Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBPMC Meeting March 3, 1993 210. 11. 12. 13. 14. BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA March 3, 1993 Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Training Room 10:00 a.m. CALL TO ORDER 10:00 a.m. ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA COMMENTS APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES - January 14, 1993 TECHNICAL COORDINATING SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT A. Bradley Lake Construction Cost Audit Update B. FY93 Budget, AEA Administrative Costs Update Cc. Bradley Lake O&M Cost Audit Update AGREEMENTS SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT OPERATION AND DISPATCH SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT REVIEW OF PROJECT STATUS OLD BUSINESS A. Spinning Reserves/Under Frequency Load Shedding Update B. Bradley Scheduling vs. Spin Requirement Update Cc; Fritz Creek Segment Funding D. Fish Water Bypass Update , . é- Section 3) ypass Upd F. Aa reements Disevssion NEW BUSINESS A. Revised Allocation & Scheduling Procedures B. Operations Budget Contingency Fund Resolution ae ReCmency Bb vadlery Lake Bends. COMMUNICATIONS A. Schedule Next Meeting ADJOURNMENT Highers Burlingame Ritchey Sieczkowski Sieczkowski Eberle Lovas Saxton Story Wolf Sieczkowski Saxton , 002/008 03/02/93 11:31 ‘503 226 0079 ATER WYNNE ee ATER WYNNE Sune 1800 222 SW. Cobumbia HEWITT Pordland, Oregon 97201-6618 (503) 226-1191 DODSON Fax (503) 226-0079 & SKERRITT ATTORNEYS AT LAW VIA FACSIMILE MEMORANDUM TO: BPMC FROM: Ron Saxton and Tom Lovas DATE: March 2, 1993 RE: Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Master Operating Agreement Outline - Alternatives For Bradley Lake BPMC Involvement In Project Management Consistent with the Project Power Sales Agreement ir £ n . At the last BPMC meeting, Ron was given the assignment to develop a proposal for clarifying the role of the BPMC in the various Bradley operating agreements. The assignment was to dreft these agreements in a way that recognized the BPMC's role in decisions about operating matters. Tom Lovas assisted Ron in the development of the following proposal. In summary, our proposal is to keep the individual agreements between the AEA and each contractor, but to make all such agreements subject to terms in a Master Operating Agreement to which the BPMC is a party. This approach provides protection of the BPMC concerns, while still allowing individual arrangements between AEA and individual contractors. BACKGROUND The Bradley Project Management Committee was established in the Bradley Lake Project Power Sales Agreement to provide the RLS638dermem Seattle, Washington Washington, D C. San Francisca, California Affiliated offices in (206) 623-4711 (202) 785-0303 (415) 421-4143 Anchorage, Fairbanks Fax (206) 467-8406 Pax (202) 783-8676 Fax (415) 989-1263 and Juneau, Alaska 003/006 03/02/93 Litse2 503 226 0079 ATER WYNNE dts 003/006 ATER WYNNE BPMC March 2, 1993 Page 2 purchasers of Bradley Lake power a direct participatory role in the management of the Project. The BPMC is "responsible for the management, operation, maintenance, and improvement of the Project" to the extent such responsibilities are consistent with AEA's ownership of the Project. That responsibility can be handled through direct BPMC participation in contract administration, or by making the BPMC the contracting entity for Bradley Lake activities. In either case, the AEA, as a State agency, owner and holder of the FERC license, must retain control of matters affecting its obligations under State law and the FERC license. The existing contracts between AEA and its O&M contractors place the BPMC only in a budget review mode, after AEA and the contractor have reviewed and agreed to the essentials for the following year. The issues that count most to BPMC members are schedule and cost. If the BPMC is involved after the fact, the matters most important to them have already been decided. PROPOSAL The easiest way to remedy the lack of BPMC involvement is to revise the format of the contracts to make the BPMC's role central in the planning and budgeting process. The AEA would continue its role as contractor, but would use the BPMC (or a subcommittee) to review the schedules, plans and budgets submitted by the contractor. For all matters excepting those where AEA's legal responsibilities are paramount, the BPMC's decision would control. The advantage of this type of revision is that it would require the least change in BPMC/AEA relationships. The following is an outline of the key terms of such an Operating Master Agreement: ite 3 of a Lake P A ement. 