19910618Brown Direct.pdf

4osq,C. TOM ARKOOSH
RODEN & ARKOOSHAttorneys at Law
8O2 West Bannock, Suite 900P.O. Box 2110Boise, Idaho 83701Telephone: [phone]O
ATTORNEYS FOR COII{PLATNANT
A. W. BROWN COMPANY, INC.
Complaint,
vs.
IDAHO POWER COMPANY,
Respondent.
iiicErYlil
i-ilrD Il
'31 JUll 18 Pn 3 0$
iilAi-i0;-iilLii
u ir LiTits c0h{hl ls5 lcli
,Y Yd-dZ/A-4-/
BEFORE THE TDAHO PUBLIC UTILITTES COI{UTSSION
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. IPC-E-90-20
PRE-FILE TESTIUONY
OF A. W. BROWN
Brown, Di.A. W. Brown Company, Inc
I
(
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
9
10
1l-
L2
l_3
L4
L5
16
L7
18
1,9
20
2L
22
23
Q:
A:
Q:
A!
Q:
A:
Please state your name.
A. W. (8i11) Brown
What is your relationship to petitioner?
My wife and I own A. W. Brown, Inc. I am the companyts sole
employee.
P1ease describe A. I{. Brown, Inc.
A. w. Brown, Inc ., is a California corporation qualified to do
business in fdaho. ft buiIt, owns and operates the Sunshine
# 2 hydroelectric plant in Lemhi County, Idaho, located on
Lake Creek between Williams Lake and the Salmon River.
Are you speaking on behalf of petitioner?
Yes.
Would you please describe your experience in building the
interconnection between your project and fdaho Power Companyts
facilities.
I would like the adopt the chronology set out in the trProtestrt
that cornmenced this matter:
1. After Idaho Power Company had accepted my interconnect
application and I had established communication with the
engineering department, I was informed that Idaho Power
Company would furnish a company designed protection
package with manual and automatic disconnect swj-tching.
I was told such a devise I had intended as part of the
Brown, Di.A.W. Brown Cornpany, Inc. 1
Q:
A:
Q:
A
(
t-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
1,4
r_5
16
1-7
18
19
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
3
4
2
generator controls was not acceptable to fdaho Power
Company.
I sent the powerhouse drawing to Idaho Power Company and
in return received an fdaho Power Company drawing showing
the desired location of the fdaho Power Company equipment
mounted on the inside wall.
As tine elapsed and the first energy dated approached,
Idaho Power Company conducted a site survey and finally
it vas negotiated that I would install two power poIes,
transformers, etc. and fdaho Power Company would install
one pole at the interconnect point.
The poles I installed included raptor protectj.on and cost
approximately $500.00 each installed. The Idaho Power
Company pole did not include rapture protection.
When Idaho Power Company furnished their disconnect
equipment it turned out to be nothing like that shown on
thej-r drawing. It was rated at 500 amps instead of the
expected 200 amps, it was outdoor, weatherproof equipment
and would not fit in the powerhouse without a wiring
redesign which cost me more money.
My electrical contractor installed the Idaho Power
Company equipment at my expense as well as all the
overhead wiring to the interconnect point. Idaho Power
company did not even deliver the equipment to the site.
The only work the fdaho Power company crerr performed was
the installation of one pole and the actual interconnect
Brown, Di.A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 2
5
6
7.
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l_0
11
L2
13
14
15
16
l7
18
19
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
a
to the existing 34 kv line which consumed several hours.
8. For the two manual switches, the automatic switch, two
meters, and the installation of one power pole I was
obligated to pay $19,069.00 to get on interconnect.
9. I requested a detailed breakdown of the $19r069.00 bill
which has not been made available to me.
10. I then did some price cheeking through my electrical
contractor and learned that 200 amp indoor switches cost
approximately $300.00 each. I learned from Sierra
Electro Development I could duplicate the Idaho Power
Company automatic control with lock and key for
$3,ooo.oo.
11. In short, I was forced to pay $19r059.Oo for something
that could be duplicated for less than $4,500.00 but that
is not the end of it. Ever since the interconnect date
I have been paying $133.48 a month for non-exi-stent
maintenance on one power pole worth approximately
$soo.0o, two manual switches that should be worth $goo.oo
each and one autouratic switch worth maybe $3ro00.00.
L2. After 36 months of paynents I have now paid a total of
$4r805.28 for non-existent maintenance on equipment only
worth $4r500.00, which was incorrectly designed for
Sunshine #2.
