Attachment

UTILITY COMMITTEE AGENDA AUGUST 10, 2015 - 5:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 15 LOOCKERMAN PLAZA DOVER, DELAWARE PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE WELCOMED ON ANY ITEM AND WILL BE PERMITTED AT APPROPRIATE TIMES. WHEN POSSIBLE, PLEASE NOTIFY THE CITY CLERK (736-7008 OR E-MAIL AT CITYCLERK@DOVER.DE.US) SHOULD YOU WISH TO BE RECOGNIZED. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS 1. ANNUAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF GOVERNING POLICY FOR ENERGY COMMODITY RISK MANAGEMENT (STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THE REVISED POLICY) 2. QUARTERLY REVIEW OF UTILITY RELATED CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN (CIP) (ELECTRIC AND WATER/WASTEWATER) (APRIL, MAY, AND JUNE) (PRE-AUDIT) (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED) 3. TEA/NAES REPORT (JUNE) (STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THE REPORT) 4. UPDATES (COMMITTEE ACTION NOT REQUIRED ON THE BELOW ITEMS) A. GREEN ENERGY FUNDING AND PROGRAMMING B. NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEMS (MS4) PERMIT C. GARRISON OAK TECHNICAL PARK PROJECT UPDATES C-1. CITY INFRASTRUCTURE C-2. CALPINE ENERGY CENTER C-3. DOVER SUN PARK 5. ADJOURNMENT BY 5:50 P.M. /TM S:\AGENDAS-MINUTES-PACKETS-PRESENTATIONS-ATT&EXH\COMMITTEE-AGENDAS\2015\08-10-2015 UTILITY.WPD THE AGENDA ITEMS AS LISTED MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED IN SEQUENCE. THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OR THE DELETION OF ITEMS, INCLUDING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.

U ACTION FORM U PROCEEDING: Utility Committee DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN: Finance DATE SUBMITTED: 8/10/15 PREPARED BY: Donna Mitchell, Controller/Treasurer SUBJECT: Annual review of Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management REFERENCE: N/A RELATED PROJECT: N/A APPROVALS: City Council EXHIBITS: Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management TIME TIMETABLE: N/A RECOMMENDED ACTION: Acceptance of Revised Policy dated August 10, 2015. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The City of Dover has in place an approved risk management policy associated with the purchase of energy commodity and related investment contracts. The purpose of the energy commodity and investment contracts resulting from the application of the risk management policy is (i) to secure economic and reliable energy supply to meet the ongoing energy requirements of the City and its citizens, and (ii) to provide price certainty for those end users purchasing electricity supply from the City. City Management along with The Energy Authority completed their annual review of the Energy Commodity Risk Management Policy. The following changes are being recommended for the Utility Committee and City Council acceptance. 1. Page 7 – B. Executive Risk Management Committee duties and responsibilities o Recommend changes to this Policy to the City’s Utility Committee for approval and ensure the Utility Committee understands the City’s overall compliance with this Policy and associated procedures. 2. Page 9 – Item 4. TEA Client Services Manager o Update RMC (Risk Management Committee) on training of TEA employees. 3. Page 10 – Discussion of Risk – New element of risk, carries through in Appendix C and Appendix F o Regulatory Risk arises from participation in regulated markets. With the Independent System Operator (ISO) implementation of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 741, the City faces increasing regulatory risk when participating in wholesale energy markets. The TEA Compliance department works in conjunction with the TEA Risk Control department to help the City manage regulatory risk. Regulatory risk is managed by: o Annual Compliance Training for all employees participating in regulated markets; o Integration of the appropriate compliance culture within the Trading department through ongoing interaction between Compliance and Trading; o An independent monitoring and exposure measurement on transactions that could trigger an increase in regulatory risk. o 4. Page 16 – Mark to Market Report inserted o of all existing forward transactions executed,

City of Dover, Delaware Governing Policy For Energy Commodity Risk Management Effective: August 24, 2015 (Subsequent to Council approval) Approved by: City of Dover Council Date: August 10, 2015 (Last Revision June 19, 2014)

TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY ..................................................................4 A. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................4 B. Scope of Policy ......................................................................................................................4 C. Objectives and Risk Philosophy.........................................................................................5 D. Policy Administration .........................................................................................................5 MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS .............................................................................................6 A. Utility Committee of The City Council .............................................................................6 B. Executive Risk Management Committee .........................................................................6 1. City Manager ................................................................................................................. 8 2. Director of the Utility .................................................................................................... 8 3. Controller........................................................................................................................ 8 4. TEA Client Services Manager ...................................................................................... 9 DISCUSSION OF RISKS ...............................................................................................................9 MARKETING AND TRADING PRACTICES ............................................................................10 A. Standards of Conduct ........................................................................................................10 B. Products, Activities and Limitations ...............................................................................11 C. Contract Documentation and Confirmations ................................................................11 D. Training ...............................................................................................................................12 E. New Product Protocol .......................................................................................................12 RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS ...........................................................................12 A. Limits ................................................................................................................................12 1. Volume/Maturity/Value Limits .............................................................................. 12 2. Delegation Authority .................................................................................................. 13 3. Volume Limits ............................................................................................................. 13 4. Locational Limits ......................................................................................................... 14 B. Stress Testing and Back Testing .......................................................................................14 C. Instances of Exceeding Risk Limits .................................................................................14 CREDIT POLICY ..........................................................................................................................14 2

A. Measuring Credit Risk ......................................................................................................14 B. Analysis and Extension of Credit Limits ........................................................................15 C. Instances of Exceeding Credit Limits ..............................................................................15 REPORTING .................................................................................................................................16 A. Risk Reporting ....................................................................................................................16 B. Credit Reporting ................................................................................................................17 C. Hedge Effectiveness Reporting ........................................................................................17 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS ............................................................................17 POLICY DISTRIBUTION AND COUNSEL ...............................................................................18 A. Distribution Outside The City..........................................................................................18 B. Designated Counsel ...........................................................................................................18 APPENDIX A – Approved Products .............................................................................................19 APPENDIX B – Approved Counterparties and Threshold Tables ................................................20 APPENDIX C – Business Risks ....................................................................................................24 APPENDIX D – Glossary ..............................................................................................................25 APPENDIX E – Swap Transaction Representative .......................................................................27 APPENDIX F – Authorized Individuals........................................................................................29 3

PURPOSE OF THE RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY A. Introduction The City of Dover (“City”) and its customers are routinely exposed to energy price risk, volume variability risk, basis risk and credit risk – herein referred to collectively as energy commodity risk - in the normal conduct of serving its electric load requirements. Volatility of energy commodity prices and volumetric uncertainty (either supply/generation or load obligations) impose a substantial and direct risk to the City’s financial and operating performance. By authority of its charter, the City has responsibility for overseeing the City’s electricity operations, including the management of its cost of serving Dover’s customers. By agreement dated May 6, 2011 and approved by the City (the “EMA”), the City has engaged The Energy Authority, Inc. (“TEA”) to assist the City with Asset Management and Strategic Planning Services, Risk Management Services, and Energy Management Services. This Policy for Energy Commodity Risk Management (“Policy”) is established the explicit understanding that the City has retained and delegated responsibilities to TEA to provide Risk Management Services. Additionally, the City has issued this Policy for dealing with the philosophy, framework and delegation of responsibilities necessary to govern activities related to Dover’s energy commodity risk management. As set forth herein, the City has established an organizational structure, delegated responsibility and established internal controls and procedures to ensure that all transactional and oversight activities are conducted in compliance with this Policy and in accordance with the City’s normal reporting, legal, financing and regulatory requirements relating to energy assets and transactions. B. Scope of Policy This Policy covers all transactions entered into the by the City of Dover designed to meet the City’s electric load requirement and the management of risk related to these transactions. In the event of conflict between this Policy and the EMA, the Policy shall control. This Policy is separate and distinct from enterprise risk management policies and procedures addressing the City’s safe operation of its generating stations and energy infrastructure, insurance requirements, permit compliance, employee matters regulatory compliance with laws and regulations of the State of Delaware and Federal 4

Agencies such as EPA, FERC, NERC and CFTC or other potential risks to the City beyond the purchase and sale of fuel and electric power and its ancillary products. C. Objectives and Risk Philosophy The objectives of the Policy are to identify energy commodity price and credit risk exposures and give the City a framework for the quantification and management of these exposures. The Policy will identify the reports needed to convey how the identified risk exposures can potentially impact the City’s overall cost of providing electricity service to its customers and report on the risk management of the transactions associated with City’s electric load requirements. Under the Policy, risk management activities will be conducted consistent with the City’s overall objective of appropriate risk mitigation. There are several objectives of the Policy which, when taken and executed together, serve to manage the City’s energy commodity price exposures. Specifically, the Policy:  Establishes framework for developing credit limits for counterparties and quantifies and manages the credit exposures related to potential counterparty abrogation  Quantifies the impact of the above exposures on City’s financial results  Manages the impact of the above exposures in line with the City’s identified level of risk tolerance  Provides clear delineation of responsibilities and authority, outline a separation of duties, and ensure reporting of risk is timely and accurate.  Ensures that the impact of any action affecting the City’s position is consistently quantified, monitored and authorized. The City’s risk management activities will be conducted consistent with its overall objective of appropriate risk mitigation and never for purposes of speculation. D. Policy Administration This Policy has been approved by the Executive Risk Management Committee and The Utility Committee of the Dover City Council. The Utility Committee must approve modifications to the Policy with the exception of the appendix information which can be modified with the approval of the Executive Risk Management Committee. 5

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS This Policy articulates the management and organization of the City and TEA to serve as a control framework outlining delegation of duties and responsibilities. A. Utility Committee of The City Council The Utility Committee of The City Council (The Committee) has a responsibility to provide approval of this Policy. With this approval, The Committee also assumes additional duties. They will understand the risks the City is and could be exposed to due to their energy commodity risk management activities. In this role, the Committee will have a responsibility to also understand the City’s policies and procedures, internal controls and systems which are used to help manage the City’s energy commodity risks. The Committee will approve any amendments to the Policy or limits within. The Executive Risk Management Committee will update the Committee periodically regarding the Policy and its functions. It will be the Committee’s responsibility to:  Discuss guidelines and strategic policies that govern the process by which the Energy Risk Management Committee assesses and manages risks  Review and approve the risk policy at least annually  Approve new members of the Executive Risk Management Committee  Acknowledge the risk inherent in transactions covered under this Policy B. Executive Risk Management Committee An Executive Risk Management Committee (“ERMC”) has been formed to provide executive management oversight for the City’s energy commodity risk management activities. The ERMC is charged with the creation, amendment and administration of this Policy, including acquiring any approvals required by the Utility Committee, and will ensure that all energy commodity risk management activities of the City are performed consistent with this Policy. The ERMC will meet at least monthly to review compliance and conduct its business as described in this Policy. The ERMC shall be comprised of the following voting members: The City Manager, The Director of Utility, The City’s Controller and TEA’s Client Service Manager. The City’s ERMC will make decisions following the process outlined in this Policy. TEA’s Client Services Manager may include representatives from other areas within TEA in the monthly ERMC meetings who will attend in person or by conference call as non-voting advisors. Other City employees and TEA staff may also be asked to attend 6

meetings from time-to-time, as the ERMC deems necessary. The responsibilities of the ERMC shall include:  Establish scope and frequency for management reporting to the Utility Committee.  No less than annually, review the City’s Energy Commodity Policies and Procedures for correctness and completeness.  Review and approve any new risk report or change to an existing risk report provided by TEA to monitor risks outlined in this Policy.  Understand and approve any models, methodologies, and assumptions used for measuring risks such as volume risk, process risk, counterparty risk and commodity risk.  Monitor the City’s risks and ensure they are within the limits and are being managed according to what is indicated within the City’s Policy and associated procedures  Understand the City’s risk management objectives and risk tolerances.  Review and approve the risk management and trading strategy programs and associated risk. Each program should be reviewed to ensure alignment with Policy objectives and compliance with risk limits within this Policy.  Periodically review any risk management program approved in light of recent market changes, and ensure continued compliance with its established guidelines  Review and approve new products, markets, trading counterparties and credit limits  Review all violations and exceptions to this Policy and report such to the Committee.  Approve the individuals or companies that engage in the City’s commodity transactions and are subject to the limits within this Policy.  Ensure that the individuals or companies authorized to transact on behalf of the City as well as manage its risks, are appropriately trained and qualified.  Ensure independence and segregation of duties between front, middle and back office at TEA.  Recommend changes to this Policy to the City’s Utility Committee for approval and ensure the Utility Committee understands the City’s overall compliance with this Policy and associated procedures.  The ERMC will meet at least monthly to review risks identified and reported on by the Policy, this meeting shall be chaired by The City Manager. Minutes of each meeting of the ERMC shall be recorded and reflect any decisions and follow-up action items to be performed. These minutes will be reviewed and approved by the members of the ERMC in a timely manner. 7

Each member of the ERMC has a unique role as defined below: 1. City Manager The City Manager is independent of all commercial functions and carries the responsibility of establishment and maintenance of risk management for the City. The City Manager will be a voting member of the ERMC and act as a chair of the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Ensure this Policy is maintained.  Oversee reviews of the City’s energy commodity risks, limits, risk measurement methodologies and models, and programs and recommend changes to the ERMC.  Ensure potential transactions and their impacts on the City’s risks and limits defined within this Policy.  Develop and monitor the implementation of the Policy, and oversee other risk management processes and procedures established by this Policy or otherwise by the ERMC. 2. Director of the Utility The Director of the Utility is responsible for all trading, hedging, pricing, structuring, and market and operational risk management activities associated with the City. The Director of the Utility will be a voting member of the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Review the effectiveness of transaction processing systems and procedures relating to risk measurement.  Recommend operational risk and business risk assessment guidelines. 3. Controller The Controller is independent of all commercial functions and carries the responsibility of the City’s accounting practices. The Controller will be a voting member on the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Perform financial accounting including accounting for hedging and derivatives activities.  Comply with tax rules and make appropriate tax elections.  Record realized and unrealized gains and losses.  Reconcile general ledger, cash transactions and margin accounts.  Implement tax-hedge accounting policies and other regulatory tax requirements. 8

 Develop and maintain documentation outlining standard procedures for conducting business.  Invoice counterparties and resolve billing disputes.  Perform daily/weekly/monthly transaction checkout with counterparties.  Develop and maintain documentation outlining standard procedures for conducting business. 4. TEA Client Services Manager The TEA Client Service Manager roles and responsibilities are defined exhibit B of the EMA between the City and TEA. The TEA Client Service Manager will be a voting member on the ERMC. Other responsibilities include:  Monitor risk reports between ERMC meetings.  Report to the Committee and the ERMC on the City’s adherence to all limits and functions within this policy.  Engage the ERMC in discussions regarding events or developments that could expose the company to potential losses.  Recommend to the ERMC specific risk limits consistent with the City’s risk management objectives, risk tolerance, and risk management policy.  Coordinate and distribute independent market fundamental analysis.  Provide advisory support and recommendations as specified in Article 5 of the EMA.  Update RMC on training of TEA employees. DISCUSSION OF RISKS This Policy covers the management of all material energy market risks faced by the City. A comprehensive list of risks that are or could be relevant to City is shown in Appendix C of the Policy. Among the most critical of these risks are commodity risk, counterparty risk, process risk, volume risk, and budget risk. These risks are measured by the limit structure and controls outlined in the Policy. Commodity risk represents the potential adverse impacts to the value of the City’s portfolio due to changes in the market. Commodity risk encompasses volatility risk, forward price risk, basis risk, correlation risk and liquidity risk. Counterparty risk represents the potential losses the City could incur due to delivery risk and receivable risk. Delivery risk stems from a supplier or trading counterparty that is unable or unwilling to perform on its commitments including but not limited to delivery or receipt of commodities. Receivable Risk includes the City’s risk associated with a counterparty’s timeliness of payment for services rendered. 9

