6.1. ERMUSR 03-09-2010Ji
Elk River
Municipal Utilities
13069 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 430
Elk River, MN 55330-0430
March 4, 2010
To: Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission
John Dietz
Jerry Gumphrey
Daryl Thompson
From: Troy Adams
Subject: Staff Updates -Director of Operations
Phone: 763.441.2020
Fax: 763.441.8099
The week of February 22"d, Commissioner Jerry Gumphrey and I attended the American Public Power
Association (APPA) Legislative Rally in Washington, D.C. Attached for your reading is APPA's
Legislative Rally Key Message Points. Also attached is Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association's
(MMUA} Federal Position Statement. This MMUA document nicely covers Minnesota utilities' position
with these national issues. During the rally, we had the opportunity to address our representatives about
two issues important to Minnesota public power. These issues were climate change legislation and
railroads. This was my first time attending this event and was a great learning experience. The intention
for me to attend was to learn the system. However, I had the opportunity to be more involved. MMUA
asked me to speak about our position on climate change legislation with our District's House
Representative, Michele Bachmann. Overall, this was a great learning experience.
The MMUA legislative Conference is March 24-26. Thursday morning March 25`x' is when we meet with
our legislators at the Capital. The program information is attached. We have budgeted for two to attend.
Typically, ERMU sends one Staff and two Commissioners to the APPA National Conference. This year
this conference is in Orlando on June 19-23. This event is included in our 2010 budget. APPA has also
scheduled a Leadership Workshop this year. This workshop will be held in Portland on November 3-5.
There isn't any program information for this workshop available yet. This workshop may be snore
appropriate for me to attend this year than the National Conference. This event wasn't included in the
2010 budget. Once the program information and costs are available, I may recommend that I attend the
Leadership Workshop in lieu of the National Conference this year. I will provide information at a future
commission meeting.
On March 15t Staff met with Connexus staff regarding the upcoming territory acquisition. The purpose of
the meeting was to provide an opportunity to meet and to set a date for the acquisition change over. The
date, weather permitting, has been set for May 11 `~'.
Enclosed for your reading are the current issues of the MMUA Resource.
r, ®American
Pubfic Power
Air.. Association
2010 APPA Legislative Rally
Key Message Points
Support Programs to Promote Environmental
Stewardship and to Provide Comparable
Incentives for Public Power's Development
Of Clean Energy
APPA continues to support important federal initiatives
and prograns that will enable public power to address
enviromnental challenges. Specifically, we support:
^ Increasing substantially the. authorization for the
Clean Renewable Energy Bond (CREB) program for
investment in renewable resources;
^ Including public power in additional incentives for
renewable energy provided to the private sector dur-
ing this economic downturn, including the Section
1603 grant-in-lieu of tax credit program provided to
the private sector in the stimulus bill to build renew-
able generation;
^ Restoring funding for the Department of Energy's
Renewable Energy Production Incentive Program
(REPI) in FY 2011-in order to ensure that appli-
cants receive the full two cents per kWh production
payment that is comparable to that the investor-
owned utilities receive through the Production Tax
Credit;
^ Ensuring the inclusion of incentives for public power
systems for production of other clean resources, in-
cluding clean coal and nuclear; whenever incentives
are made available to for-profit entities. In particu-
lar APPA supports the transferability of the nuclear
Production Tax Gredit to public power electric utili-
ties partnering in new nuclear facilities.
^ Funding programs to promote the commercially vi-
able production of Flexible Fuel Plug-in Hybrid Elec-
tric Vehicles (PHEVs) that will reduce GHG
emissions by utilizing off-peak electricity as a trans-
portation fuel.
Address Dysfunctional Wholesale Electricity
Markets by Providing Greater Transparency
Federal electricity policies should promote effective
competition supplemented by effective regulation in
wholesale electricity markets as a means of benefiting
and protecting consumers, and should do so in ways
that recognize the regional diversity of those markets.
In many regions of the country, principally those re-
gions where the wholesale market is administered by a
regional transmission organization (RTO) or independ-
ent system operator (ISO), these goals are not being
met and consumers are being harmed as a result. Prob-
lems in these RTO/ISO-run markets are numerous and.
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has
the ability to address them should they so choose. How-
ever, FERC has resisted major changes to these markets
for years, despite the strong concerns raised by con-
sumer-side interests, including APPA.
Given this situation, Congress could and should take
a simple but extremely important step in improving
these markets by requiring greater transparency - in-
cluding the timely posting of bid data, the identity of
those generators bidding power into the markets, and
the actual operating costs of the generating units, com-
pared to their bids. One of the primary indicators used
by economists, regulators and market analysts to deter-
mine whether or not electricity markets are competitive
is whether market participants are exercising market
power or manipulating prices or quantities. The princi-
pal way to determine whether or not market power is
being exerted or market manipulation is occurring is to
analyze market data, which. is not currently available or
is only available in a limited way months after the mar-
ket transactions have occurred. APPA urges Congress to
improve transparency in these RTO/ISO-run electricity
markets by requiring this information to be made pub-
lic and in a timely manner.
www.APPAnet.org
2010 APPA Legislative Rally Key Message I'oults
Address Climate Change in a
Workable Manner
APPA supports congressional action to address the issue
of climate change, but does not support the major leg-
islation that has been considered by Congress to date
(H. R. 2454 and S. 1733). Instead, APPA believes that,
among other things, federal legislation must: be-econ-
o:my wide and apply to all industry sectors: protect the
U.S. economy and consumers; recognize regional dif-
ferences; maintain electric reliability; protect national
security; and avoid anover-reliance on arty single fuel
for electricity production..~PPA also believes that any
cap-and-trade .regime should, among other thngs:.in-
clude adear preemption of the Clean Air.Act and
other applicable federal laws; include a hard collar on
the cost of allowances; provide a robust and workable
offset p:rogranu; provide emissions allocations commen-
surate with that sector's share of emissions (approxi-
mately 40 percent to the elech•ic utility sector); and
include achievable targets and timelines that allow for a
:more gradual transition to slow-carbon economy so
that the market produces the desired environmental
benefits in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.
Move Energy Policy Legislation Separately
From Comprehensive Climate Change
Legislation
While APPA supports workable federal climate change
legislation as described above as well as .new energy pol-
icy legislation that would include a reasonable renew-
able electricity standard (no more than 15 percent by
2020), we have long advocated that these major issues
be addressed in separate legislation. Tying them to-
getl~er; as was done in the House-passed energy and cli-
mate bill, H.R. 2454, significantly increases the
complexity and controversy of the legislation, as well as
the potential for duplicative mandates, as we have seen,
Moreover; due to the mare near-term economic and
jabs benefits of energy policy legislation, there is cur-
rently broader support in Congress for energy legisla-
tion than for a climate bill. While that could change,
given the :relatively limited time left in the 111th Con-
gress, it would be imprudent to miss the opportunity
for enactment of energy legislation that would itself re-
sult in sigriificarlt reductions in greenhouse gas enris-
sions among other benefits, simply because agreement
cannot be reached on climate change legislation . .
Ensure that any Legislation Addressing
Cyber-Security Recognizes What the
Electricity Sector Is Already Doing
The stakeholders of the electric power industry, includ-
ing public power systems, continue to wrnk closely and
in partnership with governmental authorities at the
federal, state/,provincial and local levels in both the
United States and Canada in order to maintain and im-
prove upon fhe high level of reliability consumers ex-
pect. Cyber secw•ity is an important element of bulk
power system reliability that the electric power industry
takes very seriously. Every day, the electric power indus-
try continuously monitors the bulk power system and
mitigates the effects of transmission grid incidents -
large and small. Consumers and gover~rment are rarely
aware of these incidents because of the sector's advance
planning and coordination activities which reflect the
quick and often seamless response the sector takes to
address reliability and security events. This response in-
cludes prevention and response/recovery strategies-
both are equally important. The industry's strong track
record on reliability and security continues as we work
diligently to adhere to mandatory reliability standards,
which are approved by Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC), including standards that address
Cyber security. Any additional federal legislation should
build on this framework, not undermine or duplicate it.
