HomeMy WebLinkAboutBPMC Meeting - March 3, 1989 1BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
March 3, 1989 FILE COPY pe
Chairman Kelly called the Bradley Lake Project Management Committee to order at 10:10 a.m. in the Training Room of Chugach Electric Association to conduct the business of the Committee per the agenda and public notice.
1. CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
The roll call was taken and a quorum was established. In attendance were the following:
Designated Representative Designated Alternate Representing
Donald L. Shira Alaska Power Authority
James F. Palin Myles C. Yerkes Matanuska Electric Association
Dave Highers Tom Lovas Chugach Electric Association
Kent Wick Homer Electric Association
Michael Kelly Robert Hansen Golden Valley Electric Association
Thomas R. Stahr John Cooley Municipal Light and Power
E. Paul Diener City of Seward
Representatives Absent Alternates Absent Representing
Bob Peirson City of Seward
Sam Mathews Homer Electric Association
Brent N. Petrie Alaska Power Authority
It was noted for the record that in the absence of Messrs. LeResche and Petrie, Mr. Shira was the designated Power
Authority representative for today’s PMC meeting. It was also noted that Denise Burger, Alaska Power Authority, would
serve as recording secretary for this meeting.
Others Present Representing —
Ron Saxton Golden Valley Electric Association
Susan White Alaska Power Authority
Dick Emerman* Alaska Power Authority
Afzal Khan Alaska Power Authority
Denise Burger Alaska Power Authority
Marcey Rawitscher Alaska Power Authority
*Present from 12:10 p.m. to conclusion of meeting.
PMC Meeting Minutes (MARBRAD) Page 2 of 7
March 3, 1989
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
There being no public comment, Chairman Kelly proceeded to agenda item 4.
4. MODIFICATION OF AGENDA
No modifications to the agenda were made at this time; however, it was noted later that Ms. White would address the PMC
relative to Executive Order No. 75 after agenda item 8., Review of Project Status.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
January 20, 1989
Mr. Yerkes noted that page 2, agenda item 7., Technical Coordinating Committee Report, should be changed to reflect
that the TCC met with PTI, rather than SEI. The minutes of the January 20, 1989 meeting were approved with Mr. Yerkes’
correction by acclamation.
FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
Ms. Rawitscher reported that all necessary information has been provided to R.W. Beck. Ms. Rawitscher will be in Seattle,
Washington on March 13-14, 1989 on other business and will meet with R.W. Beck during that time. Development of the
feasibility report by R.W. Beck is anticipated to take 2-3 months and is required prior to bond issuance.
Ms. Rawitscher said that Mr. Seagraves would like to set up a Finance Team meeting with Messrs. Palin, Kelly and Highers.
There being no objection to this, Ms. Rawitscher was directed to set up this meeting.
Although, interest rates currently are not favorable (i.¢., early financing is not desirable at this time) Ms. Rawitscher said
that the PMC should be in a position to issue bonds if interest rates suddenly decrease. According to Ms. Rawitscher,
some analysts believe that interest rates will continue upward during 1989 and then come down at the end of the year. The
Bond Buyer Index (BBI) went up 80 basis points in 10 days and then the BBI went down. Ms. Rawitscher noted that interest
rates are currently very volatile, but in an up mode. Fall of 1989 is the earliest time that bond issuance is anticipated;
moreover, historically November and December have not been favorable months to issue bonds due to the number of bond
issuances flooding the market at this time which results in higher interest rates.
7. TECHNICAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
Mr. Yerkes reported that Power Technologies, Inc. (PTT) made a Phase II, Stability and Reliability, presentation to the
TCC. It was determined that additional work is required on the preliminary PTI study and another meeting was scheduled
with PTI and the TCC.
The TCC is currently reviewing the bids for the SCADA system. Lowbid for the SCADA system was received from a firm
with questionable past performance which necessitates further bid evaluation.