Process risk represents the risks associated with process problems including, but not limited to, inaccurate data capture, untimely trade execution or settlement problems. Controls over process risks are embedded in the organizational structure of TEA through the design processes and operating procedures. Volume Risk represents the potential for unforeseen changes from projections of excess or shortfall of capacity or energy from the actual needs. When variances are large coupled with large costs to transact and adverse moves in market prices this risk could be realized. In management of this risk, the City must be aware of the fact that unexpected variations in volume are often highly correlated with price movements. Budget Risk represents the potential to deviate outside of tolerable bounds of the City’s budget. Deviations from budget can be caused by forecast error or unforeseeable adverse changes in market prices. Regulatory Risk arises from participation in regulated markets. With the Independent System Operator (ISO) implementation of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 741, the City faces increasing regulatory risk when participating in wholesale energy markets. The TEA Compliance department works in conjunction with the TEA Risk Control department to help the City manage regulatory risk. Regulatory risk is managed by:  Annual Compliance Training for all employees participating in regulated markets;  Integration of the appropriate compliance culture within the Trading department through ongoing interaction between Compliance and Trading;  An independent monitoring and exposure measurement on transactions that could trigger an increase in regulatory risk. MARKETING AND TRADING PRACTICES A. Standards of Conduct Individuals authorized to transact for the City shall not misrepresent, conceal or withhold information regarding energy commodity trading and risk management transactions to any person responsible for the accurate recording and/or reporting of such transactions; participate in any such transaction or similar activity for the benefit of any party other than the City; or hold or be a beneficiary of any financial interest in any entity with which the employee is engaged in trading or other business activity (other than ownership of an interest in a mutual fund managed by another party). Further, no employee authorized to place or execute such transactions may engage in trading power or energy commodities derivative instruments for his or her personal account. 10

B. Products, Activities and Limitations Pursuant to achieving the City’s core objectives for the purpose of energy commodity risk management, the following limitations shall apply.  Permissible instruments will be restricted to the products and instruments specified in Appendix A – Approved Products of the Policy; o All physical forward transactions shall be governed by the Edison Electrical Institutive (EEI), North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB), or similar agreements with counterparties approved by the City. o The City reserves the right to enter into financial hedge transactions to effectuate Policy objectives, but does not authorize TEA to enter into financial hedge transactions on its behalf. Any such financial transactions that the City may enter into shall be governed by ISDA agreements with counterparties as approved by the City.  The maturity for each permissible instrument will be restricted to the maturity limits specified in the risk limits section of the Policy.  Transaction volumes for each risk management transaction will be restricted to the amounts specified in the Risk Limits section of the Policy.  Risk management transactions will be outlined in the City of Dover Hedge Program which will be approved by the ERMC. Risk management transactions may include the following: o Hedging the forward price of purchased power for delivery to the City as needed to meet its electric load requirements. o Hedging the forward price of natural gas and fuels as needed to generate power to meet the City’s electric load requirements. o Unwinding of hedges to accommodate changes in expected load requirements, or for economic reasons subject to explicit constraints set by the ERMC. C. Contract Documentation and Confirmations No over-the-counter transaction may be executed until an EEI, NAESB, or similar agreement has been authorized by the City, approved by the ERMC and fully executed by the parties. Written confirmations will be required from counterparties, as defined in the Master Service Agreement between the City and counterparty, within one business day or such longer time as required by the contract in question for all risk management transactions. Contemporaneous with any commitments and prior to receipt of written confirmations, verbal commitments shall be memorialized internally as to instrument structure, quantity, relevant time horizon, price and any other relevant terms; such internal 11

documentation shall be time stamped and correlated to the ultimate written confirmation to or from the counterparty. Both the internal documentation as well as the written confirmation from the counterparty shall be provided to TEA’s Risk Control Group immediately upon receipt for verification. In the event that there is a material failure to provide timely documentation or confirmations, then at the City Manager’s sole discretion, the offending individual’s authorization may be suspended. Similarly, if the failure to provide timely documentation or confirmations is due to the failure of counterparty, then at the discretion of the City Manager, a moratorium may be imposed on transactions with that counterparty. In such cases, the City Manager shall notify the ERMC of the issues leading to the suspension or moratorium shall. Nothing herein shall inhibit the City Manager from bringing control issues to the TEA’s Client Services Manager prior to a decision on materiality or the imposition of a suspension of trading privileges or counterparty moratorium. D. Training The ERMC will ensure that all City employees and/or TEA Staff that will execute transactions on behalf of the City will have appropriate training in the markets in which the transactions occur. E. New Product Protocol As required to manage the City’s energy commodity risk the ERMC shall approve new products provided the requirements of the New Product Approval Procedure are met. RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS A. Limits The limit structure is designed to quantify the types of risk in City’s energy commodity portfolio. The City will manage and report on its energy commodity market risk using Volume/Maturity/Value Limits, a Cost of Service Limit and a Hedge Loss Limit. 1. Volume/Maturity/Value Limits Transaction limits for the Individuals Authorized in Appendix F E to execute transactions and the maturity limits for each permissible instrument are listed below. Transactions for amounts in excess of those listed may be executed only upon approval 12

of the ERMC. This limit, maturity and value structure is not intended for use when transacting day-ahead and real time in the PJM market. Maximum Daily Notional Limits Volume/Maturity/Value Limits Volume Value ($000) Balance of the Month through 12 Months 50 20,000 Power Between 13 Months and 24 Months 50 20,000 (MW) Between 25 Months and 36 Months 25 10,000 Hourly Limit Between 37 Months and 48 Months 25 10,000 Between 49 Months and 60 Months 25 10,000 Balance of the Month through 12 Months 30,000 400 Natural Gas Between 13 Months and 24 Months 30,000 400 (MMBtu) Between 25 Months and 36 Months 10,000 200 Monthly Limit Between 37 Months and 48 Months 10,000 200 Between 49 Months and 60 Months 10,000 200 Balance of the Month through 12 Months 6,000 400 #2/#6 Fuel Oil Between 13 Months and 24 Months 6,000 400 (Bbl) Between 25 Months and 36 Months 3,000 200 Monthly Limit Between 37 Months and 48 Months 3,000 200 Between 49 Months and 60 Months 3,000 200 The amounts in the table above refer to the maximum volume of orders that can be placed in any one day the individuals authorized to conduct trades for the specified time period. On any one day the maximum transaction volume placed can be for up to 50 MegaWatts per hour for every hour during a single calendar month (including both on-peak and off-peak hours), OR 25,000 MMBtu per month for all months pertinent to the natural gas transaction, OR 6,000 Bbl per month for all months pertinent to the oil transaction. 2. Delegation Authority The Utility Committee delegates the following approval authority limits to the Dover ERMC. The ERMC may delegate these authorities to individuals authorized to commit Dover to financial obligations. Position Maturity Limit Term Limit Notional Value Limit Dover ERMC 5 years 5 years 20,000,000 3. Volume Limits For no reason should a transaction be executed that exceeds the City’s electric load requirements. If there is an adjustment to the City’s electric load requirements and the existing transactions greater than 100% of the adjusted electric load requirements the ERMC will review and approve the offsetting strategy deployed in sufficient proportion to mitigate the encroachment. 13

4. Locational Limits Non-Commodity Transactions must support the requirement of one of the City’s generation units, native load or transaction locations. B. Stress Testing and Back Testing The City’s positions shall be periodically stress tested and models shall be back tested. The processes around these tests are outlined in the Stress Testing and Back Testing Procedure. C. Instances of Exceeding Risk Limits Should the City or TEA enter into a transaction that causes the portfolio to exceed any above mentioned limits the Director of the Utility shall, in addition to notifying the ERMC, also notify the Chair of The Committee as soon as practicable and shall provide periodic reports to the Chair on the status the transactions for as long as the City is exceeding its limits. The ERMC will review and determine whether any liquidation or offsetting of transactions is warranted. The incident will be documented as a Policy Exception by the Director of the Utility. CREDIT POLICY Credit Risk is the risk due to the uncertainty in a counterparty’s ability to meet its contractual obligations. The primary objective of this credit policy is to mitigate, to the extent commercially reasonable, the credit risks associated with transactions covered in this Policy while still allowing the City to achieve its objectives. A. Measuring Credit Risk The status of credit risk will be measured and reported through reports provided by TEA. The current credit exposure will be reported at the agreement level via a Counterparty Credit Report provided by TEA. This information will be made available in real time to TEA trading personnel so that it can be checked prior to executing transactions for the City. Those responsible for risk oversight at the City and TEA will have access to this information no less frequently than once per day. The ERMC will monitor overall credit utilization and any credit exceptions at least monthly. When measuring the current credit risk, netting will be applied to the exposure if the City’s contract with a counterparty includes provisions for netting. 14

B. Analysis and Extension of Credit Limits Physical and financial commodity transactions will be executed with counterparties approved by the ERMC with credit available to support the transactions. The creditworthiness of a counterparty will be determined by both qualitative and quantitative factors. Factors shall include, but not limited to:  A company’s debt credit ratings provided by the rating agencies.  Financial data such as an analysis of the income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow, as well as liquidity and capital structure.  Subjective factors such as company’s fuel diversity, overall size, risk management policy and internal controls, geographic diversity, and market intelligence. A credit limit is the amount of unsecured credit granted to a counterparty. Unsecured credit exposure includes amounts owed by the counterparty, whether billed or not, and the mark-to-market differences in value of any collateral which the counterparty has provided the City. Any net exposure above the collateral threshold will require the posting of collateral by a counterparty. Further information on the City’s procedure for establishing credit is contained in the Counterparty & Credit Review Process. Collateral thresholds, term limitations and credit exposure limits will be subject to the maximums indicated in Appendix B, based upon the lower of the S&P and Moody’s credit ratings. At no time will the City incur a credit exposure with any counterparty greater than $60,000,000. C. Instances of Exceeding Credit Limits The City and TEA are restricted by the credit limits approved by the ERMC. The ERMC can suspend trading with a counterparty, if that counterparty’s credit limit has been reached or exceeded. The City or TEA traders shall not exceed the Counterparty Credit Limit by executing transactions with any counterparty without approval of the ERMC. The ERMC will determine when it’s appropriate to require additional collateral if a counterparty’s credit exposure exceeds its credit limit. Collateral includes standing letter of credit, cash, and prepayments. All credit exceptions will be documented and reported to the ERMC and the Committee as Policy Exceptions. 15

REPORTING A. Risk Reporting Preparation of timely reports is critical to monitoring risk. TEA will furnish the required reports on a regular frequency for the City in a format acceptable to the ERMC. In addition, the ERMC and its designees will be provided access to the City’s risk reports as updated daily via TEA’s secure Web Portal. Reports required on a monthly basis and for periodic meetings of the ERMC include the following:  Profit and Loss Report The Profit and Loss (P&L) Report shows the daily realization of transactions at either the transaction price or the market price as transaction roll from unrealized to realized. This report should show volumes, transaction prices and market prices of realized physical and financial power and fuel transactions.  Mark to Market Report The Mark to Market (“MTM”) Report conveys the potential transaction exposure, of all existing forward transactions executed, if the energy commodity portfolio was liquidated at the most recent market settlement prices. This report should show volumes, transaction prices and market prices of unrealized physical and financial power and fuel transactions.  Daily Activity Report The Activity Report presents a summary of the day’s trades executed in the bilateral energy market.  Cost of Service Report The City’s exposure to energy price risk shall be monitored and reported on a Cost-of- Service basis. All calculations are at the wholesale level. The Cost-of-Service recognizes all prior (expired) months within the Power Year on the basis of actual (incurred) costs, and recognizes all forward (pending) months within the Power Year on the basis of expected forward power and fuel prices and expected forward load-following risks. As defined below, the Cost-of-Service is an aggregation of Forward Energy Commodity Portfolio Cost, the Load Following Cost Expectation and the City’s Budget Target for Purchase Power Expense. o The Net Purchased Power Cost shows the net cost of all physical and financial transactions related to the City’s anticipated commodity requirements for power and fuel and is based on the price of all hedge transactions plus the forward market price of all unhedged transactions valued at current forward prices for 16

energy commodities, customer-level cost per MWH of all physical and financial transactions related to Dover’s actual plus anticipated energy. o The expected fixed costs defined as load-serving entity (LSE) capacity costs, transmission costs and TEA management fees. o The Expected Load-Following Cost for a specified power year is defined as the expected cost (or revenue) associated with intra-month load variations due to weather or other events affecting demand. As an interim measure due to lack of necessary market information and the rapid evolution of the PJM RTO market, the ERMC has specified $2.50 per MWH as an estimate of the Load Following Cost to be used for estimating the City’s Forward Cost-of-Service Report. The ERMC will update the Expected Load Following estimate while lack of necessary market information persists no less than annually. o The Budget Target for Purchase Power Expense represents the City’s view of expected purchase power expense. B. Credit Reporting  Counterparty Credit Report The Counterparty Credit Report conveys the exposure to all counterparties with which the City has credit exposure resulting from its energy commodity risk management activities.  CFTC Reporting The City understands that transacting over the counter (OTC) swaps carries an additional Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) reporting function. Once required by the CFTC, the City will report on how the City generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non-cleared swaps in a manner acceptable to the CFTC. C. Hedge Effectiveness Reporting If the City’s transactions require a hedge effectiveness test, those testing results will be reported to the ERMC no later than one month after the end of the financial reporting period. The report will include a summary of testing methodology, assumptions of the testing and the outcome of results with a pass or fail by transaction. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS Since information systems play a vital role in The City’s trading abilities, the City shall ensure that the information systems and technology used to store all transaction information is maintained and secure. The City’s transactions will be stored in TEA’s enterprise trading and risk management system. TEA uses the TriplePoint Commodity 17

XL (CXL) system, integrated with Commodity XL for Credit Risk (Credit Risk). TEA has assigned a Database Administrator (DBA) that is charged with the database security and maintenance for the transaction database, CXL. The following safeguards for data security and backup will be installed:  Transaction data stored in the system of record will be replicated daily to ensure data redundancy;  The CXL database will be backed up at least daily after the close of business. POLICY DISTRIBUTION AND COUNSEL A. Distribution Outside The City The City’s Policy is restricted to the use of the City and TEA organizations. It shall not be distributed outside these organizations without the consent the ERMC. B. Designated Counsel Questions about the interpretation of any matters of this Policy should be referred to ERMC. The ERMC will provide clarification and explanation on any updates to this Policy. All legal matters stemming from this Policy will be referred to the City’s Legal Counsel. 18

APPENDIX A – Approved Products The following shall constitute a list of approved products to be utilized by TEA to manage the City’s energy commodity portfolio:  Physical Power  Physical Natural Gas Delivered Dover via Eastern Shore Pipeline  Physical Residual Fuel Oil (#6) Delivered Dover  Physical Residual Fuel Oil (#2) Delivered Dover  Capacity  Financial Power  Financial Call Option  Financial Put Option  PJM Demand Bids and Generation Offers  PJM InSchedules  PJM Transmission Products o Financial Transmission Rights o Annual Auction Revenue Rights  PJM Tier 2 Synchronized Reserves The above instruments can be executed by TEA on behalf of the City of Dover for the current and next two successive Power Years (July to June). 19

