulent i
i misconduct or willful action of VIPCO, and except to the er. tent l
l such liability is discharged or indemnified against by insurance, I
WIPCO and its directors, officers, agents, or employees shall have no liability to SOYLAND for any liability, loss, cost, damage, and
- expense, including attorney fees and expenses of litigation incurred or sustained by SOYLAND as a result of any act or failure I
l
~
20-to act, whether negligent or otherwise, by WIPCO (or its directors, i'
officers, agents, employees, or contractors), or any error or delay whether negligent or otherwise attributable to WIPCO (or its i
i directors,
- officers, agents, employees, or contractors) in the F
l course of work pursuant to this contract and in the course of any other activity under or in connection with the provisions of this f
Agreement.
j r
Section 5.
SOYLAND Liability to WIPCO.
Except for fraudulent i
i misconduct or willful action of SOYLAND, and except to the extent l
l
" such liability is discharged or indemnifie'd against by insurance, i
SOYLAND and its directors, officers, agents, or employees shall have no liability, to WIPCO for any liability loss, cost, damage, and expense, including attorneys fees and ' expenses of litigation incurred or sustained by WIPCO as a result of any act or failure to act whether negligent.or otherwise by SOYLAND (or its directors, i
officers, agents, employees, or contractors), or any error.or delay
}
i whether negligent or otherwise attributable to SOY' AND (or its l
directors,
- officers, agents, employees, or contractors) in the i
i l'
i l
course of work pursuant to this contract and in the course of any i
other activity under or in connection with the provisions of this j
Agreement.
l Section 6.
Indemnification of the Parties.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create joint or several liability of a Party for the acts, omissions, or obligations of the other f
t Party.
Subject to the foregoing,.the Party shall have such rights of indemnity and contributi~on between themselves with respect to i
1 I
J
_21 the subject of this Agreement as shall be permitted by law and cens.3te:.c with clie provisions of the Agreement.
i-Other provisions in this Agreement notwithstanding, this Agreement shall not be construed as relieving WIPCO or SOYLAND from
' W14 ey to the other Party for any willful action or fraudulent l
misconduct of WIPC0 or SOYLAND or any action of WIPCO or SOYLAND taken in bad faith which prejudices the other Party for the benefit of itself.
Section 7.
Liability.
Except as otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement, the liability of one Party to the other for any branch of this Agreement or default, the recoverable damages shall be limited to the actual direct damages suffered by the Party
' nclude exemplary, punitive or remote so damaged and shall not i
t damages.
i In the event either Party to this Agreement breaches or 4
creates a default in agreements with third parties and the parties thereto, which breach or default results in the termination of said f
j ijgreements or any of them with third parties, the Party hereto i
hireaching such agreementa or defaulting shall be liable to the i
f I
o;;her Party hereto for any and all damages resulting therefrom to l
s.pid other Party, said damages shall not be limited by the l
j.
i pqovisions of the preceding paragraph.
6 i
{
Section 8., Default.
" Default" means the failure of any Party l
to perform its ' duties, obligations and responsibilities under this Agyeement.
The Parties recognize that a default may jeopardize the 1
ingestment of the other Party made pursuant to the Parties f
t agr}sements with third parties, and deprive said Party of the l
)
I
. benefits of power.
pooling with c:her
- parties, including the defaulting Party and that the consequences of a default would be substantial.
i The remedies for default provided herein are and shall be in addition to all other remedies at law or equity for the 1
nondefaulting Party.
If the default consists in nonpayment of a Party's share of costs or failure to provide the service obligated, then the nondefaulting Party may pay said costs or provide the service and the defaul' ting Party shall be obligated to reimburse said Party for the money paid or costs of service plus interest at 5% above the then commercial prime rate as charged by the The First National Bank of Chicago.
Further, until paid the sum due shall constitute a lien upon any real estate owned by the defaulting Party.
ARTICLE XII MERGER t
Section 1.
Agreement to Merge.
The parties hereto agree to merge the two corporations.
Said merger to be effective on July 1, 1986, unless extendad by mutual agreement.
~
The merger shall be accomplished pursuant to the Illinois Not-for-Profit Act, as amended (Chapter 32 Par. 163(a) ct. seq.
(
Illinois Revised Statutes).
The parties shall adopt a plan of userger and submit the same to their respective members all as provided by statute.
Section 2.
Provisions of Meraer Agreement.
The plan of l
t j
merger shall in addition to other provisions as required by the
[
j statute and such other terms and conditions as may be mutually l
i l
I I
' agreed upon will contain in suitable language the following P
conditions which will be binding upon the Parties after the merger is effective.
1.
The Board of Directors of the surviving corporation shall consist of two directors from each Member of the corporation having voting rights.
At least one of the said two directors shall be a director of the Member.
'he merged l
2.
The rates charged to each Member of t
cooperative shall be ' determined as provided in Section 3, Article l
IX of the Coordination and Operation Agreemeht between the parties dated Juiv 24 1984, except that upon commercial operation of the Clinton Power Station, the fixed costs and variable costs t
for the former WIPCO Hembers shall be, increased by the following
{
percentages for the years given, with the former Soyland Members paying the balance:
TEAR PERCENTAGE 1987 and 1988 8
i 4
I 1989 and 1990 7
~
1991 6
i 1992 5
l t
1993 4
l l
1994 3
j 1995 2
1996 1
l 1997 and thereafter 0
The above assumes that the Clinton Power Station is placed in j
commercial operation in January of 1987.
However, if it is not, j
f
, the time periods covering percentages above beginning with 1987 ar.d i
1988 shall be adjusted to commence on the first of that month'in I
which Clinton becomes commercial.
3.
Continuation of Terms of Coordination and Operation Agreement.
The provisions of Article IX, Section 7
of the Coordination and Operation Agreement between the parties dated July 24 1984, will continue in force and effect after the merger.
4 ARTICLE XIII GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.
Right of Installation and Access.
A.
