Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBPMC Meeting March 3, 1993 1Revised Action Nos. - September 7, 1993 RECORD VUOPY FILE NO “hb acd BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ay Soke! mes 3/13/93 APPROVED MEETING MINUTES i March 3, 1993 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Highers called the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Management Committee to order at 10:15 a.m. in the Training Room at Chugach Electric Association in Anchorage, Alaska to conduct the business of the Committee per the agenda and the public notice. 2. ROLL CALL Alaska Energy Authority Brent N. Petrie, Designated Representative Chugach Electric Association David L. Highers, Designated Representative and Chairman Golden Valley Electric Association Mike Kelly, Designated Representative City of Seward Paul Diener, Designated Representative Homer Electric Association Dave Fair, Alternate Representative Matanuska Electric Association Ken Ritchey, Designated Representative Municipal Light & Power Tom Stahr, Designated Representative Others Present: Ron Saxton, Ater, Wynne, Hewitt, Dodson & Skerritt David Burlingame, Chugach Electric Association John Cooley, Chugach Electric Association dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 2 of 13 Tom Lovas, Chugach Electric Association Jim Hall, Matanuska Electric Association Bob Hufman, AEG&T Moe Aslam, Municipal Light & Power Bob Price, Municipal Light & Power Dave Calvert, City of Seward David R. Eberle, Alaska Energy Authority Stanley E. Sieczkowski, Alaska Energy Authority Denise Burger, Alaska Energy Authority Eric Wohlforth, Wohlforth, Argetsinger, Johnson & Brecht Tom Klinkner, Wohlforth, Argetsinger, Johnson & Brecht Jim Seagraves, Nuveen 3 PUBLIC COMMENT There being no public comment, the meeting continued to the next agenda item. 4. AGENDA COMMENTS The following items were added to the agenda: 11 E. Section 31 Costs 11 F. Agreements Discussion 12 C. Refinancing of Bradley Lake Bonds Ss APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 14, 1993 The minutes of the January 14, 1993 Bradley PMC meeting were approved with minor corrections. 6. TECHNICAL COORDINATING SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Burlingame reported that the TCS had not met and noted that an update of the SVC testing would be included with the O&D Subcommittee report. 7. BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT Bradley Lake Construction Cost Audit and FY92 O&M Audit Mr. Ritchey reported that both audits were nearly completed. A draft report on the construction cost audit is expected from Metzler and Associates by mid- March. Copies of the audit will be distributed to AEA and members of the dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 3 of 13 Budget Subcommittee. Final reports of both audits are expected by the end of March. FY94 Budget Noting that BPMC approval of the budget was required by April 1, 1993, Mr. Ritchey informed the Committee that the FY94 budget was very similar to the FY93 budget. It was anticipated that the FY94 budget would be ready for distribution to the BPMC members by mid-March. Mr. Ritchey recommended that the BPMC schedule a meeting or teleconference at the end of March to consider approval of the budget. Fish Studies Mr. Ritchey relayed the Subcommittee had discussed continuing funding of the Bradley River fisheries studies. AEA recommended a three year fisheries studies program. The studies, also supported by other State and Federal resource agencies, would determine how much water was actually needed for salmon spawning. It is anticipated the results may indicate that the current flow requirements (40 cfs winter and 100 cfs summer) are higher than necessary to ensure salmon egg incubation. The total cost of the three year studies program is expected to be $117,000. It was pointed out that a reduction of the minimum flow requirement could ultimately save the utilities as much as $2,500/day. Lower minimum flow requirements could reduce potential violations due to current monitoring difficulties (i.e., icing at the gage stations). Additionally, information gained by the studies could be used to support alternate monitoring methods. Mr. Ritchey noted that the Budget Subcommittee revised the FY93 budget to include an additional $4,600 for this year's studies and that additional funds would be added to the FY94 budget to continue the studies. 