EWEB Board of Commissioners — June 16, 2022

0:02 ready to go all right i'll call the june 16th uh work session for the gene one election board to order the first agenda item this evening is the agenda chapter is there anybody that has about the agenda that they want to discuss not um before i start for the second agenda item i just want to make sure that everybody present is aware of the facility awareness where the emergency exits are where the restrooms are and things like that so i will not read this real good all right the next agenda items wildfire mitigation plan brad price tyler and ice and janine parisi hi good evening commissioners uh in real person and on virtual my first time i've been go hybrid meetings a little rusty

0:49 here to talk about our wildfire mitigation plan we have just a couple slides to go through maybe next slide the things we want to try to cover one is to review the plan vis-a-vis the regulatory requirements that are anticipated we want to highlight a couple of the actions that are going to be underway in the next couple of years preview a wildfire mitigation program maturity model and most importantly we're looking for direction from you that will move towards a approval at the july assets meeting and that will meet our compliance deadlines just a real quick recap so you've seen a couple early drafts of this plan back in october and december we've been building out the plan a little bit further while

1:35 the oregon puc is still doing their rule making development development believe it or not that's still ongoing there's another public forum on june 30th and those will be wrapped up in the netherlands july and so even though the rule banking is not done we still meet our compliance obligation was set at bill 762 our needs as a consumer on utility is to submit a plan to our board at the end of june well in that file that's our reasons why we're here tonight while all of that's happening in the background we are working internally to do some housekeeping and documentation update to align us towards these and the obligations in our uh

2:24 in our past couple conversations we've had with you we've heard from the board members that there's an interest in going above and beyond baseline compliance and moving us towards best practices so this is a little bit of a wordy slide but i wanted to just highlight a couple areas where i think we are achieving that a couple one of them is our annual inspection process and our high risk fire zones both vegetation management and equipment roles and inspections not required but it's an example of a good development the ious have to have a psps program if you look at our plan we do have protocols for what happens when there is a red flag warning and that includes extensive community outreach the community outreach and coordination in general and working with our other utility partners our fire professionals

3:10 the best practice that we've adopted and developed and the fact that the board is going to be and annually and that we have measurable metrics that you'll be reviewing to track progress another best practice not required i'm going to toss it over to tyler to talk about some of the upcoming manager for the record uh when we think about our mitigation activities and investments we're doing we come in these four layers mainly and so start at the bottom you want on the pyramid triangle 2d uh is our year-round system maintenance so these are things that we kind of have woven into our work day in and day out things like regular inspections both on

3:55 our high-risk fire circuits for vegetation that we do annually but also the ones we do in our normal cycle also equipment inspections for possible failure we'll go out and inspect those and make repairs and we try to get all that annual high fire risk work done before fire season so this year we're on track with that a couple of specific examples of vegetation related is dillard substation that's one that we did some vegetation removal that's part of our high fire risk circuitry and the substation is and we did some setback on that that provides some benefit and also our carmen uh tap which is a 17 mile line from river up to our carmen facility that runs through forest service land that's one that last year you may remember we did some helicopter trimming on which was really successful to kind of reset some of that right away

4:40 we're going another step further through some partnership with forest service and topping trees off that could reach the line if they're outside of that and those those tops will be used for some of it removed some of it left for wildlife habitat and then also they'll be removing some of the smaller trees in the forest floor to limit better fuel uh we're gonna do about 500 of those trees next year so really excited for that's another partnership that's come along and that that's something a theme too i'd mention is as we meet with other utilities make partnerships with agencies talk about this more and more ideas come and we start new things and i think that's part of the evolution here the next level up is really around grid hardening things like new technologies that we

5:25 might take advantage of new reconfigurations of our system a couple examples over here are is our 69 kv line that's one that we decommissioned actually a bit ago when we commissioned holden creek that's getting removed that's going to benefit us because that line is still up in the air it still has components that can fall so we're doing maintenance on that so this will remove that off our plate and in the process we have some reconfiguration up there that limits the amount of wires in the area is called taps some of that limited by some of our supply chain constraints but we're still prioritizing it and and making headway on it another one is it is involved in our resourcing so one thing that's really important in this grid hardening is planning this into your capital work we've been talking about the capital plan and looking forward thinking some

6:11 of this is different materials it could be a steel pole instead of a wood or a composite different technologies could be a control device out in the field or a different type of fuse or some monitoring so some of that takes effort and people to plan so we do have moving into the plan and ft that we're hiring this year on standards they're going to be focused both on our normal construction standards and staying up to date with with new codes and new technologies but also some of this that will do pilot projects and get some of those things off the ground so excited about that next layer up gets a little more immediate feeling but still a planning focus it's this seasonal situational awareness so as we move into wildfire season we start doing things like monitoring the

6:56 fire fuel levels we're taking partaking in briefings and joining meetings with some of the local areas we had one with lane county that all the fire agencies came to and gave us updates so that starts getting us in that season and we also look at training and upkeep on our tooling all the crews need to carry certain tooling out in the field during fire season we make sure that's all to snuff and we have water tankers that we've outfitted also an example this year that was really successful another partnership example was we had oregon department of forestry and a couple weeks ago now and did training on all of our electric ops for kind of situational awareness safety best practices also had some folks from different groups that might find themselves planning work or being up in that area

7:41 that's just some of that some of that piece we've been doing really appreciate their time and then a couple examples here off to the right things that give us more of that eyes and ears in the field we have a partnership with you of the whole alert ball choir and we'll be installing a camera up on smith ridge for that and that's that's coming soon really excited about that then a new weather station that we're looking to at hayden bridge for the lower side of the valley and really that that allows us to make more real-time decision making if we can see what's going on there the peak of this triangle extreme risk days that's things when we have extreme fire weather come through or red flag warnings and red flag warnings or combination it can be different things can be a lightning warning can be low humidity temperature and fuel loading and is another large factor so when

8:27 those happen really have built into our operations and dispatch they went through a cadential credential process with the weather service to get that direct to them that triggers a couple things one is increased communication with more the leadership level similar to an ics system that we do for storms to kind of huddle and make sure we're in tune and then also triggers us to go up to the field send folks out via call out to change settings which we're calling protective settings mode the lines more sensitive and won't close on trips after a trip does happen we go out and physically patrol it with the folks in the field and that also involves a check with local status of any fires to ensure safety so with all those added together that kind of makes that kind of weaves in uh her

9:13 investments and also her tactics also while i got the mic just do want to say thank you to janine for all the help in developing this you know electric wasn't really outfitted to do this breadth and depth of all the community outreach and stuff and uh we handled a lot of that analytics but gene really brought it together so please thank you publicly well thank you for that and so funny you've said that because i was just thinking as you were talking about getting all this off the ground i'm like thank you tyler i really appreciate all the work you've done to make this happen so what a partnership so i've talked to you in the past about having a plan as one piece but really having a program that is taking more systematic approach to multiple hazard risk reduction and resiliency is where we want to be moving as an organization so a maturity model is one way that kind of quantifies your capabilities that

9:58 establishes a baseline and you can rank yourself against other women patients in your industry so if you look at the next slide um all maturity models there's not like one model in the world but you'll have kind of like a five level approach where you're starting at a baseline where you're launching a program and then you're moving more into that development where you're taking off that low hanging fruit you're scaling up and integrating into the an organism organization-wide process where the scalability is your program and then when you get to that level four optimizing that's when you're really thinking about how do i get improvements continuous improvements in my program because you're really you've got a solid basis and you're looking for those areas to

