HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-12-07 RMLD Board of Commissioners MinutesReading Municipal Light Board of Commissioners
Regular Session
230 Ash Street
Reading, MA 01867
December 7, 2011
Start Time of Regular Session: 7:31 p.m.
End Time of Regular Session: 10:07 p.m.
Commissioners:
Richard Hahn, Chairman
Mary Ellen O'Neill, Secretary
Robert Soli, Commissioner
Staff:
Philip B. Pacino, Vice Chair
Gina Snyder, Commissioner
D
RECEIY
TOWN CL�RK
READING. MASS.
1111 JAN 2b P 2t 45
Vinnie Cameron, General Manager Beth Ellen Antonio, Human Resources Manager
Jared Carpenter, Energy Efficiency Engineer Jeanne Foti, Executive Assistant
Robert Fournier, Accounting/Business Manager Craig Owen, Materials Manager
Jane Parenteau, Energy Services Manager Kevin Sullivan, Engineering and Operations Manager
Citizens' Advisory Board
Tony Capobianco, Member
Guests:
Esquire, Rubin and Rudman, LLP
James Bonazoli, Town of Reading, Selectmen Liaison to the RMLD Board
David Williams, Cities for Climate Protection, Reading
Chairman Hahn called the meeting to order and stated that the meeting of the Reading Municipal Light Department
(RMLD) Board of Commissioners is being broadcast live at the RMLD's office at 230 Ash Street, Reading, MA.
Live broadcasts are available only in Reading due to technology constraints. The meeting was video taped for
distribution to the community television stations in North Reading, Wilmington and Lynnfield.
Opening Remarks/Approval of Meeting Agenda
There were no suggested changes to the agenda.
Introductions
There were no members of the public present at this point in the meeting. Citizens' Advisory Board (CAB)
representative Tony Capobianco reported that the Citizens' Advisory Board will be meeting on Wednesday,
December 14, 7:00 p.m. at the RMLD. Chairman Hahn stated that he will cover that meeting for the Board.
Presentation - Maureen Hanifan — Customer Service Programs (Attachment 1)
Ms. Hanifan provided an overview of the programs in Customer Service.
Approval of October 26, 2011 Board Minutes
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that the RMLD Board of Commissioners approve the Regular
Session meeting minutes of October 26, 2011 with the changes presented by Commissioners Snyder and Soli.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
Changes to the minutes presented:
Ms. Snyder, page one, remove second sentence in third paragraph in CCP Activities Update section.
Mr. Soli, page two second sentence take out "pretty" add "financially" end of sentence in Audit Committee section.
Page five, last sentence in fifth paragraph, put in "that" after mentioned, add problem at the end of the sentence in
IFNSTAR Outage section.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes 2
December 7, 2011
Report from Board Committees
.SG�er s
et vSommittee — Vice Chair Pacino - Report of November 7 Meeting
Mr. Pa i at the General Manager Committee met on November 7. The Department did supply the Board
members with the minutes of the meeting that reflect what was discussed. Mr. Pacino said that there were two
issues discussed. One was an issue relative to the Phoenix business trip that was discussed and resolved. The main
issue discussed was the NSTAR Radial line support overpayments. Mr. Pacino said that there was discussion on the
NSTAR Radial line support as to what happened, how it happened and the timetable. The committee's
recommendation to the Board is that the General Manager receive a verbal reprimand for not bringing the NSTAR
Radial line support to the Board when it was discovered. There was also discussion on further action that can be
taken to recoup more of these NSTAR Radial line support payments. Discussion would need to take place in
Executive Session, because litigation may be involved.
Ms. Snyder and Mr. Soli signified their support of the General Manager Committee's recommendation to issue a
verbal reprimand to Mr. Cameron for not disclosing to the Board the NSTAR overpayments when they were
discovered. Chairman Hahn conveyed the reprimand to Mr. Cameron. Mr. Cameron responded that he understands
the wishes of the Board. Also, Chairman Hahn said that Mr. Cameron has taken steps to make sure there are no
other situations that fall into this category. Chairman Hahn stated that it is his understanding that there are no other
situations that have been found, and asked if this were correct. Mr. Cameron responded, yes.
Power & Rate Committee — Chairman Hahn — Report of December 5 Meeting
Chairman Hahn reported that he, Ms. Snyder and Mr. Soli met on Monday, December 5. Chairman Hahn said that
the committee went into Executive Session to review a potential Purchase Power Agreement with a solar facility,
which the full Board will discuss in Executive Session this evening. The committee voted 3:0 to recommend to the
full Board that the staff be directed to pursue this deal and finalize it under the agreed terms and conditions. The net
metering rate tariffs were reviewed. Net metering involves residential or commercial customers in which certain
types of generation that qualify for this rate. These rates set the terms and conditions that the RMLD will use to
purchase excess kilowatts generated by a residential or commercial customer. Modifications to the rates were
suggested. Chairman Hahn said that the tariffs can be voted on at the next Board meeting. Chairman Hahn asked
that these tariffs be sent to the Board and the CAB as a courtesy next week.
Chairman Hahn said that the two other items discussed deal with renewable energy. There was discussion on what
to do with the Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) that the RMLD receives from the purchase of electricity from
Swift River Hydro sites. Related to this are revisions to the proposed Sustainable Energy Policy. Modifications to
the policy will depend on what decision is made on the RECs.
Chairman Hahn summarized the discussion on the potential sale of the RECs. Chairman Hahn reported that over a
year ago, the Board voted unanimously to direct the RMLD staff to develop renewable energy resources as part of
its power supply portfolio. In response to this directive, the staff recommended the Swift River hydro projects and
the Concord Steam biomass project. Both projects were approved by the Board, which involved the purchasing of
energy and RECs which certify that the energy comes from a renewable source.
Chairman Hahn noted that it is a generally acknowledged fact that renewable energy resources cost more than
conventional power supplies. Chairman Hahn stated that it is a cost many people are willing to incur to help green
up the RMLD's portfolio, to reduce pollution, green house gases and to have an impact on global warming. This is
something that the RMLD is doing voluntarily under the full direction of the Board. Having done this and incurring
a higher cost, the issue is now should we sell these RECs and recoup some of that money. The Power & Rate
Committee voted 2:1 not to authorize the General Manager to sell the RECs associated with the Swift River power
contract. What that vote means is that we do not want to sell the RECs. You want to keep them as part of the
renewable portfolio. If the RECs are sold, Chairman Hahn explained, we would no longer have renewable energy
resources in our portfolio.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2011
Report from Board Committees
Power & Rate Committee — Chairman Hahn — Report of December 5 Meeting
Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Ms. O'Neill that the Reading Municipal Light Board (RMLB) move to
authorize the General Manager of the RMLD to sell the Renewable Energy Certificates associated with the output of
four hydro electric plants owned by Swift River LLC that the RMLD presently has entitlement to.
Ms. O'Neill said that she seconded this motion for discussion purposes only.
Mr. Pacino said that he is going to move that this be tabled with the intent of obtaining CAB discussion on this
issue. Mr. Pacino explained that the CAB was set up to be the voice of the ratepayer and this issue should be
addressed by them to obtain their recommendation prior to Board action. He is also not in favor of letting the RECs
expire; he is in favor of selling them.
Mr. Pacino made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder to table the motion. Mr. Pacino withdrew his motion to table
the motion until further discussion on the issue has occurred.
Ms. O'Neill stated that from a procedural standpoint, she felt the topic of RECs needed to be on the Board agenda.
She believes that to put something on an agenda as a report only without any indication of what might come to the
Board for a vote does not meet our obligation under the Open Meeting Law. Secondly, although she is interested in
what the CAB has to say, she, as an elected member of the Board of Commissioners, does not feel bound to follow
the voice of the CAB. She is interested in their input and expertise. Ms. O'Neill is open to keeping the RECs, but
needs more information.
Chairman Hahn said that in regard to the procedural matter, it was not in the books, however at the last RMLD
® Board meeting everyone was put on notice that we were going to try to get a vote on the RECs this evening.
Ms. Snyder said that the decision to purchase renewable energy including the RECs was because of their value of
demonstrating our commitment to being greener. Ms. Snyder did not hear anything at the meetings to change that
rationale. Several constituents have said to Ms. Snyder in the past that they did wish that the RMLD would make a
stronger position on renewable energy. It is good that the RMLD and the CAB members were in attendance at
several meetings where the power purchases were discussed and finalized. They expressed their satisfaction and
approval on the part of the RMLD Energy Services for purchasing these renewable projects. That explains why she
voted the way she did at the meeting. If the RECs are sold we cannot say that we have purchased renewable energy.
We simply purchased more expensive power. Someone else will be using the credit to meet their required
renewable portfolio standards and get out of purchasing renewable energy.
Mr. Soli said that he was the one in the 2:1 vote, who voted to sell the certificates. Mr. Soli has talked to people
since the last meeting whose opinion is to sell them. Mr. Soli said that before we go ahead the auditors need to
define how to report the RECs and if they expire on the expense side we need to have a notation that these were
allowed to expire because of the Board vote.
Chairman Hahn asked Mr. Capobianco if he wanted to comment on this. Mr. Capobianco responded that the CAB
has not voted on this, therefore he does not feel comfortable speaking on this for the CAB. They will be making a
recommendation at their meeting on next Wednesday.
Mr. Cameron said that the REC issue was brought to the Power & Rate Committee, and he received direction from
the Board to purchase renewable energy products for RMLD's portfolio. This was done with the knowledge that
none of the municipals in Massachusetts are under Renewable Portfolio Standards. Mr. Cameron's plan was to
purchase renewable power and sell the RECs until the state mandated a Renewable Power Standard (RPS) for
municipal utilities. When a RPS is put on the RMLD then he will stop selling the RECs to be able to meet our
percentage according to the RPS.
Vra —10
Regular Session Meeting Minutes 4
December 7, 2011
Adlikk
Report from Board Committees
Power & Rate Committee — Chairman Hahn — Report of December 5 Meeting
Mr. Cameron wants the viewing public to know that he wants to be fiscally responsible to the RMLD customers and
sell the RECs.
Ms. Parenteau said that over the past three years, Energy Services staff has been actively reviewing, analyzing and
seeking these cost effective projects to incorporate into the RMLD's power supply portfolio with suppliers who have
either developed the projects, online or are looking to develop projects from sustainable resources such as wind,
solar, hydro and biomass. The staff fully supports the direction that the Board has given in terms of incorporating
these projects into the portfolio. It is the right thing to do.
The staff has been working with the Power & Rate Committee since September to try to draft a Sustainability
Energy Policy that would address all these aspects, that includes how much power do you want with RECs and at
what cost. Based on these past three months, it is unclear to the staff what the ultimate goal of the Board is in terms
of sustainable projects.
Chairman Hahn said that the Board has given staff direction, perhaps not as clearly as it liked, but the Board has
given both the General Manager and staff direction and will continue to do that. Secondly, but more importantly, he
heard tonight, the plan by the staff all along was to buy these RECs and sell them. Chairman Hahn said that he does
not recall that being part of the discussion, and stated that he is going to resist the assertion that this was the plan all
along, it was not unless someone can provide the documentation that he is wrong.
Messrs. Bonazoli and Williams were asked at this point if they would like to make any comments; both declined.
Mr. Pacino made a motion, seconded by Mr. Soli, to table this issue.
Motion carried 5 :0:0.
Chairman Hahn said that this issue should be discussed at a joint meeting with the CAB after it meets on December
14. It is his suggestion to bring this discussion to a conclusion one way or another, because they need to decide
what to do with the RECs and finalize the renewable policy. Chairman Hahn asked Mr. Capobianco to check with
the CAB if the Board could meet jointly with the CAB.
Mr. Pacino requested that the Board could receive in writing what the value of the RECs are presently and what the
projected value will be. Mr. Pacino said that he also wants the exposure in terms of cost if the RMLD has an
Renewable Portfolio Standard imposed on it. Chairman Hahn stated that the cost is in the Board packet $29.50 is
the current going price for RECs for a non -solar project.
General Manager's Report — Mr. Cameron
MMWEC Arbitration Legal Costs
Mr. Cameron stated that he will be going over on his budget for outside services for $100,000 because he thought
the MMWEC arbitration would come to settlement. Mr. Cameron said that he is letting the Board know that his
outside services budget will need another $50,000. Chairman Hahn clarified that Mr. Cameron is asking for a
budget increase.
APPA Legislative Rally Monday, March 2012
Mr. Cameron stated that the American Public Power Association's Legislative Conference is scheduled for March
12 -14 in Washington, DC. Mr. Cameron usually attends this conference and visits with New England legislators to
discuss issues that are important to the municipal electric utility industry in Massachusetts and New England. Mr.
Cameron is asking that the RMLD Board approve his travel for this conference.
Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Mr. Pacino to authorize the travel for the General Manage to attend the APPA
Legislative Rally, Monday, March 12 to Wednesday, March 14.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2011
• Financial Report — October, 2011— Mr. Fournier Attachment 2
p � ( )
Mr. Fournier reported on the Financial Report for October 2011.
Mr. Fournier reported that for the month of October the year to date Net Income is $178,000 making the year to date
Net Income $2.1 million, coming in under budget by $2.1 million. Mr. Fournier said that the year to date Fuel
Expenses exceeded Fuel Revenues by $38,000. Year to date Base Revenues are under budget by $1 million or
5.6 %. Actual Base Revenues were $16.7 million compared to the budgeted amount of $17.7 million. Purchase
Power Base expense was $211,000 or 2.2% under budget. Actual Purchase Power Base costs were $9.3 million
compared to the budgeted amount of $9.5 million.
Operating and Maintenance expenses were under budget by $211,000 or 5.3 %. Actual Operating and Maintenance
expenses were $3.8 million compared to the budgeted amount of $4 million. Depreciation Expense and Voluntary
Payments to the Towns were on budget. Operating Fund was at $10 million due to the timing of payables, and good
collections in October which reduced the receivables balance.
Year to date kilowatt sales were 259 million, 1.8% below last year's figure.
The Gaw revenues collected year to date were $259,000 with the total collected since the inception of the Gaw rate
to $866,000. This fee will be in effect for approximately two more years.
Cumulatively, all five divisions were under budget by $232,000 or 3.6 %.
Power Supply Report — October, 2011— Ms. Parenteau (Attachment 3)
Ms. Parenteau reported that RMLD's load for October was a little less than a 1% decrease compared to October
2010. Energy costs were $2.96 million, equivalent to $.0534 per kilowatt hour.
Ms. Parenteau said that the October Fuel Charge was set at $.0500/kWh. RMLD sales totaled approximately 57.1
million kilowatt hours and, as a result, the RMLD undercollected by approximately $144,000 in October resulting in
a Deferred Fuel Cash Reserve (DFCR) balance of $3 million. The Fuel Charge was set at $.05 per kilowatt hour for
November and increased to $.055 for December. The current projection is to have the DFCR balance at $2.2 million
by the end of December.
Ms. Parenteau reported that the RMLD purchased approximately 20.3% of its energy requirement from the ISO Spot
Market at an average cost of $44 per megawatt hour. The RMLD hit a peak demand of 97.5 megawatts at 7:00 p.m.
on October 10, 2011 with a temperature of 70 degrees as compared to a demand of 111 megawatts, which occurred
on October 1, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. with a temperature of 77 degrees. The RMLD's monthly capacity requirement was
209.4 megawatts, equivalent to $6.71 per kilowatt hour month.
Table 4, added per Mr. Soli's request, shows the average energy and capacity dollars calculated by dividing the total
amount of dollars by energy to yield dollars per kilowatt hour. For the month of October RMLD's costs came in at a
little over $.0777 per kilowatt how for capacity and energy. There is no transmission dollars associated with that.
Transmission costs for the month were $727,000 which is approximately a 7% decrease from the previous month.
Time of Use Rates (Attachment 4)
Ms. Parenteau reported on the Time of Use program for the first six months since the new rate became effective
May 1. Ms. Parenteau requested that the Department look at the customers on those rates to determine if they were
saving money on that rate. Ms. Parenteau commented that Rahul Shah a coop student prepared this report and as of
October 31, there are 234 residential customers and 61 commercial customers on this rate. All customers are saving
on that rate. The average residential savings is $19 per month. The hours for the TOU rate were switched from
10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The new peak hours in current Time of Use rate are from noon to 7:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday excluding holidays. The time has been shortened, but the cost differential between the on peak and
off peak rates have been increased considerably.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2011
17�1
Power Supply Report — October, 2011— Ms. Parenteau (Attachment 4)
Time of Use Rates
Ms. Parenteau said that on the commercial side there are 61 customers with an average savings rate of 7 %. The
range is from $110 to $7,900 per month. The load factor is a significant component of the savings. On a six month
basis the total dollar value they were able to save is $193,000. It is the staff's hope to promote this rate to encourage
customers to sign up, especially on the Residential Time of Use. Ms. Parenteau said that they are testing out a
couple of vendors for mass e- mailings and will have to use a third party vendor to do this because of spammers. A
sample was sent to one hundred customers with a couple signing up for the Time of Use, and the staff is monitoring
these customers to look at their savings.
Mr. Soli said that he would like to see more data on the commercials because of the diversity of businesses that are
on the Time of Use Rate.
Engineering and Operations Report — October, 2011 - Mr. Sullivan (Attachment 5)
Gaw Update
Mr. Sullivan reported that there are no additions or changes to the Gaw project. Mr. Sullivan said that the chart
remains the same; the RMLD is at $6.9 million. Chairman Hahn asked how much longer it will take to close out the
project. Mr. Sullivan responded that there has been a struggle for the contractor to get his paperwork together.
Mr. Sullivan said that in regard to the soil remediation at Gaw, the Notice of Intent with the Reading Conservation
Commission is officially closed out. There is some additional paperwork that has to go between the RMLD, DEP
and Registry of Deeds.
Mr. Sullivan stated that there have been 12,000 meters installed as part of the meter upgrade project.
In the variance report: Project 1 — 5W9 Reconductoring — Ballardvale Street — is being worked on, Project 2 — High JM
Capacity Tie 4W18 and 3W8 Franklin Street — is being worked on, Project 3 — Upgrading Old Lynnfield Center
URDs — is being worked on which consists of engineering labor and we are working with the Lynnfield DPW on this
project. Project 4 — RTU Replacement — they are reviewing the bid spec, Project 5 — Reclosures — they are writing
the bid spec. Project 6 — Capacitor Banks — the prototype development has begun, Project 8 — Relay Replacement
Project — the bid vote is this evening and Project 9 — 115kV Disconnect Replacement — it is scheduled for late
December at Gaw.
There was one new commercial connection last month and 15 -18 new residential services. One -third of the routine
construction total is due to the October snowstorm. The numbers on the cutout replacement program will be
provided next month. In the Reliability Report the Customer Average Interruption Duration Index ( CAIDI) does not
include the October snowstorm because it involved greater than fifteen percent of the service territory for customer
outages. The October CAIDI number is up due to the limited number of customers affected and outages beyond the
RMLD four year average duration. The average October CAIDI is 55.42 minutes and 65.57 minutes with the rolling
average for the year at 60.8. The smaller the number of customers the easier it becomes to be above the four year
average if restoration takes longer than the 50.98 minutes.
The System Average Interruption Frequency Index ( SAIFI) is down due to the low number of customers that were
affected in October apart from the snowstorm. The average October SAIFI is 1.26 outage incidents and the RMLD
is below that at .08 with 192 customers affected for the month. The Months Between Interruptions (MBTI) went up
from 27 to 30. This demonstrates that customers are experiencing less outages.
