Meeting #7 Minutes by FrancisMaloney

VIEWS: 18 PAGES: 13

									                                              Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                                  Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                                 Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006


                                                                     CONTENTS

Table of Contents
MEETING OBJECTIVES..........................................................................................................................................4
PROPOSED AGENDA ...............................................................................................................................................4
PRESENTATIONS DELIVERED AT THE MEETING (NO PAPER COPIES DISTRIBUTED).....................4
AGENDA ITEM #1 – WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS ....................................................................................4
AGENDA ITEM #2 – UPDATE.................................................................................................................................5
   QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION.........................................................................................................................................5
AGENDA ITEM #3 – DEBRIEF AND FEEDBACK ...............................................................................................9
   QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION.........................................................................................................................................9
ACTION ITEMS .......................................................................................................................................................13

Table of Figures
Figure 1 LTAP Load Resource Capacity Balance ...................................................................................................7
Figure 2 BC Hydro’s LTAP and Contingency Plans................................................................................................8




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                                                                                       Page 1
                            Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                       Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                      Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

ATTENDEES (in alphabetical order by the name of the organization)

      Name                    Organization                                    Member or
                                                                              Alternate ?
      Brian McCloy            BC Business Council                             Member
      Dr. John Calvert        BC Citizens for Public Power                    Member
      Bev Van Ruyven          BC Hydro                                        Member
      Mary Hemmingsen         BC Hydro                                        Member
      Julius Pataky           BC Transmission Corporation                     Ex-officio
                                                                              Member
      Katherine Muncaster     Energy and Materials Research Group, Simon      Member
                              Fraser University (SFU) and BC Sustainable
                              Energy Association (BC SEA)
      John Newcomb            Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce            Member
      Dan Smith               Hamatla Treaty Society                          Member
      David Austin            Independent Power Producers Association of      Member
                              BC (IPPBC)
      Dan Potts               Joint Industry Electricity Steering Committee   Member
                              (JIESC)
      Sharron Simpson         Kelowna City Council and Central Okanagan       Member
                              Regional District
      Russell Leslie          Nelson Hydro                                    Member
      Mansell Griffin         Nisga’a Lisims Government                       Alternate
      Collier Azak            Nisga’a Lisims Government (Director of Lands    Member
                              & Resources)
      Fred Fortier            North Thompson Indian Band                      Member
      Gwen Johannson          Peace Williston Advisory Committee (PWAC)       Member
      Dr. Nola Kate           Sustainable Cities Foundation                   Member
      Seymoar (Kate)
      Jane McRae              Sustainable Cities Foundation                   Alternate




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                         Page 2
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

BC HYDRO PROJECT TEAM (in alphabetical order by first name)
      Name                   Organization &           Role on the IEP Project Team
                             Department
      Anne Wilson            BC Hydro, IEP Project    Feedback Facilitator
                             Management Office
      Basil Stumborg         BC Hydro, Stakeholder    Facilitator & Decision Analyst for
                             Engagement               Provincial IEP Committee
      Brandee Clayton        BC Hydro, IEP Project    IEP Logistics Coordinator
                             Management Office
      Brenda Goehring        BC Hydro, IEP Project    IEP Stakeholder Engagement
                             Management Office        Coordinator
      Heather Matthews       BC Hydro, IEP Project    IEP Technical Coordinator
                             Management Office
      Randy Reimann          BC Hydro, IEP Project    Project Manager for 2005 IEP
                             Management Office




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                        Page 3
                              Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                        Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                       Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006


MEETING OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the last Provincial IEP Committee (PIEPC) meeting are to:
•     Update PIEPC members on the final IEP filing process, the Long Term Acquisition Plan and
      next steps in the regulatory process,
•     Provide the Committee members with a formal opportunity to debrief on the PIEPC
      process, and to be recognized for their contributions and efforts.

