said that once it was established that OVEC had the additional capacity, was unlimited responsibility on their part to continue supplying He pointed out that under the agreement, there was a firm liMs power. commitment on the part of OV EC to supply the specified amount of power even ii they had to supply the power from the member companies’ systems. there Iv.r. Murray observed that the proposed agreement had a term of three years, and that twenty-seven months were required for notice He asked why the five year conof cancellation or annual extensions. tract which had been previously discussed had not been accepted. lvr. Bloch discussed +&is point with the Commissioners and said that after consideration of the problem, it was decided that a contract invo~ving a $xed demand charge based on the estimated operating coqts OX#e plagt would be most desirable. He added that, under this conditi=ti} ? thyee Year contract would be to the mutual advantage of the AEC aud .Q$!EC as neither party would then be committed to costs w~c~ w..d’be based on estimates. Further, he explained that the ..-tw&i&=seven month notice period was necessary in order that OVEC would have two years to absorb the 150,000 kilowatts into their system and that the additional three months would be allowed for renegotiation of an adjustment in price. ‘lwutually satis l\4r. Niurray questioned the use of the term factcwy” as related to the renegotiation of the price for this power and suggested consideration of a fixed price with escalation. Mr. Bloch t~i~c~~.~~edtllds point and Mr. N;urray requested that this clause in the ● a~:eement be clarified with OVEC through an exchange of letters. In response to a question by Mr. Murray, Mr. Bloch said that ‘~-,,~AZC had the right to transfer power blocks of not less than .5,000 ~~iowatts to other government plants if that power was not required e.$ Portsmouth. Mr. Murray then commented on the proposed letter to the JCAE, az:cl suggested certain revisions in wording relating to cancellation charges. Mr. Strauss su~~ested, and the other Commissioners agreed, that a briefer letter should ‘be sent to the JCAE omitting any reference - 131-