1s Parties. AEA, BPMC (acting on behalf of the Bradley Lake Power Sales Agreement Parties) and Contractors for O&M of the Bradley Lake Project and related transmission and communication facilities. 2. Nature of Agreement. All Bradley Lake subcontracting would be subject to the same planning and budgetary provisions és provided in the basic agreement. Specific responsibilities would RLS\G3iider.wem 03/02/93 11:00 503 226 0079 ATER WYNNE 005/007 ATER WYNNE BPMC March 2, 1993 Page 3 be included in separate exhibits to the agreement and executed by the AEA and the individual contractor. 3. Term. The term of the Master Operating Agreement would extend until the Bradley Lake Power Sales Agreement terminates. Each of the exhibits signed by AEA and a Contractor would state the term of the exhibit based upon the particular circumstances. 4. BpMC Rights and Obligations. a. Exhibit Approval. BPMC approval would be required before any exhibit (or amendment thereto) detailing the duties of a contractor is executed by the AEA. De Budget Approval. All plans and budgets would be submitted to the AEA and the BPMC for approval. The AEA and the individual contractor would be responsible for the preparation of the initial submission of plans and budgets. C. AEA Rights. The relationships of the BPMC and the AEA would continue as provided in the Power Sales Agreement. (The limitations on BPMC actions consistent with AEA's legal responsibilities and obligations as a State agency and FERC licensee would be preserved.) Specific procedural requirements (time for approval, payment of obligations, contractor performance) would be included in the Master Operating Agreement with the right of the AEA to proceed in the event of disagreement. d. Dispute Resolution. All disputes would be subject to mediation for a limited period prior to invoking arbitration or litigation. The BPMC would be responsible for setting up mediation and would be a stated party to any mediation or arbitration. e. BPMC Status. The BPMC would sign the Agreement acting on behalf of all the Parties to the Power Sales Agreement. It would continue to act as a non-incorporated body without any separate legal status. - Standard Contractor Provisions. a. di nm a » Unless otherwise agreed, each of the contractors signing an exhibit will act as an independent contractor. RLS\638dermen 03/02/93 11:00 503 226 0079 ATER WYNNE 006/007 ATER WYNNE BPMC March 2, 1993 Page 4 De Budget Preparation. Unless otherwise agreed, all contractors will be subject to the same requirements regarding budget submission and subsequent approval process by the BPMC (and AEA). c. Invoice and Payment. Standard procedures for invoices and payments of contractor costs will be included in the Master Operating Agreement. d. Dispute Resolution. Consistent with BPMC description above. e. Insurance. The base agreement would contain guidelines but leave details to each contractor's exhibit. £. In and F eure. Same for all contractors. 6. Contractor Exhibit. Each Contractor for the Project would execute a detailed exhibit with AEA and be obligated to the terms and conditions affecting Contractors included in the Master Operating Agreement. The specific duties relating to the work performed by the Contractor would be contained in the exhibit. All exhibits would be subject to BPMC approval prior to execution or amendment. An Example (Outline) of the contents of an exhibit based upon the current AEA-Chugach O&M Agreement for Daves Creek follows: 1. Parties to Exhibit. AEA and Chugach. ae Definitions. The exhibit would contain definitions specifically related to the exhibit (Party, SVC, SVC Facilities). 3. Term of Exhibit. Separate Term and Termination provision. 4. Maintenance of Facilities. Similar to existing O&M Agreement. 5. Maintenance Plan, Schedule and Budget. Section would only include provisions that are unique to the exhibit. 