APPENDIX B – Approved Counterparties and Threshold Tables This Appendix establishes approved counterparties and their Collateral thresholds. Collateral thresholds, term limitations and credit exposure limits that are subject to the following maximums based upon the lower of the S&P and Moody’s credit ratings: Credit Thresholds from Dover Extended to the Counterparty Constellation Energy Threshold S&P Moody's $ 60,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 50,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 50,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 40,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 30,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ 20,000,000 BBB- Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Integrys Threshold S&P Moody's $ 20,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ 1,000,000 BBB- Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Sempra Energy Threshold S&P Moody's $ 20,000,000 A or above A2 or above $ 20,000,000 A- to A+ A3 $ 15,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 10,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or lower Baa3 or lower Conectiv Threshold S&P Moody's Unspecified * Above BBB+ Above Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 * Conectiv does not have a defined credit threshold, so for planning purposes, a $10,000,000 threshold is imposed as a conservative limit 20

Macquarie Cook Power Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below FPL Energy Threshold S&P Moody's $ 30,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 25,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 20,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 15,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 10,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Deutsche Bank Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Barclays Bank Threshold S&P Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below 21

Credit Thresholds from the Counterparty Extended to Dover Constellation Energy Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 40,000,000 AA- or Above Aa3 or above $ 30,000,000 A+ A1 $ 20,000,000 A A2 $ 10,000,000 A- A3 $ - BBB or below Baa1 or below Integrys Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 20,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ Aa3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ 1,000,000 BBB- Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 Sempra Energy Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 27,000,000 A- or above A3 or above $ 5,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 1,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or lower Baa3 or lower Conectiv Threshold Fitch Moody's Unspecified * Above BBB+ Above Baa3 $ - Below BBB- Below Baa3 *Conectiv does not have a defined credit threshold, so for planning purposes, a $10,000,000 threshold is imposed as a conservative limit 22

Macquarie Cook Power Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below FPL Energy Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 23,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 18,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 13,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 8,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 3,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Deutsche Bank Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below Barclays Bank Threshold Fitch Moody's $ 25,000,000 AAA Aaa $ 20,000,000 AA- to AA+ AA3 to Aa1 $ 15,000,000 A- to A+ A3 to A1 $ 10,000,000 BBB+ Baa1 $ 5,000,000 BBB Baa2 $ - BBB- or below Baa3 or below 23

APPENDIX C – Business Risks Business Risks Topology Commodity Counterparty Process Volume Budget Regulatory Risk Risk Risk Risk Risk Risk Receivables Market Load Market Market Price Risk Risk Deadline Risk Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty Performance Reporting Load Load Volume Risk Supply Risk Risk Risk Uncertainty Uncertainty M2M/Forward Generation Forecast Forecast Curve Risk Uncertainty Error Error Liquidity Risk Basis Risk 24

APPENDIX D – Glossary Back Office – That part of a trading organization which handles transaction accounting, confirmations, management reporting, and working capital management. Bilateral Transaction - Any physical or financial transaction between two counterparties, neither of whom is an Exchange or market entity (e.g. MISO). Capacity – The real power output rating of a generator or system, typically in megawatts, measured on an instantaneous basis. Commodity - A basic good used in commerce that is interchangeable with other commodities of the same type. Commodities are most often used as inputs in the production of other goods or services. The quality of a given commodity may differ slightly, but it is essentially uniform across producers. When they are traded on an exchange, commodities must also meet specified minimum standards, also known as a basis grade. Financial Bilateral Transaction – A Bilateral Transaction that is non-physical and is defined by a Source Point, Sink Point, and Delivery Point that may be any CP Nodes as specified by the Midwest ISO. Financial Forward – An agreement regarding a position in a specified commodity, a specified price, and a specified future settlement date, that does not result in physical delivery of the commodity. Rather one party in the agreement makes a payment to the other party on the basis of the commodity price at the future date. Front Office – That part of a trading organization which solicits customer business, services existing customers, executes trades and ensures the physical delivery of commodities. Hedging Transaction - A transaction designed to reduce the exposure of a specific outstanding position or portfolio; “fully hedged” equates to complete elimination of the targeted risk and “partially hedged” implies a risk reduction of less than 100%. Mark-to-Market Value – A measure of the current value of unrealized positions; includes both Open Positions and Closed Positions. Middle Office – That part of a trading organization that measures and reports on market risks, develops risk management policies and monitors compliance with those policies, manages contract administration and credit, and keeps management and the Board informed on risk management issues. 25

Policy – Dover’s Governing Policy for Energy Commodity Risk, as amended and approved by The Utility Committee. Portfolio – A collection of transactions. Realized Gains/(Losses) – The amount earned (or lost) from a transaction , considered to be realized once the time for performance has lapsed (e.g. delivery of power in the case of physical transactions or expiration of an option in the case of financial transactions). Term – The total duration of a contract, defined as the number of days between the beginning flow date and ending flow date, inclusive. Unrealized Gains/ (Losses) – The amount expected to earn (lose) on a specific transaction(s); however, the time for performance has not lapsed. The total value of Unrealized Gains/ (Losses) is the Mark-to-Market value. 26

APPENDIX E – Swap Transaction Representative Purpose: To ensure that the City of Dover, a Special Entity under the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act, selects a qualified representative (“Representative”) to provide advice and guidance when entering into swap transactions with Swap Dealers or Major Swap Participants. Definitions: Special Entity: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 6s(h)(2)(C) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 23.401(c). The City of Dover is a Special Entity as defined by 17 C.F.R. 23.401(c)(2). Swap Dealer: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a(49) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 1.3(ggg) Major Swap Participant: As defined in 7 U.S.C. 1a(33) and further interpreted in 17 C.F.R. 1.3(hhh) Representative: As defined in this policy and 17 C.F.R. 23.450 Policy: Selection: The City of Dover shall endeavor to seek and employ an individual or entity that will voluntarily act as a Representative for all energy commodity swap transactions between XXXX and any Swap Dealer or Major Swap Participant. The Representative must meet the following qualifications identified in 17 C.F.R. 23.450(b): (i) Has sufficient knowledge to evaluate the transaction and risks; (ii) Is not subject to a statutory disqualification; (iii) Is independent of the swap dealer or major swap participant; (iv) Undertakes a duty to act in the best interests of the Special Entity it represents; (v) Makes appropriate and timely disclosures to the Special Entity; (vi) Evaluates, consistent with any guidelines provided by the Special Entity, fair pricing and the appropriateness of the swap; and (vii) In the case of a Special Entity as defined in § 23.401(c)(2) or (4), is subject to restrictions on certain political contributions imposed by the Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or a self-regulatory organization subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission or the Securities and Exchange Commission; provided however, that this paragraph (b)(1)(vii) of this section shall not apply if the representative is an employee of the Special Entity. The Representative and the City of Dover shall enter into a legal agreement that binds the Representative to comply with items (i) through (vii) in this policy. 27

At no longer than any 12 month interval, the City of Dover shall review the performance of the Representative to ensure compliance with items (i) through (vii) in this policy. 28

APPENDIX F – Authorized Individuals As described in RISK LIMITS AND RISK MEASUREMENTS, the ERMC may delegate approval authority. Dover has delegated to TEA execution authority and with the delegations below, if there is a trade within the limit structure, TEA may execute without ERMC approval: Position Maturity Limit Term Limit Notional Value Limit TEA Trader 30 days 30 days 1,000,000 29

City of Dover Capital Investment Plan Project Tracking Report Quarterly Report as of Jun 30, 2015 Preliminary Points to Remember - * Original Project Budget = Original Total Project Budget initially included in approved annual budget. * Latest Project Budget = Revised Total Project Budget included in most recent approved annual budget or one of the following: bond resolution, revolving fund loan agreement, Council approved budget amendment, or City Manager approved amendment as per the Budget Amendment Procedure. * Current Fiscal Year - Revised Fiscal Year Budget = Current Year approved project budgets plus carry forward balances of unspent budgets in the prior fiscal year. Project Carry Forward balances will be submitted to City Council for amendment in January 2010. Can also be amended with City Manager approval per the Budget Amendment Procedure. * Water Quality, Inflow/Infiltration, Distribution Upgrades and New Development projects are budgeted as a blanket project and once individual projects are identified and estimated they are created using an allocation of the overall budgeted amount. * Status and Comments provided by City Manager. Community Water & Total Current Year Budget Funding Sources General Transportation Wastewater Electric CIP Budget Balance $ 1,989,300 $ - $ 10,994,600 $ 2,318,900 $ 15,302,800 General Billings for Reimbursement of Expense - - - 250,000 250,000 Debt Financing 3,532,200 - - - 3,532,200 Other State/Federal Grants 208,000 - - - 208,000 State Community Transportation Funds - 1,677,800 - - 1,677,800 Transfer from WW Impact Fee Reserve - - 1,315,600 - 1,315,600 Transfer from General Fund 2,196,000 - - - 2,196,000 Transfer from Operating Funds - - 3,000,000 4,750,000 7,750,000 Transfer from Parkland Reserve 104,000 - - - 104,000 Interest Income - - 40,000 24,800 64,800 Total Funding Sources (Unaudited) $ 8,029,500 $ 1,677,800 $ 15,350,200 $ 7,343,700 $ 32,401,200

City of Dover General Fund - Major CIP Projects Quarterly Report as of Jun 30, 2015 Preliminary TOTAL PROJECT - PAST, CURRENT & FUTURE BUDGETS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR Original Latest Project Project % Original Revised Fiscal % Project Project Project To Date Budget Budget Fiscal Year Fiscal Year YTD Budget Budget Code Type Description Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Status Comments 1 FY 2013 2 ST1304 M B/L Garrison Farm Improvements $ 1,924,000 $ 4,600,000 $ 2,853,968 $ 1,746,032 62.0% $ 2,600,000 $ 4,226,700 $ 2,480,657 $ 1,746,043 58.7% In Process Project approximately 80% complete 3 Totals - FY 2013 $ 1,924,000 $ 4,600,000 $ 2,853,968 $ 1,746,032 62.0% $ 2,600,000 $ 4,226,700 $ 2,480,657 $ 1,746,043 58.7% 4 5 FY 2014 6 --- Equipment (Sprayer) $ 18,600 $ 18,600 $ - $ 18,600 0.0% $ - $ 18,600 $ - $ 18,600 0.0% Cancelled 7 CS1402 G Security Cameras/Fence 55,000 55,000 49,672 5,328 90.3% - 55,000 49,672 5,328 90.3% Complete 8 PR1401 A/C System @ Pitts Center 65,000 104,000 104,000 - 100.0% - 104,000 104,000 - 100.0% Complete 9 PR1402 G Schutte Park Land Improvement 30,000 49,700 49,700 0 100.0% - 48,300 48,276 24 99.9% Complete 10 PR1403 G Demolition @ White Oak Park - 70,500 59,452 11,048 84.3% - 66,100 55,047 11,053 83.3% Complete Project complete awaiting final 11 ST1402 Concrete Program 70,000 45,500 3,937 41,563 8.7% - 42,300 702 41,598 1.7% Complete invoices 12 ST1403 B/L FY 2014 Bonded Street Program 595,494 547,594 548,461 (867) 100.2% - 85,294 150 85,144 0.2% Complete 13 ST1403 B/L Pear Street 126,100 126,100 123,133 2,967 97.6% - 126,100 123,133 2,967 97.6% Complete 14 ST1403 B/L Emergency Storm/Sewer Repair 18,406 18,406 18,406 0 100.0% 18,406 18,406 0 100.0% Complete 15 ST1404 Village of Westover IV 129,400 129,400 129,400 - 100.0% - 129,400 129,400 - 100.0% Complete 16 Totals - FY 2014 $ 1,108,000 $ 1,164,800 $ 1,086,161 $ 78,639 93.2% $ - $ 693,500 $ 528,786 $ 164,714 76.2% 17 18 FY 2015 19 --- Vehicles & Equipment $ 673,100 $ 673,100 $ 632,869 $ 40,231 94.0% $ 673,100 $ 673,100 $ 632,869 $ 40,231 94.0% In Process 20 --- 800 MHZ Radio Replacement - Police 329,500 329,500 329,450 51 100.0% 329,500 329,500 329,450 51 100.0% Complete 21 FR1500 Annual Contribution to Robbins Hose 238,500 238,500 237,965 535 99.8% 238,500 238,500 237,965 535 99.8% Complete 22 FR1501 SCBA Equipment/Radios 588,800 588,800 288,651 300,149 49.0% 588,800 588,800 288,651 300,149 49.0% In Process Equipment has been ordered 23 PR1501 50%G Park & Playground Impr Equipment 66,000 66,000 - 66,000 0.0% 66,000 66,000 - 66,000 0.0% Deferred Carryforward to FY16 Awaiting completion of needs 24 PR1502 Dover Park Improvement 80,000 - - - 0.0% 80,000 - - - 0.0% Deferred assessment. Put in Reserve for now. Project under re-design. 25 ST1501 Salt Storage Barn 50,000 75,000 - 75,000 0.0% - 75,000 - 75,000 0.0% In Process Carryforward to FY16. 26 ST1502 Streets, Alleys and Concrete Prog. 900,000 624,400 179,592 444,808 28.8% 900,000 624,400 179,592 444,808 28.8% In Process Project approximately 50% complete 27 ST1503 Misc Emergency Street/Storm Repairs 75,000 75,000 40,090 34,910 53.5% 75,000 40,090 34,910 53.5% Complete Work complete awaiting final invoices 28 ST1504 G Old PW2 Site Improvements 150,000 150,000 106,195 43,805 70.8% 150,000 150,000 106,195 43,805 70.8% In Process Design work ongoing Design work complete, staff ready to 29 ST1505 Silver Lake Dam Inspection 51,400 51,400 24,613 26,787 47.9% 51,400 51,400 24,613 26,787 47.9% Complete bid out project Kent Conservation District has 30 ST1506 Stormwater Ditch Maintenance 15,000 15,000 - 15,000 0.0% 15,000 15,000 - 15,000 0.0% In Process scheduled work to occur in the fall 31 ST1507 Buttner Place Flooding Design - 30,000 24,249 5,752 80.8% 30,000 24,249 5,752 80.8% Complete Project continuing, approximately 50% 32 ST1508 G Stormwater Utility Planning 90,000 90,000 7,650 82,350 8.5% 90,000 90,000 7,650 82,350 8.5% In Process complete with study. 33 CS1502 12 Additional Security Cameras 102,600 102,600 102,585 15 100.0% 102,600 102,600 102,585 15 100.0% Complete 34 $ 3,409,900 $ 3,109,300 $ 1,973,908 $ 1,135,392 63.5% $ 3,284,900 $ 3,109,300 $ 1,973,908 $ 1,135,392 63.5% 35 36 Grand Totals $ 6,441,900 $ 8,874,100 $ 5,914,036 $ 2,960,064 66.6% $ 5,884,900 $ 8,029,500 $ 4,983,351 $ 3,046,149 62.1% Legend M = Multi-year project - a project with a specific schedule to occur over multiple years. R = Recurring project - a project that begins and ends each fiscal year and is re-budgeted to start over each fiscal year. G = Grant funded project B/L = To be financed through bonds or commercial loan.

