HomeMy WebLinkAbout0136.095"
t
FROM:
,'.
, :-' -
--',
City of Palo Alto
ritv Manager's Report
HONORABLE CITY dl'UN'C!!rL
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT:UTILlTIES'
AGENDA DATE: Febrwu'y n. 1995 CMR:136:95
SVBJECT:
REOUEST
This is an infornmtlooal report and 00 action is requLTOd from \he Cit:/ Cooncil at this time.
EXECJ.,1D'E SUMMARy
This report is 10 infonn tlJe Cily Cow>::i1 of rapidly evolving activities occurring at tlJe federal
level !hat !!lAY impact Palo Aho', Westem Are. Power Administration (WAPA) PO"'''
allocalion. WAPA supplies 70 10 90 per<:em of !be CiIy', curren! electrical power needs.
On November 3, 1994. the fedonl pofoti<:allandsc.ape cbanged clramatkally, . There is • renewed
emphasis in d;'Vesting tlJe federal goverrunent of some of its traditional roles, such as tlJe
operation of tlJe Pewer Marireting Administtations (PMAs) including W AP A.
The Clinton admlnistraOOn IllIlOUII<ed in mid-December !hat it may propo<e selling five PMA •.
SabseqYently, political pressure Iw; effectively removed tlJe Bonneville Power Administration
(BFA) and tlJe Tennessee Valley Authorily from coosideration. On 1amwy 6, staff learned that
tlJe Office of Manageroent and Budget (OMB) will inclu<le .. Ding !be oilier three PMAs in tlJe
buaget. The proposal prohably will be 10 seD !be Alaska PMA in 1996, !be Southeast PMA in
1997 and !be Soulhwest PMA and WAPA in 1m.
rae divestiture of !he WAPA and !be Celllral VaDey Project (CVP) in particular couId do
e!lOl1llOOS and ll!llle<:essary damage 10 Palo Aha and other CVP customers. Even if tlJe etisting
power sales coIllr.lCts are lloovred by !be new owner, !be Cily could face severe uncertainty
about long-term power supplies in 2004, wbeD W AI' A cootracts "'Pice. EvCll if honored, !be
CiIy', ccst--based colllf>CtS incre .... subsunliany if new co.u are aDowed ., be passed through 10
c=llt W AI' A cusromers. In a<Idition, tl!e CVP customers cooJd lose access 10 transmission
"-""" that have given !hem • <lCa..<ure of indepeo:lenooe in ol>taining power supplies Crom
else",bere in California and b..-yooo at competitive price.. All tlJese problems wookl damage !he
competitive ~al:lI!«: whiclloow exists io the California power mari:et.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal iropaet of • sale c.( the CVP COIIld raise CVP r.les from their CO<I plus interest basis
to I park'y with future J:lCW Fesource altematives~ such as combined cycle com'!>ustion turbine
power plants and other resources. at • GOSl of roughly 2.0 to 3.0 cents per tWll. more than. our
CMR:136:95 Page I of 2
-~--_.-,,, ----."---_.--
,
r
"
•.
cmen! CVP =. The CO!t impact .. 'auld then be an incre<tse of approxHruitely $20 million
10 $30 million per year. This would result in eklctric .... '" increases of approxHruitelj 1. B 10 2.1
. cents per kWh, or approxHruitely 26 10 39 percelll aggregate electric rate increase<.
~ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The sale of the CVP ..,auld have. numl>er of adve"" enviromnental impacts i:>clu<fmg:
(I) The possible duplic~tion of C\<-p generation and trnISlDlssioo assets,
(2) Reduced emp!Jasis Dn clcao I<Chnologies, renewable eDCr<JY and energy efflCiency
programs as CVP custome" become IIl<n del>t ladeD and ra", coostrain<d in an
in::rcasingly competitive environment,
(3J Reduced funding roc CVP cuslDmer supported enviroornental mitigation programs sucll
as the Central Valley Projecllmprovemeot Act.
ST.4n ACTMTIES
Starr bas IIUIde =ponding 10 the proposed sale of the PMAs • priority.
