PSI energy, reinventing itself, faces clean air act challenges with optimism

T

$1.7 Billion

H

E

Bill for SO2

PSI Energy,

Reinventmg Itself, FacesClean Air Act Challenges With Optimism -

T

PLAINFIELD,

INDIANA

he Clean Air Act amendments, approved by Congress last No-

NEWS

F

IN

0

C

U

S 1

As a result, only one of PSI’s 22

ahead. “I don’t see the Clean Air

coal-fired units has a scrubber to

Act as a cloud,” Rogers says. “It’s

remove sulfur, though the utility

a great opportunity.” But he ac-

burns about 12.6 million tons of

knowledges that PSI is still formu-

coal each year.

lating its compliance strategy and

PSI officials now estimate they

has not decided exactly what it

will have to spend $1.7 billion in

will do. ‘We’re in the process of

the next decade to reduce sulfur

figuring out how to comply,” Rog-

dioxide and nitrogen oxide emis-

ers says. The challenge is how to

sions. That is a huge amount of

“minimize the cost impacts to our

money for a utility with total as-

customers and reassure our finan-

sets of $2.8 billion.

cial backers.” (See page 12 for a

Indiana is one of several Mid-

profile of Rogers.)

U

vember, are forcing many electric

west states -

utilities to change their habits.

souri and Ohio -

And nowhere is the Act’s imple-

Clean Air Act will hit the hardest,

Act amendments create a free-

mentation more painful and un-

according to data compiled by the

market for pollution allowances

along with Miswhere the

nlike other environmental statutes, the 1990 Clean Air

certain than at PSI Energy, Inc., an

(similar to “rights to pollute”).

investor-owned

The number of allowances is es-

utility with head-

quarters here, in a suburb of India-

tablished by statute, and key pro-

napolis.

visions take effect in 1995. The

PSI, formerly Public Service Co.

EPA is expected to publish de-

of Indiana, serves about 600,000

tailed rules in September for im-

homes, farms and businesses in

plementing the Act. Affected

central and southern Indiana, in-

utilities, including PSI, must then

cluding the town of Huntington,

start scrambling to meet the Act’s

home of Vice President Dan

1995 deadline.

Quayle. (A separate utility serves Indianapolis.)

What makes the legislation so

Like many of its

utility neighbors, PSI is heavily

different is that it allows PSI and U.S. Environmental Protection

other utilities to design their own

dependent on coal as a fuel

Agency (EPA). Other electric utili-

compliance programs, including

source. Last year, for example,

ties in region, many of them

plans to sell or buy allowances on

the utility obtained 99% of its elec-

larger than PSI, may have to in-

the open market as they see fit.

tricity from coal-fired plants

vest more money to comply with

The affected utilities must meet

which are subject to the Act’s

the Act. But none is likely to in-

the overall goals of the Act, but

stringent controls on sulfur diox-

vest more dollars per kilowatt of

they have dozens of ways in

ide, generally believed to be the

generating capacity than PSI,

which they can do so. The Act

which will soon become a testing

therefore creates uncharted terri-

ground for the Act -

tory for PSI and every other coal-

prime cause of “acid rain.” Many of PSI’s coal plants were built 20 or 30 years ago, before acid rain was considered a pressing national problem. Further-

a crucible

for implementing its complex formulas and innovative incentives. Despite these challenges, the

burning utility in the nation that is covered by its provisions. Furthermore, proposed legisla-

more, PSI’s plants are in rural

utilivs

parts of the state, where pollution

James E. Rogers, Jr., seems to rel-

sues, including the Public Utility

laws are more 1enientIy enforced.

ish the tough choices that lie

Holding Company Act of 1935

August/September

2992

chief executive officer,

tion in Congress on other utility is-

9

T

H

E

NEWS

IN

FO

c

u

s

(PUHCA) and transmission ac-

ened the utility with bankruptcy

the expensive costs of complying

cess, will affect PSI as well.

Although PSI escaped bank-

with the Clean Air Act.

