1981-03-17
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
667 North Carroll Avenue
Southlake, Texas
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
March 17,1981
7:30 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Mayors Report
2. Discussion: Texas Power and Light Company, request for
Rate Increase. Mike McKinney.
3. Consider: Park Project and New Resolution No. 81-6
4. Discussion: Water Service. W.N. Ratcliff
5. Discussion: Problem with Southlake's Zip Code
Eleanor Kasper
6. Department Reports:
Fire: Approval to purchase fire extinguishers.
Water:
Police:
Building:
Court:
7. Bills for Approval
I hereby certify that the above agenda was posted on the bulletin
board and on the front door in city hall, 667 North Carroll Avenue,
Southlake, Texas, on Friday, March 13,1981 at 1 p.m.
City Secretary
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
• arm no -3 to r`nn MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
z d d MEETING.
d z 9 ITJ DATE: March 17,1981
to r~ rn c~ o TIME: 7:30 p.m.
tz~ H PLACE: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
3 0 667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE, SOUTHLAKE
NAME OF o o TEXAS.
COUNCILPERSON z z
PAGE: 1 INDEX
COUNCILPERSONS PRESENT: Mayor; Pat
Hawk, Mayor Pro Tem; Sam Sparger,
Councilpersons: Modine Stricker,
AC Urbanosky, Shari Massey.
COUNCILPERSON ABSENT: Lloyd Latta
CITY STAFF PRESENT: Police Chief;
Daymond Gaddy, Fire Chief; Bob
Steele, Water Superintendent; Wallace
Cline.
PARKS COMMISSIONERS: Robert Wood,
Freddie Cate.
INVOCATION: Sam Sparger
The Minutes of the March 3,1981,
meeting were approved as presented.
MAYORS REt'ORT :
Mayor Hawk read facts as presented LONE
by Lone Star Gas Company in an effort STAR
to inform Council of their request GAS CO.
for a rate increase. Mayor set a
public hearing date for April 7,1981.
The adjusted rates mentioned were
approved by both Grapevine and
Westlake.
Mike McKinney from Texas Power and TP & L
Light Company made a presentation PRESENTA`
requesting a 25.2% rate increase for TION.
their electric service. He indicat-
ed that the request is a system wide
increase and that the last increase
was granted in June 1980.
Robert Wood, a member of the Southlak
Parks Commission addressed the
Council concerning the possible
funding of a new ball field. He
presented costs of materials which
are apart of the minutes.(Attached
hereto and made a part hereof).
~ o o CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
o ~A MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
z 9 d d MEETING,
z v ITI DATE: March 17,1981
d d ° TIME: 7:30 p.m.
0 o z PLACE: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Cn 667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE, SOUTHLAKE
NAME OF o z TEXAS.
COUNCILPERSON
PAGE: 2 INDEX
Sparger x x Mr. Wood indicated the ball field wil BALL FIELI
Stricker x x also serve as a soccer and football #2
Urbanosky x field as well as baseball. The gradi gAPPROVED
Massey x of the field was donated by James
B. Arnold.
After discussion, Mayor Hawk recommen -
ed to Council that the expenditure
be approved in the amount of $5,000.
Completion date for field #2, is
May 5,1981, as announced by Mr.
Wood,.project manager.
W.N. Ratcliff, whose place of busines WATER
is located on Highway 114 in Southlak SERVICE
addressed Council concerned about REQUEST
his request for water service made to
the City in January 1981, that had
been denied. Mr. Ratcliff indicated
the property in question is located
on East Continental Blvd, in the
City of Southlake's extraterritorial
jurisdiction. He reminded Council
that his findings were that the
property-is in Southlake's water
district, as described in our
' Certificate of Necessity and Conven-
ience from the PUC #10101.
Mayor Hawk indicated to Ratcliff
that he would review the request
and notify him in writing within
one week, giving an answer.
A Citizen, Eleanor Kasper, of
7S0 N. White Chapel Road, asked for
Council support as she attempts to
help solve Southlake's Zip Code
problem. She strongly feels that if
not addressed soon, Southlake will
loose its identity. A strong
indication was given that Council
would work with Ms. Kasper on this.
s
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS
d ~ REGULAR
M 0 Iq MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
z Y d d MEETING.
x z DATE: March 17,1981
d rri n 0 7:30 p.m.
TIME:
H PLACE: CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
0 0 Cn 667 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE, SOUTHLAKE
NAME OF 0 0 TEXAS,
COUNCILPERSON z z
PAGE: 3 INDEX
Department Reports:
Chief Steel reported that the annual
fish fry held March 2, was a success.
750 persons were served and a profit
of $3,400. was made.
Sparger x x Approval was given on the recommenda-
Stricker+ x x tion of Councilperson Stricker, for
Urbanosky x the purchase of two fire extinguisher
Massey x for a cost of $50. each or less.
Sparger x x Authorization was given to the Water
Stricker x Department for a school for the water
Urbanosky x x worker, at a cost of $40.
ssey x
Sparger x Harold Knight, chairman of the Sewer
Stricker x Committee requested Council purchase
Urbanosky x x three (3) signs advertising the Nutt
Massey x x Shell System that was installed in
the Dove Estates Area. The cost
is $287.50 for the signs. Approval
was given.
The bills presented, were approved
for payment. (Attached hereto and mad
a part hereof).
The meeting wa journed by ay r
Hawk.