Activities 10 date include:
-Problem assessmeDl and qualitative analysis 10 better nndcrstand the propc;;al
-BraiDstorrnL"Il and deveJopmeDl of Llternative strategies to respond to the situation
-Meeting with CYP alStomers 10 coordinate strategiel;
-Meeting wilh NCPA members 10 coordinate and implemelll strategies
-Meeting wilh officials. legislators and their staff members in Washington, D,C. 10
share ,ie .. points and di;cuss Palo Alto', coocerns
-Developing join! comments wilh utility and environmell!al a<ganizations
ATTACRMf.NTSJEXHIlUTS
Memorandum 10 the Utilities Adviso<y Commission
Letter \<) RepresenI&tive Anna &boo
l..etter from Senatoc Barbara Boxer
Prepared by: Tom Kabat. Senior Resource Planner
P-"""",ed by: Tom Ha!>ashl, Assistant Directoc of Utilities, Resource M.an:.geIDCDt
Department Head Approval:
City M.an:.g<r Approval:
CM1U36:'l5 Pagelof2
. -',
, <..
ME.\lORANDUM
TO: Utilities Advisory Commission
FROM; Utilities Department
AGflIDA DATh Fel>ruary I. 1'195
SUBJECT: . PoteutiaJ sale of Power Marketing Admi'llstrations
RF£9MMENPATIONS;
This memorandum is 10 inform t1le UAC of act.'vities OCCll'TIng at the Federal level tha! may
impact Palo Alto', Westen> Area Power Adminislntion (WAPA) power .rrtJC3tion fuat
supplies 70% 10 90% of t1le City's =nt elec!rical needs.
BACKGROUND;
On November 8, 1994. Ihe RepubIkans .. ere ,wept into office promising 10 reduce t1le size
0( t1le Federal Government. cut laXeS and balance Ihe budget. &o!h Republicans and
Democrats in Congress and t1le White RollS< ra<:ed to announce plans 10 cut middle-class
taxes.
By law. any plan to cut taxes bad 10 be accompanied by proposals 10 reduce spending or
mise Ihe fimds 10 facilitate !he tax CUll. ConseqceOlly. some Repnb!icans suggested
abo!ishiog • few Governmental departments including t1le Department Of Energy (DOE)
. whick controls t1le Power Marketing AdmiIiistrations (PMAs) including W AP A.
Cootinning lljeir drive 10 reduce t1le size of Ihe Government and attempting 10 raise $16
billion 10 fund • portion of t1le tax cut, !lJe Administration announced in mid December that
!bey may propose seDir.g t1le five PMAs.
On January 6. we learned that Ihe Off>ce of Management and Budget (OMB) will include
selling !he PMAs in the budget inespecuve of !be DOE', opposition. To ease the pain. they
will start ",ith selfmg one project (a pilot program). The parameters proposed fa< me p<oject
gIves staff sufflcienr ,reasons iO believe that the Central yaney Project (CVP) c.ould' be the
pUot project
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Because there are no recomrnend.<:!tions at t.ltis time, there are also no poIlCY implications.
7. a,
DISCUSSION: . .'
WAPA markets el .. ,Criciry from !he Cenrral Valky Project 10 the Cily of PaJo Alto, among -
more than .. bundred other customers in CaIifomia. These customers include munlcipalities.
public utility districts, irrigation districts, mJ1itary bases, federal science laboratories,
u.nh'ersHies and nume!,OO5 other instanations, inducmg state-o\lrr1led fKilities.
Tht divestiture of the W AP A and the CVP m particular could do enornlOUS and unnecessary
.<Jamage to Palo Alto and other CVP customers. Even if the c;tisting p0V1-er sales contracts
are bonored by the new owt>er, the Cily could face severe uocertallllJl about long lenn po"'et
supplies in 2004, wl:en WAPAcoO!racts expire. Even Hhonored, the Ciry's cost based
conIr.>Cts increase substanllally jf new co<ts OR aDowed 10 be passed througb ID current
WAPA customers. For icstance. because existing assets "'Quld be refinanced at modern
illterest rates. significant: new i1J.:erest costs or higher supplemental power costs could go on
the CVP boob and would get pas.. .. d through 10 the City. In addition, !he CVP customers
cooId lose :access 1O transmission a.sse~ that have given them .. measure of independence in
.obtaining PO"'"' supplies from .lsewbere in California IUld beyond 2C competitive prices. AD
these problems ,"'CUld damage the compeutive balance which DOW exists in the California
power martel. Divestiture would C<ause similar problems elsewhere in the nation.