.APPA, therefore, supports legislation in the :House,
H.R. 2165, that provides additional, targeted authority
for FERC in the event of a Cyber emergency. APPA has
strong concerns about the Cyber security title in the
pending Senate energy bill, S. 1462.
Ensure Reliable, Low-Cost Delivery of Coal
By Creating a Competitive Railroad Industry
Many coal-burning electric utilities receive coal ship-
meats from only one rail carrier, and are thus consid-
eyed captive to a railroad with monopoly power.
Legislative remedies are necessary to enhance competi-
tive rail transportation for these captive rail shippers.
APPA supports legislation that encotu-ages structural
www.APPMetorg
2010 APPA Legislative Rally liey Message Points
and policy changes to enhance rail competition at the
Surface Transportation Board (STB). APPA also sup-
ports legislation to remove the antitrust exemption for
the railroads.
Support the Ability of Public Power Systems
To Offer Advanced Communications Services
Given the community benefits of advanced communica-
tions services provided by public power systems across
the country, including enhanced economic develop-
ment opportunities, Congress should prohibit the states
from creating barriers to the ability of public power sys-
tems to offer these sei~~ices by enacting the Community
Broadband. In addition, in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (or Stimulus Bill), Congress included
a provision requiring the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) to develop and deliver to Congress
within one year a report containing a national broad-
band plan. This plan seeks to ensure that every Atneri-
can has access to broadband capability and establishes
clear benchmarks for meeting that goal. While this doc-
ument does not make legislative changes, its recom-
mendations will likely serve as the framework for a
large telecom bill in Congress. One of the recommen-
dations expected to be included in the plan will be the
removal of exemptions from federal pole attachment
regtilation for public power systems and place it under
the jurisdiction of the FCC. APPA opposes any recom-
mendations or legislative efforts to remove this exemp-
tion for public power entities as it would have the effect
of hampering broadband expansion in public power
communities.
www.APPAnet.org
Awsir..:
~iiiiv~~
Our Mission:
To unify and serve as a common voice for municipal utilities,
and to provide them with the support they need to be able
to improve service to their customers and community.
Tale of Contents
Climate Change ................................... 1
Transmission ................................... 3
Rail Shipping: The Need for Reform ........................ 5
Federal Support for Renewable Energy ............... . ... 7
Protecting the Interests of WAPA Customers ............ . ... 10
Municipal Telecommunications ....................... 11
Municipal Utilities' Right to Grow with Their Cities - A State Issue ... 13
Why Public Power? ............................ 15
Background
Minnesota's public power systems
recognize that Congress is placing a
high priority on global climate change
as one of the most significant envi-
ronmental policy issues confronting
the nation, and we support Congress'
efforts to pursue federal legislation
in this area. We do not believe that
a patchwork ofsingle-state or even
multi-state fossil fuel registration and
cap-and-trade programs is an eco-
nomic or effective approach to the
climate change problem. Unilateral
action by one state or even actions by
a small group of states is inconsistent
with the structure of large regional
wholesale electric markets, would have
little impact on the climate, and would
place Minnesota businesses and jobs at
a competitive disadvantage.
The climate change problem encom-
passes aseries of issues that transcend
state boundaries. We need to develop
comprehensive national solutions that
ensure a reliable and cost-effective
supply of energy.
Congressional Action
Throughout the 110th Congress,
the House Energy and Commerce
Committee held numerous hearings
to educate Members on the issue of
global warming. The committee, under
Chairman John Dingell (D-MI),
released a series of"White Papers"
focusing on various issues relating to
climate change. Finally, several mem-
bers of the panel, including Dingell
and Representative Rick Boucher
(D-VA), developed various climate
proposals, but a bill never reached the
House floor.
In the Senate, the Environment and
Public Works Committee, chaired
by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA),
in late 2007 passed the "America's
Climate Security Act," introduced by
Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and
John Warner (R-VA). The bill would
have created a greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions cap-and-trade program with
the goal of reducing GHG emissions
to 10 percent below current levels by
2020 and to 80 percent below current
levels by 2050. To achieve this goal,
the bill required owners and opera-
tors of coal-fired power plants, natural
gas processing plants, and petroleum
refineries, among others, on an annual
basis to provide the Environmental
Protection Agency with enough emis-
sion allowances to account for all of
their GHG emissions. Some of these
allowances would be allocated for free
and some would be auctioned, with
the auctioned portion increasing over
time. But serious concerns over the
bill's costs and impact on the economy
caused it to be withdrawn before a
vote could be taken by the full Senate.
With a new White House, larger
majorities in both chambers, and sig-
nificant differences in the committees
of jurisdiction, climate change legisla-
tion will continue to be a top priority
for the 111th Congress. To date, many
bills have been proposed or introduced
in the House and Senate that would
impose a mandatory regime to re-
duce GHG emissions, including two
carbon tax proposals and a multitude
ofcap-and-trade proposals with vari-
ous targets and timetables for GHG
reductions.
MMUA Position
MMUA believes that Congress
should, in addressing the climate
change problem:
• include, to the extent possible,
all human causes of greenhouse
gas emissions, not dust
electrify generation;
make the minimization of
economic disruption a high
priority; and
• hold other nations accountable
for their contributions to
atmospheric greenhouse gas
levels so the U.S. is not
economically disadvantaged.
If Congress and the President deter-
mine that acap-and-trade system is
the best way to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, MMUA believes such a
system should:
• be economy-wide;
limit compliance cost
volatility by avoiding the
temptation to auction off
allowances to non-emitters and
prevent windfall profiteering
by establishing an allowance
price limit and other necessary
failsafe measures;
Climate Change
be based on existing and
reasonably foreseeable electric
generation, transmission and
distribution technologies,
greenhouse gas emission
control and sequestration
technologies, and efficiency
technologies;
avoid disrupting the U. S.
economy and local economies,
particularly by causing high
energy prices;
recognize the importance of
preserving a diverse mix of
electricity generation fuels,
including coal, nuclear, natural
gas, and all renewable energy
sources including hydro; and
recognize that major shifts
from other fuels to electricity
will transfer increasing
emission reduction
responsibilities to the
electricity sector over time
(e.g.,gas-powered cars and
trucks replaced by electric
autos).
Transmission
Background accommodate changes in the way preempted in this area, or states should
wholesale power transactions occur. be compelled to participate ].n regional
We believe that substantial new trans- planning.
mission capacity will be required to: The planning, approval and construc
tion of transmission facilities is a
• transport electric power from new regional activity that also affects the
renewable generation sites to load national interest. If these facilities
centers; are going to be completed in a proper
and timely fashion, this work must be
• meet the increased energy demand coordinated on a regional basis with
from current uses; the federal government, under the
auspices of the Federal Energy Regu-
• provide for a growing reliance on latory Commission (FERC). In many
electricity for transportation; and instances state authority should be
T ~. s ,
c 'y::. _ ~1g ti~ x,
} 'r.
~ ,~- _ ~
.~ ~ `,~ ,+
.m, ~ ~ _,
_:..
One major positive development
relating to transmission occurred only
recently -the enactment of federal
"back-stop" siting authority granted to
FERC for certain new interstate trans-
mission lines. State authorities have
traditionally opposed any preemption
of their rights and have fought any
incursion into what they consider to be
their "turf". A problem with this posi-
---~ ~ -._
5 ~„
~ ~v
tt a
a ~ ,ce a~~~~ ~1
ar~;~>~~
~.~ ~w, i S~ .~
r' ..,~`. aY .
lion is that state regulators often do
not share a sense of immediacy about
approving transmission petitions in a
timely fashion. A case in point is the
certificate of need proceeding before
the Minnesota PUC for the high volt-
age transmission line in Minnesota
providing an outlet for the Big Stone
II coal plant in South Dakota. That
proceeding took more than three years,
even though Minnesota state law al-
lows aone-year time frame for such
a decision. Minnesota is not alone;
there are other cases across the country
in which state authorities are block-
ing transmission projects for various
reasons.