8. AGREEMENTS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Sieczkowski reported the Agreements Subcommittee held two teleconference meetings. Final revisions were made to the Soldotna Substation Agreement and Transmission Facilities Maintenance Agreement. Comments have not been received on the draft Daves Creek or Soldotna SVC Facilities Maintenance Agreements that were distributed in December. Agreements Discussion Mr. Saxton, referring to his memorandum dated March 2, 1993, recommended that the BPMC establish a master agreement designed to clearly define the role dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 4 of 13 and rights of the Committee to which all other agreements would be subject (Attachment 1). Mr. Saxton explained that the master agreement would define and preserve the rights of the BPMC without requiring the already completed agreements to be rewritten. Noting that AEA had only received Mr. Saxton's memorandum the day before, Mr. Petrie requested additional time to review the proposal before any action was taken by the Committee. In response to inquiry by Mr. Kelly, Mr. Saxton stated that the master agreement would recognize the BPMC as the central authority (rather than AEA). Mr. Lovas noted that there was no intent to change or create legal entities or relationships, but to reshape the agreements in order to be consistent. Chairman Highers deferred further discussion to Agenda Item 11 F., Agreements Discussion. 9. OPERATION & DISPATCH SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Sieczkowski distributed a summary of the January 28, 1993 O&D Subcommittee meeting without additional comment (Attachment 2). Fish Water Bypass Update Mr. Eberle reported AEA anticipated removal of the estimated 40 - 60 cubic yards of material blocking the intake using hydraulic dredges through the ice. Proposals will be requested from three diving firms and the contract awarded by mid-March. Work is expected to begin March 22, 1993 and take about two weeks to complete. The total cost of the work is currently approximated at $125, 000. SVC Testing Mr. Burringame distributed a summary of SVC Testing (Attachment 3). Reporting that the SVC systems performed well during testing, Mr. Burlingame noted the only problem was with the capacitors. The SVC's have not been energized below zero degrees without experiencing capacitor problems. ABB is trying to determine if the problem is the capacitors or system harmonics. Testing of the SVC is expected to be completed by March 5, 1993. Mr. Burlingame reported two outages had occurred which fully tested the SVC system. While Bradley was operating at 115 megawatts, a 73 megawatt load trip islanded the Kenai, splitting the Kenai into two islands. The SVC operated at 64 hertz and the voltage remained solid until the Kenai blacked out. Mr. Burlingame noted that the present SVC configuration did not allow the Kenai to be picked up while black, however, the configuration was being changed. During the second outage, both Bradley Lake units were synchronized dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 5 of 13 10. 11. on line at 61.2 hertz. A synch-check relay closed the units in, causing a 90 megawatt power swing on the Kenai. The SVC dampened the severe voltage swings, but hit its ceiling of 70 megavars for five seconds. Air Crash Accident Reporting on the February 20, 1993 South Central Air plane crash at the Bradley Lake Project, Mr. Sieczkowski informed the Committee that the air craft experienced difficulty upon takeoff from the Project airstrip. Larry Wolf, John Zidalis and his wife Gail, and their grandson were in the plane. The plane clipped the fence at the end of the runway and crashed, nose down, into the tidal flats. The pilot, Larry, John and Gail received multiple injuries, however all are recovering. The grandson was uninjured. Anticipated recovery time for both Larry and John is expected to be about two months. Mr. Sieczkowski noted that Richard Turner has assumed John Zidalis's responsibilities at the Project site and Dave Eberle is filling in for Larry Wolf. The cause of the accident is currently being investigated by the FAA and NTSB. REVIEW OF PROJECT STATUS Mr. Eberle reported that problems with the Bradley Lake governors (AGC) are being worked on. ABB is investigating the problem with the SVC capacitors. ABB suspects the problem may be caused by a manufacturing defect and expects that, when identified, the faulty capacitors will be replaced. Eight proposals have been accepted by AEA for the contaminated soil cleanup work. Bids are expected from the proposers by mid-March. Mr. Eberle noted that the capacitance rating of the existing CEA breaker at the Soldotna Substation was not high enough and that AEA was purchasing a new breaker to replace it. Installation of the new breaker is expected to be completed by the end of July 1993. IBEW Labor Negotiations Mr. Sieczkowski reported the IBEW made an initial proposal