TXX-6715, Forwards Response to Ci Grimes Re Further Clarification of Items Discussed in Util Up Response to Reg Guide 9.3 Concerning Antitrust OL Review
| ML20238D767 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/1987 |
| From: | Counsil W TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| References | |
| CON-#190-9860, RTR-REGGD-09.003, RTR-REGGD-9.003 A, TXX-6715, NUDOCS 8709110381 | |
| Download: ML20238D767 (65) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- x, t 7 .- -,-- - Log # TXX-6715 N == L File # 843 clo M , l9 _, d
=
10020 10047 clo
"*'; IUC' 0' 1UELECTRIC
' September 8, 1987 wmiam c. counsis rucuave vwe presuem
, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555
SUBJECT:
COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION (CPSES) UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-445A AND 50-446A ANTITRUST OPERATING LICENSE REVIEW CLARIFICATION!10F RESPONSES TO REGULATORY GUIDE 9.3
REFERENCE:
- 1) Christopher I. Grimes letter to William G. Counsil dated July 27, 1987.
- 2) Texas Utinttes Electric Company letter logged TXX-4998, dated Septeiner 2, 1986. ,
- 3) Texas Utilities Electric Company letter logged TXX-6190, dated December 22, 1986.
- 4) Texas Utilities Electric Company letter logged TXX-6377, dated April 13, 1987.
Gentlemen: Enclosed is our response to Reference 1 regarding further clarification of items discussed in our updated response to Regulatory Guide 9.3, Reference 2. Additional information has also been provided in References 3 and 4. Although your request only referenced Unit 1, our response applies to both Units 1 and 2, Docket Nos. 50-445A and 50-446A. l 1 Our attached response follows the same order as your request for I clarification, Reference 1. I Very truly yours,
? ;.
!:. G. Counsil W
j , i
)
WJH/mlh l Enclosure ! c - Mr. W. M. Lambe, NRR - Planning and Program Analysis Staff l Mr. R. D. Martin., Region IV I Resident Insper. tors, CPSES.(3) qj-C t 8709 f ,1103G1 870w)gADOCK 05000443 400 sorth oti,e sittet LB 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 i PDR
l TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 Enclosure
-TU ELECTRIC RESPONSE Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2; Dockets Nos. 50-445A and 50-446A, Antitrust Operating License Review; Clarification of Responses to Regulatory Guide 9.3 Page 8; Question B.1.h. Requests or Indications of Interest in Electric Service A: Requests From'Other than North Texas Entities Our perception of the requirements of the September 2, 1986 filing was that responses were necessary only for North . Texas Entities as defined in the License Conditions. The following covers all other requests per your July 27, 1987 letter.
Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. In 1983, Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. of Baton Rouge, Louisiana notified TU Electric that it was seeking partners for ownership of up to 300 megawatts of expected excess capacity from a 540 megawatt lignite plant it then had under construction. Cajun cited reduced load growth as the reason for this expected excess. Cajun also asked if TU Electric would be interested in Cajun's participation, either as joint owner or power purchaser, in future generating units which TU Electric had planned for the early 1990's. TU Electric responded that it too was experiencing load growth reduction, which, along with a fuel -Y conversion program to reduce dependency on natural gas in favor of lignite and nuclear fueled generation, had resulted in adequate reserve margins for its system. Based on its resource plans TU Electric noted that it did not expect the arrangements proposed could be beneficial.
J
. Kansas Gas'& Electric (KG&E)
In 1985, KG&E made informal contact with TU Electric to determine its possible interest-in purchasing surplus capacity over the next several years. TU Electric responded that its 1985 needs were met but that it ' would consider any KG&E proposal for later years based on the TU Electric Resource Plan, available alternatives i 4 and the feasibility of having such power wheeled to TU Electric loads. No proposal was received nor has further contact been made by KG&E on this subject. Lubbock Power & Light ! TU Electric was verbally contacted in 1985 by a ! representative of the municipal utility of the City of Lubbock, Texas relative to interest in joint participation in a future power plant. The City was apparently considering building a plant at a planned municipal water supply reservoir. The representative indicated he would contact TU Electric again in early 1986. Such contact was not made nor has any other contact since been made by Lubbock relative to this matter. We assume Lubbock's interests or plans have changed. City Public Service Board of San Antonio (CPSB) In May of 1985, CPSB offered to sell TU Electric surplus capacity for the summer months of 1985. TU Electric responded that it had sufficient capacity available to meet its expected summer loads and reserve requirements. In the fall of 1985, CPSB inquired of TU Electric's interest in purchasing reserve capacity E for the summer of 1986. CPSB, after developing a more agressive load forecast for CPSB 1986 load, decided
r- { f not to pursue sales further. At the same time, TU ( l l -Electric's 1986 needs had been otherwise met. l Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM)' In 1985' and 1986, PNM initiated contacts with TU ! Electric, as well as with many other utilities, to I seek support for its proposed Dineh Project. Support would be in the form of a binding commitment to purchase power and energy from the project. This project, as conceived by PNM, would consist of a four unit coal-fired generating plant with aggregate capacity of some 2000 megawatts. The plant would be sited in New Mexico on Navajo Indian reservation land. Under the PNM concept, the plant would be linked to a number of Southwestern states by new high voltage transmission lines to be constructed for this purpose. PNM, through a wholly-owned subsidiary, and in partnership with others, would own the plant and market power from the units. PNM's stated intent was to operate the units in a manner that would not subject sale of power and energy to state rate regulation. PNM made it clear that its decision to proceed with the project was subject to prior purchase commitments for the capacity and to its meeting of other PNM objectives. TU Electric's consideration of this proposal took into account the uncertainty attendant to PNM's (partnership's) unilateral decision of whether to carry the project forward. Also considered were the uncertainty of completion if begun and the cost, which PNM would not guarantee, if completed. The project, if begun, is subject to substantial uncertainty in ~ numerous areas including environmental and other regulatory issues. Under these circumstances, TU l ____ 4
I Electric concluded that commitment to this project was an unacceptable option for its resource plan and responded to PNM accordingly. Southern Services Company In June, 1986, a power marketing team from Southern Services Company, a subsidiary of the Southern Company, called on TU Electric representatives with the information that the Southern Company operating subsidiaries expected to have power and energy available for sale in the 1990's and to explore TU Electric's interest in purchase of such power and energy. The Southern Services Company representatives were aware that consideration of such sale was dependent on resolution of the East HVDC Tie. TU Electric responded that any future interest it might have would be dependent on a number of factors, including not only the East HVDC Tie but on its own needs at the time and on the relative costs of options available to meet those needs. Representatives of Southern Services Company have made no further contacts with TU Electric to discuss the possibility of their having excess capacity in the 1990's. Short Term Peaking Reserve Capacity Purchases
- The only other specific items which might be relevant were purchase by TU Electric of 400 megawatts of short-term reserve capacity, excluding cogeneration purchases, which fully covered requirements for the 1985 peak load period. The 400 megawatts consisted of 200 megawatts each from Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA) and the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA). ,,
TMPA later offered to sell reserve capacity for the
-1986 peak period and Houston Lighting & Power Company
- These items of a short-term, routine nature were not previously noted in our filings but are included
- now to assure our response is exhaustive.
4
(HL&P) offered to sell reserve capacity for the 1986 and 1987. peak periods. However, such peaking reserve requirements for these years were otherwise met and the offers were declined. B: Clarification-of Last Sentence on Page 8 You regnest details pertinent to the last sentence of our September 2, 1986 filing which reads, "These responses do not
' include discussions and agreements . with others resulting from :
4' the normal process of business operations and communications." The primary intent of this sentence was to assure completeness of response rather than generalization of specific known .or documented inquiries. In preparing our filing, we not only reviewed corporate. records, but contacted those in our organization most 'likely to be familiar with issues relevant to Question B.l.h. Aside from the reserve capacity transactions noted above, all known and documented requests and inquiries from North Texas entities were specifically included in our filing. At the same time, in the normal course of business, conversations and discussions among entities routinely take place at many functional and local levels. The sentence was added in recognition that some of these activities, though routine and readily resolved to the mutual satisfaction of all participants, might broadly be relevant to the substance of Question B.1.h. Such activities, especially where undertaken as elements of broader issues, might not be documented or recalled except in the broader context. ' l Page 9 - City of Bowie
.As noted in the original filing, the City of Bowie was furnished information necessary to support its evaluation and decision process. Local TU Electric representatives were
,y
]
1 _______________________--_________A
l contacted just prior to the September 2, 1986 filing. They 1 l noted that representatives of the City had from time-to-time l mentioned the subject of its request in a general though not specific way. For this reason TU Electric felt the need to note in its filing that discussions were ongoing. While no recent contact has been made by the City to reinitiate substantive discussions, neither has the City officially terminated its interest. TU Electric therefore will continue to consider the matter open and will respond to further requests if, or when made. Page 13 - Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. You ask whether paragraph 20 of the Joint Ownership Agreement has been altered to conform to the Comanche Peak antitrust License Conditions. It is TU Electric's view that paragraph 20 is not in conflict with the License Conditions and thus does not require alteration. While Brazos in a letter of July 16, 1986 (Exhibit A1) asked to be relieved from " interstate" clauses and specifically cited paragraph 20, it did not allege, and has never to our knowledge alleged, that paragraph 20 was in conflict with the License Conditions. It is TU Electric's belief that Brazos was simply using the guise of antitrust issues to attempt to gain advantages through modified contract rights that the License Conditions do not afford. As we have discussed in detail in prior filings, there is substantial ongoing litigation between Brazos and TU Electric. Exhibit A2, the document you request, is a copy of a letter from TU Electric giving Brazos assurance that paragraph 20 does not restrict operations with respect to interstate commerce. The letter is self-explanatory. Page 15 - Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, Inc. As indicated by the letter agreement of Exhibit B, Rayburn *I has elected for the time being to continue service as currently provided under wholesale power rates approved by the Public
Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT). The letter agreement
-establishes TU Electric's willingness to continue service in accordance with Rayburn's request on an interim basis until a new wholesale power agreement can be negotiated. The " proposed specimen wholesale power agreement" referenced in Exhibit B is the same " master agreement" referenced in TU Electric's September. 2, 1986 filing. The letter notes that TU Electric encourages timely completion of a new wholesale service agreement.
