ML20206T024
| ML20206T024 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/17/1974 |
| From: | Kauper T JUSTICE, DEPT. OF |
| To: | Shaper H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206S994 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8609230079 | |
| Download: ML20206T024 (268) | |
Text
y7 2
== ** s i
~
l
- g. =r5 a- gg
. . ,.,. w% . , ,
p
} f22 874m. E '
' . ER ! ! .'? !!: 3 3 30 44s .
i
, "f4 0F gSECAttuty ,g g _
asmend E. maper, Rogeiro JAll 17 ftpa Asseeiste General Counsel
- 5. S. Atente Eastgy Commission .
tenshingtsa, D. C. 20545 ;
mes Whilities Gemarating Company, et a1
> Peak Steam Electrical. Station, and 2, ABC Docket Noe. 50-445 and 50-440, Desertment of Justice File 60-415-74 _
5 Dear att. S aper
. Ese have regensted eer advice persuant to the pro- i visiens ed section 105 si the Atomia Raargy Act of 1954, as ammaded by P.h 91-540, in regast to the above- i i
emptiones applicaties.
l App 18 east Temas Otilities Gemarating compear (TUG),
for itsens and as agent ser Dallas Power a Light company (n984, Samos atestria servies (TEs), and Tenas Power a Qt campmar (195J, has for a construo-tien pese&B Sur its Commaes Peak Steam Elastric Station, '
enite 1 aos 2. The desility will he loosted in somervell '
ame Emed Ceemties, Texas. Operation of unit 91 has been d
- 1md for Jameery 1990, with unit 92 to follow in j Jammasy 1982. Emeh amelaar unit' will iaa1'ada a 1,150 .
megewett alastrie gemarettag unit.
Asslioast '.
I TUS is .a sube141ary of Tenas Utilitime company (TU) .
the chamaaha Peak facilities as egent I TOS will for the j owners, DPL, TES and TFL. The three joint I ownere ase the operating electric utility subsidiaries l of TU. Together with TO's suasi.:!iarins, Texas Utilitias services Inc. ar.d Tswas ut:Licias rual co. spa.sf, which '
provida speelalized services for the operating craias, these ceWes comprise the Texas Utilities company system (Tocs).
l 8609230079 860916 PDR ADOCK 05000445 -
M PDR 635.
) 069359 r . ,.
_ . . = - . ..-
<?eJ:
The transmission lissa of the TUCS are interconnected and oomstitute an integrated system through wnich the out-put of the generating stations -is distributed. This output
- provides retail elec.ric service to 323 oities and towns, and wholesale electrio servicet to th.ee municipal electric i
systaas and 33 rural electrie co-operatives. The Tucs servios area oevers approximately 75,000 square miles in the aarth central, eastern, and western parts of Texas with
= an estimated populaties of 3.7 million.
E This represents I
about one-third the total area and population within the State of Texas. -
I For the 1972 fiscal year Tucs had total energy sales
~
of 37,341,387 segawatt-hours. TUCS had at tha and of 1972
( aet generating e=- eity of 10,929 megawatta of which its E- own installed oapeoity amounted to 10,767 megawatts. Tha TUcs peak load in 1972 was 3,285 megawatts. Tucs is the largest utility system operating in the State of Texas.
- Int..
- : _ xtM and Coor**== tion with others
[ OpL, TSS and TFL are ha of the Texas Interconnected
, System (TIS). TIS is a group of nine interomanacted electrio .
systems that operate threeghout the state of Texas. TIS .
g- ' is comprised of sia invester-owned and three pi'M icly owned -
electrio systems. The asabers of TIS have an oral under-r standing with regard to the minimum installed reserves and E- spinning reserv.te that seek member will maintain. The seabers of TZS also osodast various studies relating to the need for, and effects of, any future transmission and
- generaties osanges plammed by the members. Thus, member-ship in TIS allows eask
- system to obtain various benefits from such coordiastion that are not available to
- aca-members.
?
The members of TIS have in operation, under construction i or in p1 a number of 345 XV transmission lines which
[
will form var loops among the member systems to sub-
-p stantially improve the system reliability of oacn samber.
These interconnections will also allow power in:are.angss to improve the operacing aconomy of the members.
W e 2
= \
F il
'~ '
j Q
s r . - . . -- --- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
9 <
I 1
l l
(~
TOCS as well as es ottier ammbers of TZe operate ehe11v minia the stats et Teens. Tucs is set see a to segulation by the Federal Poues Ceemissies. ther le einese aer state regolatory bety in Tessa keries juris- l dientes ever ese rates ei electrie utilities. l l
l Es es poet, membeest19 is TES hee met been ase11shte to a11 et es elastase et.11ty e e aespuenhes system een*ime==
tes et ma*rstems in Tasse, sien~ to aske a osa- even th l
l betten to the seliability ed the hulk peues sepply et me .
asselte ed Astiemmet aeriew e !
as notes above, fgCS is the demisset heik power sey- -
plier la its sesvise emme ese eues see anatonne e demseest
~~
paties et the h==Aa= Sesilities 1e its aanvise esse. l
. es esamme et see entitsest sostem, easteim wees cessived, the l
hee atesses its et edek uns that As ame enese-assesse es sootsets es as eme11er
.e.ses.o.
la Sesame est g
.or
. 1. -
tiene as to ther that, to the perise es peg 15W i
' its .
to een immt to . as a e '
og h heet hees to to 3ettee e to sgostaaet, dated Jesseer
- Af 1974, sed d kesets.
..I.4 3e 4ts egen6M WW e$fings met it e611 anha the
~
- < p "
- e. .e.e pe. .eese oi.',Wisstie ene assie
' of resessess aet h ==4== essetene s u r A M N ,
time. 14 2 epistas, these shee14 provide sempetitore of -
App &icaat.ete onepetitive, alternativa nulk power supply seanses ast-embetaatially elimieses the grouado en which em sede to the Departemet by the emelles systems
, sees based. Ce the eamonge of these pelley h e 3
{ ,
n l
I 9 . .
1 4
1 -
s i
~ .u.
)
( i* ( -
l ams with the expostatism that the commission will include I
, them antitr:.st as canditions hear
- to the license, we conclude that an the i=sta=t app will ation. not be n=e====7 with respect to -
Sianerely yours, :
b M~f
~ Assistaat Attorney naral Antitrust Division ..
i Easlosure
?
6 k
F Y
f h
4 m
9 i
- -\
s1 .
5 L
i, t
i I . . . . -*
I
0 l
1
- p. , ,
C tan nm '
- tRutR l
999999 4'W
' l
$9991 lM 98 r
e 1
f t
l
= ,) ) ,
1 e
y -, ,. _ . ..-_y , . - ,_ ..._._y ,,, *___,.__..__,_.__._.-_m.,_ . . _ --_ . , _ _,
- f %, UNITED states Aa NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
i g ,. jI waammeTom. o. c. aosas .-
- $4*h ** January 8,1985 (focket Nos 6 !
Mr. M. D. Spence, President Texas Utilities Generating Company
- 400 North Olive* Street Lock Box 81 Dallas, Texas 75201
Dear Mr. Spence:
Subject:
Comanche Peak Review -
On July 9, 1984, the Comanche Peak Technical Review Team (TRT) began an intensive onsite effort to complete a portion of the reviews necessary for the NRC staff to reach its decision regarding the licensing of Comanche Peak Unit
- 1. The onsite effort covered a number of areas, including the review of allegations of improper construction practices at the facility.
On September 18, 1984, the NRC met with you and other Texas Utilities Electric Company representatives to provide you with a request for additional infor-motion in the electrical and instrumentation, civil and structural, and test program areas having potential safety implications. On November 29, 1984, i we reported to you on the status of our technical review in the protective coatings area and requested additional inferination in the mechanical, and miscellaneous areas. TRT reviews of construction QA/QC allegations and technical issues have progressed to the point where we can now provide you -
with the status of our efforts in the construction QA/QC area and a request for a program plan specifically addressing our concerns. Further background l information regarding these allegations and . technical issues will be published in Supplements to the Comanche Peak Safety Evaluation Report (SSER),
which will document the TRT's detailed assessment of the significance of all issues examined.
The TRT effort constitutes one element in the process of the agency's review of the Comanche Peak license application. The QA review group on the TRT was ~
comprised of about 20 individuals having a total of over 300 years experience in nuclear engineering, QA, and related fields. This group spent several months at the Comanche Peak site examining the construction QA progres in depth.
The TRT findings are provided in the enclosure to this letter. We have not proposed specjfic TUEC corrective actions as we have in previous reports from the TRT. We request that you evaluate the TRT findings and consider the implications of,these findings on construction quality at Comanche Peak. We request that you submit to the NRC, in writing, a program and schedule for completing a . detailed and thorough assessment of the QA issues presented in the enclosure to this letter.
/% -S50tt4012L 850108 -
(. ,f PDR ADOCM 05000445 ,
A PDR
g *M
- y. -
A.i_ p. -w.
i
( ;
. (~:t l' January 8, 1985 Your programmatic plan and the plans for its implementation will be reviewed -
and evaluated by the staff before NRC considers the issuance of an' operating license for Comanche Peak Unit 1. The TRT considers the construction QA/QC findings to be generic to both Units 1 and 2 and your program plan and schedule should address both units. This program plan shall: (1) address the root cause of each finding and its generic implications on safety-related systems, 4 programs, or areas, (2) address the collective significance of these deficiencies, and (3) propose an action plan from TUEC that will ensure that such problems do not occur in the future. Your actions should consider the use of management personnel with a fresh perspective to evaluate the TRT's findings and implement your corrective actions. Finally, you should consider the use of an independent consultant to provide oversight to your program. ;
The findings of TRT with respect to QA/QC allegations, along with the TRT's 4 assessments of your response to this letter, will be provided to the Senior .
Management Panel on Contention 5 established by the Executive Director on December 24, 1984 The Senior Management Panel will determine an overall NRC staff position on Contention 5 based on an integrated review of a number of sources of information concerning QA/QC at Comanche Peak in addition to the TRT findings, including information from the CAT team, the SRT team, OI, Region IV and the Hearing Board.
The TRT's overall evaluation of the technical issues and allegations is nearing completion. As we finalize information received in conversations with allegers, and further assess the implications of our findings we will inform q, you of additional concerns, as they arise. In the mean time, your examination of the potential safety implications of the TRT findings should include, but not be limited to the areas or activities selected by'the TRT.
. In order to fully discuss these concerns with you we are scheduling a meeting for January 17, 1985 which will be held in our office in Bethesda, Maryland.
This meeting will provide an opportunity to ask questions regarding these concerns prior to formulating your program plan. Additional meetings will be held at NRC request as your program plan is formulated.
This request f.s submitted to you in keeping with the NRC practice of promptly notifying applicants of outstanding information needs that could potentially
. affect the safe operation of their plant. Future requests for infomation of this nature will be made, if necessary, as TRT technical reviews continue.
Distribution Sincerely, Docket File RWessman RXeimig NRC POR HLivermore JCalvo LPOR RCTang CMcCracken .)
PRC System 58urwe11 Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director L8d1 F/F LShao Division of Licensing MRushbrook PMatthews Office of lear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated C CPTRT 0 ector C. W 8t v <
cc w/ enclosure: R sman VSNo ut H. L.< t<w . e t, See next page 1/7/85 1/ 1/ /85 '/' 1//T5 V ,
+
- - - - . . . _ - . - , , _ , _ - ~ _ _ _ - _ _ - - -
t 0
. (!
~
, Your prograsmatic plan and the plans for its fraplementation will be reviewed -
and evaluated by the staff before NRC considers the issuance of an operating license for Comanche Peak Unit 1. The TRT considers the construction QA/QC '
findings to be generic to both Units 1 and 2 and your program plan and schedule should address both units. This program plan shall: (1) address the root cause of each finding and its generic implications on safety-related systems, programs, or areas (2) address the collective significance of these
- deficiencies, and (3) propose an action plan from TUEC that will ensure.that such problems do not occur in the future. Your actions should consider the use of management personnel with a fresh perspective to evaluate the TRT's findir.gs
. and implement your corrective actions. Finally, you should consider the use of an independent consultant to provide oversight to your program.
The findings of TRT with, respect to QA/QC allegations, along with the TRT's assessments of your response to this letter, will be provided to the Senior Management Panel on Contention 5 established by the Executive Director on December 24, 1984. The Senior Management Panel will determine an overall NRC staff position on Contention 5 based on an integrated review of a number of sources of information concerning QA/QC at Comanche Peak in addition to the TRT findings, including information from the CAT team, the SRT team 01, -
Region IV and the Hearing Board. .
The T1tT's overell: evaluation of the technical issues and allegations'is nearing completion. As we. finalize information received in conversations with allegers, and further assess the implications of our findings we will inform you of addit.ional concerns, as they arise. In the mean time, your examination
. of the potential safety implications of the TRT findings should include, but not be limited to the areas or activities selected by the TRT.
In order to fully discuss these concerns with you we are scheduling a meeting for January 17, 1985 which will be held in our office in Bethesda, Maryland.
This meeting will provide an opportunity to ask questions regarding these concerns prior to formulating your program plan. Additional meetings will be held at NRC request as your program plan is formulated.
This wi.t. is submitted to you in keeping with the NRC practice of promptly l notifying applicants of outstanding infomation needs that could potentially
- affect the safe operation of their plant. Future requests for information of this nature will be made, if necessary, as TRT technical reviews continue.
Sincerely, i
. _huurres am *r ,4
. s .107," uTrHtor
. Division a Licensing.
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ enclosure:
h) See next page .,,
e
, , - - - - . - - , . y -, - _g yp.4.. -_ --.r .-- _
w.- -- _-.-e-----
COMANCHE PEAK ,
Mr. M. D. Spence , ,
President Texas Utilities Generating Company 400 N. Olive St., L.8. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 cc: Nicholas 5. Reynolds. Esq. Mr. James E. Cummins Bishop Liberman, Cook, Resident Inspector / Comanche Peak Pures11 & Reynolds Nuclear Power Station 12D0 Seventsenth Street, N. W. c/o U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Washington..L C. 20036 Conslission
_ P. D. Box 38 .
Robert A. Wooldridge, Isg. Glen Rose. Texas 76043 Worsham, Forsyths, Sampels &
Wooldridge , Mr. Robert D. Martin 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500 U. 5. NRC, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Dallas, Texas 75201 Suite 1000 Mr. Homer C. Sciurf dt Arlington, Texas 76011 Manager - Nuclear Services Texas Utilities Generating Company - Mr. Lanny Alan Sinkin -
Skyway Tower 114 W. 7th, suite 220 400 North ' Olive Street Austin, Texas' 78701 L. 8. 81 -
Dallas, Texas 75201 8. R.* Clements Vice President Nuclear Mr. H. R. Rock Texas Utilities Generating Company .
Giths and Hill Inc. Skyway Tower 393 Seventh Avenue 400 North Olive Street New York, New York ID001 L. 8. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. A. T. Parter hastinghouse Electric Corporatton William A. Buri:itette. Esq.
P. O. Box 355 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Suite 420 Washington, D. C. 20036 Renes Mteks, Esq. - -
Assistant Ai.i .. i General Ms. Billie Pirner Garde Environmental Protection Division Citizens Clinic Director P. L Esa 12548. Capitol Station tsvernment Accountability Project Austin,Tesas 75T11 1901 Que Street, N. W. ^
Wasitington, D. C. 20009 Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Citizens Association for Soend David R. Pigott, Esq.
l
( Energy Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe 1426 South Polk 600 Montgomery Street Dallas. Texas 75224 San Francisco, California 94111 Ms. Nancy H. Williams Anthony Z. Roissan, Esq.
CYEMA Trial Lawyers for Public Justice 101 California Street 2000 P. Street, N. W.
!'(). San Francisco, California 94111 Suite 611 Washington, D. C. 20036 l
I
, , l l
h~
COMANCHE PEAK .
cc: Mr. Dennis Kalley . .
Resident Inspector - Comanche Peak c/o U. 5. NRC -
P. O. Box *1029 Granbury. Texas 76048 .
Mr. John W. Beck Manager - Licensing Texas Utilities ElectricImmpany Skyway Tower-400 N. Olive Street ~
L. 8. 81 ~ .
Dallas, Texas 752D1 Mr. Jack Redding Licensing Texas Utilities Generating. Company 4901 Faiment Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20014 D
~ "h .
l.
. . . . ... ~- - .<
l n'
~
Enclosure .
Technical Review Team Findin'gs Resulting From Quality Assurance / Quality Control Allegations In evaluating the QA/QC program at CPSES, the Technical Review Team (TRT) com- -
plated the following: (1) interviewed Texas Utilities Electric Company (TUEC) and Brown & Root (8&R) personnel and allegers, (2) reviewed quality assurance records, selected affidavits, transcripts and depositions, and NRC Regional and Office of Investigations reports,.and (3) physically inspected hardware to evalusta the safety significance of quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) allegations at Comanche Peak Stama Electric Station (CPSE5).
1 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM TheTRTfoundtitatalthoughtheTUECQAprogramdocumentationmetMRCrequire-monts, the weaknesses of its implementation in several areas demonstrata that TUEC lacked the commitment to aggressively feplement an effective QA/QC program in several areas:
A. TUEC failed to periodically. assess the overall effectiveness of the j sita QA program in that there have been no regular reviews of pregram adequacy by senior management. Further, TUEC did not assess the effectiveness of its QC 1. W . ion progrus.
- 8. During the peak site construction period of 1981-2, TIEC esplayed only four auditors, all of whom had questionable qualifications' in technical disciplines. Although charged with overview of all site construction and associated vendors, these Dallas based auditors provided only limited QA surveillance of construction activities.
C. Repetitive NCRs were issued that identified the need to retrain con-struction personnel in the requirements and contents of QA procedures.
One corrective action request (CAR) dealing with inadequate construc-tion training and records remained open for one year. The identical problem was identified in a subsequent CAR, which still had not been closed at the time of the TNT's onsite review. .
j
- 0. The TNT found eeny exagles of incomplete and inadequate workmenship and ineffective QC inspection in TUEC's evaluation of the as-built j program. (See Section 4 for a detailed discussion.)
E. Some craft workers newly assigned as QC inspectors were in a position
! to inspect their own work and records. Site senegement did not view
- tDis lack of separation between production and inspection roles as a potential conflict-of-interest.
F. There were potential weaknesses in the TUEC 10 CFR 50.55(e) deficiency-reporting systam. Applicable procedums did not identify what types i- -9601t40130'850108 '
I :i PDR ADOCM 05000445 A PDR I . .
4
. . , - . - , , . . , , - , .-,,._.n-.,., _ . , - __-.,,,----,n-_ . . - _ . , . , - , _ - - , . . . - - , _ . -_ _ . _- -
of deficiencies constituted significant breakdowns in the QA program, b:" ,- nor how they should be evaluated for repodability to the NRC. Evalu-ation guidelines for reporting hardware deficiencies lacked clarity and definitive instructions and the threshold for reporting deficien-cies was too high. Specific past and present construction deficien- -
cies that were not reported by TUEC are listed in Sections 4, 5 and 11 of this enclosure.
G. The TUEC exit interview system for departing employees appeared to be neither well structured nor effective, as evidenced by the lack of employee confidence, ifnited implementation, failure to document explanations and rationale, and failure to complete corrective actions and to determine root causes.
H. The 8&R corrective action system was generally ineffective and was bypassed by the 84R QA Manager, as examplified in the following instances: - '
- 1. There were no definitive instructions to describe the types of problems that required corrective action. Minimal procedural instructions resulted in corrective action decisions frequently being left to the , judgement of the QA Manager.
- 2. Since June 1983, B&R had issued no Corrective Action Requests (CARS), and was substituting menos and letters of concern for this function. This shortcut had become a regular method of operation and appeared to bypass the CAR system.
I.- The TUEC corrective action system was poorly structured and ineffec-tive in that:
- 1. Controlling procedures were brief and general. ,
- 2. There was no translation of FSAA requirements on trending and no details on how trend analyses were to be accosplished.
- 3. Quarterly reports were not issued in a timely manner.
- 4. The method of categorizing problems by building did not assure meaningful trend analysis.
L A 1984 CAR report identified three items requiring action; how-mer, none had been takan. ,
- 8. CAR 029 ens used as a vehicle for a specific disposition rather I than for generic action, as intended by the CAR systan.
2 QUALITY CONTML INSPECTION l
The TNT evaluated the CPSES QC program to determine if it was functionally !
effective ahd if the QC system and organization effectively ensured consistent l quality of. design, procedures, processes and product at the' plant. The results of this review showed the following problems.
~
2 l
l
l
.g N
A. Based on the TRT review of about 200 fuel pool travelers, TUEC was D unable to maintain an effective and controlled QC program for fuel pool liner fabrication, insta1Tation,. and inspection. Typical fuel pool traveler irregularities were:
- 1. There was apparently a routine practice during construction of
~
the fuel pool that allowed craft personnel to complete a portion of the inspection report forms prior to the actual inspection.
Craft personnel entered the word "5AT," dated the entry, and left blank only the space for the QC inspector's signature. It appeared that the craft personnel were judging the inspection results prior to inspectioca.
- 2. .The data accompanying the signature for visual examination of an inside weld was changed to a date that appeared to precede the examinatio,n. .
- 3. Entries by the same inspector for two different inspections did not appear to match in that one, entry appeared to be written by another person.
- 4. The procedure number for a dye penetrant inspection was changed by an inspector different from the one who conducted the inspection. ,
- 5. The date for a dye penetrant inspection was changed by an inspector other than the one who performed the inspection.
- 6. Fuel pool travelers were found with missing QC signoffs for fitup and cleaniness. No proof could be found that some of the required weld fitup and cleanliness inspections were ever performed.
- 7. The TNT review disclosed the following irregularities with traveler entries in addition to those listed above:
(a) Data changes after the fact (b) Signeffs for functions out of sequence (c) Corrections after the fact (d) Changes to first party inspector data signoffs (e) Missing signatJres
- 3. There were examples of 11mi'.ed corrective action, including vendor-supplied pipe whip restraints that had received inadequata source inspections. Twelve NCRs were issued involving weld defects on these restraints. TUEC corrective action included paint removal from only a, sample of the welds and 21 restraints were selected for reanalysis; however, the TRT found no basis or criteria for paint removal or how tpe worst case restraints were identified.
The reviewrof allegations in the Civil and Structural, Coatings, Electrical, Test Programs, and Piping and Mechanical areas also indicata QC inspection deficiencies, as provided in our letters of September 18 and November 29, 1984.
~ .
G 3 e ,
9.m,---- . , - _ _ , ,. - _ . _ _ . . ,
, , - . . _ _. _,,,---4 . - _ _ . . , , , . , _ _ _ , , _ _ _ . _ . , , __
.3 T-SHIRT INCIDENT The T-shirt incident has previously been explored in many forums, including
. hearings before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. The TRT has examined this matter, but will not now describe all of the associated issues. Impor-tantly, however, the TRT believes that TUEC management failed to adequately investigate the incident to deteristne its root cause, but reacted as though the QC inspecto~rs involved were guilty of disruptive behavior. Of particular concern to the'TRT is the strong perception that TUEC QA management any have acquiesced to pressures and complaints from construction personnel and may have failed ta adequately support their QC workforce.
i 4 INSPECTIONS OF AS-8 HILT PIPE AN0' ELECTRICAL RACEWAY SUPPORTS The TRT conducted a series of inspections encompassing.as-built safety-related pipe sipport and electrical racewey support installations. These inspections -
were of completed systems or components that had been previously inspected and
, accepted by TUEC 'QCi as meeting the respective construction and installation requirements.
~
i A. Pine Suonort Inspections Tables 1 and 2 are indicative of the scope of the TRT pipe support as-built inspection effort. Of the 42 pipe supports inspected, 37 were randomly
- selected, while 5 originated from an alleger's list. Forty-six deficien-cies were identified in the supports inspected. Following are examples of the deficiencies identified and the applicable criteria. TUEC's final QC inspections of this sample' ranged from December 1982 to October 1984.
- 1. Component Supoort Welds:
l
! (a) Applicable critaria.
ASME Section III, IF Subsection and subarticles NF-4424 and NP-5360 set forth rules for examining welds.
84R OI-CAP-11.1-28 Revision 25. Paracrash 3.5.5.1 delineates criteria for the examination of welas, including inspection peransters for acceptable weld sizas.
The TNT found supports exhibiting welds- that did not appear to be in <
accordance trith the above referenced codes and procedures. l (b) Isamples of deficient welds l
(1)' Sunoert No. AF-1-001-001-533R. Diserspencies included porosity; insufficient sold legl facamolete welds and
- insufficient fill. This support was removed, scrapped, and completely rebuilt subsequent to the TNT inspection.
am
\
4
,( Table 1 Pipe supports in unit 1 -
Supports Inspected by TRT As-Built group -
842 Class 1 supports inspected 4
- Class 2 supports inspected * - -
14 Class 3 supports inspected 24 Hangers with problems 26 Total problems identified
~
. 46 Procedure adequacy problems 5 Hardware-related problems- 16 As-built drawing related problems 8 Component identification problems 2 Weld-related problems 10 QC record problems ,
1 Material identification problems 4 Welds inspected without paint by TRT 305 .
Welds inspected with paint by TNT 89 Total welds inspected by TRT 394 Welds needing weld repair 10
% of welds inspected
- 2. 5%
Supports needing welding repair 6
% of supports inspected 145 -
I No. of Supports g System Inspected Containment Safety Injection (SI) 1 Containment Reactor Coolant (RC) 6 Containment Residual Heat Removal (RNR) 2 Fuel Handling Component Cooling (CC) 11 Safeguards Residual Heat Removal (RNR) 1 Safeguards Containment Spray (CT) 8 Safeguards Domineralized Water (DD) 1 Safeguards Auxiliary Feedwater (AF) 8 Auxiliary Chemical Volume & Control (CS) 1 Safeguards . Main Steam (MS) 2 Safeguards Chilled Water (CN) 1
- All 42 pipe supports lead by the TNT had been previously accepted by site QC-e me 5
j i I}
Table 2 Pipe supports in unit 1* .
Probles' Catenary Haneer No.
No. of Problems Tm
- 1. Ile lacking device for threaded fasteners RC-1-901-702-C825 2 Har&are problain C5-1-085-003-A42K
- 2. Min. edge distance (en base plate) violated CC-M-039-006-F43R i Hardware prob.
l 3. Baseplate hele-lacetten dimenstens out of tolerance CC-M-039-007-F438 4 ' As-Sullt prob.
i CC-1-126-010-F33R CC-1-126-011-F33R i
CC-1-126-012-F33R
- 4. Spherical bearing / washer gap excessive CC-1-126-015'-F43R 4 Harh are prob.
. RC-1-052-016-C41K .
, RC-1-052-020-C41K MS-1-416-001-533R
- 5. Spherical hearing contaminatten SI-1-090-006-C41K 2 Hardware prob.
MS-1-416-002-5334 ,
- 6. Snubber adapter plate-Insufficient thread engagement MS-1-416-002-5338 3 Proced. prob.
SI-1-090-006-C41K g
- CT-1-013-012-532K
- 7. Insufficient thread 6d eng'at, threaded red
- RC-1-901-702-C825 1 Mar &are prob.
j (sight holes) ,
- alssine
! 9. Lead side of pipe clasp halves not parallel AF-1-001-001-533R 2 Proced. prob.
AF-1-001-014-5338 .
- 10. Pipe clearances w/ support out of tolerance CC-1-126-013-F33R .2 ~ Hardware prob.
AF-1-001-702-533R
- 11. Pipe clamp locknut loose AF-1-035-011-5334 1 Hardware prob.
f
- All 42 pipe supperts inspected by TRT had been previously accepted by site qc.
I l-
.-r , e , _ $ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
G v O<
Table 2 (Continued) Pipe supports in unit la -
Problea Cetenory llaneer No. lie. af Problems 'Tyge
- 12. Snubber / Sway strut alsalignment CC-1-126-014-F4SR 2 Hardware problee RC-1-052-020-C41R
- 13. Snubber cold set dimensipa does not match drawing CS-1-085-003-A42k 1 As-Sullt prob. i
- 14. Sad ber orientation does not match drawing CT-1-005-004-522K 2 c As-Built prob.
! Ci-1-013-010-522E
- 15. Ceaponent type /model as lastalled does not match SI-1-090-006-C41K ~ 2 Compon.k0 prob.
g drawing RC-1-052-020-C41R
- 16. No identificatica for support materials, parts, and CT-1-013-014-532R 4 Matl. Identific.
! components CC-1-126-012-F33R prob.
- CC-X-039-005-F43R l AF-1-035-011-533R Support not affected As-Bul'It prob.
l 17. SRP column line dimensten does not match BRHL 1
- Olsensten
- 18. Wald porosity excessive
- y M-1-001-001-533R 1 Weld-related prob.
- 19. Wald undercut excessive AF-1-001-702-533R 1 Weld related prob.
~ ~ ~
- 20. Wald length understaed AF-1-001-001-533R 1 Weld-related prob.
- 21. Wald leg er effective throat undersized AF-1-001-001-533R 3 9 eld-related prob.
l . RN-1-006-012-C42R CC-X-039-007-F43R
- 22. Wald called out on. drawing does not exist in fleid CC-1-126-013-F33R 1 Weld related prob.
i
~
- 23. Welds added in fleid are not reflected on drawing AF-1-001-702-533R 1 Weld-related prob.
numerous welds
- 24. Exces'stve grinding resulting in sin. thickness AF-1-037-002-533R 2 Weld-related prob.
j violations (weld clean-up) CT-1-013-014-532R
46 Total problems identified by TRI
- All 42 pipe supports inspected by TRT had been previously accepted by site QC,
I(' '
(2) Support No. AF-1-001-702-533R. Exhibited extraneous welding that was not documented on the as-built drawing. One of the required welds was undercut beyond the limits of acceptance (this weld was subsequently repaired).
(3) Support No. CC-1-126-013-F33R. Support drawing required a 1/4" fillet weld to connect item 5 to item 6. This weld was omitted in the field. -
(4) Support No. CC-X-039-007-F43R. A required 5/18" all-around fillet weld had an approximately 1/18" undersize weld leg for the length across the top flat of the tube steel.
(5) Support No. RH-1-006-012-C42R. An all-arouno 1/4" fillet weld connecting item 5 to itam 7 was undersized by 1/32" to 1/18" across the top. -
(8) . Support No. AF-1-037-002-533R. This support exhibited a s 1/15" to 3/32" reduction-in plate thickness and weld size due to excessive grinding of the weld at the base plate.
Base material thickness of the support plate was reduced beyond the limits of acceptance in three locations.
(7) Succort No. CT-1-013-014-532R. Excessive overgrinding of welds resulted in notching o"Y the sway strut rear bracRats.
This condition was-repaired subsequent to the TRT l
. , inspection.
- 2. Lockino Device for Threeced Festaners: ,
(a) Applicable critaria 5derticle NF-4725 states in part that all threaded fasteners, except high-strength bolts, shall be provided with locking devices to prevent loosening during service.
ASE 5ect. III. Div. 1. Mate mretation N. III-1-83-49R provides that the user should sat < sfy himself that any other device than those described in NF-4725 is capable of acting as a locking device under all service conditions.
Braun & Root A,,;et we 01-CAP-11.1-28. Attachment 2. Doeration 7.
Insoection Attribute n. , requires that all exposed threads be free of entraneous material.
CPSE5/FSAR. Parenresh 17.L* a states that the design verification procedure assure that drawings, specifications, procedures, and ,
. instructions most stipulations of related codes and standards.
10 CFR 50.5Me)C.) directs that the holder of. the construction pemit shal' not fy the NRC regarding each deficiency found in
- design and construction which, if not corrected, could adversely effect the safety of operations at any time throughout the aspected lifetime of the plant.
ih ^
l i---_-, . - - - . , - - _ . - - - - - . - , . . - - - - - _ . - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ __ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ - -
I (J -
There appeared to be a difference in locking devices on threaded fasteners for similar pipe support hardware made by two separate vendors. Whereas in some cases Nuclear Power Service Incorporated (NPSI) specified only one nut and no locking device, ITT-Grinnell required two nuts in those same 1
applications. If the design of NPSI andels indeed should be found to need *
. the locknuts or their equivalent, there could be hundreds of pipe supports x
instal, led without adequate locking devices. .
i The TRT found examples in Unit I where deficiencies existed so that TUEC was in potential violation of the codes, procedures, guidelines, and commitments concerning locking devices for threaded fasteners.
In spite of the requirements pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55(e)(1), TUEC did not report to the NHC the omission of thread-locking devices in the s Unit I nuclear safety systems and did not attempt corrective action until May 1984, when TUEC tastad previausly applied paint for thread-lock capability. That test was inconclusive, since it did not estah- ~
lish that the paint, an epoxy process, would reliably perfo m as an effective locking device under all service conditions and throughout the axpected lifetime of the plant. Further, TUEC could not identify to the TRT which paint was the seject of testing.
s TUEC had a potentially inadequate quality assurance specification No. 2323-AS-31, which did not cover inspection of painted threaded fas-teners. The paint was applied to ASME code-controlled, NF hardware per specification 2323-AS-30 (non-Q) whtch required no inspection. This issue appears to be generic for Unit 3.
. The TNT notes that TUEC did not initiate an NCR identifyirag the widespread probles of missing locknuts; only a Request for Information was generated, which TUEC could not locate for the TRT. An NCR, required by procedure, would have brought the probles and its ramifications to management atteve-tion and would have provided a vehicle for controlled, organized, and approved engineering disposition.
( (b) Examples of deficient locking devices.
Pipe support RC-1-901-702-C825 had a load bolt at a beam attach-ment which did not exhibit an approved locking device. (The bolt meterial. type was SA-307 grade A.) Additionally, pipe support C5-1-005-003-A42K had no approved locking device on the "special clasy" belts..even though the design drawing for this clamp' showed each belt with a nut and a locknut.
- 3. Minimum Edse Distance for Bolts:
-(a) Applicable criteria
- 01-0AP 11.1-28 Revision 19. N h 6.1 required that bolt heias in structural seaters sha'1 not be closer than 1-1/2 times the bolt diameter from the edge of the member ta the center of the bolt hole.
4
~
i t4 i i; s _ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
N
- . B s
F ASME Sect. III Div'. 1. Subsection NA. Apoendix XVII, Table
( -
XVII-2462-1(b)-1, gives specifically allowed einimum edge dis-tances for bolt holes (reamed, punched or drilled) at sheared or rolled edges of plates, shapes, or bars. .
(b) Example of minimum edge dista'nce violation
- The baseplate for pipe support CC-X-039-006-F43R, located in the
, component ecoling system, floom 249A, Fuel Handling Building, s violated minimum edge distance criteria for bolt holes. g
. 's
- 4. Base Plate Hole-location Otsensions: * '
s-(a) , Applicable criterion j Y' OI-0AP-11.1-25. Revdoh 19. Attachment 4 Paracraoh2,uber fabrication tolerances, limits a " hole centerline location to C 21/4" or as shown on the design drawing."
(b) Exahples of hole-location dimension problems 4 f
The TNT four.d the horizontal nember of Support CC-1-126-010-F33R i was 3 inches lower at its centerline relative to the upper halt-hole centerline than shown on the vertfor-certified drawing.1,The i, '\-
as-built drawing had not been revised to reflect the actuah' \ >
installed condition in the plant. This support was locateo in [ .. ' >
thecomponentcoolingsystem, Room 247A,intheFuelHand1N;g /s .
Building. Other supports with similar hole-location violations 7}
found in the inspections' were: CC-X-039-007-F43R, CC-1-126-011-F33R, and CC-1-126-012-F33R.
} g(,
~ 5. Scherical Bearino Gao: ' ? ,r s
i
,5 (a) Applicable criterion Brown &RootProcedure.01-0APidi-28. Revision 25 caracrash 2.7.3.1 states that "a sufficient number of spccars .'
shall De used to prevent the spheical bes. rings from becoming ,,
dislodged," and "in no case shall'the resulting gap De more than' o [i tha thickness of one vendor-supplied specar.'" g ,
- ; 2 l
(b) Esamples of spherical bearing gap deficiencies q An ascessive free gap existed between spherical hearing a.h ' 1 washers on the sway strut assembly 5 of ' support CC-1-126-015-F43R.
Other supports with similar bearins gas anomalies found in TRT's inspections were: RC-1-052-016-C41K, RC-1-052-020-C41K, and MS-1-415-001-533R. The frequency of this type of procedure vio-l 1ation in the TRT's limited inspection suggests that this problem. ,.
l is generic for Unit 1. . 1( <
l i t ,
. 8 y I i .1 ,
1g
\
h 4
\ .
1 -
~ -- - - - - --
- t . .
i .
l C , 6. Scherical Bearina Contamination:
-, ,s y
)p (a) Applicable critarion .
OI-0AP-11.1-28 Revision 22. Paracraoh 6.3.1 Note 2 states in part
- L_ .
. that " bearing internal and external surfaces shall be free of rust and foreign matarial, and bearing shall move freely within
&* 9 . '
the housing." .
l O (b) Examples of spherical bearing contamination N
l' The TRT found paint contamination in the bearings of both snubber assemblies on component support SI-1-090-006-C41X that severely 13 f+ obstructed the bearing cavities and limited their movement. This
, Class 1 component support is located in the Containment Buf1 ding
,. of the Unit I safety injection system. A similar condition .
exists on support MS-1-416-002-533R.
- ;w ' 7; Snubber Adapter Plate Bolting - Lack of Full Thread Encacement:
i3
- 9 af- (a) Appitcable criteria OI-CAP-11.1-28. Revision 22. Paracruoh 6.1, states that "all
) bolts, studs, or tareaded rods snal' have full thread engagement 4 s in the nut." ~
ASME Sect. III. Div. 1. 3ubsection NF. Subarticle NF 4711 states
/
i 'N that "the threads of all bolts or studs shall be engaged for the h full length of thread in the nut."
^
O
[
01-0Ap-11.1-28. Revision 25. Attachment 29 permits less than full I
thread engagement in threaded plates. This allowance for less than full thread engagement is a potential violation of the ASME Code Sect. III. NF-4711; no code case was invoked to set
(( h
'3 t aside this procedure. The requirement of NF-4711 that "the threads of all bolts or studs shall be engaged for the full s length of thread in the nut" also implies that there be a full length of a threaded hole in plates, shapes, or bars where the required threaded hole length is the same as the bolt' diameter.
Further, there is no evidence that partial thread engagement at (4
5 the sneber adapter plate connection has been given consideration in the design procedures for linear-type supports, nor does it i
appear that sufficient design mergins have been introduced to I
- allow for less than full-threaded connection. The TRT did not 4
check "as-built" analyses to determine whether any such varia-tiens from the design nere had been considered in the "as-built" j f _. stress calculatioso.
~
idhat is in question is whether any calculations had been made to
- o. address this particular thread engagement condition for each size snubber being used in the plant.
S N) f [
~
11 l .
1 L - _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _
.~
(T- ~ (b) Examples of lack of full thread engagement Snubber (shock arrester) adapter plate balt threads were insuffi-ciently engaged in all four threaded holes of component support MS-1-416-002-533R. The worst. condition was 0.095" short, or more * ,
than 25X less than full thread engagement. - Steilar lack of full thread engagement deficiencies was found on NF supports SI-1-090-006-C41K and CT-1-013-012-5321C l S. Threaded Rod Thread Encacemeni:
(a) Appitcable critarion l i
01-CAP-11.1-28. Revision 21. Paraarsch 6.3.2.a. directs that "QC i shall verify thread engagement if site [ sight] holes are present )
in the strut body." ;
. (b) Example of rod thread engagsment deficiency Sight holes were present in the strut body to verify threaded
, rod engagement. The rod was not visible through the sight hole for support RC-1-901-702-C825. .
(a) Applicable.critarion Of-CAP-11.1-28. Revision 22. Paracroch 6.3.1.1.b states that "the size of the cotter pins, when used, should be the maximum size
- tho' hole will accamsodate and shall be fully opened."
(b) Example of locking device deficiency >
Sway strut No. AF-1-001-014-533R had a broken cotter pin.
- 10. Load Side of Pine Clamo Halves Not Parallel:
(a) Applicaale critarina
'Of-0AP-I 1-21l. Rev. 25. Sec. 3.7.3.1 states that " pipe clamp halves,'n re'ation to attaching eyered end, shall be parallel."
l (b) Examples of halves not. parallel Clemp halves for pipe supports AF-1-001-001-533R and
- AF-1-001-014-533R werg not pere 11e1.
- 11. PJoe Clearances Outside of Allowable Tolerance:
f l (p) Applicable critacion l
QT-CAP-11.1-28. Revision 19. Attachment 4. item 3.b states "where the design shows 0" en one side and 1/16" on the other, 0" aust I be maintained while 1/18" 2 1/32" is required on the other side." ,
i
' @ 22 e
_- -. _ _ - _ - -. . _ - - . . . .. _ _ 0
i (b) Examples of pipe clearance violations O,m Pipe support CC-1-126-013-F33R exhibited no clearance on top or bottom, while the hanger drawing called out 0" on the bottom and 1/16" on top. A similar pro (1em existed for pipe support .
AF-1-001-702-533R. !
~
- 12. PJoe Clamo Locknut Loose: - - .
(a)
- Applicable criterion C"-CAP- H.1-28 Revision 21. Sect. 6.1 states that "unless other- '
w'se shown on the drawing, fasteners will be tightened securely."
(b) Example of loose lo'cknut A pipe clamp locknut for pipe support AF-1-035-011-5334 was found -
loose (less than finger-tight).
- 13. Snubber / Sway Strut Misalf onment:
(a) Applicable criterion 5, CI-QAp- n.1-28. Revision 18. Sect. 6.3.1.d states that " maximum sway strut sisalignment snall not excea 5' for ITT-Grine11 and NPSI from the centerline of the sway strut."
1 (b) Examples of misalignment 1
Pipe support CC-1-126-014-F43R exhibited angularity that exceeded this requirement. A similar probles existed with pipe sapport RC-1-052-020-C412.
(a) Applicable criterion 0"-0AP-11.1-28. Revision 24. Sec. 3.8.3.5.b states that "devia-t' on of more than 21/8" from the specified cold setting (AC dimension shown on the design drawing) is not permittad, unless authorized by a design change."
(b) Example of incorrect AC dimension Pipe sieport CS-1-085-003-A42K deviated by approximately la from the cold set dimension shown on the design drawing.
- 15. Support Confiauration Did Not Match Deswine:
(a) Applicable critation 01-QAP-11.1-28. Revision 24. Attachment 2. Coeration 3 lists the following inspection attribute: " support configuration complies with the design drawing."
Q g
(.] (b) Examples of configuration problem,s
. Pipe support snubber CT-1-005-004-522K was installed end-to-end opposite from the orientation shown on the drawing. A similar problem existed with pipe support CT-1-013-010-522K, where dimen -
sional discrepancies existed on the support drawing that detailed the orientation of the snubber. -
- 16. Component Tyne/ Mode.1 No. Installed Did Not Match'Orawino: ,
(a) Applicable criterion
.i OI-0Ap-11.1-28. Revision 24. Sect. 3.2.1.1 states that " vendor-supplied NPT stamped component supports shall bear marking (i.e.,
name plata) traceable to the design drawing."
(b) Examples of component identification problems.
Model numbers of installed snubbers for pipe suppo-t SI-1-090-006-C41K did not match the model number or the design drawing. A similar problem existed with pipe supp:rt RC-1-052-020-C41R. .
i
- 17. M d Data Card Missino QC Initials For Welds: .
' ~
(a) Appifcable critarion QI-CAP-:,1.1-28. Rev. 25. Paracraoh 3.5.3 Welder and weldino Materia' verification states that "The QCI shall verify that the welder is qualified to make the weld utilizing the welder quali-fication matrix (attachment 18, typical), that the use of the WP5 (Attachment 17, typical), and the type of filler material listed on the WFML (weld filler asterial log] are the same as those listed on the weld data card (WDC), and the welder's sy e ol has been recorded on the WFML."
(b) Example of deficient weld data card Support number CC-1-126-013-F33R had some welds performed with no QC inspector initials or signature on the corresponding blocks of the weld data card for that support inspection package.
IS. Identification of Meterials and Parts:
h) Applicable criteria 10 CFR 50 Aeoendix 8. Critacion VIII states that " measures shall
. assure that identification of the itas is maintained by heat number, part number, serial number or cther appropriata means either on item or on records traceable to the itas, as required l
throughout fabrication, erection, installation and use of the itas."
@ 1.
t
i
(; LI-QAP-U.1-28, Revision 19, Sect. 3.1.2 states that "at U
Installation inspection, the QC inspector shall verify the hanger number, the material type, grade and heat number ... using the information provided on the Material Identification Log." ,
(b) Examples of material identification deficiencies 2
~
A replacement part (sway strut eyerod) for pipe support l CT-1-013-014-532R had no apparent material identification either on the hardware or in the documentati.on package for the support.
The Metarial Identification Log (MIL) did not list any identi-fication traceable to the origin of the replacement part. A similar problem existed with pipe supports. CC-1-126-012-F33R, CC-X-039-005-F43R, and AP-1-035-011-533R.
- 8. Deficiencies with Hich Rate of Occurrence _
The following pipe support inspections by the TRT were in addition to those already listed in the previous examples. Results of these ancillary inspections are summarized in Table 3.
The TRT identified six specific deficient items which need further evalua-tion to assess their generic implications. The TRT concern is that these items may have a high rate of occurrence throughout plant safety-related systems. The specific " frequently occurring" itans and relevant inspec-tion criteria were as follows: ,
. (1) Strut and snubber load pin spherical bearing clearance with washers was excessive (Ref. QI-QAP-u.1-23, Sec. 3.7.3.1 Rev. 25).
(2) Strut and snubber load pin locking devices (cotter pins or snap lock
. rings) were damaged or missing (Ref. QI-QAP-u.1-28 Rev. 25, which did not specifically address load pin locking devices).
. (3) Pipe clamp halves on load side were not parallel (Ref. QI-QAP-11.1-28, Sec. 3.7.3.1 Rev. 25).
(4) Bolts threaded into tapped holes of saubber adapter plates had less than full thread engagement (a " frequently occurring" deficiency; see related discussions on pipe supports, example 7 " Snubber Adapter Plata Bolting - Lack of Full Thread Engagement" within Part A of this section on as-built inspection).
(5) *Nilti Ibrik" bolts (concreta expansion anchors) as installed did not most minimum effective embedmont critaria (Ref QI-qP-11.2-1, Sec. 3.5.1 Rev. 18).
(5) Locking' devices for threaded fasteners were missing or of a non-approved type (see itas 2 " Locking devices for threaded fasteners" on p,ipe support deficiencies within Part A of this section on as-built 1,nspection).
l 1
I i
15
- .-. - . _. - == .
Table 3 Summary of additional TRT inspections
- (apy i f
- Area: Room 77N, El 810'-6" Unit 1, Safqquards 81dg .
No. of Supports No. of Supports Deficiency Insnected Deficient % Deficient Itam 1. Excessive 92 5 5.45 -
Spherical Bearing Clasrance .
- Itas.2. Load Pin Locking 92 14 15.2% I Device Missing Itam. 3. Pipe Clamp Halves 40 9 22.55 -
Not Paral,lel Itan 4. Snsditor Adapter 19 *13 to be Plata solts With detemined Lass Than Full Thread Engagement Area: Cable Spread Room 133, E1 807'-0"
- Unit 1, Auxiliary 81dg -
Deficiency solts Insnected Number Deficient %beficient !
Itas 5. Hilti Kwik Bolt 24 3 12.55 Does Not Meet
< Minimum Embedmont**
- Bolts had less than full thread engagement.
- Taking ints account the " allowed" slippage of the bolt for a distance of one not thickness due to torquing (Ref. " Installation of 'Hilti' Orilled-In Bolts" 35-1195-CEI-20. Rev. 3. Para. 3.1.4.1) and the minimum specified embednent, the above Hilti bolts violated the " effective" embedmont requirements.
9 O
O em
^3 .
The TRT undertook additional hardware inspections to ascertain the regu-
.11 1arity with which these specific items may exist. All accessible pipe supports in Room 77N, at the 810-foot, 6-inch elevation of the Unit 1 Safeguards Building, were inspected for " frequently occurring" defi-ciencies 1, 2, 3 and 4 listed above. To assess the level of occurrence of *
" frequently occurring" deficiency 5, electrical support 'Hilti' baseplates located in the Cable Spread Room 133, at the 807-foot elevation of the Unit I Auxiliary Building, were inspected. For details on " frequently occurring" deficiency 6, see item A.2, " Locking Dev. ice for Threaded Fas-teners," of the pipe support deficiencies, described above.
, ; C. ElectMcal Raceway Sunoort Insoections The TRT inspected electMeal conduit supports and cable tray hangers to the requirements of QI-QP-11.10-1, Inspection of Setssic Electrical Support and Restraint Systems; QI-QP-11.21-1, Requirements of Visual .
Wold Inspection; and other applicable instructions for conduit sgport and cable tray hanger inspections. All electMeal raceway supports included in TNT inspections had been previously QC accepted. Table.4 summeH2es the results of the TNT inspections not previously provided as part of our letter of September 18, 1984.
The TNT found the following discrepancies during its inspection of selected electMeal conduit supports and cable tray hangers in Unit 1:
- 1. Undersize Welds:
(a) Applicable criterion i
DCA 3464. Rev. 23. nace 3 of 32. note 3 states in part that
, " welding requirements as shown on various details should be read as the minis m requirement."
i (b) Examples of undersize welds Three of four welds on conduit support C120-21-194-3 (cable spread room) wars undersized. The required weld size was 1/4" at all weld joints, while the measured weld size was 7/32* to 5/32* for the full lengths of three out of the four welds. ,
Similarly, cable tray henger CTH 5824 (Containment Building) had 12 undersize welds. The all-around welds on the six horizontal beams should be 1/4" in size, according to details La and Le on Drawing FSE-00159, sheet 5824,1 of 2.
The measured size of these welds was 3/15" to 5/32" at each connection. Also, sgport IN-SP-7b exhibited undersize
. welds measuH ng 7/32" to 5/32" instand of the required 1/4".
em i
6 *.
h w--- .- --. . , - n_ , - - - , , - ae,--,--e-----m---.,-- ------- - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, ----
- ({.; Table 4 Summary of electrical raceway support inspection by the TRT - unit 1 Supp6rt welds inspected -
59 Supports inspected 5* *
. Supports with problems
- 3 (60%)
Tvoes of problems ,
Harthsere-related, other than welding 6 Unauthorized configuration change 1 ideld-related types of problems (categories) 2 .
idelds requiring rework 41 idelds made in field but no,t recorded on drawing 80**
8eam stiffeners added but not recorded on drawing 40 Buildina/ Area Sucoorts
~
Cable Spread Roce CTH 12646 C 130-21-250-3 C 120-21-194-3 Auxiliary Building CTH 6742 Containment -
CTH 5824 "All electrical supports inspected by the TRT had been previously inspected and accepted by QC.
- Full visual inspection was not performed by the TRT on these extra maids .
I l .
e e
en e
$ ,Y 6 g . s e
S6mg g ug g g g a
- Q , g, 8 L
,( 2. M1 solaced Welds:
, (a) Applicable criterion .
01-0P-l'. 10-1. Revision 29. Paracraoh 3.5.2. Assembly -
. Mnsoect on. includes the requirement to inspect a support for configuration. Paragraph 3.6.2 of the same procedure requires that support welds receive visual inspection and that nonconforming welds be reported.
(b) Examples of pisplaced welds During inspection of Hanger CT14-6742, the TRT found that two
. structural welds were made in 'the wrong direction. The 3/16" shop welds which , join MK-10 and MK-11 were made hori-zonta11y .instead of vertically, as shown on drawing .
FSE-00159, sheet 6742. QC Inspection Report ME-I-0024909,
. dated February 16, 1984, accepted all inspectable attributes as satisfactory prior to the TRT inspection.
- 3. Unauthorized Confiouration Chances:
(a) Applicable criterion OI-0P-:,1.10-1. Insoection of Seismic Electrical Support and l Restra' nt Systems. Daracraoh 3.5.2 includes the requirement for inspection of a support for configuration camp 11ance.
l '
(b) Examples of configuration change .
The TRT found that cable tray hanger CTH 5824 (Containment Building) had been fabricated to include 40 more stiffeners and 80 more welds than required or shown on drawing F5E-00159, sheet 5824, 2 of 2, Oetail Ls. Inspection Report ME-1-0006155 verified final QC inspection and acceptance on January 3, 1984.
Further, cable tray hanger CTH-6742 (Auxiliary Building),
Clip, MK-12, snould be 6" x 6" x 3/4" angle stock in accord-ance with F5E-00159, sheet 6742. The actual flange thick-ness of IGL-12 was 3/8".
- 4. Rilti Anchor Bolt Testa 11ation Deficiencies:
(a) Appitcable criterien 01-Op-11.2-1. Concrete Anchor Colt Installation, provided
. requirements for proper instal'ation and inspection of Milti anchor belts.
O .
19 1 -
(b) Examples of Hilti bolt deficiencies CTH-6742 *(Auxiliary Building) anchor bolt torque was not verified (paracraoh 3.5 of the procedure). Hilti bolts were
'not marked in accordance with attachment 1 of the procedure.
