HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.17.2017 IMC Approved minutesIntertie Management Committee
Regular Meeting
MEETING MINUTES
Friday, February 17, 2017
Anchorage, Alaska
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Mark Johnston called the meeting of the Intertie Management Committee to order on
February 17, 2017 at 8:38 a.m.
2. ROLL CALL FOR COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Brian Hickey Chugach Electric Association (CEA)
Cory Borgeson Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA)
Tony Izzo Matanuska Electric Association (MEA)
Kirk Warren Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)
Mark Johnston Anchorage Municipal Light & Power (ML&P)
3. PUBLIC ROLL CALL
David Pease, Gary Kuhn, Jim Brooks (MEA; Bob Day, Larry Jorgensen; Lee Thibert, Burke
Wick, Russ Thorne, Mark Johnson (CEA); Anthony Scott (ML&P); Dan Bishop (GVEA); John
Foutz (City of Seward); David Lockard, Bryan Carey, Teri Webster, Valerie Leavitt (AEA); Kirk
Gibson (McDowell Rackner & Gibson PC); Brian Bjorkquist (Dept. of Law); Bernie Smith, Jay
Lang (RCA); Henri Dale; TW Patch.
4. AGENDA APPROVAL
MOTION: Mr. Borgeson made a motion to approve the agenda. Motion seconded by Mr.
Hickey. The motion passed unanimously.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
6. APPROVAL OF PRIOR MEETING MINUTUES – December 14, 2016 and
December 28, 2016
MOTION: Mr. Hickey made a motion to approve the agenda. Motion seconded by Mr.
Izzo. The motion passed unanimously.
7. OLD BUSINESS
a. Douglas Substation Upgrades
Mr. Johnston stated the Douglas Station Upgrades was postponed at the last meeting, December
28, 2016, from any action to thoroughly review documents with legal counsel. A revised Utility
MOA took into account all corrections that have been made to date.
February 17, 2017 IMC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5
Mr. Kuhn affirmed all the additions, or revisions, to the project summary are current. AEA is
working out the final procurement document, with direction from the committee, to proceed with
the project. The EPS estimated a total cost of $1,581,229. The breakdown of funding
responsibility is AEA at 41 percent, MEA at 26 percent, and the IMC at 33 percent.
AEA does not have approval for the sole source portion of the procurement from the Department
of Administration yet but is expected to be approved soon. The sole source request is for the
relays that are made by Switzer Engineering Laboratories, which are common in the railbelt and
are identified as a specification with no substitutes.
MOTION: Mr. Izzo made a motion to approve the Intertie Management Committee
Resolution 17-1, #2 in the upper right corner, and in addition move to approve the Utility
Memorandum of Agreement for 2016 Douglas Substation Improvements. Motion seconded
by Mr. Borgeson. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Hickey brought four documents and provided copies for the committee members to walk
through in order to explain Chugach’s interpretation of the Intertie participants’ rights to the use
of the Teeland-Douglas section of the intertie and the associated assets. These documents were;
The 1984 Douglas Substation Agreement, The Joint Use Agreement (covers AEA Owned line
section from Teeland to Hollywood road), 1986 Transmission Service Agreement, covers the
MEA Line section from Hollywood Road to Douglas, 2004 Regulatory Commission Order No.
4, U-03-100.
Mr. Hickey stated he understands the agreement covering modifications to the control room (the
MOA) will provide effectively the same access rights found in the first document, the 1984
Douglas substation agreement. The agreement will give the IMC rights to enter, to occupy, and
perform necessary work for construction, testing, and maintenance for the project. Everyone will
have rights for the new installed equipment.
Mr. Pease, MEA’s counsel, stated that with the assistance from Mr. Kirk Gibson, they both
believe the IMC has continued access to the lock and to the equipment for which ownership has
been retained as in the 1984 Lease Agreement. However, they are not offering an interpretation
of the older agreements and documents.
Mr. Bjorkquist referenced the 1984 Douglas Substation Agreement, attachment C, column 1 has
AEA retained ownership, and column 2 has MEA ownership. The items in the MEA column is
what the IMC will not have continued access to and rights to, thru this new agreement.
Mr. Hickey stated that most of the items on the list will be replaced in the control enclosure.
Line #18 is not clear, 138 bus. He assumed the IMC will have the rights to the AEA’s 138 bus
that goes through the substation. Mr. Kuhn concurred that the intention was for the IMC to have
rights to access and maintain the 138 Bus as necessary for intertie purposes.
Mr. Kuhn detailed the MOA and the resolution. He believes the document replaces a component,
which is the relay panels and control room. The MOA states continued unrestricted access for 45
years.
Mr. Hickey stated his understanding is to still have access to the equipment associated with the
transfer of power through Douglas substation. No access is needed in anything that directly
February 17, 2017 IMC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5
serves the MEA load, except for in operational regard for the purposes of establishment of
clearances on the intertie.