All of these developments put

ruptcy, one of its Marble Hill part-

R

ogers says PSI has four

basic choices in terms of

PSI at the hub of the fundamental

ners, the Wabash Valley Power As-

and sometimes contradictory

sociation, did not, and the

complying with the Clean Air

changes swirling around the elec-

Wabash bankruptcy proceedings

Act: (1) it can impose a stringent

tric industry. “We’re redefining

and multimillion dollar lawsuits

conservation program and thus

the utility,” Rogers says.

against PSI were settled only re-

reduce the amount of electricity it

cently. PSI, however, was so

has to generate; (2) it can switch

weakened that it wrote off $2.5 bil-

from high-sulfur coal (mined in

with a narrow mission. That is no

lion. Only a series of emergency

Indiana, Kentucky and Illinois) to

longer true, Rogers says. The

rate increases approved by the In-

low-sulfur coal from Wyoming

pending changes in the bulk

diana Utility Regulatory Commis-

and other Rocky Mountain states;

power market (which allow utili-

sion saved PSI. The rate increases

(3) it can install scrubbers at the

ties greater freedom to buy and

were in effect between 1984 and

plants to remove sulfur; or (4) it

sell power with each other), the

April 1990, by which time the

can buy “allowances” (rights to

n the past, PSI saw itself as a I conventional electric utility

proposed PUHCA amendments

pollute that are created under the

(which, if enacted, would encour-

Act). A fifth choice, not men-

age more nonutility generators to

tioned by Rogers but one that is

enter the bulk power market),

under consideration, is to build

and the pressures to open up

several gas-fired units to replace

transmission corridors -

aging coal plants. Burning gas is

these

much cleaner than burning coal,

are all signs that the utility industry, like it or not, is being trans-

and the utility would therefore re-

formed. PSI, Rogers says, is no

duce dramatically its sulfur diox-

exception.

ide emissions.

Preparing for Change

A Mix of Strategies The most likely choice is a com-

“The overall and overarching

bination of all the strategies, with

principal (facing the electric industry) is that we’re moving to a

commission concluded that PSI

more competitive arena,” Roger

was healthy again and approved

increased load growth, now about

maintains. PSI, he says confi-

a 4.2% reduction in retail rates.

2.4 percent per year. In June, PSI

dently, is prepared for the coming changes. Unfortunately, PSI is just recov-

Indeed, by most measures, the company is now doing relatively

conservation helping to dampen

announced it would implement a conservation program to reduce

well. In 1990, for instance, a share

its summer air-conditioning peak

ering from its last set of financial

of PSI stock earned $2.20, and it re-

load by 85 megawatts by 1995.

challenges, some of which were

instituted quarterly dividends,

PSI’s peak demand is 4,642 mega-

not so kind to the utility and its

which had been suspended in the

watts, and the effort is considered

shareholders. In the 198Os, the

mid-1980s in the midst of the Mar-

the most ambitious energy-effi-

Public Service Company of Indi-

ble Hill crisis. PSI, however, has

ciency program of any electric

ana (PSI’s predecessor) stopped

not had enough time to develop a

utility in Indiana. Consumer

building the Marble Hill nuclear

consistent track record for Wall

groups said they were pleased

power plant because costs had

Street, and it must now deal with

with the proposed conservation

ballooned to $7 billion and threat-

10

The Electricity ]owrml

T

H

E

NEWS

IN

FO

c u s

package, which must still be ap-

Regulatory Commission.

proved by state regulators.

won’t be a double A-rated com-

to be thrilled to own stock in a

pany, but that may not be neces-

company whose clean-up strat-

sary. The big ‘if’ is whether emis-

egy will make it a higher cost pro-

No matter how successful, conservation alone will not help the

“They

-

ment is installed. “I’m not going

utility meet its load growth and

sions trading (authorized under

ducer of electricity,” Hyman says.

the complex demands of the

the Act) works. That’s critical.”

Higher costs could mean that

Clean Air statute. Low-sulfur

PSI, in Monk’s opinion, spent too

large industrial users would go

coal, another option under seri-

much money and time on at-

elsewhere, leaving the base of resi-

ous consideration, will probably

tempting to complete the Marble

dential customers with the respon-

be used to replace only part of the

Hill nuclear plant in the 198Os,

sibility to pick up the tab. “And

current supply, and scrubbers will

and as a result, it neglected its air

that is only one of the dangers,”

be installed at some units. (In

pollution problems. PSI, he says,

Hyman warns.

