Laserfiche WebLink
The process for participation in this proposed power supply coalition would begin with data <br />collection and focus on the aggregate needs for baseload, intermediate, and peaking. This would <br />be done primarily through the "grunt work" of CMII~PA's staff, but be overseen by third party <br />consultant R.w. Beck. Then, R,w. Beck would develop modeling assumptions for the aggregate <br />need. This information would be used to prepare a request for proposal ~RFP}. An analysis of <br />the individual needs of each participant would also be done. For ERMU, this would build off of <br />the study done by R.~w. Beck that compared BSII to the all requirements contract with <br />Connexus. Based on the information in the RFP responses, R,w. Beck would evaluate and <br />provide a recommended mix of resource types to each participant to build an individually <br />customized portfolio. Some of the deliverables from the process would include: <br />Projections of load, resource balance, and capacity for each participant. <br />Projected capacity requirements of the coalition. <br />Documentation of modeling assumptions. <br />RFP document and forms. <br />issue of RFP, monitoring of submittals, and bidder question response service. <br />Project pricing for existing participant's suppliers, <br />Response screening, results of final proposals, and participant portfolio analysis. <br />Cost comparison to participant's current power supply arrangements, <br />The scope of the process would not include the following deliverables: <br />Technical reports documentation limited to power point presentation format} <br />individual presentations to participants <br />® Comprehensive risk analysis <br />Robust portfolio optimization analysis snapshot analysis, not multiyear present value <br />analysis <br />Comprehensive solution to all related transmission issues. <br />The overall view of this process would start at data collection and end with a customized <br />portfolio proposal to take to the participant's governing body. <br />The process cost allocations have not been finalized. These could vary based on the number of <br />participants and the method selected for cost allocation, rf those in attendance of this meeting all <br />became participants, the costs for Elk River Municipal Utilities could range between $2ok and <br />$45k. This range reflects the differences in participant cost impact based on variations in <br />allocation methods, The cost allocation method that had unofficial general consensus at the <br />meeting would result in a project cost for ERMU of over $30k. The project would also have <br />provisions and off ramps for getting out part way through. The pro ject may be broken down into <br />phases for planning and RFP submittal, These are all points of discussion once the list of <br />participants firms up. <br />For Ellc River 11~unicipal Utilities, there are pros and cons to participating in the power supply <br />coalition, Some of the pros include: <br />. Analysis needed to compare our current contract with other opportunities .and utilities. <br />Economy of scale -lower individual study costs, potentially better proposals. <br />doting authority on coalition coordinating committee. <br />Customized participant portfolio, potential for individual participant contracts. <br />. RFP could request existing andlor new power supply sources. <br />. Ability to walk away with the study and not commit to entering into a wholesale power <br />contract. <br />Negotiating leverage with other potential agencies or power suppliers, <br />