ML20135D163
| ML20135D163 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 09/10/1985 |
| From: | Cleary D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Spangenberg F ILLINOIS POWER CO. |
| References | |
| A, NUDOCS 8509130367 | |
| Download: ML20135D163 (1) | |
Text
- ~
~
^
[,
,~,
~
_ f. l
.y .
. ,.- n September 10, 1985 t _. i
~
- MrP F. A.'Spangenbe'rg, Director- .
Nuclear Licensing:and Configuration. '
- Nuclear. Station Engineering Il1inois' Power Company '
P.O. Box 678 Clinton,' Illinois :61727 Re: Clinton Power Station, Unit 1 Antitrust Operating License Review .-
Updated No Significant Change Finding (Docket No. 50-461A)
Dear Mr. Spangenberg:
Pursuant to the antitrust review for the captioned nuclear unit, the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has made a finding, in accordance with Section 105c(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as >
amended,'that no significant antitrust changes have occurred subsequent to the initial operating license review in 1982.- .
1 This finding is subject to reevaluation if a member of the public requests same in response to publication of this finding in the Federal Register.
A_ copy of the notice that is being transmitted to the Federal Register and j a copy of the Staff Review are enclosed for your infomation.
Sincerely, i
l Donald P. Cleary. Acting Chief
! Site Analysis Branch l Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
DISTRIBUTION l 1. . Federal- Register notice Docket File-l
AToalston l- $1Mk$50910ji WLambe i
n -BVogler BSiegel
- 3-fl '
' 0FC- :DE:5AB :DE: : -
4
...__:___________.:_.. d___:DE:5AR: . _ . $ . . . . : . . _ . . . . . . . . . : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ :. . . . . . _ _
(NAME.:WLambe:aj :AToa ton . :DCleary :- :
l
________... :q ... ':.......... ________':......___ -:
lDATErg/(p/85
.... : .........___ ::h N/85
':f/l /85O ': : : : i j' !
f1- ,0FFICIAL RECORD COPY !
7
__ __.____L__.n.____ ____________2_z_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ O
F 4
September 9, 1985 7590-01 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION 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-ancewithSection105c(2)oftheAtomicEnergyActof1954,asamended, 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:
f "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 Connission determines that significant changes in the licensee's activities or proposed activities have occurred ,
{ subsequent to the previous construction pennit review. The Commission has delegated the authority to make the "significant g
e P change" detennination to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor i Regulation. Based upon an examination of the events since issuance of the Clinton 1 and 2 construction pennits to the Illinois Power Company, the staffs of the Antitrust and Economic Analysis Section .
e 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, 3p- o 5~~Il0313
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 7 reviewoftheClintonNuclearPowerStation(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,
" 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 initiel 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 completed its initial antitrust review. Staff felt this four year period created a " review vacuum" and requested updated i
j 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 Illinois and other interested parties, staff identified several changes in the applicants' activities (principally those of
Illinois Power Company) since the initial operating license review. Many of the changes, e.g., new interconnections and partial requirements wholesale power sales, by Illinois Power Company, represented extensions of those changes identified in 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 i
" shop" for alternative sources of power and energy. Applicants Illinois Power Company, Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc. and Western Illinois Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. have initiated a study to determine whether or not future jointly owned generat-i ing facilities would be economically feasible. New transmission agreements have been consummated between Illinois Power and its wholesale power customers that provide these smaller power e- systems with the means to take advantage of the benefits nor-P mally associated with larger, fully integrated power systems, t
j 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.
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 industry participants began with the I
i
institution of antitruct license conditions at the construction permit review stage.
i '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 recommendation that "no affirmative significant change determination be made pursuant to the appli-cation for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station."'
P " Based on the staff's analysis, it is my finding that a formal t
j operating license antitrust review of the Clinton Power Station,
, Unit 1 is not required."
1 Signed on September 4,1985 by Harold R. Denton, Director of Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
i
g 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 Comission, Washington, D.C.
20555 for 30 days from the date of the publication of the Federal Register 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 information, such as information 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 C099tISSION Donald P. Cleary, Acting Ch Site Analysis Branch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation P
i h
o ,- - -, ,
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
G e e
b e
e
. _ _ __ _ _. _ . _ . . . - -. .. . ._______.m.. - - - - - - - , _ . .
N CONTENTS I. Introduction II. Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois A. Applicant Systems III. Previous Antitrust Reviews of Clinton A. Construction Pemit Review B. Operating License Review C. Monitoring Review IV. Changes Since the Initial Operating License Review A. Interconnections B. Wholesale Power Developments L, .
Proposed Mergers and Acquisition Involving Applicant Systems 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
. Information from F. ArSpangenberfr Mrector of-Noclear-tteensing and-"--"*~
Configuration Illinois Power Co., to Wm. H. Regan, Chief, Site Analysis Branch, Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
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.
E. Coordination and Operation Agreement Setween Soyland Power Cooperative and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, dated July 24, 1984.
i
r.. m . m_ m ._ m - _ _ _ _. .._ = w. e_.mu.m . . . _ _ . . cme 9
I. Introduction A prospective operating licensee is not required to undergo a formal anti-i trust review unless the Nuclear Regulatory Connission (41RC or Connission)*
detemines that there have been "significant changes" in the licensee's '
' activities or proposed activities subsequent to the review by the Attorney i
General and the Connission 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 Commission.
In its Sumner decision.** the Connission has provided the staff *** with a set of criteria to be used in making the significant change determination for operatinglicense(0L) applicants:
! "Thestatutecontemplatesthatthechangeorchanges(1 have -
( "~ ' - ~
occurred since the previous.4atttrust. rev.iewaf. 4he Hee)ns;;'.). ~~ - ---
(2) are reasonably attributable to the licensee (s); and (3) have antitrust implications that would most likely warrant some ;
- Commission remedy."****
l
- The Consission has delegated the responsibility for making a significant !
- change detemination to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, i
- t
- Virgil C. Sumner Nuclear Station Unit 1. Docket No. 50-395A June 26, 1981at13MRC862(1981). , ,
l
- "Reactor Staff" Regulation hereinafterand refers to the antitrust staffs of the Office of Nuclear the Executive Legal Director., l i i
- Connission Memorandum and Order, p. 7. dated June 30 1980(CLI-80-28). ,
t i
_ _ _ _ _ __.,..__..__.._.____..__-._.__m_.__.__..._.__.__._
... _ __.~ ___,___,.,.,,_. - _ _ _._._ ..._ _ _'
....u.. -. . . .. . w - w.a_n . ..n:.w.;w m .._ m .
2- l
~ 1 To warrant a significant change finding, i.e., to trigger a forwal OL antitrustreview,theparticularchange(s)mustmeetallthreeofthese criteria.
l On February 23, 1982, the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued a finding pursuant to the antitrust operating license P
review for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (herein <
recommending that no formal operating license antitrust review was required '
for Clinton.* Since the Director's initial finding in 1982, the fuel load date for Clinton was changed twice, from 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 antitrust operating license review and antiquate
(
much of the data used by staff in its original review procedure. Consequently. i
- l staff , initiated a " monitoring review" of Clinton which was completed in !
January of 1983.** Staff's monitoring review "found no reaIon to amend its
{ 'no significant change' determination pursuant to Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Station."*** .
i As a result of the change to the most recent fuel load date, i.e.. January i of1986, applicant'soriginal(andmostcomprehensive)datasubmissionwould 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
- Clinton Nuclear Power Station. Unit 1 - Findin! of No Significant Antitru Changes. Hereinafter. "No Significant Change inding." (Attached as
- Clinton Nuclear Plant Unit 1 - OL Monitoring Review. Hereinafter. " Monitoring Review." (AttachedasAppendix8.)
- lbg.,p.5.
i
- ~... _ _ _ -.s.- .- ..-.w-.-u,-.u.__._.-.~.~.-
-1 e' t
and southern Illinois. For this reason staff requested updated data respor.ses 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 recommends 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 Cosmon-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 comp'anies 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 is the area in which the three applicants serve and the area where the use of the power and energy generated by the Clinton plant will be most concentrated.
- n. .n.--u . = . , - .. ~ . . , _ . . - -
maw .. --, a.
P A. Applicant Systems -
Illinois Power Company, with approximately 82% ownership of the plant, is 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) serving primarily the central and southern portions of the State of Illinois.
Western Illinois Power Cooperative is a GAT cooperative -- engaged primarily in the generation and transmission of electric power and energy serving 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 ass 6ers currently provide service to retail loads in central and southern .
portions of Illinois. (See Appendix A for a more detailed description of applicant systems.)
III. Previous Antitrust Reviews of Clinton l
A. Construction Permit Review .
The initial antitrust review of Clinton was conducted by the Department l
... .:.,~ . w ~ . a use~w xt u. ,. m i= - w w e -- . _ =.= .
of Justice (Department or D0J) and the Commission at the construction per-mit (CP) stage in the early 1970's. During the construction pemit review,
...thestaffsoftheDepartmentofJustice(DOJ)andtheAEC/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 comitments 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 cannitments later became license conditions that were attached to the Clinton construction pemits.** Based upon the policy conuitments agreed to by Illinois Power and the inclusion of these commitments as license conditions to the Clinton construction per-mits, the Department issued an advice letter to the Connission dated April 29, 1974 recommending no hearing. No petitions to intervene were . I received and the CP antitrust review was effectively completed with the publication of the advice letter in the Federal Reaister in May of 1974.
- No Significant Change Finding, p. 7.
l **1111ncis Power received construction pemits for both Units 1 and 2.
Unit 2 has since been cancelled.
- l
yms w - - nr w. u; .un.... ,
B. Operating License Review ~
As indicated supra, the Connission'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 area generally. Other changes which have occurred tave not had significant negative antitrust implications that would warrant a Comission remedy, and therefore do not warrant a significant change finding."*
~
, Staff completed its initial operating license review in February of 1982 and found no reason to recomend that the Director of NRA issue a signifi -
cant change finding. The review concluded that,
" Based upon the successful implementation of CP license conditions j
and the lack of any detrimental conduct or activity.... staff recomends that no affirmative significant change determination be i
made pursuant to the application for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station."**
I, .
i
- No significant Change Finding, p. 17 i
- Ibid.
l l
. }
- . _ _ _ _ _ _ . .. .._. .__. . ..=n=
C. Monitoring Review
- 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 was not intended as an in depth significant change analysis, but more of a i flash review, intended to pick up f14 grant changes in conduct or particular i
complaints from affected parties engaged in or interested in the Illinois electric power industry. (The formality and extensive data requests that characterize the significant change analysis are.not a part of the monitoring
{
reviewprocess.) Staff's monitoring review for Clinton was completed in January of 1983. The review concluded. *
- 1 "In sum:
- Because of a delay in issuing the Clinton Unit 1 OL,
. staff has reviewed Illinois power's activities since last con-ducting its significant change analysis approximately a year ago. .
i
.No one has come forth to request reevaluation of staff's signifi ~ - -
cant change determination rnor'hn W the~re'besn'any submissions of complaints or views of affected parties during the interim since February 1982. After reviewing industry trade journals and initiating contact with Mmer entities in the relevant areas, ;
staff, as of this date aas found no reason to amend its 'no significant change' determination pursuant to Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Station."* l, l
i i 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
- 2: -
= -
r
).
i activities since the antitrust construction permit review that would warrant a hearing recomendation pursuant to the, applicants' application for.an
, operating license for Clinton.
i IV. Changes Since the Initial Doerating License Review Considering the most recent delay in fuel loading from January of 1984 to 4
January of 1986, and the fact that staff's broad data base of the Illinois I
i electric power industry is based upon dated information, i.e., that pro-vided by the applicant in 1980, staff decided to request updated responses !
i 3
to Regulatory Guide 9.3* from the applicants and conduct a supplemental significant change analysis, focusing on those changes which have taken
~
4 place since the initial operating license review was completed in 1982.
l This supplemental significant change review, in conjunction with staff's l 1982 and 1983 reviews, encompasses all of applicants' changed activity i
f t
} .
(withcompetitiveimplications)sincetheantitrustreviewattheconstruc-l .
i tion permit stage.
- i 4
(
P From the applicants' updated responses to Regulatcry Guide 9.3** and infor-mation gathered from public print sources as well as contacts with govern-1 l mental agencies and members of the electric power industry, staff has
- f i *"Infomation Needed by the AEC Regulatory Staff in Connection with its !
l Antitrust Review of Operating License Applications for Nuclear power j Plants," October 1974. l
- Data submitted by letter dated March 12,1984.
I
.u,,. _- ,, -. _ 7 , y ,, , .; 2 .,
.a . a*
l
.g. >
t t
l i
identified several changes associated with the applicants' conduct and activity since the initial significant change review. !
{ !
Among the three applicant systems, Illinois Power Company has experienced l l !
! the greatest number of changes (with possible competitive implications)
! since the initial OL review. As evidenced during the original OL review. I l
these changes have come about largely through new interconnections and '
i sales of wholesale power by Illinois Power Company to smaller power systems in Illinois. .
t.
A. Interconnections i I !
i j
i The trend toward new interconnections involving all applicant systems and j
j particularly Illinois Power evidenced during the initial OL review has i
! continued.
Illinois Power has consummated a number of interconnections,
, with both large and small systems, since 1982. '
i 1 1.
Illinois Power Co./ Southern Illinois Power Coop. -- In !
1 i
september of 1984 Illinois Power energized a 138 kV interconnection with the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative (51PC). Representatives
) of both parties began discussions pursuant to the feasibility of an '
- interconnection between the two systems that, according to SIPC.
j i
would eliminate the need for SIPC to construct approximately 16
] miles of 69 kV line. The two systems are presently interchanging h
i short term and economy power over the intertie and according to i
. _ _ ..=:_._= . .:. .
s s'
) 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.
1 i
, 2. Illinois Power Co./ Western Illinois Power Coop. -- On 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 cospleted. The interconnec-i i
tion was initiated by WIPC0 primarily to serve one of its customers, j a coal company.
1 4
Another 138 kV interconnection between Illinois Power and WIPC0 was completed on August 30, 1982. The interconnection was initiated by WIPC0 according to Illinois Power "in drder to isprove service to the
- 69 kV system in the area." -
\' .
l .
/
! 3. , IllinoisPowerCo./Kentuckf-UtilitiesCo.--Byagreement .
I dated January 1, 1983. Illinois Power entered into an interconnection agreement with the Kentucky-Utilities Co. The agreement provides for l various power transactions between the parties.
1
! - 4.
! Illinois Power Co./ Central Illinois Public Service Co. --
j
, A 345 kV interconnection was energized on October 25, 1983 between Central Illinois Public h rvice Co.'s Kansas substation and Illinois Power's Sidney Substation.
4 4
, . . = . = a.L
- s. - - - ==. : :-~. a.. m =:wc.:x ...:a w.u. m :=.
J i
i ,
- i j 5. Illinois Power Co./ Farmer City -- An interconnection to
- provide wholesale power service to the Fanner City electric system l was energized in October of 1984.
j Illinois Power Co. has energized numerous interconnections since the initial i
l OL antitrust review in 1982. New agreements have been consununated with both !
large, fully integrated power systems as well as smaller municipal and j cooperative power systems. The new interconnections identified by staff f l represent a continuation of a trend toward interconnection which was stimu-1 lated by the antitrust license conditions attached to the Clinton construc- l tion permit as well as general reliability and service requirements imposed f l t
! upon a large public utility s" stem. It is staff's view that applicants' L interconnections since the CP antitrust review have had a procompetitive l
\
effect upon the bulk power services market in central and southern Illinois.
[
j To the extent that new interconnections have increased reliability of par- (
1 l,* ticipating power systems and broadened access to power supply alternatives t ,
- for Illinois power entities, staff would encourage applicants to continue * '
i j the development of new interconnections and interconnection agreements i
j evidenced since the completion of the construction permit review.
4 i
! 3. Wholesale power Developments i
i The applicants, principally Illinois Power Co., have been responsible for a series of power supply developments at the wholesale level since the CP i i
antitrust review. I,
, *i I
. ::~. . z. - c. ~.. .. . . :.a . . =.u. m - . . . . . .i.w . . w . . u: . . :- . .- :.=;
l t
- 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.
4
- 2. As a result of the newly energized interconnection between Illinois Powar and Farmer City, Illinois (see " Interconnections"), the '
City requested and received full requirements wholesale power from !
Illinois Power beginning on October 4, 1984 s
- 3.
According to Illinois Power's Regulatory Guide 9.3 response,
- the City of Red Bud Illinois expressed interest in obtaining wholesale L
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 .
i requirements wholesale service from Illinois' Power'on~ January 1, 1983.
r l Illinois Power delivered power under this Purchase Power Agreement to Central Illinois Public Service Co., which in turn provided trans-l mission service for delivery of the power to Mt. Carmel. Effective -
January 1, 1984 Mt. Carwel transferred to a full requirements whole-sale Purchase Power Agreement and. began taking all of its power require- !
j ,
ments from Illinois Power Co. over the transmission lines of Central Illinois Public Service Co. .
I i i
i - _ _ _ _ .
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 /sunner of 1984 pursuant to the purchese of a large block of short term power. The generation -
and transmission cooperative did not consunnate 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 into a new three year agreement for purchase of power from Illinois Power Co. The agreement will terminate upon commercial operaticn of I the Clinton nuclear plant. The agreement provides supp'lemental power.
i to WIPC0 until such time that WIPCO, a co-owner of the Clinton nuclear
{ plant, can begin taking power from the plant once it begins to produce connercial electric power.
I i
i
- 8. The Western Illinois Power Cooperative has anticipated various !
1 power shortages through 1993 and. plans to meet any de'ficiencies with new l
generation (i.e.,Clinton)andpowerpurchasesthroughitsinterchange agreementswithIllinoisPowerandtheSpringfield(Illinois) City, Water.
Light and Power electric system.
{
14 -
- 9. As part of a FERC rate settlement reached with*its wholesale power customers on November 18, 1983, Illinois Power agreed to a Short 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 aconoiny 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, procosipetitive developments since the earlier OL antitrust review, allowing smaller power sfstems to com-pete more effectively with the larger, fully integrated power systems j
for the most efficient sources of power and energy in and adjacent to, 1 the Illinois bulk power market.
Those changes attributable to the applicants which have taken place in i
the Illinois wholesale power market since the initial Clinton~ operating 4 license review have for the most part been representative of a continuum
{ which began after the coupletion of the antitrust construction permit review. Power systems, both large and small, have continued their efforts to minimize costs by " shopping" for the most cost efficient
_ . _ . ~ - ,-.__-.--...#,,w- , , . __- , _ , _ _ , ,,,,,,.._,_r,_ , . - _ _ _ _ , _ _ , _ _ . , _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ , . . , . , - - , . , . , , , , - - _ . , , _ _ . , _ . . , _ . . .
__ _ -- _ _ _ _ . . , . . _ , , , .. . _ _.--m.,
.. s source of power to meet their individual loads. The Wabash' Valley Power 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 privatepowercompanylocatedinMt.Carmel. Illinois),theSouthern Illinois Power Cooperative and the Fanner City electric system all have 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 WIPCO to meet anticipated load deficiencies until Clinton comes on line.
All of these developments in the Illinois wholesale bulk power market point toward the continuation of increaised coordination and competition among industry members evidenced during the initial operating license
, 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-trust review have come about largely as a result of the antitrust license conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit and for the most part have resulted from procompetitive forces at work in the Illinois l wholesale bulk power market.
l .
i f
i
..a .+ uw w. = - . .u= .: :, .- -;- = m.pn - u u.= . x .
.. .=
i C. Mergers and Acquisition Involving Applicant Systems .
i
, 1 i
- Since the initial OL antitrust review was completed in 1982, staff has ;
}
identified two proposed mergers and one acquisition involving applicant i
systems.
j i. Early in 1981. Illinois Power Company began discussions with the Cedar Point Light & Power Company regarding a merger of i
i the two systems. On March 29, 1985 Illinois Power purchased the j
assets of Cedar Point Light & Power. Cedar Point was a privately owned electric distribution system serving approximately 180 custo-i mers in the Illinois town bearing the same name. Prior to the i
- acquisition, Cedar Point purchased 100% of its power requirements from the Illinois Power Company.
l 2. Illinois Power and the Mt. Carmel Public Utility Company executed a stock exchange merger agreement late in 1981. The companies are presently awaiting federal and state regulatory approval before i proceeding with the merger.*
' 'I!!1r. ts Power and the Mt. Carmel Public Utility Com agreement with the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC)pany filed on December the merger 7, 1981.
The Central Illinois Public Service Co. intervened and protested the proposed merger.
i Tae ICC initially ruled against the Illinois Power /Mt. Carmel merger, l
indicating that greater cost efficiencies would result from a Mt. Carmel/ 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. Carmel merger. Both Illinois Power and Mt. Carmel appealed the decision which was overruled by the appellate court. The State of Illinois appealed the appeals court ruling to the State Supreme Court where the case is now pending.
The Illinois Power /Mt. Carmel merwer is also awaiting approval before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commiss' on (FERC). Docket No. EC82-4-00. At the request of I linois Power Company, the FERC delayed a ruling on the merger pending a resolution at the State level; however, the FERC has recently decided to proceed with its own hearings and not wait for the ruling by the Illinois state supreme Court. .
.a ,_ u a a.,.~ .- . . - -'=m w " ~ " ' -- '
i
- Illinois Power acting
\
as agent for the owners of the Clinton nuclear plant, forwarded infor-f nation pertaining to the planned merger of Western Illinois Power
{ Cooperative and Soyland Power Cooperative. A copy of a " Coordination l
'. and Operation Agreement" between Soyland and WIPC0 dated July 25, 1984 i was included along with the February 21 letter. According to the !
a " General Provisions" of the Agreement.
"As of January 1,1985, Soyland Power Cooperative (Soyland) and Western Illinois Power Cooperative (WIPCO[)] will ' pool' .
all electric power and energy and transmission capacity avail-
! able from their respective facilities so that the electric power and energy and transmission capacity will be utilized as though i
2 the two cooperatives were merged as of January 1, 1985. The i
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 be11 eve that the Cedar Point acquisition or the proposed j Mt. Carmel merger pose significant anticompetitive problems in the Illinois bulk power market. Both systems serve small municipalities and were
!* wholesale customers of Illinois Power prior to being acquired. (The
(
r Mt. Carmel/ Illinois Power merger 1s-still pending.-)-The proposed Soyland/--- ',
WIPC0 mergee represents a marriage of convenience and appears to provide
}
the surviving system significant operating economies not available to i
i
- Letter to Wm. H. Regan, Chief, Site Analysis Branch (NRC) from i F. A. Span i Power Co.)genberg, Director, Nuclear This (AttachedasAppendixC.) Engineering letter was andprecipitated Configuration by a(Illinois letter from Wm. H. Regan, dated January 16, 1985, requesting all information pertaining to the merger or proposed merger between Soyland and WIPCO.
i i
l
- John CitedT.from Wardletter to Sheldon A. Zabel (counsel for Illinois Power) from j Appendix D.) (counsel for Scyland) dated January 2g,1985. (Attached as i
' i
, r i
I
~~m_._.-._,_. _._--__a.,,.- ..~_..,_.-d
- v. . n . . . ._.a_ , . .uc ac a.a c_t.s.a.. -. . m . . . _. ca.w2.wedh ma wa
.s .-
either system standing alone. For example, the Coordination and Operation i 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-for-profit basis at the lowest feasible cost through the coordi-nation and use of the facilities and capabilities of both Soyland and WIPC0 acting as a single entity."*
Soyland's member systems are located primarily in central and southern l Illinois, while WIPCO's member systems primarily serve the western
[
counties of Illinois. The combination of the two systems should result !
t in cost efficiencies normally associated with membership in an operating pool once Soyland becomes a generating entity, i.e., when Clinton comes
, i on line. The more efficient Soyland/WIPC0 has the potential to provide stronger competition in the Illinois bulk power industry, particularly l
,, in its dealings with larger more fully integrated power systems.** ]
Staff sees no significant anticompetitive effects befalling the Illinoit l bulk power market as a result of the acquisition or proposed mergers which f
have occurred since the original OL antitrust review.
f i
i i
4
- Coordination and Operation Agreement between Soyland and WIPC0 dated !
l July 24, 1984, page 3. (Attachedas,AppendixE.) ~
j
- A possible extension of the Soyland/WIPC0 Pool involves a recent power supply study by the combined cooperative pursuant to the benefits, if any, associated with joint participation in any of Illinois Power's existing ,
fossil-fired generating units. !
i i
. .-. w . w ,z a w , u 2 , c. .x. -- o . m . m s m . e, m s .. u s .. m .m. m . m .
g ..
19 -
D. Miscellaneous Changes ~
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.
- 1. Co-owners Soyland Power Cooperative and Western Illinois 1 Power Cooperative initially agreed to a combined 20% ownership share in the Clinton nuclear plant. Due to cost overruns associated with the construction of the plant, Soyland and WIPC0 have placed a dollar 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%.
~
- 2. During 1983 Illinois Power Co. entered into discussions with the City of Peru Illinois pursuant to a request 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 power, however, the City cancelled its plans to build the (
j hydro facility and consequently no transmission agreement was consumated with Illinois Power. j r
l
- 3. Effective Juno 8, 1983, eight members of the Soyland Power l
Cooperative, which had been purchasing their wholesale power require-f ments directly from Illinois Power Co., had their wholesale power .
