Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBPMC Meeting Jan. 15 2014BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING SPECIAL MEETING Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska January 15, 2014 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Evans called the regular meeting of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Management Committee to order at 10:00 a.m. 2. COMMITTEE MEMBERS ROLL CALL Bryan Carey Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Dan Kendall Anchorage Municipal Light & Power (AML&P) Bradley Evans Chugach Electric Association (CEA) John Foutz City of Seward (SEW) Cory Borgeson Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) Brad Janorschke Homer Electric Association (HEA) Joe Griffith Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) 3. STAFF/PUBLIC ROLL CALL Burke Wick, Brian Hickey, Paul Johnson, Lee Thibert, Mark Johnson, and Paul Risse (CEA); Larry Jorgensen, Rick Baldwin, Rebert Day, Harvey Ambrose, and Jim Patras (HEA); David Pease (MEA); Richard Miller and Jeff Warner (AML&P); Bernie Smith (Regulatory Commission of Alaska); Robin Brena (Brena, Bell & Clarkson); Robin Gould; Kirk Warren, and Teri Webster (AEA); Brian Bjorkquist (Department of Law); Kirk Gibson (McDowell Rackner & Gibson PC); Sunny Morrison and Miranda Studstill (Accu-Type Depositions) 4. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. 5. AGENDA COMMENTS/MOTION FOR APPROVAL The agenda was approved. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Issues related to Resolution 2013-02 (Homer Electric Tariff Filing) to include e The process(es) to be used to bring resolution to the matters at issue; e Current status of the transmission of power from the Project; and ¢ Resolution of any issues involved in the transmission of power from the Project. BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 1 of 8 Mr. Gibson commented this special meeting is to develop dispute settlement to handle the issues that are coming out of Resolution 2013-02 and the transmission of energy coming from Bradley Lake power. Mr. Gibson recommended the Committee follow this resolution process; 1) select a Chairman to oversee the dispute resolution process, 2) identify all the issues that need to be addressed, 3) determine the sources of the information to be gathered, 4) determine what analysis needs to be performed and who performs the analysis, and 5) determine the process of examining the claims and reaching a resolution. Mr. Gibson urged the Committee to work as a whole. Unanimity is required for the dispute resolution procedures. Mr. Borgeson asked what happens if there is not a unanimous decision. Mr. Gibson hopes that there would be a unanimous decision on resolution procedures because the bylaws require a unanimous decision. Chair Evans stated the Committee would keep working on the resolution procedures until a unanimous vote is reached. Chair Evans asked if there needs to be a unanimous decision to the resolution of any disputes. Mr. Gibson stated there does not need to be unanimous decision to the resolution of disputes, only for the resolution procedures. Chair Evans yielded the gavel to Mr. Gibson to proceed with number one of the process, election of the Chairman of this dispute resolution process. Mr. Gibson advised a new Chairman will be elected for any other dispute in the future. A roll call vote was taken. Mr. Griffith was elected as Chairman of the Dispute Resolution Process. Chair Evans yielded the gavel to Mr. Griffith. Mr. Griffith thanked the Committee and looks forward to the challenge of resolving these issues. Mr. Borgeson suggested Mr. Griffith work with legal counsel to develop a briefing schedule where members would have an expedited, short period of time to present to Mr. Griffith, as Chair, the legal issues, considerations, documents and fact finding issue. Mr. Griffith- : n's i im and asked Mr. Borgesonifthat process.could | be-crafted today. Mr. Borgeson believes it can begin today and recommends there be a three-day period for members to send Mr. Griffith all the issues that need to be discussed. Mr. Janorschke agreed with the recommendations of Mr. Borgeson and stated he would like to have the O&D Committee involved in contributing to the issues and providing their technical expertise. Mr. Griffith asked if the suggestion is to outline the issues today or to request the technical people to provide a scoping of the issues to Mr. Griffith by Friday. Mr. Janorschke prefers to let the technical people identify the issues and the BPMC can add to the issues and determine the priority of issues to make it manageable. Mr. Griffith asked if the intent of the body is to have a special meeting or meetings to address these issues, rather than include it on the currently scheduled next meeting date of January 27th. Chair Evans believes a separate schedule can be set for the dispute resolution process and does not have to run concurrent with the regular business meetings. BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Janorschke asked Mr. Gibson if these committee