Please explain your conment regarding incorrect design.
The design of the protection package and associated equipment
was not correct for this application, the bulk of which was
Brown, Di.
A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 3
A:
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1,2
13
L4
15
L6
1,7
18
L9
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
a
unnecessary and more costly than need be by an outstanding
margain. The fdaho Power Company protection package addressed
over/under frequency, voltage and phase unbalance. The
simplest and most logical way to have phase unbalance and
fluctuating voltage and frequency protection would be to
incorporate the fdaho Power Company ItWilmarrt package into the
SEDCO (Sierra Electro Development Co. ) generator control
purchased for the overall control of the system. This control
package already has the other functions necessary to
accommodate the rrWilmarlt package for its function including
the high and low side disconnects. See Exhibit 1. Voltage or
frequency fluctuations protection was only deleted in the
sEDcO package because ldaho Power Company dictated their own
cornplete package. The equipment in the SEDCO controls could
have been j-dentical to Idaho Power Companyrs for apporximately
$5oo in addition to the $]-2,468 initial cost i.nstead of the
$13,994 for Idaho Power Company protection package and $rzor
for the switches and $2000 approximately more for contractor
charges for installation. A total difference of $16,695.
Even now voltage and frequency fluctation protection can be
incorporated into the SEDCo controls for approximately $1000.
(Please see the quotes in Exhibit 2.)
Who drafted the Protest that has given rise to both the
protest proceeding, Case No. Idaho Power company-E-9o-2o, and
your complaint proceeding, Case No. Idaho Power Company-E-91--
2?
Brown, Di.
A.W. Brown Company, Inc.4
I
(
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
9
10
11
1,2
13
L4
15
16
t7
L8
79
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
A:
Q:
A:
I did, on behalf of A. w. Brown, fnc.
why did you file a protest?
I reviewed Schedule No. 72, and perceived that its
requirements are not economically reasonable. Specifically,
I know of no useful reason why the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission (which I will call the Commission) provides that a
developer must buy certain equipment from fdaho Power Company
when that equiprnent is otherwise commonly available on the
open market. No 1aw I know of requires this.
After creating this guaranteed market for equipment, the
Commission then alIows Idaho Power Company to charge any price
it wishes for the equipment. The Commissionrs proposed
Schedule 72, and the past practice, limits the price to
anything rrdetermined by the Company. tr The result is that
Idaho Power Conpany provides disconnectj-on and rnetering
eguipment at exorbitant prices, and the developer must buy
from Idaho Power Company at ldaho Power Companyts price, or he
is not allowed to interconnect.
Even considering if design and costs are correct, the
maintenance charges imposed by Schedule 72 are also very
difficult to reconcile with economic sense. Each month, the
project pays to fdaho Power Company .72 of the cost of the
equipment that Idaho Power Company maintains on the project.
That amounts to 8.48 a year. At this rate, the equipment is
repurchased every 11.9 years. Stated in dollar amounts, the
project pays to rdaho Power company .72 x $19,069 = $133.48
Brown, Di.
A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 5
{
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
9
L0
11
L2
13
14
15
16
L7
18
19
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
A:
per month. If one factored in interest, or a capitalizatj-on
rate, or a discount rate, or whatever one desired to call the
time value of money, at the $ffa.ae per month rate one would
have accumulated the entire $19,059 in
approximately 100 monthsr or 8.4 years, assumj.ng an 8?
interest rate. In my view, that equipment should have a
useful life of at least 35 years, whj-ch means the project will
have paid to replace itself at least 4 times by the time it is
expected to wear out once, even at the price Idaho Power
Company charges.
Starting with your first point, that this equipment is
otherwise available on the market, what information do you
have to substantiate this?
I have reviewed the requirements of Puget Power and Pacific
Gas and Electric Company. Both companies allow the developer
to install the protection devices. Puget Power provides that
the utility may operate the equipment at its option, but the
installation is done by the developer. I can find no claim by
Puget Power that it will own the equipment. Pacific Gas and
Electric provides that it will install the equj-pment at
customer expense if it is located in the companyrs wiring;
but, that the developer install the equipment at his expense
if it is located in the developerrs wirj-ng.