PROPOSED AGENDA
    2:00 p.m.   Introduction and welcome
    2:15 p.m.   Update
                         •   The IEP
                         •   The LTAP
                         •   The regulatory process
                         •   The planning cycle in context

    3:00 p.m.   Debrief and feedback on the PIEPC process
    4:00 p.m.   Break
    4:10 p.m.   Acknowledgements
    5:00 p.m.   Reception
    6:30 p.m.   Dinner



PRESENTATIONS DELIVERED AT THE MEETING (No Paper Copies Distributed)
The following presentations were delivered during the meeting but paper copies were not
provided at the meeting. Electronic copies will be made available on the BC Hydro website
at: http://www.bchydro.com/info/epi/epi20274.html
Item                          Description
IEP/LTAP Update               Randy Reimann delivered a power point presentation that reviewed some
                              of the changes in data since the last PIEPC meeting, a review of the
                              various portfolios and strategies examined by PIEPC and how PIEPC
                              feedback was considered in developing the LTAP



AGENDA ITEM #1 – WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS
Basil Stumborg formally welcomed everyone to the last meeting of the Provincial Integrated
Electricity Plan (IEP) Committee and commented that the first part of the meeting was to
report out on results while the second, and larger, part of the meeting was for BC Hydro
receive feedback on the PIEPC process and to collect advice for similar processes that may
proceed in the future.



Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                          Page 4
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

AGENDA ITEM #2 – UPDATE
Randy Reimann delivered a power point presentation to the Committee on the IEP and the
LTAP. This presentation reviewed the key threads that led to the actions within the plan.
Randy reviewed with the committee that the Load Forecast is not set numbers, but a range
based on uncertainties and that the 2005 Load Forecast that was used to develop the LTAP.

Questions & Discussion
•   Load Forecast discrepancy between 2004 and 2005. Katherine asked why there was
    such a discrepancy between the 2004 and 2005 Load Forecast?
       •   Mary commented that the discrepancy falls from the impact of cumulative load
           growth. The 2004 forecast was based upon the 2003 observations and since then
           the economy has heated up significantly.
       •   Mary also commented that there was a significant jump in gas prices due to
           consumption pressures, increased prices, and from forecasters stating that there
           will not be enough gas.
•   Gas Price Forecast. Brian stated that BC Hydro’s ‘high gas price forecast’ is the only
    realistic forecast.
       •   Mary commented that the ‘high gas price forecast’ has been adjusted to reflect
           increases from various sources of information, i.e. the Department of Energy in the
           US, Cambridge Energy, and the Energy Research Association. Randy followed this
           comment by noting that the gas market is beginning to soften.
•   Gas Price Forecast Accuracy. Mansell asked if BC Hydro has compared previous gas
    forecasts for their accuracy?
       •   Mary commented that yes, this has been reviewed and the gas price forecasts are
           fairly accurate in the short-term and then accuracy begins to fall off.
•   Resource Requirements and Supply Plans. DSM and the three calls will fulfill some of the
    projected need.
       •   Brian asked if some of BC Hydro’s thinking has been influenced by the fact that the
           2006 bids came in higher than what was expected? Mary said that this fact raises
           the threshold for DSM programs and the inception of lead times on future projects.
           Bev followed stating that this makes DSM look much more attractive.
       •   Brian then asked how this was going to affect the capital cost estimates for Site C?
           Mary commented that sensitivities for Site C costs were built in at +/- 40%, and
           that this bandwidth covers what is currently being seeing in the increased
           economy.
       •   Sharron asked why increased costs are factored into what will happen? She felt
           that if BC Hydro is on the ground and looking at a project these costs should be
           factored in now. Mary stated that BC Hydro is meeting with IPP developers to
           understand the costs they are facing. BC Hydro is also meeting with other
           jurisdictions to talk about what they are experiencing. In addition, BC Hydro is
           looking at ways to structure subsequent calls e.g. fixed prices or index?



Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                      Page 5
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