j
Mayor
ATTE T:
City Secretary
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
BILLS FOR APPROVAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 17,1981
TO WHOM FOR AMOUNT
Texas Power and Light Co. Water 1,801.21
Texas Power and Light Co. Municipal buildings 284.68
Pitney Bowes Maintenance agreement 301.25
IBM Lease on machine 126.00
The Banner Quick Print Ballots 51.82
Regional Office Supply 5.40
n E.L. White Office Supply 67.12
The Wicks Corp. Misc. 48.76
Fort Worth Star Telegram Legal notices 62.99
Gulf Oil Corp. 1,112.64
Smith, Smith and Rake Extra legal 707.00
Professional Appraisal Co. Title reports 90.00
Grapevine Auto Parts 7.43
Jordan Bell Co. Repairs to A/C Unit 69.40
Village Grocery Store 5.90
North Star Laboratories Samples 67.50
Burroughs Corp. Maintenance Agreement 11%107.00
Aqua Utiltiy,Inc. 672.14
TOTAL: $ 6,588.24
C'
lest 'ire .r - e Ater;?ber 30, 1 ?78 -June 30 , 1")30 - 21 months
rroposed date late 2.1102
-resent Gate wale 1.923 ca
rroposecj Increase I eveirue >20, 3` 1
rercent -ncrc;ase '.ecuested x.73;
~f
Lnir er gFPlwo:w W04 e- sinter 49
rresent hate 2.1!913 2.7448
rro_>osed 'gate 2.9176 a-81 ~p 3.1676 04 10
ncre~~se .I~227, ~
less Cate pate Correction -.1364 ,.31 -.1864 /8
•f3J4 .2(D4 .~.Z9
Customer Chc rye 1-resent _ro;)oseci
yes Ld.,n4„ i--u:_ 0j 3 . ?r
,
Commercial 6.00 7.u0
'resent _'-at^c o' E3tlrn 11dj'15tE3d 'Ta 1ue 5.`-7;
rropose(i to o:C Ret.sn ".."justed Value .7?
Last rate Cc.se 'Iles '-Y)ril 2", _l.'-)79
Date r~rovea .'.uC, st 21, l'>??
t0 the
I1 1i8.rCi1 3r u:C'~e,4LnE; `.'assea a v.~ increase in reven;l.e a- ory_iOSeQ ~
9.78;,' revue, tec.. Gistea plec:.sf3 L l ~'t"!l C ct it :.Tmld 'lavF O" -11 C _tiu&.
,evenue yncreased evemac Increase
'raposed ura ovine '_ate
Grapevine 32,6'34 55,545
outhlaI e 20, u 31 ~1 G, 036
estla"He 11 F c 6 7 uZ,2
,311 ,131 777
,~GZI ~~-~GCJ
CITY UP SOUTHLAKE
STATUS OF BICENTENNIAL PARK- PROJECT NUMBER 48-00417
a
The grant has been extended until December 1,1981.
The grant is a SO% reimbursement grant, total amount of $ 103,996.00.
Possible reimbursement to the City of Southlake is $51,998.00.
So far, we have received $ 10,995.00.
Items covered under the grant include:
1 lighted ballfield
foot bridge
picnic units
tennis courts
landscaping
permanent sign for the park
Items which are prepared to be submitted to the Department of
Parks and Wildlife at this time are:
Project: Lighted Ballfield
Texas Power and Light Company 2,666.78
Wicks 84.63
Robert Woods (misc.expenses) 64.07
Watson Electric 7,393.75
Hurricane Fence Company 3,438.00
Total 13,647.23
Other: James Skinner (percolation test) 100.00
Chem Can Company (rental) 592.19
Total 692.19
TOTAL,...... 14,289.42
nra h.eta L,eGrand
CitydSec ry
March 17,1981
March 13, 1981
To: The Honorable Mayor & Council - City of Southlake
Re: Estimated Cost for Completion of Second
Baseball Field at Park Site and Completion
of Bathroom Facilities.
I. New Baseball Field
A. Grading of Land - -0-
B. Backstop $ Dugout Area - $1700.
C. Lighting of Field - $2100.
II. Completion of Restrooms and Concession area of
Existing Baseball Field
A. Bathroom Facilities - $500.
B. Septic Tank System - $700.
Total Estimated Cost: $5000.
Note: The above estimates are based on volunteer labor.
III. Estimated Revenue (reimbursement) from State of
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
A. Total amount of expenditures
to be submitted to State of
Texas (Based on 100% Reimbursement): $14,500.
B. Realistic return that should
be received from State: $6,000. - $9,000.
1
2
Comments:
The first baseball field and concession area were constructed in
1980 at an estimated cost of approximately $12,500. The City had
received approximately $11,000. from the State for improvements to
our Park. A conservative estimate of replacing the baseball field
and concession area at current replacement costs today would be in
excess of $125,000.
Res ectfullyy~Su/b-mitted,
Robert A. Wood
Park Board
City of Southlake, Texas
WATER DEPARTMENT REPORT
MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1981
Gallons Pumped Previous Month 7,505.2
Gallons Sold Previous Month 6,14 1.0
New Water Taps Installed 5-3/4" - 1.1" - 1.2"
Fire Hydrants Installed 1
Meter Change Out 5
Machine Rental $710.00
Other Repairs Repaired Elvated Tank
t ~
i
Water Superintendant
00
a. cr
x Q
w ZD
F - LY
00
^ w
W
J O
z
CD z
cn O
c
U-
O W W
Ll =
> --C f -
z
t. O
U-1 u_
C> 7 '-i
Z ~
O F-
L~ Y_ U
cDt'
? LLI
F- J F-
t) ~
F- rJ
~ cr_ v
W- O J 00
CD c_~ ~L rn
a r
Q J
Iii Z
J = z
00 C)
Z C~
Q
O 7- c
Z F-
O U
z w
7 LU
CD co F-
p Cr ::D Q
F LL Ul G]