PMC Meeting Minutes (MARBRAD) Page 3 of 7 March 3, 1989
8. REVIEW OF PROJECT STATUS
Mr. Shira noted that Messrs. LeResche and Eberle are currently in Japan and Korea meeting with Fuji regarding Fuji’s turbine subcontractor, Hyundai. Mr. Shira reported that Messrs. LeResche and Eberle are negotiating the release of materials that have been locked up due to a labor strike by Hyundai. Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) informed Mr. Shira that the labor strike has been settled; however, the float in the schedule for this item has been utilized.
The Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) is on site in the tunnel and the system is currently being reviewed. The TBM is
anticipated to be ready for drilling in 7-10 days.
Enserch is installing the steel penstock sections at this time and the powerhouse contractor, HC Price, is beginning their
mobilization.
The transmission line bids are currently being evaluated. The Engineer’s Estimate was $13.8 million; whereas, the low bid
presented by Frontier-Marenco (i.e., a Canadian-Anchorage joint venture) was $16.7 million. The second lowest bid came
in at $17 million by Newberry and Associates. Mr. Yerkes expressed concern over the high bids on the transmission line
construction contract. Mr. Wick noted that the per mile cost for labor and materials for the HEA portion of the transmission
line is $132,000, compared to $432,000 for this bid. Mr. Wick commented that the terrain is more difficult on the southern
portion of Kachemak Bay and Fox River; however, the question remains as to whether or not the recent bid solicitation is
overdesigned with steel versus wood poles.
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 75 AND DONLEY’S CONCURRENT
RESOLUTION NO. 1
Ms. White distributed copies of:
House Special Concurrent Resolution No. 1, Disapproving Executive Order No. 75,
February 27, 1989 memorandum from Teresa Cramer, Legislative Counsel, to Representative Donley, Chairman, House
Labor and Commerce Committee, subject: Constitutionality of Executive Order No. 75 (Transferring programs to the
Alaska Power Authority), and
Executive Order No. 75.
Ms. White reported that Executive Order No. 75 will go into effect March 9, 1989 if it is not blocked by Representative
Donley’s House Special Concurrent Resolution No. 1, which if adopted by the Sixteenth Legislature, would disapprove
Executive Order No. 75. Ms. White said that the purpose of the Executive Order is threefold:
To change the name of the Alaska Power Authority to the Alaska Energy Authority,
To transfer administration of the Power Development Revolving Loan Fund to the Alaska Power Authority, and
To establish the Bulk Fuel Revolving Loan Fund in the Alaska Power Authority.
Ms. White said that the central issue regarding the Executive Order and Resolution is Legislative versus Executive branch
prerogative in the expenditure and appropriation of funds. Ms. White noted that Representative Donley will withdraw his
Resolution if a concurrent bill states that the prerogative will transfer to the legislative branch on future funds. Ms. White
asked that the PMC express some form of support for the Governor’s Executive Order No. 75, as written. Mr. Highers
motioned, seconded by Mr. Stahr, that the PMC adopt a resolution expressing support for Executive Order No. 75 and that
PMC Meeting Minutes (MARBRAD) Page 4 of 7
March 3, 1989
Ms. White be directed to prepare such a resolution during the remainder of today’s PMC meeting. The motion passed by acclamation. It was noted that the resolution would be provided to the Governor, House of Representatives and Alaska
Senate.
9. OLD BUSINESS
Status Report on Rural Electrification Administration Approvals
Mr. Saxton reported that he and Mr. LeResche met with REA representatives in Washington, D.C. and that there are two sides to the REA review process:
1) Review of Legal documents
Mr. Mitchell has requested an opinion from legal counsel (i.c., the Alaska Attorney General’s Office) on the application
of the APUC exemption to the three contracts.
2) Review of Prudency
REA staff has stated that they will recommend approval of the various contracts for all of the cooperatives to the REA
Assistant Administrator.
Mr. Saxton said that the executed letter agreement and HEA agreement need to be provided to REA. Mr. Saxton also
noted that this item may be removed from future PMC agendas as the process is virtually complete relative to securing REA
approvals.
10. NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Kelly said that he had directed Mr. Saxton to draft a document identifying and outlining issues requiring the
PMC’s attention during 1989 (reference February 27, 1989 memorandum to the Bradley PMC from Mr. Saxton regarding
Issues for Discussion at BPMC Meeting). The issues outlined in Mr. Saxton’s memorandum were reviewed: insurance;
budget process, funds and payment obligation; tax treatment of Bradley PMC; and FERC license fee issue. Mr. Saxton
noted that there are two timelines relative to the PMC addressing these issues; 1) the last date is prior to project operation, and 2) an earlier date is prior to issuance of bond resolution. Mr. Saxton noted that timeline 2 would simplify how these items are handled. Mr. Saxton suggested that small committees be established to address each of these areas. Mr. Stahr
noted that an additional item of primary importance is that the Bradley Lake Project be property built.
The following issues were discussed and Committees organized:
Issue No. 1, Project Monitor
It was noted that this function is being performed by the Configuration Control Committee Representative Yerkes and that issues will be brought back from the CCC to the PMC as they arise for decision making.
Issue No. 2, Insurance Committee
Brent Petrie, APA, Chairman
Kent Wick, HEA
PMC Meeting Minutes (MARBRAD)
March 3, 1989
Robert Hansen, GVEA
Mike Cunningham, CEA
Ron Saxton, GVEA, resource as required
Issue No. 3, Budget Committee
Marcey Rawitscher, APA
Tom Klinkner, Wohlforth, Argetsinger & Brecht
Dennis Lapp, CEA
Cathy Jacobs, ML&P
Ron Saxton, GVEA, resource as required
Issue No. 4, Tax Committee
Pending recommendation by Messrs. Petrie and Saxton relative to pursuing tax exemption.
Issue No. 5, FERC Licensure
Pending briefing/recommendation by Messrs. Petrie and Saxton.
Issue No. 6, Operating and Dispatch Agreement Committee
Donald L. Shira, APA
John Cooley, ML&P
Marv Riddle, GVEA
Tom Lovas, CEA
Sam Mathews, HEA
Page 5S of 7
The consensus was for PMC legal assistance to be provided to each of the above committees by Mr. Saxton, as required.
It was noted that changing or expanding these committees will remain flexible as required. It was determined that it was
up toeach Committees to elect its chairman and individual to report a brief update to the PMC at each meeting. Chairman
Kelly charged each committee with preparing a timetable of their objectives and report back to the PMC at their next
meeting. It was anticipated that each committee would eventually present a menu of options and recommendations to the
PMC.
PMC Meeting Minutes (MARBRAD) Page 6 of 7
March 3, 1989
12. OTHER BUSINESS
Schedule Next Meeting
a. Date April 6, 1989
b. Location Training Room, CEA
c. Time 10:00 a.m.
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 75 (Continued)
Ms. White read a Resolution of the Bradley Lake PMC in Support of Executive Order No. 75. There were no objections
expressed to the language and Mr. Saxton said that he agreed with the language in the resolution. Chairman Kelly noted
that the PMC had approved this resolution proforma as Resolution 89-4.
10. NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Emerman reviewed the progress on the Southern Intertie study. Mr. Emerman said that estimates of the measures
which are necessary to run Bradley Lake at capacity, with and without the Southern Intertie, are required. The costs
associated with each of those scenarios are also required. Mr. Emerman said that it needs to be determined what is required
with and without the intertie to provide satisfactory operating conditions for Bradley Lake. PTI has provided this
information with the intertie and it appears that 2 series capacitors, a small SVS and stabilizers and breaking resistors at
the site are required. In order to meet the same criteria without the intertie, an additional series capacitor and a larger SVS
are required in addition to the above measures.
Mr. Emerman noted that the money in the PTI Phase III budget will be used to provide additional runs focusing on what
is needed to accommodate the utilities’ expressed constraints on voltage and frequency. Mr. Emerman said that he
anticipates that the best advice will be that acceptable stability conditions can be maintained with Bradley operating at 120
MW without the new intertie, if money is spent on these measures. Mr. Emerman said that the items required at the site
will be part of the total Bradley Lake Project costs; the SVS and series capacitors are not part of the Bradley Lake cost
estimate. Mr. Emerman said that the preliminary cost estimate for these measures is approximately $4 million in the
non-intertie case, and $1.5 million in the intertie case.