- r)or was the length of these bolts verifiable (paracraoh 3.2).
~
CTH-5824 (Containment Building) baise plate bolt holes had violated minimum edge distance--edge distance cannot be less than 1 7/8" (Attachment 2 of the procedure). Actual dis-tance was 15/8" to 13/8" from the nearest plate edes.
This condition affected five of the eight Hilti anchor bolt holes in the base plates for this hanger.
One Hilti bolt was skewed to more than 15 degrees. Maximum alloweble skew was 6 degrees without corrective bevel weshers (paraoraoh 3.1.2).
The Hilti bolt torque on this hanger CTH 6741 (Auxiliary Building) was not documented as being verified by QC (paragraph 3.5).
- 5. Undersize Nuts:
There was inconsistency in the application of nuts for SA-325
~
bolts in that both standard and heavy hex nuts were used. No stipulation was found which would permit the use of standard (neer-heavy) hex nuts. This condition is a potential violation of the Material paraorech 1.5, Soecification which provides ASTM that A325 (ASTM.
" heavy Part 4-197a),lts han structural bo and heavy hem nuts shall be furnished unless other dimensional requirements are stipulated...." 84A Orawing No. F5E-000159, sheet 5824, 2 of 2, required the use of ASTM A325 bolts for cable tray hanger number CTH-5824.
D. - Summary of pine Sunoort and Electrical Raceway Sucoort Insoections d The as-built verification effort conducted by the TRT provides evi-dance of faulty construction by craft personnel, installed hardware that does not match as-built drawings, and ineffective QA and QC inspections. Despite the small size of the TRT's sample, there appears to be:a large nielber of deficiencies. The potential also exists that these deficiencies are not represented correctly in tan final stress
, analysis.
ft' em e
C 20
l . ._.
5 DOCUMENT CDNTRDL (T
w The TNT evaluated the CPSES document control system to determine if it was effective and if it. ensured consistant quality 'of documents for construction practices and records. The results of this review showed the following .
problems. -
A. The TRI found that there was a potential for document control center (DCC) field distribution centers (satellites) to issue deficient document packages to craft personnel. Typical problems identified were: packages were not thoroughly examined; procedures and guidelines were not specific or were not followed; and documents controlling operation of the centers existed t
in the form of giridelines and charts rather than as controlled procedures.
B. The TNT found that many problems indicative of inadequata drawing control
, existed at CPSES from September 1981 to April 1984. These problems had l been identified prior to the TRT's evaluation by both TUIC and NRC ,
Region IV audits and reviews.
Prior to placing the satellites in operation (a phased effort between February and August 1983), DCC distributed drawings, component modifica-tion cards (CMCs), and design change authorizations (DCAs) to file custo-dians, welding engineering, the pipe fabrication shop, QC, and the hanger task forca. Doctment control through this systen proved to be ineffective.
In an attempt to correct identified ' problems, DCC satellites were created to distribute drawings ta field personnel, rather than use the file custe-diens. However, between August 1983 and April 1984, recurring problems with docuent control were identified. Exagles of the types of dociment control problems that existed between August 1983 and April 1984 were as follows:
^
- 1. , Drawings released to thei field were not current.
- 2. Druring and specification changes were not current.
- 3. Design docuentation packages were incomplete.
- 4. DCC did not provide the satellites with up-to-data drawings, CMCs, DCAs and document revisions.
! 5. Drawings hanging from an open rack, which had no checkoot control, i
were availan',e to craft and QC personnel.
- 6. Desip change logs.were inaccurata.
- 7. Desip documents were not always properly accounted for in DCC.
- 8. Chrrent and swerseded copies of design documents were filed together. .
- 9. $stellita distribution lists were inaccurate.
- 10. There were discrepancies between drawings contained in the satellites and those in DCC.
.g -
21
. l
)
{ 11. Somedrawingswereakssingfromthesatelliteflies.
- 12. Telephone requests for design documelits resulted in the issuance of dociments that bypassed the controlled distribution system.
In April 1984, top management took a di interest in recurring document control problems. Their efforts appear to have been successful.
For instance, in April 1984 satellitas 308 and 307 had error rates of 305 and 105, respectively; but by July 1984, these error rates had fallen to less than 1% for both satellites. The TNT has found that TUEC document control after July 1984 was adequate; however, the effects of document control inadequacies prior to July 1984 have yet to be fully analyzed by TUEC.
C. Deficiency reporting procedure CP-EP-18.3 appeared to relata only to craft and engineering personnel and was not directed to noncraft and nonengineer- _
ing personnel who may have had knowledge of reportatie itans. Procedure CP-EP-18.3 indicated that the appitcable manager was responsible for docu-menting and reporting Deficiency and Disposition Reports (00Rs); but there 9 were no checks or balances to ensure thac a manager or a designated substi-
- tute would process a DDR.
O. TUEC did not consider the CYGNA audit findings regarding the DCC as appropriate for formal reporting to the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 50,55(e),
as required.by procedure CP-EP-18.3; " control of Reportable Deficiencies."
E. The T1tT found that the OCC issued a controlled copy stamp to the QC depart-ment to expedits the flow of hanger packages to t.he Authorized Nuclear Inspector. Methods for this kind of issuanca and control of secti stamps were not described in TUEC's precadares.
8 TRAINING / QUALIFICATION .
The TNT identified numerous weaknesses during its review of the ASE and now-ASE training, certification, and quattfication of QC and DCC personnel. TUEC's training and certification prograp' lacked the programmatic controls to ensure that the requirements in 10 CFR 50, Appendix B were achieved and maintained.
The itaan identified by the TNT include those listed (below, in addition to the items previously provided in our letter of September 18, 1984.
A. Twenty percent sf the training records reviewed contained no verifica-tion of education or werk experience.
L The results of Level 'I certification tests were used for some Level II certifications rather then the results of a Level II test.
C. After failing a certification test, a candidata could take the identical' test again.
su.
6
- w-w,e~wn-wn-w--o--,----ea,a-www-e--m-w--m---w-v----w--w---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - - " = " * ' " " " - "- - - - - " ' ~ '
-(g. D. Certifications were not always signed or dated.
E. White-out was used on certification' tests.
F. Seven inspectors had questionable qualifications.
- G. There was no limit or control on the number of times an examina-tion could be retakan.
H. No guidelines were provided for the use of waivers for orthe-job-i training.
I. In some cases recertification was accomplished by a simple "yes" from a supervisor.
J. There was no formal orientation training for DCC personnel prior -
to August 1983.
i K. The responsibility for administration of the non-ASME training -
program was not clearly assigned to a single individual or group.
L. Non-ASME personnel capabilities were loosely defined by levels (I,II,III). '.
! M. There were numerous additional problems in non-ASE certificatios
- testing, such as: no requirement for additional training between
- a failed test and the retest; no time limitation between a failed test and a retest; two.different scoring methods ta grade a test i and a retest; no guidelines on how a test question should be i disqualified; no program for periodically. establishing new tests except when precedures changed; and no details on how the askinistration of tests should be monitored. -
1 i N. The exemption provision in ANSI M45.2.6, which allowed substitution of previous experience or demonstrated capability, was the normal method for qualifying inspection personnel rather than the exceptional method.
7- VALVE INSTALLATION The TET found that installation of certain butt-welded valves in three systans required removal of the valve bonnets and internals prior to welding to protect temperature-sensitive parts. The three systems involved were the spent fuel e cooling and cleaning systan', the beren recycle system, and the chemical and volume control systan. This installation process was poorly controlled in ,
that disassenhled parts were piled in uncontrolled areas, resulting in lost, damaged, or interchanged parts. This practica created the potential for inter-changing walve hennets and internal parts having different pressure and temswr-ature ratings.
l h ,
23 s
l . _ . __ _
t
\
t l l
e 1
'[, 8 ONSITE FA8RICATION The TRT findings' regarding onsite fabrication shop activities indicated that:
A. The scrap and salvage pile in the fabrication (fab) shop laydown yard was not identifi.ed and did not have restricted access.
I 8. Niterial requisitions prepared in the fab shop did not comply with the applicable procedure.
C. The fab shop foremen were not familiar with precedures that controlled the work under their responsibility.
D. Fabrication and installation procedures did not include information to
~
ensure that 844-fabricated threads confomed to. design specifications
. or to an applicable standard. i l ,
E. Indeteminate bulk meterials that accumulated as a result of site '
cleanup operations were singled with controlled safety and nonsafety, material in the fab shop laydown yard.
F. Site surveillance of meterial storage was not documented.
G. Work in the fab shop was performed in response to memos and sketches instead of hanger packages, travelers, and controlled drawings.
9 HOUSEKEEPING Ale SYSTDI CLEANLINESS TNT faspections at CP5ES indicated that the facility was well maintained.
However, two issues were identified that indicate housekeeping and system cleanliness deficiencies.
A. The TRT reviewed the August 8,1984, draft of flush procedure FP-55-08.
The purpose of this procedure was to verify the cleanliness of Unit I reactor coolant loops, including the reactor vessel, by means of hand-wiping, visual inspection, and swipe testing. Tests to determine surface chloride and fluoride contamination were perfomed by TUEC systems test engineers and Westinghouse representatives. The TRT notes, however, that FP-58-04 required only two swipe tests of the reacter vessel--one on the side and one on the bottom. This limited number of. swipe tests may not provide adequate assurance that the vessel had been properly cleaned.
L In reams 87, 72, and 74 of the. Unit 2 Safeguards Building, the TNT observed that not all snubbers were wespped with protective covering when welding was being done in close preaisity to them. This practice uns a violation of 844 precedure CP-CMF14.1, which required protec-t4en of installed equipment during welding. This condition was immediately corrected when the TNT reported it to TUEC QA management, and an inspection was performed by TUEC to correct similar conditions
- in other areas as well.
'h 24
-+=m.me--
l
~
O 10 NONCONFORMANCE REPORTS (NCRs)
.k-There were several weaknesses in the NCR and deficiency identification reporting systans. The TRT found that:
A. The TUEC procedure for preparation and processing of NCRs did not contain explicit instructions for handling voided NCRs.
- 3. NCRs were used as a tracking document to record removal of a part from equipment on a permanent equipment transfer rather than for reporting
, a nonconfoming condition; such usage of the NCR was not defined in procedures.
l C. There was an inconsistency between paragraphs 2.1 and 3.2.1 in pro-
! cedure CP-Qp-16.0. Paragraph 2.1 required all site employees to
, report nonconformances to their supervisor or to the site QA super- ~
visor, while paragrapa 3.2.1 required persons other than QA or QC l ,
personnel. to submit a draft NCR to the Paper Flow Group.
D. The NCR fom had no fem number or revision data to indicata that the j form was being adequately controlled.
E. There were two versions of the TUEC NCR form, one with and one with-out a space for the Authorized Nuclear Inspection (ANI) review. ,
F. The NCR fore had ne space to identify the cause of the nonconformance i
and the stape takan to prevent its recurrence.
G. The NCR fore had'ne prevision for quality assurance review.
M. The TNT found approxiustaly 40 different foms (other than NCRs) for '
i recording ' deficiencies. Many of these forms and reports were not l considered in trending nonconforming conditions.
l 11 MATERIALS I
! The as-built review effort by the TNT included a estarial traceability check on 33 of the same pipe supports that the TNT had field inspected. The material
' traceability was adequate for those 33 pipa supports, with the exception of four meterial identification discrepancies, as noted in section 4 on as-built
! inspections.
! In another case. TIEC failed to unintain meterial traceability for safety-
! related asterial and nimerous hardware crapenents. This QA breakdown was e identified in an ASE Code survey in October 1981 yet was not reported to the l IRC in asserdance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e).
i O
am.
\%
iV
~
25 I
l .
j
1 4
o 9
1
$ $ Nl N &
t seees mee RUR I $999995 f 95 Bf96 e
o e
l l . ,Y ,
r
- - - - , - - , , . -#-, . ,#-,. y , ,-. - ,,,,,,,,_-,7,_ ,_,____..._,,_.7__, . _ , _ . _ . , . _ , , _ _ . , . , _ _ , _ _ _ . , . . . , _ . , , , _ . _ _,_ _ _ , ,_
6 EW,e m c . - - - > %
Ihw;4,Aff,;W=m- ..
M I
gi.
p z. .
+b ,
k (29 W7 . ~.
)*
r RECD 8.3.0.
i JUL 14195 3
[ l SECURITIES ANO EXCHANGE COMMIS$10N n
4 o j Washington,D.C. 20549 l} 3
GMT FoRn 8-K a 15 ges f BecNdinformadonSIMlas l; G88"'*"S * .
CURRENT REPORT l
c Pursuant to Section 13 or 1C (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 i
1 0 ATE OF EARLIEST EVENT REPORTED - JUNE 26, 1981 h .
TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY Is
\ {
A Texas Comm8ssion File l.R.S. Engloyer No. 0-11442 Corporation j No. 75-1837355 I-h 2001 BRYAN TOWER, OALLAS, TEXAS 7520' li ,
l (214) 653-4600 1
l/
j l
l0 /or:L
. , : M g,' y' s'
Y. . ._ , I ..
4; Ja[(C 41 i . ,, .,, ,
h.' ' }^7(( - .
.p.
E- ., g. {.
_g, , , , .
y 7 ,
.L' [ -
4 k.
3 ITEM 5 OTHER EVENTS.
Reference is made to the Registrant's 1985 Form 10-K in item in 1 under Fuel Supply-Nuclear and Regulation and Rates-Regulation,
.g item 8 under Note 9 to
' Item 2 under Construction Program and inReference Is also made to the Registrant's Financial Statements. 1986 In Part 11, item 5, .
y Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, y, and the Registrant's Forms 8-K dated June 6, 1986 and July 1, 1986.
f j subsidiary of Texas Utilities Company, is a
The Registrant,two nuc lear-fueled generating units at the Comanche constructing On June 26, 1986, the Atomic Safety Peak Steam Electric Station.
and Licensing Soard !(A5LB), designated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to ' address Intervenor contentions relating to the Registrant's application for an operating license for Comanche '
Peak, Issued a Memorandum which addresses the Registrant's Comanche Peak Response " BoardTeam Concerns" about .
the adequacy of The Memorandum states that, based upon the ASL8's
+
program (CPRT). af ter having reviewed the first current knowledge of the program, results reports and the NRC Staff's Supplemental Safety Evaluation _
Report on the CPAT program, the ASL8 as continues to have concerns described in the documents '
expressed in earlier memorandums, referenced above. The ASL8 also raised additional concerns about how findings in one area of the reinspection effort may affect the Registrant's programs in other areas, whether suf ficient attention i
^
is being paid to problems of quality assurance and quality control and the adequacy of the CPRT sampling program, ')
regarding design, perceived oversights in one of the results reports recently The Registrant is addressing these concerns and will respond to the ASLB within the next few weeks.
The Registrant has previously reported that modifications would beof the p required on approximately thirty percent Unit I and that containment electrical penetrations would be replaced. Ic now appears that more c orrer,tive ac*lons will be that time, in the course of the '
required than was anticipated at design revienes being performed at Comanche Peak, additional problems have recently been discovered in several areas of the design of the plant. Some of these dlscoverles will refult in additional corrective actions which include reanalysis, revision or ij. $gs h 3 updating of existing design calculations, reinspection, These developments will and, in further
. 4 '.g y some cases, physical rework.
^Q f extend the time needed to perform corrective action and to obtain
. ".#/
increase the cost for
- QTp an operating license Prom the NRC and willDue to uncertainties regarding fu i JM this generating facilhty.reenalysis, reinspectioes and rework is ar.s the nat ha the hearing process before the ASL8 thereaf ter, the Registrant g$ 4N ' unable at this time to predlet how much additional time will be 1.
" I k QsC i j
f .
)m,yf g
3 7!ei,j., . F
>>jj'[ .7
-..j } [ h}
$V - '
155 k*' 5*[ .' ", ge ,'
[ 7[ [.M F
"=" - _ _ _ . - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _
c y l...,w !
)
required to obtain Ilcense approval tc permit the operation of Unit 1. The reanalysis, reinspection and corrective action and the hearing process before the ASLB cannot be completed in time for comnercial operation of Unit I for the Registrant's peak load in the summer of 1988 and the Registrant is, therefore, making other arrangements to obtain additional power supplies for such time.
- y. :) -' . ,
SIGNATURE Pursuant to the requirements of the Securitles Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
TEXAS UTit.lTIES ELECTRIC COMPANY By
- Date July 11, 1986 H. Jarrell Gibbs
- /
Treasurer and Assistant Secretary h
!4 e
[
i
- - - ~ ~ ..
a
_~
.Q*,; ' .
C N *
- Hl H 406 Sett 4
m eg :
- $9006
- I, M to 9999995 e tW M' .
m 1 e
O 9
. ..:;)
e- - - , - , - ,we . . , . . . _ , . -y._.._,-,w-- _- , . , . . .y_ - , ...,---,,--.--...-e-.- _ - - _ . _ , _ _ - -,.-.,.,,,--_-._.,,.._m,,,_,_,_,m_.-
- c .5,a- fysemer=%9s?l=pGwu.~:-tydf.Mu- -
___..._,.____.mg--w -z m x w w m ::~~ =
. : " ?l ? M e g ;-
c'oi-By couronvro r ed Cu Fr paand dminis e
ne sto trc i /
s A 2tr Rate Power '
of rn n eeto Divisio So uthw AGaEna:7 rm THE SAzz AND/ca xxCHMCE OF E!2CTRIC POWDL AND B3RGY Bi!3G3t THE UNITED STATES OF Al2RICA AMD THE TZIAS PCh5R & LIGHT CoffPAIY THIS AGaEDGET, made and entered into as of the 4th day of April,1947, by and between the WITE STATI3 0F AMllRICA, represented by the Southwestern Power Administration, an agency of the Department of the Interior (hereinafter referred to as the 'tievernment"), and the TZIAS POWER & I2GHT CWPANT, a corpo-ration organised and existing under the laws of the State of Texas (hereinafter referred to as the W 3), '
WITNISSETH, that, WHEREAS, the United States has constructed and is now operating under the supervision and control of the War Department the Denison Das Project on the Red River between the States of Oklahoma and Temas, for the purposes of flood control, stream regulation, navigation, and power production, and l
WHDtEAS, there is now installed and in operation one 35,000 m generating unit and construction work is now in progress on the installation of a second 35,000 W generating unit at the Denison Dem with a scheduled completion date of July 1,1948, and .
WHDtEAS, it is contemplated that the installation of a third 35,000 m generating unit will be undertaken at the Denison
s Dam as soon as funds are provided by the Congress for such installation, and ,
10EREAS, a portion of the surplus electric power and energy now being generated at the Denison Dan Project is being sold by the Govemment to the Comparar under and in accordance -
with the terms of a certain contract dated as of May 3,1944, and subsequently ==aded and modified, and a portim of such power and energy is being sold to the Oklahoma Gas and Electric 07amr under and in accordance with that certain contract dated as o5 April 13,1945, and subsequently amended and modified, and 16HRZAS, the Congress of the United States, under the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944, has directed the Secretary of War to deliver to the Secretary of the Interior all the surplus electric power and energy generated at, reservoir projects under control of the Disr Department, and authorised the Secretary of the Interior to transmit and dispose of such power and energy in such manner as to encourage the most widespread use thereof at the _
l lowest possible rates to eensumers consistant with sound *=4aams principles, at rates confirmed and ay,.s#M by the Federal Power Commission, giving preference in the sale of such power and energy to public bodies and cooperatives, and
)RGREAS, the Secretary of the Interior has designated the Administrator of the Southwestem Power Ad=4a4mtration as l
2 e
, - - - , . - ~ - , - - , . , , . _ , , - , . - - - - _
g _ , -- . , - . , , - - , . , - - , - - . - - - - , - -a,w_---,--,.--,-,.,,, . , , . ___, .-- -. _
t N his agent in marketing such power and energy generated at such reservoir projects in the aren Wiich is defined as , comprising the States of Arkansas and Inuisiana, that part of the States of Kansas and Missouri lying South of the Missouri River Basin and East of the 98th lieridian, and that part of the States of _
' Texas and Oklahoma lying East of the 99th Weridian and North of the San Antonio River Ensin, and i,
15EREAS, the parties hereto mutually desire to carry .
out the will of the Congress as supressed in the Flood Control Act of December 22, 19 M , and to utilise their respective gener-ating, transud.ssion, and distribution systems in the accomplish-i asnt thereof, and
)DEREAS, the Campany now owns and has in operation, trenesission and distribution facilities in the State of Texas Wiich are interconnected with the Denison Das Project through which power and energy generated by the Denison Dam Project can be marketed, and o
1853EAS, the Government does not now have the trans-mission and distribution facilities necessary to serve directly customers as provided in said Flood Control Act of December 22, i
19 4 , and does not desire to construct or acquire such facilities l
if existing facilities can be utilised for that purpose under adequate contractual arrangements with utility systems, and ,
1, ,. ..n l
l
_ __.,_____-____,.,_.4__,_, ..- . , ,--..---.y._,.._..c...,-_.
.N l
WGREAS, the Government desires to leave the way open for the sale, and be free to sell, to customare outside the State of Texas a portion of the power and energy generated at the Denison Das Project, and MGREAS, the parties hereto matually desire that the .
=av4== benefits accming from full utilisation of the Govern-ment's hydroelectric power developmente through their inter-connection and integration with each other and through inte-gratius of the Gmrernment's systen with the system of the Company shall be made available to power consuners of the area, and ,
WGREAS, there is now allocated at the Denison Dem for Project reservoir storage between elevation $90' and 6178 power production, and HEREAS, competent engineering studies, based upon the best available records of river flow, indicate that with one generating unit and the utilisation of the reservoir ca-pacity now allocated to power, there can be produced at the Denison Das Project, 140,000,000 I:Af of prianay and an average I
of 7s,000,0c0 Ks of secondary enersy Per year, with a second generating unit installed there can be produced the same samunt of prianry and an average of 127,000,000 Ih3 of secondary energy l
' per yeer and with a third generating unit installed there can be l 156,000,0(x) i 1
produced the same amount of primary and an average of
,n C:d IMH of secondary energy per year, and !
l I
4 ..-
. l l
r WHEREAS, present estimates of primary and secondary energy that can be produced hr the Denison Dan Project d11 probably be increased thawugh the effects of integrated opera-tion, and .
WHEREAS, the amounts of the primary and secondary energy that can be produced by the Denison Das Project mLght be changed by (a) a revision in the operating policy of the War Department.
(b) the possible future construction of additional reservoir storage on the Red River above the Denison reservoir or (c) othor ,
factors entering into their determination, and l
WHDtEAS, the greatest economic value of the Denison Das Project can probably be attained through the effects of the inte-gration of the Project M th the electric distributing agencies in
+
its vicinity; l
HOW, THEREFOKE, in eensideration of the premises acd of and in order
' the autual covenants and agreements herein ese*aineds ..
\
to carry out the policy and accomplish the purposes of the Co'ng ... '
22, 191.4, the as expressed in the Flood Control Act of, December parties hereto contract and ac. .
agrees with each other as follows:
y fi , . .
- 1. (a) The Government shall generate and deliver, and
' the Company shall'recette end accept, inte the Compar:y's systen untilthesecondgenerating.nditattheDenisonDasisinstalled
~~.
so notified by l
and ready for coercial operation and the o
- l Ch. '-
5 i
i
- n. -
i e'
the Government, 120,000,000 EWH of prinary energy per year as.
scheduled by the Company; provided, that the C77 shall not schedule power at a rate less than 10,000 EW, nor at a rate greater than 5,000 KW 1ess than the anziaman generating capacity, which, in the judgment of the Govemeent, can be safely sopplied byonegeneratingunitatthe[Denison. Dam. s
/
(b) The Government shall generate and deliver, I
and the C77 mhall receive and accept, into the Company's .
erstem until the second generating mit at the Denison Dam is installed and readt for commarcial operation and the Company so notified by the'Goverranent, such sWav energy, in addition to the primary energy provided for in Paragraph 1 (a) hereof, as, in the judgnant of the Government, is available for sale from the
~
~
Denison Das Project through the use of not to exceed 5,000 EW lees than the ==M== generating capacity, which, in the judgment of the Government, can be safely supplied by one generating unit at the Denison Dam. *
- . I . -
~
4 .W) L . - ___
a . . . ..
- - g _ . _ . _ _d li ted.-Ahe-a- /.e .
i.... . . . . ... , .
nemt man nam.ts IEstalled and.r==* ** commeercial'eparatien and the Company. As me notified.Mr thet.__ -i the Government shall generate 'and deliver, and the Cm shall receive and 7 .'o.;
accept, into the Company's systeau ,70,000,000 KWH of primary energr per year as scheduled by th3 Ccespany; provided, that the
. 6 *
- _ , , , . , . _ _ - - _ . , _ _ . . _ - - , _ _ , _ _ - .,_,._,.-rm._m -_ _ , _ - ---_..____-.eo, _ _ - _ _ . - . - - - - - - -- -
g . *
- . 9
..t-.
s lY Comparg shall not schedule power at a rate less than @.,
nor at a rate greater than the maxisman generating capacity, which, in the judgment of the Goverrament, can be safely supplied at arg a tias by one generating unit at the Denison Dam.
N (t) m u er sne ----.4 .__ _ ti g unit at the Denison Dam is installed and ready for operation and -
.s the Comparg so notifi,ed.nyd. *-Government., the Government shall generate and<teliver,,aand, e Comparg shall receive and accept,
. into the .GaWs system, o/, ne-half of the secondary energy, as .
herein defined, generated at the Decis/ 7 -- %
on F,/ ^ ( 7 e ,
total delivery of energy under Penagenphs g (a) and $ (b) hereof .
i-shall be limited from time to time and at arg time to the practical .
capability of the Compary's ' system and of those systems with which
{ the Comparg's system is integrated to receive and distribute such i .
energy.
{ .,,,,,',,',,.',,',,,,-
I enever in the judgment of the Government .', - .
secondary energy can be generated and delivered into the Comparg's system ~-^ _ T--.s J. e or'M 't) '._ _l and the Denison reservoir level is below the top of the power storage allocation in said reservoir, the Comparg any sch a receipt and accept-i ance of such secondary energy; providedfthat the Company Aan asmans all of the responsibility for arg loss ty the Comparg of secondary energy by reason of the discharge of the water 7
1
qq ..
i, ,
o \ -
sluices in order representing'such stored energy through t \
1; and provided further; to meet the requires =ts of flood power on any unit at the that the Company shall not sob 000 W nor at a rate ge mter DenisonDamataratelessthanj .
than the ===4== generating espacity which, in ths $4pprie,t cC ~
e atens rd ,
the Government, can be safely supplied at any tim !
such unit. . / . *. .. . . ,
~.. ,... ,, ,.
, ~
, After the third generating unit is installed
[ ,, ,,
)
and ready for commercial operatica and the Company is so notified zi Gv...._- t, the Government shall make. heaf-the capacity it the
of such third generating unit available for service to t'Je Company f I
in its schadn14y of the primary and secondary energy 1shich it is I obligated to receive and accept under 1-'[r'.
- ' :ND fbh -
! hereof, excepting when such third generating unit is required as j her two generating unit 2 at the reserve capacity for one of the 34 h ..ru.n. e #
~
~ w Dent.on o.m poser piant,AA> n u m & fo w; -4t m '
Ow ~f is instaned g"., r y w w h %MA _ b r the 7 f --
7 --
and ready for ecuman:ial opera ion and the Co
}
is so notified
^
',*\
s l
4, shall make avatlable to the (, e t ', ;
ty the Government, the C.. t of the espacity 6f the thsrd gener- {
causmar, in addition to . _ ^
. ;i; the,Comparg unske Paragraph 2 (d) i ating unit unde available , ,
ity of the third generating unit for
- i bereof, the . rest cf the ,
) , '/
. of primary and seoendary energy which it
- the Campany's schad=14 i
'J p ,..; l.. 1 ; $
s 8
b 4
r
w - --,.~---,,.,r,.- - - r -----.J .-------w.-.,-.---w- - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- e +
n -- - - -- - - - _ . _ _ _ _ _.
aq--
~ r e, ,
[' .
4 T ,
"\ is obligated,t2 r eive,and accept under P agraphs 2 (a) and 2 (b) hereof, opt when such third g ersting unit is required
\
as reserve pacity for one of the er two generating units in .-.
s the Dani Den power plant or for use tqr the Govemannt i,n )
3 -
t, .f .
)'N t
l tainine ts service to other amers on its system. t ^
Q n( ' 'o h;
.M . ..- ..;... . ..
aygs-
,. p < r - >- /. -lR) Tach of the first three main senerating units O jl t 'et the Denkson Den power plant put into comercial operation .
, during the tena hereof shall be maintained in comercial oper- l 1
- .ating condition W the Govemment thereafter (excluding '
periods /[/
/
fr.r inspecti m , maintenance and repairs, scheduled in advance iqr .
. e .
i . .
i
( '>. , i ,-
the Governmora with due consideration for the convenience of the
- f
/
S* , '
\ Company) until the temination of this Agreement.
I , , , , , . . ;
..2,... .-w me Gover-ent shan ha,e the right to to.
, art of the Cymr's gates at say point or points designated by
'i 'tirie Government electric power and energy for use tqr the Govern-us.t ja serving its oest customers in wholesale quantities, as a
, / f autkrised under the provisions of Section 5 of the Flood Control
!/ Act of December 22, 1914, to the extent and upon conditions as l '- '"
follows, to-wit:
i (I) It is recognised by the parties here-to that the right of the Government to take 3
l power and energy out of the Cr/w's syste l
hereunder is pdmarily for the purpose of l !
2 9
i
- Y s b
x g
i :
i i
r y s' s ;.
I i .
t q,
l l
C,
~
\
l serving public bodies and cooperwtives in l l
accordance with the preferenc's provided fo?
under the Flood Control Act of December 22, y l
1914, and the Covernment agrees to make dili-gent effort to dispose of all the power and I
energy taken out of the Campany's system to such preferred custamm s and that it will not -
dispose of any such power and energy to any customer outside such preferred class so long as such power and energy can be marketed by the Covern:as:.t within such preferred class.
In order to provide a reasonable tims to ae-complish auch primary purpose, the Government agrees that it will not dispose of any such power and mergy to any custcmer outside such preferred class until after the espiration of eighteen (IE.) :mths from the date on which servics begins hereunder; provided, that, in the event the Government thereafter disposes of such power and energy to a custamar or customers outside such preferred class, the Company may at its election at any time teruL-nate this A:,reement hy giving the Government (Q
3D "o
~ yJ 1
-. )
l
\
three (3) years witten notice to that effect.
i (D T1.e wf.ma decard of the G- ter:rmat (as hereafter defined in Paragraph 3 (b) p gjpgy. g g d, her.of) shan not be in exenes ot4. coo V
_r r tt tr.' : ....- g.
twee a u
~ ' - r n .: = 2 . _ , wr cEW5cral
'~
tt;tempetr1FYofUIe7d the wE t4 - :--
.GoressmenArwm o,wu El th~e reafter.
,( A) The Government shall give the Company thirty (30) days written notice of its inten-tion to take out of the Company's systemt any power and energy and the date (.m which such withdrawal shan begin, and shall promptly .
supply the Company with a copy of any con-tract or cor: tracts with the Govemment's customers which are to be served out of the Comparg's system, and shall notify the Can-pony as to the date on Wd.ch such service
, win begin.
(A)' The Company shan not be required to deliver power and energy to the Government
' which delivery requires the installation of new facilities until the Company shan have O u 4
, - , - - .u ,.- , p ,, , ----- . - - . - - .,--.,,,-----e --
(D had reasonable time in idsich'to 1.wtan such fac,ilities.
(/) The Company shall not be ree; aired to l deliver power and ene:'gy to the Government
{
or its customers fog delivery W the Govern- -
ment or its customers for service in any town or amicipality in iddch the Cw is now serving or nay hereafter serve customers ~
at retail; provided, that the Company any be required to deliver power and energy here-under from the Compag's 138-KV hp at its Payne substation for delivery 1qr the Covern-ment over the Govermeent's own lines, sub-ject to the p ovisions of Paragraph 3 (a) (7) hereof, to such tones or municipalities now onming and operating their com electric dio-
-i tribution systems. '
l The Compag shall not be required to deliver power and energy to the Govermaant er its customers for delivery to any customer i
or customers of any other privately owned utility ocupay having electric facilities directly interconnected with the transmission l
G .
- Y na e . .
9
( :,
l
. . l liaso of the Campaar end parchassag electric power and m ergy frem, er interchanging the saw ulth,,the Compaar.
(7) In the event and es lang as the Govem. ,
ment delivere power and energy for service to eastemare now or hereafter supplied W the Cenpany (ancepting (a) establishmente operated W or for the acesunt of the Federal Government ,
and (b) rural electric sosperatives, incorporated under the Electric Cooperative C g ion Ast of the State of Tmuss and serving only casteners authorised to be served under said Act), the Government shall osayensate the compaar 4 means of a credit equal to the difference between the cost of such power and energy oenputed at the lowest the effective rate of the Government i
and the oest of such power and energy computed '
at the lowest then effective rate of the Compaar applicable to the service to such sustomare.
Such credit shall be MriAnggd Whly g usens of a deduction from the surrent monthly parasats W the Cenpaar due e der Paragraph (6) bereof and a eash parasat W the covernment, if c *******'T * .
.. . n .. .
_w - __ --_m e v - - -* ----*-----' =- = "- "' '
i i
,1 I-l /T*,
,y- ,
i
~
N For the purpose of this Agreement the term -
W - demand of the Government $5 for a v month shall mean the tdal of the naz:hmut thirty adnute dananda at each of h deliv l ary points, during the twelve months period ending with h month l
l eder consideration, of each of the Government's custammes, dher than the Compaq, taking power and energy out of h CWs .
syste hereunder, adjusted for 2agging power factor as provided
, / 'for herein.
~ ,'., ***
( *
-i
. / ..
- . *me e Nst *> pi . y el .
,' 3i [ * '
g Although the Government shall ad be required ,
to..../
generate and the Ccumpag shall not be allowed to a power j and energy fnet av one main generating unit Denison Den power plant d less than ten thousand (2fl 000) kilowatts, the I
- dau,f.,the wefit b .6 re ,ue.t of the Campaq, operate one or mere of the generating units available l
1 for use tqr the Compag d no load as condensers to the esitent that ,
I such operatica does not unreasonably interfere 1sith the delivery -
of the Government's asunuttaants to other customers, and is not contrary to good operating practices or detrimental to the Govern-I ment's facilities in escens of ordinary wear and tear. *
~ .: +
- ~
. ACCOUiI M D - -
l [ the Compe g shall keep sn accurate account of D e
?
various classifications of electrie power and energy delivered h M
- % ~%
'O& _
~.
N,ij -
W the Gewersusent into the system of the Caspery, and of all
' et the electrio power and energy taken out of the Compost's -
ersten W the Government. The Gempany shall furnish to the Government, as seen as prestiemble after the and of each unath, a detailed eartified statemsut for such aanth of the power and energy delivered into the Compaar's system ny the Government here.
under and the power and emergy taken eut of the CWs systa -
hereunder tr the Govestment at each point et delivery. Tbs Govern-ment shall furnish the Gompany each aanth a statment for the pro-i viens month of the total generation of ensegF at the Denisen Den power plant, the amount used for operating the project and the amount of each class of energy dispeeed of ly the Government to the Gumparg and to its other sustomers. Such statement shall in-
- alude the amount of any water.idnich any have been discharged through the dam, other than through the turbines, when the reser=
voir level was below the top of the power storage aliaa=*iaa. The Government shall give the Congssy, ty telephone through their dio-patching offices, the dai27 elevation of the hinan reservoir.
EulEllI 6 (a) The Campany ahan per the Gewersemat far power and enerEFidelivered into the caugnar's syste as provided in Pare-graphs 1 a) and 1 (b) hereof $39,000 per month lese $155 por
_t 5 -- e, % -
lO l _
t- ,. .
month and less feur mills per kilmsatt hour for all the ki1==*t
' ' hours of energy taken out of the Comparg's system ty the Govern-l ment in excess of 250 kilowatt hours per kilowatt of ==r4==
demand of the Goversument for such month.
(b) The Campany shall per ike Goversument for power !
and energy delivered ny the Govemment iagto the %"s systaa
/
as provided in Paragraphs 2 (a),and 2 b)-hereof $52,000 per month less $1'.55 per kilowatt per month of / he ===i== demand of the Government for such masth and less four mills por kilowatt hour taken out of the Company's for all the kilowatt hours of tt -
,,t ,. _ y . .t ,, - ,
kilowatt of unzimum demand ! of the Government for such month.
(c) After th ' Government has declared the third ready for commercial operation and generating unit at Denison,
/
has so notified the Compaar in writing, the Company shall per to the Government for the period when all three generating units are' available for commercial operation the sum of $6,000 per month in
/
addition to the other perments provided for herein.
(d)*If,duringanymonthorpartthereof,(ex-ciuding periods f inspection, mainterance and repairs scheduled in advance tg ual agreement of the parties hereto) all three are not a="^1e for commercial operation, the generating uni to the Govemment under Paragraph 6 (c) hereof Company's g
l .;
,e
(.%
9 shas.1 to redused for m a f w m e r tso m at n e hours of such non-evails ty of such mits bear to the total ember of hours month.
c MZIEIG2!LT.EE5il
- 7. For the purposes of this W :
==M== certain (a) #prianry energy" shan mean the i'
~
aumber of kilowatt hours of electric energy which esuld be produced at the Denison Das power p3 ant in every year during a repetition of the stream flow of the Red River at the Denison Dam during the period from January 1,19Q, to December 31, 191.6, or to an appropriate later date for fut,ure determinations hereunder, W asens of the natural flow of the Red River at the Denison Dan and the utilisation of the wate storage capacity in the Denison reservoir allocated to power.
(b) # diversity energy shall aman that energy which could be produced at the Pro. ject in addition to the primary energy from water not needed for use or for storage for the production of the primary energy and which could be combined with energy avail-able from other dans constructed and operated in the area W the United States so as to aske available on a transmission system inter-connecting such dans and the Denison Dam a constant amount of energy during every month during the most adverse senditions of stream flow which any be espected, assuming a repetition of previous records of streen flow at all of such dans and at the Denisen Das since January 1, 1913, without foresight with roepect to stream flow and without f
m .
U 17
l
- (.r h full amount of the primary jeopardising the production of t e energy of the Project to be delivered into the Compaay's system hereunder, and (c) doecondary w .J" shall anon that energy dich, in addition to-the primary energy and the diversity energy, could, in the judgment of the Covernment, be produced at the Denis Dem, at any time and front time to tias, during such a repetition of the stream flow at the Denison Dem, without for6 with respect to strosa flow and without jeopardising the production of the full amount of the primary energy ara diversity soargy of the Project.
ADJUSDEF rinn_510F
- 8. (a) In the event the amount of the various clasai-fications of energy presently deterndned W the Government to be a=="=Me from the Denison Dam Project are changed from tias to time or at any time through, the integration of the Denison Dea Project (1) with other hydroelectric power projects in the t
.:es, a change in policy of the '4ar Depwenant (2) in the opera *. ion of the Decison Reservoir, (3) the construction of addition reservoir storage in the Red River basin above the g
19 0% -
- QV i
ar . .::
I E.?Y .
other factors affecting such amounts, (4) the Goverts:ent shall, not oftener than once '
s' year excepting on its own volition anke a '
proper redetermination of such amounts and notify the Cougeny precytly of the results thereof.
In event, after any such redetermination, the (b)
Government notifies the Comparg that the diversity energy avail-able from the Denison Das Project has been increased, the commit-ment of the parties for the delivery and receipt of primary i eragy under Paragraph 2 (a) hereof shall be increased W dan amount equ va-W of the increase in diversity energy as determine lent to w W the Gm c it.
In event, after any such redetermination, the (c)
Government notifies the Ceapany that the primary energy availab for sale in Texas from the Denison Den Project f has been incros the Govermaant any, at its election, increase thedcommit:asnt o the part,ies for the delivery and rossipt of primary energy un er .
Paragraph 2 (a) hereof, W such amount of primary l of energy as it may specify to the Comparg in 1sriting; providedh8 that the tota all increases in primary energy as previded for in this Paragrap 30,000,000 kilowatt bours por year inithout the shall not esseed .
eensent of the Company.
19
_ - . . - _ _ _ e _ - - . ____m _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(';
...y l
(d) In the evast, as a result of aar such re-detemination, the ammust of primary one.gr delivered to the I
Compaar is increased under the provisions of this Paragraph 8,
- er 70,000,000 kilowatt hours of primary energy p year are not available from the Denison Dem Project for sale in Texas, the Company's payment to the Government for power and energy m
.gi..
provided in Paragraph 6 (b) hereof, shall be adjusted i
stely it four aills for each kilowatt hour that the 3rimary energy delivered under this Agreement differs from 70,003,000 kilowatt hours.
PrMDt FACTOR AND TOLTAGE 9 (a) The Company shall take power and energy from
- the Government at the Company's Payne Substation at such power
~
factor as uill best serve the Company's system at that point from time to tias and at any timog provided, that the Company shall not intentionally impose any power factor en the system of the Government in such a uny as to overload or impair the _
facilities of the Government, or unreasonably interfere with the delivery of the Government's commitments to other customers.
The Government shall take power and energy from the Company at the power factor ddch the loads of the Government's austomers impose en the Compaar's systems provided, that, if the power factor of the load of any such customse dsring aar month should
== .- - - .
~
Ae- - . - - , , .
i
~
(: S be less than s5 per sent lagging at its point of delivery, the Government's =wi== demand at such point of delivery shall be' sdjusted W determining the Government's anziana demand imposed W such customer for such month W amitiplying the measured kilo-watts of demand w e5 and dividing the result W the actual power factor at the tias of =d== demand.
' (b) The electric power and energy delivered hereunder into the Compaar's erstem shall be delivered as three-phase alternating current, at a frequency of -,,gc.zimately 60 arcles per second, at a nominal voltage of 138 kilovolte, with adjustments above er below nominal voltage, as requested W the ,
Compaar, within the limits of tranaforese tape. The Goverissent will, from time to time, and at any time, upon request of the l
Compaar, raise or lower the voltage at the Dan 4 man Den power plant in delivering power and energy to the Company at its perne Substation, within reasonable limits and considering the ressen-able voltage requirements of the Government's other customers served W the same g u l e . The electrie power and energy ,
delivered hereunder to the Government, or its customers, out of the Compaar's system aball be delivered as three-phase alternat-ing current at a frequency of approximately 60 arcies per seeend at such standard service voltage of the Campaar as the Govern-l amat may specify, with an a11swahle variatism of 5 per sent above 21 M 'M TQ q , _
l t
i
\
C~
. j
- i~
4 shall not ,
er below nominal voltage; provided that the C..C -
specify delivery to it or its customers at a voltage requiring the installation or construction of facilities by the Compaar in assess of these p.;1d=8 to be furnished by the Campany under ~
Paragraph 12 hereof.
70DPf3 0F NTTVERT fI ;
- 10. The point of delivery of the power and energy delivered Iqr W Government into the Company's system shall be that point in the Campany's Payne Substation where the Govern-ment's 138-KY tran==d==4on line makes electrical conn l the Campany's system; provided, that the electric power and energy delivered to the Company shall be measured by astering equipment belonging to the Government installed at the Denison Das power plant, without adjustssut for transmission losses between the The point, or points, of astering point aud the delivery point.
delivery by the Campany to the Government of power and energy which the Goverrment takes out of the Company's system hereunder shall be at such point, er points, on the Campear's system, in accordance with the Comparg's usual wholesale practice, as any be designated tqr the Government from time to time or at any time.
FACI 11 TIES
- 11. The G..a 4 shall furnish a substation at the Denison Das site, including astering equismant at the Danison Das i
22 ,
~
?
,% ^
~ l:,, .
power plant, a 138-17 tronadesic.n line extending from said sub-
- station to the Compag's Farne Substation and shall maintain said l facilities and all equipment necessary (a) to enable the Government to deliver to the Compeg at its Feyne Substation the power and energr severed hr this Agreement, and .
(b) to assure reasonable protection to the linee l
and equipment of the Compag.
- 12. (a) The Compag shall maintain and operate during the term of this Agreement its esisting generation and transmission j facilities or generation and transudssion facilities at least sub-stantia117 equivalent to its existing facilities idiich shall be adeqpate at all times to enable the Compag to fulfill its obli- .
gations hereunder. In the event the Compa q , at ag time before the termination of this Agreement, disposes of any substantial ,
part of such facilities adequate-provision shall be made it the ,
Compag for delivery to the Government and its customers of so mach of the power and energy to idnich the Government is entitled hereunder as may be necessary, within the limitations hereof, to supply the requirements of the Government and its er.mtemers in the l
ares served ty the facilities so disposed of.
- (b) The Campag shall furnish, install, operate and maintain all facilities, including e.,, winte metering equipment l
23 .
l 6-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -----en ~ - ,--- s- w - -' - - - -
l.
j I
o l
(% ~
W
- h i s that may be necessary (a) to snatale the Compaar to take and a receive into its system at its Payne Substation all' of the
! i slectric power and energy that may be delivered to the Company -
imider Paragraphs 1 (a),1 (b), 2 (a), and 2 (b) hereof, (b) to 1 enable the Company to deliver to the Govenaient, or its customers, i the power and energy taken out of the Compaar's systas, as allowed l under Paragraph 3 (a) herect; provided, that the Company shall not [
o be obligated to install or ocastruct near transmianian or related '
t facilities solely for the purpose of delivering electric power j
~
and energy to the Government or its customers, the cost of which would, in the opinion of the Compaar, result in an sucessive h
.i financial burden to the Compaqr, and the Company shall not be j required to furnish any transmission or related facilities idiich i.
i the Government could not const uct or acquire under the authori-i antion of the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944, to transmit 4 and dispos,e of the power and energy from the Denisen Das Project, I iffundsthereforwereprovidedbytheCongress,and(c)toassure l reasonable protection to the lines and equissient of the Govern-l asntand/oritscustomers. The plan, or plans, for protection of the Government's lines and equipment, and those of its custom-ers, smast be submitted to and syy...M hr the Government. The Goveniment, or its customers, may, if desired, install suitable ,
astering equijssent at any point of delivery for the purpose of
,n l
.j S
,,-a v ---- - - , --
if i:
h{l t!.
p:
e ea-S j
checking the seters installed 4 the Cm. The Compag any, I j
it, desired, install suitable astering equipment at the Denison .
j Das power plaint for the purpose of checking the meters installed :
W the Government.
13 Each party shall install and operate on its re-spective facilities (a) such equipannt .as'any be required to ,
l
- afford a carrier current telephone system d ich will provide !
direct communication between the Compaq's district operator's i
office at the Payne Substation and the operator of the Denison vu.., t equipment and automatic ,
Den power plant, and (b) carrier frequency and load control equipment for telemstaring the load on .
the Government's generating plant to the Compag's dispatching office in Dallas, and for automatic centrol of the not flow into the Camps-g's system.
16 EinM Al*D ADJ15DS'?S ,
Ik. Each aster used in determining the amount of electric power and energy delivered into the Compag's system at its Payne Substation, and each meter used in deter-tMan the amount of elec-tric power and energy delivered W the Ccapag to the Govenment, or its cuatraers, out of the Compaq's system, including check meters, it installed, shall, W comparison with accurate stamtmis, be tested and calibrated W the Company in the presence of a re-presentative of the Govemannt at intervals of not to encoed six (6) 25 cy .
k
i E (Fy seaths. If a meter shall be found ime;t or inaccurate, it shall be restored to an accurate condition or a new aster sub stituted W the owner thereof. A meter shall be considered in-accurate if it is found to deviate from an accurate standard meter in excess of 1/2 of 1 per cent eben tested at 100 per cent of load or 1 per cent idun tested at 10 per cent of 2med.
- 15. The Govemannt, or the compent, shall have the _
right to request and have a special aster test unde at any time.
I If ag test ande at the G-verTaant's request discloses that the aster tested is registering correct 27, the Goversment shall bear the expense of such test, but the esponse of all other testa shall be borne W the Company.
- 16. The results of all such tests and onlibrations shall be open for examination br the Govermaant and a report of every test shall be furnished by the Campeg to the Government promptly.
Ag aster tested and found to be within 2 per cast accurag but in sacess of the specified accuracy under paragraph la above, shall be recalibested, but no correction in MmM meter reading shall be made. If, as a result of av test, a g aster is found to register in excess of 2 per cent either above or below normal accuracy, then the readings of such meter previously taken shall be corrected according to the percentage of inaccuracy so fo'ad, but no such correction shall extend beyond abety (90) days previous r
'--T---w-,--
n' N,, l l
to the date on dich the inaccuracy is determined by such test, nor for a longer period than such inaccuracy may be detersuined to have existed.
- 17. For any period that a aster is found to have failed to register, the readings of the check asters, if installed and I found to have normal accuracy, shall be used for such period of failure. In case the asters and the check asters, if installed, fail to register at the same time, the electric energy delivered during such period shall be assumed to be the same as that for a period of like operation during d ich such asters were in service and operating, such like period to be agreed upon by the parties hereto. i
- i-
- 18. The Company's and Government's meters and the ,
i Commir's and Government's check asters, if installed, shall be ',
i read tqr a representative of the Company and, at the election of ;
the Government, simultaneously checked by a representative of the Government, except that the Government's asters at the Denison Den power plant and the Company's check asters, if any at such place, shall be reed tqr a representative of the Government and, at the election of the Company, simultaneously checked by a representative of the Company, regularly on the last day of each month, except i
when ia. a ed by a holiday er Sunday, or other cause, in which event, the r==M_y will be made on the follawing day, or as early uh l 27 , ,
i
i e
! H 11 l
? i I
l - ?
'(- a.. s l 5
l thereafter as possible. The result of all aster readings and j-all meter tests shall be mailed by the Company to the Government I l
at Tulsa, Oklahoma, P. C. Drawer 1619, en or before the fifth i
u I
day after such readings or tests are ande, unless another day is i
eet tr a tual agreement. [
3
. a
<x*5iinJCTION STANDARDS r.,
W
- 19. The parties hereto shall construct, maintain, and g operate their respective receiving and delivery facilities in accordance with accepted standards at least equal to those pro- i, -
vided ty the Naticeal Electrical Safety Code of the United States ,
Bureau of Standards. .
RIGHT5 OF ACCESS l
- 20. Each party shall give all necessary pamissions ta the other to enable its representatives to carry out this Agree- !
i<
p asnt, and shall give the other the right, by duly authorised rs=
i j
presentatives and employees, when acc ,= M ed hr its o m authorised -
i i
representatives, to enter the premises of t,he party costing same at j
all reasonable tinies for the purpose of reading or checking asters, ,
or inspecting, testing, repairing, renewing, or exchanging any or ,
all of its eqpipasnt idsich any be located on the e y tof the, l
i l other, or for the purpose of performing any other work ipeidant to the perfomance of this Agreement.
/
.s*
O m .
.: a.
' ' ' ' ' ' ' " " ' ' - --em,- __
~
(i".s
- w. .
MAL
- 21. Any and all eqpipsont, apparatus, and devices necessary to fulfill either the Govermant's obligations or the Compaig's obligations hereunder, placed or erected hr the Goveevenant or the Campany on or in the premises of the other
~
party shall be and resin property of the.part,y owning and in- '
s'='14af such ec4M, apparatus and devices, regardless of the mode or manner of its annexation or attacht to real pW.y of the other, and upon the termination of service pro- i vided for hereunder, the Government and the Company shall have l the right to enter upon the premises of the ot.her, in order to, I.
and to reove such equipment, apparatus, or devices, onmed hr it
~
l j
or in its possession.
CQ!iwuna CF SDt? ICE .
- 22. The electric power and energy delivered by the i Govemment into the Compaig's system hereunder, and the electrie power and energy delivered hr the Campmay to the Goverautant, or its.custcmars, out of the Caugeny's system hereunder, shall be unde av=41=hle cce+4-==17, except, (1) for interruptions due to anuncontrollableforceashereinafterdefined,and(2)fortempo-rary interruptions or reductions which, in the opinion of the party I
siening the facilities in which such interruptions occur, may be necessary or desirable for purposes of amintenance, repaire,
,R
&' 2, l
i i(* -
ii
[
g.1 V. .j L
q 6
replacements, installation of equipment, imestigations and in- 4 spections; provided, that such party causing such, interrupt, ions, {
easept in case of ensegency, shall sin the other party reason-able advance notice of such temporary interssptions or reductions.
and will make such instauntions, innstigations, inspections, and perform such maintenance, repairs or replacasants, with diligence ~
and in accordance.with a schedule, of idtich the company aball haw '
reasonable notice, so as to cause the least incomunience to both I l
parties hereto.
- 23. Both parties hereto shall anarcise due diligence, reasonable care and foresight to =4d=4n continuity of service in the delivery and receipt of power and energy as provided for in this Agreement, but shall not be considered to have failed in
[
said obligation by reason of an uncontrollable force as hereinafter defined, or 4 reason of outages for repairing, r=1=My or in-Such interruptions in service shall not spe-ting of facilities.
constitute a breach of this Agreement on the part of either party, f
l and neither party shall be liable to the other for damages resulting l In case of impaired or defective service, the receiver therefreen.
of such service shall innsediately give notice to the load dis-patcher of the party rendering such service W telephone, oon-i fi m ing such service W telephone, confirming such notice in j tl h ne.
