Board Members present: Mike Dyer, Sandra Bishop, Dorothy Anderson, Susie Smith. Commissioner Peter Bartel was excused.
Others present: Randy Berggren, JoAnn Andersen, Ken Beeson, Tom Buckhouse, Jon Cunningham, Marty Douglass, Kathy Grey, Eric, Hiaasen, Dick Helgeson, Everett Jordan, Bob Lorenzen, Jim Maloney, Roseanna McArthur, Mat Northway, Jim Origliosso, Scott Spettel, Dick Varner, Debra Wright, and Krista Hince of the EWEB staff; and Kim Kunkel, minutes recorder.
President Dyer called the Work Session of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) to order.
DISCUSSION OF IERP ACTION PLANS
Referring to a memorandum entitled Draft Action Plans, copies of which were included in the meeting agenda packet, Resource Planning Analyst Jim Maloney recalled that when the Board adopted the energy resource strategy, it directed staff to return in the first quarter of 2000 with a more detailed action plan. Mr. Maloney said the work session would include a review of the following first draft action plans arising from the Energy Resource Strategies 2000: 1) Demand-Side Management; 2) Renewable Resources; 3) Power Purchase Portfolio; and 4) Centralized Generation.
Following a brief overview of the four draft action plans, Mr. Maloney solicited comments from the Board.
Commissioner Smith recorded her comments on a large display board, as follows:
Commissioner Smith stated that as she read the draft action plans, she perceived a danger in viewing them as separate paths, as the "key" to EWEB's Integrated Energy Resource Plan (IERP) is the integration of the utility's strategies. In addition, Commissioner Smith stated that prior to supporting EWEB's involvement in specific projects, she would like to know staff's expectations in terms of planning these projects, as well as how these projects fit into the "bigger picture." Commissioner Smith stated that her discomfort with the Umatilla Project was both related to not knowing how it fits into the bigger picture and the Board's lack of agreement regarding the definition of "environmentally superior."
Noting that the 1996 IERP was a document leveraged during the budget process for which details were not determined until a later time, Mr. Spettel inquired as to Commissioner Smith's comfort with applying that level of detail to the Umatilla Project.
With regard to the information she would like to see prior to EWEB's involvement in the Umatilla Project, Commissioner Smith said she was interested in conceptual information. For example, she said she would like to know whether EWEB could accomplish the project with existing staff. Noting that she was doubtful that would be possible, Commissioner Smith said the next logical question would be whether to phase the project. She expressed interest in knowing how EWEB would proactively plan the project and position itself, with regard to staffing, to accomplish the project.
Noting that she had struggled with considering such factors as the costs, environmental impacts, and availability of the resource options, Commissioner Anderson requested that staff provide the Board with a comparison of the options in terms of resource costs and related staff costs.
Vice President Bishop stated that, in general, she was concerned about meeting the time lines associated with the Umatilla Project. Noting that it appeared that the Board was at a standstill in terms of making a decision about the project, Vice President Bishop expressed concern that EWEB could miss valuable opportunities and face considerable constraints if the Board demands too much specificity prior to moving forward.
President Dyer expressed frustration regarding the Board's ongoing debate concerning the definition of "environmentally superior" resources. He said the Board must come to some agreement or it will inevitably revisit the debate. President Dyer predicted that future opportunities will demand the Board to make quick decisions.
In response to a request for clarification from Mr. Berggren, Commissioner Smith said she views the IERP as a description of the "path" EWEB will take with regard to resources; however, it was clear there was a lack of consensus regarding that path. She suggested that the Board establish its priorities and direct staff to then assess what resources, in terms of staffing, would be required to accomplish those priorities. She said flexibility to make changes due to shifts in the industry or resource availability should be incorporated into the IERP.
The Board offered the following specific feedback with regard to each of the four draft action plans:
A. Demand Side Management
With regard to objective 1, "Cost Effectiveness," Commissioner Smith said it was her understanding that the Board and staff agreed to benchmark resource acquisition goals. She said she did not want to lose sight of that agreement because EWEB may want the flexibility to acquire an additional amount of a specific resource.
Referring to Objective 2, Vice President Bishop said she was uncomfortable combining, under one objective, "economic sustainability" and "environmental sustainability." She suggested that they be considered separately. Commissioner Smith concurred with Vice President Bishop's comment and suggestion. She said economic sustainability should be considered under business-related issues.
Commissioner Smith suggested several a number of grammatical changes. Her suggestions were recorded by participating staff members.
B. Renewable Resources
With regard to Objective 1, "amount equal to 1 percent," Commissioner Smith said it was her understanding that the Board set 1 percent as a minimum rather than a limit. The other Board members concurred with Commissioner Smith's recollection.
Commissioner Smith noted that EWEB's marketing of wind power was a pilot marketing program, and said it should not be assumed that other resources would be marketed in the same manner. Mr. Northway responded that customer response to the wind power pilot marketing program will direct how EWEB markets other energy resources.
In response to a question from Commissioner Anderson, Mr. Maloney clarified the graph on page 3. He said staff would consider how to present the information in a manner that was more easily understood.
Referring to page 5 of the draft action plan, Commissioner Smith said she was intrigued with Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA's) use and definition of the term "environmentally preferred power." She said it might be helpful to assess what terms and definitions are being used by other agencies.
Referring to page 5, under "form and participate in cooperative efforts with others to promote the development of renewable energy resources," Commissioner Smith suggested adding: "staff support to Northwest Energy Coalition and Reenables Northwest."
With regard to landfill gas, Commissioner Smith commented that investing in landfill gas is "buys" a longer future for fossil fuels. She wondered whether it matters where landfill gas is placed, in terms of resource type, in the Action Plan.
In response to a question from Mr. Maloney, Commissioner Smith expressed support for developing this stuff with outer limit and with an understanding that doing it for benefit of citizenry.
Mr. Maloney solicited feedback as to whether diversity requirements should be applied to renewable resources.
Commissioner Anderson suggested that diversity be a consideration rather than a requirement. Vice President Bishop said she was not concerned about diversity in relation to renewable resources, but rather about EWEB keeping up with current technology. She agreed with Commissioner Anderson that diversity should be a consideration rather than a requirement.
C. Power Purchase Portfolio
Referring to the Preamble on page 1 of the draft, Commissioner Smith suggested reinforcing that EWEB was acting to position itself such that it can develop superior resources for the community. She suggested including language to this effect in sentence 2, as part of the discussion regarding EWEB's business success.
Referring to paragraph 2 on page 1 of the draft, Commissioner Smith suggested stating clearly that development of a power purchase portfolio is a sound business decision.
Referring to the final page of the draft, Commissioner Smith suggested clarifying that utility resources would be leveraged in line with available staff levels. She said leveraging utility resources beyond that level should include consideration of how the investment "fits into the larger picture."
D. Central Generation
Referring to page 2 of the draft, Commissioner Smith wondered who would evaluate the upstream impacts.
With regard to the level of EWEB's participation in the power market, Commissioner Smith suggested that EWEB set its upper limit based upon the interests of the community.
Vice President Bishop expressed interest in defining "environmentally superior" as a means by which to generate agreed-upon criteria, and then discarding the term.
The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
_____________________________________ ______________________________________
Assistant Secretary President