As a matter of interest this specimen agreement is patterned after an agreement executed between Texas New Mexico Power Company (TNP) and TU Electric. Page 19 - El Paso Electric Company In 1982, El Paso Electric Company (EPEC) planning personnel met with TU Electric representatives to discuss long range possibilities for mutual cooperation. El Paso Electric Company (EPEC) representatives were visiting with a number of utilities to generally explore potential for mutually beneficial I cooperation. In the approximately two hour meeting between TU Electric and EPEC, expected long-term growth rates and generation and transmission options were generally discussed. The result of the meeting was that both companies concluded that no potential for meaningful mutual cooperation was apparent at that time. We are aware of nothing which has occurred in the interim to substantially change that conclusion, although EPEC has recently requested discussion regarding possible sale by it to TU Electric of temporarily surplus capacity. Such discussions have not yet been held, but TU Electric stands ready to participate in such discussions. Page 20 - Texas-New Mexico Power Company On May 6, 1987, TU Electric and TNP signed an " Agreement *I to General Terms Regarding the TNP One Generating Facility" ; (Exhibit C). This agreement is the basis upon which definitive l __--__-__-______-_____D
t agreements for wheeling and other transactions necessary to integrate TNP's proposed plant in Robertson County into TU Electric's transmission network will be negotiated. Under this general. agreement, no further definitive actions were contemplated until or unless TNP obtained regulatory approval from the PUCT to construct the plant. On AuguLt 12, 1987 the PUCT approved the project and an initial meeting has already been held between TU Electric and TNP toward negotiation of definitive agreements pursuant to the general agreement of Exhibit C. Page 20 DC Asynchronous Connection The " ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT" issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on July 23, 1987 is attached as Exhibit D. Page 24 - Question B.2 License Conditions 3.D.(2)(i) Exhibit El lists wheeling transactions undertaken by TU Electric for the benefit of others. Exhibit E2 lists wheeling transactions by others for TU Electric. In addition to these specifically negotiated transactions, TU Electric routinely wheels economy energy upon request, limited only by operating conditions which would adversely affect customer service reliability. 3.D.(2)(m) The table below describes contracts between TU Electric ' and others which have been amended to assure compliance with the Comanche Peak License Conditions. The contracts are of two types:
, l Interconnection and power interchange j agreements, which establish criteria for interconnected s ,
operation and for energy transfer and pricing; and wholesale power agreements, which establish criteria for delivery and metering of service provided under wholesale power rates. 4
BEPC and LCRA, with whom TU Electric has ' maintained contractual relationships, have refused to sign agreements amending intrastate clauses in a manner consistent with the License Conditions. TU Electric has therefore waived any and all prior contractual provisions which might be in conflict with License Conditions 3.D.(2)(1)(a) and (b). Entity Contract Amended Contract Date, Amendment HL&P Power Interchange Agreement 2/1/62 Exhibit F1 Tex-La
- Wholesale Power Agreements 1/20/64 Exhibit F2 (and amendments) 6/12/73 Rayburn
- Wholesale Power Agreements 1/20/64 Exhibit F3 (and amendments) 6/12/73 WTU Interconnection Agreement 2/16/38 Exhibit F4 BEPC Interconnection and Power 3/29/68 Exhibit A2 Interchange Agreement LCRA Agreement (for inter- 10/14/49 Exhibit F5 connection and power interchange)
TNP Wholesale Power Agreements 3/16/76 Exhibit F6 (and amendments) 3/30/76
- Agreements exp. ed on sne 30, 1987.
Y l I l
< act 4 *v J .- onsch nunu o ana*En naisaw wmea an<s ..cn acser r b .w l
k TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 The Brazos System EXHIBIT Al Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,Inc. RICHARD E McCAsKILL EXECUTIVE WOE PRESCENT July 16, 1986 < AND GENEAAL MANAGER YI~@
.y , o u= ,QI[f LJ M' N JUL 171986 J
JOHN W. BECK Mr. John W. Beck . Vice President Texas Utilities Gwerating 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 Comanche Peak restricts our ability to transmit power and energy in interstate commerce. Similar language is found in other contracts with your company. I am advised by our counsel that Section 20, and similar pro-1 l 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 forecd to I 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 PCST CFFICE BOX 629,6 WAcc.1EXAs 76706 6296 PHCNE (S t7) 7$2 2501 / GENEAAL offC6 2404 La$ALLE 4% ENCE (
I l ~.d' . 4t l TXX-6715 September ', 1987, 8 { EXHIBIT Al Mr. John W. Beck Page 2, 7/16/86 would appreciate an er.rly reply. 5 Very truly yours, I
/
ichard E. McCaskill REM /1w cc: Mr. J. S. Farrington, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Texas Utilities Electric Conpany 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 Texar, Inc. Mr. Ed Wagoner, General Manager Texas Municipal Power Agency
.y i
1
, c j
__ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .-..A
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT A2 { TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY
~
l itpesYWAY 701FER
- 400 N()RTIE OLIVE STREET. tall. 8 8 a D ALL.AN. TEXAN 7 S201 MICH AEL D. SPENCE August 14, 1986 I
Mr. Richard E. McCaskill Executive Vice President and General Manager i Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. P. O. Box 6:96 Waco, Texas 76706-6296
Dear Richard:
{ l This is in response to your letter to John W. Beck dated July 16, 1986. Ownership Agreement We dorestricts not believe you from that transmitting Section 20 of the Joint power and j energy in interstate commerce or restricts you to buying and selling power within the ERCOT area of Texas. The North DC interconnection was installed specifically for those and other purposes. However, please be advised that,to avoid any mi' understanding in this regard 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 are waived. Peak (a copy of which is attached) such provisions We will of course maintain all our rights under thc,se License Conditions and will expect you to comply therewith. Very truly yours,
= -
71 MDSpence/Im . i xc: Messrs. John W. Beck
' Mike Ozymy Mike Greene A S UT ilJT!?:N E:IJ:C'I'Ittc con tgm y s-I
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT B lllllll:.tlllllllll
- ' =l:::
=
=--
TUELECTRIC Al. S. Greene Drea<>r. Spenal rn.yetts July 22,1987 Mr. John W. Kirkland President w Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, Inc. 750 Int. 30 Suite 140 Rockwall, Texas 75087 Re: Interim Wholesale Power Agreement
Dear John:
Confirming our prior conversations, it is recognized that the wholesale power agreements dated October 20, 1964, and June 12, 1973, both as amended, between TU Electric (as successor of Texas Power & Light Company) and Rayburn Country (to the extent said wholesale power agreements were assigned to Rayburn Country by Tex-La Electric Cooperative, Inc. on October 23,1981) expired on June 30,1987. This letter is to confirm that TU Electric will continue to supply electric power and energy to Rayburn Country at the rates set forth in TU Electric's Rate WP, together with all pertinent riders (as said Rate WP and riders are approved by the Public Utility Commission of Texas and as same may, from time to time, be changed by that Commission) and that the contract i demands for the various points of delivery from TU Electric to Rayburn Country specified in the above-mentioned wholesale power agreements will continue to apply and be used for purposes of applying said rates. It is also recognized that this letter will serve as an agreement for electric service ; on an agreement. interim basis until completion of our negotiations of a replacement wholesale power ! In this connection, you will recall that we supplied Rayburn Country with a j proposed specimen wholesale power agreement several months ago. We believe that it would be in our mutual interest to timely complete an agreement along the lines of the specimen wholesale power agreement previously furnished to you. .' i If the terms of this letter agreement concerning the basis upon TU Electric's continuing to supply electric power and energy to Rayburn Country are correct, please ~; ' l \ omnn ose sirm.i tnu non,s. in os732ni
- _ _ - - - -- - a
TXX-6715 September '8, 1987 Mr. John W. Kirkland EXHIBIT B July 22,1987 Page 2 indicate your agreement in the space provided below. Please return both originals to me for execution by TU Electrie. One fully executed original will be returned to files. you for yo Yours very truly, l S. 1 AGREED TO: , Rayburn Country Electric i Cooperative, Inc. Texas Utilities Electric Company By: tJ.
==- By: <. C Oo> w Tit e Pronianne
Title:
Division President Dat e: July 28, 1987 Date: Auaust 17, 1987 i
- 1 l
o e4
\
- ) .y TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT C Texas-NewMexico #Na"agne f M OY P.O. Box 29 0 Fort Worth, Texas 76113 (817) 731-0099
{ May 26, 1987 Mr. Michael D. Spence Division-President TV Electric 400 N. 01ive, L.B. 81 Da l l a s , Texa s 75201 RE: Agreement to General Terms Regarding the TNP One Generating Facility
Dear Mr. Spence:
This letter will confirm conversations between representatives of Texas-New Mexico Power Company (TNP) and Texas Utilities Electric Company
- (TV Electric) with respect to general terms for TNP to interconnect the TNP One facility with the TU Electric System and for TU Electric to wheel the capacity and energy therefrom for TNP should TNP receive regulatory approval. If accepted by TU Electric, this letter will also constitute the agreement of both cornpanies to the following terms:
1. TNP and TV Electric agree to negotiate in good faith toward execution of interconnection and transmission wheeling service agreements for the TNP One (Robertson County) Plant. 2. TNP will pay for the total applicable costs of transmission and terminal Oak facilities Switching to tie the Station, TNP One including, but Plant into TU Electric's Twin not limited to, all necessary associated switchyard additions / modifications and associated ongoing operation and maintenance expenses at Twin Oak Switching Station applicable TNP. to said transmission and terminal fac i l i t ies added for
.y 3
For TNP One generation that is scheduled to TNP's Southeas t Division (Houston), TU Electric wilI charge, and TNP wili pay for wheeIing such power to fully compensate TV Electric based on a mutually agreed upon impact on the TU Electric system for the maximum scheduled transfer.
- n. TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 TEXAS NEW MEXICO PowrR COMPANY EXHIBIT C 4.
For TNP One generation that is scheduled to existing TNP loads in TV Elec tric's service area, TU Electric will charge, and TNP will pay for wheeling such power to fully compensate TV Electric for the maximum scheduled transfer. 5. TNP supplierOne for will be in the same control area as its standby service TNP One or TNP will acceptable to TV Electric. make arrangements equally 6. THP willreserve spinning be responsible for securing standby service and providing for TNP One. 7. TNP will be responsible for payment for applicable transmission system One line losses on TV Electric's sytem due to the transfer of TNP generation. 8. TNP recognizes that wheeling service from all other impa c t ed ERCOT utilities needs a rrangemen t s , asto well be considered as, pay and TNP will endeavor to make such transmission line losses. for such services along with 9 TNP recognizes that there may exist transmission capacity res t ric t ions and constraints which may affect compensation and deliveries as discussed in paragraphs 3. and 4. This Letter of Agreement is subject to all applicable laws, regulations and orders of regulatory authorities having jurisdiction. This Letter of Agreement shall be effective from and af ter its execution. The 6, 1986, Agreement s ha l l rema i nforinElectric Service signed between the parties on May full force and ef fect. If the foregoing correctly sets forth our agreement, please sign and return one original of this letter to my office. Very truly yours, Yb. Y . Michael D. Bianchard Assistant Corporate Secretary AGREE TO this A day of M , lW
. d TU ELECTRIC, LR g W.H e 4'
l BY. ^. i TITLE: , l l 2 l
TXX-6715 i September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D L L 316M 7 4 i UNITID STATES OF AMERICA
, TEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION ELECTRIC RATES: Settl'e=ent I l
l Before Com=issioners: Martha O. Hesse, Chair =an; Anthony G. Sousa, Charles G. Stalon Charles A. Trabandt and C. M. Naeve
* \
, Central Power and Light Co=pany, )
Public Service Company of Oklahoma, ) Docket No. EL79-8-002 ! Southwestern Electric Power Company, ) West Texas Utilities Company )
~
l l ORDER APPROVING SETILEMENT i (Issued July 23, 1987) { On June 10, 1987, Central Power and Light Co=pany (" CPL"), Public Service Company of Oklahoma ("PSO"), Southwestern Electric Co=pany ("SWEPCO"), West Texas Utilities Company ("WTU") (collec-tively, the "CSW Operating Companies"), Houston Lighting & Power Company ("HL&P") and Texas Utilities Electric Co=pany ("TU Electric"), pursuant to section 385.602 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, filed an Offer of Settlement with the Com=ission for its consideration and approval. By this Order, ve adopt and approve the Offer of Settlement and order the relief requested therein and in the Petition filed on May 1, 1986, by the CSW Operating Companies and HL&P, l modifying the prior Orders of the Co==ission in Docket No. EL79-5 to the extent set forth herein. Backcround By its order issued in Docket Nos. EL79-8 and E-9558 on ' i October 28, 1981, as corrected by the Errata Notice issued ,. November 5, 1981, 17 FERC 1 61,078, and its Order on Rehearing 'f issued January 29, 1982, 18 TERC 1 61,100, incorporating by l reference the form of " Order Approving Settlement" sub=itted with the Second Supplemental Offer of Settlement in such proceeding (the " Original Orders"), the Commission, among other things, approved a settlement requiring the construction of two asynchronous direct current interconnections between electric utilities in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas ("ERCCT") .;
' and electric utilities in the Southwest Power Pool ("SWPP"). The Original Orders also required the provision of transmission
, /