       •   Sharron stated that low cost as the primary driver will affect the resources
           selected. David suggested that the whole issue is more complicated. An example
           he gave is that BC Hydro has been advised not to have such a long evaluation
           period in its call for tender, as costs go up over time. However, BC Hydro has not
           taken this advice. Therefore bidders have to budget for contingency plans and
           include terms and conditions in their contracts with Hydro. This makes the
           resultant costs bid in look high.
       •   Brian asked if there was any thought given to tariffs where there is one flat price
           like in Ontario? David then asked why a price would be set when it might be
           possible to get it cheaper? A competitive bidding process is necessary to get the
           best price. Bev interceded that this is done in Ontario only for small projects.
           Brian mentioned that one flat price takes all of the risk out of the equation and
           also makes the process completely transparent. David said that risk can still be
           taken out and better prices are still possible. Bev stated that BC Hydro is hearing
           the need to make decisions on getting new supply and BC Hydro is listening and
           agrees.
•   LTAP and the Load Resource Balance.
       •   John C. enquired if Alcan is factored in to the Load Resource Balance? David
           replied that Alcan never supplied BC Hydro with that much power anyways. Mary
           followed stating that the agreement between BC Hydro specifies that Alcan is to
           supply BC Hydro with 130 GWh per year. Alcan has the option of recalling this, but
           they must use it for their smelter or they have to supply the power back to BC
           Hydro.
       •   Fred asked when Revelstoke 5 and 6 are coming on, as people in his community
           were enquiring. Mary said that stating specifically when they will come on board is
           a challenge. The chart in the slide (shown below as Figure 1) shows when
           Revelstoke 5 and 6 are needed. However those start-up times are affected if the
           results from the calls are intermittent and/or there is less capacity. Randy
           followed stating that slide 15 (shown below as Figure 2) shows the LTAP plus two
           potential contingencies. If the load forecast is higher, Revelstoke and Mica could
           start-up earlier. This is depending upon the calls and the success of DSM programs.




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                      Page 6
                                                                    Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                                                            Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                                                               Meeting Notes                                              Version: June 22, 2006

Figure 1 LTAP Load Resource Capacity Balance


                               17,000

                               16,000
                                               Operating Planning
                               15,000
         Dependable Capacity




                               14,000
               (MW)




                               13,000

                               12,000

                               11,000

                               10,000

                                9,000
                                        6

                                               7

                                                      8

                                                            9

                                                                    0

                                                                          1

                                                                                  2

                                                                                         3

                                                                                               4

                                                                                                       5

                                                                                                              6

                                                                                                                    7

                                                                                                                             8

                                                                                                                                    9

                                                                                                                                          0

                                                                                                                                                  1

                                                                                                                                                        2

                                                                                                                                                                3

                                                                                                                                                                       4

                                                                                                                                                                             5
                                     00

                                              00

                                                     00

                                                            00

                                                                   01

                                                                          01

                                                                                 01

                                                                                        01

                                                                                               01

                                                                                                      01

                                                                                                             01

                                                                                                                    01

                                                                                                                           01

                                                                                                                                   01

                                                                                                                                          02

                                                                                                                                                 02

                                                                                                                                                        02

                                                                                                                                                               02

                                                                                                                                                                      02

                                                                                                                                                                             02
                                   F2

                                            F2

                                                   F2

                                                          F2

                                                                 F2

                                                                        F2

                                                                               F2

                                                                                      F2

                                                                                             F2

                                                                                                    F2

                                                                                                           F2

                                                                                                                  F2

                                                                                                                         F2

                                                                                                                                 F2

                                                                                                                                        F2

                                                                                                                                               F2

                                                                                                                                                      F2

                                                                                                                                                             F2

                                                                                                                                                                    F2

                                                                                                                                                                           F2
                                                                                                   Fiscal Year
                                                                                             (year ending March 31)

                                    2005 Load Forecast Range after full DSM targets*                                     Heritage Hydroelectric
                                    Existing Purchase Contracts                                                          Resource Smart
                                    Heritage Thermal                                                                     F2006 Call
                                    F2007 Call                                                                           F2009 Call
                                    Revelstoke Capacity Addition                                                         Mica or Revelstoke Capacity Addition
                                    Downstream Benefits
                                    2005 Mid Load Forecast after full DSM targets*                                       * including planning reserves




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                                                           Page 7
                                                Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                                        Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                                           Meeting Notes                                   Version: June 22, 2006