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL PERSONS
SUBJECT: Southlake Fire Department Monthly Report for the Month of F~bruary,
A. Responses: Number of calls
1. Structure Fires
2. Grass Fires_____ 2
3. Auto & Truck Fires
4. Auto or Truck Accident - Stand-by (Fire & Rescue Unit) 3
0
5. Mutual-Aid for City of Grapevine-------------------------------------
6. Mutual Aid for City of Colleyville----------------------------------- 0
l
7. Mutual-Aid for City of Keller---------------------------------------- 0
8. Mutual-Aid to other Cities 0
9. Calls in Tarrant County (outside city limits) 2
10. Calls in Denton County (outside city limits)_________________________ 0
11. False Alarms in City------------------------------------------------- 0
12. Rescue Unit Calls---------------------------------------------------- 5
A. Patient low B/P Faintinq Spell - 307 Southlake Rlvd.
B. Possible hip fracture 1029 E Continental (Barlett Residence)
C. Roberts Residence, Patient sick - 2400 Crooked Lane
D. Subject fell from horse - 100 Blk S. Carroll Ave.
E. Possible Head injury - 2525 Lonesome Dove Rd.
13. Miscellaneous -------------------------------------------------------1
A. Water Vac call - N. White Chapel Road, Wooden Residence
1.4. Trophy Club Calls --------------------------0
B. Total Emergency Calls for the Month of 15
C. Man Hours Expended: Number of Hours
_ 84
1. On Emergency Calls - - - - - - - - - Y - _ - _15 men 120
2. Meetings (4 for Month) Average Men Per Meeting
C A clads 320
3. Special Training Sessions or Drills E-f•-- F
Maint. time 0
4. Any Extra Man Hrs. on Maintenance (other than normal
February_1L81 524
D. Total Man {lours Expended for Month
E. Firefighters Responding and Number of Times Responding for Month-----
Chief Steele 12
Asst. Chief Bradley 5
Capt. Brown 10
Lt. Fuller 10
Lt. Jones 6
J. Joyce 5
R. Stacey 9
D. Brown 6
D. Barnes 5
J. Walsh 7
R McCoy 2
B. Dinsmore 3
J. Sullivan 2
L. Russell 6
B. Tanner 8
J. Vann 2
N. Wooden 2
Bobby Jones 2
B. Roper 1
R. Martin 2
Res 1) S.f4e6 bmi ted,
P ,~S t, ~
Fire Chief
SOUTIiLAKE FIRE DEPARTMENT
wr
rr
AV0
"m
SUMMARY OF RATE INCREASE
PROPOSAL
Am
m
Im TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
I.
1981
~r
do
Id
Is
INTRODUCTION
The major reasons Texas Power & Light Company must
seek rate relief at this time include: the spiraling cost of fuel; a
construction program based on providing for growing peak
demand requirements and to reduce dependence on expensive
natural gas; increased government regulation, continued dou-
ble-digit inflation, and the importance of attracting investment
to a capital-intensive company.
In the following pages, these reasons are more thoroughly
explained and additional information is provided. The data for
this request is based on a test year ending December 31, 1980.
Accordingly, Texas Power & Light is requesting $198 mil-
lion in additional revenue, a 20.3% overall increase in total
revenue dollars. For the average residential customer using
1012 kilowatt hours per month, this amounts to an increase of
approximately $12.35 to the monthly bill.
Approval of this request will help insure that TP&L can
continue to provide quality service to its customers.
x
N
CONTENTS
REASONS FOR RATE RELIEF REQUEST
Quality of Service 3
Financial Strength 4
Construction Program 6
Inflation 10
Government Regulation 11 *k
w
.F
.p
aw
aw
w
QUALITY OF SERVICE
TP&L has a commitment to serve
its customers with reliable, abundant TOTAL EMPLOYEES COMPARED
electric power at a reasonable cost. TO TOTAL CUSTOMERS
Reflecting that commitment, the 1980
company reliability index was 700,000
.999928 which means each of our
customers were without power on an 600,000
average of less than 3 minutes per
month.
When ice, wind, rain or extreme CUSTOMERS 500,000
heat interrupts service, TP&L em-
ployees work until service is restored,
regardless of the time or the weather. 1400,000
Service and maintenance programs
are reviewed constantly to determine EMPLOYEES 4,000
areas that can be improved, and
TP&L is proud that its own standards 2,000
are generally much more stringent I all 0
than the requirements of governmen- 1971 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79 1980
tal authorities.
The Company's continuing inspec-
tion and preventive maintenance siastic about the availability of in- Therefore, TP&L has minimized
programs help minimize interruptions formation on conservation and the the price of electricity to its custom-
of electrical service. Company's emphasis on its own effi- ers, and since 1975, the estimated
Inspections are made on distribu- cient management. savings to customers from burning
tion and transmission lines and poles lignite instead of natural gas is $375
on a regular basis. Load and voltage Savings to Customers million.
checks are made constantly through- During the 1980's, TP&L will con-
out the system on all types of equip- During the 1970's, the Company tinue to build to meet load growth of
ment to avoid potential trouble spots built lignite power plants to take over the system. This growth will be
with overloads or low voltage condi- the base load being served with natu- served with coal and nuclear power, a
tions. ral gas. These new plants also served continuation of the commitment to-
Five dispatching centers are new load as it developed in the TP&L ward becoming less dependent on
manned 24 hours a day to monitor and service area. natural gas.
control the operation of generating
plants, transmission, switching sta-
tions and distribution substations. ESTIMATED NET SAVINGS
. Practically all major substations are Lignite Coal vs. Natural Gas
equipped with remote control equip-
ment in order to gather information (Since 1975)
vital to the control of the system net- 400
` work. The remote control equipment '4$375.2
also aids operators in quickly restor- Million
ing service in the event of an interrup- 300 TOTAL
tion. ,.o..:•.; NET
TP&L is serving more customers SAVINGS
today with fewer employees per cus-
tomer than the Company did ten years rY:>:>.::::•<•.<•>.:•'..
200
is
ratio
to employee
ago; the customer
•:i~:i:.{ .:..v::::: is
still among one of the best in the elec-
tric Lit:::'ri;v:::
utility industry.
A survey
conducted
among 100
the
indicated that
in 1980
customers
with com-
vast pleased
pany performance are majority
and the value of
.
service. Customers find the consumer
services very helpful and are enthu- 75 76 77 78 79 80
3
FINANCIAL STRENGTH
TP&Us ability to provide the cus- have confidence in the Company's Return on Common Equity
tomer with reliable service at a ability to earn a satisfactory return on
reasonable cost is directly dependent investment. A financially healthy Return on common equity is an ex-
upon the Company's financial health. Company can borrow at lower interest tremely important indicator used by
It is extremely important for TP&L rates and more easily attract capital. an investor to measure financial
to maintain its good credit rating. The Present rates are inadequate to meet strength. It is the amount earned on an
high credit rating has afforded the these costs of providing service. investor's common stock ownership
Company's flexibility in its planning And, projections based on the best in a Company. A stock must compete P.
for the future. available data, indicate that without a for investor dollars with stocks of
The Company's financial flexibility rate adjustment TP&Us revenues will thousands of other industries. The
and strength played a significant role fall below the necessary level to main- stock of Texas Utilities does not com-
in its ability to utilize lignite fueled tain the reasonable financial strength pare favorably according to current
generation in place of high-cost natu- of the Company. standards used by investors. As a re- •
ral gas fueled generation saving cus- sult, the last two issues of Texas Utili-
tomers $375.2 million since 1975 ties stock sold for a price lower than
through 1980. Financial Condition actual book value. When this happens
At times, the market has shown re- of the Company it dilutes the value of the holdings of
luctance to absorb utility offerings but thousands of investors.