11:01 503 226 0079 ATER WYNNE 007/007 03/02/93 ATER WYNNE BPMC. March 2, 1993 Page 5 6. Payment, Accounts, Records and Audits, Extraordinary Maintenance, Insurance, Indemnity, Uncontrollable Forces and other "boiler plate" provisions would be part of the Master Operating Agreement. des f or E Exh. . The exhibit to the Master Operating Agreement would contain a similar list of equipment. List of Bradley Lake Project O&M Agreements. The following is a list of agreements between AEA and individual Bradley Lake participants which could be included in a “Master Operating Agreement". l. Dispatch Agreement between AEA and CEA. an Maintenance Agreement between AEA and Maintenance Contractor. 3. Transmission Facilities Maintenance Agreement between AEA and AEG&T. 4. Facilities Interconnected Dispatch Agreement between AEA and HEA, 5b Communications Equipment Agreement between AEA and DIVCOM. 6. Static VAR Compensator Systems at Daves Creek and Soldotna Maintenance Agreement between AEA and CEA, 7. Operating Agreement with Bradley Lake contract operator. Distribution: Paul Diener, Seward Ken Ritchey, MEA Dave Highers, CEA Norm Story, HEA Mike Kelly, GVEA Tom Stahr, ML&P Ron Garzini, AEA Brent Petrie, AEA Stan Sieczkowski, AEA LGINIS4igh doo ATTACHMENT 2 BRADLEY LAKE OPERATION AND DISPATCH SUBCOMMITTEE SUMMARY OF MEETING JANUARY 28, 1993 CORRESPONDENCE Bradley Draw-down, January 8, 1993 Update on Fish Water Bypass Intake Obstruction, January 19, 1993 OPERATIONS Participant subcommittee voting rights were discussed by the Subcommittee. It was noted that questions regarding voting rights had been previously raised at the BPMC level and that Mr. Saxton was investigating the issue. The Chairman will request Mr. Saxton provide written procedural guidelines for the subcommittees. It was reported that a second dive inspection of the fish water bypass intake area disclosed approximately 40 yards of material covering the intake. Because the size of the material is small (generally under 6 inches), the debris could potentially be vacuumed from the intake area. The work will be done in April at a proposed reservoir elevation of 1108' with minimal impact to the scheduling utilities. A reservoir draw-down to the 1068' level would not be required. The utilities will be requested to use an additional 9,000 acre feet of water over current schedule in order to reach the 1108' reservoir level by April 1, 1993. Responsibility for the remaining DECnet installation work was discussed by the Subcommittee. AEA recommended that the DECnet be installed and maintained by the utilities using it. GVEA and AML&P will discuss AEA's recommendation. It was noted that, ultimately, the issue may need to be re-addressed by the TCS and that any additional expenses to complete the task would need to be approved by the BPMC. ACTION ITEMS Transient Stability Analysis Study: The Subcommittee approved recommendation of a transient stability analysis study to be done by Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation for an amount not to exceed $10,000. The study is needed in order to determine potential transient effects in the tunnel in the event of a sudden needle closure at a reservoir elevation below 1080'. ATTACHMENT 3 CHUGACH ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION. INC. Anchorage, Alaska March 3, 1993 TO: Bradley Lake Project Management Committee FROM: David W. Burlingame, Manager, Power ae caal SUBJECT: Bradley Lake SVC Testing On February 22, 1993 while setting up the system to perform testing for the SVCs, the Kenai peninsula suffered an outage to approximately 60% of the HEA consumers for approximately 1-1/2 minutes and 12,000 Chugach and Golden Valley consumers for 3 minutes. The following is a synopsis of the outage and the follow-up performed since the event: Bradley Lake was operating at 115 MW Bernice Lake unit 3 was on-line at 23 MW Exports as measured at Daves Creek were 68 MW and 73 MW at Quartz Creek. Quartz Creek breaker to Anchorage tripped on a power swing above 80 MW, islanding the Kenai. This relay was originally set to protect the Kenai for an overexport condition. Immediately following the Kenai separation, the Bernice Lake 115/69 KV transformer was tripped by the transformer differentials, islanding the Bernice Lake Power Plant and Golden Valley and Chugach shed consumer load