HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-04-20 RMLD Board of Commissioners Minutesr
i
N Town of Reading
Meeting Minutes
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
RMLD Board of Commissioners
Date: 04-20-2017
Building: Reading Municipal Light Building
Address: 230 Ash Street
Purpose: General business.
Attendees: Members - Present:
A RECEWEG ,.
TOWN CLERK
READING. ASS
1911 AUG 21 P ' 2- 316 I
Time: 7:30 PM
Location: Winfred Spurr Audio Visual Room
Session: Open Session
Version: Final
Thomas J. O'Rourke, Chairman, Philip B. Pacino. Chairman, Dave Hennessy,
Vice Chair, Secretary Pro Tem, John Stempeck, Commissioner
Members - Not Present:
David Talbot, Commissioner, Absent
Others Present:
Coleen O'Brien, Tracy Schultz, Jane Parenteau, Joyce Mulvaney, Hamid
Jaffari, Neil Cohen, CAB Member, Mayhew Seavey, PLM Engineering
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Philip B. Pacino, RMLD Board Chairman
Topics of Discussion:
Call Meeting to Order
Chairman O'Rourke called the meeting to order and announced that the meeting is being videotaped for
distribution at community television stations in Reading, North Reading, Wilmington and Lynnfield.
Opening Remarks
Chairman O'Rourke read the RMLD Board of Commissioners' Code of Conduct and explained that Ms. Markiewicz
would not be in attendance; therefore, there is no financial report. Chairman O'Rourke welcomed Reading's new
CAB representative, Neil Cohen, and Mayhew Seavey from PLM Engineering. Mr. Hennessy agreed to serve as
Board Secretary. There was no public comment. Mr. Stempeck stated that he attended the CAB meeting on April
S` and commented that it was an outstanding meeting: The presentation of the Capital Budget was met with
excellent questions and the RMLD team is to be commended for a job well done. The subsequent tour of
Wilmington's new high school revealed a beautiful building with much forethought put into materials.
Report of the Chairman
Reorganization of the RMLD Board
Chairman O'Rourke announced the annual reorganization of the RMLD Board of Commissioners and asked for
nominations for Chairman and Vice Chair. Mr. Stempeck nominated Chairman Pacino for Chairman and Mr.
Hennessy for Vice Chair. Chairman Pacino seconded the nomination.
Chairman O'Rourke moved that the Board accept the nomination of Chairman Pacino for Chairman and Mr.
Hennessy for Vice Chair.
Motion carried 4:0:0.
Chairman O'Rourke was Chairman up to this point in the meeting.
Chairman Pacino thanked the Board and stated that it is his thirty first year serving. The first time he served as
Chair was in1998. Chairman Pacino stated that he has no set agenda; only the best interest of the ratepayers. He
has been through two votes Town of Wilmington to pull out of the system and the Twenty -Year Agreement
Page 1 1
Report of the Chairman
Reorganization of the RMLD Board
that arose from that, the construction of the RMLD building, and four General Managers. Chairman Pacino clarified
that his purpose as Chairman will be to guide, not to dictate. He concluded by stating he fully supports Ms. O'Brien
and the direction that she is taking the RMLD.
Electric Rate Design Scenarios — Mr. Seavey
Ms. O'Brien pointed out an error in the Board Book and explained that the agenda and attachment cover page of
the presentation should read 'Electric Rate Design Scenarios.'
Mr. Seavey explained that his analysis began by updating the Cost of Service Study that was performed three years
ago. That edited document then served as a basis for designing rates that will accomplish various goals. One such
objective being to send price signals to customers to control the peak. The Cost of Service Study is intended to
provide an analysis of how the rates are currently performing, and to then provide options for restructuring.
The FY 2016 Cost of Service was updated to reflect the FY 2018 operating budget. To reach the targeted rate of
return, customer distribution revenues were increased by 4 percent and streetlight rates were adjusted to reflect
the formula rate that is allowed by statute.
The results show rates of return by class ranging from -2.7 percent for basic residential customers to as high as 28
percent for industrial customers. The overall rate of return is close to the target of 8 percent. It comes in at 7.9
percent. Class rates of return varied from minus 10 to plus 28. These are comparable to what was found in FY
2014, and are well within the range of the rates of other municipal utilities.
Mr. Seavey continued, explaining that subsidies are always an issue that arise during rate design, where the
question arises: Is everyone paying their fair share to run the utility? Retail electric rates cannot reflect the actual
cost of providing service. The cost of energy varies hourly. Additionally, capacity and transmission make up an
increasing portion of cost structure. These costs are incurred in very specific ways. The cost of capacity, which is
doubling, is determined by the New England load during a single peak hour. Even if a customer is offline at that
time, they still pay the cost of that capacity. Similarly, transmission costs are incurred based on one peak hour a
month. This is determined by the transmission grid's peak, not RMLD's. The actual distribution costs vary
depending on where the customer is located on the electric system, but the rate structure is socialized.
Vice Chairman Hennessy asked what is the actual variability in distribution cost. Mr. Seavey replied that the
average distribution cost is about 4 cents a kwh. The cost for a customer located right next to a substation is
probably less than a cent, whereas the actual cost for a customer further away could be 7 or 8 cents a kwh.
Mr. Seavey then stated that there are political considerations that are always present in rate design. Residential
customers are viewed as a favored class in both private and municipal utilities. In municipals, they elect the
Commissioners, and when private utilities file their rates the Attorney General is representing the residential
customers. Additionally, Associated Industries of Massachusetts represent industrial customers so the small
commercial customers end up picking
up the balance. Large customers are viewed as employers in the town and as being subject to competitive
pressure, and having choices that small commercial customers do not.
There are two types of subsidies to address in RMLD's rate design: Cross -class and intra -class. Cross -class is where
one rate class is subsidized by another rate class. Residential rates don't even cover their own expenses; there is a
negative rate of return. All RMLD's net income is produced by commercial and industrial customers. Additionally,
there's a subsidization of renewable generation and net metering customers, who are not paying a significant cost
of the distribution services that they are using. Within each class are Intra -class subsidies, because the demand
charge that large customers pay doesn't reflect the actual cost of demand. If a customer has a high load factor and
is purchasing a lot more kwh than what they impose on the system and they are paying capacity charges through a
cents-per-kwh charge, they're paying more than their share. If customers are not paying the actual cost, then they
don't have a proper incentive to control their demand.
There are three scenarios that all produce the targeted eight percent rate of return. The total revenue remains
consistent, but is shifted across customer classes.
Page 1 2
Electric Rate Design Scenarios — Mr. Seavey
Scenario 1 is an across-the-board 4 percent increase. The customer and distribution charges will increase, which
make up one quarter of the bill impact. The bill impact is between 1 and 1.5 percent. The rates of return shift very
little. Revenues increase $1 million. Average bill will increase 1 percent. The rates of return remain uneven.
Residential rates still lose $1.3 million and commercial and industrial earn $7 million.
It is worth noting that all rates, regardless of which scenario was being looked at, are 10 to 40 percent lower than
comparable rates from National Grid.
Scenario 2 has every class of customer producing a uniform 8 percent rate of return. The impact is dramatic. There
would be a 13 percent increase for residential customers, a 20 percent increase for residential time -of -use
customers, an 11 percent decrease for commercial customers and a 4 percent decrease for industrial customers.
Customers generally do not notice changes of less than ten percent. Large customers will notice smaller changes
because they have access to their accounts and usage.
Scenario 3 brings residential rates up to break even (up to a 0 percent rate of return), and the commercial and
industrial rates produce the net income to meet the overall 8 percent rate of return.
This results in a 4 percent increase for residential customers, and a 12 percent increase for time -of -use. The
commercial rates would go down about 3 percent and the industrial rates would remain relatively flat, with only a
0.5 percent increase. It's not an enormous impact.
These are the parameters that RMLD has to work with for overall rate class design. The present rate charges
demand only to commercial, industrial, and school classes of customers. The demand charges vary between $7.5
and $9 dollars a kw. In FY 2018, forward capacity and transmission costs alone total $16. The present demand
rates will only recover half of the cost of capacity and transmission. The rest is recovered through a cents-per-kwh
charge. High load customers are paying more than their share of transmission costs. Mr. Seavey gauged the level
of subsidy that each of the 80 industrial customers are paying. This was based on the allocated cost of capacity and
transmission versus how much the 80 customers were paying through the present rates. There are customers
whose capacity and transmission charges are almost entirely being paid by someone else. Then there are
customers paying 60 percent more than their share of capacity and transmission costs. This is a direct function of
the load factor of the customer -the number of hours that they use each kw of demand. If you take the customer's
monthly kwh and divide it by kw's of demand, the unit you get is hours. The higher that number is, the more the
customer will be paying to subsidize others. The dollar amount that is subsidized varies tremendously.