TP&Us excellent credit rating gave As a result of the Company's fuel When stock continues to sell for
the Company unrestricted access to conversion program, a highly suc- less than book value, it obviously be-
the markets at lower costs and under cessful plan to utilize lignite fuel and comes less attractive as an invest-
reasonable terms. reduce dependence on high-cost natu- ment. Then the Company must sell
TP&L is a capital-intensive indus- ral gas, plant investment has more more stock to get the required dollars.
try. It is necessary for the Company to than doubled in 10 years. This has ex- Dividends must be paid on these addi-
attract enormous amounts of money erted a great degree of pressure upon tional shares. It is a vicious circle
from outside sources to meet con- the Company's financial position. steadily undermining the financial
struction needs. These funds are TP&Us total electric plant has in- health of the Company and resulting
obtained by selling bonds and pre- creased from $760 million to over $3 in higher costs in attracting necessary
ferred stock to outside investors and billion at the end of 1980. Since the capital. These higher costs to the AW
common stock to Texas Utilities, the majority of these dollars were spent Company eventually create higher '
parent company of TP&L. Those who for conversion, the Company was not costs to the customer.
provide money by buying TP&L able to generate enough funds For this reason, TP&L is asking for
bonds and Texas Utilities stock must internally. 173/a% as the minimum return neces-
sary on common stock equity.
TEXAS UTILITIES Overall Cost of Capital
MARKET AND BOOK PRICES ON LAST THREE
ISSUES OF COMMON STOCK Cost of capital is a major consid-
eration that effects the authorized re-
turn and the Company's ability to
actually earn that return. Being
$20.00 $20.17 $20.45 granted a rate of return by the Public
$19.18 $19.50 Utility Commission does not guaran-
tee that the Company will earn that
$15.50 return.
s
When a Company is faced with a
$400 million per year construction
program, it is going to have to raise
Market Book Market Book Market Book significant amounts of capital from "
external sources. It,.
Construction funds come from two
general sources: money available w.
from Company operations (internal
funds) and money raised outside the
Company (external funds).
MARCH JANUARY MARCH Internally generated funds cannot
1978 1979 1980 provide all the money necessary to
4
w
carry out expensive power plant con- pense attrition. These types of attri- year levels during the period rates are
struction. So the rest of the funds tion practically assure that the Com- in effect. Inflation increases the
needed for construction must be pany will be unable to earn the autho- Company's operating expenses over
raised from outside the Company rized return. the average level of operating ex-
through the sale of bonds and stocks. In the inflationary period of the last penses allowed in the Company's cost
15 years, new debt capital has more of service and TP&L also experiences
Attrition often than not carried an interest rate cost increases attributable to the
in excess of the embedded or average changing nature of the Company's
Attrition is literally defined as "the cost of debt. An example of this is business such as the increased cost of
act of wearing down." In the context TP&L's May, 1980 offering of $50 operating new lignite generating units
of rate proceeding, it is the erosion of million of First Mortgage Bonds at an versus gas fueled units. The result is
earnings with the passage of time due annual coupon rate of 11-3/8%. The expense attrition.
to unit cost increases in all areas of 11-3/8% rate was near the market
the Company activities. This, of minimum rate for electric utilities for Work In Progress
course, would include increases in the the year. The TP&L embedded cost of Construction Allowance For Funds
unit cost of plant investment, operat- debt included in the rates in effect at CWI); Allowance
ing expenses and capital costs. If the the time was 7.79%. This is the phe- Used P P During revenue/cost relationships of each of nomenon we refer to as capital attri- (AFUDC)
these areas are not properly main- tion. There are many benefits derived
tained, earnings will deteriorate. Unit Another consideration is invest- from including CWIP in the rate base.
cost increases in our Company are ment attrition. Even if inflation is Most important are: 1) Improvements
being experienced in all areas and completely eliminated, because the in cash flow; 2) Improvement in qual-
customer growth and usage are not Company is building plants at a high- ity of earnings; 3) Improvement in in-
adequately offsetting the adverse er cost per kilowatt than the embed- terest coverage; and 4) Helping to
effect on earnings. The ultimate result ded cost, investment attrition would keep future rates lower.
of attrition is reduced residual earn- still be a factor contributing to the in- The customer does not pay for con-
W ings available for the common share- ability of the Company to earn autho- struction if CWIP is included in the
holder. rized returns that are based on embed- rate base. The investor pays for the
In financial terms, there are several ded cost of plant. construction while the customer is
forms of attrition: capital attrition, in- Also, the Company's other costs of only paying the interest, or carrying
s vestment attrition and operating ex- doing business do not remain at test costs, on the money used to pay for
construction.
INTEREST RATES ON NEW ISSUES OF LONG TERM DEBT If CWIP is not included in the rate
base, this interest on construction paid
PERCENT INTEREST by the customers is instead added to
113 / the cost of the plant and is known as
/8 % an Allowance for Funds Used During
Construction (AFUDC). Under this
90 accounting procedure, AFUDC is re-
'/8 corded ~0 corded on the books of the utility.
This results in deferring costs which
the utility must pay for currently-for
future recovery.
Therefore, inclusion of CWIP in
8 p ~0 the rate base is in the best interests of
the utility, its customers and its stock-
holders. With CWIP in the rate base,
the utility collects the financing costs
as they occur which improves its cash
flow. CWIP keeps the ultimate cost to
the customer at the lowest possible
cost. Also, when CWIP is included in
the rate base, the utility regains its
financing costs as they occur. TP&L
is requesting 100% of CWIP in the
rate base, for a total $637 million.
JANUARY FEBRUARY MAY
1968 1979 1980
5
Recovery of Fuel Costs Through
the Fuel Adjustment Clause benefits the customer with lower fuel
costs immediately and the Company
It is very important to continue to is protected when fuel costs increase.
utilize the Fuel Cost Factor tariff Under this FCF tariff schedule,
(FCF) schedule (fuel adjustment only fuel costs incurred to produce the
clause) to recover the Company's cur- electricity consumed by TP&L cus-
rent cost of fuel used in generating tomers are used in computing the fuel
electricity. The fuel adjustment clause cost factors.
CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
TP&L's construction program is There are many factors which and changes during the construction r°
based on providing for the growing affect the planning of facilities to period in demand and energy fore-
peak demand requirements of our ser- meet the ever-increasing needs of casts could affect the time when com-
vice area with plants capable of utiliz- TP&Us customers under today's eco- pletion is necessary. Government reg-
ing more abundant, lower cost lignite nomic conditions. The availability ulation must also be considered, since
and nuclear fuels. and cost of capital is a major consid- previously enacted and possible future '
The Power Plant and Industrial eration as is the cost and availability legislative action regarding plant con-
Fuel Use Act of 1978 mandates the of fuel. Anticipated growth in system struction and/or fuel use could limit or
shift from natural gas to alternative peak load and energy requirements alter the options available or change
fuels. As of the end of the test year, must be considered. System reliability the time needed for construction.
December 31, 1980, the Company is of extreme importance and must be In view of the uncertainties associ-
owned an interest in eight lignite units continually evaluated. ated with each of these factors, it is
now in service, of which TP&L's The long lead-time necessary for imperative that the planning process
share is 2,458 megawatts. plant construction directly affects remain flexible. Viable options must
Construction costs of electrical planning flexibility. Design and con- be maintained to ensure that changing
generating plants are increasing pri- struction of a generating plant must be conditions do not prevent TP&L from
manly because of the combined fac- started eight to ten years in advance of meeting the needs of its customers.
tors of inflation, the fuel crisis, the the time when it is actually needed, W •A
change from natural gas to solid fuels,
the cost of capital, and compliance
with government regulations.
Even with these increased con-
struction costs, TP&L's fuel conver-
sion construction program has been of
great benefit to its customers. The AVERAGE COST OF NEW GENERATION PLANT FACILITIES
conversion from natural gas to coal
generating units has allowed the Com- $959/KW
pany to produce electricity at a price
below that generated with natural gas. $798/KW
TP&L's Planning Process
TP&L's planning process involves
continual examination and evaluation
of alternative methods of supplying
the future electricity needs of its cus-
tomers by the most cost-beneficial
means. This planning ensures that the $286 /KW
Company's decisions and commit-
ments meet lead-time requirements
for the construction of new facilities.
The planning process involves a con- $60/KW°
stant re-evaluation of changing factors
so planning can change as factors G A,$ LIGNITE LIGNITE-` NUGLE
change. 1965-1970 1975-1980 1985-1990 1982-1984
.w
6
Plant Costs 1968, the year TP&L began building Comanche Peak over that originally
Big Brown. TP&L's construction anticipated, the estimated Comanche
Prior to 1970, TP&L could build a costs in 1971 were about $100 mil- Peak completion cost of $959 per kw
gas plant for about $60 per kw. lion, and they were over $420 million compares favorably with other nu-
During the mid to late 1970's, lig- in 1980. The projected construction clear plants coming on line in the
nite units were built for about $286 expenditures for 1981 will be the same 1982 to 1984 timeframe. The
per kw. The cost of lignite plants is second largest in the history of the national average of all nuclear units to
much higher because of their relative Company, second only to the test become operational between 1981 and
complexity and because of such fac- year. The construction costs for 1982 1985 will be about $1,500 per kw.
' tors as inflation, higher capital costs, and 1983 are estimated to be about TP&L projects that the total cost of
longer lead times, and required air $434 million and $496 million, electricity generated at Comanche
pollution facilities. respectively. Peak in 1986 will be about 25% less
The Big Brown plant went into ser- than the fuel portion of the cost of
vice in 1972 at a cost of $130 per kw. Comanche Peak electricity produced by natural gas.
The average cost of lignite plants
coming into service in the mid to late The construction of Comanche
1980's is about $798 per kw - more Peak alone has had a large impact on Future Construction
than six times as much as the Big the Company's construction expendi-
Brown plant cost. It is estimated that tures. For the test year ended Decem- TP&L's future generation construc-
the average cost of lignite plants be- ber 31, 1980, of the $290 million tion plans through 1988, in addition to
gun today will be more than $1,000 spent on generation facilities, $168 the 545 mw lignite unit at Sandow
per kw - more than seven times the million was spent on the construction #4, due for commercial operation in
cost of the Big Brown plant. The of Comanche Peak. Even though 58% early 1981, will be the Company's
Comanche Peak nuclear plant is esti- of the construction expenditures for share of ownership in two 1,150 mw
mated to cost approximately $959 per generating facilities in 1980 were nuclear units at Comanche Peak. The
kw - 16 times as much as the gas spent on Comanche Peak, TP&Us de- Company also shares ownership in
plants of earlier years. cision to build this plant is and was two 750 mw lignite units, Twin Oak
With the exception of a slight de- economically sound. Unit #1 and #2, scheduled to come
w crease in 1976, construction expendi- While changes in regulatory re- on line in 1986 and 1988,
tures have increased each year since quirements have increased the cost of respectively.
500 500
TP&L ANNUAL CONSTRUCTION EXPENDITURES"
450 450
41111
Generating Plants
400 400
All Other
350
350 ED _77-
0 300 300
° 250
0 250
All f 200 200
150
150
100 100
50
50
0 0
1971 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79 '80 '81* '82* 1983*
*Estimated Includes Nuclear Fuel
ail
«ie
7
Changes In Construction margins are sufficiently in the future Plant Held For Future Use
and changes can be made if the de-
TP&L entered into an agreement veloping data warrants a change. The Plant is defined as the total facilities
during the test year with DP&L to Company's construction plan is under available for the production of service.
purchase 2'h% of Comanche Peak constant re-evaluation. If financial and
Poles, hardhats and transmission lines
No. 1 and No. 2 and 2'h% of Martin engineering circumstances warrant, are among the many examples. , .
Lake No. 4. This transaction was the construction plan can be acceler- The portion of plant held for future
approved by the Public Utility Com- ated to have additional generation use that the Company is requesting to
mission. plant into operation by the peak of be included in the rate base represents
Also during the test year, the Com- 1987. the cost of water rights and lignite
pany executed an agreement to sell a leases that the Company has acquired
41/3% share of Comanche Peak plant, for its customers' benefit. Water and
fuel, and associated transmission fa- lignite rights are potentially irreplace-°
cilities to Tex-La Electric Cooperative Benefit To Customer able resources that the Company can-
of Texas, Inc. This agreement, not purchase at any time it chooses.
approved by the Commission, was These reserve margins have been a It is very important to the Company
completed in January 1981; however, benefit to the rate payer. and its customers that plant held for
this transaction still has to be approved TP&L customers have realized sub- future use be included in rate base.