Mr. Lovas cautioned that the intertie issue is not solely a stability criterion. Mr. Emerman responded that the final feasibility
report will be presented according to the following six categories of benefits; stability, reliability, economy transfers, capacity
reserve sharing, operating reserve sharing, and transmission losses. The draft feasibility report is scheduled for April 1,
1989, with the final feasibilty report anticipated at the end of June, 1989.
11. COMMUNICATIONS
There were no further communications or business.
12. ADJOURNMENT
The Committee adjourned at 1:50 p.m.
PMC Meeting Minutes (MARBRAD) Page 7 of 7 March 3, 1989
Mle. KM
ATTEST: eo SECRETARY
APPROVED AT PMC MEETING HELD April 6, 1989
Great Mar cey For your review Com > Sorry fr tHe format
ao. 5 am (Unablé-to print in te proqrom usually use, m DRAF) ae
Danise AECORD UOPY
RPEPHE—= BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE FILE NO aia @TITLE = March 3, 1989 pro 3-lil
@LEVEL 1 = 1. CALL TO ORDER ~
@TEXT = Chairman Kelly called the Bradley Lake Project Management g13/e4 ¥
Committee to order at 10:10 a.m. in the Training Room of Chugach Electri
Association to conduct the business of the Committee per the agenda
and public notice.
@LEVEL 1 = ROLL CALL
@TEXT = The roll call was taken and a quorum was established. In
attendance were the following:
@COLUMN HEAD = Designated Representative Designated Alternate
@COLUMNS = Donald L. Shira Alaska Power Authority<R>
James F. Palin Myles C. Yerkes Matanuska Electric Association<R>
Dave Highers Tom Lovas Chugach Electric Association<R>
Kent Wick Homer Electric Association<R>
Michael Kelly Robert Hansen Golden Valley Electric Association<R>
Thomas R. Stahr John Cooley Municipal Light and Power
@COLUMNS = E. Paul Diener City of Seward
@COLUMN HEAD = Representatives Absent Alternates Absent Represen
@COLUMNS = Bob Peirson City of Seward<R>
Sam Mathews Homer Electric Association<R>
Robert E. LeResche Brent N. Petrie Alaska Power Authority
@TEXT = It was noted for the record that in the absence of Messrs.
LeResche and Petrie, Mr. Shira was the designated Power Authority
representative for today’s PMC meeting. It was also noted that Denise
Burger, Alaska Power Authority, would serve as recording secretary
for this meeting.
@COLUMN HEAD = Others Present Representing
@COLUMNS = Ron Saxton Golden Valley Electric Association<R>
Susan White Alaska Power Authority<R>
Dick Emerman* Alaska Power Authority<R>
Afzal Khan Alaska Power Authority<R>
Denise Burger Alaska Power Authority<R>
Marcey Rawitscher Alaska Power Authority
@TEXT = *Present from 12:10 p.m. to conclusion of meeting.
@LEVEL 1 = 3. PUBLIC COMMENT
@TEXT = There being no public comment, Chairman Kelly proceeded
to agenda item 4.
@LEVEL 1 = 4. MODIFICATION OF AGENDA
@TEXT = No modifications to the agenda were made at this time;
however, it was noted later that Ms. White would address the PMC
relative to Executive Order No. 75 after agenda item 8., Review
of Project Status.
@LEVEL 1 = 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES @LEVEL 1 = January 20, 1989
@TEXT = Mr. Yerkes noted that page 2, agenda item 7., Technical
Coordinating Committee Report, should be changed to reflect that
the TCC met with PTI, rather than SEI. The minutes of the
January 20, 1989 meeting were approved with Mr. Yerkes’
correction by acclamation.
@LEVEL 1 = FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
@TEXT = Ms. Rawitscher reported that all necessary information
eeeee
has been provided to R.W. Beck. Ms. Rawitscher will be in
Seattle, Washington on March 13-14, 1989 on other business and will meet with R.W. Beck during that time. Development of the
feasibility report by R.W. Beck is anticipated to take 2-3 months
and is required prior to bond issuance.
@TEXT = Ms. Rawitscher said that Mr. Seagraves would like to set
up a Finance Team meeting with Messrs. Palin, Kelly and Highers.
