ML20214G554
| ML20214G554 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1987 |
| From: | Fred Miller DUNCAN, WEINBERG, MILLER & PEMBROKE, P.C. (FORMERLY, PLAINS ELECTRIC GENERATION & TRANSMISSION COOPERATIVE |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#287-3527 A, TAC-63969, NUDOCS 8705270099 | |
| Download: ML20214G554 (6) | |
Text
,.
- $91 A
s UNITED STATES OF AMERICA U$bc BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 17 MY 20 P3 :46 Arizona Public Service Co., et al.,
)
Docket No. STN 50 5,30A.
6 1
Receipt of Antitrust Information
)
00CMEinn i hn cm BHi.t:CH COMMENTS OF PLAINS ELECTRIC GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION COOPERATIVE, INC.,
ON EL PASO ELECTRIC COMPANY'S APRIL 22, 1987 SUBMITTAL On April 22, 1987, El Paso Electric Company ("EPE")
transmitted to the Commission a submittal to which were appended voluminous attachments.
Although Plains Electric Generation and Transmission Cooperative, Inc.
(" Plains"), neither intends nor desires to initiate another round of briefing to the Commission, a brief response to and comment on the April 22 EPE submittal is appropriate. to the April 22 submittal is a February 27, 1987 Amendment to the agreement for electric service between Plains and Public Service Company of New Mexico ("PNM").
EPE's description of the PNM/ Plains contract amendment is totally at odds with the terms of that contract amendment.
Whereas EPE claims that the PNM/ Plains contract amendment does not require Plains to bear its ratable reduction in its share of the system import capacity (See April 22 Submittal at 3), a review of the contract amendment itself clearly reveals that Plains has agreed to suffer its share of a shortfall of transmission capability.
Plains respectfully refers the Commission to the following 0705270099 870520 PDR ADOCK 05000530
})$()k 0
PDR 1
9,'
portions of the PNM/ Plains contract amendment for references to Plains' commitment regarding transmission capacity shortfalls:
Article 5 (p. 7); Service Schedule G, SG.5.1 (p. 9 of Schedule i
G); Service Schedule G,-5 G.7.1 (p. 18 of Schedule G).
l
' Attachment 7 to the EPE April 22 submittal is a March, 1986 Ten Year Transmission Plan prepared by Plains.
EPE makes 4
much of the fact that the Plan reflects Plains' conclusion in March, 1986, that north-south transmission capacity is adequate for firm load requirements through 1995.
See April 22 Comments I
at 4.
EPE suggests that this reference in the March, 1986 Plan is inconsistent with Plains' position before this Commission.
EPE's suggestion is susceptible to short answer.
First, the March 1986 Plan (which was based on 1985 i
data) does not, of course, reflect events which occurred sub-sequent to the issuance of the Plan.
The critical subsequent 1
events include:
EPE's recently espoused position (October 21, 1986) that Plains does not have the right to use the capacity on its 60 MW West Mesa-Dona Ana transmission line (See Exhibit'10 to l
Plains' November 28, 1986 Comments); newly developing (October, 1986) retail load on Plains' members' systems (See Exhibit 7 to Plains' November 28, 1986 Comments) ; recent developments l
(October, 1986) in the Ground Based Free Electron Laser 4
Technology Integration Experiment at White Sands Missile Range, which load Plains could serve (See Exhibit 8 to Plains November 4,
28, 1986 Comments).
These events, which occured after the i
f
_ - _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _,. _, _. _, _ _ _, _.. _ -. _,.. _. - _,. _. _ _. _ _ _ _, _. _, _ -, _ _ _ _ _... _... =.
. -=
I 3_
preparation of the March 1986 Plan and which could not have been considered in that Plan, substantially affect Plains' March 1986 conclusion (based on 1985 data) that transmission capacity in Southern New Mexico was adequate to 1995.
Further, the March 1986 Plan's conclusion that Southern New Mexico transmission capacity would be adequate to 1995 was based, in part, on two other matters which are no longer opera-i tive.
First, the March, 1986 Plan assumed that Plains would not be providing wheeling services for the City of Truth or Consequences, New Mexico.
Since that Plan's preparation, the j
City of Truth or Consequences' wheeling contract has been renewed by Plains.
That additional transmission load ranges from 5.7 MW to 6.5 MW.
Second, the March, 1986 Plan was predicated on Plains' Southern New Mexico load obligation which was calculated utilizing Plains' 1985 Power Requirements Study which was based-on a system coincidental peak load analysis that assumes certain system diversity.
However, Plains has determined that due to the lack of geographic proximity among Plains' members, the system non-coincidental projection provided a more accurate forecast for the Southern area requirements.
l The conclusion in the Mterch, 1986 Plan that
-transmission capability in Southern New Mexico would be adequate to 1995 is not inconsistent with Plains' position before this 4
_4-Commission.
The conclusions of the March, 1986 Plan simply have been affected and superceded by intervening events.
Dated:
May 20, 1987 Respectfully submitted, f
al_ k &wN F Fr erick L. Miller Jr.
c J.es D.
Pembroke
. Cathy Lichtenberg eter Glaser Duncan, Weinberg & Miller, P.C.
1615 M Street, N.W.
Suite 800 Washington, D.C.
20036 Attorneys for Plains Electric Generation and Transmission Cooperative, Inc.
O CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ffh[C I hereby certify that, on this 20th day of Mav,20 P3 :46 1987 I
'87 2 caused a copy of the foregoing document to be delivered by United States mail, first class, postage prepaid (except kkNhahiNWpd1hr BRANCH who was served by hand delivery), upon the following persons:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Attention:
Chief, Antitrust and Economic Analysis Branch Jesse L. Funches Director, Planning and Program Analysis Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Benjamin Vogler Senior Supervisory Trial Attorney U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7735 Old Georgetown Road,.Rm. 10700 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 A.J.
Pfister, General Manager Salt River Project Box 52025 Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2025 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 111 N. Hope Street Box 111 Los Angeles, California 90051 Southern California Public Power Authority 613 E. Broadway Glendale, California 91205 Arizona Public Service Company 411 N. Central Avenue Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Public Service Company of New Mexico Alverado Square Albuquerque, New Mexico 87158
Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut. Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770
-William W.
Royer El Paso Electric Company Three Civic Center Plaza i
El Paso, Texas 79901-Royal Furgeson, Jr.
'Kemp, Smith, Duncan & Hammond P.O.- Drawer 2800 El Paso, Texas 79999 Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.
Snell.& Wilmer 3100 Valley Bank Center Phoenix, AZ 85073 George Bruder, Esquire Bruder & Gentile 1350 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington,-D.C.
20005 R. K. Gad, III Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston,LMassachusetts 02110 Janet Urban, Esquire U.S. Department of Justice 555 4th Street, N.W.
Room 9816 Washington, D.C.
20001.
(
- ) 1 __
M s
fre rick L. Miller, JJ:.
Du an, Weinberg & Miller, P.C.
3 16 5 M Street, N.W.,
Suite 800 W shington, D.C.
20036 Counsel for Plains Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative, Inc.
1
... _. _. ~.,.. -,.. _. _. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _.. _ _ _ _... _ _ _.. _ - -. _
.