Board Members present: Susie Smith, Jeff Osanka, Sandra Bishop, and Dorothy Anderson. Commissioner Dyer was excused.
Others present: Randy Berggren, Tom Buckhouse, Gale Banry, Cathy Bloom, Marty Douglass, Roseanna McArthur, Libby Henry, Cathy Bloom, Jim Origliosso, Scott Spettel, Everett Jordan, Mat Northway, Dave Koski, Garry Kunkel, Gale Banry, Debra Wright, Ken Beeson, Dick Varner, Dick Helgeson, and Krista Hince of the EWEB staff; Peter Bartel, and members of the public; and Kim Kunkel, Minutes Recorder.
President Smith called the meeting to order.
AGENDA CHECK
Commissioner Bishop requested that the agenda be reordered so that item 8, Northwest Energy Coalition, follow item 6.
President Smith determined there was consensus to approve the agenda, as amended.
ITEMS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Vice President Osanka reported that the recent Year-2000 (Y2k) information session held at Harris Hall was well attended. He characterized the event as a success.
MINUTES
The Commissioners reviewed the minutes of the October 6, 1998, Work Session and Regular Board Meeting.
Referring to sentence 4 of paragraph 2 on page 3 of the Regular Board Meeting minutes, Commissioner Anderson requested that "staff" be replaced with "the General Manager."
Referring to the final paragraph on page 4 of the Regular Board Meeting minutes, President Smith requested that sentence 2 be amended to read "Commissioner Bishop said she would be absent from the December 1 meeting."
Referring to the final paragraph on page 6 of the Regular Board Meeting minutes, Vice President Osanka requested that the following language be inserted as the final sentence: "Vice President Osanka noted that the other pilot project is likely to be with the Bethel School District."
Referring to paragraph 4 on page 5, President Smith requested that sentence 3 be amended to read "President Smith inquired as to whether a Board Policy might be established that requires industries of a certain demand size to develop a conservation plan."
Vice President Osanka moved, seconded by Commissioner Bishop, to approve the minutes of the October 6, 1998, Work Session and Special Board Meeting, as amended. The motion passed unanimously.
CORRESPONDENCE
General Manager Randy Berggren reviewed draft agendas for the November 3, 1998, Work Session and Regular Board Meeting.
PUBLIC INPUT
There was no public input.
NETWORKING FOR YOUTH PROPOSAL
Jim Origliosso, Treasurer, explained that this presentation was part of the continuing discussion of options related to the strategic application of accumulated assets. He said this matter requires no Board action at the present time.
Referring to a packet of information that was distributed to the Board, Networking for Youth (NFY) Executive Director Joe Berney presented an overview of NFY's conceptual proposal to EWEB.
Mr. Berney explained that EWEB's participation in YouthPledge can be structured in a manner that furthers the utility's energy conservation goals as well as its public purposes. He reviewed the following EWEB YouthPledge objectives developed by NFY in consultation with key EWEB staff members:
Mr. Berney presented a brief overview of the proposed three phases of EWEB's YouthPledge, noting that the estimated total cost is between $400,000 and $475,000.
In conclusion, Mr. Berney said the team that developed this project concept proposal is anxious to develop and present further details upon concept approval. He said NFY has, and will continue, to make every effort to coordinate with the appropriate EWEB departments in the development of the details of this partnership. Mr. Berney said that every effort will be made, as NFY moves forward, to incorporate existing EWEB energy conservation and public purpose priorities into the development and implementation of this major YouthPledge.
Mr. Berney presented a brief overview of the proposed time frame related to EWEB's YouthPledge. He said NFY will request Board approval of Phases one and two in the near future.
Noting his general support for the proposal, Vice President Osanka expressed concern regarding the Phase three request that EWEB contribute Water System Development charges, and electric and water line extension and hookup fees. Noting that the Board established the aforementioned fees, Vice President Osanka said he does not like allowing many exceptions due to the number of valuable and deserving projects that exist. He said EWEB should either make clear that all such programs receive automatic funding, or state that no waivers are allowed. Vice President Osanka suggested that NFY frame its proposal in a manner that addresses the question of why EWEB should, in fact, change its policy and allow exceptions to the fees.
