Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutElectric Board - Minutes - 03/17/1999A regular meeting of the Fort Collins Electric Board was held at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 17, 1999 in the Utilities Training Room at 700 Wood Street, Fort Collins, Colorado. BOARD PRESENT. Bill Brayden, Jeff Eighmy, Mark Fidrych, Len Loomans, Barbara Rutstein, Richard Smart and Jim Welch STAFF PRESENT: Dennis Sumner, Eric Dahlgren, Tom Rock, Mike Smith, Bill Switzer, Wendy Williams and Shannon Turner COUNCIL LIAISON: Scott Mason GUEST: John Allum of Platte River Power Authority OBSERVER: Lu Fisk of the League of Women Voters AGENDA: 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Changes to the February 17, 1999 minutes were proposed. Board Member Fidrych made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Board Member Loomans seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, and the minutes from the February 17, 1999 meeting were approved. 2. ELECTRIC INDUSTRY RESTRUCTURING PANEL: John Allum gave Board Members a presentation on the Electric Industry Restructuring Panel. In Colorado independently owned utilities (IOU's), which include Public Service Company and West Plains, control 64 percent of Colorado's customers. Rural Electric Associations (REA's) account for 19 percent of the customer base. Twenty-nine municipal electric systems have 17 percent of the load in Colorado. Colorado is part of an interconnected electrical system located along the border of Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming and the Dakotas. There are few ties between the eastern and western electrical systems. Colorado faces severpl transmission problems. The transmission line TOT 3 has limited transmission capacity. Ninety percent of the electric load is in the Front Range area, between Fort Collins and Pueblo. A question was raised as to whether the panel is looking into installing new transmission lines. John stated that they haven't gotten to that point yet, but they have asked WAPA to investigate some transmission issues. The debate is whether to bring transmission from Laramie River Station versus Craig Colorado. The panel recognizes that transmission will have to be enhanced. The panel is considering which areas are most likely to be deregulated. John stated that generation will likely be the first to be deregulated. In most situations, transmission is regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and distribution is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission or local city councils. Services such as metering, billing and audits are regulated in some states. The advocates of competition consist primarily of large industries and independent power producers. Large industries feel that competition will lower costs, give them a choice of suppliers and provide them with multiple services. Independent power producers feel they may profit from deregulation. Opponents of deregulation are residential, small commercial, and low and fixed income customers. These customers believe that rates will increase, services will decrease and they may not be able to participate because of their size. Small customers will not have the advantages that large customers will have in negotiating power prices. John provided a background of how the panel was created. Last year, Study Bill 152 was passed, creating a study committee to investigate electric restructuring in Colorado. The panel, consisting of 30 members began meeting in July, 1998. Members include representatives from municipals, IOU's, coop's, utilities, agriculture, residential, and industrial. Several consultants and a report writer were hired to prioritize the issues. The legislation requires two-thirds majority for any recommendation. A seminar and dialogue series is currently underway to educate panel members on various aspects of the electric industry. Since many of the panel members were unfamiliar with the electric industry the seminars included information on basic electrical issues. Other issues discussed during the series included western power system operations, wholesale power issues, national perspectives, consumer issues, resource and delivery systems, market power, and stranded cost and tax issues. The legislation, listed sixteen items to study. • Rate Comparison • Short/Long Term Impacts • Stranded Costs s Market Power • Consumer Safeguards • Universal Service • Reliability/Affordability • Renewables • Energy Efficiency • Tax/Fee Issues -2- 171 • Low Income Impacts • Rural Impacts • Local Choice • Competitive Advantage • Utility Employees • Licensing Requirements • Preference Issues Consultants have been hired to research these issues. Stone & Webster, in conjunction with DRI, is investigating energy and economic modeling. CH2M Hill and Econergy are studying socio-economic & legal issues. Low income issues will be investigated by Colton. Public Utilities Commission staff will research rate comparisons, licensing, regulatory history, and transition issues. Stone & Webster and DRI are using a production costing model, a generation expansion model and a power flow model. The generation expansion model includes the use of alternate power sources such as nuclear, renewable, gas and coal in 250 MW increments. The power flow model was used to study the transmission system to discover TOT limitations in Colorado. A question was raised regarding the model used by Stone & Webster. The concern was with the figure of 250 MW as an increment. John noted the technical advisory committee chose to use publicly available information. The panel is looking at relative relationship. Therefore, the results of the modeling will be reasonable, but not precise. John explained that once the base of the model is completed sensitivity runs will be conducted to see how the model responds. Stone and Webster is investigating the economic impacts of deregulation on seven metro areas and five rural areas. Sensitivity runs will be conducted taking into account high/low load forecasts, high/low fuel prices, environmental sensitivity and reliability. The task force decided reliability should be constant in all of these scenarios. Stone and Webster's report is due in April. John provided Board Members with the preliminary results of the model for the study period of 2003 to 2017. These included: • 4,000 MW will need to be added (or about 250MW/yr) • A recommendation for combine cycle and combustion turbines along the Front Range • Reliability stays at 1 day in 10 years (15%) • Colorado production costs are mid range • Colorado market clearing price is low • Municipal retail rates are the lowest of the state Combining Stone & Webster's data with their own research, CH2MHILL has provided three scenarios for Socio-Economic & legal issues. The first scenario is status quo with a little fine tuning, followed by retail competition, and lastly a transition to the competitive market. Low income issues CH2MHILL are investigating include consumer education, disclosure, jurisdiction, enforcement and aggregation. The Public Utilities Commission tasks include performing a rate comparison of Colorado versus other states, investigating supplier licensing, reviewing regulatory history and looking at transition issues. John noted that the panel may find that restructuring is not good for Colorado, that it is good for Colorado or that only limited restructuring is needed. -3- The consultants report is expected to be finalized in April. A draft report is scheduled to be completed in July. The panel will conduct five public hearings throughout Colorado, to be completed by September. A final report is to be out by November 1999. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: • Cities For Climate Protection Campaign update • Wind Power update • Use of fuel cells at DWRF update • R.W. Beck second phase update Adjourned 6 p.m. Shannon L. Turner, Board Liaison -4-