There being no objection to this, Ms. Rawitscher was directed to
set up this meeting.
@TEXT = Although, interest rates currently are not favorable
(i.e., early financing is not desirable at this time) Ms.
Rawitscher said that the PMC should be in a position to issue
bonds if interest rates suddenly decrease. According to Ms.
Rawitscher, some analysts believe that interest rates will
continue upward during 1989 and then come down at the end of the
year. The Bond Buyer Index (BBI) went up 80 basis points in 10
days and then the BBI went down. Ms. Rawitscher noted that
interest rates are currently very volatile, but in an up mode.
Fall of 1989 is the earliest time that bond issuance is
anticipated; moreover, historically November and December have
not been favorable months to issue bonds due to the number of
bond issuances flooding the market at this time which results in
higher interest rates.
@LEVEL 1 = 7. TECHNICAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE REPORT
@TEXT = Mr. Yerkes reported that Power Technologies, Inc. (PTI)
made a Phase II, Stability and Reliability, presentation to the TCE. It was determined that additional work is required on the
preliminary PTI study and another meeting was scheduled with PTI
and the TCC.
@TEXT = The TCC is currently reviewing the bids for the SCADA
system. Low bid for the SCADA system was received from a firm
with questionable past performance which necessitates further bid evaluation.
@LEVEL 1 = 8. REVIEW OF PROJECT STATUS
@TEXT = Mr. Shira noted that Messrs. LeResche and Shira are
currently in Japan and Korea meeting with Fuji regarding Fuji’s
turbine subcontractor, Hyundai. Mr. Shira reported that Messrs.
LeResche and Eberle are negotiating the release of materials that
have been locked up due to a labor strike by Hyundai. Stone and
Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) informed Mr. Shira that
the labor strike has been settled; however, the float in the
schedule for this item has been utilized.
@TEXT = The Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) is on site in the tunnel
and the system is currently being reviewed. The TBM is
anticipated to be ready for drilling in 7-10 days.
@TEXT = Enserch is installing the steel penstock sections at this
time and the powerhouse contractor, HC Price, is beginning their
mobilization.
@TEXT = The transmission line bids are currently being evaluated.
The Engineer’s Estimate was $13.8 million; whereas, the low bid
presented by Frontier-Marenco (i.e., a Canadian-Anchorage joint
venture) was $16.7 million. The second lowest bid came in at $17
million by Newberry and Associates. Mr. Yerkes expressed concern
over the high bids on the transmission line construction
contract. Mr. Wick noted that the per mile cost for labor and
materials for the HEA portion of the transmission line is
$132,000, compared to $432,000 for this bid. Mr. Wick commented
that the terrain is more difficult on the southern portion of
Kachemak Bay and Fox River; however, the question remains as to
whether or not the recent bid solicitation is overdesigned with
steel versus wood poles.
@LEVEL 1 = EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 75 AND DONLEY’S CONCURRENT
@LEVEL 1 = RESOLUTION NO. 1
@TEXT = Ms. White distributed copies of:
@TEXT = House Special Concurrent Resolution No. 1, Disapproving
Executive Order No. 75,
@TEXT = February 27, 1989 memorandum from Teresa Cramer,
Legislative Counsel, to Representative Donley, Chairman, House
Labor and Commerce Committee, subject: Constitutionality of
Executive Order No. 75 (Transferring programs to the Alaska Power
Authority), and
@TEXT = Executive Order No. 75
@TEXT = Ms. White reported that Executive Order No. 75 will go
into effect March 9, 1989 if it is not blocked by Representative
Donley’s House Special Concurrent Resolution No. 1, which if
adopted by the Sixteenth Legislature, would disapprove Executive
Order No. 75. Ms. White said that the purpose of the Executive
Order is threefold:
@TEXT = To change the name of the Alaska Power Authority to the
Alaska Energy Authority,
@TEXT = To transfer administration of the Power Development
Revolving Loan Fund to the Alaska Power Authority, and
@TEXT = To establish the Bulk Fuel Revolving Loan Fund in the
Alaska Energy Authority.
