Board Members present: Patrick Lanning, Sandra Bishop, Dorothy Anderson, Mel Menegat, and Ron Farmer.

Others present: Randy Berggren, Jim Origliosso, Tom Buckhouse, Dick Helgeson, Debra Smith, Brenda Sirois, Scott Spettel, Mike Freeman, Lance Robertson, Deborah Brewer, Nancy Cook and Krista Hince of the EWEB staff; Ruth Atcherson, City of Eugene Minutes Recorder; and John Simpson, Commissioner-elect.

President Lanning called the Work Session of the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) to order at 6:15 p.m.

INTEGRATED ELECTRIC RESOURCE PLAN - PROJECT AND WORKING GROUP STATUS UPDATE

Brenda Sirois, Resource Planning Analyst, provided a "thumbnail sketch" of the public involvement process, accompanied by a power point presentation. She noted the working group had represented the gambit from an industrial customer to the "average" residential customer, as well as including President Lanning and Vice President Bishop. She said she would provide a five to ten page report, to include appendices, within the next two weeks and would return before the Board on August 17.

Ms. Sirois said half-way through the process, the group was divided into smaller groups and asked to build a power portfolio and strategy. She showed the results on the overhead. She stated that, while the individual groups produced a wide array of portfolios and strategies, they were unanimous in their opposition to the use of coal or nuclear power.

President Lanning noted that Commissioner Anderson had attended the last two sessions.

Vice President Bishop commented that staff had done an extraordinary job. She recognized that it had been a lot of work and a lot of material to present and lauded the level of expertise brought into the process by staff. She noted there was a certain lack of knowledge among business people.

Vice President Bishop said there would be at least two open house public meetings and two public hearings.

Commissioner Anderson found the comments at the end of the process to be very interesting. She asked staff if it would be possible to provide a compilation of the comments to the Board.

Ms. Sirois stated that staff was in the process of compiling the results from the group. Additionally, a list of ten questions had been circulated to group members and approximately 60 percent had been returned. She remarked that the questions had been difficult, such as what the role of natural gas should be in the resource portfolio and how group members felt about the risk of hydroelectric generation.

President Lanning echoed Vice President Bishop's comments regarding the high caliber of staff work. He complimented the work done to provide the group with the written information enough in advance to allow the group to be well-prepared. He commented that the previous Integrated Energy Resource Portfolio (IERP) working group had met more times than the present one. He felt the group had been very sharp and worked diligently toward development of a better-balance portfolio in the face of the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) risk.

General Manager Randy Berggren was impressed by how quickly the working group had learned and at their natural knowledge base as it related to energy resources. He said he was part of a group that built one of the more expensive and least responsive portfolios, because of concerns about hydro risk in the face of climate changes.

Power Management and Planning Manager Scott Spettel acknowledged the work of Jim Maloney, Energy Resource Project Manager. He complimented Ms. Sirois for a "project well done." He said it was clear that conservation was supported at current levels, at least, in all of the portfolios. He had felt conflicted about the role of natural gas and felt there had been some direction in terms of fuel substitution. He related that there had not been much enthusiasm for a combined cycle combustion-turbine plant. He thought there would be an opportunity to fine tune needs of EWEB from the BPA. He noted one participant, a major customer who worked in the "global economy," had voiced concern about the price of renewable resources. He also felt this would be a point of consideration for the substantial low income community that lived in the area.

Ms. Sirois explained that staff would integrate the feedback from the five or six final portfolios and craft for the Board's perusal three portfolios that would accurately represent the working group's recommendations.

In response to a question from Commissioner Farmer, Ms. Sirois said staff and the Board would be delving more into the IERP at the August meeting. Commissioner Farmer responded that it would be helpful to have a "baseline comparative"and to know the assumptions that the group was working from. He added that he wished the report to include costing out the construction of building a natural gas facility.

Commissioner Anderson asked that the report include why hydrogen had not been looked into as part of the portfolio. She acknowledged that it was not practical within the time frame, but felt it would benefit the public to see the reasons for its exclusion delineated.

In response to a question from Commissioner Anderson, Ms. Sirois affirmed that natural gas was the power generation resource considered in the distributed generation (DG) model. She noted that the group had also looked at bio-mass for DG, adding that it was categorized under renewable resources.

Ms. Sirois called attention to the time line. She said she looked forward to adoption of the plan on October 14, after full consideration of the report. She welcomed questions from the Board.

President Lanning suggested that it would be helpful to Commissioners Menegat and Farmer to meet individually with Ms. Sirois or Mr. Spettel in order to better understand the material.