10:44 get a little bit better benefit and then finally at the top of the pioneer is where you're really out of best practices and a leader in the world so i took a look at the if you get on the next slide the california they have a wildfire maturity model that all the utilities are required to submit and there's nine categories and i've kind of adopted them to eweb and as you look at those categories you see a lot of more light green and that makes sense because unlike the california utilities who've been doing this for five to 15 years we're pretty early in our wildfire maturity right it makes sense that we're a little bit lower on some of those levels there are some categories where we have established programs if you look at our vegetation management or even our community outreach other

11:30 areas where we're really building off a solid foundation and looking at enhancements for wildfire versus kind of building something if you go to the next slide it just dives in a little deeper with two examples and i picked safety standards as one area where i my judgment categorized us as a level two across the four capabilities for each of these categories and it's not because you have a very strong safety culture at uf so that's not why it's a level two it's more because when you look at it through a wildfire mitigation lens the first space construction standards being able to get more granular operational settings on your system or places where we would need a little bit further when you compare that to our vegetation management program i'd say we're very

12:16 solid level forwarder because if we really wanted to be in that kind of leadership category we'd be moving towards california utilities are doing where they're inventory and tracking every tree in their system by type but conditioned and putting in a database for inventory management they're not there yet that's it but we wanted to be that pioneer that's where everyone can get to so last slide i'm going to wrap up here um this is really an opportunity for you to give us feedback in preparation for that july 5th plan approval which is my target still doing some documentation updating to kind of get us ready for compliance started our public outreach on wildfire for wildfire season already so we've had a number of patients out there but those

13:02 will ramp up thank you thank you it's given us some more time so we don't feel so panicked to be talking about wildfire right now it feels very good i have every intention of working with tyler to launch a phase two risk assessment that's more focused on the up river territory more in our area the wildling urban interface of south eugene and getting a little bit better granular data there and benefits tracking using our gis system to optimize some of that information make it a little easier to report to you and federal funding we know there's money out there for resiliency we'll be exploring those one example is for that phase two risk assessment we have submitted a letter of interest to

13:47 payment and fireworks funds and development thank you very much and i'll open up the queue for questions or comments and feedback from board members two less trees but uh that that aside uh we have areas like south eugene and uh you know i can go down the llama street from 34th to 40th we've got huge trees all over the communication

14:32 so if we have a red flag event it comes up and it brings these lines down and causes the fire are we allowed to require the communications our power lines are clear and that brings it down and starts fire we allowed to clear clear those because nobody's doing it it's it's an accident waiting for those to happen is this going to allow us to finally force the puc to have those people from those where are we going to have to just play this game if you've been listening to the pbc hearings because this is a huge area of contention one of the reasons why we're still talking about this at the puc is they are really trying to i would say

15:18 make electric utilities more responsible for the communications than we are today so right now we don't have to inspect for communications equipment and new rules are going to ask us to be looking for violations that could start an ignition on the communications this side to that is if we see something we alert and notify the coms facility that they have a problem they have a certain time frame to respond if they don't respond and do the work and charge them plus a surcharge of 25 but this is all in flux right now but it isn't we are going to proactively do that because i can i can see some areas that it would create great concern

16:03 like i said we have a high wind event a tree comes down takes the whole system down it's because of the comm lines not because we didn't do our job and we're gonna get tagged for it because ours are electric and there's on and so i'm just concerned about that and then the second thing is that in south eugene um or any place if we have a red flag event and we're going to shut things off how much notice of warning are we going to have are we going to have a list of people that have like you know people have machines that run on electricity that could affect their life how much warning are they going to get and how are we going to do that reverse call system what are we going to do to notify people that we're going to de-energize a geographic area that's a really great question i say that would put us higher in the maturity

16:49 model if we have that figured out right now we don't i am working with another colleague to start more of an outreach opportunity to try to get better data on who in our system has relies on medical equipment we don't have people opt into that program we don't have a very good inventory of who they are so even we need to know who they are before we can notify so that's the very first step and that's a piece of work that i hope to get started this summer so i'm just saying you're looking for feedback is there a way we can coordinate with the 911 center that when they have a critical um like a law enforcement event they do a reverse call and they call everybody in a geographic area and say close your doors lock it up maybe do the same part of that system yes we can tag onto that system and say

17:34 your power is going to go off in the next hour and it's probably going to be off for 8 or 10 hours be prepared yeah we're part of this as well so we can take advantage of it we can't do it but we can ask the um emergency managers at dispatch to do it on our behalf and probably to get a little bit closer we'd want to have pre-scripted messages so that they just push a button and send them out okay that's an option for us yes that's what i got mindy we're kind of piggyback on that um i don't know if we still have it but we have the program that was mostly aimed for upriver folks during the winter with the um the zero interest loans for the backup generators is that something that we could like incorporate into this kind of plan too i know we don't

18:19 usually think about that in the summertime but these folks who rely on electricity for yeah i absolutely think that's an option in fact i reached out to our partners at the county there's a little bit of arka funds that they're looking for grants for to see if they would consider a pilot for that they're i don't know if we'd be eligible for those funds but i did kind of ask the question and see if we could get in there for that but the california utilities are doing something very similar great um my only other comment is i really appreciate that we're going above and beyond what's required of us and um like in many areas we tend to be a leader in things and so it's exciting to

19:04 see us kind of john me too thank you um thanks for the presentation and all the hard work in this plan uh one of my questions would be how are the other utilities i mean have you looked at the other utilities plans especially the upriver ones are they comparable to ours or i haven't seen lane electrics yet i've looked at subs central lincoln cpi ppe pacific power i would say that we are in the middle of the pack um but definitely working in our plan compared to the local pds um one of the things on the red flags

19:51 when we had our up river meeting one of the things that out there was you know if it's a red flag just shut us off we don't care and i think that in the communications thing we need to do a good job of letting them know what we're doing during red flags you know the the like we said that if if a circuit trips we're not just going to have it go back on without the things making sure that they understand that the last resort is shutting off the power to the to the upper valley even though they may want it or to think that they may want it you know i think that the communication on that is going to be the important part and i think also that again the south eugene area the communication part is going to be really

20:37 important because that that's the area that i worry about the most because of the density of the population and you know what we've seen or one of those areas something starts in that area and it's dry even though we have urban firefighting capacity that's the one that gives me the most and so i think again everything that we have in place as far as the plans and everything is good it's just making people aware of it is that is the hardest part of this whole plant in my view is maybe bringing the public awareness on this and so i'm looking forward to seeing the metrics of how that plays out

21:22 over the next year how our communication plan is reaching that the people so that when there is a red flag warning they're not like oh shut me off or or whatever knowing that we're doing everything we can to make it safe people are paying attention because there's so much fear about wildfire so we have that to our advantage in terms of communication but keeping it front of mind because it's there's a lot going on in the world so i agree that it's a that's going to be a challenge and frank had his hand up right yeah john appreciate well appreciate everybody's points around communications if if you do look at where utilities have a longer history and a more mature process especially things like california

22:07 a lot of the upside that we would see right now is going to be in the area of communications and some of those even spell out certain types of messages in certain degrees of advancement so 48 hours if there's a red flag potential you have to communicate this 24 hours etc etcetera and so it's a little bit more prescriptive i think there's a lot of area for us to continue to evolve and communicate our response whether it's psps or moving into protective setting mode or or whatever i think all of those are uh important for our customers to be aware of so i think that's really important feedback for us that that ha that piece has to continue to evolve it continuous improvement process right there