Each Party hereto grants to the other permission to
- install, maintain, and
- operate, or cause to be installed, maintained, and operated, on its premises, i
any and all. terminal equipment and L
associated apparatus and devices necessary in the performance of this Agreement.
i B.
Each Member shall permit duly authorized representatives and employees of the TOOL l
to enter upon its premises for the purpose l
of reading or checking meters, inspecting,
- testing, repairing,
- renewing, or exchanging any or all of the aquipment owned by the POOL located on such premises, or for the purpose of performing any other work necessary in the l
perfcrmance of cl.is Agreement.
Section 2.
Right of Removal.
Any and all equipment, I
l
\\
j apparatus, devices, or facilities _placed or installed or caused to e
l be placed or installed, by either Party hereto on or in the j
i premises of tha other Party shall be and remain the property of the f
Party owning and installing such equipment, apparatus, devices, or facilities, regardless of the mode or manner of annexation or e
i f
~_
t f
45-attachment to real property of the other, and, upon the termination i
of this A reement, the owner thereof shall have the right to enter i
5 upon the premises of the other and shall, within a reasonable time, l
renova such equipment, apparatus, devices or facilities.
f Section 3.
Reliability and Adequacy of Service.
Electric service rendered under this Agreement shall meet accepted standards of relisbility and adequacy.
If questions arise concerning the f
quality of service, factual data shall be obtained with respect to the cha.racter of such service and appropriate corrective or remedial action shall be promptly taken by the Party at fault.
'f f
Section 4 Continuity of Deliveries.
' Electric power and energy delivered, and transmission. capacity made available under i
i l
this Agreement, shall be furnished continuously and/or as scheduled l
l except for interruptions or curtailments in service caused by an 4
I Uncontrollable Force, or by operation. of devices installe.d for l
system protection, or by the necessary installation, maintenance,
- repair, and replacement of equipment.
Such int'arruptions or 6
~
reductions in
- service, as hereinbefore set
- forth, shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement, and neither Party shall be I
l liable to the other for damages resulting therefrom.
Except in t
i case of an emergency, each Party shall give the other reasonable j
i advance notice of temporary interruptions or curtailments in i
I j
service necessary for such installation, maintenance, repair, and t
replacement of equipment, and shall schedule such interruptions or j
curtailments so as to cause the les-t inconvenience'to the Parries l
hereto.
It is understood and agreed that Members shall not schedule auch installation, maintenance, repairs, or replacement in respect i
~
, of any of the Combined Generating Facilities or Combined Transmission Facilities without the approval of the POOL.
Section 5.
Reports.
Each Party hereto shall furnish to the other such reports conceraing its operations as the other Party may reasonably request from time to time, and !! embers shall in any event submit to the POOL such records, reports, and information in respect of the Combined Generating Facilities, Combined
\\
Transmission Facilities, and other costs, as the POOL may, from time to time, reasonably request.
l Section 6.
Audit.
Throughout the term of this Agreement, l
each of the Parties hareto shall cause an annual audit of its 1
operations covering its audit year, to be made by a Certified Public Accountant.
The Members' audit shall include such l
information as shall be prescribed by the POOL.
A duly certified copy of such audit shall be furnished to the other Party within a reasonable period after the and of each audit year.-
F Section 7.
Assignment.
Neither Party shall assign this
~
Agreement'or any interest therein, except to the United States. of America, without the approval in writing of the other Party, and of the Administrator of REA.
l i
fection 8.
Amendment.
Subject to the approval of the n
Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration and any regulatory authority or body which may have jurisdiction thereof, this Agreement may be amended from time to time by agreement in f
writing duly executed by the Parties hereto.
In. the event any l
t provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid or in conflict with any law or any regulation or order of any regulatory
{
i i
l t
= - -
[
i l l
agency having jurisdiction, the Parties hereto will attempt by l
mucual written agreement to amend this Agreement, which amendment will eliminate such invalidity or conflict.
Section 9.
Governing Law.
The validity, interpretation, and
- f:- :n:: of this Agreement and each of its provisions shall be governed by the law of the State of Illinois.
Section 10., Counterparts.
Any number of counterparts of this Agreement may be executed and each shall have the same force and effect as the original.
Section 11.
Understanding.
This Agreement shall constitute I
the entire understanding of the Parties.
Section,12.
Mutual Assistance.
Each Party shali assist each of the other Parties in fulfilling and discharging the responsibilities assumed under this Agreement and in making this i
Agreement productive and beneficial t.o the stated intent.
This undertaking of mutual assistance shall be limited only by any j
cbligations of a particular Party which, in the judgment of that Party,. limit the assistance which it may provide.
This general cask of mutual assistance.shall not be deemed to replace or modify in any respect the specific. responsibilities and obligations of the
~
Parties as described in this Agreement.
Section 13.
Section Hesdings Not to Affect Meaning.
The descriptive headings of the various Sections of this Agreement have been inserted for convenience of reference only, and shall in no I
l l
vay modify or restrict any of the terms and provisions thereof.
l Section 14 Relationship of Parties.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create an association, joinc I
l i
or partnership, or to impose a trust or partnership venture, trust
- covenant, obligation or liability for either of the Parties.
Neither Party shall be the agent of or have a right or power to bind the other Party without its express written consent, except as expressly provided in this Agreement.
(The Parties hereby elect to be excluded from the application of Subchapter K of Chapter 1 of i
Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended from time to time, or such portions thereof as may be permitted or authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegee insofar as such Subch tprer, or any portion thereof may be applicable to the Parties under this Agreement).
ARTICLE XIV EFFEdTIVE DATE, TER11, AND CONTINGENCIES Section 1.
Aporoval by REA.
This Agreement shall not become effective unless and until it shall' have been approved by the Administrator of REA.
i Section 2.
Term of Agreement.
Subj ect to Section 1 of this l
- Article, this Agreement shall become effective for the tem beginning as of January 1, 1955 and ending at midnight December 31, 2025, unless extended by mutual agreement-of the tarries.- --
Section 3.
Operative Date.
The delivery of power and energy by Members and the POOL, pursuant to this Agreement, shall begin on the " Operative Date" hereof, which shall be January 1, 1985, or as mutually agr**d.