at 59.3 Hz. Bradley Lake islanded by itself, one unit was placed in deflector by Chugach SCADA upon detection of islanding. Chugach and GVEA restored their consumers but CEA but did not realize the system was separated in three places. The Dispatcher was in contact with the Bradley power plant and the operator did not mention his frequency of 64 Hz. Approximately 4 minutes later, both Bradley Lake units tripped on overfreguency, blacking out the Kenai. Bernice Lake stayed on-line since it was separated from the rest of the Kenai and no service interruptions were experienced by Tesoro or other industrials. Following blackout of the Kenai, HEA load was picked up by closing in from Anchorage. It was 5 minutes before a Bradley Lake unit was synchronized to the system. The overcurrent relay at Quartz Creek has been reset and will no longer trip for power swings. A Chugach SCADA change was made to place a unit in deflector after checking for a gas turbine status and also to block the Bradley units from raise pulses after the needles are fully open. There is still a problem of not having a reliable, fast response frequency source on the Kenai for Bradley Lake, should Bradley become islanded from Bernice. We are working with the AEA to install a frequency source into our SCADA computer via microwave to eliminate this problem. Bradley Lake has been tested up to its full power output of 115 MW. The SVC systems have performed very well, although some problems have been experienced with Bradley Lake. On March 2, 1993 the Bradley units were allowed to synchronize onto the system by a synch-check relay while on an overspeed condition @nits were at 61.25 Hz). The closing caused a large power swing and voltage oscillations on the Kenai. AEA is investigating the problem. The only remaining tests are the Kenai islanding and possible staged fault tests. Testing should be completed by March 6, 1993. DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Alaska Energy Authority RECORD uOPY FILE NO MEMORANDUM February 26, 1993 iF Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Brent N. Petrie co AVY ZE; cot ] Manager/Planning and Project Development Alaska Energy Authority Funding of Bradley River Hydrology Study Background The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) License for the Bradley Lake Project requires that minimum flows be maintained in the lower Bradley River. Generally speaking, these flows are 40 cfs in the winter, 50 cfs in the fall and 100 cfs in the summer. Documentation that minimums have been met is provided by the USGS using their gage located on the lower Bradley River. The USGS also operates a gage just below the dam. That gage, referred to here as the upper gage, measures seepage from the dam and any water released to augment fisheries flows in the lower river. FERC License Article 8 requires that the License provide this adequate gaging so that flows can be measured accurately. The Problem During winter months, freezing of the lower Bradley River causes elevated staging which results in erroneous gage data. For example, the gage may be reporting 150 cfs in the river when only 35 cfs are present. In these situations, the powerhouse operators have no way of knowing whether water must be released at the dam to provide the required minimum flow. When USGS analyzes the data, they may find that the License conditions have been violated. These violations must be reported to FERC. FERC determines whether an actual violation has occurred and whether the Licensee should be fined. Fines may be $10,000 per day. FERC will not accept ice staging or long term faulty gage readings as a justifiable defense for missing the minimum flow requirements. FERC points to Article 8 and its requirement for the Licensee to provide adequate gaging. Current Solution The only way that we currently have of assuring that minimums are being met when the gaging is inadequate is to release the entire minimum flow from the dam. Since this is a winter problem only, 40 cfs are released. 