22:54 i had a question though too um and i think this is a question for you tyler but it comes from a comment janine you made around the commute the role of communications and the fact that there's this communication space on polls which is which is really part of a joint use requirement and i was wondering tyler if if we are chartered with a heavier burden of responsibility for trimming those and you know sort of maintaining working space and and clearances and other things on that does that qualify as some area that we can recover through our joint use fees with the telecommunications companies that co-locate on our polls there was actually a meeting today

23:40 talking with other utilities about this subject and you know really we have to re-establish those contracts renegotiated does it open and back up for a different service so yeah i think that that would exactly be what we'll be kind of doing more more impact i was going to go back to the power shut off just one thing just to let you know too as part of the work we did here was a gap analysis you know some of what janine was talking about here's here's the requirement here's us here's the future here's us on that preemptive shutoff you know there's there's a recipe of things you have to be prepared for and really we're just the readiness isn't there for our utility yet but we do have that roadmap and that is our next task is to start putting that together because shut the power off you get some people want it and other people say and i want to water my house down you know okay which one communication what do you do so we kind

24:26 of have to answer these questions before we can be ready to turn that on but that we do have that kind of road map ready and that's our next task that was part of this process knowing what we got to do i also think some of the people that gave us feedback at the upper river meeting are are thinking oh a two or three hour red flag warning well what if it's a day what if it and and what are the consequences to communication systems to traffic control systems to to hospitals to emergency recovery centers i mean there's this isn't something where you just go oh the wind is picking up let's turn off everybody's power because it could be long term it could be and there could be other things that in a gap analysis we would have to mitigate for matt do you have any questions or

25:12 comments yeah thanks very much i um i have a few comments and a couple of questions um you answered most of my questions to the presentation so thank you uh it's i'm glad that we hired some help with this i think it just helps us get another set of eyes on on how we're putting this together i feel like this plan as it's put together is really solid so nice work to the team for i'm glad to see that we're going above and beyond baseline compliance and i'm certain we'll keep doing that and i appreciate the leadership of our baptist making that effort i appreciate hearing about our partnerships with the forest service and the university of oregon it's one of the things i think eweb does really well is

25:58 partnering with others who have similar goals and um and sharing funding and finding way to work together and i appreciate seeing that here in our mitigation plan as well i'm glad to see we're looking at leveraging federal funds for this work there's a lot of opportunity and a lot of dollars coming on the horizon um glad to see we're leaning in on that um we're doing great work on undergrounding stuff that we own which is uh was great um i think we should feel really proud about that the south hills makes me the most nervous um i understand we have an incentive program for rebuilding the holiday farm fire to underground power lines i do wonder if um we have a similar program i i don't believe we do for the rest of our

26:44 service territory um yeah good question there we have a incentive program for other even our high hazard areas for underground uh privately owned blinds mr mccray we do not have anything similar to what we've offered the holiday farm fire victims in terms of um helping them underground secondary service during rebuild that's definitely an area we could pursue if there was interest and i would focus it on high risk buyer zones if i were to do something like that but i've had an initial conversation with a colleague about this and

27:29 you know if the board was interested we could bring back some kind of proposal yeah i personally think it'd be valuable for us to decide some you know reasonable amount of budget to help with two things both undergrounding power lines where people are you know adjusting their service anyway and if we can help them make that happen i think that's a good investment on both sides and also to help with um small household size generators for those customers who have medical contraptions or the right word medical equipment that requires electricity to function um i think yeah useful for us to think about setting anxiety offers for that purpose

28:16 so procedurally i'm matt so i can understand this so what i hear is that you want uh you would like to have staff come back with some information about the possibility of undergrounding up river uh people that were affected by the fire or all of people on the river yeah i know we already have a program in place to help underground power lines up river um so this is really more about providing incentives for undergrounding in other areas of service territory especially those high-risk areas um yeah i mean i i think it's valuable to have a you know staff look at you know what scale of resources would be required to um to make a difference on that front i

29:03 mean i guess maybe but i just gotta i gotta pull the board because typically we gotta get at least three head nods before we send staff on a mission to do things and so basically so i understand the question is that you're you're asking to get more information on undergrounding in our high-risk areas a way to synthesize this yep an incentive program to underground and provide incentives for generators yep before you do that can i clarify one thing this is this is for secondaries this program it's not for primaries so and and secondary underground is is valuable and but it's also remember all these uh properties up there are

29:48 almost green field right so just wanted to make sure people are understanding so if we say south eugene uh it's it's not a greenfield situation it's a landscape backyard and we've got a lot of experience now through some of these fema projects but just want to make sure people are clear that what we're doing up river not under founding primary 67 john b sorry and just uh just a question for new infrastructure if you build a new house now it's required to go underground unless it's not unless you can't basically or or it's isn't that part of the city code it is but we're also trying to work on

30:34 that because there's some economics there that are really challenging to some people that when you have to underground it is it's and i understand that and i actually worked on that through through some stuff on the city but i was just saying as of right now it's codified that if you're putting new construction in you have to underground it and that that is a good thing when it comes to fire but it's also it's a double-edged sword when it comes to i want to add a line there's a you know i've got an underground it's going to cost me twenty thousand dollars to underground to where it's a 20 foot from a pole to my house so just be aware that there's already a codified thing for primaries and that it is a it is a quite an expensive

31:19 proposition i want to be fair to the time because we have another big topic coming up and we're we're out of time on this but i still i want to get back to matt's request and do i have three head nods from other commissioners to direct staff to come back with the information as requested uh i'll pull the board mindy are you good john you're good yeah sure okay so that that makes three so you got what you need from that in terms of timing you know my attention wants to probably do some kind of correspondence at the end of the year when we have better metrics just and when all the compliance is done is that okay timing to come back with this or is there interest in seeing it sooner i i don't want to derail you from your current work plan and i think we got a

32:04 lot of things on the board so you can you can do it as you know as time allows i think you know i'll just take executive privilege to just say yeah don't put something else aside and do that i want to give uh commissioner carlson an opportunity to weigh in if she's listening to us that if you want to say anything sonya i know you wanted to just listen this evening if there's anything you say because i'm about ready to cut this off so we can go to the labor topic yeah thank you i did put a hand rate well the closest to a hand raised that was available in the chat no that's okay um i thank you for everything i i appreciate the work that's been done the only thing i really wanted to note was i know that there's a lot of work especially focused in the woody areas

32:51 but i was in colorado last year when boulder caught on fire and it ripped through the suburban areas so i just want to make sure that we're aware that fire is a risk all all in in all areas there's obviously a lot more fuel in the wooded areas but it is possible in other areas so if there are other risky points that we see within the city we should also pay attention to those so that was all i want to know thank you again i i really appreciate the plan this is really important work um and you're doing a great job in it so thanks okay thank you very much and thank you for the great work and no fires in the rain yep that's my plan thanks next agenda item bleeberg

33:36 gold 3a we've got an hour scheduled for this we're going to have a staff presentation but we're going to have a lot of time for questions and comments thank you thank you good evening commissioners i'm lisa krentz generation manager joining me tonight is mark zuniker a generation engineering supervisor and jeremy simoji he is our um we work strategic evaluation project manager we're providing an update this evening on organizational goal 3a to work in collaboration with the board mckinsey valley community to determine the long-term use of the labor canal next slide please

34:23 here's a brief agenda for this evening's presentation we're going to review both the near-term and long-term road maps that we originally presented to you in august of last year then we're going to give an overview of the alternate alternatives that were considered as possibilities for future options and the criteria we use to ultimately select the four alternatives that we are doing further analysis on we'll give you detail on those four alternatives and then uh we'll provide updates to each of the tbl categories the triple bottom line categories social economic and environmental and then talk about next steps now the majority of this evening's conversation is focused on the financial inputs to the triple bottom line that said we want to be sure that we couch these as preliminary inputs