4 Section 4 Remedies of Parties.
Except - as otherwise l
specifially provided, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed to abridge, limit, or deprive any of the Parties hereto 1
i
, ~
of any means of enf.orcing cny remedy which it might otherwise have, either at law or in equity, including the right, if any, of injunction and specific performance, for the breach of any of the provisions hereof.
Section 5.
Usivers.
Waiver at any time of rights with respect to a default or any other matter ar,ising in connection with this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver with respect to any subsequent default or matter.
I Section 6.
Notice.
Any payment, written notice, demand or request required or authorized under this Agreement shall be deemed properly given to or served on Members if mailed to:
WIPCO Executive Vice President t
I, and General Manager Western Illinois Pdwer 4
Cooperative, Inc.
{
Highway 67 South Pose Office Box 609 Jacksonville, Illinois 62651 SOYLAND Executive.Vice President q~
and General Manager l
Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc.
l i
Post Office Bor A1606 i
Decatur, Illinois 62525 l
Any such p-Nent,
- notice, demand or request shall be deemed properly given to or served the POOL if mailed to:
SOYLAND/WIPCO Post Office Box AI606 Decatur, Illinois 62525 The designation of the persons to be notified, or the addresses of j
such persons, may be changed at any time upon written notice of the i
other Parties.
(
I l
i t
\\
---.- L
~
Section 7.
Cood Utility Practices.
The Parties shall discharge any and all obligations under this Agreement in a prudent
~
manner and in accordance with good utility practices.
Section 8.
Conflict With Memorandum of Understanding.. To the extent that any 'of the provisions of this Agreement conflict with the Memorandum of Understanding dated February 15, 1984, between j
the Parties, this Agreement shall supersede said Memorandum of j
Understanding.
s i
i IN WITNESS W11EREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this i
t Agreement in several counterparts all of which are duplicate j
i originals as of the day and year first above written.
[
SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.,
h By
/M h l
Attest:
I f
? 2 055
- s Seal WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
l
~ 4./* (p-7 i
)
w
~
By
-' fin' u -} {e#
i;"i l
l i
Attest:
[
~
lNaA /W
~
seal t
i I
[
t
' a; EX:!IDIT 1-A
' EXISTI?:C CCICRATIO'; FACILITIES WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
PEARL Unit I 1 - 24 Mw (net) coal-fired steam unit 1 - 22 Mwa, 13.8/69 Kv step-up transformer Unit II 1 Mw (nat) oll-fired, internal combustion unit 1 - 15 Mya, 13.8/69 KV step-up transformer Switching Station 1 - 6 bay, 69 Kv with main and transfer bus 3 - 69 Kv line oil circuit breakers 2 - 69 Kv generator oil circuit breakers -
1 - A9 Kv station service oil circuit breaker 1 - 2 Mva, 69/2.4 Ky station service transformer PITTSFIELD l
Generators 5 - 9.48 Mu (net) internal combustion, dual fual, oil-fired units f
i 2 - 5 Mva, 4.16/33 Kv. step-up transformers l
j Switchina Station - 34.5 Kv r
1 - 6 bay, 34.5 Kv with main and transfer bus 2 - 34.5 Ky line oil circuit breakers 2 - 34.5 Ev generator oil circuio breakers i
2 - 34.5 Kv bus tie oil circuit breakers Switchina Station - 69 Kv 1 - 3 bay, main bus l
l 2 - 69 Kv line oil circuit breakers 1 - 69/34.5 Ky transformer oil circuit breaker 1 - Bank of 6 - 1000 Kva f6 Mwa) 69/34.5 Ky stepdown transformer l
WINCHESTER Generators I
5 - 3.2 Mw (net) internal combustion, dual fuel, oil-fired units i
1 - Bank of 3 - 500 Kva-(1.5 Mva) 4.16/34.5 Kv step-up transformer 1 - Bank of 3 - 667 Kva (2.0 Mwa) 4.16/34.5 Kv step-up transformer j
l i
Switching Station - 34.5 Kv 1 - 7 bay, 34.5'Kv main bus 3 - 34.5 Ky line oil circuit breakers
~1 - 34.5 Ky transformer oil circuit breaker Switching Station - 69 KV 1 - 5 bay, rain and transfer bus 2 - 69 Kv line oil circuit breakers 1 - 69 Ky bus tie oil circuit breaker 1 - 69 Ky station tie oil circuit breaker (to 138 Kv sub) 1 - 69/34.5 Kv, 10 Mva transformer Switching Station - 138 KV 1 - 2 bay, main bus 1 - 138 Kv circuit switcher 1 - 138/69 Kv, 30 Mva transformer l
l l
l r
9 1
i i
i y
+
l t
i
s s
EXHIBIT 1-B t
IIISTING GENERATING FACILITIES SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
I i
i Soyland presently has no generating or related facilities i
s p
i r
t l
~
i l
}
(
e t
t t
I f
i I
e f
?
F I
h i
i I
t i
i I
e i
?