July, PSI announced that it would

is now having to play “catch-up.”

build a scubber at one of its Gib-

Another major question for PSI,

A

nother unknown element in the PSI strategy is the effect

son coal units at a cost of about

according to Leonard Hyman,

of a Federal Energy Regulatory

$170 million. Construction is ex-

first vice president at Merrill

Commission decision, issued in

pected to start in 1993. Once com-

June 1990, which authorizes PSI

plete, the scrubber will remove

to sell 450 megawatts of baseload

100,000 tons of sulfur dioxide

coal generation on “market rates”

each year from the unit’s stack

rather than traditional cost-of-ser-

emissions.

vice rates. FERC’s decision, is-

But additional scrub-

bers may also be installed at other

sued at PSI’s request, should

units in order to comply with the

encourage the utility to sell some

Act.)

of its excess capacity at a greater profit than it would normally be

‘Share the Pain’

allowed to do with traditional

ogers has described this as a

rates. Under the decision, PSI is

R “share the pain” approach.

obligated to share any profits

Ratepayers, shareholders and the

from the market-based transac-

community (including Indiana

tions with its retail customers.

coal companies and their employ-

Lynch in New York, is how the

But so far no utility has bought

ees) will all feel the effects of PSI’s

utility will finance its clean-up ef-

any of PSI’s excess firm power.

activities. Under a typical sce-

fort. PSI probably hasn’t worked

nario, residential rates would be

out the details, and at this point it

expected to increase 18%, plus in-

may be prudent not to have done

As part of the 1990 decision, the

flation, by the year 2000, Rogers

so, Hyman says. Some flexibility,

FERC also approved a PSI plan to

says.

Hyman maintains, is necessary

open up its transmission system

Nonetheless, state regulators

Opening the Grid

But there are potential pitfalls

to outside utilities and qualifying

here and financial experts in New

waiting for the utility. “The pres-

facilities. This open-access provi-

York are cautiously optimistic

sure to use local (high-sulfur) coal

sion, like the market rates, has re-

about PSI’s future.

is substantial.”

mained largely symbolic to date.

“They have a reasonable chance

That may help the

coal companies and their work-

No one has taken up PSI on its

to come out of this in good

ers, but it puts extra costs on the

offer to wheel electricity.

shape,” says James R. Monk,

backs of consumers as scrubbers

chairman of the Indiana Utility

and other pollution control equip-

AugustfSeptember

1991

continued on page 14

11

T

H

NEWS

E

By Jim Rogers’ own admission, his career illustrates the “z” theory of corporate advancement. Beginning with a job as a consumer advocate in the early 197Os, Rogers has zigzagged his way from various positions inside and outside of the utility industry to become chief executive of PSI Energy, Inc., the largest investor-owned electric utility in Indiana. He assumed control of the company in 1988 and quickly established himself as one of the innovative executives in an industry that often seems bound by its own tradition. To detractors Rogers seems brash and his ideas, well, they’re definitely not a product of the old school. In recent months, for instance, Rogers has recommended scrapping the restrictive provisions of the Public Utility Holding Company Act, which deter nonutility companies from building power plants, and he endorsed the goals of a transmission access bill in Congress that would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the authority to open up existing transmission systems to competing utilities. And at conferences and seminars he talks about the benefits of competition, occasionally needling fellow executives for not welcoming changes. At one meeting last September, Rogers’ comments on transmission so agitated fellow panelist Dick D&brow, chairman of American Electric Power, that the AEP chief turned crimson and the dialogue grew testy. Rogers, age 43, is one of the youngest utility executives in the country He says he never planned his career this way, and his resume offers proof. While attending the University of Kentucky in Lexington, Rogers worked as an attendant at a funeral home - his small apartment was above the business. Needing more money and feeling financial pressure because of his impending marriage, Rogers began casting about for new opportunities. He saw an advertisement for a reporter at the Lexington Herald-Leader and interviewed for the position. The editor, however, told Rogers he was looking for an experienced journalist. Rogers, undaunted, convinced him that someone with no experience would be easier to train than a reporter who brought preconceived notions of how to do things. Rogers got the job and worked there while finishing his undergraduate degree in busi-