35:10 and that we're continuing to further refine and are likely to change at least to some degree with more refinement please right shown here is the roadmap that we initially presented to the board in august of last year the red dotted line shows where we're currently at in the process and please to note we're on track to look to meet all the deliverables in the roadmap to provide the board with the information for a recommendation on path forward by the end of this year i wanted to do a real quick summary of what we've accomplished to date last year we provided a primary preliminary list of triple bottom line issues we conducted research on regulatory options and conducted a water rights evaluation then we presented the board with a

35:56 communication and stakeholder engagement strategy at the end of last year that's currently being implemented and then earlier this year we conducted an initial water quality technical analysis we're now at the scenario development and cost refinement stage which is what we're presenting on this evening bye please all right you've also seen this graphic before which depicts the various paths forward depending on which option is chosen a couple of reminders the decision to pursue one option over another does not necessarily prohibit us from changing course but it is ineffective from an inefficient from both a schedule and cost perspective there's a couple of other assumptions that we're making namely the investment to return to service for power

36:41 generation um is substantial enough that licensing the project to get a return on that investment is necessary and also for a stormwater conveyance or any decommissioning scenario we're assuming that um licensing there's going to be a significant regulatory effort to get to that point both in planning and deployment now the one change you'll see on this graph is that we've extended the expected timeline for all long-term options so this is based on new information and around what's feasible and how quickly we could conduct any of these implement any of these options and we do believe that um with any scenario we're going to go out into the 2030s and perhaps well beyond and with that i'm going to turn it over

37:26 to jeremy for a discussion of the alternatives great thank you lisa thank you everyone for uh the opportunity to present yeah so we're going to go through the alternative analysis overview initially we started with 11 alternatives seven include return to service and three decommissioning alternatives and also the do nothing option and we further refine those down to four more detailed analysis uh that we will be uh further drilling down on we have our alternative one which is return to pre-project conditions we have our alternative two which is full return to service which is essentially restoring the facility in its existing footprint we have our alternative three which is a partial return to service which entails an approximate 6.2

38:12 megawatt facility at the leftman powerhouse plant or also known as the wasteway gate and we have our alternative four which is a decommissioning with a storm water conveyance model and some of the key reasons we did not select the seven alternatives that will not be moving forward is essentially doing nothing is not feasible to the regulatory requirements or doesn't align with the web goals and we have geologic and geographic constraints uh on multiple uh alternatives and uh generally the uh powerhouse options that were near the dam and other alternatives as well have a really relatively high cost relative to their return on investment potential and uh please refer to the april board

38:57 background or for any additional information on that we have a bit more detail in that background this figure is a aerial overview of the lieber canal in the top right you see the intake the blue line signifies the the red line signifies the canal and its current footprint the loftman powerhouse is signified with uh its location is signified with the yellow hatching there and we just wanted to kind of give perspective for folks there and this next group of slides will be our preliminary triple bottom line update and essentially it's the economic the environmental and the social aspect of our drill down on these

39:42 alternatives and our social issues we have identified some topics that we will be further looking to prioritize as we move forward we have public safety local economics and resiliency property value impacts water rights and supply environmental justice recreation and recreation opportunities visual aesthetics we have historical preservation firefighting resources to compound on what janine's team was talking about local resource local transportation network travel resources and insect and pest and also all attractive nuisance issues and in regards to our environmental aspect where we're drilling down on climate impacts water quality aquatic resources air quality and terrestrial

40:29 resources and again these are all preliminary there's additional work to be done and other areas that may be identified as we as we move forward and marco also really expound upon the economic issues but uh you know at this point we're looking at rate impacts capital cost operations maintenance going forward net present value which you'll see a bit of a preliminary snapshot of that federal power value resiliency other miscellaneous and economic costs and issues which entail ongoing re-licensing with ferc and other regulatory agencies power contract compliancy web bond capacity financial resiliency other miscellaneous impacts etc and with that i'm going to turn it over to marx and occur to to give a more

41:15 detailed analysis of the financial update so just an overview of the next set of slides uh that'll focus on the analysis we've progressed so far we'll talk about the type of cost estimate that we had developed about some of this scope of those estimates what was included what was excluded we'll talk about the baseline cost results as well as the range associated with those estimates we'll talk about anticipated spending rates particularly the difference between spending rates for return service scenario versus a decommissioning scenario and we'll look into the preliminary net present value results

42:06 so there is a association that provides guidelines for cost estimating and we are targeting the class four cost estimate appropriated for feasibility studies at the concept stage and our estimates rely on a combination of unit costs where we had enough detail available to do so as well as cost models an example of that would be for a new power plant if there's an equation out there for if you have a flow ahead a megawatt rating you can estimate the cost of such plan but the bottom line is that this class 4 cost estimate has a plus 50 minus 30 percent level of accuracy wide range next slide

42:51 so what's included in those upfront apple costs our intent was to be as comprehensive as possible uh big ticket items on the right include the design work actual construction re-licensing and permitting smaller items on the left and include legal property acquisitions included as well are early subsurface investigations as well as late stage post-construction performance studies next slide and what's excluded so these costs were based on normal bidding conditions it assumes that we don't have any abnormal contract conditions that would motivate a contractor

43:36 to add their bid due to abnormal risks we assume that we're going to have a reasonably normal bidding climate the consultant costs were developed in 20-22 dollars so it was up to e-web to take these and inflate them in our dot that present value analysis uh refine the timing assumptions for when those dollars will be spent uh we do assume that uh we have contingencies for small developments that might be a surprise but nothing like uh discovery of a small superfund site or having to deal with a hundred year flood during construction or something like that um pretty pretty reasonable solutions um next slide

44:23 we uh also included assumptions such as that the construction work will need to take place during the dry weather season a lot of earth work needing to take place contractors will be working a five-day 10-hour work schedule so there's some overtime but no weekend uh associated highway impacts but that does result in some extended durations of work there's nothing particularly unique about the work that we have coming up so uh we think that uh there's a lot of uh good uh examples out there that indicate uh what we should expect with equipment costs uh contractor productivity rates um

45:08 and don't expect to have any high price subcontractors that's fine and so here are the preliminary results that we have alternatives one and two that's the decommissioning to pre-project conditions and the full return to service are both coming in at roughly 250 million dollars baseline uh alternatives three and four that's the new plant with the short canal and the deep conditioning to stormwater conveyance those alternatives are coming in at about 180 million um we are also showing on this slide the accuracy range so you see the plus fifty percent and the minus thirty percent on the side of the baseline uh but these are upfront capping costs

45:53 and aren't the entirety of the story uh we need to understand the all-in costs we gotta look at this from the net present value perspective that slide and the net present value requires an understanding of the timing of the spend and this is an uh that's a good example and what we have here uh is illustrating what we expect as differences in timing between the return to service and decommissioning the return to service we do expect there to be some level of urgency in the form of pressure from our regulator regulator ferc to maintain our hydro license from the oregon water resources board for maintaining our water items for power generation and from ourselves to address the work cost effectively

46:39 on the other hand with the decommissioning scenarios uh there does remain a lot of near-term pressure to get the canal to a safe position through our risk reductions but beyond that there's the status quo is uh is probably not going to be an urgent need for change um there's a lot of issues that are going to need to be resolved to figure out those details of what decommissioning looks like a lot of time at negotiating tables that we do expect to be uh lengthy and that does matter because uh the spending gets more heavily discounted the more delayed in our expectations it becomes