i h
I r
r b
i e
+
--,,n-9, -, -, - - - -. - -
EXHIBIT 2-A EXISTING TRAN5MISSIOi FACILITIES WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
4 Trrnsaission Lines Section Name Conductor Length in Miles 138 Rv Jceksonville-Winchester 795 45/7 ACSR 19.00 4
Turris Tap 336.4 26/7 ACSR 0.84 Subtotal
,19.84 69 Rv i
Paarl Tap 4/0 ACSR 2.00 Winchester-Smith Junction 3/0 ACSR 10.77 Winchester-Murrayville Junction 4/0 ACSR 8.40 Murrayville Junction-Jacksonville Tap 3/0 ACSR 10.85 Jncksonvile Tap-Pisgah Junction 4/0 ACSR 3.54 Berlin-Amos 4/0 ACSR 19.78 Pearl Tap-Smith Junction 4/0 ACSR 8.68 i
Pearl-Pearl Tap 4/0 ACSR-0.57 Pearl-Rampsville 4/0 ACSR 9.42 Amos-Athens Junction 336.4 26/7 ACSR 8 80 Athens Junction-Barclay 4/0 ACSR 11.48 Athens Tap 336.4 26/7 ACSR 4.50 Amos-Glenara 4/0 ACSR 16.70,
Amos-CUL&P Amos 336.4 26.7 ACSR 0 10 Pittsfield-El Dara 4/0 ACSR 9 06 i
Pittsfield-Smith Junction 3/0 ACSR 12.77 l
l
- Picgah Junction-Berlin 4/0 ACSR 14.63 Pisgah Tap 3/0 ACSR 1.16 l
El Dara-Badley Junction 4/0 ACSR 7.26 l
Badley Junction-East Hannibal 4/0 ACSR 18.99, i
Badley Junction-Kellerville 4/0 ACSR 15.51 l
Smith Junction-Pearl 4/0 ACSR 9 55 l
4/0 ACSR 2.50 l
Salisbury Tap East Lanesville-Lanesville 336.4 26/7 ACSR 0 92 i
Mortonvilla Tap (1) 4/0 ACSR 7.65 l
El Dara-New canton 4/0 ACSR 5 96 El Dara-Atlas 4/0 ACSR 7.63 i
Barclay-Lanesville 4/0 ACSR 7.27 i
- Jacksonville Tap 3/0 ACSR 1 00 W. Murrayville Tap 3/0 ACSR 0.60 Poplar City Tap 2/0 ACSR 6.52 Topeka Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.10 Nutwood Tap 4/0 ACSR 4.94 Ipava-Smithfield Junction 2 FCWC 8.38 j
14.30 l
Smithfield Junction-St. David 2 FCUC Smithfisld Junetion-Smithfield 2 FCUC 1.40 l
Smithfield-E111sville Junction 2 FCUC 8.96
[
f
.t h
f I
3
i 6+ction Name_
Cenductor Length in Miles 69 Rv (cont.)
2 FCWC 2.40 1
Ellisville Tap R111sv111e Junction-DeLong 4/0 ACSR 17.27 Riveston-Powellton 4/0 ACSR 9.70 4/0 ACSR 14.23
~
Rivcston-Sutter t,aPrairie' Tap 2 FCWC 0.50 LaPrairie-Big Neck 4/0 ACSE 12.89 4/0 ACSR 0.10 4/0 ACSR 0.90 Bishop Tap Newbern Tap Oaktord Tap 4/0 ACLR 7.52 i
Middletown Tap 4/0 ACSR 10.34 DeLong-Rnoxville 4/0 ACSR.
6.47 4/0 ACSR 6.40 Hardin Tap Tcylorville Tap 4/0 ACSR 3.38 4/0 ACSR 8.52 Denver Tap Bru::sels Tap 4/0 ACSR 11.80 SuSer Crove Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.25 Bluff Springs Tap (1) 4/0 ACSR 2.76 Subtotal 398.0' 34.5 Kv i
Wfw h.=ter-Murrayville 3/0'Al 6.88 Murrayville Tap 3/0 ACSR 1.30 Murrayville Junction-Roodhouse Junction 3/0 ACSR 7.59 0.30 Greenfield Tap 3/0 ACSR 14.05 Grasnfield Junction-Carrollton 3/0 ACSR 12.10 Hillview-Winchester
- 2 CU 9.40 Crocnfield Junction-Roodhouse Junction 3/0 ACSR Rampsville-Carrollton Junction 1/0 ACSR 7.70 Pittsfield-Pittsfield Junction 3/0 ACSR 3.40 4
F.ittsfield Tap 3/0 ACSR 0.50 P.ittsfield Junction-Griggsville 3/0 ACSR 15.00 Criggsville-Neelyville 3/0 ACSR 10.52 Neslyville Tap 3/0 ACSR 0.51 Winchester-Neelyville 3/0 ACSR 15.13 Ne31yville-Arenaville 4/0 ACSR 10.41'*
Carrollton-Carrollton Junction 1/0 ACSR 0.50 i
corrollton Junction-R1 dred 4/0 ACSR 7.32*
Rampsv111e-Rampsville Junction 4/0 ACSR 0.60*
Marblehead-Adams 2 FCWC 8.80*
Burton Tap 4/0 ACSR 6.90*
Quincy Tap 4/0 ACSR 3.80*
Rinaker Tap 4/0 ACSR 6.20*
P01myra Tap 4/0 ACSR 1.34*
Brighton Tap 4/0 ACSR 1.07*
Breeda Tap 4/0 ACSR 3.79*
i Boney Bend Tap 4/0 ACSR 1.12*
- 4/0 ACSR 3.04*
Witt Tap i
Astoria Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.70*
Subcotal 159.c Total 577.E~
- Constructed 69 Rv (1) Anticipate in service by 12-31-06
.m
's l
EXHIBIT 2-B EXISTING TRANSMISSION FACILITIES SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
Cocoerative Line Section volcame Conductor Miles Clev Bible Grove Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.00 Bible Grove arathon 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 2.00 t
Iola-Gulf 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.30 i
Sailor Springs Tap (2) 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 4.30 i
Subcatal 69 Kv 14.60 1
l I
1 t
i Clinton Boulder Tap 69 KV 4/O ACSR 1.80 Shattuc I Tap 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR,
2.24 l
Shattue I - Shattue II 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 0.84 Mascoutah Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 5.00' l
Bartelso Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 4.05
.I Beckmeyer-Keysgre
.69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 8.42 l
4/0 ACSR 3.80
(
Trenton II Tap 69 Kv i
i Subcotal 69 K+
26.15 l'
I i
j i
C'les-Moultrie Bathany - Sullivan 69 Kv' 4/0 ACSIL 11.40 I
Charleston Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 0.90
[
]
East Charleston Tap 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR
.90 j
Fairgrange Tap 69 Kv Afu ACSR 4.30 l
Lake Land Tap 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 1.70 J
Mattoon Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSE 0.05 Sarah Bush Tap 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 0.30 f
Sullivan Tap "69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 11.50 Union Center Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 0.50 i
Bethany to Proposed Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 5 80 t
Subcotal 69 Ky 37.35 f
l Brue.e Tap 34.5 Kv
- 1/0 ACSR 5.40 t
subtotal 34.5 Ky 5.40 l
1 i
'Cenowrativc Lint Section Voltace_
Conduetor Ni3es Cern Belt Olympia Tap 69 Kv 3/0 ACSR 6.86 Savbrook Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 15.33 Deland Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 8.55.