TXX-6715 - September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D Docket No. EL79-8-002 - 2- ' service for wheeling power to, from and over th' interconnections by the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and the electric utility operating companies of Texas Utilities company, to which TU Electric is the successor. The Original Orders specifically required the CSW Operating Companies and HL&P to " construct or cause to be constructed the necessary facilities to effect the interconnections as described in or consistent with the settlement agreement." The settlement agreement and the Original Orders described two interconnections: (1) an asynchronous direct current interconnection between PSO system f acilities near Lawton, Oklahoma and WTU system facilities near Oklaunion, Texas, having an initial nominal capacity of 200 MW (the " North Interconnection"), to be constructed by the CSW Operating Companies; and (2) an asynchronous direct current interconnection between the CSW Operating Companies in Walker County, Texas and the South Texas Project (the " South Interconnection"), having an initial nominal capacity of 500 MW, to be constructed by the CSW Operating Companies and HL&P (the North Interconnection and the South Interconnection being referred to herein jointly as the " Interconnections") . 14, The Sorth Interconnection was placed in service on December 1984 Settle =ent" Paragraph (10) (c) (ii) of the " Order Approving January 29, incorporated by reference in the FERC's Order issued 1982, provides that whenever planning is undertaken to increase the capacity of the Interconnections, but at intervals of no more than every three years after June 30, 1983, until June 30, 2004, electric utilities in ERCOT and SWPP will be given the opportunity to participate in the planning of increases in the capacity of the Interconnections and of participating in the evnership of any incremental capacity added, provided certain conditions are =et. Having complied with this provision in 1986 by offering participation to ERCOT and SWPP electric utilities, the CSW Operating Cocpanies entered into an agreement to permit the expansion of the North Interconnection from a nominal capacity of 200 MW to a nominal capacity of 300 MW. The 100 MW { of expanded capacity would be owned by the City of Austin, Texas. On February 18, 1983, CPL, ! Public Utility Com=ission of TexasSWIPCO and HL&P ("TPUC") filed with the an application for the issuance of a certificate of convenience and necessity for the construction and operation of the South Interconnection. Because of continuing litigation regarding the application for - p' i certification and attendant delays in the certification, - construction 1, and operation of the South Interconnection, on May i 1986, the CSW Operating Cocpanies and HL&P flied a Petition with the Commission proposing that the South Interconnection be relocated. Specifically, Petitioners requested that Original Orders current be modified so as to (a) require construction of direct terminals and such associated alternating current ,! I D
_ _ _ _ ~ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D Docket No. EL79-B-002 -3 - transmission facilities as are necessary to effect an asynchronous direct current interconnection between SWEPCO's Welsh generating station and TU Electric's Monticello generating station (hereinbelow defined as the " East Interconnection"); (b) require the CSW Operating Co=panies, HL&p and TU Electric to interconnect with each other at the East Interconnection; (c) require such ownership of the East Interconnection by the CSW Operating Co=panies, HL&P and others, and such wheeling, coordination, ce==ingling, sale and exchange of electric power to, from and over the East Interconnection or within the State of Texas as may facilitate its use; and (d) relieve the CSW Operating Companies and HL&P from their obligation to construct and operate the South Interconnection upon construction of the East Interconnection. The State of Texas and the TPUC intervened, and while reserving their jurisdiction and authority regarding the need for and issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity for construction of the East Interconnection, do not oppose the Offer of Settlement or modification of the Original Orders as requested by Petitioners and recognize that the Original orders and the proposed modification thereof preclude any consideration by the TPUC of the adequacy of existing service and the need for additional service. Alb ether parties, while reserving their respective positirns in the event the co==ission rejects or modifies the Offer of Settlement, have either affir=atively joined in the proposal or announced their intention to accept the proposed order without appeal. . The Offer of Settlerent The Offer of Settle =ent would resolve all matters at issue in this proceeding. The Offer of Settle =ent provides, as an alternative to construction of the South Interconnection, for the construction of an interconnection at a site in east Texas between SWEPCO's Welsh generating station and TU Electric's Monticello generating station, both located in Titus County, Texas, with an initial nominal capacity of 600 MW (the " East Interconnection"), and for the construction, operation, ovnership and use thereof by the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and TU ~v Electric. The Offer of Settle =ent further provides that the : North Interconnection cay be expanded to a nominal capacity of 300 MW. The East Interconnection is to consist of the following facilities: (1) a 345 kv AC switchyard f acility at the TU Electric Monticello generating station necessary for the inter-connection of the TU Electric AC electric system with the Welsh-
- Monticello Line (the "Monticello Switchyard Facility") ; (2) the
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987, EXHIBIT D Docket No. EL79-8-002 " Welsh-Monticello Line," which is a 345'kV AC transmission line between the Monticello Switchyard Facility and the HVDC Terminal; (3) the."HVDC Terminal," consisting of high voltage direct current back-to-back converters and related facilities and the land on which it is Incated; and (4) a 345 kv AC switchyard facility at the SWEPCO Welsh generating station necessary for the interconnection of the SWEPCo AC electric system with the HVDC Terminal (the " Welsh Switchyard Tacility") . The Offer of Settlement provides that the foregoing facilities are to be owned as follows: (1) the Monticello Switchyard.Tacility by TU Electric; (2) the Welsh-Monticello Line by SWEPCO; (3) the HVDC Terminal by CPL, SWEPCO, HL&P and TU Electric (the " Participants") in accordance with the ratio of their respective ownership interests set forth below to the total HVDC Terminal nominal capacity of 600 megawatts: CPL - 150 nominal megawatts , SWEPCO - 150 nominal megawatts HL&P - 200 nominal megawatts TU Electric - 100 nominal megawatts and (4j t'he Welsh Switchyard Facilities by SWEPCo. hotwithstandingtheseparateownershipofcertainofthe facilities co=prising the East Interconnection, all of such facilities are to be exclusively dedicated to the transmission of electric energy to, from and over the East Interconnection pursuant to the provisions of this order. The Participants shall compensate SWEPCO, as the evner of the Welsh-Monticello Line and the Welsh Switchyard Facilities, and TU Electric, as the owner of the Monticello Switchyard Tacility, for use of such facilities by an annual facility charge suf ficient to compensate SWEPCO and TU Electric for their costs, including a reasonable return on invest =ent. Discussion : As proposed by the offer of Settlement, the construction of the East Interconnection will enable the parties to give effect
- L.
to the Commission's Original Orders, consistent with the objectives of the Commission's original orders. In this regard, the opportunity afforded for electric utilities in ERCOT and SWPF l_ to participate at this time in the ownership of the East l Interconnection approved herein satisfies the undertaking in the Original Orders to first offer such opportunity with respect to l the South Interconnection within three years af ter June 30, 1983. Notwithstanding this opportunity, nothing herein is to be o J
TXX-6715-September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D 318521 Docket No. EL79-8-002 , construed to ter=inate capacity reserved for qualified utilities in the East Interconnection, except as li=ited by the provisions of Paragraph (10) (c) (1) of the original orders. The offer of settle =ent, which provides for the interconnee-tion of the CSW Operating Co=panies in ERCOT with those in the SWPP and for the interconnection of HL&P and TU Electric in ERCOT with the SWPP pursuant to sections 210 and 212 of the Federal Power Act, as a= ended (the "Act"), is consistent with the objec-
~
tives of:the Co==ission's original orders and preserves the rights set out therein. The Co==ission has jurisdiction to issue the order requested under sections 201(b) (2), 210, 211 and 212 of the Act. This order, which = edifies in part the original orders issued in Docket No. EL79-8, is consistent with and supported by the findings of the original orders and the supporting evidence adduced herein. The co==ission has reviewed the engineering reports sub=itted by the Participants, and investigated the inter-connections preposed in the offer of Settle =ent, in order to deter =ine whether they are in the public interest. 1/ Pursuant to sections 210 and 211(a) of the Act, this order is in the public;in'terest, will i= prove the reliability of each electric utility syste= to which this order applies, and will reasonably preserve existing co=petitive relationships. The order will not result in any reasonably ascertainable unco =pensated econo =ic loss for any electric utility affected by the order, nor will it place an undue burden on, unreasonably i= pair the reliability of, or i= pair the ability to render adequate service to custo=ers of any electric utility affected by the order. The Co==ission Staff prepared an Environ = ental Assesscent concerning the settle =ent proposal and concluded that the con-struction and operation of the proposed interconnections would ( not constitute a =ajor federal action significantly affecting the quality of the hu=an environ =ent. The i=ple=entation of the )' environ = ental reco==endations ordered below will provide adequate
=itigation of the potential adverse environmental effects of the l actions required by this order.
. ~;
The Cor-ission orders: , i i 1/ The Consission notes that the participants have indi- ! cated that transient stability studies related to the operaticn of the expanded North Interconnection will be .' conducted pricr to construction of the expansion of that interconnection. l 4
TXX-6715 . September 8, 19'87, EXHIBIT D Docket:No. EL79-8-002 - 318822 * (A) The CSW Operating Co=panies, ML&P and TU Electric shall construct or cause tp be constructed the necessary facilities, described in Ordering Paragraph (E) (1) of this Order, to effect as a direct current asynchronous East Interconnection with a nominal capacity of 600 MW between SWIPCO's Welsh generating station ~and TU Electric's Monticello generating station. (B) Consistent with the expansion provisions of the Original Orders, _the North HVDC Interconnection may be expanded to a nominal capacity of 300 megawatts. (C) The CSW Operating Co=panies, HL&P and TU Electric shall interconnect with each other and with any other adjacent utility at (i) - the East Interconnection, (ii) at locations which are presently in place and (iii) at such locations which may be mutually agreed upon by the LSW Operating Companies, HL&P or TU . Electric and any utility in order to permit or to facilitate the transmission, purchase, sale, exchange, wheeling, coordination or commingling of electric power in interstate co==erce, *o, fro = or . over such interconnections (including the North Interconnection and the . East Interconnection, being referred to herein jointly as the "HVDC Interconnections") or within ERCOT, by or for the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P or TU E1cetric, or any other electric utility. The CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and TU Electric will maintain:and use any such interconnection for any purpose, except in andidoring emergencies as deter =ined by_ the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P or TU Electric or except when otherwise ordered by a governmental entity with putative authority, regardless of the source of the electric power in interstate commerce, and whether other govern or not authori:cd
= ental or ordered by the Commission or by any authority. However, the CSW Operating Companies,. HL&P and TU Electric shall not be required to maintain any such interconnection and say each disconnect in order to assert rights under the Act if any utility or federal power marketing agency proposes or proceeds to construct or operate a
-facility co== cree,for the trans=ission of electric power in interstate without first other than.the facilities provided for in this Order, obtaining an order under the provisions of sections 210, 211 and 212 of the Act. Unless any such interconnection is a non-jurisdictional interconnection ordered by the Commissien under the provisions of sections 210, 211 and 212 of the Act, (i) HL&P may disconnect in the event it determines that to '
maintain any such interconnection would affect its non-jurisdictional status under the Act, and (ii) TU Electric may . u-disconnect in the event it deter =ines that to maintain any such ' interconnection would affect its non-jurisdictional status under the Act. In any event, HL&P or TU Electric may elect to maintain any interconnection without prejudice to its non-jurisdictional i 1 status set forth in ordering Paragraph (I) . (D) The CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and TU Electric shall permit other utilities to participate in the construction and
- a Y
. TXX-6715 . September' 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D '
l Docket No. EL79-8-002 S3 ownership of the East. Interconnection on the condition that each such other party that wishes to' participate pays its pro rata share of the costs of constructing the East Interconnection and i undertakes to pay its pro rata share of the costs of operating and maintaining that Interconnection and agrees further to be bound by the ter=s and conditions of the Agreement among the ! Participants in the Iast Interconnection. (E) (1) The East Interc.cnnection shall consist of the following facilities: (a) the Monticello Switchyard Facility,
'which shpil be owned by TU Electric; (b) the Welsh-Monticello Line, which shall be owned by SWEPCO; (c) the HVDC Ter=inal, which shall be owned by the Pa'ticipantsr in accordance with the ratio of their respective ownership interests set forth below to -
the total HVDC Terminal nominal capacity of 600 megwatts: 1 CPL - 150 nominal megawatts SWEPCO - 150 nominal megawatts HL&P - 200 nominal megawatts TU Electric - 100 nominal megawatts and (d) the Welsh Switchyard Facilities, which shall be owned by SWEPCo. -
~
(2) Notwithstanding the separate ownership of certain of the facilities co=prising the East Interconnection, all of
-such facilities shall be exclusively dedicated to the trans-mission of electric energy to, from and over the East Interconnection and for use by the Participants in proportion to their relative ownership interest in the HVDC Ter=inal, by any qualified utility having a.right to the use of the East Interconnection pursuant to an arrange =ent entered into in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph (G) (5), or by any electric utility having such right pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph (H).