47:25 delayed spending also impacts when offsetting revenues for power generation would come online with respect to home service scenarios so those are important assumptions and this chart does show an aggressive return to service we're talking about making some adjustments to this to push the return to service back by a couple of years but at a high level we do expect a return to service uh scenario to play out more rapidly at a necessity than the decommissioning slide power press projections also factor into the net present value and our power planning team has done a great job of providing us with information that's consistent with our overall integrated resource plan that they have underway

48:12 they're giving us expected price as well as low end and high end values used for our sensitivities excellent and so these inputs along with others that were defined in your uh background or memo allow us to indicate these preliminary value results severely in the red across the board as we knew would be the case alternative three the new planet which short canal is currently showing as the best npv at roughly 200 million dollars alternative four conversion to storm water conveyance deep conditioning is the runner up at negative 230 million

49:00 restoring the project to pre-project conditions is the worst npv at negative 300 million and the full return to service isn't that far behind at about negative 260 million um we were also showing results from a couple of sensitivities here uh we've got high power prices and low range capital costs for best case scenario and low power prices and high wage capital cost for a worst-case scenario we have a lot more of sensitivity analysis to do with the timing of the spending with the inflation rate assumptions with discount rate assumptions all of those um are need to

49:45 be better understood and so lots of more study to come so that we can show the board uh where the key sensitivities lie so that you can see key break points in the assumptions and then use that information uh to weigh the effects of your own crystal ball opinions on the future so again this is just a sneak preview a lot of work yet to go scrutiny and stress testing of this mdv is yet to go great thank you mark he had the um privilege of conveying the the shocking information so um thanks for sticking with us i'm going to give a brief um status update on our social

50:30 environmental components of the triple bottom line we're still gathering data for both uh but we have a number of activities underway from a social impact perspective we have convened a couple of listening sessions upriver at lloyd knox park to hear directly from up river residents we also have a couple of those scheduled per month throughout the rest of the summer and to give ample opportunity for those residents to come out and share their opinion with us our communications team has also developed a social impact survey that went live earlier this week that should also be helpful in identifying the social impacts to the upriver community we also had a recent customer survey that went out to our entire customer base that that also will probably provide some good information to input

51:16 to this social aspect of the tbl and our consultant has also been conducting interviews with subject matter experts around the utility those are almost complete we do continue to update fish agencies on the status of the lieber canal specifically as it relates to the fish hatchery and recreation impacts related to their operation and we're also in the coming months going to be doing some outreach to tribal entities next slide please all right from an environmental perspective earlier this year we conducted a high level water quality technical analysis to identify specific areas that need further study out of that we developed a plan to collect field data this year on additional parameters

52:01 that i think is currently underway the results of that will help quantify the potential water quality impacts of the various options our triple bottom line consultant is also completing subject matter expert interviews for environmental professionals within the utility from a carbon perspective eweb's climate policy analyst is assisting us in determining the carbon impacts of the four alternatives and again we continue to stay in contact with federal and state fisheries agencies as it relates to both the recreation component but also potential impacts and of the various options inside please all right now given the complexity of this project um

52:47 quantifying all of the social environmental and economic impacts of the decision is very very difficult and there will inherently be trade-offs amongst the options simply not possible to avoid impacts in all areas and there's likely to be perceived inequity amongst stakeholders regardless of which option is chosen even though it's difficult to quantify all the impacts what we can do is qualitatively capture all the considerations and then quantify the mitigation actions that will lessen the impact for example as you saw earlier this evening each alternative is very expensive and some more so than others now as a public utility our um rates are paid by our customer owners so in effect

53:32 the financial impact has a direct social impact to our community um we'll need to weigh that impact against the more localized and potentially more severe local economic impact to the upriver community right and then decide if there are opportunities to lessen the burden on one or both next slide please so considering the large number of issues we've identified for the tbl as um that's those issue lists that jeremy went over earlier this evening we recommend identifying the top priorities to focus on based on our customers values for example we may choose to prioritize rate impacts to our entire customer base as well as public safety carbon and

54:17 water quality or whatever menu you might want to come up with if the board agrees with this approach in august we'll bring back a list of recommended priority issues to focus on and that list would be developed and based on subject matter experts both internally and with our consultants as well as from results of our customer impact surveys we would explain our rationale and survey results when we provided those recommendations and we'd like to get feedback from the board in august and then we would adjust the recommended priorities as requested and then once priorities are identified we'll conduct a sensitivity analysis to determine if adjustments would result in a different chosen outcome so in other

55:02 words what are the issues that sway the decision the most we'll also present the board with a tool so you can do your own uh sensitivity analysis um yourself so you can see which widgets have the greatest impact all right that is the last um slide uh for the formal presentation we do invite feedback from the board i have put up um at frank's good recommendation and the preliminary npv results will be on the next slide in case you want to um reference that during the discussion well that will take whatever questions you've got thank you very much and as you know we have questions because i'm so raising yourself so um we've got what uh 40 minutes left and yeah 38 so there's five of us are

55:50 going to be asking questions and so do the math and so i ask you to respect it and you can either use all your allotted time in one or you can go back and have a second bite at the apple put it however you want to do it but i want to be fair to everybody that we try and get us equal amount of questions because i personally think this is probably going to be the biggest decision you'll ever make on this board unless we have to hire a new general manager i mean this is this to me is big and so i don't think that's going to happen uh this this is big and so we got it we got to get into it so i'll open it for the queue um you know and see if anybody has any questions i as you know i submitted questions earlier and i can use my time and you can respond to some of those i mean you know i think i know that 100 million bucks is like seven percent rate increase and so if we

56:36 any of these is like 15 and things like that but um one of the questions i respect the staff to me this is a full-time job for more than one person you all had things to do before you started this now you've got this whole thing so do we need to think about staffing this up and say this is this is a project like an ad hoc committee and say because if we're in a 10 year time frame to evaluate this is the living thing um do you need help i mean do you guys need more staff do you need more help and i don't care about you because this is an incredible incredible job like you i talked i see your construction trap train may through november that thing's ripping right now full of water because of the rains we've had and everything

57:22 else and so how you tear down a wall and then it rains all of a sudden we have stormwater advanced i mean this thing is logistically i don't understand it i know that it's going to be a monumental task for for you to do and to oversee so do you need any help well i'm sort of looking at frank and trying to gauge how i should don't be drunk to that question but but i i will acknowledge this is a very very big project and in order to do it effectively um we're gonna need to develop an adequate resourcing plan that can look a whole there's a lot of different options for that but that would be something we would we would want to do once we figure out really what the direction of the project is okay then another group of information about partial rts and full rts i know that partial rts only creates a small amount

58:09 of generation full our return to service does but the to me the price delta didn't make sense it to me it would appear to be more economically feasible because of uh we're going to generate a whole lot more on full return to service versus partial um can you help me with that yes yeah you're right we're almost three times three times a generation to full return to service versus the full return to service requires the modification of some very tall expensive um versus the canal yeah all right right

58:55 disability okay yeah and i go on the team commissioning route we avoid the most expensive um you have so that's why it's showing with that it doesn't generate as much revenue it's yeah okay that's fine and i want to adhere to my own rule and so who else has cement mindy yeah um thank you i was hoping there was a typo and there was too many heroes on that um it's pretty shocking so i just have a couple questions um one a little bit basic but um john brown you mentioned something about property lines changing if one of the scenarios happened that out i