Mr. Stempeck asked, with the forward capacity and transmission costs due to increase dramatically, will that effect
National Grid as well? Mr. Seavey answered in the affirmative, and explained that all utilities within NEMA's load
zone will be similarly affected.
Mr. Stempeck asked we have such granular data in terms of who is subsidizing who, can another scenario be to
work with each company so there is no subsidizing? Mr. Seavey replied that a good approach is to adjust the rate
and then work with individual customers either directly or through an energy services company to look at their
consumption patterns and their processes. The price signal must be correct first.
Mr. Stempeck stated that with all the data and algorithms available, there must be a straightforward way to adjust
on a rational basis. Mr. Seavey responded that it is tricky; customers vary widely in their ability to control things
like that. Some of it is behavior and some of it is technology. If the customer has a process that is inflexible, there's
not much that they can do other than looking at storage technologies or onsite generation.
Mr. O'Rourke clarified that Mr. Stempeck was not suggesting changing the relationship between residential and
commercial. Mr. Stempeck replied that he was just focusing on commercial. Would imagine that all supermarkets
are being treated the same. But if one becomes significantly differentiated, then that becomes an issue. Mr.
O'Rourke remarked that a supermarket is a good example, since they are inflexible due to refrigeration.
Mr. Seavey explained that refrigeration has a flywheel effect. When the input is reduced, the temperature rises
quite slowly. If you can target a narrow window you could very easily control that. It's the same thing with air
conditioning.
Page 1 3
Electric Rate Design Scenarios — Mr. Seavey
If you know that there's going to be a peak later in the day you can do extra chilling in advance of that, and then
reduce or completely turn off. There are options with technology if you have the information in advance.
Mr. O'Rourke then commented on how it's impossible for manufacturers when they could be losing millions in
production time. Mr. Seavey replied that's why businesses need a good accountant to calculate whether there is a
cost benefit.
Mr. Seavey continued, saying that the approach they're working on is to create a separate purchase power
capacity transmission charge for customers who are billed a demand charge. Currently, every customer pays the
same cents per kwh rate. We could take some of the revenue being recovered from commercial and industrial
customers, turn that into a demand charge, and recover the rest through a kwh charge. This would reflect the price
of capacity and transmission without shifting any revenue between classes of customers. It would keep the
amount of revenue that you're recovering from commercial and industrial customers the same, but would shift
some of those energy charges into demand charges. This will have an enormous impact on the amount of
subsidization that takes place within the larger customer class.
The impact to the largest 80 customers would be some significant increases. Most of the customers would
experience an impact of plus or minus 5 percent. There are some customers who will get a strong price signal. The
amount of dollars involved is relatively small for most of the customers, but there are a few with sizable increases.
There are also some with moderate decreases. About 2/3 of the industrial customers would see an increase. Only 5
will experience an increase greater than 10 percent. None of the decreases would be more than 5 percent.
Mr. Seavey then addressed the amount of subsidization of renewable generation net metering customers. RMLD's
present rate allows the customer to avoid paying distribution for all kwh that are produced by the solar generator
and consumed behind the mirror. That means that RMLD is losing an average of 30 percent of distribution
revenues from each net metering customer. It amounts to an average of $3.16 per installed kW of solar capacity.
Across all of RMLD's solar customers, the total amount of the subsidy is about $1,800. The average is $22 a month
per customer. That being said, RMLD is better off than many utilities. RMLD is not crediting the full distribution for
kwh that are delivered to the utility and is not doing strictly fill net metering. The fuel charge is below the value of
the capacity and transmission that is delivered to the system.
Vice Chairman Hennessy asked what the typical loss is, if ours is 30 percent. Mr. Seavey replied that the average in
terms of dollars per kw is $6 kw. RMLD's is half of that.
Mr. Seavey continued, stating that oversizing a solar array doesn't harm RMLD that much. The more that the
customer exports to RMLD's system, the less RMLD loses from the customer in terms of dollars per kw. If only 20
to 30 percent of the electricity is being used behind the meter and 70 or 80 percent of it is being exported, losing
about a $1 a kwh.
Mr. Seavey then presented three of the most commonly used options to reduce this subsidy.
The option that Mr. Seavey sees most often is to add a distribution recovery surcharge for a certain amount of
dollars per kw of installed solar capacity every month. It becomes an additional monthly customer charge based on
the size of the customer's solar array. This is easy to implement but it's not ideal. Picking a number to charge per
kW still leads to subsidies between solar customers. RMLD recovers all its distribution revenue, but instead of non -
net metering customers subsidizing net metering customers, some net metering customers subsidize other net
metering customers.
Another option is to install a demand meter in place of a standard kwh meter for every residential solar customer.
The peak demand for solar customers is at night. The demand meter would pick up that peak and bill the customer
an appropriate distribution charge, based on their demand. This was not previously an option due to equipment
costs. However, demand meters are no longer as expensive. It is feasible but would mean billing system
modifications.
The best way is to completely separate the solar generation from the consumption is to have two separate meters.
Page 1 4
Electric Rate Design Scenarios — Mr. Seavey
The meter on the house records all the kwh use within the house, while a revenue meter on the solar array has a
tariff rate for solar electricity. This is based on avoided capacity transmission value and the avoided energy value.
There is no subsidization at all if you do it that way. Mr. Seavey stated that he knows of a few municipals who do
this for customers over 100 kw, and it could be done for smaller customers. However, it's a more complicated
meter installation. The more effective a solution is, the more complicated and concluded his presentation.
Mr. O'Rourke inquired as to what the next step is. The Board has received good information. Is there now
supposed to be a digestion period to think about the presentation and then come back and clarify?
Mr. Seavey answered that RMLD is looking for feedback on how important is it to address the different levels of
subsidization and how important it is to be sending the correct price signal for capacity and transmission in order
to try and control the peak.
Mr. Stempeck clarified that the three scenarios were picked, from an unlimited range of options, because they
seemed the most reasonable. Mr. Seavey affirmed this, and stated that he had disregarded scenarios that were
extreme and so moderate as to be almost meaningless.
Mr. Stempeck asked if this is something to address at the strategy meeting. Ms. O'Brien replied that she would
think so as we're trying to resolve rate increases and structures to roll into the budgets for a July 1
implementation.
Ms. Parenteau added that the rates must be filed shortly before July 1; there is some time.
Mr. Seavey explained that the presented rates were carefully devised so as not to impact the budget -the revenues
are the same.
Chairman Pacino asked what the Department is looking for the Board to do -are the Commissioners supposed to
choose one of the scenarios?
Ms. O'Brien stated that she appreciates this type of presentation because it shows exactly how the rates work,
including the numbers needed to recover the rate of return. It starts a conversation on subsidization, time of use,
and solar. It highlights any type of revenue erosion from solar that is currently occurring, and raises questions as to
what the future will bring. In California, circuits aren't connected to anything; they're on standby Going forward,
the rates need to be designed to be fair to all customers. We need to make sure we're strategically thinking: what
is it now and what is it going to be in the future? Do we need to make a change now or do we want to wait? There
is a subsidy with solar. Is it at a level now where it's still okay? If we allow that number to continue to grow, the
next thing you know you're trying to recover from that and the increase to the customer is much greater.
Ms. O'Brien stated that she would be strategizing with Ms. Parenteau to make recommendations as to what they
think. The state of the electric industry has been standard for the last thirty years. There's never been the threat of
competition. However, going forward, solar will have an impact. The cost of the peak, load factor, and customers
not paying their share all need to be addressed. It's always easier to stay consistent with the past, but there are
changes that we want to make sure we're addressing. This can be discussed further in a strategy meeting and still
try to get any rate changes in for July 1.
Mr. Stempeck appreciates the fact that other area utilities are significantly more expensive than RMLD and are
facing the exact same issues in terms of rates. It comes down to a question of who subsidizes who or not, or if
everyone just pays their fair share. Solar is great and he supports its proliferation. However, there are concerns
that need to be addressed. We still need to provide power to customers in the morning and at night.
Ms. O'Brien agreed with Mr. Stempeck's support of solar. However, parallels can be drawn to the owners of
electric cars who receive a tax break. When everyone has an electric car, at what point do we reinstate that tax?