President Smith expressed concern regarding NFY's request for "seed money." She requested that staff provide the Board with an assessment of which funding selections best match EWEB's key result areas and established criteria. She said such an assessment might better illustrate the linkage between Phase one and two funding selections and EWEB's key result areas and criteria.
NORTHWEST ENERGY COALITION
Mr. Berggren stated that the purpose of this presentation was to address, per the Board's request following the October 14 presentation by Northwest Energy Coalition (NWEC) in which the NWEC solicited Commissioners' endorsement of a resolution supporting the partial removal of four lower Snake River dams,
Mr. Berggren acknowledged that EWEB has not closely followed the science that was summarized by the NWEC during its presentation to the Board. As such, Mr. Berggren said staff is not prepared to issue a recommendation on this matter. He said that what follows is intended to be a high level overview of what EWEB staff does know at the present time.
Mr. Kunkel stated that it is staff's intention to offer candid views, ideas, and thoughts based upon what it has identified as implications of NWEC's proposal resolution to partially dismantle four lower Snake River dams. Mr. Kunkel said that he would begin by summarizing potential issues related to McKenzie relicensing. He said Ms. Henry would then discuss issues of timing and politics.
Mr. Kunkel expressed concern that taking a position in favor of breaching the dams could be inconsistent with resource positions EWEB has taken in the past with regard to McKenzie River projects. He said EWEB has been adamant that hydroelectric decisions should be made in consideration of the competing uses of the river. In addition, Mr. Kunkel said he understood that a number of studies that impact on the breaching question and that address broader, competing uses of the Snake river like transportation, navigation, and jobs are still underway and will be completed and available for review by the end of 1999.
Mr. Kunkel stated that although EWEB is confident that our McKenzie hydro projects are operated in the best interests of all resources and are relatively "green," he said it is very difficult for the general public to draw distinctions between "good" dams and "bad" dams. He expressed concern that taking a position in support of the NWEC resolution may invite unreasonable attacks of EWEB's dams. Mr. Kunkel stated that action in support of partially dismantling the four lower Snake River dams may provide an avenue for another party to use such a position against the Board in upcoming 9th Circuit Court oral arguments scheduled for spring, 1999.
With regard to the relationship between EWEB's projects and those on the Snake River, President Smith inquired as to whether McKenzie fish are listed as threatened or endangered. Mr. Kunkel responded that Bull Trout are listed as threatened. Mr. Banry noted that Bull Trout are a concern with regard to higher McKenzie River projects, such as Carmen Smith. He said McKenzie River Salmon may be listed in March, 1999.
Mr. Kunkel stated that an additional concern exists that if EWEB's case should proceed to the Supreme Court and we are on record supporting breaching, we are at risk of losing our Amicus, or "friends of the court," who have thus far expended considerable legal resources in support of EWEB's relicensing position in the 9th Circuit Court case. Additionally, he said a position on breaching by EWEB may become part of the agencies' initial filing, and used against us if the case proceeds to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Lastly, Mr. Kunkel stated that support of dam breaching may have implications relative to issues of strategy in the upcoming relicensing of Carmen-Smith. He explained that although we mitigated the damming of the river with smolt beds, which was accepted by resource agencies and FERC at the time, we did not cut off access of Salmon returns to the upper reaches of the McKenzie.
Referring to copies of Oregonian articles that were distributed to the board, Ms. Henry said she had wondered what Governor Kitzhaber had meant when he claimed it was a "no-brainer" to breach the dams. Ms. Henry said she contacted a representative of Governor Kitzhaber who clarified that the governor (whose statements were taken out of context) was not endorsing dam breaching in general, but rather stating that dam breaching is more effective than barging with respect to Snake River Spring Chinook. Ms. Henry said Governor Kitzhaber wants the scientific community to assess what approach would benefit all species, rather than limiting scientific investigations to endangered or listed species. The Governor wants scientists to consider competing uses of the river as well.
Ms. Henry said Eric Bloch, Governor Kitzhaber's representative, would like to discuss with the Board, during its November 3 meeting, the Governor's framework for considering this matter. She said the framework consists of an analysis of social, economical, and environmental costs.