40 cfs, if not released for one day, has the potential to generate 80,000 kwh. This problem 93Q1\JD4406(1) Memorandum to Bradley wane Project Management Committee Subject: Funding of Bradley River Hydrology Study February 26, 1993 may persist for 90 days depending on weather and may diminish generation by 7.2 million kwh. Alternative Solution The Alaska Energy Authority has conferred with State and Federal resource agencies, USGS and FERC to find an acceptable alternative to relying on the lower gage and wasteful water releases to assure that flows are being met. The proposed solution is a 3-year hydrological/biological study which will provide the following: 1. Conduct a statistical analysis to determine the volume of flow that must be released from the fish-water bypass to maintain a minimum of 40 cfs in the lower Bradley River during the winter months rather than relying gaging. 2. To determine if a reduced flow requirement will provide adequate protection of the spawning beds. This information would be used to seek a License amendment to decrease the flow requirements making more water available for generation. 3. Gain insight into the lower limit of flow that would provide assurance of egg survival in the event of unexpected decreases in flow thereby providing a defense to FERC in case of these events. Study Cost AEA COST USGS MATCHING FUNDS FY93 $ 22,600 $ 19,000 FY94 $ 44,100 $ 36,000 FY95 $ 46,400 $ 38,000 FY96 $4,750 $ 0 Total $117,850 $93,000 Schedule Field work will begin March 1993. Annual, interim reports will be prepared for use and distribution by the Energy Authority. Final, summary reports will be prepared in late 1995. TJA:BNP:jd 93Q1\JD4406(2) ATTACHMENT 4 State of Alaska DS Walter J. Hickel, Governor Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation MEMORANDUM VIA FAX AND REGULAR MAIL TO: Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Mr. Ron Saxton, Ater Wynne Hewitt Dodson and Skerritt Mr. Jim Seagraves, John Nuveen & Company Mr. Eric Wohlforth, Wohlforth Argetsinger Johnson & Brecht FROM: BrentN. Petrie ()./), / tex Alaska Energy Authority SUBJECT: Partial Refunding of Bradley Lake Bonds DATE: February 24, 1993 Attached is an information item on the possibility of refinancing a limited portion of the outstanding Bradley Lake bonds. Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Chairman Dave Highers has agreed to place this item on the agenda for March 3. We can discuss it further at that time but will need an agreement from the BPMC on whether or not to proceed soon since these bonds can be refunded only until June 30, 1993. There is also a risk that any investment of time would be lost if interest rates move up half a point from where they are today (February 24, 1993). See you on March 3. BP:tg Attachment as stated Distribution: Mr. David Highers, Chairman, BPMC, Chugach Electric Association Mr. Norm Story, Vice Chair BPMC, Homer Electric Association Mr. Ken Ritchey, Matanuska Electric Association Mr. Paul Diener, City of Seward Mr. Michael Kelly, Golden Valley Electric Association Mr. Thomas Stahr, Municipal Light and Power PO. Box 190869 704 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 Fax: (907) 561-8584 Refunding of Bradley Lake Bonds Information Item Over the last several months, the Energy Authority has received three proposals from underwriting firms for refunding a portion of the Bradley Lake bonds. The first two proposals were submitted to us by Merrill Lynch and by Dean Witter in Fall 1992. Both proposals were quickly withdrawn, however, once the firms discovered that the Bradley Lake bonds are "private activity" bonds which are not normally eligible for advance refunding. The most recent proposal is from Nuveen and is based on certain "multi-purpose allocation rules" that expire July 1, 1993. Nuveen believes, and Eric Wohlforth agrees, that these rules allow the Authority to refund Bradley Lake bonds that are properly allocable to Anchorage ML&P and Seward, that roughly $28 million in callable bonds can be so allocated, and that all savings realized from the refunding would be melded under terms of the power purchase contracts to reduce costs to all purchasers. The most recent estimates provided by Nuveen (2/24/93) are as follows: Net savings in debt service would be about $120,000 per year. Total net savings over the life of the bonds would be 3.6 million. The present value of savings over the life of the bonds would be $1.8 million. The present value of savings as a percent of the bonds being refunded would be 6.5%. This assumes of