w. believe 1hB! the government should no( divest the PMAs for several reasons:
• The one-time sale of ISsets does no( appear to be a legitimate offset 0( pernlanem revenue
reductions. -
• Ratepa.y.", could nevor be held "lwmIess,' as iodicaled by the Administration because
many of these assets were financed y.'ben interest rates were Iov.'er than today·s. New
financing costs will be higher and must be absorbed somewhere in this transaction. If our
[lites are indifferent 10 the IIarlSaCtion. the costs .. ill hay. 10 absorbed by the government
in a d"lSCOOllted sale price, which means that the taxpayers wouk1 be taking a considerable
loss for !be sake of generating a one time immedi><e cash flow _ If the proposal includes
having I new buyer restrict rate increases 10 a certam annual percentag:e~ then our rates
will go up 10 Illat enell! because of an .,tificWiy foo:ed refmancmg. Moreover, the
uxpayers will still be llIking loss in • dlscoonted asset price, .''On if iI is only • smaller
loss.
• These transmission systems are valuable as systems CO ourselves and 10 the larger public.
Selling !bom out of federal "' .. nership could result directly in breaking ;l'.em up. Evea Jf
the transmission systems were sold inLact, bowever. there would be DO g'.lafantee that
pieces of tbCm coold not be re:;old later. The problem with breaKing up the transmission
systems is the expense and dif!)Cu1ty of negotiating several transmission agreements per
power saie. This would make competitive power sale shopping much more difflCUlt and
result in Jest savings oppornmities.
• Many 0( We...q:em"''S CVP -customers are federal laboratories, mmtiirJ bases and similar
installations. The higher prices they must pay for power will become an incre->..sed federal
expense.
2
j
I ,~ .
..
~~, ..
~c ___ ~"+J' .-_.:~
, ... , -
• The sale of the: CVP will resul! in 01: significant curtailment of investment in renewable
resoun:es and .nergJi .ffIciency programs !bat have been encouraged by Ibe PMAs.
• The federal governmenl may have diffICulty coping with enviror.mental mitigation
eXpenses associated with the ... 'ater projects once the revenue generating PO\li er ~omponenl
is n<> Iooger in federal olOnership.
• There are deep inequities involved in the proposal Payments from ourselves 2.00 the
other CVP power customers ('ver the years have been critical in covering the paymel!t
shortfalls from !he oIher CVP beneficiaries. Not only have ",'e not been SUbSWll.ed. 1<>.
signlf.cant degree our financing has made Ihe CVP possible. It is inequitable I<> deprive
us 0( !he eqo.uly assets we have bUllt (particularly since Ihe BP A and TVA are no< being
sold) wben oIher sources of renewable hyilropower have been made very hard 10 get Ia
1986 Congress passed • I • .., saying !hat utilities bo!ding Federal EnergJi R<gullltOf)/
Commission licenses Joe power facilities 00 federal waterwa:ys will be able 1<) keep those
licenses under a1most any circumstances. ' Yet. divesting Ihe PM"-, could take !his form
0( federally co.lroned hydropower from us.
At TERNAl1VES;
Because there are DO recommendations at this lime. there are :also no alternatives to discuss.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of a saIc: of !he CVP could raise CVP rates from lheir cost plus interest
basis to I parity wre:J future new resoun:e alternatives such as combined cycle combustivn
,tumiD< power plants and oIher res<>urces at • cost of roughly 2.0 10 3.0 cents per kWh more
!ban oor cum:nt CVP resource. The cost impact would thea be an increase 0( approximately
$20 million I<> $30 million per year, This would result in electric rate increases 0( .
appro;timately 1.81<>2.1 cents per kWh or aPllroximately 26~ to 39~ aggregate electric rate
increases. -
ENYJROM,fENTlLL ASSESSMENT:
The sale 0( the CVP would h.ave a number of adver.:.e C!lviroomentat impacts including:
(1) The possible duplication of CVP generation and tra-'1smJs...~}on assets.
(2) Reduced emphasis on clean locllllologies, rene .. 'able energy and ene'gy eftkiency
programs as CVP CustOUler5 become more debt lad.en and rate (:onstrained in :an
increasingly competitive environment.
(3) Reduced funding foc CVP customer Sl!pported environmental mitigation programs '
such .s Ihe Centra! Valley Projecl Improvemenl Ac~
3
.~-.
f."