1sriting on the same date such notice is given W e ep o m
30
- - - M
- f.
' I, 1
. 7
., F,
~
i UFC0FTROLIABIE PCRCES
- 24. Neither party hereto dall be considered to be i<
in default in roepect to any obligation hereunder if prevented l from fulfilling such obligation by reason of an uncontrollable force. For the purpose of this Agreement, the tem nuncontrollable ..
}
j forcen means any cause beyond the centrol of the party affected, 1 including, but not limited to, failure of facilities or water ;
i supply flot:ing into the Denison reservoir, flood, earthquake, stom, lightning, fire, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance, labor disturbance, sabotage, o restraint by court or public authcrity, which, by ezercise 2 due diligence and foresight, such party could not reasonably have been expected to avoid.
l Either party rendered unable to fulfill ary obligation by reason of an uncontrollable force shall esercise due diligence to remove i
such inability with all reasonable dispatch.
REATI0t? 0F u mfLT. Cof;T*.AC' _
- 25. The contract between the parties hereto of date Har 3, 191,l., as amended and modified, for the sale of electric power and energy shall terminate instantaneously with the begin-ning of service under this Agreement.
CAEmATIOf! 0F SETVICE COPtRAITS BT C0f7A:T
- 26. The C m shall cancel and terminate any contract p\
for electric service it has or may have with any customer entitled
'f '
e v %7 --w -.
!h
@t ma q;c Id cn l '[
1 s
(
to receive service hereunder from the Goverranant W means of s h
- .nd energr su,,ued here. der w the C ,anr. it w.ed 1 n.'
to do so ty such customer, effective when and provided such f
eustomar ariters into a contract with the Government for the service p
covered ty the Campaig's contract, but service shall continue under g the tems of the Compaig's contract until service begins under the *y n' ,f Goverisesnt contract. .;,,
LIMITATIONS OF 3ERVICE ...
27 (a) The Government shall not at arg time enter into a contract or contracts with customers to be served from k
,the Comparg's srstem hereunder idiich will cause the maximas demand of the Government to exceed the number of IN specified in Paragraph
[.I 3 (a) hM, and the Government will not at arg time render service I to its customers to an extent idiich will result in the =mw4- #
. demand of the Goverrunent exceeding the number of IN specified in Paragraph 3 (a) hereof. U (b) The Comparg shall not be obligated to extend its facilities to or establish service to arg additional customar or at aug additional delivery points if such service or such facilities and their use would result in the anximann demand of the Government enseeding the number of IN which the Government is en-l l titled to have delivered to it out of the Company's srates hereunder.
32
( _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
'l
, f
(~h (c) In W event the =w4== demand of the Govern-asnt.during arg month shall azzeed the number of Df specified in )
Par. graph 3 (a) herect, - c png .hau ,re,u, n.ufy . !
l Government of such fact, and the Government shall within thirty (3G) days after receipt of such notice direct the Company to
~
discontinue service to a specified castcase or customers to the .
emient necessary to reduce the anximum demand of the Government f to the number of El Wich the Governannt is than entitled to l receiveunderParagraph3(a) hereof. In the event the Govern- l f
ment does not so direct the Campa q within such period, the t
- cape g shall have the right to disconnect the necessery number of customers of the Government to reduce the =w1== demand of W Government to the number of DT which the Government is than !.
entitled to receive under said Paragraph 3 (a) hereof, and shali ![
l disconnect them in the reverse order of the dates of their asisting 1 l
ocotracts with the Government for service supplied 17 reason of ,
this dgreement, the one bearing the aset recent date being the [
first to be cancelled. , ;
j SUSPB15I0if CF SEVICE ,
- 28. The failure of either party to pay to the other i l
a v amount due under this Agreement shall entitle such other l party to discontinue the delivery of electric power and/or energy thereafter upon giving twenty (2G) days prior written notice to l
.n. .
_ a] .
l
{,
l ..
the defaulting part,y of its intentien te de oe, unless such l
payment is unde before the diseantivm=*e.et such delivery. {
M ,
- 29. Any written notice, dammad, or request, required er authorised by this Agreement, shall be deemed properly given l
to er served en the Government if mailed to the Na4=trator of I l
Southwestern Power Waistration, P. O. Drewer 1619 Tulsa 1, rarlsh -a, and shall be deemed 17 given to er served on the f
of the Temas Power & Light
- l Caepony if mailed to the Presid i /
Coupear, Dallas, Texas. The designation of the persons to be .
! notified, or the address of such persons, may be changed at any .
i time and from time to time by letter so addressed.
AVATTa37tr!"I 0F PUFDS l
- 30. The performance of the Goverriment's obligations hereunder is contingent upon the Congress making the necessary
-yr.ey.lations for + ./.itures incideut to the performance of this Agreement.
j Cuaruu'ATIO'? AMD APPROVAL OF RA'tE5 BY TEERAL POWER CCi42SSICtf
- 31. This Agreement, and all rights and obligations he:.ounder, are espressly cariditioned upon the Federal Power Cee-d osion approving and confirming the rates set forth herein at inhich power and energy is er any be disposed of hereunder hr the Government to the c m as required by the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944. -
34
(- .
i
W t
.). { 'i .
. p ATE OP RATION E
- 32. It is the purpose of the parties hereto that their systems shall be so operated that power and energr will not flow from the Caspaur's system to points outside the State of Texas or from points outside the State of Texas into the Convent's
~
system. The Governosat shall aske no interconnection on its _
system. .and the Government shall not operate its system, in a manner that will cause or allow power and energy to flow from the Company's syst e to points outside the State of Texas or from points outside the State of Texas into the Compaar's system; pro-vided, that after the Comparg has had the opportunity to install, maintain and operate protective equipment at the Denison Das power l
plant for the purpose of preventing the flow of power and energy into or from the Company's treassdssion system from or into a state or states other than the 3 tate of Texas, the Govem ment may supply power and energy to the Company in the State of Texas and to the Government's customers in states other than the State of Texas simitaneously ddle ces or more generating units at Denison Dam are interconnected. In the event it is impracticable for the Government to deliver its causitzents for power and energy to the Campany in the State of Teams and to the Government's custam-t I '- -
ers in aar other state or states Wdle one or more generating units
- at Denisen Den are interconnected without contravening the purpose :
-Q O' ,,
._ m,
-. I f3-=. . '-q
' ~ ~ ~
~ - - - - --
g W
.e.
(? g, r
, 9 it of this paragraph, er service to the Company hereunder is in-I paired ty such interconnected operatica, thf generatik unit t or units as scheduled by the Company to sut. ply the pow and ~
, I A -
i energy agreed to be delivered to the Campany hereund$f,,shalTr t 4
3 be isolated and the Company shall be servCfrom such isolat'ed'
' : a i
y unit or units alone so long as any be necescary:to prevent the ,
I flow of power and energy into the Company 5c system fram outside p . ;{~
the State of Texas or from the Company's system Q points out- -
t I, ,
side the State of Texas. All electric powt.T and energy delivered f hereunder by the Company to the Government or,its customers shall 'y be for use wholly within the State of Texas by customers d ose -
l lines have no connections to or from pointa outside the State ,-
of Texas. } {.
.- i l
TERN OF ACP m 227 j
': i
.;i 33 This Agreemaat shall became offectitz- upon date of its execution, and service shall begin i
hereunder on the first I' ,
day of the month following the date of the confirmation and ap- ,
preval of rates ty the Federal Power Commincion as provided in '
, t Paragraph 31 hereof sad shall remin in force a@"foct for a period of twenty (20) years unless sooner terminated as herein 4 <
l provided. Either party any terminate this greenent ' at car time l '
l IF siving six (6) years written notice to the other party in ad -
' e vance of the effective date of termination thereof in whic'h esent \'
i , i the Agreement ,shall teminate on the data fixed in such notice.
5 l .
' {
i
- T'
'h It =
l
, s, . 'i
^
'y- ,
~.
4\ l
- (~ ug ' i
',U .i ,k
\ n o
>s ,y <
, 4 .
9 e, jj '
)
go
, .g t.
t "f
ODIGi RDEDIE
[ 34. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be so s$nstrued as, in are manner, to abridge, lixitit, or deprive t f
i either party hereto of any means of enforcing any remedy, ~
k either at law or in equity, for breach of a:g of the pro-
{
.,7 . J visions hereof which it would othensise have. f GNEAL REST!CCTIO?'S ,
~
I 35 Fo person undergoing sentence of imprisonment .!
t
-' t
, at hard labor shall be employed under this Agreement. .i 3
- / \ 36. No Hember of or delegate to the Congress, or i
/ :
Resident Conctissioner, shall be admitted to ar;r share or part, ll
- I of this Agreement, or to any benefit that may arise therefree. '
{ 37 The Compa y warrants, hr the act of accepting and ,
i ; or,ccuting this Agreement, that it has employed no person to solicit l
l c or to secure the same upon any agreement for a connission, per-centage, brokerage or contingent fee.
j 38. Feither party, in the performance of this Agree-ment, will discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of ra:e, creed, color or national origin.
MD'CT ASSIS*A"CE l 39 In ti=== of emergency each party w"1 render to-the other all aid and assistance possible within the limitations i
< 1 of its existing facilities and the provisions of Paragraph 32 l
hereof.
c -
- s
- y 1
. _ _ _ 1 v -I J
v
. - - - U 1
, s k'
EI_ 0N FOR ADDITIONAL POWER AFD Ei'ERCY f.0. Before the Government sells for use in the State of Texas, to any party other than the Compaq, ag of the power and ensegy generated at the Denison Das power plant, other than that delivered to the Cougary under this Agreement, the Campaq shall have the option of purchasing such power and energy under I
mindlar terms and conditions as provided for herein with pro-portionate charges therefor, includig a W W .icnate increase
- , is entitled to take in the power and energy which the G m .
out of the Compaq's system for service to its own customers.
SUCNMR AUD ASSICTS
- 41. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successor and assigns of the respective parties hereto.
I l
e t
eO i h
- 1. !5
'r '
I*
r
[
l' V i
n s
IN WITNESS MGREDF, the parties hereto have caused a this Agresesnt to be ausented in several counterparts, each
{
of Weh shall constitute an ori-4a=1, by their duly author-ised officers, as of the day and year first. horeinabove witten, .
but actually on this the 4th day of April,1947 l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4 (sis ed) Deuslas G. Wright _
MTLAM G. WRIGHT, WeAstrator, Southwestern Power Administration, '
an agency of the Department of the Interior.
(Seal)
TEIAS POWDt & UGHT COMPANI ATTEST /s/J.E.VanHorn Secretary 4 (si ned) w. w. Irneh Vice President l
l l
.Lw.
i
_ f
[
v_, .
}
li I4 I, J. E. Van Hem -
. certify that I as the Secretary of the Te:as Power & Light Ocupaq, and that W. W. Lynch . who signed this agreement on behalf of said f Carpa q was then Vice President of said C 7 v; that said Agreement was duly signed for sad on behalf of said Compa q j under the general authority of its se w ing body, and is ;
within the scope of its corporate powers. t 3
k.
/s/ J. E. Van Horn .
J Secretary (Seal)
- P 5.
I hereby certify that to the best of ar imowledge and belief, based upon observation and inquiry, W. W. Lynch who signed this Agreement for the Texas Power & Light C77, has authority to execute the same, and is the individual who signs similae agreements on behalf.of said Company with the public generally. l
/s/ Doualas % Wriaht .
i b l .
camas con :
or xxzcurm cazca u.
A.1 U
.m :
1 L._____ -
,(:,% .
t e
e e
G s
e i ma w l- (_i m j
- . . J.J.; i a
O e
0 e
i 4
- A. l J
acun? w. sunne.e ucurcamaa,*
wnuw o euan >.new.,
=. :. s: s- ci a s
$F~
The Brazos System e-e .. -ar. Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,inc.
_mecurm va =mesen March 23, 1983 Mr. Walter M. Bowers
- Chief, Division of Power Marketing Southwestern Power Administration Department of Energy ~
P.O. Box 1619 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101
Dear Mr. Bowers:
Please accept this letter as our request for consideration in the event that additional hydro electric power and energy becomes available at Denison Dam, delivered or ERCOT into the other locations system.where the power and energy could be We are currently serving nineteen rurst distribution cooperatives, and a have state interconnection agreements with seven municipal systems and university.
All of these systems would benefit directly from the availability of additional hydro electric peaking power and energy .
Yours very truly,
,s /.f/&'
Richard E. McCaskill
/
REM /DRS/1w cc: Mr. Dan 8. Swenke Mr. J. D. Copeland o' . , .
g.
Post cFFICI acx 429s wAcc,7tXAs 7am=4296 . . , . . . _ . ..
.. . . .. . . 7.. 6~
. - . , . ,_ . g ., -- - w. w. n.m.; MCNR4814 J32 -
i 2333,.y . p3Mgggg" ggggg 3 eta 1
1 <
I A
e
,Y %
f
- x. , -
i 4
m I
== == m
' M Wt '
m ml m e
W 6
g.~ g
/ .
D F e4 ,
'#+
..9
- ..W.
e
' ')
ei.d.. w o uc--.m. -
{ -uu .,mn ,
i
[l n., . ..cc
' . .e. ..; -
- The grazos Systern
"*aa""*"* '
Brazos Electric Power Cceperative,Inc.
."'*.".1"l' """ aanuary is, isab '
Mr. Valter Sowerst Chief -
Olvision of Power Marketing Southwestern Power Administration P.O. Box 1619 Tulsa, Oklahone 74301 .
Dear Mr. Bowers:
I wish to thank you for your courtesies at our meeting on January .
6 By thisand power letter energyi reiterate free theBesacs'
.0enison Interest Units. and request for a share of as we stated at the meeting, we would find acceptable any reasonableWitho Electric Cooperative of Texas. Inc. (" Tex-La") and Raybu Electric Cooperative. Inc. ("Rayburn").
While it is our legal position that the existing contract between the United States, through the South-western Power Administration ("$WPA"), and the Texas Power & Light Compa
("TPL") is in violation of the preference laws and legally unenforceable we would not necessarily object to final arrangements under which TPL ,
continued to recalve 35 MW of capacity from the Denison Das with up to 1200 hours0.0139 days <br />0.333 hours <br />0.00198 weeks <br />4.566e-4 months <br /> per kw of associated energy.
We note that even if it were
. assumed that such allocation to TPL were valid, if the TPL contract (or any subsequent allocattert....whether direct or Indirect....in connection with the contract) were Interpreted to give TPL rights to l
additional energy or to expand its rights beyond its current contract such Interpretation. term, then certainly the contract could- not be legally enforced und We discussed the possibility of Oresos' " firming" Denison power for would beand Tex-t.a Rayburn beneficial to beginning'In the parties. 1990, or some other arrangement which Brazos is very much Interested in this now. possibility, and, indeed, has proposed that this be implemented 1
Brazos from reiterates Denison. that it would like to purchase available excess energy -
\ ~
We discussed the possibility of Bretos and SWPA entering intona "ba ng" ki or interchange arrangement for non-ERCOT SWPA You stated ated p (
1 l
i
- 1 1
k, gJ PCsf cnica acx 429s wAco, ftxAs 76706.c2pe MecNe (s171 rst-tson / caNeag o s
1.21
~
r "
l .
~
r i
C e k.
.o. Mr. Walter Bo. ors
- . Southwestern Power Administration
1/16/84 ,
Page 2 electrically.
upon the availability and price of transmission over the pro ties or the possibility of AC transmission. -
We have taken the IIberty of sending cooles of this letter to Texas UtIIItles, may and to Tex-l.a and Rayburn Country.
h,, ave different views concerning these matters.We recognize that they Yours very truly, ,
- QQ2:
Dan Swenke, P.E.
- - w Ots:cc cc: Mr. Mike Ozymy Mr. Ray Raymond Mr. John Sutts Mr. Bill Surchette Mr. Bob 08Mell bcs: Joe AIIey .
Clarence Carpenter t
Bob Jablon e
e i e
, _ _ _ _ . _ . . . , - ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ^ ' ' ~
.< .me . - -
O
,s&
'(-
l l
l l
l i
l 9
e e
G e
! mee. l
- m. es ,
a.g ,
N $$ 99991 M 98 f
4
...~
S 4
e
" * " - - ,r- -, - - , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , _ , _ , , _ __ _ . _ _ _ __
6 "*. supeppeo tactfasrw w, o, paasta asessesp.,
p, g, ag rs! act a f
/1
, The Brazoo Systern ocnaas s. mecassat Brazca Electric Power Cooperative,Inc. 1 omaw in ssameen January 27, 1984 4 .
Mr. Walter Bowers, Chief .
Olvision of Power Marketing Southwestern Power Administration P.O. Box 1613
- Tulsa, Oklahome 74101
Dear Mr. Bowers:
At our meeting on January 16, 1984, we restated our belief that we are
{ entitled to an allocation of Denison capacity and energy. It is our understanding that Southwestern Power Administration has determined to allocate the capacity and energy frcus the Denison North unit to Tex-La Electric Cooperative, Inc. and Rayburn Country Electric Coooerative, Inc.
It is our further understanding that Tearta and Rayburn Country are no-gotf acing arrangements with Texas Power & Light Company, a non-preferen:e entity, under which TPSL will receive a substantial portion of the economic benefits from the North unit and, indeed, from the entire project. Soeci-fically, TPSL will receive the capacity and energy from both the South and North units (provided It is not necessary to back 'up Whitney Texas
- Power with its &systemLight will be allowed the scheduled Oenison output in). accordance needs.
In conjunction with the above arrangements, TPst will sell load factor power.to Tex-La and Keyburn Country a total of 34.5 megawatts of firm Under the above arrangements, TPSL would be reoutred to sell to the Cooperatives approximately 138,000 TPSL Denison will be able to keep for its own benefit all additional availableeneh from Denison energy.
We estimate that this would average 53,000 mwh/ year.
Under 131,000the proposed arrangment TPSL will be obtaining approximately demand charge. mwh of energy at 1 326e per kwh, more or less, including the I Moreover, it is Indisputable that TPsL's attlity to schedule Denison power to meet its peak needs, and therefore to displace the most expensive energy on its system, is very valuable.
Absent some specific justification, we are certain that you would not project would be going to a non-preference entity.amorove arrange However, at our meeting last week you confirmed that $WPA is encouraging Tex-La and Rayburn Country to pursue the above described arrangements instead of arrangements with Srazos for two reasons: (1) SupA feels that it must honor the TPsL contract, or series of contracts ("lPSA 177"), and (2) the' 0enison project capacity has been allocated to Tex-However, as you are aware.La and Aayburn Country, who need firm power.
Sra20s has been willing to provide long-term
, POST CPPtCI $Cx 429s
. WACC, ftXAS 74706a4294 PMONG (SQ752 1301, / CINesAt CMIC24 2ase ta&Auf Avieeut
, wg-*w "* _ _ , _ - - - - - - ---
s Mr. Walter Sowers - -
i
('.
Southwestern Power Administration January.27, 1984 Page 2 arrr.ngements to " firm" the caoecity of those two cocoeratives, or to otherwise give thee comparable economic benefits to those in the i
of Denison power and energy to Tex-La/Rayburn Country There-I fore, as a practical matter, the only reason for your approving arrange-ments under which Tex-La and Raybum Country pass benefits to TPSL.
as opposed to arrangements with Brazos. Is your insistence that the SWPA/TPSL contract be considered at least presumotively valid.
The TPsL/SWPA contract, Clause 40, states:
OPTION POR A00iTIONAL POWER AND ENERGY
, 40.
Before the Government sells for use in ~
i the State of Texas, to any party other than the Company, any of the power and energy generated at the Genison Dam power plant, other than that
- deliverad to the Company under this Agreement, the Company shall have the cotton of purchasing such poser and energy under similar tems and con-ditions as provided for herein with proportionate , .
charges therefor, including a proportionate Increase In the poser and energy which the Government Is entitled to take out of the Company's system for service to its own custaaers.
To the extent this clause Is valid, It only gives the Company "the cotton of purchasing such power and energy under sI=Ilar terms and conditions as provided for" In this contract, which terms and conditions do not require SWPA to sell TPSL secondary energy.
Wile tratos has stated a willingness to work with Tex-La and Rayburn Country to provide long-term arrangements to " firm" their capact ty' (as
. TPsl would de under the proposed arrangements), reoresentatives for these cooperatives have stated that they feel constrained to work through TPtL because of SWPA's position that the TPSL contract with SWPA must be honored.
Sob 0'Nell, attorney for Rayburn Country pointed out at the meeting that' i
his client is losing substantial revenues, under the temocrary arrangements that have been put in place for firming the Denison North unit caoacity and energy compared with those which were of fered by Grazos. He stated that Aayburn
$WPA Country was taking the could position notthat consununate a deal with Brazos so long as Its allocation would be threatened -
unless Rayburn Country contracted for " firming" through TPtL, althougn it was and is prepared to consider alternative arrangements with Brazos .
l -
i fb l
, n . .
7 l
.? 7y
- - . _ - - , , . , . - . _ _ -._,___I-_____.--.__._<,,_.s_ . . _ ___ _ , _ . - - - _ _ . ,__
- -- - ^ -
~
Mr. Welter Bowers L
Southwestern Power Administration January 27, 1984 Page 3
' We are advised by counsel that $WPA could not approve future arrangeme under which substantial preference power and energy would go to TPsL where there are practical alternatives to such arrangements. Certainly SWPA ,
cannot allow the preference laws to be defeated based upon enforcement !
of a contract, dating back to the IS40's, which contract not only locks l in the the delivery laws preference of power and energy on a long-term basis , contrary to and purportedly restricts SWPA from making new ,
merketing arrangemen,ts in the future in confonnity with the preference !
laws, but which contains restrictions which -- to say the least- are ;
highly questionable as a metter of antitrust.poIIcy. Moreover, as is J t' TPsL would be entitled to at mostset forth above, by any reading of the IP 1200 hours of energy per kilowatt of <
' contracted capacity and not to the very valuable excess energy too. We
. having some limitations, but we are not certain of the deta 4
Based upon the above, Brazos requests that you do not approve the new proposed arrangements (or similar arrangements) between Tex-l.a. Rayburn
^
Country should beand TPsL.directly allocated It is 8resos' position that Denison capacity and energy
- to 8casos. Plainly, Brazos was not put on notice before the final allocation of the contemolated new arrangements, and, in any event, an' allocation excluding it would have no basis in equity.
i However, Srazos does desire to cooperate with $WPA and the other parties to to Denison entitlements. reach a fair resolution of all problems arising out of the Therefore, we are presaring to submit a new pro-posal next week, which wis hope will be fair to all parties and consistent with the preference laws and will assure SWPA of its revenue entitlement from and satisfactory operation of, the Centsen units. ,
Srazos interprets you to have stated at last week's me entitlement to firm power from that unit. It seems totally inconsistent for SVPA to take the position that TPSL is entitled to the maximum benefits that could be imelled from its contract, but Srssos would have to give us
.protect rights to fire power under its contract, or be penalized. Obviously, to demand to protest our valuable Whitney power allocation, doing protest and reserving our rights.
In any event, as our counsel stated, we are willing to consider giving up our rights to firm power from Vhitney and entering into a "run of the river" agreement. However, we think if such changes were made, trazos should certainly obtain some benefits frem Denison.
would be making the Denison project more valuable.Sy entering i Also, the fact that the present
'.h * .t ar i Whitney 4.. Iww water u=6
- levels (and those at Morris Shecoard, which af fect ve res,wynizee in considering equities.
7F2d .
-,w---s-g.---e p-w--r-+---v
( ( l
( ,' Mr. Welter Bowers
(
Southwestern Power Administration January 27, 1984 I Page 4 I urge you to examine the possibilities of Brazos firming non-ERCCT hydro-electric projects in exchange for a right to receive non-ERCOT energy.
Brazos is directly tied to Texas Utilities Electric Comoany and Indirectly tied to the Central and South West Company transmission facilleles. Of course, because the normal power flows over the DC ties would be into ERC07, there non~(RCOT should power be capacity in these ties to permit Brazos to Firm projects.
- as a result of displacement.When Brazos generates to firm non-(RCOT power, It will actually free DC tie capacity. On the other hand, If Brazos buys non-(RCCT hydroelectric energy of f peak there should be capactcy avallablIIty coming south. If there were even, . --
slight amounts of potential savings as a result of SWPA and Brazos entering to such arrangements, acceptable such savings agreements relating to Denison. could aid the parties' reaching mutually Yours very truly. .
W _ O '
0.n wen,e, ....
Manager - Operations cc: Mr. Mike Caymy Mr. Ray Raymond Mr. John Butts Mr. ' Sill Surchette i nr. Sob 0*Neli Mr. Richard McCaskill Mr. Bob Gross Mr. Carl Stover bec: Clarence Carpenter Joe Riley Sob Jablen I
f r
iG '
_ 73v P
g-w-9.,-. .-,,- , .,--_, -,_ ,
A a ,
l 8
4 e
e : meet esses s .teet . smud f9999995 t et estet stl es l h3 I
I s-4
- , - - - -+, , , - , - - , , - , - - --,-n~+----- ,w,,- - - -- -~~ - - - - - , - - . ..m,--m-,--,-,--,_ . n,w,e-w w ,m --,-,e ,- --,- - - -+ , - -e ec-,-- --m-,---g--o-e- ww-
i Department of Energy soum==wn Power uminiarecen Pea ornes s = ists Tuish, oktanome 741o1 FEB - 7 594 -
Mr. Dan Swenke, P.E.
Bruos Electric. Power Cooperative, Inc.
P. O. Box 6296 -
Waco, TX 76706-0296 l '
Dear Mr. Swenke:
I This is in response to your letter dated January 16, 1984, to SWPA from the Denison O m project. reiterating Brazos' interest and request for We appreciate generated at theyour interest Denison and concern over the disposition of power project.
As you know SWPA's Final Power alloca-
, tions of 1980 resulted in Tex-l.a of Texas and Rayburn Country Cooperatives sharing in a 70 MW allocation of Peaking Capacity and 1200/km/kW/yr of 1200 kWh/kW/yr of associated energy. associated energy, and Bra We did not address energy allocations during this'public the Peaking process except for the 1200 hours0.0139 days <br />0.333 hours <br />0.00198 weeks <br />4.566e-4 months <br /> that is to accompany Capacity.
The TP E Contract (Ispa-177) referred to in your letter was considered legal when executed, is an omligation of the Government until 1990, and was executed for the benefit of SWPA serving its Texas customers rather than
- for the benefit of TP E .
Texas preference customers could just as well be accomplished i
entity, including Brazos, willing to do so under terms satisfactory to the allottee.
( Althamp these TPE arrangements were made in 1947 when the L hydropower was a " ass attractive commodity than it is today, the Cooperati still feel they benefitted and are presently attempting to continue the use of TPE (now TUEC) to deliver their % IPA power to their customers. The arrangements befag made are not that different than several of SWPA's customers who are reeste to our system.
Cooperatives for future arrangements but must remind you that we feel ou
. obligations to TPE are just as binding as our obligations to 3razos are in supporting neiitney out of Denison, at least untti contracts expire.
, As to available acess energy from the Denison project 8razos is entitled to a portion of any such excess energy from Cenison as is not needed to satisfy Section 40 of the SWPA/TPE contract just as the Cooperatives ard entitled to a portion of excess energy available from Whitney. It is our intention to make excess energy available much in the same manner as we to preference customers outside of Texas, except as may be barred by a C ,
(/
}
g, h
2 project being sold as a " narrows" type project. As you are aware, the quantities of excess energy available to both the Cooperatives and Brazos are somewhat clouded until the expiration of the TP&L contract in 1990.
tion to TP&L (and to the Cooperatives upon execution of a contract) will be made availeile to the preference customers in Texas as circumstances allow. ,
As we with have you indicated at any time. to you, we will discuss banking / exchange arrangements We can also appreciate your interests and concerns in' developments affecting i
these two Texas projects and would suggest that you consider the proposal of developing the " narrows" type contract with $WPA which would preserve -
- the Whitney output for Brazos, estimated by the Corps of Engineers to be in _
j excess of 2400 kWh/kW/yr of nameplate capacity. Moreover, Braros would use i the project for operational benefits, have access to the overload of the generating units, and other considerations as discussed with you before--
all at SWPA's system rate. And if Brams and the Cooperatives devise an 1
arrangement by which Brazos can, schedule / integrate the Denison and Whitney projects, fire the sale of 100 MW by SWPA (70 MW to the Cooperatives and 30 MW to Brazos), and enable SWPA to honor its existing obligations, we would be supportive of such arrangements.
' Sincerely 7 '
/ / A z.t .AD Walter M. Bowers -
Director, Power Marketing cc:
Mr. Mike 03)ey Texas Utilities Electric Company 2001 Bryan Tower -
Dallas, TX 75201 Mr. Ray Raymond, President Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, Inc.
P.O. Box 370 Kaufman, TX 75142 W. John M. Butts Executive Director
- Tex 4a Electric Cooperative of Texas. Inc.
P.O. Box 1623 Nacogdoches. TX 75961 Mr. Willias H. Surchette Heron, Surchette, Rickert & Rothwell Suite 420 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, OC 20036 7d ;
f; 3 Robert O'Neil. Esquire Miller, Salis & 0'Neil Suite 1400 Washington, OC 20005 6
e I
@h# >
0 9 6 9
l e:, -
, k.,N =
~
73'7
1 I
W
- : C
. w).
M e
3, 1
1 i
, Department of Energy
/ seuesueuem Power Admenstraten
- Pest Ofnes ses 1819 Tm Chrianame 741o1 FES12 W .
' Dan 3menke, P.E.
' Manager, Operations I
Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
P.O. Box 6296 Waco, TX 76705-0298 Daar W. Suenke: ~
i 31s is in reply to your letter dated January 27, 1984, concerning the
- allocation De projectyof 35 MW of power and associated energy generated at the Denison 1he 35 MW allocation to Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas. Inc., and Raytern Contry Electric Cooperative Inc. (Cooperatives) resulted from comments made to our preliminary powe,r allocations (1980-1988) and attend-
- ant Pubite Review and Coment. Not only was this allocation process announced in the Federal Register for August 2,1979, copies were mailed to 1 each customer (including Irazos) with our ' Notice
- dated August 7,1979.
The allocation process was widely publicised in articles appearing in various customer organization nousletters. Moreover, a copy of the Final j
Power Allocations (FPA) which ap 24,1900, was sailed to Brazos. peared in the Federal Register dated March Srazos failed to attend these public review forums, offer comments, or request an allocation during these public participation processes prior to the PPA. Thus, the responsibility for such failure and attendant consequences must rest squarely with Brazos.
Regarding the Texas Power & Light Company's (TPt&) involvement in the proposed 7,1984, February contractual to purarramps,
' ettar dated we can only reiterate our answer dated
. January 18,1984. Our primary concern is to aerket preference castamers. the power generstad at designated projects to our SWPA does not object to arrangments with inter-andiaries se long as the preference customer concerned benefits from the Federal researce. As pu are quite aware, such intermediaries are com>.
pensated for the power novannts through various arrangements.
We have said many times we would welcome an arrangment whereby Brazos wesid schedule the projects while honoring our Power Allocations and our TP&L contract. Your statement that 51dPA is encouraging Tex-La and Rayeurn Country to pursue arrangements with TP&L instead of Brazos is not correct.
Your statseent that the FPA excluded Brazos is incorrect. In f act Brazos was allocated 30 MW. The 1980 FPA provides that if the allottee does not have adequate whoe11ng or supplemental power sources under contract by the Q;'
J3] .
Y 2 i
j first of the year in which the allottee is scheduled to receive power, suca
(??
w "g
- power will be withdrawn ad redistributed per the FPA criterion. Thus,
' under tne FPA procedures, the Denison power and energy would probely be allocated to preference customers in Kansas and Louisiana. The present interia arrangements with the Cooperatives have only been condoned since SWPA did not hwe the full capacity from the Denison North unit we11 ele for sale pursuant to the FPA allocations. The upcoming March 1,1984, emeirusion date of the interie agreement is based on the expectation that
' this condition will be rectified. Moreover, any new criterion for the allocation of power would be subject to the public participation process and requests of any interested parties'in SWPA's area would hwe to be considered. Etz;,1 ally, the potential for trazos to receive an allocation is unknema. .
5HPA is primarily concerned with the' development of a satisfactory marketiny arranquent which can be tuplemented when the full 35 MW at l
Denison 's wai' able. A Irazos proposal satisfactory to the Cooperatives ~
and consisant with the 1980 FPA would be viewed favorably by SWPA, so long as Witney (and subsequently our Brazos contract) support interests are protected.as are those interests of TP&L under its contract with SWPA. All such ' arrangements would need to be accepted by all parties and be in place by March 1,1984.
Variring theories concerning the meaning of Section 40 of Contract Ispa-177 hus;bgen, put forth; however, this clause is rather staply stated and however 'one may interpret the Section, the intent seems fairly' clear and
_ enautiguous; the Campany should have the first option of purchasing power generated"at the Denison Dam project ad delivered into Texas. TP&L has
'ndicated in its negotiations with the Cooperatives time and again that they.uoald forego whatever additional benefits, real or perceived, they may receivd .through scheduling this power to the Cooperatives. The Cooperatives hug indicated they would be receptive to an arrangement with Brazos if the economics were persuasive. On. January 16, 1984 that:Rayburn Country was losing substantial revenues under Mr. O'Nett the tenoorary represented arrangement. Mr. Bob Gross, Consultant for Tex-La of Tasas strongly disputed that claim and declared the Brazos offer to date is not economic-ally as good as that of the Company. On February 13,1984, three options as presented by Brazos were discussed. The Cooperatives found these options' unacceptable. We understand a final offer was made by Brazos which the .gooperatives were to discuss with their respective Board of Otractors. '
. Aingsdi t . . fres_m.sg your cameents that Brazos could lose part of its 'entitlementit ,
~
Brazos' entitlement under its contract with SWPA is 30 MW uith 1200 kWh/kW '
of associated energy. Srazos is guaranteed this amount. Additional l
secondary energy could be made available from time to time and sold as excess . energy at SWPA's option. In the past Bruos has received the seco#ary. energy at Witney because no other preference customer could use such . energy. Brazos has never been
- entitled
- to all the secondary energy generated at Whitney. Under the proposed Cooperatives contract, the Cooperatives will receive a portion of Whitney secondary energy in exchange for finning us the, Witney Om Project as a resource to meet SWpA's caligations under the current SWPA/Brazos Contract (No. 14-02-0001-
_ , 1482, dated January 27,1971.)
d 'N
3 s
4
,e - f ;,
'u We appreciate this opportunity to reply to your ccaments and stand ready to further dfscuss the proposed integration of the Denison and Whitney projects.
. Sincerely,
. As . - '_
Walter M. Bowers Director, Power Marketing
~
- t.
t Y* e M~
L,:
A
, ****C .
l
\ t te
+6 M e >*e e6 p
- e --
' t *. * *. -
._p.t
. . L' E.
- s 9 e
e-~-%,
1
- . 7Y' l .
___ ____ _ . -...--.= - --- . - ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - -
l i
l 1
-l 9
O W
h l .
l s.m. a m00+ - emmue l
$ 9999991 f 95 99991 BI96 e et 99991 l .
t l
l l
- Inm: T i
\
SCHEDULING ACENT AGRESENT between TEXA3 UTHJTIES ELECTRIC CCMPANY and TEX-LA ELECTRIC CCCPERATWE OF TEXA3, NC.
,,g RAYBURN COUNTRY MC CCCPERATWE, NC.
THIS AGREEMENT, rnede and entered ines this 282 day of February,1984, by and between Texas Utilities Electric Company (TUICL a corporation of Dallas, Texas, ergenimd and esisting under the laws of the Sam of Texas, acting thro its duly autherland atScials, Ten.La Elastric " ;_ - ed Texas, Inc. (Tem-La et Teemak'a " ~
,;-G carperusies ed."N ' ~ Teena, and Rayburn Centry Elastric '": , M-, Inc. (Rayburn e= s i), a F: ~
, _. - corporation of Kaufman, Tamme, both ergeniand and existing under the laws of the Sete of Tex
- Quereinmeter h'* AJi referred a as me ""- ; _.#, acting erough their respoutive daly authorized atScials, WITNE35ETH, Thas, THERIAS, in aemordance with me 3euevessern Power Adrainistration%
(3WPA) P!nsi Power Auscasions (1980-1983b 4319,432 Ped. Reg.
(1980) Tex La Electric e . , _ .C-, Inn. (Ten La), a F -
, M m carpersalen of P E t r t Teens, ed which Ten La ed Teena and Eayburn Country are enembers, has been allocaand 33,000 kileusess et hydroelocurls power and associssed energy gener as me Nere Unit ed me Denisen Dam :t,4 '
_=% Project om me Red River between the Sams ed Teams and e'-! ' , said Norm Unit being located in l
Grayson County, Teens (the North Untak conditiened, however, upon Ten-La's support, or arrangement to support, SWPA's contractual obligation a Brazos as to power and energy from the Whitney Prolect pursuant to C i 7. No.14-42 0001-1482, as amended; and
- O .
.~. ...
O _ -
e
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
l
- 6 WHEREA3, the Cooperatives and SWPA, an or before February , , win 23 198 esecus a Power Sales C . .is under which the F-
- : .tives win purchase from i
SWPA.up a 70,000 kilowatts of power and associand energy generate Nere Unit and the Saum Unit of Danteen Dam and t'n _. 1 Energy gene at t,
- . _ _'_ =M projecs other than Denison One (said comrect hereina referred a es me Tower Sales F- = -$and WHEREAS, pursuant a Contract No. 161-464, as amended, SWPA an Ten La entered ines a Power F '
,_ Agreement en Ossober 20,1993, under which, among other things,13,000 kilowessa of firm power and asso ~
' furnished to members of Tae-La by SWPA from theount syssen of at TU generatten frera the Sipsth Unit of Denison Dam; and i WHERIAS, the ainEty ed STPA a fulful la contractual chilgation a Tez-L frera said Seush Unit is dependent upon the sais at 35,000 leilsweets electric power and ammaissed energy by STPA a TUIC pursuant m C-...
~
I fopen.177, as amended; and THERIA 3, since neither SWPA nor the Cooperatives have faciuties ava ta transmit L,4 '- _ k power and energy generesed at Denisen Dam er as oth r
SWPA hymerseisstric projects a the Cooperatives nor own faciuties fo douvery of such power and energy furnished frorn the SWPA system to CasperatiW member syssumes and ^
^
j WHEREA3, sinen SWPA and the Cooperatives de not have faculties a to tronandt me adoremenslaned t, -
- ' au power and Mb energy from Denisen Dann er from esher SWPA hyteeisstric projeca i~ m~ me Cas '
member systems, TURC and me "n;M.
desire a enter las mis Agreement wherehr TUIC "1s autherland to act as the CooperattW agent f'er the da!!very of such .'.,4 i-Z power and associated energy Ints is system for the account of me Cooperativeug e
- D;
.z.
wm I 6 9 <me6
. ,4
._n . s._ _
4 g b.. g ,L
e
. G e i
, o e
\
I(S
,s t NOW, THEUUD' ORE, in consideration of the prunines and numm s
and agreemems hacematter set forth, the perdes heress mumally con sgree as fadows: :
i ,
t
__C-seen AkT T Am.um Agent eraugh whern au wansassions wie SWFA wiein ther provisions '
4 s Sales Camrast, other than esse i;- ' '--- a bi1Hng and ,payment
, sha!.1 he '
4 l
and receive kern STPA, for the 'acesunt at the F witw all " _k : T.i- 4 power and assectased enery senerated at me Nore Unit *and au Suppiam Energy and a receive and asempt au nemmenary notismo and asuo i
and to act for and en behalf of the F- , _
._ as e au nsatsers pertaining to
( [
,, _ . . schuhding, receipt, and delivery of the A power and w=w z.:t--J quantity ad hy, A k enery, seer een matters permining a bunng and payment, in au respecs and with the same force and effect asescould me Cooper acting notisms shnu be doomed poperty given is er served en TUP.C li mausd toe i
W ~
(
Tamme utints Fm; cany ny, . "
A Divisian ed Teens Utiurias Electric Company -
M, Sk !
e = , e .,
p, _
w % %
. a h.
, _ _ QaMas, Temas 73201
^ ' E.
1 Term of This itM'8'ar Asent A.a. ....i i h Wansfer, acceptance, and dailvgay g( h7_
i 4_ 'i:LM power and energ
! pursuant to the provisions of this Scheduling Agent Agreement shad be a.m., March 1,1984, and shnu terminate at 11d5 p.m.,1984, Apru urdess 30 s
~- .
04 e gs, **(
g.
i , -
es enriier terminand by mumm 1 agreement of TUEC and the e m _etives in writing.
l 1:Is understood and agreed by the parties hereto that the Power Sales Ce
{
inchades Wm mis by SWPA m Tes-1.a of 35,000 i kilowatts of t e - % po .
Y and asessisted energ generated at the South Unit of the mid Denisen Dam
' :",4
- TEM Project and thas, insofar as mid Power Sales Centract a provi
~
p the F: ,_
s
.- agree that, during the term of this Agreement, SWPA's abil-t s gestens to the F--
-;_etives permining a power and energ generated at said South
, c I ' Unit are fully setiefted pursuant a Centrace No. !apsv.177, as amended, b i
SWPA and Temas Power 4 IJefit Company (TUIC having acceeded to al
( '
(i -
rights and abalgations at Teens Power 4 IJght Company imder Camrec 177, as amended, purment to a ===== y merger that occurred an senuar i _.
and Centract No. 14 02 401-444, as amended, between SWPA and Tes-La, t
_ Camract No. Ispe.177, as amended, and Centrace No.1H1-844, as ame
_a remain la full force and effect throughout the tamn of this. Agreement.
TUEC
{'
hereby agrumes != claimed rigger of first retumal pursuant a C .. s No i ,
177, as amended, a all power and enery genersed at tw North Unit and re same, but anty for ths: power and enery genera Ing during the term of this Agr==rn=ste, provided that me F; M.- reunive and pay for all af such po and energ guarated at the Nere Unis daring such term pursuust to the Powe
$sles Contract.
Wtth respect u in claimed rigtet of f!rst rufuena. the Cooper-atives, by eencutism et tids Ayeoment, neither admit nor deny es esistenc meh ciaknad right ei Tusc. _
j, -
t C.
i ReueletaflL- _ ' :s;.E Power and 2.
~
la order that the Casperatives may fully reallas the benetta of the varia _
quantities of hje ~'- _=k power and enery made available to the c :;;ettves
! by the Power Sales C .
. between SWPA and the '*:,_.tives from the North i Unit and the Supplemental Energy available from other SWPA hydroele Qp '
\
.s. _
- e .
4 M . .
9
- e o
.-.,,----,,,-,-J -
. , - - - w------w----w-r,.-y.,--w-,
- - . - - - . . . . . ._.n. ..
- -- .. .~t L ,
t
, , . i
[. projecm, TUIC shall be entitled a untitze all iwudsting capadty fr
$p
\ Iy i
eO N
-. D&T &
@ EE,E b$ce W % N ,
dMN specised condittans when operating beyond is namepiam rating but wi notes et in e--%
. guaransee, er in me mee,4e empiration of me ,
('
guaranese, within sadeJ,< 11miss' as dwiermined by en owner), and ' a23 <
rnenmi Enery availahre a em Cospen, stver.
{ , !
TUEc> shalt aise be entitled m , 1 i
scheehde an es hyeenienwie power and assoaisand energy avagable a ' . '
i unit asen,: such energr as la reedred a meser.
3Wes somrnc==l ehugatans ser'2 >
1,200 Idlewetth per idlewett per year ad Penidng Camract Genand w
{
- pursuant a Centract No.14 42 4001-1482, as amended. It is fure r rer .
the parties to mis Ayeomant that there enny be parkds setewhen es not d M af M b $s M ,,
N Nm
- C C
-d - E rg, m, 00 - - - --=
pone and energy aross me Norm Unit in suencient quanitstes, as aven '
when utuland with me power and energy avagable frans the generatin Whtmey Project, viu be suinsient a ital 2H1 es said SWFA er stugation Censrast No. 14-03 4001.L482, as amended. 45 censideration.a T ohugnalen pursuant a Camract No.
14 42-0001 1482, as amended, TURC shan be enttElad W remtve sevat Idlewatts of poww med sevat idlewest-h front the Nere Unit for eneh six idlevata et power and rssia -
of IdleenE hou
~
energy scheduled for deitvery to Braans a fulful the said SWPA conwac etilgation from the Nere Unit.
It is further apsed, that if the Norm Unit is D
e e .
- 4
in
~, *
' ('O
- maveliable, in whole or in part, to support the SWPA conenctual obil fL the aforesaid parieds, then, a the extent power and energy is available fro
,i r
- I from saures other then, the Nare Unit, TUIC shan provide me powe neessunry a fuittu the SWPA contracent obligation and the F:
., z.iives shan pay TURC theredar in acuerdance with the appropriam TUEC Thelemale
,5 inchaded as Ishibit A to this Agreement, er la =- tartif. -
{ ;) * '
dthef , . . . -
": M._ shnu asempt 15,000 td'
.si. et firm lead faster power and associ.
- i. , i
- .s ' ased energy in eseange for me 33,000 idlemata et '-
Fd
. . , - 'n. M power and h==8 energy generaand at me South Unis et menisen Dam and tr
- ansferred Inte the syvenet et TUIC b F the e , _..E. ss as provided for in Centract No. Ispe-177, as amended, and Centreet No. 14-02.101-464, as amended. Wie respect a the ,
- g. .. -
M M M TUIC M M UW M d 8$$
( e ; r.r.. M 8e wie au me .t,1 l
r=a energy generated as me Nore Unit (whic, h fr the ptspeem af this Agreement, is amened B be 77.73 percast of the es emire o.ni o o ad au su,,ismana! Energy from SWPA.ransferred lam en syssum at TUIC. such pesar and eersr man be eedied to me e-x;; itves !
in assardense with the rasehedningy set fare in Ishilds 5 m mis Agreeme
-L
. , . -- kurastam N===e of Transmethm a +=
{" .. . . .
- '~' ;'
- the Nere Unit and me Thimmy Project and their respective reissed s de faciutie ~
I rot and wiu not, eteer direcety er ereugh conneensens wie other entistas, iransmit eesstrte energy la Intersom comm erce. Casperatives fureer agree that wkN nsI i y
n E edlE Wl $M in an7.M i
x- .
e
- _ - - - - , - - - . - - - ~ - , . - _ . , _ , - - . . - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - _ - - - - , - - - - . - - . -
i g
sy t lnarstate activities raladng a mie Nore Urdt or me Whimey , e, Prefec esubilsh, mainmin, modity, or utilize, directly or arough oeer entities
- connecelan or facility used or a be used for me mis or transmissian of La t
' energy in Intersma commeres froen either en Nere Unit er the Whimey ,
It is undersoned and agreed est me brusch by the Casperatives or the es i
e ;;ves a comply wie any provtsian d ein secuan E shnu entic TUEC i
to disconnect la facilities farewith.
L ,
F.
S. 2-2% for F'=8m A.-W Cut of This A_ -.mt ~
W -
The Casperatives agree is indemnify and held harmless TUEC and/o
' Texas Power at L!ght Campany from any and au damages assessed a i
and/or TPatL by Judgment, decres, arder er otherwise sogether wie au dodense including reasonable asserneys' fees that readt front any cialm, ,
~
m
- - cuise, cause of action, complaint, suit, action er administrative procee ,
brought, er pressened by Ername, in member ansperatives or any through, by or under Bruses er les rnamber cooperatives, against , ught in TURC bro l .
any sense er federai court or mi=wasive agency or osherwise, that raiates to o -
arises out ed TUICs assaution er perh ed this Agreement. This Indem i
- ~~
does not anand as any claim er award fair damages that arises out of TU
- 1 -
- u ' emanution er parthrmance of any oese agreement, wheter kidpast or inW
- - ~ ~ -
fusure Gncluding Centract No. Ispe.177, as amended), or any TUIC ac ~
failure a act other een in to emesution or performance of this Agreemen
. M .
Any such lademnity 'a be paid a TUIC by the Casperasives shan be
(. ,_ allocated between me " , M In'amoordance wie emir respeedve Allocation Pereuntage set farth In Exhibit C to this Agreement.
IN WESS NP, the undersigned parties have duly executed this Agreement on the date Srst mondoned above, ig .
. .y
. - - - - - _ _ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,- - - - - e------~ ----- - - ,---.--r,_., - - - - - ------------,-------,-,,-_,,m,-
~
g . .
em 1( _
TEXA3 m gLECTRIC COMPANY sys $
f - ( x(.l.' .. _
Ddes Division PresiMme TEX-LA OF TEXAS, ELECTRIC INC. CCCPERAUVE sys. /,f'
.suv 1
RAYBURN COUNTRY ELECTRIC CCCPERAT!YE, INC.
ae r
,, gysA =::!
i
= .. .
~
e e- m 4
t .
e c.e*
- e
,,h ,,
g -
4 4 e M
- q e
-r. , _ -
r5.;"-@ .%
O e
S k
a ems N 9e ml es ,
4 9 95 31 es l
ro m
- , ; . g, ,
w.. c u-en - . tox. u , .<, - m -
t
. ..ero ec ....
i
)s c
The araz.s system
/d Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,Inc.
MCHAmo E. McCASKILL executw vce paesceur July 16, 1986 A*dD OeN.AAL taA8sAQ R Mr. John.W. Beck .
Vice President Texas Utilities Generating Company Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 - - - -
Dear John:
We have received your July 14, 1986 letter, concerning the NRC antitrust
- review. We shall follow your suggestion that we respond directly to the NRC. In this context, I note that Section 20 of our Joint Ownership Agree-ment for Quanche Peak restricts our ability to transmit power and energy in interstate comerce. Similar language is found in other contracts with your company. I an advised by our counsel that Section 20, and similar pro-visions in other contracts, restrain trade through their effect of restrict-ing Brazos to buying and selling within the ERCOT area of Texas.
Two simple examples point up the difficulty that Section 20 brings:
- 1. If Comanche Peak continues to be delayed (and we are forced to retain our ownership share), we cannot practically replace such deficient power and energy from economical power supply sources outside of ERCOT.
- 2. Brazos has.made application for 7.5 MW of non-ERCOT SWPA power.
The value to us of such power is greatly reduced because of our inability to have normal A.C. transmission of such power.
We therefore, request that we be released from such " interstate" clauses'.
Since your response is necessary to respond to the NRC antitrust review, I L@,-
_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _.o O _ ________-__m __
W_ .
i 4
Cry v
Mr. John W. Beck Page 2, 7/16/86 would appreciate an early reply.
Very truly yours, chard E. McCaskill REM /1w cc: Mr. J. S. Farrington, Chairman of the Board and Chief Exe6utive '
Texas Utilities Electric Company ie4 Mr. Michael D. Spence, Division President Texas Utilities Generating Company Mr. Frank Bennett, Director
~~
Southeast Area - Electric' ,
. Rural Electrification Administration
_ Mr. John H. Butts, Manager Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
Mr. Ed Wagoner, General Manager ~ ~ ' '
Texas Municipal Power Agency
- ~
L
- m e
- 4-o 9
, tb t.
m
7: -.
O ces S
p c
l M' M M
l nesse, e et u es *
- E e
I e
0 e
9 p Y.% g Se ,
4 f
8 ' '
42 , . r e
.r + ~ .
- 4' g.
Mr.MUA l aiLA6w e r.M WWO 3 E-22-tM5 3 480W PMi 1 817 7152 2*a01 + 2028794001 ;e2 Md N o- ,.
Q't 00*
(O
'J-TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY ausvway - . ese asnowns osava spuusurr. a m. e s . == . = = ramaa veesa
"'*" W ""*' August 14, 1986
. Mr. Richard E. McCaskill Executive Vice President and General Manager Brazos Electric Power Cooperative. Inc. -
P. O. Box 6296 Waco, Texas 76706-6296
Dear Richard:
This la in res?onse to your letter to John W. Beck dated l July 16, 1986. We to not believe that Section 20 of the Joint Ownership Agreement restricts you from transmitting power and energy in interstate commerce or restricts youh o buying and selling power within the ERCOT area of Texas. The North DC interconnection was installed specifically for those and other purposes.
However, to avoid any-misunderstanding in this regard
. please be advised that, as we have stated in the past, to the extent that Section 20 of the Joint Ownership Agreement or similar provisions in any other agreements are inconsistent with paragraphs 3.D(2)(1)(a) and (b) of the License conditions for Comanche Peak (a copy of which is attached) such provisions are waived. We will of course maintain all our rights under those License conditions and will expect you to comply therewith.
Very truly yours, m
S MDSpence/la n
.kd REIElVED AUG 191986
,. c. . . .. .a
xanox m.rcopien ass : 8-22-es: 4:10 PM: 1 817 752 2501 + 20297 4001 : e3
...: glNAL)
. . ,. * . v. .
A'* -
p- i LICENSE CONDITIONS FOR COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION NUCLEAR UNITS NOS. I AND 2 .