course that interest rates at the time of refunding are the same as they were on 2/24/93. All of these savings are projected as net of financing costs including underwriter’s discount and issuance expenses. If interest rates increased by about 50 basis points from the levels reached on 2/24/93, no savings would be realized. The Authority has also heard that a refunding proposal has been prepared by Smith Barney and presented to Chugach. However, we have not yet seen it. In order for the Authority to proceed with one of these refunding plans, authorization from the Bradley PMC will be necessary. Expenses would be incurred by Authority staff, bond counsel, and financial advisor that would have to be paid directly by the utilities if the refunding is prepared but not implemented due to future increases in interest rates. If the refunding occurs, the expenses would still have to be paid by the utilities but can presumably be capitalized. In addition, according to Nuveen’s lawyer, a certificate of agreement by the Bradley PMC (to the effect that the refunding will not create an increased burden or obligation) will be necessary in accordance with Section 11 of the Power Sales Agreement. Prepared 2/24/93 DRE "93 @2722 18244 ATER WYNNE e2 | HEWITT reins One) 221 DODSON Fax (503) 226-0079 & SKERRITT ATTORNEYS AT LAW VIA _ FACSIMILE MEMORANDUM TO: David Highers, Chairman Ken Ritchey, Budget Committee Chairman Bradley Project Management Committee FROM: Ron Saxton DATE: February 22, 1993 RE: Bradley Lake Refinancing There has been quite a bit of discussion recently about the possibility of refinancing Bradley Lake bonds. AEA, Nuveen, Smith Barney, and associated bond lawyers, etc., have been looking at this issue, I have discussed it with Brent, Jim Seagraves, folks at Smith Barney, and others. The combinations of very low interest rates, together with a soon-to-expire tax code provision present a need for immediate consideration of the potential refinancing of a portion of the Bradley Lake bonds. I request that this item be put on our March BPMC agenda. Jim Seagraves of John Nuveen and Associates (the original underwriters of the Bradley Lake bonds) has concluded that a portion of the current bonds (approximately 26-1/2% or $42 million dollars) could be refinanced tax-exempt at an interest rate which could potentially produce a significant savings. A couple factors require that we consider this and make a decision in March. Although current interest rates would produce a modest savings through refinancing, conventional wisdom is that the spread needs to be a little wider than it currently is. In other words, interest rates should probably move slightly lower before we should finally decide to refinance. The other important factor is that the tax law provision allowing this refinancing will expire on July 1, 1993. Therefore, if we are to take advantage of this, any refinancing would need to be completed by the end of June, 1993, ie Seattle, Washington. Washington, D.C San Francisca, Callforuts Affiliated offices in (206) ©23-47)) (202) 785-0303 (415) 421-4143 Anchorage, Fatrbanks Bax (206) 467-8406 Pax (202) 785-8676 Fax (415) 989-1263 and Juneau, Alaska a "93 02722 18:45 ATER WYNNE a3 ‘ATER WYNNE In order to complete a bond refinancing by the end of June, it would be necessary to begin work no later than mid-March on the relevant documents, etc. Because the optimal interest rates may occur at some time earlier than the end of June, it would be advantageous to be ready for a sale significantly before that date. Several factors influence the decision about whether to proceed. Now that the project is completed, the financial responsibility for payment of the bonds is with the utilities. The AEA pays no portion of the bond debt service. AEA does bear administrative responsibility for handling payments, etc. Any savings from a refinancing would be savings that flow entirely to the utilities. Conversely, I assume that AEA will expect the utilities to bear some (or maybe all) of the costs associated with preparing this transaction. If we actually completed a refinancing, all such preparatory costs would be included in the refinancing and paid over the life of the bonds. However, if we decided not to proceed with the refinancing (e.g., interest rates