It occurs to me then that the other developers around the
country are building and retaining ownership of this
interconnection equipment, and I began to search about. The
Brown, Di.A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 6
t {
Q:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
t2
l_3
14
15
16
L7
l-8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
A:
o
equipment at issue on my plant is metering and disconnection
equipment, plus one pole installed by Idaho Power Company. ff
I understand Idaho Power Companyrs invoice for the
disconnection equipment, or protection package, Idaho Power
Company charged the project $11r 511 for the materials in the
protection package. f have found, from telephone quotations
from l{i1mar, that their materials, purchased directly from
Wilmar, would cost $1485 built to fdaho Power Companyrs
specificatj-ons, $610 built to standard specifications, and
$SgO if the over voltage and under voltage were combined.
Idaho Power Company charged me $6581.46 for these materials.
These materials could have been integrated into the SEDCO
controls for under $500 with Idaho Power Company approval at
the time the project was built.
When you compare the prices that Idaho Power chargres for this
equipment, and the prices that you are able to purchase this
equipment for on the open market, can you say whether the
project or Idaho Power Company can interconnect more cheaply?
Yes. It is clear that the project can interconnect for
significantly less than Idaho Power Company can, as testified
to before. Indeed, f see in the billing provided j-n discovery
in this matter that the project was charged $668L.46 for the
three Wilmar relays; but, the answers to i-nterrogatories
appear to admit to charges of only $frfZ.06 for what appear to
be the same relays.
Do you know whether Idaho Power Company deducted any amount
Brown, Di.A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 7
I (
Q:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
9
t_0
1L
a2
13
L4
15
L6
t7
18
19
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
A:
Q:
A:
from the interconnection costs that it charged you which
represent the costs that Idaho Power Company would have
incurred if it had generated or purchased an equivalent amount
of electric energy?
From the records I have seen, absolutely no consideration has
been given me for this savings to the ratepayer. From the
pleadings that I have seen, Idaho Power Company alleges that
I am being paid this amount in the avoided cost palment that
I receive, and then they bill the amount back to me. However,
I sincerely doubt that the Commission included the cost of
interconnection in the avoided cost of power because the
regulation set out in my rrProtestrf provides, rflnterconnection
costs do not include any costs included in the calculation of
avoided costs.rr My understanding is that for my energy I am
to be paid the same cost that the ratepayer would otherwise
pay to Idaho Power Company to receive the energy I provide;
and, before the project must pay interconnection costs, the
ratepayer must pay up to as much as it would otherwise cost to
interconnect this new power from Idaho Pohler Company.
Final1y, you have complained about the maintenance chargres
proposed in Schedule 73. What specifically is your complaint?
As I testified above, the project must pay ldaho Power Company
for the amount it charged for its interconnection over and
over every 8.5 years. This strikes me as exorbitant. If one
applies the monthly maintenance charges of the project to what
the interconnection should have cost, say $4500 to be liberal,
Brown, Di.
A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 8
t{
1
2
3
4
5
5
7
I
9
10
11
L2
13
1-4
15
16
L7
18
L9
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
Q:
A:
rather than the $191069, the project is paying for the worth
of the entire interconnection every 2.5 years. Assuning a
useful life for this equipment of 35 years, the project is
required to pay for it L7 times before i-t can be expected to
lrear out.
I would again also note that the federal regulations
a1low the utility to charge a project, to maintain
interconnected equipnent only to the extent that more costs
are incurred by the project than the utility would have
incurred maintaining its own equipment to provide this extra
energy.
Would you please sunmarj-'ze your position for the Commission.
I believe that a utility nay charge a project for
interconnection costs and maintenance only to the extent those
costs exceed what it would otherwise cost the utility to
provide the extra energry and capacity. The present assumption
is that Idaho Power Conpany could interconnect, the energy and
capacity provided by Sunshine # 2 for free, and therefore the
project must pay 100? of tbe interconnection costs and
maj.ntenance thereon in order for the ratepayer to be left
neutral regarding the source of electricity. I cannot believe
that this assumption is correct, even for energy that fdaho
Power would otherwise purchase from Bonneville Power, because
there must be sorne transmission cost and admini-strative cost
associated with that extra energy.
Even if Idaho Power Company could successfully
Brown, Di.