Deland - Fullerton 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 8.53 Hopedale Tap 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 8.53 i Cooksville Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 2.83 i
Subtotal 69 Kv -
50.63 i
Eastern Woodland Tap 69 KV 4A CWC 0.09 i
Fairbury Tap 69 Ky 2A CWC 0.72 Jamesburg Tap 69 Kv 2/0 ACSR 7.10 l
Anchor Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 7.90 Cissna Park Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 2.50
[
Fapineau Tap-69 KV 4/0 ACSR 0.95 l
i Subtotal 69 Kv 19.26 i
Edger Kansas Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.50 l
Brocton Tap 69 Ev 1/0-ACSR 3.95 l
Ferrell Tap 69 Kv 1/0 Stranded CU 4.71 l
l Baldwin Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 2.85 l
)
Subtotai 69 Kv 16.01.
f l
i Fntiners Mutual Geneseo Tap 34.5 Ky
- 1/0 ACSE 9.76 Geneseo - Ladwig 34.5 Kv 4/0 ACSR 7.69 Subtotal 34.5 Ky 17.45 I
Illini cifford Tap 69 Kv 2-3 S:randed CU 7.1 l
Ludlow Tap 69 Ky 2-3 Stranded CU 3.7 j
Ludlow - Fisher 69 Ky 2-3 Stranded,CU 7.0 Sidney Tap 69 Ky 2-3 Stranded CU 17.0 l
l Farkville Tap 69 Ev 2-3 Stranded CU 12.0 Longview Tap 69 Ky 336.4 KCHIL 4.8 l
j Carrect Tap 69 Ky 336.4 KCHIL 3.0 Mahomet Tap 69 Ky 336.4 ECMIL 6.0 I
l Subtotal 69 KV 60.60 1
d C woerative Line Section Voltane Conductor g les 1
Illinois vallev Oak Run Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 4.7 Burns Tap 69 Kv 336.4 KCMIL 4.0 Subcocal 69 Kv 8.7 n-
~
Wyanet Niskilva 34.5 Kv,
1/0 ACSR 10.0 Sheffield Tap 34.5 Kv 336.4 KCMIL 5.0 Troy Grove Tap 34.5 Kv,,
336.4 KCMIL 2.5 Granville Tap 34.5 Kv,
336.4 KCHIL 0.5 Princeton Tap
- 34.5 Kv 336.4 KCMIL 3.1 34.5 Kv,
-336.4 KCHIL 6.9 Neponset Subtotal 34.5 Ky 28.00 McDonoush Industry Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 9.69 Brainer Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 14.30 i
Brainer - Kington 69 KV 4/0 ACSA 10.53 Spring Lake - Macomb 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 5.11 mi.
5.61-1/0 ACSR 0.50 mi.
Table Grove Tap 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 3.62 Subtotal 69 Kv 43.75 Monroe Poe-Tults-Maeystown Creek 34.5 Kv
- 4/0 ACSR 25.18 Subtotal 34.5 KV 25.18 e
e (3)
'Ceeoerative Line Section Voltage Conductor Miles Sh,1bv Neoga Tap 69 KV 1/0 ACSR 9.87 Subtotal 69 Kv 9.87 f
Blue Mound Tap 34.5 KV 1/0 ACSR 4.99 i
Lakewood Tap 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.23 Pana Tap 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR 8.74 Taylorv111e Tap 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR 6.57 Yantisville Tap 34.5 KV 1/0 ACSR 9.51 i
i Subtotal 34.5 KV 34.04 j
i l
=
S*utnwest.u.
34tyville Tap 138 KV 336.5 MCM 0.50 l
i Subtotal 138 Kv 0.50 l
I l
4 Edgewood Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 5.5 Wright's Corne~r Tap (2) f 69 KV 336.5 18/1 ACSR 2.0 Subcotal 69 Kv 7'. 5 l
t 1
Confidence Tap 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 5.00 Sefton Tap 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 3.00 Cgap 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 1.00
[
Sefton 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 1.75 i
Reno Tap Pocahontas Shell Pump 34.5 Kr
- 4/0 ACSR 2.50 Wordon - Boliday Shores Kast 34.5 Kv
- 4/0 ACSR 5.75 i
Edwardsville Tap 34.5 Kv
- 4/0 ACSR 5.00 i
Maryville
'Pruit (2) 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 3.00 Eoliday Shores East to t
Roliday Shores West 34.5 KV 4/0 ACSR UG 2.00 f
Ecliday Shores West - Bethalto 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 4.50 Subtotal 34.5 Kv 33.50 l
i (4)
teco$rstiva Lina Sectica Voltr.cn Cenductor Milec
^
Tri-County Patoka Tap 69 Kv 4.00 CSR Patoka - Kinmundy 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 11.75 Ashley Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 1.30 Hoyleton Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 8.00 Irvington - Dix 69 KV 4/0 -ACSR 9.50 Iuka Tap 69 Kv 2/0 ACSR 5.30 1
Iuka - South Sales 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 2.00 Bonnie Tap - Bonnie Sub 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR-12.28 Bonnie Tap - Freeman Coal 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 0.25 Bonnie Tap - Barva 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 3.20 Bonnie Tap - Reserve 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 4.30 i
Subtotal 69 Kv 61.85 V"vne-White Phillipstown Tap 69 Kv 2/0 ACSR 3.00 Carmi-Crossville Tie Line 69 Kv 4/O ACSR 4.00 Crossville - Emma 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR
.11.50 Carmi 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 18.50 Enfield - Inland Steel Coal 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 6.50 Inland Steel Coal - Diamond City 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 6.60 Diamond City - McLeansboro 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 7.4C
-McLeansboro - Aden 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 11.50 Aden - Mill Shoals 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 7.80 Mill Shoals - Boogerville 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 16.00 Boogerville - Albion 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 14.00
- Boogerville - Boyleston 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 13.50
..Boyleston - Wayne City 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 16.50 i
Zif Tap 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 3.50 Clay City - Rinard 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 10.00 Rinard - Jefferson 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 5.50 Boogerv111e Jefferson Tie Line 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 6.50 Jefferson Johnsonville 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 8.50 Johnsonville - Orchardville 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR
.7.40 Vayne City - Aden Tie Line 69 Ky 1/0 ACSR 9.50
~
Ashland Pipe - Line Tap 69 KV 1/0 ACSR 1.25 Orchardville - Keenes Tie Line 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 7.50 Subtotal 69 Kv 196.45 Bluford - Eryne city 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR 5.00 Subtotal 34.5 Kv 5.00 Total 138 Ev Transmission
.50 miles
. Total 69 Ev Transmission 552.75 miles Total 34.5 Kv Transmission 148.57 miles Total 701.85 miles Conscructed.for 69 Ky' 1 Not In Service 2 In Service 1984 3 In Service 1985 n
~*
Transmission Switching Stations Albion 1 - 69 Ky oil circuit breaker Carni 1 - 69 Kv oil circuit breaker l
Clav City 1 - 69 Ky oil circuit breaker i
t Crossville
{
1 - 69 Ky oil circuit breaker r
I j
i
?