Figure 2 BC Hydro’s LTAP and Contingency Plans

                              LTAP           Contingency Plan 1       Contingency Plan 2
  Change in Key Resource Planning Variables
  Load Forecast
                            Mid                 High                            High
  Uncertainty
  DSM                    All DSM              All DSM
  Deliverability         EE/LD 2              EE/LD 2                    20% Less DSM
  Uncertainty           EE 3, 4, 5           EE 3, 4, 5
  Supply-Side Type    Low Cost ROR        Low Dependable                Low Dependable
  Risk                                       Capacity                      Capacity
                                                                         50% of LM/VI
  Supply-Side                                                          Region Resources
                          As per ROR1             As per ROR
  Location Risk                                                          moved outside
                                                                         LM/VI Region
  BC Hydro’s Planned Actions
  Revelstoke Unit
                           F2011                     F2011                      F2011
  5In-Service Date
  Mica Unit 5 or
                                                                                F2013
  Revelstoke Unit          F2018                     F2013
                                                                            (earliest date)
  6In-Service Date2


 1 The LTAP consists of a large project that is presumed to be located in the Tumbler Ridge/Peace River region. The large project could
 be either a large hydro or coal fired plant. Alternatively, these facilities could be located in the Elk Valley or the Central Interior.
 BC Hydro plans to test all three locations in its NITS application.
 2 Earliest in-service date needs to be coordinated with the ILM upgrade.




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                             Page 8
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

•   Transmission Requirements. Sharron asked if there was a process where if A happens
    than B and C will automatically follow?
       •   Randy replied that BC Hydro will proceed with the plan outlined for the earliest in
           service date. BCTC knows what is in the IEP and what BC Hydro will require for
           transmission in the future. Mary added that BC Hydro is proposing to the regulator
           that Revelstoke be advanced to its earliest in service date, as well as proceeding
           with the two calls, and DSM programs. BCTC will design the infrastructure timing in
           accordance with all these. Bev followed stating that the outcomes of all of these
           have risks which may shift through planning.
•   2008 IEP? Randy stated that the current thinking is to do an update on the acquisition
    portion of the IEP every second year.
       •   Brian asked if any gas projects had bid into the 2006 CFT and Randy stated no.
           Brian then asked of BC Hydro was obligated to at least buy the 2500 GWh and
           Randy stated no to this question as well.
       •   Brian enquired if Hydro was expecting the costs to come down in future calls? Mary
           felt that the costs would probably not come down. Some IPP’s and industrials are
           looking to BC Hydro to structure the calls with longer delivery dates which might
           bring down the prices. Mary also noted that there was a quite a range between the
           bids themselves.
       •   John C asked if anyone knew what the total obligation was amongst all the current
           contracts with Hydro? Mary said that although she did not know that number off
           the top of her head she would get that information for him. Bev followed this
           comment by stating that there are already 58 EPA’s which is 9000 GWh and this
           will grow as the next three calls are finished. Some EPA’s are already on line and
           some still need to be delivered.
    Mary to send John C the amount that BC Hydro is obligated to under the various IPP
    contracts.
Basil wrapped up the discussion by pointing out that the IEP team did a good job of bridging
what PIEPC discussed and what ended up in the report, so he encouraged the members to
take a close look at the IEP.

AGENDA ITEM #3 – DEBRIEF AND FEEDBACK
Basil introduced Anne Wilson stating that Anne will be playing an increasing role in the
Stakeholder Engagement of energy planning going forward. Anne addressed the committee
expressing that BC Hydro started off this type of process in WUP and now the IEP, and BC
Hydro is looking to potentially do this again. Therefore, Hydro would like to ask what advice
the committee would give BC Hydro in undertaking similar processes in the future.

Questions & Discussion
The following are highlights of the questions that were asked – and the points that were made
– during the open discussion.




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                      Page 9
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

