ML20004C286

Info for Antitrust Review of OL Application,Per Reg Guide 9.3.Tables of Peak Demand & Energy Projections Encl

ML20004C286
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	03/17/1975
From:	Hamann J DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20004C270	List: ML20004C269 ML20004C272 ML20004C277 ML20004C281 ML20004C282 ML20004C286 ML20004C293 ML20004C294
References
NUDOCS 8106020494
Download: ML20004C286 (9)

Text

-

BEFORE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF Docket No. 50-341 THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY ENRICO FERMI UNIT 2 INFORMATION FOR ANTITRUST REVIEW OF THE OPERATING LICENSE APPLICATION l

1 l

l l

8106020bs.

o Attaciment 4 e

INTRODUCTION On September 26, 1972, the Commiss. ion issued Applicaw in this Docket a construction permit containing language whichThe satisfied Applicant's commitment to the Justice Department.

condition in the construction permit is as follows:

" Applicant agrees to abide by the agreements and interpretations between it and the Department of Justice relating to Article I, paragraph 8 of the Electric Power Pool Agreement between the Applicant and Consumers Power Company as specified in a letter from Applicant to the Director of Regulation dated August 13, 1971, and the letter from Richard W. McLaren, Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, to Bertram H. Schur, Associated General Counsel, Atomic i

Energy Commission, dated August 16, 1971.

(Copies of the Letters are attached)

On May 1, 1973, a new agreement was executed between Consumers Power Company and The Detroit Edison Company called the

" Electric Coordination Agreement between Consumers Power Company Edison Company".

This agreement per Article XIV and The Detroit cancels and supersedes the " Electric Power Pocling Agreement" dated December 22, 1962.

This agreement further states under Article 1, paragraph 6 " Connections with Others" as follows:

"This Agreement shall be revised, amended, modified or replaced in order to admit third parties, having public utility functions and responsibilities, to this or an amended, revised, modified ar new agreement.

To be eligible, the applicant third party must have the:

(a)

Ability to meet the installed reserve capability responsibility criteria then applicable to the parties hereto (without prejudice to the rigb: of the parties hereto, upon the entry of an applicant, to propose such changes, if any, in the terms and conditions of said participa-tion as may be necessary to allocate equitably all costs and benefits of said and participation between the applicant the parties hereto):

(b)

Ability to participate in interconnection and grid line responsibilities:

(c)

Ability to have its system be dispatched by the central control center of the parties hereto:

,_...7

,.-.,.,r..-,

.. ~,. _., _

.r

Attactwient 4 d

(d)

Ability to provide representation on the five standing committees of this Agreement:

(e)

Ability to comply with the other terms and conditions of this Agreementi and (f)

Ability to have sufficient financial stand-ing so as to reasonably assure that it can perform fully the various previsions of this Agreement."

The new co-ordination agreement was reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice in De kets 50-452A and 50-453A (Greenwood Units 2 and 3) and found to be in compliance with Enrico Fermi Unit 2 construction permit condition.

ANSWERS TO REGULATORY GUIDE 9.3 I

1 (a).

In the initial filing, Enrico Fermi Unit 2 was scheduled for operation in 1974.

Four units, two fossil-i fired at 800 MW each and two nuclear at 1150 MW each, were scheduled to follow Enrico Fermi Unit 2 starting in 1977 and running through 1980.

Slippage of these units has resulted in an expectation of lower generatin7 capaci-ty resources than orig" 11y reported.

However, lack of projected load growth -

,alting from the fossil fuel shortage and the recessionary economy has caused the company to lower the anticipated load growth.

The ccmbination cf th reduced generation and lower projected loads has resulted l

in a lesser generating reserve than originally anticipated.

Capacity and energy purchases from other parties are anti-cipated to supplement the company's reserves in those years when needed.

(See attached revised Load Forecast Tables 1 and 2) 1 (b).

The Detroit Edison Company has amended or replaced in whole the following agreements with other electric utilities, since the initial filing of Fermi 2:

A new Inter-Utility Power Interchange Agreement between The City of Detroit and The Detroit Edison Company went into effect October 1,1971. (y)

A new Electric Coordination Agreement between Consumers Power Company and The Detro t, ) Edison Company became effective May 1, 1973. -

A new Interconnection Agreement between Consumers Power Company, The Detroit Edison Company and Ontario Hydro went into effect January 1, 1975.(2)

(1)

On file with the Federal Power Commission.