There should be a benefit for helping to clean the planet, but there are also fixed costs that need to be paid.
Redistribution of that responsibility needs to be done strategically so we're not hurting our customers. Ms. O'Brien
mentioned even making some minor adjustments in that direction so that we're covered in the event of rapid solar
technology development. Money will still need to be paid to keep up the poles and wires.
Page 1 5
Electric Rate Design Scenarios — Mr. Seavey
Mr. Stempeck added that it pays to be strategic about this and consider the different options. The future is tied to
how many people convert to solar and whether what is happening in California could happen here. With all the
possible rates netting the same return, it really becomes a question of balance.
Mr. O'Rourke stated that the strategy session should provide governing thoughts on what the Board wants to do
and what the Board does not want to do. There are different impacts on different customers; disadvantaging
RMLD's largest customer should be avoided. Options need to be analyzed in terms of their relative merits. We
need to make sure whatever we select outlines and protects as part of our strategy.
Mr. Stempeck reported on an article he read a week earlier about Google trying to divorce itself from PG&E
because they've put in so many solar arrays that they no longer need the power from PG&E. They want to
disconnect from the utility. PG&E is going to be charging them a transmission charge. This is reflective of how
technology is changing in both our industry and our world. Ten years ago, this would have been unthinkable.
Ms. O'Brien said that whether people are connected to us or not, RMLD will not compromise the safety of its
system, the workers, or the public. The cost of maintaining the system remains. Charge for providing standby
power in the future -those costs will still be there.
Mr. Seavey explained that it ultimately becomes a policy question. A subsidy exists over time -when you try to take
it away, it becomes an entitlement. When rates aren't looked at for a long time and don't adjust according to
market conditions it creates a situation you can't fix without disadvantaging one group over another.
General Manager's Report — Ms. O'Brien
Ms. O'Brien announced that the Art Contest calendars are available and have been delivered to the schools. Ms.
O'Brien thanked Ms. Mulvaney and Ms. Parenteau's group. Ms. Parenteau added that the calendars were designed
in house, resulting in a significant savings to RMLD.
The North Reading Town Day will be June 11 and the Reading Friends and Family Day will be June 17; RMLD will be
attending both events. The Shred the Peak educational program will launch early to mid-May. The website
redesign, historic calendar design, and Public Power Week event planning have all kicked off.
Ms. O'Brien's last Town presentation, to the North Reading Board of Selectmen, has been rescheduled to May 8.
Mr. O'Rourke asked about Earth Day. Ms. Mulvaney explained that the Reading Climate Advisory Committee will
be holding an event at Parker Middle School. RMLD will attend.
Power Supply Report — February 2017 — Ms. Parenteau (Attachment 1)
Ms. Parenteau reported the power supply report will be for February 2017. Comparing heating degree days with
kWh sales showed that the winters were much colder in 2013, 2014, and 2015. Heating degree days dropped
significantly in 2016 and 2017. The tricky part of kwh sales is that the monthly report is sometimes reflective of
both January and February based on billing cycles.
In 2016 and 2017 where there is a decrease in sales, and then a slight increase, that could be related to January
sales that are incorporated into the February bill. It was a bit non -conforming but Ms. Parenteau explained that
she wanted to capture the significance of heating degree days and the drop in 2016 and 2017.
Ms. Parenteau then spoke on comparing imbedded fuel costs and heating degree days. Because of gas constraints
in New England in February of 2013, 2014, and 2015, there were significant cost increases, especially
the spot market (day ahead and real-time). That has dropped significantly in 2016 and 2017. The day ahead
markets and the real-time markets were averaging over $100 a month. In February of 2016 and 2017, because of
the mild conditions and lack of gas constraints, cost dropped to $30 in those periods. This is reflected in fuel
charges.
Mr. Stempeck clarified that the cost drop was due to temperature differentials. Ms. Parenteau answered that the
mild weather was a contributing factor, as was the gas supply and RMLD's laddering and layering portfolio. These
brought the price down.
Page 1 6
Power Supply Report — February 2017 — Ms. Parenteau (Attachment 1)
Ms. O'Brien asked Ms. Parenteau if she had any information into Mr. Talbot's inquiry about solar panels held down
on roofs by cinder blocks.
Ms. Parenteau answered that there are access issues at our solar projects at 1 Burlington Ave. and 326 Ballardvale.
IRD reached out to one of our customers, Teradyne in North Reading, and they have access to their panels and we
can walk on the roof and take a look. They can provide a structured tour of the facilities. It is comparable to
RMLD's arrays. Preliminary dates for the tour are May 16 and May 17. Ms. Schultz stated that she would resend e-
mail that Ms. Foti had distributed about the tour.
Mr. O'Rourke explained that Mr. Talbot had been looking for information on the feasibility of RMLD having its own
solar business.
Ms. Parenteau thought Mr. Talbot had asked for a hypothetically, without considering the structure's integrity, the
cost of placing solar on RMLD's garage roof. Ms. Parenteau stated that she had reached out to developers, and
that it would cost roughly $200,000 to do 250 kw.
Mr. O'Rourke added that he believed the end game was a cost benefit analysis, if we purchased those solar panels
then what kind of cost benefit would there be for RMLD. Ms. Parenteau stated that she would run those numbers.
Chairman Pacino added that it was his understanding that RMLD is looking for other locations for solar panels.
Ms. O'Brien agreed with Ms. Parenteau regarding what Mr. Talbot originally asked. However, the question has
shifted. Mr. Talbot wants to know what we are doing to solicit roofs to put solar panels up that are just held down
by cinder blocks. Mr. Talbot is viewing it as a very low-cost method of throwing solar panels up and he wants that
scenario evaluated.
Ms. Parenteau commented that RMLD needs to consider that if we own the solar panels, we would have to pay
the owner of the building a lease payment. What do we do with the tax incentive credits that are here, since we
can't take advantage of those. It is an analysis that can be done.
Ms. O'Brien added that the property owner would be responsible for a tax payment once the panels are placed on
the roof as well.
Engineering and Operations Report — February 2017 — Mr. Jaffari (Attachment 2)
Mr. Jaffari began his report on the progress made in February 2017. Year-to-date, construction total $485,426. As
part of a pilot program, RMLD is installing a generator in which construction has started.
A concrete pad has been poured at Station 4 and it's going as scheduled. The generator will be delivered on June 1.
Then there is wiring and testing to do to get ready for July 1. It is on target.
Routine construction for the month of February totaled $109,591, bringing the year-to-date to $1,171,604. Other
capital projects have brought year-to-date spending to $4 million. There is $5 million more to spend.
Approximately $2.5 to $2.6 million will be spent on the generator.
Ms. O'Brien asked Ms. Mulvaney to work with Mr. Jaffari to set up a ribbon cutting ceremony in mid-June and to
invite the Commissioners. Ms. O'Brien said that she had just visited the site with Mr. Jaffari and Mr. Zanelli is doing
a great job.
Mr. Jaffari then moved on to the seven programs that comprise routine maintenance. Crews have upgraded
almost 26 percent of the pad mount transformers and almost 17 percent of the overhead transformers have been
upgraded as part of the transformer replacement program. As of April 10, 224 poles have been replaced and 126
of those 224 transfers have been completed.
Feeder patrols showed no problems. 961 out of 1,237 manholes have been inspected. Through February 2017,
RMLD has completed 91 percent of its porcelain cutout replacements, with 253 remaining. 75 spans were trimmed
in February, totaling 831 spans trimmed year-to-date. Infrared scanning showed no hot spots at the substations.
Page 1 7
Engineering and Operations Report — February 2017 — Mr. Jaffari (Attachment 2)
The NJUNS double pole report shows 3 transfers pending in Lynnfield, 23 transfers pending in Reading and 27 pole
butts that need to be removed. North Reading has 13 pending transfers and 106 poles butts that need to be
removed, and Wilmington has 26 transfers, 4 pole butts, and 1 guy install pending. RMLD is making good progress
on double poles and making transfers but unfortunately, we must wait for Verizon and Comcast to do their
transfers.
Mr. Jaffari then discussed reliability indices, stating he is pleased to announce the use of a new reliability tracking
from APPA. Most utilities use this program. The 2016 totals just came out and RMLD was well below the national
and regional average for SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI. The programs we have in place are paying off, but there is still a
long way to go. Maintenance hasn't been done on the system for 20 to 30 years and we're trying to catch up.