Number of calls for the month outside of the snowstorm was 139; outage incidents 24; customers affected 192; no
feeder outages; 17 area outages; and 7 service outages.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes 7
December 7, 2011
is
Engineering and Operations Report —Mr. Sullivan (Attachment 6)
October Snowstorm
Mr. Sullivan reported that the snowstorm occurred late October 29 into October 30. The RMLD service territory
was significantly affected by this northeaster with five inches of wet heavy snow on top of fully leafed out trees.
Mr. Sullivan stated that there were power lines and trees down which caused poles to come down in all four
communities. At the height of the storm there were approximately 7,000 customers without service. The RMLD
brought in out of state tree crews on Sunday to augment the two tree crews who work with the RMLD on a daily
basis. There were a total of five mutual aid municipal crews from Marblehead, Middleton, Danvers, Taunton and
Wakefield. By Wednesday night we had all power restored with approximately two hundred customers out of
service. Mr. Sullivan stated that on behalf of the RMLD and the Engineering and Operations Department we would
like to give our thanks to the towns of Marblehead, Danvers, Taunton, Wakefield and Middleton for helping us out
in time of need.
Mr. Pacino said that he would like to also thank the outside towns as well for their assistance. Mr. Pacino
commented that he received calls from customers at home who wanted to know when their power would be restored.
In response to concerns raised by Mr. Soli, Mr. Cameron explained that communities to the east faired better during
the storm. Marblehead, for example, received rain; Braintree experienced no outages; and the western part of the
state was particularly hard hit.
Mr. Bonazoli commented that from a Board of Selectmen perspective he would like to work more tightly on
emergency response. The police and fire were responding to a lot of phone calls because customers could not get
into the RMLD. One suggestion was looking at the 911 system. Mr. Bonazoli offered as the liaison to take that up.
In response to a question from Chairman Hahn, Mr. Cameron explained that there are 25 lines coming into the
RMLD, more than sufficient for most of the year, but not in a storm where thousands of customers may be out. Mr.
Cameron said that the RMLD staff is looking into this issue to see if there needs to be changes to the phone system.
Chairman Hahn said that he would like to see a report on Mr. Cameron's investigation into this matter. Mr.
Cameron commented that he will have this report ready for the February meeting. Mr. Pacino said that he would
like the social media aspect of this addressed such as Facebook and Twitter. Mr. Cameron responded that this is
being looked into also.
M.G.L. Chapter 30B Bids (Attachment 7)
2012 -02 - 224 Ash Street Demolition
Mr. Cameron explained that this bid is for the demolition of the old Control Center formerly used by RCTV. The
RMLD received a letter from Francesco stating that they would not be able to proceed with the contract for the
demolition due to pricing. Mr. Cameron stated that the Department recommends awarding the bid then the
Department will deal with Francesco with respect to their letter.
Mr. Owen added that the RMLD can accept a bid withdrawal up to the bid opening, however, this letter came in
after the bid opening. If Francesco were to reject the contract award then the RMLD can proceed to collect on the
bid bond and other remuneration that may be applicable.
Chairman Hahn asked if the Board should vote on this tonight. Mr. Owen replied that he cannot make the award
unless the Board makes a recommendation on the bid. If the bid is awarded and the winner does not honor its bid,
then the RMLD can collect on the bid bond.
Ms. O'Neill asked why there were only two bidders. Mr. Owen responded that at the pre -bid conference there were
fourteen companies in attendance that were eligible to bid.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2011
M.G.L. Chapter 30B Bids (Attachment 7)
2012 -02 - 224 Ash Street Demolition
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -02 for Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of
the Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA 01867 be awarded to Francesco Demolition for $56,800 as the lowest
qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
2012 -08 — Meter Data Management (MDM) System
Mr. Sullivan said that notice was sent to six potential bidders and one bid came back from Itron. The capital budget
allocation for the fixed network MDM system is $702,000. The fixed network is for the server, hardware and
software, engineering design and project management service and support for the installation.
Ms. O'Neill asked Mr. Sullivan to explain where this number came from because it exceeds the capital budget
amount. Ms. O'Neill pointed out that this is not the only area that is over budget in the capital budget. Ms. O'Neill
said that the total overage in the capital budget translates into $336,000. Mr. Sullivan stated that at the time the
capital budget was put together this was the best information that they had to arrive at the $702,000. In the capital
budget there is a line item for hardware and software costs and project management as it relates to this project.
Mr. Sullivan said that the bid has the same items as well as a contingency. The difference between the budgeted and
bid amount was that the RMLD estimated it only needed a certain amount of repeaters, a piece of hardware included
in the project. The bid came in with approximately double the amount of repeaters and that drives up the number
considerably. There is a possibility that all those repeaters will not be required throughout the project and we will
not know until the project takes place.
Ms. O'Neill asked if we followed up as to why the RMLD did not receive any other bids. Mr. Owen replied that it Amok
was incompatibility with RMLD's system, databases, platforms and meters. Mr. Owen said that there was one
company that had an internal communications problem related to submitting the bid. Chairman Hahn pointed out
that he is more concerned about the lack of competition rather than the amount of the bid. Chairman Hahn
suggested a re -bid and asked if there is a way to get other bids and would you get the same answer. Mr. Sullivan
responded that is quite possible.
Mr. Sullivan investigated eight or nine references provided by Itron and all were extremely pleased with their
professionalism and how the installations were handled. This was based on nationwide feedback.
Mr. Soli said that he has a concern with the language "contingent upon finalization of negotiations and the execution
of a definitive agreement." Mr. Cameron said that Diedre Lawrence of Rubin and Rudman and Messrs. Owen and
Sullivan have been finalizing the contract.
Mr. Soli asked if this is 30B compliant. Mr. Cameron responded, yes. Mr. Soli said that this is not the norm, the
Board votes the bid and the contract is executed. Mr. Soli asked if the bottom line was going to change. Mr.
Cameron, replied, no. Mr. Cameron pointed out that if there are any material changes then it would require re -bid.
Ms. O'Neill commented that we may have blocked ourselves in by separating these bids out which forces bidding
with Itron on both ends. Chairman Hahn said that it is probably an accurate comment, but the first contract cannot
be overturned.
Ms. Snyder stated that she wanted to know if Ms. Lawrence had anything to add. Ms. Lawrence stated that she
wanted everyone to be assured that the pricing terms and statement of work are not subject to change as part of the
authorization the Department is seeking. In order to finish the negotiation of the contract it is really the commercial
terms and conditions as related to warranties and indemnification that employers disagree over, it is to ensure that
the RMLD is protected. Ms. Lawrence explained that the pricing terms are what they were in the bid.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2011
M.G.L. Chapter 30B Bids (Attachment 7)
2012 -08 - MDM System
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -08 for Fixed Network Meter Data Management
(MDM) system be awarded to Itron for a total cost of $876,379.11 as the lowest qualified bidder on the
recommendation of the General Manager contingent upon finalization of negotiations and the execution of a
definitive agreement between Itron and the RMLD for this project.
Motion carried 3:2:0. Chairman Hahn and Ms. O'Neill voted against this motion.
2012 -14 — Three Phase Polemount Transformers
Mr. Sullivan reported that this bid was sent out to 17 bidders, two responded. The capital budget allocation is
$22,000.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -14 for Three Phase Pole Mounted Transformers
be awarded to WESCO for a total cost of $10,164 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the
General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
2012 -15 — Single Phase Polemount Transformers
Mr. Sullivan reported that this bid was sent out to 17 bidders, five responded. The Department did not allocate
funds in the fiscal year 2012 capital budget. It will bring the inventory back up to the necessary level. Ms. O'Neill
asked why the transformers are not in the budget. Mr. Sullivan replied that since the capital budget book was
created the Department has used a considerable amount of these transformers. At the time of the budget there was
sufficient inventory.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -15 for Single Phase Pole Mounted Transformers
is be awarded to WESCO for a total cost of $17,625 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the
General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
2012 -16 — Three Phase Padmount Transformers
Mr. Sullivan reported that this bid was sent out to 17 bidders, three responded. The capital budget allocation is
$94,800.
Ms. Snyder asked why there would be a $50,000 differential. Mr. Sullivan replied that it is a timing issue. Mr.
Sullivan explained that the RMLD used five transformers in Wilmington as replacements. Mr. Sullivan explained
for future projects they need six transformers for a total of eleven. None of these transformers were purchased
during the 2011 fiscal year.
Ms. Snyder asked if these are the transformers she has seen clean up costs for. Mr. Sullivan replied that one is. Ms.
Snyder asked about the additional six and if they were replacements or for new locations. Mr. Sullivan replied that
they are for new locations.
Ms. O'Neill asked why the RMLD did not take the lowest bidder, Irby. Mr. Owen responded they did not complete
all the requirements and took multiple exceptions and are considered non responsive.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -16 for Three Phase Pad Mounted Transformers
be awarded to Power Sales for a total cost of $142,924 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the
General Manager.
Motion carried 4:0:1. Ms. Snyder abstained.
2012 -17 — Single Phase Padmount Transformers
Mr. Sullivan reported that this bid was sent out to 17 bidders, three responded. The capital budget allocation is
$94,800.
Regular Session Meeting Minutes 10
December 7, 2011
E
M.G.L. Chapter 30B Bids (Attachment 7)
2012 -17 — Single Phase Padmount Transformers
Ms. O'Neill asked what the difference is as two bid awards are being made for this item. Mr. Cameron replied that
there are two types of KVAs. Chairman Hahn said that there should be two separate motions to reflect the KVA
differences. Mr. Soli asked that FR3 be explained. Chairman Hahn said that soy oil is used as a dielectric fluid in
these transformers.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -17 for Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 50KVA
Transformers be awarded to WESCO for a total cost of $30,086 as the lowest qualified bidder on the
recommendation of the General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -17 for Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 75KVA
Transformers be awarded to Power Sales for a total cost of $15,198 as the lowest qualified bidder on the
recommendation of the General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
2012 -18 Material Handler Truck
Mr. Owen reported that a bid was sent out to 22 bidders and two responded.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -18 for One Material Handler Truck be awarded
to James A. Kiley Co. for $202,595 as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the
General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
2012 -19 Bucket Truck
Mr. Owen reported that a bid was sent out to 22 bidders and two responded.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -19 for One Bucket Truck be awarded to James A.
Kiley Co. for $201,061 as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the General
Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
2012 -22 Substation Relays
Mr. Sullivan reported that this bid was sent out to 15 bidders, three responded. The capital budget allocation was
$25,000.
Mr. Soli asked what the relays do. Mr. Sullivan responded that relays provide protection and control at the 13.8KV
level.
Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that bid 2012 -22 for Substation Relays be awarded to
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories for a total cost of $31,044 as the lowest qualified bidder on the
recommendation of the General Manager.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
BOARD MATERIAL AVAILABLE BUT NOT DISCUSSED
Rate Comparisons, October 2011, E -Mail responses to Account Payable/Payroll Questions
RMLD Board Meetings
Wednesday, January 25, 2012, Thursday, January 12, 2012, T -Shirt Award Ceremony Q19
Regular Session Meeting Minutes 11
December 7, 2011
® Citizens' Advisory Board Meetin
Wednesday, December 14, 2011 at the RMLD, Chairman Hahn will cover this meeting.
Executive Session
At 9:50 p.m. Ms. O'Neill made a motion seconded by Ms. Snyder that the Board go into Executive Session to
approve Executive Session meeting minutes of October 26, 2011, discuss MMWEC Arbitration, and discussion of
power supply based on Chapter 164 Section 47D exemption from public records and open meeting requirements in
certain instances and return to Regular Session for the sole purpose of adjournment.
Mr. Soli, Aye; Ms. Snyder, Aye; Chairman Hahn, Aye; Mr. Pacino, Aye; and Ms. O'Neill, Aye.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
Adjournment
At 10:07 p.m. Mr. Soli made a motion seconded by Ms. O'Neill to adjourn the Regular Session.
Motion carried 5:0:0.
A true copy of the RMLD Board of Commissioners minutes
as approved by a majority of the Commission.
Mary Ellen O'Neill, Secretary
RMLD Board of Commissioners
L'
Ell-
C
ATTACHMENT 1
Reading Municipal Light Department
TO: Vincent Cameron
FROM: Maureen K. Hanifan
SUBJECT: Customer Service Programs
DATE: December 1, 2011
This is a brief outline of programs in Customer Service at Reading Municipal Light:
1. Payments
We accept many types of payments. We spend time educating customers on different
payment methods. We walk them through payment processes such as making a
payment on the RMLD web site and setting up RMLD as a payee at their bank.
2. Paperless Invoices
We explain the benefits of going paperless.
3. Budget Bills
Many of our customers enjoy the Budget Bill Program. Customers pay the same amount
® for eleven months of the year and then pay extra in December if they use more
electricity or they receive a credit if they use less. Many customers conserve because
they do not want to pay more in December.
4. Credit and Collection Program
We work with customers continuously, offering payment plans, educating them on
conservation and informing them of programs and services available to them in the
community from outside agencies.
S. Utility Authorization Number Program
We implemented new software in the past year which has streamlined the process.
6. Energy Star Appliance Rebate Program
We process rebate credits for customers who purchase Energy Star Compliant
Appliances such as Refrigerators, Washing Machines, Dishwashers, Central Air
Conditioning Units, Room Air Conditioning Units, Dehumidifiers and Programmable
Thermostats. This year, rebates for electric Heat Pump Water Heaters, Air Source Heat
Pumps and Ceiling Fans were added.
7. Home Energy Audit Program
Coordinate and process requests for home energy audits.
8. Gift Certificate Program
RMLD offers gift certificates in any denomination that can be applies to any RMLD
40 customer account
ATTACHMENT 2
® Dt: November 30, 2011
To: RMLB, Vincent F. Cameron, Jr., Jeanne Foti
Fr: Bob Fournier Ilf 1jit,
4 �r
Sj: October 31, 2011 Report
The results for the four months ending October 31, 2011, for the fiscal year 2012
will be summarized in the following paragraphs.
1) Change in Net Assets: (Page 3A)
For the month of October, the net income or the positive change in net assets was
$178,906, bringing the year to date net income to $2,112,956. The year to date
budgeted net income was $4,284,977, resulting in $2,172,020 or 50.69% being
under budget. Year to date fuel expenses exceeded fuel revenues by $38,967.
2) Revenues: (Page 11B)
Year to date base revenues were under budget by $1,000,240 or 5.63 %. Actual
base revenues were $16.7 million compared to the budgeted amount of
$17.7million.
3) Expenses: (Page 12A)
10 *Year to date purchased power base expense was $211,785 or 2.2% under budget.
Actual purchased power base costs were $9.3 million compared to the budgeted
amount of $9.5 million.
*Year to date operating and maintenance (O &M) expenses combined were under
budget by $211,877 or 5.3 %. Actual O &M expenses were $3.8 million compared
to the budgeted amount of $4.0 million.
*Depreciation expense and voluntary payments to the Towns were on budget.
4) Cash (Page 9)
*Operating Fund was at $10,136,260.
*Capital Fund balance was at $4,302,802.
* Rate Stabilization Fund was at $6,059,433.
* Deferred Fuel Fund balance was at $3,016,258.
* Energy Conservation Fund balance was at $139,384.
5) General Information:
Year to date kwh sales (Page 5) were 259,317,001 which is 4.9 million kwh or
1.8 %, behind last year's actual figure. GAW revenues collected ytd were
$259,294 bringing the total collected since inception to $866,469.
6) Budget Variance:
Cumulatively, the five divisions were under budget by $232,428 or 3.6 %.
