1994 AGN MAY 03 I05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Mssrs. H:su, Collins, and Drew April 21, 1994 Page 4 Edison notifying the Cities as to what the cost will be each hour. 11. SONGS Disputes Section 5.1.4 and Exhibit C resolve disputes concerning Anaheim's and Riverside's obligations at San Onfre. 12. Svlmar Firm Transmission Service Aqreement Section 5.5 and Exhibit D provide revisions to the Sylmar FTS to conform the agreements to the 1990 Settlement. 13. Monetary Claims Both Edison and Cities had monetary claims which were offsetting. The 1994 Settlement provides that those claims will be resolved and no payments will be made by any party. 14. Reserved Issues Section 5.7 provides for the withdrawal of two issues which had been included in Appendix C of the 1990 Settlement Agreement as issues to be subsequently resolved. The first issue concerned Cities' request to expand their right to use Partial Requirements energy to displace energy from City Capacity resources and Replacement resources. The second issue concerned a dispute over a City's right to displace energy from certain resources with Minimum Take Obligations. The negotiating teams were not able to resolve these issues. It was agreed that neither issue would have any immediate impact on either Edison's or Cities' resources. Therefore, we agreed to withdraw the issues from the settlement as this time without the parties waiving their rights to seek resolution of the issues in the future. Recommendation The 1994 Settlement represents a reasonable resol�tion of the issues. It resolves a number of technical disputes between Edison ��nd Cities concerning the 1990 Integrated Operations Agreemerit, the Power Sales Agreement, the Sylmar Firm Transmi��sion Agreements, and the 1990 Settlement Agreement. Implemeritation of the 1994 Settlement Agreement should facilitate