Mr. Stempeck asked if the 2017 numbers were year-to-date. Mr. Jaffari answered yes, adding that there are areas
of concern. Maintenance needs to be increased, but we are doing the best that we can do.
Major outage causes from 2012 to 2017 were 35 percent equipment, 30 percent trees, and 21 percent wildlife.
Outages in February 2017 were caused by equipment, trees, and wildlife. A squirrel recently caused an outage in
Lynnfield. It's mating season and wildlife finds a way into the equipment.
Mr. Stempeck commented that the reliability program is working very well, which is testimony to the effectiveness
of the maintenance programs.
Vice Chairman Hennessy clarified that SAIFI and CAIDI are year-to-date; we're not expecting those numbers to go
up due to seasonal factors. Mr. Jaffari answered yes, they are year-to-date. SAIDI and SAIFI increase as we
experience outages. SAIFI relates to the frequency of outages experienced. That number is usually higher than the
other two. That number is nothing right now, due to the mild winter, and that will hopefully remain the same.
RMLD Procurement Requests Requiring Board Approval (Attachment 3)
IFP 2017-33 Hourly Rates for Overhead Line Construction and Maintenance Work as needed, Storm
Management Line Construction and Restoration
Mr. Jaffari explained that this bid is for a contractor that will provide its staff to help with construction upgrades
and help during system emergencies in order to restore service faster. The bid was sent to 30 companies and 2
responded. Powerline and Matrix. The lowest responsive bidder was Powerline. Matrix bid $796,704, which is a
$50,000 price difference.
Mr. Stempeck made a motion, seconded by Vice Chairman Hennessy, that proposal 2017-33 for Hourly Rates for
Overhead Line Construction and Maintenance Work as needed, Storm Management Line Construction and
Restoration be awarded to Powerline Contractors, Inc., as the for a total cost of $746,760 pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30
§ 39M on the recommendation of the General Manager.
Motion carried 4:0:0.
General Discussion
There was none.
RMLD Board Meetings:
Tuesday, May 2, 2017 Strategic Meeting, Wednesday, May 10, 2017 Operating Budget Review
Thursday, May 11, 2017 Capital Budget Review
Chairman Pacino asked whether a 6PM start time for the Strategic Meeting and the Budget Meetings was
agreeable to the Board. The Commissioners confirmed this was amenable.
CAB Meeting
Wednesday, May 3, 2017
Chairman Pacino volunteered to attend the CAB meeting.
Mr. O'Rourke asked when Board committees would be elected. Ms. Schultz explained that historically it has been
done at a subsequent meeting, but she has assigned AP Warrants and Payroll. Chairman Pacino and Vice Chairman
Hennessy are the only ones who can sign AP due to the other Commissioners having signed for the last three
years. Per Board rules, they must take a year off. Vice Chairman Hennessy volunteered to sign AP for the month of
May.
Page 1 8
Executive Session
At 9:07 p.m. Chairman Pacino made a motion, seconded by Mr. Stempeck, that the Board go into Executive Session
to discuss the deployment of security personnel or devices, to consider the purchase of real property and discuss
strategy with respect to collective bargaining, Chapter 164 Section 47D exemption for competitively sensitive or
other proprietary information provided in the course of proceedings conducted pursuant to this chapter when
such municipal lighting plant board determines that such disclosure will adversely affect its ability to conduct
business in relation to other entities making, selling, or distributing electric power and energy pursuant to this
chapter and return to Regular Session for the sole purpose of adjournment.
Chairman Pacino called for a poll of the vote:
Mr. O'Rourke: Aye; Chairman Pacino: Aye; Mr. Stempeck, Aye; and Vice Chairman Hennessy: Aye.
Motion carried 4:0:0.
Adjournment
At 9:53 p.m. Mr. O'Rourke made a motion seconded by Mr. Stempeck to adjourn the Regular Session.
Motion carried 4:0:0.
A true copy of the RMLD Board of Commissioners minutes
as approved by a majority of the Commission.
David Hennessy, Secretary Pro Tem
RMLD Board of Commissioners
Page 1 9
fl,
M
of
11
r
O
LOM
4-J
E
fu
J'
CD
■
fu
4mJ
Ofu
■ _
U
4-J
C-
O
=
4
O
V
ro
L
V
'0
W
Q
Q
M
of
11
r
a)
U)
fo
fu
w
O
E
w
,V
L
O
Ln
0
U—
(n
Z)
a
.0
00
U-
cc�
G
LL
E
0
W
O
0
,O
L
E
0
A
0-
�V
.C:
'D 0 CD
' Cl)
0 c S - R
ce) r- r -
V
co G
C, CO
(US, 9 9
IT 04
0 (D Of
W)
W) C4
(D 0
w Ot CN
I--
(N 0) N
Cli a!
'T IT co
Ct 'IL A
0) O r-_
co N (D
CL
(D
70-
co
C'I
0 Ln 0 Ln 0 Ul 0 Ul 0 Ul 0 Ln
it m m C4 CN r -I r -I
C")
E
co O
� O �
� O
O � �
IR -i CD
O
,--1 L
O Q w
4-' • –
•— O C: ■_
•
V
- Qfu
3,–
E
O
i C:V ate., (n
L
:3LZO
O fa �-
■� O C-
O :3V
0
-0
0 4-J Un Q) :3 M
V0 7w 4— m fu
.�
— i O O ,>
ao V L
O U oC cOn oC O
L L* Y Y
cn
�L
Q�
Q�
C:
w
L
O
a
L
_a)
0
N
N
L
C.
Q
H
d
R
N
D
J
W
fu
L—
C
_W
fu
fu
W
O
V
V)
O
V/
0
Fc
L
0
U
•
Y
fo
O
dJ
E
Q
�
O
�
E
fu i
_0E
+�
C
Qn
�
O
fu
u
4-1
ru
C
E
Q
O O
-o
e--,
m
0
m
ry c
.�
C
Q
.fd
D
C
CC:
v
�
�
O �
O
V) V
0
CL
L
fo
c
=3
fu
-0
c�
(A M
V)
O
Q
E��
V N
0
ra
>
u
O
.��/�
4-+
o=Q)
E
V^ O
O
fu'�
Ln
L
•
u
cn O
O
C .0
>
(a se
4-J f�
to
-0 Q C
O
p
fu
� O .
V
4 •�
CD
c
.V 0) V)
L
Lu
fQ,C C
Q i fu
w
•fu
L.
U-o�
•
.61
O
fo
O
a�
E
�"
O
V)
L
�
E
u
0
Qn
u
L
fu
u
4-1
L
c
E
-0 -�
O
-o
m
O-
m
ry c
.�
C
Q
Q
O)
C
CC:
v
�
>. a)
CL(
O O
0
�` 4
"j60)
c
u
'CL•C:
f�
-0
(A M
V)
"D
V)
E��
00
0
ra
C 4-J
u
�
•o O
4-+
o=Q)
Vi L
~
4-Jfo
•
•
T O
0
•
H
D
J
■m
4m
O
0
N
N
.--i
CL
4-
O
faUl
Ln
E
>
O
._
O
Q
a-'
O�
a
�
tea-'
�
•�
—cin
V
Lno
• L
i O
}-�
L
O
. V
W
C �
• -
W
4-
(�'�
_O
L V)
QV]
O
Q�J
O
a�
L
O
E
O
o(l)Q)
�O
C:
fo
�
OE
�
fo
0
�
K))
ffi
fo
fu
O
._
O,
.0
a) L-
O
�
fO
�_
�
c
'- V)
O
��
a
L-
Via-'
E
(�
�fo
V
Q
O
n
._
C%i
.1--j
4
L
O
.fo
fo
V
-O�
Q cam
V
Q4
'C:
_
O
i
Q
V)
fa
N> 'V)
Q�
-J
fu
L
-0
oC
m
�- L
Ql
U
O
a --J
QC
fa
J
Q
O
O
CL
•
•
0
N
N
.--i
CL
fu
0
O
_0
L
c�
N
` �
L
N
•N
0
p
A
E
O
_0 �
C
V .i �-*
ru
�
0=
4M--
Q)
L
•L
-C
0
� 0
V fu
O
v
O
Q.
uj
N
=3 O
c:
u�
C:LO
O
a
`v
> L
�■/
X
U
0 O
0 E
Ln'0
O
Ln
C
V
'L C
>
O
a�
CD V
70
N
L
EU E
C
00
.y
i
O
a�
o
`l U
M
EQ�
Z.J
.8
V)
�
a�
■�
.�
�
��
Ccn
._
� C
O C
O
(n
�
.-
cn
L-
N
4 -JO
N
L
(D V)
�(1)-00)4..