_ n,. ,-_a.--, ~--.- - - - - - - , - , - - - - - - . n. -,-- , - + - - - ,an-
u.a .=.a.ax =w v - . =. : .x s ..1..;wrw.z c: .u. .. xuma= a=::=. uiw 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 with the commercial operation of the Clinton power station.)
None of these miscellaneous changes have had any significant negative impact l
on tne 1611nois bulk power market. Co-owners Soyland and WIPC0 have assessed l
^
their consnitment 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/WIPCO commitment, staff believes that the co-owners made a business decision based upon their ability to pey 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.
t s % '
f l
< V. Susanary and Conclusion i
.,, . l
. Staff completed its initial antitrust operating license review of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station (Clinton) in February of 1982. Several changes in the {
m l
, t
?, ~
l
\ !
_ _ _ _ -- - - - ~ -
~--- ---- -- ~~~~ ~~~'--~
ya. .: . w .
~ .w: . u. .u . =m .: .u.~xw:~.a. , n . . - .w. . . ? - ,
1 i
i applicants' activities since the original construction permit (CP) review in
{
1974 were identified; hewever, staff concluded that, i
" Based upon the successful implementation of CP license conditions i
and the lack of any detrimental conduct or activity (to the competitive !
process in central and southern Illinois) on the part of Illinois l Power Company, Soyland Power Cooperative or Western Illinois Power i
Cooperative, staff recomends that no affirmative significant change determination be made pursuant to the application for an l 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.) j t
Since the staff completed its initial antitrust operating license review in !
l February of 1982, there have been construction delays necessitating changes l
in scheduled fuel load dates for the Clinton plant. Fuel loading is now
- scheduled for January of 1986, approximately four years after the staff com- !
l t
plated its initial antitrust review. Staff felt this four year period created !
I a " review vacuum" and requested updated information from the applicants
- {,
~
pursuant to any changed activity since the initial antitrust operating license review.
l After reviewing the updated Regulatory Guide 9.3 information and contacting various electric utility representatives in Illinois and other interested !
t parties, staff identified several changes in the applicants' activities '
(principally those of Illinois Power Company) since the initial operating (
license review. Many of the changes, e.g., new interconnections and partial requirements wholesale power sales, by' Illinois Power Company, represented t
extensions of those changes identified in the original operating license !
I review and have provided additional procompetitive stimuli to the Illinois j
, i 1
~=
n ss m sm.a.w.a.: u,. a.unu; = =.:. .x .. z.u, - --
. ~ . l l
l han
> a~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 initiated a study to determine whether or not future jointly owned generating facilities would be economically feasible.
New transmission agreements have been consumai:ed between Illinois Power and its wholesale power customers that provide these smaller power systems
, with the means to take advantage of the benefits normally associated with larger, fully integrated power systems, e.g., access to short term econouy and diversity power and energy sales and access to transmission for long term block purchases of power and energy from a number of differer.t power suppliers.
\
Increased coordination between those fully integrated power systems and the smaller, less diversified power systems has led to greater competition in the i
Illinois bulk power industry. This trend toward greater coordination among industry participants began with the institution'of antitrust license condi-tions at the construction permit review stage.
The changes that have been identified since the construction permit review have by and large provided momentum for grea'ter coordination, and consequently I
increased competition, between all groups of power supply systems in central I
- and southern Illinois. Staff observed this trend toward increased competition f among b'ulk power suppliers in its initial antitrust operating license analysis. !
l This trend has continued since 1982 and consequently staff sees no reason to change its recommendation that "no affirmative significant change determina- l tion be made pursuant to the application for an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station." !
! I
- 2.cisi x - W .aar.a w a a- a
- - ~ ~. a.a a r. - -
o '
t 9
8 e O O
. 1 1
1 APPENDIX A P
a S
e O
e q
n ms uc._ w.m-m u mc ,,..s_awr
> s c .
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 0
- en e
a J
l
_ , , - - -- - - - , . ,y -- , - . , c .r- .m , , ,. ,-w
m._ ..
- ~. ~.
'O o s
INDEX .
I. Introduction II. Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois A. Investor Owned Utility Systems Illinois Power Company 1.
- 2. Central Illinois Public Service Company
- 3. Central Illinois Light Company
- 4. Electric Energy, Inc.
B. Municipal Electric Systems C. Cooperative Power Systems III. The Construction Permit Antitrust Review IV. Changes Since the Construction Permit Review A. Changes Resulting from License Conditions
~
B. Changes Not Resulting from License Conditions .
V. Summary and Conclusion
[
Appendices i
A. Illinois Power Service Area Map
- 8. Municipal Generating Systems Located in Illinois C. Members of Soyland Power Cooperative l
D. Members of Western Illinois Power Cooperative E. Clinton CP License Conditions and Department of Justice ", Advice Letter"
^
F. FERC Litigation O "
I
=:..:.:.~. a=::.: - 1 : --
- - ' - " "- - - ~ ' - - -- - -
I. Introduction -
i
- 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 the 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);
l (2) are reasonably attributable to the licensee (s); and (3) have 1
L antitrust implications that would most likely warrant some '
Commission remedy."4 -
i -
l 1
To warrant an affirmative significant change finding, i.e., triggering a formal l l OL antitrust review, the particular change (s) must meet all three of these i criteria'. !
Staff has documented two groupings of " changes" in its analysis of the Clinton ,
, OL application that warrant analysis under Summer: 1) those resulting from the ;
'This responsibility was officially delegated to the Director of Nuclear l Reactor Regulation in a memorandum dated September 12, 1979 from Chairman !
i 2Section 105c(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. !
8 Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, No.1 Docket No. 50-395A, dated. June 30, !
1980.
45ummer, p. 7 '
I h
l - -. - - - ._
. - = _
_ r-, .,_o -
w - -
1 l
4 . ,
I applicant's CP license conditions; and 2) those not directly resultant from the r i
CP license conditions. Staff has found no change in either group that meets l 6
all three Summer criteria and consequently is not recommending a formal OL i antitrust review. - !
4 :
To put these changes in prospective, it is helpful to first resiew the structure [
of the market pertinent to this review and the basis or benchmark from which !
change is measured.
l Structure of the Electric Power Industry in Illinois !
II. i The electric power industry in Illinois can be segmented into two portions, that integral to the City of Chicago and its surrounding area, and the remainder ,
of the state.
.I' I
The Chicago area is serviced by one of the largest domestic electric power ;
! companies, Commonwealth Edison Company. The remainder of the state (i.e.,
l 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 power companies.
! The relevant marketing area for the Clinton Nuclear Power Station focuses !
~
on the central and southern portions of the State of Illinois, i.e., the area in which the incidence of any anticompetitive practices associated with the
- activities of the Clinton Applicants will have the greatest impact. This is ;
! theareainwhichthethreeapplicantsserve.andtheareawherethe.useof_..I the power and energy generated by the Clinton nuclear plant will be most i
concentrated.
l A. Investor-Owned Utility Systems (IOU)
I
l l Illinois Power, the company responsible for constructing and operating the l Clinton plant, is the largest electric utility system in the relevant marketing 2 ,
y -
=- - .- - u : =: - :=~ ~
. =. : =. .. a . . :: . . ~=; ; :w.ma O e
. f
. I area, in terms of owned or controlled generating capacity, high voltage !
transmission facilities and electric load served. In 1979, Illinois Power had !
1 7AQ Mw of Canerating Capacity; 2,448 miles of transmission lines 69 kv or f
higher; and a (summer) peak load of 3,019 N. -
. I 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 1.ocated j in the northern portion of the state. The three geographic service areas are i non-contiguous, however they are all linked by company-owned high voltage ,
j- transmission lir.es as well as with interconnections to other power companies in the area. (See map of Illinois Power's service area, included as Appendix A.)
5 j Illinois Power's operating revenues for 1979 andunted to $752 million l
l (approximately 65 percent from electric operations and 35 percent from gas
) tacility operations), with not income of $91 million.
1 i 2. Central Illinois Public Service Company (Central Illinois) l i t Outside of the Chicago area, in the lower two-thirds of the State, Central I I Illinois is the second largest 100 following closely behind Illinois Power [
l in generating and transmission facilities owned and electric load served. !
In 1979 , Central Illinois owned or controlled 2,581 Mw of generating capacity; j l 3,581 miles of transmission Ifne 69 kv or higher; and had a summer peak load . !
j- of 1,818 k. Central Illinois had operating revenues of $448,mi-itionior--- ----h i-1970 cr.d .et ir.come of $67 million. !
1 !
, Central Illinois and Illinois Power are the principal producers of electric l
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 f
high voltage and extra high voltage transmission ties. !
i i I P
- I
! 3 [
i
Central Illinois Light's service area is primarily in the central portion of the state centering around the cities of Peoria and Springfield, Illinois.
Although the Company is one of the smaller IOUs in the state, it has inter-connections with Central Illinois Public Service, Commonwealth Edison, . Illinois Power and the City of Springfield electric system to provide for interchange of electric energy on an emergency and mutual help basis.
In 1979 Central Illinois Light had generating capacity of 1,501 Mw, 339 miles of transmission line 69 kv or higher and a summer peak load of 1,055 Mw. The Company's 1979 operating revenues amounted to $364 million with a net income of $53 million.
- 4. Electric Energy. Inc.
The Company was incorporated in Illinois in 1950 by four private utility 8
companies to supply a specified 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 Mw, and 55 miles of transmission lines above 69 Kv. Of the total generating capacity available, 735 Mw has been contracted to the government facility through December 31, 1989. Operating revenues amounted to $124 million with $3 million net income for 1979.
"The sponsoring companies are: Central Illinois Public Service Company, 20%
3 ownership; Illinois Power Company, 20% ownership; Kentucky utilities Company,
- 20% ownership and Union Electric Company, 40% ownership.
I l
- 4 1
Of the 12 investor-owned utilities doing business in Illinois, those mentioned above represent the largest in terms of load served and the most relevant for purposes of assessing competition in the electric power industry in the state outside of the Chicago area.7
- B. Municipal Electric Systems Twenty-Three of the thirty-eight municipally owned electric systems in the state possess some degree of self generation.s Of these twenty-three systems, the largest is that owned and operated by the City of Springfield, Illinois with 530 Mw of capacity in 1979. Most of the remaining generating municipals are very small and typically supply only portions of their loads, purchasing the remainder from other suppliers -- usually the larger IOU's throughout the State. (This is typical of the structural format for the industry nationwide, with the larger private investor-owned companies supplying varying amounts of partial requirement service to the smaller self generating utilities and full requ'rements service to those municipals or cooperatives with no generation.
There are however, pockets throughout the industry where very large municipal or government systems, e.g. , in the City of 1.os Angeles or the TVA throughout the State of Tennessee respectively, where the private systems do not represent the predominant source of power and energy, buk, these areas represent exceptions to the norm.) None of the municipal systems in Illinois is a co-owner of the
, Clinton nuclear plant, however, many of the systems have benefited from the license conditions attached to the Clinton construction permit. See section entitled, " Changes Since the Construction Permit Review." .
'The other 100's operating within the state are: Cedar Point Light and Water Company, Mt. Carmel Public Utility Company, Sherrard Power System, South .
Beloit Water, Gas and Electric Company, Interstate Power Company, Union i Electric Company and Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Company. (Though most of Electric Energy, Inc.'s load is outside of the state much of the excess i capacity produced by the Company goes to members operating in the relevant area.) ,
sSee Appendix B for a listing of all municipal generating systems located in
, the State of Illinois.
5 l
j C. Cooperative Power Systems (Coops) l 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 Cooperative, Inc. (Soyland) and Westera Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc. (WIPCO). The
! majority of the coops are distribution coops and have no generation or trans- f mission facilities of their own. They are characteristically supplied by the !
private IOU's or larger generation and transmission (G&T) coops serving in ,
! the area.
)
i 4 Presently, there are two G&T coops in the state, WIPCO and the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative (SIPCO). SIPC0 had generating capacity of 280 N j
- in 1979 with 100 miles of transmission line supplying its three distribution I i
cooperatives at wholesale. In 1979 WIPC0 had generating capacity of 57 N and 545 miles of transmission line.
j Soyland is an organization (which presently has no generation or transmission ,
j facilities) set up to acquire a 10.5% interest in Clinton Unit 1. It is com- !
l prised of fifteen member distribution coops' located in the central and southern t
portions of the State of Illinois -- essentially, the non-Chicago area of the f
, 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 !
i bulk power.
! . i III. The Construction Permit Antitrust Review ,
i I
In order to make a "significant change" determination it is necessary to have j 4
some benchmark from which to measure " change." A brief resume of the results !
I l of the CP review should provide an adequate framework in which change can be -
f measured.
i I
'See Appendix C for names and addresses of Soyland members, and Appendix 0 t for names and addresses of WIPC0 members. !
I [
! i
- 6. !
. t i i
, .. .. - - - . . - . ~ - -- . - _ . . . . _ . - . - . . - - . - - - . . --
1-l !
i Illinois Power Company, the principal applicant and operator of the Clinton
{
Plant, applied for a construction permit to build its first nuclear power j plant in 1973. Like all other non grandfathered nuclear applicants (those }
applicants seeking cps or OLs after the 1970 amendment), Illinois Power had f
to undergo an antitrust review at the CP stage to insure that its activities !
in connection with the construction of the plant did not " create or maintain j a situation inconsistent with the antitrust laws" -- as prescribed by Sec. 105c of the amended Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
l During the review process, the staff's of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and
- the AEC/NRC became aware of certain allegations of misconduct by Illinois Power
) in conjunction with its dealings with cooperative and municipal power systems i in or adjacent to Illinois Power's service area. These concerns were addressed l by the Department in a letter to the AEC requesting additional information
! from the Applicant:
1 i
j "Among the alleged matters with possible antitrust implications
! which the Department [of Justice] seeks to clarify by means of the requested documents are: refusals of the Applicant to inter- I j connect with other electric utilities on reasonable terms; efforts i to preclude development of alternative bulk power supply sources !
l by others; acquisitions of other electric utilities; refusals to !
wheel power for small systems; allocation of territories and !
j res,trictions on end use of purchased power."10 l
l .
l After submitting additional clarifying data in response to D0J's document j request and after the anticompetitive concerns were aired, the Applicant agreed j to a set of policy commitments that were attached as license conditions to j j its construction permit for Units 1 and 2 of the Clinton nuclear plant.
}
l l
l 3" Letter dated January 24, 1974 from Thomas Kauper, Assistant Attorney General, (signed by Joseph Saunders) to Howard Shapar, Assistant General Counsel, AEC. 3 P
7 ,
- I
- - _ - . - _ . ,i
i : -
i
. Generally, the policy commitments addressed the following areas: 11
- a. Illinois Power (Company) will interconnect with any neighboring entity i
and will assist in coordination of reserves and the sale of emergency and l
maintenance power to interconnected entitites;
- b. Interchange arrangements between the Company and neighboring entities will lI not include restrictive provisions which would preclude a party from i engaging in interconnection and :oordination arrangements with others;
- c. Interconnectons will be available for a neighboring electric system on ;
any of the Company's installed transmission and subtransmission facilities; i
- d. The Company will afford an opportunity to participate to any neighboring
{
electric system that makes a timely request therefor in the ownership (or i l unit power purchase) of the Clinton nuclear plant or any other nuclear !
j plant owned by the Company which is scheduled for commercial operation j
prior to January 1, 1989; ;
i
- e. The Company will. sell bulk power to any neighboring electric system with l no restriction upon use or resale; -
I !
i :
! f. The Company will wheel power over its transmission facilities; and, i j g. The Company will include in its planning and construction programs -
[ sufficient transmission capacity to provide for the wheeling requirements' 1 of neighboring electric systems. !
- i
- Subsequent to Illinois Power agreeing to the antitrust policy commitments l listed above, the Department of Justice issued its CP advice to the Commission by letter dated April 29, 1974. The letter concluded as follows
i :
l
- l t
i "See Appendix E for complete listing of all of the antitrust conditions l l attached to the Clinton construction permit. !
! l 1
i e ,
i
- t
~
'"In our opinion, these policy commitments should provide competitors of Applicant with. competitive alternative sources of bulk power
- t nd substantially eliminate the grounds on which complaints made to the Department by smaller systems were based. On the' strength of these policy commitments, and with the expectation that the Commission will include them as conditions to the license, we conclude that an antitrust hearing will not be necessary with respect to the instant application.us2 The Attorney General's advice letter was published in the Federal Register in May of 1974. Since no petitions to intervene were received, the CP antitrust review effectively ended with the publication of the Attorney General's advice letter, although the construction permit was not issued until February of 1976.
l IV. Changes Since the Construction Permit Review The Commission's Regulatory Guide 9.3 for OL applicants requests data pertaining
- te changed activities since the CP antitrust review
- '
)' "This regulatory Guide identifies the type of information that i
i the Regulatory staff considers germane for a decision as to
, whether a second antitrust review is required at the operating license stage."
4 By letter of May 23, 1980 the principal applicant, Illinois Power Company, submitteo on behalf of itself and as agent for the co-owners, Soyland Power Coop. and Western Illinois Power Coop. , responses to the Commission's 9.3 data request.
From staff's review of the 9.3 data response and analysis of various public I
information sources, two distinct types of " changes" since the CP review
'3 Appendix E, 00J " advice" letter dated April 29, 1974, pp. 4-5. :
i l
1
have been isolated: 1) changes resultant from implementation of CP license conditions; and 2) changes not directly related to the CP license conditions.
A. Changes Resulting from License Conditions .
Many of the changed activities which have occurred in the Illinois electric power industry since the CP antitrust rev..w 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. u The fruits of these negotiations have been realized by many of the smaller systems in the area. For example:
- 1) Several municipal generating systems have obtained interconnection agreements with Illinois Power Company, agreements that were similar to j those Illinois Power already had with its neighboring investor-owned
- electric systems. Although the interconnection agreements were imple-I mented after the CP review terminated in 1974, they were directly related to requirements imposed by license conditions negotiated i
during the CP antitrust review; l .
I 2) The same municipals which sought in'terconnection agreements from Illinois Power have recently opted to take partial requirement
- wholesale service rather than taking service under the provisions of 'I
- the previously negotiated interconnection agreements. This represents l
l a new option for these systems; . ;
i t
- 3) Illinois Power entered into an interconnection agreement with the ;
electric system operated by the City of Springfield, Illinois; l I
- 4) Two smaller power companies, Soyland and Western Illinois Power Coops, j have purchased ownership shares of the Clinton Nuclear Plant, thereby sharing in the benefits of a large, fuel efficient baseload power plant; l l l
" Illinois Power is also currently involved in several rate proceedings with !
I various Illinois municipals before the FERC. These issues were current during '
the CP review and consequently do not involve changes since that review. ,
For a brief description of these proceedings, see Appendix F. ,,
t
! 10 !
i w _ _ _ -- - _-
~
I
- 5) The City of Waterloo, Illinois opted for a partial requirement j
, wholesale power agreement rather than agreeing to an offer of purchase !
l (of its electric system) by Illinois Power; }
. ?
l
- 6) Illinois Power received interconnection requests from the Villages l i
of Flora and Chatas, Illinois and from the Farmer City, 1111'ois n f
- electric system;
} {
i !
- 7) The City of Springfield, Illinois has approached WIPC0 regarding
{ possible participation in a joint generating plant; and, l
- 8) As a result of WIPCO's 138 kv tie with , Illinois Power in 1978, the i
Coop became a member of NAPSIC (North American Power Systems Inter-
{ ,
connection Committee) a data gathering organization formed to ensure l l acceptable levels of operation and reliability of its members.
i ,
i, I t
j Altnougn tne above changes have occurred subsequent to the CP antitrust review, j 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 l
(
) conditions, they do not connote changes in the " proposed activities" of the j Applicant. Consequently, staff needs only to " assure itself that these changes l are indeed consistent with the license conditions.
1
(
i As discussed earlier, the license conditions attached to the Clinton construction ~
permit were structured to remedy certain allegations of anticompetitive conduqt
> - - by-Illinois Power. Generally, the license conditions were-designed-to-increase----l i
- 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 J 4
functions of power supply that make baseload nuclear desirable. By increasing l coordination between the various industry participants (notably the large and t
f j 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 l implementation of the license conditions has had positive performance effects !
I l
i !
1
. n 1 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 Commission.
] 8. Chances Not Resulting from License Conditions There have been changes in the electric power industry in central and southern j Illinois not directly attributable to the Clinton CP license conditions. 1 These changed activities, documented by the 9.3 response, have not detrimentally i 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: !
i
! 1) The addition of new members to the Mid-American Interpool Network e
(MAIN):
a) The Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin, b) Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc., and 1 .
c) Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc.
, Normally, the addition of new members to operating power pools i directly increases the coordination and cooperation among power ,
systems in common or adjacent marketing areas. Even though the MAIN l pool is basically a regional planning organization with little or no i control over the operating practices of its members, the addition of i
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 l review, however, this change is procompetitive and consequently does f not satisfy the remaining two Summer criteria, i.e., attributable to l the applicant and having negative antitrust implications; ;
i l u i
- . - - - . _ _ - - - _ - - _ - - .- J
i i
l
, These three G&T cooperatives (Soyland will become a G&T 'once it !
begins to receive Clinton power) have joined together to disucss the l
possibility of constructing various size coal-fired generating plants {
l in the late 1980s. Soyland has already contracted with the Peabody
{
! Coal Company for a one hillion dollar, thirty year supply of coal for [
its plar.t to be built in Pike County, Illinois in the late 1980s. "
~
4 I
This type of joint planning and development is indicative of I i
i competitive forces at work within the bulk power market. By joining i
! forces, these relatively small power suppliers are able to build a f generating plant that will provide the benefits of large baseload I power normally reserved for the large 100s in the industry. The f
j increase in coordination, and cooperation among these firms has l l provided more meaningful competition between the large and the not i
so large power generating systems in central and southern Illinois.
1 Only the first Summer criterion is met by this change, i.e., the l planning has occurred since the CP review. The joint planning is l
not attributable to the applicant no'r does it carry any negative l
l antitrust implications that would likely be remedied.by the Commission. !
1 j 3) , Illinois Power's new retail rate structure was redesigned to encourage l
- off peak usage on its system. Many systems throughout the country .
l have instituted this retail rate structure in an attempt to ward off i or delay construction of costly new generating plants and to level j their system loads throughout the year. The Commission has no j jurisdiction over retail rate structure and would not likely impose f
l any remedy if a dispute over retail rates ever arose. (Certain rate l l
l conflicts may fall within the purview of the Commission, e.g., when i
! a wholesale rate and a retail rate are manipulated by an applicant to impose a'" squeeze" on customers, however, this is not the case l l
with the change instituted by Illinois Power); !
i U See the April 10, 1981 issue of the Wall Street Journal. !
l I
i 13 t
\ .. - --- - ---
l
m - - . . . . . __ _ _ _ -. _.
a
- 4) Illinois Power has made offers to acquire three electrfc power systems since the completion of the CP review: the City of Waterloo, the Vil'lage of Ladd and the private system supplying '
the City of Mt. Carmel (all Illinois systems). In view-of Illinois Power's history of acquiring smaller electric systems in its area, it is important to fully consider these proposole, particularly in the context of the third Summer criterion.
i.e., negative antitrust implications.
Prior to the institution of the CP license cenditions, Illinois ,
Power's prospective acquisition partners did not have the option '
1 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 j i
area with an alternative to acquisition. The municipal systems l
{
located in central and southern Illinois can now conduct feasi- f bility studies and determine if they can provide efficient and reliable service to their customers with various forms of sup-port available from Illinois Power Co., without being acquired i by Illinois Power. (Support Illinois Power has offered other
- l interconnected systems in its area for years.) However, if i t
~
these studies indicate that remaining in the electric power ;
' industry is no longer feasible for the municipal, they may l then choose to sell out to Illinois Power.
- i l
j The systems serving Mt. Carmel and the Village of Ladd are very small and the City of Waterloo has exercised its
{
recently obtained option and requested a partial !
i requirement service agreement from Illinois Power, in lieu of being acquired, under the negotiated " Agreement I for Purchase of Power," dated May 1,1979. In this light, l
14 i i
L
i 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 :
1 attributable to the Applicant -- however, the proposed a'cquisitions !
do not appear to detrimentally affect the competitive process in .
t
- t central and southern Illinois -- thereby failing to meet the third i Summer criterion dealing with significant antitrust implications j capable of being remedied by the Commission. Consequently, these !
overtures of acquisition do not invoke a significant change f determination; and lastly, !
l
- 5) A group of time-related changes has been documented since the CP 1
antitrust review. This grouping of changed activity is characterized l !
j by variations in system load and individual growth patterns and is l
largely dependent upon economic conditions within the service area
! of each individual system. These changes are as follows: {
t a) Western Illinois Power Coop (WIPCO) has planned to add new generating capacity to its system by adding a new 100 W coal plant in 1988; f
{
5 I
b) WIPCO reduced the size of a newly planned turbine plant from 75 Mw to 72 Mw and slipped the planned on line date from 1985 to 1986, l
- I c) WIPCO's projected annual load factor for 1979 was projected in, i 1973 at 53, however, .the actual. load _ factor- for--the system for- i 1 ----H
- 1979 was 50.9;
, i l
d) WIPC0's peak load increased from 42 Mw in 1978 to approximately. !
l 45 Mw in 1979; l
! (
) e) Illinois Power's peak load and generating capability have !
changed since 1976. Met Generating capability increased from j
approximately 3,400 Mw in 1976 to approximately 3,800 Mw in 1980, while peak load increased from 2,570 Mw to 3,150 h over {
i the same period; and, i
2 15 i I
__ _ . . . , _ , . . . . _ _ .---.m.__,,,-____...--,.,_,_,__.,__,___._..-_.--,,,___,_-.___,..,..,,,._,.,.--,___._m.
~ - - - ._ _ . - -_ - _ - - -. . _ _ - .
f) Soyland Power Cooperative has announced plans to construct a baseload coal-fired plant in Pike County, Illinois to go on l line in the late 1980s.