@TEXT = Ms. White said that the central issue regarding the
Executive Order and Resolution is Legislative versus Executive
branch prerogative in the expenditure and appropriation of funds.
Ms. White noted that Representative Donley will withdraw his
Resolution if a concurrent bill states that the prerogative will
transfer to the legislative branch on future funds. Ms. White
asked that the PMC express some form of support for the
Governor’s Executive Order No. 75, as written. Mr. Highers
motioned, seconded by Mr. Stahr, that the PMC adopt a resolution
expressing support for Executive Order No. 75 and that Ms. White
be directed to prepare such a resolution during the remainder of
today’s PMC meeting. The motion passed by acclamation. It was
noted that the resolution would be provided to the Governor,
House of Representatives and Alaska Senate.
@LEVEL 1 = 9. OLD BUSINESS
@LEVEL 1 = Status Report on Rural Electrification Administration
Approvals
@TEXT = Mr. Saxton reported that he and Mr. LeResche met with
REA in Washington, D.C. and that there are two sides to the REA
review process:
@TEXT 1) Review of Legal documents
@TEXT Mr. Mitchell has requested an opinion from legal counsel
(i.e., the Alaska Attorney General’s Office) on the application
of the APUC exemption to the three contracts.
@TEXT 2) Review of Prudency
@TEXT REA staff has stated that they will recommend approval of
the various contracts for all of the cooperatives to the REA
Assistant Administrator today.
@TEXT = Mr. Saxton said that the executed letter agreement and
HEA agreement need to be provided to REA. Mr. Saxton also noted
that this item may be removed from future PMC agendas as the
process is virtually complete relative to securing REA approvals.
@LEVEL 1 = 10. NEW BUSINESS
@TEXT = Chairman Kelly said that he had directed Mr. Saxton to
draft a document identifying and outlining issues requiring the
PMC’s attention during 1989 (reference February 27, 1989
memorandum to the Bradley PMC from Mr. Saxton regarding Issues
for Discussion at BPMC Meeting). The issues outlined in Mr.
Saxton’s were reviewed: insurance; budget process, funds and
payment obligation; tax treatment of Bradley PMC; and FERC
license fee issue. Mr. Saxton noted that there are two timelines
relative to the PMC addressing these issues; 1) the last date is
prior to project operation, and 2) an earlier date is prior to
issuance of bond resolution. Mr. Saxton noted that timeline 2
would simplify how these items are handled. Mr. Saxton suggested
that small committees be established to address each of these
areas. Mr. Stahr noted that an additional item of primary
importance is that the Bradley Lake Project be property built.
@TEXT = The following issues were discussed and Committees
organized:
@LEVEL 1 = Issue No. 1, Project Monitor
@TEXT = It was noted that this function is being performed by the
Configuration Control Committee Representative Yerkes and that
issues will be brought back from the CCC to the PMC as they arise
for decision making.
@LEVEL 1 = Issue No. 2, Insurance Committee
@TEXT = Brent Petrie, APA, Chairman
@TEXT = Kent Wick, HEA
@TEXT = Robert Hansen, GVEA
@TEXT = Mike Cunningham, CEA
@TEXT = Ron Saxton, GVEA, resource as required
@LEVEL 1 = Issue No. 3, Budget Committee
@TEXT = Marcey Rawitscher, APA
@TEXT = Tom Klinkner, Wohlforth, Argetsinger & Brecht
@TEXT = Dennis Lapp, ?
@TEXT = Cathy Jacobs, ML&P
@TEXT = Ron Saxton, GVEA, resource as required
@LEVEL 1 = Issue No. 4, Tax Committee
@TEXT = Pending recommendation by Messrs. Petrie and Saxton
relative to pursuing tax exemption.
@LEVEL 1 = Issue No. 5, FERC Licensure
@TEXT = Pending briefing/recommendation by Messrs. Petrie and
Saxton.