59:41 think a river meeting and i don't know that um i don't fully understand that issue or if we've gotten like a full answer but i know that there are some upriver folks who are concerned about that so i don't know if we can get more information on that as part of the triple bottom line and so we have identified that as an issue that was specific to if um the dam were removed and leeward lake uh were no longer there and it was it was a river there that there would be um exposed land that is currently underwater um jeremy has done some looking into it there's no harder fast rule but i'll let um i'll let jeremy respond yes i mean the short fast answer to that is each individual property owner needs to review their deed and we're

1:00:28 happy to assist them with them and work with the county i've already reached out to county survey et cetera we're pulling records in-house as well to look at things it's uh a lot has changed over the years and one i can one i can say one surprising element was the land on the north side of the lake has some interesting features that we're going to start drilling down on um as well but i think that the long the long answer and the short answer all combined is each individual property is how it's going to to unfold because there's just so many transactions and agreements over the years and chasing those records back is complex and you know the ordinary high water rule that is a rule of thumb but it may not

1:01:14 be applicable here so it's just we're gonna we're gonna do what we can to help each property owner so any of your constituents reach out to you you can just put them in touch with me and i'll work with our staff surveyor and county surveyor to do what we can can i make one more comment on that piece and that is that um you know we would still with with eweb supporting property owners we would still very strongly recommend that the property owners themselves work with the title company to truly understand the site-specific details of their parcel i mean the onus is on the property owner but we're able to assist um how much time left um my question or comment is on the survey that went out i

1:02:00 took a look at the survey today and um i feel like without people knowing the scope of the cost of the project that some of the answers might be skewed a little bit yeah and you know we don't have adam spencer who really did exceptional work putting that survey together i think available for questions this evening but we went around and around on that and that's why i think there's a ranking associated with it so it's it comes out as relative importance as opposed to a hard and fast um prioritization but um but appreciate the comment and maybe as we're getting these number these numbers out then that folks will have an opportunity to update

1:02:49 our npv did you go past 2040 or we did you did go past 24. it doesn't presume that we will get a new license for an amendment that extends it an additional 40 years past the return service date of early 2030s we took it into the 23rd 2070s so when i look at 259 000 as opposed to 203 000 that has the energy production and the wrecks and all of that added in full second licensing so that's a good it's got all the power production [Music] based offsetting revenue in there it does not include in our npv the value of the rex

1:03:35 value capacity value and as a the rough indication we're getting is that it's worth maybe five or six million a little over the full length of the license that's the second license because when i just just on the 53 dollars i saw the small plant does about two million dollars in revenue and the the leeward plant does about five billion dollars in revenue at 53 so so yeah just elaborate a little bit on that if i could the way because it's a run of the river facility or generation site the it's not something that you can store water and and sort of model the flow um

1:04:21 and the capacity value is and and also the requirement it doesn't generate wrecks but what we used was a cost avoidance model if we took this out of service and we might have an obligation a compliance obligation with the state how much would those wrecks be worth if we had to go buy them to replace that resource so some of these were looked at not so much that they generate wrecks or there's a carbon benefit but if we did and had to avoid that what would it cost us okay second question is if we and it's it's a it's an alternative five i hate to say this and if we did alternative three filled the water there but didn't build

1:05:07 a power plant does that cost it out as so that it's a less less i think the storm water conveyance so i think you're describing a scenario where the dam would remain yeah um and not generate right and the issue there is that we decided to not generate we don't have full control of what the deep commissioning requirements are yeah i simply can't trade with the water rights and all those other things and water rights become an issue and the precedent of hydro projects that have been decommissioned is that the dam is

1:05:52 expected to be removed and so it's not we're in a unique situation so it's not guaranteed and that's that answers enough of my question um next thing that i would want to have is to i want to be aware of when those listening sessions are upriver but if we have the opportunity to go i would like to be that those and then the last thing mr brown alluded to uh 100 million dollars equals a certain percentage of rate increase if i if you could send me a memo of how that would be you know you had the chart of where it's going to go and where it would be done how would that be implemented over the overtime and if we if we pick one that's let's say we

1:06:38 do the full return to service and it's 259 million dollars if you can kind of pencil out a memo for me to that i know what that does to race over specific years and how how it's going to be paid for that will help me make the decision as well okay frank wanted to jump in the queue just real quick so that is um already on the docket for us to bring back in april so i'm sorry august all right i did it before i april so so rate impact is is coming in august and i was just going to jump in and i have been talking to our cfo deborah hart about looking when we do a long-term financial plan and

1:07:23 potentially doing some generic versions if we were how we were to look at these an rts option or storm water option so that we can get a little bit more specific and at least give give the board a feel how that impacts some of the financial decisions i was wanting to jump in the cube because i actually wanted to ask because we're looking at this 2070 or so the rts option assumes another license but did we include in that the cost of re-licensing and the obligations that comes with re-licensing you know as as we know you have to deal with the fish and wildlife requirements recreational additions the last time we

1:08:10 re-licensed it it was 35 million or so at least that was how much we bonded were those costs included in any of the return to service options and so our intent was to capture those um licensing and permitting costs for each of these decommissioning would have a now what it doesn't look at is the next license period like you know are you going to be doing another re-licensing or decommissioning effort at the tail end and those 2060s or whatever doesn't include those and that included things like rewinding the generators and things like that so okay great another way of asking john's question which i think i was going this direction as well would be to take alternative

1:08:56 four and rather than put a bridge in leave the dam as it is because i know the bridge cost is wide and unknown that's the same kind of thing as you were asking for with alternative three without the generator so it i think it would be important to understand the amount of investment and the amount of recovery of the investment specific to generation or not at that site and recognizing there's regulatory risks obviously there's some regulatory risks because i have a feeling that would be from a financial perspective could be a wider risk but is probably lower than any of these the um detail we'll give you guys in august

1:09:42 you'll be able to see the line items associated with dam removal and damn side by the lake site restoration those are some tremendous numbers and just one note on that so with any of these scenarios um really it's a negotiation that we start with the stakeholders including the federal and state agencies right so we i do think it's worthwhile to cost that out whether or not we can realize that ultimately and implement it is pretty far off in the future and involves a negotiation john uh first i just want to say thanks for

1:10:27 the presentation and for these bite-sized presentations we've had a handful of these um warming us all up and helping us understand the context um so thank you for piecing this out into smaller fits um i second brown's concern about uh you know planning resources uh not that there aren't enough i don't know but i sure hope we provide sufficient resource for this planning work um that's all um my question uh one of my questions is how do we assume the generation um capability or the capacity will change over time what's our assumption about um the

1:11:12 impacts on how long we can generate over the course of a year given temperatures and pressure on fish good question so um we we have um we we didn't actually show all of the scenarios here that we did a net present value we have made some assumptions um particularly related to the up on the core of engineers projects that are located up river from library and change in flow regime and how that might impact generation my recollection is it it doesn't really change things all that that much to where the options are flipping um in terms of how we've accounted for changes in um

1:11:58 potential changes in in-stream flows due to climate change that we want to take that this week so our modeling of the future core operation is really intended to capture that expectation that management of the water for which purposes um is going to be of the reality of the future and that does have an impact it's not that big but i think frank maybe something you said is kidding yeah when you do re-license you don't have full control over what the outcome of that re-licency is going to be it doesn't change your 1000 cfs bypass flow that we currently have at this point we're assuming that we're

1:12:43 able to preserve that 1000 cfs minimum flow requirement but that's not guaranteed that would be a risk factor when we go back into renegotiating there was a lot of pressure on us to have a higher number last time around so i'm certain i think mark to answer commissioner mccrae's question the detail in august will highlight certain sensitivities around how much value we're getting from the generation itself um if you have restricted flows it's going to make that worse right so you you or if you have um certain constraints around water regimes that that's that's going to show that from a sensitivity