. 1 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 [
i and would not require Commission remedy.
t In sum: -within the two groups of changes, those related and those unrelated l 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 f that no affirmative significant change determination be made pursuant to f
- Applicants' application for an OL for the Clinton nuclear plant. !
'J :
V. Summary and Conclusion !
t
} The principal applicant, Illinois Power Company, represents the largest power i system in the relevant marketing area. Additions of large baseload power plants I and increases in accompanying transmission facilities generally tend to increase i tha oversight or planning role of the' larger systems in a particular marketing (
area, i.e., usually enhancing any existing market power of the system. !
I i 1
i 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 !
{ 1arge 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 i area and adjacent areas. Consequently, a set of antitrust license conditions !
was attached to the Clinton construction permit which was designed to implement [
l greater coordination between Illinois Power and smaller municipal'and cooperative !
t 3 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 !
i
! supply were subsequently made available to smaller systems in the area. ;
- 16 l I
I 4, .
I Staff has identified a' number of changes that (1) have occurred since the !
construction pemit antitrust review, and (2) are reasonably attributable to l thelicensee(s). However, many of these changes are in confomance with the construction pemit antitrust license conditions and have had positive. perfor- [
mance effects on the availability of bulk power supply and on competition in f the area generally. Other changes which have occurred, have not had significant negative antitrust implications that would likely warrant a Commission remedy, f
and therefore do not warrant a significant change finding.
Based upon the successful implementation of CP license conditions and the lack of any detrimental conduct or activity (to the competitive process in central i and southern Illinois) on the part of Illinois Power Company, Soyland Power f t,
Cooperative or Western Illinois Power Cooperative, staff recommends that no j
affimative significant change detennination be made pursuant to the application
{
ror an operating license for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station. :
4 t
t I
f i
i l
l I
t l
l :
e 17 '
1
~ ~ ~
APPENDIX A: ILLINOIS POWER CO. SERVICE AREA MP
,.; ~. ....,,.u. . . v. . ... .L.. r.c.. ,.w. . . . .. >.s, ,. .
- n. , ,.. . .w. a :.. .. . p .,. .
.y x..
'.y. g.v q q:.y.[;p. :2 ._
. 2%,,
. mm:y *.
"'2Y. .'i.*:d.Nb*h:. r a..e '::4.P N*.*.q* ' --*[f.tNk.*t'k.
4
- c. Pat. 4,wed 'A*.h55 vnpe. e.M.:. .
' .i...t.y@wc,,
- m. . p;.. _ w. . :
w... w.. m. w n. ; m, m. x .
- n::.;W =>ss;
. w.. + .-
y.WA-*
- n m.,,..v: -
+. ,,::yM,.a.n. -s.na.
..s.
. ,W:n.E ::. w.Tx . .'TL.tw 4$ffas$.
.a?s,r W ~] N g,i enwr-" wd. .. .a seg LA SALLE
' ~"
ntdQI.t.
M., .2.
..il4. : . .a... ..
.. ._ w s-:- m . HENNEPIN ~
Y_ m-
,M. 7W+%.V.
2 STATION n_
M_ fM . :L3"9M'N'Vq.iW#Mds'
~
..~1 -
o GALEsauRG
. ASW ygmy.= .---
l Qj,j. ;e:,w m-
_ t=41.:: 1 -W~ . :. ;c. e.p.. -- 'Wwm~si.: -
n g g.. E.g . E ,:2:,2f D* %.,-aer.+, 'I A ._-
MMEEMN i
e m. p-eET EYJY E M :a.J1 W "i.'.iS 5 :.RG M-INGTON p$F h-- .. m..,m. -
M_g-<w OT,- _
l STA N
- w.
- M.-w..v
--- w, e + @e .w .w-6%.c.Wea m:r .b CHAMPAlGN DAN) ILLE J.tN!NMMA[s.T*d'*( '
CQssST. 4.
.=.N.s.s
,. M.YNN.'N'
.s:,.a .n.,. . .s.w -w :.: z m
' BD: :EFi- .
Es.tsm. ~
r- __
oscATuR Ira ph
+
- 'y'..w+-
a -- = =c % p yy M .m T M en -
]-
d y Wi-N:
~~-$~J.tf.,- .p%.y_ . &.x'.%,-DTriWL.m,gsbeiME
--r n
- A .
+ - . _-~ -
- . - . _ . .- \ __. &
WY .'*?ro sw'M s,a .. f*:~.~tc : . -& - ~- - : p* = s.-
-'acg g.. .c.,.an=g .n ' ' ^ ^ l: _ _-
. e2 MR.LSSORO
- w.e .e.'~ . e _ _ _ _ _ _ . r.
I ;.* N," t h-.- -
. TsMi .,. M. 5 -.x-w- .- - ~s-- a ,
- ,m - ---
s-.-
Q w
- woooRtvaR pr. .yc 3 ~c -_;
a - ~ g...g.__
- h. w- m e - M -.w.
Dd l
ST. LOUIS * -
GRANITE CITY . _ ..._ I; Wiz r = u 1- . - - .r '
L s u _iGERY -
e e
rm.,w_q. M* ..
- I MT. VE.RNON -::= .w' "" *"' - i i
BALDWM M... ~ -' w' O..y' 'P LEGEND 1
STATION O -..
I j g E e.T+ c _ . . , f e.r AREA SERVED
$9ARTA :
K-. w - r:.3 s. % n" ' E MAJOR GENERATING STATION 1
[p;.;/[C.F..-
N k' Si NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION O GAS STORAGE FIELD
!.-'J. *NJ' - * *9C""%"
- I r._Qg. s ,.v,., - <
- . e=.
_.-c e e.d_- ..,,w-a A.w )
nactL*tM:fss tW -
>- l
- a.m ::,a' . M, t.a.9.
s , . s.v.a. < ~.
.. ....,4~.r.,
- va.
- .sw .e M
- . ,.....,..w.*
- kJ J
. . e e. w #C *.*fHD , bed; I e . ii. :
, . . *, l
- v. . :, * ..
- .g . I I i l
I l .
O
_ Appendix B - Municipal Generators in Illinois * -
Altamont Municipal Electric Light Plant Batavia Municipal Electric System Breese Water and Light Department Bushnell Municipal Electric Light and Power Utility Carlyle Municipal Utilities Carmi Water and Light Department Fairfield Municipal Electric Department Farmer City Electric System Freeburg Municipal Light Plant Geneseo Municipal Utilities Highland Electric Light Department Marsnall Water and Light Department Mascoutah Municipal Light Department McLeansboro Municipal Light and Water Plant Peru Municipal Electric '
2 Princeton Municipal Utilities Department - '
Rantoul Light and Power Department .. i l ,
Red Bud Municipal Power Plant Rochelle, Municipal Utilities j Springfield Water, Light and Power Department
, j l Sullivan Electric Department-- - - - - - -
i Waterico Light and Power l Winnetka Electric Department I f
i 9
~
a fi Source: Electrical World Directory of Electric Utilities, 1979-80, '
8th Edition.
l I I i
B-1 !
i
m, . , , . _ ._ _ _. . _ . _ . . . . _
i .
1 -
. 1 APPENDIX C , l l
1
'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 l Cooperative; Inc. 475 N. Main Street Breese, Illinois 62230 l
Coles-Moultrie Electric , P. O. gox 709 Cooperative, Inc. ,
East Route 316 and Logan Street Mattoon, Illinois 61938 Corn Belt Elec.iric 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 l
Farmers Mutual Electric Company P. O. Box 43 1004 S. Chicago Street Geneseo, Illinois 61254 Illini Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 637 -
S'.' Ne i'l
- Str ee tr---' '"-- - -~ -
16 0 5 4
Champaign, Illinois 61820 Illinois valley Electric P. O. Box 70 l Cooperative, Inc. Princeton, Illinois 61356 l McDonough Power Cooperative P. O. Box 352 )
West Jackson Road !
Macomb, Illinois 61455 :
Monroe County Electric
- P. O. Box 128 l Co-operative, Inc. Illinois Route 3 and Country !
Club Lane
. Waterloo, Illinois 62298 i i i [
i
[
L__ _ _ - . _ - - _ . . . _ - - . _ . _-.- . . - - - _- . -_ !
Name Address Shelby Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 368 -
Route 128 and North 6th Street Shelbyville, Illinois 62565 r
~ Southwestern Electric Cooperative, P. O. Box 409 i 2..: . South Elm Street and Route 40 5, Greenville, Illinois 62246 Tri-County Electric Cooperative, P. O. Drawer 309 Inc. 3906 N. Broadway l Mt. Verndn, Illinois 62864 '
Wayne-White Counties Ele'ctric P. O. Drawer E Cooperative West Highway l Fairfield, Illinois 62837 I i
j I
l
.j l
l r
l
- i
=
i i
i i
s I
I i
s i
i '
e t
APPENDIX,D .
WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
l Cooperative 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 1 Petersburg, Illinois 62675 Rural Electric Convenience P. O. Box 9 Cooperative Co. Auburn, Illinois 62615 Spoon River Electric Co-operative, 930 South Fifth Street Inc. Canton, Illinois 61520 i
Western Illinois
- Electrical Coop. P. O. Box 338
. . Carthage, Illinois 62321 i
O e
e e e e
e s
e 9
0
7 ac -
nonces -
{'
4 .i
'gection 427.22 What taxable. All (ther retu$1 on investment found hrtsin to be ArraczuxwT 1 I property. real or personal.1s subject to taza. riesonaht?, 111g.000. The cotubined total tion in the maf'=' prescribed, and this sec. 1:s3St.o33. .
. irs.u. 29.1974.
tion 23 also loteaded to embrace t - As already sta.ted. the total revenues re, minois " Power Cocnpany. Cunton Powei
< 1' 2. Ferry a-ancham and son bridgu which, .mind in 19n neth ima highway and from staca. Unm 1 and s: Arc omt soa. sa
< l* for the purpose of this chapter are consid. runroad tons as well as misceuaneous in. 461A and $4462A1 Department of Justlet I erod rea1 property. .
emme, amoostad to only 4359.947, and thag Fue No. 60-415-47. -
meeding an of the quoted provtssons of the sum was insumetent to provide the return You han mqmted our advios pursuant te
'! Tows Code in context. it seems clear that found hersta to be reeaonable. Accordingly. the provisions of section los of the Atomi:
' I the Code in efect gives tbs City the discre. 38 must be considered that the present ton Energy Act, as amoded. in. Mgard to the
- l. tion to permit taxatton of a bridge !! such structure is ace excesolve. aM-cited appucauon.
bridge is otherwsse esempt Dom tasation. Upon aD the evidence I find that the me. Estrodiactiom This is an app!! cation to coh<
but the Code does not exempt bridges which enUed estes of tou for the transit of the Mis. struct two nuclear electric generating units are held for proSt1 rather the Code spec 18 eaur includes a taxable re.1 property as stastopi Etter via m Esotuk bridge have not each wnh a aminal raung of 950 megawatta been abown to de uniust or unreasonable "*****"7-
- bridsw except thee. municipally owned
- noe head for praat. I conclude than the tassa Aos of.isos. and wiein the meaning of the oeneral artage Township, o c"w ::** located County. minois. Unns at a ali 2
paid to I4e County consutute an item nas
- ^d 8 *" **ntaunty scheduled a commence
- '*1'1 operauon in loso and 19s2. re.
i as y chupabk u a mtop exponen. [ Fat Doc.7610sss Fried 8-4 74;8:43 am) spectively. Tha units are to be integrated j Although the tas k charly charpahle se with Appucanta electric buit power supply a bridge cost. the amount oc the expena.
abould be reduced to me essent that the ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION S'1,,7,"* **8'^*
I tax was actuany mfunsied to the City. Fw
, mI 7P **'**8*d M a Poruca (as g a the C1ty, brsef ma as P
_/ [ Docket No. 80-412A)
~ **
APphesnt. App!! cant is the second largest
,_ p,gg VDUQUESNE UGHT CO., ET A! peaklos 2NInNts go city, thereby constituting an arsect,, n. atin's en a 1 ' fund or that much at m expense. Acec'rd. Assignment of Members of Atomic Safety 14 at nas time consisted of 2.4 mw depende tagly, m cisted expem abould be reduo'd and Uconsing Appeal Board able capac14 W hydmlectric genusung n; in the amount of $14.239' In the matter of Ise,,, aver ValJey, Unit 2.. of nIgNe'rau[r are **
' Ntice is hereby ghen that. in accordance Appucant*a peak load ts expected to double stude an t / o which was a e .With the authority h110 CFR 2.787(a), in tne next to years. and it has planned a hutson to a recrer. con fund and is eta-ty r.ot the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and under construction additional generattng es.
- Theexpenas an Federst property Eighway chargeable Mmintautuan to also the bridge.
fo!. lowing I.icansing Appeal Panel panel members to servehas as assigned the *"E the P**$ $ ['77 ne*g' dependaele system
~ "
erstsamed 2 torr.ey s fees.an Deexpense tumnotetshcw t%oc in at. Atomic Safety and IJcensing Appeal ' '
recert does how "*cape
- 'uty "**'**
tauch. If any, of said fees were for tte non. Boarti for this act1.tzust procm11ng! , Appucant has high voltage or extra high rosuaring upense W promocuting h cua, Alan 8.Resenthal. Chairman voltage (ebt) interconnections to a num.
No other beats is shown for escludir.g whst Mchaat c. Parrst. Mamber k W map sysums adjacent u its senice -
13 etherwsee unconusted as an accual es. W1ulam C.Farler.Memhec ,
ama, including Commonwealth Edison Co. .
penditure: I conclude that it is p:operty pgggg. AprQ 20,1974. Union Electric Co. Centrs! Illinois Public j w*w s a-** as sa en mae.
- The complainants argue generany what MAsCAssT E.DU PLo, M,oe Ca A h ud Cam hn g,;p c , raps 3*
is ursammaff aMa in theory.14, that funds Secretary fo fAe AppeoJ Board - C% and Cental m N e $'m*"
. [
Iowemr. with 2e eson' dons already lasted, Az:n ra [FR Dos.76do248 Fned 6-4-M;8:48 amj Co, Appucant participatu in 2e minois.
Missourt Pool (I11140). nrough 3111o and MRpa poln$ #
- a other interconnection and coorcindtion in Ezhi agreementa. Applicant engages in a sfgnAC.
1 which [Dec:ket Nos. 80.481A and 40 4e2A) emot degree of coordinated planning. cpers.
statute such an evpenalture for son. brides
- ILIJNOIS POWER CO. [,y*s"te$. "'"*"#***""I* P***#****
7charpsba agNN or Receipt of Attorney Genersys Advice and Appucant is also a member or m M!d. .
. . year 1972 were as touows: Time for Fillrig of Petitjons To littervene American Interpool Network WIN), a n. .
Clatmed ern.~ on Antitrtsst Mettera stonalrenability oouncil.
02es.Se7 Add: 1:epreesstaan esponse is,ses Firmeture o
- 'The Commfanfan has received. m1rsu. fmaoce. r a==f == tAs wealthsu14 Fotter utaan seningMarketprin.is l- .r'2 beat ant to section 105c. of tJss Atomic EnerW7 etpa!!y in the northern one. third of minois. -
l; Imss:R M M2 deco d
- seg.s72 Act of 1954, as amended a letter of ad. se by far the tarpst suppuer of eteetr$ city in 17,see vice from 'the Attorney General of the me state.* With a 1972 pesh load of 11. 30 .
United States, dated April 29, 1974, a aw, Commonwealth Edison la more than an -
. gg a as Appucant, as meanst mi.
N f"~' 14.23s copy of which ts attached as Attachment j 8.808 Total brtdge rolsted aa=*= - ant peralIt whoSe-1DtereSt7na7 T . Appucant and Central riff naf a Publie Serv. -
275,083 affected by '.hls proceed!DE may, pttr. loo Co. (peah load 1.394 mw) through s' h City tatrodneed an ethibit sumana. suant to l 2.714 of the Cnmmtestem's pe,tchwork dessen of sonico areas. an m rimang its stalmed costs durtng recent years "Ruhe of Practice," 10 CPR Part 2. Sie dominant suppuere of the electricity, both at aan paante out thes thane costs have been a petition for leave to intervene and r,. wholesale and retail, ta lower two.th:rits or nunate. Each system ta ruur integrated g snarenatar steadny white revenues have re. quest a besrtng on the antitrust aspects with high voltage and ehr interconnections maaned almost esnatant. on the basis at this showing. the City argues that in azug rsses of the spp11 cation. Petitions for leave to with each ocer and with ne thborin ""g srs.
for the future. It is not reasonable to con. intervene and requests for hearing shalle ***** * *** *T'**"' ""****** * *****
m caly past costs and mas some ocasider. be Sled by June 5.1914 either (1) b7 se t n and tr-mimon, in i
aston abould be given to antletpated in. dellyer7 to the AEC Public Document metr servios ansa. A wi aw privately. owned ,
eroness6 Accortungty, the City assouaung Room at 1717 E Street, NW., Washing
- utcity, Central Ininois I.1ght Co. (pean load witness puolested ruture easts bened upon ton. D.C., or (2) by ms!1 or talegram Tsimw), serves in two anu in the central an assumed esatinuing at the same rate or addressed to the Secretary. U.S. Atomic part of the smte.
i inernese as has been experkneed in me moong Energy Commtnfim WanNnston. D.C., ,
past. In say opinson this pm$ctlas is toe 20545. Attn 1 Chief Public Proceedings ,a see the Department's Istters of Adetee to i l* 8peculat1To to be given eteet ta deantte and. Branch. -
the t a===fmon concerning Commonwealth ings horeta. .Por.the Atomic Znstry Cnmminefan. Edlaon s Lasa!!e County Units 1 end 2. AIC '
- Docaat Nos. 60-373A and 80-374A. Depart.
azaaowaatsms or votAs ment of Justice File No. to-415- 41. December AssAxAM BsArtMAN The total, rewooahle bridge manue needs Chfe/, 03!ce of Antitrus! & In. 2o. let2, and Byron Station. Unitz 1 and 2. >
et the city for the present are ascessalna_ by demnity, Directordts of Lia armadwood station. Unita 1 and 2. AzC l
, adding to the {osal 1872 costs 827s.cos, the censing. .
Docket Nos. 80-454A. 60-448A, SO.438A. and l 40 487A. March 4.1974.
~
(
mim mism, vot. 3,,
r..-- ed ' Dose fC- d W
.._Moeny.cy im - -
ne .
. 4 I
j ; . - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ __ _
. galoa mectrie Co. (s targe Mammoet.bseed heartng win mot be asemenary with. respect malaterance esponses, capital onets and a stutty). Interstate Power Co.Sherrard Power to the lastmas typ11causa. , reasonable return on lavestatnt which are gygtem. and Iowa.D11asts One sad Electris g,,,, , g,94, ymperly appuenble 2 h particular trene-g , eer,e senau geographical areas along the accon ans ths facilittes tavotted ta that vessera border of D11aois. IIuaoh Power Company. Clinton Power transactisa, aural electric ooopermures oever n!! of Iggg. Stanoa. Units 1 and 2: AEC Docket Nos. 30- - 1(c). " Neighboring electric system
- means sees geographicany but serve mainly la rurag 441A and 50-443A; Department of Justice (1) a Snanciauy responsible bustness corpora.
areas 14 the southern three-qua.-tors of the File No.80-41M. ston, not.for-proat corporsuon. rural elec.
easte. Twenty eeven distribution ocoperatives We set forth as Appendtz A to this letter trte cooperettve, municipal corporation or-and two generation and transmienton co. a statement of poucy of D11 acts Power Com* ganaamd under the laws of the State of U11 ,
,,,,ggg,ee (Westers Iulnote Power Coopers, pany concerntag butt power supply arrange
- nots, company, association, joint stock com .
- ve and Southern Zulnois Power Coopera. masts wlm netshbortag. electrio erstems pany. Arm, partnership or person owulsg i teve) cosaprise the mesaberskap of the Asso. whleh it is prepared to make la consecuan or operating. or propostag bona Sdely and in 1
- i. esattoa of D11 acts Electric Cooperastres, with its C11nton Power Station Units 1 and good faith to own or operate, facilities for i i Western Dunois Power Cooperstave serves 3. (The deAaltlons contained la the state
- the generation, trarimmianton or distributton '
- coveral distributlaa cooperettves la es west. seant are latesbded to apply naso to the test of electricity for bula power supply, tus l 4
ers-eastral portion of the state. Its genero, of this letter.) This comunitment to spade bT whose faculties are or wiu be located in the I i
tasa is audDetent to supply approsismately 20 Me Company with the understanding est State of Ultnota. (13) whoes fac:11ttes are <
33 percent of its load. The resmalader is pur, the Department of Justice wul recommend laterconnected. or are proposed to be inter. l enesed at wholesale from Appucant and CIPS to the Asemaa Energy Commlaston that aa saanected, for the purpose of carrytag out 2 appresimate ratics of 40 percent and 80 antitrust hearing will nos be reqW ta con
- ene or anors of the trananctions referred to g,,,,,,g ,,;7 mestaca with the ueensing of the Company's hereta with factitues of the Company (pro.
I*'""hern Soot Dunods" Power Cooperative gen. Custon Power Station Units 1 and 3. On this vided that any proposed interconnocuon erstes roughly 100 av fross three units.This basis, the Cesapany agrees that tu polley ahan be lawful and feastble) and (15) which 0&T' serves escluattely the three achthers, statements saay be lacauded as condit&oas as or wu! be a public utiuty under the laws i'
most oospemans with their estare supply to the constructica permita and operating of the State of U11 acts or the Federst Power lleenses to be leeued by the Atonnie Inergy Act and is or win be providing electric serv.
etbulkpower'tbuties Other diser esoperatives purehaos Consmaneaea with respect to these unna, see under a contract or rate schedule on Sie 3
. bum power entirely frosa App 11 cant. entstely TF Osmpany bouevos and smaintains that with and subject to the regulauon of the gresa CIPs.er perunny Inn m sts rate and servies poucles and procuses Blunots Commerce Commisalon or the Pett.
Ligh
- 1 j
mmm_ _=m _,
ently operate sa na teolated besse each plytag its total restuarements ta to ave 44 the penethtuty of having to eseR- g.!1be deAntuon of neighboring electric sfa.
their resoluttoa la an antitrust hearing. It seaeratsag unnae seen tactude erstesne which meet the above '
me,efes. w determined w man me sim.
Aeonate of Antternet Reedow. In the eserne meat of peticy and sommitment. espressed
,,,,1,,,,,,s ,,u3,, now or in ce future.i et our aantrust rettew. serham ausgassons henta. 1(4)."Notshboring entity" means a netsh.
vure reestved by the Department the general hartag electrse system owning or operaung, Paragraph T et the statement of polary er proposing bona adely and in good faith to '
?
tapart of which was that Appuamat has used applies te say addittomat suelear genersung wwa or operate, fac111ues for the generataos !
- 31 5 " d"*"* pesttson la sumeratana .ad unit of the compeay watch.la na applicataos of electricity for bulk power supply.
Waassatsetoa la its servles area to metrata to the Atenaic Energy Co=='amma as sched- 2. *!'ho breed purposes of any laterchange
- j. me sempettme opportualtlee & mauer sys* uled to comenesbee ensamental operstles er other arrangement for bulk power supp1T tems. Per Its part. Apptaenas has densed that prter to Jassary 1.1980. De '%'apaay does transactaeas between the Company and a ,
8Be peticies and praettees have been er an set, however, have any present plans for meeghboring electria systeen are w :snprove '
l 1mesmeistent with the sattsrues laws. Itow" any suetear generattag units in addit 8ea to the rettaaulty and quality of service, to archt
! Mar. la order to e41stante may caestless as. Citates power stattom Catts 1 and 3. the duplienties of facS1ues. and to m1almtre j to the peticles that it 1 steads to fellow dur- A quentles has base raised "somearning the sensa. Any such arrangement wu! DulM l
has need 1 p. appliestles of the Company's Servles Clasal* planalag by the partsee and should be tech-ented its vlutngman 2 have them lastaded Seattaa 44 (Wholeenas Electric Servtoo for ateauy and seesemleauy feasible and pree- ,
as W"aan to me usasse, mas peiteteo Beanie). The Cesapany dose not regard a tasal.The arrange: Beat should ateo be ree:p. t l- see est est la the attaehement to the letter whalesale sustomer 2 be.umited by mas mgat as nearly as may be n!though it is ,
et Appuenats vtes preendens. dated w s. **lastafa servies er as to the ausaber and r y. d that an any particular arenage- !