11
FINANCIAL REPORT
® OCTOBER 31, 2011
ISSUE DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 2011
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
BUSINESS -TYPE PROPRIETARY FUND
STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS
10/31/11
PREVIOUS YEAR CURRENT YEAR
ASSETS
CURRENT
UNRESTRICTED CASH
(SCH A
P.9)
6,898,800.38
10,139,260.28
RESTRICTED CASH
(SCH A
P.9)
16,548,105.61
17,563,997.77
RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS
(SCH A
P.9)
2,200,000.00
2,200,000.00
RECEIVABLES, NET
(SCH B
P.10)
7,921,417.80
8,312,266.76
PREPAID EXPENSES
(SCH B
P.10)
1,303,369.04
996,685.20
INVENTORY
1,559,001.78
1,536,388.43
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS
36,430,694.61
40,748,598.44
NONCURRENT
INVESTMENT IN ASSOCIATED CO
(SCH C
P.2)
97,690.11
70,068.61
CAPITAL ASSETS, NET
(SCH C
P.2)
67,024,182.66
67,559,140.43
TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS
67,121,872.77
67,629,209.04
TOTAL ASSETS
103,552,567.38
108,377,807.48
LIABILITIES
CURRENT
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
6,301,598.27
7,593,153.02
CUSTOMER DEPOSITS
509,524.67
585,723.27
CUSTOMER ADVANCES FOR CONSTRUCTION
356,044.00
328,009.94
ACCRUED LIABILITIES
1,082,992.03
1,219,683.70
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES
8,250,158.97
9,726,569.93
NONCURRENT
ACCRUED EMPLOYEE COMPENSATED ABSENCES
3,020,032.75
2,934,698.58
TOTAL NONCURRENT LIABILITIES
3,020,032.75
2,934,698.58
TOTAL LIABILITIES
11,270,191.72
12,661,268.51
NET ASSETS
INVESTED IN CAPITAL ASSETS, NET OF RELATED DEBT
RESTRICTED FOR DEPRECIATION FUND (P.9)
UNRESTRICTED
TOTAL NET ASSETS (P.3)
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET ASSETS
(1)
67,024,182.66 67,559,140.43
4,936,796.36 4,302,802.25
20,321,396.64 23,854,596.29
92,282,375.66 95,716,538.97
103,552,567.38 108,377,807.48
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
NONCURRENT ASSET SCHEDULE
10/31/11
SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS IN ASSOCIATED COMPANIES
NEW ENGLAND HYDRO ELECTRIC
NEW ENGLAND HYDRO TRANSMISSION
TOTAL INVESTMENTS IN ASSOCIATED COMPANIES
SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL ASSETS
STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS
EQUIPMENT AND FURNISHINGS
INFRASTRUCTURE
TOTAL CAPITAL ASSETS, NET
TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS
(2)
SCHEDULE C
PREVIOUS YEAR
36,244.74
61,445.37
97,690.11
CURRENT YEAR
15,747.64
54,320.97
70,068.61
1,265,842.23 1,265,842.23
6,749,553.74 6,537,440.54
12,919,082.62 12,885,286.95
46,089,704.07 46,870,570.71
67,024,182.66 67,559,140.43
67,121,872.77 67,629,209.04
i
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
BUSINESS -TYPE PROPRIETARY FUND
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET ASSETS
10/31/11
OPERATING REVENUES: (SCH D P.11)
BASE REVENUE
FUEL REVENUE
PURCHASED POWER CAPACITY
FORFEITED DISCOUNTS
ENERGY CONSERVATION REVENUE
GAN REVENUE
NYPA CREDIT
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES: (SCH E P.12)
PURCHASED POWER BASE
PURCHASED POWER FUEL
OPERATING
MAINTENANCE
DEPRECIATION
VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
OPERATING INCOME
OPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES)
CONTRIBUTIONS IN AID OF CONST
RETURN ON INVESTMENT TO READING
INTEREST INCOME
INTEREST EXPENSE
OTHER (NDSE AND AMORT)
TOTAL NONOPERATING REV (EXP)
CHANGE IN NET ASSETS
NET ASSETS AT BEGINNING OF YEAR
NET ASSETS AT END OF OCTOBER
MONTH MONTH LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR
LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR TO DATE TO DATE
3,709,738.26
3,643,450.86
16,135,385.81
16,752,391.04
3,632,858.99
2,852,952.53
14,835,431.26
13,993,802.42
46,862.80
(10,841.98)
1,050,844.82
(49,260.34)
78,743.96
72,658.52
358,571.25
331,587.72
46,009.49
56,188.65
209,555.36
195,647.98
56,389.36
57,073.70
124,304.80
259,294.42
(62.298.35)
(45,133.69)
(263,393.04)
(235,495.98)
7,508,304.51 6,626,348.59 32,450,700.26 31,247,967.26
YTD %
CHANGE
3.82%
-5.67%
- 104.69%
-7.53%
-6.64%
108.60%
- 10.59%
-3.71%
2,456,232.55
2,078,533.97
9,850,552.42
9,320,607.36
-5.38%
2,586,224.15
2,955,398.39
14,730,285.57
13,797,272.59
-6.33%
731,664.70
677,691.69
2,675,526.51
2,865,252.25
7.09%
480,615.46
235,294.98
1,515,485.97
918,636.51
- 39.38%
287,729.05
296,027.47
1,150,916.20
1,184,109.88
2.88%
110.000.00
113,000.00
(625,422.54)
452,000.00
2.73%
6,652,465.91 6,355,946.50 30,362,766.67 26,537,878.59 -6.01%
855,838.60 270,402.09 2,087,933.59 2,710,088.67 29.80%
0.00
20,418.99
14,987.06
24,104.99
60.84%
(180,990.00)
(183,829.75)
(723,960.00)
(735,319.00)
1.57%
3,673.47
8,646.49
51,444.03
43,953.05
- 14.56%
(1,015.87)
(506.03)
(4,070.14)
(2,028.40)
- 50.16%
10,312.06
63,774.19
36,176.51
72,157.19
99.46%
(168,020.34)
(91,496.11)
(625,422.54)
(597,132.17)
-4.52%
687,818.26
178,905.98
1,462,511.05
2,112,956.50
44.47%
(3)
90,819,864.61 93,603,582.47 3.07%
92,282,375.66 95.716,538.97 3.72%
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
BUSINESS -TYPE PROPRIETARY FUND
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN FUND NET ASSETS
10/31/11
OPERATING REVENUES: (SCH F P.11B)
BASE REVENUE
FUEL REVENUE
PURCHASED POWER CAPACITY
FORFEITED DISCOUNTS
ENERGY CONSERVATION REVENUE
GAW REVENUE
NYPA CREDIT
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES: (SCH G P.12A)
PURCHASED POWER BASE
PURCHASED POWER FUEL
OPERATING
MAINTENANCE
DEPRECIATION
VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
OPERATING INCOME
NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES)
CONTRIBUTIONS IN AID OF CONST
RETURN ON INVESTMENT TO READING
INTEREST INCOME
INTEREST EXPENSE
OTHER (MDSE AND AMORT)
TOTAL NONOPERATING REV (EXP)
ACTUAL
BUDGET
(211,785.64)
YEAR TO DATE
YEAR TO DATE
VARIANCE*
16,752,391.04
17,752,632.00
(1,000,240.96)
13,993,802.42
15,374,851.00
(1,381,048.58)
(49,260.34)
(50,807.00)
1,546.66
331,587.72
390,558.00
(58,970.28)
195,647.98
198,170.00
(2,522.02)
259,294.42
231,252.00
28,042.42
(235,495.98)
(200,000.00)
(35,495.98)
31,247,967.26
33,696,656.00
(2,448,688.74)
CHANGE
-5.63%
-8.98%
-3.04%
- 15.10%
-1.27%
12.13%
17.75%
-7.27%
9,320,607.36
9,532,393.00
(211,785.64)
-2.22%
13,797,272.59
13,789,520.00
7,752.59
0.06%
2,865,252.25
3,064,377.00
(199,124.75)
-6.50%
918,636.51
931,389.00
(12,752.49)
-1.37%
1,184,109.88
1,200,000.00
(15,890.12)
-1.32%
452,000.00
452,000.00
0.00
0.00%
28,537,878.59 28,969,679.00 (431,800.41) -1.49%
2,710,088.67 4,726,977.00 (2,016,888.33) - 42.67%
24,104.99
200,000.00
(175,895.01)
- 87.95%
(735,319.00)
(740,000.00)
4,681.00
-0.63%
43,953.05
60,000.00
(16,046.95)
- 26.74%
(2,028.40)
(2,000.00)
(28.40)
1.42%
72,157.19
40,000.00
32,157.19
80.39%
(597,132.17)
(442,000.00)
(155,132.17)
35.10%
CHANGE IN NET ASSETS
2,112,956.50
4,284,977.00
(2,172,020.50)
- 50.69%
NET ASSETS AT BEGINNING OF YEAR
93,603,582.47
93,603,582.47
0.00
0.00%
NET ASSETS AT END OF OCTOBER
95,716,538.97
97,888,559.47
(2,172,020.50)
-2.22%
* ( ) = ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET
0A)
f�; 1
E�
0
El
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
RECONCILIATION OF CAPITAL FUNDS
10/31/11
SOURCE OF CAPITAL FUNDS:
DEPRECIATION FUND BALANCE 7/1/11
CONSTRUCTION FUND BALANCE 7/1/11
INTEREST ON DEPRECIATION FUND FY 12
DEPRECIATION TRANSFER FY 12
FORCED ACCOUNTS REIMBURSEMENT
GAW SUBSTATION (FY 12)
TOTAL SOURCE OF CAPITAL FUNDS
USE OF CAPITAL FUNDS:
PAID ADDITIONS TO PLANT THRU OCTOBER
PAID ADDITIONS TO GAW THRU OCTOBER
TOTAL USE OF CAPITAL FUNDS
GENERAL LEDGER CAPITAL FUNDS BALANCE 10/31/11
PAID ADDITIONS TO
PAID ADDITIONS TO
PAID ADDITIONS TO
PAID ADDITIONS TO
PAID ADDITIONS TO
TOTAL
GAW
GAW
GAW
GAW
GAW
FROM FY 12
FROM FY 11
FROM FY 10
FROM FY 09
FROM FY 08
(4)
1,182,740.72
0.00
4,297,944.13
0.00
3,488.96
1,184,109.88
0.00
0.00
5,485,542.97
1,182,740.72
4,302,802.25
0.00
531,784.00
1,372,876.00
3,136,764.00
1,895,975.00
6,937,399.00
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
SALES OF KILOWATT HOURS
10/31/11
MUNICIPAL SALES:
STREET LIGHTING
MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS
TOTAL MUNICIPAL CONSUMERS
SALES FOR RESALE
SCHOOL
TOTAL KILOWATT HOURS SOLD
238,701
MONTH
MONTH
LAST YEAR
CURRENT YEAR
YTD %
SALES OF ELECTRICITY:
LAST YEAR
CURRENT YEAR
TO DATE
TO DATE
CHANGE
RESIDENTIAL SALES
19,115,368
19,204,222
101,918,379
97,139,437
-4.69%
COMM. AND INDUSTRIAL SALES
34,763,786
35,363,504
152,262,442
152,036,997
-0.15%
PRIVATE STREET LIGHTING
71,242
72,515
284,544
291,463
2.43%
TOTAL PRIVATE CONSUMERS
53,950,396
54,640,241
254,465,365
249,467,897
-1.96%
MUNICIPAL SALES:
STREET LIGHTING
MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS
TOTAL MUNICIPAL CONSUMERS
SALES FOR RESALE
SCHOOL
TOTAL KILOWATT HOURS SOLD
238,701
239,112
954,956
956,268
741,187
752,753
3,267,819
3,352,749
979,888
991,865
4,222,775
4,309,017
228,270
270,035
1,361,446
1,367,179
1,222,690
1,221,607
4,176,065
4,172,908
56,381,244
57,123,748
264,225,651
259,317,001
(5)
0.14%
2.60%
2.04%
0.42%
-0.08%
-1.86%
El
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
KILOWATT HOURS SOLD BY
TOWN
10/31/11
TOTAL
READING
LYNNFIELD
NO.READING
WILMINGTON
MONTH
RESIDENTIAL
19,204,222
5,893,793
2,746,724
4,951,349
5,612,356
CONK & IND
35,363,504
4,326,379
271,771
5,221,313
25,544,041
PVT ST LIGHTS
72,515
13,777
1,360
21,268
36,110
PUB ST LIGHTS
239,112
80,436
32,437
39,880
86,359
MUNI BLDGS
752,753
176,460
124,547
156,852
294,894
SALES /RESALE
270,035
270,035
0
0
0
SCHOOL
1,221,607
452,428
259,451
165,440
344,288
TOTAL
11,213,308
3,436,290
10,556,102
31,918,048
57,123,748
YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
97,139,437
30,117,496
14,224,889
22,959,727
29,837,325
CONN & IND
152,036,997
19,120,895
1,214,776
23,516,318
108,185,008
PVT ST LIGHTS
291,463
56,324
5,440
84,940
144,759
PUB ST LIGHTS
956,268
321,744
129,748
159,520
345,256
MUNI BLDGS
3,352,749
760,691
572,468
705,918
1,313,672
SALES /RESALE
1,367,179
1,367,179
0
0
0
SCHOOL
4,172,908
1,519,523
945,654
515,840
1,191,891
TOTAL
53,263,852
17,092,975
47,942,263
141,017,911
259,317,001
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
101,918,379
31,916,392
14,781,437
24,043,838
31,176,712
COMM & IND
152,262,442
18,829,641
1,239,445
22,957,040
109,236,316
PVT ST LIGHTS
284,544
55,772
5,440
83,572
139,760
PUB ST LIGHTS
954,956
321,744
129,900
158,628
344,684
®
MUNI BLDGS
3,267,819
784,710
591,324
722,597
1,169,188
SALES /RESALE
1,361,446
1,361,446
0
0
0
SCHOOL
4,176,065
1,521,742
919,588
539,240
1,195,495
TOTAL
264,225,651
54,791,447
17,667,134
48,504,915
143,262,155
KILOWATT HOURS
SOLD TO TOTAL
TOTAL
READING
LYNNFIELD
NO.READING
WILMINGTON
MONTH
RESIDENTIAL
33.62%
10.32%
4.81%
8.67%
9.82%
COMM & IND
61.91%
7.57%
0.48%
9.14%
44.72%
PVT ST LIGHTS
0.12%
0.02%
0.00%
0.04%
0.06%
PUB ST LIGHTS
0.42%
0.14%
0.06%
0.07%
0.15%
MUNI BLDGS
1.32%
0.31%
0.22%
0.27%
0.52%
SALES /RESALE
0.47%
0.47%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
SCHOOL
2.14%
0.79%
0.45%
0.29%
0.61%
TOTAL
100.00%
19.62%
6.02%
18.48%
55.88%
YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
37.46%
11.61%
5.49%
8.85%
11.51%
COMM & IND
58.63%
7.37%
0.47%
9.07%
41.72%
PVT ST LIGHTS
0.11%
0.02%
0.00%
0.03%
0.06%
PUB ST LIGHTS
0.37%
0.12%
0.05%
0.06%
0.14%
MUNI BLDGS
1.29%
0.29%
0.22%
0.27%
0.51%
SALES /RESALE
0.53%
0.53%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
SCHOOL
1.61%
0.59%
0.36%
0.20%
0.46%
TOTAL
100.00%
20.53%
6.59%
18.48%
54.40%
LAST YEAR
TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
38.57%
12.08%
5.59%
9.10%
11.80%
COMM & IND
57.63%
7.13%
0.47%
8.69%
41.34%
PVT ST LIGHTS
0.10%
0.02%
0.00%
0.03%
0.05%
PUB ST LIGHTS
0.36%
0.12%
0.05%
0.06%
0.13%
MUNI BLDGS
1.24%
0.30%
0.22%
0.27%
0.45%
SALES /RESALE
0.52%
0.52%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
SCHOOL
1.58%
0.58%
0.35%
0.20%
0.45%
TOTAL
20.75%
6.68%
18.35%
54.22%
100.00%
(6)
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
FORMULA INCOME
10/31/11
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES (P.3)
ADD:
LESS:
POLE RENTAL
INTEREST INCOME ON CUSTOMER DEPOSITS
OPERATING EXPENSES (P.3)
CUSTOMER DEPOSIT INTEREST EXPENSE
FORMULA INCOME (LOSS)
(7)
31,247,967.26
1,455.00
380.17
(28,537,878.59)
(2,028.40)
2,709,895.44
It'-]
SALE OF KWH (P.5)
KWH PURCHASED
AVE BASE COST PER KWH
AVE BASE SALE PER KWH
AVE COST PER KWH
AVE SALE PER KWH
FUEL CHARGE REVENUE (P.3)
LOAD FACTOR
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL STATISTICS
10/31/11
MONTH OF
OCT 2010
56,381,244
54,966,971
0.044686
0.065797
0.091736
0.130231
3,632,858.99
67.60%
111,392
MONTH OF
% CHANGE
YEAR
THRU
OCT 2011
2010
2011
OCT 2010
OCT 2011
57,123,748
8.33%
-1.86%
264,225,651
259,317,001
55,392,262
7.74%
-2.10%
266,040,019
260,444,723
0.037524
-3.10%
-3.35%
0.037027
0.035787
0.063782
7.51%
5.79%
0.061067
0.064602
0.090878
-3.89%
-3.93%
0.092395
0.088763
0.113725
-3.96%
1.15%
0.117214
0.118566
2,852,952.53
-6.77%
-5.67%
14,835,431.26
13,993,802.42
77.82%
97,508
(8)
kwh analysis
$0.100
$0.085
X0.070
$0.055
$0.040
$0.025
-�- base cost
--fuel cost
-fuel revenue
w base revenue
$0.010
A'p,:�� o� �'C' Q
(9)
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
SCHEDULE OF CASH AND INVESTMENTS
10/31/11
SCHEDULE A
UNRESTRICTED-CASH-
PREVIOUS YEAR
CURRENT YEAR
CASH
- OPERATING FUND
6,895,800.38
10,136,260.28
CASH
- PETTY CASH
3,000.00
3,000.00
TOTAL UNRESTRICTED CASH
6,898,800.38
10,139,260.28
RESTRICTED
CASH
CASH:
- DEPRECIATION FUND
4,936,796.36
4,302,802.25
CASH
- TOWN PAYMENT
1,165,000.00
1,192,000.00
CASH
- DEFERRED FUEL RESERVE 2,167,864.74
3,016,258.63
CASH
- RATE STABILIZATION FUND 4,377,893.85
5,059,433.61
CASH
- UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCTS
RESERVE 200,000.00
200,000.00
CASH
- SICK LEAVE BENEFITS
2,023,253.80
1,946,177.34
CASH
- HAZARD WASTE RESERVE
150,000.00
150,000.00
CASH
- CUSTOMER DEPOSITS
509,524.67
585,723.27
CASH
- ENERGY CONSERVATION
403,822.38
139,384.57
CASH
- OPEB
613,949.81
972,218.10
TOTAL RESTRICTED CASH
16,548,105.61
17,563,997.77
RESTICTED
INVESTMENTS:
RATE
STABILIZATION *
1,000,000.00
11000,000.00
SICK
LEAVE BUYBACK **
1,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
OPEB
* **
200,000.00
200,000.00
TOTAL RESTRICTED INVESTMENTS 2,200,000.00
2,200,000.00
TOTAL CASH BALANCE
25,646,905.99
29,903,258.05
OCT
*
2010•
FREDDIE MAC
1,000,000.00; DTD 09110110; INT 2.00 %;
MATURITY 09/15/20
**
FREDDIE MAC
11000,000.00; DTD 09/10/10; INT 2.00 %;
MATURITY 09/15/20
• *•
FREDDIE MAC
200,000.00; DTD 09/10/10; INT 2.00 %;
MATURITY 09/15/20
OCT
*
2011•
FREDDIE MAC
1,000,000.00; DTD 09/10/10; INT 2.00%;
MATURITY 09/15/20
•*
FREDDIE MAC
1,000,000.00; DTD 09/10/10; INT 2.00$;
MATURITY 09/15/20
* **
FREDDIE MAC
200,000.00; DTD 09/10/10; INT 2.00 %;
MATURITY 09/15/20
(9)
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
10/31/11
SCHEDULE OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - OTHER
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - LIENS
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - EMPLOYEE ADVANCES
SALES DISCOUNT LIABILITY
RESERVE FOR UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS
TOTAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE BILLED
UNBILLED ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
TOTAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE, NET
SCHEDULE OF PREPAYMENTS
PREPAID INSURANCE
PREPAYMENT PURCHASED POWER
PREPAYMENT PASNY
PREPAYMENT WATSON
PURCHASED POWER WORKING CAPITAL
TOTAL PREPAYMENT
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE AGING OCTOBER 2011:
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL
LESS: SALES DISCOUNT LIABILITY
GENERAL LEDGER BALANCE
CURRENT
30 DAYS
60 DAYS
90 DAYS
OVER 90 DAYS
TOTAL
(10)
PREVIOUS YEAR
4,334,551.47
75,719.97
54,049.80
1,067.16
(341,902.63)
(257,227.08)
3,866,258.69
4,055,159.11
7,921,417.80
684,793.05
196,968.29
247,206.63
159,877.37