go up), the BPMC could end up bearing the costs of the not completed transaction. Finally, if we were to proceed with the refinancing, we could consider whether the utilities desired to raise any additional funds for project related activities. There is no legal problem combining a refinancing with the raising of additional capital for Bradley Lake enhancements or repairs. Although the bonds ere in AEA's name and AEA would be the issuer of replacement bonds, the financial risks and benefits belong to the utilities. As such, we need to have the utilities actively involved in decision-making. The ultimate decision about whether to issue or not must be made by the utilities, and we need a cooperative relationship with AEA that recognizes the legitimate roles and interests of the utilities and AEA. My recommendation would be that you appoint one or two utility representatives to work with me as part of a refinancing team that would include AEA, bond counsel, the underwriter and underwriter's counsel. I will be prepared to discuss this at the March BPMC meeting. AEA has had the benefit of analysis by its advisors and Brent is prepared to share that information. It may be appropriate to ask Jim Seagraves of John Nuveen to participate by telephone. cc: (via facsimile) Paul Diener, Seward Norm Story, HEA Mike Kelly, GVEA Tom Stahr, ML&P Brent Petrie, AEA Ron Gone ale Cama os npdotiane ena Mauer Bradley Lake & PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING, |: 3,5“ __ MARCH 31993 __ PRD 3-hs mind (Date) /xj on 3/3/93 CEA (Location) — PLEASE SIGN IN No. NAME REPRESENTING 1 Wave Ebeve AEA ” Dave Fare— ZEA 3 Bob Helbwar AE GST 4 | Dave CasveRT SES a, <a S| aul “dyener =o= : : ay rAM LL Ze | 24 Bure Lil e! P 9 Mecadl Hell cal! Mey © 10 | “Pwadle, Goons QVvEA | Wie chy Ce ae | 12 | E fake CEA : 3 fon SAN Avrcbutin —ubl her 7 Ton. LOQUAS LHVC ACH 15 Lixerd Lech ote aa 16-| Nie Hal MEL Jr | John Coole, | Chugach 18 9 | Greurt ete AE A— 20 21 22 92Q2\IT9884 Alaska Energy Authority ax BRADLEY PMC VOTING ee CITY OF SEWARD 0% [4 | | MATANUSKA ELEC ASSOC 14% CHUGACHELECASSOC —- 30% )~—Ss[=]_ |_| HOMER ELEC ASSOC 12% GOLDEN VAL ELEC ASSOC 17% MUNI LIGHT & POWER 26% it 1) no somes ALASKA ENERGY AUTH 37 'umos™*® [7] ] O- YOTING METHOO A: REQUIRING 4 YEAS W/ 51% OF UTILITIES, WITH NO APA VOTE; 1) PROCEDURES FOR SCHEDUUNG, PROOUCTION ANO DISPATCH OF PROJECT POWER. 2) ESTABUSHMENT OF PROCEDURES FOR USE OF EACH PURCHASER'S WATER ALLOCATION (APA ASSENT REQUIRED FOR FERC UCENSE REQUIREMENTS). 3) SELECTION AMONG ALTERNATIVE METHOOS THAT 00 NOT INVOLVE APA FOR FUNDING REQUIRED PROJECT WORK. YOTING METHOO C: UNANIMOUS VOTE BY ALL (INCLUDING APA): ADOPTION OF PROCEDURES FOR DISPUTE RESOLU- TION. WOTING METHOD O- MAJORITY VOTE (INCLUDING APA). ELECTION OF OFFICERS. MAJORITY YOUNG METHOD 8: REQUIRING 4 YEAS W/ 51% OF UTILITIES, AND APA CONCURRENCE; 1) ARRANGING OPERATION ANO MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT. 2) ADOPTION OF BUOGET OF ANNUAL PROJECT costs. 3) ESTABUSHMENT OF FY ESTIMATED ANNUAL PAY- MENT OBLIGATION AND SCHEDULE OF EACH PUR- (CHASER. 4) DETERMINATION OF ANNUAL PROJECT COSTS AFTER EACH FY. 5) EVALUATION OF NECESSITY FOR AND SCHEDUUNG OF REQUIRED PROJECT WORK 6) DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE AMT. OF IN- SURANCE. 7) ADOPTION OF ADO'L MIN. FUNDING AMTS. FOR RENEWAL AND CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUNO ABOVE THAT REQ. BY BOND RES. 8) SELECTION AMONG ALT. METHOOS THAT INVOLVE APA FOR FUNDING REQ. PROJECT WORK. RECORD UOP¥ FILE NO TRO B=) | mip DATE: 3/3/93 jafl2) YES NO ABS 4 1ac(:) YES NO ABS 9) ADOPTION_OR AMENOMENT OF PROCE- OURAL COMMITTEE RULES (EXCEPT OxS- PUTE RES) 10) ADOPTION, OF PROJECT MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES. 11) DETERMINATION OF RULES, PROCE- DURES AND ACCOUNTS NECESSARY TO MANAGE PROJECT WHEN NO BONDS OUT- ‘STANDING. 12) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL OF OPTION- AL PROJECT WORK ANO COMPENSATION FOR SUCH WORK. 13) APPUCATION OF INSURANCE CLAIMS PROCEEDS NOT GOVERNED BY BOND RESOLUTION. 14) APPROVAL OF PROCEDURES ANO ANY WNOMOUAL UTILITY AGREEMENTS RELATING TO ELECTRIC POWER RESERVES FOR PROJECT. 