Support for the construction of new
transmission has resulted from a
desire to bring renewable energy
from remote locations to population
centers. In fact, there are those who
would like to see new rules for trans-
mission capacity built exclusively for
renewable resources. But transmission
doesn't work that way. While bring-
ing renewable energy to market is one
reason for supporting new transmis-
sion, it is not the only reason. The
"renewable transmission" concept fails
to recognize the interconnected nature
of the transmission grid that does not
distinguish the types of electrons (coal
vs. solar, natural gas vs. wind) being
transmitted at any given moment. A
nondiscriminatory, robust, and reliable
transmission system is the best means
of promoting renewable energy.
Financing new transmission is another
important issue for public power. Mu-
nicipal electric utilities are anxious to
participate in joint projects with other
sectors of the industry. However, an
onerous provision included in the 1986
omnibus tax legislation currently pro-
hibits public power utilities from using
tax-exempt financing (the traditional
method of raising capital for units of
local government) in certain instances,
including imposing a cap of X15 mil-
lion on new transmission built jointly
with a private entity, which represents
the majority of such projects. Given
the high capital costs of transmission
projects and their use by multiple enti-
ties, this restriction has stifled public
power investment in needed new fa-
cilities both on a stand-alone basis and
through joint ownership arrangements
that could have widespread benefits.
Congressional Action
As mentioned, federal "back-stop"
siting authority was granted in the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct05)
in Section 1221, which added new
language to the Federal Power Act.
But this provision has been challenged
in court. Many parties contested the
final rule and later brought a court case
contesting FERC's right to approve
certain transmission projects, even
if they had been rejected at the state
level. Also, some in Congress continue
to work for the repeal of this section.
On another issue, Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) intro-
duced a bIll in the previous Congress
that attempts to designate bulk trans-
mission lines for the nearly exclusive
use of renewable generation. The bill
would also mandate that the federal
Power Marketing Administrations
build these transmission lines if the
investor-owned utilities fail to do so
after three years. In addition, Senator
Reid developed language authorizing
X2.5 billion in loans for the Western
Area Power Administration to build
transmission to non-hydropower re-
newables.This requirement is incon-
sistent with basic utility operations
and reliability requirements and could
guarantee that the line is uneconomic
by preventing unused capacity from
being utilized.
MMUA Position
MMUA urges Congress to:
oppose repeal of the federal
"backstop" siting authority and
support expansion of this concept
to include interstate transmission
that meets national policy goals
under the banner of "regional
transmission";
• oppose the financing and
construction of limited, one-
dimensional renewable transmission;
and
• support the repeal of the 1986
"private use" tax restrictions for
new transmission projects that
include both public power and
investor owed utilities.
Background
Railroad transportation is the principal
method of delivering coal to the elec-
tric generation facilities that provide
power to Minnesota municipal utili-
ties and their customers. This heavy
reliance on rail has left these utilities
vulnerable to significant market power
abuses caused by the absence of com-
petitors in the railroad industry. Utili-
ties and other rail commodity shippers,
including those who are served by only
one railroad and are often referred to
as captive shippers, are facing signifi-
cant rate increases due to the lack of
competition in the railroad industry.
The consolidation of the railroad
industry that has occurred over the
last 25 years has been stunning. When
Congress passed the Staggers Rail Act
in 1980, the resulting industry deregu-
lation was supposed to usher in a new
era of competition that would benefit
customers. However, instead of experi-
encing the intended result, shippers
endured a period of unprecedented
consolidation as the number of Class I
railroad companies in the United
States was reduced from 42 to 4. This
has resulted in a duopoly of two major
railroads serving the Western regions
of the U.S. and a similar duopoly of
two railroads serving the East.
In 1995, Congress responded by
abolishing the Interstate Commerce
Commission and by giving the newly
created Surface Transportation Board
(STB) authority over mergers, rate and
service disputes, construction, and op-
eration and abandonment of railroad
lines. Since that time, however, the
STB has declined to use its legal and
regulatory authority to protect railroad
customers from the monopolistic prac-
tices of the railroad industry.
The lack of real competition in the
railroad industry, coupled with an
absence of effective regulation of
industry operations, has significantly
undermined the operations of many
Minnesota municipal utilities. Ship-
ping costs are skyrocketing as current
contracts expire and unreasonably
high new rates are set with virtually
no negotiation. Furthermore, even
as the railroads dramatically increase
their rates, in a number of cases, their
service has actually declined.
In 2006, the Government Account-
ability Office (GAO) issued a report,
"Freight Railroads: Industry Health
Has Improved, but Concerns about
Competition and Capacity Should
Be Addressed," which validated rail
customer concerns. Among other
things, this report highlighted: a lack
of competition in the national railroad
industry; the inadequate STB efforts
to ensure rail customer access to com-
petition and to protect rail customers
from monopoly abuse; the failure of
the STB to collect adequate data from
the railroads on all of their annual
revenues from rail customers; and
concerns over the ability of the na-
tional rail system to provide sufficient,
reliable service in the future.
While the railroads argue that any rail
customer legislation is an attempt at
re-regulation, the goal of rail custom-
ers is not a return to the regulation of
the 1970's, but rather a national rail
policy that will ensure reliable rail
transportation and reasonable rates
for all rail customers -particularly
for those customers without access to
meaningful competitive transportation
alternatives.
Local Case Studies
'There are a number of examples of the
adverse impacts caused by the lack of
railroad competition on joint action
agencies and Minnesota municipal
electric utilities.
Rail Shipping: The Need for Reform
'Ihe Laramie River Station power
plant (LRS) in V~~heatland, Wyoming
serves 24 Minnesota municipal utili-
ties through Missouri River Energy
Services. Along-standing BNSF con-
tract for coal delivery to Laramie River
expired in 2004. The new rail. shipping
rates set by BNSF more than doubled,
increasing the cost by about $1 billion
over 20 years.
The drastic rate increase was given.
without negotiation or explanation. In
response, coal providers and the plant
operators filed a complaint with the
STB in 2004, spending more than $6
million and three years on the case.
After all filings were submitted, the
STB put the case on hold while it
developed a new rulemaking on cap-
tive shipper cases and subsequently
decided to retroactively apply the rule
to the case, rejecting the complaint in
2007.On February 18, 2009 the STB
issued a decision on appeal that pro-
vides substantial relief to the Laramie
plant partners. We are pleased with
this decision, but appeals are likely and
many other STB cases are still pend-
ing. We believe that the issue of rail
reform remains an important one, and
the cost of pursuing a case before the
STB is well beyond the means of most
ratepayers.
In another example, Southern Min-
nesota Municipal Power Agency
(SMMPA) supplies wholesale power
to 18 municipal utilities in Minnesotan
The agency is a 41 percent co-owner
of Sherco 3, an 884 MW coal-fired
power plant near Becker, MN. Coal is
delivered by BNSF, the only railroad
that serves the plant. Unfortunately,
BNSF's charges to SMMPA have
nearly doubled in the past two years.
Indi~ridual municipal utilities have
experienced similar problems with coal
shipments to their local plants. Hib-
bing and Virginia, two small com-
munities located on Minnesota's Iron
Range, enjoy the benefits of owning
and operating their own municipal
electric utilities. Recently both com-
munities have been forced to give up
their rail service -they have resorted
to trucking coal from Superior, Wis-
consin to their respective towns to fuel
small coal plants rather than deal with.
prohibitive rail transport costs. The
Virginia Department of Public Utili-
ties, for example, now pays upwards of
$57 per ton of coal, but only $16 is for
the coal itself. The remaining $41 cov-
ers the costs of transportation.
Congressional Action
Two major pieces of legislation that
address the concerns of rail customers
were introduced in previous Con-
gresses and will be reintroduced in
the 111th. The bipartisan Railroad
Competition and Improvement Act
was introduced in both chambers; the
lead sponsor in the House last year
was Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee Chairman James Ober-
star (D-MN), who will once again
take the lead in the new Congress. A
similar bill in the Senate will also be
reintroduced. This legislation ad-
dresses serious inadequacies in the rate
reasonableness process of the Surface
Transportation Board, and seeks to
.improve rail service for all customers
and provide new remedies for a STB
in need of reform.