Vice President Osanka stated that in one Oregonian article, the Governor is quoted as saying that it is time to calculate the cost of saving salmon. He said it appears as though one of the options on the table, as suggested by the NWEC, is to do nothing and let the salmon go extinct. Vice President Osanka inquired as to whether this was an accurate characterization of what the Governor considers to be on the table in terms of options. Ms. Henry responded that the Governor wants the costs calculated so that regional stakeholders can decide whether they are willing to pay those costs.
Vice President Osanka inquired as to who disagrees that breaching the dams would, at a minimum, save the Snake River Spring Chinook Salmon. Ms. Henry responded that the Governor agrees that breaching would accomplish that; however, he wants scientists to consider the impacts on other species. Vice President Osanka inquired as to whether dam breaching endangers other species. Ms. Henry said it has been suggested that while breaching dams helps Spring Chinook Salmon, it could harm other species, and that is the balance which is being tested.
Commissioner Bishop stated that she viewed this as an opportunity for EWEB to step forward as a leader on a national issue specific to this region. She said she now feels bound and gagged because it appears as though any action by the Board will jeopardize EWEB's relicensing. Commissioner Bishop stated that fish are literally being talked-to-death while the Governor sets up review panels. For the record, Commissioner Bishop stated that a factual basis for the October 17 Oregonian commentary is lacking. She said it is outrageous to say that the dams should not be breached due to the economic impacts Snake River barging, for example, which is heavily subsidized.
Additionally, Commissioner Bishop stated that the power lost from breaching the four dams represents five-to-seven percent of the total amount of power generated in the northwest. She said she is frustrated to have to deal with economic and political threats. Moreover, she said she is frustrated that there is no way to separate, in the public's perception, the Snake River and McKenzie River. Commissioner Bishop said she wants to distribute information and educate the public with regard to the distinction between the two rivers. She said the public must be educated that breaching four dams on the Snake River is unrelated to hydroelectric relicensing on the McKenzie River. Commissioner Bishop said EWEB must start taking a stand by making these distinctions clear to the public.
President Smith echoed Commissioner Bishop's frustration. She said she appreciates staff's efforts to brainstorm potential impacts and it is her perception that staff has taken a conservative approach in an effort to protect EWEB's business. President Smith expressed her opinion that EWEB often finds its own business reasons to "punt" on some very baseline value issues related to resource sustainability. Noting that the science data presented by NWEC is compelling, President Smith said the concerns raised by staff pale in comparison to losing a species. She stated that if McKenzie River Bull Trout are listed, EWEB should assess its own practices.
With regard to public perception, President Smith expressed confidence in EWEB's public education skills. She said she views public education on this matter as a challenge that EWEB must accept. With regard to staff's concern about the 9th Circuit Court case, President Smith said that like the other issues presented, it does not compare to the threat of losing a species. She said she was comfortable taking no action on the matter that evening and would be comfortable taking no action at all. She said EWEB must become knowledgeable about the Columbia River fish issues. President Smith stated that if the science supports partial dismantling of the dams, and the rest is politics, something must be done.
Mr. Kunkel assured the Board that last year's Bull Trout listing on the McKenzie River has the full attention of EWEB's Environmental, Generation, and Relicensing departments and that we are taking all appropriate steps to protect the species.
With regard to the legal advice EWEB has received, Vice President Osanka stated that while he can see EWEB's decision impacting its legal case, he wonders whether EWEB could suggest that the fact it felt strong enough to take action is evidence of its ethical position and therefore the soundness of the McKenzie River dam.
WHOLESALE POWER RISK MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Referring to a series of overhead displays and a memorandum that was included in the meeting agenda packet, Jim Origliosso presented a brief overview of the following five proposed EWEB Wholesale Power Risk Management Policies:
Mr. Origliosso said he would request Board action on these policy statements during a November Board Meeting.
President Smith expressed her opinion that two-year contracts should be reviewed and approved by the Board. Mr. Berggren said that is what staff wants codified in the policies.
President Smith requested an explanation of how the contracts under this proposal differ in comparison to agreements traditionally brought before the Board for approval. Mr. Origliosso agreed to provide the Board with a point-by-point comparison of the proposed policies versus current practice.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.