- - ** ** ** ** *rees in watch is furanahes
'i I
1FTA which h metached herma, e meat. the beneAte may not be equal or iden- ,
loanstse et delivery potass for reestytag serv. tasal for each party and that a amaAler elec= }
l In our optatemithese pelsey esaamitmuna lee. If the Company were to reestve a re- trte system asay reellas beneSts welch are i
eeund provide essapetitees et Appuamat with gamot fresa a malghbortag electrte system for greater thaa mese r.altend by a larger syntesa.
eenpetittu alternattu scenes of bulk pow
- the perchase of enestris sorytes for resale 38e party should be obugated to pater late sa
( er supply and substaattany entinisate the which is met presently a sustomer of he t if it would Mause no set bene-P , grouade on wtsersemptatate swee*"12s@maff. the company wouaa est4W"a thernrrangement.~er tf the arrnage-l - -- * *r m anar era'me 's" ** *-
Os me struerth of thans peticy esma" nit. , mas system either pursuant a servise meat wound roount in met burdens to the
- n. sa .e== 40 as it may be amended la party. De pelletes herein esproceed cannot t l Dd h*"g,*,g*ue 2em the particular etreamstaases er puro#aat to be implemented nausterally by the Com '
new rate enhedules na eeny be asespted er pany. If an arrsagement between the Com- '
" ** U****** ** ""*I"** *** "" *EII "
l
- appresed by the Pheeral Power Commtentos pany and a motgabortag electrie system la to l and any seer regulatory anathertey havtag se emessemitd and le te operate la the public e Applicaat ales supp4tes the entire bqt1g partedletiest. laterest. it Baust be negotiated and performed ,
. power requiressests of take Cedar Potat 1.lght . Aposenes A h good faith and with full eseperatica Dy ;
and Water Co a mmtt privately-owned
- the partase to it.No party should caprtetously .
. utility (peak lead 378 kW). E8.astess powes essapearY reject a proposal submitted by maatter party t eThese maalcipal ayatamm imetade the Statement of Pelley Conseralag Bulk Preer and the Cestpany and setshbertag electrie l l Cassee of Peru. Attaansat. Eresso. Bustae4L Supply Aarnagements with Netshbertog symeme abound gtn naamantle manderauma l
- Cariyie. Presburg. wigni - s asaaneetah. Eiseirte Syoises in Ceanos 4em with maa- **r"*'s"****r********'- '
j Prtasetoa. Red Bud. Sunivsa, and Waterlee, see Power Statica Unita 1 and 3 3.N Company wiu 1sterceaneet with any
- numene, whneh are presently eemplatanam . meagabertag entsty la ereer that the partise , t
! la a pe===aetat before the Pheerst Power A8 Bat 8.1874. may esek and reatise au beneata practiemble
^====*aai== (City of Peru, et al. FPC Deches 1(a). - J T
- meene II11aose Power to be efected through the soordiastlos mad i' i No. 5-7814. Aled December 8, lect) ta watch Compnay and taatudes each present er fu- developoseas of their respectste systems and [
they are seettag as order freet the PPC ture wheny-owned subendtary of the osen- la arrytas out.vartene toterconnection serv. !
direettag Applicaat er CIPS to lateresAmeet pany and say euseessor to it, asse sad armasectaeas, no Cosnpany will as- a with theirfasuttles. 1(b). " Casts
- mesas an operating and oest to'the fulleet estant feastate any netgh- !
f
. menAL esseg7se, vg4. 39. NO. SMONOAy, AAAY 4.1974 *
. e ,
. . - - - - - - - - - " - ^ - ' - - - - - ' '
~' " ~~"'"
f g' .
E E
v . - ..159d0 '
, "MOTICES -
e t. ! boring entity !n ths coordinauen of reserves conditions sat on a beats that wiu fully 31(a). D.ts statement of poiscy is ac _
! e 4 through the sale and purchase of emergency compenaste ths Company for its costs tended to edect in any way the franc' ,
energy aad maintenance power upon terms incurred and to be incurred and that will not cert 1Acates of pubuc convenience and n jI
,4 that win provide for the tuu compense41oa adversely aEoct the Snancing of such power sity, or other rights of the Company et the Company's costa. No party shan be re. osauon, ne request shan be deemed timely any neighboring electrte syste:n to r=
quared to provide emergency energy or main. with respect to Clinton Power Stauon Units electrse service in the State of Elinois. "
E . teaanse power if to do ao will impair the 1 and 2 tf recetted by June 20.1974, and 11(b). Nothing herein shall be conse f
=
gI i
supplytng party's ability to render adequate with respect to any additional generating as a waiver by the Company of its rig -
t t and musale servtce to its customers or to satt if received witbla a reasonable period sentees whether or not and the exter 3
- - discharge its prior --**==ata. If any, is of uma frosa a planning and operaung whleh a partreular factual attuation - -
i {t oeer electria systems, etandpoint after the puhuc announcement covered.by this statsunent of potley or a *3
- 4. De Company and the nalghboring on. Dy the Company of the proposed lasta14uca clude the Company from contastm =
h j *- toty ahan each provide suJBesant capacity of any such unit. As a part of any arrange. auered act of unfair competition. -
6 g (walsh may include Aran contracted for es. unent that may be reached with nopeos to 11(cl. De Company recognises that
[
pacity) In its system to enable it to carry its such paructpauon. the Company wiu inter. earrying out of some of the pouctee -
?
planned for peak demand plus an adequase eoanect with and deuver any power to which pressed hereta la particular 'circume ~
- - senerve. Aa adequate salnamum reserve re. the metshboring electric system may be en* may not be in the mutual interest of
- quiremane saan be mutunuy determined tiusd under such strangement as a doutory Company and a neighboring electric sy' ;
R . frosa ser-peastimeaesmand to time as(unless a percentage otherwiseof planned agreed) potat er points on a base thatonwinthe Company's fully compensatesystern th* Nothing hereta is latended to preclude
- L and chan take into account such reserve crt. Cosspany for its costa. Company and a netthboring electric s+
g tarta as the nature of the respecure systems from reaching an agreement which ezi -
- 8. De Coespany win een bu!n power to vartes or supplemente the provisacus os 3
= and planned order to assureforrehabulty peak demand require of service and an la any ancemelghboring electric with rates, terms and system condluonsla accord.
which foregoing parsgraphs in a manner not La
. equitable sharing of reserve responsibuity, fany compenaste the Company for its costa. eastent with the broad purps em 2' Each party ahan provide such amount og and which de act restrict use or toonte ez* paragraph 2 and appucable law.
P armatne reserve as ahan svold the trapost. copt as may be aseeenary to protect the rel!" 11(d). The Company does not inten- M
( taan of an unt==aaamh'a desnand on the sys. shalty of the Compacy's system, and as are this statement of poucy to buome a e ~
]
g tem of the other party. 3Eowner such spla. accepted or approved by the appropriat* mon12. carrier.
De foregoing pouetes are to be im mang renerve requiressent ahalknos exeoed tbe regulatory body or bodies. De Cosspany
? =me=== lastaned reserve . requirement. If shan not be required to snake any such sale mented and apptted la a nianner consts ever a :- hi- period, a pany has faned af the Compaar does not have avanable suf* with Federal, state and local laws -
W to deuver samorgency energy, or tf a party has Setent generauon to provide the requested uans and orders. Au :ases chard. '
- appeared to make eseessive aans for emner. service or if the sale would impair the Com* ditions, les and practica are ud b -'
7 r
sency emersy, the partase akan }otatly study pany's abusty to render adequate and istia. subW to me acceptanu or woM W a
the matter for the purpose of determtalag We servlee to its eustomere or to d*h-P reguhtory ageneta or courts hartny b 8' Y
- the adequacy er saadequacy of the reserve its prior ecuamataments. If any, to othe*r else. d3ctica over them. To the estent that
- seeerating onpacity and tramanussen focus. trte systems. .
astido may at the stane be required in o' y taan being provided to anset the requiremente S. De Cesapany win work with neighbor. to erect any such changes, the Compan af the Latercommested systems and of deter. lag etestrie systems to fact:! tate the es* any neighboring We e7 $ M
[ =w ~ -- or correcung any ded. ehange of bula power by tramanussion over anIof the f gy U n rmm 2e ,
esemeans. see tramanueston factuuse between or among of rocourse appropriate forum to
[ 5. De agreement for me latershaage ar. two er more aedghboring electrie systems and such chanpo 2ervin as snay at the um_
e E
- reasosaeat between the Counpaar and a between any melshbortag electrte erstema and E aetchbartag esuty win nos include > restric. say other.electrie system engaging ta bulk, gpsamt, or good ladustry pracuee _
[ tive provtances which would proctude a persy power supply entside the Company's servtoe [FE Dec.410372 FUed 5+74;8:43 am ?
=
from enreging in laterconnectaan and coer. area between. whees far m es the Conn. i dtnacon arrassments wtth others, but may pmayas transeusaton uses and emer trane. "
nactude appropriate provinsons to aneure 1) anaesson unes would form a esatianous eles.
E that the compety recetves adequase mecae(og triona path. provided that (1) permanaloa so (DoenetNo.FRM-50 60] -
i seek add'*ia==2 tatereennectson er esardana, utsuas seek eeer tr====== unes has TE OF NEW JERSEY-NUCt.EA. -
tana. (11) that the parues wiu jotaur son. heen ottaamed by the proposeat of the ar. ENERGY COUNCIL i_ . seder and agree upon such uneneurse. it aar, sensammas, and (u) the arrensements res. '
P as are r==aa==hty asaammary to prosses the asashly eaa he ha'ad trema a fune. +-
FWeg of Petitiost for Rule Making
. . seuahnity of the tateremmaseted aretens and wenst and whau i =madpetat. seek Notice is hereby given that the at -
E p -.-
.se prevent unduo burdens troen tetag san. transatados shan be es terms that runy of New Jersey through its Nuclear ; ,
posed om any system, aad (111) that the Conn. f-'^ the Company for its eesta. Amy argy Council, by letter dated Marc.h 6 pany wtB be fullypractase eensposessed as Cfor 4 its la acene.
he tr=. =Sotgabortag edestrie system requesttag such IM4. has Sled with the Atomic Ene- "
5 Good ladustry ==' a='^=
arransessante chan give ren* Cotamissiott a pelluon for rule maki g ares trean time to time (if aes unr======wy semahae advanee nouse et its schoeuse and x
+
senartsuvel win estasty taus processen, requissements, no Casapaar ehan nos to re. h peuuoner me.ts that the >
r 4. ratereennectsens win as avausMe for a guared to anter into any arrassment which quirements in Appendiz E of 10 C .-
- - m:m r meghhnstag'electrtf efogset"stg ggy*ag 13euweeld"teBpetrMeyeteer*eeMeh@erNameye Par $4$ f0E'etgergengyvydam6nf3gd osampany*e instaued tr==-==<m and sum. semey ta==- == empnesty, to totag ree. terfacing by Conunissica licensees v a E tranamusessa reenauen it the proposed 1sta, osassed that whue essee tr==Wwm gaatu. State and local gerernments be adap d
-uen ss techasesur and ==a=a==pany taas anny to operated rauy leaded. ether and applied to Com nission !!cansees w p rena:We and the Company is tour emepen. tr"""""- faamtsee amar be ter emergene7 are not otherwise subject to Appen I e assed for its eosta. Inter-a==ama== win nos use and opermoed etther unleaded or par. 1 F .
to Hansted to low valtasse them hisbar verg, asany leadec.
- E and who receive, store. PI' Cess, and- '
{ . a2es are avausMe freen the company's ta. 10. The company shan taetude ta its plaa. distribute large quantities of radioact -
m e
- saaned factuuas ta the eres where me taler. asag and seastrustaan programs suscsent materials routinely (e.g. Srms wh-g tr==== 'a='a= empaatty as required for the process radloactive drugs or kilocu g emanestses is destrod. Control and tesesmeter. 4 r tag fastuuss shan to provided as requared tennasetaeas rarerred to la parsgraph s. pro- 1rradiators). The petitioner requests ti --
e-k-
for the sarety eemmested and renahtuty et the aster. vided any meashmertag electris erstem gives rules be developed which will requ systems, the Company suscleat advance mettee as !
k *= tes re* clear ident1Acation of critical nucLtd 7, The Cesapear win areed as apparte, anny be messenary te --===d atty to paruespate to say met 6abersag ones. quirossents frees a funcuonna and testasse2 critical pathways, and critical segmes f h tria areten that amates a timely reques steadpotal and that such motsatertag alet. of the population potentially at risk 1r- 4, thererer la the evaaransp et, er purehene et trte system rutty socapenessee the company pruvisions made for' chemical for=1 a g mass partsetpattes power frem. Cuassa for sta easts. ne Campany shau not to re. vartsbility of critical nuelldes ad a fur Power stauen Unita 1 and :t. and any ad. quired to cometreet tr==== fastuues at tion of varytng product mix. The De -
E dauenaa nuenear generating unst whash the 18 ands eemstrustsen et such teenatsas ta. tiener requests that the requiremene "
c Company anar sonstrues, own, and operate reasswe, or er its esses ta osaneetten there. the Commission's " Reactor Site C L and which a me appuestaos aled with th* 3 with wouse sessed us beredts therefrnsa or teria." 10 CFR ~ Port 100 be sultat h
[ sch
^" '
ror eo it it ando such factutsee would tapatr syseems modined and incorporated into the pt ermoon pr er to Jeauary 1.1ses. to a run. seuaksury er, emersemey tr= ====i ana= posed rule and that the rene deanttic j
1 -
sesame estent and en renaeanme terms and espeetsy.
Y m
) ,
be reviewed and Protective Action Levt 4
?
W .
- h ,
- psessAL stetsfas, vot. 39, No, es==#0NOAy, MAy 4,1974 5 Bi . . .
~ _
e .
i 4
APPENDIX F: FERC Litigation Involving Illinois Power Company -
I l Wholesale Rate Proceedings t 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 l
- of the issues raised by the cities originated in the late 1960s and early i
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 }
,j also as a result of the oil squeeze beginning in the winter of 1973. It is staff's opinion that the issues raised during these proceedings to date were
, current at the time of the CP antitrust review and for this reason do not !
j represent changes (in activities or proposed activities) since the CP review. l
! Moreover, the issues raised by the intervening parties addressed rate matters f
1 and would be more properly aired before the FERC, i.e. , any negative antitrust
)
4 implications would be more likely remedied before the FERC than the NRC. ;
j Consequently, the issues pending before the FERC do not satisfy all of the i criteria established by the NRC in Summer and no matter what the outcome ;
j before the FERC, these issues would not trigger an affirmative significant j 4
change finding and an ensuing OL antitrust review. However, the issues and l contentions raised by the intervening parties before the FERC do shed light , (
o ._. on.rompat.1 tion among.nenbecs.atJ.ha.alectnic..paner. todustry iall1.ino.is Sower).s _. J service area and for this reason a brief discussion seems in order. l t l In the late 1960s a group of Illinois (self generating) municipal electric systems comprised of the Cities of Breese, Carlyle, Highland, Mascoutah, Peru, !
t Princeton, Waterloo and the Village of Freeburg, petitioned the Federal Power )
l Commission, l
. i
)
"for an order under Section 202(b) of the Federal Power Act requiring . Illinois Power Company to interconnect its facilities ,
{
i !
! F-1 l 4 .. t
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - . .__ ~ . _ . _ . . _ . . _ . . . _ _ , _ . ________._____.__.a
cndcxchtnggcaptcityandcnargywiththemonth2sametermsas
- those prevailing in interconnection agreements between the Company
[ Illinois Power] and its neighboring utilities."1 This case was settled in 1974 after 1111riois Power agreed to t'he municipals' request for interconnection agreements. At about the same time, Illinois Power agreed to a set of policy commitments (which later became formal license conditions attached to the C1,inton construction permit) with the Department of Justice which required Ill'inois Power, inter alia, to offer interconnections to neighboring power systems.
~
Subsequent to the municipalities' obtaining interconnections with Illinois Power, the oil embargo reached its peak and placed intense capacity and cost burdens on their systems. (Their systems were largely comprised of oil-fired peaking facilities.) The municipal systems requested long-term power supply 4
arrangements under existing interconnection agreements with Illinois Power, to assure continuous operation and reliability of their systems and to limit radical upward movements in their costs of supplemental power requirements in future years. At issue before the FERC at present is the rate at which the
=:.icip:1: would pay for the partial requirements power only recently offered by Illinois Power. -
According to Illinois Power, the rate schedule under which the municipals had been taking service was not designed for long-term continuous reservations of capacity, i.e. , the type of service proposed by the municipals, because energy charges were unpredictable due to the incremental nature of the costs attribu-table to said reservations -- Illinois Power alleged that energy charges were a function of hour-by-hour load conditio'ns and capacity availability. The incrementa,1 cost issue was resolved when Illinois Power agreed to offer the municipals a partial requirement power agreement (also required by the license 2 Letter from 5. L. Swarthout, Illinois Power Co. , to Kenneth F. Plumb, Secretary, FERC, dated May 25, 1979, p. 2.
F-2 4 O
. I
c:nditicns cttach(d to th] Clintsn nuc1ccr plant) for ren:wablo fiv; year '
periods and based upon fuel costs incurred by the company's plants during the period the contract,is in force.
- In a sepa.ote proceeding, two municipal ejectric systems (Citie's of Ladd and Oglesby) and one small private distribution system (Cedar Point, Li.ght and Water Company) (all total requirements customers of Illinois Power) have intervened before the FERC to protest a }976 wholesale rate increase by the Company (Dkt. E-9520). The principal contention of the intervenors was that-Illinois Power could not unilaterally rai,se rates under their existing contracts with the Company. Ultimately, the D.C' . Court of Appeals ruled "in favor of the two Cities and against Cedar Point Light stating that Illinois Power's contract with Cedar Point Light permitted unilateral raising of rates by Illinois Power.
This decision reversed the FERC order regarding Cedar Point. The FERC has yet to respond to the Court of Appeals decision which was issued on August 21, 1979.
i In a similar rate proceeding involving the same parties (ER77-531), the intervenors petitioned the FERC requesting relief from another wholesale rate increase by Illinois Power in 1977. The FERC recently ruled upon this inter-vention8 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.
Generic Interconnection Rate Proceedings '
I Illinois. Power has-instituted new wheeling' rates Nith'a11'Of thi 'p~6werY 'yste'ms s
it has interconnection agreements with -- as required by FERC Order No. 84.
l There has b,een no intervention by parties in the relevant marketing area.4 2See " Wholesale Electric Service Agreement," Exhibit A, between Illinois Power and the municipals, attached to Appendix F.
3See FERC orders dated April 10, 1981 a'nd June 8, 1981.
I 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.)
t 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 Order No. 84
, proceedings would not invoke antitrust implications that would warrant remedy by the NRC.
4
.A
- P e
0
~
\
e s
t l
, . F-4
- -. -. - , - . _ - - . - - - - , - , - ,~ . . - _ . - , . .
AGREEMENT FOR PURCIIASE OF POWER
. FROM ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY
. This is an agreement dated this 1st day of May,1979, between ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY (" Utility" or " Company"), and .
the (" Customer"). .
U,tility is an Illinois corporation with its business .
office at 500 South 27th Street in Decatur, Illinois, is engaged in the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of
.. electric energy to the public in various municipalities and areas in the State of Illinois, and is a public utility within the ~ meaning of an Act entitled "An Act Concerning Public Utilities,"
approved June 29, 1921, as amended, set forth in Chapter 111-2/3,
.ce ction 1 et s_eg. e of the Illinois Revised Statutes, and now in force.'.
- Customer owns and operates an electric generating and distribution facility and provides electric public utility service to customers located in and about . .
Customer desires to purchase electric energy for r- municipal uses and for resale to its customers, and Utility u desires and is will'ing and able to supply customer with electric energy for these purposes, on the terms and conditions herein-af ter 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 w.,...~-....
of Exhibits- A and Dyr attachedrheretopantitled.JholesaleJ.laq 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.contraci '
capacity. -
' *~
II. Conditions of Service .
- 1. Customer requires and Utility agrees to supply a minimum amount of capacity according to the
- following five year cchedule, beginning with commencement of the Agrcement under'Soction X. ;
I l-1
4, . .
! . II. Conditions of Service (continued) -
I <
1st year Kva '
. 2nd year Kva '
3rd year Kva ,
- 4th year Kva -
5th year Kva
' This capacity will be the initial " contract capacity",
- governed by the provisions of section 5(a) of
- Exhibit A. At the expiration of each year, Customer will specify a new contract capacity for the fifth year following. In the absence of such j .
- specification, the contract capacity specified.
for the' fourth year shall carry over to become
- the contract capacity for the fifth year. . .
i '
e l 2. Customer shall provide a volt substation -
i at the point of delivery to transform energy i
received from Utility at volts to the .
volts required by customer. (see Exhibit B.)
/ 3. Utility requires an automatic circuit switcher -
.. or oil circuit bre.aker 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 Ky oil circuit .
breaker satisfactory to Utility, Utility shall -
control, operate, and maintain at Customer's expense j .such oil circuit breaker'to assure satisfactory oper-l ation with its electric system. Customer shall either j install or pay utility the non-aalvable cost of .
installing such lightning arresters plus a acnthly j ,
rental for 'the salvable cost of the lightning arresters, I
all as provided in Exhibit C. .
, ~ 4 ~. Utility "shall,' extend--its -line -to 'thewiat-of Melbresy m j to Customer and shall furnish and install meters,-
- j recording devices and other apparatus necessary*for ,
i the purpose of measuring the energy received by ;,
Customer at the point of delivery. The point of i
delivery shall be at the Ky bus installed in, the Ky substation referred to i'n the preceding paragraph 2 located on Customer's propurty. -
- 5. Custemer agrees that any existing towers, poles, wires
- or equipment placed by Utility on the streets, avenues,
.- alleys and public places in the
. *shall be exempt from any special tax assessments, license or rental fee to Customer during the term .
. of this Agreement. '
e
. _ , I
m .
T' j . .:
l II. Conditionn of Sorvicq (continund) -
l
- 6. Customer agrees to use reasonable care to design
. its circuits so that loads of the individuni phases on 'its lines at the point of delivery will be j balanced as nearly as practicable. ..
Customer and Utility agree to maintain and operate'
! 7.
! . their systinas in accordance with sound utility .
i practices, so as to minimize the likelihood of a disturbance in either system which might cause impairment of service to_the other. party's sys, tem. <
III. Rates and Charges '.
l
- 1. Customer agrees to pay Utility monthly for electric j
service rendered during the preceding month at the j rates and charges due and payable therefor as provided q in Exhibit A, attached, or as subsequently revised j under Section X, paragraph 3. -
i . 2. Utility shall add to all charges under this Agreement l 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 offactive after the execution date
! of this Agreement, measured by but not included in the i ,.
purchase price paid or revenues received by Utility
! on account of the service rendered under this AgreemenG IV. Meter Reading and Billing . ,
j 1. Utility shall read meters and render bills monthly.*
j *
- Bills will be rendered at a gross charge using the '
. rates and charges contained in Exhibit A in effect l . at the time, including other charges in this Agreement m~ , . . . . . increased Ay...two..peza=%,.Ra,yment,_=h=11.belps.*thir.ty ,
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. '
l . . '
j ,
l 2. Should either over-billing or under-billing occur due' l to causes other than inaccurate meter registration, it shall be corrected by proper allowance or payment i upon written notice by either party to the other, 'by mail or by personal delivery, provided that such noticC must be given within one year following the data on -
, which the bill to be corrected is rondered.
- 6
- e ,
N
., m IV. Meter Reading and D'illing (continued) -
. 3. If custiomer has failed to pay any bill accruing .
under this Agreement on or before the thirtieth
- day after day of billing, Utility may discontinue i . delivery of electric energy provided at least fifteen days prior written notice has been given to customer' .
i Utility will not be liable in any manner for any loss
{
or damage arising from such discontinuance'of electric '
service. .
i . .
i V. Metering, Testing and Billing Adiustments ,
l'. Utility shall own and maintain the number of meters , *
- and related. metering equipment necessary . to measure i the demand and energy delivered to customer by Utility I at the point of delivery.
l
- l 2.' Utility shall test and calibrate the meters by com -
parison with accurate standards at approximately twelve month intervals.
1
- 3. Utility shall make special meter tests at the written
!- request of customer. If a special test made at .
1
- - . customer's requesr. shall disclose that meters are l' -
registering within 2 percent of 100 percent accurac'y ,
l customer shall bear the expense of the tests otherwise, 1
- the cost of such test shall be borne by Utility. Utilit;
! shall give customer thz w. days advance notice of its
! intention to test .and calibrate meters when such test is' I requested in writing by customer. Customer shall be per<
l
- mitted to witness any meter tests nade by Utility. .
l 4. Meters found by test to be registering inaccurately'
{.,___. shall be restored to a condition of accuracy. If' the inaccuracy exceeds two pe'rcenti the meter readings -
1 -
'taken during the period of 90 days preceding (or during l such shorter period as may have intervened since the !
l previous test) shall be corrected by the percentage of l
! inaccuracy found by the test and payment adjusted *!
accordingly. No prior readings will be corrected. ,
i VI. Rights of Access .