HR 233, the bipartisan Railroad An-
titrust Enforcement Act, was recently
introduced in the 111th Congress
by Representative Tammy Baldwin
(D-WI). Another lead cosponsor is
Representative Tim. Walz (D-MN).
A similar bipartisan bill, S 146, was
recently introduced by Senator Herb
Kohl (D-WI); Senator Amy Klobu-
char (D-MN) is also a lead cosponsor.
This legislation would eliminate anti-
trust exemptions relating to mergers
and acquisitions, collective ratemaking
and private antitrust lawsuits that the
railroads currently enjoy. Last year
both bills were approved in committee
and awaited floor action as the session
ended.
Finally, in the last Congress the
railroads began to express interest
in receiving a federal investment tax
credit (ITC) of 25 percent to apply to
new investment in rail infrastructure.
Any additional federal subsidy for
infrastructure improvement should not
come without guarantees that dollars
will be spent to enhance reliability,
especially in captive shipper corridors.
Minnesota municipal utilities and
captive shipper groups like Consum-
ers United for Rail Equity (CURE)
support an ITC for the railroads only
if STB reforms are enacted at the same
time that provide relief for rail cus-
tomers.
MMUA Position
MMUA urges Congress to:
• support the STB reform bill;
• support the rail antitrust bill; and
oppose enactment of the
controversial federal ITC
proposal for the railroads
without these reforms.
Background
Two federal programs important to
Minnesota municipal utilities should
be addressed in any energy legislation
passed by Congress: Clean Renew-
able Energy Bonds (CREBs) and the
Renewable Energy Production Incen-
tive (KEPI). Relative to other utility
programs, both CREBs and KEPI
remain small but significant provisions
for public power systems around the
country. And, as Congress debates the
merits of a federal renewable portfolio
standard (RPS, or renewable energy
standard or RES), CREBs and KEPI
will become even more important to
municipal utilities, and face a grow-
ing demand on their limited federal
resources.
Minnesota municipal utilities have
long embraced the use of renewable
generation to meet the electric energy
needs of their communities. "They have
been motivated by the need to secure
wholesale power that will result in reli-
able and reasonably priced service to
their customers. It was for that reason,
more than 50 years ago, that municipal
utilities in western Minnesota began
making commitments to purchase
wholesale power from federal hydro-
electric dams at a time when power
from conventional sources would have
been less expensive and, it seemed,
possibly even more reliable. It is with
this same sense of responsibility that
municipal utilities are approaching the
effort to develop wind, solar, and other
renewables in order to meet a portion
of their electricity needs.
In 2007 Minnesota enacted one of
the most comprehensive renewable
energy standards (RES) in the country.
Patterned after a proposal developed
by the Minnesota Municipal Utilities
Association (MMUA) and passed with
the support of utilities and envi-
ronmentalists, the new law requires
private or investor-owned utilities,
generation & transmission coopera-
tives and municipal power agencies to
produce 7 percent of their electricity
from renewable resources by the year
2010,12 percent by 2012,17 percent
by 2016, 20 percent by 2020 and 25
percent by 2025.
The significant expansion in the
construction of renewable generation
will be expensive. The total cost for
developing all the renewables neces-
sary to meet Minnesota's RES, com-
bined with the cost of expanding the
regional transmission grid to accom-
modate new wind generation, could
reach $20 billion. Federal investment
incentives are needed to buffer the
cost of constructing renewable facili-
ties.One way to create such a buffer is
through the creation of a production
tax credit (PTC), the federal tax credit
for electricity generated from qualify-
ing renewable energy projects.
However, production tax credits are
available to privately-owned utilities
and energy production companies,
but not to publicly-owned utilities or
rural electric cooperatives, which to-
gether serve 25 percent of the nation's
electricity load. With the passage of
Minnesota's aggressive new RES law,
federal support for renewable develop-
ment by Minnesota municipal utilities
is more essential than ever before.
Congressional Action
Clean Renewable Energy Bonds
(CREBS)
To address this lack of equity, Con-
gress enacted the CREBs program
in the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct05) for three different groups:
municipal electric utilities; rural
electric cooperatives; and other gov-
ernmental bodies, such as housing or
airport authorities, or Indian Tribes.
CREBs is a debt instrument which
can be offered for qualified renewable
facilities under the U. S. tax code; the
program is administered by the IRS
under the supervision of the Depart-
ment of Treasury. Investors receive
credits against their federal income tax
liability instead of the traditional in-
terest that is usually paid by the issuer.
the municipal utility or cooperative
is liable for the face value of the bond
and saves money by owing no inter-
est on the bond. The federal govern-
ment essentially pays the "interest" in
the form of tax credits. The CREBs
program provides participants greater
certainty and affordability in both
planning and investing in renewable
resources.
After its passage in 2005 CREBs has
been extended twice, most recently
in last year's Emergency Economic
Stabilization Act. That legislation
provided $800 million to the program,
to be split three ways, which was far
Federal Support for Renewable Energy
lower than originally sought. vlost
recently, the new stimulus legislation
in the 111th Congress doubled that
appropriation to $1.6 billion, again,
split three ways. Unfortunately, even
at those levels, much of the potential
renewable development by eligible
entities continues to go unfunded.
Renewable Energy Production Incentive
(KEPI).
The KEPI program was created by
the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and
reauthorized in 2005. It authorizes
the Department of Energy to make
direct payments to publicly and
cooperatively-owned electric utilities
at the rate of 1.9 cent/kWh (indexed
for inflation) for electricity generated
from solar, wind, and certain geother-
mal and biomass electric projects. Prior
to the development of CREBs, KEPI
had been the only incentive available
on the federal level for public utilities
to make new investments in renewable
energy projects and has been instru-
mental in making public power wind
projects viable in Minnesota.
Congress implemented the KEPI
program with two goals in mind: to
help public power utilities overcome
economic barriers to greater renew-
able energy use and to ensure equity
between investor-owned utilities that
receive energy tax credits and not-
for-profit utilities that are unable to
do so. $ut for the past 15 years KEPI
has been consistently over-subscribed
and under-funded; the program needs
to be funded at a substantially higher
level to accomplish its purpose.
MMUA Position
For real renewable energy growth,
and to provide greater comparability
for public entities, CREBs and KEPI
should be funded at levels that will.
sustain the total effort of public power
and other eligible entities.
MMUA urges Congress to:
• raise the financial cap imposed on
the CREBs program, and
increase the annual appropriations
that fund KEPI.
__ _ ~ ,..a
~..~~ ~' ~ s.;
~~
`~
is
a... .,.. i -'
,W '~ 1
`"~~
~. .
~~.~
~ ~~',
y:.
Background
The Western Area Power Administra-
tion (WAPA or Western) is one of
four federal power marketing adminis-
trations (PMAs). WAPA markets and
delivers reliable, cost-based hydro-
electric power within a 15 state region
of the central and western United
States. WAPA is critical to Minnesota
municipal utilities, providing wholesale
power allocations to 47 public power
systems serving over 200,000 people in
the western part of the state. WAPAs
17,000-mile transmission system car-
ries electricity from 55 hydropower
plants operated by the Bureau of
Reclamation, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and the International
Boundary and Water Commission.
In marketing electricity, WAPA must
follow many laws, regulations and
policies, some of which are unique to
that agency. Included in these laws is
the Reclamation Project Act of 1939,
which requires WAPA to give prefer-
ence in selling federal power to certain
types of non-profit organizations
including cities, rural electric coopera-
tives, state and federal agencies, irriga-
tion districts, public utility districts
and Native American tribes. WAPA
customers in Minnesota are served by
the Upper Great Plains Region office
located in Billings, Montana, which, in
turn, provides electric service from the
seven dams of the Pick-Sloan Mis-
souri River Program, developed as a
result of Congressional authorization
in 1944.