A.W. Brown Company, Inc. 9
(I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
t2
13
t4
15
16
L7
18
19
20
27
22
23
24
interconnect extra energry for free, and it truly is necessary
that the project must pay 100t of the interconnection costs
and maintenance costs on the interconnection so that the
ratepayer is left unaffected, Idaho Power Company is clearly
charging more than it costs for interconnection equipment and
maintenance on that equipment. The project should be left to
go into the market to build and own the interconnection
equipment, built to Idaho Power Company specifi-cations if that
is necessary to meet prudent electrical practices. The job
can be done significantly cheaper in the open market, and
apparently other utilities successfully use this approach. I
see no reason why Idaho Power Company does not remove the
needless and needlessly expensive equipment it has reguired,
the project be refunded that money, and the project be allowed
to install and own reasonanable equipment at its own cost.
Final1y, I see no reason to pay the fuIl value of the
equiprnent every 2.5 years in order to merely maintain the
equipment. I would propose to the Commission that to the
extent it would cost more to maintain the equipment in the
hands of the project rather than the utility, the payments be
placed in a suspense fund. I would further propose that a
fair interest be paid upon that money, and when the balance
reaches the worth of the equipment, no more payment be
required so long as that balance is maintained.
Brown , Di.
Brown Company, Inc.A. W.10
I I
L
I
I
i (
I
(
F
r
,l
r.i
I t
i
!!i
trtl,
'l t
f
!
1!#Case
A
A
-2, Di.
Co. r Inc.
!{
l'I
Ir
l.
Il-
I
I
i
I
I
I
t
I
l.
*a
t..
r.+
tt,l
rl
o
tstrt
ll^I\i
{iji
IIrl
II
U
itr
tt
U
II
I
I
-1
_l
1, Page I
(I
illll
t
'i f' '"p:
,tI
T
!
JI
I
olrl
I
rili
: 'i'.::
"ii c'1,
t !n l,'till
','.'tr' i
i.ij': iitlri.
,.
.'>r:;-::r;i-i;a.;H-- :: ..1 .. :
Case f IpC-E9l-2
A.W. Brown, Di.A.l{. Brown Co.r Inc.
leI*Io2IEUIttl8t
E't
(
oUAq,
b
"!ijjariIIIi;f
(
I
a'
I
.t
I
I
I
I I i
I
I I
I
I i T
i
a
I
I
Iil'lr
_[_i
i
!
1lrl:l:
I
!
,
I
lii,li,tltl'r i
{t
I I I I I I I
,
'I
,
I
I
I,I I,i
a
tiII
III
!
I
I
Ii,
t
I
jl I
It I
I I
!
:
I
I
t
I
I
I!
I
II
I
I
!
I
I
a
I
Ii i
I t
I
I
,
d,r
I
I
I
I
aIat
I
I
I
ii
:
I
1I
;
Page 2Exhibit lr
i
t,t
I{
-. --{
i
1
c
4r
t-.
Case * IPC-E9I-2
A.W. Brownr Di.
A.W. Brown Co. rExhibit 1r Page
ou
Foz!i
s6dd
GOE
(
oIU$.
ta
i.'rlrr!l!
i,t'1,."'i1!ririrjil5
3
tlr . r il ' r -t'
.[r; ; I I j ,:: I ,
il:r,rittrr;*ra
.i1.,,'.r!;iirit
I
I
r.:.
i.irI'
I
i
I
iiItl.il- r[i
r- 'l
I
.J--.!
.1,lili
,I
li;
ri
I
.-:
I
-i
i
+'- f;-I
:l
' i!'
lr!J
-Ii-
i
I
II
I
I
I
--l----
I
P
a
a-
!
t-.?
ti,l,t
i1
f_t
it-
t,
-*'i
IIIj
?
li.
I
I
i
i
::-
il
I
,tt
I
I
-)I
I
,.1-.-
,
{
(
'd
.J
I t
!
cl1l
i
I
iiiiliii
'' i'-:'-..--''l_iiii i ii
I
Io
I
t
iit\!(Q
i
ll{
I
I
I
I
i
i?1tcitt
!i
I
.;1. .
,
I
r:j
rt
I
oU
Foz=g3tJd
ra
E
(
o
tstr,\N
:
t:tr l ,
i,l.i ;
,ni!. l,) a-. , ialu,'tt ,.($o (
')
t
J
i
ItI
!ld,n,
Iti
i;1
;i;lliil
I
II .1.. ';_:-
i
r)
;I
t.:t
it
?lii.:lt
:: 1
.,
:1
':l
i,
_.Jf"l
I
I
I
I
II
i
i
I
I .ri' C
,ili
ll:
Case # IPC-E9I-2- *:H:-Bl3*l'.e.3l;
.-,-.'-.t
,.--l
i,l
!