.l O. 0) The following definitions apply to paragraph 3.D.(2):
(a) "Applicantt' means severally and jointly Texas Utilities Generating Company, Dallas Power & Light Company Texas Electric Service Company, Texas Power & Light Company,, Texas
- Utilities Company and each other subsidiary, affiliate or successor company now or hereafter engoged in the generation, transmission
.. p and/or the distribution of electric power in the State of Texas. 2
? (b)
I " North Texas Area" means the following Texas countfes:
Anderson, Andrews, An Baylor, Bell, Borden, Bosque, Brown, gelina, Archer, Bostrop, Burnet, Che Comanche, Cooke, Coryell, Crane, Culberson, Dallas, Dawson,,
Delta, Denton, Eastland, Ector, Ellis, Erath, Falls, Fannin, Fisher, Freestone, Gaines, Glasscock, Grayson, Henderson, Hill, Hood, .
Hopkins, Houston, Howard, Hunt, Jack, Johnson, Kaufman, Kent, Lamar Lamposas, Leon, Limestone, Loving, Lynn Martin McLenn,an, Midland, Milam, Mitchell, Montague, .%, g--ses,, .
Navarro, Nolan Polo Pinto, Parker, Pecos Rains, Reagan, Red C River, Reeves,, Rockwolf, Rusk, Scurry, ,Schockelford, Smith, Somervell, Stephens, Sterling, Tarrant, Terry, Tom Creen Upton, Van Zandt, Ward Wise, Wood, and Young. , Wichita, Wilborger, Winkler, Willia (c) " Entity" means an electric utility which is a person, a private or public corporation, a governmental agericy or authority, a
- municipality, a cooperative, or an association owning or operating or contractually. controlling, or proposing in good faith to own or operate or contractually control, facilities for generation of electric power and energytpovided however, that as used in paragraphs 3.D.(2Xo), 3.0.(2Xb), 3.0.(,2Xo), )3.0.(2X electric utility which is a person, a private or public corpor~ation, o governmental agency or authority r
a municipality, a cooperative, or on association owning or op,erating, or proposing in good faith to own or operate, facilities for generotlon, transmission and/or distribution of electric power and energy.
(d) " Entity in the North Texas Area" means on Entity which owns or operates facilities for the generation transmission and/or distribution of electric power in any area,within the North Texas Area.
.. (e) Bulk Power" means the electric power ond/or electric energy Q ,.
supplied or made available of transmission or subtransmission voltages.
yy .* . [ 4 b
{* ,
l .
f__._.._.__, - -- -- -- _ . _ _ _ _ _ - -
y NIER 295 ; ,e-22-e6; 4:13 pur i a m
.==
-ww.
v 2020'/94001 ;e4 lL ,' fP
. 2 m
.t [
N (f) " Costs" means all oppropriate operating and maintenance expenses I ond all ownership costs where applicable. .
(g) The terms " connection" and " interconnection" are used Interchangeably. ;
(2) !
- The Applicants defined in Paragraph 3.D.(l)(a) are s'ubject to the following antitrust condtions:
(a) The Applicants shall offord on opportunity to participate in the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units I and 2, for h term of the instant license, or any extension or renewal thereof, to any Entity (ies) In the North Texas Area making a timely request therefor, through a reasonable ownership interest in such -
unit (s) on reasonable terms and conditions and on a basis that will fully compensate Applicants for their costs. It is understood that any request received prior to December I,1973, shall be deemed to be timely. In connection with such participation, the Applicants also will interconnect with and offor transmission service as may be required for delivery of such power to such Entity (les) at a point or points on the Applicants' system on a basis that will fully compensate the Applicants for their costs includ:ng a reasonable
- return on investment. Notwithstanding the December I,1973 date gpearing hereinabove, the Applicants' offer of participation in C - Comanche Peak, Units I and 2, to Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc. shall not obilgate the Applicants, by virtue of such offer, to offor on opportunity 1o participate in Ce,r,sr.de Peak, .
, Units I and 2, to any other Entity.
(b) The Applicants, as long as they are members of the Texas interconnected Systems (TIS) shall support reasonable requests by Entitles in the North Texas , Area having generating capacity for membership in TIS. The Applicants shall also propose and octively support, as long as they are members thereof, the creation of one or more additional classifications of TIS membership based on non-discriminatory criteria to afford access to data, studies and r -
recommendations to all Entitles in the North Texas Area who desire membership. The Applicants shall ofso support requests by qualified Entities in the North Texas Area for membership in any 7" or operating organization of which other electric the Applicants areutility members planning (other then one involving only Applicants). The Applicants shall shore information with other Entitles with respect to, and shall, with other such Entities through any electric utility planning organizations (other than one involving only the Applicants) of which the Applicants- are members, conduct and/or participate in joint studies and planning of future
. however, this generation, condition transmission shall not obligote and related facilities; provided, the Applicants to
( conduct or participate in such joint studies or joint planning A unless (1) the studies or pionning are requested and conducted in .
l I
d -
~
G
_._________~__.1---.--~=--- * " " " ' - " - ' ~ ~ " ~ ~ '
wrom m m:= 27c . ' 6-Ju-ue:
4:15 PM: 1 817 752 2001 +
20297 4001 : *5
. s *; , .t ,
~s
(
good faith and are based on reasoncbly realistic and reasonobly complete dato and projections, (2) the studies or planning are reasonably justified on the basis of sound engineering principles, (3) oppropriots protection is accorded proprietary or other confidentici business and financial information, and (4) the costs
~ basis.for such studies or planning are allocated on a fair and equitable (c)
The Applicants will connect with, coordinate reserves, and se.ll, purchase or rc.d.cr.ge emergency and/or scheduled molntenance bulk power with any Entity (ies) in the North Texas Area on terms that will provide for the Applicants' costs, including a reasonable '
return on investment in connection therewith and allow such - -
Ent!ty(les) full occess ,to the benefits of such reserve coofdination.
4 (d)
. Emergency service and/or scheduled maintenance service to be
. provided by each party shall be furnished to the fullest extent s ovoilable from the supplying party and desired by the party in
' need.
If requested, Applicants shall exchange maintenance schedules with Applicants and Entity in the North Texas Area. The. s such Entity (les) shall provide to the other emergency service and/or scheduled maintenonce service if and when available to the extent they con do so without unreasonably impairing service to their customers including other electric
(.. - systems to whom they have firm comrhitme6ts. Any curtailment or refusal to provide such emergency and/or scheduled maintenance service shcIl be on a non-discriminatory basis.
(e)
The Applicants and the other party (ies) to o reserve sharing arrangement minimum shall from time to time jointly establish the reserves to be installed ond/or provided under contractual arrangements as necessary to molntoin in total a
.- reserve margin sufficient to provide odequate rollobility of power supply to the Interconnected systems of the parties in occordance with good industry practice os developed in the area. Unless otherwise agreed upon, minimum reserve requirements shcIl be calculated as o percentage of each party's estimated o'et peak load demand (taking into account firm soles and firm purchases). No party to the arrangement shall be required to maintain greater
- reserves than the percentage which results from the aforesaid coleulation. The reliability of power delivered into TIS-ERCOT -
over de asynchronous connections sholl not be treated differently by the Applicants, for purposes of spinning and installed reserve calculations and requirements, than would be the cose if such power originated within TIS-ERCOT. Outoges on de osynchronous connections shall be treated by the Applicants the sorne os losses of generation within TIS-ERCOT. The Appliconts agree to support the adoption of principles involving de csynchronous connections
--(
DI, contained in this peregraph within any TIS or ERCOT organizction.
[ w _.. - -. - - -
.-a e ca su r e EM 295 ; 22-86; 4: 18 PN; 1 817 752 2501 + 2028794001 ;
- 6
'I
!O (f) The parties to such a reserve sharing arrangement shall provide
~
such amounts of spinning reserves as may be equitable and odequate to avoid the imposition of unreasonable demands on the other party lts (their) (les) in system meeting the normal contingencies of operating (s). However, in no circumstances shall such reserve requirement exceed the installed reserve requirement.
(g)
Interconnectiomi with any Entity will not be limited to low voltages when higher voltages are requested and are available
. - from the Applicants' installed facilities in the crea where a connection is desired, when the proposed arrangement is found to be technically and economically feasible. Control and telemetering facilities shall be provided as required for sofe and
. prudent operation of the interconnected systems. .
(h) '
- Interconnection and coordination agreements shall not embody any restrletive provisions pertaining to intersystem coordination.
Good industry practice os developed in the area from time to time i (if not unreason &ly restrictive) will satisfy this provision.
(i) The Applicants shall participate in and facilitate the exchange of bulk power by transmission over the Applicants' transmission facilities between or among two or more Entities in the_ North Texas Area with which the Applicants are connected, and between 4
(,,, -
- any such Entity (ies) and any Entity (les) outside the North Texas _
- Area between whose facilities the Applicants' transmission lines and other transmission lines, including any direct current (cyml.onous) transmission lines, would form a continuous electrical paths provided that (i) permission to utilize such other 3
transmission lines has been requested by the proponent. of the arrangement, (ii) the arrangements reasondly L con be .
- occommodoted from o functional and technical standpoint and (ill)_
any Entity (les) requesting such transmission arrangements shall have Appi1conts reasonable eds..co notice' of its (their) se e and req,uirements.
. Sveh transmission shall be on terms that fully compensate the Applicants for their costs including a .
reasondse return on investment; provided, however, that.such
~ transmission services and the rates to be charged therefor.shall be subject to any regiatory agency (ies) having jurisdiction thereof. _
.- The Appilcets awil not refuse to provide such transmission .
- service merely because the rates to be charged therefor are the subject of dispute with such Entity. The Applicants shall not be-required to enter into any arrangement which would unreasonably impair system reliability or emergency transmission copocity, it being recognized that while some transmission may be operated fully loaded, other transmission may be for emer y use and
- operated either unloaded or portially loaded. foregoing opplies to any Entity (les) to which the Applicants may be connected in the future as well as those to which they are now connected.)
O O
a-,-.. ---------w-, -----w -,v w +- - - ~ - - - - -
xuox mzcopia 2ss : ,-n-=: a
.. . e t r::: i 6i7 ici noi
.' + 2028N4oot : 7
- ; *. *l .-
- e w _S.
. , '~~' ,
(j)(c) The Applicants shall include in their pionning and constnicti programs ' sufficient trcnsmission c ocity as re
. transactions referred to in perogra@phs (1) and (k) quired for the
, provided any odvance n)otice os may be necessary to o requirements from o functional and technical standpoint and that such Entity (les) fully compensates the Appliconts for their costs Including a reasonable return on investment. The Appilconts sha
- not be required to construct transmission facilities if construction of such facilities !s infeasible, or if such would unreasonobly Impair system relisility or emergency transmission egoelty. In connection with the performance of their obilgations above the .
Applicants shall not be foreclosed from requiring a reason, die contribution in old of construction or from making arrangements for coordinated each of the parties to construction the transactionof future would owntransmission on Interest in or lin a segment of the transmission oddtion in proportion to its shore of the cost of the additlen. Any such contribution mode in old of construction determining orwheeling any ownership Interest shall be properly credited in charges.
i if the Applicants engage in
{ -
joint ownership of tronsmission lines with any other Entity, they ,
-~( circumstances with other Entities, subject to limiting the Applicants' obligations above. '
~
s (JXb) Applicants shall provide other Entities with reasoneble acces l
any future interstate Interconnection facilities which Applicants may own, on terms and conditions comparable to the provisions of l
' paragraph D.2(I) hereof, and subporograph (a) of this porograph. '
. 0c)
The Applicant, portici requirements shall, bulkupon reasonable advance notice, sell full and
- North Texas oreo having, power to requesting Entitles in the
~
on the date of this L.icense, non. -
generating capacity) under reasonele terms and
~'~
- ~
shall provide for recovery of Applicanis' costs, including o a reasondie return on investment. ~~
' ~
required to make any such sole if they do not have ovelloble sufficient bulk power or adequate transmisalon to provide the-t render odequate and rollste service to their own their dility to discharge prior commitments.
(t)(c) In connection with the performance of their obilgations herein a subject to the provisions of this porogroph, the Appliconts will not disconnect from or refuse to connect their then-existing or proposed fccilities with the fccilities of any Entity, used or proposed to be used for the transmission of electric energy in
@ interstate commerce by recson of the interstate chorocter of such
- XEROX TELECOPIER 296 ; 8-22-96: 4:23 PM: 1 R 1 ? ?'LO 04S * ^^^^******
~ . ...~.., w. .~ ~ a
. . . . , ~
- ,1 #
, r
=-
(O facilities, and the Applicents will not prevent any Enfity with which they maintain connection from establishing, maintaining,
- modifying, or utilizing a connection with facilities used or
- proposed to be used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce by reason of the interstate chorocter of such
= facilities, provided that, anything in these License Conditions to the contrary notwithstanding (but subject to paragraph f(b) and 1(d) below), any Entity seeking to establisk, maintain, modify or utilize any connection which could offect the nonjurisdictional status of
- the Applicants under the Federal Power Act shall have filed on e
application with and used its best efforts to obtain on order from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, applicable to the Applicants under Sections 210,211 and 212 of such Act, requiring r
- the establishment, maintenance, modificotton or utilization of -
such connection. In the event that on Entity files an application g pursuant to this subporograph, the Appilconts agree that they will
- not unreasonably oppose any such applicotton. In the event such
=-
- opplication is denied by a valid order of the Federal Energy r - Regulatory Commission, any continuing refusal by the Applicants to establish, mcIntoin, modify or utilize such connection with such Entity shall be subject to review by the NRC in accordance with t
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the rules and regulation's thereunder, to determine whether any such refusal would create or molntain a situction inconsistent with -the antitrust laws or the policies thereunder In'ot:cordance with-the stonderds set forth in Section 105 of sveh Act; provided that all .
7 foctual determinations by the FERC on any cost or system reliability reason (s) for any such refusal shall not be subject to
= redetermination by the NRC. The burden of proof will be on the Applicants in such NRC proceeding.
E .
~
(I)(b) Applicants shall not enter into or maintoln any agreement or understanding with any other Entity (ies) to refuse to : deal with
~
onother Entity (leis) with the purpose of meintaining an exemption E .
frorn jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act, and in the event
- that Applicants refuse to make on interconnection with to disconnect from any Entity (les), such decision and/or.;oroctionchoose by
- - the Applicants will be undertaken unilaterolly, not jointly, and e
without consultation with any other Entity (ies), provided, -
/
- however, that after Applicants decide to undertake such action, '
they may notify any offected Entity. --
(l)(c) in the event that an Entity files an application pursuant to subparagraph (a) of this porogrcph solely by reason of Applicants' d desire to maintain their exernption from jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act, Applicents agree to pay. such Entity's reasonable expenses in connection with such application and the f
- ensuing proceeding 1/ provided however, that Applicants shall not #
r be required to pay fo,r any expe,r.ses of such Entity if that Entity'c j' A *
=
=-
.J VThislebligesian.shaHmotgplydo1he .expensus nF1he CentralTSouth ifest /
k
._ Ij -)
nCorporation or~ Houston Indsstries or any of :their respective a&diories, ^
including, . but.- not; lisaited Mng.dhe mapanses .sfECentralW3 martin-West Cwuilon smd any of its siesidiesiesWM BrmN am j"h'][M/'" 4
, - == ztrcc;iEii no a u-22-es: 4:26 PMI 1 817 752 2501 + 2029794001 ; e 9 4
hplication ileants atisFERC, denied andbyprovided for reasons FERC' further, advocated- by that Applicants shall not be required to pay for any expenses of such Entity which that
- Entity would have incurred had it not filed on application solely by reason of Applicants' desire to maintain their exemption from jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act.
(IXd) Nothing in these License Conditions shall impair the right of the .
Department of Justice or any other Entity, public or private, to file on antitrust action in any Federal Court in the event any Applicant refuses to establish, maintain, modify or utilize any connection with any Entity (ies), provided, that nothing herein shall
~ preclude any Applicant from raising any legal or equitable defense that may be available to it. .
(m) Applicants agree to use their best efforts to amend any agreements with all Entities to ensure that such ocreements are
, not inconsistent with paragraph 3.D.(2XIXo) and (b) above.
(n) The Applicants will, in accordance with applicatile law, attaw
' ownership participation in future nuclear generating facilities l
which they may construct, own, and operate in the State of Texas on conditions similar to these License Conditions.
(o)
(- -
Applicants shall use their best efforts to. modify the Offer of Settlement filed in FERC Docket No. EL79-8 to include each of the undertakings set forth in the letter.
- eement among Applicants, Centrol & South West Corporation, ton Lighting
& Power Company and the FERC Staff dated September .1980; Appilcants shall thereafter use their best efforts to secure approval thereof by the FERC, and shall obide by any valid l order (s) of the FERC issued pursuant to the Offer of Settlement.
- Nothing herein shall preclude the Depod...ent of Justice from
- instituting or intervening in any proceeding at FERC, including
- FERC Docket No. EL79-8, and from presenting such arguments and evidence that it deems appropriate. -
(p) The foregoing conditions shall be implemented (i)'in a manner r
consistent with applicable Federal, state and local statutes and regulations and (11) subject to any regulatory agency having jurisdiction. Nothing herein shall preclude the Applicants from seeking on exemption or other relief to which they may be entitled under applicable law or shall be construed as a wolver of their right to contest the applicability of the license conditions with respect to any factual situation.
eh
.* ,9 m e . - ,
8 l~- . : .
l= L .
, a .. 1 a"
,r*,
I
\.. .
I e
f y,
,gs gg g e'#
r e
,c . .
I
? -
l
- g. s 9 .
o TEKAS tiRECIPAL POWER POOL 1
e l
l
- o. .
. t u ,'
4
4 s -me -'- ' .
l l
l I
- n. '
INDEX 1
TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER POOL POWER POOL AND ' INTERCHANGE AGREEMENT I. PARTIES .............................................................Page, 1 1
II.
RECITALS ........................................................... 1-2 III.
OBJECTIVES ......................................................... 2 3.01 Hutual Assistance ............................................ 2 3.02 Coordinated Operation ........................................ 2 3.03 Sh a ri ng Re s e rve s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -
- 3.04 Exchange of Economy Power & Energy ...........................
3 3.05 Ec on omic Di s pa t ch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.06 Generation and Transmission Facilities Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3 3.07 Joint Pa rt icipa tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 IV.
DEFI N I TI ON S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 4.01 Dedi ca ted Fa cili ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.02 Economi c Dis pa t ch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.03 Powe r and /o r Ene rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 l
4.031 Ec onomy En e rg y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
'4.032 Eme rgen cy Ene rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.033 Fi rm Powe r and Ene rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.034 In ad ve rten t Ene rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 l
4.035 Maintenance Powe r and Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.036 No n-Fi ra Ene rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 '
4.037 ' Supplemental Powe r and/or Ene rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.04 Ge ne ra ting Capa ci ty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.05 Generating Facilities ........................................ 4 4.06 Ne t Ene rgy fo r Lo ad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.07 Transmission Facili ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.08 Poi n t s of De live ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.09 Poo l Di s pa t c he r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.10 Powe r and E n e rgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.11 Substation and Switchstation Facilities ...................... 5
-s 4.12 Fi re Po o l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
\_A c) 4.13 Prudent Utility Practices ............................'........ 5 9
i .o .t.
e e l
1 4.14 Re s e rve s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 I
., ( ,
l 4.15 System ....................................................... 5 i 4.16 Dedication of Fa cili ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 !
4.17 Pool s......................................................... 6 V.
P OOL ADMINI STRATI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.01 Po ol Commi t t ee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.02 Of f i ce rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'[sr. . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.03 Meetings ..................................................... 6 5.04 Vot i ng Righ t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .
5.05 Responsibilities ............................................. 7 VI.
TECIMICAL CGetITTEE ................................................ 7 6.01 Membe rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.02 Res pons ibili ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-8 6.03 Meetings ..................................................... 8 VII. P OOL FACI LI TI ES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7.01 Dedica tion of Facili ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .~. . . . . r. s. . . . . 8-9 7.02 Facili ty Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-10 7.021 Schedule A - Generation 7.022 Schedule B - Transmission 7.023 Schedule C - Substations, Switching Stations, H' etering 7.024 Schedule D - Auxiliary Communications 7.Q25 Schedule E - Other Facilities 7.026 Schedule F - Rates and Charges 7.027 Schedule C - Existing Pool Facilities i
VIII . P OOL SYSTEN OPERATI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10. .-
8.01 Ge ne r al . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~. . . . . . . . . 1 0- 1 2 i
l.
8.02 Coordina tion of Rese rves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.021 I ns t al l e d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.022 Sp i nni ng . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12~
8.03 Powe r and Ene rgy Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.031 Emergency ............................................. 12
- a. Facility .......................................... 12 b.
Fuel .............................................. 13 8.032 Economy ............................................... 13 (m).
2
. .tk -
^
t _ e. . :. -
i 8.033
'(.', Maintenance ........................................... 13 8.034 Su p pl e me n t a l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.035 Fi ru Powe r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.04 Di s pa t c h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.041 Normal 8.042
..a.............................................. 13-14 Emergency ............................................. 14 8.043 Economic ...............................................
14 8.05 8.06 Control Areas ................................................ 14 Eme rge n ci es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 -15 8.07 Transmission Lines, Substations and ,
Interconnection Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -15 8.08 System Protection Coordination ...............................
~
15 8.09 Brokerage Operation .......................................... 16 IX.
RATES AND CHARGES .................................................. 16 9.01 Powe r and Ene rgy Ra t es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9.02 Charges fo r Exis ting Pool Facilities . . . . . . . . . . _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
- 9. 03 Ac coun ting and Billing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 X.
JOIN T PARTI CI PATI W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . 16 ........
XI.
OPERATI WAL ASSI STANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16. .-17 ....
XII.
REFERENCE TO OTHER CNTRACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 XIII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 .........
XIV.
TERM OF AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 ........
14.01 Intial Tern ................................................. 17-18 14.02 Withdrawal by any Party ...................... m ._.._.i..._...I. . 18 14.03 Enforceability .............................................. '
18 14.04 Limi ts of Pa rty 's Obliga tions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 14.05 Expa ns ion o f Poo l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 XV.
EXECUTI S .......................................................... 19-20 SCHEDULES T
A. Generation B. Transmission C. Substations, Switching Stations, Metering D. Auxiliary Conaunications E. Other Facilities F. Rat as (n') G. Existing Facilities l
4 *
..y
. ~ . . . .
(jj IEKAS MUICIPAL POWER POCL POWER POOL & INnxCHANGE AGEEMENT I. PARTIES:
This Agreement is entered into this 1st day of February,1982, by ,
and between the City of Bryan, Texas; the City of Denton, Texas; the City of Garland, Texas; the City of Greenville, Texas; (hereinafter referred to as." Cities"); the Brazos Electric Pwar Cooperatiw, Inc. ("Brazos"); ,
and the Texas Emicipal Pwer Agency (IMPA). All of such entities may .
hereinafter be referred to indivf abally as " Party" and collectively as
" Parties".
II. RECITALS:
MIEREAS, the Cities are amicipal corporations of the State of Texas and home rule cities; and MIEREAS, Brazos is an Electric Cooperative Corporation organi=d and existirg tmder Article 1528b, V.A.T.C.S., and -'- ~ -
MIEREAS, the Texas Mmicipal Pbwer Agency (IMPh), a~nmicipal~ power -
agency organized pursuant to Article 1435a (4a), V.A.T.C.S., created for the purpose of providing wholesale power and energy for the Cities; and idHEREAS, the Cities own their out power generating facilities and intracity distribution and transmission systems by which each of tin ~
Cities generates, transmits, and sella power to the general ptblic; and MIEREAS, Brazos owns its own power generating facilities and exten-t siw cross-cosmery transmission facilities by wh151t generates, trans-
~
mits, and sells electrical power to cooperative disEibetion agencies or associations, amicipalities, universities and other distribution enti-ties; and e WiEREAS,1MPA la now constructing and/or purchasing generation and d -
, transmission facilities for the purpose of providirg the.Citime future-1 l . :
..ay - E
..y electric power and energy requirenents, and WEREAS, the Parties are willirs to make existing transnission facilities available for.use by the Pool as appropriate and as allowable by other contractural obligation and upon reasonable canpensation therefore; and WEREAS, the Parties have decennined by action of their respective i
governing bodies that it is to their several and mutual advantage to -
utilize.their respective generatirs and transmission facilities in as .
economical and reliable a manner as is possible by pooling such power and i
energy generation and transnission facilities as set out herein; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to coordinate the operation and
. . maintensuce of said generation and tran aission facilities, and to establish a framework for coordinating the future planning and
. participation in joint facilities:
NCN THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION & THE MJiVAL PROGSES AND WDERTAKINE HEREIN CONTAINED, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLiDWS:
=
,. III. OUECTIVES:
~
The Parties agree that the intent of this Agreenent shall include but not
~~' ~ to be limited to the followirg objectives:
~' '
2 3'.01' Mkual Assistance
- ~
Provide for mutual assistance in time of emergency and =eharlaled W._ .
c _mcages. ,
3.02 Coordinated Operation (bordinate the operation of the respective Parties' systems so as to create a coordinated Pool systas. ~
3.03 Sharira Reserves Provide for coordination in sharing responsibilities for g maintainirg reserves of power and energy.
j k:)
- l. ..
- . .m '
?
3.04 Exchange of Economy Power and Energy
?
(C#
Provide for periodic sales or exchanges of power and energy on an av==ic=1 basis between the Parties.
3.05 -Economic Dispatch Provide a basis for Economic Dispatch and Power Brokerage Operation.
3.06 Generation and Transmission Facility P1mming Provide for coordination in planning generation, transmission, and systen facilities. ,
~
3.07 -Joint Participation Provide a fonan for the parties to discuss and consider joint participation in future system facilities.
IV. IEFINITIONS:
4.01 Dedicated Facilities
- :- 3 = U Facilities owned by the respective Parties that have been <wnedeted -
to the common use and nutual benefit of all Parties in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. -
. 4.02 5' fa Dispatch: _
'the joint coordinar4= of start-up, operation, and shut-down of the Parties' electrical generation, transmission, and other related facilities by and among the Parties in order to minimize their total systan-wide fuel requirements, thereby __resulting in a '
monetary savings to all the Parties.
4.03. Pbwet and/or Energy shall be categorized as folldus; 4.031 Eccm j Energy ~
! x..-_=_ - =-
Ehergy prodaced by one Party and asstituted for.,_ less
-ie=1 energy of another Party on a non finn basis.
_ e: ~ ~
4.032 Emergency Energy Ehergy required by a Party to make up a deficiency between the current energy requirements and the immediately
, available energy of the Party.
4.033 Firm Power and Energy ~ _
Power and energy intended to be available at all times jh during the period covered by a commitment, even mder adverse conditions.
t N4
.: 3 -
a t ,
e .. .
4.034 Inadvertent Energy
( Any energy that was interchanged that ws not scheduled.
4~.035 Maintenance Power and Energy Power and Energy required to replace pc,wer 'and energy not available due to maintenance of a system facility. !
~ 74.036 Non-Firm Energy r- Ehergy supplied or available mder an arrangement which does not utve the availability feature of firm energy.
4.037 Supplemental Power and/or Enargy ~
Supplemental yr and/or energy is any excess available -
when a Party a normal maxima capacity exceeds its peak requirements.
4.04 Generating Capacity _
Ein maxima normal rated load carrying capability expressed in WA or W of generating equipment. - - - - - - -
[, . _
4.05_ Generating Facilities ~
" ~ -
~
IE electric generation mits or interest therein belonging to any or all of the Parties.
= -
4.06 Net Energy for Iced A~^ Party's net energy generation plus energy received from ude.rs minus energy delivered to others during the period under l
.. . consideration.
4.07 Transmission Facilities
- All tranmeission lines, poles, interest in land incidantal thereto, and other apparatus belonging to a Party and necessary to transmit.--- -
power and energy.
__ " 'l ~ 4'.08 Nints of Delivery ~ 1- ~
1 hose points where the systen of any one party interconnects-with i a
,L.
the system of the other Parties or with outside entities.
l 4.09 Pool Dispatcher ,
1he Party or Parties designated by the Pbol to coordinate and monitor the flow of power and energy. - - - --
4.10 Power and Energy
~.
C ' Electrical power shall be expressed in megawatts (MW). Ehergy shall be expressed in ":-7-et hours (HWH). -
- m. Ag ,4 6
l 4.11 Substation and Switch Station Facilities i(% - All facilities, electrical equipment, interest in land incidental- 3 thereto, and other apparatus belonging to a Party used for the purpose of transforming electrical power from one voltage to another or used for switching electrical power. Such facilities
' shall be inclusive from points of transmission line termination to transformer low voltage terminal or as defined by individual facility schedules.
4.12 Firm Pool 2
f Firm Pool is defined herein as one that can sustain the loss of its largest generating tait, or any dedicated portion thereof, or any transmission facility, and still have the capability to serve '
, its firm load commitments.
4.13 ~ ~ Prudent Utility Practice Any of the practiices, methods and acts engaged in or accepted by a signifiamt proportion of the electric utility inch 2stry at the time the decision was made or any of the practices, methods, and acts
._ that, in the exercise of reasonable judgement in the light: of-facts
~
known at the time the decision was made, could have been expected '
to accomplish the desired result at the lowest reasonable costs i
l consistant. with reliability, safety and Wition. Erudent._ ._
utility practices are not intended to be limited to the optimian
~ ~
'- - practice, method or act to the exclusion of all'others, but rather
'to a spectrum of possible practices, methods or acts. -
4.14 Reserves .
~
t _ 1 _
Generating capability that is in excess of that required to carry
_ , the system load.
4.15 System . .
A group of one or more generatirg sources and/or ting
. . transmission lines operated smder common management or supervision
. ' .;- _ ,to supply load.
4.16 w ie=einn of Facilities nadication of a facility shall mean the commitment by the owner of
- .the facility to make such facility available for use to other
=a=hars of the Pool for purposes as outlined in this Agreement.
4.17 Pool __ _
- The Pbol is defined as a coalition of indivWal generatirg and transmission systems organized for the purpose of coordinating, i operating and maintaining the combined generation and transmission facilities of the member systems for the autual benefit and j assistance of such systems.
i dy ~
p
.- j - . - - .
1
- _ - _ - , . - ,------_-,__-,-,,--.,-,.-_--,v- - . . . .
V5 IOOL ADMINISIRATION k '5.01 Fool Cournittee
- The Pool Committee shall be couprised of two representatives from each Party. Each Party shall select its own representative" to the
. Pool en==ietee and may change such representative (s) permanently or
--on a temporary basis as designated alternate (s) at any time upon written notice to the other Pool Parties. Each Party shall be permitted to bring personnel in an advisory or consulting capacity to any Pool Committee meet representatives or their des
- however, only duly appointed ed alternates to the Pool Committee will be allowed .to participate in formal action taken by the Pool Immittee. '
5 02 Officers -
The Pool rm-ittee shall elect from its membership a mairman and Vice mairman at its first meeting and annually at its January meeting in all subsequent years. The Chairman shall not be elected 1
twice from the representatives of any one Party tritil a representative from all other Parties has served as ~mairman. A
- Secretary shall be selected by the Pbol Committee but shall not be
~-Ma member of the Pbol Committee. 1he Pool Committee shall have such
_ j ther officers as the en==ittee shall determine are desirable.
-- ~-
5.03 afeatings
- The Pool Committee shall meet at a time and at a place to be agreed to by all Parties. Meetings shall be held on the third _1hursday in the nonths of Jaruary, April, July and October, and at such other times as the Pbol Committee may select. Special meetings shall be
--Tield at the call of the Qui =m or by the Secretary upon the written request of any two Parties.
1he Pbol Committee Secretary shall transmit, by mail, within five (5) working days after the meeting, the minutes of the meeting to
' ~ ~ ' - nthe designatal official of each City constituting a member of the C P6ol and to the r==r+2tive General Managers of Brazos and the TMPA.
Unless written notice is received by the Pbol Secretary within thirty (30) days from the date of the-meeting.from one of the members that such maahar has an objection to the aElon taken',~~~ -.---
' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
the action shall be bi_rvH.
"r objection in writing is made,on all concerned. In the-event that -
- then the Pbol en==ittee shall meet -
Mand take what. action it deems expedient in accordance with the H' - -~
terms of this Agreement.
5.04 Voting Rights ~
All decisions of the Pool Committee shall be decided by tmanimous vote of all Parties. Eadt Party's representatives shall vote as a unit. A quorun for a meeting shall consist of a representative of n Brazos,1MPA and at least two of the four Cities.
~m m
, a . .; .
c 5.05 Responsibilities N
The Pool enemietee shall be responsible for administering the .
provisions of this Agreement. The Pbol Committtee shall approve or
- disapprove of all recommendations as may be presented- by the Technical Ccamittee as hereinafter established. The Pbol thamittee shall approve or disapprove of all data subcitted by Parties for .
Pbol planniog or operating purposes.
VI. TECHNICAL C3HITlTE: .
6.01~h 1here shall be established a Technical Committee with ===d=rship -
consisting of one person from each Party. Each Party shall select its om representative to the Technical enemittee and shall notify -
the Pbol Secretary of its representative. Tenporary alternates may
' be designated by appropriate notification to the chairman of the Technical Committee. The Technical Committee shall elect from its membership a Chairman and Vice Chairman at its first meeting and at the first meeting of each year thereafter.
6.02 Responsibilities ,
~
1he Technical Committee shall advise and make rem-andations to the Pool Committee concerning planning and operating aspects of the Pool System. Recommendations of the Technical Committee, when appropriate, shall be given consideration in action by the Ebol
. . . Committee. The responsibilities of the Technical Committee shall
- include but not belimited to the following:
[ 021 Annually develop a ten year power and energy forecast.
6.022 Coordinate planning of respective systems so as to avoid
~~
a necessary duplication. .
~
~
6.023 Consider feasibilities and recommend participation in joint generation, transmission and substation facilities where
-- c n such facilities would be autually beneficial. ~
'~,
~.~
-6.024 Coordinate planning data for generation, trana=f amirm, and
=<
- u:
substation facilities prior to submittirg such data to the
=
Electric Reliability Comcil of Texas (ERCOT).
~
6.025 Coordinate planning of respective systems considering ERCDT and other appropriata reliability and security criteria. '
6.026 Consider and recommend mininun installed reserve criteria for each of the Parties.
6.027 Consider all other such matters as are relevant to planning of generation, transmission and related facilities of the Parties.
- 4
) e -men *
- j 6.028 Appoint subcommittees to study any special plaming tasks.
. p' :/
6.029 Prepare and present annually to the Pool Committee a work plan and associated expenditures required for any planning studies or activities that will be paid for by Pool members.
6.030 Recommend psocedures for intersystem operations to provide for flows of intersystem power and energy in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.
6.031 Re-nd appropriate rates to be applied to the rM'ive types of power and energy.
_ .6.032 Coordinate the time schedule for maintenance outages so that 2
- 1. the Parties can reasonably meet their load requis m .
'~6.033 Coordinate maintenance of any possible jointly owned facilities.
~6.034 Recommend frequency and voltage levels and acceptable reactive volt agere interchange.
6.035 Recommend spinning reserve criteria for each of. the__ Parties ,1 in accordance with ERCOT guidelines.
(~ ~ ~ ' ' .6.'036 Coordinate operations of the respective systems- considering
~
',1 ~ ERWE and other appropriate reliability ~ and sea. rity . _
criteria. -
~
~
V 6.037 Consider all other matters ecisming operations smder this
, Agreement.
6.038 Appoint ** ttees' to study any special operating
. activities.
6.03 Meetings
' ~
E-~ ~
'~ ~
Be Tedmical Committee shall meet quarterly at a time, date and p lace as determined by the Committee, or at such other times as the
~~ -
Committes may select.
. . VII.-~ P02. FACILITIES:
7.01 Dedication of Facilities
~
Each Party shall dedicate to the Pbol such facilities of their
~
- ~
' ~
respective systens, as deemed appropriate by such Party, that are attually beneficial to coordinated Pbol operation. All facilities offered for dedication to the Pbol shall be subject to a J
recommendation of the Technical Committee and approval by the Pbol Committee. All dedicated facilities shall be rated in temas of net
- megawatt output or capability. Dedication and rating of facilities shall be as follows
h.
OY
. :- g - -
, , , . _ - - , , ., 4 --,, b
\
(Q 7.011 Normal maximum rating of generating mits shall be the
"' maxinnan continuous net output or capability of the facility under loading and climatic conditions expected d2 ring the period of system annual peak.
7.012 Emergency rating shall be the maximum net output or s u capability that can be supplied for a four-hour period following normal maxima output or capability as provided in 7.011 above. .
- .7.013 thits capable of generating with alternate fuels shall be tested to determine their rating with alternate fuels. -
- 7.014 Ratings of transmission lines, substation facilities and ~
communication facilities shall be recommended by the
'Dechnical Committee. .
7.015 Within three months after coupletion of rating tests set
, forth in subpara more than twelve graphs 7.011, 7.012, 7.013 hereof but not months 'after installation of new facilities to be included in the Pool, the results of such rating tests
- r. u shall be reported in writing to the h 1 Committee for modification of Schedules A throqgh G as appropriate.,
r - =;
7.016 All generating mits shall be tested in accordance with
. _ . ur . -
applicable operating guidelines or as recommended by the~.
Teanie=1 CommLttee, to meet the requirements of Paragraph 7 011 above.
Any Party may withdrar, in whole or part, from the Pbol any dedicated acion units, dedicated transmission lines, dedicated substations, or
- _ ie=ted contractual agreements that are necessary to Ibol operation by written . notice to the Pool Committee provided that such notice shall be
' not less than the "minism withdrawal time period' listed on each respective facility dedication schedule. .
b- NotwithsemnMng the foregoing provisions, any Party may at any time bring aurequest to the Pool Committee for such modification of Sdudules A
-through G as defined in Section 7.02.
= - _
~ '
7.02 Facility Schedules - - - - -
Schedules A through G attached hereto and by reference made. a.part hereof, set forth the ratings of all generating resources,"trairiinission ~~
lines, substations and equipment and connunication systems dedicated to the Pbol. Schedules A through G shall be modified from tiina to i:ime as newly dedicated facilities are installed, tested and accepted. Schedules A through G shall also be nodified if facilities are derated or if generating, transmission or substation capacity is withdrawn from the l
Pbol; provided, however, that such capacity cannot be withr!rawn from the Pool except as provided herein.
O
__ . 9- . , r. )
p . Schedules A through G shall be indentified as follows:
t ' .,.
~
7.021 Schedule A Generation
, 7.022 Schedule B Transmission 7.023 Schedule C Substations, Switching Stations, Metering 7.024 SShadule D Auxiliary Communications .
7.025 ScMla E Other Facilities
! 7.026 Schedule F Rates and Charges 7.027 Schedule G Existing Pool Facilities VIII. POOL SYSTDI OPfiRATICNS: .
8.01 General '
-It. shall be the responsibility of each Party to plan, finance, install, and operate the facilities of its own system. Generation, .
transmission, and substation equipment .shall be installed to keep
_the Ibol with the required reserves as outlined in he*4=s_8.021 -
.and 8.07 herein. 1he Pool Party (ies J _
-~~
. _ _ additions shall be the Party whose pre)dicted system load exceedsre its capacity.
~ ' ' -
If. a Pool Member does not have the required reserves, .no other member of the Pbol shall sell capacity such that the Pbol will not have the required reserves without giving the reserve deHeiant member first refusal. .
" Detailed planning for installation of generating,- tran==f maion.and. . l.
stbetation equipment shall be the responsibility of the Party (ies)
_shceduled to install such aq'iyt, with such plans to. conform to..
'. the considerations of Party (ies), responsibility as set forth 1
'herein. 1he Pbol Comed.ttee and party installing new facilities -
shall consider the faasibility of joint particip=eim in such facilities. .-.. t...
~
~
_If_.any of the above provisions fail to address a condition of: Pool .
ema=eity deficiency, the Pbol Committee shall work in a coordinated .
manner to assure the oraration of a firm Pbol. .
- n. . _ _ ..
G G .
O s
.M G r
) ".
i On. or before January 1st of each year, each Party shall submit to f,3 the Pool enemittee the peak load projections for its system for the G next ten year period. Projections shall be substantiated by past peak loads experienced and other supporting data. The methodology for projecting d====4 and energy requirements shall be current state of the art and shall be approved by the Pbol en-ndetee.
On the basis of these projections, and in accordance with the methods stated herein, the Parties shall develop plans for.
generation, transmission and subse=*ina installations for the next ten year period.
In the event that each Party (ies) has generating capacity such that its normal anximma planned installed e=a= city exceeds its planned '
system load, but the Party (ies) and the Pbol will not have the required reserve capacity, then the deficient Party (ies) shall be -
responsible for securing additional e=== city in an amount at least equal to the ratio of the Party's deficiency such that the Pool will have the required reserves. - (Additional Capacity Required =
1 Members Deficiency / Total Deficiency of All Members) x Pbol Deficiency)
In the event that a Party (ies) has generating equipment such that
"-its nonnel maxistat planned installed capacity does not. meet. its ,
~ planned system load but the Pool has required reserve e=aaetty,
~ - -
. ,than the deficient Party (ies) may purchase supplemental power from _
"_= Pool members or may purchase ema= city from utilities: external to h Ibol. . _
- ..If the Pbol has sufficiaae capacity to meet the Ibol load, but does nbt have the capacity to meet load plus reserves, and one or nore members do not have ema=aity to meet load (and the member shortage.
- - to seet load is greater than the Pbol shortage to meet load plus reserves) than the capacity deficient member (s) shall be
_ _ __ .. responsible for securing additinnal capacity anFfiei=* . for- the_
- -- n .r Pbol to meet load plus reserves, in an amount proporcina=1 to their - -
. Jdefiancy. Members that are still deficient of capacity to meet 7- - 7 1oad shall either purchase additional supplemental capacity from 1 . .
, _ {_the other members (who have excess) or from the outside. -
~
If ~the Pbol has sufficient -aity to meet the Pbol load, but does not have capacity to meet l'oad plus reserves, and one or more
-' members do not have capacity to meet load, (and the Pool.deffeiancy -
...to meet load plus reserves is greater than the manber defiefaaey to. -
- met load) the camcity deficient member (s) shall be_ responsible.
L for securing addit: mal capacity sufficient to meet thei,r load. In addition, all those members who are deficient of reserves shall purchase capacity outside of the Ibol necessary for the Pbol to l meet reserve requirements proportional to their shortage.
All Parties shall submit annually on the date selected by the Pool rm mietee, their maintenance schedule for dedicated generating l@
=4
, , ! .p g 'M
- , ;~n units for the next arumal period. The Technical Comittee shall
'/
review such Schedules and submit a proposed Pool Maintenance Schedule to the Pool rn-mietee for its approval.
8.02 Coordination of Reserve 8.021 Installed Reserves h hl Committee shall assure that installed and/or purchased generating capacity in the hl system are such that the normal enximum rating of the combined generating
.r equipment shall arcaM the annual Pbol peak load by 157, or as
.__u required by ERWI operating spidelines. Generation, transmission, substation equipeant and related facilities ihall be installed or such respective capacity ==N under -
j _ contract so as to keep the Pbol firm.
8.022 Spinning Reserves -
i Spinning reserve requirements for the Pbol shall be s&oduled
' day-by-day throughout the year as required and divided among the Parties in an equitable manner and in accordece with-
.. ERWI guidelines. ER&r allocation of spinning reserve to ~ .,
the Pool shall, with the exception of IMPA, be. divided among
__ .- ~ .- . 2:: the Parties in proportion that each Party's prMi+% annua:
- 7 peak load bears to the stan of all Parties' prMi*d annual peak loads. 1he Cities may utilize IMPA generation to satisfy their spinning eserve requirements, providing that
_ , ::e such utilization la operarinaally feasible. However, to the
- 2. extant possible, and *rieMa the operating g idelines stated
'q herein, the spinnimg reserves shall be allocated in such a manner so as to provide for maxham utilization of the most
- .. eFficiane generating eqayt.
_. 8.03_ Rmer & Energy Exchange . _
~ ~' '-
_ :-e. '
l . ~ _
- The Parties agree to exchange power and energy as provided herein.
. _ . . '~ '
l 8.031 Bueranocy r .
- e -
~~
- a. Encility Emergency
~ ~
___( ~ ~
..:.cr ' - - - ~
If any Party requires energy & ring a fo' ced' outage of ~
r
. _ _ . , that Party a systen the other Parties' shall make i
' c avellable the emergency eneqy to such Party to the '
maximan extent possible including startup' of generating units if necessary.
j 4 1
- edy- , =
,m b. h 1 Emergency k- -
If any Party suffers a fuel curtailment the other Parties shall make available energency energy as above, providing
' that the furnishing of such energy does not result in a fuel emer Parties. gency on the system of a providing Party or For - the first four Dispatcher may arrangethe (4)hours of an emergency condition, the Pool delivery of enerDr from any of the Parties with capacity available to supply it. Del:.veries of emergency energy after a tour hour period shall be made from other Parties with excess capacity in the portion that their normal maxinasa eaaaaity avenada their '
predic.ted net load or from such other sources as the Pool Dispatcher and
_ tionally Party with such emergency determine to be sooncaically and/or opera-feasible.
8.032 F- =- ry ,
Should any two or more Parties have operating enaditions n::.;
which meet those required for m energy, the Party having available energy shall make availahle the same.to the -
. .: other Parties. -
2*. ;
.m .: cr8,.033 Maintenance ~ ~~
k; Endt Party agrees to sell to any other Party any excess' power ~
n and energy during periods of scheduled unit ==ine=aance on
. _a dedicated Pool facilities.
.ne-8.034 Supplemental
- v.
Each Party agrees to sell to any other Party supplemental power and avranda its to the extent its normal maxinaan capacity -
load. -
~
~
7..-A 035 Firm Power
_ - - 2.
~
Should the Parties determine to transfer firm power;and energy, they shall have the right to do ao according to terms determined at the time of the transaction. ~~ -- r
.z. --
8.04 N =aatch
~ 8.[041 Normal ~
Each Party shall submit to the Pool Di=a=tcher an estimate of the daily peak demand and available capacity. 1he Pbol Dispatcher shall then make a determination of total capacity and spiming reserve requirements and allocate generating
)
O
, e
' Je '.
1 3
- q resources as necessary to meet the anticipated b l peak load l'/ and reserve requirenents for that day.
8.042 Bneraency In the event that any Party's systen suffers the' failure of a !
generating tait, transmission line, substation, or any other ;
equipment, each Party agrees to, upon the call of the hl Dispatcher, inanediately. start additional toits and to furnish to the limits of its energency ratings such power and energy as may be required.
t 8.043 Econanic
'Ihe Parties are encouraged to participate in an economic .
dispatch operating plan. All econanic dispatch transactions shall be coordinated through the h l Dispatcher.
8.05 Control Areas Each .manber of the Texas MJnicipal Power Pool may operate as a separate control area, or may operate with manbers of the Bool, or '
with Utilities that are not manbers of the Bool in other control area configurations, provided that such operation is conducted in accordance with applicable operating rules and criteria, and provided that such operation doe not adversely affect the integrity of the Bool.
Any manber, or group of manbers may make changes in their control area configuration, provided that sufficient and reasonable notice is given to other manbers of the Bool in order that they can be prepared for the new mode of operation.
Any intent to make chages in control area configuration shall be I set out in detail and such information shall be provided in writing to the Bool Cassittee.
Such chages shall be studied by the Technical Committee and a report concerning the implications of such -
chages shall be made to the Pool Consmittee within 60 days of such time that written notice is provided to the Pool rmmitree.
- No changes shall be made before the elapse of the 60 day period, without the tmanimous approval of the hl Cannittee.
8.06 Bnergencies During the systen disturbances due to tmit failures within the systen or transmission line switching, each Party agrees to' maintain its generatig equipment in service until authorized by the Pool Dispatcher to renove smits from service or to separate its systen fran the Bool. It is the intent of this provision to have each Party maintain its toits in service totil the systen is relayed
!Q. .. ,
off. Questions as to relayim facilities, relay settings, and r=1= rad matters shall be invasegarad by the Technical Daunittee.
- .Le, men %* -*
r- men indicated to be necessary, the Pool Canunittee shall have the W required studies made to decemine the proper relay settings and other imprwanents to correct deficiencies in the systen operation.
8.07 Transmission Lines, Substations and Interconnection Facilities The facilities referred to as " Pool Facilities", shall be those facilities decemined to be required by the Bool Canunittee to pemit
- power pooling operations.
Each Party shall maintain substation or interconnection equipment at its points of deliveries to the hl Facilities in sufficient capacity to provide to the hl that part of its excess generation --
required to make the Ebol fim. In addition to the foregoing, each
' Party shall also maintain adequate substation or interconnecting -
equipment at the points of deliveries to the Pool Facilities or to other systens not a Party to this Agreenent, to pemit the sale or purchase of power. and energy if such sale and/or purchases are made by the Party (ies) as provided for herein.
Substation and interconnection capacity between the Party's systans and the Pool Facilities shall be reviewed annually by the Pool Committee from transnission systen studies conducted pursuant to Section 8.01 and 8.07 herein.
- Such facilities as are needed to maintain adequate capacity in the
!. Pool shall be constructed or contracted by the Party (ias) approved by the Pbol remnittee. Such facilities or any parts thereof shall
.be designated as Pbol Facilities. . Campensation for use of added i
transmission facilities shall be ,detennined jointly by the Pbol i
. Committee and the Party (ies) approved to furnish the same and shall be binding on the Party (ies).
throsqdt participation in ERCOT, the Bool Cannittee shall annually conduct computer studies for operation of the transmission systen for the future to decennine the adequacy of the transmissica systen 1 and Party's substations and interconnecting facilities to accomplish the Pool operation and contemplated power sales and purchases, during the study period. All Parties shall participate in and share in proportion to the previous year's peak loads the cost of such systen studies. It is understood that certain transmission systen additions will be jointly developed and may be financed and owned by more than one Party. In such event, the compensation for use by the Pbol of such facilities will be determined by the Pool re==ittee.
8.08 Systen Protection Coordination i
, Relaying facilities, relay settings and related matters shall be
! reviewed and investigated by the Technical Causaittee. Wen indicated to be necessary, the Technical Committee shall have the required load flow and short circuit studies perfonned to determine the_ proper relay settings and other improvanents to correct l deficiencies in sysces protection and coordination. All such
. . . - . ., <- n 1-. w.,, < n, . ,,. . .
, ~ ~ ~
s * %e %P 4
' . _3_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ ,
,h'? A
<3 8.09 Brokerage operation t .,
The Parties should be encouraged to participate in brokerage operations if such became available and as long as such arrangements do not adversely affect Pool operations.
-IX. RAIES AND CHARGES 9.01 Ibwer and Energy Rates All rates included in this Agreement as Schedule F attached hereto for exchange and sale of power and energy between Parties shall be as reconunended by the Technical Committee and approved by the Pool Committee.
,- 9.02 Q1arges For Existing Pool Facilities Each Participant in the Ibol shall pay Brazos an annual rental charge-for the use of existing facilities installed mder the terms of the Power Ibol & Interchange Agreenent dated September 23,1%3, and further identified in Schainle G attached hereto. The amual rental charges shall total 7% of the installed cost of the '
facilities and shall be proportioned among the four Cities and Brazos in proportion to each systan's previous year's peak demand.
9.03 Accounting and Billing i
Accomtirg and billing for all Ibol transactions. shall be administered by the Pool Dispatcher. Invoices shall be rendered aanthly between Parties accordirg to a tabulation of charges prepared by the Pool Dispatcher. Such charges shall be according to rates and charges defined herein and according to power, energy, facility use and services rendered mder the provisions of this Agreement. -
X. JOINI PARTICIPATION As each Party recognizes and begins planning for additional facilities, consideration shall be given to joint participation with other Parties of the Ibol. This provision is not intended to imply any form of mandatory action, but rather to recognize the mutual benefits that may exist in jointly participating in the ownership of future facilities. Any such participation of generating, transmission or substation equipment shall be by separate agreement and shall not be a part of this Agreement.
XI. OPERATIONAL ASSISTANCE In the event of disaster, natural or ockwrwise, or other unusual
- @ circunstance that results in sewre damage to a Party's systen, the
- ^ '
, Parties hereby agree to provide line crews, equipment, materials and a . e ,4
i(- '
services to the greatest extent possible to assist the Party suffering A==a= in restoration of service. Those Parties providing assistance shall be rainbursed for services rendered at their cost plus any expenses for personnel, housing, food, gasoline, etc.
XII. REE"ERENCE TO OIHER CONIRACTS Each of the Parties now have in force contracts to purchase, transmit and inter &ange . power and energy with other Parties and joint pareis ia=*N agreements and ownership agreements with Parties not party to this Agreement. This shall in no way invalidara any provision of any such agre$nnt ements. .,
XIII. MISCEIIANEDUS PROVISIONS Any Party may contract with any system not a Party to this Pbol Agreement as a Party to furnish to that system or be furnished by that system, power and energy, provided that the contract provision will not adversely affect Pool operations or reserve requL._ats.
