My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1. ERMUSR 10-11-2011
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2011
>
10-11-2011
>
4.1. ERMUSR 10-11-2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2011 2:39:52 PM
Creation date
10/10/2011 2:39:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
10/11/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Elk River .= <br />Municipal Utilities <br />13069 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 430 <br />Elk River, MN 55330-0430 <br />UTILITIES COMMISSION MEETING <br />PDWpEBEB B1 <br />A,~'UR~ <br />P ow [aEO Tu S=^= <br />Phone: 763.441.2020 <br />Fax: 763.441.8099 <br />TO: FROM: <br />Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission Troy Adams, P.E. -Utilities Director <br />John Dietz -Chair <br />Daryl Thompson -Vice Chair <br />Al Nadeau -Trustee <br />MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: <br />October 11, 2011 4.1 <br />SUBJECT: <br />Power Su ply Options /Resource Planning Update <br />BACKGROUND: <br />[n September 2008, Connexus Energy terminated the ] 0-year rolling "all requirements" power contract <br />with Elk River Municipad Utilities. In April 2010, the Utilities Commission authorized entering into <br />"Phase 1" of a resource planning study with a coalition which includes Central Minnesota Municipal <br />Power Agency (CMMPA) as a participant. In September 2010, the Utilities Commission authorized <br />entering into "Phase 2" of a resource planning study which includes the release of a Request For Proposal <br />(RFP). The RFP was issued on November 15, 2010. In May 2011, the Utilities Commission authorized <br />entering into "Phase 2b" of the resource planning study which will include risk assessment of the <br />proposals. <br />DISCUSSION: <br />As things progress with CMMPA and the Resource Planning Coalition, other opportunities have <br />presented themselves and other opportunities still need to be explored to do our due diligence in our <br />efforts to secure a future wholesale power provider. In the process of searching for ERMU's future, there <br />is a need to understand what we currently have and what the big picture differences are between the <br />options. <br />The option of renegotiating our current all requirements power contract with Connexus/Great River <br />Energy (GRE) is still a relatively easy solution. The advantages of this option are the simplicity and <br />relatively decision-free nature of the all-requirement type contract and no transmission interconnect issues <br />result from the renegotiation. There are significant disadvantages too. The renegotiation of this contract <br />will focus on limiting ERMU's legal right to acquire service territory within the corporate boundaries of <br />the City of Elk River. The relation of this type of contract would be that of customer and power supplier, <br />meaning ERMU would be a customer and not a "member". Elk River Municipal Utilities would not have <br />any local control to influence or direct the decisions made by Connexus or GRE. When ERMU's and <br />Connexus' and GRE's needs align and the wholesale power rates are good, this is would be a great <br />situation to be in. When our needs do not align or the wholesale power rates are high, ERMU would be <br />trapped with no options to correct the situation. Basically ERMU would be along for the ride. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.