:
I
I
i
I
I
Inc
O
()
irr.iItrr
I
I
i
.t
lri
olI'
I
I
.!
il
ElI
H
I'
l,,lil
,$i
\.,
I'l
r.l
,- --. ..4:.-r',-..rliJ
II
i:"fr i,r.l
I
:)i_
,l
1
!'i
It....: ,,t : ,
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
,)
c(L
nJ
t---
I,l
L i
tI\f
iI1 t
,
i I!I
II !I
I I I t
I
t tI iI!
tII
I
II I
I
I
I
I li
i,rll
I
I
I
I
i I I!
I
I
I ,
I
,
I
tII2
I
.rlt! ttt. ttrt rtt
i'ifrl
iJ
,!,
i:t.t!l'.,r1..,;t,
li
rl ''l' '!'
i
I
l*
r=l:l,_i
I' 'r' ,';t -'l
I;: !J.t .,1(j, ri'1,,l
art-)
;i-_!__.,I
:t
I
,l ,ti'
I
.l.1.
:
I
I
t
4 U525PB
Edillon 2
PROTECTOR
Phase Balance,Belav
, i ZSOlSerieS,
t.
pton
,il
LOSS
dc.cr rc
one ol
to
:'r
:l
jl
rh nol ene
.I supply r!connected
,i
rt
, ',ll'
. r:.
,t
,:',.
,l
,'.S cif cati o n
D€VICE NO. :T47.'t27:
addltloni
tho
durlng
at low
Sct polntr
Symmelrlo
Unbalanca
t"t
agaln
rs have
when all lhe supply :
r roturn€d lo sale and ,
' "-ii il*:iillrilili'i,
t'.!
':1..
Voltage
10
P Presel
'ii'
Tlme ,Delay
DPDT
240v,lri 24V
Oporollons
Rseet
Dleloclrlc
llmlts
m.r:"1:
i1:,:,ii
1.2
:,1 i,t :li+.;.,: ' 1;lor 10
e;
5o6 loon
, o.c,
100 at abovo
. Automatlc ,:ckcults aro lod lo a comparolor
Oonorol
Tost '''
and
module.
lor monhotlng
lromOulputg
chongos
,''i, :.. . .
tho'i ' , "'
Plo:t " ' '
qlso i,i,
condundorslat0laull
lho
serlos,i::h
LEDand aulomallcawllllly
t..
.*r
P.
iiii
TJ
Cage # IPC-E91;2
.t,r.r.,A'W.r, Brciwnr-lb:i,,1,.1,'irri,/;l
A.W. Brolrn Co. r 'Inc.,t..,,,E$igig lL pase g
I
!
t.
:'
L
!7;i"'3:ALLI5 -
iih,,"
lI',:
lll'il'lili
RQ21 TI+' ^]MAL OVERLOAD
RE
YPE OLR
0.1
il ..[ : WARNING
iCT.FBOM POWER SUPPLY BEFORE
NG INSPECTION OR MAINTENANCE
I
e lhermal overload relay ls a last acllng NEMA
y healed adjustable blmetallic devlce.
nolor overload protectlon, a unlque lnlornal,ldesvoltage unbalance an<l slngle phase protec'
Curve 1 ls the normal three phase Tlme Currenl
,, lhe thr6e phases ls oponed, lhe relay sensss
l shltls lo lhe lelt (Curve 2), lhus making ll more
hlgher slnglo phase currenl. ll tho rolay lrlps. lt
elther a normal threo phase overload or slngle
with aOjustabte ovedoad set at lutl load motor
;ures conslslenl motor protecllon. The relay has
aed and one normally opsn contact. The nor-
tact ls used ln lhe conlrol clrcuh. The normally
be used lor an alarm ll doslrod. Tho rolay calt be
ual, as shlpped, or lor automallc resol. Labsls
tlngs are on the relay lor wlrlng and changlng
et. Labels atso lndicato trlp range, contact ratlng
rck-up luse slze.
r include a trlp lndicalor. a test bulton and an
r cover whlch can be snapped ln place. The
leslgned to prevent adiustment by unaulhorlzed
:over can be sealed lo the relay body by a
dre.
ear plastlc cover, insert a screwdrlver lnlo the
9.2, ltem A) and move lhe screwdriver handle
m is used. break oll the rlght slde ol lhe cover
'bending lt soveral tlmes or by scoring lt witlt a
l"
nap mounlodon a standard DtN railormountod
The relay can be mounled ln any posltlon.
rr dusl-laden almosphores provall, protcct lhog enclosuro. ll lho rolay ls nol lnslnllsd lrn-
in aclsan dry placo. Dimcnslons antl urrange-
arg shown ort rovorsg sldo.
rrrrtocl lnconrln$ art(, orrlgrllng powur loads lo'[srmlnals roqroctivoly. Connoct llto lcrrtilnals
r phaso oporatlon.