Commissioner Farmer remarked that, while he recognized that the utility had to reduce the hydro risk, he did not want to exchange one volatility for another. Ms. Sirois assured him that all of the risks had been outlined and considered by the work group.

Commissioner Farmer recommended the report be written so that it was accessible to members of the public.

BOARD GOVERNANCE - CUSTOMER SERVICE PHILOSOPHY

Mark Freeman, Customer Services Supervisor/Field Services & Cash Collections, explained that staff sought Board input on specific service strategies. Mr. Berggren added that, as indicated in the memorandum from Mr. Freeman entitled Customer Service Transition Assessment Update and Service Strategy Discussion, it was hoped that the Board would brainstorm ideas for improvement.

In response to a question from Commissioner Farmer, Mr. Freeman clarified that staff did not seek "nuts and bolts" detailed responses to customers, but rather sought to build a philosophical foundation from which the interactions with customers could be guided.

Commissioner Menegat commented that the customer was not always right. He felt a demanding or abusive customers presented a challenge to the staff person on the receiving end of the phone. He emphasized the importance of maintaining a professional attitude. He related that he saw meter readers on the street and their demeanor was pleasant and accessible.

Vice President Bishop remarked that EWEB was a public utility and this put customer service representatives in an uncomfortable position at times. She felt it was appropriate, when dealing with a rude customer, to suggest that the conversation be stopped until the customer could calm down. She suggested that representatives should have more discretion and more time in order to be able to listen with a "fully open mind and open heart" to a customer's concerns. She cited an incident she had been involved in for which a faster cheaper solution would have been to empower the customer service representative to remedy the situation for the customer rather than remaining intransigent and not addressing the issue the customer had raised. She disagreed that the customer was not always right. She declared that the customer was always right in his or her own mind. She advocated for allowing customer service representatives more time to fully address problems that arose.

Assistant to the General Manager Debra Smith commented that the meter readers feel like they have less flexibility, as there are so many meters that must be read in a period of time. She suggested that without a philosophy that people could "attach to," an implied philosophy was created and measured in things such as lost calls in the customer service department.

Commissioner Anderson said the customer was not always right, even in their own mind. She agreed that the challenge was to find a way to get the information to the customer quickly so that customer representatives could have more time and more flexibility to resolve issues. Then a representative could potentially determine how much a customer could pay and when they could pay it, for instance, without having to spend so much time working through channels.

Mr. Freeman commented that it was a challenge to balance flexibility with consistency. Commissioner Anderson thought guidelines should be set.

Mr. Freeman related that he had attended a workshop where other companies had clear service philosophies. Staff determined that EWEB really did not have a consistent philosophy.

Commissioner Farmer emphasized keeping the philosophy simple. He noted that Les Schwab Tire Center did not have a large bound notebook. Instead they had five key principles. He asserted that management was the key to customer service and was charged with telling representatives the attitude they should impart. He related that, in his place of employment, "customer delight" surveys were conducted on a regular basis.

Mr. Freeman liked the Blockbuster Video service principle, which was 15 words long. He agreed it was unnecessary to generate reams of paper.

President Lanning said this was the area he had most passion for. He remarked that he did not think he could be a customer service representative. He called it the most difficult job. He thought the establishment of efficiencies had resulted in some unintended consequences. He felt in order to feel empowered and impassioned about something, it was necessary to be part of the creation of it. He agreed that management had an active role and needed to be fully engaged, but emphasized the importance of the wealth of knowledge that came from the employees. He commented that he liked the customer service model espoused by Les Schwab Tire Center.

Mr. Freeman listed two customer service principles and the businesses from which they came, as follows:

• Les Schwab Tire Center: "It's important to always remember that we are in business for one thing and that is to take care of our customers."
• Nordstrom's: "Offer the customer the best possible service, selection, quality, and value."

Commissioner Farmer asked if it was even known whether EWEB customer service was good or bad. Mr. Freeman responded that a customer service survey had just been conducted the previous week because of the lack of specific data from the customers on service.

Vice President Bishop asked if there was a way to determine if there were divisions or work groups that were better perceived by the public as providing better service than others. She noted that construction people were happy with the temporary hook-up process. Mr. Berggren responded that, through the development of operation performance measures (OPMs) it had become more apparent which areas worked more fluidly than others.

President Lanning suggested a focus group be convened to provide input. He commented that he never really heard from customers unless they were very unhappy about an aspect of the service and this tended to cloud one's view.

Commissioner Farmer stated that every employee should provide the same answer when asked what customer service meant.

President Lanning closed the Work Session at 7:40 p.m.

_____________ ______________________________________

Assistant Secretary President