to AEA to which AEA provided a counter proposal. The negotiations broke down and the IBEW issued a complaint of unfair labor practice. AEA is preparing another counter proposal and will be meeting with the IBEW on March 22, 1993. OLD BUSINESS dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 6 of 13 Spinning Reserve/Under Frequency Load Shedding Update Mr. Lovas reported that the Intertie Operating Committee had received a load shedding schedule recommendation. The proposal included recommendations for additional work and investigation by the ASCC Reliability Criteria Committee (or some other group). The current proposed load shedding schedule is subject to action on or before March 19, 1993. If approved, the new schedule will go into effect within 60 days. The ASCC is focusing on defining various aspects of spin and spinning resources (i.e., quality, character, distribution and location of spinning resources). The Reliability Criteria Committee is currently compiling utility input regarding the spinning reserve and operating reserve issues. Bradley Scheduling vs. Spin Requirement Mr. Saxton stated that, with the exception of AML&P, neither the utilities or AEA had submitted any comments regarding spin requirements. Mr. Lovas noted that CEA had agreed to carry additional spin on behalf of SES and MEA (and HEA) to cover the portion attributable to each utility until February 1, 1993. It was clarified that CEA was no longer covering that portion of spin. Mr. Stahr stated that the utilities still had a spin obligation and recommended that the BPMC consider whether AEA had a spin obligation. Mr. Saxton pointed out that both issues needed to be addressed, stating that the only binding spin requirement was in the Intertie Operating Agreement. Mr. Lovas stated that the RCC was investigating system technical requirements and representative shares of the utilities, but it had not discussed the issue of AEA spin obligation. In response to Mr. Kelly, Mr. Lovas confirmed that the issue of utility spin obligations and share proportions ( allocation of spin responsibilities) could be addressed by the RCC. However, Mr. Lovas felt that determining any AEA spin obligation was beyond the authority of the RCC. Mr. Kelly cautioned against allowing the issue to be dropped. Mr. Saxton stated it was his understanding from a previous BPMC meeting that the utilities were to submit written comments on the spin requirements to him. Mr. Stahr observed that, at some point, the utilities were going to have to find a consensus solution, rather than a solution favorable to an individual utility. Mr. Kelly suggested that the dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 7 of 13 utilities review the AML&P comments and either agree with them or provide their own comments. Mr. Petrie stated AEA will provide comments on the spin requirement issue to Mr. Saxton. Mr. Stahr will distribute AML&P's previous comments to the utilities for reference and recommended that all utility responses be forwarded to Mr. Saxton. Mr. Petrie, acting as Chairman, directed the utilities to submit responses to Mr. Saxton no later than March 30, 1993.1 Additionally, Mr. Kelly recommended that the utilities send each other a copy of their response (Action 93-151). Gc Fritz Creek Segment Funding Mr. Petrie reported the Energy Authority bond counsel and accountant were researching methods to restructure money within the bond issue to cover HEA's acceleration cost for the Fritz Creek transmission line segment. Mr. Petrie stated that AEA expected to be able to make a recommendation to the Committee at its next meeting. Mr. Saxton requested that AEA forward its findings to him. Mr. Petrie confirmed that the information and resulting recommendations would be forwarded. Mr. Saxton asked if HEA had developed any alternative proposals in case AEA's efforts were unsuccessful. Reiterating HEA's position presented by Mr. Story at the January 14, 1993 BPMC meeting, Mr. Fair stated it (funding of the Fritz Creek line costs) was not HEA's problem. Mr. Fair noted that it was an obligation of the Project and that three financing options had been provided in the Transmission Agreement. Mr. Fair stated that HEA was not responsible to independently resolve the problem. D. Fish Water Bypass Update This item was previously discussed under Item 10, Review of Project Status. E. Section 31 Costs This item refers to funding of the Fritz Creek Segment previously discussed under Item 11 C. ! In the temporary absence of the Committee Chairman and in the absence of the Vice Chairman, the Committee Secretary, Mr. Brent Petrie, served as Acting Chairman. dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 