Approximately 1,200 public power
systems and rural electric cooperatives
throughout the country buy low-cost,
zero-emissions hydropower from the
federal Power Marketing Administra-
tions that market this power from the
federal multi-purpose dams. While
these utilities pay for funding for
operation and maintenance for the
hydropower facilities at these dams
through their power rates, that money
gets returned to the U.S. Treasury and
must then be appropriated annually
to the Bureau of Reclamation and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Unfortunately, these funds have not
always gone back into the hydropower
facilities, but have instead been used
for other purposes. Therefore, a main-
tenance backlog exists on many of the
turbines and other machinery that
enables these dams to produce hydro-
power.Whenever these federal assets
are not being used at their full capabil-
ity,other forms of power generation,
including fossil fuels, must be used to
make up the difference.
Congressional Action
Unfortunately, every year opponents of
the federal PMA program have sought
to renew legislative and administrative
challenges to the way PMAs provide
service to municipal utilities and rural
electric cooperatives.
For example, over the last several years,
as part of the White House budget
proposal, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) has recycled a
number of proposals that were soundly
rejected in the past: requiring the
PMAs to sell power at market rates;
reallocation of Pick-Sloan irriga-
tion costs to power customers; and an
administrative increase in the inter-
est paid on new PMA investments.
Additionally, OMB proposed drastic
reductions in Western's construction
budget. These Administration propos-
als needed Congressional approval and
were consistently rejected by bipartisan
efforts in both chambers.
MMUA Position
MMUA urges Congress to:
• support the continued existence and
federal ownership of the PMA
program, including increased
customer involvement in funding,
and
oppose legislative or administrative
efforts that could result in substantial
and unnecessary rate increases,
including proposals to require the
PMAs to sell power at market rates.
Protecting the Interests of WAPA Custonners
Background
Securing a modern, affordable tele-
communications infrastructure is criti-
cal for economic growth in the 21st
century. Unfortunately, some areas in
Minnesota are without this infrastruc-
ture and suffer from unreliable, slow,
or expensive telecom services.
Studies by the International Telecom-
munications Union show that the
U.S. is falling behind other industrial-
ized countries in the deployment of
broadband communications services.
A key factor is the lack of a national
broadband policy. Past Congresses
have attempted to address this issue
through legislation, and MMUA urges
Congress to adopt pro-competition
and pro-consumer policies such as
those championed by the US Broad-
band Coalition that will foster the
deployment of broadband delivery
systems by any entity willing to do so,
including municipalities and public
power systems.
Why municipal telecommunications?
Municipal utilities are at the cutting
edge of providing broadband technol-
ogy service in Minnesota and across
the nation by offering a variety of
wireless, DSL, broadband power line
and fiber optic broadband services.
Municipal utilities with modern tele-
communications capabilities will be
able to:
• keep customer savings in the
community, where further economic
activity is spurred;
• provide a wide variety of other
public purposes that citizens
demand; and
entities are simply responding to
the demands of their community by
providing services that were often
expensive, inadequate, or even non-
existent. Unfortunately, in some areas
of the country, communities have been
restricted or even prohibited from of-
fering such services.
Municipal Telecommunications Services
Over 700 public power systems across
• improve the efficiency of the city the country now offer some form of
and other local government telecommunications services, several
institutions; of them in Minnesota. These local
• drive economic development by close the "digital gap" that exists in Congress acknowledged this disparity
serving existing business and many areas. more than 10 years ago. The Telecom-
industry and by attracting new ones; munications Act of 1996 provides
that "any entity" is allowed to provide
telecom services, yet 14 states have
laws, which the courts .have upheld,
that prohibit local governments from
providing these important telecommu-
nications services.
Congressional Action
The Community Broadband Act of
2007 was introduced in both chambers
last Congress. The legislation prohibits
states from precluding municipal gov-
ernments from offering competitive
alternatives to incumbent providers
and includes compromise language on
bailout provisions due to bankruptcies
and on the opportunity to bid com-
petitively.
The bipartisan Senate bill was ap-
proved by the Commerce, Science and
Transportation Committee last year.
While considered non-controversial,
the lack of any major movement on
telecommunications issues prevented
the full Senate from acting on this
legislation during its session.
The House measure was heard in the
Energy and Commerce Committee
in 2007 and was included as a title
in a draft bill on telecommunications
issues related to wireless consumer
protections, community broadband
and spectrum issues. Unfortunately,
due to issues regarding the wireless
consumer protections provisions in
the draft bill, the broader bipartisan
legislation was never formally intro-
duced. Both the House and Senate
bills are expected to be introduced in
the 111th Congress.
MMUA Position
Cities should be able to offer all
telecom services without barriers. The
contention that public bodies shouldn't
provide a service offered by private en-
terprise is disingenuous, since in many
areas of the state the private
sector is unable or unwilling to pro-
vide these services. In these localities,
municipalities may be the only viable
means of introducing such services.
this was often the case with electricity
over 100 years ago, and is still the case
with telecom today. Affordable, truly
high-speed broadband access is crucial
to a city's economic future. Federal
policy that facilitates consolidation and
limits any entity's ability to provide
services will not bring about benefits
to consumers. Regulation that protects
consumers from monopoly pricing and
predatory pricing must be enhanced.
MMUA urges Congress to:
recognize the positive role that
units of local government,
including municipal electric
systems, can play in enhancing
their communities by offering
advanced communication services;
support federal legislative efforts,
including the bipartisan
Community Broadband Act, that
protect the ability of local
communities to offer
telecom services; and
oppose federal efforts that would
restrict or prohibit local entities
from providing key communication
services.
A State Issue
Background
Municipal electric utilities work very
closely with their rural electric coop-
erative colleagues on many fronts: we
help each other out in times of need;
we work together on large transmis-
sion and generation projects; and we
agree on most public policy issues,
including preservation of the Power
Marketing Administrations, captive
rail, tax credit bonds, and climate
change. Unfortunately, the one issue
on which we consistently disagree
is known as "service territory" or
"annexation" -the historic right of
municipal utilities to grow with their
cities.
Like most issues relating to retail elec-
tric distribution service, the designa-
tion of service territories has long been
governed by state law. Minnesota's
municipal electric utilities have had
the right to serve annexed azeas since
the inception of the industry more
than 100 years ago. This historic right
was preserved in the 1974 state law
that established the current regulatory
scheme. Our law, like that of many
states, provides that a municipal elec-
tric utility has the right to serve areas
annexed by the city. The law also pro-
vides that the utility previously serving
the annexed area - be it an investor-
owned utility or a rural co-op -- must
be provided with fair compensation.
Municipal Utilities' Right to Grow with Their Cities -
The history of the 1974 Minnesota segment of the electric industry in with their cities. There are concerns
agreement was based on consensus, Minnesota. that the co-ops might attempt such an
fairness, and understanding: effort again.
The co-ops needed the 1974 service
territory Law in order to obtain
funding to build the Coal Creek
project, which still serves today as
one of their primary sources of
wholesale power. To secure
passage, they agreed to and
supported the municipal annexation
provision in the law.
The co-ops are poised to capture
much of the growth around
communities served by investor-
owned utilities, as well as around
those communities already served by
co-ops. This has been happening for
some time in the Twin Cities Metro
area, and is beginning to occur in
other parts of the state as well.
MMUA Position
The co-ops have enjoyed
tremendous growth in the years
since the service territory law was
enacted. Their growth, which has
largely come from the expansion
of cities that do not own their
electric service, has far outstripped
that of the municipal utilities. In fact,
co-ops represent the fastest-growing
The designation of electric utility ser-
vice territory is fundamentally a state
issue, fully governed by state law in
Minnesota and in other states. This is-
sue should be left to the states -there
is no justification for Congressional
involvement in the service territory
• In addition to enjoying their own issue.
rapid growth, the co-ops receive fair
compensation under the law when a
city purchases service rights
following annexation.