City of Dover Community Transportation - Major CIP Projects Quarterly Report as of Jun 30, 2015 Preliminary TOTAL PROJECT - PAST, CURRENT & FUTURE BUDGETS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR Original Latest Project Project % Original Revised Fiscal % Project Project Project To Date Budget Budget Fiscal Year Fiscal Year YTD Budget Budget Code Type Description Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Status Comments 1 FY 2009 - FY 2013 2 CT0212 South Street Paving $ 80,400 $ 42,200 $ 42,198 $ 2 100.0% $ - $ - $ - $ - 0.0% Complete Remaining funds transferred to CT1562 3 ST0232 Pat Lynn Drive/D.H.S. Storm Drain Pipe 155,200 190,300 184,778 5,522 0.0% - 5,500 - 5,500 0.0% Complete Unused funds still available 4 CT0555 Little League Parking Lot paving 11,600 - - - 0.0% - - - - 0.0% Complete Remaining funds transferred to CT1562 5 TE0601 M Lincoln Park Center 900,000 1,423,500 523,277 900,223 36.8% - 900,200 - 900,200 0.0% In Process On-going 6 CT0708 E Water Street Brick 65,000 65,000 - 65,000 0.0% - 65,000 - 65,000 0.0% Specialty contract needed 7 CT0977 Schutte Park Parking Lot 22,000 - - - 0.0% - - - - 0.0% Complete Budget transferred to CT1562 8 CT1201 North Street Roundabout 500,000 572,200 572,205 (5) 100.0% - 17,800 17,840 (40) 100.2% Complete 9 CT1317 Wesley College Phase II 148,600 148,600 119,241 29,359 80.2% - 29,400 - 29,400 0.0% Complete Awaiting invoices 10 CT1369 Bayard Ave (Orchard Av & Morris Dr) 24,700 24,700 3,396 21,304 13.7% - 24,700 3,396 21,304 13.7% Complete 11 Totals - FY 2009 - FY 2013 $ 1,907,500 $ 2,466,500 $ 1,445,095 $ 1,021,405 58.6% $ - $ 1,042,600 $ 21,236 $ 1,021,364 2.0% 12 13 FY 2014 14 CT1405 Lakeview Drainage Study $ 24,400 $ 24,400 $ 18,187 $ 6,213 74.5% $ - $ 24,400 $ 18,187 $ 6,213 74.5% In Process Working with homeowner to obtain easement. 15 CT1412 Inner City Cultural League - S. West St. 38,400 38,400 37,092 1,308 96.6% - 38,400 37,092 1,308 96.6% Complete 16 CT1490 Persimmon Park Place Planning Study 600 6,000 5,638 362 0.0% - 6,000 5,638 362 94.0% Complete 17 Totals - FY 2014 $ 63,400 $ 68,800 $ 60,917 $ 7,883 88.5% $ - $ 68,800 $ 60,917 $ 7,883 88.5% 18 19 FY 2015 20 CT1542 Loockerman Plaza $ 42,600 $ 42,600 $ - $ 42,600 0.0% $ 42,600 $ 42,600 $ - $ 42,600 0.0% Complete Awaiting final invoices 21 CT1551 Townsend Blvd Striping 5,100 5,100 5,067 33 99.4% 5,100 5,100 5,067 33 99.4% Complete Project underway. Phase I complete, phase II and 22 CT1562 Village of Cannon Mill Repavement 315,000 386,900 25,997 360,903 6.7% 315,000 386,900 25,997 360,903 6.7% In Process III underway. 23 CT1571 Solid Rock Church 25,000 25,000 17,350 7,650 69.4% 25,000 25,000 17,350 7,650 69.4% Complete 24 CT1599 Signage Agreement 2,700 2,700 1,170 1,530 43.3% 2,700 2,700 1,170 1,530 43.3% Complete Awaiting final invoices 25 CTxxxx Unapplied CT Projects (placeholder) 500,000 500,000 - 500,000 0.0% 112,300 104,100 - 104,100 0.0% Future CT Agreements 26 Totals - FY 2015 $ 890,400 $ 962,300 $ 49,584 $ 912,716 5.2% $ 502,700 $ 566,400 $ 49,584 $ 516,816 8.8% 27 28 29 Grand Totals $ 2,861,300 $ 3,497,600 $ 1,555,596 $ 1,942,004 44.5% $ 502,700 $ 1,677,800 $ 131,738 $ 1,546,062 7.9% Legend M = Multi-year project - a project with a specific schedule to occur over multiple years. R = Recurring project - a project that begins and ends each fiscal year and is re-budgeted to start over each fiscal year. C = Project funded by combination of CT Funds and General Fund

City of Dover Water/Wastewater Improvement & Extension Fund - Major CIP Projects Quarterly Report as of Jun 30, 2015 Preliminary TOTAL PROJECT - PAST, CURRENT & FUTURE BUDGETS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR Original Latest Project Project % Original Revised Fiscal % Project Project Project To Date Budget Budget Fiscal Year Fiscal Year YTD Budget Budget Code Type Description Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Status Comments 1 FY 2008 - FY 2013 Staff working on a memorandum of understanding with 2 WD0804 M 1.0 MG Elevated Water Storage $ 4,196,600 $ 2,556,000 $ 87,827 $ 2,468,173 3.4% $ - $ 2,470,700 $ 2,500 $ 2,468,200 0.1% In Process owner of property 3 WD0805 M Piney Point Well 398,800 1,096,200 1,093,212 2,988 99.7% - 3,000 - 3,000 0.0% Complete 4 WW1010 I Tar Ditch Interceptor Upgrade 518,200 310,400 50,082 260,318 16.1% - 260,400 - 260,400 0.0% In Process On hold per City Manager 5 WD1302 M Garrison Farm Water Storage Tank 1,828,000 4,677,000 2,555,680 2,121,320 54.6% 400,000 4,221,600 2,100,291 2,121,309 49.8% In Process Project underway, approximately 80% complete 6 WW1304 M Garrison Farm WW Improvements 1,828,000 3,738,400 3,109,976 628,424 83.2% - 3,199,700 2,571,260 628,440 80.4% In Process Project underway, approximately 85% complete 7 Totals - FY 2008 - FY 2013 $ 8,769,600 $ 12,378,000 $ 6,896,778 $ 5,481,222 55.7% $ 400,000 $ 10,155,400 $ 4,674,051 $ 5,481,349 46.0% 8 9 FY 2014 10 WW1205 Dover Brook Gardens PS Upgrade $ 52,800 $ 28,000 $ 27,924 $ 76 99.7% $ - $ 14,400 14,295 $ 105 99.3% Complete Project underway, general contractor and 11 WW1206 Brandywine Pump Station 402,000 375,600 274,381 101,219 73.1% - 339,100 237,906 101,194 70.2% In Process manufacturer have stalled project. 12 WW1207 McKee PS 55,000 154,900 154,834 66 100.0% - 147,200 147,110 90 99.9% Complete 13 WW1301 Hazlettville Rd Interceptor 20,400 5,200 5,129 71 98.6% - 1,100 1,075 25 97.7% Complete 14 WW1302 Lakeview PS 52,700 42,900 42,871 29 99.9% - 800 804 (4) 100.4% Complete Contractor has mobilized, beginning site 15 WW1303 Westover PS 768,800 1,350,400 58,002 1,292,398 4.3% 718,000 1,299,600 7,254 1,292,346 0.6% In Process reconstruction. 16 II1402 West Dover Connector 37,800 37,800 37,800 (0) 100.0% - 2,000 2,000 - 100.0% Complete 17 II1404 Basin #5 I & I Buck Drive 342,000 465,400 464,034 1,366 99.7% - 426,200 424,883 1,317 99.7% Complete 18 Totals - FY 2014 $ 1,731,500 $ 2,460,200 $ 1,064,975 $ 1,395,225 43.3% $ 718,000 $ 2,230,400 $ 835,327 $ 1,395,073 37.5% 19 20 FY 2015 21 --- R Vehicles & Equipment $ 345,800 $ 345,800 $ 33,771 $ 312,029 9.8% $ 382,300 $ 345,800 $ 33,771 $ 312,029 9.8% In Process Meters have been ordered, on back order, awaiting 22 WD1500 R Meter Replacement Project 19,000 19,000 - 19,000 0.0% 19,000 19,000 - 19,000 0.0% In Process delivery. 23 WD1501 R Wellhead Redevelopment 80,000 67,200 8,250 58,950 12.3% 80,000 67,200 8,250 58,950 12.3% In Process Contractor has begun, awaiting invoices 24 WQ1501 R Water Quality Improvements 527,500 4,800 - 4,800 0.0% 527,500 4,800 - 4,800 0.0% Complete 25 WQ1502 R Misc Emerg Water Quality Repairs 75,000 87,800 87,716 84 99.9% - 87,800 87,716 84 99.9% Complete 26 WQ1503 West Dover Connector Project 336,000 336,000 184,561 151,439 54.9% - 336,000 184,561 151,439 54.9% In Process Project approximately 90% complete. 27 WD1503 R WTP Process Improvements 175,000 160,000 25,896 134,104 16.2% 175,000 160,000 25,896 134,104 16.2% Complete Phase I of design complete 28 WD1504 SCADA Equipment Tech Upgrade 78,000 78,000 75,698 2,302 97.0% 78,000 78,000 75,698 2,302 97.0% Complete 29 WD1505 Well #11 VFD Repair 6,000 6,000 5,668 332 94.5% - 6,000 5,668 332 94.5% Complete Project awarded, awaiting crop to be harvested prior to 30 WD1506 Shallow Well #7 Abandonment 15,000 15,000 - 15,000 0.0% 15,000 15,000 15,000 0.0% In Process work commencing. Carryforward to FY16. 31 WW1501 Inflow/Infiltration Removal 917,400 - - - 917,400 - - - 0.0% Complete All money allocated to a location 32 WW1503 Hazzletteville Road Interceptor 755,000 201,700 - 201,700 0.0% 755,000 201,700 - 201,700 0.0% In Process Project on hold per City Manager 33 WW1504 Lakeview Dr Pump Stn Replacement 450,000 408,400 48,817 359,583 12.0% 450,000 408,400 48,817 359,583 12.0% In Process Project underway, approximately 25% complete. 34 WW1505 R Pump Station Repairs 36,000 38,000 34,853 3,147 91.7% 36,000 38,000 34,853 3,147 91.7% Complete 35 WW1506 Walker Rd PS Gen Replacement 58,000 44,000 - 44,000 0.0% 58,000 44,000 - 44,000 0.0% Complete 36 WW1507 Retreat Pump Station Replacement 52,000 42,000 36,174 5,826 86.1% 52,000 42,000 36,174 5,826 86.1% Complete Complete with design. 37 WW1508 McKee Run PS Generator Repair 14,000 25,000 23,672 1,328 94.7% - 25,000 23,672 1,328 94.7% Complete 38 WW1509 West Dover Connector Road Utility Relo 922,000 922,000 10,859 911,141 1.2% - 922,300 10,859 911,441 1.2% In Process Project approximately 90% complete. 39 WW1510 Puncheon Run Pump Station Repair 36,000 36,000 35,293 707 98.0% - 36,000 35,293 707 98.0% Complete 40 II1501 R Misc Emergency I&I Repairs 200,000 127,400 115,629 11,771 90.8% - 127,400 115,629 11,771 90.8% Complete 41 Totals - FY 2015 $ 5,097,700 $ 2,964,100 $ 726,855 $ 2,237,245 24.5% $ 3,545,200 $ 2,964,400 $ 726,855 $ 2,237,545 24.5% 42 43 44 Grand Totals $ 15,598,800 $ 17,802,300 $ 8,688,608 $ 9,113,692 48.8% $ 4,663,200 $ 15,350,200 $ 6,236,234 $ 9,113,966 40.6% Legend M = Multi-year project - a project with a specific schedule to occur over multiple years. R = Recurring project - a project that begins and ends each fiscal year and is budgeted to start over each fiscal year. No carry forward. SL = State Loan Project - construction phase is financed I = Impact Fee (partially) financed project O = Operating revenues