14,523.70
1,303,369.04
3,950,262.04
(327,843.87)
3,622,418.17
3,033,221.11
83.73%
350,011.22
9.66%
109,960.45
3.04%
29,784.51
0.82%
99,440.88
2.75%
3,622,418.17
100.00%
SCHEDULE B
CURRENT YEAR
3,950,262.04
101,725.33
24,579.16
892.14
(327,843.87)
(267,642.41)
3,481,972.39
4,830,294.37
8,312,266.76
532,446.52
(3,186.38)
238,330.65
214,570.71
14,523.70
996,685.20
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
SCHEDULE OF OPERATING REVENUE
10/31/11
SCHEDULE D
MONTH MONTH LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR YTD
SALES OF ELECTRICITY:
LAST YEAR
CURRENT YEAR
TO DATE
TO DATE
CHANGE
RESIDENTIAL SALES
2,724,727.01
2,469,306.13
13,033,422.62
12,817,646.93
-1.66%
COMM AND INDUSTRIAL SALES
4,273,245.85
3,732,581.76
16,652,595.95
16,695,386.17
0.26%
PRIVATE STREET LIGHTING
10,990.51
5,907.27
40,789.02
29,149.46
- 28.54%
TOTAL PRIVATE CONSUMERS
7,008,963.37
6,207,795.16
29,726,807.59
29,542,182.56
-0.62%
MUNICIPAL SALES:
STREET LIGHTING
48,246.84
29,238.94
182,461.69
136,314.37
- 25.29%
MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS
99,268.41
90,023.56
389,523.15
407,180.55
4.53%
TOTAL MUNICIPAL CONSUMERS
147,515.25
119,262.50
571,984.84
543,494.92
-4.98%
SALES FOR RESALE
30,364.39
32,156.57
164,041.49
168,273.04
2.58%
SCHOOL
155,754.24
137,189.16
507,983.15
492,242.94
-3.10%
0 SUB -TOTAL
7,342,597.25
6,496,403.39
30,970,817.07
30,746,193.46
-0.73%
FORFEITED DISCOUNTS
78,743.96
72,658.52
358,571.25
331,587.72
-7.53%
PURCHASED POWER CAPACITY
46,862.80
(10,841.98)
1,050,844.82
(49,260.34)
- 104.69%
ENERGY CONSERVATION - RESIDENTIAL
9,559.39
19,208.94
50,985.14
73,760.92
44.67%
ENERGY CONSERVATION - COMMERCIAL
36,450.10
36,979.71
158,570.22
121,887.06
- 23.13%
GAN REVENUE
56,389.36
57,073.70
124,304.80
259,294.42
108.60%
NYPA CREDIT
(62,298.35)
(45,133.69)
(263,393.04)
(235,495.98)
- 10.59%
TOTAL REVENUE
32,450,700.26
-3.71%
31,247,967.26
6,626,348.59
7,508,304.51
(ii)
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
SCHEDULE OF OPERATING REVENUE BY TOWN
10/31/11
(11A)
TOTAL
READING
LYNNFIELD
NO.READING
WILMINGTON
MONTH
RESIDENTIAL
2,469,306.13
760,990.58
351,408.33
634,115.29
722,791.93
INDUS /MUNI BLDG
3,822,605.32
512,777.37
46,471.11
592,577.02
2,670,779.82
PUB.ST.LIGHTS
29,238.94
9,188.27
3,635.45
5,319.15
11,096.07
PRV.ST.LIGHTS
5,907.27
1,097.24
108.10
1,822.27
2,879.66
CO -OP RESALE
32,156.57
32,156.57
0.00
0.00
0.00
SCHOOL
137,189.16
50,929.25
28,899.02
18,793.92
38,566.97
TOTAL
6,496,403.39
1,367,139.28
430,522.01
1,252,627.65
3,446,114.45
THIS YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
12,817,646.93
3,981,107.08
1,873,731.68
3,018,744.49
3,944,063.68
INDUS /MUNI BLDG
17,102,566.72
2,319,205.44
212,779.72
2,729,663.19
11,840,918.37
PUB.ST.LIGHTS
136,314.37
44,524.29
16,851.13
24,005.74
50,933.21
PRV.ST.LIGHTS
29,149.46
5,500.80
535.10
8,937.00
14,176.56
CO -OP RESALE
168,273.04
168,273.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
SCHOOL
492,242.94
180,719.74
109,358.26
62,540.14
139,624.80
TOTAL
30,746,193.46
6,699,330.39
2,213,255.87
5,843,890.57
15,989,716.63
LAST YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
13,033,422.62
4,107,033.98
1,869,900.65
3,086,537.28
3,969,950.71
INDUS /MUNI BLDG
17,042,119.10
2,295,412.44
213,113.08
2,640,731.67
11,892,861.91
PUB.ST.LIGHTS
182,461.69
63,961.75
22,228.65
30,028.35
66,242.94
PRV.ST.LIGHTS
40,789.02
7,770.50
777.55
12,541.82
19,699.15
CO -OP RESALE
164,041.49
164,041.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
SCHOOL
507,983.15
185,151.80
109,619.85
67,198.51
146,012.99
TOTAL
30,970,817.07
6,823,371.96
2,215,639.78
5,837,037.63
16,094,767.70
PERCENTAGE OF OPERATING
INCOME TO TOTAL
TOTAL
READING
LYNNFIELD
NO.READING
WILMINGTON
MONTH
RESIDENTIAL
38.01%
11.71%
5.41%
9.76%
11.13%
INDUS /MUNI BLDG
58.84%
7.89%
0.72%
9.12%
41.11%
PUB.ST.LIGHTS
0.45%
0.14%
0.06%
0.08%
0.17%
PRV.ST.LIGHTS
0.09%
0.02%
0.00%
0.03%
0.04%
CO -OP RESALE
0.49%
0.49%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
SCHOOL
2.12%
0.78%
0.44%
0.29%
0.61%
TOTAL
100.00%
21.03%
6.63%
19.28%
53.06%
THIS YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
41.69%
12.95%
6.09%
9.82%
12.83%
INDUS /MUNI BLDG
55.62%
7.54%
0.69%
8.88%
38.51%
PUB.ST.LIGHTS
0.44%
0.14%
0.05%
0.08%
0.17%
PRV.ST.LIGHTS
0.10%
0.02%
0.00%
0.03%
0.05%
CO -OP RESALE
0.55%
0.55%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
SCHOOL
1.60%
0.59%
0.36%
0.20%
0.45%
TOTAL
100.00%
21.79%
7.19%
19.01%
52.01%
LAST YEAR TO DATE
RESIDENTIAL
42.08%
13.26%
6.04%
9.97%
12.81%
INDUS /MUNI BLDG
55.03%
7.41%
0.69%
8.53%
38.40%
PUB.ST.LIGHTS
0.59%
0.21%
0.07%
0.10%
0 21+
PRV.ST.LIGHTS
0.13%
0.03%
0.00%
0.04%
Cl 06
L31
CO -OP RESALE
0.53%
0.53%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00
SCHOOL
1.64%
0.60%
0.35%
0.22%
0.47%
TOTAL
100.00%
22.04%
7.15%
18.86%
51.95%
(11A)
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
BUDGETED REVENUE VARIANCE REPORT
10/31/11
* ( ) - ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET
SCHEDULE F
ACTUAL
SALES OF ELECTRICITY:
RESIDENTIAL
YEAR TO DATE
COMM AND INDUSTRIAL SALES
VARIANCE *
PRIVATE STREET LIGHTING
7,562,160.57
MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS
(575,442.43)
PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING
8,742,255.56
SALES FOR RESALE
(320,499.44)
SCHOOL
84,915.13
TOTAL BASE SALES
(86,976.87)
TOTAL FUEL SALES
94,384.43
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE
(15,674.57)
FORFEITED DISCOUNTS
268,675.35
PURCHASED POWER CAPACITY
(1,647.65)
ENERGY CONSERVATION - RESIDENTIAL
ENERGY CONSERVATION - COMMERCIAL
17,752,632.00
GAW REVENUE
-5.63%
NYPA CREDIT
15,374,851.00
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
* ( ) - ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET
SCHEDULE F
ACTUAL
BUDGET
%
YEAR TO DATE
YEAR TO DATE
VARIANCE *
CHANGE
7,562,160.57
8,137,603.00
(575,442.43)
-7.07%
8,742,255.56
9,062,755.00
(320,499.44)
-3.54%
84,915.13
171,892.00
(86,976.87)
- 50.60%
94,384.43
110,059.00
(15,674.57)
- 14.24%
268,675.35
270,323.00
(1,647.65)
-0.61%
16,752,391.04
17,752,632.00
(1,000,240.96)
-5.63%
13,993,802.42
15,374,851.00
(1,381,048.58)
-8.98%
30,746,193.46
33,127,483.00
(2,381,289.54)
-7.19%
331,587.72
390,558.00
(58,970.28)
- 15.10%
(49,260.34)
(50,807.00)
1,546.66
-3.04%
73,760.92
76,440.00
(2,679.08)
-3.50%
121,887.06
121,730.00
157.06
0.13%
259,294.42
231,252.00
28,042.42
12.13%
(235,495.98)
(200,000.00)
(35,495.98)
17.75%
-7.27%
(2,448,688.74)
33,696,656.00
31,247,967.26
(11B)
OPERATION EXPENSES:
PURCHASED POWER BASE EXPENSE
OPERATION SUPER AND ENGIN -TRANS
OPERATION SUP AND ENGINEERING EXP
STATION SUP LABOR AND MISC
LINE MISC LABOR AND EXPENSE
STATION LABOR AND EXPENSE
STREET LIGHTING EXPENSE
METER EXPENSE
MISC DISTRIBUTION EXPENSE
METER READING LABOR & EXPENSE
ACCT & COLL LABOR & EXPENSE
UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS
ENERGY AUDIT EXPENSE
ADMIN & GEN SALARIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES & EXPENSE
OUTSIDE SERVICES
PROPERTY INSURANCE
INJURIES AND DAMAGES
EMPLOYEES PENSIONS & BENEFITS
MISC GENERAL EXPENSE
RENT EXPENSE
ENERGY CONSERVATION
TOTAL OPERATION EXPENSES
MAINTENANCE EXPENSES:
MAINT OF TRANSMISSION PLANT
MAINT OF STRUCT AND EQUIPMT
MAINT OF LINES - OH
MAINT OF LINES - UG
MAINT OF LINE TRANSFORMERS •*
MAINT OF ST LT & SIG SYSTEM
MAINT OF GARAGE AND STOCKROOM
MAINT OF METERS
MAINT OF GEN PLANT
TOTAL MAINTENANCE EXPENSES
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
PURCHASED POWER FUEL EXPENSE
VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
SCHEDULE OF OPERATING EXPENSES
10/31/11
SCHEDULE E
MONTH MONTH LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR YTD %
LAST YEAR CURRENT YEAR TO DATE TO DATE CHANGE
2,456,232.55 2,078,533.97 9,850,552.42 9,320,607.36 -5.38%
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
44,685.01
41,995.20
153,943.52
174,038.98
13.05%
12,066.13
11,983.39
39,155.31
45,183.28
15.40%
40,730.90
61,250.44
205,081.62
229,014.58
11.67%
43,151.75
37,674.31
153,889.68
157,962.28
2.65%
7,503.87
9,427.35
22,524.53
33,358.20
48.10%
31,174.86
21,576.61
104,282.30
85,022.04
- 18.47%
30,032.81
25,226.83
110,887.90
108,979.89
-1.72%
5,915.54
6,823.52
27,925.25
33,310.20
19.28%
148,880.93
87,335.05
413,352.18
397,782.95
-3.77%
15,000.00
16,000.00
60,000.00
64,000.00
6.67%
43,931.87
33,342.23
144,166.63
139,814.22
-3.02%
68,143.73
57,750.68
231,594.34
243,307.65
5.06%
21,180.40
36,698.17
97,230.89
69,143.39
- 28.89%
29,460.85
46,913.21
77,430.55
115,188.22
48.76%
30,631.88
31,778.71
123,097.52
127,150.88
3.29%
3,670.57
718.57
16,151.27
(6,827.06)
- 142.27%
99,937.89
111,011.63
482,101.26
534,940.81
10.96%
10,182.84
7,599.42
42,384.20
55,204.83
30.25%
14,129.47
636.37
55,712.12
55,863.87
0.27%
31,253.40
31,950.00
114,615.44
202,813.04
76.95%
731,664.70
677,691.69
2,675 526.51
2,865,252.25
7 09%
2.73%
k f.
227.08
227.10
908.32
908.40
0.01%
11,394.91
16,300.88
33,266.65
64,690.24
94.46%
170,440.23
134,239.22
438,719.36
527,105.75
20.15%
10,215.43
15,946.71
46,135.24
72,792.29
57.78%
231,472.16
7,599.63
788,808.99
24,023.60
- 96.95%
6.43
(51.77)
(139.52)
(236.74)
69.68%
44,803.61
46,345.75
171,528.14
171,524.15
0.00%
0.00
8,159.64
0.00
28,742.17
100.00%
12,055.61
6,527.82
36,258.79
29,086.65
- 19.78%
480,615.46 235,294.98 1,515,485.97 918,636.51 - 39.38%
287,729.05
2,586,224.15
110,000.00
296,027.47
2,955,398.39
113,000.00
1,150,916.20
14,730,285.57
440,000.00
1,184,109.88
2.88%
13,797,272.59
-6.33%
452,000.00
2.73%
6,652,465.91 6,355,946.50 30,362,766.67 28,537,878.59 -6.01%
•+ FY 12 total includes GAW soil remediation expenses totalling $0.00
Total costs to date for entire project is $2,482,825.80.
(12)
+ ( ) = ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET
++ FY 12 total includes GAW soil remediation expenses totalling $0.00
Total costs to date for entire project is $2,482,825.80.
(12A)
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
BUDGETED OPERATING EXPENSE
VARIANCE REPORT
10/31/11
SCHEDULE G
ACTUAL
BUDGET
OPERATION EXPENSES:
YEAR TO DATE
YEAR TO DATE
VARIANCE +
CHANGE
PURCHASED POWER BASE EXPENSE
9,320,607.36
9,532,393.00
(211,785.64)
-2.22%
OPERATION SUPER AND ENGIN -TRANS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
OPERATION SUP AND ENGINEERING EXP
174,038.98
144,230.00
29,808.98
20.67%
STATION SUP LABOR AND MISC
45,183.28
19,780.00
25,403.28
128.43%
LINE MISC LABOR AND EXPENSE
229,014.58
235,540.00
(6,525.42)
-2.77%
STATION LABOR AND EXPENSE
157,962.28
142,757.00
15,205.28
10.65%
STREET LIGHTING EXPENSE
33,358.20
28,274.00
5,084.20
17.98%
METER EXPENSE
85,022.04
47,381.00
37,641.04
79.44%
MISC DISTRIBUTION EXPENSE
108,979.89
113,659.00
(4,679.11)
-4.12%
METER READING LABOR & EXPENSE
33,310.20
25,023.00
8,287.20
33.12%
ACCT & COLL LABOR & EXPENSE
397,782.95
459,673.00
(61,890.05)
- 13.46%
UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS
64,000.00
64,000.00
0.00
0.00%
ENERGY AUDIT EXPENSE
139,814.22
137,578.00
2,236.22
1.63%
ADMIN & GEN SALARIES
243,307.65
240,439.00
2,868.65
1.19%
OFFICE SUPPLIES & EXPENSE
69,143.39
88,694.00
(19,550.61)
- 22.04%
OUTSIDE SERVICES
115,188.22
234,940.00
(119,751.78)
- 50.97%
PROPERTY INSURANCE
127,150.88
155,008.00
(27,857.12)
- 17.97%
INJURIES AND DAMAGES
(6,827.06)
18,917.00
(25,744.06)
- 136.09%
EMPLOYEES PENSIONS & BENEFITS
534,940.81
518,558.00
16,382.81
3.16%
MISC GENERAL EXPENSE
55,204.83
97,740.00
(42,535.17)
- 43.52%
RENT EXPENSE
55,863.87
70,668.00
(14,804.13)
- 20.95%
ENERGY CONSERVATION
202,813.04
221,518.00
(18,704.96)
-8.44%
TOTAL OPERATION EXPENSES
2,865,252.25
3,064,377.00
(199,124.75)
-6.50%
MAINTENANCE EXPENSES:
MAINT OF TRANSMISSION PLANT
908.40
1,000.00
(91.60)
-9.16%
MAINT OF STRUCT AND EQUIPMENT
64,690.24
38,464.00
26,226.24
68.18%
MAINT OF LINES - OH
527,105.75
462,816.00
64,289.75
13.89%
MAINT OF LINES - UG
72,792.29
71,257.00
1,535.29
2.15%
MAINT OF LINE TRANSFORMERS *•
24,023.60
77,828.00
(53,804.40)
- 69.13%
MAINT OF ST LT & SIG SYSTEM
(236.74)
3,179.00
(3,415.74)
- 107.45%
MAINT OF GARAGE AND STOCKROOM
171,524.15
205,915.00
(34,390.85)
- 16.70%
MAINT OF METERS
28,742.17
28,458.00
284.17
1.00%
MAINT OF GEN PLANT
29,086.65
42,472.00
(13,385.35)
- 31.52%
TOTAL MAINTENANCE EXPENSES
918,636.51
931,389.00
(12,752.49)
-1.37%
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
1,184,109.88
1,200,000.00
(15,890.12)
-1.32%
PURCHASED POWER FUEL EXPENSE
13,797,272.59
13,789,520.00
7,752.59
0.06%
VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS
452,000.00
452,000.00
0.00
0.00%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
-1.49%
(431,800.41)
28,969,679.00
28,537,878.59
+ ( ) = ACTUAL UNDER BUDGET
++ FY 12 total includes GAW soil remediation expenses totalling $0.00
Total costs to date for entire project is $2,482,825.80.
(12A)
OPERATION EXPENSES:
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
BUDGETED OPERATING EXPENSE VARIANCE REPORT
10/31/11
RESPONSIBLE
SENIOR 2012 ACTUAL
MANAGER ANNUAL BUDGET YEAR TO DATE
(io
REMAINING
BUDGET REMAINING
BALANCE BUDGET %
PURCHASED POWER BASE EXPENSE
JP
27,402,177.00
9,320,607.36
18,081,569.64
65.99%
OPERATION SUPER AND ENGIN -TRANS
KS
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00%
OPERATION SUP AND ENGINEERING EXP
KS
438,974.00
174,038.98
264,935.02
60.35%
STATION SUP LABOR AND MISC
KS
62,909.00
45,183.28
17,725.72
28.18%
LINE MISC LABOR AND EXPENSE
KS
692,484.00
229,014.58
463,469.42
66.93%
STATION LABOR AND EXPENSE
KS
441,924.00
157,962.28
283,961.72
64.26%
STREET LIGHTING EXPENSE
KS
85,338.00
33,358.20
51,979.80
60.91%
METER EXPENSE
DA
152,130.00
85,022.04
67,107.96
44.11%
MISC DISTRIBUTION EXPENSE
JD
352,508.00
108,979.89
243,528.11
69.08%
METER READING LABOR & EXPENSE
DA
76,220.00
33,310.20
42,909.80
56.30%
ACCT & COLL LABOR & EXPENSE
RF
1,427,255.00
397,782.95
1,029,472.05
72.13%
UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS
RF
192,000.00
64,000.00
128,000.00
66.67%
ENERGY AUDIT EXPENSE
JP
414,098.00
139,814.22
274,283.78
66.24%
ADMIN & GEN SALARIES
VC
745,939.00
243,307.65
502,631.35
67.38%
OFFICE SUPPLIES & EXPENSE
VC
265,700.00
69,143.39
196,556.61
73.98%
OUTSIDE SERVICES
VC
454,250.00
115,188.22
339,061.78
74.64%
PROPERTY INSURANCE
JD
465,000.00
127,150.88
337,849.12
72.66%
INJURIES AND DAMAGES
JD
55,859.00
(6,827.06)
62,686.06
112.22%
EMPLOYEES PENSIONS & BENEFITS
JD
1,441,637.00
534,940.81
906,696.19
62.89%
MISC GENERAL EXPENSE
VC
203,091.00
55,204.83
147,886.17
72.82%
RENT EXPENSE
JD
212,000.00
55,863.87
156,136.13
73.65%
ENERGY CONSERVATION
JP
643,789.00
202,813.04
440,975.96
68.50%
TOTAL OPERATION EXPENSES
8,823,105.00
2,865,252.25
5,957,852.75
67.53%
(a
MAINTENANCE EXPENSES:
MAINT OF TRANSMISSION PLANT
KS
3,000.00
908.40
2,091.60
69.72%
MAINT OF STRUCT AND EQUIPMT
KS
107,072.00
64,690.24
42,381.76
39.58%
MAINT OF LINES - OH
KS
1,419,953.00
527,105.75
892,847.25
62.88%
MAINT OF LINES - UG
KS
214,037.00
72,792.29
141,244.71
65.99%
MAINT OF LINE TRANSFORMERS **
KS
188,500.00
24,023.60
164,476.40
87.26%
MAINT OF ST LT & SIG SYSTEM
JD
9,636.00
(236.74)
9,872.74
102.46%
MAINT OF GARAGE AND STOCKROOM
JD
662,139.00
171,524.15
490,614.85
74.10%
MAINT OF METERS
DA
85,444.00
28,742.17
56,701.83
66.36%
MAINT OF GEN PLANT
RF
127,620.00
29,086.65
98,533.35
77.21%
TOTAL MAINTENANCE EXPENSES
2,817,401.00
918,636.51
1,898,764.49
67.39%
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
RF
3,600,000.00
1,184,109.88
2,415,890.12
67.11%
PURCHASED POWER FUEL EXPENSE
JP
39,768,817.00
13,797,272.59
25,971,544.41
65.31%
VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO TOWNS
RF
1,356,000.00
452,000.00
904,000.00
66.67%
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
65.93%
55,229,621.41
28,537,878.59
83,767,500.00
** FY 12 total includes GAW soil remediation expenses totalling $0.00
Total coats to date for entire project is $2,482,825.80.