' All int &A-- ---Onna by a Party with any system not a party to this Agreement shall be electrically compatible with the op.u..i.~en of the
- h l. .
Demand and energy losses on the transmission system inidaae to the sale or purchase of power and energy between Parties or between Party (ies) and systems not a party to this bling Agreement shall be replaced in kind by the purchasing Party in amomes as
-rar r===nded by the Technical committee and approved by the hl Ccamittee.
During normal operating conditions some power and energy int -deige will result without being scheduled or desirable. All such interchanges shall be classifimri as Inadvertent Interchasqp. The h1 Dispatcher shall advise monthly all Parties of such incarchange l
and schedule the return of the energy in a timely menner.
xlv. Tsan w AmEnerr - '
14.01 Initial Tara lhe Pbol shall continue to function under the terms of the existing Power h1 and Interdaqp Agreement dated September 23,1%3, and amendmaats to same unt:.1 execution hereof by all Parties now signatories to the said existiog Agreement. This bling Agreement shall ha< n=a effective upon execution by the Parties and upon approval by the Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration at which time the said existing A reamane 6 shall become rull and void.
O
" ' seen a
i .
'Ihis tw it shall provide for Pool operation for a period of 6s 4
ten (10) years and shall continue in force thereafter m til l notification by any Party of its intent to withdraw as provided in thisSection XIV.
14.02 Withdrawal by any Party ,
- Any Party of the Pbol may withdrar from the Pbol by written notice delivered to all other Parties at least ten (10) years in advance
,of the date of withdrawl.
Withdrawl of any Party in accordance with t.he provisions of thisSection XIV shall relieve that member of any oblig=eim for payments to other Parties as of the date of its withdrawal, except as provided hereinafter. .
i After a Party withdraws they may choose not to pay for Pool facilities authorized after notice of withdrawal is made, but they must pay for Pool facilities authorized prior to such notice for a period of ten (10) years after such notice.
In the event that ~ a Party withdraws all obli =eima and priviledges of that member to the Pool and of the other Pool ...
~ members to that member will be kept the level that existed at the time notice of withdrawal as received.
Withdrausi of any Party in accordance with the" provisions of this
' Section XIV shall not relieve that Party of its obliri= for payments for Pbol Facilities until tan (10) years from the date of Its notice of withdrawal from the Pbol.
'Ihm withdrawal or notice of withdrawl of any Party (las) shall not affect the priviledges and obligations of those remaining in the Pbol.
If any Party withdraws from the Pbol, that Party shall purchase any. Pool Facilities that were constructed for int w---
Party's system to the Ibol's system if the facilitiam 2_ % the are no
- longer xmquired by the Pbol & e to the Party's withdrawal. '
- 14.03 I!hforceability It is stipulated and agreed, between the Parties hereto, that in
~the event that any Party shall, after assuming responsibilities as
- provided herein, fail *o carry out these responsibilities and that as a result of this failure the Pbol becomes mfirm, that such failure, shall relieve all other Parties of their responsibilities i to such Party. Upon finding that a Party has failed to carry out a responsibility assmed hereunder, the Pbol m=edttee shall give written notice to the Executive Officer of the Governing Body of the Party in question.
i@ 4.
4B '
- - ; M
14IO4 Limits of Party's Obligations Nothing contained in this Agreement shall obligate any Party:
- a. To provide any facilities for which it is unable to obtain necessary financing or;
- b. To enter into any contract or amend or cancel any existing contract without the approval, if such approval is required, of the holder of such Party's loan contract, mortamge, or bond indenture, or;
- c. To make any use of its facilities in a manner which would be in violation of such Party's obligation to the holder of its loan contract, mortgage, or bond indenture.
14.05 Expansion of Pool .
1he Parties recognize the benefit of expanded Pbol c-;-- : b= and agree that ===harship in the Texas MLaticipal Power Raol may be expanded to include additional Parties. Acceptance of additional Parties shall be by Raol Committee action and aneaeirvi of amendments to this Pooling Agreement, as modified to inn 14 the Pool Facilities- necessary to interconnect and provide for successful pooling operation of all Parties.
14.06 Severability If any part of this Agreement shall be held invalid or illegal, such invalidity or illegality shall not affect the reeninder hereof.
- XV. I!XECUTION IN WI11ESS WiliRl!N, this Agreement has been executed by the Parties hereto on this 3ir+ day of M.v4 , 1986 .
ATIEST: CITY & BRYAN, TEXAS
,i"/ W IAr , By: r J- M City Secretar \ Mayor ATIEST: CI'IY & DENION, TEXAS
()
/$ / Q By:
y u cy'sectecary Ma r O .
-g
.
- 4 '*
6
ATIEST: CITY T GARIAND, TEXAS
.m
! s. ,A By: //M City secretary / T Mayor ATIEST: -
CI1Y OF GEENVILLE, TM l M d' By: t' , f City secrer.ary Mayor ATTEST:
BRAZOS ELECIRIC POWER 000P., IIC.
d
' ', i ' M By:
h*=~ a
~A Datcutive Vice President "
~
, , ' Mio the sectr.':sry
& hal r ATTEST:
TEXAS HJNICIPAL POWER AGEICY ,
By:
secretary ceneral Manager 1
G
..g,' e
.(
l 6
0
%g
- s G
e
- e T
l l l testet ,
19 @ .9991 91 ft t m
F "g I
- r,%
.. j e
N e . , , [.-.y-, - - ,.4., - - . - - -----.,+- + -. . . , - - - - . - . - ~ - * ~ e * . - + , , . - +
RECEIVED MAR 1 7 1986 l
Electric Reliability Council of Texas l
l l
r
?
AGREEMENT Originauy dated as of July 22, 1970 and as M and restated on E:;" ":- 5, 1972 and as again annended and restated on September 4,1981 and as again d on September 27, 1985 fk;^ 1:. 27, 1985
ELECrBIC RELIABILITY COUtCIL OF TEXAS AGREDGNT PREAPELE With the desire:
(1) To serve better their respective customers; 1 (2) To render more reliable service; (3) Tb ensure the availability of angle electric power and energy
, now and in the future; and .
With the belief:
(1) h t availability of an adequate and reliable supply of electric -
power and energy is a necessity; .
4:u.
(2) , h t voluntary cooperation between those responsible for supplying electric power and energy is the only satisfactory way to achieve the degree and type of cooperation which would be meaningful; (3) h t exchange of information between those si.g lying electric power and energy is of great benefit in the performance of their respective obligations; (4) That cooperation can be achieved best through voluntary creation and operation of a reliability council; f^' -
'Ihe undersigned have created the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, hereby become members thereof.
?W ARTICLE I Puro6ee EClrm The purpose of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
_, (hereinafter referred to as the Council) is to promote the reliable operation of power systems by: _
(a) Exchanging information concerning the planning and operation of generating, transmission and distribution facilities; O
- ~ -
....,..-a-
l and manpower cv2ilable to others in the restoration of service" dis-4 rupted by hurricanes, cyclones, tornadoes, floods, riots, enemy attack and disorders; E (c) Maintaining direct communication channels for the purpose of rendering total aid to victims in the event of enemy attack, thereby prwiding maximum civil defense for all menbers of the Council; (d) " Prwiding a means of exchanging information and systen data and for g making necessary regional studies designed to increase the relia-bility of such power systems t. *r all normal and abnormal ciretme-stances; (e) Creating a vehicle for the reporting, where appropriate, of infor-f:(!W mation to regulatory agencies,- and (f) By maintaining adequate reliability of bulk power supply facilities and other facilities of members of the Council through coordination ,
of planning and operations. ~
SBCTION 2. The responsibility of the Council is to assist in the achieve-z ment of the purposes set out in Section 1 above; however, it is understood that this responsibility shall not conflict with the responsibility of the individual a.
I member systems and associations to carry out their own coordination of planning i .
Wi!?ij and operation within their respective areas.
M ,
4
_7_~ _ _ .
M$6
- D e
W 4
,L .
m em e emesme-e..-- o.
- ARPICLE II cualifications for Menbership l
M ION 1. Any entity, corporate or otherwise, including agencies of I
~'
the Federal goverranent or federally-owned or financed systems and state, municipal or other government-owned or financed entity, which owns, controls and operates an electric power system in Texas, all or part of which consists of facilities i
for the generation, transmission or distribution of electric energy in intrastate comuneroe only [save and except for those purchases, transmissions or sales of electric energy that (1) are made pursuant .to an order of the Federal i
, Energy Regulatory Casaission under Sections 210, 211 and 212 of the Federal 4 .
Power Act, as amended, such as that entered in FEIC Docket EL79-8 and (2) do not
@a s 2 ject an entity to jurisdiction under Section 201 of that Act] and offers electric utility service to all members of the general public (menbers served by rural electric cooperatives shall be considered "public" for the purpose of this ,
provision) may be achmitted to membership in the Council. Entities with generating andtransmission facilities which are owned or (Entro11ed by members -
shall also be-eligible for ussbership in the Council. ~
p SBCTION 2. Any electric system which meets the ateve qualifications l .. for membership and has executed this Agreement shall be a member of the Council
- ~
so long as that assber continues to meet these qualifications and the obli-gations of membership.
S CTION 3. Any other electric system which meets the above qualifi-cations for assbership and makes written application for assbership to the Chairman of the Executive Board of the Council will be approved for member-ship and upon signing a copy of this Agreement shall become a member with equal standing to the parties originally signing this Agreenent and remain a member so long as it continues to meet the qualifications and obligations of membership.
G -
i!
i
, _ . . _ . mm
,_,----,,-----.,--,-~----e--~...-w-- --
enumer neoresent tives
- 4. Each member shall appoint a representative, which representative chall 5
?
Lf r.-
be one of its employees, to act for it at meetings of the Council and shall 7 ~,;) give to the Chairman of the Executive Board in writing the name of the person v.
g thus appointed.
I P
l .
I' anricLe tv N
P~ Meetines it.
p The organization meeting of the Council was held on the 22nd day of July, 1970 at Austin, Texas. SLbsequent meetings of the Council shall convene at least n
annually on a date and at a place to be established by the Executive Board. -
!I, Additional meetings of the Council may be held prwided that such meetings have N.? '
been authorized by the Executive Board and pewided that written notice of any g such meeting shall be mailed to all manbers of the Council at least three (3) weeks prior W the scheduled date of the meeting.
(, . .
F
) rx: my - - - -
I f.. creanization i
SBCrION 1. The affairs of the Council shall beiadministered by an gg. :;
Executive Board of thirteen (13) representatives elected by the Council.
-! !' - The Eneastive Board shall be selected so as to prwide representation, ~
- s. ,
insofar as practicable, from each of the various types of systems, comprising
~
the aanbership of the Council, i.e., imestor-owned, state, unanicipal, and
~
1 cooperatives. The Executive Board shall include at least six (6) representat'ives
' ~ ' '
L-of thilmestor-owned companies, at least two (2) representatives of the naani-
] 'cipal systems, at least one (1) representative of statie authorities, and at least two (2) representatives of the cooperative systems, which representatives
}
I I.
l
(
- 6) b O
-- --.--_.----,,,--.-n_._.., _ ,, .------.--,,,a,--..n , , . w-- ___ - - , - , - , , , ,
the types of systems specified. The two additional members of the Executiva Board !
shall be clected by majority vote of the Council menbers.
SBCTIW 2 The Executive Board shall be elected initially at the organiza-tional meeting of the Council and annually thereafter, in each case for a term of one (1) year and by a majority of the votes (as established in Article VI) of
==hars present and voting at such meetings, except as provided herein. Any vacancy occurring on the Executive Board prior to an annual meeting of the Council
- l may be filled by a majority vote of the Executive Board.
SBCTION 3. The Exeastive Board shall elect initially at the organizational ,
meeting of NCouncil and annually thereafter from the Board's membership a Chairman and a Vice Chainnan. In addition, the Executive Board shall appoint a Secretary-freasurer who need not be a menber of the Council. The Executive Board may enploy such staff and may agpoint such conunittees or subconunittees an@'or task forces from employees of the Council members as it deems appropriate to .
carry out the purposes of the Council. The Executive Board shall also appoint from employees of the Council members the chainnan and members of a Technical Advisory Comunittee; such comunittee shall have a membership at least equal to the number of members of the Executive Board and shall have the same mininta represen-tation as required in Section 1 of this Article for the Executive Board. The W' Technical Advisory Comunittee shall include a representative from each of the
~
following who were members of the Texas Interconnected Systeun on the date of adoption of this amen &nent: '
Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. Houston Lighting & Power Company
~
~" ~'
Centrak N r & Light Coupany Imer Colorado River Authority
~~ ~~ ~'
~
City 5f' Austin South Texas & Medina Coops.
City'of Brownsville Texas Electric Service Conpany City Public Service of San Antonio Texas Municipal Power Agency Dallas Power & Light Conpany Texas Power & Light Conpany West Texas Utilities Cenpany m
cf the Executive Board at 1 cast one (1) month in advance of the annual meeting.
'Ihe Naminating Comittee shall consist of four (4) representatives of the Council, two (2) of whom shall represent non investor-owned systems and two (2) p 6 of whom shall ripresent investor-owned systems. It shall be the duty of the Ncaninating Comittee to receive the names of eleven (11) representatives selected j to serve as menbers of the Executive Board by the groups of systems having i , appointment; rights and to nominate two additional representatives to conplete a slate of thirteen (13). 'Ibe two (2) representatives nominated by the Nomin-ating Comittee shall be submitted for election at the annual meeting of the Council. Additional nominations for election to the Board may be made at the annual meeting; however, representatives of the systems appointed in accor-
" nam dance with_ Article V, Section 1, and duly reported to the Neinating Comittee shall be binding upon the Courz:il.
SECTION 5. In advance of the annual meeting each of the groups of systems .
I ~
E t_ .
having appointment rights under Article V, Section 1,'shall notify the Nominating
-k- Comittee of their respective selections. In the event that such selections are
.not; reported to the Nonunating Comittee, the Comittee shall ncaninate an additional
}, nunber of-repqesen'tatives sufficient to ocuplete a thirteen (13) nenber slate and 1 -
g any representative so nominated shall be submitted for election at the annual meet-
~
I Wi%yf .ing.
-g SBCTICH 6. Meetings of the Executive Board shall be held at least ann-I. ually upon call of the Chairman. 'Ihe Chairman may call additional meetings of
_- the Executive Board as required. 'Ihe Chairman shall preside at all meetings and shall be responsible for preparation of agendas for such meetings. In the absence -
_ of the Chairman, the Vice Chairman shall serve in his place. The Secretary 'Irea-surer shall be responsible under the direction of the Chairman for timely issuance i
of notices and agendas of meetings, the keeping of accurate minu'tes of meetings, the distribution of such minutes and other connonications to all menbers of the e M
- Council, and the reporting, whera appropricta, of information to regulatory agencies. i
([ SBCrION 7. Nine (9) membere of the Executive Board shall constitute a quorum and 80 percent of the voting strength of the Council aball constitute a
~
quorum at meetings of the Council.
ARTIQE VI vohh strarw*b of Members Prior to each annual meeting of the Council, the Chairman of the Executive Board shall have prepared and sent to each member a written tabulation showing _
the voting strength of each member of the Council. The voting strength shall be 9
determined by' the following formula V = 1000 X WT rer:c 2 j ~M = Average kwh handled by assber through the intrastate system, ,
.;2:c which is the basis for its membership herein, during three,(3) j preceding calendar years (reported on .T. C Form 12 as Total
- c
- , Energy Delivered or equivalent for systems not reporting on 1
Form 12).
- ted_:;;-
T = The sum of M for all members.
%W ..!:' 2.7
. V = Voting strength of menber (expressed in nearest whole nunber
_.2 g but not less than one vote per assber).
%. ,s y Sach voting strength shall prevail from the convening.of ea& annual meeting until the convening of the next following annual meeting. Each assber must report for each year, on a calendar year basis from the above described FPC Form 12, the .
~
. energy. account;for its system. For each member the valug of M in the formula
-' shall be.th_epverage of the energy accounts for the three (3) calendar years Ismediately preceding the next anmal meeting. Such energy reports shall be made _
to the Chairman.of the Executive Board not less than.three (3) months prior to the next scheduled annual meeting.
..h
' + = _ _ _ _ , - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__ n __
g,
i
. m ~ e. . w v. c . .u -mewwiveuumu E2IW_ im It shall be the duty of the Executive Board to inititta the action required, in their opinion, to fulfill the purposes of the Council as ;
[A
^ * '
stated in Article I within the limitations set out herein. The Executive Board or such casnittee or individual as may be appointed by the Executive Board shall e
(a) assemble and distribute to members information from each marber with respect
' to the items sentioned in Article I, Section 1 hereinabove; (b) namsehle and distribute to members 'information pertaining to reliability of service; (c) aid in obtaining information requested by any member or group of assbers pertaining _
to matters related to availability and reliability of service; (d) remmerd
~~
criteria for such elements of design as affect the reliability of any inter- ,
> connected bulk power systen, and reconsnand procedures for the effective estab-q:-
- lishment of up information which is vital in maintaining mad == reliabil-ity in the important segment of the electric utility systems between the bulk
__y -
3 power supply and the ultimate consumer; (e) report, where appropriate, infor- . .
- - nation _ to iegulatory agencies concerned with reliability; (f) determine and _
t j establish guidelines with regard to coordination of planning and operation of the systess of Council members; and (g) review and evaluate operating criteria
+, ;
i 4 ~ andproce51resaffectingthereliabilityofbulkpowersupplyandotherfacil-
- s
, , - ities of Council members.
nW{_-
- - SE21W 2.: Each assber of the Council shall report to the Executive
/ .
j _
- Board in.such form and for such period of time as may be requested by the Board
~
from time-to time such available data for the system whic'h the assber representii f_
i _
.which are reasonably necessary to prepare and file reports to regulatory agencies
~
. --as provided-for a in Section I (e) of this Article. [
I l
8-0, .
. ._- - -cm.--
,- SECTION 3. Each menber of the council shall inform the Executive Board of its plans for generation or transmission additions which significantly affect
, the reliability of operativ of the bulk power supply system and shall report any
(
decisions as to alteratic or changes proposed for their respective electric l systems whether in generation, transmission, distribution, intersystem connuni-i cation or control or protective equipment, which may significantly affect the I reliability of the interconnected bulk power syst a s.
SBCFION 4. Each member of the Council shall inform the Executive Board
) of operating pr<ww bres or changes in operating procedures which may signifi-1 f cantly affect the reliability of operation of the mobers' systems. Upon receipt of such information the Executive Board,shall study and evaluate (or shall direct 4::
such <weittee, =*ww-ittee or task force as it may appoint to study and to evaluate) the operating procedures or proposed changes in operating procedures.
SBCTION 5. 'the Chairman of the Executive Board shall report to the .
Council for its consideration any findings, conclusions and recommendations of the
- Board with respect to such additions, alterations, operating procedures or proposed changes in operating procedures.
ARTICLE VII-A 4
Functions of the '14chnical Advisory C-ittee SBCFION 1. g 'the Technical Advisory Committee shall, itselToIthrough its i*w==ittees,,.(a) make such studies and plans as it deems appropriate to accone- -
Plish the purposes of the Council and the duties of its s@connittees, (b) review ,
I and coordinate the activities and reports of its seconnittees, (c) make such recesmondations to the Executive Board as it deems appropriate including reconnend-ations for the adoption of guidelines and criteria, (d) perform such other duties as directed by the Executive Board, and (e) submit an annual budget to Executive i,
,J6 l kW9e . nm. ,.
ovatu.cuvzring expenaltures or specini projects proposed by the Ccmnittee, such budget to represent 50% cf the actual cost cf the projects, which will be billed proportionately to the ER00r membership in accordance with Article VIII, Section
({
.3 3; the other 50% to be divided and billed equally to members of the Conunittee. 1
, SBCrION 2. The Technical Advisory Conunittee shall appoint at the Annual j Meeting, from employees of the Council members, the Chairruan and senbers of the Engineering, Operating, and Environmental m*wv==ittees. Membership of the j
~
=*wv==ittees shall include representatives from each entity on the Technical 7 Advisory Ccanittee. The Technical Advisory Ccannittee may appoint, from among its 1
j members and the members of its =*ww==ittees, such other s2camittees, study
~
- groups,dndtaskforcesasitdeessappropriate. ~
.. .. SBCrION 3. The Engineering S4comunittee shall, under direction and MR;r , -
supervision of the Technical Advisory Caunittee, perform, evaluate, and review basic systen studies for Council members, perform such other duties as the Cour-l [ . .._ mittee may..direct, and make such recommuendations to the Comunittee as it deems ,
" - L j g-o appropriate.' Studies of the m*wv==ittee shall include but not be limited to:
[g insta11eId g::en:weration reserves, abnormal systess conditions, major outage p
g.
t tingencies, statistical studies, transmiazion facilities and-future generation installations. All studies prepared by the m*wv==ittee shall be classified as
" work papera" until approved by the Esecutive Board.
~1 M
SBCTICE 4. The Operating m*ww=mittee shall, under the directibn and
~~
E e supervision"of the Technical Advisory Comunittee, undertake studies and perform r
~
such duties as it doess appropriate and as directed by the Comunittee, and make
~ '
~recommendatilb to the Comunittee. Studies of the Seconstittee shall include, but
~ .
not be limited to ,
relay settings, communication facilities, allocation of t- -
l _ .._ --
~. -
,i
'I _
spinning irese,rve generation, systemi dispatching procedures, load frequency tie
~
line control, 1oad shedding procedures, coordination of maintenance schedules t
i .
l lh .
w
ocenittee shall be classified as " work papers" until approv'ed by the Executive
.n Board. . . . -
j- SBCTION 5. The Envirornental Subconunittee shall, under direction and
/%
Q} supervision of the Technical Advisory Consnittee, perform studies and review of 1
envirornental matters related to the utility business and follow the activities of state and federal agencies in development and inplementation of envirornental regulations. Such studies, reviews and reports that may be made to the h nical Advisory Conanittee, and subsequently to the Board, shall be classified as
" work papers" until approved by the Executive Board.
RICTICE,J, The Comunittee and its s@rmunittees, study groups and task forces, shall meet as often as necessary to perform their duties and functions.
g ~
All meetings of the Connaittee and S@comunittees shall be called by their respective chairman and all such meeting notices shall be sent in writing to each menber at i
least two (2Pweeks prior to the meeting, unless an emergency condition should r~
suggest otherwise (such emergency to be by nantual consent of a majority of the members) . : :: ,
~
p -r AL'ICLE VIII
~
' Finances g: SBCTION 1. " The personal and travel expenses of each member of the Council,
, I . ~ Eneastive' Board, any committees, si*mmittees or task forces that shall be J ~
~ -- formed,~shall-be borne by the system which such member represents.
~
l ' - ~
[ -
SBCrIGi 2. An Administrative budget for the Coubckl for each ensuing year,
~ r 7-startingfrontthedateoftheorganizationalmeeting,sha51iMiadopkedatthe
~
- ~
~ ' '
~
annual meeting. Sach administrative budget (including cost of' liability
~ ~
insurance) for the Council itself for each fiscal year '(0ctcber 1 through the '
l l
l lkh l
'f h - _,,
, y- - . -
w --um ec ct .,v , m.au u= eteeat=u uy we c.xe.:ucive coaro ano suonutteo
'^
, to the Council ct the annual meeting, and to be effective must be rpproved by E the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the voting strength of the Council (as such voting strength is defined in Article VI); provided a budget for
, a&ninistrative expenses which may be incurred by the Council between time of formation and September 1970, and the method of meeting same shall be agreed i n
{.
upon at the organizational meeting.
l
{
,4
. SBCTIW 3. The a&ninistrative expenses of the Council shall be fin-4 anced by funds received from annual dues levied against the members of the l j,', Council in proportion to each member's voting strength at the beginning of the 1
fiscal year for which the budget of such a&ninistrative expenses was adopted.
. ;, The foregoing basis for apportionment of the Council's a&ministrative expenses M .
7.- will be reviewed annually by the Executive Board and may be modified by that
" p. Board to assure equitable distribution of the Council's expenses among the
.~.
member systems.
- W. _ __
SBCTION 4. Each member shall be promptly notified of the administrative
.b[
I( budget and its proportionate share of the a&ninistrative expenses of Council
- i following adoption of the budget at the Council's annual meeting.
G SBCTIW 5. Any' member may withdraw from the Council after the budget is
, t -
(} .
approved, and will thereby be relieved of any obligation to.psy any part of such n
l, i
a&ninistrative expenses, provided written notice of the member's desire to ,
J' withdraw is given within thirty (30) days after receipt of the member's _. __
J statement of annual dues.
I. . s L: ~
L SBCTIW 6. Each member shall pay its proportionate _ share of the a&ninistrative expenses within sixty (60) days after adoption of the Council's 0 budget at 'its annual meeting.
p 5
i h ._
SBCTION 7. No menber shall, without its consent, be responsible for the adininistrative expenses of the Council in any one year in escess of its proportion of the amount budgeted for administrative expenses for that year.
[j SBCPION 8. Special projects may be separately budgeted and the cost allocated upon any basis agreed upon by those participating in such special project.
i-i l
ARFICIE IX Ii Termination of Membershin i SBCTION 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement or any amendment of this Agreement, any member may terminate its obligation under this
$j Agreement,otherthanitsobligationtopayitsproportionateshareoftheadmiE I
istrative expenses of the Council for the full fiscal year within which such termination is effective, at any time upon thirty (30) days' notion, whereupon ,
it shall cease to be a member of the Council.
SBCFICH 2. TheCouncilmaybedissolvedbyavoteofamajorityofthe voting strength.
ARTICLE X i .-
i w
p This Agreement may be amended at the Annual Meeting by. a vote of two-thirds of the voting strength of the assbers present and voting; provided no amendment -
shall curtail the right of a member to withdraw from the Council as set out in Article VIII, Section 5, and Article IX hereof.
o _
ARPICtK_.XI General SECTICN 1. It is agreed that this Council is a voluntary association and L no member shall be subject to any type of claim whatsoever by reason of any action b,.
._23 _ ... (
a .w; ,
"[A \
cr frilure to cet of said member or any other neber as there is no legal obliga-tion on any member to do any act or refrain from doing any act hereunder. Each
( menber shall do such things and perform such acts as such menber may deem desirable.
SECTIOti2, Each menber shall retain sole control of its own facilities and'the use thereof, and nothing in this Agreenent shall require a menber to construct or dedicate, facilities for the benefit of any other marber or allow its facilities to be used by any other member, or to construct or provide any facili- .
ties for its own use, and nothing herein shall be deemed to inpair the ability or right of any member to take such actions or to fail to act, as it deans necessary or desirable, with respect to the management, extension, construction, maintenance .
and operation of its own facilities, present and future.
1 ARrICIE_XJI Tagg .
j This Agrcement shall continue until terminated by agreement of a majority of the voting strength of its members.
~
t e
- f 4f i
f i
- p. ,
q b
e O
/1 s
e e
o i mu 'mee :
- mag i ;
egeoem e l et seem HM ! M 15 e
e
- G S
e
,ap i
l*.b
- i .
e B
s 4 = - \
- _ - . - . . , , _ ~ .
t ,...c . _ . _ . . , , .
CILL OF SALE THE STATE OF TEXAS $
$ KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
COUNTIES OF HOOD, $
[.. SOMERVELL, TARRANT $
i AND JOHNSON $
THAT, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (hereinaf ter the
" Seller *), in accordance with the terms of the " TRANSMISSION AGREEMENT BETWEEN DALLAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, TEXAS ELECTRIC SERVICE COMPANY,
. TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, and BRAZOS ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
(hereinafter the 'Agreesent*), said Seller has SOLD, TRANSFERRED, AND CONVEYED, and by these presents does SELL, TRANSFER, AND CONVEY an undivided 18.164 interest in and to all transmission lines and facil-itles associated with the Comanche Peak - Cleburne Junction and Cleburne Junction - Everman 345 kv electric transmission lines situated in Hood, .
Somervell, Tarrant and Johnson Counties, Texas (hereinafter the
" transmission lines and f acilities") , unto BRA 30S ELECTRIC POWER -
COOPERATIVE, INC. (hereinafter the " Purchaser"), its successors and assigns, to have and to hold forever, as a tenant in common.
For purposes of this Bill of Sale, the " transmission lines and facilities' associated with the Comanche Peak - Cleburne Junction and Cleburne Junction - Everman 345 kv electric transmission lines means the following, to the extent such may exist on the date of execution hereof:
al'1 towers, conductors, lines and apportenances, and an'y other personal property or fixtures associated with said transmission lines.
Seller RESERVES and EXCEPTS for itself, its successors and r assigns, the right, at its cost and expense, to install, maintain, use and operate a second circuit on and along the right-of-way herein l conveyed and assigned, including the right to use poles and towers and related f acilities situated thereon. Seller hereby ASSIGNS to DALLAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (DP&L) and TEXAS ELECTRIC SERYICE COMPANY (TESCO) an undivided interest in and to the rights reserved by selle'r in this l paragraph, so that such rights shall be owned by Seller, DP&L and TESCO, t
I as tenants in common. ,
I l
l .
e
This conveyance end sale is expres:aly orda cubjset to cpplicaole terms and conditions of the Transmission Agreement dated July 25, 1979, between DP&L, TESCO, Seller and Purchaser, including but not limited to
(
.~ -
the following:
(a) The waiver by Purchaser of any right to partition, pur-
' suant to Section 15.02 of said Transmission Agreement.
(b) Restrictions on lease, use by others, sale, transfer, encumbrance and other disposition of the aforesaid right-of-way pursuant to Section 15.04 of the Transmission Agreement.
This conveyance and sale is also subject to the followings (1) Liens for current taxes, assessments, or governmental charges or levies not in default.
(11) Claims of materialmen or mechanics, the payment of which is not due or being contested in good faith. -
(iii) Easements and mineral reservations, grants, and leases of record in Hood, Somervell, Johnson and Tarrant Counties.
Seller binds itself to WAnaAltf AND DEFEND said transmission lines and f acilities unto the said Purchaser, its successors and assigns, from and against the lawful claims of whomsoever claims or shall claim the same, or any part thereof, by, through, or under Seller, but not otherwise, subject, however, as'aforesaid.
At execution hereof, Purchaser has paid Seller all construction costs to date for construction of a second circuit on Seller's 345 kv transmission line described in Section 4.02 of the Transmission Agree-ment, together with interest thereon, as provided in said Agreement.
Upon completion of construction of the second circuit as described in said Section 4.02 and of the transmission lines herein deactibed, the l
undivided interest of Purchaser in the property and easements herein conveyed and assigned shall be adjusted to a percentage derived from a fraction, the numerator of which is the actual costs of construction of second circuit as described in said Section 4.02 of the Transmission Agreement, together with interest thereon through September 30, 1981, l
l i
O
tnd th3 d:nwinstor is the sctual costs of construction of the C: anene Peak - Cleburne Junction and Cleburne Junction - Everman 345 kv transmission liner Seller, by execution. hereof, and Purchaser, by
( ,
acceptance hereof, covenant to execute such conveyances, assignments j and other instruments as may be necessary to adjust Purchaser's owner-ship in the property and easements herein conveyed and assigned.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Bill of Sale is executed by Seller on the date of its acknowledgme t hereto, but effective and dated for al1 purposes as of the Li day of /I4 , 1982.
I TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ATTEST By .-aa
" ' Prest 3ent Secretary SELLER ,
THE STATE OF TEXAS $
COUNTY OF DALLAS $
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared R. K. Campbell , known to me to be the person and -
officer whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of the said TEXAS POWER &
LIGHT COMPANY, a corporation, and that he executed the same as the act of such corporation for the purposes and consideration therein ex-pressed, and in the capacity therein stated.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, thi's 26th day of August , 1982.
. A ec U[u g '.
, , , NotaryPflic,DallasCounty, Texas
,s ' /.
\ My commission expires 12/31/84 4
. .I (
g l
l l
Q I
l
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED AND
~
ASSIGIglENT OF EASWEENTS (y . THE STATE OF TEXAS $
$ RNOtt ALL NEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
COUNTIES OF HOOD, 3 -
SOMERVELL, TARRANT $
AND JOHNSON $
THAT TEXAS POtfER & LIGHT COMPANY (hereinafter the " Grantor"), a Texas corporation, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration paid to the undersigned by BRA 306 ELECTRIC POtfER COOPERATIVE, INC. (hereinaf ter the
" Grantee"), the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowl-edged and confessed, has GRAtrtED, 8012 and CONVEYED, and by these presents does GRANT, SELL and CONVEY, unto Grantee, en undivided 18.16%
interest in certain real estate lying and being situated in Johnson and Tarrant Counties, Texas, and being more specifically described in .
Exhibits A and B, attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes.
And for the same consideration, Grantor has SOLD, ASSIGNED and TRANSFERRED, and by these presents does SELL, ASSIGN and TRANSFER unto Grantee, an undivided 10.164 interest in and to all those certain easements for electric power lines across lands in Hood, somervell, Johnson and Tarrant Counties, Texas, such easements being more specif-ically described in Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes.
The property and easements described in Exhibits A, 8 and C_ _
attached hereto, constitute the right-of.way for the Comanche Peak =
~ ~
Cleburne Junction and Cleburne Junction - Everman 345 kv electric transelesion lines.
~
Grantor RESERVES and EXCEPTS for itself, its successors and assigns, the right, at its cost and expense, to install, maintain, use and operate a second circuit on and along the right-of-way herein conveyed and assigned, including the right to use poles and towers and related f acilities situated thereon. Grantor hereby ASSIGNS to 3ALLAS POWER & LIGNT COMPANY (DP&L) and TEXAS ELECTRIC SERVICE COMPANY (TESCO) an undivided interest in and to the rights reserved by Grantor in this l
I o
1
(
- l I
p e.
9
~
l p3rtgetph, to thst such rights th211 be owntd by Grtntor, UP6L End l
TESCO, as tenants in common.
This conveyance and assignment is expressly made subject to applicable terms and conditions of the Transmission Agreement dated July 25, 1979, between DP&L, TESCO, Grantor and Grantee, including but not limited to the followings (a) The waiver by Grantee of any right to partition, pursuant to Section 15.02 of said Transmission Agreement.
(b) Restrictions on lease, use by others, sale, transfer, encumbrance and other disposition of the aforesaid right-of-way pursuant to Section 15.04 of the Transmission Agreement.
This conveyance and assignment is also subject to the followings (1) Liens for current taxe s, assessments, or governmental charges or levies not in default.
(11) Claims of materialmen or mechanics, the payment of which is not due or being contested in good fait'h.
(iii) Easements and mineral reservations, grants, and leases of record in Hood, Somervell, Johnson and Tarrant Counties, Texas.
TO NAVE AND TO NOLD the aforesaid property and easements, together with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto, unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns, and Grantor does hereby bind itself and its succesors and assigns to warrant and forever defend all and singular the property unto Grantee and its successors and assigns, against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the same, e
or any part thereof, by, through, or under it, but not otherwise, subject, however, as aforesaid.
At execution hereof, Grantee has paid Grantor all construction costs to date for construction of a second circuit on Grantor's 345 kv transmission line described in Section 4.02 of the Transmission Agree-
! ment, together with interest thereon, as provided in said Agreement.
! Upon completion of construction of the second circuit as described in said Section 4.02 and of the transmission lines herein described, the undivided interest of Grantee in the property and easements herein 2-b i
, C \
i P
. , _ - _ , _ _ _ . , _ _ _ __ _,._,,, __.._m.__ __, , _ . , _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . , ._ , ,_ _ _ . _ . _ . - , , _ _ . . _ _ . . , , . _ , . _ . _ _ _ _ . - . , . . - ,
ctnytyrd tnd assign:d chall ba tdjuatsd to a perezntage d:r tved from a fraction, the numerator of which is the actual costs of construction of second circuit as described in said Section 4.02 of the Transmission
) i Agreement, together with interest thereon through September 30, 1981,
~
and the denominator is the actual costs of construction of the Comanche Peak - Cleburne Junction and Cleburne Junction -
Everman 345 kv transmission lines Grantor, by execution hereof, and Grantee, by acceptance hereof, covenant to esecute such conveyances, assignments and other instruments as may be necessary to adjust Grantee's ownership 5
in the property and easements herein conveyed and assigned.
EXECUTED by Grantor on the date of its acknowledgment hereto, but effective and dated for all purposes as of the day of[ ,
f 1982.
TEXA5 POWER & LIGHT COMPANY By .
sM
', ' % President
. ATTESTS J
, ..cr.t.r, GRANTOR THE STATE OF TEXAS $
COUNTY Or DALLAS $
SEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared m. m. e " - s t , known to me to be the person and officer whose name~is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of the said TEXAS PONER 6 LIGNT COMPANY, a corporation, and that he esecuted the same as the act of such corporation for the purposes and consideration therein ex-pressed, and in the capacity therein stated.
GIVEN UNDER MY NAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this 26th ' day of Aucuat , 1902.
. I '* . , , .
a.uu, kN4.
,' . t'N Notary Public, ualias County, Texas i . !8- My commission espires: 12/31/84
. */ (
. n\
t 3
i ae i t .)
- i. -
i e A
, - - - - - - - - . _ . - . _ - , - - . - --p, ,, , _ _ . . _ . . , . -- , - _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ . - . , ,,-_,_nn,., , , _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ . - - , - - -
EXHZE8T A TO SPECIAL NAARANTY DEED
- AND ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENTS (m
4 .
TRON TEXAS POWER a f.IGNT COMPANY TO BRAS 05 ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE. INC.
All those certain lots, tracts or parcels of land in Johnson and *
- Tarrant Counties, Texas, described as follows:
~- ,
,, g g .. . - - . . . - . . ..
All that certain lot, treet or parcel of land out of the Hiram Little Survey. Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, being a poriton of Tract No.1 of that certain conveyance to Robert J. Harding and David F. Lee by a deed -
recorded in volume 4357. Page 41. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described in two tract by metes and bounds as follows:
. 30E.1
- SEGINNINS at a point in the East line of said Tract No. I and the West line of the old I. & G.N. Railway Company property, said point of beginning being the most northerly Southeast corner of that certain tract conveyed to Texas Electric Service Company by a deed recorded in Volume 3641. Page 191. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texass THENCE with the East line of said Tract No.1 and the West line of the old I. & G.N. Railway Company property. South 20 degrees 13 minutes East 239-7/10 feet to a steel rods THENCE South 63 degrees 50 minutes West 1096-1/10 feet to a steel rod in the South line of said Tract No.1s .
THENCE with said South line. North Og degrees $$ minutes West g6 3/10 feet to the most southerly Southeast corner of said Temas Electric Service Company tract;
.TNENCE 'with the Southeast line of said Texas Electric Service Company tract.
North $4 degrees 38 minutes East 1223-05/100 feet to the place of beginning, containing some 3 78/100 acres. ,
30E.1
< SEGINNING at a steel rod in the East line of said Tract No. I and the West line of the old I. & G.N. Railway Company property, said rod standing 390 5/10 feet
~
South 20 degrees 13 minutes East along said East line from the most northerly 1
Southeast corner of that certain tract conveyed to Texas Electric Service Company
! by a deed recorded in Volume 3443. Page 191. Deed Records of Tarrant County.
Temast ,
l
(
l .
I I
l t
Page 1 of $
i m
1 1
I d
i
U. & G.N. Railway Company prfperty. South 20 degrees 13 minutes East 365-1/10 feet to the South:ast corner of said Tract No It THENCE with th2 South line cf said Tract No.1. North 89 degrees 55 minutes West 823-0/10 feet to a steel r:d. said rod standing 435-44/100 feet South 8g degrees 55 c;inut:s East along said South lin3 from ti,e most southerly Southeast corner of said Texas Electric Service Company tract; THENCE North 63 degrees 50 minutes East 776-3/10 feet to the place of beginning, containing some 3-25/100 acres.
bw .
TRACT A-2 All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land out of the H!RAN LITTLE SURVEY.
Abstract g30. Tarrant County. Texas, being a portion of the Third Tract of that -
certain conveyance to A. E. Cantrell recorded in Volume 2175. Page 42. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at a steel rod.in the West line of said Third Tract, said rod standing 143-5/10 feet South 0 degrees 00 minutes East along said West line.from a con-
- crete monument at the Southwest corner of that certain tract conveyed to Texas Electric Service Company by a deed recorded in Volume 3558. Page 107. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texast THENCE North 54 degrees 42 minutes East 562-g/10 feet to a steel rod in the East line of said Third Tracts said rod standing 183-4/10 feet South 0 degrees 05 minutes East along said East line from a steel rod at the Southeast corner of said Texas Electric Service Company tracts THENCE with said East line. South 0 degrees 05 minu es East 324-6/10 feet to a pointi ,
THENCE South 8g degrees 55 minutes West 43g-g/10 feet to the place of beginning.
.and containing 1-713/1000 acres ~of land, more or less.
TMACT A-1 All that certain lot, tract er parcel of land out of the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract g30. Tarrant County. Texas, beine a portion of the Fourth Tract of that certain conveyance to tass T. Cantrell recorded in Volume 2175. Page 42 Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
- SEGINNING at the Southeast corner of saidFourthTract:
THENCE with the South line of said Fourth Tract. South Og degrees 56 minutes
,, West 575-0/10 feet to a' steel rods THENCE North 54 degrees 42 minutes East 704 4/10 feet to a steel rod in the East line of said Fourth Tracti '
THENCE with said East line. South 0 degrees 08 minutes East 406 5/10 feet to the
, place of beginning, and containing 2 688/1000 acres of land, more or less.
TRACT A-4 .
!' All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land out of the R. W. Waggoner Survey.
Abstract 1818 and the John N. Lucas Survey. Abstract g32. Tarrant County Texas, being a portion of the First Tract of that certain conveyance to Eula Mae Thompson. et vir, by deed recorded in Volume 2613. Page 15g. Deed Records. Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as followst
- SEGINNING at a steel rod set in the East curved R.0.W. of State Highway No. 731 .
in the North line of said First Tract and said Lucas Survey, said point being North $1 degrees 07 minutes 30 seconds East 384-85/100 feet from the West corner of said Survey and the most Westerly Northwest corner of said,First Tracts PageJ2 of 5 2
i .
\
. . . sy su a .o 3 nu; i i .a wt . s ... . m a w . J .w L- n
.6 - =4 surv;y and said First Tract. and with tha fouth line af that certain tract cony:yed t3 th) City af Crowley. known as Crosley Park North 61 degrees 07 cinut;s 30 seconds East, passing 1-0/10 feet left of a fecn3 post at 179 feet and c^ntinuing with said Survey line and comon property line. in all 1314-85/100 feet to a st:e1 rod found for c:rner; THENCE. departing said Survey line and comon property line. South 45 degrees 37 minutes West, passing the line comon to said Lucas and Waggoner Surveys
,'* at approximately 1248-5/10 feet, a fence at 1546-9/10 feet. and continuing in all. 1548-5/10 feet to a steel rod found for corner in said State Highway No. 731 East fenced R.0.W.;
THENCE North 6 degrees 09 minutes West 140-4/10 feet to a Texas Highway Depart-ment brass capped monument found 1-8/10 feet West of a fence. said point being the beginning of a curve to the right, whose radius point bears North 83 degrees 43 minutes 40 seconds East 11.409-16/100 feet; THENCE around the arc of said curve. to the right and in a Northerly direction.
recrossing the line comon to said Waggoner and Lucas Surveys at approximately 95 feet and continuing in all. 310-05/100 feet to the point of beginning. con-taining 6-260/1000 acres of land.
TRACT A-5 All that certain lot tract or parcel of land out of the John Steele Survey.
Abstract 1400, Texas, being and the a portion of.John TractH.
Two Lucas Survey.
of that certainAbstract conveyance932.toTarrant Cutie Countybrowle Property Venture by the trustee's deed, dated July 6.1976, and recoroed in Volume 6196. Page 176. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at a lis inch pipe found at the Southeast corner of said Tract Two; THENCE with the South line of said Tract Two. South 89 degrees 44 minutes West, crossing the line comon to said Steele and Lucas Surveys in all 693-6/10 feet to a steel rod; THENCE North 45 degrees 37 minutes East, re-crossing the line comon to said Steele and Lucas surveys, in all 973-75/100 feet to a steel rod in the East line of said Tract Two; THENCE with said East line. South 0 degrees 12 minutes West 677 9/10 feet to ,
the place of beginning. containing in all, some 5-397/1000 acres of land.
TRACT A-6 All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land in the M. Hunt Survey. Abstract
- 763, and the J. W. Gorbett Survey Abstract 608. Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described by metas and bounds in two tracts as follows:
TRACT I'
, All that certain lot, tract", or parcel of land in the M. Hunt Survey. Abstract 763. Tarrant County. Texas, being a part of that certain 27-28/100 acre tract conveyed to Jack C. Wessler. Trustee, under " Tract l' in the deed dated 22 January 1979 and recorded in Volume 6669. Page 803. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
8EGINNING at the North corner of said Hunt Survey and Wessler " Tract l' and of '
that certain tract conveyed to Alan 8. Connell, Jr. under " Tract 4" in the deed recorded in Volume 5693. Page 880, of the Tarrant County Deed Records, and a Northwest corner of the R. W. Waggoner Survey Abstr6ct 1618 and a Southeast corner of the E. 8. Fryear Survey, Abstract No. 535; THENCE along the Easterly line of said Tract 4 and Tract I, and with the Ifne comon to the Hunt and Waggoner Surveys South 45 degrees 021s minutes East 321 1/10 feet to a point that stands 75 feet Northwesterly from measured at right angles to the surveyed centerline of the Proposed Everman-Cleburne 345 KV electric transmission.11ne; Page 3 of 5 f ;? .
osuInforwu sassurveyrd centerVin South 46 desrtes 15's minutes ' dest, at approximatsiy 2.681 fe:t crossing a fence, at 2.675-3/13 feet passtn; a steal rod and continuing in all 2.703 4/10 fast to the Sout%esterly line of '
said Hunt Survey. Tract ! and Tract 4. and the nortneasterly lire of tne J. W. Heyres Survey Abstract No. 774; THENCE North 44 degrees 29% minutes West, along said Surveys and said tract line. 259-1/10 feet to the North comunen corner of said Hunt and Haynes Surveys and the most westerly corner of said Tract 4 and Tract I; THEXCE North 44 degrees 573s minutes East, along the Northwesterly line of said Hunt Survey. Tract I. and Tract 4. a distance of 2700-2/10 feet to the place of beginning, containing in all some 17 99/100 acres of land.
TRACT !!
All that certain lot, tract or parcel of land in the J. W. Gorbett survey.
Abstract 608. Tarrant County. Texas, being a part of that certain 17 46/100 acre tract conve under " Tract 11"yed by deed in the Alan dated B. Connell. et un 1979 22 January to Jack andC;recorded Wessler. in Trustee.
Volume 6669 Page 803. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, and being more particularly described.by metes and bounds as follows:
SEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Jack Wessler 17.44 acre " Tract 11".
by description aise being the Northwest corner of the Gorbett Survey and the Northwest corner of that certain " Tract 1" described in the deed to Alan B.
Connell Jr., recorded in Volume 5693. Page 880 of the Tarrant County Deed Records; .
THENCE South 87 degrees 53% minutes East along the comunon North line of said Gorbett Survey and said Tract I and Tract II. generally along a fence.1003 4/10 feet to steel rod set 75 feet Northwesterly from, measured at right angles <
to, the surveyed centerline of the proposed Everman-Cleburne 345 KV electric transmission line; THENCE crossing said Wessler 17.44 acre tract with a line running' 75 feet '
Northwesterly from and parallel with said centerline South 45 degrees 27 minutes 30 seconds West 1434 75/100 feet to a steel rod set for the West line of said 17.46 acre tract;
. THENCE North 1 degree 051s minutes' East along the common West line of the Wessler tract, the Connell Tract 1 and said Gorbett Survey. 1043 5/10 feet to the place of beginning, containing in all some 12 01/100 acres of land.
- TRACT A.7 All that certain lot, tract, or parcel of land in the E. P. Browning Survey.
Abstract 56. Johnson County Texas. being a portien of that certain 157.74
- acres of land conveyed to Jack C. Wessler. Trustee by the deed dated December 2g 1978 and recorded in Volume 784. Page 212. Deed Records of Johnson County.
Texas, and being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at a point in the Northwest line of said Jack C. Westler 157.74 acre tract. in the line casumon to said Browning Survey and the A. J. Stephens Survey.
' Abstract 783 Johnson County Texas, said point being 5 5/10 feet Southwesterly along said conunon line from an iron pin found in place for the most northerly I
corner of the Wessler tract, said point also being to feet Southeasterly from, measured at right angles to, the centerline of the existing Comanche Peak.
Cleburne 345 KV electric transmission Ifne; THENCE parallel with and 80 feet southeasterly from said centerline South 22
- , degrees 10 minutes 20 seconds West, at 3.300 4/10 feet passing an iron pin
! set in the East line of a County Road, and continuing in all 3.328 2/10 feet
. to a point in said County Road and the West line of the Wessler tract, the West Ifne of the Browning 5urvey, and the East line of the J. W. Armstrong Survey. .
Abstract 950 Johnson County. Texas, said point also being 580 8/10 feet North.
westerly along said West property line from the Southwest corner of the Wessler 157.74 acra tract; i,
. Page'4 of 5
[
- Q;,
l l
_._ _ . _ . --- _. ~.
THENCE with th) West line of the llessler tract and the line co.run to the Browning and Armstring $ury;ys North 30 degreIs 10 Einutes West, at 101-05/103 feet crossing the centerline of said 345 KV transmission line, and continuing in all 202 12/100 feet to a point that stands 80 feet Northwesterly from, measured at right-angles to said centerlinet-I THENCE with a ifne that runs parallel with and 80 feet Northwesterly from s- said centerline North 22 degrees 10 minutes 20 seconds East at 27-8/10 feet passing an fron pin set on the East' side of said County Road, and continuing in all 2.998-6/10 feet to an iron pin set in the Northwest line of said idessler 157.74 acre tract and the Ifne comon to the Browning and Stephens Surveyst THENCE with said property line and survey line' North 60 degrees 00 minutes East at 130 44/100 feet recrossing said transmission line centerline, and continuing in all 260-88/100 feet to the place of beginning, containing in all some 11-62/100 acres of land.
i Page S of 5 s
Wd 4
EXH2817 B TO .
1 SPECIAI, WARRANTY DEED
. ng ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENTS i
FROM TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY To BRAZOS ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
All those certain lots, tracts or parcels of land in Johnson and Tarrant Counties. Texas, described as followes d
- 1. The West 150 feet of that certain tract of land in Block 46; Shelby
. County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, coa.
. ~
voyed by Troy C. Crenshaw, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company
- by the deed dated November 6.1968, and recorded in Volme 4644. Page
$59. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 2. All of that certain 1 379/1000 acre tract of land in Block 46. Shelby County School Land Survey, Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, con.
veyed by Den Novikoff, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company by the' - -
deed dated January 22. 1979, and recorded fa Volume 6667. Page 463. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
. 3. All that certain 0 766/1000, acre tract of land in Block 46. Shelby Comty School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Harold L. Frank. 'et us, to Texas Electri6 Service Company by the de'ed
~
dated February 5.1974, and recorded in Volume 5628. Pa9e 172. Deed Records of Tarrant County Texas. . .
~
Page'1 of 6 b ,*f' e
School Lcnd Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, cenveysd ty Florence Bandy, et vir, to Texas Electric Service Conary by the deed dat d Decenter 28, 1973, and rectrded in Volume $581. Page 24. Deed Records of Tarrant County Te' mas, yw, 5. All that certain 0-992/1000 acre tract of land in 81ock.46. Shelby County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas. conveyed by Dennis Lehmen, et ux to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated January 16, 1974, and recorded in Volume 6005. Page 539. Deed Records of Tarrant Comty. Texas.
- 6. All that certain 1-145/1000 acre tract of land in Block 44. Shelby County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by J. C. Fletcher Jr.. et us, to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated March 27, 1974, and recorded in Volume $628. Page 156. Deed Records
. o'f Tarrant County. Texas.
- 7. All that certain 4-43g/1000 acre tract of land in Block 47. Shelby County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by -
Joe N. Johnston, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed acknowledged on March 28, 1974.'and recorded in Volume 5661. Page 245 Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 8. All that certain 0-125/1000 acre tract of land in Block 47. Shelby County ,
School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Jon N. Johnston to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated Novoster 15. 1977, and ' recorded in Volume 6382. Page 425. Deed Records of Tarrant Comty. Texas. .