1 1
Duly authorized representatives of either party heireto .
I shall be permitted reasonable access to the premises i of the other party if required to carry out the pro-
! visions of this Agreement. Each party shall have i . access to the facilities of the other party at a l l.- mutually agreed-upon time for the purpose of removing j .
its own facilities from the. facilities of the other l l . party where such' removal is permitted under this j
Agreement.
VII. Continuity of Service
- 1. . Utility agrees to provide adequate and reliablo
., service to Customer. Howevor, Utility shall not be liable to custome'r for. interruption o~r inadequacy , -
- of service, loss or damage to property, or injury (including death) to any person caused by act of God, public enemy, vandalism, strikes and other labor troubles or their equivalent, legal process, state, -
municipal or other governmental regulation, windstorm, '
flood, fire or explosion, or other matter or, thing .
beyond Utility's control, whether the same shall -
- affect or o'c cur in connection with the operations or property of customer, Utility or any other person.
- 2. Utility shall not be responsible for damaiges due' to any'
- failure to supply electricity, or for interruption, or reversaI of the supply, if such failure, inter-ruption, or reversal is without willful default or negligence on its part, nor for interruptions, by underfrequency relays or otherwise, to preserve the integrity of Utility's system or interconnected ,
, systems. .
Utility may interrupt service to make necessary repairs w 3.
or to make changes in equipment or to install new equipment, but only for such reasonable Hmma as may be unavoidable. If the. nature of the situation parmitsc reasonable advance notice of these interruptions shall be given by Utility. . .
~
VIII. Liability ,- -
Customer shall not be liable for and Utility shall save customer harmless against any and all claims, damageis, liability or expense, resulting from or occasioned -
by the presence, use or maintena'ce n of any electrical
- conductor or other type of' equipment owned or maintained ,
~
by Utility or Customer or by the escape of electric -
energy in or from any such conductor or equipment, '"
provided that such claims, damages, liability or expense 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 .
j 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, damagos, liability or expense l * .
i . .
[ .
3
1,
\
j VIII. Liability (continued) 1
- shall be cauzad by customer's negligence or misconduct. !
i Negligence or misconduct, as used herein, shall include '
but not be' limited to failure to comply with all General
- orders of the Illinois commerca commission applicable -
~; , to the furnishing of electric service by Utility or i 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 -
l ,
any of such orders, regulations or statute.
s I
IX. Annexed Areas and other services * '
l ,
i j
- 1. Utility shall be permitted to continue to provide i
- retail electric service on a non-exclusive basis t j
to its existing' customers or existing customers'
{
] .
premises served by Utility within the municips.} limits {
as of the effective date hereof. - i i
i
- 2. Whenever, af ter the date of this Agreement, Customer I l
annexes an area in which utility is providing electric !
i -
service, the parties shall meet and shall negotiate l in good faith as to the party to provide and the manner (i i,*
- of providing electric service to present and. future.
i j'
' electric customers in the annexed area. Such negotia-tions shall be conducted by the parties in the light
)
j
, of all relevant matters, and any agreements made and
- procedures established by them shall be in the public j
interest and in accordance with then prevailing law i
, and applicable regulatory authority. .
l 3
j -
- 3. Neither party to the detriment of the other party j .
shall require any person to take electric service t j
from it as a condition to, or in combination with, !
i i
any other commodity or service, including but not
' limited to gas, sewer, watery- or any other municipal--~l
~
or utility service. .
X. Term of Agreement
- 1. .This Agreement shall be for a term of five years commencing on the first date that Utility completes construction and installation of facilities necessary ')
to provide service contracted for in section II,- t paragraph 1. Such date shall be stated in a letter of i i
undprstanding to be effected between the parties after (
service is commenced. The Agreement shall continue
- j thereafter from year to year unless cancelled by either l party at the expiration of the primary or extended !
term upon..not.. lass th'an.two years. prior written notice.
j
. i b -
. X. Term of Agreement (continued) -
1 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, paragrap,h 1, Utility will supply service to customer pursuant to the terms and provisions '
t of the Interim Wholesale Electric Service Agreement j which is attached hereto as Exhibit D. -
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 .
j of Utility. -
. 4. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as '
! (.
- affecting in any way the right of either party
- under this Agreement to unilaterally make appli-3
- cation to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission l .
or any successor agency for a change in rates set forth in Section 3 of E::hibits A and D hereof under Section 205, or any similar provision, of the Federal
' Power Act and pursuant to the Commission's Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder or under any other applicable federal law or commission. It is i further provided, however, that in the absence ,
l -
of agreement by Customer no change shall be made I
in any term or condition of this Agreement for l Purchase of Power, or in any term or condition I in Sections 1, 2, 4 or 5 of Exhibits A and D, until it has been finally approved by the Federal
) -
Energy Regulatory Commission (or any successor
- i agency) under Section 206 of the Federal Power
Act. ~
l* * * ,
O 6 l . .
9 .* - -
4 . . .
i l *
[ .
IN t.7TNESS Wi!CRCOP, the parties hereto have duly enter &d into this Agroomont the day and year first above mentioned.
ILLINCIS POWER COMPANY -
By By Title Title +
^ ' '
Date ,
Date Attest: Attest:
e As to I ninois Power Company As to .
(00=:starY (Village Clerk) .
O e
s
. 'e
- Pago 1 Of 6 j -
I l .
Wholesale Electric Service Agreement j . .
l . 1. Availability - -
Service hereunder is available to the -
, (" Customer") subject to the following conditions:
- , l l a. That customer is engaged in the distribution and sale of j elec :1 city to the general public within the service terri-j ,
tory served by Utility; i b. That Customer is located , adjacent to Utility's lines having
! a capacity adequate to supply Customer's requirements in addition to the requirements of other customers already
. receiving service from such lines or that Utility s} fall have sufficient time before customer shall require service
{
to construct such lines. Prior to commencement.of service i hereunder, Utility will construct additional facilities to
, provide service to customer, provided the cost of such l
- facilities does not exceed one and one-half times annual i
revenue estimated by Utility to be received from customer.
! Any costs in excess of one and.one-half times this esti- -
. mated annual revenue shall be paid by customer to Utility;
! c. That prior to the commencemen,t of service hereunder, customes i shall execute and shall thereafter keep in full force and i effect a written agreement with Utility with a primary term j of five years. ,
t j *2. Conditions of Service ,
t .
i service hereunder shall be provided to customer subject to
! the following conditions:
1
! a. Should customer desire to receive electric' energy from any
} source other than capacity owned and operated by customer i
and to operate in parallel with the power supplied by .. -
! Utility to customer under this schedule, it shall, in the j
- absence of existing arrangements with Utility for the deliveE i of such power, give the Utility reasonable notice of such I desire, specifying the requirements involved and the date when it desires such transfers to commence. Reasonable i
notice shall be defined as notice sufficient to allow Utilitg l to continue safe and efficient operation of its system and
( shall be interpreted in an engineering context considering the facilities and requirements involved; l .
[ : -
1 . l l,
- 2. Conditionn of s'arvica (continued) , ,
i i b. Utility shall be reimbursed for any expenses incurred by d it by reason of the transfer of electric energy require- !
, sients referred to in subsection 2(n);
- c. Service hereunder will be initially delivered- to customer j for a volt three phase electric line having l
- capacity sufficient to serve customer's energy require- i ments. Utility retains discretion to select the' supply I i
line or lines from which service will be rendered to G.tomer.
- i 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 -
j voltage of the supply line or lines or other conditions ,
j of service. If such change is initiated by Utility, the j -
cost of providing service under' the new conditions 4ncluding the cost of transformation shall be borne by Utility. In i
j all other cases, except for changes caused by an increase in Customer's. electric energy requirements which shall j
be governed by subsection 1(b), costs of changes shall t
be-borne by customer; s
i d. G.Lumer shall provide and maintain all transformers and
{,* related facilities necessary for handling and utilizing 4 the energy delivered hereunder; ,
2
- e. Utility will provide and maintain one three phasi voltage connection, provided Customer will make available, without j
charge to Utility, space requ' ired for Utility's lines and c delivery facilitios, and;
! f.
Utility will provide and maintain one point of delivery and i metering equipment therefor. Such metering equipment,shall be located on the high voltage side of Customer's trans-i formation. Utility, at its discretion, may elect to install
- i. such metering equipment on therlow voltage: side <of tans -
j formation (whether or not for the convenience of Utility i.
or customer) and in such case, both the demand and energy
- l j
consumption will be increased to compensate Utility for transformer losses as measured by such metering equipment, ot in the absence of such measurement, by computing such losses based on the installed.
transformers manufacturer's data pertaining to the specific
- 3. Rates and Charges .
The gross charge shall equal the sum of the charges below l
i and any other applicable charges increased by two percent.
i
- a. Customer Charge Delivery Voltage Charge 4160 or 12,470 volts $ 50.00 per mon %
34,500, 69,000 or $110.50 per monC-138,000 volts
- i. ..
', 3. Roto and Chargon (continurd) ,
Chargo por Kv0 Billing Demand
- b. Demand Charge: Delivery Voltage Any one Montl
. . 4160 or 12,470 volts $3.73 per Ky 34,500, 69,000 or
~~
$3.18 per',3Zi
~
138,000 volts -
. c. Energy Charge: 1.254 per Kwh for all Kwh delivered by'
. Utility in any one month -
- d. Cost of Power Adjustment: .
(1) A Cost of Power Adjustment (CPA) will be applied to each Kwh of energy billed hereunder during.the.
- billing period" as defined herein.
(2) CPA = ( G + ECPP + ECIP - FCIS) X 100 _ ,g34)
(CG + PP + IP - IS) X LF '
Where: .
CPA = Cost of Power Adjustment. The . amount round to the nearest .0014 per Rwh to be charged
, each Kwh billed hereunder during any monthJ
" 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. The net er cost of energy purchased on an economic dis patch basis from other utilities under pur-chased power agreements during the "determJ
.- tion period," exclusivecof2capacitycorr.dems charges. Otherwise, the actual identifiab]
fuel cost associated with such energy purck ECIP = Energy Cost of Interchange Purchages'-. The energy cost of energy purchased on an econc dispatch basis from other utilities during
" determination period" under interchange os interconnection agreements irrespective of designation assigned to such transactions.
Otherwise, the actual identifiable fuel cos associated with such energy purchased.
FCIS = Fuel Cost of Inter' change Sales.' The cost c fuel consue.ed in " Company's plants" to gene energy sold to other utilities during the
" determination period" through all inter .
systen sales. .
(.
\
. 3. Rates and Charges (continued) l CG = Company Generation. All Kwh generated dur" the " determination period" in company's pla PP = Purchased Power. All Kwh purchased, except interchange purchases, from other utilities
. . during the " determination period" irrespect) of the designation of such purchases. .
All Rwh purchas. ed o!
I,P = Interchahge Purchases.
received 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 ,*determinatiot
- . period" through all inter-system salesa LF = Loss Factor. The estimated ratio of Kwh sa
. at the average delivery volts.ge of wholesal
, sales for resale to the Kwh #Jenerated for s sales. This ratio is .97. ' ,
-, , (3) Definitions (a) The " determination period" is defined as the calendar month inriediately preceding the billing month. .
. (b) The " billing period" is defined at 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. .
" Company's plants" is defined as Company's. fossil (c) and nuclear generating plants and Company's share
, of any jointly owned or leased fossil and , nuclear generating plants. .
- 4. Determination of Demands
- a. Maximum kilovolt smpere (Kva) demand will be the highest
- average Kva delivered duting any fifteen minute period,
- b. Billing demand for any billing month shall be the greater oft
. (1) 50% of the maximum Kva demand measured for the billing month, or e
~
. 4. Determination of Demands (continued)
(2) the contract capacity ,
- 5. Additional Conditions and Contract Provisions .
- a. A capacity (called " contract capacity" herein) shall be . ,
as provided in Article II, Section 1 of the Agreement. ,'
In the event Customer's maximum Kva demand during the 13 ' consecutive hours of 10:00 a.m. through 11:00 p'.m. on weekdays occurring during the period June 15 through !
I september 14, in any one year, exceeds the conttact
!' . . capacity in effect at that time during any 3 fifteen l minute intervals, no twd of which shall be selected in
- any one calendar day the contract capacity shall be increased, without notice or other action by the amount by which the average of the three highest measured Eva demands exceeds the then existing contract capacity, and i
any existing contract shall be deemed to have b.een amended j to include such increased capacity.
! . b. Customer may reduce Customer's contract capacity upon I .
providing Utility with twelve months' prior written notica
{ . However, in no event shall customer be permitted to reduce i Customer's contract capacity to a level below that speci- *
- j ,,
fled under Article II, Section 1 of'the Agreement.
- c. If customer reciuires service at the delivery point sp'ecified
! herein for existing, new or added capac.ity of 500 Kva or l more in excess of the contract capacity which requires Utili l to install special apparatus, customer shall execute and keep in full force and effect a written contract with Utilit
- for service which shall specify a contract capacity and.othe i . terms 'and conditions of service not inconsistent with those
- 'provided for herein. The primary term for such written
{ agreement shall be five ' year's.
.I l ,
- d. The" primary or extended term of any agreement provided* ,
for herein shall be automatically extended from year,to ,
l year with the privilege of either party to terminate the
! agreement at.the end of the primary term, or any extended term, on not less than two years' prior written notice.
- e. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as affecting i in any way the right of either party under this rate -
! schedule to unilaterally make application to the Federal i
Energy Regulatory Commission or any successor agency for a change M 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 and Regulations promulgated thereunder or undar any other applicable federah i . 1aw or commission. It is further provided, however, that I
1
- _.___-____..L_____._.___._---.-,..-__._ ----~._--- - .- - - - - - - - - - -
h '5.' Additional conditien, rnd C*ntreet Prnvicinna (enntinued)
, in thn cbscnca of Ggronment by cuatcmer no chnnge chc11 he made in any term or condition or service specified -
in Sections 1,2,4, or 5 hereof until it has been finally
. approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or any successor agency under Section 206 of the Federal Power Act.
e O
e * ,
- 4 ,
e s
4 g O 9 9 O O 9
. t .
e t
t O
e e
e e
D e
e O
9'
- Sm b
6 0 g 4 e es e 9 m g e
g a
. e e
- P t
, I l
O
. e i
. I
i o
O e e
m G
e e
9 9
APPENDIX 8 e
e
+
D e
0
% e e
0 9
e 0
0
- s. . .- . , . . . - , _ .
- ',M* " Coq #o,,
' UNITED STATES 8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .
& . ,E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Sy v /
~
JAN 3 1533 4
l I Docket No. 50-461 MEMORANDUM TO: The Files FROM: W. Lambe, AEAB
SUBJECT:
MONITORING REVIEW - CLINTON NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 .
Attached is staff's initial 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 .
e i
I i
t' f !
e i
e
- - - , - , - - - - - ,----.--,,,rm --, t - _ - - - m---- - - - , y. ----- -
cr-- .--.-.---y. - -- ,----,
CLINTON NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 1 -- OL MONITORING REVIEW Construction delays have become connon place for the nuclear power industry.
l Applicants have delayed construction completion of facilities for months and l
l sometimes several years frora the time they initially have requested an operating license. From the standpo'nt of our significant change review, these delays create voids in the review process 1f the OL significant change review is
- completed far in advance of the construct 19n completion date. In the instant !
i
. case, the significant change review was completed in February of 1982 while l the construction completion date has been moved back to August 1984--leaving ;
a two and one half year void in the review process (one and a half years longer i than our one year lead cime). To remedy this chronic problem. AEAS has developed a " monitoring review" procedure that fills this void through periodic contact with pertinent power entities and research of public data, i.e., trade and related periodicals. .
j , Staff completed its operating license significant change determination ,
(significant change) for Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Plant on February 23 .
1982. The review c'oncluded that no significant antitrust changes had occurred since the completion of the construction permit (CP) antitrust review in May i
of 1974. The no significant change determination was published in the Federal Register on March 11. 1982.
The function of the significant change analysis is two-fold in that it.1) captures j any changes in applicants' competitive activities since the CP review. and 2) reduces '
7/ Applicants include: IllinoisPowerCo.(leadapplicant).SoylandPower Tooperative. Inc. and Western Illinois Power Cooperative. Inc. -
. . s ;
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 Power Co. (IP) t and smaller power entities in central and southern Illinois. These conditions l 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 systems in and/or adjacent to IP's service area in an effort to determine if i
any changes in IP's activities (of a competitive nature) have taken place since I I
the original significant change dete_rmination was made in February of 1982.
{
l i
City Systems ;
i
') The city systems ranged in site from Farmer City. Illinois with a peak load !
i of approximately 4.5W to the' City of Springfield. Illinois with generating i capacity of over 500W and a system peak of approximately 338W. Fanmer City i
is involved in interconnection negotiations with Illinois Power., The represen-
, tative of the system contacted indicated that negotiations were continuing and f 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 fina'nc- i r
I ing for construction of the necessary facilities. ;
{
l TheCityofChatham, Illinois (peakloadofapproximately10W)requestedan
' 1 interconnection with Illinois Power in 1979, about the same time its wholesale '
supply contract was to expire with Central Illinois Light Co. The interconnection i was not built, according to the Mayor because IP refused to finance the entire !
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) !
r
m.. , _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _. . . . _ . _ ._ __
l j
- i
- l
! l i
over Central Illinois Light's (CILCO) lines, the Mayor said yes and that IP l t
l was willing, but the wheeling charges imposed by CILCO would have made the i transaction uneconomical. According to the Mayor, the City negotiated a l
i
! settlement with its existing supplier (CILCO) through 1986 that was very i
l favorable to the City. The City was faced with expiration of its wholesale !
supply contract and after shopping around, ultimately negotiated a new contract f t
j 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 l 8
- it cost efficient to construct and finance a long intsrtie to a relatively I
J small load. (Moreover, the Mayor indicated that he had not had any contact l
j with Illinois Power in the last 18-24 months--our monitoring is concerned with l I
g the last 12 months.)
l l
Waterloo, Illinois (approximately 10W system peak) energized an interconnection with Illinois Power in 1979 and is now taking all of its requirements from IP. l I]11noisPowerallowstheCitytopeakshavewithitsowndieselcapacityduring l i t 1
the sumer months, i.e., credits the City's generation against power sales by }
I i .
}
IP !.o the City. According to the Superintendent of the system, this is very , !
l l
- bene.ficial to the City and the arrangement has worked out fine to date. , ;
- t j LWate\ loo opted to take power from IP in lieu of being acquired by IP in the mid-1570's. Contact was initiated to determine how smoothly this arrangement wasgo,ng7 i
l The Cit) of Springfield, Illinois was the largest system contacted, with 500 W t i !
of generation, and of the systems contacted, probably most resembles Illinois l
j Power's filly integrated power system. The City energized its interconnection ;
l l l h I
7
, with To in 1074 and according to the Superintendent of Electric Operations has had satisfactory dealings with the company ever since. Presentiy, the City '
I and IP exchange emergency power when needed and share in economy power.transac-
) -
i tions when available (the City usually sells more to IP than IP to City). IP i and the City also compete for wholesale loads, e.g., they share a common tie I l 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 l it sold, however, this was primarily due to an emergency outage on the City's l t
4 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 l
of power to a neighboring private utility. According to the superintendent, i the city hat enioyed a good working relationship with Illinois Power Co. [
f i
j These four cities were chosen for individual contact in the monitoring program l 4
because of their diversity.in size and integration and because some had
~
experienced difficulty in dealing with Illinois Power Co. in the past. The f
responses from thes,e cities indicate that in terms of its dealing with smaller -
i !
{ systems in its service area, Illinois Power has not engaged in any anticompet- !
I itive activity that would warrant staff changing its significant change !
l '
l l determination reached in February of 1982. (See notes of telephone conver-J. . ,
sations attached to this memorandun.) !
Mt. Carmel Mercer e ,
i As mentioned in staff's significant change analysis, Illinois Power tendered !
l < 1 an offer to acquire a privately-owned, small electric system serving'the City j of Mt. Carmel, Illinois. The acquisition has yet to be conswanated and in fact !
l t
d is being held up by the state commerce 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's this acquisition by IP poses no significant threat (or change since the February review for that matter) to competition in the bulk power industry in central and southern Illinois. .
In sum: Because of a~ delay"in issbing the Clinton Unit 1 OL staff has reviewed Illinois Power's activities since last conducting its significant change analysis approximately a year ago. No one has come forth to request reevaluation of staff's significant change determination, nor have there been any submissions of complaints or views of affected parties durina the interim since February 1982.
After reviewina industry trade journals and initiatino contact with power entities in the relevant area, staff, as of thi,s date, has found no reason to amend its "no significant change" determination pursuant to Unit 1 of the Clinton Nuclear Station.
G e
Farmer City Illinois (January 13,1983)
Contact:
Mr. Richard Hardesty. Assistant Superintendent '
Electric Department Phone f: (309)928-3421 During the significant change review staff noted that Farmer City had requested an interconnection 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 stated that IP wanted the City as a customer and the company was not holding
! up construction of the entertie.
. O I
- e l
l e
l
~
City of Chatham Illinois (January 18,1983) !
Contacts: T. Kaufman, Superintendent John Whitney, Mayor -
l Phone #: (217) 483-2451 l
The City had requested an interconnection with Illinois Power Co. (IP) in i late 1979 and early 1980. I phoned the City to ascertain the status of this interconnection request. -
I originally telephoned Mr. Kaufman, however he referred me to the Mayor, i
Mr. John Whitney, as he was the principal negotiator dealing with IP. 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.
I asked him if he ever consummated the interconnection he requested from IP
- i in 1979-80. He said no, because IP was unwilling to pay for the cost of constructing the seven mile tie necessary to serve the City.
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 City's existing supplier). He said he had looked into it but decided that the wheeling charge quoted by CILCO was exorbitant and would make the transaction uneconcaical.
l The request for an interconnection with IP came about after the City's wholesale 4
supply contract had expired with CILCO -- the City was searching for an alternative power source to CILCO.
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 contrast he would contact WIPCO (Western Illinois Power Coop) which had just built a
- transmission line near the City as well as other surrounding systems capable of serving the City. (These include CILCO, CIPSCO (Central Illinois Public !
l Service Co.) City of Springfield and IP.) !
l i
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 i made, t
i i.
i i
f
, i
~
t
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 sunner months. The City has no plans of adding any new generation of its own ,
and has considered wheeling over IP lines but hasn't negotiated anyth10 g firm l
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."
+
l
. .u- . m _ .
l City of Springfield, Illinois (January 17,1983)
Contact:
Mr. L. Gladish, Superintendent of -
Electric Operations Phone f: (217)789-2120 I telephoned the superintendent of the Springfield utility division to inquire whether or not the City was having any specific difficulties in its dealings with Illinois Power Co. (IP). The City had recently energized an inter-connection with IP (late 1979) and given Springfield's substantial size, the City's input into staff's monitoring program seemed essential.
arenrM 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 exch'anges with IP--c::n::::y exchanges and emergency and maintenance power exchanges.
(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.)
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 -
mwhrs. The City's entire system went out in March of 1982 requiring extensive maintenance that lasted about three months. During this period, IP supplied the City with emergency and maintenance power.
l Besides IP, the City has interties with Central Illinois Light Co. (CILCO) i and the Western Illinois Power Cooperative (WIPCO). When asked whether the City ever had occasion to use IP's transmission facilities, Mr. Gladish
1 .
, i described a recent sale to the Central Illinois Public Service Co. (CIPSCO),
which was facilitated by IP wheeling the power over its lines 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. (He thought the utility was WIPCO.)
Generally, Mr. Gladish stated that he had a good working relationship with Illinois Power Co.
F P W
e 9
- i i
l i
a- a_,m.w - a n +u. ...n,-.- ..a.a.a~ m u. ,e .g . . . w ,w- -.n. . a. -- --- - -- ~-- - - - - --
f e e t 6-f
[
t e
O i
i 1
i 1
D e
i, o
APPENDIX C I
+
i i
j .h I
t '
l l
. I I
l l
l t
1
+
i e
I t
i
s . .
... 0-0799 L30-85 (02-21)'-L 1A.120 ILLINCIS POWER COMPANY Loi 1
l CLINToN PowfR STATION. P.O. son 878. CLINToN ILLINOIS 61727 February 21, 1985
~
Docket No. 50-461 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Atta: Mr. Wm. H. Regan, Jr., Chief.
Site Analysis 3 ranch Division of Engineering U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Countission Washington, DC 20555
Subject:
Clinton Power Station Unit 1 ,
Planned Merger of Soyland Power Cooperative Inc.
and Western Illinois Power Cooperative Inc.
4
Dear Mr. Regan:
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 Westarn Illinois Power Cooperative. Inc. (WIPCO), the co-applicants with Illinois Pouer Company for the Clinton Power Station operating license.
Ian enclosing herewith for your information and review a copy of the " Coordination and Operation Agreement" dated July 25. 1984, between Scyland and WIPCO. This agreement provides for the pooling of Soyland and WIPCO's operations effective January 1. ,1985. In addition, as set forth in Article III, the agreement contemplates ,a merger of Soyland and WIPCO on July 1, 1986 or such later date as they may mutually agree.