IN

F

0

c

u

s

ness administration. Although he thought about graduate school in journalism, Rogers enrolled instead at the University of Kentucky Law School and graduated in 1974. His first job was as an assistant attorney general for the Commonwealth of Kentucky, where he acted as a consumer advocate (intervener) in gas, electric and telephone rate cases. After little more than a year in the position, Rogers moved to Washington, D.C., where became a staff lawyer with the Federal Power Commission, the predecessor of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. He worked at the Commission for only a year and a half before joining Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer and Feld, a prominent D.C. law firm. Rogers specialized in energy issues at the law firm for 18 months before returning to federal service, this time as deputy general counsel for litigation and enforcement at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. His stint at the commission was a short one again. After 20 months, he returned to the Akin Gump law firm, where he represented natural gas pipelines, gas producers and electric utilities before FERC, the U.S. Department of Energy and federal courts. Then, in 1985, Rogers became senior vice president for rates and regulatory affairs at Enron Corp., a Houston, Texas energy firm. He was subsequently promoted to executive vice president and also served as president of Enron’s interstate gas pipeline companies. In October 1988, after almost four years with Enron (his longest stay at any company or agency), Rogers left to become chairman of the board, president and chief executive officer of PSI Energy, Inc., and its parent holding company, PSI Resources, Inc. His salary, including bonuses, is $547,000. In order to bring new talent to the PSI board of directors, Rogers added two new board members, Kenneth Duberstein, former chief of staff in the Reagan administration, and Stuart Eizenstat, former domestic policy advisor for President Carter. (Eizenstat now practices law for Powell, Goldstein, Frazer and Murphy, a Washington, D.C. law firm than handles federal legislative and regulatory issues for PSI.) And Rogers immediately set out to change the companys image in the electric industry as well as in

Jim Rogers, A New Kind of Utility Executive, Rattles Cages

L

The Electricity ]ournal

THE

NEWS

the community “I came to PSI with a strong belief in competition. I want to interject competition into the electric utility business. It’s good for stodgy companies,” Rogers says. “Competition forces you to reinvent the business and to rethink the assumptions. That’s healthy Competition will help create a stronger industry for the next century.” The competition that Rogers talks about is a relatively new phenomenon in the electricity-production business. The passage of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, which required utilities to buy power from independent power producers at the utility’s avoided cost, marked the first time that the federal government encouraged nonutilities to enter the business. Subsequent changes, including the use of competitive bidding procedures for acquiring conservation, only produced more pressures on utilities to compete with nonutility firms. But there are even more challenges to the status quo on the horizon, and Rogers says he welcomes these developments. Predictably, his statements have placed him at odds with some of his fellow utility executives, who are not sure whether this outspoken newcomer to the electric utility industry understands the subtleties of the power business and how it differs from the gas industry At a May congressional hearing on amending the Public Utility Holding Company Act, Rogers took the position, along with other electric utility executives, that the oncevenerated legislation, enacted in 1935, had simply outlived its usefulness and ought to be rewritten. PUHCA, Rogers told the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power, effectively precludes some of the best and most experienced companies from applying their “considerable talents” to the emerging independent power business. Sitting next to him was Edmund Schroer, chief executive of Northern Indiana Public Service Co., PSI’s neighbor, who adamantly urged the Congressional committee to leave PUHCA alone. The PUHCA amendments would in effect deregulate wholesale bulk power markets in the country and could encourage abuses in self-dealing, Schroer warned. ‘We believe the electric consumer will be best served by preserving the current

August/September

1991

IN

FO industry structure. That structure is characterized predominantly though not exclusively - by vertically integrated utilities, regulated in the public interest, and by a system of voluntary transmission serViClZS."