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commis- stantial savings as a direct result of the For example, the fuel shortages of
sion (NRC). construction of lignite generating recent years have focused much in-
units. The decision to change from terest in Texas lignite. The price of
fuels historically used by the Company lignite has increased greatly as a result
was made to utilize fuel sources that of this new demand. The Company has
Reserve Capability were cheaper and more abundant than been buying lignite for many years. If
natural gas and oil. TP&L had waited until it was needed
If fewer lignite units had been built, to buy it, the price would be much
Reserve capability is the Com- the reserve margin would have been higher. In fact, it probably would not
pany's installed generating and purch- lower; however, more generation from even be available in the vast quantities
ase capability in excess of the peak gas-fired plants with higher fuel costs now needed.
demand on the Company's system. It would have been required. Producing Purchases of generating plant sites,
is an accepted utility practice to main- electricity with natural gas would have water rights, and sites for facilities
tain a reserve to offset the unforeseen '
resulted in higher priced electricity for such as switching stations, sub-
loss of generating capability and addi- our customers. stations and transmission lines are also
tional load beyond that which was
forecasted. The reserve is usually ex-
pressed as a percentage of peak de-
mand. „w
In recent years the Company's re-
serve margins have increased because TEXAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
of the construction of generating FUTURE GENERATION FACILITIES .w
plants using fuel other than gas and oil.
Even with the relatively high reserve
margins, TP&L's construction of lig- Generating Capability
nite-fueled generating plants has saved MW °w
its customers millions of dollars by Location In-Service TP&L Type of
reducing the Company's dependence Plant County Date Net Share Fuel
on high-cost natural gas and increasing Sandow #4 Mllam 1981 545 95 Lignite
its dependence on low-cost lignite. Comanche Peak #1 Somervell 1982 1,150 362* Nuclear
In any construction plan as large as Comanche Peak #2 Somervell 1984 1,150 362* Nuclear Nil
the Company's, the financial consid- Twin Oak #1 Robertson 1986 750 563 Lignite .w
erations of the plan are just as impor- Twin Oak #2 Robertson 1988 750 562 Lignite
tant as engineering considerations. r~.
The construction plan allows the *The TP&L share of Comanche Peak reflects the Company's agreement to
greatest engineering flexibility within sell 41/3 percent interest in the project to Tex-La Electric Cooperative of
the financial constraints under which Texas Inc., subject to NRC approval.
the Company's currently working. It is
also important to realize that engineer- aw
ing flexibility is inherent in the con-
struction plan and that lower reserve-65
8
very important to TP&L. Customers Alternate Energy Sources study residential usage of solar
receive a very substantial benefit from energy. Additionally, the use of waste
the flexibility of the planning practice TP&L is very concerned with alter- heat from air conditioning systems for
which allows such properties to be nate fuel generation and research and water heating is being studied in five
purchased, and unquestionably that development. Although generation residences and two commercial build-
planning process is essential to TP&L With alternate fuels cannot be accom- ings in the TP&L service area. The
in meeting its service obligations. plished in a short time, TP&L is pur- Company contributes to the research
r suing its development in a systematic and development work of the Electric
manner consistent with the best in- Power Research Institute (EPRI) and
terests of its customers. the Texas Atomic Energy Research
Fuel Program The Company monitors several ex- Foundation (TAERF). TAERF sup-
perimental homes it helped develop to ports nuclear fusion work at the Uni-
In the electric utility industry, fuel versity of Texas at Austin.
is the largest single item of expense. It
costs almost as much as all other oper-
ating expenses combined including
labor, taxes, and depreciation. Fuel
cost is so significant that minor fluc-
tuations in the unit cost of gas, oil or
lignite multiply to a great deal of
money when considering the extreme- 50
ly large quantities TP&L burns. An TOTAL ENERGY BY FUEL TYPE
effective fuel program is the backbone
of an electric utility.
For many years, the management 40
of TP&L has been, quite concerned at
with the short and long range future = Nude
availability of the fuels for electric Y 30
generation. As far back as the later
1940's and early 1950's, the Company o
began acquiring lignite leases z
' throughout east and central Texas. By o 20 Lignite Coal
the mid-to-late 1960's, the Company m
foresaw the probability of future fuel
shortages and increasing prices.
TP&L cooperated with DP&L and 10
TESCO in the construction of the first
modern lignite plant. The first gener-P11 !1466
ating unit of the Big Brown plant 0
M came on line in 1971 and the second 1972 '74 '76 '78 '80 '82 '84 '86 1988
unit in 1972. TP&L has since added ESTIMATED
three Monticello units and three units
at the Martin Lake plant.
Lignite, in addition to being more
abundant, is now much cheaper than
natural gas. TP&L owns or has min-
ing rights to lignite deposits and is ac-
quiring additional rights so as to ade-
quately fuel the existing lignite plants.
Since the Company owned or con-
trolled the mining rights to the lignite,
its cost is low compared to natural
gas.
TP&L, however, is still dependent
to some degree on natural gas. Also,
many of the Company's gas plants can
burn fuel oil under certain limited
conditions. Oil is kept in storage at
' these plants to assure continued op-
eration in the event of gas curtailment
or shortages.
9
INFLATION Ilia,
INCREASING COST OF TRUCK EQUIPPED WITH HOLEDIGGER
Unlike many other businesses,
TP&L does not have the option of
foregoing a share of the market if eco-
nomic conditions are not favorable. $105,120
Utilities are obligated to secure equip- 5, ~
ment, materials and capital necessary $81500' >
to meet the publics requirements, re-
' • ~~t>v::..:s:.~..~,.:
$75,430
ardless of the cost of money or the
g
p
current rate of inflation now standing
n:iriii•:^i
is ti 2 c:'•'i'. i 2N: : ~ is
In
excess of 12%. One example of inflations effect
On COStS is a ho1e digger truck which
has more than quadrupled in price $25,000
since 1968.
TP&L s lignite power plants
1968 1979::::.:. 1980::::.: 1981
brought into service as of 1980 were
~
built for an average cost of $243 per
kw. This cost will double for plants
completed after 1981 and quadruple AVERAGE COST OF NEW LIGNITE POWER PLANT FACILITIES
by the end of the decade.