/
.. "-,
NEXT STEl'S;
Staff is wodlng ",ill! OIl>er Wt.tern ,,"'OlIl<!S art<! AWA '" lOrmul.t<: art<! implement
Slntogles 10 ~ the CiIy'$ interests, Staff .,. ... 1 seek O:Iuocil'. J1>d!or May,,'.
signaturel Of' rts(;lurioos u ~essary in me near future to ill...fiueoce the coorS(. of e,"cnU.
.'
'. -
Jall\la:y 19. 1995
l'eprneDtative Anna Eshoo
ISCS Lor.por1h Office Building
W>shlDgu,n. D,C. 2()51S
:. _.,., .
OtyofPaloAlto
~if~CilyMmager
10$ you know, lbe Ctinron Administr>tion Iw proposed sale of three power marietiog
adnliIllstratio (!'YoM) in o<der to belp finance • <ax cut for tbe middle class. Divestiture of me
.f'MA5 is also presented as consistent wUh ~downsizing· government. It is likely !bat a: shnilar
proposal foe similar P'J'PO"'s will be inc!\lOed in bodge! proposals being developed .. ilhin
Congress i<>elf.
The proposals for divestiru..., h.ave DOt 1>=1 described in any detail &"",.or. i< appear. Ih>t tile
gOVernme!ll .,.",JId selllO UIikoo"", bll)'m at -.mspetifien pri< .. l) permaneDl rights '" Ille power
generated at fcleral clams and 1) tbe lrlInSmis.ioo systems owned by !he PMAs !bat CODlIeCt !hose
clams to lb. regional wholesale grids. For reasons 0()( yet formally explained, lb. Bonneville
Power A<lminislrarioo (BPA). Wblch serves !be P-~-iIic NO!1hwes1:, and lh' Tenness« Valley
Auihoriry (TVA) are iio< included in !be ClintOD Administration', dIvestilllfe proposal.
As you kno .... !he We""'" Area Power Administration (WAPA} markets elecaidty from tbe
cio.trat Vatley ProjecllO die City 0( Palo Alto, amoa.g over a. bundred ~-romers in California.
These customers include cities like oorsdves., mi1:itary bases, federal science laboratories and
numerous OCher inSta.II.ations,. ino:Iuding s!::ue-c'W:led ones. We at !he City of Palo Aho obt:ain
SO,. of cur po .. 'er from W .. lem.
You tal> appreciate !bat divestiture of !be W APA and me CVP in paniculat <ouid do eoormou;
and. .... believe. UIlIleCe5Sar)l. damage 10 Palo Alto and DIller CVP oustcmers. Even if !be
.existing power sales contracts are bonored by the DeW owner. .. we c:ooId face se'lete wxeitUn..'1'
about 'CUI" long lerm po'iiocr SUPP[1f:5 in 2004 .. when our contracts expire. Even if honored, our
COUIracts are fiexlble eoough Iil allow many new co... 10 be possec! right through to us. Fa<
instanCe, because existl:og as..cets would be refinanced aI modem D:iterest rateS. signjfu:anl ~w
capitol C?SlS would go on (he C~ l' hooks :md w001d get ps;ed throogh !O os. In additio,," !he
CVP customen could k1se access to 2ran5m!ssion 'assets rhat '!lave gi .. "en them il me.asure of
independence in obtaiWn.g power s-u'PPfies from elsewhere in CalifDrnia and beyond at competitive
prices. Al1hese probIetr.s would damage the competitive ba:l.aoce wbkl! now uists 10 (fie
CaIifornia power marbL Divestirure would: cause similar problems eIs.ewbere fume paoon.
We believe chat the government ibauld DO[ divest !he PMAs for severa! re3.$Ons:
• How can a ooe-time sale of assets be considered a legitimate offset of permanent re l.Ienue
reductions?
P.Qb1O!..~
Palo Alto, C~ 9oI.3(D
.l',.j,329 . .sl
4l;.]25,J6,.'1 Fa'!;
:"". -, ~o '-J~ .