•   Sharron stated that the initial learning curve is very steep as there is no consistent
    knowledge around the table. Rather than starting from scratch every time BC Hydro
    should utilise some of the same people through various processes. This would ensure that
    there is a deeper understanding in similar processes. The more knowledgeable committee
    members could ‘seed’ other processes with their knowledge.
•   Anne asked how the committee members felt the process went with the wide range of
    people involved, i.e. interveners and others? Mansell stated that he found a benefit to not
    having a firm position upon entrance into the process. He felt that fresh perspectives
    were gained from having people with different backgrounds and knowledge. Mansell did
    feel that better planning around meeting dates could be improved as there were no set
    dates and the dates fluctuated a lot.
•   Dan S. felt that he did not see PIEPC stopping, but continuing on in the future, as
    required, to potentially serve in a variety of areas. Dan S. believed that the committee
    served well as representatives from all over the province and a variety of backgrounds.
    The knowledge base built over the PIEPC process should be used in the future. Dan S. also
    stated that he would like to see more involvement with First Nations as his own
    involvement has been beneficial to prospective First Nation IPP’s on Vancouver Island as
    well as around the province.
•   John believed that awareness was built throughout the process as people with conflicting
    roles and view points benefited from exposure to each others opinions. Commonalities and
    conflicts of interest were highlighted.
•   Fred thought that a multi-stakeholder process could be improved by defining the various
    stakeholders who should be present at the table. Implications of the options discussed
    throughout the process affect different areas. It is important that there is representation
    around the table from the various areas in order to increase understanding of what is lost
    when lands are flooded. Many people would not support building in their own backyard.
    Fred also emphasized that a separate, bi-lateral process should be set up to consult First
    Nations. Capacity with First Nations should also be addressed as BC Hydro has a lot of
    human capacity but the First Nations participants in such a process would not. The
    Province also has to be clear about the relationship it has with Crown Corporations.
•   Brian felt that BC Hydro should offer a per diem for the amount of time invested.
•   Anne asked if the PEIPC process required a reasonable amount of effort?
•   Brian believed that more effort and thought would be put into the opinions and advice
    given if BC Hydro was not asking for it for free. Mansell supported Brian’s point.
•   David felt that if BC Hydro was going to assemble a group of people, BC Hydro should
    listen to what was said rather than trying to convince committee members that what BC
    Hydro was saying is correct. Anne asked if others felt this way? Mansell, Dan S. and John C
    all disagreed and believed that a lot of change was seen.
•   Brian thought that the Campbell River meeting was a great ice breaker. Sharron agreed
    that meeting should take place outside of the Lower Mainland as it offers a good
    opportunity to see what is going on, and how other people are involved.




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                     Page 10
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

•   John C. was frustrated that the issues for him are managed by the Provincial Government
    and not BC Hydro even though many things are closely related. John felt that the PIEPC
    was only dealing with one piece of the pie and limits were set upon what the committee
    members could offer suggestions on. John however is not sure how this issue can be
    addressed. Katherine expressed similar frustration over BCUC regulations.
•   Anne asked if the committee members felt that this was a valuable process? Katherine
    said yes, however she still had concerns that she would like relayed to the BCUC. Susan
    felt that the biggest value for her was the respectful and constructive dialogue. She also
    agreed that people should be paid for their time in order to encourage attendance and
    expertise. She also saw a value of having a two to three year window for the committee,
    balanced against having fresh faces. Susan also agreed that the Campbell River meeting
    was a good idea. It is important to get out of Vancouver and visit sites to see what
    happens in the long term.
•   Katherine was surprised that at the conclusion of the meetings there was not more of an
    effort made to come to some sort of consensus. She expected that there would be some
    effort beyond just boiling down the positions and finding common ground. Katherine
    expected the committee members to answer the question “where would you be willing to
    compromise?” and hence provide BC Hydro with one report that sums up PIEPC’s position.
    Sharron agreed with Katherine’s comments, and felt that the committee members should
    have been informed at the outset that they were ultimately looking at strategies rather
    than coming to consensus. David stated that the valuable part of the portfolio exercise
    was in looking at peoples’ relative priorities and values. However, given the accuracy of
    the numbers, it did not make sense to push beyond this to land on a particular portfolio.
    Because once a portfolio was chosen, then external factors would change. Brian felt that
    had the committee received the current numbers in advance, the discussion might have
    been different. John N. appreciated David’s input on costs but pointed out that
    fundamentally it was a discussion of peoples’ values. Although dollars matter, values
    don’t necessarily involve dollars.
•   Mary stated that the process profoundly influenced how the planning group developed the
    IEP. The team struggled initially to bring all the information to the committee but as the
    process progressed, the team became more able to present the information and connect it
    for the committee. The outcome shows in the final product. Each person has their own
    idea on what the correct outcome was, and the IEP reflects that.
•   John C. felt that it would be useful at the outset of future processes to give each member
    a chance to explain their own key issues and view points, thus facilitating a shared
    understanding of where everyone is coming from.
•   Sharron stated that so much of what came to the table was historical and that having this
    information prior to the process would have been helpful. Sharron also stated that she
    developed an appreciation for the history as she went through the process. One idea may
    be to tap into the people sitting on the committee to provide the historical context rather
    than having BC Hydro provide the history.
•   Brian wanted to bring up the point that there seemed to be a perception that cabinet
    turned down the report. He stated that it was impossible to turn down the report as there
    was something in there for everyone.