H'CL
Ln
tin
0�
X00
U
3
O
fu
0
cn
C:
.5
C:
LU
L
a�
0
a
t
v
w
a
0
N
N
L
Q
EO
O
N
` �
L
N
•N
0
U
fu
_0 �
o
cv
ru
�
0=
4M--
O
V)
•L
-C
� 0
V fu
O
OL d
O
Q.
uj
N
0.—
c:
u�
C:LO
0C
.�,
C •u�i
O
O
> 'a
0 E
Ln'0
75
C
V
'L C
cn
0 �
O
O
70
� :
42
V fu
i
-a
c:�—
fu
M
EQ�
Z.J
.8
V)
�
cn
C:
.5
C:
LU
L
a�
0
a
t
v
w
a
0
N
N
L
Q
EO
c
M
4)
0
c
L
i
H
L
0
Im
rn
.5
LU
L-
a�
0
a
V
.7
N
uw
a
�
4-
O
0
i�
O
cn
0
00
4-J
O
4-J
-
4-Jfu
fu
(13
L
u
V
Q
L-
O
>
o
C
O
c
L
"0
fu
=3V
0
V
E
L
=
E
O
O
O
L
O
L
Qtr)
�.
-0
H
ca
��
V
V
L
O
A
v
a)
04-
QO
=3
4-)
L-
c
0
O
4-J
O
Q
fu
O
.�
tr)
O
o
1'-
—
V
fo
fu
4-J.-
O
O
V
00
4-J
4�
4-J—
-J
>,�O
fu
O4
fu
O
_0
—
fo
E
Tv
LZ
,0
.L
Q
fu
c
s=
C:
OO
v
O-
O
O
fu
0
L
L
Q
L
N
M
rn
.5
LU
L-
a�
0
a
V
.7
N
uw
a
a°
0
�O
O
N
4)
L
v
CL
c
r+
00
cn
Io
o
N
_E
c
a H
p
io
io 0
IO
IL
c
m
4)
2
0
cr
U)
W
o
a°
0
�O
O
N
>
�.
CL
r+
00
cn
Io
o
N
_E
ai
a H
p
io
io 0
y
_
o
tw
c
O
O------------
a ------------------------ ---------
Ui
N
m
-I
L
d
u
oft
o\°
d
>
O
o
Ln
O-----------------------------------------------
N
N
M
M
Ma.
-4
O
ri
N
...
M
O
>
�.
r+
00
cn
Io
vl
N
V1
ai
ri
l!1
e-1
M
y
_
o
tw
c
O
O
-i
Ui
N
m
-I
L
u
d
>
O
o
Ln
N
N
M
M
Ma.
-4
O
ri
...
M
O
M
N
n
N
V1
ri
M
M
N
D
w
O
E
Q
m
F
0-
_
f0
�
v
in
�
v
0
O
t
of
E
E
U
n
c
o.
O
U
M
NR
IR
O
0
4)
U)
cr
W
d�
v
c
w
L
0
CL
u
(1)
LU
a
0
N
N
Q
ao
c
O
.E
O
(1)
iA-
.O
E
�
O
O
_0
V)
fu
W\
W
c
E
Lc
O
O
fu•—
c:V
Q)�
(/)
cnj
—
fu,rB
VcnE
C:
a�
W
.—
51
=3
a -J
C
(u
>
L
V)
C
L
=
O
aj
�^
v /
'0
E
M�
�
a)
O
4)
V
Z
4-J
QC
U
O
d�
v
c
w
L
0
CL
u
(1)
LU
a
0
N
N
Q
ao
a'
0
�O
>
•`
_
O
N
Ln
N
00
O
m
.0
6
A�
c
m
4)
2
0
cr
0)
W
7
a'
0
�O
>
•`
_
r-1
.1
Ln
N
00
O
lD
cu
40
cm
W
4D
m
.1
N
0o
i
Q
M
m
ei
rl
u
Qj
N
Q
m
Q
m
C
''
'.
c
>
Q
,'
0Ln
v�
Q_
2
Y
N
O
N
N
V1
w
0w0
mv
cr
v
00
00
00
00
00
1.�
1Z
cc
01
O
E
f0
c
CV
CIn
N
a
4A
E
K
V
O
U
cc
to
0
IT
Cl11
0-01
O
0
0
F -I
0)
QJ
C
.5
C
W
L
OR
u
L
U
Q)
W
OL
4-J
^7
W c
C: •O
Q Q O c
O
M —
4J Ln
o i
O o
. - C � ,--i O C,
� co � M T --i o w
V) C:fu
V)
V fu(1) C
.� V i� ca u w
Q- V L--0 U a
=3 Q • — C -O
L- (3) •- O
to 4-0 ra
cu E
ff 'u) 0
(1)O C
V> fu 4� 0C U o
W Q
Q-
<
. .
c
L
SIR
O 3
o O
H
U
H
cr
•• 01011 W
M �tQ H
amO c 4)
NoO
3°
0
0
co
O
N
0
O
oI°
N
>> a� ae a° ae ae ae ae
G ` 00 N O n cn tD t0 0
J
Z ri r -I ri t!1 O1� M
tw
M
L
3e
v
v
.-i
to
N
IL
g
O
E
d
_
� N
d W
0
O
� E
N
p
O
N
.-1
� 1� m a0 M Ln
y!
O
�
oI°
N
>> a� ae a° ae ae ae ae
G ` 00 N O n cn tD t0 0
J
Z ri r -I ri t!1 O1� M
tw
M
L
3e
v
.-i
to
N
O
O
U
a
GJ
�
L
'
N
p
O
N
.-1
� 1� m a0 M Ln
y!
O
�
o
w,
rn co
O O ai O V1 M
r-1 N epi M
^
IIR
d
O
E
Q
IOR
O
F
M
R
f°
2:2
N
cc
in
cc
C
t
to
E
E
u°
A
S
a
O
U°
N
T--4
0
(V
fV
i
Q
Q
O
OO
E
._
ro
iA-
O v,
OR w
O '- LQ Q)
._
o y � O a
O O LO •�
U) I" cn v v
O . _ s... f W
U)
y V � a
V� =3 • � C:
V a' > — •- —
OCL — _0E
•w _ n
L= c L a) O c
CD
O > > N
Oy OQ .�
v O = CL
y a i Q
th
L
L
2�.'
2�
L
�O
O �
O -0
H
V fa
. -
o i
fu E
O E
-0 O
fa U
0
V to
fu— — L
L
V (1)
U4) O
�
O V
-00
'i O
CL -0 V
V)
V)
O
V
c
,O
L E
Q C-
� L-
00
iA- -0
_0 C:
fum
00 ,
� V
� Q
C: to
�
U Q
•0
fa
iA-
CU 4-J
�� Ll O
v o0 E
oC U- ca
• H 0
0
w
E
� to
> ateJ
O
fa
f W
4 -J
L ,
O .�
V V
C
'V) L
� O
cn Q -
M4 -J
L- c:
-0 V
fa fa E
O
C V
Q
V 0 fa
_ L L
Q 4-J 40--
0 0
Ln
L V)
.� O
O V
4-3 E c:
0 cn.0
^ul
ul
C
iLZ
fa -W
�
�
O
t fu4-
O ' ,
O-0 m
_ ca
fa O fu
V
(L6 -
=3.2)O
O`��
�
r=
c
La E , L•
-�
O� C:
M fu
U 0- 4-,
0
C:
0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0
00 ko� o oIH � w 00
Apisgns iso:)uoissiwsueal pue Ali�ede� lenuue }o lunowe
•
O
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 000 tD Iq 0 0 o v 000
14
Apisqns Ism uoissivasuejl pue Ali:)ede:);o aRelua»ad
o
'
� L
MI
m
j. .. •. O . 1. _.. ..
U.