15) APPROVAL OF CONSULTANTS. u— CITY OF SEWARD ere) ere ee ] MATANUSKAELECASSOC =m = [©] | | [1] CHUGACH ELEC ASSOC 30% Se ene as HOMER ELEC ASSOC 12% [- i GOLDENVALELECASSOC 17m [4 |] [VL] ] MUNI LIGHT & POWER 26% pe eat aan a hu €+ ooesen ALASKA ENERGY AUTH Si Seame* [7] |_| VOTING METHOO A: Alaska Energy Authority i BRADLEY PMC VOTING orD Avot Y YES NO ABS RECORD VUOPY FILE NO PRO B-h mi ~ maa OD = MAJORITY YOTING METHOO 8: REQUIRING 4 YEAS W/ 51% OF UTILITIES, WITH NO APA VOTE; REQUIRING 4 YEAS W/ 51% OF UTILITIES, AND APA CONCURRENCE; 1) PROCEDURES FOR SCHEDUUNG, PROOUCTION ANO DISPATCH OF PROJECT POWER. 1) ARRANGING OPERATION ANO MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT. 2) ESTABUSHMENT OF PROCEDURES FOR USE OF EACH PURCHASER'S WATER ALLOCATION (APA ASSENT REQUIRED FOR FERC UCENSE REQUIREMENTS). 3) SELECTION AMONG ALTERNATIVE METHOOS THAT (0 NOT INVOLVE APA FOR FUNDING REQUIRED PROJECT WORK. YOTING METHOO C: UNANIMOUS VOTE BY ALL (INCLUDING APA): ADOPTION OF PROCEDURES FOR DISPUTE RESOLU- TION. YOTING METHOO D- MAJORITY VOTE (INCLUDING APA). ELECTION OF OFFICERS. 2) ADOPTION OF BUOGET OF ANNUAL PROJECT costs. 3) ESTABUSHMENT OF FY ESTIMATED ANNUAL PAY- MENT OBLIGATION AND SCHEDULE OF EACH PUR- CHASER. 4) DETERMINATION OF ANNUAL PROJECT COSTS AFTER EACH FY. 5) EVALUATION OF NECESSITY FOR AND SCHEDUUNG OF REQUIRED PROJECT WORK 6) DETERMINATION OF APPROPRIATE AMT. OF IN- SURANCE. 7) ADOPTION OF ADO'L MIN. FUNDING AMTS. FOR RENEWAL AND CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND ABOVE THAT REQ. BY BOND RES. 8) SELECTION AMONG ALT. METHOOS THAT INVOLVE APA FOR FUNDING REQ. PROJECT WORK. 9) ADOPTION_OR AMENOMENT OF PROCE- DURAL COMMITTEE RULES (EXCEPT DiS- PUTE RES) 10) ADOPTION. OF PROJECT MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES. 11) DETERMINATION OF RULES, PROCE- DURES AND ACCOUNTS NECESSARY TO MANAGE PROJECT WHEN NO BONDS OUT- ‘STANOING. 12) EVALUATION ANDO APPROVAL OF OPTION- AL PROJECT WORK AND COMPENSATION FOR SUCH WORK. 13) APPUCATION OF INSURANCE CLAIMS PROCEEDS NOT GOVERNED BY BOND: RESOLUTION. 14) APPROVAL OF PROCEDURES ANO ANY WOMOUAL UTIUTY AGREEMENTS RELATING TO ELECTRIC POWER RESERVES FOR PROJECT. 15) APPROVAL OF CONSULTANTS. Mr. Everett P. Diener City of Seward 5th & Adams P.O. Box 167 Seward, Alaska 99664 Mr. David L. Highers Chugach Electric Association 560I Minnesota Drive P.O. Box 196300 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6300 Mr. Michael P. Kelly 1 Golden Valley Electric Association 758 Illinois P.O. Box 1249 Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 Mr. Fred Arvidson Perkins Coie 1029 W. 3rd Avenue, Suite 300 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Mr. James Hall Matanuska Electric Association 163 Industrial Way P.O. Box 2929 Palmer, Alaska 99645-2929 Mr. S.C. Mathews Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer, Alaska 99603 Mr. Ron Saxton Ater W: Dobson & Skerritt 225 S.W. Columbia, Suite 1800 Portland, OR 97201-6618 90Q1\JD0068L(1) Mr. Ken Ritchey ; Matanuska Electric Association 163 Industrial Way P.O. Box 2929 Palmer, Alaska 99645-2929 Mr. N. L. Story Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer, Alaska 99603 Mr. Thomas R. Stahr Municipal Light and Power 1200 E. Ist Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99501-1685 Mr. Eugene N. Bjornstad Chu; Electric Association 560f Minnesota Drive P.O. Box 196300 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6300 Mr. John Cooley Chu; Electric Association 560I Minnesota Drive P.O. Box 196300 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6300 Mr. Bob Hansen Golden Valley Electric Association 758 Illinois P.O. Box#1249 Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 Mr. Kurt Dzinich 4511 N. Riverside Drive Juneau, Alaska 99801 Mr. Robert Hufman Utilities Consulting Services 1018 Galena Street Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 Mr. David Burlingame Chugach Electric Association, Inc. P.O. Box 196300 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6300 Mr. Tom Lovas Chugach Electric Association, Inc. P.O. Box 196300 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6300 9001\JD0068L(1) Legislative Research Agency P.O. Box Y Juneau, Alaska 99811-3100 e Munici i lower {00 Has it Sue Anchorage, Alaska 99501 is 1249 Alaska 99707 Mr. Bradley Evans Golden Valley Electric Association 758 Illinois P.0. Box 71249 Fairbanks, AK 99707 .