Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutElectric Board - Minutes - 07/06/2011Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 1 Fort Collins Utilities Electric Board Minutes Wednesday, July 6, 2011 Electric Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Steve Wolley, 288-0317 Lisa Poppaw, 223-4136 Electric Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Edward DeCourcey, 206-9996 Brian Janonis, 221-6702 Roll Call Board Present Chairperson Steve Wolley, Vice Chairperson Ed DeCourcey, Board Members Peggy Plate and Tom Barnish Board Absent Board Members John Graham, John Harris, and Steve Yurash Staff Present Brian Janonis, Tom Rock, John Phelan, Carrie Daggett, Robin Pierce, and Harriet Davis Guests Council Liaison Lisa Poppaw, Rick Coen, Robert Overbeck, John Bleem (Platte River Power Authority) Meeting Convened Chairperson Wolley called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Public Comment Bob Overbeck expressed concerns about privacy issues with the Advanced Meter Program and sharing Social Security numbers with Utilities. He questioned if private information can be destroyed by shredder. He also questioned that if he opts out of the Advanced Meter Program, how much will he be charged for electricity? He also raised a question concerning if the state mandated goals of reducing emissions can be achieved without the new technology. Is the new Advanced Meter Program necessary to meet the energy goals? Utilities Executive Director Brian Janonis stated the Advanced Meter Program will be discussed at the Council Work Session on Tuesday, July 12 th , 2011. These types of concerns will be addressed at that time. Board Member Barnish stated he uses less energy simply because it costs less and he doesn’t necessarily expect a reward for that; however, he does empathize with the customers on the low end of energy usage and the fact that they will not necessarily be rewarded. Approval of June 1, 2011, Minutes Vice Chairperson DeCourcey moved to approve the minutes of the June 1, 2011, meeting. Board Member Plate seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. Energy Board Discussion Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 2 Chairperson Wolley stated he invited Council Liaison Lisa Poppaw to discuss the creation of an Energy Board and answer questions from the board members. Ms. Poppaw began the discussion by mentioning that Council has been discussing the possibility of an Energy Board for quite some time. A Futures Committee has been created as well to discuss broader topics. The Telecommunications Board was dissolved several years ago because it became less necessary for that particular board in the City of Fort Collins. Since that time, the discussion has been made for the need for a broader board regarding communication tools such as Twitter. She stated the Electric Board seems narrow in its focus. Council hopes to create a broader board to discuss future power generation and future projects relating to energy. The Futures Committee includes Mr. Janonis, City Manager Darin Atteberry, Assistant to the City Manager Bruce Hendee, Councilmember Wade Troxell, Councilmember Gerry Horak, and Ms. Poppaw. Topics discussed include future water usage in the City, the future of transportation, the creation of power, and the City’s regional role in the future. Ms. Poppaw feels the Futures Committee is going in an exciting direction. Sustainability is also a major focus of the committee and is at the core of the discussion for an Energy Board. She stated the Energy Board will help Council become better decision-makers in the future. Board discussion: Did you consider making the Energy Board part of the Futures Committee? The Futures Committee is a Council board and will not include citizens, only Councilmembers and staff members. The Energy Board will dovetail with the Futures Committees, much like the Transportation Board brings information to Council. What do you want to look at within the current Electric Board group? The Electric Board has a purpose in working with the Electric Utility. Councilmembers desire a group to advise Council on broader topics. Mr. Janonis stated there is new leadership within Council. City Management is changing focus on how to create a sustainable community. There is a paradigm shift within the city government right now. A board member expressed concerns about the method. Once the permanent office achieves what they are seeking, what would be their focus after that is achieved? Should a more specific task force be created rather than a board? The focused task force will respond to specific questions when they arise. There is a specific function for the Electric Board as a representative for the citizens since the Utilities is a monopoly. The Energy Board would respond to Council questions and what Council wants to understand. The Electric Board is more of a “watch-dog” for the citizens. Ms. Poppaw stated since the energy field and the issue of sustainability is incredibly dynamic, a task force would not encompass all the functions that are being discussed and would not meet the needs of Council. The Futures Committees has discussed if all the existing boards are relevant. Mayor Weitkunat has also looked at the relevance of the existing boards. She feels the Energy Board can look at a broader picture. Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 3 What is the function of the Energy Board? Is it to bring new ideas to Council or for formal proposals for new ideas? Are they seeking new philosophies, goals and directions? Ms. Poppaw stated all these functions would be included. She also stated there are gaps within the City with regards to obtaining advice from citizens regarding sustainability and progressive technologies. Currently, there is no feedback from the appropriate board or commission regarding these types of issues. How do you separate a “think-tank” from an advisory board within the scope of the new board? Several current boards and commission bring ideas to Council and serve as a “think-tank.” The Council desires that kind of feedback because the community is so dynamic. Are there tasks from other boards that would be a part of the new Energy Board? No. Ms. Poppaw stated most other boards have board members that are liaisons to other boards. There needs to be better intercommunication between boards and also better communications between departments within the City. Are there dotted lines between all the boards? No; however, there is a dotted line between the boards and Council. Deputy City Attorney Carrie Daggett stated the City Code describes the functions of every board. Mr. Janonis stated the Electric Board Charter has not been revised in several years and it does not contain a section for a liaison to other boards from the Electric Board. Ms. Poppaw stated the ultimate goal is make the City organization more efficient and more effective. She sees overlap with the Energy Board and with other boards, including the Transportation Board, the Air Quality Board, the Natural Resources Advisory Board, and the Planning and Zoning Board, for example. How do you structure the boards to operate efficiently? How do you keep everyone updated so that it does not turn into a staff member’s full time job? Ms. Poppaw stated the Electric Board is no longer sufficient to handle all the aspects involved, including the vastness of transportation infrastructure in the City and the future of regional transportation planning. The idea of an Energy Board was well-received by the Electric Utilities staff and the City Manager’s staff when it was first mentioned. How do you control the scope of the board and how do you make it as effective as possible? The Energy Board will have input as to whom they will be interfacing with concerning other boards and commissions. Will the Electric Board have the opportunity to review the proposed Energy Board ordinance and make suggestions? Ms. Poppaw stated that the board members will have the opportunity to review it as a private citizen. Is Council the gatekeeper for where the proposed projects go? No, that is the role of staff. Ms. Poppaw encourages her boards to look at the Six-Month Planning Calendar and ask for information from their staff liaison regarding questions and/or opinions concerning future projects. Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 4 Does Utilities look at future planning and usage for electric vehicles and communicate that information to the Transportation Board? Mr. Janonis stated they are discussing the use of electric vehicles with the Transportation Board. This would also be part of the Energy Board’s scope. What is the time frame for the creation of the Energy Board? The first reading of the ordinance will be July 19 th , 2011. Question to Board Concerning Multipliers (from Meeting the State Renewable Energy Standard presentation on June 1) (Presentation available upon request). Chairperson Wolley stated this item is brought to the board again to give board members the opportunity to make a comment about multipliers if they so desire. Light and Power Operations Manager Steve Catanach presented information on multipliers and meeting the state Renewable Energy Standard (RES). Utilities also has a carbon reduction goal. The installation of renewables, particularly solar and wind, are not the least expensive route to carbon reduction. The Energy Policy states Utilities will do the minimum to meet the state RES standard. The usage of multipliers minimizes the amount of renewables and gives Utilities the opportunity to work out the economics as a feed-in tariff model can be implemented. Board discussion: Have you talked to the Natural Resources Advisory Board about the use of multipliers? Yes, they were very supportive of the use of multipliers. Mr. Catanach stated there have been several discussions surrounding the concept of thermal energy storage and a pilot program was conducted installing ice energy units at different locations. What are the contributions to the RES goal from the local community projects and the Colorado based projects? There is no clear definition on local community projects. A Colorado based project might be a wind farm in Pawnee Butte, Colorado. How is a wind farm in Colorado a better benefit than a wind farm in Wyoming? This is part of the discussion from the lawsuit alleging an unfair advantage with the use of multipliers. A board member stated multipliers should contribute to the goal of reducing carbon. Chairperson