meeting are open to the public. Mr. Gibson believes the O&D Committee meetings are open to the public afd believes th spute resolution process special meetings would be open to the public, as well. Chair Evans asked if the dispute resolution process special meetings can be closed. Mr. Bjorkquist commented BPMC meetings are subject to the Open Meetings Act and he would be happy to work with BPMC counsel to see what parameters there are under both the Open Meetings Act and under the BPMC bylaws to answer that question with the intent of conducting closed meetings. Chair Evans asked if these would follow the executive session rules. Mr. Gibson stated he will research the answer with the help of Mr. Bjorkquist. Mr. Day requested the Dispute Resolution Committee to be real clear about how the O&D Committee should behave and if they will conform with ‘he Open Meeting Act or not. The practice is to be open, but the O&D meetings are not publically noticed. Mr. Griffith asked what the criteria is for the O0&D Committee and is it necessary £0 notice meetings. Mr. Bjorkquist stated he will research that question with BPMC counsel to provide the answer. Mr. Griffith stated he will include the expectations of the group in the schedule. The identification of issues will not be determined at this meeting, but at a later date. The source information and analytical work will be assigned after the issues are determined. The O&D Committee volunteered to be the body / that addresses the main issues. Mr. Griffith advised he will pass this information onto Mr. Jim Brooks, Chair of the O&D Committee. Chair Evans asked what process of negotiation will be followed. Mr. Griffith asked for input from the parties at odds. Unidentified:member believes it would be appropriate for negotiations to begin within the BPMC and if progress cannot be made, the next step would be to go to a mediator. Chair Evans commented much of the dispute involves everyone and not just the principals who have framed the problems. Mr. Gibson recommended the Committee needs to act as a whole whenever it can throughout this process. Mr. Griffith agreed. Mr. Kendall recommended the Committee members develop a list of issues at the meeting today. Mr. Borgeson stated there are going to be legal issues and factual issues. One of the questions is what does it cost Homer to provide the transmission to its line for the Bradley power. He does not believe the Committee will be able to reach agreement on the legal issues, including contract obligations, limitations and appropriate charges for power. Mr. Borgeson asked if the contract language included specification regarding a dispute resolution process through arbitration or mediation. Mr. Borgeson suggested the BPMC agree to allow a neutral party to make a final decision on anything the BPMC cannot agree on. Mr. Gibson advised there is a dispute resolution process under the services agreement that states the BPMC will create dispute resolution procedures with the affirmative vote of Chugach required. Chair Evans asked Mr. Borgeson if he is suggesting to jump to arbitration or 6 ry mediation firs. Mr. Borgesonsuggested Mr. Griffith could act as a mediator. ChairEvans not Griffith cannot bé the mediator bevause he has involvement with the issues. Mr. Borgeson. agreed and recommended having a neutral party be-the mediator. He recommended using an arbitrator if mediation fails. BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 3 of 8 Chair E suggested meeting with the negotiating group first and then see if the issues need to go beforé a mediator. ry Mr. Griffith asked Mr. Borgeson when the neutral yaaa oe step in during the process. Mr. Borgeson stated if the Committee cannot come to a imous resolution, then the process should go to a mediator, and then lastly, to an arbitrator. Mr. Borgeson requested the Committee address the issues that can be resolved at the Committee level first within two to three weeks and then move to mediation and lastly, arbitration, if necessary. ee Janorschke believes the issues can be identified within a week because most of the issues are already known and outlined. Mr. Griffith addressed number two in this process, identify all the issues that need to be addressed. Mr. riffith requested a statement of all issues be given to him by this Friday from the parties, including information from the O&D Committee. The body agreed without objection. Mr. Griffith addressed number three and four in this process, 3) determine the sources of the information to be gathered, and 4) determine what analysis needs to be performed and who performs / the analysis. Chair Evans requested a Special Purpose Subcommittee be established to address steps three and four in this process. The Special Purpose Subcommittee could be comprised of individuals from the O&D Committee and/or any assigned subject matter experts. The body agreed without objection. \. Mr. Foutz asked what is the neutral party's role in this part of the process. Mr. Gibson stated the Committee will outline shar mer recatral party should do when they are necessary, including