In the past few years some coop-
eratives have unsuccessfully tried
to secure federal legislation denying
municipal utilities their right to grow
One hundred twenty-six Minnesota
cities benefit from having a locally
owned and locally operated municipal
electric utility. "Thirty-one cities have
a municipal natural gas system. Fifty
of our eighty-seven county seats are
served by a municipal electric or gas
system. Anot-for- profit municipal
electric or gas utility is a tremendous
asset in these uncertain times. Here
are some of the reasons why:
• We have great service. We're part
of the community and our policy
makers, managers and workers are
part of the community. Our crews
are always on hand in the event of
emergency. You don't need to call an
800 number to talk to us.
• We're locally regulated. Members
of the community who live in
the community set rates and service
practices. If you have a problem,
you know who to talk to.
We're owned by our customers.
There is no tension between the
interests of customers and the
interests of stockholders. Our focus
is Main Street, not Wall Street. We
work for you.
We're not in it for the money.
Municipal utilities are not-for-
profit and therefore operated in the
public interest. Our goal is long-
term community benefit, not short-
term gain. We work hard to save
you money.
• We're the yardstick for the
industry. For generations, public
power systems have set standards
for rates and service that other
utilities have had to meet.
We'll be there. Many of
Minnesota's municipal electric
utilities have served their
communities for more than a
hundred years. In an era when new
competitors come and go faster
that we can learn their names, you
can count on us. We will be there
when you need us.
• We're Public Power.
We're here for you!
Why Public Power?
1Vara3d ~
,aasa~u j
•Hal t :k
l
•S.eDhen ~_.
~,.`
r,Mo 'kVan.=r. ~.
• shier sliver F:~~tls
East ~3rand F:.%Irs
•u•~
GrinA ldxrjur--"
•C'earh;rnk
•Fa^,sion V"• jig iia • ,~'
~'iielsviite •i3aytr: yi -~iCCuuntiin t;orl •'t 9ivr,3c"rk
SherEy 'Kr:watin ~{ Gi4;eri
.'
•Natstad _ 'Yhbintj ~
` P~asnwa;}k
.ai~a +azktassat ~
/
,I y'351.j AaCrLs
;
%
/
t
l Twa Hara~rriv; ;
/
G~lvorhr_ad}i3~.vtay mike?ark ~~:-
•t]e:m]t Lak05 Lillkllh `
f'nxNr• -.
•' am~;vii!e t•~
~
\ •Perham _ .
I
•Alety `fvYr. Ais,is `" ~ 'Ait!!ir!
~~ •ysariena ,~ ivta;sa Lake•
~l S6 les !
-Henning ~F ~'DrnS•x:;d t
~6reckevrdge
14 E: ,+6e ~t~nC. 1 I
•Clati'ssa
`
1 .Fiar
s+:al` .I
~ .., f
~
Ehoiv lzeke ,Pu=rz ~-;
+1
• •Ne~aixirra .Mora ~ ~''
•S:a111c L'antre ~ ~~~„~
hSetm•_ E
~.~ Prirratun. ~ ~,,.,~~~
North Bran ~~
•-~`•or~m,,,.~ .~~°° ~--~;={itAiver '' M u n ici pa I EI ectri c &
~ ~ -'~ Groira City .Durakt ` --"~Ar~eka
~'-~ 4+hlimar• K;~indiy°tiY •litct:fi.?Id Ci .le Piri Gas Utilities of
i
G
•MadCion, aryo
n •D2tanD tit] •i. Paid
~utui=liesnn Mi
t
nneso
a
'~.t;rariiie F.a3h Ch:xska~ y
h
Gt
"
ennnii
•Otivia •
d
~-.
•Dro~ronb~n
\
-~ i1di.~ xfr~i
\..,._
~
_.
~~
Aedvtrx3d Fd)t"i•
.. •F:31rG3M •'Nmthmp ~ •NP.tYP guz
y
•taa ; =le Sueur Laka Ci{
~...`
rsfiall •bA.31`g~[I
'
~
Gcxxi4l:.s ~
~
_~
.Tyler Sleepy Eye.
dvi:,v t31rn /.Kasr~ta •Kmi i
`~ ~
•SPrirx=nefd {5t. Peter
•
.Lake Crys.al ••binesviiie ~\
•OnvaNnna
•Mtatleik'1 Nl3:;e:.3
•Wastbmck
.A,x:fiestar -~
ILasuai \'
y
t James
'M°w~t~tn Lak» St Cha19e~s
•
AV4r:doin ~ ~
,
•Clunda :Tri;man BS~mirtg Prairia Aush{.vd
stei •WeUs lanasb°r°. •N1Fra~ nr~~ 11
Drew
•~verne pd ~. r. ~ •
.L:akefield •Prestun Cakid°nui
AI ha 'Fairrnarti • ue Ah AilStin SPrkiy Vaitay 1
• F
:.
Aushmbre
.,.__,_...
c son
J'Ptiryi Grov;,
!
...___,. _~_ .,. ___., ......__ Harrrn;nv.... .
A/1///1/j.~/
~riir~vl~
INTER f 1
LEGISLATIVE ~ ~ ~ ~ t
CONFERENCE
:~
MARCH 24 - 26, 2010 -~~ " ~`
_:
~. _ - ~ .::
_ ~ .~
HOLIDAY INN SELECT, ~ ~- _ - .. _ ''^
_- ..
BLOOMINGTON ~ :~ ~~ - , ~ f' ~~ ~" : ~' ~ . ~::~:,~,
. ~,
- i ~
_.
.. . ~ . ~.
. _. __~..F.. 1
...
_ ; ,:
.. "..
.~ "._
r 6 i
!~ ~ _
*i ~! L~ ~1
~I
'' ~
t._ r
h~
_ _
..
.__._ - ..~ #~~.$' - ~ z
_ ~ ~ `~
4
__
~.~,~
;~ r
~~.%'
6~
~'
.--,
. ~~~! _ ~! .~~~ s:~-
. , -...I~j~ ~..
:: _.. _
- ~,___.,
r-_ ~ .,
~.
i ~
,. ~~,i,
__,
a.,_- _-~
_._ __. __
.._
,~ . ~ ~;~:
~r
Make Your Voice Heard!
Circle your calendar and make plans for MMUA's Winter Legisla-
tive Meeting. This is our primary opportunity to make our con-
cerns known to government leaders. With the state's budget in
crisis and many changes on the horizon, making a good showing
has never been more important. Remember, numbers count,
and we need your help. A strong turnout will ensure that our
message is heard.
Our day on the Hill is the centerpiece of the program, but there
is much more to take in. We have a full slate of informative
speakers to bring you up-to-date on our industry and where it's
headed.
Please take time to review all of the information in this brochure.
It contains everything you need to register with MMUA and Holi-
day lnn Select, Bloomington, MN.
Specific questions or concerns regarding this meeting should
be directed to Bonnie Hayes at 763-746-0707 or 1-800-422-0119
(MN only). Please take special note of all deadlines. It is impor-
tant to get your registrations in on time.
~. -~-. r
.f~
a a'
~.
~, ~~, , _ k
is ` ~ ~ ~.
_ 1 ~ _ - ~ ~
..
D
~2
v ~~
S.r7
_ .,,_ , ;.
.. `~,.
A ~-.
_,
F
~ ~ ~ -F:~>. j 7
y,. ~'r..
ww ~
!~"~ . o . r
~~~
;~~~
~. _.. _
-~~.
.~.
~:
:~
~~
-- ~, Join us!
~,
. -~~ ~ _.,
PROGRAM
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24
9:00 MMUA Board of Directors Meeting
12:00-5:00 Registration Desk Open
1:00-1:45 What Main Street is looking for from Utilities
Buzz Anderson, MN Retailers Association
1:45-2:30 Solving Minnesota's Transmission Dilemma
Jarred Miland, Manager, Transmission Services
Midwest ISO
2:30-2:45 Refreshment Break
2:45-3:30 North American Gas & Power Overview
Don Black and Dawn Constantin
BP North American Gas & Power
3:30-4:45 Legislative Briefing
Dinner on your own.