Representative Aon.a Eshoo
January 19. 1995
Ptg~ Two
• R3~yen could !lever be beld "b> .... mJess.· as in<f!Catea b)' 1he AdmInistration because
many 0( I:hese ~ts 'lIefe financed .... hen interest ntts Wert Fd!' lower than today",. N~w
financing costs vl! be bigber al1d IIlU!.t be a!:tsorbed somew!Y-re in !his transaction. If our
r.tes are indifferent !O the transaction. I:he costS wiD have ro Jbsorbe~ by tbe govem..-neru in
• <liscounl<d sale prU. which means _ me taxpayers would be taking. consider.ole los,
lor Ehe sake of immediate cash. Ii the proposal is that I DeW buyer must restrict rat!:
increases to a c.enain percentage a year. !hen our rates .. in go up to lhat exS::nl beQuse of
an artificially forced ",firumcing" More. me taxpayers wiD still be takbg loss in •
discounl<d pri;:,. ooly • smaller loss"
• These transmission sp.~ms are vaIuabie as S}'S1f:ms 10 oursel .... es and 10 Ihe larger public.
Selling 1hcm Ol.tt of federal o~rsh:ip touId result directly in breaking £b.em up. Even. if .
the lransmisskHl S)'SfelDS .. 'ere sold iru3ct. bowever. there 'Wouid be 00 guarantee lhat
pieces of !hem could not be resold later-.
• Many of WesterB~s CVP customers are ff:deraI laboratories, military bases and sim.ila.r
installations. Th< higher pcioes iIley ttl'.L<t p,y for power will still be • federal expense.
• The sale of tile CVP wiD. result in I significant curtaiIIr.ent of investInent in renewable
resources and energy efficiency program"
• Can the gcvernmecr p!'operly cope with environmental mitigation e;::;:penses associated ""itll
the water projects if che power compoaem is DO longer in fe1er2l ownership?
• There are deep inequities involved in the proposal. P:iymeD[s from ourselves .and the otber
CVF power customers over !be years ba ve been critical in covering !he paymem s..'lortfalls
from IIle 011= CVP beneficiaries. No< only lui" "'" DC<~' sub<idized. to • signif"1Calll
degree our finan<:ing Iw made me CVP pos.ible. I! is inequItable to deprive us cf !he
assets ~ have built (particularly since 'She SPA and TVA are.DC( being sold) v.:hen other
sources of renewa"ble l!ydropower hC!ve been made 'Je;;y har~ l'J ,get In 1986 Coagres.s
passed a law saying dIa1 ut:Juties !lcensed bJ the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
JOe power facilities on federal wate"''aYs will be able ID keep Ihose &enses under almost
any cirturnscances. Yet. di'.'eSUng Ihe PM.A..s could c~:1(e this form of federaIl)l concroned
nydropower from us,
We urge !he defeat of cfu-estiture proposals mal cause any of me problems above and as'k mat you
cootK."t VVhib:: House Chief of Smff leon Panena lIJ anpress 00 him bow imporutru: tltig is 10 you:
cocstl:tuenrs. Thank you very mucA.
Sihcerely. /-
t ' (
/';~/t~ ~~g .;
Qry Ma:r-.ager ____ " .
,-"
. ',,-:.-
~--.
'.
~1JOX!'I .....".... . _ ....... -
-.-.~-1IIa8IMI. .... ~ ......
~6It_ ...... ---~-
>0
11'<11 4n .i ••
.
.-.
Tb<I 1IO(Io~e JU tea U"lh
Off1c: .. e( __ " and Bu<1get.
Uti< IIt.reft • l'o>nn.!IytT&.OJ.a ATe.
_I.U .
vacb£~~O, P.~. 20'03
IlU% nt= lUd4.
J Iul .... _" Uf~ ~t tl\e .~ .. tlO'l 1 .. cot>S~4er!n!i
•• Uil><] t:h<> ..... 1It$ of tile !ede.r&lly-"".,..ad _ x.u.l<-u...;
""'U..u.ot.ra!;f.Ol1 (PIa) ~ U .. IIIU'=-Od St.ote.l. [ruth...".'
'b~ tMt ~be ~iil.l. of t.h. vest. .. ~ Area :PQVeZ' k'rfF!'s~tlOD
(YAP"", •• rvlng' APP:r;t;l'~t.ly 15 a.111Un C:&l.1£erJ".Ja. eotL!I~, 1Jf
Ln<:l_ "" the _dllJdst:catl." I':ua.