fact finding or reviewing technical reports. The neutral party does not need to be involved in the identification of issues and information gathering steps of the process. Mr. Griffith addressed number five in this process, determine the process of examining the claims and reaching a resolution. Mr. Griffith described the process where the Committee comes to as many resolutions as possible and then utilize a neutral party to mediate the lack of resolution on any of the ‘issues. If mediation fails, the Committee comes back together to discuss how to proceed, rather than going directly to an arbitrator. Chair Evans explained this process is not a substitute for the decision-making or the voting protocols the BPMC is held to under the agreements. Chair Evans stated he is willing to engage in mediation to / try to get closure where everybody is happy with the result of the vote. Mr. Borgeson commented / when he used the term mediation, he meant the parties would come to a unanimous decision and no rights are abrogated. Mr. Borgeson noted arbitration is different. Chair Evans disagreed and stated his concern is the idea of consensus in mediation. Chair Evans / believes there does not have to be a consensus vote as a result of mediation and wants to be clear the decision process does not have to be a consensus decision. Mr. Borgeson understands no agreement rights are being forfeited under this process, but one of the / biggest issues to determine is which agreement are we operating under to come to this decision. BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 4 of 8 Mr. Janorschke requested the wording of number five to include; identify a process for examining claims and reaching resolution, up to and iielucling mediation, which will not waive any ot a petty s rights. All parties agreed, exce h e e e A deciding— Mr. Gibson noted mediation only works if everybody agrees and either likes what the deal was or can live with the deal. Ifa party does not like the deal or cannot live with the deal, mediation has failed. Chair Evans requested the record reflect the intent of mediation does not waive any currently existing voting rights. The body agreed to the amended language of number five. —_—— Mr. Gibson restated the procedures that will be used for the body to approve are as follows: 1) selection of a Chair for purposes of overseeing the dispute resolution, 2) identification of all the issues, 3) determination of what information needs to be gathered, 4) determination of what analysis needs to be 90x formed, which will be completed by the O&D Special Purpose Committee, including any f representatives from the organizations they feel are important to the process, 5) identification of a process for examining claims and reaching resolution, up to and including mediation, which will not waive any party's rights. A roll call vote was taken. The body agreed unanimously. Mr. Gibson noted he spoke with counsel for AEA during-the-break and is confident they can develop a process the Committee can use to keep these issues in private consultation. He will report on that process as soon as possible. Mr. Griffith noted the next item of business is current status of transmission of power from the project. Mr. Griffith asked Chugach, as the dispatcher, is power being delivered as requested. Chair Evans believes the requested power is being delivered. The dispute is about where custody transfer is and noted Chugach is seeking status quo until the dispute has been resolved. This disagreement is causing energy accounting issues between Chugach Electric and Homer Electric and some control area performance between the two areas. Mr. Griffith asked if Homer Electric refuses to continue process as it has been, were the status no different than 31 December. Mr. Janorschke stated some of the issues were heard yesterday at the RCA. He commented there are operational people in the background who are suffering the consequences of these disagreements, including dispatchers. Mr. Janorschke requested Mr. Day provide an update on the dispatching. Mr. Day agreed with most of what Chair Evans stated regarding : the effort that is going into reconciling the various measuring points. Mir Day-disagreed-with-Chair—> 1%) \\\¢Evans-and-does not believe there is such a thing as status quo with Chugach encompassing the entire load balancing area. Mr. Day would like to focus on what is done after this meeting to make the process go forward. He stated HEA has made every effort to ensure the Bradley power is delivered. Mr. Day believes Chugach wants to maintain the ability to move Bradley power rapidly. He would suggest an agreement on the operational control points of the ports in Bradley junction and use the third-party loss table produced by EPS for the interim and at the end of this process when the legal representatives have spoken, then the appropriate compensation can be made. BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 5 of 8 Chair Evans noted contract assignments and responsibilities are being waived and Chugach does not agree. Chair Evans stated the