(3) The Participants shall co=pensate SWIPCO, as the owner of the Welsh-Monticello Line and the Welsh Switchyard Facilities, and TU Electric, as the owner of the Monticello Switchyard Facility, for use of such facilities by an annual .r t facility charge sufficient to ce=pensate SWEPCO and TU Electric - for their cost, including a reasonable return on investment. Said facility charges, determined in cc=pliance with this Order, shall be incorporated in an agree =ent between the owner-Parti-cipant and the user-Participants. Such agreements shall unilaterally be filed by each owner-Participant fro: ti=e to time with the Ce==ission, and the Connission shall review such agreements pursuant to the procedures of section 205 of the '
, Federal Power Act. The first such agreements shall be filed so a
TXX-6715 , September 8, 1987, EXHIBIT D Docket No. EL79-8-002 - 8- ' as to beco=e effective prior to the commercial operatien of the facilities. J t' (F) Subject to the provisions of section 203 of the Federal Power Act, ownership or use of the East Interconnection or the North Interconnection, including the rights and obligations established herein, may be transferred at any ti=e withcut , further order of the Co==ission. , (G) (1) Except as other otherwise provided in ordering Paragraphs (G) (4 ) and (5), and unless limited by contract, each Participant or owner sha'11 use and have the exclusive right to the use? for any purpose, of that EVDC Interconnection in which it has an ownership interest, to the extent of its ownership ' interest that HVDC Interconnection, or in the case of the. East 3 Interconnection, to the extent of its ownership interest in the HVDC Terminal. (2) HL&P and TU Electric shall use the HVDC Interconnections for any purpose, including the purchase, sale, - f exchange, wheeling, coordination, commingling or transfer of electric power and energy in interstate commerce.
'i
. (3) The CSW Operating Companies shall use the HVDC Interconnections for any purpese, including the central dispatch of energy between and a=ong the CSW Operating Cc=panies to enhance the ecenc=ic operation of the CSW Operating Co=panies as a single integrated and coordinated system.
(4) Any capacity in the HVDC Interconnections whic'h - may be unused at any point in time may be used by any other system in ERCOT or SWPP upon request, subject to interruption by any Participant or evner desiring to utilize its entire capacity and subject to payment of such rates as shall be adequate to ' recover the cost of such use of the Interconnection, and other s ter=s and conditions as may be unilaterally filed by the Participant or owner frc= time to time with the Co==ission in , i accordance with the procedures of Sections 205 and 206 of the i Federal Power Act, whether or not otherwise applicable, by virtue . of agreement of the parties pursuant to section 211(d)(3) ofsthe i Act.
. q(
(5) The C5W Operating Ccepanics, HL&P and TU Electric will each reserve 15% of their respective capacity in the HVDC Interconnections for fir = power wheeling and purchase by 7! qualified utilities original orders) under (asthe thatterns, term conditions is defined in andthelimitations Cc==ission's provided by the Com=ission's Original Orders. , j (a) All requests for reserved capacity frc= qualified utilities cust be acce=panied by a signed binding agreement for 1 o
)
I J
,,= -
'p' l
TXX-6715 ( September 8, 1987( EXHIBIT D Do et No. EL79-B-002 31bb2b the reservation of the capacity sought or for the purchase of such capacity. (b) If, in response to.the annual solicitation to qualified utilities for reserved cppacity, the aggregate of
-requests to use and/or purchase such capacity exceeds the a=ount of uncommitted reserved capacity, . then capacity will be made available pursuant to such request:p on the following basis:
(i) Each qualified utility requesting reservation capacity shall be entitled to con-tract for the use of, or to purchase, a nrg rata share of the available reservation capacity based on the proportion its request bears to the ,
/
total of all requests. (ii) The agreement signed by the requester shall provide for its cancellation or f or reduction in the amecnt to be cen-tracted for or-purchased in the event that the requester is unable to receive as large a share of capacity as requested due to the nIn rata reduction set forth in subparagraph (b)'(i) above. If a requester finds it necessary to cancel its request as a result j bf the nrg rata reduction, the capacity so relinquished will be divided among the
' remaining requesters on a RI2 rata basis pursuant to subparagraph (b) (1) above.
(c) Purchase of reservation capacity by qualified utilities in the East Interconnection shall be on a nI2 rats basis from the CSW operating Co:panies, HL&P and TU Electric unless the CSW Operating Cocpanies, HL&p and TU Electric otherwise agree. (6)- Whenever planning is undertaken to increase the capacity of the HVDC Interconnections, but at intervals of no more than every three years after June 30, 1986, with respect to the North Interconnection, and after June 30, 1989, with respect to the hast Interconnection, until June 30, 2004, electric utilities in ERCOT and SWPP shall be given the opportunity .v to participate in the plann$ng of increases in the capacity of I the HVDC Interconnections and s of participating in,the ownership of any incre= ental capacity added, provided again that each party that wishes to participate pays its RIs r.?tt,nhare of all ecsts and undertakes to pay its pra rata share of the costs of t operating and maintaining that KVDC Intpreennection and agrees further to be bound by the terns and conditions of the applicable Agreement among the owners or Participants of that UvDC Inter-
- connection.
- Any such planned increase in the capacity of either HVDC Interconnection shall be submitted to the Commission for
F \ l TXX-6715 [ September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D
' Docket No. EL79-8-002 action Act. pursuant to :sections 210, 211 and 212 of the rederal Pcwer (H) The CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and TU Electric shall wheel power for each other and for other electric syste=s in ERCOT and SWPP to, from and over the East Interconnection at the rates and under the ter=s and conditions set forth in the settle-nont tariffs submitted in Docket Nos. ER82-545-000, 21 al.,
with this order.except that such tariffs shall be nodified as necessary to ec: ply Such modified tarif.fs shall be filed with the Commission as co=pliance filings within ninety (90) days after entry,of this Order. (I) Co:pliance with this order and the offer of Settlement or other entity aHL&P shall not make or utility" "public TU Electric as thator any other electric utilit; ter= is defined by I Section 201 of the Act and subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission out for anyofpurpose the provisions sectionsother 210,than for the purpose of carrying 211 and 212 of the Act. (J) As a result of this Order, HL&P and TU Electric may be or will be operating in interstate commerce by virtue of the interconnections required by this Order and the wheeling, trans-mission, purchase, sale, exchange, coordination or cc =ingling of electric power to, from or within ERCOT, including the evnership or use;of facilities therefor, or by virtue of the synchronous or asynchronous operation of electrc=agnetic unity of response of interconnected electric facilities; HL&P and TU Electric, however, shall not be subject to jurisdiction under secticn 201 of the Act by virtue of section 201(b)(2) of the Act. (K) In the event any other electric utility is deter =ined to be subject to jurisdiction as a public utility under the Act as a direct or indirect result of the flow of power and energy through the North Interconnection or the East Interconnection, ownership of the North Interconnection or the East Interconnect- or tion, such jurisdiction shall not affect the non-jurisdictional status of HL&P or TU Electric. (L) Since the parties have aircady agreed on the ter:s and conditions upon which this Order is to be carried out, including the apportionment of costs between them and the compensation or reimburse =ent reasonably due to any of the=, no preposed order pursuant to section 212 (c) The Cot =ission approves the settlecent and, pursuant to Sectionof thef re 212(c)(2)(A) of the Act, the terms and conditions of the settle-ment bursementrelating to apportionment of costs, cecpensatien and rein-Order. as set forth therein are hereby incorporated in this (M) The owners of the 100 mw expansion of the North Inter-connection shall - o submit to the Connission transient stability e
TXX-6715 ( September ( 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D
/
t, ! f Docket No. EI,79-B-002 j 31882'? ~ f *' f ~ > g / studies the relating construct, ion tpJfthe expanded that North Interconnectioji interconnection. prior to 4 (N) Th/PardicipantsintheEastInterconnectionshall
?
cecply t'ith the =itigation =casures contained in Attachment A hereto in order to minimize the environ = ental impact 'resulting frc= conr.truction of the AC transmission lines. - (O) Not less than 90 days prior to the co==ence=ent of construc. tion /cight-of-way clearing) of the East Interconnect-tion, the Participants shall submit to the Division of Environ ~
= ental Analysis, Office of Hydropower Licensing, a report -
detailing co=pliance with Environ = ental Reco==endations Nos. 1 : through 4 of Attachment A. Such report shall include the final right-of-way 142ntified for the East Interconnection. Not less than.120 days after the trans=ission line is energized < the Participants shc11 submit a qqport detailing co=pliante with . Environ =entaY'Reco==endations Nos. 5 and 6 of Attachrent A. ,
)
(P) Subject to reasonable contingencies, such as possible delays in co= plying with the environmental requirements of this Order, and fatte paieure, the CSW Operating Companies, HL&P and ' A TU Elect ~ic vill co==it to cause the East Interconnection to bes' 'O installed and operational within four (4) years of the dat.e this order is no longer subject to review. ,i (Q) Upon construction of the East Interconnection, the CSW Operating Co=panies and HL&P shall be relieved of any obligation to construct, install, expand or operate or ta =ake capacity available in the South Interconnecticr.-an required by the ' original Orders and from any obligation to t'.ansmit power for other electric utilitien to, fro = and over the South Inter-conr- tion. (R) The provisions of the Co==iss';on's original Orders, except as herein modified, are unchanged by this Order, and the rights and obligations established thereunder shall re=ain in full force and effect. (S) TheCo==ission'sahprovalofthissettlementdoesnot constitute approval o::' or precedent regarding any principle or issue in this pro 9edihg. -T By the Co==ission.' ( SEAL \t p . r Kenneth F. Plumb, S e cret a ry . __ _ ~- "
*
- TXX-6715
, September 8, 1987
'l EXHIBIT D t
3186CH Docket Nc. EL79-B-002 Attachment A Environmental Recommendations g 1. SWEPCO, before starting any land-clearing or land-disturbing activities, should consult with the lan-downers, the Soil Conservation Service and the U.S. 6' Fish and Wildlife Service about developing a plan that i
, includes the best manage =ent practices to control l' , ; crpsien and sedi=entation as a result of project construction and mainten.ance.
'p/ SWEPCO should include in the plan an implementation .
L schedule, =enitoring and maintenance programs for project construction, and provisions for periodic l review of the plan and for making any necessary revisions to the plan.
- 2. SWEPCO, after consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, should locate the final right-of-way (RCJ) alipnment of the East Interconnection so that botto=-
land hardwoods and other wetlands are avoided. Where bottomland hardwoods and other wetlands cannot be avoided, SWEPCO should, as much as possible, avoid the !' placement of transmission towers within wetlands, span ie streams, and allow shrubu to revegetate the ROW
. following construction.
- 3. SWEPCO, after consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Depart =ent, should develop a wildlife mitigative plan that will provide for the clearing, revegetation, and maintenance of the project transmission line right-of-way for the benefit of wildlife resources.