Wolley reminded the board they are not obligated to give a statement on multipliers, but they have the opportunity if they so desire. Mr. Catanach stated this will be presented to Council on July 12 th , 2011. The use of multipliers makes it possible to achieve our goals and do local projects through the Fort Collins Solar Program. A board member stated there are also risks associated with using the multipliers. Advanced Meter Fort Collins Update Mr. Catanach gave an update on this topic. This item was scheduled to go to Council on June 28 th , 2011. It was postponed and rescheduled for July 5 th , 2011. It was postponed Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 5 again and has been rescheduled for July 12 th , 2011. The presentation video is available at www.fcgov.com. Privacy, costs, and health are the three hot topics concerning the Advanced Meter Fort Collins project. The World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) recently classified radiofrequency (RF) cell phone emissions as carcinogenic. Utilities has taken a look at the health data concerning RF exposure levels. The meter will only broadcast four times per day for approximately 1.5 seconds. Relatively speaking, the strength for the meters is much lower than RF from cell phones, microwave ovens, and Wi-Fi (Wireless Fidelity) routers. Utilities will not interpret health effects from the data; however, staff has been working with Dr. Bruce Cooper from the Health District of Larimer County. Dr. Cooper has reviewed several reports and studies, including the WHO study, and given the statement that RF from the meters is not a concern and is a manageable risk. Utilities is providing customers with three options since there are concerns with the project: Customer Option 1 This option is the standard mode with full functionality. It will gather 15 minute to 1 hour data. The data will broadcast four to six times per day with a 1.5 second signal. Customer Option 2 With this option, the meter can be programmed so it only collects data once a day. It still broadcasts four to six times per day; however, it sends the same data number each time. Customer Option 3 This option includes a manually read meter with no broadcast and minimal functionality. There will be an extra fee associated with this option to read the meter, estimated at approximately $10 per month. The meter can still gather data that can be downloaded, not broadcasted. Board discussion: Can the Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) technology be installed on the existing meter for a future resident if Option 3 is chosen? The meter would be replaced at that point. The manually read meter will still gather data if the customer desires that level of information. A board member emphasized the current Customer Information System (CIS) is not currently broadcast, and if someone hacked into the current system, they would obtain the same information whether there is an automated meter attached or not. Mr. Catanach stated a risk evaluation was conducted as part of the grant process. The data was classified as low value and low risk. The meter will broadcast information concerning meter identification and kilowatts, not personal information that ties to an account. Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 6 Can you present this information effectively to Council so they are prepared to answer questions concerning the project? Yes. Information is available showing that personal information is not available on the meter and that the control systems are totally isolated. Mr. Catanach reminded the board that the full presentation is available online, along with a specific timeline for the project. The project is approximately two weeks behind schedule. Community Partnerships and Energy Policy Update (Presentation available upon request). Energy Services Manager John Phelan presented information on the Fort Collins Energy Policy 2010 Annual Update. The report includes information on efficiency program results, reliability, economic health, and affordability metrics. Efficiency Goal Programs would achieve 1.5 percent of the community’s electric use each year or 15 percent over 10 years. It is not an absolute reduction in community energy consumption of 1.5 percent per year. Even through economic and population changes, Utilities could continually have a measurable target to achieve. The 1.5 percent goal is very aggressive. Efficiency in Practice This includes a comprehensive portfolio approach, including residential, commercial, and industrial customers. The framework includes funding (incentives), technical assistance, service providers, retailers, regulation (including the Green Building Code), and education. Utilities emphasizes a strong connection between water and energy efficiency, for example, providing rebates on energy efficient dishwashers and clothes washers. Board discussion: Are there still a lot of inefficient dishwashers on the market? No, most are labeled as Energy Star appliances. In 2007, almost every dishwasher on the market was an Energy Star appliance. Since that time, dishwasher standards have been raised. There are different tiers available and Utilities has considered rebates on certain tiers. What about energy efficient televisions? Utilities recently signed a nondisclosure agreement with Best Buy on obtaining television sales data in the Fort Collins store. It is difficult to offer a consumer rebate on televisions that provides enough incentive to customers. Efficiency Results – 2010 Mr. Phelan explained the efficiency results and the efficiency portfolio: • Customer savings (gross): 20,500 megawatt-hours • Utility savings (net): 17,800 megawatt-hours • Lifecycle cost: 3.8 cents per kilowatt-hour (wholesale electricity cost = 4.5 cents per kWh) Calculating Efficiency Results Mr. Phelan explained how the efficiency results were calculated for commodity products, standardized projects, custom projects, and all programs. Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 7 Fort Collins Utilities – 2010 Efficiency Programs Customer Savings 65 percent of the customer savings included commercial use and 35 percent included residential use. Commercial lighting encompasses the majority of the customer savings at 37.9 percent. Mr. Phelan noted the amount of savings will decrease as federal regulations for T12 fluorescent light bulbs change. Fort Collins Electric Use 1992 to 2010 • 57 percent more people • 75 percent more energy • 103 percent higher peak demand Board discussion: How do we know how many more businesses existed in Fort Collins from 1992 to 2010? Would that account for the higher demand peak? That economic component is not shown on this graph. Do you rate your programs based on the cost of conserved energy? Yes, that is one component of the program; however, it is necessary to look at the program on a portfolio basis. Do you see the costs for conserving energy fluctuate? Yes, the numbers can be skewed by larger projects. Community Partnerships Mr. Phelan presented information on community partnerships with Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) and partner cities; Northern Colorado (NoCO) Energy Star Homes; Fort Zero Energy District (ZED) Community Energy Challenge; NoCO Green Building Education Consortium; and others including the Chamber of Commerce and Sustainable Living Association. Board discussion: What is your take on Energy Star Homes versus the Green Building Code? The Green Building Code has a broader focus; however, they are very closely aligned. Mr. Catanach stated almost 1,000 individuals have signed up for the Fort ZED Community Energy Challenge. For the past three years, Utilities has been working with the Larimer County Youth Conservation Corp (LCYCC) to conduct light home audits. An income qualification component was added this year. The NoCO Green Building Education Consortium is a combination of efforts of Utilities, Colorado State University (CSU), Front Range Community College (FRCC), Aims Community College, Larimer County, and Rocky Mountain Sustainable Living Association (RMSLA) to develop a way for individuals to navigate what options are available. Electric Board Meeting Minutes July 6, 2011 8 Are the same budget dollars available next year? The current budget is for 2011-2012. The budget presented to the board is the program piece only. It does not include staffing or other components. Will you use the same amount of dollars for the next budget to achieve the 1.5 percent goal? Yes, the budget is available. Is Utilities considering adding more programs? Yes, Council is interested in researching more financing options for customers. Another gap in the portfolio involves incentives for multi-family customers. Routine Updates Platte River Power Authority (Utilities Executive Director Brian Janonis): No update. Mr. Janonis stated there was no board meeting in June because of the American Public Power Association (APPA) National Conference. Capitol News (Vice Chairperson DeCourcey): No update. Staff Reports Utilities Financial Operations Manager Ellen Switzer provided a monthly Financial Report that was included in the agenda packet. Board discussion: A board member questioned the appropriation of funds for the Mason Corridor Project. Has the project been approved by Council? Mr. Catanach stated the item went to Council on July 5 th , 2011 for the first reading. The second reading is scheduled for July 19 th , 2011. Other Business Mr. Phelan gave an update on the Colorado Industrial Energy Challenge (CIEC). The program is sponsored by the Colorado Governor’s Energy Office (GEO) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Avago Technologies, New Belgium Brewing Company, and Woodward are founding members of the program. Both Avago Technologies and New Belgium were recognized for their energy efficiency achievements from 2008 through 2010. Advanced Energy and Anheuser-Busch recently joined the program, which consists of twenty companies. Mr. Phelan noted that five of the companies in the program are from the City of Fort Collins. Future Agenda Items None Open Items Tracking Customer and Employee Relations Manager Patty Bigner provided an answer to the third item listed on the tracking document (cost of paper bills versus online bills). The attachment was included in the agenda packet. Submitted by Harriet Davis, Administrative Assistant, Fort Collins Utilities Approved by the Board on 3 ,201 Signed \“ Board Secretary Date Electric Board Meeting Minutes 9 July 6, 2011