@LEVEL 1 = Issue No. 6, Operating and Dispatch Agreement
Committee
@TEXT = Donald L. Shira, APA
@TEXT = John Cooley, ML&P
@TEXT = Marv Riddle, GVEA
@TEXT = Tom Lovas, CEA
@TEXT = Sam Mathews, HEA
@TEXT = The consensus was for PMC legal assistance to be provided
to each of the above committees by Mr. Saxton, as required. It
was noted that changing or expanding these committees will remain
flexible as required. It was determined that it was up to each
Committees to elect its chairman and individual to report a brief
update to the PMC at each meeting. Chairman Kelly charged each
committee with preparing a timetable of their objectives and
report back to the PMC at their next meeting. It was anticipated
that each committee would eventually present a menu of options
and recommendations to the PMC.
@LEVEL 1 = 12. OTHER BUSINESS
@LEVEL 1 = Schedule Next Meeting
@TEXT = a. Date April 6, 1989
@TEXT = b. Location Training Room, CEA
@TEXT = c. Time 10:00 a.m.
@LEVEL 1 = EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 75 (Continued)
@TEXT = Ms. White read a Resolution of the Bradley Lake PMC in
Support of Executive Order No. 75. There were no objections
expressed to the language and Mr. Saxton said that he agreed with
the language in the resolution. Chairman Kelly noted that the
PMC had approved this resolution proforma as Resolution 89-4.
@LEVEL 1 = 10. NEW BUSINESS
@TEXT = Mr. Emerman reviewed the progress on the Southern
Intertie study. Mr. Emerman said that estimates of the measures
which are necessary to run Bradley Lake at capacity, with and
without the Southern Intertie, are required. The costs associated
with each of those scenarios are also required. Mr. Emerman said
that it needs to be determined what is required with and without
the intertie to provide satisfactory operating conditions for
Bradley Lake. PTI has provided this information with the
intertie and it appears that 2 series capacitors, a small SVS and
stabilizers and breaking resistors at the site are required. In
order to meet the same criteriem without the intertie,4 additional
series capacitorg and a larger SVS are required in addition to
the above measures. PTL
@TEXT = Mr. Emerman noted that the money in the4Phase III budget
will be used to provide additional runs focusing on what is
needed to accommodate the utilities’ expressed constraints on
voltage and frequency. Mr. Emerman said that he anticipates that
the best advice will be that acceptable stability conditions can
be maintained with Bradley operating at 120 MW without the new
intertie, if money is spent on these measures. Mr. Emerman said
that the items required at the site will be part of the total
Bradley Lake Project costs; the SVS and series capacitors are not
at Sot ae ae
ye ae a es oy os part of the4cost estimate. Mr. Emerman said that the“cost ‘of
these measures is approximately $4 million in the non-intertie
case, and $1.5 million in the intertie case.
@TEXT = Mr. Lovas cautioned that the intertie issue is not solely
a stability criterion. Mr. Emerman responded that the final
feasibility report will be presented according to the following
six categories benefits; stability, reliability, economy
transfers, capacity: operating reserve sharing, and transmission
losses. The draft feasibili report is scheduled for April 1,
1989, with the final teas ibility report anticipated by’ the end of Tune Apeid, 1989.
@LEVEL 1 = 11. COMMUNICATIONS
@TEXT There were no further communications or business.
@LEVEL 1 = 12. ADJOURNMENT
@TEXT = The Committee adjourned at 1:50 p.m.
@TEXT =
@TEXT = CHAIRMAN
@TEXT = ATTEST:
@TEXT =
@TEXT = SECRETARY
@TEXT = APPROVED AT PMC MEETING HELD .
DRAFI
BRADDLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING 3/ 3/€4
March 3, 1989 7
FES EE ROUGH DRA PTcnnnbninbinininkinnink
1. CALL TO ORDER
w
€hairman Kelly called the Bradley Lake PMC to order at 10:10 ok shit
“a.m. in the Training room of CEA to Conduct the business of xo" u\ / . / Ge the Committee per agenda. pric poh cin ip! Ww?
2. ROLL CALL WE ga?
The roll was taken. In attendance were the following: wn vd pe”
ike Kelly _ Ron Saxton
im Palin ~ Robert Hansen |
pee Yerkes pon Shira ah
vPaul Diener Afzal Khan see
“Dave Highers _Aenise Burger C
Aom Stahr U’'arcey Rawitscher CY a Aohn Cooley ent Wick \Wv
Sue White Aom Lovas Xe { Pick Emerman yn shi
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
/ Pe public comment.