+
i
,t t
t I
~
)
l 1
g f
h
)
r I
i i
I r
l t
l i
r
?
(6)
EKilIBIT 3-A EXISTING POINTS OF DELIVERY
~
WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
~
I.
BULK POINTS Metering Delivery' Cooperative Deliverv Point Substations High Side Low Side _
Voltage._
AA==
LaPrairie LaPrairie CIPS WIPCO 69 KV Big Neck WIPCO 69 Kv Marblehead (Payson) Adams CIPS WIPCO 34.5 Kv Burton WIPCO 34.5 Kv Quincy WIPCO 34.5 Kv Illinois Hardin Brussels CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Rural Hardin WIPCO 69 Kv Henard Greenview Middletown CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Oakford WIPCO 69 Kv Topeka Poplar City CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Topeka WIPCO 69 Kv Spoon River Ipava Ipava CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Smithfield WIPCO 69 Kv Enoxville DeLong IP WIPCO 69 Kv Ellisville WIPCO 69 Kv St. David St. David CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv
~
Western Elvaston Elvaston CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Powellton WIPCO
- 69 Kv Sutter WIPCO 69 Kv Carthage
'Carthage CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Denver VIPCO 69 KV I
e I
i II.
INDIVIDUA1. POINTS.
Metering Delivery (
Cooperative Delivery Point High Side Low Side
_ Voltage Adams Colmar CIPS
~
69 Ky Kellerville WIPCD 69 Kv Mt. Sterling CIPS 69 Kv Rushville CIPS 69 Ky Sugar Grove CIPS 69 Kv Ursa CIFS 34.5 Kv Illinois Rural Arensville WIFC0 34.5 Kv Atlas WIFC0 69 Ky carrollton WIPCO 34.5 Kv Carrollton Wells IREC 34.5 Kv (2) l Kast Hannibal WIPCO 69 Kv j
K1 dred VIPCO 34.5 Kv Greenfield WIFC0 34.5 Kv Griggsville WIPCO 34.5 Kv i
Hillview WIPCO 34.5 Kv
(
Murrayville WIPCO 34.5 Kv i
Naples WIPCO 34.5 Kv (3)
Neelyville WIFC0 34.5 Ky New Canton WIPCO 69 Kv i
i Nortonville (9)
WIPCO 69 Kv l
Fearl' WIFC0 69 Kv l
l Pisgah WIPCO 69 Kv Pittsfield WIFdo 34.5 Ky
~
Uinchester WIPCO 34.5 Kv l
s j
M.J.M. Electric
- Brighton IF 34.5 Kv i
j Bunker Hill IF 34.5 Kv Butler IP 34.5 Kv i
Money Bend (4)
IF WIFC0 34.5 Kv Jerseyville CIPS 69 Kv j
Newbern CIPS 69 KV
- l Nutwood CIFS 69 Kv j
Palmyra (4)
CIFS, WIPCO 34.5 KV.
Rinaker IF 34.5 KV i
Staunton IF 34.5 KV Taylor Springs IF 34.5 Kv Witt IF 34.5 Kv Womac IF 34.5 Ky j
Beadquarters IF 4.16 Kv (5) l 4
I l
Mana'rd Athens WIPCO 69 Ky Barcisy; WIPCO 69 Kv l
l Bishop CIPS 49 Kv
'}
Bluff Springs (9)*
CIPS 69 Ky i
l Ianesvinle WIPC0 69 Ev Mason Ct.ty-CIPS 69 Ky l
New Ber31a VIPCD 69 Ky l
t f
f l i i
..-.m.
..,,. _.,. _ =
+
Delivery (1)
Hetering Cooperative Deliverv Point _
High Side Low Side Voltage Menard Petersburg CIPS 69 Kv Saidora CIPS 69 Kv 69 Kv l
Salisbury WIPCO Turris WIPCO (7)
WIPCO 138 Kv (6) '
j Virginia CIPS 69 Kv l
[
Rural Klectric Farmersv111e CIPS 34.5 Kv Girard CIPS 34.5 Kv Clanara VIPCO 69 Kv Harvel IF 34.5 Kv I
Louder CIPS 34.5 Kv j
Sicily CIPS 69 Kv Taylorville CIPS 69 Kv Spoon River Astoria CIPS 34.5 Kv i
Breeds CIPS 34.5 Kv l
Wee-Ma-Tuk CIPS 34.5 Kv j
)
Western Lomax IP 69 Kv j
i WIPCO Jacksonville Ndq.
IP 7.2 Kv (8) f i
L Note:
I i
. All standard 12.47 Ev low side unless noted.
l 1.