1:13:28 perspective so or or if you have um impacts of future power markets that that's all all of those things i think can be shown from a sensitivity perspective and in that one so the line item veto opportunity will come in in august it sounds like thank you um have we done that full cost evaluation of like the levelized cost of generating at the facility with i guess i guess that would just be this it really is not the present value divided by all the kilowatt hours hours that we assume we generate do we have that

1:14:14 or is that something that could be provided in august so commissioner mccree are you are you asking sort of of pre-canal challenges did we have on did we have a good understanding of the roi of the facility prior to sort of this large capital uh thing the issue that needed to be addressing i think that would be sufficient yeah i mean my guess is the the cost of generation this facility is higher than most other alternatives including other low-carbon alternatives and i just you know to the extent that we can make that

1:15:00 comparison that would be valuable and um you know i know like the the national standards of levelized costs are sometimes used really idyllic situations but we could you know compare this to other hypo in our area or new solar in our area so to understand um you know what comparable low carbon electricity costs that would be helpful for me dollars per minute one hour yeah we we can get that also commissioner mcrae we we do have some context that we can provide that we've gotten from other utilities who so for example a type of facility like this with a canal this long a number of utilities

1:15:47 have said they they need a minimum of 50 to 100 megawatts of generation to make that you know have a return on its investment which is you know we're talking six in in one of these scenarios and 15 or so in another 10 average megawatts so um but yeah the carbon pieces we did include the carbon piece we include the capacity piece and we included a wreck piece in the analysis um so all of those attributes were included in its value that makes sense okay uh in a question um looking at the alternative one there's assumed like ongoing capital costs and maintenance cost of that

1:16:33 scenario and i'm curious what those are not that i question that there are any i'm just trying to wrap my head around i think it was like 50 million or sorry it was some amount every five year capital costs and maintenance costs i'm just curious what those costs are likely to be those would be those two assume that uh eweb would maintain responsibility for maintenance of war creeks there's still creeks but under underpasses the highways recreational facilities and um things like the bridge the bridge itself that replaces libra dam would

1:17:19 have ongoing and and there there may be some other lingering rich um demands associated with the project so it's those types of lingering responsibilities that you would have if they were generating are you there sonia i am okay i wasn't sure if you said to go uh yeah real quick uh i agree with much of what was said from the other commissioners so i won't repeat that i

1:18:05 had a couple of questions um mindy had mentioned a survey that went out somehow i missed that is that something that was sent to all of us i don't believe it was sent to commissioners it was sent to upriver residents but we can check on that and if you'd like to see it we can be certain to have it sent over to you yes i would like to see that in my email i think it went through the e-web email system so they may have gotten through that because i know they're signed up for it we'll send them another link okay well yeah i'm again i'm not feeling great so i may have missed a few things the last few days um to mindy's point about the the cost if that's only going to to well i guess

1:18:55 is that going to aliweb customers or is that just targeted at the upriver customers the direct outreach was upgraded but it's intended for the entirety of the yesterday there's places on there also for um bonnie with great players to participate and note that they are not a payer or a president okay okay it does ask for your zip code commissioner carlson so we can identify and sort by upriver customers versus customers at large versus non-customers okay all right excellent um i agree that i think

1:19:41 when people see the effect and especially the effect of the rate if it is you know 15 percent over some amount of time that that's definitely gonna sway people's opinions it's one thing to say yeah i want to keep the river but do i am i willing to pay that amount over that time i think that could be a big sway so i get it won't be on this survey but we should definitely have survey in the future when we have another um updated numbers with the most accurate of what we got um other than that uh thank you for the work um i'm not gonna talk too much else thanks thank you um so we'll start round two

1:20:27 and some some of us have had more time than others and i've been keeping track and so i i think i went first then i'll go back to indy so uh that that said um i'm gonna somehow get answered to all my questions but one of them was that if we go back to return to service and we have to be licensed so we bundle walterville with weeburg and so did you factor in the costs of three lights if we to get a license to run libra we're gonna have to get a license to redo walterville did you factor in those costs too because they're gonna be huge yeah so let me take that and um commissioner brown we did respond in writing to all of your um uh questions yeah they we were we were scrambling a bit okay to be honest

1:21:13 but i but i would like to to cover that briefly here so because it's it's an important point so the lieberg and waltersville projects are licensed together under one ferc license no matter what we do with leeberg we've got to figure out at some point how walterville is involved in that because whatever we do with liber will result in either an amendment or a license surrender or some other licensing proceeding that will trigger a reopener for walterville we have not um done this same analysis at walterville um to date quite frankly because our urgent issue is leeburg and this is a lot of work so we're focusing on this at this point that said it's always been my um assumption that we would ultimately need to do a similar evaluation of walterville because i get a feeling

1:21:59 they're going to tell us to fix that canal too and i just you know if we're going to put this much money into there and that license is only good for 10 years and we have to re-license it and then they say we have to spend another 250 million to get walterville to license we're not going to get a license then i want to be aware of that because we've just taken a 40-year license down to a 10-year license if we can't afford it so then the fact that i can't read my email and watch this at the same time i want to know what what happened to the stranded cost of when we licensed liberte and walter bill 140 million bucks over for a 40-year license and we're halfway through it are we going to costs are not going to get amortized are those costs included in here that what i call the stranded all the money that we spent that we're

1:22:44 not going to get to generate power to capture so before so i'm not going to attempt to answer that but i do know that we have both deborah hart and alicia voorhees on the line if they if one of them wants to chime in they can answer a little question they can answer it later right but in short story is the um the sunk costs are not included the mpv is forward-looking um and they can explain more around the rationale or um explanation including those does not change the relationship between yeah i i get that it's his money lost but i just want to know that you know we're our ratepayers are going to be servicing debt that we had anticipated generating revenue from that debt and we're not going to get that and so i'm just thinking about the real cost of this and so it's another 50 million bucks you know it just goes to every one of those

1:23:29 scenarios so it is what it is i just wanted to know those now that that 50 million is in these and it's not so i want to get to the true cost and magnitude of this so i'm done mindy so um i just want to say i'm a little concerned with the timeline because i see how much how much work just this has taken and when i look at the upcoming project milestones there aren't very many more before we have to make a decision um and i see that there is one work session at the very end before i have to make a decision and so i'm curious how you're feeling about this timeline

1:24:17 what there's three check-ins three check-ins yeah we're basically we're coming back to the board every month or two between now and the end of the year and and again the strategy there is to we call it bite sex chunks i realize this information is not bite-sized there's a lot of information here it will continue to at least for the for the august meeting be you know perhaps some more aha moments um but after that i think we're we're trying to get you comfortable to be able to make a decision one of the pieces of that is that's going to be important is prioritizing figuring out what our priorities are from a social and environmental perspective to focus on and so that's the other thing that i did want to to keep if you had any input on our proposed approach which is to we

1:25:03 come back to you with a recommendation um but i guess short stories we're still we're heading forward we want you all to be comfortable with the decision you're making and make sure that you have the information needed to make an informed decision but um i wouldn't at this time propose to extend that deadline and then with that decision that we're going to make is the expectation that we are absolutely focusing on one of the alternatives or could it be that like we narrowed it down to two not ready to make a decision yet and we just need more information what is the expectation in december my my expectation

1:25:49 here would be this is a directional decision so and and really what we're looking for is the difference there's a difference between a return to service option and a stormwater advance option i do think it's feasible to to say that there's i'll call it a quote preferred alternative and that we can start to focus our efforts on that preferred alternative obviously they're like a lot of things there's going to be a number of cycles and check-ins even on that preferred alternative and if there's something that that goes askew for some reason an assumption that we made that was significantly different that we could we could retrench and we could