It is my understanding, that a merger is required to be approved by the vote cf two-thirds of the membership of each cooperative voting separately. I
^
Should you have any questions or require further information do not
- l hesitate to contact me. j 5 care yours 1
F. A. pa enbe g Direc or - Nuclear Licensing and Configuration )
Nuclear Station Engineering Enclosure ,
JLP/1s
~
cc: 3. L. Siegel, NRC Clinton Licensing Project Manager NRC Resident Office Regional Administrator, Region III, USNRC Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety s.m4114-
- p. . - . Lambe. .Sias -W Areach .u-l
- * <0 < >
0 e 4
- 0 . .
e O ,
o O
4 O
e e
APPENDIX 0 9
i e
e
.J * ,
P e
e O
O
- e e
9 e
F
, , . l Law Crracas I WAsxrR, SULMVAN & WARD l i
- - - - - oss momes, sowa sesos j ,,**",",f,"~'" . .I'.','.~l1 j January 29, 1985
,,, " f".' v ae.... ,
.. ...u..
Sheldon A. Zabel, Esq. l Schiff, Hardin & Waite l 7200 Sears Tower !
l 233 South Wacker Drive l
- Chicago, IL 60606 l t
Re: Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Nuclear i l Station, OL Antitrust Review--Merger of Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc. *
-l and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, l
- Inc. l Dear Mr. Zabel l
Mr. E. H. Williams of Soyland Power Cooperative has forwarded l to this office a copy of the letter from William H. Regan to l Mr. Frank Spangenberg dated January 16, 1985*concerning the anti- !
iru.L A. view of Illinois Power Company's application for an operating license of the Clinton Nuclear Station. In accord with my conversation with Mr. Williams, I antenclosing for your'use a i copy of the " Coordination and Operation Agreement between Soyland
- Power Cooperative, Inc. and Western Illinois Power Cooperative, Inc." l dated July 24, 1984. This Agreement provides in pertinent part i the following terms and conditions
1 j . 1. General Provisions. Pages 1 and 2 of.the Agreement
- (the Whereas provisions), set out the general intents .
i of the Agreement. As of January 1, 1985 Soyland Power Cooperative (Soyland) and Western Illinois Power ;
Cooperative (WIPCO will " Pool" all electric power and !
l energy and transmission capacity available from their
- respective facilities so that the electric power and i energy and transmission capacity will be utilized as though the two cooperatives were merged as of January 1, l
1985. The Agreement goes on to provide that a plan of merger will be prepared, and that the formal merger i
under Illinois law will take place effective as of l July 1, 1986. .
. 2. Management. At a meeting held in January, the parties i
met and selected Mr. C. E. Ferguson as Chairman of the
- joint operation, and Mr. R. E. Gant as Secretary.
l '
I l \
i i
i
.m _ . .. __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
t . . .
l Sheldon A. Zabel,'Esq. i January 29, 1985 ,
i Page 2 l
Mr. E. H. Williams was selected as Executive Vice President, !
Mr. Don Bringman as Vice President and General Manager.
Article III, Section 2 provides that any action by the i Pool requiring board approval must be presented to the Joint Pool. Board and approved by an affirmative vote of the directors of each cooperative member. ,
- 3. Furnishing of power and energy by the Pool and trans-mission capacity. Articles V and VI of the Agreement ;
provide that the Pool will provide all power and energy '
and transmission capacity to Soyland and WIPCO from and ,
after January 1, 1985.
-l
- 4. Merger. Article XII provides the terms wherein the parties !
will merge by July 1, 1986. !
- 5. Term of the Agreement. Article XIV, Section 2 provides l
that the Agreement shall begin operation on January _1, .
4' 1985 and shall terminate on December 31, 2025 unless :
extended by mutual agreement of the parties. I
! Please'do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any
~
f question concerning any aspect of the Agreement between Soyland '
- and Western Illinois Power Cooperative.
We would appreciate reviewing any material planned for sub- l 3
mission to the Nuclear Licensing and Configuration Management i j Office prior to that submission. !
~ I j ,
Very truly yours, f l
. WASKER, SULLIVAN & WARD -
ddilTGA !
John T. Ward JTW:as i I
c:: Mr. Donald Bria m ;
Mr. E. H. Williams I -
l t
i h
'-6-- e - - " --- - '- '
e 9
J 0
9 e
9 S
S e
i.
APPENDIX E O
e e P O
e P
e e
e O
O 4 9
0 t
G e
0 e*
1
~a DO P
l COORDINATION AND OPERATION AGREE 1GliT BETWEEN SOYLAUD POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. i i
r AND . . ,
- WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. l t
a I
b i
- i
, i l
i . .
l ;
- . [
h i 9 l
. I t
t
[
! l I - -
-. , _ l
s
- t TABLE OF CONTENTS -
Page Article I -- Purpose . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . 3 l Article II -- General Definitions . . .. . . . . . . . . . 3 l
t Article III -- Administration . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . 6 l l
Article IV -- Delivery of Power Bv !
1 Members to Sovland/WIFCO . . . .. .. . . .. . . . . . 10 l i
6 Article V -- Furnishing of Power i
- and Energy By the Pool .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . 11 Article VI -- Availability of
- Transmission capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 11 i
Article VII -- Operation and Maintenance. . . . . . . , . . . 12 1
Article VIII -- Construction of Additional Facilities . . . 13 .I:
a e t
, Article IX -- Charges and Credits . . . ..... . . .. .
14 i
Article X -- Accounting and Payment .. . . . . . . . . . . 17 Article XI -- Insurance -- Indemnification ... .. . . . 18 .
Article XII -- Merger . .... . .. . . .... . . . . 22 i i
- i Article XIII'-- General Provisions . ... ..... . . . 24 l -
i Article XIV -- Effective Date Term and Contingencies . . . 28 -
l Exhibit 1 I . . . . . . . ... . . . .. . ,. . .
. . . . . . 31 !
Exhibit 2 . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . '. ... . . . 32 l Exhibit 3 . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 33 !
- Exhibit 4 . . . . . . . ... .
...'....... . . . 34 Schedule 1 . . . . . . . ... . .. . . ... ... . . . 35 Schedule 2
- l
. . . . . . . .. . . ..... . .... . .. 36 I ,
t f
i l
I .
, '; \
- i l
l 4 .
COdRDINATIONANDOPERATIONAGREEMENT l l
AGREEMENT made this 24th day of July , 1984, by and l L
- between SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC., hereinafter called i "SOYIAND ," a not-for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, and WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER I COOPERATIVE, INC., hereinafter called "WIPCO," a not-for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois. SOYLAND and WIPCO may be and/or are sometimes referred l' l to hereinafter as " PARTY," " PARTIES," " MEMBER," or " MEMBERS."
i WITNESSETH:
W EF.EAS, SOYLAND and WIPCO are engaged in the generation and 4
, transmission of electric energy and are the wholesale pouer -
l suppliers for their distribution cooperative Members in Illinois; ;
[
2
' 2
- and ,
WHEREAS, SOYLAND and WIPCO now purchase portions of their ,
electric power requirements frosi Central Illinois Public Service Company, hereinafter called "CIPS," and from Illinois Power !
i Company, hereinafter called "IP" and others. WIPCO now generates'a {
i portion of its own power requirements and the Parties will lease j 5
and/or purchase capacity and use of facilities of CIPS, IP, and/or [
j others hereafter in lieu of or in addition to the Purchase
! Agreements above-referred con and, i
i
- WHEREAS, SOYLAND and WIPCO presently own 10.5% and 9.5% shares [
respectively of Clinton Power Station Unit No. 1, hereinafter j i
called "CLINTON": and. . ;
h t
I
V V
. ~. -
o ' O. .. '
WHEREAS, WIPCO has transmission ownership and obligations for i i
its distribution cooperative Members and, WHEREAS, the primary purpose of SOYLAND and WIPCO is to furnish adequate supplies of electric power and energy to the load l centers of their distribution cooperative member-consumers on a cooperative not-for-profit basis at the lowest feasible cost, and, I to this end, SOYLAND and VIPCO 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 j of the -electric pouer and energy and the transmission capacity available from their respective facilities mid any facilities constructed jointly by SOYLAND and WIPCO acting as a single entity; and, WHEREAS, to further the interests of acting as a single entity the Parties believe it to be in the best interests of their q distribution cooperative member-consumers to operate on a pool basis from January 1, 1985, to July 1, 1986, and to merge into one corporate * -it.y effective as of July 1,1986, and WHEREAS, the agreement herein described shall be referred to ;
?
as "SOYLAND/WIPC0" or " POOL." t I
NOU~, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL AGREEMENA t HEREIN CONTAINED AND MUTUAL BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED THEREFR011, IT IS AGREED BY AND BETWEEN SOYULND/WIPCO AS FOLLOWS:
i e
l t
I
. 3 i
. 3_ j
~
ARTICLE I -
PURPOSE Section 1. The purpose of this Coordination and Operation Agreement is to combine power supply facilities and costs from !
l
.Ta mtarv 1. 1985, to July 1, 1986, and to merge into one corporate l entity effective as .of July 1, 1986, in order that adequate l s'upplies of electric powe,r and energy be delivered to load centers j
)
4 of the distribution cooperative member-consumers of SOYLAND and WIPCO on a cooperative not-for-profit basis at the lovest feasible c'est through the coordination and use of the facilities and capabilities of both SOYLAND and WIPCO acting as a single entity.
- ARTICLE II GENERAL DEFINITIONS
- Section 1. Existing Generating Facilities. Any-reference to j i I
" Existing Generating Facilities" shall mean the generating and
. related facilities, described in Exhibit 1 attached hereto and by l
~
q this reference made a part hereof.
~
, Section 2. Existing Transmission Facilities. Any reference I
co " Existing Transmission Facilities" shall mean the 34.5 kV .or l
! higher transmission and related facilities, described in Exhibit 2. ,
! I Section 3. Additional Generating Facilities. Any reference to " Additional Generating Facilities" shall mean generating and i i i
related facilities . con'structed by SOYLAND or WIPCO, or .!
SOYLAND/WIPCO as a single entity in accordance with Article VIII of l this Agreement. -
. Section 4 Additional Transmission Facilities. Any reference to " Additional Transmission Facilities" shall mean the transmission l l
t I
. '?
- _4_
and related facilities constructed by SOYLAND or WIPCO 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 reference 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 reference to " Installed Cost" t
. shall mean: (a) as to 'the Existing Generating Facilities, the ,
installed cost thereof (b) as to the Existing Transmission l ,' Facilities, the installed cost thereof and (c) as to the j Additional, Generating Facilities or Additional Transmission Facilities, the installed cost thereof as shown on the books of the l
members or as may be determined from time to time by the members. ,
! Section 7. Monthly Billing Period and Month. The term
" 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 i
hours the last day of each calendar month. -
l Section 8. Contract Year and Fiscal Year. The term " Contract !
1 l Year" and the term " Fiscal Year" shall mean the 12-month period l l
beginning on January 1st of each calendar year and extending j through December 31st of the same year.
l l Section 9. Uncontrollable Force. The term " Uncontrollable 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 l
. i 1 .. - - .-. . - _ _
- _ - _ _ - - . - _ _ . - . . . .. __ . __________i
...'~. .
-5 ,
- to, failure of facilities, flood, earthquake, storm, lightning, fire, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance, labor disturbance, sabotage, collision, or restraint, or order by a court or public authority having jurisdiction. ;
! POOL, Member.
Section 10. SOYLAND/WIPCO, For purposes of j this Agreement, reference to SOYLAND/UIPCO shall nean the l contractual power pooling created by this Agreement, together with 1 :
the Mesorandum 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
Mecher or Members shall refer individually to SOYuND and/or VIPCO i i
as a Member or Members of the Power Pool. i t
l licction 11. Merger. Soyland and WIPCO have ' agreed to merge into one corporation effective as of July 1, 1986. All reference to " merge" or " merger" herein vill be to such event.
l l
Section 12. NRUCFC. NRUCFC means National Rural Utilities j l Cooperative Finance Corporation.
l
_ Section 13. REA. REA means Rural Electrification !
Administration, Department of Agriculture of the United States. l t
Section 14 Pool Board. Pool Board means the Board 6f l 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.
Section 15. Pool Board Aporoval. Any action ci' the combined [
I i
Boards of Directors of SOYLAND and WIPCO and such action to be j i
t i approved shall be passed by a majority vote of the elected !
t 1
f'
' I
1
. Directors of SOYLAND and a majority vote of the elected Directors )
of VIPCO. 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 !
i action may be taken unless a quorum is present.
ARTICLE III .
ADMINISTRATION l i Section' l. Management. The Parties agree that the POOL will be initially managed by a Management Coc:mittee consisting of the General Manager of each of the Parties to tihis Agreement. An i
l Executive Vice President and General Manager will be named of the i .
l Management Cocmittee 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 I the POOL Board and subject to supervision and direction by such f Board.
i 1 The Management Committee shall act as a settlement con:mittee I
j and shall decide any controversy, claim, counterclaim or dispuce-l arising out of or, relating to this Agreement (except as otherwise provided herein), including other committee functions and actions.
In the event the Management Comunittee is unable to reach a settlement, the dispute shall be submitted to the Pool Board for settlement. .
Section 2. -Pool Board Approval. Any action by the POOL requiring Board approval shall ,be presented at ' a joint Board Meeting of the Members and .such action must be adopted by an l
affirmative vote of a majority of all of the directors as defined i under Article II - Definitions.
- .! t ,
_7 j
Section 3. Board Meetings. The combined Board of Directors i .
- of the !! embers shall meet at least quarterly for regular meetings I 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 the Pool Board, the Presidene of SOYLAND or the President of WIPCO.
The Pool Board Secretary shall give at least ten - days ' written notice to SOYLAND and WIPCO who will then notify its respective ,
, Directors.
Section 4 Con:mittees . To administer, coordinate, carry out
{ the intent of this Agreenent and to assist the Hanagement Committee I and the Boards in implementation of this Agreement, various cons:ittees (in addition to the Management Committee) shall be appointed. They shall be as follows: the Power Supply Committee, the Audit Committee, and the Operating and Engineering Planning
- Conunittee and such other committees as created by thi' Pool Board.
~
Section 5. Power Suoply Cocanittee. The existing Power Supply-
! Committee of SOYLAND and of WIPCO shall serve as a Joint Powqtr j Supply Committee for the Pool. The Joint Power Supply Committee shall be composed of eight directors from Soyland and seven directors from WIPCO End said Committee shall be responsible for advising the Management Committee on all matters pertaining to this Agreement,'and the operation of the combined power supply system. l l The Power Supply Committee shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once quarterly. The Power Supply Cossnittee shall
~
i
. .. i
(
l review at its mid-year meeting the annual plan submitted by the j f
- Management Comittee. .
. I Section 6. Audit Comittee. The Parties shall each appoint !
one representative to serve on the Audit Consnittee which shall have the duties and responsibilities set forth below:
i i
i A. The Comittee chall meet at least once !
, each month and shall confirm that the -
costs outlined herein are proper and j
j t= rect, and if vaquested by either party, j 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. l
. i
- ' B. The Comittee shall also audit invoices or i bills from other parties including i auditing the books and records of others.
C. A dispute between Members of the Audit l 4 Comittee shall be settled by the Pool ~
j Board. ;
Section 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 general duties and responsibilities to assure that Existing and j I
) Additional Generation an'd Transmission Facilities install.ed j hereunder are in the best interests of the POOL set forth below, i
subject to review by the Management Comunittee. ;
i A. The Committee shall be responsible for !
advising the Management Conunittee as to :
- performing or carrying out the terms and )
conditions of this Agreement as '
! they pertain to the day-to-day operation of the i i
POOL. .
i B.. The Comunittee shal1 he responsible for the reporting of all system loads, load j forecasting, and for dispatching of capacity and energy and for transmission system operation. j
- - - - . - _ - . - . - - - . . . - , - _ . . . . . . -. . - --_ - - - - .---.- - - I
! t
~
_9 C. The , Committee shall be responsible for ,
advising the Management Committec upon '
acceptance into service of all~
construction projects. l D. The Cocnittee shall be fully informed as to the operating standards set forth in 4 all POOL agreements to which the Parties !
shall subscribe, and shall have the '
responsibility to maintain within the POOL l conditions compatible with such requirements as may be set forth therein.
E. The Conmittee shall be responsible for -
joint system planning of the Transmission
! and Generation Facilities and for the i engineering criteria for the acceptance of l same as a part of the POOL. -
! F. The Committee annually shall prepare a .
long-range plan to meet reouirements of !
l the POOL, which plan shall include a j proposed in-service date or effective date .
zor each item or transaction recommended.
This plan shall be submitted to the Management Committee by July 1st of each year.
C. The Committee shall be responsible for necessary studies to ' determine future requirements of the Parties and, upon 1
approval of the Management Connittee, may
- retain outside consultants for such f i - purposes. The costs of such studies shall be shared by the parties as mutually
- , l l agreed. l i H. The Committee shall prepara and keep !'
i current all load and capacity tables for l
the Management Committee for capacity purchases, sales, etc . . . as may be l necessary to meet the requirements of the POOL. !
l I. The Committee shall perform such other !
i duties as provided for in this Agreement !
or as may be assigned to it by the !
Management Committee. -
l v
E i
[
r
- l i
, ?o ,
i ARTICLE IV DELIVERY OF POWER BY MEMBERS TO SOYLAND/WIPCO Section 1. Deliverv of Power. Each PCOL Member sh'all 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 set forth, the entire electrical output from any and all generating ,
i 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 I that the POOL shall not schedule energy from any such unit at a l rate: (a) greater than the safe generating capacity of such units i
)
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 ea'ch unit in said generating facilitied to be maintained in such a state of readiness or in such other state or condition as shall be i specified by the POOL. r Section 2. Character of Service and Deliverv Points Electric energy from the Existing Generating Facilities, if any,
- shall be delivered or caused to be delivered by each Member to the ,
j POOL as three-phase alternating current at a frequency of
- approximately sixty hertz at such voltages and points as are l
l specified in Exhibit 3 as exiisting points of delivery. Said points l 1 \
l may be deleted and additional points may be added, as required, to said Exhibit 3.
l l
~
11 ARTICLE V FURNISHING OF POWER AND EHERCY BY THE POOL
~
Section 1. Furnishing of Pouer and Energy. The POOL shall ;
j furnish or cause to be furnished to each Member, and each Member !
j shall receive or cause to be received from the POOL, all power and energy which each Member shall require in accordance with the terms ,
4 >
hereof. l t !
Section 2. Utilization of POOL Resources and Transmission j Csoacity. The POOL shall reserve all POOL Generating Properties, power supply contracts, and POOL transmission capacity in their
! entirety for the securing of power and energy for, and the furnishing of power to, the Members. All personnel of WIPCO and
- Soyland, excluding only those personnel associated with design, ,
l operation and maintenance of distribution'. facilities, shall be made available and utilized by the Pool at the direction of the ;
- Management Committee. The POOL shall have the right to use the
~
Transmission Facilities of the Members for the purpose of i.~ utilization of its resources.
i .
ARTICLE VI .
AVAILABILITY OF TRANSHISSION CAPACITY
~
Section 1. Availability of Capacity of Transmission Facilities. Each Member shall make available to the POOL, on the l .
l terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the entire capacity of 1
the Existing Transmission Facilities, and any Additional Transmission Facilities. .
Section 2. Connections. The POOL shall have the right at any time and from time to time to make, or cause to be made, any i I
i
..,---..r_r-.,r--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --.-~e --_-~__-.---% ----_-.-m---mem-- ----_..-e-.-,---r--.--w. ---,ce ---r. e-m--,
connection between the Existing or Additional Transmission i Facilities and any other facilities.
1 ARTICLE VII OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE Section 1. Routine Operation 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 i Generation and Transmission Facilitics (i) 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 Cocuserce, National Bureau of Standards: (ii) in confomity with established and acceptable electrical utility practices in the areas and (iii) in the most economical manner consistent with the aforesaid laws and ,
i standards. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, each l l
Member shall (i) make all repairs and replacements with materials j
{
of quality and specifications and at e standard of workmanship at
! least equal to those used in the construction of the aforesai,d l 1
i facilities: (ii) perfom routine generating plant inspection and i
I line patrols and properly perfom any necessary maintenance, ,
repair, and replacements: and (iii) carry out the purchase of ,
materials, supplies and services in the most economical manner. j
- t j Any repair, replacement, or maintenance cost on Existing Generation
{
and Transmission Facilities owned.or controlled by 'the POOL other j than routine must be approved by the POOL.
r I
ARTICLE VIII CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONAL FACILITIES Section 1. Ownershin 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 ownership interests shall be mutually j 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 Pool Board approval, j Section 3. Construction of Additional Facilities by a Member.
)
i From time to time it may be dasirable for a Member'of the POOL to j l ?
~
l be the owner of Additional Generating Facilities, Additional I i -
t l- Transmission Facilities, or to contract for additionci power 1
f l supply. Such determination and approval shall be subject to POOL j l
l Board approval, subject to the following can'ditions: l
- A. Determination of ownership of Additional i
Facilities or contract for additional l power supply shall be determined by the l POOL Board, based upon the best interests of the POOL and its Members. !
i
' ~ !
B. The entire cost , associated with the i additional facilities or contract for !
power supply shall be the obligation of !
the POOL.
l l
l !
l t 5
l
t
. ' ?. *. ,
_14 r
Section 4. Construction by Members. If loan funds are l obtained for the construction of additional facilities by a POOL L Member, said Member shall, subject to the conditions of the loan 3 i
agreement, construct the additional facilities or additional power j
! . supply involved in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, or l l
l the requirements of the approvals 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. j i
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, l 1985, SOYLAND and WIPCO shall combine their power supply costs, !
. . a 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 l t
costs, all transmission costs, administrative and general costs, l
! . i and all other proper system costs on a monthly basis for purposes j of determining total power costs of the POOL. Ther.e power supply l costs shall include all costs related to power supply billed by f i
others and incurred by the Parties. . i 4
- Section 2. Records. The Parties shall keep complete cost l j records to substantiate all of its. costs and expenses of facilities , f owned by each and other proper expenditures pursuant to this l
Agreement, and said records shall be available for an inspection by (
! I I
f
__ ~ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . , . . . . _ . . _ . . _ , - _ . _ , , _ _ . . , _ _ . , . . . _ _ .
.. r l
the duly authorized representatives of each Party at all reasonable f
- . L . : . '
.11 expenses and costs shall be prudent, proper, reasonable i i
and in keeping with good utility practices and are subject to j r
I review by either Party.
Section 3.
Division of Co.sts Between Parties. The combined ,
I costs of the Parties shall be divs.ded into Fixed Costs and Variable I Costs. Fixed Costs shall be allocated to SOYLAND and to WIPCO i based on SOYLAND's contribution to and WIPCO's contribution to the ;
maximum one-hour coincidental demand of the POOL on a summer and winter basis as mutually agreed upon by the Parties. Each Party shall pay its share of these Fixed Costs as so determined until ,
- cornercial operation of the Clinton Power Station. Variable Costs ,
i shall be allocated to SOYLAND and to WIPCO .on the basis of actual j l
kilouatt-hours sold. .
The division of costs as determined above shall be effective from January 1, 1985, until Clinton Power Station becomes commercial, even though the two Cooperatives be merged by July 1, !
i
~
l 1986. -
l i
Other revenues shall be allocated to the Parties in the same manner as above outlined. !
~
Section 4 Combininst of Costs. Combining of costs to the j I
l PCOL and charges thereto shall be as outlined on Schedules 1 and 2 l attached hereto end made a part hereof.
! Section 5. Payment of Costs and Expenses. SOYLAND and WIPCO i i
vill each pay its costs and expenses as incurred' directly which !
shall include all production costs, including ownership. l l transmission costs, including ownership, and administrative and
~
~
l 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 1
Office Box A1606, Decatur, Illinois 62525, and SOYLAND shall pay l
these expenses insofar as funds are available. Other revenues shall be paid to SOYLAND/WIPCO in care of the above address.
At the and of each accounting month, total power costs in 4
accordance with Schedule 2, shall be determined and the Party owing the difference shall make payment to the other Party as provided 5.n
~
Article X.
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.
i .
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 as required in proportion to SOYLAND's and WIPCO's power cost responsibilities as datermined in accordance with the principles of ,
Section 3 hereof.
i I
I
., _ . . _ _ _._ , ~ .- ._ ,
,' _17 Section 7. Contribution of Funds By Parties. SOYLAND and WIPCO agree that it is desirable to reduce future debt requirements related to Clinton. In order to do so, the Parties will generate cash from their Members by additions to their power costs in an amount equal to Eighty Million Dollars ($80,000,000) of which WIPCO I
shall obtain Thirty-Eight Million Dollars ($38,000,000) and SOYLAND l vill obtain Forty-Two Million Dollars ($42,000,000). The i 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. l l
Such annual sums shall not be less than those showri by Exhibit 4. ;
1 ARTICLE X ;
ACCOUNTING AND PAYMENT
- Section 1. Billing Aaent. The POOL Board shall designate a l l
Member as Accounting and Billing Agent. The duties of the Billing !
l, _ e i Agent shall include, but not be limited to, maintaining the records l
l ?
of the POOL and billing, paying and/or crediting the Members of the POOL. -
i i
Section 2. Records. Each Member shall maintain, or cause to !
be maintained, accurate records, in such form and manner as may be ;
i prescribed or approved by the POOL and REA of (a) the respective j r
components of the Annual Costs and matters relating thereto, (b) l 1 monthly costs related to Monthly Rainbursement, and (c) such other !
i' matters as shall be prescribed by the POOL.
c 1 - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ . .
Section 3. Monthlv Accounting Stacements. On or before the 20th day of each month, !! ember shall prepare and submit to ch'e POOL
~
an accounting statement, in form prescribed or approved by the 4
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 i
day of each month (a) Member shall pay the POOL the amount above determined, 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 vaiver of the right of any Namber 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 l be delayed due to a question or contes't as to the correctness of I
any charge by the POOL or Members. -
~
ARTICLE XI l
INSURANCE -- INDDINIFICATION ,
i Section 1. Insurance for Generating Stations. The Parties will carry in the name of SOYLAND and WIPCO as their interest now or hereinaf ter exist, insurance to provide appropriate protection for SOYLAND and WIPCO from the usual hazards as owners and 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 s
j . ' '.- '-
19 i
reasonable terms, all-risk insurance coverage on breakdown of genuating 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, operated 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 determined i
l by the Management Committee.
Section 3. Other Insurance. The' Parties will carry in the name ' of SOTLA1C and WIPCO, as their interests now or hereafter Evnership exist, all other necessary insurance covering 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 Committee. .
Section 4 WIPCO Liability to SOYLAND. Except for fraudulent misconduct or willful action of VIPCO, and except to the er. tent such liability is discharged or indemnified against by insurance.
WIPCO and its directors, officers, agents, or employees shall have no liability to 50YLAND for any liability, loss, cost, damage, and expense, including attorney fees and expenses of litigation incurred or sustained by 50YLAND as a result of any act or failure
i i
' .'*, ~
i to act, whether negligent or otherwise, by WIPCO (or its directors, ;
, officers, agents, employees, or contractors), or any error or delay j i
whether negligent or otherwise attributable to VIPCO (or its i directors, officers, agents, employees, or contractors) in the course of work pursuant to this contract and in the course of any other activity under or in connection with the provisions of this
- Agreement.
i l Section 5. SOYLAND Liability to WIPCO. Except for fraudulent i misconduct or willful action of SOYLAND, and except.to the extent i . .
l such liability is discharged or indemnified against by insurance, ,
SOYLAND and its directors, officers, agents, or employees shall have no liability, to WIPCO for any liability loss , cost, damage, i
- . and expense, including attorneys fees and ' expenses of litigation
- incurred or sustained by WIPCO as a result of any act or failure to ,
i
- act whether negligent or otherwise by SOYLAND (or its directors, , ,
j officers, agents, employees, or contractors), or any error or delay !
- whether negligent or otherwise attributable to SOYLAND (or its
) directors, officers, agents, employees, or contractors) in the
- ~
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 !
l Agreement. !
l
) Section 6. Indemnification of the Parties. Nothing in this i
Agreement shall be construed to create joint or several liability l
of a Party for the acts, omissions, or obligations of the other Party. Subject to the foregoing, the Party shall have such rights l of indemnity and contribution between themselves with respect to i
i I
.. . _ . . - -. _ . - . , , , - _ , _ _ . . - . , _ _ . ~ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . - _ _ , _ . . _ . , . . - . - . . - _ - . . - - _ . . , _ , _ - _ _ . _ - . - - _ - . . . . .
. . t
~
f the subject of this Agreement as shall be permitted by law and {
t
{ cena.st.e:.c with the provisions of the Agreement. ,
j f
Other provisions in this Agreement notwithstanding, this !
Agreement shall not be construed as relieving WIPCO or SOYLAND from
. '*-ki14*y to the other Party for any willful action or fraudulent l
misconduct of WIPCO or SOYLAND or any action of WIPCO or SOYLAND !
i !
taken in bad faith which prejudices the other Party for the benefit I of itself.
j Section 7. Liability. Except as otherwise expressly provided j i
for in this Agreement, the liability of one Party to the other for
- j 2
any branch of this Agreement or default, the recoverable damages shall be limited to the actual direct damages suffered by the Party j i
so damaged and shall not . include exemplary, punitive or remote '
i
- j damages.
j In the event either. Party to this Agreement breaches or t
creates a default in agreements with third parties and the parties !
thereto, which breach or default results in the termination of said agreements or any of them with third parties, the Party hereto branching such agreements or defaulting shall be liable to the !
- other Party hereto for any and all damages resulting therefrom to l said other Party, said damages shall not be limited by the j provisions of the pret
- eding paragraph.
Section 8. Default. " Default" means the failure of any Party I to perform its duties, obligations and responsibilities under this i Agreement. The Parties recognize that a default may jeopardize the j investment of the other Party made pursuant to the Parties agreements with third parties, and deprive said Party of the i j i !
- l l
22- l j benefits of powez; pooling with other parties, including the defaulting Party and that the consequences of a default would be substantial. [
The remedies for default provided herein are and shall be in l addition to all other remedies at law or equity for the l
nondefaulting Party, f
- If the default consists in nonpayment of a Party's share of !
i costs or failure to provide the service obligated, then the i nondefaulting Party may pay said costs or provide the service and f I
the defaulting Party shall be obligated to reimburse said Party for !
the money paid or costs of service plus interest at 5% above the i
l 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. -l ARTICLE III i MERCER I
- i l Section 1. Agreement to Herme. The parties hereto agree to l
- l
- merge the two corporations. Said merger to be effective on July 1, I i =
i 1986, unless extended by mutual agreement. ,
! The merger shall be accomplished pursuant to the Illinois l Not-for-Profit Act, as amended (Chapter 32, Par. 163(a) ot. seq.
Illinois Revised Statutes).
l The parties shall adopt a plan of merger and submit the same to their respective members all as provided by statute.
l Section 2. Provisions of Merzer Aareement. The plan of merger shall in addition to other provisions as required by the statute and such other terms and conditions as may be mutually
.\
t
~
l ;
agreed upon will contain in suitable language the following conditions which will be binding upon the Parties after the merger j is effective.
l
- 1. The Board of Directors of the surviving corporation i shall consist of two directors from each Member of the corporation l having voting rights. At least one of the said two directors shall ,
be a director of the Member. [
- 2. The rates charged to each Member of 'he t merged
- cooperative shall be ' determined as provided in Section 3, Article 4
IX of the Coordination and Operation Agreemaht between the parties I,
dated Juiv 2t. , 1984, except that upon commercial operation l of the Clinton Power Station, the fixed costs and variable costs l for the former WIPCO Members shall be, increased by the following J
percentages for the years given, with the former Scyland Members t paying the balance:
! YEAR PERCENTAGE !
i
! 1987 and 1988 8
! ~
l 1989 and 1990 7 .
- l t
, 1991 -
6 -
4 1992 5 r 1993 4 l
i
. 1994 3 l l 1995 2 l 1996 1 '
1997 and thereafter . 0 l The above assumes that the Clinton Power Station is placed in i l commercial operation in January of 1987. However, if it is not, i j -
l
i . . .
i .
the time periods covering percentages above beginning with 1987. ar.d I i
1988 shall be adjusted to conunence on the first of that month'in i e which Clinton becomes commercial. .
I 3. Continuation of Terms of Coordination and Operation i
Aareement. The provisions of Article IX, Section 7 of the l
Coordination and Operation Agreement between the parties dated
- July 24. 1984, will cohtinue in force and effect f
- after the merger. ,
l ARTICLE XIII
. 1 1
CENERAL PROVISIONS l i
j Section 1. M6e of Installation and Access.
J l
A. Ea :h Party hereto grants to the other l
! . poraission to install, maintain, and i
!. operate, or cause to be installed, l l nuintained, and operated, on its premises, i l . any and all terminal equipment and i
, associated apparatus and devices necessary l
- in the performance of this Agreement. *
~
{ .
4 B. Each Member shall permit duly authorized '
- . representatives and loyees of the 700L j to enter upon its r ses for the purpose
- of reading or chec ing meters, inspecting,
- testing, repairing, renewing, or !
exchang g any or all of the equipment l owned the POOL located on such -
premises ,y or for the purpose of performing !
any other work necessary in the l performance of.this Agreement. I i
! Section 2. Rinht of Removal. Any and all equipment, !
j apparatus, devices, or facilities placed or installed or caused to l
be placed or installed, by either Party hereto on or in the premises of the other Party shall be and remain the property of the l
Party owning and installing such equipment, apparatus, devices, or facilities, regardless of the mode or manner of annexation or !
i i
i
_____.______.______D
l , ,
l.. ..
{
- attachment to real property of the other, and, upon the termination -
1 of this Agreement, the owner thereof shall have the right to enter i . .
l upon the premises of the other and shall, within a reasonable time, remove such equipment, apparatus, devices or facilities.
i l Section 3. Reliability and Adequacy of Service. Electric l
service rendered under this Agreement shall meet accepted standards ,
of reliability and adequacy. If questions arise concerning the j quality of service, factual data shall be obtained with respect to j the character of such service and appropriate corrective or i -
! remedial action shall be promptly taken by the Party at fault.
) Section 4 Continuity of Deliveries. ' Electric power and energy delivered, and transmission . capacity made available under ;
l this Agreement, shall be furnished continuously and/or as scheduled i ., l I
except for interruptions or curtailments in service caused by an j- .
l Uncontrollable Force, or by operation. of devices installed for i .
system protection, or by the necessary installation, maintenance.
l "
l repair, and repla, cement of equipment. Such int'arruptions or
- reductions in service, as hereinbefore set forth, shall not I
l constitute a breach of this Agreement, and neither Party shall be 1 -
liable to the other for damages resulting therefrom. Except in 1
t
. case of an emergency, each Party shall give the other reasonable '
advance notice of temporary interruptions or curtailments in service necessary for such installation." maintenance, repair; and
} replacement of equipment, and shall schedule such interruptions or l i
! curtailments so as to cause the least inconvenience to the Parties
{
hereto.
It is understood and agreed that Members shall not l l, schedule such installation, maintenance, repairs, or replacement in respect
}
l l
I
~
!.'- k of any of the ,
Combined Generating Facilities or Combined 1
- Transmission Facilities without the approval of the POOL. -
l .
- Section 5. Reports. Each Party hereto shall furnish to the other such reports concerning its eparations as the other Party may reasonably request from time to time, and !! embers shall in any j
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 i
! time to time, reasonably request. ,
1 .
{ Section 6. Audit. Throughout the term of this Agreement, 4
each of the Parties hereto shall cause an annual audit of its operations covering its audit year, to be made by a Certified l,
Public Accountant. The Members' audic shall include such
! information as shall be prescribed by the POOL.
A duly certified i
copy of such audit shall be furnished to the other Party within a i
reasonable period after the and of each audit year.- I Section 7 Assignment. Neither Party shall assign this i
Agreement'or any interest therein, except to the United States. of America, without the approval in writing of the other Party, and of '
i
- the Administrator of RZA.
l Section 8. Amendment. Subject to the approval of the 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 I writing duly executed by the Parties hereto. In ' the event any i
provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid or in conflict with any law or any regulation or order of any regulatory I
l -
i _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _
_ _ = - _ - - - - . . - - - . -- . _ _ - - - -
l
. '. s -
I '
l agency having jurisdiction, the Parties hereto will attenpt by !
mutual. written agreement to amend this Agreement, which amendment will eliminate such invalidity or conflict. !
l .,
Section 9. Governing Law. The validity, interpretation, and p:rf:- : net of this Agreement and each of its provisions shall be i
governed by the law of the State of Illinois.
Section 10. Counterparts. Any number of counterparts of this j Agreement may be executed and each shall have the same force and l effect as the original. -
1 l Section 11. Understanding. This Agreement shall constitute f i
the entire understanding of the Parties. l i
f Section 12. Mutual Assistance. Each Party shall assist each j i.
l of the other Parties in fulfilling and discharging the i
l responsibilities assumed under this Agreement and in making this f a
, Agreement productive and beneficial tp the stated intent. This undertaking of mutual assistance shall be limited only by any I
obligations of a particular Party which, in the judgment of that
- Party, . limit the assistance which it may provide. This general l 9
l task of mutual assistance shall not be deemed to replace or modify i in any respect the specific responsibilities and obligations of the ,
j Parties as described in this Agreement.
i Section 13. Section Hesdings Not to Affect Meaning. The descriptive headings of the various Sections of this Agreement have J
been inserted for convenience of reference only, and shall in no 1 way modify or restrict any of the terms and provisions thereof.
- Section 14 Relationship of Parties. Nothing in this i
l Agreement shall be construed to ereste an tasociation, joint f i
- -,,,m- . , ,e- - - - - -----%---.---r..----.--,------~------~m.----.--.------------,--,-m---.c
. ---m..- -w- - , - - . - , rv --- e v--
i ..'
l ,
J venture, trust er partnership, or to impose a trust or partnership covenant, obligation or liability for either of the Parties.
Neither Party shall be the agent of or have a right crr power to bind the other Party without its express written consent, except as expressly provided in this Agreement. (The Parties hereby elect to l be excluded from the application of Subchapter K of Chapter 1 of i
j Subcicle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended from :
time to time, or such portions thereof as may be permitted or i authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegee insofar ;
i l as such Subchapter, or any portion thereof may be applicable to the
{
Parties under this Agreement).
ARTICLE XIV :
EFFECTIVE DATE, TERM, AND CONTINGENCIES l Section 1. Aperoval by REA. This Agreement shall not become 4
effective unless and until it shall' have been approved by the ,
i g Administrator of REA.
- 1 i Section 2. Term of Asreement. Subj ect to Section 1 of this -
) -
Article. *his
. Agreement shall become effective for the tern beginning as of January 1, 1985 and ending at midnight December 31,
- 2025, unless axtended by mutual agreement of-the Fabias;-- ' ~
l 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 ,
1 l
sestually agreed.
l
- . Section 4 Remedies of Parties. Except as otherwise k
specifially provided, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be l construed to abridge, limit, or deprive any of the Parties hereto t
I l '
l i
. , , , -,,--,~,---c. - -.--, - .--,--, - -
. .g _ _ . .
_ . . . , , . . . - - ..-_...a_.m _.___a .mm#,.m__._.m_...__a.a__m_=
_.2-_m.g .m_ .__
. . a. j
! )
i
, of any means of enforcing any 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 i provisions hereof.
- l
{ Section 5. Univers. Waiver at any time of rights with i respect to a default or any other matter arising in connection with .
1 1 j this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver with respect to !
j any subsequent default or matter.
l i
j 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
i t
- WIPCO Executive Vice President l i
! . and General Manager ,
{
o Western Illinois Pdver Cooperative Inc.
i Righway 67 South Post Office Box 609 Jacksonville, Illinois 62651 SOYLAND Executive Vice President
) -
and General Manager i
i,
- . Soyland Power Coopera,tive, Inc. ,
t Post Office Box A1606 !
Decatur, Illinois 62525
- i 1
! Any such payment, notice, demand or request shall be deemed i
f properly given to or served the POOL if mailed to: I S0YLAND/WIPCO Post Office Boz AI606 i Decatur, Illinois 62525 i 1
The designation of the persons to be notified, or the addresses of 3
such persons, may be changed at any time upon written notice of the ,
j other Parties. I i : \
3 I i i
I !
i
..J
d -
- - Section 7. Gocd 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 Understandinz.. To the extent tL : any 'of the provisions of this Agreement conflict with the Memorandum of Understanding dated February 15, 1984, between
! the Parties, this Agreement shall supersede said Memorandum of .
Understanding. ,
1 i IN WITNESS W11EREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this
- Agreement in several counterparts all of which are duplicate
- originals as of the day and year first above written.
- i SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC., ;
l l 0$
By Wh -
Attest:
- l
[
l-Seal .
- s?2 Nil !
l WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER l
- COOPERATIVE, INC. l 1
- f. f By #M -- tr 1, :
l Atcesc !
I l
i l
5eal
/kA k- - .
\
- . . - - _ - . . - - _ _ - _ - . - - . - . - . - - _ . . - . -_-_ a
_ _ . . - _ - . . _ _ _ _ . _ _. . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ ___ ~ _ _ _ __
i
. ; o. .
EX:tIBIT 1-A
\ 1
'EXISTIMC CENCRATIO.' FACILITIES WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. .
< I.[A,,,g q Unit I
, 1 - 24 Mw (net) coal-fired steam unit i 1 - 22 Mwa,13.8/69 Ky si:ep-up transformer .
r
. Unit II .
1 - 24 Mw (net) oll-fired, internal combustion unit j 1 - 15 Mwa, 13.8/69 KV step-up transformer
- '. Switchina Station 4
4 1 - 6 bay, 69 Kv with main and transfer bus 3 - 69 KV line oil circuit breakers 2 - 69 Kv generator oil 1:ircuit breakers 1 - A9 Kv station service oil circuit breaker 1 - 2 Mva 69/2.4 Ky station service transformer * '
l PITTSFIET.D
!, Generators . ,
i 5 - 9.48 Mw (net) internal combustion, dual fuel, oil-fired units l 2 - 5 Mwa. 4.16/33 Kv. step-up transformers **
(
! Switchina Station - 34.5 Kv 1 - 6 bay. 34.5 Kv with main and transfer bus .
2 - 34.5 Kv line oil circuit breakers 2 - 34.5 Kv generator oil circulo breakers 2 - 34.5 Kv hus tie oil circut'. breakers Switchina Station - 69 Ev 1 - 3 bay, main bus 2 - 49 Kw line oil circuit breakers 1 - 49/34.5 Ky transformer oil circuit breaker 1 - Bank of 6 - 1(40 Kva f6 Mwa) 69/34.5 Kv stepdown transformer WINQtESTER Generators 5 - 3.2 Mw (not) internal combustiae, dual fuel, oil-fired units 1 - Bank of 3 - 500 Kva (1.5 Mwa) 4.16/34.5 Kv step-up transformer 1 - Saak of 3 - 667 Eva (2.0 Mva) 4.16/34.5 Ev step-up transformer
Switchina Station - 34.5 Kv 1 - 7 bay. 34.5'Ky main bus 3 - 34.5 Kv line oil circuit breakers
'l - 34.5 Ky transformer oil circuit breaker -
Switchina Station - 69 KV 1 - 5 bay, main and transfer bus 2 - 69 Ev line oil circuit breakers 1 - 69 KV bus tia oil circuit breaker 1 - 69 Ev station tie oil circuit breaker (to 138 Kv sub) 1 - 69/34.5 Ev, 10 Mwa transformer Switchina Station - 138 Kv 1 - 2 bay, main bus 1 - 138 Kv circuit switcher 1 - 138/69 Kv, 30 Mya transformer e .
e
- e .
e e
G 9'
P e
l E
e
., l
\
l
. i EXHIBIT 1-3
, EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES -
SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
J Soyland presently has no generating or related facilities
~
e J
9 e
e O
I e
- e 0
D e
e o
D e
e d
- e i
I L
l J
EXHIBIT 2-A (
l . j
! EXISTINC TRANSMISSIO: FACILITIES {
! WESTERN ILLINOIS F0WER COOPERATIVE. INC. .
i l Transmission Lines l l
Section Name Conductor Lanath in Miles j i
138 Rv !
l t 795 45/7 ACSR 19.00 f Jacksonville-Winchester 0.84 Turris Tap 336.4 26/7 ACSR Subtotal 19. 8 t. .
I i
69 Kv 2.00 Pearl Tap 4/0 ACSR .
j Winchester-Smith Junction . 3/0 ACSR 10.77 Winchester-Murrayville Junction 4/0 ACSR 8.40 j
Murrayville Junction-Jacksonville Tap 3/0 ACSR - 10.85 l 3.54 j Jacksonvile Tap-Fissah Junction 4/0 ACSR Berlin-Amos 4/0 ACSR 19.78 Fearl Tap-Smith Junction " 4/0 ACSR 8.68 j Fearl-Pearl Tap 4/0 ACSR- 0.57 l j Pearl-Kampsville 4/0 ACSR 9.42 l Amos-Athens Junction 336.4 26/7 ACSR 8.80 i Athena Junction-Sarclay 4/0 ACSR 11.48 [
Athens Tap 336.4 26/7 ACSR 4.50 l 4/0 ACSR 16.70 ,
Amos-Glenara
! 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 4/0 ACSR 14.63 i
- Fi:Sah Junction-Serlin 1.16 Pissah Tap .
3/0 ACSR l El Dara-Hadley Junction 4/0 ACSR ,
7.26 l Badley Junction-East Hannibal 4/0 ACSR 18.99, l l
Endley Junction-Kellerville 4/0 ACSR 15.51 l l
Smith Jur.ction-Pearl 4/0 ACSR 9.55 ;
Salisbury Tap - 4/0 ACSR 2.50 l Sast Lanesville-Lanesville 336.4 26/7 ACSR 0.92 l Nortonvilla Tap (1) 4/0 ACSR 7.65 )
l
! El Dara-New Canton 4/0 ACSR 5.96 l El Dara-Atlas 4/0 ACSR 7.63 l
Barclay-Lanesville 4/0 ACSR 7.27 l
Jacksonville Tap 3/0 ACSR 1.00 i N. Murrayv111e Tap , 3/0 ACSR 0.60 {
Foplar City Tap 2/0 ACSR 4.32 i Topeka Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.10 j Netwood Tap 4/0 ACSR 4.94 l Ipave-Smithfield Junction 2 FCWC 4.38 }
! Smithfield Junction-St. David 2 FCUC 14.30 Smithfield Junction-Smithfield 2 FCUC 1.40 Smithfield-Ellisville Junction 2 FCUC 8.96 l
=
i i
i i I
1 e -. . j Length in Miles I j
,. 6*ctirn Name. Conduceer ,
69 Rv (cont.)
Ellisville Tap , 2 FCWC 2.40 .
l l i R111sville Junction-DeLong 4/0 ACSR 17.27 i
Riveston-Fove11 ton 4/0 ACSR
- 9.70 !
Riv:ston-Sutter 4/0 ACSR 14.23 l 1,aPrairie Tap 2 FCWC 0.50 }
LaFrairie-Big Neck 4/0 ACSR 12.89 !
0.10 Bishop Tap 4/0 ACSR Newbern Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.90 4 Cakford Tap 4/0 ACSR 7.52 -
Middletown Tap 4/0 ACSR 10.34 f DeLong-Raouville 4/0 ACSR . 6.47 l Hardin Tap 4/0 ACSR 6.40 i l
Taylorville Tap 4/0 ACSE ,
3.38 {
j i
De:ver Tap 4/0 ACSR 8.52 l j scussels Tap 4/0 ACSR 11.80 1 Sugrr Grove Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.25 l Bluff Springs Tap (1) 4/0 ACSR 2.76 l Subtotal ,398.0!j i
'. l l
l 34.5 Kv I f
Wieh==cer-Hurrayv111e 3/0 A1 6.88 !
I Murrayville Tap 3/0 ACSR 1.30 Murrayville Junction-Roodhouse Junction 3/0 ACSR 7.59 l
Sreenfield Tap 3/0 ACSR
. 0.30 Crocnfield Junction-Carrollton 3/0 ACSR ,
14.05 M111 vie M inchester #2 CU 12.10 I
Gr enfield Junction-Roodhouse Junction 3/0 ACSR .
9.40 l Rampsville-Carrollton Junction 1/0 ACSE 7.70 ;
Pittsfield-Fittsfield Junction 3/0 ACSR 3 40 i F.ittsfield Tap 3/0 ACSR 0.50 i F.ittsfield Junction-Griggsville . 3/0 ACSR 15.00
. l
- Criggsville-Weelyville 3/0 ACSR 10.52 ;
l 0.51 Ne31yville Tap 3/0 ACSR Winchester-Neelyville 3/0 ACSR 15.13 Nealyville-Arensv111e 4/0 ACSR 10.41'*
I Carrollton-Carrollton Junction 1/0 ACSR 0.50 i Cerro11 ton Junction-Ridred 4/0 ACSR 7 32*
Rampeville-Rampeville Junction 4/0 ACSR 0.40*
l 2 FCUC 8.80*
Marblehead-Adams 1
Burton Tap 4/0 ACSR 6.90*
i l Quincy Tap 4/0 ACSR 3 80*
Rimskar Tap 4/0 ACSR 6.20*
l 1.34*
l Palmyra Tap 4/0 ACSR l BriShton Tap ,
4/0 ACSR 1.07* j Breeds Tap 4/0 ACSR 3.79* :
l -
1.12* l Money Send Tap 4/0 ACSE
- 4/0 ACSR 3.04* i Witt Tap l
Astoria Tap 4/0 ACSR 0.70* j Subtotal 159.0 Total 577.G l
- Censtructed 69 Ev .
(1) Anticipate in service by 12-31-06
_ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ . _ _ _ , _ __ _ I
I , ., L
. ' t, .
j p
I EXHIBIT 2-B EXISTING TRANSMISSION FACILITIES SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. -
I I
Coooerative Line Section voltane Conductor Miles !