City of Dover Electric Improvement & Extension Fund - Major CIP Projects Quarterly Report as of Jun 30, 2015 Preliminary TOTAL PROJECT - PAST, CURRENT & FUTURE BUDGETS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR Original Latest Project Project % Current Revised Fiscal % Project Project Project To Date Budget Budget Fiscal Year Fiscal Year YTD Budget Budget Code Type Description Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Budget Budget Expenses Balance Spent Status Comments 1 FY 2012 - FY 2013 Unit operations, balancing, and commissioning of TSI 2 EG1212 M Unit 3 Turbine Inspection/Repair $ 1,494,000 $ 1,713,536 $ 1,660,148 $ 53,388 96.9% $ - $ 151,800 $ 98,392 $ 53,408 64.8% In Process to be completed in May 2015 3 EE1308 M Horsepond Substation Upgrade 730,900 934,200 934,157 43 100.0% - 314,600 314,588 12 100.0% Complete 4 EE1312 M General Scott Switchgear 1,155,000 1,155,000 47,794 1,107,206 4.1% 1,100,000 1,137,600 30,421 1,107,180 2.7% In Process Construction to start Sept 2015 5 EE1314 Capitol Park Upgrade - 347,872 340,238 7,634 97.8% 27,500 19,815 7,685 72.1% In Process Under construction 6 Totals - FY 2012 - FY 2013 $ 3,379,900 $ 4,150,608 $ 2,982,338 $ 1,168,270 71.9% $ 1,100,000 $ 1,631,500 $ 463,215 $ 1,168,285 28.4% 7 8 FY 2014 9 --- R Metering Infrastructure & Freightliner $ 392,000 $ 425,000 $ 241,828 $ 183,172 56.9% $ 33,000 $ 425,000 $ 241,828 $ 183,172 56.9% In Process 10 EE1443 GOTP Transmission Line Relocation 550,000 550,000 141,526 408,474 25.7% - 550,000 141,526 408,474 25.7% In Process 11 EG1402 M Unit 3 Cooling Tower Repairs 803,000 1,133,000 1,130,569 2,431 99.8% 676,000 1,101,200 1,098,784 2,416 99.8% Complete 12 EG1406 McKee Run Energy Pipe Replacement 80,000 80,000 77,692 2,308 97.1% - 26,500 24,178 2,322 91.2% Complete 13 EG1407 R Metering System Upgrades 150,000 90,000 - 90,000 0.0% 125,000 90,000 - 90,000 0.0% Deferred Project on hold until FY16; No carry forward 14 EG1408 R McKee/VanSant Safety & Compliance 185,000 86,000 59,695 26,305 69.4% - 63,100 36,770 26,330 58.3% In Process No Carry Forward 15 EG1413 McKee/VanSant Preserve Structure 42,000 42,000 - 42,000 0.0% - 42,000 - 42,000 0.0% Cancelled Project cancelled Multi-year project. Mechanical installation in progress. Electrical and controls modification 16 EG1416 M VanSant Capacity Increase 1,500,000 1,000,000 521,390 478,610 52.1% 750,000 901,900 423,334 478,566 46.9% In Process reviews on-going. Anticipate testing in June 2015. 17 EE1421 Richardson Circle Upgrade - 400 307 93 0.0% - 400 307 93 76.7% Complete Project complete in FY14. Final invoice rec'd FY15. 18 EE1433 Chandelle Airport URD 117,900 100,200 100,129 71 99.9% - 52,900 52,828 72 99.9% Complete 19 EE1429 Clearview Meadows 88,000 85,300 4,108 81,192 4.8% - 81,200 - 81,200 0.0% Complete Bankrupt Subdivision; No action since 2013; Close 20 EE1438 Dover Downs Tower 53,800 51,600 51,508 92 99.8% - 51,600 51,508 92 99.8% Complete 21 EE1439 Family Dollar Store 9,800 7,500 7,357 143 98.1% - 7,500 7,357 143 98.1% Complete 22 EE1440 Kraft Foods 69kv Temp 10,000 10,000 5,739 4,261 57.4% - 4,300 - 4,300 0.0% Complete 23 Totals - FY 2014 $ 3,981,500 $ 3,661,000 $ 2,341,847 $ 1,319,153 64.0% $ 1,584,000 $ 3,397,600 $ 2,078,420 $ 1,319,180 61.2% 24 25 FY 2015 26 --- R Vehicles & Equipment $ 53,100 $ 53,100 39,389 $ 13,711 74.2% $ 53,100 $ 53,100 $ 39,389 $ 13,711 74.2% In Process 27 EG1503 McKee Unit 3 Aux Sys Comp 160,000 89,000 87,293 1,707 98.1% 160,000 89,000 87,293 1,707 98.1% Complete 28 EG1504 McKee Unit 3 Boiler System 295,000 138,000 57,287 80,713 41.5% 295,000 138,000 57,287 80,713 41.5% In Process Will need to extend project into next FY 29 EG1505 VanSant Unit II Comp Replacement 25,000 - - - 0.0% 25,000 - - - 0.0% Cancelled 30 EG1506 McKee & VanSant Safety Improvement 52,000 52,000 33,776 18,224 65.0% 52,000 52,000 33,776 18,224 65.0% In Process 31 EG1507 McKee Run 1&2 Comp Replacement 37,000 - - - 0.0% 37,000 - - - 0.0% Cancelled Transferred budget to EG1402 32 EG1508 R Plants - Preserve Structure 120,000 83,800 52,965 30,835 100.0% 120,000 83,800 52,965 30,835 63.2% Deferred Transferred portion of budget to EG1402; No C/F 33 EE1500 69 kV Rebuild 75,000 75,000 12,029 62,971 16.0% 75,000 75,000 12,029 62,971 16.0% In Process Cancelled by state due to lack of state funding for 34 EE1505 DNREC R&R Metering 41,000 - - - 0.0% 41,000 - - - 0.0% Cancelled FY15 35 EE1506 R Lighting Proj & Rehab 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 0.0% 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 0.0% Deferred New project for FY16 - EE1604; No C/F Underground relocation to begin depending on 36 EE1509 West Dover Connector 250,000 250,000 94,209 155,791 37.7% 250,000 250,000 94,209 155,791 37.7% In Process weather 37 EE1513 M Town Point Distribution Feeders 250,000 250,000 240,837 9,163 96.3% 250,000 250,000 240,837 9,163 96.3% In Process Directional boring has begun 38 EE1514 Meadows @ Jefferson Terrace 15,400 - - - 15,400 - - - 0.0% Cancelled Waiting on developer 39 EE1515 R New Developments FY 2015 171,300 56,000 - 56,000 0.0% 171,300 56,000 - 56,000 0.0% Unallocated to a location; No C/F; Contractor to install conduit to proceed, PS 40 EE1516 Chestnut Grove 299,000 255,000 118,999 136,001 46.7% 299,000 255,000 118,999 136,001 46.7% In Process completed 41 EE1520 69 kV Cable Replacement North Street 85,000 85,000 - 85,000 0.0% 85,000 85,000 - 85,000 0.0% Deferred In design. New project for FY16 - EE1605 42 EE1521 College to McKee Feeders 50,000 - - - 50,000 - - - 0.0% Cancelled PW not doing their portion for several years 43 EE1522 Garrison Oak Park 184,000 184,000 166,523 17,477 90.5% 184,000 184,000 166,523 17,477 90.5% In Process 44 EE1523 Uzin Utz 39,300 8,000 7,936 64 99.2% 39,300 8,000 7,936 64 99.2% Complete 45 EE1524 Best Buy Transformer 12,400 12,400 12,339 61 99.5% 12,400 12,339 61 99.5% Complete 46 EE1525 Leander Lakes Apt Phase 1 73,000 73,000 3,608 69,392 4.9% 73,000 3,608 69,392 4.9% In Process 47 EE1526 Playtex Addition 200,000 354,100 204,136 149,964 57.6% 354,100 204,136 149,964 57.6% In Process NSC permits being submitted. Line work in process. 48 EE1527 DAFB Temporary Concrete Plant 36,000 27,200 27,157 43 99.8% 27,200 27,157 43 99.8% Complete 49 EE1528 640 Beechwood Avenue 6,600 6,600 6,919 (319) 104.8% 6,600 6,919 (319) 104.8% Complete 50 EE1529 W. Denny's Bridge 5,000 4,100 4,079 21 99.5% 4,100 4,079 21 99.5% Complete 51 EE1530 Bayhealth URD Relocation 12,600 10,200 10,144 56 99.5% 10,200 10,144 56 99.5% Complete 52 EE1531 Windstream DAFB/College Road 17,700 14,700 14,663 37 99.7% 14,700 14,663 37 99.7% Complete Fiber path from College to DAFB complete 53 EE1532 Dover Litho 1 & 2 30,500 22,700 22,580 120 99.5% 22,700 22,580 120 99.5% Complete 54 EE1533 DE State Police Generator 5,500 4,400 4,301 99 97.7% 4,400 4,301 99 97.7% Complete 55 EE1534 Hardees Rte 13 Damage 7,800 7,800 7,782 18 99.8% 7,800 7,782 18 99.8% Complete 56 EE1535 Eden Hill Lights Phase 1 17,000 17,000 17,315 (315) 101.9% 17,000 17,315 (315) 101.9% Complete 57 EE1537 Kirby and Holloway 21,900 - - - - - - 0.0% Deferred Awaiting owner direction 58 EE1541 Blue Hen Corp - Phase I 25,600 25,600 - 25,600 0.0% 25,600 - 25,600 0.0% In Process Roll over to FY16 - EE1632 59 EE1542 Westminster Village 26,200 23,900 23,774 126 99.5% 23,900 23,774 126 99.5% Complete 60 EE1543 Habitat Kirkwood Street 10,700 10,700 8,433 2,267 78.8% 10,700 8,433 2,267 78.8% Complete 61 EE1544 Nottingham Meadows 28,600 28,600 2,011 26,589 7.0% 28,600 2,011 26,589 7.0% In Process 62 EE1545 Firefly Lights 12,500 12,500 9,680 2,820 77.4% 12,500 9,680 2,820 77.4% Complete 63 EE1546 DelTech Signs 13,600 13,600 8,113 5,487 59.7% 13,600 8,113 5,487 59.7% In Process 64 EE1547 NBR Properties 16,600 16,600 2,686 13,914 16.2% 16,600 2,686 13,914 16.2% In Process Primary fee paid 65 Totals - FY 2015 $ 2,831,900 $ 2,314,600 $ 1,300,962 $ 1,013,638 56.2% $ 2,252,100 $ 2,314,600 $ 1,300,962 $ 1,013,638 56.2% 66 67 Grand Totals $ 10,193,300 $ 10,126,208 $ 6,625,148 $ 3,501,060 65.4% $ 4,936,100 $ 7,343,700 $ 3,842,597 $ 3,501,103 52.3% Legend M = Multi-year project - a project with a specific schedule to occur over multiple years. B = Bonded Project R = Recurring project - a project that begins and ends each fiscal year and is re-budgeted to start over each fiscal year. S = State fully or partially reimbursed project

Monthly Management Committee Update – June 2015 July 23, 2015 Prepared by: Arline Holloway Client Services Manager 904.360.1347 aholloway@teainc.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary 1 II. Budget Report 12 III. Operations Management 15 IV. Appendix 29 i

I. Executive Summary a. Power Supply Summary: Overall Power Supply costs were $564,052 below budget predominantly driven by lower Energy, Congestion and Losses. Dover’s budgeted cost for all power supply (capacity AND energy) was $69.74/MWh. The actual cost of all power supply (capacity AND energy) was $59.05/MWh resulting in a positive budget variance of $10.69. The cost of energy alone was $38.03/MWh, versus a budgeted energy cost of $45.86. Dover’s hedge purchases totaled 43,040 MWh, which was 61% of the actual load. The budgeted hedge purchase totaled 40,304 MWh which was 59% of the budgeted load. Dover’s power purchases from hedge transactions totaled $1,959,322. Purchases from PJM (energy and fees) totaled $1,866,267.20. This number includes DA spot market energy charges of $ $898,169.44, and increased Local Reliability Charges (LRC) to $ $874,987.80. As of June 1st the Zonal Capacity rate used in the LRC calculation increased from $145.37277 to $166.935259. Dover’s total load was 71,105 MWh versus a forecasted load of 68,295 MWh. Dover’s planned energy purchase from the SunPark solar installation was 2,328 MWhs. Dover’s actual energy purchase from the SunPark installation was 1,931 MWh. 2

I. Supply Source Summary: II. Supply Variance: 3

b. Generation Summary: Net generation revenue for the month of June was $325,200 versus a budget of $550,982. 4

Generation Breakdown:  June Oil Consumption moved to Project EG1416, 487‐8101‐591‐40.31 5

c. Emissions Summary: Emissions Allowance Summary through June 30, 2015 The reinstated Cross‐State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) replaced the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) beginning January 1, 2015. The final CAIR true‐ups for 2014 will occur in 2015, after which CAIR allowances will have no value. The State of Delaware was included in the CAIR footprint but is not included in the CSAPR footprint. CAIR allowances cannot be used for CSAPR compliance, so Dover’s CAIR allowances essentially became valueless when CSAPR was reinstated. The separate Clean Air Act acid rain deposition control program (CAA Title IV) which governs SO2 national allowance trading program will remain in effect, however the CAIR provisions for SO2 are no longer applicable to Dover’s generating units. Market liquidity for Title IV SO2 allowances is very low, with few transactions occurring. The following table shows estimated values for Dover’s banked allowances, based on mid‐point of bids and offers from Evolution Markets. Beginning with the January 2015 report, TEA no longer includes a CAIR summary. It will continue to report on Dover’s Clean Air Act Title IV SO2 allowances. Market Value for Clean Air Act Title IV Allowances Commodity $/Ton1 Tons Market Value SO2 Allowances – Title IV $0.50 15,018 $ 7,509 TOTAL $ 7,509 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative The State of Delaware is a participant in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). The City of Dover must comply with RGGI by surrendering carbon dioxide (CO2) allowances pursuant to the State of Delaware’s laws (Title 7, Chapter 60, Sub‐Title II‐A). Delaware adopted a combined emissions allowance allocation/auction mechanism for RGGI, in which 40% of CO2 allowances were allocated to sources for 2009, declining by 8% per year so that by 2014, all CO2 allowances are auctioned. Dover had more than a sufficient number of RGGI allowances allocated to it to cover its requirements through the first compliance period (calendar years 2009‐2011) and second compliance period (2012 – 2014). Any unused allowances are carried over (“banked”) for subsequent years. The table below includes Dover’s 1 June 30, 2015 Market Update by Evolution Markets 6

historical activities, and has been enhanced to include projections through 2020. Two projections are presented: (1) future annual emissions equal the average for 2009 – 2014, and (2) future annual emissions equal to the highest emissions for 2009 – 2014. Dover, DE RGGI Allowance History and Forecast - June 30, 2015 CO2 Tons EOY Historical CO2 Tons CO2 Tons Projected EOY Compliance CO2 Allowances Allocated CO2 Projected EOY Emitted - Allowance Emitted - Proj. Emitted - Proj. Balance Year (CY) Purchased Allowances Balance (High) Historical Balance (Avg) (High) (Average) 2009 62,184 5,796 56,388 2010 49,747 32,971 73,164 2011 37,311 17,763 92,712 2012 27,983 15,957 104,738 2013 24,818 10,213 119,343 2014 1,000 N/A 25,426 94,917 94,917 94,917 2015 10,000 N/A 7,454 97,463 18,021 33,000 86,896 71,917 2016 N/A 18,021 33,000 68,875 38,917 2017 N/A 18,021 33,000 50,854 5,917 2018 N/A 18,021 33,000 32,833 ‐27,083 2019 N/A 18,021 33,000 14,812 ‐60,083 2020 N/A 18,021 33,000 ‐3,209 ‐93,083 7

Dover RGGI Allowance History and Projection June 30, 2015 (Includes 4,000 Allowances procured in June 3, 2015 Auction) 150,000 100,000 Tons of CO2 50,000 0 ‐50,000 ‐100,000 Historical CO2 Emissions Projected CO2 Emissions ‐ Avg CO2 Tons Emitted ‐ Proj. (High) EOY Historical Allowance Balance Projected EOY Balance (Average) Projected EOY Balance (High) The table and chart indicate that Dover could run out of banked allowances as early as the end of 2016 under the high emissions scenario and by the end of 2019 under the average scenario. Therefore, Dover has recently initiated a program to participate in RGGI’s quarterly auctions to insure it has adequate allowances in the future. In anticipation of needing additional RGGI allowances in the future, Dover participated in Auction 26 held on December 3, 2014, Auction 27 held on March 11, 2015 and Auction 28 held on June 3, 2015. It was awarded 1,000 allowances from its highest price bid, at the auction clearing price of $5.21/ton in Auction 26 and 6,000 allowances in Auction 27 at the auction clearing price of $5.41/ton and 4,000 allowances in Auction 28 at the auction clearing price of $5.50/ton. The next quarterly RGGI auction will be held on September 9th, 2015. Based on the July 21, 2015 ICE price for the August 2015 strip ($5.82/ton), the estimated market value of Dover’s existing 97,463 ton2 RGGI allowance bank is $567,245. 2 May 2015 CO2 emissions were not deducted for this report. They will be included in future reports. 8

Renewable Energy Certificates Dover owns two photovoltaic systems totaling 15 kW, consisting of (one 5 kW unit at the Utilities Administration Building and two 5 kW units at the McKee Run generating station. Dover also receives solar energy produced by the 10 MW Dover Sun Park which is owned by White Oak Solar Energy, LLC. In addition to the all of the physical energy produced by the Sun Park, Dover receives 15% of Sun Park’s Solar Renewable Energy Credits (SRECS). Dover participates in the Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation’s (DEMEC) Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) for compliance with the State of Delaware’s RPS laws applicable to municipal utilities. The first compliance period under DEMEC’s RPS was for the 36 months ending May 2014. Through the end of May, June, Dover had accumulated a total of 7,207 SRECS from these renewable energy resources, net of 2,941 SREC transferred to DEMEC for retirement on October 3, 2014 in accordance with the RPS requirement for the first compliance period. Delaware periodically holds SRECs auctions, however these auctions are for size tiers N1 – N3, E1 and E2. The Dover Sun Park is in the N4 tier for very large facilities. State‐wide carve outs for Tier 4 has been fully subscribed, so there is not a market for tier T4 SRECs in Delaware. The nearest viable market for Dover’s SRECs is Pennsylvania. Daily settlement prices from Flett Exchange Environmental Services and SREC Trade. The most recent settlement prices for Pennsylvania SRECS are used in the table below. Market prices for Pennsylvania SRECs decreased significantly from last month’s report. For example, 2014/15 SRECs were valued at $28.00 in May, compared to $20.00 in this month’s report. Market prices for SRECs continue to decline due to increased penetration of solar generation, due in part to rapidly declining installation costs. TEA continues to recommend to Dover to retain these allowances for compliance with its Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Additionally, Dover will need to acquire additional SRECs in future years. \ 9

d. Risk Management Summary: Forward power prices in PJM have decreased from last month. The current projected cost of service is below: 10

II. Budget Report Budget Actual Variance Jun-15 Jun-15 Gross Load 68,295 71,105 (2,810) Power Supply Hedged Energy $1,930,632 $1,959,322 ($28,690) PJM - Energy, Congestion & Losses $933,694 502,674 $431,020 PJM - ARR, Transmission and Fees $587,352 501,960 $85,392 Dover SUN Park Energy $267,990 $272,166 ($4,176) Dover SUN Park RECs $40,005 $48,170 ($8,165) Management Fees $83,000 $83,000 $0 PJM - Capacity UCAP Obligated Purchased $920,134 $ 861,633.69 $58,500 Subtotal - Power Supply $4,762,807 $4,228,925 $533,882 Power Generation O&M Plant O&M $362,659 $677,426 ($314,767) Subtotal Generation O&M 362,659.00 677,426.00 ($314,767) Power Generation Production Margin PJM - Economic and reliability dispatch $0 $ (159,862.19) $159,862 Fixed Fuel and Transport Charges $0 $ 87,901.65 ($87,902) Subtotal Generation Production Margin $0 $ (71,960.54) $71,961 Power Generation Non-Production Revenue PJM - Generation Capacity Credit ($879,166) $ (873,044.10) ($6,122) Capacity Replacement Charge $19,440 $ - $19,440 PJM - Reactive Supply & Transmission Losses ($53,915) $ (57,621.77) $3,707 Subtotal - Non-Production Revenue ($913,641) ($930,666) $17,025 SubTotal - All Generation (550,982.00) ($325,200) ($225,782) Total - Utilities Cost $4,211,825 $3,903,724 $308,101 Unit Costs Total - Power Supply $69.74 $59.47 $10.26 Total - Power Generation ($8.07) ($4.57) ($3.49) Final Cost of Service to City of Dover Ratepayers $61.67 $54.90 $6.77 11