M
f N
f0
0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0
00 ko� o oIH � w 00
Apisgns iso:)uoissiwsueal pue Ali�ede� lenuue }o lunowe
•
O
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 000 tD Iq 0 0 o v 000
14
Apisqns Ism uoissivasuejl pue Ali:)ede:);o aRelua»ad
>C L
-0 O > Q 0
bill Lr) C O O L- L
O f = u'un a,D O4
._ c :� c (D " c O
ME O4 -J LQ 0
Vag U i 4-)o
L -o ate.JU V V) 0
o .a-.+ fuL
ii■ o O B O O V i c
OUZ >-�
O a.0 )ry VOO O c
cn �j O 0
Mc fu -C CL
N 4-Ja
V DC� vi V
L
= C C Q1 L )
O a L1 C C 0LU
L■ �� 4� (BO O =3V
CL sC 4-1 Q. Q V �� a
fu
V Q
V b Q� fu
Q O" Q-0 u a L O
(n L 0
V) (n C (1)
(u -0 Ul)
L 0 L. O i L
V� a�E Eo� a)�o.—�E
O = ��p�o� C��� O
EL L 0 0= N
� � U ~ v � � z u.- V
L
IL W i •CL
h„
•
C
m
E
�
•
O
7
n]
CL•
`
L
.
. Q
_ ... . _
N
LL
O
•
0
O
0 0 0
O O C O O C O
O
000
� Q 0ry rry V l s
O
C
O
Apisgns jso:) uoissivasueal pue Ali:)ede:) lenuue jo junowe
W
L
y
0
�o
cot
V
c
O
Q)
w
E
a
w
o0
dOoo
J
•
C)
N
_
0
v;
v
o 0 0 el � �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o Ln o rn o 1 o vi o Ln
v m m ry ry .-1
m
3°
0
o
1�
N
•--�
a
uoissiwsue�� pue �i�ede� �o a�elua�aad
�lpisgns;soy �(
Q
v
m
CL
V
0)
c
A.]
O
E
H
'M
4-J L
a �
f
V �
cn L
.O E
O
EV
O "
4-1 V) O
=3 V
U
N
0
N
N
L
Q
Q
L
L
�
O
E
fo
�
0
O
O
cn
O
4-J
fu
OV
�
�
C:
a)
o
V)
•-
L
-
'-
f
cl
.V
Q
-
O
U
O
Q
.2
4-J>
V
4-3
U
(1),0)
E
U
•�
�-
O
-
O
04-)
�
O
i 4-J
�
.�
U
0
O O
L
(V(uO
O tu
.
Ln
• —
4--
O
4-J cn
4--J
M
(n C
U
E
O
�--
O
c
z
.
. _
4-J
'M
4-J L
a �
f
V �
cn L
.O E
O
EV
O "
4-1 V) O
=3 V
U
N
0
N
N
L
Q
Q
c
4)
U)
CD
LN
0■
c
O
�N
13
�J
UVJ
,I- P�
L-
0 0
� a✓
0
'L
0
f0
�•O
.�
0
Q
M �
0 0 i
a--, O
N C:) -O
E &Lnj
O fa =3
�
� V
U�
O 0
0
ate-+ E
L
�oLn
C � �
cn
d. U
(1) C:
•N_ o
� 4-J
ate-•+
= V)
Q�
'L O
>0
o
'C3 O
O L
O
�Ln
0)
V
O >
� � N
O O
fuV
4-; O
� O-
fd .— .}..,
atd O
O �
c
>
L
fu
0
4--
0
fp
..0 N
'X
4-1
tf
fu
CL
.�
L><a.J
�
O
O
O
N U)U
C'
M
U
Oa0i>
fQ
co
a61
`N
C
O O
O
•tn
cu0
-0>,
fu =
au
c:
-0
—
4-Jfu
fv
= =3
a-� LL
-0
•�
fu
Ofo
.
72
> a
' .�
fl.
�
V
-0
fu
> (n
fo cn
al
0)=
c:E
a_+ U
C
O
C
O
O
E
0
a✓
E L
4-Jth
=3
V) 0
•m
-�
L
6
.p
V
C
00
_r_
>
O
F-00
-C0)
Ha✓facn
v
N
m
N
N
N
ri
N
0
N
01
ri
co
N
n
r1
t0
ri
Ln
ri
lqt
e-1
M
N
rq
r -f
rr
0
r-�
al
w
n
MW
i
m
N
r-4
O
N
N
r�
CL
Q
C)
N
N
.Q
Q
O
o
0
o
0
•
i
00
4-J
0
'_
}Si._..� _... ... _. __..�
.__. _. __._ _ _ .. _._.
f Q
MM
W
OCL
VI ��
>
•,
aJ
x ++
o
D
E i
Ln
. N _
V1 ` � .N C
. tie
-
o
_.
:oma
LO IJ 7 C= 0
ai a �, M 1
` .. �. iii C
�•
o
Ma-+
��
(R/
G 4: a+ m
(10
H > Q
Gi L 0 -a
++ 4'O
O E
o
o
L
QJ
_N
Qi M L
a'
V i H E
0
O
x 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
y
a) 00 fl, � vi
v m ry r+
O(JeJOS
Pallelsul 10 /V\I/$) ssol awo:)ul 3aN
C)
N
N
.Q
Q
i
C: Q) Q)O
Fi
E N
O Q)
p v O ^ `� Q)
'� v
CL
c
C 0) -C
w.> V' v ca N � V)
/�■
i� c
ro N c 0 (n �
4-='
:n c- v c a�
X � L � •" � mc .v p
(� QJ ra V)V al c D1
p O a v ala � v) >` w
p1o 0-0L p L- c 3
�- +� c C a� E 4 V - o
U v L fo
o) U c v— v ++
�� Q O v— p 't- Ln - O co _v v
i U NEO •X a V .0)LA Q) 'p "" 0 a w
X
p �rO f� o
o
op
U J
V) C O aJ 0) p
v c N QLJ N O 0, ro V p
C: N ul v p� Ora O V
O� E v� E s -0-0 3 o� o> c�
0 0
c=� �, -a �c• c �� � Q o v c m v�
�■ , -� o o o ramc V) c c v o c
Y/ QJ c 'J a C 'B Q1 O Q) c V E c z O v
l/) N a m v c O O 1� � V L-
L � � u � .+-' c i5 a) � :
O _ ra � E � — a� ra cv .�
N
CL Ul) — Q c
00
0)
C_
L
C
.5
C
w
L
a
v
L
U
Q)
LU
G
J
CL
0
N
N
d
Q
1 0 lb'001. LAO
lqqw
f7olk
!Iwo 010" 6, zolo
AOF .d� /0
saajbap S9 mola4 GOH
V
O
N
2
O
SaPS 4MA
o
9
g
o
o 9
C%i
0 0
g
o
o
o,
n
ao
n
Ln Ln
Ln
vn
v
vn
co C4
LO LO
saajbap S9 mola4 GOH
V
O
N
2
O
0
CV
Soot laM PaPPagwl
8
8
0
0
O
O
O
Vs
w w
o
.s
w
0
CV
v
0
N
5)
0
N
40H
v
0
N
5)
0
N
M O
N
W
Q N c+1
N
W W
N c
0
To: Coleen O'Brien
Fro J C -i) Maureen McHugh, Jane Parenteau
Dat April 6, 2017
Subject: Purchase Power Summary - February, 2017
Energy Services Division (ESD) has completed the Purchase Power Summary for the
month of February, 2017.
ENERGY
The RMLD's total metered load for the month was 51,014,776 kWh, which is a 6.53%
decrease from the February, 2016 figures.
Table 1 is a breakdown by source of the energy purchases.
Table 1
Monthly Total 49,552.206 $50.68 100.00% $2.511.341 100.00%
'Pepperell, Woronoco, Indian River, Turner Falls, Collins, Pioneer, Hosiery Mills, Summit Hydro
Amount of
Cost of
% of Total
Total $
$ as a
Resource
Energy
Energy
Energy
Costs
%
(kWh)
Millstone #3
3,349,435
$6.72
6.76%
$22,514
0.90%
Seabrook
5,337,160
$6.32
10.779/6
$33,731
1.34%
Stonybrook Intermediate
0
$0.00
0.00%
$0
0.00%
Shell Energy
7,472,000
$59.36
15.08%
$443,530
17.66%
NYPA
2,140,208
$4.92
4.32%
$10,530
0.42%
EDF
3,049,600
$61.90
6.15%
$188,775
7.52%
ISO interchange
8,649,127
$41.06
17.45%
$355,116
14.14%
NEMA Congestion
0
$0.00
0.00%
$51,909
2.07%
Coop Resales
9,628
$120.88
0.02%
$1,164
0.05%
BP Energy
8.558,400
$46.78
17.27%
$400.362
15.94%
Hydro Projects`
1,943,548
$57.19
3.92%
$111,145
4.43%
Braintree Watson Unit
62,240
$747.51
0.13%
$46,525
1.85%
Saddleback/Jericho Wind
2,462.991
$100.71
4.97%
$248,058
9.88%
One Burlington Solar
129,337
$70.00
0.26%
$9,054
0.36%
Exelon
6,361,600
$91.55
12.84%
$582,387
23.19%
Stonybrook Peaking
26.932
$242.93
0.05%
$6,543
0.26%
Monthly Total 49,552.206 $50.68 100.00% $2.511.341 100.00%
'Pepperell, Woronoco, Indian River, Turner Falls, Collins, Pioneer, Hosiery Mills, Summit Hydro
Table 2 breaks down the ISO interchange between the DA LMP Settlement and the RT
Net Energy for the month of February, 2017.