8 of 13 Agreements Discussion Review of List of Agreements Mr. Saxton stated that no comments had been received on the list of railbelt agreements distributed at the last Committee meeting. Mr. Petrie directed the utilities to submit revisions of the list to Tom Lovas. Master A ment The Committee continued discussion of the master agreement concept started under Item 8., Agreements Subcommittee Report, Agreements Discussion. Mr. Saxton stated that his memorandum outlined the east intrusive way to accomplish transfer of the BPMC to the central role without throwing away the work already done on the agreements. Mr. Petrie reiterated his earlier request for more time to review the proposal, stating that AEA was not prepared to vote on the recommendation. AEA wanted, however, to pursue closure of the current agreements. Mr. Petrie stated that if the agreements could not be signed, AEA would need to develop an interim memorandum of understanding with HEA. Mr. Saxton stated, according to the Power Sales Agreement, the BPMC was given the authority to operate and maintain the Project. Mr. Saxton further stated, at question was the right of AEA to independently contract with the utilities. Mr. Saxton explained that his recommendation ensured that both the BPMC and AEA agreed, adding that neither had the right to act independently. Mr. Saxton clarified that the proposed master agreement would relate to both past and future agreements (excluding power sales, services and transmission agreements). Mr. Fair expressed concern over the potential delay of completing the Substation Maintenance Agreement. Mr. Fair noted that HEA had a temporary Transmission Maintenance Agreement but no Substation Maintenance Agreement. Mr. Sieczkowski and Mr. Fair agreed that, a temporary substation agreement was needed in the absence of a final agreement. Mr. Saxton contended that the creation of a master agreement would not produce any more substantial delays, citing the process had already taken about one year.2 Mr. Fair requested direction from the Committee on whether HEA should delay signing the current 2 Chairman Highers returned to the meeting. dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 9 of 13 agreements. Mr. Stahr recommended that the established process continue and all agreements be done the same way and all modified the same way. It was the understanding of Mssrs. Petrie and Fair that the members of Agreements Subcommittee were ready to approve the agreements for signature. Mr. Saxton disagreed, stating his understanding was that the members of the Subcommittee had not reached a consensus favorable to signing the present agreements. Mr. Sieczkowski stated that prior to Mr. Saxton's memorandum, all final comments had been incorporated and the agreements were recommended for signature and, in fact, were ready to sign. In response to Mr. Kelly, Mr. Saxton stated that the BPMC had the ability to contract directly, however, that it would result in disadvantages as well as advantages. Mr. Fair commented that he did not disagree with the proposed master agreement and even supported the concept. Noting that HEA now had SVC equipment installed at its substations, Mr. Fair added that any further delay finalizing the agreements created a practical problem for HEA. Mr. Saxton pointed out that, even though the agreements were ready to sign, the agreements and resulting budgets needed to be approved by the BPMC. Mr. Saxton stated that the development of a master agreement could be accomplished within two or three days and would not cause a significant delay. Mr. Kelly asked what would happen if the Energy Authority ceased to exist and how that would affect the Project under the proposed master agreement. Mr. Saxton explained that the agreements would be composed of three parties: the BPMC, the Energy Authority, and the individual utility, and to accommodate for loss of the Energy Authority would be more complex than the current proposed master agreement. Mr. Eberle suggested that the Committee execute the current pending agreements with a provision that the agreements be subject to the proposed master agreement. Mr. Kelly concurred, recommending that a clause be included in the pending agreements recognizing the authority of the master agreement and that the master agreement address the possible disappearance of the Energy Authority or a change in BPMC policy. Mr. Saxton proposed CEA, HEA and ABA sign a letter of agreement subjecting all utility operating agreements to a master agreement which would allow the current process to continue and pending agreements to be signed. Mssrs. Petrie, Fair and Highers dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 10 of 13 preferred that a clause be included in the pending agreements rather than a separate letter agreement. In accordance with the consensus of the Committee, Mr. Saxton will draft and distribute the clause to the utilities within a few days (Action 93-152). 