! 9. All that certain 3-815/1000 acre tract of land in Block 47. Shelby County School Land Survey, Abstract 1375. Tarrant County Texas conveyed by Thomas V. Fouts, et us, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated Decea6er 17.1974, and recorded in Volume 5755. Page 620. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 10. All that certain 2 581/1000 acre tract of land, in Blocks 47 and 48. Shelby County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by The Fort Worth National Bank. Trustee U/W T.C. Jones. Deceased. et al.
to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated June 28. 1977, and recorded in Volume 6309. Page 924. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
l i
Page 3 of 6
+
l
[,')
I i
us. %.. u.es cunaw o-us, .--s dua tract r 64ne n. s.:.s a, a.,e.:y 5:.r.:j School Land Strvey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas censeyed by tne First National Bank of Fort Worth. Ind: pend:nt Executcr of the Estate of Ruth McCracken Osborne. Deceased, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated Decenter 8.1978. and recorded in Volume 6686. Page 760 s
Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
+
- 12. All that certain 4-198/1000 acre tract of land in Blocks 36 and 37. Shelby County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas. conveyed by rearfield T. Siebenhausen, et ux to Texas Electric Service Coseany by
, the deed dated February 28, 1975, and recorded in Volume 5786. Page 415 Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 13. All.that certain 4-252/1000 acre tract of land in Block 36. Shelby County School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed 'by
. Gertrude Squires, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated February 14. 1975, and recorded in Volume $778. Pa9e 196. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 14. All that certain 2-441/1000 acre tract of land in Blocks 35'and 36. Shelby Comty School Land Survey. Abstract 1375. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Roger E. Souder, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Cospany by the deed dated March 11. 1975, and recorded in Volume $793, rage 651. Deed Records of Tarrant County.. Texas.
- 15. All that certain 7-224/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little. Abs' tract =
930. and the M. Hunt. Abstract 762. Surveys. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Fonnte Squires and Marquerite 5. Sentley to Texas Electric Service Company
.. by the deed dated February 11. 1975, and recorded in Volume 5776. Page 817 Deed Records of Tarrant County Texas.
- 16. All that certain 4-598/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Marquerite 5. Sentley to
( Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated February 11. 1915, and recorded in Volume $779. Pa9e 704. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 17. All that certain 8-271/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Wafne Morgan to Tenas (16ctric Service Company by the deed dated January 9.1974, and recorded ,
in Volume 5580. Page 818. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
Page.3 of 6 i
! el
-10. All that certain 3-22/N3' acre tract of land in tr.e ntras Little Sarvey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, convey 2d by Jan C. k'essler. Trustle, te Texas E1cetric Service Cc:;any by the deed dated June 26. 1974. and recorded in Volume 5745. Page 320. Deed Records of Tarrsnt County. Texas.
19 All that certain 2-561/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
O.,
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Municipal Refuse Disposal Authority to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated March 17 1975, and recorded in Volume 5800. Page 751. Deed Records of Tarrant County.
- 20. All that certain 1-939/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Jack C. Wessler. Trustee.
to . Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated March 27.1974, and recorded in Volume 5765. Page 973. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 21. All that certain 2-974/2000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey, Abstract 930. Terrent County. Texas, conveyed by Jack C. Wessler. Trustee to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated October 12. 1973 and recorded in Volume $557. Page 931. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 22. All that certain 2-584/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant Consity. Texas conveyed.by , Mary Kathryn Arnold, et vir. to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated June 27. 1974, and recorded in Volme 5676. Page 201. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
! 23. All that certain 1-07/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
- Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by George G. Phlripes to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated February 5,1975,. and recorded in Volume 5713. Page 382. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 24. All that certain 1-062/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey,
~
.. Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Thespa Demakas to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated February 10*1975, and recorded
. In Volume 5717. Page 142. Deed Records of Tarrant County Texas.
! 25. All that certain 2 079/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Mary Albert to Texas Electrfc Service Company by the deed dated February 19. 1975, and recorded in Volpe $787. Page 786. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas. .
Page 4 of'6 o
O 1
I
,26. All that certain 1 OZ9/1CC0 acre tract of, land in the Mira- Little Survey. -
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by R: tert E. Forrester. Jr.,
et ux, tz Texas Elsetric Service Company by the deed dated May 6.19f4. and recorded in Volume 5641. Page 985. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, g 27. All that certain 3-936/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstreet 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Excel Construction Company.
Inc., to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated February 13, 1973, and recorded in Volume 5431. Page 414. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 28. All that certain 1 725/1000 acre tract of land in the Hiram Little Survey.
Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Excel Construction Company.
Inc.. to 'Temas Electric Service Cogeny by the deed dated February 15,1973
. and' recorded in Volume 5431. Page 424. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 29. All that certal'n 5-624/1000 acre tract of land in the Hires Little Survey, Abstract 930. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Oak Grove Venture 12-73 to Temas Electric Service Company by the deed dated March 6.1974, and recorded in Volume 5609. Page 898. Deed Records of Tarrant founty. Texas. <
- 30. 11 123/1000 acres of land in the Hiram Little Survey Abstract 930. Tarrant County Texas, being the East-West 150 foot wide strip of Parcel "B" of that certain conveyance from Capital Syndications Company Investment No. 77 to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated January 10.1974, and recorded in Volume 5581. Page 430. Deed Records of Tarrant County Texa,s.
- 31. All that certain 5-006/1000 acre tract of land in the Green 8. Stone Survey. '
Abstract 1401. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Huggley Memorial Seventh
' ^
Day Adventist Medical Center. Inc. to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated February 26. 1976, and recorded in Volume 6025. Page 38. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
~
- 32. All that certain 4-709/1000 acre tract of land in the J. E. Phillf ps Survey.
Abstract 1232. Tarrant County Texas, conveyed by Wi111am Joseph Luck and .
l Leskie Luther Luck to Tesas Electric Service Company by the deed dated March 13. 1970, and recorded in Volume 4436. Page 196 Deed Records of
{ Tarrant County. Texas. ,
j 33. 20-404/1000 acres of a 20 649/1000 acre tract of land in the William Stone.
Abstract 1400, and Joseph Martin. Abstract 1017. Surveys. Tarrant County.
i i Texas, conveyed by "E" Systems. Inc. Pool Trust to Texas Electric Service l Company by the deed dated January 20. 1977, and recorded in Volume 6175.
f Pa9e 135. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas, the 0 275/1000 acres being j, excepted being a 10 foot wide strip for a distributton line.
i' Page 5 of 6 B
4 G
34 All that certain 3-874/1000 acre treet of land in the John Steele. Abstract 1381 and John H. Lucas. Abstract 932. Surveys. Tarrant County. Texas, con-i s-
. voyed by Jack C. Wessler. Trustee to Texas Electric Service Company by the
(. deed dated January 22. 1979 and recorded in Volume 6678. Page 310. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 35. All that certain 6-066/1000 acre tract of land in the R. W. Waggoner.
Abstract 1618. John H. Lucas. Abstract 932, and the A. W. Reynolds. Abstract 1318. Surveys. Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Jack C. Wessler. Trustee to Texas Electric Service Company by the deed dated January S.1979. and i recorded in Volume 4672. Page 702. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 36. All that certain 9-29/100 acre tract of land in the M. Hunt Survey.. Abstract 763, and S-45/100' acts tract of land in the J. W. Gorbett$urveyr Abstract 60:
1 Tarrant County. Texas, conveyed by Jack C. Wessler. Trustee to Texas Electric l Se.rvic.e Company under Tract I and Tract !! respectively, by the dee'd dated ,
- January 22. 1979. and recorded in Volume 6705. Page 407. Deed Records of 4
Tarrant County. Texas.
- 37. Lots 71. 85. 86 and 93. Shannon Vality Estates, and addition to Johnson
- County. Texas, according to the plat recorded in Volume 1. Page 261. Plat Records of Johnson County. Texas. ,
- 38. Lot 6 and the West 200 feet of Lot 7. Block 1. Space Acres, an Addition to Johnson County. Texas, according to the plat recorded in Volume 1. Page 65 Plat Records of Johnson County. Texas. -
1" 39. Lot 5. Block 1. Space Acres, an addition to Johnson County. Texas, according j to the plat recorded in Volme 1. Page 65. Plat Records of Johnson County.
- Texas. ,
i, i
l Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid recorded instruments for all purposes.
i Page 6 of 6 ,
- l 1
l 2
1 t -
~.. . -.-.m , ... . ,_ . . . ___,,,,.m .,,,rm.._,,-,__,,,_r.,__,.,_._-__.-_,_,_, m , .____, _
EXHTBIT C TO SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
- AND ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENTS FROM
(}g TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY TO BRAZOS ELECTRIC POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.
~
- 1. Easement from Curtis"W'. Wen'zel EUfe'.711'aTuiWen$eI.'to'femas~ ~ '
Electric Service Company, dated February 10. 1976, and recorded in
- Volume 5964. Page 124. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 2. ' Easement from Jerry Frank Berger and wife. Margaret Ann Berger, to ,
Texas Electric Service Coepany, dated February 28. 1975, and recorded
- ~
in Volume 5791. Page 611. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 3. Easement from Elton M. Hyder Charitable and Educational Fund. Inc.,
to Texas Electric Service Company. dated February 12. 1979, and recorded
~
in Volume 6680. Page 526. Deed Records of Tarrant County Texas.
- 4. Easement from Paul H. Pewitt to Texas Electric Service Company.
, dated October 12, 1978, and recorded in Volume 6'597. Page 713. Deed ..
Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 5. Easement from W. T. Crouch to Texas Electric Service Company. dated March 31. 1978, and recorded in Volume 6449. Page 976. Deed Records .
' of Tarrant County. Texas. .
- 6. Easement from Joe W. Crouch. Individually and as Independent Executor, of the Estate of Annie M. Crouch, deceased to Texas llectric Service Company, dated September 3,1976.* and recorded in Volume 6109. Page 623 Deed Re' cords of Tarrant County. Texas.
Page'l of 8
,b*
- 7. Easement fron Robirt W. Ortskell to Texas Electric Service C: ;any, dated July 1. 1976 and recorded involuma 6007. Page 171. Died Records cf Tarrant County. Texas.
- 8. Easement from Ster 1 Malone to Texas Electric Service Company, dated m - December 11, 1978 and recorded in Volume 6654, Page 161, Deed Records (4f of Tarrant County. Texas. -
- 9. Easement from Mrs. W. C. Hampton to Texas Electric Service Company, dated February 21. 1979, and recorded in Volume 6688. Page 25. Deed Records of Tarrant County. Texas.
- 10. Easemen$ from len. R. Harris. Executor of the Estate of 5. W. Harris.
(eceased..to Texas Electric Service Company dated February 21,1979, and recorded in Volume $$88. PaSe 27. Deed Records of Terrent Co'unty.
Texas. .
- 11. Easement from Adi tenne sans Simon to Texas Electric Service Company, dated February 16,1979, and recorded in Volume 6684. Page 929. Deed Records of Tarrant County, Texas. .
- 12. Easement from Hallmark Development Company. Inc.. to Texas Electric
~
Service Company, dated May 6,1977, and recorded in Volume 724, Page 607 Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 13. Easament from Marvin L. Sabbitt and Martha Ann Sabbitt to Texas Electric Service Company, dated February 17,1977, and recorded in Volume 714.-
. Page 5. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas. ,
- 14. Easement from Gordon L. Kimberling and Virginia Ann Kimberling to Texas Electric' Service Company, dated December 8.1978, and recorded in Volume 783. Page 16, Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 15. Eaesement from Frank A. Wolfe, Sr., e,t' un, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated August 25,1975, and recorded in Volume 674. Page 163 Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 16. Easement from Wynell Hooper. et vir to Texas Electric Service Company, dated December 1.1978, and recorded in Volume 781, Page 763 Caed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 17. Easement fras Inst Kathryn Lucas Glenn, et al. to Texas Electric Service
- Company, dated January 5.1976, and recorded in Volume 680. Page 731.
I Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas. .
Page.2 of 8 i
l l .
O .
k'
- 18. Easement from James C. Armstrong, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated Cctober 12. 1975 and recorded in Johre 677. FI;e 93 Deed Rec 2rds of Johnson C unty. Texas.
- 19. Easement from Lowell Thomas Nadows. et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company. dated December 13,1978, and recorded in Volume 783. Page 24 (41.', .
Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 20. L.'sement from A. T. Vandiver, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company. .
dated March 26',1975, and recorded in Volume 659. Page 829. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
II. Easement from J. Haden Vandiver to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated March 26,1975, and recorded in Volme $$9 Page 827. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 22. Easament from A. T. Vandiver, et ux, to Texas Electric Service company,
~
dated March 26. 1975, and recorded in. Volume 659. Page 831. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 23. Easament from ifalter Claer to Texas Electric Service Company, dated August 28, 1975, and recorded in Volume 674. Page 79. Deed Fecords of Johnson County Texas.
- 24. Easament fran niesley R. A11 bright, et us, to Texas Electric Service Campany, dated May 26,19M. and recorded in Volume 665. Page 417 Deed Records of Johnson County. Teras. .,
- 25. Easement from David C. Hall et us, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated July 18,1975, and recorded in Volume 657. Page 721. Deed Records of Johnson Couet'y Texas.
- 26. Easament from David C. Hall, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated July 18,1975, and recorded in Volume 667. Page 718. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas. .
- 27. Easanent from Robert F. Tork. Jr., et ur. to Texas Electric Ser*vice Company. dated August 13. 1974, and recorded in Volume 648. Page 462 Deed Records of Johnson Couity. Texas.
- 28. Easement from Robert F. Tork. Jr., et ux, to taxas Electric Service Company, dated August 13,1974, and recorded in Volume 646. Page 456 Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- Easement from Robert F. Tork.Jr., et um. to Texas Electric Service Company.
1 29.
dated August 13;1974, and recorded in Volume 646. Page 459. Deed Records 1l of Johnson County Texas.
l .
i . Page 3 of 8
- 30. EasemInt from G1tnn E. Blair to Texas Electric Service C::;any, dat:d November 6,1973, and rected:d in valuce 623. Page 793. Ceed R; cords cf J;hnson County. Texas.
- 31. Easement from Fay Fuqua and Bessie Fuqua to Texas Electric Service Company, dated April 20,1976, and recorded in Volume 693. Page 842 Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 32. Easement from A. C. Cruze to Texas Electric Service Company, dated August 30,1976, and recorded in Volume 701. Page 215. Deed Records of Johnson County, Texas.
- 33. Easament from Elizabeth C. Brom to Texas Electric Service Company, da,ted November 7,1978, and recorded in Volume 779. Page 540. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 34. Easement from William J. Jones, et us.'to Texas Electric Service Company, dated August 23. 1974, and recorded in Volume 651. Page 858 Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 35. EasementfromHugh Q. Suck to Texas Electric Service Company, dated January 2. 1979, and' recorded in Volume 783. Page 710. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 36. That certain easement acquired by Judgment of Condannation dated August 20,1979, recovered in Cause No. 249-290-78 in the District Court of Johnson County. Texas, by Texas Electric Service Company. ,
as Plaintiff against Hugh W. Parchman, Jr., et al. as Defendants, a
^~
certified copy of which is recorded in Volume 827. Page 484. Deed Recor'ds of Johnson County Texas.
- 37. Easement from Keith F. Kelly, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated December 6.1978, and recorded in Volume 783. Page 18. Deed Records of Johnson County Texas. ,
- 38. Easement from James Edward Ashcraft, et us, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated September 16'1975, and recorded in Volume 677. Page 87 Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 39. Easement from J. W. Orrell, et us, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated September 15. 1975, and recorded in volume 677. Page 148. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
~
- 40. Easement from Mrs. O. D. Wyatt to' Texas Electric Servjce Company, dated November 29,1978, and recorded in Volume 781. Page 324. Deed Records of Johnson County. Tesas.
Pagt 4 of 3 i
l 4
e--v--, - - ,, , -- - ,_-_.4 . , - _ , -
, . , - , . _ _ . - . - ---.--n - - ,- ,..
- 41. Easement from R. U. Ball. et ux. to Texas Electric Service Cce;any, dated 5:ptember 18. 1975, and recorded in Volume 677. Page 342. Caed Records cf Johnson County. Texas.
- 42. Easement from Walter G. Mize 'et ux. to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated December 29. 1978, and recorded in Volume 785. Page 348. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 43. Easement from C. 5. Doyle to Texas Electric Service Company, dated January 17. 1979, and recorded in Volume 786 Page 69. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 44. Easement from E. R. Martin, et um. to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated, March 1.1978, and recorded in Volume 751. Page 44. Deed Records of Johnson County Texas.
- 45. Easement from L. T. Hollingsverth.,et us. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated March 1,1978, and recorded in Volume 751. Page 42. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
i
~
i
- 44. Easement from W. L. Riley to Texas Electric Service Company, dated January 9.1979, and recorded in Volume 72. Page 498. Deed Records -
of Somervell County. Texas.
- 47. Easement from Thomas 5. Weary to Texas Electric Service Company, dated December 12, 1977, and recorded in Volume 69. Page 1017. Deed Records of Somervell County. Texas. . ..
- 44. Easement from C. H. Somers, et us. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated June 10. 1977, and recorded in Volume 64. Page 584. Deed Records of Somervell Coun'ty. Texas.
- 49. Easement from Eugene Ratliff, et um. to Teras Electric Service Company.
j dated June 19. 1978, and recorded in Volume 71. Page 142. Deed Records
. 'of Somervell County Texas. *
- 50. Easement from Marvin 5. Davis, et us, to Texas Electric service Company,
~
dated August 24,1977, and recorded in Volume 69 Page 560. Deed Records of Somervell County. Texas.
I St. Easement from Marvin 5. Davis, et us, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated August 24,1977, and recorded in Volume 69. Page 562. Deed Records. .
f of Somervell County. Texas.
i
- 52. Easement from Marvin 5. Davis. et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated August 24.,1977, and recorded in Volume 69. Page 564. Deed Records i of Somervell County. Texas.
Fage's at 8 Ies
- -- - - - -, v. ,e, - - ---c., , ,. , ,..p,wc----<w..m,.mn- ,wy,c,-e,, m_y ,--w,..-.,~me-- - - ,- - - -,- - - . - - . - . - - - ,- .
- 53. Easement from L. M. Wirt. Sr. to Texas Electric Ssrvice Co ;any. .
dated September 6.1977. and recorded in volume 69. Page 555. Ceed Records of somervell County. Texas.
- 54. Easement from J. D. Sparks. et a1. to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated February 18. 1978, and recorded in Volume 70. Page 241. Deed Records of Somervell County. Texas.
- 55. Easement from James R. Hewlett to Texas Electric Service Company, dated June 14, 19'8. and recorded in Volume 71. Page 115. Deed Records of
- Somervell County. Texas.
~
- 56. Easement from J. T. Dugger, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company, ,
dated June 8. 1977, and recorded in Volume 68. Page 582. Deed Records of Somervell County. Texas.
- 57. Easament from Freida Ann Beckham to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated June 23. 1977, and recorded in Volume 68. Page 711. Deed Records of Somervell County. Texas.
- 58. Easement from Walter A. Reeves. Sr. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated October 3. 1978, and recorded in Volume 71. Page 676. Deed Records of somervell County. Texas.
- 59. Easement from C. 5. Harrington, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated April II.1976, and recorded in Volume 66, Page 670. Deed Records of Somervell County Texas. .
- 60. Easament from E. M. Cavasos, et ux. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated May 31,1977, and recorded in Volume 68. Page 578. Deed Records of Somervell Coun'ty. Texas.
- 61. Easement from C. R. Kelly.to Texas Electric Service Company. dated September 25,1977, and recorded in Volume 70. Page 239. Deed Records
~
of Somervell County Texas. -
- 62. Easement from R. E. Roberts to Texas' Electric Service Company, dated
. April 3, 1978, and recorded in Volume 70. Page 792. Deed Records of Somervell County. Texas'.
- 63. Easement from Doris 8. Hlaton, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated February 24, 1978, and recorded in Volume 70. Page 253. Deed ,.
Records of Somervell County. Texas, i,.. Easement from Allen Russell. et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated March 9.1978, and recorded in Volume 280. Page 279. Deed Records of Hood County. Texase Page 6 of 8
- 65. Easement from Allen Russell to Texas Electric Service Company. Cated March 22. 1978, and recorded in Volume 754. Page 99. D;ed Records of ,
JIhnson County. Texas.
- 66. Easement from Raymond P. andHelen Elliott to Texas Electric Service Company, dated November 18, 1977, and recorded in Volume 741. Page 446.'
Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
67 Easement from Robert A. King to Texas Electric Service Company, dated June 6,1978, and reccrded in Volume 761. Page 508. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 68. Easement from H. E. Kennon, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated June 16, 1978, and recorded in Volume 762. Page 749.' Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas. -
- 69. Easement from John,A. and Louise t.. Jones to Texas' Electric Service Company'. dated November 30. 1978, and recorded in Volume 781. Page 768
. Deed Records of Johnson County Texas.
~
- 70. Easement from William C. Harris, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company.
dated November 15, 1978, and recorded in Volume 779. Page 742. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 71. Easement from Winifred A. Hutchison, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated November 29,1978, and recorded in Volume 781. Page 761 Deed Records of Johnson County Texas. .,
- 72. Easement from John 8. Manning, et ux,. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated December 13. 1978, and recorded in Volume 783. Page 22. Deed
. . Records of Johnson County. Texas.
- 73. . Easement from Dudley J. Hanna, et ux, to Texas Electric Service Company, dated September 12, 1977, and recorded in Volume 736. Page 156. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas. .
- 74. Easement from Roy W. Reitz, Jr., et al. te Texas Electric Servic'e Company, dated December 5.1978, and recorded "in Volume 781. Page 784. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
~
- 75. Easement from Margaret H. Walters et al. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated December 4.1978, and recorded in Volume 782. Page 27 .
Deed Records of Johnson County Texas.
l l
- 76. Easement from Setsy trum, et al. to Texas Electric Service Company, dated l October 10, 1977, and recorded in Volume 738. Page 37. Deed Records of Johnson County. Texas.
l I
Page 7 of 8 O.
l
- 77. Easament from Donna Boog-Sco8t. eB vir, et al. to Texas Electric Service Companye dated Setpebner 8.1977 and recorded in Volume 738
, Page 29. Deed Records of Johnson County Texas.
- 78. Easement from John E. Boog-Scott, et al. to Texas Electric Service Y, I Company, dated September 28,1977, and recorded in Volume 738. Page 27 Deed Records' of Johnson County. Texas.
Reference is hereby made to the aforesaid recorded in'struments for all purposes.
a 1 .
Page 8 of 8 3
e h
(!,
.9 I
(
G M I'b I gg g j +-
mu me. ! esee<
9
' 999995 t l 9; ltesti Hl 95 y 5 '
?'
- - - - - +
l Contract Changes to the March 29, 1968 Interconnection and Power Interchange Agreement Between Texas Power & Light Company and '
Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
DATE FACILITY SCHEDULE # NAME STATUS 12-21-83 2 Garland 69 KV Deleted 05-03-85 4 Seymour Amended 10-14-83 10 Rice Amended 12-21-83 13 Grapevine Deleted 12-21-83 26 Denton Deleted 12-21-83 28 DeCordova Deleted 12-17-80 39 Killeen/Trimmier New 05-07-81 40 Montague New 06-29-83 41 India New 03-31-82 42 Hood New
- 05-25-83 43 liilltop Lakes Nsw _
06-07-85 43 Hilltop Lakes Leleted 05-26-82 44 Keller New 05-26-82 45 Collin-Frisco New 05-26-82 46 West Weatherford New 06-23-83 47 Roanoke New i
07-28-82 48 Winkler New 06-21-83 49 Scotland New 04-15-83 50 Talbertridge New -
06-29-83 51 Windsor New 11-23-83 52 Alvord New 09-24-83 53 Telico New 09-24-83 54 Zephyr New 11-23-83 55 Fairfield New 11-23-83 56 Argyle New ,
02-20-84 '57 Belton New 02-29 58 'Hearne Switch New 02-29-84 59 Jewett New 11-23-83 60 DeCatur New 11-23-83 61 Spring Valley New 06-07-85 62 Goodloe New
, 06-24-85 63 Temple-Taylor Valley New l 12-10-85 64 Hebron New 02-05-85 65 8eargrass New 06-07-85 67 Farrar New 08-16-85 68 - Milano New 04-07-96 69 Brownwood Switch New In addition to the above Facility Schedule Changes, the following changes were made on 12.5 KV delivery points.
04-26-84 Abandon Alma and Rice delivery points.
06-21-84 Abandon West delivery point.
i 06-26-84 Abandon Early and Zephyr delivery points.
e
- . - - . . _ _ _ i
i 1
iP I -
I r
s a
e e'
"" * :* % geo m .
w j 7 *:* 9.** .
- l It l
W tt es M l
l l ~
O e
D D
e l b l ', 3 e
e 4
' .,w.__ , . _ _ _,_ ,_ _ , _ _ _ _ _ __ _
NEW CONNECTIONS TO WHOLESALE CUSTOMERS
( DATE ENERGIZED NAME CUSTOMER 10-28-80 Ennis Substation Navarro Coop 04-17-81 Mt. Zion Substation Mid-South Coop 04-28-81 Trimier Substation Bartlett Coop 06-26-81 Post Oak Substation J-A-C Coop 08-26-81 Lake Forrest Substation Mid-South Coop 02-22-82 Salem Substation Cooke Coop 05-28-82 Dobbin Substation Mid-South Coop
~
06-21-82 Fall Creek Substation Johnson Coop -
02-10-83 Winkler Substation Navarro Coop 05-06-83 Talbertridge Substation Bartlett Coop
- 06-22-83 Highland Substation Denton Coop 07-20-83 Scotland Substation J-A-C Coop 07-21-83 Sota Substation Mid-South Coop
~
02-20-84 Telico Substation. Navarro Coop 04-03-84 Knox Substation B-K Coop l 06-13-84 Zephyr Substation Comanche Coop 11-27-84 Audubon Substation Wise Coop .
02-20-85 Spring Valley Substation McLennan Coop 04-19-85 Beargrass Substation Navasota Valley Coop 08-22-85 Farrar Substation Navasota Valley Coop 10-03-85 Hearne Southwest Substation City of Hearne 10-10-85 Center Point Substation Tri-County Coop 10-21-85 North Zulch Substation Mid-South Coop 04-29-86 Hebron Substation Denton Coop 07-18-86 Milano Substation Belfalls Coop 04-01-86 When Dickens Coop and Gate City Coop became members of Brazos, Brazos leased the following substations from the cooperative. Brazos will assume ownership of the facilities at a later date.
5 ; Dickens Substations Gate City Substations Aspermont Liberty Bissett McAdams Clairemont Paducal South Espuela S
l l
~ "
sm
\
Y l
A 4
ma me. >
_: ' b
- aa* +: =
f
== :
1 a : :j G
6 l
l j '
i
257203
(- UNITED STA'TES OF AMERICA
.t FEDERAL' ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION i
Central Power and Light )
Company .
)
Public Service Company )
' of Oklahoma )
Docket No. EL79-8-002 Southwestern Electric Power )
Company
)
West Texas Utilities Company )
,f NOTICE OF FILING OF PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF ~
COMMISSION ORDERS
( May 6 , 1986)
Light Company Take("notice that on May 1, 1986, Central Power and CPL"), Public Service Company of Oklahoma
("PSO") / Southwestern Electric Power Company ("SWEPCO") and West Texas Operating Utilities Company ("WTU") (collectively, the "CSW Companies")
("HL&P") petitioned theand Houston' Lighting & Power Company Commission to modify its earlier orders proceeding.
accepting the offer of settlement filed in this settlement, In its earlier orders approving the offer of the Commission, inter alia, ordered the CSW Operating Companies and HLP.to construct an asynchronous direct current interconnection between Walker County, Texas and the South Texas Nuclear Project (the " South Interconnection").
its earlier orders to (a) Petitioners ask the Commission to modify require establishment of an l
asynchronous direct current interconnection (the " East -
Interconnection")
and Texas Utilities Electric Company'sbetween SWEPCO's Welsh generating st generating station, both in Titus County,("TUEC") Texas, Monticello and the immediate undertaking of actions required therefor, (b) require the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and TUEC to interconnect their facilities with each other at Interconnection, (c) require such ownership of thethe East East Interconnection others, by the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and exchange andof such electric wheeling, power to, coordination, commingling, sale and from and over the East Interconnection facilitate its use, and and within the State of Texas as may (d) relieve the CSW Operating Companies and HL&P from their obligation to construct and
() oc-a-17 i
yA' -
n
257204 operate the South Interconnection upon construction of the ri'- East Interconnection. The filing Companies expressly reserve V_ the right to withdraw their petition in the event that opposition arises which is not' resolved.
Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. ,
20426, in accordance with I
Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 C.F.R. 55 385.211, 385.214). All such motions or protects should be filed on or before May 19 , 1986.
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copics of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available ,
for public inspection.
n th F. Plumb ReEeIretary h
e 0
e e
at e
e
,---_n- - ,
. 4 9
9 9
I c
4 e
b
- *
- 48 4e4 ese e l
m:. m! .m:n ..
I e
l 0
I e
l I
i e
i
> r
- l. # - t _
.:., - m .u . - . . . u - m .,, ,:.;e:c .2..u:
~
. t., r ' .
RECEIVED j. . . a. m c .. ...
The Brazos System Or,r..jce MAY 2 41985 Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,lnc. ^3 0u SPIESEh4MfiggggnD 64
%Ty,; "y' f May 21, 1985 Mr. Michael D. Spence President Texas Utilities Generating Company Skyway Tower -
400 North Olive Str'eet, L. B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201
Dear Mr. Spence:
We have today wire-transferred $380,000 to your account. This construction progress payment was due May 16, 1985. Mr. Max Tanner was advised by tele-phone last Friday, May 17, 1985, of the reasons for the delay in payment.
It is felt that it would be appropriate to describe the reasons in this letter.
As a result of the enormous construction cost overruns, our currently avail-able REA loan funds have been depleted. This includes our supplemental loan of $95,500,000 in addition to the original loan of $96,136,000. As everyone has recognized since the discussions which led to the Joint Ownership Agree-ment for Comanche Peak, Brazos has relied on REA financing to pay for our share of the units. As we have told TU many times, REA has infomed us, in writing, that REA does not intend to consider any request from Brazos for an additional
" deficiency loan" to cover continuing cost increases in construction of Comanche Peak.
Based on your estimates, we fully expected the funds approved by REA to cover the total costs of our share of the Comanche Peak units, including interest during construction. However, the construction contributions requested by TU a-i paid by Brazos to date already have substantially exceeded the total costs
- .imated for Brazos' share of the project at the time we entered into the soint Ownership Agreement. On March 27, 1985, we requested an explanation for these massive overruns. On May 7,1985, we forwarded to you a memo ~ prepared by our attorneys. We have not seen a response to either of these transmittals.
Under these circumstances, there is at least a genuine dispute as to whether Brazos has any obligation to make further payments for construction of Comanche Peak. In order to avoid even the possibility of a default under the Joint Ownership Agreement, however, we are anxious to work with you to resolve our l
h
'NIN9Q M)K S2m -e422. smate c4 m em g sr.w1 ppm 2esidsastlehN dD l - - - - - -
Mr. Michael D. Spence
,- 5/21/85 - Page 2
(
mutual concerns. To that end, on May 20, 1985, we forwarded to Mr. Mike Ozymy a draft of a proposed agreement intended to settle these issues.
Accordingly, we are requesting an early meeting to discuss this proposal.
Sincerely,
,T / h f W Y Vg gv,frCWFW .
Richard E. McCaskill REM:1r cc: Mr. Max Tanner 9
i
(
l
- =
0 C
g . 9
- ees - f i f :
seeest ; ee essefl ofes f l
.^
1
-- - _ , . _ _ _ - _ _ - . ,. g.
aC8(tT H.Omtreeo toeveraev neoute wituau o. ,AR;I!( setiqgst * *
, s,.. LLEO N ! .: est!
, f4 JN RECElVED ,l .3,3 3,pi ('()PV
%l {
MAY 2 41985 M C "' 70 " N 0. -
,-- The Brazos System 8'r a >
b SPIEGEL & McDIARMID acHAno r. u.casxitt BraZOS Electric Power Cooperative,Inc. (v "#*
May 20* 1985 d'I E,'oTUE.T* "Ec'iI Mr. Mike Spence, President Texas Utilities Generating Company Skyway Tower, 400 No. Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. John Butts, Manager Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
P.O. Box 1623 Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Mr. Ed Wagoner, General Manager Texas Municipal Power Agency P.O. Box 7000 ,
Bryan, Texas 77805 Gentlemen:
Brazos wishes to sell its interest in the Comanche Peak Project. Our understanding of the spirit of our Joint Ownership Agreement requires Brazos to give each of the co-owners of the Project the right of first refusal in acquiring Brazos' 3.8% ownership interest. Accordingly, before we seek any outside interest in the Project, we feel obligated to offer our ownership interest to you first. Please advise us, as soon as possible, if you desire to purchase part or all of our interest in Comanche Peak.
Sincerely, Richard E. McCaskill RDf/1w cc:
Spiegel & Mc lamid l
resrtwersensm.u- aco. mas,sm.am me.amm .~r noamomcu.2=mmeaWOc l
f
(,
e O
C
! ettes ette e n g'
( l 9999996 99 99991- ':s i M 1
9 e
1 -
r*
k Ql l
t
. m c. ..ise.c . , ~ .. wwua.mo .sc. .
- .. :< a a wi. .
F .r ' ~
l.l
~
RECEIVEu . , v. H I.W -
- j M 41985
" E " ~ " .: u,.2 The arazos system
,,~
,p s-l l
SPIEGEL & McDIARMio Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,inc .# ~l
- cx4ao e. wcAsxin May 29, 1985 NaNY5'm",'!En?
Mr. Michael D. Spence President Texas Utilities Generating Company -
Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201
Dear Mr. Spence:
As you are probably aware, Brazos has not paid the construction payment for -
Comanche Peak in the amount of $209,000 scheduled for May 23, 1985. We be-lieve there are serious questions.at to whether Bra:os has any obligation to make further construction payments in view of the enormous construction cost overruns on the Project. By letters of March 27, May 7 and May 21, 1985, we requested an explanation for these overruns. As of this date, we have not received a response to our requests. During conversations of May 24, 1985, with your staff we were advised that TUEC personnel would be fully occupied in responding to NRC requests until approximately Mid-June.
In light of these representations, we ag' reed to table our requests tempo-rarily at that time. Recent events, however, compel us to insist upon a prompt response.
Sections 5.03 and 5.04 of the Joint Ownership Agreement as well as appli-cable principles of agency law obligate TUGC0 to provide us with informa-l tion concerning the Project. Notwithstanding your obligations to the NRC, -
l we believe that TUEC's failure to respond to our requests for an explanation of the construction cost overruns constitutes a breach of these provisions, which relieves Brazos of any obligation to make further construction pay -
ments at least until such breach has been remedied.
As we have repeatedly told you, REA refuses to finance additional capital payments for Comanche Peak in view of the unexplained cost overruns, and your failure to provide reasonable explanations nakes it impossible for us to obtain additional funds. We remain anxious to work this problem out with you, but we need a clear understanding of the reasons for the cost overruns and delays in order to be able to do so.
l Very truly yours, e
l . ichard E. McCaskill df $
REM /1w i
l cc: Mr. Max Tanner -
i Mr. Mike 0:ymy m
3 O
- CST OFACE 804 6236 4ACO..TEMAS 78704-4296 PNCNE M s 71 *s2-lso 3 - i 4ENEAAL.CMICE.340uaSALLE AC4.E -
. T .
e O
p- '
=
a O
e C
~
, .- . . . "3 :!l i s ,
in O
i O
e l
I i
1 o
.3as d
- W i
l . .
. . - 1(;
[ . V;';
XTROX TELECOPIER 296 6-12-958 243 PMi 1 817 752 2501 + 2025794001 ; *1
- c. . . ~j~,,, foe.,t7 "Ie b s%' r
- ]. 3Nah3 bE MC W'd "Fou.: K 3. b. CepLIMd s, .
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY SILYW47 TtttWRED . 40e Nt)ERT90 f 8LIVF! STREET. I. M. At . GALLArt TNAAve 733g4
, *m._.~. .
- RECEIyga :d y'l U
""*"'"I.'..,
.. P '
June 10, 1985 r - -
JUN 121985 SPIEGEL & MeDIARMfD
'h#
Mr. Richard McCaskill .
Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
P. O. Box 6296 Waco, TX 76706-0296
Dear Richards ,
We have reviewed matters raised in recent correspondence f rom REPCI which was generally susumarized in your letter of May 29, 1985.
The correspondence addresses two basic areas of concern. The first area is the furnishing of information regarding the Comanche Peak construction schedule, cost estimates and items raised by the Nuclear Regulatory cosumission's Technical Review Team (TRT). The second area
, is SEPCI's problem with obtaining financing to meet its obligations for construction costs of Comanche Peak.
With respect to the first point, such information has been provided regularly at the Owner's Comunittee meetings which began immediately ,
following the execution of the Joint ownership Agreement. Additionally, the owners have been and continue to be furnished correspondence, budget information, schedule reports, news releases and other related materf,al on a regular basis. As indicated in Max Tanner's letter to you of April
, 19, 1985, it was thought that all of SEPCI's questions had been adequately addressed. Subsequently, however, in meetings to discuss SEPCI's financing problem you indicated that some specific questions relating j
to the Technical Review Team Report may have not been answered to your
- satisfaction. While we feel those questions have been addressed, we committed to furnish additional detailed information at an agreed later date' , and we stand by that casusittment. This additironal detailed information will staff in Arlington, gilable at the June 13-14 meeting with the NRC t; and, if necessary, can be further disucased at the next owner's Committee meeting presently scheduled for June 28, 1985 at the Comanche Peak atte.
j As yoo are aware, the Joint ownership Agreement established the l
- owner's committee to provide a forum for interchanging information regarding the status of the Project. We continue to feel that this mechanism to provide the owners with information regarding the Project
, has functioned appropriately and we see no basis for departing now frota this agreed upon approach. If BEPCI has questions you feel have not been addressed, they should be placed on the agenda of the next owner's
! Committee :neeting.
REElVS Jull:r: 1535 -- -
WM
. , . , , - - , - - y- - , . - - - ---,.w. -.-------------------v--
AOX TELECOPIER 295 3 6-12-85 2:05 PM: 1 017 752 2001 0 2026794001 ; o2 Mr. Richard McCaskill
.[
f June 10, 1985 Page 2 Regarding the second point, BEPCI's financial problem with the Rural Electrification AdmiPietration, we have met, as you know, on several occassions to discuss ways to assist BEPCI with its problem. A proposal to cap BEPCI's cost has been offered and is still active from our position. Our efforts in this endeavor to address BEPCI's financing problems have been responsive and timely.
Finally, in response to your suggestion that BEPCI's obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement may be relieved, we certainly disagree since, as stated above, such information has been provided. TUCCO as
, Project Manager, has certainly not . defaulted in its obligations and we expect BEPCI to timely meet its committments and obligations as well. -
! Very truly yours, n _, ,,
,v --
MDSpence/ma
[
l l
1 I
l
.s 4
/ M
- nn.L u A n - ,_ i I
I 9
e
1 e
XEROX TELECOPIER 295 : 9-18-85;10:02 AM3 1 817 752 2501 e 2028794001 ie2 I . .
~.
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY sarwar vowsw . e o montes ns.svs arnrer. i.. . ne . u4i.i.4.. rezas moi n
i mienago_sys=ca september 16, 1985 l
i Mr. Richard E. McCaskill CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN Executive Vice President and RECEIPT REQUESTED Ceneral Manger NO. P 068 029 167 )
Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. I P. O. Box 6296 waco, TX 76706-0296 RE: Written Notice of Failure to Make Payment in the Time and Manner Provided by the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Eleqtric station.
Dear Mr. McCaskill:
This letter serves written notice, pursuant to Paragraph 18.02 of the Joint ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (Agreement), upon Brasos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., of the failure of Brazos Electric Potatr Cooperative, Inc. .to make payments in the time and manner provided in soid Agreement.
Whenever used in this letter, the term Agreement shall mean the " Joint Ownership Agreement Between Dallas Power & Light Congiany, Texas Electric service Company, Texas Power & Light Company, Texas Utilities Generating Company, Texas Municipal Power Agency and Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station," dated January 2, 1979, as modified by the " Modification of Joint ownership Agreement Between Dallas Power & Light Company, Texas Electric Service Company, Texas Power
& Light Company, Texas Utilities Generating Company, Texas Municipal Power Agency, and Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station,' dated June 1, 1979, as amended by the " Amendment of Joint ownership Agreement" by and between Dallas Power & Light Company, Texas Electric Service Company, Texas Power & Light Company, Texas Utilities Generating company, Texas Municipal Power Agency, Brasos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., and Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc., dated December 9, 1980, and as amended by the "Second Amendment of Joint Ownership Agreement" by and between Dallas Power & Light Company, Texas Electric Service Company, Texas Power & Light Company, Texas Utilities Generating Company, Texas Municipal Power Agency, Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., and Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc., dated February 12, 1982.
(j Specifically, Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. has failed to make the following payments in the time and manner provided by the Agreement:
'. r
-scresuen tra . * - '. m tr.v
ADVA 8 f.6C.4WP" i F.M 43Q # e"8G~eQ.8U*W9 M8 8 e8i iD4 4DU8 .T 'W'O 8 3"'V V 8 8
- J Mr. Richard E. McCaskill r september 16, 1985 -
Pa9e 2
- 1. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-22 by May 23, 1985, in the amount of $209,000.00 and
- 2. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-23 by May 30, 1985, in the amount of~$311,600.00s and
- 3. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5260 by June 3, 1985, in the amount of $53,984.76: and
- 4. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-24
- by June 6, 1985, in the amount of $136,800.00s and l 5. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-25 by June 13, 1985., in the amount os $258,400.00s and
- 6. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5207 by June 18, 1985, in the amount of $34,927.39: and j 7. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5298 ,
i by June 18, 1985, in,the amount of $12,335.29: and
- 8. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-26 by June 20, 1985, in the amount of $300,200.00 and
- 9. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-27 by June 27, 1985, in the amount of $288,800.00; an'd ,
- 10. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5334 by July 2, 1985, in the amount of $54,129.66: and
- 11. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-28 by July 3, 1985, in the amount of $167,200.00 and
- 12. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5295 l
by July 3, 1985, in the amount of 544.84: and
- 13. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-29 by July 11, 1985, in the amount of $399,000.00 and
- 14. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-30 by July 18, 1985, in the amount of $209.000.00; and
- 15. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-31
. by July 25, 1985, in the amount of $254,600.00s and
- 16. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5349 by July 28, 1985, in the amount of $118.19: and
- 17. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-32 by August 1, 1985, in the amount of S437,000.00s and (Oc '9 .
xERux'ILLLt,UPIER 295 : W-10-Eb;10:Ob AM: 1 ti1Y Yb2 4o01 e JudD(w4uus ;o=
([, Mr. Richard E. McCaskill September 16, 1985 Page 3
- 18. Paywnt that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5408 by August 2, 1985, in the amount of $54,109.90s and
- 19. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-33 '
by August 8, 1985 in the amount of $205.200.00s and
- 20. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5412 by August 14, 1985, in the amount of $266,353.45 less credit Memo No. 5469 dated August 12, 1985, in the amount of $189,835.94:
and .
- 21. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-34 by August 15, 1985, in the amount of $418,000.00 and
- 22. Payment ~that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-35 by August 22. 1985 in the amount of 5235,600.00s and
- 23. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5435 -
by August 28, 1985, in the amount of $342.75; and
- 24. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-36 by August 29, 1985, in the amount of $497,800.00; and
- 25. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Invoice No. 5472
- by september 4, 1985, in the, amount of $54,426.05
- and l
- 26. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-37 by September 5, 1985,.in the amount of $163,400.00s and
- 27. Payment that should have been made pursuant to Request No. 85-38 I
by September 12, 1985, in the amount of $247,000.00.
Brasos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., pursuant to said Paragraph 18.02, is hereby notified that payment of the above amounts must be made within thirty (30) days of ' the receipt of this notice in order to cure the default that exists. Failure of Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., to cure such default within said thirty-day period will give the nondefaulting Parties (as the term Parties is defined in the Agreement) all of the options, rights and remedies provided for in Paragraph 18.03 of the Agreement or otherwise afforded by law.
As you know, we have delayed sending you this notice only because of the extensive efforts we have made with you to consider alternative methods by which Brasos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.'s obligations under the Joint ownership Agreement could be met, which efforts, unfortunately have proven unsuccessful. It is especially unfortunate that your Board has declined to authorize the executior. of an agreement, 6
XEROX TELECOPIER 295 i 9-18-05:10:03 AM; 1 U17 Yb2 2001 e dud 3 /W4UU I ieo
. Mr. Richard E. McCaskill
( ,)
~'
September 16, 1985.
Page 4 the subetance and material terms of which you have acknowledged to be reasonable and acceptable to both you and officials of the Rural Electrification Administration. Despite our good faith in attempting to negotiate an agreement by which Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, l Inc. could meet its obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement, your .
l response of September 11, 1985, totally rejects the agreement developed i by ua jointly over the last several months. It had been our understanding that we were making progress toward a mutually agreeable and satisfactory 1 arrangements otherwise, this notice would have been sent long before now.
Your
- 1atest resnonse states that Brazos Electric Power Coooerative.
i Inc. wishes to discuss further the terms and conditions contained in -
proposals originally made by you. While we are willing to discuss mutually agreeable arrangements, we remain resolute that the terna contained in those proposals hre neither acceptable nor fair and reasonable, and that arrangements by which Brasos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. can meet its obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement must be along the lines of the agreement which your Board rejected. In the event that your Board is willing to authorise you to negotiate in good faith toward ,
arrangements reasonably similar to those contained in the September 3, 1985 draft, we will be available to promptly meet upon your request to continue the negotiation process expeditiously.
Sincerely, Texas Utilities Generating Company,
,a Division of Texas Utilities Electric Company, Project Manager l ay: D2 RQ Pr'seiknt " * [/
cc Mr. E. L. Wagoner, General Manager Texas Municipal Power Agency Mr. Marvin P. Tate
. Mr. Juan D. Nichols, President Tex-La tiectric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
Mr. John Butts, General Manager Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
- \
NWAN I-~~WMm 2G m'LTTh ' , '&iM r. 7. ZU -4J. 7 4 TX- ~a - ".~6- m'. E7 . .- ' . ZZLT T 4. S a..-- - -~ - ~ _ --' 7...!- -1s.----
. .T-Zi-~-~-.---TS--e.
- a 7,
O d
~
- * #8 set ses
,ogg . .
~ = + = l.. 3 .
4 Ya
k *
, .Or ***Ve. 83,*s % age.se . . er
- 2.89 e- - -
W
.w s .
a .o > ~, . 7.gggg gggy 7 : j 3 .I ' * ' The Brazos System ' ~.;j;, .r: ; " . g.) ce g M
ept1GE, q mW Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,lnc .
mcHao E weasmLL September 27, 1985 Istr$c.t V:3 set!E':*
m st .zu. vmm
>fr. Stichael D. Spenca, President Texas Utilitiec Generating Company Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 31 Dallas, Teus 75201 Re: Additional Written Notice of Default by TUGC0 and TUEC of Obligations Undar the Join Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station i
Dear Str. Spence:
In response to your letter of September 16, 1985, claiming that Bra:os -
Electric Power Cooperative is in default with respect to its obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, ,as amended (hereafter " Joint Operating Agreement" or "Agreemeat").
Bra:os hereby denies that it has committed any act of default under the Agreement. On the contrary, Texas Utilities Generating Company ("TUCCC"'..
Texas Utilities Electric Company ("TUEC"), and their affiliates (including Dallas Power $ Li2ht Company, Texas Electric Service Company and Texas Pow?r 6 Light Company) have breached the Agreecent and are in default of their obligations under the Agreement.
TUCCO and TUEC failed to have the, plant in commercial operation as scheduled and within the budget esticates that TUEC presented to Bra:os to induce, Bra:os to enter into the Joint Ownership Agreement. In June, 1979, . shen Bra:os entered into the Joint Ownership Agreement for a 3.S'i share of the Comanche Peak Units, the cost estimate for the construction of the Comanche Peak units was approximately 32.325 billion. TUCCO agreed that it would "act with due diligence in performing its obligations and will use its best '
efforts to timely complete constmetion of, and place into service, each 'Jnit of the Project." (Section 3.04 of the Joint Operating Agreement.) The A;ree-ment calls for the Date of Commercial Operation for Unit 1 to be January. IMl and Unit 2 to be January, 1983. Although the Agreement reci:es that the Parties recogni:e that the actual dates may vary from the estimates given .~or commercial operation, Section 2.02 of the contract also states that cost estimates given at the time of closing will be " realistic and curreat." ,
Because of TUGCO's and TUEC's apparent failure to prepare the plant for licensing, it now appears that Unit I will not be ready for commerical o'er- ,
ation at rated capacity until late 1956, and there are no guarantees aca m :
additional delays. The :otal cost of the units (including AFUDC) could be Q,? approximately $4.36 billion or more.
As cm:rseu en - wms s :eea +:s w:m:sc- n e cau=ct w a:s_te..?nh$
y
>!r. Michael D. Spence
.N 9/27/83, Page 2 TUGCO's and TUEC's failure to meet their :)1igations has caused substan:ial harm and damage to 3ra:os in the form of incTeased costs for Bra:os' share of the Comanche Peak units, increased interest expense on Bra:os' debts associated with its participation in the Comanche Peak units,and deprivation of. a source of power, among other things. In addition, TUGCO's and TUEC's failure to provide timely budget, cost, and scheduling information as re-quired by the Joint Ownership Agreement has impaired Bra:os' ability to ob:ain financing.
TUGCO's and TUEC's failure to construct and pince the Comanche Peak units in operation within a reasonable time and cost is the direct result of TUGCO's -
and TUEC's substantial breach of their duties under their contract with Bra:os and their other ' legal obligations. Section 3.04 of the Agreement pro-vides that TUGCO, as Project Manager, "shall have sole responsibility for and is fully authori:ed to act for the Parties with respect to the licensing, design, construction, operation, maintenance .. . and decommissioning of the Proj ect , and the Parties further agree that the Project ifanager shall have comple:e possession and control of the Project .... " This cont rol has ex- ,
tended to the hiring and supervising of architectural, engineering and design firms and other agents, employees and consultants. Brazos believes that TUCCO and TUEC have breached at least the following obligations imposed under the contrac: '(among others):
- 1. the duty to employ " prudent utility practices" contained in Recitals to the contract and in Sections 1.19, 3.04, 3.00, S.02 and 3.03 of the con:ract;
- 2. the duty to construct the plant in accordance with NRC licensing requirements and any applicable federal or state laws and regulations, including the principal architectural and engineering criteria and environmental commitments made to the NRC in accordance with standards set forth, among other places, in Sections 3.04, 3.01, 3.01, 8.03 and 23.03 '
of the contract; and
- 3. the duty to keep Bra:os inforned of all significant matters with respect to the construction and operation of the proj ect, includ-ing esti .ates of the costs and schedule for completing the project, as required in Sections 3.03, 9.01, 9.00 and 9.03 o f the contract, among others.
In additicn, TUCCO and TUEC have breached numerous other express and implivd legal obligations to perfot, the contrae , includinj the duty to perfor- in a worknanlike manner and :o comply with warranties and independent 8:nndarls of law, and it may have breached Section :: relating to training.
Under the terms of Section 3.04, TUEC and TUCCO promise to indemnify Bra: 0-77 for damages, los.ies or expense sus:sined by Bra:os as a result of a bre teh Of i
i
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _____________________e
l l
Mr. Michael D. Spence
- ~g 9/ 27/85, Page 3 m
)
l the Joint Ownership Agreement by the Project Manager or its agents, serva.ts or employees. .
The facts which indicate TUGCO's and TUEC's brea$h of the provisions listed i
3, above are, unfortunately, too numerous to list conveniently in letter form.
Many of TUGCO's and TUEC's failures to conform to NRC. regulations have been identified by the special Technical Review Team ("TRT") and the constructien Assessment Team (" CAT") of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as well as by the consultant Cygna. For example, in a December 28, 1933 decision, the Licensing Board concluded that TUCCO's and TUEC's iterative design process is not a satisfactory fulfillment of the requirement of 10 C.F.R. Part 50, _
Appendix B, to promptly identify and correct design deficiencies. In that decision, the Board states that a number of the design problems identified (by CASE's witnesses, among others) could have been detected and mitigated had an appropriate quality assurance program been in place. Scme examples may include specific problems subsequently reviewed and identified by the TRT and CAT assessments and'by Cygna, including those relating to the design and construction of the pipe supports and the design and installation of the -
cable trays. Other deficiencies in TUGCO's and TUEC's performance are identified in the reports of those groups, including numerous deficiencies in the quality' assurance / quality control area ranging from inadequate train-ing of inspec: ors to failure to perform audits. TUGCO's and TUEC's commit-ment to a3gressively implement quality assurance / quality control requirements in certain areas has been questioned by the TRT.
In addition, it appears that TUGCO's and. IUEC's handling of the licensing proceedings, including its failure to provide the Licensing Board with adequate responses to questions raised by intervenors, has further under-mined the Board's confidence in TUGCO's and TUEC's performance as Project Manager. Such failure constitutes an additional violation of TUCCO's and TUEC's obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement to satisfy SRC requirements and secure a license to operate the Comanche Peak units.
, Thus, TUSC, TUGC0 and their affiliates and agents have breached the Joint Ownership agreement and are in default. Bra:os has not c.or.mitted any act of default under.these circumstances, and the other. Parties to the Agreement have no rights under Paragraph 13.03 or otherwise to any relief against Bra:os.
I disagree with your interpretation of how REA and I v ewed your proposal.