2.
240/480 v. lov side.
l 1
3.
2.4 Ky low side.
j 4.
Substation also serves Rural Klectric Co., WIPC0 l'
meters each Cooperative.
5.
120/208 v. Iow side.
[
6.
13.2 Kv low side.
t 7.
Considered 138 Ky interchange with IP.
[
8.
Single phase service, WIPCO owns 3 span 0.H.16 7.2 Kv line and 300' of #2 alue. 16 7.2 Kv underground.
[
9.
Anticipating in service by 12-31-84.
j f
i i
I l
O l
?
t i
.2
Transmission Switching Stations
- Kampsville
. bay, main and transfer bus 2 - 34.5 Ky line oil circuit breakers 1 - 34.5 Kv transform:r oil circuit breaker 1 - 69/34.5 Kv. 10 Mva, stepdown transformer 1 - 69 Kv motor operated airbreak switch Amos 3
1 - 5 bay, main and transfer bus 3 - 69 Kv line oil circuit breakers 1 - 69 Ky tie oil circuit breaker (to CWL&P) 1 - 69 Ky motor operated circuit switcher 1 - 9600 Kvar bank of capacitors i
Kast Lanesville
(
l 1 - 2 bay, main bus i
1 - 69 Kv line oil circuit breaker 1 - 138 Kv motor operated circuit switcher 1 - 138/69 Kv, 20 Mva, stepdown transformer i
wu... e 3
i i
1 - 69 Kv oil circuit breaker j
lurris 2 - 138 KV motor operated circuit switchers 1
i I
c i
1 l
l l
l
- All have relaying, some have metering.
i i
l l
i i
l i
l i
l >
i l
_ ____,__.___._.... _. _ _ _ _ _. ~ _ _ _ _ _ _.. ~.. _. _ _.. _. _ _ _ _.)
EX111 BIT 3-5 I
EXISTING POINTS OF DELIVERY j
SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
j t
[
L BULK POINTS j
l Metering Delivery i
Coooerative Delivery Point Substations Binh Side Low Side voltage Clav Bord Bible Grove CIPS 69*Kv
)
Marathon Oil I
i Clinton Beckmeyer Beckmeyer IP 69 KV f
I Keysport I
Shattuc I IP 69 Kv f
f Shattuc Shattuc II
{
l cole -Moultrie Arcola Sullivan CIPS 69 Kv j
Bethany(1)-
t Chicap i
Corn Belt Belt Line Belt Line East IP 34:5 Kv l
Belt Line West Cisco
- Deland IP 69 Ky i
Pullerton
[
Normal Normal North
'.IP 34.5 Kv Normal South i
Sutter Eopedale CILCO 69 Kv l
Olympia i
Parmers Mutual Atkinson Geneseo IP 34.5 Kv j
hh4 l
i i
l Illini Ludlow Ludlow CIPS 69 Kv l
Fisher L
I i
i Illinois vallev Wyanet Wyanet IP 34.5 Kv Tiskilva L
I i
t (1) Presently De-energized i
)
__m__ _... _ -. _. _ _ _,., _. _ _, _ _ ~ _ _. - -. _.
_. _. _..., _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _. ~., _ _ _ _ _ _, _ _... _... _ _ _.,.
Metering Delivery Cooperstive Delivery Point Substations High Side Low Side
_ Voltage McDonouzh West Macomb Woodland CIPS 69 Kv Brainer Kington Macomb South Macomb Industry j
Monroe Waterloo Waterloo IF 34.5 Kv Yoe Fults Maaystown Creek Southwestern Bethalto Bethalto IP 34.5 Kv I
Holiday Shore West j
Edwardsville Edwards 11e IP 69 Kv (Marine)
Pruit Petersburg Petersburg North
- IP 69 Kv i
Petersburg South' j
3 t
i i
Pocahontas Pocahontas IP
,34.5 Kv r
Shell Pump l
Troy Troy North' IP 34.5 Kv Troy South Worden Worden IP 34.5 Kv f
Holiday Shore East l
Tri-County Irvington Irvington IP 69 KV DU j
[
l Patoka Patoka IP 69 Kv i
Kin-mdy Iuka Iuka IP 69 Kv l
South Sales 4
Bonnie Bonnie IP 69 Ky l
i' Barva Reserve i
i L
f (2) Ia, Service September; 1984 i
(2)
[
l I
e.
I Metering Delivery C*onerative Deliverv Point Substations High Side Low Side Voltage 4
U vne-White Albion Albion CIPS 69 Ky Boogerv111e Mill Shoals Aden McCleansboro Wayne City
~
Boylestown Diamond City '
Carmi Carmi CIPS 69 Kv Indfield I
Inland Steel T
Clay City ri'f CIPS 69 Kv Rinard Jefferson Johnsonville Orchardv111e
)
Ashland 011.
Crossville Phillipstown CIPS 69 Kv (Phillipstown)
. White County Coal Imma O
e 9"
e a
a e
i i
l-(3)
s t.