Variance Analysis: Power Supply  Dover consumed 2,810 MWh more than forecasted for the month.  Dover experienced a favorable variance for budgeted PJM ‐ Energy, Congestion & Losses of $431,020.  This resulted in a net power supply cost of $59.05/MWh, $10.69/MWh below budget.  The city realized a favorable variance of $564,052 for power supply vs. the monthly budget.  Dover Sun Park generated 397 MWhs less than forecasted. Generation  Power generation had an unfavorable budget variance of $ 225,782 driven primarily by higher Plant O&M expenses which had an unfavorable budget variance of $314,767 for the month. 12

Budget Actual Variance YTD YTD Gross Load 744,332 757,247 (12,915) Power Supply Hedged Energy $21,851,690 $26,170,382 ($4,318,692) PJM - Energy, Congestion & Losses $11,287,680 $8,681,190 $2,606,490 PJM - ARR, Transmission and Fees $7,102,687 $4,292,658 $2,810,029 Dover SUN Park Energy $2,071,776 $2,024,716 $47,059 Dover SUN Park RECs $386,765 $372,329 $14,436 Management Fees $996,000 $913,000 $83,000 PJM - Capacity UCAP Obligated Purchased $9,760,360 $9,617,562 $142,798 Subtotal - Power Supply $53,456,957 $52,071,836 $1,385,120 Power Generation O&M Plant O&M $5,902,467 $5,989,533 ($87,066) Subtotal Generation O&M $5,902,467 $5,989,533 ($87,066) Power Generation Production Margin PJM - Economic and reliability dispatch ($2,392,662) ($2,560,292) $167,630 Fixed Fuel and Transport Charges $1,699,002 $1,671,065 $27,937 Subtotal Generation Production Margin ($693,661) ($889,227) $195,567 Power Generation Non-Production Revenue PJM - Generation Capacity Credit ($8,875,378) ($8,706,981) ($168,397) Capacity Replacement Charge $120,600 $0 $120,600 PJM - Reactive Supply & Transmission Losses ($490,407) ($717,739) $227,333 Subtotal - Non-Production Revenue ($9,245,185) ($9,424,720) $179,535 SubTotal - All Generation ($4,036,378) ($4,324,414) $288,036 Total - Utilities Cost $49,420,578 $47,830,422 $1,590,156 Unit Costs Total - Power Supply $71.82 $68.76 $3.05 Total - Power Generation ($5.42) ($5.71) $0.29 Final Cost of Service to City of Dover Ratepayers $66.40 $63.05 $3.34 13

III. Operations Management Executive Summary: During the month of June, there were no recordable accidents, no lost time accidents and no environmental incidents. The facility has gone 75 days through June 30, 2015 without an OSHA Recordable Accident or a Lost Time since the April 16, 2015 reportable accident and 137 consecutive days without a lost time accident. There were no Environmental Notice of Violations or exceedances issued during the month and no Near Miss incidents reported. All units are available for dispatch. Monthly Budget Variance – The actual expenses attributable to O&M of the two sites for the month of June are $677,426 against a budgeted amount of $362,659 for an unfavorable variance of $314,767 or 86.8%. The principal reasons for the unfavorable variance were due to, personnel expenses, materials and supplies and administrative expenses. An unfavorable monthly variance of $140,846 was due to having three (3) payroll periods being invoiced against two (2) pay periods budgeted for June and flex time payouts. An unfavorable variance of $12,844 was due to completion and billing of buildings and grounds maintenance that was originally budgeted for earlier in the fiscal year. An unfavorable monthly variance of $161,077 due to (2) monthly electricity bills being expensed. In addition, there were expenses related to the completion of the Unit #3 ID fan repairs and the boiler tube leak repairs. The forecasted expenses for this fiscal year are $5,714,230 expensed versus an approved budget of $6,141,100 thereby realizing a 93.05% expenditure rate. This is excluding the operator and employee incentives in the budget. 14

NAES Corporation Dover, Delaware June 2015 Monthly Report Senior Operator, Steve Warren Senior Operator, Dave Hodge 15

Recent Retirees – Congratulations!!! You Will be Missed!!! Table of Contents 1.0 Environmental, Health, and Safety 2.0 Financial 3.0 Operations 4.0 Maintenance 5.0 CIP 6.0 General Plant Information 7.0 Summary of NAES Performance 16

1.0 Environmental, Health and Safety: During the month of June, there were no recordable accidents, lost time accidents or environmental incidents. The facility has gone 75 days through June 30, 2015 without an OSHA Recordable Accident or a Lost Time since the April 16, 2015 reportable accident. There were no Near Misses reported in June at McKee Run or VanSant. McKee Run attempted to schedule two CPR/First Aid and AED classes on June 16; however, this class was canceled because Unit #3 was called into service. On June 17, eight (8) more employees completed CPR/First Aid and AED training leaving only eight (8) employees remaining until all employees have been trained. Additionally, NAES Corporate Safety Manager conducted training classes for all NAES employees on the NAES Safe program. NAES completed the quarterly Facility Response Plan (FRP) Qualified Individual Notification calls on June 25, 2015. No further action is required. During the month of June, there were two IWW discharges to the Kent County Public Works sewer system for a total of 51,684‐gallons. A representative sample of the industrial discharge was taken on June 24, 2015. The June SIU Report was submitted to Kent County Public Works indicating no exceedances in June. During the month of June, there were no sampling events at Outfall 001, 004, 005 and 006 and there was no discharge from Outfall 006. The June DMR was submitted to DNREC indicating no discharge for this month. No NPDES exceedances have been identified. All non‐contact cooling tower blow‐down water is being discharged directly to the Kent County Department of Public Works under the facilities Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit #18. McKee Run and VanSant were exempt from the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) report. McKee Run and VanSant did not meet the mandatory three required criteria in order to be included in this report. McKee Run had the required SIC code and worked more than ten equivalent full time employees (20,000 hours/year), but did not meet exceed the 25,000 lbs. threshold for a specific chemical. VanSant did not qualify because it is an unmanned station and worked employees less than 20,000 hours/year, but had the required SIC code. Based on not meeting the three criteria necessary to be included in the submission, no McKee run and VanSant TRI reports were submitted for either site. The McKee Run and VanSant Generating Stations conducted a Relative Accuracy Test Auditing (RATA) on Unit 3 and Appendix E emission testing on Unit 11 between the timeframe of June 18‐26, 2015. Optimization testing was performed on June 18 and 19 at VanSant station to develop baseline emission testing of the combustion turbine with and without the new fogging system using pipeline natural gas and No. 2 fuel oil. Upon completion of the optimization testing, the stack testers moved to McKee Run’s Unit #3 to perform a RATA. This testing was required because the continuous emission monitor system (CEMS) umbilical cord was replaced earlier this year. Based on the RATA results, McKee Run met the acceptable criteria for annual testing. The Appendix E testing was concluded at VanSant between 17

June 23 and 26. NAES is waiting on the stack testing company to provide the final report on the VanSant emission testing which will then be submitted to the DNREC as part of the Wet Compression Construction permitting process. Environmental, Health, and Safety Statistics Month Fiscal Year to Date (June) (7/1/14-6/30/15) NOVs 0 0 Opacity Deviations 0 5 Environmental Deviations 0 0 OSHA Recordable 0 2 OSHA LTA's 0 1 First Aid cases 0 0 Restricted Workday Accident 0 0 Near Miss 1 16 Man Hours Worked 4,664 105,159.75 Date last OSHA Recordable 4/16/15 Date last Lost Time Accident 4/16/15 Days since last OSHA recordable 75 Days since last Lost Time Accident 75 18

2.0 Financial * ‐ Actual and Budgeted totals do not include the Operator or Employee Incentives. 2.1 Variance analysis: The actual expenses for the month of June are $677,426 against a budgeted amount of $362,659 for an unfavorable variance of $314,767 or 86.79%. The variance was due to the following: PERSONNEL EXPENSES – An unfavorable monthly variance of $140,846 was due to having three (3) payroll periods being invoiced against two (2) that were budgeted for June. In addition there were flex time payouts to employees who left the facility. As a result, this impacted three (3) labor accounts – Straight Time, Overtime, and Labor Burdens. 19

MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES EXPENSES‐ An unfavorable monthly variance of $12,844 was due to completion and billing of buildings and grounds maintenance that was originally budgeted for earlier in the fiscal year. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES – An unfavorable monthly variance of $161,077 due to (2) monthly electricity bills being expensed. In addition, there were expenses related to the completion of the Unit #3 ID fan repairs and the boiler tube leak repairs. The forecasted expenses for this fiscal year are $5,714,230 expensed versus an approved budget of $6,141,100 thereby realizing a 93.05% expenditure rate. Note that the operator and employee incentives are not included in this total. 3.0 Operations Unit Operations / Outages / Trips: PJM dispatched Unit 3 two times and was self‐dispatched for RATA testing in the month of June. Unit 3 operated for 32.385 hours online. Unit 11 ran for environmental testing (Appendix E) the week of June 22nd. Unit 11 had nine starts with one trip for the month of June with a total of 41.407 hours of run time. During this time the new wet compression system was tested with very good results. Month – June 2015 McKee McKee McKee MRS Facility VanSant Total Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 11 All Units Capacity MW 17 17 102 136 39 175 On Line Hours Hrs 0.0 0.0 32.385 32.385 40.77 73.492 Starts # 0 0 3 3 9 12 Gross Generation MWh 0.0 0.0 1,097.358 1,097.358 1,279.699 2,377.057 Net Generation MWh 0.0 0.0 981.762 981.762 1,278.403 2,260.165 Total Auxiliaries MWh 0.0 0.0 294.194 294.194 2.610 296.804 Auxiliaries purchased MWh 21.309 21.309 178.598 221.216 1.314 222.530 Fuel Gas Used# MMBTU 0.0 0.0 13,848.158 13,848.158 10,601.060 24,449.218 Fuel Oil Used MMBTU 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6,187.219 6,187.219 Fuel Oil Used Gallons 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43,463 43,463 Total Fuel MMBTU 0.0 0.0 13,848.158 13,848.158 16,788.279 30,636.437 Net Heat Rate BTU/KWh 0.0 0.0 14.105 14.105 13.079 13.592 Unit Trips # 0 0 0 0 1 1 Capacity Factor % 0.0 0.0 1.34 1.00 4.55 1.79 Availability Factor % 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Commercial % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unavailability (CU) Planned Outage Hours Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maintenance Outage Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hours Forced Outage Hours Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Reserve Shutdown Hours 720.000 720.000 737.000 687.615 744.000 2,127.615 497.000 744.000678.593 744.000 1,971.000 1,971.000 2,806.208 744.000 744.00 737.0 Hours HW Boiler Gas Usage MMBTU 0.0 0.0 Pilot Gas Usage MMBTU 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 # Note: Does not include HWB or Pilot Gas. Fuel usage numbers are taken from fuel flow instruments. 20

2014-2015 Fiscal Year-to-Date ( 12 Months) McKee McKee McKee MRS VanSant Total Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Facility Unit 11 All Unit Capacity MW 17 17 102 136 39 175 On Line Hours Hrs 30.966 35.134 532.167 598.267 68.807 667.074 Starts # 3 5 40 48 15 63 Gross Generation MWh 261.694 252.941 26,317.666 26,832.301 2,260.894 29,093.19 Net Generation MWh 247.853 233.930 23,938.007 24,419.790 2,248.879 26,668.66 Total Auxiliaries MWh 315.277 320.447 4,911.016 5,231.463 43.844 5,275.310 Auxiliaries purchased MWh 334.769 334.769 2,581.477 3,251.015 50.105 3,301.120 Fuel Gas Used MMBTU 3,780.381 3,255.417 262,226.144 269,261.942 18,145.786 287,407.72 Fuel Oil Used MMBTU 0.0 0.0 20,793.918 20,793.918 11,396.421 32,190.33 Fuel Oil Used Gallons 0.0 0.0 150,686 150,686 81,108 231,794 Total Fuel MMBTU 3,780.381 3,255.417 283,020.062 290,055.860 29,542.207 319,598.06 Net Heat Rate BTU/KWh 15.253 13.916 13.855 14.341 13.079 13.710 Unit Trips # 1 3 1 5 2 7 Capacity Factor % 0.17 0.16 2.68 2.02 0.66 1.72 Availability Factor % 56.31 55.42 53.44 55.06 58.64 55.95 Commercial % 2.32 3.22 3.21 2.92 0.0 2.19 Unavailability (CU) Planned Outage Hours Hours 3,623.00 3,623.00 3,796.580 11,042.580 3,623.00 14,665.58 Maintenance Outage Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hours Forced Outage Hours Hours 203.420 282.000 273.657 759.077 0.0 759.077 Reserve Shutdown Hours 4,901.614 4,818.866 4,133.929 13,854.409 5,066.893 18,921.30 Hours HW Boiler Gas Usage MMBTU 6,491.061 6,491.06 Pilot Gas Usage MMBTU 527.631 623.391 1,151.022 1,151.022 Fuel Oil Inventory Monthly Monthly Fuel Monthly FY 14-15 Fuel FY 14-15 Inventory Inventory Purchases Inventory Inventory Purchases Inventory (Start) (End) (Month) (Change) (Start) (FYTD) (Change) McKee Run (#2 Fuel Oil) 736,725 739,369 0 2,644 452,963 451,198 286,406 VanSant 226,700 180,770 0 (45,930) 73,572 186,592 107,198 (#2 Fuel Oil) Note: As measured by tank level instruments. Tank levels may change due to oil temperature. VanSant Lifetime through June 2015 Actual Starts Factored Starts Fired Hours VanSant 1,390 2,375.75 4,387.50 Since HGP - Dec 2004 268 708.05 1003.92 21

Team Report: In the month of June, Appendix E testing was completed and passed on Unit 11 as well as successful testing with the wet compression system. The unit also completed a successful capacity test. On June 22, Unit 3 completed a successful RATA test. Operations personnel continue to support maintenance by working on Preventative Maintenance (PM) work orders and other work orders that they have the skills to successfully complete the task. The Operations Department continues to utilize the Day Shift Workers in both the Operations and Maintenance areas to assist with maintenance of the plant. The operators also use the GPi Learning courses to improve their knowledge and skills. The GPI online training which supports plant safety, OSHA, and environmental training requirements are being used by the teams to complete their training for the year. Along with the GPI OSHA training, the operators review the plant’s safety procedures to follow up with the GPi Learn modules and knowledge. Maintenance During the month of June, the Plant Maintenance staff continued addressing the backlog of work orders. Back logged Work Orders are work orders that have been open for greater than thirty days. There were seventy‐three work orders issued with eighty work orders being completed during the month. There was one Safety Work Orders entered into the plant’s Computerized Maintenance Management System (MP2) during the month. The table below summarizes the monthly work order activities based on MP2 records and will continue to improve with time. This table gives a clear picture of outstanding work; PM’s and back logged work items. City of Dover – McKee Run Work Order Backlog Starting Completed Total Total WO Received Total Comp End Site WO Received Completed Open Type WOs WOs WOs Backlog Backlog WOs WOs WO's ADM 23 2 25 4 1 5 19 20 CIP 15 0 15 13 0 13 2 2 CM 47 23 70 7 11 18 40 52 EM 1 2 3 0 2 2 1 1 EW 9 2 11 2 1 3 7 8 PM 35 29 64 9 17 26 26 38 PR 10 0 10 0 0 0 10 10 RO 11 5 16 0 0 0 11 16 SP 1 2 2 0 2 0 1 2 SW 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 Site Totals 152 65 217 35 32 67 117 150 22

