HomeMy WebLinkAboutREFAC Minutes 3-20-2009 DRAFT
Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting
March 20, 2009, AEA Board Room
2:00pm to 5:00pm
Draft Minutes
ROLL CALL:
Committee Members AEA Staff Other Participants
Vince Beltrami Chair) Steve Haagenson Wynn Menefee DNR
Jodi Mitchell (phone) Mike Harper Mike Mitchell Dept of Law
Chris Rose Peter Crimp
Rep. Bill Thomas (phone) Doug Ott
Sen. Lyman Hoffman (phone) Butch White
Brad Reeve James Jenson
Chris Rutz
Marge Cabanski
Christa Caldwell
The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee meeting convened at 2:05 pm.
Butch White asked that the regulations be added to the agenda.
MOTION: Mr. Rose moved to approve the meeting minutes from the March 17, 2009
Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (the Committee). Seconded by Brad
Reeve. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously.
Peter Crimp explained the process of ranking the RFPs. The same evaluation method
as Round 1 was used. The scoring for a project terminated in Stage 2 of the evaluation
of the project was not recommended or was ineligible. ISER is now managing the
economic analysis portion of the evaluations and AEA project managers are working
closely with ISER on these and are happy with the results.
Issues Discussed:
-The importance of sustainability and local support as evaluation criteria.
-The score for local support is raised if letters of support are received.
-Should the score for local support be reduced if letters of opposition are presented?
-IPPs (Independent Power Producer) and how they are considered in regards to
receiving grant monies are of concern.
1.) Must they be an established business or company in Alaska before being
given grant funds?
2.) Must they have a power sales agreement in place before given the funds?
3.) Must they receive a certificate of public necessity and convenience by RCA
before receiving construction grant funds?
4.) Should AEA require RCA-established based power purchase rates to make
sure that there is no unfair profit for the IPP at the expense of the consumer
before granting construction funds? Ultimately the constitutional requirement
is that there be public benefit out of state expenditure. This would require
RCA willingness and resources to do this work.
5.) In general, should IPPs be given more scrutiny or would that be
discrimination? There are many issues that come up when dealing with IPPs.
Mike Mitchell explained how and when Executive Session should be used.
MOTION: Mr. Reeve moved to move to Executive Session to discuss IPP’s because it
may affect the finances of AEA. Seconded by Chris Rose. Roll call vote was taken and
the motion passed unanimously.
Public Session ended and Executive Session began at 2:45pm.
The Committee reconvened in Public Session at 3:12pm.
Discussion was held on funding of the grants and allocation of funds to all regions of the
state. Not all areas will be equal but the committee agreed that they did not want to
“throw money away” to undeserving grants just to have fair percentages. Also, they did
not want to duplicate resources in the same community; one project will have to drop
out. Apply caps, the exclusion, and then apply the remaining funds to pro-rated portions
that are underfunded and then to the next viable projects according to statewide
funding.
It was noted that AEA staffing costs around $200,000 per round. Steve Haagenson,
Mike Harper, Peter Crimp and Chris Mello will discuss staffing issues for AEA. It was
asked if there would be any DNR (Department of Natural Resources) staffing issues of
concern regarding the permitting processes. Wynn Menefee said the DNR will look at
the list of projects and will be able to tell what time is required for staffing from DNR.
The next meeting will be scheduled for early April to discuss “lessons learned” on
rounds 1 and 2.
MOTION: Mr. Rose moved to adjourn, seconded by Brad Reeve. The meeting
adjourned at 4:34pm.
Respectfully submitted
Christa Caldwell
Marge Cabanski