(2)

In process for filing with the Federal Power Comm ssi:n.

^ *'

h TNARhinwa Th blic Ser vice Cc missi:

1 (b).

The Inter-Utility Power Interchange Agr^- r '

(Cont'd) between the City of Wyandotte and The Dc:r:it Edison Company was amended ef f ective January 1, 1975. (2)

A new Power Interchange Agreement b; tween the Ford Motor Company and The Detroit ggjisonCompany went into effect January 1, 1975.

The Operating Agreement among Consumers Power Company, The Detroit Edison Company and Indiana and Michigan Electric Company now has eight amendments, the latest of which went into effect January 13, 1975.

(1)

As a result of conferences held with representatives of the Anti-trust Division of the U. S. Department of

, Justice in the filing of construction permits fer the

! Enrico Ferni and Greenwood nuclear units, The Detroit Edison Company agreed to accept certain conditions pro-posed by the Justice Department.

In conformance to those conditions, the Consumers Power Electric Cocrdination Agreement, the Ford Motor Company Interchange Agreement, and the amendment to the City of Wyandotte Inter-villity Power Interchange Agreement were consummated.

The new agreement with the City of Detroit was pri-marily a format change to be more uniform with the other interchange agreements.

The new agreement with Ontario Hydro, as well as the amendments to the Operating Agreement with Consumers Power Company and Indiana and Michigan Electric Ccmpany, were basically price changes.

The following changes to transmission in respect to:

l 1 (c).

, the nuclear unit, (2) interconnections, or (3) connec-(1) tions to wholesale customers, have been made since the l

initial filing for Enrico Fermi Unit 2.

(1)

The original Enrico Fermi Unit 2 transmission included four 345 KV circuits.

These circuits were part of the planned transmission for two units (Enrico Fermi Unit 2 and Enrico Fermi Unit 3).

Due to the indefinite deferment of Enrico Fermi Unit 3, two of the transmission circuits have been deferred.

(2)

Original plans called for four 345 KV circuits interconnecting Detroit Edison with Toledo Edison.

These included two circuits frem Detroit Edison's Lulu Station.

That station is now deferred and present plans call for a single tap to Toledo Edison from a double cir-cuit Detroit Edison line.

This wil.. result in

.a total of only three interconnections between Detroit Edison and Toledo Edison.

l l

(3)

Transmission to the -: y of Pontiac, City of Croswell, and th= T.. mb Electric Co-op has been strengthened.

The City of Sebewaing now has a 40 kV interconnection with Detroit Edison.

Automatic throw-over of the circuit to the Southeastarn Michigan Rural Electric Co-op has been added to improve power supply reliability.

1 (d).

There are no contractual allocations of the owner-ship or output of the Enrico Fermi 2 unit nor have there

(

ever been any.

l l

1 (e).

Rate design for sales under Federal Power Commission jurisdiction has not changed since the filing of the original information.

1 (f).

The Village of Sebewaing and the Michigan Municipal Co-operative Power Pool have been added as new wholesale customers.

There have been no changes concerning parts (2), (3) and (4) of the question.

1 (g).

The following units are presently scheduled for operation after the Enrico Fermi 2 unit.

No power output allocations have been made for any of these units.

As the company agreed in the Greenwood Units 2 and 3 Dockets (50-452A and 50-453A) the right of participation was offered to entities in southeastern Michigan.

No entity agreed to participate with Detroit Edison in the units as i

either owners or purchasers of power output from these units; However, as a result of the offer the Michigan Municipal j

Co-operative Power Pool commenced negotiation with the company and was taken on as a new wholesale for resale I

customer.

i Unit Size (MW)

Type Year Belle River 1 676 Fossil 1981 Belle River 2 676 Fossil 1982 l

Greenwood 2 1208 Nuclear 1984 Greenwood 3 1208 Nuclear 1986 1 (h).

As was mentioned in the initial Enrico Fermi Unit 2 i

filing, negotiations were underway between the Public Lighting Commission of the City of Detroit and The Detroit i

I Edison Company regarding a proposed revised interconnection l

agreement.

The new agreement became effective October 1, i

i 1971.

It provides for mutual emergency and standby l

assistance, econcmy energy interchange and the sale l

or purchase of capacity and energy between the parties.

The Village of Sebewaing has been generating all of its own requirements, utilizing low-cost interruptible-rate gas as its primary fuel and oil as its backup fubl.

l.