We hdd negotiated to the point where your proposal Was more reasonable tSc.r it had been. However, this does not mean that I personally thought term 4 which I might accept in compromise, were fair. For example, it is not fair ,
or reasonabic for Bra:os to lose capacity or to have its costs for retained capacity inflated because of TUEC or TUCCO failures to fulfill their obligations. Nor were your proposals fair that Bra:os waive claims invul. ine Comanche Peak construction which were totally unrelated to cost overruns er O
f a.
.J w.- = . ~- e--m ,- ,._ -.. w -- - . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . _ >
t Mr. Michael D. Spence 9/27/85, Page 4
.,m Y.*
, delays or that Bra:os agree that TUEC had made no representations involving Comanche Peak. Furthermore, I always made clear and you indicated that you understood that the Board is responsible for settlement decisions and cust be satisfied by the terms of any proposai. As I have inforced you, the Ecard rejected your proposal as unfair and unsatisfactory.
Bra:os preserves all its rights and recedies. Because specific items of breach or legal claims are not mentioned, they are not waived. References to TUEC include TUCCO and all other affiliates. In this connection I antic-ipate sending separately :he notice required under Section 17.50A of the . .
Texas Deceptive Trade Practices - Consumer Protection Act.
Having said the above, as is required to protect its legal rights, Bra:os remains willing and, indeed, anxious to cooperate with you to reach an amicable resolution of all problems. By letter of September 11,19S5, we forwarded an outline of terms which we believe are both reasondble and fair to all parties. Ne remain available to discuss resolution of our differences along the lines described in our Septenber 11 letter, or on any other poten- '
tially satisfactory basis.
Very truly yours, 4
/N .
/ $
Richard E. McCaskill
. REM:1r cc: Mr. J. S. Farrington, Chairman, Texas Utilities Generating Company
.Ir. T. Michael 0:ymy, Director, Special Projects, Texas Utilities Generatin2 Company Mr. John Butts, General Manager, Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
Mr. E. L. Wagoner, General Manager, Texas '!unicipal Power Agency Sk. Juan D. Nichols, President, Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc.
Mr. Marvin P. Tate, Vice President, Texas Municipal Power Agency Mr. Frank Bennett, Director, Southwest Area-Electric, REA Mr. Thomas L. Eddy, Chief, Power Engineering Branch, REA Mr. Charles B. Gill, Covernor, CFC Mr. Richard Rulman, Loan Officer, CFC Mr. John W. Beck, Chairman, Comanche Peak Owners Committec bec: '!r. J. D. Capeland
'fr. Pc5 .!ablon issesencStnnniw/.KlaiT.s Mr. Joe Riley 0
W_c ia u :s r.:.ss=1:.a :-- s, x w d .. u:- a .em ,-z w .w < .ac.::ui.7.u.. . . . n .x * . - - - ..L-. '!...:-a.~.~, u. . su-i .
O af. ,
y ',t o
G G C
, y
- pees mese esem I
<t' eseem ee leeem ades me/
4 l
l l
h i
,**3
---,- 4 . ._. , , _ . , , _, ., . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. . ~ -
,,,, ..... . m .e ... e e e ene,== =
4%ILLIAh8 G PLRKER Pet 5 CENT LUTW2 SAGES wiCf PA[$C(NT
~~
, 7 99 A COPY 7 The Brazos System 00ES NOT NEED TO BE FILECd
'" $ [
- --engs,L & McDIARMID g Brazos Electn,c Power Cooperative,Inc . m._,
- CHARD E. McCASKu.
Oct6ber 1, 1985 1'E :: L"I'3"'
Mr. Peter B. Tinkham, Secretary Texas Utilities Company Texas Utilities Electric Company Texas Utilities Fuel Company Texas Utilities Mining Company Texas Utilities Services, Inc.
- 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Re: Additional Written Notice of Default by WGC0 and TUEC of Obligations Under the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Generating Station
Dear Mr. Tinkham:
Last Friday, I sent to Mr. Michael D. Spence on behalf of Brazos Electric Power Cooperative the attached letter notifying the Texas Utilities Gener-ating Company ("TUGC0!'), the Texas Utilities Electric Company ("111EC"), and their affiliates, of a breach and default in their obligations with regard to the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station
, and with regard to Comanche Peak. I attach and incorporate this letter as providing you with further, formal notice of such breach and default.
r Very truly yours, a
f I
REM:1r ichard E. McCaskill Enclosure (Ltr. 9/27/85) .
cc: Mr. Michael "D. Spence, President, TUGC0
' Mr. J. S. Farrington, Chairman,1UEC Mr. T. Michael Ozymy, Director, Special Projects,11JGCO ,
Mr. John Butts, General Manager, Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas,Inc.
Mr. Juan D. Nichols, President, Tex-La Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Mr. E. L. Wagoner, General Manager, TMPA Mr. Marvin P. Tate, Vice President, TMPA Mr. Frank Bennett, Director, Southwest Area-Electric, REA Mr. Thomas L. Eddy, Chief, Power Eng. Branch, REA Mr. Charles B. Gill, Governor, CFC Mr. Richard Bulman, Loan Officer, CFC Mr. John W. Beck, Chairman, Comanche Peak Owners Committee bec: Mr. J. D. Copeland Mr. Robert A. Jablon U . .
_wm Joe Rney -
' ecst Imct morares wAco.TEmas maseres ~m ts17rTsr-2soi F zulee manczpos:E aosi Amm
- AVENUE "
- M l .
l . . .
S g.*
& 0. 00000( + e 08: 88 400 peg % -
g
,gggg M
= f e Of N W u
- ,.~,
~
.p -
.ou ,
.ac.o -.,..u w o .wm a nana mim, wr,.s..a.t a e-SPIEGEL & McDIARMID Y=
OCT 8 1W5 "'.
et The Brazos System ]",_
DEUVERED BY AIR COURIER Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,Inc.
EMARo E. McCAsKILL October 7, 1985 '.
Mr. Michael D. Spence, President CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN
.) Texas Utilities Generating Company RECEIPT REQUESTED Skyway Tower No. 43790 400 North Olive Street, L.B.81 Dallas, Texas 75201
Dear Mr. Spence:
This letter constitutes notice under Section 17.50A of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices - Consumer Protection Act (Texas Business 6 Commerce Code, Title 2, Sub. Sec. 17.41 et. seq.) that Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (" Bra:os") intends tTfile a lawsuit against Texas Utilities Electric Generating Company ("TUGC0") and its affiliates, including Texas Utilities i Electric Company ("TUEC"), Dallas Power 6 Light Company, Texas Electric Service Company, and Texas Power 6 Light Company for violations of that statute and for breaches of and defaults under the Joint Ownership Agreement for the construction of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (" Comanche Peak"), entered into by Brazos on June 1,1979, as amended.
Under the terms of that Agreement, TUGC0 acts as Project Manager for the i
construction and operation of the units (Joint Ownership Agreement Section 3.04). .
WGC0 and TUEC have failed to have the plant in commercial operation as sched-uled and within the budget estimates they presented to Brazos to induce Bra:os to enter into the Joint Ownership Agreement. In June, 1979, when Brazos entered into the Joint Ownership Agreement for a 3.8% share of the Comanche Peak Units, the cost estimate for the construction of the Comanche Peak units was approximately $1.700 billion. TUGC0 agreed that it would "act with due diligence in performing its obligations and will use its best efforts to timely complete construction of, and place into service, each unit of the Project." (Section 3.04 of the Joint Ownership Agreement). The Agreement calls for the Date of Conniercial Operation for Unit 1 to be January,1981 and Unit 2 to be January, 1983. Although the-Agreement recites that the Parties recognize that the actual dates may vary from the estimates given for commer-cial operation, Section 2.02 of the contract also states that cost estimates given at the time of closing will be " realistic and current."
TUCCO's further failure to provide Brazos with changes in cost and schedule estimates in a timely manner and its failure to keep Brazos informed of de-velopments in the licensing process, including the identification of substan-tial deviations by TUGCO from NRC requirements, also constitute actionable breaches of the Agreement. Under the circumstances, none of the cost or completion schedule estimates provided by TUGC0 to Brazos has reficcted a reasonable assessment. Indeed, because of WGCO's and TUEC's ao h- bre to satisfy NRC regulations, it now appears that Unit I will' not parent fail-be ready I -
! 803T CFFCEM3 aman f test lD.15aAS15254EM'~*' NBf73152-2Bt M.s OmJlPFM 3ame.L .
Mr. Michael D. Spence
- 10/7/85, Page 2
. h[,
for commercial operation at rated capacity until late 1986, and there are no guarantees against additional delays. The total cost of the units (including
- AFUDC) could be approximately $4.56 billion or more.
The substantial discrepancy between TUGCO's promised performance and its actual performance as well as its continuing inability to pe'rform its obli-gations under the contract lead Bra:os to conclude that TUGC0 misrepresented its ability to manage the plant, misrepresented its ability to select and/or supervise competent contractors, misreprescated the competence of the major contractors selected by TUGCO, specifically Brown 6 Root and Gibbs 6 Hill, and misrepresented its ability and intent to comply with Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") regulations, espec1111y in the areas of quality assurance -
and quality control.
TUGCO's and TUEC's failure to construct and place the Comanche Peak units in operation within a reasonable time and cost is the direct result of TUGCO's 4
and TUEC's substantial breach of their duties under their contract with Bra:os
, and their other legal obligations'. Section 3.04 of the Agreement provides that TUGCO, as Project Manager, "shall have sole responsibility for and is fully authorized to act for the Parties with respect to the licensing, design, ~
construction, operation, maintenance ... and decommissioning of the Project; 3 and the Parties further agree that the Project Manager shall have complete l possession and control of the Project .... " This control has extended to the hiring and supervising of architectural, engineering and design firms and other agents, employees and consultants. Brazos believes that TUGC0 and TUEC have breached at least the following obligations imposed under the contract (among others):
l 1. the duty to employ " prudent utility practices" contained l
in Recitals to the contract and in Sections 1. 19, 3. 04, 5.02, 8.02 and 8.03 of the contract;
- 2. the duty to construct the plant in accordance with NRC licensing requirements and any tpplicable federal or state laws and regulations, including the principal architectural and engineering criteria and environmental commitments made to the NRC in accordance with standards set forth, among other places, in Sections 3.04, 5.01, 8.01, 8.03 and 23.08 of the contract; and
- 3. the duty to keep Bra:os informed of all significan't matters with respect to the construction and operation of the pro-ject, including estimates of the costs and schedule for com-pleting the project, as required in Sections 5.03, 9.01, 9.02 and 9.03 of the contract, among others.
- In addition,TUCCO, and TUEC have breached numerous other express and implied legal obligations to perform the contract, including the duty to perform in a worknanlike manner and to comply with warranties and independent standards
({) ,
of the law, and it may have breached Section 22 relating to training.
i- '
_,y-...,,-.c... -, , - , . , _ ~
Mr. Michael D. Spence
,(t3 10/7/85, Page 3 1
/ . I Under the terms of Section 3.04, TUGC0 and TUEC promise to indemnify Bra:os for damages, losses or expenses sustained by Bra:os as a result of a breach of the Joint Ownership Agreement by the Proj ect Manager or its agents, ser-
.vants or employees.
Many of TUGCO's and TUEC's failures to conform to NRC regulations have been
, identified by the special Technical Review Team ("TRT") and the Construction Assessment Team (" CAT") of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as well as by the consultant Cygna. For example, in a December 28, 1983 decision, the Licensing Board concluded that TUEC's and TUGCO's iterative design process
~
is not a satisfactory fulfillment of the requirement of 10 C.F.R. Part 50, -
Appendix B, to promptly identify and correct design deficiencies. In that decision, the Board states that a number of the design problems identified (by CASE's witnesses, among others) could have been detected and miti' gated had an appropriate quality assurance program been in place. Examples include specific problems subsequently reviewed and identified by the TRT and CAT assessments and by Cygna, including those relating to the design and construc-tion of the pipe supports and the design and installation of the cable trays.
Other deficiencies in TUGCO's performance are identified in the reports of '
those groups, including numerous deficiencies in the quality assurance / quality control areas ranging from inadequate training of inspectors to failure to
' perform audits. TUGCO's commitment to aggressively implement quality assur-
. ance/ quality control requirements in certain areas has been questioned by the
- TRT.
i In addition, it appears that TUGCO's and TUEC's handling of the licensing
- proceedings, including their failure to provide'the Licensing Board with adequate responses to questions raised by intervenors, has further undermined the Board's confidence in TUGCO's and TUEC's performance as Project Manager.
Such failure constitutes an additional violation of TUGCO's and TUEC's obli-gations under the Joint Ownership Agreement to satisfy NRC requirements and secure a license to operate the Comanche Peak units.
As a result of thy behavior described above, and related and similar behavior, TUGC0 and TUEC are in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
Each of the failures of performance described above constitutes the breach of an express ar implied warranty and unconscionable action or course of action under Sec.17.50(a) of the Act. In addition TUGCO's and TUEC's actions constitute one or more unlawful false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices as enumerated in Sec.17.46(b) of the Act.
TUGCO's and TUEC's conduct constitutes a producing cause of actual and sub-i stantial damages to Bra:os in the form of increased costs for Bra:os' share of the Comanche Peak units, increased interest expense on Bra:os' debts associated with its participation in the Comanche Peak un'it, and deprivation of a source of power, among other things. The damages. claimed by Bra:os
. amount to $205,000,000, to date, including overheads, interest and attorneys
! fees. In addition, Brazos will claim any additional amounts incurred until
)
,. . - - e- - - - , --- ,..-~ _ - . ~ ~ - - _ . - . , - _ . , - - - - _ , - - - - - _ . _ _ . . , - - - - - , - - - . - - - - . _ . - - - - - _ _ _ _ - . - - . - . , - . - _ . . _ - - . ,-. -~
Mr. Michael D. Spence 10/7/85, Page 4
%W the issue is resolved. Brazos intends to make a claim for treble damages bnder the Act if no sat'isfactory offer of settlement is received within thirty days after the date of this letter.
Brazos preserves all its rights and remedies. Because specific items of breach or legal claims are not mentioned, they are not waived. References to TUEC include TUGC0 and all other affiliates.
Very truly yours, e
~
Y Richard E. McCaskill
~ '
REM:Ir cc: Mr. Peter B. Tinkham, Secretary Mr. J. S. Farrington, Chairman, TUEC ,
Mr. T. Michael 0:ymy, Director, Special Projects, TUGC0 Mr. John Butts, General Manager, Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas.Inc.
Mr. Juan D. Nichols, President, Tex-La Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Mr. E. L. Wagoner, General Manager, TMPA Mr. Marvin P. Tate, Vice President, TMPA Mr. Frank Bennett, Director, Southwest Area-Electric, REA Mr. Thomas L. Eddy, Chief, Power Eng. Branch, REA Mr. Charles B. Gill, Governor, CFC Mr. Richard Bulman, Loan Officer, CFC Mr. John W. Beck, Chairman, Comanche Peak Owners Committee bec: Mr. J. D. Copeland Mr. Robert A. Jablon Ms. Bonnie BlaiC ",
MrMoi nuey ---
i l
l
)'
Y e
,.m --__ ,,._m-- . ---_.m-... _.. .,.----_.-.-~._-,,-,--.,,,.m. yc-&ww,-e.i g - -%w. %,>w + -p m -ry3 ._..m_ _y ._._
- A -
, 4 1.
\
-f O
D
- 3 .
.. a ., s_ .
t e
l e...
XEROX TELECOPIER 295 ; 11- 6-05; 0: 15 PM; 1 817 752 2501 0 2028794001 ;O2 1
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY saww4r vnwse..ee wnern us.svar evasst. a m. me . ana.s.4.. n=4= vseen
'* " ".*.'. ,",4,l*"* 8 November 4, 1985 -
Mr. Richard E. McCaskill Esecutive Vice President & General ManaT**
Brasos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
P. o. asa s29s uneo, Texas 76706-4296 l
Dear Mr. McCaskill l This letter is written in response to your october 7, 1985, letter. That letter purports to constitute nettoe to Tomas Utilities Electric Compeay and its affiliates (collectively "TURC") of the intention of Srssos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., ("Brasos")
j -
to instit'ute a lawsuit agalast TURC for alleged violations of the Texas Deceptive trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (" Teams I
DTP-CPA") in connection with the construction of the ' h ==te Peak steam Electric Station (" Comanche peak") and for alleged breeches of the Joint Ownership Agreement (the " Agreement") relating to comaaohe peak. TURC has reviewed the allegations set forth in your letter and believes that they are wholly without any bases in fast.
Furthermore, TURC denies that it has in any way or =a===r violated the Teams DTP-CPA la any of its dealings with Brasos or that it has in any way or manner breached the Agreement. Any lawsuit lastituted by Brasos under the Teams DTP-CPA therefore would be groundless and brought either in bed faith or for the purpose of harrassing TUBC.
Consequently, if such a suit were filed, TURC would be entitled, under section 17.50(c) of the Teams DTP-CPA, to recover its reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees and court costs in defending such a suit.
Motwithstanding the foregoing, representatives of both TURC and Brasos have had several discussions la the past few months regarding their disagreements. Those . discussions eulminated in the preparation of a September 3, 1985 draft agreement. The emeoution of that agreement by TURC and Brasos would reesit in a substantial benefit to Brasos. TUSC is still willing to enter into that agreement, and TURC hereby agrees to settle and compromise the parties' dispute persuant to terms of that agreement. This settlement offer is made pursuant to sections 17.50A of the 1977 version of the Teams DTP-CPA and sections 77.50A and 17.50B of the 1979 version of the Tenas DTP-CPAs and it is not an admission by TURC of any liability to Brasos or the truth of any allegation in your letter. On the contrary, TURC, as pointed above, empressly denies the same. Rather, the purpose of the settlement offor is to avoid needless and esponsive litigation.
G Yours very truly, AJ A
'~ .C J
(___'. y M peace /km ,y f},
l g ,- m. -
6 9
e O
O e
W O
peces mese l
l
- . . . e. s . . ,es.
I l
l e
e D
.V 4 6 9
s
. g- *I'4 I
l- - . ._ . - . . _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ __ . ___________._.__- _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
11- 5-e5;10:45 AM; 1 817 752 2501 + 2028794001 ;e2 graOx Tn.ECOPIER 296 ;
7Jayas s J4 TsW**
, u .f-tr'
.m .
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY
==ww.r vowsa . . nom ouvs st===v. i..a. .. . us.i,4.. romaa vuei November 1,1985 mena g neenes Mr. M. P. Tate CERT!FIED MAIL, RETURN 4101 Texas Avenue, Suite 8 RECEIPT REQUESTED NO. P072741607 Bryan, Texas 77802 Mr. J. H. Butts CERT!P1ED MAIL, RETURN Tez-La Electrie Power Cooperative RECEIPT REQUESTED NO.707274160s .
i of Texas,Inc.
- P. O. Box 1823 Necogdoches, Texas 75961 Re Default Provisions of the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station.
Gentlemen ,
! As you Imow, Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (Brases) has failed to make j payments as required by the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electrie l Station dated January 2,1979, as amended. Written nottee of that failure was mailed to Brasos on September 18, 1988, pursuant to Paragraph 18.02 of that Joint Ownership Agreement. Brasos has faded to cure its defadt by making the required payments within tidety days of said written nottee, which makes applicable Paragraph 18.03 of that Joint Ownership Agreement.
Subparagreph (a) of said Paragraph 18.03 provides:
"(a) The nondefaulting Parties, fouowing the expiration of thirty days after notice was received by the defadting Party and provided suoh defadting Party did not sure its defadt es allowed by Paragraph 18.02, shan make payments and take eetions neesssary to cover the defant, with the east thereof anoosted among and paid by each of the nondefautting Parties in the ratio that its Ownership Share bears to the total ownership Shares of au nondefaulting Parties."
Since Brasos' Ownership Share is 3.8%, the total Ownership Shares of au nondefaulting Parties is 98.2%. Accordingly, the obligation of each of the individual nondefaulting Parties under the above quoted Paragraph 18.03(a)is as follows:
s Texas UtBities Electrie Company (TURC) =
l 87-5/8% l 96.2%, or 91.303%
Texas Munleipal Power Agency (TMPA) =
h 6.2% 4 96.2%, or 6.445%
( . Tex-La. Electric Cooperative of Tazas, Inc. (Tex-La) =
l l . $=1/$% e i.98.2%, or 3.252% . /M.
. .s w _ _
. _ ._ .. v .
_ _ -.- - ~ _ _ . . . _ _ . _ _ - - _ _ -- - - - - -
i + 20227s4uvi .e .
11- 5-eSi10:47 AN3 1 817 752 2501
! x TELECOPlER 295 ;
l .g.
c
?(' '
The amount of the default as same currently exists f Brazos fromas the of the date l Aeoordingly, the amounts necessary to cover the default o
- e9,816,097.13.
nondefaulting parties is currently as foRows:
TURC a $8,962,391.16; i TMPA = $432,447.44; and
. Ten-La = $221,058.51, by th e percentages shown ith above.
the J
thich is calculated by multiplying the $9,816,097.13Moreove
! percentages shown above.
i TURC is, however, wuling to relieve Tex-La and in lieu TMPA of insisting of this a .
i under the Joint Ownership Agreement due to Brasos' defaults therefore, fau upon TMPNs and Tes-La's oovering their proportionate uant to the saidamount Joint of the traking the above stated paymen;s and by making future payments purs Cwnership Agreement as provided in said Paragraph td from Brazos 18.032), TUI the default of Brases itself (both existing and as concerns future paymen s ue under said Joint OwnersMy Agreement), subject to the fonowing di condition -
i l ding, under (1.) the said Joint Ownership Agreement Sutqmregraph (b) of accessed Energy with without limitation, their rights to receive laterest as provided h (oX1) in of Paragraph 18.03 of the said Joint Ownership Agreement, their i rights to a Entitlement Shere of Energy produeedprovided from d the in any B an or any part of the undivided interest and entitlements18.03 of Brases as Subperegraph (eX3) of P W$ 18.03 of the said Joint Ownership A of the rights to receive payments from Brasos under Subparagraph (oX said Joint Ownership Agreement; i t TUEC that TMPA and Tez-La agree to promptly and i that TUIC duly execute may and del (2.)
such from time documents and assurenees to time reasonabty request and in to order take ih tod suchprotect other carry out moa purpose of the undertaldngs of the above-etated conditon no.1 dition no.1; the rights, options and remedles assigned to TURC pursuant i ilitytoforsaid con (3.)
that by making this offer TUIC does not acknowledge any respo causing Brason' default, as Breens has anaged and h t the default (4.) of Brases itself by signing in the space undersigned within thirty (30) days of the recolgt hereof. di g Despite the use of the term "TMPA andi Tez-La"d in the arately to each Tex-immediat paragraph of this letter TUEc's offer as stated in said paragraph s ma e TMPA and Tex-La and it is espressly not a condition to said off La accept said offer.
Sincerely,
& l f ' Os m .,ense .
- 9
_- . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - - - - _ - . - - . _ - _ _ _ - . _ _ _ . ~
1 817 752 2501 + 20297 4001 ; o4 y.Enex TELECOPIER 295 i 11- 5-05 10:50 m; (T' MDS/ lad v ee: Mr. L L. Wagoner Mr. Juan Nichols Mr. Richard L McCaskill[ .
Mr. John Beek Mr. T. Mieheel Ozymy .
THE OFFER HEREIN MADE BY TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY IS HEREBY ACCEPTED AND ALL OF THE ABOVE-STATED CONDITIONS TO SAID OFFER ARE
. ACCEPTED AND AOREED TO:
TEXAS MUNICIPAL POWER AOENCY Bt Y Date Its duly eutTwW Officer TEX-LA ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE OF TEXAS, INC.
By:
Date Its duly authorized Ofnoer I
l l
{
9 4
l l
s .
e
.9 I
o
.._ . m.m _, . . ,o . . o-.= 4 i o . . -e i . < <=< <=ui . 2o2e7s4coi : .i RECEIVE 0 MW^ s rdt ?
-y NOV 51985 *~ i
( .)
M SPIEGEL & McDIARMID l
- T E L E w' O P Y COVER 3REET __
DATE: ll 'f- 95~ T13g: 9 '. 4c FRON: ~
Brasos Electric Power Cooperative TO: h3 To
- M Telecopy No.: M S- D -40c i
We are sending you b pages, including this cover sheet, by a 3M INT 9140 Autoestic Telecopier. If you do not receive all pagee, or if there is any other problem with the transalesion, please phone (817) 752-2501 Eat. 220 at your earliest convenience.
Thank you.
. . _ , - - _.--____.m.____ _ _ _ _ . . - . _ . , _ . _ . . . , _ _ _ . . , _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . . , _ _ _ _ , _ . . _ _ _ _ . . - . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ , , _ _ _ _ , , _ _ _ _ . - . . - _ , - , . . _ . . . . _ - , _ _
O C
e t.
m es me. .m i
5M t* toget Hl es da g og I
t e
O
+
S G,in .
- 4 9
4
- ' -4 9
l sol. 4N 5tcmetaae e f.gasW *WAM G ptange e.tsctmf I afwEm sands :ss.tt:ts*
j mpy L. a
~c
~
it t. C til V 11 U t.,, . g '; , p,g ; ey The Brazos System fg ^ " ' 7 '
i
' ' ' l
' UOV 13 % F Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,Inc. A 4;uliE n b Ts3.'#" * "
jegceggur November 7, 1985 Mr. M. P. Tate CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN 4101 Texas A' venue, Suite B RECEIPT REQUESTED NO. 43795 Bryan, Texas 77802 Mr. J. H. Butts CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN .
Tex-La Electric Power Cooperative RECEIPT REQUESTED NO. 43796-of Texas, Inc.
P. O. Box 1623 Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Mr. Michael D. Spence, President CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN Texas Utilities Generating Company RECEIPT REQUESTED NO. 43797 Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Re: Default of Texas Utilities Generating Company Under the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Gentlemen:
We have received a copy of'a letter, dated November 1,1985, from Michael D. Spence to M. P. Tate and J. H. Butts, stating, among other things, that Brazos is in default of its obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station dated January 2, 1979, as amended, and that, subject to certain conditions, 'IVEC is "willing to relieve Tex-La and DIPA .... (of payments of] the amounts necessary to cover the default.
of Brazos."
The purpose of this letter is to reaffirs Brazos' position that it is not in default, but rather that TUEC and its affiliated companies have breached and are in default of their obligations under the Joint Ownership Agreement.
Brazos has refrained from making certain payments referred to in Mr. Spence's letter because it could not obtain necessary cost and other information from l TUEC and its affiliates for it to obtain financing or for it to justify that i amounts TUEC claims are owed are, in fact, owed. See letters of Richard E.
i McCaskill to Michael D. Spence of September 27, 1985 and October 7, 1985.
Brazos, of course, has no objection if TUEC relieves Tex-1.a and DfPA of any obligations which TUEC believes that those systems may have, but Brazos does j not waive any of its rights.
O
.i eOST ONMahs eats s-meCO.15mes Jenseres .4*e3sE tet?)73 Hest A. t. .IngeneL armm/Jes a .wreaivenig . .- H l
.f Page 2,11/7/85 i
)
Brazos continues to believe that outstanding disagreements between the parties should be resolved through negotiations on a fair, equitable basis to all. con-corned.
Very truly yours, Richard E. McCaskill REM:Ir cc: Mr. E. L. Wagoner, TNPA Mr. Juan Nichols. Tex-La Mr. John Beck, BXiC0 Mr. Frank Bennett, REA Mr. Joe Riley, Attorn bec: Mr. Robert A. Jablon [ey Mr. J. D. Copeland .
4 l
1 i
h l
l l
i
--- --4 - , . - - - - - . . _ ,y _ . . - - - - , - - . - _
, ,p. , y,- ,---,--m- , _ _ .yr. - - - , . ,---,_-.---y, _
,, - , ,,,,,-m . , , - ,- . , _ _ . -, _ .- , . _ . , _ _ . - . - . . . . -
. ~ _ s -
.k
- t ..-
O e
em 9
- et ese esec f
N
]
esse st : l
- es*
d ..
eee. l .,
l' ee m e *. :
- esses te l
l F
S e
9.
4 e
i i-
,. - - ~~ ~~
- /,, .
- DOCKET No. 4079 '
APPLICATION OF 3RAZ05 ELECTRIC POER C0lFERATIVE, INC. FOR A PUBLIC UTILITY Copet!$SION i - RATE INCREASE *
( ., .,;. ' ,
OF TEXA5 O't0ER in public meeting at its offices'in Austin, Texas, the Public Utility Consissio Texas finds that the above-styled application was processed in accordenc statutes by an Examiner who prepared and flied a report containing Findings Conclusions made a part hereof. of Law, which Examiner's report, with the following changes, 1.
Due to concern regarding the point during the proceedings in this 7 docket at which evidence concernino the $2,232,322 spent to complete projects after the end of the test year was presentad by Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, the 52,232,322 shill nnt he includevi in plant in service, nor shall any interest on that .mtsnt Se considered in c v ting return. *
- 2.
Return for Brazos Electric Power Cooperative in this docket shall be calculated so as to provide a TIER of 1.1.
3.
Finding of Fact No. 8 is revisec to read as follows:
Brazos and South Texas. Electric Cooperative, Inc. (5TEC) are joint owners of San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc. which constructed ine operates a 400.* Ifgnite-fired steam generating plant and asssciated' '
mine.
Finding of Fact go, gy is revised to read as follows, .,
Brazos has invested capital of $212.473,045, computed as follows:
Original Cost of Plant in Service Less: Accomulated Depreciation $165.103.102 Net Plant $ 36.000.974 Construction Work in Progre'ss 1129,102,2 5
, Nuclear Fuel
- 70.998,219 i Other Long Term Assets 2,932,512 i Working Cash Allowance 649,744 -
Materials and Supplies 1 353,143 Propa g ts 5,916.239 Fuel Inventory - 454,940 Total Invested Capital 1.051.0n0 ulz,e75,045 5.
Finding of Fact No.14 is revised to read as'follows.
A total cost of service for 8tates of $125,760,133, computed as follows, is reasonable:
g
.*./
,,,. .g -
g ..i.., - -
-+.'
, ....-.+me
- n- ,j id't* asi- g- -@
- t. _ _ _ . - - - - - - - - - - _ _ ,wm er w'N--- __ _ , _ _ ,,----wm' ' ' " " * * ' ' ' " ' ' " ~
fee 3:ccat
- o. 4.'s
.. .:, . { Pag se r n y n M .y { m ., g 2 2 of Orc
'...**I t
% Purchased Power $70,731,87(s Operation and Maintenance
/9 , 6.l . Ospreciation 40,776,011
\ /
m "- '
Total Other Tames 4,691,400 1,232,070 Return
- Total Cost of Service 8 328.774
$iz5,Ioo,133 .nsav'i*fW
.If
/,
L*1 fO*W #4~
- 6. IhQf1*oO h *#
Finding of Fact No.15 is revised to read as follows:
A return for Brazos in the anoont of $8,328,774 is fair and reasonable.
That amount represents a return of 3.919 percent on the Coop's invested capital. .
7.
Finding of Fact No. 16 is revised to read as follows:
Given adjusted test year fuel ravenues of $59,371,841 and other revenue
$66,200,883 of 1187,409, Brazos has a base rate revenue requirement of ,
and a base rate revenue 'feficiency of $13,416,144 3.
Findin2 of Fact flo.18 is revised to read as folicws:
The followleg ratos are just and reasonable and should generate sufflctent revenues to cover Srazos's cost of service:
Fact 11ttes Charge: $150.00/ delivery point / month Demand Charge:
- 16.75/kw of billing demand
- Enei gy Charge: 9.8233 mills per kwh
- Minton based on 751 of previous June. September motored misteza 9.
As the rates authorized by the Commission herein exceed those rates
- which the Company has been charging on an interim basis, no ~ refund is necessary. Thus, Finding of Fact No. 21 is deleted. a.
The Commission further issues the following additional Orders:
1.
The application of Bretos Electric Jower Cooperative, Inc. for a rate increase is GRANTED to the extent set forth in 'tevist1 Finding of Fa
. No. 18. ,
e>
- 2.
Srazos Electric Power Cooperative, (nc. shall file a revised tariff in
, accordance with the rates and guidelines set out in the taaminer's Report sufficient to generate revenues not greater than those prescribed in the report. The revised tariff shall be filed in four copies with the Commission Filing Ciert within 20 days from the date
.of this Order. The Commission Staff shall have 20 days from the data of the filing of the revised tariff to revleir it for approval or rej.?ction.
The tariff shall be desned to be approved and shall become effective upon the espiration of 20 days after filing or sooner upon notification by the Ccssission. In the event of rejection, tratos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., shall be nettfed by the Comalatio and it shall have 20 additional days to file an amended tariff wit h
the same procedures to then be repeated. ~
(
N
..,- $..Y rM,..&-A
. . . -r-
- l. .< -
N.,
~,,,'.* { Occet ::o. :.;;
Page 3 of Order so
.g '< it
(
4.'/qp,1,')
3.
The revised and approved rates shall be charged only for 5cryica
- t. . .f. .
O .. rendered in areas over which this Consistins was exercising itt ,
original jurisdiction as of the adjournecut of the hearing on the merits herein, and said rates may bn charq.wt only for service rendered after the tariff approval date. Should the tariff approval date fall within Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.'s billing period, the Coop shall be authorized herein to prorate each customer's bill to reflect that customer's dally energy consumption at the appropriate
, rates.
4.
Brazos Electric Power Cooperative. Inc. is ORDERED to file with the Commission's Engineering Olvision the monthly power cost adjustme for a given billing perfod, along with the corresponding worte pap either monthly or on a quarterly basis. ~
5.
This Order is deemed to be f'n.nl upon the date of rensition. Approva of the revised tariff filed in compliance vith this Order shall be deemed to be final on the date of its offectiveness either by operation of th!s Order or by nottf tcation by the Constssion.
whichever occurs first*
RENDERED AT .WSTIN, T!XAS, on this the '@ day of _77 e t :)
_. 1982.
Pl?tl.!C UTI'.!Ty CrJ; tits:(CM OF rgus
- SIGNED: *I k H. M RG.L'{r
/
/] /.
SIGNED: / i !/fl. ,
y v. - .
-[M e
$1GNED: /- C! _. -
I. G. SMIIN ATTEST:
i Ad1tf on 5. .Y2f:frtn ^ A _
CAROLfM C. ..NELLM N
$!CRETARY 7 Tite C0t99155!0N Id
! "* ,,'d
- h
. , .s ,
- -. M. . . . , 4 .'f-i ~ *N ,
- , . .-- - - . . , , - -,.-.--...n.-,-.- -
- . - - , , - . , - . , , .-.-.-,n, , .
-- - - - - _ - ._ . . . . .. . . _ = - - - _ . _- - -
's,
(
.- ,,f .
(
00CXET N0. 4079 APPt.! CATION OF 8AAZ05 ELECTRIC f PUBt.!C UTILITY Com!5SION 1
0 g 1
[/'/ POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. FOR A RATE INCREASE OF TEXA5 3.p.., . . r . . . . , .. . mex,,tre.rREp0Rn.wM< '.e'.v s'<' m.wx'e Procedural History 4
4 4
On Septenher 25, 1981 Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (hereinafter l variously referred to as Brazos, the Applicant, and the Coop), filed the above-referenced application seeking authority to change certain of its rates for electric utility service.
4 The proposed changes would, according to Brazos's projections, generate :
additional revenues of between $33,703,170 and $4g,760,675 annually, or a percen J
f increaseofbetweend.02and61.12percentoftestyearoperatingrevenue. 1 Aprehearingconference'was'heldin'thisdocketo$ October 13, 1981. Appearing at thatconferencewereMr..Josephji1 City of Weatherford, and Mr,* F,,ernando Rodrigues,.'for th a
tc intervene filed by the Cities of Weatherford and Bartlett were granted at the prehearing, as was the motion of the General Counsel to suspend the effective date of the rate increase for 120 days pursuant to Section 43(d) of the'Public utility Regulatory Act, TEX. REY.CIV.57AT. ANN. art.1446c (1981). ' In a prehearing order entered on O
} 15, 1981,
! the motion to intervene filed ,by ,the City of Seymour was also granted. ,., .,
. t .. At,theyehearing conference,on
, ,0ctober,13.1981., the Cit [of Waatherford raised the questien of whether or not cities buying wholesale power from Brazos have original jurisdiction to set the rate at which that power is purchased, where one or more of the i delivery points at which$theccities ,take.the . power. are, within. the citiesh, mu .
j limits. In her prehearing order of October 15, 1981, the Examiner ruled that section i * ,17(a) of the Public Utility Regulatory Act does not give cities original jurisdiction in '
such instances, and that the Commission had original jurisdiction under such ' .
circumstances pursuant to Section 17(e) of the Act. 'That ruling by the Emeniner was appealed by the City of Weatherford to the Commission on October 23,1981. The Cannission i
considered the appeal and entered an order upholding the Examiner's ruling on Novem 13, 1981.
, .' ' 4.,' f 'f /,' ..k.'fpl) i . -
l i. -
he haring oF,the merlits , ,
f' Ortaos's' application was convened on December 14,1981.
At that time the motion to intervene filed by the City of Granbury on November 2,198 granted for the record, and the objections filed by Brazos to the City of Weatherford's Third and Fourth Requests for Information, filed on Novener 20 and Decem respectively, were upheld. .
Entering appearances st' 'the hearing on the merits were Joseph Riley an i for the Applicant, Jeses 0. Mullin, for the' City of Weatherford, William T. Wilson, the City of Bartlett, Ralph Walton, Jr., for the City of Granbury, and Fernando Rodrigues, for the Commission Staff. ,
Testimony was presented by Oratos, the City of '
tranbury, the Commission Staff, and the City of Weatherford, and all parties had an -
' W**SopMrtukty te cros's.'edNY[nfthe iel'tne'Ishf)**IU l*I.M / ' ' 8 *
' ' ' "'.I I
. y. . :- .h '
- g. . .N..c. . . ,
. .t .- , ,
,. r . *
.. . .d .-
I L , :: m' '. . -s.; a w 'd. * *.* s ..-
f
. - _ _ _ , - - . - - - . - - - - , - - - -. n,,- . , - n-,
..s
(~ { Occket N3. 407)
Pag) 2
,g" 7 .*
/ The hearing on the merits was adjourned on Decuber 15, 1981, but with the agreement
.y.,,pe,.;oh a11. part fes, .thp records,wgs., held,openJqc.3the;,1lmi,ted, pur 5,e(ofg110w1,ng ,
' file an exhibit showing the rate at which some $4g allifon of its debt was rolled over on December 28. That exhibit was filed on January 7, 1982.
On Decenter 2g,1981, an Examiner's Order was entered granting Brazos interim rates,
, subject to refund, to become effective upon the beginning of consnercial operation of the San Miguel generating facility. Such operation began at 12:00 a.m. on January.7,1982. I triefs were filed by the parties in this case on January 11, 1982.
,,,.. Ontnion '
.'. . l I" " # " * *
, ,i , '
~'
.,. e,'.' 8
-i I. . A Brazos Electric,Powirjtooperattve', Inc. ts a generation and transmis's ton electric cooperative incorporated under. the Rural Electric Cooperative Act of the State of Texas.
Br'azos sells wholesale power to its nineteen member' distribution cooperatives, as~w to the Cit [tes of, Bartlett,' Granb'ury,' Hearne, San'ger, "Seymour, ' Seatherford', 'a'nd idhttesboro, and to Texas A'& M University, pursuant to' Certificate of convenience and Necessity No. 30016.
Brazos obtains the mejority of its
- financing from the Rural Electrification ;Adefntitration '(REA)3hENatt'ona'l ,RUrEl Utt,1,'i[t'fes ' C Corporation (CFC),andtheFederalFinancing8ank(FF8).
- Brazos owns ,threhah,Y1 fe' gsnbr'aling' 'hianti Ejt'h "a"t$taY'ha'pa
- ' approximately 500 W, and is a sember of San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc., which
' ' ,own.s 'and op'erates 'a,3g1 W,1tgnite-fired g steen 1' enera' ting p'[anE and ass ju,s,t, began commercial operation. The Cooperative purchases additiq'ial capacity from th Southwest Power Adminstration and the Brazos River Authority., Brazos is a me Texas Huntetpal Power Pool, and is. interconnected with Texas, Power and Light Co (Tr&L)$'TetasElectricServiceCompany(TESCO),'LowerCo1FadoAlvarAuthori "3 an, .Sou'th T i ,*p'dif."
. k ,[ y,j,esasit.lectri[./(*((<, ,cooperativip/*Da,'), p Ij..f. ,[Inc'7 eh,4,f lf/. ($TEC) y ,
The rates being charged by Brazos at the time of this rate filing were estabitshed in
,1976.
.. The Coop' is seeking' this. . rate incre'ase to support the costs o.f, n
. planned by the Coop to meet its increasing load requirements. . .The , major --,ttees ~
' o.f additional cost being incurred by the Coop are its payments to San Miguel 'Electrt'c Cooperative,Inc.(hereinafterreferredtoasSanMiguel)foritsshareofthelignite.
fired generating plant, the debt service,on the cost of the 345 kv transmissio i
the San Miguel plant to the 345 kv network, and the wheeling charges incurred in,g the San* Miguel power into the Brazos system. Brazos will Initially take 67.5 percent of San Mig el's capacity, with Brazos's shar Ing to 50 percent as the require $ents,of South Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. /co-owne of,the project, grow.
- l. , uw u.s f,.. n ...s, w..a.a r w , .
.x e . . . .
. ... . . ri o B
t
. ,,g .. ; U , ,
d,,) ,.....'y..
G
. M: . . . . . . ,. w,D=1EE
_- . .. ..+ -
4
- . , - - . , , . , , . + - , . -- - . , - - . - . . , - , . . - - - - -.----.,-,.,n_ . - , . . , - - - , . , , -
1
, . .' 1 Docket Ns. 4073
( f Pag 2 3 As the San Miguel plant did not begin operation untti after Brazos's rate
- .pg9apgifcation was . prepared. ands thej h earing.',onj thatv 4ppitc4tly.,*.was ',heldt;'danyt,'of expenses associated with San Miguel which the Appitcant seeks to have included in its cost of service are, by necessity, estimates. Careful consideration should be given to those estimates to insure that the rates finally established herein are indeed fair and reasonable.
Invested Casital i In its rate filing package, Brazos showed an adjusted original cost of plant in
! service of $169,301,848. Schedule 8-1.0, Applicant's Exhibit 9. That amount included a I
$3,529,000 adjustment to test year plant"in service made ta' reflect the estimated i additional co.st which wou.ld be..f de.spleti f jo. cts; .c,.ch~.
the end of the test year, :. . but wh ...ic.gm ;
w s wor.e,in.p.roctss,.at
, ,a . ,
vi h.wou.ld v se khe't1 the .r. ate.scroquested.;tn -
this docket go into effect.n.s.~.a o At the 'hea.t * . inter.. .
w s. * "'s
- ring on th'.< .e merits it was shown ,that all the s projects associated with that' estimate were completed as of October, 1981, and th
{ actual cost incurred to complete thos's projects was $2,232,322. App 1tcant's Exhibit 8. '
- The Appiteant requested the known amount be substituted for the $3.5 mill.fon es
, included as plant in service.
.I The Staff
- Accountant,
' Marilyn Neff, recommended that the $3 529,000 he esclude i the invested capitai cilcu,1stfon' s [~as,tige m'siteyh'ad Me[bdUn*pe,nhed as of the en
' ~ test year.
She alte rejected the Company's proposal that the known empenditure of
$2,232,322 be substt' tut.ed. in I.t.s p - n >.
. test year dictates that 'there .
must .. . be lac.e . for. .the
.e* .m sam.e . . ..reas.o.n.
. :: . v..Th.e.
v" .ne.tte -
i same cutoff point, after which updates to the historicaldataarenotallowed. In this instance the Staff has chose ~
- test year,'serch 3i"19813 as that cutoff point' with regard to plant in service.
, , . . . s. g. ..s. r. . . A,s. . c.
.: . .' . . i . 9 i '. i . ' '-
j Both the Coop and the Staff found it appropriate'te reclassify $36,601,362 of i
construction wort' in progress, associated with projects uhtch were under constructio the end of the test perted but which have since.go.ne.en I.f.ne, i.nte plant i a
.i*I'D7e*.%'e,yth,,the,$. p. . d(ao g. . . ygg,,ac1
, . . . . . . . . . ., . . . .'s,ahrej
.kneuneassents sponded telcesp b' ring than de line. ,Ihg, addittenal essenditure of $2.212.322 7 -.^s a i-should be i;----ized at thin timm_ and measurahla C which Free plant in service, invested capital is calculated as follows:
Original Cost of plant in Service $147,335,424 KN*" 8 'd
- A sL- s t.ess: Accumulated Deproefatten not plant -
8Z_4 e Censtructten Wort in progress , 555 guclear Fue1 70,900,219 M J.6a.s., c. o o,,, 4. 4 <
Wortfag Cash Allowance 2,932,$12 hs.ase.6 sJ., '
Meterfals and Supplies 1,353,163 prepa ts
- 5,918.239 s,La.4. deco h *%entery V,e 454,940 EM 4 r. a e Wo,yeH s ojod*'*Totai Invested Ca;>p tal. . trp&:h sn.i.ffs 's,P W1R1n006 e !Ent ,1.d m 4,040,5Z3 .. ,
e Q
- e'
* "" . x m..A..y'4 is
. . . . s, . .
a
- lg. , , .,,,, p . '
v----- s-w ,r%r r ..-y-- y,,,. _w--- ---,+,,,.,,=-w.,,m----i,.re --~s
- ...* 0
- cket No. 407)
- { { Page 4
~ ./
a,s'
,.7.,,9yy *.The' components of invested, capital,, added ,to p1, ant;>fn ,tervicevabove8 aref all;:as proposed by the Company except for the working cash allowance, which has been increased to reflect the recommended level of 0 & M expense.
Brazos filed its application solely on an original cost basis. No evidence was presented by any party as to the current cost of' plant or a reasonable adjustment thereto for age and condition. Consequently, the Examiner has made no recommendations herein concerning the adjusted value of the Applicant's invested capital or a ressonable rate of ,
return thereon.
Deprecfation -
8
- ( '.cs h'/.I%S.Mthg*i.f'.l d' C* b '
Staff Engineer Kent 5aathof,.f',r,eviewed,thWy@rectak,1 found then to be reasonable and within recommended REA guidelines. He reccmmendJd the proposed rates be adopted, and as no party offered any evidence to' the contrary, the Examiner concurs with that recommendation.
.. ... ... . , , . . ...o.. .
Cost of Service .
- I On Schedule A-1.0 of its rate filing package, Brazos shoived a raquested total cost' of s'ervice o'f'$12$N35Nk The hometss'fo'n' $taktkt[muIdvl$e[s'everal a Company's proposal whfch had the efet effect of reducing the Company's request
$1,304,380,to$125,631,359.,l.,.Tha,C1,ty,Intervenorslf11nd,testimonyshowing, of serytce of $127,372,51.1
- for Braacs. tie components of the various proposals are at forth brie, fly below: , , ,,
s . . .,....
}rgggg,'A ,
+
..{taff.
, t. /, , .
Purchased Power
, n Interyt'gt
$71,476.997 / $70.731,878 $73,112.07!
Operation and Maintenance 40,253,088 /, ., 40,776,011 Depreciation 4,788.448 ' 40,825,161 Total Other Tames, . 4.591.400 4,? L8.4Ff 1.237,903 # 1,232,070 1,i J/,90'
.. 1(eturns #s .,.
- 9.179.305.M';f,18' 8.200.000
. .. * (, '
,,;;;T .g ,. ,o k p;},, . ,e .
7.408.32?
$1Z7,J72,551
, Qi.A1,Zp,631,359
,,for the most part, the adjustments to cost of servfce proposed by the
- Staff were not contested at the heari'ig. The major points of difference will be highlighted in the discussion which fg11ows.
The Staff's proposed $745,119 adjustment to Brazos's purchased power reque result of the recalculation of the adjustment necessary to reflect rate increases of suppliers of power to trazos's isolated delivery points.
As the final rates for Texas Power & l.lght Company in Docket flo. 3700 had not beer determined by the C ,
time Brazos prepared its rate filing package, the Company used TP&t.'s propos calculating its adjustment.
Use of the appifcable tariff as approved by the Canaission
. V9)l).'f95)P1,!89 M49 Tesisited,In',g. de' crease, fin a*purdias' dhower. empense Purchased power from West Tesas Utflities Company had been o'verstated b amount of $185,695 due to the inclusion of amounts for fuel which had previously bee
.?;'
- . . .b O. *
.s *,
.. :s.;;f
- an; a m -
..<i
1
,' . .' e '
Docket .42. 4073 1
- f f
- Page 5
. l s
l gr included in base rates. purchased power costs from LCRA had been understated by $19.130
.9 hf*'-dile 'to'a*sta'theatica'l sirroF.YThe' remainting $fiS98 Af't'h'e"a$tmin't90*tli re's' ult'of 'm'iE l s
mathematical differences.
The Intervenor's proposed increase of Brazos's requested purchase power expense is largely the result of their recommended adjustments to billing units made to reflect end of test year usage. The Examiner believes th'at the recommendation of the Commission Staff on this expense is more reasonable.
/
The Commission Staff recommended a not increase of $522.925 to the 0 & M expense request made by Brazos in its rate filing package. ,- . -
' The first adjustment /
prdse'dk 5 a[ d
$209,305 decrease in power produst'ioieziN$$,bNf DNb'[fS'1'. 'TN hs'e 'o, [t$1[owan sed.
BIaNss adjustment was to adjust expenses for the expected decrease in generation from Brazos' gas fired plants when San Miguel comes on line. The Staff has doubts about the cost simulation study used by Brazos to project required generation. Ms. Neff,also found in her analysis of power production costs by month that the costs do not vary significa with the level of production.
As she felt that the method us,ed by the Coop did not adequately identify the varishle costs involved, she recommended the proposed adjust be disallowed.i.. w.- W.. . .. *i. . <. N (
W.,%,'f,. P.:?.5 ,.4 !:
Ms. Neff proposed an. increase to fuel empense.of $249,701 to reflect the effect of the Staf f's weather adjusted' sales th adjusting sxpected generatida figures.*' A11' part in the case stipulated Eo the adoption of the Staff's proposed weather adjustment.
Calculating the adjustedledH generation required from the Staff's adjusted Peel sale from there calculating the numer of BTU',s required to produce the adjusted MWI, Ms.
_ _ arrived at the increased fuel empense of $249.701.
. ../ . .
Ms Neff proposed $333.646 .a o.f Oayrol d The Coop had adjusted I to -. J-
-; . . IS'I.e....
. st. ., %ar g
[. m. . s . tfec,t j'a}a,ev , as,qs ,1.'.U: late,g.,,.
tye on May 1,. 1991. adjustme Ms. Neff determined'that s[lary lov fiad'1ncreas'ed ibsequent to May' 1, 1981, and used payro data as of November 1,1981 as a basis for her adjustments, restating the Novem for the end of test year number of employees. She also recalculated the ratio of expensed to payroll capitallaed by including the test year figures.
Medical and dental Insurance expense was adjusted to reflect the change in th percentage of payroll esponse which should be applied to the cost of the employee benefits.
The Staff reconnended that rate case expenses be amortized over two years.
- bWUb'Th'd'raale*ineraYilidsk$st'The'cosidf above are reasonable, and recommends their adoption.
'dMeMh%a'tfont u O'.;
.'l")
7,-
~ .
., ,, , yJ
+
, yC*- f
. t * >.Tt e
, , . . .e Oceket No. 40M f f Page 6 i
None of
'h [y WW the adjustments discussed above were really contested by any party. ,
b'M.. the, qu,es,tjon. o.f what,, amount ,whic,h should pe,, allowed ,,fn,,pe.
- ling charges became one of the most contested issues in the case. _ ,
^
J In its rate filing package, Brazos proposed a total adNstment of $4,412,581 to i
test year transmissfore 0 & M empense. An adjustmen'. of $50,000 was included associated with the 78 alles of# new 345 ky transmission 1tne from the San M plant.
Brazos requested $281,561 be included to amorti:;e a reported $
wheeling charges associated with San Miguel testing, deferred subsequent to th year, over a fiva y ar period. ,
} Finally, Brazos proposed,the inclusion of $1,681,020 to cover annual wheeling charges from LCRA, and $2,400,00eto cover those charg Texas Utt11ttes Companies. *. -
6 .
s *
. e . .. ct h . :.p. b h . .<
In her 'prefiled tes tieny ,.;Ms.a4..Netf t .re ; W Jc'requ.ested
. .n';y't'h'atj th w.- $281,561 amortf ration allowance be. disallowed!'. y #v.. a.co.nnended. .. g - . . .
.a.