I.<>c.u ~ts .114 nUUt7 <li.h1ct. that. ~ -= fz."OlII
1!j\PA k ... COGUct.ed lIlY oftlOe to ~n.. COr><;UI\ &I>o<!t. t.be
~ .. t::1lU"9 P~"'" 'l'I!ey ~e toMt l/APA 10 It '".,..""abl
~ tbat ~COVU". t!'.o hll "" •• of P"""""!.nV itt' ...,....,.. and
~Y1I the feda>:&l debt "" Bu..."EaIl of J:Ael ..... uO!1 I;<:<Ij~ w.!.u
iDteres,... T!tey haV"E!' ~xPZe5~ CQII.,:e.rPJ. t.hat the Ad. f n' ~k&t..l.oD.' I
pI.a.n t:G" se11 1Q;'" 'W'Qul.::2 IMJie. thei~ i:OSt~ vul:ne.:.bl-e ~o
1<t.iU ty ,nce !IO<'gl.l>q. .
r1.Jal1y. I ~ta.ncI that-~:c"e are sevw:re.l qs.rat.!.one ~t
tho! Ad1111n1stnUon' • p1&:l t!' ROll t:lle FlO. ... ~etII thfl~ ~
~.ClU1fLcaUon <If the .. ~ttaUIII\'. P"Ol'olla.l ... y
_..,....., to ee.l.m .""'. ct Cb6 ".~ "~ed by rry COMUt:nents
< 1:1\ c..,lUo.rnl... t """,14 ~ct .. " .... """"'" 1:0 the fell~
quasUonii so I can lIelp tho ... ag""d .... h<>t.br .",d"ni.aM. "!I.e
"dDI~"Uoa' B pUll to sell IIAP'>' an<! oth= """".
2)
3)
Wha~ sPecif!eallY Is prcpas~ to be SQld (~lssien
l...1ne81 5cl:1&t.et1on& .. po"oilil.c output of" lleClaaetJ.On
.t'iIlCUf,J:;.les .. ~Ob"'..r-act rlghu ua. Ql::llgat.ions)'l \rnetl
1i'OQ.ld. sach a sa.le 'U.ke pla~e ... a.nc:l bow WO&lld. it be
cr;mdul;t.scll
t1ha:t lav", won..lA· ~ve: t.01 k ~e4 iA or4al'; to 1S~11
thee:Q t'U'OOZt:Q on the: cpt!l _U'ke:t: Wo-uld
$nv~~ ):,eYiev U req-..iJ:ed1
_ vould profe..-=t9la<>rs. "'hi> have t:epa.l.d
blUldreds ot IlllllIc..". of ~~~s 1.11 ~&<IeraJ. ""'t.a:r arK!
pcower prole<:~ ([ea~ a:>A :.oU9<I 0" lr.'.PJ. for .. ~l1a1>le
, -~--~" -' -'------.. ,,-----'.~-:,"~~-~--.--
,,-.',-' -..
... , .. ,>~:.:"\.:-> "
-, \':-.
-:t.
0"'; ..:.. " ", "::''1
~¥ r ~
.. /
•
""""" ~i, tIo 1:>:e4~1!d .'" .1Ich .. =1 .. 1 i'<r.a14 t.h ........ ~ s4'e~ t.o proteet d .... !n;. pr1.~ gou.q.£l:~ U t.ho .... ~. wcr>
p<:.rc~ !>y ptbatG irl"".~ •• 1 If act, vcuJ.d ~te U-!>
aUOV1!<t for hist1"'1 crust:otoen t.o U<:eMQ ....s J>u.l.lcI. reJ;l.o_
res~cea'')
f) !ICIW ,""'O\1l.d 8ttdl • sa.!.e ben.f1t. t.be ted.Q.U.l gever.nment. 1ll
the: long nnl Arl c.elctllaUOM alilrailabl. ",Ur;h
~Nlt.rat. U. mit. b&nlfif1t " the fcr.1ere.l gov~t!
'WtL&t. .are the aErt.!dp.~e4 ~.,c:-ts on. repa~t: of Sur.at!
of /l.<!cl.alll>~!oa prajel:t. d~ on4 the eilv:lr.>nmend
It ye1I. I1iMd hrtlt~ Wor.oa'tloa,. please eget.ac;t. It=tJ.ra
l!arrUl U rq sa lnnCUCO effiee at 41~;03"~lCO.
1 l.¢oJo: , .. :vu4 to y¢\Ir p:ompl: nspctlS~.
<