Another example of inflation's $1,000+/KW
effect is the interest TP&L must pay ><.<«:>
bonds. In 1968, the interest on new
bond issues was 65/8% a cost that to-r''`<>
da has almost doubled. Capital costs
on outstanding debt are a significant expense in
TP&L s operation; •
e and Akaw
when this is accelerated by inflation
the effect on the cost of service to the
448KW
company's customers is
substantial.
Still
electricity remain
s one of the
best bargains in a market where other 243KW .::.:.~x
;:.::ii:::}iii:'6j:'t'tiii::.%ki;:;<{:::::<:;;i::;:::L+: .::n::':.:'n::::\ ~i::n.,:':.:':.:.~....::.:.:. .r:.:::h::•
:::>::>:iii:::»:::>::i;•:>j>:>ii::::>:f::'i:x;ii ;i'{.k: n:V'+•;;.. 'i ~:iv..:::: ni:'.:':.. :1nvn::•
vn4:v.
ucts and services continue
Prod
•i':nv:::iv:. v: i:.y:::...: ii:: n....: n::n: v:: x:v:
vrF~
nom v.•
x:•,++' ;.iititii ii it
.::!::.:.i::?::::v:::;::n.•; ii;.:::...: .:ii':::::i~.~n:~:iv:;: Y.;ii:;;...•; :i:.i •.i•.n: i•: \r ii. vi
spiral in price.
In -
1940, the average TP&L res
;::ii:i:.ii;:i:.;:.:.ii:i:::i::<.i.
idential customer consumed 676 kwh LIGNITE PLANTS AS OF COMPLETED 1981 NEW PLANT
per year and paid approximately 5.3¢ DEC. 1980 BEGUN TODAY
per kwh (fuel included). In 1960, an
average customer consumed 3,200
kwh and paid approximately 3.1 ¢ per COST COMPARISON
kwh (fuel included). And in 1980, the $85,000
average residential customer con-
sumed over 12,000 kwh per year and
paid approximately 4.5¢ per kwh
(fuel included).
$5,585
$1.20 $25,000 $2,600
150 300 ~ $4,500 $450 ~ 5.30 3.10 4.50
1940 1960 1980 1940 1960 1980 1940 1960 1980 1940 1960 1980
1 Gallon of Gas 2,000 Sq. Ft. Home 1 Year College Kwh-Electricity
(Residential Annual Average)
10
GOVERNMENT REGULATION
The cost of complying with gov- to pour a foundation today than it did 3) The Nuclear Regulatory
ernment regulation continues to im- ten years ago. It doesn't take a weld- Commission (NRC) regulates
pose heavy financial burdens on er, pipe fitter or any other worker any TP&L with regard to the con-
Texas Power & Light. Some regula- longer to do his job than it did then. struction and operation of
tion is necessary. As a monopoly, The difference between four years of nuclear reactors, such as the
TP&L must be regulated by fair and construction and eight to ten years is ones that will be used at
reasonable commissions. Common the difference between six permits the Comanche Peak plant.
sense regulation is necessary for clean and 24. Although the NRC does not
4W air and water and for environmentally exercise jurisdiction over
acceptable strip mining. The problem Regulations are decreed by numer- rates, it does exercise exten-
is over-regulation, which costs more ous agencies and commissions. Some sive jurisdiction over all
than the benefits it provides in health of the government bodies which aspects of a nuclear plant be-
and safety. Many regulatory agencies exercise control over TP&L are as fore, during and after con-
have gone far beyond what Congress follows: struction, particularly with
intended in the first place. (Such reg- 1) Under the provisions of the regard to certain public
ulation creates uncertainty in planning Public Utility Regulatory Act health, safety and antitrust
for the future, because regulations (PURA), the Public Utility matters.
keep changing.) Commission (PUC) has exten- 4) The Texas Air Control Board
~r In 1972 the total cost of air pollu- sive jurisdiction, both original (TACB) has jurisdiction con-
tion control equipment at the Big and appellate, over rates and cerning the permissible level
Brown lignite coal-fired generating services. PUC jurisdiction de- of air contaminant emissions
plant was $4.6 million or $4.01 per termines the facilities which from power generating sta-
kilowatt (kw). At the Monticello lig- can be constructed and the tions.
nite plant, the total cost of air pollu- territories in which the Com- 5) The Texas Department of
tion control equipment was $93.3 pany can operate by way of Water Resources (TDWR)
" million or $49.12 per kw. The current the certification process. exercises jurisdiction over the
cost of pollution equipment at the 2) The Securities and Exchange Company's water discharges.
Martin Lake lignite plant is $214.4 Commission (SEC) regulates The diversion of water by
million, or $95.29 per kw. the reporting, filing, and reg- the Company for cooling and
While costing millions of dollars, istration requirements per- other purposes is also subject
a* pollution equipment produces no elec- taining to the sale of the to the jurisdiction and regula-
tricity and, in fact, consumes a sub- Company's securities. tion of the TDWR.
stantial amount of a power plant's
total energy. For example, Units 1, 2
and 3 at Martin Lake use approx-
imately 2% of the plant's gross gen-
eration, an equivalent demand of over
22,000 residential customers.
To illustrate the impact of increased AIR POLLUTION CONTROL COSTS
government regulation on TP&L's
Construction program, the Big Brown
unit, which began operation in late $95.29/KW
1971, was built with six permits and in
less than 4 years at a cost of $130 per
kw. Since that time, there has been a
proliferation of government regula-
tions. This has dramatically increased
the time, the resources and the invest- $49.12/KW
ment required to build such a plant. $21a.a MILLION
TP&L must now get some 24 differ-
ent permits and approvals for a new
coal-fired plant. $93.3 MILLION
Construction time is now eight to
ten years. Coal units started today $4.01/KW
N
cost in excess of $1,000 per kw to %4.61 Id 0[
complete. It doesn't take any longer BIG BROWN 1&2 MONTICELLO 1,2&3 MARTIN LAKE 1,2&3
40
11
1W
6) The Environmental Protec- 8) Under the provisions of the 9) The Company is subject to the m.
tion Agency (EPA) decrees Surface Mining Control and requirements of the Depart-
regulations concerning both Reclamation Act (SMCRA) of ment of Energy (DOE) and w~
air and water quality stan- 1977, the Department of the the Federal Energy Regula--
dards which are implemented Interior controls and regu- tory Commission (FERC) as
by the TACB and the TDWR. lates surface mining at the provided for in the constituent
Company's lignite power bills of the National Energy
7) The Railroad Commission of
plants. The Departments Act of 1978 (NEA).