4. MODIFICATION OF AGENDA
ne? pier Address PMC on matter of Executive Order No.75
after Review of Project Status. / @ 'y
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Aon Change ere made and minutes were approved (refer to tape e mon
O eb} efron, poi rley -pprrd
6. FINANCE COMMITTEE REFORT
wee
Matcey Rawitscher réported that all necessary as es
has\ been sent to , Seattle. _Ms. Rawitscher ans to be
in attle on other business the-13th and 14th of March a
will personally checking on progress at BEC. The ort
preparation BEC is antici take 2- s. Mr.
Seagraves to up a Finance. Te ing with
Hi \ The Finance
Committee suggests that the finance team/be ready to act if
N ‘
P Wg
the maxket should become suddenly favorable, though n
expected\to do
7. TECHNICAL COORDINATION COMMITTEE REPORT
‘ —(Frida he~TCe viewing iid “prop The low bid was received by a firm with
A questionable past performance, req
Shira reports that Mr. LeResche and Mr. Eberle are
tiating the release of materials from the Hyundai Plant
The
ented b te)
ond SALT site due to the
There is no activity to report for the dai
snow conditions.
YS
9. MEXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 75
Ponty 5 Conarrtnt (6. Wo. |
Sue White repo t Exe i Order No. 75 wi into
effect March’9, 1989 as long as it is not blocked by
Repres tive Donely. MS. White requested that the PMC ,.\\*"
express some form of s port for the Governor's Sree ae
Highers mggionad that s. White ea resolutiow#ot thé’! a PMC toSappueme at this meetin * \{Tom Stahr and pass
i) L
6n répotts that the Recomme
on. “REA agrees that_it i
ince Mr. Mitchell that an gpinion from ft
Couns, : ; eneral's Office) would suffigk oy + ic hey of gm TR Howey <gf Ctrtal Khctiny 0 folcureat L4fny odin yt cKE
decided this item could now be rémoved fr
future
CYC pt br occ sion report excactel Hy
11. NEW BUSINESS ney
Define Major PMC Issues Leto-sked bon L WAP pacar” +
a jor”
Ron Saxton gave an overview of the major issues he felt the je yell o as : yan Fale PMC would w. to consider. The subjects included in Ay? HM of ; ¢ ‘ relationsh ke Project we ce, ™! \st = ect i) J x Funds, Bugget, Pa axes, and FERC ¢’ \. 7a pe" v
\ Lic Mr. Saxton suggested that small committees be awl of ee
(a established in each of these areas. Tom Stahr pointed out an : Le Np : ow \ that another primary issue of importance was to have the ? yr" tt project properly built. Mike Kelly suggested that this (oO cif al should be the PMC’s No. 1 Issue and noted that Mike Yerkes ce Kr
and the TCC are performing this roll at the present time and Worl jee
; =f A {
Byent Petrie, X" Robe ansen, “Y of” ; g
Kent Wick/ieh Miké Cunn cee —<—$ == ¥
Ron Saxton (servic required) Asef
Issue No. 3 - Budget Committee
ye?
Marcey Rawitscher, m. inkner We
athy
as required)
Brent Petrie and ( Hold for reco i b
Lect; + pose this
prieGn . recommendation by Brent
Ron Saxton.
-y Issue No. 6 - Operating and Dispatch Agreement Committee
| Shira s ‘ : I. é John Ggoley on or . + t yt)
g U Te Marv Ri 4 a et a f yw oi é
Mike Kelly charged each-committee with preparing a time mY
table the next PMC meeting. Mr. f Kelly ittees be pr ed to
a brief
The next meeting of the PMC was scheduled for April 6, 1989
19:00 a.m. ip-elis termining room of Chugech-Biectsio———
As 2
9. EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 75 (CONTINUED)
Dic
study. The studies
stating that estj
Tom Lovas‘é:
_tested and confirmed_
Mike Kelly-stated that_he would try to.
LeResche/ to uss’ the si Qn
Intextié study.
12. ADJOURNMENT