She stated th>.at 'in'her review:and ' investigation ,
the application, she learned that $1.600,000 of the amount' supposedly defe been b111ed coenercial operation. by TexaE Utt11ttes and would not be incurred until San Additionally, she discovered that the charges which had actua been billed by LCRA were less than the amount which the Coop had expen recommended that the amortization of deferred wheeling charges beidisallowed, s had not been incurred. As the Coop did' not dispute this testimony, the Exa theyagreewiththe:Staffadjustment..******"$..*iU ! / ** t What the Coop did not agree with was the Staff's recommendation that for annual wheeling chahes 'be'inc' lude'd'hn he'cIo'st of se[vice 'a the Coop in its rate filing package, $4,081,020, , rather than at the revised level requested by Brazos at the hearing on the merits, $5.127,516.' -
~~
It' ls' (frst ' important to Eealtre that both, the reconsendations regarding t wheeling charges are estfestes, as the charges will be incurred for whee San Miguel, which . .. has come on .. l.ine si th
,. There is no argument
.ove.r;,vthe}e.sti.mp*ted .os-ch.arge.s
~
'tht'estina'te o'f' w
, hedling efiarges wh g,
fro,.
m T.. ., for,.,t. .dq n,nce . e ,en
- . rom
. i. ttL,CRAk.
s'si.Ut't
.m..g.87420s
-. . is now proposing that be facce,M ad te 13.',' ,4g6, while the Staff ano Intervenors ,say it, should rematniat $2;400,000,
(
from the cost of service.
or be eliminated entfrely .
' .a p ^ . :. ' ~. . .
a L. , . ... v. .
The dispute over wheeling charges arose as the resuit of Ms. Neff's confirm the,$2.4 allifon astimate originally presented by the uttitty. Brazos based its
. , origfnal request upon a telepheae taquiry to TP&L personnel made
, preparation of its rate f t1tng. The $2.4 million was the figure quoted by TP to confirm that] amount, Ms. Neff made her own inquiry to Mr. Louis How
, who provided her with an estimate cf $3,446,4g6.
l Ms. Neff testified that since the amount l -i ,
requested by Brazos was lower than the estimate provided to her by TPE, sh I
p.gt4N, thy,8casos sitheate'wes. reasonable.'e She.'f'u'rtiier tes,t[9fje ,,,
4
. assessment of the Brazos application, she would have probably ad i Brazos to be reasonable as long as it was less than or equal tor th by T,E in confi,.stion or the 8ra,os esti-te.
ng v .M
- p. .. .. .s.g . 7-s; .y4 E* [ .E
..w I
..y. ..,.>- . , *
. . , - - -a - * *' _
d (
I A
..'. ( ( %cuet flo. *.07)
Fags 1 i
Brazos argues that since both estimates are the result of inquiries made to TPR for d . .
. n. 9ag. estimate of.ther annual charges: which,.will. be,. ass'ocjated igit[hJ5an'.Miguef.d the lat'er estimate should be presumed to be more accurate and should be used for purposes of this rate case.
The Staff, on the other hand, is basically taking the position that both figures are rough estimates, that the Coop has presented no evidence showing that either number is particularly reliable, and that, therefore, while it is reasonable to include something in the, cost of service for wheeling expense. It is more reasonable to include the lower, more conservative amount.
The Examiner believes that Brazos hasdone a poor job'of supporitng its estimated request for wheeling charge.s. JIP, Copeland:testi iw the $200,000 per month, orj,2,4.afl,,atxn: v.. 2,;q.x,f,ty;,.that,ng.gffor$ madeJ.to verify sa wa.s 6 i
1,on pep p ar d,estjmete g: jen ;i. 3..over, Meone- p 7, ,
in the engineering department of TP E . Transcript page 13g., llor was an atteset made to verify the subsequent $12.7468 per k111owatt per year estimate that was the basis of the
$3,446,496 wheeling charge estimate. Although there is contract between Brazos.and the Texas'Utt11ttes Companies which sets forth the components of the formula which is to be used in computing the mount of the wheeling charges Brazos apparently made no reference tothatformulainestimatingitswheelingcharges'forpurposes'.ofits'ratelll'ing.'
a r
.r. . . . . r. % v- c eves . . .. it, 'is . . reasonable to recogn..> ?;+A :ias in.this docket the fac This Ex' sine.. , beli.
Brazos will incur costs for wheeling San Miguel power during the period the rates approved herein are in effect,* ,
even though. it,f s japossib,le to, ascerta.in,at ,this,t.ime wh that cost will be. A $2.'4 million allowance,foLwheellne charees from the Texas Utilities Companies appears to be s' reasonable,es,t,imate f,or such charges over the course of a year,
$hould Brazos's costs actually run higher, then the Coop can use the funds made available by the' operating margin recommended by the Examiner herein, cc it can seek additional tata relief as necessary,
~
~
v Ms. Ileff recommended that requested depreciation esponse be decreased by $g7,048 to
..g removegdepr'ecj,affog f on thep$3',52g[000I,wh'icli,,# a#
s
- rec'oimendEd',n6t'be# 1 ncidi$il 'tY.1' ave'sted ' capita'l?.*das 'h* iou Tht'ExaNner iecommends that it only be decreased by $35,65g, in light of her inclus,lon of the $2,232,322.
' Ad valores tas was decreased by $20.085 by the Staff as a result of the same invested capital recommendation.
The reduction should be only $7,381, based upon the Examiner's recommendations.
Payroll tases were reduced by $2.ASg because of a change in methods used to compute F.I.C.A. y,*%
,3; .f( l ,, /.J, . t, g. M e - ~
- p. =,W D r,**s Based upon the discussion above, the Examiner recommends a total cost of service for Brazos, including return which will be discussed below, of $125,530,452, computed as follows:
s Ve**roitte s e,'o s o' g*h .. N. ~ vo.Y< ' .* o.: 1 & ce G Wct'n.'t?'idt!* 4 - .. e .*. ' '? ?
,p.
.~ik.p' k"%
, um ' -
%.* ra.2*
. t Docket .No. *07;
, ( ( Pagt 3 l
i pm~j Purchased Power Goeration and Maintenance 5 70,731,878
,5,1.. @.',0 4' 40
' * *Deoreciation ' * >" " 7 P/ ?N . 9. W ,776,011 ' .
4,752,789; .M'W. #'N' .. ', ', , *. 3 ,# (,
Total Other Taxes 1,244,744 Return 8.025.000 UZ5,530,45Z Return The return requirements of Brazos in this rate case were determined by the parties
' on the basis of a cash flow or interest coverage type of analysis: how much revenue does Brazos require to maintain an appropriate times interest earned ratio (TIER). Both the Coop and the Staff determined that an operating TIEA of 1.10 was reasonable anc appropriate for Brazos at this time. ~ The Intervenors have urged the adoption of a 1.C
. *k,,,e, ) ,. f , ' ,#,! . ,
,' ek *(* . * *[. '
Return is ccaposed of two itans: that necessary for equity management and that necessary for interest.
l That portion of the return necessary for equity management can be divided into two subcomponents:
,one for the increase, or decrease, of equ,ity in,the
~
system capitalization and the other*for the rotation or retirement of capital credits.
The portion of return necessary for the rotation or refirement of' capital crbits is this docket.is zeros According to.the , testimony,of; Mr. McCaskill,: 8cazos has decided th'at at this time the rotation or retirement of capital credits appears to be,an unwarrante burden for their rateriyer,s. Brazos has never rotated or retired capital credits, t k '
it should give serious # cons'idNatio'n te the' rctation of capital credits in'the future since such .,
rotation is~ an" inherent characteristic of the coopera'tive philosophy.' ~ * -
~
1 The second portion of return necessary for, equity manag'ement is ' that amount i necessary for management of the system's capitalization. Brazos's capitalization at the
! end of the test year was g.34 percent equity and 90.66 percent debt. $taff Financial Analyst Jim Johnson testified that he believes that this capita 11 ration ratio is 8%.this time dl "g ,othe
. , It'js]O,s (k,an ,., s comparag1,e ing gat,8caros,{as as,. wel,Y,ggenerati,on,and, tran distribut' ton cooperatives ,for their financial strength and not, as is the case in investor-owned utilities, upon an equity cush' ion.
Derefore, he concluded that this '
portion of the return should also bc zero.
' ~
..s n: .:.:
,The final portion of return is that amount necessary for interest cover,ag,,e,,. Since both portions of return necessary for equity management are zero,' the return co this docket is an amount for interest coverage. To compute an adequate return a interest expense must be known.
- t
. : - . . . v In making his recommendations, Mr. Johnson performed an analysis of $c t r.,jgt,p ,d,eg as, des,tyar, end ;,5chedu,1e ,A .17, Itrop,osettatergst espense op debt, and various responses to requests for information concerning amounts and
.. . .4
,g W.#*p- *
- . . ."m.'.-C*-
. 4.W'-
+ .fx n.. .:u a m i
. e
.'. Occuet .*io. 40.*; ,
Page 9 l debt.
As a result of his analysis, he adjusted ,5chedule A-17, proposed interest expense,
\j
.h.,e < to,Jeore accurately reflect his. concept.cf.the curren(3conomy,an) what.he expectt'of the economy during 1982. On Schedule A-17 Srazos listed a variable rate CFC $2.105.868 note i as carrying an interest rate of 18.51. This note was subject to renewal in December 1991 and Mr. Johnson assumed it would be converted into long term debt. The CFC long ters interest rate at the time the Staff's testimony was filed was 14.0 percent. He therefore recalculated the interest expense on the note at 14.0 percent.
Again on Schedule A-17, Brazos listed an TFS note in the amount of $60,304.000 at a
- 15.302 percent interest rate. This $60,304,000 was the result of certining FF8 notes F0015 through F0035, shown on Schedule H-5, ad adding a $1,528,000 note advanced May 20, 1981. The interest rate of 15.302 percent was the inte5t iate'on the'$1,528,000 note.
Mr. Jchnson felt that it is more apgpiateg'sepapa .
Contained within the $60,304,000,)t,,a,.notehor' ,
, .f9,50[,teg,no 647.,ishic,N was,' subject;to a. renewed interest rate in December 1981. All parties agreed that it was critical that the interest rate on this note be as accurate as possible, as this one note is equal to approximatel 25 percent of the total notes payable of Schedule A-17. Therefore, Brazos was allowed to submit a late filed exhibit, showing the interest rate at which the note was actually renewed.
That interest rate was 13.845 percent. The Examiner believes it is proper to use interest.
the actual interest rate which that note now carries in calc,ula' ting' the Coo
. . . .. ..w.: y.<- :. . . % .%. ,%, p v;p,4f;g A j .
FFB netes F0015, in the amount of $3,000,000, and F0020, in the amount of $2,50 were included in the $60,30,4,000,at,15.302, percent.intere,s,t. ,, Note. FOC15 has bee with an interest rate of.15.832 percent. , Note F0020 has been renewed with an interest rate of 12.,694 percent. 'The actual interest rates of,,those notes should be used in calculating interest costs.
FFB notes F0030 and F0035, which are to be renewed in 1982, were also included
$60,304,000.
The weighted cost of all notes subject'to renewal in 1982, according to Mr.
Johnson's Schedule !!, is 11.489 percent.
- The sispie average of these interest rates
$ i '
- 11,802 percent 'Ar. Johnson'. feels'ti'et .thqd 1McNU'ttE Eculd not be adjusted as he bel'feSe's fhat'
'rifinge oNik}MtNN.5dbie[cNbE1 Mere'st rates l's a very real possibility during 1982. Although the money market has been quite erratic during th past year or so, and many economists believe the trend of interests rates is going d
' the Examiner believes that the interests rates used by Mr. Johnson are too low. She recommends that these two notes be assigned a rate of . . percent for purposes of calculating return herein.
it s **/ IL M The Staff accepted the $912,000 April 2, 1981, 13.807 percent note as well as the
$1,528,000 May 20, 1981, 15.302 percent note listed by the Coop in making its interest calculations. It escluded the $3,529,000 construction estimate at the 15.302 percent interest rate, however.
In Itght of the Examiner's reconsendations concerning invested
, r ,.CtPi.t.4),;,,a,11 9 wancp..for, $2,'23.2.322' at an* jnteret't rate.*ofMpercents should be includ I
in the return calculations, so an e! /3. N f
- z.7 _
.s.r* :
9
~ , , .,CM n. A'. .bsdhb -
~
- Docket No. C D 1
, I ( Page 10 1
3,g,,y .8razos has requested an operating, TIER.of.1,.1?in* thisidockjtt', although'its , lenders only require that it maintain a not TIER of at least 1.0 for two out of three years to avoid default.
The Coop stressed the fiscal uncertainties related to San Miguel as thet main reason for requesting the 1.1 coverage. Should any of the many estimates rega the costs which will be incurred in conjunction with San Miguel turn out to be too low the Coop fears that it may find itself in financial trouble. Brazos specifically pointed to the variation between the two estimates which have been provided from TPR on w charges af, sur, port for its request for a higher TIER. Should TPE 's second estimate of Brazos's wheeling charges prove to be correct and the Commission not increas expense to cover the increase, then Brazos contends that $1,046,516 of the Staff's recommended $1,522,586 operating margin' sould already' be gone, leaving very little -
cushion to cover any other mistaken estimatesJ
. . q ,z , ,q,p fg , , ,s
_ ,f, .;b,. ' .
h lND,Y . .N .
Jim Johnson agreed with Brazos's assessment of the uncertainties which they a facing and testified that the requested 1.1 operating TIER request by the Coop w unreasonable in this instance. Hwever, he also stated that it was not the only reasonable TIER for the company. - -
v
. v Mr. McMorries, testifying for the Intervenors, recommended that'a'n' operating TIE ,
1.0 be targeted instead of the 1.1 requested. He pointed out that even if the Coop's
~
{ operating TIER is's'at it',1.0, ~1ts' ne' t ' TIER, th[IIHitctoI$[e$ a in finding default, wo be higher than the 1.0 level should the Coop receive non-operating margins, as it has in
. the past.
The Intervenors, assert that, the difference between, net, TIER. and oper,at is the only cushion which should be afforded Brazos, as it is supposed to be a nonprof entity.
ihe Examiner agrees that the situation with San Miguel may we l some unexpected expenses during the coming year or so. However, if the Commission follows her recommendation concerning approval of' the Coop's requested .PCA clause discussed below, the Coop' will be shielded
- from a largsi number of those risks.
g Furthermorebconsidering.the .1kge.l' number jf 'esIttmetes' madfin this application i
11k'ek th.iit s$d of lhehes'sMwl'It' tNN out'ho.*b'[tN'Ngd,' although othe l
been too low. The Examiner recommends that 8raros be allowed an operating TIE daebat of 1.06.
Should additional relief become necessary, the Cooperative can return to
' the Commission for another rate increase. By the time of such a filing, Brazos will ha gained valuable knowledge concerning the expenses which will indeed be incurred connection with San Miguel, and rates can be set which accurately reflect those costs.
The Examiner recommends a total return for Brazos of $8,025,000, which is sunnariz on the following table: ,
, ..a.
Return $ 8,025,000 -
l . We b ' U s' . 6 <,*, ' n 'e\ Long lere Dent
- Interest Exoense a * 'h' . *'".$1 '... ...<. '
6,558,621 '* ** "* ' * *' ** * '#*.~- '
Charged to Construction (10,102 679) ~
Other Interest '
554.940 N
,.c, 3 7.012,884 I ON h 7 O,[f.
Operating Margin .a Operating TIER $ 1.012.116 ,. .'. 7 1.061
.,_. $ Y' N # U W
- J = = " A " N l
?:h
, ,;y . .. .
e
... p Cocats ?ia. L')
. O Page 11
/ M Co N*of Serw'tce Ithdv a'nd'R$tEbe'~ sic'n'* * *
- Brazos prepared and flied a cost of service study as a part of its rate filing-package.
The purpose of such a study is to allocate to each rate class an appropriate enount ofrates.
equitable the utility's expenses incurred in providing service as a basis for formu A cost study also identifies cost components as being demand, energy, customer, or fuel related.
Brazos used two customer rate classes in preparing its cost study. One was the group' of 19 member cooperatives which take fire power requirements from Brazos. .The other consisted of seven municipal e.lectric.. 111 - ' ties
.c sal;p,..
which algo take fire power service Brazos. Braz'os additionally... mak ; w..it . n. - w r ta e University, on a nonfire basis..es v ; is. es cert
. m.1;;v. ' of powe. *
. g nm ; . ... e , . . sThese A. I. M-i .
. w. % - '
customers.were not treated as a separate
- classification in the cost of service study, but rather, revenue associated with such customers was treated as a revenue credit to the firm customers.
l The Coop's use of two customer classes, Member Cooperatives and M was contested by both the Staff and Intervenors. The Coop just.ified its decision with reference to the cost study on the basis that whfie all of the municipals and mos e
. cooperatives' take s' rvice directly fro'n the 'Brbos 1Etij*pr'at'e'
, d 'sy' stem, a portion cooperative load is served from isolated points of delivery. Brazos purchases capac,ity
~
and energy from various entities such as West Texas Utilities Company a
~
the member cooperatives' ',at' t'he'se~ iso"Ihted' po'ir[O.
"Brizos 'is'b(11ed 'for"$apabity and energy at the rate estabTished by the selling utility. The cooperative taking isolate
~
delivery is, however, billed based upon Brazos's applicable' wholesale rate.
In developing the cost of service, Brazos believed it was important to d between the costs associated with providing service to the coeperatives and associated with providing service to the municipals. However, even though a portion of s th.e. *,...c. oop ofat'
, appropria,er.a.t.i,ve.s? ; ..
Ioad.
... ~. ts$'s.uppl.i,ed. .y .in '..a.t..'
, 8casos did not think it ta to' 'estabIIINs*;differentt' wh6 a}hi ed' '. hts'.F rst Ysuch cooperatfves. Brazos proposed the estaD11shment
- of one rate for all the cooperative load, with that reflectingablendofcostsassociatedwithhoththeintegratedsystemandtheisolate systen.
i The municipals, Brazos argued, do not use or benefit from the isola and, therefore, the isolated systen.
should not be assigned any of the purchased power costs as In developing the cost responsibility of the municipals, only the integrated Brazos system was considered by the Coop.
It was the position of the Commission Staff and Intervenors that the major which should be considered when segregating customers into different rate cl usage or lead characteristics, and that separate customers classes should i
t /si. N I..S,',.*"*[. D '.'" ,D **.".!sf*@. 8 9 Sign Q ant h dt @ rent usage characteristici.-
... j :
.. .g. , .
4e
, , ., _ . . - . . _ ;,2.sh i .44:AA.
_w v .- . -, _ . .,_m., e - .,,,. -.._.,._y...---._$.m._- . .
( Cocbei No. 47) l
( Page 12 '
Although the usage and ioad characteristics of the Brazos customers vary o M..ewjde range; there is no divif*on along'the -lind.of 'ooperative?'ard'niuhitipa'11tie proposed by Brazos.
The other justifications given by the Coop for maintaining two rate classes are th facts that there have historically been two separate classes, and that the membe cocotratives have more responsibility for the' debts of Brazos than do the municip The Esaufner does not feel that there is sufficient justification for applying diffe rates to the cooperatives and the municipal customers, and therefore recesm one class of rates be established.
Although he disagreed with the Coop's use of two custonIer classes in ,
- as well as with the Coop's,*v's .cla 1 cation \.6
. a:o . . r 1
< c6st.
s .- .,c.omponents.,
>.-. Mri Saath.off testified that he believed the resu ,ts p o(.'the,' study,ns.:are.,usefu.1"as 'a. guide e' signing -f rates in this docket.
~
Brazos and the Intervenors in this case reached an agreement that Brazos charge should be set at 56.75 for all customers.
Although Mr. Saathoff had originally proposed a $5.00 charge, he testified that a $6.75 charge would be reasonable. The
~
Examiner recommends that charge be adopted.
- She would further propose
.of- g.7288 mills per kwh to cover her recommended cost of service.
1 Purchas'edPoweradfustmentClause ~
. & ph'a . 3..'s h %. . . . -l . *: . * '
. :~. . . ~ .*
- tariff.
Brazos currently has,.an approved purchased power cost adjustment (PCA)
, , Ho'w'ever, in its current application, the Coop has proposed a ne clause which would allow the same deller for dollar recovery of purchased p is accompilshed for fuel costs through the standard fuel cost adjustment cla and energy related components of purchased power costs (excluding fuel) wo recovered
.,. separat'ely thr'ough a demand cost adjustment and an energy cost
..s .
~ r.,. Theimajor.,ieas4n suc'h'.'a iiau0e 'li,ne'ekby ' r[2N 'is ' San Miguel. '
Brazos is
'ob11gSted.So pay ftli 'sid[E Na*1N'f tidc' hah ***asso'c'iake '
whether it operates or not. - San Miguef. engineers have forecasted A 70 p
~
avaflability facto'r for the plant, but as the plant is brand new, there
' knowing for sure what its availability factor will be. Should San Miguel be non.
operational during a peak month, off system purchases of power wou ~
Brazos, in addition to the Coop's having to continue to pay San Miguel'
~
Because Brazos's base power cost has the potential of being extremely v during the early e operations of San Miguel, and also because the Com approved stellar d'llar for dollar PCA's for other utilities, the Commission Staf recommended Brazos's proposed clause be approved. -' --
s r% di.s .,*rs i g*.\ ..s.', YI.V'* ' .* ! $ .' a' ' * ' % ' *A I * *O' _
e g .
.: .C4
. p::-
. . W'. - a 0%
,,,-.g - , - - - - . , - ,,---.,y , - ~ - - +
( Dochet tio. 4073
( 9sgo 13 The Intervenors expressed a great deal of concern that approval of such a clause
,h..gr would somehow allow Brazos: to pass ,through s al,1 JScr,ts '.of.. papenseseindiscriminatelyf effectively removing their rates from regulation by the Commission. They also expressed concern that utilization of both a Fuel cost Adjustment clause (FCA), and a two part PCA would be confusing to the customers, and that the fluctuating bills which might result would sent false price signals to the customers.
The Intervenors' argument appears to be that San Miguel Electric Cooperative will be able to pass all manner of cost increases through to Brazos and that the PCA clause will then allow Brazos to pass those unregulated charges through to its customers. That is not the case. San Miguel is a public utility under the Public Utility Regulatory Act whose rates will be set by this Commission jus't 'as the rates of Brazos are. 'The problem which confronts us,in this case is,Jha San,Mjguel,.h permanent rates of San Miguel,,are,se,hedul,ed't[g,j,ust,gn ,
com be.gi,d,ed upon by tsa.Ceimitission,o,n March 10,1982.
Those rates will reflect the costs incurred by San Miguel in providing power.
For purposes of this rate case, the cost of power from 5.an Miguel must be estimated. The PCA,will allow Brazos to amend its rates to reflect the approved rates being charged to i by San Miguel at any given time. -
Additionally, as the' San Miguel pla'nt is just becoming operation'al, its're is somewhat uncertain. Should Brazos not be able to obtain all the power it has planned to from Sa$ Miguei, it will' nave' topur' chase"powe'r 'fM 'other sources to meet i requirements. The proposed PCA will merely allow Brazos to pass through the excess cost of that purchased power to. Its customers. , ,8razos will,, derive ,,no,, net,, income ,f utilization of the PCA. . ,
Regarding the Intervenors' concern that automatic adjustment clauses may lead to customer confusion, the Examiner would have to concede that they are right. However. In a climate of highly volatile costs, the use of fuel and purc5ased power cost adjustment factors is the most equitable means available of assuring fair and reasonable rates.
Additionally, in the case of Brazos whicH sells Only wholesale power, virtually all of s its custone'rs are utilities themse0es,' tieus:
. ~,
- c 'y ;
- y.^. % q . gy .d::,. 3K,.atif.'at'n'1Nt' i.v rg -
z' ing the confy %
~
Cn order to ena578 the Gonn+ssion t6'iionitir Brazos's use of its PCA, the Coop shoul be instructed to file detailed estimates and calculations used to calculate the purchas
' power adjustment factors with the Camelssion's Engineering Olvision by the fifth day of each billing period for review by the Engineering Staff.
Pre-esistine Contra m Brazos Electric Power Cooperative has written contracts for servics with each of th municipalities to which it provides service and with Texas A & M University. The Cities of 'Jeetherford and Granbury raised the issue of these contracts, which were entered int
, s /n before, the, creation ofs th'e ,Cannission'ter 1975; in their'preflied testimony,' c that perhaps the wholesale rates of those customers should be established ac the terms of their contracts rather than by this Commission.
4
, ,,.. ~
. = * . E.< edman : -- - %
I*
- b Doctet No. 20F9 Page 14 P'
C' * ' ' ^ * .
O..*r,'#'Th'fublic 'dtI11ty CoMis'sio"ni p'ur's5Unt N.tYehub11bi[thity' yA Rku1It
- the duty and authority to regulate the rates, services, and operations of the publici utilities under its jurisdiction. It additionally has the authority, if it is in the-pubite interest, to change rates of service specified in contracts. Crystal City v.
Lavaca Gatherino company, 535 5.W.2d 722 (Tex. Civ. App.-El Paso,1976, n.r.e.). . In the.
instant case, if the rates of the municipalities were allowed to stay at levels specif in their contracts, the rates charged to the Cooperatives would have to be increase significantly to compensate for the revenue shortfall. The resulting rates would be unreasonably discriminatory, and would definitely not be in the public interest.
Refund of Interim Rates
, i *. c. .
], .
The cost of. serviceandk..'
I I. / c . ,<,
! ,b
', 'd.'
~
resultant:. rates recommiendedE.O.. bh tNem'Exa* einer~iE'th report.
are slightly lower than those currently in effect pursuant to her interim Order. It 1s: ,
therefo,re the recommendation of the Examiner'that Brazos be ordered to calculate amount billed to its customers under'the interim rates in excess 'of the amount which would have been billed under the rates a'pproved herein, and t'o refund that
~
means of billing credits, over a period not to exceed these billing cycles... .
, , The Examiner, recommends, that the Commission set. {ates for all 'the cu ,, ,
Brazos Electric power Cooperative in accordance with the reconnendations set fo herein.
She further recommends adoptfori of the following' Findings of Fact, Conclus of Law , and proposed Order..Q. '.i b,' . . . , < , . . , . ' . . s. 4 . .. ! 4. d .
h s : . * *. . ..
.. : .. ~ : u.. ..
Findines of Fact . ,
- 1. " On September 25,1981, Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.' *
- appit .
", ..,,, 3..y,.
.a.n.. ., s.. cat. ion seeking au.tho.rity ' . , . . . .
to,changa . . .
ce.rtain of its rates so as
. s. c. , s.:. .149,762,675 a.te,.; addi.t tio' . gen.e.r. :3 . g . . .;i..s . . .) ;nue t . e.w .,s. .,',.pf.
annuaflyiona
~ , or a per'contage .,,: , , ,
'in.. between . 333,703,170. a
-i.- * .. .. .. crease of between 42.02 and 61.12. percent of test year operating reve. nue. * * * * * ' ~ ' -
.s. .
.' .: r ~- .
- 2. y . n A prehearing conference was held herein on October 13, 1981, at which l time the effective date of the proposed rate increase was suspended for ..
l 120 days.. pursuant to 'Section '43(d) of the Public utility Regulatory Act.
,- ~
- 3. .
The Cities of Weatherford, Bartlett, Seymour, and Granbury requested and were granted Intervenor status in this docket.
s Vo y ,H. s .,*o ' t ;+ ..s.'. vo r *. . '. o 1,. * .
- s O. ..'< *' *
- s. - i i e <.
l .. e .*. . . ' ' ' . -
.s.
ge 4
{ ..y ny.s
= , I?
, m.m. . =.
-wr
- . Docket 'lo. 4079
( C pan 1s p' A* N'*. .,
4 la '". .Or,8'"
. .'".t"'d .Y b , th.' J."*"1. aft .'a.Sct*6*i..'.5 n .P8.!r it. ."*5..
., determined that the Commission has ' original .
jurisdiction to set rates charged by Brazos to its wholesale municipal customers, even if the delivery points for the wholesale power are located within the municipal limits of the purchasing municipality. The City of _
Weatherford appealed that ruling to, the Commission on October 23,
, 1981, and the Commission entered an order upholding the Examiner's ruling on November 13, 1981.
5.
The hearing on the merits of this application was convened on December 14,1981. 8y agreement of all parties, Brazos was allowed to submit a late filed U exhibit after the close of the hearing showing the, '
. newinterestrateat,P{i5$h.l w n
..'.'d,i ' 'n,ak. e h' i'o **#
That exhibit wasanuary> filed'on
. g..v JI 7;#1982?e.,;. ,,.ad.
, s ff, .p'(.;q'ro',Yledi
. . i;
.s. '
, , #,s 6.
On December 29, 1981, Brazos was granted interim rate rell'ef at the level proposed by the Commission Staff at the hearing on the merits.
Those rates became effective' when San Miguel began commercial operation on January 7, 1992. .. .. . . -
7.. .Brazos.is an REA cooperative which generates and. transmits wholesale electric power to 19 member distribution cooperatives serving 57
. counties, seven.municipa11 ties, and Texas.A & M University.
. f ;% : ,i.'. *n
,.. . < g ..
. *: . e. * . . r . ' v. h~ ' -
8.
Brazos and Sout'h' Texas' Electric Cooperative, Inc.* (5TEC) are joint owners of San Miguel Electric Cooperative, Inc. which constructed and
.. operates a 391 18f lignite-fired steam generating plant and associated eine.
9.
Brazos and STEC are obligated to take poweir from and pay all
' e'., :gy construction and4' operating costs of.,the San Miguel plant.
I
. .s Y' . '
l
.. y.'e'..
,, . no;'t
' yr '"';-..*
. t ' ~p'h. ' f.;*,.'y, .,. g g;c;g . e H.,.}
k,%;..
. , . *, '(*'.
- 10. 'The original cost of Brazos's Illant in service is $167.335,424 i Accumulated depreciation thereon is $36,000,874, resulting in a net l
plant in service of $131,334,$50.
e 11.
Brazos has invested capital of $214,040,623, computed as follows:
Original Cost of Plant in Service $167,335,424 Less: Accumulated Depreciation Ilet Plant .
S 36.000.874 .
l Constructfon IJork in Progress U J1.JJ4.550 leuclear Feel 70,998,219 Working Cash Allowance 2.932,512 Materials and Supplies 1.353.163 Prepayments 5,916,239
. v ,v.)t.,,j,, Fuel Inventory, g r, , , . , 1,..,..*,,..,,e', .. / / 454.940
. .e . <'~
Total Invested Capital 1.051.000 5Z14.040,623 9 . -
s
~~
, , - d *SW ~~ ' ' ~ ^ <
. f f Oceket No. 4073 Page 16
\
~
7,p'-.,.,, * ,12.. ,Brazos ,dp no,t pr,e,sgn,t, any ev,1,d,ence regarding the,qurgfl,t ,co,1t
,,,7,,
o utility plant in service or the adjusted value of its invested ,
capital, nor did any other party to the case.
13.
The depreciation rates proposed by Brazos are reasonable.
14 A total cost of service for Brazos of $125,530,452, computed as follows, is reasonable:
purchased Power
,$70,731,878 Operation and Maintenance *
- 40,776,011 * .
Depreciation
- 752,789 Total Other Taxes ,,j.:',,{'. ) 2 6 .q,.I'*.! 244,774'. *'
e.i' . , e .s.' e. .'
Return.
Total Cost of Serv, ice , g. l .'8.025.000.: lv.jh,.y.
, pg9,(*.;,i,. ;'. f,g.'i,'.),
UZ5,530,45Z' , . '
- 15. A return for Brazos in the amount of $8,025,000 is fair and reasonable.. That amount represents a return of 3.749 percent on the Coop's invested capital. .
16.
Given adjusted test year fuel revenues of $59,3'71,841 and other '
- ' ~ revenue of $187,409',' Brazos' he's' a 'bNs 'ra^te EeIen'ue ' requirement of
$65,971,202 and a base rate revenue deficiency of $13,186'463. ,
..:.. 4: . *.r~y
- 17. Brazos's pro. posed cost of se.' .. .;. .e.rvice ..*- ..
study4.reasonably..
the iden -
- customer, denarid, and energy related pertions of its total cost of service.
i However, the Coop did not sustain its burden of proof in Justifying separate customer classes for member 'trooperatives and municipal customers.
18.
The following rates are just and reasonable and should generate
, ' 'g.. ,J.p , s'uffi i V '..y d," j'.cient revenues td 'co'ver Bra'zos 's' cost ofliIrYic'e:
? ,:{. . ~,' :'['y % -((:' ?)9,'.', . !. 4;,ff,7,'y] . . * , ,
Facilities Charge: $150.00/ delivery point / month ~*
Demand Charge: $6.75/kw of billing demand * '
Energy Charge: 9.7288 allis per kwh 8
- Minimum based on 751 of previous June-September metered maximum 19.
Srazos's proposed fuel cost adjustment and power cost adjustment clauses are reasonable. They will provide the Coop with an acceptable means of recovering volittle operating costs without over.or under-recovery of those costs.
. t .=*s b a d .' . t .,*. e e g ',k ,.s , ' ,d *. . * . e 1.****#*.,'. '
s / .s'* .. e
, 67 0 -
'ea e
~
b h
, , .,s .
w
<m-- . , , , .-m,- w-y , , - - , , , - - - - - , , , -w,
.- ^
- f ( Oochet No. 4071 Page 17 20.
It is reasonable to require Brazos to file with the Commission's ft . e * 'y > * * . Engineering' Divisidh its. inonihly' powir co'sF a'd[u'stme f it' i' oIa 'g' ve'n billing period, along with the corresponding work papers, by the fifth day of the hfiling period.
- 21. It is reasonable to require Brazos to refund revenue collected pursuant to its interim rates in excess of that which would have been collected had the rates approved herein been in effect.
conclusions of 1.aw 1.
The Commission ha's jurisdickio'n ove'r this matter pursuant to ,
J7f48(( '
TEX. REY.CIV.
.. Si..hl.?l0.b)$$:Wk!. STAT. ANN.' j artk'.1446ch.551 *' ~ ' ?"$' $ 0-
- . e 2.
The Commission has ratemaking jurisdiction in this docket over all customers of Bratos not subject to the original jurisdiction of any municipality.
The rates approved by the Commiss' ton in the instant docket may only be charged to those customers not under the original
jurisdiction of any municipality. , , , , , , , . ..
- 3. n Thedepreciationrate, sand,practicesrecommendedbytheExaminerare proper under TEX. REY.CIV. STAT. ANN. art.1446c, *827 (1980).
4.
The rates recommended by the. Examiner in t'his docket wi.11 allow Brazos to recover its, operating expenses with a reasonable return on its invested capital, pursuant. to the . requirements of TEX. REY.CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 1446c, 339 (1980).
5.'
The rates reconnended by the Examiner in this docket are reasonable and nondiscriminatory and :should be approved by the Commission because they c,omply, , wit.h , the, ratemaki.ng criteria set forth in ,
. .s
.. 9. *;r.1.. ,. 3'f TEX. REY.CIV. STAT. ANN.; art.144(c. *5837-48
- y. ., .
- p . < : y 'y. ' .;h' ? N,. .,. <, v:.v. .' 900)-
6.
The Comeission has jurisdiction to set the rates which will be charg by Brazos to all of its customers, including those having contracts
' with Brazos which purport to establish rates, consistent with the public interest.
Respectfully submitted, n M u 0. '
JAj;JUElaJl E 5. NGA;J
!!.Ya5 EXANINER t . .
- el *. APPROVE!T on this M day1 o1 1)talai' * 'i i982. / *' ' ' ' '
OfAr.),n f.SHLrv0A>
cama.ra E. snEwen DIRECTOR OF HEARIMS Id
- z. . = . . .
--..,,m. _, . _ _ . , - . _ . _ . - . _ _ . . . . - _ - , . - _ _ . .- _ . , - _ _ _y.,_ _..
- t
",s #
O e
e 9
9 eesteet , ,
l ee seest at es e: es e
h i
9 e'
W
-M O ,
m n
. a ' . b.
~ ,
. ~i-b-g . - L,,.,7 s '
. l.
- Y , '
,40 eshv - 'g
- . :c.
e*4 7y* .
- I' , . s 4
, ;png
,, y y - '. -* _' ,
A >ie t ,
.y3 / - .. - .. ,,.
f
- u
k'. -
( (.
[
'O _
TARlFF ITEM: '
ggg, g, 4 RATE SCHEDULE Sheet No. 1 APPLICATION: Effective Date ENTIRE SYSTEM Page 1 of 3 AVAILABILITY:
To all customers. '
CHARACTER OF SERVICE:
The Cooperative will supply 60 cycle alternating current,at any available standard distribution voltage. Metering will be at distribution voltage or, .if otherwise, will be compensated for transformer losses.
I MONTHLY CHARGE:
f Facilities Charge: $150.00 per delivery point per month Demand Charge: $ 6.75 per kW of billing demand Energy Charge: , 9.8233 mills per kwh BILONG DEMAND:
The billing demand is the sum of the moximum demands of all points of delivery to customer for the current month, provided that in no event shall such billing demand be less then seventy-five percent (75%) of the highest maximum demand similarly determined during the preceding months of June, July, August, and September.
MAXIMUM DEMA ND: .
The maximum demand of a delivery point shall be the overage number of kilowatts supplied during the 15-minute period of maximum use at the delivery point during the month provided that a) if at any delivery point the power factor is determined to be less b - PUBUC UTIUTY COMMIS$10N OF TEXAS
- ... m neovmo
.n
- ~
, ,.. .mus.:nts.. nacm .aD79 ; '
. _ . _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ **
- C - * * * * " " ~
Y,
. F.' .
(
1 .
TARIFF ITEM:
Section No. 4 RATE SCHEDdLE Sheet No. 1 APPLICATION: ,
Effective Date ENTIRE SYSTEM Revision No. -
~~
Pege 2 of 3 j
MAXIMUM DEMAND (Continued):
than 90% logging for a period of maximum use during the months of June, July,' August, and September, the maximum demand of such point for the month of such determination and for the succeeding eleven months shall be multiplied by 0.9 and divided by the determined power factor, and b) no maximum demand of a member substation of the Brazos system shall be less than 300 kW.
BILLING ADJUSTMENTS:
The monthly charges shall be adjusted to reflect the following billing adjustments:
Fuel Cast Adjustment (FCA) -
Reference Sheet No. 3 Power Cast Adjustment (PCA ) -
Demand, Reference Sheet No. 4 D
Fower Cost Adjustment (PCA ) -
Energy, Reference Sheet No. 5 E
The billing odiustment will not be credited in determining the minimum monthly bill.
MINIMUM CHARGE:
The monthly charge shall be the higher of the following:
- 1. Facilities charge plus applicable billing demand charge;
- 2. Reference the Agreement for Service. PUBUC M OF TEXAS
- g APR19'82 nocuT 4o79
~ ~ 7ILE .... . .. . . ...... .. 8Y .. . . . .. . . ... .. . .
,, .a +- -
,;g .*7ARNrFCLERK
,,* ~
~* 4
C C O
TARIFF ITEM:
Section No. 4
' RATE SCHEDULE Sheet No. I APPLICATION: Effective Date ,
l ENTIRE SYSTEM Revision No. -
Page 3 of 3 O-PAYMENT:
Bills for electric service will be rendered monthly and are due when rendered and become delinquent if not paid within 15 days from the date of the bill.
CONTRACT PERIOD:
As provided in the Agreement for Service. .
l -
l l
~
PUBUC UTIUTY COMMISSION OF TEXAS APPROVED cocxtr - 4079
,O ~APR19'82 r i a . .... .. . . . . .. . . . . 8Y . . . .. . .. . ...... ...
, 1 .,_.. ..........
TARIFF CLERK . .
..g.-1
._~Yi.nmM9=_ z -- __3_ %_ -
6
~
v, \/
...x'3t ,Y' 4
(.. (.
9.
TARIFF ITEM:
Section No. 4 RATE SCHEDULES INTERIM FIXED FUEL FACTOR Sheet No. 3 APPLICATION: Effective Date 9-1-83 TO ALL RATE SCHEDULES Revision No. 1 Page 1 of 1 INTERIM FIXED FUEL FACTOR [ Filed in obedience to and subject to Substantive Rule 052.02.03.033 (b) (3)j The fuel cost factor per kWh for the current billing month for all rate schedul,es is determined as follows:
FCA =
~
S Where:
/
SG =
Estimated firm kWh sales generated by Cooperative.
! =
.J' Estimated kWh sales for current month, excluding off-system sales.
CF =
Correction factor adjustment to be applied in the curcent billing
- month to account for the difference between estimated fuel cost revenue and actual fuel cost revenue in preceding periods in
! accordance with Public Utility Commission of Texas Substantive Rule 052.02.~03.033 (b) (3) and under such terms and conditions as the Commission may order.
l l
1 eveuc umm commssion or mas APPROVED
~
' ~
NOV22 '83 ooc m 5388 ,
e c.. . .. .. .... .. RY .
t,
.-.T. .M.nFF CL:U:.- .t G
"y *e.%
q '
s E e .b ; 9I e.
'
- 2
(
F' . ~
(
.. ~
Q -
l TARIFF ITEM: i Section No. 4 RATE SCHEDULES Sheet No. 4 POWER COST ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION: Effective Date -
Revision No.
TO ALL RATE SCHEDULES _
Page 1 of I
~
DETERMINATION OF POWER COST ADJUSTMENT The demand and energy component of the rate will be adjusted in accordance with the following: ,
Demand Charge Adiustment:
PCA D =
P j -
P O 1 CFo BD Where: .
Pj =
Estimate of current month's total demand related costs associated with purchased power.
=
P o Estimate of current month's total demand related costs associated with purchased pcwer which are included in Brazos' base rates BD =
Estimate of Brazos' current month s total billing demand excluding off-system sales l CFD= Correction factor to be opplied to current month billing to account for differences in PCAD costs and revenue in previous periods.
PUBUC UTILITY COMMISS10ff 0F TEXAS APPROVED M APR19'82 DOCKER - 4079 .t' f!LE . . ... .. ... . .. . ... . BY . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
- ,y, TARIFF CL.ERK
. 'mg-
.., . . . . . 7_.. & . dMesmw1NeefstehF h-
' ? '* .
( C i
-~
(".u TARIFF ITEM:
Section No. 4 RATE SCHEDULES POWER COST ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION: Effective Date
' ~
Revision No. -
TO ALL RATE SCHEDULES
_J DETERMINATION OF POWER COST ADJUSTMENT Energy Churge Adiustment:
PCA =
E E j -
Eo 1 CFE -
S Where: -
E =
j Estimate of current month's total energy related costs associated with purchased power
'E =
Estimate of current month's energy related costs associated O
with purchased power which are included in Brazos' base rates S =
Estimate of current month total energy sales excluding off-system sales CF PPli ed 6 Ae cuant mone bHlig k
= ncti n et r E
- account for difference in PCAEc sts and revenue in previous periods.
PUBLIC UTIUTY COMMISSION OF TEXAS APPROVED -
APR19'82 coCxEr 4079 C' n a ................. 81 .... -
TARIFF CLERK q .
. %mn =wu==
. . . ... -: n a
A-4 e
v-S O
e 9999991 9 95 l 19991
, M 95 l
) e 95 I
r 1
i l
1 I
l S'
o ,
g
,he -
O Y m f*,
, - - - , , - , , e, - - , . , - - , , , -
/-
G p
I3W /kY4 l
\
n n ,
Q . W. l
,s_ G'M G.R (CllE*J a 2,*/ r,.pg 3-Wdb la_L,.4 ,
__.,L ELECTRIC CCCPERA35. :NC o e r.c.y c . c. c,8. E *,* A h ": Y .U: ,*
1 March 20, 1986 Mr. William G. Parker Pr sident Brczos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
P. O. Box 729 Ctmanche, Texas 76442 Mr. Richard E. McCaskill
~
Executive Vice-President and General Manager Brazos Electric Power Cooperativo, Inc. ,
P. O. Box 6296 W co, Texas 76706-6296 G:ntlemen, For the past six months Coleman County Electric Cooperative, Inc. Board and Manage- -
ment has been re-evaluating the Cooperative's application for membership in the Brczos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
Since our original request for membership was made, and a change over date agreed '
upon, other circumstances arose that made us take another look at a proposed change in power suppliers. The Comanche Peak Prcject, and the present power costs were th3 primary factors in our decisions.
Ec:nomic conditionis in our service area are severely strained because we are so h:cvily dependent on farming, ranching and oil. Therefore our members would be vary adversely affected by any increased pass through in power cost at this time.
B:ccuse of the circumstances surrounding this major move by our Cooperative, and cur Board's responsibility to our members, based on the best possible information tv311able to them, the Board of Directors of Coleman County Electric Cooperative, Inc. passed the following resolution:
i Resolved, that whereas studies have been implemented b'y, and between Brazos
! Electric Cooperative, Inc., Coleman County Electric Cooperative, Inc., and other distribution Cooperatives, to determine the possibility of Coleman County Electric Cooperative becoming a member of the Brazos System on January 1, 1986.
And Whereas, the original information and studies indicated that mutual benefit to both Cooperatives could be realized by making the transfer on January 1, 1986. -
And Whereas, current information received from Brazos indicates that the optimum membership date of January 1,1986 is extended to some date in the future.
Wow *hefasehh ,Besolved.ahat. CalamantCounty Fhie Casperative,4nc. '#**
. h
.J.fcg2 Tus M:rch 20, 1986 l -
p withdraw it's application for membership in Brazos at this time, and that (j Brazos reassign Coleman County Electric Cooperative's Wholesale Power Contract back to West Texas Utilities Company before April 1, 1986.
' Please accept this Jetter as our notice to withdraw our application to become a member of Brazos at this time. We also request that you reassign our Wholesale -
Power Contract back to W.T.U. before April 1, 1986.
- Coleman County Electric Cooperative, Inc. and Brazos Electric Cooperative, Inc.
have expended much time and money studying this over the past two years, and we feel our association with Brazos has been strengthened by it. We would like '
to continue to work together as all Cooperatives should. We are all working -
toward the same destination, even though we may all travel a different route at times.
Thanks again. Maybe at some future date something acceptable to all might be worked out. -
Singerely,
&Yf fM&W
~ JAMES C. BARR ~
General Manager JCB/rb i
1 4
O tu
f.?
e e
e g - , -
g
- 9885 95 I Ml .6 h .
i
(
e e
M 6 Og 6 j' A
e r ..
<- , a n ,, ,, - , - , , . - . - - - - - - - - - - - , , , , , - , . - - - - - - .. -,. , . , .
/- u - s nowx,
{ -n C
o CONCHO VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
l
~
Area Code (915) 6554057 2530 Pulliam St.
P. O. Box 30130 6 . San Angelo, Texas 70003 February P.1, 1986 Mr. Richard McCaskill Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
P. O. Box 6296 .
Waco, Texas 76706-0296
Dear Richard:
Thank you for meeting with our group on the 13th of January. ,
We have seen a number of changes during the last two years of planning between our organizations. Most of which neither of us had very little control over. However, we feel the original mutual agreement on the objective that CVEC's membership in Brazos should be timed to be of advantage to both our organiza-tions remains unchanged and is paramount.
Based on the data analysis for our system, we have concluded the following:
Total Actual Cost for 1983, 1984 and 1985-( A. Brazos would have billed CVEC $1,367,568 more than paid to WTU for CVEC power cost.
l B. Brazos cost for depreciation, interest, taxes and 0 & M on CVEC substations and Transmission plant transfer to Brazos would have cost Brazos $374,841.
C. The three year period would have benefited Brazos members by
$1,192,727 at the expense of the CVEC membership.
Projection Total for 1986, 1987 and 1988 A. Brazos is projected to bill CVEC S1,814,766 more than would ~
be paid to WTU for CVEC power cost.
B. Brazos cost for depreciation, interest, taxes and 0 & M on OL- CVEC substations and transmission and on 1986, 1987 and 1988 new plant transferred to Brazos would cost Brazos $906,235.
.?
'3 C. The next three year period would benefit Brazos members by
- {O $908,531 at the expense of the CVEC membership.
The above rcost was based on Brazos furnished projections of power cost which were adjusted for CVEC's load factor.
Estimates for the increased cost impact on Brazos members, if Comanche Peak:did not become operational, were not projected.
The unknown outcome of the Comanche Peak project and the news media coverage and related member relations problems are also of much concern.
It is evident, that the original membership date of January 1986 or the April 1, l',
1986 date, is not of benefit to our organi-zation at this point in time. In fact, the date now is 1989 or -
1990 based on the information Brazos has furnished our group.
j Based resolution:
on this information, our board has adopted the 'following NOW BE IT RESOLVED, that based on the current infor-i mation available, presented by Brazos Electric Power l Cooperative, Inc. to the Concho Valley Electric
! Cooperative, Inc. Board of Directors, it is not in the l best intarest of Concho Valley Electric' Cooperative's, -
l Inc. membership to become a member of the Brazos Electric Power Cooperative; Inc. at this time.
, We understand that you and th'e Brazos Board of Directors must do l what you feel is in the best interest of the entire Brazos mem- ,
j bership and hope you understand that we must do the same-for the CVEC membership.
Both our organizations have expended much time and effort to arrive at this point. We do not feel our efforts have been in vain and look forward'to continued communications with Brazos and to a time when Brazos Membership would be of benefit to both CVEC and Brazos members. ~ ~
Thank.you again for your time and offorts. - -
Sincerely, -
ALTON E. ROLLANS General Manager -
AER/ val O
1 es
%, 4-s.--~ ----- me-, -+-,.-r- - - . . - - - , - - + - - - , - - - + - +w--_ --www- .ewi-~ + . - - . - - , , , -
9 ON h
t w*'
s e
em G
w a ll 4= -
M '
MM i m MW i
I a
e e
+
6 g
.,a
- w $ y 4
4
+ _. , ,,-c @ - , - - . - - - -, -- - - - - ,-+-
- w --- ---we - -- - -
4M * 'pe c ni.usm'fc/As 19 p
C SOUTHillEST TEXAS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, IAC.
P.O. DRAWER 677 ELDORADO, TEXAS 76936
%t March 13, 1986 Mr. William G. Parker President Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. .
P. O. Box 729 Comanche, TX 76442 Mr. Richard E. McCaskill Executive Vice-President and General Manager Br.azos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. '
P. O. Box 729 -
Comanche, TX 76442 Gentlemen:
Over the past several months, our Cooperatives have engaged in studies and discuss _ons to determine the feasibility of
) SOUTHWEST . TEXAS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE becoming a member of the l Brazos system. In addition, efforts were made to determine the o ptimum time for such membership to occur. Subsequently, the date of January 1, 1986 was chosen as the date when both Cooperatives would receive approximately equal benefits from the new membership. However, after application for membership was made by SOUTHWEST TEXAS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. and after the optimum membership date was selected, new information concerning the Comanche Peak Project as well as Brazos power costs effectively moved the optimum date to some date in the future which is yet to be determined.
Because of the responsibility each Cooperative's Board and management staff owes its members, it was necessary for the SOUTHWEST TEXAS Board of Directors and management to re-evaluate the application for membership in light of the new information provided by Brazos. Therefore, at the regular , Board of Directors meeting held on March 11, 1986, the Board of Directors unanimously passed the following Resolution: _
O
.. a
( , _ ._ _ _ -__._. ___
W
/
, RESOLVED, that whereas studies have been implemented by and between Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
( ^) ' ./ (Brazos), Southwest Texas Electric Cooperative, (Southwest) and other distribution cooperatives ,Inc.
to determine .the optimum time for various cooperatives to become members of Brazos.
THAT WHEREAS, the original studies indicated the optimum membership data was January 1, 1986, however, current information furnished by Brazos indicates that such optimum time is extended-to some date in the future.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that Southwest Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. withdraw it's Application for Membership in Brazos at this time and that - the West Texas Utilities-Southwest Texas Electric Cooperative .
Wholesale Power Contract be reassigned to Southwest Texas Electric Cooperative.
Please accept this letter as notice of the withdrawal of our application to become a member of Brazos at this time. Further, we ask that the Wholesale Power Contract with West Texas Utilities be reassigned immediately.
- did.
We are terribly disappointed that events turned out as they However, it is our firm conviction that electric cooperatives must continue to work together and assist one another whenever they can. We look forward to continuing our relationship together in the future.
Sincerely, G. J,? dZusuu
- A. T. TURNER General Manager ATT/vcg .
f
- I
\O
(- -
w.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE s
., I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing Response and' Enclosed Exhibits of Applicant Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,^Inc. to Data Requested in Nuclear Regulatory Cocnitsion Regulatory Guide 9.3 were served this 2nd day of September, 1986, upon the following counsel for, Applicants:
Robe'rt A. Wooldridge, Esq '
Worsham, Forsythe, Sampels 3 c&'Wooldridge 2001 Bryan Tower '
Suite 2500 10 Dallas, TX 75201'
+, -
William H. Burchette, Esq. I Mark D. Noiette, Esq. ]'
Heron, Burchetts,. Ruckert 1
& Rothwell i" -
Suite 700 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20007 .,
1 Mr. W.G. Council '
/*
Executive Vice President .
Texas Utilities Generating Company +
.; 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, TX 75201 Blake Tartt, Esq. s Fulbright & Jaworski Suite 400-1150 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
- Washington, D.C. 20036 3
%,LL lxl =
- ~
Donald Weightmap Law Offi~es c of:
Spiegel & McDiarmid 1350 New York Avenue, N.W. -
Suite 1100 washington, D.C. 20005-4798 N
L (A) l i
.i ?
.2 .
Mb M I