City of Dover ‐ VanSant Work Order Backlog Starting Completed Total Total WO Received Total Comp End Site WO Received Completed Open Type WOs WOs WOs Backlog Backlog WOs WOs WO's ADM 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 3 CIP 3 1 4 3 0 3 0 1 VanSant CM 8 3 11 1 0 1 7 10 PM 7 1 8 3 1 4 4 4 SP 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 SW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Site Totals 22 8 30 9 4 13 13 17 Notable activities during the month include: The NAES IC&E staff and Catalyst Environmental conducted a RATA test on Unit 3 CEMS monitoring systems. The test was conducted on natural gas at minimum load or approximately 40MW gross. The team completed all nine runs required for the testing protocol. All of the nine runs were in compliance with The State of Delaware regulations and the City of Dover McKee Run air permits. The NAES Maintenance Staff and the Operation staff changed out the acid containment tote for Units 1 & 2 cooling tower. The reliability of the existing tote was in question when during an inspection the sides of the tote seemed to bulging on all sides. The tote was replaced with a tote that is able to carry more loads thus allow a better reliability of containment for the acid tote in the event of an acid spill. The NAES IC&E Staff, MEE Fog Industries, Emerson and Catalyst Environmental were on site to test the wet compression system that was installed on the combustion turbine at VanSant Generating Station. The testing consisted of testing the wet compression with the water injection to determine the correct bias that would be needed to achieve the correct wet compression water to water injection flow ratio so as to maintain the requirements of the Title V permit for NOX. There were several adjustments made during the testing process to achieve the correct ratio. After two days of testing the correct bias was achieved. The following week, Appendix E testing was conducted in accordance with The State of Delaware regulation and The City of Dover air permits. The testing was completed with no deviations in the testing protocol and regulations. 23

5.0 Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) 24

6.0 General Plant Information Dave Hodge, Senior Operator, retired as of June 19, 2015. Dave spent over thirty years working for the City of Dover. He was an asset to the company and to the plant. The absence of his valuable experience will be felt among all staff members. Steve Warren, Senior Operator, retired as of June 22, 2015. Steve spent approximately thirty five years working for the City of Dover. The first seven years at the water department and in 1987 came to the power plant. Steve was a pleasure to work with and was a dedicated worker. Steve’s valuable experience will be missed as well. James McDowell, Senior Operator, resigned on June 20, 2015 for personal reasons. Jim spent approximately thirty years working for the City of Dover. Jim’s knowledge and experience will be missed. Plant employees welcomed Jesse Kummerer as an Operator I on June 1, 2015. Jesse recently graduated from Williamson with an Associate’s Degree in Power Plant Technology. Most recently Jesse had internships with Zeeco Burners and Powerhouse Boilers. The Plant was introduced to Jesse at a welcome breakfast hosted in the Control Room on his first day of employment. Currently the Plant is looking to fill (2) Operator positions, and is actively conducting interviews with qualified applicants. Training: Plant employees continue with General Physics safety training and environmental courses to enhance their overall knowledge of the plant permit requirements and the NAES safety requirements. Topics discussed during the monthly safety committee meeting were reviewed by the entire staff. The monthly safety topic was on “Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Kill Two” and therefore everyone is empowered to stop a job if they consider the work practice at hand to be unsafe or dangerous to the health and well‐being of the employee(s) performing a given task. They are all aware that safety and safe performance of work and tasks is a team effort and making sure each of us is watching out for the safety of others is a core value for NAES Safe practices. Calendar of Events Date NOx Ozone Season Starts May 1, 2015 PJM Summer Capacity Test Period June 1, 2015 – August 31, 2015 FY 2014-201454 Budget Year Begins July 1, 2015 Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Annual Report July 1, 2015 Semi-Annual Title V Certification Due July 31, 2015 NOx Ozone Season Ends September 30, 2014 Annual VanSant Black Start Test TBD Units 1, 2, 3 and 11 Fall Outage Starts TBD Winter Capacity Period December 1, 2015 to February 28, 2016 Title V Annual Certifications Due January 31, 2016 25

7.0 Summary of NAES Performance to Date Plant Performance FY 2014-2015 Measure Month Year to Date YTD FY Maximum Incentive Incentive Commercial 0.0% 2.66% $0 $96,875 Unavailability (CU) Safety 0 2 $0 $18,163 Environmental 0 0 $18,163 $18,163 Capacity Tests Summer Winter Summer Winter Completed Unit 1 No No Yes Yes* $3,634 $3,634 Unit 2 No No Yes Yes* $3,634 $3,634 Unit 3 No No Yes Yes $21,797 $21,797 Unit 11 No No Yes Yes $7,266 $7,266 Total YTD 32.14% Total YTD Incentive $54,494 $169,532 Incentive % Note*: All units have successfully completed the Summer (FY 2014‐2015) Testing for PJM and were entered in the PJM Winter Capacity Test Exemption Program. Unit 11 and Unit 3 successfully completed capacity testing for the Winter period. Units 1 and 2 did not come online so were included in the Winter Exemption Program. 26

IV. Appendix 1 – PJM Invoice REPORT NAME: Monthly Billing Statement ‐ CSV and XML CUSTOMER ACCOUNT: City of Dover, Delaware CUSTOMER CODE: DOVDE CUSTOMER ID: 76 FINAL BILLING STATEMENT ISSUED: 7/8/2015 9:03 BILLING PERIOD START DATE: 6/1/2015 BILLING PERIOD END DATE: 6/30/2015 INVOICE NUMBER: 2.01506E+12 INVOICE DUE DATE: 7/17/2015 12:00 SOURCE BILLING AMOUNT CHARGES ADJ BILLING LINE ITEM NAME PERIOD START ($) 1100 Network Integration Transmission Service 435135.3 1108 Transmission Enhancement 69777.03 1130 Firm Point‐to‐Point Transmission Service 0 1140 Non‐Firm Point‐to‐Point Transmission Service 0 1200 Day‐ahead Spot Market Energy 712052.94 1205 Balancing Spot Market Energy 40431.16 1210 Day‐ahead Transmission Congestion ‐416588.05 1215 Balancing Transmission Congestion ‐26246.62 1220 Day‐ahead Transmission Losses 26051.6 1225 Balancing Transmission Losses 3263.62 1230 Inadvertent Interchange ‐147.57 1242 Day‐Ahead Load Response Charge Allocation 255.57 1243 Real‐Time Load Response Charge Allocation 226.55 1250 Meter Error Correction ‐3158.7 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1301 Service ‐ Control Area Administration 11704.34 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1302 Service ‐ FTR Administration 0 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1303 Service ‐ Market Support 2748 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1304 Service ‐ Regulation Market Administration 88.77 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1305 Service ‐ Capacity Resource/Obligation Mgmt. 906.6 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1306 Service ‐ Advanced Second Control Center 1025.79 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1307 Service ‐ Market Support Offset ‐314.27 1313 PJM Settlement, Inc. 314.27 1314 Market Monitoring Unit (MMU) Funding 284.36 1315 FERC Annual Recovery 4634.69 1316 Organization of PJM States, Inc. (OPSI) Funding 47.76 27

North American Electric Reliability Corporation 1317 (NERC) 816.23 1318 Reliability First Corporation (RFC) 1328.16 Transmission Owner Scheduling, System 1320 Control and Dispatch Service 5139.69 Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from 1330 Generation and Other Sources Service 35927.96 1340 Regulation and Frequency Response Service 11933.09 1360 Synchronized Reserve 7828.18 1362 Non‐Synchronized Reserve 1216.44 1365 Day‐ahead Scheduling Reserve 10849.82 1370 Day‐ahead Operating Reserve 9010.07 1375 Balancing Operating Reserve 6177.48 1376 Balancing Operating Reserve for Load Response 2.59 1378 Reactive Services 17280.97 1380 Black Start Service 1738.38 1400 Load Reconciliation for Spot Market Energy 9399.62 Load Reconciliation for Transmission 1410 Congestion ‐895.38 1420 Load Reconciliation for Transmission Losses 306.06 1430 Load Reconciliation for Inadvertent Interchange 2.58 Load Reconciliation for PJM Scheduling, System 1440 Control and Dispatch Service 45.39 Load Reconciliation for Schedule 9‐6 ‐ Advanced 1442 Second Control Center 5.64 Load Reconciliation for Market Monitoring Unit 1444 (MMU) Funding 0.85 1445 Load Reconciliation for FERC Annual Recovery 14.73 Load Reconciliation for Organization of PJM 1446 States, Inc. (OPSI) Funding 0.15 Load Reconciliation for North American Electric 1447 Reliability Corporation (NERC) 2.59 Load Reconciliation for Reliability First 1448 Corporation (RFC) 4.22 Load Reconciliation for Transmission Owner Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1450 Service 16.33 Load Reconciliation for Regulation and 1460 Frequency Response Service 98.98 1470 Load Reconciliation for Synchronized Reserve 19.14 Load Reconciliation for Non‐Synchronized 1472 Reserve 0.03 Load Reconciliation for Day‐ahead Scheduling 1475 Reserve 0.54 Load Reconciliation for Balancing Operating 1478 Reserve 2.14 1490 Load Reconciliation for Reactive Services 252.05 1600 RPM Auction 6120.9 1610 Locational Reliability 874987.8 1932 Generation Deactivation Refund ‐580.18 28

1230 A Inadvertent Interchange 5/1/2015 ‐0.03 1250 A Meter Error Correction 5/1/2015 4.78 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1304 A Service ‐ Regulation Market Administration 2/1/2015 ‐0.05 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1304 A Service ‐ Regulation Market Administration 3/1/2015 ‐0.02 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1304 A Service ‐ Regulation Market Administration 4/1/2015 ‐0.03 PJM Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch 1306 A Service ‐ Advanced Second Control Center 2/1/2015 ‐0.01 1340 A Regulation and Frequency Response Service 1/1/2015 ‐0.96 1340 A Regulation and Frequency Response Service 2/1/2015 ‐16.3 1340 A Regulation and Frequency Response Service 3/1/2015 ‐9.54 1340 A Regulation and Frequency Response Service 4/1/2015 ‐4.1 1340 A Regulation and Frequency Response Service 5/1/2015 ‐41.28 1360 A Synchronized Reserve 6/1/2015 ‐139.75 1360 A Synchronized Reserve 1/1/2015 ‐1714.99 1360 A Synchronized Reserve 2/1/2015 ‐2271.19 1360 A Synchronized Reserve 3/1/2015 ‐384.8 1360 A Synchronized Reserve 5/1/2015 ‐0.01 1365 A Day‐ahead Scheduling Reserve 5/1/2015 57.29 1370 A Day‐ahead Operating Reserve 5/1/2015 131.43 1375 A Balancing Operating Reserve 2/1/2015 82.94 1375 A Balancing Operating Reserve 3/1/2015 2.06 1375 A Balancing Operating Reserve 4/1/2015 171.49 1375 A Balancing Operating Reserve 5/1/2015 3.45 Michigan ‐ Ontario Interface Phase Angle 1911 A Regulators 5/1/2015 187.17 Total Charges 1857603.93 SOURCE BILLING AMOUNT CREDITS ADJ BILLING LINE ITEM NAME PERIOD START ($) 2100 Network Integration Transmission Service 0 2108 Transmission Enhancement 55113.41 2130 Firm Point‐to‐Point Transmission Service 0 2140 Non‐Firm Point‐to‐Point Transmission Service 733.17 2210 Transmission Congestion 0 2220 Transmission Losses 23280.02 Transmission Owner Scheduling, System 2320 Control and Dispatch Service 0 Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from 2330 Generation and Other Sources Service 29467.58 2340 Regulation and Frequency Response Service 0 2360 Synchronized Reserve 2297.48 2365 Day‐ahead Scheduling Reserve 1785.75 2370 Day‐ahead Operating Reserve 868.18 2375 Balancing Operating Reserve 1259.29 29

2380 Black Start Service 0 2420 Load Reconciliation for Transmission Losses 27.45 2510 Auction Revenue Rights 73697.4 2600 RPM Auction 879165 2630 Capacity Transfer Rights 2081.4 2640 Incremental Capacity Transfer Rights 341.7 2661 Capacity Resource Deficiency 10931.01 2140 A Non‐Firm Point‐to‐Point Transmission Service 5/1/2015 25.01 2220 A Transmission Losses 5/1/2015 7.73 2662 A Generation Resource Rating Test Failure 6/1/2015 783.21 Total Credits 1081864.79 Monthly Billing Net Total 775739.14 Previous Weekly Billing Net Total 517609.49 Total Due / Receivable 258129.65 30