'ol clrcull loads ln tltr.r lollowln0 rnannsr: For
rn, wlro conlrol circu.l llrrouglr lho normally
atkod 95 and 96.'l'err.rinals marketl 97 and 98
conlacls whlclr can be usod to lnitials o com-
n alarm light.
cP 3100
--'4 AMPS Ellectlve
Aprll. 1984
hrcts Dlvlsion INSTALLATION AND MAINTEN,INCE INSTBUCTIONS 25-127-300-093
l. Llno formlnal!
2. Load Terninalc
3. Adiurhont (mb
4. Trlp lodicalo,
5. fcll Buuon
6. Bosol Bullon
7. Contact Toflrfnalr
6. Manusl or Auto,nsth Reaet
9. Temper Prool CoYo,
'FlG. I
B
FIG.2
Case # IPC-891-2
A.W. Brownr Di.
A.W. Brown Co. r Inc.'
!5--LirL!-'i 1,- .\-/
I
TF
ah
&F
T
,
I
Averagg
Trlpplng
Curve
),10 r FLA
Curvos oro batod on'cold" shn.
For lutl runnlng contlilon lrlpp,ng
llnro rr 257. ol ,alod valuo3.FIG. 3
Cwvo't
?
.'.. --. i,':,t,.. .r:n"!LJI1...L.'
J.J'r, ,
I
{I
u
Ul
zo
IEr
3
ll,i3F'T;Io
o\,r\
cn
\o
GO
('ro
r\o
A
(r,lo
@
i
!
\
o\o\or\o\
od<{u
o-cJUodzl, aBpraAEE0rr,EA f{o.r\ oBo '.N o4-t2
o
:
'I
i
I.l
I
.
It,
ti,
lit;i
{rri
,/,
tilr
ll
tlrl
ll't
HIal
BIot2l
clHIOIt{l
,;
tro. .r{.1,
Uat{.t,
U'dsl
oot:il,A qdrJic!o
rUBt{&oT{ +{acriotq, l,1 r{or (uOr\}eEt*oql -r o0.dO>r{a.lF{€COOOO'r{Dt{>o+J rl d. .a F{doo.Eoouduoo0rGltaaA-tErd(lto(0l,
{J O }{ F{ .r{oood.cHFINTQH
l-O
5oUdA.I,a
vrt-t5
|/r0ro Fo
ciE
ctC'EtF, l\E S i!.+ tro.! r- !I l(:, lJatEa;Z?F-!l .ot :r F:, Fct 'Y- 2 u.! r\> -:Y -(E l\l, 3 c/, g ^-.
IEsEs=
GIE
,91ta
'il
I:l
II
.l
iII
IIi
I
i
(n\o\o. Ilrc.lCAorJrtd,c,tn
oE€U..f q,ZFI O,3raOcl&,rl ura> lro.\O AE.{ 3!.f O<oZ (r,
c.,l,
vl6
6
L;I
t.=, o=r*..r'-r:rxrfi.!s.r*Jly::; r-;:;,".: l: .; --r;,,,r..'l E,|
@cnoN
Case *. IPC-891j2
A.[I. Brown,. Di.
A.[rl. 'Brown Co. r fncExhibiE 2r Page I
:.ff'l
<t>
.{l
N
F{
<r>
NF
@a/>
,
I Or.,fN1r>
o()o
ETu)1o
o
O{
Hotr!
oaI
1I
rOFNGI
II
o
6I
z,o-{
F6
=b:&<=
6s
EerBiq
5o
;Xn:.
I
I
Ii
DCO
SIENN..\ ELECTRO
DEVELOPMDNT CO.
120.1 A .Stolc 8tr..t
lrllryrvlllc. WA 98270
(20{,1 0!3-{06,1
(200) ?71-3?60
FACIMILE TRANSMISSION SIIEET
FAX r (oOA) 653-2424
SEDCO, FAX FILE * 1957
DATE: 6-3-91
T0 FAX ft ?14-046-5890
To: A.W. BR0WN ATTN: BILL BROIJN
FROM: RON OLSON
il OF PAGES: 1 (INCLUDING TRANSMITTAL SHEET) .