Mr. Borgeson stated he wants it clear if he votes in favor of this it is with the assumption and not
with a capitulation that we are giving up our termination rights or any rights that survive the
termination of this 1984 Agreement.
Mr. Kuhn stated he will defer to the GM, but it is not our intent to limit the access. Our intent is
to replace the control enclosure.
Mr. Borgeson stated there are also provisions in there as to what will be charged upon
termination. He would not vote for this if rights are going to being terminated by virtue of this
new agreement.
Mr. Bjorkquist stated only the Agreement will be terminated, but for interpretation, we would
really need to defer to MEA, but they are not willing to discuss that.
Mr. Hickey stated his understanding is we are not giving anything up but actually gaining access
to the specific pieces of equipment.
Mr. Johnston concurred.
Mr. Izzo stated it is MEA’s intent and belief the document we are proposing be approved by the
IMC.
Mr. Hickey affirmed he is not going to worry about the 138 bus, ten-foot section. He went into
detail his understanding of rights of transmission using the Joint Use Agreement, the 1986
Transmission Service Agreement, and the 2004 Regulatory Commission Order No. 4, U-03-100.
Mr. Pease stated to Mr. Hickey he is doing exactly what MEA said they will not discuss. Mr.
Pease stated MEA is not going to agree upon any interpretation. They made it clear at the
December meeting they were not prepared to do this in the context of the relay control enclosure.
If this is a condition of going forward than they will pull support from the project.
Mr. Borgeson stated he is appreciating Mr. Hickey’s explanation of his understanding and it has
really helps him and other committee members’ position to understand.
Mr. Warren stated this really speaks towards the e-mail from yesterday regarding AEA’s
participation in the project when the 1984 Agreement Lease Agreement goes away. AEA does
not believe there will be any agreement in place for transmission of power. AEA is still willing
to support the project but wants the utilities understand that. Something will have to happen in
order to continue transmission but it is unclear what that is.
Mr. Johnston informed Mr. Hickey he may continue, seeing no objections.
Mr. Hickey stated his concerns at the last meeting. These concerns were that the participants
outline and understand, both the participants’ rights and the contractual basis for them with
respect to the assets that they were agreeing to make significant capital investments in through he
Douglas Substation upgrade project. He believes as he understands it and believes, to the
February 17, 2017 IMC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5
State’s point, the utilities don’t have a guaranteed 80 MW transfer capability from Hollywood
north, the contractually guaranteed right on this section of line is between [0 to (80 MW minus
the Douglas load)] this depends on what MEA load exists north of Douglas. And further the
participants only have the right to 40MW of transfer capability from Teeland to Hollywood
should MEA require 40 MW in this area. In summary, he believes the utilities have the rights to
access the equipment at Douglas needed, and from a power transfer perspective, will have a
minimum of 40MW of transfer capability from Teeland to Hollywood road and then will have
between [0-(80MW minus the MEA load of Douglas and MEA loads north of Douglas)]. At
some future point, the utilities would need to negotiate with MEA if loads increase north of
Douglas to a level that they could not transfer sufficient power from Teeland to Fairbanks. So
long as the participants agree that this is where we stand, and that we are willing to make
investments based on this power transfer capability, Mr. Hickey stated his support for the
upgrade project.
MOTION: Mr. Izzo made a motion to approve the Intertie Management Committee
Resolution 17-1, #2 in the upper right corner, and in addition move to approve the Utility
Memorandum of Agreement for 2016 Douglas Substation Improvements. Motion seconded
by Mr. Borgeson. The motion passed unanimously.
8. NEW BUSINESS
a. Enforcement of reliability standards
Mr. Mark Johnson presented the committee with progress of the enforcement of reliability
standards committee. Mr. Johnson has been working with Mr. Gibson in proposing a matrix of
their approach, which had a consensus by the committee. There was further discussion on
monetary sanctions. The committees’ number one goal is to draft an outline without the
monetary sanctions included, but with the understanding that is the next stage. This process will
occur in the next month and regular progress reports to the committee will take place.
Mr. Wick has provided the committee with the railbelt standards but do not have a consensus of
all utilities accepting those standards. The IMC did not want to approve the standards until the
penalties are included. HEA has been and will be involved in developing the penalties and
continue to be invited to the meetings. An agreement to the standards for spinning reserves has
occurred, but there is not an agreement on the procedure for carrying those spinning reserves
amongst the utilities. Revamping the enforcement of the reliability standards has been
completed by EPS.
9. IOC / OPERATOR’S REPOT – ML&P/GVEA
There were no reports
Mr. Dale asked for the power pooling utilities to do a presentation to the IMC on how it will
work with the IMC. Mr. Borgeson suggested a presentation to the utilities would be more
appropriate.
10. COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
11. NEXT MEETING DATE