next month, the Edison Electric Institute, the D.C.-based trade group, issued a sweeping condemnation of a bill pending in Congress that would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission new authority to order transmission access and wheeling on a case-by-case basis. Rogers, irritated at Edison’s ‘hell no, we won’t go” approach, said he would form his own group of utilities to negotiate with Congress. “Jim is always prepared to challenge the conventional wisdom. A businessman has to be that way in order to be successful,” says Mike Naeve, a former Federal Energy Regulatory Commission member and now a Washington, DC. lawyer with the firm of Skadden Arps, which does legal work for PSI at the commission. “He has a poster on his wall that summarizes his philosophy,“ Naeve says. “It shows a cavalry charging down a hill, with one guy in front creating a lot of dust. The cap tion is ‘Make Dust or Eat Dust.’ That’s Jim’s approach too. He would rather make dust than eat it.” One of Rogers’ top priorities when he assumed his duties at PSI was to modify the company’s position on the proposed Clean Air Act amendments, which had been the subject of a protracted and bitter Congressional debate for more than a decade. Rogers, according to colleagues, was quick to realize that a bill was likely to pass Congress in 1989 or 1990. There were new political factors at work, including a new President who had endorsed a version of the Clean Air Act, and a new majority leader in the Senate, George Mitchell (D-Me.) who made the Clean Air Act one of his top legislative priorities. Rather than “just say no,” as PSI and other utilities had done in the past, Rogers steered his utility toward a more moderate position. The change was particularly welcome news for Rep. Phil Sharp, whose district includes much of PSI’s territory. Sharp’s Energy and Power Subcommittee had been besieged by utilities, conservation groups, coal industry trade groups and The

13

T

H

E

NEWS

IN

labor unions,alI with a stake in the complex legislation that had tiedup Congnzssfor ten years. “Jim Rogers is a very politicalanimal He realizedhe could zesist(the pressurestopasstheCleanAirAct)and not become part of the pmcess, or he could affect the outcome/ says DanielWatkiss,a Washington,DC. lawyer with the Powell,Goldsteinfirm. “Jimdecidedto become a player and becamepart of the process,” Watkiss says. “He put forwardthe interestsof the @on and influencedthe overall debate. He made legislatorsmore sympatheticto PSI’sposition.” Rogersalso took the initiativein his own backyard. In the tradition-boundworld of Indiana utilities, Rogers broke ofd barriers by establishing communications with state ratepayer advocates and consumer groups. “He’s extremely approachable,” says Bob Johnson, an attorney with the state Office of Utility Consumer Counselor, which represents ratepayers before state regulators. “He’s always eager to strike up a conversation, and he seems to have a natural curiosity that carries him a long way” Shortly after assuming his duties at PSI, Rogers called the state’s leading consumer group, the Citizens Action Coalition, and asked to meet its staff. “Jim Rogers broke the ice,” says Chris Williams, the Coalition’s executive director. “He’s nice guy, and I don’t say that often about utility chief executive officers. I’ve been here 11 years, and he’s the most forthright of the utility chief executives and the only one to visit our offices. There’s a real dialogue now between his utility

F

0

c

u

s

Wilhams says that genuine disagreements still remain on issues, and he warns that Rogers has established himself as a ‘lone ranger@ among his peer group in Indiana, a role that has certain advantages as well as risks. “He’s blazing a trail. He’s a very slick character. He knows what he’s doing and he does it well.” But Rogers, according to Williams, is beginning to “get heat” for political activities that have put him in the pub lit limelight. Local pmss mports recently described a $l,OOO-a-platefundraiser that Rogers held for Gov. Evan Bayh, who makes the appointments to the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. (The commission sets retail rates for electric utilities, including those of PSI, and must approve the utility’s Clean Air Act compliance plan.) According to press reports, Rogers raised $90,000 for the governor’s m-election campaign at his fundraiser. Rogers insisted that because the fundraiser was at his home, he was helping the governor as a private citizen, not as a PSI executive, but “that doesn’t wash from our perspective,” Williams maintains. Rogers’ response, according to Williams, was to say that back in Texas, no one would have camd. Adds Williams: “He’s not in Texas.” Rogers, however, seems not to have slowed down long enough to worry about what his critics are saying. He speaks about PSI and its challenges with boyish enthusiasm. ‘Being agile, creative, and quick on your feet is necessary for survival. That’s what makes this job fun,” D.S.

and our organization.” continued from page 11

Rogers acknowledges that the FERC decision has not yet produced concrete money-making opportunities for PSI, but he says

power to a neighboring utility

general approach is codified in

that has chosen to shut down one

the statute.

of its coal plants because compliance costs are too high. The Act establishes a free-mar-

One hundred and eleven “dirty” power plants are named in the Act and must reduce their

the market rate decision will in-

ket trading system for emissions

emissions by 1995 (Phase I> to the

deed make a difference in the future. “The market is soft now,”

allowances.