SUBJ: PROTECTIVE RELAY QUOTE
SEDCO t36l-412
DEAN BILL,
PER YOUR CONVERSATION I,'ITH DAN BATDORF INCLUDED FIND PRICIHG FOR YOUR
PNOTECTIVE RELAYS AND INSTALLATION.
QTY 1- CRoMPTON oVERVOLTAGE RELAY, 3 6, 3 I{IRE, l2OVAc,
2s2_pVAU_peBXr (ss)
.I- CROHPTON UNDERVOLTAGE RELAY. 3 O. 3 I{INE, I2OVAC.
252-PVKU-PoBX (27)
1- CROHPTON OVER/UNDER FREOUENCY RELAY, I2OVAC,
253-PH0U-NW8X (8lO/U)
1- SIEHENS CONTACTON (86U)
TOTAL NET PRICE $ 51.1 . 50$ 575.00 PEn DAYONE OAY LABOR RATE
IF YOU ELECT TO INSTALL TTIE EOUIPMENT YOURSELF THERE I'ILL BE A 2-3 HOUN
ENGINEERING CHARGE AT $ 75.A9 PER HOUR
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER OUR SCOPE. SHOULO YOU HAVE ANY
OUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS. PLEASE DO NOT }{ESITATE TO CONTACT ME.
YOURS TRULY,
7fr //Case # rPC-E91-2
A.W. Brownr Di.
A.91. Brown Co. r Inc.Exhibit 2,.Page 2
RON OLSON
. Swtf qHGE,An . CONTnOL $viTEMg . CUjTqM CONTnOLS
j7==7
i
I:
z<or:
,oo
AJ
o
7
t
€ aSeCL ,Z tTqTqxg''cul ''oC uAoJg 'M'V-TO 'uAoJg -M.qY
z-T6s-cq # asm|\l
a\
({
*lrl
\<.
\
I\r{
I
lJ
):.'
.: },*
d, ^o. t il
tl \r \ $
oN\\\J 'r\'
'$
+ ',
js
rql':'\
oo-\o
oai-(<-[$..\.: t'
F.tl-\7 I
i g*ils
C.
,i
t-
rl
ii
I
x
I
!lt
t
t
i
!
E
(,
\^
D.tr\
,;it .'t,
t\-trrl
I!
I
t'-- r.(j.:- (:
^tr ,'r '{r \.
S\!r'}\i'
--;S\', t!--. c)-, \-+
I
E
I
!tu !B it:Ir Tu IB
;IB t iB t ,B tu T
E Eu
;IE I iB ,t:E
;I
B
;i
E
,I !I
git!T t 7tI;
7I I:
E E E r ,r I t:,i ,:E E I
T
7
I
Tr
r
t
T
t
I
d
u
t!t
t
t
t
(
zI
B
!
r
aI
t
l1{
t
E
t
ttt
I
Eo
I
a
,
I
i
:
T
E
TI
II
E
I
T
t
Ed
B
il
I
!
I
I
a
tIJt
:
II
JII
!
I
t
IJ
IIItI
E
rii
uII,I!
E!
E
ti
E
Ttt
I
B!BI
I
:
tI
I
li
,t
I
I
I
a!
(
l!:
!iI
t
tD
B
:
t
I
5
E
E
jIt
E
t
t
I
r
B
t
I
t
I
Ea
Ir
E
I
a
I
I
t:t
B
,
t
a
i
g
E
l.
a
!
E
E
u
L
3
t
B
t
I
E E E
E
0
5 !IEUI
I
t
r
It
I
I
t r 8 r
I
I
c
a
t
t
4
ET
a
IIrt
I?
Tt
I
I
I
I
aI
I
I
t II
It
!!
a
s
t
ts
T
i
?
6
II
t
s
,I
a
II
t t
i
iI J
i I
T
I
rI
?i
;
I iI
0,
*
i
I
A
j
EIa
III
;i t
I
E
I
:
t
Iil
tI
I
II
t
I
T
t
,
a
t
,l
t
Ta I
E
I I ,l I t Ia
0
I?i I II
f
t
I ?
t
I I I I I
t
Ia
;
t
I
t,i:
I
I
I
n
!
It
B
a.t
ti
:
?
I