1:26:34 say okay this is there there's a surprise here and we would we would review that with the board but our hope would be that we could whether it's four or five that point that you commissioner borowski because you added another win in here but yeah have a preferred alternative selected that we can start to put more focused effort on and very last comment i'll bring this up at our next board meeting but october 4th is the jewish holiday of yom kippur and i will not be at that meeting you got a little minute or two yeah um this just goes to the overarching position that we have to make as commissioners and kind of what what

1:27:19 you're talking about and trade-offs you mentioned trade-offs you're going to give us all of the the boxes that we can look at on the trade-offs but it's up to the five of us to make that decision and for me i think the way that i would hope that we could make that decision is have a meeting of the five of us all the information that you've given to us but just a free-flowing type of a meeting where matt says this this trade-off is important to me and mindy says this trade-off is important to me and and i get to say what's important to me and it's more of a free-flowing thing not a three-minute say your say your piece because like

1:28:04 john says this is gonna be this is a legacy project and it's one of the most important ones that we're gonna make so for me to have it in a i don't want to clock at that meeting i want that meeting to to go for as long as it needs to go so that we make the right decision so wherever however that's planned that is something that i would like to see i don't know if there's going to be head nuts from the other board members but once we get to that point of these are the social impact ones that we've identified and this is how it hits the ground and this is the the economic ones this is how it hits the ground and we've got those in front of us we can dig through them that's what i'm hoping we can have in the timeline i think we

1:28:50 can still hit that timeline but i think we need to figure out when and where that meeting is going to happen and the logistics of that and i hope that well i'll work on that with sonia i've already seen three three head nods now so we'll figure that out and uh we'll do it we have we have a meetings law a quorum requirement that we're gonna have to deal with it has to be an open public meeting yeah and i don't have a problem with that but that to me that and not uh not a time sensitive you know if it takes us four hours i want to take four hours bring breakfast lunch and dinner i'll get engaged all right thank you very good matt do you have any uh because you kind of use a lot of time there so you have any more questions or comments i used all my time as you as you said i could yeah i use it all at once

1:29:36 thanks i'm keeping track i'm sorry uh sonya do you have anything for the game no i just noted that i supported john's suggestion too thank you thank you um but then i you know thank you very much and i want to kind of throw something out here but kind of unload it so if there is an option that the majority of us say it's a non-starter for me and we can kick it off the board right now and narrow this from four to three um is that something you want from us now or do you think we have enough information to make a decision i i personally think i i i would kick out number one and i'd say don't waste any more time on that because i want you to focus on either rts or stormwater and i don't want to tear down everything and return it to a pasture and things like that i that that

1:30:22 to me is that and if if that would be the sentiment if other people don't think they have enough information to make to make that call right now that's cool but if they do and we can lighten their load a little bit and let them do more focus and more detail on what we think may be the preferred alternatives is that something that you want to see from i think sonya just said i thought that was a thumbs up but i wasn't quite sure it looked like hang loose but i i'm not sure the hand it's the vulcan hand because there's not just a regular hand like hand raised in the options um i it's odd uh no i on that on that question i i'm wondering the variances that they

1:31:08 used in here i mean it goes from negative thirty percent to plus fifty percent i'm just wondering if they get more um precise on these numbers could some of these shift so that the the costs like flip from one being more um advantageous to another being more advantageous or do you think these are pretty well set you know i'd like to just say that you know the the issues we're gonna have with the people on the lake and the dam and the access and the water rights and things like that if we and still we're going to we're going to have all these streams and all these advances we're going to have to figure out how we're going to get the water from one side of

1:31:54 that mountain to the other and across the highway down to those properties because those greeks are still going to flow and if we tear all that out i mean to me number one is a non-starter but i'm i'm one person and john yeah i i i agree with you on that that point i also think that the amount of analysis that goes into number one is a lot of work you know just to do the analysis what does this mean as far as property what does it mean as far as water quality what does it mean as far as you know and to be honest with you i would have a real real hard time getting to number one even even if it dropped down so

1:32:41 i agree that if we can right yeah i was just going to mention if you look at the four alternatives the first two would be considered the extremes you you have either return to its natural state or full production where i personally i'm not part of the board but where i personally look at this whether it's a return to service or stormwater conveyance it comes down to three versus four or some um combination of three versus four and but that's that's just um because if you if you look at some of the issues and how you how you judge return on investment for generation it's going to be included in number three

1:33:27 um you know so that's one and two we're considered sort of the boundary let me answer that real quick um yeah and the part of the reason that we did that full decommissioning scenario we believe that that's it's pretty unlikely to be required of us is but i don't want it to get lost in the conversation is that decommissioning is a negotiated agreement and um there's a lot of of um agencies that have authority over what what we ultimately are allowed to do there so part of our thinking was to have the two extremes as the again the the book ends for what the possibilities might look like yeah i just given the resources the timing and what

1:34:13 we have here you know if i want to make sure we personally i want to make sure that we have our best focus on the most probable alternatives and like i say my my preference after looking at this would be just kick number one to the curb and quit talking about it um but like i said i want to pull the board if this is premature then let's just wait and but you'll have to continue to to use time and resources to do number one yeah and also sonia and sonia raised her hand sonia matt and sonia and i know i'm over time but this may save some time yeah a quick question about these npv calculations i know they're preliminary how much more refined do we expect them

1:34:59 to get is there a lot of refinement to do or or not much i would characterize it as not a lot of refinement on the numbers but a lot of sensitivity analysis work to be done on the information that we've already developed okay thanks for following up on my previous question um i while i my gut says that i'm you know that one and two are probably off the table my only concern is that we've communicated to the public that these are the ones that you know we're considering and while i know it's a great way to get people to the table by making a decision

1:35:47 sometimes that has backlash because it's you sometimes don't get feedback until you know we actually make a decision and then people are like wait but you said you were gonna do this and then you didn't do that um so i i value the idea of um taking that the work off the table on the sensitivity analysis side i just wonder how that'll impact the community's uh you know response to this project entirely if tonight we decided we were just going to wipe those off after we've told everybody that this is the process and this is how we're going to do it so i'm curious what other people think of that

1:36:34 i agree with sonia i you know i i have a way that i'm leading but i don't have all the information yet um and i feel like to be fair we need to see those other analysis for all four options before they okay well it died for lack of a second i tried that's okay uh anything else for the good of the order uh anybody else have any questions or comments uh john we'll get back to you on getting pow-wow together and and the dialogue and so we can have i really want to i'm looking forward to that kind of like our dinner but to be able but to be able to legally talk about business um that's going to be good did you get what you needed from us um i believe i

1:37:20 did if if um it's okay for us to come to the board in august with our sort of recommended list of top priority issues to focus on from a tbl perspective yeah i think you can sense that we have a lot of questions we have a lot of concerns because it's huge this is huge this is one of the decisions we we make that you know when we spend 200 million dollars we get to generate and repay that usually or it provides you know something else this is something that we're going to spend a lot of money on and we may not get any return on that i'm thinking about the equity portion too about strapping future generations to pay for something that they didn't benefit from and there's a lot of a lot of thoughts here that are going to go into how we do things in the future

1:38:06 because we're going to think about this in carmen someday in another 20 years because we're going to have to come up with 300 million to either get rid of that or do it again you know so food for thought so anything else for the good of the order before i say goodbye adjourn thank you thank you everybody soon you get better