12. NEW BUSINESS A. Revised Scheduling & Allocation Procedures Mr. Sieczkowski reported that the Operation & Dispatch Subcommittee recommended adoption of the revised Allocation & Scheduling Procedures. Mr. Kelly moved to approve the revised procedures. Seconded by Mr. Petrie, the revised Allocation & Scheduling Procedures were approved by unanimous role call vote after minor corrections were noted (Action 93-153). B. Operations Fund Contingency Resolution Mr. Saxton deferred discussion of this item to the next regular Committee meeting. GC. Refinancing Bradley Lake Bonds Chairman Highers noted a memorandum regarding possible refinancing had been sent to the Committee by Mr. Petrie (Attachment 4). Mr. Petrie informed the Committee that AEA had received three bond refunding proposals, noting that two were later withdrawn. The remaining proposal, submitted by Nuveen, specifically addressed the portion of the bond funds allocable to AML&P and the City of Seward. Mr. Petrie noted that, due to anticipated changes in the tax laws, there was only a limited amount of time to complete the bond refunding transaction. Addressing the Committee, Mr. Seagraves explained that private activity bonds cannot be typically advance refunded, however under the current tax law, the portion of the bond funds attributable to municipal entities (i.e., AML&P and Seward) could be refunded. Referring to the Nuveen proposal, Mr. Seagraves noted a calculated savings of $3,000,000 (under present market conditions). Mr. Wohlforth relayed that treasury regulations amended last year allowed portions of bond fundings to be allocated for different purposes. dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 11 of 13 The regulations also state that governmental purpose (not private) bonds may be advance refunded. Therefore, those portions of the Bradley bond which qualified as government purpose were eligible for refunding. However, the regulation that allows advance refunding of the bond will end with new treasury regulations effective July 1, 1993. Mr. Wohlforth stated his firm was confident that the municipal portions of the Bradley bonds could be refunded under the current regulations and would survive any Treasury scrutiny. Mr. Kelly asked if the bond refunding could be insured against a later (retroactive) determination of tax liability. Mr. Wohlforth explained the bond insurer does not insure for legal risk (only economic). Mr. Wohlforth stated that any potential problem would become evident prior to the bond closing and expressed confidence in the tax analysis. Mr. Seagraves, citing the Daily Bond Buyer, stated that the only post closing, retroactive tax liability decisions occurred in obvious fraudulent cases. Mr. Klinkner stated that the tax analysis was innovative and within the law, however, the law was expected to change to disallow this type of transaction. Mr. Lovas questioned whether the analysis addressed the receipt of the savings produced by the refunding by private participants. It was Mr. Wohlforth's belief that the effect of the refunding would not influence any tax liability determination. Chairman Highers stated that investigations by CEA indicated a lack of consensus regarding the interpretation of current Treasury regulations. Mr. Seagraves noted that, as a general rule, a three percent savings guideline is applied when evaluating the cost effectiveness of refunding. It was clarified that all expenses related to the bond sale could be capitalized. In response to inquiry by Mr. Lovas, Mr. Seagraves indicated that a simultaneous series of bonds could be issued to provide for additional project costs (i.e., HEA acceleration costs for the Fritz Creek transmission line). Mr. Seagraves estimated that the preliminary bond sale efforts would cost approximately $15,000 and that the majority of the associated costs would not be incurred until the final decision is made just before the sale. It was noted that the utilities must first unanimously agree to the bond sale. Mr. Petrie informed the Committee that a letter of intent to issue bonds was required by the State sixty days in advance of the sale. Mr. Petrie anticipated minimal legal costs associated with the preliminary effort. dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 12 of 13 Chairman Highers expressed reservations committing to the bond sale. Mr. Stahr noted that what he estimated to be an