Table 2
Amount Cost % of Total
Resource of Energy of Energy Energy
(kWh) ($/Mwh)
ISO DA LMP ' 15,448,228 $33.45 30.83%
Settlement
RT Net Energy" (6,799,102) $23.30 -13.57%
Settlement
ISO Interchange 8,649,127 $41.10 17.26%
(subtotal)
Independent System Operator Day -Ahead Locational Marginal Price
FEBRUARY 2017 ENERGY BY RESOURCE
CAPACITY
The RMLD hit a demand of 100,242 M, which occurred on February 13, at 7 pm. The
RMLD's monthly UCAP requirement for February, 2017 was 232,352 Ms.
Table 3 shows the sources of capacity that the RMLD utilized to meet its requirements.
Table 3
Source
Amount (kWs)
Cost ($/kW -month)
Total Cost $
% of Total Cost
Millstone #3
4,950
28.07
$138,930
9.44%
Seabrook
7,909
22.68
$179,398
12.20%
Stonybrook Peaking
24,981
1.83
$45,618
3.10%
Stonybrook CC
42,925
3.39
$145,651
9.90%
NYPA
0
0.00
$16,834
1.14%
Hydro Quebec
0
0
-$27,475
-1.87%
Nextera
60,000
6.15
$369,000
25.09%
Braintree Watson Unit
0
0.00
$86,849
5.90%
ISO -NE Supply Auction
91,587
5.64
$516,152
35.09%
Total
232,352
$6.33
$1,470,957
100.00%
Table 4 shows the dollar amounts for energy and capacity per source.
' Renewable Resources 1444%
Table 4
Cost of
% of
Amt of Energy
Power
Resource
Energy
Capacity
Total cost
Total Cost
(kWh)
($/kWh)
Millstone #3
$22,514
$138,930
$161,443
4.05%
3,349,435
0.0482
Seabrook
$33,731
$179,398
$213,129
5.35%
5.337,160
0.0399
Stonybrook Intermediate
$0
$145.651
$145,651
3.66%
-
0.0000
Hydro Queoec
$0
-$27,475
-$27,475
-0.69%
0.0000
Shell Energy
$443,530
$0
$443,530
11 14%
7,472,000
0.0594
NextEra/EDF
$188,775
$369,000
$557,775
14.01%
3,049,600
0.1829
NYPA
$10,530
$16,834
$27,364
0.69%
2,140,208
0.0128
ISO Interchange
$355,116
$516,152
$871,268
21.88%
8,649,127
0.1007
Nema Congestion
$51,909
$0
$51,909
1.30%
0.0000
BP Energy
$400,362
$0
$400,362
10.05%
8,558,400
0.0468
* Hydro Projects
$111,145
$0
$111,145
2.79%
2,503,508
0.0444
Braintree Watson snit
$46,525
$86,849
$133,374
3.35%
62,240
2.1429
" Sadd eback/Jeecho
$248,058
$0
$248,058
6.23%
2.462.991
0.1007
One Burlington Solar
$9.054
$0
$9,054
0.23%
129.337
0.0700
Coop Resales
$1,164
$0
$1,164
003%
9,628
01209
Exelon Energy
$582,387
$0
$582,387
14.62%
6,361.600
0.0915
StonybrooR Peak:ng
$6,543
$45,618
$52,160
1 31%
26.932
1.9367
Month,y Total
$2,511,341
$1,470.957
$3,982,298
100.00%
50,112,166
0.0795
' Renewable Resources 1444%
RENEWABLE ENERGY CERTIFICATES (RECs)
Table 5 shows the amount of banked and projected RECs for the Swift River Hydro
Projects through February 2017, as well as their estimated market value.
TRANSMISSION
The RMLD's total transmission costs for the month of February, 2017 were $1,023,048.
This is an increase of .35% from the January transmission cost of $ 1,019,500. In
February, 2016 the transmission costs were $996,019.
Table 6
Ccrrent Month
Table 5
last Year
Peak Demand (kW)
100,242
RECs Summary
104.312
Energy (kWh)
50,112,166
Period - January 2016 - February 2017
54,713.763
Banked
Projected Total
Est.
$3,056,024
RECs
RECs RECs
Dollars
Woronoco
0
10,715 10,715
$198,228
Pepperell
0
7,455 7,455
$137,918
Indian River
0
2,103 2,103
$38,906
Turners Falls
0
1,135 1,135
$20,998
Saddleback
0
13,678 13,678
$253,043
Jericho
0
6,709 6,709
$124,117
Sub total
0
41,795.773,208
RECs sold
$0
1 0
$0
Grand Total
0
41,795 41,795
$773,208
TRANSMISSION
The RMLD's total transmission costs for the month of February, 2017 were $1,023,048.
This is an increase of .35% from the January transmission cost of $ 1,019,500. In
February, 2016 the transmission costs were $996,019.
Table 6
Ccrrent Month
Last Month
last Year
Peak Demand (kW)
100,242
105,335
104.312
Energy (kWh)
50,112,166
58,270,115
54,713.763
Energy ($)
$2,511,341
$2.911,543
$3,056,024
Capacity ($)
$1,470,957
$1.477,200
$1,491,572
Transmiss.on($)
$1,023,048
$1.019,500
$996,019
Total
$5.005,347
$5408,243
$5,543.616
u
�j
I-
m
Q
Q
F
S,M1
�•'
WY
oll
U
N
0
L
y -
E
0
E
0
V
08,E NO
r
8
M
V)
LO�
o
o600o
40r
--
'
0
CD
C
Q�
_v
ffi�
U
0
Q
O
0
Qe.
G.
p
C
-p-
�:.
v
E .�
�
v
i�,
m m
3
N
�
U .a
�
Q
,, N
v
�
C7
0
00
nc
Q
v
c ._
m
LO
N
N
75
?�
0
O
N -C N
N H N
O
ce
-ir
N
N
08,E NO
r
M
NO
LO
O
�
N.
Y'..
^'
V
O
tf}
LO
O
co
CV
O.
t�
611}
6
too
C10
_OiD
40.
t09-
t09-
t09
t09t09-
O
V
L
MON-
N
O
°
V
D
Q
E
C^�^,,
CLCD
N
c
w
°-
v
€
O °'
c
O
to m
c
O
U
3
a�
1
=
'D
u
N
C n
C
a)C
}
N
0
3
rn
c N
c
c
O
w t
O6
a
O
o
O
U
N
j
O
N
v 0
Q
_(
.N
.�
D
O
}
Cpm
V
O
-�
2
-0c
�
C
c
3
�� CL0,3:
o
N
Q
Q H
N
N
-p
of
�y'�< o
�30
UC
a
O
}
p
Qua,
�3
(�
�C=
`�
O
OO
c
O
IS
2)U
a
••.
O
O
_0
NCEU
•O
.0�OC
�o
v
ori
v
v
O _
Cd
Q
E co
O -%
U �
.. O
N O M "
o u`v M £
"
N t T
Co :r ..
COLn
p o0 Cd
p
t 3.c� N v
} CL r
= O -0� � U. Q
C14d 3� c }
_L ^ co LO
m
O O o •� 33 t p tJ
co
E 7o 0 Lo
CL ro
LO LO
°° E
a 0 O- :- `� t N •c
LO 0
Lo ft --
N m
10 = N C Lo
O d'—— '� V
r g
+•- Q
H E Q v� O u~ v
o
1
vi
0
CL
O
0
<) ^0
OO
LO
L,
L�
Q
E
o
.O
�--'
N
\N
N
�
O
W
•�
a
i
Z
P. P.
m m pi it
W6
�f �
�
�
� /�
!!f
� � \
,
��
� i
�
.
�
\
:\
f�
i
-
CL
. 2�
|
.
�
� a.
� �
■
����
� �
.
�.
�
§ :
��
§
. �
��
� § � ��
� �
�� §�
$ § ��
$�
��
�,\
ƒ
$\� y
«:
,
�'
.