01
(129)
I � E
TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS
MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10/31/2011
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BY PROJECT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BY VENDOR
ACTUAL
ROMARRE INSURANCE
ITEM
DEPARTMENT
ACTUAL
BUDGET
VARIANCE
1
RMLD AND PENSION TRUST AUDIT FEES
ACCOUNTING
30,940.00
32,250.00
(1,310.00)
2
PENSION ACTUARIAL EVALUATION
ACCOUNTING
0.00
0.00
0.00
3
LEGAL- FERC /ISO ISSUES
ENERGY SERVICE
0.00
6,000.00
(61000.00)
4
LEGAL- POWER SUPPLY ISSUES
ENERGY SERVICE
8,773.10
15,000.00
(6,226.90)
5
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ENERGY SERVICE
7,484.32
8,000.00
(515.68)
6
NERC COMPLIANCE
E & 0
7,175.00
3,350.00
3,825.00
7
LOAD CAPACITY STUDY
ENGINEERING
9,280.00
7,500.00
1,780.00
8
LEGAL SERVICES- GENERAL
GM
43,887.06
16,668.00
27,219.06
9
LEGAL SERVICES - GENERAL
HR
6,190.41
14,000.00
(7,809.59)
10
LEGAL SERVICES- NEGOTIATIONS
HR
0.00
0.00
0.00
11
LEGAL GENERAL
BLDG. MAINT.
0.00
500.00
(500.00)
12
SURVEY RIGHT OF WAY
BLDG. MAINT.
0.00
11668.00
(11668.00)
13
ENVIRONMENTAL
BLDG. MAINT.
0.00
1,668.00
(1,668.00)
14
STATION 1 STRUCTURAL FEASABILITY
BLDG. MAINT.
0.00
25,000.00
(25,000.00)
15
DEMOLITION OF CONTROL CENTER
BLDG. MAINT.
0.00
100,000.00
(100,000.00)
16
INSURANCE CONSULTANT
GEN. BENEFIT
1,458.33
1,668.00
(209.67)
17
LEGAL
GEN. BENEFIT
0.00
1,668.00
(1,568.00)
TOTAL
115,188.22
234,940.00
(119,751 78)
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BY VENDOR
ACTUAL
ROMARRE INSURANCE
1,041.66
RUBIN AND RUDMAN
43,985.14
UTILITY SERVICES INC.
10,346.67
MELANSON HEATH & COMPANY
37,903.62
DUNCAN AND ALLEN
1,711.40
CHOATE HALL AND STEWART
6,190.41
PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
560.00
CUM
9,280.00
CMEEC
4,169.32
TOTAL
115,188.22
(13)
DIVISIONS AND DEPARTMENTS
E &O MGR
ENGINEERING
LINE
METER READING
METER TECHNICIANS
STATION OP
STATION TECHS
DIVISION TOTAL
GENERAL MANAGER:
GENERAL MANAGER
HUMAN RESOURCES
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
CAB
BOARD
DIVISION TOTAL
FACILITY MANAGER•
GENERAL BENEFITS
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
MATERIALS MANAGEMENT
DIVISION TOTAL
BUSINESS DIVISION:
ACCOUNTING
CUSTOMER SERVICE
MIS
MISCELLANEOUS DEDUCTIONS
DIVISION TOTAL
DIVISION TOTALS
PURCHASED POWER - BASE
PURCHASED POWER - FUEL
TOTAL
RMLD
BUDGET VARIANCE REPORT
FOR PERIOD ENDING OCTOBER 31, 2011
0
ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE CHANGE
78,278
68,363
9,915
14.50%
183,376
152,063
31,313
20.59%
863,061
802,152
60,909
7.59%
33,310
25,023
8,287
33.12%
85,022
47,467
37,555
79.12%
203,146
162,537
40,608
24.98%
117,547
144,919
(27,371)
- 18.89%
161,216
11.49%
1,563,740
1,402,524
358,944 388,263 (29,320) -7.55%
146,559
121,412
25,148
20.71%
41,743
56,479
(14,736)
- 26.09%
43,065
74,536
(31,471)
- 42.22%
5,137
4,936
201
4.08%
4,768
2,500
2,268
90.71%
(18,591)
-7.15%
241,272
259,863
736,873
799,365
(62,492)
-7.82%
171,524
334,750
(163,226)
- 48.76%
109,018
114,159
(5,141)
-4.50%
1,017,414
1,248,273
(230,859)
- 18.49%
185,930
218,097
186,449
2,385,499
274,380
210,611
199,073
2,406,785
(88,450)
- 32.24%
7,486
3.55%
(12,624)
-6.34%
(21,286)
-0.88%
2,975,975 3,090,849 (114,874) -3.72%
6,157,345
6,389,773
(232,428)
-3.64%
9,320,607
9,532,393
(211,786)
- 2.22`k
7,753
0.06%
13,797,273
13,789,520
29,275,225
29,711,686
(436,461)
-1.47%
RMLD
DEFERRED FUEL CASH RESERVE ANALYSIS
10/31/11
GROSS
MONTHLY
TOTAL
DATE
CHARGES
REVENUES
NYPA CREDIT
DEFERRED
DEFERRED
Jun -11
3,055,224.78
Jul -11
4,131,396.83
4,049,745.45
(79,163.65)
(160,815.03)
2,894,409.75
Aug -11
3,795,607.97
3,924,541.80
(52,328.74)
76,605.09
2,971,014.84
Sep -11
2,914,869.40
3,166,562.64
(58,869.90)
192,823.34
3,163,838.18
Oct -11
2,955,398.39
2,852,952.53
(45,133.69)
(147,579.55)
3,016,258.63
RMLD
STAFFING REPORT
FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE, 2.012
J
ACTUAL
12 BUD JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
TOTAL 11
11
11
11
GENERAL MANAGER
GENERAL MANAGER
2 2
2
2
2
HUMAN RESOURCES
1 1
1
1
1
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
1 1
1
1
1
TOTAL
4 4
4
4
4
BUSINESS
ACCOUNTING
2.00 1.50
1.50
1.50
2.00
CUSTOMER SERVICE
*" 7.75 8.75
8.75
8.75
8.75
MGMT INFORMATION SYS
* 6.25 5.25
5.25
5.25
5.25
MISCELLANEOUS
1 1
1
1
1
TOTAL
17.00 16.50
16.50
16.50
17.00
ENGINEERING & OPERATIONS
AGM E &O
2 2
2
2
2
ENGINEERING
5 5
5
5
5
LINE
21 20
20
20
20
METER
4 4
4
4
4
STATION
8 8
8
8
8
TOTAL
40 39
39
39
39
PROJECT
BUILDING
2 2
2
2
2
GENERAL BENEFITS
2 2
2
2
2
TRANSPORTATION
0 0
0
0
0
MATERIALS MGMT
4 4
4
4
4
TOTAL
8 8
8
8
8
ENERGY SERVICES
ENERGY SERVICES
*# 5.5 5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
TOTAL
5.5 5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
RMLD TOTAL
74.5 73
73
73
73.5
CONTRACTORS
UG LINE
2 2
2
2
2
TOTAL
2 2
2
2
2
GRAND TOTAL
76.5 75
75
75
75.5
'
part time employee
'# part time employee and a coop student
*^ part time employee and a temp
ATTACHMENT
To: Vincent Cameron
From: Energy Services
Date: November 29, 2011
Subject: Purchase Power Summary — October, 2011
Energy Services Division (ESD) has completed the Purchase Power Summary for the
month of October, 2011.
ENERGY
The RMLD's total metered load for the month was 55,307,487 kWh, which was a decrease
of .92 % compared to October, 2010 figures.
Table 1 is a breakdown by source of the energy purchases.
TABLE 1
Amount of
Cost of
% of Total
Total $
$ as a
Resource
Energy
Energy
Energy
Costs
%
(kWh)
($ /Mwh)
Millstone #3
893,956
$5.54
1.61%
$4,952
0.17%
Seabrook
1,466,807
$8.87
2.65%
$13,006
0.44%
JP Morgan
8,532,000
$54.18
15.40%
$462,293
15.64%
Stonybrook CC
1,846,222
$48.99
3.33%
$90,447
3.06%
Constellation
7,440,000
$61.62
13.43%
$458,489
15.51%
NYPA
1,974,876
$4.92
3.57%
$9,716
0.33%
ISO Interchange
11,288,742
$43.87
20.38%
$495,221
16.76%
NEMA Congestion
0
$0.00
0.00%
- $11,034
-0.37%
Coop Resales
85,187
$131.99
0.15%
$11,244
0.38%
Stonybrook Peaking
0
$0.00
0.00%
$102
0.00%
MacQuarie
19,164,000
$62.27
34.60%
$1,193,426
40.38%
Braintree Watson Unit
687,149
$49.14
124%
$33,763
1 14%
Swift River Projects
2,013,323
$96.25
3.63%
$193,773
6.56%
Monthly Total
55.392,262
$53.35
100.00%
$2,955,398
100.00%
Table 2 breaks down the ISO interchange between the DA LMP Settlement and the RT Net Energy
for month of October, 2011.
Resource
ISO DA LMP'
Settlement
RT Net Energy"
Settlement
ISO Interchange
(subtotal)
- 1,540,291 48.73 -2.78%
11,288,742 43.87 20.38%
CAPACITY
The RMLD hit a demand of 97,508 kWs, which occurred on October 10, 2011 at 7 pm.
The RMLD's monthly UCAP requirement for October, 2011 was 199,846 kWs.
Table 3 shows the sources of capacity that the RMLD utilized to meet its requirement.
Table 2
Amount
Cost % of Total
of Energy
of Energy Energy
(kWh)
($ /Mwh)
12,829,033
44.45 23.16%
- 1,540,291 48.73 -2.78%
11,288,742 43.87 20.38%
CAPACITY
The RMLD hit a demand of 97,508 kWs, which occurred on October 10, 2011 at 7 pm.
The RMLD's monthly UCAP requirement for October, 2011 was 199,846 kWs.
Table 3 shows the sources of capacity that the RMLD utilized to meet its requirement.
Table 3
Amount of
Cost of
% of
% of
Capacity
Capacity
Total
Total
Source
(kWs)
($ /kW- month)
Capacity
Total Cost $
Cost
Millstone #3
4,991
$41.61
2.48%
$207,699
15.40%
Seabrook
7,910
$55.29
3.94%
$437,363
32.43%
Stonybrook Peaking
24,981
$1.92
12.43%
$48,009
3.56%
Stonybrook CC
42,925
$3.74
21.36%
$160,691
11.92%
NYPA
4,666
$2.55
2.32%
$11,896
0.88%
Hydro Quebec
4,274
$5.60
2.13%
$23,947
1.78%
ISO -NE Supply Auction
100,672
$3.45
50.10%
$347,314
25.75%
Braintree Watson Unit
10,520
$10.61
5.24%
$111,667
8.28%
Total
200,939
$6.71
100.00%
$1,348,586
100.00%
• ISO DA LMP: Independent
System Operator
Day -Ahead Locational Marginal
Price
"RT Net Energy: Real -Time
Net Energy
Table 4 shows the dollar amounts for energy and capacity per source.
The RMLD's total transmission costs for the month of October, 2011 are $727,145.
This is a decrease of 6.59% from the September 2011 cost of $778,431.
In 2010, the transmission costs for the month of October, 2010 were $936,684.
Table 5 shows the current month vs. last month and last year (October, 2010).
Table 5
Current Month
Last Month
Table 4
Peak Demand (kW)
97,508
124,448
111,392
Energy (kWh)
55,392.262
60,207.277
55,881,826
Energy ($)
Cost of
$2.914,869
$2,586,224
Capacity ($)
$1.348.586
% of
Amt. of Energy
Power
Resource
Energy
Capacity
Total cost
Total Cost
(kWh)
($kWh)
Millstone #3
$4,952
$207,699
$212,651
4.94%
893,956
$0.2379
Seabrook
$13,006
$437,363
$450,369
10.46%
1,466,807
$0.3070
Stonybrook CC
$90,447
$160,691
$251,138
5.84%
1,846,222
$0.1360
Hydro Quebec
$0
$23,947
$23,947
0.56%
0
$0.0000
Constellation
$458,489
$0
$458,489
10.65%
7,440,000
$0.0616
NYPA
$9,716
$11,896
$21,612
0.50%
1,974,876
$0.0109
ISO Interchange
$495,221
$347,314
$842,534
19.58%
11,288,742
$0.0746
NEMA Congestion
- $11,034
$0
- $11,034
-0.26%
0
$0.0000
Coop Resales
$11,244
$0
$11,244
0.26%
85,187
$0.1320
Stonybrook Peaking
$102
$48,009
$48,111
1.12%
0
$0.0000
JP Morgan
$462,293
$0
$462,293
10.74%
8,532,000
$0.0542
MacQuarie
$1,193,426
$0
$1,193,426
27.73%
19,164,000
$0.0623
Braintree Watson Unit
$33,763
$111,667
$145,431
3.38%
687,149
$0.2116
Swift River Projects
$193,773
$0
$193,773
4.50%
2,013,323
$0.0962
Monthly Total
$2,955,398
$1,348,586
$4,303,984
100.00%
55,392,262
$0.0777
TRANSMISSION
The RMLD's total transmission costs for the month of October, 2011 are $727,145.
This is a decrease of 6.59% from the September 2011 cost of $778,431.
In 2010, the transmission costs for the month of October, 2010 were $936,684.
Table 5 shows the current month vs. last month and last year (October, 2010).
Table 5
Current Month
Last Month
Last Year
Peak Demand (kW)
97,508
124,448
111,392
Energy (kWh)
55,392.262
60,207.277
55,881,826
Energy ($)
$2,955398
$2.914,869
$2,586,224
Capacity ($)
$1.348.586
$1 424,726
$1,517,694
Transmission (S)
S727.145
$778.431
$936.684
Total
$5.031,130
$5,118.027
$5,040,602
ATTACHMENT 4
0 To: Jane Parenteau
From: Rahul Shah
Date: November 30, 2011
Re: Time -Of -Use (TOU) Consumption Review
Time -of -Use (TOU) is a helpful tool for both, RMLD customers as well as the utility because it saves
money for customers and it helps to reduce peak demand for a utility company at the same time. As of
October 31, 2011, there are 61 Commercial TOU customers and 234 Residential TOU customers. The
RMLD Board of Commissioners requested that RMLD review the electricity consumption of Commercial
and Residential TOU customers in the RMLD territory to determine if all customers were achieving
savings following the revised TOU rates which took effect on May 1, 2011. It has been found that all
customers have saved money under RMLD's TOU rate compared to RMLD's Base rate.
Residential TOU
The average monthly Residential TOU customer pays approximately $143 per month. The same
customer would have paid about $162 per month under the Base rate. This equates to an average savings
for Residential TOU customer of $19 per month (equals to 12% of savings per month compared to Base
rate). On a monthly basis, Residential TOU customers saved anywhere from $1.76 to $76.22.
RESIDENTIAL
On -peak
consumption (percentages)
kWh /month
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
250
14.1%
11.0%
8.1%
5.3%
2.2%
-0.7%
-3.8%
500
17.7%
14.6%
11.4%
8.3%
5.2%
2.1%
-1.1%
750
19.0%
15.8%
12.6%
9.5%
6.3%
3.1%
-0.1%
1,000
19.6%
16.4%
13.2%
10.0%
6.8%
3.6%
0.4%
1,250
20.0%
16.9%
13.6%
10.4%
7.2%
3.9%
0.7%
1,500
20.3%
17.1%
13.8%
10.6%
7.4%
4.1%
0.9%
2,000
20.7%
17.4%
14.2%
10.9%
7.7%
4.4%
1.2%
2,500
20.9%
17.6%
14.3%
11.1%
7.8%
4.6%
1.390
The table above shows the monthly consumption and savings for residential customers under the TOU
rate. The percentage of savings a residential TOU customer can achieve is based on an amount of
consumption per month (kWh/month), with a certain percentage of On -peak consumption. For example,
a TOU customer who uses 1,000 kWh/month (out of which 10% is on -peak consumption) would save
19.6% on their monthly bill compared to the Base rate. The same customer would save 13.2% on monthly
bill if the on -peak consumption is 20 %.
Commercial TOU
Commercial TOU customers, on average, pay about $39,803 per month under the Commercial TOU rate
whereas the same customer would have paid about $43,248 per month under the Commercial Base rate.
This saves an average Commercial customer $3,445 per month (which is equals to almost 7% of savings
per month compared to the Base rate). The demand charge is a major component on the commercial bill.
Therefore, a lower demand can certainly result in more savings for Commercial customers. On a monthly
basis, Commercial TOU customers were able to achieve savings between 1 % - 11 % which equates to a
monthly dollar range of $110 - $79,000. The table below shows the monthly consumption and savings for
Commercial customers under TOU rate.
COMMERCIAL
kWh /month
kW (demand)
On -peak consumption (percentages)
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
10,000
27
12.1%
9.7%
7.3%
4.8%
2.4%
-0.1%
-2.5%
40,000
90
14.4%
11.9%
9.4%
6.9%
4.3%
1.8%
-0.7%
120,000
290
14.4%
11.9%
9.4%
6.9%
4.4%
1.9%
-0.6%
500,000
900
15.7%
13.1%
10.6%
8.0%
5.4%
2.9%
0.3%
750,000
1,350
15.7%
13.2%
10.6%
8.0%
5.4%
2.9%
0.3%
1,300,000
2,600
15.3%
12.8%
10.2%
7.7%
5.2%
2.6%
0.1%
7,000,000
12,000
15.9%
13.4%
10.8%
8.2%
5.6%
3.0%
0.4%
The percentage of savings that a Commercial TOU customer can achieve depends on the amount of
consumption per month (kWh/month) and demand (kW), based on the amount of On -peak consumption.
For example, a TOU customer who uses 500,000 kWlVmonth (with 20% of on -peak consumption) and a
demand of 900 kW would save 10.6% on their monthly bill compared to the Base rate. The same
customer would save 5.4% per month if the on -peak consumption was 30 %.