Texas is authorized state jurisdictional concerns in- The NEA requires the
law to control and regulate clude surface mining stan- Company to conduct exten-
surface mining la TP&L's dards, land reclamation prac- sive energy audits of its
lignite power plants. The
tices, and associated air and customers homes and build-
Railroad Commission also water control requirements. ings. The act will also limit
regulates the production of Among other things, SMCRA our use of oil and natural gas.
natural gas by Texas Utilities requires payment to the feder- as boiler fuels. It, also, has
Fuel Company ) and al government of a maximum greatly increased the report-
TP&Us sale of natural ural gas by of 10¢ for each ton of lignite ing burden to governmental
for use as boiler commercial fuel. suppliers mined. The assessment in authorities.
for use turn is used for such things as
the reclamation of previously
mined land throughout the
United States.
COST OF 1000 KWH OF ELECTRICITY FOR RESIDENTIAL USE
IN MAJOR CITIES COMPARED TO TP&L
SEPTEMBER, 1980
NEW YORK $117.06
PHILADELPHIA 581.66
CHICAGO $72.82
CLEVELAND $69.39
EL PASO $66.59
WASHINGTON, D. C. $64.63
BALTIMORE $63.08
LOS ANGELES $62.21
AUSTIN $61.22
AMARILLO $57.70
r-.
DETROIT $56.75
CORPUS CHRISTI $55.40
NEW ORLEANS 554.60-
HOUSTON $54.38
DALLAS $52.03
SAN ANTONIO $51.35
a 9:21.1 $49.71
BEAUMUNT $49.65 °
ow
12
L' i'1'Y lal' S(31.r1'l U AKE
Mt;IEl11LLY lulOM' '10 '111R CITY couNCIL
DURDING DEPARIMEM
I. NMAKR CIP INS1'117VIONS MKxM OF Februar ,,1981
('U tt1ZE~t 1' LAST MAM
E:1.iX`1`luc 28 20
Y111ML~ 1 N(; 21 15
1'liACL1NG 5 3
1(X1NItA'1'1(kd 5 6
MNV1 ; & AIR 16 13
SITIV1C SYS'1'1r1 14 10
011 IER 29 16
118
'!r1''AL 1NS1'El rIONS
2. N1~ftMI'1'S
LAST KW11i FEE
1sU111ANG 6 906.00 10 978,00
1::1.11"1'It1CA1. 11 192.50 9 157.00
t'1 131-1131NG 4 83.00 4 120.00
HENFING & Alt 4 84.00 6 139.00
11 275.00 5 125.00
cl1rrlF1c:ArE: OF (x:Ch.
6 55.00 11 87.00
OTHER
VAAL ILL: d-WI'S 43 1595.50 45 1606.50
3. [itii Idiny VA111,1t i()i►
_
`[1 i I S M1-l[11! 1 111: 1' Nl >fJ i'I I YEAR I U LlNrE
265,000.00 422,663.00 5,381,810.25
4. 1'l ANNING & GIIN 1N(; 1'EE.S
`1t1 _ __IS MI)141'l_i _ I ,f1`I' WY. W1'I 1 YFAR '10 DATE
162.00 500.00 18,260.00
5. 'INA'AL 1)LRXSF11-3 IN BIJIII ING 1UNO
`I7 t IS NiiNm 1 YRAR 'A) DATE
1595.50 20,092.00
RE:S1'EX..'111113M SU11MI`1' LI),
UttIiDING PEWIT BREAKDOM
BUI4wc I ' 4-Re sidence 233,000.00
1-Warehouse 30,000.00
1-Storage 2,000.00
LpItJG EPAR~?-M- r C*TIC:AL
"February 1980
5-Rec,iBence '-Add, !-Commercial
1-Garage s-Storage
C I T Y OF S O U T H L A K E
POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT
February, 1981
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:
Police Department Report for the month of February, 1981.
Tickets issued in January, 1981 265
Tickets issued in February, 1981 168
Persons in jail in January, 1981 26
Persons in jail in February, 1981 16
Traffic Accidents in January, 1981 10
Traffic Accidents in February, 1981 10
Burglaries reported in January, 1981 6
Burglaries reported in February, 1981 2
Approximate value taken in burglaries in January $25,567.20
Approximate value taken in burglaries in February $140.00
Approximate value recovered in burglaries in January 0
Approximate value recovered in burglaries in February 0
Thefts reported in January, 1981 4
Thefts reported in February, 1981 3
Approximate value taken in theft in January $10,047.21
Approximate value taken in theft in February $5,515.00
Approximate value recovered in theft in January $8,257.21
Approximate value recovered in theft in February 0
Total offenses to date for 1981, reported and activily investigating 15
Number of calls in January, 1981 1,218
Number of calls in February, 1981 884
Speedometer reading on Unit 11 (_78 Ford) 117,608
Speedometer reading on Unit 12 (78 Ford) 108,933
Speedometer reading on Unit 14 (80 Plymouth) 74,129
Speedometer reading on Unit 15 (80 Plymouth) 48,970
Miles driven in January, 1981 10,835
Miles driven i,n February, 1981 9,971
Respectfully submitted,
C'
C. 4ay nd G addy
Chief of Police
SOUTHLAKE POLICE DEPARTMENT
CDG/mrb
zN
1-+ W
►L-. O 4 J W
a h- c/l W W
C.~
5 5 0 35 50 55 168
TICKETS
234 213 884
# OF CALLS 42 76 50 153
# ARRESTS
6 2 1 10
ACCIDENTS 0 2
0 0 2 0 0 T
BURGLARY
0
THEFT
-
MILES 1208 829 1308 1174 1959 2834 9,971
DRIVEN
HOURS ASSIST MILES
TICKETS ACCIDENTS ARRESTS WORKE D CALLS
RESERVES
1 ---,0
ANDERSON 0 8
2
SCROGGIN 0 0 p 6 1/2 O 4 0 _
T
2 p 3 p
TAYLOR 0 1 0. ""--T
13 0 0 28 1/4 47 2 335 _
SPENCER
0 0 0 62 . 16 6 16_ a
SHOEMAKER
0 2 16 1/2 26 1 160
HUGHES 3