- 4. SWEPCO, aftr.r consulting with the State Historic Preservation Of fice (SHPO), should conduct a survey of the area of the project's potential environmental .
impact (APEI). The survey should be of sufficient scope and intensity to identify the properties that are listed on er eligible for listing on the National y Register of Historic Places that are located within the l APEI and should culminate in a survey report that adequately documents every National Register and l
, eligible property in the APEI. This survey report, along with the comments and recommendations of the SHPO, should be filed with the Commission before SWEPCD
, begins constructing the proposed transmission line. _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ' - - ' - ^- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D Xcket No. EL79-8-002 In the survey report, SWEPCO should identify each National Register and eligible property in the APEI, according to the National Register criteria of eligibi-lity in 16 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 60. SWEPCO should specify the criteria that each National Register and eligible property satisfies, and should describe each National Register and eligible property ' according to the applicable criteria. In the survey report, SWEPCO should evaluate the effect thit constructing and operating the transmission line would be likely to cause at each National Register and eligible property according to the criteria of effect in.36 CFR 800. SWIPCO should then determine, in the case of each effect, whether or not the effect would likely be adverse. SWEPCO should apply the criteria of effect and adverse effect to the specific characteris-tics of the National Register and eligible properties that have substantially contributed to satisfying the National Register criteria of eligibility. In the survey report, SWEPCO should describe =easures to mitigate adverse effects to the specific character-istics of National Register and eligible properties that have contributed substantially to satisfying the National Register criteria of eligibility. SWEPCO should apply the criteria of eligibility of the criteria of effect and adverse effect and should present its deter =inations of eligibility, effect, and adverse ef fect to the SHPO in formal written for prior to filing these data with the Co==ission and should request, pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, that the SHPO concur with SWEPCO's deter =inations of eligibility, effect, and adverse effect. SWEPCO should not begin construction of the trans=is-sien line in a =anner or location that night affect a
- National Register or eligible property until all require =ents of the National Historic Preservation Act that pertain to the construction and operation of the 'L line have been satisfied and the Commission has so !
infor=ed SWEPCO.
- 5. SWEPCO should coordinate with the operators of the two radio towers (FAA and Southwestern Bell) located in the project area to insure that the interconnection would not degrade the perfor=ance of these facilities. The results of coordination with the operators should be *i filed with the co==ission.
- - +-
TXX-6715
, September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT D Dockct no. EL79-6-002 .
318939 6, SWEPCO should cpnduct a radio noise survey along the transmission line ROW at appropriate locationa that are relatively free of electrical noise frc= other sources. SWEPCO should use an AM radio receiver in the survey, and should evaluate the reception of the pripcipal' broadcasting stations serving the area at each location-both with the line energized and deenergized. The results of this survey should be filed with the Commission. 3. 4 7 e
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT El EXHIBIT E 1 ENERGY WHEELED BY TU ELECTRIC FOR THE BENEFIT OF OTHERS Throughout this exhibit the following abbreviations apply: HL&P Houston Power & Light Company CPSB City Public Service Board of San Antonio WTU West Texas Utilities LCRA Lower Colorado River Authority CP&L Central Power & Light COA City of Austin COB City of Brownsville BEPC Brazos Electric Power Cooperative TMPA Texas Municipal Power Authority STEC South Texas Electric Cooperative MEC Medina Electric Cooperative TNP Texas New Mexico Power TEX-LA Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc. RAYBURN Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, Inc. WEATHFD City of Weatherford RECIPIENT SOUllCE POWER DATE WEATHFD City of Greenville 12 - 15MW 1986 to 1988 STEC TMPP (via BEPC) 20 MW 1980 TMPA Gibbons Creek SES or 480 MW 1979 to equivalent power
- 2014 **
BEPC San Miguel SES or 374 MW 1979 to equivalent power
- 2014 **
CP&L Oklaunion SES 52 MW 1986 to 2021 .r COA Valley View Energy Corp.: Hereford Unit: 50 MW 1989 to 2019 ** Gruver Unit: 50 MW 1990 to 2020 ** ,
TXX-6715
~
September '8, 1987 EXHIBIT El COB' Oklaunion SES 68 MW 1986 to 3 TNP City of Bryan (via TMPP) 60 MW 1986 HL&P COA 800 MW in '83 800 MW in '84' 800 MW in '85 300~MW in '86 300 MW in '87 , i HL&P- CPSB 400 MW in '83 200 MW in '84 500 MW in '85 200 MW in '86 400 MW in '87 j WTU CPL 7 MW 1985
)
,WTU TMPP 150 MW 1985 200 MW 1986
- These Transactions are taking place pursuant to Comanche Peak ' ownership Agreement and related Transmission Agreements.
The Comanche Peak Ownership Agreement with Tex-La will become operative and wheeling of the : power owned by Tex-La under that ! agreement will commence when the plant goes into commercial operation.
**- Contract terminates at the end of the life of the project. I SCHEDULING AGENT AGREEMENTS:
These agreements provide for the scheduling and transmission over the TU Electric transmission system of economy energy for the benefit of the recipients. RECIPIENT SOURCE POWCR
- DATE TEX-LA HL&P 300 MW 1986 TEX-LA. WTU 100 MW 1987 l
RAYBURN HL&P 300 MW 1987 -Y j TNP HL&P 300 MW Negotia-tions underway
*- Power levels are contract maximum with source entity.
Actual transfers are subject to daily schedules and , transmission limitations. 1 i
TXX-6715 i September 8, EXHIBIT E2 1987] 1 f l EXHIBIT E 2 ENERGY WHEELED BY OTilERS FOR TU ELECTRIC EXPIRED TRANSACTIONS , WHEELING SOURCES ENTITIES COGENERATOR ENTITIES SOURCE: DOW DOW LCRA TMPP TERM: JUN 85- OCT 85- JUN 85- JUN 85- ' SEP 85 SEP 86 SEP 85 SEP 85 POWER: 300 MW 450 MW 200 MW 200 MW HL&P X X X X CPSB X X X X WTU X X X X LCRA X X N X CPL X X X X COA X X X X BEPC X X X N TMPA X X X N STEC X X X X MEC X X X X TEX-LA B B B B Leciend: X Energy from this transaction was wheeled in part over this system.
. p-N Selling entity therefore no wheeling involved.
B Tex-La has notified TU Electric, in response to TU Electric's notification of potential Tex-La rights to compensation from wheeling services, that such impact is so minimal, up to this point in time, that it would forgo compensation for such wheeling . services. I
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987.. EXHIBIT E2 CURRENTLY ACTIVE TRANSACTIONS' WHEELING SOURCES ENTITIES COGENERATORS SOURCE: DOW COGEN ENRON TEXASGULF AES l LYONDELL DEEPWATER l r TERM: OCT 8 6- JUN 8 6- JUN 8 5- MAR 8 6- J AN 87-SEP 88 APR 88 JUN 99 DEC 95 SEP 88 l < POWER: 350 MW 400 MW 450 MW 70 MW 145 MW HL&P E A E A A
'CPSB A A A A A WTU, A A A A A LCRA E A A A A CPL A A A A A COA E E A A A BEPC A A A A A TMPA A A A A A STEC- E E A A A MEC E E A A A TNP NA NA E NA NA TEX-LA B B B B B IEGENDL E Execut ad agreement A Transaction taking place under verbal agreement in -
accordance with PUCT Substantive Rule 23.66 pending negotiation of final contract (Non-jurisdictional entities g have verbally agreed to price wheeling services at Rule - 23.66 rates) NA No impact on entity. B Tex-La has notified TU Electric, in response to TU Electric's notification of potential Tex-La rights to compensation for wheeling services, that such impact is so minimal, up to this point in time, that it would forgo compensation for such wheeling services.
.i
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F1 Interstate Clause from the November 15, 1983, Agreement Between Ilouston Lighting & Power Comp 8ny and Texas Power & Light Company for the Construction and Interconnection of Transmission Facilities Associated with the Limestone Electric Steam Generating Station, which amends prior agreements. ARTICLE V INTR ASTATE OPER ATIONS (1) The parties herein represent and warrant to each other that they do not, either directly or through connections with other entities, transmit electric energy in interstate commerce or sell electric -energy in interstate commerce or own or operate any facilities therefor. Except as provided below, each party hereto agrees that it will not hereafter engage, directly or through other entities, in any such interstate activities or operate, establish, maintain, modify, or utili:c, directly or through other entities,'any connection or facility used or to be used for the sale or transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce without one year's prior written notice to the other party; provided further, that such party desiring to-commence interstate operation agrees to file an application with, and use its best efforts to obtain an order from, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, applicable to the other party, under Sections 210, 211 and 212 of the F.ederal Power..Act, requiring .the . establishment, maintenance, modification, or utilization of any such connection which may be involved; provided, however, that compliance with the Orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in FERC l . Docket No. EL79-8 and E-9353 issued on October 23,193!, November 5,19S1 and j l January 29, 1932, shall not require further notice to the parties or application to l j the FERC pursuant to this Article V. 1
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987{ EXHIBIT F1 1 (2) It is understood and agreed that the failure of the party electing to commence interstatejperations, to'co,mply with any provision of this Article V or said Orders shall entitle the other: party to disconnect its facilities. (3) The parties will use their best efforts .to obtain from all other entities 3with .whom they-maintain connections agreements containing provisions similar to this Article V. (4). The parties hereby agree that it will be impossible to measure in terms of money the damages which may or will accrue by reason of any breach of the representation and warranty above set forth, or any failure in the performance of any of the obligations contained herein and, for that reason, among others, the parties agree that, in case of any such breach or failure, the non-breaching party will be irreparably damaged if this Agreement is not specifically enforceabic and, accordingly, the parties agree that the non-breaching party is entitled to specific performance of the provisions of this Article V, in addition to any other remedies which may exist. If the non-breaching party should institute proceedings to enforce the provisions hereof, the breaching party hereby waives any claim or defense that an adequate remedy at law exists. (5)' 'Niithing'"c6ntained'in'this"Xrticle V 'shs!! preclude "the utilization of
~
connections ~fs 'the 'traEsiBission of" electric c'nergy in interstate commerce under b'onafide e'mergencies pursuant to the provisions of Section 202(d) of the Federal Power Act. (6) This 5rticle V shall' supersede any and all prior intrastate operation provisions in interconnection agreements between the parties hereto.
.y l
l l
_ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ - - _ . - _ _ - . -- - - _ - - _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l-l TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F2 L Intrastate Clause from November 13, 1986 Scheduling Agent Agreement For Economy Energy between Texas Utilitiet Electric Company and Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc. SECTION 7 -INTRASTATE NATURE OF TRANSACTION 7.1 Intrastate Operations The provisions of this Subsection 7.1 apply only to the facilitics of Tex-La which are, directly or indirectly, interconnected with the facilitics of TUEC, and a reference to Tex-La in this Subsection 7.1 shall be limited to such facilities. (a) Except in compliance with the Orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (the "FERC") in FERC Docket No. EL-70-3 and E-9558 issued on October 28, 1981, November 5,1981, and January 29, 1982, TUEC and Tex-La represent and warrant to cach other that they do not, either directly or through connections with other entitics, transmit electric energy in interstate commerce or sell electric energy in interstate commerce or own or operate any facilitics therefor
.y
-]
TXX-6715 L I
+
." September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F2-and TUEC and Tex-La cach agrecs that it will not, except in compliance with such i Orders, hereafter engage, directly or through other entities, in any such interstate activitics or operate, establish, maintain, modify, or utilize, directly or through other entitics, any connection or facility used or to be used for the sale or transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce without one year's prior written notice to the other party; provided further, that such party desiring to i
commence interstate operation agrees to file an application with, and use its best efforts to obtain an order from, the FERC, applicable to the other party (unless such other party agrecs in writing that such application need not be filed), under Sections 210, 211 and 212 of the Federal Power A ct, requiring the establishment, maintenance, modification, or utilization of any such connection which ly be involved; provided, however, that compliance with such Orders shall not require further notice to the parties or application to the FERC pursuant to this Subsection 7.1. (b) It is understood and agreed that the failure of the party, electing to commence interstate operations, to comply with any provision of this Subscetion 7.1 or said Orders shall entitle the other party to disconnect its facilitics. (c) TUEC and Tex-La agree that it will be impossibic to measure in terms of money the damages which may or will accrue by reason of any breach of the representation and warranty above set forth, or any failure in the performance of any of the obligations contained in this Subsection 7.1 and, for that reason, among others, TUEC and Tex-La agree that, in case of any such breach or failure, the non-breaching party will be irreparably damaged if this agreement is not specifically enforceable, and accordingly, TUEC and Tex-La agree that the non-breaching party is entitled to specific performance of the provisions of this Subscetion 7.1, in addition to any other remedics which may exist.