level cited in the statute. For PSI,

tem, utilities can swap allowances

that means cutting back its total

(“rights to pollute”) or sell them

sulfur emissions from roughly

on the open market to other inter-

475,000 tons to 285,000 tons by

ested parties (e.g., brokers, inde-

1995, according to the EPA.

pendent energy producers, etc.). The EPA is still formulating rules

decade, requires even more reduc-

Rogers admits. “But we think it will firm up” in coming years. The FERC decision also appears to give PSI the incentive to overcomply on the Clean Air Act and take advantage of the marketbased rates by selling surplus

24

Under the new sys-

for emissions trading and other portions of the Act, though the

Phase II, which begins the next tions. It establishes a nationwide cap of only 8.9 million allowances

The Electricity Journal

T

H

E

NEWS

IN

F

0

c u s

of sulfur dioxide per year. This

the open market. If the utility in-

point is certain. PSI must behave

cap, which becomes permanent

stalls scrubbers, it must therefore

like a juggler who is supposed to

after January 1,2000, applies to all

attempt to recover this cost in any

perform any number of tricks -

existing and new facilities. For

open-market transaction.

under a set of ground rules that

Why

PSI, that means it will only have

would a utility want to pay PSI to

has yet been written and for an

about 136,400 allowances.

install scrubbers at a plant when it

audience that has yet to arrive.

That

The clean air problems come at

figure represents 29% of the sul-

could do the same at its own unit?

fur dioxide it emitted in the mid-

And if PSI proceeds to build gas

198Os, EPA data shows.

turbines -

B

ut compliance is not just a mat-

ing about 500 megawatts of gas-

well. “Our middle-sized utility

ter of implementing straight-

fired generation in the coming

has made history,” Rogers says

line engineering drawings and

years to replace coal-fired plants

about the company that he has

installing scrubbers. PSI has sev-

-will

headed since October 1988.

eral basic choices and a myriad of

with even more surplus coal-fired

subchoices from which to select.

generation?

it has proposed build-

that not flood the market

a time when PSI has charted new ground for itself in other areas as

In late May, Indiana Gov. Evan Bayh signed into law a bill that allows PSI to obtain advance ap-

It can comply exactly with the in other words, it can re-

proval from the Indiana Utility

duce emissions by the levels speci-

Regulatory Commission for its

fied in the Act. Or, it can

Clean Air Act compliance plan,

overcomply and sell allowances

thus removing doubts that what-

to other utilities that have un-

ever strategy PSI chooses will be

dercomplied.

second-guessed at a later date by

statute -

Or, it can un-

dercomply and buy allowances

the Commission and found in

from utilities that have over-

hindsight to be imprudent.

complied. PSI, in short, can

Prior Plant Approval

choose whether it wants to be conservative and watch out for itself,

According to PSI officials, Indi-

or whether it wants to enter the free-wheeling, opportunistic world of allowance trading.

‘Byzantine Permutations’

Another dimension is that in

that allows a utility to obtain ap-

1995 the Act also allocates 200,000

proval of compliance plans before

extra allowances for utilities in the

money is invested.

Midwest. PSI will obtain a pro

Some of these options involve Byzantine permutations.

ana is the only state in the nation

Under

rata share of those allowances.

State statutes also allow PSI to pass on compliance costs for in-

Another set of additional allow-

stalled pollution control equip-

the Act, any utility that invests in

ances are available for clean-coal

ment to customers on an annual

scrubbers (which remove sulfur

demonstration technologies, such

basis as “construction work in

when coal is burned) will receive

as one that PSI and Destec, Inc.

progress,” another incentive for

a two-year extension of the Phase

(which operates cogeneration fa-

PSI to proceed with necessary ex-

I deadline. Scrubbers, however, are not only expensive to install

cilities at Dow Chemical plants)

penditures.

have submitted to the Depart-

In addition to those state provis-

they are expensive to maintain,

ment of Energy for funding. A de-

ions, PSI also benefitted from an

and they actually reduce the effi-

partment decision is expected in

April 1990 decision by the Indi-

ciency of the overall plant. In

fall. In each of these cases, PSI has

ana Utility Regulatory Commis-

PSI’s case, it has surplus coal gen-

the possibility to obtain greater

sion which allows the utility to

eration which it wants to sell on

flexibility,, but nothing at this

calculate its rate of return on a

August/September

1991

15