� nI- I
Gaw Transformer Upgrade Project
Schedule Milestones Start Date % Complete
1* 0
Completion Date Notes
Conceptual Engineering
Jul -08
100
Jun -09
Complete
Major Equipment Procurement
Feb -09
100
Oct -10
Complete
Design Engineering
Jul -08
100
Jun -09
Complete
Scheduled Transformer Delivery
Dec -08
100
Dec -08
Complete
Construction Bid
Jan -09
100
Mar -09
Complete
Construction Contractor
May -09
100
Dec -10
Complete
Construction Transformer Replacement
May -09
100
Oct -10
Complete
Construction Switchgear Upgrades
Dec -09
100
Jul -11
Complete
Construction RMLD Personnel
Jan -09
100
Jul -11
Complete
Tangible Milestones
Start Date
% Complete
Completion Date
Notes
Relocate Station Service transformers
06/22/09
100
07/17/09
Complete
Transformer 110C on concrete pad
06/01/09
100
07/22/09
Complete
11 5k circuit switchers replaced
07/25/09
100
08/02/09
Complete
Transformer 110C secondary work
07/27/09
100
10/05/09
Complete
Transformer 110C replacement
08/31/09
100
10/09/09
Complete
Transformer 110A replacement
09/21 /09
100
09/30/10
Complete
Transformer 110B replacement
02/19/10
100
03/31/10
Complete
Switchgear upgrade
12/01/09
100
07/31/11
Complete
Feeder Reassignment work
08/16/10
100
01/30/11
Complete
Changes highlighted in bold
D
D
n
2
M
z
L 2
SP Ioio old \�e�o1X
$,,e��od
2
�4 0 -4so
woloW
Ad ap
oll
0
i
N
i }
i
9 0
4 L N
[I
i
LM
6 0
Reconciling the Gaw Upgrade Project
Capital Item
Bud
et
Expenditure I
Delta
Description
Fiscal Yr I
Item]
CumulativeA
Actual
Cumulative
by FY
Transformer Payment
2008
1 2.080
2.080
1.836
1.836"
-0.244
Contract Labor
2009
1.380
0.170
Procured Equipment
0.360
0.101
RMLD Labor
0.446
0.111
Feeder Reassignment
0.282,.''
0.000
Transformer Payments
2.757
7.305;
1
4.97311
-2.332
Contract Labor
2010
0.285
0.838
Procured Equipment
0.195
= 0.155
RMLD Labor
0.200
0.380
Feeder Reassignment
0.110
8.0951 0.000
6.346.
-1.749
Contract Labor
2011
0.545
0.411
Procured Equipment
0.030
0.007
RMLD Labor
0.064
0.109
V
N.
Feeder Reassignment
0.236,
8.0951 0.048,
6.9211
-1.174,
Project Sub-Total
0.875
8.095
6.921
6.921
Project Total
6.921
-1.174
12/1/2011
9:33 AM
# PROJECT DESCRIPTION
READING MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
FY 11 CAPITAL BUDGET VARIANCE REPORT
FOR PERIOD ENDING OCTOBER 31, 2011
E&O Construction - System Projects
1 5W9 Reconductoring - Ballardvale Street
2 High Capacity Tie 4W18 and 3W8 Franklin Street
3 Upgrading Old Lynnfield Ctr URDs
SCADA Projects
4 RTU Replacement
Distribution Automation Proiects
5 Reclosures
6 Capacitor Banks
7 SCADA Radio Communication System
Station Up-grades (Station #4 GAW)
8 Relay Replacement Project
9 115kV Disconnect Replacement
New Customer Service Connections
12 Service Installations - Commercial /Industrial Customers
13 Service Installations - Residential Customers
14 Routine Construction
Various Routine Construction
Total Construction Projects
Other Projects
15 GIS
16 Transformers /Capacitors Annual Purchases
17 Meter Annual Purchases
17A Meter Upgrade Project
18 Purchase New Small Vehicle
19 Purchase Line Department Vehicle
20 Purchase Puller Trailer
21 Roof Top Units
22 Engineering Software and Data Conversion
23 Plotter
27 Hardware Upgrades
28 Software and Licensing
OTH Cooling Tower Replacement
Total Other Projects
TOTAL RMLD CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES
29 Force Account/Reimbursable Projects
TOTAL FY 12 CAPITAL PROJECT EXPENDIITURES
ALL - - -
310,616 1,182,741 5,910,047 4,727,306
ACTUAL
YTD ACTUAL
ANNUAL
COST
COST
BUDGET
TOWN
OCTOBER
THRU 10/31/11
AMOUNT
VARIANCE
W
27,140
53,110
242,649
189,539
R
21,842
39,318
157,766
118,448
LC
377
377
579,927
579,550
R
30,000
130,255
130,255
ALL
197,901
197,901
ALL
20,570
40,000
105,052
105,052
ALL
94,435
75,255
231,386
231,386
R
(16,713)
62,406
99,656
99,656
R
310,616
1,182,741
88,585
88,585
ALL
1,373
11,165
62,530
51,365
ALL
14,202
61,331
206,017
144,686
ALL
183,276
769,169
1,016,382
247,213
2,183,636
3,118,106
934,470
248,210
ALL - - -
310,616 1,182,741 5,910,047 4,727,306
50,000
50,000
198,800
198,800
46,360
46,360
52,975
160,264
1,740,656
1,580,392
31,544
36,000
4,456
386,000
386,000
75,000
75,000
30,000
30,000
76,690
76,690
18,000
18,000
431
20,570
40,000
19,430
9,000
19,180
94,435
75,255
16,713
-
(16,713)
62,406
248,271
2,791,941
2,543,670
310,616
1,182,741
5,910,047
4,727,306
ALL - - -
310,616 1,182,741 5,910,047 4,727,306
Reading Municipal Light Department
Engineering and Operations
Monthly Report
October, 2011
FY 2012 Capital Plan
E &O Construction - System Proiects
1. 5W9 Reconductoring - Ballardvale Street - Wilmington - Engineering labor,
install temporary guy, install messenger.
2. High Capacity Tie 4W18/3W8 Franklin Street -Reading -Frame; make ready
work for new spacer cable; install spacer cable; install messenger, transfers.
3. Upgrading of Old Lynnfield Center URDs - Engineering labor.
SCADA Proiects
4. RTU Replacement at Station 4 - Reading - No activity.
Distribution Automation (DA) Proiects
5. Reclosers - No activity.
6. Capacitor Banks - No activity.
7. SCADA Radio Communication System - No activity.
Station Upgrades
8. Relay Replacement Project - Station 4 - Reading - No activity.
9. 115 kV Disconnect Replacement - Station 4 - Reading - No activity.
New Customer Service Connections
12. Service Installations — Commercial /Industrial Customers — This item includes new
service connections, upgrades, and service replacements for the commercial and
industrial customers. This represents the time and materials associated with the
replacement of an existing or installation of a new overhead service, the connection of
an underground service, etc. This does not include the time and materials associated
with pole replacements /installations, transformer replacement/installations, primary or
secondary cable replacement/installations etc. This portion of the project comes under
routine construction. Notable: Day Care Center, 220 Main Street, Wilmington
13. Service Installations — Residential Customers — This item includes new or upgraded
overhead and underground services, temporary overhead services, and large
underground development.
14. Routine Construction — The drivers of the Routine Construction budget category
YTD are listed. This is not an inclusive list of all items within this category.
Pole Setting/Transfers
$125,625
Maintenance Overhead/Underground
$188,133
Projects Assigned as Required
$119,729
Pole Damage includes knockdowns some reimbursable
$10,512
Station Group
$0
Hazmat/Oil Spills
$3,118
Porcelain Cutout Replacement Program
$1,231
Lighting Street Light Connections
$27,200
Storm Trouble
$38,558
Underground Subdivisions
$15,448
Animal Guard Installation
$25,723
Miscellaneous Capital Costs
$213,892
TOTAL
$769,169
*In the month of September three cutouts were charged under this program.
Approximately 20 cutouts were installed new or replaced because of damage
making a total of 23 cutouts replaced this month.
Fil
a
Reliability Report
Two key industry standard metrics have been identified to enable the RMLD to measure and
track system reliability. A rolling 12 -month view is being used for the purposes of this report.
Customer Average Interruption Duration Index ( CAIDI) — Measures how quickly the
RMLD restores power to customers when their power goes out.
CAIDI = Total of Customer Interruption Duration for the Month in Minutes/ Total
number of customers interrupted.
RMLD 12 month system average outage duration — 60.80 minutes
RMLD 4 year average outage (2006 -2009) — 50.98 minutes per outage
On average, RMLD customers that experience an outage are restored in 60.80 minutes.
180.00
160.00
N
140.00
c
120.00
100.00
O 80.00
L
E 60.00
O
40.00
Ial
20.00
� m
N' �0 'N �N �N �N �N �N �N �N �N �N
�— Monthly minutes per outage
RMLD 12 month system average outage duration 60.80
—�- RMLD 4 year average outage duration -50.98 (2006 -2009)
3
System Average Interruption Frequency (SAIFI) — Measures how many outages each
customer experiences per year on average.
SAIFI = Total number of customer's interrupted / Total number of customers.
RMLD 12 month system average - .40 outages per year
RMLD 4 year average outage frequency - .82
The graph below tracks the month -by -month SAIFI performance.
�aA
-4 -- RMLD monthly outage frequency
--- RMLD 12 month system average outage frequency .40
RMLD 4 year average outage frequency .82 (2006 - 2009)
Months Between Interruptions (MBTI)
Another view of the SAIFI data is the number of months Reading customers have no
interruptions. At this time, the average RMLD customer experiences an outage
approximately every 30 months.
In
ATTACHMENT
October Snowstorm
October 291h and 30`h, the RMLD service territory was significantly affected by a
Nor'easter that brought with it, approximately 5" of wet, heavy snow. This caused trees
to topple and limbs to break bringing down power lines and poles in all four
communities.
On Sunday as the storm began to wind down, we estimate 7,000 customers were without
power. Out of state tree crews were brought in Sunday afternoon to augment the two
local tree crews that were already working beside the RMLD Linemen. Each day
additional mutual aid crews arrived from yet another municipality to help in the
restoration process. Between Sunday and Thursday, the RMLD averaged 50 employees
devoted to communication, restoration and clean-up work with an additional 25 men
made up of Linemen, electricians, and tree crews from out of town. By Tuesday night all
power had been restored to all but xxx customers.
While restoring power to our customers in what is believed to have been the worst storm
to affect the RMLD service territory, we were fortunate to have Linemen from
Marblehead, Danvers, Taunton, Wakefield, and Middleton working to repair the
infrastructure that delivers electricity to our customers.
ATTACHMENT
A U �0
i FRANCESCO DEMOLITION, INC.
wv�w
ORMOLMON P O. Box 1915 I Duxbury, MA 02331 y O: 781.585.0200 I F: 781934.9193
December 1, 2011
Mr, Craig Owen, MCPPO
Material Manager
Town of Reading Municipal Light Dept
230 Ash Street
Reading, Ma 01867.
RE: Proiect Number: 2012 -02.
This letter is to inform you that Francesco Demolition will not be able to
proceed with the upcoming possible contract for the Demolition of the
Communications Building. The reason being is the asbestos pricing we
received for the asbestos removal portion of the project was lower than
anticipated, and when we approached the contractor to award them the
project they unfortunately withdrew there bid. We have contacted at least 4
other vendors and all of their numbers are between $6,000.00 - 7,000.00
higher. We realize that the 2nd bidder is almost $11,000.00 higher than our
number. Would there be room to increase our bid price, but keep it lower
than the 2n6 bidder? If we are not allowed to increase our bid price we will
have to withdraw our bid.
We are sorry, for the inconvenience this has caused.
Sincerely yours,
Francesco Demolition
V
Frank Durante
12 Canoe Club Lane
Pembroke, Ma 02359
/ft
RMLD ' Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading, MAO 1867-0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942-2409
Web: www.m- dd.com
December 1, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA 01867
On September 21, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting
proposals for Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA 01867.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
ASAP - All State Abatement
Professionals, Inc.
EnviroVantage
Jay -Mor Enterprises Inc.
NCM Demolition and
Remediation LP
RS Hurford Co.
Compass Restoration Services LLC
F.A. Moschetti & Sons, Inc
LSP Envirogreen
Premier Abatement
Bids were received from Francesco Demolition and R.M. Technologies, Inc.
Dec -Tam Corporation
Francesco Demolition
Mill City Environmental
R.M. Technologies, Inc.
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. November 9, 2011 in the Town of Reading
Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
2012 4)2 Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, �v1A 01867.L10C
RMLD (0)
Reading Municipal Light Department
RE LIA B L PUR FR FUR GE N E: RA r IONS
230 Ash Street, P.O. Box 150
Reading, MAO I8h7 -0250
Move that bid 2012 -02 for Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA
01867 be awarded to:
Francesco Demolition for $56,800.00
Item 1 Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, $56,800.00
Reading, MA 01867
as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
The FY 2012 Operational Budget amount for this item is $100,000.00.
rta,Gt / eL
Xncent F. Ca eron, Jr.
201' -02 Asbestos Abatement alld Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, S1A 01967.doc
6 0 0
Asbestos Abatement & Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA 01867
Sid 2012 -02
RM Technologies bid submittal failed to include the required FLSA certification, OSHA Training 1 Work in
larmony Certification, Asbestos Contractor License, and Pollution Liability Policy.
Final price will be adjusted at a rate of $65.00 per cubic foot for brick containerization and proper disposal.
2012 -02 Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA 01867.xls Page 1
*Unit Price per Cubic
Rule for award
Foot for Brick
only - Lump
Containerization &
Required
Responsive
Specifications
3dder
Sum Pricing
Prover Disposal
Documentation
Bidder
Met
=rancesco Demolition
tem 1
$66,800.00
$65.00
Yes
Yes
Yes
R.M. Technologies, Inc.
tern 1
$68,000.00
$16.00
No
No'
No
RM Technologies bid submittal failed to include the required FLSA certification, OSHA Training 1 Work in
larmony Certification, Asbestos Contractor License, and Pollution Liability Policy.
Final price will be adjusted at a rate of $65.00 per cubic foot for brick containerization and proper disposal.
2012 -02 Asbestos Abatement and Demolition of Building at 224 Ash Street, Reading, MA 01867.xls Page 1
RMLD ',�_
Aft
December 1, 2011
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading. MA 01867 -0250
Tel: (781) 9441340
Fax: (781) 942-2409
Web: www.m- dd.com
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Fixed Network Meter Data Management (MDM) system
On August 23, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting
proposals for Fixed Network Meter Data Management (MDM) system for the Reading Municipal
Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Smart Synch Itron Elster GE
Mueller Systems Landis and Gyr
A bid was received from Itron.
The bid was publicly opened and read aloud at 11:oo a.m. October 12, 2011 in the Town of Reading
Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 23o Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
The bid was reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
Move that bid 2012 -08 for Fixed Network Meter Data Management (MDM) system be awarded to Itron
for a total cost of $876,379.11 as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the General
Manager contingent upon finalization of negotiations and the execution of a definitive agreement
between Itron and the RMLD for this project.
Item (desc.) Project completion Total Cost
1 Fixed Network Meter Data 36 weeks ARO, based on current scope 876,379.11
Management System
The Capital Budget allocation for the purchase of this Fixed Network Meter Data Management
(MDM) system project was estimated at $702,000. This information is found in Tab 17 Part B of the
Capital Budget.
nt F. Cameron Jr.
SJ,
Nick D'Alleva
File: Bids, FYI 2, deter Data Management /2012 -oS
Fixed Network Meter Data Management (MDM) system
Bid 2012 -08
Bidder
Itron
Item 1 Fixed Network Meter Data Management System
Projected completion 36 weeks, based on current scope, ARO
Infrastructure Hardware
Software
Professional Services
Computer Hardware
Freight (Estimated)
Total
608, 930.00
25,000.00
219,820.00
18,361.11
4,268.00
876,379.11
Bid Scope:
Bidder to furnish labor, materials, and equipment for all field mounted components and head-
end system consisting of servers, hardware, software, engineering, design, and project
management support services necessary for the installation of a complete fixed network
meter reading, Meter Data Management (MDM) system.
Bid Submittal:
Itron submitted documentation requested by RMLD, however, exceptions were taken to
specifications, terms and conditions, as well as pricing structure.
Evaluation:
We are of the opinion that Itron, Inc. possesses the necessary skill, ability, and integrity
required for the faithful performance of the work as described in the Invitation for Bids.
At the time of this recommendation efforts are being made to develop a contract agreement
acceptable to both Itron and the RMLD. We are working with RMLD Counsel, Rubin and
Rudman, in the negotiation of an agreement that substantially protects the interests of the
RMLD in the execution of this contract.
2012 -08 Meter Data Management Analysis.xls
Page 1
RMLD
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading, MAO 1867-0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942-2409
Web: www.rtnld.com
November 30, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Three Phase Pole Mounted Transformers
On October 10, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading
Chronicle requesting proposals for Three Phase Pole Mounted Transformers for the
Reading Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Power Sales Group
EDI
Hughes Supply
IF Gray
Hasgo Power
HD Supply
WESCO
Yale Electric Supply
Ward Transformer Sales
Metro West Electric Sales, Inc.
Robinson Sales
HD Industrial Services
Graybar Electric Company
Shamrock Power Sales
Jordan Transformer
Power Tech -UPSC
Stuart C. Irby
Bids were received from WESCO and Power Sales Group.
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:oo am November 9, 2011 in the
Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 23o Ash Street,
Reading, Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the
staff.
Move that bid 2012 -14 for Three Phase Pole Mounted Transformers be awarded to:
WESCO for a total cost of $io,164.00
Item (desc.) Qty Manufacturer Unit Cost Total Net Cost
1(45 kVa) 2 Athens 3,157.00 $6,314.00
2 (75 kVa) 1 Athens 3,850.00 $3,850.00
as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
File: Bid /FY12 /TR 2012 -14
RMLDOO
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELI AR LE POI "ER FUR GF NE RATIONS
230 Ash Street, P.O. Box 150
Reading, MA 01867 -0250
The Capital Budget allocation for the purchase of these units under the
Transformer project was estimated at $22,000.
Jr.
Peter Price
File: Bid /FY12 /TR 2012 -14
U�j
Three Phase Polo Mounted Trandonners
Bid 2012 -14
10,164.00
Power Sales Group alternate led (Amorphous) yes
Item 1 (45 kVa) Howard 12 -14 weeks ARO 4097.00 2 8,194.00
Item 2 (75 kVa) Howard 1214 weeks ARO 48M 00 1 4.808.00
13,002.00
Power Sales Group yes
Item 1 (45 kVa) Howard 10 -12 weeks ARO 4617.00 2 9,634.00
Item 2 (75 kVa) Howard 10.12 weeks ARO 6967.00 1 6,967.00
16.601.00
Yes yes Yes yes no yes
yes yes yes yes no yes
3 PH Pde TR A-1y-
0 0 Oim
Page 1
Meet
Ce~ Exceptions to
Unit
Total Not
Soeciitcabon
SpeciRcatan Form All bmis
Check or stated hid Authorized
Bidder
Manufacturer Delivery Date Coot Q)y
cost
reouirement
Data Sheets Em fWtl our
Bid Band reawroments sbnature
WESCO
Yes
Yes you yes
yes no yes
Item 1 (45 kVa)
Athens 7 weeks ARO 3157.00 2
6,314.00
Item 2 (75 We)
Athens 7 weeks ARO 3050.00 1
3,050.00
10,164.00
Power Sales Group alternate led (Amorphous) yes
Item 1 (45 kVa) Howard 12 -14 weeks ARO 4097.00 2 8,194.00
Item 2 (75 kVa) Howard 1214 weeks ARO 48M 00 1 4.808.00
13,002.00
Power Sales Group yes
Item 1 (45 kVa) Howard 10 -12 weeks ARO 4617.00 2 9,634.00
Item 2 (75 kVa) Howard 10.12 weeks ARO 6967.00 1 6,967.00
16.601.00
Yes yes Yes yes no yes
yes yes yes yes no yes
3 PH Pde TR A-1y-
0 0 Oim
Page 1
RMLD CO)
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading, MAO 1867-0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942-2409
Web: www.nnld.com
November 30, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Single Phase Pole Mounted Transformers
On October 11, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading
Chronicle requesting proposals for Single Phase Pole Mounted Transformers for
the Reading Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Power Sales Group WESCO Graybar Electric Company
EDI Yale Electric Supply Shamrock Power Sales
Hughes Supply Ward Transformer Sales Jordan Transformer
IF Gray Metro West Electric Sales, Inc. Power Tech -UPSC
Hasgo Power Robinson Sales Stuart C. Irby
HD Supply HD Industrial Services
Bids were received from WESCO, Power Sales Group, Moloney, Sutart C. Irby and
HD Supply.