._ - _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..., ~ _ _ -. ~

,,. _ _. _ _. _ _... - -., _, _. _...l

O

~

O 1 (h).

Due to the shortage cf these fossil fuels, it arrreached (c:nt'd)

The Detroit Edison Company and a contract for th: sale by The Detroit Edison Company to the Village of Sebeweing for 2,500 kW was negotiated.

On November 15, 1973, a 40 kV Interconnection was placed in service between the parties.

In the Summer of 1974, The Detroit' Edison Company was approached by the Michigan Municipal Co-operative Power Pool concerning a capacity and energy purchase.

An agreement was negotiated wherein Detroit Edison sold 20 megawatts of capacity at a 100 percent load factor to the Michigan Municipal Co-operative Power Fool, beginning September 1, 1974, and running for at least two years.

Charges for this capacity and energy are at Detroit Edison's wholesale for resale rate.

In the Fall of 1974, representatives from the Rural Electric Association, Northern Michigan Electric Coopera-tive, Inc., and Wolverine Electric Cooperative, Inc. met with Detroit Edison to discuss the possibility of their purchasing Detroit Edison existing generation as well as generation still under construction.

Their proposal would provide a source of funds to aid Detroit Edison to resume its construction on new generation.

The proposal is still under study.

Also in the Fall of 1974, the City of Wyandotte -

Department of Municipal Service informed the company that it was requesting its engineering consultants to make a thorough study of the various alternate methods that were The open to it to meet its future energy requirements.

company has promised to provide these consultants with what-I ever assistance it can to complete their study, which is currently in progress.

J l

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Detroit Edison Company has caused its name to be hereunto signed by John R. Hamann, its Senior l

Executive Vice President - Operations, this 17 day of March, 1975 THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY

._,h/1

'/ol/JAU BY:

46hh R. Hafna~nn ' ~

' Senior Executive Vice President

' Operations _

d STATE OF MICHIGA'?

)

)

SS.

COUNTY OF WAYNE

)

John R. Hamann, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he is Senior Executive Vice President - Operation -

cf The Detroit Edison Company, the Applicant for licenses hereunder; that he has read the foregoing Application for Licenses and knows the contents thereof; and that the same are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.

C/N!U 1

, 9- -

J l

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17 day of March, 1975.

^

I A

/AlAA'4Zl t'WM

(

- -- # 9 7,:- Ev t C:..:,.!.Sch,

--.. Expes E '.3 77.

l -

l

j' TABLE 1 d

Detroit Edisen Annual Peak Demand and Energy F: vjections 14CFJAL ENERGY ANNUAL PEAK REQUIREMEh7S YEAR LOAD (MW) kWh x 106 1963 3,281 18,632 1964 3,616 20,375 1965 3,975 22,375 1966 4,273 24,704 1967 4,422 25,611 1968 4,835 28,171 1969 5,201 30,303 1970 5,465 31,158 1971 5,986 33,062 1972 6,049 35,616 1973 6,935 37,835 1974 6,614 37,880 1975 7,360 37,750 1976 8,140 42,800 1977 8,620 45,250 1978 9,080 47,800 1979 9,550 50,400 1980 10,050 53,150 l

1981

_J,570 55,960 l

1982 11,290 58,500 l

l 1983 11,610 61,065 I

1984 12,140 63,725 1985 12,690 66,415 November 1974

d TA3LE 2 Combined Systems of Detroit Edison and Censumers Power Annual Peak Demand and Energy Projections COMBINED SYSTEMS COMBINED SYSTEMS A.WJAL ENERGY COINCIDENT PEAK REQUIREMENTS YEAR LOAD (MW)

(kWh x 10D) 1962 8

5,476 30,899 1964 5,966 33,535 1965 6,526 36,913 1966 7,099 40,595 1967 7,280 42,276 1968 7,846 46,286 1969 8,435 49,738 1970 8,751 51,:53 1971 9,573 54,571 1972 9,743 58,946 19 3 11,265 63,045 1974 10,711 63,515 1975 11,880 67,232 1976 12,880 71,758 1977 13,590 76,176 l

1978 14,300 80,571 1979 15,020 84,781 1980 15,830 90,450 1981 16,680 95,853 1982 17,500 100,943 1983 18,330 106,177 1984 19,180 111,617 1985 20,080 117,213

_,. -