annual saving of $25,000 might not provide sufficient incentive to take even a small risk. Mr. Petrie recommended that the Committee approve only the preliminary work and defer the final decision. Mr. Wohlforth noted that the next opportunity to refinance (after July 1, 1993) was not until 1999, when the bonds were callable. Mr. Seagraves cautioned that, as in any bond sale, market conditions were subject to change. Addressing tax liability, Mr. Wohlforth stated that if the proposed refunding received an unfavorable tax determination, it would not effect the previous bonds. Mr. Seagraves added that application of a retroactive tax was highly unlikely, however, if, in a hypothetical extreme case, it did occur, the bond holders would sue. Mr. Seagraves explained that the burden became the bond holders and that the utilities were only obligated to pay the debt service originally agreed to. Mr. Seagraves informed the Committee that the bonds had to close by July 1, 1993 and that preparation for the bond sale should by complete by June 1, 1993. If the notice of intent to issue bonds was given within the next few days, Mr. Seagraves stated the bond sale could take place as early as the first week of May, or any time favorable between then and July 1, 1993. Mr. Stahr stated that AML&P counsel was conservative and hesitant to proceed without an IRS opinion, however, AML&P would agree to proceed with limited preliminary steps. Mr. Kelly motioned that AEA be directed to give notice to the Legislature of intent to issue bond. The motion was seconded and passed by the following role call vote: City of Seward Yes Matanuska Electric Association Yes Chugach Electric Association Yes Homer Electric Association Yes Iden _V; Electric Association Yes Anchorage Municipal Light & Power Abstain Alaska Energy Authority Yes (Action 93-154) Mr. Kelly motioned that the BPMC reimburse costs incurred to investigate the Bradley Lake bond refunding not to ex 25 3 3 Costs include AEA bond counsel and AML&P legal counsel. dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93a BPMC Meeting Minutes March 3, 1993 Page 13 of 13 The motion, seconded by Mr. Ritchey, passed by unanimous role call vote (Action 93-155). Chairman Highers requested that the utility managers be kept informed on the issue. 13. COMMUNICATIONS A. Schedule Next Meeting March 30, 1993 9:00 a.m. via Teleconference The teleconference will address approval of the budget and the Bradley bond refunding. Mr. Burlingame noted that the Committee would need to meet in April to discuss release of the 90 megawatt interim operating restriction. Mr. Stahr motioned that the Operation & Dispatch Subcommittee be authorized to increase the project output to 120 megawatts (or another determined appropriate level) only by consensus of the Subcommittee. The motion, seconded by Mr. Kelly, was approved by unanimous role call vote (Action 93-156). Mr. Ritchey requested approval of attorney legal expenses for the month of January 1993. Mr. Kelly moved the Committee approve the expenses. Seconded by Mr. Ritchey, the expenses were approved by unanimous role call vote (Action 93-157). 14, ADJOURNMENT 0 further business before the Committee, the meeting adjourned at 1:05 p.m. ighers, Chairman Attest: Brot My = Brent N. Petrie, Secretary dburger\word\minutes\pmc\03-93 eonor es reer @PoVy 640 VVIY ALEK WYNNE — i ATTACHMENT 1 ATER WYNNE masw canes HEWITT Portland, Oregon 97201-6618 (503) 226-1191 DODSON Fax (909) 226-007 & SKERRITT ATTORNEYS AT LAW DUPLICATE FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL NOTICE: This facsimile contains confidential information that is being transmitted to and is intended only for the use of the recipient named below. Reading, disclosure, discussion, ssemination, distribution, or copying of this information by anyone other than the named recipient or his:or her employees or agents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, please immediately destroy it and notify us by telephone, (503) 226-1191. DATE: March 2.1993 0 TO: an i ee cae em CITY/STATE: A —————E————— FAX NUMBER: OFFICE NUMBER: FROM: 16) eS ee DOCUMENT : Memo re: Master Operating Agreement Outline _ PAGES (INCL. COVER) 6 USAGE TIME CLIENT NUMBER: _53844-0000 Fax No, Office No. Dave Highers, Tom Lovas, CEA, Anchorage, AK 907/562-0027 907/563-7494 Ken Ritchey, MEA, Palmer, AK 907/745-9368 907/745-3231 Paul Diener, City of Seward, Seward, AK 907/224-3248 907/224-3331 Norm Story, HEA, Homer, AK 907/235-3313 907/235-8167 Mike Kelly, GVEA, Fairbanks, AK 907/451-5633 907/452-1151 Tom — ML&P, Anchorage, AK 907/263-5204 907/263-5201 Ro ent omnes tan Sieczkows BA, Anchorage ———907/561-8584 907/561~7877 RLS\ BPMC. fax