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:oo a.m. November 9, 2011 in
the Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 23o Ash Street,
Reading, Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the
staff.
Move that bid 2012 -15 for Single Phase Pole Mounted Transformers be awarded to:
WESCO for a total cost of $17,625.00
Item (desc.) Qty Manufacturer Unit Cost Total Net Cost
1(371/2 kVa) 15 Cooper 1,175.00 $17,625.00
as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
File: Bid /FY12 /TR 2012 -15
RMLD Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POR ER FOR GLNLRAI ION)
230 A.h Street, P.O. Box 150
Readina. MA 0 ► 867 -0250
The Department did not allocate funds for the purchase of single -phase pole mount
transformers in the FY12 Capital Budget. The Department has used a significant
number of 371/2 Wa transformers since the budget was proposed. These quantities
will bring the inventory back up to the necessary level.
t F. Cafneron Jr.
Ke in uthvan
Peter Price
File: Bid /FY12 /TR 2012 -15
Single Phase Pole Mounted Transformers
Bid 2012 -15
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva) Central Moloney 12 -13 weeks ARO 1,500.00 15 22,500.00
2010 -17 1 PH Pole TR Analysis.xls
Page 1
Meet
Certified
Exceptions to
Total Net
Specification
Specification
Firm
All forms
Check or
stated bid
Authorized
Bidder
Manufacturer
Delivery Date
Unit Cost
Q ty
Cost
requirement
Data Sheets
Price
filled out
Bid Bond
requirements
signature
WESCO
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva)
Cooper
6-8 weeks ARO
1,175.00
15
17,625.00
Power Sales
alternate (Amorphous)
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva)
Howard
10 -12 weeks ARO
1,210.00
15
18,150.00
Power Sales
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva)
Howard
8 -10 weeks ARO
1,225.00
15
18,375.00
Moloney
no
no
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva)
Moloney
12 weeks ARO
1,350.00
15
20,250.00
Irby
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva)
Central Moloney
12 -14 weeks ARO
1,437.00
15
21,555.00
HO Supply
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
yes
Item 1 (37 1/2 Kva) Central Moloney 12 -13 weeks ARO 1,500.00 15 22,500.00
2010 -17 1 PH Pole TR Analysis.xls
Page 1
RMLD C))
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading, MAO 1867-0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942 -2409
Web: www.m- dd.com
November 30, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Three Phase Pad Mounted Transformers
On October 11, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading
Chronicle requesting proposals for Three Phase Pad Mounted Transformers for the
Reading Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Power Sales Group WESCO Graybar Electric Company
EDI Yale Electric Supply Shamrock Power Sales
Hughes Supply Ward Transformer Sales Jordan Transformer
IF Gray Metro West Electric Sales, Inc. Power Tech -UPSC
Hasgo Power Robinson Sales Stuart C. Irby
HD Supply HD Industrial Services
Bids were received from Power Sales Group, WESCO and Stuart C Irby.
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:oo a.m. November 9, 2011 in the
Town of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 23o Ash Street, Reading,
Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
Move that bid 2012 -16 for Three Phase Pad Mounted Transformers be awarded to:
Power Sales for a total cost of $142,924.00
Item (desc.)
1 (15o kVa 13800 Delta w /taps 120/208)
2 (150o kVa 13800 Delta w /taps 120/208)
3 (225 kVa 13800 Delta w /taps 277/48o)
4 (3oo kVa 13800 Delta with taps 277/480)
5 (l000 kVa 13800 Delta w /taps 277/48o)
6 (150o kVa 13800 Delta with taps 277/48o)
Manufacturer Qty Unit Cost Total Net Cost
Howard
2
5,869.00
$11,738.00
Howard
1
24,428.00
$24,428.00
Howard
2
7,623.00
$15,246.00
Howard
1
8,470.00
$8,470.00
Howard
2
19,101.00
$38,202.00
Howard
2
22,420.00
$44,840.00
as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
File: Bid /FY10 /TR 2012 -16
RMLD Reading Municipal Light Department
RF.I IABIE PDX "FR FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street, P.O. Box 150
Reading„ MAO 1867-0250
The Capital Budget allocation for the purchase of these units under the Transformer
protect was estimated at $94,800. The Department has installed a number of 3 phase
pad mount transformers since the FY2012 budget was proposed. Installations were for
service upgrades, new services, and preventative maintenance. These quantities will
bring the RMLD inventory back up to the necessary level.
t F. Cbmeron Jr.
Z. V .i,-�
Kevpn Sull <vti
Peter Price
File: Bid /FY10 / "FR 2012 -16
s�
Three Phase Pad Mounted Transformers
Bid 2012 -16
Power Sales
Item 1 (150 Wa 1201208)
Item 2 (1500 We 1201208)
Item 3 (225 kVa 277/480)
Item 4 (300 kVa 277/480)
Item 5 (1000 kVs 277/480)
Item 6 (1500 kVa 277/480)
Power Sales
Item 1 If 50 Wa 1201208)
Item 2 (1500 Wa 1201208)
Item 3 (225 We 277/480)
Item 4 (300 kVa 277/480)
Item 5 (1000 Wa 277/480)
Item 6 (1500 Wa 277/480)
Irby
Item 1 (150 kVa 120/208)
Item 2 (1500 Wa 120/208)
Item 3 (225 Wa 277/480)
Item 4 (300 Wa 277/480)
Item 5 (1000 Wa 277/480)
Item 6 (1500 Wa 277/480)
17
142,840.00
alternate (Amorphous)
no yes yes yes yes yes yes
yes yes yes yes yes no yes
Howard
8-10 weeks ARO
Meet
Certified Exceptions to
11,738.00
Howard
8.10 weeks ARO
24,428.00
1
Total Net
Specification
Specification Firm All forms Check or stated bid Authorized
Bidder
Manufacturer
Delivery Date
Unit Cost
ON
Cost
requiremenl
Data Sheets Price filled out Bid Bond requirements sionature
WESCO
non - responsive - does not meet specifications
19,101.00
2
no
Incomplete yes yes yes yes yes
Item 1 (150 Wa 1201208)
ABB
10 -12 weeks ARO
6,421.00
2
12,842.00
115,691.00
This quotation is subject to CG Power Systems USA T &C of sale.
Item 2 (1500 We 120/208)
ABB
9 -11 weeks ARO
27,684.00
1
27,684.00
Howard
Exceptions:
Item 3 (225 Wa 277/480)
ABB
10 -12 weeks ARO
7,895.00
2
15,790.00
1
No undercoat supplied. Our finish does not require undercoat to maintain integrity.
Item 4 (300 Wa 277/480)
ABB
10 -12 weeks ARO
9,052.00
1
9,052.00
6 -8 weeks ARO
8,880.00
Item 5 (1000 Wa 277/480)
ABB
9 -11 weeks ARO
17,052.00
2
34,104.00
46,940.00
Enalneees note:
Item 6 (1500 Wa 277/480)
ABB
9 -11 weeks ARO
21,684.00
2
_43,368.00
No dimensional information on primary and secondary bushings, etc. only height, length and width
Power Sales
Item 1 (150 Wa 1201208)
Item 2 (1500 We 1201208)
Item 3 (225 kVa 277/480)
Item 4 (300 kVa 277/480)
Item 5 (1000 kVs 277/480)
Item 6 (1500 kVa 277/480)
Power Sales
Item 1 If 50 Wa 1201208)
Item 2 (1500 Wa 1201208)
Item 3 (225 We 277/480)
Item 4 (300 kVa 277/480)
Item 5 (1000 Wa 277/480)
Item 6 (1500 Wa 277/480)
Irby
Item 1 (150 kVa 120/208)
Item 2 (1500 Wa 120/208)
Item 3 (225 Wa 277/480)
Item 4 (300 Wa 277/480)
Item 5 (1000 Wa 277/480)
Item 6 (1500 Wa 277/480)
17
142,840.00
alternate (Amorphous)
no yes yes yes yes yes yes
yes yes yes yes yes no yes
Howard
8-10 weeks ARO
5,869.00
2
11,738.00
Howard
8.10 weeks ARO
24,428.00
1
24,428.00
Howard
8-10 weeks ARO
7,623.00
2
15,246.00
Howard
8-10 weeks ARO
8,470.00
1
8,470.00
Howard
8-10 weeks ARO
19,101.00
2
38,202.00
Howard
8-10 weeks ARO
22,420.00
2
44,840.00
115,691.00
This quotation is subject to CG Power Systems USA T &C of sale.
142,924.00
yes yes yes yes yes no yes
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
6,380.00
2
12,760.00
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
32,024.00
1
32,024.00
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
7,994.00
2
15,988.00
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
8,880.00
1
8,880.00
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
23,470.00
2
46,940.00
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
22,605.00
2
45,210.00
161,802.00
non - responsive - does not meet specifications
no yes yes yes yes yes yes
CG Power
6 -8 weeks ARO
5,519.00
2 11,038.00
CG Power
6 -8 weeks ARO
25,764.00
1 25,764.00
Exceptions:
CG Power
6 -8 weeks ARO
6,390.00
2 12,780.00
Not clearly listed as part of bid.
CG Power
6 -8 weeks ARO
7,209.00
1 7,209.00
CG Power
6 -8 weeks ARO
12,320.00
2 24,640.00
Note:
CG Power
6 -8 weeks ARO
17,130.00
2 34,260.00
Any design dimension, unless otherwise specificed ar for indication only and are not binding
115,691.00
This quotation is subject to CG Power Systems USA T &C of sale.
3 PH Pad TR Analysis
0 01�
Page 1
RMLD Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading, MA 01867 -0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942 -2409
Web: www.rmld.com
November 30, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 Transformers
On October 11, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle
requesting proposals for Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 Transformers for the Reading
Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Power Sales Group WESCO Graybar Electric Company
EDI Yale Electric Supply Shamrock Power Sales
Hughes Supply Ward Transformer Sales Jordan Transformer
IF Gray Metro West Electric Sales, Inc. Power Tech -UPSC
Hasgo Power Robinson Sales Stuart C. Irby
HD Supply HD Industrial Services
Bids were received from Power Sales Group, WESCO, HD Supply and Stuart C. Irby.
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:oo a.m. November 9, 2011 in the Town
of Reading Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 23o Ash Street, Reading,
Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
Move that bid 2012 -17 for Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 Transformers be awarded to:
WESCO for a total cost of $30,o86.00
Item (desc.) Qty Manufacturer Unit Cost Total Net Cost
1(5o kVa) 14 Ermco 2,149.00 $3o,o86.00
Move that bid 2012 -17 for Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 Transformers be awarded to:
Power Sales for a total cost of $15,198.00
Item (desc.) Qty Manufacturer Unit Cost Total Net Cost
2 (75 kVa) 6 Howard 2,533.00 $15,198.00
as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
File: [aid /FY 12 TR 2012 -17
RMLD Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading, MAO 1867-0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942-2409
Web: www.nnld.com
The Capital Budget allocation for the purchase of these units under the Transformer project
was estimated at $30,000. The estimated cost of $30,000 did not account for the larger
size pad mounts that are required. These units will mostly be used to replace live front
transformers in the Departments older underground subdivisions.
t F. Cameron Jr.
Keen Su an
Peter Price
File: Bid /FY12 TR 2012 -17
Single Phase Pad Mounted FR3 Transformers
Bid 2012 -17
2012 -17 1 PH Pad TR Analysis.xls
Page 1
Meet
Certified
Exceptions to
Total Net
Specification
Specification
Firm All forms Check or
stated bid
Authorized
Bidder
Manufacturer
Delivery Date
Unit Cost
y Q�t
Cost
requirement
Data Sheets
Price filled out Bid Bond
requirements
signature
Power Sales
Alternate (Amorphous)
yes
yes
yes yes yes
no
yes
Item 1 (50 kVa)
Howard
8 -10 weeks ARO
2167.00
14
30,338.00
Item 2 (75 kVa)
Howard
8 -10 weeks ARO
2533.00
6
15,198.00
45,536.00
Power Sales
yes
yes
yes yes yes
no
yes
Item 1 (50 kVa)
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
2203.00
14
30,842.00
Item 2 (75 kVa)
Howard
6 -8 weeks ARO
2641.00
6
15,846.00
46,688.00
WESCO
yes
yes
yes yes yes
no
yes
Item 1 (50 kVa)
Ermco
8 weeks ARO
2149.00
14
30,086.00
Item 2 (75 kVa)
Ermco
8 weeks ARO
2736.00
6
16,416.00
46,502.00
HD Supply
yes
yes
yes no yes
no
yes
Item 1 (50 kVa)
Central Moloney
10 -11 weeks ARO
2720.00
14
38,080.00
Item 2 (75 kVa)
Central Moloney
10 -11 weeks ARO
3320.00
6
19,920.00
Note:
No loss data.
58,000.00
Irby
non- responsive
yes
yes
yes yes yes
yes
yes
Item 1 (50 kVa)
Central Moloney
10 -11 weeks ARO
2610.00
14
36,540.00
Item 2 (75 kVa)
Central Moloney
10 -11 weeks ARO
3180.00
6
19,080.00
Exceptions:
Not clearly listed as part of
bid.
55,620.00
See Central Moloney comments, CM takes
exception to IFD.
2012 -17 1 PH Pad TR Analysis.xls
Page 1
R�(�� Reading Municipal Light Department
��/� RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
is 230 Ash Suw
P.O. Boa 150
Reading, MA 01867 -0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fa: (781) 942 -2409
Web: www.rwdd.com
November 16, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: One Material Handler Truck
On September 28, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting
proposals for One Material Handler Truck for the Reading Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Altec Industries, Inc. Baker Equipment
Coastal International Truck,
LLC
Dejana Truck Equipment
James A. Kiley Co.
Minuteman Trucks
NESCO
Place Motor, Inc.
Taylor & Lloyd
CUES Equipment
Fredrickson Bros., Inc.
Liberty Chevrolet
Moore GMC Truck Inc
Nutmeg International Trucks,
Inc.
Stoneham Ford
Bids were received from James A. Kiley Co. and Boston Freightliner.
Boston Freightliner
DC Bates
G & S Industrial, Inc.
Mid -State International
Morse Manufacturing, Inc.
Patriot International Trucks of
Boston, LLC
Sunrise Equipment Company
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. November 8, 2011 in the Town of Reading
Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
2012-19 One Material Handler Truck doc
RMLD
Reading Municipal l fight Department
NII I%NIf I'OAIN ION "I IlIN{(10%,
1.14) Ash Street, PO Bur 150
Reading. %IA1)IKb7-0'_50
Move that bid 2012 -18 for One Material Handler Truck be awarded to:
James A. Kiley Co. for $202,595.00
Item 1 One Material Handler Truck
as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
The FY 2012 Capital Budget amount for this item is $1%1000.00.
c^
cent F. Ca eron, Jr.
2012 18 line Matrnal I landlvr irut:k dtx:
$202,595.00
One Mak Handler Truck
Bid 2012 -18
Total Vehicle
Bidder Pnce
Boston Freightliner
Item 1 $208,878.00
James A. Kiley
Company
Item 1 $202,595.00
�I
Total Extended Delivery-
Vehicle Price Warranties Weeks
7
Responsive Specifications
Bi der Met
$197,703.00 $11,175.00 24-26 Yes No'
$200,560.00 $2,035.00 32-38 Yes No'
Notes:
1 Offered 5 year extended warranty not 8 year for engine, engine efearorics, and wyeMis & 5 year erdsrtdsd warranty not 7 year
for rear axle. tlWHerential. and front axle asseff 0ty Bid did not iw.Nrde rsoormwtded spare parts Est with pncirg for al mayor
2 Od not xtdude recommended spare pans list with prxxg for aN mayor egtrpinenL
2012 -18 One Material Handler Truck.xls Page 1
RMLD Reading Municipal Lig_ht_Department
RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street
P.O. Box 150
Reading. MA 01867 -0250
Tel: (781) 944 -1340
Fax: (781) 942 -2409
Web: www.ffnid.com
November 16, 2011
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: One Bucket Truck
On September 28, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting
proposals for One Bucket Truck for the Reading Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Altec Industries, Inc.
Coastal International Truck,
LLC
Dejana Truck Equipment
"a James A. Kiley Co.
Minuteman Trucks
NESCO
Place Motor, Inc.
Taylor & Lloyd
Baker Equipment
CUES Equipment
Fredrickson Bros., Inc.
Liberty Chevrolet
Moore GMC Truck Inc.
Nutmeg International Trucks,
Inc.
Stoneham Ford
Bids were received from James A. Kiley Co. and Boston Freightliner.
Boston Freightliner, Inc.
DC Bates
G & S Industrial, Inc.
Mid -State International
Morse Manufacturing, Inc.
Patriot International Trucks of
Boston, LLC
Sunrise Equipment
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. November 8, 2011 in the Town of Reading
Municipal Light Department's Audio Visual Spurr Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
F]
2012 -19 One But itet Fruck tit x:
RMLD C())
Reading .Municipal Light Department
Xf 111P1! 1'�I �tfX II�X �,F. \I X.\IIUV�
230 A.h Street. PO. Box 150
Reading. MAOIX67 -0250
Move that bid 2012 -19 for One Bucket Truck be awarded to:
James A. Kiley Co. for $201,061.00
Item 1
One Bucket Truck
as the lowest qualified and responsive bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
The FY 2012 Capital Budget amount for this item is $190,000.00.
t� r, /1, 'd, ,, 0, k A 1
64 — -- —
Yincent F. Ca eron, Jr.
ph J. D oe
Crai wen
2012 -11) One But kct Truck.dfx
$201,061.00
One 8uc ruck
Sid 2012 -19
Total Vehicle
Bidder Price
Boston Freightliner
Item 1 $207,559.00
James A. Kiley
Company
Item 1 $201,061.00
Total Extendtgd t)e/t)e iverv- Responsive Specific -bons
Vehicle Price Warranties weeks bidder let
$196,384.00 $11,175.04 2426 Yes No'
$199,026.00 $2,035.00 32-38 Yes Noe
Notes:
t Otfere0 5 year exterxw warranty not 8 year far "no, ergm , and w9ack is 6 5 year exlerxfed warranty toot 7 year
for rear axle, ddfererAwi, and from axis assew"y. flit did not w"49 recomnanded spwe parts Net wo prtanp for aN m 4w
2 Did not uidude wwwranded spare parts Nsst with pngnp for aN trrafor equipment.
2012 -19 One Bucket Truck.xis Page 1
1-1-]
RMLDOO
November 30, 2011
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIARLE POWER FOR GENERATIONs
230 Ash Street, P.D. Box 150
Reading, MAO 1967-0250
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: Substation Relays
On October 14, 2011 a bid invitation was placed as a legal notice in the Reading Chronicle requesting
proposals for Substation Relays for the Reading Municipal Light Department.