.
.
.
. :
low
® 40 a CA
W6
�f �
�
� .
�
� � \
i
-
CL
�� ,
+ T1
0
ƒ
�
�$
.
�
■
® 40 a CA
N
Y
M
o o
a o v 'Ci r o ...
cu
m
A
a
a
c
c
¢
0
z
,"
N m V J1
1p
n.
z
l0 l0
N
O
m < in 0 In ID
O O O O N N
\O
O
i...
L
V,
s
1rj
•�
4
rn
Q
W
A�
O
O
`
C
1 1 1 1
1
1
1 1
aZI
il
e
E
0
a u
> cn
Y1
�WtuE
_
O
f
�
M1
m
O °
V
2 m 3
N
Y
M
o o
a o v 'Ci r o ...
LM
F)
N
3
0
oe
0
Q
h
D
n
0
t
C W
v c
e a G
3 > 3 > > i
cl Z. 15
i• W
O V 415 G E
z
W 3 > 3 > > ?
N
EMM
O
N
RMT ' `T � � i Reading Municipal Light Department
L f RELIABLE POWER FOR GENERATIONS
J
230 Ash Street, P.O. Box 150
Reading, NIA 01867-0250
April 14, 2017
Town of Reading Municipal Light Board
Subject: IFB 2017-33 Hourly Rates for Overhead Line Construction and Maintenance Work as needed, Storm
Management Line Construction and Restoration
Pursuant to M.G.L c. 30 § 39M, on March 22, 2017, an invitation for bid was placed as a legal notice in the
Middlesex East Section of the Daily Times Chronicle, on COMMBUYS, and in the Central Register requesting
sealed bids for Rates for Overhead Line Construction and Maintenance Work as needed, Storm Management Line
Construction and Restoration.
An invitation for bid was sent to the following thirty companies:
ABM Electrical Power Services,
LLC
Albanese Brothers, Inc.
Dagle Electrical Construction
Corp.
ElecComm Corp.
Evans I-ine Construction Co.
Evermore Light and Power
Fischbach & Moore
GEOD Consulting
Grattan Line Construction Corp.
I lamilton Electric Co., Inc.
Harlan Electrical Construction
Hawkeye - Elecnor Group
Hi Volt Line Construction &
Maintenance
IB Abel Inc.
K.B. Aruda Construction, Inc.
Mass Bay Electrical Corp.
Matrix NAC, LLC
Maverick Construction
McDonough Electric Construction
MEC Power Group
Northeast Line Construction Corp.
One Source Power
ONVIA
Power Line Contractors
Prime Vendor, Inc.
Project Dog
Shay Enterprise
Spencer Contracting
Thirault LLC
Utility Service & Assistance, Inc.
Sealed bids were received from two companies: Powerline Contractors, Inc., and Matrix NAC, LLC.
The sealed bids were publicly opened and read aloud at 11:00 a.m. on April 6, 2017, in the Town of Reading
Municipal Light Department's General Manager's Conference Room, 230 Ash Street, Reading, Massachusetts.
Attachment 4
Fik: Bid/FY17/2017-33 for: Overhead Line Construction and Maintenance Work as needed, Storm Management Line
Construction and Restoration
RMLD
Reading Municipal Light Department
RELIARLF POWER FOR GENERATIONS
230 Ash Street, P.O. Box 150
Reading, MA 01867-0250
The bids were reviewed, analyzed and evaluated by staff and recommended to the General Manager.
Move that bid 2017-33 for: Hourly Rates for Overhead Line Construction and Maintenance Work As
Needed, Storm Management Line Construction and Restoration be awarded to: Power Line Contractors,
Inc., as the lowest responsible and eligible bidder on the recommendation of the General Manager.
This project will be paid from various operating and capital accounts as work dictates.
/Jr
Steph . DeFerrari
21i�-mid 1
1
Coleen O' rien
FII,: BL1/ Fti 17/2017-33 for Overhead line Construction and Maintenance Work a+ needed. Storm Management Line
Construction and Restoration
Q �
M CO .� I
In,
h!
v Q
N CO M.
N
0
O
0
V
M
N
ao
1n
.
O 0 66I
N
N N 00
m
W
00
ao
14
N
"
O
N
v
M
N
N
O
V
i
x
«
mJ
J
q
N
\
a
N
co a
CO
N
NNN
W
V
N
w
O
v
h
o
c
Zui•�-
c0
O O O
•p -
R CO
O
M
CO
M
V
o
O
V
M
W
a
c
r'�
O
V
in
N
Sao
N
N
CD
r -
E
b
n �
0
p
N N
E
\
C
CD
W
....
C
r E
C �F-
m
E 2
O ��
my
E
E
..
v
m
E
m
N
COO CSO.YM'f
00, C"
p0
C
c
E
c i w
in
'n
o
m
W
c
ai
O
}
��g
M
�O
M
l0
a
N
W
M
CD
•0
W
N
V
N
co 0)
V
•
0
N
N N
O
C
p
N
ao f
p
ui
000N
mom
iD
co
m
Q
M
O75
J
O
N
O O O
M to
3
b.
M
N
m
.M-
C
d
N
NN
M
N
N
N
.
N
3 y is
N
O 00z
V
O 00
O
O
C
Q
N
N
10
N N N4
N M'
'o
N
C
O
O
co
U
�
N
Q
p
Q
3
m
F-
N
N
N
Q
NN
two
it
C
O
U
m
c
J
Q �
M CO .� I
In,
h!
v Q
N CO M.
IV
0
O
0
V
o
C
ao
r
ao
1n
.
O 0 66I
N
N N 00
m
O
00
ao
14
N
\
N
v
M
N
N
ri
N
i
x
I+
W
q
N
\
a
N
N
CO
N
O�COO CO
W
O
N
w
O
v
h
o
CA
os
c0
O O O
R CO
O
M
CO
M
V
Cro
O
V
M
W
a
M
N
r'�
N
in
N
Sao
N
N
CD
r -
E
N
o
p
�
E
\
2
CD
r E
C �F-
�
E 2
O ��
my
E
..
v
m
E
m
.,
N
COO CSO.YM'f
00, C"
p0
Q
c
E
c i w
in
'n
o
m
c
ai
O
�-
000
M
�O
M
l0
a
N
W
M
CD
VI
W
W
N
c
N
a
N
O
M
N
O
o �`
N
p
�
000N
mom
000
co
m
Q
M
O75
Q er R'
M
O
N
O O O
M to
OOiI
O�
N
M
N
in
.M-
N
N N
N
M
N
N
N
.
N
3 y is
N
O 00z
O 00
O
O
O
Q
N
N
N N N4
N M'
'o
N
M M Imo'
M CA
.0
co
U
N
Q
p
Q
h N
kn
N
F-
N
N
N
Q
NN
two
it
H
050:
�
000;
o
0
o
Q
W
Go
0
N
Cl
�_��
M
A
Oi
M
M
N
N
O!
N N i
NN
M
N
t
N
M
01i
.
\
\
v
=
=
x
x
I+
W
q
m
\
a
N
y
z
d e
0
_ 0
0
0
Cro
Sao
3
�rn
h �0
3
E
o
L°
E -.
E
\
2
r E
C �F-
E 2
O ��
my
E
..
v
m
E
m
.,
c
m
'�Y
o
= m
E
c
E
m
t m u
cc a� v
m
c
ai
�-
E
Y 7
o m
a�
C Y 7
0 o m
IMm
l0
m
N
W
m
VI
W
W
IMo c
c
a
m
O
W
0
}
O
o �`
�
mom
0► Jca� m
=
m
tA
C
O75
O
M a� U �a
a� V ca
U
a
U
a
m
3 y " m
3 y is
o
o
J Z 2
m _. LL 2
C
tt
C
a
~O
U
U
Q
Q
F-
c\,
§K
�k-
2&r
\§C:
22§
—f,
#0 "
| ��
{f;
{j
From: Tracy Schuh
To: RMUr Board Members Grouo
Cc: Jeanne Foti
Subject: AP Warrants and Payroll
Date: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 12:42:00 PM
Good afternoon,
There were no Account Payable Warrant questions for the following dates:
March 17, March 24, March 31, and April 7.
There were no Payroll questions for the following dates:
March 20 and April 3.
This message will be included in the Board Packet for the RMLD Board Meeting on
Thursday, April 20, 2017.
Tracy Schultz
Executive Assistant
Reading Municipal Light Department
230 Ash Street. Reading. MA. 01867
Tel: 781.942.6489