THURSDAY, MARCH 25
6:30-8:00 Hosted Breakfast Buffet at Hotel
9:00-5:00 Registration Desk Open
7:00-8:30 Shuttle Buses to Front Steps of Capitol (Front Entrance)
Schedule: 7:00, 7:30, 8:00 & 8:30
7:00-11:30 Meet with Your Local Legislators at Capitol
9:00-11:00 Visits with Legislative Leadership at Capitol
11:00-12:45 Shuttle Buses Return to Holiday Inn Hotel (Capitol Front Steps)
Schedule: 11:00, 11:30, 12:00, 12:30 & 12:45
12:15-1:15 Hosted Luncheon Buffet at Hotel
Thursday afternoon will have two concurrent tracks of programming
Track 1
1:30-2:15
Willmar Municipal Utilities'
Biomass Combined Heat & Power Project
Bruce Gomm, General Manager,
Willmar Municipal Utilities
2:l 5-3:00
MMPA's New Wind Project
Patrick Hessini, Vice President,
Avant Energy, Inc.
3:00-3:30 Refreshment Break
3:30-4:15
Renewable Energy Template
Randy Hilliard,
U of MN Crookston,
Agricultural Utilization Research Institute
4:15-5:00
Web Based Customer Energy Reports
Scott Revenig, Business Manager
Accelerated Innovations
Track 2
1:30-2:15
Power Grid Security
Brian Isles, Cyber Security
2:15-3:00
Minnesota's Changing
Broadband Landscape
Gary Evans, President, Hiawatha Broad-
band Communications, Inc.
Milda Hedblom,Telecommunications
Consultant and Lawyer,
Dain International Services
Connectivity Consultant, HBC
Professor, Augsburg College and Visiting
Professor, U. of Minnesota
3:00-3:30 Refreshment Break
3:30-4:15
Water and Sewer Infrastructure Costs
Craig Johnson, LMC
4:15-5:00
Regional Haze Rule, Ozone Limits and
Co-firing Permit Issues
Frank Kohlasch, MN PCA
FRIDAY, MARCH 26
8:00-12:00 Registration Desk Open
8:30-9:15 Legallssues
Kaela Brennan, McGrann Shea Carnival Straughn & Lamb
9:15-10:00 Clean Air Regulation
Robert Jagusch, MMUA
10:00-10:15 Refreshment Break
10:15-11:15 Issues Roundup
MMUA staff
11:15-11:45 Rally Recap
12:00 Hotel check out
MMUA Registration Information
Registration Fee
$200 on or before March 10, 2010
$225 on or after March 11, 2010
Fee includes: conference tuition, 3 refreshment breaks, 1 breakfast buffet, and 1
luncheon buffet plus bus transportation.
Transportation
Bus transportation will be provided for your visits to the Capitol on Thursday
morning.The bus will leave from the front door of the hotel starting at 7 a.m. and
continue running back and forth until early afternoon.
Spouses
We do not include meals for a spouse or significant other at this meeting, but we
do encourage them to come along and enjoy the Mall of America, IKEA and other
points of interest in the area. Contact Bonnie if you would like to arrange for an
extra meal.
Special Diets
If you need a special diet for either the breakfast or lunch please contact Bonnie
for your request at 1-763-746-0707.
Refunds
A refund will be given on advance registrations if the MMUA office is notified by
4:30 p.m. on March 16. A cancellation fee of $25.00 will be charged.
Hotel Reservation Information
Holiday Inn Select Minneapolis/St. Paul
International Airport Hotel
3 Appletree Square (I-494 & 34th Avenue South)
Bloomington, MN 55425
Reservations
Call 952-854-9000 or 1-800-465-4329 and referencing
Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association -MMUA
Cut-off Date
TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 2010.
Room Rates
King or two double beds is $109.00 + tax Check-in Time: 3 p.m.
King or two double bed suite is $139.00 + tax Check-out Time: 12 p.m.
Questions
If you have any questions or problems with your registration or reservations,
please contact Bonnie Hayes at the MMUA office for assistance. Call 800-422-0119
or 763-746-0707 (direct dial).
~ • I ~
~~„~'~
iiriv~~
MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL LRILITIES ASSOCUTION
Minnesota Municipal Utilities Assocation
3025 Harbor Lane N, Suite 400
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763-551-1230
Date: March 24-26, 2010 Fax:763-551-0459
Location: Holiday Inn Select, Bloomington, MN www.mmua.org
Attendee Information Registration Fees
Name:
$200 on or before March 10
Name (2): $225 on or after March 11
Name (3):
Conference Fee:
Name (4): x Number of Attendees:
Utlllty: Total Due:
Address:
Payment
State:
Zipcode: Check Payable to: MMUA
• PO#
• Bill Utility
Main Contact:
Email:
Phone:
REFUND: A full refund (minus $25.00 processing fee) will be given on advanced
registrations if the MMUA office is notified by 4:30 p.m. on March 16, 2010.
PHOTOGRAPHS: By registering for this conference, I authorize Minnesota Municipal
Utilities Association (MMUA) to photograph me at this event and use such photographs
in MMUA marketing pieces (both electronic and print). I understand that I will not be
paid for giving this consent.
QUESTIONS: Please contact Bonnie by email bhayes@mmua.org or phone 763-746-0707
Registeronline: www.mmua.org under calendar link
Registerbymail: MMUA Office
3025 Harbor Lane N, Suite 400
Plymouth, MN 55447
Register by phone: 763-551-1230
Register by fax: 763-551-0459
Registration Deadline is
March 16, 2010
Elk River -~--
Municip al Utilitie s
Memorandum
To: Elk River Utilities Commission
Jabn Died
.~*r~~.~n+~y
ne~s+~~~
From: David Berg
Date: 3/3/2010
Subject: Water Conservation Efforts
Subject: Water Conservation Efforts
Project Conserve Meeting
Recently, Project Conserve asked for someone in the water department to speak on
SMART Irrigation. Angela went to present the benefits and of SMART irrigation and
water conservation efforts to two groups of Project Conserve members. The information
was received warmly and sparked interested by many.
Star News SMART Irrigation Article
This February, Star News contacted the water department for information on SMART
irrigation and saving money on water bills. Elizabeth Nelson conducted the interview
with Angela and told of the great success that residents have had with the installation of
these systems. The new rebate was mentioned and this will hopefully get the message
out about the money saving and water saving advantages of SMART irrigation.
2010 Energy Expo
This years Energy Expo just took place. The water department raffled off a SMART
irrigation controller to an ERMU water customer. Many came to inquire about the new
technology that they read about in the Star News. Positive feedback was given across the
board for the innovative technology and the rebate that ERMU is now offering.
Elk River
Municipal Utilities
Memorandum
To: Elk River Utilities Commission
John Diets
Jerry (~nnphrey
DarylThompson
From: David Berg
Date: 3/4/2010
Subject: Antenna Inspections
To protect our water towers, ERMU has contracted KLM engineering. KLM has
the experience and knowledge of structural reviews, welding inspections and field
painting. In the past, ERMU has always contracted KLM Engineering for our
towers; they are familiar with our structures. KLM will be used to assist us with
the Sprint antenna construction. These expenses will be covered by Sprint. KLM
has asked that ERMU open an ESCROW with funds of $8,200.00 to cover
KLM's services.
~j
Elk River
Municipal Utilities
Memorandum
To: Elk River Utilities Commission
John Dietz
Jetty (~nnphtey
Daty1 Thompson
From: David Berg
Date: 3/4/2010
Subject: Laptop for Water Dept. on call
The laptop computer and software was picked up by "In Control Inc." at the end
of February. "In Control Inc." will have it back to the Water Department sometime
during the week of March 22"d and at that point there will be no more Water Dept.
employees on call.
Also, the bids came in less than we thought.
Elk River;-
Municipal Utilities
Memorandum
To: Elk River Utilities Commission
John Dietz
.i~*r~~r
n~~n~~
From: David Berg
Date: 2/24/2010
Subject: Water Quality Report
We have started preparing our 2010 Annual Water Quality Report. This year we are
trying to make it more appealing towards Elk River citizens. Our cover picture for the
brochure will have an iconic image of River's Edge (Main Street area). July is the
distribution month for the mailing.