An invitation to bid was emailed to the following:
Stuart C. Irby Co. WESCO
Graybar Electric Power Tech (UPSC)
HD Industrial Services J.F. Gray & Associates
E.L. Flowers & Associates Power Sales Group
Bids were received from Schweitzer Engineering
received from Power Tech (UPSC).
Genergy Corp.
Yale Electric
Hasgo Power Sales
MetroWest Electric
Laboratories, WESCO and
HD Supply
Shamrock Power Sales
Robinson Sales
Yale Electric. A "no bid" was
The bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. November 9, 2011 in the Town of Reading
Municipal Light Department's Board Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by the General Manager and the staff.
Move that bid 2012 -22 for Substation Relays be awarded to: Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories for a total
cost of $31,044.00
Item (desc.) Qty Unit Cost Total Net Cost
1 - Schweitzer P/N #: SEL- 0501- 203X561CXB 3 1,000.00 3,000.00
2 - Schweitzer P!N #: SEL -0351 S -71 HA455461 6 4,674.00 28,044.00
31,044.00
as the lowest qualified bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
The total 2012 Capital Budget allocation for "GAW Substation - Relay Replacement Project" is $25,000.
7
incent F. Ca ron Jr.
K4 in Sul an
ukh
ar
Nick D Alleva
File: Bid /FY12 GAW bids /Relays 2012 -22
buDstar ►On He►ay
Bid 2012 -22
Bidder
Meet Certified Exceptions to
Specification Specification Firm All forms Check or stated bid Authorized
Delivery Date Unit Cost ON Total Net Cost requirement Data Sheets Price filled out Bid Bond requirements signature
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Item 1 - SEL- 0501- 203X561CXB 4 weeks ARO 1,000.00 3 3,000.00
Item 2 - SEL -0351 S-71 HA455461 4 weeks ARO 4,674.00 6 28,044.00 Exceptions: See attached.
31,044.00 Note: These exceptions are acceptable.
WESCO yes yes yes yes yes no yes
Item 1 - SEL-0501 -203X561 CXB 4 weeks ARO 1,045.00 3 3,135.00
Item 2 - SEL -0351 S -71 HA455461 4 weeks ARO 4,920.00 6 29,520.00
32,655.00
Yale Electric yes
Item 1 - SEL- 0501- 203X561CXB 28 days ARO 1,053.00 3 3,159.00
Item 2 - SEL -0351 S -71 HA455461 28 days ARO 4,920.00 6 29,520.00
32,679.00
yes yes yes yes no yes
Analysis.xls
TOWN OF READING MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPARTMENT
RATE COMPARISONS READING L SURROUNDING TOWNS
PEABOOY MUNICIPAL LIGHT PLANT
TOTAL BILL $86.94 $186.52 $114.13
PER KMM CHARGE 50.11592 50.11234 $0.11413
%DIFFERENCE -9.72% -0.91% 2.35%
8410.74 $153.07 94,406.74 $10,584.40
50.12558 50.14257 50.12762 50.09648
6.12% -8.26% 11.39% -3.67%
MDDLETON NUNICPAL LIGHT DEPT.
INDUSTRIAL • TOU
TOTAL BILL
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL -TOU
RES. NOT WATER
COMMERCIAL
SMALL COMMERCIAL
SCHOOL RATE
100,300 kWh'0
PER KIM CHARGE
790%Wh'Y
1500kWh'0
1000 kWh'0
7,200 kWh'i
I.M kWh'0
39M kWhs
290.000 kW DMrW
%DIFFERENCE
3.60%
75125 SPIN
18.95%
25000 kW DOIIIRI14
10.00 kW DOwrq
130.9 kW DrnOrd
am"
READING MUNNCIPAL LIGHT DEPT.
TOTAL BILL
396.30
$170.07
$111.51
:00107
$167.93
{4,000.94
$10.84.44
PER K04 CHARGE
$0.12840
50.11338
50.11151
S 0.11834
50.15540
$0.11457
50.10015
NATIONAL GRID
7.07%
17.55%
21.40%
18.95%
-1.23%
19.90%
20.79%
TOTAL BILL
$10111.62
$216.62
$143.84
$1,131.32
$16200
$4,726.32
$13.267.54
PER NWH CHARGE
$0.14510
50.14455
SO. 14384
50.15498
50.15000
$0.13509
$0.12116
%DIFFERENCE
13.01%
27.49%
28.99%
30.96%
-3.47%
17.91%
20.98%
NSTAR COMPANY
TOTAL 84LL
$114.96
$209.21
$151.15
$1,000.84
$160A7
95,924.76
$14,345.84
PER NWH CHARGE
50.15332
$013881
$0. 15118
$0.14532
$0.14858
50.16928
50.13101
%DIFFERENCE
19.41%
22.43%
35.57%
22.80%
-4.39%
47.75%
30.81%
PEABOOY MUNICIPAL LIGHT PLANT
TOTAL BILL $86.94 $186.52 $114.13
PER KMM CHARGE 50.11592 50.11234 $0.11413
%DIFFERENCE -9.72% -0.91% 2.35%
8410.74 $153.07 94,406.74 $10,584.40
50.12558 50.14257 50.12762 50.09648
6.12% -8.26% 11.39% -3.67%
MDDLETON NUNICPAL LIGHT DEPT.
TOTAL BILL
06.77
$190.39
5132.64
3999.51
i1MA4
$4762.93
$13,330.75
PER KIM CHARGE
$0. 13303
50.13226
50.13264
50.13144
$0.15596
50.13608
50.12174
%DIFFERENCE
3.60%
16.65%
18.95%
11.07%
0.36%
18.78%
21.56%
WAKEFIELD MUNICIPAL LIGHT DEPT.
TOTAL BILL
$103.11
$190.92
$135.36
$1,027.59
$160.76
84.90.06
$13,245.67
PER KIWI CHARGE
50.13748
50.13328
50.13538
5 0.14077
50.15349
50.13737
50.12097
%DIFFERENCE
7.07%
17.55%
21.40%
18.95%
-1.23%
19.90%
20.79%
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne FoU
From:
Vincent Cameron
Sent:
Saturday, October 22, 2011 8:56 AM
To:
Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc:
Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Foti
Subject: Account Payable Questions - October 14
O'Neill
1. Artery Lock - RMLD employee went to shop for purchase - could not use petty cash for $16 sale?
Yes we could have used petty cash. I will remind the employees they have this option.
2. Century Bank - Nice to see these credit card fees in steep decline. Could the Board receive a report
on how the new billing system is working?
It will reported as part of the part of the financial report at the next Board Meeting.
3. Fournier - Please remove this from this week's payables as the back -up material for reimbursement
is for the electronic download of three copies of a software
program. "Spector Pro 2011 for Windows" and not a printer as is noted in reimbursement
request. Please call me on this.
I believe Mr. Fournier called Commissioner O'Neill on this issue and it is resolved. This is software for the
printer in the GM conference Room. A printer and computer (both used) has been put in the GM
AlIkk conference room at the request of Commissioner O'Neill. I will get the particulars to the Board
Members for use of the computer.
4. NAPA - Can't we move this to petty cash - a $13.74 local purchase?
rONE7
Yes we could have used petty cash. I will remind the employees they have this option.
10,24 201 1
Page IofI
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 1:42 PM
To: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Mark Uvanni; Jeanne Foti
Subject: Account Payable Questions - October 21
Soil
I. XO Comm. -How is difference between charges & payments being resolved?
We recently signed a three -year contract with XO to be our ISP (Internet Service Provider). We have
been an XO customer for almost a decade now, however they just recently released GSA pricing
schedules for municipal entities. We were able to secure a monthly price that was about $250 per
month lower than what we had been paying, and they (XO) also installed a coupled TS circuit that
doubled our Internet access speed. However in the process, they never disconnected the old circuit and
kept billing us for it. on Oct. 21St XO disconnected the old circuit and we will be credited the full
amount of what we have been billed in error over these past few months. We have a complete paper
(email) trail of all conversations. Again, they are obligated contractually to charge us a fixed amount per
month. The billing error(s) should be corrected very soon and we are staying on top of it.
O'Neill
1. Wilmington Police - What was the reason for a two - person police detail from 1:30 pm to 10:30 pm on
October 3? 4
A car hit a pole and broke it at Middlesex Avenue and Federal Street in Wilmington. This is a very busy
intersection, which required two officers to direct traffic around the scene. Since this was a pole hit, the
RMLD will be reimbursed for the police details and RMLD work done, through the car insurance of the
person who hit the pole.
r
L
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 2:43 PM
To: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Jane Parenteau; Jeanne Foti
Subject: Payroll Questions - October 24
Soli
1. DeMone - She's 32hrs /week correct? What does she do?
Yes. Customer Specialist - Handles customer payments, inquiries, credit, and billing issues.
2. McHugh - She's 20 hours /wk, correct? What does she do?
Yes. Energy Analyst - Handles power supply accounting, billing, and ISO demand and load reporting.
10, 26, 201 1
Page 1 of l
Page I of 1
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 7:53 AM
To: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Foti
Subject: FW: Account Payable Questions - November 11
Categories: Red Category
O'Neill
1. Marblehead Municipal - GM signature needed.
Done.
2. New England Power - Invoice says to make checks payable to "National Grid."
The name on the check was changed to National Grid when we sent the warrant up town. National Grid
used to be know as New England Power Company.
3. WB Mason - No PO? What is item?
This is an Office Supply and we don't create POs for supply purchases. We get supplies from either
Office Depot or WB Mason. This is for a roll of tickets the RMLD uses it for raffles for different events.
Snyder
1. Halls + HD - Are these the same grips? They seem to be different pricing?
Normally we would have bought the grips from HD but they were out of stock. We needed the grips and
bought them from Halls for $26 more.
2. MMWEC - What is the difference between administrative charges on check remittance versus wire
transfer?
I am assuming your question is "What would be the Admin. Charges if we mailed a check versus wiring
the payment. I don't know what the difference would be. I will ask MMWEC. However, for payable
amounts larger than $25k I have the money wired.
3. Snyder note: Petty Cash - I'm not sure I am comfortable with cash tips. I'd prefer it on a charge card
or find to get food without gratuity.
According to RMLD Travel Policy #5 III. F. 2. "...Maximum gratuity which will be reimbursed will be set at
15% of total bill...." In this case the tip of $20 was 2.3% of the total bill.
11 16,2011
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne FoU
From: Bo or Gina (bogina03 @earthlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:22 PM
To: Vincent Cameron; Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Fob; Gina Snyder
Subject: Re: FW: Account Payable Questions - November 11
Hi Vinnie,
The question on MMWEC had to do with administrative charges on the bills and how are they distinct?
The concern regarding reimbursement was not that there was a tip, but that it was separate from the
charge which had a receipt. I agree that when tips are appropriate we would be including them, and that
the people were probably trying to be good customers, which 1 also agree with; however, I am not
comfortable with cash payments without receipt, and if that would be the only way to do it at a particular
company, then we should find a company where we would be provided with a receipt for the paperwork
for reimbursement. I am not disputing the reimbursement as I have great faith in the people there,
however, without receipts, it is not something that I can be comfortable with given the situation on all other
accounts. Please let me know if you have questions.
Thank you,
Gina Snyder
-- Original Message- -
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Nov 16, 20117:53 AM
To: Richard Hahn, Phil Pacino , Gina Snyder, Mary Ellen O'Neill, Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier , Steve Kazanjian , Jeanne Fob
Subject: FW: Account Payable Questions - November 11
Ift O'Neill
qW 1. Marblehead Municipal - GM signature needed.
Done.
2. New England Power - Invoice says to make checks payable to "National Grid."
The name on the check was changed to National Grid when we sent the warrant up town.
National Grid used to be know as New England Power Company.
3. WB Mason - No PO? What is item?
This is an Office Supply and we don't create POs for supply purchases. We get supplies from
either Office Depot or WB Mason. This is for a roll of tickets the RMLD uses it for raffles for
different events.
Snyder
1. Halls + HD - Are these the same grips? They seem to be different pricing?
Normally we would have bought the grips from HD but they were out of stock. We needed the
grips and bought them from Halls for $26 more.
2. MMWEC - What is the difference between administrative charges on check remittance
versus wire transfer?
I am assuming your question is "What would be the Admin. Charges if we mailed a check versus
wiring the payment. I don't know what the difference would be. I will ask MMWEC. However, for
payable amounts larger than $25k I have the money wired.
3. Snyder note: Petty Cash - I'm not sure I am comfortable with cash tips. I'd prefer it on a
charge card or find to get food without gratuity.
According to RMLD Travel Policy #5 III. F 2. ".. Maximum gratuity which will be reimbursed will
be set at 15% of total bill...." In this case the tip of $20 was 2.3% of the total bill.
11 17 :2011
Page I of 2
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron`
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 9:01 AM
To: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Foti; Patricia Mellino
Subject: FW: A/P Questions 11 -21 -11
Categories: Red Category
Snyder
1. Dell — What is Optiplex Minitower Windows and what is it for?
This is a replacement computer for an employee.
2. Fischbach & Moore — A lot of manholes had to be pumped down. Perhaps we should
check cost & effectiveness of seal and covers. What was being done on OT 10/5/11?
The water table is high in parts of the service territory. The water does no come in from the top of the
manholes but from the ground water.
3. JCM Realty — Could you refresh what this is for? I thought it was warehouse / storage, but
it's very high electric usage.
The RMLD pays for storage area and for a portion of the electric usage according to the storage
agreement.
4. Mal's — Please clarify what happened here. What is the value of 2002 Ford 150 with
105,000 miles?
A vehicle was hit by another vehicle at the intersection of Summer, West, and Willow streets. one of
the vehicles rolled over and the RMLD pick up, which was stopped. Insurance paid for the repairs and it
was cheaper than buying a new vehicle.
5. Melvin — Why does it say employer is Marblehead Municipal Light?
That is a mistake by Holiday Inn Express. It should have said Reading.
6. Town of Reading PO — Some inconsistencies between blue & white forms. Need to
accurately record times.
The time the RMLD records are off the blue sheets. I will contact the Town of Reading about their
times.
O'Neill
1. Hanifan - GM signature needed.
Done.
2. Kiley On �chich %chicle is this work dune - modcl, age, miles"
1 1 10 l /ll I
E
Page 2 of)
A 2006 50' Material Handling Bucket Truck with 33,079 miles.
3. Stanstield — Where is original receipt'?
The original receipt was sent to the Town of Reading by mistake. They sent it back.
4. Town of Reading — Treasure's Office — When did these charges invoice 12 -0503 — begin?
The RMLD has been paying for a portion of the Town of Reading costs related to administering the RMLD's bill
paying, health care, payroll, etc. The parentages used to allocate the costs to the RMLD are based on RMLD
activity (employees, bill paid, etc.)
5. Verizon — What is and why an NGrid line?
This is a phone line which was installed by the RMLD in order for NGrid to acquire data from the North Reading
Substation.
11 29 201 1
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 11:18 AM
To: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Foti
Subject: Account Payable Removal Questions - October 28
Categories: Red Category
These answers were held up because it occurred during the snow storm.
Soil
1. Petty Cash - Hansen did not sign.
He has signed.
O'Neill
1. Fournier - Copy of check with employee name on it should be part of the documentation for
reimbursement.
The receipt from the Post Office that accompanied the payable was enough for reimbursement.
2. Melanson Heath - These costs should be included in total costs reported to the Board for professional
services related
to the MMWEC arbitration. Perhaps they already are? ;
They are. I mentioned it in the MMWEC Arbitration updates.
3. Petty Cash - Why is Mr. Fournier's name on this - wouldn't reimbursement be in the name of the
RMLD or an internal
transfer. Why is the beginning balance of $2,850, and not $3,000?
Mr. Fournier's name is on it because he is responsible for the petty cash. The $150 is used as the
beginning bank for the businees counter.
R113
I I '1(1 III I
Page 1 of 1
Jeanne FoU
From: Bo or Gina [bogina03 @earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 20116:36 PM
To: Vincent Cameron
Cc: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli; Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Foti
Subject: Re: Account Payable Removal Questions - October 28
Vinnie,
On # 3, does "The $150 is used as the beginning bank for the businees counter."
mean that it costs $150 to have a petty cash fund? I'm sure it couldn't be that, but I don't
understand the explanation.
Gina
On 11/29/2011 11:17 AM, Vincent Cameron wrote:
These answers were held up because it occurred during the snow storm.
Soil
1. Petty Cash - Hansen did not sign.
He has signed.
0 O'Neill
1. Fournier - Copy of check with employee name on it should be part of the documentation
for reimbursement.
The receipt from the Post Office that accompanied the payable was enough for
reimbursement.
2. Melanson Heath - These costs should be included in total costs reported to the Board
for professional services related
to the MMWEC arbitration. Perhaps they already are?
They are. I mentioned it in the MMWEC Arbitration updates.
3. Petty Cash - Why is Mr. Fournier's name on this - wouldn't reimbursement be in the
name of the RMLD or an internal
transfer. Why is the beginning balance of $2,850, and not $3,000?
Mr. Fournier's name is on it because he is responsible for the petty cash. The $150 is used
as the beginning bank for the businees counter.
11/30/2011
Page 1 of 2
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 7:08 AM
To: Gina Snyder
Cc: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli; Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne
Foti
Subject: RE: Account Payable Removal Questions - October 28
Categories: Red Category
At the start of the business day you need a "bank ", which is money used to make change as customers
come into pay their bills. The RMLD uses $150 as the bank to start off the day.
From: Bo or Gina [mailto:bogina03 @earthlink.net)
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 20116:36 PM
To: Vincent Cameron
Cc: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli; Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Fotl
Subject: Re: Account Payable Removal Questions - October 28
Vinnie,
On # 3, does "The $150 is used as the beginning bank for the businees counter."
mean that it costs $150 to have a petty cash fund? I'm sure it couldn't be that, but I don't
understand the explanation.
Gina (a
On 11 /29/2011 11:17 AM, Vincent Cameron wrote:
These answers were held up because it occurred during the snow storm.
Soil
1. Petty Cash - Hansen did not sign.
He has signed.
O'Neill
1. Fournier - Copy of check with employee name on it should be part of the documentation
for reimbursement.
The receipt from the Post Office that accompanied the payable was enough for
reimbursement.
2. Melanson Heath - These costs should be included in total costs reported to the Board
for professional services related
to the MMWEC arbitration. Perhaps they already are?
They are. I mentioned it in the MMWEC Arbitration updates.
3. Petty Cash - Why is Mr. Fournier's name on this - wouldn't reimbursement be in the
name of the RMLD or an internal
transfer. Why is the beginning balance of $2,850, and not $3,000?
Mr. Fournier's name is on it because he is responsible for the petty cash. The $150 is used as the
beginning bank for the businees counter.
1 30,201 l
Page I of I
Jeanne FoU
From: Vincent Cameron
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 10:48 AM
To: Richard Hahn; Phil Pacino; Gina Snyder; Mary Ellen O'Neill; Bob Soli
Cc: Bob Fournier; Steve Kazanjian; Jeanne Foti
Subject: Answer to Account Payable Cluestions - 11/29/11
Categories: Red Category
Snyder
1. Asplundh - Meals on this one. No supporting doc. + can't recall for meals on previous work.
Wouldn't meals generally not be including in billings?
This crew was from Northern Vermont and worked under a different contract from our usual tree crews.
Before coming to assist us, we contacted them about the hourly and the per diem for storm work.
11 30,2011