06/10/1992 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e and that being less reliant on the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is an important strategy. Paula Fleitell, Energy Resource Planning Analyst, gave an overview of the plan including the following: current and projected energy needs; options; the public comment period; and the citizen involvement committee, including the committee's top-ranked recommendations. The end product is a large, diversified plan that uses conservation, research, and resource development to meet the community's future needs. e- Responding to a question from Mr. Boles, Ms. Fleitell said the utility helps residential customers by auditing and paying most of the cost for energy efficiency in the home. Jim Origliosso, Financial Services Division Director, said that the objective of the financial strategies around the resource plan is to first fund the plan. To do this, he said, there first has to be agreement about the overall objective (less reliance on the BPA) and then agreement on the mix of resources. He said the financial strategy would seek to maximize the financial benefits to the community and minimize the costs, principally by developing partnerships with other utilities or energy providers. Mr. Origliosso said that there are two scenarios describing the scope of all the various contracts that the utility will need to undertake. The optimistic scenario has the underlying assumption that the community would receive payments based on the value of the resources to others, not necessarily the cost of those resources. Mr. Boles expressed concern that the projected net revenue include replacement of assets. He flagged the issue of a sinking fund for asset replacement for further discussion. Continuing his report, Mr. Origliosso said that the conservative scenario assumes reimbursement on a combination of value and cost of the resource. He said that under the conservative scenario the cost to the rate payer would be about ten percent of the total cost over a ten-year period. In the optimistic scenario it would mean a zero-percent increase to the rate payer, while in the conservative scenario, it would translate into a rate increase of about 2.5 percent annually. Responding to a question from Mr. MacDonald, Mr. Origliosso explained that the EWEB Citizen Involvement Committee's discussion of environmental costing was reflected in the analysis and recommendations in the portfolio. Mr. Origliosso explained the in-lieu-of-tax consequence of this strategy, saying that these payments are only attributable to wholesale sales. Mr. Boles thanked EWEB for its presentation and asked that the next planning effort include water as a resource. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council 11:30 a.m. June 10, 1992 Page 5