~ II Individual Delivery ?oint Metering Delivery Coooerative Substation Hiah Side Low Side voltage Clay Plora CIPS 69 Kv Iola CIPS 69 Kv Noble CIPS 69 Kv Sailor Springs.(3)
CIPS 69 KV Ionia CIPS 69 Kv i
j Clinton Bartelso
.IP 69 Kv Boulder IP 69 Kv Breese IP 69 Kv j
Ferrin IP 69 Kv l
Mascoutah IP 69 Kv i
Trenton I IP 69 Kv i
Trenton II (3)
SPC 69 Kv l
I
' Coles-Moultrie Ashmore CIPS 69 KV
[
Bruce (Windsor)
CIPS 34.5 KV i
Charleston CIPS 69 KV i
K. Charleston (S. Charleston)
CIPS 69 KV l
Pair Grange CIP.S 69 KV 3
Lakeland CIPs 69 KV i
Mattoon (Dorans)
CIPS -
69 KV l
Neosa CIPS 69 KV l
Sarah Bush CIPS 69 KV l
Union Center (Cassy)
CIPS 69 KV j
- Carn Belt Argenta D
69 KV I
l Armington CILCO 69 KV Cooksv111e IP 69 KV i
Danvers IF 34.5 KV -
(
l Goodfield IP 34.5 KV Molder IP 69 KV Kappa IF 34.5 KV La Roy IF 34.5 KV
[
Lexington IP 69 KV l
L111y IP 34.5 KV Maroa IF 34.5 KV Parkside IF 34.5 KV Saybrook IP 69 KV i
Tazewell CILCO 69 KV l
Wapella IP 34.5 KV j
i i
DeWitt (4) 12.5 KV I
i l
I (3) In Service October; 1984 (4)' Low voltage astering point IP has a KWR meter (no tape cartridge) i I
(4) i I
. - ~
~
i
Z~
.N 1
- Matoring, Delivary Cooperative Substation High Side Low Side Voltage Eastern Anchor CIPS 69 Kv Buckley CIPS 69 Kv Cissna Park CIPS 69 Kv Clifton CIPS 69 Kv Donovan CIPS 69 Kv Fairbury CIPS 69 Kv Gilman CIPS 69 Kv Boopaston CIPS 69 Kv Jamesburg CIPS 69 Kv Fapineau CIPS 69 Kv Faxton CIPS 69 Kv Fiper City CIPS 69 Kv Sibley CIPS 69 KV Watseka CIFS 69 Kv Wellington CIPS 69 Kv Woodland CIPS 69 KV Edgar Baldwin CIPS 69 KV Brockton CIPS 69 Kv Chrisaan CIPS 69 KV Ferrel CIPS 69 Kv Kansas CIPS 69 KV Marshall CIPS 69 Kv Paris CIPS 69 Kv West Union CIPS 69 KV Illini Garrett CIPS 69 KV Gifford CIPS 69 Kv Longview CIPS 69 Kv Mahomet IP 69 KV Parkv111p CIPS 69 Kv Sidney (Villa Grove)
CIPS 69 Kv j
West Ridge (East Tuscola)
CIPS 69 KV 1111ndis Valley Altona - - -
IP 69 KV l
Annawan IF 34.5 Kv Burns (Kawanee)
IP 69 Kv Deer Park (3)
D 34.5 Kv Granville SPC 34.5 Kv Ladd D
34.5 Kv Mineral IF 34.5 K v Naponset IF 34.5 Kv Norway IF 34.5 Kv j
Oak Run (Victoria)
D 69 Ev Princeton IP 34.5 Kv Sheffield D
34.5 Kv Troy Grove U
34.5 Kv i
Wedron D
34.5 Kv Mineral (1111 asis valley Readquarters) 12.5 Kv i
(3) In Service October 1984 i
(5) l
~
1 e,
Metering Delivery Cooperative subotation High Side Low Side voltage McDonough Cameron IP 69 Kv Colchester CIPS 69 Kv Monmouth IP 69 Kv Poneaah IP 69 Kv Table Grove (Adair)
CIPS 69 KV Monroe East Carondolet (5)
SPC Kv Pountain IP Kv Millstat IP Ky New Athens
. IP Kv Smithton IP Kv Shelby Blue Mound CIPS 34.5 Kv Crest CIPS 34.5 Kv Dunkel CIPS 34.5 Kv Elvin CIPS 34.5 Kv Lake Wood CIPS 34.5 Kv
]
Howesqua CIPS 34.5 Kv i
Neosa CIPS 69 Kv i
Pana (Oconnee)
CIPS 34.5 Kv Richland CIPS 34.5 Kv Shelbyville CIPS 34.5 Kv j
Taylorvilla CIPS 34.5 Kv Velma CIPS 34.5 Kv l
Wenonah
'CIPS 34.5 Kv Yantiaville CIPS 34.5 Kv l
t Southwestern Altamont (St. Elmo)
CIPS 69 Kv Confidence IP 34.5 Kv Edgewood (N. Priana)
CIPS 69 Kv Bookdale IP 12 Kv Maryville (5)
SPC 138 Kv New Doug(las.
IF 34.5 Ky Ramsey 5)
SPC 34.5 Kv Reno (5)
SPC 34.5 Ky Sefton IP 34.5 Kv Shafter IP 69 Kv Smithboro IF 34.5 Kv Wrishes Corner (5)
CIPS 69 KV Creenville Headquarters IP 12.5 Kv Borsehoe Lake IP 12.5 Kv i
Tri-County Ashley (Rados)
IP 69 KV Boylston IP 69 Ky Lively Grove IP 69 Ky Mt. Vernon IF 34.5 KV Marlow IP 34.5 KV l
l (5) In servive dates: East Carond61st December 1984, Maryvilla August 1984 Ramsey August 19846 Reno February 1985 Wrights Corner December 1984.
n
E.
.~
Metering De liver r C* operative Substation High Side Lov Side Vcitare Tri-County (cont)
Naishville IP 69 Kv Odin IP 69 Kv Salem IP 69 Kv Waltonville IP 69 Kv Woodlawn IF 34.3 Kv Mt. Vernon Headqurters IP 12.5 Kv W:yna-White Grayv111e CIPS 69 Ky Noble CIPS 69 Kv Norris City CIPS 69 Kv j
West Salem CIPS 69 Kv i
e e
i B
e J
t L
P I
i i
t t
F e
l l
r
~
e e.
EXHIBIT 4 CONTRIBUTION n!NDING RETURN The Eighty-Million Dollars ($80,000,000) Contribution of Funds shall be returned to the Members as a credit against fixed cost to the Soyland/WIPCO Pool. Credits shall begin in the let full quarter following commercial operation of Clinton Unit I.
TEAR ANNUAL CREDIT' 1
$17,800,000 2
$15,500,000 3
$13,300,000 4
$11,100.000 5
4 8,800,000 -
6
$ 6,700,000 7
$ 4,400,000 8
$ 2.400.000 Total
$80,000,000 4
e e
9 e
D r
9 0
e i
e i
l I
.. -....- -.