. l
j TXX-6715- I September 8, 1987l EXHIBIT F2 l 1 l t c
- j (d) Nothing certain in this Subsection 7.1 shall preclude the utilization of l
connections for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce 'under I bona fide emergencies pursuant to the provisions of Section 202(d) of the Federal Power Act.
.g .
.y l
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ ~
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F3 Intrastate Clause from March 6, 1987 Scheduling Agent hgreement For Economy Energy between Texas Utilities Electric Company. and Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, Inc. SECTION 7 -INTRASTATE NATURE OF TRANSACTION 7.1- Intrastate Ooerations The provisions of this Subsection 7.1 apply only to the facilities of Rayburn which are, directly or indirectly, interconnected with the facilities of TU Electric, and a reference to Rayburn in this Subsection 7.1 shall be limited to such facilities. (a) 'Except in compliance with the Orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (the "FERC',') in FERC Docket No. EL-79-8 and E-9558 issued on October 28, 1981, November 5,1981, and January 29, 1982, TU Electric and Rayburn represent and warrant to each other that they do not, either directly or through connections with other entitles, transmit electric energy in interstate commerce or sell electric energy in interstate commerce or own or operate any facilities therefor and TU Electric and Rayburn each agrees that it will not, except in compliance with such Orders, hereafter engage, directly or through other entities, in any such interstate activities or operate, establish, maintain, modify, or utilize, directly or through other entities, any connection or facility used or to be used for the sale or I transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce without one year's prior written notice to the other party; provided further, that such party desiring to
, g.
commence interstate operation agrees to file an application with, and use its best a efforts to obtain an order from, the FERC, applicable to the other party (unless such other party agrees in writing that such application need not be filed), under Sections 1 210, 711 and 212 of the Federal Power Act, requiring the es tablishm en t,
-TXX-6715 September @, 1987 EXHIBIT F3 maintenance, modification, or utilization of any such connection which may be
' involved; provided, however, that compliance with such Orders shall not requi further' notice to the parties or application to the FERC pursuant to this Subsection 7.1.
(b) It is understood and agreed that the failure of the party, electing to commence interstate operations, to comply with any provision of this Subsection 7.1 or said Orders shall entitle the other party to disconnect its facilities. (c) TU Electric and Rayburn agree that it will be impossible to measure in terms of money the damages which may or will accrue by reason of any breach of the representation and warranty above set forth, or any failure in the performance of any of the obligations contained in this Subsection 7.1 and, for that reason, others, TU Electric and Rayburn agree that, in case of any such breach or failure the non-breaching- party will be irreparably damaged if this agreement is not specifically enforceable, and accordingly, TU Electric and Rayburn agree that the non-breaching party is entitled to specific performance of the provisions of this Subsection 7.1, in addition to any other remedies which may exist. (d) Nothing certain in this Subsection 7.1 shall preclude the utilization of connections for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce under bona fide emergencies pursuant to the provisions of Section 202(d) of the Federal Power Act.
.y i
____m---_-
L TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F4'
- s. Intrastate Clause of September 7, 1983 Agreement For Firm Transmission Service between TU Electric and WTU which amends prior-agreements.
I ARTICLE VII INTRASTATE OPERATIONS 7.1 WTU does not now nor will it hereaf ter engage, directly or through any affiliated company, (1) in the sale or trans-mission of electric energy in interstate commerce, or (ii) own, operate, establish, maintain, modify or utilize, directly or through any affiliated company, any connection or facility used or to be used for the sale or transmission of electric energy in 1
' em I
I 1 _ ____C
t 4 -44 - TXX-6715
; ,~ 4, . . ..
September .8, 1987
, EXHIBIT F4 p
g interstate commerce without one (1) year's prior written notice to the companies, such (a) except for activity by WTU in l connection with the operation of its north system during periods when such north system is electrically isolated from its south system and, directly or indirectly, the . facilities of the Companies, and (b) .except for facilit'ies owned'.by WTd in connection with construction of the direct current asynchronous interconnections required by Orders of t'fie Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as more specifically identified below; and provided -further, that should WTU, directly or through any affiliated company, desire to commence interstate operation as described in- (i) and (ii) above (other than as excepted by (a) and (b) above), it agrees to file an application with, and use
.(e-l
.its best efforts to obtain an order from, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, applicable to the Companies, under the Federal Power Act (including Sections 210, 211 and 212 thereof) and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, or if amended or repealed, under any such amended or similar law, rule and regulation, requiring the establishment, maintenance, modi-fication, or utilization of any such connection which 'may be involved. Compliance with the Orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in FERC Docket Nos. EL 79-8 and E-9558
.y issued on October 28,- 1981, November 5, 1E81 and Janaury 29, 1982, shall not require further notice to the Companies or I application to the FERC pursuant to this Article VII.
7.2 It is understood and agreed that any failure of either party to comply with any provision of this Agreement or said
,. {
TXX-6715 j September 8, 19871 EXHIBIT F4 C- s Orders shall entitle the non-defaulting party to terminate this Agreement and/or to exercise such other rights and remedies which ! may be available to them including all rights and remedies pursuant to said Orders. 7.3 WTU will attempt in good faith to obtain agreements from all entities with whom it maintains connections on its South system, requiring each such entity to give it one (1) year's prior written notice before owning, opera ting , establishing, maintaining, modifying or utilizing any f acility used or to be 1 used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce (other than facilities constructed in accordance with orders in FERC Docket Nos. EL 79-8 and E-9558 issued on October
., 28, 1981, November 5, 1981 and January 29, 1982) and to promptly provide copies of any such notice to the Companies, but if WTU is unable to obtain such, agreement after having attempted same in l good faith, its obligation under this paragraph shall be deemed satisfied.
7.4 WTU agrees to use its best efforts to promptly advise the Companies of any information known to it which indicates to WTU that any entity that operates interconnected with the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, intends to transmit or sell electric energy in interstate commerce, or own, operate, Y establish, maintain, modify or utilize any connection or f acility used or to be used for the sale or transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce, (other than facilities constructed in accordance with orders in FERC Docket Nos. EL 79-8 and E-9558
'\ "
issued on October 28, 1981, November 5, 1981 and January 29,
Y, ~l,' TXX-6715
** l - September 8,
' 1987-EXHIBIT F4 6
- 'f , '
.( 1982) solely in order that the Companies may exercise whatever rights they may have; 'provided, however, that. .it is expressly-understood that WTU does not=by this Paragraph 7.4 undertake to engage in'any surveillance or other affirmative act to determine whether. such transmission, sale, ownership _or operation. is contemplated or intended by such other- entity, and that the extent of WTU's obligation hereunder is limited to conveying to the Companies such information described herein as WTU learns in the' ordinary course of business; and provided further that it is expressly understood ~ that WTU does not by anything in this Paragraph 7.4 agree expressly or by implication that it will take any action in response to such transmission, sale, ownership, e operation, establishment, maintenance, modification or utiliza--
k') tion, and that any action taken by WTU in response will be unilateral and independent, based on all facts and circumstances known to it at the time. 7.5 .Nothing contained in this Article VII shall preclude the utilization of connections for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commmerce under bonafide ' emergencies pur-suant to the provisions of Section 202 (d) of the Federal Power Act and- the rules and regulations of the Federal Energy
' Regulatory Commission promulgated thereunder.
,y 7.6 This Agreement shall not in any manner limit the rights i or obligations of WTU or the Companies set forth in the Orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission identified in Paragraph
. 7 .1 above, including the form of Order Approving Settlement submitted with the Second Supplemental Offer of Settlement in
L ,,4 TXX- 6 715 '.
- ] ... ' . " 3 September.. 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F4 4
i l L1 N l ' Docket EL'79-8 on June,22, 1981,.and incorporated-by reference in l
+.
L' the. Order to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission dated January 29, 1982, the Operating License Conditions for Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Nuclear Units Nos. 1 and 2 imposed by the Nuclear
-Regulatory Commission Texas in Utilities . Generating Company. 1 (Comanche Peak Units 1 and 2) , NRC Docket Nos. 50-445A and 50-446A, as approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by Order dated May .
6, 1982,.and the -Judgment entered by the United States District <
-Court for the Northern District of Texas on February 27, 1979, in
' Cause No. CA3-76-0633-F, as amended by the Modified Judgment
. entered by such Court in such cause on April 6,1982. 4 7.7 In the event that any of the provisions of this agreement conflict with .the . Orders, License Conditions and Judgments
-{'
)
identified in Paragraph 7.6 above, the provisions of such Orders, License Conditions and/or Judgments shall control.
, 7.8 In any action brought by a non-defaulting party to specifically enforce this Article VII, or to enjoin a . violation
-thereof, the defaulting party shall have the burden of proving that the non-defaulting party does have an adequate remedy at law.
7.9 This Article VII shall supersede any and all prior intrastate operation provisions in interconnection agreements between the parties hereto. ARTICLE VIII ASSIGNMENT 8.1 This Agreement shall inure
/
to the benefit of and be (
. L. .
up
TXX-5715 September 8, 1987' EXHIBIT F5 j I TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMI%NY S KYW.W 't s aw p:tc . g uts Ns 3st t ag (8 8.I V t: ATit 9, .t/l, .. l..n. pel . yas,ggig g g g w 3 p3 w I MICHAEL D. SPENCC
*a m ai~'
August 6, 1986 Mr. S. David Freeman General Manager Lower P. Coldrado River O. Box 220 Authority Austin, TX 78767
Dear Mr. Freeman:
i As- you know, Lower Colorado and Texas Utilities River Authority (LCRA) to an InterconnectionElectric Company (TUEC) Agreement dated Octoberare parties and amended by various letter agreements. 14, 1949 have had several conversations on Our companies specifically regarding the intrastate provisions, Intrastate Operation, of that modification of Article VI, its provisions Agreement to insure are that Conditions approved by the inconsistent not with Nuclear Regulatory Commission the License on- May 6, 1982, and for Comanche Peak Steam imposed on the construction permit Electric Station, but have been unable to reach an agreement with respect thereto. In this connection, please be advised extent: any provision of Article VI that, to the such License Conditions, compliance therewith is inconsistent by LCRA is with hereby waived by TUEC. Very truly yours, f /g,
~
MDSpence/ma C: M. D. Sampels - L-bc: Ralph Helyer H. A. Bunting T. M. Ozymy M. S. Greene i J. B. Herring R. L. Ca s e y,,' g q %< se e'
- w
- g. o A (> f t f M I .') V f 3 7' 7 P '14 N ( *Ti f.17 f f?h P 'I fif'Tif f t ' t # > gg g. g y g.
_ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~
TXX-6715' September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 Agreement between TU Electric and TNP which amends (supercedes) 3 prior' agreements. l l .- l I f t
.y i
i l l
- - _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ .
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 ' i AGREEMENT FOR EL ECTRIC SERVICE ! Texas-New Mexico Power Company, a Texas Corporation (hereinaf ter called
" customer") and Texas Utilities Electric Company, a Texas Corporation (hereinafter called " company"), in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, and of the mutual benefits to be derived herefrom, hereby covenant and agree as follows:
i
- 1. Purpose. The purpose of this agreement is to set out terms and con-ditions under which company will provide electric power and energy to each of the points of delivery listed on Exhibits A (TESCo) ar.d B (TP&L),
attached hereto and made a part hereof. Said terms and conditions apply to each such point of delivery separately and individually and any action ! taken hereafter by either party hereto under said terms and conditions shall apply only to the points of delivery specifically covered by such ( action and no others. Terms and conditions contained in Paragraphs 8 through 14 pertain only to transactions when customer acquires power and energy as described in Paragraph 11, and do not relate to transactions described in Paragraph 6.
- 2. General Duty of Parties. Company agrees to provide and customer agrees to purchase and pay for the electric power and energy required by customer for the operation of customer's distribution systems at the locations described on Exhibits A and B, unless otherwise specifically provided in this agreement. Electric power and energy provided under this agreement -r will be furnished by company to customer under and pursuant to such appli-cable Rate Schedule and Service Regulations of company as may from time to time be fixed and approved, in company's Tariff for Electric Service, by i
_ regulatory authorities as may have jurisdiction at the locations described
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 C in Exhibits A and B. SAID RATE SCHEDULE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS ARE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT TO THE SAME EXTENT AS IF FULLY SET OUT HEREIN AND ARE ON FILE AND AVAILABLE AT COMPANY OFFICES.
- 3. Description of Power Available. Company will provide electric power up to the maximum electrical load (contract kW) specified for each point of delivery, respectively,'shown on Exhibits A and B. The electric service to be delivered hereunder will be of the character commonly described as three-phase, 60 hertz, at a voltage fnr each point of delivery as specified on Exhibits A and B, and with reasonable variation in voltage and frequency to be allowed.
- 4. Rate Schedule. The electric power and energy to be delivered by com-
/ pany to customer will be provided in accordance with terms and conditions
( of the appropriate rate schedule and/or rider as indicated for each point of delivery on Exhibits A and B. Such rate schedules and/or riders may j from time to time be amended or succeeded by regulatory authorities as may j have jurisdiction at the locations described in Exhibits A and B,
- 5. Term of Agreement. The term of this agreement will be for twenty years j from Mg i,19 8 6 .
Unless written notice is given by either l l party hereto to the other not less than five years before expiration of the aforesaid term of this agreement, it will be continued thereaf ter until 5 terminated by written notice served not less than five years before the desired termination date. Both parties specifically agree and acknowledge I that company has no obligation or duty to continue providing electric serv-ice to customer t>eyond the expiration of this agreement. l
i TXX-6715 I September 8, 1987 EXIIIBIT F6
- 6. Changing Maximum Electrical Loads. The maximum electrical loads (contract kW) specified in Exhibits A and B for each point of delivery may be adjusted for normal load variations by mutual a.greement from time to time only by written amendment to this agreement. However, both parties agree that an upward adjustment in the maximum electrical load (contract kW) for any point of delivery is wholly dependent upon company's ability and the time required to provide for such increased maximum electrical load (contract kW) and is subject to company's extension policy in its Tariff for Electric Service in effect at that time. The maximum electrical load (contract kW) for any point of delivery may be adjusted downward by written amendment to this agreement; however, in such event, customer agrees that any applicable minimum billing demands (including any ratchets) resulting
-( from prior usage will continue as specified in the applicable rates without .
regard to such reductior, and, in addition, customer agrees to pay company the then current cost of any transmission and/or distribution facilities rendered idle plus removal costs less salvage value of the idled facili-ties, all such costs to be estimated in accordance with company's standard > procedures then currer.tly in practice; said payment is due company whether or not facilities are actually removed. " Current cost" as used herein means the reproduction cost new less an allowance for age and condition. In lieu of paying company for the facilities rendered idle, customer mey,
^
at the sole option of company, purchase the idled facilities or pay conpany annually the reasonable carrying costs of the idled facilities. In addi-tion to changing maximum electrical loads for reasons of normal load variations as described in this paragraph, if customer loses one of its t' . retail customers, representing at least 507, of the maximum electrical low l
p
],
\
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 l 0 at a, point of delivery hereunder, customer may reduce the maxim m electri-cal load (contract kW) at said point of delivery by written amendmcnt to this agreement up to but not more than 50%: provided, however, that any i applicable minimum billing demands (including any ratchets) and applicable payments as specified above in this paragraph shall apply without'rrgard to. such reduction, except as provided in the next sentence hereof. In the event that customer gives company written notice not less than three years in advance of its desire to adjust downward at a specific point of del.iyery
/
the maximum electrical load (contract kW) for normal load variations c(for the loss of one of its retail customers representing at least 50% of the' maximum electrical load at a point of delivery hereunder, both situations as described above, company will waive any applicable minimum billing demands (including any ratchets) resulting.from prior usage which would< have become due after the effective date specified in customer's written notice to company, which effective date shall in no event be earlier than three years after company's receipt of such written notice.
- 7. Change of Voltage in Company Facilities. Company will provide power and energy to customer at each point of delivery at the delivery voltage specified in Exhibits A and B as long as such delivery voltage is '
available. If company, at its sole option, converts its facilities pro-viding power and energy at any point of delivery to a different operating voltage, customer agrees to take power and energy at the changed citage ^E< then available or bear all costs to transform the voltage from the bhanged voltage to that which customer may require. Company will give customer }
' \
written notice at least two years in advance of such voltage change.
~.
( _ - _ _ _ = _ D
u
/
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6
?
a o/
%, .z,
- 8. Early Deletion or Re, uction. ' Customer only, and not company, may delete or reduce electric service to any or all of the points of delivery on Exhibits A and B under certain circumstances and under certain terms and conditions as descritad in Paragraphs 8 tnrough 14 hereof. Eowever, early deletion or reduction et any cr' ell points of delivery does not terminate this agreement, which can only be terminated as specified in Paragraph 5.
In the event of a deletion or reduction of electric service to any or all of the points of delivery on Exhibits A and B pursuant to Paragraphs 8 through 14 hereof, customer shall make tne payments for idled facilities as provided in Paragraph 6 hereof.
- 9. Required Notice. In all cases of early deletion or reduction, customer must give company written notice four years in advance of its desire to delete or reduce electric service at any point of delivery. However, com-pany agrees to reduce the four years advance notice for circumstances involving qualifying facilities as described below in Paragraph lla, but in no event shall the required advance notice be less than six months. The term " qualifying facility" as used in this agreement means and is defined in Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, Sections 292e201 through 292.207, or successor regulations.
1
- 10. Re-Serving Early Deleted or Reduced Loads. When customer has exer-cised its option .herbunder to early delete or reduce electric service, and -I later, during the original or extended term of this agreement, customer desires company to re-serve the deleted load or increase service to the point of delivery which has been reduced in accordance with terms and con.
4 _ ditions contained in Paragraphs 8 through 14, company will re-serve the _ _ _ _ _ _ __ a'
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 F deleted load or increase service to the reduced point of delivery only if sufficient capacity is or can be made available by company. Both parties recognize that, in case of a substantial increase in load, notice chould be several years in advance in order to allow for construction and installa-ti'on of appropriate facilities. If company does not have sufficient capa-city and transmission facilities for such increase, or if such increase would impair its ability to render full and reliable service to its custo-mers or impair its ability to discharge prior commitments, it may defer supplying the same until sufficient capacity and facilities are available. If company re-serves such deleted load or increases service to such reduced point of delivery, customer agrees to pay company a contribution-in-aid of construction, according to company's extension policy then in effxt, including a production cost component consisting of the estimated cost of { the next base load production unit expected to be in service on or after the date customer desires its deleted load to be re-served or service to its reduced point of delivery to be increased. Said cost to customer will be as determined above but shall, in no event, be less than $500 per kW of added contract kW. However, company agrees to waive the contribution-in-aid of construction by customer specified above in this paragraph for that part of any change relating to qualifying facilities as described below in Paragraph lla, but in no event will the contribution-in-aid of construction required by company's normal extension policy in its Tariff for Electric Service, if applicable, be waived. -r
- 11. Circumstances _0ualifying for Early Deletion or Reduction. Customer may exercise its option for early deletion or reduction only if customer acquires power and energy to re).. ace power and energy provided by company .
in one of the following ways:
TXX-6715
-7~ September 8,' 1987 EXHIBIT F6
- 4. i
-(, ) ' . f' C. *L ,
y a. Customer purchases,pnwer from a qualifying facility located in s custcmer's certificated service area of one of its distribution systems served hereunder by company, where such qualifying facility is con-nected directly to customer's distribution system; or
- b. Customer purchases power from a qualifying facility located outside custs6r's certificated service area of its distribution systems served hereunder by company, where such qualifying facility is not connected directly to customer's distribution system; or
/
- c. Customer installs its own production plant or purchases power and energy f rom others.
- 12. Wheeling. If customer desires company to wheel power and energy !
( acquired as described above in Paragraph lib and/or lic, company will pro-vide wheeling services,in accordance with its Tariff for Electric Service, the rules of the appropriate regulatory authority, or under other mutually agreeable arrangements. Customer agrees to pay company monthly, in addi-tion to all other costs applicable to wheeling and wholesale service, a charge to cover the administrative costs associated with adjusting and maintaining records at each involved point of delivery to reflect power and energy consumption exclusive of the wheeled power and energy, which addi-tional charge shall be equal to the customer charge at the point of deli-
~
very applicable to wholesale customers or $1,000 per month per involved point of delivery, whichever is greater.
- 13. Standby and Other Electric Service. If customer desires standby and/or other types of electric service in connection with power and energy
- acquired as described above in Paragraph 11, company will provide such
i TXX-6715 ' September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 b ^p': ft[ services in accordance with its Tariff for Electric Service and the rules l
- l. of the appropriate regulatory authority if same obligate company to do so !
I or, if 'same do not obligate company to do so, company may at its option { l provide such services under mutually agreeable arrangements.
, i i
- 14. Billing Demand. When customer acquires power and energy as described above in Paragraph 11, has complied with the other provisions of this l l
agreement, and has reduced by at least 20% the firm maximum electrical j demand by amendment to this agreement for the point of delivery, then in such event, prior recorded demand history (kW) will be reduced in propor-tion'to said reduction in firm maximum electrical demand in determining future monthly billing demands (billing kW).
- 15. Customer Provides Electric Service to Company. When company requires
( a source of electric power and energy in customer's service area of one of its distribution systems served hereunder by company, customer agrees to provide such service, if feasible, under one of the following arrangements, to be chosen by company: i
- a. Subtract Meter Service. Company installs necessary facilities, including metering equipment, to take electric service through the lines owned by customer at a mutually agreeable point of delivery and agrees tnat any required investment in facilities by customer would be subject to customer's extension policy in its approved tariff; pro- ?
vided, however, that the maximum electrical load (contract kW) for any individual subtract meter service will not exceed 5% of customer's maximum electrical load (contract kW) at the company's point of deliv-ery to customer from or through which such subtract meter service is provided, or 500 kW, whichever is greater, and, in addition, the sum of
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987
-9 EXHIBIT F6 all rach subtract meter services will not exceed 8% of customer's maxi-mu n electrical load (contract kW), at the company's point of delivery to customer from or through which such subtract meter services are pro- !
vided, or 1000 kW, whichever is greater. The energy (kWh) thus ; I delivered and registered by company's metering equipment is increased I 2% for lossa and customer's usage (kW and kWh) at its point of deliv-ery from company is adjusted monthly as follows: (1) deduct the kWh, increased for losses, registered by company's metering equipment from customer's kWh, and (2) reduce customers's kW by the amount of kW that the kWh, increased for losses, registered by company's metering equip- { ment represents at the load factor of customer's usage; or
- b. Resale Service. Company takes resale service under customer's applicable resale rate and service regulations as may from time to time be fixed and approved by regulatory authorities as may have jurisdic-tion, with customer providing the metering equipment.