C1"v Bible Grove Tap 69 KV 1/0 ACSR 4.00 h arathen 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 2.00 i Bible Grove (1 Iola-Culf 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.30 f Sailor SprinSa Tap (2) 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 4.30 l Subtotal 69 KV 14.60 !
l l
- I i
Clinton Boulder Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 1.80 l Shattue I Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR , 2.24 Shattue I - Shattue II 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 0.84 !
! Mascoutah Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 5.00' i Bertelso Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 4.05 l Beckmeyer-Keysgrt .69 Ky 4/0 ACSR S.42 !
Trenton II Tap -
69 Ev -
4/0 ACSR 3.80 .!
Subtotal 69 E9 26.15 I t
Coles-Moultrie Bethany - Sullivan 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 11.40 Charleston Tap 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 0.90 l
j East Charleston Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSE .90 i i
Fairgrange Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSE 4.30 i Lake Land Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSE 1.70 :
Mattoon Tap 69 KV 1/0 ACSR 0.05 l Sarah Bush Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSE 0.30 Sullivan Tap *69 KV 1/0 ACSR 11.50 l Union Center Tap 49 KV 1/0 ACSR 0.50 l' Bethany to Proposed Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR t 80 I
Subtotal 69 Ky 37.35 ;
Brue.e Tap 34.5 Kv
- 1/0 ACSR 5.40
. Subtotal 34.5 Kv 5.40 ;
. i 4
i
+
+
, 'Ce ntretig Line Sect $rn Volt.see Conductor g13es Corn 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 KV 4/0 ACSR 8.53 Cookaville Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 2.83_
Subtotal 69 Kv - 50.63 Eastern Woodland Tap 69 Kv 4A CWC 0.09 Fairbury Tap 69 Kv 2A CWC 0.72
. Jamesburg Tap 69 KV 2/0 ACSR 7.10 Anchor Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 7.90 Ciasna Park Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 2.50 Fapineau Tap- 69 ".v 4/0 ACSR 0.95 Subcatal 69 Kv 19.26 Edter Kansas Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.50 Brocton Tap -
69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 3.95 Terrell Tap 69 Kv 1/0 Stranded CU 4.71 Baldwin Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 2.85 t Subtotai*69 KV 16.04 Farmers Mutual Geneseo Tap 34.5 Kv
- 1/0 ACSR 9.76 Geneseo - Ladwig 34.5 Kv 4/0 ACSR 7.69 Subtotal 34.5 Kv 17.45 e .
t Illini Cifford Tap 69 Kv 2-3 Stranded Ctf 7.1 i Ludlow Tap ,
69 Ky 2-3 Stranded CU 3.7 Ludlow - Fisher 69 Ky 2-3 Stranded.CU 7.0 Sidney Tap 69 Kv 2-3 Stranded CU 17.0 Parkville Tap 69 Ev 2-3 Stranded CU 12.0 Longview Tap 69 Ky 336.4 KCHIL 4.8 Carrett Tap 69 Ky 336.4 KCHIL 3.0 Mahomet Tap 49 Ky 336.4 XCHIL 4.0 Subretal 49 Kv 60.60
=
. l l
Cooperative Line Section volcane Conductor Mies Illinois Vallev Oak Run Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 4.7 Burma Tap 69 KV 336.4 KCMIL 4.0
) . Subtotal 69 KV 8.7 34.5 Kv Wyanet - Tiskilva 1/0 ACSR 10.0 Sheffield Tap 34.5 Kv , 336.4 KCHIL 5.0 Troy Grove Tap 34.5 Kv , 336.4 KCMIL 2.5 Granville Tap 34.5 Ev. 336.4 KCMIL 0.5 Princeton Tap - 34.5 Kv ,. 336.4 KCMIL 3.1 Neponset . 34.5 KV 336.4 KCMIL 6.9
- Subcotal 34.5 Ky 28.00 McDonouah Industry Tap *
- 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 9.69 Brainer Tap 6e KV 4/0 ACSR 14.30 Breiner - Kinston 69 KV 4/0 ACSE 10.53 Spring Lake - Macomb 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 5.11 mi. 5.61 i 1/0 ACSR 0.50 mi. !
Table Grove Tap 69 KV g 4/0 ACSR 3.62 Subtotal 69 KV 43.75 l
gggg,3, Poe-Fults-Maeyscown Creek 34.5 Ev
- 4/0 ACSR 25.18 l l subtetal 34.5 Ky 25.18 f !
l l !
(3)
- $oon,rative Line Secti_og voltase Conductor Miles Shelbv Neosa Tap 69 Kv 1/0 ACSR 9.87 2
Subtotal 69 Kv 9.57 i
Blue Mound Tap 34.5 KV 1/0 ACSR 4.99 '
Lakewood Tap 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR 4.23 Fana Tap 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR 8.74 Taylorville Tap 34.5 KV 1/0 ACSR 6.57 Yantisville Tap 34.5 KV 1/0 ACSE 9.51 Subtotal 34.5 KV 34.04 s
1 e
Soutnwetten. 34syvilla Tap
- 138 KV 336.5 MCM 0.50 subtotal 138 Kv 0.50 1 .
Edsewood Tap 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 5.5 Wright's Corne*r Tap (2) 49 KV 336.5 18/1 ACSR _ltg.
. Subtotal 69 Kv 7.5
. 4 e
Ceafideece Tap 34.5 Ev
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 5.00 !
Settes Tap 34.5 Kv
- 334.5 18/1 ACSR 3.00 i
- Seftea Cgjap 34.5 Ky
- 334.5 18/1 ACSR 1.00 l
. Rene Tap 34.5 Kv
- 334.5 18/1 ACSR 1.75 Focahontas Shell Fump 34.5 Kv
- 4/0 ACSK 2.50 l* Werdes - Beliday Shores East Edwardsville Tap 34.5 Ev
- 34.5 Ev
- 4/0 ACSR 5.75 5.00 l
4/0 ACSR !
Maryville 'FTutt (2) 34,3 g, e 354.5 18/1 ACSR 3.00 Beliday Shoras East to -
) Estiday Shores West '
34.5 KV 4/0 ACSR Uc 2.00 l Beliday Shores West - Bethalto 34.5 Kv
- 336.5 18/1 ACSR 4 . 3 0_ __
Subtetal 34.5 Kv 33.50 i l 4 (4)
tocoorntive Linn Sectten voittr7 Conductor Milne
.t * .
AC Tri-County Fatoks Tap 69 Kv 4.00
- R Fatoka - Kinmundy 49 Ky 1/0 ACSR 11.75 Ashley Tap 69 Kv 4/0 ACSR 1.30 Royleton Tap 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 8.00 IrvinSton - Dix 49 Ev 4/0 *ACSR 9.50 Iuka Tap 69 Ky 2/0 ACSR 5.30 Zuka - South Sales 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 2.00 Bonnie Tap - Bonnie Sub 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 12.28 Bonnie Tap - Freeman Coal 49 KV 4/0 ACSR 0.25 Bonnie Tap - Barva 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 3.20 Bonnie Tap - Reserve 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 4.30 Subtotal 69 KV 61.88 Favne-White Phillipstown Tap 49 Ky 2/0 ACSR 3.00 Catsi-Crossville Tie Line 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 4.00
, Crossville - Emma 49 Ev 4/0 ACSR .11.50 Carmi 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 18.50 Kafield - Inland Steel Coal 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 6.50 Island Steel Coal - Diamond City 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 6.60 Diamond City - McLesnaboro 69 KV 4/0 ACSR 7.4C McLeansboro - Aden 69 Ev 1/0 ACSR 11.50 Aden - Mill Shoals 69 Ev 1/0 ACSE 7.80 Mill Shoals - BooServille 69 Kv ' 4/0 ACSR 16.00 BooServille - Albion 69 Ky 4/0 ACSR 14.00
, . BooServ111e - Boyleston 49 Ev 4/0 ACSR 13.50
. Boylestos - Wayne City 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 16.50 Sif Tap -
69 KV 4/4 ACSR 3.50 Clay City - Risard -
69 Ev 1/0 ACSE 10.00 Rinard - Jefferson 69 Ev
- 1/0 ACSE 5.50 BooServille Jeffersen Tie Line 69 Ev 4/0 ACSR 6.50 Jefferson Johnsonville 69 KV 1/0 ACSR 8.50 Johnsonville - Orchardville of Ky 4/0 ACSR .7.40 Wayne City - Aden Tie Line
- 69 KV 1/0 ACSR 9.50 Ashland Pipe - Line Tap 49 KV 1/0 ACSR 1.25 Orchardv111e - Keenes Tie Line of Ev . 4/0 ACSR . 7.50 Subtotal 49 KV 196.45 Bluford - Wayne city 34.5 Kv 1/0 ACSR _L,g,q Subtotal 34.5 Kv 5.00 Total 138 Kw Trememisessa .30 miles
. . Total 69 Ev Tremesission 352.75 miles Total 34.5 19 Trememiastem 148.57 miles Total 701.85 miles I : .
Cemetrusted ,fer 69 Ev '
1 Not is Service
- 3 In Servies 1984 ,
3 la Fervice 194S '
Transmission Switching Stations 1
i Albion ,
1 - 69 Ev oil circuit breaker !
r
[
Carmi -
l, 1 - 69 Kv oil circuit breaker
. I t
Clav City 1 - 69 Kv oil circuit breaker :
. i l
Crossville ,
1 - 69 Ev oil circuit breaker -
1 I
I !
. I
. i i
I L
i, o
. i.
(
i !-
! I l.
1 I .
t I
I I
i (6) [
. s EXIIIBIT 3-A EXISTING POINTS OF DELIVERY
~
WESTERN ILLINOIS POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
I. BULK POINTS Natering Delivery' Cooperative Deliverv Point Subs tation_s_ High Side Low Side Voltare Adams LaPrairie LaPrairie CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Big Neck WIPCO 69 Kv l Marblehead (Payson) Adams CIPS WIPC0 34.5 Kv Burton WIPCO 34.5 Kv Quincy WIPC0 34.5 Kv Illinois Hardin Brussels CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Rural Hardin WIPCO 69 KV Menard Greenview Middletown CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Cakford WIPCO 69 Kv '
Topeka Poplar City CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv '
Topeka WIPCO 69 Kv i
Spoon River Ipava Ipava CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv
- Smithfield WIPCO 69 Kv i
Knoxville DeLong IP WIPCO 69 Kv ;.
69 Kv
. . Ellisville WIPCO
- 69 Ky i St. David St. David CIPS WIPCO .
Western Elvaston Elvaston CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv Powellton WIPCO ' 69 Kv ;
Sutter WIPCO 69 Kv i Carthage 'Carthage CIPS WIPCO 69 Kv j Denver VIPCO 69 Kv ;
?
. i o
i
- . - , . _ , , , , . , , . - _ . , . , _ . _ _ , - , - - -____,,_,-.,.._.n.
~
r . l II. TNDIVIDUA1. POINTS -l i
Metering Delivery (1) l Cooperative Delivery Point _ High Side _
14w Side _ Voltage l
~ 1 l Adans Colmar CIPS 69 Kv ;
3 Kellerville WIPCD 69 Ky l Mt. Sterling CIPS 69 Ky :
Rushville CIPS 69 Kv !
Sugar Crove CIPS 69 Ky ,
Ursa CIPS 34.5 Ky l Illinois Rural Arenzville . WIPCO 34.5 Kv Atlas WIPCO 69 Ky Carrollton WIPCO 34.5 KV !
Carrollton Wells IRKC 34.5 Kv (2) 1 Kast Hannibal VIPCO 69 Kv K1 dred VIPC0 34.5 Kv I Creenfield WIPC0 34.5 Kv Criggsv111e WIPCO 34.5 Kv Hillview WIPC0 34.5 KV Murrayv111e WIPC0 34.5 Kv i' Naples WIPCO 34.5 Kv (3)
Neelyville WIPC0 34.5 Kv I New Canton WIPCO 69 Kv Nortonville (9) WIPCO 69 Kv Pearl VIPCO 69 Kv Pisgah WIPCD . 69 Kv -
Pittsfield WIPdo 34.5 Kv !
Winchester l
VIPCO 34.5 Kv M.J.M. Electric ' Brighton IF 34.5 Kv i
i Sunker Hill IF 34.5 Kv !
a Butler IP 34 5 Kv l Boney Bend (4) IP UIPCO 34.5 Kv i
- Jerseyville CIPS 69 Kv 4
Newbern (
CIPS 69 Kv :
, Nutwood ; CIPS 69 Kv . i l' Palmyra (4) '. CIPS. WIPCO 34.5 KV. !
Rinaker IP ;' 34.5 KV Staunton IP 34.5 KV Taylor Springs IF 34.5 KV {
Uitt IF 34.5 KV i Womac IP 34.5 Kv (
Eeadquarters IF 4.16 Kv (5)
Manaird Athens WIPCO 69 Kv Barclay, WIPCO 69 KV !
Bishop CIPS 69 Kv l Bluff Springs (9), CIPS 69 Kv Lanesville WIPCO 69 Ky {
i Mason City' CIPS 69 Kv 1 New Berlin WIPCO 69 Ky
, J
- . - - . , ,, . , . . - - -.- L
Hetering Delivery (1)
- Cooperative _ Delivery Point. High Side Low Side Voltage 69 Kv Menard Petersburg CIPS Saidora CIPS 69 Ky ,.
Salisbury WIPCO -
69 Kv Turris WIPCO (7) WIPCO 138 Kv (6)
Virginia CIPS 69 Kv i Rural Electric Farmersv111e CIPS 34.5 Kv Cirard CIPS 34.5 Kv Clenarm ii1PCO 69 Kv Harvel IF
- 34.5 Kv Lowder CIPS 34.5 Kv Sicily CIPS 69 Kv Taylorville CIPS 69 Kv Spoon River Astoria CIPS 34.5 Kv Breeds CIPS 34.5 Kv Wee-Ma-Tuk CIPS 34.5 Kv Western Lomax IP 69 Kv WIPCO Jacksonville Hdq. IP 7.2 Kv (8)
Note:
1._ All standard 12.47 Kv low side unless noted.
- 2. 240/480 v. lov side.
- 3. 2.4 Kv low side. -
- 4. Substation also serves Rural Electric Co., WIPCO meters each Cooperative.
- 5. 120/20E V. lov side.
- 6. 13.2 Kv low side.
- 7. Considered 138 Kv interchange with IP.
- 8. Single phase service, WIPCO owns 3 span 0.H. 16 7.2 Kv line and 300' of f 2 alus.16 7.2 Kv underground. .
- 9. Anticipating in service by 12-31-84.
l k
i l . ,
1 ;
3_
Transmission Switching Stations
- Kampsv111e bay, main and transfer bus ;
2 - 34.5 Ky line oil circuit breakers - -
1 - 34.5 Kv transformer oil circuit breaker j 1 - 69/34.5 Kv, 10 Mva, stepdown transformer i 1 - 69 Ev motor operated airbreak switch l Amos 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 espacitors -
East Lanesville 1 - 2 bay, main bus 1 - 69 Kv line oil circuit breaker 1 - 138 Kv motor operated circuit switcher 1 - 138/69 Kv, 20 Mva, stepdown transformer w o..... -
1 - 69 KV oil circuit breaker lurris 2 - 138 Kv motor operated circuit switchers .
e l
l .
- All have relaying, scos have metering.
i l
P
EXillBIT 3-B EXISTING POINTS OF DELIVERY SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
L. BULK POINTS l Metering Delivery Cooperative Delivery Point Substations High Side Low Side voltage ;
Clav Hard Bible Grove CIPS 69 Kv l Marathon Oil l
)
Clinton Beckmeyer Beckmeyer IP 69 Kv Keysport Shattue - Shattuc I IP 69 Kv Shattuc II -
l t
i cole -Moultrie Arcola Sullivan CIPS 69 Kv i l
Bethany(1)
Chicap L
Corn Belt Belt Line Belt Line East IP 34:5 Kv j Belt Line West ;
i
. t Cisco* Deland IP 69 Kv Pullerton I I
s i
Normal Normal North '.IP 34.5 Kv i Normal South i Sutter Hopedale CIICO 69 Kv Olympia t Parsers Mutual Atkinson Geneseo IF 34.5 Kv [
Ladwig l
[
i r
- Illini Ludlow Ludlow CIPS 69 Kv ;
Fhkr i i !
i Illinois vallev Wyanet Wyanet IP 34.5 Kv I I Tiskilva (1) Presently De-energized ;
l i
l b
Metering Delivery
- Cooperative Delivery Point Substations High Side Low Side . Voltage l
l McDonouth West Macomb Woodland CIPS 69 Kv '
Brainer Kington Macomb i South Macomb .
Industry l
. l Monroe Waterloo Waterloo IP 34.5 Kv Foo Fults Maeystown Creek Southwestern Bethalto Bethalto IP 34.5 Kv Boliday Shore West Edwardsville -
Edwardsv 11e IP 69 Kv (Marine) Fruit (2 Petersburg Petersburg North IP 69 Kv Petersburg South' Focahontas Focahontas IP , 34.5 Kv Shell Pump i
Troy Troy Norti IF 34.5 Kv Troy South Worden Warden IF 34.5 Kv Holiday Shore East Tri-County Irvington Irvington IP 69 Kv Dix ,
Fatoka Patoka IP 69 Ky Kineundy
. Iuka Iuka IP 69 Kv South Salem Boar.ie Bonnie IP 69 Ev Barva Reserve I . !
i (2) In, Service September; 1984 l
l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ , _ . _ _ . _ , . . _ , . _ . . . . . _ _ _ _ . - _ . _ . , .m . .. _ _.._ . . _ _ . . . _,
Metering Delivery Cooperative Deliverv Point Substations High Side Low Side Voltage Wayne-White Albion Albion CIPS 69 Ky I Boogerville Mill Shoals Aden i McCleansboro :
Wayne City '
l Boylestown l Diamond City
. Carmi Carmi CIPS 69 Kv Endfield Inland Steel -
Clay City Zi'f CIPS 69 Kv Rinard Jefferson Johnsonville
. Orchardville A~hland s 011.
Crossv111e Phillipstown CIPS 69 Kv (Phillipstown) White County Coal Emma e
P e
a O
i (3)
s t. ..
II Individual Delivery Points Metering Delivery goverative Substation High Side Low Side Voltage Clay Flora CIPS 69 Kv Iola CIPS 69 Ky Noble CIPS 69 Kv Sailor Springs 'I3) CIPS 69 Kv Xenia CIPS 69 Kv Clinton Bartelso IP 69 Kv Boulder IP 69 Kv Breese IP 69 Kv Ferrin IP 69 KV Mascoutah IP 69 Kv Trenton I IP 69 Kv Trancon II (3) SPC 69 Kv .
Colas-Moultrie Ashmore CIPS 69 Kv Bruce (Windsor)
- CIPS 34.5 KV Charleston CIPS 69 Kv K. Charleston (S. Charleston) CIPS 69 KV Fair Crange CIP,S 69 KV 3 Lakeland '
CIPSI 69 KV -
Mattoon (Dorans) CIPS - 69 KV Neosa CIPS 69 KV i
. Earah Bush -
CIPS 69 Kv l Union Center (Casey) CIPS 69 KV ;
.. i
- Corn Belt Argenta IP 69 KV 3 Armington CILCO 69 KV '
Cooksville IP 69 KV l Danvers IF 34.5 KV - i
, Goodfield IP 34.5 KV i l
Holder IP 69 KV Kappa IF 34.5 KV i Le Koy IF 34.5 KV i
- Lexington IP 69 KV l L~ily t I? 34.5 KV !
Maroa IP. 34.5 Kv i Parkside IF 34.5 Kv Saybrook IP 69 KV Tazewell CILCD 69 KV !
Wapella IP -
34.5 KV l DeWitt *
(4) 12.5 KV j i t i ;
I j (3) In Service October; 1984 l (4) Low voltage metering point IP has a K1dB meter (no tape cartridge) f (4) i
~
.e .'.
Mstoring. ~
Delivary Cooperative Substation High Side Low Side VoltcBe Eastern Anchor CIPS 69 Kv
-Buckley CIPS 69 KV Cissna Park CIPS 69'KV Clifton CIPS . 69 Kv Donovan CIPS 69 Ky Fairbury CIPS 69 Kv Gilman CIPS 69 Kv Ecopeston CIPS 69 Kv Jamesburg CIPS 69 Kv Papineau CIPS 69 Kv Paxton -
CIPS 69 Kv Piper City CIPS 69 Kv Sibley CIPS 69 Kv
, Watseka CIPS 69 Kv Wellington CIPS 69 Kv Woodland CIPS 69 Kv Edgar Baldwin CIPS 69 KV Brockton CIPS 69 KV Chrisman CIPS 69 KV Parrel CIPS 69 Kv Kansas CIPS 69 KV Marshall CIPS 69 Kv Paris CIPS 69 Kv West Union CIPS 69 KV ,
Illini , Garrect CIPS 69 KV Gifford - CIPS 69 KV Longview CIPS 69 Kv Mahomet IP 69 KV i,
Parkv111p CDS 69 Kv ;
. Sidney (Villa Grove) CIPS 69 KV l l ,
, West Ridge (East Tuscola) CIPS 69 KV !
Illinois Valley .
Altona -. --- - D -
69 KV -
q Annavan D 34.5 Kv :
4 Burns (Kawanee) D 69 Kv l D 34.5 Kv !
Deer Park (3)
Granville SPC 34.5 Kv 3 Ladd IP . 34.5 Kv i Mineral -
IP 34.5 Kv i Neponset IP 34.5 Kv ;
Norway
- IP 34.5 Kv l 1
Oak Run (Victoria) D 69 Ev l Princeton D -
34.5 Ky !
Sheffield
- D 34.5 Ev !
Troy Grove IP 34.5 Kv i Wedron D 34.5 Kv l
- Mineral (1111 asis Valley Readquarters) 12.5 Kv i i
e i
(3) Ia Service October ; 1984 .
i r
(5)
I f
-.7 - .
'e
..
- o Cooperative Metering Delivery Substation High Side 1.ow Side voltage McDonough Cameron IP 69 Kv
.Colchester CIPS 69 Kv Monmouth IP 69 Kv
~
Poneaah IP 69 Kv Table Crove (Adair) CIPS 69 Kv Monroe East Carondolet (5) spe gy Pountain IP Kv
) Millseat IP Kv i
New Athens . IP Kv Smithcon IP Kv
. i 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 j
Movesqua {
CIPS 34.5 Kv -
Neoga CIPS 69 Kv i Pana (Oconnee) CIPS 34.5 Kv [
Richland CIPS -
34.5 Kv !
l Shelbyville CIPS 34.5 Kv Taylorville CIPS 34.5 Kv [
, Velma CIPS 34.5 Kv r Wenonah 'CIPS 34.5 Ky I Yantisville CIPS 34.5 Ky f l
A Southwestern Altamont (St. Elmo) CIPS 69 Kv l Confidence IP 34.5 Kv ;
j _ Edgewood (N. Priana) CIPS 69 Kv -
?
Bookdale IP 12 Kv Maryville (5) SPC 138 Kv f l -
New Doug(las.Ramsev 5 L . . _ -
IF 34.5 Kv i SPC -.- 34.5.Kv. ...;
i Reno (5) SPC 34.5 Kv ,
i Sefton IF 34.5 Kv j Shafter IP 69 Ky i Smithboro IF 34.5 Kv l j Wrights Corner (5) CIPS 69 KV i Greenville Headquarters IP 12.5 Kv i Eersehoe Lake . IP 12.5 Kv j r
Tri<ounty Ashley (Radom) IP .
69 Ev i Royleton . IP 69 Ky j Lively Grove IP 69 KV !
Mt. Vernon IP 34.5 Ky ,
Marlow IP 34.5 Ky l
i i
(5) In servive dates: East Carond61st Deces6er 1984. Maryville August 1984, i Ramsey August 1984. Reno February 1985, Wrights Corner December 1984.
. 7
. Metering De liver r Cecoerative Substatien High Side Low Side Vcitate l
Tri-County (cont) Nashville IP 69 Kv I Odin IP 69 Kv Salem IP -
69 Kv Waltonv111e IP 69 Kv Woodlawn IP '34.5 Kv .
Mt. Vernon Headquarters IP 12.5 Kv i
W yne-White -
Grayville ,
CIPS 69 Kv Noble CIPS 69 Kv Norris City CIPS 69 Kv West Salem CIPS 69 Kv m o G
e .
e o
e I
i .
P e
6 G
i I
i
,. , {
. t ' ..
i EXHIBIT 4
. CONTRIBUTION FUNDING RETURN I The Eighty-Million Dollars ($80,000,000) Contribution of Funds i shall be returned to the Members as a credit against fixed cost to the Scyland/WIPC0 Fool. Credits shall be81n in the let full quarter following commercial operation of Clinton Unit I. j l
TEAR ANNUAL CREDIT' 1 $17,800,000 (
2 $15,500,000 f 3 $13,300,000 f 4 $11,100,000 f 5 .$ 8,800,000 - i 6 $ 6,700,000 f 7 , $ 4,400,000 !
8 $ 2.400.000 Total $80,000,000 !
l
. I i
- I i 1 i i
I i
e i
t
- i i
, i l [
6 i
- -