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                    Page 11
                           Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                    Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                   Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

•   Mary felt that one gap was having a regulatory perspective present at the table. Other
    jurisdictions have been able to get a regulatory person involved. The benefit of this is that
    it is difficult relating what took place within this forum to the regulator.
•   Mansell appreciated having David on the committee, as well as Fred, as his insight into the
    Revelstoke and Site C project was invaluable. Mansell would have preferred if the PIEPC
    received a First Nations perspective on Site C. Brenda said that BC Hydro tried to get a
    representative and they recognise the need going forward.
•   Brian felt that more external experts should be brought in to discuss certain topics.
•   John N. clarified that PIEPC is here only because the regulator says that it needs to be
    here. David stated that the PIEPC committee can not be here just for that purpose. The
    committee needed to find a practical plan the will be accepted by BCUC and outside the
    room. However the PIEPC can not go to the final step of selecting a portfolio as the rules
    are constantly changing. This process needs to adjust its process to fit with other cycles.
•   Julius suggested that when a process is created, such as the IEP, the product that BC
    Hydro files with the regulator is improved. If everyone in the room can agree on that then
    the process is worthwhile. Susan agreed that the committee can not be dismissed because
    it does not have decision making abilities. The dialogue that takes place is still valuable
    and should inform both BC Hydro and the Province going forward.
•   Katherine would have like to have seen the report before it was publicised. She also felt
    that the two hour notice for the conference call was unacceptable. Several other
    committee members added their support to this statement.
•   Dan S. stated that there are 53 projects and 37 IPP’s. He would like to know who the
    proponents are as well as the types of projects. First Nations are very interested in being
    involved in energy production and should be involved right from the very beginning. First
    Nations currently get referrals from industry and government in their area. Those referrals
    require capacity building. David supported this view point. Mansell stated that it is not
    necessarily the case with all proponents.
    Brenda to send Mansell, Fred and Dan S. the listing of proponents.
•   Fred felt that a bilateral process is needed between First Nations, the Province and BC
    Hydro. The obligations in dealing with BCUC must be clear right from the start. A lot of
    these issues can not be addressed at this table.
•   Basil asked what the committee’s feedback is on the people sitting on the committee. Are
    the individuals reporting back their own views or that of their association?
•   Dan S. felt that he would like to think that the committee represented the citizens of BC.
    Dan S. stated that he can only give an idea of what to look for in dealing with First
    Nations, particularly the cultural connection to land and resources. He felt that an expert
    in First Nations issues should be brought in for future meetings.
•   Mary stated that both her, and Bev tried to reflect other issues outside of BC Hydro, and
    so did not necessarily bring the same view to the table. BC Hydro endorsed this approach
    and the preference expressed for the strategies was their own.




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                     Page 12
                            Integrated Electricity Plan (IEP) 2005
                     Provincial IEP Committee – May 29th, 2006
                                    Meeting Notes           Version: June 22, 2006

•   John C. felt that the people around the table came with different expectations. It is
    messy and he could not see how it could be any different.
Basil and Anne concluded the discussion by thanking the committee members for their time
and clarifying that the feedback given from the discussion as well as the feedback given on
the forms will help to develop future processes.
Randy thanked each member personally and distributed the thank you gifts.

ACTION ITEMS
What needs to be done?                                         Who will do it?   By when?
Send Mansell, Fred and Dan S. the listing of IPP proponents.   Brenda            Before the end
                                                                                 of June

Send John C the amount that BC Hydro is obligated to under     Mary              Before the end
the various IPP contracts.                                                       of June




Meeting – May 29, 2006 at Westin Grand in Vancouver                                     Page 13

								
To top