- 16. Intrastate Operations. The provisions of this paragraph apply only to the f acilities of customer which are, directly or indirectly, intercon- 1 i
nected with the facilities of company, and a reference in this paragraph to i customer shall be limited to such facilities, j l
- a. Except in compliance with the Orders of the Federal Energy '
Regulatory Comniission in FERC Docket No. EL 79-8 and E-9558 issued on October 28, 1981, November 5,1981, and January 29, 1982, the parties Y l herein represent and warrant to each other that they do not, either directly or through connections with other entities, transmit electric l energy in interstate commerce or sell electric energy in interstate commerce or own or operate any facilities therefor and each party hereto agrees that it will not, except in compliance with such Orders, , q
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 EXHIBIT F6 ( hereafter engage, directly or through other entities, in any such interstate activities or operate, establish, maintain, modify, or uti-lize, directly or through other entities, any connection or facility used or to be used for the sale or transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce without one year's prior written notice to the other party; provided further, that such party desiring to commence interstate operation agrees to file an application with, and use its va% uoe.. m.m b ,gt- 0 best efforts {to obtain an order from, the Federal Energy Regulatory f Commission, applicable to the other party, (unless such other party agrees in writing that such application need not be filed) under Sections 210, 211 and 212 of the Federal Power Act, requiring the establishment, maintenance, modification, or utilization of any such connection which may be involved; provided, however, that compliance k with such Orders shall not require further notice to the parties or application to the FERC pursuant to this Paragraph 16 Company agrees subject to prior authorization to reimburse customer for all reasonable costs directly required for the filing of said application and obtain-ing of such order.
- b. It is understood and agreed that the failure of the party, electing to commence interstate operations, to comply with any provision of this Paragraph 16 or said Orders shall entitle the other party to disconnect its facilities.
.y
- c. The parties hereby agree that it will be impossible to measure in terms of money the damages which may or will accrue by reason of any breach of the representation and warranty above set forth, or any fail-ure in the performance of any of the obligations contained herein and, -
for that reason, among others, the parties agree that, in case of any such breach or failure, the non-breaching party will be irreparably
---------------------------------------------a I
TXX-6715 !
' September _8, 1987
EXHIBIT F6 I l ( b damaged if this agreement is not specifically enforceable, and accord-ingly, the parties agree that the non-breaching party is entitled to specific performance of the provisions of this Paragraph 16, in addi-tion to any other remedies which may exist.
- d. Nothing contained in this Paragraph 16 shall preclude the utiliza-tion of connections for the transmission of electric energy in inter-state commerce under bona fide emergencies pursuant to the provisions of Section 202(d) of the Federal Power Act.
- 17. Paragraph Titles. The paragraph titles herein are included only as a convenience in reviewing the terms and conditions and have no effect on the meaning or interpretation of this agreement.
( 18. This agreement supersedes all previous agreements, written or verbal, between company and customer and shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the respective successors and assigns of the parties hereto, but no assignment by customer shall be binding upon company until accepted in writing by company. This agreement is subject to all laws and govern-mental regulations and to the provisions of company's certificates of con-venience and necessity and franchises now in effect or which may hereafter become effective. This agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas including all matters of construction, validity, and performance. ~ l l 1 , s
TXX-6715 September 8, 1987 l EXHIBIT F6 I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be exe-cuted by their respective authorized officers on this the 1st day of May , 1986. l l TEXAS UTI ITI S EL CTRIC COMPANY Attest: By-[- g-, f 1 d' "
Title:
Vice President Se cretary TEXAS-itEW MEXICO POWER COMPAtiY Attest: By: ,)R M It e: A:s:m :: v ct tree. -- - Secretary r k 7
O R aS o C P W P W P o WN P W P W P o WN Ht P o WN l c e e m o f t e s r u c g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o g n 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 t 0, 0, n i r 4, 0, 4, 0, 0, d i e 9 9 2 9 2 9 9 e l t 6 6 1 t l 6 6 ee 1 6 s i gM j u b a t - d s l or y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 a e
'y V e 0, 0, n v 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, r a i 9 9 9 9 2 9 a p l 6 6 6 9 m e 6 1 6 6 s o D g c n
i f d o a Y . e n R l ) r o E V aW 0 0 0 0 0 0 r i mck 0 0 0 0 5 0 t I ui( 0, 0, e a L mr 5, 0, 5 0, t r E i td 5 7 4 5 0 e e D xca 1 7 m d aeo i F Ml l d s O E n n a o S c T n t
? , o n I
y - f i . i AO t a o t e P g ag 0 T
, 5 n t g n r 2 u s n e ,
t a 0 I E u e a o b u y st 4 e C o g s d bl $ v I Y n
.C f g uo i ft uo efF on sY s on s v A3 AR EE V
0 R a eo r . a y t o u sn t yo u sn fl oe grCl
'y sY s rC o S 8 rs ee C a i
a a 'r i e gf 2 aa d nf en nd e . d r es C ex ro , hi an t ne ms ro I t ne 3 o 7 t pe en ul a R c ct0 rn oi h s T a ,T h u4 oo mB n h a ok t m ct C r n , th o ni tl b n ss E n t oy rt t ch P i un yi L o s t t n tW ca l o E it oud c sa nu on s r h p i b t n nona et i o i e , nt S t a A au sar l s S d s w5 i t nn t o t l t ib s ra - A c y sC ee s mu t ai X E l o e v b ehfb S uf b o aB y h eB d a e r ud ft oA 5 n tk T r S n m yn ga c td l B u a 3f t , rw ae a S . fl 3 ocy 1 a h . a o . ni ro cr nn s l t 4 ae yas im al oe oa ya dt s h r eB l v us 2t rv l ra n - a ce n ii nx G a st r eG x oex tP , i t ae E t e u t e ch e i t9 sl i r pT r nweS asT etT ws n2 ie d e m en r s d dP s 'y i o , gi oscy i m 'y , n , i on t ny a C y n pea e . x n y eiy en po . eg t as t l s oat h t nn L n R a au3 na rpn t nn h a t p at a i s mr pe aa 8 u x n9 ax pmu ou m cx E o t e ti3t e poo i n yk TC AT A m2ST ti o no t ee ue a A cC AtC I c AST o pi ed n o ga t e n y i r st r r e e e ) ) ew et v n e t o ep ra g i w ) l m ay l a a l f f e r yi l oD t tl d v i eo re S no ns n d ev ef ( ur ea a i t mi mo a r ot Bi ni sn u ot t c Nt y e C e m l r m k : wo sn P a er n e g y( h hE t( t e i n S E om uu i n n a a L a Cj o r u sP W T l a l o e O P O R C G S W N 1 2
1 YV $ e U r , s
$%@tQ" o~ w$
n NilEEe 2 dl o nai ait 1 ci 2 eed V V V 2 d t pn R aS o C H P W H P W H P W V e l it P o WN W P V H P W P o WN t e Bf t o i1 b i e h g g 0 0 0 0 0 0 x a n 0 0 0 0 EP 0 4 0 0 i r 0, 0, 0, 0, 9, 0, 6, e 9 9 8 8 4 9 1 t 6 6 3 3 2 6 2 e e 1 1 gM a t l y 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 V e 0, 0, 0, v 0, 9, 0, 0, i 9 9 8 8 4 9 l 6 6 3 3 8 e 2 6 3 1 1 1 D l) Y R aW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mck 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 E V ui( mr 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, I i td 0 0 5 0 2 0 L xca 3 5 2 5 E aeo 1 2 1 1 D Ml L E F O S T n BN s o I g i TO n t e IP i s m a r N B I T r p oy ze u l o t e ey
'r HH XG S an rt Bt S .
no n h y wna rn ea f e ov y EI t Bi f m oi np L u h p r n oW h ou tt om wm tus
& l t hB l l a i o o sa S 'y a s l t t c nc _
R W t oS a o e , n rs E W s tnev'e o n 'y r rd an td sn id t n h1 a t/ p b a aa r2 m O P i n o 'yn ci at ja sa ep n Ca l u S r t sr o3 o n c S a th e b e e A t a p d r aep l m . sg ym um smf i oe ei eo S o eao X E c o m o ro mcn wH rt t l r i h b s ss if , T L c oo 5 nl t s uu l u m0
.C o r A c i
n r i r 3 8k V o 'r l c e 3 H5 e N e sf Bf r+ s u . sw uo . y8 l 48 so m
'y o s
o ya l e8 . b n o bP n o t e23 a 1 'y ts ns ae 'y es t en3 e 6 n Vi V ci e nu pn nn an1 i _ ac mo mi . ai . kt kit i m M. n p ol t pl t it n l -_ a ra xF r mr c c m c xeoV 9t 9tt o u oo V e oV e ocik 6 s 6 cs rrb c/ rk n ck n rnt b eb pae d a n n pi a8 t u tl u pel t n e5 o - AS n9 o prt3 AES A nC Aa H2 c I 6 c APS1 "E y r e v s i g l n f e i oD r e p a ef S t l n mo y s l i o t a t e i v y e
, Nt u n V s e s c n n t i r l n i l i o w b l o a h i e u e i
r P W W R L A B P 1 l o
aS o P P o P t H e Rf _ P P o P l R C W HN W W WN W f t _ e i2 r b'e i
^
o h g g 0 0 0 0 0 0 t xa n 4 7 0 7 EP 7 0 d ' i r 9, 4, 0, 4, 4, 0, e '
~
t e 4 2 9 2 2 9 s t 2 1 6 1 ' ee 1 6 j u gH a - d t a l y 0 0 0 0 or 8 0 0 7 0 0 e 0 0 r ' V e v 9, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, a - i 4 8 9 2 9 9 s s l 2 3 6 1 6 6 g e 1 n D i d _ a e r l ) aW 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 e mck 0 0 0 0 0 0 t ui( mr 5, 5, 0, 6, 4, 0, e i t d 7 0 5 5 2 m 8 _ xca 1 2 1 d _ a eo n Ml L a _ E n s . o i . g n t e n o s a g i
- p r
i t a ,re
'r t a bl st mS o f t
s eem uo cr nt o s v o b A - nh u se d t S u i st l ns eu s n o t r o op 3 u l 'y n , R sf ao e y yuc tM
'r i es p /S an h s b
m n uf r e ms oi e 6 po t u u ooe . t m D o mi ub C C h t ss dt ot o un s n ca sy s est wc e ca n o 'yn at s oS t sa r
'yn uet n gwnn nt r
i 2 e t ed a io i t a / r g l n . a t soc t a p 6 c t n . i on p nep d a c o m o s e r nis mco m ol s e et a ei o Miae td L c ev ca x 5 st c m n ae ri are a d ti cr n uR jet 1 t t f n6 al oe i t d n as o a l v cV ae , y b y2 s i s uk G y l su s sl u . r d t eas u tyl e 8 'y i e b n t8 nt n t x b nt yn . d o s3 as u a es ua a a y t Vi 1 eo V omwp r k t n f rC i m T 'y k Cih m e ny eg a es oc x ,n xgo v mr 5t e rr oya 2 s w 'y e . t ee rrp 9 6 eoic k rH i l pe i n b t nn sv v pom op d e ue t u eai eii pmo t opnn d q AS B pl WRR AE c A C a oa ed f n o ga n s i r y t re r n ew e i t o v o ep p m i f f e l e eo l d oD t p it s i sn ef e t u mo r l wo a t c : u om
/ Nt r o r y y e S M L a n o c e r b k E i p l v o m o T o e a i m u o O . .
P D T R E C C N 1 2
;), ? C'S if*
l' to i g ca 4.
<t j O cc _-
j< := m a i D 4 e r}}