~~
` t.
_. ~ ..._ b
Elk River ~ ;~
Municip al Utilitie s ,;~:,t
~__..
-~~~
Elk River
Municipal Utilities
13069 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 430 Phone: 763.441.2020
Elk River, MN 55330-0430 Fax: 763.441.8099
March 2, 2010
To: Elk River Municipal Utilities commission
John Dietz
Jerry Gumphrey
Daryl Thompson
From: Theresa Slominski
Re: Staff Update -Office
Mayor Stephanie Klinzing's Random Acts of Kindness challenge involved her visiting
the Spectrum High School and suggesting they could help raise money to contribute
towards helping out individuals with their utility bills. We were contacted by the school
and were told that they had raised $300 to help out a family (or families.) Each student
had taken a thermometer replica (of the Random Acts of Kindness thermometer
downtown) home and was asked to contribute $1 if they could. There are 210 students at
the school and those who could bring in $1 did, some brought in more, one brought in
$10, one brought in $50, and the school contact contributed some amount out of her own
pocket to make it an even $300. Michelle, from our office, was able to identify the
perfect family to benefit from the kindness. The family had been in a car accident right
before Christmas with all members being hospitalized. The family wasn't eligible for
any financial assistance from the various state and local agencies and were struggling to
pay all their bills. We had to protect the confidentiality of the family and couldn't share
much with the students but did share a little bit about the circumstances of the family so
they could see how their contributions made such a difference. It really helped this
family get caught up and have this one less bill to worry about.
To try and remedy the glue not sealing on the eco-envelopes, our supplier picked up the
remaining envelopes and re-applied the glue. We will be using these envelopes this
month and we'll note if there are any improvements.
The auditors are here this week. As mentioned before, we have a new auditor lead this
year, Andy Berg, as Steve McDonald has taken on more managerial responsibilities at the
firm. I will provide more of a verbal update at the meeting.
Elk River -=~
Municipal Utilities
13069 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 430
Elk River, MN 55330-0430
March 2, 2010
TO: Elk River Municipal Utilities Commission
John Dietz
Jerry Gumphrey
Daryl Thompson
FROM: Mark Fuchs
SUBJECT: Staff Upate -Electric Department
The following is a summary of projects and/or updates over the past several weeks:
Phone: ?63.441.2020
Fax: 763.441.8099
• Tested our overhead and underground protective grounds. We also tested our hot sticks;
both of these are done annually.
• Working on a street light counts in Dayton, Otsego, Big Lake Township and Elk River.
We verify the size of the fixture and location and get that documented in the map book.
• Continued working on tree trimming.
• Continued working on rebuilding and converting overhead lines on County Road 30 from
2400 volt to 7200 volt.
• Continued changing out our cutouts and fuses. Also checking underground equipment
and making map book changes.
• Received ten applications for new electric service.
• The City shop does D.O.T. inspections for our trucks and trailers. Half the units were
completed in February and the other half will be done during March.
• MMUA conducted our annual CPR training.
Elk River .~
Municip al Utilitie s
13069 Orono Parkway . P.O. Box 430 Phone: 763.441.2020
Elk River, NIN 55330-0430 Fax: 763.441.8099
TO: Elk River Utilities Commission
John Dietz
Jerry Gumphrey
Daryl Thompson
FROM: Wade Lovelette
SUBJ: Staff Update -Technical Services Department
The following is a summary of projects and/or updates over the past several weeks:
1. The Locating Department had a total of 60 locate tickets for January. Some of
these were meets which required several trips back to the same area as needed to
mark utilities. Two of the tickets were emergency locates.
2. The Metering Department continues with weekly and monthly substation checks,
changing out meters to the radio read meters, and doing the monthly power bill.
3. The Security Systems Department had a total of 57 phone contacts, 8 personal
visits, 8 systems quoted, 7 sales made, 8 installs completed and 20 service calls
for the month of February.
4. Power plant staff has performed the monthly run of the generators. The
generators seem to be running great.
5. Michael Price and I attended a UMMA (Upper Midwest Metering Assoc)
conference in St. Cloud this past month. Very informative. It covered topics such
as: electricity theft, liability, arc flash, etc.
6. Steve Ziemer attended the fuel seminar put on by Beaudry Oil at the Rockwoods
center in Otsego. He learned a lot about fuels and the algae that grows in it. Also
about the changes to diesel engines and exhaust.
7. Chris Sumstad, Jeff Murray and I attended the MMUA Meter school in Marshall
at the end of the February. They took track one which was basic metering and I
took track two which was advanced metering.
,~~~11~~
ELK RIVE%t P2I7TTIC:IPA%. UTILITIES EDY~CATI~DRY/ SEMINAR REPORT
DATE Z. I~ l o ' Z ~ ~~ -
J,, }
EMPLOYEE NAME_ ~~~' S ''~'~~
TITLE OF EDUCATIONISEMINAR ~ mid ~C~~ ~~~,:
ORGANIZATION SPONSORING EDUCATION/ SEMINAR Y1~Yv~~...W-
DATES ATTENDED Z ~~C,IIo- 21 ` ~ 1~
LOCATION 1~1~"S~ ~
~^
WHY DID EMPLOYEE CHOOSE TO ATTEND ~~. ~/c~ Ylvk.,~ ~~[c,,~. ~~
WHAT INFFORMATION WAS LEARNED BY ATTEN' DING ~/~~'l~S ~~
/l'1G / `~ % l2t !~ ~ ~'l/f-c~-Y`t% (1! i 1. /~ li r ~, 7 / C/[~l c:7 ~
enn ! / ~ ~
I Y 1 {~fr ~ K~ ` G.Yj C d'YL..c' i ~ V t9v~ ~/ ~ ~ ~G? ~"yl~-
_ . %'67 ~C'~-N. ~hc- y ~h /S v ~--y / Y~~ C / cam, ~ .r?~~.1 ~ ~/~
~ ~~~~~ ~~
F1~~sNFORMAT~~ ~ NVEY~DLT0~6UPEF~7ISOR AND C~ 1WQRKERS AND TO WHO
ELIC itlVEit ~fIJYdYCIPAL LJTII.ITIES EDLIC~iTI®Id/ SEMIP~tAR FtEP®I~T
DATE. .~ ~ /~i ~ /U
EMPLOYEE NAME ~'.•-c-~G ~'yi"r~ /~i^~i~_/
TITLE OF EDUCATION/SEMINAR ~'~~!~.- ~ lt:ss
ORGANIZATION SPONSORING EDUCATION/ SEMINAR /~I~~~~-'=4
DATES ATTENDED__ ~ "~~~ --~U ~ ~ -/S-s--/~
LOCATION ;'~1 c~-,~S ~~ l I
WHY DID EMPLOYEE CHOOSE TO ATTEND ~ ~,,, ~,2,-~, ~..,5.~,ti<~1,~~% ~, ,,,~,~~,_
_•yt.Z.~i•~ ~ ci --~ G~ r't' ~ T ~ 'ci \ ~ 1 i ~ ~ -` r1c ~t L
f
WHAT INFORMATION WAS LEARNED BY ATTENDING
_('~ ~~~ ~ ; c s L
,'ti e S ~ C. ,n.~~,.~- i -~~ L^~r9 e.-s ~-- ~;} : ~ ~ C ~- s Wit--~ .') i/
~~ l i
-e''-~e .~ ¢ L l~ Civ^ 'h ~ w ~ ,~ r .1n ~. lc. S v ~ ~ ~ CJ ~ ~~ I~~ .L
v'~1_ Jt ~-•.. ~e ~ ~~ .yam
WAS INFORMATION CONVEYED TO SUPERVISOR AND CO-WORKERS AND TO WHO
-~/fJt'.~V'[ Sn.r 15i: ~=-~-'T'C..tt~.lci < ~ .n,.~. C'~x+.SS
,
G~~'~'/--~ / 777 ~.-.t•.~-.
GNATURE