status quo is what was going on before the change at midnight on December 31st. He believes the implementation of dynamic scheduling will resolve the problem. Chair Evans believes the loss tables are similar, but not identical, to the ones used before. The issue is where the energy accounting point is and who generates the losses. Chair Evans thinks the dispute resolution process is the only way to solve these disagreements. Mr. Griffith stated his understanding is ultimately the responsibility for the performance of the project, delivery of the power and the definition of the transfer points rests with this body. Those issues could all go through the dispute resolution process just created or the body could vote to hold the operator of the plant to the former processes. Mr. Griffith asked for the will of the body. Mr. Janorschke stated some of these issues are being discussed at the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. Mr. Janorschke commented some participants may disagree, but he does not believe the BPMC has the authority to dictate any control efforts on HEA's system. Mr. Janorschke suggested this dispute resolution is expedited and to provide temporary relief, per Mr. Day's requests, to HEA and Chugach dispatchers, who are really paying the price for these disagreements. HEA's load balancing area has come as no surprise to anybody, since it has been discussed for three years now and have raised these issues. Mr. Kendall noted he is the new guy and commented the important issues he sees for AML&P is continued deliverability of power and reliable accounting for how it is delivered. There has been an interruption in the status quo on January Ist, and the financial responsibilities and operational responsibilities go along with that interruption, which creates liabilities and costs for AML&P that are unknown at this point. They will request a full accounting of the deliverability and costs that have been associated with this process. Mr. Kendall commented there should have been a resolution prior to the current situation and without that resolution, the status quo would have been a better operation than what we have today. Mr. Janorschke asked Mr. Kendall if he has noticed any deliverability problems since the change in status quo at the first of the year. He believes the status quo in the industry is changing every day because of continual evolvement, including upgrades in new metering equipment. Mr. Kendall commented change can occur with agreements of the parties. The current situation is confusing. Chair Evans noted the dispute is regarding the requirement for status quo. He does not believe there are disputes over any of the infrastructure changes Mr. Janorschke listed. Chair Evans stated status quo is required when there is a dispute. Mr. Borgeson asked Mr. Janorschke if HEA is able to measure its losses as a result of CEA's operational issues HEA believes exist under the status quo. Mr. Borgeson asked if this is just a financial issue for HEA and its members. Mr. Borgeson stated if this is a measure of damages, he encourages HEA to allow the status quo go forward and the question how much HEA might be owed will get resolved. Mr. Borgeson agreed with Mr. Kendall the status quo needs to be kept going until there is a resolution to this dispute. Mr. Borgeson does not fault HEA for this non-resolution at this point. BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 6 of 8 new work needs to be done. Mr. Griffith stated if the problems and issues come to him as a series of bullet points or one-line sentences, then he can sort it out, compile the appropriate issues and throw out the issues that are not appropriate. Mr. Griffith expects all issues to be sent to him by the close of business on Tuesday, January 21, 2014. The next Board meeting was scheduled for Friday, January 24, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. Mr. Janorschke stated at the next meeting, there will have to be an agreement on which issues fall under the BPMC purview and which do not. Chair Evans believes that determination would be made behind closed doors and not at the BPMC meeting. Mr. Borgeson recommended developing a budget for this process to provide resource assistance to the Chair going forward, Mr. Gibson's time, a mediator, and other expenses. He believes developing a budget would be helpful in understanding the costs that may be incurred. Mr. Griffith stated he will develop a rough budget and send it around. He requested Mr. Borgeson develop a rough budget and send it around as well. Chair Evans reminded the Committee there is a regularly scheduled meeting on January 27th that has an entirely different agenda than the dispute meeting scheduled on January 24th. He advised members need to attend both meetings. Chair Evans will chair the meeting on January 27th and Mr. Griffith will chair the dispute meeting on January 24th. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business for the committee, the meeting adjourned. BY: Bradley Evans, Chair Attest: Sara Fisher-Goad Alaska Energy Authority, Secretary BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 8 of 8 Mr. Janorschke stated there is metering in place and it has been tested. HEA is measuring actual real time losses. Mr. Janorschke advised the dispatching of Bradley has not changed. Chugach continues to dispatch and they have that right through contracts and is not in dispute. Mr. Griffith asked if the custody point has changed. Chair Evans advised the custody point change is the dispute. Mr. Borgeson asked if the custody transfer point is part of the dispatching. Chair Evans stated the custody transfer point is part of the dispatching and both parties are trying to accommodate the losses between the disputed boundaries. Mr. Kendall asked if both HEA and CEA currently have access to the monitoring equipment and information is going into both dispatch centers. Chair Evans believes there is some access. Mr. Day stated the monitoring equipment has remained intact to a great degree. Mr. Kendall asked what does "to a great degree" mean. Mr. Day advised there could be dispute over some areas that have been disabled and they are internal to HEA's system. Mr. Kendall commented it is important for CEA to have all of the same information HEA has and if there is limited access, that is another issue. Mr. Janorschke reported HEA is trying to set up ie LBdju like it is for everybody else. It is on the property line of the transmission system, no differen AML&P's, CEA's or GVEA's. The property line is the end of the ownership of that system. Chair Evans disagrees that is uniformly true across the system and stated there are occurrences in the system where people have LBA responsibility outside their direct ownership boundaries. Mr. Kendall stated his question was more about the status quo and if CEA still has full communication and information with what they had previously. Mr. Janorschke stated probably not into Soldotna. Mr. Day stated that question should be directed to Paul Johnson to see if there was anything missing. Chair Evans commented that is not a fair redirect and HEA is not responsible for any changes Mr. Johnson could have made. Chair Evans believes that is a cloaked answer and would appreciate answers being more forthright. Mr. Foutz asked for a clarification regarding what Mr. Day noted was disabled. Mr. Day stated internal to HEA's system, there are controls over circuit breakers that are necessary to the function of that system. There is no reason for CEA to have control over those breakers and that has been disabled. Mr. Foutz asked what the function of the breakers were before they were disabled. Mr. Day stated CEA was the dispatcher of the HEA system and therefore, needed control over that system. CEA is no longer the dispatcher of the HEA system. Mr. Foutz asked if those breakers were strictly so CEA could dispatch power to the HEA system. Mr. Day stated in the event of a disruption for those breakers, they could close them from their dispatch center, with actual physical control of those circuit breakers. Mr. Foutz if HEA owned the breakers. Mr. Day agreed. Mr. Janorschke asked if CEA is getting all the information they need right now for Bradley. Chair Evans and Mr. Griffith both stated they do not know the answer. Mr. Griffith hopes CEA is getting adequate information to define and send the power to the requesting entities, including GVEA, AML&P, and CEA. If that is not happening, Mr. Griffith suggests having an emergency BPMC meeting to determine the causes. Chair Evans noted there has been correspondence that characterizes the problems and does not believe new reports have to be written, adding work and slowing the process. Mr. Gibson does not believe any BPMC Minutes 1/15/14 Page 7 of 8 RESOLUTION OF THE BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE RESOLUTION NO. 2013-02 HEA Tariff Filing WHEREAS, on December 8, 1987, Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (“Chugach”), Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. (“GVEA”), the Municipality of Anchorage d/b/a Municipal Light and Power (“ML&P”), the City of Seward d/b/a Seward Electric System (“Seward”), and Alaska Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative, Inc. (“AEG&T”), and Additional Parties Homer Electric Association, Inc. (“HEA”) and Matanuska Electric Association, Inc. (“MEA”), entered into the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Agreement for the Sale and Purchase of Electric Power (“Power Sales Agreement”) with the Alaska Power Authority (“Authority”) (collectively “Project participants”); and WHEREAS, HEA, GVEA, MEA, ML&P, Seward, and AEG&T also entered into the Agreement for the Wheeling of Electric Power and for Related Services (“Services Agreement”) with Chugach; and WHEREAS, Chugach, GVEA, ML&P and AEG&T also entered into the Agreement for the Sale of Transmission Capability (“Transmission Agreement”) with HEA; and WHEREAS, the Authority issued Power Revenue Bonds under the Power Revenue Bond Resolution (“Bond Resolution”); and WHEREAS, the Power Sales Agreement, the Services Agreement, the Transmission Agreement, and the Bond Resolution (“Bradley Lake Agreements”), among others, collectively set forth the arrangements, responsibilities, and obligations necessary to secure the benefits of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project (“Project”) for all the Project participants; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 13 of the Power Sales Agreement, the Project Management Committee (“PMC”) has been formed for the purposes and with the responsibilities specified by the Bradley Lake Agreements including, without limitation, the responsibility to address disputes arising under the Bradley Lake Agreements; and WHEREAS, the State of Alaska has enacted into law provisions (AS 42.05.431(c)(1)) that exempt the Bradley Lake Agreements, and amendments to those agreements, from review or approval of the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (“RCA”) until all long-term debt for the Project is retired; and WHEREAS, HEA entered into the Agreement for the Lease of Facilities (“Lease”) with Chugach wherein Chugach agreed to lease and operate HEA’s transmission line running between the Soldotna Substation and the Quartz Creek Substation (“S/Q Line”); and vy oe ALASKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND EXPORT AUTHORITY \\ x BOARD MEETING ae Comte Chr o&V © BPMC 1/15/14 [ise First | Second Roll Call "Rri6r\Miniites - Roll call from top to bottom ending with Chair Cead Cory Homer Electric Association Ove. d Golden Valley Electric Association { we Matanuska Electric Association a >t iw Tan 0 a Alaska Energy Authority ry AW) ~ Municipal Light & Power : A | _ [chugach Electric Association ad Z| First Second First | Second First Second First Second Roll call from top to bottom ending with Chair yes | No Yes No Yes No Yes No Golden Valley Electric Association Homer Electric Association Matanuska Electric Association | City of Seward Alaska Energy Authority Municipal Light & Power Chugach Electric Association Next Meeting: xxxx xXXxX XX, XXXX Jan 21 1:30 ita cs lis pute (20 lhe frm committee Be Chan, -rok invalved) (Os ‘Sue adress cap Spread Aoxy isis Les. a ported % S clams we © \relade Mitaton & does not tani vg ei rights Je gh Frotk ele over problems framed by OAD men Broat< -chan O4D (MEA) iSSues by Friday tha Giants Be Ehe deserunates Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Wednesday, January 15, 2014 @ 10:00 A.M. **PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY** Kg GrBSoN) ‘ LAVYY, -\ovagensere React _Vry ORGANIZATION —+— HEA yey | hah Ss s+ Mar Veo Ainbrose _ Kick Bed dunn _ GHA EA BERNE _Sp17HW Aga JO tn Ay gerd _ eea7— peA- LEA at HEA | CyOocGACH CoS RCA Ave Als ELEM Chyerh MEA [= ALASKA mm ENERGY AUTHORITY BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, January 15, 2014-— 10 a.m. Alaska Energy Authority’s Board Room 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, AK ie CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL (for Committee members) 3. PUBLIC ROLL CALL (for all others present) 4. PUBLIC COMMENT Ss AGENDA COMMENTS / MOTION FOR APPROVAL 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Issues related to Resolution 2013-02 (Homer Electric Tariff Filing) to include e The process(es) to be used to bring resolution to the matters at issue; ¢ Current status of the transmission of power from the Project; and e Resolution of any issues involved in the transmission of power from the Project. 7. NEXT MEETING DATE —- Monday, January 27, 2014 1:30 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT To participate by teleconference, dial 1-800-315-6338 and use code 3074#. 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard Anchorage, Alaska 99503 T 907.771.3000 Toll Free (Alaska Only) 888.300.8534 F 907.771.3044 BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Special Meeting Public Notice Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Notice is hereby given that the Bradley Lake Project Management Committee will hold a special meeting on Wednesda January 15, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. For additional information contact Teri Webster. This meeting will be conducted by electronic media pursuant to AS 44.62.310 at the following location: Alaska Energy Authority Board Conference Room, 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, Alaska; a teleconference line has been set up for those unable to attend in person. Dial 1-800-315-6338, Enter Code 3074#. The public is invited to attend. The State of Alaska (AEA) complies with Title Il of the Americans with Disabilities Act « 1990. Disabled persons requiring special modifications to participate should contact AEA staff at (907) 771-3074 to mak arrangements. Attachments, History, Details Attachments Details Agenda.pdf Department: Revision History Category: Created 1/10/2014 3:52:26 PM by tawebster Sub-Category: Modified 1/10/2014 3:52:26 PM by tawebster Location(s): Modified 1/10/2014 3:53:12 PM by tawebster Project/Regulation #: Publish Date: Archive Date: Events/Deadlines: Commerce, Community and Economic Development Public Notices Advisory Committee Meetinc Statewide 1/10/2014 1/16/2014