FUND SUMMARY as of 07/09/2015 Total Collected $ 1,164,229.60 DEMEC Admin Fee Paid $ 69,616.84 State Admin Fee Paid $ 26,675.07 Customer Grants Paid $ 535,563.25 Customer Only Grants/Fees Reserved and Amount Owed $ 63.75 Community Project Funds Requested - Dov. Lib - Requested $ 1,970,000.00 Community Project Funds Paid - Dov. Lib $ 397,408.32 Energy Depot Fees Paid $ 58,593.90 Efficiency Program Dollars Paid $ 37,268.34 Solar Electric Power Association (SEPA) Fee Paid $ 6,476.41 Unencumbered Funds Available Grants $ 2,563.72 Funds Available for Dover Library $ 30,000.00 Current Grant Payment Delay (Months) 0.0 GRANTS PAID Grant Amount Review Fee Amount Date Grant Paid Applicant Type Paid Paid Owed 9/21/2007 Laura Drew Kelly Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 12/5/2007 Domingo Reyes PV-Res $ 12,762.50 $ 750.00 $ - 4/16/2008 Lakeland Commercial Group Geo-NonRes $ 10,800.00 $ 750.00 $ - 6/19/2008 & 08/25/2008 L.D. Shank - Triad Farms PV-NonRes $ 30,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 10/6/2008 City of Dover PV-NonRes $ 40,820.00 $ 750.00 $ - 10/21/2008 Robert & Cynthia Hartman Geo-Res $ 1,800.00 $ 135.00 $ - 10/21/2008 Robert Varipapa Geo-Res $ 2,400.00 $ 180.00 $ - 2/27/2009 David Jump PV-Res $ 15,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 2/27/2009 Jakob Seren PV-Res $ 15,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 2/27/2009 William Sweet PV-Res $ 15,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 3/31/2009 LD Shank - Triad Farms SHW-NonRes $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 3/31/2009 Warren & Joan Seaver Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 4/22/2009 William Sweet SHW-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 4/28/2009 State of DE/DNREC - DE National PV-NonRes $ 30,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 4/29/2009 Delaware Primary Care, LLC PV-NonRes $ 30,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 9/11/2009 NCALL PV-NonRes $ 30,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 9/11/2009 D.Brian Beckman Geo-Res $ 2,000.00 $ 150.00 $ - 9/21/2009 LSKC Dover, LLC - Kids Cottage PV-NonRes $ 29,925.00 $ 750.00 $ - 10/5/2009 Mark F. Boller Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 10/5/2009 John Welgan PV-Res $ 15,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 11/4/2009 LSKC LLC/ Kids Cottage Geo-NonRes $ 12,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 3/25/2010 James G. McGiffin Jr. & Kathleen Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 3/23/2010 Minaxi Patel PV-Res $ 15,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 5/28/2010 Nancy Warner Geo-Res $ 1,200.00 $ 90.00 $ - 6/2/2010 David Teel Geo-Res $ 1,800.00 $ 135.00 $ - 6/2/2010 Dewey J. Barich Geo-Res $ 2,400.00 $ 180.00 $ - 7/12/2010 Mike & Sharon Laverty PV-Res $ 5,105.00 $ 382.88 $ - 8/19/2010 James Grilli Geo-Res $ 1,800.00 $ 135.00 $ - 8/19/2010 Michael Noble PV-Res $ 15,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 9/17/2010 David Teel PV-Res $ 7,500.00 $ 562.50 $ - 3/8/2011 Michael & Carol Apgar PV-Res $ 7,500.00 $ 562.50 $ - 3/17/2011 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo-NonRes $ 9,200.00 $ 690.00 $ - 5/24/2011 Richard Avant Geo-Res $ 2,400.00 $ 180.00 $ - 6/23/2011 Charles Messina Plumbing & SHW-NonRes $ 10,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 10/4/2011 Charles Bounds Geo-Res $ 1,800.00 $ 135.00 $ - 3/29/2011 Michael J Kopp Geo-Res $ 2,300.00 $ 135.00 $ 37.50 7/8/2011 Psychiatric Access of Central DE PV-NonRes $ 13,187.50 $ 750.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Ruth Ann Piper Geo-Res $ 1,200.00 $ 90.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Robert Hall Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo-NonRes $ 13,800.00 $ 750.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo-NonRes $ 12,000.00 $ 750.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo-NonRes $ 5,400.00 $ 405.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Elizabeth Murphey School (Garage Geo-NonRes $ 1,800.00 $ 135.00 $ - 3/7/2012 Frank Daniels Geo-Res $ 4,400.00 $ 303.75 $ 26.25 3/7/2012 Elizabeth Murphey School (Sanford Geo-NonRes $ 10,200.00 $ 750.00 $ - 8/15/2012 Chong S. Tamburo-Lepage Geo-Res $ 2,300.00 $ 172.50 $ - 12/19/2012 Christopher W. Los Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 1/30/2013 Matthew and Kimberly Chesser Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 2/25/2013 Dennis Ho PV-Res $ 6,775.00 $ 508.13 $ - 6/28/2013 John DeMarie Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 10/30/2013 James and Corinna Fritsch PV-Res $ 5,287.50 $ 396.56 $ - 10/30/2013 James and Deri Austin PV-Res $ 7,500.00 $ 562.50 $ - 2/28/2014 Calogero Guarraggi PV-Res $ 7,500.00 $ 562.50 $ - 2/28/2014 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo-NonRes $ 3,700.00 $ 277.50 $ - 2/21/2014 Mohammed Fuad Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 4/8/2014 Holly Pfeifer PV-Res $ 5,750.00 $ 431.25 $ - 5/13/2014 Governors Avenue Animal Hospital PV-NonRes $ 13,550.75 $ 750.00 $ - 7/17/2014 Julia M. Pillsbury Geo-Res $ 3,000.00 $ 225.00 $ - 11/7/2014 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo - NonRes $ 3,700.00 $ 277.50 $ - 11/7/2014 Elizabeth Murphey School Geo - NonRes $ 3,700.00 $ 277.50 $ - 1/8/2015 Rex Bell Geo - Res $ 2,300.00 $ 172.50 $ - Total $ 535,563.25 $ 26,675.07 $ 63.75 ARRA RELIEF GRANTS PAID Paid by State Customer System Type Amount 6/10/2011 Arturo Sanchez Solar - PV - Res $ 7,500.00 10/19/2011 John Diamond Enterprise LLC Solar - PV - Com $ 30,000.00 10/19/2011 John Diamond Enterprise LLC Geo HP - Com $ 10,000.00 Total $ 47,500.00 RECEIVED APPLICATIONS Grant Reservation Status Applicant Type Request Review Fee Total $ - $ - ENERGY DEPOT FEES SEPA Fees Paid Fee Period Amount Date Measure 3/3/2008 Start-up Fees $ 5,872.50 3/19/2012 2012 Annual Membership $ 2,158.81 4/15/2008 Start-up Fees $ 1,957.50 1/31/2013 2013 Annual Membership $ 2,158.80 4/15/2008 Mar, Apr, May 2008 $ 1,692.13 1/27/2014 2014 Annual Membership $ 2,158.80 7/22/2008 June, July, Aug 2008 $ 1,692.13 10/10/2008 Sept, Oct, Nov 2008 $ 1,692.13 1/2/2009 Dec 08, Jan, Feb 2009 $ 1,692.13 4/3/2008 Mar, Apr, May 2009 $ 1,692.13 7/1/2009 June, July, Aug 2009 $ 1,692.13 9/11/2009 Sept, Oct, Nov 2009 $ 1,692.13 1/4/2010 Dec 09, Jan, Feb 2010 $ 1,692.13 3/29/2010 Mar, April, May 2010 $ 1,692.13 6/30/2010 June, July, Aug 2010 $ 1,692.13 Total $ 6,476.41 10/4/2010 Sept, Oct, Nov 2010 $ 1,692.13

1/3/2011 Dec 2010, Jan, Feb 2011 $ 1,692.13 4/5/2011 Mar, Apr, May 2011 $ 1,692.13 7/8/2011 June, July, Aug 2011 $ 1,692.13 10/4/2011 Sept, Oct, Nov, 2011 $ 1,692.13 1/3/2012 Dec 2011; Jan, Feb 2012 $ 1,692.13 4/5/2012 Mar, Apr, May 2012 $ 1,692.13 7/2/2012 June, July, Aug 2012 $ 1,692.13 10/2/2012 Sept, Oct, Nov 2012 $ 1,692.13 11/30/2012 Dec 12, Jan, Feb 2013 $ 1,692.13 2/25/2013 Mar, Apr, May 2013 $ 1,692.13 7/22/2013 June, July, Aug 2013 $ 1,692.13 8/26/2013 Sept, Oct, Nov, 2013 $ 1,692.13 12/3/2013 Dec 13. Jan, Feb 2014 $ 1,692.13 3/4/2014 Mar, Apr, May 2014 $ 1,692.13 6/4/2014 June, July, Aug 2014 $ 1,692.13 9/4/2014 Sept, Oct, Nov 2014 $ 1,692.13 12/1/2014 Dec 14, Jan, Feb 2015 $ 1,692.13 3/9/2015 Mar, Apr, May 2015 $ 1,692.13 6/1/2015 June, July, Aug 2015 $ 1,692.13 Total Paid $ 58,593.90 ENERGY EFFICIENCY CAMPAIGNS/EDUCATION PROGRAMS Paid Program Measure Amount 10/21/2008 1,500 CFL Campaign & $ 5,012.29 Reimbursement for Green 12/11/2008 Energy/Information Pamphlets $ 3,459.12 Thermal Imager for Home Audits 3/31/2009 Program $ 5,581.12 Eco @ Home Energy Conserve. 1/4/2011 Calendars $ 20,015.81 Presbyterian Church of Dover - 1/14/2014 Energy Efficiency Grant $3,200.00 Total $ 37,268.34 10/30/2013 Dover Library Community Grant Payment Schedule Dover Library Community Funds Collection - $ 1,970,000.00 Allocation change from Dover Payment Due Date Requested Amount Funds Paid to Date Collections 10/17/2011 $ 48,267.00 $ 48,267.00 12/5/2012 $ 152,141.32 $ 152,141.32 $ 5,021.15 1/2 of Oct 2009 GEF Payment June 1, 2014 $ 98,500 $ 98,500.00 $ 4,783.94 1/2 of Nov 2009 GEF Payment June 1, 2015 $ 98,500 $ 98,500.00 $ 4,813.23 1/2 of Dec 2009 GEF Payment June 1, 2016 $ 98,500 $ 5,454.02 1/2 of Jan 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2017 $ 98,500 $ 5,147.49 1/2 of Feb 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2018 $ 98,500 $ 4,897.69 1/2 of March 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2019 $ 98,500 $ 3,976.14 1/2 of April 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2020 $ 98,500 $ 5,638.90 1/2 of May 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2021 $ 98,500 $ 5,645.35 1/2 of June 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2022 $ 98,500 $ 6,590.60 1/2 of July 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2023 $ 98,500 $ 7,786.09 1/2 of August 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2024 $ 98,500 $ 6,415.31 1/2 of Sept 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2025 $ 98,500 $ 5,327.96 1/2 of Oct 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2026 $ 98,500 $ 4,787.73 1/2 of Nov 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2027 $ 98,500 $ 4,939.75 1/2 of Dec 2010 GEF Payment June 1, 2028 $ 98,500 $ 5,452.55 1/2 of Jan 2011 GEF Payment June 1, 2029 $ 98,500 $ 5,410.35 1/2 of Feb 2011 GEF Payment June 1, 2030 $ 98,500 $ 4,646.32 1/2 of March 2011 GEF Payment June 1, 2031 $ 98,500 $ 4,742.22 1/2 of April 2011 GEF Payment June 1, 2032 $ 98,500 $ 4,702.48 1/2 of May 2011 GEF Payment June 1, 2033 $ 98,500 $ 5,664.97 1/2 of June 2011 GEF Payment Total $ 1,970,000.00 $ 397,408.32 $ 6,430.15 1/2 of July 2011 GEF Payment $ 6,916.50 1/2 of Aug 2011 GEF Payment $ 6,149.31 1/2 of Sept 2011 GEF Payment $ 5,243.92 1/2 of Oct 2011 GEF Payment $ 4,829.91 1/2 of Nov 2011 GEF Payment $ 4,531.81 1/2 of Dec 2011 GEF Payment $ 4,990.50 1/2 of Jan 2012 GEF Payment $ 5,071.81 1/2 of Feb 2012 GEF Payment $ 4,828.32 1/2 of March 2012 GEF Payment $ 4,857.07 1/2 of April 2012 GEF Payment $ 4,230.04 1/2 of May 2012 GEF Payment $ 5,711.19 1/2 of June 2012 GEF Payment $ 6,085.89 1/2 of July 2012 GEF Payment $ 7,347.66 1/2 of Aug 2012 GEF Payment $ 6,453.66 1/2 of Sept 2012 GEF Payment $ 4,886.43 1/2 of Oct 2012 GEF Payment $ 4,132.99 1/2 of Nov 2012 GEF Payment $ 5,513.86 1/2 of Dec 2012 GEF Payment $ 5,187.25 1/2 of Jan 2013 GEF Payment $ 5,307.83 1/2 of Feb 2013 GEF Payment $ 4,783.25 1/2 of March 2013 GEF Payment $ 4,903.40 1/2 of April 2013 GEF Payment $ 4,673.21 1/2 of May 2013 GEF Payment $ 5,322.04 1/2 of June 2013 GEF Payment $ 6,352.74 1/2 of July 2013 GEF Payment $ 6,519.11 1/2 of Aug 2013 GEF Payment $ 5,995.23 1/2 of Sept 2013 GEF Payment $ 4,913.73 1/2 of Oct 2013 GEF Payment Allocation Request from Dover 10/30/2013 - DEMEC to direct more money to library $ 8,589.16 All of Nov 2013 GEF Payment $ 8,846.64 All of Dec 2013 GEF Payment $ 9,286.45 All of Jan 2014 GEF Payment $ 10,267.60 All of Feb 2014 GEF Payment $ 8,950.89 All of March 2014 GEF Payment $ 8,960.46 All of April 2014 GEF Payment $ 8,069.10 All of May 2014 GEF Payment $ 9,357.61 All of June 2014 GEF Payment $ 10,776.24 All of July 2014 GEF Payment $ 10,967.67 All of Aug 2014 GEF Payment $ 10,883.75 All of Sept 2014 GEF Payment $ 8,932.20 All of Oct 2014 GEF Payment $ 8,549.42 All of Nov 2014 GEF Payment $ 8,805.66 All of Dec 2014 GEF Payment $ 9,524.94 All of Jan 2015 GEF Payment $ 10,268.95 All of Feb 2015 GEF Payment $ 9,387.70 All of March 2015 GEF Payment $ 8,845.29 All of April 2015 GEF Payment $ 8,371.57 All of May 2015 GEF Payment All of June 2015 GEF Payment All of July 2015 GEF Payment All of Aug 2015 GEF Payment All of Sept 2015 GEF Payment All of Oct 2015 GEF Payment All of Nov 2015 GEF Payment All of Dec 2015 GEF Payment $ 441,654.22 Total Collections

City of Dover Electric Revenue Fund FY15 - White Oak Solar Park Incremental Cost Original July August September October November December January February March April May June YTD Budget Power Supply & Generation Dover Sun Park - Energy $ 227,139 $ 219,981 $ 185,885 $ 140,672 $ 96,640 $ 54,849 $ 80,597 $ 111,516 $ 153,863 $ 212,274 $ 206,943 $ 223,996 $ 1,914,354 $ 2,067,600 Dover Sun Park - REC's 47,469 42,307 33,221 25,192 17,303 9,828 14,396 19,932 27,546 42,751 48,170 - 328,115 378,600 Total Power Supply Cost 274,609 262,288 219,105 165,864 113,943 64,677 94,993 131,448 181,409 255,025 255,113 223,996 2,242,468 2,446,200 Non-Solar Power Supply Cost (170,970) (136,533) (97,948) (80,182) (63,893) (26,259) (48,763) (103,555) (70,973) (113,593) (115,696) (113,430) (1,141,795) (1,471,635) Incremental Energy Cost $ 103,639 $ 125,755 $ 121,157 $ 85,682 $ 50,050 $ 38,418 $ 46,229 $ 27,894 $ 110,436 $ 141,432 $ 139,417 $ 110,566 $ 1,100,674 $ 974,565 Revenues Customer Sales - Electricity (9,870) (8,024) (7,893) (7,840) (8,061) (8,135) (8,448) (8,367) (8,186) (7,849) (9,323) (9,003) (100,999) (84,600) Rent Receipts (14,807) - - (14,807) - - (15,177) - - (15,177) (15,177) (15,177) (90,324) (101,400) Total Revenues (24,677) (8,024) (7,893) (22,647) (8,061) (8,135) (23,625) (8,367) (8,186) (23,026) (24,500) (24,181) (191,322) (186,000) Incremental Sun Park Cost $ 78,962 $ 117,731 $ 113,264 $ 63,034 $ 41,989 $ 30,283 $ 22,604 $ 19,527 $ 102,250 $ 118,406 $ 114,917 $ 86,385 $ 909,351 $ 788,565 MWh Purchased/Generated - Solar 2,217.724 2,006.392 1,602.868 1,213.000 833.320 472.956 694.980 961.592 1,326.748 1,830.424 2,020.536 1,931.496 17,112.036 18,159.000 MWh $ Solar Energy $ 102.42 $ 109.64 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 115.97 $ 102.42 $ 115.97 $ 111.87 $ 113.86 Solar REC's MWh 332.000 301.000 240.000 182.000 125.000 71.000 104.000 144.000 199.000 299.000 348.000 - 2,345.000 MWh $ Solar REC (one month lag)* 142.98 140.56 138.42 138.42 138.42 138.42 138.42 138.42 138.42 142.98 138.42 - 139.92 MWh $ Non-Solar Energy $ 77.09 $ 68.05 $ 61.11 $ 66.10 $ 76.67 $ 55.52 $ 70.16 $ 107.69 $ 53.49 $ 62.06 $ 57.26 $ 58.73 Note: Solar REC's are one month behind due to the time the invoice is received.